illegal attacks/steps during a turn, pt. 2

Discussion in 'TCG News & Gossip Discussion' started by PokeDaddy, Jun 2, 2008.

8 league13 468 60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    SteveP: Look at my 1st post (#12).....that is exactly what I said. Exactly as Mike L stated a year ago. It is up to the oppo to decide.

    You never did answer my last query. Do you want to track the error or not? Personally, I do want to track it. If player A keeps making the same error, it may add up to a higher penalty later on (depending on the error).

    Also, what if player A never asks for a take back from B.....B simply calls the judge over bc an illegal attack was made? Maybe both players dont know that a take back can be given. B just knows that an improper/illegal attack was attempted and he/she knows that if an error happens, call a judge. Then what? I say, you tell them the rule and see what B says.

  2. PokeDaddy

    PokeDaddy New Member

    From Mike Liesik:

    If an action is mandatory (i.e. draw a card at the beginning of your turn, take a prize for knocking out a Pokemon, place damage counters for an attack, etc.), and you forget to take that action, you do not need your opponent's permission to do it. However, you should immediately call a judge so that things don't get muddled.
    If an action is optional (playing a Trainer, attaching an Energy, attacking your opponent's Pokemon, etc.), and you forget to take that action, you must ask your opponent for permission to take that action. For example, if you attach a Grass Energy to your Pokemon, and you wanted to attach a Fire Energy, you must ask your opponent's permission to take back the Grass Energy and attach the Fire energy instead. If he or she says no, you're stuck with the Grass Energy.​
    While it is mandatory to proceed through both step 2) and step 3), the actions in those steps are optional. You can choose not to attach an Energy card. You can choose not to play a Trainer. You can choose not to attack the defending Pokemon. However, once you have entered one of these steps, you cannot rewind to a previous step without your opponent's permission.
    In other words, once you've entered step 3), you cannot leave it without your opponent's permission. If you declare an "illegal" attack, you may ask your opponent if you can back out of step 3). If he or she says yes, you go back to step 2) and can take any actions that you could have taken during that step. If he or she says no, you may either select an attack that is "legal" or pass.
    Most often a rewound game state is due to mandatory game actions that were not taken (i.e. placing damage counters for an attack or effect).​

    Now, lets all play nice.


    Michael Liesik
    Pokemon Organized Play
    Pokemon USA, Inc.​


    Let's break this down.

    1. Player A declares an illegal attack. This covered in 7.1.1 of the Penalty Guidelines under "Game-Play Error - Minor"
    2. Player B raises his hand for a judge.
    3. The judge assess the situation and informs the players of the rules.
    a. Player A, you may use another attack that you are able to do without asking your opponents permission. From PUI, If he or she says no [backing out of Step 3], you may either select an attack that is "legal" or pass.
    b. You have the proper energy for different attack but you don't want to use it. You want to go back into Step 2. You must ask your opponents permission. From PUI, In other words, once you've entered step 3), you cannot leave it without your opponent's permission. If you declare an "illegal" attack, you may ask your opponent if you can back out of step 3). If he or she says yes, you go back to step 2) and can take any actions that you could have taken during that step.
    1. Player B says yes, you may go back to Step 2. You as a judge say ok. A caution is given to Player A, it is noted on the match slip, and you move on.
    2. Player B says no, you may not go back to Step 2. You as a judge have indicated to Player A his options. Player A can do the following per PUI. If he or she says no, you may either select an attack that is "legal" or pass. A caution is given to Player A, it is noted on the match slip, and you move on.​

    SteveP, I believe that your quote may not be wholly correct.

    Let's all play nice.

  3. bugsbite

    bugsbite New Member

    Just out of curiosity how often does this happen when the judge intercedes. Most players in my short time of experience give you permission for a simple honest mistake, but I can see some of the slimly players doing this to take advantage of others.
  4. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Okay Keith, I admit I read your posted quote from MikeL wrong. If multiple attacks are "legal" and you announce the wrong attack, it's up to your opponent to allow you to switch to another "legal" attack - allowing you a take-back. So, PokeDaddy is NOT wrong with regards to "illegal" attacks. My bad.

    Keith, regarding your question about tracking this kind of game-play error, if you issue a penalty, there's no option NOT to document the penalty. So, the question is moot. Now, would I want to be called over everytime a player requested a tack-back? Probably yes. But MikeL's ruling only requires that when mandatory actions are skipped, so I'd leave the take-back notification option up to the PTO/HJ.

    I'm not in any way, shape, or form disputing this ruling. Players can always ask permission for tack-backs. I'm just trying to point how wrong it is for a judge to inform players that they can ask their opponents for take-backs anytime they make a game-play error, ESPECIALLY if that game-play error also caused them to make a strategic mistake (ie., they forgot to attach energy).
  5. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    Thx Steve (PokeDaddy)...I knew that Mike L. had expounded further on the issue in that a legal move could still be used, I just couldnt find it last night.

    Bugsbite: It happens enough that it is/was an issue. I like to track errors in case the same player keeps making the same/similar mistakes, I can then talk to them after a round and hopefully clear w/e issue is up with their misplay(s).

  6. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Yup. That was one of my earlier points. Young, tender-hearted players might be "compeled" to allow a take-backs.

    Basically, take-backs allow players to IGNORE the game rules.

    Correct me if I'm wrong Keith. When someone is prosecuted for breaking the law and is called to trial, does the judge inform the defendant at that point that he can plea bargain? Does he inform the criminal that he can petition the victim to drop the charges? It seems like once the judge gets involve, it would be inappropriate for the judge to inform the offender of ways he can reduce the effects of his mistake.
  7. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    SteveP: This ruling is designed for a particular error, the "illegal attack" situation. A player always has a right to ask their oppo to allow a take back on any error, but I doubt an oppo will grant that request often (depending on the level of tourney also).

    IMO, the only way to rule on many issues is to state that as a Judge, I cannot require a "take-back" (unless the move was a mandatory one ie player didnt draw card to start the turn and the oppo says...haha too late. Nope, the card must be drawn) but your oppo can allow one, IF THEY CHOOSE. Take the energy drop situation. How many times have we seen/heard a player say....I should have attched this to here, not here OR I grabbed a fighting energy and I meant to grab the psychic (playing GG for instance). We as a judge cannot force a player to allow the "mistake" to be changed/corrected. But, IMO, the correct ruling would be to point out that this is the players game play error and only the oppo can allow a take back. Agreed?

    In the scenario of an energy drop on the wrong poke, wrong color used, etc....there is no penalty to issue bc it was a LEGAL move, just placed in the "wrong place" according to player A. Only B can allow the take back and it should be explained that way to both players.


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

    Last edited: Jun 3, 2008
  8. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Player's question: "Hey judge, I attached my energy already. Can I change my mind and attach it to a different Pokemon instead?"

    Correct judge's response: "No you may not."

    Incorrect judge's response: "Yes you may, if your opponent gives you permission."

    Judge's shouldn't be informing players how to IGNORE the rules.

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

    Yeah, regarding the legal-system example, I was just trying to make an analogy. Certainly, they are different situations, but the analogy is valid. Mistakes happen.

    If I'm speeding, I can ask the officer to give me a take-back, thereby ignoring the speed limit rule. But, if the officer gives me the ticket, then I go to court, at that point, the judge isn't going to tell me I can request the officer to give me a take-back.

    My point is this: Once a "line is crossed" and the judge is called in to rule, things change.
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2008
  9. PokeDaddy

    PokeDaddy New Member

    or is indicating that there is a clause in the rules that allow for take backs PART of the complete ruling?
  10. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Good question. But then again, although not explicitly stated, take-back requests are allowed for many other game-play mistakes. Do I mention the take-back request option in other rulings as well?

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

    Also, with take-backs, mulitple infractions can occur. In the case of the illegal attack, if a take-back is allowed, the other infraction would be, "did multiple phase 2 actions after starting phase 3."
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2008
  11. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    And with that speeding ticket, when you get to Court, since it is a fairly minor offense, many times the judge will allow a "take back" in the form of ...go to driving school and the ticket gets dismissed. :biggrin:

    SteveP wrote:
    "Player's question: "Hey judge, I attached my energy already. Can I change my mind and attach it to a different Pokemon instead?"

    Correct judge's response: "No you may not."

    Incorrect judge's response: "Yes you may, if your opponent gives you permission."

    Judge's shouldn't be informing players how to IGNORE the rules."

    If the player never asked the oppo for a take back. simply called over to the judge, then the proper ruling would be "No, but your oppo has the right to allow a take back if they so desire." This game does allow for take backs. Now, if they had already asked their oppo and they said No and then they called the judge over, then the correct ruling would be "No, your oppo did not allow a take back".

  12. meganium45

    meganium45 Active Member

    and, now, between Steve P and Lawman, we have a clear as mud picture of what the two possible responses are.

    Is one right and the other wrong?

    I think it comes down to a judge by judge opinion.

    I can certainly see Steve's point.

    I can certainly see Keith's point.

    I am not going to ask that this be turned into a poll, but it certainly shows one of the gray areas of the game.

    My answer would be...well it depends. (What a cop-out!)

  13. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    Its as clear as a sunny day to me Vince....I'm correct! :wink: :lol:

  14. PokeDaddy

    PokeDaddy New Member

    When I make a judgement on this, I give the complete answer which includes asking your opponent for a take back. That's me.

    What this affords is for folks to look at themselves, their situations, and their game state. Let's not forget, this is a game. We want children (yes, that's who I really care about) to know that there are options.

    We need a Judge Program.
  15. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Yeah Vince, until the "super delegates" are counted, I'm not going to bow out.:thumb:

    I suppose I need to back off of my statement that judges cannot allow take-backs when asked to rule. Many games allow mulligans, some requiring opponent permission. Golf wouldn't be enjoyable for me without mulligans.:biggrin:

    I have to admit, I have in the past "hinted" at the possibility of take-backs when called over to a match. My method is to say, "Can you two resolve this without me ruling?" If they say no, that means I have to rule, possibly impossing a penalty for game-errors.

    It seems contradictory to me that a judge would even impose a penalty if they inform players of the take-back option. Take-backs basically undo the game-play error. Otherwise, we create a new class of penalties - suspended penalties that don't get assessed unless it happens again. I'm not opposed to suspended penalties. I just think such penalties go beyond the normal Penalty Guidelines.

    I respect your method. Perhaps at a CC or BR (Tier I) I'd do the same...perhaps. At higher levels, perhaps I'd do the same for the Juniors...perhaps. :wink:

    But, in the highly competitive Masters Division, at higher level events, I'd be much more cautious about letting players undo their mistakes when asked to rule. That's me.

    One last word, then I'll shut up. I think it's a good idea for the PTO to announce the take-back option at the beginning of the tournament, for all to hear. The announcement could go something like:

    "If you make a mistake, you can ask your opponent permission for a take-back. Resolve your take-backs BEFORE calling the judge over. If you resolve your take-back, you may still call the judge over for a ruling. However, let him know about the take-back before he rules - and possibly reverses the take-back (ie., it was an illegal take-back) and/or imposes a penalty."

    One final question for the panel:

    Do you consider take-backs a positive or negative aspect of the game? Personally, I see both pros and cons, though to me, the cons outweigh the pros.
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2008
  16. NoPoke

    NoPoke Active Member

    take backs are part of the spirit in which the game is played. When playing I frequently let opponents correct play errors if they wish. I'm no saint: it is much easier to allow takebacks when you are either a long way ahead or behind. Quite often my opponents dont accept the offered take-back: insisting that their bad plays stand. If as a player I'm happy to allow my opponent to correct a bad play why should a judge rule otherwise?

    If a player is unwilling to allow takebacks I'm fine with that too. What I don't want to see is players leaping on bad plays by their opponents. That gets too close to rules lawyering in my opinion.

    A judges role is more than just ensuring that the rules are followed.
  17. sgtdarryl

    sgtdarryl New Member

    Not to butt in.... IF this is the professor's forum: (because it seems that only professors and mods are posting, but I thought( assuming) that "It stays as It is played" if aplayer miss aturn or place a card on the wrong pokemon or forgot to attach an energy\tool before attacking or forgot to draw before attaching(energy) or attacking ;these are errors and not "go backies " ?!!! I'm very , very, confused is the forum is correct or is the resources are???? I don't know.
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2008
  18. BJJ763

    BJJ763 Trading Mod Supervisor Staff Member Trader Feedback Mod

    Try re-reading what has been posted. If it stays its played but you can ask your opponent if you can correct your misplay. Your opponent may or may not let you. If you do something like an illegal attack, you can pick another attack that you can do or ask your opponent if you can go back to the step prior to your attack (to drop an energy, play Windstorm, Retreat).

    Lots of Mods & Profs because this is an important subject (that i hope gets into the General Gameplay section of The Compendium so i can be easily found).
  19. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    By allowing take-backs, someone is saying, "Heck with that rule. You're forgiven."

    Players demand justice, but have authority to be merciful. There's no disputing that.

    I suppose that at the foundation of this whole argument is the "justice vs mercy" tug-of-war. Justice demands adherence to the rules. Mercy forgives violation of the rules. Can the two co-exist, or will one pull the other into the big puddle of mud in the middle? I suppose that both players AND judges are tugging on opposite sides of the rope. :thumb::wink:
  20. Ledyba

    Ledyba New Member

    Thanks - choices - opinion - one last thought

    I am glad to read this ruling and this discussion thread. If this is an example of how some our questions get discussed by the Professors and Moderators "behind the scenes" so that you can arrive at answers and/or rulings for those of us on this side of the board then all I can say is Thank you so very much for taking this so seriously and for Caring.

    I hope that all who read this will not "see" an arguement so much as a discussion of valid points that shaves away until there is a refinement and clarity left that meets the needs of most if not all situations.

    As a Pokemom who is learning the game and makes LOTS of mistakes and forgets the simplest of things - I made a personal choice (not knowing anything about this ruling) to not ask to replay a mistake that I caught or an opponent kindly pointed out to me and offered to allow even when I forgot to draw my card. Yes, I have lost games because of these mistakes. But when I started doing this I also started becoming more focused in my play. I still lose a lot - but now it is more because I don't know the cards than because I forgot or I misplayed my energy. I don't find doing this to be a problem for me - that said I am also not 6 or 9 or .... Winning isn't what motivates me to play. I play because my daughter wants to play and needs someone that can help her and more than that because I have found that I really like/enjoy playing Pokemon.

    Again - I am very glad to read this ruling.

    In my opinion: PokeDaddys' ruling to inform the players of the ruling was a sound ruling. Taking in to account that it was the first time for each incident and assuming that each time different players were involved. I might have added that IF for some reason they could not work it out between them then I could make a ruling. However if I ruled that was the final ruling for the entire game - no do-overs or some such so as to encourge them to at least try to work it out.

    That said - if as a judge I found myself back at the same table for the same issue again ... then I would be inclined to agree with SteveP - "no take backs" because one or both players is not following the SofG. And I do understand about "softies" who "can't" say NO and need someone to run a little interference for them - I am Mom to one! Thanks for thinking of "her." (Me too when I was a kid!) That said - having to choose to say "yes or no" at least once in a game wouldn't kill her even if she doesn't like being put on the spot. But it will slowly help her build up what she needs to be able to say "No" when she needs to or in a game situation wants to and it is okay to do so. It is a safe way to learn how to say NO and people "have" to listen. When else do kids get to say NO - not get in trouble for it and even adults have to listen!

    Also if one of these players was involved in the same issue in another match up with a totally different player and the same thing occurs because of the first player then for the player from the first game there would be noe do overs. He already knows the rules and in the SofG should share them with his new opponent.

    So - - why not do both? Just a thought....

    One last thought - isn't this the kind of ruling that should or could be "taught" or shared at league by the league leader? That would save a lot of wear and tear on those of you that judge! I really wish more was shared at league. We go - we play - we come home. I sorta expected - I don't know what - but maybe some little tidbits like this for example, something.

    that's my 2 cents worth -

    Thanks for all you all do ~

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page