DISCLAIMER: This is an unofficial rules document written by independent judges. This is not official Wizards of the Coast documentation.

Introduction

The Multiplayer Addendum to the Infraction Procedure Guide exists to assist Judges who are working at Competitive or Professional Rules Enforcement Level in Multiplayer Game Mode Tournaments. This document is written as a supplement to the Infraction Procedure Guide and should be used in close conjunction with it and the Multiplayer Addendum to the Magic Tournament Rules.

This document is an extension of the Infraction Procedure Guide, and therefore a person using the Multiplayer Addendum should first be familiar with that document. Once a person has reviewed the relevant sections of the Infraction Procedure Guide, they can turn to the Multiplayer Addendum to the Infraction Procedure Guide to find details on how to proceed in Multiplayer Tournaments.

Framework

Each section within this document mirrors its namesake in the Infraction Procedure Guide. Within each section, Policy Additions can be found. Policy Additions are policies outlined as best practice for handling infractions, penalties, and fixes.

See the Multiplayer Addendum to the Tournament Rules for further definitions of terms in this document.

At the time of original publishing, this document has been published solely in English. If such a time exists that this document be printed, translated, or otherwise ported to another language, tournament participants must refer to the English version to settle disputes concerning interpretations.

This document is updated periodically. Please obtain the most current version here.

1. General Philosophy

1.1. Definition of Penalties

Original policy

Warning

Warnings are used in situations of incorrect play when a small amount of time is needed to implement the corrective procedure. The purpose of a Warning is to alert judges and players involved that a problem has occurred and to keep a permanent record of the infraction. A time extension should be issued if the ruling has taken more than a minute.

Game Loss

A Game Loss ends the current game immediately and the player who committed the infraction is considered to have lost the game for the purpose of match reporting. The player receiving a Game Loss chooses whether to play or draw in the next game of that match, if applicable. If a Game Loss is issued before the match begins, neither player in that match may use sideboards (if the tournament uses them) for the first game they play.

Game Losses are applied immediately if the game is still ongoing, or to the player’s next game if it is not, unless otherwise specified. If a player would receive multiple Game Losses at the same time, they only receive one. If simultaneous Game Loss penalties are issued to each player, they are recorded, but do not affect the match score.

Match Loss

A Match Loss is a severe penalty that is usually issued when the match itself has been compromised.

Match Losses are applied to the match during which the offense occurred unless the offender’s match has already ended, in which case the penalty will be applied to that player’s next match.

Disqualification

A Disqualification is issued for activity that damages the integrity of a tournament as a whole or for severe unsporting conduct.

The recipient of a Disqualification does not need to be a player in the tournament. They may be a spectator or other bystander.

Disqualification can occur without proof of action so long as the Head Judge determines sufficient information exists to believe the tournament’s integrity may have been compromised. It is recommended that the Head Judge’s report reflect this fact.

When this penalty is applied, the player loses their current match and is dropped from the tournament. If a player has already received prizes at the time they are disqualified, that player may keep those prizes but does not receive any additional prizes or awards they may be due.

When a player is disqualified during a tournament, they are removed from the tournament and do not take up a place in the standings. This means that all players in the tournament will advance one spot in the standings and are entitled to any prizes the new standing would offer. If the Disqualification takes place after a cut is made, no additional players advance in place of the disqualified player although they do move up a spot in the standings. For example, if a player is disqualified during the quarterfinal round of a Magic Tabletop Mythic Qualifier, the former 9th place finisher does not advance into the single elimination top 8, but they do move into 8th place in the standings.

Disqualifications should be reported here. Please include the Wizards Account email address of the disqualified player and that player’s opponent.

Policy Additions

1.1A. In Multiplayer Tournaments, in some cases the penalty or additional remedy of Skipping a Turn is applied. Please refer to the Comprehensive Rules 500.10 for details on how Skipping a Turn works.

1.1B. In Multiplayer Tournaments that use a Best-of-One match structure, a new penalty is introduced:

Skip Priority

The Skip Priority penalty applies for Multiplayer Tournaments, at Competitive and Professional REL, in Best of One Matches:

  • The Penalty consists in the player Passing Priority on every action until the end of their next turn.
  • The player will still put triggered abilities on the stack, chose targets for them, and resolve them.
  • The player will be able to pay costs (such as when resolving triggers from Remora, Pact of Negation, Mana Vault, Rhystic Study).
  • The player will be allowed to declare blockers.
  • The player will only be allowed to declare mandatory attackers (such as creatures that must attack).
  • The player will not be allowed to play a land.
  • The player will not be allowed to cast a spell by normal means (but they can if they are resolving a triggered ability, like Rebound or Suspend).
  • The player will not be allowed to activate abilities (except mana abilities to pay for costs).

1.3. Randomizing a Library

Original policy

The remedy for some infractions in this document includes shuffling the randomized portion of the library. This requires first determining whether any portion of the library is non-random, such as cards that have been manipulated on the top or bottom of the library, and separating those. Check with both players to verify this, and check the graveyard, exile, and battlefield for library manipulation cards, such as Brainstorm and cards with the scry mechanic. Once the library has been shuffled, any manipulated cards are returned to their correct locations.

Shuffles performed by a judge as part of a remedy are not considered shuffles for game purposes.

Policy Additions

1.3A. In Multiplayer Tournaments, check with all Players when determining and verifying wheter any portion of a library is non-random.

2. Game Play Errors

Original policy

Game Play Errors are caused by incorrect or inaccurate play of the game such that it results in violations of the Magic Comprehensive Rules. Many offenses fit into this category and it would be impossible to list them all. The guide below is designed to give judges a framework for assessing how to handle a Game Play Error.

Most Game Play Error infractions are assumed to have been committed unintentionally. If the judge believes that the error was intentional, they should first consider whether an Unsporting Conduct — Cheating infraction has occurred.

With the exception of Failure to Maintain Game State, which is never upgraded, the third or subsequent Warning for a Game Play Error offense in the same category is upgraded to a Game Loss. For multi-day tournaments, the penalty count for these infractions resets between days.

Policy Additions

2A. In Multiplayer Tournaments, given the added complexity of the game state that can occur, specially in Best-of-One matches, the third infraction is often not worthy of an upgrade from Warning to Game Loss which is an effective Match Loss. It is still important, however, to discourage the infraction and mitigate the possible gained avantage.

As such, in Multiplayer Tournaments, the fourth and fifth Warnings for a Game Play Error in the same category, are upgraded to a Skip Priority penalty. The sixth and subsequent Warnings for a Game Play Error in the same category, are upgraded to a Game Loss.

2.1. Game Play Error — Missed Trigger

Original policy
No Penalty

Definition

A triggered ability triggers, but the player controlling the ability doesn’t demonstrate awareness of the trigger’s existence by the first time that it would affect the game in a visible fashion.

The point by which the player needs to demonstrate this awareness depends on the impact that the trigger would have on the game:

  • A triggered ability that requires its controller to choose targets (other than 'target opponent'), modes, or other choices made when the ability is put onto the stack: The controller must announce those choices before they next pass priority.
  • A triggered ability that causes a change in the visible game state (including life totals) or requires a choice upon resolution: The controller must take the appropriate physical action or acknowledge the specific trigger before taking any game actions (such as casting a sorcery spell or explicitly taking an action in the next step or phase) that can be taken only after the triggered ability should have resolved. Note that passing priority, casting an instant spell or activating an ability doesn’t mean a triggered ability has been forgotten, as it could still be on the stack.
  • A triggered ability that changes the rules of the game: The controller must acknowledge the trigger or stop an opponent who tries to take any resulting illegal action.
  • A triggered ability that affects the game state in non-visible ways: The controller must make the change known by the first time the change has an effect on the visible game state.

Once any of the above obligations has been fulfilled, further problems are treated as a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation.

If the turn-based action of putting a lore counter on a Saga is missed, it should be handled as though it was a missed trigger.

Triggered abilities that do nothing except create delayed triggered abilities automatically resolve without requiring acknowledgment. Awareness of the resulting delayed trigger must be demonstrated at the appropriate point. Triggered abilities that do nothing except create one or more copies of a spell or ability (such as storm or cipher) automatically resolve, but awareness of the resulting objects must be demonstrated using the same requirements as described above (even though the objects may not be triggered abilities).

Abilities consisting of an action followed by “when you do” in the same ability are considered communicated by the announcement of the action. This is most commonly the case for exert and similar abilities.

If a triggered ability would have no impact on the game, it’s not an infraction to fail to demonstrate awareness of it. For example, if the effect of a triggered ability instructs its controller to sacrifice a creature, a player who controls no creatures isn’t required to demonstrate awareness of the ability. Similarly, a player demonstrating awareness of an optional trigger with no visible effect is assumed to have made the affirmative choice unless the opponent responds.

Judges do not intervene in a missed trigger situation unless they intend to issue a Warning or have reason to suspect that the controller is intentionally missing their triggered abilities.

A player controlling another player is responsible for that player’s triggers in addition to their own.

Examples

  1. Knight of Infamy (a 2/1 creature with exalted) attacks alone. Its controller says “Take two.”
  2. A player forgets to remove the final time counter from a suspended spell and then draws a card during their draw step.
  3. A player casts Manic Vandal, then forgets its triggered ability by not choosing a target for it. They realize this only after casting another spell.
  4. A player forgets to exile the Angel token created by Geist of Saint Traft at end of combat. They realize the error when declaring blockers during the next turn.

Philosophy

Triggered abilities are common and invisible, so players should not be harshly penalized when forgetting about one. Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one may be Unsporting Conduct — Cheating (unless the ability would have no impact on the game as described above). Even if an opponent is involved in the announcement or resolution of the ability, the controller is still responsible for ensuring the opponents make the appropriate choices and take the appropriate actions. Opponents are not required to point out triggered abilities that they do not control, though they may do so if they wish.

Triggered abilities are assumed to be remembered until otherwise indicated, and the impact on the game state may not be immediately apparent. The opponent’s benefit is in not having to point out triggered abilities, although this does not mean that they can cause triggers to be missed. If an opponent requires information about the precise timing of a triggered ability or needs details about a game object that may be affected by a resolved triggered ability, that player may need to acknowledge that ability’s existence before its controller does. A player who makes a play that may or may not be legal depending on whether an opponent’s uncommunicated trigger has been remembered has not committed an infraction; their play either succeeds, confirming that the trigger has been missed, or is rewound.

Players may not cause triggered abilities controlled by an opponent to be missed by taking game actions or otherwise prematurely advancing the game. During an opponent’s turn, if a trigger’s controller demonstrates awareness of the trigger before they take an active role (such as taking an action or explicitly passing priority), the trigger is remembered. The Out-of-Order Sequencing rules (MTR section 4.3) may also be applicable, especially as they relate to batches of actions or resolving items on the stack in an improper order.

A triggered ability is considered to have triggered even if it was subsequently missed. Effects that count or restrict the number of times a triggered ability can trigger will count the missed one.

Additional Remedy

If the triggered ability is an enters-the-battlefield trigger of an Aura that affects only the enchanted permanent and causes a visible change to that permanent, resolve the ability immediately.

If the triggered ability is a delayed triggered ability that undoes a zone change (including token creation) caused by the effect that created the delayed triggered ability, the opponent chooses whether to resolve the ability the next time a player would get priority or when a player would get priority at the start of the next phase. The new zone does not need to be the same as the one the card was originally moved from.

For all other triggered abilities, if the ability was missed prior to the current phase in the previous turn, instruct the players to continue playing. If the triggered ability created an effect whose duration has already expired, instruct the players to continue playing.

If the triggered ability isn’t covered by the previous paragraphs, the opponent chooses whether the triggered ability is added to the stack. If it is, it’s inserted at the appropriate place on the stack if possible or on the bottom of the stack. No player may make choices for the triggered ability involving objects that would not have been legal choices when the ability should have triggered. For example, if the ability instructs a player to sacrifice a creature, that player can't sacrifice a creature that wasn't on the battlefield when the ability should have triggered.

If the player is in the process of, or has just completed, an action that indicates the trigger has been missed, and completing that action would change the effect of the trigger, a simple backup may be performed on that action.

Upgrade: If the triggered ability is usually considered detrimental for the controlling player and they own the card responsible for the existence of the trigger, the penalty is a Warning. The current game state is not a factor in determining this, though symmetrical abilities (such as Howling Mine) may be considered usually detrimental or not depending on who is being affected.

Policy Additions

2.1A. Definition In Multiplayer Tournaments, since there are multiple opponents, for triggered abilities that require its controller to choose targets, including ‘target opponent’, modes or other choices made when the ability is put onto the stack, the controller must announce those choices before they next pass priority. This is a change from Head-to-Head Tournaments, where the target opponent is obvioulsy defined.

2.1A. Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, since there are multiple opponents, the decisions that would be made by “the opponent” (when and if the missed trigger is put on the stack / resolves), are instead made by a majority vote of the opponents. If no majority decision is reached (perhaps because one opponent was eliminated and there is an even number of opponents), the final decision will be made by a randomly chosen opponent.

2.1A. Note In Multiplayer Tournaments, Judges and Players must be on the lookout for situations where the Player that committed the infraction is benefiting from the opponent’s decision, which in some corner cases can be a sign of collusion and / or cheating. Keep in mind that given the nuances of multiplayer, sometimes opponents will legitimately choose an option that benefits the Player that committed the infraction.

2.3. Game Play Error — Hidden Card Error

Original policy
Warning

Definition

A player commits an error in the game that cannot be corrected by only publicly available information. It is not a Hidden Card Error if the opponent acknowledges the action or controls the continuous effect modifying the game rule that made the action illegal. This infraction only applies when a card whose identity is known to only one player is in a hidden set of cards both before and after the error.

If an additional card is seen but not added to the set, the infraction is Game Play Error — Looking at Extra Cards.

Examples

  1. A player draws four cards after casting Ancestral Recall.
  2. A player scries two cards when they should only have scried one.
  3. A player resolves a Dark Confidant trigger, but forgets to reveal the card before putting it into their hand.
  4. A player has more cards in their hand than can be accounted for.
  5. A player casts Anticipate and picks up the top four cards of their library.
  6. A player, going first, draws for their turn.

Philosophy

Though the game state cannot be reversed to the ‘correct’ state, this error can be mitigated by giving the opponent sufficient knowledge and ability to offset the error so that it is less likely to generate advantage.

If cards are placed into a public zone, then their order is known and the infraction can be handled as a Game Rule Violation. Order cannot be determined from card faces only visible to one player unless the card is in a uniquely identifiable position (such as on top of the library, or as the only card in hand.)

Be careful not to apply this infraction in situations where a publicly-correctable error subsequently leads to an uncorrectable situation such as a Brainstorm cast using green mana. In these situations, the infraction is based on that root cause.

Information about cards previously known by the opponent, such as cards previously revealed while on the top of the library or by a previous look at the hand, may be taken into account while determining the set of cards to which the remedy applies.

Always operate on the smallest set possible to remedy the error. This may mean applying the remedy to only part of a set defined by an instruction. For example, if a player resolves Collected Company, picks up three cards with one hand and then four cards with the other, the last drawn set of four cards should be used for the remedy, instead of the full set of seven cards.

Additional Remedy

In cases where the infraction was immediately followed by moving a card from the affected set to a known location, such as by discarding, putting cards on top of the library, or playing a land, a simple backup to the point just after the error may be performed.

If the set of cards that contained the problem no longer exists, there is no remedy to be applied.

If the error put cards into a set prematurely and other operations involving cards in the set should have been performed first, the player reveals the set of cards that contains the excess and their opponent chooses a number of previously-unknown cards. Put those cards aside until the point at which they should have been legally added, then return them to the set.

If the error involves one or more cards that were supposed to be revealed, the player reveals the set of cards that contains the unrevealed cards and their opponent chooses that many previously-unknown cards. Treat those as the cards that were ‘revealed’ and return them to the set that was being selected from; the player then reperforms the action. If recreating the original selection set and reperforming the action would be too disruptive, leave the selected cards in hand.

If a set affected by the error contains more cards than it is supposed to contain, the player reveals the set of cards that contains the excess and their opponent chooses a number of previously-unknown cards sufficient to reduce the set to the correct size. These excess cards are returned to the correct location. If that location is the library, they should be shuffled into the random portion unless the owner previously knew the identity of the card/cards illegally moved; that many cards, chosen by the opponent, are returned to the original location instead. For example, if a player playing with Sphinx of Jwar Isle illegally draws a card, that card should be returned to the top of the library.

Upgrade: If a face-down card cast using a morph ability is discovered during the game to not have a morph ability, the penalty is a Game Loss. If the player has one or more cards with a morph ability in hand, has not added previously unknown cards to their hand since casting the card found in violation, and has discovered the error themselves, the upgrade does not apply and they may swap the card for a card with the morph ability in hand.

Policy Additions

2.3A Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, the decision on what cards must be returned is made by a majority vote of opponents. If no majority decision is reached, the final decision will be made by a randomly chosen opponent.

2.3A. Note In Multiplayer Tournaments, Judges and Players must be on the lookout for situations where the Player that committed the infraction is benefiting from the opponent’s decision, which in some corner cases can be a sign of collusion and / or cheating. Keep in mind that given the nuances of multiplayer, sometimes opponents will legitimately choose an option that benefits the Player that committed the infraction.

2.5. Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation

Original policy
Warning

Definition

This infraction covers the majority of game situations in which a player makes an error or fails to follow a game procedure correctly. It handles violations of the Comprehensive Rules that are not covered by the other Game Play Errors.

Examples

  1. A player casts Wrath of God for 3W (actual cost 2WW).
  2. A player does not attack with a creature that must attack each turn.
  3. A player fails to put a creature with lethal damage into a graveyard and it is not noticed until several turns later.
  4. A Phyrexian Revoker is on the battlefield that should have had a card named for it.
  5. A player casts Brainstorm and forgets to put two cards back on top of their library.

Philosophy

While Game Rule Violations can be attributed to one player, they usually occur publicly and both players are expected to be mindful of what is happening in the game. It is tempting to try and “fix” these errors, but it is important that they be handled consistently, regardless of their impact on the game.

Additional Remedy

First, consider a simple backup (see section 1.4).

If a simple backup is not sufficient and the infraction falls into one or more of the following categories, and only into those categories, perform the appropriate partial fix:

  • If a player forgot to untap one or more permanents at the start of their turn and it is still the same turn, untap them.
  • If a player made an illegal choice (including no choice where required) for a static ability generating a continuous effect still on the battlefield, that player makes a legal choice.
  • If a player failed to draw cards, discard cards, or return cards from their hand to another zone, that player does so.
  • If an object is not in the correct zone, the exact object is still known to all players, and it can be moved with only minor disruption to the current state of the game, put the object in the correct zone. This only applies if the object being in the wrong zone is the Game Rule Violation, and not if it is the consequence of a different error.
  • If damage assignment order has not been declared, the appropriate player chooses that order.

For each of these fixes, a simple backup may be performed beforehand if it makes applying the fix smoother. Triggered abilities are generated from these partial fixes only if they would have occurred had the action been taken at the correct time.

Otherwise, a full backup may be considered or the game state may be left as is.

If the game has proceeded past a point where an opponent could reasonably be expected to notice the error, the opponent has also committed an infraction. In most cases, the infraction is Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State. However, if the judge believes that both players were responsible for the Game Rule Violation, such as due to the opponent controlling the continuous effect modifying the rules of the game that led to the Game Rule Violation or a player taking action based on another player’s instruction, they have instead committed a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation. For example, if a player casts Path to Exile on an opponent’s creature and the opponent puts the creature into the graveyard, once the game has continued both players will have committed a Game Rule Violation.

Policy Additions

2.5A Philosophy In Multiplayer Tournaments, it is expected that all players are mindful of what is happening in the game.

2.5B Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, if the judge believes that more than one player is responsible for the Game Rule Violation, such as due to the opponents controlling the continuous effect modifying the rules of the game that led to the Game Rule Violation or a player taking action based on another player’s instruction, then all of the involved players will have committed a Game Play Error - Game Rule Violation, where the remaining players that were not involved have commited a Game Play Error - Failure to Maintain Game State.

3. Tournament Errors

3.1. Tournament Error — Tardiness

Original policy
Game Loss

Definition

A player is not in their seat at the beginning of a round, or has not completed tasks assigned within the time allocated. If a round begins before the previous round would have ended (due to all players finishing early), tardiness does not apply until the scheduled end of the previous round.

If, before or during a match, a player requests and receives permission from a judge for a delay for a legitimate task, such as a bathroom break or finding replacements for missing cards, that player has up to 10 minutes to perform that task before they are considered tardy. If the player takes more than 10 minutes, a Match Loss will be applied. Otherwise, no penalty will be applied and a time extension given for the time taken.

Examples

  1. A player arrives to their seat 5 minutes after the round begins.
  2. A player hands in their decklist after the time designated by the judge or organizer.
  3. A player loses their deck and cannot find replacement cards within the first 10 minutes of the round.
  4. A player sits at an incorrect table and plays the wrong opponent.

Philosophy

Players are responsible for being on time and in the correct seat for their matches, and for completing registrations in a timely manner. The Tournament Organizer may announce that they are giving the players some additional time before a penalty is issued. Otherwise, the penalty is issued as soon as the round begins.

Additional Remedy

The players are given a time extension corresponding to the length of the tardiness.

Upgrade: A player not in their seat 10 minutes into the round will receive a Match Loss and will be dropped from the tournament unless they report to the Head Judge or Scorekeeper before the end of the round.

Downgrade: A player who arrives at their seat before 1 minute has elapsed in the round receives a Warning.

Policy Additions

3.1A. Penalty In Multiplayer Tournaments, no Game Loss is awarded for Tardiness. Instead, players who arrive late and would normally receive a Game Loss skip their first turn. For more information on skipping turns, refer to Comprehensive Rules 500.10. There is still the path for upgrade to Match Loss after 10 minutes, and the path for downgrade to Warning before 1 minute.

3.2. Tournament Error — Outside Assistance

Original policy
Match Loss

Definition

A player, spectator, or other tournament participant does any of the following:

  • Seeks play advice or private information about their match from others once they have sat for their match.
  • Gives play advice or reveals private information to players who have sat for their match.
  • During a game, refers to notes (other than Oracle™ pages) made before the official beginning of the current match.

These criteria also apply to any deck construction and draft portions of a limited tournament. Additionally, no notes of any kind may be made during a draft. Some team formats have additional communication rules that may modify the definition of this infraction.

Notes made outside the current match may only be referenced between games, and must have been in the player’s possession since the beginning of the match.

Examples

  1. During a game, a player references play notes that were created before the tournament.
  2. A spectator points out the correct play to a player who had not solicited the information.

Philosophy

Tournaments test the skill of a player, not their ability to follow external advice or directions. Any strategy advice, play advice, or construction advice from an external source is considered outside assistance.

Visual modifications to cards, including brief text, that provide minor strategic information or hints are acceptable and not considered notes. Detailed instructions or complex strategic advice may not be written on cards. The Head Judge is the final arbiter on what cards and notes are acceptable for a tournament. Spectators who commit this infraction may be asked to leave the venue if they are not enrolled in the tournament.

Downgrade: If the information acquired is information that the player would have access to between games, the penalty is a Game Loss.

Policy Additions

3.2A. Definition In Multiplayer Tournaments, this refers only to players outside of the current match. Players who offer advice or strategic lines of play to opponents within their current match have not committed Outside Assistance. Keep in mind that players that got eliminated count as spectators, so while eliminated, they are considered outside of the current match.

3.3 Tournament Error — Slow Play

Original policy
Warning

Definition

A player takes longer than is reasonably required to complete game actions. If a judge believes a player is intentionally playing slowly to take advantage of a time limit, the infraction is Unsporting Conduct — Stalling. </p>

It is also slow play if a player continues to execute a loop without being able to provide an exact number of iterations and the expected resulting game state.

Examples

  1. A player repeatedly reviews their opponent’s graveyard without any significant change in game state.
  2. A player spends time writing down the contents of an opponent’s library while resolving Thought Hemorrhage.
  3. A player takes an excessive amount of time to shuffle their deck between games.
  4. A player gets up from their seat to look at standings or goes to the bathroom without permission of an official.

Philosophy

All players have the responsibility to play quickly enough so that their opponents are not at a significant disadvantage because of the time limit. A player may be playing slowly without realizing it. A comment of “I need you to play faster” is often appropriate and all that is needed. Further slow play should be penalized.

Additional Remedy

In the event that the match exceeds the time limit, two additional turns are added to the number of additional turns played. This turn extension occurs before any end-of-match procedure can begin and after any time extensions that may have been issued. No additional turns are awarded if the match is already in additional turns, though the Warning still applies.

Policy Additions

3.3A. Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, no additional extra turns are added as a remedy for slow play. Players who receive a Slow Play warning during the round will skip any extra turns originating from the End-of-Round procedure. Their turn is not considered when determining extra turns for end of round procedure. The remaining players take their extra turns.

3.3B. Additional Remedy If a player is issued a Warning for Slow Play after time in the round has been called in Multiplayer Tournaments, that player’s turn(s) originating from the End-of-Round procedure are not skipped, though the Warning still applies.

3.5. Tournament Error — Deck Problem

Original policy
Warning

Definition

The contents of a deck or sideboard do not match the decklist registered and the decklist represents what the player intended to play.

If there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard unless they are:

  • Promotional cards that have been handed out as part of the event.
  • Double-faced cards represented by substitute cards in the deck.
  • Damaged cards that have been officially proxied for the tournament.
  • Double-faced cards being used to represent the back side of cards in the deck. These cards must not be sleeved in the same way as cards in the main deck and/or sideboard.

Cards in different sleeves, tokens, and double-faced cards for which substitute cards are being used are ignored when determining deck (not sideboard) legality.

If a player is unable to locate cards (or identical equivalents) from their main deck, treat it as a Decklist Problem instead. If sideboard cards are missing, make a note of this, but issue no penalty.

The discovery of a card that violates a companion restriction is a Deck Problem if the player does not wish to modify their decklist to accommodate the companion restriction.

Examples

  1. A player has 59 cards in their deck, but 60 listed on their decklist.
  2. A player has a Pacifism in their deck from a previous opponent.
  3. In game one of a match, A player has Pithing Needle in their deck, but only has one registered in their sideboard.

Philosophy

Players are expected to call attention to deck errors immediately, and not gain any potential advantage from having the cards in their deck. </p>

The most common forms of deck error are failure to desideboard and having a card in the wrong deck. Both of these are difficult to gain advantage from without obvious cheating. Allowing the opponent to choose which card they would otherwise be working with is sufficient to compensate for the easily discovered situations. Duplicates of cards that begin in the main deck are more problematic, as they are not as easy to realize and catch, and thus mandate an upgraded penalty.

A window in which the error is a Game Loss is necessary to discourage intentional abuse of the minimum number of cards in the deck. Once that point has passed, the opponent agrees that the deck is valid. Judges should always be mindful of the abuse possibilities when investigating these infractions.

Additional Remedy

Locate any cards missing from the deck and any incorrect cards in any game zone. Reveal those cards to the opponent. If the game has started, the opponent chooses whether to fix the problem now or when a player would next get priority, and which of the missing cards replaces each incorrect card; any extras are shuffled into the random portion of the library. If more cards are being removed than added, prioritize ones not in the library first. If there are still additional cards not in the library that need replacing, they are replaced by cards from the random portion of the library. If the missing card(s) are with the sideboard and it isn’t the first game, choose the ones to be returned to the deck at random from main deck cards in the sideboard.

If the error caused a violation of a companion restriction and it is a post-sideboard game (or a pre-sideboard game and the player has elected to continue with the deck they registered that does not match the revealed companion condition), locate all cards violating the restriction. Then, choose that number of cards at random from unrevealed cards in the sideboard that meet the companion restriction. The opponent decides which chosen card replaces each illegal card. If making the deck match the companion condition is impossible, upgrade the penalty to a Game Loss.

If the missing card(s) were in a previous or current opponent’s deck, issue penalties to both players.

Upgrade: In games before sideboarding, while the deck is presented to the opponent for pre game shuffling or during a deckcheck, if the deck contains fewer cards than registered (and any missing cards are not in the opponent’s deck) or the sideboard contains more cards than registered, the penalty is a Game Loss.

In games after sideboarding, while the deck is presented to the opponent for pre-game shuffling or during a deckcheck, if the deck contains fewer cards than the format minimum (and any missing cards are not in the opponent’s deck) or the sideboard contains more cards than the format maximum, the penalty is a Game Loss.

Upgrade: If an opponent may have made strategic decisions based on the presence of a sideboard card (such as having seen it in the hand or library during a search effect), the penalty is a Game Loss.

Upgrade: If an error resulted in more copies of a main deck card being played than were registered or allowed by companion restriction and this was discovered after the game had begun, the penalty is a Game Loss unless all copies of the card are still in the random portion of the library. For example if the decklist has two copies of Shock in the main deck and two in the sideboard, but a search finds two copies of Shock in the library with another already in the graveyard, the penalty is upgraded.

Policy Additions

3.5A. Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, the located card or cards are revealed to all opponents. The majority of opponents must come to a decision on wether to fix the problem now or when a player would next get priority, and which missing cards replaces each incorrect card. If no majority decision is reached, the final decision will be made by a randomly chosen opponent.

3.5A. Note In Multiplayer Tournaments, Judges and Players must be on the lookout for situations where the Player that committed the infraction is benefiting from the opponent’s decision, which in some corner cases can be a sign of collusion and / or cheating. Keep in mind that given the nuances of multiplayer, sometimes opponents will legitimately choose an option that benefits the Player that committed the infraction.

3.5B. Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, it’s possible for multiple cards to be missing by be located in multiple players’ decks. If the missing card(s) were in a previous or current opponent’s deck(s), issue penalties to all involved players.

3.7. Communication Policy Violation

Original policy
Warning

Definition

A player violates the Communication policies detailed in section 4 of the Magic Tournament Rules and the judge believes their opponent has taken an in-game action or clearly chosen not to act based on the erroneous information. This infraction only applies to violations of that policy and not to general communication confusion.

Examples

  1. A player is asked how many cards they have in their hand and answers “Three.” A few moments later, their opponent casts a discard spell and they realize that they have four.
  2. A player keeps their Llanowar Elf in with their land, and their opponent attacks thinking they have no blockers.
  3. A player casts Path to Exile, forgets to remind their opponent that they have the opportunity to search for a basic land and, as a result, they don’t.

Philosophy

Clear communication is essential when playing Magic. Though many offenses will be intentional, it is possible for a player to make a genuine mistake that causes confusion and these should not be penalized harshly.

A player may commit this infraction in situations where they have not spoken. A physically ambiguous board state is not automatically a penalty, but judges are encouraged to tell players to fix ambiguous placements before they might become problematic.

Misapplication of a shortcut is usually not a Communication Policy Violation, as the default interpretation applies in ambiguous situations and the opponent is able to act on that shortcut. Any deviation from a tournament shortcut requires a clear explanation.

Additional Remedy

A backup may be considered to the point of the action, not the erroneous communication.

Policy Additions

3.7A. Definition

In a Multiplayer Tournament, physically revealing hidden information is allowed in certain conditions (see MAMTR 3.13 Hidden Information). Secretly exchanging hidden information with an Opponent is a Communication Policy Violation (see MAMTR 4.1 - Player Communication).

3.7B. Examples

Anton is about to win a match between them, Bart, Cicero and Danika. While Bart has priority, and before they make a decision, Cicero shows them a card from their hand. This is a Communication Policy Violation.

3.7C. Philosophy

In Multiplayer Tournaments, Communication Policy Violation Warnings exist as a deterrence for Collusion, and because it’s admissible that some Players are unaware of the Policy. In addition to the Warning we also have an additional remedy to mitigate any potential advantage gained.

3.7D. Additional Remedy

In the case where hidden information could be legally revealed and instead is shown only to a subset of players, that information must be revealed to all players. If it’s not possible to determine the exact piece of information shown (i.e.: the actual card face) because its part of a larger hidden set, the entire set is revealed.

4. Unsporting Conduct

4.1. Unsporting Conduct — Minor

Original policy
Warning

Definition

A player takes action that is disruptive to the tournament or its participants. It may affect the comfort level of those around the individual, but determining whether this is the case is not required.

Examples

  1. A player uses excessively vulgar and profane language.
  2. A player inappropriately demands to a judge that their opponent receive a penalty.
  3. A player appeals to the Head Judge before waiting for the floor judge to issue a ruling.
  4. A player throws their deck on the ground after losing a game.
  5. A player leaves excessive trash in the play area after leaving the table.
  6. A player fails to follow the request of a tournament official to leave the play area.

Philosophy

All participants should expect a safe and enjoyable environment at a tournament, and a player needs to be made aware if their behavior is unacceptable so that this environment may be maintained.

Additional Remedy

The player must correct the problem immediately. Subsequent Unsporting Conduct — Minor infractions, even for different offenses, will result in a Game Loss. If a Game Loss is issued for repeated infractions, and it occurs at the end of a game, it is acceptable for the judge to apply the penalty to the next game instead.

Policy Additions

4.2A. Examples

  1. In a Multiplayer Tournament, a player uses coercive language to convince an opponent into intentionally drawing the game by saying “You either agree to draw or we lose the game to them”.
  2. In a Multiplayer Tournament, a player coerces and opponent into performing an action so they get priority back by saying “Tap that land for mana so I get priority back, otherwise we lose the game”.

4.2. Unsporting Conduct — Major

Original policy
Match Loss

Definition

A player takes action towards one or more individuals that could reasonably be expected to create a feeling of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked. This may include insults based on race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, or sexual orientation. Threats of physical violence should be treated as Unsporting Conduct – Aggressive Behavior.

It is possible for an offender to commit this infraction without intending malice or harm to the subject of the harassment.

Examples

  1. A player uses a racial slur against their opponent.
  2. A player intentionally misgenders their opponent.
  3. A player takes inappropriate photos of another player without express permission.
  4. A player asks a spectator for a date, is denied, and continues to press the issue.
  5. A player purposefully obstructs another player with the intent of inducing physical contact.
  6. A spectator uses social media to bully another player.

Philosophy

A safe environment is a basic expectation of any tournament attendee. Harassment undermines the safety and integrity of a tournament. Players who purposefully create harmful or unwelcoming situations in a tournament are expected to immediately correct the behavior and demonstrate remorse or be removed.

Because of the confrontational nature of this infraction, judges need to end any match in progress and separate the players. Care should be taken not to escalate the situation if at all possible. The offender will be removed from the area to receive the penalty, and education about why the behavior is unacceptable regardless of excuse. They may need a few moments to cool down afterwards. Apologizing is encouraged, but the desire of the other individuals to not interact with their harasser must be respected.

Officials must investigate these matters as soon as they are brought to their attention. If they determine that the infraction does not meet the criteria for Unsporting Conduct – Major, it is still recommended that the players be talked to to avoid future misunderstandings.

Additional Remedy

The player must correct the behavior immediately. If the offense occurs at the end of a match, it is acceptable for the judge to apply the penalty to the next match instead.

Upgrade: If the offense was committed with malicious intent, the player displays no remorse, or the offense is repeated at a later time, the penalty is Disqualification and removal from the venue

Policy Additions

4.2A. Definition In Multiplayer Tournaments, Colluding with an opponent is also an Unsporting Conduct - Major infraction. Misplays or suboptimal plays are not Collusion, Collusion require intention to do so.

4.2B. Definition In Multiplayer Tournaments, performing a Spite Play against an opponent is also an Unsporting Conduct - Major infraction. Misplays or suboptimal plays are not Spite plays, Spite plays require intention to do so.

4.2C. Philosophy In Multiplayer Tournaments, only the players instigating or perpetuating confrontation are removed from the match, in which case the match can continue with the remaining players.

4.2D. Additional Remedy In Multiplayer Tournaments, whenever a Collusion or Spite Play infraction occurs, a full backup may be considered or the game state may be left as is.

4.2E. Upgrade: In Multiplayer Tournaments, if it is determined that players in Collusion with each other were aware that what they were doing was not permitted, or they acted with malicious intent, the penalty is Disqualification. All players found in Collusion receive this penalty.

4.2F. Upgrade: In Multiplayer Tournaments, if it is determined that a player performed a Spite Play while aware it was not permitted, or they acted with malicious intent, the penalty is Disqualification.

4.4. Unsporting Conduct — Bribery and Wagering

Original policy
Match Loss

Definition

A player offers an incentive to entice an opponent into conceding, drawing, or changing the results of a match, encourages such an offer, or accepts such an offer. Refer to section 5.2 of the Magic Tournament Rules for a more detailed description of what constitutes bribery.

Wagering occurs when a player or spectator at a tournament places or offers to place a bet on the outcome of a tournament, match or any portion of a tournament or match. The wager does not need to be monetary, nor is it relevant if a player is not betting on their own match.

If the player was aware that what they were doing was against the rules, the infraction is Unsporting Conduct — Cheating.

Examples

  1. A player in a Swiss round offers their opponent $100 to concede the match.
  2. A player offers their opponent a card in exchange for a draw.
  3. A player asks for a concession in exchange for a prize split.
  4. Two players agree that the winner of the match will be able to choose a rare card out of the other person’s deck after the match.
  5. Two spectators place a bet on the number of games that will be needed to decide a match.

Philosophy

Bribery and wagering disrupt the integrity of the tournament and are strictly forbidden.

Policy Additions

4.4A. Philosophy In Multiplayer Tournaments, in-game agreements, such as offering to not attack one another, are not Bribery. Bribery refers to tangible, monetary, or other similar means outside of the game offered to influence or change gameplay decisions or match outcome.

Credit

Initially Created by Bryan Spellman and Landon Liberator

Initial Consultation and editing by Savannah Beard, Nicholas Hammond, Fábio Batista, Erin Leonard, Mark Mason, Graydon Beadle, Tyler Bloom, Fatty Springer, Maria Howerton-Sweid, Ethan Smilg, and Seth Arar.

Subsequent Contributions by the community via the github repository