Good morning boys and girls, and welcome back to AAJ!
So I thought we had moved on from this but this morning Patrick Chapin discussed spell queller in his SCG article.
I don't have premium but the gist of it is this. He says that flicker effects bring back a different queller so his first ability doesn't necessarily retarded the same spell on the stack. His exact quote.
Essence Flux can also be used on Spell Queller when the exile ability is on the stack. Spell Queller is worded like an Oblivion Ring (not Banishing Light). This means the exile ability is separate from the returns from exile ability. If they Explosive Vegetation and you Spell Queller it and Essence Flux it, in response, you'll end up with a ¾ flier and their Explosive Vegetation will be exiled forever. Blinking the Spell Queller makes the play from exile ability go on the stack, but without having had a chance to exile the spell, yet, there's nothing to play. Then, when you resolve the first ability, the card is gone for good. Even if your opponent tries to kill the Spell Queller in response to its ability, that spell is gone.
So this goes against what most people understood about the card, as most agree EoT effects and bounce effect were find, but flicker wasn't.
This card is gonna be a nightmare.
>>48240901
He's half right. The Queller is worded 'the old way', like Oblivion Ring (rather than Banishing Light), having an ETB trigger that exiles and a LTB trigger that returns, rather than a single ETB trigger that exiles for a set duration. So yes, it is possible to perma-exile something by yanking your Queller off the board before the ETB trigger resolves, same as the old O-Ring trick.
The problem is that blinking it doesn't work well, because the ETB trigger is mandatory. If there's JUST that Explosive Vegetation on the stack, then here's what happens when you blink it:
>Top of Stack
Queller ETB trigger #2
Queller LTB trigger #1
Queller ETB trigger #1
Explosive Vegetation
So, that second ETB trigger has to exile the Vegetation because it's the only legal target, and the trigger isn't optional. Then, the LTB trigger resolves and does nothing, and then the first ETB trigger is countered by the rules of the game for having no legal targets. Instead of being perma-exiled, the vegetation is just NORMAL exiled, and will come back when the Queller leaves the board.
It'd work if there was a second target (you can perma-exile one, and temporarily exile the other), or if you just removed the Queller from the field without returning it (bounce or sacrifice, for example). But in the "one legal target and blink" scenario, you can't perma-exile without outside help.
>>48240958
Since the Queller leaves and enters the battlefield during the resolution of a single blink spell, it isn't possible to choose in which order the ETB/LTB triggers enter the stack?
>>48241007
*isn't it
Forgive my bad english
Thanks for clearing that up.
>>48241007
It is, but that's irrelevant, because the LTB is associated with the Queller that you originally targeted. If you have the LTB trigger resolve before the second ETB it's the same result- the LTB does nothing because the ETB associated with it hasn't resolved, then the new ETB resolves and exiles the spell. As soon as Queller leaves the board it'll bring back Veg.
>>48240958
So if they try and counter my Queller, I can flicker it in response and hit the counter with temp exile and veg with perma?
>>48241632
If they're countering your Queller, it's a spell on the stack and is not a legal target for Essence Flux.
My oponnent and I both control a Sphinx of the Final Word. He casts Clip Wings. In response I cast Void Shatter. What Happens? What if instead of Void Shatter it was Summary Dismissal, or Overwhelming Denial?
>>48241835
Your Void Shatter attempts to counter his spell and fails because he has a Sphinx of the Final Word. His clip Wings resolves and you sacrifice your Sphinx. Same for Overwhelming Denial.
Were it a Summary Dismissal, your spell would exile his.
>>48241882
But if I also control a Sphinx, how can his Sphinx counter my Void Shatter?
>>48241948
>how can his Sphinx counter my Void Shatter?
it didn't, your counterspell can't counter his uncounterable clip wings.
>>48241948
It doesn't counter it. "Counter" means "move from the stack to the graveyard". If you attempt to counter an uncounterable spell, your counterspell will resolve. But the "counter" part if it won't happen, so unless it has some additional effect then it just does nothing.
>>48241948
Nothing's countering your spell. Your spell is resolving and doing nothing. It's like casting Doom Blade on an indestructible creature.
Sphinx only stops your spells from getting countered by other spells an abilities. It doesn't stop your spells from being rendered pointless, or being countered by the rules of the game.
Slow day for MTG questions
Bump
>>48242064
Would >>48244659 be penalized for Slow Play? or for Stalling?
If i have Oracle of Mul Daya on the field and I play a spell that lets me draw multiple cards do i have to reveal each card?
>>48247022
yes
>>48240125
Not a question just wanted to saythanks for doing this gA, you've been doing it for years and it helps a lot of players out
>>48247000
No? Slow Play is for when you're taking more time than is reasonable to perform game actions, and Stalling is when you're doing it on purpose to weaponize the clock. "Taking pointless actions" or "playing to force a draw" are not illegal so long as you're not taking too long to do them.
>>48247022
Yes.
>>48247271
Happy to do it, but thank you for your appreciation.
>>48247518
And an "I'm home and dinner's done" bump.
What happens if i play a shockland with Blood Moon on the field? Does it still enter tapped, and do i get the chance to pay 2 to have it untapped?
>>48249541
It enters tapped no matter what, but you do have the option to pay 2 life. It'll still enter tapped though.
>>48249541
>>48249626
Bleh, mixed it up, sorry.
You can pay 2, and it will enter untapped if you do. It enters tapped if not.
>>48249636
>You can pay 2, and it will enter untapped if you do. It enters tapped if not.
Is that a recent ruling change? I could have swore the way you listed in >>48249626 was correct.
>>48249730
I may be mixing things up. Let me double check, I'm feeling a little fried.
>>48249754
>>48249730
>>48249636
Okay, I was mixing it up. I'm more used to Shocklands + Vesuva and the wires got crossed. With Vesuva, it always enters tapped, so you have the option to pay 2 if it's copying a shockland, but it still enters tapped even if you do.
With Blood Moon, lands (like all permanents) enter the battlefield untapped by default. A shockland's replacement effect has it enter tapped instead of the 'default' unless you pay 2, and that replacement effect exists immediately before it enters the battlefield. So, you either pay 2 for it to come in untapped, or it comes in tapped. Either way, it is a Mountain, but you have the option to pay 2 for it to enter as an untapped Mountain.
So I was having sort of a hard time finding an answer to this, even asking some pretty experienced in magic friends of mine, and got different answers each time.
Let's say I have the mana to cast emrakul, the promised end twice and also a man o' war. (29 mana, or less with cards in graveyard). I cast emrakul, then man o'war to return him to my hand, then cast emrakul again.
What exactly happens in regards to my opponent's next turn/extra turn(s?)
>>48249968
You DOUBLY control their next turn, and then after that they take 2 turns that you do not control, back to back.
>>48249987
Thanks. That answer makes a lot of sense, considering how multiple uses of mindslaver in a single turn do not stack (you doubly control the next turn, not multiple turns), but extra turn effects like time walk do stack up (into multiple extra turns).
You rock!
>>48249987
I managed to get two copies of paper tiger, rock lobster and scissors lizard, but when I used them to decide who went first at the LGS the owner said I couldn't use them or I'd be DQ'd
What gives?
>>48250519
Is the owner the judge? I've seen this exact thing done multiple times before and never seen anyone have anything remotely close to problem with it.
>>48250519
Owner was being a bit of an ass. The CR just says to use a 'mutually agreeable method', and the MTR says to use a 'random method'. The usual argument against the RPS cards is that you might have the sleeves marked and know which is what (though usually I see people lay out one of each face-down and each player chooses one).
You wouldn't be snap DQed because nothing you're doing is inherently DQable unless you're using marked sleeves, so don't fret too much. Just be prepared to switch to rolling for it or flipping a coin if your opponent or the judge has an issue with it.
Also, you might want to go talk to the owner of the LGS and ask why he said you'd be DQed. If he says the rules disallow it, bring up MTR 2.2, and/or CR 103.2.
If my opponent chooses to put his commander on the top of his Library then before his next draw step I force him to shuffle does the commander get shuffled with it?
>>48250940
Yep! The only time he can shunt his Commander to the Command Zone is if it's moving between zones. In your question, it's not moving between zones, just changing position in the zone where it already is, so he can't do much about it.
>>48251067
What happens if an opponent controls a Tainted Remedy and I control a Transcendence, and then I get bolted or some ought?
gA, what tournament rules (if any) have been broken if Player A says "pass turn, I have effects on your upkeep", and Player B immediately untaps and then draws for turn? What's the fix, if there is one?
>>48252703
Tournament rules? Technically none. That's not a Tournament Error, that's a Game Play Error. Pretty much a GRV, since it doesn't fit neatly into anything else. An argument could be made for Hidden Card Error, saying that he's drawing when nothing is telling him to.
If we apply the GRV fix, we just put a card at random from his hand on top of his library as a 'rewind' and go back to the upkeep where the opponent has stuff to do. If we apply the HCE fix, then we reveal the hand to the opponent, they pick a card and we shuffle that card into the random portion of the library, and continue on.
>>48252759
How would you know which of those to slot it into? What would you look for to go one way or the other?
>>48252786
Judgement call, really. It comes down to whether the responding FJ decides "The problem is you didn't give him priority and jumped right ahead to your draw step" (GRV) or "you drew a card during your upkeep, which you cannot do" (HCE).
Personally I prefer the GRV route, but I wouldn't argue against an HCE.
>>48252833
What kinds of things might clue you in that Player B had intentionally rushed past their upkeep? Asking as always to try to become a better judge myself.
>>48252882
I can't give you hard answers here. Pretty much anything involving the word "investigation" has an inherent "you had to be there" component to it that's hard to just discuss via text. A lot of it comes with experience, and better teachers than I might be able to explain more clearly; I know some judges have done interactive Investigation Scenarios to help train newer judges.
Personally I just go off of body language, consistency of story, and consistency of skill. If someone who has been playing very tightly and technically all day suddenly starts making sloppy plays that happen to potentially benefit them, I ready up the Baleful Stare. Sometimes it's just something about the way they're acting that rubs you the wrong way, and makes you want to poke into it a bit and see what you can find.
But yeah, a TON of it isn't really something you can convey in text. The body language, potential changes in speech patterns, minor changes in their story, nervousness, etc.
So last week I was playing this kid and he played a Structural Distortion targeting my Wild-Field Scarecrow. In response I payed its cost and sacrificed it. He insisted I still took 2 damage from his spell and I didn't feel like arguing so I just took it.
I shouldn't have taken any damage when Structural Distortion resolved, correct?
>>48253006
Thanks anyways! It does help a little.
Another question:
Player A controls two Ornithopters, one Signal Pest, a Ravager, a Vault Skirge, and a Mox Opal. Player B controls a Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet and a random flier (I forget, doesn't really matter anyways). Player A attacks with the Ornithopters, Skirge, and Pest. Player B blocks Skirge with the flier. Player A then sacs Skirge to Ravager, sacs Opal to Ravager, and then sacs the Ravager to itself in an attempt to put counters on an Ornithopter. At this point, Player B remember that he controls Kalitas, and points to it. They agree (without me there) to rewind the Ravager eating itself. Player A passes after combat, Player B draws for turn, and then for some reason they call me over. What do you do at this point?
I had them rewind back to the point where the Skirge was sac'd (so Player B gets their zombie) and progress again from there since as far as I could tell it repaired what should have happened pretty reasonably without substantial strategic changes. Note that this happened at Regular - I basically explained what my two options were (either rewind or let it go) and while I didn't give them a choice, I paid attention to reactions/body language to try to suss out which would make a better experience for the players. They both seemed happier about a rewind, so that's what I went with.
>>48253059
Correct. Structural Distortion has exactly one target: target artifact or land. If that target becomes illegal before the spell resolves (for example, because it stopped existing on the battlefield like your Scarecrow did), then the entire spell will be countered on resolution by the rules of the game ("Fizzle", in slang terms). The game rules eat the spell and none of its effects happen.
Compare to Searing Blaze- that still has a legal target if the target creature gets sacced (the target player), so it will still resolve and do all it can.
>>48253093
And now sleep. If the thread's still running when I wake up I'll tend to it; if not, I'll make a new one as soon as I get to the office.
Pic related comes from an ancient modern general thread.
The deck's premise was:
>So today I learned how to flip a coin to always get the answer I want.
>I'm gonna post a deck list and you guys tell me how to refine it.
>I want to disguise it as best I can so it seems like a deck that is a little janky, but that if I get lucky I win with.
If someone caught on and called for a judge, how would you handle it?
>>48254396
im not a judge but you could get a third party to do flips for the player if their winrate is shifty
>>48250774
The TO said that since RPS is strategy and not random, it's improperly determining a winner and referred me to the IPG.
>>48254396
dunno how gA would handle it, but if I was, I'd want to see the flips or the coin and determine if there's foul play there.
This may be confirmation bias, but I've found that often times (though hardly every time) if the coin is heads-up when you flip it, it'll land on tails and vice versa. If he's just doing that or something, there's not much I can do as judge.
>>48254396
If I suspected the person was unfairly flipping the coin, I'd investigate. If my investigation led me to believe they were knowingly cheating, I would DQ them.
>>48256382
"A player uses or offers to use a method that is not part of the current game (including actions not legal in the current game) to determine the outcome of a game or match."
Improperly Determining a Winner is only a penalty if you're using a non-Magic method to determine the winner of a game or match of Magic. It has fuck-all to do with determining who goes first. Maybe just don't break out the RPS at his shop, but they shouldn't be a problem elsewhere.
>>48252566
Sorry, totally missed this last night.
So, the Bolt hits you for 3, which triggers Transcendance. As that trigger resolves, it'll try to make you gain 6 life, but Tainted Remedy will replace that with "lose 6 life". So you'll go down another 6 life, which triggers Transcendance again to gain you 12 life, which turns into "lose 12 life", which triggers it to gain you 24 life, etc.
Unless one of you elects to destroy one of the two enchantments, the game ends in a draw because your enchantment will just keep triggering itself and the game can't move on.
If I play Hazezon Tamar and leave him on the field until my next turn when the tokens appear from his ability and then use Descent of the dragons on him and the tokens do his tokens survive him leaving? Do things leave in a particuliar order, or is it all at the same time or what?
>>48260641
Descent will destroy everything at the same time and put dragons into play. Once it's finishes resolving there will be a Hazezon trigger that makes you exile his tokens which you will have zero of assuming you hit all of them with Descent.
>>48260641
Unless the spell or ability says to destroy them in a certain order, you destroy them all at once. Even if you were destroying them one at a time, Hazezon's trigger can't go on the stack in the middle of a spell resolving. By the time that trigger even goes on the stack, your Descent has fully resolved and turned your Sand Warriors into Dragons.
>>48257503
Isn't losing the game a state based action? Why don't you lose the game after your life drops below zero?
Is that a chumhandle?
>>48261631
Yes and no. I picked the name 5 years ago when a friend had introduced me to Homestuck and I pondered what my chumhandle would be. I haven't actually read Homestuck in a whiiiiiile.
>>48261644
Apparently it's finished.
So if Helix Pinnacle triggers and it changes controllers before the ability resolves, what happens exactly?
If you block a 6 power creature with Tree of Perdition and it's toughness goes down to 7 until the end of the turn, if you activate it's ability will your opponents life total go down to 7?
>>48262708
Damage =/= losing Toughness
>>48262679
The player it triggered for wins the game, because he still controls the trigger.
Could you link to the Comprehensive Rules in the OP from now on?
>http://media.wizards.com/2016/docs/MagicCompRules_04082016.txt
>>48262708
If Tree of Perdition has 13 toughness and takes 6 damage, it's toughness is still 13.
Unless it got damaged by a wither or infect dork. Those would change it's toughness.
>119.6. Damage marked on a creature remains until the cleanup step, even if that permanent stops being a creature. If the total damage marked on a creature is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed as a state-based action (see rule 704). All damage marked on a permanent is removed when it regenerates (see rule 701.12, "Regenerate") and during the cleanup step (see rule 514.2).
>>48262843
>>48263120
thanks guys, I figured that was the case but I wanted to be sure
>>48262679
The controller of the trigger is the player who controlled the Pinnacle when it triggered. The trigger will begin to resolve, check if the Helix Pinnacle that it came from has 100 counters (it does, probably) and then you'll win the game.
>>48262708
Damage does not reduce toughness.
>>48262998
I suppose I could. That or Yawgatog, since it's hyperlinked.
>>48263406
>Yawgatog, since it's hyperlinked.
Didn't know about this. Godamn that's a lot of purple.
Seems to load just about as quickly, which is nice.
I get the impression the links were script generated though.
More than a few glossary references seem unintentional.
>>48263406
This site's great. I feel like I'm looking at Black Box Packs from Duel Masters.
>>48264095
why is this card hilarious?
>>48264095
>>48264149
post more joke cards.
>>48264251
>>48263871
Possibly. I also use blogs.magicjudges.org/rules since it has the CR, MTR, JAR, and IPG all in one place.
>>48264149
Because Dandan had a fish in the art but people used to joke that the creature was the boat.
>>48264363
What am I looking at, here?
>>48264630
In 2002 WotC had an anime/manga/etc. made to compete with Yugioh.
But it was mechanically pretty different from Magic, so they made a second TCG.
It was called Duel Masters. English translations got axed in 2006.
Pretty interesting game, still going strong in Japan. Lots of weird shit.
>http://tabakrules.tumblr.com/post/100530619404/duel-masters-triple-faced-cards#permalink
That card is "Parlock ~Crossword~" from the Duel Masters equivalent of an Un-set.
The crossword has multiple correct solutions, and it's ability is dependent on your answer.
Those sets are tournament legal in Duel Masters though, so if you want to build a "2016 Calender" tribal deck you totally can.
>>48264951
Except that's only partially right. It started in 1999, and was not owned or made by WotC at all. The TCG started in Japan, owned by Takara Tomy, and WotC just published the English version because they owned the rights to the name "Duel Masters".
>>48240125
Can you figure it out?
>>48265641
Easy.Mind Control on one of the Flagbearers. Cast Chain Lightning on the one you stole, then pay RR to copy it. The copy is created directly on the stack, not cast, so you can dome your opponent and bypass their Flagbearer entirely.
>>48265691
wow, that was quick.
>>48265691
On the equally valid other handPacifism has flowers in it's picture. Aren't they nice?
>>48265728
To be fair, I've seen the"Create a copy directly on the stack to bypass Flagbearer"thing in Magic Puzzles before.
>>48265752
I'm expecting a puzzle with a changeling one day, where them being Flagbearers will be the solution.
>>48265777 Make one yourself. While you're at it, make one where it's relevant that they're Sand.
I have questions and need critique on my deck. Should I add another kozilek? How terrible is this? Should I splash white for declaration and unmaking? What else?
It runs okay, but I want to improve it. I want it to be competent at the start then flop a big ol' eldrazi dick on everything. I need critique/suggestions
>>48266812
I have no opinions on the matter because I am laughably bad at Magic.
>>48266812
4x Thought-Knot
4x Reality Smasher
>>48266865 Favorite Legacy deck to judge? Least favorite Legacy deck to judge? Favorite Legacy deck to run?
For that matter, what do you play besides EDH?http://tappedout.net/users/galvanicAutogenitor/deck-folders/
>>48267047
I don't really have a favorite one to judge, because I judge very little Legacy. Miracles and Horsemen can be a pain though due to time problems, ESPECIALLY with less-competent pilots. I don't play Legacy, unfortunately- nobody in town to play with, so it's not worth buying into. I pretty much only play EDH, and occasionally Limited.
New player here, not too educated on phase rulings and the like. Say I have both a Putrefax and a Meren of Clan Nel Toth survive to the beginning of the end phase with 5+ experience counters. Meren and Putrefax both trigger and I can choose what goes first so I choose to have Putrefax sac itself and Meren to bring it back to the battlefield. Will Putrefax still sacrifice again immediately after?
Alternatively, if I had 4 exp counters instead of 5 could I have Putrefax brought back since its death triggers Meren's exp counter gain?
>>48267741
Meren's trigger needs a target the second it goes on the stack, at which point your Putrefax is still alive. You won't be able to get back the Putrefax.
Let's say you have two, though (maybe your current one is a clone, I don't know). As soon as you move to the End Step, everything that triggers "at the beginning of your end step", triggers. If you put another Putrefax or something like that onto the battlefield after those triggers fire, it's "too late" for these new guys to trigger.
>>48267791
If the Putrefax from a turn before is in the grave is pulled out by Meren will it stay on the battlefield during that end step? I'm trying to abuse Putrefax as an alternate EDH wincon.
>>48267855
Yes, it will- sorry if I didn't make that clear! Once all the 'beginning of upkeep' triggers have fired, we're past the point where any more WOULD. If you put a second Putrefax onto the battlefield once you actually have priority in the End Step, it's too late in the step for it to trigger.
Of course, it's just gonna die during your opponent's end step, so that's not terribly helpful.
>>48267879
Ah. Then I'll just have to put it back in my hand. Thanks for the help.
>>48267898
Well, if you just have the one Putrefax, you won't be able to target it at all with Meren's trigger if it's on the board when you move to the end step.
If you have one in the graveyard and you have any less than 5 counters, you get it back to your hand.
If you have one in the graveyard and you have 5 or more counters, it'll come back to the board and die during your opponent's end step. You don't get the option of putting it into your hand if it has CMC less than or equal to the number of experience counters you have, it just goes to the board.
>>48267930
BEDTIME BITCHES.
See you kids in the AM.
>>48265737 >>48268872
You never answered
>>48265641With one more mana (any color) Firebolt > Flashback Firebolt > Keldon Marauders would work, yeah? Not familiar with flagbearer mechanics. Do they apply to triggered abilties?
>>48270768
No, flagbearer doesn't work for triggered abilities.
Solution posted here: >>48265691
how does this intereact with odric 2.0?
>>48270894
You stack the triggers so the blood mist resolves first, then odric triggers to give your team double strike. Doesn't work on your opponent's turns though.
>>48270894
>4/8/2016 Odric’s ability triggers at the beginning of each combat, not just combat on your turn, whether or not any creatures you control have any of the listed abilities. If a creature gains one of the listed abilities before Odric’s triggered ability resolves, perhaps due to another ability that triggered at the beginning of combat, then creatures you control will gain that ability.
The order of simultaneous triggers are picked by the active player (the player taking their turn).
If Blood Mist triggers after Odric, it's ability will be above Odric's on the stack and will resolved before Odric's ability does.
Odric's ability only checks your creatures when it resolves, so anything they gain before that is kosher.
A hilarious scenario from EDH night yesterday:
Noyan Dar player has a few animated lands and turns his Contested War Zone into a creature, then casts Mirrorweave, targeting it. All our creatures become Contested War Zones and thus stop being creatures for a turn, then he swings at us with one previously animated creature each. Since we have no creatures we can't block, and he gains control of all our warzones. Then the turn ends and the lands he stole become normal creatures again.
Later when the Marton Stromgald player cast Insurrection, he still had to give those stolen creatures back to Noyan Dar at end of turn, right?
Besides being the most stylish and original combo play I've seen in a long time, this whole interaction works like I said it, right?
>>48271007
>he still had to give those stolen creatures back to Noyan Dar at end of turn, right?
Yes.
>this whole interaction works like I said it, right?
More yes.
>>48268872
In a multiplayer game, Player A indefinitely steals control of a creature from Player B.
Then it gets Act of Treason'd (etc.) by Player C, and A dies before C has to give it back.
What happens to the creature?
>>48271175
>800.4a. When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game, any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end, and all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had priority at the time he or she left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.
When player A dies his "I control player B's creature" effect ends. At EoT Act of Treason will give the creature stolen by Player C back to it's original controller A.
>>48270306
Ah, my mistake.They are quite nice
>>48270894
If you stack the triggers right, you can have Mist give one of your guys Double Strike, then have Odric's trigger share the love.
>>48271007
Yes. The War Zone's trigger created a control-change effect in layer 2 as it resolved that said he controlled your creatures. The duration is not stated, so it is indefinite.
Insurrection steals those creatures by creating a new control change effect, but that one DOES have a duration, and as soon as it ends we default back to the 'old' one that says he controls them.
>>48271175
As soon as A dies his control-change effect ends. C will keep the creature until HIS effect ends at the end of the turn, then it goes back to B.
ga i'm scared to go to prerelease
>>48273467
You shouldn't be! They're usually quite fun and laid back.
>>48273516
Lunch bump
>>48276703
Does having a Havengul Lich and a Rooftop Storm let me cast zombies from my yard for 1?
If I'm observing a match, and a player misses a trigger (a must trigger, not a may trigger), can I point it out? Or is that match interference?
>>48276960
It does! Activating Lich for 1 lets you cast that spell from your graveyard this turn. It's not an alternate cost or anything, it's just giving you permission to cast things from your graveyard when you normally can't.
Rooftop Storm lets you pay the alternate cost of 0 to cast Zombies, with no restriction on where they're cast from. So you can pay 1 to target a Zombie, then cast it for 0.
>>48277075
You shouldn't ever "point out" anything in a match you're observing. If you see someone break a rule, you should stop them and say "Something is wrong, stop playing, I need to go get a judge". Don't point out the mistake for them, let the Judge do his job.
For triggers, the only time you should interfere as a spectator is if you think someone is cheating. JUDGES don't step in when they see triggers being missed (unless we suspect cheating).
