I would agree if that player played a single-player game. But at an Event that is supposed to be competetive, letting players keep Pantheon packs might be the best experience for said player, as he gains a considerable edge, but sounds like terrible customer service to the other 100+ people in the room, which expected a fair, competetive environment.

We agree.

The solution you want (a rule to force someone to do what is best) is not coming.

That means relying upon expectation management, diplomacy, and other skills to try, and accepting that course may fail.

Andy


From: Philip Körte
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 1:14 PM
To: Heckt, Andy
Subject: Re: “Gods pack” in GPT/PTQ (Competitive REL)


I would agree if that player played a single-player game. But at an Event that is supposed to be competetive, letting players keep Pantheon packs might be the best experience for said player, as he gains a considerable edge, but sounds like terrible customer service to the other 100+ people in the room, which expected a fair, competetive environment.

——————————————————————————–
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/60791/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/9745/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/9745/?onsite=yes

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit

One more takeaway from this: encourage other judges to do “register, verify, swap pools, then build” at any limited event that might include these Pantheons. Encourage your TOs to support the pack swap, when a player opens a Pantheon (you can remind them that happier customers greatly offset their cost of one or two boosters).

It will be an extremely rare occurrence, given those two things, for a player to think it best to refuse the pack swap. In fact, if a player thinks that's his or her best option, it should be easy to explain things so they can make a more informed decision.

d:^D

In that case am I right in saying that this is just being handled as an exceptional case with its own unique approach? If so, is there going to be some sort of public announcement to that effect? Anyone trying to decide what to do based on the MTR alone is not likely to arrive at this solution.

Originally posted by Alex Roebuck:

is there going to be some sort of public announcement to that effect

I believe that's what we've accomplished right here… since not everyone who should (IMO) read these Forums actually does so, I encouraged all of you who are reading (THANK YOU!!!) to reach out to those other judges … you know, the ones who can't be bothered to read all this? :)

d:^D

Additionally, there have been two announcements from WotC in completely public fora.

DailyMTG, for players: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/arcana/1481

WPN site, for TOs: http://www.wizards.com/WPN/News/Article.aspx?x=2014_4_28_BlessedByTheGods&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Edited Kim Warren (April 30, 2014 05:25:42 AM)

In today's Cranial Insertion, the Pantheon pack is explicitly described as abnormal product, and the final say is given to the TO/HJ. Maybe it could be worth it to tell the team to change that.

I think I understood most of the cases, but I'd like to have confirmation on two cases:

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

where you plan a deck swap, and the TO won't replace Pantheon packs, but one player opens one and loudly proclaims “you HAVE to let me keep it, it says so (in the rules)(on the Judge list)(etc.,etc)”.

In that case, the loud player can keep the pack for registration, but he will have to swap his pool, won't he?

In a draft, if the player who opens the Pantheon pack refuses the exchange or forgets about it, will the other players have any choice in the matter (apart from leaving with their unopened product)?

Edited Florian Horn (May 5, 2014 12:06:32 PM)

While Cranial Insertion chose to use an unfortunate phrase (“abnormal card distribution”), the rest of that answer is just fine the way it is.

How you deal with “the loud player” is a Customer Service concern; policy is a fine guideline, but the TO and their customer need to resolve that - not the IPG, nor the MTR, nor any ‘O’fficial answer you read anywhere.

Once a player picks from a pack and passes it on, it becomes increasingly difficult to “fix” anything in that pack. That's why it's a great idea to teach your players to count to 14, look for any surprises, and THEN consider a windmill-slam of that obvious first pick. (heh)

In your example, the 2nd or 3rd player will almost certainly notice that they have nothing but Gods to choose from; I would be very surprised if they are unhappy with such an opportunity. Let the draft continue, no harm done.

d:^D