Blanket Priority Statement at Start of Match
from UDE's Player Management Forums
At the start of the match, would a player be allowed to tell their opponent “I will always be retaining priority, unless I explicitly decline”?
Since there is a difference between retaining and using priority, I would think this should be allowed. It would force the opponent to wait until priority is explicitly passed.
This would avoid situations like this:
Player A: Draws for his turn (now has 4 cards including Mystical Space Typhoon)
Player B: Activates Trap Dustshoot as Player A draws.
Player A: States he had not passed priority, and will activate Mystical Space Typhoon targeting Trap Dustshoot
Player B: Can no longer chain Trap Dustshoot as Player A has only 3 cards in hand.
Player B is already upset about losing his Dustshoot, and getting a warning for a procedural error won’t help his mood (even though it’s his own fault).
http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/COMMUNITY/forums/thread/1366133.aspx
from UDE's Player Management Forums
At the start of the match, would a player be allowed to tell their opponent “I will always be retaining priority, unless I explicitly decline”?
Since there is a difference between retaining and using priority, I would think this should be allowed. It would force the opponent to wait until priority is explicitly passed.
This would avoid situations like this:
Player A: Draws for his turn (now has 4 cards including Mystical Space Typhoon)
Player B: Activates Trap Dustshoot as Player A draws.
Player A: States he had not passed priority, and will activate Mystical Space Typhoon targeting Trap Dustshoot
Player B: Can no longer chain Trap Dustshoot as Player A has only 3 cards in hand.
Player B is already upset about losing his Dustshoot, and getting a warning for a procedural error won’t help his mood (even though it’s his own fault).
http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/COMMUNITY/forums/thread/1366133.aspx