Alex,

Thanks for your input here. I still think I would have given the option to the other player to reshuffle but your explanation shows me why you would not do that.

As for the Unsporting Conduct penalty, I don't see a Game Loss option in the guidelines. I just see Unsporting Conduct-Minor Warning and then Unsporting Conduct-Major Match Loss. Based on heresay, a game loss seems harsh but I guess you are trying to set the tone that even joking around is unacceptable.

I still need to learn much more about the nuances of assigning penalties so your post is much appreciated.

EDIT: Just saw your 2nd post. You downgraded the Match Loss to a Game Loss. That makes sense now and why I don't see that UC Penalty in the Guidelines.

that is actually possible, i do the same thing with USB's, it is all about using the chain.

Flipping a location doesn't use the chain, so the KO of the location with the same name will happen at the same time.

Unlike USB, activating Genosha, KO's it as part of the cost so once she activates the 2nd one (she is at 4 and will knock down to 3), she can't flip up the 3rd one.

Alex,

I feel where you're coming from on the game loss ruling. Niether you nor the judging staff know or knew the two guys involved in the match and you have to play it safe and try and be fair. however, your response about this just reinforces the impression that even the judges involved knew Josh wasn't intentionally doing anything wrong and tried to give the smallest possible penalty that was above a warning. You basically say that Josh was made an example of so that other less scrupulous players wouldn't try to make a rules loophole and jump through it, i.e. the intent was to set precedent. Fair enough. Now me personally, I would never have done what Josh did. I have been playing in tourneys at this or higher levels for years and I am aware of the risks. You never know what the judges are going to do or say in response to seemingly inoccuous behavior. But Josh is a tourney n00b. He hadn't been acting badly during the tourney. He wasn't previously waned about unsporting conduct or any other similar infraction. Most importantly, he was at the top tables in the final round of swiss. I personally feel the ruling was inappropriate under those circumstances and was in fact a little paranoid. I would have went with the warning myself. The opponent in this case knew Josh wasn't suggesting a bribe and he simply was taking advantage of the judging staff and Josh's good nature. In esscence, the opponent was acted in an unsportsmanlike fashion and got what he wanted in the end.

As a sid-note, after the tourney when we talked about all of this, Josh isn't in the least bit upset about any of this. For him this was simply a lesson learned and he is pretty pleased to have made 11th in his first big tourney. The whole experience has actually toughened his resolve to do well next time and finalized his decision to get on the plane and go to Indy and grind in next month.

The judge can't be asked to take that kind of information into account when he approaches a situation after the fact. Yes, the ruling was probably a bit harsh, considering the circumstances in hindsight. But were I the judge at the scene I'd do the same. If you don't, any offer that's not accepted becomes a 'joke' and the guy offering was 'just kidding', but any offer that is accepted goes through. There cannot be any lenience on this, and you cannot joke about it. If you allow people to beg out of 'possible' bribery when money was actually discussed, 'joking' becomes an excuse for serious offers when the opponent does the right thing and calls a judge.

ah, so that is it, so three genoshas, wont work, but three USB's will, which is good cuz i dont care about hood.

3 USBs will work on turn 6... but not turn 5 because USB is a 5-threshold location.

i think that i can understand the stand that ude wants to take on this, but i just don't think it will lead to any thing good.

so basically what is being said is ' once per tournament any player may simply reshuffle his or her deck at the time that they decide to take a mulligan, and only get a warning.'

part of the game is the 'shuffle and present decks'.

if after looking at your hand you decide that you don't want your high cost character, but wish to keep your low to mid cost character you decide to mulligan.

but wait! i only have 2 of that plot twist in my deck, and i don't want to risk never getting it back this game, so i'll just shuffle, and if my opponent doesn't call me on it i'll get to do it again later on in the tournament again!

come on guys... how is this just a minor issue?

so what would happen to a player whose deck performs exactly the same in every game? does he get in trouble for stacking his deck? or just get a warning?

i personally feel that as we are talking about a PRO CIRCUIT each player is to be assumed to know the rules well enough that this kind of infraction should carry a heavier penalty.

isn't that part of the reason for a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT where the RULES are enforced?

how many times will a player need to do that in a single match for it to make a warning a real penalty?

i mean, i could do this in each round, so long as my opponent doesn't notice, or say anything, and the warning i got from the first round means nothing.

and what about the loss you get for playing against the person?

glossary:

cheating: the willful act to circumvent the rules as described for an event.

so an opponent makes a mistake that has huge game altering effects, and all they get is a warning, and you don't simply force the restart?

this doesn't really seem to make a lot of since, especially in the face a player that even the judges didn't think had actually done something wrong, and he got a way more serious penalty than the person that actually did do something.

do you see my point?

It's not. You are cheating and hoping you get away with it.

This is not a Pro Circuit. This is a Pro Circuit Qualifier, which is open to anyone who wants to play. This includes Magic players, 6-year-olds, and anyone who wants to cough up the money.

In Magic, when you take a mulligan, you shuffle your hand into your deck. If you're playing Marvel and don't read the rules carefully, with all the other similarities, you may assume that the mulligan works the same way. This sounds just like an honest mistake.

They are enforced. If this guy tries this again and gets caught, he'd get a game loss for it. Laying the hammer down on a slight mistake is not what the staff is there to do.

More than once and he gets a more major penalty. Not more than once in a match--more than once in a tournament, and if he has a history with the TO, more than once ever.

Now you're cheating and hoping you get away with it. If you don't, the penalties might well put you out of the tournament.

This, however, is on you. Keep your eyes open and you can prevent this kind of thing.

How do you know this is willful? After an afternoon of playing Marvel I've switched to Magic and drawn two cards in a turn. Why couldn't someone screw up mulligans in the opposite way?

I do see your point, but I don't think the guy shuffled in on purpose. With that in mind, what if he shuffled in a hand full of cards he didn't want to see? That's hardly good for him, is it?

it is always fascinating to get other people's insights in to events and situations.

first off, my hypothetical situations that i posed that are being quoted above were just hypothetical. but i make a very strong case.

now that a precedent has been set, you guys have to see the huge flaw in this reasoning:

there are many other checks and balances designed to help prevent cheating, right?

and this is now saying that it is ok to do it once, but if you do it again, then you are in trouble. and that kind of thing does not carry from one event to the next. it was only marked on the record sheet with initials from a judge, it only stands a chance of carrying a penalty that same day.

and why should one player suffer from another players actions?

see, i know people are thinking that this seems petty or even whiny, but believe me, you'll sing a different song when it is you that it happens to, that or you will be glad that i made an issue out of this now, so that you will have some kind of recourse for when it happens.

disregarding this as just an accident and nothing more does not hold the same cause and effect that making an example out of a player over an obvious misunderstanding.

why don't my nay sayers see that?

if a player can be penalized with an auto loss for making a joke, that even the judges say they didn't think any harm was intended( which is why they only reduced the penalty to a game loss, not a match loss) how can any rules infraction be treated as a lesser offense, and one that can have just as serious an effect on the game?

and if my opponent chose to take a mulligan, it is obviously not because he had the kind of hand that he wanted to keep, or not early game any way.

as i have stated before, this was probably not done for the purposes of cheating, but the resolution is not acceptable.

if one player is permitted to reshuffle his deck, and by not penalizing him/her, that is what is occurring, then both players should at the least be given that option. period.

other wise you are bordering on shananigans.

and keeping my eyes open was how i caught it in the first place, but i still had to play with a bad shuffle, and my opponent did not.

so that idea really doesn't help too much, i don't think. as i am the one that actually was in the situation, i think i have a rather unique insight in to how it all played out, and it was a bit disheartening that it was handled the way it was.

this is the kind of background rules enforcement that really does need to be looked at very closely.

i think you should have been allowed to reshuffle your deck is you chose to.. the game has not been started yet and it would even out the current advantage that your opponent created for himself.. it does create a slippery slope where in a person who hypothetically draws his one and only apocalypse for example but all other cards are poor i.e. no low drops can shuffle his hand into his deck via a mulligan and be penalized by only a sloppy play warning.. of course this is cheating but who's to say if he did it by accident or by purpose? are we going to hook him up to a lie detector? How do we determine intent or lack thereof? This is a good thing to know because if i'm in the same position i'll just shuffle my hand into my deck and if it's caught i'll say oops and reap the rewards.. and all i'll get because of it is a warning.. big deal.. i won't do it again.. until the next tourney when my slate has been whiped clean.. does anyone see something wrong with this? i do.. is it really considered a bonus or advantage if you gave the other person the choice of shuffling his deck? i think personally that you are not only dealing out a low slap on the hand to a person who just gained a big advantage.. but you also set their opponent at a disadvantage because they weren't allowed to do the same..

Having never been to a PCQ myself (too far) I am almost glad I haven't. The environment seems to be far too uptight and cut-throat to me. I play because I enjoy the game.

So, what keeps someone who has some supporters from claiming an opponent offered them money who, in fact, did not? I mean, it'd be an easy way to win against a difficult opponent.

It just seems a bit... petty, cut throat, cowardly, jerkish, unsportmanlike, rude, unfriendly, and simply not in the manner I like to play the game... that whoever "Player X" (Josh?) was playing would even call a judge over on what happened. I know I would hold a grudge with that player, and then the game becomes nasty.

Right or not, wow, am I glad I don't have to deal with all of this.

And yelling "bomb" on an airplane... I think we are talking about two very different situations. One is about money, one is about people's lives.

Latuki your right to an extent, but you need to remember that some peoples greed overcomes them, but yeah, this is a card game, dont try to kill any chance of having friends in the future when you could need them

this is just one of those situations where the rules seem to have been made only from one side of things, not a fair balanced side of things.

the option to shuffle should have been left up to me, as the game was no further along than the initial draw cards/ mulligan step.

and the advantage gained is not the only issue here. the POTENTIAL advantage could have been huge! and for all who say ' but so could the disadvantage have been equally as bas' i will point out that if his original hand was sooo good any way, then he wouldn't have been taking a mulligan, so he really didn't have much to lose. especially after he got to shuffle his deck.

think of it like this :

you are on turn 3 and your opponent has not played a single character, but is unhappy with his deck. he then picks up his deck and begins to shuffle it in the middle of the game.

do you think THAT has an effect on the game?

realize that the purpose for taking a redraw in any game is to hope to get a better opening hand, and the purpose of shuffling is to randomize your cards.

if after this process has been done, one player decides that he just didn't shufle enough and decides to reshuffle without his opponents consent, there is a violation that is occurring, and it is a violation that simply put does have an effect on the game, and a warning is a slap in the face to the other player, as the opponent has just been given the consent to cheat and get a way with it.

while i will make the concession for the argument ' well it could have been out of ignorance and he just didn't know' i pose this scenario: what happens if your opponent decides not to play a resource for the turn, believing that he/ she has enough points for everything that they wish to play this turn, and then after recruiting one character they realize that they miscounted and need to play one more resource, so they simply place a card from hand in to their resource row.

do you let that slide too? my opponent tried to place an extra resource on a subsequent turn because he had not played on on the previous turn. i said no, he could not play an extra resource that turn ( same guy from the main scenario), as he had not spent the points nor had he done anything that would indicate he had simply forgotten to place a resource. ( i wound up not placing a resource later in the event against a different player as a result of us both taking actions during my turn, but before i placed a resource, and after my opponent finished taking their actions, i went on and played a character, and was then told it was not permissible to play the character as i had too few resources, and was not allowed to back up as i had attempted to recruit a character so i had moved on to a new step, which i agree with totally. it was my own lackings that caused me not to realize my error.)

this is a game, and is a lot of fun to play. this is a true statement.

tournaments are designed for a higher level of competition. that is the entire nature of a tournament. and as such, the rules need to be strict where definitive and enforced at all times, not just when easiest.