Items Played when they cannot be

[duelistrealms]

A lot of different rulings have been coming from different judges as to what happens when an item card is played when the game state would technically not allow it to be. (Example opponent used Seismitoads Quaking Punch to stop them from playing items.) What penalty do you feel should be given to the player who played the item card in the following examples. (assuming the mistake was caught just after the item was resolved)

1. Player uses a deck search item (Computer Search) card to find something in there deck. They now have knowledge of what is/isn't in there deck as this is their first time searching through their deck.
2. Same situation however they have previously searched through their deck so they would already be aware of the contents.
3. Item grabs something from discard pile. IE Dowsing Machine


All the examples are easily reversible but kind of wondering should a larger penalty be given when someone gains knowledge of the contents that are in their deck.

Thanks so much

 

[LOLZ]

A lot of different rulings have been coming from different judges as to what happens when an item card is played when the game state would technically not allow it to be. (Example opponent used Seismitoads Quaking Punch to stop them from playing items.) What penalty do you feel should be given to the player who played the item card in the following examples. (assuming the mistake was caught just after the item was resolved)

1. Player uses a deck search item (Computer Search) card to find something in there deck. They now have knowledge of what is/isn't in there deck as this is their first time searching through their deck.
2. Same situation however they have previously searched through their deck so they would already be aware of the contents.
3. Item grabs something from discard pile. IE Dowsing Machine


All the examples are easily reversible but kind of wondering should a larger penalty be given when someone gains knowledge of the contents that are in their deck.

Thanks so much

It depends on how long ago the illegal play was and which actions took place between the illegal play and the point the error was discovered.

For 1 and 2, if it goes as far as the deck has been searched and shuffled, this Warning at Tier 1 and PL at Tier 2. (Recommended Starting Penalty)
For 3, if the error is caught and is reversible, Caution at Tier 1 and Warning at Tier 2 (Recommended Starting Penalty)

Depending on other issues that arise due to an illegal play the penalty could justifiably be increased to offset advantage.

If you want to see how the penalty could change, post new scenarios with more details.

 

[bulbasnore]

What the world is wrong with the Seismitoad player? Setting a game loss trap? Just completely out to lunch? So, whatever penalty the offending player earns, except maybe if playing lightning fast so he can't be stopped by his opponent, Seismitoad player should get caution escalation to warning on next gap in attention.

Reversible? OK, on the other side of the coin, if you can catch your opponent napping, you gain advantage. For that reason, these 'ignore effect', like attacking with insufficient energy, etc. should always be tracked. I would likely start at warning in competitive matches.

When you give a warning, let the players know the penalty could escalate and to pay attention. Make sure the Seismitoad player is also appraised of this.

 

[TheStrictNein]

What the world is wrong with the Seismitoad player? Setting a game loss trap? Just completely out to lunch? So, whatever penalty the offending player earns, except maybe if playing lightning fast so he can't be stopped by his opponent, Seismitoad player should get caution escalation to warning on next gap in attention.

Reversible? OK, on the other side of the coin, if you can catch your opponent napping, you gain advantage. For that reason, these 'ignore effect', like attacking with insufficient energy, etc. should always be tracked. I would likely start at warning in competitive matches.

When you give a warning, let the players know the penalty could escalate and to pay attention. Make sure the Seismitoad player is also appraised of this.

Exactly. Unless your opponent is playing so blindingly fast they've put down their Computer Search and have already picked up their deck and are searching before a word can come out of your mouth, you should have stopped them. It's in the game rules that it's the duty of both players to make sure plays are legal.

 

[ShadowCard]

I've watched players play blindly fast that the opponent looks at me and goes "what was I supposed to do?" so I recognize the possibility.

1. Player uses a deck search item (Computer Search) card to find something in there deck. They now have knowledge of what is/isn't in there deck as this is their first time searching through their deck.

GPE-Major: Warning in T1, PL in T2. Warning to the Seismitoad EX player.

2. Same situation however they have previously searched through their deck so they would already be aware of the contents.

GPE-Major: Warning in T1, but I'll reduce to Warning in T2 because the previous searches reduce the level of knowledge that can be gained. This is more about tracking the error. Warning to the Seismitoad EX player.

3. Item grabs something from discard pile. IE Dowsing Machine

Got the something but didn't use it?
GPE-Minor: Caution in T1, Warning in T2.

League Challenge, senior division:
Player A used Quaking Punch.
Player B plays Dowsing Machine for N. Player B plays N. Both players shuffle their hands into their decks.
My ruling: Double Game Loss.