I was recently watching a video of a player who I believe was testing for PT OGW and they were lamenting the fact that on magic online their opponent having a Chalice of the Void with 1 counter meant they wouldn't be able to play their five 1 CMC spells they had in hand. To explain this they said: “Unfortunately this is not like paper, because in paper you can cast your spells and force your opponent to remember the chalice.”

So I am aware that remembering triggers is the responsibility of the player controlling the ability. However, with chalice having no “may” clause or default option this seems to me to cross over a line into cheating. The criteria, as I'm sure you are aware is as follows:

•The player must be attempting to gain advantage from his or her action.
•The player must be aware that he or she is doing something illegal.

The player is clearly aware of that chalice would counter their spells and they would be deliberately failing to adhere to the trigger in order to gain an advantage. Even if missing the trigger is not a problem for the player the Game Rule Violation caused by following the instructions of the countered spell surely would be, no?

First and foremost, is my interpretation correct?

Assuming my interpretation is correct, is it appropriate to have a judge who will be attending tomorrow try to pull this person aside and educate them to avoid the situation altogether? If not what would be the preferred method to handle this?

Edited Chris Shannon (Feb. 4, 2016 09:25:36 PM)

You are not required to remember or point out your opponents triggers. If you want them to go on the stack, remind your opponent or call a judge.That's all there really is to it, and yes, this is an advantage you have on paper over MODO

Subject: Chalice of the Void & “Making your opponent remember it” (Competitive REL)
From: forum-24541-cde4@apps.magicjudges.org
To: sean_crain14@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 03:25:16 +0000

I was recently watching a video of a player who I believe was testing
for PT OGW and they were lamenting the fact that on magic online their
opponent having a Chalice of the Void
with 1 counter meant they wouldn't be able to play their five 1 CMC
spells they had in hand. To explain this they said:
“Unfortunately this is not like paper, because in paper you can
cast your spells and force your opponent to remember the
chalice.”

So I am aware that remembering triggers is
the responsibility of the player controlling the ability. However,
with chalice having no “may” clause or default option this
seems to me to cross over a line into cheating. The criteria, as I'm
sure you are aware is as follows:

•The player must be
attempting to gain advantage from his or her action.
•The player
must be aware that he or she is doing something illegal.

The
player is clearly aware of that chalice would counter their spells and
they would be deliberately failing to adhere to the trigger in order
to gain an advantage. Even if missing the trigger is not a problem
for the player the Game Rule Violation caused by following the
instructions of the countered spell.

First and foremost, is
my interpretation correct?

Assuming my interpretation is
correct, is it appropriate to have a judge who will be attending
tomorrow try to pull this person aside and educate them to avoid the
situation altogether? If not what would be the preferred method to
handle
this?

——————————————————————————–
If
you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or
view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/158612/

Disable
all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/24541/
Receive
on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/24541/?onsite=yes

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

It sounds to me like your perspective is that Active Player (A) is doing something wrong by “letting” the Non-Active Player (N) forget about his triggered ability because I isn't supposed to have the option of using it or not. This is ultimately true. But, what your video host was saying wasn't that (I can only assume… feel free to link the video you're talking about). A was talking about N accidentally forgetting about Chalice entirely, not making a conscious decision to not use it. If N is aware of his trigger but decides that he's better off not using it, then he'd be cheating. But if he legitimately forgets, it's pretty much just an “oh well, his loss” situation.

If you want to read bunches of words about this, I'll point you to the Missed Triggers page in the Annotated IPG. Specifically, the third paragraph in the “Philosophy” section.

While it's ultimately not relevant for this question, the Pro Tour is at Professional REL, not Competitive.

Edited Matt Marheine (Feb. 4, 2016 09:44:06 PM)

First your interpretation that the controller of the trigger would be accidentally, not intentionally, forgetting the trigger is absolutely correct. So right off we can clear that part out of the way.

The link you provided was helpful, however, where I am still having a hard time with this is where the philosophy says “however, they cannot trick their opponents into missing triggers.”. It seems to me the intention to get your opponent to forget a trigger puts you in a tricky position. What constitutes “tricking” your opponent afterall? Drawing their attention away by (legally) bluffing some other action, and then trying to resolve the spell and pass the turn quickly?

Obviously the controller of the trigger has the ability to point out the trigger even through the rapidly passed turn (this is clearly outlined in the philosophy stating that you don't have the ability as the opponent to advance the game passed the trigger in order to force a missed trigger). But this doesn't change the intention of the opponent to “trick” their opponent into missing that trigger, at least in my estimation.

My expectation, based on my new understanding, would be that the opponent of a player who controlled a chalice with 1 counter could cast a Lightning Bolt targeting a Kitchen Finks and wait to see what the opponent does hoping they persist the finks and record 2 life gain. But performing the same action and then immediately saying (and recording) “You gain 2 from persist.” would be an infraction. Is that correct?

Finally, my other question from the opening post is still of interest to me. Namely, had this issue been as I originally understood it, what steps (if any) could/should we take to educate the player?

Looking further I do not think my new interpretation is true. More from the philosophy:

“A player who makes a play that may or may not be legal depending on whether an uncommunicated trigger has been remembered has not committed an infraction; their play either succeeds, confirming that the trigger has been missed, or is rewound.”

Hoping that your opponent misses their trigger is not tricking them into
missing their trigger. Casting a spell legally and doing nothing else is
legal.

Players are never obligated (at Comp REL) to remind opponents of their
triggers.

I don't believe that “Bolt your Finks, you gain 2” is an infraction, though
it may not be entirely sporting.

As this player has done nothing illegal, there are no steps that you should
take to educate him.

Originally posted by Dan Collins:

As this player has done nothing illegal, there are no steps that you should
take to educate him.

That particular question was predicated upon their having been wrong. Or more directly, I am asking, if you were to become aware of a player's intention to do something illegal, but that they thought was legal, at the upcoming Pro Tour what would be the appropriate reaction to that?

I am under the impression we would try to educate before an infraction occurs, is that correct?

You're absolutely right that we try to educate preemptively. This doesn't apply in all cases, but a common example of doing this is discussing before the last round of Swiss in a tournament with a T8 cut what you can and can't say as far as a prize split / intentional draw.

My interpretation is the following:

1) Player A (the one in the video) is doing nothing wrong by casting a 1 mana spell and hoping his opponent misses his Chalice trigger. Casting a spell is never an infraction (well, unless the spell is cast illegally, but that's not what's happening here).

2) Forgetting a generally non-detrimental trigger such as Chalice has no penalty. If Player N forgets his Chalice trigger, we ask Player A if he wants the trigger on the stack (to which he will say “no”), and that's it. This is a difference between paper and MODO, and Player A is correct in saying that this is detrimental to him online vs in paper. That said, if he's hoping that he's going to use this trick at the Pro Tour, he's probably got another think coming. I'd almost consider not saying anything to him in the hopes that he'll learn the hard way at the Pro Tour that trying to angle shoot the best players in the world isn't the best way to get a trophy :-P

3) Is intentionally forgetting a non-detrimental trigger considered “cheating”? I've actually had this question asked to me before (not in a real situation, but as a hypothetical). I believe it isn't, because there is no advantage to be gained, that's why we don't give a Warning for it. For example, there is a Chalice on 1 in play, the opponent casts Gitaxian Probe, opponent lets it resolve, then casts a Noble Hierarch, opponent says “that's countered”, then casts Serum Visions, opponent lets it resolve. Is this Cheating? I'm pretty sure this is kosher.

Note that this is not analogous to remembering Chalice for your opponent's stuff and then “forgetting” it for your own stuff; that's covered in policy:

Originally posted by IPG:

Upgrade: If the triggered ability is usually considered detrimental for the controlling player the penalty is a Warning. The current game state is not a factor in determining this, though symmetrical abilities (such as Howling Mine) may be considered usually detrimental or not depending on who is being affected.

I am assuming in this response that the player being affected is the opponent of the controller of the Chalice. My handling of the situation would be different if the affected player was also the Chalice controller.

4) Regarding “tricking” the opponent into forgetting their trigger, this is not actually present in the IPG. Here is the actual quote (I think) being referenced, from IPG:

Originally posted by IPG:

Players may not cause triggered abilities controlled by an opponent to be missed by taking game actions or otherwise prematurely advancing the game. During an opponent’s turn, if a trigger’s controller demonstrates awareness of the trigger before they take an active role (such as taking an action or explicitly passing priority), the trigger is remembered. The Out-of-Order Sequencing rules (MTR section 4.3) may also be applicable, especially as they relate to batches of actions or resolving items on the stack in an improper order.

Basically, you can't say “Serum Visions, draw a card, Scry 2, go, now it's your turn sorry your trigger is missed gg no re”. But saying “Serum Visions - oh hey look over at that bird!” and hoping the opponent doesn't remember their trigger when they turn back towards the game, is completely legit. I mean, whether or not it's unsporting conduct is a different story, but in terms of missed trigger policy it's legal.

Edited Lyle Waldman (Feb. 4, 2016 11:08:12 PM)

Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:

3) Is intentionally forgetting a non-detrimental trigger considered “cheating”?

Absolutely…

IPG 2.1
Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one may be Unsporting Conduct — Cheating (unless the ability would have no impact on the game as described above).

Edited Matt Marheine (Feb. 5, 2016 12:22:02 AM)

Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:

If Player N forgets his Chalice trigger, we ask Player A if he wants the trigger on the stack (to which he will say “no”), and that's it.

If I was A - I'd be very upset if a judge came in and asked that.

My opponent has forgotten his Chalice trigger, perhaps I can get away with it again - and now someone has identified a beneficial trigger for my opponent - so that angle is taken away. Is it sporting? Probably not, but it's in the rules.

Watching the game, I'm sure you just let it slide. You should only interfere if you're going to issue a Warning or you're about to prevent an illegal board state - and you're not - so you should leave the game to play on and watch in dismay every time N allows A to cast a spell that could've been countered.

Let me address a few things that were posted overnight:

Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:

3) Is intentionally forgetting a non-detrimental trigger considered “cheating”? I've actually had this question asked to me before (not in a real situation, but as a hypothetical). I believe it isn't, because there is no advantage to be gained, that's why we don't give a Warning for it. For example, there is a Chalice on 1 in play, the opponent casts Gitaxian Probe, opponent lets it resolve, then casts a Noble Hierarch, opponent says “that's countered”, then casts Serum Visions, opponent lets it resolve. Is this Cheating? I'm pretty sure this is kosher.

Maybe? Remember that Cheating occurs whenever a player takes an illegal action, which they know to be illegal, with the intention of gaining advantage. Also remember that it isn't “detrimental”, it's “generally detrimental”, that acts as our line for Warnings. A trigger that isn't “generally detrimental” might still be advantageous to miss under certain game states, but let's not waste time trying to construct such a situation.

Edward Bell
If I was A - I'd be very upset if a judge came in and asked that.

Judges only intervene in Missed Triggers if they intend to issue a Warning (or if they have cause to investigate for Cheating). If a player does bring this to the attention of the judge, the judge will do what Lyle described, with one caveat: Chalice is the sort of thing that, once it's missed, it's almost certainly too late to put the trigger on the stack. If it is too late (if the trigger was missed and the spell has started to resolve), then there is no remedy.

In addition to all the comments above I'd like to point out a difference between “unable to cast” and “counter”. There are (corner) cases where you want another spell in your graveyard so even if it gets countered by chalice you're fine casting it. It could turn on spell mastery or allow you to delve enough for tasigur next turn, etc. Trickbind is also a thing. With that difference in mind you can't really call casting a spell in to chalice an illegal play, just an ill advised one in most cases.

Dan: I had a player asking about a specific thing like this, so they do exist. I told him 100% that it would be cheating, as he's trying to gain advantage from it. Players often don't ignore there own non-detrimental triggers unless they are trying to gain some form of advantage from it or feel like being nice (I guess?)

With Chalice he may “forget” to trigger on a spell of little relevance such that his opponent may play something that matters and suddenly he remembers his trigger. Is this cheating?

Originally posted by Christopher Wendelboe:

With Chalice he may “forget” to trigger on a spell of little relevance such that his opponent may play something that matters and suddenly he remembers his trigger. Is this cheating?

It's certainly a rules violation. Whether it's cheating or not depends on whether the player knows he's violating rules–missed trigger policy is confusing enough that I suspect the even some skilled players may think this line is acceptable.

Edit: this is a tangent and a corner case, btw, but if a player actually tried this line and I ruled no cheating, I'd have a very hard time figuring out an appropriate remedy…

Edited Eli Meyer (Feb. 5, 2016 04:07:39 PM)