Duelingbook Forum

You'd probably really struggle trying to find an official Konami source that explicitly says you cannot view your Main Deck for no reason. You can probably refer to page 55 of the Official Rulebook (v10) which tells you that you can pick up your Deck and search through it "whenever an effect instructs you" to do so. You can probably refer to page 5 of the same document where it mentions you can "look at the cards in your Extra Deck during the game" but makes no mention of that with respect to the Main Deck. Based on those 2 rulings, you might infer that you can't just look at your Main Deck without a reason, but you're not going to find anything explicit very easily.

Even if an official source does exist with respect to this ruling, you can't expect my judges to have these sources readily available at all times. This is such a fundamental ruling to the game, that we genuinely aren't prepared to provide this ruling at a moment's notice, and it would likely take more time to look for such an official ruling than it's worth. It would be like asking us to provide a ruling that says you can't randomly send cards to the Graveyard, or asking us to provide a ruling that says you can't randomly decide to increase your Life Points. We sort of expect that, if you've been playing this game for longer than 20 minutes, you probably should know these things.

Also, I'd get out of the headspace that Konami is the only source that provides us with the tools on how to play their game. As much as I hate to say it, there are very few official sources out there relatively. It took 18 months just for Konami to officially tell us we were following the April 2020 revisions in the TCG, despite sanctioned events following those rulings since April 2020.

With all the respect to the rules, but what's wrong with looking at your deck, provided that it is shuffled afterwards?

Goatobed wrote:With all the respect to the rules, but what's wrong with looking at your deck, provided that it is shuffled afterwards?

Just ain't allowed to do it. Nothing more can really be said.

I imagine the argument is that we want to avoid changing the gamestate as much as possible if we can. Accidentally messing with the deck when the deck shouldn't be messed with gets you PE/DC penalties. Intentionally doing it can get you hit for cheating.

Psily wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Psily wrote:I have bad laptop. Master duel doesnt work. Its not about the game if allows or not. I just want reference to offical rule

Everyone telling you that you can't do something is the reference. Otherwise google it yourself.

I dont trust anyone that tells me something. You can tell me that sky is red but is blue. I want offical ruling from KONAMI. only than the reference is 100% true. I belive you and judges and everyone that is not allowed and i accepted it. Only VALID reference from anywhere that is confirmed

When you decide to go play ranked, it is taken for granted that you know and agree with the tournament policies stated by Konami, it is not the Judges nor other users' job to teach you what are the tournament policies, it is your responsibility as a player to know this information beforehand.
Ignorance DOES NOT extent you of receiving penalties. 2 days is more than enough time to go and read the tournament policies yourself.

At this point, its not up to a judge or anyone to prove it to you or "link the ruling" saying YOU CANNOT arbitrarily ruffle through deck and shuffle it for no reason. Its up to YOU to prove to all of US and show a document that says YOU CAN. Go ahead, we'll wait.

Goatobed wrote:With all the respect to the rules, but what's wrong with looking at your deck, provided that it is shuffled afterwards?

IF you were allowed to shuffle your deck whenever you wanted, cards and effects that intentionally stack the deck in a specific order would be completely and utterly meaningless and would alter your draws in a significantly unfair manner.

I think as a judge, teaching people about the rules/policies of the game is incredibly important. Our enjoyment of teaching others is one of the biggest reasons why most of us judge in the first place.

If I'm taking a call, I do try to teach Duelists why rulings/policies are in place. If I have an official ruling on hand, or can easily get one in 30 seconds, I'll try to provide that if they ask. But I can't always do that, and I won't spend the time to go search for one if I am 100% certain I'm correct. At the end of the day, the Judge's ruling is what's going to be enforced, especially the ruling of a Head Judge (or someone acting in the capacity of a Head Judge, as was in this case). If you don't like it, you can complain about it on the internet later and either be told you were right or be told you were wrong (usually, it's the latter if I'm honest).

Jon-Stark wrote:

Goatobed wrote:With all the respect to the rules, but what's wrong with looking at your deck, provided that it is shuffled afterwards?

IF you were allowed to shuffle your deck whenever you wanted, cards and effects that intentionally stack the deck in a specific order would be completely and utterly meaningless and would alter your draws in a significantly unfair manner.

This is actually a good point. You wouldn't have needed 18-21 handtraps to beat SPYRAL back in early 2018.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Psily wrote:I never stated that is good to view your deck, i stated that no one (judges) points to official ruling about this thing. I agreed that is wrong and it shouldnt be done, i just want points to official ruling. its about principles not ruling in the game

Literally, nearly every single yugioh video game does not let you look through your deck in the middle of a duel unless a card allows it.

That is reference enough, stop trying to cheat.

This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Psily wrote:I never stated that is good to view your deck, i stated that no one (judges) points to official ruling about this thing. I agreed that is wrong and it shouldnt be done, i just want points to official ruling. its about principles not ruling in the game

Literally, nearly every single yugioh video game does not let you look through your deck in the middle of a duel unless a card allows it.

That is reference enough, stop trying to cheat.

This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:Literally, nearly every single yugioh video game does not let you look through your deck in the middle of a duel unless a card allows it.

That is reference enough, stop trying to cheat.

This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

The Sound4 x Renji Asuka romance continues. You deserve each other.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:Literally, nearly every single yugioh video game does not let you look through your deck in the middle of a duel unless a card allows it.

That is reference enough, stop trying to cheat.

This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

Yeah you are lying at this point he literally said that the issue he had was the judge not showing any source to support his claim. If the judge showed a source supporting his claim he said himself this thread would have never been created.

troglyte wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

The Sound4 x Renji Asuka romance continues. You deserve each other.

Ah you again the person who ignores points and runs when your point is debunked. Correct?

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:This is very hypocritical of you because I remember a few months ago I said type x thing. You said "you need to link your source or else it makes your point less reliable" Paraphrased a bit. You yourself decide to do the same thing.

Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

Yeah you are lying at this point he literally said that the issue he had was the judge not showing any source to support his claim. If the judge showed a source supporting his claim he said himself this thread would have never been created.

Are you just stupid?

Just say you are and you won't look like a fool, as I can easily correct you from within this thread.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:Considering the OP doesn't trust any source.

It wouldn't matter at all.

Yeah you are lying at this point he literally said that the issue he had was the judge not showing any source to support his claim. If the judge showed a source supporting his claim he said himself this thread would have never been created.

Are you just stupid?

Just say you are and you won't look like a fool, as I can easily correct you from within this thread.

Go ahead if you can.

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Yeah you are lying at this point he literally said that the issue he had was the judge not showing any source to support his claim. If the judge showed a source supporting his claim he said himself this thread would have never been created.

Are you just stupid?

Just say you are and you won't look like a fool, as I can easily correct you from within this thread.

Go ahead if you can.

3rd Reply from the bottom on Page 1.

Their words exactly "I dont trust anyone that tells me something."

Now, do you want to stop being stupid? Or are you going to smarten up and keep your mouth shut so you don't make more of a fool of yourself?

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:Are you just stupid?

Just say you are and you won't look like a fool, as I can easily correct you from within this thread.

Go ahead if you can.

3rd Reply from the bottom on Page 1.

Their words exactly "I dont trust anyone that tells me something."

Now, do you want to stop being stupid? Or are you going to smarten up and keep your mouth shut so you don't make more of a fool of yourself?

"I asked judge nicely, no judge refused to send me anything. If he did that, i would say thank you and im sorry. "
I recommend paying attention more when you are reading. Also that quote refers to a statement with nothing to back it up. Again you either clearly did not read properly or misunderstood.

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Go ahead if you can.

3rd Reply from the bottom on Page 1.

Their words exactly "I dont trust anyone that tells me something."

Now, do you want to stop being stupid? Or are you going to smarten up and keep your mouth shut so you don't make more of a fool of yourself?

"I asked judge nicely, no judge refused to send me anything. If he did that, i would say thank you and im sorry. "
I recommend paying attention more when you are reading. Also that quote refers to a statement with nothing to back it up. Again you either clearly did not read properly or misunderstood.

The whole point of (head) judges is that they know the rules, so if they say something is against the rules then they ARE the source

Sound4 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Go ahead if you can.

3rd Reply from the bottom on Page 1.

Their words exactly "I dont trust anyone that tells me something."

Now, do you want to stop being stupid? Or are you going to smarten up and keep your mouth shut so you don't make more of a fool of yourself?

"I asked judge nicely, no judge refused to send me anything. If he did that, i would say thank you and im sorry. "
I recommend paying attention more when you are reading. Also that quote refers to a statement with nothing to back it up. Again you either clearly did not read properly or misunderstood.

Ah yes, the whole "Maybe you should pay attention while I selectively read" argument.

This is drama, not a serious discussion bruh...

The nosense never ending story...