Magic Judges Forum / Competitive REL / Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 10:21:26 AM

As a preface, the example I'm going to provide uses Panglacial Wurm, because professionals have considered it in Mono Green Tron, a competitive viable deck. This question has implications outside of Panglacial Wurm, including all Future Sight effects.

Stated simply, there are several steps in casting a spell, which you complete in a linear order every time you cast a spell. If a player knows that they cannot, or do not want to, complete one step, is it still legal to complete all steps preceding the step where they intend to break? I realize that this question is functionally irrelevant in almost all cases, but not every case.

For a functional example, Aaron has Expedition Map, Chromatic Sphere, and three lands in play. Aaron sacrifices Expedition Map, and begins searching their library, starting by picking up and looking at just the top card of their library. Aaron sees that it's a card that they'd like to draw, so they separate it noticeably for their opponent, and clarify that it's the top card of their library before continuing. They thumb to a Panglacial Wurm in their library, and say “I'm going to move Panglacial Wurm to the stack. When I can activate mana abilities, I will sacrifice Chromatic Sphere, adding green. Draw this card,” then they point to the card they separated earlier, and don't physically move it into their hand. “I can't pay the total cost of Panglacial Wurm, so it goes back to the part of the library it came from. I can't reverse my Chromatic Sphere draw. I'll continue resolving Expedition Map.”

In the comprehensive rules, 721 handles illegal actions. 721.1 begins, “If a player takes an illegal action or starts to take an action but can’t legally complete it, the entire action is reversed and any payments already made are canceled…” By beginning the steps of casting a spell, without the ability or intention to complete those steps, Aaron has brought the game to an error state, which must be corrected. We already have a prescribed way to correct the game state. What we lack is an answer as to whether or not Aaron has committed an infraction by intentionally bringing the game to this state. Has Aaron “taken an illegal action” or has Aaron “taken an action but can't legally complete it.” All actions that Aaron has taken are legal, with the potential exception of beginning a process he couldn't complete. The question is just that; is beginning the process illegal if completing the process is impossible or not the intention.

I believe the existing comprehensive rules support interpretations in favor both for and against this being an infraction. I don't think there's an unambiguous answer that exists at this moment, which is why I bring it here instead of the floor of a competitive REL event. For what it's worth, while it's a confusing line of play to allow, I don't worry about the harm of this trick being legal. It doesn't seem like it can cause any damage, as just one of many arcane loopholes one can utilize given a deep understanding of the rules, similar to the recent Krark-Clan Ironworks trick that has been discovered by the larger community. I am worried that by designating it illegal, we are setting a precedent where our policy looks into the future to determine if present actions are legal.

PS: I promise I'm not playing stump the chump here. The point of this question isn't some game to see if I can come up with the most convoluted loophole in Magic. This started as some passing idea I had about Future Sight, and when I figured out the implications it had with Panglacial Wurm, I realized that it has the potential for competitive play. Green tron can check for a land or bomb they are missing on top of their library with every search effect, and choose whether or not they want to draw it if they have a Sphere in play and a Wurm in their library. It's a marginal advantage, but a significant one. If this trick is legal, I intend to play with it.

Edited Karl Simmons (Dec. 17, 2018 10:57:57 AM)

Scott Marshall · Dec. 17, 2018 11:34:43 AM

First, thanks to Andrew for linking my similar answer (and saving me some time!).

Second - Karl, I think I was fairly clear in that previous (Official) answer. If you intentionally do something that you know is (or will become) illegal in order to gain an advantage, you’re Cheating.

While the Comp Rules cover what players do when an action can’t be completed legally, the IPG instructs Judges on what to do. When you break a rule in the CR, it’s a Game Play Error, often specifically a Game Rule Violation. Doing so intentionally, to gain advantage, checks all the boxes for Cheating.

d:^D

P.S. - this is also a candidate for Most Extreme Corner Case Annually (MECCA?). Blech…

Federico Verdini · Dec. 17, 2018 10:39:15 AM

What you're describing sound “a lot” like the player is:
a) doing something illegal
b) knowing it's illegal
c) in order to gain an advantage
So, doing this is cheating, and the player should be disqualified from the event

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 10:53:55 AM

Originally posted by Federico Verdini:

What you're describing sound “a lot” like the player is:
a) doing something illegal
b) knowing it's illegal
c) in order to gain an advantage
So, doing this is cheating, and the player should be disqualified from the event

They are doing something to gain an advantage, but are we sure that what they're doing is illegal?

Yeah, it “sounds a lot like” cheating, but that doesn't mean it's cheating. Trample+deathtouch “sounds” wrong, but it isn't.

Is it illegal to follow the steps of casting a spell without completing them?

Andrew Villarrubia · Dec. 17, 2018 10:56:50 AM

This sounds an awful lot like intentionally taking illegal actions to gain an advantage. I think we have a word for that.

This situation reminds me a bit of this old thread about Goblin Test Pilot vs Suppression Field.

Edited Andrew Villarrubia (Dec. 17, 2018 10:58:19 AM)

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 11:03:04 AM

Originally posted by Andrew Villarrubia:

This sounds an awful lot like intentionally taking illegal actions to gain an advantage. I think we have a word for that.

This situation reminds me a bit of this old thread about Goblin Test Pilot vs Suppression Field.

Thanks for bringing up that situation. I hadn't read it before. It seems weird that nobody mentioned the issue the suggested situation has to do with regard to non-deterministic loops.

The response also states that there is an illegal action taken, but hasn't explained or provided any evidence to explain, that any illegal action has actually occurred. What's the illegal action?

Edited Karl Simmons (Dec. 17, 2018 11:03:26 AM)

Scott Marshall · Dec. 17, 2018 11:34:43 AM

First, thanks to Andrew for linking my similar answer (and saving me some time!).

Second - Karl, I think I was fairly clear in that previous (Official) answer. If you intentionally do something that you know is (or will become) illegal in order to gain an advantage, you’re Cheating.

While the Comp Rules cover what players do when an action can’t be completed legally, the IPG instructs Judges on what to do. When you break a rule in the CR, it’s a Game Play Error, often specifically a Game Rule Violation. Doing so intentionally, to gain advantage, checks all the boxes for Cheating.

d:^D

P.S. - this is also a candidate for Most Extreme Corner Case Annually (MECCA?). Blech…

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 11:55:28 AM

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

First, thanks to Andrew for linking my similar answer (and saving me some time!).

Second - Karl, I think I was fairly clear in that previous (Official) answer. If you intentionally do something that you know is (or will become) illegal in order to gain an advantage, you’re Cheating.

While the Comp Rules cover what players do when an action can’t be completed legally, the IPG instructs Judges on what to do. When you break a rule in the CR, it’s a Game Play Error, often specifically a Game Rule Violation. Doing so intentionally, to gain advantage, checks all the boxes for Cheating.

d:^D

P.S. - this is also a candidate for Most Extreme Corner Case Annually (MECCA?). Blech…

I fail to see how the comprehensive rules, or any document, outline how any player has taken an illegal action. I don't see a rule being broken in the CR. I agree that if a GPE GRV has occurred, and the player was aware that what they were doing was illegal, then the result is cheating, but I do not believe a case has been made that any game rules have been violated, or any error in game play has occurred.

IPG 4.8 Unsporting Conduct - Cheating
A person breaks a rule defined by the tournament documents, lies to a Tournament Official, or notices an offense committed in their (or a teammate’s) match and does not call attention to it.
Additionally, the offense must meet the following criteria for it to be considered Cheating: …The player must be aware that they are doing something illegal.

What rule, defined by the tournament documents, has been broken?

601.2 To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 721, “Handling Illegal Actions”).

There is a case to be made with the passage “the casting of the spell is illegal” that beginning the process becomes illegal at the point that the “player is unable to comply with any of the steps,” but I think it's more common to interpret “the casting of the spell” as the final step, 601.2i, “the spell becomes cast.”

In the example I provided, Aaron followed steps that he was allowed to take, as described in the comprehensive rules, and nothing was problematic up until 601.2h, when the player is unable to comply with a step that the game is asking them to take. If the answer is that beginning the process becomes illegal once the process cannot be completed, and doing so intentionally inherently is cheating, that's obviously an answer that I can accept. I don't believe, however, that there has yet been thorough explanation of why any action taken is illegal. That's not a conclusion that I think has been explained.

P.S. - The goal with this question isn't to find a corner case. It's to receive an answer on whether or not this action, which I see as having the potential to be legitimate, is legal. If it's not, then it's obviously cheating (given that the player understands that it's illegal). That's not a point I feel needs to be explained.

Edited Karl Simmons (Dec. 17, 2018 11:56:17 AM)

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 12:31:40 PM

To clarify, I think I found where the disconnect is coming from. It seems that the majority perceive casting a spell as 1 discrete action, which has several steps. If any step is bad, the whole action is illegal. I'm just looking at the discrete steps, and as long as each is fine individually, we don't stop until one isn't.

While I think others are seeing “everything happening is illegal,” I'm seeing “nothing illegal happened until the player was unable to pay total costs,” and don't believe that fits neatly into an “illegal action.”

Federico Verdini · Dec. 17, 2018 12:57:35 PM

Originally posted by Karl Simmons:

They are doing something to gain an advantage, but are we sure that what they're doing is illegal?
(…..)
I fail to see how the comprehensive rules, or any document, outline how any player has taken an illegal action. I don't see a rule being broken in the CR

Because like you said on your first message, in the comprehensive rules, 721 handles illegal actions. 721.1 begins, “If a player takes an illegal action or starts to take an action but can’t legally complete it…”
I mean, 721 tell us how to deal with such illegal actions, but that doesn't make those actions “legal”

Nelson Mendoza Moral · Dec. 17, 2018 01:02:17 PM

You are using rule 721 to handle this action. Rule 721 is called “Handling Illegal Actions”. The entire purpose of this rule is to handle illegal actions. If you need to invoke this rule, it's because an illegal action needs to be handled.

Beginning to cast a spell that you are unable to cast is an illegal action that might to be handled by rule 721.

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 01:06:13 PM

@ both
The phrase “If a player takes an illegal action or starts to take an action but can’t legally complete it…” implies that these are not mutually inclusive. I'm not arguing that the existence of rules to handle an illegal action make that action legal by definition, I'm saying that this phrasing implies that things which aren't illegal actions can still fall into this bucket. A player has started to take an action but cannot legally complete it. There isn't a definition that codifies that as inherently illegal, and it's subtraction from “If a player takes an illegal action” can be read to imply that it is legal.

Federico Verdini · Dec. 17, 2018 01:17:27 PM

Honestly, I think you're overthinking it. What your saying is that there are actions that are neither legal nor illegal?
If you can't legally complete it, that means the casting of the spell just became illegal, and that's why we need to deal with it. And that's what 721 is there for

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 01:28:52 PM

Originally posted by Federico Verdini:

Honestly, I think you're overthinking it. What your saying is that there are actions that are neither legal nor illegal?
If you can't legally complete it, that means the casting of the spell just became illegal, and that's why we need to deal with it. And that's what 721 is there for

Alright, that's fair. That's what I'm trying to talk about here:

Originally posted by Karl Simmons:

To clarify, I think I found where the disconnect is coming from. It seems that the majority perceive casting a spell as 1 discrete action, which has several steps. If any step is bad, the whole action is illegal. I'm just looking at the discrete steps, and as long as each is fine individually, we don't stop until one isn't.

While I think others are seeing “everything happening is illegal,” I'm seeing “nothing illegal happened until the player was unable to pay total costs,” and don't believe that fits neatly into an “illegal action.”

If it's true that we should treat casting a spell as a singular action, and require that each step within that action be legal, else the entire action is illegal, then that's a resolution. That's not my inclination, though, and I'm not sure it's the correct way to treat the process. It has problematic implications with regards to things like 601.3, which deals with the legality of casting a spell changing as we progress through the steps.

Edited Karl Simmons (Dec. 17, 2018 01:30:05 PM)

Scott Marshall · Dec. 17, 2018 02:47:16 PM

Karl, I've provided an ‘O’fficial answer.

If I'm reading your responses correctly, you're arguing that I must be wrong, because you want to read the rules differently than the manner that might support my answer? Perhaps instead you might consider that the rules support my answer, and use that to guide your understanding?

Let me shift the scenario slightly, in hopes you'll see things more clearly.
Suppose you control the only creature on the battlefield, a Demonlord Belzenlok, and several untapped lands that could produce blue mana.
I cast Doom Blade, targeting your Demonlord, even though I know I can't complete the casting of this spell (no legal target). I tell the Judge I did that because I was hoping you would start to counter it, before realizing my illegal play, and then I'd know you had a counterspell.

Hopefully, it's very clear how this is Cheating. The difference from your scenario is nitpicking, really - if anything, it's worse, because you're drawing a card at a time you shouldn't be able to because you know the reversal process can't undo it. (I don't have to undo it, because you're no longer playing in the tournament.)

d:^D

Karl Simmons · Dec. 17, 2018 03:02:14 PM

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

If I'm reading your responses correctly, you're arguing that I must be wrong, because you want to read the rules differently than the manner that might support my answer? Perhaps instead you might consider that the rules support my answer, and use that to guide your understanding?

I apologize that I have given you that perspective. I understand that everyone in here believes that the answer to the topic “Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps” is “No, that's illegal.” I trust that the rules support the answer that this is illegal. I would just like to understand how, because as of now, I'm still not sure that I do.

I am having a hard time seeing the “why” behind the conclusion. I'll take Federico's answer as the most complete, which is essentially if any one step is illegal, the entire bucket of casting that spell was illegal, regardless of which steps in the process were legal. Again, that's a conclusion, and it's one that I can just accept moving forward.

Please keep the forum protocol in mind when posting.

Dec. 17, 2018 10:21:26 AM [Original Post]

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 11:34:43 AM [Marked as Accepted Answer]

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 10:39:15 AM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 10:53:55 AM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 10:56:50 AM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 11:03:04 AM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 11:34:43 AM [Marked as Accepted Answer]

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 11:55:28 AM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 12:31:40 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 12:57:35 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 01:02:17 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 01:06:13 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 01:17:27 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 01:28:52 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 02:47:16 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?

Dec. 17, 2018 03:02:14 PM

Is it legal to begin the steps of casting a spell without the ability or intention to complete those steps?