Ahhh.... That would make some sense...

Well, I got through, finally fixed my account, and took the Rules Adviser Exam.

It was a lot easier than I was expecting, the only question that really caused me to think had more to do with my misreading of the answer choices than actual rules knowledge. For awhile though i was trying to figure out if Vanguard would be considered a valid card type though.

If I sacrifice my Mirari while paying the costs to cast a spell (using Krark-Clan Ironworks) does its ability trigger?

If I activate Prophetic Prism and I have KCI out can I sacrifice the prism to pay the cost of its own ability?

Nope; it won't be around when you finish casting the spell, which is the time abilities that trigger on casting trigger. So it won't trigger.

Nope again; if you sacrifice the Prism itself to produce mana, you won't be able to pay the cost of tapping the Prism.

huh, so if I had KCI out I could sac Baton of Morale to give something banding?

Yup, for pretty much the same reason you can sac Mogg Fanatic to ping something. (Though the timing's a bit different.) Once you've started activating the ability, it's on the stack and independent of the source, so whether or not the source is around any more doesn't affect the ability itself.

yeah, that makes sense, just hadn't thought it through.

I have a rules question, but it pertains more to tournament rules.

Playing a states this weekend, where the head judge was an L2, I was playing in a match in which my opponent had a Tasigur and a Siege Rhino in play. He attacks into my board of Thragtusk, I block, then he says "take four". We both record this life total change. Next to my opponent on either side is a floor judge and his friend watching the match. His friend calls a judge after damage, then talks to the floor judge aside. When the judge comes back, he asks about the damage step that just happened. Basically they thought we missed assignment of damage and neither of them heard that my opponent said "take four". So the floor judge explains that it was procedure because it was necessary to determine if both players were maintaining game state correctly or if I was cheating. Then the judge goes on to explain how my opponent's responsibility to assign trample damage correctly which I think is providing him with game play advice. I ask the floor judge to bring the head judge as I felt that this has not been handled properly as in this exchange all that happened was that I was implied to be cheating as well as my opponent now is definitely going to remember how trample works for the rest of the match. The head judge gives a similar response about how the situation was handled and explains how this is the best way to protect the integrity of the rules.

So, my question is, was this situation handled properly? I feel all that happened was that I came out on the short end of the stick, even if it's something that is not totally critical. In general it makes me wary of letting people's friends watch the match because they are going to screw up the game for me. I have no idea what type of recourse I was looking for, but I feel that the judging in this instance didn't help me in any way.

that does seem kind of wrong. I mean, at the point where things happened the player probably already was aware that the issue was trample damage, so the reminder had been given, but still. I'm not really sure how anyone was supposed to handle that differently though. the moment the friend called the judge it was likely clear what the problem was. should they not have done that? would it be different if you were cheating?

I think if somebody is cheating, anybody watching should be able to call the judge over so we can stop it. But I don't think any cheating was involved here and I think the friend calls a judge because he's unsure about how the rules worked here, which ended up being bad for me. I don't really know what I'm expecting in this. Maybe just some further clarification of the intent of the rules and how these procedures are supposed to be handled. I could ask people not to watch the matches but I just feel that is being overly cautious about a scenario that doesn't happen very often.

wait. Did you have to take an extra 1 or did they penalize you?

Your opponent said 'take 4'. I would have taken 4 without doing the math. Had I done the math, I would have said -- whether kitchen table or pro tour -- you mean 5? It's not cheating to not say anything, but it's the right thing to do. Once a judge is called, and it's established that you (both) made a mistake you should take an extra damage. Maybe if you were shady or dickish about it you should get a warning.

IF on the other hand - your opponent said take 4 and then CLAIMED that he said take 5 and you didn't, then that guy should be taken out behind the woodshed.


Note: I am not a Judge and don't know how the tournament rules work. They are probably fairly strict on the matter.

chu didn't make a mistake, he took the damage assigned to him. their opponent made a mistake, but it was a tactical one, not a rules one. the judge has no grounds on which to intervene on poor strategic decisions.

How is it a tactical mistake to not assign trample damage? Chu didn't double block , did he?
It's not allowed to NOT assign damage, right? I can't attack you for 3 in the air and say, ooh, that activates something, just take 2.

Is it treated like a missed trigger or something?

Trample allows you to assign leftover damage to the defending player, but it's completely legal to assign it to the blocking creature instead.

you can over-assign damage to objects. it has to assign damage, but it can assign it all to the blocker if you want. you might want to do this if, say, your opponent is at 14 and you have hidetsugu's second rite. this is an unlikely scenario, but it is not for the judge to decide whether it was the right play, just that it was a legal play.

Other possible scenarios:

*Your opponent has No Mercy in play
*Your opponent blocked with a Jackal Pup enchanted with Ragged Veins

I...from your description I don't even know how it was handled. All I'm getting is that a judge was called, there was concern you might be cheating, and the head judge was brought in and agreed with...whatever the floor judge said, though I don't know what that was.

What, specifically, was the friend/judge's concern? What questions were you and your opponent asked? Was a penalty assessed? If so, what was it?

far as I can tell, the friend saw Chu not taking trample damage, didn't realize that the player had explicitly told him to "take 4", and asked the judge to intervene, which effectively provided his opponent with strategy advice while implying that Chu was cheating when they weren't.

when exactly does Mul Daya Channelers get their bonuses, layer-wise? the +3/+3 would be in 7c, and the mana ability would be in 6, but...



those seem to imply that the top card of your library isn't even revealed at that point. so when do the bonuses happen?

Dr. Demento actually reads the Comprehensive Rules Part 1: The 600 Section

"601.2h Once the steps described in 601.2a–g are completed, the spell becomes cast. Any abilities
that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller
had priority before casting it, he or she gets priority."

If this a typo, do I misunderstand priority, or does casting a spell screw with AP/NP order?

"601.2f If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana
abilities (see rule 605, “Mana Abilities”). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.
601.2g The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable
costs can’t be paid."

If I am paying for Devastating Dreams by cracking Chromatic Sphere, I assume there is no way for me to prevent having the card drawn eligible for discard? Also, do you know of anyway to abuse being unable to pay costs in order to discard your preferred card at random?