Please keep the forum protocol in mind when posting.

Competitive REL » Post: "Trade?"

"Trade?"

Dec. 10, 2013 04:39:43 AM

Jeremie Granat
Forum Moderator
Judge (Level 3 (International Judge Program)), L3 Panel Lead, Scorekeeper, Tournament Organizer

German-speaking countries

"Trade?"

Hi all,

I think this topic has exhausted what we could learn from this discussion. I will quote Scott here with his (more exhaustive) answer and lock this thread.

I understand this subject is not sitting well with some of you and I'm sorry for that. However, for the sake (and mailbox) of the other 4500 judges, I'll ask you to take this conversation offline. If anyone would like to discuss it further or if anyone has anything to add to the conversation beside saying “I'm not okay with it”, please contact a Moderator or me per PM.

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

Rest assured, it's already a very carefully considered position. The crafting of the Communication Policy and the continued improvements made since required untold hours, e-mails, discussions, etc. Bluffing has always been a fairly volatile topic; there are many who don't feel it should be a part of the game. However, it is a part of the game, within the guidelines defined in the MTR.
“Details of current game actions and past game actions that still affect the game state.” Note that the (very carefully considered) wording is “current … and past … that still affect the game”. Nothing in there about future game states; as others have noted in this thread, future game states are different.

Think about that for a bit: how could we hold players to the same standards (Free/Derived, etc) when it comes to future game states? If I predict something (I might attack with everything) and you make it impossible (Cryptic Command, tap all your creatures), how could I be guilty of anything (other than being bad at predicting)?

Also, as others have noted, “Trade?” has no meaning in Magic. It is a common phrase, and it's very clear that Anna fully intends to have Natalie make an incorrect assumption about what will happen in the future - but it is not a violation of Player Communication, it's a valid bluff.

One key phrase in that section of the MTR to keep in mind: “expectations of both sporting and competitive players”. Sporting players may not like bluffing, but it remains competitive behavior that is allowed.