Forcing Methuselah to play cards you cannot play

@ANKHA: Would be nice to get an official clarification, because the switch to a totally different target seems too severe in my book to force a play ...

Also compare to this: Announcing a Govern The Unaligned at superior, indicating the only vampire in your uncontrolled region, then realizing he's older. Would you now force that vampire to bleed? I don't think so ...

AFAIR LSJ always ruled for a total rollback.

Umh, any official statement on this available?

You roll back - this follows the example form Budapest EC day 2 final a bleed of 1 was declared when it was actually a bleed of 0 as that was a not a correct declare. LSJ made Ferenc rollback and do something else (he could have declared bleed for 0 that would have been legal).

Judges aren't there to mess with a table, forcing someone to rush cross table because that was the only legal correct legal target for example distorts game state.

Squidalot wrote:

Judges aren't there to mess with a table, forcing someone to rush cross table because that was the only legal correct legal target for example distorts game state.

I hope you dint say that because of my example,because my example say how player who is target by rushing,have another legal target,i dint ask if acting player need to rush crosstable.
and you see how 2 judges have 2 diferent opinions!
and what in this example,you want to play govern sup,and you have 2 target. but you chose older target,and after resolution,you see that. do judge need to roolback,or you just put 3 blood on another(legal) target?

Yes, I would have ruled to do rollback, I have ruled like that several times, like a player announcing Gover the Unaligned Superior when the vampire has only inferior, I am not there to force the player to play it at inferior, but to correct the game state as the declaration wasn't legal, so if you play Ambush targetting an unlocked minion I will perform a rollback as a judge (quite often I have to rule this situation in the JOL tournaments)