Level Two - Lesson 11
Master Event Document - General Philosophy
Also available are archives of live broadcasts, where the Program Director goes over the lesson, answers any questions that folks may have and sometimes goes on tangets about other elements of judging. You can find the playlist of broadcasts on youtube.
Click for Translation
While proper translation and localization are among our long-term goals, we are currently offering Google Translate on the page. Please keep in mind that the translation is automatic, which means that specific game terms, names of cards or mechanics, or technical language used to describe the game may not translate well. As with the documents for the game itself, the English page is the authoritative document in case of any confusion or discrepancy.Join the discussion in our Discord and talk with other judges about what you learned, and ask any questions you may have!
Hello there!
Welcome back to the level two lessons for the Star Wars™: Unlimited Judge Program!
As always, I’m your host Jonah, and this lesson marks the first level two lesson covering the Master Event Document. We’re going to be starting with part two - the floor rules, as the first part is covered adequately in the level one lesson on the Master Event Document, and we’re going to take a wide angle look at policy and the underlying philosophy.
The goal of this lesson isn’t to get into the specifics for any situation, or even talk about particular infractions. This is all about setting up that foundation that I continue to discuss.
As always with policy, this is an area that is continually being refined, and will grow and evolve as play also continues to evolve. This does make it a bit of a challenge to both learn and teach, so this is likely a lesson that will similarly evolve over time.
Introduction
As the Master Event Document says, in order for competition to have meaning, participants must agree to play within a set of rules or boundaries.
In the case of Star Wars: Unlimited, those boundaries are the comprehensive rules and the associated tournament documents, as well as appropriate clarifications and errata.
This makes sense on an instinctual level - if players weren’t constrained by the rules, players would be playing a game of calvinball (an anachronistic American reference) - another way to say that is that players would be able to do whatever they want. They could say “I declare myself as the winner.” and that’d be how it is - of course, their opponent would similarly be able to declare themselves the victor, they’d call a judge, and we’d have to figure it out - hence... rules.
Of course, this leads to when players accidentally break the rules - both players, in a fair and competitive environment, will want that break addressed, and the error remedied. That’s where policy comes in.
For competitive play, as stakes begin to grow, whether they’re for higher value prizes, invitations to exclusive events, or just exceptional bragging rights against a crowd of thousands of competitors, it’s important that there are rules to how we remedy errors as well.
These rules about addressing player errors are what constitute policy. And here, it’s critical that we are consistent in policy. Like players knowing that “if I play Resupply, it becomes a resource” it’s as important for a player to know that “if I forget this trigger, this is how it will be handled.”
One of the goals of competitive play is to find the best player within the rules. If the policy - the way the rules are enforced - are inconsistent, then it’s effectively the same as the rules are inconsistent, and it deligitimizes a player’s victory.
If, for example, a store develops a habit of having all players draw an opening hand of seven cards and starting with three resources - it means that individuals outside that ecosystem won’t accept those results.
Hence, we want to have consistent policy enforcement. We’re going to spend the next several lessons talking about various infractions that can come up, and how to handle them.
How to Use These Floor Rules
I want to start by quoting the first line of this section with “these procedure guidelines...”
The Master Event Document does not and cannot entirely encompass what to do in every situation. Many times, your fix will be directly in the Master Event Document, and you can and should follow procedure as guided. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, you’ll be dealing with straightforward issues - a player forgot to exhaust the appropriate number of resources, somebody put an extra damage on a unit, a player grabbed an extra card while drawing for regroup.
These sorts of common and simple scenarios are what these guidelines are for, and it’s the expected skill set of level two judges, to understand these infractions, the penalties and the remedies.
As the Master Event Document says, in several places, the goal is promote a fair and enjoyable experience for all players. It is central to the skills of being a judge to approach a situation with an impartial attitude, and the goal of making the experience as positive for players as possible.
While this does mean being vigilant for cheating, you need to temper that vigilance with respect and trust. If you begin judge calls with the belief that a player is cheating or could only have intentionally made the mistake, players will recognize that attitude, and not feel welcome - they’ll feel harassed and affronted.
Players will often feel offended for their opponent, as well. Most players believe that their opponents are also operating in good faith, and if you come in like the Grand Inquisitor they’ll not be satisfied with the experience, and in the future, not call a judge.
If we train players to not call judges, there are a few consequences.
First, cheaters will begin to thrive - if there’s a culture of “don’t trust judges” or “judges aren’t looking out for players.” Malicious actors can get away with “Oh, sorry, let’s just handle that ourselves.”
Second, outcomes will be less consistent - players will fix things in different ways, and the outcomes of tournaments will be less based how players played, and begin to be influenced by how well they can argue their case to their opponent. Even if players do try to do things by the book, they’re less likely to have the appropriate training, and it’s possible that they make things worse trying to fix it.
Third, TOs will see fewer calls and see less need for judges, and consequently hire fewer... which will lead an spiral effect where the quality of experience goes down further and further for players.
While being timely in handling calls is important for the overall experience, taking the time to consult with other judges, if other judges are immediately available is encouraged. If you’re able to talk with the Head Judge or another senior judge, that’s immensely valuable, but even talking with another judge with less experience than you can help you wrap your head around the problem in a way that speaking with player’s might not.
The Role of a Judge
This section of the master event document lays out a few key elements of a judges role at events.
It is important to remain impartial and objective - and maintaining an appearance of impartiality and objectivity is equally important.
As a level two judge, you may frequently judge at your local game store, where you know the majority of the players - if a new player comes in to the space, it’s important that you treat them similarly to all of the players you already know - feeling like a judge is biased, even if there’s no real evidence of a bias being in play - can be very alienating to a player.
While you should recuse yourself should you not be able to remain impartial - that sometimes can’t happen at local events, because you are the only judge. If you need to take a moment to step away and reset yourself to focus on the facts, or if you need to consult with someone who is not involved, but doesn’t have the expertise that you do, those can be reasonable steps to help you maintain that impartiality.
Judge Errors
Sometimes a judge will be wrong. Possibly they misread a card, or they misheard a question, or they just didn’t know a rule or screwed up a piece of policy.
Judges will make mistakes.
It’s how the mistakes are handled that is important.
First - if you realize that you’ve made a mistake, and the match that it impacted is still ongoing, make it a priority to return to those players and identify what impact the error has had on the match. You can talk to players away from the table to ask if they’ve made decisions based on the ruling, if the game has progressed significantly and more.
If you did cause damage to the game, you can apply fixes as though it were a gameplay disruption to remedy it and get the game back on course. If you didn’t - simply providing the corrected ruling and apologizing (which should be done in either case) can be sufficient.
If you’re a Floor Judge, it’s important to escalate this to the Head Judge - let the players know to pause as soon as you realize - to minimize the chances of further damage, but inform the Head Judge before taking any steps to remedy the issue if it has progressed - these situations can get very tricky and players can become upset if they felt that they are now incorrectly going to lose a game or match because of a judge ruling.
However, it is important to remember that players always have the option to appeal a ruling. Players are not required to automatically accept what a judge says - even if they’re a head judge. While players do have a responsibility to remain respectful, they can and should ask for clarification or explanation if they believe that the judge issuing the ruling is incorrect.
Judging at your local game store, you’re likely to be the only judge, so there isn’t anyone for you to take the appeal to, but you should still listen to the player, hear their argument, and even review the parts of the rules that they believe support their argument. Sometimes, you’re absolutely correct and absolutely confident in your ruling, and while you should let the player voice their concern, you don’t have to let them continue to debate it.
When you’ve made up your mind, let the player know in no uncertain terms that this is your final ruling and that they need to return to playing their match. I frequently offer the opportunity to continue the conversation after the match, because it is important that players understand why the game works the way it does, or why policy fixes things in particular ways, but if you’re just arguing in circles, you want to keep the event moving.
This feels like I’ve barely even dipped my toe in to talking about policy and the master event document - and truly we only looked at two pages out of nearly forty. We’ll be back in the next lesson to discuss penalties and the penalty structure for the game, before continuing with further lessons on the Master Event Document for the next several lessons. If you’re watching this on YouTube, and you want more level two lessons in your feed, go ahead and subscribe. Join us Tuesdays and Fridays on twitch.tv/swu_judges for live broadcasts covering the content of these lessons as they are released, and join the Star Wars: Unlimited Judge Program Discord to join the community in discussion of this and much, much more.
As always, good luck, and have fun.