Tricky vs. Deceptive Behavior (updated 2/12)

[Jayson]

Jayson: Lying about your hand is gamesmanship. Will such lies pick up a penalty? That is down to the local judges.

Just because a player does not have to believe an opponents lies does not absolve the opponent from making such misrepresentations.

I understand the concept of gamesmanship. I don't necessarily agree with some of the things that fall under that category as I don't see them having a negative impact on the game. But I don't have a lot of experience with this sort of behavior so I could be wrong.

Finally, someone who agrees with me. A little bluffing IMO really doesn't take away from SOTG at all.

I don't agree with you. Eww.

 

[The Captain]

Really?? WoW seriously bluffing is a mind trick and you need skills to do this this is a big part of the game in games like yugioh this is soo big. So you r saying that players that can bluff susesfully are pathetic ?? plz bluffing is part of any game sorry.

haha you spell WoW the same way i do.

 

[Ra2xse]

I think that bluffing should be in game, it's an card game. The reason why bluffing shouldn't be banned is that it's so hard to catch bluffers. But it's banned so could there be any chances to get that in the roule books bolded.

Before finnsih nats 2008 i asked in the finnish pokemon forums about bluffing and about is it allowed in pkmn. The answer was: ''You gave me lauhgts of the day, of course you can bluff it's an card game'' (i translated it my self) Then in worlds 2008 i made a giant bluff with Dusknoir as a translation but not in deck, i tought that the cards in my deck wouldn't be in public knowelenge and i could have any transaltions on table. Then in the score of 4-1 i've got DQd. The sadest thing is that the orginal bluffer (who i saw doing the same, and i tought that it was legal [stupid senior]) didn't get called. And still i feel like a victim, DQ because wrong information...

 

[The Captain]

question can i play duskul in my deck with no dusknoir, or is that illeagal now. If my noir is prized can i put duskul on my bench to bluf that i can
get a dusknoir

 

[prodigal_fanboy]

Jayson: Lying about your hand is gamesmanship. Will such lies pick up a penalty? That is down to the local judges.

Just because a player does not have to believe an opponents lies does not absolve the opponent from making such misrepresentations.

I fail to understand how lying about one's hand is gamesmanship.

Public knowledge is what's on the field, face-up prized from things like Gallade's attack, and in discard.

You have no clue what five cards I'm holding. If I say one is a Power Spray, you have no clue what five cards I'm actually holding.

They will become public knowledge when I play them, or if you play a Looker's/use Gengar's attack.

"Pushing the rules to the limit without getting caught, using whatever dubious methods possible to achieve the desired end."

I don't see how bluffing (no net change in verified game state knowledge to the opponent) pushes the rules to the limit, WITH OR WITHOUT getting caught bluffing.

You could argue that it's using dubious methods possible to achieve the desired end, however that's a moral judgment as to what constitutes "dubious," or the inherent topic of debate.

Magic: the Gathering analogy. If I say I'm going to Mana Leak the spell you cast on your second turn, you play the spell, and I do in fact Mana Leak it, you still benefit. You now know that I have at most three Mana Leaks remaining at one fewer in my hand to use against what you play next.

While of course the resourcing and context are very different in this game, the essential principle holds true: there's a value in calling your bluff, even if it's true.

 

[Lawman]

question can i play duskul in my deck with no dusknoir, or is that illeagal now. If my noir is prized can i put duskul on my bench to bluf that i can
get a dusknoir

You can put any modified legal card in your deck you want. You want to try to run a bare duskull w/o the Noir...go ahead. You may "fool" the 1st player, but once you NEVER evo it.....people will start playing a 4th and 5th poke on bench and laugh at you.

Keith

 

[The Captain]

You can put any modified legal card in your deck you want. You want to try to run a bare duskull w/o the Noir...go ahead. You may "fool" the 1st player, but once you NEVER evo it.....people will start playing a 4th and 5th poke on bench and laugh at you.

Keith

i know my point, in playing a sole dusknoir is clearly into decieving my opponent into misplaying, like having the dusknoir for translation

 

[NoPoke]

i know my point, in playing a sole dusknoir is clearly into decieving my opponent into misplaying, like having the dusknoir for translation

Seems like you really don't understand the difference between any legal game action that causes your opponent to make an incorrect inference and a non-game action that is designed to distract the opponent or misrepresent the gamestate. Such misrepresentation extends to the hidden parts of the game too.

An early Bebe's Search for a Dark Palm Dusknoir may be enough to have your opponent restrict their bench for a while. I can see it working in the early swiss rounds but not in the top cut. I wish you luck with the tactic and though it isn't the kind of tactic that some would wish to encourage it is legal. Not sure I'd want to waste a Bebe on such but each to their own.

 

[TheCaptainScrewdUp]

Radu C

Minnesota

Masters

This information was not hard to find out, I bet he's going to nats as he did last year.
Too bad none of his judges will do anything about cheating players.

 

[The Captain]

Radu C

Minnesota

Masters

This information was not hard to find out, I bet he's going to nats as he did last year.
Too bad none of his judges will do anything about cheating players.

my judges? WTH i don't own judges bro

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

I can't help but think of THIS when I see "The Captain"

Anyway Pokemon has it's roots as a childrens game. Adults may play, but we are supposed to play by the rules we usually teach our children. Things like sportsmanship, honor, truth, etc.

Deception has it's place in plenty of games, but just not this one. It's not a hard concept.

 

[vietgamer1021]

Obviously YGO tv show teaches people to be as optimistic as they can, play fair, and be friends with everyone

the card game?

YEAH RIGHT

example? the people the disregard SOTG and use low tactics to get an advantage over a game

 

[The Captain]

Obviously YGO teaches people to be as optimistic as they can, play fair, and be friends with everyone

YEAH RIGHT

example? the people the disregard SOTG and use low tactics to get an advantage over a game

i just had applebees and it was really good but now im sooo full, im going to puke or something. There is no SOTG in yugioh thank god , im not ten for christsake.

 

[yoshi1001]

In my years of covering it, the Pokémon TCG has had a particular ethic to its style of play, which is different from most other games listed in this thread. Unlike Magic, Yu-gi-oh, poker, etc., Pokémon originated as a video game and later as an anime, both of which suggest a lighter atmosphere than is associated with the other games. This is a trait which PUI/PCL has worked hard to maintain, likely both as a commercial differentiator and the personal preference of the company. Some of the actions suggested in this thread run counter to the type of game atmosphere the company desires, and as such are either frowned upon or outright penalized.

Pokémon is not poker, it is not Magic, and it is not Yu-gi-oh. When I talk to people who run events for multiple games, they often tell me how much they enjoy the Pokémon players more than some or all of the other gamers they run events for, and I strongly believe that this is why.

 

[ShadowCard]

This topic always comes up every so often months. The last thread I saw, the consensus was that anything that involves an outright lie is cheating, while bluffing, which does not involve a lie/cheat, is alright. Summing up that thread a bluff is:

It is displaying (not articulating) a false sense of confidence or a false sense of weakness.

Such display doesn't mean anything until the opponent designates that display to mean something.

Bluff example: a player playing Machamp can look at the cards he/she has in hand, and then smile, frown or do whatever else as long as the player does not verbally confirm or deny anything, and it'd be alright. This would be a bluff. The opponent decides what a smile/frown means.

Cheating example: if the same player says "Sweet! I've got the Machop RC to Machamp for the GG!" and then turns out to not have it, that is lieing, which is against the rules. How would someone know? Such comments do tend to draw attention.

Some people will agree that the first example is alright and others will not. Players don't stay in one place. What this means is correctly summed up by Vince Krekeler:

If you bluff or use questionable tactics, you are going to go up against the opinion of an individual judge, or an individual head judge who may or may not penalize you for the action.

Eventually, you will run into [a judge that disagrees with you], and you will get smacked down.

Of course a player can show their opponent their hand if they wish. But it is not a normal game action and your motives for doing so may be questioned. Not least because doing so would be highly unusual.

Intimidation penalty?

Unlike Magic, Yu-gi-oh, poker, etc., Pokémon originated as a video game and later as an anime, both of which suggest a lighter atmosphere than is associated with the other games.
...
Pokémon is not poker, it is not Magic, and it is not Yu-gi-oh. When I talk to people who run events for multiple games, they often tell me how much they enjoy the Pokémon players more than some or all of the other gamers they run events for, and I strongly believe that this is why.

Agreed. People like Pokemon because of its lighter atmosphere. SotG was definitely the right move for PUI to make. Store owners notice the difference between the two atmospheres as well, and Pokemon doesn't have the negative opinion.

 

[ChaosJim]

I'm alarmed people are going to call people on bluffing as a form of angle shooting.

What if I'm playing a Galactic deck and watch my opponent VERY carefully? Does this imply/bluff/influence them that I have a Power Spray?

A few pages ago someone said that Pokemon was unlike any other game. I agree, but I feel as though thats not the appropriate response.

Not benching Duskull until you can Rare Candy into a Dusknoir immediately is a form of bluffing that maybe you didn't have it until the perfect moment. I understand this is considered separate because it consists entirely of ingame actions.

I would suggest that there are three categories, explicit cheating (breaking the rules, obv), deception (an aggressive effort to manipulate an opponent's actions through untrue facts or blatant gestures) and bluffing (opening your opponent's imagination to possibilities that might or might not be true).

Cheating is never acceptable, we as a community agree on that ethic (I really hope).

Deception is not acceptable either, but I will be annoyed by it and remember it, harboring no grudge, mostly just keeping track to know what to expect from certain people.

When people have bluffed/attempted to I find myself playing around everything is possible, but primarily what I believe to be true. This should always be everyone's course of action. If you imagine something extra due to the way in which your opponent plays the game, and your game plan doesn't work out, they got you. Thats kind of how I'd feel if someone did it to me, and i'd just take it on the chin. Likewise, I'd hope that someone I play with could take it like that. Before anyone says we can't imply what attitudes people should have, that is part of Spirit of the Game, an expected set of attitudes. I think this last area is gray however. Some of us view it as an interesting and challenging facet to the game (and other aspects of life and other games). Some people view it as wolves after sheep (and that is undoubtedly some people's intents). And some still are the wolves.

PS Bluffing seems to be achievable through entirely legal game actions, and I'm curious how judges are expected to draw lines on this matter.

 

[PokePop]

I'm alarmed people are going to call people on bluffing as a form of angle shooting.

What if I'm playing a Galactic deck and watch my opponent VERY carefully? Does this imply/bluff/influence them that I have a Power Spray?

A few pages ago someone said that Pokemon was unlike any other game. I agree, but I feel as though thats not the appropriate response.

Not benching Duskull until you can Rare Candy into a Dusknoir immediately is a form of bluffing that maybe you didn't have it until the perfect moment. I understand this is considered separate because it consists entirely of ingame actions.

I would suggest that there are three categories, explicit cheating (breaking the rules, obv), deception (an aggressive effort to manipulate an opponent's actions through untrue facts or blatant gestures) and bluffing (opening your opponent's imagination to possibilities that might or might not be true).

Cheating is never acceptable, we as a community agree on that ethic (I really hope).

Deception is not acceptable either, but I will be annoyed by it and remember it, harboring no grudge, mostly just keeping track to know what to expect from certain people.

When people have bluffed/attempted to I find myself playing around everything is possible, but primarily what I believe to be true. This should always be everyone's course of action. If you imagine something extra due to the way in which your opponent plays the game, and your game plan doesn't work out, they got you. Thats kind of how I'd feel if someone did it to me, and i'd just take it on the chin. Likewise, I'd hope that someone I play with could take it like that. Before anyone says we can't imply what attitudes people should have, that is part of Spirit of the Game, an expected set of attitudes. I think this last area is gray however. Some of us view it as an interesting and challenging facet to the game (and other aspects of life and other games). Some people view it as wolves after sheep (and that is undoubtedly some people's intents). And some still are the wolves.

PS Bluffing seems to be achievable through entirely legal game actions, and I'm curious how judges are expected to draw lines on this matter.

I like how you have split this up.
It is the deceptive acts/statements that are being called out here.

 

[prodigal_fanboy]

In response to ChaosJim and PokePop - so implying you have someone through your gesturing and body language is acceptable, but actually saying anything that effect is not?

Of course, the above definition breaks down if you do not find DarthPika's actions acceptable.

 

[PokePop]

Here's the problem.
And I said this exact thing in the last topic on this subject.
Most people, judging by the posts of players on this topic, can't tell the difference between what would be acceptible and what would not.

In fact, depending on the judge that you're dealing with, the line between those actions is going to be different.

Given the extreme penalties that could be awarded for behavior that goes over the line, is it a good idea to skate on that line?
A line that you could find is no longer under you at any moment?

No, in my opinion, it's not worth it.

 

[ChaosJim]

Here's the problem.
And I said this exact thing in the last topic on this subject.
Most people, judging by the posts of players on this topic, can't tell the difference between what would be acceptible and what would not.

In fact, depending on the judge that you're dealing with, the line between those actions is going to be different.

Given the extreme penalties that could be awarded for behavior that goes over the line, is it a good idea to skate on that line?
A line that you could find is no longer under you at any moment?

No, in my opinion, it's not worth it.

Yeah, no matter where we draw the line, the Head Judge's decision being subjective and final worries me.

They've bluffed us into not doing it!