If an opponent clearly damaged one of your cards during the game do the rules dictate that he/she was replace it?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
Make the white queen run so fast, she hasn't got time to make you wise.
Pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, like thoughts inside a dream.
Doctor, my eyes, tell me what you see. I hear their cries... just say if it's too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes...cannot see the sky. Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry?
I checked the Magic tournament rules here, but I was unable to find a ruling that said this would happen. If an opponent damages one of your cards through errant shuffling or however, call a judge immediately to rectify the situation. Judges are authorized to issue proxies in these situations if the card is no longer playable, and it's likely the other player will incur some sort of penalty, especially if the damage was intentional, but it's at the judge's discretion.
EDIT: Forgot to check the IPG: which qualifies this as a disqualification under the description of such. Still doesn't specify replacement, though.
EDIT: Forgot to check the IPG: which qualifies this as a game loss under the description of such. Still doesn't specify replacement, though.
Where specifically do you see Game Loss? Please specify the Infraction when mentioning a penalty. I don't see anything in the IPG that associates damaging an opponent's cards with a Game Loss.
If the opponent is purposely destroying your cards (because he's angry or is trying to de-value your cards) then that would be Unsporting Conduct - Aggressive Behaviour, which is a Disqualification.
If the opponent accidentally marks your cards by riffle shuffling, or spilling pop on it, then there's no real penalty associated with it. The player can request that a judge shuffle the deck instead of the player. And in the case of spilling pop or other accidental damage, the TO may be able to provide some sort of customer service, but there is no penalty for it. (You could probably appeal to the guy's sense of right, and ask for him to reimburse you or replace it.)
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!
Where specifically do you see Game Loss? Please specify the Infraction when mentioning a penalty. I don't see anything in the IPG that associates damaging an opponent's cards with a Game Loss.
If the opponent is purposely destroying your cards (because he's angry or is trying to de-value your cards) then that would be Unsporting Conduct - Aggressive Behaviour, which is a Disqualification.
If the opponent accidentally marks your cards by riffle shuffling, or spilling pop on it, then there's no real penalty associated with it. The player can request that a judge shuffle the deck instead of the player. And in the case of spilling pop or other accidental damage, the TO may be able to provide some sort of customer service, but there is no penalty for it. (You could probably appeal to the guy's sense of right, and ask for him to reimburse you or replace it.)
so i can say that I don't want my opponents touching my cards? Is cutting a deck necessary?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets. (Matthew 7:12)
Make the white queen run so fast, she hasn't got time to make you wise.
Pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, like thoughts inside a dream.
Doctor, my eyes, tell me what you see. I hear their cries... just say if it's too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes...cannot see the sky. Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry?
A Game Loss is issued in situations where the procedure to correct the offense takes a significant amount of time
that may slow the entire tournament or causes significant disruption to the tournament, or in which it is impossible
to continue the game due to physical damage. It is also used for some infractions that have a higher probability for a
player to gain advantage
From IPG under heading "Game Loss"
I noticed the error and edited the post; INTENTIONAL damaging is what I was trying to get at, but that's what I was referring to.
If you cannot find replacement, the judge would allow you to proxy it.
If your opponent intentially damages your cards, what the judge can do is to disqualify him. Apparently the only way to get him replace your card is to sue him in court.
If you cannot find replacement, the judge would allow you to proxy it.
If your opponent intentially damages your cards, what the judge can do is to disqualify him. Apparently the only way to get him replace your card is to sue him in court.
"the only way to get him replace your card is to sue him in court."
lol i totally do that
Shuffling your opponent's deck is mandatory at Competitive and Professional RELs. You may ask a judge to shuffle your deck rather than your opponent.
And the judge will likely refuse unless you have a good reason - It has to be better than "sweaty palms"
Also i had an unpleasant situation where a guy was OVER protective of his cards, he called me over and said he didnt like the way his opponent was "mash-shuffling" his cards, and asked if i wouldnt mind shuffling instead.. i didnt see the harm, so i took the deck and gave a couple of quick riffles - and he flipped at me, how i dared to ruin his cards by riffleshuffleling them... apparently in his world the only "acceptable" form of shuffling was Pile-shuffling since everything else was bad for the cards... (*HINT* Pile-shuffling alone is never sufficient)
And the judge will likely refuse unless you have a good reason - It has to be better than "sweaty palms"
Also i had an unpleasant situation where a guy was OVER protective of his cards, he called me over and said he didnt like the way his opponent was "mash-shuffling" his cards, and asked if i wouldnt mind shuffling instead.. i didnt see the harm, so i took the deck and gave a couple of quick riffles - and he flipped at me, how i dared to ruin his cards by riffleshuffleling them... apparently in his world the only "acceptable" form of shuffling was Pile-shuffling since everything else was bad for the cards... (*HINT* Pile-shuffling alone is never sufficient)
I never pile shuffle its such a waste of time i can play a 20 turn game and have 15 mana clumped up and be able to seperate them by the time i am done shuffling
And the judge will likely refuse unless you have a good reason - It has to be better than "sweaty palms"
Also i had an unpleasant situation where a guy was OVER protective of his cards, he called me over and said he didnt like the way his opponent was "mash-shuffling" his cards, and asked if i wouldnt mind shuffling instead.. i didnt see the harm, so i took the deck and gave a couple of quick riffles - and he flipped at me, how i dared to ruin his cards by riffleshuffleling them... apparently in his world the only "acceptable" form of shuffling was Pile-shuffling since everything else was bad for the cards... (*HINT* Pile-shuffling alone is never sufficient)
I would be instantly suspicious. Pile-shuffling allows a player to easily keep track of any number of cards in their deck. Forcing their opponent to pile-shuffle as well allows them to continue to keep track of cards.
As TO/Judge, you can point out it's not sufficiently randomized, and give them a warning.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"If you don't wear your seatbelt, the police will shoot you in the head."
- To my youngest sister when she was 6.
Everyone knows that good luck and good game are such insincere terms that any man who does not connect his right hook with the offender's jaw on the very utterance of such a phrase is no man I would consider as such.
As TO/Judge, you can point out it's not sufficiently randomized, and give them a warning.
Could we please avoid such suggestions? Any determination of insufficient shuffling depends a lot more on the overall situation, which is a bit more complicated conclusion as a result of an investigation, rather than the player requesting his opponent using one "shuffling" technique over another.
Could we please avoid such suggestions? Any determination of insufficient shuffling depends a lot more on the overall situation, which is a bit more complicated conclusion as a result of an investigation, rather than the player requesting his opponent using one "shuffling" technique over another.
Piling is SPECIFICALLY called out in the MTR or IPG however.
If he is Piling, and ONLY piling, the investigation, is short, sweet, and conclusive.
Piling is SPECIFICALLY called out in the MTR or IPG however.
What the Magic Infraction Procedure Guide mentions is that a player may not utilize pattern pile-shuffling alone in order to "shuffle" his or her own deck. Specifically, a player shuffling his or her own deck.
There is no such requirement for the opponent once the player has presented his or her deck to the opponent. The opponent is only required to shuffle the player's deck at Competitive and Professional RELs, but the opponent can use any method to accomplish that.
In the context of the situation and the thread in general, the opponent was the one shuffling.
If he is Piling, and ONLY piling, the investigation, is short, sweet, and conclusive.
I would hope that people posting to any thread in this forum would exercise considerable more care in discussing any potential investigation for any infraction, and what may or may not be involved.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Regional Judge (L3)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Make the white queen run so fast, she hasn't got time to make you wise.
Pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, like thoughts inside a dream.
Doctor, my eyes, tell me what you see. I hear their cries... just say if it's too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes...cannot see the sky. Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry?
EDIT: Forgot to check the IPG: which qualifies this as a disqualification under the description of such. Still doesn't specify replacement, though.
When in doubt, call a judge.
Objectivist here. Hit me up to talk philosophy.
Where specifically do you see Game Loss? Please specify the Infraction when mentioning a penalty. I don't see anything in the IPG that associates damaging an opponent's cards with a Game Loss.
If the opponent is purposely destroying your cards (because he's angry or is trying to de-value your cards) then that would be Unsporting Conduct - Aggressive Behaviour, which is a Disqualification.
If the opponent accidentally marks your cards by riffle shuffling, or spilling pop on it, then there's no real penalty associated with it. The player can request that a judge shuffle the deck instead of the player. And in the case of spilling pop or other accidental damage, the TO may be able to provide some sort of customer service, but there is no penalty for it. (You could probably appeal to the guy's sense of right, and ask for him to reimburse you or replace it.)
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!
so i can say that I don't want my opponents touching my cards? Is cutting a deck necessary?
Make the white queen run so fast, she hasn't got time to make you wise.
Pilot of the storm who leaves no trace, like thoughts inside a dream.
Doctor, my eyes, tell me what you see. I hear their cries... just say if it's too late for me.
Doctor, my eyes...cannot see the sky. Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry?
I noticed the error and edited the post; INTENTIONAL damaging is what I was trying to get at, but that's what I was referring to.
When in doubt, call a judge.
Objectivist here. Hit me up to talk philosophy.
Shuffling your opponent's deck is mandatory at Competitive and Professional RELs. You may ask a judge to shuffle your deck rather than your opponent.
If your opponent intentially damages your cards, what the judge can do is to disqualify him. Apparently the only way to get him replace your card is to sue him in court.
"the only way to get him replace your card is to sue him in court."
lol i totally do that
And the judge will likely refuse unless you have a good reason - It has to be better than "sweaty palms"
Also i had an unpleasant situation where a guy was OVER protective of his cards, he called me over and said he didnt like the way his opponent was "mash-shuffling" his cards, and asked if i wouldnt mind shuffling instead.. i didnt see the harm, so i took the deck and gave a couple of quick riffles - and he flipped at me, how i dared to ruin his cards by riffleshuffleling them... apparently in his world the only "acceptable" form of shuffling was Pile-shuffling since everything else was bad for the cards... (*HINT* Pile-shuffling alone is never sufficient)
I never pile shuffle its such a waste of time i can play a 20 turn game and have 15 mana clumped up and be able to seperate them by the time i am done shuffling
I would be instantly suspicious. Pile-shuffling allows a player to easily keep track of any number of cards in their deck. Forcing their opponent to pile-shuffle as well allows them to continue to keep track of cards.
As TO/Judge, you can point out it's not sufficiently randomized, and give them a warning.
- To my youngest sister when she was 6.
Could we please avoid such suggestions? Any determination of insufficient shuffling depends a lot more on the overall situation, which is a bit more complicated conclusion as a result of an investigation, rather than the player requesting his opponent using one "shuffling" technique over another.
Piling is SPECIFICALLY called out in the MTR or IPG however.
If he is Piling, and ONLY piling, the investigation, is short, sweet, and conclusive.
What the Magic Infraction Procedure Guide mentions is that a player may not utilize pattern pile-shuffling alone in order to "shuffle" his or her own deck. Specifically, a player shuffling his or her own deck.
There is no such requirement for the opponent once the player has presented his or her deck to the opponent. The opponent is only required to shuffle the player's deck at Competitive and Professional RELs, but the opponent can use any method to accomplish that.
In the context of the situation and the thread in general, the opponent was the one shuffling.
I would hope that people posting to any thread in this forum would exercise considerable more care in discussing any potential investigation for any infraction, and what may or may not be involved.