story of a ruling

Story of a RulingDaniel Kitachewsky, L3 and GPHJ

Ancestral Recall

Mountainous Recall

Sparta Recall

How is the IPG built?

Goals● Discourage cheating● Protect innocent players● Let the players play their game

Discourage cheating● This is common to all sports● Large penalty if a player is found cheating● Present even in the earliest IPGs

Protect innocent players● Penalty should be just enough to offset potential advantage● Players have to be encouraged to call the judge

Let the players play● Many times players won’t call a judge for a small mistake● What should a judge do it if they see a mistake?

Today’s principles

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not _________ from it

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should _________ the game as close as possible to the original

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be _______ to apply by any L2 judge in the world

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world4. A player can’t _________ the penalties or fixes

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes5. The fixes should be ___________ so that players don’t feel they’re treated

differently and thus unfairly

What enters into it1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes5. The fixes should be Consistent so that players don’t feel they’re treated

differently and thus unfairly

● No Benefit● Restores the game● Easy to Apply● Can’t be Abused● Consistent

BREAC

No Benefit“A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it.”

● Hidden Card Error: the opponent removes my best card. Maybe the one I just drew, maybe a better one, never a worse one.

● Missed Trigger: if beneficial, my opponent denies it. If detrimental, I still get the effect.

Restores the game“The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original.”

● AP casts Divination for RRR. The cards are returned to the top of the library with no shuffle. In two turns, the game is back on track.

● NAP sees AP’s morph by mistake as she was picking it up to read an Aura enchanting the morph. LEC and no fix.○ Shuffling the card would change the game

○ Revealing something else “in exchange” might feel like justice, but drifts even further away from the game

Easy to Apply“The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world.”

● Multiple iterations of Missed Triggers● More important as we move towards decentralized tournament system● Many PPTQs have one judge who has never been to a GP or a judge

conference● IPG should stay small and simple

Can’t be Abused“A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes.”

● I count my opponent’s deck and find 39 cards.○ What if I tell them immediately?○ What if I wait?

● Proving intentional waiting is often hard.

Consistent“The fixes should be Consistent so that players don’t feel they’re treated differently and thus unfairly.”

● Complete guidance on many mistakes● No deviations● No single-card rulings● Similar situations should be ruled similarly

A Little Time Travel

Disclaimers● This is my own research, no input from the authors● I have personal experience from 2005, not before● This is not criticizing the past, but trying to learn from it

○ Einstein vs Newton

PG 1999● First complete set of infractions for Magic I could find● Already full breakdown:

○ Deck, decklist errors○ Marked cards○ Shuffling○ Tardiness○ Slow Play○ Unsporting Conduct

PG 1999● Focus on procedure violations● Very little guidance on play errors

○ One paragraph

● Big penalties● Big reliance on judge discretion

PG 1999 - PhilosophyWhile uniformity is highly desirable, the goal of each penalty should be that it fits the infraction. Judges must always use discretion, and if a penalty listed in this document is not appropriate for an infraction they are adjudicating, they should issue the penalty they see fit.

PG 1999 D.2. Illegal Decks & SideboardsLevel 1 or 2First Offense: Single warning and duel loss. The player committing the infraction has ten minutes to correct the deck, or the penalty is upgraded to a double warning and a match loss.Second Offense: Double warning and match loss.

Level 3First Offense: Double warning and match loss.

Level 4 or 5First Offense: Double warning and ejection.

PG 1999 H.2. Card MisrepresentationA player is in violation of the floor rules section 1.3.18--Card Interpretation if he or she misrepresents a card.

Note: If more than one turn has elapsed since the violation occurred, it is generally better to let the current game situation stand (despite the error).

Correct the mistake if feasible.

PG 1999 H.4. Failure to Agree on RealityPlayers fail to agree on reality if they disagree on a central fact of the game--such as life totals, mana in the mana pool, what one player said, and so on--and the truth cannot be successfully determined.

The judge should always first try to reconstruct the actual events using whatever means are available (...). If the players agree on what happened or the judge successfully demonstrates the reality, do not invoke any penalties.

General: In all failure to agree on the situation, the judge determines who is correct using whatever means he or she sees fit.

PG 1999 D.3.2. Receiving a Misrecorded Decklist--Limited

In the event of deck swapping, the player who will play the deck receives a misrecorded decklist in which one or more cards is mismarked in the "Total" column.

Note: The player receiving the misrecorded decklist receives a penalty because, in many cases, it cannot be clearly determined whether the error came about as a result of the recorder or the player. In all such situations, therefore, enforcing a penalty against both players is deemed necessary to deter cheating.

Level 5First Offense: Single warning and duel loss.Second Offense: Double warning and ejection.

PG 1999 G.8.Drawing Extra Cards

Whenever a player draws too many cards, choose cards at random from that player's hand and shuffle them into his or her library until that player holds the proper number of cards.

● No Benefit● Restores the game● Easy to Apply● Can’t Abuse● Consistent

PG 1999

● No Benefit => I can get free brainstorms by drawing extra cards● Restores the game => Unclear● Easy to Apply => “Determine who is right using any means available”● Can’t Abuse => I can misregister my Limited decklist and penalize

someone else● Consistent => Only instruction is “correct the mistake if feasible”

PG 1999

PG 2000-2006● No more disproportionate penalties

○ Illegal main decklist now Match Loss at most○ No more penalties for mistakes you have no control over

● Big “Procedural Error” section○ Judge discretion still used

● No more guidance on game errors than PG 1999● Little evolution until 2006

○ More examples of game errors appear in Procedural Errors, but still judge’s choice to give Caution, Warning or Game Loss

● A Pithing Needle with no choice… never gets a choice.

PG 2007● Toby Elliott rewrites PG completely and is promoted to Level 5● More detailed game play fixes● Big push on consistency

IPG 2010● Regular REL split into its own 2-page document (thank you James Mackay)

IPG 2012● In the middle of reforming Missed Trigger● Peak of complexity

IPG 2016● Minimal penalties: almost never Game Loss thanks to Hidden Card Error

and downgrades for Deck/Decklist Problem● Simpler than 2012

Solving Ancestral Recall

A simple mistake: 1. Original versionNAP notices before AP draws

A simple mistake: 2. Delayed versionNAP notices after AP has drawn 3

A simple mistake: 3. Intentionally delayed versionNAP notices before AP draws but chooses to wait

AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once

A simple mistake: 4. Extra card version

PG 1999 H.2. Card MisrepresentationA player is in violation of the floor rules section 1.3.18--Card Interpretation if he or she misrepresents a card.

Note: If more than one turn has elapsed since the violation occurred, it is generally better to let the current game situation stand (despite the error).

Correct the mistake if feasible.

PG 1999 G.8.Drawing Extra Cards

(Level 3: Warning)

Whenever a player draws too many cards, choose cards at random from that player's hand and shuffle them into his or her library until that player holds the proper number of cards.

PG 1999: ???

PG 1999: OriginalNAP notices before AP draws.

“Correct the mistake”, which could be:

● Tap blue instead● Tap blue in addition● Unplay● Counter

PG 1999: DelayedNAP notices after AP has drawn 3.

Extra cards at random are shuffled away.

If I have no blue, I will try this.

If my opponent tries this, I’ll let him.

AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once.

Shuffle one random card away.

If I draw all lands, I’ll try one more.

PG 1999: Extra card

PG 2005 Procedural Error - Major(E) A player in a Magic tournament plays Wrath of God (mana cost: 2WW) using one white mana and three colorless mana.

Procedural errors vary significantly. The judge should adjust the penalty appropriately to reflect the level of tournament disruption.

If the procedural error makes it impossible for a player to effectively complete the game or match in the allotted period of time, the judge should upgrade the penalty to a match/game loss.

PG 2005 Drawing Extra Cards (Level 3)(...) When it is obvious which extra card was drawn, the card should be placed back on top of the deck. If it is unclear which card is the “extra” card, a random card should be selected from the player’s hand. (...) The opponent of the player committing the infraction should be allowed to see any cards the other player has seen due to this infraction.

An automatic game loss should be applied if a player has drawn so many cards that a judge is unable to correct the situation. If the judge feels that the player has received enough of an advantage by drawing an extra card (for example, the player has had his or her library modified by his or her opponent or the player sees the next card, which reveals some crucial strategic information), the penalty should be upgraded to a game loss.


No guidance, but likely PE - Major.

Fix = depends on judge


Automatic Game Loss.

I will not try this.

If my opponent tries this, I’ll let them and win the game.


Game Loss.

No abuse possible here.

PG 2005: Extra card

PG 2007 Game Play Error - Game Rule ViolationIf the error was caught immediately, back up the game to the point of the error. If not caught immediately, leave the game state as it is. Additionally, if not caught immediately, the opponent should receive a Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State penalty.


GPE - GRV.

Fix = back to hand, untap mana.


Automatic Game Loss.


If my opponent tries this, I’ll let them and win the game.


Game Loss.


PG 2007: Extra card

IPG 2012 Drawing Extra CardsA player illegally puts one or more cards into his or her hand and, at the moment before he or she began the instruction or action that put a card into his or her hand, no other Game Play Error or Player Communication Violation had been committed, and the error was not the result of resolving objects on the stack in an incorrect order.

IPG 2012 GPE - GRV 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).

IPG 2012: OriginalNAP notices before AP draws.

GPE - GRV.


IPG 2012: DelayedNAP notices after AP has drawn 3.

GPE - GRV.

Put 3 cards at random on top.

I will try this.

If my opponent tries this, I want to stop them before they do.


Game Loss.


IPG 2012: Extra card

IPG 2016 Hidden Card ErrorExcess cards are returned to the correct location. If that location is the library, they should be shuffled into the random portion unless the owner previously knew the identity of the card/cards illegally moved; that many cards, chosen by the opponent, are returned to the top of the library instead. For example, if a player playing with Sphinx of Jwar Isle illegally draws a card, that card should be returned to the top of the library.

(Thank you Matt Johnson).

IPG 2016: OriginalNAP notices before AP draws.

GPE - GRV.


IPG 2016: DelayedNAP notices after AP has drawn 3.

GPE - GRV.

Put 3 cards at random on top.

I will try this.

If my opponent tries this, I want to stop them before they do.


HCE.

Opponent shuffles my best card away.


IPG 2016: Extra card

Questions?

story of a ruling

Education