taking back plays

[DEA]

this might sound like sloppy play, but here goes
if you announced a spell, and have tapped your lands for mana, AND shown the card, but you realise it will be a very bad play, can you or can you not backup to announcement without penalty and do something else with the mana?

what about the same situation, but you have not tapped your lands for mana?

what penalties would be involved under the different RELs?

thanks in advance

[Jebus]

You're right.  It does sound like sloppy play.

I wouldn't let you back up, as long as it is a legal play.

Otherwise it opens the door to trickery, chicanery, and shenanigans.

And I just can't stand chicanery.

When you tap your lands for mana isn't relevant.

Play carefully and this won't happen.

[combo_dude]

In other words, once you've announced the spell, if you can legally play it, you must?

[Komatteru]

In other words, once you've announced the spell, if you can legally play it, you must?

For the most part, yes.  If you're at FNM (which is REL 1) or Arena (not sanctioned), such take backs would probably be allowed, especially for new players, but there's nothing that obligates anyone to allow that.  It's going to depend on the tournament you go to.  In general no, but it is up to the TO/judge.  At high level play, such as a PTQ, don't expect anyone to allow you to take anything back--certainly not the judge!

[J*Dizzle]

In other words, once you've announced the spell, if you can legally play it, you must?

So what happens if you cant legally play it? Is there some kind of penalty?

The True JDizzle

[Jebus]

In other words, once you've announced the spell, if you can legally play it, you must?

So what happens if you cant legally play it? Is there some kind of penalty?

The True JDizzle

That falls under Procedural Error, which is normally a Warning, unless you keep doing it.  Then we start upgrading it.

[DEA]

yup, that's what i thought
thanks for the response

[Toad]

In other words, once you've announced the spell, if you can legally play it, you must?

For the most part, yes.  If you're at FNM (which is REL 1) or Arena (not sanctioned), such take backs would probably be allowed, especially for new players, but there's nothing that obligates anyone to allow that.  It's going to depend on the tournament you go to.  In general no, but it is up to the TO/judge.  At high level play, such as a PTQ, don't expect anyone to allow you to take anything back--certainly not the judge!

In this particular situation, this is not a take back action since the spell is not on the stack yet. Since nothing in the game forces you to tap lands for mana, you can always take back the spell into your hand as long as no mana costs have been paid for it. If your opponent calls the judge on that situation, you can always argue that you paid no cost for the spell, you just showed the wrong card. Since the judge can't force you to pay mana for that spell (just say "I don't have the mana needed to pay for this spell"), you'll get some kind of Procedural Error, leading to a warning, but you can't be forced to actually play the spell.

That is obviously only if the spell is not on the stack yet (ie. no mana cost paid).

409. Playing Spells and Activated Abilities

409.1. Playing a spell or activated ability follows the steps listed below, in order. If, at any point during the playing of a spell or ability, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the spell was played illegally; the game returns to the moment before that spell or ability was played (see rule 422, "Handling Illegal Actions"). Announcements and payments can't be altered after they've been made.

409.1a The player announces that he or she is playing the spell or activated ability. It moves from the zone it's in to the stack and remains there until it's countered or resolves. In the case of spells, the physical card goes onto the stack. In the case of activated abilities, the ability goes onto the stack without any card associated with it. Each spell has all the characteristics of the card associated with it. Each activated ability that's on the stack has the text of the ability that created it, and no other characteristics. The controller of a spell is the player who played the spell. The controller of an activated ability is the player who played the ability.

409.1b If the spell or ability is modal (uses the phrase "Choose one -" or "[specified player] chooses one -"), the player announces the mode choice. If the spell or ability has a variable mana cost (indicated by {oX}) or some other variable cost, the player announces the value of that variable at this time. If the spell or ability has alternative, additional, or other special costs (such as buyback or kicker costs), the player announces his or her intentions to pay any or all of those costs (see rule 409.1f). You can't apply two alternative methods of playing or two alternative costs to a single spell or ability. Previously made choices (such as choosing to play a spell with flashback from his or her graveyard or choosing to play a creature with morph face down) may restrict the player's options when making these choices.

409.1c If the spell or ability requires any targets, the player first announces how many targets he or she will choose (if the spell or ability has a variable number of targets), then announces the targets themselves. A spell or ability can't be played unless the required number of legal targets are chosen. The same target can't be chosen multiple times for any one instance of the word "target" on the spell or ability. If the spell or ability uses the word "target" in multiple places, the same object or player can be chosen once for each instance of the word "target" (as long as it fits the targeting criteria).
Example: If an ability reads "Tap two target creatures," then the same target can't be chosen twice; the ability requires two different legal targets. An ability that reads "Destroy target artifact and target land," however, can target the same artifact land twice because it uses the word "target" in multiple places.

409.1d If the spell or ability targets one or more targets only if an alternative, additional, or special cost (such as a buyback or kicker cost) is paid for it, or if a particular mode is chosen for it, its controller chooses those targets only if he or she announced the intention to pay that cost or chose that mode. Otherwise, the spell or ability is played as though it did not have those targets.

409.1e If the spell or ability affects several targets in different ways, the player announces how it will affect each target. If the spell or ability requires the player to divide or distribute an effect (such as damage or counters) among one or more targets, or any number of untargeted objects or players, the player announces the division. Each of these targets, objects, or players must receive at least one of whatever is being divided.

409.1f The player determines the total cost of the spell or ability. Usually this is just the mana cost (for spells) or activation cost (for abilities). Some cards list additional or alternative costs in their text, and some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. The total cost is the mana cost, activation cost, or alternative cost, plus all cost increases and minus all cost reductions. Once the total cost is determined, it becomes "locked in." If effects would change the total cost after this time, they have no effect.

409.1g If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to play mana abilities (see rule 411, "Playing Mana Abilities"). Mana abilities must be played before costs are paid.

409.1h The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed.
Example: You play Death Bomb, which costs {o3}{oB} and has an additional cost of sacrificing a creature. You sacrifice Thunderscape Familiar, whose effect makes your black spells cost {o1} less to play. Because a spell's total cost is "locked in" before payments are actually made, you pay {o2}{oB}, not {o3}{oB}, even though you're sacrificing the Familiar.

409.1i Once the steps described in 409.1a-409.1h are completed, the spell or ability becomes played. Any abilities that trigger on a spell or ability being played or put onto the stack trigger at this time. The spell or ability's controller gets priority.

In this situation, you could be in step 409.1h (paying costs) after failing to put enough mana into your pool in step 409.1g (playing mana abilities) to play the spell. This is an illegal action, so you have to take back your spell and start the announcement all over again. Warning is the sanction.

[SliverKing]

I think its worth noting that doing an 'illegal action' on purpose is no longer "illegal action - warning", its "cheating - DQ".

This is relevant to this conversation because of the 'chromatic sphere' question

For those that dont know what I'm talking about, using chromatic sphere effectivly lets you draw another card mid-announcement of a spell.  Occasionally drawing a card will make a player not want to cast what he originally announced  (eg I draw a Wrath of God and wish I hadnt just announced Pristine Angel).   By then NOT tapping any more mana to pay for the spell, these players effectively make a mistake on purpose and the card goes back into their hand. The latest ruling from the judge list was that this behavior constitutes cheating.

[Toad]

That's totally irrelevant. In the Chromatic Sphere situation, a card has been draw between the moment you are beginning to cast the spell and the moment you are actually paying the casting cost. We are in a different situation where no card has been drawn during the announcement process.

I think its worth noting that doing an 'illegal action' on purpose is no longer "illegal action - warning", its "cheating - DQ".

How is that "Cheating"? You are announcing a spell you can't pay because you don't have the mana in pool to cast it. That's hardly cheating. It's just a procedural error. It's not even an illegal action you are doing. You are just not putting enough mana into your mana pool.

[Jebus]

In this particular situation, this is not a take back action since the spell is not on the stack yet.

Actually, it is on the stack as soon as you announce it.

This whole discussion on was brought up on the Judge list not too long ago.

The whole issue of "takebacks" and tapping mana wrong on purpose can potentially open the door to cheating.

It comes down to a question of intent, but there is a line that can be clearly crossed.

I find it best to encourage careful and deliberate play to prevent such situations from arising.  However, if the situation does arise, I don't belive it is prudent to always allow a tackback.  Certainly REL does play a big factor here, but one must make sure this isn't just a bad play mistake or someone fishing for an advantage.

[SliverKing]

[quote="JebusThe whole issue of "takebacks" and tapping mana wrong on purpose can potentially open the door to cheating.

It comes down to a question of intent, but there is a line that can be clearly crossed.
[/quote]

Thank you Jebus. This is what I was trying to get at.  Making a mistake (oh damn i dont have double white) is a minor penalty and gets a warning... purposefully violating the game rules to give yourself a takeback is cheating. The chromatic sphere issue is NOT irrelevant. Yes it involves extra knowledge, but the reason its cheating is the same: you're purposefully commiting an error. The entire penaltyguideline is built on the assumption of accidental infractions... anything purposeful is cheating.

[the Luke]

Maybe it would help to define "accident" and "mistake" here in the course of announcing a spell... can you clarify, Jebus?  I would define "accident" to be "inadvertantly making an illegal announcement" which would be like trying to Befoul a black creature or announcing Wrath of God with only one White mana untapped.  I would define a "mistake" as announcing a spell that you CAN legally make and then realising it isn't the best play, for example announcing Brainstorm when you can pay the mana and Chains of Mephistopholes is on the table.

What I think you said is that if I announce a spell and mid-announcement find that it's a "mistake" then technically by the rules I should have to continue the announcement... the opponent is doing me a favour by letting me take it back, and if I deliberately make an illegal play like tapping mana incorrectly to force the "mistake" to become a deliberate "accident", then I'm technically cheating.  Is that right?

[Jebus]

If the spell can't be legally played (such as playing Control Magic on a creature with Protection from Blue) then that is a clear illegal action and is reversed.

If it can legally be played, but you make a decision mid-announcement that causes it to become illegal, that's when it gets tricky.

You can't be certain if there was some foul play involved, or if they just were being really stupid.

It's a judgement call at that point and no one is going to give you the same answer.

[racetraitor]

So basically you could possibly get away with naming a spell and putting it on the table to get a tell on an opponent and then taking it back claiming that no costs were paid? That seems an awful lot like string betting to me...

[Jebus]

So basically you could possibly get away with naming a spell and putting it on the table to get a tell on an opponent and then taking it back claiming that no costs were paid? That seems an awful lot like string betting to me...

And that's the problem.

Which is why I don't like the prospect of take backs.

[Tristal]

I'm in favor of takebacks as a matter of civility and course, in the correct circumstances.  For instance, at the Kamigawa Prerelease, I would be more than happy to let a guy take back casting Rend Flesh on a Kitsune Riftwalker (Protection from Arcane), where the only other legal targets are his own creatures.  I'd consider it rude of you as a player to demand he choose one of his own creatures, or even to burn for 3.

In this instance, there's no real possibility of cheating or chicanery.

[Toad]

I'm in favor of takebacks as a matter of civility and course, in the correct circumstances.  For instance, at the Kamigawa Prerelease, I would be more than happy to let a guy take back casting Rend Flesh on a Kitsune Riftwalker (Protection from Arcane), where the only other legal targets are his own creatures.  I'd consider it rude of you as a player to demand he choose one of his own creatures, or even to burn for 3.

Your opponent made a procedural error, so the game is backed up to the point where the initial error has been made. The spell returns into his hand, his lands are untapped. He'll never get to kill one of his creatures or burn for 3.

That's not a take back, that's just correcting a rule problem.

[the Luke]

The problem we're getting at is that you can deliberately make a procedural error and thus force the game state back to before the announcement of the spell, meaning you get a takeback because of the procedural error and not because the opponent thinks it is a nice thing to do.  Deliberately breaking the rules is cheating, though, and should be penalised as such.  An example of this is announcing Brainstorm when Chains of Mephistopholes is in play and deliberately not paying the blue, so as to cause a procedural error.  If the game was particularly close and high stakes, the opponent probably wouldn't allow the takeback just for civility's sake.

The most obvious case of cheating is to deliberately pay the costs incorrectly after using the mana ability of, say, Chromatic Sphere, and seeing a new card which causes the playing of the original spell to be suboptimal... though if that is a possibility you should just use Chromatic Sphere and float the mana before announcing the spell.

-Luke

[Jaapmans]

So basically you could possibly get away with naming a spell and putting it on the table to get a tell on an opponent and then taking it back claiming that no costs were paid? That seems an awful lot like string betting to me...

Have to love the guys that try this. Yes, a player might get away with it. A player also might run into a DQ for cheating. And if the judge knows that the player knew and the judge reports this to WotC, that player has a large chance of running into a minimum 2 year ban.

Is that worth it?

Keep it simple: play hard and fair in competitive play, play easy and fair in fun play.

Jaap

[Jaapmans]

I'd consider it rude of you as a player to demand he choose one of his own creatures, or even to burn for 3.

This is down right wrong. This can not be demanded from any player. Any judge that enforces this penalty is most likely 'out-of-date'.

Jaap

[Khahan]

So, basically there are multiple issues to consider here:
1) Player announces a spell they cannot actually pay for, no matter what they do (wrath of god w/ only 1 W mana source).
Possible outcomes:
The game will back that up and there is  nothing to do about it.

2) A player announces a legal play, then realizes he has a better play (w/out gaining additional knowledge) and asks to take it back or forces the game state to take it back by not tapping the proper mana
Possible outcomes:
a) If he asks to take it back, its up to the opponent and is entirely situational.
b) If  he does not tap the appropriate mana, the game will automatically go back.  The opponent can call a judge and it is up to the judge.
c) Be a man (or woman in some cases) learn from your mistake and hope for the best

3) A player announces a legal play. Gets additional info (for ex: card draw from chromatic sphere) and then does not tap the proper mana forcing a take back
Possible outcomes:
a) Game backs up
b) Opponent calls a judge. Becomes judges discretion (and most likely a judge will, at the very least, issue a warning).
c) Be a man (or woman..we'll say adult) and just tap the proper mana in the first place and don't try and cheat

I'd say in situations 1 and 2, many instances, your opponent will allow the play to go back.

In situation 3, you should be at least warned for your action.  If its a first offense fine. But if it becomes a recurring habit (and judges DO learn what kind of players many people are) then it turns into a DQ.

[Toad]

In situation 3, the game has to be backed up right upon resolution of the Chromatic Sphere. The original spell is still anounced (and there will never be any kind of take back on this since the player received additional information, here a card has been drawn) but the player can change the color he took on Chromatic Sphere and has to use that mana to pay for the first spell put on the stack.

If that situation can't be backed up properly, I'd end up forcing the player to burn for 1 so that he's not able to use the floating mana he filtered from Chromatic Sphere to pay for the drawn card.

[Jebus]

In situation 3, the game has to be backed up right upon resolution of the Chromatic Sphere. The original spell is still anounced (and there will never be any kind of take back on this since the player received additional information, here a card has been drawn) but the player can change the color he took on Chromatic Sphere and has to use that mana to pay for the first spell put on the stack.

Actually, it would probably be more appropriate to reverse everything except for the sphere.

This leaves no spell announced and on the stack, but leaves the card from the sphere and the mana from the sphere.

[SliverKing]

Maybe I'm just a hardass, but if I was called over in situation 3 (some extra information causing a player to not pay for his spell),  there will definetly not be a takeback.  Because there has been some debate over this, even among judges, I dont know what penalty would really be appropriate. A player could very well think this was a legal loophole, and to DQ him for something he honestly thought was legal seems harsh. However, I firmly believe that allowing the 'Oops, I dont pay for that' trick to back out of things is cheating and intolerable.

[Jebus]

However, I firmly believe that allowing the 'Oops, I dont pay for that' trick to back out of things is cheating and intolerable.

I agree with this sentiment.  I didn't mean for my last post to appear otherwise.

[Pern]

Your opponent made a procedural error, so the game is backed up to the point where the initial error has been made. The spell returns into his hand, his lands are untapped. He'll never get to kill one of his creatures or burn for 3.

Depends on when his lands were tapped, doesn't it? If he taps three lands and then announces the spell, he's got three floating when you back it up to announcement.

[Upinthe]

If I want to, can I let someone take something back at higher RELs even though most players wouldn't let them? If I did, would I get any kind of penalty?

[SliverKing]

If I want to, can I let someone take something back at higher RELs even though most players wouldn't let them? If I did, would I get any kind of penalty?

For most practical applications you can allow a takeback.  Its not legal to allow a takeback, but you'd both be guilty of the action if he did it and you allowed it, so its not likely one of you is going to call a judge over on yourselves.  The only chance you have of actually getting busted is if some busybody at the next table calls a judge.  
Legally there is no such thing in the Magic Comprehensive rules as a takeback... so picking up a creature, or taking a spell off the stack is procedural error and punishable accordingly.  Allowing something you know to be incorrect is also against the rules, so technically you would both be committing an infraction, and as a judge I have to tell you to never do that...

[SliverKing]

If I want to, can I let someone take something back at higher RELs even though most players wouldn't let them? If I did, would I get any kind of penalty?

For most practical applications you can allow a takeback.  Its not legal to allow a takeback, but you'd both be guilty of the action if he did it and you allowed it, so its not likely one of you is going to call a judge over on yourselves.  The only chance you have of actually getting busted is if some busybody at the next table calls a judge.  
Legally there is no such thing in the Magic Comprehensive rules as a takeback... so picking up a creature, or taking a spell off the stack is procedural error and punishable accordingly.  Allowing something you know to be incorrect is also against the rules, so technically you would both be committing an infraction, and as a judge I have to tell you to never do that...