Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! This week we have another Silver scenario, so L2s should wait until their FNM to jump into the conversation.

Abby and Nova are playing in an Amonkhet Sealed PPTQ. Abby taps four Forests, discards a Shefet Monitor, and announces she is paying the cycling cost. She draws a card and then starts searching her library. Nova stops her and says, “Hold on. You have to search your library before you draw. It even says so at the bottom of your card.” Abby reads her Shefet Monitor closely and replies, “Oops! You’re right. JUDGE!”

What do you do?

Edited Joe Klopchic (May 18, 2017 04:28:30 AM)

Since Abby has drawn a card at the wrong time, I think it would be a GPE-HCE - Warning. Check that none of the cards in Abby's hand are known, then get Nova to look at and choose a card to be the excess card. Shuffle that card into Abby's library and then get her to resolve the Shefet monitor ability first, then have her draw for cycling.

I see two options here.

Option A: We backup to the point of error – which here is the premature card draw. We will reveal Abby's hand to Nova, and Nova will choose the card that was drawn from the cycle ability. We then put that card back into the library and allow Abby to resume searching for Shefet's ability. She will finish resolving Shefet Monitor's ability and shuffle her library, and then draw her card from the cycling ability. GPE - HCE for Abby.

Option B: Abby missed her Shefet Monitor trigger entirely. Have her shuffle up her deck to resume playing without resolving Shefet Monitor's triggered ability. GPE - Missed Trigger, no penalty.

I really don't like Option A because it shuffles away a card from Abby's hand, which is by definition VERY disruptive (she could have been holding onto that card for the whole game). On the other hand, Option B doesn't allow any flexibility for a simple error that borders on out-of-order sequencing – it seems pretty harsh for her to lose that ability. I think ultimately I'll stick with Option B here.

Edited April Miller (May 18, 2017 01:52:55 PM)

Back up to the point of error - AP drawing a card at the wrong time.

Abby revels her hand. Nova chooses a card that is added to Abby's library. Shefet Monitor resolves, Abby searches up her land, shuffles and draws a card.

Abby is given GPE - HCE - Warning with a reminder to read her cards more carefully.

I don't see this as a missed trigger because Abby is in the process of resolving this trigger.

Due to the fact that this is a beneficial MAY ability, I was rule that she has Abby has decided to say no to the may ability due to her immediately drawing the card. The trigger was never missed as you cannot miss a may ability, and due to it being Competitive REL I am less likely to back this up. I understand the intent, and due to Abby not declaring (in the text above) that she is going to use the addition ability of the Monitor, I am happy with reshuffling the library, minus any known cards and a warning for Looking At Extra Cards (I think).

Originally posted by April Keeler:

Option B: Abby missed her Shefet Monitor trigger entirely. Have her shuffle up her deck to resume playing without resolving Shefet Monitor's triggered ability. GPE - Missed Trigger, no penalty.

Just wondering
So, no infraction for picking and looking through library?

I would not rule it as a missed trigger because Abby has clearly demonstrated awareness of it by picking up the library and start searching. She also was aware of the draw effect produced by cycling. The issue I see is that she resolved two effects in the wrong order.
I would rule a GPE-HCE, with Warning. I would return a card from her hand to the library (of opponent's choice), then resolve the two effects in the correct order (search, then draw).

Demonstrating awareness of a trigger after the time has passed to resolve the trigger doesn't matter. If you have a Pact trigger in your upkeep, and you draw a card in your draw step, there's no “Oh yeah I'm gonna pay for my Pact now.”

L@EC - Warning for Abby, have her shuffle her library, continue play.

So, no infraction for picking and looking through library?

Good point. GPE - Looking at Extra Cards. Duh.

Thanks for everyone joining in this week, Jack Hutson was the first to point towards our correct solution.

Abby's mistake cannot be ruled as Out of Order Sequencing. Since she drew a card before searching her library, this makes it more probable for AP to draw a land card.

Even though we don’t consider this problem Out of Order Sequencing, failing to search the library before drawing a card this way isn’t specifically a Game Rule Violation either. Shefet Monitor’s triggered ability is optional. Drawing the card and declining to search is legal, so there was a non-detrimental Missed Trigger when Abby started searching. Regardless, starting to search was still not legal as the trigger was missed.

Nova did stop the game immediately after watching Abby make the first noticeable error. This means Abby committed a Looking at Extra Cards infraction and she receives a warning. Have Abby shuffle the random portion of her library and remind her she always needs to search her library before drawing a card every time she cycles Shefet Monitor. Since the Shefet Monitor trigger was missed and is non-detrimental, Nova may choose to put the ability on the stack now.

Edited Joe Klopchic (May 24, 2017 05:20:23 AM)

I agree on giving a warning for LEC here, but I'm curious about a technicality!

Why do you choose to give a warning for a different infraction than the infraction that was the root cause? The (first) infraction occurs when Abby draws a card (misses her trigger), and the missed trigger is arguably the root cause for the second infraction (LEC).

Originally posted by IPG:

Infractions with the same root cause are treated as a single infraction.

If we were to strictly apply the IPG, wouldn't it actually be correct to not give a warning (as MT defaults to no warning)? It sounds a little weird, but I'd love for someone to point out where the error is! :) do you disagree on this being two infractions with the same root cause, for instance?

Hey Hakon,

Missing a trigger is a legal outcome(presuming it was not intentional), and furthermore searching with Shefet Monitor is optional (so to Nova Abby hadn't done something illegal by drawing the card). Like the posted answer says

Drawing the card and declining to search is legal, so there was no infraction the moment Abby drew a card. Nova couldn't have been sure there was an issue until Abby started searching.

I hope this makes sense!

-J

Edited Jeff S Higgins (May 23, 2017 12:57:30 PM)