(Aether sideboard) hainkarga 3 - 0 theelkspeaks (Fire Lt.) [sub TheonlyrealBeef]

[TheonlyrealBeef]

It's worth mentioning that the deck wasn't illegal, or I'd have caught it without a doubt.

So there would only be a penalty for making a change past deadline if such a change were allowed. If I made the change myself I could change anything and it breaks the rules. I'm proud of breaking no rules that I'm aware of in all the wars that I've been in so far and not about to start now.

I made an error with the mark (though not one that breaks the rules), if that's consistently ruled as a "deal with it, play with this mark since it's in vault or take a loss" then that's that. WMs ruled it as such, so I took a loss. Personally, that's where I thought it ended.

In general, the best way to resolve this -if mark or anything else were allowed to be changed altogether- is to remove the opportunity for salvage. That way there is no "strategic" solution and only consistency. It shouldn't involve a decision on whether to ask for a ruling or not since the error is the same. Of course, just not allowing changes altogether is the easiest way to deal with this, since there is a clear deadline. Just, you know, let this be consistent.

As far as "obvious" is concerned: we've fielded similar decks in previous rounds using an Aether Mark and 4 cards can be played if and only if the Mark is Aether. These are purely objective facts regarding the obviousness of Aether being the desired Mark for this deck.

[deuce22]

I already asked the WMs to change/edit the rules for this. If I were WM, I would have them state something like the following:

"You must not edit your vault (decks, salvage, discard, etc.) after the deckbuilding period ends. If an edit to the vault after the deadline is to be made, it must be approved by WMs. The exact penalty will be at the discretion of the WMs. Edits made shortly after the deadline will be weighted much lighter, as is notifying WMs of late vault completion. Any part of a deck (card, upgrade, or mark) may not be edited after a match has started. Any edits to a deck must be approved by a WM prior to starting the match."

In general, when I was a WM I would only allow edits shortly after the deadline. Probably the only exception being for very minor "obvious" edits (like a wrong mark) I would allow mid/late round prior to starting the match.

I'm sure people would have slight modifications to what i wrote above, but i think it clarifies these situations a little more clearly yet gives the WMs flexibility in handing out penalties.

Personally, I prefer adherence to strict rules during large events like this. I remember when Kael Hate was WM and he handed out penalties for not having the title in a battle thread being perfect. I'm not that harsh, but the rules need to be clear so that it can prevent stupid drama like this.

[Higurashi]

What happens indeed if along with their late mark change, they also change a card and the WM doesn't notice? Would that be traceable in the gdoc and would the WM think to do so? This certainly adds work for the WM. Looks like a rule edit would help reducing the friction that a case-by-case precedent can cause.

[killsdazombies]

I'd like to also mention, this wasn't a case of "better to take the loss than a penalty and loss" since my position has always been it's better to play a match than not, and was torb's position as well (edit: I dont mean to speak for him, it was just what he mentioned in the intial WM pm). Sadly, Ive been busy this week at hospital and just finished my third funeral, else I would have caught this before it was fielded, since I play a few dozen games with each deck to get a feel of it. It's a shame it's come to drama but the WMS have the right to make the final call obviously.

[worldwideweb3]

What happens indeed if along with their late mark change, they also change a card and the WM doesn't notice? Would that be traceable in the gdoc and would the WM think to do so? This certainly adds work for the WM. Looks like a rule edit would help reducing the friction that a case-by-case precedent can cause.

Fwiw, It's possible to see what was edditted, takes 1 minute.

[Jenkar]

What happens indeed if along with their late mark change, they also change a card and the WM doesn't notice? Would that be traceable in the gdoc and would the WM think to do so? This certainly adds work for the WM. Looks like a rule edit would help reducing the friction that a case-by-case precedent can cause.

Fwiw, It's possible to see what was edditted, takes 1 minute.

With the size of the sheets we're using, google does bug quite a bit on history (especially in later rounds, i'd expect), so more than 1 minute.

[worldwideweb3]

What happens indeed if along with their late mark change, they also change a card and the WM doesn't notice? Would that be traceable in the gdoc and would the WM think to do so? This certainly adds work for the WM. Looks like a rule edit would help reducing the friction that a case-by-case precedent can cause.

Fwiw, It's possible to see what was edditted, takes 1 minute.

With the size of the sheets we're using, google does bug quite a bit on history (especially in later rounds, i'd expect), so more than 1 minute.

Never happened for me last round ^^