Errata's on tournament cards

To avoid confusion, I thought I could put my older cards in sleeves with errated text on it. It would be a small piece of paper, with the errated text printed on it, put in front of the "normal" card text box of the sleeved card. To be clear this little piece of paper should not be greater than the card text and let thus the illustration and card name totally visible.

Should this be allowed in an official tournament and not bet considered as "proxies" ? and should be this mentioned to the judge before playing ? I should also mention it to other players before the round begins for clarity.

On my opinion it should be allowed, because the card ie a legal card with only an errata on it. But I prefer to ask.

In general old versions of a card always have the same cards as the newest version of the same card. Or are at least treated that way.

In principal you can put whatever you want in front of your cards, but the question is how this affects shuffling or the ability to tell if the next card(s) in your library is one with that piece of paper in front of it or not.

If you can determine what "type" the next card is, the judge/organizer must disallow the extra piece of paper in front of the card, because it's simply cheating. If it does not make a difference, it's still up to the judge/organizer if he allows it.

pcmichke wrote:

To avoid confusion, I thought I could put my older cards in sleeves with errated text on it. It would be a small piece of paper, with the errated text printed on it, put in front of the "normal" card text box of the sleeved card. To be clear this little piece of paper should not be greater than the card text and let thus the illustration and card name totally visible.

I've done this in a number of my decks, and it's great for casual play. It's much easier to just be able to pass the card over to someone to read rather than finding a version with the correct text (not to mention the various cards for which no printed version with the current text exists), and it's a great boon when loaning a deck to another player not to have to spend a chunk of time explaining which cards don't match their text.

pcmichke wrote:

Should this be allowed in an official tournament and not bet considered as "proxies" ? and should be this mentioned to the judge before playing ? I should also mention it to other players before the round begins for clarity.

On my opinion it should be allowed, because the card ie a legal card with only an errata on it. But I prefer to ask.

I would also like to see this allowed, although that's entirely up the judge.

In my experience, provided you're using opaque sleeves and not printing on particularly thick paper, there's no effect on shuffling and no information leakage when playing the deck. I've found clear sleeves to be more problematic - especially the cheaper ones - they're generally thinner, and don't fit the cards as snugly, so if the paper shifts, it can be seen from behind the card.

pcmichke wrote:

Should this be allowed in an official tournament and not bet considered as "proxies" ? and should be this mentioned to the judge before playing ? I should also mention it to other players before the round begins for clarity.

On my opinion it should be allowed, because the card ie a legal card with only an errata on it. But I prefer to ask.

As long as it doesn't interfere with section 130 - Marked Cards of the Judges Guidelines, I think it can be allowed.
However, I wouldn't recommend it. Either have a list of updated cardtexts, or call for a judge when a card is played without its up-to-date cardtext printed on it. I'd rather not recommend it, because this way you learn which cards have been updated and which haven't been.

When playing with a little paper for card X, you know its cardtext was updated, and you only know the correct cardtext when the card is in your hand / on the table. When someone else plays that card, the only thing that you can do is say : "I think its cardtext changed." It only costs a little amount of memory to remember the "important" changes - Aanrch Revolt, for instance.

Or have access to an internet connection, or ask the judge to look. No-one should have a problem with you checking correct texts.

floppyzedolfin wrote:

However, I wouldn't recommend it. Either have a list of updated cardtexts, or call for a judge when a card is played without its up-to-date cardtext printed on it. I'd rather not recommend it, because this way you learn which cards have been updated and which haven't been.

When playing with a little paper for card X, you know its cardtext was updated, and you only know the correct cardtext when the card is in your hand / on the table. When someone else plays that card, the only thing that you can do is say : "I think its cardtext changed." It only costs a little amount of memory to remember the "important" changes - Aanrch Revolt, for instance.

This seems a rather strange position to me.

a) From personal experience, I'd argue that determining which cards are sufficiently errata'ed to be worth printing corrected text for is quite a good way of learning which card texts have changed.

b) How is something which helps speed up the game by reducing calls to the judge a bad thing?

c) What constitutes important? Is the current errata on zip gun ("Bearer takes 1 damage during strike resolution when striking with this gun" as opposed to the CE printing "when this gun is used") something you remember? It's a minor detail, but, because of Immortal Grapple, it's something that can come up and enough close games turn on whether a single vampire has enough blood left to play a given card that forgetting it can potentially decide a game.