Players in our community have brought up a question we would like to have an answer for.

Situation is the following. Player A has 2 show and tell and Emrakul in his hand. Player N has Oblivion Ring in his hand. Assume that A knows content of N's hand due to some effect.

Now A wants to win, naturally. He has mana to cast both Show and Tell and proceeds with the first one. Player A knows that if he chooses a card from his hand, N will certainly choose the Ring. But Show and Tell sais “may”, so player A would like to use pieces of paper to write down what he wants to put on the battlefield instead. He also wants to write “nothing” on that paper or leave a dash to lure oblivion ring out of his opponent.

So, can he (and his opponent) use pieces of paper? How do rules support or forbid it? Or is the choice to put something on the battlefield indicated the same way as the card choice? Meaning that by the time N has to make his choice he knows about A's choice to use the action.

From a player's perspective, show and tell provides two choices: the first one is the choice to perform an action, and the second one is the choice of the card. Thus the question.

(Not a rules question, more of a judging question, so I moved this here.)

Rules neither support nor forbid the idea of writing a card name on paper - but I doubt that will help, in this example. Essentially, the player is trying to trick his opponent into choosing the O-Ring that he knows is there - and that the opponent knows he knows about.

So, when my opponent says “hey, let's do Show & Tell different from how most people do it”, I'm likely to figure out what's going on.

How do you handle this, if A insists on using paper, and B refuses? Again, rules don't support either position.

As a slight tangent: A might place his 2nd Show & Tell face-down, indicating that's the card he wants to S&T into play; then, when it's revealed as an illegal choice, he's committed a GRV and we assume he chose nothing. But in this example, it gets tricky - he intentionally committed a GRV to gain an advantage; he may not know it's a GRV, but he knows it's an illegal choice.

Given that, and the fact that his desire to use paper is to accomplish the same end result? I'm inclined to tell him that the rules and I will not support his attempted trickery.

d:^D

Uncle Scott,

Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that the choice of “you may” would be
public and does not need to be kept secret in the same way that the choice
of a card does? We know from the rules and Oracle Rulings that the active
player chooses their card first, but before choosing a card they must
choose if they wish to choose a card or not.

That's a good point, George, and:

Originally posted by Gatherer, April 2008:

The current player chooses first, then each other player chooses in turn order. A player does not have to reveal the chosen card, so long as it is clear *which* card was chosen.

Given that ruling, it seems clear that using paper to make it *unclear* which card was chosen is not allowed.

d:^D

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

Given that ruling, it seems clear that using paper to make it *unclear* which card was chosen is not allowed.

I think the issue is that there is no ambiguity about what card player A wishes to choose. it's clear that he wants to choose “nothing”, ie he wants to choose not to play a card. However, player A is wanting to make it unclear whether he is choosing a card or not, which is where it gets a little confusing.

however, because Gatherer clearly distinguishes that players choose their card in turn order, I would say that the choice of playing a card or not is open knowledge, and can be used by player B in their decision of what card, if any, to play.

George, Scott,
what you say makes perfect sense, and the Oracle ruling is the reason why I posted it in Rules forum :)

There are 3 rules relevant for this situation:

101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player’s left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the “Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order” rule.

101.4a If an effect has each player choose a card in a hidden zone, such as his or her hand or library, those cards may remain face down as they’re chosen. However, each player must clearly indicate which face-down card he or she is choosing.

101.4b A player knows the choices made by the previous players when he or she makes his or her choice, except as specified in 101.4a.

It looks like the choice to perform the action is governed by 101.4, so according to 101.4b player N should know whether or not player A wants to put something in play.
Thus this becomes relevant:

Originally posted by Lev Kotlyar:

the choice to put something on the battlefield indicated the same way as the card choice

However, this means that that using pieces of paper actually contradicts 101.4b, as this choice should be open.
Is this correct?

On a sidenote:
If using pieces of paper is legal, this might as well be the way players would do it and get accustomed (even in frames of a single match). If this happens it won't be “an obvious hint” when such a suggestion comes in the first place.

On another sidenote:
It doesn't really matter if A knows if the only card in N's hand is O-Ring, but having 2 Show and Tells could give advantage to actually test it.
If using pieces of paper is illegal, there is no way player A can legally trick his opponent into wasting his O-Ring.

Originally posted by Lev Kotlyar:

However, this means that that using pieces of paper actually contradicts 101.4b, as this choice should be open.
Is this correct?

That's how I'd rule, yes.

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

Lev Kotlyar
However, this means that that using pieces of paper actually contradicts 101.4b, as this choice should be open.
Is this correct?

That's how I'd rule, yes.

Thank you!

http://www.starcitygames.com/article/31069_Ask-A-Judge.html

What is the most rules friendly/strategic way to put nothing into play with Show and Tell?

Flatts - Any agreed-upon method of selecting a card (or lack thereof) is acceptable. My suggestion (suggested to me by Level 4 Judge Jared Sylva) is for both players to write down on a sheet of paper which card they are selecting and then revealing that selection to the other player. This gets around any sleight of hand shenanigans or dexterity errors during the reveal.

Why is it ok here? And that article are reading many nonjudges…

We are posting a revision to the article. We were wrong and feel that 101.4b precludes exactly what the player was asking. :-)

I'd use the Like-button, but the forum doesn't have ;-)