Please keep the forum protocol in mind when posting.

Competitive REL » Post: A different kind of two for one

A different kind of two for one

July 15, 2015 08:36:15 PM

David Elden
Judge (Level 2 (Judge Academy)), TLC

USA - Great Lakes

A different kind of two for one

Well put, Brian. This matches my thoughts on the “inappropriate” nature of the DEC penalty to the situation issue, which is one reason I wanted to pose this question.

There's one other interesting thing I wanted to see opinions on.

Of course, this situation fits DEC; as Marc pointed out, this is listed as an example of such in the IPG. On the other hand, Amy broke a game rule by not revealing her morph as it changed zones. This fits the definition of a GRV.

These infractions have a single root cause, so the IPG tells us to consider them as “a single infraction.” The old IPG had language that told us to apply the infraction with the heavier penalty, but the new IPG has that line removed, so we have no guidance from official documents (that I can find) about which should have “priority.”

So to recap:
Putting the morph into her hand instead of the graveyard = DEC
Not revealing the morph as it left the battlefield = GRV
Which one do you apply, and why do you do it?

July 16, 2015 09:02:20 AM

Brian Schenck
Judge (Uncertified)

USA - Midatlantic

A different kind of two for one

Originally posted by David Elden:

Which one do you apply, and why do you do it?

My own preference is to defer to the more specific infraction. I agree with your analysis here about this being a bit unclear though, as specific guidence on how to proceed should be present and isn't . It's just clear that we don't assess multiple infractions for the scenario you proposed.

Edited Brian Schenck (July 16, 2015 09:04:42 AM)

July 16, 2015 10:09:11 AM

Scott Marshall
Forum Moderator
Judge (Level 4 (Judge Foundry)), Hall of Fame

USA - Northwest

A different kind of two for one

The Game Play Errors section of the IPG is (still) designed to be read top-down, such that the first infraction that fits the actual scenario is the one we apply.

That just doesn't work out well in this case, because that means we apply DEC - which has an odd remedy for this corner case - instead of GRV, which has a remedy that “feels” right (move to correct zone). And even though we can imagine other corners with similar complications, that doesn't increase the likelihood of this happening, nor does it make this the “wrong” remedy.

Even though it might not feel right to apply the DEC fix in this case, I still come back to three key points:
1) the player made a mistake, and needs to accept the consequences of that;
2) this really is a corner case;
3) the system won't break if it doesn't “feel” right.

And yes, it's OK if the opponent says “let's shuffle away that land, you can keep your Morph”.

d:^D