Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Sep-19 12:51 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-22 7:23 am 

Joined: 2017-Oct-19 12:02 am
Age: Drake
I want to talk about the 'moral' aspects of conceding and if it is or is not a good practice

I think conceding is a 'bad player's' choice (bad not for skill reasons) and these are my thoughts abut it.

Sometimes in some games we will want it to end because it is looking bad for us, one or more opponents just focuses on us, or we are mana screw, or we misplayed a lot or any other reason that is taking the fun away from us.

I know the feeling, I have been there a lot of times and I will be there a lot more, but no matter hw bad is the game for me, no matter how much I want to concede I don't do it for these reasons

1. It is a game we play with friends, so, we should have our focus on having fun altogether, if I am the victim of a focus by two players and I rage-quit the game, I will leave the table, but the bad feeling will stay at the table, so why ruining the game for the other players?

2. The game is not over for us until our life total get's 0, so we can try to overcome the problems, maybe winning sometimes will be very out of our reach in some games, but we can try, we can learn, we can take the opportunity to study how our deck behaves against such games and how to improve it.

3, Maybe one or 2 players are focusing on us to 'have revenge' for past games, and that is ok too, I remember a session were I won 2 games in a row, one player was very salty because I killed him first at 1st game, then he 'side boarded' tons of counter spells with the sole focus of not letting me play and I won the 2nd game too and other player got salted, so when we got to the 3rd game, I knew they will be focusing me, I got mana screw, I had 5 lands at turn 7 and one of my opponents played Terastodon aiming for 3 of my 5 lands, so it was pretty much game over for me, but I didn't concede, I play to the end working hard to overcome the situation, to survive long enough and try to win, I din't won, I was killed first, they had the blood they wanted and we all had fun, no bad feeling at my side of the table.

So, if the players are focusing you because you won too many games, or you commander is scary or any other reason, just suck it up

4. Some times some one will cast Bribery on us, nobody want's our opponents having our stuff, but conceding to an effect like this, or a annihilator X or any other bad stuff just ruins the game for your friends.

What is the deal then? The opponents can't target us bribery or similar effects because 'in response' we will concede and it will be a wasted attack or a 'counterspell like'?. For me this kind of behavior show bad sportsmanship to say the least.

5. Let people do their magic, if you are in a 1v1 against the last player, and he will attack us for lethal, let him do it, it wont take more than 30 seconds, do you feel better saying 'concede' than 'lose'? is that it?

So many times I saw that a player gets his engine going, he is getting the upper hand against the last one, the last player knows the game is not in his favor, so he concedes, well that is also bad sportsmanship, because you may find a way to overcome it, and even if you don't, the winning player build his or her deck to do some magic and it is doing it, by conceding 2 or 3 turns earlier we are taking away his fun


What are your thoughts?

_________________
Playing:
Edgar Markov The current updated decklist is here
Oloro, Ageless ascetic The current updated decklist is here
Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign The current updated decklist is here
K'rrik, son of yawgmoth The current updated decklist is here


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-22 8:13 am 

Joined: 2009-Jul-02 4:25 pm
Age: Drake
How is conceding when you know you can't win any different from folding in poker?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-22 9:55 am 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Conceding to deny another player something is just poor sportsmanship. Let them have their life gain

Conceding because you have no hope of winning or are being focused on in a way which ruins the game for you is fine. Let the game finish faster so you can play again sooner.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-22 12:32 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Dec-10 12:16 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
1) I know you aren't a native speaker, so I will just mention that ethical and moral are not the same thing (since the title uses one, and the first line of the post uses the other); I am basing my responses on moral grounds.

Ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals
https://www.dictionary.com/e/moral-vs-ethical/


2) I feel it is a mistake to take any game topic, especially when it is entertainment only, and try to define it as black and white (right/wrong; acceptable/forbidden; etc.). Concession is no exception, so I balk whenever I see somebody try to say it is always/never acceptable to concede. There are no absolutes in life (except death) and MtG is no exception.
a) The corollary, of course, is that a person define their own behavior this way (then attempt to actually live it out). I, personally, will not concede 99% of the time. Personally, I don't like it - so a circumstance has to be very compelling for me to concede**. However, no matter what your personal "moral code" on concession is, you can't expect others to feel the same way in all circumstances.

3) Concession, as a precept, is very dynamic and very personal. To concede or not will be based on some or all of the following:
A) the person - in my experience, most gamers are either concession inclined or not. Any given player will, generally, lean in one direction; and will often have a number of criteria they feel merit the opposite response (see above, I generally don't concede, but I have in the past no matter how rare the occasion) It's generally a good idea to cover this topic (among many others) when sitting down with another player for the first time.
B) the playgroup - Playgroups should discuss the topic for the group as a whole, and define when/why a concede is/is not acceptable in the group.
C) the setting - For many players, what is or is not acceptable changes based on where they are playing. Is the game online, at a league, at a convention, at a friend's house? There is a lot of game behavior that changes based on this factor alone...
D) the situation - Being "picked on," suffering "manascrew," being "locked out," etc. are all examples of a situation that some people may consider an acceptable reason to concede. Many people may concede in one situation and not in another. The situations where a person feels concession is acceptable may change based any of the above (e.g. Player "X" may feel that conceding due to manascrew is acceptable online, but unacceptable at a league match)

All that said, you raise some good points. When a player may consider concession, they should also consider how it affects the other players, the game, the mood, etc. A concede is rarely about one person, and it is good that players begin to consider how their personal decision to concede or not affects others.

I, personally, don't like to concede and I don't like playing with people who concede too easily/often (which is a huge problem in MTGO). But I am willing to discuss it, and recognize that people don't feel as I feel on the subject.

majikal wrote:
How is conceding when you know you can't win any different from folding in poker?

As I understand it (I am not a poker player - I prefer pinochle):
- Folding in poker is for a hand. Usually about 3-5 minutes of game-time. Conceding in Magic can be much longer.
- Folding in poker generally doesn't affect the other players at the table (unless cards are still coming from the deck) negatively. Conceding in Magic can have drastic in-game effects on the players that remain.


**Note: The two times I can remember conceding in the last 10 years are:
1) I was called in to work and had to leave the game and
2) Random player (not playgroup) wanted to play solitaire. I was hard locked, and normally I would make the person play it out (with no shortcuts for combos, if you want to make 1000 mana I want you to tap and untap as necessary for each "iteration" - it's my response to repressive players) but he was such an ass and I was hungry and just wanted to get away from him. So, once I was the last player, I lasted about another two turns (we had been locked for 8 turns and he still had not won and wasn't really close to finding his "wincon") and just scooped.

_________________
V/R

HK

Hazezon Tamar - Manland theme
Seshiro the Anointed - Snake Tribal
Jedit Ojanen of Efrava - Cat and Warrior Dual Tribal
Doran, the Seige Tower - Wall Tribal
Progenitus - Hydra themed Proliferate Deck
Karona, the False God - Backstabbing Hug


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-23 2:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Feb-07 3:37 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Danbury, CT
Kinda of an interesting topic, although I'm not sure the numbered points are the best aspects of when to concede or not.

I agree with Niheloim... conceding comes down to sportsmanship. Not like the MTG Judge rules definition of sporting/unsporting -- I mean the classic definition, where players enjoy a competition for its own sake, and for the companionship of the competitors. For me, one of the core ideas of sportsmanship is making a reasonable, good faith effort to play your best game, while respecting your opponents efforts to do the same.

This idea of moderates a lot of EDH behavior...

Are you attacking your friend because he killed your Bird of Paradise last game? Unreasonable.
Are you attacking your friend because this is your best avenue to win? Reasonable
Are you playing your broken net deck because it will crush your friends' scrub decks? Unreasonable.
Are you playing your broken net deck because you expect your friends to do the same? Reasonable.

This covers deciding when to concede as well. Has one player established a dominant position after everyone at the table has exhausted their best efforts? Then it's fine for everyone to concede. Does a player think they still have an out to trump the lead player? If yes, then no one should concede -- that player should have the chance to make the best game of it that they can. (Competitive Go has a interesting culture around this idea... In Go, if you've clearly lost, it's considered rude to keep playing. But if it's not clear, both players are expected to keep playing 'til a clear winner emerges.)

Plays like conceding to life gain or Gilded Drake are clearly unsportsmanlike. Not only are you not playing your best game, you're actively denying your opponents' best game as well.

With all that said, I don't like the idea of using ethics or sportsmanship or whatever to trap people at tables where they're miserable.

Ie... For a while, I was playing with a couple Legacy players that who were new to EDH. They had picked up the idea that if you had a Strip Mine or Wasteland, you should activate it immediately (usually a fine play in Legacy -- not as much in EDH). So they constantly got blown out by Gaea's Cradle, Nykthos, Coffers, etc. One night we got table wiped 3 times in a row by Derevi, losing each time to some Cradle-powered idiocy (including an especially foolish game where one Legacy bro Strip Mine'd the others Strip Mine). Game 4, my t1 play was shock land pass, and Legacy guy to my left's play was Wasteland, waste your shock.

So I scooped. I don't know if that player was trying to be funny, or if he genuinely thought he was making a smart play; either way, it seemed unreasonable to me.

I saw a lot of similar walk-aways when I was working events regularly; there are wildly divergent ideas about what a good game looks like, and many (most?) players will say something like, "Oops, this is not for me," and leave, which I think is totally fine.

_________________
The deck-o-pedia


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-23 4:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-18 11:59 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I want to preface these words first and foremost by admitting that I play Lantern Control in Modern. So my take on game concession is a bit biased with that experience.

Quote:
1. It is a game we play with friends, so, we should have our focus on having fun altogether, if I am the victim of a focus by two players and I rage-quit the game, I will leave the table, but the bad feeling will stay at the table, so why ruining the game for the other players?


I don't 100% agree here. If you're getting ganged up on, by two or more players, you should first assess why that's happened. If it's just to be mean and spiteful, I feel you should advise the other players you're not really enjoying the game at hand, and do then concede. We are playing this game for fun, and if you're at a impasse with people you should not play with them.



Quote:
2. The game is not over for us until our life total get's 0, so we can try to overcome the problems, maybe winning sometimes will be very out of our reach in some games, but we can try, we can learn, we can take the opportunity to study how our deck behaves against such games and how to improve it.


Again, yes and no. From a skill perspective if you know your deck well enough, you should know which answers and outs to a certain situation you have, as should the others at the table. In this case, I believe you should assess whether or not you'll gain from playing further, and if not conceed to get to another game.

Quote:
3, Maybe one or 2 players are focusing on us to 'have revenge' for past games, and that is ok too, I remember a session were I won 2 games in a row, one player was very salty because I killed him first at 1st game, then he 'side boarded' tons of counter spells with the sole focus of not letting me play and I won the 2nd game too and other player got salted, so when we got to the 3rd game, I knew they will be focusing me, I got mana screw, I had 5 lands at turn 7 and one of my opponents played Terastodon aiming for 3 of my 5 lands, so it was pretty much game over for me, but I didn't concede, I play to the end working hard to overcome the situation, to survive long enough and try to win, I din't won, I was killed first, they had the blood they wanted and we all had fun, no bad feeling at my side of the table.

So, if the players are focusing you because you won too many games, or you commander is scary or any other reason, just suck it up


If someone wants their revenge, then let them have it. I totally agree there. I don't beleive hate concessions should be a thing, I merely believe that intelligent players realize when the game is over, acknowledge that fact, and move on.

Quote:
4. Some times some one will cast Bribery on us, nobody want's our opponents having our stuff, but conceding to an effect like this, or a annihilator X or any other bad stuff just ruins the game for your friends.

What is the deal then? The opponents can't target us bribery or similar effects because 'in response' we will concede and it will be a wasted attack or a 'counterspell like'?. For me this kind of behavior show bad sportsmanship to say the least.


I feel like once again the context of this situation greatly should be considered. Is this a turn 2 Bribery? Or a turn 13? Is the Annihilator X going to leave us with anything, or have we seen 3 combat steps from a Kozilek this game? There are situations where you literally cannot get out of unless the right 2 cards show up. A land, and a 1 mana answer. It's not fun for anyone to just flounder around for 14 turns hoping for that. A concession feels acceptable there. If you're being hit by annihilator 4, and left with 19 permanents aftewrards, you shouldn't be conceding.

Quote:
5. Let people do their magic, if you are in a 1v1 against the last player, and he will attack us for lethal, let him do it, it wont take more than 30 seconds, do you feel better saying 'concede' than 'lose'? is that it?


Usually, on my turn, I'll be able to assess the math, know if I die to an alpha or over extending strike, and offer the concession if I don't draw into an answer. Sure you may feel this is depriving them of anything, but I must admit finding an opponent who knows that no matter what they do they'll lose, and openly admitting that feels REALLY good too.

There' also a lot ot be said for actions of a player who knows they're about to concede. There's a brand new EDH player at my LGS, and they're about to find out Thursday that the game is a social game.

Last Thursday, we shuffled up for a five player game of Star. If you're not familiar with the format, you have 2 enemy players, and two partner players. Each player has a different set of each. You win once your enemies have been defeated, and lose once a player wins. The new player was my team mate, and I was suggesting plays to help advance their board position as well as my own. They recieved a text message indicating they were about to be picked up.

I had a 6 lands, Mind Over Matter and Noble Benefactor in play, and was colluding with my other ally who had been stone rained into oblivion that game on what we could collectively do to ensure we survived the onslaught from our shared enemy.

The new player, who was my other ally, takes their turn and proceeds to cast their commander, Shattergang Brothers. They then sacrifice them forcing us all to sacrifice a creature. My enemy players are still in a good spot, but I was to tutor up a Nevinyrral's Disk.

They look around the table, asking if the Benefactor trigger had resolved. Upon confirmation, they cast Awaken the Erstwhile let it resolve as we all discard our hand announcing what we've discarded, then proceeds to scoop letting us know their ride was set to be there any moment.

All in all a pretty jerk move to do. The concession did absolutely nothing to further the gameplay, other than to accelerate the ahead playters and de-accelerate my other ally and I.

In that case, conceding after ruining the game state is a horrible and unreasomable thing to do in a multiplayer game.

Thursday I intend to make them aware that I, and most players in our group prefer not to play such a game.

_________________
"... the RC doesn't negotiate with terrorists. " - Sheldon Menery 9/14/2011


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-23 6:20 pm 

Joined: 2012-Oct-24 8:05 pm
Age: Drake
Treamayne wrote:
... normally I would make the person play it out (with no shortcuts for combos, if you want to make 1000 mana I want you to tap and untap as necessary for each "iteration" - it's my response to repressive players)

Demonstrating a loop and shortcutting to repeat it any number of times is specifically allowed by the rules of Magic. You can decline the shortcut if you want to take a game action before they're done, but you can't force them to physically perform each iteration.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-23 8:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Dec-10 12:16 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
NMS wrote:
Treamayne wrote:
... normally I would make the person play it out (with no shortcuts for combos, if you want to make 1000 mana I want you to tap and untap as necessary for each "iteration" - it's my response to repressive players)

Demonstrating a loop and shortcutting to repeat it any number of times is specifically allowed by the rules of Magic. You can decline the shortcut if you want to take a game action before they're done, but you can't force them to physically perform each iteration.

Sorry I wasn't clear, ...

...this is on MTGO. As long as I refuse to concede, if the player wants to actually win, that player has to click-by-click go through their combo. Many people will demo the first 1-2 passes then ask "this is infinite, do you concede?"
For courteous players, I will consider if there is anything I can do; and concede if not. For <expletive> players, I will not concede and simply reply "Nope, play it out please."

I've also found a number of players bluffing the win. The combo is for something like infinite life or infinite mana; but they don't actually have a wincon. They ask for the concession, presumably to feel good about themselves, but they aren't actually winning. Many opponents will scoop just because they don't want to "watch" all the clicking (activations, triggers, responses). By not conceding, I am essentially asking them to prove they can win, if they want it bad enough to play it out.

_________________
V/R

HK

Hazezon Tamar - Manland theme
Seshiro the Anointed - Snake Tribal
Jedit Ojanen of Efrava - Cat and Warrior Dual Tribal
Doran, the Seige Tower - Wall Tribal
Progenitus - Hydra themed Proliferate Deck
Karona, the False God - Backstabbing Hug


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-23 11:34 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2013-Oct-26 9:21 am
Age: Dragon
Location: Xenia, OH, USA
Kemev wrote:
Ie... For a while, I was playing with a couple Legacy players that who were new to EDH. They had picked up the idea that if you had a Strip Mine or Wasteland, you should activate it immediately (usually a fine play in Legacy -- not as much in EDH). So they constantly got blown out by Gaea's Cradle, Nykthos, Coffers, etc. One night we got table wiped 3 times in a row by Derevi, losing each time to some Cradle-powered idiocy (including an especially foolish game where one Legacy bro Strip Mine'd the others Strip Mine). Game 4, my t1 play was shock land pass, and Legacy guy to my left's play was Wasteland, waste your shock.

So I scooped. I don't know if that player was trying to be funny, or if he genuinely thought he was making a smart play; either way, it seemed unreasonable to me.


This is the cause of most of my conceding when playing with my playgroup. People using Legacy/Standard/Modern considerations in their 'targeting' behavior. Or being afraid of a card simply because it exists. Just a couple of days ago, I had someone hate kill a Seedborn Muse(my only creature, all I had was an enchantment and lands and nothing to do with the lands) I dropped on the table because I had nothing else to do, and didn't want to discard, while leaving the true threat card (I believe it was Thunderfoot Baloth with a board full of creatures) simply because their reasoning is "You could go off with that card" when the other person with the Thunderfoot was actively killing people.

Also if a player is repeatedly targeting me simply to just hatebear me out of the game for no good reason (I don't consider revenge for past games a reasonable reason, as each game is separate and distinct, and I treat them as such), I will concede at the point that will do the most damage to them specifically. Tit-for-tat, so to speak. Or if someone specifically targets my mana base so I can't get moving at all when I'm already behind for whatever reason? Dick move, I'm conceding with your spell on the stack so you wasted effort.

I won't concede just because a game isn't going my way. If you're acting like a total douche to me for to good reason, then yeah, I'll hate concede your shit.


EDIT: As an aside to my example above of Seedborn Muse. NEVER, EVER, **EVER** kill one on sight. Wait until they've tapped out, expecting to use the next turns resources to their advantage, and THEN kill it. That's the smarter play every time. Too many people get caught up in the "OMG I have this spell in my hand and I know that needs to die so I gotta kill it right now" mentality. Sometimes it is better to wait for the right time to strike, as opposed to going on the offensive too quickly.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-24 1:42 pm 

Joined: 2012-Oct-24 8:05 pm
Age: Drake
Treamayne wrote:
...this is on MTGO. As long as I refuse to concede, if the player wants to actually win, that player has to click-by-click go through their combo. Many people will demo the first 1-2 passes then ask "this is infinite, do you concede?"
For courteous players, I will consider if there is anything I can do; and concede if not. For <expletive> players, I will not concede and simply reply "Nope, play it out please."

I've also found a number of players bluffing the win. The combo is for something like infinite life or infinite mana; but they don't actually have a wincon. They ask for the concession, presumably to feel good about themselves, but they aren't actually winning. Many opponents will scoop just because they don't want to "watch" all the clicking (activations, triggers, responses). By not conceding, I am essentially asking them to prove they can win, if they want it bad enough to play it out.

Oh, yeah, MTGO is different, obviously. You're being reasonable there. I imagine the loop rules would be hard to program there (though not impossible for some cases). But they could avoid the bluffing issue by allowing players to reveal some cards from their hand.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-26 9:29 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-May-09 10:39 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I normally don't concede unless I have zero chance of winning.

I have conceded (and sadly rage-quite last week for reasons) to do the following:
    Deny a Bribery/Gilded Drake/other theft advantage
    Fizzle a spell that needed multiple targets that would have ensured a certain victory
    To leave a game where one player was overwhelmingly gaining an advantage, and I was the only one fighting to stop them. (Group Hug situation, and I never play Group Hug.)

I do like to play games through generally, but if it's obvious one players has a marked advantage then the table will just move on and start fresh. There's only a limited time to play Commander for me (maybe 1-3 hours on Saturdays, generously 2-4 hours) so I want to get as much gaming in as possible in that time.

_________________
Generals:
Jasmine Boreal - Flower power! Nature/Justice/Retribution themed casual fun.
Radha, Heir to Keld - All white-bordered!
Xantcha, Sleeper Agent - cEDH discard/attrition.
Pre-Modern:
A Denying Wind.
Duel Commander:
Nissa, Vastwoord Seer - Ramp ramp ramp into Ugin+Painter's Servant.
Kari Zev, Skyship Raider - Unbridled Aggro

Find me Saturdays at the Wizard's Tower - Ottawa and occasional Mondays at Westboro Legion for Duel Commander.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-29 1:40 am 

Joined: 2017-Oct-19 12:02 am
Age: Drake
CrazyPierre wrote:
I normally don't concede unless I have zero chance of winning.

I have conceded (and sadly rage-quite last week for reasons) to do the following:
    Deny a Bribery/Gilded Drake/other theft advantage
    Fizzle a spell that needed multiple targets that would have ensured a certain victory
    To leave a game where one player was overwhelmingly gaining an advantage, and I was the only one fighting to stop them. (Group Hug situation, and I never play Group Hug.)

I do like to play games through generally, but if it's obvious one players has a marked advantage then the table will just move on and start fresh. There's only a limited time to play Commander for me (maybe 1-3 hours on Saturdays, generously 2-4 hours) so I want to get as much gaming in as possible in that time.


I strongly disagree


Scenario #1

Player 1 plays Insurrection and takes all creatures, you have a huge board but 2 life, before damage you tap a mountain and lightning bolt yourself to deny the win to player 1.

This scenario is fine, is good and fair game, you used a in game play to deny your opponent the victory, it very well could be a teferi's protection, a counterspell or even a fog

Scenario #2
Player 1 plays Insurrection and takes all creatures, you have a huge board but 2 life, before damage you concede denying the victory because your creatures are not longer in the game

This is wrong, because you are using a non-game play, conceding is not a game move and in multiplayer it should not be allowed

In a 1v1 scenario, you can concede because the only player affected is you, you are not changing the outcome of the game by conceding in a 1v1 situation. so if you get salted because you are getting bet up in a 1v1 then conceding or not have zero impact in the result

But when you concede in a multiplayer game, then you are affecting other players and you are affecting the game by NOT PLAYING instead of affecting the game playing.

_________________
Playing:
Edgar Markov The current updated decklist is here
Oloro, Ageless ascetic The current updated decklist is here
Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign The current updated decklist is here
K'rrik, son of yawgmoth The current updated decklist is here


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-29 7:56 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon
99% of the time you should not be conceding unless it's your turn before you untap (or the game is simply all-but-won and you are drawing just to see if it's your one card, once chance at hope).
Conceding when someone else builds their combo and has the win on board is fine. I see no rudeness in saving time just because you don't care if you dead to craterhoof at -12 or -23, cause whats the difference.

There is not much that needs to be explained, you are a garbo person if you spitefully scoop. It's not a political tactic, it's a pain in everyone's ass. I wouldn't presume to *make* a person play a game they don't want to, or that they are losing and not enjoying (and sometimes we just have to leave).

But really the only reason quitting is a thing is simply because you can't be made to play. The game is not designed around or intended for it to 'be a thing' that you can spite scoop, it's not designed for scooping to be a political play, it's actually just the opposite of play; "You Win". This merely does not translate well to having 3+ group play, and the fact that it exists does not justify using it to screw people.

"Attack you for lethal with my Edric army, i can't get through to other players' blockers"
"[s]I scoop, no draw triggers for you[/s]" "Fuck yourself."

*P4 has an enormous board and p1, p2, p3 do not.*
P1: "I cast insurrection"
P4: "[s]I scoop, i'm dead either way but i can save them![/s]" "Fuck yourself."

"[s]I attack with all my creatures in the most nonsense manner. I cast Armageddon. Okay, i scoop cause i'm dead next turn anyway[/s]" "Fuck this gaaaaaame! Wooh!"


Merely an anecdote, but one time i played a commander event and the prize support was reasonably high. I supposed it would be high power and brought my best deck. At the time, it wasn't even a cedh deck. But i had a big beautiful board state, and 2 of the casual-er players were unable to keep up with my ramp and countermagic and value. The 4th person had an annihilator eldrazi and some other big'uns but not enough to truly 1v1 me on the side and take over just yet They had told us a few turns ago their ride was there and they'd have to leave. They get to their turn and attack me all out, it's a losing battle for both of us. He casts supreme verdict, i ProphetofKruphix-speed clone my Venser to put it in his hand - which i was happy with since he was a smug pos and thought uncounterable was gonna be the end of me. He has 8 mana though, i did not realize, and simply casts it again, then scoops and says "It's not really fair they don't have a chance to beat you, i tried guys" and just leaves. That just sticks out to me as one of the worst and weirdest even though that was 2013 probably but all the above are things i've seen.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-29 8:44 am 

Joined: 2017-Oct-19 12:02 am
Age: Drake
Maybe we can whisper to the RC the suggestion of adding a rule about conceding, only at sorcery speed

_________________
Playing:
Edgar Markov The current updated decklist is here
Oloro, Ageless ascetic The current updated decklist is here
Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign The current updated decklist is here
K'rrik, son of yawgmoth The current updated decklist is here


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ethical aspects of conceading
AgePosted: 2019-Apr-29 8:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
alexev wrote:
Maybe we can whisper to the RC the suggestion of adding a rule about conceding, only at sorcery speed

None of us are the moral authority on when conceding is OK. The rules explicitly permit conceding to happen any time, for a lot of reasons.

Are you going to tell me that when you're taking super-long extra turn #5 out of 10 and control several of my permanents, I'm not allowed to concede? I'm still going to take my cards away and leave the table for a break, thanks, and you're not entitled to keep hold of them for any length of time, not even long enough to take notes on whatever it was you controlled that was mine so you can pretend you still control it for gameplay purposes.

I've tactically conceded in the past -- in the blocking step to a Medomai the Ageless who swung at me relying on the extra turn, leaving him open for someone else to defeat a minute later. It was taken with good humour, but in hindsight I would prefer to not do that again, and I like the general idea of keeping my conceding outside of the combat step.

I haven't spoken up here because I don't care about debating the moral quandrary of when and why and who's allowed to do what, y'all can do whatever you want, and I'll do whatever I want that privately works for me and the people I'm playing with at the time.

But I'm speaking up now because pretending there's any single right way to do it or that any one of us is Correct and Right in whatever we think is cruising for a bad time. Trying to bake any one approach into the rules is going to be a very, very bad thing, and the RC would know that.

(I also need to point out that Magic is a game for teenagers 13 and up, some of whom are playing Commander, and some of whom need to concede because "my mom's here, I have to go, she's not waiting, give me those cards back, no I don't have time for you to take notes." Like I said, there's reasons you can concede any time without restriction. That they wouldn't even begin to work is one of them.)

_________________
Decks: Chaos colored dragons, Mathas, the Instigator (politics and mayhem).
Beloved precons: Atraxa, Praetors' Voice; Saskia the Unyielding; Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shabbaman and 62 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: