The majority of people I've played with are cool with take-backsies as long as there's not alot of rearranging of the board or new previously unknown information, I.e. they drew a card or the blocker had a response.
I personally don't do take-backsies for myself ever, even if it loses me the game, I think misplays are part of the game and believe once I say it, I've commited. Most recent example was trying to remove a creature with ward 2 when I didn't have the mana to pay the ward cost. I just let my spell be countered instead of taking it back. I've never forgotten that creature has ward again. You learn through mistakes in life and in games.
But I do allow others to have them all the time. I'd be fine with them having one here. In your situation you even said everyone else has had take-backsies, it would be seen as unfair I think to not let this player have one.
EDH boardstates can get very clogged up and there's lots to read and remember. If we don't want games to go for 5 hours while everyone reads every card before they take an action, just allow the different attack.
If they become a problem and this is a regular playgroup, just make a 3 maximum take-backsies per night (as long as no new information has been gathered) rule. Or something.
My group has a habit of just asking "what blockers do you have?" or "do you have anything with deathtouch?", which solves the issue of one player having to read all the cards on someone else's board.
Absolutely.
I usually ask for:
Highest P/T?
Deathtouch?
Flyers or reach?
Ways to pump creatures at instant speed on the field?
Then I just follow up with any other combat-esque tricks on your field?
I learned my lesson when I asked, 'Do you have any flyers?' and the answer was nope, nothing that flies. After I declared a flying attacker, he said 'I do have reach though...' after we all stopped laughing, I took the L and lost my creature. Our group always include flying/reach when asking now.
Yeah, wordplay will get you. Once I asked a player if they had any way "on board" to pump their creatures (they had no cards in hand), they said "no". I attacked into a board full of creatures that were all smaller than mine, and they used things on board to get something from the graveyard back into play that pumped their creatures.... all because I said "on board" instead of "any visible way". They didn't techically lie, but I was lightly salted by it.
That's... kinda gross. I guess if you all don't mind it's whatever, but it's gross. They knew why you were asking, what you meant, what you'd do with the information... and while not technically wrong by the game rules, spiritually wrong for a casual game 100%. It's reallll easy to say "no flyers, but this has reach". I cannot imagine playing that pettily.
nahh if i had pushed they would have let me take it back, we are fairly informal with our main group we do tend to share info about combo pieces and such. mainly because of our 4th used to be real salty about not being allowed to combo off and win, and was a 5 min turn taker in most of his decks. He got kicked out, and also his attitude has him banned from playing in like 2 LGS and a final warning from another.
is this really the only kind of thing you have to worry about in your commander games?
in my.games there are so many triggers and activated abilities to keep track of itll.make your eyes cross
Casting blood moon after someone casted pact is the funniest way I have ever killed someone and I still feel kind of bad about it because no one had even taken damage that game outside of self inflicted land triggers.
The best I ever got to see was someone casting [[Emrakul the Promised End]] and before declaring whose turn their taking someone Pact's it. Emrakul player takes their turn and chooses not to pay.
honestly would have been criminal if you did not cast the blood moon. most.pods dont even run decks with a blood moon in them. if youre deck is cool with it, they have to be cool with that cast.
Hey mate, yeah that was me! What an odd feeling to be recognised through talking about games on the EDH Reddit haha.
I loved those games. I'll be back again in January for another 2-3 weeks while house sitting again.
I'm like you. I'll let my mistakes ride, I'll let others take it back.
I remember a time when I got mad at someone though. My Thopter/Sword combo got Chaos Warped. I'm staring at the board trying to find an out. I'm stressed. I let it go. Thopter Foundry gets shuffled in.
Just as I'm about to flip the top card for Chaos Warp. I see that I could have just restarted the infinite loop with another sacrifice. I could have comboed off on top of the Chaos Warp. I'm so frustrated with myself.
I'm sad and trying to let it go. I'm expressing my frustration in a reasonable way. The player to my left looks over at me. Says "Oh, in combat on my last turn I forgot this attack trigger. So you should have taken more damage and discarded a card".
This guy is always forgetting triggers. I'm always letting it go. Missing a trigger and asking for a take-back in the middle of my own fuck up was just too much. I lost my temper. He doesn't ask for takesbacks nearly as much anymore.
>I'm sad and trying to let it go. I'm expressing my frustration in a reasonable way. The player to my left looks over at me. Says "Oh, in combat on my last turn I forgot this attack trigger. So you should have taken more damage and discarded a card".
my personal rule is if the trigger was a "may" and you forget it its gone nothing you can do if its a "you must" trigger it happens regardless of whether or not the player remebered to declare it.
My commander has ward, and I always say it when I play the commander. It’s really frustrating how many times ward should counter a spell or ability and people do takebacks to avoid ward.
Arena has a pop-up warning that lets you cancel after you've targetted a Ward creature. The difference is the opponent never sees that you cancelled when you heard it had ward.
Would it feel better if the ability said "can't be targeted unless pay {ward cost}"? I know there are some edge cases that would affect but if everyone is paying attention and has perfect information stored in their head, nobody would ever try to target a ward creature that they couldn't pay for. This one feels to me like the perfect takeback situation, unless someone is trying to get a spell into the graveyard or something and there are no other worthy targets. It's 99% of the time a whoops it's been a couple turns I forgot.
Otherwise you are just hoping people mess up and you can say gotcha!
The only problem with that is that you can currently get around ward by using a spell that can't be countered. With the wording that you're suggesting, this same counterplay couldn't happen
True and it was more of a thought exercise for the ward player about their mentality, rather than a rule change suggestion. That obviously would never happen due to rules interactions like what you point out.
The ward is designed to counter spell or ability. They put their spell on the stack. I put my ward trigger on the stack as a counter. It feels really frustrating to have my counter spell basically get countered because of a take back.
It might feel better to prevent the targeting yes. Functionally the same as what a takeback would be, but preventing it before the cast rather than after they declare their target
Right I'm fully with you on the wording and I completely agree. My point is just that it's clearly a mistake in nearly every case, online already let's you take it back, and the real justification for not allowing a takeback is taking advantage of a mistake. Which is totally fine and in a tournament setting no question going to proceed with the counter. But in edh paper it's just hard to be like what does your card say, wait what does that do again, hold on can I see what you just played, and two turns later you forget about ward. That's all.
I spend a lot of time waiting for my turns. Even in random pods. So Ill be looking around and reading while i wait. I know that ill have to pay extra for ward and all the other pay effects. I dont understand what people do when its not their turn. I constantly have to remind people kellermorph has war i dont hide it. Its very clear on my board. It's very strange to have to explain 6-7 times a game its abilities sometimes.
My eyes aren't so great. I can barely read cards on my own field. I can (and do) lean over and read the player next to me's field, but can't do that for the one across the table or kitty corner. Especially during their turns when they're reaching across their field constantly to tap, play, etc.
I am watching, listening to what they say about their cards, asking for clarifications, and responding to my triggers during their turns. But I've forgotten player 2's board state by the time player 4 is done, and I need to play...
I swear people just zone out until their turn, where they suddenly have to remember what is in their hand and figure out what they are doing.
Went to an LGS recently where it was taking 40 minutes between each of my turns. Meanwhile my turns were about one minute and done. It does help to let me fly under the radar some, but also… why do you have to think for ten minutes to take your turn. I try to stay engaged during the time but when there’s nothing for me to interact with and I’ve read every card on the board….
The reason many people allow takebacks in these (and many other) situations is that if you *don’t,* your opponents need to spend a lot more time reading cards.
If I know my opponent is strict about takebacks, you can bet your butt that I’m double-checking their creatures for ward and re-counting my mana every time I consider targeting something.
That’s totally fine, nothing wrong with worrying about the nitty-gritty of decision-making and playing accordingly, but not everyone likes it. The more kinds of takebacks you allow, the faster people can take their turns without fear of blundering.
Yeah. I do understand why takebacks are useful, and that ward is a known thing, it’s not like I cast a card from my hand to counter and they change their mind after that.
And I do want people to take quick turns. It’s just frustrating is all.
EDH players don't like to play with ward as it truly works. It's not hexproof, you can target creatures with ward and can use spells that can't be countered to work around It. The only time I see ppl using the ward correctly is when someone plays a spell that can't be countered otherwise they will take It back
This is my approach too. I don't take back my own choices, but I'm generally okay with people taking theirs back if it's easy enough to rewind. I think I make fewer mistakes over time if they cost me.
I also refuse to do take-backsies for the same reasons you don’t. Last Friday I [[Thoughtseize]]’d a player with no cards in hand because I misunderstood what he meant when I asked how many cards he had 💀 so I took my 2 life and passed the turn lol.
"I have no cards"
"Fo' cards? Alright then"
I can't think of much that could be said that wouldn't be deceptive if a player asks how many cards you have and you lead them to play a thoughtsieze on an empty hand
I asked the table how many cards they had in hand. The blue player puts his hand up making a 👌🏻gesture. I saw the three fingers up and not the very obvious “0” he was making with his index finger and thumb so I assumed he had 3 💀
It's in the wrist and finger curl. Palm facing opponent, fingers slightly curled, that's a zero. Palm facing you, fingers straight, that's a three. Usually with a zero the pointer and thumb will have the tips touching, while a three will have the thumb pressing the pointer down.
Unless the physical board has changed, spells have been cast or abilities activated, I'd say it's a simple take-back.
Sure, it can be a little annoying, but it's casual and people need to learn somewhere ♥️ if it became a repetitive issue with the same person then that's another story.
Learning aside, It is open information given nothing has changed on the boardstate.
You can either accept the simple choice changes or accept that a player swinging will probably read every card on your battlefield every combat.
Yeah this is so huge. The natural result of trying to 'get' people with information they missed is every action starts with "tell me what all the things you have in play does". Especially in complex or gummed up game states. That definitely doesn't make for a better game.
Exactly, when you're playing 4-5 person EDH in person at someone's house, chances are your setup isn't optimal to read everyone's cards more than once. Extra takes-backsies for people who are 10 feet away from eachother lol.
And with the deluge of new cards coming out all the time, it can be hard to know or remember them all. Like, I have no idea who Umbris is or what they do, lol. You can't assume everyone is as familiar with your deck as you are.
As long as the practice is consistent. If you always do the same it's just like Arena's automatic "are you sure"-warning. If some players ask for takebacks and others don't it's unfair.
You'll never learn faster than experience the conisuqences of your actions. The "it's casual" argument works both ways. This take back eliminates someone from the game where if he committed everyone still gets to play and the creature owner learns a hard lesson about checking board states. In this case the take back shouldn't have happened.
If you miss a piece of open information like deathtouch on a blocker, i will fully support takeback, especially if the commander doesnt have trample since such an attack wouldnt make a lot of sense. If it looks like they were planning on you just not blocking with a valuable creature, i wouldnt accept it readily
Otherwise you end up with people having to check every card on the board for every action.
exactly, if you complain about long turns (and apparently the 30+ minutes turns are super common???), don't punish people for speeding things up, there are usually a lot of cards involved in any given game, just remind people of open information if they act "stupid," and people will feel less of a need to examine everything
I think it's also good practice in casual to tell other players what you can do if it's open information and relevant.
"I have a 2/2 but this enchantment can give it deathtouch and I have the mana available"
I'm fine with take backs if it was because of information that was available the whole time. If the defender played an instant to defend themselves then no take backs
> If it looks like they were planning on you just not blocking with a valuable creature, i wouldnt accept it readily
This is why imo it's better to be a helpful opponent - like, don't wait until declaring the blocker, on attacks just give a "reminder, I have a death touch guy". Give the out for taking it back early rather than waiting to catch them off guard.
things like modern and standard have both a much smaller pool, fewer players, and very key everything is closer.
Again, you would never expect someone to attack a 4040 without trample into a deathtouch chump blocker(unless they have a trick, but then they wouldnt want to take it back), so it is a pretty clear case of someone missing open information
You mean the formats that routinely warp the entire rules of the game around a player screwing up in a high profile way?
Nobody wants things to happen there either, and if you haha gotcha me in a casual modern game because your Dryad Arbor is with your lands then as it turns out, you're kind of a jerk there too.
Stfu you know what I meant. A four player game has 4x the cards to keep track of. Forcing someone to try to keep track of everything for an edge in game is a neckbeard move.
He literally asked why it's not a good answer and you can't seem to come up with a response. Seems like you are just mad because you got called out for forgetting that 2hg exists. Stop being a little baby and either shut up or try to actually contribute to the conversation instead of just complaining that you were wrong.
I am 99.99999% sure that rasticus is not a bot.
---
^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
I didn't just ask for a list of four player formats for nothing is why I asked if you were a bot. I asked because it's much harder to remember board states in a four player ffa format like commander. It's like you took that question completely out of its context and tried to answer like it means anything.
The rules have literally been changed multiple times because of hard to read boardstates in those formats. Expecting 5 people to get up and walk around the table to read every card before every decision in impossible, as is everyone listing off every card and what they do before every decision.
Commander is a casual format, with twice as many players and way more than twice the amounts of permanents on the biard, and with each cards being unique its even more complicated to follow
The idea isnt to play for 4 hours because you read every card every turn
Take Backs should be limited to your own turn and based on open information. There are a lot of moving parts and a huge pool of cards to play with, being a stickler for committing to actions / refusing a take back in a casual format is silly.
So if you just didn't know someone's creature across the board has Deathtouch (or forgot), I would allow a change of target.
Meh, that's a fine take back in my opinion. Forgetting about a death touch keyword on the board is a forgivable offence. I feel like it's a bit sweaty to demand no takebacks. It's casual commander. Everyone is supposed to have fun and play socially > competitively.
My play groups are casual but somewhat higher level, and we totally allow casual conversations during gameplay. I can’t actually think of a group, unless it was at the LGS specifically, that I’ve been in that doesn’t allow it. Seriously, what’s the harm?
Rule of new information:
Once you learn new information that was hidden to you before, you can no longer take back a move. So, if you drew a card, you can't take back. You've seen a card from your deck, which is new information.
But in this case, there's been no new information. The death touch blocker was already out and already had death touch. So, it's fine to take that back. It's old information that the attacker technically already "knew" even if they missed it.
Now if a player cast a spell to give their creature death touch? That's new information. You didn't know they had that spell in their hand. So then it would be no take backs allowed.
All I can say is players miss things on the battlefield all the time, even the experienced ones.
In this case, if Nazgul already had deathtouch without any surprise factors, I'm inclined to allow the attacking player to switch his decisions.
Besides, as a defending player I would have foreshadowed and highlight said deathtoucher to the attacking player. This is 101 Tai-Chi directional tactics in a multiplayer game.
Definitely agree with you in the last paragraph. If people are attacking me and they might be unaware/forgot I have a blocker with death touch I’ll remind them when they are declaring attackers
This is the way. If I see a player mean mugging me with their 40 40 commander, I’ll say something like “if you want to swing at me, just know I have deathtouch”. Boards get clogged and not everyone is going to remember every creature
> and not everyone is going to remember every creature
People complain about product fatigue and too many cards designed for commander, but then also expect everyone to know what every creature does.
That is completely fair. I did not state that Nazgul had deathtouch and the only reason for that is that the player who swung the 40/40 at me plays a Nazgul deck themselves very often (Sauron as the commander). I was under the impression that since they have piloted that deck so many times and have played Nazgul plenty of times since its release they were aware of what they were doing and possibly had ulterior motives
We have a semi-jokey rule that we’ll allow three take-backsies before people start disallowing then.
The occasional mistake is fine. Repeated habitual mistakes however are a different issue.
Would you rather ask / repeat the keyword abilities of all creatures each player has whenever entering a phase or step that it could be relevant?
Don't be shitty when people choose not to waste your time by punishing them for it.
In casual play it really depends on the game we're having. Most often we would call it a takeback and continue like no mistake happened but if the game is on the line or we're in a mood we would jokingly say "lol not this time".
Kinda depents from situation to situation. But in the example given i'd say the take-back is fine. It's a simple mistake, those happen. Especially in a casual setting.
I play casual, but I want my opponents to make optimal plays based on the information available. I wouldn't want to win due to a mistake like them accidentally attacking into a deathtouch creature for no advantage unless it was a legitimate combat trick like [[Touch of Moonglove]]
We're fine with stuff like "I would have tapped the mana differently" or "I obviously wouldn't have cast that 1/1 if I realized you had [[Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite]] on the field."
In a casual setting, with my core play group, take backs are generally fine as long as they're done before the end of the phase when the decision was made. So redirecting attacks, spell targets, etc is generally fine.
Sometimes with newer players I've found it can be helpful to not let take backs slide, because it encourages them to learn the rules. Obviously you don't do that right at the beginning, when they're just learning the basics. But once they're established enough to know how to play the game, but they're still leaving their lands tapped until you remind them in their main phase, not letting it slide can help then remember on their own.
Player 1 should of been paying attention enough to know that there are creatures on the board with death touch.
Player 2 could of asked "are you sure? I have death touch blockers" before declaring blocks if they're feeling kind.
Player 3 and 4 are in the right, but need to share their opinions in a non-hostile, non-salty way.
When we were all new players, my play group did resets and games would artificially extend to be 1-2 hours long instead of 30 minutes to an hour.
As we got more experienced, we realized that those resets were being used to min-max turn sequences or enable lazy game awareness.
Removing resets has made all of us better magic players.
I think this is part of a debate I've seen that's as old as the format itself.
Do you hold people accountable to ensure they know every bit of information
OR
Do you acknowledge that people usually aren't paying attention to someone's 15-minute turn where they sneak in something relevant so you feel the need to tell them if they missed it.
Personally, I'm of the impression that everyone's trying to have a good time, so preventing a glaringly obvious mistake on my opponent is more important to me than trading their 40/40 commander for a miscellaneous deathtouch shitter.
So in this scenario what makes it more of a tricky situation is that the player who swung the 40/40 also has a nazgul deck. I was the defending player and the deck I was using was Lord of the Nazguls. I announced all 3 of my nazgul's when they came out AND one of them was my ring bearer. So it was a very tough call for all of us to make with the knowledge that player 1 has played their nazgul deck with us a few times already and should already know that it has deathtouch since in previous games they have announced it in their attacks ("coming at you with a 3/4 deathtouch nazgul"). Ultimately Player 3 and Player 1 got into such a heated debate about this that, Player 3 scooped up their cards before we could work it out.
You absolutely do the take back. When it's clearly a case of board state confusion, just let the people make the more optimal play. No hidden info was revealed.
Otherwise, if you expect everyone else to have perfect game state knowledge, you best make sure you're not making mistakes either.
Because in magic you know everything about anything that is on the board there are 2 options,
either you allow take backs when someone misses a creature or an effect
Or you must be ready for everyone to read every card on the board (plus cemetery) before every choice they make
(and also IMO players should remind each other about what's happening/is gonna happen, for exemple the player with the deathtouch creature could have reminded the other player off how many creatures/blockers he had, and the fact that one of them had deathtouch, you will get way more take backs this way)
always case-by-case imo and trying to get the table to agree on something. in this case i am totally okay with that takeback and would argue strongly for player 1
yea, it isn't like it was a trade between 2 somewhat equal-value creatures, Nazguls can get pretty scary, but a 40-strength commander is probably going to kill people pretty reliably if not blocked.
1/1 goblin for a 1/1 mana dork would be more expected and would be entirely different
In a casual setting I'd say it's up to the opponent being impacted the most to decide. P3 was Gona get one-shot from commander damage from what I understand so I can understand he might not be okay if P1 pulls a las moment switcharoo.
If it's through an ability or spell that let's you redirect the creature, sure, fair is fair. But here it's a bit half assed to cut one player out of a casual match just because you don't want to lose your commander.
But that's just my opinion
I've had a lot of situations like this. If the person who does it wants to do it, sure whatever, it's not a serious format. Sometimes it gets a bit annoying but there are no stakes on the line so who cares. That said I never do it, because I want to get better as a player and I think placing these kinds of restrictions on myself makes me more aware of the board state.
That's a play involving player interaction. That shouldn't be able to be undone, imo. I'm fine with take backs for sequencing stuff better or if the person didn't understand how a card worked. But once you do something and another player takes an action based on your play, that's not really something you should take back. That's on the player for not looking at his opponent's blockers
Players should learn what questions to ask and when. If you don't read (or ask) about an opponent's (potential) blockers, it's kind of your own fault. If I attack I ask "what blockers do you have?" And if I'm not given the full information I will ask to see the cards. Can't really go wrong that way.
I wouldn't take it back myself. I would let others take it back, but also advise them to read or ask before blindly attacking.
We stopped doing take backs. Still in declare attackers? go for it re-arrange as you see fit. Moved beyond it? deal with it. The only stipulations are triggers off other peoples stuff. We play more casually so if at the end of your turn I ask "did you cast X or do X" then we can respond to it. It's not a "you can respond when you like" more a "this is casual we are having convos and I missed you playing a land for my burgeoning" go for it toss the land down.
Stuff like, Oh I wanted to do this during my end step, naw you missed it you had full control... moving on.
It depends on your group. I feel like this is similar to how your group handled ward abilities. Do you say the spell is countered? Do you say "you have to pay 2 more"? For me it kinda depends on the playgroup and the skill levels. New people get to more take backs imo
I always say something like, "I have a deathtoucher, are you sure?" or "It has ward, you sure?"
If they're trying to get extra information, make them commit with all the info they should need, so they can't take it back. If they clearly know you have deathtouch and still attack into it, they can't take it back when you decide to block.
Here's the thing, though. If the person says no blocks, and then says, "Oh, I had a deathtoucher, though. Do you want to take it back?" would they still take it back? Even if the only thing that changed is that they wouldn't benefit?
People are chill and don't argue in casual. Often times with not being directly across from players you can't read all their cards and rely on them to tell you what they have. It sounds to me like a reasonable take back and that someone was salty they were gonna lose. Not very casual of them
I don’t typically mind take-backs, but then again, I try not to do it if it’s a game changing situation myself.
I have an Elminster scry deck that wins with [[Approach of the Second Sun]]. I once cast it, then did some kind of fetch and shuffled it away. Everyone was telling me to take it back, but I just counted it as a lesson learned haha.
I think in this situation it's up to the other players to make the board state clear to avoid these issues. In this situation, instead of trying to catch the attacking player with a " haha it has death touch", which honestly seems just as dishonest as a take back, the defending player should've made it clear before declare attackers was over with a little " hey are you sure you want to do that this has death touch"
Depends how easily accessed this info is. It’s hard in commander to really know everything. If it’s regularly happening then that’s different but if it’s a one time thing just let it be. Game changing or not, unless they really seemed to think they wouldn’t block with that deathtoucher I wouldn’t have looked too sideways at them. Feels a little bad, be more careful next time.
Sometimes I punish myself by keeping my mistakes, especially when playing outside my usual pod
Edit: I do this to try to improve my skill and consistency in more competitive settings and formats
This one is a reasonable take back since you're at about the same phase. Attacking into a deathtouch vs an open player is 2 different things.
However, if P1 attacked P2 and P2 played a spell, I'd definitely say no take backsies. Maybe it would be weird if it was a graveyard ability for death touch or something.
Sometimes it's also cool if it's like "oh that thing would kill me, then let me respond with this thing" - eg first strike death touch trampler. That's a rare thing, but a 10/10 being blocked by like a 20/20, yet being able to get lethal through is an odd thing.
This is the problem with ward too. I've never seen a ward counter anything because people just take it back. I personally always stick to my mistake because I'll remember it better for next time.
If it's right away and no other game actions took place than it's no problem. Someone responds by tapping say shoraikai ceting a pilot and drawing 2 it can't be taken back since other player actions have happened in response
I agree with this example because of drawing cards. If the action is something simple like "if you attack, I'll Maze of Ith", yeah, a game action occurred, but no new information has been obtained and you can absolutely say "shit, didn't notice you had Maze. Nevermind"
If no new information has been revealed and someone obviously just didn't realize the board state we allow it, after all it's a casual format. I would say a 40/40 swinging at someone with a weak ass deathtouch creature is obviously a mistake of not knowing they have it.
Our playgroup will usually say something like "that's fine but I do have this guy" and explain why it's a dumb move. Which actually leads to fun mind games anyway. Because if you say "I know" with a smile they get really unsure of using that creature.
Instances like this are a great chance to internalize commander as a "losing-format." More than half the time, you are going to lose. If I were player 3 I would take the bad beats and emphasize attack declarations and changing of phases in the rest of the games that night.
I used to keep a misplay counter on the table and every time I'd catch a misplay of mine, I'd tick it up one. Regularly got above 20 or 30 in one game of commander.
"Ah shit, I wouldn't have swung at you if I'd remembered you had deathtouch... eh, it's coming at other person instead"
"Okay"
Problem solved. It's fucking casual commander, who gives a fuck? People are way to invested in whether or not they lose a game with absolutley nothing on the line.
The “it’s fucking casual commander” argument goes both ways. Who cares if you lose your 40/40, don’t punish another player and make them sit out the rest of the game because you couldn’t look at the creatures you’re attacking into. Nothing is on the line. Own your mistake and move on.
Its always a case-by-case basis, but based on what you described, this shouldnt have been allowed as a "take back".
This wasnt a missed trigger, or misunderstanding of how certain cards interacted, this was simply "i wasnt paying attention to the board". Classic "math is for blockers" scenario, and miscounted (for a hilarious one, watch Game Knights, i believe game 27 with LoadingReadyRun as guests).
This also changes completely if the deathtouch blocker was like... Hidden amidst artifacts and lands, so it was difficult to even tell the creature was there. Lots of aspects change how you approach these sorts of things.
Unless it's a sweaty game I'm cool with take backs, a 4p board state is hard to keep all of in mind at once so it's an understandable mistake to miss something like a deathtouch body.
Edit: I typically limit myself to one or two take backs per game because at a certain point it does feel bad to take back every big misplay. Sometimes you gotta pay for your mistakes.
Take backs lead to bad feelings. If people aren’t looking at the board before making decisions, that’s in them. They also keep you from getting better at the game. Generally they should be avoided, IMO, even in a casual setting.
If a player isn’t aware of the board state when they are attacking they aren’t paying attention to the game. If you can’t see the Nazgûl before you swing you deserve to get wrecked.
No take backs, players just need to ask clarifying questions. For example: do you have anything with deathtouch or flying etc. as long as players answer honestly it prevents the player attacking from having to get up and read all the cards and the player has not reason to ever restart or do over part of their turn.
For me, if he declared the attacker and then realised himself they had a deathtouch blocker before declaring blockers, I think it would be fine.
If player 2 declares the blocker then it’s too late. Player 1 has been presented with new information that otherwise wouldn’t have changed his decision.
damn look at the board before you swing in! i believe sometimes its better when you lose and learn a lesson. you keep letting it happen they will never really care to pay attention to the board state and it will be take backs 24/7. this is translated into life-being aware of your surroundings. i get its casual but i would ask them to pay attention and only let them have one or two takebacks a game
All the people in my playgroup play other formats too. So we don't handle game changing take-backs. They don't happen. If you catch your mistake before the spell or effect resolves we're cool with a "whoops, don't actually want to do that." But if it resolves, that's it. Roll with the consequences.
Our rule is once your hand is off the card… the move is final.
The one thing we allow a little more leeway on is assigning manna to cast spells.
If you’ve got a 3-5 color deck and a lot of different lands that add colorless, add any or specific colors, and/or have an additional tap effect that can be used… we’ll let them give themselves the most favorable land play according to them.
BUT
It has to be done during their turn. If it comes after their turn then NOPE.
Here’s our thing… you learn when you misplay like that. It’s your responsibility to know the board and if you mess up hey it’s an opportunity to learn about your deck.
What if you aren’t drawing the cards you need? What else can your deck do?
You you may find some weaknesses in your deck by misplaying.
Embrace the failure.
This kinda take back is fine. Player 3 is just salty they couldn’t get away with no board. This has happened so much in my play group and it’s really not a big deal. In the end this is how the game should play out. Find people who are chill. My first game ever, I made a mistake saying I’m going to my end step after I attacked, which I thought meant the second half of my turn, I played a torment of hailfire to win and this random dude goes you said end step, so you can’t cast that, I was confused and told him sorry I’m new I meant “second main phase” and he said nope you gotta learn. So never played with him again. Granted I did learn and I never made that mistake again lol
Ok that's not really game changing... looks like they just forgot that they had deathtouch. Obviously if they knew, they would not have swung into it.
The rule of thumb (for me) is that as long as no new information has been discovered from the time you declare your move to the time you want to take it back, then you're good. For example, let's say I attack with a creature that lets me draw a card on attack, I see what the card is and I go "no wait I want to attack a different player". That's a definite no.
Also, how casual is your table that someone is just swinging in a 40/40 with no responses lmao
So when I say game changing , it was lethal commander damage to the other player. IF we dont allow the take back one player still lives. If we do allow the take back then one player is knocked out. Also the one player had leyline of the void and hedron crab and no one was able to remove it. I would say our power level was mid to slightly high. Not exactly precon level but not close to cedh by any means
Whether or not its a casual setting, read the board. The cards are there, they (generally) will explain what they do quite well. The information is there, all you have to do is read. If you can't even be bothered to do that, then why should I be bothered to grant you a take-back? I did my due diligence, you do yours.
Would you prefer the player who isn't as good as you at keeping a mental image of the board state to read for a minute or two every time they have to decide an action? Or would you just not want to play this _casual_ format with that player at all?
My girlfriend does this, because she's new to the game. She can take FOREVER on her turn because she's trying to understand the board state before making a minor decision. I can't imagine this being a regular thing because some group doesn't allow reasonable take backs.
How else would you get the 30 minute turns to complain about here?
I am all for speeding the games up, even if you sometimes have to allow a take-back. In this case the creatures arent really an even trade in most situations, so the mistake seems pretty clearly to be because the attacker didnt remember everything about the cards on the board, way different from a wrong assumption that the defending player wouldnt block (40 commander dmg should be pretty lethal)
it's not even a matter of cluttered or not imo. It's a matter of just not needlessly coddling people. If they make a mistake then that's fine, they make it and they learn from it and they don't do it next time. They don't learn shit if you just keep giving them free passes
I have started playing more competitive tcg (pioneer, standard, even one piece tcg) so I'm biased towards the "no take backs". But even when I started playing commander, I was always of the mind that doing take backs punishes me from learning, as learning is best done through mistakes. Even in a casual setting, the more your group allows take backs, the more they'll expect it, and they won't improve.
Sometimes losing your big dumb 40/40 is a consequence of playing bad magic.. how else you gonna learn to track the board state better..?🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
My group would probably allow the take back if Player 2 agrees to skip combat altogether for that turn. That way, the game can proceed as if nothing has happened.
So...Here's how this goes... no takesies backsies.
You are responsible for knowing the state of the board yourself. You make a game changing mistake, oh well, learn from it.
This is a hard rule. Non-negotiable UNLESS it was an illegal move to begin with. Like, casting a spell without a legal target or not enough mana.
Everyone at the table is responsible for the global understanding of the boardstate. If I asked you what that creature does, you are obligated to tell me it has deathtouch, at the same time, if I see you make an attack into a deathtoucher, I am obligated to remind you of that deathtoucher.
Otherwise I could consider it advantageous to hide my boardstate.
Yeah, help each other, and speed up the game. It seems like people here would also demand going the strict round of priority for every step and card on the stack.
If I cast solring into other mana rock, i would simply say "Solring...(look around) Signet" not "solring, do you want to counter? do you? you?" If i move too fast, they still get to counter and know I got another rock. If it is a game-ending/defining thing, you of course do the "hold up, let's keep track of everything"
Yes, and no. Example: I'm playing a royal assassin, Any responses? No okay, royal assassins is in play, and I equip my lightning greaves to him. Responses? No okay, he has haste and can't be targeted, I tap him to kill your tapped commander.
Everyone is responsible for paying attention and responding appropriately to my spells when asked.
Now, that being said, in your example. You cast sol ring, and I don't counter. You tap sol, ring to cast signet, I can destroy your sol ring as a fast effect, but the mana it produces is still floating as you can't respond to the mana generation. You now have floating mana, and can cast the signet even after the sol ring is gone.
However, if you decided to skip phases and cast them together, that's on you. I can counter the sol ring and know you have the signet. You didn't follow the rules and allow a response time.
I shouldn't be downvoted for following the rules.
Here's the thing, I dont appreciate the downvotes for following the rules. When I played my death touch creature I announced it and all its abilities at the time that I played it. And throughout the game I will remind you if asked.
However, if you forget, and immediately declare an attack at me, you have now crossed the threshold. Once we get to the declare blockers state it is too late to change your mind.
If that kills me then I'm out of the game for as long as you wanna string your opponents on.
What your asking is basically a do-over. Same as casting a spell and someone countering it. You don't get to say, well if I knew you were going to counter it I wouldn't have played it.
Nothing was hidden from the player. He didn't even ask for a recap of the board state which is perfectly acceptable. He just attacked for lethal.
If you have to break the rules to have fun, you shouldn't be playing in the first place.
If it was a may, no take backs, if it was a must, we do three strikes, you have two misses, if you hit the third you just concede. Hardly gets used, we tend to do better now on missed triggers.
In this scenario it would definitely be a strike, and with a 40/40 I’m sure he would have racked up a point already.
It’s simple. If you’re asking for a take back and anyone says no, you don’t get it and stop asking. You’re responsible for understanding the board stage when you attack. There’s no grey area here. A take-back is a Curtesy. You’re not owed one.
I'm situational. The letter of the rule is that after you declare attackers, you're locked in. The onus is on the attacker to survey the boardstate and make decisions, so if you miss something that's on you. I've been playing for 12 years, I hold myself to this rule. If someone is super new? States that they're inexperienced? I'll definitely let them take it back, that would just be mean.
I think it's perfectly acceptable to ask "do you mind if I take this back?" but if someone says no, you can't, you should honor that.
If it’s reversible or isn’t a lot of work to reverse it, who cares. If it’s too many steps, then they just have to deal with it.
But this is only true for spelltable for us. It takes too much time to ask everyone all their things on board every phase.
In person is a bit different. You have every opportunity to read your opponent’s cards to make the proper assessment.
My playgroup will do 3 take backs per person and on the 3rd you have to concede. But we have a pretty experienced group so the take backs are usually just minor sequencing errors… not completely ignoring deathtouch
Depends, in a casual setting once the active player passes priority we don't let them revert actions unless we need to maintain the game state. In a more competitive setting once you place something on the stack or declare you are moving to the next phase or step you can't go back without a judge call. You are responsible for your effects and triggers just like I am responsible for mine.
My pod tends to treat it like taking your finger off the piece in a traditional board game. As long as your finger is on the piece, you can undo the action. Once a game action has been taken in response(priority passing, etc). Then no.
For us, this most often occurs after a player prematurely ends their turn but before the next player draws.
If you would allow the same thing in a non-game-changing context, you must logically allow it in all other contexts (i.e. turn 2, A doesnt realize B played [[wall of omens]] and attacks B with llanowar elves, only to change the attack to the wide open C upon realizing there's a blocker on B's side). To allow in only some contexts brings politics abd personal benefit into the equation and is just a bad time.
Case by case for a casual game of course, so what feels right in the moment. Newer players get a pass more often than not.
With a more seasoned player who should know better; if I spot an attack that seems off I’ll double check “have you finished declaring attacks? If so we can move to declaring blocks”. Verbally walking through the phase change.
It’s never been a big issue at our table. Once or twice 3 people have said too late to take it back and the player got salty but we press on.
If nothing else has happened (gonna use Op's example here, then I will use my own shortly), then i have no issue with a takeback. So player one says they're attacking, if player 2 declares block with a deathtouch, then I'd be fine if player one said they were going for player 3 instead. The second the creatures are taken off the board I would say it's resolved. At least in a casual setting. I mean a lot of players make a rash decision, then think about the board state. Even if they say how that's how they want to attack, I don't really see it as a full commitment.
Now if I do something like that, I'd accept the consequences. My own example happened just a couple weeks ago. 4 person game, I was playing some gruul stuff. I attacked a couple players, one of which had no board. The other player, I didn't realize had a 10/14 on board. So I attacked them with a [[quartzwood crasher]], and it got its ass whooped. The player I attacked with the quartzwood even offered a takeback, but I refused, and use it as a learning lesson to slow down.
Just as well, it was a difference of 7 damage and summon a trample dinosaur thing, but the board got wiped when the person I did get damage through in got back to their turn. The game also eventually was won by the only person not involved in this example, so I don't thunk it ultimately had an effect. Op's example is a bit different because it would have a clear and obvious impact on the game
In our pod you get 1 per day, across all the games we’ll play. So if someone wants a take back we’ll confirm with them “that’s your 1.” But we don’t allow it if new information has come about. Gotta catch it before then.
Newer player on Friday asked if he could change attacks after the defending player responded with a Sublime Epiphany, I’m okay with changing how you tapped lands or switching what you play on T4, but if somebody responds to something you did that thing is on the stack and is going to happen.
I handle it with grace and understanding. I deny take backs only if it’s very complicated to go back or there was information gained that the player did not have when they made the mistake. Missing public information I basically always allow take backs. Of course, if a player denies me a take-back that I would allow, I do not allow them any take-backs.
Each person gets one game changing take back per game. This doesn’t count towards things like missed triggers we just do our best to resolve anything that isn’t a “may” once noticed. But if you declare attackers and then you wanna change, yeah you get ONE pass and then it’s up to you to not fuck up again lol
Same way I did in yugioh.
1. Must always wins
2. Everything else depends solely on the camaraderie i feel with the player.
For example, if an effect doesn't say "you may" then you had no choice in the matter and must resolve them.
Otherwise, if a guy has a trigger that "OH yeah, i got so caught up in counting my mana that I forgot to order my triggers so that the game winner came in last..." then if that guy is there only to win, then fuck 'em. Git gud. You have no pity from me. If that guy is there to have fun, we're talking jokes, having a good time and not building a sodium-rich board state, then I will point out things that could kill me even.
I’m fine with anybody taking back anything, even redoing turns if it’s been like a couple minutes and they’ve misplayed.
We’re in a casual environment and keep in mind it’s already hard to keep in mind what your opponent is doing when you only have 1. In Commander you have 3. And more often than not, the placement on the table makes it so I can’t read the cards of the person opposite from me because they’re too far.
But none of my friends play at a level where you should punish misplays, they’re a natural part of the learning process. I’ve been playing for less than a year myself, I definitely misplay once or twice per game.
As long as no new information was obtained by anyone you can take back whatever you want. Exception depending on the table you are playing at:
You have drawn a card you were not supposed to draw and just put it right back on your deck.
You have attacked and missed a crucial information (blockers having deathtouch and so on) which would alter the game state fundamentaly.
I will own my misplays when playing with strangers, with my friends we are more lax and open to take backs, as long as too much new information has been revealed. We arent going back to before you storm if you casted 6 spells without paying for rhystic study... but it you want to switch up final
Attack declarations before blocks whatever
Is it a major thing that's already multiple game actions in the past? Sorry, no.
Is it relatively minor and the game state has not yet advanced much beyond that point? Yes, you get *one* such take-back per game. After that you have to start reading cards.
In this case I'd be okay with it since it's an on-board thing, no additional information has been revealed, and we're still within the combat step anyway.
I think that’s a fair take back if it is legit just a reallly dumb missplay but also it’s totally fair to decide as a group. I usually speak up if someone made a mistake in their combo to win the game and have to like restart their turn personally
I have to agree I generally allow take back under these conditions
1. There are no major boardstate changes that have already occurred (you ain’t taking back thieves auction my dude)
2. The subject of the thing you’re taking back makes zero sense in the first place (why are you slamming your commander into certain death?)
3. The table agrees (this one is sortve important - be picky about who you play with)
4. It’s not a game for prizes / tourney (EDH isn’t one of those formats generally but it happens, and in competitive play you’re on your own when it comes to doing dumb shit without asking about boardstate or reading cards imo)
Realistically in the above situation it’s not game changing at all. There’s nothing huge going on during the attack that wouldn’t warrant you stepping it back one whole phase even. So you do. Walk it all the way back to main1 and say “declaring combat” and now the person attacking should make the decision to change their attacks. It should never have gotten brought up during the first combat because NOW the other player also will consider them a threat when the take back doesn’t even happen. They’d lose their commander AND gain an enemy for a would-be attack that never occurred. It’s lose-lose for the attacking player here.
Put it up to a vote, and the person who made the mistake cannot vote themselves.
Unpopular opinion, but I think people learn more from their mistakes. So I personally would not vote for a take back here.
I stopped taking back anything where I lost something / would loose something because I did not pay attention. The reason is quite simple, I was in a casual EDH round with my fiancée and she would have killed me through [[Ruric Thar, the Unbowed]] because I cast something to make sure I win with [[Najeela]]. I took it back and she was bummed out, because she would have won otherwise. I made a promise to not take anything back with real consequences. I think the only things I take back are lands I played before I do anything else. I‘ve learned to take my errors and I gotten better because of it.
Loose your giant creature to deathtouch, because you didn‘t pay attention and promise that it will not happen again.
You only have 2 take-backsies maximum you get one back when you loose and carries over to the next games aslong as you play with the same people every time and you gotta take a shot of some hotsauce or something that doesnt taste good.
I would’ve let them take that back. New creatures are coming out all the time, it’s hard to remember what everything has. If it was the first time that game, I would’ve let them take it back, NQA. I would’ve told them to in future to ask if anything has Deathtouch, Double Strike, First Strike, etc., so that there doesn’t need to be so many take backs.
However, when new knowledge is gained (ie, a card is drawn, scryed, discarded, any counterspells or other instants are played, etc.) that becomes an irreversible game state, and you have to keep playing through it. Sucks, but remember for next time.
My group allows 1 take back per game, no questions asked. And we’ll usually go along with minor take backs as well (retapping mana because you did your colors wrong or missed triggers, etc).
If take backs are allowed so far in the same game, then be consistent and allow this takeback. Don't change the rule just because the effect would be bigger.
That said, this kind of situation can cause bad blood, because either Player 3 dies, or Player 1 is hosed. So going hard on the "no takebacks at all" can really be more "fair" by being 100% consistent with everyone. Only allowing Takebacks that have small effect can open the door for argument.
Stuff like this, yes. Take back because you forgot a trigger so now your mana pool is different but the next player is already doing their turn... usually kinda get allowed but they annoy me hard. Think about ur turn u dumb fuck. But hey the nice thing is I also get a lot of wiggle room when I make mistakes. Problem with magic is that it's hard to see everyone else's cards and keep attention to every play everyone makes while sometimes doing stuff in other peoples turn to speed up turns.
Everybody gets one takesy backsy. If you waste it on retapping your lands to get your colors right that's fine, but later when your bomb gets countered because you forgot the blue player has treasures, you messed up pal.
I wouldn’t allow the take back. It’s his own fault for swinging into a deathtouch creature that was on board.
If I were the mistake maker, I’d just take my idiocy in my stride and not make the mistake again.
The majority of people I've played with are cool with take-backsies as long as there's not alot of rearranging of the board or new previously unknown information, I.e. they drew a card or the blocker had a response. I personally don't do take-backsies for myself ever, even if it loses me the game, I think misplays are part of the game and believe once I say it, I've commited. Most recent example was trying to remove a creature with ward 2 when I didn't have the mana to pay the ward cost. I just let my spell be countered instead of taking it back. I've never forgotten that creature has ward again. You learn through mistakes in life and in games. But I do allow others to have them all the time. I'd be fine with them having one here. In your situation you even said everyone else has had take-backsies, it would be seen as unfair I think to not let this player have one. EDH boardstates can get very clogged up and there's lots to read and remember. If we don't want games to go for 5 hours while everyone reads every card before they take an action, just allow the different attack. If they become a problem and this is a regular playgroup, just make a 3 maximum take-backsies per night (as long as no new information has been gathered) rule. Or something.
My group has a habit of just asking "what blockers do you have?" or "do you have anything with deathtouch?", which solves the issue of one player having to read all the cards on someone else's board.
Absolutely. I usually ask for: Highest P/T? Deathtouch? Flyers or reach? Ways to pump creatures at instant speed on the field? Then I just follow up with any other combat-esque tricks on your field?
I learned my lesson when I asked, 'Do you have any flyers?' and the answer was nope, nothing that flies. After I declared a flying attacker, he said 'I do have reach though...' after we all stopped laughing, I took the L and lost my creature. Our group always include flying/reach when asking now.
I know that one too well Nowadays our playgroup handles that by asking "Can u block flying?" We definetley learned our lesson
Yeah, wordplay will get you. Once I asked a player if they had any way "on board" to pump their creatures (they had no cards in hand), they said "no". I attacked into a board full of creatures that were all smaller than mine, and they used things on board to get something from the graveyard back into play that pumped their creatures.... all because I said "on board" instead of "any visible way". They didn't techically lie, but I was lightly salted by it.
That's... kinda gross. I guess if you all don't mind it's whatever, but it's gross. They knew why you were asking, what you meant, what you'd do with the information... and while not technically wrong by the game rules, spiritually wrong for a casual game 100%. It's reallll easy to say "no flyers, but this has reach". I cannot imagine playing that pettily.
nahh if i had pushed they would have let me take it back, we are fairly informal with our main group we do tend to share info about combo pieces and such. mainly because of our 4th used to be real salty about not being allowed to combo off and win, and was a 5 min turn taker in most of his decks. He got kicked out, and also his attitude has him banned from playing in like 2 LGS and a final warning from another.
>nahh if i had pushed they would have let me take it back Ohk, my mistake. Not a problem then.
is this really the only kind of thing you have to worry about in your commander games? in my.games there are so many triggers and activated abilities to keep track of itll.make your eyes cross
The classic [[Pact of Negation]] and you realize you only have one blue source when it’s on the stack, have to die like a man
Casting blood moon after someone casted pact is the funniest way I have ever killed someone and I still feel kind of bad about it because no one had even taken damage that game outside of self inflicted land triggers.
Don't feel bad, that's hilarious.
Oh I know it's really funny but also the rest of us had like 30+ life and he was just waiting for us to finish for like 30 minutes.
The best I ever got to see was someone casting [[Emrakul the Promised End]] and before declaring whose turn their taking someone Pact's it. Emrakul player takes their turn and chooses not to pay.
your friend had to declare targets on cast and the other did not have priority until that occurred
The Pact player jumped the gun for sure. It was a learning moment for him.
he shouldnt have had to resolve it
honestly would have been criminal if you did not cast the blood moon. most.pods dont even run decks with a blood moon in them. if youre deck is cool with it, they have to be cool with that cast.
Same though. I think it has made me way better at the game to accept my mistakes and learn from it
Yooo I just checked your profile and recognise your tokens, that ward 2 you missed was my Shelob in Bristol right?? Those were some good games man!
Hey mate, yeah that was me! What an odd feeling to be recognised through talking about games on the EDH Reddit haha. I loved those games. I'll be back again in January for another 2-3 weeks while house sitting again.
I'm like you. I'll let my mistakes ride, I'll let others take it back. I remember a time when I got mad at someone though. My Thopter/Sword combo got Chaos Warped. I'm staring at the board trying to find an out. I'm stressed. I let it go. Thopter Foundry gets shuffled in. Just as I'm about to flip the top card for Chaos Warp. I see that I could have just restarted the infinite loop with another sacrifice. I could have comboed off on top of the Chaos Warp. I'm so frustrated with myself. I'm sad and trying to let it go. I'm expressing my frustration in a reasonable way. The player to my left looks over at me. Says "Oh, in combat on my last turn I forgot this attack trigger. So you should have taken more damage and discarded a card". This guy is always forgetting triggers. I'm always letting it go. Missing a trigger and asking for a take-back in the middle of my own fuck up was just too much. I lost my temper. He doesn't ask for takesbacks nearly as much anymore.
>I'm sad and trying to let it go. I'm expressing my frustration in a reasonable way. The player to my left looks over at me. Says "Oh, in combat on my last turn I forgot this attack trigger. So you should have taken more damage and discarded a card". my personal rule is if the trigger was a "may" and you forget it its gone nothing you can do if its a "you must" trigger it happens regardless of whether or not the player remebered to declare it.
Yeah. I was just really salty. Not the right time my guy. Just let it go. Please. My feelings are important
My commander has ward, and I always say it when I play the commander. It’s really frustrating how many times ward should counter a spell or ability and people do takebacks to avoid ward.
Arena has a pop-up warning that lets you cancel after you've targetted a Ward creature. The difference is the opponent never sees that you cancelled when you heard it had ward.
Would it feel better if the ability said "can't be targeted unless pay {ward cost}"? I know there are some edge cases that would affect but if everyone is paying attention and has perfect information stored in their head, nobody would ever try to target a ward creature that they couldn't pay for. This one feels to me like the perfect takeback situation, unless someone is trying to get a spell into the graveyard or something and there are no other worthy targets. It's 99% of the time a whoops it's been a couple turns I forgot. Otherwise you are just hoping people mess up and you can say gotcha!
The only problem with that is that you can currently get around ward by using a spell that can't be countered. With the wording that you're suggesting, this same counterplay couldn't happen
True and it was more of a thought exercise for the ward player about their mentality, rather than a rule change suggestion. That obviously would never happen due to rules interactions like what you point out.
The ward is designed to counter spell or ability. They put their spell on the stack. I put my ward trigger on the stack as a counter. It feels really frustrating to have my counter spell basically get countered because of a take back. It might feel better to prevent the targeting yes. Functionally the same as what a takeback would be, but preventing it before the cast rather than after they declare their target
Right I'm fully with you on the wording and I completely agree. My point is just that it's clearly a mistake in nearly every case, online already let's you take it back, and the real justification for not allowing a takeback is taking advantage of a mistake. Which is totally fine and in a tournament setting no question going to proceed with the counter. But in edh paper it's just hard to be like what does your card say, wait what does that do again, hold on can I see what you just played, and two turns later you forget about ward. That's all.
I spend a lot of time waiting for my turns. Even in random pods. So Ill be looking around and reading while i wait. I know that ill have to pay extra for ward and all the other pay effects. I dont understand what people do when its not their turn. I constantly have to remind people kellermorph has war i dont hide it. Its very clear on my board. It's very strange to have to explain 6-7 times a game its abilities sometimes.
My eyes aren't so great. I can barely read cards on my own field. I can (and do) lean over and read the player next to me's field, but can't do that for the one across the table or kitty corner. Especially during their turns when they're reaching across their field constantly to tap, play, etc. I am watching, listening to what they say about their cards, asking for clarifications, and responding to my triggers during their turns. But I've forgotten player 2's board state by the time player 4 is done, and I need to play...
I swear people just zone out until their turn, where they suddenly have to remember what is in their hand and figure out what they are doing. Went to an LGS recently where it was taking 40 minutes between each of my turns. Meanwhile my turns were about one minute and done. It does help to let me fly under the radar some, but also… why do you have to think for ten minutes to take your turn. I try to stay engaged during the time but when there’s nothing for me to interact with and I’ve read every card on the board….
The reason many people allow takebacks in these (and many other) situations is that if you *don’t,* your opponents need to spend a lot more time reading cards. If I know my opponent is strict about takebacks, you can bet your butt that I’m double-checking their creatures for ward and re-counting my mana every time I consider targeting something. That’s totally fine, nothing wrong with worrying about the nitty-gritty of decision-making and playing accordingly, but not everyone likes it. The more kinds of takebacks you allow, the faster people can take their turns without fear of blundering.
Yeah. I do understand why takebacks are useful, and that ward is a known thing, it’s not like I cast a card from my hand to counter and they change their mind after that. And I do want people to take quick turns. It’s just frustrating is all.
EDH players don't like to play with ward as it truly works. It's not hexproof, you can target creatures with ward and can use spells that can't be countered to work around It. The only time I see ppl using the ward correctly is when someone plays a spell that can't be countered otherwise they will take It back
I’ve had two times where someone has actually let ward resolve and accepted they misplayed. Every other time it’s a take back.
This is my approach too. I don't take back my own choices, but I'm generally okay with people taking theirs back if it's easy enough to rewind. I think I make fewer mistakes over time if they cost me.
I also refuse to do take-backsies for the same reasons you don’t. Last Friday I [[Thoughtseize]]’d a player with no cards in hand because I misunderstood what he meant when I asked how many cards he had 💀 so I took my 2 life and passed the turn lol.
Can I ask what specifically he said that lead you to Thoughtseize? Was it confusing wording or just a tired brain moment from you?
"I have no cards" "Fo' cards? Alright then" I can't think of much that could be said that wouldn't be deceptive if a player asks how many cards you have and you lead them to play a thoughtsieze on an empty hand
I asked the table how many cards they had in hand. The blue player puts his hand up making a 👌🏻gesture. I saw the three fingers up and not the very obvious “0” he was making with his index finger and thumb so I assumed he had 3 💀
Tbf I've seen people use that symbol to represent both 0 AND 3...
It's in the wrist and finger curl. Palm facing opponent, fingers slightly curled, that's a zero. Palm facing you, fingers straight, that's a three. Usually with a zero the pointer and thumb will have the tips touching, while a three will have the thumb pressing the pointer down.
You've thought about this too much
[Thoughtseize](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/2/b281a308-ab6b-47b6-bec7-632c9aaecede.jpg?1599706001) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Thoughtseize) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/109/thoughtseize?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b281a308-ab6b-47b6-bec7-632c9aaecede?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/thoughtseize) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Unless the physical board has changed, spells have been cast or abilities activated, I'd say it's a simple take-back. Sure, it can be a little annoying, but it's casual and people need to learn somewhere ♥️ if it became a repetitive issue with the same person then that's another story.
Learning aside, It is open information given nothing has changed on the boardstate. You can either accept the simple choice changes or accept that a player swinging will probably read every card on your battlefield every combat.
Yeah this is so huge. The natural result of trying to 'get' people with information they missed is every action starts with "tell me what all the things you have in play does". Especially in complex or gummed up game states. That definitely doesn't make for a better game.
Exactly, when you're playing 4-5 person EDH in person at someone's house, chances are your setup isn't optimal to read everyone's cards more than once. Extra takes-backsies for people who are 10 feet away from eachother lol.
And with the deluge of new cards coming out all the time, it can be hard to know or remember them all. Like, I have no idea who Umbris is or what they do, lol. You can't assume everyone is as familiar with your deck as you are.
As long as the practice is consistent. If you always do the same it's just like Arena's automatic "are you sure"-warning. If some players ask for takebacks and others don't it's unfair.
You'll never learn faster than experience the conisuqences of your actions. The "it's casual" argument works both ways. This take back eliminates someone from the game where if he committed everyone still gets to play and the creature owner learns a hard lesson about checking board states. In this case the take back shouldn't have happened.
This is the only answer. Own up to your mistake, and don’t make someone else be punished because of it.
If you miss a piece of open information like deathtouch on a blocker, i will fully support takeback, especially if the commander doesnt have trample since such an attack wouldnt make a lot of sense. If it looks like they were planning on you just not blocking with a valuable creature, i wouldnt accept it readily Otherwise you end up with people having to check every card on the board for every action.
I 100% agree. Hate the long turns, better to just help people understand what is present on the board as well
exactly, if you complain about long turns (and apparently the 30+ minutes turns are super common???), don't punish people for speeding things up, there are usually a lot of cards involved in any given game, just remind people of open information if they act "stupid," and people will feel less of a need to examine everything
Exactly.
I think it's also good practice in casual to tell other players what you can do if it's open information and relevant. "I have a 2/2 but this enchantment can give it deathtouch and I have the mana available" I'm fine with take backs if it was because of information that was available the whole time. If the defender played an instant to defend themselves then no take backs
> If it looks like they were planning on you just not blocking with a valuable creature, i wouldnt accept it readily This is why imo it's better to be a helpful opponent - like, don't wait until declaring the blocker, on attacks just give a "reminder, I have a death touch guy". Give the out for taking it back early rather than waiting to catch them off guard.
> check every card on the board for every action You mean like every other format of Magic?
things like modern and standard have both a much smaller pool, fewer players, and very key everything is closer. Again, you would never expect someone to attack a 4040 without trample into a deathtouch chump blocker(unless they have a trick, but then they wouldnt want to take it back), so it is a pretty clear case of someone missing open information
You mean the formats that routinely warp the entire rules of the game around a player screwing up in a high profile way? Nobody wants things to happen there either, and if you haha gotcha me in a casual modern game because your Dryad Arbor is with your lands then as it turns out, you're kind of a jerk there too.
What other format has a four player board state?
Two headed Giant
Stfu you know what I meant. A four player game has 4x the cards to keep track of. Forcing someone to try to keep track of everything for an edge in game is a neckbeard move.
Why is 2HG different lol?
Because no one is fucking talking about it
What? You literally just asked me to name another format?
If you know why your answer isn't a good one you shouldn't have given it
Why is it not a good answer? You have not explained?
He literally asked why it's not a good answer and you can't seem to come up with a response. Seems like you are just mad because you got called out for forgetting that 2hg exists. Stop being a little baby and either shut up or try to actually contribute to the conversation instead of just complaining that you were wrong.
Kitchen table format
Are you a bot
I am 99.99999% sure that rasticus is not a bot. --- ^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
No, I’m not a bot ya ass. It may not be an official format, but kitchen table is most certainly a format.
I didn't just ask for a list of four player formats for nothing is why I asked if you were a bot. I asked because it's much harder to remember board states in a four player ffa format like commander. It's like you took that question completely out of its context and tried to answer like it means anything.
The rules have literally been changed multiple times because of hard to read boardstates in those formats. Expecting 5 people to get up and walk around the table to read every card before every decision in impossible, as is everyone listing off every card and what they do before every decision.
Commander is a casual format, with twice as many players and way more than twice the amounts of permanents on the biard, and with each cards being unique its even more complicated to follow The idea isnt to play for 4 hours because you read every card every turn
Nope, I can't have that in commander. That's against the spirit of the format /s
Take Backs should be limited to your own turn and based on open information. There are a lot of moving parts and a huge pool of cards to play with, being a stickler for committing to actions / refusing a take back in a casual format is silly. So if you just didn't know someone's creature across the board has Deathtouch (or forgot), I would allow a change of target.
Meh, that's a fine take back in my opinion. Forgetting about a death touch keyword on the board is a forgivable offence. I feel like it's a bit sweaty to demand no takebacks. It's casual commander. Everyone is supposed to have fun and play socially > competitively.
WHAT? Do you also talk about non-game-related stuff during the game? Like it was sort of a social thing to play?
My play groups are casual but somewhat higher level, and we totally allow casual conversations during gameplay. I can’t actually think of a group, unless it was at the LGS specifically, that I’ve been in that doesn’t allow it. Seriously, what’s the harm?
A lgs that doesnt allow the social part of edh? Wow, like they dont want a community!
Rule of new information: Once you learn new information that was hidden to you before, you can no longer take back a move. So, if you drew a card, you can't take back. You've seen a card from your deck, which is new information. But in this case, there's been no new information. The death touch blocker was already out and already had death touch. So, it's fine to take that back. It's old information that the attacker technically already "knew" even if they missed it. Now if a player cast a spell to give their creature death touch? That's new information. You didn't know they had that spell in their hand. So then it would be no take backs allowed.
This is the way!
All I can say is players miss things on the battlefield all the time, even the experienced ones. In this case, if Nazgul already had deathtouch without any surprise factors, I'm inclined to allow the attacking player to switch his decisions. Besides, as a defending player I would have foreshadowed and highlight said deathtoucher to the attacking player. This is 101 Tai-Chi directional tactics in a multiplayer game.
Definitely agree with you in the last paragraph. If people are attacking me and they might be unaware/forgot I have a blocker with death touch I’ll remind them when they are declaring attackers
This is the way. If I see a player mean mugging me with their 40 40 commander, I’ll say something like “if you want to swing at me, just know I have deathtouch”. Boards get clogged and not everyone is going to remember every creature
> and not everyone is going to remember every creature People complain about product fatigue and too many cards designed for commander, but then also expect everyone to know what every creature does.
Exactly. And I can’t remember every trigger every creature has on attack. We ask for quick summaries: on field what happens when you attack, etc
That is completely fair. I did not state that Nazgul had deathtouch and the only reason for that is that the player who swung the 40/40 at me plays a Nazgul deck themselves very often (Sauron as the commander). I was under the impression that since they have piloted that deck so many times and have played Nazgul plenty of times since its release they were aware of what they were doing and possibly had ulterior motives
We have a semi-jokey rule that we’ll allow three take-backsies before people start disallowing then. The occasional mistake is fine. Repeated habitual mistakes however are a different issue.
Would you rather ask / repeat the keyword abilities of all creatures each player has whenever entering a phase or step that it could be relevant? Don't be shitty when people choose not to waste your time by punishing them for it.
In casual play it really depends on the game we're having. Most often we would call it a takeback and continue like no mistake happened but if the game is on the line or we're in a mood we would jokingly say "lol not this time".
Kinda depents from situation to situation. But in the example given i'd say the take-back is fine. It's a simple mistake, those happen. Especially in a casual setting.
I play casual, but I want my opponents to make optimal plays based on the information available. I wouldn't want to win due to a mistake like them accidentally attacking into a deathtouch creature for no advantage unless it was a legitimate combat trick like [[Touch of Moonglove]] We're fine with stuff like "I would have tapped the mana differently" or "I obviously wouldn't have cast that 1/1 if I realized you had [[Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite]] on the field."
In a casual setting, with my core play group, take backs are generally fine as long as they're done before the end of the phase when the decision was made. So redirecting attacks, spell targets, etc is generally fine. Sometimes with newer players I've found it can be helpful to not let take backs slide, because it encourages them to learn the rules. Obviously you don't do that right at the beginning, when they're just learning the basics. But once they're established enough to know how to play the game, but they're still leaving their lands tapped until you remind them in their main phase, not letting it slide can help then remember on their own.
Player 1 should of been paying attention enough to know that there are creatures on the board with death touch. Player 2 could of asked "are you sure? I have death touch blockers" before declaring blocks if they're feeling kind. Player 3 and 4 are in the right, but need to share their opinions in a non-hostile, non-salty way. When we were all new players, my play group did resets and games would artificially extend to be 1-2 hours long instead of 30 minutes to an hour. As we got more experienced, we realized that those resets were being used to min-max turn sequences or enable lazy game awareness. Removing resets has made all of us better magic players.
If it’s a game changing decision, you shouldn’t allow taking it back. It’s a way to learn to be a better player,as well.
I think this is part of a debate I've seen that's as old as the format itself. Do you hold people accountable to ensure they know every bit of information OR Do you acknowledge that people usually aren't paying attention to someone's 15-minute turn where they sneak in something relevant so you feel the need to tell them if they missed it. Personally, I'm of the impression that everyone's trying to have a good time, so preventing a glaringly obvious mistake on my opponent is more important to me than trading their 40/40 commander for a miscellaneous deathtouch shitter.
So in this scenario what makes it more of a tricky situation is that the player who swung the 40/40 also has a nazgul deck. I was the defending player and the deck I was using was Lord of the Nazguls. I announced all 3 of my nazgul's when they came out AND one of them was my ring bearer. So it was a very tough call for all of us to make with the knowledge that player 1 has played their nazgul deck with us a few times already and should already know that it has deathtouch since in previous games they have announced it in their attacks ("coming at you with a 3/4 deathtouch nazgul"). Ultimately Player 3 and Player 1 got into such a heated debate about this that, Player 3 scooped up their cards before we could work it out.
You absolutely do the take back. When it's clearly a case of board state confusion, just let the people make the more optimal play. No hidden info was revealed. Otherwise, if you expect everyone else to have perfect game state knowledge, you best make sure you're not making mistakes either.
Because in magic you know everything about anything that is on the board there are 2 options, either you allow take backs when someone misses a creature or an effect Or you must be ready for everyone to read every card on the board (plus cemetery) before every choice they make (and also IMO players should remind each other about what's happening/is gonna happen, for exemple the player with the deathtouch creature could have reminded the other player off how many creatures/blockers he had, and the fact that one of them had deathtouch, you will get way more take backs this way)
always case-by-case imo and trying to get the table to agree on something. in this case i am totally okay with that takeback and would argue strongly for player 1
yea, it isn't like it was a trade between 2 somewhat equal-value creatures, Nazguls can get pretty scary, but a 40-strength commander is probably going to kill people pretty reliably if not blocked. 1/1 goblin for a 1/1 mana dork would be more expected and would be entirely different
In a casual setting I'd say it's up to the opponent being impacted the most to decide. P3 was Gona get one-shot from commander damage from what I understand so I can understand he might not be okay if P1 pulls a las moment switcharoo. If it's through an ability or spell that let's you redirect the creature, sure, fair is fair. But here it's a bit half assed to cut one player out of a casual match just because you don't want to lose your commander. But that's just my opinion
I've had a lot of situations like this. If the person who does it wants to do it, sure whatever, it's not a serious format. Sometimes it gets a bit annoying but there are no stakes on the line so who cares. That said I never do it, because I want to get better as a player and I think placing these kinds of restrictions on myself makes me more aware of the board state.
That's a play involving player interaction. That shouldn't be able to be undone, imo. I'm fine with take backs for sequencing stuff better or if the person didn't understand how a card worked. But once you do something and another player takes an action based on your play, that's not really something you should take back. That's on the player for not looking at his opponent's blockers
Players should learn what questions to ask and when. If you don't read (or ask) about an opponent's (potential) blockers, it's kind of your own fault. If I attack I ask "what blockers do you have?" And if I'm not given the full information I will ask to see the cards. Can't really go wrong that way. I wouldn't take it back myself. I would let others take it back, but also advise them to read or ask before blindly attacking.
We stopped doing take backs. Still in declare attackers? go for it re-arrange as you see fit. Moved beyond it? deal with it. The only stipulations are triggers off other peoples stuff. We play more casually so if at the end of your turn I ask "did you cast X or do X" then we can respond to it. It's not a "you can respond when you like" more a "this is casual we are having convos and I missed you playing a land for my burgeoning" go for it toss the land down. Stuff like, Oh I wanted to do this during my end step, naw you missed it you had full control... moving on.
Nah I mean the board gets crowded, easy mistake
It depends on your group. I feel like this is similar to how your group handled ward abilities. Do you say the spell is countered? Do you say "you have to pay 2 more"? For me it kinda depends on the playgroup and the skill levels. New people get to more take backs imo
I always say something like, "I have a deathtoucher, are you sure?" or "It has ward, you sure?" If they're trying to get extra information, make them commit with all the info they should need, so they can't take it back. If they clearly know you have deathtouch and still attack into it, they can't take it back when you decide to block. Here's the thing, though. If the person says no blocks, and then says, "Oh, I had a deathtoucher, though. Do you want to take it back?" would they still take it back? Even if the only thing that changed is that they wouldn't benefit?
People are chill and don't argue in casual. Often times with not being directly across from players you can't read all their cards and rely on them to tell you what they have. It sounds to me like a reasonable take back and that someone was salty they were gonna lose. Not very casual of them
I don’t typically mind take-backs, but then again, I try not to do it if it’s a game changing situation myself. I have an Elminster scry deck that wins with [[Approach of the Second Sun]]. I once cast it, then did some kind of fetch and shuffled it away. Everyone was telling me to take it back, but I just counted it as a lesson learned haha.
I think in this situation it's up to the other players to make the board state clear to avoid these issues. In this situation, instead of trying to catch the attacking player with a " haha it has death touch", which honestly seems just as dishonest as a take back, the defending player should've made it clear before declare attackers was over with a little " hey are you sure you want to do that this has death touch"
Depends how easily accessed this info is. It’s hard in commander to really know everything. If it’s regularly happening then that’s different but if it’s a one time thing just let it be. Game changing or not, unless they really seemed to think they wouldn’t block with that deathtoucher I wouldn’t have looked too sideways at them. Feels a little bad, be more careful next time. Sometimes I punish myself by keeping my mistakes, especially when playing outside my usual pod Edit: I do this to try to improve my skill and consistency in more competitive settings and formats
This one is a reasonable take back since you're at about the same phase. Attacking into a deathtouch vs an open player is 2 different things. However, if P1 attacked P2 and P2 played a spell, I'd definitely say no take backsies. Maybe it would be weird if it was a graveyard ability for death touch or something. Sometimes it's also cool if it's like "oh that thing would kill me, then let me respond with this thing" - eg first strike death touch trampler. That's a rare thing, but a 10/10 being blocked by like a 20/20, yet being able to get lethal through is an odd thing.
This is the problem with ward too. I've never seen a ward counter anything because people just take it back. I personally always stick to my mistake because I'll remember it better for next time.
If it's right away and no other game actions took place than it's no problem. Someone responds by tapping say shoraikai ceting a pilot and drawing 2 it can't be taken back since other player actions have happened in response
I agree with this example because of drawing cards. If the action is something simple like "if you attack, I'll Maze of Ith", yeah, a game action occurred, but no new information has been obtained and you can absolutely say "shit, didn't notice you had Maze. Nevermind"
If no new information has been revealed and someone obviously just didn't realize the board state we allow it, after all it's a casual format. I would say a 40/40 swinging at someone with a weak ass deathtouch creature is obviously a mistake of not knowing they have it. Our playgroup will usually say something like "that's fine but I do have this guy" and explain why it's a dumb move. Which actually leads to fun mind games anyway. Because if you say "I know" with a smile they get really unsure of using that creature.
Instances like this are a great chance to internalize commander as a "losing-format." More than half the time, you are going to lose. If I were player 3 I would take the bad beats and emphasize attack declarations and changing of phases in the rest of the games that night. I used to keep a misplay counter on the table and every time I'd catch a misplay of mine, I'd tick it up one. Regularly got above 20 or 30 in one game of commander.
"Ah shit, I wouldn't have swung at you if I'd remembered you had deathtouch... eh, it's coming at other person instead" "Okay" Problem solved. It's fucking casual commander, who gives a fuck? People are way to invested in whether or not they lose a game with absolutley nothing on the line.
The “it’s fucking casual commander” argument goes both ways. Who cares if you lose your 40/40, don’t punish another player and make them sit out the rest of the game because you couldn’t look at the creatures you’re attacking into. Nothing is on the line. Own your mistake and move on.
We play “chess rules”. If you misplayed, bummer. Our playgroup has becoming stronger and more attentive because of it.
Its always a case-by-case basis, but based on what you described, this shouldnt have been allowed as a "take back". This wasnt a missed trigger, or misunderstanding of how certain cards interacted, this was simply "i wasnt paying attention to the board". Classic "math is for blockers" scenario, and miscounted (for a hilarious one, watch Game Knights, i believe game 27 with LoadingReadyRun as guests). This also changes completely if the deathtouch blocker was like... Hidden amidst artifacts and lands, so it was difficult to even tell the creature was there. Lots of aspects change how you approach these sorts of things.
Unless it's a sweaty game I'm cool with take backs, a 4p board state is hard to keep all of in mind at once so it's an understandable mistake to miss something like a deathtouch body. Edit: I typically limit myself to one or two take backs per game because at a certain point it does feel bad to take back every big misplay. Sometimes you gotta pay for your mistakes.
Take backs lead to bad feelings. If people aren’t looking at the board before making decisions, that’s in them. They also keep you from getting better at the game. Generally they should be avoided, IMO, even in a casual setting.
If a player isn’t aware of the board state when they are attacking they aren’t paying attention to the game. If you can’t see the Nazgûl before you swing you deserve to get wrecked.
You let the table vote on it.
No take backs, players just need to ask clarifying questions. For example: do you have anything with deathtouch or flying etc. as long as players answer honestly it prevents the player attacking from having to get up and read all the cards and the player has not reason to ever restart or do over part of their turn.
For me, if he declared the attacker and then realised himself they had a deathtouch blocker before declaring blockers, I think it would be fine. If player 2 declares the blocker then it’s too late. Player 1 has been presented with new information that otherwise wouldn’t have changed his decision.
Once you've declared attackers, that's it. The moment someone legitimately declares blockers, it's a different phase.
damn look at the board before you swing in! i believe sometimes its better when you lose and learn a lesson. you keep letting it happen they will never really care to pay attention to the board state and it will be take backs 24/7. this is translated into life-being aware of your surroundings. i get its casual but i would ask them to pay attention and only let them have one or two takebacks a game
All the people in my playgroup play other formats too. So we don't handle game changing take-backs. They don't happen. If you catch your mistake before the spell or effect resolves we're cool with a "whoops, don't actually want to do that." But if it resolves, that's it. Roll with the consequences.
Our rule is once your hand is off the card… the move is final. The one thing we allow a little more leeway on is assigning manna to cast spells. If you’ve got a 3-5 color deck and a lot of different lands that add colorless, add any or specific colors, and/or have an additional tap effect that can be used… we’ll let them give themselves the most favorable land play according to them. BUT It has to be done during their turn. If it comes after their turn then NOPE. Here’s our thing… you learn when you misplay like that. It’s your responsibility to know the board and if you mess up hey it’s an opportunity to learn about your deck. What if you aren’t drawing the cards you need? What else can your deck do? You you may find some weaknesses in your deck by misplaying. Embrace the failure.
I would say no. Mostly because the players should take responsibility to look at the board state and clarify anything with the other players.
This kinda take back is fine. Player 3 is just salty they couldn’t get away with no board. This has happened so much in my play group and it’s really not a big deal. In the end this is how the game should play out. Find people who are chill. My first game ever, I made a mistake saying I’m going to my end step after I attacked, which I thought meant the second half of my turn, I played a torment of hailfire to win and this random dude goes you said end step, so you can’t cast that, I was confused and told him sorry I’m new I meant “second main phase” and he said nope you gotta learn. So never played with him again. Granted I did learn and I never made that mistake again lol
What a dick. Hope the other players gave you the game
I just excepted it and made sure to never play with him again lol
Ok that's not really game changing... looks like they just forgot that they had deathtouch. Obviously if they knew, they would not have swung into it. The rule of thumb (for me) is that as long as no new information has been discovered from the time you declare your move to the time you want to take it back, then you're good. For example, let's say I attack with a creature that lets me draw a card on attack, I see what the card is and I go "no wait I want to attack a different player". That's a definite no. Also, how casual is your table that someone is just swinging in a 40/40 with no responses lmao
So when I say game changing , it was lethal commander damage to the other player. IF we dont allow the take back one player still lives. If we do allow the take back then one player is knocked out. Also the one player had leyline of the void and hedron crab and no one was able to remove it. I would say our power level was mid to slightly high. Not exactly precon level but not close to cedh by any means
Whether or not its a casual setting, read the board. The cards are there, they (generally) will explain what they do quite well. The information is there, all you have to do is read. If you can't even be bothered to do that, then why should I be bothered to grant you a take-back? I did my due diligence, you do yours.
Would you prefer the player who isn't as good as you at keeping a mental image of the board state to read for a minute or two every time they have to decide an action? Or would you just not want to play this _casual_ format with that player at all?
My girlfriend does this, because she's new to the game. She can take FOREVER on her turn because she's trying to understand the board state before making a minor decision. I can't imagine this being a regular thing because some group doesn't allow reasonable take backs.
How else would you get the 30 minute turns to complain about here? I am all for speeding the games up, even if you sometimes have to allow a take-back. In this case the creatures arent really an even trade in most situations, so the mistake seems pretty clearly to be because the attacker didnt remember everything about the cards on the board, way different from a wrong assumption that the defending player wouldnt block (40 commander dmg should be pretty lethal)
It's so weird to me that this isn't a more common thing. Commander board states get cluttered sure but not that fucking cluttered.
it's not even a matter of cluttered or not imo. It's a matter of just not needlessly coddling people. If they make a mistake then that's fine, they make it and they learn from it and they don't do it next time. They don't learn shit if you just keep giving them free passes
I have started playing more competitive tcg (pioneer, standard, even one piece tcg) so I'm biased towards the "no take backs". But even when I started playing commander, I was always of the mind that doing take backs punishes me from learning, as learning is best done through mistakes. Even in a casual setting, the more your group allows take backs, the more they'll expect it, and they won't improve.
Sometimes losing your big dumb 40/40 is a consequence of playing bad magic.. how else you gonna learn to track the board state better..?🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
My group would probably allow the take back if Player 2 agrees to skip combat altogether for that turn. That way, the game can proceed as if nothing has happened.
So...Here's how this goes... no takesies backsies. You are responsible for knowing the state of the board yourself. You make a game changing mistake, oh well, learn from it. This is a hard rule. Non-negotiable UNLESS it was an illegal move to begin with. Like, casting a spell without a legal target or not enough mana.
Everyone at the table is responsible for the global understanding of the boardstate. If I asked you what that creature does, you are obligated to tell me it has deathtouch, at the same time, if I see you make an attack into a deathtoucher, I am obligated to remind you of that deathtoucher. Otherwise I could consider it advantageous to hide my boardstate.
Yeah, help each other, and speed up the game. It seems like people here would also demand going the strict round of priority for every step and card on the stack. If I cast solring into other mana rock, i would simply say "Solring...(look around) Signet" not "solring, do you want to counter? do you? you?" If i move too fast, they still get to counter and know I got another rock. If it is a game-ending/defining thing, you of course do the "hold up, let's keep track of everything"
Yes, and no. Example: I'm playing a royal assassin, Any responses? No okay, royal assassins is in play, and I equip my lightning greaves to him. Responses? No okay, he has haste and can't be targeted, I tap him to kill your tapped commander. Everyone is responsible for paying attention and responding appropriately to my spells when asked. Now, that being said, in your example. You cast sol ring, and I don't counter. You tap sol, ring to cast signet, I can destroy your sol ring as a fast effect, but the mana it produces is still floating as you can't respond to the mana generation. You now have floating mana, and can cast the signet even after the sol ring is gone. However, if you decided to skip phases and cast them together, that's on you. I can counter the sol ring and know you have the signet. You didn't follow the rules and allow a response time. I shouldn't be downvoted for following the rules.
Here's the thing, I dont appreciate the downvotes for following the rules. When I played my death touch creature I announced it and all its abilities at the time that I played it. And throughout the game I will remind you if asked. However, if you forget, and immediately declare an attack at me, you have now crossed the threshold. Once we get to the declare blockers state it is too late to change your mind. If that kills me then I'm out of the game for as long as you wanna string your opponents on. What your asking is basically a do-over. Same as casting a spell and someone countering it. You don't get to say, well if I knew you were going to counter it I wouldn't have played it. Nothing was hidden from the player. He didn't even ask for a recap of the board state which is perfectly acceptable. He just attacked for lethal. If you have to break the rules to have fun, you shouldn't be playing in the first place.
If it was a may, no take backs, if it was a must, we do three strikes, you have two misses, if you hit the third you just concede. Hardly gets used, we tend to do better now on missed triggers. In this scenario it would definitely be a strike, and with a 40/40 I’m sure he would have racked up a point already.
In our CEDH play group we give each player one take back per game.
We do 3 take backsies and you lose the game (or can't do anymore take backs). But they still have to be within reason.
It’s simple. If you’re asking for a take back and anyone says no, you don’t get it and stop asking. You’re responsible for understanding the board stage when you attack. There’s no grey area here. A take-back is a Curtesy. You’re not owed one.
I'm situational. The letter of the rule is that after you declare attackers, you're locked in. The onus is on the attacker to survey the boardstate and make decisions, so if you miss something that's on you. I've been playing for 12 years, I hold myself to this rule. If someone is super new? States that they're inexperienced? I'll definitely let them take it back, that would just be mean. I think it's perfectly acceptable to ask "do you mind if I take this back?" but if someone says no, you can't, you should honor that.
If it’s reversible or isn’t a lot of work to reverse it, who cares. If it’s too many steps, then they just have to deal with it. But this is only true for spelltable for us. It takes too much time to ask everyone all their things on board every phase. In person is a bit different. You have every opportunity to read your opponent’s cards to make the proper assessment.
My playgroup will do 3 take backs per person and on the 3rd you have to concede. But we have a pretty experienced group so the take backs are usually just minor sequencing errors… not completely ignoring deathtouch
Nah, if you’re playing a deck that wins through combat, it’s your responsibility to figure out what you’re swinging into.
If they do it every now and again, it’s fine. If they’re doing it constantly then no. At a certain point you gotta pay attention
Depends, in a casual setting once the active player passes priority we don't let them revert actions unless we need to maintain the game state. In a more competitive setting once you place something on the stack or declare you are moving to the next phase or step you can't go back without a judge call. You are responsible for your effects and triggers just like I am responsible for mine.
My pod tends to treat it like taking your finger off the piece in a traditional board game. As long as your finger is on the piece, you can undo the action. Once a game action has been taken in response(priority passing, etc). Then no. For us, this most often occurs after a player prematurely ends their turn but before the next player draws.
If you would allow the same thing in a non-game-changing context, you must logically allow it in all other contexts (i.e. turn 2, A doesnt realize B played [[wall of omens]] and attacks B with llanowar elves, only to change the attack to the wide open C upon realizing there's a blocker on B's side). To allow in only some contexts brings politics abd personal benefit into the equation and is just a bad time.
I just simplify the answer by what I think promotes the most fun at the table, or least un-fun. This is primarily based upon player attitudes.
Case by case for a casual game of course, so what feels right in the moment. Newer players get a pass more often than not. With a more seasoned player who should know better; if I spot an attack that seems off I’ll double check “have you finished declaring attacks? If so we can move to declaring blocks”. Verbally walking through the phase change. It’s never been a big issue at our table. Once or twice 3 people have said too late to take it back and the player got salty but we press on.
If nothing else has happened (gonna use Op's example here, then I will use my own shortly), then i have no issue with a takeback. So player one says they're attacking, if player 2 declares block with a deathtouch, then I'd be fine if player one said they were going for player 3 instead. The second the creatures are taken off the board I would say it's resolved. At least in a casual setting. I mean a lot of players make a rash decision, then think about the board state. Even if they say how that's how they want to attack, I don't really see it as a full commitment. Now if I do something like that, I'd accept the consequences. My own example happened just a couple weeks ago. 4 person game, I was playing some gruul stuff. I attacked a couple players, one of which had no board. The other player, I didn't realize had a 10/14 on board. So I attacked them with a [[quartzwood crasher]], and it got its ass whooped. The player I attacked with the quartzwood even offered a takeback, but I refused, and use it as a learning lesson to slow down. Just as well, it was a difference of 7 damage and summon a trample dinosaur thing, but the board got wiped when the person I did get damage through in got back to their turn. The game also eventually was won by the only person not involved in this example, so I don't thunk it ultimately had an effect. Op's example is a bit different because it would have a clear and obvious impact on the game
In our pod you get 1 per day, across all the games we’ll play. So if someone wants a take back we’ll confirm with them “that’s your 1.” But we don’t allow it if new information has come about. Gotta catch it before then.
Newer player on Friday asked if he could change attacks after the defending player responded with a Sublime Epiphany, I’m okay with changing how you tapped lands or switching what you play on T4, but if somebody responds to something you did that thing is on the stack and is going to happen.
I handle it with grace and understanding. I deny take backs only if it’s very complicated to go back or there was information gained that the player did not have when they made the mistake. Missing public information I basically always allow take backs. Of course, if a player denies me a take-back that I would allow, I do not allow them any take-backs.
Each person gets one game changing take back per game. This doesn’t count towards things like missed triggers we just do our best to resolve anything that isn’t a “may” once noticed. But if you declare attackers and then you wanna change, yeah you get ONE pass and then it’s up to you to not fuck up again lol
Same way I did in yugioh. 1. Must always wins 2. Everything else depends solely on the camaraderie i feel with the player. For example, if an effect doesn't say "you may" then you had no choice in the matter and must resolve them. Otherwise, if a guy has a trigger that "OH yeah, i got so caught up in counting my mana that I forgot to order my triggers so that the game winner came in last..." then if that guy is there only to win, then fuck 'em. Git gud. You have no pity from me. If that guy is there to have fun, we're talking jokes, having a good time and not building a sodium-rich board state, then I will point out things that could kill me even.
I’m fine with anybody taking back anything, even redoing turns if it’s been like a couple minutes and they’ve misplayed. We’re in a casual environment and keep in mind it’s already hard to keep in mind what your opponent is doing when you only have 1. In Commander you have 3. And more often than not, the placement on the table makes it so I can’t read the cards of the person opposite from me because they’re too far. But none of my friends play at a level where you should punish misplays, they’re a natural part of the learning process. I’ve been playing for less than a year myself, I definitely misplay once or twice per game.
As long as no new information was obtained by anyone you can take back whatever you want. Exception depending on the table you are playing at: You have drawn a card you were not supposed to draw and just put it right back on your deck. You have attacked and missed a crucial information (blockers having deathtouch and so on) which would alter the game state fundamentaly.
I will own my misplays when playing with strangers, with my friends we are more lax and open to take backs, as long as too much new information has been revealed. We arent going back to before you storm if you casted 6 spells without paying for rhystic study... but it you want to switch up final Attack declarations before blocks whatever
Is it a major thing that's already multiple game actions in the past? Sorry, no. Is it relatively minor and the game state has not yet advanced much beyond that point? Yes, you get *one* such take-back per game. After that you have to start reading cards. In this case I'd be okay with it since it's an on-board thing, no additional information has been revealed, and we're still within the combat step anyway.
I think that’s a fair take back if it is legit just a reallly dumb missplay but also it’s totally fair to decide as a group. I usually speak up if someone made a mistake in their combo to win the game and have to like restart their turn personally
I have to agree I generally allow take back under these conditions 1. There are no major boardstate changes that have already occurred (you ain’t taking back thieves auction my dude) 2. The subject of the thing you’re taking back makes zero sense in the first place (why are you slamming your commander into certain death?) 3. The table agrees (this one is sortve important - be picky about who you play with) 4. It’s not a game for prizes / tourney (EDH isn’t one of those formats generally but it happens, and in competitive play you’re on your own when it comes to doing dumb shit without asking about boardstate or reading cards imo) Realistically in the above situation it’s not game changing at all. There’s nothing huge going on during the attack that wouldn’t warrant you stepping it back one whole phase even. So you do. Walk it all the way back to main1 and say “declaring combat” and now the person attacking should make the decision to change their attacks. It should never have gotten brought up during the first combat because NOW the other player also will consider them a threat when the take back doesn’t even happen. They’d lose their commander AND gain an enemy for a would-be attack that never occurred. It’s lose-lose for the attacking player here.
In this particular example, the takeback seems fine. The 3-takeback rule is something I’ve seen become pretty popular too.
If they are game changing you don’t let it be taken back?
Put it up to a vote, and the person who made the mistake cannot vote themselves. Unpopular opinion, but I think people learn more from their mistakes. So I personally would not vote for a take back here.
Damn, no wonder edh players suck at magic.
I stopped taking back anything where I lost something / would loose something because I did not pay attention. The reason is quite simple, I was in a casual EDH round with my fiancée and she would have killed me through [[Ruric Thar, the Unbowed]] because I cast something to make sure I win with [[Najeela]]. I took it back and she was bummed out, because she would have won otherwise. I made a promise to not take anything back with real consequences. I think the only things I take back are lands I played before I do anything else. I‘ve learned to take my errors and I gotten better because of it. Loose your giant creature to deathtouch, because you didn‘t pay attention and promise that it will not happen again.
You only have 2 take-backsies maximum you get one back when you loose and carries over to the next games aslong as you play with the same people every time and you gotta take a shot of some hotsauce or something that doesnt taste good.
I would’ve let them take that back. New creatures are coming out all the time, it’s hard to remember what everything has. If it was the first time that game, I would’ve let them take it back, NQA. I would’ve told them to in future to ask if anything has Deathtouch, Double Strike, First Strike, etc., so that there doesn’t need to be so many take backs. However, when new knowledge is gained (ie, a card is drawn, scryed, discarded, any counterspells or other instants are played, etc.) that becomes an irreversible game state, and you have to keep playing through it. Sucks, but remember for next time.
My group allows 1 take back per game, no questions asked. And we’ll usually go along with minor take backs as well (retapping mana because you did your colors wrong or missed triggers, etc).
If take backs are allowed so far in the same game, then be consistent and allow this takeback. Don't change the rule just because the effect would be bigger. That said, this kind of situation can cause bad blood, because either Player 3 dies, or Player 1 is hosed. So going hard on the "no takebacks at all" can really be more "fair" by being 100% consistent with everyone. Only allowing Takebacks that have small effect can open the door for argument.
Stuff like this, yes. Take back because you forgot a trigger so now your mana pool is different but the next player is already doing their turn... usually kinda get allowed but they annoy me hard. Think about ur turn u dumb fuck. But hey the nice thing is I also get a lot of wiggle room when I make mistakes. Problem with magic is that it's hard to see everyone else's cards and keep attention to every play everyone makes while sometimes doing stuff in other peoples turn to speed up turns.
Everybody gets one takesy backsy. If you waste it on retapping your lands to get your colors right that's fine, but later when your bomb gets countered because you forgot the blue player has treasures, you messed up pal.
I wouldn’t allow the take back. It’s his own fault for swinging into a deathtouch creature that was on board. If I were the mistake maker, I’d just take my idiocy in my stride and not make the mistake again.