I was under the impression that you usually can't rewind through a card draw at Comp REL.

GPE-GRV for Aaron e GPE- FtMGS for Neville, warning for both

It's not a case of GRV GRV because it's not an active effect controled by Neville that prevents the tokens from Boeing created, as it's explained in the Annoted IPG:

“If a player takes an action called for by an effect controlled by his or her opponent, but does it incorrectly, both players receive a Game Play Error – Game Rule Violation. For example, if a player casts Path to Exile on an opponent’s creature and the opponent puts the creature into the graveyard, both players receive a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation infraction.
As always, both players are responsible for maintaining a clear game state. If my card tells you to take an action, and you do it incorrectly, who's fault is it? Yours for doing the action incorrectly, or mine for not making sure my spell resolved correctly? Turns out, in this case, its reasonable to say we are both equally at fault. Its important to realize this is only for active effects. If player A forgets to pay 1 more when casting a shock because he forgot about player N's Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, that is not considered an active effect on Player N's part. In that case, the error is on player A's shoulders, and Player N should get a Failure to Maintain Game State..”

Since there's more harm to the gamestate to leave it as it is than to back it up, i would do so.

Edited Thiago Perígolo Souza (March 23, 2015 03:46:53 PM)

Originally posted by Henry Cao:

I was under the impression that you usually can't rewind through a card draw at Comp REL.

If that would be true, why is there a describtion of what to do in the IPG?

IPG 1.4 Backing up
If the identity of a card involved in reversing an action is unknown to one of the players (usually because it was drawn), a random card is chosen from the possible candidates.

Aaron receives a warning for GPE-GRV. Neville receives a warning for GPE-FtMGS.

For me personally, I don't think a rewind is reasonable at this stage. Too many steps have already been done.
Maybe Aaron passed the turn because he thinks he is safe with the tokens in play. With a rewind, he might change the game state.
Maybe Neville declared attacker with the Hushwing because he has a combat trick of some sort and he wants to use it on the tokens.
I don't know exactly, but too many decisions could be made if the game state is changed, and with the information gained by the players (Aaron not doing anything post combat, Neville drawing the card, Neville choosing to declare attackers anyway, etc.) I don't think we can safely back up.

Thank you everybody for the discussion on this scenario. First up many of you correctly assessed that both players are receiving penalties. We are going to issue the following:

Aaron receives a warning for a GRV.
Neville receives a warning for FtMGS.


There has been quite the back and forth on do we rewind or leave the game as it is, so let’s talk about that. A quick glance at the IPG shows this is not covered in partial fixes. On to a backup, maybe? When considering a backup, first we figure out how much has happened and how many decision points passed. So then….

How many decision points were there since the error occurred?

After the error has happened, we have the declaration of attacks with Hornet Queen, blocking choices, choices on whether to cast spells in combat or after combat by both players, the Hornet Queen being exiled, Neville untapping, drawing, deciding whether to cast things in the precombat main phase, then declaring attackers before the error was noticed.

That is a lot of decisions being made there, so we’re not backing up. That leaves us with the only choice to leave the game as it is. We even have a little bit of clarification coming from the IPG that solidifies our decision to leave it as is:

Backups are only applied in situations where leaving the game in the current state is a substantially worse solution. A good backup will result in a situation where the gained information makes no difference and the line of play remains the same (excepting the error, which has been fixed). This means limiting backups to situations with minimal decision trees.

Thank you again for participation in this discussion. Don't walk away with a bee in your bonnet, please come back later this week for a new scenario.

Originally posted by Piotr Łopaciuk:

Jarrod Feight
We would want Hornet Queen in play with the etb trigger on the stack.

I'd say that if you rewind, you should rewind to Hornet Queen in play, but no trigger in this case -because of Hushwing Gryff.

Ah thank you. Yes for some reason I was mixing Hushwing Gryff and Containment Priest into some sort of card that doesn't exist. Thank you for the correction.