While I knew most of that stuff already, it was a really interesting video. If you want to read it, here is an old story from the good old days when Upper Deck (UD) ruled the tournaments: Did you know that UD had a policy to upgrade Tournaments? No? Here is how I got to know about it... I went to my locals wanting to win the damn thing after over a month of preparation and meta-calling and as I did not have a lot of money, I needed to play a budget version of the chaos decks that were running wild at the time, especially since it got ruled by our local judge that Cyber Dragon was legal for that event. I had the strategy of playing chaos-recruiter-stun with TONS of draw cards like Des Lacooda, Skelangel etc. and ~12 traps, including anti-side-deck-techs like blast with chain (was a premium-out to Jinzo despite being a trap). So I got to the event and saw basically half of the top 8 players of my homecountry sitting there together and thought: Fuck, thats going to get rough. It wasn't. My local shop owner called UD as he wanted to report the extremely high amount of cossy points gathered there in the form of national players. UD decided that he had to give us a 4-rounds-swiss pre-tournament to balance-out the points given (note: The higher the number of points your opponent had, the more points you got when you beat him/her). I teared through my first 2 games of swiss and then had to go against an old pal on mine that went 4th place in nationals the year before. A big fish. It was close, but I beat him 2-0 as he couldn't handle the burn-cards in my sidedeck and the draw power of my little monsters. 4 rounds of swiss went by and I defeated everyone 2-0, so I got into the main event with 4 perfect wins. The pre-event filtered out half of the players and just 32 were left, all the big fishes and I included. In this short 4 rounds I had to go against every single one of the big players and somehow my deck steamrolled them as nobody thought that he had to play against burn, stun and chaos in a single functioning deck. In the finals, I lost due to 2 bricky opening hands and my opponent having a Cyber Dragon in both his opening hands. Wasn't glorious, but I felt great due to the wins I had. AFTER the event our local shop owner called us and said that upperdeck called him back and told him that our gains in cossy points were alocated as if it were a big main event, thanks to the high quality of players. The event got upgraded! Thanks to this, I, someone without a single point beforehand, shot up to the top 30 players nationally (germany) due to my wins against big players. Sorry for the long read, but this is and probably will forever be one of my favorite memories of Yu-Gi-Oh
So I only skimmed through this video, but some of the things I noticed: Intentional Draws: Being a locals is not a reason to downgrade the disqualification penalty to a warning for intentional draws. If it is determined that the Unsporting Conduct - Cheating infraction has been committed, the player(s) should be DQ'd from the event, and the proper statements and paperwork submitted to KDE. "Light to moderate rules enforcement" means that we make use of the caution penalty, are less strict with sleeve standards before making players re-sleeve their decks, etc. It doesn't mean we look the other way when people compromise the integrity of the event. As per Konami policy: "Tournament Policy and Penalty Guidelines still apply at these levels, but the focus is on fostering a friendly and fun atmosphere for Duelists to play in." Downgrading the penalty for an intentional draw to a warning doesn't do anything to help foster a friendly and fun atmosphere. As you explained, it does just the opposite. Public Knowledge: Asking about the result of an action that you are considering is not public knowledge. You're not asking about a game mechanic, you're asking whether or not this play is optimal. This is coaching, and a judge will not answer. You can ask about a game mechanic, but you really shouldn't be relating it to the current game state to avoid any potential coaching problems. "If you're purposely trying to misrepresent the game you'll probably get a warning": No. Intentionally misrepresenting the game state is an Unsporting Conduct - Cheating infraction, the penalty for which is not a warning, it is disqualification without prize. Intent is a key element of policy. All infractions, except for unsporting conduct, are only committed unintentionally. Any intentional violation of the rules is Unsporting Conduct. All other infractions (Procedural Error, Deck Error, Drawing Cards, etc.) are unintentional. Verification: Tournament Policy says: "While resolving an effect that asks for a card in the hand to be verified - if all legal copies of that specific card can be accounted for, (Public Knowledge areas, etc), the hand does not need to be revealed; unless an effect specifically allows the Duelist to do so. ***In the case where an effect requires the hand to be revealed, the opponent may read every card in the hand.*** This verification must be done in a timely manner so as to not hold up the current Duel."
Being a locals: it can all be prevented by simply not having draws all together by using the intended end of match procedure. As for the hand reveal, I interepreted as if a card effect REQUIRES to reveal the hand, you can read each card even if it is unrelated to the card effect at hand. I did not include card effects that do not contain/require reveal hand, but cannot confirm copies. Because those cards no not require hand revealing, to me they are not included. It's similar to why when a player activates, B buster dragon and C crush wyvern, you have to assume C crush wyvern is legal. You can't check if it was.. that would be a gray area.
Aye, you can't have draws at locals so that wasn't really the issue I was addressing. If the event is allowing draws at locals there are far more serious issues at hand. I was moreso addressing your interpretating and application of policy: the event being a locals does not mean you take cheating infractions less seriously. Policy takes the cheating infraction, and the disqualification penalty, **very** seriously, regardless of the level of event. Regarding verification, your comparisons aren't valid. Verification is required to confirm that an effect has resolved properly (or to confirm that it can no longer be resolved properly), but we do not perform verification to confirm that activations are legal. (This is a whole different discussion.) As with the Sangan example provided for in the document, the player does not just "glace" at the card to confirm it is a monster with the appropriate stat, the player can read the entire card. The same with a card such as Mind Crush, if you can't account for all legal copies of the declared card, the hand must be revealed. The player can then read each card in the hand in a timely manner, so as not to delay the current duel. With respect, you haven't done a very good job of conveying neither the letter of the law, nor the spirit of the law with respect to KDE's policy in this video.
Question: I have those God Cards that say "this card can't be used in a duel", just like all the token cards. They also just have a description, not the actual effect. Am I allowed to use these as tokens.? Or would it be a misrepresentation of the game state because they could be mistaken for the real good cards.?
So, if I activated one of the virus traps(that are worth anything), it says check all cards my opponent controls, would I be able to read every card in their hand? Or would I have to pray I have a good enough memory from the glance through to confirm all possible affected cards are destroyed?
To add to this video: - End of match procedure is variable, locals can choose to enforce which to use; T1 or T2 since the difference is minor. It also allows TO's to prevent draws or allow them depending on the environment of the local event, and sometimes having players use the one they've seen at a regional is simpler. Consistently using one is most important. - Players do not have to answer questions about potential gamestates, and judges should be careful not to coach in this scenario, however you are right that lying about it is a penalty. This mostly comes under the advice that is repeated throughout the game: You must know what your cards do. If you are not sure about some commonly occuring things (i.e. X vs Master Peace) then talk to a judge before the event. - You are missing the point of the named cards stuff I think. Named cards is fine but asking with the intent to get your opponent to reveal where that card is is a Major penalty. If ever in doubt call a judge don't get angry with an opponent. This is a common question and very few judges will be surprised by it. It is worth everyone who wants to play Yugioh for a significant amount of time to read the tournament documentation, the PSCT blog posts and to take the judge test to check your proficiency.
Fair point all around. Asking for a generic card name and it's printed text is legal, it is however it is also the truth if you don't know the answer off the top of your head. If u already set the monster and it's no longer there, the truth would be I dunno and if I checked would give u access to non public information. That is also valid answer. Remember I only said answer with the truth and only lying would offer a penalty.
Shurtugal998 afraid this is not what I've got from 3 national coordinators within the organised play scheme. I was strict about it previously but T1 event structure simply exists as an alternative to the t2 which is more suitable under certain conditions, so while recommend for a local setting the to or head judge has final disrection.
Nowhere in policy does it give a TO or a HJ the right to choose which EOM procedures they use. They are violating KDE policy by using the wrong EOM procedure.
I think you are misunderstanding the point of the policy. Rights are not awarded to TO/HJ from policy. If you do not understand the context and how judges adhere to and enforce the policy I don't see the point discussing this further. What do you think the reasoning for there even being a difference is?
Hey, around the 6 minute mark you suggest that if a player doesn’t know how an interaction will go then they can call a judge and ask. If they have not yet committed an action then receiving this information would be coaching which is not permitted. It is fine to ask a judge after a play has been attempted but not before as judges cannot give information mid match about interactions which have not begun.
There are always ways to ask without it being coaching with just public knowledge. As a player is entitled to definition based on Card Text alone. A player shouldn't be asking a judge for interaction OUTCOMES, or how to play, but there is a gray area. A player CAN ask say to items that are currently public knowledge: Unaffected by monster effect and what does that mean? A judge can answer it as it it is public knowledge and it doesn't directly reveal any sort of plays. "The definition of "unaffected" means Monster Effect will not apply to the card" Based on that definition: You can ask your opponent, does that mean Mechaba's effect does not apply to Master Peace currently. And the player must answer truthfully. Say the player activated the effect of Mechaba and attempted to negate/ remove Master Peace's effect after lying to his opponent saying he could get removed... then said nevermind it doesn't work and you committed to that move, that is misrepresenting the game state. Never ask a judge for an outcome or IF I DO tHIS then Can I do that? That is Coaching. They wont give it to you. As what isn't public knowledge is how the board would end up, any of that information would yes be on the coaching side.
It is important to activate and to resolve cards properly in order to maintain game state. Like using Miracle Fertilizer but not sending it to grave after a monster summoned through its effect leaves the field via a synchro summon for example. It could be noticed the mistake was made a few turns later but at that point game state is already ruined.
Hey Tombox(or anyone who knows for that matter), how do rulings for hand verification work with cards on the limited/ban list? Example being something like calling monster reborn with mind crush or harpies feather duster.
Are you allowed to look at an opponent facedown defense card that has been previously flipped facedown by card effect such as book of moon or fairy tail - snow?
Michael Ngo no you cannot flip it. You can ask for the stats of card name, but you cannot flip the card to check. The moment the card flips face down its card text is no longer public.
So with the mat if my opponent has same colored mat like dark blue no art and uses dark blue sleeves can I ask him to use a different colored mat and is it required of him
Only if you really can't see! Like it's super matte and blends in 70% then you can request it and have a judge follow up. It is not required of him. Especially when the hue is different or the sleeves are reflective enough
So does this mean I am not allowed to have tokens on my extra deck? I should put them next to it? What should I do if at a tournament, someone has like 4 tokens on their 15 card extra deck? Is this fine or should I also call a judge for this?
So if I search for a card and then keep it in hand and pass, can my opponent then ask later if they "know any cards in my hand"? Would it just be up to them to keep track of it or do I have to say "I haven't used the wisdom eye I searched earlier" or something? I've always heard it was the latter but that just seems like bull
Bulbasam 214 they can ask you what did you search with that previous card and deduce it himself. In that case you have to answer, I searched wisdom eye.
Am I able to "shuffle" / change positions of my cards in my own GY? For example, before activating "Question" is it allowed? I guess nobody plays the card but Lightsworn or BA players are moving their GY a lot and change card's position during every game (Question: When activating this card, your opponent cannot check cards in the Graveyard. Your opponent calls the name of the first monster found at the bottom of your Graveyard. If he/she calls it right, the monster is removed from play. If he/she calls it wrong, the monster is Special Summoned to your side of the field).
i keep getting people putting their decks on the left where their extra deck goes and their extra where their main deck is supposed to go. i keep getting on them about it but they keep doing it. since i'm the main judge at my locals, should i be issuing warnings about it, and ramping up the penalty if it keeps up?
FeanixFlamage i like mill decks and say if im activating grass then I prefer to mill the cards with my right hand, it just feels more comfortable with the deck on my left hand side
If that causes confusion say u play field spells and that misrepresented the game state, then the opponent can call a judge... If it has caused a misplay, even if the judge offers an accepted game state, he is likely going to prevent it from happening in the future, this request the deck be placed in the correct game mat location.
thanks for the ruling know how tbh i got screwed at my last regional because i didn't know these certain things anyways i just have one question is all since im going to nationals this year do they allow tokens inside your deck box or how would that work as far as where can tokens can go as far as nationals also this is my first nationals so idk tbh please reply if u can mst.tv and again thanks for the info once again
Tokens in the deckbox are fine as along as they are clearly tokens. When you get deck checked, if the tokens are tokens then ur fine..if your tokens can be misrepresented, they will warn u to remove the tokens.
Good info here, but I’d criticize the “master piece / Mechiba” example. Answering your opponents question about (if Mechiba would banish master piece) is coaching unless he commits to the play. If you bring a judge over they will not answer that question until the player commits. Hiding public knowledge would be more or less (not letting your opponent see your grave or hiding your board.) Or (adding a card from your deck with out showing it to your opponent.)
I should have worded it better for the master peace, mechaba thing. Here's what you can ask based on public knowledge and the answer won't be coaching. Coaching would involve giving advice towards an undetermined outcome and leading into an outcome, so ask for public knowledge definitions. 1. What is Master Peace immune to? (Thats public) 2. I want to make sure we have the same definition: What does it mean to be unaffected by Monster effects? (Usually a ruling dispute happens when the 2 definitions don't match) If you ask is Master Peace affected by Mechba's monster effect? ANSWER 1: I don't know ( lying after establishing a definition) ANSWER 2: He is unaffected to monster effects, what do you think? ( Still the truth) ANSWER 3: No, Master Peace is currently unaffected by any monster effects. (All of this is still public information) Coaching: If you ask: Will Mechaba banish Master Peace if I negate him? That would be leaning towards a coaching question. Just don't ask IF questions because those tend to end up being coaching answers, the judge will then say: I cannot answer as the situation has not happened yet. It is likely that a judge will find you very annoying for asking and would've preferred that you ask these before the event starts. The thin line of coaching vs public info.
Hiding public knowledge and lying about public knowledge are similar. Both are unethical and against policy used to make the opponent misplay. Because if you acquire any info that isn't public knowledge through the tactic or by accident, you can be penalized. Like saying Master Peace is immune to spell trap, but when you activate your monster effect vs it they "just so happen to remember" he is monster immune. That's thin ice.. Not telling how master Peace was summoned, "You should've paid attention" would be hiding info. Not revealing hand size. Not revealing when searching is not only hiding public info, it also is an irreparable game state if the card cannot be traced. If someone is obstructing the view of your board, that's misrepresenting game state not necessarily hiding info.
I hate the hand verification one, because people try to fuck me over with it a lot. As you said with Mind Crush. Like, Dragoons is at 2, the other copy is in the grave already and the other copy is now there from mind crush resolving you DONT get to look at my hand. Happens so much on DB.
I think that a better example of public knowledge is playing against mechaba, you can ask how many cards are in their hands, and they need to answer correctly
A lot of people (myself included) like to put their decks horizontally (as if it were in defense position) instead of the proper way, could this be considered as misrepresenting the game-state?
Just wanted to verify let’s just say I’m player A. Player B uses Beatrice on player A turn, to detach scarm, in end phase he searches tour guide. During players Bs turn is it still public knowledge that tour guide is in playe Bs hand?
We have to be specific here: Scarm's search target is public knowledge. You can confirm Scarm's search target at any given point in the game. You can ask for that. You can know of the existence of tour guide. Tour guide, when in the hand is not public knowledge. Your opponent does not have to show you that they still have it in hand. You have to deduce it. (Facedown and cards in hand are technically not public even if you already knew.)
At our locals we do five turn time just to do the same as a bigger event, then if the match would be a draw we just die roll for win since our system makes draws double losses
At ycs denver a deskbot player used machine duplication on his deskbot 002. I then asked a judge if his machine duplication would resolve if i chained my drident and targeted that monster. Is this considered public knowledge then? (Judge asked me if i’m going to chain my drident otherwise he wouldnt tell me what would happen)
Reason he’s asking if you would or wouldn’t is because he can’t coach you. If you have performed an action and want to know how the action works out then you have every right to ask, but if you want to know how the action works out before using the eff so that it’s beneficial to you then that is coaching.
Spyros Sakellariou lmao no, not only will the head judge not answer that, they can not answer that. In game a judge can not answer a question like that unless the action has been preformed. It is coaching because the judges answer will decide whether or not the player uses drident. I can see you do not go to many tournaments higher than locals very often.
I understand the bit about "coaching". In the video tombox used the example of "if i used my mechaba on a monster immune master peace, would master peace be banished". He then stated that you have to answer with the truth and said that you cant say "i dont know, you can find out by activating your card". This is where i got confusion regarding my drident scenario. Also, could i have worded my question to the judge to obtain better knowledge regarding if machine duplication would resolve summoning the monsters? Should i have said "does machine duplication resolve with its effect to special summon monster(s) if its target is no longer on the field upon machine duplication's resolution?"
Jonathan Ly Payia yeah he was wrong about that too, kind of. He's right you can't say I don't know, if you actually do. But you can literally say, I don't have to tell you that. Because you don't.
Jonathan Ly Payia likewise a judge can not tell him that unless he's activated mechaba.the judge can say, it's unaffected by monster effects. But if the owner of mechaba still doesn't understand that that means he won't get banished, the judge can't tell him that,
Jonathan Armijo the position of honest is public, so it technically has some attributes that's public. You can ask where the honest was flipped face down ,until something like magical hats is activated.
You can always ask questions about named cards. What is the defense of the card "Honest" is always fine. Asking which face down card is honest isn't fine after it is set face down, while it is being set you can double check.
quick question about the face-down cards. cards that were face-up and set face-down that turn by card effect (e.g. ultimate conductor tyranno effect), can you ask your opponent the defense/position of these cards? because I have heard that you can ask this for the turn that these cards were set face down by that effect only but not on a new turn.
Dave Phillips you can always ask the details of named cards but if your opponent can't tell you off the top of their head they don't have to reveal where it is. It's definitely allowed to check if he effect is still resolving, or if it was the last thing to happen. Some players are polite enough to extend to the turn but once a card is facedown you cannot ask "what is this card" since it is set and not public knowledge.
You should make a win condition video. Like could you lose from being forced to draw or mill. Like from a lightsworn effect, reincarnation, necfroface, etc.
The intro threw me off a little bit. Thanks for all of the tips. I think the billy brake situation begs a reminder that even bigger name players can get caught up on so much as a technicality. So keep it clean, keep it kosher with friends and don’t abuse the rules.
Soo basically if your opponent forgets to bring back their Omega once the game state is irreversible, then technically it's both players fault, correct?
If it is your own monster sure. Opponent's monster... You can ask "what IS (NAME OF MONSTERS) Printed card effect" they will have to answer u honestly. U cannot flip over your opponents card just to read it.
I have a friend who did this in later rounds at YCS, lots of fairy tail snows going around... even though his opponent didn't care a judge was walking by and gave him a game loss
I don't know man I don't consider a game only lasting 3 turns even a game at all. You should be able to take as many turns as you want untill a Victor is decided. As for card effects And what they do if your opponent asks to look at what you have in your graveyard Or want to pick up A faceup card you have on the field to read what it does you let them I have trouble with card effects all the time especially when learning a new deck or if I haven't played a specific deck in a long time Even when special summoning monsters from the graveyard Facedown you should at least be told the defense But if it's out of the hand or deck then no beacuse it's considered a newly played card. Life points are public knowledge Banished face up card are public knowledge Banished facedown is only knowledge to the one who banished them Both players hands are public knowledge But it is not knowledge that either of the two players share with each other unless a card effect says so So neither player can just look at the others hand. I know the rules and understand the common misconceptions This is a nice refresher course Since I have not been to any tournaments for at least 4 years. Alot has changed More or less Maybe even stuff I did not even know about back then Although I do have a bit of a vauge memory. Today's game Is more or less is Very combo oriented Which makes it hard for some of the older decks That need more than just a single turn to get a proper board set up.
one thing with your list, banish face-down should only be knowledge to the player that owns the card, not the player that banished the card (eater of millions banishes opponents monsters face down by its effect in battle). just a tip for your wording on this point as it may cause some confusion.
I didn't know splitting was wrong... Why should it be frowned upon? I usually split the prize and play anyway because I play for fun, but why would it be unfair to the other top 4 guys? They will get the same prize no matter what the top 2 decide to do with their stuff, I don't get it... It's just less stressful and more fun if you turn the stakes off for the last Duel, it's only locals
First of all at the lowest level, this is a form of collusion. Regardless of level of tournament. You feel relieved because you are basically securing the largest payout to you and the one who split with which wouldn't be fair to tie breakers. This is depending on the number of players at locals and prize distribution. If your locals has a larger number say 32 people and prize. Say the pool was 100 and this goes with a top heavy split. 40,20,10,10,5,5,5,5. Splitting guarantee the top 2 to secure 60. Where as if one won and 1 lost. Between those 2 players one potentially is at 10 or 5. Which is significantly lower. But all that means in splitting is that it forces everyone to the 10s and 5 even if they have better tie breakers because players chose to collude.
Unsporting Conduct - Minor (Warning) for rule-sharking. “Rule-sharking” is defined as “using rules and policy in an attempt to gain an advantage, rather than to ensure fair and consistent gameplay.” Genuinely wanting policy enforced is one thing, using policy as a weapon to gain advantage, such as only using the rule "to put your opponent on tilt", might just net you a penalty for rule-sharking.
I learnt tons of new things about rulings from this video! Thanks a ton! Will make sure to apply these at nats.
go whisper at maccas you dog
Learned not Learnt, but glad I also gained new knowledge as well from TomBox
While I knew most of that stuff already, it was a really interesting video.
If you want to read it, here is an old story from the good old days when Upper Deck (UD) ruled the tournaments:
Did you know that UD had a policy to upgrade Tournaments? No? Here is how I got to know about it...
I went to my locals wanting to win the damn thing after over a month of preparation and meta-calling and as I did not have a lot of money, I needed to play a budget version of the chaos decks that were running wild at the time, especially since it got ruled by our local judge that Cyber Dragon was legal for that event.
I had the strategy of playing chaos-recruiter-stun with TONS of draw cards like Des Lacooda, Skelangel etc. and ~12 traps, including anti-side-deck-techs like blast with chain (was a premium-out to Jinzo despite being a trap). So I got to the event and saw basically half of the top 8 players of my homecountry sitting there together and thought: Fuck, thats going to get rough. It wasn't. My local shop owner called UD as he wanted to report the extremely high amount of cossy points gathered there in the form of national players. UD decided that he had to give us a 4-rounds-swiss pre-tournament to balance-out the points given (note: The higher the number of points your opponent had, the more points you got when you beat him/her).
I teared through my first 2 games of swiss and then had to go against an old pal on mine that went 4th place in nationals the year before. A big fish. It was close, but I beat him 2-0 as he couldn't handle the burn-cards in my sidedeck and the draw power of my little monsters. 4 rounds of swiss went by and I defeated everyone 2-0, so I got into the main event with 4 perfect wins.
The pre-event filtered out half of the players and just 32 were left, all the big fishes and I included. In this short 4 rounds I had to go against every single one of the big players and somehow my deck steamrolled them as nobody thought that he had to play against burn, stun and chaos in a single functioning deck. In the finals, I lost due to 2 bricky opening hands and my opponent having a Cyber Dragon in both his opening hands. Wasn't glorious, but I felt great due to the wins I had.
AFTER the event our local shop owner called us and said that upperdeck called him back and told him that our gains in cossy points were alocated as if it were a big main event, thanks to the high quality of players. The event got upgraded! Thanks to this, I, someone without a single point beforehand, shot up to the top 30 players nationally (germany) due to my wins against big players.
Sorry for the long read, but this is and probably will forever be one of my favorite memories of Yu-Gi-Oh
So I only skimmed through this video, but some of the things I noticed:
Intentional Draws:
Being a locals is not a reason to downgrade the disqualification penalty to a warning for intentional draws. If it is determined that the Unsporting Conduct - Cheating infraction has been committed, the player(s) should be DQ'd from the event, and the proper statements and paperwork submitted to KDE. "Light to moderate rules enforcement" means that we make use of the caution penalty, are less strict with sleeve standards before making players re-sleeve their decks, etc. It doesn't mean we look the other way when people compromise the integrity of the event. As per Konami policy: "Tournament Policy and Penalty Guidelines still
apply at these levels, but the focus is on fostering a friendly and fun atmosphere for Duelists to play in." Downgrading the penalty for an intentional draw to a warning doesn't do anything to help foster a friendly and fun atmosphere. As you explained, it does just the opposite.
Public Knowledge:
Asking about the result of an action that you are considering is not public knowledge. You're not asking about a game mechanic, you're asking whether or not this play is optimal. This is coaching, and a judge will not answer. You can ask about a game mechanic, but you really shouldn't be relating it to the current game state to avoid any potential coaching problems.
"If you're purposely trying to misrepresent the game you'll probably get a warning":
No. Intentionally misrepresenting the game state is an Unsporting Conduct - Cheating infraction, the penalty for which is not a warning, it is disqualification without prize. Intent is a key element of policy. All infractions, except for unsporting conduct, are only committed unintentionally. Any intentional violation of the rules is Unsporting Conduct. All other infractions (Procedural Error, Deck Error, Drawing Cards, etc.) are unintentional.
Verification:
Tournament Policy says:
"While resolving an effect that asks for a card in the hand to be verified - if all legal copies of that specific card can be accounted for, (Public Knowledge areas, etc), the hand does not need to be revealed; unless an effect specifically allows the Duelist to do so.
***In the case where an effect requires the hand to be revealed, the opponent may read every card in the hand.*** This verification must be done in a timely manner so as to not hold up the current Duel."
Being a locals: it can all be prevented by simply not having draws all together by using the intended end of match procedure.
As for the hand reveal, I interepreted as if a card effect REQUIRES to reveal the hand, you can read each card even if it is unrelated to the card effect at hand. I did not include card effects that do not contain/require reveal hand, but cannot confirm copies.
Because those cards no not require hand revealing, to me they are not included.
It's similar to why when a player activates, B buster dragon and C crush wyvern, you have to assume C crush wyvern is legal. You can't check if it was.. that would be a gray area.
Aye, you can't have draws at locals so that wasn't really the issue I was addressing. If the event is allowing draws at locals there are far more serious issues at hand. I was moreso addressing your interpretating and application of policy: the event being a locals does not mean you take cheating infractions less seriously. Policy takes the cheating infraction, and the disqualification penalty, **very** seriously, regardless of the level of event.
Regarding verification, your comparisons aren't valid. Verification is required to confirm that an effect has resolved properly (or to confirm that it can no longer be resolved properly), but we do not perform verification to confirm that activations are legal. (This is a whole different discussion.) As with the Sangan example provided for in the document, the player does not just "glace" at the card to confirm it is a monster with the appropriate stat, the player can read the entire card. The same with a card such as Mind Crush, if you can't account for all legal copies of the declared card, the hand must be revealed. The player can then read each card in the hand in a timely manner, so as not to delay the current duel.
With respect, you haven't done a very good job of conveying neither the letter of the law, nor the spirit of the law with respect to KDE's policy in this video.
How would you stop someone from claiming you broke a rule, assuming that nothing was done despite their claim?
I don't really like people playing with there deck and banish piles in the wrong area just feels sketchy
That's why I always place it in the right place
Had somone switch their grave with their banished once.
Question: I have those God Cards that say "this card can't be used in a duel", just like all the token cards. They also just have a description, not the actual effect.
Am I allowed to use these as tokens.? Or would it be a misrepresentation of the game state because they could be mistaken for the real good cards.?
So, if I activated one of the virus traps(that are worth anything), it says check all cards my opponent controls, would I be able to read every card in their hand? Or would I have to pray I have a good enough memory from the glance through to confirm all possible affected cards are destroyed?
To add to this video:
- End of match procedure is variable, locals can choose to enforce which to use; T1 or T2 since the difference is minor. It also allows TO's to prevent draws or allow them depending on the environment of the local event, and sometimes having players use the one they've seen at a regional is simpler. Consistently using one is most important.
- Players do not have to answer questions about potential gamestates, and judges should be careful not to coach in this scenario, however you are right that lying about it is a penalty. This mostly comes under the advice that is repeated throughout the game: You must know what your cards do. If you are not sure about some commonly occuring things (i.e. X vs Master Peace) then talk to a judge before the event.
- You are missing the point of the named cards stuff I think. Named cards is fine but asking with the intent to get your opponent to reveal where that card is is a Major penalty. If ever in doubt call a judge don't get angry with an opponent. This is a common question and very few judges will be surprised by it.
It is worth everyone who wants to play Yugioh for a significant amount of time to read the tournament documentation, the PSCT blog posts and to take the judge test to check your proficiency.
Fair point all around.
Asking for a generic card name and it's printed text is legal, it is however it is also the truth if you don't know the answer off the top of your head. If u already set the monster and it's no longer there, the truth would be I dunno and if I checked would give u access to non public information. That is also valid answer.
Remember I only said answer with the truth and only lying would offer a penalty.
EOM is not variable. You cannot have draws at a local level. You use the appropriate EOM procedures for the tournament tier.
Shurtugal998 afraid this is not what I've got from 3 national coordinators within the organised play scheme. I was strict about it previously but T1 event structure simply exists as an alternative to the t2 which is more suitable under certain conditions, so while recommend for a local setting the to or head judge has final disrection.
Nowhere in policy does it give a TO or a HJ the right to choose which EOM procedures they use. They are violating KDE policy by using the wrong EOM procedure.
I think you are misunderstanding the point of the policy. Rights are not awarded to TO/HJ from policy.
If you do not understand the context and how judges adhere to and enforce the policy I don't see the point discussing this further.
What do you think the reasoning for there even being a difference is?
Hey, around the 6 minute mark you suggest that if a player doesn’t know how an interaction will go then they can call a judge and ask. If they have not yet committed an action then receiving this information would be coaching which is not permitted. It is fine to ask a judge after a play has been attempted but not before as judges cannot give information mid match about interactions which have not begun.
There are always ways to ask without it being coaching with just public knowledge. As a player is entitled to definition based on Card Text alone. A player shouldn't be asking a judge for interaction OUTCOMES, or how to play, but there is a gray area.
A player CAN ask say to items that are currently public knowledge: Unaffected by monster effect and what does that mean?
A judge can answer it as it it is public knowledge and it doesn't directly reveal any sort of plays.
"The definition of "unaffected" means Monster Effect will not apply to the card"
Based on that definition: You can ask your opponent, does that mean Mechaba's effect does not apply to Master Peace currently. And the player must answer truthfully.
Say the player activated the effect of Mechaba and attempted to negate/ remove Master Peace's effect after lying to his opponent saying he could get removed... then said nevermind it doesn't work and you committed to that move, that is misrepresenting the game state.
Never ask a judge for an outcome or IF I DO tHIS then Can I do that? That is Coaching. They wont give it to you. As what isn't public knowledge is how the board would end up, any of that information would yes be on the coaching side.
hmm do you think people who plays with horizontal decks, would hold a handgun sideways?
It is important to activate and to resolve cards properly in order to maintain game state. Like using Miracle Fertilizer but not sending it to grave after a monster summoned through its effect leaves the field via a synchro summon for example. It could be noticed the mistake was made a few turns later but at that point game state is already ruined.
Hey Tombox(or anyone who knows for that matter), how do rulings for hand verification work with cards on the limited/ban list?
Example being something like calling monster reborn with mind crush or harpies feather duster.
If u call harpies feather duster... With mind crush. There is 0 legal copies. You don't check and u discard randomly
If monster reborn is public in the grave and u call reborn with mind crush. No check. Key note: all legal copies are visible
Are you allowed to look at an opponent facedown defense card that has been previously flipped facedown by card effect such as book of moon or fairy tail - snow?
Michael Ngo no you cannot flip it. You can ask for the stats of card name, but you cannot flip the card to check. The moment the card flips face down its card text is no longer public.
MST.TV Okay, Thanks!
So with the mat if my opponent has same colored mat like dark blue no art and uses dark blue sleeves can I ask him to use a different colored mat and is it required of him
Only if you really can't see! Like it's super matte and blends in 70% then you can request it and have a judge follow up. It is not required of him. Especially when the hue is different or the sleeves are reflective enough
So does this mean I am not allowed to have tokens on my extra deck? I should put them next to it? What should I do if at a tournament, someone has like 4 tokens on their 15 card extra deck? Is this fine or should I also call a judge for this?
So if I search for a card and then keep it in hand and pass, can my opponent then ask later if they "know any cards in my hand"? Would it just be up to them to keep track of it or do I have to say "I haven't used the wisdom eye I searched earlier" or something? I've always heard it was the latter but that just seems like bull
Bulbasam 214 they can ask you what did you search with that previous card and deduce it himself. In that case you have to answer, I searched wisdom eye.
Am I able to "shuffle" / change positions of my cards in my own GY? For example, before activating "Question" is it allowed? I guess nobody plays the card but Lightsworn or BA players are moving their GY a lot and change card's position during every game
(Question: When activating this card, your opponent cannot check cards in the Graveyard. Your opponent calls the name of the first monster found at the bottom of your Graveyard. If he/she calls it right, the monster is removed from play. If he/she calls it wrong, the monster is Special Summoned to your side of the field).
No
It's due to game state
Thank you! ^^
i keep getting people putting their decks on the left where their extra deck goes and their extra where their main deck is supposed to go. i keep getting on them about it but they keep doing it. since i'm the main judge at my locals, should i be issuing warnings about it, and ramping up the penalty if it keeps up?
FeanixFlamage i like mill decks and say if im activating grass then I prefer to mill the cards with my right hand, it just feels more comfortable with the deck on my left hand side
but that's not where your deck goes. he even points out in the video that it's against the rules.
Yes. At least for the older players
If that causes confusion say u play field spells and that misrepresented the game state, then the opponent can call a judge... If it has caused a misplay, even if the judge offers an accepted game state, he is likely going to prevent it from happening in the future, this request the deck be placed in the correct game mat location.
The bro is probably just left handed. I wouldn't be that guy if I were you. There are way worse rules to break in the game
Can I check a card text on the phone if I suspect my opponent is lying?
No you cannot use any electronic device to get access, just ask a judge but make sure u know whether or not the information is public
Is asking a question about a named card that is yet to be revealed legal?
All card data and printed text is public knowledge
thanks for the ruling know how tbh i got screwed at my last regional because i didn't know these certain things anyways i just have one question is all since im going to nationals this year do they allow tokens inside your deck box or how would that work as far as where can tokens can go as far as nationals also this is my first nationals so idk tbh please reply if u can mst.tv and again thanks for the info once again
Tokens in the deckbox are fine as along as they are clearly tokens. When you get deck checked, if the tokens are tokens then ur fine..if your tokens can be misrepresented, they will warn u to remove the tokens.
Good info here, but I’d criticize the “master piece / Mechiba” example. Answering your opponents question about (if Mechiba would banish master piece) is coaching unless he commits to the play. If you bring a judge over they will not answer that question until the player commits. Hiding public knowledge would be more or less (not letting your opponent see your grave or hiding your board.) Or (adding a card from your deck with out showing it to your opponent.)
I should have worded it better for the master peace, mechaba thing. Here's what you can ask based on public knowledge and the answer won't be coaching. Coaching would involve giving advice towards an undetermined outcome and leading into an outcome, so ask for public knowledge definitions.
1. What is Master Peace immune to? (Thats public)
2. I want to make sure we have the same definition: What does it mean to be unaffected by Monster effects?
(Usually a ruling dispute happens when the 2 definitions don't match)
If you ask is Master Peace affected by Mechba's monster effect?
ANSWER 1: I don't know ( lying after establishing a definition)
ANSWER 2: He is unaffected to monster effects, what do you think? ( Still the truth)
ANSWER 3: No, Master Peace is currently unaffected by any monster effects. (All of this is still public information)
Coaching:
If you ask: Will Mechaba banish Master Peace if I negate him? That would be leaning towards a coaching question. Just don't ask IF questions because those tend to end up being coaching answers, the judge will then say: I cannot answer as the situation has not happened yet.
It is likely that a judge will find you very annoying for asking and would've preferred that you ask these before the event starts. The thin line of coaching vs public info.
Hiding public knowledge and lying about public knowledge are similar. Both are unethical and against policy used to make the opponent misplay. Because if you acquire any info that isn't public knowledge through the tactic or by accident, you can be penalized.
Like saying Master Peace is immune to spell trap, but when you activate your monster effect vs it they "just so happen to remember" he is monster immune. That's
thin ice..
Not telling how master Peace was summoned, "You should've paid attention" would be hiding info.
Not revealing hand size.
Not revealing when searching is not only hiding public info, it also is an irreparable game state if the card cannot be traced.
If someone is obstructing the view of your board, that's misrepresenting game state not necessarily hiding info.
I hate the hand verification one, because people try to fuck me over with it a lot. As you said with Mind Crush. Like, Dragoons is at 2, the other copy is in the grave already and the other copy is now there from mind crush resolving you DONT get to look at my hand. Happens so much on DB.
I think that a better example of public knowledge is playing against mechaba, you can ask how many cards are in their hands, and they need to answer correctly
A lot of people (myself included) like to put their decks horizontally (as if it were in defense position) instead of the proper way, could this be considered as misrepresenting the game-state?
ogeid772 it's ok as long as both players are ok with it and it lower event
Could you do a ruling on bagooska?
C Kalfus I could
Just wanted to verify let’s just say I’m player A. Player B uses Beatrice on player A turn, to detach scarm, in end phase he searches tour guide. During players Bs turn is it still public knowledge that tour guide is in playe Bs hand?
We have to be specific here:
Scarm's search target is public knowledge. You can confirm Scarm's search target at any given point in the game. You can ask for that. You can know of the existence of tour guide.
Tour guide, when in the hand is not public knowledge. Your opponent does not have to show you that they still have it in hand. You have to deduce it.
(Facedown and cards in hand are technically not public even if you already knew.)
MST.TV perfect makes sense.
At our locals we do five turn time just to do the same as a bigger event, then if the match would be a draw we just die roll for win since our system makes draws double losses
At ycs denver a deskbot player used machine duplication on his deskbot 002. I then asked a judge if his machine duplication would resolve if i chained my drident and targeted that monster. Is this considered public knowledge then?
(Judge asked me if i’m going to chain my drident otherwise he wouldnt tell me what would happen)
Reason he’s asking if you would or wouldn’t is because he can’t coach you. If you have performed an action and want to know how the action works out then you have every right to ask, but if you want to know how the action works out before using the eff so that it’s beneficial to you then that is coaching.
Spyros Sakellariou lmao no, not only will the head judge not answer that, they can not answer that. In game a judge can not answer a question like that unless the action has been preformed. It is coaching because the judges answer will decide whether or not the player uses drident. I can see you do not go to many tournaments higher than locals very often.
I understand the bit about "coaching".
In the video tombox used the example of "if i used my mechaba on a monster immune master peace, would master peace be banished". He then stated that you have to answer with the truth and said that you cant say "i dont know, you can find out by activating your card". This is where i got confusion regarding my drident scenario.
Also, could i have worded my question to the judge to obtain better knowledge regarding if machine duplication would resolve summoning the monsters?
Should i have said "does machine duplication resolve with its effect to special summon monster(s) if its target is no longer on the field upon machine duplication's resolution?"
Jonathan Ly Payia yeah he was wrong about that too, kind of. He's right you can't say I don't know, if you actually do. But you can literally say, I don't have to tell you that. Because you don't.
Jonathan Ly Payia likewise a judge can not tell him that unless he's activated mechaba.the judge can say, it's unaffected by monster effects. But if the owner of mechaba still doesn't understand that that means he won't get banished, the judge can't tell him that,
Would an honest that was face up on the field then set face down would still be considered public knowledge if I ask what was the defense of it?
Jonathan Armijo the position of honest is public, so it technically has some attributes that's public. You can ask where the honest was flipped face down ,until something like magical hats is activated.
as he stated. only if you ask the question properly. "What is the defense of Honest?" is appropriate because it was public
You can always ask questions about named cards. What is the defense of the card "Honest" is always fine. Asking which face down card is honest isn't fine after it is set face down, while it is being set you can double check.
quick question about the face-down cards. cards that were face-up and set face-down that turn by card effect (e.g. ultimate conductor tyranno effect), can you ask your opponent the defense/position of these cards? because I have heard that you can ask this for the turn that these cards were set face down by that effect only but not on a new turn.
Dave Phillips you can always ask the details of named cards but if your opponent can't tell you off the top of their head they don't have to reveal where it is.
It's definitely allowed to check if he effect is still resolving, or if it was the last thing to happen. Some players are polite enough to extend to the turn but once a card is facedown you cannot ask "what is this card" since it is set and not public knowledge.
What if it is a card limited to 1 like book of moon
If someone gets really butthurt because they just got bodied, are you allowed to sprinkle alittle salt on the table to purify their scrubbery?
Sure why not?..... Wait...
Honestly though, as long as you don't escalate a preventable incident... Sure, but use clear judgment
You should make a win condition video. Like could you lose from being forced to draw or mill. Like from a lightsworn effect, reincarnation, necfroface, etc.
So in proper game state where does your banished pile go?
Somewhere on the table that isn't any of the other zones. There no zone for it. But it must be visible to you and your opponent.
I put it sideways above my grave usually seems like what every one around where I live does that
The intro threw me off a little bit. Thanks for all of the tips. I think the billy brake situation begs a reminder that even bigger name players can get caught up on so much as a technicality. So keep it clean, keep it kosher with friends and don’t abuse the rules.
Can you know how many cards people sided?
No. You cannot. You can only know the total number of the side deck itself, but not how many went in or out.
Soo basically if your opponent forgets to bring back their Omega once the game state is irreversible, then technically it's both players fault, correct?
rfitz yes
rfitz your opponent is supposed to remind you of mandatory effects same as you also you are required both both player to specify effects
When a monster is hit with book of moon can I flip it over to read it's effects?
If it is your own monster sure. Opponent's monster... You can ask "what IS (NAME OF MONSTERS) Printed card effect" they will have to answer u honestly. U cannot flip over your opponents card just to read it.
no u cant he riigth only if it your own moster
I have a friend who did this in later rounds at YCS, lots of fairy tail snows going around... even though his opponent didn't care a judge was walking by and gave him a game loss
MST.TV thanks for the response
Adriaan Lagerwaard wow that hurts
I don't know man
I don't consider a game only lasting 3 turns even a game at all.
You should be able to take as many turns as you want untill a Victor is decided.
As for card effects
And what they do if your opponent asks to look at what you have in your graveyard
Or want to pick up
A faceup card you have on the field to read what it does you let them
I have trouble with card effects all the time especially when learning a new deck or if I haven't played a specific deck in a long time
Even when special summoning monsters from the graveyard
Facedown you should at least be told the defense
But if it's out of the hand or deck then no beacuse it's considered a newly played card.
Life points are public knowledge
Banished face up card are public knowledge
Banished facedown is only knowledge to the one who banished them
Both players hands are public knowledge
But it is not knowledge that either of the two players share with each other unless a card effect says so
So neither player can just look at the others hand.
I know the rules and understand the common misconceptions
This is a nice refresher course
Since I have not been to any tournaments for at least 4 years. Alot has changed
More or less
Maybe even stuff I did not even know about back then
Although I do have a bit of a vauge memory.
Today's game Is more or less is
Very combo oriented
Which makes it hard for some of the older decks
That need more than just a single turn to get a proper board set up.
one thing with your list, banish face-down should only be knowledge to the player that owns the card, not the player that banished the card (eater of millions banishes opponents monsters face down by its effect in battle). just a tip for your wording on this point as it may cause some confusion.
Dave Phillips well that was what I was trying to say
In a way
That's why I said unless s card effect says so
roll for it every time not taking 1 point
my locals doesnt let you tie a game
That's good... A game or match? Match then they are doing the right thing according to the v1.3 of the policy.
MST.TV a match
I didn't know splitting was wrong...
Why should it be frowned upon? I usually split the prize and play anyway because I play for fun, but why would it be unfair to the other top 4 guys? They will get the same prize no matter what the top 2 decide to do with their stuff, I don't get it... It's just less stressful and more fun if you turn the stakes off for the last Duel, it's only locals
First of all at the lowest level, this is a form of collusion. Regardless of level of tournament.
You feel relieved because you are basically securing the largest payout to you and the one who split with which wouldn't be fair to tie breakers.
This is depending on the number of players at locals and prize distribution. If your locals has a larger number say 32 people and prize. Say the pool was 100 and this goes with a top heavy split. 40,20,10,10,5,5,5,5.
Splitting guarantee the top 2 to secure 60. Where as if one won and 1 lost.
Between those 2 players one potentially is at 10 or 5. Which is significantly lower. But all that means in splitting is that it forces everyone to the 10s and 5 even if they have better tie breakers because players chose to collude.
It's can screw people out of prizing
I hate it when people place the deck in the wrong place.
Place them on tilt by asking them to put it in the right position.
Then call a judge if they refuse... #playproperly
Unsporting Conduct - Minor (Warning) for rule-sharking.
“Rule-sharking” is defined as “using rules and policy in an attempt to gain an advantage, rather than to ensure fair and consistent gameplay.”
Genuinely wanting policy enforced is one thing, using policy as a weapon to gain advantage, such as only using the rule "to put your opponent on tilt", might just net you a penalty for rule-sharking.
Screw the rules, I have loopholes!
I played the same guy 2 weeks in a row and I was trying to evenly him and he mind crush and I had all 3 in my hand
*Plays path of destiny to decide the game with a dice roll*
12:40 he said dodo
they call mr x-1 at locals always 2nd or 3rd place when will it end!
JJJ MVP1 if you have 16+ players maybe not. If 2 undefeated players play and 1 loses, I've seen people drop to 7th.
Some guy played mind crush on me I tricked him with evenly Can he take a pic of my hand
I got tricked before....go into battle phase...
So I planned to trick him and it worked
He can look in the real world for confirmation