Hi everyone, we are back with another scenario for you. As this is SILVER, all L2+ should wait until after their FNM to answer, so L1's can have some time to think and discuss first.

Link to the Blog post

You are head judging a Competitive Legacy event. Anthony calls you to his table. He is holding two cards and says: “I just drew for the turn and these two were stuck together, but I know the order of the top of my deck.” He points at his Sensei's Divining Top. “This is the card I should not have drawn.” He shows you an Island. You investigate. Barnabus, his opponent, says he didn't notice Anthony drawing two cards at once and that both cards were in his hand with some other cards when he called you. After you make sure there is nothing malicious going on, what do you do?

Edited Josh Stansfield (Feb. 11, 2016 11:24:59 AM)

This is HCE and will get Anthony a warning.

Despite his knowledge of the cards order (and I'm assuming I'm convinced no cheating is occurring, which seems likely as he called this) that information is not verifiable from public information and the opponent did not confirm the additional draw.

Therefore this section of the IPG on HCE is applied as a remedy:

…the player reveals the complete set of cards that contains the unrecoverable information and his or her opponent selects a number of cards equal to the number of excess or unverified cards. Those cards are returned to their original zone. If that zone is the library, they should be shuffled into the random portion.

We have Anthony reveal the two cards, the opponent then chooses one of them to be shuffled into a random portion of the library.

I would remind Anthony to play more carefully. If challenged about the remedy I'd explain that the error Anthony made has very high potential for abuse and that it is not possible to ‘fix’ the gamestate the remedy therefore has to ensure no benefit can be gained.

I'd also quickly check if the stickiness is an oddity in the deck or a recurring problem. If there are lots of sticky cards I might take a moment (away from the table and ensuring not to change the order of any cards) to look for patterns as there is a possibility of a marked cards penalty upgrade if so (to a game loss) and if not I'd instruct Anthony to change sleeves between games (the warning here would be ignored as I'm already issuing a warning for an infraction with the same cause).

Edited Marc Shotter (Feb. 11, 2016 08:39:29 AM)

As the drawn card and extra card became part of the cards in Anthony's hand it is an HEC violation. Anthony gets a GPE-HCE warning, and reveals his hand to Barnabus, who gets to seclect one card to be shuffled into the unknown portion of Anthony's library.

Anthony commited a Gameplay Error - Hidden Card Error because he drew more cards than he was supposed to. The cards were in a hidden zone both before and after the action.
The default remedy in this case is to reveal Anthony's hand to his opponent, he chooses one of them (the number of excess cards) and that card is shuffled into the random portion of the library. Before this remedy is applied, verify that Anthony really used the Top to check the top 3 cards (by asking him and his opponent), and if this is really the case, preserve the single known card on the top of the library and shuffle the excess chosen card from his hand into the unknown portion.
Anthony receives a warning for this infraction.

This is Hidden Card Error for Anthony. Despite the fact that he knew the order, the information is not public, so we can't use it to correct the situation. (A good way to also think about it is that this used to be Drawing Extra Cards–it translates nicely into HCE.)

Anthony receives a Wanring. He reveals his hand, and Barnabus selects one card to be shuffled back into the library. We must confirm with Anthony whether he knows about the position of any cards in his library (which is extremely likely, since he has the Top and just told us he knew the order of the cards. Keep those cards in their positions, and shuffle the selected card into the rest of the library.

Anthony can, of course, choose to concede rather than receive the fix. Remind Anthony to be more careful.

This is definitely HCE with a Warning. What a player claims he knows isn't sufficient if only he knows it. That's why it's a “hidden” card, not a public one. For the Remedy part, Anthony has to reveal his full hand to Barnabus who gets to select one that Anthony will shuffle into his deck. Even though Anthony only showed two cards to the judge, Barnabas claims that some other cards were also there, so the whole hand is revealed. Once Barnabas has chosen a card, it gets shuffled into the random portion. As a judge I need to see if Anthony scried at the beginning of the game, and search all public zones for cards that could have put cards in specific places in the library. Sensei's Top tells me I should leave the top card of the library alone since Anthony has legally seen it.

Then remind Anthony to be more careful, along with the suggestion to take the cards off the top of the library face down first. I might also recommend new sleeves?

The first thing I do is I confirm Barnabus' account with Anthony.

“Anthony, did these two cards touch your other cards in your hand? Did you place them in your hand?”

If no - then we need to investigate further. It's important to establish between the players whether or not those two cards touched the hand. Hopefully, in this case we get a straight story and both players agree. If so, we'd move to the ‘If Anthony’ paragraph. If however Barnabus continues to assert they touched or joined Anthony's hand, then I'd have to make a call based on their conflicting stories as to who I believe. If I believe Barnabus (we'll go with the slightly more complicated route), I'd state to Anthony, “Anthony, the policy for this infraction is that you be given a warning for Hidden Card Error. The fix is to show your two cards there and your hand to Barnabus and allow him to select a card and shuffle it into the unknown portion of the deck.” I'd wait a few moments to see what reaction this earned. Depending on body language/statements, I'd offer a chance to appeal. I see that as almost a given that it will be offered.

If I agree with a fictional account by Anthony in which the cards ended up always separate, then this falls into an LEC-Warning and the same situation regarding description of the fix follows (only this time directed at Barnabus). (Edit note, with all the hub bub about HCE, forgot LEC still existed).

If Anthony agrees that the cards touched, then there should be no need to offer a chance to appeal - Hidden Card Error, Warning. Thoughtseize fix the hand and two cards together, one card to shuffle into the unknown portion of the library.

No matter the result, remind both players to be careful when drawing cards.


(Oh, and for the record before I'm asked - Sensei's Divining Top has no affect on my ruling. The cards revealed to Anthony were always hidden, so there is no way for both players to confirm the assertion that the cards on the top of Anthony's library were in the order he's stating).

Edited Charles Featherer (Feb. 14, 2016 04:25:50 PM)

If I agree with a fictional account by Anthony in which the cards ended up always separate, then this falls into an LEC-Warning and the same situation regarding description of the fix follows (only this time directed at Barnabus). (Edit note, with all the hub bub about HCE, forgot LEC still existed).

This is a pretty good train of thought to find yourself on, but…

(Oh, and for the record before I'm asked - Sensei's Divining Top has no affect on my ruling. The cards revealed to Anthony were always hidden, so there is no way for both players to confirm the assertion that the cards on the top of Anthony's library were in the order he's stating).

Bolded for emphasis, I want to remind you that we need to know if a portion of the deck is known before making these kinds of fixes. Should you investigate with the two players last when the top was used?

If Anthony agrees that the cards touched, then there should be no need to offer a chance to appeal - Hidden Card Error, Warning. Thoughtseize fix the hand and two cards together, one card to shuffle into the unknown portion of the library.

Now the way you worded the bolded part causes concern for me.
MTR 2.9 the player wanting to appeal to the head judge or the designated appeals judge is their decision. Although not covered by the MTR, IPG, or CR, we shouldn't follow-up a ruling with “Would you like to appeal?” it undermines your ruling. If you are unsure of your ruling, please confer with another judge before you give it.

No matter the result, remind both players to be careful when drawing cards.

Always solid advice!

Edited Jarrett Boutilier (Feb. 15, 2016 07:06:06 AM)

Originally posted by Jarrett Boutilier:

Charles I want to point out that in the scenario it is stated that AP has two cards in hand after drawing two cards. They did not have any other cards in hand.

Niels Viaene
both cards were in his hand with some other cards

Watch out with details like this…

I missed the details about other cards in the original post (it has been edited since I posted but I think the comment about cards in hand was there originally) and that changes my answer a little, so here it is:

Originally posted by Marc Shotter:

We have Anthony reveal the two cards his hand, the opponent then chooses one card to be shuffled into a random portion of the library.

Its also worth stating that ‘random portion of the library’ would exclude what is now the top card of Anthony's library assuming the opponent confirms that the top had been used in the prior turn cycle. In this case even though both players can't confirm that card, both players do know that Antony has seen the top card, therefore we know it is ‘known’ but aren't able to confirm the identity. This is the same logic that means we maintain scried cards.

Niels-

Perhaps it is the overall phrasing of this scenario? The way I read this - it sounds like there were two cards in one hand, and that from the continued description that there were other cards already in his hand…

Originally posted by Niels Viaene:

, says he didn't notice Anthony drawing two cards at once and that both cards were in his hand with some other cards when he called you

Bolded emphasis is mine. If this is a situation where Anthony only has two cards in his hand now in total - from the bad draw - then my answers do in fact change.

Charles

Originally posted by Charles Featherer:

Niels-

Perhaps it is the overall phrasing of this scenario? The way I read this - it sounds like there were two cards in one hand, and that from the continued description that there were other cards already in his hand…

Niels Viaene
, says he didn't notice Anthony drawing two cards at once and that both cards were in his hand with some other cards when he called you

Bolded emphasis is mine. If this is a situation where Anthony only has two cards in his hand now in total - from the bad draw - then my answers do in fact change.

Charles

I believe your original thoughts were correct on this one Charlies, I tried to edit my response before you got to see it. Rereading, it seems there are more then just the two cards drawn. The phrasing threw me off a bit.

Jarrett-

Originally posted by Jarrett Boutilier:

Bolded for emphasis, I want to remind you that we need to know if a portion of the deck is known before making these kinds of fixes. Should you investigate with the two players last when the top was used?

It's fair to say that I should have investigated this further. I'm was pretty focused on the first ability of Top, and didn't think through the possibility of the second ability. I'll do better.

Originally posted by Jarrett Boutilier:

Now the way you worded the bolded part causes concern for me.

I shorthanded that a little bit. My intent here was to suggest that with the other possibilities, I was looking at a likely appeal as when it is a ‘he said/she said’ situation, there is a much higher chance of it. I want to be confident in my rulings. But simultaneously - if a player is going to be visibly dissatisfied and upset regarding it in a situation where it could go either way (I'd go so far as to actually say angry) - I have a desire to make the option of an appeal an actual step in what I'm telling them. Not sure if this is translating as well as I would like here. Perhaps I should stop before I dig myself too much deeper. :) I'll just close by stating I don't go around offering appeals to every ruling I give - and that it is very driven by the situation. I'll give this more thought in the future and talk about it with other Judges outside of KP.

Thanks for the feedback. Both points feel important. They may all be moot though if I really did misunderstand the phrasing of the scenario as has been pointed out.


Charles

Before reading other responses:

Anthony's hand should have N cards in it, but it actually has N+1, due to the cards being stuck together. While Anthony knows which card is the ‘extra’ card, the opponent can't verify that, and as judges, we can't just take the players word for it.

Anthony has committed Game Play Error - Hidden Card Error, and will receive a warning. To fix this, we'll reveal Anthony's hand, and Barnabus will choose one card to shuffle into the unknown portion of Anthony's deck. (At least the top card of the deck is considered a known card, for purposes of this fix, due to the previous Top activation).

Apply a time extension as necessary, remind players to play carefully, and continue the game.

—

After reading other responses:

Nothing to add.

Some thoughts (questions) I had:

1) given that the top three cards of the library were considered ‘known’ prior to the HCE, would there be any justification for returning the extra card from the hand to the top of the library? I recognize that this would be a deviation, but since the illegally-drawn card was considered ‘known’ prior to the draw it seems to me that it could be reasonable for the card to retain some of its ‘known’ status.

2) If both players agree that the top card of the library was a sensei's divining top (due to it previously having activated to draw a card), is there an argument to be had for requiring the opponent to select a different card to be put back into the library? What about if there were only two cards in hand (top plus the extra card)?

I'm mainly wondering what the philosophy is regarding these. In a tournament I'd certainly want to go ‘by the book,’ but I'm curious as to why ‘the book’ seems to rule out considerations like these.