Please keep the forum protocol in mind when posting.

Knowledge Pool Scenarios » Post: What creature type is that? - SILVER

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Pages: 1 2 3 »

Oct. 9, 2013 05:59:47 AM

Michael White
Judge (Uncertified)

Canada

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Good morning Judges!

What creature type is that? - SILVER

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/?p=878

Adam and Niko are playing in a Modern Grand Prix. Niko has an Adaptive Automaton in play, and has chosen “Sliver” as his creature type. Adam casts Shock, targeting the Automaton, and Niko responds with a Restoration Angel, blinking the Automaton.

The next turn, you're called to the table by Niko. Adam has cast Mizzium Mortars targeting the Restoration Angel, and Niko just realized he didn't choose a creature type when the Automaton was blinked.

How do you handle this call?

Edited Josh Stansfield (Oct. 9, 2013 02:50:46 PM)

Oct. 9, 2013 06:33:34 AM

Khanh Le Thien
Judge (Level 3 (International Judge Program))

France

What creature type is that? - SILVER

A lovely scenario ^-^

Like other SILVER level scenarios do you wish for L2+s to wait one or two days?

Oct. 9, 2013 06:37:08 AM

David de la Iglesia
Forum Moderator
Judge (Uncertified)

Europe - East

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Yes please, allow L1s a few days to participate first :)

//David

Oct. 9, 2013 06:54:53 AM

Nicholas Brown
Judge (Uncertified)

USA - North

What creature type is that? - SILVER

It looks like we have the classic textbook example of Game Play Error - Game Rule Violation. Niko failed to announce his choice of a creature type for Adaptive Automaton. The penalty will be GPE-GRV for Niko and FtMGS for Adam.
Now as to the fix, the error was caught within a turn, and the game state looks fairly simple to back up to the point of the error, (untap lands return Mizzium Mortars to Adam's hand, Put a random card from Adam's hand on top of his deck, Re-tap any lands Adam may have had on Niko's turn, have Niko declare a creature type) I would ask the HJ permission to back up. If the HJ denies the request then I would have Niko declare a creature type immediately (before the morters resolves). The policy states per IPG 2.5 under partial fixes: “If a player made an illegal choice or failed to make a required choice for a permanent on the battlefield, that player makes a legal choice.”
If I were the HJ and nothing happened on Adams turn after the error I would back up since I feel there have been very few “decision points” since the error.

Edited Nicholas Brown (Oct. 9, 2013 06:55:54 AM)

Oct. 9, 2013 07:00:31 AM

Christian Genz
Judge (Level 2 (UK Magic Officials)), Scorekeeper

United Kingdom, Ireland, and South Africa

What creature type is that? - SILVER

@Michael: Could you use the 
[card]Cardname[/card]
format? It's way easier when you can look up the actual cards without using a new Browser tab…
Adaptive Automaton Shock Restoration Angel Mizzium Mortars

Edited Christian Genz (Oct. 9, 2013 07:52:16 AM)

Oct. 9, 2013 07:07:09 AM

Christian Genz
Judge (Level 2 (UK Magic Officials)), Scorekeeper

United Kingdom, Ireland, and South Africa

What creature type is that? - SILVER

@Nicholas: Decision Points is not the only thing that matters here… What about information gained by any of the players in between? Nothing fishy here?

Oct. 9, 2013 07:31:14 AM

Chris Vlastelica
Judge (Level 2 (Judge Academy))

USA - South

What creature type is that? - SILVER

PER IPG this is a simple GPE-GRV for Adam and a GPE-FTMGS for Niko.

Under Additional Remedy of GPE-GRV the IPG states that "If a player made an illegal choice or failed to make a required choice for a permanent on the battlefield that player makes a legal choice".

May want to see investigate Adam for Cheating if he's done this before.

Oct. 9, 2013 08:18:01 AM

Nathanaël François
Judge (Uncertified)

France

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Niko failed to make a required choice for Adaptative Automaton when it entered the battlefield, so it's GPE-GRV for him and GPR-FtMGS for Adam. If I understand correctly the scenario, the only things that happened since the error are Adam untapping, drawing, and casting Mizzium Mortars, so it should not be too complicated to rewind. It disturbs the game state a lot less to have Niko know a card in his opponnent's hand than to have a creature that should have died not die. Additionally, Niko made the mistake so I'm less inclined to choose a fix that so blatantly favors him when other options exist.

I think some investigation with Niko is in order. Here are some of the questions I'd ask:
- Did he forget that he could rename something, or only forget to announce his choice to his opponent?
- If the second, was he intending to name Angel when he blinked Adaptative Automaton ? Presumably, his deck has more Slivers than Angels, and some Slivers may even be on the battlefield.
- If he forgot he could change the creature type, how come he only realised it as the Angel was about to die?
- How well does he know the IPG? (i.e did he know that without a rewind he would get to make a choice whenever the mistake was caught?)

Oct. 9, 2013 09:47:48 AM

Eric Paré
Judge (Level 2 (Judge Foundry))

Canada

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Originally posted by Nathanaël François:

Additionally, Niko made the mistake so I'm less inclined to choose a fix that so blatantly favors him when other options exist.

Don't forget that Adam is equally responsible for the game state as Niko is. Even if we are to believe that Niko will get a potential advantage against Adam if we just apply the partial fix w/o rewinding, this fix is still an option to consider if too much has happened to back up safely. Judges should only make an effort to correct the game state, not the potential advantage one may receive from an incorrect one.

Oct. 10, 2013 07:07:02 AM

Lyle Waldman
Judge (Uncertified)

Canada

What creature type is that? - SILVER

The above posts seem reasonable. GRV for Adam, FtMGS for Niko, with the additional remedy of allowing Adam to make a choice.

Question: Is it a reasonable deviation in this case to set Automaton to “Sliver” by Proclamation of Judge, based on the following reasons:

1) It allows a “more fair” resolution to the additional information issue brought up elsewhere in this thread, and doesn't require any sort of rewind (since neither player is gaining strategic advantage by this resolution based on the game actions that have occurred in the meantime).

2) If Adam had really wanted to reset his Automaton that badly, he would have remembered to. Failure to reset the Automaton implies that it is not strategically relevant to Adam to set his Automaton to something new, and he is just as happy leaving it as-is, which is why he forgot in the first place.

EDIT :% s/Adam/Niko/g because reading is hard.

Edited Lyle Waldman (Oct. 10, 2013 07:08:38 AM)

Oct. 10, 2013 07:12:12 AM

Toby Hazes
Judge (Level 2 (Judge Academy)), TLC

BeNeLux

What creature type is that? - SILVER

From the IPG:

These procedures do not, and should not, take into account the game being played, the current situation that the game is in, or who will benefit strategically from the procedure associated with a penalty. While it is tempting to try to “fix” game situations, the danger of missing a subtle detail or showing favoritism to a player (even unintentionally) makes it a bad idea.

Oct. 10, 2013 08:16:03 AM

Nathanaël François
Judge (Uncertified)

France

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Originally posted by Toby Hazes:

From the IPG:

These procedures do not, and should not, take into account the game being played, the current situation that the game is in, or who will benefit strategically from the procedure associated with a penalty. While it is tempting to try to “fix” game situations, the danger of missing a subtle detail or showing favoritism to a player (even unintentionally) makes it a bad idea.

I know, but yet in many case backing up and not backing up are both valid options, so is it bad to use all the additional information you have? I'm only speaking of situations where you firsthand asses that both options are reasonable, do little damage to the game state, and well within the IPG guidelines.

Oct. 10, 2013 08:34:23 AM

Adam Zakreski
Judge (Uncertified)

Canada

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Is it fair to ask the player, “What did you intend to name?” and hold him to that choice, or is he free and clear to make a choice based on the new game state.

I ask because I recently watched a video where a high level judge in a high profile match held the player to his intended choice even though he hadn't explicitly announced it.

Oct. 10, 2013 09:02:39 AM

Charlotte Sable
Judge (Level 3 (Magic Judges Finland))

Europe - North

What creature type is that? - SILVER

One thing I'd like to point out here: While there is the “required choice”
partial fix for GRVs, partial fixes should only be applied if a full rewind
would be too complicated.
On Oct 10, 2013 11:33 AM, “Adam Zakreski” <

Oct. 10, 2013 09:08:09 AM

Lyle Waldman
Judge (Uncertified)

Canada

What creature type is that? - SILVER

Originally posted by Adam Zakreski:

Is it fair to ask the player, “What did you intend to name?” and hold him to that choice, or is he free and clear to make a choice based on the new game state.

With the Mizzium Mortars on the stack: “I intended to name Angel, clearly.”

This doesn't seem fair (in any sense of that word).

You must be registered in order to post to this forum.

Pages: 1 2 3 »