[LSJ] - declaration of actions and taking them back

ok, in a game on Jol - the following happened. A player declared a bleed, and tapped the Creepshow Casino for stealth. I mentioned to him that the Creepshow did not provide stealth on D actions, so he untapped it and the minion and declared no action instead. Now, normally this isn't an issue - however, the game on Jol was in the Jol tournie, and so I felt should be treated like a tournie. A ruling was called for, and ruled in favour of the player declaring the bleed. I thought that he couldn't take it back, because bleed is a default and legal action regardless of what modifies it. However, the judge ruled as follows: "If an illegal action combination is proposed such as bleeding with the Casino, the entire action is cancelled when corrected. The minion is not forced to bleed in this case. This is different from declaring a bleed action, and then using an illegal modifier (such as faceless night on a minion without obfuscate) in which case the action had already been declared separate from the illegal modifier. The casino explicitly states "when the action is announced". Now, I don't mind the ruling one way or the other, and this post is merely to try and work out what is right and wrong. If this were done in a tournament in Australia, the bleed as declared would have stood, as it is legal regardless of anything else. There are other modifiers that can be played "as the action is declared", such as Stealth Ritus and Seduction - but if these were played in error, does that mean the action is cancelled? The action isn't what is at fault. I ask mainly because as I said, in Australia this wouldn't fly - but it seems it does overseas, and I am heading to the EC in a couple months. So, who is right? Are we generally playing it wrong out here in the boondocks, or have we got it right? To the judge who ruled it this way, and the player(s) who it affects, please don't take this as a slight or personal - I just need to know due to the conflict in ways it would be ruled. Thanks --> J grail_pbem "at" hotmail.com

When an action is declared you can't take it back. After the action he try to use the creepshow casino that is illegal. So it's not working. Because it's not a big deal the judge the judge can avoid giving a caution for tryng to use a card when you can't. But the action is announced. If you allow once that king of mistake how will you draw the line between trying to cheat and making a mistake? When you know the level of the player you can handle it, but in a tournament you can't know everyone. See you

On May 1, 1:21 am, Olivier_PEREZ <olivier.eni...@gmail.com> wrote: > When an action is declared you can't take it back. That's my belief - unless it is an illegal action. But I'm after an official answer... of course, stupid google groups cut off the [LSJ] tag.... so an official answer would be useful to have, especially as the latest round of quals etc for me start in little over 3 weeks. [ quoted text not captured ]

J wrote: > On May 1, 1:21 am, Olivier_PEREZ <olivier.eni...@gmail.com> wrote: >> When an action is declared you can't take it back. > > That's my belief - unless it is an illegal action. But I'm after an > official answer... of course, stupid google groups cut off the [LSJ] > tag.... only on google's display. the tag is still on your original post on my newsreader, and I think Scott uses a real newsreader, too, so just be patient young padawan. (for what it's worth, i wouldn't let him undo the bleed, either. :) -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

> only on google's display. the tag is still on your original post on my > newsreader, and I think Scott uses a real newsreader, too, so just be > patient young padawan. > > (for what it's worth, i wouldn't let him undo the bleed, either. :) > Young padawan.... oh dear. I'm doomed. So, wtf is happening with V:TES in our nations capital Salem...? [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] It depends on the judge's judgment. > To the judge who ruled it this way, and the player(s) who it affects, > please don't take this as a slight or personal - I just need to know > due to the conflict in ways it would be ruled. Well, when preparing for a tournament, you can build your deck assuming that the judge will rule against such things -- builing a deck to take advantage of such a thing (if that's possible at all) is asking for trouble, since the ruling may go against you.

> It depends on the judge's judgment. So there is no real official guideline for this, just the judges discretion? That's cool... but wouldn't it be better for their to be a standard? [ quoted text not captured ]

J wrote: >> It depends on the judge's judgment. > > So there is no real official guideline for this, just the judges > discretion? > That's cool... but wouldn't it be better for their to be a standard? No. It's better to allow the judge to use his judgment to provide the best gaming experience, using all the details of the game and the players he has available.

[ quoted text not captured ] we had a couple of games the other week. The Imbued thing almost worked out for me, but wasn't quite quick enough to keep hold of my speedy weenie dem prey (also, I made a few dumb mistakes, which didn't help). We also had a SoC very-post release before that. I think it was 4 3rd Ed 4 SoC, or something like that. Was quite fun, too. We're working on getting a regular fortnightly game up and running....but people are all growed up, and have commitments, and have those small people that their partners spawned, so they can't seem to all get available at the same time. [ quoted text not captured ]