Forcing Methuselah to play cards you cannot play

Ankha wrote:

Orpheus wrote:

- depending on the cards, the annoucements, the judge etc, it would be ruled either way, and I've seen it ruled differently in tournaments. I think we really need clearer guidelines for tournament rules.

Indeed.

I'll keep this comment of yours in mind when making judgments in the future, but a key component to my judging has been that a card that is played is played. In other words, if it were possible to have the game state be correct with that card in play, then it should still be played, even if that alters the target of the the effect. In part, it depends on when the misplay is discovered, but many things can transpire or be deduced from a small misplay. Did the DI window pass? Was there talk of DIs? Was there a potential deal asked about DIs? Was there a redraw? Were other cards played after?

In a situation where I attempt to use Seduction with a dom vampire, but mistakenly target an illegal vampire of my prey what is the right solution? If there is a legal vampire elsewhere on the table? If there is not? Would I have even declared the action if I hadn't misplayed an as-announced card? How should the action declaration be handled? What if that targeting was a mistake because I failed to see a skill card on my prey's vampire? If the game state was not clear to me when beginning the action? How much rewinding is correct?

I know the mountain of tasks before BC is large, but a judge's guide needs more examples of faulty games states and resolutions, so we can establish a clear pattern for all judge's to follow.

kschaefer wrote:

In a situation where I attempt to use Seduction with a dom vampire, but mistakenly target an illegal vampire of my prey what is the right solution? If there is a legal vampire elsewhere on the table? If there is not? Would I have even declared the action if I hadn't misplayed an as-announced card? How should the action declaration be handled? What if that targeting was a mistake because I failed to see a skill card on my prey's vampire? If the game state was not clear to me when beginning the action? How much rewinding is correct?

The Judges' Guide provides several examples of how to correct game state, specifically about how much to rewind. The basic principle it espouses is that you should always back up to the point of the error, if you reasonably can. If you can't (primarily because too much stuff has happened, and too many cards have been played), the judge fudges it based on the available information.

See section 200 of www.vekn.net/judges-guide

I've read it and it's not good enough.

Specifically, the misplay has already resulted in some foreknowledge of the game that rewinding can almost never solve.

kschaefer wrote:

I've read it and it's not good enough.

You asked how much rewinding is correct, and it tells you how much is correct - as much as you can (reasonably) carry out. I'm not sure how telling you the exact answer to your question on rewinding is not good enough?

kschaefer wrote:

Specifically, the misplay has already resulted in some foreknowledge of the game that rewinding can almost never solve.

And that would be true in your "You must play the card in a legal fashion if it was possible to do so" situation too. You find out that someone else has played a Wake, or a DI, or whatever.

What alternative way of handling this are you suggesting that re-instates mystery?

(Note that if you believe that this wasn't an innocent misplay, but a specific attempt to draw out information, that's cheating and is punished under separate parts of the rules.)

The card's effects are declared when it is played. If the effects declared are illegal, then the card cannot have been played at all - so to rewind before the declaration of effects means that the card goes back to the player's hand. There is no 'after card is played and before the effects are declared' step to rewind to.

The Judge's Guide establishes as a guiding principle that the player making the mistake should not benefit from it. Some people interpret that as to mean that the player must be punished, however that is not correct - punishment is accomplished through the Cautions/Warnings system, and the game state should simply be returned 'to a fair and playable state'.