With playing cards like Mindslaver and Emrakul, the Promised End, a participant can take management of one other participant’s flip. The controlling participant could make most choices for the managed participant, however they could not, for instance, concede the sport for that participant, or have a look at their sideboard. Mindslaver’s Gatherer rulings even present a really common rationalization:

You can’t make any choices that aren’t referred to as for or allowed by the sport guidelines, or by any playing cards, permanents, spells, talents, and so forth.

Now, since when controlling a participant, you additionally acquire entry to their hidden data, equivalent to their hand playing cards. In a two-player sport, this often implies that till the tip of the flip, one participant has entry to all hidden data within the sport, since they see each their very own in addition to their opponent’s data – in a multiplayer sport, nevertheless, there might be different gamers not permitted to see this data.

All the Comprehensive Rules must say about it appears to be:

402.3. A participant could (…) have a look at [his or her hand] as a lot as she or he needs. A participant can’t have a look at the playing cards in one other participant’s hand however could rely these playing cards at any time.

The Tournament Rules elaborate on a participant being allowed to disclose hidden data accessible to them:

3.12 Hidden Information

(…) gamers could select to disclose their fingers or another hidden data accessible to them, except particularly prohibited by the principles. (…)

This is a dilemma, as a result of even when the above-quoted Gatherer ruling prevented the controlling participant to determine that the the managed participant reveals their hand, the controlling participant themself has entry to this hidden data, so they may at all times state precisely what was in that participant’s hand. The level of bluffing apart, this successfully is similar distinction.

Now, the complete hidden data rule is a part of the match guidelines, and whereas it is wise to imagine a participant could as nicely reveal their hand in an off-the-cuff sport, I do surprise if it is a distinction on this instance.

Questions

1. Is a participant allowed to determine that the participant they management reveals their hand?
2. In case they are not, are they allowed to share the information they themselves gained, due to this fact attaining about the identical?
3. May the managed participant nonetheless determine to disclose their hidden data?

All of these questions could be attention-grabbing to listen to about whether or not it makes a distinction if performed in an off-the-cuff surroundings vs. in a sanctioned occasion, or in different phrases, whether or not the applicability of the Tournament Rules adjustments issues (understanding that there are no precise multiplayer codecs with greater than two groups.

Concerns

These aren’t actually a part of the query, however could assist perceive why I feel it is a related query.

If the reply to both 1 or 2 is sure, that will make an impact like this surprisingly robust in multiplayer video games, seeing as you are not solely getting the already robust impact of taking up somebody’s flip, however you are additionally gaining numerous diplomatic energy from revealing sure playing cards, or not doing so.

Furthermore, if the reply to 1 isn’t any, however to 2 is sure, this implies a participant could rightfully state that they don’t seem to be allowed to disclose the playing cards, however may state what they’ll do. Since it is not forbidden to misrepresent hidden data, they may successfully bluff that any given card is in that participant’s hand.

Both of those factors aren’t game-breaking on their very own, however are selling to determine video games not by ability or the contained quantity of randomness in Magic, however as a substitute by ability of diplomacy, deceit or different traits that are not fitted to match matches, and will spoil informal or social matches simply as nicely.