General situation: a spectator points out a forgotten trigger. It's within a reasonable amount of time and no major strategic decisions have been based on the trigger being missed. Do you put it on the stack?

I faced this situation at this weekend's prerelease and it was really awkward–the trigger was a game changer that cost the non-active player her match. I was called over because of this outside interference; the spectator hadn't played for a while and thought that he was obligated to point out a mandatory trigger (he wasn't trying to help one player or the other). I ended up ruling that the trigger would go on the stack. I felt like I had to do so for two reasons:

1) While the JAR is very flexible in terms of fixing broken game states, it is pretty clear on how to handle triggers and this meets all the criteria for just putting the trigger on the stack
2) The active player could have, theoretically, realized the trigger was missed on his own–ruling his trigger completely missed based on outside interference is denying him the chance to catch it himself.

At the same time, it felt really bad to issue this ruling. The opposing player probably (not certainly) would not have caught the trigger, and deciding the trigger was missed was probably closer to the “natural” game state the way it would have played out without interference.

What are your thoughts?

A few things here:

(a) I like to remember this line in the JAR, particularly the last bit which I've highlighted: "Unlike other illegal actions (which must be pointed out), players may choose whether or not to point out their opponent's missed triggers, though we should encourage them to do so.“
So at Regular (and for me this goes doubly so at a Prerelease), there's a sense that you could play things strictly by the rules when it comes to Missed Triggers, but that we'd rather people point them out rather than keep quiet.

(b) I'm a little unclear as to when in the turn we are, in relation to when the trigger was supposed to have triggered. If it's triggering right now, and the spectator has pointed it out, then I don't see a way to avoid putting it on the stack, as both players are now well aware of it*. If it happened earlier in the turn, there may be scope to ”use your judgement to decide if putting the trigger on the stack now would be too disruptive - don’t add it to the stack if significant decisions have been made based on the effect not happening!“

© How the players take it can depend on how you deliver you're ruling. If you make a huge deal about how awful it is for AP or NAP (depending on the ruling) you may exaggerate such feelings of awfulness. But a smile and a crack about how close the game was or something like that can turn a sad situation into a fun interaction. Customer Service can make or break awkward feeling rulings!



*As an aside - under no circumstance will I say to the player ”well it looked like you had missed it, but I'll let YOU decide if you actually want to put it on the stack or not. Sometimes people suggest that the judge ask the player(s) what they want to do. I dislike putting the players on the spot - especially as there are many people who might (wrongly) feel like it's a ‘dick move’ to decide one way or the other. Also - since the Judge was called, the Judge should handle it ;)

Originally posted by Mark Mc Govern:

I'm a little unclear as to when in the turn we are, in relation to when the trigger was supposed to have triggered. If it's triggering right now, and the spectator has pointed it out, then I don't see a way to avoid putting it on the stack, as both players are now well aware of it*. If it happened earlier in the turn, there may be scope to ”use your judgement to decide if putting the trigger on the stack now would be too disruptive - don’t add it to the stack if significant decisions have been made based on the effect not happening!“

AP controled a Weaver of Lightning and cast a card draw spell on his main phase, the played a creature, missing the ping trigger. When the trigger resolved after I was called over to resolve the OA, it killed a Shrill Howler that would have transformed and attacked for lethal on the next turn.

Was the Shrill Howler in play at the time the trigger was missed?
If so, there's no difference in the outcome. Under normal circumstances and
everybody remembering their triggers, the Howler should have died, so no
harm no fault.
If no, then maybe I'd apply a little IPG Philosophy here. “No player may
make choices involving objects that would not have been legal choices when
the ability should have triggered”. I know JAR <> IPG, but I think the
philosophy behind that sentence still applies in either case


2016-07-18 13:24 GMT-03:00 Eli Meyer <forum-28702-1a58@apps.magicjudges.org>
:

Originally posted by Federico Verdini:

Was the Shrill Howler in play at the time the trigger was missed?

Yes, it was. Legal target and the obvious target (though not the only one, there were a few other creatures that would not have died to a ping)