I was at my local store recently watching some of the games for a RTT and I was noticing several mistakes during play and during several of the games that I was spotting as they were pretty obvious, some were really game changing, some had the potential to be, a few examples:
A single (as they always are) dreadknight firing gatling psilencer at a squad of guardsmen and then multi assaulting them, and their chimera, and then 'auto penning' without rolling using the Nemesis Greatsword (which yes, as long as you roll over a 4 on 2d6, you do penetrate with a reroll if you miss) and going directly to the damage chart.
Space Wolf army facing chaos terminators who are inches away from the wolf lines disembarking from their rhinos, rapid firing bolters, firing meltas, and then assaulting (which led to an oh poo moment when someone else asked "you rapid fired their bolters?" and undid the assault moves
In the above situations, do you inform a judge as to what is going on? mention to the player who is breaking the rules that they may have missed the FAQ on that issue, or let it go? I don't want to be TFG, but I also don't want to see people getting robbed out of a fair game.
Aye, personally if I overhear someone say something completely wrong. Like...if someone states a rule completely wrong like a 4 on the penetrate table is a destroyed, or if you get 1d6 or 2d6 for run and they pick the wrong one. Why would you not want to quickly just say, you might want to check the rulebook as I remember it differently. Just my perspective, don't know why you wouldn't help out your fellow gamer.
I'm always torn when it comes to the situation. On one hand, if they are truly breaking the rules, the fairness of the tournament results are in question, however i could also see how one could be annoyed by what they see as coaching. This happens to be my major pet peeve in 40k.
If it had been me, I would have mentioned it to the judge as a heads up but not at the table (unless it was a friend that was getting screwed over and then I would discretely tell him). Its annoying when a stranger third party interrupts a game for a rules correction. It's different if you're on a first name basis with one or hopefully both of the players.
If it's really clearly a broken rule, I'll speak up or raise my hand, but politely- I'll respect their choice if they prefer that a third party not intrude and give them the chance to object to my interjection. If it's something ambiguous, I'd rather leave it alone; I might have heard only part of the situation, or they may have come to an agreement that I didn't hear regarding a piece of terrain, or whatever.
nkelsch wrote:As long as both players agree on a rule, then it is right. You should never interject in a tourney game even if they are playing wrong.
In the Grey Knight example in the OP, it looks like one player was taking the other player's word for a rule in his codex that the other player wasn't familiar with (I say this as a fantasy player, but that's what it looks like). I find these situations particularly tricky, because one player (for whatever reason) has their own army's rules wrong (which he should know stone cold). It's hard for the other player to call him out on each instance of an army-specific rule, if he's not familiar with playing against them... particularly with an army like GK, with all their custom rules.
He could/should ask to see his codex and double-check for himself... but again that's not feasible for every instance of an army-specific rule that he's not familiar with, if he hasn't played an army like GK before. He also could/should read up on the army's rules, so that this situation doesn't come up... but that doesn't change the fact that it will come up quite often with players in tournaments.
nkelsch wrote:Now a judge can, but really they usually stick to the head table.
Judges should be spread equally among tables for the most part, for one thing, and for another, I totally agree with the sentiments raised above- if someone really has a concern, they can go get the judge themselves. OR, as Mannahnin said, I see nothing wrong with an observer very politely mentioning that there is a major rules infraction going on- particularly if the players are looking up the rule themselves / wanting help / etc.
If they're not looking for help, I still think a polite interjection ("Did you rapid fire and assault?") can be extremely helpful. Tournament games are not islands, one of the reasons I enjoy them is the fact that there can be judge intervention when needed, and certainly a knowledgeable person pointing players in the right direction can be really helpful, too.
This is not a black and white situation, there's a huge grey area here- and it should be treated as such. I'm not advocating for anything beyond what people said above (getting a judge, very politely mentioning the broken rule, or the like). It's a fine line between doing the appropriate thing in this situation and overstepping, and I've seen and done it wrong both ways (for lack of a better expression, sinning by omission or commission).
If it was me I was playing in a tourney and someone plays me wrong I would want a 3rd party to speak up I don't know every book well enough to know otherwise. The problem with getting the organiser or a ref is that by the time you have found him and gone back to the table its to late you cant replay the turn, and it seems very spiteful. If you speak out then honest players will not mind if they are purposefully dishonest then they will get mad. Can you imagine how annoying it would be to be told after a game "you lost that because you opponent cheated but I didn't say anything."
In a tourney... Mind your business. Correcting rules in defense of a player who doesn't know the rules could be considered coaching or helping which people get pissy about. Friendly games, feel free to chat It up. In a tourney, it is not your role as a spectator to do anything.
If you are playing simple rules wrong in a tourney, you are probably not at the head tables so the integrity of that game probably means nothing.
In a tournament, unless you are a judge you shouldn't say anything as it's not your place to officiate on rules.
That being said I personally have walked behind the 'victim' of a rules violation and whispered something like, "You might want to look at his codex." but that's as far as I'll go.
Trooper wrote:So if you saw a player completely get things wrong and trash his opponent in the process, you would do nothing.
In a tourney... Yes. People will get pissed if they think you are coaching or giving advice.
It is not your place to observe and play judge, and if two players play it wrong and finish the game that is how it is. None of your business. A judge can be involved, it is his business.
Spectators have no reason to involve themselves in tourney games. The times they have and videotaped it and put it online, nothing turned out well.
As a judge at events.. People shouldnt explain rules at other tables, however they SHOULD come see the judge to explain whats going on. Ive done this many times where I ask what just happened, and explain to them that they did it totally wrong
Just like its not a citizens place to enforce the laws, its not a players place to judge a tournament :p Since generally you dont have authority nor do they appreciate it
Aduro wrote:I'm sure the guy currently being cheated (even if unintentionally) would appreciate it if someone mentioned it.
Thats my point really, if the person cheating has a problem with it then so what he's cheating. The poor guy being thrown will thank you for it. I think ye it is a 2 player game but the rules are the rules.
What I do, as this happens to me a lot, is I remember what happened, and discreetly tell the individual after the game. That way they don't get it wrong next time. It's a buyer beware game, so each person is responsible for knowing the rules.
Let them play.
Say nothing.
If you forget after the game, who cares.
This has happened to me in a tournament and what you say you'd do and how you feel about it being done can be two different things.
In my situation I was playing against a clearly weaker player who had only a very limited grasp of their rules set. In this case I decided to help them out and commented on when they had done things wrong/ made errors as I felt this was good gamesmanship. I knew I could have smashed them to pieces but felt this wasn't what I wanted to do. However, my feelings changed quite drastically when a friend of the player came over and began 'coaching them' specifically pointing out how to counter what I was doing. Clearly they also knew this was a weak player but me helping them and them getting help from a friend I saw quite differently. By the end of the game I was sorley pi**ed off.
As a helper in our local tourneys, I have to interject all the time. If I'm not playing I'm usually correcting someone about squadron rules or the damage charts.
Coaching someone how to play, and telling them when they have played rules wrong are two different things. What you have described is wrong nanook is quite bad, the person had no right to help.
nkelsch wrote:Correcting rules in defense of a player who doesn't know the rules could be considered coaching or helping which people get pissy about. Friendly games, feel free to chat It up. In a tourney, it is not your role as a spectator to do anything.
If you are playing simple rules wrong in a tourney, you are probably not at the head tables so the integrity of that game probably means nothing.
As the above poster says, correcting a blatant rules mistake and coaching are two separate things.
I'll give a personal example. I cast a spell on an opponent's unit, a spell that it turns out I'm not allowed to cast on that unit because it's ItP. A spectator knows this and says nothing, only telling me after the game.
I was not pleased... I would have welcomed a simple "Can you cast that on a unit that's ItP?" to remind me of the rule and stop me from cheating my opponent.
It's a small example, but shows how easy it is to do this in a non-obtrusive way... whereas doing nothing results in things being played wrong. I also totally disagree that for some reason you think the "integrity of that game means nothing" if it's not at the head tables? Especially in 5-round tournies, players can get an early draw and then work their way up through the standings, ending up at or near the top. I've seen it happen... and to say the integrity of their games that were not on the top tables means nothing is obviously wrong- as they affect their final placement just as much (or possibly even more, depending on the outcomes) as their final round games at the top tables.
someone trying to be cheeky using their own codex, which the opponent might not be aware of- i'd jump in. If i was 100% certain, for example, if they were trying to claim that the camo netting on their russ gave them a cover save, if it moved and wasn't obscured for example, i would say ' you might wanna check that'. People losing out because they haven't read every other codex is not on, i'd then probably tell a judge that player was doing that, as i think its an abuse of neccasary trust.
as for 40k rules, if it was someone i knew didn't know better, for example a guy i know who has no idea what furious charge and counter attack do, or that kind of thing, and people are claiming they do stuff they arn't, i might throw in a slight nudge.
If it's random strangers with the rules, i don't jump in.
but again, it's open to interpretation, the only way i would jump in 100% of the time is if the player is deliberately cheating, or i think they are abusing the other players naivity and exploiting it..
Automatically Appended Next Post: As a summary, if it is something a player wouldn't neccasarily know, i.e rules not in their armies book that was being deliberately exploited for a big advantage (like, bad example, but a necron 'forgetting' to mention phase out)
if it's a rule they should know from the 40k rulebook, then i won't
The issue is there IS a difference between the following:
*Both players unfamiliar with the rules and playing it wrong.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player letting them play it wrong for personal advantage.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player playing their rules wrong for personal advantage.
*Two players who know the rules who are disagreeing over a rule.
The issue is there is a fine line between people being unfamiliar with rules and someone purposely cheating. And there is also a line between coaching and fixing rule disputes.
Is it your place to to step in if someone forgets to use wargear? They are breaking the rules. Is it your place to step in if two people agree on a misinterpreting of the rules? If they agree, then they are playing the game in an appropriate way. Very often, telling someone that a rule works differently changes the way someone ends up playing which could be considered coaching in some situations.
The *ONLY* fair and valid thing is for spectators to butt out unless asked for help. It isn't a spectators place to be involved in a game, even if they play it horribly wrong. It is a judges job.
If you are so smart, and good at rules, then ask the TO if you can be deputized as a judge.
Spectators should stay out of games unless they are a judge or both players ask for input from the peanut gallery.
I'd want to make absolutely sure I was in the right before I chimed in on someone else's game. I've had people chime in on my games and they were wrong. In one instance the guy was very polite and asked if he could say something. We said ok and he proceeded to explain to us that my opponent's long fangs couldn't split their fire. So we corrected him. In another game my valiant war walker was stuck in combat with some chaos marines and all my opponent can manage is stunned and shaken results. An observer chimes in "aren't war walkers open topped?"
I guess this depends on how friendly your scene is I respect what you are saying but to me wrong is wrong. If there are loads of thing the players are doing wrong then fine get a TO but if its a simple that unit is below half strength they cant rally neither players spots it then tell them. Polity of course.
In friendly play, if you guys have a good group, chime in.
Tourneys you have no business saying a word regardless how wrong they are. It is not your job, and has no place in a competitive event. If you really have to intervene, then go to a TO. Even if you were 'right' those two players have no obligation to listen to you or your input.
I agree with the point of annoying spectators being wrong. And with games already being having issues finishing in time for tourneys, I don't appreciate spectators wasting my games time for them to feel like they are helping. I many times make the informed choice to not fight with opponents with different rule interpretations when it is an issue that won't impact the game because I don't want to burn the time it would take to clear it up. Those are decisions two people playing a game can make. They don't need you interjecting.
Since I don't have a way of knowing which spectators are skilled informed judge-quality spectators and which are just noobs who are going to waste my time or interfere with the game, I would rather all of them act the same, which is 'butt out.'
One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player letting them play it wrong for personal advantage.
I’ve been the victim of this when (in my second game in the current edition of the rules), I wanted to multi-assault but was informed categorically by my opponent that I could not. I would have written it off as a simple mistake but in a second game he ‘helpfully’ informed me there was no point in my assaulting his drop pod as ‘it couldn’t do anything to you’ and then fired its storm bolter in his next turn. Sadly he also claimed a unit of mine was in the open because he could see one model when the rest were obscured or concealed entirely. At that point I just let him have his way as winning was clearly rather important to him.
Now fair enough, one can argue I should know all the rules. But I don’t think deliberately misinforming a less experienced opponent should go unchallenged by a third party. In fact I’ve had an observer chip in and correct me when I’ve (in ignorance) tried to do something illegal and I was grateful for that intervention.
An honest mistake is one thing. But even in a tournament, I think there should be fair play. The comment about unsound third party advice is pertinent (I have inadvertently benefited from this when an observer quoted a fourth edition rule to my advantage) but it seems to me that disallowing comments from observers entirely is not necessarily helpful. Certainly it would be best for an umpire to make a specific ruling, but I don’t think an observer saying ‘check the codex on that because...’ or ‘check the rulebook on that because...’ is necessarily out of order.
I should add that one chap I've played three times (once in competition) went out of his way to remind me of things I should do because he knew I was inexperienced with the current rules. Not telling me what to do tactically but reminding me of psychic powers or terrain benefits/restrictions. Of course this had a positive affect on all three games as I'd remind him of units not moved/fired, give him the benefit of terrain when ambiguous, etc.
Tourneys you have no business saying a word regardless how wrong they are. It is not your job, and has no place in a competitive event. If you really have to intervene, then go to a TO. Even if you were 'right' those two players have no obligation to listen to you or your input.
I have to disagree you must have a hard core tournament system in America. The last thing I want to see is a group of people pitching in and telling the players the rules but there isn't a judge at every table, playing the rules correct does matter.
Nkelsch, I feel you are dead wrong, a judge simply can't be everywhere and it takes less time to simply bring it up then to freeze the game and get a judge. Willingness to let a player get cheated should not be tolerated.
If I was gaming at any level and got a rule wrong I'd want people to speak up and correct me or even suggest "I have a quick read of the rulebook on that one"
If the player starts getting agro about it then I suggest they're knowingly mis-representing the rules or down right cheating, If you get abuse from the people in the game then either go tell the judge or simply walk away...
I really dislike when players interject in to a game with "you should" "why the heck didn't you" or start commenting on unit choices compared to their lists etc. People who rule lawyer other games are sometimes these people. Games are timed and many of these interruptions are not helping either player. I have even seen other players interject with incorrect rules during tournaments, that needs to be stopped immediately with a "I suggest you ask a judge" response rather than slowing their game down even further with another bystander weighing in. Tournament games are timed and sometimes these interruptions can lead to a player consistently not getting past turn 4 where some armies hit their sweet spot.
I think how and how often you interject if you are not a judge is a deal breaker here. When in doubt just wave a judge over, most players are only mistaken and not intentionally taking advantage of a newer player. The rule needs to be corrected or at the very least prevented from being broken repeatedly. Mistakes sometimes happen and are not caught until after a game is over.
When I was new to tournaments I would inform my opponent and let them know if you think I am making a mistake on a ruling just let me know. I also ask the store owner or judges how they rule on a controversial equipment my army uses so I know if I am doing it correctly for the tourney (deff rolla, KFF n kans). Any players entering a tournament or playing unfamiliar people should do the same.
You guys think the two people playing at these tables are brain dead monkeys who never played the game before and apparently it is so common that only the wise casual observer can maintain the integrity of the tourney from collapsing under the incompetence of its participants.
Sorry... your opinions, rule interpretations and tactics are totally unwelcome and have no place in a tourney, and I believe that the occasional rule correction that may be correct doesn't justify the interruption or all the other horrible unwelcome interjections from observers. The fact many rules have multiple unclear interpretations, the only people who should decide rules are me and my opponent. I don't need or want some observer chiming in in any capacity.
I find it also unreasonable that if someone is telling you to butt out that you as the observer intervene as 'You are a cheater!!! JUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDGE!'. You have no place in that game. If you do feel that a great moral injustice is happening, tell a judge and let them handle it.
Do some of you guys really just go to tourneys so you can walk around and play judge? I have seen judges ask observers to shut up and leave for bothering players. Most tourneys barley have enough room for people to play let alone room for observers to stand close enough to watch what we are doing and follow our conversation. With a game on either side of me with a long table, I suspect this observer will be blocking my space and interfering with my ability to play by simply STANDING around in some gaming events.
I think you misinterpret the point here nkelsch. The way I read the OP is that if you see someone blatantly cheating, should you speak up? Your argument seems to be along the lines of "if the other play doesn't spot it, and there's no judge there, it's not cheating". It's not a case of people saying "you should have done that..." or "why didn't you do this...", it's a case of "I'm pretty sure you can't do that". If that comment gets both players to check the rules and reach a judgement fairly, I see no issue. As others have said, not knowing an opponent's army book inside out is no reason to suffer a loss.
narked wrote:I think you misinterpret the point here nkelsch. The way I read the OP is that if you see someone blatantly cheating, should you speak up? Your argument seems to be along the lines of "if the other play doesn't spot it, and there's no judge there, it's not cheating". It's not a case of people saying "you should have done that..." or "why didn't you do this...", it's a case of "I'm pretty sure you can't do that". If that comment gets both players to check the rules and reach a judgement fairly, I see no issue. As others have said, not knowing an opponent's army book inside out is no reason to suffer a loss.
No... if someone is cheating, the person in the game should then exercise his right to call a judge over. The observer really has no business being involved. I would ask a Judge to remove the observer if he tried to interject in any way in my game, even if he was trying to help me.
It is a case of people saying "you should have done that..." or "why didn't you do this...", because they totally do and those remarks are unhelpful and have no place in a tourney. And "I'm pretty sure you can't do that" is also terrible because often they are wrong, and also it can be seen as helping with tactics. If I am making bad decisions to assault something that is totally going to be a flub and he says "you know your wargear doesn't work like that." I can be 'thanks! Now I will change my tactics". That is help and unfair.
The issue is the number of unhelpful and unwanted comments outnumber the possible reasonable ones. And I do not trust observers judgements that they can tell the difference between advice and disarming cheating.
TOs and Judges are smart and easily identify the people who are not good with rules and need more observing and help. You can attempt to tell judges 'who you feel is inexperienced' so they will watch them but it is pretty arrogant to assume us tourney participants need your help to save us from ourselves.
When you play in a tourney do you play your neighbors game for them too? I get mad when my opponent can't focus on OUR game and wastes time being King rule guy for everyone in a 6 foot radius.
You are the only person talking about discussing tactics during a game. Everyone else is talking about if you see someone playing the rules incorrectly then either interjecting or getting a judge to interject. If it's something small like 4 is wrecked or something silly then I don't see a reason to not "butt in."
Aus-Rotten wrote:You are the only person talking about discussing tactics during a game. Everyone else is talking about if you see someone playing the rules incorrectly then either interjecting or getting a judge to interject. If it's something small like 4 is wrecked or something silly then I don't see a reason to not "butt in."
But many supposed 'rule interpretation' butt-ins basically results in helping with tactics during a game. When do you correct the rule? before you see someone getting ready to make a mistake or after they have made the mistake and are now in the thick of it? If you do it too early, you are going to be accused of 'coaching'. All you are going to do is cause trouble and waste people's time... Especially for the people who don't know the rules right but think they are smart and then quote wrong rules.
I will agree with nkelsch that my biggest pet hate is people who think they are helping and go 'no you can't do that' and are wrong... like someone who butted in saying 'his tanks have camo netting, that gives them a 4+ coversave.' It then took me 10 minutes to explain that it didn't
your an observerer, its not your place to say anything. you want to play enter the tourney. interferring ina game is just plain rude. if either gamer makes a mistake thats his business.
Interfering because someone is making a decision because they don't know about a rule that will screw them over in assault and interfering because their opponent told them the wrong rule is completely different.
Aus-Rotten wrote:You are the only person talking about discussing tactics during a game. Everyone else is talking about if you see someone playing the rules incorrectly then either interjecting or getting a judge to interject. If it's something small like 4 is wrecked or something silly then I don't see a reason to not "butt in."
But many supposed 'rule interpretation' butt-ins basically results in helping with tactics during a game. When do you correct the rule? before you see someone getting ready to make a mistake or after they have made the mistake and are now in the thick of it? If you do it too early, you are going to be accused of 'coaching'. All you are going to do is cause trouble and waste people's time... Especially for the people who don't know the rules right but think they are smart and then quote wrong rules.
The lesson here is to be cautious and polite, and not to intrude inappropriately or offer tactical advice. It is also good to be conscious that certain types of questions or comments CAN materially help someone tactically ("what turn are you on?" "Is this unit over here dead?"), and you really need to be careful not to speak inappropriately and impact the game.
That being said, I appreciate that you've moderated your position and do acknowledge that it is sometimes appropriate to comment or offer a correction. If a the players are clearly playing a core rule wrong (examples: allowing an independent character with a jump pack to re-roll a dangerous terrain test; or not allowing a model with multiple attacks to split its attacks between multiple engaged enmy units, or multi-assaulting with a single large model), or playing a codex rule wrong (grey knight player casts Quicksilver in his opponent's turn, Ork player with Warboss attached to Snikrot's squad attempts to split them off the turn they arrive to assault different units far apart), it is better to correct them. Whether the error is accidental or one player is attempting to cheat, the tournament's integrity is damaged by the players not abiding by the rules.
That being said, I appreciate that you've moderated your position and do acknowledge that it is sometimes appropriate to comment or offer a correction. If a the players are clearly playing a core rule wrong (examples: allowing an independent character with a jump pack to re-roll a dangerous terrain test; or not allowing a model with multiple attacks to split its attacks between multiple engaged enemy units, or multi-assaulting with a single large model), or playing a codex rule wrong (grey knight player casts Quicksilver in his opponent's turn, Ork player with Warboss attached to Snikrot's squad attempts to split them off the turn they arrive to assault different units far apart), it is better to correct them. Whether the error is accidental or one player is attempting to cheat, the tournament's integrity is damaged by the players not abiding by the rules.
Again... If the OBSERVER says "hey, It looks like you are going to deploy your bikerboss with Snikrot, you know he can't detach when he comes on right?" that is inappropriate coaching. It could change the deployment location, even change what the player will do with Snikrot depending on the time of the comment. The timing of the rule correct along with the rule correction itself causes issues. If I had a choice between nosey unwelcome spectators following some unenforceable code and spectators shutting the hell up 100% in tourneys, I would want the gag order.
So what happens if some nosey spectator spends all game spouting wrong rules or rule corrections which basically end up being tactical advice? Do I get a tie? re-play the game? what? In a tourney you guys speak about the integrity of the game if you let people play by wrong rules... What about interference where these nosey people impart unfair coaching or introduce wrong rules due to the attitude an observer has the right and duty to intervene in other peoples games in a tourney the person is not participating in?
Besides the fact that it is crowded enough and I don't want someone looming over our table all game, it is not as black and white as you guys say and the only way to handle such unknown is "keep your mouth closed, and if your really upset, go to the TO or Judge to 'inspect' the table." Having random people ruining games is madness and rude to players. I would say it would be a poorly run event if TOs couldn't keep spectators from interfering with games.
This is a grey area, not a 100% black and white area. If a spectator is being rude, intruding, and wasting your time, both players should have no problem asking them to butt out.
Part of the problem is that, unlike in most competitive events with reasonably complex rules, not every game is umpired (unlike when I played historical ancients games in the 80s when every tournament game did have an umpire, or at least one to every two tables, and the WRG rules were fewer and less obscure than GW ones anyway).
In my experience most people who break the rules do so unknowingly through inexperience or genuinely misremembering a rule. There are players though who deliberately exploit a new player's ignorance of the rules or any player's ignorance of a specific codex. It is unfortunate that should happen and, were I to see it happen at a tournament, I would likely say something.
This is nothing like giving tactical advice. The "hey, It looks like you are going to deploy your bikerboss with Snikrot, you know he can't detach when he comes on right?" is coaching and nobody's talking about that. An example of what I think we're talking about is your opponent deploys his bikerboss with Snikrot, and then detaches him once he's come on (ie he cheats through ignorance or wilfulness) and you don't know whether he can do that or not as you don't own the Ork codex -- and you don't challenge him either because you assume he's a good sport and knows his codex or because you don't wish to be constantly questioning everything your opponent does that you are unsure about. If I see that and no umpire is handy, what is wrong with saying 'I don't think the codex allows that, you should check.'?
That's quite different from chipping in with ill-informed rules judgements or giving tactical advice. It's an attempt to preserve the integrity of the game. Otherwise what happens when after the game (but still at the tournament) you discover your opponent has accidently or deliberately broken the rules? Shouldn't he then be disqualified? And wouldn't it be better to avoid that by having someone speak up appropriately before it comes to that? Or is it just okay to cheat so long as your opponent doesn't know you're doing so?
Artemo wrote:If I see that and no umpire is handy, what is wrong with saying 'I don't think the codex allows that, you should check.'?
1. It is not your job
2. You are not playing in the tourney so the supposed integrity of the tourney has nothing to do with you.
3. You are not running or officiating tourney so the supposed integrity of the tourney has nothing to do with you.
4. Not all 'could you check the codex?' will come to a simple, or quick or easy solution. The players are adults and have the right to not have their game interrupted and officiated over by a nobody who has no authority and no evidence that they are correct.
5. 40k allows for rule disputes to be handled by rolling a 4+ dice... Any rule resolved via a 4+ or mutual agreement becomes valid even if wrong... The rule then makes it right.
6. Spectators like you are often wrong.
7. Checking the codex or rulebook every-time the spectator feels like interjecting wastes time in an already tight timeline.
8. In the Snikrot example, before the FAQ there was no CLEAR answer to being able to ambush ICs as much as people claimed there was. Two educated players may have different opinions on how it should be played and should handle it without spectator's involvement.
9. In the Snikrot example, before the FAQ there was debate as well as common RAI on how people played detaching from units. This particular rule in applying to Snikrot would take minutes of searching and it still may not be clear to some people. It is not a common rule and would possibly take explanations od dozens of other rules to make it clear... This a spectator has no business forcing on a game, a Judge should be handling something like this with a quick FAQ or spot ruling.
10. What happens when you the all-knowing and insistant Spectator is like 'Read the FAQ dummies.' I assume you the nosey spectator have copies of the FAQ to provide to these players who could never finish a game without your help.
11. As a spectator, you might be super ignorant to the rules of the tourney and what versions of the FAQs or what some judges have ruled at other tables. You may be standing there giving totally wrong information as You are forcing INATFAQs on players in an event that has an event FAQ, or do you ask for a rules packet and event FAQ for every event you spectate?
Or you could just butt the hell out as it is none of your business. Or if you really have to rectify a great wrong, tell a judge who can do what he wants with the information you provide.
That's quite different from chipping in with ill-informed rules judgements or giving tactical advice. It's an attempt to preserve the integrity of the game. Otherwise what happens when after the game (but still at the tournament) you discover your opponent has accidentally or deliberately broken the rules? Shouldn't he then be disqualified? And wouldn't it be better to avoid that by having someone speak up appropriately before it comes to that? Or is it just okay to cheat so long as your opponent doesn't know you're doing so?
People can't distinguish from coaching and rules debates. People can't help themselves. How do I know you are a well-informed rules player and not some 3rd edition noob who wandered into the store spouting how the game used to be played 10 years ago? What happens when you intervene in my game and in the attempt to help fix a rules dispute, you begin saying things that changes the way the game unfolds or people play because it gives them tactical advice either through your boorish ignorance or unintended help by clarifying rules? Shouldn't the game be disqualified? How does a judge handle that? There is no time to 'replay' the game without you damaging the integrity. On the other hand, if you said nothing and we followed the rules to the best of our abilities and the judges interaction, if we messed up via ignorance or cheating, the integrity of the game is sound as the rulebook allows for mutual acceptance of given rules to move forward. At any time if one of the two people wishes to disagree and not accept a ruling, they can have a judge officiate.
It works fine... If you want it to work better as a participant of the event... then learn the rules better and speak up for yourself. Events do not need spectator nosey self-appointed judges int he name of event integrity. They ruin the integrity more often then they claim to protect it.
And regardless of your supposed integrity of the game, looming over people's tables while they are playing is rude. Eavesdropping on thier conversation while they play the game is also rude. And being arrogant enough that two adults can't play a 2-player game without you saving them from themselves is also rude.
Butt out and let the TO run his event. If you don't like it, then run your own event and have a judge at every table.
Sounds very much like tournaments don't have enough Judges to check things. I'd assume with more available this would be less likely to occur.
My club is set to run a tournament and we agreed one patrolling judge would be fine for the 20 tables (the other managing the scoring system) as we assumed all players would play honestly and appropriately in the spirit of the game. Now I'm thinking this needs revising in light of this thread - so thanks everyone for this.
This is obviously quite a contenscious issue but I agree with many posters:
1. It really isn't the job of observers to 'frequently' intervene - it might be unwelcome, waste time or they might not know the rules well enough themselves. This is what the Judges are for and we should assume that all players will play openly and honestly or it will ruin the whole atmosphere of tournaments.
2. However, if as an observer you notice something that isn't correct (and you are sure) from the main rulebook then a polite 'I didn't know you could do X'... or 'Are you sure you can do that'... 'might be worth checking that' - are okay.
3. Players need to be clear that if they use army specific rules and are asked about them they can immediately locate the point in their own codex to prove it otherwise they can't do it. Owness should be on players to prove their own rules not for others to disprove them. Main rulesbook should be clear to all though as these are the rules of the main game!
4.Time wasting is a big problem in a short tourny so resolving issues where you can't find the answer with a dice roll off is the best solution at the time. Perhaps after if you find it there is nothing wrong with going back to the player and saying 'hey look I've now found it and I/you were right'.
That being said, I appreciate that you've moderated your position and do acknowledge that it is sometimes appropriate to comment or offer a correction. If a the players are clearly playing a core rule wrong (examples: allowing an independent character with a jump pack to re-roll a dangerous terrain test; or not allowing a model with multiple attacks to split its attacks between multiple engaged enemy units, or multi-assaulting with a single large model), or playing a codex rule wrong (grey knight player casts Quicksilver in his opponent's turn, Ork player with Warboss attached to Snikrot's squad attempts to split them off the turn they arrive to assault different units far apart), it is better to correct them. Whether the error is accidental or one player is attempting to cheat, the tournament's integrity is damaged by the players not abiding by the rules.
Again... If the OBSERVER says "hey, It looks like you are going to deploy your bikerboss with Snikrot, you know he can't detach when he comes on right?" that is inappropriate coaching. It could change the deployment location, even change what the player will do with Snikrot depending on the time of the comment. The timing of the rule correct along with the rule correction itself causes issues. If I had a choice between nosey unwelcome spectators following some unenforceable code and spectators shutting the hell up 100% in tourneys, I would want the gag order.
So what happens if some nosey spectator spends all game spouting wrong rules or rule corrections which basically end up being tactical advice? Do I get a tie? re-play the game? what? In a tourney you guys speak about the integrity of the game if you let people play by wrong rules... What about interference where these nosey people impart unfair coaching or introduce wrong rules due to the attitude an observer has the right and duty to intervene in other peoples games in a tourney the person is not participating in?
Besides the fact that it is crowded enough and I don't want someone looming over our table all game, it is not as black and white as you guys say and the only way to handle such unknown is "keep your mouth closed, and if your really upset, go to the TO or Judge to 'inspect' the table." Having random people ruining games is madness and rude to players. I would say it would be a poorly run event if TOs couldn't keep spectators from interfering with games.
I really don't understand why your so against people pointing out a rule that is totally wrong.
Just because you think you get all your rules correct and feels no need for others to butt in because they are normally wrong does not mean people can't butt in if some new player is being cheated on rules that would break his army in turn 1. Also you think people are going to butt in with wrong rules.
We are discussing if you know a rule that is wrong and have 100% proof in a form of a rulebook or FAQ then should you point it out to the people playing.
I say yes because if they are getting rulebook rules wrong then they need to be coached, if they are getting FAQ rules wrong they need to be informed.
If someone says something stupid you can easily get rid of him in a few seconds. If someone actully pointed out something useful then both players should be happy unless they are cheaters.
I think this shows that the tournement should post something at the entrances with how they want the situation handled. So that the observers know what is expected or allowed in this particular instance.
My personal feeling is that if you see rules being broken then you should find an official and tell him the wheres and whys and let him decided how to handle it.
Norsehawk wrote:I was at my local store recently watching some of the games for a RTT and I was noticing several mistakes during play and during several of the games that I was spotting as they were pretty obvious, some were really game changing, some had the potential to be, a few examples:
A single (as they always are) dreadknight firing gatling psilencer at a squad of guardsmen and then multi assaulting them, and their chimera, and then 'auto penning' without rolling using the Nemesis Greatsword (which yes, as long as you roll over a 4 on 2d6, you do penetrate with a reroll if you miss) and going directly to the damage chart.
Space Wolf army facing chaos terminators who are inches away from the wolf lines disembarking from their rhinos, rapid firing bolters, firing meltas, and then assaulting (which led to an oh poo moment when someone else asked "you rapid fired their bolters?" and undid the assault moves
In the above situations, do you inform a judge as to what is going on? mention to the player who is breaking the rules that they may have missed the FAQ on that issue, or let it go? I don't want to be TFG, but I also don't want to see people getting robbed out of a fair game.
All bystanders should shut up and butt the hell out unless one of the players asks them. They are, after all, merely bystanders and utterly irrelevant to anything. If a bystander jumped onto a football field to question one of the team's he'd be eaten.
If I'm playing in a tournament and someone starts interjecting themselves I'd ask if they were a judge. If they said no i'd tell them to off or I'll hurt them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nkelsch wrote:You guys think the two people playing at these tables are brain dead monkeys who never played the game before and apparently it is so common that only the wise casual observer can maintain the integrity of the tourney from collapsing under the incompetence of its participants.
Sorry... your opinions, rule interpretations and tactics are totally unwelcome and have no place in a tourney, and I believe that the occasional rule correction that may be correct doesn't justify the interruption or all the other horrible unwelcome interjections from observers. The fact many rules have multiple unclear interpretations, the only people who should decide rules are me and my opponent. I don't need or want some observer chiming in in any capacity.
I find it also unreasonable that if someone is telling you to butt out that you as the observer intervene as 'You are a cheater!!! JUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDGE!'. You have no place in that game. If you do feel that a great moral injustice is happening, tell a judge and let them handle it.
Do some of you guys really just go to tourneys so you can walk around and play judge? I have seen judges ask observers to shut up and leave for bothering players. Most tourneys barley have enough room for people to play let alone room for observers to stand close enough to watch what we are doing and follow our conversation. With a game on either side of me with a long table, I suspect this observer will be blocking my space and interfering with my ability to play by simply STANDING around in some gaming events.
Observers more often than not are nuisances...
indeed, in any other sport or game, you'd get your head handed to your for interjecting in a game.
Actually at many sporting events the audience are vociferous in pointing out what they think to be foul play so that's a rather poor analogy. Doubly so because there is actually one or more officials refereeing, not one bloke running about adjudicting several games at once.
Artemo wrote:Actually at many sporting events the audience are vociferous in pointing out what they think to be foul play so that's a rather poor analogy. Doubly so because there is actually one or more officials refereeing, not one bloke running about adjudicting several games at once.
they may be vocal, but they arent listened too, and more often than not seen as interferance. Tennis and snooker for example : told to stfu, football, you could be asked to leave. Never once has a ref turned around and said - wow you got a point there... cheers. the more initmate the game the quieter the audience is expected to be.
in professional sports every player knows all the rules exceptionally well, and there are penalties for breaking the rules. there are professional judges/refs that get paid alot of money to watch the game, and to know the rules.
so comparing 40k to a sport is not a valid analogy as there are players that might be considered professional, playing against someone that started yesterday. and there are no penalties for a rules violation, so for example you failed to properly execute this rule so you lose 25 points of figures.
I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.
allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.
coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...
There was an example just yesterday in international cricket of crowd pressure influencing decisions of umpires and players, actually. And that's happened before too. I've never met anyone who's been asked to leave a football match because they were shouting comments to the ref, such behaviour is fairly normal. And I agree in events where silence is called for, then different standards apply (and there are always judges in close attendance anyway). I wasn't aware that GW games were in that category.
If I'm playing in a tournament and someone starts interjecting themselves I'd ask if they were a judge. If they said no i'd tell them to off or I'll hurt them.
indeed, in any other sport or game, you'd get your head handed to your for interjecting in a game.
So Troy, it sounds like you are of the school that says "Anything I can get away with is fair, and if someone other than a judge catches me, I will injure them?" That sort of play is why I don't normally play tournaments, too many people with the I've got to win at all costs, fair play, the rules, and if someone calls me on my cheating, I will them up.
The thing that drew me to watch for about 3 minutes at the GK vs. IG table was that someone came and told me that when I was in the painting room that a Dreadknight was destroying an entire guard army almost by itself, so I had to go take a peek, since they weren't doing that well for me. While I will admit the guard player was making newbie mistakes (not moving his tanks at all) the GK player was making so many rules errors in his favor that it was absurd. As I said in the initial post that caused me to ask this question in the first place, in less than 3 minutes, I saw: The GK player shooting guardsmen, then assaulting their tank that they got out of by 'multi assaulting' which is not possible to do with a single model. Then hitting at str 10 monstrous creature attacks because he was wielding a Sword and a fist, which was cleared up in the faq that since the knight was not a dreadnaught that it doesn't get the doubling of the strength from the fist. Now, odds are, that yes, the knight would shred vehicles, especially if they didn't move, but really, he should have been rolling to penetrate anyway, I mean rolling over a 5 on 2d6 to get a pen with a reroll isn't hard.
That said, while I didn't tell the judge, others were watching, and the guy disappeared before the last game of the day.
I'd hate to come up against some of you in a tournament. It sounds like you're basically saying that if I don't know your codex inside and out that it's my fault and I deserve to be cheated.
So for that reason, feel free to tell me whenever you spot any one bending or breaking the rules to suit their army please.
No one has said anything of the coaching sort "Hey buddy, don't stick your predator tank there, stick it here" kind of thing.
They've said it'd be for clarifications like "umm that long fang squad can split fire for two targets only, not one for each long fang".
Yes you can argue that the top players should know each and every Codex and units, some people just like playing their army as best they can and have to rely on trusting their opponent to know their own Codex while knowing their own inside and out.
If I'm playing in a tournament and someone starts interjecting themselves I'd ask if they were a judge. If they said no i'd tell them to off or I'll hurt them.
indeed, in any other sport or game, you'd get your head handed to your for interjecting in a game.
So Troy, it sounds like you are of the school that says "Anything I can get away with is fair, and if someone other than a judge catches me, I will injure them?" That sort of play is why I don't normally play tournaments, too many people with the I've got to win at all costs, fair play, the rules, and if someone calls me on my cheating, I will them up.
The thing that drew me to watch for about 3 minutes at the GK vs. IG table was that someone came and told me that when I was in the painting room that a Dreadknight was destroying an entire guard army almost by itself, so I had to go take a peek, since they weren't doing that well for me. While I will admit the guard player was making newbie mistakes (not moving his tanks at all) the GK player was making so many rules errors in his favor that it was absurd. As I said in the initial post that caused me to ask this question in the first place, in less than 3 minutes, I saw: The GK player shooting guardsmen, then assaulting their tank that they got out of by 'multi assaulting' which is not possible to do with a single model. Then hitting at str 10 monstrous creature attacks because he was wielding a Sword and a fist, which was cleared up in the faq that since the knight was not a dreadnaught that it doesn't get the doubling of the strength from the fist. Now, odds are, that yes, the knight would shred vehicles, especially if they didn't move, but really, he should have been rolling to penetrate anyway, I mean rolling over a 5 on 2d6 to get a pen with a reroll isn't hard.
That said, while I didn't tell the judge, others were watching, and the guy disappeared before the last game of the day.
It sounds like you are of the school that draws false conclusions and then runs with them screaming into a ditch of false accusations.
I meant exactly what I said. Bystanders have no place to make comments. If they think there is cheating they can get a judge. Otherwise they can shut the up.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kijamon wrote:I'd hate to come up against some of you in a tournament. It sounds like you're basically saying that if I don't know your codex inside and out that it's my fault and I deserve to be cheated.
Not at all. We're saying Joe blow walking by accusing you of cheating is not acceptable.
I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.
allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.
coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...
This is exactly coaching. If you squatted on his game and basically helped him play his army for him, you coached him. Being someone to tell him how the rules of the game worked so he could make decisions off your information is coaching. Not to mention if you are only there to coach one side of a table and are not even attempting to be impartial. A tourney is not an appropriate place to be 'learning' the rules. If you are telling him rules, during a tourney, he is 'learning' and that is 'coaching'. What you should have done is *YOU* enter the event... *YOU* play the games and let him watch. He can then learn while he watches you play. THAT is the correct way of handling this situation. Not unfairly coaching him through his games.
And you guys say 'obvious' but the examples in this thread are rule disputes that have often been grey areas. What is obvious to you, the arrogant nosey interloper who knows the rules better than the person who wrote it may not be as obvious or as clear to interpret as threads in YMTC show.
In this example, you should have told a judge about your friends inexperience. And the judge could either watch over his games or let him get eaten by the meatgrinder. It was on him to save himself by asking for rule verification, not for you to loom over his game and play half of it for him.
This shows the lack of poor judgement by observers and how they are basically trying to justify their unfair interference. For every person who could possibly give unbiased fair advice to clear up obvious disputes, there are dozens of uninformed, rude, coaching interlopers who may not even be giving correct information and are totally overstepping their bounds. The only valid way to protect games from the bad spectators is to ban all spectators from interfering.
I'd have to go with the "it isn't your place to say anything as an observer crowd". RTTs aren't the place for those who don't know the rules to learn them. With time limits per round, looking up every little question will lead to 2 turn games. Learn the rules by playing at your LGS beforehand. As an observer if you see something wrong get with the TO or a judge and let him correct the mistake.
As someone who does play at a local club this isn't always enough to know everything about every army type. At my club certain armies are very popular and some are never seen i.e. no-one plays Tau, Necrons, Demons, GK, Orks or really Dark Eldar that much. Therefore my knowledge of these armies and there codexes is quite limited - a recent tournament near thrashing from Tau proved this point.
Clearly it is best/desirable to know about every army build and the ins and outs of their respective codexes but this isn't always that easy for everyone. What seems to be the problem is that different people enter tournaments for different reasons:
Player 1 - the Win at all costs player who wants the status and rank of winning. This player will not readily want nor accept third party intrusions, and nor should they. We all know these players as they often bring the spam list you'd never want to see a t a normal club gaming evening. (Sounds like we have a few in this thread)
Player 2 - the Semi-regular tournament player who enjoys the challenge of new players and the competitive element but who isn't too worried about losing some games. These players are generally a mixed bag, in my opinion. Ranging from those who are happy to accept any third party intervention to those who, like player 1, are not happy to have any input from outside the game.
Player 3 - the new to gaming and quite naive to the rules who want to play new people and learn more about the game. Whilst these are okay at tournaments they are probably best learning more at a club before going. Just my opinion.
It is when people from these different groups mix that problems arise. How to deal with this is the million dollar question!
Perhaps player 3 types are best not to enter until they can call themselves player 2 or 1s. Player 2 and 1s maybe should agree before hand whether they want any third party involvement from bystanders and display this on the table i.e. You are welcome to watch but keep your opinions/comments to yourself. We don't want any interference.' This stops un-wanted interference but still allows players the option of asking for an offical Judge to arbitrate if they are in dispute.
If I spot someone doing something that blatantly violates the rules, intentional or not, you can bet your sweet behind that I'm going to point it out in a polite manner. If said person tells me to butt out, I will. As some people have pointed out, "it's not my business", but since I'm not a completely selfish prick I don't give a damn, I'm just trying to be helpful. "Treat others the way you want to be treated", and all that...
I also can't see how pointing out that you can't, for example, multi-assault with a single model could be considered "coaching" If you do it during the movement or shooting phase then sure, but if you do it during assault movement then what's the harm?
I don't play tournaments so you can ignore what I say but if this were pro sports the crowds always shout advice to the team from the stands its up to the players to be professional enough to ignore it.
Pointing out an explicit rules violation....I agree that it is fine. ANY form of coaching...I have an issue with. I even had a judge coaching my opponent at Wargamescon. "Hey, you forgot to move them..."
On the flip side of the discussion here, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that if you open your mouth to point out a rule being broken, that you are 100% certain about it. I have a lot of spectators during some of my games, and spectators interjecting with incorrect beliefs about rules is a major cause of slow-down in games. More often than not it ends up with a rulebook having to be opened, and now we've lost 3-5 minutes of our gametime in a timed environment because of a spectator.
In a high-stress environment with time ticking down on a tourney table...I've bitten some peoples' heads off verbally for interjecting themselves in our game. In the future, I'm also going to start asking spectators to back away from the table, because of the difficulty of having to go around the crowd AND around the table to get to the other side to move my models.
Its akin to reminding people about minor law violations imo.. I imagine most would get irritated if someone followed them around saying "Its illegal to jaywalk.. Hey you parked more than 12" from the curb.. Did you know that you have to have your car behind the line, you are 3.5 centimeters over"
Let the police or the judge enforce the law but by all means if its actually cheating TELL SOMEONE dont just sit there and pout. To a limited degree I agree with Dash tho also, if its very blatant and the person is bullying a person into accepting a wrong rule then I can support someone interjecting. However the above applies, get a judge still because inevitably it will come to that. What if the person doesnt give a damn what you say? Well you need a judge who has authority to change things
Also, yes make sure you're correct too if you gotta jump in. Even as a judge I dont got time to focus on every little thing people may or may not be doing wrong. For grievous rule errors yes, but for minor things.. thats more up to the players to know their game.
I was at a tournament, and round 1 I was up against a newer player. There was never any threat from this guy, but we were having a good, fun game until some SCHMUCK came up and butted in.
"Your Incubi don't have grenades, so they go last" he told me as I cahrged my opponents unit that was in cover.
"Phantasm grenade launcher on the arcon" I replied, and continued to move.
Well, the tool went on a rant saying that sure, my arcon has grenades, but the Incubi do not! I told him he was wrong, where he told my opponent I was cheating.
Now remember, this was a fun, enjoyable game up to this point. I got out the codex and went to hand it to my opponent to show him where I was right, but this tool took it out of my hand!
Ok, there I drew the line!
"Um, put that codex down and dont touch my stuff!"
He replied "So you can cheat some more?"
At this point, i started to walk around the table to throttle the life out of this guy, who saw the look in my eyes, dropped the codex and walked away.
I showed the guy where I was right, and we continued. But know what? the game was no longer fun. He questioned every move I made, asked other people around to verify, and pretty much did not trust me because of 1 idiot.
After the game, i cornered him and told him if he ever interrupted a game of mine again, i would beat him down.
Afterwards, he did have the courtesy to apologise and admit he was wrong, but the whole day was ruined for me, all because someone couldn't mind thier own business.
So NO, i do not allow people to chime in durning my games. I tell them to shut the hell up and walk away.
And if you EVER butt into someone elses game, make sure that you are right!
On the other hand, there are times it is hard to bite your lip and walk away, but I would rather do that than have what happened to me happen to someone else. besides, it is rude... the game is between two players, not two players and a couple obnoxious spectators!
You do NOT EVER interrupt a game, not for minor and not for major mistakes.
Why? If any one side is so unskilled not to notice, or even both, then it's their loss in a competetive event.
Me personally, I'll ask my opponent twice wether he's sure of wich weapon to destroy, or remind him twice of my deepstrikers. I do not say "you should do X because it's more advantageous"
From a rules point, if an opponent cheats himself out of some benefit, then there's 2 possibilities:
a) the opponent is skilled but makes a bad move. His loss, he should know better.
b) (usually with a noob being paired to me in game1) A noob. I will ask him wether he wants me to remind him of rules. I will help him, since I'll win anyways.
In any instance, outsiders intervening aggravates me. The game is played between 2 consenting adults - what they agree upon is what is fine. The game is also supervised by judges, YOU should consult THEM, and NOT intervene in a game.
Any intervention runs the risk of undermining trust, of endangering the good mood in a game. Do NOT ruin someone elses game.
My 4 year old nephew will speak without thinking of consequences. Adults should know that in doubt: You keep your mouth shut.
archont wrote:The rules are what the players agree upon.
You do NOT EVER interrupt a game, not for minor and not for major mistakes.
Why? If any one side is so unskilled not to notice, or even both, then it's their loss in a competetive event.
Me personally, I'll ask my opponent twice wether he's sure of wich weapon to destroy, or remind him twice of my deepstrikers. I do not say "you should do X because it's more advantageous"
From a rules point, if an opponent cheats himself out of some benefit, then there's 2 possibilities:
a) the opponent is skilled but makes a bad move. His loss, he should know better.
b) (usually with a noob being paired to me in game1) A noob. I will ask him wether he wants me to remind him of rules. I will help him, since I'll win anyways.
In any instance, outsiders intervening aggravates me. The game is played between 2 consenting adults - what they agree upon is what is fine. The game is also supervised by judges, YOU should consult THEM, and NOT intervene in a game.
Any intervention runs the risk of undermining trust, of endangering the good mood in a game. Do NOT ruin someone elses game.
My 4 year old nephew will speak without thinking of consequences. Adults should know that in doubt: You keep your mouth shut.
Wow - lot of different thoughts on this. Think I am as much in the dark of the answer to the million dollar question as I was when the thread title caught my eye!
Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.
From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"
However, the casuals are not at fault: They do & say as they feel is right, what they feel is right is directly influenced by their gaming environment.
In a casual game, where you do not have competition, no time restraint etc etc - people can butt in, if they deem so necessary
nkelsch wrote:The issue is there IS a difference between the following:
*Both players unfamiliar with the rules and playing it wrong.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player letting them play it wrong for personal advantage.
*One player unfamiliar with the rules and the other player playing their rules wrong for personal advantage.
*Two players who know the rules who are disagreeing over a rule.
The issue is there is a fine line between people being unfamiliar with rules and someone purposely cheating. And there is also a line between coaching and fixing rule disputes.
I agree with this quote... just not your conclusions from it.
I also agree with Dash and Kirasu's points of view above. Imo, this more accurately represents real players' views. Some might not want you to say anything, some might not mind if you're 100% certain- but all of them (that I've met) would have no problem with a spectator who sees a clear rules violation getting a judge.
As Kirasu says- if you see something clearly wrong happening, and you feel like something should be done about it- don't wait until afterwards. If you don't know the folks / aren't 100% sure / don't feel comfortable speaking up- just get a judge, and have them take care of it.
I would also like to point out, nkelsch, that while I agree about the fine line of being unfamiliar with rules and purposely cheating- your point #3 above is clearly cheating. And whether it is intentional or not, if one player is unfamiliar with a rule (particularly an army specific one) and the other player is using it wrongly to their own advantage, I think a spectator is obligated to "notify the authorities" as it were... or for those who feel comfortable doing so, a simple, polite comment can do the same job.
Tournament games aren't black boxes, and if you're not comfortable having your game watched, I'd say you shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Dash clearly experiences this a lot, and takes your position in a sense (that people who aren't 100% sure about a rules violation shouldn't say anything) but also says pointing out a clear rules violation is fine.
In my opinion, that's clearly the common ground. And from what I've seen, this isn't nearly so polarizing in real life. If someone has an obvious rule wrong, and it gets pointed out, everybody's grateful for it- even the person doing it wrong usually, as now they know how to do it correctly, and aren't getting an unfair advantage from playing it incorrectly.
On the table / in tournies... this is not going to be so black and white, as has been pointed out many times. It's just on the internet. If you have a rule wrong, I politely point it out, and you have a problem with that? In my opinion, you shouldn't be playing in a tournament... and more than that, how can you be offended if you actually had the rule wrong in the first place?
To say it's a "contract between two players"... well, that contract also involves playing by the rules. And to the comment that "The rules are what the players agree that they are?" I disagree... the rules are as they are written, and the players interpret them, but only up to a point. Some things are clearly right and wrong by the rules, and must be reasonably played as such in a tournament environment.
But if you're unsure of the rule, for heaven's sake, don't say anything and let them figure it out on their own.
I agree with this quote... just not your conclusions from it.
I also agree with Dash and Kirasu's points of view above. Imo, this more accurately represents real players' views. Some might not want you to say anything, some might not mind if you're 100% certain- but all of them (that I've met) would have no problem with a spectator who sees a clear rules violation getting a judge.
I agree. Get a judge. Don't intervene. The judge can intervene. If you let the judge intervene, then that solves most of the issues:
*If you are wrong, you don't waste people's time and the judge prevents you from getting involved
*If your interpretation conflicts with the event FAQ , you don't waste people's time and the judge prevents you from getting involved
*You don't have an external person with no authority poisoning a game by calling people cheaters. A judge can handle it.
We are talking about people who sit there and just chime in and try to officiate the game.
As Kirasu says- if you see something clearly wrong happening, and you feel like something should be done about it- don't wait until afterwards. If you don't know the folks / aren't 100% sure / don't feel comfortable speaking up- just get a
judge, and have them take care of it.
TOTALLY AGREE. Get a judge. Don't intervene. Any interventions in a tourney need to come from official organizers... especially so the TO and judges have the ability to filter the wide array of nonsense that spectators bring in the form of coaching and totally wrong interpretations.
I would also like to point out, nkelsch, that while I agree about the fine line of being unfamiliar with rules and purposely cheating- your point #3 above is clearly cheating. And whether it is intentional or not, if one player is unfamiliar with a rule (particularly an army specific one) and the other player is using it wrongly to their own advantage, I think a spectator is obligated to "notify the authorities" as it were... or for those who feel comfortable doing so, a simple, polite comment can do the same job.
It is clearly cheating. But letting someone make a big mistake because they don't know your rules technically isn't... and while it may not be sporting to some to go 'Ah HA! you just activated my trap card!!! This rule makes all your models kill themselves... you should have known better!' it is not the place of a spectator to chime in and say "you do know your plan to Do X won't work because X doesn't work that way right?"
When clarifying a rule in advance changes the tactical decisions of a player, it is coaching. Sometimes you have to let the people make mistakes. If someone moved 12" in the movement phase with the expectation of shooting all his weapons and you say during the movement phase: "You can't shoot if you move over 6" even though the vehicle can shoot if it moves 12" "... That is coaching. You say the exact same thing during the shooting phase when the person has already made his tactical failure, then that is correcting a rule. This is such a grey area as it is a fine line between helping fix rules played wrong and coaching!!!
Personally, I give my opponents heads up when I see them about to play a rule wrong... but it is *MY* game and I am involved in it. I have the right to 'coach' my opponent if he wants the input or not. Spectators do not.
Tournament games aren't black boxes, and if you're not comfortable having your game watched, I'd say you shouldn't be playing in a tournament. Dash clearly experiences this a lot, and takes your position in a sense (that people who aren't 100% sure about a rules violation shouldn't say anything) but also says pointing out a clear rules violation is fine.
It is rude to eavesdrop. It is rude to interject into other people's conversations and it is rude to invade people's personal space and be in the way. Some people lack social skills and don't realize when they stand pressed up against your table edge with a big gulp and cheetos, eating over your table while you are trying to play that they are not welcome. (true story)
Now you are going to tell us how to play? No... please if you have a problem get a judge.
In my opinion, that's clearly the common ground. And from what I've seen, this isn't nearly so polarizing in real life. If someone has an obvious rule wrong, and it gets pointed out, everybody's grateful for it- even the person doing it wrong usually, as now they know how to do it correctly, and aren't getting an unfair advantage from playing it incorrectly.
On the table / in tournies... this is not going to be so black and white, as has been pointed out many times. It's just on the internet. If you have a rule wrong, I politely point it out, and you have a problem with that? In my opinion, you shouldn't be playing in a tournament... and more than that, how can you be offended if you actually had the rule wrong in the first place?
To say it's a "contract between two players"... well, that contract also involves playing by the rules. And to the comment that "The rules are what the players agree that they are?" I disagree... the rules are as they are written, and the players interpret them, but only up to a point. Some things are clearly right and wrong by the rules, and must be reasonably played as such in a tournament environment.
But if you're unsure of the rule, for heaven's sake, don't say anything and let them figure it out on their own.
At some point, you have to accept people play stuff wrong and spectators who want to help should volunteer to be judges, even if it is only for part of the day. Since spectators show terrible judgement more often than not, then I think the only reasonable position is for everyone, even the smartest, most rules-aware socially atuned spectator to still go through a judge.
No one wants to cheat, but no one wants a 3rd party person crapping up their game. So I would rather everyone butt out to protect us from the bad spectators and the good spectators can go get judges.
They key is to excercise appropriate courtesy, discretion, and basic adult social skills.
Don't be rude or accusatory. Don't be hostile or loud. Don't give tactical advice. Be conscious of the environment and the clock if they're running short on time. Be courteous, and be prepared to shut up if the players at the table ask you to butt out. And ff you are not 100%, it's better to be silent or check the book before speaking. Even if you ARE 100% certain, it is still best to use a polite, inquisitive tone leaving room for you possibly being in error yourself.
But I maintain that it absolutely is appropriate to correct a clearly broken rule.
archont wrote:Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.
From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"
You don't think Dash or me are tournament players? I think you're exaggerating the universality of your preference.
Nice post, nkelsch- and in thinking about it, I actually tend to agree. As Dash said... spectators are often wrong, and cause more trouble than they help solve. I think we only disagree in that I believe someone knowledgeable and courteous could speak up directly, if done in the right way (as Mannahnin describes above).
I also want to clarify that my "cheating" comment was referring to the situation you'd laid out where someone plays their own rules wrong (perhaps even intentionally), and their opponent (ignorant of those rules) doesn't know that they're doing it... in that case I think getting a judge would be even more appropriate, as if it's intentional, the infringing player could then be dealt with however severely the judge deems appropriate.
I was also going to point out about Mannahnin's and Dash's views in this thread... clearly, they're prolific tournament players, so to the poster who pointed to people disagreeing with them as being non-tournament players... that's simply not the case.
Not having attended a tournement I have a question. If you see someone making an intentional/unintentional mistake and you go to get a judge. If, by the time the judge gets there other actions have occurred what happens then?
Leo_the_Rat wrote:Not having attended a tournement I have a question. If you see someone making an intentional/unintentional mistake and you go to get a judge. If, by the time the judge gets there other actions have occurred what happens then?
At that point the purpose of informing the judge is to have an official keep an eye on the table because there are/were perceived rules problems.
If the players have moved on to other actions, then it's because they've come to an agreement on resolution of the rules dispute.
Take note that most of the people saying they would butt in do not appear to be tournament goers.
From tournament goers the response was an almost universal "Do not interfere"
I think most people that play in tournaments are fairly split on the matter, but most players will agree that you don't bring up controversial rules issues and for the most part you point out simple things that may just be slips of the mind or subtle cheating.
My general rules for observing tournaments games over the years...
1.) Never interrupt the game unless you know the person(s) playing and then it's to say hello and how's it going when nothing is happening gamewise.
2.) If you see something being played wrong, go inform a judge and let them sort it out
It's a general fact that most people will get rules wrong, either through not reading the books, not remembering things, or getting confused (due to it being a difficult game, they aren't feeling well or are hungover). If they get the rules wrong it's not up to you as an observer to jump in and point out
I have to love how some of the Internet Warhammer Community gets all puffy chested and potentially physically violent when any sort of conflict seems to arise. Makes you wonder why they don't just install boxing rings in all FLGS to settle arguements.
Personally, I would rather spectators butt out. And if you do feel that you need to interject, that you are willing to stand beside that table for the rest of the game because you just nominated yourself as judge. I absolutely hate when a spectator only seems to be around the table when it is his buddy's turn to provide his absolute rule's knowledge.
Certainly if I saw some issues that I will speak up with the player post game, but most certainly at a tournament it is both player's responsibilities to know the rules, or at least have the forsight to simply ask to read the opposing players codex on rules that seem shady.
I have to love how some of the Internet Warhammer Community gets all puffy chested and potentially physically violent when any sort of conflict seems to arise. Makes you wonder why they don't just install boxing rings in all FLGS to settle arguements.
We have a stage at Legions.. Not sure people wanna see a bunch of warhammer geeks in a boxing match. Plus, no ring girls so whats the point really?
I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.
allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.
coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...
This is exactly coaching. If you squatted on his game and basically helped him play his army for him, you coached him. Being someone to tell him how the rules of the game worked so he could make decisions off your information is coaching. Not to mention if you are only there to coach one side of a table and are not even attempting to be impartial. A tourney is not an appropriate place to be 'learning' the rules. If you are telling him rules, during a tourney, he is 'learning' and that is 'coaching'. What you should have done is *YOU* enter the event... *YOU* play the games and let him watch. He can then learn while he watches you play. THAT is the correct way of handling this situation. Not unfairly coaching him through his games.
And you guys say 'obvious' but the examples in this thread are rule disputes that have often been grey areas. What is obvious to you, the arrogant nosey interloper who knows the rules better than the person who wrote it may not be as obvious or as clear to interpret as threads in YMTC show.
In this example, you should have told a judge about your friends inexperience. And the judge could either watch over his games or let him get eaten by the meatgrinder. It was on him to save himself by asking for rule verification, not for you to loom over his game and play half of it for him.
This shows the lack of poor judgement by observers and how they are basically trying to justify their unfair interference. For every person who could possibly give unbiased fair advice to clear up obvious disputes, there are dozens of uninformed, rude, coaching interlopers who may not even be giving correct information and are totally overstepping their bounds. The only valid way to protect games from the bad spectators is to ban all spectators from interfering.
apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.
in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.
I personally was at the GT a few years ago with a friend who was new to the game, and i watched the end of 3 of his games. in all 3 of the games i could tell a more experienced player was taking advantage of him and i sat and made sure the rules were followed. so it both worked at teaching my friend the rules, and kept the other player from steam rolling him. like "forgotten" psychic tests, "forgotten" morale test and the list goes on. but i also made sure he was following the rules also so i pointed out his mostakes also.
allowing obvious rules "violations" (differing from rules disputes) to go at the very least not pointed out is a problem, because either one person is cheating, or both people dont know the rules and should be given the opportunity to learn them.
coaching is also different than the above, and should never occur in a tournament. why dony you use this, move here shoot that...
This is exactly coaching. If you squatted on his game and basically helped him play his army for him, you coached him. Being someone to tell him how the rules of the game worked so he could make decisions off your information is coaching. Not to mention if you are only there to coach one side of a table and are not even attempting to be impartial. A tourney is not an appropriate place to be 'learning' the rules. If you are telling him rules, during a tourney, he is 'learning' and that is 'coaching'. What you should have done is *YOU* enter the event... *YOU* play the games and let him watch. He can then learn while he watches you play. THAT is the correct way of handling this situation. Not unfairly coaching him through his games.
And you guys say 'obvious' but the examples in this thread are rule disputes that have often been grey areas. What is obvious to you, the arrogant nosey interloper who knows the rules better than the person who wrote it may not be as obvious or as clear to interpret as threads in YMTC show.
In this example, you should have told a judge about your friends inexperience. And the judge could either watch over his games or let him get eaten by the meatgrinder. It was on him to save himself by asking for rule verification, not for you to loom over his game and play half of it for him.
This shows the lack of poor judgement by observers and how they are basically trying to justify their unfair interference. For every person who could possibly give unbiased fair advice to clear up obvious disputes, there are dozens of uninformed, rude, coaching interlopers who may not even be giving correct information and are totally overstepping their bounds. The only valid way to protect games from the bad spectators is to ban all spectators from interfering.
apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.
in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.
I'm sure your illumination of their ignorance will go over well.
Why wouldn't it if it ensured a smooth flowing game that adfhered to the rule and was impartial?
I forgot to roll a psychic test in a recent local tournament match and a spectator pointed it out. I was pleased he did (even though the test failed...). He was very pleasant, just said 'Hey, you forgot to roll for Holocaust just now'). No need for aggravation there that I can see.
Certainly I don't think anyone wants someone butting in with half-remembered rules that are a conglommeration of 3rd/4th and 5th ed, or whatever. But a simple 'You forgot that compulsory action' if delivered in a timely and pleasant manner should in my view be welcome. And if you don't welcome such, a simple 'Thanks but we'd prefer to catch our own mistakes' would seem sufficient. wild threats of physical violence and swearing seem just a trifle over the top to me. But I'm very old-fashioned.
OT, slightly, but I was at a tournament a few weeks ago. After finishing my game I was watching a hard-fought battle between Blood Angels and Space Wolves. The game ended and the players were unsure if a BA marine was close enough to contest an objective. The two players measured a few times and it was really close. They turned to me and said, "Here you measure it." I said, "Not a fething chance am I going to measure that!" and got a judge.
You have to wonder why someone would have a problem with being called on __flagrant__ rules "oversight" by an observer. As I've said before, the appropriate response to this should be, "Why thank you. My mistake," followed by an apology to his opponent.
Artemo wrote:Why wouldn't it if it ensured a smooth flowing game that adfhered to the rule and was impartial?
I forgot to roll a psychic test in a recent local tournament match and a spectator pointed it out. I was pleased he did (even though the test failed...). He was very pleasant, just said 'Hey, you forgot to roll for Holocaust just now'). No need for aggravation there that I can see.
Certainly I don't think anyone wants someone butting in with half-remembered rules that are a conglommeration of 3rd/4th and 5th ed, or whatever. But a simple 'You forgot that compulsory action' if delivered in a timely and pleasant manner should in my view be welcome. And if you don't welcome such, a simple 'Thanks but we'd prefer to catch our own mistakes' would seem sufficient. wild threats of physical violence and swearing seem just a trifle over the top to me. But I'm very old-fashioned.
yes but I prefer wild over the top threats of physical violence. It helps me cope with people who butt into my business.
olympia wrote:OT, slightly, but I was at a tournament a few weeks ago. After finishing my game I was watching a hard-fought battle between Blood Angels and Space Wolves. The game ended and the players were unsure if a BA marine was close enough to contest an objective. The two players measured a few times and it was really close. They turned to me and said, "Here you measure it." I said, "Not a fething chance am I going to measure that!" and got a judge.
You have to wonder why someone would have a problem with being called on __flagrant__ rules "oversight" by an observer. As I've said before, the appropriate response to this should be, "Why thank you. My mistake," followed by an apology to his opponent.
The problem is when the observer calls a player on a _flagrant_ rules "oversight" and the observer was flat out wrong. See the post on this page from Anglacon to see how an observer who jumped into a rules dispute and was wrong destroyed the rapport of two players in the game.
apparently you didnt take the time to read the whole post where i pointed out both sides, Also you assumed i coached him by telling how and where to move, I let him make his own choices, i just pointed out that the rules require you to do or not do "this" action.
in my opinion, if there are rules violations they need to be pointed out. to let people just keep going is either allowing someone to cheat, or allowing people to be ignorant of the correct rules.
I disagree with your opinion of what coaching is. Correcting rules farther in advance gives people chances to compensate. Sometimes making bad tactical decisions is part of the game. If you tell them in the movement phase that they can't shoot if they move over 6" then you have coached that player into moving less than 6". If you tell them while in the shooting phase after they have assaulted that they can't shoot because they moved too far then you might have less of an issue. Just because you don't think you are coaching, doesn't mean you are not coaching. Again, another reason why spectators should butt out. Many can't tell they are wrong with the rules and many can;t tell the difference between coaching or not.
The problem is you guys who are like, "yeah, i know there are a ton of problems that could happen, i am talking about 'OBVIOUS' rule disputes that I am clearly smart enough to officiate on."
All those people who are wrong and coaching and causing issues also think that the rule was "OBVIOUS" and that they were also smart enough to officiate on... And they were wrong. Which is why you should VET all interactions via an official judge, even if it is supposedly obvious and you are supposedly smart.
A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
lord_blackfang wrote:A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
lord_blackfang wrote:A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
The thing we keep getting back to is that, if a player does something wrong the game has been changed.
1. You find a judge explain to him that your saw something done wrong you both go over to the table. The players are now on the next turn thinking everything is fine. The situation has passed and now the game can never be resolved fairly.
2. You say "excuse me" your forgot this or whatever after it has happened but before anything else has a chance to happen that player should be grateful and say well spotted. You then go back to watching.
Im not saying be proactive and tell the players before they do anything what the rules in a situation is, tell them after. You cant be blamed for coaching by calling out a mistake.
Unless your tactics rely on preying on a less knowledgeable opponent and you don't want to be called on it.
Troy wrote:yes but I prefer wild over the top threats of physical violence. It helps me cope with people who butt into my business.
Please stop posting along this line... threats of violence are not only against Dakka's rules, but a very poor overreaction to an issue involving a game of toy soldiers.
I know people feel more OK with doing this over the internet, for some reason, but as we're talking about what to actually do in these cases, it's inappropriate.
Even if you feel that that's what you would do in these situations, it doesn't belong on Dakka.
lord_blackfang wrote:A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
lord_blackfang wrote:A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
And judges are judges. You aren't.
Is crime also okay unless a cop is looking?
Are you going to arrest people committing crimes and do you have the authority to? You can report the crime to the police... That is the responsible thing to do... What if you try to do a citizens arrest because you see what you claim is an 'obvious' crime only to find out that what may be a crime in your home town is not a crime in the jurisdiction you are visiting? What if int he attempt to stop an OBVIOUS crime you cause more issues for the store because you are an untrained onlooker... What happens if instead of getting the police, your intervention causes harm to the store clerk during a robbery? Are you going to hide behind, "It was an obvious crime, and it was my obligation to step in... sorry about the gunshot wound my old chap..."
Troy wrote:yes but I prefer wild over the top threats of physical violence. It helps me cope with people who butt into my business.
Please stop posting along this line... threats of violence are not only against Dakka's rules, but a very poor overreaction to an issue involving a game of toy soldiers.
I know people feel more OK with doing this over the internet, for some reason, but as we're talking about what to actually do in these cases, it's inappropriate.
Even if you feel that that's what you would do in these situations, it doesn't belong on Dakka.
I am not addressing any poster whoatsoever in my statement, just noting that if you interject into my business I will aggressively push back.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
lord_blackfang wrote:
Troy wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:A few people seem to be of the opinion that cheating is fine as long as you don't get caught... a rather surprising stance considering the stink the tourney crowd throws up every year after "Ard Boyz. But of course nobody is man enough to call out the cheaters there, instead they film them and shame them on Youtube later from safe anonymity...
Yes, I will point out significant rules errors and I will certainly point out blatant cheating. Rules are rules.
And judges are judges. You aren't.
Is crime also okay unless a cop is looking?
Are you going to arrest the criminals then? Do you wear a mask and roam the streets at night? I'm not talking to the [see forum posting rules] am I.
Wow, lot of harsh stances on this issue, and alot of it I understand, from both sides. I have run a number of small events and won a few larger ones in my area and am often called upon for rules help by people playing in tournaments that I am, myself, playing in. This has yet to be an issue as I make damned sure I am only giving answers regarding the specific rule (no coaching) and if I'm not 100% sure I tell them so and recommend they get a judge. I have also at times, stopped people from accidentally cheating. But I do so in a descreet and respectful manner and again, only if I'm 100% certain.
On the flip side I have had some people due the same for me and I was always greatful when done properly (I would hate to find out afterward). What I cannot tollerate is blatant coaching and people just spouting whatever nonesense they THINK is the rules and slowing down my game. To those I usually end up asking them to please move on as this is a competative event and they are interfering, only having to raise my voice once.
Of course, our area (Middle TN) has a pretty laid back group of tourney goers, and alot of tournament questions get handled by player concensus (both those playing and not playing the game in question) before going to a judge.
lord_blackfang wrote:All your hyperbole aside, I certainly have the right to say "Excuse me, miss, but that guy's hand is in your purse."
On the street = General FLGS play.
This is in an event. You certainly do not have the 'right' to interject into someone else's event. While you can feel there is cheating and you can feel you have a right to do something about it, only the judges and TO have any authority to do anything about it. You can tell the judges who can listen to you or do nothing. You don't get to run on the field and throw your own red card when you see someone cheating in a soccer game...
You have no 'RIGHT' to inject yourself anywhere in a tourney. It is not your job or your place... if you want to help, address your issues to the JUDGE.
I think some people get off on being 'the smart guy' and love standing around FLGS spouting rules... they don't play in the events but go to them so they can play judge. Those people should be removed from spectating as they cause lots of trouble... There are way more troublemakers than honest, informed, courteous spectators. If you have an issue go get a judge.
I suspect many Judges probably have better things to do than have nosey spectators being 'Hey judge! juuuuuugde Table 3 forgot to roll a psychic test, you need to stop the cheating or the tourney will collapse under corruption! Juuuuuuudge!"
gardeth wrote:
Of course, our area (Middle TN) has a pretty laid back group of tourney goers, and alot of tournament questions get handled by player concensus (both those playing and not playing the game in question) before going to a judge.
I also would rather ask the neighbor table, or have another tourney participant interject himself in our game than a random spectator. I feel it is fine to ask the next table over for an opinion on a rule (remember, ASK). People involved in the tourney have more of legitimate claim than spectators. I have a feeling in real life, us tourney participators have been getting our rules resolved ourselves without spectators just fine.
Best thing to do is inform a judge to take care of the situation but only if its something really game breaking or major rules breaking. I agree with what nkelsch says though about not informing the judge on every little transgression.
I think people's opinions often depend on which party they subconsciously identify with more. Some people identify with the guy who didn't place because an opponent used a rule wrong. Some people identify more with the guy who doesn't want to be interrupted while he lies, cheats and steals his way to the top.
...and I'm not even talking about warhammer anymore.
lord_blackfang wrote:I think people's opinions often depend on which party they subconsciously identify with more. Some people identify with the guy who didn't place because an opponent used a rule wrong. Some people identify more with the guy who doesn't want to be interrupted while he lies, cheats and steals his way to the top.
...and I'm not even talking about warhammer anymore.
So you're accusing those who disagree with your position as being liars, cheaters, and thieves? Impressive, most impressive.
No, no, not at all. Just like nkelsch totally didn't call the other side troublemaking smart guys who should be removed. It was all meant in really broad terms, not to be applied to anyone in this tread.
lord_blackfang wrote:No, no, not at all. Just like nkelsch totally didn't call the other side troublemaking smart guys who should be removed. It was all meant in really broad terms, not to be applied to anyone in this tread.
lord_blackfang wrote:I think people's opinions often depend on which party they subconsciously identify with more. Some people identify with the guy who didn't place because an opponent used a rule wrong. Some people identify more with the guy who doesn't want to be interrupted while he lies, cheats and steals his way to the top.
...and I'm not even talking about warhammer anymore.
Im identifying with being the judge :p People coming to me with questions (Even about others) causes less hassle.
Im identifying with being the judge :p People coming to me with questions (Even about others) causes less hassle.
I personally would like to hear the opinion of TOs who run events, especially large ones and their experiences or opinions of spectators involvement with games. I mean we have seen the result of spectators videoing games and causing drama mid-game, but I wonder if TOs have had other major issues with spectators or have a preference on how they feel spectators should act or if they have rules like "no spectators involved in games"
I trust their judgement as they have run more events and get the feedback of hundreds of gamers and spectators and judges over a lot of our anecdotal experiences... I can just say, I have observed spectators being wrong and harmfulw ay more than they were being resonable and helpful... but mostly because good judges are very much on top of things and getting a judge it usually quite easy in a well-run event. I am always surprised how many games a good judge can keep tuned in to and keep on top of rule issues.
nkelsch wrote:
I suspect many Judges probably have better things to do than have nosey spectators being 'Hey judge! juuuuuugde Table 3 forgot to roll a psychic test, you need to stop the cheating or the tourney will collapse under corruption! Juuuuuuudge!"
[
I agree I dont think judges need to know every little thing, the situation here is to say "hay mate you forgot your psychic test" and it goes no further than that.
The last thing you could possible ask it that no one tell a judge or tells the players that's goes totals against the rules and general fair play.
I think this has become an important debate we could do with the top tournaments judges and organisers to say what they would like us to do as there is clearly a difference in opinion.
nkelsch, when you/myself/others were using the term "spectator", I assumed we were mostly talking about other participants at the tournament. It actually hadn't occurred to me that we'd be talking about random passersby in a game store or the like... I'd be much less comfortable taking their input than that of another tournament participant (who, if I know them, I'll often ask for a quick rules confirmation / interpretation / etc, before going to a judge, if it's a fairly obvious thing that we've forgotten or are trying to figure out).
RiTides wrote:nkelsch, when you/myself/others were using the term "spectator", I assumed we were mostly talking about other participants at the tournament. It actually hadn't occurred to me that we'd be talking about random passersby in a game store or the like... I'd be much less comfortable taking their input than that of another tournament participant (who, if I know them, I'll often ask for a quick rules confirmation / interpretation / etc, before going to a judge, if it's a fairly obvious thing that we've forgotten or are trying to figure out).
A person who is playing at the table next to you isn't a spectator... and in tourneys it is fairly common to ASK for input from the table next to you but not so much interject without asking. I don't know about you, but I don't have time to pay attention or watch my neighbors game to see if they are doing things right and I don't know who does. Sometimes games end early and participants mull around, but even then, that is the last 10 minutes of the game... if they have been playing it wrong all game and they are one of the last people finishing... that is a judge issue.
So when someone has enough time to stand there and watch your game and actually follow what you are doing enough to know you skipped a psychic test, they are spectating and have nothing better to do than stand there and watch you play. I have to say that is farily common at small RTTs or large GTs in my experience. In small RTTs, Joe FLGS who can't play all day comes expecting to play a little warhammer and then finds a tourney which he can't participate in, but he has 4 hours to killl... BAM... self-appointed judge officiating an event in his local stomping grounds where he is used to forcing his interpretation of rules on people. Don't get me started on the people who stand there with a video cam and think they are not in the way as they are physically looming over your table...
I think it is fine for people to ask their neighbors for a quick rule dispute... I think spectators need to go away.
So many times I want to interject on a guy who is playing an army I know very well wrong in the sense he is cheating, such as CSM and thinking taking a familiar lets you cast multiple powers even though it plainly says not. I had said things in the past but the TO of the store pulled me aside, explained he was appreciative of what I was doing but unfortunately I had to sew the lips shut. Now I just sit back, grit my teeth and watch.
I would have spoke up. Its happened a couple of times with me. I had a player say that Monstrous Creatures would hide behind smaller unties then jump up and shoot. Basically he could get a cover save when i shoot but when he shoot i got nothing.
Frogboy14 wrote:I would have spoke up. Its happened a couple of times with me. I had a player say that Monstrous Creatures would hide behind smaller unties then jump up and shoot. Basically he could get a cover save when i shoot but when he shoot i got nothing.
I then screamed at him for 10 minutes....
Welll... he might have been right... If the smaller unit was tightly packed and covered 50% of him, he would indeed get a cover save. And if the bugs were close to his base and he had an unobstructed view over them then he could indeed shoot without cover being given. It is very situation and is 'get down and check' but I am not going to agree it is impossible.
It is common for orks to do this with grots and totally legal. LOS is from the eyes of the model. THe only difference is TMCs need total blocking 50% not just interviening models... Not likley, but is possible.
Kurgash wrote:So many times I want to interject on a guy who is playing an army I know very well wrong in the sense he is cheating, such as CSM and thinking taking a familiar lets you cast multiple powers even though it plainly says not. I had said things in the past but the TO of the store pulled me aside, explained he was appreciative of what I was doing but unfortunately I had to sew the lips shut. Now I just sit back, grit my teeth and watch.
I don't get this response. As has been said many times in the thread... why not just go get a judge / the TO? I'd bet the TO was simply telling you not to interrupt... but certainly if you see someone playing a rule significantly wrong, you should mention it to those in charge if it's bothering you that much.
I haven't played in a 40k tourney but I've played in a number of magic the gathering tourneys and the same types of things tend to happen, people butting in with differing rules interpretations, etc.
If you feel the need to but in then go get a judge as I really don't want to hear it from someone that isn't actually involved in the tournament in any way. Intentional or not knowing the rules and calling out your opponent when he plays a rule wrong is part of the skill of the game and shouldn't be interfered with by anyone who isn't a judge.
Droma wrote:Intentional or not knowing the rules and calling out your opponent when he plays a rule wrong is part of the skill of the game and shouldn't be interfered with by anyone who isn't a judge.
While I think the main part of this statement is true... if you mean that your opponent is intentionally playing a rule wrong for their own advantage (underlined, but hard to tell what you meant due to grammar) that person is cheating, and would hopefully be forced to forfeit the game by the TO, imo, if not be kicked out of the event.
Especially if it's intentional, getting a judge instead of saying something directly would be even more important, I think- since then the appropriate consequences can happen, instead of the player simply covering up and saying "my bad".
If my opponent is playing a rule wrong either because he forgot the rule or how it works, or he's intentionally playing it in his favor because of my inexperience I still don't want someone that is not a judge jumping into my game as knowing and remembering the rules is part of the skill of the game.
If you see someone cheating or just ignorant because of inexperience get a judge instead of interfering in the match yourself.
Edit: I will say though that if someone is blatantly cheating. IE my back is turned and he's moving models half an inch to make sure he's in assault range then by all means say something.
I don't see any difference between moving models while my opponent's back is turned, or casting Quicksilver on my opponent's turn. Either way I have blatantly broken a rule.
While in theory it would make sense for every player to learn every special rule in every codex, in practice that doesn't happen. The onus is not, and cannot be, on each player to ensure that his opponent is not cheating. You do your best to catch stuff that seems funny, and to know the rules or ask to see the rule in question if it something trips your BS Detector, but the responsibility has to lie with each of us to know and play by our own rules and not cheat our opponents.
If I, playing Blood Angels, were to take FNP saves against Plasma wounds, that's my fault, not my opponent's if he's new or overtired and somehow doesn't catch the error. And if a passer-by notices it and points it out I have no business being angry about it. If I did it out of some kind of absentminded mistake I thank him sincerely and apologize emphatically to my opponent.
If you want to be a part of the game, play the game. Observers are just that: observers. Watch what people do, and don't screw up like they might. But it is not your place to interject.
Mannahnin wrote: And if a passer-by notices it and points it out I have no business being angry about it.
Except when they are wrong and don't know what they are talking about... which is very common with spectators... Even examples in this thread where people are like "The rule obviously works this way! So I told him!" were quoting incorrect rules.
And there is still a whole coaching aspect when someone makes a tactical decision based on a wrong assumption, interjecting too early gives them the ability to rethink and recover from bad tactical moves. There is a huge difference between telling someone they can't shoot when moving 12" in a transport before the transport moves and after the transport moves in the shooting phase. Spectators have generally bad judgement in determining how their advice impacts the game.
If all spectators were 100% correct and exercised good judgement, I would agree. But they don't. They are a hot mess of misinformation and unfair coaching.
I understand and recognize that spectators have interfered inappropriately in your games, and I think your experiences are excellent reasons why spectators should be cautious and polite and ready to double-check themselves and/or back the heck off if asked.
That being said, when they're right, they're right. And IMO it's more important that SOMEONE remember the rule. Putting a blanket ban on outsiders saying anything is enabling cheaters and promulgating/prolonging innocent but game-changing errors in play.