Is there a rule against giving false or misleading information to your opponent? I mean I know it's underhanded and I wouldn't do it but for example:
If I ask someone how many cards in hand before making what I think to be a game winning move and they answer zero only to counter my spell or play something else to stop me from winning and put me into a losing situation, is that allowed?
Or when it comes to asking about creature types or effects? Does s/he have to show me the card in question?
I had a clash at my last draft where my opponent said he didn't get a good enough look at my card and asked to see it, I showed it to him but am I obligated to do that? I'm sure this one is no.
You may not lie about the game state. Your hand is part of the game state.
Oracle text for cards is considered free information. You cannot knowingly give false information about a card's rules text/type/name etc.
Most likely, the answer to your question is yes. If an effect tells you reveal the card, and you must give your opponents a good chance to look at the card. If you play a spell, he has every right to look at it. If it's a permanent, then he has every right to look at it. If you gave your opponent a good chance to look at the card, and he says "okay" or something like that, then it's debatable. You're not obligated to show him the card once he acknowledges what it is, but what "acknowledging" means is different in many people's perspectives.
An easier way is to ask a judge for the Oracle text for a card. Some cards may have older editions that aren't up-to-date with current rules, and reading the card may be misleading.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 3 Magic Judge
Do you know any judges who always impress you with their work ethic, knowledge, or attitude? Nominate them to be the next Judge of the Week!
Is there a rule against giving false or misleading information to your opponent? I mean I know it's underhanded and I wouldn't do it but for example:
If I ask someone how many cards in hand before making what I think to be a game winning move and they answer zero only to counter my spell or play something else to stop me from winning and put me into a losing situation, is that allowed?
Or when it comes to asking about creature types or effects? Does s/he have to show me the card in question?
I had a clash at my last draft where my opponent said he didn't get a good enough look at my card and asked to see it, I showed it to him but am I obligated to do that? I'm sure this one is no.
Hand size is public information, so you must answer truthfully. Also, any revealed card is public information, you must allow your opponent to see any card that is revealed to them. Generally, you may not lie about the game state, you sometimes do not need to give your opponent any information they don't ask for though. If you have any other questions of this kind, I'd suggest this article http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=judge/article/20070911a
Huh, I'm confused. Say my opponent plays a card whose oracle text is different than its printed text, is he obligated to tell me the differences? For example, if my opponent plays General Jarkeld and I say, "Can I see what his ability does?", is he obligated to tell me that the "actual" ability of the card is in fact different from the printed ability? Or can he just show me the card and keep me in the dark?
Let me get one thing straight with you. When Condor and an official ruling disagree, 50% of the time the official ruling gets reversed later. The other 50% of the time, the rules get clarified/changed to make the ruling right when it really wasn't before.
I'm going to start by saying that the DCI's stance on player communication is covered in the Penalty Guide, Section 50. The policy stated in the Penalty Guide effectively sets the requirements for how players should communicate with one another and what is allowable in terms of bluffing and the line between bluffing and fraud. I invite the OP to read this and see if it gives an idea on some of the original questions (and ask follow-up questions as necessary):
Communication between players is essential to the successful play of any game that involves virtual objects or hidden information. While bluffing may be an aspect of games, there need to be clear lines as to what is, and is not, acceptable for players to say or otherwise represent. Officials and highly competitive players should understand the line between bluffing and fraud. This will confirm expectations of both sporting and competitive players during a game.
The philosophy of the DCI is that a player should have an advantage due to better understanding of the rules of a game, greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state, and superior tactical planning. Players are under no obligation to assist their opponents in playing the game. Regardless of anything else, players are expected to treat their opponents politely and with respect. Failure to do so may lead to Unsporting Conduct penalties.
There are three categories of information: free, derived and private.
Free information is so called because all players are entitled access to this information without contamination or omissions made by his or her opponent. If a player is ever unable or unwilling to provide free information to an opponent that has requested it, he or she should call a judge and explain the situation. Free Information includes:
·Details of current game actions and past game actions that still affect the game state.
·The name of any object in a public zone.
·The physical status (tapped/flipped) and current zone of any object.
·Player life totals and the game score of the current match.
Derived information is information to which all players are permitted, but opponents are not obliged to assist in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine. Derived Information includes:
·The number of objects present in any game zone.
·All objects in public zones and any of their characteristics that are not defined as free information.
·Game Rules, Tournament Policy, Oracle content and any other official information pertaining to the current event. Cards are considered to have their Oracle text printed on them.
Private information is so called because players have access to this information only if they are able to determine it from the current visual game state or their own record of previous game actions.
·Any information that is not free or derived is automatically private information.
The following rules govern player communication:
·Players must answer all questions asked of them by a judge completely and honestly, regardless of the type of information requested. Players may request to do so away from the match.
·Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly, improperly, or falsely.
·Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions pertaining to free information.
·At Regular REL, all derived information is instead considered free.
Judges are encouraged to help players in determining free information, but must avoid assisting players with derived information about the game state.
I also remind anyone who chooses to answer these questions to refer people to the actual policy, so as to be clear on what is DCI policy versus "personal opinion". While people should be careful in making an assessment on what is an infraction/penalty, at a minimum, be clear on how you are drawing your conclusion and that it is "your opinion" (not fact). Policy questions are different from rules questions in that respect (as policy requires more judgment and isn't necessarily or unequivocably "exact").
well if they're purposely hiding their hand from view, and saying they have zero, then that could be considered cheating, however if its clear they have a few cards in a hand and you can see them right there and they answer 0, well that might be your fault because they're just lying on purpose
I think this is an unclear, and unfair, assessment of the original poster's question. Especially as I think it adds "information" that wasn't originally stated. To be clear on the question:
"If I ask someone how many cards in hand before making what I think to be a game winning move and they answer zero only to counter my spell or play something else to stop me from winning and put me into a losing situation, is that allowed?"
The number of cards in hand is derived information per the policy, as this is "The number of objects present in any game zone." If you ask your opponent how many cards you have in hand, generally speaking, he can either:
(1) Answer with the actual number of cards he has in hand.
(2) Show you his hand (obviously only the backs of the cards, not the faces) and let you count the number of cards yourself.
If he makes an incorrect statement about the number of cards in hand, then a judge would have to investigate to determine the hows and whys of the situation to assess whether an infraction occurred and what infraction.
You may not lie about the game state. Your hand is part of the game state.
This is not a completely accurate statement, as there are several things that players can "lie" about (depending on how someone personally defines the term, as it is never used in Section 50 of the PG). To be clear, the policy requires that:
(1) Statements about free information be complete and honest without contamination or omission.
(2) Statements about derived information not be incorrect, improper or false. They do not need to be "complete" and careful ommissions can be made involving such statements.
When it comes to certain statements regarding the game state, a player can certainly make an ommission and not have it be a violation of the policy. This can change depending on REL, as derived information is considered free information at Regular REL and the statements that are allowable would change accordingly for derived information.
Oracle text for cards is considered free information. You cannot knowingly give false information about a card's rules text/type/name etc.
Actually, Oracle text for cards is considered derived information, not free information. Note: It is only at Regular REL that derived information is considered free information. And that can make all the difference when playing in a PTQ versus FNM. While it is correct that you cannot give false information regarding a card's Oracle text, you also may not have to give a complete statement either (again, that depends on REL). I don't see that the OP said anything about the REL, and while it may be reasonable to presume it was a Regular REL event (because they tend to be pretty common), it would be better to acknowledge the variance in how the policy treats derived information at different RELs.
If I ask someone how many cards in hand before making what I think to be a game winning move and they answer zero only to counter my spell or play something else to stop me from winning and put me into a losing situation, is that allowed?
Or when it comes to asking about creature types or effects? Does s/he have to show me the card in question?
I had a clash at my last draft where my opponent said he didn't get a good enough look at my card and asked to see it, I showed it to him but am I obligated to do that? I'm sure this one is no.
Oracle text for cards is considered free information. You cannot knowingly give false information about a card's rules text/type/name etc.
Most likely, the answer to your question is yes. If an effect tells you reveal the card, and you must give your opponents a good chance to look at the card. If you play a spell, he has every right to look at it. If it's a permanent, then he has every right to look at it. If you gave your opponent a good chance to look at the card, and he says "okay" or something like that, then it's debatable. You're not obligated to show him the card once he acknowledges what it is, but what "acknowledging" means is different in many people's perspectives.
An easier way is to ask a judge for the Oracle text for a card. Some cards may have older editions that aren't up-to-date with current rules, and reading the card may be misleading.
Do you know any judges who always impress you with their work ethic, knowledge, or attitude? Nominate them to be the next Judge of the Week!
Hand size is public information, so you must answer truthfully. Also, any revealed card is public information, you must allow your opponent to see any card that is revealed to them. Generally, you may not lie about the game state, you sometimes do not need to give your opponent any information they don't ask for though. If you have any other questions of this kind, I'd suggest this article http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=judge/article/20070911a
~Tau
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=156381
epeeguy's post towards the end basically answers most of the issues
MTG Rules Adviser/Advisor
Comp Rules, FAQs, and DCI Rules
The philosophy of the DCI is that a player should have an advantage due to better understanding of the rules of a game, greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state, and superior tactical planning. Players are under no obligation to assist their opponents in playing the game. Regardless of anything else, players are expected to treat their opponents politely and with respect. Failure to do so may lead to Unsporting Conduct penalties.
There are three categories of information: free, derived and private.
Free information is so called because all players are entitled access to this information without contamination or omissions made by his or her opponent. If a player is ever unable or unwilling to provide free information to an opponent that has requested it, he or she should call a judge and explain the situation. Free Information includes:
·Details of current game actions and past game actions that still affect the game state.
·The name of any object in a public zone.
·The physical status (tapped/flipped) and current zone of any object.
·Player life totals and the game score of the current match.
Derived information is information to which all players are permitted, but opponents are not obliged to assist in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine. Derived Information includes:
·The number of objects present in any game zone.
·All objects in public zones and any of their characteristics that are not defined as free information.
·Game Rules, Tournament Policy, Oracle content and any other official information pertaining to the current event. Cards are considered to have their Oracle text printed on them.
Private information is so called because players have access to this information only if they are able to determine it from the current visual game state or their own record of previous game actions.
·Any information that is not free or derived is automatically private information.
The following rules govern player communication:
·Players must answer all questions asked of them by a judge completely and honestly, regardless of the type of information requested. Players may request to do so away from the match.
·Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly, improperly, or falsely.
·Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions pertaining to free information.
·At Regular REL, all derived information is instead considered free.
Judges are encouraged to help players in determining free information, but must avoid assisting players with derived information about the game state.
I also remind anyone who chooses to answer these questions to refer people to the actual policy, so as to be clear on what is DCI policy versus "personal opinion". While people should be careful in making an assessment on what is an infraction/penalty, at a minimum, be clear on how you are drawing your conclusion and that it is "your opinion" (not fact). Policy questions are different from rules questions in that respect (as policy requires more judgment and isn't necessarily or unequivocably "exact").
I think this is an unclear, and unfair, assessment of the original poster's question. Especially as I think it adds "information" that wasn't originally stated. To be clear on the question:
"If I ask someone how many cards in hand before making what I think to be a game winning move and they answer zero only to counter my spell or play something else to stop me from winning and put me into a losing situation, is that allowed?"
The number of cards in hand is derived information per the policy, as this is "The number of objects present in any game zone." If you ask your opponent how many cards you have in hand, generally speaking, he can either:
(1) Answer with the actual number of cards he has in hand.
(2) Show you his hand (obviously only the backs of the cards, not the faces) and let you count the number of cards yourself.
If he makes an incorrect statement about the number of cards in hand, then a judge would have to investigate to determine the hows and whys of the situation to assess whether an infraction occurred and what infraction.
This is not a completely accurate statement, as there are several things that players can "lie" about (depending on how someone personally defines the term, as it is never used in Section 50 of the PG). To be clear, the policy requires that:
(1) Statements about free information be complete and honest without contamination or omission.
(2) Statements about derived information not be incorrect, improper or false. They do not need to be "complete" and careful ommissions can be made involving such statements.
When it comes to certain statements regarding the game state, a player can certainly make an ommission and not have it be a violation of the policy. This can change depending on REL, as derived information is considered free information at Regular REL and the statements that are allowable would change accordingly for derived information.
Actually, Oracle text for cards is considered derived information, not free information. Note: It is only at Regular REL that derived information is considered free information. And that can make all the difference when playing in a PTQ versus FNM. While it is correct that you cannot give false information regarding a card's Oracle text, you also may not have to give a complete statement either (again, that depends on REL). I don't see that the OP said anything about the REL, and while it may be reasonable to presume it was a Regular REL event (because they tend to be pretty common), it would be better to acknowledge the variance in how the policy treats derived information at different RELs.