Two things I've found helpful when explaining this shortcut:

1) Shortcuts are not intended to pass priority in order to pass priority again.

Asking your opponent to pass priority so that you can pass priority again is silly. If you don't intend to pass priority again, then you should be making it clear that you're going to do something. Just as it is a player's responsibility to tell their opponent they want to act in Upkeep before they draw, it is also a player's responsibility to tell their opponent they want to do something in Beginning of Combat before declaring attackers.

2) Shortcutting to Beginning of Combat with NAP priority is exactly the same as casting a spell and passing priority.

Casting a spell automatically shortcuts to the spell on the stack with NAP priority. Going to combat automatically shortcuts to Beginning of Combat with NAP priority. Yes, you can do stuff after casting a spell before passing priority, but you have to say what you're doing. Yes, you can do stuff in Beginning of Combat before passing priority, but you have to say what you're doing. There is no benefit to shortcutting to yourself receiving priority.

I mean, basically, shortcuts give your opponent priority. That's the whole point. You're saying you're done, the ball's in their court. Doesn't matter if we're in combat, ending the turn, resolving a spell… you're still passing priority.

New LvL 1 here: how many players need to find this shortcut confusing before it is revisited? (Ie if 90% of players can't grock it would it be changed?)

Edited Brian Dale (Oct. 31, 2016 05:31:02 PM)

Some voices here are arguing that if the shortcut worked the other way, everything would be great. In fact, things would be much worse. Yes, we could say that the shortcut was that “combat” or something like it moves the game to combat with the active player having priority. Here's what would happen then:

AP: Combat?
NAP: OK.
AP: I attack with these guys.
NAP: Before you attack (and now that I know who you plan to attack with), I tap your most important attacker with my Deadlock Trap.

I find it very difficult to accept that tournament Magic with this new loophole for NAP is better than the current situation.

Confusion will happen no matter which way the shortcut goes, so the question about “how many players need to be confused” is moot. Those same players would be confused about the above situation if the shortcut worked the other way.

I dont think there's a problem with the shortcut. The shortcut si fine and works as intended
The problem is with the UNwritten policy that specifies that you cant NOT use the shortcut, since you cant just pass priority in your main phase with the intent of getting it back in the BOC step. The only way is saying what you intend to do in the BOC step
This “special shortcut” is not defined in any policy document, and many players dont get it. So, when we enforce it, if asked by the players, are we supposed to say that this policy is detailed in a high level Judge article? We cant just cite MTR/IPG

PS: this is not a theorical question. It has happened to me

The MTR says:

If a player wishes to deviate from these, he or she should be explicit
about doing so. Note that some of these are exceptions to the policy above
in that they do cause non-explicit priority passes.

Which tells me that if you are not explicitly deviating from the shortcuts
that follow, then you are using them as written.

On Nov 1, 2016 10:44 AM, “Federico Verdini” <

Again, if someone says “combat” they are using the shortcut. And if any player wish to deviate from it, they should be explicit
The problem appears when I dont say “combat”, dont use the shortcut and have no intention of using it. In this case, the shortcut is being enforced upon me
The MTR tells me what are the shortcuts and how to use them. It doesnt tell me that I have to use them wether I like them or not

Originally posted by Federico Verdini:

Again, if someone says “combat” they are using the shortcut. And if any player wish to deviate from it, they should be explicit
The problem appears when I dont say “combat”, dont use the shortcut and have no intention of using it. In this case, the shortcut is being enforced upon me
The MTR tells me what are the shortcuts and how to use them. It doesnt tell me that I have to use them wether I like them or not

Federico, could you provide an example of how or where this has happened? Because I'm having trouble grasping what you mean.

The situation that has been discussed in the thread so far seems relatively straight forward (albeit with its own wrinkles), so I don't see anything like what you seem to be describing.

Originally posted by Jeff Morrow:

AP: Combat?
NAP: OK.
AP: I attack with these guys.
NAP: Before you attack (and now that I know who you plan to attack with), I tap your most important attacker with my Deadlock Trap.

That example is exactly how things work today.

As a reasonably intelligent human with english as my first language I had this happen to me a couple of times, went and re-read the rules to figure out how to get around that. I then came up with the following sequence as a way to deal with that:

AP: Move to comabat
NAP: OK
AP: Declare attackers
NAP: Go ahead (or “I tap that dude”)
AP: These guys attack

However, that lead me to find out the hard way… just like every other player because nobody suspects this silly shortcut… that when I said “Move to combat” I could not then activate my man-land. Then, even later and more hard feelings, I find out that there is literally nothing I can say that will give me priority in beginning of combat step because “This shortcut is true for any statement that would imply that you want to leave your first Main Phase, no matter how carefully it has been worded.”.

I want to activate a man-land in my beginning of combat step. Comp rules say that's just fine. Tournament rules say its not… makes no sense. If the shortcut, no matter how carefully worded, ended up with the AP having priority in the beginning of combat then it would make sense to players. Sure judges will go on and on about how it makes no sense to go from one point of passing priority to another point of passing priority but I think that it is better for the shortcut to work the way players want/expect it to rather than the way judges think makes the most sense mechanically. It would cause a whole lot of bad feelings to drop them in beginning of combat with AP having priority.

“I want to activate a man-land in my beginning of combat step.” <- This is
exactly what you can say. It always works. You don't need to ask your
opponent for permission beforehand or use any complex linguistics.

Just say what you want to do and when you want to do it. Don't try to
split those two things up.

The game is played with shortcuts, not a series of verbal priority passes.
Active player acts and the NAP reacts or interrupts.

Mark,

What's wrong with the following?

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: OK
AP: Declare attackers
NAP: Go ahead (or “I tap that dude”)
AP: These guys attack

NAP gains no information he wouldn't have already and you've activated your manland in BoC like you want.

Originally posted by Shawn Doherty:

“I want to activate a man-land in my beginning of combat step.” <- This is
exactly what you can say. It always works. You don't need to ask your
opponent for permission beforehand or use any complex linguistics.

Again the point is lost that you are a judge, talking to another judge, on a judge forum. This is not what players see/know. Players expect the word “Combat” to mean “Combat Phase” and the word “Attacks” to mean “move to delare attackers”… mostly because that's what the words actually mean and because those are the names of steps/phases in the game. They learn about this shortcut the hard way, always, because it is non-intuitive.

So… once they've learned about it they study, as I did, and get a hard-way introduction into a blog post (nothing that a player would have ever found on their own) that says “This shortcut is true for any statement that would imply that you want to leave your first Main Phase, no matter how carefully it has been worded.”

This isn't players trying to be clever, this is players trying to use the english language to reference the names of steps/phases in the game and that blog post specifically says they cannot do that.

Then… there are the judges who have read that blog post but who have not seen all of the follow up in the forums (like where Scott Marshall says that there are phrasings that should be acceptable) and they enforce the shortcut as the blog is written…. TRUE FOR ANY STATEMENT… NO MATTER HOW CAREFULLY IT HAS BEEN WORDED… and that is where players end up having no way of ever getting first priority in beginning of combat if they are active player.

I have two real questions for the judge community as affects this particular shortcut:
1. When was the last time you had to explain to a player that their attempt to word-smith a main phase reaction out of another player failed because they used a phrase that indicated movement to combat?
2. When was the last time you had to explain to a player that no they cannot activate their man-land or no they cannot crew their vehicle because they said the word “Combat”?

My problem with this shortcut is that it is non-intuitive and causes bad feelings from a lot of players and I have never seen the problem that it is intended to solve.

Originally posted by Rob Marti:

Mark,
What's wrong with the following?

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: OK
AP: Declare attackers
NAP: Go ahead (or “I tap that dude”)
AP: These guys attack

NAP gains no information he wouldn't have already and you've activated your manland in BoC like you want.

What's wrong with it is by the MTR and by the explanatory blog article AP cannot activate Mutavault at that time. As soon as he said the word “Combat” it is now the NAP's priority in beginning of combat. When NAP says “Ok” both players have now passed priority in beginning of combat and AP never get's opportunity to activate mutivault. If I were NAP that interaction would look like this:

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: JUDGE!!

Take care when you walk into the “what player expect”-path.

You know the players in your community, not all the players.
You know player that Speak good english.

Lot of players don't even know that there is a “Begining of combat” step.
Lot of players know the “combat”-shortcut.
And in the middle, some player know there is a “Begining of combat” step but don't know the “combat”-shortcut.

There is also some player who are really bad with english and having such a shortcut can help them.

Edited Pascal Gemis (Nov. 1, 2016 12:48:28 PM)

Originally posted by Mark Randol:

Rob Marti
Mark,
What's wrong with the following?

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: OK
AP: Declare attackers
NAP: Go ahead (or “I tap that dude”)
AP: These guys attack

NAP gains no information he wouldn't have already and you've activated your manland in BoC like you want.

What's wrong with it is by the MTR and by the explanatory blog article AP cannot activate Mutavault at that time. As soon as he said the word “Combat” it is now the NAP's priority in beginning of combat. When NAP says “Ok” both players have now passed priority in beginning of combat and AP never get's opportunity to activate mutivault. If I were NAP that interaction would look like this:

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: JUDGE!!

No, it doesn't. Saying the word “combat” doesn't invalidate the rest of the words in the sentence.

Originally posted by Mark Randol:

What's wrong with it is by the MTR and by the explanatory blog article AP cannot activate Mutavault at that time. As soon as he said the word “Combat” it is now the NAP's priority in beginning of combat. When NAP says “Ok” both players have now passed priority in beginning of combat and AP never get's opportunity to activate mutivault. If I were NAP that interaction would look like this:

AP: Move to combat, activate Mutavault
NAP: JUDGE!!

If AP says that, they can, in fact, activate Mutavaukt and attack.

The shortcut refers to phrases like “combat?” “Combat step?” “Beginning of combat?” It is to prevent players from scumbagging each other.

AP: “combat?”
NAP: “cryptic”

Without the shortcut, AP could then say “ok, then I'll cast this sorcery that changes the game and let's me win”
With the shortcut, it's assumed NAP is acting in beginning of combat.

What you are wanting is a shortcut that allows both players to act in beginning of combat after the phrase “combat”. However, with the way priory works, this can't happen if we want to make sure AP acts first in the phase.

Can you come up with a new shortcut that does that? When you start walking through priority, there's not a better way to do it than I can come up with. In reality, AP just has to say “beginning of combat, crew”

Edited Bryan Spellman (Nov. 1, 2016 01:00:18 PM)