Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! As a reminder, Silver scenarios are designed for those who are working up to an L2 level of IPG understanding. As such, if you are L2 or higher please refrain from responding or guiding others until Friday. This gives those who are still growing in their IPG knowledge ample time to learn from each other and have a conversation.

The blog post for this scenario can be found here:
http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/?p=1026

Adam and Nelson are playing in a Standard GPT. Adam taps his 3 Mountains and Temple of Triumph to cast Chandra's Phoenix and Chained to the Rocks. He exiles Nelson's Arbor Colossus with his Chained to the Rocks, and attacks for 2 with his Chandra's Phoenix while putting the Chained to the Rocks on his Temple of Triumph. Two turns later, you walk by the match and notice Chained to the Rocks enchanting the Temple of Triumph.

What do you do?

Since we know it was 2 turns ago from the scenario, and we didn't stop things earlier, it looks like we've already asked enough questions to confirm this wasn't an error of dexterity (targeting a mountain, and just placing it on the wrong thing). It also sounds like there's enough going on that while it's in principle possible to rewind through 2 turns, we're probably not going to.

There is some funniness with the batch of actions being interspersed like they were, but assuming the target was legal, it would be fine for Out of Order Sequencing. A target wasn't explicitly announced, but was indicated towards the end. But we're well beyond OoOS clarification here. So I'm not worried about this aspect of it.

This looks like a pretty standard GRV/FtMGS because Chained to the Rocks was cast with an illegal target. This wasn't an illegal choice (this was a target, not a choice), and doesn't fit the other conditions for a partial fix, so we're just going to have to let things stay as they are, correcting anything currently illegal.

It's tempting to go with the principle of “both players knew what he intended to do” here, but it represents a deviation, and this is neither significant nor exceptional. It just feels a little silly, but that happens with sloppy play sometimes.

GRV/Warning for Adam, FtMGS/Warning for Nelson, Chained to the Rocks goes to Adam's graveyard as a State Based Action, Arbor Colossus then goes to Nelson's side of the battlefield. Advise both players to play more carefully (and possibly give a time extension if it took more than a minute)

It's likely too complex to reverse back to the point of the error.

Therefore an illegal choice was made for the permanent (when it was a spell) so we attach it to a mountain instead.

We issue a GPE - GRV to Adam and GPE - FtMGS to Nelson.

Edited Todd Bussey (April 2, 2014 09:47:28 PM)

This is clearly a game rule violation. We could rewind but since this happened two turns ago we can't because it would be way too much complex. Since the other player didn't commit any GRV he will get a warning for GPE-FtMGS. Adam will have a warning for GPE-GRV.

As for the board-state fix, we'll simply check the state-based actions. Since Chained to the Rocks is enchanting an illegal permanent, it will be put into Adam's Graveyard and the exiled creature will come back.

Chained to the Rocks should fall off Temple of Triumph due to state based effects; both players miss this. GPE: GRV for Adam and FTMGS for Nelson.

The error was made two turns ago, so there is no way to back up the game state. The next time state based effects are checked, Adam should put his Chained to the Rocks into the graveyard and put the trigger returning the creature onto the stack.

My only question is “Was Chained to the Rocks cast targeting Temple of Triumph?”. If the answer is no then we put the enchantment where it is supposed to be on the board. It's possible it got moved around accidentally caused by tapping and moving around lands. If this is the case, no penalty.

Otherwise, what we've got is a GRV/FtMGS. This is a resolved illegal target, not an illegal choice. Similar to Doom Bladeing a black creature, however, it is not like failing to pick a color for a card like Utopia Sprawl. Therefore this doesn't qualify for a partial fix.

At the current state of things we assume backup is impossible (two turns is pretty much always too much). Chained to the Rocks will fall off because it is not attached to a Mountain. The Arbor Colossus will return to the battle field and Adam will be sad.

Before reading other responses:

Comprehensive-rules wise, the Chained to the Rocks is currently enchanting an illegal permanent. It can only enchant a Mountain, which Temple of Triumph is not. We're in this state because Adam made a game play error, and Nelson didn't catch it. This is a Game Play Error - Game Rule Violation for Adam, and Failure to Maintain Game State for Nelson, with warnings for both.

To fix this, we either back up to the point of error, or bring the game into a legal state. Given that two turns have passed, it's almost definitely too late to do a rewind. To bring the game to a legal state, Chained to the Rocks is put into the graveyard from the Battlefield, and Arbor Colossus ends its exile.

Remind both players to play more carefully.


After reading other responses:

Other responders pointed out that it's worth investigating how the Chained to the Rocks ended up on an illegal land. It's a given in this scenario, but it's certainly worth looking at. The way most players sort out their land, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the enchantment was currently uniquely on a temple, with no ambiguity that it might have originally been placed on a mountain and just ‘walked over’ to the wrong land. In investigating, I'd take statements from both sides, although I wouldn't be surprised if both players managed to remember a sequence of events that's most favorable to them. Unless the players agree that Adam originally enchanted a mountain, I'd err on the side of assuming he did not.

Originally posted by Dennis Xiao:

Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! As a reminder, Silver scenarios are designed for those who are working up to an L2 level of IPG understanding. As such, if you are L2 or higher please refrain from responding or guiding others until Friday. This gives those who are still growing in their IPG knowledge ample time to learn from each other and have a conversation.

The blog post for this scenario can be found here:
http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/?p=1026

Adam and Nelson are playing in a Standard GPT. Adam taps his 3 Mountains and Temple of Triumph to cast Chandra's Phoenix and Chained to the Rocks. He exiles Nelson's Arbor Colossus with his Chained to the Rocks, and attacks for 2 with his Chandra's Phoenix while putting the Chained to the Rocks on his Temple of Triumph. Two turns later, you walk by the match and notice Chained to the Rocks enchanting the Temple of Triumph.

What do you do?

I'd ask if the Temple of Triumph is what's really being enchanted and confirm how long it's been there.

Since it's been several turns, I don't believe that it would be a good idea to rewind back, so the board state would just have to stay as is.

Adam has committed a GPE-Game Rules Violation, and Nelson a GPE-Failure to Maintain Game State, for not noticing the illegal enchantment.

After two turns, I think that too much has happened to be able to rewind, entire lines of play have probably occurred around this.

After reading through the question I agree with the other posts.

Adam has committed a GPE-GRV and should be given a warning.

Nelson has committed GPE-FtMGS for not noticing the illegal enchantment.

Since this is done at a GPT we are obviously at CREL. I do not think this is something I would go to the HJ for about a rewind. The board state needs to be corrected, both players warned and reminded to play more carefully.

It is possible that the player confused his Temple with a Sacred Foundry, perhaps a moment to educate the player about the difference between these two?

Seeing all the answers going the other way…

I ask myself if the choice of target is considered a choice made for the permanent.

The permanent attaches to the target of the aura spell.
If the aura was put directly on the field, wouldn't that be considered a choice for the permanent?

I don't think that it's materially different if it's an aura cast as a spell - a target is still a choice for that permanent granted it's made on a game state prior to the permanent's existence, but likewise Clone's choice of creature to copy is made on a game state prior as well.

The fix says to apply SBA's except with those three exceptions.
I contend that the target of the aura spell is a choice for that permanent and as such is an exception to the SBA procedure of sending illegally attached auras to the yard.

I don't know that I'm right, but it seems too invasive to let the exiled creature return - especially given that the opponent may have noticed the illegal attachment and calls a judge at an opportune time in hopes of getting his creature back for his maximum advantage.

Further, if we witnessed the illegal casting of the aura as it happened, we'd back it up then and there and he'd just cast it on his mountain.

Before reading any responses ( thanks to Talin Salway for this inspiration from the last Knowledge Pool ;) ) and consulting any documents:
The first thing I do after noticing the Chained to the Rocks on Temple of Triumph is to make sure that Adam casted it targeting the Temple instead of a Mountain, making sure it did not end on the Temple due to some error of dexterity / the card ending up there to some shenanigans (also I make sure that Nelson did not let this happen hoping that he could get a strategic advantage by “blowing up” the Chained to the Rocks at a specific moment). Since the Chained to the Rocks being on a land it cant enchant for over two turns, rewinding is not an option. I fix the current gamestate - Chained to the Rocks being attached to something it cant enchant - I put it into the graveyard, returning the Colossus. Since we are dealing with Competitive REL I give Adam a Warning for GPE-GRV and Nelson a Warning for GPE - FtMGS, and remind both players to be more careful in the future.

Todd, I asked myself the same question. With the number of cards that say choose, I was putting Choice and Target in two separate categories. I'm basing this separation on intuition though, not a specific rule somewhere.

I don't think selecting a target for a spell or ability is considered a choice, since it's part of the casting/activation process. From what I gather, choices are done on or after resolution, while targets are done on the other side.

“If a player made an illegal choice or failed to make a required choice for a permanent on the battlefield, that player makes a legal choice.”

But in any case, the IPG exception refers to choices with regards to permanents, and this was missed while it was a spell so the exception still doesn't apply.

As for invasiveness, yeah, it feels off. But remember, they're both responsible for the game state, and they both let it get there, and stay there. Consistency and avoiding the appearance of bias on our parts is more important than trying to fix a mistake that both players have let exist. They're both responsible for the game state.

The IPG does say ‘While it is tempting to try to “fix” game situations, the danger of missing a subtle detail or showing favoritism to a player (even unintentionally) makes it a bad idea.’ It also says part of what we're there for is to “ensure the consistent and fair running of a tournament.”

After some sober second thoughts and letting my aspie hyperfocus drop…

If we're not going to reverse, we do SBA's first and then apply the fix.

I started thinking what if it was a Holy Armor on Blood Baron? Would I let the player move it to another creature?
Well no of course not. Then why would I do something different here?

In fact, auras specifically have this issue of having a choice made to attach them to something whether by target of the spell or chosen as it is directly put on the field. The exception about choices doesn't sensibly apply because it'd justify attaching the Holy Armor to another valid object and that doesn't seem right which then makes sense that the IPG sensibly says to apply SBA's first.

Granted in this case it has a pretty harsh effect on the game state which warrants an investigation of Nelson to ensure that he isn't exploiting the situation, but yes, move Chained to the graveyard and return the exiled creature to the field seems appropriate.

Since I walk by their table and I'm not called by one of the players, I would casually ask what is the Chained to the Rocks enchanting. Now, I believe two things could happen:

A) I could be told that that the card is enchanted on the Temple of Triumph, which is not a legal target. IPG-wise, I would then assign GRV for Adam, FTMGS for Nelson, Warning for both of them, no backup and no partial fixes. Then SBAs apply immediately: the enchantment falls off the Temple and goes to the graveyard, thus freeing the creature exiled with it. I would eventually give some extra time if needed, and instruct to continue the game normally after this point.

B) it could be told that yeah, Adam enchanted the wrong permanent but Nelson agrees to move it onto a Mountain and keep playing with the board state they were considering up to that point. I would maybe give a Caution to both of them but I wouldn't go much further since they both agree on the board state and I believe Customer Care is something worth to be taken into consideration.

I think that a dexterity issue is extremely likely to be at play here. Even if a dexterity issue is not at play, applying the SBE resolution sets a horrible precedent where legitimate dexterity issues would be punished in an incredibly draconian manner.

I've seen many players accidentally separate the mountain from the Chained to the Rocks (or Nylea's Presence, etc.) only to repair the aura with a random land of the correct type after realizing what happened.

I've seen many players play with the Chained to the Rocks off to the side with the exiled creature under it (a la O-Ring) with just a verbal acknowledgement that it belongs on a Mountain.

Many if not most players physically pick up a group of lands as they move to tap them, virtually ensuring that the aura will be shuffled around.

Even if the aura is currently physically touching an illegal target, I'd give it at least a 50% chance of having originally been cast on a legal one. I would treat this as if the current game state has the Chained to the Rocks attached to a Mountain, but the player's board is disorganized and poorly representing that fact.

The SBE resolution is not only poor for customer care reasons, but it also promotes an unhealthy subgame. Players would be given incentive to watch how their opponent physically taps their mana and call a judge whenever it looks like Chained to the Rocks might be touching the wrong land. When playing with the troublesome enchantment, players would be continuously worried that a fumbling tap could get their opponents creature released via judge.

Imagine two players frantically trying to finish game three, when it became apparent that a Naya player's Chained to the Rocks was underneath a basic Forest. I think that giving their opponent to get a free disenchant effect is a horrible way to solve this as the ongoing standard.