Rock-Paper-Therapy-Elder-Spock! - BRONZE


Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool!

Today's scenario is Bronze, and while it is focused on L1s, and that's the group we expect will benefit most, it's not exclusive to them All you L2+ judges please give our target audience a few days to enjoy this one, before you join in.


Here's the scenario:

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/2012/08/20/rock-paper-therapy-elder-spock/ [blogs.magicjudges.org]

During day 2 of a Legacy Grand Prix Anton casts Cabal Therapy in his first main phase by paying its mana cost. He names Lightning Bolt and sees that in Nicholas’ hand there are two copies of Tarmogoyf. Anton then attacks Nicholas with his Yavimaya Elder, deals combat damage and then moves to his second main phase.

Once there, he casts Cabal Therapy for its flashback cost by sacrificing his Yavimaya Elder and while reaching for his library to search for the lands from the Elder’s ability he says “I’ll name those Tarmogoyf you have in hand” .

Now Nicholas claims that Anton has missed his trigger for Yavimaya Elder, because he already named a card for Cabal Therapy and calls a Judge.

What is the infraction/fix/penalty, if any?

Thanks to Sebastian Reinfeldt (L2, Germany) for suggesting this scenario!

Edited Carlos Rada (Aug. 20, 2012 02:48:21 PM)

It seems pretty obvious to me that this is OoOS (MTR 4.3).

Anton begun searching halfway through casting Cabal Therapy. Not only has he not missed the Yavimaya Elder trigger, but he's triggered it, and begun resolving it, part-way through casting another spell.

There doesn't seem to be any information gained prematurely; “An out-of-order sequence must not result in a player prematurely gaining information which could reasonably affect decisions made later in that sequence.”

Additionally, as described, there's no chance for Anton to gauge Nicholas' reactions; “Players may not try to use opponent's reactions to some portion of an out-of-order sequence to see if he or she should modify actions or try to take additional ones.”

And finally, I think this is the portion of MTR 4.3 that is most relevant; “All actions taken must be legal if they were executed in the correct order, and any opponent can ask the player to do the actions in the correct sequence so that he or she can respond at the appropriate time (at which point players will not be held to any still-pending actions).”

The actions taken here would be legal if they were performed in the correct order;

1. Flashback Cabal Therapy, sacrificing Yavimaya Elder
2. Put Yavimaya Elder's ability on the stack.
3. Search library for a basic etc. etc.
4. Resolve Cabal Therapy.

There may be a consideration that this is Day 2 of a GP, and is thus Professional REL. However, OoOS applies at all RELs.

Anton was also obviously intending to, and did, trigger and resolve his Yavimaya Elder's ability, as shown by the fact he picks up his library and begins searching.

I would rule this as Out of Order Sequencing, with no penalties for either player. There is no fix, yet I would tell Nicholas he can ask Anton to perform the actions in the technically correct order if he wishes to respond to one or both abilities.

I am slightly concerned about Nicholas' rules lawyering. I would likely make the effort to have a chat with him after the current match is over.

I would treat Anton favourably for two reasons:

• He is clearly trying to improve the flow of the game, and use time efficiently, by using the downtime of shuffling to reveal his plan for the turn. This enables Nicholas (who seems to have nothing else to do) to perform the required actions without meticulously passing priority six times.
• Anton worded his statement in a way that, when interpreted literally, simply describes his future intentions.

I would issue no infraction to Anton. Whether or not he is deemed to have proposed a shortcut, used out-of-order sequencing, or simply revealed his plan; there was no opportunity to gain an advantage, and behaviour to improve a match's efficiently should not be punished.

Depending on the attitude of Nicholas and his reaction to my ruling, I may consider issuing an Unsporting Conduct infraction, if “fishing” appeared to be his motivation for the judge call.

Edited Ryan Brierley (Aug. 20, 2012 03:27:50 PM)

I 100% agree with Joshua on this one. This seems to be textbook OoOS. We've got clear indication of intent when the active player picked up his library, we've got a completely legal sequence of plays if ordered correctly, no possible extra knowledge gained that I can see. As far as I'm concerned, Anton is shortcutting the sequence to speed up game play.

There would be a little bit more of a case if Nicholas has responses, but in that case, you do the standard rewind and resolve the abilities normally. I don't think Nicholas deserves any infraction, but a verbal caution may not be out of the question to make sure he doesn't continue this pattern.

I agree with all.
No penality, because it's just a short cut, with no implication in the game, and with clear indications of intent.
But Nicholas has the right to ask Anton to play in the correct order.
I will ask Anton to re-do all his actions since he plays Cabal Therapy, in order to make clear for both all the steps and offer the opportunity to Nicholas to respond in a particular moment of the sequence if he wishes it.

Edited Aurélie Violette (Aug. 21, 2012 08:32:56 AM)

I would say out of order sequencing

I appreciate Ryan's acknowledgment of the intent of the sequencing: to improve the flow of the game.

In commander games, we do OOOS as a courtesy to other players to let people do things while other processes are going on so the game doesn't take up extra time. If we apply this to a competitive 2-player game, Anton is actually doing his opponent a service by trying to preserve time on the clock.

Nicholas may not be receptive to this concept because he really doesn't want Anton to get those extra lands, but I think that as judges we should appreciate Anton's intention and pay attention to the fact that he was resolving both abilities simultaneously to save time.

Edited Evan Cherry (Aug. 20, 2012 09:42:43 PM)

What Anton said is that he “will” name Tarmogoyf, right? Do we even need to bring up Out-of-Order-Sequencing on this case? Just curious.

The subtleties of semantics, or “Communication is hard, m'kay?”

Think of two players playing the game, and they're moving along at a less-than-accurate pace - like most players do - and, when Anton flashes back the Therapy, he says (in English) something like “I'll name those ‘goyfs you got in hand”, then reaches for the library to search for his lands.

Yes, “I’ll” is a common contraction, in English, for “I will” - but it's most common usage is more immediate, and less a prediction of the future.  How often do people from the USA actually say “I name Tarmogoyf”?  I suspect “I'll name Tarmogoyf” is far more common - or just “Tarmogoyf”, or even “get those ‘goyfs outta your hand”, etc.

But, to get back to the scenario at hand - don’t get caught up in those semantics.  The scenario is meant to paint a picture of a player doing what players do, a lot.

Thanks - Scott “just piping up” Marshall

An here is the response :D

This is a typical case of Out-of-Order Sequencing as defined at MTR 4.3. There’s no infraction and no penalty. Players are allowed to perform Out-of-Order Sequencing of actions at any time provided the resulting game state is both legal and clear once they have finished.

Yavimaya Elder’s ability triggers when is sacrificed to pay for Cabal Therapy’s Flashback cost and Cabal Therapy’s card is named on resolution so the right order is to resolve first the Elder’s ability and then name the card for Cabal Therapy.

As no player have gained advantage nor additional information by this Out-of-Order Sequencing, the current sequencing should be allowed to resolve as it is, then Anton looks at his opponent’s hand for Tarmogoyfs and discards all the copies and then he searches his library for up to two basic land cards an puts them into his hand and shuffles his library unless Nicholas asks for the actions to be resolved in the correct order.

Is also noteworthy that Out-of-Order Sequencing applies at any REL, so even as this is held at Professional it doesn't change our ruling.

Congratulations to Joshua Andrews from Australia for his very complete answer!