Do you know a “no parking” sign that nobody takes any notice of and no car gets ticketed for violating? Does your airline have a 10kg limit on carry-on baggage that is honoured only in exception? These are two real-life examples of the Magic-related conundrum I have been considering for a few months — do we have rules in the MTR (or elsewhere) which judges don't apply or enforce consistently? I've found several, and the question I have is about what this means. Do we have the wrong rule? Do judges need to be re-educated? Is there a customer service question? I'd love to know the opinions of other judges.

The first rule I'd like to discuss is from MTR 2.7, and it says this:

Once your decklist has been accepted by a Tournament Official it may not be altered.

My experience with this rule has been varied, particularly in Limited events. I'm sure most people posting here have had this happen: a player comes up a few minutes after turning in their decklist and asks to change one card, or edit their basic land mix, on their (legal) decklist, which is now somewhere in that nice big pile over there. At Grand Prix events, often this request comes through a team other than the deck checks team, so a judge scribbles down the player's name and the change request on a piece of paper, and thrusts it at the deck checks team leader ten minutes later when he's passing by.

Applying the rule as written, requests like this should not be honoured. (Contrast: also in MTR 2.7 it says that requests to view a decklist between matches will be honoured if logistically possible.) On the other hand, it could be said to be good customer service, or an application of the rule downgrading a Tournament Error: Deck/Decklist Problem when a player calls it on himself before he could gain an advantage.

So what do you think? Is this a bad rule and should it be changed? Or should judges be applying it more consistently? Or is the answer something else entirely?

Some people who've met me at events may have heard of this topic from me before and I thank Jani Havukainen, Zdenek Sury, Jack Doyle, Oli Bird, and Luca Romano as well as all the others who have listened and given ideas and suggestions to me.

If you want to suggest something for a future edition, please send me an email (rather than posting here; I would prefer each thread to stay on the topic of a single rule.

This rule exists for an important reason, and that is to establish a baseline for judges to fall back to if it is not logistically possible. I've seen an entire event delayed for an hour because of complications arising from an edited decklist, and I know that this rule was put in to prevent that sort of thing from happening. But there is another important rule to consider (at least at Competitive, which is where this really matters), and that is in section 1 of the MIPG:

If a player commits an offense, realizes it, and calls a judge over immediately and before he or she could potentially benefit from the offense, the Head Judge has the option to downgrade the penalty without it being considered a deviation, though he or she should still follow any procedures recommended to fix the error.

Especially at an event where decklists are not all being collected all at once, a head judge should very strongly consider downgrading any DDLP that is called to attention by a player before the start of the tournament. While it may not be logistically possible to correct the deck list right away, this implies to me that if a player says “I have a problem on my list”, we shouldn't just go ahead and ignore it.

I don't have much time to expand on my thoughts here, but hopefully I'll be able to come back later and contribute more to the discussion.

In Limited I see the problem that a player just discussed the deck and sideboard with friends and was told he should be playing card X instead of card Y. Building the best deck out of your pool on your own is a skill that is tested in Limited tournaments. I think allowing players to change their decklist a few minutes after handing it in just laughs in the face of that concept.

Edited Julien de Graat (Feb. 24, 2014 08:11:13 AM)

Yes, sorry, I was thinking Constructed. At Limited events, I'm not going to apply the logic I described above unless it's immediately after he hands it in.

Originally posted by Thomas Ralph:

So what do you think? Is this a bad rule and should it be changed? Or should judges be applying it more consistently? Or is the answer something else entirely?

I believe we should never allow players the opportunity to alter a decklist once it's been accepted by an official. In limited events, like Julien already metioned above, building decks out of limited product under a time limit is one of the skills for playing in a limited event.

Also, once a player turns in his deck list he is allowed to roam the game hall. In that case he can see what his potential opponents are playing if they're still making decks and can make adjustments to his deck list based on that information.

(Edited for clarity.)

Edited Eric Paré (Feb. 24, 2014 11:06:32 AM)

Because of the potential for advantage here (getting advice from other players or making a phone call to a friend) I follow this rule quite strictly.

-Eric Levine

Originally posted by Sean Hunt:

But there is another important rule to consider (at least at Competitive, which is where this really matters), and that is in section 1 of the MIPG:

If a player commits an offense, realizes it, and calls a judge over immediately and before he or she could potentially benefit from the offense, the Head Judge has the option to downgrade the penalty without it being considered a deviation, though he or she should still follow any procedures recommended to fix the error.

What, then, if the player hasn't committed an offense, but wants to change their decklist from one legal state to another, such as changing the land balance?

If it is a constructed tournament and he comes to me before the start of round 1 (so basically, right after my announcements but before pairings for R1 are up) - sure, no harm done here.
If it is after pairings for R1 have been posted, no - for multiple reasons, a) he now knows his opponent (and thereby potentially what he is playing) and b) as this would delay the start of R1 significantly (i.e. as long as the process of finding and altering the decklist would take).
If it is a limited tournament, then only within reasonable time, where reasonable time is certainly no more than 30 seconds. If a player gives me his Decklist, turns towards the landstation, turns again half way there and comes back to me asking ‘did I write down the 1 Mountain for my splash?’ and he hasn't, then I let him add that. On the other hand, if he's been at the land station for a few minutes and then comes back, there's a very real possibility that his friend told him ‘you really should play 1 more green source, all your 2-drops cost green’, therefor no, sorry, can't do that.

In my discussions with other judges before making this post, one of the common reasons that people gave me to support changing of a decklist between the decklist being turned in and the start of round 1 is that it's “good customer service”. Do folks think this is (a) right and (b) an appropriate consideration?

If you are going to collect Constructed decklists all at once, such as
during a Player Meeting, then there should be no delay between collection
and the start of the event. In that case, I don't see any reason to allow
altering of the list. If you are going to collect decklists at different
times, such as when the players register for the event, then there are
several good reasons to allow players to get their lists back. You are
encouraging players to turn them in early without the fear of losing out on
a last-minute change. It reduces players holding onto their lists until
the last minute, which could delay the start of the event or overload
registration. If I had to take a guess, I'd say that MTR 2.7 is intended
for the cases where lists are collected all at once. So if you collect
them at different times, it is reasonable to allow players to make changes
until the last moment that lists are collect.

For Limited decklists, players can bring errors up to the judges and make
those corrections without penalty, but other changes cannot be made without
penalty once they submit their decklist.

Shawn

If the list is still in my hand and I can find it in a matter of seconds I'll hand it back to them. If I've already dropped it off with the other unsorted decklists I usually just look at the table… cringe… look back… “No?”. Once the player realizes what they're asking, they usually don't argue.

I think “good customer service” should always be a consideration. Although, not adhering to a rule in the MTR for the sake of good service can also be seen as poor service to the rest of the tournament. It is more important to be consistent and to offer the good customer service to the tournament as a whole than it is it to satisfy the one customer.

Allowing players to preregister and get copies of blank decklist sheets, reminding players to double check all aspects of their decklist during the player meeting, and giving them plenty of time to do so, these things are all good customer service. Allowing a last minute change after handing in the decklist is good for one person but could be seen as unfair and poor service to the rest of the players. If I told someone “Sorry, you cannot alter your decklist after it has been collected”, it could be awkward when they respond “But Judge Whats-his-name let me do it before”. I say let's be consistent and not allow changes once the decklists have been collected.

Edited Brian Brown (Feb. 25, 2014 04:58:10 AM)

Hey Shawn,

Originally posted by Shawn Doherty:

For Limited decklists, players can bring errors up to the judges and make
those corrections without penalty, but other changes cannot be made without
penalty once they submit their decklist.

Shawn

How do we know what is an “error” and what is an “other change”?

Edited Thomas Ralph (Feb. 25, 2014 07:41:18 AM)

An error is something that makes the decklist illegal, such as 39 cards
listed or no basic lands. Often you'll hear: “Judge, I forgot to write
down this card” or “I just counted my deck and there were only 38 cards in
there”.
An error is not “I wrote down X, but I'm actually playing Y”. That is a
change.

This feels more of a “rule to fall back on” than a “rule to enforce” similar to player must shuffle their opponents library.