I challenge you to come up with a situation where you want to do something in your beginning of combat that wouldn't be fine to do in your first main phase.
Maybe my issue comes from the fact that Angelic Favor was the first combat trick I ever figured out on my own. I *do* say "Moving to my beginning of combat step" fairly regularly. But then I don't play in tournaments where Angelic Favor is legal, so it doesn't really matter what a judge would think.
It seems to me that your "beginning of combat step?" "OK" "LOL you can't tap me now" situation would be covered by the clause that allows you to rewind when the players are confused, so there's no reason to make "Moving to my beginning of combat step" different from "Moving to my second main phase." I understand why you would want them to be different though; I just can't twist the rules as written into that interpretation.
A statement such as "I'm ready for combat" or "Declare attackers?" offers to keep passing priority until an opponent has priority in the beginning of combat step. Opponents are assumed to be acting then unless they specify otherwise. No shortcut can result in the active player declaring attackers without all opponents first receiving priority in the beginning of combat step.
It really doesn't. Trust me, I wrote the shortcut.
Lets take you at your word. Now answer my question: if I want to go to a specific step, why would the tournament rules require that I go to that step, and pass priority? Obviously, I want to do something in that step. And obviously the rules need to be such that my opponent has priority first, since that's the way priority works. The only logical place to end up is the step or phase immediately before the one I asked for.
*edit: OK, I actually dug up my copy of the tournament rules. I remember them incorrectly, and I was mistaken.
if a player wishes to demonstrate or use a new tournament shortcut entailing any number of priority passes, he or she must be clear where the game state will end up as part of the request.
...
If the players are confused by the use of a tournament shortcut, they should be backed up to the beginning of the shortcut
Depending on how its used, "Moving to my beginning of combat step" is either a new tournament shortcut entitling any number of priority passes, or a simple statement of fact [empty stack, first main phase. "Pass priority" "Me too" "Ok, moving to the beginning of combat step."] In the former case, I am being clear about where the game state will end up: the beginning of combat step. Nothing in the rules says I am required to immediately pass priority once I get there. Or maybe I'm not being clear, because I didn't say "I have priority during the beginning of combat step", but in that case it isn't a legal shortcut, so we go back to before the shortcut and try again. I still don't get forced to pass priority at the beginning of combat step.
Later, we have this:
A statement such as "I'm ready for combat" or "Declare attackers?" offers to keep passing priority until an opponent has priority in the beginning of combat step. Opponents are assumed to be acting then unless they specify otherwise.
In my experience, "Beginning combat" fits this description. In which case, we go to the beginning of combat step and I pass priority, just like you said.
Actually, bimmer has it mostly right here. Offering to move to your beginning of combat is offering to move there, then passing priority.
Why would I offer to move somewhere, if I plan on passing priority so that the most common outcome is skipping that particular step all together? Wouldn't I have offered to move to the place I actually wanted to be instead?
Whenever you take such a shortcut, you end up at the last time the non-active player would have priority *before* the point you want to cut to, not after. If you say "Declare attackers" then you go to the Beginning of Combat step then pass, so that when your opponent passes you are in the Declare Attackers step. When you say "your turn" you go to your end step and pass, so that when your opponent passes you end up in his turn. And so on.
No, these are considered to be exactly the same thing.
No. "Beginning combat" means "Moving to the Declare Attackers step" while "moving to my beginning of combat step" means "moving to my beginning of combat step." See above for what this means in terms of where the game actually ends up in both cases.
I predict that very few of the Praetors will have infect (maybe one or two).
Have to agree here. Black and Green will be the only Infect Praetors. White maybe, but my gut says it'll deal with -1/-1 counters, but not poison itself. Blue may apply a Poison Counter directly, but not via combat damage. And Red will just not care about Poison and shoot straight for your life total.
I actually hope they *don't* reprint Hazezon Tamar in the set, as they'd probably take the opportunity to make his ability make more sense, and likely make it less easy to abuse in EDH than its current oracle incarnation.
They almost never change a card's functionality. So unless you've been cheating you have nothing to worry about.
I believe what he meant was mechanics that work on their own, without support from the rest of the set. You can print one card with Scry in a set and it'll work, but if you only have one Ally it's kind of a wasted ability. He's allied with... what?
Still wrong forum, but he gets exiled. The pool's trigger is already on the stack and will resolve in due time. You'll still cast another card in his place though so it's not a complete wash.
no no, i definitely remember them announcing the Choose a Faction Event and on the site it said that the victories would be counted and decide wether the phyrexians or mirrans would win...i cant be imagining this
You can't be imagining this, and yet, here we are.
and thats the crappiest promo i ever saw if its just a useless common from a set that will never be printed? man that stinks, why would they go through the trouble of even making it? why not just say who wins and preview ACTUAL cards or make a REAL promo? if what you say is true then some one fell on their head at wotc
They are previewing ACTUAL cards. They are simply previewing a fake expansion symbol. One of the two cards gets a symbol that won't appear on any other cards for the prerelease events, and when the set comes around it gets printed with the proper one. No big deal.
Cards go from your hand to the stack, where they wait for resolution. The last step of resolving the spell is moving it to the graveyard. So in your example, when he activates the Relic you only have one card in the graveyard, and one spell on the stack. The relic will resolve first, exiling your graveyard card before your lightning bolt gets in there. He doesn't even have to activate the second Relic unless he also wants to remove the Lightning Bolt.
All the triggers from the Valakut, the Molten Pinnacles go onto the stack immediately after the Scapeshift resolves. If you then destroy one of the volcanoes, all the triggers from each Valakut except the one you destroyed will end up doing nothing, since they no longer count 5 other mountains when they resolve.
You will still end up taking 18 damage though.
I only count 12 damage. 4 Valakuts all see the destroyed one enter the battlefield, and do three each. The other... 20? triggers will fail their intervening if check.
How exactly would it increase the card's playability? By definition, a legendary version of a permanent is *less* playable than a non-legendary version. And it would be confusing as hell. Remembering the occasional card got turned into a Zombie is one thing; "Zombie" doesn't change the rules, just how it interacts with a handful of cards that care about Zombies. No so with Legendary.
In short, never ever going to happen. Ever.
Near-functional reprints, meant to capture the essence of a card via a Legendary representative, perhaps. But never via errata.
Maybe my issue comes from the fact that Angelic Favor was the first combat trick I ever figured out on my own. I *do* say "Moving to my beginning of combat step" fairly regularly. But then I don't play in tournaments where Angelic Favor is legal, so it doesn't really matter what a judge would think.
It seems to me that your "beginning of combat step?" "OK" "LOL you can't tap me now" situation would be covered by the clause that allows you to rewind when the players are confused, so there's no reason to make "Moving to my beginning of combat step" different from "Moving to my second main phase." I understand why you would want them to be different though; I just can't twist the rules as written into that interpretation.
Or something to that effect.
Lets take you at your word. Now answer my question: if I want to go to a specific step, why would the tournament rules require that I go to that step, and pass priority? Obviously, I want to do something in that step. And obviously the rules need to be such that my opponent has priority first, since that's the way priority works. The only logical place to end up is the step or phase immediately before the one I asked for.
*edit: OK, I actually dug up my copy of the tournament rules. I remember them incorrectly, and I was mistaken.
Depending on how its used, "Moving to my beginning of combat step" is either a new tournament shortcut entitling any number of priority passes, or a simple statement of fact [empty stack, first main phase. "Pass priority" "Me too" "Ok, moving to the beginning of combat step."] In the former case, I am being clear about where the game state will end up: the beginning of combat step. Nothing in the rules says I am required to immediately pass priority once I get there. Or maybe I'm not being clear, because I didn't say "I have priority during the beginning of combat step", but in that case it isn't a legal shortcut, so we go back to before the shortcut and try again. I still don't get forced to pass priority at the beginning of combat step.
Later, we have this:
In my experience, "Beginning combat" fits this description. In which case, we go to the beginning of combat step and I pass priority, just like you said.
Two very different results.
Why would I offer to move somewhere, if I plan on passing priority so that the most common outcome is skipping that particular step all together? Wouldn't I have offered to move to the place I actually wanted to be instead?
Whenever you take such a shortcut, you end up at the last time the non-active player would have priority *before* the point you want to cut to, not after. If you say "Declare attackers" then you go to the Beginning of Combat step then pass, so that when your opponent passes you are in the Declare Attackers step. When you say "your turn" you go to your end step and pass, so that when your opponent passes you end up in his turn. And so on.
No. "Beginning combat" means "Moving to the Declare Attackers step" while "moving to my beginning of combat step" means "moving to my beginning of combat step." See above for what this means in terms of where the game actually ends up in both cases.
Have to agree here. Black and Green will be the only Infect Praetors. White maybe, but my gut says it'll deal with -1/-1 counters, but not poison itself. Blue may apply a Poison Counter directly, but not via combat damage. And Red will just not care about Poison and shoot straight for your life total.
They almost never change a card's functionality. So unless you've been cheating you have nothing to worry about.
I believe what he meant was mechanics that work on their own, without support from the rest of the set. You can print one card with Scry in a set and it'll work, but if you only have one Ally it's kind of a wasted ability. He's allied with... what?
It does clearly state "wallpaper" in the title.
Who says there will be one?
You can't be imagining this, and yet, here we are.
They are previewing ACTUAL cards. They are simply previewing a fake expansion symbol. One of the two cards gets a symbol that won't appear on any other cards for the prerelease events, and when the set comes around it gets printed with the proper one. No big deal.
Yes.
I only count 12 damage. 4 Valakuts all see the destroyed one enter the battlefield, and do three each. The other... 20? triggers will fail their intervening if check.
In short, never ever going to happen. Ever.
Near-functional reprints, meant to capture the essence of a card via a Legendary representative, perhaps. But never via errata.
It could be Magnum, which wouldn't be too bad. I need to see the card up close to be certain.