Some corrective steps will ask that the random section of a deck (which excludes any known cards or card orders on the top, bottom, or any other non-random sections of the deck) be shuffled. In this case, judges are tasked with finding out which parts of the deck that must be manipulated remain random, setting those cards apart from the non-random subsets of cards, shuffling the random portion, and then recombining the non-random portions with the random portion of the deck. Judges should consider any deck manipulation cards or cards with the glimpse mechanic that might have been played before manipulating a deck. As noted in our other rules and regulations documents, a 60-card deck is considered sufficiently randomly shuffled after 7 shuffles.

After a Judge Call, the first judge to appear at the call is considered the attending judge. Players cannot ask for a different judge other than the attending judge. Players or any other tournament attendees that made the Judge Call should explain the situation and the reason for the Judge Call to the attending judge. All information should be presented truthfully; attendees may not lie to judges during Judge Calls or investigations. Then, the judge should determine whether an infraction occurred. If an infraction occurred, the judge should explain the infraction, the recommended corrective steps, and then perform those steps.

Some situations rely on private information that might harm match integrity if shared publicly. In these situations, judges should be discreet and investigate the matter with each player privately, if necessary. Players can always request to speak with a judge away from the table. The severity of the infraction can also be the cause of why a judge may speak to a player discretely or in private.

Investigations for Judge Calls may not be recorded by any of the tournament attendees.

The rules, regulations, and guidelines of Grand Archive TCG serve players to promote an environment where game enjoyment can be maximized and every person is treated fairly and respectfully. Judges are trusted members of the community who showcase both in-depth understandings of these documents, the philosophy behind them, and the desire to create a positive environment for players in competitive settings. We create this document to serve as a resource for judges to mete out just penalties to players who violate the rules and to educate players on avoiding future errors. Judges hold the position of a neutral party that can enforce and interpret the policy and rules documents to resolve player mistakes. Ordinarily, judges can only directly intervene when a policy or rules violation has occurred or to prevent the escalation of a situation in the competitive environment. Otherwise, judges act as a resource for players and other tournament attendees.

While not exhaustive, this document provides standard procedures for many game and policy infractions and violations. If a significant and extraordinary event happens that goes beyond the scope of this document, Head Judges are permitted to act and issue penalties in ways that might deviate from the procedures outlined in this document. This extends to situations where an entire play area is disrupted, such as by a spilled drink, complete disruption of game pieces/cards/decks, error product being opened, etc. Any questions on whether a situation qualifies as “significant and extraordinary” can be posed to the Head Judge if a judge believes procedure deviation is in order.

Mistakes in issuing penalties or actions taken to correct a prior error may happen. If these mistakes happen, judges should identify the mistake, offer an apology regarding the mistake, and correct any necessary actions or issued violations, if possible. Penalties may sometimes be retracted or downgraded in these circumstances. If any further violations happen as a result of a judge’s attempt to correct a prior mistake or from offering incorrect information to a player, the player should not be penalized for such secondary violations. Judges are encouraged to ask players to maintain proper and clear play areas to minimize the risk that a game rules violation takes place.

Players cannot use any rules, policy documents, or this infraction guide in an attempt to gain advantages in games and tournament settings, also known as “rule-sharking.” This is part of Unsporting Conduct and can be penalized. Seeking loopholes in either policy documents, rules documents, or clarifications offered on the Index to gain an unfair advantage is considered cheating. Attempting to leverage issued penalties from a judge or issuing Judge Calls with the intention to penalize another player is considered Unsporting Conduct.

Judge Calls are appropriate for rules concerns, questions, or any questions regarding policies or regulations. Any calls should be made with the expectation that any results from the call will continue to promote fair tournament play consistent with the philosophy behind rules and regulations documents.

For the different Rules Enforcement Tiers detailed in the Tournament Rules and Regulations document, judges should apply penalties suitable to that tournament tier. E.g, Play mistakes at Casual events should most often be met with warnings and education regarding the violation and avoidance of future violations rather than as stringent applications. At these kinds of events, upgrades to violations in this category (i.e. Gameplay Errors) should seldom be upgraded.

The Head Judge of a tournament always has the final say on issued penalties and interpretations of rulings and policy decisions. If they feel necessary, Head Judges may request counsel and make decisions as a congress with other experienced judges. If there is only one judge at an event, they are the acting Head Judge for that event.

Tournament attendees are recommended and encouraged to be familiar with regulation and policy documents as well as any relevant FAQs regarding a tournament setting or general tournament protocol.

Warning

Warnings are the least severe penalty a judge can apply to a player. These penalties are typically used for small infractions or for when the correction for an infraction does not take significant time to correct. Warnings primarily exist as a point of identifying that a (usually) minor infraction took place and to bring attention to the players to avoid performing the same or similar violations. Warnings typically do not take more than a minute to resolve and should not require judges to add time to the round.

Game Loss

A Game Loss issued to a player immediately causes that player to lose the current game or a game that is yet to be played. An issued Game Loss penalty will be reported as a loss during round reporting and determining a match winner. Players losing a game via this penalty do get to choose whether they go first or second in the next game of the current match. Neither player may sideboard if this penalty is issued before the first match game.

Multiple simultaneous Game Loss penalties result in a single issued Game Loss. If each player were to receive a Game Loss penalty, the match score will not be affected but the losses are still recorded.

Match Loss

Match Loss penalties are severe and should be reserved only for when the integrity of the match has been compromised. Match losses can be applied both to a current match or a match that is yet to be played. A match loss issued during a match applies to the ongoing match, otherwise, if no match is currently being played, the match loss is applied to that player’s next match.

Disqualification

Disqualifications (or DQs) are the most severe penalties judges can issue to a player for a tournament. These penalties should be reserved for any actions a player takes that constitute severe unsporting conduct and/or conduct compromises the integrity of a tournament. It is recommended that the Head Judge be notified by an attending judge if there are grounds for disqualification. Attending judges should not issue Disqualification penalties; this should be reserved for the Head Judge and/or Tournament Organizer (TO)

At the time this penalty is applied, the player receiving the penalty loses their current match and is dropped from the tournament. They may keep any prizes they may have been awarded but cannot be awarded any further prizing or awards, even those pending. During a tournament, a disqualified player is removed and does not take any standing in the tournament. All players below that player’s standing will move up one place in the standing and are entitled to any prizes from the new standing. While standings in the case of a top-cut will change if a disqualification is issued after a cut, the players playing a top-cut elimination portion of a tournament will not change, i.e., a former 9th place that moved into 8th place will remain 8th place in standing while not participating in the elimination portion of a tournament.

Head Judges are expected to record and report an account of events, evidence, or information that led to the issued disqualification. Judges may issue disqualifications without proof of action, but the report and account must reflect this.

IMPORTANT LINKS:

3/14/2025

• Minor fixes in Failure to Maintain

3/7/2025

• Fixed various inconsistencies with ruling examples in Failure to Maintain and Communication Policy violations.

• Updated wording on Communication Policy Violations

• Updated Deck Issue section with significant revision/reorganization for clarity.

• Updated section on Bribery, Waging, and Collusion with significant revisions for clarity.

• Minor change in Tardiness section for consistency across tournament enforcement surrounding tardiness (now to 5 minutes being the game loss threshold rather than 3 minutes). This allows up to the maximum given time extension for a tardiness that is only penalized with a warning when not given a game loss.

1/23/2025

• Fixed Deck Issue section regarding failure to de-side to clarify intended ruling guidelines

• Amended procedures and penalties listed under Decklist Issues with additional detailed examples given.

• Added False Start under the IPG.

8/23/2024

• Migrated IPG from hosted PDF to Gitbook

• Bribery/Collusion is now by default a disqualification rather than a match loss

After any penalty is issued, the attending judge should explain the infraction to the players in the match, the recommended procedure for resolving the infraction, and the penalty applied. During any deviations from recommended procedures, the Head Judge is expected to explain the typically recommended penalty and procedures, the intended course of action, and the reason for deviating from the presented guidelines.

If multiple infractions related to an error are made and multiple penalties might be applied, only the most severe penalty should be applied.

Penalties should only be applied to the root cause of an infraction. As an example, if an error based on private knowledge occurred or originated from a game rule violation based on public information, the error would not be a Private Card Error but would instead be treated as a Game Rule Violation and penalized accordingly.

Judges may investigate whether players have received penalties for the same infraction over the course of the tournament and upgrade the penalty if deemed to be a fair punishment. Players may not lie to judges about previously received penalties during that tournament.

These procedures and recommended guidelines for managing infractions will offer corrective steps for the initial violation. It is recommended that judges do not deviate from these procedures and that Head Judges only deviate if absolutely necessary and in exceptional circumstances. This is to ensure that any corrective actions taken are standardized and fair for all players regardless of game state or other extenuating factors.

The Game State can be affected by illegal actions, missed triggers, or other infractions that might occur in a game. The Game State is often reversible in the sense that if an illegal play or action took place to create an errored Game State, actions can be retraced with any applied effects reverted to go back in the game to a point where the Game State was correct. If the errored Game State cannot be easily reverted or if the new Game State resulted in a significant change in the information available to either player, corrective procedures should be applied.

Reverting game states should only be used when the errored Game State did not result in a significant change of information available to either player and is optimal when there is no change in any such information. Often this is when there were few resolved effects or player actions taken. Simple reversals will just require the last action taken or the current action to be reversed to the point before that action was taken. Game State errors involving random or unknown elements are not considered simple and should rarely be opted for. Game States should be reverted (if possible) if the present Game State was caused by illegal action, even if an opponent gains knowledge of previously private or private information.

Head Judges or any judges authorized by a Head Judge may allow reverting game states. When a game state is reverted, every action taken and resolved effect is reversed in time order from most recent to the oldest. Everything that is reversed is to be reversed as it had originally resolved or was performed without any derivation or deviation. If a reversal involved a card unknown to a player but not the other (such as a card drawn), a random card out of possible cards is chosen for that step.

E.g. Reversing a single card drawn would require the owner of those cards to randomly select a card from whichever zone that card was drawn into and place it back to where it was drawn from. If knowledge is gained as to the order of cards in a section of the Main Deck, that section is shuffled into the randomized part of the deck if those cards were not drawn. If known-ordered cards were drawn, they would be returned to the Main Deck in the order they originally were.

If an errored Game State can be reverted to repair the integrity of the game, a warning for Failure to Maintain Game State suffices. The infraction penalty should only be a Game Loss if being upgraded from prior Failure to Maintain Game State infractions.

Gameplay errors fall into the category of Comprehensive Rules violations. These kinds of errors may be the most common and are usually unintentional. Judges are encouraged to investigate whether an error of this type might have been made intentionally, which falls into the category of Cheating under Unsporting Conduct.

While gameplay errors often result in either no penalties or just a warning, the third and any subsequent gameplay errors should be met with a Game Loss penalty. In a tournament spanning multiple days, error counts for players will reset each tournament day.

Communication between players is key to maintaining the Game State end and clear communication about actions and intentions between players is paramount.

Players can’t misrepresent or be untruthful about the Game State to other players or judges. Players must always answer questions about public information of the Game State truthfully. Players can’t lie about the Game State or any rules in the game. Any lies or deceit fabricated in this aspect is considered Unsporting Conduct. Players cannot place any objects or game elements in a way to intentionally mislead an opponent as to the Game State. Players may not obscure or conceal any aspects of the Game State from judges or other tournament officials.

“Game State” is a term that refers to the current state of a game, including all cards and their locations and properties, tokens, dice, concurrent ongoing effects, turns, and any other trackable or knowable characteristics in a game.

Maintenance of the Game State is a shared responsibility among players in a game to ensure accurate representation of all actions taken and the possible decisions players may make in the future. Failing to maintain the Game State can compromise a game to the point where information that shouldn't have been known is revealed or mistakes resulting from a misrepresented Game State can cascade, making it irreparable. For the sake of tournament integrity, the Game State should be tracked as accurately and consistently as possible.

Players of Grand Archive do not have the same goals in terms of engaging with the game in tournament settings. Some seek to compete at the highest level while some wish to enjoy the game in a more casual setting. For this reason, tournaments in Grand Archive can be hosted at multiple competitive levels.

This document informs decisions for rules enforcement in the strictest sense to ensure that tournament integrity is preserved over all else. However, we recognize that players that may seek to engage with the game more casually prioritize a good experience and fun. Many violations and mistakes that are "easy" to make and avoid might appear more frequently at lower tiered events, but over-enforcement and policing of these mistakes may detract from the experience.

For these settings (namely, events below the Store Championship and Regional tiers), we have added "Variable Enforcement" suggestions for certain infractions that inform judges and tournament staff in how to more leniently apply infractions and penalties apart from the typical penalties and corrective procedures. This section will be found at the bottom of each infraction type offer an alternative penalty or serve to put a limit on the severity of penalty applied.

For those that familiarize themselves with this document, please keep in mind that this serves as a guide rather a strict end-all-be-all for violation cases and corrective procedures. Tournament staff and judges are expected to use their best judgement in cases where this document is insufficient to maintain tournament integrity. This may result in corrective procedures and escalation or deescalation of penalties that are not described within this document. If such deviations exist, players deserve proper explanations as to the transpired events and what led to deviations and documentation for posterity may help set precedent and inform both future event staff, judges, and future versions of this document.

As with the other documents, we reserve the right to modify this document as needed and without notice. The most current version of the document will always have the most updated changelog to inform what content has been significantly changed, if any.

When too many actions, effects, or turns have passed from when the Game State originally became errored, a judge may determine that it is too late to revert all actions and events that have led up to the present game state. If the integrity of a game or match has been affected to grant the player most at fault a significant advantage over their opponent, an infraction that led to an irreversible errored Game State may be penalized with a game loss.

In times where it is determined to be too late to reverse an errored Game State, but the error and present Game State have not generated a significant advantage for the player most at fault for the error or infraction, a judge may rule that the Game State is acceptable and the game can continue without reversal or significant corrective procedure.

Irreversible errored Game States happen if not every action and effect can be reverted to repair the Game State to its previously maintained state or if far too many actions dependent upon prior information have been taken. Irreversible errored Game States should never lead to restarting a match or game.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player sees the face or obtains information of a private card they were not supposed to be able to obtain or know while performing an action. The penalty is only applied once per action sequence, regardless of how many extra cards are seen.

Players may sometimes accidentally handle more cards either due to a physical or dexterity error or an error in following game rules. If the extra cards are being seen from a private set of cards (i.e., the main deck) and the cards join together with another private set, such as the hand, the error becomes a Private Card infraction or a Game Rule infraction, depending on the circumstances (see below).

Corrective Procedures: The set of cards that are seen which includes the extra seen cards are all shuffled into the random part of the private set that they came from (typically the Main Deck) and the action which would reveal/draw is repeated. Known cards (such as previously arranged cards due to prior Glimpse effects or card arrangement instructions would be placed in their proper locations after the random portion is shuffled.

Examples:

• After shuffling and presenting a cut/further shuffle, a player sees the bottom card of their deck.

• A player revealing 3 cards accidentally reveals 4 cards instead.

• A player accidentally flips over the top card or top few cards of their deck.

• A player picking up 3 cards from their Main Deck after being instructed to draw 2, but that player has not yet added those cards to their hand nor has seen those cards (they are still hidden from both players).

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: This error class considers all gameplay errors which can’t be corrected with public information given a component of private information for a player. Often, this is a result of a player drawing or adding an extra card to their hand or memory or adding a card that was supposed to be revealed but wasn’t to their hand or memory. This error differs from the Seeing Extra Cards infraction by whether or not the additional card is added to a private set of cards.

A corrected Game State might not be achievable since it can be impossible to discern or verify (from a public point of view) which was the additional card. If card order is maintained and added to a public zone (and seen by all players), the infraction can be treated as a Game Rule Violation rather than as a Private Card Error. This is also true if a card is identifiable from the others, such as being the only card in a hand or memory.

Corrective Procedures: If the error were to contain a sequencing error regarding a set of cards in which additional cards are placed, first the player reveals that set of cards (with the extra card) and an opponent chooses the cards that can't be verified and returned to their proper zone (and shuffled, if necessary). The proper sequencing is applied to the proper set of cards before the additional cards entered that set.

If the error involves a card or cards that were supposed to be revealed, the player will show the set of cards that has the card(s) meant to be revealed. An opponent chooses that many unknown/unverifiable cards and returned to their proper zone (and shuffled, if necessary). The action of selection and revealing is attempted again with the unknown cards returned.

If the error involves a set of cards containing more cards than it is supposed to contain or than can be accounted for, that set of cards in excess is shown and an opponent chooses a number of cards equal to the number of cards in excess that are unverifiable to reduce the set to its proper size. The chosen cards are shuffled back into the random portion of the deck from which they came. If continuous effect modifies game rules such that the top card of the main deck is public and excess cards are drawn from the main deck, excess cards can simply be returned in the correct order and position they were previously in.

Upgrading: If a private or hidden card is set aside or played with consideration of particular properties or attributes of a card and is later discovered to not correlate with the actual properties or attributes of the face card, the penalty to be applied is a Game Loss. E.g. A player banishes a card face-down under Quicksilver Grail’s effect and the card is revealed to be a champion card when the game ends. However, if that player discovers such an error on their own, no other unknown cards have been added to the concerned private set of cards, and can correct the error, the card can be revealed and switched with a correct card without penalty applied. In the previous example, that player would have to show that no unknown cards had been added to their material deck and they would be able to exchange the champion card for a non-champion card.

Examples:

• A player has more cards in hand or memory than can be accounted for.

• The first turn player in a two-player game draws a card during their Draw Phase.

• A player is instructed to draw 2 cards and instead draws 3 cards.

• A player sees 4 cards after being instructed to Glimpse 3.

• A player puts the top card of their deck into their hand after resolving Fairy Whispers but forgets to reveal the card.

Penalty: No Penalty

Definitions and Philosophy: When a triggered ability would trigger and the player controlling the trigger does not express knowledge or does not remember the trigger the first time it would affect the Game State. Triggered abilities can be different with respect to their game impact.

If a triggered ability would not cause an immediate change in the Game State, the trigger must be acknowledged the first time it would cause such a change. If a trigger changes the game rules, the controller must acknowledge the trigger and stop opponents that try to take any illegal actions given the modified game rules.

Delayed triggers must also be acknowledge by the player who owns the trigger. Abilities that specify “when you do” are considered reflexive triggers and must also be acknowledged. Any of these triggers that are not acknowledged are considered missed triggers. A trigger that would have no impact on the game if it is left unacknowledged would not be considered to be a missed trigger.

Judges should not intervene for missed triggers unless they are mandatory (no "may" clause) or would imminently cause a significant gameplay error, or if there is suspicion of Unsporting Conduct via intentionally missed triggers.

Triggers are assumed to be remembered until they are evidently missed past the first point at which they would need to be acknowledged (e.g., a "beginning of Recollection" trigger is realized to have been missed during the player's End Phase).

If a player’s action is dependent on the result of an unacknowledged trigger, and the trigger is acknowledged when attempting to perform that action or resolve it, the trigger can become acknowledged at that time. Then, either the intended action succeeds or the Game State is reverted. Sequencing errors are common and missed triggers are often a component of these.

Missing the card drawn during the Draw Phase as a turn-based action is also considered as a Missed Trigger.

Corrective Procedures: If it has been a full turn of phases since the missed trigger, it will not be added to the Effects Stack and players should keep playing with a presumed accepted game state. If the trigger would have created a temporary effect whose duration would have expired in the current Game State, the trigger will not be added and players should keep playing. Otherwise, judges will allow an opponent to choose if the triggered ability can be placed in the appropriate layer of the Effects Stack pending resolution or, if not possible due to the time when it was missed, it will be placed on the bottom (it would resolve last).

Upgrading: This penalty may be upgraded to a warning under a Failure to Maintain Game State infraction a player continues to miss triggers. Judges can also upgrade the infraction class to Cheating under Unsporting Conduct if a Judge determines a player is intentionally missing triggers to gain an advantage.

Examples:

• A player forgets an On Attack trigger and remembers the trigger at the beginning of the damage step of combat.

• A player forgets an On Enter effect from their Materialization phase and remembers it during the start of their Recollection Phase.

• Forgetting or missing the draw a card turn-based action during the Draw Phase.

VARIABLE ENFORCEMENT: At events of lower level than Store Championships and Regionals, enforcement of missed triggers should be more lenient. Mandatory missed triggers should be placed onto the Effects Stack when possible and appropriate. For optional triggers (using "may"), judges should offer the player a chance (if appropriate, without significant impact on the current Game State) to acknowledge the trigger and make a choice. Missed triggers should not be upgraded to Failure to Maintain Gamestate and should remain at No Penalty. If there is concern for Unsporting Conduct, this should be investigated and penalized as found appropriate.

Penalty: Game Loss

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player is not in their seat at the start of a round or has not completed assigned tasks (such as registration procedures) during the allotted time. This penalty will not apply until the official scheduled end of a prior round.

Players can request permission from a Judge for a delay before the start of their games in the round, up to 10 minutes until they are considered tardy. Valid reasons include bathroom breaks or replacing missing cards. Other tasks may be permitted by Judges if deemed reasonable. If a player returns within the 10-minute period, the Judge can issue their match a time extension up to the maximum allowed and no penalty should be applied.

Players hold responsibility for being respectful of tournament proceedings and their opponent’s play time in the match. Tardiness detracts from the integrity of a tournament by potentially not giving players sufficient time. Players are also expected to complete their registration and other tournament-necessary tasks in a timely fashion. If players need assistance with these tasks for any reason they believe is justified, they are encouraged to call for a Judge and request assistance. Tournament Organizers reserve the right to allow additional time before any penalties might be issued. The larger a tournament is, the more Tournament Organizers are encouraged to provide ample time for players to reasonably obtain their seating and reach their seats before the round timer is started.

Players that are both seated correctly but have not yet begun a game are expected to start their match within 5 minutes of the round. If both players have not yet begun their match before 5 minutes have elapsed, both players may be penalized with a game loss.

Corrective Procedure: Players can be given a time extension in a match up to the maximum allowed at the discretion of the Judge.

Upgrading: A player not in their seat or seated with their round opponent in the first 10 minutes of a round will receive a Match Loss. The player should also be dropped from the tournament unless the player reports to either the Head Judge or Event Recorder before the end of the round. If a player exceeds the time given to perform that task and then is tardy for their match (10 minutes), they will receive a Match Loss.

Downgrading: A player who arrives at their seat within 5 minutes of the round start (before 5 minutes in the round timer has elapsed) should only receive a warning. This will still count towards the violation count in the category of tardiness.

Examples:

• A player arrives at their seat 5 minutes after the start of the round is announced (5 minutes after the round timer is started).

• A player hands in their decklist after the submission time announced by the Tournament Organizer or Judge.

• A player loses their deck and cannot replace their cards within 10 minutes of the round start.

• A player sits across from the wrong opponent and plays them (under free-seating) or sits at the wrong table and plays the wrong opponent (under assigned seating) and realizes the mistake before 10 minutes have elapsed, arriving at the correct seat and playing the correct opponent.

• The same as above, but they instead realize the mistake and arrive at the correct seat against the correct opponent before 3 minutes have elapsed. This would result in a downgrade from a game loss to a warning.

• Tournament officials declare a specific call time of 8:30 AM for which players are required to be present and a couple of players show up late. Even though their first round may not begin until 9:00 AM, they may be penalized for tardiness and receive a game loss.

VARIABLE ENFORCEMENT: At events of lower tiers than Regionals and Store Championships, event staff are encouraged to be somewhat more accommodating with respect to tournament start times and allow more time to a player before a game loss is issued. It may be recommended to allow up to 5 minutes to be seated without a penalty with a game loss issued at 10 minutes, as normal. There should still be reasonable expectations to complete tasks on time such that an entire event does not go on pause to the detriment of all other players.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: This Gameplay Error covers most of the situations in which a player errors or fails to follow game procedures and rules. These violations cover violations of the Comprehensive Rules which are not covered by the other errors listed in Gameplay Errors.

These violations are often based on public information concerning the Game State. While these errors may often be simple to fix independently of a judge, consistency of corrective procedure is important and players should rely on Judges for assistance with all Game Rules Violations.

Corrective Procedures: Reverting game states, if possible, should be the first consideration regarding any Game Rules Violations. If an errored Game State is easily corrected with minimal game impact by reverting actions taken that resulted in the Game Rules Violation, this should be the first step taken.

Then, if a simple revert is not enough, follow these steps to determine the correct fix:

• If a player forgets to wake up their objects at the start of their turn and it is still the same turn, wake up them.

• If a player did not draw cards, discard cards, recollect cards, or move cards from one zone to another that they were supposed to, the player does so.

• If an object or card was placed into an incorrect zone and the exact card/object is still known publicly, move the card to the appropriate zone if it does not significantly disrupt the game.

If any of these steps create a trigger, the trigger is appropriately generated only if these fixes can be accompanied by a simple revert where the actions that generate those abilities have the correct timing.

Once the game has passed a time where it would be reasonable to expect the opponent of the violating player to also notice the error, the opponent then would have also committed an infraction (most often Failure to Maintain Game State). If the Judge determines that both players are responsible for the violation, they would instead have committed a Game Rules Violation rather than just a Failure to Maintain Game State.

Upgrading: Repeated Game Rules Violations from a player may be upgraded to a Game Loss if deemed appropriate by the judge. Intentional Game Rules Violations are subject to harsher Cheating infractions under Unsporting Conduct.

A player might still violate the rules underlined in the aforementioned document in a way not covered under the following infractions. If they do so, the Judge should make the player aware of the proper procedures and protocols and explain them. If repeated or continued violations of the rules continue, Judges are encouraged to investigate further.

Tournament Errors are upgraded to Game Losses from Warnings if a player has already committed a Tournament Error violation of the same type with the count for these penalties being reset daily over the course of multi-day tournaments.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player allows other players in the game to make a Gameplay Error and does not indicate this to the other players.

If the player is determined to be doing this intentionally, a Cheating infraction under Unsporting Conduct should be considered.

Upgrading: This penalty may be upgraded from a warning to an issued Game Loss after a player repeatedly fails to maintain the Game State (3 or more times), but it should not be upgraded more than this.

Examples:

• A player did not notice that Warrior’s Longsword had dealt an extra point of damage after the opponent’s champion leveled up from a Warrior to an Assassin champion

• A player does not maintain their board and unintentionally misrepresents how many buff counters there are on an ally, causing a mistakenly-informed attack from either them or their opponent

• A player fails to stop their opponent from drawing a fourth card while a Tithe Proclamation is in play, leading to an extra card being drawn.

VARIABLE ENFORCEMENT: Failure to Maintain Game State should be met with more leniency at events below the Regional and Store Championship levels. In these situations, it is suggested that this penalty is not to be upgraded to a game loss except for severe and irreparable game states that advantage the infracting player.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player does not produce a sufficiently randomized deck or sufficiently shuffle the random portion of a deck before presenting it to their opponent for a final cut/shuffle. This infraction is also committed if a player fails to present their deck to their opponent. A sufficiently shuffled deck or section of a deck means that any player could not know the position or positions of any card or set of cards in the deck. For Insufficient Shuffling, it is most often an unintentional mistake. If there is consideration of intentionally leaving a deck or portion of the deck insufficiently shuffled, a Cheating infraction should be considered.

Corrective Procedure: Judges may shuffle the deck or section of the deck until they are satisfied. Players can always request for a judge to watch the shuffling process to ensure it is complete.

Upgrading: If a player repeatedly fails to shuffle their deck sufficiently or shortcuts the presentation of their deck to the opponent, consider escalation to a Game Loss or investigate whether there are grounds for a Cheating infraction.

Examples:

• A player forgets to shuffle their deck when instructed to do so.

• A player only minimally riffles (i.e., any number of riffles less than recommended in Tournament Rules and Regulations) when shuffling.

VARIABLE ENFORCEMENT: At events of lower tier than Regionals and Store Championships, players may feel comfortable shortcutting the deck presentation, but it should still be offered. Gentle warnings should be given and players should be encouraged to communicate with one another regarding sufficienct shuffling. Especially in more casual environments, players may not know or have the dexterity to properly shuffle decks. In such cases, judges can intervene and assist or suggest to players to assist their opponent.

Penalty: Match Loss

Definitions and Philosophy: Outside assistance considers any advice or information about a match that is not public or readily available. An Outside Assistance infraction is committed whenever a player offers another player in a match advice or information that the player within the match should not have access to, or when a spectator or other tournament member similarly offers advice or reveals private information. A player within a match commits an Outside Assistance infraction when they seek advice or information regarding their match from any others outside of that match. Outside Assistance infractions also consider written or prepared notes outside of what is allowed per the Tournament Rules and Regulations document. For a limited format, Outside Assistance also covers advice on the draft process and deck construction.

Games between players in a tournament setting are meant to test the skill of the players in those games. Any communication in terms of advice, instruction, or unduly revealed information from outside of the game breaches the integrity of the tournament process. Players may ask Judges whether the result of an intended player action or set of decisions would be legal, but not whether those actions reach a specified outcome. The latter is considered a hypothetical question which Judges can't answer. Players should avoid formulating questions in a way they could be construed for requesting Outside Assistance.

Cards also can’t be physically modified in such a way that would reasonably indicate detailed tactics or strategies. Players may only use the notes during a game that they have written during the game; any referencing of notes over this is considered Outside Assistance.

Tournament Organizers reserve the right to remove spectators that commit Outside Assistance infractions from the tournament venue and premises.

Downgrading: If it is not clear whether the offending player or spectator is committing Outside Assistance or if it is a matter of lacking communication clarity, making the person aware that they are on the border of committing an Outside Assistance infraction in addition as a warning suffices. If the behavior isn't correct, follow through with the penalty.

Upgrading: If it is not the first time Outside Assistance has been incurred by the offending player, consider whether there are sufficient grounds for a Disqualification with the Head Judge or in conference with other judges and Tournament Staff.

Examples:

• A player writes lists of sideboarding notes before their matches and references them before/between games.

• A spectator giving instructions to a player regarding sequencing or decisions for player actions within an ongoing game.

• A player asking a judge if they would win the game if a card they intend to play resolves.

VARIALBE ENFORCEMENT: In many cases, novice players do not have a clear grasp of what phrasing they may use for certain questions and whether or not they are allowed to ask certain questions. During events at Store Championship or Regional levels, it may be appropriate to offer an additional reminder (see Downgrading) before a Match Loss is issued. At events of lower tiers than those, it may be helpful to have continued discussions and reminders as to what consitutes Outside Assistance. For players that are learning the game, it may be permissible to offer limited guidance on what actions they are able to legally make in a game without informing any strategy. Many of these considerations usually deal with times during release of new sets of cards and questions are mostly concerning interactions and understanding rules text rather than attempting to gain an advantage.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: Taking longer than is reasonably expected to complete these game actions is considered Slow Play. If a Judge determines that a player is playing slowly intentionally to take advantage of the round time limits, the appropriate infraction would be Stalling under Unsporting Conduct. As a note, all parts of match procedures account for "playing" the match or games in a match. This includes sideboarding procedures and, therefore, players are expected to complete this step in a reasonable time, not to excessively shufflle, count cards repeatedly, etc. If there is concern that a player is attempting to stall their sideboarding to seek a decision from the losing player regarding whether they will be playing first or second before the required time (after both decks are presented for finals cuts/shuffles), consider stalling as the infraction.

A player is responsible for playing the game and taking player actions at a reasonable pace, regardless of the Game State. All players should have the same opportunity for fair play and players should perform actions quickly enough to not disadvantage their opponent due to time. Players may sometimes be playing slowly unintentionally; it is often enough for a player to communicate with their opponent that they should play faster. If this communication is insufficient, a Judge Call is warranted.

Corrective Procedure: After the penalty is applied, the Judge can apply a time extension in the round, up to the maximum. If the maximum round extension has been applied already from a prior corrective procedure, an additional extension of 2 turns may be added to the extra-turns procedure.

Examples:

• A player takes an excessive amount of time shuffling and/or cutting their opponent’s deck.

• A player leaves their seat without valid reason and permission from a tournament official.

• A player spends a significant amount of time examining/picking up cards in public zones without any significant changes in the Game State, e.g. not performing any player actions.

VARIABLE ENFORCEMENT: At events of lower tier than Regionals and Store Championships, it is expected that more novice or casual players are in attendance. It is recommended to be more lenient with multiple reminders to play faster before the first warning for Slow Play is given. It might also be helpful to prompt a discussion with the offending player that there is limited time in the round and each player should be mindful of the time allotted. If in agreement with Tournament staff, consider extensions beyond the recommended for a round, if appropriate (i.e. 10 minutes or 5 turns as opposed to the maximum 5 minutes and 5 turns under corrective procedures).

Penalty: Game Loss

Definitions and Philosophy: A player provides an illegal decklist for tournament format, their submitted decklist does not match the deck they are playing or intend to play, or the list needs modification due to missing or necessarily replaced cards.

Decklists for certain tournaments ensure that players do not modify their decks throughout the tournament. This allows for verification and validation that the deck and all cards within it are legal for the tournament format.

Typographical mistakes and form of handwriting can vary from decklist to decklist; it is at the discretion of the Judges to discern if what is written on the submitted decklist is clear and unambiguous. If there is any concern for lack of clarity, Judges can bring up the concerns with the player who submitted the decklist and ask them to validate or correct any potential errors. Penalties should not be applied under these circumstances.

If a decklist must be modified or is altered after the start of a tournament, a Game Loss should be issued. If a performed deck check leads to the discovery of an invalid decklist (after any consideration is given to minor mistakes), the penalty issued should be given at the start of the next match.

Corrective Procedure: Judges should remove illegal cards from a decklist and deck. If a player has cards within their sideboard to make their decks (main and material) legal, they may exchange cards to restore legality. If there is a mismatch between the deck being played and the decklist, the player should modify the deck to match the submitted decklist. If a deck contains insufficient cards after any removal such that the decklist violates the minimum requirement, players may add any number of Refurbish cards to meet minimum deck size requirements.

Examples:

• A player lists “Rai Level 3” in their material deck without specifying the title. The player should be requested to clarify the name and modify the list.

• A player lists Rai, Storm Seer when their material deck includes a Rai, Mana Weaver. The player should be instructed to obtain a Rai, Storm Seer to replace the Rai, Mana Weaver. If they are unable to do so within the amount of time given, they are to be given a Match Loss as part of Tardiness.

• A player lists 5 copies of a main deck card in their decklist (they can only play 4). The player should remove any extra copies (if applicable) and edit the decklist so that the decklist remains legal.

• A player is playing Stalwart Shieldmate at four copies while their submitted decklist has four copies of Veteran Soldier listed, which are absent. They would be instructed to remove all copies of Stalwart Shieldmate and replace them with copies of Veteran Soldier. As with the second example, failure to obtain the correct cards in a timely fashion should result in a match loss.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: A player violates the player communication/information policies and guidelines outlined in the Tournament Rules and Regulations document, which results in the opponent making a decision, taking a player action, or not taking an action based on wrong information.

As mentioned in the Tournament Rules and Regulations document, players are responsible for maintaining a clear Game State, and players should answer all questions regarding publicly available information (i.e., Status and Public Information) as honestly as possible. Giving wrong information, even if accidentally, can result in an undue strategic advantage that would harm the integrity of a match. This does include instances where a player states whether they are going first or second during sideboarding and then changes their decision after decks are presented.

If a player is suspected of intentionally misinforming their opponent for strategic advantage, a Cheating penalty should be considered.

Corrective Procedure: If a judge determines that an action was taken or not taken (i.e., there was a chance to take an action that was not opted for), the Game State may be reverted to before that decision was made with information correctly accounted for. In the case of a miscommunication of first versus second to play after sideboarding procedures, judges should offer players a chance to redo their sideboards with the most recent declaration of first versus second taken as the intended decision.

Examples:

• A player is asked how many cards are left in their Main Deck and they reply “17” when they had 15, having miscounted, and the opponent activates Sink Oblivion targeting that player as a result.

• The losing player after a game states that they will go second as they are sideboarding but changes their decision and states they will instead play first as the decks are presented for a final cut/shuffle. Players should be offered a chance to redo sideboarding with the losing player dedicated to playing first, in this case.

• A player asks an opponent for their Influence, and they reply with "seven" when they have six, leading the player to believe they can activate Gloamspire, Black Market's ability, without benefiting their opponent.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player fails to follow correct tournament procedures at the beginning of the round. Specifically, this covers when players begin the first game of the match (they have placed a Lv 0 Champion onto the field and drawn an opening hand) before the round timber has begun.

The round timer exists to provide all players with both an everpresent clock to maintain a timely pace of play in addition to serving as a fair constraint for all players. Abridging tournament procedures to gain more time in the round may give an unfair advantage to some competitors and strategies. To ensure that all players compete under a fair environment, the round time and start of round time should be respected. It is only acceptable to being manipulating cards to the extent that it is only the spirit champion card that has been put into play as long as no further cards have been seen or considered.

Upgrading: After multiple warnings, it is acceptable to penalize a player with a game loss. Remaining ignorant to the proper guidelines of a tournament in an attempt to gain more play time than is allowed for other players in the round is not fair for other competitors. The timed rounds serve to moderate the time allowed to each competitor and provides a fair play environment and condition.

Examples:

• The first turn player draws an opening and begins considering their cards before the round timer has formally been started.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: A player makes an error concerning draft procedures. These errors include but are not limited to:

• Passing a pack in the wrong direction

• Stacking cards remaining from multiple packs

• Looking inappropriately at another player’s selections

Draft involves many players opening multiple packs and handling multiple cards. In addition, players might not be making picks and passing cards at the same speed as other players. As a result, there are multiple opportunities during the draft process for an error to occur. These errors can greatly affect the draft procedure as even one missed pick or extra pick disrupts a draft. Stacking piles of cards accidentally can also disrupt the draft. It is recommended that players make picks in an organized manner and not create a backlog that allows opportunities for errors. Additionally, even accidentally seeing what another player picks disrupts the integrity of the draft process; it is encouraged that players focus on their own cards and picks during the draft process to maintain that integrity.

Communication regarding the draft process for such things as picks or intended direction or strategy falls under an Outside Assistance infraction and would be grounds for an upgrade to a Match Loss, accordingly.

Penalty: Match Loss

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player or players in a match use an alternative method to the prescribed Match End Procedures denoted in the Tournament Rules and Regulations document for the determination of a winner of a game or match.

The aforementioned section sets in place rules meant to properly determine the outcome of a game/match through the results of having played a properly structured match. Using any other method other than the delineated steps compromises the tournament's integrity. While intentional draws can be achieved through mutual agreement as described in the Tournament Rules and Regulations document, any other method of reaching this match result is not allowed.

Examples:

• Two players roll a die to determine a winner of a match.

• Two players wish to play an additional game beyond the tournament match structure to determine the winner.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player has discernable markings on any card or cards such that they are uniquely identifiable from other cards of the same deck (Material or Main). This includes any marks made from writing implements, bends, folds, scratches, indents, or any other potential marking. This includes any cards that are substantially warped to the point of being identifiable from among a set of cards. This violation excludes any decorations or ornamentations that might be a part of a sleeve as long as those decorations or ornamentations are identically consistent with the other sleeves of the same deck.

Corrective Procedure: The offending player would need to replace the card or sleeve that is marked or sleeve their deck with identical sleeves to ensure that no card or cards are identifiable. If a card becomes damaged or marked in the course of a tournament, a Judge can issue a proxy at their discretion. If marked sleeves cannot be replaced, the player has the option to de-sleeve all of their cards within that deck to ensure conformity.

Upgrading: The inability to replace the marked card/cards will grant the player an opportunity to replace the cards with any number of cards named Refurbish. By extension, this requires modifying the deck list and will incur a Game Loss penalty as a result. Replacements can still be done at a later time without further penalty.

Or, if a Judge believes that a player would be able to use a pattern of markings to gain a significant strategic advantage, the penalty is a Game Loss

Examples:

• A player is using cards from a printing that had slightly thicker cardstock that is obvious through a sleeve.

• A player has markings on the sleeve of one of their Refurbish cards.

• A player is using a sleeve-less deck where the card back of one Refurbish is noticeably misaligned.

Unsporting Conduct is any way in which a player can act or behave themselves such that it is disruptive to the tournament environment, risks compromising the integrity and competitive focus of the tournament, or risks compromising aspects of safety and enjoyment of the event. It is recognized that oftentimes, tournaments may give rise to tense situations through competition. However, this does not excuse the poor conduct of tournament participants to the detriment of other tournament participants and tournament or venue staff. All participants and staff should strive to be as respectful as possible to avoid engaging in unsporting conduct. The Head Judge is always the final authority on what constitutes unsporting conduct.

When bringing up violations of conduct, Judges should first examine the situation and focus on de-escalation, if possible. Then, violations of conduct can be discussed where the Judge should discuss the penalty with players, what part of their conduct was found unsporting, and how to correct it. Players are expected to be cooperative with Judges in this process and conform to the requests to change conduct. If there are any concerns regarding the ruling, players always have the opportunity to appeal it.

Penalty: Disqualification

Definitions and Philosophy: Bribery is when a player offers any form of consideration, whether it is a physical or non-physical incentive or reward, to an opponent either in exchange for or the enticement of anything that might change the result of a match apart from the process by which it is normally determined (i.e. modifying the outcome via concession, draw, or another result via bribe). Bribery considers when extrinsic factors influence the match result and that the decisions are dependent upon one another. Considerations of bribery do not apply if discussions about prizing and discussions to determine the winner of a match are independent of each other, that is, the potential outcome of a match is not influencing the potential prizes or vice versa.

Wagers are any bets placed on the outcome of a match or tournament result by any player, spectator, or any other tournament attendee. The Wager violation includes all forms of bets including non-monetary bets and does not regard which match is being bet upon.

Both bribery and placing bets/wagers compromise tournament integrity and are not allowed under any circumstances.

Collusion considers whenever players agree upon the result of the match and/or take actions outside of fair tournament play to achieve that result. This can also be known as match fixing or rigging. Collusion can include components of bribing and wagers, as well.

All of the above are not permissible and will be met with a detailed investigation on behalf of tournament and judge staff and, if found in error, players will be disqualified from the tournament.

Examples:

• A player offers another player a portion of a potential prize in exchange for conceding a match. This is bribery.

• A player offers another player a card or any other material object in exchange for conceding a game. This is bribery.

• A player asks their opponent to concede in exchange for a prize split. This is bribery.

• Player A asks if Player B would be willing to evenly split any prizing from the tournament and Player B agrees. Player A concedes to Player B. This is not bribery as player A has conceded voluntarily and has not asked for anything in exchange.

• Player B believes they have a better chance at higher prizing than Player A. Player A asks if player B would like to split prizing. Player B states "I have a better chance of getting more prizes for us to split, so you should concede to me." This is bribery.

• Player A believes player B has higher chances of making Top 8 at an event. They ask player B if they would be interested in splitting future prizing. Player B agrees. Player A concedes to player B. This is not bribery.

• Player A calls a judge and asks at the match table if it would be allowed for them to offer a Top 8 promo to their opponent if their opponent concedes. As an informal offer is made with their opponent in their presence, this constitutes bribery and the player should be disqualified. If the player instead asks this question away from the table with their opponent not able to hear them, they should be warned that this would be considered bribery, but not penalty should yet be applied.

• Two spectators bet $10 on the outcome of a match. This is betting.

• Players A and B in a match agree ahead of time that player B will concede to player A. Or arrange that player A concedes to player B. This is match fixing/rigging.

• Two players make a decision on who should concede the game based on the results of other player's matches. This is collusion.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: A minor conduct infraction typically deals with the general case of disruptive behaviors. This includes but is not limited to:

• Use of excessive profanity

• Insulting other tournament participants (depending on the nature of the insult and the intent, this may be upgraded to a Major Conduct Violation)..

• Not complying with mandated instructions given by a tournament official.

• Inappropriate demands to penalize others.

• Abusing Judge Calls for frivolous issues.

• Obstructing tournament space.

• Impeding tournament procedures.

• Takes destructive actions (e.g. throwing objects in upset).

• Being untidy or disrespectful of common areas including play areas.

• Using vulgar or offensive tournament materials.

• Appealing a Judge Call before the attending Judge has made a ruling.

• Making an intentionally unfair trade with a less experienced/knowledgeable participant.

• Violating any other venue policies.

Tournament participants, as well as any venue staff or auxiliary staff, are deserving of respect and of a safe environment in which they may enjoy their tournament experience. All participants should work together to secure a positive environment for the enjoyment of all in attendance. Judges owe any violators of conduct guidelines an explanation for why their conduct was unacceptable and a chance to fix or change their conduct.

Corrective Procedure: Players are expected to conform to any prescribed behavior changes by Judges. Failing to do so or further offenses in this category will automatically upgrade the infraction penalty to a Game Loss. Judges reserve the right to determine whether any misconduct fits into this category. Tournament Organizers reserve the right to remove any individual they feel is excessively disruptive to the tournament environment.

Penalty: Disqualification

Definitions and Philosophy: This penalty includes theft of any tournament materials including property of another player or attendee, Tournament Organizer, venue, or other persons or entities. Materials related to the tournament environment or required to run the environment include but are not limited to:

• Cards

• Dice

• Sleeves

• Playmats

• Cases/Boxes/Binders/Backpacks

• Currency

• Clothing Items

• Sealed Product

• Furnishings

• Decorations

• Equipment

• Appliances

Theft may be simultaneously present with the destruction of the material, in which case a disqualification is a maximum penalty that may be imposed. If a player finds any lost equipment or any equipment that is unclaimed, those items should be either turned in to the Tournament Organizer station or deliberate and enthusiastic attempts are made to find the owner(s) of the item(s).

As tournaments and the venues in which they are hosted are expected to be a safe environment, all individuals in attendance hold reasonable expectations that their personal property will be protected from theft and/or damage. However, theft in the busy tournament environments unfortunately does occur and tournament participants hold the responsibility to be vigilant about their belongings as much as is reasonably possible. Participants should expect to keep the belongings they brought to the venue and any objects or materials they were given to keep over the course of the event.

Tournament Organizers should take concerns and reports of theft seriously. Judges should assist any attendees concerned for stolen materials, if able.

Corrective Procedure: The stolen materials should be returned to their rightful owners, if possible, and the offending individual should be asked to leave by the Tournament Organizer.

Examples:

• A player steals cards from another player.

• A player steals a table covering or playmat.

• A player finds a lost card or currency bill and keeps it rather than reporting it.

• A player realizes they still have a card from another player but fail to return it or fail to notify a Judge/Tournament Official about the card.

Penalty: Match Loss

Definitions and Philosophy: Major Conduct Violations define any actions that a participant takes towards another individual in the tournament venue that can reasonably be expected to make that individual feel threatened, harassed, bullied, frightened, or stalked. Intent or proof of intent is not a requirement of this infraction; people may commit this infraction without the intention to do so or without any malicious intent. Comments or insults owing to nationality, ethnicity, religion, age, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, etc. would fall under this category. Threats of physical harm (or threatening actions) allow upgrading of this penalty to immediate disqualification.

Tournaments should provide a safe and enjoyable environment for all participants and individuals present, including venue staff or individuals present in any other capacity. Actions that can result in the above feelings transgress the safety and integrity of a tournament setting. As a result, infractions of this nature are treated severely and may be upgraded to disqualification and removal of the offending person from the venue.

Judges reserve the right to interfere in ongoing matches and end the matches if they feel this is needed to properly deal with this infraction. De-escalation should be a primary concern and Judges should approach each situation calmly, making their best effort to not escalate a situation. Judges may instruct a player to follow them to a more private setting to discuss the transgression and assert the need for corrected behavior.

Tournament officials should take all concerns under this class of infraction seriously and investigate them when they appear to not allow for situations to escalate, if possible. If the attending Judge/Judges feels that the offense was insufficient for this category, it may be downgraded to a Minor Conduct Violation.

Corrective Procedure: Players must conform to the prescribed behavior remedy of the attending Judge. Judges may apply the penalty for the next match if this infraction was committed at the end of a match.

Upgrading: If the player was found to have committed the offending action with malicious intent, repeats the offense, is not seen to be remorseful regarding the infractions, or does not correct their behavior, the participant may be disqualified from the tournament. They may also be removed from the venue at the request of the Tournament Organizer.

Regarding threats of physical harm, if a participant acts in any way which might suggest the threat of, imminent, or enacted physical harm towards another person or their property, that participant can be immediately disqualified from the tournament. The Tournament Organizer can request that they leave the venue.

Penalty: Warning

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player’s Main Deck, Material Deck, or sideboard contents do not match with a registered decklist submitted at an event.

When an event requires a submitted decklist, the list indicates the intention of what the player wishes to play in the event. Players are expected to conform their decks to that list and any deviations might detract from the integrity of the event formats. Issues in the decks that a player owns might be commonly found for a variety of reasons, including accidental inclusion of cards from an opponents deck, mixing of Main Deck and Material deck cards, or forgetting to undo any sideboarding that took place within a match before the next one.

This infraction excludes any proxied cards mandated for use by a Judge as well as any cards that are reasonably separate from a player’s Main Deck, Material Deck, and Sideboards.

Players should maintain good organization of cards being used in a given tournament to avoid accidental mixing of non-tournament cards that might lead to a deck issue. Players are expected to observe and watch for potential deck errors before any advantage or disadvantage can result. A Game Loss penalty is a justifiable upgrade to deter any abuse in these respects.

If there is a concern for an intentionally made deck issue that confers an advantage to the offending player, cheating should be investigated with the proper penalty as Cheating as opposed to just a deck issue.

To avoid common deck issues, extra copies of generated, double-faced (if applicable), or previously sideboarded cards (if it is a new match) should all be removed prior to starting a new game or match.

Corrective Procedure:

• Missing Cards: If cards are simply missing or found in absence, the missing cards are shuffled into the random portion of their appropriate decks, from whichever zone they were found in.

  • If it is the first game and a deck that does not meet legal criteria is presented for shuffling (less than 60, typically) the missing cards should be looked for, revealed, and added to the random portion of the deck.

  • If it is not the first game and missing cards are found within the sideboard, the missing cards are revealed and placed in their appropriate decks. If cards are added to the Main Deck, the deck must be shuffled after the cards are added. If the cards were missing in a such a way that the deck construction was not legal (i.e. less than 60 cards) then Main Deck cards in the sideboard are revealed, shuffled, and a random selection of those are should be shuffled in the main deck to achieve a legal construction. If missing cards need to be added to the Material Deck (where the sideboard is in excess of points due to a surplus of Material Deck cards, the player will reveal and then shuffle the Material Deck cards within the sideboard (which would not result in an illegal list if added, particularly with respect to Divine Relics) and, from among them, add a random selection of those into the Material Deck.

• Divine Relics: If the Material Deck constraints are violated due to a deck issue caused by multiple Divine Relics, the player reveals all cards in the Material Deck with the Divine Relic keyword and an opponent chooses which from among them is kept while the others are replaced.

• Extra or missing cards found belonging to another player require the penalty to be applied to both players. The cards belonging to each player should be checked and verified with a deck check performed for each deck and ownership of cards should be rectified before resetting the start of game procedures.

Upgrading: If an invalid number of cards is determined with respect to the submitted deck lists during after a game has begun or during a deck check, the penalty is upgraded to a Game Loss. This mainly considers the following cases: Cards are found which are in excess quantities of cards submitted on the deck list or the player's deck is found to contain cards from the sideboard

If a deck issue is identified with more copies of a card in a Main Deck or Material Deck than would be allowed by deckbuilding constraints after a game has started, and one of the cards has been drawn, played, or entered any zone apart from the Main or Material Decks, the penalty is upgraded to a Game Loss. Otherwise, standard corrective procedures are sufficient.

If a player begins the first game with a deck that is clearly post-sideboard or had remained sided from a previous match, that player should be given a game loss and reminded to reset their decks to match the submitted deck lists before a match has begun.

De-escalation of game-loss: If the offending player realizes that they forgot to de-sideboard at the beginning of game before taking significant action in their first turn, or if an excess of copies was identified in the same context, the game loss may de-escalated back to a warning with the proper corrective procedures applied and their first turn reset.

Examples:

• A player presents a deck for shuffling containing fewer cards than the minimum required for a format.

• In the first game of a match, a player has a card that is listed as a Sideboard card on their submitted decklist but no copies listed in the Main Deck. This would be grounds for a game loss unless this mistake was caught by the offending player in their first turn before significant actions have been taken.

• A player has multiple sideboard cards present in the starting Material and Main Decks without any missing/extra cards across the decks. This an example of failure to de-sideboard from a prior match and should be upgraded to a game loss.

Penalty: Disqualification

Definitions and Philosophy: When a player intentionally plays slowly to gain an advantage due to the time limits in a round. The key difference between Stalling and Slow Play is intentionality; if a player playing slowly is doing so unintentionally, a Slow Play infraction is more appropriate. Stalling typically presents when a player changes their pace of play without justifiable in-game factors to account for such stalling and, typically, with the context of being advantaged in a match due to time constraints. This can also present when a player delays finalizing their sideboard to get their opponent to declare whether they are going first or second in the following game to gain an advantage during sideboarding procedures.

Examples:

• A player is winning in the match record and plays significantly more slowly to disadvantage the opponent regarding available time to play in the round, detracting from a fair competitive setting

• A player who is losing a game/match plays more slowly to take advantage of the round timer.

• A player takes any repetitive actions or performs actions more slowly than reasonably expected to slow the pace of the game to gain an advantage (shuffling slowly, picking up and reading cards with no apparent purpose, etc., with the intent to slow down the game).

• A player spends an unusually long time shuffling and moving cards during sideboarding while their opponent has not yet stated their play intention but is ready to present their deck for a final cut/shuffle.

• A player has no cards, resources, or options available to affect the game but spends more than a reasonable amount of time contemplating/planning the current turn/following turn given current information.

Penalty: Disqualification

Definitions and Philosophy: The following conditions must be fulfilled for cheating to be the appropriate class of infraction:

At least one of the following:

• Breaking any rule defined in official tournament documents

• Lying to a tournament official

• Noticing a rule violation or infraction in their game/match but does not bring it to the attention of a Judge (i.e. does not make a Judge Call for it).

Plus, at least one of the following conditions:

• The player knows that their action/lack of action is against the rules or is illegal.

• The player is using the action/lack of action to gain an advantage within the tournament.

If a Judge determines that the above conditions are met, Cheating is the appropriate violation class. If there is any lacking criterion from the above categories (e.g. Lying to a tournament official, but without the intention of generating an advantage or without being cognizant that they are lying) then it is not cheating and the correct penalty should be identified under a different class or category. Most commonly, Cheating is performed as a Gameplay Error or through abusing a Tournament Error. Cheating should be always taken very seriously and investigated thoroughly, ensuring that the tournament’s integrity is maintained as well as possible.

Examples:

• A player intentionally modifies their deck prior to the first game in a match such that it deviates from the submitted decklist in order to gain an advantage.

• A player allows an opponent to place the incorrect number of damage counters on their champion and does not call attention to the mistake.

• A player knowingly performs an action they are not allowed to perform.

• A player lies to a Judge during a Judge Call regarding the context of an infraction investigation to lessen or avoid a penalty.

• A player notices that their opponent had not finished resolving all effects of a card (often with Class Bonus) and does not call attention to it.

• A player allows the opponent to make a mistake that results in them having an advantage over the opponent and does not call it out.

• A player intentionally looks over at their neighboring players during a draft process to see their choices.

• A player accidentally draws an extra card but fails to invoke a Judge Call to correct the mistake.

Gameplay Errors

Failing to Maintain Game State: Warning

Missing Triggers: No Penalty

Seeing Extra Cards: Warning

Private Card Error: Warning

Game Rules Violation: Warning

Tournament Errors

Tardiness: Game Loss

Slow Play: Warning

Outside Assistance: Match Loss

Insufficient Shuffling: .Warning

Decklist Issue: Game Loss

Deck Issue: Warning

Communication Policy Violation: Warning

Improper Game/Match End Procedures: Match Loss

Limited Procedure Error: Warning

Marked Cards: Warning

Unsporting Conduct

Minor Conduct Violation: Warning

Major Conduct Violation: Match Loss

Bribery, Wagers, and Collusion: Disqualification

Theft: Disqualification

Stalling: Disqualification

Cheating: Disqualification