I started a new thread about this because well, I'd like some answers and explanation from the UDE people about this. Specifically, if UDE is set on letting people break these rules (which it sounds like they are), then how are they going to deal with future cards that generate effects during these steps? This is an issue that needs to be resolved now. Here is my post from another thread:


I still have no idea where UDE is coming from with that silly ruling. I know you might not want to discuss this on this thread but I'm getting sick of this and it's getting discussed.



In order to even attempt to recruit a character, a player would have to have passed that priority point by default since you can only recruit a character during the recruit step which occurs after the resource step. Not that it matters a whole lot anyways since you have to build a resource before that priority point. Also notice 403.2 which says that building a resource is optional. UDE has taken the position that players who attempt to do an illegal action during the recruit step before they have done any legal actions may go back past the priority points into the resource step, play a resource, get the resource point from that resource, and re-enter the recruit step. I have problems with this for three reasons.

First, it sets a horrible precedent for the future and promotes sloppy play. What happens when more cards have triggered effects which go on the chain during the resource step or at the start of the recruit step? What happens if I play a smaller character legally and then realize I forgot to play a resource and don't have enough for my other drop? I made the same mistake as the other guy, it's just that he happened to have a bigger drop so he could conveniently make an illegal play and back up. If someone has resolved any effects (or even put any on the chain) after their opportunity to play a resource, their is no way that you could let them go back since you would be altering the game state.

Second, I could make a solid case to let me "back up" in many other game phases to complete an optional action that I neglected to complete. Say we enter the recovery phase. Neither player has anything that triggers at the start of the phase so we just go ahead recovering without saying anything (just like not saying anything about the priority points in other phases and steps like the draw, resource, formation, etc... because we assume neither player has effects and passes). I am the attacker so I recover first. I try to recover a character that cannot be recovered for one reason or another (poison ivy...). My opponent points out that I cannot do that and it is an illegal action. Being that I haven't done anything yet, I now want to back up and play an effect at the start of the recovery phase. Using UDE's logic, this is NO DIFFERENT than the resource/recruit step example. *EDIT* *BAD EXAMPLE, BUT YOU GET THE POINT; I spaced out about what Poison Ivy's text says. Instead of poison ivy, assume my opponent controls an unstunned 7 drop Magneto. That works.*

Third, and most importantly, NOWHERE in the rules does it say anything about me being able to do this (back up, cheat) in a tournament. It actually specifically spells out how the resource step works and clearly states that playing a resource is OPTIONAL. If UDE would enforce the rules that it writes, then we would have consistent policies and rulings since it is crystal clear in the rules. I'm sure people would learn not to make that mistake very quickly if it was being consistently enforced as it is printed in the rules. If you are going to continue to rule this way, CHANGE THE RULES. There is nothing worse than having a rules documents that clearly states how something works and then show up at an event and have judges either rule differently or refuse to acknowledge or enforce the written rules.

UDE has to stick by their rules and enforce them consistently as they are written or else players will never learn them and stop making these mistakes. I could see letting this slide at the first couple events but doing this at the PC was absolutely inexcusable no matter what justification was whipped up for it. The fact is that the rules state something that directly contradicts what is being enforced. That is a major problem. This needs to be addressed now. Having some obscure justification that isn't clearly supported by the rules and that nobody knows or understands is unacceptable. The day a judge lets my opponent do this in the PC is the day that I either get DQ'd for arguing with the judges, quit this game, or both.


-Eric

i agree with eric completely. if you attempt to recruit a character this means that you have left your resource step and have entered your recruit step. a player that forgets to lay a resource should not be allowed to back up a step to play a resource. it was a bad play and this play must suffer the consequences of his/her actions now. i don't understand why ude is always their rules to be bent/broken. this leads me to believe that anyone can talk their way out of any rule. Rules need to be enforced consistently or this game will be garbage

1) Backing up is not cheating - it's a mistake many people make
2) I agree with you except for the point above

What happened that made you come up with this post? Personally I enforce all the rules to the letter, but even I let something like that slide since many people make it (I just warn them that I won't let it happen a second time in the matchup and they never do it again).

Edit: It's just a game as well. If you have to rely on calling opponents on simple mistakes like that, your deck doesn't deserve to win

I made this resource mistake during my first pcq. It was turn 3, I forgot to set my resource and tried to play 3 drop thing. It was ruled that I had passed the resource step and could not place one down at this point. While upsetting at first, I realized that I messed up, and I have never made this mistake again. Every turn, I count my resources and make sure that I lay one down first.

If it is the rule, then it should be maintained and enforced. In casual play I allow my opponent to go back the first time, remind them, then enforce it, so that they may learn before it really counts.

You can't make an illegal play, you can't try to recruit a character and fail, putting a character on the field when you don't ahve the resource points is not "trying" to recruit a character cause no where in the rules does it outline "trying" to recruit a character, an illegal play is no play at all. People make game mistakes and they should get warnings for them, but when you get into things like this and you try to enforce itto the T you start making people more uptight, and they start calling you on the tiniest stuff. Some understanding promotes more casual, more friendly play, and some people may get pissed cause they coulda won money or yaddah yaddah yaddah, but guess what UDE makes the rules and enforces them how they see fit so get over it.

That last part I for the most part was not serious but you see how unsportsmanlike it sounds when you say something like that "you forgot to play your resource, you've lost, get over it."

UDE wants to encourage frindly play if they can thus why they made this ruling.

And your poison Ivy example is flawed, cause you could say you are recovering her, then when you go to flip her they could stop you and say you chose to recover the character and thus it doesn't get KO'ed but it doesn't get recovered.

Just to add my 2 cents worth here:

What is the penalty for trying to recruit a character where by you cannot fulfill it's recruiting cost? (This does not only refer to the resource points but addtional costs as well)

Um... We are talking about the PRO CIRCUIT here guys. This isn't about "casual" or "friendly" play. You can't just let rules slide in high level events like this. When you do that you encourage sloppy play which leads to bigger problems that can't be fixed so easily. If you don't play in or don't care about high level competitive events like PCQ's, CC's, and the PC, this thread does not concern you.


-Eric

No penalty, you just can't recruit the character. That is what UDE should do in this instance instead of letting a player back up to the start of the resource step after they try to recruit a character.


-Eric

The penalty is usually a warning, and the game backs up to the last legal action, which is the resource step or just after the card draw, depending (I've seen it happen both ways). Repeated offenders can be given a game loss. (Off the top of my head, rule 505.2 refers to this).

I haven't decided on my position yet on this thread....

Actually, as I show in my example, the last legal action is you passing during the resource step since that occurs after you build or don't build a resource. This is the primary reason why the justification that you and UDE both share is flawed.


-Eric

i agree with eric. the rule should be enforced. If you don't put a resource down, oh well. in magic/duel masters if you don't untap during your untap step, oh well(even though i was almost positive it was manditory to untap, a judge ruled otherwise).

In hobby league i could understand that being allowed, but pcqs, 10ks, PC's, or any other "pro" event, or qualifier it should be enforced.

They just need to change the rule to this:

403. Resource Step

403.1 As a player's resource step starts, that player may build a resource by putting one card from his or her hand face down into his or her resource row OR announcing their choice to not play a resource this turn, and then any powers or modifiers that trigger at the start of the resource step are added to the chain. Then the primary player gets priority.

403.2 Building a resource is optional.

Hang on here, Eric. I said I've seen it ruled both ways. Never ruled that way myself.

I specifically said I haven't made an opinion yet.

see i don't even think the rule needs to be changed. if someone is going into a pro event, they should know the bloody rules, don't ya think?

Oh, ok, I'm sorry. What you said just sounded a lot like some of the justifications I've heard from UDE about this so I figured you shared their view.



-Eric