Hello everyone, it's time for another Knowledge Pool scenario! The one we have today is Silver level, so L2+ judges should please wait until Saturday to give their thoughts.

The blog post for this scenario is here.

Ali is playing against Ned in a Competitive Legacy event your local store is hosting.
You're called over by a spectator Sonia. She tells you that Ali activated his Sensei's Divining Top's second ability, and asked Ned “Draw a card?”, and Ned answered, “Yeah, no effects”. Ali resolved the ability, including drawing a card. However, Ned controls a Spirit of the Labyrinth, so Ali should only have put the top on top of his deck.
The players confirm that this is what happened, and you're confident that both of them simply forgot the spirit was in play. What do you do?

I believe that this situation falls under the IPG's Additional Remedy Section of GPE-DEC “If the player confirmed the card draw with his or her opponent before drawing, a backup may be considered or the game state left as-is.” This line of the IPG leaves me with two options; A: rewind the game state or B: leave the game state as is. If there are multiple cards in Ali's hand I'm going to be inclined to leave the game state as is. however, if the only card in Ali's hand is the one he illegally drew off of sensei's divining top, I'm a lot more willing to put that card underneath the sensei's divining top in Ali's library. Either way I'm still going to give Ali a warning for GPE-DEC, and Ned a warning for GPE-FTMGS, and remind both players to play more carefully.

I would be inclined to give Ned a TE-CPV warning for misrepresenting information, and Ali a warning for GPE-DEC. The fix states in the IPG that of the card draw was a result of a CPV, that it can be backed up or left as is, I would depend that on Ali's hand size (if it was empty or not prior), or if for some reason the card was known to both parties.

Presuming that Ali actually was not supposed to draw the card (i.e. we are after his draw step), this is a warning for GPE-DEC for Ali and GPE-FTMGS for Ned.

The remedy is a bit more complex and depends in part on some information that wasn't presented here. This clearly falls under the additional remedy set forth in the IPG for GPE-DEC, so the question is simply whether we backup or leave the game state as is.

If the card can be uniquely identified or it was already known to one or both players (due to a previous effect), I would issue a backup to the activation of the Top (i.e. the activation is on the stack). It is not very disruptive and easy for everyone (me and the players) to verify that we have backed up correctly. (I would be most concerned if only Ali knew the identity of the card but would probably still back up if his opponent confirmed that he knew the card already).

If the card is unknown and can't be uniquely identified, I am inclined to leave the game state as is. It becomes difficult to verify we've backed up correctly and provides additional information to Ali that he should not have access to.

And of course, once the remedy is applied, I will remind both players to play more carefully.

I'm assuming Ali has already passed the draw step and so there is actually a problem with the situation, otherwise there is nothing to say here.

Ali has committed GPE-DEC as the Card drawn should not have been. I would assess a warning for Ali.

If Ali's hand was empty or the card was known to both players before it was drawn I would return the it to the deck underneath the Top (I believe this fix can be applied with minimal disruption).

If the card was unknown or Ali's hand not empty then under the clause for having confirmed the draw I need to consider if I should back up or leave the game state as is. A back up results in the top on the table and Ali with knowledge of cards on top of the library. This has the potential to create a multitude of different lines of play and so I would leave the game state as is.

Ned is responsible for a GPE-FtMGS and also receives a warning. I'd also remind both players to play more carefully and thank Sonia for calling me over.

Edited Marc Shotter (Nov. 20, 2015 10:36:54 AM)

First up, ned definitely gets a GPE-FTMGS. Ali received confirmation on the draw, so it is NOT DEC. I'd issue him a warning for GPE-GRV, remind them both to play more carefully, and consider a backup if the card is uniquely identifiable; this being legacy, anything more complex than that the card drawn is uniquely identifiable (for whatever reason), I'm probably not OK with any sort of backup.

Ali recieves a warning for GPE: DEC
Ned recieves a warning for GPE: FTMG

The solution is to evaluate the graveyards and ask the players, so you can determine the randomized section of the library. Set aside the unrandomised section, then have Ned select one card of his choice from Ali's hand. I then shuffle the selected card into the randomised portion of the library, put the set aside portion of the library back in the appropriate location. Tell players to play more carefully.

Before reading other responses:

Ali has moved a card into his hand, when the game rules did not allow him to do so. He has committed Game Play Error - Drawing Extra Cards. This particular infraction has been the subject of a bit of policy editing recently, so it's good to check what's currently in the IPG.

Since the scenario did not specify, it's safe to assume that the identity of the top card of the deck was not known to both players, and it was not drawn into an empty hand. Additionally, this isn't reasonably the result of an “legally resolved illegal instruction” (though that phrase is a bit complicated…have to check the AIPG), CPV, nor resolving the stack in an incorrect order.

The one sticking point is, was this a “confirmed” draw? If it is, the correct fix is to consider a backup (which means taking a random card from hand, putting it in the deck just under the Top), or leave the game state as-is. If it's not, the correct fix is to reveal Ali's hand to Ned, and shuffle a card of Ned's choice into the random portion of the library (i.e., not the top 3 cards, likely).

On investigation, we find that, when asked about a card draw, Ned said “Yeah, no effects”. Furthermore, Ned said this while not remembering his own Spirit was on the field - i.e., Ned believed his statement would be followed by a card draw on Ali's part, and Ned's statement could reasonably be understood by Ali as a confirmation. I would rule that Ned “confirmed” the draw, and I would authorize a simple backup here - Move the Divining Top from top of library to battlefield, tapped, select a random card from Ali's hand and place it on top of the deck. The game is now in the middle of resolving Divining Top's ability - Ali doesn't draw a card, then the Top will be placed on top of library.

Ali receives a Warning. Ned has committed no infraction. (Unless it's actually FtMGS?). Continue the game.


After reading other responses:

Ned has probably committed FtMGS here.

Originally posted by Michael Warme:

Ali received confirmation on the draw, so it is NOT DEC

I believe this was the case in an older version of the IPG, but the current version does not indicate that the infraction is different. It's still DEC, still a Warning.

I believe the correct backup would back up to the point of error - the card draw during Top's resolution. So, I wouldn't backup to before the Top was activated, I think a backup would effectively put a random card from hand into the library under Top. (which, realistically, is no extra information for Ali, who has almost certainly been activating Top's first ability). So, I believe a backup is justifiable here, it doesn't open up extra lines of play.

This time we have a DEC infraction. We have a special fix for situations where the draw was confirmed by an opponent:

If the player confirmed the card draw with his or her opponent before drawing, a backup may be considered or the game state left as-is.

You may consider backing up, or leaving the game state as is.
If you want to back up, you should set aside Sensei's Divining Top, put a random card from Ali's hand to the top of his library, and then put the Top on top of it.
Ali will receive a warning for DEC, and Ned will get a warning for FtMGS.