Mind Crush

[Jack-Wyler]

Can I check my opponent's hand when I use this card? because it's not really written on the text of the card and Netrep only answer me in the case of my opponent has not the card in hand.

 

[Duelmaster]

Can I check my opponent's hand when I use this card? because it's not really written on the text of the card and Netrepâ„¢ only answer me in the case of my opponent has not the card in hand.

When you activate Mind Crush you declare a name and if your opponent has that card he/she has to discard it. If he/she says: I haven't the card you declared, than you can check his/her hand to confirm that he/she hasn't got that card.


Question about this too:

Which Tournament Penalty would you give as judge, if it turns out that the player lying?

 

[Kyhotae]

If he's willfully lying, it's no different than if he stacked his deck before drawing. I'd discuss it with the Head Judge, but I would lobby for a game loss at the least, maybe even a match loss.

 

[Jack-Wyler]

Declare 1 card name. If your opponent has a declared card(s) in his/her hand, discard all of the declared card(s) to the Graveyard. Otherwise, you randomly discard 1 card from your hand.

If you can not check his hand, you are not forced to trust him as you can check opponent's deck when you remove a flip with NoC.
For example, he could have another copie of the card in his hand but because you can not check, he can say that he drew it later.
If I am wrong, it is a very silly rulling.

 

[slither]

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=2554#2554

 

[masterwoo0]

When you activate Mind Crush you declare a name and if your opponent has that card he/she has to discard it. If he/she says: I haven't the card you declared, than you can check his/her hand to confirm that he/she hasn't got that card.


Question about this too:

Which Tournament Penalty would you give as judge, if it turns out that the player lying?

It's called "cheating", and cheating is covered under Tournament Policy for penalties.

You have at your disposal:

Disqualification w/o Prize



P-32 Unsporting Conduct"“Cheating (Penalty: Disqualification without Prize)

Cheating is the highest display of unsporting conduct a player may exhibit during a tournament. Cheating includes, but is not limited to, intentionally misrepresenting the game state, rules, and policies; reporting inaccurate information to tournament officials; and bribery. A statement must be sent to the address given at the beginning of this document outlining the incident leading to this penalty.


That sounds about right. I'm sure there would be some that might moderate this Penalty to something lower, but I feel cheating should not be rewarded with a mere "Game Loss" or "Match Loss". If you can't play fair, you shouldnt be playing, period. There is no middle ground.

While I agree some penalties can be reduced to a lesser degree, this is one that if proven, should be followed. You can't tell me someone can't look at their hand, see they have the card, and not honestly answer. Unless you can't read, there's absolutely no way you can explain it to my satisfaction that you just didnt see it. It's YOUR hand!!!

 

[Jack-Wyler]

But why does the rulling precise that you can look at his hand if he's supposed to have no copy of the card in hand?

The two situations are to avoid cheat but have different rullings. Strange.

 

[masterwoo0]

But why does the rulling precise that you can look at his hand if he's supposed to have no copy of the card in hand?

The two situations are to avoid cheat but have different rullings. Strange.

If your opponent states that they do not have any of the called cards in hand, then you are allowed to check their hand.

However, if they discard at least one card, they have followed the effect of Mind Crush, and therefore, looking at your opponents hand is not allowed, since the effect itself does not give you the option to look at your opponents hand when resolving the effect.

If it stated,

"Declare one card name. Look at your opponent's hand, and if they have the declared card, discard all copies of the declared card from hand, to the Graveyard."

There would be no need to check your opponents hand, as it is part of the effect anyway.

 

[Jason_C]

However, if they discard at least one card, they have followed the effect of Mind Crush, and therefore, looking at your opponents hand is not allowed,

Actually, they may still have a second or even a third copy of the card in their hand. You would still have the right to look at their hand to ensure they were not lying.

What about if the card were limited to one per deck, though, and they discarded one?

 

[slither]

Actually, they may still have a second or even a third copy of the card in their hand. You would still have the right to look at their hand to ensure they were not lying.

What about if the card were limited to one per deck, though, and they discarded one?

In this case no, that's why woo0 brought up the cheating quote. Cards like D.D. Designator DO allow such things, as it states to look at your opponents hand.

If they discarded one limited card and had another one thats an immidiate Game Loss.

 

[Jason_C]

In this case no, that's why woo0 brought up the cheating quote. Cards like D.D. Designator DO allow such things, as it states to look at your opponents hand

I'm afraid you may have missed my point. Mind Crush states to discard ALL copies of the card declared to the Graveyard. Therefore, just because they've discarded ONE copy, is no reason to believe they've discarded ALL copies. Even after they've discarded, you may still check their hand for additional copies.

If they discarded one limited card and had another one thats an immidiate Game Loss.

Again I have failed to communicate my point. What I meant was, if you declare a limited card, and they discard one, can you still check for additional copies, or is it assumed that they have no additional copies?

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

However, if they discard at least one card, they have followed the effect of Mind Crush, and therefore, looking at your opponents hand is not allowed, since the effect itself does not give you the option to look at your opponents hand when resolving the effect..

"You" refers to the cards controller.

Declare 1 card name. If your opponent has a declared card(s) in his/her hand, discard all of the declared card(s) to the Graveyard. Otherwise, you randomly discard 1 card from your hand.

Notice the lack of an "s" on discard. The third person sungular would have an "s." Therefore it is not saying Your opponent discards all of the declared cards. If you were to go by the text: you check your opponent hands then discard all of the cards.

 

[slither]

I'm afraid you may have missed my point. Mind Crush states to discard ALL copies of the card declared to the Graveyard. Therefore, just because they've discarded ONE copy, is no reason to believe they've discarded ALL copies. Even after they've discarded, you may still check their hand for additional copies.

Again I have failed to communicate my point. What I meant was, if you declare a limited card, and they discard one, can you still check for additional copies, or is it assumed that they have no additional copies?

I understood your point, the list is clear on when it is or it is not allowed to check the hand. If one card is discarded a Judge/Official is the only one allowed to check if that is correct, this being for a lack of doubt.

 

[Jason_C]

I understood your point, the list is clear on when it is or it is not allowed to check the hand. If one card is discarded a Judge/Official is the only one allowed to check if that is correct, this being for a lack of doubt.

And what of DaGuy's point?

:edit Not to mention the excruciating inconsistancy of saying you can check if they discard nothing, but can't check if they discard one or two.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

If one card is discarded a Judge/Official is the only one allowed to check if that is correct, this being for a lack of doubt.

3 mind crush in a deck, maybe a mask of darkness, and so how many times do you think a Judge could/should be called over to one table every single round?

 

[masterwoo0]

3 mind crush in a deck, maybe a mask of darkness, and so how many times do you think a Judge could/should be called over to one table every single round?

As many times as it takes. How many times do you think we get called on calls that you would think we dont need to be called on? I could run down a list of trivial rulings that get issued.

There isnt a "quota" for the amount of calls a Judge gets during a Tournament. We arent there for our pleasure. We're there to resolve prolems and keep the peace. Once you start thinking about how many times you get called to a Table, its probably time to be a player and not a Judge.

Most of the time, the only person who is going to thank you is your Tournament Organizer when it's all said and done, so even that player who called you a gazillion times isnt going to look you up at the end of the day. He just figures you're doing your job, which IS what you're doing.

So while you may grumble and grit your teeth, and mumble quietly under your breath every time you see "that player" raise his hand, that's what you're there for.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Sure, if nobody else needs you then there's no problem getting called over to that one table.

But that's a really big "if."

I will not concede that you won't be needed elsewhere.

 

[masterwoo0]

Sure, if nobody else needs you then there's no problem getting called over to that one table.

But that's a really big "if."

I will not concede that you won't be needed elsewhere.

You dont have to concede that. That's why there is more than one Floor Judge, as well as the option to add time to a Match in unusual circumstances.

There is always a remedy, but choosing to ignore a player because he has basically gotten under your skin, is pretty much what you would be doing by not responding to him, and wouldnt look good to other players who don't know the situation. The only thing they see is you not coming, and believe me, player's DO talk. Like I said, they may not thank you for doing your Job, but they can sure call you every name they can think of when you don't.

 

[Jason_C]

Fair arguments, perhaps, Masterwoo0, but you're addressing what is probably the weakest of three points made, in my humble opinion, and not the stronger two.

Point 1:

Notice the lack of an "s" on discard. The third person sungular would have an "s." Therefore it is not saying Your opponent discards all of the declared cards. If you were to go by the text: you check your opponent hands then discard all of the cards.

Point 2:

Not to mention the excruciating inconsistancy of saying you can check if they discard nothing, but can't check if they discard one or two.

 

[masterwoo0]

Fair arguments, perhaps, Masterwoo0, but you're addressing what is probably the weakest of three points made, in my humble opinion, and not the stronger two.

Point 1:
Point 2:

I dont really see where there is a need to address that. I dont see a missing "s" in the text.

Mind Crush
Text
Declare 1 card name. If your opponent has a declared card(s) in his/her hand, discard all of the declared card(s) to the Graveyard. Otherwise, you randomly discard 1 card from your hand.

"Card(s)" is what the focus is on. Discard card(s), not "Discard card".