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.

Hey folks!

A friend of mine from here on Dakka (Che-Vito) and myself have decided to foray into the realm of High-Stakes ($$) 40k. Since we don't have any reference points for other events awarding large cash prizes for 40k games, we've agreed on the terms of the game and mutually agreed to solicit input for whom to use as our third parties.

What we have agreed upon:

-Cost of Entry to the game
-Point Value (2,000)
-Location (The Nova Open)

We've also mutually agreed to solicit input from Dakka on whom we should get to referee our game, and whom we should use as escrow.

Mike Brandt, who runs the Nova Open has agreed to provide a table for our use (either during the Whiskey Challenge on Thursday night, or after the GT games on Saturday night; I have another game to juggle in here against our friendly local Space Wolf - Grimwulfe). Mike and I discussed both escrow and refereeing, and while he's willing to provide his head judge (John Moore) as a referee, Che-Vito and I wanted to see what if there were going to be any Dakkanauts at the Nova Open (and the Thursday night Whiskey Challenge) that we could both agree on as extremely competent with the rules.

Mike's additional requirements are that we each submit our army lists to him several months ahead of time (to be revealed to each other at the event), that we both have exceptionally well-painted armies, and that we have a "pre-game conference" with both participants, himself, and our referee to discuss terrain and any nuances that might impact our game.

Aside from us soliciting input on who might best serve as a referee (and be willing to) we also need ideas for escrow. I approached Mike about serving as an escrow for us, but he'd prefer we find another source. We're not concerned about gambling laws (Viginia Gambling Law), for several reasons, foremost of which being that contests of skill between two men for which a purse is awarded to the winner is legal.

So with that said, the terms agreed upon, and this thread having been previously discussed between both parties and endorsed, I open the floor to comments, suggestions, and advice, with a few notes:

-We previously discussed a series of games, but there simply isn't enough time to do so at the Nova Open, unless we were to do a series of small point combat patrols, which is not particularly appealing.
-For moderators concerned about this thread for other reasons, Che-Vito and I have both finalized terms and agreed to solicit input on these two items from this thread.

Everything Dash wrote sounds good, game on!

After a long chat with Mike Brandt (Nova Open organizer) about Virginia Gambling Laws, he's agreed to hold our funds.....which just leaves us in need of finding a referee.

Question: Do you want an active referee, who will point out rules mistakes as they are occurring, or do you want a passive referee, who will adjudicate disputes when requested, but who will otherwise be silent?

Redbeard wrote:Question: Do you want an active referee, who will point out rules mistakes as they are occurring, or do you want a passive referee, who will adjudicate disputes when requested, but who will otherwise be silent?

Important point that.

Redbeard wrote:Question: Do you want an active referee, who will point out rules mistakes as they are occurring, or do you want a passive referee, who will adjudicate disputes when requested, but who will otherwise be silent?

Active; as long as he doesn't have a high-pitched, or nasally voice

Some other things you want to consider:
1. Active or passive judge.
2. Use any Pre-determined non-GW FAQ (INAT, NOVA Open FAQ)?
3. Time limit?
4. How formal/strict of a rules interpretation do you want? (i.e. declare everything and be very methodical, or allow understood leeway)

If John is unavailable I might be able to do it.

Have you decided what rules you intend to use? Wil the INAT be in play, for instance? Straight BRB+GW FAQs? How would you expect something that's not clearly defined in the rules to be handled?

Someone who is putting their own reputation on the line to adjudicate such a high profile (and high stakes) game probably needs as much guidance about what the involved parties want from them as possible.

darwinn69 wrote:Some other things you want to consider:
1. Active or passive judge.
2. Use any Pre-determined non-GW FAQ (INAT, NOVA Open FAQ)?
3. Time limit?
4. How formal/strict of a rules interpretation do you want? (i.e. declare everything and be very methodical, or allow understood leeway)

If John is unavailable I might be able to do it.

Redbeard wrote:Have you decided what rules you intend to use? Wil the INAT be in play, for instance? Straight BRB+GW FAQs? How would you expect something that's not clearly defined in the rules to be handled?

Someone who is putting their own reputation on the line to adjudicate such a high profile (and high stakes) game probably needs as much guidance about what the involved parties want from them as possible.

We'll discuss those things. I'd absolutely prefer to avoid anything that stinks of INAT, but I know that Dash mentioned having a pre-game meeting with whomever the judge may be, to hash some of the details out.

Hrm...good points that we hadn't thought of.

Since it will be taking place at the Nova Open, I expect us to be using Nova Open rules; I don't believe they use the INAT.

Since its not a tournament game, I presume we're going to be playing to completion as opposed to time - if last year's Whiskey Challenge is any indication, our game is going to be interrupted a few times for interviews and discussions.

An active judge sounds fine. I'm exceptionally familiar with the rules (I don't deny that I still learn things from time to time though) - at a tournament last month, I learned that when you're assaulting, each assaulting model has to move into assault in coherence with a model that has already moved into assault, and I thought that it was that each assaulting model had to move into assault in coherence with the last model that just moved into assault.

Not sure what you mean by rules interpretations - I rarely run into rules issues, and when I do, its always been a matter of flipping open the rulebook to sort it out or referencing the GW Rules FAQ.

You'll probably want to do that pre-event, at the very least.

Remember, from the judge's perspective, the worst thing possible is that they volunteer to do this, and you guys end up disagreeing about something. Then the judge has to make a call, and because you disagreed to begin with, one of you won't be happy with the ruling. That then goes out on the internet and the judge is dragged through the mud having to defend themselves to any who decide to jump on.

In the ideal world, the judge is superfluous, you guys both play like gentlemen, and he never says a word and everyone walks away happy. But with a lot of cash on the line, tensions can run high. No ref ever wants to have a game decided by their call (or lack of a call).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:
Not sure what you mean by rules interpretations - I rarely run into rules issues, and when I do, its always been a matter of flipping open the rulebook to sort it out or referencing the GW Rules FAQ.

Well, things that are not well written aren't outside the realm of GW rules. One example might be can a psyker cast the same power multiple times if it is not a shooting power. The rules for that can easily be read either way.

Ah.

Truth be told, in all past encounters, if an issue like that arises, I've always asked my opponent what they normally do in tournament games, then tell them to go ahead and do that. I much prefer to give the benefit of the doubt to my opponent then to grind into the mud about it.

Unless it *is* something clearly defined in the rules, that is intentionally getting greyed.

How much money is being put down?

thehod wrote:How much money is being put down?

A lot. We've chosen not to disclose the exact amount.

Unsure if hi-jacking thread

Whilst I haven't got much to add to the overall context (I live in the UK, not the US) I would *love* for there to be a 3rd party to battle report this for the masses. The only reason I say 3rd party is that s/he can put their own personal opinion on things, that can then subsequently be commented on by the players (why I did this, why this was a bad move etc) on the forums.

Best of luck to both participants, and I look forward to hearing the results!

L. Wrex


EDIT: Also: 'exceptionally well-painted armies' - best get the missus working overtime then Dash

I'd love to see the whole game be filmed... but I guess I might be one of the few people to find that fascinating!

I'm really looking forward to hearing more, anyway.

Another thing to consider -- if you come up with something where there is no definite right answer, however much you consult the rules and FAQs, do you want the referee to make a definitive judgement call one way or another, or do you want the referee to ask the pair of you to roll-off?

If last year's Nova Open was any indication, this will probably be (at a minimum) streamed live across the internet on their website, with audio and commentators.

Never been one for doing things by halves when it comes to publicity, have you Dash?

Is it because there is no thrill in winning anymore for you? Now, before you answer, please note that I am not trying to pick a fight with you Dash, I am genuinely curious. I noticed in your Space Wolf thread that it not only do you want to take a shot a phase (which I know is in the spirit of the Whiskey Challenge), but that you wanted to bet the HQ model of the winner's choice from the loser's army.

Does risk have to be involved for you to enjoy the game? (Again, this is an actual question, not a rhetorical jab.)

Dashofpepper wrote:

thehod wrote:How much money is being put down?

A lot. We've chosen not to disclose the exact amount.

What is "a lot". Thats a very subjective term ....

"A lot" for me is probably significantly more than "a lot" for most of this forums users ....

A lot = an amount undisclosed to us, leave him be.

kill dem stunties wrote:

"A lot" for me is probably significantly more than "a lot" for most of this forums users ....

That's fine. A "lot" for us is probably more than "a lot" for most of the forum users here. For what its worth, I'll tell you that its more than the money I've put into purchasing all of my models combined. But I've been requested to not disclose the sum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puma713 wrote:Is it because there is no thrill in winning anymore for you? Now, before you answer, please note that I am not trying to pick a fight with you Dash, I am genuinely curious. I noticed in your Space Wolf thread that it not only do you want to take a shot a phase (which I know is in the spirit of the Whiskey Challenge), but that you wanted to bet the HQ model of the winner's choice from the loser's army.

Does risk have to be involved for you to enjoy the game? (Again, this is an actual question, not a rhetorical jab.)

Honestly, in part yes. I rarely visit Vassal anymore even though I live in the middle of a barren FLGS area. The last time I went to Vegas, I played a losing progression on Roulette Black and Red, and was $7,000 up by Sunday morning. I went to the Hard Rock Casino before we left and lost it all in three spins. But the adrenaline was pumping!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ketara wrote:Never been one for doing things by halves when it comes to publicity, have you Dash?

Publicity is/was a side-effect of trying to reach the top of my game by soliciting attention from the people who had something to teach me.

Now its an agenda to push our hobby in a direction - what would it be like if in five years sponsored players playing for cash prizes is the norm, not an exception?

Dashofpepper wrote:
Now its an agenda to push our hobby in a direction - what would it be like if in five years sponsored players playing for cash prizes is the norm, not an exception?

I feel that you'd get two very different reactions to this. One would be that it is a great idea and that it will get 40K and the tournament scene even more exposure. Another would be that it would do irreparable damage to the hobby itself, cultivating powergaming and bringing it to a new level because the stakes are higher.

Use a shared dice pool provided by a third party.


You can't use your own dice when money is on the line...it just breeds suspicion.

Agreed on the dice pool. EIther sealed beforehand dice boxes, provided by the third party (ideally the ref holds on) or something similar.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Agreed on the dice pool. EIther sealed beforehand dice boxes, provided by the third party (ideally the ref holds on) or something similar.

Just make mine dark-purple!

Bat Manuel wrote:Use a shared dice pool provided by a third party.


You can't use your own dice when money is on the line...it just breeds suspicion.

This. You may want to look into getting a small, separate table specifically for dice rolls so you're not worried about cocked dice and the like. You may want to have your judge doing your scatters as well.

Separate table for dice rolling doesnt help with scatters - these NEED to be rolled as close as possible. The ref could thn, if mutually agreed on, provide a parallel with a tape measure (something myself, puma et al use, and is a great idea) to help people judge the scatter more accurately.

If you're playing for, at a comfortable guess, low 4 figure then make it as solid as you can, to prevent as many disagreements as you can.

Deep purple dice? How about *glow in the dark* cthulu deep purple dice?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Separate table for dice rolling doesnt help with scatters - these NEED to be rolled as close as possible. The ref could thn, if mutually agreed on, provide a parallel with a tape measure (something myself, puma et al use, and is a great idea) to help people judge the scatter more accurately.

If you're playing for, at a comfortable guess, low 4 figure then make it as solid as you can, to prevent as many disagreements as you can.

Deep purple dice? How about *glow in the dark* cthulu deep purple dice?

Sorry, I didn't mean that scatters should be rolled on the separate table, but that the judge should do the measurements for the scatter. Scatter should obviously be rolled as close as possible to the target.

Fair enough, good old forum misunderstanding there

If you want to be even more sure of avoiding any issues around dice rolling then having a table with cushions like in Craps would work - make sure the players have to roll along the surface to bounce off a cushion and you have removed most of the issues around natural rolling / other ways to influence otherwise fair dice.

I'd certainly see if you can stump up for at least some semi precision dice - the basic GW / chessex cast and drilled dice are horribly imbalanced.