TheManaDrain.com
September 30, 2022, 06:46:33 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
1  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Debt of Loyalty on: February 16, 2016, 07:43:54 pm
Go with the oracle wording, not the printed wording.  This card was printed at a time when the rules on regeneration worked very differently.
2  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Accidental Card Revealed During Shuffling/Cutting on: November 02, 2015, 01:01:57 am
Doing it on purpose is Cheating - Disqualification but it's hard to prove. If you do it often enough, you might get flagged by the DCI and potentially get banned for sloppy play/cheating.

This goes for pretty much every infraction. And this is why they're all recorded and tracked by the dci. Realistically anyone could probably "accidentally" drop part of an opponent's deck while shuffling (or cast a spell for one less mana, or anything else) once and have minimal consequences because there won't be anything to suggest that it was intentional. But if someone is getting a warning for the same thing over and over, once or twice per event, but never more than a warning, this gets noticed. There have been dci suspensions for "accumulated warnings" before.
3  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: looking at your opponents deck while shuffling on: October 28, 2015, 05:47:39 pm

How should this situation best be  handled? I didn't want to call a judge at that point because a) it was just my impression that's what he was doing   and   b) its just my word vs his word

To put it simply and bluntly, if you don't want to call a judge in this situation you don't want to handle it. If you are correct about what your opponent is doing and why he's doing it, this is potentially a very serious infraction. Get a judge over there and talk to him discretely. The only way "it was just my impression" plays in is that you don't want to start yelling "my opponent's a cheater."  Talk to the judge away from the table and tell him your concerns.

The only other thing for you to do is shuffle in a way that the cards are not visible to either yourself or your opponent. Sure your opponent is wrong if he's trying to look, but the easier you make it for the opponent to see the more likely he'll do so and the less he'll be doing wrong if he does.
4  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Shahrazad & Extra Turns on: October 21, 2015, 07:58:51 am
We had this at a bluebell tournament. It was ruled that you do everything you can. So the sub-game began. But the Shar was cast on turn 2 of extra turns. So the sub-game's first turn was the 3rd turn of extra turns.


This is exactly how it worked when shahrazad was legal.
5  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Shahrazad & Extra Turns on: October 20, 2015, 04:27:53 am
When shahrazad was legal any turns taken in the sub game counted as part of the 5 turns.

That said, the rules forum is for rules questions and answers. How something worked many years ago is borderline on acceptability, and the various responses speculating how people think it should be are far past that borderline.
6  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Removing attacking creatures via untapping them on: June 14, 2015, 10:17:11 am

 It only works in the case of Maze of Ith specifically because the card states that using the ability removes the creature from combat.

Maze of Ith does not state anything about removing a creature from combat.  Maze of Ith prevents damage.  The creature in question is still very much attacking, can be blocked, etc.
7  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Announcing (or not announcing) triggers :Sabertooth Outrider on: June 14, 2015, 10:12:31 am
Everything here is correct.  If you want to Stifle it, you need to do it while it's on the stack.  You can't wait until multiple steps after it resolves until you know your opponent remembered it to retroactively stifle it.
8  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Replicate on: June 14, 2015, 10:06:34 am
Trinisphere will never make it cost 4.  Trinisphere looks at the entire cost, which includes things like replicate and kicker.  Sounds like a MTGO bug.
9  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Keeping Track of Storm Count on: December 19, 2014, 02:01:39 am
My interpretation of this is that there really is no such thing as the "storm count". It's a convenience to the players while playing the game. Compared to life totals, Storm is an activated ability and not a critical component of the game like life.

There is such a thing as "Storm Count."  It's not an official term, no, but it simply refers to the number of spells that have been cast during the current turn.  Sure someone could keep track of "Number of spells cast this turn" and keep referring to it as such, but storm is (as far as I can recall) the only thing it matters for, so calling it "storm count" is easier for most people.  (Also, storm is a triggered ability, not activated.)


A player is not required to provide their opponent with a running total of how many spells have been played during the turn.  Many do so because it's convenient, and typically doesn't provide your opponent any kind of advantage.  If you think it will for some reason (certainly is possible), you can always keep the count to yourself. 

Making sure you and your opponent are clear and in agreement on something that you know will be relevant later (even if your opponent doesn't know this) also has the advantage that it's less likely there will be a dispute on it, and that if there is a dispute and a judge gets involved, less likely the judge will accept your opponent's version as correct.  Think about it, if you cast 10 spells, graveyards get shuffled around, and such, and then when a judge gets called over, you explain, "I cast Ancestral, then 2 other spells, but I don't remember what, then..." your lack of remembering details may work against you. 
10  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Clean up step and EoT effects/spells on: December 09, 2014, 03:55:29 pm
It seems a bit of closure is necessary for this post:


"Until end of turn" effects ending and damage being removed both happen during the cleanup step.  This is after the end step.  Players do not normally get priority during the cleanup step.  If something happens which allows players to get priority during the cleanup step (either an ability triggers or a state-based action happens), then players will get priority during the cleanup step AFTER the "until end of turn" effects end and damage has been removed.  And then after this cleanup step is finished there will be another cleanup step.

To reiterate a couple examples of things that can allow players to get priority (this is not an exhaustive list, of course):  A creature is left with 0 toughness after an "until end of turn" boost wears off, or something like a mishra's factory that became a creature has an equipment on it that falls off when it ceases to be a creature.

11  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Notion Thiefs, replacement effects on: November 19, 2014, 01:39:00 pm
All of these scenarios are correct.
12  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Clean up step and EoT effects/spells on: November 19, 2014, 01:35:11 pm
No, you will never have priority (no one will) at the point where the Lynx is an 0/1.

"Never" isn't exactly accurate here.  Under normal circumstances you will not get priority during the cleanup step after the +4/+4 wears off.  There are some circumstances where you will, however.  Basically you need something to trigger during the cleanup step to get priority here.  For example.  If there is a second Steppe Lynx with +4/+4 from landfall, but that one also has a -1/-1 counter on it, and there is a Deathgreeter on the battlefield.  Then during the cleanup step after the +4/+4 wears off, SBA get checked and the 2nd Steppe Lynx is a -1/0 so it dies, and this causes the Deathgreeter to trigger.  You'll then get priority with the trigger on the stack and after it resolves during the cleanup step after the 1st Lynx is a 0/1 (and can be killed with a Lightning Bolt)
13  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Arena/Magus of the Arena on: August 28, 2014, 07:36:56 pm
If I control a Magus of the Arena and my opponent has Thrun, the Last Troll...when I activate magus (assume they are the only 2 critters on the battlefield) will they fight?  I control the source that is doing the ability, but my opponent is doing the targeting.  Does that dodge hexproof, or is it still blocked since I control the source of the ability?

To clarify a bit more, if Thrun, the Last Troll is the only creature your opponent controls, you cannot activate the Magus at all.  You can't activate an ability that requires targets if you don't have the necessary legal targets available. 
14  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Control of Gods on: February 24, 2014, 10:02:38 am
The duration of the control effect is "as long as Sower of Temptation remains on the battlefield."  Whether the object is still a creature or not doesn't matter.
15  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Was this ruling correct? (Eternal Weekend, round 7) on: January 29, 2014, 10:08:22 am
Shockwave, what you're completely missing here is that the individual decisions do not exist in a vacuum.  Each decision made is based heavily on the decisions made before it.  The idea here is to maintain the integrity of the game as much as possible.  This is why the two options are what they are.  If it's still possible to rewind, you undo everything done since the illegal play and continue with the game state as it should have been.  Or, if it's not possible, you leave the game state as it is.  And the whole 'not possible' is based on two much happening since then, because those things that happened since then were all based on the things that happened before them.

To change the state of the game on which various decisions were based while keeping those decisions locked in leaves you with a game state that is neither what the players arrived at with their decisions (and illegal play), nor where it should have been if everything happened properly.  You instead end up with "Well, if he had 2 more cards in hand I would've wanted to do..." 
16  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Was this ruling correct? (Eternal Weekend, round 7) on: December 22, 2013, 10:26:17 am
Partial rewinds are a problem.  Many posting here like to look at it as "simple" to just put the 2 cards from library into hand.  But this really makes for more of a mess of things than they already are.  Decisions are made based on the game state as it is.  After the cards were put back both players passed priority multiple times (including ending the turn).  Given that the player wanted those 2 cards on top and hadn't activated Jace yet that turn it seems pretty likely if those 2 cards were in his hand he would've made different decisions after the Ancestral.

Some people think that it's OK because this is just "punishment" for making the Game Play Error.  Any attempt at punitive game fixes will certainly create situations that might benefit the player instead of hurting them.  Here we're talking about putting more cards in the players hand as a way to fix things by not letting him benefit.  99% of the time, just putting more cards in someone's hand is going to be a huge benefit to them.  It may seem obvious to everyone that this would be OK here and won't be a benefit to the player, but that isn't necessarily the case, and it's a really dangerous idea to leave it up to the judge to determine how to twist around the game state to make things "fair" for everyone.  It's hard enough (and certainly sometimes messed up) trying to determine whether to backup or leave things as they are in borderline cases.  It's even harder and almost certain to be messed up if the judge is going to try to modify things as he sees fit to make it all fair.
17  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Was this ruling correct? (Eternal Weekend, round 7) on: December 15, 2013, 10:18:01 am
The thing is I agree with you only in part. If he didn't have 2 Confidants and 8 life (6, actually, if you count another Deathrite activation) I would mind that they did what they did. But with the game state as it was, he probably returned those cards to the top on purpose, knowing he made a mistake that could cost him the game and hoping no one would notice. I think it's very similar to a situation where a player "forgets" Confidants trigger in order not to die.

What you're suggesting here is that he was cheating.  While it is possible that this was the case, of course (but given that he could've just activated Jace after the Ancestral resolved, seems unlikely), it was clearly not the determination of the judges.  And determining cheating based on just a video without any clear evidence in pretty much impossible.

The suggestion that others seem to be making that the 2 cards should've been put from library to hand where they belonged and everything else remain the same is not the proper way to fix it.  You either back up completely (as was done) or leave things as they are (meaning turn stays over, cards stay on top of library).  You don't mix the two.
18  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Imposing Sovereign and Planar Guide on: December 14, 2013, 10:47:35 am
All of the creatures are entering the battlefield at the same time, so the Imposing Sovereign is not there yet to affect the opponent's creatures.
19  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Cards with Bestow vs. spell type triggers on: October 25, 2013, 09:28:18 am
The last step of casting a spell is where abilities trigger from it being cast.  This is after it's been set whether it's a creature spell or not, so such abilities will only trigger if your choices match the trigger condition.
20  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Morph and Opponents' Response on: August 09, 2013, 01:16:35 am
also, assuming this is the full set, how does the REL impact your decision about which way to go?  Are you more likely to go with 1 in competitive REL events?

Yes, REL has an impact here.  It is one of those "details" that can vary from situation to situation.  In Professional it's much more likely to be a 4/5 with 3 damage than in regular.
21  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Morph and Opponents' Response on: August 08, 2013, 11:19:09 am
How a judge would fix it could vary from situation to situation.  As such, it's impossible to offer you any definitive answer here.  Perhaps the judge would say he cast the bolt on the face-up Angel, perhaps the judge would say he tried to do something he couldn't and rewind it.  The specific details of each situation mean the results might be different. (And no, this is not an invitation to follow up by attempting to provide what you consider to be every relevant detail to get an answer to this specific situation.  For all the relevant details to be available, the judge needs to be there, and how one specific situation would be handled isn't a discussion that helps anyone, since the next situation won't be exactly the same.)

For reference:
702.35d If you have priority, you may turn a face-down permanent you control face up. This is a special action; it doesn't use the stack (see rule 115). To do this, show all players what the permanent's morph cost would be if it were face up, pay that cost, then turn the permanent face up. (If the permanent wouldn't have a morph cost if it were face up, it can't be turned face up this way.) The morph effect on it ends, and it regains its normal characteristics. Any abilities relating to the permanent entering the battlefield don't trigger when it's turned face up and don't have any effect, because the permanent has already entered the battlefield.


So, I know in comp rules it states that morph is a static ability creating a special action and does not use the stack.  The issue is whether or not opponent gets to keep their lightning bolt and untap their land due to reversing an illegal play (response to a morph).  The opponent wasn't very specific about what he was responding to...

I just want to know how a judge would fix this.  Opponent calls the judge when I won't put my angel in yard because morph doesn't use stack and he can't respond to flips...
22  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Chalice of the Void Triggers, Announcing it... on: August 03, 2013, 04:11:40 am
It's a matter of whether the person attempts to resolve the spell or not.  This is a gray area because it's all about the communication between the players, and communication in one match may be different than communication in another.  As long as the spell is still on the stack, you haven't gone past the point of Chalice's trigger resolving, so having missed it (or intentionally ignored it).
23  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Deck reg requests on: July 13, 2013, 05:15:47 am
They can just verify it after the match.

Verifying after the match won't do anything to help you, the opponent, if something is amiss.  Once the match is completed, the result isn't going to be changed.
24  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Deck reg requests on: July 11, 2013, 04:49:17 pm
If you feel something about your opponent's deck is illegal, call a judge.  The judge can look into it.  It's pretty unlikely the judge will take the entire deck and check it, as this is pretty much impossible to do in the middle of a game.  But the judge can easily consult the decklist to see if a card in question is on it.
25  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: bloodchief ascension and spell timing on: July 09, 2013, 02:05:28 pm
FWIW, the game will actually end BEFORE the Bloodchief Ascension trigger goes on the stack.  After an object on the stack resolves, SBA are checked before triggered abilities go on the stack.  Doesn't really matter in this case, but can in others.  


(For example, an Eternal Witness entering the battlefield with a Night of Souls' Betrayal out.  Since SBA are checked first, the Witness is already in the GY at the time the triggered ability goes on the stack so is a legal target for its own trigger.)
26  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Sudden Spoiling & BSC on: June 09, 2013, 03:36:47 pm
Blightsteel Colosssus has the ability, "Blightsteel Colossus is indestructible."  Sudden Spoiling removes this ability.  Without it, nothing makes the Colosssus indestructible, so it's not indestructible.
27  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Sudden Spoiling & BSC on: June 08, 2013, 03:48:55 am
Blightsteel Colossus doesn't have the ability to replace it going to the graveyard, so it goes to the graveyard as normal.
28  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: draw step and priority on: June 02, 2013, 05:10:29 am
Both players can cast spells during the draw step.  The active player has a chance first, then after he passes priority, the nonactive player has a chance.  So he can, if he wishes cast an instant during his draw step before you have an opportunity to cast Extirpate, but you will get a chance ot cast Extirpate before he moves to his draw step.
29  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Shroud + equip on: May 28, 2013, 10:35:52 pm
A creature with shroud cannot be the target of an equip ability.  Shroud means it cannot be targeted by spells or abilities, and the equip ability targets.

A creature with shroud can, however, have an equipment attached to it.  Either by having it equipped at a point when it didn't have shroud, or having it become attached through some method that doesn't target.  For example, if you control a Cloak and Dagger and a Deft Duelist enters the battlefield, Cloak and Dagger's ability will trigger and on resolution you may attach it to the Deft Duelist.

Quote
Cloak and Dagger {2} |Tribal Artifact -- Rogue Equipment| Equipped creature gets +2/+0 and has shroud. / Whenever a Rogue creature enters the battlefield, you may attach Cloak and Dagger to it. / Equip 3

Quote
Deft Duelist {W}{U} |Creature -- Human Rogue| 2/1 First strike / Shroud
30  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Re: Null Rod and Mana Abilities (specifically moxen, Sol Ring, and artifact lands) on: May 18, 2013, 04:16:19 pm
Damping Matrix does not stop Dryad Arbor from being tapped for mana.  Damping Matrix doesn't stop mana abiltiies.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.582 seconds with 19 queries.