Careful Consideration – You Are Not a Pretty Pretty Princess

October 29, 2009 |

We could do with thicker skins.

Whenever I go to events or hear stories or read tournament reports, I'm struck by how sensitive people are to perceived slights. I see people get bent out of shape over the smallest of etiquette breaches, even when they aren't really breaches at all, and far more drama is manufactured than is necessary.

There are a lot of great people who play the game, and overall I think Magic players get a bad rap for being socially awkward, but there is a grain of truth to the outsiders' perception of said awkwardness. Basic rules of etiquette and human decency sometimes get lost in a sea of "unwritten rules," and it's necessary to take a step back from time to time and examine your behavior towards another human being who is, at the core of it all, playing the same game that you both love.

Let's look at some situations where I think people have been far too sensitive.

He was not social at the table!
Magic's a pretty tough game, and different people approach the game differently. Just because someone's not chatty or engaging in small talk doesn't mean they're a bad person, nor does it necessarily indicate what their demeanor will be away from the table. I'm not talking about people who are abrasive or abusive, but people who are just not particularly social.

Some people take this personally and think that that person is generally just a "douchebag" or an "asshole," and don't want to go to parties with that person and have developed a dislike towards them. I have a couple of friends who are great, funny, socially awesome people whom I enjoy hanging around with, but if I'm matched against them at a PTQ, their presence suggests they want me to lose in fiery, horrific fashion that shatters my very soul. That's fine.

Someone's table demeanor does not necessarily translate to their real life persona. Just because they wouldn't laugh at your jokes doesn't mean that they hate you. Often, they just focus on what matters.

Now if that persona continues over to his off-table interactions, you have a case. Then it's a case of the "real life" persona carrying over to his table demeanor. To be fair, I've never encountered anyone who was a jerk away from the table but was really nice when in front of you, but that distinction really should go only one way.

Princesses:

He was a stickler for the rules!
This really only applies to Competitive Rules Enforcement Level (REL) events. At an FNM or store draft, things are a little different. But when there's a plane ticket, or money, or byes to a Grand Prix at stake, then you and your opponent have every right to stick to the rules.

I've had people get upset with me because I wouldn't allow takebacks. If I attack with a bunch of creatures and you block with a Mogg Fanatic, then put your Mogg Fanatic in the graveyard and write down the damage you took from my creatures, then you cannot go back and say "wait, I meant to sacrifice the Mogg Fanatic at you." Yes, you probably did, but you didn't. I'm all for keeping things friendly, but it's a PTQ. Suck it up.

An example of this came up between two friends of mine in a Cruise qualifier, a competitive level event with a $300 prize (entry to the Magic Cruise) at stake. The event was unsanctioned, but announced to be enforced at the Competitive REL.

Player A attacks with Boggart-Ram Gang.
Player B flashes in Plumeveil.
Player A plays Deathmark on the Plumeveil before blockers.
Player B puts the Plumeveil in the graveyard and takes three points of damage.
Player A passes the turn.

Player B (we'll call him "Bob") during his turn realizes that Deathmark is a sorcery, so the Plumeveil should not have died during the combat phase. Bob calls a judge, the judge determines that the situation is reversible. Player A (hereafter known as "Alfred") says that this isn't how the rules should be applied, that the turn has passed, and both players should get a warning, but the game state should stand. Alfred appeals to the head judge, and the Plumeveil ultimately ends up in the graveyard.

Alfred and Bob are very good friends with each other, and Alfred almost certainly did not cheat (he's well-established as an honest player), but both were guilty of sloppy play. Bob felt that Alfred's conduct to try to get the edge once the mistake was made was uncalled for because they were friends.

Bollocks.

There's a multi-hundred dollar prize at stake here. You play to win, and you are free to take any legal edge you can. If Bob thought that Alfred had intentionally cheated by trying to sneak the Deathmark by him, that would be one thing, but that wasn't the case. Bob never thought Alfred was trying to cheat, but that they were both guilty of sloppy play.

I don't care if you're my friend or not. I'm not going to allow a takeback at a competitive level event, even if you're my best friend. I wouldn't even allow that sort of thing if I were playing against my own wife. (Her response to this discussion: "It's a PTQ! No takebacks! Not even with my own husband!" I married well.) And I expect my friends to treat me the same way. I want a takeback? Too bad. It's nothing personal, and I won't take it personally.

Princesses:

He tried to get a mental edge!
This one you don't see very often, but I have seen it from time to time, and it can really get people upset.

The best example I can think of is from Noah Weil's tournament report from Grand Prix: Seattle, particularly round 14 against Stan Bessey. Noah felt that Stan was a little too comfortable and also felt he was playing a little slow, so he called a judge to watch for slow play, killing two birds with one stone. Noah's demeanor was intentionally to get Stan out of his comfort level, which elicited a pretty harsh response from Stan in his podcast the next week, calling him a "douchebag," a "jackass", and a "jerk," and doing so in a very public way (for what it's worth, the podcast was recorded before Noah's article went up).

Both players had a shot at top eight for the Grand Prix at this point. So trying to get a mental edge seems like fair game to me. I like Stan an awful lot and I was very happy to see him succeed in Seattle (and make day two in Austin), but his reaction to a judge call was a little out of line my opinion. At the very least, it was quite princess-like.

Trying to get a mental edge is part of the game, and I don't think it is in any way uncalled for or bush league.

One of my very favorite mental edge stories comes from a Cruise Qualifier last year. Bill Stark was playing in top eight and his opponent was complaining that he hadn't eaten for hours and was quite hungry. Some of Bill's friends had brought him a cheeseburger and fries, and Bill took the opportunity to try to get an edge. He ate the fries quickly, but instead of eating the cheeseburger (the original plan), he decided to just leave it in front of his opponent, opening the wrapper and letting the delicious cheeseburger aroma waft over to the guy who was complaining about starving.

It's just part of the game. Is it really uncalled for or above and beyond the bounds of sportsmanship to show your opponent a delicious cheeseburger? That's brilliant!

There are boundaries, of course. Anything personal is off-limits. If you find out that your opponent's child is sick or something, you don't go after that. Don't make fun of their stutter or religion, either (both of which I've seen).

Princesses:

He took advantage of my lack of knowledge!
If you walk into a PTQ without the knowledge of the rules and someone gets you on a rules interaction, it's not their fault. When Demigod of Revenge was first seeing play, I was able to power through a few Cryptic Commands because they didn't understand the interaction with the Demigod trigger.

"Demigod of Revenge. Pass priority to you."
"Cryptic Command, counter and draw a card."
"Okay, Demigod goes to the graveyard. Pass priority to you."
"Um, okay."
"Demigod comes into play."
"Wait, what?"
"We should call a judge, because this is kind of confusing."

I chose my words carefully and said things in such a manner that whenever a judge was called in these situations, they would rule in my favor. There was no ambiguity as to whether or not I passed priority, and the judges always snap-ruled in my favor as a result.

A more iffy, but still completely legal rules interaction also features Bill Stark, who describes the situation this way (taken from thestarkingtonpost.com with permission):

"Here was the situation: my opponent, Sam Tian, and I were mired in a Zoo mirror match. The winner would get to double draw into the Top 8, and we were deep into the third game. Sam's Domain Zoo was behind to my Ranger Zoo/Naya build when time was called. He was at just 1 life when I untapped for my final of five turns. Unfortunately for me, Sam had had just enough removal to kill all of my attackers on his turn. Sam couldn't win, but as I cracked a sac land to maximize my draw step, I mentally calculated a small number of outs. I needed to hit any of the remaining burn spells in my deck in the form of a singleton Keldon Marauders, or a combination of Seal of Fire and Lightning Helixes (though I had already used some of them up over the course of the game).

What happened instead, as the crowd pressed in and I carefully peeled the last card from the top of my deck, was me drawing Ranger of Eos. For a split second my heart sank at the realization that I was about to get a draw where I felt I should have gotten a win had we had infinite time to finish our match, particularly considering my Ranger topdeck. For a second I considered playing Ranger, tutoring up two Wild Nacatls, then asking my opponent to concede to me as I was going to kill him if we had just one more turn.

Instead, I realized I had another plan. I could play Ranger, point out the Mogg Fanatics I had in my graveyard, and say something to the effect of "I play Mogg Fanatics, you're at 1." It would be a stone cold bluff as my list had only two Mogg Fanatics in it (the two in my graveyard) and all my opponent would need to do was say "Okay, show me" to earn a draw. At that point, I'd still be left with my original plan (try to earn a guilted concession which my opponent was under no obligation to provide and which I, in the same position, would not grant) but would have taken the opportunity to improve my lot in life with an additional grab at victory. In the course of a few seconds after drawing, that's what I decided to do, confidently dropping the 3/2 on the board, pointing out a Fanatic in my graveyard and indicating my ability to tutor up another for the win. My opponent bit, opting to concede rather than force me to go through the motions, and I was able to double draw into the Top 8."

Note the wording here. He didn't misrepresent anything. He simply said, "I play Mogg Fanatics, you're at 1." Both statements are true, and his opponent should have taken the extra ten seconds to make Bill confirm that he had Mogg Fanatic in his deck. Bill pulled a win out of an unwinnable situation with a great bluff, and did so without breaking any of the rules. Had he said something like, "I'm going to get Mogg Fanatic and kill you," maybe there might have been a grey area. But Bill's knowledge of what he could and could not say, and also knowledge of how to say it while being legal and misleading, won him a match that would have otherwise been a draw.

If you don't know the rules, don't be surprised if you get taken down by the sharks.

(And if you aren't sure about anything, call a judge. Don't trust your opponent. Ever. That's what judges are here for.)

At a casual competitive level, it's totally different. I wouldn't try to do any of these things at my local FNM, but rather explaining to my opponent why a Demigod trigger resolves or doesn't, and using it as an opportunity to teach something new. But when it's the PTQ level? It's cutthroat, baby.

Princesses:

He cheated!
So your opponent cheated during your match, and because of an incorrect judge call or a judge being unable to prove intent, they get away with it. Maybe they drew an extra card and put it in their hand, then put it back on top of their library and blatantly lied about not drawing the card. There are situations where your opponent definitely cheated, you know they cheated, they know you know they cheated, and bad blood happens.

In those cases, those cheaters should be set on fire. All cheaters should be set on fire. Ban them, burn them at the stake, banish them to Siberia, whatever it takes to get them out of Magic. They have no place in the game.

You have a problem with a cheater? Good. You should. Everyone should.

Princesses:

Why, you're not a princess at all!

He wouldn't scoop!
I can understand this one, and it's hard to fight off the visceral reaction when you get paired down and you have a shot at top eight, and your opponent for whatever reason wants to play it out. Maybe they want rating points, or maybe they just want better prizes. Since you can't offer to give prizes in exchange for a concession, the best you can do is try to convince them that they will get good karma.

(Some people nudge nudge wink wink suggest that if they get a concession, they will get prizes in a roundabout way by saying things like, "I'm a nice guy," or "I can't make any promises, but good things happen to those in your position." I'm pretty sure this is illegal.)

Sometimes they're dreamcrushing because they want to get a friend into top 8 (which I've done in the past). Sometimes they're dreamcrushing because they're mad at their girlfriend and want to take it out on their opponents (I saw this happen once at a PTQ). Sometimes they want prizes. Whatever the reason, they won't concede.

If you're in that position, it's unfortunate, but you aren't owed anything. You aren't entitled to that top eight slot, and you can still get it by winning your match. And if they scoop to you to get into top eight, then another guy doesn't get in. Why are you more entitled to that slot than they are?

(And having been in the position where I would get into top 8 unless the guy getting paired down is scooped in, I've felt that pain, too. Why can't I be entitled?)

It happens, but there's no need to vow everlasting revenge, or to "take down his name" or some such.

Something kind of similar happened at a tournament I played in. It was the last round against a friend, and he and I discussed a prize split. The winner got prizes, the loser did not, and the prizes were substantial (worth $100 or more at the very least). We were trying to work out a split and we had a judge nearby just to make sure everything was legit, and the judge asked us to start playing or make an agreement. So we agreed to start playing, and we'd discuss things later.

We had a very, very long, drawn out game that was back and forth and took up 45 minutes or so, and it was unclear to either player who would win. He won, and we never finished game two, and that was the match to him. I was pretty upset because he ended up taking all the prizes even though we only started playing because the judge told us to.

Well, we didn't have an agreement, so he won the match and got the prizes. But somehow I was still upset for some reason, as if I was entitled to a portion of the prizes. If we didn't agree to a prize split, then we didn't agree, and my getting upset about the situation was not really appropriate.

I was fitted for a nice sparkly dress and my tiara was beautiful.

Princesses:

Well, my prize split drama isn't one princess. It's a solid four.

OMG, a netdeck!
This happened to me once at City Champs. The winner of City Champs finals could bypass Regionals and get an invitation to Nationals, and the way you qualified for the finals was through feeder tournaments at smaller stores. This was shortly after Worlds 2008 when Chapin's Dragonstorm deck had gone to the finals, and it looked like a fun deck to play.

My first round opponent was caught off guard and was unprepared for the potent combo deck, and he was dispatched fairly quickly. After the match, he started complaining to me about how I had no creativity and that I shouldn't be playing a netdeck because it's dishonorable. Making things worse, several other people at the shop chimed in, and I was getting yelled at for playing a netdeck.

I didn't go back to that store again, but I did make the City Champs finals tournament via another store. In that tournament I saw the guy who started the whole whining about the netdeck thing. What was he playing?

A deck he got off the Internet.

To paraphrase Oprah Winfrey, "You get a tiara! You get a tiara! You get a tiara! You get a tiara!"

I couldn't go below ten on this one.

Princesses:

Special Handshake Session
Perhaps no other simple interaction has resulted in more hurt feelings, drama, and Princess-dom than the handshake. Extending the hand is a nice custom, it shows some good will, and it's something we've been doing since Little League. You spend 50 minutes trying to smash your face in, but at the end of the day, it's a game and a handshake shows good sportsmanship.

He won, then initiated the handshake!
This seems to be a bit of a regional thing. I've heard from people who have moved to the Northwest from the Midwest that the loser should always initiate the handshake. If the winner initiates the handshake, then it's rubbing it in that they won.

How fragile. When the match is over, I don't care or notice who initiated the handshake. It's like two girls (or princesses, if you will) showing up at a party and agonizing over the protocol over what it means if one says hello to the other and IT'S A FREAKING HANDSHAKE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD THIS ISN'T THE PROTOCOL FOR THE ROMAN ARMY.

Ahem. Sorry.

We're in "basic human decency" territory here. If someone extends a hand in good sportsmanship, it's very rude to turn it down, but people have the smallest tolerance for perceived slights.

But I was manascrewed!
There was a bit of a hullabaloo in the forums of a Kyle Sanchez article last week. In the Last Chance Qualifier for Pro Tour: Austin, Kyle wrote that he was manascrewed and his opponent did lethal damage, then extended the hand. Because apparently handshake protocol is so specific that things should be gathered up before the hand is to be extended, and the loser should initiate the handshake, Kyle decided he would turn down the shake.

His opponent called him a name of sorts, and Kyle turned around and yelled at him.

In the forums, he defended his behavior by saying, "I turn around and explain vulgarly why your[sic] not supposed to shove your hand in the face of someone that just lost to screwed situations."

Magic is a game with variance, and there are going to be times when you get screwed. It happens. Stop getting upset over it. Yes, it sucks to be stuck on two lands and not be able to play the cards in your hand, but it's not your opponent's fault. Does a handshake need to meet some sort of mood requirement pre-test?

I can understand being annoyed if the opponent is a little zealous in shaking the hand. There can be personal space issues which are violated, and that's a legitimate concern/reason to be taken aback in the heat of the moment, but because you were screwed in the game?

Princess, did you draw enough land? Princess, were you able to cast your spells? Princess, did you mulligan?

It's a freaking handshake. Just shake the hand and put down the sparkly wand.

(And if they turn down my handshake, oh well. I'm certainly not going to call after them and call them names. Pink dresses everywhere.)

Princesses:

He was a douchebag!
In the semifinals of Grand Prix: Tampa, Conley Woods was playing against John May (see the 5:55 mark of the video) and played a Mold Shambler with kicker, initially tapped one mana source too few, then shortly after tapped the forest to kick the Shambler and pointed at May's Island to blow it up.

May called a judge to see if he could get a ruling on that, perhaps trying to get a judge to rule that Conley didn't kick the Shambler. The judge quickly ruled by intent and let the Shambler be kicked. To me, this is fine; May was trying to get an edge. It was the top four of a Grand Prix, so the stakes are quite high. And Conley said he didn't care about the judge call, either.

But according to Conley, May said afterwards, "You need to own up to your own mistakes and you should be punished for playing badly."

So Conley proceeded to win the game and the match, and after the match, John extended the hand and Conley said, "No thanks."

Conley's reasoning was this:
"The shake implies good game, good sportsmanship, friendly competition. Once he made that remark, that all went out the window. I wasn't having it."

That's a fair point. I don't think a "good game" is necessary, but the handshake definitely implies good sportsmanship and friendly competition, and if the guy is making insults like that, well"¦it's justifiable. I wouldn't turn down the handshake personally after that, but I don't fault Conley for doing so.

Princesses:

Of course, this is all in my opinion. There's no etiquette book in Magic, and I expect there to be some disagreement over my opinions. But my wife often has observed that the drama that plays out over etiquette slights reminds her of when she went to an all-girls private school, where catty teenage drama played out every day over silly, insignificant things. That's not a good comparison. Magic players could use a little social adjustment and be a little more thick-skinned.

At the end of the day, I think a good barometer is intent. Did I intend to slight you when I won the game and initiated the handshake? Was it my intent to do you personal harm if I don't scoop you into the top eight of a PTQ? If you think the answer is "yes," then there's solid ground to be miffed. But if someone's just clueless or they don't subscribe to the same exacting rules of etiquette you do, is it really worth getting worked up over?

Yours sparklingly (with unicorns!),
-Zaiem

zaiemb at gmail dot com
zbeg on twitter

(Princess illustration by Frits Ahlefeldt-Laurvig under Creative Commons license.)

Share This Article

Share |

About This Author

Zaiem Beg

Zaiem is the editor-in-chief and director of IT for Channelfireball. He's also a competitive PTQ grinder with a pair of Pro Tour qualifications and a handful of PTQ top 8s. ...