Is this a ban worthy offense?
General forum
Posted on Oct. 25, 2015, 1:29 a.m. by charleyh
My friend was playing 5 color bring to light at a recent fnm. The deck ran four Jace, Vryn's Prodigy. However, due to the fact that he is only 14 and does not have the necessary $280 to buy a full play set. He had pulled one from a pack and hence he decided to play the deck using 4 proxy cards. In round 4 (he was 3-1, up a game in the match and far ahead in the current game, almost surely locked for top 8 and prizes), he attempted to play a second jace. He realized his mistake, admitted to only owning one jace, and then he proceeded to drop from the tournament and concede the current round. The tournament organizer said that he was going to have to report the incident and that it was possible that a one year ban would be issued.
Is this likely to occur, as my friend is rather worried that he might be banned.
Also of note is the fact that he was not the only player to have used the tactic of only owning one Jace, Vryn's Prodigy but was the only to have made the mistake of having tried to cast a second. In addition, one of the magic playing employees at the store overhead several players discussing that they were using this tactic. However, the employee, despite possessing reasonable suspicion of cheating, decided not to do ANYTHING about it.
This friend of mine is a very nice person who has never cheated intentionally. The worst offenses he has ever committed were forgetting to de-sideboard at a grand prix, for which he called a judge on himself and the problem was promptly rectified.
Any information you can give will be much appreciated. Thanks alot.
DERPLINGSUPREME says... #3
I can't help but feel this is not a new thing that places have had to deal with.
if your friend gets banned, A LOT of others will be too, leading to a drop in income, and based on that alone he probably will not get that. also, if they only banned 1 person and not others for the same thing, that can be reason enough to sue, and we dont want no hangins on our hands...
October 25, 2015 1:41 a.m.
Im not sure that's ban worthy but that's probably the stupidest thing iv heard. Honestly, there's no way he didn't know you can't do that. Even new players know you have to own 4 of one card. Sounds like it was intentional. Also, if I were an opponent that lost to him I'd be pissed. He pretty much screwed the entire tournament based on faulty statistics but oh well.
October 25, 2015 1:43 a.m.
Pure_Insanity says... #5
He knew that he was doing the wrong thing "He realized his mistake, admitted to only owning one jace, and then he proceeded to drop from the tournament and concede the current round."
Sounds like he knew he couldn't do this. Unless the tournament states proxy can be used. Besides he would have asked around first, I know I did before I attempted this having only 2 Jaces.
October 25, 2015 1:48 a.m.
JexInfinite says... #6
Instant DQ, and it's probably not impossible for it to be a ban.
October 25, 2015 1:56 a.m.
It's an FNM. Not a DQ, not a ban. The decklist is changed and the card is generally replaced. It 's basically impossible to be DQ'd from an FNM.
October 25, 2015 2:47 a.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #8
Unfortunately getting caught and committing an offense are two completely different things. Although all deserve bans, only the one who got caught committing the offense should actually be banned. The others will, hopefully, eventually get caught. I see no problem requesting every player get all decks featuring flip cards ok'd by a judge prior to a tounrnament beginning. Don't reveal a morph? DQ'd. Fair? Doesn't matter those are the rules.
I don't care if he was 14. That's even worse as he has no bills and can spend all his allowance on a game. Some of us are adults and pay bills and also can't afford a playset of Jace, Vryn's Prodigy Flip. You know what we do? Make decks out of the cards we have. He's old enough to know he was cheating, hence "accidentally" playing a second. You answered your own question. It was not an honest mistake, he was attempting to exploit an innate weakness in the game for his own personal benefit. That is a punishable offense. End of discussion.
Cards are expensive, so what. That's life and that's the game. If everyone had equal access to all cards it would be a different story. But it's not. There is randomness and people who spend more deserve to have better cards. All there is to it. Life isn't equal and neither is the game.
Your friend deserves to be punished so he learns the valuable lesson that cheating does not prosper. What he did is no different then stacking a deck or palming a card. He used an exploit for his own benefit. If he didn't get banned it would be a travesty to the integrity of the game. Games can not function with out rules. The others will get caught eventually. Don't get your panties in a twist about them, be more worried your young friend is already displaying a blatant disrespect for rules and fairness. This is the kind of kid that would steal a deck when someone isn't looking and wouldn't blink an eye. Good riddance.
October 25, 2015 2:48 a.m.
Did you have a traumatic childhood incident involving a child stealing your deck? You're getting awfully worked up about a minor incident that has nothing to do with you.
October 25, 2015 3:06 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #10
Yes, he needs to be penalized. Sharply. He admitted his guilt by conceding the game. By the way you've rendered this story, I think it's almost certain that your friend knew he was wrong and in clear violation of the rules.
If I lost a game to him, I'd be upset on the grounds that he was in fact cheating.
To play a card, you must own said card. Reminder cards are place-holders, not cards.
Now, is this ban-worthy? Quite possibly. Someone who's willing to break the rules on this score is very likely willing to break (or has already broken) other rules. These types need to be penalized to discourage them and others from cheating again. An example needs to be made. Every time vigorous action isn't taken against infractors in cases like these, the integrity of the game is damaged and cheapened.
So, if I were the tournament organizer, would I...
report him? Yes, definitely.
ban him? Again, yes. Perhaps not for a year, but maybe. The presence of a cheater of any magnitude in an LGS's scene causes great damage to the business and its player community. Failure to punish violators of the rules would be absolutely unacceptable. As a player and a member of the community I would expect my LGS staff and tournament organizers to protect me from players who want to violate the rules. When they get away with it, every single participant in the event is harmed.
Your friend ran a risk by breaking the rules. He got caught. It is appropriate that he bears both the blame and the penal consequence, no matter how nice a guy he may otherwise be. End of story.
October 25, 2015 3:25 a.m.
It'd be different if it was just someone who didn't realise it was wrong, but he knew what he did was wrong, and only admitted it after he got caught. I'm not entirely sure what the penalty is for cheating, but if it's a bannable offence then he should be banned, just as sure as if he had been caught stacking his deck.
October 25, 2015 4:22 a.m.
I had a friend of mine (about 13/14) who "unknowingly" was running 43 cards in deck. I brought it up with the judge an he said it's a dq based off of decklist issues. Your friend would have been dq'd if someone caught him early and called judge. With this though, it might be a ban able offense. Age doesn't matter as Jimmy_Chinchila said. To prevent this issue with people running jace, ask them after the game if you can see how many copies they are running and own. It could prevent people losing games to a cheater.
October 25, 2015 4:36 a.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #13
Commonplace cheating affects us all, but nice try xlaleclx. And you wouldn't want to see me actually worked up. I don't like cheaters, and I would run a 4x Jace deck if I could afford it but I've lost to people who have and so have no tolerance for such things. I would run completely different decks if I could proxy in competitive play, as would anyone that isn't a trust fund baby. Related to the game as a whole and the entire community. Apparently you felt it was more important to critique my tone than offer your opinion on the matter.
xlaleclx be like... "Contribute to thread or Sedge Troll"
October 25, 2015 5:15 a.m.
I would have to agree, I have a feeling alot of people at my LGS are doing the samething but haven't had an idea on how to bring this up with the owners. But I like your idea Derpachus, I will have to do that next time at my next tournament.
October 25, 2015 5:54 a.m.
really on an FNM level being kicked from the tournament should be plenty a punishment, especially as a first offense, on an FNM level it's all about learning how to play on a competitive level and being banned for a year really doesn't work well for a learning curve, even if he's someone trying to farm up some prizes with cheating simply being kicked every time he's caught trying to pass off proxies simply means the prize pool is 1 person better and everyone is reminded of the rule.
Derpachus your idea of having people with flip cards show they actually have the copies to support what they're running could might as well require decklist registration and allowing the top 8 to see their opponent's list before an after each game, even at an entry level, FNM is still a competitive tournament and being forced to reveal that amount of info really is not ok for a system where you can face the same opponent twice.
And now that I think about it xlaleclx's probably right, it is crazy hard to get kicked from an FNM, even a game loss is a punishment that's hard to get, though it's also fun to remember most FNM's rarely have a judge on hand and who really wants to deal with the timesucking processes needed to make sure no one is playing secretly on a budget.
October 25, 2015 6:08 a.m.
Demarge, I think you're being a little soft. You're basically saying that cheating should carry no punishment other than being kicked from the tournament. If that's all that happens, it makes cheating a lot easier to justify, because if it happens, "I can just go back next week."
If it were only a game loss, there'd literally be no point in even using cards. Just let everyone proxy whatever they want and play whatever deck. At that point, might as well just toss out all the rules, because what's the point anymore?
October 25, 2015 6:31 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #17
Demarge does have something right, though. At the FNM level (Regular REL), the rules are applied differently. Regular REL is meant to create a more lenient and educational atmosphere, and it does not carry all of the nuances and penalties that Competitive or Professional REL does.
The proper penalty here, according to the precedents for judging at Regular REL, is to disqualify the player (and thus prevent him or her from claiming any prizes regardless of placement after the concession) and to report him or her to the DCI. From there, the DCI will determine whether the player will be suspended or not.
As much as players have to follow the rules when playing the game, stores also have to follow the rules while arbitrating. You don't get to decide some punishment based on how you feel and not on how you are supposed to act.
Now, I believe the LGS does have the autonomy to request that the player not play there, but this is in no way an official, DCI-sanctioned suspension or ban. That player would still be able to play at other venues. Any LGS-specific "ban" would be the prerogative of the business to manage its clientele.
October 25, 2015 8:39 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #18
Is this not what the checklists are for? The checklist represents the creature side allowing for you to keep the walker side in a sleeve outside the game like a token, yes? You cannot control 2 at a time so as long as the 2nd jace doesn't flip I see no problem. If it does you simply follow legend/planeswalker rules and it goes to GY automatically.
October 25, 2015 9:38 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #19
Reason I ask is I was thinking of doing this myself, I have 3 lily's but don't want to damage them constantly resleeving them.
October 25, 2015 9:42 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #20
@Mj3913: A checklist card is a stand-in for a double-faced card. You use it if you don't want to unsleeve a card to transform it or if you're playing without opaque sleeves.
A checklist card does not absolve you of your responsibility for constructing a legal deck. The actual composition of your deck must be legal. If you own one copy of Jace, Vryn's Prodigy Flip, then you can't include four copies of it in your deck because you don't actually have three of those copies. Checklist cards are not proxies. You must have one copy of the real card per checklist card in your deck. If you don't, then you have an illegal deck. If it can be proven that you knew that what you were doing was against the rules, you get disqualified and potentially suspended for cheating.
Now, as long as you actually own a sufficient number of the real card, you may keep that card to the side in a clear sleeve or something and simply place it over top of the checklist card while the card is on the field. That's fine. But you can't use multiple checklist cards if you have only one real card.
October 25, 2015 10:25 a.m.
Rasta_Viking29 says... #21
The checklist cards are stupid. I have wondered if opponents I've played were doing this and wether it was reasonable to call a judge to verify. I play my Nissas in sleeves and have no issues flipping the card when needed. You're not going to fuck things up unless you're a klutz or a slob.
October 25, 2015 2:03 p.m.
I'm not sure how other LGS' run things but at our FNM, I play my flip walkers in sleeves and have 2 of each of the flip side proxied. I set those on top of the real card when it gets activated. No one has had an issue at my store.
October 25, 2015 3:20 p.m.
"The important question here is to find out why. If the player knew it wasnt allowed to do this, then theyll be disqualified for cheating. If they didnt know that it wasnt allowed, then theyll receive a game loss for a deck/decklist problem. Theyll have the option to quickly find 3 more Jaces, or more likely theyll end up having to replace the other 3 checklist cards with basic lands of their choice."
Source from Magic Judge Tumblr
DERPLINGSUPREME says... #2
October 25, 2015 1:33 a.m.