During a game of Commander at my local store last week some of the folks I was playing with stated that conceding the game was a 'sorcery speed' action. The playgroup made some valid points about this preventing collusion and also the somewhat-irritating situation where one player takes control of someone else's creature and swings for lethal damage with it, only to have that creature's owner leave the game, taking the creature with them.

At the time I just accepted that this could well be the case and got on with the game (I had no intention of conceding) but in a moment of curiosity decided to do a quick google search which brought me to the below entry from the comprehensive rules:

104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes loses the game immediately.

This makes it pretty clear to me that by normal rules a player can concede at any time, they don't even need to have priority.

Does anyone know whether this supposed sorcery speed concession is just a myth/common misconception or is it some sort of rule enforced only in multiplayer tournaments?

  • Interesting practical application: 3-way multi player game... Player 1 is at 1 life, Player 2 gains control of all Player 1's creatures and attacks Player 3 and Player 1 for lethal damage. Player 1 likes Player 3 so he concedes before Declare Blockers taking all his creatures controlled by Player 2 with him. Player 2 is then wide open to counter attack by Player 3. Commented Aug 14, 2015 at 20:29
  • 2
    You answer yourself in your question.
    – Waterseas
    Commented Aug 17, 2015 at 15:28

2 Answers 2


As you have shown in your question, it is a house rule. That said, it's not a particularly surprising house rule as generally the kind of concession this would arise in could easily be a jerkish move, though not necessarily.

104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.

101.1. Whenever a card’s text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence. The card overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation. The only exception is that a player can concede the game at any time (see rule 104.3a).

712.6. The controller of another player can’t make that player concede. A player may concede the game at any time, even if he or she is controlled by another player. See rule 104.3a.

405.6. Some things that happen during the game don’t use the stack.

405.6g A player may concede the game at any time. That player leaves the game immediately. See rule 104.3a.

Conceding isn't covered by the rules governing timing and priority. It is not listed in the rules under special actions. Rules as written; it can be done at any time, even when not in control of your own turn.

  • Does rule 101.1 apply to the whole of 104.3a? or just that they can concede at any time. Just thinking about Platinum Angel..."I play Platinum Angel and concede, but I don't lose..."
    – Cameron
    Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 14:19
  • Actually I suppose, you leave the game, as do your permanents, therefore you lose. Fun to think about though.
    – Cameron
    Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 14:20
  • @Cameron your comment reminds me of this joke; m.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/24lrp1/standoff_in_honolulu
    – Isaac
    Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 14:29
  • Isaac - Absolutely hilarious. Thank you for sharing!
    – Cameron
    Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 14:33

As far as official rules are concerned, it's certainly a misconception. The right to concede is unaffected by the state of the game or the number of remaining players. A player conceding can absolutely affect the game for the remaining players in a multiplayer match, but there still is no official rule anywhere that restricts your right to concede at any time. Of course, house rules can change any official rule - if your game store uses house rules for their (inofficial) tournaments, then that's the way it is.

Note that collusion is a valid concern in a tournament setting and forbidden by the official tournament rules. However, while conceding a game can be the result of collusion, the act of collusion is forbidden and punishable, not the act of conceding. If the tournament you have mentioned was a sanctioned event, changing the rules of conceding to be sorcery speed was not consistent with the official rules of the game, but if the Head Judge made that call, it still stands, as the Head Judge is the final rules authority at an event.

  • The game in question wasn't a tournament game, just a friendly so there was no Head Judge ruling per se. I was less querying the official rules on the matter and more curious as to whether this misconception arose from rules in some tournament, a third-party format rule (e.g. it originated in EDH but didn't translate into the official Commander format) or some other source that could be traced. If that's not clear in my question I can edit it to try and make that more prominent, great answer anyway though.
    – Aiken
    Commented Aug 14, 2015 at 11:29
  • 1
    @Aiken Tis not really a misconception, just a rule put into place to prevent dickishness.
    – Waterseas
    Commented Aug 14, 2015 at 13:48
  • Ah. That's a slightly different question - I didn't catch that nuance. Seems more likely to me that it was a house rule put in place a while ago, then taught to new players who took it as gospel. But I don't think you will get certainty; baring knowing that it isn't from an official, central source. That said it isn't an uncommon thing to put house rules in place about - though this isn't the only solution I've seen.
    – Isaac
    Commented Aug 14, 2015 at 20:29

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .