Given the IPG update of today and Toby's blog about it, I still have some questions of clarification.

First of all, however, I would like to mention that it seems to me that the new documents haven't yet been published on the wizards site. I still see the IPG effective october 1st 2012 as the most recent version.

On with the questions:

Triggered abilities are assumed to be remembered until otherwise indicated, and the impact on the game state may not be immediately apparent. The opponent’s benefit is in not having to point out triggered abilities, although this does not mean that they can cause triggers to be missed. If an opponent requires information about the precise timing of a triggered ability or needs details about a game object that may be affected by a resolved triggered ability, that player may need to acknowledge that ability’s existence before its controller does.

Let's see if I have understood this correctly. Assume my opponent is attacking with 2 bears and warmind infantry (2/3 battallion +2/+0). I block a bear with a bear of my own, and block his warmind with a 3/3. If I understand the above correctly, it's ok for me to ask “so my bear, your bear and the warmind infantry die?”, but not ok for me to state “so my bear, your bear and the warmind infantry die.”. Is this correct?

Let's further assume that my opponent plays a Giant Growth on his warmind infantry. I'm not allowed to respond with a Dimir Charm (relevant mode: Destroy target creature with power 2 or less) without explicitly asking about the Warmind's power, since the trigger is assumed to have been resolved? If I do play the Dimir Charm there, knowing that the Warmind Infantry should have triggered, I'm cheating?

Assume your opponent's triggers have resolved, unless you have proof that they've been missed.

Sometimes this means you may have to ask your opponent questions about what's going on in order to make the correct play with full information. That's not the end of the world.

Quick question, my opponent attacks with an exalted creature. I'm trying to figure out whether he missed the trigger or not before I decide whether or not to block. I want to ask in a way that tells me whether or not he/she has missed the trigger without pointing out the trigger in case they did miss it.

I ask “How big is that creature?” My opponent responds “figure it out”, since we're at competitive, and this is derived information, he isn't obligated to answer my question.

Am I then forced to ask specifically about the trigger? Or is there another way I can figure out whether or not they missed it?

Michael: You are not ‘forced’ to ask about the trigger. Just assume he remembered the trigger until you have evidence he didnt. If you want to gamble that he forgot, gamble. If you want to make sure, ask.
The opponents advantage is that he doesnt have to point out the trigger, not that he has the ability to “trick” his opponent into missing it.

Originally posted by Bryan Prillaman:

The opponents advantage is that he doesnt have to point out the trigger, not that he has the ability to “trick” his opponent into missing it.

<– this. Really, this may be the most important part to understand: if the new policy on Missed Triggers eliminates the opportunities for you to trick your opponents into technically missing a trigger they didn't really miss? Then we've done our job.

One of the things I hated most about Triggers, and all our iterations of policy - and I don't think I was alone in this - was the number of ways savvy opponents could get an advantage by subtle manipulation of policy. My new favorite speech for players? “Play the game, not the judges.”

d:^D

I'm not trying to trick anyone, just trying to figure out if there is a way for me to assess whether or not they missed it before I declare a block, and without altering them to the trigger myself. If I ask “Did you remember exalted?” the obvious answer is going to be yes, regardless of whether they actually did or not.

When does the new policy take effect?

Effective from this Friday, 8th February.

As for whether there's a way to find out if they've remembered exalted or not, having spoken with others earlier today we couldn't really find a way. I think you're stuck with either assuming they have remembered it, taking the risk that they've remembered it but not said anything and blocking anyway, or straight up asking them.

In the exalted scenario, if they say “work it out”, I think you're screwed. But then again, any player who knows the rules well enough to know that he doesn't have to tell you derived information, is probably good enough that they've remembered their exalted trigger and is hoping YOU make an error. So personally, as an opponent, I would assume they've remembered it.

Dimir Charming a Warmind Infantry after you've blocked it and in response to a pump spell/bloodrush card is interesting. The rules say to assume it has resolved until something happens which leads you to believe it hasn't (more or less). Strictly speaking then, targetting it with Dimir Charm would be illegal, and knowingly doing so would be cheating.

It's a bit quantum though - it might be legal to Charm it, and it might not be, but you won't know until you do target it at which point the creature becomes one of the two options (4/3 - “But it's a 4/3 because of battalion”; or 2/3 “oh crap, I forgot about Battalion”, or “sure, it dies” followed by a turn later - “oh crap, I forgot about Battalion”).

With Dimir Charm and Killing Glare in Gatecrash Limited, and GP London this weekend, I would be interested in hearing the fficial answer on how best to proceed when players use these spells to target Warmind and Boros Elite hoping their opponent has missed their trigger.

If you want to use Dimir Charm or Killing Glare on Warmind and Boros Elite,
the correct way to do it is something like “Before the trigger resolves,
play ‘X’” or “In response to the trigger, play ‘X’”. You need to assume
that the trigger will resolve, so you don't want to wait until after you
find out if it happened or not.

Shawn

I get that you can use it when the trigger is on the stack. That's not really an issue. The issue is when I block, and, in order to kill my blocker they use a pump spell or Bloodrush effect. We are past the point where the trigger should have resolved, but nobody is clear on whether it was remembered without asking. If I respond to the pump with one of these removal spells, hoping that they've forgotten Battalion, have I cheated (given that the assumption is “remembered until proven forgotten”)? That's the question.

Hmmm, let's see… I have a Dimir Charm in hand, which can kill his Boros Elite - but not after the Battalion trigger resolves. So, I put a blocker in harm's way, exposing it to (a) the likelihood - and the default assumption! - that he'll remember his Battalion trigger, and (b) any sort of pump spell. So then, I try to Dimir Charm his Elite, hoping he's forgotten about Battalion (which has already resolved, since we've done the Declare Blockers thing).

Am I Cheating? The crux of the question is, can you make a play that's illegal only if we accept that default assumption (i.e., that the trigger has resolved)?

Originally posted by IPG and Toby:

Triggered abilities are assumed to be remembered until otherwise indicated, and the impact on the game state may not be immediately apparent.

Especially note how Toby points out that this may be (part of) the most important paragraph.

Remember that part, earlier, in Toby's DVD Commentary, where he talks about the need for an opponent to be able to act with certainty? That wasn't the case before, now it is. You can act with the certainty that your opponent has *remembered* his triggers … until/unless the conditions for missing the trigger have been met (or until you ask - which is what you're hoping to avoid, here).

So, if you act with certainty, based on the default assumption, and make what would be an illegal play in those circumstances … hoping that the circumstances are other than what we've told you to assume? Is it really so hard to see that you're intentionally breaking a rule in order to gain advantage?

More to the point: given the context and philosophy of the new rule, is it really so hard to see that this should be Cheating?

Is it reasonable to say that, because there's a small chance that you're not breaking the rules, it's not Cheating?

(Note: I am not providing any Official answer here; I'm asking questions to gauge people's understanding, to see if we're even on the right track.)

d:^D

Oh, and - you always remember that one last point you wanted to make *after* Submit - consider this (likely) scenario…

Same setup as above, your Boros Elite is attacking me, I block, you pump, I respond to the pump with Dimir Charm, hoping you've forgotten the Battalion trigger. You bin your Elite, because you assume I know what I'm doing … and not realizing the targeting restriction of Dimir Charm makes your 3/3 Elite an illegal target.

We resolve the rest of combat, including the Battalion bonuses on your other attackers - because you did NOT forget that trigger - and then you read Dimir Charm, in my graveyard, because you want to remember the other modes … and notice the illegal play.

Do you feel like I've cheated?

d:^D

Those are all questions I have been asking myself alright, and all of them are pretty sketchy. The situation is so grey that it is almost black. But what if the guy forgot Battalion the previous turn? Suppose last turn he attacked with Boros Elite and two 2/2s and said “take 5”, forgetting the trigger. Now he's attacking the following turn the rules are telling the opponent to assume he's remembered his trigger, but historical evidence is telling him he's forgetting Battalion. That's pretty jarring.

If I'm walking the floor, and stop to watch this match, but only catch the second turn of combat described, which ends with block, pump, dimir charm, do I step in and begin down the road to DQ investigation? Is the fact that Battalion clearly forgotten the previous turn sufficient to not DQ someone?

How about this:



Aarons attacks Nadine with Knight of Infamy, and doesn’t indicate the trigger at all. Nadine wants to know if Aaron forgot the trigger, and following ensures:



Nadine: “How big is that Knight?”

Aaron: “It’s a 2/1”.

Nadine: “OK, I block with my War Mammoth, your Knight dies.”

Aaron: “So does your War Mammoth, my Knight is 3/2 from exalted.”

Nadine: “JUDGE!”

Me: “Aaron, did you state that the Knight was a 2/1 when asked?”

Aaron: “Yes, but at the time that I was asked the exalted trigger was still on the stack, so it was a 2/1.”



Sounds like from a reading of policy we should rule in Aarons favour, but that feels really sketchy to me. He’s so close to the line on fraud that he’s not just buying it dinner, but they’re well into the second course.

Edited Michael White (Feb. 5, 2013 03:46:56 AM)

I'm going to have a serious talk with someone who tries to pull that, to be honest. As you have pointed out, it is not on a good place in relation to the line.

Looks like Aaron attempted to take advantage by arbitrarily deciding that the Exalted trigger hadn't resolved yet, as if the moment where a trigger resolves is when someone takes the next action. The Exalted trigger in actuality should resolve as soon as possible and should be assumed to be remembered/resolved at all times by all players unless any player mentions he is responding to it or the controller demonstrates that he has missed it.

This rule change really is awesome and simple. At all times, triggers are assumed to have been remembered. What I love about this change is it keeps the game state closest to what it should be and limits the scummyness (that shouldn't be such a large part of competitive play anyway) available to the opponent. There is no checking to see if the opponent forgot his trigger or not. The focus is on playing the game on board and not playing around tournament rules.