Intentional Penalties and SOTG

Discussion in 'Cards: Strategy and Rulings Discussion' started by Muscovy Level X, May 19, 2008.

  1. Muscovy Level X

    Muscovy Level X New Member

    We all know that in the game, there are penalties (usualy warning, then prize card) for miss-plays.
    But what if you take a penalty for the bennifit? Torterra Lv.X and Rayquaza d ex are both capable of giving you an edge if you are losing by prize cards. There's also cards like scramble energy and "if your opponent has only one prize card left, this attack does..." that benifit from'getting behind'.
    So here's an example: You have Torterra Lv.X in play. You can win if you KO one of your opponent's Pokemon on the bench (the active is too strong to KO). You make a miss-play or two, and the judge gives your opponent a prize. You then are free to use Torterra's power and win.
    So can you actualy do that? Are there some other rulings that degree that your miss-plays can't be used for your intentional benifit?
     
  2. Prime

    Prime Content Developer<br>Blog Admin<br>Contest Host

    I would hope that any judge would notice if the player was playing on of those cards before he or she gave them a prize penalty. I think in those cases, the penalty could be higher because it could be suggested that the player was purposely trying to get the penalty.
     
  3. SD PokeMom

    SD PokeMom Mod Supervisor Staff Member

    the opponent always has the *choice* to take the penalty prize, or not.

    the penalty is still recorded and remains on the offending player's record...but if taking the prize would put them at an obvious disadvantage, they don't HAVE to take it.

    and if there is any question if the offending player committed the 'misplay' on purpose, you're looking at cheating/gamesmanship, not 'just' a procedural/gameplay error and the judge should be penalizing accordingly.

    'mom
     
  4. ColdCoates90

    ColdCoates90 New Member

    I've always thought the rule was that you MAY select a prize.
     
  5. Magic_Umbreon

    Magic_Umbreon Researching Tower Scientist, Retired

    I don't understand how something can be a penalty if it helps the penalised player win. The advantage or disadvantage of you or your opponent drawing cards or a prize is fluid, completly dependent on the gamestate.

    I don't understand why it is appropriate to use penalties completly dependent on the gamestate.

    If the penalties were something like: "they lose all their Gardevoirs" that would be rediculously unfair for obvious reasons. Yet, both their effectiveness is based on gamestate only.
     
  6. Muscovy Level X

    Muscovy Level X New Member

    It's never happened to me, it was just hypothetical.
     
  7. drmario

    drmario New Member

    Taking a prize penalty is ALWAYS optional.
     
  8. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Part of the penalty could be the explanation by the judge that taking a prize will activate their opponent's Forest Murmurs, Scramble, etc. If the penalized player then incriminates himself by saying "hey, you can't help my opponent by telling them that kind of information!" then you could elevate the penalty to "Cheating."
     
  9. Lordofflareons

    Lordofflareons New Member

    once i played at a tourney(cities when ludicargo was awesome) and we ended up with me getting a przie penalty so he t1 scrambles mentors circlesteps gg. i thought it was funny but now i realize it was almost cheating. thanks.
     
  10. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    Whenever I have to give a prize penalty, I advise the players of the penalty and then ask the non offending player IF they are going to take the penalty. I also remind them they do not have to take it.

    IMO, the judge should not advise the players that IF the prize is taken , that scrambles, certain powers, etc will come into effect. BUT, as a Judge, if it appears that the error was intentional to set up a potential gaming winning KO (and the PP is necessary to achieve that), I may very well escalate to cheating/gamesmanship and GL. No one says the judge has to walk away from a match once the penalty is dished out. They can remain and observe a turn or 2 also. If gamesmanship has been used in this fashion, it should be dealt with in a harsher manner.

    Keith
     
  11. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    Even though the player doesn't have to take the prize card, the other player may use this to their advantage and commit the infraction knowing that their opponent won't take the prize anyway. A player should never be put in a situation where they are defenseless against an opponent's misplay by virtue of the fact that their only recourse would make the situation worse.
     
  12. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    Thats one reason why the guidelines are just that.....guidelines. It gives the judge a starting point. A player will still get the penalty noted and turned into PUI to track. The oppo. is not completely defenseless either. If this oppo. does a similar move again....the judge has the history of that event.

    Keith
     
  13. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    I wasn't really disagreeing, Lawman, I was just pointing out why the option not to take the prize is not necessarily enough to discourage the behavior.
     
  14. Lucario EX

    Lucario EX Moderator<br>Fanfic Contest Host

    Giving a player's opponent advice is not an official penalty. I agree with Lawman, always inform players that taking the prize is optional , but do not advise them in any way on whether or not to take the prize.
     
  15. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    If it's obvious that the prize-take will benefit the offending player, then the penalty is actually no penalty at all other than documenting the infraction for possible future excalations.

    I suppose it's not good for the judge to specifically point out what might activate, but I see no reason why the judge can't say something less obvious like, "You may take a prize if you like. There might be good reasons why you might NOT want to take a prize."

    Anytime a judge imposes a penalty that will actually benefit the offender, yet fail to warn the opponent of such, is NOT being a good judge, IMO.
     
  16. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Steve: Giving a player advice goes over a line that can be problematic to a tournament's integrity.
    It should not be done.

    What a judge CAN do is to take a look at the offending players hand and if they see a Scramble there (or something else that would give them an advantage if they are behind on prizes, they can use that information to help determine if the "error" was really gamesmanship and escalate to Game Loss.

    Also remember, Judges can AND SHOULD use past history to help determine this.

    If a player made this same "error" in the last event and here they are doing it again, the judge should give a game loss.
     
  17. meganium45

    meganium45 Active Member

    ANy HJ worth his salt will stay around the table for a bit after the PP is given, or assign a judge to do so.

    If the penalizing player immediately searches out or drops a scramble, there may be problems, as we will talk gamesmanship at that point.

    Judges (OK, most all judges) are not idiots, and do know the game. They may not be the 1337 (read elite) players, but they know how the game works.

    A player getting penalized intentionally is, frankly, doing something wrong.

    The player who gets penalized intentionally always runs the risk of the judge saying,,,you know, you put the game too far out of whack, I think this is a game loss.

    Then the judge waits for the , we will call it a "Chicago Moment" for the player to say, "But I was only trying to get a prize penalty" at which point the letters DQ run through your mind.

    Vince
     
  18. skarmory777

    skarmory777 New Member

    man...now my strategy for battle roads and the grinder is totally in the open. ;)
     
  19. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    In NO WAY, SHAPE, or FORM should a judge's penalty EVER provide an advantage to the offender. If it does, the penalty should NOT be given, UNLESS the opponent is given the option to accept or reject the penalty.

    I never "advise" seasoned players about the potential danger of drawing a prize penalty - they know the game well-enough. However, for younger/novice players, I see nothing wrong with stating "You may draw a prize if you wish. Consider the consequences."

    Bottom line. I will always treat my younger/novice players a bit differently than my "pros."
     
  20. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    Steve: You should always tell EVERY player that taking the PP is an OPTION, not mandatory. The player ALWAYS has a choice to accept or reject it. The penalty still gets sent along to PUI to track.

    What 'Pop and others are saying is that NO judge is allowed to give advice/coach a player into making a "better" choice. They have to play the game themselves.....even if we would choose to do differently! Obviously, we as judges can moniter the game for a turn or 2 and see if the move is more a gamesmanship issue or not. If so, the bigger penalty can come out.

    Bottom line. IMO, is to state it like this "This penalty is XYZ, I rule that this is a major error and the appropriate penalty is a PP. Now, you have the option/choice to take the prize or not, your call" and end it there. Since a penelty higher than a warning is involved, that means a HJ is there and there would be no need to advise the right to appeal to the HJ after your ruling. (At least, in any tourney I have run or judged at, the staff is instructed to get the HJ for anything over a W)

    Keith
     

Share This Page