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'm just curious about opinions on judgement calls made by TOs in tournaments.

If you asked a TO to make a ruling on a specific question before a match starts, should that decision on the rule be enforced, even if it was mostly considered a bad call, after the game has begun and the groundwork was already layed out, based on that initial ruling?

Should the TO be obligated to allow the initial ruling, just for that specific match?

Accept the ruling and move on. Dont make a big deal out of it. Accept it for the rest of the tournament. As a TO I can firmly state we are only human, sometimes we make mistakes. Feel free to talk to the TO about it AFTER the tournament but dont back the poor guy into a corner during the tournament. Trust me, we've got a lot of other things going on as well, especially if we are also playing in the tournament.

 Pete Melvin wrote:
Trust me, we've got a lot of other things going on as well, especially if we are also playing in the tournament.

Well that's the first problem. You shouldn't be playing in your own tournament. Not only is that negligent to the attendees if judges are spread thin, but rulings and pairings could be sleighted. I'd be pretty suspicious of shenanigans and probably pass on the next event. I'm not say you or any other event organizer is guilty of such shadow play, but TOs are only human, right?

 Nyghoma wrote:

 Pete Melvin wrote:
Trust me, we've got a lot of other things going on as well, especially if we are also playing in the tournament.

Well that's the first problem. You shouldn't be playing in your own tournament. Not only is that negligent to the attendees if judges are spread thin, but rulings and pairings could be sleighted. I'd be pretty suspicious of shenanigans and probably pass on the next event. I'm not say you or any other event organizer is guilty of such shadow play, but TOs are only human, right?

That's harsh and probably unjustified. As an RTT TO, I've had to play in plenty of my own tournaments. When I did so, it was because I had an odd number of participants and rather than having a bye round, I would play a game against a random person in the first round and the lowest ranked person in the second and third rounds. My opponent would automatically receive a win and we'd essentially be playing for the bonus battle points obtainable by in game objectives. That way no one has to sit around and feel left out but it does make running the event a little bit more of a hassle.

And just so its clear, I was not eligible to win anything in any tournaments I had to both run and play in.

Yeah, that is understandable. I think I was referencing more of an official participant capacity. Subbing in for byes is legitimate and favorable.

Could you give an example of what you're talking about here? Because to me it sounds like you're asking "if the TO makes a ruling should the players follow that ruling?", which has a pretty obvious answer.

A TO is only going to get half the calls right in a tournament. The reason being is that someone at the table is going to believe he got it wrong.

TO's are human. They are going to get calls wrong. It sounds like your question is more about if they say it is one thing before a match/tournament starts, then both you and your opponent realize it's wrong (likely RAW wrong)

My advice here is that you raise any issue like this first with your opponent. Simply put, if they agree with you then fine. It's your guys match - play it as you will within the rules and where you both agree it's shenanigans then at least for that match in a tournament decide it between yourself before deployment.

That said, if your opponent doesn't agree, or the next opponent doesn't, etc. do not make it all about the TO. You are very unlikely to suddenly get a call in your way annoying them about something they previously gave you a call on while they are busy. Furthermore, you have 2 1/2 hrs. If you already know what the TO would/will say and it isn't in your favor don't make a stink about it. You're wasting both your time, and your opponent's time, and they likely paid for that time.

Just keep a level head on these things, and be happy to walk away with no complaints if a call doesn't go your way. Rules lawyering it up mid match on something you already have had explained to you by one TO is a sure-fire way to snag an "unpleasant" sportsmanship rating.

 Nyghoma wrote:
I'm just curious about opinions on judgement calls made by TOs in tournaments.

If you asked a TO to make a ruling on a specific question before a match starts, should that decision on the rule be enforced, even if it was mostly considered a bad call, after the game has begun and the groundwork was already layed out, based on that initial ruling?

Should the TO be obligated to allow the initial ruling, just for that specific match?

When you say things like 'the groundwork was already layed out', it sounds like a giant red flag to me that you are purposefully trying to push through something controversial/unpopular by attempting to manipulate the TO with a leading question before the event without giving them the proper context, and then attempting to use that ruling to hold the TO and your opponents' hostage to it.

The truth is, unless a tournament has a printed FAQ document that you can point to, any ruling you get from a TO before the game (not in the presence of your opponent) is worthless, because when the question actually occurs in the game and your opponent asks a judge or TO for the ruling, you don't know how exactly they will answer any given question.

That's why you should never go into a game assuming anything that isn't written down somewhere. The first thing you should always do is to discuss the issue with your opponent. If they don't agree with your assessment of how the rule should be played, then (and only then) you have to get a ruling from a tournament judge/TO, where both of you can get and understand that ruling, knowing full well that it is possible for some judges to interpret a rule differently than other judges at the same event (which is why having a tournament FAQ is such a nice thing to have, as it helps minimize these issues).

When you say things like 'the groundwork was already layed out', it sounds like a giant red flag to me that you are purposefully trying to push through something controversial/unpopular by attempting to manipulate the TO with a leading question before the event without giving them the proper context, and then attempting to use that ruling to hold the TO and your opponents' hostage to it. 

The issue wasn't controversial, nor was I trying to manipulate a TO. The rule was a simple interaction between two specific items. I was thorough on my intentions with it for the match. It was pretty clear cut. I won't elaborate much further, because I'm not in the business of calling people out over mistakes. I'm just getting an idea of opinions so I can determine how to handle a similar situation in the future without overreacting.

The problem is that this happened twice with the same judge/TO at the same event. The first one I brushed off, since he was a pleasant guy. But later in the pairings, when the second issue occurred, I was ticked off. I won't participate in any of their future events on principle, due to the inconsistency and the flip flopping of rulings. Avoiding events without FAQ is a great idea.

 Nyghoma wrote:

 Pete Melvin wrote:
Trust me, we've got a lot of other things going on as well, especially if we are also playing in the tournament.

Well that's the first problem. You shouldn't be playing in your own tournament. Not only is that negligent to the attendees if judges are spread thin, but rulings and pairings could be sleighted. I'd be pretty suspicious of shenanigans and probably pass on the next event. I'm not say you or any other event organizer is guilty of such shadow play, but TOs are only human, right?

Negligent is a damnably harsh word to use and frankly Im insulted. Judges?! My god man its a game! If theres a rules query try and figure it out with your opponent first like a gentleman, THEN ask the TO. I've organied 5 tournaments in the last 2 years and won exactly none of them. I came 2nd once. You imply that a TO would intentionally cheat to win their own tournament. What kind of scumbag would you have to be to do that?!We're playing for piddly plastic trophies and maybe a laser cut building, its not the olympics, Im not out to break someones legs so I can get the all the "glory". Begads sir, if I had the option of duelling you at dawn I would do so, you have impugned my honour.

Edit: and in any case, you'd be the only one who thought that way. Our latest tournament is more than half filled in less than 24 hours, so I must be doing something right.

 Nyghoma wrote:

When you say things like 'the groundwork was already layed out', it sounds like a giant red flag to me that you are purposefully trying to push through something controversial/unpopular by attempting to manipulate the TO with a leading question before the event without giving them the proper context, and then attempting to use that ruling to hold the TO and your opponents' hostage to it. 

The issue wasn't controversial, nor was I trying to manipulate a TO. The rule was a simple interaction between two specific items. I was thorough on my intentions with it for the match. It was pretty clear cut. I won't elaborate much further, because I'm not in the business of calling people out over mistakes. I'm just getting an idea of opinions so I can determine how to handle a similar situation in the future without overreacting.

The problem is that this happened twice with the same judge/TO at the same event. The first one I brushed off, since he was a pleasant guy. But later in the pairings, when the second issue occurred, I was ticked off. I won't participate in any of their future events on principle, due to the inconsistency and the flip flopping of rulings. Avoiding events without FAQ is a great idea.

Perhaps you should elaborate, because right now it's only a "i didn't like what they said" complaint.
Perhaps if we had an understanding of the situation and the two items you were attempting to interact with, we could better assist you in your question.
You don't need to call anyone out, you can say "Me, My Opponent, the TO".
How is a rule call during one game an issue in pairings?

Reminds me of the whole:

Player: "Hey TO, A Ram is a type of tank shock right?"
TO: "yeah..."
Player:"thanks!"

Game one starts, Player has 8 Battlewagons with deffrollas. Fight ensues

Player: "but you said A Ram was a type of tank shock! If you don't allow me to deffrolla ram you are changing your ruling and life is unfairs and you cheat!"

@ OP

Best thing is not to attend their events anymore. Win win.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
@ OP

Best thing is not to attend their events anymore. Win win.

Seeing as he is talking about Templecon, I am intrigued as to hear the whole story.

 Pete Melvin wrote:

 Nyghoma wrote:

 Pete Melvin wrote:
Trust me, we've got a lot of other things going on as well, especially if we are also playing in the tournament.

Well that's the first problem. You shouldn't be playing in your own tournament. Not only is that negligent to the attendees if judges are spread thin, but rulings and pairings could be sleighted. I'd be pretty suspicious of shenanigans and probably pass on the next event. I'm not say you or any other event organizer is guilty of such shadow play, but TOs are only human, right?

Negligent is a damnably harsh word to use and frankly Im insulted. Judges?! My god man its a game! If theres a rules query try and figure it out with your opponent first like a gentleman, THEN ask the TO. I've organied 5 tournaments in the last 2 years and won exactly none of them. I came 2nd once. You imply that a TO would intentionally cheat to win their own tournament. What kind of scumbag would you have to be to do that?!We're playing for piddly plastic trophies and maybe a laser cut building, its not the olympics, Im not out to break someones legs so I can get the all the "glory". Begads sir, if I had the option of duelling you at dawn I would do so, you have impugned my honour.

Edit: and in any case, you'd be the only one who thought that way. Our latest tournament is more than half filled in less than 24 hours, so I must be doing something right.

Hahaha! Don't take it personal. I'm just generalizing. Frankly, I'm a paranoid New Yorka, who doesn't trust anyone, from Sheet to Shinola. Maybe a symptom of my untrust comes from my past tournament experiences in other games, MtG being the one that stand out the most.

On the local level, the tournaments were riddled with unmentionables. Fortunately though, it cleaned up quite a bit on the National/Global level. In addition, tournament earnings weren't a pittance of plastics and card board. It was for a serious amount of greenbacks, in some cases. Warhammer could reach that prestige, if there was more attention paid to loose ends. It has all the makings of greatness, to accelerate it's evolution.

But enough talk of other games. To address your point that trivializes winning. People play tournaments for all types of reasons. Some do it for the prestige. Some do it for validation. Some do it to test themselves. Some do it to prove a point. Sheet, I'm sure some may even do it for the physical prize! In any case, it matters not. The point is players could spend upwards of $1000 just to attend a tournament, on travel, board, and sick days. In most cases, there's no way to recover those expenses based off of current WH standards. I'd be cautious to placate a person's motivations to winning a tournament, to the ancillary.

 Nyghoma wrote:
I'm just curious about opinions on judgement calls made by TOs in tournaments.

If you asked a TO to make a ruling on a specific question before a match starts, should that decision on the rule be enforced, even if it was mostly considered a bad call, after the game has begun and the groundwork was already layed out, based on that initial ruling? Yes. The TOs ruling is law. If you need to bring in a TO because you can't work it out with your opponent you need to follow his ruling.

Should the TO be obligated to allow the initial ruling, just for that specific match?The TO is obligated to apply that ruling for the remainder of the tournament unless he is PROVEN wrong beyond ANY AND ALL DOUBT. This is only to be fair as his ruling may have effected the outcome of that game and all players must be held to the same rules.

 Shas'O Dorian wrote:
The TO is obligated to apply that ruling for the remainder of the tournament unless he is PROVEN wrong beyond ANY AND ALL DOUBT. This is only to be fair as his ruling may have effected the outcome of that game and all players must be held to the same rules.

While that is a lovely notion and ideal to pretend exists, reality is often not so black and white.

As I mentioned above, a TO can be asked to give a ruling and that question can be phrased by a player so as to conceal the point they're really trying to get to. So the TO can give a ruling not truly realizing the implications of that ruling. Moreso, rulings are usually not about being 'wrong' or 'right', they are interpretations based on unclear rules (so it is a judgement call).

Then, after the game, say the opponent comes up and complains and explains what the implications of that ruling actually mean. While it is not 'fair' to that opponent (who may have lost the game), a good TO would not, nor should not stick with that same ruling for the rest of the tournament allowing that player to potentially dominate the rest of his games based on the ruling.

While there is no easy way out of that situation for a TO (especially if the first opponent lost the game), it does not make sense to compound the issue for the rest of the tournament simply because an uniformed decision was initially made. TOs are human, they make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes cost people a game. Such is life...although a good TO would also probably offer the player that lost the initial game due his ruling that he later reversed some sort of compensation for their entry fee to the event as a way to say sorry.

If you have a specific question about a particular rules interaction, you could always email the TOs ahead of time (not one day or even just one week, I'd do at least 2) so they have time to research it and let you know. I emailed the TempleCon TOs pretty early on with some of my questions and they answered promptly.

Not that a bad ruling is necessarily binding, but if you build your army around a certain combo (eg deff rollas in 5th ed Ork codex), you'll know to sit out that event or bring a different army.

Edit: Checked out the YMTC and rest of post.

Turns out I was Nyghoma's opponent for the match/rule issue in question. Will give a few more details on this since people are asking. My understanding is that he had either been given bad advice by a TO (or someone related to the TO group) ahead of the tournament/round or had misunderstood what he was being told. This was in regards to the function of the Escape Hatch from a building. He attempted to seize the relic in the middle, then use the escape hatch to shuttle it back into the building in the shooting phase with a run by scouts that had picked it up in the movement phase. His Centurions started in the building and they left through the escape hatch during the movement phase to allow the scouts to move in.

I called no-go on that and asked for a TO to make a call on it (my understanding is that the Relic only can move 6" during any phase, and cannot be run with.) The TOs made the call that I was correct. I allowed my opponent to take back the move (otherwise he'd have dropped the relic) and gave him a free move to run his non-relic holding scouts or shoot them if he'd like.

It's understandable that it basically ruined that game for him as it blew up his strategy. I really couldn't say on what he was told ahead of the match.

Other than the rules kerfluffle he was a decent guy and it was just a mess of a rules issue for him on a relic map where having played it out that far it was kind of impossible to go to a fallback position as my next round of shooting effectively removed his scouts and cents from the table. His pylon star was still circling but it was unlikely to put out the damage needed to keep me down before I killed it (which played out that way)

GreyDragoon wrote:
Turns out I was Nyghoma's opponent for the match/rule issue in question. Will give a few more details on this since people are asking. My understanding is that he had either been given bad advice by a TO (or someone related to the TO group) ahead of the tournament/round or had misunderstood what he was being told. This was in regards to the function of the Escape Hatch from a building. He attempted to seize the relic in the middle, then use the escape hatch to shuttle it back into the building in the shooting phase with a run by scouts that had picked it up in the movement phase. His Centurions started in the building and they left through the escape hatch during the movement phase to allow the scouts to move in.

I called no-go on that and asked for a TO to make a call on it (my understanding is that the Relic only can move 6" during any phase, and cannot be run with.) The TOs made the call that I was correct. I allowed my opponent to take back the move (otherwise he'd have dropped the relic) and gave him a free move to run his non-relic holding scouts or shoot them if he'd like.

It's understandable that it basically ruined that game for him as it blew up his strategy. I really couldn't say on what he was told ahead of the match.

Other than the rules kerfluffle he was a decent guy and it was just a mess of a rules issue for him on a relic map where having played it out that far it was kind of impossible to go to a fallback position as my next round of shooting effectively removed his scouts and cents from the table. His pylon star was still circling but it was unlikely to put out the damage needed to keep me down before I killed it (which played out that way)

You cannot Run with the Relic.
You cannot Run back into an Escape Hatch, as that is Embarking into a Building, which can only be done in the movement phase.

I am not entirely sure what then the OP is attempting as both rules would prohibit the actions he is attempting in your scenario.

 Nyghoma wrote:
I'm just curious about opinions on judgement calls made by TOs in tournaments.

If you asked a TO to make a ruling on a specific question before a match starts, should that decision on the rule be enforced, even if it was mostly considered a bad call, after the game has begun and the groundwork was already layed out, based on that initial ruling?

Should the TO be obligated to allow the initial ruling, just for that specific match?

Nyghoma,

I appreciate that you have not mentioned any names at this point, but clearly people have been able to infer that this happened at Templecon, and as the TO there, I would like to address the specifics to clear up any confusion.

I believe you are referring to the rules call I was asked to make in round 4 of the event regarding moving with the Relic through an escape hatch. I know you had talked to me before the round started, but there must have been some miscommunication in that initial conservation because we seem to have gotten two different things out of it. I may have misheard or misunderstood you, but it was never in my understanding that you were specifically asking whether or not you could move the Relic through your escape hatch. If I had thought you were asking that specific question, I would have given you the same answer that I did when asked in the middle of round 4. As a TO I would never intentionally go back on a rules call that I had previously made.

I'm terribly sorry this caused a bad experience for you at our event. This is clearly just a simple case of miscommunication and something clear communication skills can easily prevent from happening in the future.

 djdarknoise wrote:

GreyDragoon wrote:
Turns out I was Nyghoma's opponent for the match/rule issue in question. Will give a few more details on this since people are asking. My understanding is that he had either been given bad advice by a TO (or someone related to the TO group) ahead of the tournament/round or had misunderstood what he was being told. This was in regards to the function of the Escape Hatch from a building. He attempted to seize the relic in the middle, then use the escape hatch to shuttle it back into the building in the shooting phase with a run by scouts that had picked it up in the movement phase. His Centurions started in the building and they left through the escape hatch during the movement phase to allow the scouts to move in.

I called no-go on that and asked for a TO to make a call on it (my understanding is that the Relic only can move 6" during any phase, and cannot be run with.) The TOs made the call that I was correct. I allowed my opponent to take back the move (otherwise he'd have dropped the relic) and gave him a free move to run his non-relic holding scouts or shoot them if he'd like.

It's understandable that it basically ruined that game for him as it blew up his strategy. I really couldn't say on what he was told ahead of the match.

Other than the rules kerfluffle he was a decent guy and it was just a mess of a rules issue for him on a relic map where having played it out that far it was kind of impossible to go to a fallback position as my next round of shooting effectively removed his scouts and cents from the table. His pylon star was still circling but it was unlikely to put out the damage needed to keep me down before I killed it (which played out that way)

You cannot Run with the Relic.
You cannot Run back into an Escape Hatch, as that is Embarking into a Building, which can only be done in the movement phase.

I am not entirely sure what then the OP is attempting as both rules would prohibit the actions he is attempting in your scenario.

What he said.

1) Cannot run with a relic
2) Cannot embark an access point during any phase other than the movement phase
3) Relic auto-drops when moved over 6 inches, at the point where the unit started. Even if allowed to do 1 and 2 (which are clearly against the rules), by embarking via that access point your unit would now be inside the building (which is over 6 inches away, more likely 12) and would autodrop at the escape hatch.

Seems like a misunderstanding due to phrasing/etc. similar to what Yak was describing. Good response by BroComp to it.

 yakface wrote:

 Shas'O Dorian wrote:
The TO is obligated to apply that ruling for the remainder of the tournament unless he is PROVEN wrong beyond ANY AND ALL DOUBT. This is only to be fair as his ruling may have effected the outcome of that game and all players must be held to the same rules.

While that is a lovely notion and ideal to pretend exists, reality is often not so black and white.

As I mentioned above, a TO can be asked to give a ruling and that question can be phrased by a player so as to conceal the point they're really trying to get to. So the TO can give a ruling not truly realizing the implications of that ruling. Moreso, rulings are usually not about being 'wrong' or 'right', they are interpretations based on unclear rules (so it is a judgement call).

Then, after the game, say the opponent comes up and complains and explains what the implications of that ruling actually mean. While it is not 'fair' to that opponent (who may have lost the game), a good TO would not, nor should not stick with that same ruling for the rest of the tournament allowing that player to potentially dominate the rest of his games based on the ruling.

While there is no easy way out of that situation for a TO (especially if the first opponent lost the game), it does not make sense to compound the issue for the rest of the tournament simply because an uniformed decision was initially made. TOs are human, they make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes cost people a game. Such is life...although a good TO would also probably offer the player that lost the initial game due his ruling that he later reversed some sort of compensation for their entry fee to the event as a way to say sorry.

Great reply !

Target wrote:


What he said.

1) Cannot run with a relic
2) Cannot embark an access point during any phase other than the movement phase
3) Relic auto-drops when moved over 6 inches, at the point where the unit started. Even if allowed to do 1 and 2 (which are clearly against the rules), by embarking via that access point your unit would now be inside the building (which is over 6 inches away, more likely 12) and would autodrop at the escape hatch.

Seems like a misunderstanding due to phrasing/etc. similar to what Yak was describing. Good response by BroComp to it.

Yeah... Sounds like a case of 5th edition deffrollers to me. You can't ask loaded questions then use those answers to construct some easter egg tactic.

Yes, best practice is a written list of requirements prior to the event to avoid any army selections that may run afoul of grey-zone rules (and prevent someone from playing)
Most TO's do try to reign-in some army selection types so it only makes sense.

During the tournament the TO if acting as a referee, they are to be an unbiased person to hand down a ruling if both players cannot agree and do not want to dice-off.
We do not typically corner a referee before a hockey game for a bunch of what-if scenarios: they make the calls as they see them when they see them.
Right or wrong, a ruling is made and the game can get on with it.

So, you can be happy with a person's judgment or what is determined by the roll of a die.
Since most of the game is rolling dice, I see little reason to get upset either way.

Target wrote:
3) Relic auto-drops when moved over 6 inches, at the point where the unit started. Even if allowed to do 1 and 2 (which are clearly against the rules), by embarking via that access point your unit would now be inside the building (which is over 6 inches away, more likely 12) and would autodrop at the escape hatch.

This is the only part I disagree with. You're embarked in the building - that's allowed.

The fact that it's the escape hatch access point doesn't matter - you were allowed to embark.

rigeld2 wrote:

Target wrote:
3) Relic auto-drops when moved over 6 inches, at the point where the unit started. Even if allowed to do 1 and 2 (which are clearly against the rules), by embarking via that access point your unit would now be inside the building (which is over 6 inches away, more likely 12) and would autodrop at the escape hatch.

This is the only part I disagree with. You're embarked in the building - that's allowed.

The fact that it's the escape hatch access point doesn't matter - you were allowed to embark.

I say that purely because escape hatches in gameplay are typically placed 12 inches away from the building - if it was right next to the building I'd agree. You would then measure range to the unit to any part of the building to determine if the relic had moved more than 6 inches in that phase. In almost any circumstance, this would equate to more than 6 inches, so it would drop where the unit started their move.

Target wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Target wrote:
3) Relic auto-drops when moved over 6 inches, at the point where the unit started. Even if allowed to do 1 and 2 (which are clearly against the rules), by embarking via that access point your unit would now be inside the building (which is over 6 inches away, more likely 12) and would autodrop at the escape hatch.

This is the only part I disagree with. You're embarked in the building - that's allowed.

The fact that it's the escape hatch access point doesn't matter - you were allowed to embark.

I say that purely because escape hatches in gameplay are typically placed 12 inches away from the building - if it was right next to the building I'd agree. You would then measure range to the unit to any part of the building to determine if the relic had moved more than 6 inches in that phase. In almost any circumstance, this would equate to more than 6 inches, so it would drop where the unit started their move.

The underlined has no basis in actual rules though. The unit moved and embarked - their movement was only to the access point. The actual rules don't support anything more than that.

If they embarked on a Battlewagon that didn't move and then disembarked the next turn, would they drop the Relic?