Since the Magic rules are hard, even for judges, here's an edit thread for anything that wasn't right or wasn't explained clearly in the video: Opalescence only affects other Enchantments. So anywhere I said it will be a 4/4 to its own ability is incorrect. Just the Humility will be 4/4 or 1/1. Dress Down will be 2/2, but Opalescence won't be a creature. An Evoked creature WILL stay in play if it has no abilities. Evoke adds "sacrifice this if it would come into play" to the creature, it is not a separate delayed trigger based on how the spell was cast as I thought it was originally. That trigger, along with any effects the creature would have, is removed. So you can play Dress Down and pitch a Green card to have a permanent 3/4 Endurance in play. :)
Section on DD vs Evoke is wrong. Evoke is two abilities; a) Static ability that functions while on the Stack, and allows the Alt cost. And, b) Triggered ability that only functions while on the Battlefield. If DD is already on the Battlefield when any Evoke Creature enters the Battlefield, the Evoke Triggered ability does not exist. No Triggered ability. No Trigger. No Sacrifice.
I used to nearly have enough knowledge of the rules to be an L1 due to playing Modern for years, but took a 5 year hiatus from Magic. This was a great refresher and each interaction was explained in a succinct manner without any ambiguity. Thanks!
Impressive, by the way, how everytime I thought to myself "Is he gonna bring up obscure interaction X?", it was immediately followed by an explanation of obscure interaction X. The Flicker of Fate Blood Moon with Dark Depths out surprised me a bit, not sure I could have figured that one out.
Access to oracle text. That reminds me of a friend of mine who played legacy for the first time and was paired against a dredge player match 1 who had a full Japanese foil deck 😂 Dredge player was really annoyed because my friend asked for a judge all the time. Yes, you decided to play dredge in Japanese. Don’t blame someone who doesn’t know how dredge works 😂
it's almost the same when playing Japanese enchantress. Enchantress pilot is the one who annoys, not be annoyed. Confusion is one of the best tactics to make your opponent angry. If you are angry you cannot think properly. Blackest Magick in practice, indeed.
Yeah, if you make the active choice for your cards to be unreadable to your opponent, then you really shouldn't be surprised when they ask someone to read them. I know people who play their most complex cards in non-English languages to encourage their opponent to call a judge and get the complex thing explained. So doing that with your complex deck, you should be happy that your opponent is doing that. Or buy English versions and be happy when your opponent doesn't need to call a judge every time you put something onto the stack (or hell, when you replace something without using the stack)
I started this video at 1am, I said to myself I will go to bed and finish the video tomorrow. It is now 2am, I have finished the video and I regret nothing. Incredible content, thank you Brian
As a longtime Legacy player, this video was amazing and reminded me how little I sometimes know about rules interactions. The cleanest explanation of layers I've ever seen though, I was shook when you just jumped right in but within minutes I felt stupid that it seemed actually so straightforward.
Love the video. I found quite funny that I catched your evoke mistake because you're the very person who taught it to me! I was like "Wait, that's not true mister Coval, Bosh and Roll told me so!". Really neat video.
This is great stuff Brian, very well made and very useful for (less entrenched) players. Especially a good point that many players just wouldn't have played for a long time (e.g. due to covid). At 18:38, the natural follow up question would be what happens if the Anger is in the graveyard already, but a mountain enters the battlefield after the Dress Down is already there. I guess that the time that ability would start granting Haste would be its timestamp, not the time the Anger would go into the graveyard. Something that I expect people to ask, and could come up. Oh, at 48:43 you have a weird version of Helm of Obedience in the presentation; I don't know where that's from... But it seems to have {1}{X}, {T} as an activation cost.. While the actual cost is just {X}, {T}.
I think the ruling at 22:05 is not correct, I don't think the Evoke creature is ever sacrificed, because the triggered ability causing it to be sacrificed is removed. It's an ability on the permanent itself, even if it's granted by the game rules, it is removed by Dress Down as it enters the battlefield, and never triggers.
I think that you are correct and I missed the important aspect that Evoke gives the "sacrifice this if it enters the battlefield" trigger TO the creature. It is not a delayed trigger locked in at casting like I thought it was. That would also be removed with Humility. The Evoked creature should stay in play. Great catch! I hope people are reading the comments. :)
As someone who knows you only by your channel, I always find it amazing how many layers you have mr. Brian. I'm a casual MTG Player, and prob will never play Legacy unless I win millions in a lotery or something, but even so this video was very interesting and entertaining!
You do! Sorry that was the one big mistake in the video that was pointed out by folks after I already released it. You DO get to keep the evoked creature. Sorry!
This helps explain interactions so much easier to people who aren't too knowledgeable on the rules and layers. Dryad and bloodmoon comes up often in my playgroups and it's always a web to explain, the slides you made gives an easy visual for people to see exactly what is going on if they care, or to just snag a short form to save time. Thank you and keep the content coming, regardless of how often it Comes out 🙌
About deckchecks, a befriended L3 Judge once told me he was at a large tournament(GP or bigger, don't remember exactly what) where two players came to the judge stand asking about their decks, someone in a judge shirt had come up to them, told them it was a deck check, took their decks and was never seen again. The bigger the event, the more wary the player should be.
Yup. The deepest corners of my brain have definitely had the thought "You own several judge uniforms. This would be so easy." Obv wouldn't do it, but it's there.
This kind of content is very insightful, bewildering, and eye-opening for how truly amazing Magic is as a game. More rules videos would be sweet and keep being awesome.
So glad you covered brainstorm into Sylvan library. It's been my go to mtg "party fact" for a while and I was always curious how a judge actually deals with it
Even though I'm never planning on judging a Legacy tournament this was a very enjoyable watch, I could listen to you talk about rules interactions all day
Liked, commented and thinking about subscribing. love this type of content! Every player should watch this. This is a 1 hour video .. it was over before i knew it.
I love educational content so much! I haven't decided yet If I'm done playing competitive Magic indefinitely, but I love the game enough that I think I could come back as a judge.
I was confused about the layering order for a while because of the term “upwards”. To me, upwards = UP, as in Layer 4, then 3, then 2, then 1. But upon studying it more I realize you mean “upwards” as “increasing value”.
@@BoshNRoll I think part of the issue here is that your slides have "Layer 1" towards the top of the slide and "Layer 7" towards the bottom - maybe flip the slides upside down in any future revision so it does actually look like a pyramid?
I know it has no competitive merit, but it would be fun to see a video solely on Panglacial wurm interactions, like with chromatic sphere, mul daya channelers, millikin, and most notoriously, selvala explorer returned :)
Aw damn, I half expected to also see Sylvan Library + Chains of Mephistopheles interaction. (Just for the lulz, since Chains is not a played card in legacy.)
Great Video. I was hoping to get an explanation to what the Problem with 4 Horseman is and at what point executing the combo (by hand because you cant create a shortcut) becomes stalling. But obviosly you cant explain every cornercase in 1 video.
Thanks for doing this. Question about the Anger vs. Dress Down situation. What if Anger is already in your graveyard and there's also already a Dress Down out, THEN a rootwalla comes out. Will the Rootwalla have haste? Is it dependent on which came out most recently of the Anger and Dress Down?
Important note: Opalescence does not animate itself, since it reads "Each OTHER non-Aura enchantment is a creature in addition to its other types [...]"
The evoke + Dress Down interaction doesn't make sense to me, even after reading the comprehensive rules. If evoke is a triggered ability created by the creature, it should be removed via Dress Down. It doesn't feel different from any other etb triggered ability to me.
17:50: What happens if Opalescence and Humility enter the battlefield at the same time (say, using Replenish), so they both have the same timestamp? The controller decides? What happens if both etb from different graveyards? Sorry for asking the fringe cases of the fringe case :-D
What would happen in the case of the tabernacle/pact of negation example if the player cast a rite of flame and then suddenly "remembered" the trigger? Would a judge rule that as cheating? Would the player be allowed to use the mana produced by the ritual to pay for the trigger?
“Is this cheating” is not a question that can ever be answered in a vacuum. Per the rules, an action must be done *knowing it was illegal* and *for the purpose of gaining advantage* to count as cheating. If one or both of these is not met, it is not cheating. When cheating is suspected you should always pause the game and ask both players questions to gain as clear of an understanding of the game progression and player thought processes as possible. As a judge you are expected to use your discretion to determine what is plausible and what is not. If, based on the game history and your knowledge of the players, you do not think it is plausible that the player forgot then you should rule it is cheating. If you do, then you should not. This is why Brian mentions interviewing players: you are not expected to know who players are or what their backgrounds are, and asking questions like “how often do you play paper legacy tournaments” is very helpful. Players who play primarily online are less likely to remember their triggers than players who have extensive paper experience. At the end of the day, you are not a mind reader. Your job is to ascertain the situation to the best of your ability. If you are uncertain about your decision, consult with the head judge *before* issuing a ruling.
I have a question about pact of negation/tabernacle. You said the trigger goes on the stack as soon as the players recognize it. What if one of two things happen in between that time, the pact player plays a land, or the pact player draws a dark ritual from their draw step. Can they then pay mana from the land they played? or can they cast dark ritual to help pay for the pact? If they are allowed to do this, it seems like cheating to me as they have an extra resource that wasn't at their disposal before the trigger should have gone on the stack.
Hey Bosh! Really enjoyed the video, it's always good to learn about these sorts of interactions! I've been confused for a while why people weren't using LED to cast cards from their hand - shows my age I suppose 😅 Not entirely related but do you know what the rules are regarding respecting your opponent? Eg sexist/racist remarks, making sexual statements to make someone uncomfortable, or not respecting pronouns for someone. Is there a section of the rules where these issues are ironed out? Thanks again for the videos, and best of luck with your work coming up!! ☺️
@@BoshNRoll I have another question, sorry! It might just be me, but while I did see mentions of disrespecting gender/sexual orientation/disability and more, I didn't see anything about gender identity. Is that covered under gender?
Was there a rules change regarding Trinisphere and Phyrexian mana? I remember being able to pay 1 "actual" mana and 4 life for Dismember under Trinisphere, because the ruling was that Phyrexian mana is still mana, therefore Trinisphere is satisfied.
Yes. Phyrexian Mana was at one point a "payment of mana." That is no longer the case. You used to be able to over-Delve cards too, but Trinisphere would still make you pay 3 for Treasure Cruise. That rule has also changed.
Could you comment briefly on split cards, be it they fuse or not, and what the cmc is of those cards at different moments in the game? Chalice, Counterbalance, I. Sceptor, etc. type interactions.
The mana value of a card is the total of its cast parts while it's on the stack. Wear is 2, Tear is 1, fused Wear/Tear is 3 while being cast. Anywhere else the mana value is the total, so 3 in hand, deck, graveyard, exile, sideboard, etc. There was a time that this was different, but they simplified it to always being the total anywhere except the stack.
Question: You missed the Pact of Negation trigger on your upkeep. You have 5 Islands in play. You have already cast a high tide when your opponent points out the missed trigger. Could you pay the 3UU with mana from your Islands and have still UUU left?
I still don't get how Sagas aren't sacrificed as soon as a player gets priority after it's final chapter triggers. Being able to activate a Stage-Saga "in response" to its final chapter going on the stack seems wrong. 714.4 says it's a SBE that doesn't use the stack, so if the third and final chapter trigger triggers, a player would gain priority, but first SBEs are checked and the Saga is sacrificed. So what am I missing here?
You need to read all of 715.4: "If the number of lore counters on a Saga permanent is greater than or equal to its final chapter number, AND IT ISNT THE SOURCE OF A CHAPTER ABILITY THAT HAS TRIGGERED BUT NOT YET LEFT THE STACK, that Saga’s controller sacrifices it. This state-based action doesn’t use the stack." So while the chapter ability (to search the library for a 0 or 1 cost artifact) is still on the stack and hasn't resolved yet, the SBA doesn't happen. If you respond to that chapter ability by making the stage-saga into a copy of a thing that's not a Saga, then after the chapter ability resolves the SBA also will not apply (because the permanent is not a Saga).
@BoshNRoll Regarding "creatures only being creatures when they are on the battlefield" (dress down not affecting anger in the graveyard)... > As long as Grist, The Hunger Tide _isn't_ on the battlefield, it's a 1/1 Insect Creature in addition to its other types. Does Grist lose its abilities? For example, if it was a "1/1 insect creature with deathtouch" instead, would it lose deathtouch?
Grist is not a 1/1 insect creature while it is not on the battlefield. It is a creature *card* representing a 1/1 insect creature. As such, it is not effected by Dress Down. Only a handful of cards will modify cards not in play and they are specifically worded to reference “cards.” Compare Dress Down to Painter’s Servant: PS effects all cards, while dress down only effects creatures in play.
@@stellabiderman4056 I mean, "yeah, obviously", but also that's not what it says on the card. It says it _is_ a creature and there is no oracle ruling which says it isn't. It also says "in addition to it's other types", which could be interpreted to mean that you just apply the _types_ from "1/1 insect creature", which would fit your "it's just a creature card" interpretation. But with that interpretation, you'd have to drop the "1/1" since power and toughness are characteristics, not types (and you would also lose "Insect", since it's a subtype, but I'll give that a pass), leaving it just an insect creature card with indeterminate power and toughness. It's not a point I would ever bother arguing if a situation arose where I would need to. Just sayin'. It could have been worded "As long as Grist, The Hunger Tide isn't on the battlefield, it inherits all characteristics of 1/1 Insect creature cards" (which is probably how it's coded in MTGO), but it wasn't. I thought about asking whether it would be sent to the graveyard by damnation (which would be a more relevant interaction than dress down), but then I looked up the definition of "destroy", and no, that isn't a loophole :(. ps. To be clearer, I'm just pointing out that given the wording, it either _is_ a creature or you can't search for it using imperial recruiter (since its toughness would be unknown). Since you _can_ search for it using imperial recruiter, it must therefore be a creature even while not on the battlefield. But still, "yeah, obviously".
Is Brainstorm + Sylvan Library your personal approach or an official policy? Because an L5 told me to always call a judge to watch my hand, though that was well over a decade ago.
In my research I found some passionate judge forum conversations from 2014 where judge leadership were on the “players need to play for themselves” side.
What does happen, when [Dryad of the Ilysian Grove] and [Magus of the Moon] are put into play by [Show and Tell] simultaneously? Both work on the same layer and there is no different timing, right?
I believe APNAP resolves this by creating a timing difference such that the player whose turn it is will technically put their permanent into play last. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
Hey Brian, I just wanted to know your thoughts on how missed mandatory triggers are handled in MtG (ignoring how the current rules treat them). I'm still baffled that somehow you can be aware of a mandatory trigger and chose to ignore it if you don't control/own it because it would somehow be "too taxing" to do so but you are however obliged to tell your opponent they have not resolved their spell/effect properly (say not drawing with T3feri or some other spell). Are these two situations not extremely similar and isn't the solution to just adapt the way missed mandatory triggers are handled to be *less* punishing to the non-controlling player rather than be a vehicle for angleshooting? I can't think of a single game outside of MtG where chalice checking wouldn't be considered cheating.
An effect resolving incompletely is something that has happened and it is the responsibility of both players to make sure things happen correclty. A missed trigger just doesn't happen. That is the difference. I judged back in the day when both players got warnings every time any trigger was missed. In the finals of a State Championship I had the 2 players miss 2 Soul Warden triggers. When they missed the third one I had to decide if I was going to game loss its controller for accumulated warnings or disqualify the opponent for cheating by letting him miss the trigger again. That sucks for everyone involved. I don't write policy, but I have enforced and it played a lot of tournament Magic. From both sides of that trench, the missed trigger update was a huge plus.
Missed trigger policy was one of the many reasons I stopped judging. They apparently have changed the policy since then, probably because enough other people saw how stupid the original missed trigger policy was. Specifically, there was a Jace that shrank your opponent's creatures with it's + ability, by means of a delayed trigger looking for the creatures to be announced as attacking you. Back then, if you didn't announce the trigger as affecting your opponent's creatures when they attacked, and only when you were finished blocking or whatever else, you were deemed to have missed the trigger. I did not have a very good time judging that tournament. Thankfully that changed sometime later to the current regime of only needing to show awareness of it when it actually matters, but the experience of that tournament weighed heavily on my soul.
Lands used to be a deck whose primary win con was timing out in game 2. Now it’s a game whose primary win con is opponents misplaying due to not understanding the deck.
I believe that everything other than flavor text in a card's text box is its abilities. There might be some fringe corner exception, but that is sweepingly true. "Nonbasic lands are mountains" is Blood Moon's ability.
Strictly I think reminder text (in italics) is not an ability. However, given that reminder text has no bearing on the game I can't see a situation that's relevant.
Wow I didn't know any guy could just walk up and ask to be a judge, and actually get in on it that day, that's actually terrifying. Almost feels like mtg judges should need the same kinds of background checks/piss tests you'd expect a security guard to need.
The situation that Brian describes is extremely unlikely to happen today. That occurred over a decade ago when tournament procedures were less well defined.
@@BoshNRoll I know, but still. The original explicitly states basic Mountain. You have to wonder why they changed that in Oracle, there's no reason as far as I can see.
@@Attlanttizz I talked about that in the presentation. They didn't have subtypes, supertypes, etc in 1995. The rules evolved over time. As cards and the rules got more sophisticated, Blood Moon changed along with it.
@@Attlanttizz It functions as a basic mountain. Basically nothing at the time cared about nonbasic lands, so it wasn't a problem, and wordings were generally less precise then anyway. I can't think of a single card that affects nonbasic lands until much later than The Dark. (First one I can think of is Wasteland.) It may have even worked that way until Basic was promoted to supertype.
btw.. in Real Life presentations, the speed you speak at would be less accepted.. if you plan on doing another presentation in the future pls slow it down so all can keep up.. Thx, judge ruling are a confusing point in any form of the matter and take some time to formulate why things work.. you talked so fast during layers i could not follow what was going on and yet, I even play painter.. so yes interactions as such have come up..
Yeah this is from a conference for judges, so I assumed a lot of baseline knowledge. I also made a 100-slide presentation and had 1 hour to present it, so I was in full pod race mode to get through it. :) If this were live or I had a longer window I would have gone slower, stopped for questions, etc. RU-vid has the feature to increase and decrease playback speed. That may help.
@@BoshNRoll yeah, this might be the first video of yours I was watching at 1.25 and not 2.00, most of the time You are suprisingly understandable at 2.0 compare to other conent I watch ;)
@@wawrzyniecbonk5226 My day job is in behavioral health. A key component to that job is explaining advanced scientific concepts to laypeople in a way that they can both understand and implement for themselves. Those skills translate to directly into Magic content.
I really dislike all of the rules/interactions that you had to qualify with: this may feel scummy, but... I feel like the CR and judges should deal with stuff like that to behave more like mtgo instead of saying your SOL in paper.
I think the only place I said that was in the trigger policy. On MTGO if you don't pay your Pact of Negation trigger you lose. In paper you get a second chance to pay it later when someone remembers. I also prefer MTGO where things just happen and there's no debate or judgement to be had. But mistakes will happen and policy is written really well these days to give people more than one chance to play the game correctly. Keep in mind that in the case of a missed trigger, the player had the opportunity completely in their hands to not miss it in the first place.
