Evolution of a ruling

1. Story of a Ruling
Daniel Kitachewsky, L3 and GPHJ

2. Ancestral Recall

3. Mountainous Recall

4. Sparta Recall

5. How is the IPG built?

6. Goals
● Discourage cheating
● Protect innocent players
● Let the players play their game

7. Discourage cheating
● This is common to all sports
● Large penalty if a player is found cheating
● Present even in the earliest IPGs

8. Protect innocent players
● Penalty should be just enough to offset potential advantage
● Players have to be encouraged to call the judge

9. Let the players play
● Many times players won’t call a judge for a small mistake
● What should a judge do it if they see a mistake?

10. Today’s principles

11. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not _________ from it

12. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it

13. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should _________ the game as close as possible to the original

14. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original

15. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be _______ to apply by any L2 judge in the world

16. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world

17. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world
4. A player can’t _________ the penalties or fixes

18. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world
4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes

19. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world
4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes
5. The fixes should be ___________ so that players don’t feel they’re treated
differently and thus unfairly

20. What enters into it
1. A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it
2. The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original
3. The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world
4. A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes
5. The fixes should be Consistent so that players don’t feel they’re treated
differently and thus unfairly

21. ● No Benefit
● Restores the game
● Easy to Apply
● Can’t be Abused
● Consistent
BREAC

22. No Benefit
“A player making an honest mistake should not Benefit from it.”
● Hidden Card Error: the opponent removes my best card. Maybe the one I
just drew, maybe a better one, never a worse one.
● Missed Trigger: if beneficial, my opponent denies it. If detrimental, I still
get the effect.

23. Restores the game
“The fix should Restore the game as close as possible to the original.”
● AP casts Divination for RRR. The cards are returned to the top of the
library with no shuffle. In two turns, the game is back on track.
● NAP sees AP’s morph by mistake as she was picking it up to read an Aura
enchanting the morph. LEC and no fix.
○ Shuffling the card would change the game
○ Revealing something else “in exchange” might feel like justice, but drifts even further
away from the game

24. Easy to Apply
“The fix should be Easy to apply by any L2 judge in the world.”
● Multiple iterations of Missed Triggers
● More important as we move towards decentralized tournament system
● Many PPTQs have one judge who has never been to a GP or a judge
conference
● IPG should stay small and simple

25. Can’t be Abused
“A player can’t Abuse the penalties or fixes.”
● I count my opponent’s deck and find 39 cards.
○ What if I tell them immediately?
○ What if I wait?
● Proving intentional waiting is often hard.

26. Consistent
“The fixes should be Consistent so that players don’t feel they’re treated
differently and thus unfairly.”
● Complete guidance on many mistakes
● No deviations
● No single-card rulings
● Similar situations should be ruled similarly

27. A Little Time Travel

28. Disclaimers
● This is my own research, no input from the authors
● I have personal experience from 2005, not before
● This is not criticizing the past, but trying to learn from it
○ Einstein vs Newton

29. PG 1999
● First complete set of infractions for Magic I could find
● Already full breakdown:
○ Deck, decklist errors
○ Marked cards
○ Shuffling
○ Tardiness
○ Slow Play
○ Unsporting Conduct

30. PG 1999
● Focus on procedure violations
● Very little guidance on play errors
○ One paragraph
● Big penalties
● Big reliance on judge discretion

31. PG 1999 - Philosophy
While uniformity is highly desirable, the goal of each penalty should be that it
fits the infraction. Judges must always use discretion, and if a penalty listed in
this document is not appropriate for an infraction they are adjudicating, they
should issue the penalty they see fit.

32. PG 1999 D.2. Illegal Decks & Sideboards
Level 1 or 2
First Offense: Single warning and duel loss. The player committing the
infraction has ten minutes to correct the deck, or the penalty is upgraded to a
double warning and a match loss.
Second Offense: Double warning and match loss.
Level 3
First Offense: Double warning and match loss.
Level 4 or 5
First Offense: Double warning and ejection.

33. PG 1999 H.2. Card Misrepresentation
A player is in violation of the floor rules section 1.3.18--Card Interpretation if
he or she misrepresents a card.
Note: If more than one turn has elapsed since the violation occurred, it is
generally better to let the current game situation stand (despite the error).
Correct the mistake if feasible.

34. PG 1999 H.4. Failure to Agree on Reality
Players fail to agree on reality if they disagree on a central fact of the
game--such as life totals, mana in the mana pool, what one player said, and so
on--and the truth cannot be successfully determined.
The judge should always first try to reconstruct the actual events using
whatever means are available (...). If the players agree on what happened or
the judge successfully demonstrates the reality, do not invoke any penalties.
General: In all failure to agree on the situation, the judge determines who is
correct using whatever means he or she sees fit.

35. PG 1999 D.3.2. Receiving a Misrecorded Decklist--Limited
In the event of deck swapping, the player who will play the deck receives a misrecorded decklist in
which one or more cards is mismarked in the "Total" column.
Note: The player receiving the misrecorded decklist receives a penalty because, in many cases, it
cannot be clearly determined whether the error came about as a result of the recorder or the player.
In all such situations, therefore, enforcing a penalty against both players is deemed necessary to
deter cheating.
Level 5
First Offense: Single warning and duel loss.
Second Offense: Double warning and ejection.

36. PG 1999 G.8.Drawing Extra Cards
Whenever a player draws too many cards, choose cards at random from that
player's hand and shuffle them into his or her library until that player holds
the proper number of cards.

37. ● No Benefit
● Restores the game
● Easy to Apply
● Can’t Abuse
● Consistent
PG 1999

38. ● No Benefit => I can get free brainstorms by drawing extra cards
● Restores the game => Unclear
● Easy to Apply => “Determine who is right using any means available”
● Can’t Abuse => I can misregister my Limited decklist and penalize
someone else
● Consistent => Only instruction is “correct the mistake if feasible”
PG 1999

39. PG 2000-2006
● No more disproportionate penalties
○ Illegal main decklist now Match Loss at most
○ No more penalties for mistakes you have no control over
● Big “Procedural Error” section
○ Judge discretion still used
● No more guidance on game errors than PG 1999
● Little evolution until 2006
○ More examples of game errors appear in Procedural Errors, but still judge’s choice to give
Caution, Warning or Game Loss
● A Pithing Needle with no choice… never gets a choice.

40. PG 2007
● Toby Elliott rewrites PG completely and is promoted to Level 5
● More detailed game play fixes
● Big push on consistency

41. IPG 2010
● Regular REL split into its own 2-page document (thank you James Mackay)

42. IPG 2012
● In the middle of reforming Missed Trigger
● Peak of complexity

43. IPG 2016
● Minimal penalties: almost never Game Loss thanks to Hidden Card Error
and downgrades for Deck/Decklist Problem
● Simpler than 2012

44. Solving Ancestral Recall

45. A simple mistake: 1. Original version
NAP notices before AP draws

46. A simple mistake: 2. Delayed version
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3

47. A simple mistake: 3. Intentionally delayed version
NAP notices before AP draws but chooses to wait

48. AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once
A simple mistake: 4. Extra card version

49. PG 1999 H.2. Card Misrepresentation
A player is in violation of the floor rules section 1.3.18--Card Interpretation if
he or she misrepresents a card.
Note: If more than one turn has elapsed since the violation occurred, it is
generally better to let the current game situation stand (despite the error).
Correct the mistake if feasible.

50. PG 1999 G.8.Drawing Extra Cards
(Level 3: Warning)
Whenever a player draws too many cards, choose cards at random from that
player's hand and shuffle them into his or her library until that player holds
the proper number of cards.

51. PG 1999: ???

52. PG 1999: Original
NAP notices before AP draws.
“Correct the mistake”, which could be:
● Tap blue instead
● Tap blue in addition
● Unplay
● Counter

53. PG 1999: Delayed
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3.
Extra cards at random are shuffled away.
If I have no blue, I will try this.
If my opponent tries this, I’ll let him.

54. AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once.
Shuffle one random card away.
If I draw all lands, I’ll try one more.
PG 1999: Extra card

55. PG 2005 Procedural Error - Major
(E) A player in a Magic tournament plays Wrath of God (mana cost: 2WW) using one
white mana and three colorless mana.
Procedural errors vary significantly. The judge should adjust the penalty appropriately
to reflect the level of tournament disruption.
If the procedural error makes it impossible for a player to effectively complete the game
or match in the allotted period of time, the judge should upgrade the penalty to a
match/game loss.

56. PG 2005 Drawing Extra Cards (Level 3)
(...) When it is obvious which extra card was drawn, the card should be placed back on
top of the deck. If it is unclear which card is the “extra” card, a random card should be
selected from the player’s hand. (...) The opponent of the player committing the
infraction should be allowed to see any cards the other player has seen due to this
infraction.
An automatic game loss should be applied if a player has drawn so many cards that a
judge is unable to correct the situation. If the judge feels that the player has received
enough of an advantage by drawing an extra card (for example, the player has had his
or her library modified by his or her opponent or the player sees the next card, which
reveals some crucial strategic information), the penalty should be upgraded to a game
loss.

57. PG 2005: Original
NAP notices before AP draws.
No guidance, but likely PE - Major.
Fix = depends on judge

58. PG 2005: Delayed
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3.
Automatic Game Loss.
I will not try this.
If my opponent tries this, I’ll let
them and win the game.

59. AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once.
Game Loss.
No abuse possible here.
PG 2005: Extra card

60. PG 2007 Game Play Error - Game Rule Violation
If the error was caught immediately, back up the game to the point of the
error. If not caught immediately, leave the game state as it is. Additionally, if
not caught immediately, the opponent should receive a Game Play Error —
Failure to Maintain Game State penalty.

61. PG 2007: Original
NAP notices before AP draws.
GPE - GRV.
Fix = back to hand, untap mana.

62. PG 2007: Delayed
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3.
Automatic Game Loss.
I will not try this.
If my opponent tries this, I’ll let
them and win the game.

63. AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once.
Game Loss.
No abuse possible here.
PG 2007: Extra card

64. IPG 2012 Drawing Extra Cards
A player illegally puts one or more cards into his or her hand and, at the
moment before he or she began the instruction or action that put a card into
his or her hand, no other Game Play Error or Player Communication Violation
had been committed, and the error was not the result of resolving objects on
the stack in an incorrect order.

65. IPG 2012 GPE - GRV
Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately
prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the
location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the
incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned
instead).

66. IPG 2012: Original
NAP notices before AP draws.
GPE - GRV.
Fix = back to hand, untap mana.

67. IPG 2012: Delayed
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3.
GPE - GRV.
Put 3 cards at random on top.
I will try this.
If my opponent tries this, I want to
stop them before they do.

68. AP draws 4 because they take all the cards at once.
Game Loss.
No abuse possible here.
IPG 2012: Extra card

69. IPG 2016 Hidden Card Error
Excess cards are returned to the correct location. If that location is the library,
they should be shuffled into the random portion unless the owner previously
knew the identity of the card/cards illegally moved; that many cards, chosen
by the opponent, are returned to the top of the library instead. For example, if
a player playing with Sphinx of Jwar Isle illegally draws a card, that card should
be returned to the top of the library.
(Thank you Matt Johnson).

70. IPG 2016: Original
NAP notices before AP draws.
GPE - GRV.
Fix = back to hand, untap mana.

71. IPG 2016: Delayed
NAP notices after AP has drawn 3.
GPE - GRV.
Put 3 cards at random on top.
I will try this.
If my opponent tries this, I want to
stop them before they do.

72. AP draws 4 because they take all
the cards at once.
HCE.
Opponent shuffles my best card
away.
I will not try this.
IPG 2016: Extra card

73. Questions?