[[:IPG:2.4|2.4. 游戏行动失误～再调度失误]] | [[:IPG|返回IPG目录]] | [[:IPG:2.6|2.6. 游戏行动失误～未维护游戏状态]] ====== 2.5 Game Rule Violation 违反游戏规则 ====== Penalty 处罚 ===== DEFINITION 定义 ===== **This infraction covers the majority of game situations in which a player makes an error or fails to follow a game procedure correctly. It handles violations of the Comprehensive Rules that are not covered by the other Game Play Errors.**\\ ++此违规涵盖了大多数关于牌手发生失误，或是没有正确的执行游戏程序而造成的游戏状况。这也用来处理违反完整规则、且未包含在其他游戏行动失误中的违规。|\\ "Game Rule Violation" does not refer to any particular type of error. Rather, Game Rule Violations are specifically defined as errors that aren’t another infraction. Newer judges will sometimes talk about how “mis-resolving a spell” is a Game Rule Violation. In actuality, resolving a spell improperly could result in one of several different infractions, such as Looking at Extra Cards (e.g. thinking Dissolve allows you to scry 2) to Drawing an Extra Card (e.g. mis-reading Divination and drawing three cards).\\ “违反游戏规则”不指代任何特定类型的错误。然而，违反游戏规则明确定义为所有不能归类为其他违规的错误。新裁判有时会讨论“错误地结算一个咒语”是否应当是违反游戏规则。事实上，不正确的结算咒语可能会导致另一些违规，像是额外看牌（如忘记了克罗芬斯的骏马已经离开战场）及非公开牌张失误（看错了卜卦的叙述而抓了3张牌）等。\\ ++ ===== EXAMPLES 范例 ===== **A. A player casts Wrath of God for 3W (actual cost 2WW).**\\ **A. 牌手支付{三}{白}来施放神之愤怒/Wrath of God（正确费用为{二}{白}{白}）。**\\ **B. A player does not attack with a creature that must attack each turn.**\\ **B. 牌手没有让每回合都必须攻击的生物来进行攻击。**\\ **C. A player fails to put a creature with lethal damage into a graveyard and it is not noticed until several turns later.**\\ **C. 牌手没有将受到致命伤害的生物放进坟墓场，且在数个回合之后才发现。**\\ **D. A Phyrexian Revoker is on the battlefield that should have had a card named for it.**\\ **D. 非瑞克西亚断念妖/Phyrexian Revoker 在战场上，当初应为其说一张牌名时却没有说。**\\ **E. A player casts Brainstorm and forgets to put two cards back on top of their library.**\\ **E. 牌手施放脑力激荡/Brainstorm，却忘记将两张牌放回牌库顶。**\\ ===== PHILOSOPHY 原则 ===== **While Game Rule Violations can be attributed to one player, they usually occur publicly and both players are expected to be mindful of what is happening in the game. It is tempting to try and “fix” these errors, but it is important that they be handled consistently, regardless of their impact on the game.**\\ ++虽然违反游戏规则通常是归咎于其中一位牌手，但此类情况通常是公开地发生，且双方牌手都应留意游戏中所发生的事情。处理者应尝试去“修复”这些失误，但很重要的是：不论这些失误对游戏有多少影响，处理方式都必须一致。|\\ Consistency is a core principle of the IPG. Even though there are thousands of judges adjudicating tournaments across the world, it is important for each of these tournaments to be run and judged to the same standard. For this reason, we strive to handle penalties neutrally. Fundamentally, both players are responsible for maintaining a proper game state. Our core role as judges is not to “correct” or “fix” the players’ mistakes, but to dispassionately interpret and apply the fixes prescribed by the IPG.\\ 一致性是IPG的核心原则。以同样的标准执法世界各地的比赛是很重要的事，即使这些比赛由数以千计的不同裁判来执法。因此，我们致力于处理处罚的中立性。从根本上来说，双方牌手都有责任保持正确的游戏状态。作为裁判，我们的核心作用不是改正或者修复牌手的错误，而是冷静地解释并应用IPG中规定的修正。\\ ++ ===== ADDITIONAL REMEDY 进一步的修正 ===== **First, consider a simple backup (see section 1.4).**\\ **首先，考虑是否简单倒回（参见1.4章节）。** **If a simple backup is not sufficient and the infraction falls into one or more of the following categories, and only into those categories, perform the appropriate partial fix:**\\ ++如果简单倒回不足以完全修正，且违规属于下列某种情形或同属多种情形（但不得超出各情形规定之内容），则进行部分修正：|\\ So right here we are going to have a list of partial fixes. Try to do a simple backup (see Backing Up 1.4 for more information about back ups) then, if you can’t, you can try to do a partial fix. If you cannot apply a simple backup or a partial fix you evaluate if you need to do a back up or leave alone. If the error fits more than one of these categories, it’s ok to partial fix, but be careful that the error only fits into those categories. If there are multiple fixes within the same bullet point, you're still fine to use that partial fix.\\ 以下是部分修正的列表。首先试着进行简单倒回（关于倒回，详见[[:ipg:1.4|1.4 倒回]]一节）；如果简单倒回不够，你可以试着执行部分修正。如果你既不能进行简单倒回、也不能执行部分修正，那么你可以考虑倒回或者保留当前状态不修正。如果失误属于一种类别以上，可以使用部分修正，但必须小心注意该失误只属于这些类别。如果在同一条目中满足了多个修正条件，你仍然可以使用这种部分修正。\\ ++ **• If a player forgot to untap one or more permanents at the start of their turn and it is still the same turn, untap them.**\\ ++• 如果牌手在自己回合开始时忘记重置一个或数个永久物，并且当前依然是同一个回合，则重置它们。|\\ Out-of-Order-Sequencing has always been a viable option when this type of situation arises, and it does so with some regularity. Players get excited, or simply lose focus and forget to untap everything before advancing into the turn. If that happens, we simply issue the warning and fix the mistake, by untapping those permanents now.|\\ 发生这种情况时，判定为“次序不当的行事顺序”也是一个合适的选项，过去我们也一直这样做。在进入回合之前，牌手容易因为激动或者注意力不集中而忘记对场面进行重置。发生这种情况时，我们只需给予警告并通过重置本该重置的永久物来修正错误。\\ ++\\ **• If a player made an illegal choice (including no choice where required) for a static ability generating a continuous effect still on the battlefield, that player makes a legal choice.**\\ ++• 如果某牌手为某个在战场上之静止式异能产生的持续性效应作出的选择不合法（包括在需要作选择时未如此作），则该牌手重新作出一个符合游戏规则的选择。|\\ This partial fix refers to cards such as True-Name Nemesis, Voice of All or a Siege from Fate Reforged™, which require the choice of a player or color as they enter the battlefield. The reasoning for this is similar to why we apply state-based actions — it is impossible for these cards to exist on the battlefield without a choice being made for them, so we correct that immediately. While this could lead to the perception of advantage for one player, such errors always occur publicly, so it is in both player’s interest to be attentive.\\ 这种部分修正是指像真名宿敌、万物使者或是龙命殊途™中的围攻牌，这些需要于其进场时选择牌手或颜色之类选项的牌。这样做的原因与我们执行状态动作的原因差不多——这些牌没有做出选择的话就无法进入战场，所以我们应当立刻纠正。虽然这可能会让人产生其中一个牌手会获得优势的看法，但错误是公开发生的，所以双方牌手都需要注意。\\ So, if Nick casts Doom Blade on Albert’s Voice of All, we can have Albert chose a color now. If Albert chooses Black, Doom Blade is now illegal. Then, we can do a simple backup to just before Doom Blade was cast.\\ 如果Nick对Albert的万物使者施放送终刀锋，我们可以让Albert立即选择一个颜色。如果Albert选择了黑色，送终刀锋的施放便是非法的。然后我们便可以使用简易倒回，回到送终刀锋被施放之前的时刻。\\ ++\\ **• If a player failed to draw cards, discard cards, or return cards from their hand to another zone, that player does so.**\\ ++• 如果某牌手未能抓牌、弃牌或忘记将牌从手上移至其他区域，则该牌手如此作。|\\ Players will generally be able to determine with high accuracy if they failed to draw or discard cards.This also includes bounce. Note that this partial fix does not expire, even if the error was many turns ago.\\ 牌手如果未能抓牌或者弃牌他们一般都能较为准确地确定。也包括回手类的效应。注意，这种部分修正没有时效限制，即使错误是数回合前发生的，也应执行修正。\\++\\ **• If an object is in an incorrect zone either due to a required zone change being missed or due to being put into the wrong zone during a zone change, the exact object is still known to all players, and it can be moved with only minor disruption to the current state of the game, put the object in the correct zone.**\\ ++• 如果在改变某物件所处区域的过程中，由于遗漏要求的区域改变或将之置入错误区域，最终导致该物件所处的区域不正确，且该物件依然为所有牌手所知悉、移动此物件不会对游戏当前状态造成影响，则将该物件放入正确区域。|\\ There is a lot going on in this sentence, so let’s deconstruct it.-”Object in the incorrect zone due to a required zone change being missed” : This is for where a creature was supposed to die and didn’t, or a card was supposed to be milled and didn’t, Or a creature that is supposed to be bounced and isn't.\\ 这句话很长，我们来一点一点消化它。“由于遗漏要求的区域改变...导致该物件所处的区域不正确”：生物本应死去但却没有死去，或者一张牌本应被磨掉但却没有，或者一个生物本应被移回手上却没有，都属于这种情况。\\ -”or due to being put into the wrong zone during a zone change”: Most commonly this is when a card is supposed to be put in the graveyard, but is put in exile, or vice versa.\\ “在改变某物件所处区域的过程中..将之置入错误区域”：最常见的情况是一张牌本来应该进坟场，但却放进了放逐区（或反过来）。严格来说这不包括磨牌库，原因如下一句所说。\\ -“the exact object is still known to all players”: This means that all players know what the object is. This could be because the card was revealed or it could be because the card is in a location known by both players such as the top of a library.\\ “该物件依然为所有牌手所知悉”：这说明所有牌手都知道这个物件是什么。这可能是因为这张牌被展示过，或是这张牌所在的位置双方牌手都知道，例如牌库顶。\\ -“and it can be moved with only minor disruption to the current game state”: Things disappearing from the battlefield tends to be disruptive. Be sure to look at what decisions and actions are currently being made based on that card being on the battlefield. If it’s a creature that should have died tucked in with the lands, removing it isn’t very disruptive- unless it’s a mana producer and it has been used as a land for a turn or three.\\ “移动此物件不会对游戏当前状态造成影响”：战场上的东西消失通常都会产生影响。请务必检查根据该物件在战场上这个信息，牌手正在作出什么决定。如果是一个混在地里面没有死去的生物，将其移动产生的影响不是很大——除非它是一个产费生物，且已经被当作地使用了一个或几个回合。\\ Additionally, this partial fix does NOT include fixing things that shouldn’t have moved but did. For example, a 4/4 with 3 damage is put into the graveyard, and later discovered that it shouldn’t have been. This partial fix does not include returning it to the battlefield.\\ 此外，这种部分修正不适用于修正某物件本不应移动却移动了的情形。例如。一个4/4生物受到了3点伤害却被置入了坟墓场，稍后才发现它本来不应死去。这种部分修正不支持将它移回战场。\\ ++\\ **• If damage assignment order has not been declared, the appropriate player chooses that order.**\\ ++• 如果未宣告伤害分配次序，对应牌手决定此顺序。|\\ This is seldom relevant. Most times, when there are multiple blockers, it's clear what the intent is, and there is no real interaction. However, it can become relevant, and we now have this partial fix. Ned may get upset that Abe gets to declare blocking order in the middle of resolving spells; when it suddenly becomes relevant, however, most of the time it becomes relevant as a result of Ned casting a spell. If Ned is doing something that makes blocking order relevant, he cannot assume that whatever blocking order favors him the most is the correct one. He has the responsibility to clarify the ambiguity prior to it becoming relevant.\\ 通常来说攻击者或阻挡者的次序都没什么用。绝大多数时候，有多个阻挡者时，牌手的意图都很明确，也没有实际互动。但是，这些次序有时可能会产生影响，因此也就有了这部分提及的修正方式。如果Abe可以在结算咒语的过程中宣告阻挡者的次序，Ned可能会很不高兴；但通常来说，正是因为Ned施放了某些咒语，阻挡者的次序才会突然对游戏有所影响。如果Ned想要做一些可能会让阻挡者次序产生影响的事情，他不能假设对手采用的就是对他最有利的那种次序。他有责任在做事情导致阻挡者次序产生影响之前首先厘清次序是什么。\\ ++ **For each of these fixes, a simple backup may be performed beforehand if it makes applying the fix smoother. Triggered abilities are generated from these partial fixes only if they would have occurred had the action been taken at the correct time.**\\ ++对于以上各修正而言，如果能让修正更平滑，可以在此之前进行一次简易倒回。对于在部分修正中产生的触发式异能，只有在这些动作在正确的时间进行也会触发的情况下，才会在这些部分修正中产生。|\\ A simple backup is backing up the last action completed (or one currently in progress) and is sometimes used to make another portion of the prescribed remedy smoother. A simple backup should not involve any random elements. Also while applying a partial fix consider the triggered abilities if they would have occurred while taking the action at the correct time.\\ 简易倒回意指倒回上一个已完成的（或正在进行的）游戏动作，有时可用来使前述之修正的某一部分更加平滑。简易倒回不应涉及任何随机元素。另外，在执行部分修正时，应将在正确的时点作该动作时本应发生的触发式异能考虑在内。\\ ++ **Otherwise, a full backup may be considered or the game state may be left as is.**\\ ++若属于其他情况，则可以考虑进行完整倒回，或保留当前游戏状态不做修正。|\\ So, first we try to apply a simple back up; if not we look to see if any of the partial fixes apply, and if not, we either rewind or don't. Please see 1.4 Backing Up for information on if it‘s appropriate to back up.\\ 所以，我们先试图执行简易倒回；如果简易倒回不能适用，再看看是否有任何一个部分修正能够适用，如果没有，我们可以选择是否倒回。关于如何确定倒回是否恰当的信息，请参阅IPG 1.4节。\\ ++ **For most Game Play Errors not caught within a time that a player could reasonably be expected to notice, opponents receive a Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State penalty. If the judge believes that both players were responsible for a Game Rule Violation, such as due to the existence of replacement effects or a player taking action based on another player's instruction, both players receive a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation. For example, if a player casts Path to Exile on an opponent’s creature and the opponent puts the creature into the graveyard, both players have committed this infraction.**\\ ++如果没有牌手在预期其能注意到失误的合理时段内指出游戏行动失误，则所有对手均犯下了“游戏行动失误～未维护游戏状态”此违规。|\\ This is simply the definition of Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State, and goes back to the concept that keeping the game in a legal and clear state is both players responsibility.\\ 这就是游戏行动失误～未维护游戏状态的定义。它涉及的概念就是双方牌手都有责任去维护合法、清晰的游戏状态。\\ ++ ++如果裁判认为双方牌手在本次违反游戏规则的过程中均有责任,例如是由于现存的替代性效应而导致违反游戏规则,或是某位牌手根据另一位牌手的说明执行行动,则双方均会犯下“游戏行动失误~违反游戏规则”违规。例如,如果牌手向对手的生物施放流放之径/Path to Exile,且该对手将此生物放进坟墓场,则双方牌手均犯下本违规。|\\ As always, both players are responsible for maintaining a clear game state. If my card tells you to take an action, and you do it incorrectly, who's fault is it? Yours for doing the action incorrectly, or mine for not making sure my spell resolved correctly? Turns out, in this case, it’s reasonable to say we are both equally at fault. Fundamentally if the judge thinks that both players share the responsibility for the error, because of replacement effects or both participating in the action, then both players receive this penalty.\\ 一如既往地，双方牌手都有责任维护清晰的游戏状态。如果我的牌要求你做一个动作，而你做错了，那是谁的错？是你错误的动作还是我没有确保咒语正确结算？事实上，我们有理由说，在这种情况下双方都是有过错的。基本上，如果裁判认为两位牌手对失误都有责任，无论是因为替代性效应还是因为两人均参与了动作，两位牌手都会受到此判罚。\\ ++ [[:IPG:2.4|2.4. 游戏行动失误～再调度失误]] | [[:IPG|返回IPG目录]] | [[:IPG:2.6|2.6. 游戏行动失误～未维护游戏状态]] {{page>:规则和文档索引&nofooter}}