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.

 kestral wrote:
This thread has caused me to abandon any interest I had in returning to the tournament scene. You're talking about DQing someone after the fact for rules hotly debated in for pages and pages and requiring recourse to FAQs and multiple documents to resolve. Examples like the levels hit by a blast template have literally reversed from edition to edition IRC. It is not possible to play the game perfectly anymore without more study than a hobby should reasonably require or your own legal team.

You're right in that it's impossible to play a [mistake free] game. I get messed up from owning/playing 5 to 8 different armies (in various editions) and occasional edition 'hangovers' (edition to edition changes). But, rules problems are not like in 4e where "Skimmers vs AP1" and other nightmare circles in logic exist. 5e, 6e and 7e continue to get tighter and better. Newer *codexes* screw things up but the RB is solid enough, IMHO.

DQs, in my experience ... 5 GTs, 30+ RTT, 3 years. I know of 2:

a. One was after many complaints of general douchery on the offending player's part and a *codex* cheat/rules flub. He was banned from the RTTs. The only one in 5 years plus at that FLGS.
b. The other was because of a list brought ... and the guy wasn't banned from the event, but simply couldn't earn points and got to play in the GT anyway. Which woulda been fine with me if I'd been that guy. I wanna play 40k.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Yak said it best. Play in a tournament, and listen less to what is said online. You should always consider that some of what is being espoused on the net comes from people with little to no actual tournament experience. Members who don't have any real stake in tournaments for 40k but feel that because they can form an opinion they must state it forcibly and influence those who read what they write without the knowledge of their actual stake in things. This thread is no exception.

In short, play the game! Play in a tournament, if you like it great, play again and shape the community through your actions and attendance. If you didn't enjoy it that's fine too, there is more than one way to enjoy 40k.

Play, kestrel. It'll be fine.

I will add this: I am 45 years old. If *I* cannot help another adult resolve a rules flub with me, then I need to turn in my Big Boy pants, diaper up, and have my mom or my wife come along to solve disputes. Or dig up my Star Wars 'action figures' and play with my son instead.

Emathews2715 wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
The problem was the way the TO applied rules arbitrarily to different players. This should not occur at tournaments.

I ask. What would you have done? Honestly? from the way it sounds the model in question was pretty damn close to looking GW. So if you were running the event, and someone comes up to you with this problem, especially since the guy who's in first more than likely didn't know considering it was a thrown together event., what do you do sir. Honest answer. Do you throw him out? He paid just as much as every one else? and as far as any one knows this is the only rule he broke. I want to know what you do. Because you never said what you would do.

Well, thanks for asking! I hadn't offered my own opinion before, because I was more interested in seeing what other people thought. I'm not coming here to give advice, I'm coming to Dakka to receive it.
I think a sincere apology from the TO to the slighted player would be in order. He should own his mistake to the player and commit to be fair in the future. He should apologise that his unfairness made that player's experience less-than-awesome. He might even offer to refund the player's entry fee (a small gesture, but the thought counts).
As to penalising the player with an illegal model, I think he should receive a reminder from the TO to read all the rules surrounding a tournament. If there was a painting prize (the TO had claimed there would be, but didn't follow through), he should be disqualified from only that. There's a 99.9% chance that the model didn't affect gameplay, and it was correctly sized in every way. As I've said repeatedly, it was a pretty fun model, and definitely passed everyone's rule of cool.

So, I think those proposals aren't extreme at all. It just takes some humility and honesty from the TO to admit he was biased, and commit to not doing it again.

There's a topic here, and it's NOT about bickering over whether someone thinks someone else is a tournament player FOR REELZ.

I never really chime in on these things.... but as a #paintatallcosts player I feel I must:

There is only one reason to be DQ'd from winning a paint score and that is you didn't paint the army.

No one should ever be DQ'd from winning 'Best Painted Army/Hobbyest" because of an illegal model in game play. Half of the legit tournaments I've been to have an open point on the painting score sheet called 'something specia'l. I usually bring an extra model that's not being used in the army to fill that point, something silly and thematic but doesn't function in games per say. In fact almost every big shot painter I know does that to some extent.

In regards to the point in the OP about 75% GW models. If a TO says so, so it is. It's really the players job to read the rules and understand the parameters they are playing in. This sounds like a small town, no name tournament. Most of the biggies on the west coast will let 'rule of cool' override anything else. If its on the right size base and there is no modeling for advantage, and most importantly it looks good, why should any one care?

Otherwise how could most ork armies function? GW doesn't make plasticard. Painting scores usually have a conversion point section with the 'extreme conversions' being having multiple scratchbuilt models. So unless I'm grinding up GW spru and filling the insides of my custom tanks with GW plastic dust.... then I have an illegal army. SO I WOULDN'T support that store, or have a very long talk with the TO as to why the rule is in play. Should there be exceptions? A mutual understanding is key.

I mean here take a look at my Warboss. Its a warmachine model with some plasticard on it. It's been to the biggest tournament in the West (LVO) and several smaller regional ones. Everyone loves him, no would in there right mind would DQ me for using him. And just in case I have a painted GW warboss in my army box.


Now back to the wet pallet, I got the Broadside Bash next week and my gargantuain squiggoth needs some highlights.

 Desubot wrote:
At a Tournament level?

If its possible aka literally just happens. and things can be placed back. then redo the move and give em a warning

Anything else should be a full points round loss.

Intentional cheating should be a straight boot to the face and expulsion from the tourny and such.

In some cases it's impossible to differentiate intentional cheating from unintentional cheating. For example, I've had Necron players "misremember" their weapon stats and buff their units considerably (Fast anni barges, anni barges with TL-belly guns...all the same idiot). Did he really "misremember" or was he deliberately cheating? The guy seemed like a fething tool, so I'm betting on option 2.

If it's a rules "misremembering" issue, I'd say 0 points awarded for that game for certain and possibly DQ from the tournament. If it's something like deliberately bumping models and replacing them to gain movement, using loaded dice, something like that...that's grounds for DQ from the tournament altogether and a lifetime ban.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
At a Tournament level?

If its possible aka literally just happens. and things can be placed back. then redo the move and give em a warning

Anything else should be a full points round loss.

Intentional cheating should be a straight boot to the face and expulsion from the tourny and such.

In some cases it's impossible to differentiate intentional cheating from unintentional cheating. For example, I've had Necron players "misremember" their weapon stats and buff their units considerably (Fast anni barges, anni barges with TL-belly guns...all the same idiot). Did he really "misremember" or was he deliberately cheating? The guy seemed like a fething tool, so I'm betting on option 2.

If it's a rules "misremembering" issue, I'd say 0 points awarded for that game for certain and possibly DQ from the tournament. If it's something like deliberately bumping models and replacing them to gain movement, using loaded dice, something like that...that's grounds for DQ from the tournament altogether and a lifetime ban.

Eh talking about things like off measuring tapes, loaded dice, list fudging that no one noticed, moving things without people watching. stuff like that.

 Desubot wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
At a Tournament level?

If its possible aka literally just happens. and things can be placed back. then redo the move and give em a warning

Anything else should be a full points round loss.

Intentional cheating should be a straight boot to the face and expulsion from the tourny and such.

In some cases it's impossible to differentiate intentional cheating from unintentional cheating. For example, I've had Necron players "misremember" their weapon stats and buff their units considerably (Fast anni barges, anni barges with TL-belly guns...all the same idiot). Did he really "misremember" or was he deliberately cheating? The guy seemed like a fething tool, so I'm betting on option 2.

If it's a rules "misremembering" issue, I'd say 0 points awarded for that game for certain and possibly DQ from the tournament. If it's something like deliberately bumping models and replacing them to gain movement, using loaded dice, something like that...that's grounds for DQ from the tournament altogether and a lifetime ban.

Eh talking about things like off measuring tapes, loaded dice, list fudging that no one noticed, moving things without people watching. stuff like that.

In my experience proving any of those things can be difficult and problematic. We had a case similar to these in our local area, despite some people "clearly seeing" models being moved when the opponent was away from the table it's still a matter of "he said, she said" clear rules breaking is difficult to peg down. Just look through some of the threads from most of the major GTs in the last 3 years.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
If it's a rules "misremembering" issue, I'd say 0 points awarded for that game for certain and possibly DQ from the tournament.

How do you prove the difference between genuine mistakes and "misremembering"? Are you lucky enough to play with a psychic TO that can read each player's mind and discover their intent to cheat, or is this something where the TO is going to make an arbitrary and subjective decision that they don't like a player and kick them out (while the TO's friends of course get the benefit of the doubt)?

If the person keeps making the same mistskes it's telling.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If the person keeps making the same mistskes it's telling.

Or it's that they may actually believe they are correct. I have done this. Played with a model whom I thought had a rules for a while until it was pointed out to me that he's sword wasn't actually master crafted. I didn't think I was cheating but I kept making the same mistake.

However if it's pointed out to them and they still keep doing it, it's another thing.

 Peregrine wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
If it's a rules "misremembering" issue, I'd say 0 points awarded for that game for certain and possibly DQ from the tournament.

How do you prove the difference between genuine mistakes and "misremembering"? Are you lucky enough to play with a psychic TO that can read each player's mind and discover their intent to cheat, or is this something where the TO is going to make an arbitrary and subjective decision that they don't like a player and kick them out (while the TO's friends of course get the benefit of the doubt)?

Our FLGS TO is, in fact, psychic.

If you read the rest of my post, you'll see that my point is that it's difficult to differentiate between the two (accidentally and intentionally "misremembering" the rules) - this is why I didn't differentiate between the two in suggesting a penalty. On the other hand, if you have a guy using loaded dice or cheating to gain extra movement, and there are sufficient witnesses, you've got yourself a cheater. and the penalty should be stricter.

Nobody wants to be accused of cheating, but we can use "big boy rules" to try to gain some insight, While it's impossible to prove one way or another, I'm more inclined to believe an experienced player who claims to have "misremembered" the rules for Assaults, that have changed consistently over every single edition since Rogue Trader, than a player who claims to "misremember" to his advantage his own codex's rules.

 Desubot wrote:
At a Tournament level?

If its possible aka literally just happens. and things can be placed back. then redo the move and give em a warning

Anything else should be a full points round loss.

Intentional cheating should be a straight boot to the face and expulsion from the tourny and such.

Not a good solution. While full points loss sounds good for the loser as you punish him, it can lead to really unfair consequences, as in, for example, this opponent suddenly winning the tournament because his opponent was not lucky enough to get a cheater as his opponent and only managed to get a small victory.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
If you read the rest of my post, you'll see that my point is that it's difficult to differentiate between the two (accidentally and intentionally "misremembering" the rules) - this is why I didn't differentiate between the two in suggesting a penalty.

And that's the problem. You think that imposing an automatic game loss or DQ for an honest mistake is an appropriate price to pay for making sure that cheaters are punished. That's an absolutely terrible way to run an event, especially in a game like 40k where the rules are such a bloated mess that keeping track of everything 100% perfectly is difficult at best.

On the other hand, if you have a guy using loaded dice or cheating to gain extra movement, and there are sufficient witnesses, you've got yourself a cheater. and the penalty should be stricter.

Sure, but that's not what this thread is about. Nobody "accidentally" uses loaded dice.

Nobody wants to be accused of cheating, but we can use "big boy rules" to try to gain some insight, While it's impossible to prove one way or another, I'm more inclined to believe an experienced player who claims to have "misremembered" the rules for Assaults, that have changed consistently over every single edition since Rogue Trader, than a player who claims to "misremember" to his advantage his own codex's rules.

I see. So in your world nobody gets up early to drive to a tournament and then, at the end of a long day of playing, makes a mistake about the rules for one of their units? Why is "the rules have changed so many times" an acceptable excuse for mistakes involving the core rules but not for codex rules that may have changed just as many times since a person started playing?

 Peregrine wrote:
Sure, but that's not what this thread is about. Nobody "accidentally" uses loaded dice.

There was the tourney where the one player realized one of his dice was loaded, DQ'd himself, stating to the effect, I just bought a bundle bag. I didn't realize [one die] was loaded. An east coast one I think. A big name guy, too. Perhaps last year's NOVA?

Someone else figured out he was using loaded dice. He claimed he didn't know about it after they went to the TO.

 DarkLink wrote:
Someone else figured out he was using loaded dice. He claimed he didn't know about it after they went to the TO.

Still accidental unless there is some sort of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Which perfectly illustrates the problem with these situations.

 DarkLink wrote:
Someone else figured out he was using loaded dice. He claimed he didn't know about it after they went to the TO.

Was it several dice? And, though quite possibly damage control , it was posted by most accounts, that he humbled well, prostrating himself adequately?

Darklink, was it last year's NOVA?

FoB .