Game Layout rules
-
@dstinct said in Game Layout rules:
What people really find strange is that I play all my cards facing my opponent and always have. I just figure I already know what everything in my deck does, so it just makes it easier for my opponent to read the cards. Anybody else do this?
edit: interesting. As per 4.6 this is illegal. "Each untapped permanent should face its controller." I've never been called on it. Perhaps because it says "should" instead of "must"?And how do you mark creatures with summoning sickness? I have always played them facing my opponent as a courtesy and reminder which creatures just came into play.
-
turning things 180 is also the normal way that elves players represent having used the 1/turn abilities on quirion ranger and wirewood symbiote, so prohibiting it would be bad.
-
pros just use the ability more than once.
-
@dstinct said in Game Layout rules:
What people really find strange is that I play all my cards facing my opponent and always have. I just figure I already know what everything in my deck does, so it just makes it easier for my opponent to read the cards. Anybody else do this?
edit: interesting. As per 4.6 this is illegal. "Each untapped permanent should face its controller." I've never been called on it. Perhaps because it says "should" instead of "must"?
Right before they made this rule, people complained about Adrian Sullivan doing it on a Pro Tour feature match. As a bonus, he made a major misplay due to not knowing how one of his cards worked. Maybe if they'd been facing him, he could've read them
-
A clarification on enforcement from Toby Elliot:
"If everything is clear and both players are acting on mutually-understood information (both active and passive), then we’re not going to worry if there’s technically a violation."Generally speaking, if you and your opponent don't have an issue with it, a judge isn't going to swoop in and make you fix it,
-
@solemn_storm said in Game Layout rules:
A clarification on enforcement from Toby Elliot:
"If everything is clear and both players are acting on mutually-understood information (both active and passive), then we’re not going to worry if there’s technically a violation."Generally speaking, if you and your opponent don't have an issue with it, a judge isn't going to swoop in and make you fix it,
In other words, it's prohibited to drive on red, but if there are no cars and pedestrians that's ok. It's quite silly to introduce the rule only to tell players to ignore it, but keep the right to punish players for subjective lack of "mutually-understood information."
-
@chronatog This is more of a "some speeding is okay if you're matching the flow of traffic". Flexibility in enforcement isn't necessarily a flaw, especially in something so subjective as game state communication in a game where decks can have very different sets of relevant information. Having a default just reduces the burden on the judges when resolving these situations.
-
@chronatog I put the card in the row right in front of my mana producers. My next upkeep I move them closer to the red zone.
