Easy, the MTG player actually wants to draw more therefore the +4 benefits him. Neither the gun nor the rooks stand a chance against him at this point.
Yeah but they’re playing mono-W so unless they draw into another plains, probably nothing too threatening is hitting the field.
No bullets in the revolver and it didn’t belong to checkov so it’s not important anyway no more csrds to draw from. So A for sure
Have you considered bribery? The drugs may improve performance, but they’re addictive, and expensive. That gun could go for a fair amount of money.
Black bribes white to throw the match, and white saves face by pointing out blacks rook count. Player b wins the game, but the international chess committee send them a very, very strongly worded email
Removed by mod
What if B just moves A’s pieces after shooting them?
Then B is disqualified and A can enjoy their victory.
Anarchychess?
Google en hancingdrugs
deleted by creator
Y’all’d’ve done well to pay attention in English class.
What’s bad, is that I’m about 95%sure I’ve legit heard words like that used but my Southern family
“Y’all’d’ve” just so we’re clear
I’m 95% certain I’ve said y’all’d’ve before unironically.
I said y’all’ld’ve more than once yesterday.
deleted by creator
technically lands are colorless, plains just produce white mana
otherwise everything seems fine and legal here
The winner’s spirit is revenant-capable, so the only thing the gun can do is assure a draw. The heart of a champion, while useful in some rites to please the gods is still mortal. So only civil victories are attainable here at least without making an ectoplasmic mess.
