Commander Sealed is a unique, cultivated experience that we constantly edit, modify, and update. For 2025 we will be using the following rules and adaptations.

Our events will be using the Magic Tournament Rules and Magic Infraction Procedure Guide. For our event, we will be using the Regular REL Infraction Guides.
The MTR can be found at https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/mtr/
The IPG can be found at https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/ipg/
Our event will be run at Regular REL. This means that the goal of our judge staff when they find a game play infraction is to do their best to resolve the situation in a way that everyone at the table gets to keep playing as fairly as possible while correcting the situation. Our judges are volunteering their time to help you have a fun event instead of participating, and doing so in a very special event with bonus rules, so we ask that you have extra acceptance of their rulings and address them with patience and calmness. We want everyone to have as much fun as possible
The Judging at Regular REL Rules can be found at https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/jar/

Our event will also be using many of the rules in the Competitive REL Addendum for Commander events used by Topdeck.gg. That information can be found at https://topdeck.gg/mtr-ipg-addendum

Some of the important Addendums for our event include:

MTRA 2.5

Players are encouraged to concede while they have priority, and the stack is empty on their own turn. A player who needs to concede at any other time will be dropped from the event and must talk to a tournament organizer in order to re-enter. In this case, a judge will facilitate any mandatory actions of the conceded player until the stack is empty. In the event this happens in response to combat, the turn will be facilitated until the end of combat.

Our event is meant to be a friendly experience where the story and gathering is just as important as the charity and competition. The “Feel Bad” of conceding during an attack step to deny an opponent damage triggers, or prevent a player from drawing card off a damage trigger is not necessary. If you feel emotional about the way a game play went down and don’t wish to continue with the game, feel free to call for a judge yourself and step away from the table.

MTRA 4.1

The active player may request the table to stop excessively influencing game actions to progress play. Failure to do so may result in an Unsporting Conduct – Minor penalty.

MTRA 4.8

Addition to Reversing Decisions. Because CEDH is a social game, players can influence others. In order to allow for fast and natural play, players may do so after an action has been taken in order to convince that action’s controller to change their mind. This will naturally result in that player gaining new information, but if that information was shared in service of the decision being reversed, a judge may allow that player to do so. The judge must be sure the information was given in order to change the current play.

These two rules are meant to allow players to help each other stay alive and discuss how they can handle specific threats. However, the goal is to have fun and progress the game. Players and judges are responsible for helping us run the games in a timely manner. It is okay to insist that the game moves forward, and to ask a judge to help facilitate that movement.

MTRA 2.4

When time is called, the active player finishes their turn, and there are no additional turns. The game ends when the active player passes their turn. If a non-active player is acting in the end step of the active turn, when time is called, the subsequent turn becomes the final one.

We are not using this rule. Commander Sealed has always had a unique game ending mechanic that ensures games end in a result promptly. This year, the end of turn procedures will start 60 minutes into the round and continue to 100 minutes on the round clock. Games that do not end before 100 minutes will be considered a loss for all players. The end of turn procedures will make this ending very impractical, but it is in place to make sure that everyone gets to enjoy their experience instead of waiting for a select few. The end of round mechanic will be announced at a later date.

IPG 4.2 Unsporting Conduct — Major

As explained below, the penalty for this infraction is sometimes upgraded to Disqualification.

Definition

A player takes action towards one or more individuals that could reasonably be expected to create a feeling of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked.

For all of us at Commander Sealed, we hope we never have to use this ruling. However, many of our friends attending this event are subject to harassment, bullying, and threats in many aspects of their lives. Our event is not only a fundraiser to help them survive, but also is intended to be a safe space for them to enjoy their life. Specifically, repeated reports of misgendering or discrimination will be dealt with promptly and you will be removed from the venue for the entire weekend.

Penalty

Match Loss

In stark contrast to previous revisions of this infraction, Unsporting Conduct — Major is no longer defined by its examples. Whereas in the past, a player needed to take one of a very specific set of actions to be considered committing Unsporting Conduct — Major, this is no longer the case. This infraction has been expanded to include a wider category of unacceptable behavior.

For the purposes of identifying this infraction, it is important to consider whether or not a player’s conduct toward others might reasonably be expected to cause any of the above-listed feelings, and not necessarily that anybody has been actually made to feel any of those ways. For further illustration of this point, please see Sean Catanese’s excellent blog article.

Note that it is possible for a player to commit this infraction by potentially causing these feelings in individuals other than their opponent. Participants in other matches, spectators, or tournament officials are all potential recipients of the harmful effects of a player’s misconduct. The Match Loss penalty should be applied to the offending player even if the person potentially harmed by their actions is not their current round opponent.

Finally, it should be pointed out that actual incidents of Unsporting Conduct — Major are pretty rare. Local Magic communities tend to be very self-correcting even without the presence of judges. Basic social contract theory applies here; Magic players are humans, first. Most players already refrain from acting in ways that violate the communal agreements of society at large, so instances of this infraction are likewise unusual.

This may include insults based on race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

A harassing comment or threatening slur directed at a person that meets the criteria above is unacceptable. Even if a comment is intended to be humorous, it may still be reasonably expected to create one or more feelings of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked. Other players do not deserve to be spoken to in this way and judges are responsible for enforcing the standards Wizards of the Coast has put forth. It doesn’t matter if a particular judge personally feels this type of insult doesn’t merit a Match Loss, they should consider only how others might be expected to react to it.

Furthermore, the infraction doesn’t depend on whether or not anybody was actually made to feel any of these ways. The IPG has no way to measure or normalize how offended a person is. We, as judges, also do not want a player’s level of offense dictating the severity of a penalty as offense is highly subjective.

Similarly, a generic comment that merely annoys or offends another person is not necessarily sufficient for Unsporting Conduct — Major. Again, what’s important here is whether or not the action could reasonably create feelings of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked. Here, too, judges must take care to make sure that their own personal likelihood to be offended doesn’t preclude their treating players fairly. Judges should be be mindful to neither over -nor under- penalize for Unsporting Conduct based on their own personal biases.

Threats of physical violence should be treated as Unsporting Conduct – Aggressive Behavior.

Threats of violence, be they explicit or implied, represent an even more serious category of problems that should be dealt with even more severely. Unsporting Conduct — Major does not cover these.

It is possible for an offender to commit this infraction without intending malice or harm to the subject of the harassment.

Realistically, most incidents of Unsporting Conduct — Major will have come about without malicious intent. Whether or not a player simply used a poorly-chosen word or made an instantly-regretted remark doesn’t matter in determining whether or not the infraction has been committed. If a player does or says something that could reasonably create feelings of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked, even without meaning to, then the damage has potentially already been done and the player should still receive the penalty.

In fact, if a player committing Unsporting Conduct — Major does so with malicious intent, meaning they have acted with the specific intention of creating a toxic environment for others, then the penalty for this infraction should be upgraded to a Disqualification as explained below.

Examples