At the RPTQ I judged Sunday I was in charge of deck checks. I did a targeted one on a player because his deck was about as tall as a commander deck and I wanted to know why. Conducted the check and discovered he has sleeved a token in the perfect fit behind all his cards (which were all foil). The tokens were all the same (I checked about 15 of them), and the sleeves were opaque. I checked with my head judge and he said it was ok, but it still felt weird to me. When I investigated with the player they said they'd checked it with other HJs in the past and been OK'd. Curious how others would handle that situation/has anyone seen that sort of thing before.

Some questions I had specifically:
1) If the tokens were different but the sleeves are still opaque does that matter?
2) If the sleeves aren't opaque but the tokens are the same does that matter?

From my point of view…
1) I would say no, it does not matter. If all sleeves have a token in a perfect fit behind them in opaque sleeve, theorically they should all have the same thickness to it, and therefore that should be fine.
EDIT : On second thoughts… this could be abused by putting more than 1 token in some sleeves and only 1 in the other. Would an opponent be able to tell the difference? Would we? Without having to de-sleeve all the cards… hum…. Not so sure anymore…
2) You would have to check the back of the token because the back of it is not a standard MTG card back. I'ts printed on the “tips” card and those back changes. it could be a case of marked cards if the backs are not all the same. At this time, since we usually do not have the time to check all backs of all cards to make sure this is legit, I would ask the player to remove the token from his sleeves before next round.

I'm also very surprised and curious. Did you ask the player the reason why he sleeved that way? Is it because he likes to handle cards with a little more thickness? Does this gives added protection?

Edited Maxime Emond (Nov. 20, 2017 10:20:27 AM)

My first instinct is that the person is using the tokens to add stiffness to (a) prevent bending (which foils tend to do) and (b) to provide extra protection during shuffling.

In relation to your two questions, I'm ok with both situations. Essentially, the cards aren't different from one another. So while it's unexpected, it fits within both the letter, and the spirit of the rules (I can't see how someone might gain advantage from all this).

One caveat - if the sleeves are not opaque, then one risk is that the Card and the Token shift in the sleeve, so that they're offset. For example, if the Magic card has slipped a millimetre to the top of the sleeve, then you'll be able to see it through the sleeve. So I'd recommend using opaque sleeves just in case.

I really don't have an issue here. I've seen tokens that are sleeved and it hasn't even raised a flag. The tokens are usually sleeved differently from the deck so that the player can tell the difference.

Originally posted by Will Bumgardner:

I really don't have an issue here. I've seen tokens that are sleeved and it hasn't even raised a flag. The tokens are usually sleeved differently from the deck so that the player can tell the difference.

The difference here is that the token is in the SAME sleeve as the Magic card. There are two things in one sleeve.

Oh, I misread.

I probably still wouldn't have a problem with it. Just seems a bit odd.

While this is a different approach, the goal seems to be the same as double-sleeving - protecting the cards, and protecting himself against cards becoming marked.

Yes, it probably does feel a bit weird when you first encounter it - but I agree with your Head Judge, and with Mark Mc Govern.

d:^D

My question is then this if a player is using double faced cards with see through sleeves and was told to resleeve would you allow the player to sleeve the whole deck doubled with basic land to stop the double sleeved cards to not be seen?

The IPG I believe does not allow for that unless I am misunderstanding the scenario

Graham

Sent from my iPhone

On 28 Nov 2017, at 19:31, Scott Marshall <forum-39824-2ee0@apps.magicjudges.org<mailto:forum-39824-2ee0@apps.magicjudges.org>> wrote:


While this is a different approach, the goal seems to be the same as double-sleeving - protecting the cards, and protecting himself against cards becoming marked.

Yes, it probably does feel a bit weird when you first encounter it - but I agree with your Head Judge, and with Mark Mc Govern.

d:^D

——————————————————————————–
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/243663/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/39824/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/39824/?onsite=yes

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/settings/

Originally posted by Graham Theobalds:

The IPG I believe does not allow for that

Hmmm? What part of the IPG tells you that?

d:^D

Nothing I actually meant this has been discussed previously in policy. Was not trying to be awkward but want consistency

Originally posted by Graham Theobalds:

would you allow the player to sleeve the whole deck doubled with basic land to stop the double sleeved cards to not be seen?

As you are proposing, every sleeve would have 2 Magic cards inside, which is not the case with Tokens as has been discussed in this scenario. Your proposal would fall under TE - Deck Problem infraction, wouldn't?

OK, first of all, we started with a very unusual scenario - which, because of its unusual nature, felt weird to Jeff; weird enough that he wondered if it's wrong (it's not).

Next up, we toss out extreme extensions based on that; pushing the edges and poking the corners of policy is an amusing exercise, whenever and wherever judges gather, but it tends to clutter the Inbox of thousands of judges (which then leads to turning off notifications, which results in missing the truly valuable content, and that makes me sad). It's best to leave these ridiculous “what if” extensions to judge meetups.

Finally - the IPG could not have anticipated someone “double-carding” their deck, nor does it need to, because it's so unlikely. If you encounter something this far off the rails, then use the understanding of the philosophy behind policy which I try to impart in my ‘O’fficial Answers - and apply your judgment.

In this instance: we don't want Marked Cards, so ensure that the “double-carding” results in consistent thickness throughout, with no exceptions. A further concern is randomization, and the added thickness could impair shuffling; make sure the player can do so sufficiently, in a reasonable amount of time. If neither of those potential concerns are in fact a problem, then there's nothing wrong.

d:^D

Ok that’s fine thanks for confirming the difference



Sent from my iPhone

On 29 Nov 2017, at 12:11, David Larrea <forum-39824-2ee0@apps.magicjudges.org<mailto:forum-39824-2ee0@apps.magicjudges.org>> wrote:


Graham Theobalds
would you allow the player to sleeve the whole deck doubled with basic land to stop the double sleeved cards to not be seen?

As you are proposing, every sleeve would have 2 Magic cards inside, which is not the case with Tokens as has been discussed in this scenario. Your proposal would fall under TE - Deck Problem infraction, wouldn't?

——————————————————————————–
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/243732/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/39824/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/39824/?onsite=yes

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/settings/