With the regional championship season upon us, I thought it might be handy to discuss the role of judges at such events, how judges should act, and what type of "beyond the table" rules people have enforced in the past.

What role do you see for judges at a Call of Cthulhu tournament?

Have you been a judge in the past? Or a player who interacted with a judge?

For example, should judges be active referees, spotting and correcting mistakes preemptively? Or should the players be expected to know the rules and catch any mistakes their opponent makes (or let them slide if it's not in their favor), and the judges remain silent?

Here are a few other questions:

How should a judge deal with slow play?

What about players who have finished their round? Should they be kept away from tables where games are still on-going (to avoid "scouting"), or can they watch and even cheer players on? Can they discuss their matches with other participants, or should they keep details of their opponent's deck to themselves?

Personally, I want my local CoC community to remain welcoming and enjoyable for veterans and casual gamers alike. I don't want to bog things down with a laundry list of do's and don'ts before an event even begins - that might only serve to suck any fun out of the day. However, I've found that establishing clear ground rules upfront is always better than backpedaling later on. Where's the balancing point?

Interesting topic. I've been a judge in other games (Warmachine tournament at Gencon a few years back, some other minis game) and I can say how they wanted it done….

1. Should judges spot and correct mistakes preemptively?

No, they did not want us to interfere with games unless a player raised their hand to call a judge. So basically they expected players to catch rules infractions themselves or know the rules. Players seem to prefer NOT being interrupted by someone who's only showing up to tell them that they're both too dumb to play the game correctly On the other hand, if you suspect one player is ignoring infractions in order to "throw" the game to the other to help them win the tournament, that bears very close watching and you may need to step in and correct it. It helps if you know ahead of time who is a newbie and who isn't.

2. How should a judge deal with slow play?

In my experience, a player could raise their hand and inform a judge that their opponent was stalling or playing slowly. The judge(s) would then remind the player to keep up speed and then generally keep an eye on that table from time to time. If it was determined a player WAS deliberately stalling they could be given a loss or ejected if they repeatedly did so in multiple games.

3. What about players who have finished their round?

Players were allowed to hang around as long as they did not disturb games in progress or block the judges from getting around. If they wanted to discuss, they were expected to move far enough from the in-progress games so as not to bother the players. Generally, over to the side of the room or whatever. However, I must point out that in minis games your army composition is fully known before the game starts (you can see the models on the table) so there's a lot less concept of "scouting". I don't know what the common practice is in the card game world.

Yipe said:

The judge is there primarily to answer any questions that may arise during play to maximize the enjoyment of the tournament. Also the Judge is often the Tournament Organizer and has to maintain the schedule of rounds (who plays who).

I've judged many different games at different scales, including Call of Cthulhu Regional Tournament last year, lots of miniature games, and some Magic.

Slow play is the most complicated issue that arises. It is hard to prove, for one. Some players are just slower than others to make decisions. I've made warnings in the past, and that was enough to stop any slow play. I did lose a tournament once because of what I perceived as intentional slow play on the part of my opponent, but them's the breaks. I don't harbor any grudge or pet peeve.

Players who finish their round early have the right to observe what is going on as long as they don't interfere with play. I don't think Scouting is that big a deal - there is a limited card pool, and in a competitive environment you can make reasonable estimates of what is coming based on the deck performance early in the game anyway.

I have no problem with players discussing their experiences, as long as they don't interfere with the games that are ongoing.

Note that if you are a player-judge, you should make sure there are at least 3 player judges so that there is never a situation where the judge has to rule over the game in which they are involved.

Q: What role do you see for judges at a Call of Cthulhu tournament?

A: Being a player-judge or a non-participant judge the role is to preside over the tournament using fair, unbiased, and resonable judgement and to make sure things are ran as smoothly as possible.

Q: Have you been a judge in the past? Or a player who interacted with a judge?

A: Yes. Yes (often).

Q: For example, should judges be active referees, spotting and correcting mistakes preemptively? Or should the players be expected to know the rules and catch any mistakes their opponent makes (or let them slide if it's not in their favor), and the judges remain silent?

A: I would encourge judges to 'remind' players of non-optional steps they have missed during a game that they happen to catch (but only if they're 100% sure the players missed something). Ultimately it is the players' responiblity to make sure all rulings are followed (especially the opponent). A judge should never interfere with the game, and defiantely never influence the game beyond ensuring that all the rules are being followed correctly. Side note, if a player purposely 'forgets' to remind his opponent or denies an opponent of a non-optional rule (ie. drawing cards during the draw phase) should be and is considered cheating. Most of the time when players 'miss' something it is unintentional and innocent, but judges must descern wether to simply remind the players, issue a warning, award game/round losses, or remove a player from the tournament.

A player should NEVER, and I repeat, NEVER utter the words "you can't do <insert non-optional rule/procedure> cause you forgot to." That is balatant cheating and should not be tolerated. If said <non-optional rule/procedure> is not an easy fix the players can adjust for themselves a judge should be summoned to remedy the situation.

To be even clearer. Judges should only enforce non-optional rules and procedure. Otherwise, if a player say… forgot to use a response in the proper time window they should not be allowed to go back and change the outcome. However, if it was forced response and if it is feasable to do so, the judge should decree to go back and use the correct outcome.

When in doubt, ask a judge. Players should never, ever, ever, feel remorse for calling a judge. Judges exsist to answer questions and handle complex situations of sometimes delicate nature.

Q: How should a judge deal with slow play?

A: Most turns take 2-3 minutes and constant rythum to decisions and play are common amongst most players (rythum may be different from player to player, but a single player will typically play at the same speed throughout the tournament and in casual play). Obviously not everyone plays at the same speed, but when turns start taking 4,5,6+ minutes and rythum is not constant judges should be paying attention to these matches (when they catch them obvioulsy). Also, its common sense to take into account stress and what is going on in the game. Late game and/or in late rounds can be quite stressful and extremely complicated and players simply require more time to process this info.

Slow play is difficult to assess, and even more difficult to catch. If a player seems to be taking unusually long time making decisions a mere word of caution (not a warning) should be given in the most non-threatening way possible. The player will react to this information. However, if a player continues either immediately or whenever they happen to be in a similiar situation you happened to noticed they were taking an unusually long amount of time, a more severe action should be taken. Actual warnings, removal from the tournament… up to the judge as to how severely and how blatanly this person was slow-playing.

Obvioulsy no judge wants to kick a player out of tournament, especially in this community as CoC players tend to be fairly geniune and good people/players. However, 2008, our rose colored glasses were broken. Blatant cheating should be not tolerated. Ever. So I offer the advice, that unless it is completely obvious, warnings and in severe cases game/round losses should be preferred penalties over kicking someone out. That said, don't hesitate to pull the trigger if a player is maliciously taking advantage of other players' trust and is bending/breaking the rules to gain a win.

Q: What about players who have finished their round? Should they be kept away from tables where games are still on-going (to avoid "scouting"), or can they watch and even cheer players on? Can they discuss their matches with other participants, or should they keep details of their opponent's deck to themselves?

A: Scouting can be a major advantage. However, theres nothing wrong with it. Watching other games, cheering players on is perfectly fine. However, helping a player by suggesting moves or otherwise unknown information known is cheating. "Go Tom Go!" is cool. "Go Tom, watch out for the fanatic!" (even if there is no fanatic to worry about) is a big no-no. Of course, a judge will have to decide, who to penalize and how to remedy the problem based on the situation. Player cooridination/sabotage is sadly a real thing. It doesn't come up too often, but is something to look out for.

Ideally, people that want to watch a match should be instructed to keep quiet so nothing 'accidently' get said. Players and judges can declare that they want quiet at anytime and the audience must obey that wish.

A: As for dicussing matches, perfectly legal. As long as it is done beyond ear shot of players still playing as to not disrupt or influence other games still in progress.

Q: Personally, I want my local CoC community to remain welcoming and enjoyable for veterans and casual gamers alike. I don't want to bog things down with a laundry list of do's and don'ts before an event even begins - that might only serve to suck any fun out of the day. However, I've found that establishing clear ground rules upfront is always better than backpedaling later on. Where's the balancing point?

A: I would suggest just reminding the players that it is the responsibility of both players to ensure fair play and if they have any questions to not hesistate to ask a judge any type of question and that they should never be scared or remorseful about doing so.

Thats all you really need. All of the ticky tacky stuff is generally common sense or at least common among gaming in general. Otherwise thats why judges should be on the look out and giving out 'words of friendly caution' (not warnings) to players of all experience levels if transgressions were truely innocent.

The important thing is for everyone to have fun and the rules exsist to ensure that fairness exsists so fun can blossom.

PS. Judges, don't be intimidated. "Its not in the FFG rulebook/tournament rules/FAQ, so its not cheating according to them." Is NOT a suitable defense. I don't care that Scott got away with it in '08. (sorta) Cheating is cheating and should be handled as such.

I agree with what Tom said for most everything, with the exception of scouting. Scouting is poor sportsmanship. It is specifically trying to seek knowledge of an opponents deck and play style that they are not privy to of yours.

Watching a round because you are bored and you have completed your round and want to be entertained is perfectly reasonable and in a local weekly or monthly tournament I don't think anyone really cares because it doesn't really matter, but a regional is a different thing. There are (probably) more people, from outside your local playgroup, and it carries more meaning. I think it would be best if everyone just moved from the tournament area or found something to do quietly in the area that did not involve watching others play. That said when I judge I don't try to enforce this rule so much as enforce other players enforcement of this rule. IOW if someone asks not to be watched, everyone not in that game vacates the area. Anyone who argues or attempts to observe after being asked not to gets a warning or outright penalty. If the players playing the game (both of them) don't care I'm not going to care.

As to enforcing non-optional rules, you are a referee not just the tournament organizer. What would happen if referees in sporting events didn't enforce rule infractions and just let the players handle it? It all starts to break down. If you see someone failing to follow a rule it is your job to correct it. If you see someone making a strategic or tactical mistake, that is on them. Good choices versus legal choices are the difference.

Penfold said:

I kind of agree with this. I hope scouting wouldn't happen but it does and it is impossible to control it. So better just allow it if you can't control it in a good way. Scouting is very important in some game I play. Of course you can lock every player to some room every time match ends and confiscate their cell phones so their friends won't give any information either about what kind of deck you gonna face in finals.

Getting information about other player's decks is inevitable.

Merely turning your head to your side and catching even a glimpse of what other people are playing is technically scouting.

Anytime you see someone elses card you're gaining knowledge. Without going to extremes this is virtually impossible to stop. It may seem shady but it really isn't.

With the exception of MAYBE the first round, most, if not all, info about a player's deck should be considered to be known by other players. Thus… making scouting a non-issue.

Having said that, going around and peeking at deck registration sheets is a little suspect… but eh. While I'm not a fan I can't condemn anyone for it especially when a player-judge is involved.

Ideally playes want to keep as much secret as possible. I get that, but its a herculean task. Even more so with so few competitors in the room.

Watching, Scouting, Seeing other cards outside of your deck/game is all basically the same thing to me and isn't cheating in my book and most other books if I recall correctly. In fact I can't think of a game where scouting or watching other games is illegal.

Edit: @ Penfold: However, I do 100% completely agree. If a player or judge feels the need to remove the audience (obvioulsy they can't remove players still in game) then that request should be obeyed (within reason of course) if it has become a distraction or influence to the game in progress.

Actually scouting is illegal in a number of games. And I believe that there needs to be a rule specifically against it or everyone should have perfect knowledge. That is to say either scouting is actively discouraged or all deck lists are available. I expect people would balk at the latter and rightly so, given that, I see no reason why scouting should be tolerated… but like I said, it is not expressly forbidden in the rules, despite my thinking that everyone knows on some level it is not precisely fair. As a TO I would support the decision of the players being scouted, and as a player I never allow anyone still in the tournament to watch me play. Period.

I haven't heard for a CCG or any game yet where scouting is illegal and I have played quite many CCGs in tournaments. Can you post how they control it and what are rules? I can't think of any good ways which would cause less hassle than it is worth.

Same way they enforce rules about shuffling to avoid deck stacking, they say it is illegal and anyone caught is eliminated from the tournament and then rely on the players to police themselves.

Penfold said:

Wow, that is hardcore. I don't want to be eliminated from tournament by random player police.

I just don't understand why CoC tournament rules would need anything against scouting when it is not seen as a huge problem in any other CCG/LCG. I think scouting is little annoying but I just accept it. In some games you can get a lot of information from some decks just by seeing few cards. In CoC it doesn't help very much if you know the opponent plays some Hastur cards because there is not a well known meta. I might understand this thing more if there would a lot of tournaments for CoC and CoC would have a well known tournament scene/meta. But right now there is no such thing for CoC (AGoT is starting to have a good tournament meta now tho). Also i don't see CoC so "hardcore" game that these kind of rules would be needed.

I would agree. There's no big money on the line, being too draconian is a turnoff.

Locally some guys were trying to run a tournament for Malifaux, a miniatures game that uses a deck of cards as a randomizer instead of dice. They wanted to implement special rules dictating how you had to shuffle and things of that sort and it killed their participation. They probably thought they were protecting against cheaters but it just wasn't appropriate to the setting and community - not to mention that even the tournaments at the big gaming conventions nobody used such things.

You may have misunderstood, the players policing themselves means they simply abide by the rules because they all recognize it is the right thing to do. When someone is found to be scouting someone simply informs the TO and he comes over and makes a decision. Once everyone knows it is not accepted it is on them to ensure they are not seen doing anything that strongly appears to be scouting.

You are right, the Cthulhu metagame is not that hardcore, it isn't like being on the MtG pro-tour with big bucks at stake. IT still sucks to walk into round three against a guy who has been pumping others for information about your deck and watching as much of your games as he can and you know nothing about his deck. It simply isn't fair. For that reason alone I believe there should be a rule against it. If I am playing a control deck or combo deck that takes a while to set up other faster decks may have finished their games and are able to see what secret tech or strategies I am employing and we all know that gives them an advantage over me if we face off. I see no reason to pretend otherwise or say it is just fine because others may not take the game as seriously as I do.

Now that said, this is not really my competitive game. AGoT is. I play this one building fun thematic decks and hardcore decks, but I will never compete in a major event because I save my travel and PTO for AGoT or my other hobbies. My local meta is a mix of players, new guys who love the theme and it is their first card game, and old hands who have been playing seriously for years. I get all the fun I need at home.

So what I am saying regarding all of this, really is just my personal opinion.

following the various arguments here, i have to think there's not THAT much benefit to knowing what deck another player is playing. the luck of the draw still weighs heavy on the outcome, as does having to make resourcing decisions. they still control what events to play and when. they can still bluff, etc. even if you know specifically what deck you're up against, the real art is in playing your deck properly against whatever threats are thrown up.

This has been a great discussion so far, and quite helpful. Thank you!

Regarding different standpoints on scouting, etc… As there is very little (if any) direction given in the official CoC tournament rules on these matters, all if this is just a matter of opinion. Nonetheless, that doesn't make it any less valid, and it's good to read the various perspectives on what players want out of their judges.

Another question of preference:

Do you want your T.O. to lay out the rules, tournament format, prize packages, etc… to everyone present before the event begins, even if it takes 10+ minutes of talking? Or would you rather have a bare-bones explanation and jump right to the action?

Well this invites a detailed discussion on game theory, but I don't want to pull any more away from the op's questions so I will just say this and we can continue this in another thread if you would like…

Knowing what cards are in my opponents deck gives me superior knowledge in how to play my own deck and what types of resourcing decisions to make. This isn't chess where you have perfect knowledge of what pieces your opponent has. The knowledge I have will allow me to more effectively bluff and read your bluffs which narrows down my decision tree making the game easier for me to play than it is for you.

I want the rules and format layed out upfront. The rules of course should have not changed since the latest FFG release and/or tournament announcement, for example: if you guys were to decide that a chapter pack that came out 20 days ago is legal even though FFG has not explicitly stated that it is, that should be said well before anyone arrives at the store with their deck.

Saying that you are doing X rounds of swiss and cutting to the top Y is helpful, I may play differently than if we are just doing cyclical pairings and whomevber has the best record takes first. Also knowing how many players in the top whatever are getting prizes avoids any surprises. I don't need to know what they are just that the top two or four players are getting something, or if it is a winner take all tournament. It sucks to think you got yourself a prize to only find out later this tournament is using a different metric than the last one you played in.

I agree, rules of the tournament up front or else you're risking problems.

I've actually been in one tournament where I was kind of hosed because they didn't announce the scenario rules and I made a move that ordinarily would have won me the game until they announced "Oh, no we're not using the normal win condition in this round".

For those of you who are interested and/or know the game, this was at a Warmachine tournament - the scenario was a (very) old version of King of the Hill that the TO had somehow found which didn't count caster kill as a win condition. Normally killing the opposing leader is ALWAYS a win condition, but this was an out of date version he was going by where apparently it didn't, and they didn't announce it.

I wasn't doing well on controlling the hill, so when I found a move to assassinate the opposing caster I took it. Cast buffs, trample my Titan (giant elephant beast) over his troops into melee with his caster. Whackity whack, clobber them a couple times and they're dead. Only then after I've spent my turn doing things to set this up which DIDN'T contest the hill control the TO tells me that this doesn't count and I lose. There's really no way to roll back the whole turn, so basically it felt like someone just yanked the rules right out from under me.

Yipe said:

You should say before tournament that there will be 4 rounds of swiss and then finals (or whatever the rules). Also have a timetable printed where everybody can check when each round starts. Also inform about prizes and who gets them. These kind of organizational can be announced just before tournament but some things would be good to know before also.

Everything which affects rules, game play or deck building should of course announced in tournament webpage (or somewhere) weeks before tournament. You should say that these specific packs are legal and tournament is using rules found in FAQ x.x and if there will be changes just before tournament they won't affect this tournament yet.

So… What did Chris get away with in 2008? Tom drops that major tease and no one else seems to be biting… Well I'm biting, dammit!

HappyDD said:

Not Chris… Scott. I wasn't there, but there were suspicions abounding about "mana-shuffling" to co-opt a phrase.

TheProfessor said:

To be fair. That video shows nothing. The whole incedent happened in first/second round.

@HappyDD: Its not wise to talk in detail about it here. If you'd like the full story shoot me an email.

Magnus Arcanis said:

I agree. We're all tempted by scandal, but this is meant to be a positive thread.

Haha, see? I switched the names just to fan the flames of controversy! But the cool level-headedness of all of you have shamed me into withdrawing my question from the public forum… but I can't edit my post. Sorry about that.

Since my visit to Gen Con 2011 I was under the impression that "judges do not interfere unless asked" is a official FFG policy for tournaments. I recently had a email exchange with Damon about this and also about the topic of scouting. I have removed some text from the mails since some content is personal but I have taken care as to not alter the meaning of this dialogue.

ME:

How should I deal (if I should deal at all) with scouting? Even if players were removed from the gaming area after their matches are done scouting/information advantage is still possible. As a judge I get to see other people's deck. This would put me at an advantage if scouting otherwise was prohibited.

As a former player and now designer what do you think of the matter?

Second topic: How active should a judge be?

Let's say I have to judge the final so I have a good chance to spot most mistakes. Should I interfere? Should I remind people to draw a third card because they have Tragic celebrity in play?

DAMON:

Scouting is a matter of sportsmanship. Anyone seeking to gain or give an unfair advantage by inquiring or informing or otherwise attempting to observe another players game, without permission, is acting in an unsportsmanlike manner. This should be discouraged. It is completely up to the TO how unsportsmanlike conduct should be handled, a verbal admonishment may be enough to discourage players. I would inform all players before the start of the game that scouting is viewed as unsportsmanlike behavior and everyone is highly discouraged from giving any unfair advantage to another player by discussing deck design of any deck other than your own with out players. People are welcome to watch others play if they have finished their game early, but only if they get approval first from both players (in other words it takes two yeses or one one no).

IF anyone is found to be scouting after that I would give them a single verbal warning. After that I would either deduct points from their standing or eliminate them from the game depending on the severity. Any player eliminated from a game should have all the games they had one turned into wins as a "bye" for the opponent who played them.

As a judge and a player in a tournament you should not look at any decklists. Decklists are there for calculating statistics after a tournament or to be referenced in case their is an accusation of cheating based on cards in the deck (too few cards in the deck, too many instances of a card in a deck, multiple restricted cards in the deck, or it contains one or more banned cards). If such an accusation arises and deck check must be done, you have a choice, have the owner of the venue that you are at check the decklist to the deck. If he or she is unable or unwilling then you will have to do it and if the deck is not in violation then you can either let them examine your deck if you end up facing them or take a loss against them if you face them.

Obviously we want as many people as possible to play in our regionals, but in the end if you are judging that needs to be your priority.

In regards to how active a jude should be they should enforce any and all rules of the game they observe. Players cannot choose to not resolve a Forced Response that the game has triggered. Actions, Responses, and Disrupts must be played within the correct window and resolve in the correct order. Players must draw cards or discard cards in the proper amounts, etc. etc. IF you are observing any round and someone violates the rules in any manner and their opponent does not call them on it, you, as the judge, must enforce the rules. But if you miss it and the other players have missed it you cannot force them to roll back time unless no other player actions have been taken, or if both players agree that the effect is one which can easily be resolved now (in the case of Bay of Ice I would have had you draw a card and knelt the Bay, that you didn't have the card in hand a step or action or two earlier is the "penalty" for having not been aware of the playstate).

In short if you notice a rules violation as a judge you should enforce it. If you don't, you just don't. Then you and the players must determine what is the most fair way of preceding from there.

ME:

Thank you very much for your elaborate answer. Is it okay for you if I post it in the forums as an official answer on the topics?

DAMON:

These are not "official" the official stance is for each TO to run the tournament in a fashion that fits their group. This is my personal stance and this is officially how I will be running and ruling the tournaments I am TO for. Other TO's may choose to follow this format if they choose.

Damon was alright with publishing this as his personal stance. So at our Regional in Munich I will follow this guideline but obviously you don't have to.