Monocle of Clarity (& questions about the deck contents)

Lönkka wrote:

jamesatzephyr wrote:

You can also use it if you just want an excuse to shuffle your deck (e.g. you've been recycling cards onto the bottom with Waste Management Operation).

If the judge does it, like Pascal suggested, without showing teh cards to players there is no need to shuffle.

Errrr....

In what way does a judge get involved with me searching my library with Magic of the Smith for a Bowl of Convergence (which isn't there) and then me shuffling the library afterwards?

Lönkka wrote:

jamesatzephyr wrote:

TunFiskeMad wrote:

But If you get asked a question about your library what is a legal answer?

Yes or No. The answer should be truthful, to tbe best of your knowledge.

Truthful indeed, but then you might run across world class players who are just spontanious and unexpicably having a brainfart:

Sure. That's the risk you run with asking questions about potentially unknown information.

Azazel wrote:

I would just answer I don't remember to the first question.

That's not a legal answer. Yes or No.

Please don't make your own private rules up.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

TunFiskeMad wrote:

But If you get asked a question about your library what is a legal answer?

Yes or No. The answer should be truthful, to tbe best of your knowledge.

I know there is no power curve broken in the wrong direction, but this card just seem so ripe for abuse if played against that I don't really see the point of it.

TunFiskeMad wrote:

I know there is no power curve broken in the wrong direction, but this card just seem so ripe for abuse if played against that I don't really see the point of it.

What sort of abuse are you seeing?

I can ask you easily verifiable questions, like the contents of your hand, uncontrolled region, or other visible-to-you-but-hidden-from-me areas of the game. You have to answer truthfully, and a judge can check.

I can ask you questions that you might or might not know the answer to, and you have to answer truthfully (as best you understand it) but might be wrong. If I do that and I don't like the answer, that's my fault.

Well like people "forgetting" what they are playing - yes there is occasion where you would want to know.

Interpretation of the question asked might vary.

Yes you can ask clear cut questions like: do you have a specific card in hand, but going beyond that you might get "lawyered" if bad at the language or missing a loophole on a card.

TunFiskeMad wrote:

Well like people "forgetting" what they are playing - yes there is occasion where you would want to know.

Interpretation of the question asked might vary.

Yes you can ask clear cut questions like: do you have a specific card in hand, but going beyond that you might get "lawyered" if bad at the language or missing a loophole on a card.

That's not new with Monocle of Clarity. At any point in the game, a player might ask a misleading question, strike a misleading deal, or just outright lie to you.

If the problem is "Talking is hard", then that's a problem that needs to be fixed by the player concerned, Monocle or no.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

That's not new with Monocle of Clarity. At any point in the game, a player might ask a misleading question, strike a misleading deal, or just outright lie to you.

Well lying to you concerning deals is allowed, but you are not allowed to lie about the answer to the monocle question.

The question now is how do you interept willfully forgetting the correct answer?

jamesatzephyr wrote:

If the problem is "Talking is hard", then that's a problem that needs to be fixed by the player concerned, Monocle or no.

Which is all fine and dandy when we are talking about the "game" - but when we talk about mechanical effects in the game, they shouldn't be language dependent.