Is the poll missing a play-type? Reply with what it is and I will add it.
I am just curious to see what everyone thinks is the most annoying thing to do in a 1v1 and multiplayer (EDH) formats.
Keep in mind these factors...
1. Speed. How fast does it happen? How much time do you have to respond to it?
2. Reaction. Is there much you can do about it, or is it near impossible to stop?
3. Set back. How much does it set you back in the game?
4. Noticeability. Is it easy to spot when it is going to happen?
5. Nuisance. Does it ruin the game for you, or is it a fun mechanic even if it wins them the game?
For example, infinite combos. In my play group, they are usually slower to get going, easy to react to (discard, destroy enchantment, destroy artifact, exile graveyard, etc.) but the set back the game for everyone, is moderately noticeable, and can be really annoying sometimes.
This is subjective, so obviously it depends on your personal experience and play group, but I am still curious!
Wouldn't it be failure to maintain game state on the person who didn't notice the mistake, and a different action on the person who committed it?
It really does bother me though that in a tournament it is let go. At a pre-release, I saw someone, Person A, who was playing a card that let them play the top card of their library. Person A insisted that it lets him play it for free, Person B insisted it did not. So Person A went up to ask a judge. Later I found out what he asked a (preoccupied) judge "I can just cast the card right?". He asked just like that, and the judge said "yes". Keep in mind I do happen to know Person A, and yes, I believe he legitimately thought it meant he could cast it for free.
So I don't pay attention after this until after I finish my game 3. I look over, and Person C, another friend, comes over and points out that he is not allowed to cast it for free. Person B got really annoyed, because Person A told him the judge said it could be cast for free, AND he had been doing so for the past 3 games, so it drastically changed the outcome.
In this situation the judges were only going to issue failure to maintain game state. What a sham! Some people said Person B should have had the judge come over and not trust Person A to do it himself, but I was there. Person A, again, someone I know, got up and just walked off to ask. Person B did indeed see he was talking to a judge, and so he assumed that he asked the proper question. It's even easier to sympathize with B because these cards were new to him as well.
I feel there should be a worse penalty when a person, honest mistakenly, claims that a card acts in a way that it does not. It is his card, and it is his responsibility to understand the mechanic, and it is his fault for asking such a poor question.
In my opinion...
Failure to maintain game state should be used when a mistake is made and not noticed. Yes, B deserved one.
Failure to maintain card mechanics (or something along those lines) should be issued to someone who claims the card does something that it does not.
Game state penalty, if I am correct in saying this, is typically given to player B when Player A reads a card correctly, but uses it wrong. For example, targeting a shroud creature. He was using the card mechanics right, but breaking game mechanics.
Card mechanics penalty, I feel, should be used when a card is misread. For example, my friend has a habit of saying that Geth, Lord of the Vault makes you discard cards. In his mind, he means discard from library, but he does not say that. He is breaking card mechanics. It is his card, and it is his fault.
I feel this is especially useful in things like EDH league. It's a more crowded and casual format, so people are less likely to check every single card.
Either way, these were honest mistakes, and I am perfectly ok with that. It isn't these honest mistakes that bother me, but more so, that it could be very easy for someone to exploit cards against newbies and not be punished for it unless it was a repeated infraction.
Sorry, I usually tag them. I was on mobile at the time and I hate my mobile keyboard.
Here's the situation.
Regular creature. Regular creature is enchanted to gain shroud. ( Lightning Greaves )
Aether Gale is played. Since this is all done in one instance, he wouldn't be able to target the regular creature.
This is because he has to choose targets before the spell resolves. He has chosen Lightning Greaves, but it still exists until the spell resolves, so he would need a second card to get rid of regular creature, as he cannot target the creature with Aether Gale until the spell resolves and the greaves are gone.
Essentially, he cannot target regular creature yet. Aether Gale can only remove lightning greaves, because until the spell resolves, lightning greaves is still in play and giving the creature shroud.
Today, basically, my friend tried targetting something with hexproof at the same time as the thing giving it hexproof. This isn't allowed, it was one instance of a card. The other player didn't notice until a few turns later when he looked in his graveyard and noticed it was one instance, not two. He said he wasn't aware it was one instance, as the player said that he could do it like that. The other player said he didn't know that wasn't allowed.
1. Given that I believe both players, what should I do about this? It WAS something that could have drastically changed the game.
2. In a tournament, how would they handle it?
Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet Will also be a valuable asset. It essentially is a way to get 2/2's to enter the field and trigger our other abilities. On top of that, he can buff and become a nice life-gainer.
Braids, Conjurer Adept is the most fun at our group. Basically it skips the game ahead to the point where huge monsters start wrecking each other. Unlike Pheldagriff Briads can actually win games from time to time.
Ok, now we are talking. It doesn't directly hurt anyone else. If anything, it allows me to establish defenses early game, and since I am not the direct cause of the damage being dealt (killing me won't stop them, unlike Nekusar), they will want to go after each other. I am picky, and I don't like mono-blue, but a proxy test never hurt.
It's hard to not go with the commander. It seems like the ultimate "go f%&# yourself" card and it came from the guy with a lovecraft yellow sign as his picture. But, I'll have to pass, lol.
I do have a Daretti deck! It is super fun to play, but I don't play it because my friend actually uses a commander deck that really, really messes my day up. I save Daretti for matches without him.
So, currently I am playing with a near-complete Teysa deck that I have become proud of. It mostly focus's on her second ability rather than her first. It does feature an infinite combo, and a lot of other cards are dedicated to helping that. However, it's still very fun if I play without the combos, as it turns into a great deck that can manage it's own through nullifying combat damage, stealing from graveyard, and generally playing big swingers.
However, I wanted to make a commander that is dedicated to fun for all, while still holding it's own to win if played right. At first I made a Kruphix deck, but it quickly became a "here's 52 ways to put 25 cards down in a turn while paying 80 for X" deck. This wasn't very fun (it was a proxy, so no money was wasted.)
Now I am contemplating making Iroas, God of Victory as a human tribal. He seems to be a fun beat-down deck. However, I wanted to check to see if anyone else here could think of a really fun EDH deck that holds it's own. By fine for all, I mostly mean it doesn't accelerate from "this turn all I do is place a land" into "this turn I place a land, put omniscience and mill myself for victory." If I am going to win, I want it to be obvious, but hard to stop, as it's more fun for my play group.
While not needing to be budget, it has to be able to be budgeted. If the deck simply cannot survive or do well at all without those four $50 cards, I will pass, but thanks, haha. Send your 800 dollar decks, go ahead! I will more than likely just chop the super expensive cards and replace good cards with their cheaper counterparts if need be.
Thanks for your help guys. It can be hard to find a fun commander IMO, because some people have a lot of fun doing things like placing omniscience on the board. I, however, do not, and that's ok.
I wasn't there, so I am just guessing and putting myself in her place. There is certainly a high potential for genuine condescension and *****ty attitudes towards women at a big event (based on first hand accounts of such I have read), so when someone seems to fulfill those expectations it can be misunderstood.
Yup. This is exactly the problem. You never know if they were being cocky or not. Based on the girls response, I would argue she was just salty that she got corrected. Some people hate getting corrected. I can relate.
I once played a guy who thought this one card (I forgot the name of it) that normally let you play off the top of the library allowed you to play those cards for free. When I told him that is not how it worked, he called over a judge (fair), and when the judge said that was the case, I offered to just let the game carry on as normal (he was doing it for free earlier as I didn't read the card, he did, because it was super casual that night, as this was a draft before a pre-release, and of 6 people.) Instead of accepting my offer, he goes and not only sideboards out that card, but about 20 other cards, because he said the "synergy was ruined." This took forever and our game went into 5 turn. When the fifth turn was done, he had the gull to tell the judge it was a tie, because he had more life in that match and I won the previous match. I let things slide, but not when you try to weasle your way into not losing. I explained to the shop owner that he had ended in the middle of the game prior to this to change cards, despite my offer to continue as normal. The store owner chalked this up as a concede on his part, so I got the victory.
"Now wait," you say, "he was upset he lost, not that you corrected him." I'm getting there right now.
I got the pleasure of sitting next to him (same table) for the next game. Believe it or not this kid not only put the card back in his god forsaken deck, but he furthermore tried saying he could cast the cards for free. I leaned over and explained that this wasn't the case of the card. I didn't want to embarass the kid who make him look like a prick'ly bush so I didn't tell him anything other than the card doesn't work that way. This kid, I kid you not, ends the game and says he needs to sideboard now (what BS). I was so happy when his opponent said he was not ok with that and called a judge over, because the kid immediately just packed up his stuff and left.
Lots of people to reply to. Instead of quoting, i'll just run down the list.
FuriousMarispul: I think you have to realize two things. The first is that I am not asking them to do this every single time. If they believe the card is known well enough, they can just say the name. Second, the problem is that most people have only ever mumbled in the past, so 70% of the cards we remember, but can't remember by name, so we have to constantly ask every single time what it does. My group usually works itself out as long as you give them a starting point, such as announcing the entirety of the card.
Also, regarding the "mana untapping." It becomes a problem because he is constantly switching around what he wants to tap for mana. We don't want to enforce the "tap once and you're done rule" but instead the "once the card is announced, the mana is set." We operate best when we give leeway but actually give warnings for things like confusing the board state. Anyways, when untapping and retapping constantly, and having multiple cards that reduce mana cost, it can be difficult to keep up. Usually we have a good understanding of what the costs are. However, the problem arises that we believe he is tapping the appropriate mana, and then untapping later. He uses the excuse "I used my artifact instead, you just didn't notice." As others have said, you need to watch a player, but it loses fun when you have to watch them like a hawk. When we don't, however, is when we suspect him of doing these things. That's why we are taking precautions.
MastersElf: This is a good point that I have noticed before. It isn't so much that we are not paying attention as it is the transforming state of the board. A new creature is cast who is a threat, so people immediately go to their hand to try and make a new plan to stop said creature. This is inevitable, and a crucial part of the game, but this is when people take advantage of the lack of eyes.
Cryogen: Yes, my point exactly. The thing I love most about my playgroup is that we usually share the same positive and negative concepts in the game. When I make a request such as "read off each card clearly", most players are in total agreeance and are glad we instituted it. I can honestly say there hasn't been a time yet when it's become an issue that a player doesn't like the way we do things (the people in our group.) The nice thing about this is that we tend to just sort of "get" each other without needing to talk. You sort of just *know* when a friend may want to use his priority to play an instant, or when you don't even have to bother explaining what a card does because the first word of the card is enough for everyone. This is why we usually start with strict rules, because they eventually become easy habit on it's own. Besides that, clearly reading a card from top to bottom is important because you'd be surprised how many people misunderstand the card, or simply say it wrong. When I play Geth, Lord of the Vault I have, for some reason, a habit of saying the cards are exiled from the top of the library, not put into the graveyard, or I will say that they are discarded. I know what I mean, but it comes out wrong. This happens a lot with new cards. At first, we read them, and all is well, but sometimes the second or third time someone misinterprets it because it was summarized and not read properly.
BaronCappucino: This is an interesting play-style, but my play group tries to keep out things that would sway the game negatively without warrant. In a sanctioned event, you are allowed to change your mana decisions as long as you do so before you actually put the card out. Forcing players to keep their lands tapped would result in some people having major advantage simply because their opponent didn't tap properly, and it gives major advantage to mono-colored decks.
I like the ideas. I've told the entire playgroup to watch their mana habits. It's actually very common for this specific person to tap an artifact for mana, then change his mind and choose lands, then change his mind and use one artifact and a land. However, now that the group knows, they can watch it and make sure they don't do it too much either.
I also told the group to start announcing their cards. Typically, when people cast a card, they usually just say the name of the card and put it down, or they read the statline but mumble the name and "summarize" what the card does (which isn't always accurate, not on purpose) so I told my friends to clearly pronounce the name, it's abilities, the statline, and the manacost especially.
Thanks for the help guys. I am positive this will help out a lot.
I am just curious to see what everyone thinks is the most annoying thing to do in a 1v1 and multiplayer (EDH) formats.
Keep in mind these factors...
1. Speed. How fast does it happen? How much time do you have to respond to it?
2. Reaction. Is there much you can do about it, or is it near impossible to stop?
3. Set back. How much does it set you back in the game?
4. Noticeability. Is it easy to spot when it is going to happen?
5. Nuisance. Does it ruin the game for you, or is it a fun mechanic even if it wins them the game?
For example, infinite combos. In my play group, they are usually slower to get going, easy to react to (discard, destroy enchantment, destroy artifact, exile graveyard, etc.) but the set back the game for everyone, is moderately noticeable, and can be really annoying sometimes.
This is subjective, so obviously it depends on your personal experience and play group, but I am still curious!
It really does bother me though that in a tournament it is let go. At a pre-release, I saw someone, Person A, who was playing a card that let them play the top card of their library. Person A insisted that it lets him play it for free, Person B insisted it did not. So Person A went up to ask a judge. Later I found out what he asked a (preoccupied) judge "I can just cast the card right?". He asked just like that, and the judge said "yes". Keep in mind I do happen to know Person A, and yes, I believe he legitimately thought it meant he could cast it for free.
So I don't pay attention after this until after I finish my game 3. I look over, and Person C, another friend, comes over and points out that he is not allowed to cast it for free. Person B got really annoyed, because Person A told him the judge said it could be cast for free, AND he had been doing so for the past 3 games, so it drastically changed the outcome.
In this situation the judges were only going to issue failure to maintain game state. What a sham! Some people said Person B should have had the judge come over and not trust Person A to do it himself, but I was there. Person A, again, someone I know, got up and just walked off to ask. Person B did indeed see he was talking to a judge, and so he assumed that he asked the proper question. It's even easier to sympathize with B because these cards were new to him as well.
I feel there should be a worse penalty when a person, honest mistakenly, claims that a card acts in a way that it does not. It is his card, and it is his responsibility to understand the mechanic, and it is his fault for asking such a poor question.
In my opinion...
Failure to maintain game state should be used when a mistake is made and not noticed. Yes, B deserved one.
Failure to maintain card mechanics (or something along those lines) should be issued to someone who claims the card does something that it does not.
Game state penalty, if I am correct in saying this, is typically given to player B when Player A reads a card correctly, but uses it wrong. For example, targeting a shroud creature. He was using the card mechanics right, but breaking game mechanics.
Card mechanics penalty, I feel, should be used when a card is misread. For example, my friend has a habit of saying that Geth, Lord of the Vault makes you discard cards. In his mind, he means discard from library, but he does not say that. He is breaking card mechanics. It is his card, and it is his fault.
I feel this is especially useful in things like EDH league. It's a more crowded and casual format, so people are less likely to check every single card.
Either way, these were honest mistakes, and I am perfectly ok with that. It isn't these honest mistakes that bother me, but more so, that it could be very easy for someone to exploit cards against newbies and not be punished for it unless it was a repeated infraction.
Here's the situation.
Regular creature. Regular creature is enchanted to gain shroud. ( Lightning Greaves )
Aether Gale is played. Since this is all done in one instance, he wouldn't be able to target the regular creature.
This is because he has to choose targets before the spell resolves. He has chosen Lightning Greaves, but it still exists until the spell resolves, so he would need a second card to get rid of regular creature, as he cannot target the creature with Aether Gale until the spell resolves and the greaves are gone.
Essentially, he cannot target regular creature yet. Aether Gale can only remove lightning greaves, because until the spell resolves, lightning greaves is still in play and giving the creature shroud.
1. Given that I believe both players, what should I do about this? It WAS something that could have drastically changed the game.
2. In a tournament, how would they handle it?
Ok, now we are talking. It doesn't directly hurt anyone else. If anything, it allows me to establish defenses early game, and since I am not the direct cause of the damage being dealt (killing me won't stop them, unlike Nekusar), they will want to go after each other. I am picky, and I don't like mono-blue, but a proxy test never hurt.
It's hard to not go with the commander. It seems like the ultimate "go f%&# yourself" card and it came from the guy with a lovecraft yellow sign as his picture. But, I'll have to pass, lol.
I do have a Daretti deck! It is super fun to play, but I don't play it because my friend actually uses a commander deck that really, really messes my day up. I save Daretti for matches without him.
Pelldagrif huh... maybe... just, maybe...
However, I wanted to make a commander that is dedicated to fun for all, while still holding it's own to win if played right. At first I made a Kruphix deck, but it quickly became a "here's 52 ways to put 25 cards down in a turn while paying 80 for X" deck. This wasn't very fun (it was a proxy, so no money was wasted.)
Now I am contemplating making Iroas, God of Victory as a human tribal. He seems to be a fun beat-down deck. However, I wanted to check to see if anyone else here could think of a really fun EDH deck that holds it's own. By fine for all, I mostly mean it doesn't accelerate from "this turn all I do is place a land" into "this turn I place a land, put omniscience and mill myself for victory." If I am going to win, I want it to be obvious, but hard to stop, as it's more fun for my play group.
While not needing to be budget, it has to be able to be budgeted. If the deck simply cannot survive or do well at all without those four $50 cards, I will pass, but thanks, haha. Send your 800 dollar decks, go ahead! I will more than likely just chop the super expensive cards and replace good cards with their cheaper counterparts if need be.
Thanks for your help guys. It can be hard to find a fun commander IMO, because some people have a lot of fun doing things like placing omniscience on the board. I, however, do not, and that's ok.
Yup. This is exactly the problem. You never know if they were being cocky or not. Based on the girls response, I would argue she was just salty that she got corrected. Some people hate getting corrected. I can relate.
I once played a guy who thought this one card (I forgot the name of it) that normally let you play off the top of the library allowed you to play those cards for free. When I told him that is not how it worked, he called over a judge (fair), and when the judge said that was the case, I offered to just let the game carry on as normal (he was doing it for free earlier as I didn't read the card, he did, because it was super casual that night, as this was a draft before a pre-release, and of 6 people.) Instead of accepting my offer, he goes and not only sideboards out that card, but about 20 other cards, because he said the "synergy was ruined." This took forever and our game went into 5 turn. When the fifth turn was done, he had the gull to tell the judge it was a tie, because he had more life in that match and I won the previous match. I let things slide, but not when you try to weasle your way into not losing. I explained to the shop owner that he had ended in the middle of the game prior to this to change cards, despite my offer to continue as normal. The store owner chalked this up as a concede on his part, so I got the victory.
"Now wait," you say, "he was upset he lost, not that you corrected him." I'm getting there right now.
I got the pleasure of sitting next to him (same table) for the next game. Believe it or not this kid not only put the card back in his god forsaken deck, but he furthermore tried saying he could cast the cards for free. I leaned over and explained that this wasn't the case of the card. I didn't want to embarass the kid who make him look like a prick'ly bush so I didn't tell him anything other than the card doesn't work that way. This kid, I kid you not, ends the game and says he needs to sideboard now (what BS). I was so happy when his opponent said he was not ok with that and called a judge over, because the kid immediately just packed up his stuff and left.
FuriousMarispul: I think you have to realize two things. The first is that I am not asking them to do this every single time. If they believe the card is known well enough, they can just say the name. Second, the problem is that most people have only ever mumbled in the past, so 70% of the cards we remember, but can't remember by name, so we have to constantly ask every single time what it does. My group usually works itself out as long as you give them a starting point, such as announcing the entirety of the card.
Also, regarding the "mana untapping." It becomes a problem because he is constantly switching around what he wants to tap for mana. We don't want to enforce the "tap once and you're done rule" but instead the "once the card is announced, the mana is set." We operate best when we give leeway but actually give warnings for things like confusing the board state. Anyways, when untapping and retapping constantly, and having multiple cards that reduce mana cost, it can be difficult to keep up. Usually we have a good understanding of what the costs are. However, the problem arises that we believe he is tapping the appropriate mana, and then untapping later. He uses the excuse "I used my artifact instead, you just didn't notice." As others have said, you need to watch a player, but it loses fun when you have to watch them like a hawk. When we don't, however, is when we suspect him of doing these things. That's why we are taking precautions.
MastersElf: This is a good point that I have noticed before. It isn't so much that we are not paying attention as it is the transforming state of the board. A new creature is cast who is a threat, so people immediately go to their hand to try and make a new plan to stop said creature. This is inevitable, and a crucial part of the game, but this is when people take advantage of the lack of eyes.
Cryogen: Yes, my point exactly. The thing I love most about my playgroup is that we usually share the same positive and negative concepts in the game. When I make a request such as "read off each card clearly", most players are in total agreeance and are glad we instituted it. I can honestly say there hasn't been a time yet when it's become an issue that a player doesn't like the way we do things (the people in our group.) The nice thing about this is that we tend to just sort of "get" each other without needing to talk. You sort of just *know* when a friend may want to use his priority to play an instant, or when you don't even have to bother explaining what a card does because the first word of the card is enough for everyone. This is why we usually start with strict rules, because they eventually become easy habit on it's own. Besides that, clearly reading a card from top to bottom is important because you'd be surprised how many people misunderstand the card, or simply say it wrong. When I play Geth, Lord of the Vault I have, for some reason, a habit of saying the cards are exiled from the top of the library, not put into the graveyard, or I will say that they are discarded. I know what I mean, but it comes out wrong. This happens a lot with new cards. At first, we read them, and all is well, but sometimes the second or third time someone misinterprets it because it was summarized and not read properly.
BaronCappucino: This is an interesting play-style, but my play group tries to keep out things that would sway the game negatively without warrant. In a sanctioned event, you are allowed to change your mana decisions as long as you do so before you actually put the card out. Forcing players to keep their lands tapped would result in some people having major advantage simply because their opponent didn't tap properly, and it gives major advantage to mono-colored decks.
I also told the group to start announcing their cards. Typically, when people cast a card, they usually just say the name of the card and put it down, or they read the statline but mumble the name and "summarize" what the card does (which isn't always accurate, not on purpose) so I told my friends to clearly pronounce the name, it's abilities, the statline, and the manacost especially.
Thanks for the help guys. I am positive this will help out a lot.