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.

Had a quick question on the role of a judge. The other day I was playing a Grey Knight player in a tournament. Everything is going fine( Other than getting my butt handed to me). I decide to use Fear the Darkness on a unit of Paladins hugging the back board edge. I check range, I themm him I need a 9 because of the Agies(sp) rule. He agrees, and I am about to roll. At this point the judge who was watching the game, says "Don't forget about the -4 because of the Dread next to the unit". From my point of view the Dread was completely blocked by a large piece of terrain so I had completely forgotten it was there. Apparently my opponent had too.

Question. Should the Judge had reminded the player about his own special rules and wargear? Keep in mind that in order to be in the tournament you had to finish 1st or 2nd in local tournaments around the state, so you were in theory playing the best the state had to offer. This was by no means a Noob player, and he finished somewhere in the top 4, but not first.

One more thing. The judge(s) at the event were all fair, and friendly. This is not a thread to rag on them. I had no problem with them at all in the 2 day event. I am simply using this as an example of what a judge should or should not do while watching a game. The outcome of that one test would not have changed the game in my favor, but it would have given me some bragging rights.

Interesting situation. It's not like a referee goes up to a hockey player about to take a penalty shot and says "aim for the five hole, that's his weakness". If you and the other player made an honest mistake about not seeing the dread I don't see why the Judge had to offer his comments. He is supposed to be impartial. He obviously just helped out the grey knight player.

It's not a bad part on the judge or on anyone for that matter. I just don't think he should have said anything as he has no place in doing so.

Generally speaking, I am a proponent of fairness, first and foremost. If you cannot assign a judge to actively referee every game, no judge should actively referee any game, or worse, only the parts they happen to see. So while you both should have known and played the rule right, unless every table was consistently interfered with fairly through the entirety of each game, it's not how I would have it judged.

That said, there's a fuzzy line between policy and practice ... It also isn't as if he screwed up the rule, so his interference ensured a more accurate game. Problem comes with same deference not applied throughout game, and to all games.

If the judge was watching the game, it's his job to make sure the players are abiding by the rules. It seems like neither of you were trying to pull shenanigans, so a friendly judge reminder of a rule should be fine. The improved aegis does not say "may". You have to take your psychic test at -4. If he didn't say anything and you passed your test on anything above 6, then you would be cheating and he would absolutely have to intervene whether it was intentional or not.

However, If it was a tactics suggestion or advice on how to play during the game, that would be out of line.

I disagree on the cheating, and I should know his codex arguements. It is not my place to remind him of his wargear and special rules. I am not required to know ever codex that GW has printed. I still have not even seen the Necron Codex.

I am not cheating if my opponent tells me his guard unit is toughness 2 instead of 3, and I make my roll according to the information he gave me. Now in this case I knew all test directed at the GK units are at -1. Having only scanned the codex a few times, I did forget about the -4, at the time of the roll. The fact that I could not even see his dread at the time only made it worse.

MVBrandt I do agree with your point, that unless a judge is watching every table for mistakes, then the judge should only speak up when someone calls them over, or is forgetting something in their own codex or rulebook that is in their advantage. Something the other player might not know about. (Forgetting that your unit has Rage)

jbunny wrote:I disagree on the cheating, and I should know his codex arguements. It is not my place to remind him of his wargear and special rules. I am not required to know ever codex that GW has printed. I still have not even seen the Necron Codex.

I am not cheating if my opponent tells me his guard unit is toughness 2 instead of 3, and I make my roll according to the information he gave me. Now in this case I knew all test directed at the GK units are at -1. Having only scanned the codex a few times, I did forget about the -4, at the time of the roll. The fact that I could not even see his dread at the time only made it worse.

MVBrandt I do agree with your point, that unless a judge is watching every table for mistakes, then the judge should only speak up when someone calls them over, or is forgetting something in their own codex or rulebook that is in their advantage. Something the other player might not know about. (Forgetting that your unit has Rage)

But in any case, you are not abiding by the game rules, so voluntarily or not the judge has the obligation to ensure that the rules are followed by both players, be it in their decrement or not,.

jbunny wrote:I disagree on the cheating, and I should know his codex arguements. It is not my place to remind him of his wargear and special rules. I am not required to know ever codex that GW has printed. I still have not even seen the Necron Codex.

I am not cheating if my opponent tells me his guard unit is toughness 2 instead of 3, and I make my roll according to the information he gave me. Now in this case I knew all test directed at the GK units are at -1. Having only scanned the codex a few times, I did forget about the -4, at the time of the roll. The fact that I could not even see his dread at the time only made it worse.

MVBrandt I do agree with your point, that unless a judge is watching every table for mistakes, then the judge should only speak up when someone calls them over, or is forgetting something in their own codex or rulebook that is in their advantage. Something the other player might not know about. (Forgetting that your unit has Rage)

I suppose Unintentionally not playing by the rules sounds more friendly? If you are unintentionally not playing by the rules and a judge is watching then it's fully within his rights as a judge to correct you. They are there to ensure players play by the rules. As I said, I wasn't suggesting you did it maliciously, but it's the judges job to correct misplays like this.

Isn't what you're describing exactly the same situation? If I forget rage and a judge says "oh, they have rage". Then that is the exact same thing as reminding them about improved Aegis. It is not an option. If the squad has models within 12" of a dread, then you test at -4.

Possibly, but most time when people use the term cheat, intent is implied.

Right. You weren't intentionally breaking the rules, but the judge speaking up prevented the rules from being broken.

IMO he was within appropriate boundaries. If it's an optional rule he shouldn't say jack, as that falls under tactics. If it's mandatory/he sees a rule being misplayed, IMO he's under the obligation to speak up to make sure it's played correctly, both in the present situation and in future games if one or both of the players are unaware of the rules.

I'm of the opinion that the game should be played by the rules. Mistakes happen but we should strive to play mistake free, I'd not have a problem with anyone observing pointing out a mistake.

Mannahnin wrote:Right. You weren't intentionally breaking the rules, but the judge speaking up prevented the rules from being broken.

IMO he was within appropriate boundaries. If it's an optional rule he shouldn't say jack, as that falls under tactics. If it's mandatory/he sees a rule being misplayed, IMO he's under the obligation to speak up to make sure it's played correctly, both in the present situation and in future games if one or both of the players are unaware of the rules.

I concur.

Dok wrote:If the judge was watching the game, it's his job to make sure the players are abiding by the rules. It seems like neither of you were trying to pull shenanigans, so a friendly judge reminder of a rule should be fine. The improved aegis does not say "may". You have to take your psychic test at -4. If he didn't say anything and you passed your test on anything above 6, then you would be cheating and he would absolutely have to intervene whether it was intentional or not.

However, If it was a tactics suggestion or advice on how to play during the game, that would be out of line.

Mannahnin wrote:Right. You weren't intentionally breaking the rules, but the judge speaking up prevented the rules from being broken.

IMO he was within appropriate boundaries. If it's an optional rule he shouldn't say jack, as that falls under tactics. If it's mandatory/he sees a rule being misplayed, IMO he's under the obligation to speak up to make sure it's played correctly, both in the present situation and in future games if one or both of the players are unaware of the rules.

Agree with both of the above.

Mannahnin wrote:Right. You weren't intentionally breaking the rules, but the judge speaking up prevented the rules from being broken.

IMO he was within appropriate boundaries. If it's an optional rule he shouldn't say jack, as that falls under tactics. If it's mandatory/he sees a rule being misplayed, IMO he's under the obligation to speak up to make sure it's played correctly, both in the present situation and in future games if one or both of the players are unaware of the rules.

I have not problem with this line of thought. Just wanted to see what others in the community thought a judge should or should not do in this situation.

skycapt44 wrote:Interesting situation. It's not like a referee goes up to a hockey player about to take a penalty shot and says "aim for the five hole, that's his weakness". If you and the other player made an honest mistake about not seeing the dread I don't see why the Judge had to offer his comments. He is supposed to be impartial. He obviously just helped out the grey knight player.

It's not a bad part on the judge or on anyone for that matter. I just don't think he should have said anything as he has no place in doing so.

By NOT intervening when he sees the problem, isn't that just as much partiality on the part of the Grey Knight's opponent?

We game in a world where bystanders tape 40K games, upload them to the internet, and the gaming community dissects them and rips them apart. No leeway is given. Every mistake, genuine or not, is called cheating (BTW, by definition, it's only cheating if that is your intent). Judges who make rule calls that are unpopular are ripped "new ones."

This judge makes a pro-active move to keep things fair and by-the-book, and we're actually considering whether or not it was the right thing to do? There's no way I can see any alternative answer as being logical.

Kudos to the judge.

Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:

skycapt44 wrote:

This judge makes a pro-active move to keep things fair and by-the-book, and we're actually considering whether or not it was the right thing to do? There's no way I can see any alternative answer as being logical.

Kudos to the judge.

QFT!