Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Interesting judging decision - what would you rule?

I think that any call leaving you in a better situation than if he had install it correctly would be a good call. That includes game loss for him, agenda back in his hand and eve trashed (this leads to more information for you), or agenda scored for you and eve trashed (I disagree that this solution makes no sense, it’s an appropriate punishment for his mistake, since you get in a strictly better position than had he install it correctly and had you run).

Personnally i’d chose option 2 or 3 but wouldn’t find option 1 wrong

The only thing that makes sense here is a game loss. I don’t know why TOs at premiere events like this are so hesitant to give them when the situation calls for it.

1 Like

Side note/question for those of you that were there: how does a thing like that even happen? I could maybe see “presenting the wrong ID” with Biotech or something, where you need to drag multiple IDs with you for the deck to actually be complete, but with any other identity? These 50 cards are my deck, and I don’t drag around spare IDs just as I don’t drag around various ICE pieces that I couldn’t fit into the deck.


To be fair, the picture on the ID is pretty much the same as the picture on the other. I have made this mistake before. Just not at fucking worlds.


At the very least he should have been made to play RP for the remainder of the tournament with a deck optimized, presumably, for PE.

Decklist transcription errors will happen and I can see a little leeway given there, but deck contents errors should never happen. In event of a decklist/deck contents discrepancy the actual deck contents should aways take precedence and deck contents should never be altered over the course of a tournament. The ID card is part of the contents of a deck.

The (broader) answer to this will always be the same until the problem is solved - FFG needs a document to handle cases like this. Until that happens there are a range of correct answers (basically anything that is justified through some judging philosophy, which can change person to person, as we see from the answers in this thread) and a judge basically has to choose which one to apply, which invariably leads to people with different philosophies feeling disgruntled (whether due to excess leniency or harshness, it doesn’t really matter)


Yeah, definitely shouldn’t go to the corp, and I’m actually kind of surprised to hear this given that the judges were otherwise pretty strict yesterday, from the stories I heard - game losses rather than rollbacks for accidentally taking a fifth click, that kind of thing.

For the ruling at hand regarding the Vitruvius, I think the only reasonble ruling besides match loss would be that the Corp will have to trash his agenda and redo his turn. This is likely how I would have ruled it if the corp called for judge at the first stage (if he noticed that he had two illegal cards in his server before advancing) and probably for the current issue as well.

Bareknuckle boxing in the alley out back. Three rounds, winner take all.

1 Like

Yeah, or when this random guy at Worlds took four clicks as a Corp and installed a agenda in a remote and advanced it and was allowed to redo the whole turn. :scream::scream::scream:


Why game loss and not just give the Vitruvius scored to the runner? It punishes the corp for the mistake, and negates all the advantages of the illegal play without resorting to a full game loss. Seems to me that this should always be the punishment for an illegal played agenda that is in play that long.

1 Like

A reasonable rewind at low level play is to put the vitruvious back in hq. And he losses the click he used to install it, if he would have been over hand size for that, random discard. Credit pool restored. Corp turn begins.

At premier that’s a game loss imo.


@SimonMoon in a SC or GNK, I absolutely agree, I think that game losses should be reserved for extreme scenarios only- people are just there to play some games, so just find the simplest way to let the advantage go to the player that didn’t make the error (which ofc is not what happened here) and let them play on.

In a nationals, though… Game loss would have been the right call, as this an error that directly caused points to be scored

It’s definitely the wrong call. I can’t think of anything other than giving the Corp a game loss at this level of event.

I like Simons solution. It in no way benefits the corp (he loses points a full turn and the Econ to advance) , but doesn’t just lose the game, which is no fun for anyone.

I know pro players are always arguing for game loss- but even at worlds level events, people are there to play and have fun.

That said, if I was handed a game loss for this, I’d feel it was tough but reasonable.

As the runner - if prefer the “hand me the Vitruvius ruling.” I want to win like everyone else, but not via dq.

There are no SMC alt-arts. Using non-ffg alt art cards for anything OTHER THAN the ID is an illegal deck. You’re required to play with netrunner cards and that means official FFG product. IDs are looser ground, though in all honesty they probably are still technically supposed to be FFG only prints. I’d call judge on that one, that it was in another language other than the native on top of that (Even if he natively spoke french), I don’t know.

At the beginning of the game, imo, he needed to clarify he was using these and get your permission if he really wanted to do that, and since that tips his hand he probably should be playing it to begin with.


a question I always had about this, is that many custom art (i.e; not FFG) cards are printed on official netrunner cards that have the ink on the face cleaned off - if this was the case, it would be far harder to detect the custom card than if using the FFG alt arts (which are printed with slightly different cardstock and sizes). in this case, what’s the problem with using these cards? (maybe I’m just too naive about all the l33t cheating techniques out there…)

Part of the problem with harsh rulings at “high-level” play is that a lot of the players at US Nationals and Worlds have been casuals who were at the event anyway. Last year at Worlds I played against a guy who didn’t know that trash a program subroutines were corp choice.

Perhaps the registration cap will help with the Worlds issue, but as long as they keep GenCon as the US National tournament this will probably always be a problem.

Can always take it a little easy in the first round and at the lower tables if that’s a concern.

Well, the FFG guide does specify different levels of familiarity you should have with the game for various tournaments. On the original question, it’s OBVIOUSLY a game-loss in my book. How could it be anything else for a completely illegal play that you can’t really roll back meaningfully?