If you aren't playing the game by the rules, then their is no game to play.

The concept that players shouldn't expect that they be held to the rules they agreed to play by is just backwards. That adults, or people acting in adult settings, can't handle having a warning issued for mucking up the rules of the game is completely nonsensical. That you conceive being corrected by a TO as some shameful action and a warning as some draconian sanction is just silly. It's just a warning. Are you asserting that repeated rules mistakes shouldn't result in a Game Loss/ DQ? That's just plain non-tenable, so what's the issue with providing clear guidelines for how further issue is going to be resolved by warning the player that there could be future consequences. Now there is no room for any confusion on the players part over how things will be handled and no room for any accusation of impropriety towards the TO if subsequent sanctions are needed.

Fact is, the rules are important, but enforcing them to the point you're enacting a procedure where mistakenly breaking them can disqualify a player or auto-lose them a game is still BS. It's not hard to tell when someone is cheating versus when something is an honest mistake. Unless a pattern of behavior with a player is seen it's best to let the players handle it. Judges warnings should be limited to obvious cheating, repeated negligent play, and poor sportsmanship. That's where the line sits.

Repeated negligent play is exactly what we're talking about. If you can't keep the game on course enough for the TO to hit you with a loss, then you've stuffed up repeatedly and in severe enough fashion to warrant the TO's intervention multiple times. If that is the case, you bloody well deserve it.

I'm starting to think you're imagining the TO patrolling the tables and hitting players with warnings whenever he's something not quite right. That is not what would happen here. The TO would get called over by players who have gotten themselves into an awkward situation by forgetting or misapplying something. The TO would help them sort it out, warn them not to do it again, and leave them to it. That's it.

No, you're talking judiciary discipline after a single mutual slip up. That's nonsense. IF over the course of several games the player keeps making the same mistakes then deal with it. But the first time every time? Never. Let the players handle that. They're more than capable.

If the TO has been called over, then they are clearly not capable of handling it.

The ruling, no. The next time it comes up though, they'll know what to do. A warning only serves to move them closer to being DQ'd losing the match. Beyond that, neither player is likely to make the mistake again. Players policing themselves is a far better state for the game. And they will. But if you make it clear as a judge that you will issue warnings for every slip up you're encouraging players to not call you. And you're encouraging them to not come back because the environment is focused to much on the rules and not enough on the play.

What does a warning really matter, unless you assume the player is just going to keep making mistakes? Maybe you're the one who thinks people are too stupid to figure out how to play the game properly.

So where do you draw the line, Aminar? What's the proper buffer for mistakes before you penalize someone? Two warnings? Three? Where do we draw this grey, non-uniform line?

When it becomes a serious issue. That's up to the Judges discression, but should basically require complaints from the other players. Judges are arbiters, not police. They fix disputes the players can't fix. If the players aren't complaining about the negligence it isn't an issue.

And you are worried about casual or shy players being scared off by warnings for rules mistakes? You've got to be kidding. TOs shouldn't act on rules issues until players are complaining about them? That's a great way to have new players screwed over in your events.

Fact is, the rules are important, but enforcing them to the point you're enacting a procedure where mistakenly breaking them can disqualify a player or auto-lose them a game is still BS. It's not hard to tell when someone is cheating versus when something is an honest mistake. Unless a pattern of behavior with a player is seen it's best to let the players handle it. Judges warnings should be limited to obvious cheating, repeated negligent play, and poor sportsmanship. That's where the line sits.

Repeated negligent play is exactly what we're talking about. If you can't keep the game on course enough for the TO to hit you with a loss, then you've stuffed up repeatedly and in severe enough fashion to warrant the TO's intervention multiple times. If that is the case, you bloody well deserve it.

I'm starting to think you're imagining the TO patrolling the tables and hitting players with warnings whenever he's something not quite right. That is not what would happen here. The TO would get called over by players who have gotten themselves into an awkward situation by forgetting or misapplying something. The TO would help them sort it out, warn them not to do it again, and leave them to it. That's it.

No, you're talking judiciary discipline after a single mutual slip up. That's nonsense. IF over the course of several games the player keeps making the same mistakes then deal with it. But the first time every time? Never. Let the players handle that. They're more than capable.

If the TO has been called over, then they are clearly not capable of handling it.

The ruling, no. The next time it comes up though, they'll know what to do. A warning only serves to move them closer to being DQ'd losing the match. Beyond that, neither player is likely to make the mistake again. Players policing themselves is a far better state for the game. And they will. But if you make it clear as a judge that you will issue warnings for every slip up you're encouraging players to not call you. And you're encouraging them to not come back because the environment is focused to much on the rules and not enough on the play.

What does a warning really matter, unless you assume the player is just going to keep making mistakes? Maybe you're the one who thinks people are too stupid to figure out how to play the game properly.

So where do you draw the line, Aminar? What's the proper buffer for mistakes before you penalize someone? Two warnings? Three? Where do we draw this grey, non-uniform line?

When it becomes a serious issue. That's up to the Judges discression, but should basically require complaints from the other players. Judges are arbiters, not police. They fix disputes the players can't fix. If the players aren't complaining about the negligence it isn't an issue.

And you are worried about casual or shy players being scared off by warnings for rules mistakes? You've got to be kidding. TOs shouldn't act on rules issues until players are complaining about them? That's a great way to have new players screwed over in your events.

I'm going to let you in on something, every decent sized tournament has a few jerks in attendance. It may not be a majority, but they are there. Hell every decent sized venue has some jerks in attendance even for casual play. The level in which they impact the tournament depends on how the TO approaches the situation.

A TO that sits back and just does the pairings and only steps over to the tables when called over and dictates no consequences for breaking game rules, is going to allow them to have a great effect. They get paired with a new player they'll pull out every trick in the book; fudge movement, make up rules, stall, etc. They'll try anything they can get away with, and they can get away with most things especially if paired with a timid player. That player is then going to after the event post online asking if XYZ are legal and end up feeling cheated when everyone replies with a resounding no. Or other newer players will think how the jerks play is how the game is meant to be played which is a bigger issue.

A TO that is active, watches each game, corrects mistakes as they see them happen, and establishes clear guidelines for how they are going to handle any issues, is by contrast going to heavily curtail what effects the jerks can have. Shady play now carries a risk to it, which largely eliminates it. Certainly there is no way for a newer player to get the impression that that is how the game is played in that case.

The idea that there aren't some jerks lurking is just naive. That TOs/Judges shouldn't be actively correcting mistakes is also naive, and not in keeping with any number of other competitive systems. I have no idea how or why you view the concept of a warning with such oversensitivity. You make it out to be a far bigger deal then it is.

When it becomes a serious issue. That's up to the Judges discression, but should basically require complaints from the other players. Judges are arbiters, not police. They fix disputes the players can't fix. If the players aren't complaining about the negligence it isn't an issue.

So the Fel/Jax issue isn't a "serious issue"? Ok, then what happens with it? Jax's player says that Fel's player certainly can't USE those tokens (oh, I guess he can keep the stress however) but shouldn't have taken them to start with; it's definitely too late to go back and do something else as the game has moved on. Of course this may not sit well with Fel's play who is now suddenly in a much worse position when he could have instead used the roll/boost maneuver to get away from Jax or out of all arcs. One player wants one thing while the other wants something else and this is a case to call a "judge" over to help make sure it doesn't happen again.

Sometimes a player may not recognize the negligence which can lead to the other player continually abusing that. This is the stuff that needs to be stopped.

As for handing out warnings have you ever tried to keep track of some "little" thing without actually having a method of doing so? Not giving a warning would be a little like not having some record of buying coffee every morning. It may be "fine" now but it becomes impossible to track the long term cost of your coffee when there is no record of it. When you're short on money and ask someone to help with your finances when there is no record of "coffee" purchases it is impossible to see that as a problem.

That player is then going to after the event post online asking if XYZ are legal and end up feeling cheated when everyone replies with a resounding no.

Which I will point out has happened here a number of times. I've seen a dozen or so posts in the rule forms about something that happened at some event, and it was clear that someone was breaking the rules, intentional or not.

Allowing people to cheat is the single greatest disservice a TO can do to a game. Correcting bad but honest mistakes doesn't mean someone will get DQ'ed, I can't imagine that any here is saying there should be a hard and fast 3 strikes and you're out rule.

Just that if the TO has to be called over, and he see's people are not playing by the rules, then yes they should be spoken to about it. Doing so will improve the community by making events more newbie friendly. Not doing so will make the community worse.

Allowing people to cheat is the single greatest disservice a TO can do to a game. Correcting bad but honest mistakes doesn't mean someone will get DQ'ed, I can't imagine that any here is saying there should be a hard and fast 3 strikes and you're out rule.

If a player were to make a mistake that skewed the game in their favor, and then to later make another mistake doing the same; as a TO I'd very much consider at that point giving them a game loss on the second occasion. It's just a very fishy circumstance if the mistakes always seem to benefit them. They could be honest mistakes, but if you keep making honest mistakes in your favor your going to screw over other players, and that's not acceptable. If a player is making mistakes to their detriment what's the reason to DQ them really, maybe the further action just needs to be pulling them aside after and saying, " Hey you might want to brush up on the rules a bit, you're missing some stuff that's hurting your chances out there". Just because you want everything to be opaque and above board doesn't mean you have to be draconian about it. But giving a warning that you expect both players to be aware of the abilities and game state is not in anyway harsh. All you are doing is making what is expected from players clear. As you said doing so only protects newer players.

The larger the event though, the more I support stricter measures. At say Gencon or Worlds I'm very supportive of a 3 strike policy. If you enter those events you should know the rules, and frankly there are too many players to be able to play things by ear from a TO stand-point. As the events get bigger the odds are if a TO is seeing it, it isn't the first time it's happened.

ScottieATF, I have to say that I have agreed with most, if not all, of your posts on this matter in this thread. However, I do have to disagree with you on one thing:

There is no Scarlett W involved, ... That's it.

You're right. It isn't a Scarlet W. It's a Scarlet A

ScottieATF, I have to say that I have agreed with most, if not all, of your posts on this matter in this thread. However, I do have to disagree with you on one thing:

There is no Scarlett W involved, ... That's it.

You're right. It isn't a Scarlet W. It's a Scarlet A

Scarlett W for Warning

The onus to police the rules of the game is on both players, in a perfect world. But we aren't in a perfect world. If in the Fel/Jax example, the Fel player knows that he can't take the F/E actions, but does it anyway in hopes that the Jax player won't catch it, there isn't really much that can be done. If Fel wants to play like that, and choose to not police the rules himself, the only foil to that is for the Jax player to make sure his abilities are followed himself. It's tragic that a player with Fel would do that, but it happens.

The game isn't played with a DVR, you can't really rewind the game tape and go back and fix things easily. If the two players can work it out, that will result in the best solution, if not, I'd be apt to say the game should be played as it stands on the table. If Fel took those actions, he has gotta be able to use them (assuming he isn't still in range of Jax). If you strip away the tokens from Fel, because he shouldn't have been able to take those actions, you are abnormally altering the game state for a second time (the first being taking the illegal actions).

A game policed by the players will almost always have a better outcome than calling in the TO, I think. The burden to follow the rules, mandatory and optional, is on the players themselves. Both of them. If works especially best when each player is watching out for their own abilities.

Xwing is an error prone game. Movements are rarely "perfect", especially when bumping is involved. Firing arc interpretations are rarely perfect. Minis are bumped and repositioned leading to a butterfly effect later in the game. These are all human errors introduced into the game. Missing a mandatory effect is the same thing, an error, by both players.

If you are ignoring rules to your favor and know you are doing it, then you are scum and you know you are scum. But, most missed effects or rules and honest mistakes, and should be treated that way until there is evidence to the contrary.

If an error was made and the two players can agree on a way to correct it, perfect . If not, then play the ball as it lies.

One of the most effective ways to curtail inappropriate behavior by people who would otherwise attempt to ignore rules in a consistent and deliberate manner is simply for whoever the perceived authority in a given situation is to set an atmosphere that clearly indicates such behavior is not going to be tolerated while preserving the integrity and enjoyment of the experience for all others involved. This is true whether you are attempting to prevent shoplifting at a convenience store or prevent someone playing a game from cheating. At a convenience or retail store, the person who greets you as you walk in and asks if you need any help now and then isn't just being nice - they are letting you know they are aware of your presence in their establishment and will likely also be aware when you leave. That's a big part of the battle accomplished. When I TO an event, I have a few bulleted items right out of the Tournament Rules that I quickly review with players before we begin and make sure they know I and any others volunteering with me that day are walking around "available to help" if you need us (and watching things in the meantime to make sure nothing unfortunate takes place). I also am extra friendly and helpful to players I suspect may attempt to abuse any situation they think they can get away with. I'm not threatening, I don't rule with an iron fist - in fact, quite the opposite. I bend over backwards to find solutions when situations arise, but all within the confines of the rules and what both players agree to as agreeable outcomes. I just treat it like I would if I was a clerk in a retail store, making sure that I am always nearby and that I give off friendly helpful cues every so often that yes I am still here and yes I am still aware of you.

Aminar: When you're trying to build a community of gamers it is a bad thing. You tend to scare off the shyest of players early on and the casual ones next, leaving you with a joyless, hardcore, condescending feel to your events. If that's what you want a tournament to be go for it. Don't expect attendance.

*end quote*

You're right. It IS a bad thing when the atmosphere of something created just for fun (well and perhaps a bit of marketing) feels joyless, hardcore, and condescending. What do we do though when that is actually the intent and tactic of some of the players? Just look at the fighting game community. Then again we would have to also add mysoginistic to that list of yours, but some players (not ones I enjoy playing with of course) will actively try to discourage others from playing because they are so small minded that they think it will make it easier for them to win.

Sadly this has not hurt their attendance much....

I'm going to let you in on something, every decent sized tournament has a few jerks in attendance. It may not be a majority, but they are there. Hell every decent sized venue has some jerks in attendance even for casual play. ...The idea that there aren't some jerks lurking is just naive.

As a tournament player of various miniature games over the last 20+ years, I've actually been extremely impressed by how few TFG's I've encountered with X-wing.

Having played at half a dozen venues for the last couple years, I've not encountered anyone I wouldn't happily play again... and only *heard* of a couple of players that would be--at worst--annoying to face.

I don't know if it's the relatively high average player age (well over 30, in my experience), or the nature of Star Wars fandom in itself, but my experience with X-wing at the competitive level has been overwhelmingly positive.

Stuff brought up on here is why I don't really play in many tourneys and never any beyond the local gaming store. I don't know what it is but when people start playing "officially" it is like a Jeckyl and Hyde reaction with some players. I don't ever play a game for anything other than fun.

If you strip away the tokens from Fel, because he shouldn't have been able to take those actions, you are abnormally altering the game state for a second time (the first being taking the illegal actions).

Except you're not altering the game, you're just pointing out the fact that Fel's player said some words about actions and placed some pieces of cardboard on the table, but did not take any focus or evade actions (and in fact voluntarily skipped their "perform action" step). All removing the cardboard pieces from the table does is remove some random clutter, just like if a player accidentally dropped a shield token or some crumbs from their snack onto the table.

And, in any case, I disagree about it being wrong to reverse the game and fix a mistake. You should always fix a mistake, as long as it is possible to do so without speculating about what might have happened. Removing tokens is that kind of situation, nothing has happened that depended on those tokens so you can just take them away and restore a legal game state. Going back to fix the mistake would only be a problem if Fel's player had spent those tokens and then later, after even more dice have been rolled, someone realized that Fel shouldn't have had any tokens available. Obviously at this point you can't go back and fix the mistake because there's too much guessing involved in trying to restore a legal game state. So in that case you warn both players and make a note of it, just in case the problem happens again and it starts to look more like cheating than an innocent mistake.

Except you're not altering the game, you're just pointing out the fact that Fel's player said some words about actions and placed some pieces of cardboard on the table, but did not take any focus or evade actions (and in fact voluntarily skipped their "perform action" step). All removing the cardboard pieces from the table does is remove some random clutter, just like if a player accidentally dropped a shield token or some crumbs from their snack onto the table.

It is nowhere near as simple as you propose.

Whenever taking an action, you are saying “I am performing this action” and in reply your opponent replies “OK you are performing that action” these words are rarely said but clearly implied.

If you have an effect that prevents this action from happening you must say something at that point, you cannot simply allow an action to be taken, and to be clear it HAS been taken, and then say later on at a time convenient to you “oh BTW you messed up because you shouldn’t have those actions because I ‘forgot’ to tell you, I'm just going to take your counters away now leaving your interceptor exposed” I’m sorry but that is far to abusable by the owner of Carnor.

Now had you reminded the Fel player about this effect for the 3 previous rounds if they kept trying to take focus actions etc. I could understand somewhat, but as it stands your solution to say “sorry you voluntarily chose not to take an action” is just untenable.

I'm going to let you in on something, every decent sized tournament has a few jerks in attendance. It may not be a majority, but they are there. Hell every decent sized venue has some jerks in attendance even for casual play. ...The idea that there aren't some jerks lurking is just naive.

As a tournament player of various miniature games over the last 20+ years, I've actually been extremely impressed by how few TFG's I've encountered with X-wing.

Having played at half a dozen venues for the last couple years, I've not encountered anyone I wouldn't happily play again... and only *heard* of a couple of players that would be--at worst--annoying to face.

I don't know if it's the relatively high average player age (well over 30, in my experience), or the nature of Star Wars fandom in itself, but my experience with X-wing at the competitive level has been overwhelmingly positive.

Oh I tend to agree. My point wasn't to say that X-wing tournaments are full of assholes, but just that they are there. I played Warmachine for a number of years and despite having even less prizing then FFGs events, and the age being as you said 30+ on average, that game is full of them. There were high level players who's names were used as a synonym for "to cheat your opponent through shady play". A lot of that was because judging at the time was really lax. I hear they've made strides in that area though. But it ruined the game for me, and made coming in as a newer player really perilous. I knew my rules and never let anyone get over on me with anything silly, but it was exhausting. New players not so lucky, you'd hear some horror stories. And for this game as noted by another poster you see those forum posts from time to time. A present and active TO goes a long way to keeping that stuff out of events, which protects newer players.

But as you've said I am generally impressed with the crowd FFGs games in general draw.

The fel/jax example is clearly just a mistake, it is playing the game by the rules. You screwed up.

Other thing is the examples given for the OP, where the cards specifically tell you to play it that way, then if you are not doing it, and waiting for your opponent to remind you, even if you know the rules, it is obviously trying to cheat by not playing the game by the rules. The examples 1/2 sounded to me total dickmoves. I don't know but as a competitive player i had never needed that kind of stuff, and if anything, it goes in detriment of my win, the challenge and game experience, so it is a big nono to me. If you open that can of worms, what is next ? Is trashtalk fine ?

Luckily this game is quite straightforward and simple so knowing the rules and how they interact with each other is not complicated to really get into arguements. And i really enjoy that.

By the way, about the discussion in tournaments. Yes, you should know how the rules work if you get into a tournament.