I understand the "play to win" mentality in tournaments but you have to get past the "play" part (which I won't even get into the problem with SOS with someone forfeiting). I miss the days of "Fly Casual."

I missed the part where "Fly Casual" meant ignore the basic activation rules of the game.

Your point about possibly being accused of cheating is a valid one but its also a double edged sword. If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

So essentially if you ask your opponent to play by the rules they agreed to play by when entering event you've put yourself in a bad position socially? You don't see where that is a problematic position to take? I understand you are limiting yourself to rules that don't have anything to do with the outcome of the game, but who exactly gets to make that call? I've certainly seen players extend that criteria to many a non-mundane actions.

If I were a newer player entering a tournament and my opponent started moving all their ships at once I'd certainly ask them to stop, as I'd have no idea what the hell was going on.

The rules of a game are a social contract between two players. They allow two players that may have never met and have no trust between them to play the game without issue. When one player starts skipping over rules, with no consent from their opponent, they are going to very often make their opponent uncomfortable with what's going on. Clearly this is the case as that was what spurred on the OPs post in the first play. I believe it is very poor sportsmanship to put your opponent in an uncomfortable situation, I think it is even worse to throw some social sanctions on them for just expecting their opponent to follow the basic rules (which their opponent agreed to do when they entered the event).

So essentially if you ask your opponent to play by the rules they agreed to play by when entering event you've put yourself in a bad position socially?

Thank you for expressing it that way.

Because that is really what's going on here. People are saying that they should be allowed to play how ever they want, as long as it doesn't effect the outcome. But who gets to decide what does or doesn't effect the outcome?

Is calling the TO over to make a judgement call every turn fun for anyone?

Isn't playing by the default rules, as written the simplest thing to do? It's not like you're having some sort of burden put on you. It's also not like someone is trying to exploit the rules for an advantage.

They're simply saying that they wish to play with the rules, as written. But according to some people here, doing that makes you an ass and a poor sport.

Once again, I'm not saying we shouldn't fly casual, or that we should pounce on someone with every mistake they make. I'm simply saying that this concept that I'm a bad person for expecting you to play by the rules is nonsense.

There is no may to a ship taking an action. They "have" to take an action. So if they don't take one I assume they ffocused.

No that's not true. You don't have to take an action, Actions per the rules are optional. That's not the same as some effects like Wedges -1 die.From the rules...

Perform Action: The ship may perform one action

Plus the Tournament FAQ has this rule.

If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he cannotretroactively use it without the consent of his opponent.

So it's really up to the other guy if wants to give consent or not.

"Rise, my son! From here forth you shale be named Darth VandorDM. You know what must be done."

The issue breaks down to this, To consent or not to consent. The answer to this seems to be what short cut a player is taking. Perhaps we need to figure out the socially acceptable short cuts and just flat out rule breaking. So let's see where the community stands on these topics.

1) placing dials on pilot cards

2) moving ships with out templates

3) performing forgotten actions

A) focus

B) evade

C) Boost

D) barrel roll

E) target lock

4) performing a forgotten attack

5) using proxy cards

These are some of the things I see that players use as short cuts. Here are some other things I have seen I've seen. A player rolls to many attack or evade dice and quickly picks up the undesirable result leaving the correct number on the board. Am I being the "unsportsmanlike jerk, ass , villain" by asking them to re-roll the correct number of dice? What happens when a ship destroys another ship, damage cards are dealt and the ship removed from the field only to find out the ship that attack could not have attacked because he had the blinded pilot crit?

If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

First off you're assuming that the action doesn't effect the out come of the game. Which it may or may not, what you're getting into is a subjective argument on how much impact it has on the outcome of the game. You may not feel it does, but I might. Who's right?

If you follow the rules as written there's no room for argument or accusations. What good does saving 5 seconds do you, if you spend 15 minutes arguing over it?

Second, you either follow the rules or you don't. There's no gray area here, it's not like these rules are that vague that it's really open for interpretation.

Lastly, we're talking about a Tournament, not a social event. Tournaments have a completely different purpose then a friendly game, as such you should expect people to play it more formally then they might at their LGS with their friends.

First, it takes two people to argue. Its probably better to pick your battles instead of making mountains out of mole hills.

Second, the rules themselves are limited by the English language, which if you have any dealings with the legal system in America, means you can find a different interpretation for everything. And by everything I mean every possible conceivable definition and interpretation to a word. And that's in a system which is supposed to be the ultimate rules system and even it doesn't make someone face sanctions until the other person experiences a loss. Even within the FFG X-Wing rules themselves, The idea that the game should be fun and players work out disputes between themselves actually contradicts the notion that the rules are airtight and should be followed as such.

Third, I strongly disagree that a Tournament stops being a social event. You are still playing games with other people. The expectation may be higher, but you can't play the game by yourself and people are expected to behave themselves and generally be good opponents. To illustrate, just imagine if someone came to an X-Wing using the same behavior they would playing anonymously over Xbox live. I still think the purpose of playing a tournament involves playing the game and in order to play you have to play another person.

Vanor and ScottieATF, please understand that when I talk about social interaction, I'm not talking about imposing social sanctions against anyone. What I was trying to illustrate, and apparently failing at so I apologize, is that causing a rules dispute over minutiae may not be worth the dispute itself. In a way if you want to take it farther no one imposes the "social sanctions" (I use that term very tentatively) on you, you impose them on yourself because your actions and ability to work with your opponent to play the game will determine how you are treated.

May be I should have started with this and I believe its been pointed to multiple times, if you have a way problem with how someone plays a game, talk to them. Put the ball in their court at least once to see if they fix it because as ScottieATF pointed out making sure both parties are comfortable is important. To bring it back to the Tie Swarm example, your opponent moves all of his Ties, and announces all of his action at once. If it makes you uncomfortable and it would really have no bearing on the game let it slide but voice your trepidation and why. If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

"Rise, my son! From here forth you shale be named Darth VandorDM. You know what must be done."

Perhaps we need to figure out the socially acceptable short cuts and just flat out rule breaking.

Couple thoughts...

First I think the default behavior should always be, RAW when you're playing in a formal setting like a Tournament, or with someone you don't know. That's the safe thing to do, because there's really no room for arguments or accusations when you do that. I also am not depending on the other person giving consent for me to do something.

Second, if I'm playing someone I don't know, I have no reason to trust that they won't abuse what ever lenience I give them. So I let them drop some focus... Next thing I know they're moving Dutch, then a Gold Squad pilot, then TL'ing with Dutch and handing a TL off... Even though if they did things the right way, the Gold Squad wouldn't of been in range.

I let them get away with doing things out of order once, so they may very well push it. If on the other hand I make it clear I expect both of us to play with the rules as written... There's no room for misunderstandings.

Also, I've thought about it it a bit, and to a point there's very little you can do when moving ships of the same PS that actually would effect the outcome of the game, regardless of the order you do them in. Because most of the time you won't gain any actual information you wouldn't already have.

Lets say I have 2 Daggers, and move both of them forward 3, then BR them left. Do I really gain anything by doing them in that order as opposed to moving A then moving B? They both end up in the same spot, and A would end up there before B either way. So what practical difference does it make?

But again, you're now gotten into the realm of subjective opinions and not objective rules. Better to avoid arguments by doing it right the first time.

If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

First off you're assuming that the action doesn't effect the out come of the game. Which it may or may not, what you're getting into is a subjective argument on how much impact it has on the outcome of the game. You may not feel it does, but I might. Who's right?

If you follow the rules as written there's no room for argument or accusations. What good does saving 5 seconds do you, if you spend 15 minutes arguing over it?

Second, you either follow the rules or you don't. There's no gray area here, it's not like these rules are that vague that it's really open for interpretation.

Lastly, we're talking about a Tournament, not a social event. Tournaments have a completely different purpose then a friendly game, as such you should expect people to play it more formally then they might at their LGS with their friends.

Tournament, Social game, Friendly game, Hateful game, are we seriously making a distinct difference between what type of game and when we will enforce the rules? Your last to paragraphs are in complete contradiction to one another. FOLLOW THE RULES!. Or don't if it's not a tournament. Follow through with your philosophy, no matter the occasion.

And you're right, actions can greatly affect the outcome of the game. So play the full **** game. If your opponent forgets an action let him take it as long as the information available to him hasn't changed, or let him take the action given the state of what the board was when he was supposed to take it. Not letting him take it isn't playing the full game. If your opponent forgets a special ability affect, remind him of it (to your own disadvantage). Play the full game.

I dunno, I try to go out of my way to remind my opponents if they have missed something. I'll ask "Did that BWing take an action?" I'd rather win by playing the full game. Not by hoping that my opponent forgets to focus. Or by hoping he doesn't realize that Howlrunner is in Range 1 of his shuttle, and doesn't reroll that blank. That's just an empty hollow win if you do that stuff. Remind your opponents and let things slide, you'll generally feel better about your wins, and your opponents will have a lot of respect for you.

I get it though. Following the rules is important. So then follow them. But, it sounds more like you are trying to gain some edge against your opponents because you caught them forgetting something. Would you remind someone that they didn't take notice of a special ability use that MUST have kicked in, to your own detriment? I really doubt it. But if the rules say the ability MUST have happened, you shouldn't be quiet. According to your rule philosophy you should make him take the ability.

This whole line of argument started because someone said his opponent moved all of his equivalent PS ships and then went back to take actions on them, and he would only let his opponent take an action of the last one moved. He's entitled to enforce that rule. I'm also entitled to think he's an ass, and depends on rule gotchas to overcome mediocrity.

If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

First off you're assuming that the action doesn't effect the out come of the game. Which it may or may not, what you're getting into is a subjective argument on how much impact it has on the outcome of the game. You may not feel it does, but I might. Who's right?

If you follow the rules as written there's no room for argument or accusations. What good does saving 5 seconds do you, if you spend 15 minutes arguing over it?

Second, you either follow the rules or you don't. There's no gray area here, it's not like these rules are that vague that it's really open for interpretation.

Lastly, we're talking about a Tournament, not a social event. Tournaments have a completely different purpose then a friendly game, as such you should expect people to play it more formally then they might at their LGS with their friends.

First, it takes two people to argue. Its probably better to pick your battles instead of making mountains out of mole hills.

Second, the rules themselves are limited by the English language, which if you have any dealings with the legal system in America, means you can find a different interpretation for everything. And by everything I mean every possible conceivable definition and interpretation to a word. And that's in a system which is supposed to be the ultimate rules system and even it doesn't make someone face sanctions until the other person experiences a loss. Even within the FFG X-Wing rules themselves, The idea that the game should be fun and players work out disputes between themselves actually contradicts the notion that the rules are airtight and should be followed as such.

Third, I strongly disagree that a Tournament stops being a social event. You are still playing games with other people. The expectation may be higher, but you can't play the game by yourself and people are expected to behave themselves and generally be good opponents. To illustrate, just imagine if someone came to an X-Wing using the same behavior they would playing anonymously over Xbox live. I still think the purpose of playing a tournament involves playing the game and in order to play you have to play another person.

Vanor and ScottieATF, please understand that when I talk about social interaction, I'm not talking about imposing social sanctions against anyone. What I was trying to illustrate, and apparently failing at so I apologize, is that causing a rules dispute over minutiae may not be worth the dispute itself. In a way if you want to take it farther no one imposes the "social sanctions" (I use that term very tentatively) on you, you impose them on yourself because your actions and ability to work with your opponent to play the game will determine how you are treated.

May be I should have started with this and I believe its been pointed to multiple times, if you have a way problem with how someone plays a game, talk to them. Put the ball in their court at least once to see if they fix it because as ScottieATF pointed out making sure both parties are comfortable is important. To bring it back to the Tie Swarm example, your opponent moves all of his Ties, and announces all of his action at once. If it makes you uncomfortable and it would really have no bearing on the game let it slide but voice your trepidation and why. If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

So is it my approach on asking the player to follow the rules, Is it my right by not consenting,That makes me the villain?

First, it takes two people to argue.

No it doesn't, not in this situation.

You do something and I don't agree with you. Either one of us gives in, or else the game stops until we reach an agreement. So as long as one party refuses to change their stance the 'argument' continues.

Second, the rules themselves are limited by the English language

Yes, but the rules we're talking about are pretty clean cut. There's really no room for interpenetration in...

Move one ship, take actions for that ship. Move the next ship.

May be I should have started with this and I believe its been pointed to multiple times, if you have a way problem with how someone plays a game, talk to them.

I agree completely. Which is what did happen in the example given. Someone did something, and the other person said "No that's not how the rules work." It's not like I or anyone else is suggesting that you deny someone an action without a warning first.

But if I do make it clear I expect the rules to be played as written, it it really good sportsmanship on your part to call me names, and demand that you get to use short cuts that are clearly contrary to how the rules are written?

If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

See this is the vital point. Some people in this thread are saying that doing exactly that is poor sportsmanship and makes you an ass. That, and that alone is the argument I'm trying to make. That expecting someone to play by the rules does not make me a poor sport.

Vanor and ScottieATF, please understand that when I talk about social interaction, I'm not talking about imposing social sanctions against anyone. What I was trying to illustrate, and apparently failing at so I apologize, is that causing a rules dispute over minutiae may not be worth the dispute itself. In a way if you want to take it farther no one imposes the "social sanctions" (I use that term very tentatively) on you, you impose them on yourself because your actions and ability to work with your opponent to play the game will determine how you are treated.

To be fair, you can't impose "social sanctions" on yourself by definition. It requires others treating you differently to have any bearing or meaning.

But my overall point is that there shouldn't even be a rules dispute there as you have one player just clearly not following the rules.

When players sit down at an event they agree to play a game by the rules set out for the game. To put it simply who is being the poor sport the guy expecting his opponent to play by the known/agreed upon/non-judgement call rules or the guy who expects to let him bend/break those rules whenever that player feels it's more convenient?

If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

And I think a lot of the issue is that more then a few posters in the middle of this thread voiced opinions that doing so would still make you the dastardly rules lawyer who twirls their mustache and laugh. That's exactly where I take issue.

So is it my approach on asking the player to follow the rules, Is it my right by not consenting,That makes me the villain?

The correct answer to that it probably depends on how you go about it. I think the last couple of posts illustrate this.

And I think a lot of the issue is that more then a few posters in the middle of this thread voiced opinions that doing so would still make you the dastardly rules lawyer who twirls their mustache and laugh. That's exactly where I take issue.

Just to takes Scottie's post a little farther, the dreaded "Rules Lawyer" title card, in my experience after 10+ years of gaming, isn't given to someone just because he makes other people follow the rules. It requires that special type of person who knows the rules and is really insufferable about it and forces it down other people's throats.

While I may not agree with terms (I really don't like the term "social sanction" in this case) or how many people it takes to argue I'm glad the discussion evolved without as much vitriol as the quagmire in the middle pages of this thread.

-edit- I don't know what happened with the formatting there.

Vanor and ScottieATF, please understand that when I talk about social interaction, I'm not talking about imposing social sanctions against anyone. What I was trying to illustrate, and apparently failing at so I apologize, is that causing a rules dispute over minutiae may not be worth the dispute itself. In a way if you want to take it farther no one imposes the "social sanctions" (I use that term very tentatively) on you, you impose them on yourself because your actions and ability to work with your opponent to play the game will determine how you are treated.

May be I should have started with this and I believe its been pointed to multiple times, if you have a way problem with how someone plays a game, talk to them. Put the ball in their court at least once to see if they fix it because as ScottieATF pointed out making sure both parties are comfortable is important. To bring it back to the Tie Swarm example, your opponent moves all of his Ties, and announces all of his action at once. If it makes you uncomfortable and it would really have no bearing on the game let it slide but voice your trepidation and why. If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

I think there is a problem here. If someone requests that you play be the "rules" then you should. If you are going to make shortcuts you should get them approved BEFORE you attempt to use them. This is a case where asking for Permission is the right call instead of doing something that violates the RAW and then as for Forgiveness. "Causing a dispute over the minutiae" is what the player taking the shortcuts is doing and NOT the fault of the player calling him on those shortcuts.

No one ever know what happens with the formatting on these forums.

And while I would typically agree with you on the circumstances that the dastardly Rules Lawyer tag gets applied, with the added aside that they are often most likely to get rules wrong, as shown in this thread people are willing to lie it and other less then positive attributes at the feet of someone just requesting they adhere to basic game rules.

-edit- I don't know what happened with the formatting there.

Perhaps a bad tag? I never use the WYSIWYG editor here, because it just causes too many formatting problems. There's a 'switch' on the top left corner of the box you type in that turns it on/off.

Attitude is everything. So to your point about how you go about it. I think most everyone would agree.

There's a huge difference between...

"I'd prefer if we play the activation rules as they're written. So move your ship, take your action, move the next ship...."

And

"You can't do it that way you stupid newb!!!"

Yet based on the context of the post that started it all, it was clearly more of the first then the second way, yet people jumped on him and started calling him names despite what seems like a polite reminder of playing according to the rules.

I get the distaste people have for the "gotch" types. It was one of the things that really turned me off of 40k with the "Oh look you're 1/128th of an inch out of range, you lose your attack for this round." mentality. The lack of that here is one of the reasons I like X-Wing so much and the community as a whole.

But we do also tend to have a negative kneejerk reaction to anyone who even hints at 'gotcha' style play, going so far to call people names and trying to drive them out of the X-Wing community because they won't let someone take a shortcut that is without question contrary to how the rules work.

It's like we've gone so far to remove that style of play, that we in a way end up doing it only we do it based on how closely someone lets us 'fly casual' rather then by the rules. Look at a few posts here, and it doesn't take much reading between the lines to see that they're really saying "Gotcha you are an unclean rules lawyer and need to be driven from the congregation."

So is it my approach on asking the player to follow the rules, Is it my right by not consenting,That makes me the villain?

The correct answer to that it probably depends on how you go about it. I think the last couple of posts illustrate this.

And I think a lot of the issue is that more then a few posters in the middle of this thread voiced opinions that doing so would still make you the dastardly rules lawyer who twirls their mustache and laugh. That's exactly where I take issue.

Just to takes Scottie's post a little farther, the dreaded "Rules Lawyer" title card, in my experience after 10+ years of gaming, isn't given to someone just because he makes other people follow the rules. It requires that special type of person who knows the rules and is really insufferable about it and forces it down other people's throats.

While I may not agree with terms (I really don't like the term "social sanction" in this case) or how many people it takes to argue I'm glad the discussion evolved without as much vitriol as the quagmire in the middle pages of this thread.

-edit- I don't know what happened with the formatting there.

So I will work on my approach when addressing these issues in the future. I would ask the community to better communicate their intention of implementing short cuts during a Tournament. But, as the power hungry Sith Lord I am, don't give me the power over your fate in a game by doing an action outside the rules without asking first......

Vanor and ScottieATF, please understand that when I talk about social interaction, I'm not talking about imposing social sanctions against anyone. What I was trying to illustrate, and apparently failing at so I apologize, is that causing a rules dispute over minutiae may not be worth the dispute itself. In a way if you want to take it farther no one imposes the "social sanctions" (I use that term very tentatively) on you, you impose them on yourself because your actions and ability to work with your opponent to play the game will determine how you are treated.

May be I should have started with this and I believe its been pointed to multiple times, if you have a way problem with how someone plays a game, talk to them. Put the ball in their court at least once to see if they fix it because as ScottieATF pointed out making sure both parties are comfortable is important. To bring it back to the Tie Swarm example, your opponent moves all of his Ties, and announces all of his action at once. If it makes you uncomfortable and it would really have no bearing on the game let it slide but voice your trepidation and why. If they do it again you aren't the villain to ask the TO to come over and tell them to do it with a simple "Please tell him to do it the right way, I've tried and he won't stop, and I can't keep track."

I think there is a problem here. If someone requests that you play be the "rules" then you should. If you are going to make shortcuts you should get them approved BEFORE you attempt to use them. This is a case where asking for Permission is the right call instead of doing something that violates the RAW and then as for Forgiveness. "Causing a dispute over the minutiae" is what the player taking the shortcuts is doing and NOT the fault of the player calling him on those shortcuts.

In this case we'd probably get into the whole difference we have in "it takes two people to argue" and this isn't really the best venue for getting into a philosophical debate over the definition and actors in disputes. As I stated when I first replied to your reply (?) to my post, I was just a little surprised you chose my post to reply to. It was just meant to speak in very general terms and my original perception may have been warped by the mudslinging going around.

The only thing I would truly caution in your proscribed instance is that you have to keep in mind that people come from a lot of different backgrounds and you don't know a person's rules efficacy. I can't tell you how many times I've played a game where someone says "well, In my store..." at that point we have a nice little talk and we figure out what to do because generally, the person does what they do without knowing it would cause a problem and they've been taught its okay through no fault of their own.

Do we get to end this discussion on a "Yay" for calm discussion?

Here's a gut check for the letter of the law rule advocates:

You opponent has the Determination EPT. They are hit with a Pilot:Critical damage. They sigh and put the damage card face up next to the ship card and move on, basically forgetting about the Determination upgrade card. BUT, the determination damage card says this:

When you are dealt a faceup Damage card with the Pilot trait, discard it immediately without resolving its effect.

It doesn't say they may, it says they do it. Do you remind them that they must discard the face up damage card? After all the rules state to discard it, not that he may discard it.

Or:

Your opponent shoots at you with a Heavy Laser Cannon. Rolls 2 crits and 2 blanks. Uses a Target Lock, and rerolls two more crits. Then dutifully turns all the crits to normal hits. BUT, the Heavy Laser Cannon text says this:

Attack: Attack 1 ship. Immediately after rolling your attack dice, you must change all of your Critical Hit results to Hit results.

It gets tricky here. Immediately after rolling his dice, the first 2 crits should be changed to normal hits, so he should have 2 hits and 2 blanks. Then he should use his Target lock and reroll the 2 blanks and get 2 crits. So, by the strict letter of the rule, he should have ended up with 2 hits and 2 crits, not 4 normal hits. There is no may. There are no options along the way that he could have missed. Your opponent actually broke the rules in your favor by turning his rerolled crits to hit.

Because you are so adamant about the rules, and know them intimately. I'm sure you correct your opponent, right? If you are going to be the type of player that demands all rules are always followed all the time, no matter what, you kinda have to correct your opponent, don't you? After all, he has to follow each and every rule to the letter.

I know the answer, and you know the answer. Most (but not all) nitpick rule followers will go deadly silent in both of these or similar situations.

I can honestly say that I would tell my opponent about their mistake and suffer the negative affects. But I would also remind them that they missed their actions and let them take them as the board would have been at the time.

Obviously, Dutch can't move and then give a TL to a ship that couldn't have taken a TL when Dutch took his action. That's not within the rules. No one is suggesting that you shoudl allow your opponent to break rules to their advantage. But if he was going to focus and didn't, and it's clear, let them.

Hell, if someone makes a 3 right turn off the board, and it's clear that they CLEARLY meant to the a 3 left turn towards the rear of a ship with 1 hull left that they have a TL on, let them fix the move, it's just better that way.

The only thing I would truly caution in your proscribed instance is that you have to keep in mind that people come from a lot of different backgrounds and you don't know a person's rules efficacy. I can't tell you how many times I've played a game where someone says "well, In my store..." at that point we have a nice little talk and we figure out what to do because generally, the person does what they do without knowing it would cause a problem and they've been taught its okay through no fault of their own.

Which is another reason why adhering to the rules of the game should just be everyone's default as opposed to the short cuts being talked about here. That way everyone can and should know the expectations going into the match.

That someone would just start taking rules shortcuts with a stranger they've never played with before is really presumptuous and a bit silly.

Do we get to end this discussion on a "Yay" for calm discussion?

Apparently not given the post under yours....

I can't tell you how many times I've played a game where someone says "well, In my store..." at that point we have a nice little talk and we figure out what to do because generally, the person does what they do without knowing it would cause a problem and they've been taught its okay through no fault of their own.

Again I agree. There's a good way of dealing with that, and a poor way of dealing with it.

I don't think anyone feels it's fitting to scream and call someone names because they don't play by correctly, and are making honest mistakes. Especially if they're used to doing it one way, and taking short cuts.

I would say that a person like that owes it to everyone else to make sure that the way they play is correct before entering a tournament. It's IMO the polite thing to do. Even if you know the rules it doesn't hurt to brush up just to make sure you didn't miss something or get into a bad habit.

But, and this is the critical point here...

Just because that's how someone plays at their store, doesn't mean the shouldn't be required to play it the correct way. Also if they think they're being taken advantage of, or the other person is a ass for expecting them to play correctly... That says a lot more about them then the other person.

Do you remind them that they must discard the face up damage card? After all the rules state to discard it, not that he may discard it.

Yes of course you do. To do otherwise would be cheating IMO.

I'm sure you correct your opponent, right?

Once again yes you do correct your opponent if you see he or she made a mistake, even if it hurts you.

Most (but not all) nitpick rule followers will go deadly silent in both of these or similar situations.

Nice assumption there... Just because I expect people to play by the rules, that means I'm also willing to cheat if it suits me?

Me and my brother have houseruled this. Whenever you forget to take an action an move on to the next ship, that ship gets a focus token. Maybe I wanted to evade, or barrel roll, maybe he wanted to target lock or boost... If you forgot to do it, it counts as taking a focus, since that's action that every ship can do and it will never make a difference in ships blocking other ships. And it's just less jerky than not allowing an action at all

Do you remind them that they must discard the face up damage card? After all the rules state to discard it, not that he may discard it.

Yes of course you do. To do otherwise would be cheating IMO.

I'm sure you correct your opponent, right?

Once again yes you do correct your opponent if you see he or she made a mistake, even if it hurts you.

Most (but not all) nitpick rule followers will go deadly silent in both of these or similar situations.

Nice assumption there... Just because I expect people to play by the rules, that means I'm also willing to cheat if it suits me?

Of course it does, we are the Sith Lords! Why on earth would we play fair.

Rinehart, All the rule variances you asked about are handled by the FAQ:

HLC:

Q: If a ship attacks with Heavy Laser Cannon, can it modify attack dice to get a crit result?

A: Yes. All crit results on attack dice are immediately changed to hit results after they are first rolled, and then the dice may be modified as normal.

As all good Sith Lords should, I keep with me the Core Rulebook, Tournament Rules and FAQ. When a situation comes that I do not know of hand I refer to these documents. If the situation is not covered in any of them, I attempt to work out an agreeable solution with my opponent, if that fails we seek a solution from the TO. If the TO can't come to a conclusion, I pull out my light saber and cut my opponent in half and claim victory and his squad, mwha ha ha!

Hell, if someone makes a 3 right turn off the board, and it's clear that they CLEARLY meant to the a 3 left turn towards the rear of a ship with 1 hull left that they have a TL on, let them fix the move, it's just better that way.

Wanted to address this because it says a lot.

The assumption here is that if I don't let them fix their mistake, I'm somehow being a poor sport, and that it should be expected that I'll let them fix it. That it's better that way.

The rules are quite clear, you do the maneuver you set. The fact that you made a mistake, even if it's a clear mistake is still your fault not mine.

Why should I not capitalize on the mistake you made? How in the world does doing that make me a bad person or a poor sport? It's a big part of competitive events to take advantage of someone's mistake. In Chess for example that's really the only way you win, by capitalizing on the other persons mistake.

Letting someone fix something that is clearly a mistake may be a nice thing to do, but that doesn't mean I owe it to them, or that I'm playing unfairly if I don't. In fact expecting me to let them fix the mistake is the true form of poor sportsmanship and playing unfairly.