Since this has come up a couple of times, and the current policy differs from what is written in the most current version of the Penalty Guidelines, I decided to create this thread. I've also asked Craven to sticky it, since it does differ from the written Penalty Guidelines and may be confusing to some who are not aware of it.
As written in the Penalty Guidelines, the "fix" that is mentioned is to reveal the card that was looked at to both players and then to put it back where it came from. In most cases, the top of the library. And the policy very directly mentions that shuffling the deck should be avoided. So, this is why the new policy is so different. Anyhow, this is a copy of the [O]fficial policy:
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 12:44:15 -0600 Reply-To: Certified DCI Judges Mailing List <DCIJUDGE-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM> Sender: Certified DCI Judges Mailing List <DCIJUDGE-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM> From: Scott Marshall <scott_j_marshall_jr@YAHOO.COM> Subject: New policy for handling Looking At Extra Cards Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
This is the new policy regarding Looking At Extra Cards. You may begin to follow this policy immediately - yes, that includes this Saturday's Championships.
(Kudos to Toby Elliott and the many other judges who helped prepare this document!)
Thanks! -- Scott Marshall <scott_j_marshall_jr@yahoo.com>
DCIJUDGE-L NetRep, L3, Denver
Card Drawing - Looking at Extra Cards
Players are considered to have looked at a card when a card is moved any significant amount from a deck, but before it touches the other cards in their hand. This includes errors of dexterity or catching a play error before the card is placed into their hand. Once a card has been placed into their hand or if a player takes a game action after removing the card from the library, the penalty is Card Drawing - Drawing Extra Cards.
A player is not considered to have looked at extra cards when he or she places a card face down on the table (without looking at the card) in an effort to count out cards he or she will draw.
This penalty should be applied only once to one or more cards if they are seen in the same action or sequence of actions.
Examples
(A) A player accidentally reveals (drops, flips over) a card while shuffling her opponent's deck.
(B) A player flips over an extra card while drawing from his deck.
(C) A player sees the bottom card of her deck when presenting it to her opponent for cutting/shuffling
(D) A player takes a card from her opponent's deck instead of her own.
(E) A player activates a Sensei's Divining Top that is no longer in play, and sees 3 cards before the mistake is noticed.
Philosophy
A player can accidentally look at extra cards very easily, so the penalty is less severe than Card Drawing Ñ Drawing Extra Cards. Drawing extra cards is a separate, more severe penalty because of the increased potential for abuse.
Penalty
In addition to the appropriate penalty, the situation should always be corrected. The player should shuffle the randomized portion of his deck (which may include the cards that were seen, if they were part of the random portion of the library). This requires first determining if any portion of the deck is non-random, such as cards that have been manipulated on the top or bottom of the library, and separating those. Once the deck has been shuffled, any manipulated cards should be returned to their correct locations.
Players should not be using this penalty to get a "free shuffle," or to attempt to shuffle away cards they don't want to draw. This should be considered Cheating - Fraud and penalized accordingly.
Discussion
Two changes have been made to the penalty: a clarification of the difference between Looking at Extra Cards and Drawing Extra Cards (which will need to be modified to reflect this), and a change to how the judge should handle the situation. The penalty itself remains the same as it was across all RELs.
A card is now considered drawn once it touches the other cards in a player's hand. Even if both players believe they can identify the card in question afterwards, the potential for abuse necessitates the stronger penalty at that point. Up until then, the card is easily identified and the situation can be rectified. If the player has an empty hand when drawing the card, use your best judgement as to when it should be considered drawn; bringing the hands together is an excellent sign.
In the past, the resolution of the penalty has been for the judge to reveal the card to both players, then return it to the appropriate position, usually on top of the deck. The problem with this approach is that the additional information is likely to benefit one of the players and affect the resulting game play. By shuffling the deck, the state of the game has been restored to the point it was at before the card was accidentally revealed.
Care must be taken before shuffling to make sure that there are no "legally known" cards in the library. Check with both players to verify this, and check the graveyard, removed from game and in-play zones for deck manipulation cards, such as Brainstorm and cards with the Scry mechanic. Sensei's Divining Top can move itself up to three cards down in the library, so it is important to ask both players to make sure something has not been missed.
Players should not be allowed to use this penalty as a stalling mechanism. The deck is already randomized, so shuffling in the revealed cards should not involve an excessive amount of effort. Make sure to give sufficient extra time to account for the shuffling.
In summary, the way that this should be handled at all DCI events is:
1.) Reveal card to both players. Identify the "extra card(s)" that were seen. Set it aside, unrevealed to the opponent.
2.) Identify cards in the library that are already known (such as cards put back on top of the Library from Plow Under) and remove them from the Library.
3.) Take the remaining portion of the Library (consisting of unknown cards in a random arrangment) and shuffle the revealedextra card(s) back into the Library.
4.) Put the known cards back into their proper place.
5.) Warning to the offending player.
So, now, the deck is indeed shuffled to return the unknown portion of the deck to a randomized condition (the card is no longer "just returned" from whence it came). And that is an important thing for players to remember; keep track of cards that you know the position of in the Library. If you had a card put on the top or bottom of your Library, those need to be identified so that a judge can apply the "fix" properly. The policy has judges leave known cards alone, and only shuffle the unknown portion (which includes the extra card that was just revealed).
If you are uncertain of this fix, and don't necessarily understand it, then please post questions to this thread. That way any of the certified judges and rules gurus can respond and clarify things. Yes, it is a very different policy than what you have previously known, and yes it may not be the easiest thing to put your hands around; but any of the judges and rules gurus should be able to help you to understand the new policy. Especially as it will probably come up a few times during tournaments (as Binary has pointed out, this definitely is important to remember with Dredge).
When the new Penalty Guidelines are issued, hopefully in the near future, the appropriate section of that document will be updated to reflect this new policy. Until then, please consider this the actually policy (which supercedes that written in the PGs).
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
If there are cards that were put back on top of the library by some spell or ability, and the offending player did draw/see an extra card that he wasn't supposed to, then wouldn't he be just looking at the revealed cards on top of the library? If so, then wouldn't we need two ways to handle this? One for if the card is already known and one for if it isn't. If the card isn't known then shuffle the libray minus any known cards on the bottom, if it is known just leave it there? long-term plans would be the only card that i could see causing a problem with this. Ideally you would get that card out, shuffle the library and then put it in the correct position again.
hey i overlooked the fact that someone could possibly draw more than 1 extra card, or because of things like howling mine draw past the known cards on top of the library. this whole situation is very... situational? i still think there maybe be instances where the card should just be put back on top instead of the library being shuffled: ie drawing an extra card that is a known card.
If the only card that was accidentally looked at was known, then yes, you don't need to shuffle - the randomness of the library has not been disturbed. Then you just issue a warning and move on.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
hey i overlooked the fact that someone could possibly draw more than 1 extra card, or because of things like howling mine draw past the known cards on top of the library. this whole situation is very... situational? i still think there maybe be instances where the card should just be put back on top instead of the library being shuffled: ie drawing an extra card that is a known card.
In more exceptional circumstances, the game state may possibly be irrepairable and merits an upgrade to a Game Loss. This could be in such circumstances as to where it may be impossible to tell which card was the "extra" card and several were drawn/looked at, where there may be problems in identifying manipulated cards, etc. In which case, the integrity of the game has been impaired such that the game cannot be completed to a fair conclusion for either player.
As for not shuffling the deck and simply putting it back on top, that would have to be an exceptional circumstance in order for that to happen. The Penalty Guidelines exist to ensure that all judges follow the same approach, and the one thing the DCI stresses above all others is that we should be applying these guidelines in nearly every circumstance (only deviating when it is truly unique). So I won't say that there'll never be a circumstance where putting the card back on top and not shuffling is the correct solution, it is definitely not the standard policy and should be done in truly unique circumstances.
Was playing a 24K event last week, was in the last round of swiss. Game 2, In turns. I had a Maga in play, 22/22, with a faith's fetters on it, my opponent had no blockers and no instants in his hand (Zur's Wierding) and was at 1.
During his turn, he did "stuff" (None of it affected the gamestate, really...) and then Milled me with a millstone. I took the top 2 cards off my library, and then the player was told that he didn't have enough mana to do that - I hadn't revealed the cards yet, only I had seen them - and I asked the judge what should happen.
He had not seen the cards, and the top card of the mill was the 1x Naturalize in my deck. He told me to put the cards back on top of the library in the correct order, and continue play. I drew the naturalize and won (obv.)
Was the judge correct in his ruling?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: Dominium Eminens
Legacy: UB Tezz (Check out My Primer at TheSource)
Vinitage: Oath
Now that is a prime example of looking at extra cards. You definitely should have had them shuffled in. If the judge didn't notice that you had seen them, though, that could have caused the deviation from policy.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
I have a Mindmoil deck. What happens if I've already gone through the entire deck and then accidently look at an extra card. My library is now non-random, but I don't (or didn't) know the location of any but a few key cards.
Putting the card back would give me an information advantage, but shuffling would give me a disadvantage (as I count cards to my Niv-Mizzets)
I have a Mindmoil deck. What happens if I've already gone through the entire deck and then accidently look at an extra card. My library is now non-random, but I don't (or didn't) know the location of any but a few key cards.
I presume it is a situation where you've Mindmoiled through your deck (effectively stacking it), and then you use Sensei's Divining Top and look at the top 4 cards as opposed to the top 3? An argument could probably be made that this may not be Looking at Extra Cards on the basis that the card wasn't some unknown card that you randomly revealed, but rather a card that you knew was there. In which case, it's not like you gained any additional information (although, you may have reminded yourself of what card was there if you had forgotten what it was); which is ostensibly why the policy on looking at extra cards is what it is.
This may be an instance where the card is simply put back where it was, as opposed to shuffling the deck. The same could potentially happen if you had been hit by Plow Under and in the process of drawing for the turn, you accidentally flip over the second card in the deck (which was the second land that was put back). Again, the card is already known and you gained no additional info from this. So, there's not really any reason the deck needs to be shuffled (especially as we don't want "known" cards shuffled into the unknown portion of the deck anyhow).
Here's another case where shuffling the deck due to looking at extra cards could prove to dissadvantage/advantage certain players. Say i cast a Condemn on his only Keiga, the Tide Star putting it to the bottom of his library, then he "Accidentally" looks at too many cards causing a library shuffle, putting that Meloku possibly back up to the top of his library which could in turn lose me the game? Is that what would happen, or would his meloku on the bottom of his library also be set aside. there are alot of cards that cause effects like this, i play with both Hinder and Condemn, so i could have multiple cards put to the bottom of his library. and say he possibly could have shuffled in between some of them going and we cant agree on what cards remain on the bottom of his library? I like the old ruling better, seems more logical to me. because any way you look at it, shuffling a library out of place is completely destroying the game state. Because now your not drawing the cards you would have, even if you didnt know what they were going to be they were still there, about to be drawn
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I See Says the Blind Pissing Into the Wind... It's All Coming Back to me Now.
First Turn: Glitterfang - Attack - Remove Red Myojin 2x for 2x Blazing Shoal Targetting Glitterfang causing 21 Damage first turn.
Its only a 6 card combo.
Collecting Wee Dragonaut's as of January 21st 2006
20 Regular
1 Foil
Here's another case where shuffling the deck due to looking at extra cards could prove to dissadvantage/advantage certain players. Say i cast a Condemn on his only Keiga, the Tide Star putting it to the bottom of his library, then he "Accidentally" looks at too many cards causing a library shuffle, putting that Meloku possibly back up to the top of his library which could in turn lose me the game? Is that what would happen, or would his meloku on the bottom of his library also be set aside. there are alot of cards that cause effects like this, i play with both Hinder and Condemn, so i could have multiple cards put to the bottom of his library. and say he possibly could have shuffled in between some of them going and we cant agree on what cards remain on the bottom of his library? I like the old ruling better, seems more logical to me. because any way you look at it, shuffling a library out of place is completely destroying the game state. Because now your not drawing the cards you would have, even if you didnt know what they were going to be they were still there, about to be drawn
Well, if you count the number of such effects you've resolved, which are *probably* in your graveyard (since no one plays Stream of Consciousness, ), you could just take that many cards off the bottom of his deck, still leaving them face-down even, and then shuffle the rest of the library. Then return those cards to the bottom.
It's still reparable. What sucks is if he goes and shuffles anyway. . and then you've got to establish whether it was an honest mistake.... lousy....
I have the same deck, so I've thought about these things very carefully.;)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
nonetheless IMHO Shuffling a deck without a proper effect causing the shuffle is ruining a game state. Because it just completely altered the turnout of where the game would have went. Just showoff the card that was seen and put it back ontop or wherever it should be.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I See Says the Blind Pissing Into the Wind... It's All Coming Back to me Now.
First Turn: Glitterfang - Attack - Remove Red Myojin 2x for 2x Blazing Shoal Targetting Glitterfang causing 21 Damage first turn.
Its only a 6 card combo.
Collecting Wee Dragonaut's as of January 21st 2006
20 Regular
1 Foil
The idea behind the current policy with the shuffling is that players' libraries are supposed to be completely random (with the obvious exception of things that have been placedsomewhere or looked at). So, if your library is completely random, shuffling it will not change the fact that the cards are completely random.
The idea is, what any given card in a player's library is may as well not be determined by anything until someone looks at that card, so if they weren't supposed to look at the card, re-randomizing the deck fixes the problem. In theory, the top card of your library could be anything before you look at it, so if you look at it at the wrong time and then shuffle your library, it still could be anything, hence, no harm done.
As written in the Penalty Guidelines, the "fix" that is mentioned is to reveal the card that was looked at to both players and then to put it back where it came from. In most cases, the top of the library. And the policy very directly mentions that shuffling the deck should be avoided. So, this is why the new policy is so different. Anyhow, this is a copy of the [O]fficial policy:
In summary, the way that this should be handled at all DCI events is:
1.)
Reveal card to both players.Identify the "extra card(s)" that were seen. Set it aside, unrevealed to the opponent.2.) Identify cards in the library that are already known (such as cards put back on top of the Library from Plow Under) and remove them from the Library.
3.) Take the remaining portion of the Library (consisting of unknown cards in a random arrangment) and shuffle the
revealedextra card(s) back into the Library.4.) Put the known cards back into their proper place.
5.) Warning to the offending player.
So, now, the deck is indeed shuffled to return the unknown portion of the deck to a randomized condition (the card is no longer "just returned" from whence it came). And that is an important thing for players to remember; keep track of cards that you know the position of in the Library. If you had a card put on the top or bottom of your Library, those need to be identified so that a judge can apply the "fix" properly. The policy has judges leave known cards alone, and only shuffle the unknown portion (which includes the extra card
that was just revealed).If you are uncertain of this fix, and don't necessarily understand it, then please post questions to this thread. That way any of the certified judges and rules gurus can respond and clarify things. Yes, it is a very different policy than what you have previously known, and yes it may not be the easiest thing to put your hands around; but any of the judges and rules gurus should be able to help you to understand the new policy. Especially as it will probably come up a few times during tournaments (as Binary has pointed out, this definitely is important to remember with Dredge).
When the new Penalty Guidelines are issued, hopefully in the near future, the appropriate section of that document will be updated to reflect this new policy. Until then, please consider this the actually policy (which supercedes that written in the PGs).
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
hey i overlooked the fact that someone could possibly draw more than 1 extra card, or because of things like howling mine draw past the known cards on top of the library. this whole situation is very... situational? i still think there maybe be instances where the card should just be put back on top instead of the library being shuffled: ie drawing an extra card that is a known card.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
In more exceptional circumstances, the game state may possibly be irrepairable and merits an upgrade to a Game Loss. This could be in such circumstances as to where it may be impossible to tell which card was the "extra" card and several were drawn/looked at, where there may be problems in identifying manipulated cards, etc. In which case, the integrity of the game has been impaired such that the game cannot be completed to a fair conclusion for either player.
As for not shuffling the deck and simply putting it back on top, that would have to be an exceptional circumstance in order for that to happen. The Penalty Guidelines exist to ensure that all judges follow the same approach, and the one thing the DCI stresses above all others is that we should be applying these guidelines in nearly every circumstance (only deviating when it is truly unique). So I won't say that there'll never be a circumstance where putting the card back on top and not shuffling is the correct solution, it is definitely not the standard policy and should be done in truly unique circumstances.
Was playing a 24K event last week, was in the last round of swiss. Game 2, In turns. I had a Maga in play, 22/22, with a faith's fetters on it, my opponent had no blockers and no instants in his hand (Zur's Wierding) and was at 1.
During his turn, he did "stuff" (None of it affected the gamestate, really...) and then Milled me with a millstone. I took the top 2 cards off my library, and then the player was told that he didn't have enough mana to do that - I hadn't revealed the cards yet, only I had seen them - and I asked the judge what should happen.
He had not seen the cards, and the top card of the mill was the 1x Naturalize in my deck. He told me to put the cards back on top of the library in the correct order, and continue play. I drew the naturalize and won (obv.)
Was the judge correct in his ruling?
Modern: Dominium Eminens
Legacy: UB Tezz (Check out My Primer at TheSource)
Vinitage: Oath
I used to judge alot.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Putting the card back would give me an information advantage, but shuffling would give me a disadvantage (as I count cards to my Niv-Mizzets)
I presume it is a situation where you've Mindmoiled through your deck (effectively stacking it), and then you use Sensei's Divining Top and look at the top 4 cards as opposed to the top 3? An argument could probably be made that this may not be Looking at Extra Cards on the basis that the card wasn't some unknown card that you randomly revealed, but rather a card that you knew was there. In which case, it's not like you gained any additional information (although, you may have reminded yourself of what card was there if you had forgotten what it was); which is ostensibly why the policy on looking at extra cards is what it is.
This may be an instance where the card is simply put back where it was, as opposed to shuffling the deck. The same could potentially happen if you had been hit by Plow Under and in the process of drawing for the turn, you accidentally flip over the second card in the deck (which was the second land that was put back). Again, the card is already known and you gained no additional info from this. So, there's not really any reason the deck needs to be shuffled (especially as we don't want "known" cards shuffled into the unknown portion of the deck anyhow).
First Turn: Glitterfang - Attack - Remove Red Myojin 2x for 2x Blazing Shoal Targetting Glitterfang causing 21 Damage first turn.
Its only a 6 card combo.
Collecting Wee Dragonaut's as of January 21st 2006
20 Regular
1 Foil
Well, if you count the number of such effects you've resolved, which are *probably* in your graveyard (since no one plays Stream of Consciousness, ), you could just take that many cards off the bottom of his deck, still leaving them face-down even, and then shuffle the rest of the library. Then return those cards to the bottom.
It's still reparable. What sucks is if he goes and shuffles anyway. . and then you've got to establish whether it was an honest mistake.... lousy....
I have the same deck, so I've thought about these things very carefully.;)
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
First Turn: Glitterfang - Attack - Remove Red Myojin 2x for 2x Blazing Shoal Targetting Glitterfang causing 21 Damage first turn.
Its only a 6 card combo.
Collecting Wee Dragonaut's as of January 21st 2006
20 Regular
1 Foil
The idea is, what any given card in a player's library is may as well not be determined by anything until someone looks at that card, so if they weren't supposed to look at the card, re-randomizing the deck fixes the problem. In theory, the top card of your library could be anything before you look at it, so if you look at it at the wrong time and then shuffle your library, it still could be anything, hence, no harm done.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.