Call for judgement

I've had an interesting situation this weekend what got me thinking.
So simplified a bit, here is the example - question is, what would
You rule if You were called over?

5-player game. Methuselahs pray eachother as A -> B -> C -> D -> E.

A bleeds B successfully and gains the edge. B then bleeds C
successfully (but the players forget to move the edge marker to
represent the correct possessor of the Edge). Neither C, D nor E
bleeds successfully (or does any other action that would warrant
them getting the edge).

During A's untap he adds a pool for having the Edge marker. He
passes the round. During B's master phase (after playing a Master
card) another player realizes that the Edge marker was not moved
during the previous round, and a Judge is called to correct the
situation.

On one hand, player A added a pool when he shouldn't have, on the
other, player B didn't add a pool when he had the option to do so
(because due to an earlier mistake he wasn't even aware of the
option).

What would You rule? Let's assume now that the game state is such
that 1 pool doesn't seem to decide the game in any way (e.g. no
change would occur in either player's turn other than the modified
pool total - e.g. all players having a comfortable pool level and
player A not wanting to take any actions this turn anyway due to
Millicent, for example), so the judgement should be on principle,
and there would be no pressing reason to actually rewind the game
state.

--
Bye,

Daneel

Salem wrote:

>
> A gives back the pool (it was something they would not be able to get).

i agree. If the judge was present at the time of the whole incident and
has
significant reasons to believe that A did this intentionaly (trying to
gain 1
pool when he knew that he didn't have the edge) i would give him a
"warning".
If there is reasonable doubt that A did this on purpose, then a
"caution".

> B doesn't get the chance to get one (they failed to gain one for the
> edge during their untap phase, an optional effect, despite the fact that
> the edge wasn't in it's true place).
>
i agree, gaining 1 pool is optional and is possible only durning the
untap phase.


> *All* players get a verbal caution for not accurately representing the
> game state, A and B get extra finger-waggling because they were the
> players most responsible.
>
agreed on verbal caution. In my opinion this is due to the fact that
they let A illegaly gain 1 pool from the edge and not due to the
misplaced marker. In my opinion, the players of a table are not obliged
by the rules to remind any player that he should have the marker, as
long as they know at all times who has the edge. i am not sure if i am
correct on this, as it never came up and never had to look it, it is
just my personal opinion. I try to explain better what i am trying to
say with the following example.

e.g. B bleeds and doesn't get the marker, A,C and D say nothing. The
marker is misplaced in front of A. When A's turn comes, he doesn't take
1 pool as he knows that he really doesnot have the edge. I don't think
that he is obliged to remind to his prey (B) that he has the edge. Why
on earth would you want to do such a thing...

Maybe, C and D doesn't like either B gaining from the edge, so they
don't say anything
Forgetting to do things that are optional and give you an advantage is
part of the game.