There is a line in the IPG for DEC that I have concerns about:

“If the identity of the card(s) was known to all players before being placed into the hand, or was placed into an empty hand, and can be put in the correct location with minimal disruption, do so.”

This implies that if either:
A) If the identify of the card(s) were known to all players before being placed into the hand
OR
B) If the cards were placed into an empty hand
…and can be put in the correct location with minimal disruption, do so.

If a player draws a card(s) in error and their hand was previously empty, assuming no cheating, we simply issue the warning and put the card back on top of the library and leave it be? Now the player knows the top card of their library when they clearly should not.

I suspect that the intended meaning was:
A) If the identify of the card(s) were known to all players and before being placed into the hand
OR
B) If the identify of the card(s) were known to all players and were placed into an empty hand
…and can be put in the correct location with minimal disruption, do so.

It makes sense to leave the card(s) on top of the library if the identity was previously known to both players, but otherwise this just seems bad.

Can I get clarification on this?

With DEC, we have (for a very, very long time, if not always) returned the extra card(s) to the location from which they were drawn (usually top of the library, but could be a face-down exile pile, even a sideboard). We do not shuffle in this instance - that card is meant to be drawn, just not yet.

The correct way to parse that sentence:

• was the card known (revealed) to all players before being placed into the hand?
  
• if not, was it placed into an empty hand?
  
• if either of those are true, can it be put back with minimal disruption?
  

Note that, if more than one card is drawn, the tests are applied to all the cards; if the hand was empty before drawing 3 cards, then the second test is true for all 3. (Yes, some have argued - unsuccessfully - that the 2nd & 3rd cards didn't go into an empty hand; that is an incorrect application.)

d:^D

Scott, thank you for the prompt reply.

If a player draws multiple extra cards into an empty hand by mistake, are those cards put back on top of the library in a random order, or do we attempt to preserve the order they were originally in if both players can agree as to what that was? Also, how does this apply if AP is drawing for turn, into a previously empty hand, and draws more than one card by mistake, both whether NAP can verify the original order of the cards or not?

It will often be impossible to preserve the order, and we don't want to give the player a free Scry X - so I would randomize the cards before putting them on top of the library. (Note that situations in which all players know what the cards are, don't know the exact order, and they are all drawn into an empty hand - well, it's probably obvious that's not likely to ever happen to you, or me, or more than a handful of the people reading this.)

As to your second question - it's far more likely that a player will draw for the turn and accidentally see a 2nd card - either by dislodging one, or having the 2nd one stuck to the 1st. In other words, Looking At Extra Cards (L@EC). I'm willing to acknowledge that it's Monday afternoon (for me), and my imagination may not be up to snuff - but I'm struggling to imagine how a player can actually draw 2+ cards into their hand by mistake, as opposed to noticing the mistake while it's still a L@EC situation.

d:^D