Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've got my first tournament ever next month. What are some typical rules disputes that come up in a tournament? Are there any typical rules which you see folks break when it comes to tournament time?

I guess a common one is people getting a little sloppy and moving their figures too far; this can be related to them trying to hurry to get the game concluded within the time allowed, but still shouldn't happen. It's usually not worth the time of nitpicking every move, but if units are gaining more than an inch, or getting close to an objective, you can politely ask the person to take their time and be careful with a measurement.

Other than that I'm not sure if there are any particular ones I'd call out. If you read through the FAQ documents on the GW site, it will cover most of the common ambiguities and issues.

One of my biggest pointers for playing in tournaments is to be open to people who play things differently than you do. Don't automatically assume they're wrong or cheating. I focus a lot on the rules and on playing them right, but I've still been corrected on things (especially at my first few tournaments, or my first tournament or two after a new edition of the rules comes out) when playing with strangers who didn't make the same assumptions or read things the same way that I or my local group did. Sometimes you'll be surprised to find out you missed something clearly stated in the rules.

The better approach when your opponent does something odd is usually to be polite, say you thought it worked differently, and ask them to explain it and also show you the rule in question in the rulebook or their codex. I always say (truthfully) that it's easier for me to understand and I'll remember it better if I can read it too.

Sometimes you'll learn something new. Sometimes your opponent will. Rarely (IME) is someone actually trying to pull a fast one, but this approach both a) saves you embarassment if you're actually the one who's wrong, and b) avoids an unpleasant confrontation or argument or accusations of cheating.

Mannahnin is making really good points there.

I'll just add that most people are just there to play and have a good time, OP. Just deal with things calmly and politely and your opponent will most likely do the same and it will be smooth sailing.

Good points all around. Just remember to deal with any disagreements in a very relaxed and polite manner. Control the volume and tone of your voice so as to not sound excited or agitated - this will help keep your opponent from getting offended. Disagreements will pop up, so don't be afraid to question in this polite manner. If needed, a judge is always a good source to adjudicate opposing viewpoints.

Good luck.

p.s: One thing to make sure of is that you have a familiarity will all the codices. It's a lot to read, but it will prevent bad things from happening when a player is not as familiar with their own codex as they should be. Case in point: Last round at Astronomi-con winnipeg 2010 my opponent was using tank bustas in his orks, and playing them with tank hunters like they had from the previous codex. Long story short that essentially won him the game and kept me out contention for first place. I knew tankbustas shouldn't have been able to explode my LRC like that, but I didn't want to accuse him of not knowing his codex and couldn't remember why tank bustas were not as strong as he was playing them. If I had gone over all the codices prior to the event, I might have remembered that they didn't have tank hunters USR.

A general tip to streamline gameplay I have found as well is, before getting into a rules debate, move forward to see if it even matters.

I have sped up many games where we debated LoS rules by simply saying - "You know what, roll your cover save, if you make it we can call a judge, if not then it doesn't even matter"

Dracos touched on a good one in knowing your own codex like the back of your hand, and knowing all the other codices with some familiarity.

With that, there are a few other suggestion about what rules debates might come up.

1) As 4th edition determined who could attack at each initiative step, keep in mind it is only determined at the beginning of the assault. I still see a lot of tournament players making this mistake (Or twisting the rules to their own advantage?) to argue that because they removed a close in model their power fist an inch and a half away is left out in the cold with no attacks.

2) Try to know some of the "can of worms" issues. This way if it crops up, then you can call the judge over right away. Some of these issues include but are not limited to, Marneus Calgar's God of War and losing CC (Because there is a choice to pass or fail, you might or might not take No retreat saves), KFF is the cover save to vehicles is 5+ as the rule says or 4+ because it says obscured, is coke better than pepsi? You know, things like that.

3) More of a preparation/organization thing. Before you go, print off a copy of the FAQs located at games workshop, and keep them in a folder. You should do the same thing with your army lists, put them in a folder and keep the folder between your codex and rulebook so you don't lose it. Then you have the rulings for all the armies in respect to questions that pop up all the time, and always know where your army lists are so you can hand one to an opponent, and don't go looking for it during the game.

calypso2ts wrote:I have sped up many games where we debated LoS rules by simply saying - "You know what, roll your cover save, if you make it we can call a judge, if not then it doesn't even matter"

I love this.

I'll be adding it to my repertoire.

Dracos wrote:p.s: One thing to make sure of is that you have a familiarity will all the codices. It's a lot to read, but it will prevent bad things from happening when a player is not as familiar with their own codex as they should be. Case in point: Last round at Astronomi-con winnipeg 2010 my opponent was using tank bustas in his orks, and playing them with tank hunters like they had from the previous codex. Long story short that essentially won him the game and kept me out contention for first place. I knew tankbustas shouldn't have been able to explode my LRC like that, but I didn't want to accuse him of not knowing his codex and couldn't remember why tank bustas were not as strong as he was playing them. If I had gone over all the codices prior to the event, I might have remembered that they didn't have tank hunters USR.

This is one area where I think a little gaming ettiquette goes a long way. You wouldn't believe how many folks don't know about power of the machine spirit with land raiders, so I explain my codex based abilities as I'm doing them. I really appreciate it when other folks explain as they go, instead of assuming I know. It's like the Tryanid player who rolls a hand full of dice and suddenly they are 2 inches away from your HQ and assaulting on turn one. I like being told what power or special ability they are using as they use it. It slows things down a tad, but it allows me to know what's going on, I can usually sense if they are doing something that is against the rules even if I haven't read their codex.

Cover. I went to Adepticon, of all the places, last year for the team tournament and no two people I played against actually used the same rules for cover. The first group was still stuck in 4th edition, the second group wanted EVERYTHING to be area terrain, the third group (it was actually Mannahnin's group if my terrible memory serves me right) played it correctly, and then the fourth group wanted everything to be LoS only.

Actually, now that I think about it, the locals around here seem to have a difficult time leaving fourth edition behind as well. I'd definitely print out the FAQs as previously recommended, make sure you know your army inside and out, and remember Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Most people aren't cheating, and no, you don't play the game 100% correctly either. Local areas develop house rules for things which are vague, and they just begin to stick as cannon, at least in their minds. If you doubt any of this, then tell me what happens if you have four Space Marines in a rhino, one fires a plasmagun, it gets hot and he dies.

Another big issue is TlOS or True Line of Sight for vehicles. Becare about how you position your vehicle in the game, becuase of this rule.

Another tool that would help in the whole measuring, is the G9 Gala Force.

Just have fun, if you have any problem the TO should beable to answer any questions that you have.

I doubt this is anything rules wise, but at the last tournemant i was at, i faced what musta been a Ninja of somesort!

He was darting his hand froward and picking my dead off the table before i even registered how many had died....
All ways leaving them in nice Template shaped Paterens

in the end i had asked him "politely" to stop grabbing my models and that i was Perfectly capable to do it myself.

2nd time he tried it i slapped his hand away "Jokingly"

The guy was like 13 but in my Defence...
he touched my models ¬¬

(I'm 16 so don't think i'm 34 and i was slapping the kids hand away for the Lulz)

Bloodhorror wrote:I doubt this is anything rules wise, but at the last tournemant i was at, i faced what musta been a Ninja of somesort!

He was darting his hand froward and picking my dead off the table before i even registered how many had died....
All ways leaving them in nice Template shaped Paterens

If that did happen, then it IS a rules violation. The controlling player takes casualties, not the other way around, otherwise I would always be denying people cover saves..

It is a rules Violation?!

Soab...
i should of won that game!!!

!

Gah, Daedalus you managed to confuse me.... doesnt the marine just die?

Tekeino wrote:Gah, Daedalus you managed to confuse me.... doesnt the marine just die?

Yes, but your opponent doesn't get to choose who died, you do! This can make a huge difference if you're almost out of charge distance, almost out of LoS etc.

The marine dies but the squad just took 25% casualties, so does it test for morale or not? If it does test and fails, what happens. It cannot fall back because it cannot disembark from its vehicle, so it must be trapped and destroyed...or is it?

Almight, we were talking about if they win a rhino, but doesnt the plasma gunner die anyway?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hmmmmm, interesting.......

The gunner dies, but his death triggers an unfortunate series of events...

Edit: He is like the Archduke Ferdinand of the rules...

Bloodhorror wrote:I doubt this is anything rules wise, but at the last tournemant i was at, i faced what musta been a Ninja of somesort!

He was darting his hand froward and picking my dead off the table before i even registered how many had died....
All ways leaving them in nice Template shaped Paterens

in the end i had asked him "politely" to stop grabbing my models and that i was Perfectly capable to do it myself.

2nd time he tried it i slapped his hand away "Jokingly"

The guy was like 13 but in my Defence...
he touched my models ¬¬

(I'm 16 so don't think i'm 34 and i was slapping the kids hand away for the Lulz)

yeah; we "hard hand shaking" American folk would take you out back if you removed our minis from the table. lol

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Tekeino wrote:Gah, Daedalus you managed to confuse me.... doesnt the marine just die?

Yes, but your opponent doesn't get to choose who died, you do! This can make a huge difference if you're almost out of charge distance, almost out of LoS etc.

I think he was referring to my hypothetical "plasma in rhino" situation in my first post. There's no answer. You either break rules and ignore the morale save, or you break rules by not having a legitimate way of handling the fallback movement.

Apologies for the off-topic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The most important thing is to remember to have fun. The play-to-win mentality is poisonous. Say someone is doing something technically wrong. Before calling an infraction and demanding the judge over, stop and ask yourself, "Will this _really_ impact the game? Really?" I've got a friend who will dispute every last thing in a game, halting it until he's pulled out the rulebook and found on the exact page where it reads correctly. The problem is that he does it whether it will actually impact the game or not. Don't be that guy.

I'm not sure I totally agree with that.

At the very least, if you are going to let something go that you know is against the rules (for whatever reason, such as no in-game impact), then after the game the issue should be discussed. Better a rules infraction be pointed out so that it is not done continually, then go unmentioned and leave it until its a matter of importance. Perhaps the player who was doing it wrong was counting on the rules working in a certain way, and now being told he is doing it wrong causes him issues in another game.

I can see that point of view. Perhaps a response of "I'm not sure how that works, but lets just do it for now because I don't think it will affect the game and then look it up later" would work? Maybe I'm just too casual of a gamer.

Dracos wrote:I'm not sure I totally agree with that.

At the very least, if you are going to let something go that you know is against the rules (for whatever reason, such as no in-game impact), then after the game the issue should be discussed. Better a rules infraction be pointed out so that it is not done continually, then go unmentioned and leave it until its a matter of importance. Perhaps the player who was doing it wrong was counting on the rules working in a certain way, and now being told he is doing it wrong causes him issues in another game.

This is an excellent point. If the problem doesn't impact the game ignore it atm. But don't ignore it forever, discuss it afterwards because it may affect the game significantly in the next round.

5th edition is: "cover for all, LOS blocking for none."

Honestly, if 1% of the model is obscured, he gets cover. If you can see 1% of the model you can target him. Who wants to spend all day long dicking around with laserpointers and arguing over LOS?

Trust me, people can and do as cover arguments seem to be the biggest fight. I for the most part roll over on it because it honestly doesn't impact my army that much. I use a KFF and grot screens and most my shooting they are getting 3+ save anyways.

My best advice is to know any possible disputes over units/wargear *YOU* plant to take and be ready to present arguments or FAQs in a intelligent matter. If you want to AmbushBikerboss, then be sure to clarify with the TO pre-game or have the FAQ the Tourney is using that supports your action. If you want to Deffroll tanks and not have deffrollas removed with Weapon destroyed, then find the appropriate tourney-sanctioned FAQ that supports your position or clarify with a judge before the tourney begins.

You should know all the possible arguments in regards to your codex and be prepared to have the rule settled before the game starts. If you have a rule that interacts with a specific codex that you are playing (like orks Mob rule for Mind war when playing eldar) Then hash out a agreement pre-game, not when your opponent is trying to mindwar your LD7 painboy off the table and you claim LD10.

That is the best thing you can do. Agreements on rules pre-game are such much more friendlier than a game mid-stream with both players expecting 'something' to work a specific way only for one of the two sides to feel screwed because they lost the 4+ roll.

Just remember that rules are matter of opinion and every TO has a different answer to the rules.

Most of all, be a good opponent. I try my damnest to not laugh when a guy has just a horrible string of luck regarding rolls, mishaps, dangerous terrain, what have you. Terminators dying to bolter fire always gives me the giggles, watching death company chase after rhinos, etc. Stifle the laugh and try to remain composure. It will really speak of character to be a graceful winner.

mrblacksunshine_1978 wrote:Just remember that rules are matter of opinion and every TO has a different answer to the rules.

and with that you should have plans that allow for different rulings. Don't base your entire strategy on a rule that needs interpretation for it to be effective. I think you should make sure your list/strategy is viable no matter which way it is ruled BUT be prepared to exploit it if is ruled in your favor before the game begins.

nkelsch wrote:5th edition is: "cover for all, LOS blocking for none."

Bit of an oversimplification there.

It's quite possible to get LOS blocking in 5th ed. Though not with ANY GW terrain (unless you only use the solid panels for lower levels of buildings) and the Temple of fail is just that.

My club has a mix of both area, obscuring and LOS blocking terrain (up to and including full LOS blocking of a land raider).

What rules disputes should you expect? ALL of them. Just a quick check of the YMDC forum should tell you that when you have two people playing a game, there are AT LEAST THREE different interpretations of any rule.

chromedog wrote:

nkelsch wrote:5th edition is: "cover for all, LOS blocking for none."

Bit of an oversimplification there.

It's quite possible to get LOS blocking in 5th ed. Though not with ANY GW terrain (unless you only use the solid panels for lower levels of buildings) and the Temple of fail is just that.

My club has a mix of both area, obscuring and LOS blocking terrain (up to and including full LOS blocking of a land raider).

What rules disputes should you expect? ALL of them. Just a quick check of the YMDC forum should tell you that when you have two people playing a game, there are AT LEAST THREE different interpretations of any rule.

It's good to follow the little diddy in the rulebook which suggests you go over these things BEFORE THE GAME, ie. what's dangerous and impassible terrain, along with what's a ruin or not, what should only allow a 4+ cover save not block LOS, where the rear side of a bunker or fortress of redemption would certainly block LOS. I've always thought that when in doubt, tie goes to cover save. Use +5 cover if you are really really torn.

If you are a player then make sure to ask the TO about your codex, in particular any of the rules for your codex that raise questions here on dakka would be a good start. Most TOs will have their own rules about certain things....for orks deff rollas comes to mind, for DE some of their new moving over and causing wounds rules, for necrons its good to look at WBB again to explain how that works; if a topic in this forum has over 20 replies then there was probably a questionable rule involved.

A lot of people do the assault moves incorrectly, watch how they do their first assault to see if they seem to know the rules.

As mentioned, cover and LOS are misplayed by many many people.



If you are the TO, then take the time to reread every codex...slowly and pretend that you have never seen that codex before. Again, looking through the last few pages here on dakka to see what has generated a lot of discussion.

Sliggoth