Yeah I loved that line. I play both but mostly hearthstone now. Sorry magic has a spot in my heart but something about hearthstone, chefs kiss. Go ahead, give me your hate 😅
Friend of mine had a moment like this which was, understandably, while he was still relatively new to the game. For him, the card was Mindbreak Trap. He tried to use it to exile my entire board (other than lands, of course) because everything in play "was a spell." I had to explain how they're only spells when they're cast and on the stack, once they're in play, they're permanents and aren't spells anymore. At first he thought that was stupid, but when I told him that a 0 mana "exile everything" card would be absolutely busted he realized his mistake.
@@stepheng2799 He had been playing for months and never tried to use a standard counterspell that way before. I was totally confused why he thought Mindbreak Trap worked that way.
This reminds me of the time someone path to exiled a creature that was still being cast. It was zacama, and they were going to win if it was cast. No one had a counter spell, so the player decided to remove it while it was on the stack so that the etb effect wouldn't happen. We all looked at him and told him that's not how that worked. He called a judge to tell us it was get. When nothing happened besides the judge reinstating that we where correct he left screaming that no one knew how to play magic. It was a casual game of comander we decided to play waiting for the tournament to start
This is why Stifle, Trickbind and Disallow are soooo good in Commander. "Zacama resolves?" "Yep no response." "Zacama ETB, resolves?" "I cast Trickbind. Oops you can't respond bc Split Second, so no. ETB doesn't resolve."
I totally get why judges didn't interrupt. Assuming both players didn't know Subtle could not target Teferi, and considering Subtle never did get to target Teferi, judges interrupting would mean giving information to players they were not aware of. But being aware of that information is part of the player's skill, meaning if they interrupt they could benefit one of the players with outside information. That is why I believe judges only interrupt on illegal plays that DID occur, never on illegal plays that COULD occur even if there is intention/tries to make then. (as long they believe it is an honest mistake, because if they believe the Subtle player KNOWS about their illegal move attempt, in that case Subtle player is inducing the other player to mistake by quickly targeting Teferi).
This is correct, policy does state that us Judges are to only ever intervene on a game of magic if we intend to give a penalty. If an issue arises but they both agree on how to resolve that issue, it’s also fine.
@@ZakanaHachihaCBC so what you two are saying if I understand correctly, to hell with playing the game correctly. As long as the mis made, mis managed, or even net deck players are both equally clueless about how to play the game dont interfere. Because......(let me see here) fun? wtf!?
@@thomaspybus8468 That is not what we are saying. We are saying unless we plan to give a penalty we don’t intervene. Sometimes players will figure it out on their own without need of someone stepping in. If the opponent cast a spell at instant speed while the player has Tef3, we step in if that spell resolves to give both players the Double GRV, we don’t just let it happen because both players agree.
I really hate comp scenes where that type of judging is the norm. One of the things I actually like about the Warhammer comp scene is that judges will actually actively intervene and inform players if they're not playing a rule correctly.
@@TheLandau1894 that’s for Competitive REL so things like the RCQ and anything requièrent a decklist. Regular REL is more lax and about making a welcoming and learning environment for players. This is like your FNM kinda stuff.
"I play pot of greed! It allows me to draw two new cards!" "I play pot of greed! This card allows me to draw two cards from my deck!" "I play pot of greed! Then I draw two cards from my deck!"
What happened here, is that the Living End player played Subtlety and then proposes a shortcut of sorts, playing it and doing what they think is a legal play of targeting the Teferi in effectively the same moment. The control player of course has a chance to respond to the cast, declines the shortcut that would be an illegal play, and counters the Subtlety, which is a legal play. Magic, and especially pro magic is full of shortcuts similar to this. A similar example would be if there were more than one artifact or enchantment on the field when Foundation Breaker was played. They could cast it and point at one of the legal targets, proposing a shortcut that implies what he'll do if it resolves. If the control player doesn't counter it, the Living End player would not be able to change their target after it resolved.
If the player were to sacrifice the shortcut-targeted permanent in response, then foundation breaker ETBs, would breaker's controller be allowed to target the other legal target? Gut tells me that's allowed by the rules, but may be against the social contract.
@@canrex7540 So the shortcut proposes that Foundation Breaker resolves. If you then sacrifice in response to targeting, Foundation Breaker's ability would fizzle because the target disappeared. You would lose the ability to counter Foundation Breaker. If however, you sacrifice the shortcut targeted permanent in response to the cast of Foundation Breaker, before the targeting could legally happen without a shortcut, then Foundation Breaker could come into play and target something else.
...except that the counters were not legal, unless I am mistaken. With Teferi in play, the player was unable to play spells outside their turn, correct?
@@Mordaris Teferi's ability says "Your opponents can't cast spells during your turn." So you can still cast instants at instant speed, and possibly sorceries as though they had flash if you used the + ability.
Yup, that's the correct non-call. Combo player TRIED to shortcut subtlety resolving by declaring his intention to target teferi. If control player allowed subtlety to resolve, combo would normally be held to that choice (although, in this case, would be a warning for illegal target). But since control player didn't allow the spell to resolve, there was no illegal target. All that said, I could see some judges stepping in as soon as the combo player announced his intention to target teferi, since he was proposing an illegal shortcut.
@@josecelsofreitas5075 They are the last match in the round. So it's natural that nerves are a thing and that they are, hopefully, trying to play quickly so the match doesn't go to time. The shortcuts can help speed things along, assuming all the targets are legal, lol.
@@marchodges5310 True, but the target here is also about as obvious as it gets. He's targeting the thing preventing him from cascading into Living End. When the target is obvious, shortcuts can be acceptable.
Combo player also missed the other commonly ignored feature of the elementals - you can, in fact, cast them for their mana cost, lol. Imo, he should have just played Subtlety as a creature and started hitting Teferi...
I can feel the nightmare panic in their play. Imagine having multiple high level judges staring you down, in addition to know over 1000 people are waiting for You to get done. Edit: also as a control player in the past, you really gotta move faster. You don’t need time to honestly think. It’s like chess, you make your move, hit the timer clock and go-go-go.
I lost my chance to qualify to a day2 grand prix because i had an opponent slow play the last game. At one point he gave up trying to win and was trying to draw (won would almost qualify for sure draw would qualify only if enough other players had draws). He dragged me into the 5 turns timers, at the 5th turn he had lost on the board (no library left) but technically I didn't have anything to force him to draw so we drew (ironic) and neither got to day2. SaD
So, there's a very important point to be made: You can choose to give away information if you want, such as what targets you're going to choose for an ETB trigger on a permanent spell you're casting. A lot of players would do something like "Subtlety targetting Teferi" as a shorthand, assuming that the Subtlety will resolve, but technically, they're giving away information they don't need to give away. What I'm saying: Always, *always* cast your permanent spells with ETB triggers without declaring your choice of targets. It can and has won games.
Yep. Remember, "Can I name Dark Confidant with this Pithing Needle?" is a valid bluff question to ask a judge, before it enters and you name Verdant Catacombs to basically Stone Rain your unsuspecting opponent for 1 mana. (What you absolutely can't do is say "Pithing Needle naming Dark Confidant?" and then when your opponent confirms that they have no responses, change the named card to Verdant Catacombs, because you've proposed a shortcut which your opponent has accepted.)
I'm not making this up. Khans of Tarkir prerelease, I played against a guy who had Ashcloud Phoenix in his deck (it has morph [4RR] and "when it dies return it to the battlefield face down"). So when his morphed Ashcloud Phoenix died, he said "when a morph dies, one has to turn it face up and reveal it. So the phoenix triggers and returns to the battlefield face down". He literally thought the card returns to the battlefield and deals 2dmg when it dies no matter what. Worst of all, the guy was a judge himself at other prereleases and fnms.
Sometimes too much rules knowledge can get in the way. I once got WAY too into the weeds at a prerelease on whether an ability could target my protection-from-colorless creature because I knew that abilities are all technically colorless - completely missing that protection and related keywords care about the color or other characteristics of the ability's source, not of the ability itself.
I had a wild streak of this sorta stuff in my first modern rcq I went to last year. I’ll try to condense them. I was playing jund goblins… In no particular order, first offense was against UW control game 2. At some point in the game he played dress down, and with dress down out he evokes Solitude. This was my first RCQ and I’m way better with rules now but I wasn’t sure how evoke worked with dress down. I thought it was a delayed trigger like Ragavan Dash (which loses haste/abilities but still gets returned to hand), so I called the judge. The HEAD judge comes up and literally looks up a Reddit post that says evoke is a delayed trigger, and Tl;dr it gets sac’d. Player was extremely pissed off because he disagreed with the judge and basically 3 for 0’d himself and he just scooped on the spot. Later find out that evoke is a keyword that actually checks on ETB, so the player wouldn’t have had to sac, but could still cast with evoke cost. Next game was my friend on Creativity vs UW Control. Game 2 as well but it was almost time cause lol control, so players are playing fast. There comes a point where my friend plays a teferi, which gets countered, and friend responds with a mystical dispute, which resolves and Teferi comes out. Except he only had one blue source and couldn’t actually pay for dispute. Asked if he had a treasure and pointed it out, judge was called, and he ended up losing that game. Later apologized but he said it was fine since he fetched wrong cause he was in a rush. I made top 8 and my friend made 9th (sorry!) and I was against murktide. Fast forward it’s game 3 and I have a bunch of goblin tokens plus kiki jiki and mogg war Marshall out. I actually ran out of goblin tokens so I just used a spare “copy” token to represent one of the regular goblin tokens. Our match was the last one to finish so everyone is watching, including the judge, and they mistake the copy token for an actual kiki copy that needed to be sac’d when I passed the turn. Keep in mind this was like 10 hours into the day so I didn’t want to argue and we’d already split the top 8 money, so I just sac‘d it and moved on. Next turn I was short 1 for lethal and died to murktide. He later won the RCQ haha but I wasn’t salty at all, the pro tour was for STANDARD and there’s zero percent chance I’m traveling to play standard. Had a great time and great games but it inspired me to be the rules lawyer that I’ve now become so I’ll take it If anyone is still reading I hope you enjoyed!!
I've never played competitively, but I'm really disappointed that a Head Judge, of all people, was looking up rules (or rulings) on Reddit. Reddit! The actual rules text for evoke takes _seconds_ to find on the rulebook. "702.74a [...] “Evoke [cost]” means “You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “When this permanent enters the battlefield, if its evoke cost was paid, its controller sacrifices it.” [...]" I timed myself: nine seconds to find it (Ctrl+F for "evoke" on the rules page). Very disappointing.
When I started playing living end back in 2013 (the deck was very different at the time), my biggest misunderstanding was that I could cast Demonic Dread without needing a target creature because it didn't matter for the cascade. I was doing that in nearly every round of my first PTQ with the deck until I was finally stopped by my fifth round opponent who (with the help of a judge) explained to me I still needed a creature to target to legally cast DD and get the cascade trigger. I've misunderstood a lot of cards in my mtg career but this moment stuck with me the longest.
My understanding: Your friend was right. The subtlety could be played, the player could attempt to target something illegal but all that would happen is the spell resolves and fizzles since the target wasn't legal. It's sorta similar to say a player trying to cast a removal spell on a creature, and you respond by casting an instant that provides hexproof. That makes the creature now an illegal target and the removal just fizzles
Dude, I think you'd be one of the top MTG youtubers if you only used 1 channel. You fall out of my algorithm all the time because there are so many channels you post on.
We lack audio in the tournament video. The key thing is communication - if both players verbally say how the stack resolves - this is good. If both of them say nothing and just play cards pointing - everything is still on the stack unless shown otherwise. Example: both players play silently pointing on cards when needed. Player A casts Demigod of Revenge and player B plays counter. Player A puts Demigod into graveyard and then immediately returns it into play. (That's legal)
That's legal, but should get an IMMEDIATE judge call. If I came to the table and my investigation came up with "players were nonverbally poking cards and had differing understandings of the game state", I'm going to strongly consider assessing the Demigod player a communication policy violation. The player controlling an ability must announce its existence when it becomes relevant, and I find it hard to imagine a case where the Counterspell player wouldn't have acted differently had the Demigod player properly announced their ability. That means I'd perform a backup to the point where the player cast Counterspell, inform the players that the Demigod trigger is on the stack, and have them play from there.
100%, have a good night’s sleep and eat well. Tournaments require a lot of brain power. Even when I play outside of tournaments, I won’t do a “take-back” even if the table allows it or suggests it. I want to ensure I don’t get sloppy and home my mad skillz.
The living end player in a short time frame - tried to cast subtelty when he couldnt and was reminded he couldn't so he didnt do it. -cast grief for its evoke cost and had to be reminded he was supposed to sac it. -tried to subtlety his opponents teferi twice. Its hard to not look at these "mistakes" and assume it wasnt him trying to get away with something.
Reading what the card actually says has saved me a few times. People that play often often skip over what's happening (fetch lands are a good example), I always slow them down to tell me what they're doing.
That Living End player probably thought it was a cast trigger not an ETB trigger along with him not realizing he couldn't target the already resolved T3feri on the field. Or maybe he just jump the gun in saying his target before he needed to. Also that control player just wasting counterspells on stuff he didn't need to was just bad.
If the LE player thought that, why did he agree to the trigger getting countered? It's really easy for us to judge their plays, sitting calmly at home when somebody else explained what is wrong. Tournaments can be stressful though.
@@lamjeri A lot of less enfranchised players view an ETB trigger as a "when you cast this, choose a target - when it resolves, perform the action". Hilariously, a lot of them also view an instant or sorcery with a target as a "when this resolves, announce the target and perform the action".
@@jdowd28Notice it didn't go back to hand but to the graveyard, he knew full well it was supposed to be sacrificed. He used -3 for the card draw, since that's the other part of the ult and he no longer needs to keep gaining loyalty. He was that sure that he could prevent the opponent from sticking a creature and tbf, he was right.
Technically it isn't illegal unless they proceed to resolve the card. If the judges intervened and told a player that the resolution of their card was an illegal target prior to it attempting to resolve, that would technically be coaching and it's a big no no for judges to do that.
It's not illegal at any point. If the other player knew what the card did, they could have just let it resolve and told their opponent that nothing happens.
@@Fopenplop Attempting to put the triggered ability on the stack would be illegal, as it has no valid targets (and with Teferi on the opponent's board, it could never actually have a valid target).
I’ve had to step away from Magic to be financially sane and catch up on real life that just poured on unforeseen financial debt earlier this year, so seeing this upload helped me to shake some of the rules dust off. Thank you for making my day as you do, reminding me that one day soon I’ll be back at this game and that I really hadn’t forgotten as much as I thought I had thankfully. You’re the best!
Dunno when you quit but MTG went into the shitter long ago, sorry if you decide to come back, I did and was more than just a little disappointed in the competitive scene.
I know what happened (aside from them not knowing how Subtlety works) Its simple, control player knows he has Archmages charm in his hand, so he's already poised to bounce....he may not understand that Subtlety wont do anything, but being prepared to counterspell was how his mind was working probably.
I would like to say, I never actually realized that’s how Subtlety worked. I thought it was like Venser Shaper Savant and could bounce the spells being cast or permanents. That explains why it’s the worst of the cycle.
@@roviverdandelarosa2181 Endurance is a part of a wincon or a combo piece - see the work it puts in with Nadu (RIP soon). I wouldn't say it's worse than Force of Essence Scatter + Aether Gust (which isn't a bad card, per se, lest you think that's my argument).
7:55 Of course you can counter a spell like this. A card is so long on the stack until the opponent chosses to not counter it. You can "predict" what you are doing when it enters the battlefield, but to be secure you say: I'm playing this card. Let the opponet read and decide to counter or not, and after you say which card it will affect.
My favorite judge interaction was at a tournament I was working as an L1. Player A and player B for a reason neither could understand or explain in the middle of the game shuffled their hands and graveyard into their libraries effectively restarting the game. After a 52 minute time extension no penalties were issued as nobody could explain what caused it or who was at fault.
I mean, you just have to rule that as an intentionally drawn game, right? You can agree to draw a game at any time, so if neither player believes that they conceded to the other, you tell them that they are starting the next game of the match (and explain that matches are played until one player has won two games, rather than as the commonly-understood "best of three games").
I think the 2nd attempt at casting subtlety (with evoke) was just the living end player saying something like "evoke subtlety targeting your teferi" which is a reasonable shortcut (assuming it was a valid target for the triggered ability). You don't _have_ to announce the target before it has entered the battlefield but it's not illegal to talk ahead like that, and with this much pressure on them I can't really fault him for trying to speed things up as much as possible. What I'm saying is I think it's not that weird that a finger was pointed and then the spell countered
It wasn't a valid target - but it's not the judge's place to step in and coach the players until the ability *actually* goes on the stack targeting Teferi (and even then, we probably don't step in until the Teferi is actually moved to the graveyard, because you're technically allowed to say something goes on the stack without it doing so [think a joke like "sadness is put onto the stack?" for a silly example] - it's only truly when you actually take the illegal action in a way that it's changed the visible gamestate that you've committed a rules violation and a judge should step in.)
"Hey buddy ever play MTG?" "No" "Me either! Lets play U/w control and a combo deck in modern at the local tournament, how hard can it be?" - Those guys, probably.
That Living End player has a blinged out holographic deck and handles it like he's playing Alpha without sleeves but still has them in sleeves. The pringles. The bending. It hurts!!!!
Yeah, he seems to have a bad habit of pinching the top corner almost like he's dog earing the cards when placing them on the board. Imagine if this was a borrowed deck.
Online if there's nothing to target on the stack then the card would just do nothing. The "target spell" trigger part still happens but there's nothing to target and it will resolve doing nothing.
Online does not support shortcuts so the Teferi would not be designated as a target while subtelty was on the stack. If the spell was allowed to respond the system would prevent you from targeting Teferi.
It would've played out the same. Subtlety would be on the stack, both players having misread it, and it would've been countered before any of them noticed that its ability would've targeted nothing if uncountered.
@@fernandobanda5734 Which is precisely why the calls of "why didn't the judges intervene??" are silly. The actions taken are all supported by the rules of the game: active player evoked Subtlety, active player indicated a permanent as an attempted shortcut (which wouldn't be considered a valid shortcut since the indicated target was not valid), non-active player countered the evoked spell. There are credible ways in which both players' actions could be considered a bluff, much like "Hey judge, can I name Dark Confidant with this Pithing Needle that's currently on the stack" is a legal bluff before naming Verdant Catacombs as it enters the battlefield. Since no illegal actions were taken, it was correct for the judges to allow play to continue without intervention.
One of the problems with Magic as a game is that the confusion about spell vs permanent is something even experienced players can forget. And once you've cast the spell, you can't really take it back. We can act like the players are stupid, that Modern players should know better, but these mistakes are understandable. I'm guessing these players don't play online much.
Lol that is not a problem at all. EVERYBODY understands the difference between a spell and a permanent. This is one of the worst comments I've ever read.
Playing Magic Online back in the day makes you very autistic about the rules. When the guy tried casting a spell on opponents turn with Telferi in play not only does your spell not get played but now eat the mana burn you couldn't use that you added to your mana pool trying to cast it.
I disagree that there was no attempted cheating in this match. The combo player definitely knowingly tried to sneak past the rules. When all of their "misplays" benefit them to win then I immediately become skeptical of their intentions.
It would have been a much better play to just hard cast Subtlety for 4 mana to attack Teferi. By playing it for free they were throwing it away (and another card!) so I wouldn’t say their misplays are benefiting them. It just so happens they didn’t get punished for it because countering the subtlety is a legal play.
BIG agree. Its WILDLY naive to assume this guy bought an expensive, high-tier deck, brought it to a big tourney, and repeatedly "misplayed" something so elementary to his benefit... "Oops!"
@@chunnil4898i absolutely forgot exactly what subtlety did and had to reread it to remind myself it wasn’t a bounce spell, and the cards been out quite a while at this point, was much newer then
@@chunnil4898Honest Question, is this sarcasm? If he BOUGHT the Deck and didn't build it himself, and thought that's how the card worked, multiple missplays that benefit him would be exactly what I would expect from him not know his deck. Like Nikachu said in the end of video, technically he never did anything wrong for someone to tell him he's doing it wrong.
Huh, I don't play Magic much anymore, but I thought that same-typed planeswalkers (2x Teferis) were subject to the legend-ish uniqueness rule, so the control player would've destroyed themselves by blowing up their first Teferi. But looking it up, I guess this changed and they're just subject to the same rule as other legendary cards. Seems a bit goofy lorewise, but interesting.
If there is one planeswalkers it makes sense with it would be Teferi since he is time travelling all over the place. So it could be two Teferis from different times
You can play any Planeswalkers with different names. Teferi, Who Slows the Sunset, Temporal Archmage, Temp Pilgrim, Hero of Dominaria, etc. They aren't all just considered Teferi, the subtitle counts as a new name
Yeah, now planeswalkers are legendary and subject to the same legendary rule as any other permanent (if you have multiple legendary permanents with the same name, you must sacrifice all but one of them as a state-based action).
I didn't watch it from the sideline. When I was about 13 or 14 I played against another boy from the town. It was the time when old Kamigawa released and I played the rat ninjutsu deck. He tried so hard to convince me he could block a creature I played with ninjutsu I was doubting myself. Luckily a friend walked in who told us I was right and declaration of blockers was over.
Never, you are not allowed to have the same walker twice, because of the legend rule :D You are allowed to have 2 different planeswalkers with the same type tho. Sorry for the pedantic answer, had to do it xD
@@ich3730 that's what I'm saying. When did that change? I get that they are 2 different Teferi's, but that used to be prohibited. When did it become legal?
literally makes me laugh on how he says playing subtle to return teferi. his reaction; resolves enemy player; bounce back teferi. his reaction; thats ilegal... hahahhaha
idk what they were thinking printing a card like teferi time raveler, completely removing instant speed is so against the spirit of the game's tug of war.
I judge Pokemon not MTG but we have 50 min rounds as well, often 9 a day. Anyways my major suggestion BRING WATER!!!! Especially if you are playing control your mind can get burnt out but having the H2O in your system when everyone else hasn't really had any around round 7-9 can be what you need to make day 2.
The biggest issue I see here is the understanding of the difference of a permanent versus a spell. I have not been playing Magic for long, however, I have played other card games in the past. I love the very deep mechanics of this game. I was also at a bit of a loss of what the issue was, until I had my lightbulb moment while watching the video, lol.
I remember at my school's Magic Club, at one point I think somebody tried to play a Terror on their opponent's Plated Slagwurm, Slagwurm player tries to Reroute the Terror and I'm like "Hold the fuck up, we need to rewind cause like 7 illegal things just happened."
The biggest sin here was the Slagwurm player putting Reroute in their deck. That's probably the only time a player has ever attempted to cast one in a game of Magic.
Oddly enough, that is sort of how most judging has to be done, unless something blatantly illegal happens, a judge can't step in, unless a player calls for one, since judges are technically there to solve issues, not police games, granted, had the subtlety resolved wrongly, a judge would have jumped in to prevent the illegal move, it's a dumb distinction but sort of important, since judges can't be seen favoring one player over the other.
I think the intention here is that you can't tell apart odd decisions made for strategic reasons (for instance, I want to pretend that I can do something as a bluff, when I'm just throwing cards away) from odd decisions made due to lack of knowledge (for instance, evoking the Subtlety as shown here). So the call is to just let all valid actions happen - if players want to know about a rule, they can ask before taking actions.
As a blue control enjoyer I have to say that until I say “resolves” no other game actions are happening. Also if I were in the blue white control player’s position I likely would also counter the subtlety as if my opponent is clearly misreading their card there is no reason for me to let them be punished by their misplay while I am in full control and have the game on lock, I can quietly wait until it’s most opportune for me to capitalize on their misunderstanding.
Right? Hardcasting a Subtlety is the best action they could have taken and might get them out of the lock if they can resolve it. If you tell them that their Subtlety's ETB trigger can't target Teferi, they're not going to make the same mistake of evoking it if they draw another because they'll be hoping to be able to cascade into Living End in the same turn as casting Subtlety; if your hand is full of counters and you have the mana available now to keep them ignorant, it's better to keep your options open as to when you can conserve the counter. It even means you're safer to tap out if you need to. I don't think the control player in the video considered any of that, though, as they countered the second evoked Subtlety as well despite lethal in the air on board.
I actually had an opponent RECENTLY make that same Subtlety fumble with his U/B Control deck. Granted, he did hard cast it so he still got his nice 3/3 flyer but still.
I think the issue with Subtlety is howthe text is laid out on the card. "When Subtlety enters the battlefield, choose up to one target creature spell or planeswalker spell. Its owner puts it on the top or bottom of their library." It is easy to overlook that important word at the beginning at the second line of text. If your don't notice that the card seems to read as: "When Subtlety enters the battlefield, choose up to one target creature spell or planeswalker. Its owner puts it on the top or bottom of their library." I think that's what happened for both of these players.
Part of this reminds me of a game of commander I played. I cast Gray Merchant and in response, an opponent cast Path to Exile on it. I kinda just went with them meaning to cast it in response to his trigger, which would still go in the stack, and just take him out. When I was trying to explain how this worked, some other person jumped in to started lecturing me about the stack and started claiming that Path to Exile *could* target a creature spell on the stack, and how it was, effectively, a counter spell. 🤦
This video reminds me of Rimmer when he is explaining a game of Risk played like 20 years ago to Lister. Lister starts rolling his eyes and tries to fall asleep.
Another important rule in a tournament is to not day drink! I did that at the last RCQ I went to although things did get better after so maybe DO day drink?
The Living End player must be a rookie. There's a reason why we all can access the comprehensive rules through the official site. In addition, I'll tell anyone outside sanctioned events you're not ready for competitive play if you ask to take back a play for any reason.
Looking at this version of Subtlety they used, the line "creature spell or planeswalker spell" cuts to another line right after "planeswalker". It's easy to understand how you could miss the "spell" part at a glance
Haha, no the Grief went to the graveyard. The control player went -3 targeting nothing to just draw a card. Even the judge got confused at to what happened and had to clarify what was going on.
I can totally understand mistaking that _Subtlety_ can hit permanents because when they already have the gist of the card people typically only really look for types of targets in the card text and gloss over the rest, so that seems plausible, but Charm's first ability is so short and concise Idk how anyone would mistake it 🤷🏽
No mistake was made with Archmage's Charm, though. The Living End player is not allowed to rush past the resolution of his Subtlety and must give the other player an opportunity to respond with it on the stack, so until the Control player either agreed that the Subtlety had resolved, the Subtlety was still on the stack and able to be targeted with Charm's first ability.
I can understand the judges there. the thing is, as stupid as this line of play to counter a sorcery speed evoked subtlety is (TWICE) its not illegal. and judges are not responsible for your bad gameplay. in fact, if they had intervened, that would be inappropriate since its like giving advice. if the subtlety had resolved, and player A returned the teferi to their hand, the judges would then intervene because hats an illegal target, and therefore the teferi would remain on the battlefield. but until then, the players are doing legal actions and its not a judges job to stop stupid plays, just illegal ones. speaking as I also am a judge, and I also wouldnt intervene. a similar story is in the famous pithing needle dark confidant example where the judge did not, and should not point out that naming dark confidant does anything. the question is can I name dark confidant and the answer is yes
@@therealax6 "What's the stack? Do I have to keep my cards spread out on the table so I'm not vulnerable to Subtlety? Or is my deck my stack, and you get to look through it and counter something from it?"
Also, I think that if for some reason the uw player had let the subtlety resolve (which he should've) the judges wouldn't let the teferi actually go to the library.
Curious, if he is not planning on spending mana when he brings out Hallowed Fountain, would it be just as good as to let it come into play tapped and not loose the 2 life?
I think there were 2 mistakes made by the LE player, and probably they're illegal moves: both the times he played Subtlety at sorcery speed (5:48 and 12:09), he "targetted" Teferi, *inducing, willing or not, the UW player to react at the threaten* but the effect resolves only when the creature etb, so IIRC he had to target Teferi only when, and if, the creature etb, not when it has been casting and going into the stack
Nah. Pointing to a target when doing something that would cause a targeted ability to go onto the stack, but before that ability does go onto the stack, is a perfectly fine shortcut (and is actually binding if the opponent accepts the shortcut, meaning they don't take any game actions between the shortcut's proposal and the trigger going onto the stack). There's a grey area where the suggested target is not valid, like in the video, but for me that falls in the realm of an acceptable bluff. Had the Subtlety resolved, and the players moved the Teferi off the battlefield, that would be an illegal move, since Teferi is not a valid target for the ability. But until/unless the ability resolves and visibly changes the game state in a way that isn't supported by the card's text, no rules violations have occurred.
"I play magic ... you play hearthstone" ... EMOTIONAL DAMAGE !!!
real
Dawg shut the hell up
Yeah I loved that line. I play both but mostly hearthstone now. Sorry magic has a spot in my heart but something about hearthstone, chefs kiss. Go ahead, give me your hate 😅
@craigschaffert yo shut the hell up lil guy
Hearthstone does what MTG does better.
Friend of mine had a moment like this which was, understandably, while he was still relatively new to the game. For him, the card was Mindbreak Trap. He tried to use it to exile my entire board (other than lands, of course) because everything in play "was a spell." I had to explain how they're only spells when they're cast and on the stack, once they're in play, they're permanents and aren't spells anymore. At first he thought that was stupid, but when I told him that a 0 mana "exile everything" card would be absolutely busted he realized his mistake.
Lol yall had this man playing with a mindbreak before he knew the difference between spells and permanents.
@@stepheng2799 He had been playing for months and never tried to use a standard counterspell that way before. I was totally confused why he thought Mindbreak Trap worked that way.
when me and my friends started, we thought "spell" would only refer to instants and sorceries.
@@RayZhaTV same
imagine you have to learn magic by yourself. RIP rules.
When the world needed him the most, he returned
Honestly 😭
Yep, cards were definitely played. Also, the way LE bends his cards is painful
bending foils like that hurts my SOUL
For the love of God, I thought I was the only one
Buddy I cringed so damn hard, every time... Ugh 🤢
I hate it
Yes he is bending the cards but they are in protective sleeves so they are totally fine
This reminds me of the time someone path to exiled a creature that was still being cast. It was zacama, and they were going to win if it was cast. No one had a counter spell, so the player decided to remove it while it was on the stack so that the etb effect wouldn't happen. We all looked at him and told him that's not how that worked. He called a judge to tell us it was get. When nothing happened besides the judge reinstating that we where correct he left screaming that no one knew how to play magic. It was a casual game of comander we decided to play waiting for the tournament to start
There's always one person like this...
Hahaha no etb for you zacama. PTE shoved it 😂😂
This is why Stifle, Trickbind and Disallow are soooo good in Commander. "Zacama resolves?" "Yep no response." "Zacama ETB, resolves?" "I cast Trickbind. Oops you can't respond bc Split Second, so no. ETB doesn't resolve."
Ah, the classic yugioh mystical space typhoon negate happens in magic too.
I totally get why judges didn't interrupt. Assuming both players didn't know Subtle could not target Teferi, and considering Subtle never did get to target Teferi, judges interrupting would mean giving information to players they were not aware of.
But being aware of that information is part of the player's skill, meaning if they interrupt they could benefit one of the players with outside information.
That is why I believe judges only interrupt on illegal plays that DID occur, never on illegal plays that COULD occur even if there is intention/tries to make then.
(as long they believe it is an honest mistake, because if they believe the Subtle player KNOWS about their illegal move attempt, in that case Subtle player is inducing the other player to mistake by quickly targeting Teferi).
This is correct, policy does state that us Judges are to only ever intervene on a game of magic if we intend to give a penalty. If an issue arises but they both agree on how to resolve that issue, it’s also fine.
@@ZakanaHachihaCBC so what you two are saying if I understand correctly, to hell with playing the game correctly. As long as the mis made, mis managed, or even net deck players are both equally clueless about how to play the game dont interfere. Because......(let me see here) fun? wtf!?
@@thomaspybus8468 That is not what we are saying. We are saying unless we plan to give a penalty we don’t intervene. Sometimes players will figure it out on their own without need of someone stepping in.
If the opponent cast a spell at instant speed while the player has Tef3, we step in if that spell resolves to give both players the Double GRV, we don’t just let it happen because both players agree.
I really hate comp scenes where that type of judging is the norm. One of the things I actually like about the Warhammer comp scene is that judges will actually actively intervene and inform players if they're not playing a rule correctly.
@@TheLandau1894 that’s for Competitive REL so things like the RCQ and anything requièrent a decklist.
Regular REL is more lax and about making a welcoming and learning environment for players. This is like your FNM kinda stuff.
"He hasn't read his card!"
Me, a Yugioh player: "Now where have I heard that one before?"
"I play pot of greed! It allows me to draw two new cards!"
"I play pot of greed! This card allows me to draw two cards from my deck!"
"I play pot of greed! Then I draw two cards from my deck!"
They probably just missed the "spell" part of the text.
What happened here, is that the Living End player played Subtlety and then proposes a shortcut of sorts, playing it and doing what they think is a legal play of targeting the Teferi in effectively the same moment. The control player of course has a chance to respond to the cast, declines the shortcut that would be an illegal play, and counters the Subtlety, which is a legal play.
Magic, and especially pro magic is full of shortcuts similar to this. A similar example would be if there were more than one artifact or enchantment on the field when Foundation Breaker was played. They could cast it and point at one of the legal targets, proposing a shortcut that implies what he'll do if it resolves. If the control player doesn't counter it, the Living End player would not be able to change their target after it resolved.
If the player were to sacrifice the shortcut-targeted permanent in response, then foundation breaker ETBs, would breaker's controller be allowed to target the other legal target?
Gut tells me that's allowed by the rules, but may be against the social contract.
@@canrex7540 So the shortcut proposes that Foundation Breaker resolves. If you then sacrifice in response to targeting, Foundation Breaker's ability would fizzle because the target disappeared. You would lose the ability to counter Foundation Breaker. If however, you sacrifice the shortcut targeted permanent in response to the cast of Foundation Breaker, before the targeting could legally happen without a shortcut, then Foundation Breaker could come into play and target something else.
...except that the counters were not legal, unless I am mistaken. With Teferi in play, the player was unable to play spells outside their turn, correct?
@@Mordaris Teferi's ability says "Your opponents can't cast spells during your turn." So you can still cast instants at instant speed, and possibly sorceries as though they had flash if you used the + ability.
@@LucianDevine Nah, last turn he used Teferi's second ability.
Yup, that's the correct non-call. Combo player TRIED to shortcut subtlety resolving by declaring his intention to target teferi. If control player allowed subtlety to resolve, combo would normally be held to that choice (although, in this case, would be a warning for illegal target). But since control player didn't allow the spell to resolve, there was no illegal target.
All that said, I could see some judges stepping in as soon as the combo player announced his intention to target teferi, since he was proposing an illegal shortcut.
yeah, felt he was targeting Teferi way to fast.
@@josecelsofreitas5075 They are the last match in the round. So it's natural that nerves are a thing and that they are, hopefully, trying to play quickly so the match doesn't go to time. The shortcuts can help speed things along, assuming all the targets are legal, lol.
It depends what the opponent said, I’m not sure you can say that. Anyway shit show was a mess
That’s just bad Magic if there’s literally any other option. Wait for the etb before declaring.
@@marchodges5310 True, but the target here is also about as obvious as it gets. He's targeting the thing preventing him from cascading into Living End. When the target is obvious, shortcuts can be acceptable.
Combo player also missed the other commonly ignored feature of the elementals - you can, in fact, cast them for their mana cost, lol. Imo, he should have just played Subtlety as a creature and started hitting Teferi...
I guess his intention was to bounce Teferi and have enough mana to cascade into Living End on that very turn.
@@NikachuMTG "Plan?" These guys aren't even literate!
if these guys were in the finals they were no doubt cheating to get there...what terrible play
it wasn't finals they were the slowest table out of 750 tables@@antearesgamer
I can feel the nightmare panic in their play. Imagine having multiple high level judges staring you down, in addition to know over 1000 people are waiting for You to get done.
Edit: also as a control player in the past, you really gotta move faster. You don’t need time to honestly think. It’s like chess, you make your move, hit the timer clock and go-go-go.
I lost my chance to qualify to a day2 grand prix because i had an opponent slow play the last game. At one point he gave up trying to win and was trying to draw (won would almost qualify for sure draw would qualify only if enough other players had draws). He dragged me into the 5 turns timers, at the 5th turn he had lost on the board (no library left) but technically I didn't have anything to force him to draw so we drew (ironic) and neither got to day2.
SaD
So, there's a very important point to be made: You can choose to give away information if you want, such as what targets you're going to choose for an ETB trigger on a permanent spell you're casting. A lot of players would do something like "Subtlety targetting Teferi" as a shorthand, assuming that the Subtlety will resolve, but technically, they're giving away information they don't need to give away.
What I'm saying: Always, *always* cast your permanent spells with ETB triggers without declaring your choice of targets. It can and has won games.
Yep. Remember, "Can I name Dark Confidant with this Pithing Needle?" is a valid bluff question to ask a judge, before it enters and you name Verdant Catacombs to basically Stone Rain your unsuspecting opponent for 1 mana. (What you absolutely can't do is say "Pithing Needle naming Dark Confidant?" and then when your opponent confirms that they have no responses, change the named card to Verdant Catacombs, because you've proposed a shortcut which your opponent has accepted.)
@@doylerudolph7965 I've played Pithing Needler, asked if it resolved, then locked a player out of the game by naming Azami, Lady of Scrolls before.
7:49 -8:19 I just realized who your voice reminds me of 🤔 You sound like John Mulaney 😮
I'm not making this up. Khans of Tarkir prerelease, I played against a guy who had Ashcloud Phoenix in his deck (it has morph [4RR] and "when it dies return it to the battlefield face down"). So when his morphed Ashcloud Phoenix died, he said "when a morph dies, one has to turn it face up and reveal it. So the phoenix triggers and returns to the battlefield face down".
He literally thought the card returns to the battlefield and deals 2dmg when it dies no matter what. Worst of all, the guy was a judge himself at other prereleases and fnms.
Sometimes too much rules knowledge can get in the way. I once got WAY too into the weeds at a prerelease on whether an ability could target my protection-from-colorless creature because I knew that abilities are all technically colorless - completely missing that protection and related keywords care about the color or other characteristics of the ability's source, not of the ability itself.
The hardest part for me to watch was the living end player bending the shit out of all his cards.
Foil Protective Services needs to step in
I cringed throughout the video because of those curly ass cards.
Pain
@@markusbetts😂 this needs to be a real thing, we all use the same cards lol we trade and stuff
Yeah. People who bend card and shuffle them like a poker dealer make me cringe.
I had a wild streak of this sorta stuff in my first modern rcq I went to last year. I’ll try to condense them. I was playing jund goblins…
In no particular order, first offense was against UW control game 2. At some point in the game he played dress down, and with dress down out he evokes Solitude. This was my first RCQ and I’m way better with rules now but I wasn’t sure how evoke worked with dress down. I thought it was a delayed trigger like Ragavan Dash (which loses haste/abilities but still gets returned to hand), so I called the judge. The HEAD judge comes up and literally looks up a Reddit post that says evoke is a delayed trigger, and Tl;dr it gets sac’d. Player was extremely pissed off because he disagreed with the judge and basically 3 for 0’d himself and he just scooped on the spot. Later find out that evoke is a keyword that actually checks on ETB, so the player wouldn’t have had to sac, but could still cast with evoke cost.
Next game was my friend on Creativity vs UW Control. Game 2 as well but it was almost time cause lol control, so players are playing fast. There comes a point where my friend plays a teferi, which gets countered, and friend responds with a mystical dispute, which resolves and Teferi comes out. Except he only had one blue source and couldn’t actually pay for dispute. Asked if he had a treasure and pointed it out, judge was called, and he ended up losing that game. Later apologized but he said it was fine since he fetched wrong cause he was in a rush.
I made top 8 and my friend made 9th (sorry!) and I was against murktide. Fast forward it’s game 3 and I have a bunch of goblin tokens plus kiki jiki and mogg war Marshall out. I actually ran out of goblin tokens so I just used a spare “copy” token to represent one of the regular goblin tokens. Our match was the last one to finish so everyone is watching, including the judge, and they mistake the copy token for an actual kiki copy that needed to be sac’d when I passed the turn. Keep in mind this was like 10 hours into the day so I didn’t want to argue and we’d already split the top 8 money, so I just sac‘d it and moved on. Next turn I was short 1 for lethal and died to murktide. He later won the RCQ haha but I wasn’t salty at all, the pro tour was for STANDARD and there’s zero percent chance I’m traveling to play standard. Had a great time and great games but it inspired me to be the rules lawyer that I’ve now become so I’ll take it
If anyone is still reading I hope you enjoyed!!
I've never played competitively, but I'm really disappointed that a Head Judge, of all people, was looking up rules (or rulings) on Reddit. Reddit! The actual rules text for evoke takes _seconds_ to find on the rulebook.
"702.74a [...] “Evoke [cost]” means “You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “When this permanent enters the battlefield, if its evoke cost was paid, its controller sacrifices it.” [...]"
I timed myself: nine seconds to find it (Ctrl+F for "evoke" on the rules page). Very disappointing.
damn I really feel for the first guy. He was playing right and the head judge of all people made a wrong call because of reddit.
When I started playing living end back in 2013 (the deck was very different at the time), my biggest misunderstanding was that I could cast Demonic Dread without needing a target creature because it didn't matter for the cascade. I was doing that in nearly every round of my first PTQ with the deck until I was finally stopped by my fifth round opponent who (with the help of a judge) explained to me I still needed a creature to target to legally cast DD and get the cascade trigger. I've misunderstood a lot of cards in my mtg career but this moment stuck with me the longest.
10:49 that's a pretty mess. what's tapped? what isn't? what are the judges doing?
My understanding:
Your friend was right. The subtlety could be played, the player could attempt to target something illegal but all that would happen is the spell resolves and fizzles since the target wasn't legal.
It's sorta similar to say a player trying to cast a removal spell on a creature, and you respond by casting an instant that provides hexproof. That makes the creature now an illegal target and the removal just fizzles
Dude, I think you'd be one of the top MTG youtubers if you only used 1 channel. You fall out of my algorithm all the time because there are so many channels you post on.
Those Living End foils are curled af. The judges should have probably said something about that.
Guess you could say he never heard the end of it 😂
"what turn is it?"
"2 subtleties"
NICEEEE
We lack audio in the tournament video.
The key thing is communication - if both players verbally say how the stack resolves - this is good.
If both of them say nothing and just play cards pointing - everything is still on the stack unless shown otherwise.
Example: both players play silently pointing on cards when needed. Player A casts Demigod of Revenge and player B plays counter. Player A puts Demigod into graveyard and then immediately returns it into play.
(That's legal)
Let me go find my runed halo, demigod just got that much stronger
That's legal, but should get an IMMEDIATE judge call. If I came to the table and my investigation came up with "players were nonverbally poking cards and had differing understandings of the game state", I'm going to strongly consider assessing the Demigod player a communication policy violation. The player controlling an ability must announce its existence when it becomes relevant, and I find it hard to imagine a case where the Counterspell player wouldn't have acted differently had the Demigod player properly announced their ability.
That means I'd perform a backup to the point where the player cast Counterspell, inform the players that the Demigod trigger is on the stack, and have them play from there.
Love this kinda content. Don't play Magic but going over stuff like this is entertaining.
9:24 I am new to Magic. What are these players writing down? They are allowed to take notes or something? 🧐
If someone reveals their hand you are allowed to write down everything you see to keep track of what they have left in hand as they play cards.
100%, have a good night’s sleep and eat well. Tournaments require a lot of brain power.
Even when I play outside of tournaments, I won’t do a “take-back” even if the table allows it or suggests it. I want to ensure I don’t get sloppy and home my mad skillz.
*hone
no takebacks ;)
The living end player in a short time frame
- tried to cast subtelty when he couldnt and was reminded he couldn't so he didnt do it.
-cast grief for its evoke cost and had to be reminded he was supposed to sac it.
-tried to subtlety his opponents teferi twice.
Its hard to not look at these "mistakes" and assume it wasnt him trying to get away with something.
The living end player playing with a can of pringles lmao
Reading what the card actually says has saved me a few times.
People that play often often skip over what's happening (fetch lands are a good example), I always slow them down to tell me what they're doing.
That Living End player probably thought it was a cast trigger not an ETB trigger along with him not realizing he couldn't target the already resolved T3feri on the field. Or maybe he just jump the gun in saying his target before he needed to. Also that control player just wasting counterspells on stuff he didn't need to was just bad.
If the LE player thought that, why did he agree to the trigger getting countered? It's really easy for us to judge their plays, sitting calmly at home when somebody else explained what is wrong. Tournaments can be stressful though.
@@lamjeri A lot of less enfranchised players view an ETB trigger as a "when you cast this, choose a target - when it resolves, perform the action".
Hilariously, a lot of them also view an instant or sorcery with a target as a "when this resolves, announce the target and perform the action".
Can we not talk about him using teferi’s -3 to get rid of the grief not reacting to him evoking? He even removes the loyalty
He's not targeting grief with Teferi. Control player just points out that Grief should be sacrificed.
@@NikachuMTG so he removes the 3 loyalty for no reason?
@@jdowd28Notice it didn't go back to hand but to the graveyard, he knew full well it was supposed to be sacrificed. He used -3 for the card draw, since that's the other part of the ult and he no longer needs to keep gaining loyalty. He was that sure that he could prevent the opponent from sticking a creature and tbf, he was right.
Technically it isn't illegal unless they proceed to resolve the card. If the judges intervened and told a player that the resolution of their card was an illegal target prior to it attempting to resolve, that would technically be coaching and it's a big no no for judges to do that.
It's not illegal at any point. If the other player knew what the card did, they could have just let it resolve and told their opponent that nothing happens.
@@Fopenplop Attempting to put the triggered ability on the stack would be illegal, as it has no valid targets (and with Teferi on the opponent's board, it could never actually have a valid target).
It takes a real Subtle player to counter unnecessarily.
I’ve had to step away from Magic to be financially sane and catch up on real life that just poured on unforeseen financial debt earlier this year, so seeing this upload helped me to shake some of the rules dust off. Thank you for making my day as you do, reminding me that one day soon I’ll be back at this game and that I really hadn’t forgotten as much as I thought I had thankfully. You’re the best!
Dunno when you quit but MTG went into the shitter long ago, sorry if you decide to come back, I did and was more than just a little disappointed in the competitive scene.
I know what happened (aside from them not knowing how Subtlety works) Its simple, control player knows he has Archmages charm in his hand, so he's already poised to bounce....he may not understand that Subtlety wont do anything, but being prepared to counterspell was how his mind was working probably.
I would like to say, I never actually realized that’s how Subtlety worked. I thought it was like Venser Shaper Savant and could bounce the spells being cast or permanents. That explains why it’s the worst of the cycle.
Worse than Endurance? You don't realize Subtlety works on uncounterable creature or planeswalker spells.
The line break on Subtlety isn't helping.
"target creature spell or Planeswalker"
...
"spell"
@@roviverdandelarosa2181 Endurance is a part of a wincon or a combo piece - see the work it puts in with Nadu (RIP soon). I wouldn't say it's worse than Force of Essence Scatter + Aether Gust (which isn't a bad card, per se, lest you think that's my argument).
7:55 Of course you can counter a spell like this. A card is so long on the stack until the opponent chosses to not counter it. You can "predict" what you are doing when it enters the battlefield, but to be secure you say: I'm playing this card. Let the opponet read and decide to counter or not, and after you say which card it will affect.
My favorite judge interaction was at a tournament I was working as an L1. Player A and player B for a reason neither could understand or explain in the middle of the game shuffled their hands and graveyard into their libraries effectively restarting the game. After a 52 minute time extension no penalties were issued as nobody could explain what caused it or who was at fault.
They just shuffled it all up and they didn't know why? That's just... so silly it's hilarious.
i bet one of them was losing and used jedi mind tricks on the other to both shuffle up & play
I mean, you just have to rule that as an intentionally drawn game, right? You can agree to draw a game at any time, so if neither player believes that they conceded to the other, you tell them that they are starting the next game of the match (and explain that matches are played until one player has won two games, rather than as the commonly-understood "best of three games").
This was great thanks for finding this. KEEP STAYING PAWZITIVE NIKACHU along with 3 judges lol
I think the 2nd attempt at casting subtlety (with evoke) was just the living end player saying something like "evoke subtlety targeting your teferi" which is a reasonable shortcut (assuming it was a valid target for the triggered ability). You don't _have_ to announce the target before it has entered the battlefield but it's not illegal to talk ahead like that, and with this much pressure on them I can't really fault him for trying to speed things up as much as possible.
What I'm saying is I think it's not that weird that a finger was pointed and then the spell countered
It wasn't a valid target - but it's not the judge's place to step in and coach the players until the ability *actually* goes on the stack targeting Teferi (and even then, we probably don't step in until the Teferi is actually moved to the graveyard, because you're technically allowed to say something goes on the stack without it doing so [think a joke like "sadness is put onto the stack?" for a silly example] - it's only truly when you actually take the illegal action in a way that it's changed the visible gamestate that you've committed a rules violation and a judge should step in.)
"Hey buddy ever play MTG?"
"No"
"Me either! Lets play U/w control and a combo deck in modern at the local tournament, how hard can it be?"
- Those guys, probably.
Return of the king
I waited 5 months for this, loved every minute!!! ❤❤
That Living End player has a blinged out holographic deck and handles it like he's playing Alpha without sleeves but still has them in sleeves. The pringles. The bending. It hurts!!!!
Yeah, he seems to have a bad habit of pinching the top corner almost like he's dog earing the cards when placing them on the board. Imagine if this was a borrowed deck.
I do think the current foils look like shit though
@CrashKaiju I would blame the pringle on the foil if I didn't see him abuse those cards like they were bringing dishonor on his family.
@@wintersmonologue oh yeah the card abuse is real, I just think foils look bad
Huh wasn’t expecting a nikochu video
Holy cow this was an eye opener. If this was played online would the system know that this would be an illegal play? Great video!
Online if there's nothing to target on the stack then the card would just do nothing. The "target spell" trigger part still happens but there's nothing to target and it will resolve doing nothing.
Online does not support shortcuts so the Teferi would not be designated as a target while subtelty was on the stack. If the spell was allowed to respond the system would prevent you from targeting Teferi.
@@taemyr this is one of the reasons why playing online is the best way to go.
It would've played out the same. Subtlety would be on the stack, both players having misread it, and it would've been countered before any of them noticed that its ability would've targeted nothing if uncountered.
@@fernandobanda5734 Which is precisely why the calls of "why didn't the judges intervene??" are silly. The actions taken are all supported by the rules of the game: active player evoked Subtlety, active player indicated a permanent as an attempted shortcut (which wouldn't be considered a valid shortcut since the indicated target was not valid), non-active player countered the evoked spell. There are credible ways in which both players' actions could be considered a bluff, much like "Hey judge, can I name Dark Confidant with this Pithing Needle that's currently on the stack" is a legal bluff before naming Verdant Catacombs as it enters the battlefield. Since no illegal actions were taken, it was correct for the judges to allow play to continue without intervention.
Hope all is well! Glad to see a new video of yours!
One of the problems with Magic as a game is that the confusion about spell vs permanent is something even experienced players can forget. And once you've cast the spell, you can't really take it back. We can act like the players are stupid, that Modern players should know better, but these mistakes are understandable. I'm guessing these players don't play online much.
Lol that is not a problem at all. EVERYBODY understands the difference between a spell and a permanent. This is one of the worst comments I've ever read.
No you’re just dense. Commander players don’t understand the rules everyone else does
Playing Magic Online back in the day makes you very autistic about the rules. When the guy tried casting a spell on opponents turn with Telferi in play not only does your spell not get played but now eat the mana burn you couldn't use that you added to your mana pool trying to cast it.
Alternatively, you can tell who plays online entirely too much by how often they forget to keep track of their triggers when playing in paper.
Doesn't UW control play Subtlety too?
Modern is in such a good place right now he said sarcastically.
I disagree that there was no attempted cheating in this match. The combo player definitely knowingly tried to sneak past the rules. When all of their "misplays" benefit them to win then I immediately become skeptical of their intentions.
It would have been a much better play to just hard cast Subtlety for 4 mana to attack Teferi. By playing it for free they were throwing it away (and another card!) so I wouldn’t say their misplays are benefiting them. It just so happens they didn’t get punished for it because countering the subtlety is a legal play.
BIG agree. Its WILDLY naive to assume this guy bought an expensive, high-tier deck, brought it to a big tourney, and repeatedly "misplayed" something so elementary to his benefit... "Oops!"
@@chunnil4898i absolutely forgot exactly what subtlety did and had to reread it to remind myself it wasn’t a bounce spell, and the cards been out quite a while at this point, was much newer then
@@chunnil4898Honest Question, is this sarcasm?
If he BOUGHT the Deck and didn't build it himself, and thought that's how the card worked, multiple missplays that benefit him would be exactly what I would expect from him not know his deck.
Like Nikachu said in the end of video, technically he never did anything wrong for someone to tell him he's doing it wrong.
Another great video ! Was a mess all throughout.
Huh, I don't play Magic much anymore, but I thought that same-typed planeswalkers (2x Teferis) were subject to the legend-ish uniqueness rule, so the control player would've destroyed themselves by blowing up their first Teferi. But looking it up, I guess this changed and they're just subject to the same rule as other legendary cards. Seems a bit goofy lorewise, but interesting.
If there is one planeswalkers it makes sense with it would be Teferi since he is time travelling all over the place. So it could be two Teferis from different times
You can play any Planeswalkers with different names. Teferi, Who Slows the Sunset, Temporal Archmage, Temp Pilgrim, Hero of Dominaria, etc. They aren't all just considered Teferi, the subtitle counts as a new name
This was changed when Ixalan came out. You can now have two planeswalkers of the same character as long as they have different full names
Yeah, now planeswalkers are legendary and subject to the same legendary rule as any other permanent (if you have multiple legendary permanents with the same name, you must sacrifice all but one of them as a state-based action).
Loving the subtle Mario music in the background... Works perfectly lol
Want a current modern update!!!!!
Well,welcome back Legend!
This is the best video I've seen from you. This is what playing magic really feels like
I didn't watch it from the sideline. When I was about 13 or 14 I played against another boy from the town. It was the time when old Kamigawa released and I played the rat ninjutsu deck. He tried so hard to convince me he could block a creature I played with ninjutsu I was doubting myself. Luckily a friend walked in who told us I was right and declaration of blockers was over.
You are allowed to have 2 of the same planeswalker in play at the same time now? When did that change?
they were 2 different Teferi's
Never, you are not allowed to have the same walker twice, because of the legend rule :D You are allowed to have 2 different planeswalkers with the same type tho. Sorry for the pedantic answer, had to do it xD
@@MrXennhorn that's what I mean. 2 Teferi's or 2 Garruk's or 2 Liliana's used to be a no-go. When did that change?
From ixalan (2017)
@@ich3730 that's what I'm saying. When did that change? I get that they are 2 different Teferi's, but that used to be prohibited. When did it become legal?
literally makes me laugh on how he says playing subtle to return teferi. his reaction; resolves enemy player; bounce back teferi. his reaction; thats ilegal... hahahhaha
idk what they were thinking printing a card like teferi time raveler, completely removing instant speed is so against the spirit of the game's tug of war.
Laughs in Grand Abolisher
I judge Pokemon not MTG but we have 50 min rounds as well, often 9 a day. Anyways my major suggestion BRING WATER!!!! Especially if you are playing control your mind can get burnt out but having the H2O in your system when everyone else hasn't really had any around round 7-9 can be what you need to make day 2.
The biggest issue I see here is the understanding of the difference of a permanent versus a spell. I have not been playing Magic for long, however, I have played other card games in the past. I love the very deep mechanics of this game. I was also at a bit of a loss of what the issue was, until I had my lightbulb moment while watching the video, lol.
This game was unhinged. How those guys got matched up can only be a gift from the magic gods to us.
To clarify rhe confusion if there is any, spell must resolve for it to be an illigal play, since it was countered, it could never become illigal
So are these two decks really good then? Should I use them?
UW Control is basically transformed into 4c Omnath these days. But Living End is still pretty good as it is.
In in fairness these guys where probably absolutely exhausted
I remember at my school's Magic Club, at one point I think somebody tried to play a Terror on their opponent's Plated Slagwurm, Slagwurm player tries to Reroute the Terror and I'm like "Hold the fuck up, we need to rewind cause like 7 illegal things just happened."
The biggest sin here was the Slagwurm player putting Reroute in their deck. That's probably the only time a player has ever attempted to cast one in a game of Magic.
Oddly enough, that is sort of how most judging has to be done, unless something blatantly illegal happens, a judge can't step in, unless a player calls for one, since judges are technically there to solve issues, not police games, granted, had the subtlety resolved wrongly, a judge would have jumped in to prevent the illegal move, it's a dumb distinction but sort of important, since judges can't be seen favoring one player over the other.
I think the intention here is that you can't tell apart odd decisions made for strategic reasons (for instance, I want to pretend that I can do something as a bluff, when I'm just throwing cards away) from odd decisions made due to lack of knowledge (for instance, evoking the Subtlety as shown here). So the call is to just let all valid actions happen - if players want to know about a rule, they can ask before taking actions.
The Donkey Kong/Mario background music was a nice touch 😄👍
As a blue control enjoyer I have to say that until I say “resolves” no other game actions are happening.
Also if I were in the blue white control player’s position I likely would also counter the subtlety as if my opponent is clearly misreading their card there is no reason for me to let them be punished by their misplay while I am in full control and have the game on lock, I can quietly wait until it’s most opportune for me to capitalize on their misunderstanding.
Right? Hardcasting a Subtlety is the best action they could have taken and might get them out of the lock if they can resolve it. If you tell them that their Subtlety's ETB trigger can't target Teferi, they're not going to make the same mistake of evoking it if they draw another because they'll be hoping to be able to cascade into Living End in the same turn as casting Subtlety; if your hand is full of counters and you have the mana available now to keep them ignorant, it's better to keep your options open as to when you can conserve the counter. It even means you're safer to tap out if you need to.
I don't think the control player in the video considered any of that, though, as they countered the second evoked Subtlety as well despite lethal in the air on board.
The bgm in your videos is ultra classic, loving the Super Mario World bgm
I actually had an opponent RECENTLY make that same Subtlety fumble with his U/B Control deck. Granted, he did hard cast it so he still got his nice 3/3 flyer but still.
I think the issue with Subtlety is howthe text is laid out on the card.
"When Subtlety enters the battlefield, choose up to one target creature spell or planeswalker
spell. Its owner puts it on the top or bottom of their library."
It is easy to overlook that important word at the beginning at the second line of text. If your don't notice that the card seems to read as:
"When Subtlety enters the battlefield, choose up to one target creature spell or planeswalker. Its owner puts it on the top or bottom of their library."
I think that's what happened for both of these players.
Players made 3 lefts, judges not obligated to say just go right 😂😂
Dam every new video you put out is a treat. Thanks Nikachu!
Yay! Glad you’re back!
Part of this reminds me of a game of commander I played. I cast Gray Merchant and in response, an opponent cast Path to Exile on it. I kinda just went with them meaning to cast it in response to his trigger, which would still go in the stack, and just take him out. When I was trying to explain how this worked, some other person jumped in to started lecturing me about the stack and started claiming that Path to Exile *could* target a creature spell on the stack, and how it was, effectively, a counter spell. 🤦
what the hell
This video reminds me of Rimmer when he is explaining a game of Risk played like 20 years ago to Lister. Lister starts rolling his eyes and tries to fall asleep.
As a magic and LE player, my eyes are bleeding after this game, it should be considered a crime against magic the gathering.
Another important rule in a tournament is to not day drink! I did that at the last RCQ I went to although things did get better after so maybe DO day drink?
The Living End player must be a rookie. There's a reason why we all can access the comprehensive rules through the official site. In addition, I'll tell anyone outside sanctioned events you're not ready for competitive play if you ask to take back a play for any reason.
Looking at this version of Subtlety they used, the line "creature spell or planeswalker spell" cuts to another line right after "planeswalker". It's easy to understand how you could miss the "spell" part at a glance
3:58
We, in fact, absolutely forgot that the grief was evoked ! As it was bounced by the T3feri in the footage !
Haha, no the Grief went to the graveyard. The control player went -3 targeting nothing to just draw a card. Even the judge got confused at to what happened and had to clarify what was going on.
I can totally understand mistaking that _Subtlety_ can hit permanents because when they already have the gist of the card people typically only really look for types of targets in the card text and gloss over the rest, so that seems plausible, but Charm's first ability is so short and concise Idk how anyone would mistake it 🤷🏽
No mistake was made with Archmage's Charm, though. The Living End player is not allowed to rush past the resolution of his Subtlety and must give the other player an opportunity to respond with it on the stack, so until the Control player either agreed that the Subtlety had resolved, the Subtlety was still on the stack and able to be targeted with Charm's first ability.
I can understand the judges there. the thing is, as stupid as this line of play to counter a sorcery speed evoked subtlety is (TWICE) its not illegal. and judges are not responsible for your bad gameplay. in fact, if they had intervened, that would be inappropriate since its like giving advice. if the subtlety had resolved, and player A returned the teferi to their hand, the judges would then intervene because hats an illegal target, and therefore the teferi would remain on the battlefield. but until then, the players are doing legal actions and its not a judges job to stop stupid plays, just illegal ones. speaking as I also am a judge, and I also wouldnt intervene. a similar story is in the famous pithing needle dark confidant example where the judge did not, and should not point out that naming dark confidant does anything. the question is can I name dark confidant and the answer is yes
I think all this confusion would be solved if the card text added "on the stack". Reminds me of return to zero.
That’s a great idea
Turns out that cards deliberately don't mention the stack, as it tends to confuse new(er) players more often than it helps anyone.
@@therealax6 "What's the stack? Do I have to keep my cards spread out on the table so I'm not vulnerable to Subtlety? Or is my deck my stack, and you get to look through it and counter something from it?"
Back in my day (when I just started playing), I guy tried to Disenchant a Disenchant (we only had instructions in english and we weren't good at it)
Oh my god, the Great Teacher Onizuka clip, love it
Nice to see you man. It's been way too long!
I know!
As the Professor loves to say, "Reading the card explains the card"
Your super Nintendo background music is such a nice touch. 👍
I once saw Kenny beat Slaughter House. It was total mayhem.
Also, I think that if for some reason the uw player had let the subtlety resolve (which he should've) the judges wouldn't let the teferi actually go to the library.
Correct, as that would have been an illegal action having a visible effect on the game state.
Definitely a dominance flex. He was using counters just cuz he had them. It's just coincidence that nothing illegal happened
Curious, if he is not planning on spending mana when he brings out Hallowed Fountain, would it be just as good as to let it come into play tapped and not loose the 2 life?
He probably planned on spending the mana if the opponent threatened him with something.
@@NikachuMTG Can only cast as sorcery, so he wont 'react' with instants.
@@ingiford175 Teferi only affects opponents, not the controller. The control player can still play at instant speed. Teferi is busted!
@@NikachuMTG That is busted
Nice to see you posting again.
That Donkey Kong Country music fits so perfectly it's uncanny
Yeeeeessss you are back :) i love these videos
I think there were 2 mistakes made by the LE player, and probably they're illegal moves:
both the times he played Subtlety at sorcery speed (5:48 and 12:09), he "targetted" Teferi,
*inducing, willing or not, the UW player to react at the threaten*
but the effect resolves only when the creature etb,
so IIRC he had to target Teferi only when, and if, the creature etb, not when it has been casting and going into the stack
Nah. Pointing to a target when doing something that would cause a targeted ability to go onto the stack, but before that ability does go onto the stack, is a perfectly fine shortcut (and is actually binding if the opponent accepts the shortcut, meaning they don't take any game actions between the shortcut's proposal and the trigger going onto the stack). There's a grey area where the suggested target is not valid, like in the video, but for me that falls in the realm of an acceptable bluff.
Had the Subtlety resolved, and the players moved the Teferi off the battlefield, that would be an illegal move, since Teferi is not a valid target for the ability. But until/unless the ability resolves and visibly changes the game state in a way that isn't supported by the card's text, no rules violations have occurred.