Have the Stax rules changed recently?

[Slack]

I looked over a bunch of the previous posts on this and they seem to support what I think.  Given a ruling that I was presented with recently, I'm asking anyway.  So, here it goes:

It's my turn.  I have a Braids, Cabal Minion in play.  My opponent has Aether Vial with 3 counters, and a bunch of lands as his permanents.  I pass the turn.  On his upkeep he goes to make the stack look like this top to bottom:

Aether Vial (add a counter)
Braids (sacrifice)

So, he adds a counter to aether vial, vials in ringleader, draws 4 goblins and then sacrifices ringleader to Braids.  I was under the impression that It was the AP, NAP rule and that on his turn all of his effects triggered first and then mine triggered on top of them (So, braids would resolve before he had a chance to add a counter to aether vial).

The ruling by the head judge was that any player on their turn was allowed to stack the triggered effects in any order they wanted.  To follow this up I posed the following question:

"If I had two triggered effects (for example tangle wire and smokestack), would I be able to choose the order they go on the stack on my opponents turn because I control them both (individually, not in relation to my opponent's triggers)."  The answer was that no, I wouldn't and that my opponent still gets to stack things as he chooses on his turn.  The judge also, cited that on magic online the game sets it up like that for you.

Now, this was the ruling by the head judge at the tournament so obviously there was no argument at the time.  But, I want to know if this is really how it works now.  I though that for years stax players had been abusing the stack to make their opponents not be able to sacrifice tapped permanents and then reversing the situation on their own turn so that they would be able to sacrifice a tapped permanent.  Not to mention being able to fade tangle wire on their own turn before they tap to it.

Thanks for any insight you can provide...

edit: minor clarification

[diopter]

Here's what I found from the Comp Rules, updated as of Feb. 1 , 2007.

410.3. If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 103.4.) Then players once again check for and resolve state-based effects until none are generated, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based effects are generated and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

Bolding mine.

Your head judge was wrong. Your opponent could stack his triggered abilities any way he wanted, but then yours go on top of his and he can't change the order between his abilities and yours.

[Slack]

Hmm... that's annoying.  Do you think it's worth it to print out that portion of the rules and carry it out in case of a future misruling or would that or would that be considered out of line and just get me in trouble.

I didn't exactly have the game in the bag at the point when the ruling was made but I started losing hardcore afterwards because he did the same thing next turn.  Braids/Smokestack is pretty bad when it doesn't do anything relevant.

[diopter]

Hmm... that's annoying.  Do you think it's worth it to print out that portion of the rules and carry it out in case of a future misruling or would that or would that be considered out of line and just get me in trouble.

I didn't exactly have the game in the bag at the point when the ruling was made but I started losing hardcore afterwards because he did the same thing next turn.  Braids/Smokestack is pretty bad when it doesn't do anything relevant.

If you are playing a Stax-like deck, I think it would be definitely worht it to bring that portion of the rules. Your deck depends on being able to pullof stack tricks, and APNAP is probably one of the most misunderstood rules concepts.

As far as getting you into trouble... judges should have a copy of the Comp rules somewhere anyway. Note that I am not a judge, but, I don't foresee any trouble with pointing a judge to a section of the Comp Rules that directly addresses your game-state.

[Anusien]

Hmm... that's annoying.  Do you think it's worth it to print out that portion of the rules and carry it out in case of a future misruling or would that or would that be considered out of line and just get me in trouble.

I didn't exactly have the game in the bag at the point when the ruling was made but I started losing hardcore afterwards because he did the same thing next turn.  Braids/Smokestack is pretty bad when it doesn't do anything relevant.

You don't want to spring this sort of thing on him.  At the next tournament, if the same guy is HJing, I would talk to him privately before the tournament starts and show him the relevant section of the Comprehensive Rules and explain to him how you think it works.  If you spring it on him in the middle of a judge call, he's going to react badly (and technically the HJ overrules the CR anyway, but that's neither here nor there), but if you bring it up before the rounds begin, he's more likely going to have time to look it over and figure it out.

[Apollyon]

Also, having the CR there is considered outside notes.

[Slack]

Also, having the CR there is considered outside notes.

I didn't realize this.

You don't want to spring this sort of thing on him.  At the next tournament, if the same guy is HJing, I would talk to him privately before the tournament starts and show him the relevant section of the Comprehensive Rules and explain to him how you think it works.  If you spring it on him in the middle of a judge call, he's going to react badly (and technically the HJ overrules the CR anyway, but that's neither here nor there), but if you bring it up before the rounds begin, he's more likely going to have time to look it over and figure it out.

Probably a good point.  Given what Apollyon said, I guess I'll follow your advice and speak with him beforehand if he's judging another tournament I'm attending.

So, given the outside notes thing is a similar situation in the future likely to be resolved the way this one was where I just go with the head judge and keep on playing?  Without the comp rules I don't really have any ground to stand on.  Openly arguing with the judge is asking for trouble and I'm not going to approach whoever it may be before each tournament to address this rules point because it's insulting to assume that they will rule incorrectly.  I'm not out to make enemies with the judging staff.

[Apollyon]

If a bad ruling comes up, then discuss it with them the next time. Assuming that the judge will make mistakes does no one any favors. Least of all, yourself.

[Slack]

Alright.  Thanks everyone for your input.  Everything seems pretty clear.

[gotinput]

Thanks for this post, I had believed the judge was correct, that you could stack all triggers anyway you please.  In the past i've allowed opponents to tap to tanglewire, then sac to smokestack.

[Apollyon]

Each player stacks their triggers in the order that they choose.

Active Player's triggers go on the stack first in the order of AP's choosing.

Not Active Player's triggers go on the stack afterwards in the order of NAP's choosing.

NAP's triggers will resolve before AP's.

[OfficeShredder]

Well, if you know specifically what number rule is relevant (410.3), when you appeal you can still cite it as the reason for why you believe non-active player's abilities resolve first.