GT judges cop-out

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.

**Augustus**

From the GT rules for this season:

Be warned, however, that our Judges are under strict instructions to give players one of two answers to any question theyare asked:

1. They will show you the rule in its relevant place in the rulebook

or supplement.

2. They will instruct you to roll a D6 to sort out any rules problems

not resolved by the above.

What happens if you ask a judge about a situation that isn't in the rules? Like a drop pod that lands on friendly models? Or ordinance casualty removal out of LOS? Situations that aren't in the RAW? Or what if a player actually has the wrong understanding of the rules? Or is perhaps intentionally malicious. Simply, you are left with a die roll. Isn't the purpose of a judge to make a ruling? That's what judges do. Once asked, a Judge ought to evaluate the situation and make a decidion as to how the game is affected, based on balance, precidence, and intent, not advise players to roll.

I recognize that event judges are in a particularly slippery ground at tourneys because dynamic GW rules contain un-addressed situations, and I recognize the wisdom of GW protecting it's judges, especially if they are volunteers and in the interest of maintaining a positive environment.

However if they are not going to do any judging, weighing the outcomes, and attempting to make an impartial decision, why are they really there?

I suspect the crux of the problem is that GW hasn't published any valid FAQ updates for some time, and they are trying to insulate their volunteers from being the victims of confused players. Seemingly a sound policy.

Simply put; publish new FAQs, with every codex, give event judges power to mediate, and state in the event rules that judge rulings are indisputable, one time decisions, and not the binding position of the company. If you call a judge you must be prepared to accept the ruling.

For the record, I appreciate all volunteers who have run events. I have a great time at all GW events I have ever attended but I think there could be a better way to do it.

?

**Manfred von Drakken**

They may be volunteers, but in my experience, GW judges have been.... lacking. I had to play against an Outrider at a GT, and was constantly correcting him. And don't get me started with a local Gladiator tournament some years back...

**lord_sutekh**

I won't even go into my issues with consistency with GW judges... LOL

**thehod**

well once again Damien you have found another method of GW's Super Streamlined GT system. First you found the boards to be the same ones year after year. Then you look at the mission templates which are less complex than any other RTT I have ever been to. Lastly the judge issue. I belive Jeff is doing all he can but its to the point where He is being overruled by GW tops. I think Jeff secretly is pulling the hair out of his head.

**Manfred von Drakken**

Of course, the root of the problem is the rules themselves... If they'd sort out the rules, they wouldn't need judges as badly.

I think GW needs to realize that we Americans take this game way more seriously than the Brits do.

EDIT: Hey, cool - I've been sigged!

**stonefox**

This is why I enjoyed the DCI... Those guys were cool and were official.

**Manfred von Drakken**

I'd also suggest GW creating some sort of test for anyone who wants to be a judge (be it at a GT, RTT, whatever), but since GW can't even write their own damn rules correctly, how would they write up a test on them?

**torgoch**

I don't think either country takes the game more seriously.

The UK events crew are apparently working on an 'accredited referee' system.

**CaptKaruthors**

Sweet. With an official referee system in place. Playing 40k Professionally wouldn't be that far fetched....hehe...good.

Capt K

**torgoch**

40K is a hobby game ruleset... I think it would be asking too much of it to try to play it professionally.

**Manfred von Drakken**

Posted By torgoch on 08/02/2006 4:39 PM
40K is a hobby game ruleset... I think it would be asking too much of it to try to play it professionally.

They play video games professionally, now... Why not Warhammer?

**Frazzled**

You don't need judges for video games. Warhammer is rife with interpretation issues. Its more akin to judging a figure scating competition than a good game of pool.

**Tyfe**

Um.. ..with the new system to 1:Show the page of the rule 2:Instruct you to dice it off, the question arises why to have any judges at all. They aren't really doing anything at all to help - more than the occasional pointing out of a specific page. My guess is that the vast majority if the rules issues isn't about not finding the actual rule, but rather that the two players interpret the rule in two differing ways. So now the judges won't even help out if one of the players is way off in his grasp of the rule in question.

What's worse, this way of non-ruling from the judges leaves the field wide open for complete and utter abuse. A playes wishing to abuse this new "help" from the judges, only has to argue every single rule that has some minor ambiguity to it -or every single rule for the truly abusive- and the judges will "help" by stating that the two players will have to dice it off... So basically it is possible to get a 50/50 chance to get every single rule in the rulebook to be the way you want it to be. Let's see how far it will be pushed, once people realize that the judges will in fact do no judging whatsoever.

**Kilkrazy**

I don't think the judges will do nothing of their own initiative. People have a way of organising themselves if the management won't do it.

Can you imagine a bunch of judges being hassled for every single tiny thing that some dirtwad might complain about? Eventually they'll crack and slap the guy down, then he'll complain and the higher level judges will realise he's a jerkweed and uphold the front-line judges' decisions.

Or else it will descend into chaos.

Anyway a 50/50 dice-off isn't the way to win games.

**Arioc**

If you invite someone to an event, take his money to compete, score him on his performance, and tell him that a prize is at stake (and the prize in any "sport" -- physical or not -- is typically bragging rights, a blurb in a periodical and a trophy/medal), he is going to argue if he feels someone has slighted him and risked his place in the standings.

Thousands of years of combined competitive play experience have made this common knowledge. Even young children quickly grasp this concept of basic, human psychology.

People will play nice when it's "just for fun" but, as soon as you take something from them and turn that something into a ticket for an established prize in a weighted lottery, they're going to argue if a trained referee isn't available to settle rules disputes and infractions.

It would be nice if everyone could "play nice" all the time, but this is one bit of human nature that isn't going to change anytime soon.

It seems everyone except Games Workshop has figured this out.

**Kilkrazy**

You're right, Arioc.

There will always be a few genuine cheats but most people happily play fair. Once you've paid money to take a crack at a prize, however, you deserve a better dispute resolution system than rolling a die for a 50% chance. It blatantly favours players who are prepared to argue about rules that go against them but can be seen as ambiguous. Frankly, why bother with judges? It's just window dressing.

It's not just money either, it's an emotional investment of time and effort.

>>It seems everyone except Games Workshop has figured this out.

I'm sure they know, but they don't care. Their rules are riddled with problems that could easily be avoided by proof-reading, or fixed by timely issues of FAQ lists. GW don't care about the rules. Why should they care any better about the tournaments they run?

**Manfred von Drakken**

If they cared about the tournaments they run, they'd give Jeff Hall more people.

**Symbio Joe**

First roll for your rules set... second set up your armies...
I don't know the whole "count as" thing and the "roll a dice" rule it appaers to me like the rule settings made for kids.
While all units are as fast as their slowest member. The rules seem to be for the naivest player.

**Manfred von Drakken**

it appaers to me like the rule settings made for kids.

Um, duh? GW wants even the young 'uns playing, so they need to be able to understand the rules.

Unfortunately, GW hasn't learned that 'easy to learn' and 'clear and concise' aren't mutually exclusive.

**Vengis**

Posted By Kilkrazy 08/05/2006 2:21 PM

Anyway a 50/50 dice-off isn't the way to win games.

Unless you're playing Marines vs. Marines.

**Playa**

Posted By Phausi 08/06/2006 11:56 PM
Posted By Kilkrazy 08/05/2006 2:21 PM

Anyway a 50/50 dice-off isn't the way to win games.

Unless you're playing Marines vs. Marines.

DP Marines vs DP Marines. Playa

**skyth**

Btw, this isn't new...That has been in the Rules set at least last year, probably before that.