DDR#23 - Forgetting to Put a Lore Counter on a Saga

[@Aiviymatoc]

I love how precise, well articulated and easily understandable your videos always are

[@jwaffles9269]

I like your idea for the hypothetical rewording of sagas, but it is worth noting that it is a MASSIVE change to have your wording, as it means proliferating would never trigger a saga’s next chapter. I think it being a baked in triggered ability whenever they get lore counters is best, but I do also think “at the beginning of your first main phase, put a lore counter on this” being a separate triggered ability would be more intuitive. It’s also worth noting that sagas aren’t the only cards like this anymore. Attractions roll at the beginning of precombat main as a turn based action, then trigger based on what the roll was.

[@RPmasterGM]

Had that happen at my RCQ last week, oppoennt forgot the loot effect of Fable of the mirror breaker, i did not notice and called the judge at his end step where i and him got a warning. I knew it was the normal fix for that but it really was a feel bad moment to get a "penalty" while it's entirely your opponent's cards. Glad it got changed though

[@gujianing51]

I like your octopus

[@civi5sc2]

A good change I believe, because it was apparently misunderstood (and understandable so). Every time I explained to people that the lore counter was not treated as missed trigger, and that the game state should be backed up, people were confused, and it was clear that they were used to always treating it as missed trigger. And the

[@JudgingFtW]

I'm an editor for the Judge Articles project, and we literally had one in the queue on this exact topic. I felt really bad for the poor author when I recommended that we kick his article back for resubmission since all that work effectively went up in smoke with this policy change.

[@BigDaddyWes]

The saga saga continues

[@DrJambonius]

Nice! I didn't understood half of the changes, but will look 2-3 additional times your video and I should be ok ;)

[@bgoeschi]

Wouldn't your suggestion to have lore counter and effect happen as a single triggered ability have a significant effect on what happens if you stifle a chapter? It would just delay it instead of skipping it entirely, if I'm not mistaken. (8:48 )

[@antitheta777]

I had misunderstood the announcement and thought all 3 chapters were now handled as a missed trigger because they were all now triggers

[@Kablooey8]

So lets say my opponent forgets to put their third lore counter on Urza's Saga. They use mana from Urza's saga in their first main phase and go to their second main. I realise at that point that they forgot their third chapter, what would happen in that scenario assuming my opponent wasn't trying to be malicious.

[@negation4399]

Like any other missed trigger, you would get the option of placing it on the stack at the current time.

[@SuperfluousWingspan]

​@@negation4399 The counter placement doesn't go on the stack in that case - it just happens (which very likely puts a chapter ability on the stack). Nothing can happen in response to (i.e. before) the counter being placed on the saga. Also, this would certainly be an instance where a judge should have an eye out for indications of cheating by intentionally missing a trigger to gain an advantage.

[@negation4399]

@@SuperfluousWingspan "The counter placement doesn't go on the stack in that case - it just happens" - No it doesn't, that's literally what this video is explaining. It's been changed to a regular missed trigger and you don't have to place it on the stack.

[@SuperfluousWingspan]

​@@negation4399You're misunderstanding me. You claimed the opponent can put the missed lore counter on the stack, like a missed trigger can be placed on the stack at the opponent's discretion. The lore counter being placed is not put on the stack (presuming the opponent chooses to), because that action never goes on the stack.

[@negation4399]

@@SuperfluousWingspan Explain why the lore counter trigger doesn't use the stack.

[@letsmakeit110]

It's hard to keep track of when I'm required to help my opponent. Aren't there some instances where if my opponent misses a required ability I'm cheating if I don't tell them?

[@miserepoignee9594]

It's most cases, actually. Missed Trigger is a special exception. There's a lot more detail on this topic in that "How to Rules Lawyer your Opponent" video

[@SuperfluousWingspan]

In your magic dictator proposal, would sagas still trigger chapter abilities when a lore counter enters another way, like via proliferate? How would that be worded to not also create an extra trigger each precombat main due to the counter entering alongside the chapter ability? (Note for those who are partway through the video - this question is *not based on actual saga rules*, just a hypothetical change.)

[@seandun7083]

How does Aminatou the Veil Piercer interact with X spells like either Meathook Massacre? At first glance the "It's miracle cost is equal to it's mana cost minus {4}" looks like an alternate cost plus a cost reduction effect, but I've heard some people say that the reduction is part of the definition of the alternate cost instead of a normal cost reduction effect, so it can't reduce the mana added when you decide the X value while casting it. I haven't really been able to find an official ruling either way. The ones on Dream Devourer come close but don't quite answer it: "The reduction of the foretell cost applies only to generic mana in the foretell cost. It can’t reduce requirements of specific colors of mana. For example, if you foretell a card in your hand with mana cost {1}{G}{G}, its foretell cost will be {G}{G}." Looking at how it interacts with Sphere of Resistance when you cast something that's normally cheaper than 4 as well as looking at something with an additional cost like Bubble Snare would both be interesting.

[@rikudousennin1218]

What happens when i counter triggered ability of saga after rules changes?

[@diegoblin9090]

Very interesting topic!!

[@mainman879]

Your change suggested at 9 minutes in means that sagas would no longer work with proliferate. In fact you could *add* counters to an opponents saga with other effects to force them to skip certain chapters. I think this would be a bad change overall.

[@nigh_anxiety]

Also, cards that counter triggered abilities could prevent a saga (yours or your opponent's) from advancing for a round. You could counter the triggered ability of your own saga in order to do something like make another Thopter out of Urza's Saga. Imprint Defabricate or Stifle onto an Isochron scepter and you can stop it from advancing every turn.

[@jerodast]

Yeah that's what I figured too, although I would guess Judge Dave is aware of this interaction and would intend there would be some other rule to cause it to trigger as it currently does in those cases counters are added by other means. So there would be triggered ability "A" which handles normal Saga operation, and "B" which handles if additional counters are added other than by A. It might be awkward wording for a rule to describe how the counters added by A DON'T cause B to trigger but allow any other relevant trigger to go off, but I guess it could be done.

[@jerodast]

@@nigh_anxiety I think I'm okay with this change TBH, those cases either seem uncommon or actually interesting to allow. It certainly is a change though :)

[@frogstarian]

I've got a challenge that I haven't been able to find any rules or rulings to resolve. I control a Brazen Dwarf, a Monitor Monitor, and a Component Pouch. I activate the component pouch to roll a d20 which triggers the Brazen Dwarf and I decide to use the Monitor Monitor's ability to reroll the d20. Does the Dwarf trigger on the reroll? As far as I can tell, Monitor Monitor is the only card which lets you reroll dice and there's no ruling about whether the reroll is a new instance of rolling dice or not.

[@jerodast]

Ugh, I agree with your research that Monitor Monitor is the only CR-legal card that rerolls in this way and the CR barely covers it (whereas it does cover Cenatur's "stored dice" rerolls which are really just new rolls which do prompt triggers). This should have been silver bordered #anddontmakemesayacorn if they weren't gonna define it in CR. I notice the one place in the CR they mention "reroll", other than the Centaur stuff, is where they talk about "modifying the results of that die by rerolling that die". Therefore I conclude MM modifies the result of the overall roll, and it therefore does not count as a separate roll? Just a best guess.

[@jakeeakle]

I think it's obvious from the English meaning of "reroll" that it does trigger Dwarf. You rolled the die, then you rolled it again: two triggers.

[@JudgingFtW]

I talked about a similar interaction in DDR#741: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bauVoKl8e8l0rpY

[@frogstarian]

@@JudgingFtW So you'd say that Monitor Monitor's ability is similar to Wyll's. I think that makes sense especially considering that the first result (before the reroll) is ignored. I guess it feels strange because Monitor Monitor's ability feels like it should be a triggered ability since it's a "may" and requires a cost, but I don't think it is. If it were then the Dwarf would definitely trigger again.

[@jakeeakle]

@@JudgingFtW ​ @frogstarian I don't see anything in the CR that uses the word "ignore" in connection with rerolling, so I don't think this reasoning can apply.

[@KorboQ]

This isn't really a rules question as much as a social one, but in your experience, is it considered rude to choose to handle a missed trigger in a way that benefits you (for example, my opponent misses Urza's Saga and I don't let them put a counter on in order to delay their search)? Does that differ between different RELs?

[@JudgingFtW]

It does make a difference at different Rules Enforcement Levels. At higher REL, the fix is determined based on what it says in the policy documents. A player might allow their opponent to get a trigger that they forgot as a matter of sportsmanship, but it can hardly be considered unsportsmanlike to do the opposite when you're following the official procedure.

[@KorboQ]

@@JudgingFtW Thank you for your response!

[@jerodast]

At a casual level based on my own feelings, I would say if it wouldn't seem to have any direct impact, i.e. if the game would've played out just the same except they got their trigger, I would roll my eyes mildly at someone not allowing it, whereas if it would've affected something about the gameplay that has already occurred since the missed trigger, I would call it very reasonable to deny it.

[@buncythefrog]

I feel like that idea might need more work, since before you could stifle a step and move on, but now stifling the step would mean it just happens next turn.

[@RodRombauer]

1:55 Sleeping a saga counter? What is 'sleeping' a counter?

[@miserepoignee9594]

It's Magic slang that means to forget to do something (cf. "asleep at the switch)

[@Temzilla2]

I think that 8:04 they finally realised that the upkeep is NOT a once per turn time any more, and hasn't been since Paradox Haze, and the "precombat main phase" is a very clean "once per turn" step.

[@jakeeakle]

I think it's much less likely to be this extremely rare situation, and much more likely to be a game flow preference. As is, you get to make decisions for your Saga effects after drawing your card for the turn, which is generally more pleasant.

[@jerodast]

Could that phase be repeated also though?

[@Temzilla2]

@@jerodast No, you can only ever have one pre-combat main phase. You can have one "first" main phase, one "second" main phase etc. They recently changed a lot of cards that used "postcombat main phase" to read "second main phase" and in fact, the first Neheb commander was in a limbo of saying "your second main phase" instead of "each of your postcombat main phases" in between the release of Bloomburrow and Duskmourn.

[@Temzilla2]

@@jakeeakle I view that as an additional benefit, the avoidance of a "oh I didn't do my upkeep decision, I have to un-draw my card" is a benefit of it, but I also think it's a way to put something as a once per turn.

[@jakeeakle]

@@Temzilla2 well, it turns out you're wrong. there happens to be a quote from a Maro article just a bit further down this comment section, which I guess I'll just paste: "Finally, Dave [Humpherys] moved the triggering of the chapters from the beginning of the turn to after the draw step. He did this because he wanted players to have the information of what they drew before committing to using the Sagas. (The reason it was after the draw step rather than the beginning of the precombat main phase had to do with which was shorter to write out on the card, as functionally they're very similar.)"

[@jippiedoe]

I understand that you consider whether a certain trigger is beneficial or detrimental in the general case, and not the specific board state. But how specific is "the trigger/turn based action" here? For example, do you simply argue that all lore counters are always considered beneficial? Do you say that for some saga's, ticking up is detrimental, and for others it is beneficial? Or can you even say that ticking `The Princess Takes Flight` up to 2 is beneficial, and ticking it up to 3 is detrimental?

[@miserepoignee9594]

One of the policy writers released an article that talked about this change, and the (summarized) answer is that all saga upticks are non-detrimental.

[@jerodast]

@@miserepoignee9594 It really does seem like the third trigger which would cause you to lose an enchantment on the board should be treated differently, obviously Urza's Saga is nice to have around for an extra turn and even in general it just seems like actually losing a permanent deserves more consideration than this assumption makes.

[@jippiedoe]

@@miserepoignee9594 Interesting! This is unintuitive to me, because it's not like we rule "all etb effects are non-detrimental" or "all artifact upkeep triggers are detrimental", so why do we bundle all saga upticks together?

[@Vuohenmor]

Is rolling for attractions is a turn based action, can I still roll if the attractions get nuked?

[@seandun7083]

Yes it is (they only want you to roll once no matter how many attractions you have), but you can only roll if you have at least one. 505.5: Third, if the active player controls one or more Attractions and it's the active player's precombat main phase, the active player rolls to visit their Attractions. (See rule 701.49, "Roll to Visit Your Attractions.") This turn-based action doesn't use the stack.

[@platurt9595]

If nothing changed before amy played the land, what speaks against just rewinding the game back to the moment amy had to put a counter on her saga? Feels to me like missing a trigger (or special action) should just be treated like an illegal action.

[@Barbarossa06]

Are there other instances of triggered abilities that dont have the wording at, when, whenever??

[@cool_scatter]

No, and this isn't an instance of that. It's being treated as one in the infraction policy, but in the game rules, it's still a turn based action.

[@platurt9595]

No they always have them. Only weird cases are chapter- and room-abilities, bc their triggered abilities aren't written on the cards, but in the rules.

[@alexanderkraken7920]

@@platurt9595 what do you mean about room abilities? What triggered abilities on rooms or chapters are not written on the cards?

[@miserepoignee9594]

@@alexanderkraken7920 OP was probably referring to room abilities of dungeons which are triggered abilities, but the trigger condition "when you enter this room" does not appear on the card. You would need to read the official wording in the CR to find it. A similar situation exists for chapter abilities of sagas. Some keyworded abilities have the same thing too (Ward, Backup, Living Weapon, etc.)

[@TheRealWormbo]

@@platurt9595 Room abilities are written the normal "triggered ability way". They work exactly like the abilities on any other enchantment. The only "hidden" triggers are chapter abilities on sagas, where the card only contains the effect part of the ability, since the trigger condition is represented by the number before that. I guess some triggers created by continuous effects or other triggers can be worded in a way that they don't start with one of those words, but they still have one of the words somewhere in the sentence. (e.g. "Sacrifice it *at* the beginning of the next end step.")

[@knife1406]

Hey Dave, can you trigger Lich's Mirror from saying "I resign"

[@seandun7083]

No. With a concession, you leave the game then lose it meaning it gets around in game effects that stop you from losing. 104.3a: A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. That player loses the game.

[@iTzDritte]

Hasn’t WotC explicitly said that the rules for sagas are the way that they are to make the reminder text fit?

[@GeoQuag]

It seems like they went for start of main phase 1 instead of during your draw step after you draw the card for that reason, but if they wanted to do during upkeep it would have been basically same amount of text.

[@jerodast]

Oh maybe some of the exact phrasing was for that reason? But reminder text isn't exact anyway hmmm... @@GeoQuag I thought the timing was mainly to make mana abilities on Sagas useful for casting sorcery-speed spells.

[@GeoQuag]

@@jerodast that would also make sense, though they also could just make the abilities give mana during the main phase if they didn’t mind being a little wordy for those specific abilities

[@Ekke-MarkusMuttika]

Do lore counters have to be represented? I know a player who just remembers which saga chapter should activate next and doesn't actually put any objects on the card. Do i have to mark other permanents that rely on memory but don't use counters (eg Demonic Pact)?

[@jerodast]

This may fall under communication policy which I know Judge Dave has some videos about but I have mostly forgotten :P There was something about the highest necessity of communicating changes to certain game state elements, an example being life total, which could be done by stating it out loud or with a marker I think? So that option could be considered here, but I don't recall if counters or turn based actions specifically would fall under that same highest possible standard; if not then maybe it only needs to be tracked if someone asked about it.

[@iTzDritte]

7:57 Why they trigger during the Main Phase, from MaRo’s article “THE SAGA OF SAGAS”: Finally, Dave [Humpherys] moved the triggering of the chapters from the beginning of the turn to after the draw step. He did this because he wanted players to have the information of what they drew before committing to using the Sagas. (The reason it was after the draw step rather than the beginning of the precombat main phase had to do with which was shorter to write out on the card, as functionally they're very similar.)

[@magica3526]

functionally they're identical. Reminder text isn't rules text, and the TBA is at the beginning of the first main phase

[@raze667]

It's another case of simplifying language that's lead to headaches. Don't get me started on " Enters".

[@brningpyre]

Please be careful with how you word it. The lore counter is NOT a trigger. When you say "triggering of the chapters" that's misleading. The turn-based action does sometimes cause a trigger, but it is not a trigger itself. We don't need any more confusion with an already confusing topic.

[@iTzDritte]

@@brningpyre Friend I’m literally quoting Mark Rosewater verbatim from an article he wrote. Take it up with him.

[@raze667]

@@brningpyre the chapters are what trigger.... "Triggering of the chapters" is both specific and accurate.

[@Atypical-Abbie]

How come this is labeled as DDR#23?

[@jerodast]

Because it is answering the same question he answered in the original DDR #23, which required an update because of the policy change.

[@MyNameisWatt9]

I feel like sagas happening during main phase is a bit easier for new players, not sure if thats something others agree with. Im a very new player but i come from other card games and i think having the "stuff you do" phase is much easier for me, whenever theres a line that involves playing on yhe opponents turn, or at other points, i will usually miss it the first couple times. Just to say that if im not in my main phase im not thinking too much about my actions. Still, doesnt seem like a good enough reason to deviate from the norm but its something

[@gaelyte2550]

Do you even have to put physical counters on sagas ? If the second counter goes on Urza's saga, nothing visible on the battlefield happens Also I want to note that having counters put as a triggered ability changes a few things even for the casual player, since if you counter the ability of a saga, you would now also prevent the counter from being put on the card, doubling the number of triggered abilities would now put 2 counters and trigger 2 different chapters instead of twice the same

[@eightywight]

That is a curious question. Does a saga need to have a physical counter put on the card itself. Many players use dice and other physical representations of counters as memory devices so they can remember what the true board state is. Can a player refuse to use counters to represent the lore counters on a Saga and just go off of memory?

[@JudgingFtW]

Number one question I have as a judge is "Why would you do this?" It would be pretty hard to convince me that the answer was anything other than "Because I want to try to confuse my opponent and hopefully get some benefit out of it". I talked about this sort of interaction in a bit more detail in DDR#799, and I recommend you check this out for a fuller explanation of the philosophy that goes into this decision: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mH_PiX-BnaqerpY

[@Flyboy245]

Ok turn based action. New term to know

[@skeletor9257]

the! dumb! main! phase! is! because! one! saga! adds! mana! The First Eruption (there are others now, but this was the original) they! could! have! just! said! this! mana! doesn't! empty! and! moved! on!

[@RogueMiamiAirsoft]

Can I now copy a saga ability with stronic resonator?

[@miserepoignee9594]

You could always do that. You couldn't use Strionic Resonator to put an extra lore counter on a saga, though, because even though not putting a lore counter on a saga is handled as a "missed trigger" now, the official actions that are happening in the game to put the counter on are not a trigger.

[@takoma74]

Does this fix still apply even if you already resolved the chapter earlier but just forgot to put a counter on? Say I had fable of the mirror-breaker. Second turn I have it out I discard two cards and draw two cars. I forget to put a counter on. Then during opponents 1st main phase they realize the mistake, so they have me put the counter on then, do I get to discard two cards again?

[@jerodast]

To me this seems like you both recognized that the game state had the 2nd counter put on it at the right time, and you just forgot to put a physical marker on it, but this does not really affect what the game is legally doing. The only issue would be if there was some other effect that was supposed to happen when a counter is put on it and you didn't do that, or if you disagreed later about whether there was a counter on it or not; in the latter case a Judge could probably rule on whether the game state simply needs to be marked correctly (and this may involve Communication Policy Violation) or if something has actually been missed which requires a fix.

[@ThisNameIsBanned]

I wonder why the rule gets changed instead of how Sagas work entirely. WHY not make it a trigger ? Its exactly what players think it is and how they play it, making it a game action is just no necessary at all.

[@bluerendar2194]

Because saga abilities only trigger *after* the lore counter is placed onto it. Therefore, if the placement of the lore counter itself is a trigger, then a player could respond to that action, and potentially halt the saga chapter ability. As it is currently, once main phase starts, it is too late to, say, remove the saga (or lore counters on it) to halt the chapter effect. Granted, this is very niche since almost all such actions could have been performed prior to main phase, but that's still a change.

[@TheRealWormbo]

The way sagas are removed from the battlefield would also change if putting the counter on *and* performing the associated action in a single step would also be affected. Currently you can put counters on and have the ability trigger separately. That means you could take counters off (e.g. with Vampire Hexmage) and prevent the saga from being put into the graveyard after its final chapter ability resolved. If it was a single step, that trick would go away. Also, it might be beneficial to just stifle your own "put counter on" trigger under the proposed change to keep the saga around for longer, and the current way things work prevents you from preserving your saga just with stifle effects.

[@JudgingFtW]

In my opinion, the reason is that judges have more sway over the text of the policy documents than the text of the CR. Thus, the change we got was an easier one to achieve.

[@kurtreznor]

Are there any rules based triggered abilities? Meaning, a trigger not printed on the card, but exists because it is a rule of the game? If not, i imagine that is why Sagas are turn based actions instead of triggers. Putting counters on Sagas is not an ability of the card, it is a rule for the subtype Saga...or if that isnt correct (or is irrelevant), I'd love to hear an explanation.

[@brofst]

not sure if you mean something like "modular" or "suspend" which have triggered abilities, but are keywords printed on the card. I see what you mean, but they could have also made them inherent to the chapter abilities themselves rather than the Saga subtype (in the same way that Planeswalkers have some rules associated with loyalty counters, but the actual Loyalty abilities don't depend on the permanent being a planeswalker.).

[@raze667]

I'm half certain the counters are added by game mechanics to stop doubling season from fucking with them.

[@saemsodjesft8901]

Doubling season does affect them just like any other counter, actually. It makes for a fun infinite combo with a token copy of Three Blind Mice.

[@JudgingFtW]

That would be a very implausible explanation because it still does. I talked about this interaction in DDR#485: kzbin.info/www/bejne/npnKgoiMjbxml9k

[@raze667]

@@JudgingFtW Please allow me to review. :) Well, I stand corrected. I'll leave the comment as it is, for folk who are mistaken as I am.

[@drillerkiller9]

I have no idea why this video doesn't just start by explicilty stating the announced policy change: Forgetting to put a lore counter will now be treated like a missed trigger. This might be obvious for Dave and others that regularly keep up with Magic rules news, but for someone not so involved, who still likes to be aware of current relevant rules, it was very hard to follow along and took around 8 1/2 minutes until the coin finally dropped. In fact I wasn't even aware that it wasn't treated like a missed trigger before as I never had a judge interaction related to this at my tournaments.

[@JudgingFtW]

1) The current policy is stated at 3:07. Not "8 1/2 minutes into the video". 2) The target audience for these videos is people who want a nuanced understanding of the issues. Ironically, the reason I go so deep into the background and context is specifically for the benefit of people who aren't so involved and who may not have even realized what the nature of the change was. I'm sorry it didn't connect with you this time, but this is the common goal I have with all my videos, and the reason I don't use shorter-form media like KZbin shorts very often.

[@ubertuna1]

Wow, this change is wild to me! Do you know if there have been any other cases of one game mechanic being ruled to be treated like a different one? "missed turn based action" is nuts lol

[@JudgingFtW]

As far as I know, this is the first time. I wasn't kidding when I said it was the biggest change in recent memory!