Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! As a quick reminder, Silver scenarios are designed for those working up to a Level 2 degree of IPG knowledge. As such, if you are Level 2 or higher please refrain from responding or guiding others until Friday. This gives enough time for those with a lesser grasp of the IPG to increase their knowledge and understanding. Thanks!

You can find the blog post for this scenario HERE

Atari is playing against Nintendo on Day 1 of a Grand Prix. Atari casts a Chrome Mox. Nintendo nods, and then says, "When it enters the battlefield I'll cast Wear (from Wear // Tear) on it." Atari taps Chrome Mox and casts Brainstorm in response. Nintendo calls a judge (you), and explains that Atari tapped the Mox for mana without imprinting anything on it. Atari says, “Oh, okay. I guess it's too late for me to imprint anything?”

What do you do? What are the appropriate infractions and penalties (if any)? How do you fix the situation?

It would appear that the Wear was cast in response to the Chrome Mox's ETB trigger. The trigger hasn't yet been missed since it would still be on the stack. It seems that both players agree on this, since Nintendo acted in response and Atari didn't attempt to imprint a card. We advise Atari that he couldn't have possibly have gotten any mana from the Chrome Mox, since it doesn't yet have an imprinted card. He has committed a GRV by failing to pay for the costs of Brainstorm and will receive a Warning. Nintendo will not receive a penalty because he has committed no infraction, and acted correctly by calling a judge when he observed an infraction.

We will back up to the moment just before the Brainstorm was cast, returning the Brainstorm to the Atari's hand and untapping the Chrome Mox which was tapped to (try to) pay for it. We will advise the players that the stack is currently (bottom to top) Chrome Mox's ETB trigger -> Wear, and that Atari has priority. It is, in fact, not too late for Atari to imprint, but too early.

Before reading other responses:

This is honestly a bit of a confusing situation, there's a couple things going on, here.

First, Nintendo has shortcutted past Atari's trigger. The way things should happen, the Chrome mox resolves, the trigger goes on the stack, Atari has priority, and Nintendo would then get priority to cast Wear.

Atari apparently accepted this shortcut, since he then behaved as if Mox was on the field and Wear was on the stack (activating it, casting an instant in response). Tapping it is a legal action, but casting Brainstorm is not, since it doesn't produce blue mana.

The first error or miscommunication is the handling of the Mox's trigger. Nintendo's communication is a bit ambiguous in this case. (he said it's in response to the Mox entering the battlefield, not in response to the Mox's ETB trigger, so this could go either way). I'd investigate by asking Nintendo and Atari what they believes the stack is, and which abilities have resolved. Although, this is mostly for clarification in the situation, as pretty much all resolutions end the same way.

Nintendo either cast Wear after the Mox's trigger resolves, or while it was still on the stack. If he cast Wear while the trigger was on the stack, there's nothing Atari could do. Atari can't produce blue mana before the Mox is destroyed, because the Imprint trigger hasn't resolved.

On the other hand, Nintendo might have cast the Wear after the trigger has resolved. given that Atari is allowing wear to resolve, it's reasonable for Nintendo to believe that the trigger has been missed, or resolved with the default ‘may’ action. If Atari believed his trigger was allowed to resolve before Wear was cast, and he wanted to imprint something, he would have needed to interrupt the shortcut, and before the casting of Wear, handle the resolution of his trigger.

In either case, the penalty is a GRV for Atari, with a Warning. Brainstorm is returned to hand, and Mox untapped, and the game continues. No penalty for Nintendo.


After reading other responses:

The assumption so far is that Wear is cast in response to the ETB trigger, which is probably pretty reasonable. GRV/Warning is agreed on.

You mention shortcuts Talin, the actual shortcut I see involved here is that a player is assumed to be passing priority after putting something on the stack unless otherwise indicated. So Atari implicitly passed priority, and Nintendo cast Brainstorm.

I think Dan got it in one, with one minor nitpick: The first illegal action was adding Blue to his mana pool without having imprinted anything. He didn't say it, but his actions made it pretty clear that's what he did.

NAP doesn't have priority “when the Mox enters the battlefield”. I would take NAP's assertion to mean “in response to the Chrome Mox trigger” here, as that is the first time he would have priority, when AP passes it to him with the imprint trigger on the stack. At this time, AP has nothing imprinted on his Mox, so he can't tap it for mana, but if he can cast Brainstorm some other way and Brainstorm into something that would save his Mox, I would allow him to resolve his Imprint trigger.

I would Caution NAP for rushing the game state and GRV AP for attempting to cast a spell without the required mana. Assuming no cards have yet been drawn off the Brainstorm, rewind the Brainstorm, untap the Mox, all that jazz.

Edited Lyle Waldman (April 10, 2014 12:55:27 AM)

I think I agree with Dan's answer.

If it wasn't for Atari's “Oh, okay. I guess it’s too late for me to imprint anything?”, I would rule as Dan did. But here we seem to have a lot of confusion between players regarding what's going on, so before rushing to give a ruling I would take players apart and ask me to describe exactly what happened, what they wanted to accomplish (“I wanted to destroy his Mox before he could tap it for mana, I know it's possible to do that but I'm not sure how”, “I wanted to cast Brainstorm by exiling a blue card but he distracted me and I forgot to exile the card” are possible answers for that last one), and what they believe is the current game state.

Based on that, if it turns out that Nintendo did not realize he could react to the trigger (maybe he thought it was a replacement effect) and thought that Atari had actually forgot to imprint something, but he rushed the game a little fast, I'm likely to rewind up to the resolution of the imprint trigger. If Nintendo knew what he was doing (or at least knew there was a thing with timing), or if Atari was genuinely clueless about his imprint ability, then I'd rule as Dan did.

It seems that there may be some confusion as to when Atari would imprint the Chrome Mox. After establishing the order of events and gauging Atari's response of it being too late to imprint, I would explain that Atari's trigger is on the stack and that on it's resolution he would choose whether to imprint a card. He does not receive a warning for GRV-MT since the trigger hasn't physically affected the game by going on the stack. Then establish that Nintendo's Wear/Tear is next

I would rewind to when Nintendo cast Wear/Tear, placing Brainstorm back into Atari's hand and untapping Chrome Mox. Atari does get a Warning for a GRV as he attempted to cast a spell without the appropriate mana. Nintendo does not getting a warning for FtMGS as he caught the infraction immediately and called a judge.

Originally posted by James Butler:

He does not receive a warning for GRV-MT since the trigger hasn't physically affected the game by going on the stack.

Since you mentioned it - under what circumstances *would* we issue a Warning for missing this trigger?

According to IPG 2.1, once the player would have taken an action that could have only happened after the trigger's resolution if Atari had not made his choice known, ie. announcing that he is not imprinting on Chrome Mox.

Originally posted by James Butler:

According to IPG 2.1, once the player would have taken an action that could have only happened after the trigger's resolution if Atari had not made his choice known, ie. announcing that he is not imprinting on Chrome Mox.

That sounds like we're talking about when you identify it as a missed trigger. If the trigger is missed, when you decide it warrants a warning?

If the missed trigger is viewed as detrimental, which missing an imprint onto Chrome Mox could be seen as (it's practically useless). However, he still hasn't gotten to the resolution of that trigger since the issue occurred with spells on the stack above it that are unresolved that have caused a stop in gameplay.

Originally posted by James Butler:

If the missed trigger is viewed as detrimental, which missing an imprint onto Chrome Mox could be seen as (it's practically useless). However, he still hasn't gotten to the resolution of that trigger since the issue occurred with spells on the stack above it that are unresolved that have caused a stop in gameplay.

I don't think you understand what we mean by a “usually considered detrimental” triggered ability. A detrimental triggered ability is one that is detrimental to the player who controls the trigger if that trigger were to resolve. Basically, the philosophy is that if the player is hurt by missing the trigger (as they are in this case), we don't need to remind them and we don't need to issue a warning, whereas if the player could be helped by missing their trigger, we will intervene, and if we are called we will issue a warning. (Of course, intentionally missing a triggered ability could potentially be Cheating, regardless of whether the trigger is usually considered detrimental or not.)

This trigger is required to make Chrome Mox work, so the trigger is not detrimental. A triggered ability is often considered detrimental if we are playing the card despite it having that ability, while a triggered ability is not considered detrimental if we are playing the card because of that ability.

You can have a look at that section of the Annotated IPG and you can find some examples of detrimental and non-detrimental triggers from recent sets in the wiki's Missed Trigger guides.

Edited Dan Collins (April 13, 2014 11:34:59 AM)

Thank you for supplying me with those sources of information, Dan. They will be invaluable in my judging. :)

To be honest, I'm not playing Chrome Mox because it exiles a card from my hand. I'm playing it because it makes mana.

If Chrome Mox always exiled a card, I would consider the trigger detrimental. Even though CM doesn't make mana without it, that is not part of the trigger itself.

The reason the trigger isn't detrimental, in my opinion, is the fact that it's optional. If you feel it hurts you more then it helps you, you can choose not to use it.