As tempting as it sounds, I’m not actually going to teach you how to interrogate your players. But since communication is key to resolving conflicts during a duel and being sure that you’re giving the correct ruling, I’m going to present some strategies for getting the information you need from players. Asking questions can be nail-bitingly difficult at times, especially when dealing with very young players, very angry players, or players who aren’t skilled at organizing and expressing their thoughts. Like it or not, your ability to extract all of the relevant information from these players is going to make or break a lot of your decisions—plenty of “bad” calls result from less-than-ideal understandings of the scenarios and are usually due to poor communication. Whether you’re trying to unravel a complex chain, give a card ruling, or resolve a “he said, she said” situation, asking the right questions to get the right answers will make your calls easier.

First, there are some basic communication skills that apply to any judging situation. Start by asking for the player’s name so you can address that player by it. You’ll find that people focus on what you’re saying when you say their names. Eye contact is also important, since it expresses interest in the conversation. Pay attention to your body language—if you fidget, look around, cross your arms, or frown, you’re sending a message that you don’t care about what the player is saying. Your tone of voice matters too. If your speaking voice is loud, aggressive, or rapid, you might give the impression that you’re not interested in the problem, and some players might think that your voice is threatening. It’s easy to unintentionally give the impression that you’re impatient, disbelieving, or aggressive.

If you doubt a player’s story or have a negative opinion of them, it’s important not to let that show as you work to extract the information you need. You can master reassuring body language by keeping eye contact, an interested facial expression, and an open, non-threatening posture. You should also practice speaking in a clear, unhurried, authoritative voice. If players believe that you are interested in the problem, in control of the situation, and not prejudiced, you’ll find that they’ll be more inclined to trust you and give you the information that you need to make your call.

Get clarification if it’s needed. Players can sometimes be inarticulate, so it’s never a good idea to assume that you know exactly what they’re asking you. Narrow down a player’s focus and ask him or her to be specific. If there are particular cards involved in a dispute, the players should have the cards available so you know that everyone is talking about the same thing. And just because you know the definition of terms like “priority,” “targeting,” and “timing,” don’t assume that the players do as well. There is a surprising range of perceived meanings for many game terms. Also, look out for local slang—it isn’t always as specific or self-explanatory as you might think.

If it’s relevant, always assure players that they will get a time extension if one is necessary. Let them know this as early as possible in the conversation, because plenty of players don’t realize that their time can be extended, which can generate anxiety. Once players know that they will get back the time they spend explaining a situation to a judge, they’ll be more relaxed and willing to go into detail.

Let’s move away from general tips and look at specific situations where you’ll need to use these skills. Answering basic rulings questions is something that all judges do, particularly if you’re a higher-level judge who is sent to a new area. Some players will take advantage of your presence by asking questions about a long list of rulings. Other players will ask questions before the event starts to ensure that their decks work the way they’re supposed to. You need to make sure that you’re answering what a player’s actually asking, particularly when you’re dealing with a hypothetical situation! A good strategy is to repeat the question, rephrasing it to reflect what you think a player is asking.

Let’s say that a player asks, “If I have more than one copy of [Thousand-Eyes Restrict], can I use both copies on the same turn?” You should respond by saying something like, “I think that you’re asking if you can use the effect of multiple copies of [Thousand-Eyes Restrict]—is that right?” Hopefully, the player will clarify the question if necessary, maybe saying something like, “No, I meant to ask if I could attack with more than one.” You can see why rephrasing that question makes a difference. Make the player get as specific as possible and don’t worry whether he or she thinks you are stupid. If you use the communication strategies outlined above, most players will respond positively.

If you’re being asked a question during a duel, it’s vital to make certain that you’re answering the right question. A lot comes down to the perceived meaning of a phrase. Once, a player asked me, “If my opponent attacks me directly and I activate [Scapegoat], he doesn’t get to attack my life points, does he?” I told the player that an attack would hit a sheep token, not his life points. I had considered the question answered. The [Scapegoat] player interpreted my response as, “My opponent must attack a sheep token. He can’t change his mind and take back the attack.” A better answer would have been, “That’s correct, your opponent can’t attack your life points with [Gemini Elf] while you’ve got the sheep tokens on the field. If he wants to continue with the attack, he will have to target a token. But since the number of monsters on your side of the field has changed, he can choose to withdraw the attack.”

Even when dealing with a basic gameplay concept like a replay, make sure that the players know what to do. This takes some diplomacy, but it’s part of being an effective judge.

This next type of question is one that can cause judges a lot of grief. Some players will show you set traps or cards in their hands and ask, “If my opponent does that, can I do this?” Lots of players want to find out if they can do something before they actually do it and without revealing their plans to their opponents. You want to avoid the charge of “coaching”—trust me, someone will accuse you of it—but the tournament will run more smoothly if you deal with questions as they arise. The best rule of thumb is to avoid doing anything that will give either player an insight into the state of the game that he or she couldn’t get without help. Most players will understand this. It’s safest to answer a question once an opponent has made his or her initial move, and the player asking the question wants to respond but isn’t sure if an activation is correct. You must not give any indication that you are deciding for the player whether or not a move is smart. You’re only telling the player whether a move is legal. Keep your expression calm yet interested while confining your response specifically to something that has actually happened. Don’t get into theoretical questions like, “What if he does this? What if she does that? Can I do this or such?”

Resolving chains is definitely part of judging. When players call you over to settle a chain-resolution dispute, try this approach. After getting the players’ names, ask whose turn it is. Explain that you’re going to have the turn player begin, and ask the turn player to show you what he or she did. Ask the other player to respond when appropriate. By the time that you get to the table, it’s likely that some of the cards will be off of the field, and it might not be clear what happened. Start at the beginning of the chain and have each player demonstrate exactly what he or she did. Don’t forget to tell the players that they’ll get a time extension if one is needed. Once both players agree about which cards are involved and where the cards fit on the chain, the chain can be resolved. You should explain the steps as you go if necessary. If you’re dealing with young or inexperienced players, spending a few minutes here can save a lot of time and trouble later. Carefully explain what happens to each card, placing cards in the graveyard when appropriate and making sure the players understand the process.

Possibly the least favorite task of judges is settling disputes between players. Disagreements come up more often than they should, since gameplay basics like priority and timing are now more strictly defined. While players should announce their phases and actions and always ask opponents if they wish to respond, most of them don’t. Players should also reply clearly when they’re asked if they wish to respond, but most of them don’t. It is the unhappy lot of judges to sort out these sticky situations after the fact.

We usually end up hearing something like the following.

“I used [Snatch Steal] and took his monster, and then I asked my opponent if he wanted to respond. He didn’t say anything even though I waited. Then I went to tribute the stolen monster for [Jinzo], and my opponent activated [Compulsory Evacuation Device] and said that I didn’t get my summon. He only did it because he didn’t want me to get [Jinzo] out! And he can’t do that, because he didn’t respond sooner, and you can’t interrupt a summon!”

Meanwhile, the opponent is insisting, “She didn’t give me time! She didn’t ask for my response. I had to think about what I wanted to do, but she just took my monster and immediately tributed it. I didn’t have time to respond to [Snatch Steal]. I was going to activate Evacuation anyway!” 

Players usually have friends hanging around and watching the duel, and these spectators will either support or contradict statements according to their alliances. Judges hate these situations, because the evidence is all hearsay—if each player has a different version of the same story, there’s little for a judge to hold onto in order to make a call.

You’ll also see this type of situation happen in matches that are called on time.

“It was my turn. I have more life points, so I win!”
“No, he ended his turn, so it’s my turn now and I get to go. He hasn’t won yet!”
“I didn’t announce that I ended!”
“I asked if I could draw, and you said, ‘go ahead.’”
“Yeah, but you didn’t draw!”
“Yes I did! I drew this card right here!”

Both players often honestly think that they’re right, so don’t rely on your ability to spot a liar when you make the call.

The first thing that you need to do in this sort of situation is to quiet the table. Address both players by name, ask whose turn it is, and have the turn player speak first. If you’re consistent with this approach, you can’t be accused of playing favorites. Have the turn player give his or her side, and assure the other player that he or she will get the same attention later. Listen to the players one at a time. You’ll get good use out of eye contact and calming skills here, because you want a straightforward story from each duelist, not a list of grievances about the opponent. Make sure the players stick to the point, and if spectators attempt to get involved, remind them that their stories can’t factor into your call. The dispute must be resolved between the players and judges only. If you need to clear the area of pushy or aggressive spectators, don’t hesitate to do so¾but if that’s the case, send all the spectators away so you don’t appear to be favoring one player over another. It is important that you don’t appear to show favoritism. Make certain that each player has an equal chance to offer his or her version of any given action. It’s a good idea to have players reenact the scenario and demonstrate card by card what occurred. This will help give you a better sense of what happened. 

Listen carefully and impartially, and make your ruling according to what you feel comfortable with. When you’re dealing with a situation that you didn’t observe, it’s often impossible to know for certain who did what. Make the call that you feel best suits the information you’ve got, and then don’t worry about it. Yes, the player who you ruled against might be unhappy and might decide to tell people that you made a bad ruling. Spectators who are sure that they know what happened might second the disgruntled player’s opinion. If you’re not physically present to observe a “he said, she said” type of situation, you can’t be guaranteed to make the “right” call. That’s just the way it goes.

Remind both players that this is why it’s important to make sure that an opponent knows what is happening and has the chance to respond. Players should understand that you aren’t all-knowing, and even though you weren’t there to actually observe what happened, you must make a ruling. Most players will accept the situation as long as they feel like they’ve gotten a fair hearing.

Your reputation as a judge usually won’t come down to one tournament, one duel, or one disputed ruling. But a loud player with a grudge can make life annoying. Save yourself some trouble and do what you can to make sure that you’re communicating effectively with the players. That way, you’ll avoid a lot of “bad” calls and bad feelings from players. A judge’s duties are many, and players often don’t make the job any easier. It’s up to the judges to ask questions that will extract the correct information so we can make the best possible calls.