In the past few months I've been noticing more and more controversy around playmats. It would happen that judges from all around Italy would post on facebook some playmat asking the italian community if they think those kind of playmats should be allowed in tournaments. Sometimes it's a bit of exposed skin, sometimes it's something more controversial, like this one:
(Yes, I am well aware about the story of this playmat, I don't intend neither to explore the will of the author nor the rights, I'm just talking about content)

Whenever someone asked about playmats the answer would be something along the lines of “I wouldn't allow it because I think it's inappropriate” and “I can't see any problem”, which are perfectly good answer in an opinion based ruling, but create some confusion in players. I couldn't find a guide line and in all the posts concerning this matter we arrived to the conclusion that it would be the TO's call to make.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm on the liberal side of this matter, my opinion is that we should pretty much allow everything that doesn't involve splatter imagery, pornography or hate, but now I have come to the conclusion that we actually can't allow or not allow things. If it's really the TO call we are looking at a huge hole in the rules.

(My english is a bit rusty, so I sometimes need to circle around some concepts to express them, which is why I feel the next few examples would give a better understanding of what I'm trying to say rather than actually trying to say it)

We have some degree of power to sanction a player that is swearing (this is an all italian problem since those kind of blasphemy aren't usual in other countries) or insulting his opponent, and we have rules about what a player can have on the playing table and what he can't. Those rules are made to prevent cheating in certain degrees and overall enhance player's experience, and even if we may need the TO to enforce them (by, for instance, removing a player from the venue) they come from us, there is little to no chance that different judges would give different ruling about UC, and that is mainly because we have some precise guidelines.

When talking about artwork card, for instance, we have all the guidelines we need. I can most definitely tell my players that a card is playable, and there are very few corner cases. That makes having a shared sense of what the rule is much easier. Players won't say things like “the other judge said differently”.

That's what we need to achieve here. We need precise guidelines on naughty* playmats.
It's not the fact that it's a TO's decision to make per se, it's the fact that we can't give our opinion. We can't counsel players, and on top of that if asked we would pretty much allow everything as we have no way of doing otherwise. I feel that it can be a problem.

PS I'm not sure if this is a question or a statement, but I was advised to make this post and I really feel that the matter is worth the discussion.
PPS this is my first post on the forum please don't eat me pretty please
PPPS it goes without saying that I searched the forum for a similar discussion before posting this, but couldn't find anything

*the italian word I would've used is “birichino” which has a comic flavour to it. It can't be translated so you get this wonderful explanation instead.

Playmats aren't a core part of running a tournament or rules. That's what policy covers. Like anything else, if it causes a problem in running your tournament, work with your stakeholders (TO, players, judges) to best solve the problem.

Originally posted by Michael Musto:

It's not the fact that it's a TO's decision to make per se, it's the fact that we can't give our opinion.

That's not really true–you can have a great opinion on this, and if you're feeling strongly, it's likely a good one. The easy summary of the previous discussion is to consult your stakeholders, and handle things with a bit of tact/grace. You have some authority while judging, so acting with care is simply a responsible thing to do.

If it is your opinion that the content of a playmat might reasonably cause any of your participants to feel a negative impact to their comfort level, it is UC-Minor. If the playmat is more explicit and may reasonably cause any of your participants to feel harassed, or threatened, it is UC-Major.

I would say this is absolutely within the purview of judges given that things like enforcing the community guidelines set down by WOTC are explicitly part of our job.

I would not jump into this situation right away with a penalty. I would
simply ask the if they have another playmat they could use, then they
should use that mat. Assessing a penalty right away could escalate the
situation and no one wants that…. Thanks!

There are many reasons I advise judges to not become moral arbiters. Michael's post rightfully touches on a major reason–we don't have a directive to enforce morality.

What we are and always should be is collaborative agents working for organizers. And organizers, as the people who hold control over the space as well as the event, have a huge host of options. They also likely have a strong interest in hosting events that fit their target audience. That includes being respectful of differences as well as allowing expression.

I suggest any judge that sees anything that he or she finds objectionable should make the HJ and the TO aware immediately. Many TO's, such as Star City, have clear stances on such things, and they allow HJs to act on their behalf. But the final word really comes from the TO, and they will want to have a word.

This topic comes up every now and then at my LGS with anime products (sleeves, mats, deck boxes, etc), and my stance has always been if the players as a whole don't mind then I don't mind. But if one person is reasonably bothered by it ( by reasonably I mean uncomfortable or uneasy not just “hey I don't like that” ) then I would subtly ask the player if they could use something else between rounds.

Another thing to consider is small children and their parents, either as players or just customers walking through. This still isn't anything like strict guidelines you want, and with something vague and relative as this you probably won't find any.

As some of you may know, there have been “anime sleeves and playmats problem” in Japan for a long time.
(You know, there are lots of… child-ish porn-ish illustration sleeves in Japan)

We don't have clear-cut no-no list, and actually there are different opinion among judges in borderline case. All in all, it depends, sadly.

* Does TO/StoreOwner allow that products for environment? If no, then NO they cannot use it.
* Are You sure it distruct some of players and affect negativey in your tournament? If yes, then NO.
* Does anyone in your tournament ask you to remove that with reasonable reason? If yes, then NO.

At any time when you don't allow players to use that problematic playmats or other products, you should kindly ask them to remove it at first time with some explanations. If they refuse it even after they are asked to remove, then you need to issue USC / or TO may ask him to go another place.

Each place has each environment. Does your casual tournament have 10 year old boy? Does your night event only have adults?

To reiterate what others have said, every case is a judgement call. Get the TO involved, evaluate community standards, and try to make a balanced decision.

One word of caution on what not to do: don't wait until someone complains to address the problem. Uncomfortable players will often stay silent or feel intimidated into compliance. If one player has complained to you about a playmat, the odds are high that 9 or 10 others were also offended but didn't said anything.

Michael, thank you for your thoughts and for starting this discussion. Unfortunately, precise guidelines are something that cannot happen because the concept we are discussing is highly subjective, not only from person to person, but also culture to culture. You yourself mentioned the standards for language (blasphemy) being different in Italy, and Kenji Suzuki mentioned the reception to anime images being different in Japan. Those are just two examples in this thread where holding the entire world to a precise global standard could lead to enforcement that feels wrong by local standards.

Thank you all for your answers!

I think regarding these sorts of subjective issues (especially around things like playmats, people's language etc) we shouldn't be waiting for someone to complain about it. What's your crowd like? Do you think there's a chance someone may be affected by it? I'll be fairly more hands-off with, say, swearing in a room full of adult regular customers than I will be at a prerelease with several children attending. Use your best judgement and work with your TO/store.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty solidly of the belief that a relaxed tournament environment is no place for softcore pornographic imagery, but I am a product of my upbringing and the society and culture that I live in. Your mileage may vary.

If you have a fair amount of time on your hands, I wrote an article about being more pro-active about these sorts of things here (it focuses on language, but it follows for all these sorts of issues): http://mfcrocker.com/lets-talk-about-language-at-regular-rel/

Edited Matt Crocker (July 17, 2016 09:03:05 PM)

Echoing many here, especially Eli and Riki, to say that context is very important, and that waiting for someone to complain is a mistake.

I've found that this image in particular is a good over-under for attitudes about suggestive themes, as it seems to straddle (pun intended) the line quite nicely. I can't speak to other regions, but in the US-NE, I almost certainly ask players to put this playmat away.

I'd add that if you have to speak to a player about their playmat/sleeves/whatever, it's best to focus the discussion on education. Many players will see something like the chandra/liliana playmat, think its cool, and buy it without thinking about anyone else, and be confused and/or become angry if simply asked to hide the offending images.

By explaining how the images could make other players uncomfortable or give the game a bad image to a family at the game store, you can illustrate why the rules are as they are, and emphasize that you aren't just imposing your own sense of morality on the player for the fun of it.

This is effectively the same conversation I'd have with a player I overheard committing USC by casually using a mention of gender, religion, etc in a derogatory way.