Hi everyone!

This just happened at our LCQ for the RPTQ (Comp REL) and I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the matter.

Scenario:
Player A passes the turn. Player B unmorphs Den Protector but doesn't announce target for the trigger before Player A casts a Fiery Impulse, targetting the Protector. At this point, Player A realises that Player B doesn't seem to have discarded a card to the Kolaghan's Command Player A cast several turns ago.

When applying GRV, the correct fix is to have Player B discard a card now. The question then arose: will I discard before or after targets are chosen for the Protector?

Which route would you choose and using what reasoning?

Cheers
/Eskil Myrenberg

EDIT: This time not posted using Patrick's account :)

I can see arguments either way but I'd make player B discard and then announce a target. It just feels most correct to me, had everything gone correctly the card should have been a legal choice anyways. If the missing discard had been discovered while unmorphing the protector my answer would have been the same, and Player A rushing the game shouldn't affect this.

So lets give it a try:

I would say we discard before any targets are announced because the discard would also happen before that when no error would have occured.

Thanks for your reasoning :). Could you clarify one point for me? What's
the difference between what happened and “If the missing discard had been
discovered while unmorphing the protector…”?
Den 27 feb 2016 15:20 skrev “Anders Thiesen” <

The only difference I see is whether the opponent responds to the trigger with removal or not. And I feel the opponents rush should not be considered here, so I toyed around with how I would rule without that factor and that became my ruling :)

Imagine a player paying 1G and starts to flip their card when their opp. goes something like: “wait, did you discard from Kolaghan's Command?”. Would we make that player complete their current action before applying the fix?

Originally posted by Anders Thiesen:

Imagine a player paying 1G and starts to flip their card when their opp. goes something like: “wait, did you discard from Kolaghan's Command?”. Would we make that player complete their current action before applying the fix?

Don't think so, the “real” outcome would be that he could target the discarded card, so we fix it the real it gets?

would be my guess..

As written in the original scenario, it sounds to me like B missed his trigger if B lets FI go on the stack before picking his target.

More to the point, I'd agree with Sandro when looking at the version Anders posted (without any MT complications). Fix it Now, not Basically Now.

Incidentally Sandro, you should get yourself a profile picture on here!

This gets dicier if you consider the possibility that Player B has no cards currently in hand.

Hi Eskil

With so much having gone past, and considering there is a Den Protector flipping, I would argue it is more harmful to the game state to complete this action. Double GRV.

Also there seems to be question on timing should this type of fix be applied. Immediately or rather at the time the error was discovered.

Edited Jarrett Boutilier (Feb. 29, 2016 02:01:36 PM)

The IPG seems to have no “statute of limitations” on failing to discard (under GPE-GRV), so not completing the discard is not an option. Based on the wording in IPG, it looks to me as though you should immediately complete the action upon noticing that the game state has been broken. Therefore, whatever the game state is now, have the player discard a card. It seems as though the current game state is “Den Protector trigger waiting to go on the stack, before assigning a target”, so that's when the card is discarded, before announcing a target.

I agree with Russell above that this is sketchy if the player has subsequently emptied their hand before noticing the error, and at that point it's probably worth a Cheating investigation.

Edited Lyle Waldman (Feb. 29, 2016 01:52:58 PM)