Originally posted by Toby Hazes:

You don't need to acknowledge the wolf trigger when it fires, only when it resolves. And that can still happen (currently) after saying “go”. Hopefully in the future it can't.

A little clarity - sorry for any confusion! - we (the L4+) agreed that the current interpretation of that “Go” shortcut should include “with an empty stack”. This is not a future thing - it's how we would interpret it, today.

The only future uncertainty is whether we'll modify the language in the MTR. In my own, personal opinion, that's already implied in the existing wording; others think it's not as clear as I think. (And they're probably right… heh.)

Just as a thought on the angelic skirmisher: we don't Really need to add anything here because it's quite clear when you miss it, unlike the more ambiguous scenario with passing turns. If you swing you take an action and then you forgot. So I believe such a change to combat shortcut would only lead to inexperienced players getting gotcha'd on their skirmishers.

Cheers :)
Eskil myrenberg
L2, Stockholm, Sweden

—–Original Message—–

From: Scott Marshall
Sent: 14 May 2013 19:35:40 GMT
To: cartaginem@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Mayor of Avabruck and Out of Order Sequencing (Competitive REL)

Originally posted by Toby Hazes:

You don't need to acknowledge the wolf trigger when it fires, only when it resolves. And that can still happen (currently) after saying “go”. Hopefully in the future it can't.

A little clarity - sorry for any confusion! - we (the L4+) agreed that the current interpretation of that “Go” shortcut should include “with an empty stack”. This is not a future thing - it's how we would interpret it, today.

The only future uncertainty is whether we'll modify the language in the MTR. In my own, personal opinion, that's already implied in the existing wording; others think it's not as clear as I think. (And they're probably right… heh.)

——————————————————————————–
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/forum/post/22543/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4180/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4180/

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

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

A little clarity - sorry for any confusion! - we (the L4+) agreed that the current interpretation of that “Go” shortcut should include “with an empty stack”. This is not a future thing - it's how we would interpret it, today.

The only future uncertainty is whether we'll modify the language in the MTR. In my own, personal opinion, that's already implied in the existing wording; others think it's not as clear as I think. (And they're probably right… heh.)

Considering we ruled it differently at the PT last weekend, I think you NEED to change the language in the MTR if that's how you want it to be ruled.

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

A little clarity - sorry for any confusion! - we (the L4+) agreed that the current interpretation of that “Go” shortcut should include “with an empty stack”. This is not a future thing - it's how we would interpret it, today.

The only future uncertainty is whether we'll modify the language in the MTR. In my own, personal opinion, that's already implied in the existing wording; others think it's not as clear as I think. (And they're probably right… heh.)

When I first started reading this thread, I (and apparently others) interpreted the text in MTR exactly as written, which is to say that priority has been passed until the opponent has priority in the end step. The first instance of the opponent having priority in the end step is with the trigger on the stack.

MTR 4.2
The statement “Go” (and equivalents such as “Your turn” and “Done”) offers to keep passing priority until an opponent has priority in the end step. Opponents are assumed to be acting then unless they
specify otherwise.

Given that this interpretation is supported by the text in the MTR, I believe this text needs to change if the intent is that the shortcut passes priority until the opponent has priority in the end step with an empty stack, especially given that identical verbiage is used for the combat shortcut, but will not, as I understand it, cause a player to miss their Goblin Rabblemaster trigger.

MtR 4.2
A statement such as “I'm ready for combat” or “Declare attackers?” offers to keep passing priority until an opponent has priority in the beginning of combat step. Opponents are assumed to be acting
then unless they specify otherwise.

I do not think it is reasonable to expect judges to come to two different conclusions when interpreting the same words.

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

Toby Hazes
You don't need to acknowledge the wolf trigger when it fires, only when it resolves. And that can still happen (currently) after saying “go”. Hopefully in the future it can't.

A little clarity - sorry for any confusion! - we (the L4+) agreed that the current interpretation of that “Go” shortcut should include “with an empty stack”. This is not a future thing - it's how we would interpret it, today.

The only future uncertainty is whether we'll modify the language in the MTR. In my own, personal opinion, that's already implied in the existing wording; others think it's not as clear as I think. (And they're probably right… heh.)

Is this still the current interpretation of the “Go” shortcut?

You mean the quote from over two years ago? Yeah, well, more discussion may have happened since then…

Nope, that's not the current interpretation - you can say “Go” to pass priority into the end step, knowing that you have an “at end of turn” trigger to go on the stack. (Just be sure you remember to indicate targets, if appropriate.)

d:^D