An example of the new hidden card error, warning for Andrew and Newton picks four cards from his library to replace the hand shuffled away. I think it's worth reminding that concession is an option it shouldn't really be neccesary as players always have that option.

On the wider discusion I think this a much better fix. Yes it sucks that you might have to give away information about your deck, but as others have said this is a highly avoidable error, but there are some very good reasons to replace the hand:
>One player is being milled and replacing the hand avoids ‘changing the clock’
>In a long game decking out is possible and adding cards to one library changes the game state significantly
>It was possible to hide information or retain access to a key combo peice in the face of discard effects by ‘accidentally’ shuffling your hand away
>Rack effects may suddenly be turned on compounding the mistake

Edited Marc Shotter (Jan. 25, 2016 01:23:33 PM)

I agree that it's worth reminding them. The niceties of the new policy may not be evident to some players. There were people that thought DEC was still a Game Loss post-DEC change, and didn't necessarily know the Warning and fix (or even that we would apply the fix to the “too many cards seen” scenario a la Dig Through Time. Eventually it'll become clearer, but for now it seems prudent to allow them the option, and emphasize that it's an option.

I agree that is a HCE, but I think that the remedy is really unfair.

I quote toby in his last article about HCE : « Seriously, if you find yourself in a situation where it looks like applying the HCE remedy would do ridiculous things to the game, issue a GRV and talk about the situation with other judges later. »

Before the last update, this kind of error was handle with a GRV and no remedy. The impact of this error on the game is already very punitive for the player.

Edited Jean-François DURMONT (Jan. 26, 2016 01:13:09 PM)

The article you're quoting also includes this quote, in reference to a
player taking a mulligan when they're not entitled to it.

“Looks like the infraction was shuffling cards into their library that they
weren’t supposed to! The HCE fix is to show the library to the opponent and
let them choose the number of cards that are supposed to be in the hand –
in this case, five, since that’s where they’re mulliganning to. Of course,
odds are the opponent will just short circuit that and mulligan to four
right away. And that’s fine, since they have that option.”

I don't want to speak for Toby, but I suspect that if he felt the “reveal
the library to the opponent and let them choose the player's hand” fix was
overly punitive or inappropriate, he'd have said so there.

In the situation we're discussing, the player does not have the option to
mulligan again, so they're left with the choices of allow the fix, or
concede.

I'm curious, how is this fix unfair? Just losing your hand for nothing
sounds just as bad, if not worse. Getting to replace the cards in your
hand and improving your next draws seems like it has to be less punitive
than just getting your hand shuffled away for nothing.

When I wrote that, I was thinking about private information. It is different to talk about a entire library and a hand (in the case of « DEC »). And the missing cards would be probably replaced by lands.

It is my point of view, and I talk about that because it is a judge forum. But in a tournament, I will not deviate. However, the remedy sounds weird in this case.

Edited Jean-François DURMONT (Jan. 26, 2016 10:23:42 PM)

As many people correctly identified, this error is covered under the new Hidden Cards Error infraction. The player has committed an error that can't be corrected with publically available information (the hand is not a public zone). Previously, the player would have had to continue with no hand, as no remedy was available. Now, Newton will search the library for a number of cards that were in Andrew's hand, and those cards become Andrew's hand. Andrew also has the opportunity to concede the game if he wants to avoid this remedy.

This topic elicited quite a bit of personal commentary in addition to the answers provided. This fix is certainly a change from what had become the norm, so we understand the response, and this is the reason we decided to make it a Knowledge Pool scenario even though it is not a situation that comes up very often. Many people never would have considered this as a possible remedy without this educational opportunity, so I call this a success. See you next time!