As far as your initial question, the power level issue aside, there isn’t much you can do beyond what you did. You tried to explain the rule and you had a judge back you up. If they can’t accept that then they will have future problems playing Magic. Hopefully, after getting over their feelings on how the game ended they might be willing to accept they had the rules wrong.
The power level issue is only relevant because it put them in the mindset where they didn’t want to like you or agree with anything you said. So there you sort of have two choices; you can play weaker decks against them or you can accept that after every game with you they will be salty and unreasonable.
Not necessarily true. There's lots he could've done to improve the outcome in this scenario - OP states he used the term 'pretty good'. Pretty good does not equal high level combo. Pretty good covers some of my stronger decks, but if I were to play Ghave, Guru of Spores in a new meta I would give them a forewarning that combos were present in the deck - and if they had an issue with that, I'd play a more interactive deck.
The fact is that people in this particular game had differing expectations. It's not any one person's fault that there was a communication breakdown, it's a failing of all of the people involved. OP wasn't clear what he expected, the one person he already knew didn't communicate to the rest of the group that the new guy played combo (and it sounds like he regularly griefs the rest of the meta belligerently too), and the rest of the group were not clear that they didn't pack answers for combo and didn't enjoy combo. It happens. The only thing that's changeable about this scenario is the outcome - I definitely think the group overreacted. Walking out of the store is pretty childish, no doubt. I can see where their grievance lies though.
To my mind the best way to have dealt with this is to say 'ok guys, here's how this scenario works, see rules explained at this link in a reasonable way. If this sort of play isn't cool, how about we give it another go and I'll play a different deck or you guys play different decks? I wasn't certain what to expect in this meta and maybe we should've covered some ground rules for social interaction first.' Hell, I have this discussion with my own wife from time to time.
It's entirely possible that the group did just overreact and throw their toys out of the cot, though. In which case they'll either stop playing from a bad experience, or learn what it is they misunderstood and improve their knowledge base and their plays.
TL;DR - it's crucially important when playing with new folk to establish expectations before the game starts. The best game is not necessarily one you win, it's one everyone enjoys. And if what you enjoy is combo when the rest of the group doesn't, maybe it's best to just find a more competitive group.
OP states he used the term 'pretty good'. Pretty good does not equal high level combo. Pretty good covers some of my stronger decks, but if I were to play Ghave, Guru of Spores in a new meta I would give them a forewarning that combos were present in the deck - and if they had an issue with that, I'd play a more interactive deck.
Yep, My dragon deck is pretty good, able to even stop some combo and control decks, I play 0 Basic lands and blood moon does not shut me down completely.
That said, My dragon deck is till just beat down. (When blood moon is out, my ability to play card stops from all to 17. yet t does not completely shut me down. That is Pretty good in my opinion
Now if I were to pulled out my old Arcum deck, 4 (maybe 5 if a had a bad start) turns is all you would have had to play.
OP states he used the term 'pretty good'. Pretty good does not equal high level combo. Pretty good covers some of my stronger decks, but if I were to play Ghave, Guru of Spores in a new meta I would give them a forewarning that combos were present in the deck - and if they had an issue with that, I'd play a more interactive deck.
Yep, My dragon deck is pretty good, able to even stop some combo and control decks, I play 0 Basic lands and blood moon does not shut me down completely.
That said, My dragon deck is till just beat down. (When blood moon is out, my ability to play card stops from all to 17. yet t does not completely shut me down. That is Pretty good in my opinion
Now if I were to pulled out my old Arcum deck, 4 (maybe 5 if a had a bad start) turns is all you would have had to play.
My point exactly. I run some 'pretty good' decks myself. But none of them put the game on a clock, they're interactive, and they don't combo outside of some janky interactions I wasn't aware of. Even if I am aware of the combo, I don't necessarily use it unless the situation calls for the game to end.
Well, you did not quite know them, they did no quite know you. Get this beyond being "the guy with the nasty Sharuum deck" and the "salty guys" and get anything else built to kill people softly rather than in a sweeping-the-carpet-off-feet sryle for situations like this one. If you like combo you have tons of options in commandet to get janky and play for the kicks.
Rules disputes are the worst. I once had a player pick up their cards and walk out because they didn't understand that they couldn't Remand a Past In Flames back to their hand when it was cast for its Flashback.
Thing is though, I have never seen someone get salty over a rule that didn't benefit them. Funny thing to think if the idea is that the game is just for kicks. In the end, people will get salty to whatever they lose to, and think whatever they can stomp off of the playmat is an awesome representation of how EDH ought to be played.
As far as your initial question, the power level issue aside, there isn’t much you can do beyond what you did. You tried to explain the rule and you had a judge back you up. If they can’t accept that then they will have future problems playing Magic. Hopefully, after getting over their feelings on how the game ended they might be willing to accept they had the rules wrong.
The power level issue is only relevant because it put them in the mindset where they didn’t want to like you or agree with anything you said. So there you sort of have two choices; you can play weaker decks against them or you can accept that after every game with you they will be salty and unreasonable.
Not necessarily true. There's lots he could've done to improve the outcome in this scenario - OP states he used the term 'pretty good'. Pretty good does not equal high level combo. Pretty good covers some of my stronger decks, but if I were to play Ghave, Guru of Spores in a new meta I would give them a forewarning that combos were present in the deck - and if they had an issue with that, I'd play a more interactive deck.
The fact is that people in this particular game had differing expectations. It's not any one person's fault that there was a communication breakdown, it's a failing of all of the people involved. OP wasn't clear what he expected, the one person he already knew didn't communicate to the rest of the group that the new guy played combo (and it sounds like he regularly griefs the rest of the meta belligerently too), and the rest of the group were not clear that they didn't pack answers for combo and didn't enjoy combo. It happens. The only thing that's changeable about this scenario is the outcome - I definitely think the group overreacted. Walking out of the store is pretty childish, no doubt. I can see where their grievance lies though.
To my mind the best way to have dealt with this is to say 'ok guys, here's how this scenario works, see rules explained at this link in a reasonable way. If this sort of play isn't cool, how about we give it another go and I'll play a different deck or you guys play different decks? I wasn't certain what to expect in this meta and maybe we should've covered some ground rules for social interaction first.' Hell, I have this discussion with my own wife from time to time.
It's entirely possible that the group did just overreact and throw their toys out of the cot, though. In which case they'll either stop playing from a bad experience, or learn what it is they misunderstood and improve their knowledge base and their plays.
TL;DR - it's crucially important when playing with new folk to establish expectations before the game starts. The best game is not necessarily one you win, it's one everyone enjoys. And if what you enjoy is combo when the rest of the group doesn't, maybe it's best to just find a more competitive group.
Maybe me assuming at least one of the players knew my deck was loaded with combos and they knew what they did was a mistake, but I assumed since I had played several times with the most vocal one and that they knew what they did was a mistake. Maybe I should have just played a different deck since this player also has a history of getting salty at combos but was used to being the dominant player in his group
It sounds like the guy is not a paragon of communication. In fact it sounds like he's not that pleasant if he doesn't get his way - I could be reading that wrong though. To my mind, mentioning the word combo is essential if that is your aim.
I think maybe the takeaway lesson here is bring a casual deck with you just in case, cover yourself by being explicit regarding combo, and if players are going to get salty, well at least you've covered your ass and their being babies is no skin off your nose.
It sounds like the guy is not a paragon of communication. In fact it sounds like he's not that pleasant if he doesn't get his way - I could be reading that wrong though. To my mind, mentioning the word combo is essential if that is your aim.
I think maybe the takeaway lesson here is bring a casual deck with you just in case, cover yourself by being explicit regarding combo, and if players are going to get salty, well at least you've covered your ass and their being babies is no skin off your nose.
I did have a casual deck with me and offered to switch if they didn't want me to play my Sharuum deck. The one guy who knew my deck the most said just play it and the rest agreed.
Part of me thinks that he didn't wanna accept that there was someone with decks more powerful than his in the end and was upset someone other than him won (that group seems like he's the most powerful player in the group, as games mostly seem to turn into the rest of the table vs him)
Part of me thinks that he didn't wanna accept that there was someone with decks more powerful than his in the end and was upset someone other than him won (that group seems like he's the most powerful player in the group, as games mostly seem to turn into the rest of the table vs him)
Sounds like an accurate assessment to me too. Sounds like he likes being king of the castle. And if they agreed, they don't really have a leg to stand on walking out of the shop or getting salty at all. Anything they say, your rebuttal is 'but you all agreed to this'.
Part of me thinks that he didn't wanna accept that there was someone with decks more powerful than his in the end and was upset someone other than him won (that group seems like he's the most powerful player in the group, as games mostly seem to turn into the rest of the table vs him)
Sounds like an accurate assessment to me too. Sounds like he likes being king of the castle. And if they agreed, they don't really have a leg to stand on walking out of the shop or getting salty at all. Anything they say, your rebuttal is 'but you all agreed to this'.
I mean if I ever play with them again (which will be at least a few weeks away due to me attending GP Toronto this weekend), I'll probably play a casual deck and if they try and bring up the rules interaction, I'll just show them rules relating state based actions and ETB.
It just seemed weird to me that the guy who complained the most is the guy that usually wins most of the other games I see them play
It does seem weird, which is why I'd think of him as a big fish in a small pond. Which is sad, because no one benefits from that. His playmates are less likely to improve and so is he, all that comes out of it is this guy getting his ego stroked.
I do one of two things - firstly, have an mtg app on my phone for rulings I can't verbally explain or need clarification on. There are a lot of these, and most grab their rulings direct from gatherer/oracle. Secondly, see if there is a judge in the room, or a laptop in the room. Either one gives you access to more complex rulings as needed.
It does seem weird, which is why I'd think of him as a big fish in a small pond. Which is sad, because no one benefits from that. His playmates are less likely to improve and so is he, all that comes out of it is this guy getting his ego stroked.
I do one of two things - firstly, have an mtg app on my phone for rulings I can't verbally explain or need clarification on. There are a lot of these, and most grab their rulings direct from gatherer/oracle. Secondly, see if there is a judge in the room, or a laptop in the room. Either one gives you access to more complex rulings as needed.
I have two pages bookmarked on my phone now, one is the ruling on state based actions and the other is rulings on ETBs
big fish in small pod is probably the best way to put him. Why all of them are casual, some of them would rather buy booster boxes of sets they find fun, some of them just build from what they acquire at events like prerelease or just buy random cards. While he will actually get singles for his decks, which are casual but what I'd probably call on the higher end of casual decks
It honestly sounds like he's sharking them, to go with the analogy.
The app I use is umagic. iMTG is good too. Both are for iphone, there are plenty out there for android too though. Full card catalogs and rulings available, although anything more in depth regarding stacks, priorities and complex interactions obviously you'd need to consult a judge for.
Wow, I think people are being way too harsh on you. You told the group your deck was pretty good and offered to switch but they declined your offer, either out of arrogance or faux politeness. I think anything above and beyond that is a waste of time. You shouldn't have to spend 10 minutes playing 50 questions with a new group or laying out every possible combo in your deck to figure out exactly where they draw the line on what is and isn't okay. If a group has something they don't like that's a default part of the game like infinite combos, it's their responsibility to notify a new member of that before starting the game, not after. It's often completely arbitrary and I've found that a lot of groups that are not experienced don't even know whether they're okay with something until someone actually does it to them. I remember describing a deck to a pod of casual players and they said it didn't sound that bad, then I played it against them (janky combo deck) and they were pissed at the end and told me to never play that deck again. And in another case I asked a new playgroup if they had any special restrictions and they said no, but they didn't tell me until after we were 30 minutes in that they allow silver-bordered cards (before Unstable) and Wish cards to pull broken stuff out of their binders as needed, and I was completely blindsided.
I think the only mistake that you made was to keep pushing after the group was clearly demonstrating to you that they were not interested in facing reality by throwing shade at an L2. I think in that case I would have politely said "hey guys, I think we're at an impasse here, I know that I'm right but I think there is a mismatch between our decks here and out of respect for your group I'm just going to scoop up my cards and let you guys continue on without me." At the point you got a certified judge to confirm your victory, you had done everything you could possibly do.
Rules issues can be tricky especially with players that have been playing a long time but have literally never bothered to look at the Comp rules or even know it exists. I have literally shown the relevant section of the Comp rules to long time casuals during rules disputes and they refuse to acknowledge it because if doesn't jive with their experience or internal logic or whatever. Oh, but if their friend comes over that's been playing with them forever but isn't even a judge agrees with me, then they believe me. It can be very frustrating and in casual games it's usually not worth the extra effort.
While I agree there was a degree of harsness here that may not have been necessary, two issues I feel need to be pointed out:
1. While the line is subjective for everyone, 'pretty good' and 'Sharuum combo' are not the same to many players. While OP did not specify whether he SAID the deck was Sharuum combo, it would not have been a bad thing to say. With that one phrase, most people can get a good sense of how casual/informed a table is.
2. OP was a guest at a new location, just as one can be a guest in someone's house. There was faults on both sides here, but one CAN argue that it started with a failure to clarify. It culminated in a poor finish(that fault's on them), but nothing helped stop the escalation once it got started. Whose fault that is is arguable, and not something I will comment on; only that the onus does fall on newcomers. We don't appreciate someone to enter our playgroup and start saying, "What up, f*****s?" right off the bat, right? Some of us prefer to get to know the person in question before it's comfortable, others may never appreciate such a thing. It's a courtesy thing, but it also goes both ways, which in this case, it didn't. As I said, fault to go around there.
Yeah, there were communication issues on both sides from the sounds. It happens, and for my part I certainly didn't intend to vilify anyone for having committed the ultimate EDH sin or anything stupid like that. Sometimes it just helps to be extremely, redundantly clear - like when you're talking to someone who speaks a different language and ALL OF A SUDDEN THE DIALOGUE IS IN CAPS LOCK.
That sort of thing. Making abundantly sure that everyone is aware of whats happening.
The end reaction to this scenario was still a joke though, that's an incredibly childish reaction.
sorry for bumping a month old thread but I decided I'd post an update for anyone whose followed this thread and still cares.
I was at the LGS yesterday and saw that group for the first time since this whole incident. (went to the GP in Toornto and was working many Saturdays so couldn't really go down)
The main player who questioned my combo ended up apologizing for the whole incident and I told him I'd try and resist the urge to play broken decks against them. We ended up talking a bit before we all had to head out. So I'm assuming no bad blood between anyone
Not necessarily true. There's lots he could've done to improve the outcome in this scenario - OP states he used the term 'pretty good'. Pretty good does not equal high level combo. Pretty good covers some of my stronger decks, but if I were to play Ghave, Guru of Spores in a new meta I would give them a forewarning that combos were present in the deck - and if they had an issue with that, I'd play a more interactive deck.
The fact is that people in this particular game had differing expectations. It's not any one person's fault that there was a communication breakdown, it's a failing of all of the people involved. OP wasn't clear what he expected, the one person he already knew didn't communicate to the rest of the group that the new guy played combo (and it sounds like he regularly griefs the rest of the meta belligerently too), and the rest of the group were not clear that they didn't pack answers for combo and didn't enjoy combo. It happens. The only thing that's changeable about this scenario is the outcome - I definitely think the group overreacted. Walking out of the store is pretty childish, no doubt. I can see where their grievance lies though.
To my mind the best way to have dealt with this is to say 'ok guys, here's how this scenario works, see rules explained at this link in a reasonable way. If this sort of play isn't cool, how about we give it another go and I'll play a different deck or you guys play different decks? I wasn't certain what to expect in this meta and maybe we should've covered some ground rules for social interaction first.' Hell, I have this discussion with my own wife from time to time.
It's entirely possible that the group did just overreact and throw their toys out of the cot, though. In which case they'll either stop playing from a bad experience, or learn what it is they misunderstood and improve their knowledge base and their plays.
TL;DR - it's crucially important when playing with new folk to establish expectations before the game starts. The best game is not necessarily one you win, it's one everyone enjoys. And if what you enjoy is combo when the rest of the group doesn't, maybe it's best to just find a more competitive group.
Yep, My dragon deck is pretty good, able to even stop some combo and control decks, I play 0 Basic lands and blood moon does not shut me down completely.
That said, My dragon deck is till just beat down. (When blood moon is out, my ability to play card stops from all to 17. yet t does not completely shut me down. That is Pretty good in my opinion
Now if I were to pulled out my old Arcum deck, 4 (maybe 5 if a had a bad start) turns is all you would have had to play.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
My point exactly. I run some 'pretty good' decks myself. But none of them put the game on a clock, they're interactive, and they don't combo outside of some janky interactions I wasn't aware of. Even if I am aware of the combo, I don't necessarily use it unless the situation calls for the game to end.
When going to a new meta I take a weak deck a strong deck and my favorite. Low ball first then adapt from there to avoid stuff like this.
BRGKresh the BloodbraidedBRG, A box of lands and ideas.
Modern:
RG Titanshift. A deck made of cards too stupid for EDH.
Retired: Lots. More than I feel you should suffer through or I should type out.
Thing is though, I have never seen someone get salty over a rule that didn't benefit them. Funny thing to think if the idea is that the game is just for kicks. In the end, people will get salty to whatever they lose to, and think whatever they can stomp off of the playmat is an awesome representation of how EDH ought to be played.
Wise man once said - "Let the Wookie win."
Maybe me assuming at least one of the players knew my deck was loaded with combos and they knew what they did was a mistake, but I assumed since I had played several times with the most vocal one and that they knew what they did was a mistake. Maybe I should have just played a different deck since this player also has a history of getting salty at combos but was used to being the dominant player in his group
I think maybe the takeaway lesson here is bring a casual deck with you just in case, cover yourself by being explicit regarding combo, and if players are going to get salty, well at least you've covered your ass and their being babies is no skin off your nose.
I did have a casual deck with me and offered to switch if they didn't want me to play my Sharuum deck. The one guy who knew my deck the most said just play it and the rest agreed.
Part of me thinks that he didn't wanna accept that there was someone with decks more powerful than his in the end and was upset someone other than him won (that group seems like he's the most powerful player in the group, as games mostly seem to turn into the rest of the table vs him)
Sounds like an accurate assessment to me too. Sounds like he likes being king of the castle. And if they agreed, they don't really have a leg to stand on walking out of the shop or getting salty at all. Anything they say, your rebuttal is 'but you all agreed to this'.
I mean if I ever play with them again (which will be at least a few weeks away due to me attending GP Toronto this weekend), I'll probably play a casual deck and if they try and bring up the rules interaction, I'll just show them rules relating state based actions and ETB.
It just seemed weird to me that the guy who complained the most is the guy that usually wins most of the other games I see them play
I do one of two things - firstly, have an mtg app on my phone for rulings I can't verbally explain or need clarification on. There are a lot of these, and most grab their rulings direct from gatherer/oracle. Secondly, see if there is a judge in the room, or a laptop in the room. Either one gives you access to more complex rulings as needed.
I have two pages bookmarked on my phone now, one is the ruling on state based actions and the other is rulings on ETBs
big fish in small pod is probably the best way to put him. Why all of them are casual, some of them would rather buy booster boxes of sets they find fun, some of them just build from what they acquire at events like prerelease or just buy random cards. While he will actually get singles for his decks, which are casual but what I'd probably call on the higher end of casual decks
The app I use is umagic. iMTG is good too. Both are for iphone, there are plenty out there for android too though. Full card catalogs and rulings available, although anything more in depth regarding stacks, priorities and complex interactions obviously you'd need to consult a judge for.
but he's definitely the big fish in a small pond and has the better deck building skills/means to acquire cards
I mean I was the one who played a sort of competitive deck as a casual table, but I asked first
I think my thing with apps is that I've recently switched to Iphone (after having androids for maybe 4 years), so I'm still exploring the apps I have
I think the only mistake that you made was to keep pushing after the group was clearly demonstrating to you that they were not interested in facing reality by throwing shade at an L2. I think in that case I would have politely said "hey guys, I think we're at an impasse here, I know that I'm right but I think there is a mismatch between our decks here and out of respect for your group I'm just going to scoop up my cards and let you guys continue on without me." At the point you got a certified judge to confirm your victory, you had done everything you could possibly do.
Rules issues can be tricky especially with players that have been playing a long time but have literally never bothered to look at the Comp rules or even know it exists. I have literally shown the relevant section of the Comp rules to long time casuals during rules disputes and they refuse to acknowledge it because if doesn't jive with their experience or internal logic or whatever. Oh, but if their friend comes over that's been playing with them forever but isn't even a judge agrees with me, then they believe me. It can be very frustrating and in casual games it's usually not worth the extra effort.
1. While the line is subjective for everyone, 'pretty good' and 'Sharuum combo' are not the same to many players. While OP did not specify whether he SAID the deck was Sharuum combo, it would not have been a bad thing to say. With that one phrase, most people can get a good sense of how casual/informed a table is.
2. OP was a guest at a new location, just as one can be a guest in someone's house. There was faults on both sides here, but one CAN argue that it started with a failure to clarify. It culminated in a poor finish(that fault's on them), but nothing helped stop the escalation once it got started. Whose fault that is is arguable, and not something I will comment on; only that the onus does fall on newcomers. We don't appreciate someone to enter our playgroup and start saying, "What up, f*****s?" right off the bat, right? Some of us prefer to get to know the person in question before it's comfortable, others may never appreciate such a thing. It's a courtesy thing, but it also goes both ways, which in this case, it didn't. As I said, fault to go around there.
EDH decks: 1. RGWMayael's Big BeatsRETIRED!
2. BUWMerieke Ri Berit and the 40 Thieves
3. URNiv's Wheeling and Dealing!
4. BURThe Walking Dead
5. GWSisay's Legends of Tomorrow
6. RWBRise of Markov
7. GElvez and stuffz(W)
8. RCrush your enemies(W)
9. BSign right here...(W)
That sort of thing. Making abundantly sure that everyone is aware of whats happening.
The end reaction to this scenario was still a joke though, that's an incredibly childish reaction.
I was at the LGS yesterday and saw that group for the first time since this whole incident. (went to the GP in Toornto and was working many Saturdays so couldn't really go down)
The main player who questioned my combo ended up apologizing for the whole incident and I told him I'd try and resist the urge to play broken decks against them. We ended up talking a bit before we all had to head out. So I'm assuming no bad blood between anyone