Author Topic: Urim and Thummim and other cards (Read 4352 times)

Alex_Olijar · « **on:** January 20, 2013, 11:33:43 PM »

If a player uses Urim and Thummim, then uses Zadok anoints Solomon, then activates Hidden Treasures, would you allow them to do so though the rules don't allow that technically? Where is the spirit vs rules line? Why does there need to be a line, why can't we just have rules?

Chris · « **Reply #1 on:** January 20, 2013, 11:50:32 PM »

In regular pick up games or most low level tournaments, I'll let something like that slide, on the assumption that my opponent will do the same for me. In ROOT or anything at a state level or higher, I play for keeps, and I hold myself to the same standard I hold my opponent too. Sometimes that comes back to haunt me, but in official categories, making a mistake then complaining when your opponent doesn't let you take it back is poor form, especially if you're going to be a rule nazi yourself.

Redoubter · « **Reply #2 on:** January 21, 2013, 12:08:26 AM »

Two things to comment on this:

First, Zadok Annoints cannot be used to search out artifacts, as the card it searches must: 1. Be a good card; 2. Be O.T.; 3. Have a brigade; 4. Have a brigade other than Teal.
This card only meets #2.

Quote

Zadok Annoints Solomon
If used by a Tabernacle Priest, search deck for an OT good card with a brigade other than teal.

Secondly, I will generally agree with Chris in spirit. Generally, I'll let people take things back in most cases even in tournaments, but we get to States and beyond, then it has to stick, and I'll hold that to myself, too. It's just good sportsmanship IMO, but if you tell me I can't take something back even in a friendly game, that's fine, it's the rules and I messed up, no problem. But I'd rather be friendly when it doesn't count as much; just my decision personally.

However, I don't think that the example you gave would qualify for me even in the lower tournaments or friendly play. Looking at someone's hand and then doing something not quite following the rules to get a card you should now know works shouldn't be going on at any level of play. So, for example, if I U+T, then Pretension to draw then activate an artifact I just pulled out to finish out U+T, you should tell me 'no'. I should have done that in the right order, and it's not good sportsmanship on my part to do that in the wrong order when one of the abilities let me know exactly what I needed to use to beat you, let alone against the rules.

That's just my take, though I understand your question about 'where is the line'. It's a fair point to make.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #3 on:** January 21, 2013, 12:20:32 AM »

he searched for an enhancement, didnt mean to be confusing

Master KChief · « **Reply #4 on:** January 21, 2013, 12:34:54 AM »

Rule shark him.
Drop Shamgar on your turn.
GG.

Redoubter · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2013, 12:53:52 AM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on January 21, 2013, 12:20:32 AM

he searched for an enhancement, didnt mean to be confusing

Looking at your post, I can see that now. I read it initially as searching for HT, my bad

In that case, I would let him do it in that order (except at States+ as mentioned in my post) because it couldn't actually affect anything (as it was not an artifact being brought out a response to what was seen), and was a silly mistake. The same cards would have been played regardless, just in a different, correct order (with HT activating and THEN Zadok Anoints). I make those all the time (all the time

), and like it when other people give me a chance to play what I actually intended in friendlies/locals. Sure, you can say 'no', and you'd be in your rights to do so, but personally I let something like that slide. But again, that's just my take, and either way is respectable.

The Guardian · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2013, 01:09:31 AM »

In a friendly game I let most things slide, especially if it was simply a matter of cards being played in the wrong order. In any level tournament or ROOT game, I'm gonna have to say the cards are played.

Even if it proves a costly mistake, it is a teachable moment. Being a stickler in a low-level tournament is actually better because the opponent will better remember and be far less likely to make that mistake at the higher level tournaments. A good example of this is the RBD/Nazareth + Mayhem mistake. Someone who makes the unfortunate mistake of playing Mayhem while the opponent has RBD active will most assuredly never do it again if they are forced to deal with the consequences.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2013, 04:23:33 AM »

Quote from: Chris on January 20, 2013, 11:50:32 PM

In ROOT or anything at a state level or higher, I play for keeps

Quote from: Redoubter on January 21, 2013, 12:08:26 AM

Generally, I'll let people take things back in most cases even in tournaments, but we get to States and beyond, then it has to stick

Quote from: The Guardian on January 21, 2013, 01:09:31 AM

In any level tournament or ROOT game, I'm gonna have to say the cards are played.

Just as a point of comparison, ROOT tournaments are most equivalent to District tournaments. At least that is what their RNRS points are.

Generally I let players take back mistakes that don't change anything, unless they have been a stickler for rules earlier in the game. Once one player decides to go all rules nazi, then the rest of the game has to follow suit. But I prefer a more relaxed, friendly game.

STAMP · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2013, 01:16:45 PM »

Although I love Moses, I try my best to be more like Jesus at every level of play.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #9 on:** January 21, 2013, 01:21:29 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on January 21, 2013, 04:23:33 AM

Quote from: Chris on January 20, 2013, 11:50:32 PM
In ROOT or anything at a state level or higher, I play for keeps
Quote from: Redoubter on January 21, 2013, 12:08:26 AM
Generally, I'll let people take things back in most cases even in tournaments, but we get to States and beyond, then it has to stick
Quote from: The Guardian on January 21, 2013, 01:09:31 AM
In any level tournament or ROOT game, I'm gonna have to say the cards are played.
Just as a point of comparison, ROOT tournaments are most equivalent to District tournaments. At least that is what their RNRS points are.

That's not nearly what the competition is though. When you have 3+ national champions playing a category, it's certainly higher competition than a District (except for maybe an Arden Hills District).

everytribe · « **Reply #10 on:** January 21, 2013, 01:33:11 PM »

Quote from: Westy on January 21, 2013, 01:21:29 PM

That's not nearly what the competition is though. When you have 3+ national champions playing a category, it's certainly higher competition than a District (except for maybe an Arden Hills Game Night).

Their were 5 National champs in one category at the District Tournament in Rochester last weekend.

Chris · « **Reply #11 on:** January 21, 2013, 02:02:54 PM »

Quote

Just as a point of comparison, ROOT tournaments are most equivalent to District tournaments. At least that is what their RNRS points are.

Perhaps logistically, but otherwise, no, I don't think so. I at least treat it like a State tournament, which is to say, I don't let anyone take anything back, nor do I ask them to do the same for me. I know of at least a few other people who are pretty active in ROOT who feel the same, and they're often found at "top tables" late in the tournament. Part of this attitude may just be because I played with Gabe more than anyone else online in the first couple years I was around, but I'm a better player because of it. If I'm holding myself to a no-mistakes standard, why shouldn't I hold my opponents to it as well? Again, I'll waive this off in casual games or at a local tournament, but I'm a competitive person, and I play to win. Please explain how that's a bad thing.

My assumption is that Alex was playing you, Underwood, since you were his ROOT opponent, so would the both of you mind giving your respective sides of what happened?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #12 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:23:36 PM »

Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2013, 02:02:54 PM

Quote
Just as a point of comparison, ROOT tournaments are most equivalent to District tournaments. At least that is what their RNRS points are.

Perhaps logistically, but otherwise, no, I don't think so. I at least treat it like a State tournament, which is to say, I don't let anyone take anything back, nor do I ask them to do the same for me. I know of at least a few other people who are pretty active in ROOT who feel the same, and they're often found at "top tables" late in the tournament. Part of this attitude may just be because I played with Gabe more than anyone else online in the first couple years I was around, but I'm a better player because of it. If I'm holding myself to a no-mistakes standard, why shouldn't I hold my opponents to it as well? Again, I'll waive this off in casual games or at a local tournament, but I'm a competitive person, and I play to win. Please explain how that's a bad thing.

My assumption is that Alex was playing you, Underwood, since you were his ROOT opponent, so would the both of you mind giving your respective sides of what happened?

Urim and Thummim is activated.
He makes a comment about how I have two ways to block and he can't beat both.
He flips over Urim and Thummim.
He plays Zadok Anoints Solomon.
He gets Spiritual Warfare.
He activates Hidden Treasures.
I call foul.
He says his intent was obvious and that the order doesn't change anything.
I appeal to rules.
He asks if I'm seriously going to be that close to the rules.
I just let him do it because I don't have time to argue for 15 minutes when the games are already going to last three hours.

I honestly mostly just think it's crazy that an elder asked if I was really going to be that close to the rules. We have rules for a reason. Let's follow them.

The Guardian · « **Reply #13 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:38:18 PM »

I would have ruled your way Alex--just like any other card, U&T needs to complete before anything else is done. If something else is done, then U&T is complete in my mind.

Chris · « **Reply #14 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:50:00 PM »

Yeah, I agree, I would have stuck my ground in your position. He made a mistake, and you paid the penalty for it.

Isildur · « **Reply #15 on:** January 21, 2013, 04:04:52 PM »

I am much like STAMP and no matter the level of play or the stakes of the game I let my opponents take anything and everything back as long as it was a mistake and they intended to do something else. But in this particular circumstance getting to see your opponents hand then get a auto win like that I would have called foul.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #16 on:** January 21, 2013, 04:47:26 PM »

Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2013, 02:02:54 PM

My assumption is that Alex was playing you, Underwood, since you were his ROOT opponent, so would the both of you mind giving your respective sides of what happened?

Your assumption is correct that Alex and I were playing in ROOT. Alex's rundown of how the situation occurred is also correct. Technically I should have turned on Hidden Treasures immediately before playing the TC-GE instead of immediately after. I never disagreed that Alex was within his right to demand that we play it by the book. I did point out that there was nothing that possibly was affected in this case. He didn't have DoN in his hand, Hidden Treasures wasn't going to do anything until I switched to battle phase, there literally was nothing that could have changed anything there.

I do see ROOT as more of a friendly District level atmosphere than apparently some other people see it, so that obviously affects my perspective. If Alex had demanded to play it straight by the book, I would have let him make that call. It would have made the rest of the set of 3 games less fun because it just would've made everything more tense, but officially it was still his right. I support his right to force the game to go by the book. I also support his right to show some grace in a situation where the order of events couldn't possibly change anything.

Chris · « **Reply #17 on:** January 21, 2013, 05:07:35 PM »

Quote

I do see ROOT as more of a friendly District level atmosphere than apparently some other people see it, so that obviously affects my perspective. If Alex had demanded to play it straight by the book, I would have let him make that call. It would have made the rest of the set of 3 games less fun because it just would've made everything more tense, but officially it was still his right. I support his right to force the game to go by the book. I also support his right to show some grace in a situation where the order of events couldn't possibly change anything.

I would argue that you were not within your right to ask to take back a mistake in an official tournament game, especially if the way Alex described it is accurate. If some people choose to show grace to their opponents in these types of situations, that's their prerogative, but nobody has a right to get frustrated when their opponent asks them to follow the rules. If it created a tense situation, that's on the person who made the mistake, then complained when they were called out on it, not the person who asked for a fair game.

The Guardian · « **Reply #18 on:** January 21, 2013, 05:23:20 PM »

No one said anything about getting frustrated.

In this instance, there's nothing wrong with Prof U asking if he can change his play, and there's nothing wrong with Alex declining to let him do so.

Chris · « **Reply #19 on:** January 21, 2013, 05:32:05 PM »

Quote

I call foul.
He says his intent was obvious and that the order doesn't change anything.
I appeal to rules.
He asks if I'm seriously going to be that close to the rules.
I just let him do it because I don't have time to argue for 15 minutes when the games are already going to last three hours.

If this sequence of events needs to be corrected, then I'll change my opinion, but to me, this makes it sound like he was beginning to argue about it, and Alex dropped the subject because he didn't want to spend a bunch of time debating the subject. That's the main thing I would have an issue with in Alex's shoes. If he is in this situation and he calls foul, he's clearly not planning on letting it slide. Pressuring an opponent into letting you take back a mistake (which is, in my opinion, what this sounds like) is not good sportsmanship.

The Guardian · « **Reply #20 on:** January 21, 2013, 05:51:36 PM »

I agree that pressuring an opponent to allow you to change your mind is wrong, but I don't believe it necessary to read that far into what was presented.

My intent was to keep this a discussion focused on "takebacks" in general rather than picking on a particular player who made a mistake. That's all.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #21 on:** January 21, 2013, 06:07:48 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on January 21, 2013, 04:47:26 PM

I did point out that there was nothing that possibly was affected in this case.

Am I missing something here? You should not have been allowed to activate HT at all. Did you not use Spiritual Warfare to start the ensuing battle that turn? If you did, then that completely changes that turn's outcome.

Master KChief · « **Reply #22 on:** January 21, 2013, 06:08:09 PM »

The discussion should have been over the second Alex called him out on his misplay. Nothing should have transgressed further past that point.

Chris · « **Reply #23 on:** January 21, 2013, 06:19:31 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on January 21, 2013, 05:51:36 PM

My intent was to keep this a discussion focused on "takebacks" in general rather than picking on a particular player who made a mistake. That's all.

I didn't mean to make it sound like I was targeting Underwood specifically, it just made a good example for what I was talking about (which MKC nailed), since I've found myself in Alex's position several times (though I don't believe ever with the good Professor).

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on January 21, 2013, 06:07:48 PM

Quote from: Prof Underwood on January 21, 2013, 04:47:26 PM
I did point out that there was nothing that possibly was affected in this case.

Am I missing something here? You should not have been allowed to activate HT at all. Did you not use Spiritual Warfare to start the ensuing battle that turn? If you did, then that completely changes that turn's outcome.

His point is that, had he not violated the rules, he could have played Zadok Anoints Solomon after flipping up Harvest Time anyway. He wasn't abusing the knowledge he got from Urim and Thummim, he just forgot to make the artifact switch before playing Zadok.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #24 on:** January 21, 2013, 06:40:42 PM »

Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2013, 06:19:31 PM

(though I don't believe ever with the good Professor).

So first you pick on Prof Underwood, and now you're calling ProfessorAlstad the "bad" Professor! Sheesh!

Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2013, 06:19:31 PM

His point is that, had he not violated the rules, he could have played Zadok Anoints Solomon after flipping up Harvest Time anyway.

So he had a dominant in his Artifact Pile as well? This is like the T'eo girlfriend saga...... it keeps getting better and better.

Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2013, 06:19:31 PM

He wasn't abusing the knowledge he got from Urim and Thummim, he just forgot to make the artifact switch before playing Zadok.

He switched artifacts when he was not supposed to. That is a pretty big deal IMHO. I can certainly say that I have different expectations playing an experienced player (especially an Elder who makes rulings decisions) than I do playing a beginner or younger memeber of my own playgroup.

News:

Author Topic: Urim and Thummim and other cards (Read 4352 times)

Chris

Warrior_Monk

Chris

Chris

Chris

Chris

Chris