I've been working with a few people at my LGS who want to become judges by quizzing them and helping them get ready to start checking things off the L1 checklist.

Since judge center is being renovated, I've been making up daily questions similar to those they'd see on the L1P and recently asked some more senior judges for some help making them.

They recommended that rather than focus on rules questions, like I had been, that I should quiz them with some more complex or intricate scenarios that one may see at Regular REL.

As such, I am looking for more of these such scenarios. Thanks in advance for anyone who can contribute.

*During the third round of the prerelease, you witness Eric doing a mana weave: he sorts his deck into lands and spells, stacks them alternating (each time 2 spells followed by 1 land), then performs a riffle shuffle and a overhand shuffle and presents his deck to his opponent. You approach him and ask him why he shuffles this way, to which he replies: “That's how we always do it at our kitchen table, manascrew is just so annoying and this is the way to prevent it. I did exactly the same last rounds and my opponents were completely okay with it.” What do you do?

*Everybody is ready to start the FNM draft, when Bernice runs in: she had to do some extra time at work and just couldn't make it in time. Of course she is still welcome to join in (no boosters were opened yet), en it seems to be her lucky night: she opens a foil Planeswalker in her favourite colors! Because of her hurry, she forgot to bring sleeves, so she makes a proxy (she grabs a Mountain and writes “Nissa” on it, and puts the real foil Nissa, Steward of Elements in her purse). During round 2, you and Bernice are paired against eachother, and she casts her proxy Nissa. What do you do?

*Vincent comes to play his first ever FNM draft. You quickly explain how it works (open a booster, remove the land and token, pick a card you would like to play, shuffle the rest and pass it to the left, second booster to the right, third to the left again). At the end of booster two, you are called over: a card is missing from a pack. You make everybody count their cards, when it becomes apparent that Vincent has one card in excess: in booster two he opened a foil Plains, which he took, along with a Glorybringer. All boosters have 4 cards left, except for 1 because of Vincent's double dip. What do you do?

*In her first main phase, Nicole casts Trial of Solidarity (creatures you control get +2/+1 and gain vigilance until end of turn), then attacks with her 2 Hill Giants, which she taps. Adrian casts in his Turn Galestrike (return target tapped creature to its owner's hand. Draw a card.) targeting one of the Hill Giants, then he attacks with his 3 1/1 snake creature tokens. At that point, Nicole realizes that her creatures had vigilance due to Trial of Solidarity and her Hill Giants should have been untapped.

*Bart and Chris just finished their match and sign their result slip (Bart won 2-1). Bart starts explaining to Chris that he could have easily won if he had played better: in game 3 Chris cast two Voyage's Ends (Return target creature to its owner's hand. Scry 1) and a Dissolve (Counter target spell. Scry 1), but he forgot to scry each time. Had Chris drawn fewer lands last game, he would have won for sure, so Bart is very happy that Chris kept on forgetting to scry. You hear this happening, what do you do?

Be sure to keep on asking why they make their ruling, and challenge their asnwers. The reason why they choose for a certain solution and how they explain their reasoning may be more important and interesting than the answer itself. Hope these scenarios help you to get some discussions going; happy mentoring!

Originally posted by Dustin De Leeuw:

*During the third round of the prerelease, you witness Eric doing a mana weave: he sorts his deck into lands and spells, stacks them alternating (each time 2 spells followed by 1 land), then performs a riffle shuffle and a overhand shuffle and presents his deck to his opponent. You approach him and ask him why he shuffles this way, to which he replies: “That's how we always do it at our kitchen table, manascrew is just so annoying and this is the way to prevent it. I did exactly the same last rounds and my opponents were completely okay with it.” What do you do?

*Everybody is ready to start the FNM draft, when Bernice runs in: she had to do some extra time at work and just couldn't make it in time. Of course she is still welcome to join in (no boosters were opened yet), en it seems to be her lucky night: she opens a foil Planeswalker in her favourite colors! Because of her hurry, she forgot to bring sleeves, so she makes a proxy (she grabs a Mountain and writes “Nissa” on it, and puts the real foil Nissa, Steward of Elements in her purse). During round 2, you and Bernice are paired against eachother, and she casts her proxy Nissa. What do you do?

*Vincent comes to play his first ever FNM draft. You quickly explain how it works (open a booster, remove the land and token, pick a card you would like to play, shuffle the rest and pass it to the left, second booster to the right, third to the left again). At the end of booster two, you are called over: a card is missing from a pack. You make everybody count their cards, when it becomes apparent that Vincent has one card in excess: in booster two he opened a foil Plains, which he took, along with a Glorybringer. All boosters have 4 cards left, except for 1 because of Vincent's double dip. What do you do?

*In her first main phase, Nicole casts Trial of Solidarity (creatures you control get +2/+1 and gain vigilance until end of turn), then attacks with her 2 Hill Giants, which she taps. Adrian casts in his Turn Galestrike (return target tapped creature to its owner's hand. Draw a card.) targeting one of the Hill Giants, then he attacks with his 3 1/1 snake creature tokens. At that point, Nicole realizes that her creatures had vigilance due to Trial of Solidarity and her Hill Giants should have been untapped.

*Bart and Chris just finished their match and sign their result slip (Bart won 2-1). Bart starts explaining to Chris that he could have easily won if he had played better: in game 3 Chris cast two Voyage's Ends (Return target creature to its owner's hand. Scry 1) and a Dissolve (Counter target spell. Scry 1), but he forgot to scry each time. Had Chris drawn fewer lands last game, he would have won for sure, so Bart is very happy that Chris kept on forgetting to scry. You hear this happening, what do you do?

Be sure to keep on asking why they make their ruling, and challenge their asnwers. The reason why they choose for a certain solution and how they explain their reasoning may be more important and interesting than the answer itself. Hope these scenarios help you to get some discussions going; happy mentoring!

These are all fantastic! Thank you so much!

You are watching a match at FNM. Athos attacks with a 3/3 double striker, Ninian blocks with a 3/3 and a 1/1. Neither player says anything, both players put their creatures in the graveyard. What do you do?

Nino asks you away from the table: "Judge, my opponent's Doomed Traveler and Elder Cathar both died during combat. I wanted to kill my opponents 4/4 Angel token with my Tribute to Hunger, but was waiting to see if she would put the counter on before making the spirit. However, instead she's casting a new Doomed Traveler. Help?"

Raven and Priscilla were playing Hector and Oswin in a 2HG tournament. After their match is over, Raven and Hector exchange words. Before you're able to calm the situation, Raven announces agitated that he's dropping before storming off. Hector sheepishly offers to drop as well, so that Oswin and Priscilla can form a team to continue to play in the tournament. How do you handle this situation?

These are things I've seen and wished I had handled better as a judge the first time they've happened.

* Arnold and Nathaniel are playing in a Sealed event without decklists, and are matched together for round three. Arnold draws a card that is not printed within the set (example: a Serum Visions during Hour of Devastation Sealed). He calls over a judge and explains the situation: he drafted last night and some of the cards got mixed in with the basic lands he used for this tournament. How do you fix the situation? Is Arnold cheating?

* Alexandra and Norman are playing in Modern event without decklists, and Seymour is spectating. Alexandra calls for a judge and explains that Seymour is providing Norman advice on how to play. Seymour apologizes and says that this is Norman's first time playing a Sanctioned Modern event and did not know what his opponent's cards did, at which point Seymour began to explain what they did and what cards Norman should play. Norman and Alexandra both agree that Norman did not ask for help. What is the correct response towards Seymour's behavior? Has Norman done anything wrong?

* In a Two-Headed Giant event, the active team of Alice and Anita are playing against the nonactive team of Nelly and Nicola. Alice controls a Glory Seeker. Nelly controls a Ghostly Prison and a Protection of the Hekma. At the beginning of combat, Alice attacks Nicola with her Glory Seeker, and then says it deals one damage to the nonactive team. Nelly calls a judge and explains that Alice has an illegally-declared attack, and asks you to fix it. What did Alice do incorrectly? How would you explain the modified rules used in Two-Headed Giant's combat phase?

Hopefully your prospective Level Ones will do very well on your questions.

https://goo.gl/forms/iSbTngO51ry3wK2P2

Edited Will Bentinck (Nov. 10, 2017 06:25:13 AM)

Hey Will,

Thanks for the compliment, and glad to read that you liked the scenarios so much! However, I believe that these questions don't have a very specific answer, rather they are perfect discussion topics amongst judges, aspirant judges, and mentors. In my personal experience, it's very easy and tempting to scroll over the answers and hardly learn anything from them, while unanswered questions actually provoke thought and discussion. Most of the above mentioned questions don't even have a single correct answer, but are crafted to provide deep discussions and force people to think about the why of a ruling or the philosophy behind the JAR, rather than there being a single correct outcome that can be learned by heart and reproduced.

I want to stress that I'm in no way stating anything here as an official source, but I personally would prefer you to remove your answers from your post, discuss them privately with a mentor (or with me through email, I'd be very happy to!), and leave the questions here as, well, unasnwered questions that many people may use in the future to train prospect judges and to entertain certified judges of all levels who are interested in some Regular REL discussion and philosophy. Just my personal opinion, and not in any way an attack on your well-phrased answers.

Greetz, Dustin.

Originally posted by Will Bentinck:

1. Eric's Weave: …so he won't be penalised with anything more than a warning…
2. Lucky Bernice: … Not sure about giving a warning here - but you'll see that's a common theme…
4. Tap Tap Nicole: … Give both players a warning for failure to maintain the game state.
6. Athos Attacks: … At FNM / Regular REL I don't know whether this should be both players getting a warning for failing to maintain the game state?

At Regular REL we don't issue Warnings. I'd encourage you to become familiar with the JAR.

As for how to deal with these, I'm not sure this thread is the best place for discussion.

Dustin, Rob: thank you so much for your prompt and informative responses - I'll remove my post, get studying the JAR and find someone to discuss these scenarios with.

Dustin - I'd really like to take you up on your offer, if it still stands?

Thanks again, still learning ;)