New Rules, and the Death of Oath?

[DubDub]

Essentially, the ruling is designed to take mandatory triggers which only benefit yourself and convert them into optional triggers.

After being corrected earlier in the thread and rereading the rules (as well as this article on ChannelFireball), this was my take on it as well. Anything that would traditionally considered to be purely beneficial is now entirely optional. Cards literally work in different ways at that REL.

With that in mind, skipping the Jin Gitaxias draw is a legit play. You don't "forget" to not draw, you just choose to not do so. Similarly, you could choose to not have your opponent discard, though that obviously going to happen often.

Each draw is treated separately right?  Can I draw the first five cards and then forget the last two (if I had five cards left in my library).  I'm guessing not because once the trigger is recognized I have to complete the whole thing...

I really don't understand the justification for these changes whatsoever.  If DFC are an issue in Innistrad Standard/Draft/Block, change the rules for just those formats, no?

I am not happy with these rules changes. Mostly because I don't really understand them.  But is there to be an Oracle wording at one REL and another Oracle wording at other REL's?

And my understanding of the changes only being for one REL and not another is that these guidelines address these RELs specifically, but that we'll see identical changes to the document governing lower RELs separately.  Don't know if anyone has heard differently.

[Delha]

Essentially, the ruling is designed to take mandatory triggers which only benefit yourself and convert them into optional triggers.

After being corrected earlier in the thread and rereading the rules (as well as this article on ChannelFireball), this was my take on it as well. Anything that would traditionally considered to be purely beneficial is now entirely optional. Cards literally work in different ways at that REL.

With that in mind, skipping the Jin Gitaxias draw is a legit play. You don't "forget" to not draw, you just choose to not do so. Similarly, you could choose to not have your opponent discard, though that obviously going to happen often.

Each draw is treated separately right?  Can I draw the first five cards and then forget the last two (if I had five cards left in my library).  I'm guessing not because once the trigger is recognized I have to complete the whole thing...

You can't choose to partially resolve things, so yes, you'd have to draw nothing or the full seven.

I really don't understand the justification for these changes whatsoever.  If DFC are an issue in Innistrad Standard/Draft/Block, change the rules for just those formats, no?

I think the CFB article does a pretty good job of explaining why they chose to make these changes. The intent was to stop giving sloppy players a free correction for their forgotten beneficial triggers (at the request of pro players, no less). I can respect the goal, but certainly feel the solution they've implemented is problematic at best.

I am not happy with these rules changes. Mostly because I don't really understand them.  But is there to be an Oracle wording at one REL and another Oracle wording at other REL's?

And my understanding of the changes only being for one REL and not another is that these guidelines address these RELs specifically, but that we'll see identical changes to the document governing lower RELs separately.  Don't know if anyone has heard differently.

I don't believe there will be any changes to the Oracle wordings. I'd guess it'll just be something you're expected to already be aware of if you're playing at a high REL event, kinda like the option to "find nothing" in conditional library searches. If you didn't know it already, Oracle won't help.

[Clariax]

With that in mind, skipping the Jin Gitaxias draw is a legit play. You don't "forget" to not draw, you just choose to not do so. Similarly, you could choose to not have your opponent discard, though that obviously going to happen often.

Jin-Gitaxias modifies your opponent's maximum hand size.  This is not optional.  Also, your opponent must discard down to his maximum hand size during his cleanup step.  This is not optional.




For an ability to be optional, it must do one or more things on that list, and not do anything that is not on the list.  Dark Confidant does something not on the list (lose you life), so it's not optional.  Transcendence's trigger does something on the list (gain you life) and nothing more, so it is optional (whether this actually makes the card good is another matter entirely, and not for this forum). 

[BaronSengir]

With that in mind, skipping the Jin Gitaxias draw is a legit play. You don't "forget" to not draw, you just choose to not do so. Similarly, you could choose to not have your opponent discard, though that obviously going to happen often.

Jin-Gitaxias modifies your opponent's maximum hand size.  This is not optional.  Also, your opponent must discard down to his maximum hand size during his cleanup step.  This is not optional.

So Jin is not optional at all, either for me drawing 7 or my opponent discarding? I'm just making sure I understand it correctly.

[Daenyth]

With that in mind, skipping the Jin Gitaxias draw is a legit play. You don't "forget" to not draw, you just choose to not do so. Similarly, you could choose to not have your opponent discard, though that obviously going to happen often.

Jin-Gitaxias modifies your opponent's maximum hand size.  This is not optional.  Also, your opponent must discard down to his maximum hand size during his cleanup step.  This is not optional.

So Jin is not optional at all, either for me drawing 7 or my opponent discarding? I'm just making sure I understand it correctly.

The draw-7 trigger is optional at Competitive REL or higher.

[Meddling Mike]

Even having read articles on these changes I don't feel like I understand the changes very well. From what I gather a game of magic at a certain REL is now different from a game of magic at another REL? It seems like at lower RELs the game proceeds as we are accustomed to but at higher RELs the listed effects now act like may effects?

This also puts Vintage into a weird spot as we have never dwelled much on what the REL is because the event was unsanctioned. Will larger tournaments follow these changes while smaller ones follow the old rules? Is it at the discretion of the TO?

[LemonLyman]

Are these effects completely optional or optional as in "if someone misses them they'll be treated as optional and judges won't back up the game and force the abilities onto the stack?"

I kind of read it as the second one, but it seems like most people read it as the first one.  Either way I hope there's some serious announcements/clarifications regarding what's going on and in my opinion the first option is just terrible.  It completely obliterates printed functionality on 100s of cards.

It's totally different if they are just going to allow players and judges to treat certain abilities as optional if we miss them as derp our way through games.

[quicksilvervii]

Update:


http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28790499/January_2012_IPG_Revisions?sdb=1

Hi all,

Some among you may have noticed that the January 2012 version of the IPG has been removed from the rules section of our website. The changes to that document have been met with a lot of scrutiny and confusion over the last few days, and rightly so.

While we work on a new version of that document, the October 2011 version will remain in effect. We hope to have the new version up before January 1, but working around the holidays can sometimes be chanllenging, so don't be too surprised if it's a bit later than that.

Let me emphasize some of the philosophies behind the tournament rules: 1) Tournament play should welcome new players, protect the honest, guard against abuse, and foster competition. 2) Different levels of play will have different levels of enforcement, but the game doesn't change. The deck you bring to the kitchen table works the same way it does under the bright lights of the Pro Tour.

To that end:
1. Players will not be responsible for pointing out triggered abilities they don't control. This change was met with near-universal praise. At competitive events, the player must assume responsibility for his or her own cards.
2. If an optional triggered ability is missed, it is missed. No player is penalized, and the ability is essentially "lost." You can identify an optional triggered ability in two ways: it says "may" or it asks for a numeical choice (including number of targets), and 0 is a valid choice. The controller is simply assumed to have declined the ability or chosen 0, as appropriate.
3. Number of cards whose functionality is changing: 0. None. Zip. Zilch.
4. Number of cards that will play differently depending on what level of event you're at: 0. The empty set. The big goose egg.

There will be additional information made available in time detailing what exactly the Missed Trigger infraction entails, who gets penalized for what and when, and what players and judges can expect. Until then, I'll leave you with some principles of the changes:

1. If you forget a trigger that benefits you, you're unlikely to be penalized for it ouside of missing out on the effect. There's also little reason to alert a judge at that point. (e.g. Your opponent forgets to put a counter on his Shrine of Burning Rage. Just let it go. He's not getting a warning or the counter.)
2. If you forget a trigger that is to your detriment, you're likely to be penalized with a warning. Pay attention to your own stuff.
3. You will always have a window to point out that an opponent has forgotten a triggered ability and have the effect resolve. If he controls Honden of Whatever the White One Was Called, and you really want him to gain the 2 life, you'll be able to have that happen.

Also, keep in mind that under the current and future sets of rules, purposefully forgetting a mandatory triggered ability in order to gain an advantage is Cheating. Capital C there.

There are a lot of weird situations (e.g. Howling Mine, Curses, etc.) that can come up, and we hope the new IPG will cover them all. Minor gaps may exist, and we'll address them as we go along. (Really, I mean minor gaps, not glaring holes like last time.)

Have fun!
Magic: The Gathering Rules Manager
Wizards of the Coast

Follow me @TabakRules

And one more thing - about the version of the IPG we posted on Monday. Nuke it. Flame it. Destroy it. - It hurts me to know it's out there. Later.
Magic: The Gathering Rules Manager
Wizards of the Coast

Follow me @TabakRules

[Diakonov]

Wow.

[The Atog Lord]

This is terrific news. I guess my order of 35 Transcendence is now worthless, but I'm very happy that Wizards retracted this announcement. It takes some real courage for a group to admit that it was wrong, and Wizards has done just that. I applaud it.

[President Skroob]

I was really looking forward to annihilating some Fish decks with Necroplasms...

[LemonLyman]

It's just another in a long list of posting/announcing these things without vetting them.

[Clariax]

I'm locking this thread since the update it was meant to discuss no longer exists, and we really don't need 20 more posts of people expressing their joy (or sadness) about it or the way WotC handles such things.

When we have the new IPG wording, it can be discussed if necessary in a new thread. Please do not start one to discuss it until we actually know what it says.