Okay, I'm curious about what the official stance for TO's on this is. When a conflict comes up on an issue, and one of the players has an e-mail from an FFG employee stating a clarification, is it admissible to the TO? Can the TO just refuse to accept it as admissible? Is this done regularly? I have never seen this actually happen at a live event, but I also can't find a ruling that states that an e-mail is an addition to the FAQ as a rules reference. I know we have stopped all out wars about various things in these forums because of the almighty e-mail clarification, but I just want to know how "legal" it is for tournaments.

And yes, Lyraeus, I know how you feel on this from our discussion the other day. I'm expanding the conversation here to get more feedback for my clarification.

+ A Marshal has full and utter responsibility to issue their interpretations of the rules as they see fit.

At the end of the day, what it comes down it, is the Judge/Marshal. Their call is the end.

You may influence their call with said Email Printout... But in the end... their decision is final, even if it is against the FAQ ruling ... So long as they are consistent with it, and believe the FAQ is in error....

Judges are supposed to be familiar with the FAQs.... Although, I dare say a few of them are also familiar with the rules forum, they do not have to be.

From the Tournament Rules Document:

(Italic Emphasis Mine)

Marshal

An event may have any number of marshals, including none. A marshal is an expert in the game’s rules and regulations and is the final authority on the questions about rules, regulations, and player disputes.

Judge

An event may have any number of judges, including none. A judge is well versed in the game’s rules and regulations. A judge’s responsibilities include assisting players to resolve disputes and answer questions regarding the game’s rules.

HOWEVER:

You can also argue that said printouts are actually not allowed due to this ruling:

Taking Notes and Outside Material

Players cannot take notes or reference outside material or information during a tournament round. However, players may reference official rule documents or game components that do not contain hidden information at any time or ask a judge for clarification from official rule documents. Official rule documents include all rules documents available on the Star Wars: Armada page of our website, those found in a Star Wars: Armada product, or any portion thereof

As an Email is not an official rule document, as the Forums are not a Product, nor are they the Star Wars: Armada Page of the Website.

It is also worth noting that an email can be easily forged and verification can be difficult. So there is also going to be a matter of how well known you are to the TO and then we have a question of trust. A good TO may realise this trust issue and just not allow the letter as to not create a problem for himself if he rules against your letter, I'll rule with what I have before me.

Also, we have had one rule that was overturned in a FAQ so you may also have an issue as to the date of the letter and at what point in time it was.

In general a good TO will try to remain fair and unbiased. So I would probably just take my rule books, FAQ and Tournament Guide and accept that the TO will try his best to ensure my opponent and I play fair.

For a TO to do his Job "by the letter of the law"....

They are to utilise the following:


Rules Documents

- Rules provided within Product

(This basically means the Learn to Play book, the Rules Reference Guide, and the "Contain" Rules in the Large Ships, and the "Squadron" Rules in the Rogues and Villains)

- Rules on the Website
(This includes the current FAQ, the current Tournament Document, and the current Standard Event Document).

That is it.

Emails are worthless, until such time as they are presented in the FAQ... However, they may frame their decision if the statement in question is not inside the FAQ... But the decision is theres. If they make the decision after reading it, great. If they make the decision after wiping their arse with it, just as great! That's how much weight it should have... By the very rules themselves, Emails are effectively guidelines for casual play , and until they become part of the FAQ, they are not a rules document, and thus, mean absolutely squat .

It is also worth noting that an email can be easily forged and verification can be difficult.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I always pull out this e-mail:

To Whom it May Concern (Current TO, Marshal, Judge, etc.),

That ruling you were just called over for is clearly in CaribbeanNinja's favor. There is no need to measure, check the RRG, or FAQ documents. Move along.

This is an extremely official e-mail message that was absolutely NOT forged and again, is very official. Also, isn't CNinja such a nice guy?

Thanks for TO'ing!

Michael Gernes

Game Producer

[email protected]

It is also worth noting that an email can be easily forged and verification can be difficult.

Also, isn't CNinja such a nice guy?

Dang-nab-it, I thought that was an official email until I got there, then I knew it was a forgery. A good one but no the less. :D

Wow! How did you get that email!!!

Wow! How did you get that email!!!

Practice!

For a TO to do his Job "by the letter of the law"....

They are to utilise the following:

Rules Documents

- Rules provided within Product

(This basically means the Learn to Play book, the Rules Reference Guide, and the "Contain" Rules in the Large Ships, and the "Squadron" Rules in the Rogues and Villains)

- Rules on the Website

(This includes the current FAQ, the current Tournament Document, and the current Standard Event Document).

That is it.

Emails are worthless, until such time as they are presented in the FAQ... However, they may frame their decision if the statement in question is not inside the FAQ... But the decision is theres. If they make the decision after reading it, great. If they make the decision after wiping their arse with it, just as great! That's how much weight it should have... By the very rules themselves, Emails are effectively guidelines for casual play , and until they become part of the FAQ, they are not a rules document, and thus, mean absolutely squat .

For a TO to do his Job "by the letter of the law"....

They are to utilise the following:

Rules Documents

- Rules provided within Product

(This basically means the Learn to Play book, the Rules Reference Guide, and the "Contain" Rules in the Large Ships, and the "Squadron" Rules in the Rogues and Villains)

- Rules on the Website

(This includes the current FAQ, the current Tournament Document, and the current Standard Event Document).

That is it.

Emails are worthless, until such time as they are presented in the FAQ... However, they may frame their decision if the statement in question is not inside the FAQ... But the decision is theres. If they make the decision after reading it, great. If they make the decision after wiping their arse with it, just as great! That's how much weight it should have... By the very rules themselves, Emails are effectively guidelines for casual play , and until they become part of the FAQ, they are not a rules document, and thus, mean absolutely squat .

Not all this game that are responded too are in the FAQ. For instance where you measure for an attack vs for distance

I know that.

But that doesn't stop it being illegal until such time as it is.

As I said, they are guidelines for casual play ...

They are inadmissable as "Rules'.

For a TO to do his Job "by the letter of the law"....

They are to utilise the following:

Rules Documents

- Rules provided within Product

(This basically means the Learn to Play book, the Rules Reference Guide, and the "Contain" Rules in the Large Ships, and the "Squadron" Rules in the Rogues and Villains)

- Rules on the Website

(This includes the current FAQ, the current Tournament Document, and the current Standard Event Document).

That is it.

Emails are worthless, until such time as they are presented in the FAQ... However, they may frame their decision if the statement in question is not inside the FAQ... But the decision is theres. If they make the decision after reading it, great. If they make the decision after wiping their arse with it, just as great! That's how much weight it should have... By the very rules themselves, Emails are effectively guidelines for casual play , and until they become part of the FAQ, they are not a rules document, and thus, mean absolutely squat .

Not all this game that are responded too are in the FAQ. For instance where you measure for an attack vs for distance

I know that.

But that doesn't stop it being illegal until such time as it is.

As I said, they are guidelines for casual play ...

They are inadmissable as "Rules'.

For a TO to do his Job "by the letter of the law"....

They are to utilise the following:

Rules Documents

- Rules provided within Product

(This basically means the Learn to Play book, the Rules Reference Guide, and the "Contain" Rules in the Large Ships, and the "Squadron" Rules in the Rogues and Villains)

- Rules on the Website

(This includes the current FAQ, the current Tournament Document, and the current Standard Event Document).

That is it.

Emails are worthless, until such time as they are presented in the FAQ... However, they may frame their decision if the statement in question is not inside the FAQ... But the decision is theres. If they make the decision after reading it, great. If they make the decision after wiping their arse with it, just as great! That's how much weight it should have... By the very rules themselves, Emails are effectively guidelines for casual play , and until they become part of the FAQ, they are not a rules document, and thus, mean absolutely squat .

Not all this game that are responded too are in the FAQ. For instance where you measure for an attack vs for distance

I know that.

But that doesn't stop it being illegal until such time as it is.

As I said, they are guidelines for casual play ...

They are inadmissable as "Rules'.

Oh good! I can measure from plastic to plastic for attacks now

No, because a Hull zone is defined as Cardboard, and Plastic is not. And you measure Attack Range from Cardboard to Cardboard.

That was not a "Rules Change". That was a reinforcement statement.

Read your **** rules.

Of Course... If the Question Came up, and you were a Marshal/Judge , then you could rule it in that favour.

BUT, you would either have to be Marshal, or a Judge and not playing in the game where it happened.

But if you were a Judge, then you would have to show reinforcement in the rules and FAQs beforehand.

THEN, if there were still a "Dispute", then it would be forwarded to the Marshal, who would make the final Call..........

There's a flowchart here, and the decisions are framed by the information is available...

It is only a Rules Issue if you Argue it, and Dispute it ....

And do you want that on your head as well? The Guy who is willing to dispute rules because there's nothing that says otherwise?

A Wise Marshal will say otherwise.

(PS)

I understand what the intent of your argument was...

... But you'll have to find a Rule that isn't actually defined in the Rulebook when you read it... Because a lot of the FAQ statements we get in Email are just clarifications and reinforcements of the Actual Rule...

XI7-vs-AP, before we got the FAQ Entry... That one is actually contentious... So look for that kind of rule next time

(PS)

I understand what the intent of your argument was...

... But you'll have to find a Rule that isn't actually defined in the Rulebook when you read it... Because a lot of the FAQ statements we get in Email are just clarifications and reinforcements of the Actual Rule...

XI7-vs-AP, before we got the FAQ Entry... That one is actually contentious... So look for that kind of rule next time

Thanks guys. I appreciate the input. These comments pretty much solidified what I was thinking.

(PS)

I understand what the intent of your argument was...

... But you'll have to find a Rule that isn't actually defined in the Rulebook when you read it... Because a lot of the FAQ statements we get in Email are just clarifications and reinforcements of the Actual Rule...

XI7-vs-AP, before we got the FAQ Entry... That one is actually contentious... So look for that kind of rule next time

There was also the (fairly recent) e-mail where a FFG employee overturned the Instigator ruling from earlier...it was rescinded in another mail, but without that one a player could theoretically change the Marshal's ruling (erroneously so).

Which is why we need to respect two things, when we're dealing with Tournaments:


1) Emails don't mean anything to you, as a Player . They're not for you. You're not allowed to have them.

2) The Marshal, and their rulings, are to be immediately and completely accepted.

Which is why we need to respect two things, when we're dealing with Tournaments:

1) Emails don't mean anything to you, as a Player . They're not for you. You're not allowed to have them.

2) The Marshal, and their rulings, are to be immediately and completely accepted.

Sounds like the only way to go.

I guess that's why it's in the tourney regs!

Which is why we need to respect two things, when we're dealing with Tournaments:

1) Emails don't mean anything to you, as a Player . They're not for you. You're not allowed to have them.

2) The Marshal, and their rulings, are to be immediately and completely accepted.

Incidentally, this is why it's a good idea to check with the TO on their interpretation of a particular question if it's likely to come up with your list and isn't covered in the rules or FAQ. Prevents unpleasant surprises during play, and gives you the chance to not build your list around an erroneous or debatable rules interpretation (stacking BCCs, for example).

Which is why we need to respect two things, when we're dealing with Tournaments:

1) Emails don't mean anything to you, as a Player . They're not for you. You're not allowed to have them.

2) The Marshal, and their rulings, are to be immediately and completely accepted.

Incidentally, this is why it's a good idea to check with the TO on their interpretation of a particular question if it's likely to come up with your list and isn't covered in the rules or FAQ. Prevents unpleasant surprises during play, and gives you the chance to not build your list around an erroneous or debatable rules interpretation (stacking BCCs, for example).

Indeed!

This was actually why I posted the "This is for doobleg to make decisions, not for us to discuss it" post in the Vassal Tournament Postie when it came up.

Because he is the Marshal, effectively. 'tis his Decision to make, whichever way he makes it

Yup, you beat me to that post.

As usual.

[ninja]

Ha!

It doesn't happen anywhere near as much as I did in the past... People - you in particular - have wised up to me...

Either that, or someone's been slipping me Decaf and I've slowed down

Speaking as a marshal/TO, I would not take an email clarification … that includes that shady note from CaribbeanNinja … though he is a very nice guy. Explains how you won that regional ;-)

An email can have a strong influence on the weak minded.