Hello,

I've heard a quite interesting story regarding the recent Eternal Weekend Pittsburg (Oct. 9-12) at the Legacy event. Here's the exact transcript of the story as it was told:

"...Oh, a very interesting thing I saw was one table over to me at Eternal weekend, a person when um presenting their deck, had a deck that was like the cards in the deckbox equated to probably if I had to guess 85 card, right? And 10 of those cards were made to look like they were playing a certain deck. Something that was scary like I don't know whether it's Stifle or Oops or you know something that makes you play differently than you would otherwise, right? And then when the match actually got on its way, the opponent who saw what that guy had before realized it's completely different and called a judge to deck check him, because it's like, yo, like this is not what i saw. Like what the heck's going on? You know what i mean? And then initially the judges gave him a game loss because had more than 75 cards in his deckbox. And here's where the interesting thing happens. The um that guy who got the game loss said 'no i don't because look' and he takes those 10 cards out of their sleeves inside the deck box and said 'look, they have no magic backs, they're not backed, which means they're not legal magic cards and so they're not to be considered a part of my deck' and under the current rules he is correct, and so they withdrew the game loss and the match proceeded. But that was just like an example of what one of my friend was talking about before, you know what I mean? Is it, can it be construed as something to frowned upon by some people? Yeah, possibly. But is it against the rules? Technically not. ..."

In my opinion going to the length to make proxies that can fool a player across the board (and seemingly even the judge) is at least Unsporting Conduct - minor, but could be even understood as cheating attempt. Of course i get the argument of "no one forced them to look at my "luckybringing proxies" (and other bs excuses), but still it seems something thats very fishy. If this is 100% legal i guess every really competitive player should do this, as even if the bait only works 10% of the time, its still gives them an advantage.

Does anyone know the Judge who issued the verdict? Also what does those who write the IPG think about this situation?

Edited Ferenc Zubora (Oct. 31, 2025 10:46:26 AM)

Hi Ferenc, I have moved this post from the Rules Q&A forum (which is for questions that relate to the Comprehensive Rules) and into the Competitive REL forum.

Please keep in mind that it might not be possible to discuss details of specific events, and that description of events that someone says they saw happen "one table over" may not be accurate or complete. However, there may be some interesting discussion to be had here, so I'm going to leave this thread open for now :)

I don't know any details about the actual call, but as described, I don't consider this a problem worthy of usc-minor or anything else. Players are allowed to attempt to mind-game each other in various ways - doing something like writing the name of a deck they aren't playing on their deckbox is allowed. This strikes me as a fairly analogous situation.

Originally posted by Brook Gardner-Durbin:

I don't know any details about the actual call, but as described, I don't consider this a problem worthy of usc-minor or anything else. Players are allowed to attempt to mind-game each other in various ways - doing something like writing the name of a deck they aren't playing on their deckbox is allowed. This strikes me as a fairly analogous situation.

Hello Brook,

thanks for clearing things up!

My gut-feeling and my first instinct tells me this is inheritly wrong and should not be allowed.

Yes players are allowed to mind trick and write weird stuff. But the fun ends for me if they are deliberately trying to make an opponent believe the cards that are stored with their deck are actually real magic cards. Why else would they act in such a way? Also they use cards that would be legal and probably very playable in certain decks. 

Bringing Mana and Storm Counters with your Red Stompy Deck or store some goblin tokens with your creatureless control deck is nothing I see an issue with, but pretending to play magic cards that are not real goes to far in my opinion. 

I agree it is sometimes hard to draw the line but why does it matter so much if the card backs are fake or real? The player wants to create the impression that these cards are real, legal in the format and playable. Why should we give them special treatment? Also one could argue they created their own proxies which is not allowed. One could argue they brought realistically looking fakes that probably could be played in their deck without even being registered on their decklist?! The least I would do if someone would try to pull that off at an event I was the HJ off was to tell the player to put these counterfeits away for the reminder of the tournament. 

I am pretty sure, that the spirit of the rules would not enjoy this behavior.

Also after some thinking and rereading isn't this cheating?

Hear me out. The player does something to gain an advantage? Yes they make their opponent believe they play a different deck. Are they aware of what they are doing? Absolutely. Here is the Weakpoint of the cheating idea. Also were they doing something illegal? I would argue yes. They stored cards with their deck and sideboard that are legal in that format and until their opponent finds out about the real deck the cards are chosen to imply that they are very playable in the deck the player presented. Now are they aware that it is illegal? Probably not, because it never occurred and it is probably not easy to convince people here of this being illegal - or at least that it should be. 

I still do not understand completely why we should not do anything here. The player very obviously wants to make the impression that the cards are real. Why not give him a penalty that fits the discription? I personally believe storing random cards with their deck because a player has no other space and forgets about them being stored there should not be punished worse as someone who deliberately and premeditated puts counterfeits between their cards to make their opponents believe those cards are real. 

Edited Tristan Hof (Nov. 1, 2025 06:46:31 PM)

Quite an interesting conversation, thanks for posting this! Let me start very bluntly: this is not cheating or USC, because nothing illegal is happening here. The player is trying to trick their opponent, you may have opinions on that, but nothing illegal has happened and there's no reason for any judge to step in here.

Let's reverse the argument: if we declare this to be illegal, where do we draw the line? Can a player only bring tokens that they actually play in their deck? Can a player use the beautiful Judge Balance playmat if they don't play the card Balance in their deck? We have a clear line already: don't put any legally playable cards in your deckbox, bacause that could lead to actual problems of playing cards you didn't register as part of your deck. There are no rules for jedi mind tricks, and IMHO for good reason.

And just to take this argument one step further: what if a player plays a mono green deck and only has 10 sideboard cards they wish to play; can they put 5 red and black cards in their sideboard, and before the start of the match “accidentally” show 5 legally registered SB cards to their opponent? It's done intentionally in order to gain an advantage, but it's 100% within the rules (assuming they registered these cards as part of their SB and these cards are legal in the format).

TL;DR: what Brook said.

Agree with Brook and Dustin.

We make a distinction between Unsporting behavior and behavior that is not sporting.
One is disallowed, the other just isnt nice.

What I see as happening next is:
1) This player gets all the other cards in their deck scrutinized very carefully. 
2) Player given a direct instruction to not to keep those "cards" in their deckbox because of the confusion that having pseudo counterfeit cards in their deck boxes causes via the perception of cheating.
3) A check with previous opponents encountered any of these pseudo counterfeits in previous rounds. 

And to the comment: "If this is 100% legal i guess every really competitive player should do this, as even if the bait only works 10% of the time, its still gives them an advantage."

I'd simply point out that if they invested the time and energy that they spent in creating this troll into practicing, they would find that they dont need to stoop to such infantile deception, and if they really want a reputation for winning that way.

I'd like to weigh in with a question I have. 

The IPG states that its a problem if theres extra cards stored that could conceivably be used in the deckbox. Im aware counterfeits are not real cards. But if they hold up unless under close scrutiny they could conceivably be boarded into the deck unless someone inspects the back. Why are cards that could be used exempt because they are fake? 

I agree that if we have to fully disregard these cards that we arrive at no infraction. I also agree that we are allowed to mindtrick our opponent. But somehow this feels wrong, because using a real card would get you a gameloss (or DQ in some situations.). Using a card that looks exactly the same for all purposes, probably could be used in the deck without arising suspicion, but is not real is totally fine and legal.

There is a problem here, but I believe that it's a Tournament Organizer issue, not a Judge issue.
The player is knowingly in possession of convincing (at least on one side) counterfeit cards and is using them (albeit in a non-play purpose) in a sanctioned WPN event, and I know from discussions with various tournament organizers and store owners that such things can cause serious issues if Wizards finds out that they happened and weren't addressed. If anyone on that side of things has any insight, I would be happy to hear it.

So this has apparently been warped a bit in a game of telephone but the actual details.  No counterfeit cards were involved unless this is a separate issue from the same event.

Player has an artist proof forest.  They have the card sleeved identically to their deck.  At the start of the match the player intentially takes their deck out so the opponent sees a basic forest exposed at the bottom of the deck.  The player openly admits its to play a mind game to make the opponent think he is on a different deck pre mulligan.  Player removes the forest and sets it aside before shuffling.  

A concerned friend of an opponent comes up to me and another judge during day 1 to bring up the issue.  We inform them that its technically no problem as its not a legal magic card and couldnt not concievably be part of the deck or sideboard.  They don't love it but they accept the policy.

Same player gets deck checked on day 2.  Checks lead notices the forest and investigates.  After talking to the player they find its a artist proof and correctly issue no penalty.


Note:  Its always an important distiction to make between what we feels is fair and what policy tells us is legal and ok.  While cheeky policy says everythings fine here.

Edited Matt Muckle (Nov. 3, 2025 02:36:29 PM)

Why does it matter if it is an artist proof card? If it is sleeved like the rest of the deck, you cant distinguish between a real card, an artist proof card, a good proxy and a good counterfeit if I understand correctly. Are we supossed to unsleeve every card at a deck check and control them very toughtfully to make sure it is neither of those latter cases?

For me, if a fake card is sleeved like the deck, in the deckbox, and not distingishable at first glance as a fake, then that card is part of the deck. The player might says he only intends to play a mind game, but how can we exclud he didnt use it as a 16th sideboard card at some point? Tolerating sleeved artist proof cards opens a door to a lot of potential cheating opportunities.

Originally posted by Bernard Linster:

Why does it matter if it is an artist proof card? If it is sleeved like the rest of the deck, you cant distinguish between a real card, an artist proof card, a good proxy and a good counterfeit if I understand correctly. Are we supossed to unsleeve every card at a deck check and control them very toughtfully to make sure it is neither of those latter cases?

For me, if a fake card is sleeved like the deck, in the deckbox, and not distingishable at first glance as a fake, then that card is part of the deck. The player might says he only intends to play a mind game, but how can we exclud he didnt use it as a 16th sideboard card at some point? Tolerating sleeved artist proof cards opens a door to a lot of potential cheating opportunities.

Well the cop out answer is...thats not what the IPG/MTR says.

Generally no we should not be unsleaving cards.  Yes its very likely that a player could illegally play an entire tournament with a artist proof card and never be detected.  However there are indeed infractions there should they be caught (deck problem or Cheating).  This happens regular especially in cEDH or older formats where players try to pass off counterfeit cards as the real thing for their deck.  Sometimes they get caught sometimes they don't.  

Thats not what this player is doing.  The card is not in the deck.  The player is not playing with the card and has no intent in playing with the card.  The player is very much exploiting some (very legal) loop holes to try and gain a minute advantage.  Should they ever attempt to put it in the deck then yes we would have a problem.  Additionally its very likely this forest is not on their decklist further contributing to the fact they are not playing this card.


Ultimately we rely on the text below from the IPG. As defined by MTR 3.3 artists proofs are not legal Magic Cards.  Thus something that is not a legal magic card cannot conceivably be played in the players deck and cannot be a penalty (its not a card that we can ever consider!). This definition of cards is cemeted further in the next section where the IPG has to specifically call out tokens being separate.  Were not using the english definition of card here but the Magic definition.

If there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard unless they are:

• Promotional cards that have been handed out as part of the event.
• Double-faced cards represented by substitute cards in the deck.
• Damaged cards that have been officially proxied for the tournament.
• Double-faced cards being used to represent the back side of cards in the deck. These cards must not be sleeved in the same way as cards in the main deck and/or sideboard.

Cards in different sleeves, tokens, and double-faced cards for which substitute cards are being used are ignored when determining deck (not sideboard) legality.

about this:

how can we exclud he didnt use it as a 16th sideboard card at some point? Tolerating sleeved artist proof cards opens a door to a lot of potential cheating opportunities.

First whats the odds the player sideboarded in a basic forest in is UB legacy reanaimator deck (0)?  Second we as judges have the ability to investigate.  If you are that concerned go ask their previous opponents if they remembered that player actually playing that card among other methods.  There are quite a few things that can happen that feel bad that are either no penalty or cheating.  This is one of them.  Ultimately we are tied to what the IPG allows us to infract upon.  We should never be deviating to give a penalty where the IPG doesnt allow us.

Edited Matt Muckle (Nov. 3, 2025 07:05:12 PM)

I think the note on potential abuse if we take this read isn't about this specific forest but more the larger implication.

Theoretically for your read it would be ok to have 5 very playable cards in my deck with the sideboard as extras in the same sleeve as long as they're artist proofs because those aren't actually cards. But there's a high chance I get to use them as such anyway. That's the point people are making here. These cards (this forest too) could conceivably be played in the players deck. We don't make this distinction with likewise situations (keeping a real forest to count mana) when cards are kept with sideboards, so I'd argue we shouldn't here. An extra card with sideboard that isn't in the exceptions is an extra card. 

So then it comes down to 'do we consider this a card'. I think we can all agree artist proofs recognizable as such aren't cards according to the MTR. The problem is you likely won't notice until you investigate. Players generally don't unsleeve their opponents cards mid play.

So for the IPG I think the argument that this is a card that "could be conceivably played in the deck" isn't easily dismissed. For me, it only stops being a card deeper into an investigation. For the opponent, it's a card. 

Saying the penalty doesn't apply here because ultimately we find out it isn't actually a card opens up all kinds of potential abuses that we try to discourage with policy like this. I'm not allowed to store two extra bolts with my sideboard because it'd make it easier for me to board them in. But once they're artist proofs which are equally easy to board in and quite likely to be treated as a real card, we'd stop applying the policy and I think that's a mistake. Sure, there's other ways or investigations to catch that, but there are those very same arguments with the real bolts, but in that case we agree we have the actual penalty as well because we feel that just the fact that there's decklists and investigations isn't enough of a deterent against the pontial advantage of doing this on purpose. 

I understand that in the scenario the player isn't doing this, but if we allow this, we equally have to allow the bolt artist proof too, even if we suspect it might very well be there to have the opportunity to board it in.

'I want to show it to my opponent as a clever trick' isn't enough of a defense for me here, and also abuses the fact that we have this policy like this. It's not the same as running black mana sleeves in your burn deck or writing control on the deckbox of your aggro deck. Because we have policy around cards in deck boxes, players assume this can't be put into that category. Abusing/skirting the edges of policy to trick your opponents is always an issue to me, and not rarely something we've changed policy for in the past. 

Edited Arjen de Jong (Nov. 4, 2025 02:39:16 AM)

A lot of interesting perspectives on this, so I might as well share mine (note: no longer even the least bit [O]!).

Let's start with the relevant IPG text:

If there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard unless they are:

• Promotional cards that have been handed out as part of the event.

• Double-faced cards represented by substitute cards in the deck.

• Damaged cards that have been officially proxied for the tournament.

• Double-faced cards being used to represent the back side of cards in the deck. These cards must not be sleeved in the same way as cards in the main deck and/or sideboard.

Cards in different sleeves, tokens, and double-faced cards for which substitute cards are being used are ignored when determining deck (not sideboard) legality. 

The "artist proof Forest" meets none of those exceptions, not even the first - which is something we had to carve out years ago, because players inevitably put their GP (and then MagicFest) promo cards in their deckbox, to protect it, even when it was format-legal.

Each of those exceptions has some history behind it, and - to the best of my recall - none of that corresponds to what's happening here.  Instead, the player has admitted to a misrepresentation of their deck and/or sideboard contents, with the intent to gain an advantage - but almost certainly not thinking they're breaking any rules.  Almost certainly not Cheating, then.

Looking at the possible circumstances for an upgrade to Game Loss, the only thing that even comes close:

If an opponent may have made strategic decisions based on the presence of a sideboard card (such as having seen it in the hand or library during a search effect), the penalty is a Game Loss. 

While that might stretch enough to fit for some, I can assure you, that was always intended to address situations where a deck problem could have affected in-game decisions for the opponent.  I really don't think this was ever intended to fit this example - then again, I don't think we ever even considered this scenario...

To me, this is a Warning, and personally, I'd deliver with a convincingly stern tone to emphasize that Mayor McCheese is not what we want in our player base. (heh)  Have the player find another safe place to store any non-cards, and stop their unwelcome behavior.

But, that's just me, and time has (mostly) passed me by, so ... YMMV.

d:^D

I like Scott's take here. I also put things in this realm such as tokens in a deckbox that the deck would never use. I have known folks to do this to try to make opponents believe they were playing a different deck. I would lean toward a Warning, ask them to remove them from the deckbox, and check next round to see if they are still doing it if I had time. 

I think it is pretty cool that Scott still takes time to chime in here. Legend!

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

A lot of interesting perspectives on this, so I might as well share mine (note: no longer even the least bit [O]!).

Let's start with the relevant IPG text:

If there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard unless they are:

• Promotional cards that have been handed out as part of the event.

• Double-faced cards represented by substitute cards in the deck.

• Damaged cards that have been officially proxied for the tournament.

• Double-faced cards being used to represent the back side of cards in the deck. These cards must not be sleeved in the same way as cards in the main deck and/or sideboard.

Cards in different sleeves, tokens, and double-faced cards for which substitute cards are being used are ignored when determining deck (not sideboard) legality. 

 

The "artist proof Forest" meets none of those exceptions, not even the first - which is something we had to carve out years ago, because players inevitably put their GP (and then MagicFest) promo cards in their deckbox, to protect it, even when it was format-legal.

Each of those exceptions has some history behind it, and - to the best of my recall - none of that corresponds to what's happening here.  Instead, the player has admitted to a misrepresentation of their deck and/or sideboard contents, with the intent to gain an advantage - but almost certainly not thinking they're breaking any rules.  Almost certainly not Cheating, then.

Looking at the possible circumstances for an upgrade to Game Loss, the only thing that even comes close:

If an opponent may have made strategic decisions based on the presence of a sideboard card (such as having seen it in the hand or library during a search effect), the penalty is a Game Loss. 

While that might stretch enough to fit for some, I can assure you, that was always intended to address situations where a deck problem could have affected in-game decisions for the opponent.  I really don't think this was ever intended to fit this example - then again, I don't think we ever even considered this scenario...

To me, this is a Warning, and personally, I'd deliver with a convincingly stern tone to emphasize that Mayor McCheese is not what we want in our player base. (heh)  Have the player find another safe place to store any non-cards, and stop their unwelcome behavior.

But, that's just me, and time has (mostly) passed me by, so ... YMMV.

d:^D