Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool. This week we have another Silver scenario, so L2s should wait until Friday to jump into the discussion.

Adia is playing in a sealed MCQ. She sits down for game 1 of her match, grabs a pile of roughly 40 sleeved cards out of her deck box, shuffles, and presents to her opponent. Upon drawing her opening hand, she immediately calls a judge and explains that this is her sideboard. She has several other sets of cards sleeved for quick sideboarding, and she just grabbed the wrong pile from her deck box.

What do you do?

Edited Joe Klopchic (July 10, 2019 05:57:30 PM)

Can I just get a clarification of which version of the IPG we are using for this scenario? (I am assuming it is the one legal as of July 12th)

Knowledge Pool Scenarios always use the most recent policy documents.

Under the assumption that as with other comp enforcement events, decklists were required:
This is a pretty clear TE-Deck Problem.
The player presented a deck that did not match their decklist.
Cheating can be ruled out, since the judge was called immediately, and the player asserts that a mistake caused them to present the wrong stack of cards.
The upgrade paths don't seem to apply; the error was discovered after the deck was shuffled by the opponent, the cards were not made visible, and the provided information does not imply the presence of additional copies of mainboard cards.

Given the above, I would do the following:
Issue the player a Warning for TE-Marked Cards, Remove all sideboard cards from their library, add the missing mainboard cards to their library, and have them shuffle and perform a mulligan.

Edited Christopher Trent (July 14, 2019 08:36:40 AM)

Originally posted by Christopher Trent:

I would do the following:
Issue the player a Warning for TE-Marked Cards, Remove all sideboard cards from their library, add the missing mainboard cards to their library, and have them shuffle and perform a mulligan.

Why a marked cards penalty?

Ah, that was a typo. I had meant to say TE-Deck Problem.

Thanks for all the responses this week.

This one definitely sparked some discussion not on this forum, so I'll walk through the logic we have here.

This is clearly Deck Problem. Adia is playing with a deck that doesn't match her decklist, and the decklist is correct.

Deck Problem changed very recently, and now includes this remedy.

Originally posted by IPG 3.6 Deck Problem, Additional Remedy:

Locate any cards missing from the deck and any incorrect cards in any game zone. The opponent chooses which of the missing cards replaces each incorrect card; any extras are shuffled into the random portion of the library. If more cards are being removed than added, prioritize ones not in the library first. If there are still additional cards not in the library that need replacing, they are replaced by random cards from the library. If the missing card(s) are with the sideboard and it isn’t the first game, choose the ones to be returned to the deck at random from main deck cards in the sideboard.

Adia's opponent looks at Adia's correct deck and choose which seven cards become Adia's opening hand. If by chance any of the cards in Adia's original opening hand are also in her deck, those should remain. Adia now has a correct opening hand, and can choose to mulligan to six. Adia receives a Warning for Deck Problem.

A notable option here is to allow or force Adia to mulligan. Christopher Trent mentions this in this thread, and it came up several times over the weekend for me. Doing so isn't supported by policy and would be a deviation. Its possible to interpret this situation as significant and exceptional, but we don't believe it is. For more context, you can take a look at Toby's blog post, where he calls out the desire for the opponent to understand what's going on when we're moving cards in and out of a game.

Edited Joe Klopchic (July 16, 2019 10:10:34 PM)