用户
差别
这里会显示出您选择的修订版和当前版本之间的差别。
| 两侧同时换到之前的修订记录 前一修订版 后一修订版 | 前一修订版 | ||
|
ipg:2.5 [2019/04/15 10:58] 127.0.0.1 外部编辑 |
ipg:2.5 [2024/05/11 07:50] (当前版本) Siyang Li [ADDITIONAL REMEDY 进一步的修正] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| 行 33: | 行 33: | ||
| **• 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.**\\ | **• 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。**\\ | + | ++• 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.|\\ | 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。\\ ++\\ | 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。\\ ++\\ | ||
| 行 73: | 行 73: | ||
| 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。\\ ++ | 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.**\\ | + | **If the game has proceeded past a point where an opponent could reasonably be expected to notice the error, the opponent has also committed an infraction. In most cases, the infraction is Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State. However, if the judge believes that both players were responsible for the Game Rule Violation, such as due to the opponent controlling the continuous effect modifying the rules of the game that led to the Game Rule Violation or a player taking action based on another player’s instruction, they have instead committed 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, once the game has continued both players will have committed a Game Rule Violation.**\\ |
| - | ++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。|\\ | + | ++如果对手没能在预期其能注意到失误的合理时间点前指出游戏行动失误，则对手也犯下违规。大多数情况下是“游戏行动失误～未维护游戏状态”。然而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，例如是由于对手操控的改变游戏规则的持续性效应导致的，或是某位牌手根据另一位牌手的指示执行行动，则对手也犯下了“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，一旦游戏继续进行则双方牌手均犯下“游戏行动失误～违反游戏规则”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.\\ | 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。\\ ++ | + | 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.\\ |
| - | 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。\\ ++ | 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。\\ ++ | ||
| <WRAP center round box 60%> | <WRAP center round box 60%> | ||