Reference Toby’s post introducing the changes here.
Q: What sets are legal in Standard now?
Answer HereNote: The answer above is actually incomplete. There is an auxiliary set of cards included in decks and other products intended for new players that is also legal in Standard [MTR 6.3]. These cards are marked with the “*16” expansion symbol and are legal for play as long as SOI is legal. Fortunately, this probably won’t come up very often since most of these cards are either printed in other Standard-legal sets or are unplayable for reasons not related to format legality.
Q: Amy casts Reality Smasher, then points to her Eldrazi Mimic and says “trigger.” She then attacks with both creatures. Nicole declares no blocks. Amy says “take 10?”, but Nicole disputes this, saying that because Amy didn’t specify that she was choosing to make Eldrazi Mimic’s p/t equal to Reality Smasher’s, the default should be that she chose not to. How do you rule?
Answer Here Note: Frivolous judge calls like this one should be discouraged. This may be done by a simple cautionary word or, in the case of repeated or particularly egregious offenders, an Unsporting Conduct penalty.
Q: Amy scries for Serum Visions setting her hand down, then picking both cards at once. Unfortunately, Amy accidentally grabs 3 cards. What is the appropriate infraction, penalty, and fix?
Answer HereThe fix is the same “super-Thoughtseize” that we’re used to. Amy’s opponent will pick one of the three cards and shuffle it into the random part of Amy’s library.
Q: Amy casts Reach through Mists while she controls Jeskai Ascendancy. She points to ascendancy, says “loot,” and proceeds to draw 2 cards, then discard one. What is the appropriate infraction, penalty, and fix?
Answer HereQ: Amy casts Enlightened Tutor, in the end step, but forgets to reveal the card she searched for. After untapping and drawing for the turn, Amy realizes her mistake and calls a judge. Amy shows her hand, which contains a Plains, a Stony Silence, and a Containment Priest and says she obviously picked Stony Silence. While talking with the players, Nicole brings up that she returned the Containment Priest to Amy’s hand last turn with Echoing Truth. What do you do?
Answer HereThe card that’s picked is treated as the card that was searched for. If Nicole picks Stony Silence, that’s a legal card for Enlightened Tutor to get, so there’s no problem. If Nicole picks Plains, because that isn’t a card you can get with Enlightened Tutor, it’s shuffled into Amy’s library. Amy doesn’t get a chance to pick a legal card for Enlightened Tutor.
Note: For the purposes of “known” cards, it’s now possible to take into account information that was previously revealed to the opponent. For example, if Nicole Duressed her opponent the previous turn and saw both Plains and Containment Priest, the judge could use this information to exclude these cards from the ones that Nicole could pick to be treated as the revealed one.
Note: In general, it’s permissible to perform a simple backup to make a HCE fix more smooth, but we can’t do that here because we don’t know which card in Amy’s hand should go back, and simple backups can’t contain random elements [IPG 2.3, 1.4].
Note: Suppose that we have the same situation, except that Amy had cast Congregation at Dawn instead of Enlightened Tutor. The infraction and penalty are the same, but the fix is complicated by the fact that the “set” that contains the cards that weren’t revealed includes two zones: Amy’s hand and the top two cards of her library. These should be considered separately. The top two cards from Amy’s library should both be creatures; if either isn’t, it is shuffled back in. Then, the same fix described above is performed on Amy’s hand.
Note: This change is particularly significant because it opens up an avenue for opportunistic Cheating that didn’t exist under the way these cases were formerly handled. Nicole is incentivized to wait until Amy draws the card she searched for so that it will be treated as a HCE (where she will see Amy’s hand and strip away a card) rather than a GRV (where she will just flip the top card of Amy’s library to verify it was a legal choice). The judge taking this call should investigate to determine at what point Nicole realized that Amy hadn’t revealed her card.
Q: After Amy finishes resolving Collected Company, Amy’s opponent remarks, “That was a pretty good six.” Amy frowns, reads the Collected Company in her graveyard, then calls a judge. Amy tells you that she thought Collected Company would let her see seven cards like Dig through Time, and resolved it with an extra card. What do you do?
Answer HereQ: Amy flips over the top 6 cards from her library when resolving Pieces of the Puzzle. Her opponent can’t say for sure which card is the extra one. What do you do?
Answer HereQ: Amy mulligans, and her opponent declares that she will keep. After drawing her new hand of 6, Amy looks at the top card of her deck, says “nope,” and mulligans again. Amy’s opponent says that she can’t mulligan after she scries, whereas Amy contends that she already had made up her mind that she was mulliganing when she looked at her top card, and was just checking to see if she “would have got there.” What do you do?
Answer HereNote: The new MPE does not apply in cases where no advantage can be gained, for example a player declaring a mulligan before an opponent who is supposed to decide first makes this choice.
Q: Amy mulligans to seven. What is the appropriate infraction, penalty, and fix?
Answer HereNote: Cases like this were handled in old versions of the IPG by an infraction called Improper Drawing at Start of Game. In addition to handling what would now be considered Mulligan Procedure Errors, this infraction handled cases where a player on the play accidentally drew a card on the first turn. Mulligan Procedure Errors can only happen before the game starts. Drawing on the first turn is now handled the same way as a player drawing extra cards at any other time: as a Hidden Card Error.
Q: Amy casts Entomb and looks for her Grave Titan. After flipping through her entire library a couple times, she checks her sideboard and discovers that there are 16 cards there, including Grave Titan. A count reveals that Amy’s main deck started with 59 cards. When you ask how this could have happened, the players agree that Nicole Swords to Plowshares‘d the Grave Titan in game 1, and propose that, since it was the only card that was exiled, Amy probably put it in with her sideboard while shuffling for game 2 by mistake. What is the appropriate infraction, penalty, and fix?
Answer HereNote: Because players can look at their sideboards during a game, there is no problem with showing the affected player which card is being shuffled in. There is no provision that supports showing that player’s opponent, so don’t pick the card in a public way.
Q: Amy’s match was randomly selected for a deck check. You head toward her table, but when you get there, you see that even though the head judge hasn’t started the round yet, Amy and her opponent have both drawn and kept their opening hands. What do you do?
Answer Here Note: Pregame procedures, such as deciding who plays first and resolving mulligans and scries, may be performed before the round clock starts [MTR 2.3]. Note: The MTR specifies that a “full deck check” should not be performed in these conditions. On the other hand, a full deck check isn’t necessary in cases where it is known that one player will get a Game Loss, for example from handing in a 59 card decklist. Such errors should always be corrected at the start of the round after they were discovered for consistency [IPG 3.5]. In a case like this, stop the match and deliver the bad news, then enlist the player’s help (away from the table) to correct the decklist. The resultant Game Loss will stop the current game and put the players into game 2. Note that in the case of Game Losses given after the start of the match, the use of sideboards is permitted in subsequent games [IPG 1.1].
Q: Amy plays a Mountain, then taps out to cast Koth of the Hammer. Amy then activates the +1 ability of Koth, untaps a Mountain, and attacks. At this point, Nicole calls a judge and says that Amy can’t attack with this Mountain because it’s the one she played this turn. Amy, adamantly denies this and claims that she animated a different Mountain. What do you do?
Answer Here Note: This lemma applies only in cases where the permanents are visually indistinguishable. For example, if one of Amy’s Mountains was foil, and this is the one she played and later tried to activate, she would be out of luck.
Note: The ease of confusion and potential high stakes in cases like this are one reason why effects of this type on recently printed cards typically grant the affected permanent haste. See, for example, the awaken mechanic.
You can see other articles in this series here.