Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! This week's scenario is rated SILVER, meaning it requires a solid knowledge of the IPG and is appropriate for L1 and newer L2 judges. If you don't fall into that category, please wait a day or so to allow other judges their chance to answer. Good Luck!


You are judging a PTQ at a local store. Annie attacks with two 1/1 faerie tokens and a tarmogoyf into Nami's empty board. Nami, who is at 5 life and has an empty graveyard, is playing a deck heavy in removal. She asks, “I might have to kill that goyf… What's in your graveyard?” Annie replies “Just this enchantment and a land.” Nami then says “okay, i've still got a turn then. I'll take the damage. I go to one.” “Nope! I win! The enchantment is Bitterblossom!” Annie giggles. Nami calls for a judge.

Both players agree on the sequence of events (the situation described above). What is your ruling? If you are undecided based on this information, what further questions do you need to ask the players?


The blog post for this scenario can be found here: http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/2013/07/10/guard-your-words/

Edited Patrick Vorbroker (July 11, 2013 02:39:55 AM)

The big focus for me would be the exact words used. Nami did not ask what card TYPES were in the graveyard, just what was in there. Since Tarmogoyf's power and toughness are derived information, and Annie did not lie or mislead the information she was asked about, I see no issues or infractions here. Sorry Nami. :(

Sent from my iPhone

I would rule that Annie won the match. This seems pretty cut and clear.

Annie answered honestly, albeit deceptively, but still honestly, that her graveyard contained an enchantment and a land. She was under no obligation to mention that it was a Tribal Enchantment - Faerie. In this case, Section 402.2 states that a player can examine the cards in any graveyard at any time but normally can't change their order. The responsibility falls to Nami to verify the contents of their opponents' graveyard, and thus “derive” the power and toughness of said tarmogoyf before responding.

I would agree and give Annie the win.

Nami specifically asked “What's in your graveyard?”. Since the graveyard is a public zone Annie is not required to help Nami determine the characteristics of the cards in it. In answering the question the way that she did Annie did not represent the derived information incorrectly therefore is not lying. She did in fact have an enchantment and a land in her GY. Leaving out details in an attempt to mislead the opponent is not illegal so long as the player honestly answers the question.

Originally posted by IPG - 4.1:

Free information includes:
…
- The name of any visible object
…

The following rules govern player communication:
- Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly.
- Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions pertaining to free information.

I'm concerned that because Annie's answer to the question “What's in your graveyard?” was neither a list of card names (the most common thing that this request means in my experience), nor the *complete* set of characteristics that those cards have that is relevant for the current actions being performed (the exact types of the cards in the graveyard, which is Oracle text, normally derived information, but the player is unable to derive this without the card names), that Annie may in actuality not be answering the question properly, by misrepresenting what is actually in her graveyard through omission. Her answers may be truthful from a basic standpoint, but her omission of information that was requested that could lead to a better understanding of the current board state could be construed as a Communication Policy Violation.

I would question Nami, to see what she was asking for. Likely, this was either the names of the cards in Annie's graveyard (free information), or the different types of cards in Annie's graveyard (derived information), so Nami could properly deduce the power of Tarmogoyf and thus make a blocking decision.

Annie has provided partial derived information. I would question Annie to determine her thought process for her response. She is likely trying to ‘get’ her opponent by her superior knowledge of what derived information is. However, she is not accurately representing the information she is providing of the objects in her graveyard. By answering the question in terms of card types, she apparently already understands that this information is required to determine Tarmogoyf's power, and by not giving the full list of types present, is attempting to misrepresent it's power.

Now I have another problem. Annie is breaking a rule. She is doing so to gain an advantage in the game. If we believe that she is breaking the rule knowingly, we now have Cheating as a possible infraction. More investigation will be required to determine if that is the case.

What was inaccurate about Annie's answer?

Originally posted by Brian Miller:

Originally posted by IPG - 4.1:

Free information includes:
…
- The name of any visible object
…

The following rules govern player communication:
- Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly.
- Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions pertaining to free information.

I'm concerned that because Annie's answer to the question “What's in your graveyard?” was neither a list of card names (the most common thing that this request means in my experience), nor the *complete* set of characteristics that those cards have that is relevant for the current actions being performed (the exact types of the cards in the graveyard, which is Oracle text, normally derived information, but the player is unable to derive this without the card names), that Annie may in actuality not be answering the question properly, by misrepresenting what is actually in her graveyard through omission. Her answers may be truthful from a basic standpoint, but her omission of information that was requested that could lead to a better understanding of the current board state could be construed as a Communication Policy Violation.

I would question Nami, to see what she was asking for. Likely, this was either the names of the cards in Annie's graveyard (free information), or the different types of cards in Annie's graveyard (derived information), so Nami could properly deduce the power of Tarmogoyf and thus make a blocking decision.

Annie has provided partial derived information. I would question Annie to determine her thought process for her response. She is likely trying to ‘get’ her opponent by her superior knowledge of what derived information is. However, she is not accurately representing the information she is providing of the objects in her graveyard. By answering the question in terms of card types, she apparently already understands that this information is required to determine Tarmogoyf's power, and by not giving the full list of types present, is attempting to misrepresent it's power.

Now I have another problem. Annie is breaking a rule. She is doing so to gain an advantage in the game. If we believe that she is breaking the rule knowingly, we now have Cheating as a possible infraction. More investigation will be required to determine if that is the case.

The problem I have with this is that Nami isn't asking for the names of the cards in the graveyard specifically. Rather she is simply asking what is in the yard. I don't think we can make a ruling on what Nami implied with her question. It's her job as a player to clearly communicate her question. If she wanted the card names, she could have asked for them specifically after not gaining that information from Allison with the first question. Also the yard is a public zone she has the ability to look at the graveyard to see the types and to figure out Tarmogoyfs P/T.

Annie, while not being an exhaustive answer to the question, did give an honest answer. Being that the card types are derived information, Allison is not required to answer the question completely. I agree had Nami specifically asked what cards were in Annie's graveyard we would have a different situation as she would be asking for free information.

While it may seem sneaky, I don't think Annie has actually done anything wrong.

Edited because apparently I just like to switch peoples names :D

Edited David Hartford (July 11, 2013 01:47:26 PM)

Originally posted by David Hartford:

While it may seem sneaky, I don't think Allison has actually done anything wrong.

ummm.. David, who's Allison? :D

I agree that Nami's question isn't really specified, and Annie's answer although sneaky, is honest. Since the card types are derived, she's allowed to mention it partially.

It should be Nami's responsibility to clarify Tarmogoyf's p/t. Annie doesn't have the responsibility to help Nami in that.

So my call is no infraction, Annie win that game.

This might be slightly off-track, but what if the answer to the question was simply:

“A land.”

Once again, it is true, there is a land in the graveyard, and the types of the cards in her graveyard are derived. But is this “correctly” answering the question? I think the answer really depends on what your interpretation of “may not represent derived or free information incorrectly” means. Basically, whether by omitting something that is true about something you are describing, is your statement still true?

Another aspect of derived information is:

- The number of any type of objects present in any game zone.

A player wouldn't be allowed to answer “I have two card types in my graveyard” when there are actually three, right? If Nami would check the graveyard herself after hearing that, and call a judge, what is the result? Why does giving an answer that only provides only part of it still satisfy the standards of communication? If Annie wants Nami to figure out this derived information on her own, she should say so. Doing otherwise implies that the information is correct and complete.

Just so we are all on similar pages. I would like to quote from the MTR.

If Nami had called a judge and asked “What is in Annie's graveyard?,”
how would you answer? Would the judge be able to say “tribal,
enchantment, land?”

————————————————————————————
4. Communication
4.1 Player Communication
Communication between players is essential to the successful play of
any game that involves virtual objects or
hidden information. While bluffing may be an aspect of games, there
need to be clear lines as to what is, and is
not, acceptable for players to say or otherwise represent. Officials
and highly competitive players should
understand the line between bluffing and fraud. This will confirm
expectations of both sporting and competitive
players during a game.
The philosophy of the DCI is that a player should have an advantage
due to better understanding of the rules of a
game, greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state,
and superior tactical planning. Players are
under no obligation to assist their opponents in playing the game.
Regardless of anything else, players are
expected to treat their opponents politely and with respect. Failure
to do so may lead to Unsporting Conduct
penalties.
There are three categories of information: free, derived and private.
Free information is information to which all players are entitled
access without contamination or omissions made
by their opponents. If a player is ever unable or unwilling to provide
free information to an opponent that has
requested it, he or she should call a judge and explain the situation.
Free information includes:
• Details of current game actions and past game actions that still
affect the game state.
• The name of any visible object.
• The type of any counter in a public zone.
• The physical status (tapped/flipped/unattached/phased) and current
zone of any object.
• Player life totals, poison counter totals, and the game score of the
current match.
• The current step and/or phase and which player(s) are active.
Derived information is information to which all players are entitled
access, but opponents are not obliged to assist
in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine.
Derived information includes:
• The number of any type of objects present in any game zone.
• All characteristics of objects in public zones that are not defined
as free information.
• Game Rules, Tournament Policy, Oracle content and any other official
information pertaining to the
current tournament. Cards are considered to have their Oracle text
printed on them.
Private information is information to which players have access only
if they are able to determine it from the
current visual game state or their own record of previous game actions.
• Any information that is not free or derived is automatically private
information.
The following rules govern player communication:
• Players must answer all questions asked of them by a judge
completely and honestly, regardless of the
type of information requested. Players may request to do so away from the match.
• Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly.
• Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions
pertaining to free information.
• At Regular REL, all derived information is instead considered free.
Judges are encouraged to help players in determining free information,
but must avoid assisting players with
derived information about the game state.

Buddhist say something like this: if you want a good answer, make a good question! :)

I would say the same here, to Nami: she asked something about a free information, and received a true (but deceptive) answer. On the other hand, Annie said “an enchantment” (which is true) omitting the “tribal” portion of Bitterblossom, making the answer inaccurate albeit legal. Yes, Annie should have said that with the purpose to be deceived, but we're talking about free / derived informations here and she didn't lie to her opponent.

Under Competitive rules, I would assign no infractions; under Regular rules, I would explain Nami to ask clearly about Tarmogoyf P/T if she's somehow unable / unwilling to determine them on her own, and I would allow her to do some plays before damage assignment.

A word with Annie would follow-up eventually, to invite her for a better communication with the opponents, but I can't be with Brian here to investigate for Cheating: players should do something willing and illegal in order to take this route, and the “illegal” part does not apply here.

EDIT to answer Jacob: if I had to answer as a Judge to the same question, I would have said the card names in the graveyard. The better question would have been “what is that creature's P/T” and not “what's in the graveyard”, since this question tells me that she wants to understand P/T on her own.

Edited Stefano Ferrari (July 11, 2013 02:44:08 PM)

Originally posted by Jacob Faturechi:

If Nami had called a judge and asked “What is in Annie's graveyard?,”
how would you answer? Would the judge be able to say “tribal,
enchantment, land?”

The type is derived information so we wouldn't be able to give her that information. We could however say “bitterblossom, and (name of land)” as that is free information.

Edited David Hartford (July 11, 2013 02:40:49 PM)

Originally posted by Stefano Ferrari:

On the other hand, Annie said “an enchantment” (which is true) omitting the “tribal” portion of Bitterblossom, making the answer inaccurate albeit legal.

Nami said “this enchantment” in the opening post, not an enchantment.
Because of this slight difference I would give Nami the win. Bad luck for Annie, the better question would have been: “What's the power/toughness of that goyf?”

Originally posted by Johannes Wagner:

Nami said “this enchantment” in the opening post, not an enchantment.

Yeah, I understand your saying: “this” enchantment could be that Annie is showing the card while talking (or maybe I'm overthinking).

Originally posted by Stefano Ferrari:

Yeah, I understand your saying: “this” enchantment could be that Annie is showing the card while talking (or maybe I'm overthinking).

Yepp, that's what I meant.
Also if someone uses “this” you usually look at “this” thingy.