"Can I put my Weldfast Engineer trigger on the stack?"

Is this a valid way for AP to ask if NAP wants to do anything in main phase before AP gets his trigger, without AP revealing prematurely what the target is for the trigger?

Seems fine to me.

My question is, what difference does it make? NAP can still respond before the trigger resolves.

The issue is that the trigger needs a target and so the question is does AP
have to give up that information now or can they wait?

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017, 23:57 Nathaniel Lawrence <

Originally posted by Nathaniel Lawrence:

My question is, what difference does it make? NAP can still respond before the trigger resolves.

Knowing which artifact is going to be pumped gives NAP an advantage in theory. Maybe there are two artifacts, and one can kill NAP and the other can't (because of a trick NAP has). If AP shortcuts to targetting the lethal artifact, NAP can say “hold up, in your main phase kill the engineer”. If the AP shortcuts to targetting the non-lethal artifact, NAP can accept the shortcut and carry on. Asking the question in this manner means NAP doesn't get to find out what the target will be, so must decide to kill the engineer, or allow the trigger to go on the stack.

Originally posted by Mark Mc Govern:

Originally posted by Nathaniel Lawrence:

My question is, what difference does it make? NAP can still respond before the trigger resolves.

Knowing which artifact is going to be pumped gives NAP an advantage in theory. Maybe there are two artifacts, and one can kill NAP and the other can't (because of a trick NAP has). If AP shortcuts to targetting the lethal artifact, NAP can say “hold up, in your main phase kill the engineer”. If the AP shortcuts to targetting the non-lethal artifact, NAP can accept the shortcut and carry on. Asking the question in this manner means NAP doesn't get to find out what the target will be, so must decide to kill the engineer, or allow the trigger to go on the stack.

And if he allows the trigger to go on the stack he can still respond and kill the lethal artifact..
Or if he's that concerned about the trigger he can kill it in the main phase anyway.

Sure, in theory you could craft an edge case where it's relevant but edge cases don't make for good discussion or rebuttals.

I should have been more explicit - I'm assuming that NAP can't kill the lethal artifact.

Also, it's not about NAP here. It's about AP here. AP wants to know if NAP is going to act in AP's main phase, or allow him to stack the trigger at the Beginning of Combat.

It seems like that sort of situation would fall under the “floating mana” exception to the shortcut. As long as AP is clear that this is what they intend to do, I can't see why we wouldn't allow this.

Seems legit to me. This is like “Combat?”, but intentionally mentioning the trigger so the opponent doesn't claim they missed it.

Originally posted by Charlotte Sable:

The issue is that the trigger needs a target and so the question is does AP
have to give up that information now or can they wait?

I would say AP doesn't have to announce their target if asking if they can move to placing the trigger on the stack, because NAP may want to act in Main 1 before allowing the game to progress. The trigger doesn't target when we ask “Can I do this?”, but when we say “Do this,” when it's actually going onto the stack.

A few thoughts:

It seems like AP is asking to go to the place where NAP will pass priority before Weldfast Engineer will trigger. This location is NAP's priority in BoC, which conveniently is where the combat shortcut drops us.

Note that if NAP wants to prevent the trigger from happening, they'll likely explicitly say “Still in Main, kill your Weldfast”. This happened all the time back when Goblin Rabblemaster was in standard (to prevent a 1/1 token from being made); I'm not sold on why things have changed this drastically.

I believe this statement is going to cause more confusion for the opponent, because AP is propsing a new shortcut without exactly saying where they are ending:

Originally posted by MTR4.2:

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.

The combat shortcut causes AP to Miss the Trigger. The proposed question doesn't.

Nothing has changed drastically here. Of course NAP can still kill the engineer main phase - but they'll have to make that decision without knowing what AP intends to target.

Originally posted by Jeff S Higgins:

This happened all the time back when Goblin Rabblemaster was in standard (to prevent a 1/1 token from being made); I'm not sold on why things have changed this drastically.

Goblin Rabblemaster does not target anything!

Better comparison would be Surrak, the Hunt Caller. And yes, I have witnessed at least one GP ruling regarding Surrak's trigger, where it was used in the similar way (as a way of a last resort gotcha to escape an inevitable death).

I am a bit pessimistic about our ability to find a proper wording for the “combat” shortcut when it involves situations with a targeting beginning-of-combat trigger. Also educating players seems hopeless (when a pro like Kai Budde does not know the shortcut exists? WTH?).

Could WotC stop creating abilities that trigger at the beginning of combat and target?

Question going in the same direction:

If AP just says during his main phase one: “Pass Priority” then NAP does whatever NAPS do - eg icy Manipulator. In which Phase are we after NAP “did his thing”. Main Phase One I suppose. If NAP just passes back or looks with a puzzled face and does nothing we should be in “Beginning of Combat step”.

The whole issue is, that we encourage Communication but when it happens it has to happen the way the MTR sees it or sees it. The whole “combat” issue is a communication issue. However the only way to legally get into the so desired “Beginning of Combat-Step” is to just pass priortiy and NOT announce anything anymore.

So in my opinion when AP says “Pass Priority” and priority is passed back AP gets to do whatever he wants in the beginning of combat step. IF however AP says for whatever reason ANYTHING involving the word “combat” he has passed priortiy to declare attackers.

SIDENOTE: I know all the discussions about whether or not AP should or should not do things in his MAin phase and the doubt judges have about the “baiting” things when proceeding to beginning of combat step but I even more so understand players who see that phase as “Preparation for Combat” step and helps them structure the turn and the communication with their opponent.

Originally posted by Denis Leber:

So in my opinion when AP says “Pass Priority” and priority is passed back AP gets to do whatever he wants in the beginning of combat step.

This isn't the case. The whole purpose of the shortcut is so that AP can't use word play to trick NAP into thinking the game is about to go to combat.