2. Why is this important? Regular REL is most people's first
(and many people's only) encounter with tournament Magic, and by
extension, the judge program. Regular REL is a gateway to more
serious tournaments. Especially for L1's, most of the tournaments
you will judge are Regular REL.
3. Why have different REL's? Would you go to an FNM that did
deck checks? Would you go to a GP that didn't? People have
different purposes for playing. Different tournament types exist to
satisfy different player objectives. Different REL's make sure it's
clear to the players whether the tournament is for fun or for
making money.
4. The Golden Rule of Regular REL Regular REL is focused on
EDUCATION and FUN. If you're thinking of giving a penalty or
additional remedy that doesn't fit with this philosophy, it's time
to reconsider.
5. (Mis)casting a spell +
6. (Mis)casting a spell Because we caught it right away, back
up to immediately before the spell was cast. If it was not caught
until a couple of turns later, let the game state stand. There's
not a hard and fast rule for how much stuff has to happen before
backing up becomes a bad idea. Use your judgment. If you're in
doubt, it's usually better to let it stand. Caution to play more
carefully
7. O-ring your Thrun +
8. O-ring your Thrun Remember: education and fun In a serious
tournament, you'd be stuck picking a legal target, even if that
means exiling your own thing At regular REL, that feels a little
draconian to me. I'd let the player take it back. If your player
base is more advanced, it's possible that you might want to make
the player live with the error.
9. Mulligan to 7 At a prerelease, Amy draws her new opening
hand after taking a mulligan. She is on the draw and her opponent
casts a Thoughtseize on turn one. After revealing her hand, she
notices that she has "mulliganed" to 7 and calls a judge. What do
you do?
10. Mulligan to 7 Take one card at random from her hand and put
it on top of her library. Caution Amy to play more carefully.
Taking an extra card away isn't getting back to a legal game state,
it's a penalty to disincentivize people from doing this on
purpose!
11. Turn 4 Jace? Amy is playing in a Modern format FNM and
casts a Jace, the Mind Sculptor on turn 4. Her opponent calls a
judge, noting that this card is currently banned in Modern. Amy
explains that she's new to Modern, so she borrowed her deck. What
is the appropriate action?
12. Turn 4 Jace? We have to get to a legal state. That means
modifying Amy's deck. Sub out any banned cards in her deck for
basic lands of her choice. Interesting point...if Amy is running
61, with 3 Jaces, we only put in 2 lands. If Amy's board has Jaces
in it, we take them out, but don't put anything back.
13. Can I name Howling Mine with Pithing Needle? +
14. Can I name Howling Mine with Pithing Needle? Remember:
Education and fun! Educate the player. Let them know why naming
Howling Mine isn't a good idea. No need to be cagey or give answers
you know are misleading.
15. I'll pay the 5 A: Grizzly Bear? N: How much mana do you
have up? A: 4 N: Syncopate with X=5 A: [moves a fifth untapped land
out from underneath her pile] Ha! Got you! I really had five lands.
I'll pay the 5. What do you do?
16. I'll pay the 5 Players can bluff about information their
opponent can't normally see. But they can't lie about information
their opponent is entitled to. From the reaction, the player
probably wasn't cheating. Explain the difference between bluffing
and lying and rewind to before Syncopate is cast.
17. I only play 3 Amy casts Slaughter Games on Nicole naming
Sphinx's Revelation. After Amy exiles 3 rev's, Nicole says I only
play 3. Amy stops looking and gives her deck back. Several turns
later, Nicole casts her 4th rev. Amy calls a judge. What do you
do?
18. I only play 3 Players can lie about information their
opponents can't normally see. Nicole's bluff was legitimate, even
if it wasn't particularly sporting. No infraction; play on.
19. I'll take a Warning Amy draws her opening seven, then goes
into the tank. After thinking a few moments, she says "I'll take a
Warning," then looks at the top card of her library. She puts that
card back, then declares that she will keep her hand. What is the
proper action from a judge?
20. I'll take a Warning Of course, it's against the rules to
look at the top card of your library. From what she said, it's
evident Amy knew she was doing something against the rules. It's
also obvious that she did it to gain an advantage. Amy has Cheated.
She must be DQ'd.
21. Skill edge? Amy attacks with 2 Archangel of Thune. Nicole
lets the damage through, but says nothing when Amy puts only one
counter on all her creatures. You suspect Nicole knew she gets
more, but said nothing to help her position. What do you do?
22. Skill edge? Usually, you have to point out mistakes when
they happen. Triggered abilities are the exception. You can let
your opponent miss them. After the match, make sure Nicole knows
the difference, but otherwise there's no need to intervene. At
regular REL, a judge may point out missed triggers. Whether you do
should depend on the competitiveness of the store.
23. What can I say? It's the last round in an FNM that pays
based on record as shown. Which of these are acceptable
conversations for the players to have? X-0 = 8 packs X-0-1 = 4
packs X-1 = 2 packs
24. What can I say? A: I'll give you 3 packs if you scoop. N:
OK, you win. X-0 = 8 packs X-0-1 = 4 packs X-1 = 2 packs Amy has
offered an incentive for Nicole to concede the match. Nicole, by
accepting rather than calling for a judge, should be punished in
the same way as Amy. Both players should be disqualified.
25. What can I say? A: Want to split the packs evenly? N: OK.
A: Let's say one of us won instead of drawing so we get more. N:
OK, you win. X-0 = 8 packs X-0-1 = 4 packs X-1 = 2 packs This is OK
because the split was agreed to separately from the match result,
not contingent upon it.
26. What can I say? A: Want to split the packs evenly? N: I
think I'm favored in this matchup. How about I get 6 packs and you
get 4? A: OK, you win. X-0 = 8 packs X-0-1 = 4 packs X-1 = 2 packs
Players can split prizes as they wish as long as it doesn't occur
in exchange for a match result.
27. What can I say? A: Do you want to just split the packs
evenly? N: No, let's play it out. A: Are you $#!%%ing me? Just take
the split, you {*(&ing (*^%. Hopefully, this stood out as being
obviously unacceptable. In addition to DQ'ing Amy, I would report
her behavior to the store owner.
28. What can I say? A: I really want the PW points. I can't
offer you anything to concede to me, but you know the old saying,
'good things happen to good people'... N: I concede. Here, an offer
has obviously been made, even if it wasn't clearly articulated what
the incentive is. An offer of a bribe need not be specific or even
verbally communicated to damage the integrity of the event. Again,
Nicole should have called a judge. Because she didn't, she is DQ'd
along with Amy.
29. What can I say? A: It's turn 5 of turns, and we're in a
stall. Do you want to roll for it? N: [gets out dice] Definitely
unacceptable. Players have agreed to roll a die to determine the
winner. Again, it is immaterial that the agreement was not verbal;
the tournament integrity is still in jeopardy. Apparently, this
behavior is commonplace in Yu-Gi- Oh, where the rules do not
support draws, so keep your eyes out, especially among players who
play both games.
30. What can I say? A: It's turn 5 of turns, and we're in a
stall. Who do you think would have won? N: [reveals hand, which
contains many counterspells and two planeswalkers] I think I was in
a good spot. A: Fair enough, you can have it. Players may concede
at any point in the game. Further, it is legal to reveal cards in
your hand to an opponent. Nothing in this exchange is against the
rules.
31. What can I say? A: It's turn 5 of turns, and we're in a
stall. Who do you think would have won? N: [reveals top 3 cards of
library - a wrath effect, a planeswalker, and a draw spell] Looks
like I had some gas coming up. How about you? A: [reveals her top 3
cards, all lands] I got nothing, you win. This is not allowed.
While it's OK to reveal cards that you can see, looking at cards
that you aren't entitled to see in order to determine "who would
win" is not, because this entails using information not available
as part of the game - in other words, an outside the game method -
to determine a winner.
