I was recently playing as the runner at my LGS, during freeplay, and about to make a run on a jinteki remote server with a lot of advancement tokens on the installed card. I could not, for the life of me, remember the cost of activaton for Project Junebug's abilitiy so I quickly grabbed my phone to look it up. I was scolded for using an outside source and informed by the owner of the LGS that doing that in a tournament would get be disqualified. I checked on the tournament rules faq and couldn't find anything, from my perspective, that would result in disqualifying, but I would like a clarification.

thanks,

josh

Your TO may consider that "behaving inappropriately" or "slow play". That's something that's definitely up to the TO though. There's not a hard line about this sort of thing, but consider this - would you think it was appropriate to print out an article called "How to play against Weyland" and consult it during the tournament? What about texting your friend asking "here's my opponent's ice setup; do you think this is a trap?"

There's definitely a line there, and it's up to the TO to determine where that line is. A lot of them just say "no outside help allowed" because that's by far the easiest way for them to administer the "appropriate behavior" rule.

radiskull said:

If I was running a tournament, I'd go with

spoiler list - yes

advice column - no (warning)

friend - no (ejection)

We've discussed this in other games. In V:TES, for example, so many cards have errata, it's simply more fair to allow all players access to the spoiler list, though some TOs may choose to do this via whispered conversation instead of text document.

That sounds reasonable. I'm going to play devil's advocate here, though -

If you allow a spoiler list, would you allow someone to access cardgamedb? After all, FFG, doesn't maintain a spoiler list. Also note that on cardgamedb, you can also look at the comments people have left on each individual card. You could also look at which decks that card appears in, etc, etc.

If I were going to TO (and I may, in the future), I'd probably rule that if you have a question about a specific card, it's appropriate to ask the TO for the card text and costs, but nothing beyond that.

If I were to TO (and I probably never will), any outside information would be off the table. I expect players to be familiar with the cards and relevant erratas. Players may confirm errata by asking the TO, but no other card information should be available. If you don't remember the rez cost of something, then you will have to find out by somply continuing to play the game, even if the lack of information is to your detriment. This seems to be the fairest and quickest way of dealing with this. Netrunner games can take long enough as it is, I wouldn't want players to keep reading through card lists.

For A:NR, it's still quite easy, because there are only about 150 cards and no errata (only some clarifications). When there are more than 1,000 cards, 2 dozen errata and a whole bunch of clarifications, it'll be a whole other kettle of fish.

As an aside, the activation cost for Ambush cards:

• Ghost Branch 0
• Fetal AI 0
• Project Junebug 1
• Aggressive Secretary 2
• Snare! 4

Khudzlin said:

Yes and no. Sure, it is more of a challenge to keep those cards memorized. On the other hand, having played Game of Thrones quite a bit, with its 1400+ card pool or whatever the number is now, I find I have most cards memorized. I may not remember every detail about every card, but cost, icons, crest, relevant traits and noteworthy abilities generally are stuck in my brain for the large majority of the card pool. And I don't imagine people at worlds or Stahleck are taking out their smartphones and browsing for card details in the middle of a match.

etherial said:

Wuold you allow to use the long version of my CardByCard Unofficial FAQ?

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/83809/cardbycard-unofficial-faq

In a tournament, players should not be stopping play to consult external sources for information. Any genuine rules or wording question should go to the TO, who can then answer.

Saturnine said:

I was indeed thinking about AGoT. I'm sure I know the relevant info on cards I often see played, but I know there are many more cards. Using a smartphone… nope, that shouldn't happen. What about having a little book with all the illustrations, like one of the TO's at Stahleck has?

First off, thanks for all of the responses.

Second, I am glad this wasn't as cut and dry of a verdict, as I had expected it not to be.

I totally understand not being able to use an internet resource during an event. I should have clarified that I have scans of each of the cards, for personal use of course, on my phone.

This leads to what some of you have already mentioned. "Is it legal to use a reference of any sort to review card text of a card not currently accessed or exposed?"

I would not have a problem with someone having a printed list of all cards and their abilities as long as I can look through the list to be sure it is what it seems to be. I cannot imagine allowing somebody to check anything in their phone because I have no control what he is checking.

Legend Dan here - the TO from the original post. My comments here I only apply to tournament play - in a casual game I have no problem with lookups because that helps build your skill level, but in a tournament setting, things are different.

My ruling for when we do official tournaments is a flat, reasonably strict "No outside help." That includes, but is not limited to: Printouts of card lists, "cheat sheets" for how many creds it takes to break through ice, using a smartphone to look up details, asking a (non-judge) person questions about the game state, etc. Regardless of slow play (which is also a valid point), I don't feel that anybody should have the wealth of the entire internet at their beck and call mid game. Tournaments are meant to be contests of skill, one player versus another. A player who takes the time to familiarize himself with all possible corp threats SHOULD have the advantage over a player who doesn't know the metagame as well, and he will be winning more games because of it.

Canton Games said:

I am going to disagree with you and actually turn your argument. Your claim that "A player who takes the time to familiarize himself with all possible corp threats SHOULD have the advantage over a player who doesn't know the metagame as well, and he will be winning more games because of it," is actually a disingenuous to people who clearly don't have the retentive capacity to memorize every single card, bordering on almost elitist. By your argument, you would actually disallow people who write notes during tournaments to keep track of cards seen on top of R&D and HQ, favoring those with perfect in-game memory. Memory is not a skill tested in any game. In no way would that ever affect me but for the sake of argument, it will affect those who cannot actually attain a tournament level of gameplay.

Just like in MTG, players can call for current Oracle readings of cards from judges. Judges should have access to these and provide players with the readings when asked. Plus any notes in-game should be fair game.

This was actually addressed in the latest tournament rules update and no note taking or viewing of outside references, aside from official rules documents, are permitted in tournaments now

tyquaius said:

I think in the tournament rules it says you cannot write down stuff like what you just listed.

Think of it this way: Some people are really good at stuff. That stuff could be short-term memory, probability calculation, etc. Those people will have advantages in niche situations, like Netrunner, compared to others. While we are not explicitly competing on memory, it starts to get ridiculous if you let people consult a list of cards or go on their smart phone or whatever. It's more of a sportsmanship thing than anything. No outside help is not unduly strict, unique, or contentious. If you happen to be NOT good at stuff that is rewarded in Netrunner (like memory), you'll probably lose more games of Netrunner. That's why we play tournaments, to see who's the best at Netrunner. Not who has the best prepared reference materials.

SO, while the original post portrays their action as a harmless reference check, and it probably didn't alter the game THAT much, I would probably not allow it in a tournament, and I've run a few. Generally you just say "No cellphones so you don't accidentally break a rule", since that could also be considered slow play. Rules are there so no one feels ripped off, not so that some TO can get off on enforcing them.

… And I somehow missed the post above mine that makes this a non-issue. But still, I'd say you shouldn't feel unnecessarily handicapped by this totally normal rule. Often in cards the details matter, and sometimes people build decks around those details, so ya… Don't sweat it.

So we arent allowed to look up cards, but if the card is featured in an example diagram in the rulebook then it is fair game (since we can look at official rules documents).

Can we request the wording/costs from the TO? If not, it seems a bit arbitrary.

As to taking notes, that is interesting. Sometimes I wonder whether FFG does things differently from Wizards/DCI just to be different , or whether they have an actual reason for the deviations…

~ Tim

N0te taking ia a player aid. Where do you draw the line for what player aids are and are not allowed? How do you make the distinction between slow play using your note taking as an excuse to note taking that simply requires a minute or so to write something down in detail?

Show up with your decks and your counters. Play the game. Win or lose. Pretty much anything else should be called into question in my book. If the card pool is too deep or your recall too poor then perhaps this is just not a game you are meant to be a high level competitor in. There is no shame in that.