[16:05] <Rikipedia> Super important new: http://blogs.magicjudges.org/telliott/2014/12/12/changing-morph-handling-in-the-ipg/
[16:06] <dcollins> wat
[16:06] <lisa`> wow, ok
[16:06] <dcollins> Sweet
[16:07] <dcollins> I hope someone tells all the judges at this GP tomorrow about that
[16:07] <Rikipedia> Doing so right now.
[16:07] <lisa`> posted to the canada judge group
[16:07] <dcollins> thx
[16:08] <dcollins> Posted to NE
[16:09] <Rikipedia> I wonder if the effective immediately applies to an event already in progress.
[16:09] <dcollins> Well, they've been running grinders all day, right? So hopefully they already know
[16:10] <telliott> nope. time to change midstream
[16:11] <telliott> it'll be in place for the big show
[16:12] <telliott> don't think I've ever had a tweet retweeted this much this fast
[16:12] <lisa`> telliott: you should link to the tweet so we can RT it
[16:13] <dcollins> krizriktr also already put it on all the reddits
[16:13] <telliott> https://twitter.com/tobyelliott/status/543511629053194241
[16:13] <lisa`> telliott: thank you for sharing the thought process throughout the blog post! i love it
[16:16] <Rikipedia> I have informed Nicholas Sabin over at Grinders.
[16:16] <Rikipedia> He is talking to Abe.
[16:17] <Selkie> I've posted it and pm'd the judges in my area
[16:18] <Safy-Cell> Posted to Midwest fb page
[16:18] <dcollins> Wondering if this is /topic-worthy?
[16:19] <basicer> So not revealing with an unsummon is still a game loss?
[16:20] * Heimdallr is now known as modargo
[16:20] <dcollins> I...don't think so?
[16:20] <basicer> The TLDR; seems to impy it's not, but the new wording at the bottom seems to imply it is.
[16:21] <dcollins> I think they're handling both the same way, based on the reasoning in telliott's post
[16:21] <dcollins> Keep in mind that that parenthetical clause in the new wording is just a list of examples, it may not be intended to be exhaustive
[16:21] <telliott> it's not
[16:21] <telliott> they have the opportunity to verify
[16:22] <dcollins> The information required was still in a position where the opponent could verify it
[16:22] <dcollins> Well
[16:22] <telliott> "I bounce your morph. What is it?"
[16:22] <dcollins> Because it still says "after the infraction was committed"
[16:22] <dcollins> So I'm confused
[16:22] <lisa`> is there ftmgs for the unsummoner if the morph isn't revealed?
[16:23] <dcollins> lisa`: probably, if they don't call judge right away
[16:23] <telliott> seems like they're gonna call the judge pretty quick
[16:23] <lisa`> yea
[16:25] <basicer> So say A plays Whitemate Lion, ability resolves and A grabs their morph and quickly puts it in their hand.  How do you procede?
[16:26] <telliott> investigate, warning
[16:27] <dcollins> Merchant Scroll, get a card, place it face down next to my hand, shuffle my library, then add the card to my hand without revealing?
[16:30] <telliott> seems unlikely. For all I know, you're still thinking
[16:30] <lisa`> every time i vamp tutor i have to remind myself all the way through resolution that it isn't demonic tutor. it happens :(
[16:32] <basicer> If during investigation I find that the card could not have been a morph, because they dont have a morph in hand now for example, but I dont beleive the player did so unintentionally, that is still a game loss right?
[16:34] <Selkie> basicer: did they misplay with hidden information?
[16:38] <Anonycat> if a player asks for their opponent to reveal their morph in conjunction with a zone-change on it, but they respond by hiding it away without doing so, is that sufficient cause to jump straight to Cheating?
[16:39] <dcollins> You never jump straight to cheating. You need to investigate and ensure that the three elements of the offense are present.
[16:39] <telliott> but it sounds rather suspicious
[16:39] <dcollins> Was it illegal? Yes. Did they know it was illegal? Yes, the opponent just told them. Were they trying to gain an advantage? You need to find out.
[16:41] <dcollins> I'm still not understanding how this works with a bounce spell. I see what you're trying to accomplish, but I'm having some trouble understanding how it's covered under the new policy.
[16:42] <Selkie> dcollins: it's not left on the battlefield at the end of the game
[16:42] <Selkie> as far as I can see
[16:42] <Selkie> if you bounce a morph, fail to reveal it
[16:42] <Selkie> it's still a game loss
[16:42] <dcollins> The infraction is committed when I pick the guy up and put it in my hand without revealing it. At what point is the information in a position where the opponent had the opportunity to verify it?
[16:42] <Rikipedia> The opponent has the opportunity to say "Bounce your morph. What is it?"
[16:42] <dcollins> Selkie: I don't think that's what telliott is trying to do, though
[16:42] <Selkie> hmmm
[16:42] <Selkie> ok
[16:42] <Rikipedia> Rather than go for the "Bounce your guy... (hope for GL)"
[16:42] <Selkie> Rikipedia: ah, got it
[16:43] <dcollins> Rikipedia: Sure, but the wording still says "after the infraction was committed"
[16:43] <basicer> Even with !Whitemate Lion it's not a game loss.
[16:43] <Datatog> Whitemane Lion {1W} |Creature -- Cat| 2/2 Flash / When Whitemane Lion enters the battlefield, return a creature you control to its owner's hand. · C14-C,DDI-C,PLC-C
[16:44] <dcollins> Maybe "If the information was in a position where opponents had the opportunity to verify the legality (...) at the time the infraction was committed"
[16:53] <telliott> I just removed the "after" clause
[16:53] <telliott> it's not strictly necessary
[16:54] <dcollins> ^5
[16:54] <dcollins> Toby is best L5.
[16:58] <basicer> In the merchant scroll example dcollins gave, is next to the library not a position an opponent could verify because its not a real zone?
[16:59] <telliott> I think more "it's not a real selection"
[17:01] <dcollins> Yeah. "I assumed he was still deciding before he revealed it"
[17:10] * hayaway is now known as hay
[17:17] <dcollins> !domri rade
[17:17] <Datatog> Domri Rade {1RG} |Planeswalker -- Domri| 3 loyalty. +1: Look at the top card of your library. If it's a creature card, you may reveal it and put it into your hand. / -2: Target creature you control fights another target creature. / -7: You get an emblem with "Creatures you control have double strike, trample, hexproof, and haste." · GTC-M
[17:17] <dcollins> Writing policy is hard :(
[17:33] <Unearth18> hey is there any direct statements against a store house ruling an fnm?
[17:33] <dcollins> What do you mean by "house ruling"?
[17:33] <Natedogg2> You cannot make up your own rules for sanctioned tournament. You have to go by the Magic Tournament Rules.
[17:33] <Unearth18> for example banning infinites
[17:34] <Natedogg2> For instance, you cannot decide that you're banning cards that aren't banned in a standard tournament. Or ban combos.
[17:34] <dcollins> At this point, there's a limited set of formats that can be sactioned as FNM. You can't ban cards that are part of infinite combos just because you want to
[17:48] <DavidMurr> New Morph changes, if a morph is bounced to hand and is now not the only card in hand, is that still a GL?
[17:48] <dcollins> No
[17:49] <dcollins> (scroll up)
[17:50] <DavidMurr> ok thanks
[17:50] <DavidMurr> HJing two PPTQs this weekend so wanted to make sure i got the change rightr
[17:51] <dcollins> Good luck
[17:51] <dcollins> I'm looking forward to explaining this approximately one hundred times this weekend
[17:51] <DavidMurr> thnx
[17:51] <DavidMurr> me 2
[17:51] <DavidMurr> (but probably many less times)
[17:53] <StrnjrPhn> Welp, reading the backlog helps me for tomorrow
[17:55] <hay> Oh neato.
[17:56] <hay> "or on the battlefield at the end of the game" seems rather specific though if it also applies in bouncing scenarios.
[17:57] <Rikipedia> That is a list of possible examples, not an exhaustive list of all possibilities.
[17:58] <hay> I do realize that but then I don't see the need to include "at the end of the game" in that example.
[18:00] <DavidMurr> Is there a final count on number of morph GLs?
[18:00] <bprill> That's the most common point of interaction
[18:00] <bprill> DavidMurr: 7
[18:01] <DavidMurr> I guess there's the 0.2%
[18:02] <DavidMurr> I should get some sleep, have to get up tmz morning night all
[18:02] <Pirate16> I have a creature in play with a single +1/+1 counter on it, enchanted with two copies of !Ordeal of Thassa.  I attack with the creature.  How many cards do I get to draw?
[18:02] <Datatog> Ordeal of Thassa {1U} |Enchantment -- Aura| Enchant creature / Whenever enchanted creature attacks, put a +1/+1 counter on it. Then if it has three or more +1/+1 counters on it, sacrifice Ordeal of Thassa. / When you sacrifice Ordeal of Thassa, draw two cards. · THS-U
[18:02] <hay> Rules questions go in #mtgrules