The other topic on DEC vs GRV got me thinking about a call I made at a GPT.

Active player has a Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius in play. He's been attacking with it unblocked and drawing a card each time.

Later he attacks again and is blocked. Niv-Mizzet deals damage. He draws a card. After he does this he immediately realizes he's made a mistake and calls a judge. After interviewing both players I believe 100% this was unintentional.

Is this a DEC or did he incorrectly resolve a trigger that should never have happened? What is the remedy since the card is unknown and in his hand? (actually both players agree which card it was, but it did touch the rest of his hand).

Assuming this results in DEC. If the active player had said “Draw trigger?”, and the opponent said, “Yup”. Then they realized the mistake, does this turn it into a GRV?

I'm 90% sure on the answers to all of these, but I'd like to be 100% sure.

I don't want to start a debate, just looking for an O.

Edited Adam Zakreski (Jan. 22, 2013 06:22:00 AM)

In the first case, the first illegal action that happens is that the player draws a card that he should not have, so that would be Drawing Extra Cards. Even if both players agree that it's the same card, since it touched his hand, we can't be sure, and so we have to go with DEC here.

In the second case, where the player states “Draw Trigger” when no trigger has happened, this falls under Player Communication Violation - the player has unintentionally misrepresented the game state by announcing a trigger that didn't happen. This would be a warning for PCV, and we would back up the illegal draw (and the opponent would probably receive a warning for Failure to Maintain Game State for agreeing to the incorrect trigger).

Alright good. That follows what I did. (Except for the confusing GRV for PCV in the hypothetical situation). Unless an O has another opinion, feel free to close this thread.

And here's the ‘O’fficial reply.

First example - resolving a non-existent trigger that draws a card is Drawing Extra Cards (see the example about the Howling Mine that's not/no longer in play? yep, that fits here, too).

Now, both players insist they know which card it is - but unless ALL players know the identity, we probably should stick to the consistent ruling (Game Loss). If the opponent did know the card (e.g., Jace's ‘fateseal’ abilityOracle of Mul Daya), then the exception that allows a downgrade could be applied, with the additional remedy of returning the known card to the top of the library.

Second example is not PCV. PCV is an unintentional violation of the Player Communication policy, in Section 4 of the MTR. I know I've seen some good explanations, but my cache of links and memory of resources is failing me; if I find something, I'll add it here, later.

There's more problems with that second example than meet the eye. “robar una carta?” or “нарисовать карту?” might get all sorts of replies, and the person saying that will think it means “yes, you may draw for Niv-Mizzet”. It gets worse than simple language barriers - we don't always use words, just hand waves, nods, grunts… and we can't write policy that makes parsing non-verbal (or semi-verbal, or language-gapped) communication a requirement for judges to properly apply the IPG.

Add to that - people just don't play like that, usually. When they do, it's a result of previous misunderstandings, hurt feelings from rules lawyering, etc. “Is it REALLY OK if I finally begin my turn right now?” to someone who insists he didn't say “go” or that “go” didn't mean “your turn”… you get the idea.

Bottom line, on that second example - it's probably just DEC with some confusing embellishments - but more than anything, it's a situation that requires investigation, and use of your judgment, based on what you believe really happened.

Thanks! – Scott Marshall, Magic Judge NetRep, L5, Denver
Seen our wiki? <http://wiki.internationalmagicjudges.net>
Looking for something (judge-related)? <http://www.internationalmagicjudges.net/>

Edited Scott Marshall (Jan. 22, 2013 05:35:01 PM)