Why isn't there a 10% rule for autographs?

[Pidgeotto Trainer]

First of all, I think the no autograph rule is very silly. This and the new dice rule is really making PUI look paranoid. It's fun to have Pokegym dice and write things on your cards and people have done this for years and there's been basically no problems. The issue of people coloring the borders at nationals was caught and is clearly a different situation than 99.9% of autographed cards. I have a slightly different issue I want to address right now though.

Why isn't there a 10% rule for autographs?

It seems the biggest reason that we got the 10% japanese card rule is so that people who spent money on japanese cards still in format are not hurt too badly. They bought cards that under the rules were legal, so it would have been very punishing on them to make them suddenly not legal and have to buy lots of cards again because of a rule change. At least that's been my interpretation of the 10% rule for one year.

Why not that for autographed cards? Some of us have important and expensive cards that are autographed that are now useless. If you're going to allow the small bit of time needed to have Japanese cards in play, you can afford a small bit of time to insure that an autographed card is not giving some kind of edge (no drawing on the border, no cause of bending or anything that can be seen thru the sleeve etc.).

I don't draw on that many cards, but my only Time-Space Distortion says 'Ross' on it. When I was fortunate enough to get a TSD when Mysterious Treasures came out, I knew that A. This was a very rare card and thus very expensive card B. This was a very good card and thus C. People would be in need of it. So I wrote my name on the card. This way, I was able to lend it out all the time with a little more assurance that people would remember to give it back since it's a very rare and expensive card.
So in a way, I autographed a very valuable card so I could be of help to people, and now I've lost a 25-35$ card. I know Japanese card players are in a similar boat, but they were given a bone with the 10% rule, so unless they have more than 6 really expensive cards, they are really in the clear. At worst they'll have to buy some commons or lesser rares again.

Anyone else in a similar problem? Do you think I should ask PUI for a replacement card? (sending mine in) Do they even have singles on hand to do that? It just doesn't seem fair for changing the rules like this for me and perhaps other players in a similar predicament. The 10% rule really helps A LOT, as you just make that your 6 most expensive cards. Not many decks need 6 level x's etc.

 

[LegacyEeveeVGC]

I think the Pokegym Dice are still usable.
I wonder how many players will call judges over for dice not being transparent.

 

[kwisdumb]

Good idea.

I think (and this is a complete guess as I have no hand in that process) that the banning of the autographed cards outright wasn't because whoever makes the decision believes that people are going to cheat by drawing on the pictures of the cards, or writing their names on them. I think it was mainly just a way to completely ban these cards, rather than go through the process of "This touches the borders, but this one doesn't" "This is an autograph but this is a drawing", etc.

I agree with what you're saying and wouldn't be against this rule being implemented, but I also understand the need for simplicity and consistency with this matter.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

I think the Pokegym Dice are still usable.
I wonder how many players will call judges over for dice not being transparent.

From what I've read (I may not be completely up-to-date on the new rules thread), non-transparent/translucent dice can be used for damage counters, just not as a randomizer.

 

[Mewtant]

^ Totally agreed. The best way to eliminate gray areas is to make these things black and white. I believe this is why the decision came down as it did.

Even though I'm fairly new at this game and have never drawn on my cards and have no autographs, I understand the frustration of those who were able to use those cards before and now cannot.

 

[Mystery Thing]

I think the Pokegym Dice are still usable.
I wonder how many players will call judges over for dice not being transparent.

No they aren't; they aren't transparent. And I'm sure we'll get people calling a judge to say their opponent's die isn't transparent. But if any flip has been done on it that they accepted (whether it be a tails flip on an attack, or even the start of the game toss), they should expect some Gamesmanship penalties to be coming their way in a hurry.

The dice rule makes total sense. Loaded/trick dice are not hard to get ahold of, and when you start getting to level where there is literally thousands of dollars on the line, you need to do everything you can ensure there's no cheating. Maybe the OP is naive enough to think people won't try to cheat at Pokémon, but they'd be sadly mistaken. Besides, a transparent D6 costs what, 25 cents? Come on.

Back to the OP: as for the autographed cards thing, you are in a predicament that entirely created yourself. You modified the product yourself by your own choice; why should TPCi be responsible for replacing it? If I take a wine glass and spray paint it blue, there's not a hope in you-know-where that the manufacturer would replace it for me. Somebody correct me (with proof, please) if I'm wrong, but nowhere in the floor rules has it ever stated that autographed cards were legal to use, people just used them and it was accepted. But you really need to either blanket ban markings or do nothing about it. If a distinction was made, it's just a matter of time until somebody sharpies in the entire picture on a card and then claims that that's how they sign things. Maybe if people hadn't ever tried to cheat by coloring borders or sharpie in the entire picture, this never would have happened. Go blame those people - rules are only made when somebody stretches something too far and blows it for everybody, that's how life works.

Besides, if you look up to / idolize somebody enough to get them to sign a card, then clearly you value it enough signed that you shouldn't be playing with it anyways. That's why they invented screw-down protectors.

 

[Lawman]

@MysteryThing: Until the latest overhaul, the tourney rules allowed autographed card. They just couldnt obscure the text or picture. (too late to link...just trust me on that one)

Keith

 

[LegacyEeveeVGC]

No they aren't; they aren't transparent. And I'm sure we'll get people calling a judge to say their opponent's die isn't transparent. But if any flip has been done on it that they accepted (whether it be a tails flip on an attack, or even the start of the game toss), they should expect some Gamesmanship penalties to be coming their way in a hurry.

The dice rule makes total sense. Loaded/trick dice are not hard to get ahold of, and when you start getting to level where there is literally thousands of dollars on the line, you need to do everything you can ensure there's no cheating. Maybe the OP is naive enough to think people won't try to cheat at Pokémon, but they'd be sadly mistaken. Besides, a transparent D6 costs what, 25 cents? Come on.

Back to the OP: as for the autographed cards thing, you are in a predicament that entirely created yourself. You modified the product yourself by your own choice; why should TPCi be responsible for replacing it? If I take a wine glass and spray paint it blue, there's not a hope in you-know-where that the manufacturer would replace it for me. Somebody correct me (with proof, please) if I'm wrong, but nowhere in the floor rules has it ever stated that autographed cards were legal to use, people just used them and it was accepted. But you really need to either blanket ban markings or do nothing about it. If a distinction was made, it's just a matter of time until somebody sharpies in the entire picture on a card and then claims that that's how they sign things. Maybe if people hadn't ever tried to cheat by coloring borders or sharpie in the entire picture, this never would have happened. Go blame those people - rules are only made when somebody stretches something too far and blows it for everybody, that's how life works.

Besides, if you look up to / idolize somebody enough to get them to sign a card, then clearly you value it enough signed that you shouldn't be playing with it anyways. That's why they invented screw-down protectors.

Again, these are still usable as damage counters.

Still usable liek I said.

 

[Mystery Thing]

@MysteryThing: Until the latest overhaul, the tourney rules allowed autographed card. They just couldnt obscure the text or picture. (too late to link...just trust me on that one)

Keith

Did they explicitly say you could? Ok then.

Still doesn't change my opinion that if you decided to get a card signed, you clearly value it enough that you shouldn't be playing with it in the first place.

 

[NoPoke]

FWIW I think that allowing signed cards as part of the 10% would be good.

But look at recent threads and concerns. Over judging, not enough clarity in the rules, judges are biased. Here is a nice clear rule which avoids all that and guess what the bright line rule is unwanted. Bright line rules like this usually are unwanted. I don't want it yet I can't see how it is possible to describe an allowed signature without getting into the same issue that we have already where a player states that last week the judge allowed the card and this "bad judge" this week wont.

 

[TheDarkTwins]

FWIW I think that allowing signed cards as part of the 10% would be good.

But look at recent threads and concerns. Over judging, not enough clarity in the rules, judges are biased. Here is a nice clear rule which avoids all that and guess what the bright line rule is unwanted. Bright line rules like this usually are unwanted. I don't want it yet I can't see how it is possible to describe an allowed signature without getting into the same issue that we have already where a player states that last week the judge allowed the card and this "bad judge" this week wont.

Maybe if we leave it up to Judges and let them have the final choice on the matter if an autographed card is okay or not, might be a decent idea.

Drew

 

[Skitty]

Maybe if we leave it up to Judges and let them have the final choice on the matter if an autographed card is okay or not, might be a decent idea.

Drew

But then we would have the problem of people complaning with stuff like "But the judge at the last tournemant let me use them, why won't you?". And if only some judges let people use them then people would have to keep an extra set of non-signed cards with them incase that specific judge wouldn't let them use them.

 

[meganium45]

Drew. Bad idea.

That is what led to some of the problems with drawn on cards at Nationals.

Judges and PTOs from some areas allowed nonsense that had players DQd at Nationals.

A bright line rule such as this eliminates the possibility for THIS issue.

Vince

 

[NoPoke]

Agrees with Vince.

If the playing community had policed this itself then autographs would probably still be allowed. But that isn't what happened. Some players pushed the boundaries and POP responded in the only way they could.