MTG Commander/Elder Dragon Highlander
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/

Mindslaver
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18651
Page 1 of 1

Author:  InOzWeTrust [ 2017-Jun-16 3:27 am ]
Post subject:  Mindslaver

Specifically this question is in relation to when Mindslavering an opponent then exiling their Commander then choosing to remove the Commander from the rest of the game.

Mindslaver of course says that the controlling player makes all decisions except the ones the player couldn't make and this is the root argument that anyone taking the pro-slaver position makes. 903.9 says that only the Commander's owner can decide to command zone it. So these two seem at opposition, while Mindslaver would seem to be the obvious winner it does contradict the spirit of the format and the specific reason that the Tuck rule was changed.

"We want to engender as positive an experience as we can for players. Nothing runs the feel-bads worse than having your commander unavailable to you for the whole game."

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17560

Just because this is always a crazy heated conversation I was hoping someone from the RC would weigh in officially as to why this isn't a rule for the format as with Tuck, Graveyard, & Exile effects.

Author:  niheloim [ 2017-Jun-16 3:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Mindslaver

If you mindslave someone you can exile their commander.

It sucks. Don't do it... except maybe the one time if you promise to laugh maniacally. But then! never again.

Author:  InOzWeTrust [ 2017-Jun-21 2:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Mindslaver

So then it just is how it is and there's no justification for why this ruling stands when it contrasts the reason why Tuck was removed because it was so unfun? That seems strange.

Author:  papa_funk [ 2017-Jun-21 3:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Mindslaver

InOzWeTrust wrote:
So then it just is how it is and there's no justification for why this ruling stands when it contrasts the reason why Tuck was removed because it was so unfun? That seems strange.


Tuck was removed for multiple reasons, among them that it was showing up heavily in casual play and being regarded as a normal thing to do. It also streamlined the rules to make everything work in the same way.

The Mindslaver loophole is a relatively rare and very griefy action (that should demand immediate and total retaliation). Fixing it requires complicating the rules. It's probably best left to individual playgroups to handle. Frankly, I would avoid playing with someone who thought trying to consistently exploit the loophole was a fun way to play Magic.

It's certainly something we're keeping an eye on.

Author:  niheloim [ 2017-Jun-21 4:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Mindslaver

InOzWeTrust wrote:
So then it just is how it is and there's no justification for why this ruling stands when it contrasts the reason why Tuck was removed because it was so unfun? That seems strange.

There is no justification for the ruling because the ruling is simply a sound application of the rules as written.

Why are the rules written to allow such a loop-hole? For the reasons papa funk stated. You have to go out of your way to deny a player his or her commander. That makes you a jerk. Don't be a jerk. Don't play with jerks.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/