How do you handle fast players in a casual setting that skip priority?

Question

This really isn't a problem in a tournament setting, because players are expected to know the rules, and will usually ask their opponent if they wish to take any actions before allowing a spell to resolve. In a casual setting though, and especially in Multiplayer, where players may not be paying that much attention to what might be happening on the other side of the board, how do you handle a player who casts a string of non-instant spells without giving anyone the time/chance to counter each spell in the string?

Time is usually at a premium in MP, so I doubt that most players ask each player in turn if they have a response. (with the possible exception of the resolution of cards like Browbeat, where it is optimal to see if any player will bite the bullet and take the damage). In your multiplayer magic games, do you only ask if an opponent is playing Blue with 2-3 Mana available? Do you pause for a short time time after each spell? Do you allow opponents to backup and counter the first spell?

What is the best way to handle counterspells in multiplayer to minimize time, and not make counters too powerful?

Answer 1

By the rules, you allow opponents to backup and counter the first spell.

---

MTG is not a real-time game, it's a turn-based game. In other words, it's not a game of chicken.

MTG would be extremely tedious if you had to explicitly pass priority every time. That why people use shortcuts. If you say "I cast Foo and Bar", you are actually proposing the following a shortcut:

1. I cast Foo
2. I pass
3. You pass
4. I cast Bar
5. I pass
6. You pass

The other player(s) may accept the shortcut entirely, or they may accept the shortcut only until a point of their choosing. Accepting part of the shortcut could be done, for example, by saying "In response to Foo, I cast Baz."

If the shortcut is accepted, the person who proposed it must abide by it. (He must cast Foo and Bar.)

If the shortcut is accepted to a point, the person who proposed it must abide by it up to that point. (He must cast Foo.) He can deviate as he wishes past that point. (He need not cast Bar, though he obviously can if he wants to do so.)

So the answer, by the rules, is the last option you presented: You allow opponents to backup and counter the first spell.

If you want to be sure Foo isn't going to be countered before announcing you're casting Bar, you have to make sure noone wants to do anything in response to Foo.

Answer 2

I say "No, you don't.".

Whether he realizes it or not, any time a player says he is doing two things in succession without giving me a chance to respond, he is proposing a shortcut per rule 719, which must be unanimous per 719.2. This applies when he says he casts two Sorceries, when he says "I attack with the Angel." without first saying "I'm going to attack.", or when he assumes that an ability resolves. In fact, it happens constantly, and so long as everyone understands that their proposed shortcuts are subject to review, it works out fine.

So the thing you're supposed to do according to the rules is to back up to the point at which people disagree about what should happen next. If he announces two Sorceries and you want to counter the first one, he takes the second back to his hand and untaps any mana he tapped for it (because it is reasonable to assume he tapped between spells rather than all at once), and the stack is rewound to the point where it had only his first spell on it and it is the interrupting player's priority.[1] Note that the player casting the Sorceries does not get the stack rewound to a point where he had priority. By proposing that he cast two Sorceries in succession, he ceded priority after casting the first one. He does not get to change that decision.

It is slightly disadvantageous to announce "I attack with the Angel.", because one's opponent is justified in responding with "Actually, before you declare your attackers I twiddle your Angel.", possibly using the information revealed in the proposed shortcut. If he wants to keep his intentions private, a player needs to specify a shortcut that allows this. If he instead says "I'm going to declare attackers." and gives his opponent a chance to respond before following up with "I'm attacking with the Angel.", he denies his opponent this slight advantage.

[1]: Technically, what the interrupting player is saying is "I agree with your proposed shortcut, except that I want to change what happens after you pass priority after you cast that first spell." Because this new shortcut is the shortest sequence of events proposed, it is what happens. Crucially, no one gets to change their proposed shortcut, though they are not held to their announced intentions once the sequence executes.

Answer 3

If someone did this in a tournament setting, they would be in violation of a Game Rule Violation (specifically, 307.1. A player who has priority may cast a sorcery card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty, and technically stack is not empty until all players have passed priority.) , and the remedy is to simply back up the game to the point where the infraction occured:

If the error was discovered within a time frame in which a player could reasonably be expected to notice the error and the situation is simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge to back up the game to the point of the error. Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that point.

In a more casual setting, while there is no official rule (it is, of course, casual) this is usually the best course of action to take. The first sorcery the player played is the one you keep, the rest go back to his hand, any cards that changed zones as a result of the errant cards go back to where they came from, etcetera.

On the other hand, if players aren't paying attention, then too bad so sad. What I typically do in this scenario is I give 2 or 3 seconds to see if anyone responds. That's long enough for it to sink in. If someone is legitimately distracted (hey, I get texts from the wife a lot while I'm at magic, too!) -and- there's a high likelihood they're going to want to respond to it (I'm Doom Blading their fatty or something) I usually take a small effort to point it out to them. If it happened over, and over, and over again, I wouldn't continue to give that extra effort. I would simply give the standard couple seconds, look for a couple nods, and continue on.

For what it's worth, I've played hundreds of multiplayer games, and I've never had a player who chained their sorceries more than once. I (or another experienced player) just tells then 'When you play a spell, check for a response'. (Even though they don't have to check for a response for chaining instants, as they continue to have priority, it is good to pass priority between them to limit your opponents' options to counter you.)

Answer 4

It's a gentleman's game. You do your best to move along, your best to play correctly, and your best not to violate the rules or the spirit. Sometimes you have to back up. Some players have not fully learned the rules and you may have to figure out whether it is willful or innocent. Like life itself.