More like "We both broke this rule that said we had to do something. What should we do about it?"

It should be handled roughly the same way as someone missing bleed triggers on a figure, shooting and ignoring range, or moving a unit while stunned only to realize later.

In the nationals, the champion took a shot that was illegal, and they played a few more activations. Later, they realized it, and rewound the game. Because that's what you should do when someone breaks a required rule.

Both players are responsible for the game state.

If you can rewind a game without compromising hidden information (ie- cards in hand), it's not a bad idea.

I lean towards the side of 'if it's a non-optional trigger, and you don't inform your opponent, then you are cheating' side. But, I can also see the point of it is your cards, you are responsible for for your effects.

I have played Elite Stormtroopers for a while and maybe remember to put a focus token on another in the group once or even twice in a game. Sometimes I forget all game.

Now having to remember what options my opponent has available to them at certain times will never happen if I cant remember to do this for my figures.

But if it's unenforceable then what's the point?

Placing a mission token "On the figure's base" is also unenforceable.

While the word of the law says it's cheating, you literally cannot ever punish an opponent for it. So why does it exist at all? It can't be classed as cheating if you can never prove it.

What you are saying basically translates to if I find a way to cheat that can't be proven I do not cheat. That's neat!

That's not exactly true.

What I'm saying is that it's impossible to punish someone for something that can't be proven.

And what's worse, OP was suggesting that both players be punished for cheating when they simply forgot.

I'm not advocating cheating. I'm just saying that a more lenient and common sense interpretation of the rules is better for everyone.

There's a difference between bad sportsmanship and cheating too.

Here's an interesting example from a Regionals match last weekend.

My opponent had Luke standing next to my RGC. He did a saber strike and then performed a shot at the RGC. I was so excited that he didn't move away from me because I was holding Flurry of Blades and I had initiative next turn. I was already thinking about the next turn. I didn't even realize that he shouldn't have attacked twice until I got home later that evening.

On one hand, it as pretty horrible cheating to attack twice. On the other hand I didn't pick up on it at the time, and on the third hand, his lack of movement allowed me to kill Luke with 3 attacks the following turn. I didn't even need all 3 attacks to kill Luke, and would have probably killed him anyway, but that doesn't matter.

So who cheated? He attacked twice for clear advantage, and I didn't notice which was to my benefit next turn.

We can't take it back because neither of us noticed till hours later.

We can't nullify the result or replay it since the tournament is over.

Another situation in a different game happened when my opponent declared the use of Reinforcements, he went and placed the figure before I even had a chance to say anything. I used Comm Disruption, to stop Reinforcements and he took his figure back off the board, and started his first activation. But in the confusion, and him subsequently starting his first activation rather quickly, I forgot to play my Reinforcements.

When I asked a minute later he said no.

Now, that's fair enough but it just shows how easy it can be to make mistakes, especially when someone already has a plan in their head and goes to carry it out very quickly. That's why I usually like to verbalize everything I'm doing (eg, "and now for my second action....").

What I'm trying to say is that 95% of the time, **** like that is just an accident. A mistake. It happens and it's not really fair to somehow magically punish one or both players for a honest mistake.

Even more so when you simply can't prove malicious intent.

In your Luke/RGC example, you both broke the rules. Obviously if a judge or someone saw it eariler, you could have tried to rewind game state. Potentially you would both get a warning at a high end event.

In the situation with Reinforcements, arguably the opponent was breaking the rules by using fast play to try to skip your chance to react. By not saying "Do you have any start of round effects?" and continuing play, he is skipping your opportunity to make a move, which is explicitly against the tournament rules.

If I were you, I would have called the judge over in this scenario and argued my case for letting me play Reinforcements.

Even if you unintentionally break the rules, you still broke the rules. At the highest level of play, that is grounds for warnings/game loss. The intent of giving warnings to players that do these things is that if you accumulate enough, you get ejected. Normally, making random mistakes that you and your opponent can't fix together won't be enough to get a legitimate player in trouble. For someone that is abusing the system though, that should be enough to trigger some flags that they're causing trouble.

None of this negates the objective fact that if you allow mandatory triggers to pass without them occurring, you are breaking the rules.

If you think it's okay to break the rules to your advantage by doing things like not telling your opponent to focus his elite stormtrooper or hide a unit with Adapt, well, I guess that's that.

Execpt that is not what the judge does, read the role of the judge In the tourney doc. The job is NOT to be sure all rules are applied correctly to all games at all times- it is simply impossible and unrealistic. The players are expected, especially in ffg, to play correctly and act mature to resolve disuptes and are in fact 'running the game'. The judge steps in when there is disagreement of the rules and resolve disputes.

I prefer strategies to avoid it happening in the first place rather than having to awkwardly correct the game state after the fact. So from a practical standpoint, going forward I will - when playing Blaise - start each round by placing a Hidden token on my opponent's discard pile as a physical reminder(and vice versa, if my opponent is playing him).

Should my opponent - though I cannot imagien it being a problem - be hesitant to allow me to do that, I'll a) point to Blaise's ability being mandatory and that we are thus both responsible for it being triggered and b) remind him that this is as much a helping indicator to him as well, to not miss the fact that he will be buffing me with his first command card each round.

Yes, there might still be a few cards that are not immediately put in the discard pile and yes, you will now have to remember to place the Hidden token at the start of each game round. However, I suspect that one of the reasons that Blaise's trigger is so easily missed, is because it is not happening a set time. Most other figure specific abilities are relevant when that figure becomes active or is becoming a defender. This trigger instead happens at an arbitrary time throughout the round; and one where the unexpected turn of events - potentially game changing - from the command cards stealing your attention at a time where you should be remembering a totally unrelated effect. I think getting into the routine of dropping the Hidden token onto the discard pile at a set time, start of each round, should be far easier than keeping Blaise's trigger in mind at all times throughout the game.

From the tournament rules:

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES Players are expected to follow the game's rules, remembering to perform actions and use card effects when indicated. If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he or she cannot retroactively use it without the consent of his or her opponent. Players are expected to act with respect and not intentionally distract or rush an opponent with the intent of forcing a missed opportunity.

So both of you have the opportunity to agree on something that seems fair.

Noticing a mandatory effect which is beneficial for your opponent and not telling him or her is bad sportsmanship or cheating. Of course you hardly have a proof if that is the case.

If the game already went on and dice were rolled, hidden information given (by cards being played e.g,) or decisions made based on the incorrect game state it is not so easy or impossible to just rewind.

If I were judge I would lay more responsibility on the controller of the card because he or she has it right in front of him or her. So I would say sorry, bad luck for you.

From what I can read out of the tournament rules it is up to the judge how to solve the problem if both players can't agree on something. If the opponent admits to purposely ignoring the effect the next question based on tournament tier would be can he or she also be considered to have knowledge of his or her responsibility to remind you of the effect.

No where here does it say not reminding them of something is cheating. Rushing them and trying to distract them is. It may be bad sportmanlike but people do it in the LCGs all the time. A player is responsible for their triggers and shouldn't expect take-backs from your opponent for those that are missed.

Most other games have framework events, like the first player token passing from player to player. If this doesn't happen and after Player A decides who to activate ti's a bigger issue. Both players are responsible for this, but triggers on your card are your own responsibility, you can't really throw that on your opponent.

Cremate, that's a really good idea.

KennedyHawk, the problem is that if you're allowed to skip this mandatory trigger and have it not be cheating, how can you really argue that you're not allowed to skip any mandatory trigger your opponent will let you get away with?

The answer I got from the game designer, which I posted on page 1, says it is both players' responsibility for both positive and negative triggers. If it's your responsibility and you don't follow it, then you're not following the rules.

Both players are responsible for Adapt, Last Stand, Vengeance, Relentless, and other mandatory triggers.

I know you don't want to be responsible for making sure your opponent follows the mandatory Adapt trigger, but you are. It should carry the same weight as any other mandatory rule in the game. Just because it is on your opponent's card and helps your opponent does not matter.

Cremate, that's a really good idea.

KennedyHawk, the problem is that if you're allowed to skip this mandatory trigger and have it not be cheating, how can you really argue that you're not allowed to skip any mandatory trigger your opponent will let you get away with?

The answer I got from the game designer, which I posted on page 1, says it is both players' responsibility for both positive and negative triggers. If it's your responsibility and you don't follow it, then you're not following the rules.

Both players are responsible for Adapt, Last Stand, Vengeance, Relentless, and other mandatory triggers.

I know you don't want to be responsible for making sure your opponent follows the mandatory Adapt trigger, but you are. It should carry the same weight as any other mandatory rule in the game. Just because it is on your opponent's card and helps your opponent does not matter.

We literally had a situation like this come up at Adepticon and it was ruled the opposite way. My opponent was told he's responsible for remembering his own triggers not recalling them a turn later and trying to retroactively force them. That's how it works for every other FFG game outside of "framework events" these are different from mandatory triggers.

I'll write another rules question but if this is how they want the game played then it's more moronic than ever.

I posted exactly what I got from Paul Winchester. Both players are responsible for mandatory triggers, both positive and negative. I explicitly asked if I was required to remind my opponent of things like Relentess and Vengeance, and the answer was yes.

If you were not required to follow mandatory triggers, it seems like you should just try to ignore as many rules as possible in the hopes that your opponent forgets, then claim too bad it was their responsibility.

OK, so let's assume, that mandatory triggers are both players' responsibility.

The only ways to judge a situation, where a mandatory rule wasn't used, would be to rewind the game (most often not possible), to restart the game (on tournaments impossible due to time restrictions), to ignore the mistake and go on playing (unfair for at least one player), or to stop the game and disqualify someone (noone want's that).

For a TO this is a very inconvenient situation. No matter what I decide, it feels wrong.

In short: How do I (the TO) enforce the rules, when both players forget a mandatory trigger?.

I posted exactly what I got from Paul Winchester. Both players are responsible for mandatory triggers, both positive and negative. I explicitly asked if I was required to remind my opponent of things like Relentess and Vengeance, and the answer was yes.

If you were not required to follow mandatory triggers, it seems like you should just try to ignore as many rules as possible in the hopes that your opponent forgets, then claim too bad it was their responsibility.

You aren't ignoring rules you just aren't holding yourself responsible for your opponent's play.

I received my ruling directly from judges at an FFG event so I'm quite surprised to see the ruling fully reversed.

You are ignoring rules because you are responsible for mandatory triggers.

Feel free to submit another rules query. I'd be curious if they say the same thing again. I just double checked, the Paul Winchester forwarded it to their OrganizedPlay email, and they responded from that with the answer I posted on page 1. The response was from 2/5/2016. I would hope FFG judges would be on the same page, but there's always the chance for mistakes.

As for how a TO should enforce the rules, I have no idea what kind of guidance they given official TOs on resolving conflicts where players don't follow the rules.

I would expect any guidance to be reflective of competitive tier.

At low levels, you should probably try to rewind as much as possible to follow the rules regardless of who gets some kind of advantage from having seen future events.

At high levels, you should rewind if reasonbly possible without giving away too much, otherwise the effect is missed. Additionally, both players should probably get a warning of some kind.

Of course, this only matters if a judge has to get involved. If both players can agree on a compromise, you should just go with that. However, if the player for whom the mandatory trigger is negative insists that it should be missed completely with no consequences, I think a judge should definitely be called over to reduce the possibility of someone continuously getting away with skipping rules they don't like.

You are ignoring rules because you are responsible for mandatory triggers.

Feel free to submit another rules query. I'd be curious if they say the same thing again. I just double checked, the Paul Winchester forwarded it to their OrganizedPlay email, and they responded from that with the answer I posted on page 1. The response was from 2/5/2016. I would hope FFG judges would be on the same page, but there's always the chance for mistakes.

As for how a TO should enforce the rules, I have no idea what kind of guidance they given official TOs on resolving conflicts where players don't follow the rules.

I would expect any guidance to be reflective of competitive tier.

At low levels, you should probably try to rewind as much as possible to follow the rules regardless of who gets some kind of advantage from having seen future events.

At high levels, you should rewind if reasonbly possible without giving away too much, otherwise the effect is missed. Additionally, both players should probably get a warning of some kind.

Of course, this only matters if a judge has to get involved. If both players can agree on a compromise, you should just go with that. However, if the player for whom the mandatory trigger is negative insists that it should be missed completely with no consequences, I think a judge should definitely be called over to reduce the possibility of someone continuously getting away with skipping rules they don't like.

Ignoring rules is not the same from missing rules. 2 different concepts. Ignoring rules explicitly implies intent.

I am sure the mandatory stress from rebel captive in Xwing was ruled as a missed opportunity. Basically, the same long discussion. Of course, both players are responsible, no one is saying otherwise, but I would expect the player who brings Blaise would have a better grasp of how the character works and is familiar with him since he is on your list, so logic follows the player thus would have a greater responsibility to ensure it is played correctly think of it as a 60-40%.

Cremate, that's a really good idea.

KennedyHawk, the problem is that if you're allowed to skip this mandatory trigger and have it not be cheating, how can you really argue that you're not allowed to skip any mandatory trigger your opponent will let you get away with?

The answer I got from the game designer, which I posted on page 1, says it is both players' responsibility for both positive and negative triggers. If it's your responsibility and you don't follow it, then you're not following the rules.

Both players are responsible for Adapt, Last Stand, Vengeance, Relentless, and other mandatory triggers.

I know you don't want to be responsible for making sure your opponent follows the mandatory Adapt trigger, but you are. It should carry the same weight as any other mandatory rule in the game. Just because it is on your opponent's card and helps your opponent does not matter.

Because there are a lot of command cards (> 100?) and text in the game and shocker, maybe not everyone has every detail minute detail memorized and can recall everything at any given time in a pressure stressful environment. Seems reasonable that the person who brings the list has slightly more responsibility to make sure it is played without missing triggers since the player actually brought the list and had time to prep, read, plan and heck write it down. I played in a tourney and forgot most the whole day to play my elite stormtrooper focus ability. Would I would say my opponents were 1/2 as responsible for letting me forget this? No it is my error, as I was not prepared and it cost me; I needed practice and was playing the elites for the first time. Failure to properly plan and practice and familiarize yourself with your own list should be tactically punished by not playing optimally.

As for how a TO should enforce the rules, I have no idea what kind of guidance they given official TOs on resolving conflicts where players don't follow the rules.

As far as I know, there is NO guidance at all.

Cremate, that's a really good idea.

KennedyHawk, the problem is that if you're allowed to skip this mandatory trigger and have it not be cheating, how can you really argue that you're not allowed to skip any mandatory trigger your opponent will let you get away with?

The answer I got from the game designer, which I posted on page 1, says it is both players' responsibility for both positive and negative triggers. If it's your responsibility and you don't follow it, then you're not following the rules.

Both players are responsible for Adapt, Last Stand, Vengeance, Relentless, and other mandatory triggers.

I know you don't want to be responsible for making sure your opponent follows the mandatory Adapt trigger, but you are. It should carry the same weight as any other mandatory rule in the game. Just because it is on your opponent's card and helps your opponent does not matter.

Because there are a lot of command cards (> 100?) and text in the game and shocker, maybe not everyone has every detail minute detail memorized and can recall everything at any given time in a pressure stressful environment. Seems reasonable that the person who brings the list has slightly more responsibility to make sure it is played without missing triggers since the player actually brought the list and had time to prep, read, plan and heck write it down. I played in a tourney and forgot most the whole day to play my elite stormtrooper focus ability. Would I would say my opponents were 1/2 as responsible for letting me forget this? No it is my error, as I was not prepared and it cost me; I needed practice and was playing the elites for the first time. Failure to properly plan and practice and familiarize yourself with your own list should be tactically punished by not playing optimally.

You're mistaking playing optimally with playing correctly.

Last Stand is not an optional ability. When an elite stormtrooper dies, another in the squad becomes focused. Period. That is just what elite stormtroopers do when they die.

You're suggesting it is okay to let your opponent miss the Last Stand trigger. It is not okay to do that, because that is breaking the rules.

There is nothing that says this is somehow less mandatory than other rule in the game just because it benefits your opponent.

You can't keep initiative unless your opponent remembers to take it. You can't attack with your stunned guy unless your opponent reminds you he is stunned. You can't make impossible line of sight attacks unless your opponent calls you out on it.

Similarly, you can't ignore Last Stand unless your opponent remembers to apply it.

At a high competitive level of play, just because something is on your opponent's card does not mean you are free to ignore it if your opponent doesn't remember it.

Last Stand is not an optional ability. When an elite stormtrooper dies, another in the squad becomes focused. Period. That is just what elite stormtroopers do when they die.

Actually, Last Stand reads:

When you are defeated, choose another figure in your group. That figure becomes Focused.

[Devil's Advocate] If I were absolutely new to this forum, and hadn't read all this, I'd think, the following could be a legit interpretation: A player's Stormtrooper dies, the player doesn't Focus another Stormtrooper. The player was obliged to choose a Stormtrooper to become Focused, but he didn't. He was not following the rules. It wasn't the other player's responsibility, to choose one, but his. As he broke the rules by not choosing a Stormtrooper, he can choose now to either be disqualified or go on playing without the Focus.

In any other game I've played, it would be that way. If these were real-live laws and not a game's rules, it would be that way.

By the way: I couldn't even find a rule that defines exactly, what is a mandatory trigger and what is not. [/Devil's Advocate]

An ability is mandatory unless it includes a cost that must be paid to use the ability. If the ability contains "may", "upto", or other words to that effect, the ability triggers but can be chosen to not affect the game state.

(See Abilities, page 2 of RRG.)

An ability is mandatory unless it includes a cost that must be paid to use the ability. If the ability contains "may", "upto", or other words to that effect, the ability triggers but can be chosen to not affect the game state.

(See Abilities, page 2 of RRG.)

Just read Abilities, page 2 of RRG 3 times. Couldn't find anything regarding any of this.

Abilities can have one or more requirements. If the requirements cannot be met, the ability cannot be performed.

* Some abilities have costs which must be paid in order to resolve the ability. Here is a list of the different types of ability costs:

The Abilities section from RRG say that when Exhaust is a cost, the figure must exhaust the card to be able to use the ability. This suggests that by not exhausting they choose not to trigger the ability. Also, if the card is already exhausted, the ability is not available.

To use an ability which requires an action as a cost (special action), the figure must spend an action to be able to use the ability. However, you are not forced to use any available special action even if you have actions to spend. So, you can choose to spend the action or not.

To use a surge ability during an attack, you must spend a surge to trigger the ability. You don't need to trigger an ability even if you have extra surges. (Also, Spend Surges step in the RRG explicitly says "may spend".)

Abilities with Threat cost are not mandatory either. Usually abilities costing threat also require exhausting them. So, the imperial player does not need to both spend threat and exhaust class cards like Executioner or Combat Medic at the first opportunity.

It could be ruled that abilities without cost are voluntary, overriding previous rulings about mandatory triggers. But, abilities like Last Stand, Distracting and Protector are written in a way that they do look like mandatory.

overriding previous rulings about mandatory triggers. But, abilities like Last Stand, Distracting and Protector are written in a way that they do look like mandatory.

That's my concern. I just can't find anything in the rules concerning mandatory triggers. No definition, no rule, etc.. Not even in the FAQ. "they do look like" is not the best way to strengthen a case.

By the way: Even the Missed Opportunities rule in the Tournament Regulations exlpcitly DOESN'T make a difference between mandatory and non-mandatory effects here.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES

Players are expected to follow the game’s rules, remembering to perform actions and use card effects when indicated. If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he or she cannot retroactively use it without the consent of his or her opponent.

Therefore, I'd really love a rules reference concerning this topic.

My Interpretation of the Missed Opportunities rule would be:

- You forgot one of your own rules, that would have been good for you (e.g. Sentinel): Sorry, you cannot cannot retroactively use it, go on with the game.

- You forgot one of your own rules, that would have been bad for you (e.g. Disposable): You cheated, you'll be punished (somewhere in between a warning and a disqualification).

overriding previous rulings about mandatory triggers. But, abilities like Last Stand, Distracting and Protector are written in a way that they do look like mandatory.

That's my concern. I just can't find anything in the rules concerning mandatory triggers. No definition, no rule, etc.. Not even in the FAQ. "they do look like" is not the best way to strengthen a case.

By the way: Even the Missed Opportunities rule in the Tournament Regulations exlpcitly DOESN'T make a difference between mandatory and non-mandatory effects here.

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES

Players are expected to follow the game’s rules, remembering to perform actions and use card effects when indicated. If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he or she cannot retroactively use it without the consent of his or her opponent.

Therefore, I'd really love a rules reference concerning this topic.

Exactly.

There are a lot of triggers in other FFG games.

Star Wars LCG for example.

Emperor Palpatine has a trigger that says "Reaction: When blankity blank leaves play return an event from your discard to your hand.

No where in the rulebook does it say this is optional but if an opponent blows by it, they are not allowed to just go back and say "Well this thing left play so I get my event now" They are responsible for resolving their triggers at the appropriate time. Sometimes the terminology may is used sometimes it's not.

In these other games responsibility does not fall on to your opponent to remind you of your triggers, or to let you take them back.

There are other mechanics in the game, like removing focus tokens, and ticking a timer dial that are consider mandatory game framework events. These are the things that fall under "both players are responsible for maintaining a legal game state". So in IA that would equate to passing the first player token, and some special mechanics to do with objectives.

I'll see what FFG says to my rules question but if it really comes down to the way the OP thinks then I'd argue that 1/4th to 1/3rd of the skill was just wiped from the Skirmish game.

My Interpretation of the Missed Opportunities rule would be:

- You forgot one of your own rules, that would have been good for you (e.g. Sentinel): Sorry, you cannot cannot retroactively use it, go on with the game.

- You forgot one of your own rules, that would have been bad for you (e.g. Disposable): You cheated, you'll be punished (somewhere in between a warning and a disqualification).

This is how it has worked at every event I've attended for all FFG games.

Did you guys not read my rules query from page 1?
I asked if I had to remind the user of Relentless and Vengeance (same wording as Last Stand).

The answer was yes.

There really does not seem to be much room for argument in that statement. The response explicitly says there is no difference between positive or negative rules, you are required to follow them all the same.

Trust me, I want to make my opponents miss everything they possibly can as much as the next guy, but I don't want to be cheating.