Every month, several more or less local judges and non-judges interested in judging meet in my area (Frankfurt Main, Germany) in a restaurant for a nice evening. This meeting is not a meeting with a previously set schedule. We simply meet and since we’re all judges, it happens that we discuss and talk quite a bit about judging stuff too. This is my report from the latest meeting in February. My bet is on exams phase at german university, that’s why we were only 6 (in comparison to the usual 10+) judges this time.
Thank you to Andreu, Sebastian, Florian, Philip, Juergen for coming!
The topics from this week in a certain order:
1. Policy – Decklist Problem Burning-Tree Shaman
2. Rules – Abjure and Hatching Plans
3. Rules – Show and Tell for Emrakul and Control Magic
1. Policy – Decklist Problem Burning-Tree Shaman
In a Standard(T2) PTQ, Ahmed registers a decklist that also includes 4 Burning-Tree Shaman. Burning-Tree Shaman is not Standard(T2) legal. The deck actually contains Burning-Tree Emissary instead.
Many of us would simply corrected Burning-Tree Shaman into Burning-Tree Emissary on the decklist and caution the player about the mistake.
The deckchecks teamleader of the PTQ decided to treat this as a ‘real’ TE-Deck/Decklist Problem. The penalty is a Game Loss, and Ahmed appeals. The Head Judge upholds the decision.
Their decision is pretty much exactly what the IPG tells us to do, but it feels weird. Had the player written just “Burning-Tree” on his decklist instead of “Burning-Tree Shaman“, he’d get no penalty. There is only one card that matches the name “Burning-Tree” in Standard (T2): Burning-Tree Emissary.
IPG TE/DDLP
Definition
A player commits one or more of the following errors involving their deck:
• The deck and/or decklist contain an illegal number of cards for the format.
• The deck and/or decklist contain one or more cards that are illegal for the format.
..
One COULD argue that the error committed; a card illegal for the format on the decklist; doesn’t “involve their deck”, and that way don’t treat this mistake as an infraction, but rather as a clerical error with no potential for advantage. But why would the IPG list decklist as source for illegal cards then?
Overall, upholding the ruling is not incorrect per se, especially to keep rulings consistent in similar issues that same PTQ. But at the same time, we agree that we’d have decided, intuitively, different from the start.
2. Rules – Abjure and Hatching Plans
Anita controls Hatching Plans. She casts Abjure sacrificing the Hatching Plans. Will she first draw cards, or will she first counter a spell with Abjure?
All Crazy Teenagers Have Tried Magic Pills. That means she will first draw off Hatching Plans.
Wait, what, crazy Teenagers?
This mnemonic describes the order of the steps of casting a spell and explains the situation:
Announce (and put the spell on the stack)
Choose (what it does, which modes, what additional costs to pay, X, etc.)
Target (if necessary)
How (it affects those targets, if there are options)
Total (cost: mana cost plus additional costs minus cost reductions)
Mana (abilities may be played now)
Pay (and then it becomes played)
From [url=http://www.mtgsalvation.com/articles/15838-cranial-insertion-those-crazy-teenagers]Cranial Insertion[/url]
As first step of casting the spell, the spell is put onto the stack. It is now on top of the stack, above the to-be-countered spell! After that, some stuff happens, including paying cost etc. After that, the Hatching Plans triggered ability goes on the stack, on top of whatever is there right now (so; on top of Abjure).
3. Rules – Show and Tell for Emrakul, the Aeon’s Torn and Control Magic
With an empty battlefield, Ahri casts Show and Tell. Both players put aside a card: Ahri puts aside Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. Nami puts aside Control Magic.
They put the cards on the battlefield, but aren’t sure if Control Magic can enchant the Emrakul here.
It’s weird.
Since Control Magic can’t be attached to anything, because there was no object to enchant before the event that puts Control Magic into a different zone, Control Magic will stay in Nami’s hand.
CR 303.4g. If an Aura is entering the battlefield and there is no legal object or player for it to enchant, the Aura remains in its current zone, unless that zone is the stack. In that case, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard instead of entering the battlefield.
We also discussed the issue of Desecration Demon Mainphase 1 vs. Mainphase 2 again, but that on has a thread in that JudgeApps forum already.
That’t it already from this month:
1. Policy – Decklist Problem Burning-Tree Shaman
2. Rules – Abjure and Hatching Plans
3. Rules – Show and Tell for Emrakul and Control Magic
4. Policy – Desecration Demon Mainphase1 vs. Mainphase2
If you wish to comment on either topic, please do so in the JudgeApps forums.
For next month, we can’t wait to receive some experience shared from the asian GP!