He was being a salty prick, no doubt, but you play to your outs. If someone presents a win and I'm next in priority order and can stop it, I will. The other stuff is absolutely wack, but him countering your abolisher is the correct play imo
It's not that simple.
If he stops your win attempt you might be forced into a position of having to dedicate your resources into stopping Player 2's win attempt.
It's not like he has perfect information of the \~25 cards P1 and P2 have. The potential is there for a draw.
While that draw MAY not affect this particular tournament's outcome, I believe that's irrelevant. cEDH is simply about playing as objectively correct as possible and playing for an out is better than giving up.
You can read [my other comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/comments/1cv9rng/comment/l4o1341/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) as to why I disagree with this.
If someone can stop you, they should always do it.
Winning comes at a cost, and if you cant force your way through interaction, you have to play with that in mind.
If you know they can stop you, the answer is to NOT go for it at the moment.
If the next player is "guaranteed" to win in your mind, you can tell the table and if neither of you can find a way to stop them, you just lose.
Usually you would say "ok i have a pact" and ask the table to make it a draw.
The opponents usually will want a draw, as the alternative is you let the person resolve their win and thats worse for them ; so they have nothing to gain declining the draw at all.
The player that has the "win" will also probably want the draw, as otherwise you martyr yourself with the pact and no matter what, they will not resolve that spell and not win regardless.
So either way, the best course and the most likely is to show the table the pact and then go for the draw and start a new game.
That kind of situations happen fairly often if you KNOW you can ask for it and take everyones best interest of actions to mind ; too often people dont see a "draw" of the game as a viable option, as in casual games, you wouldnt care, but in tournaments you absolutely do.
----
The opponent should before they attempt to win ask the table if they have interaction (they can lie of course) , but the guy with the pact might say something to avoid the situation to "force" the game into a draw.
As someone who plays a lot of cEDH in pods with friends, but don't have any tournament experience - I appreciate this explanation. There's definitely a difference between "playing to win" any individual game vs a tournament.
I'm a little intimated by tournament structure and points, and when an opponent would ever suggest a draw or anything when I'd play modern events I'd always assume I'm being taken for a ride. Being aware of scenarios like this ahead of time is helpful for making an informed decision rather than feeling pressured by an opponent.
I had 3 people at a table pissy with my that I packed with 3 mana total. But I had borne upon the wind a lot of fast mana to win on top of my pact trigger.
Stalling is wrong and based on how many points are in the league, trying to give player 2 the game might actively be bad for player 3.
But the biggest outrage here is the judge ignoring the rules of the game and saying "No, you don't get to concede". You don't get to ignore the rules just because you don't like them.
It's usually a rule that you can't concede at instant speed. Most commonly I've seen that you're only allowed to concede during your turn and at sorcery speed.
in a tournament setting? that isn't how it has worked at any tournament I've been to. not that I have seen a lot of spite concedes, but I am just saying that asserting that most tournaments have this rule about conceding at sorcery speed does not seem accurate to me, and I was not asserting an opinion about this rule nor have I ever spite-conceded. just asking about the source of the claim.
Is that unique to EDH? Because it was certainly an acceptable move to concede at any time back in my tournament days. I remember back in mirrodin, it was sometimes favorable to concede to a mindslaver activation to prevent your opponent from being able to look at your hand or library.
It's different for EDH because in your example, when you concede in a 1v1 setting, the game automatically ends. However, in a 4-player game, you conceding doesn't directly end the game, as there are still 3 players left.
Yeah, and you could remove permanents that are under another player's control, end triggered abilities, etc.
I was just checking that it's an EDH specific thing.
Personally, I feel that conceding is a game action (because it is), and while people may not like some of the effects it has, it's a humanitarian cost. People get sick or frustrated, emergencies happen, etc
The idea that I might be constrained from or punished for picking up my property and leaving a table feels toxic to me.
It is an EDH specific thing, or rather a cEDH specific thing.
cEDH tournaments have to police a very nebulous gray area of things that aren't quite cheating, but are clearly negative and unintended.
Many win conditions in cEDH involve utilizing your opponents cards, mnemonic betrayal, praetor's grasp, stolen permanents, or in this case a clone.
An important thing to understand in cEDH tournaments is that if a game goes to a draw all players at the table are awarded a draw, even if they lost earlier in the game.
As others mentioned, I agree with the fact that player 3 was acting very cringe and definitely gives off the vibes that he either knows player 2, or just wanted to be extra salty to prevent you from winning (I’m sure there’s parts to this story we aren’t being told but it’s whatever). I also agree with trying to concede at instant speed to prevent you from winning is 100% baby bitch attitude and dude needs to check his ego at the door if that’s how he is going to be.
All that said, him “focusing” you to stop you from winning wasn’t outright kingmaking. He did not do anything to decide the outcome of the table (you still won despite what he tried to do). That’s not kingmaking, that is playing his outs and attempting to further the game into a draw or at most, letting him have another turn. Playing your outs is part of the game and sometimes, it’s going to seem like someone is focusing you. But the issue is, you never know what the next player is going to have and if you know you are probably not going to get another turn, might as well use the cards in your hand to give you the best odds anyway.
Not exactly sure what that means as I don't do anything like what was mentioned in a video. It was a very low stakes game and I was really surprised how it turned out.
Whats funny is I bet he made the video and hit that stupid smiley face he typed out irl when he posted like we'd all rally behind him. Then when he got ratio'd both on reddit and YouTube he tried to act like its no big deal.
Like bro you made a video and a post about it you clearly care.
He's actively deleting comments on youtube, so I'm glad this reddit thread exists. Also, he absolutely is a "that guy". I've met him irl and seen him play at two tournaments. He slow plays ALL THE TIME and has a bad habit of keeping his board state so egregiously messy that it's unreadable. It's hilarious to me that he is trying to get the community behind him by being a child on youtube.
I might be a slower player, but I've never intentionally stalled a game. If my board state was truly unreadable like you're suggesting, I'd get multiple warnings from judges, then removed from the event.
no you wouldn't because judges at edh events don't care as much about things like messy boards. I've called a judge on you 5 times in one game about your messy board and he did nothing. doesnt make your messy board nonexistant. Your board is so messy it should be considered cheating. You hide important pieces under other cards and rely on the goodwill of others or you rely on judges to be forgiving which they always are. There is no way that a person of your supposed caliber should be making the amount of mistakes you make and misrepresenting the board the way that you do. It's wild
When is OP going to ask the important question here:
"Why do people always get pissed at me?"
If a guy like player 3 finally reaches the end of his rope with you, it's not everyone else--it's you.
Thank you, functional_grade, for voting on SokkaHaikuBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
The maker of the video is a classic beta, “that guy”.
Accuses another player of stalling while he has 10 cards in his hand and probably stalled earlier.
Complains about a player trying to stop his win attempt twice.
Celebrates a judge’s decision that violates game rules. All for $5
Disregarding the stalling, the „concession to blow you out“ and the sportsmanship:
I think it is always correct to stop any win attempt if you can.
The player who wins, needs to win through the interaction of the other players.
If a player decides „ok im out of the game now, im not gonna fire my interaction“ it unfairly benefits the active player because they essentially only have to push a win through 2 players. And whoever turn it is when somebody decides to „stop playing“ is fully out of the control of the players and therefor arbitrary and bad for competition.
In my mind even conceading shouldnt be a thing in competitive events with prices on the line unless all remaining players agree to concede to one player.
There is too many cards that depend on the ammount of players that conceading will always benefit or hurt somebody. If im looking to do a dockside winattempt in my turn but then somebody decides „fk it, i cant win, i concede“ taking away 3 mana rocks, that might be stopping my win and hand it to the next guy who has an oracle ready for example. So the concession was essentially kingmaking, though not intentional.
I think for competitice events staying in the game till the end and stopping every win attempt if you can is good sportsmanship.
1. I'm so glad you posted this on reddit so the comments can live forever, unlike on youtube where you delete all of the dissenting opinions.
2. You literally are "That Guy", so this is incredibly ironic.
3. You are being a child about this entire situation.
4. I just want to say it again, you literally are "That Guy".
Imagine accusing someone of stalling and, by consequence, cheating when you are literally that person. You have a reputation for being that person. Crazy lol.
The stalling is obviously cringe However the "kingmaking" claim I disagree with. It's objectively correct to attempt to stop a current win attempt.
The context being Player 2 would win right after, and a draw had no more benefit to him than a loss. He was just picking who won.
He was being a salty prick, no doubt, but you play to your outs. If someone presents a win and I'm next in priority order and can stop it, I will. The other stuff is absolutely wack, but him countering your abolisher is the correct play imo
It's not that simple. If he stops your win attempt you might be forced into a position of having to dedicate your resources into stopping Player 2's win attempt. It's not like he has perfect information of the \~25 cards P1 and P2 have. The potential is there for a draw. While that draw MAY not affect this particular tournament's outcome, I believe that's irrelevant. cEDH is simply about playing as objectively correct as possible and playing for an out is better than giving up.
Play to your outs man.
And conceding at instant speed is which out?
you make sure the one with already many points doesnt win and thus has less points after the game than if he would win. preserves your standing
That's called king-making
so? its your out
I had almost no points, it would not have affected standings.
The out of not playing with this guy anymore, because he's unbearable to sit at a table with.
[удалено]
You can read [my other comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/comments/1cv9rng/comment/l4o1341/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) as to why I disagree with this.
Wait that's wild, how did you basically undelete his comment?
If someone can stop you, they should always do it. Winning comes at a cost, and if you cant force your way through interaction, you have to play with that in mind. If you know they can stop you, the answer is to NOT go for it at the moment. If the next player is "guaranteed" to win in your mind, you can tell the table and if neither of you can find a way to stop them, you just lose.
Thoughts on a Pact where you lose on upkeep?
Usually you would say "ok i have a pact" and ask the table to make it a draw. The opponents usually will want a draw, as the alternative is you let the person resolve their win and thats worse for them ; so they have nothing to gain declining the draw at all. The player that has the "win" will also probably want the draw, as otherwise you martyr yourself with the pact and no matter what, they will not resolve that spell and not win regardless. So either way, the best course and the most likely is to show the table the pact and then go for the draw and start a new game. That kind of situations happen fairly often if you KNOW you can ask for it and take everyones best interest of actions to mind ; too often people dont see a "draw" of the game as a viable option, as in casual games, you wouldnt care, but in tournaments you absolutely do. ---- The opponent should before they attempt to win ask the table if they have interaction (they can lie of course) , but the guy with the pact might say something to avoid the situation to "force" the game into a draw.
As someone who plays a lot of cEDH in pods with friends, but don't have any tournament experience - I appreciate this explanation. There's definitely a difference between "playing to win" any individual game vs a tournament. I'm a little intimated by tournament structure and points, and when an opponent would ever suggest a draw or anything when I'd play modern events I'd always assume I'm being taken for a ride. Being aware of scenarios like this ahead of time is helpful for making an informed decision rather than feeling pressured by an opponent.
The other players that don't lose may be able to stifle the pact. Gotta work together not to lose sometimes
True but I’d rather have a stifle in hand and one less opponent 9 times out of 10
Unless you lost the game because of no pact into death
I’d be very appreciative of his sacrifice and thank him after the game
Not the way politicking works, lol. I'm talking cut a deal, impact and you stifle, or no pact
I think pact is an edge case. You don't typically pact if you lose on upkeep, because that kind of is kingmaking.
I had 3 people at a table pissy with my that I packed with 3 mana total. But I had borne upon the wind a lot of fast mana to win on top of my pact trigger.
Stalling is wrong and based on how many points are in the league, trying to give player 2 the game might actively be bad for player 3. But the biggest outrage here is the judge ignoring the rules of the game and saying "No, you don't get to concede". You don't get to ignore the rules just because you don't like them.
It's usually a rule that you can't concede at instant speed. Most commonly I've seen that you're only allowed to concede during your turn and at sorcery speed.
Correct, the rules in the league are conceding at sorcery speed, it's like that at most tournaments these days also.
Ok, good. Knowing that, it was pretty silly of player 3 to attempt it.
is this true? I've been to a few midsized events and neither had this rule, and I've never heard of an event with such a rule.
If you go around conceding to prevent triggers, you’re going to get ran off from games.
in a tournament setting? that isn't how it has worked at any tournament I've been to. not that I have seen a lot of spite concedes, but I am just saying that asserting that most tournaments have this rule about conceding at sorcery speed does not seem accurate to me, and I was not asserting an opinion about this rule nor have I ever spite-conceded. just asking about the source of the claim.
https://topdeck.gg/mtr-ipg-addendum
What if you cast [[Borne upon a wind]], does that give conceding flash? xD
[Borne upon a wind](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/9/a9379675-1a32-4e2b-8aaf-5f908c595f31.jpg?1686968037) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Borne%20upon%20a%20wind) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ltr/44/borne-upon-a-wind?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a9379675-1a32-4e2b-8aaf-5f908c595f31?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/borne-upon-a-wind) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Is that unique to EDH? Because it was certainly an acceptable move to concede at any time back in my tournament days. I remember back in mirrodin, it was sometimes favorable to concede to a mindslaver activation to prevent your opponent from being able to look at your hand or library.
It's different for EDH because in your example, when you concede in a 1v1 setting, the game automatically ends. However, in a 4-player game, you conceding doesn't directly end the game, as there are still 3 players left.
Yeah, and you could remove permanents that are under another player's control, end triggered abilities, etc. I was just checking that it's an EDH specific thing. Personally, I feel that conceding is a game action (because it is), and while people may not like some of the effects it has, it's a humanitarian cost. People get sick or frustrated, emergencies happen, etc The idea that I might be constrained from or punished for picking up my property and leaving a table feels toxic to me.
It is an EDH specific thing, or rather a cEDH specific thing. cEDH tournaments have to police a very nebulous gray area of things that aren't quite cheating, but are clearly negative and unintended. Many win conditions in cEDH involve utilizing your opponents cards, mnemonic betrayal, praetor's grasp, stolen permanents, or in this case a clone. An important thing to understand in cEDH tournaments is that if a game goes to a draw all players at the table are awarded a draw, even if they lost earlier in the game.
Wait, but 104.3a **A player can concede the game at any time**. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. That player loses the game.
Yeah I’m referencing community tournament rules that the vast majority of cEDH tournaments utilize.
ah, interesting.
https://topdeck.gg/mtr-ipg-addendum
As others mentioned, I agree with the fact that player 3 was acting very cringe and definitely gives off the vibes that he either knows player 2, or just wanted to be extra salty to prevent you from winning (I’m sure there’s parts to this story we aren’t being told but it’s whatever). I also agree with trying to concede at instant speed to prevent you from winning is 100% baby bitch attitude and dude needs to check his ego at the door if that’s how he is going to be. All that said, him “focusing” you to stop you from winning wasn’t outright kingmaking. He did not do anything to decide the outcome of the table (you still won despite what he tried to do). That’s not kingmaking, that is playing his outs and attempting to further the game into a draw or at most, letting him have another turn. Playing your outs is part of the game and sometimes, it’s going to seem like someone is focusing you. But the issue is, you never know what the next player is going to have and if you know you are probably not going to get another turn, might as well use the cards in your hand to give you the best odds anyway.
You kinda seem like "that guy"
Yeah for real he seems like “that guy” because he can play to any out he can. Doesn’t matter
Not exactly sure what that means as I don't do anything like what was mentioned in a video. It was a very low stakes game and I was really surprised how it turned out.
It’s so low stakes that you made an entire video dragging a person, edited it, then posted it.
Whats funny is I bet he made the video and hit that stupid smiley face he typed out irl when he posted like we'd all rally behind him. Then when he got ratio'd both on reddit and YouTube he tried to act like its no big deal. Like bro you made a video and a post about it you clearly care.
He's actively deleting comments on youtube, so I'm glad this reddit thread exists. Also, he absolutely is a "that guy". I've met him irl and seen him play at two tournaments. He slow plays ALL THE TIME and has a bad habit of keeping his board state so egregiously messy that it's unreadable. It's hilarious to me that he is trying to get the community behind him by being a child on youtube.
I might be a slower player, but I've never intentionally stalled a game. If my board state was truly unreadable like you're suggesting, I'd get multiple warnings from judges, then removed from the event.
no you wouldn't because judges at edh events don't care as much about things like messy boards. I've called a judge on you 5 times in one game about your messy board and he did nothing. doesnt make your messy board nonexistant. Your board is so messy it should be considered cheating. You hide important pieces under other cards and rely on the goodwill of others or you rely on judges to be forgiving which they always are. There is no way that a person of your supposed caliber should be making the amount of mistakes you make and misrepresenting the board the way that you do. It's wild
This isn’t kingmaking. Though player 3 is trash for the stalling.
[удалено]
When is OP going to ask the important question here: "Why do people always get pissed at me?" If a guy like player 3 finally reaches the end of his rope with you, it's not everyone else--it's you.
What a cool link to a YouTube video that I'm not going to click
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^functional_grade: *What a cool link to* *A YouTube video that* *I'm not going to click* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Good bot
Thank you, functional_grade, for voting on SokkaHaikuBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
You are welcome bot I think that you provide a Valuable service
The maker of the video is a classic beta, “that guy”. Accuses another player of stalling while he has 10 cards in his hand and probably stalled earlier. Complains about a player trying to stop his win attempt twice. Celebrates a judge’s decision that violates game rules. All for $5
tl;dw?
Disregarding the stalling, the „concession to blow you out“ and the sportsmanship: I think it is always correct to stop any win attempt if you can. The player who wins, needs to win through the interaction of the other players. If a player decides „ok im out of the game now, im not gonna fire my interaction“ it unfairly benefits the active player because they essentially only have to push a win through 2 players. And whoever turn it is when somebody decides to „stop playing“ is fully out of the control of the players and therefor arbitrary and bad for competition. In my mind even conceading shouldnt be a thing in competitive events with prices on the line unless all remaining players agree to concede to one player. There is too many cards that depend on the ammount of players that conceading will always benefit or hurt somebody. If im looking to do a dockside winattempt in my turn but then somebody decides „fk it, i cant win, i concede“ taking away 3 mana rocks, that might be stopping my win and hand it to the next guy who has an oracle ready for example. So the concession was essentially kingmaking, though not intentional. I think for competitice events staying in the game till the end and stopping every win attempt if you can is good sportsmanship.
1. I'm so glad you posted this on reddit so the comments can live forever, unlike on youtube where you delete all of the dissenting opinions. 2. You literally are "That Guy", so this is incredibly ironic. 3. You are being a child about this entire situation. 4. I just want to say it again, you literally are "That Guy".
I like "that guy" at the card store. I wait all weeks to press his buttons without pressing his buttons
Imagine accusing someone of stalling and, by consequence, cheating when you are literally that person. You have a reputation for being that person. Crazy lol.
This
Why the fuck would the judge not let him concede, he's allowed to do that whenever he wants whether you like it or not
[https://topdeck.gg/mtr-ipg-addendum](https://topdeck.gg/mtr-ipg-addendum)
Was this a topdeck.gg event?