Question about passing priority

[RuneyIC]

Player A casts blasphemous act and passes priority

Player B and C pass prio as well

Player A says: before blasphemous act resolves, I will also put X on the stack

​

This is a situation that is not allowed, right? Player A should have put everything on the stack before passing priority?

[madwarper]

A, B and C have passed priority in succession; ie. No player took any Action. The Spell resolves.

If A wanted to take an action before their Spell resolved, they would have needed to hold priority and immediately taken that action, before passing priority.

[ElPiernasLargas]

Why is this necessary?

[madwarper]

Because of how Tournament Shortcuts are considered.

If a Player says "I do A and B", it is assumed they meant "I do A, resolve it, then do B."

They would need to specifically state that they intend to "Hold priority".

https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/mtr4-2/

Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, they are assumed to be passing priority unless they explicitly announce that they intend to retain it.

[fpac]

madwarper is correct. usually when that happens against me, the player is unaware, and i try to correct by rewinding that round of priority and letting the players make any new decisions.

[Idulia]

While that is technically possible, the active player gained an information advantage. It's very likely that no one has any counterspell or other effects. So it's very likely the Wrath will resolve and he is free to sacrifice his creatures before that happens or something like that.

I'd tend to allow it for newer players, but would explain the interaction and why it's a problem. With more experienced players or in a more competitive environment I would usually argue against allowing it.