Subject: Words to the Sophist Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1998 17:18:15 PST From: "Dominick Riesland" To: fkusumot@ix.netcom.com When last we left our intrepid adventurers, The Sophist jumped on his soapbox and proclaimed: ================================================================= In any case, I just wanted to make two points regarding the complaints about my personal standard of judging. First, I fully recognize the complaints. I admitted as much that I would probably make a horrible judge. Do I agree that my standards go too far? Well, they probably do. The only clarification I'd like to make, however, is what I consider to be "Taking advantage of obvious mistakes by a new player." To me, there's a difference between taking advantage of someone forgetting to activate an Oath of Druids during upkeep and taking advantage of obvious mistakes by a new player. The operative word here may be "new player" as opposed to "bad player". Anyone who shows up with an Oath of Druids deck really can't/shouldn't be classified as a new player. ================================================================== There was more, but this covers what I wish to speak about. In Duelist 31, there was an article about Professionalism. This is the opposite side of the coin of Active Ethics. Active Ethics is a concept I first heard about in Bridge and apply whenever I get a chance at Magic. In theory, Active Ethics is the concept that the players and the judges should be making certain everything is fair and equitable for all players. In practice, this means two things: not taking any advantage offered by unsolicited revelation and keeping the rules of the game intact while preserving people's dignity. Let me deal with each of these separately: * Not taking advantage of unsolicited revelation If you ever see me playing in a tournament (as opposed to judging one), you'll see something pretty amazing: All my basic lands have the same artwork and the cards are printed in the same language. This is to prevent an accidental revelation of part of my hand (due to a Tradewind bounce or somesuch) when I play a Tempest Island after my opponent knows there is a 5th Edition Island in my hand. But even if notice my opponent do the same thing, I will not take advantage of it. Nor will I try to bounce a specific land (such as an Arena Island, which many people only have one of) just to provoke that kind of revelation. In another instance, a player in Sealed paid for a Viashino Weapon- smith and put a Fault Line into play against me. After fixing the mistake, I drew Unnerve and noticed he only had one card in hand, obviously the Fault Line. While it would have been strategically sound for me to trade an Unnerve for a Fault Line, I knew that if the card had not been revealed, I would have waited until he had a second card before casting the Unnerve, so I did wait. * Keeping rules intact while preserving dignity Here is where the "new player" vs. "bad player" distinction comes' in. Take an example similar to one I had at a PTQ: Playing a red' deck against White Weenie, you get into a situation where you have no creatures on the board and are facing down a Soltari Priest, a Shaman-en-Kor, a Warrior-en-Kor, and a Soltari Monk. You draw and cast a Shard Phoenix, tapping out to do so. Your opponent untaps, draws, and attacks with everything, and you block the Warrior with Shard and sacrifice it for its ability. Your opponent, after being told that the Phoenix will deal 2 damage to all his creatures, puts them all in his graveyard. Professionalism demands that you dig the Priest out, as it cannot die to a red Phoenix. However, there is no reason to allow him to make the optimal play of stealing the damage to the Monk with the Shaman and redirecting all damage to the Priest, keeping everything on his side. In fact, dropping the creatures into the graveyard is a tacit sign that he didn't save them. I will point it out after the match, however. In the case of new players trying to cast sorceries in the middle of combat, I will not allow it. I will usually say something to the effect of, "You realize that's a Sorcery, and you can't do that until after the combat's over, right?" If I get a horrified look, I will offer to let the player change attack plans. But any player at a tournament, new or otherwise, must not be allowed to break the rules; it sets a bad precedent. In any case, I'm not about to force a burn on something like that, unless I'm in a Top 8 or a Nationals or somesuch. Playing within the rules is good. Playing not to hose new players is also good. Both can be achieved; this is better. Dominick Riesland, "The TURNABOUT Guy" Almost Official Milwaukee M:tG Rules Guru DCI Level II Judge (at least for now) =============================================== There are 3 types of ogres: good ogres, bad ogres and mediogres. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com