Regina, Saskatchewan | Modern
Time: Saturday April 30th, 2022
Main Event Players: 109 Winner: Tyler White
Role: Appeals Judge

An Appealing Role
I was really excited to get to be appeals judge for Face to Face Regina, I don’t get “red shirt” roles a lot, and so I was really looking forward to it, and while I’ve been Head Judge of events larger than 100 players (At Dallas I was HJ of a 180 player comp REL event) There’s something really special about getting to wear a red shirt. Which is why I was so disappointed that when I arrived there was no red shirt for me! When I had filled out the shirt request form I thought that was only for black shirts, so I said I didn’t need a shirt. Which uh, turned out to be incorrect. I was pretty crestfallen in the morning about it, but didn’t let it ruin my day. We did have the HJ introduce me at the beginning of the day however, since we felt that since I didn’t have any kind of judge shirt, it might be confusing for players and might be unclear that I was even on staff.

Summon a Loss
While on the floor I had the opportunity to discuss a call with a fellow judge. AP played Blood Moon, and passed the turn. On their turn, NAP played Urza’s Saga as their fourth land, put the one lore counter on it, then cast Summoner’s Pact and passed the turn. AP took their turn then on NAP’s upkeep, with the pact trigger on the stack a spectator noticed the issue and called a judge. Sacrificing the Saga would make NAP unable to pay for their pact. I don’t think the GRV partial zone change can be applied since it would cause massive disruption to the game. Depending on the board state I think a full backup to right after the Urza’s Saga was played might be a better fix.

What Does it Really Mean to Be “With” Something?
We deck checked someone and they had one of those deckboxes with two deck compartments. Both decks were in the same sleeves, one was modern burn and the other was the modern jund deck they were playing in the event. Policy states that “if there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard” which usually puts a player into game loss land. Since the deckbox had different compartments it was decided that it was kind of on the borderline. It was ruled that this wouldn’t be upgraded, but the player was instructed to take their extra deck out and put it elsewhere. Personally I’m leaning on the side of the upgrade since an opponent probably wouldn’t really pay attention to a player getting cards out of a different location in their deckbox, which is why we don’t want random extra cards to be stored with the SB.

Equipped to or Attached?
AP was attacking with an Inkmoth Nexus and cast Colossal Hammer, then, they targeted Inkmoth Nexus with Sigarda’s Aid’s triggered ability. NAP wanted to know what would happen if they took control of the hammer before the trigger resolved with Archmage’s Charm? The Hammer would attach as normal, since changing controllers doesn’t prevent the hammer from being attached to a different permanent, this would only “fizzle” an activated “equip” ability.

That Does Not Work the Way You Think it Does
A judge came up to me to discuss a call they took. AP used Merieke Ri Berit to take control of an animated vehicle, and wanted to know if the control changing effect would end when it stopped being a creature. The judge on the call said that they thought it worked like Vedalken Shackles, which continually checks to ensure that the targeting restrictions are met, even after the ability has resolved, so as soon as the vehicle stopped being a creature, it would return to its original controller. I was surprised and said that I didn’t know Vedalken Shackles worked that way, and looked it up. As it turns out, it specifically states on the card notes that it doesn’t work that way. I let the judge on the call know that I saw no reason for Merieke to work that way either. The judge nodded, slightly embarrassed and said he had a game to fix.

Communication Complication
I also processed a DQ at Face to Face Regina. It was kind of rough, I don’t process a lot of DQs and the others I’ve been a part of have all largely been fairly cut and dry. The player was quite upset, and I felt genuinely really bad about it. But I know a lot in the past I think being uncertain and afraid have potentially prevented me from issuing DQs. Recently someone told me that one of my biggest barriers in the program was my lack of confidence, and that being more sure of my own decisions would help me a lot. So I tried to do that here, however I’m still left with an uncertain feeling about the whole ordeal.

The Software is Helping
We decided to do a player meeting at this event as well, due to the limitations of companion (adding a player after the start of the event means they must be added with a loss, no exceptions) I dislike player meetings but until companion offers more malleability I think they’re kind of a necessity with events of this size.

Additionally, during top 8 one of the players noticed that while MTG Companion had correctly paired the first round of top 8, for the second round it paired things weirdly. I was uncertain and put together a paper bracket, and confirmed that yes, Companion was indeed doing something stupid. We think this was because it was continuing to update standings throughout the top 8 and was doing something wonky because of that. I spoke with the TO and they said using the paper pairings was fine.

Checking for Courtesy
The team for this event was very thin since Regina is basically a judge wasteland. (Not the good judge wasteland, either). Thus deck checks were kind of rough. In order to get all of top 8 checked before top 8 I deck checked everyone who ID’d in round 7. Then while top 8 photos were being taken, we had another judge deck check everyone who hadn’t already been checked. I know courtesy checks are going out of style, but I’ve been in a position where I’ve submitted lists to coverage that are illegal and it’s not a fun place to be. It is notable that while I found some issues (not marked cards not DLP) with the decks, because the decks weren’t presented there were no infractions issued.

Shady Behavoir
In total we had six judges for the event, the HJ, myself (appeals judge) three floor judges, and one judge to handle all ODEs/sides. One floor judge was glued to deck checks and the ODE/sides judge also had to take care of registration as well. This wasn’t great because two of our floor judges weren’t super experienced at Comp REL. At the beginning of the day I shadowed one of them on two incorrect rulings. The first was a missed Eidolon of Great revel trigger. They told the players they were going to rewind and which point I tapped them on the shoulder and said “no” somewhat sharply. I quickly let them know the correct ruling and then after getting the players playing again, had a chance to do some mentoring. Upon reflection my approach here wasn’t great, I should’ve tapped the judge on the shoulder and asked to speak to them away from the table about the call instead of just saying “no”.

In Conclusion...
Overall I had a great time at F2F Regina, it still surprises me how much I have to learn each time I go to an event, and how much stuff really catches me off guard. There isn’t much else to say about this one, I’ll be second guessing that DQ for a while, and I’m also somewhat afraid of the player taking some kind of retaliatory action against me (even though that’s quite unlikely).