Magic: The Gathering,GO TEAM MS!

[Sudo_Nym]

Also, if you had mana to pump it, you had mana to regen it. Pure misplay.

Seriously, though. i don't mind that they took anti-regen clauses off a lot of removal, just to make Regen valuable, but it seems like the Wraths should keep it, just so there is a kill effect somewhere for these things.

[hasdgfas]

There are a good amount of exile effects recently(Utter End, Silence the Believers, Perilous Vault). And then you can always make their toughness 0 via things like Bile Blight(yes, I know you can just pump it at that point, I just mean in general)

[Maestro]

I need to go check my fat pack again - I was curious what the most expensive cards in the S/M are and I must've pulled half a dozen the other weekend, including Nissa which I've already fawned over enough in this thread. I don't have much expectation or concept of value when it comes to these, so I might be selling things I don't want but I'd prefer they see play. I'm not really into the collector thing, and I'd rather not just pass them on for others to sell, but I'll put a lit of some of what I have up here in case you guys've been looking for anything:

M15
Shivan Reef
Stoke the Flames
Goblin Rabblemaster
Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
Sliver Hivelord

[chamber]

I don't think five mana for a wrath is unreasonable, but I wish the would include a no-regeneration clause. How else am I supposed to kill Rakshasha?

wait until they spend 8 mana on it all at once to pump it, then point a magma jet at it. True story, happened last friday. won the game off that

They're stupid for holding priority between each activation.

Yeah. There's a reason that I tend to pump once, let them confirm it to show they're passing priority to let it resolve, and then pump again. If you pump all at once you just get blown out.

They'd have to explicitly hold priority. If they just said something like 'pump rakasha 4 times' It's an accepted shorthand for 1 pump it once, then if the first resolves I pump it again, then if the 2nd resovles, I pump it again, etc. You couldn't magmajet it to kill it.

[Klazam]

Well, that was the opposite of what i was told by the judge.

Anyway, yeah, was a pure misplay

[Klazam]

What happened was the guy tapped 8 lands and said "this is a 10/10 now."

I told him while the pumps were on the stack,mi respond with magma jet.

Killed the thing

[chamber]

Judge was wrong unless they've changed the rules for shorthands since I last read them. Pumping like that was literally an example given of what was acceptable.

[chamber]

Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intends to retain it. If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point.

[Klazam]

Hm. Its been the same since forever idk

[Klazam]

Interesting though.

[Maestro]

M15
Shivan Reef
Stoke the Flames
Goblin Rabblemaster
Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
Sliver Hivelord

[chamber]

I hadn't read them since the section was initially added. The example is no longer there so I can only go off my memory.

[chamber]

Code: Select all

716. Taking Shortcuts
716.1. When playing a game, players typically make use of mutually understood shortcuts rather than explicitly identifying each game choice (either taking an action or passing priority) a player makes.
716.1a. The rules for taking shortcuts are largely unformalized. As long as each player in the game understands the intent of each other player, any shortcut system they use is acceptable.
716.1b. Occasionally the game gets into a state in which a set of actions could be repeated indefinitely (thus creating a “loop”). In that case, the shortcut rules can be used to determine how many times those actions are repeated without having to actually perform them, and how the loop is broken.
716.2. Taking a shortcut follows the following procedure.
716.2a. At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a non-repetitive series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can’t include conditional actions, where the outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing the shortcut.
Example: A player controls a creature enchanted by Presence of Gond, which grants the creature the ability “T: Put a 1/1 green Elf Warrior creature token onto the battlefield,” and another player controls Intruder Alarm, which reads, in part, “Whenever a creature enters the battlefield, untap all creatures.” When the player has priority, he may suggest “I’ll create a million tokens,” indicating the sequence of activating the creature’s ability, all players passing priority, letting the creature’s ability resolve and put a token onto the battlefield (which causes Intruder Alarm’s ability to trigger), Intruder Alarm’s controller putting that triggered ability on the stack, all players passing priority, Intruder Alarm’s triggered ability resolving, all players passing priority until the player proposing the shortcut has priority, and repeating that sequence 999,999 more times, ending just after the last token-creating ability resolves.
716.2b. Each other player, in turn order starting after the player who suggested the shortcut, may either accept the proposed sequence, or shorten it by naming a place where he or she will make a game choice that’s different than what’s been proposed. (The player doesn’t need to specify at this time what the new choice will be.) This place becomes the new ending point of the proposed sequence.
Example: The active player draws a card during her draw step, then says, “Go.” The nonactive player is holding Into the Fray (an instant that says “Target creature attacks this turn if able”) and says, “I’d like to cast a spell during your beginning of combat step.” The current proposed shortcut is that all players pass priority at all opportunities during the turn until the nonactive player has priority during the beginning of combat step.
716.2c. Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was originally proposed for that player.

My interpretation would be that he was proposing a shortcut, not putting them all on the stack at the same time, because he didn't explicitly say that.

[Klazam]

These are a pretty nice selection of cards, really.

Pedit: yeah, but my understanding of the shortcut rules is that he would have to explictly describe that he was shortcutting the process. Instead he just tapped and did it all at once.

[Klazam]

I've been always explict in passing priority when performing actions of that natire, personally, because i was burned by the same ruling before (i think it was a senslyna guildmage that i activated twice)

[Maestro]

These are a pretty nice selection of cards, really.

I maintain I have at-least-slightly-higher-than-average-luck with this kindof shit, but then again that was a fat pack. Lots of chances I suppose. Also pulled a Foil Staff of the Mind Magus (and other Staffs) and Foil Feral Incarnation... ?

[chamber]

The whole point of shortcuts is to save time when everyone knows whats going on anyway. Declaring that you are taking a shortcut each time would add time.

I grew up being explicit about it too because I was burned by rules lawyers when I was in grade 4 or w/e. That doesn't mean its the proper way, or the way it should be. Name a situation where it makes sense for him to put them all on the stack at once. This is like the prototypical example of where a shortcut saves everyone time.

[Klazam]

Well a situation that it makes sense for him to out everything in the stack is because he wanted me to win >.>


But yeah i see your point.

[Thestatusquo]

No, the judge is incorrect and iirc it hasn't worked this way in about 7-8 years.

What is happening is you are proposing a shortcut. I will pump this card then pump it again when I receive priority, then pump it again when I receive priority, then pump it again when I receive priority.

Your opponent has two options available to him. He can, at any point in the shortcut, interrupt the shortcut. I.e. he can interrupt you after the second pump and cast throttle. Or, he can let the shortcut go through all the way. He definitely cannot say "all of those go on the stack, in response to all of them I cast lightning strike so you wasted all your mana," since that is never a short cut that you were proposing. In magic it is always assumed you are passing priority unless you explicitly state that you are not. This is why you see so many new legacy players get blown out when they try to crack LED in response to an infernal tutor.

[Sudo_Nym]

That said, why wouldn't you always hold up regen mana if you have it available?

[chamber]

That said, why wouldn't you always hold up regen mana if you have it available?

If you are playing against a deck with only burn as removal being a 10/10 is probably sufficient? Maybe it being a 10/10 was lethal.

[Sudo_Nym]

Possibly. Still, it's a real jerk move to assume that all your opponent's pump are on the stack and that you can take them all out with a Magma Spray.

[GreyICE]

Yeah, that was settled as NOT being the case back during the arcbound ravager era, where people would try and claim they could Magma Jet a ravager after someone sacced like 8 artifacts, leading to "Trigger on the stack, does it resolve" bullshit that would waste 3 minutes and lead to the WotC ruling.

[Klazam]

10/10 was lethal

but yeah

i guess i just had 2 judges with like a 7 year gap give the same ruling on that, so...

[Thestatusquo]

TBH I can't imagine a judge possibly getting that ruling wrong, let alone two different ones. Not saying you're making it up buuuuuuuuut I think you're making it up.