As I understand it, you are able to try and proceed as if the trigger has not resolved, but just illegal actions are backed up if needed if my opponent then points it out. But you're not issued any penalty for doing so.

To make it clear, here are some examples:

My opponent (call him Oscar) attacks with a Pyreheart Wolf and says nothing. I can try and make a single block, but if Oscar says ‘no, you must block with 2 things’, then we back up blockers and try again. I'm not penalised for trying though, since he didn't announce it previously.

Oscar attacks with a Knight of Infamy and says nothing. I block with a 1/1 saproling token, since taking 3 would be lethal. I can say “so they trade?” and if he says “no, exalted” then they don't, but if he says ‘sure’ then I've got a nice bonus. Alternatively, if I don't block I can say “take 2?” and if he marks down 2 damage then I have a nice bonus. If he says “no, it's 3, exalted” I don't get to change my blocks, so I'd probably better not do that when I'm on 3. Again, in neither case do I get penalised.

This was my understanding from some discussions, but I think it would be nice to have clarification on the subject to avoid some awkward DQs for Fraud.

Matt

Hmm. Toby, what about these two situations?

Would (blocking with a single creature after Pyroheart Wolf attacks and no trigger indication is made) be Fraud?
Would (casting Dimir Charm after blockers on a lone attacking Grizzly Bear with Exalted) be Fraud?

They seem like exactly the same kind of thing to me. Holding the nontrigger player to “assume the trigger resolved until it is shown to have been missed” as a standard for Fraud seems tricky. If latter is Fraud, I don't see how the former can fail to be. They both involve actions which would DEFINITELY be illegal under the assumption that the trigger has resolved.

I don't mind if they are Fraud, but I think this is the kind of stuff we may see a lot of, and so we need to decide if we'll handle it as Fraud, or else just back the game up when trigger player objects (er, IF he objects, because if he doesn't, then is that proof that he has missed the trigger?)

-Eric S.
—– Original Message —–
From: Matthew Johnson
To: eshukan@verizon.net
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: Missed Trigger Questions (Competitive REL)


As I understand it, you are able to try and proceed as if the trigger has not resolved, but just illegal actions are backed up if needed if my opponent then points it out. But you're not issued any penalty for doing so.

To make it clear, here are some examples:

My opponent (call him Oscar) attacks with a Pyreheart Wolf and says nothing. I can try and make a single block, but if Oscar says ‘no, you must block with 2 things’, then we back up blockers and try again. I'm not penalised for trying though, since he didn't announce it previously.

Oscar attacks with a Knight of Infamy and says nothing. I block with a 1/1 saproling token, since taking 3 would be lethal. I can say “so they trade?” and if he says “no, exalted” then they don't, but if he says ‘sure’ then I've got a nice bonus. Alternatively, if I don't block I can say “take 2?” and if he marks down 2 damage then I have a nice bonus. If he says “no, it's 3, exalted” I don't get to change my blocks, so I'd probably better not do that when I'm on 3. Again, in neither case do I get penalised.

This was my understanding from some discussions, but I think it would be nice to have clarification on the subject to avoid some awkward DQs for Fraud.

Matt

—————————
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this e-email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/162024/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2772/
Receive on-site notifications only for this t opic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2772/

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit

Originally posted by Michael White:

How about this:



Aarons attacks Nadine with Knight of Infamy, and doesn’t indicate the trigger at all. Nadine wants to know if Aaron forgot the trigger, and following ensures:



Nadine: “How big is that Knight?”

Aaron: “It’s a 2/1”.

Nadine: “OK, I block with my War Mammoth, your Knight dies.”

Aaron: “So does your War Mammoth, my Knight is 3/2 from exalted.”

Nadine: “JUDGE!”

Me: “Aaron, did you state that the Knight was a 2/1 when asked?”

Aaron: “Yes, but at the time that I was asked the exalted trigger was still on the stack, so it was a 2/1.”



Sounds like from a reading of policy we should rule in Aarons favour, but that feels really sketchy to me. He’s so close to the line on fraud that he’s not just buying it dinner, but they’re well into the second course.

If that is fraud or very close to fraud, how is N meant to determine if A has forgotten her trigger before declaring blockers. Because it wont be weird for N to have a 3/3 and a 1/4 sitting around. And which creature to block with is pretty important. Straight up asking “Have you remembered exalted” is what we are trying to avoid with this whole new policy: requiring players to play the game for their opponents.

Gareth - no one is condemning Nadine in this situation; what Nadine has done is a fine way to try to determine the situation. It is Aaron's responses that we find to be questionable.

I'm a little sleep deprived at the moment, so I'm hoping this makes sense, but the line of question about combat and the (previously termed) NVE triggers seems somewhat analagous to casting, say, Circular Logic into enough untapped sources to pay for it. In this situation, my default assumption is going to be that my opponent is aware of all of his mana sources, land or otherwise. My default assumption is that he's aware that my graveyard doesn't have enough cards in it to keep him from paying for it. But maybe I'm willing to gamble on him being scatterbrained. That's the key - it's a gamble. There's no good way for me to ask if he's aware of my yard size or his available mana, I either have to go for it or let it go.

You can gamble on your opponent forgetting their exalted. Sometimes, it may be the only play that gives you a chance to win the game. But it's a gamble. You're bringing your reserves to the front lines and leaving your flanks unguarded.

There is no perfect verbiage for trigger rules. There are corner cases (and an opponent refusing to answer a derived information question is a corner case, most matches are far more amiable than that, even at Comp/Prof REL), but there are corner cases for every rule. In general, this rule passes the sniff test. Yes, there are situations where it will cause bad feelings. There are less of those situations than previous iterations, however, and frankly, I think this is as good as the rule is going to get.

i was reading this article http://www.starcitygames.com/article/25624_Trigger-Me-This.html

and saw this:

If you have a trigger that doesn't do anything, you don't need to announce it. Remember those pesky M13 Rings? They trigger on every single one of your upkeeps, equipped or not. On Magic Online, you can get around this pesky trigger with auto-yields. Now we have the equivalent of that in real life.

so.. is this correct? It will get a counter every turn even if i didn't say nothing and if i forgot about it?

Not quite; it's as Riki says. If the ring is not equipped, the trigger doesn't do
anything. In that case, you don't need to announce it. If the Ring
*is* equipped, you definitely need to announce the trigger in order to
get a counter.

Jurgen

Edited Jurgen Baert (Feb. 5, 2013 02:51:16 PM)

What he is saying is that it does not count as a Missed Trigger if you do not announce your Ring of Evos Isle trigger when the Ring is not equipped to anything, for example. Technically, the ring still triggers - but it doesn't do anything. This is much more relevant on cards that have detrimental triggers, such as Demonic Taskmaster - someone can't try to get you to accumulate Missed Trigger penalties for not announcing it when you don't control any other creatures, because it doesn't do anything.

If your Ring of Evos Isle is equipped to a blue creature and you don't acknowledge the trigger on resolution, you will miss the trigger - putting counters on the creature is a visible effect, after all.

Edit: Used too many worrds - Jurgen beat me to it.

Edited Kim Warren (Feb. 5, 2013 02:52:12 PM)

Originally posted by Gareth Pye:

Michael White
How about this:I think the whole point of the change is to avoid “determining” a missed trigger. Playing a competitive game should be based on good decisions relative to spells cast, cards in deck, and intelligent attacking/blocking. It is my belief/opinion that exploiting either a player's poor memory, or even their amateur (even pros can play like amateurs at points) status is not in the nature of sportmanship that should be tied to something specifically designed to be FUN. There is no cause to permit someone to play badly just to get an edge. Nobody expects you to walk your opponent through the best steps to defeat you, but on the other hand angling for them to miss triggers seems like it undermines the fun. I get that a player should have the skills to remember triggers, but how's that work when a relatively new player who has been in a “safe” environment at FNMs for a few months decides to try his hand at a GP? He gets to play against a bunch of misers who are hawking his every move for an option to screw him over when all he wants to do is play to have fun.


Aarons attacks Nadine with Knight of Infamy, and doesn’t indicate the trigger at all. Nadine wants to know if Aaron forgot the trigger, and following ensures:



Nadine: “How big is that Knight?”

Aaron: “It’s a 2/1”.

Nadine: “OK, I block with my War Mammoth, your Knight dies.”

Aaron: “So does your War Mammoth, my Knight is 3/2 from exalted.”

Nadine: “JUDGE!”

Me: “Aaron, did you state that the Knight was a 2/1 when asked?”

Aaron: “Yes, but at the time that I was asked the exalted trigger was still on the stack, so it was a 2/1.”



Sounds like from a reading of policy we should rule in Aarons favour, but that feels really sketchy to me. He’s so close to the line on fraud that he’s not just buying it dinner, but they’re well into the second course.

If that is fraud or very close to fraud, how is N meant to determine if A has forgotten her trigger before declaring blockers. Because it wont be weird for N to have a 3/3 and a 1/4 sitting around. And which creature to block with is pretty important. Straight up asking “Have you remembered exalted” is what we are trying to avoid with this whole new policy: requiring players to play the game for their opponents.

Originally posted by Gareth Pye:

how is N meant to determine if A has forgotten her trigger before declaring blockers

Assume that A has not forgotten the trigger, and block accordingly.

Originally posted by Gareth Pye:

Straight up asking “Have you remembered exalted” is what we are trying to avoid with this whole new policy

I disagree; the benefit is that you don't have to remind them of their trigger. What we (at least, what I) hope we're accomplishing is reducing the ways in which players will try to trick someone out of a trigger that was never forgotten.

IPG
If an opponent requires information about the precise
timing of a triggered ability or needs details about a game object that may be affected by a resolved triggered ability, that player may need to acknowledge that ability’s existence before its controller does.

That's acknowledging that you might not have a good way to “sneak past an opponent's trigger” any longer. (And I, for one, say “Yay!”)

Doesn't this result in the same gotcha feel-bads that was an issue with the previous version, except this time it's experienced by a player who forgets their opponent's trigger? Suppose I am N and my opponent A attacks with a single 3/3 that has exalted. N blocks with a 4/4. A uses an ability that grants his 3/3 w/ exalted +3/+3 and trample. I respond by casting Searing Spear on the 3/3.

At this point A informs N of A's exalted trigger, a trigger A did not miss but did not have to acknowledge until N's spell is cast. I can understand why a player is responsible for remembering their own triggers, but is it fair to extend this same level of responsibility to a player's opponents to remember triggers that arn't theirs in competitive REL? What about when this happens in Regular REL, will we be allowed to back up the game?

Edited Darcy Alemany (Feb. 5, 2013 05:06:46 PM)

Originally posted by Darcy Alemany:

but is it fair to extend this same level of responsibility to a player's opponents

Yep.

Originally posted by Darcy Alemany:

What about when this happens in Regular REL

I'll let someone else address Regular REL; I'm not much of a Regular guy (pun intended).

d:^D

A attacks with 2/1 exalted, saying nothing except “swing”
N has a 2/2 and a 1/4. Clearly blocking with the 2/2 isn't a bad deal if A has remembered exalted and blocking with the 1/4 is better if they have forgotten.

How is N expected to figure out his optimal play?
If he asks something like “How much damage will that deal?”, N can just respond with “future info, figure it out your self”.
Asking about the P/T of the creature doesn't help as N can just answer about what it is before exalted as exalted hasn't resolved yet.

I'm thinking the recommended course is: Ask if they want you to declare blockers (them passing priority after resolving exalted) and then confirming it's P/T. Has anyone don't anything shonky here:
A: “Swing with my dude.”
B: “Can I declare blockers?”
A: “Yes”
B: “How big is that creature?”
A: “It's a 3/3 now” (including the exalted)
B: “Before I let the exalted resolve I want to Shock him”

I would think that this situation is the same as many of the ones above - Player B needs to operate under the assumption that the trigger has been remembered. If he wants to shock Player A's creature in response to exalted, then he has to do it in response to exalted - asking to move to blockers indicates that if the trigger was on the stack, it has already resolved, and so he can't then go back in time to do something in response if he suddenly realizes that Player A has remembered his trigger.

Edited Casey Brefka (Feb. 5, 2013 06:20:40 PM)

How does N get a chance to respond to Exalted without reminding A that exalted exists?