You're the head judge of a Regular REL Draft in which Alfred and Nolan are both 2-0 going into the final round (they are therefore both aware that they will be playing each other). Alfred knows that Nolan has a powerful rare, Citadel Siege, in his draft deck, and decides to change the configuration of his own deck to include a Naturalize in order to defeat the Siege. What, if anything, would you do or say in this situation?

Follow-up: Would you do or say anything differently if Alfred was a local Level 1 Judge?

I wouldn't say anything, what Alfred did was legal provided the naturalize was part of his card pool. In regular REL unless decklists are being used (which in most cases they shouldn't) or it was announce at the beginning the player is free to modify the composition of their deck between games or round in sealed play.

From the Magic Tournament rules:

7. Limited Tournament Rules

7.2 Sideboard Use
.
.
.
Players participating in Limited tournaments that do not use decklists may freely change the composition of their decks between matches by exchanging cards from their deck for cards in their sideboard without being required to return their deck to its original composition before their next match. The Head Judge or Tournament Organizer must inform players if this option is not being used prior to the start of deckbuilding. This option is not available at Competitive or Professional REL tournaments.

Edited Cris Plyler (May 2, 2015 06:20:43 AM)

Agreed with Cris. At Regular REL without decklists we have the concept of “continuous constructed”, which allows players to change the composition of their deck at any time. That includes the time between determining who their opponent is and preparing for their match.

I would not treat it any different if the player were a Level 1 Judge. Would you say anything different if the player were a Level 3 judge? I've considered it at Prerelease events, but elected not to because it may be a feel-bad for my opponent and I prerelease at an ultra-casual store. But that was a personal choice. I wouldn't admonish anyone for doing it.

If anything, I would only say to their opponent: “That's allowed within the rules. I'm sorry if that makes you unhappy, but they've done nothing wrong.”

Agreed that the player has not broken any rules in this situation. Evan has hinted at one thing with his reference to his ultra-casual store, but it might be worth having a quiet word with the player later to point out to them that even though what they did is legal, it might not be considered particularly sporting and might lead to other players having a negative opinion of them.

Not an infraction.
Not unsporting behaviour.
So, not a judge concern at all.

Not a gentleman thing perhaps, but that's completely up to the player.

follow-up: should the TO tell this guy “please don't do this again in my store - change behaviour, or change store”, what should we do?

Originally posted by Francesco Scialpi:

Not an infraction.
Not unsporting behaviour.
So, not a judge concern at all.

Not a gentleman thing perhaps, but that's completely up to the player.

follow-up: should the TO tell this guy “please don't do this again in my store - change behaviour, or change store”, what should we do?

DIPLOMATICALLY explain to the TO that even if they don't like it, it's a legal thing to do. They're welcome to have a discussion with the player about how it appears unsporting and isn't great for their community. They can't ban a practice that's legal in tournament Magic.

That said, it's their house. They can forbid the player for whatever they want, but they'll face the consequences (WPN complaints, bad reputation) if they're that strict about something legal.

Personally? If I had a TO use the “change behavior or change store” after I've talked to them about why it's legal and that it's more of a social issue, I'd want to tell the TO “change behavior or I'll change store.” I'm a stickler for TOs and players respecting each other, not “my way or the highway.”

Edited Evan Cherry (June 23, 2015 07:12:37 PM)

Originally posted by Tristan Killeen:

Follow-up: Would you do or say anything differently if Alfred was a local Level 1 Judge?

As Judges, we have a responsibility not just as rules enforcers but as educators and as community leaders, so I'd need more specifics about Alfred's behavior. If he took the opportunity to educate the local player-base about the rules at Regular, I'd have no issue with it. On the other hand, if he pulled out the JREL document as a “gotcha” after getting “caught,” I might want to start a conversation. I've unfortunately had experiences with players who think that judge-players use their knowledge of the rules to take advantage of corner-cases. Validating that suspicion seems counter-productive.

I'd inform the TO that if they do not like this kind of activity they are free to restrict continuous construction in future events. The TO is unlikely to do this as the majority of players like this kind of freedom. But it is ultimately unfair to tell people that they are free to change their deck around unless they do it well.