Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Has a judge ever ruled against how your team works?

  1. #1

    Has a judge ever ruled against how your team works?

    So, with the up coming PDC scene, my local group (which includes our local judge) is planning on doing some traveling. We've play tested our teams and we're all pretty happy with them. I use Lantern ring - limited only by imagination as a key piece of my team, and I know that at my FLGS it's ruled that each energy symbol can only be used to deal damage once. (so if i have the ring and a kobold out, with 3 fists in reserve, then when he attacks he'll deal 3 damage because of the ring, but if I have 3 kobolds out, and 3 fists in reserve, and they all attack, then my opponent still only takes 3 damage from the ring.)

    So far I have heard of at least 3 ways to interpret the ring. This way, the bananas way (where all 3 kobolds from the previous example would ALL deal 3 damage, for a total of 9) and the weak sauce way (where an attacker deals one damage, regardless of how many symbols are in reserve). So what happens if a judge rules a different way? I mean, if he says its bananas, then obv. i get happy and shut my mouth, but what if he says it goes weaksauce? Don't get me wrong, I built the team well, I have other win conditions, but they are slower.

    Has this ever happened to anybody? What was the team/scenario, and how did you deal with it? I know that I could call the store and ask how to get a hold of the judge and that would be the best way, I'm more just curious about peoples stories and how they (hopefully) overcame that obstacle.

  2. #2
    This is not entirely on topic, but I need to talk about the rare lantern ring for a moment. This thing is my most hated card in the game. Not even because of it's potential power, it's the ambiguity that kills me.

    There is no ruling on this card. It's left up to the judge/organizer to determine how the card will be ruled. There are 3 agreed upon possible interpretations for the card. All of them are awful for all sorts of different reasons.

    Use the most powerful interpretation? Meta centralizing card with no "proper counters" that aren't immediately rendered null by a single prismatic spray, which has none. (No, doomcaliber knight does not counter the card well). Everyone complains because it's stale and too powerful, the game feels boring, burn isn't fun to play against, etc. People embracing powercreep complain because "people need to adapt or git gud", arguments begin, etc.

    Use the middle option? People who want to embrace powercreep and see the world burn get angry because they don't agree with you and complain all the time. People who think it's still too powerful get angry because it's still really strong for no cost and demand that you use the weakest option.

    Use the weakest option? Card is useless and everyone complains because other places rule it differently, and it was different at SLC, and there is gonna be a PDC somewhere that rules it differently so why aren't we being like that super duper official PDC and using that one?

    Then we have this: http://wizkidseventsystem.com/bb/vie...hp?f=10&t=8510

    The rule of reasonableness and choose the weaker option directly contradict each other and make decisions almost impossible.

    Of course, there will be tons of people who disagree with everything I'm saying here, but there is a non zero chance that the reason they disagree is because they only see this card as working in one particular way, usually whichever one is most convenient for them. I often see a lot of people leaning one way or the other based on whether they own the card or not.

    Is there a solution to this? Maybe. We need an official ruling explaining exactly how the ring deals damage. I'm fine with anything at this point as long as they remove the ambiguity. I won't make arguments anywhere for how things should be played when things are totally vague. I'm not the designer. I don't know what the intent was, I just need something to go off of, and then I'll decide whether or not the card is legal for play during certain events being run. During Thursday events, 3 cards have been banned from play. Tsarina, Gobby and LR: LObI. Gobby and Tsarina due to power and complaints about their appearance on casual nights damaging enjoyment and for the sake of preserving the scene, lantern ring because it's easier to deny it. It feels like allowing this card only enables arguments, people stop having fun and they feel like they wasted their time and effort.

    It's not the right thing to do. Telling people what they can and cannot use feels wrong. It's not the wrong thing to do either, because the same people who complain about these cards seem to be the people who jump at the chance to use them so they can take home extra packs. These are things I've observed after running events for a year, after being a participant here on TRP and lurking on Reddit.

    While this may have started off topic, I think I can tie it in to your question a bit. I think there is only one way to deal with this @Mongooli . Talk to whoever is running/judging the event and abide by their decision, go out and play to have fun. I know you're a capable player from what I saw at Nationals, so I know you can do well no matter what strategy you end up going with.

    I remember how much fun I had at nationals, playing with so many great and interesting people all day. Since then, I haven't had a single "no holds barred, all cards legal" type game that has felt that way. I've won them, and I've lost them, but the feeling of people just trying to have a good time doing that seems far gone. I think the enjoyment that I get from Dicemasters now comes from running events that people like, and seeing what great things they come up with. I hope people understand that.

  3. #3
    The attitude you expess at the end of your (gigantic) post is right on! There will always be a creep to more competitiveness in these sorts of games, but the secret is to keep your mindset into that of having fun. When rules conflicts like these arise, it is best to get out ahead of the issue if you see it coming and inform your opponent of your interpretation. An interpretation you hopefully get backed up by the TO on (whether because you asked ahead of time or are aware of a ruling for). If your interpretation is not backed, play it like our man @IsaacBV did at worlds, let the match go on and talk to the TO afterwords. If you can still win the match with the ruling, no sweat, if you end up losing, perhaps the TO will give you time for a rematch, when you can cite him a direct ruling. If you have no evidence or ruling, play as ruled by the TO, just as if it was in the rulebook.

  4. #4
    The interesting thing i got around here is one of our new players. I showed him the Joker Red Hood Card, Hulk Green Goliath and the Lantern Ring. He was one of very small amount of people who read the rulebook completely.
    He could tell me instant the correct use for Joker and asked me what is so hard about it. For Hulk and the Ring he couldnt decide even when i showed him the different ways it was or can be ruled(depends on the card and situation).

    The thing that only disturbed him was only then in the game using these cards because he wasnt sure even if i told and showed him the posts on WKRF.

    Why was he unsure even when i guided him for the cards in the correct way? Because he got doubted in the time the card was hitting the table and at the point she was used.

    How can you solve this? Look the post above me. Go to the TO with your team in first place (if possible) to your TO/Judge or before an Match. It is easier to call the judge with this in beforehand as call him in for every small little detail later.

    Also ask always you opponent/friend/enemy/husband/wife!!! beforehand if they have questions.

    For me personal i dont like to explain the card without a question. It is because of automatism and the flow i create with my team to play and when it get disrupted it would be like in a poker game or chess.(if it is a beginner game or just for fun with some drinks/sweets that all doesnt really matter).

    But the most critical point here is, when there is not a clear definition for you and your opponent, someone will get doubted and someone will become mad. At that point even clearing rules is not possible anymore. Here you can abort the game or just play it. And look afterwards.


    For me as a judge i try to be reasonable but also not since the rulings sometimes have loose ends in the WKRF. I will rule the ring with the powerful variant. Not because i want to use him as often(i am an Anti-Meta-Fan , i dont like to use hulk or johnny storm for example even when i know how great they are. that is my ambition to create teams that can compete against this metademons :P ) as possible, but because of the Lantern Battery that has a similar ruling and would make these rulings in the set itself natural and logical. THats all.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Mongooli View Post
    So, with the up coming PDC scene, my local group (which includes our local judge) is planning on doing some traveling. We've play tested our teams and we're all pretty happy with them. I use Lantern ring - limited only by imagination as a key piece of my team, and I know that at my FLGS it's ruled that each energy symbol can only be used to deal damage once. (so if i have the ring and a kobold out, with 3 fists in reserve, then when he attacks he'll deal 3 damage because of the ring, but if I have 3 kobolds out, and 3 fists in reserve, and they all attack, then my opponent still only takes 3 damage from the ring.)

    So far I have heard of at least 3 ways to interpret the ring. This way, the bananas way (where all 3 kobolds from the previous example would ALL deal 3 damage, for a total of 9) and the weak sauce way (where an attacker deals one damage, regardless of how many symbols are in reserve). So what happens if a judge rules a different way? I mean, if he says its bananas, then obv. i get happy and shut my mouth, but what if he says it goes weaksauce? Don't get me wrong, I built the team well, I have other win conditions, but they are slower.

    Has this ever happened to anybody? What was the team/scenario, and how did you deal with it? I know that I could call the store and ask how to get a hold of the judge and that would be the best way, I'm more just curious about peoples stories and how they (hopefully) overcame that obstacle.
    I have overruled my own cards before (the TOs usually come to me for rulings and I try to be fair). As for the Lantern Ring, I still don't see how people believe it be any other way than the most powerful. Here's why:

    http://wizkidseventsystem.com/bb/vie...hp?f=10&t=8509

    "How does ignoring text/abilities work when action dice add abilities to characters and their dice?
    Treat additional abilities from action dice as abilities on those characters. Those abilities can be ignored, prevented, and modified as if they were character abilities. If an effect would give a character die +2A and Overcrush, but that character die’s abilities are being ignored, it couldn’t use Overcrush but would still get +2A. The attack bonus isn’t an ability.
    Future rulebooks will define Ability Damage as follows:
    “Ability Damage: Damage from a character that isn’t combat damage.”
    For example, Magneto: Magnetic Monster ignores Lantern Ring’s effect on character dice with Purchase Cost 3 or lower. For another example, Human Paladin’s Global Ability could reduce the damage from character dice benefitting from Lantern Ring.
    Magneto: Magnetic Monster
    “Zombie - when fielded, KO all non-[Zombie] Magnetos.
    While active, opposing characters with Purchase Cost 3 or lower lose their abilities. Professor X can't be fielded.”
    Lantern Ring: Limited Only By Imagination
    “Continuous: While active, when your characters attack, they deal 1 damage to target player for each energy symbol in your Reserve Pool that matches their type.”
    Human Paladin Global:
    "Global: Pay [1 Shield] . Reduce the damage you take from a character's ability to 1."

    -The Dice Masters Rules Team
    In order to keep this thread easy to process, comments won't be approved by further clarification may be provided in a new post.
    dmrulesteam

    Posts: 372
    Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:27 pm"

    The fact that the Paladin can reduce the damage from the ring proves straight up that the Ring does more than one damage per attacker because each attacker deals the damage. So if you are worried about the PDC and the Ring, sight this ruling.

  6. #6
    It has happened to me once. Traveled in state for the Rainbow Draft. The whole playgroup at this new store was playing wrong, not using the transit zone correctly, and a few small things. Granted, a few of my opponents were new to the game, and had few under their belt. But the store judge had some misunderstandings of card interactions.

    During the draft, some zombies were pulled. The judge ruled that when a zombie was fielded, it KO'd all other characters in play - totally misreading that it is only supposed to KO the non-zombie version (ie the same name characters). My opponent did this to me, I asked to call the judge to check out the play, and he concurred that the total field wipe is how they have been playing the zombies. I let it go during my match, as I won anyway, but I had to dig up some references and show the judge he was incorrectly ruling on the way the first zombie mechanic works.

    No one even questioned that they were interpreting it incorrectly. Given that this was a draft for very hard to get OP cards, I wanted to be sure I was ruled against fairly. If it was a small monthly thing, I would have told the judge at the end of everything. But as soon as he ruled incorrectly, I pointed it out, and said I would get him a reference to it as soon as the match was over. If I would have lost the match over the ruling, I would have stopped the game there to look up the reference and get the ruling correct .

  7. #7

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuromorph View Post
    It has happened to me once. Traveled in state for the Rainbow Draft. The whole playgroup at this new store was playing wrong, not using the transit zone correctly, and a few small things. Granted, a few of my opponents were new to the game, and had few under their belt. But the store judge had some misunderstandings of card interactions.

    During the draft, some zombies were pulled. The judge ruled that when a zombie was fielded, it KO'd all other characters in play - totally misreading that it is only supposed to KO the non-zombie version (ie the same name characters). My opponent did this to me, I asked to call the judge to check out the play, and he concurred that the total field wipe is how they have been playing the zombies. I let it go during my match, as I won anyway, but I had to dig up some references and show the judge he was incorrectly ruling on the way the first zombie mechanic works.

    No one even questioned that they were interpreting it incorrectly. Given that this was a draft for very hard to get OP cards, I wanted to be sure I was ruled against fairly. If it was a small monthly thing, I would have told the judge at the end of everything. But as soon as he ruled incorrectly, I pointed it out, and said I would get him a reference to it as soon as the match was over. If I would have lost the match over the ruling, I would have stopped the game there to look up the reference and get the ruling correct .
    I still don't agree with Wizkids on that one but have to play it that way. It does suck when you have to burst so many bubbles like that (those pouty faces), but it must be done.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuromorph View Post
    Dude if you are going to derail a thread like this, you should start a new one.
    I did manage to connect my points to the topic though.

    Had I planned that post at all I probably wouldn't have included the first bit, but sometimes I'll type whatever comes to mind when I read the OP. It's not always an effective writing decision, but it's definitely more honest.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
    I did manage to connect my points to the topic though.

    Had I planned that post at all I probably wouldn't have included the first bit, but sometimes I'll type whatever comes to mind when I read the OP. It's not always an effective writing decision, but it's definitely more honest.
    I dont see it completely derailed, and its my fault too. We should have written in big letters as an example where these critical ruling can happen.

    I tested yesterday rulings like a quiz for WOL cards and i will see how much if have to inform beforehand so that people at the draft wont build teams they doesnt like.

  11. #11
    I did have the situation like Shadow mentioned, and it didn't effect the game, I still won. But had I loast the game I would have definitely protested it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •