CCG an artistic way of cheating

[JeenLeen]

For collectable card games, I encountered something during a Yugioh tournament years ago and I'm wondering if such is forbidden in some tournament play.

A player had painted his cards, so that, for a number of them, you couldn't see the graphic. You could still see the card name, level, stats, and ability text, etc., but the picture was blotted out.
While that has everything needed to play, I found it caused me some trouble playing against him, as it took more time for me to mentally process the card. I know what something like D.D. Warrior Lady, Sangan, etc. look like. Just seeing the picture instantly brings to mind their abilities, so I can start focusing on how my opponent is probably using them and on counters.

By painting his cards, he made me spend extra mental processing time figuring out what the card was. Which meant more mental drain and less time to focus on playing well. (part of that was my own sense of taking too long on my turns.)
I think the rules were that a card was valid as long as you couldn't detect it as distinct while it's in your deck (and most folk use card protectors for that) and you could see the mechanics.

I'm not actually bitter about that. I think I remember this mostly because he had the same color card protectors and I'm pretty sure he stole a $30 card of mine (Enemy Controller, back when it was rather new); he rushed off really quick after our round was done, and I only realized a few games later I was 1-card short. But I was wondering if any of you had reflections on the legality and tactical edge of obfuscating one's cards by messing up the artwork.

[Dhavaer]

I don't know about Yu-Gi-Oh, but this is against the rules in M:tG tournaments.

[Joran]

I don't know about Yu-Gi-Oh, but this is against the rules in M:tG tournaments.

Yup, here's the rules: https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rulestips/2013/06/tournament-tuesday-card-alters-and-you/

The person who played against you is in violation of "the altered art must still be recognizable".

Yugi-oh has the same rule:

Cards that have been altered from their original appearance with surface decoration may be used for play only if the
alterations do not obscure any portion of the card text, make the illustration difficult to recognize, or make the card
distinguishable from other cards in the Deck while it is face-down.

So, 100% it was forbidden and not tournament legal, pending head judge ruling.

http://www.yugioh-card.com/lat-am/gameplay/penalty_guide/Yu-Gi-Oh_Tournament_Policy_05May11.pdf

P.S. This is one of the things I like a lot about Hearthstone. No alternate card images even though it'd make sense. For instance, there's a card that's called "Mirror Image" which shows pictures of the default Mage champion Jaina. The card art is unchanged if you play one of the alternate mage champions.

[Eurus]

There's an interesting philosophy behind the rules regarding MTG card alters... The card must be "recognizable", as mentioned. But the defining characteristic of a card is considered to be its original art, not its text or even name. It's actually often easier to get a card alter that covers portions of the card's text approved by an event judge than it would be to get one that thematically changes the art itself.

This seems kind of counter-intuitive, especially to a new player. In some regards it makes a degree of sense, since during play you tend to recognize cards from across the mat based on their art more than their text, but that really only goes so far... Not everybody recognizes every card's specific rules based just on the art. Are you sure you remember each ability of every Gideon?

But it's consistent. When you think about it, the oracle text is what determines the actual rules for a card, not the printed text. So we've set precedent for text being malleable right there. Add in the textless full-art promo cards, the ability to play cards in different languages, etc. All of which, at least in my mind, are a much bigger time sink/"mental drain" factor than altered art in many cases. If you've ever played against an American player with a deck of entirely Russian cards and had to either trust your memory or spend a lot of time calling for oracle text, you know the frustration.

So yeah. Like it or hate it, it's apparently expected that you recognize cards mainly by the art, not the text. And when in doubt, always call a judge.

[Wraith]

There is also the issue that painting a card gives it a slightly different weight and texture to other cards in the deck.

I am NOT saying that your opponent intentionally marked his cards so that he could identify them or shuffle them into a particular order by touch, I have no reason to suspect that's what he was doing. As that player's opponent, and perhaps also as the TO or Judge watching someone try to play with a deck of cards that have, for all intents and purposes, been individually marked, however.... I absolutely would not be happy about it.

[Joran]

There is also the issue that painting a card gives it a slightly different weight and texture to other cards in the deck.

I am NOT saying that your opponent intentionally marked his cards so that he could identify them or shuffle them into a particular order by touch, I have no reason to suspect that's what he was doing. As that player's opponent, and perhaps also as the TO or Judge watching someone try to play with a deck of cards that have, for all intents and purposes, been individually marked, however.... I absolutely would not be happy about it.

The rules covering altered cards also requires that they can't be distinguishable by weight or by feel.

I saw some examples of borderless cards, where someone painted over the borders so that it looks like the art covers the entire card, which should be tournament legal.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Sleeves would probably deal with that easily.