This is bugging me more and more, both as a player and as a judge. The situation is very clear:

Aditi sets up an attack and passes priority. Then Nantu looks at the board and is in decision making process (often taking some time for it). Than quickly saying okay I take X-damage with his pen already on the paper.

The problem is when this happens in following situations:
Aditi attacks with a an exalted trigger that hasn't been announced yet.
Aditi is planning on using a combat trick for more damage

The problem isn't necessarily the communication, as I agree that at one time Nantu has to say he is not blocking and might expect nothing to happen during the declare blockers, but it's the fact that it's being done intentional, with an air of “I hope I can say it convincing enough so that my opponent follows my incorrect(!) lead”.

I have had players say to me in between games on events that I attend as a player that they do it intentionally in the hopes to fool lesser-aware players.

I even had a player brag that he even succeeds in pulling the same trick, disregarding first strike damage from (soulbond) double-striking creatures a couple of times.

I educate players as best as I can (both during casual as tournament play), but what bugs me is that all of them find it “lame” that you can't fool your opponent.

I agree that both players are responsible for the game state, but the problem is with players who are charismatic enough and use it to their advantage, every single time they can. As a judge I find it hard to step in also, because it's something very difficult to proof that they do it intentionally. How do I handle this as a judge?

Intentionally skipping double strike is cheating. Tricking an opponent into forgetting a trigger is not. It's pretty much that simple.

So basically you are saying that I can trick my opponent into forgetting his triggers? So the more bespoken person has an advantage, as I could very well imagine that I could be telling a lot of gossip/crap in order to draw the focus away of my opponent? Where do we draw the line on that than?

Isn't the bluff factor becoming deceit than? (Sorry English is not my first language, but I think I use the correct wording here)

I mean bluff is part of the game, I could be bluffing I have all my combo pieces on hand, but it's still up to my opponent to believe me or not in this situation. I even bluffed I had Elesh Norn on hand by simply putting my Cavern of Souls on “Praetor” (and it has won me the game from a loosing position).

But the type of bluffing/deceit/trickery I have in my original post is in my book very borderline. The problem I have with it is that it's done with a style of I'm going to fool my opponent and not outwit my opponent. Maybe this is becoming more a semantic discussion now (as in where do you draw the line there than).

But what I have found as a player is that I rather outwit my opponent than fool him. But maybe this is my personal standard of etiquette while playing magic.

The current missed trigger rules might not be perfect but they may be the best we've had in years (and we've had a lot). Yes tricking your opponent into forgetting triggers is an unfortunate side effect of the current rules, but that's what we have to work with. Basically, taking advantage of fools is seen as less undesirable than having to help fools win a game against you.

If a player is prone to forgetting his exalted triggers, they are free to announce them on attack. “Attack, 2 exalted triggers”.
This way, the opponent can't trick them into forgetting them by stating a wrong amount.
Not announcing your triggers until the required moment is a tactical advantage, an option, that players are not required to take. It might help educating your players to get used to doing this if they forget a lot, so they'll have less feel-bad moments.

Edited Toby Hazes (May 7, 2013 09:50:31 PM)

Yes, it's ok to trick an opponent into forgetting a trigger. You also have the right to ask your opponent to quiet down if he is distracting you with a lot of nonessential talk.

Originally posted by Toby Hazes:

current missed trigger rules might not be perfect but they may be the best we've had in years (and we've had a lot). Yes tricking your opponent into forgetting triggers is an unfortunate side effect of the current rules, but that's what we have to work with. Basically, taking advantage of fools is seen as less undesirable than having to help fools win a game against you.

I agree with you Toby, but I'm not addressing a problem with the new trigger rules (although I am using a side effect of them as an example), I'm trying to address a problem that lies more in communication.

@Joshua, could you explain me -why- it is okay into tricking an opponent to forget a trigger? I feel that I need more information on how far one could go with deceiving his opponent as to me it's a form of cheating, you do it in the hopes that your opponent forgets something that is actually present in the game.

All I'm trying to say if my opponent attacks with an exalted creature and he tells me I get one damage, that I'm happy to deduct one damage of my tally, but I will never tell him “okay I take one damage”. Hell, it's even become so bad that when I hear my opponent say “that is X damage to me than”, that I say stop and recheck my whole board simply because of fear my opponent is luring me into forgetting a trigger. (Just like “can I start my turn”, makes me say “no” immediately).

Originally posted by Niki Lin:

All I'm trying to say if my opponent attacks with an exalted creature and he tells me I get one damage, that I'm happy to deduct one damage of my tally, but I will never tell him “okay I take one damage”. Hell, it's even become so bad that when I hear my opponent say “that is X damage to me than”, that I say stop and recheck my whole board simply because of fear my opponent is luring me into forgetting a trigger. (Just like “can I start my turn”, makes me say “no” immediately).

If you attack with a 1/1 without indicating an exalted trigger I can say “okay, I take 1 damage” and there's nothing wrong with that; you have the chance to indicate awareness of the trigger at that point by correcting me, pointing out the trigger, and saying I take 2. If, however, you attack me with a 1/1 and indicate an exalted trigger I can't say “okay, I take 1”; at the very least that's a Communication Policy Violation for misrepresenting the creature's P/T, at worst it's cheating.

“Why is it okay?” is not a question that policy seeks to answer.

Instead, it only answers “Why is this wrong?” Since policy doesn't say that
you are required to help your opponent remember triggers, nor does it
forbid you from giving bad strategic advice, nothing here is wrong.

Even before the current trigger policy if player A attacks and Player B decides not to block it would be common to say “no blocks take X”. The difference now is that Player B doesn't have to point out the triggers that might have happened so X doesn't have to include them.

Why is there nothing wrong with this? Player A still controls the turn, Player A still has the ability to point out the triggers because nothing is missed until it's not pointed out at a time that it would affect anything - i.e. life total changes.

If Player A falls for this “trick” it means Player A isn't paying attention. If Player A wants to cast a combat trick, they still have that opportunity, as easily as saying “wait, before damage I do Y”, and if they just want to point out Exalted they can easily say “No not X, it's Z because of Exalted”.

Thank you all for the input. It's been an interesting discussion, making me mend my view on the topic better.

Originally posted by Niki Lin:

I agree with you Toby, but I'm not addressing a problem with the new trigger rules (although I am using a side effect of them as an example), I'm trying to address a problem that lies more in communication.

Ah in that case, isn't this kind of communication part of normal shortcuts?
Other example: If you have an on-board tapper, I will ask “I would like to attack” but otherwise I'll just tap my attackers, I won't ask that for every single attack. If you have a hidden trick you want to cast beforehand, no problem we back up a bit. I tap my attackers right away because that's a good flow of the game, not because I want to trick you into forgetting your trick.

Basically my new point would be that I'm not necessarily seeing ill or shady intent behind the behavior you describe. I just see standard behavior to make the game go smoother and faster.

Although having said that, the examples you give do seem to have some additional intent behind them. Hmm…
Although in my defense, in your original post you said “The problem isn't necessarily the communication” and here you say “a problem that lies more in communication”, so that's why I started talking about the wrong thing again.

Let me try a third time.

What is your opinion on the ‘pen trick’?
(http://www.mtgsalvation.com/943-at-the-gathering-be-the-spell-danny.html)
Basically, as Joshua says, you are allowed to trick your opponent in making bad strategic decisions, that's part of the game.

Edited Toby Hazes (May 8, 2013 07:51:46 PM)

Sorry for the miscommunication ;)

I think you put it right Toby, the communication needs to happen (I'm aware of that), but what bothers me is the way the communication is happening.

I mean in my book it would be more correct to say (once I decided I don't want to block) “Okay chap, how much are you hitting me for than” if I see a source with exalted. That way I feel I don't force my opponent in forgetting something.

The thing is that this type of behavior (especially at Regular) is being used by the spikes against newer players. It bothers me that “correct Magic” isn't learned at FNM anymore. Because if you don't tell them that they are forgetting things (or worse really deliberately fooling them in forgetting triggers), they are not going to learn and become better. I know 60-80% of the playerbase is going to tell those newer players they forgot triggers, but that is too late, bad behavior should be corrected the moment itself.

In my experience I have also found a number of players who don't know where to draw the line of deceit anymore. Like ignoring first strike damage of a soulbond creature or static abilities like +3/+3 enchantment. I know for sure they do it on purpose because they've told me before I was a judge, now that I'm a judge they don't brag anymore about it to me, because they know they are wrong.

This topic has learned me a great deal in understanding this type of behavior and where to draw the line. I think it's in my character to be as honest as I can, hence the questions I had…

Edited Niki Lin (May 8, 2013 08:48:13 PM)

Niki, Magic is a game played by a various players, for various reasons, and with various mindset. We set up limits to protect players from problematic, but we recognize this diversity.
We don't allow cheating, but we also need to leave a room for bluff, and recognize it is a game aspect.
For those reasons, we allow some legal “tricks” that may sound like too competitive minded or too sneaky to some players and a way to demonstrate their superior knowledge and tactical flair to others.
Our documents punish unsporting conduct and draw the line that shouldn't be crosses, but sportmanship conduct is only encouraged, and we leave room for a “gray zone” between these two concepts.

However, if you feel that during Regular events, some of your players, because of their behavior, are doing a disservice to your local community, you should talk to them about that. It is in their best interest that they have some challenge during these events, and they will profit of a wealthy community, which only exist with a large casual player base. Their future playtesting partners, PTQ-road trip companions and GP Team members are among this base and it's their best interest to develop it instead on focusing on short term profit of an extra pack by tricking little Timmy during last round of FNM.

You can teach them that they can modulate their behavior to their opponent. Use their best mindtrick when facing their veteran friends and be helpful and friendly when facing a new player. They can be merciful with some and merciless with the guys who are actually presenting a real challenge.

Also, walking the line one the gray area is a dangerous way to live. That means that if at some point, they misunderstood the documents, they are more likely to step in the forbidden territory and cross the line. The grey zone protects player, it's a buffer. Living in this buffer remove their protections. They surely heard about stories of famous pro players who got disqualified for trying to be too sneaky for their own good. Without going into specific examples, you can use those as cautionary tales.

Finally, your TO should make sure that his best players don't have incentive to prey upon his new customers, as it's likely they will scare a lot of them, and hurt his commercial activities. It's in his best interest to propose flat prize structure, door entry prizing, and other structure that make sure that casual players get an healthy amount of prizing. This will also lower the incentive to try winning games at all cost. If that doesn't work, he should not be afraid to redirect his most competitive players to other events more suited to what they seek.

Even if the documents don't penalize a behavior, it doesn't mean that you, as a judge and a figurehead of your local community, you don't have plenty of options to make your events more fair and fun.

Players who are cheating (consciously not applying first strike damage or static abilities) deserve a DQ, at regular REL too. I hope you can catch some of them in the act of doing anything like that (this probably does require the opponent or spectators calling a judge, so maybe you could educate everyone on the importance of doing so). The others will probably learn very quickly to keep on the correct side of the line.

Players who are playing more competitively than you'd prefer they'd do… as Emilien says, that's their right to do so, but you could still try to stimulate a more friendly environment.
Pointing out your opponent's missed triggers is not required, but it can be encouraged.

Edited Toby Hazes (May 11, 2013 11:48:18 PM)

I wouldn't allow this. The MIPG states “Triggered abilities are assumed to be remembered until otherwise indicated”. This means that, by announcing an incorrect damage total before his opponent indicated that the trigger was missed, the defending player has broken the communication rules. Since he was doing so deliberately, it's Cheating and deserves a disqualification.

Edited Alexis Hunt (May 13, 2013 01:56:46 AM)