Level Two - Lesson 19

Master Event Document - Unsporting Conduct

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.
Below is the full script of the lesson, if you learn or process material better through the written word!

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 is the final L2 core lesson covering the Master Event Document. In this lesson we’re going to discuss the Unsporting Conduct category of Tournament Disruptions. Unsporting conduct is a broad term that covers a wide variety of poor behavior that is unwanted at the events, but isn’t necessarily directly regulated by the rules or policy documents.

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.

Sporting, Unsporting and Inbetween

As has been discussed throughout our lessons on policy and logistics, one of our primary goals is to ensure that all participants have an enjoyable experience - to that end, all participants, whether they’re someone showing up to their first event or an entrenched member of the community, whether they’re a player, spectator or staff member, are held to the same standards of politeness and respect.

The MED lays out some specific behaviors that cross the line, and penalties associated with them. There aren’t “remedies” for these infractions, because unlike gameplay disruptions and tournament disruptions, there isn’t a mechanical impact to a game or match, it’s purely social or behavioral.

Opposite of unsporting conduct is sporting conduct - this includes many things that players do automatically - introducing themselves at the start of the match, saying good luck and good game at the beginning and end of the match, and generally being a positive experience to play against.

However, there’s also a category of behavior that falls into the space between sporting behavior, which we want to encourage, and unsporting behavior, which is over the line of what is appropriate.

This undesirable behavior is allowed. This can include things like not saying good luck at the beginning of the match, or taking advantage of misplays by their opponent. Particularly at competitive tier events, players are held to an expectation of skill and dedication - if a player makes a tactical mistake, even if the error is obvious, it is absolutely not a requirement of their opponent to let them take it back or to not take advantage of it. Similarly, per the rules, players are not required to point out optional effects belonging to their opponent even if they think that the player accidentally missed them, and didn’t intentionally decline them.

Players can be short and curt with their language, and unfriendly or unexciting to play against. They can take advantage of better knowledge of the rules to win games.

While it is incorrect to infract and penalize this behavior, it can sometimes be correct in your role as a community facilitator to have a conversation with the player about their actions, and how it impacts not only the play experience of the other players in the community, but how it impacts the player themselves. If a player is more assertive and contentious, their opponents are going to reflect that behavior.

Inappropriate Behavior

However, there are behaviors that are not acceptable - some examples are listed in the Master Event Document, but that list is not exhaustive. It is important to note that inappropriate behavior does not have to be intentional or malicious - a player can do something that they believe is appropriate, but it still crosses the line. Because of this, the penalty for a player’s first Unsporting Conduct (USC) - Minor is between two and eight penalty points. While the default is four points, a player demonstrating genuine remorse may receive two, and a player who was potentially more intentional or malicious may receive eight. A player who repeats the inappropriate behavior in the same event should be disqualified.

Here are some examples of inappropriate behavior:

You also want to keep the venue and experience that is being curated in mind. Some events occur after hours, and have a purely adult demographic, and so some language that may not be acceptable at an event that has families and children can be acceptable at a different event.

Harassment

There’s also USC Major - Harassment, which is more extreme versions inappropriate behavior.

The penalty for harassment, whether or not the player demonstrates remorse or took the harassing action intentionally, is disqualification. For players who show remorse and were not aware that their behavior was inappropriate, it is sometimes reasonable to allow them to remain in the venue and continue to participate in other events that may be taking place. However, it is also reasonable, especially with smaller venues where they are likely to cross paths with the impacted participant again that they should be ejected from the venue.

As a reminder, while it is the discretion of the head judge on whether or not a player is disqualified, it is the responsibility of the tournament organizer who is in charge of the space to determine whether a player is ejected from the venue - although they can absolutely consult the head judge on the decision.

Aggressive Behavior

From here on out, the penalties for all of these infractions are disqualification, and frequently removal from the venue is recommended.

Aggressive behavior is any sort of explicit physical threat or action aimed at another participant. Threatening to strike a person, pulling a chair out from underneath someone, throwing game components at someone, flipping a table, shouting in anger or threatening to bring a weapon all fall under Aggressive Behavior. Similarly, actually doing any of these actions is also Aggressive Behavior.

Vandalism and Theft

Damaging or taking the possessions of another participant, the organizer or the venue is strictly not allowed. Taking excess cards from a draft, or intentionally keeping a card you realized you picked up from an opponent accidentally, both fall under this category. Similarly, stealing a table number or a store display is considered theft. Telling a member of staff that you have not receive a promo or some other participation prize even though you already have in order to get additional copies is also considered theft.

As with most other unsporting conduct infractions, the penalty for theft or vandalism is disqualification.

Bribery and Collusion

Bribery is a relatively straightforward infraction - a player offering another participant a reward or incentive in order to change the outcome of a match (or ruling!) is strictly not allowed. Furthermore, accepting a bribe falls under the same consideration.

Collusion is a bit more of a complicated topic, and so we’ll take a bit longer on it. Collusion is when players discuss explicitly the outcome of their game or match, and then artificially produce a result.

There are two broad groups of collusion - unintentionally improperly determining a winner and intentionally doing so.

The outcome of a match needs to be determined by playing the match. TCGs have a significant element of randomness to them, and with prizes on the line, instead of looking like a test of skill, it can appear to external evaluators that tournaments are games of chance, and consequently, should be regulated like gambling.

If players are determining the outcome of matches by flipping coins, arm wrestling, looking at the top card of their deck or playing a different game altogether to determine the winner of their match, we’re no longer finding out which player is the better Unlimited player on the day, and consequently the integrity of the tournament is damaged.

Players can discuss the current board state, tournament placements, and tournament structure, but only from a factual position. A player can reveal cards from their hand or resources, but cannot reveal cards that are hidden information (such as the top card of their deck, even if they know it from another source). A player can say “we’re both X-2, and no X-2-1s will make the cut.”

However, a player can not ask for a concession or imply it. Saying something like “a draw here is bad for both of us” or “I’m going to win this match.” both include opinion and future tournament results or match outcomes, and can not be discussed.

We have to allow players to discuss the current board state, otherwise players wouldn’t be able to discuss the game - the context shifts towards the end of the match. If players are starting to have a conversation around the outcome of their match, it is a best practice to intervene as soon as you can to make sure both players are aware of what they can and can’t say - we’d very much rather ensure that players don’t offer collusion when we can simply prevent it from happening.

Furthermore, if a player attempts collusion, which includes asking for a concession, but they are declined, they are not disqualified, but do receive an escalated penalty and two penalty points. Note that bribery does not have this exception. If a player says “I’ll give you half of my packs if you concede”, that’s both bribery and collusion, and even if their opponent declines, the player will still be disqualified for bribery. However, if a player says “hey, we’re going to draw - want to roll for it?” and their opponent declines, they are not disqualified.

Stalling

Stalling is when a player intentionally plays slowly to take advantage of the clock. An example is a player wins a grueling forty-minute game one, and then spends an excessive amount of time sideboarding and thinking over every decision.

A player changing pace as the round nears the end is a common signifier, or a player frequently checking the clock.

However, a player who is playing methodically, and at a normal pace, even if their opponent is playing quickly is not stalling.

Slow play is already very hard to identify and call out, as discussed in the previous lesson. However, with stalling, the head judge now needs to be convinced that the player is doing so for a tactical advantage. The head judge should investigate if they believe stalling may be occurring.

Cheating

There are two types of cheating - tournament cheating and gameplay cheating. Lying to tournament officials, intentionally altering or misreporting match results, or similar behavior is not allowed, and results in disqualification.

Gameplay cheating occurs when a player:

  1. Does something illegal
  2. Knows that their action is illegal
  3. And does so to gain an advantage (or put their opponent at a disadvantage)

All three criteria must be met in order for a player to have cheated. Any time you believe a player may have cheated, the head judge should investigate and make a determination. We’re going to focus on the more technical aspects in this lesson, and not talk about investigation procedures until we reach the lesson dedicated to them.

There are many actions that can be confused with cheating, that are not.

Illegal Actions

A player says “Judge! I cheated. Last turn I didn’t attack with my unit even though my opponent had a sentinel in play. I knew that I had to attack it, but I chose not to, because I knew that I’d be able to use removal on it and then attack their base”

This player thinks that they’ve done something illegal, and did so to gain an advantage, but they didn’t actually do anything illegal. Similarly, if a player resolves their Vigilance by resolving the effects out of printed order, or resolves one to see what happens before they make their next decision... they may think they’re being shady, because that isn’t how the card would function in other TCGs, but it is a legal action in this one.

Understanding The Problem

A player registers a 30 HP common red base, but after playing a couple of rounds, they switch to Tarkintown. One of their later round opponents sees the Tarkintown, and says “I thought you were playing a 30 HP base - you played my friend in round one.”

The player’s response is “Yeah, I registered it, but after a couple of rounds, I felt that Tarkintown was better, so I swapped it out.”

When you talk with the player, they explain that at their local store, at weekly play, players make changes to their deck every round they play, it’s a normal behavior, and this is their first event outside of their local game store. You’re able to corroborate this with other players from that store.

In this case, the player did something illegal, and they did it to gain an advantage, but they didn’t know it was illegal - this is also not cheating.

Gaining an Advantage

A player realizes that their opponent made a mistake and exhausted two resources instead of three to play a card. They choose not to call a judge because they don’t want their opponent to get a penalty, and they don’t think it matters to the rest of the actions in this phase. After a few actions, a spectator notices and calls a judge. When you’re investigating, the player freely admits that they saw it happen, but didn’t call for a judge - they knew they were supposed to, but they didn’t want to get their opponent in trouble.

Well, the player has done something wrong - they let a gameplay disruption occur. They know it’s illegal - they know that they’re supposed to call a judge. Again, this is not cheating because they’re not gaining an advantage.

However, if it’s a situation where a player thinks they’re not gaining an advantage - for example, they underpay for a card by one, and realize later, but also see that there isn’t anything that they can do with that one extra resource, so they don’t call a judge - They’ve still potentially gained an advantage - their opponent doesn’t know that they can’t use that resource, and so might be playing differently.

Note that intentionality only applies to Cheating and Stalling - the other infractions can be committed by a player who is not aware that those are against the rules of the event. However, it is also a reasonable expectation for players to know that they’re not allowed to threaten other players, steal, or harass, whereas it’s a bit harder to expect players to understand exactly how piloting works exactly - and so we don’t need to believe that the player understands that crimes (even minor, civil crimes) are not permitted at events.

Closing Out

There are two categories that are not currently mentioned in policy - gambling and fraud. Players betting on the outcomes of matches can fall under the bribery rules, as it can create external incentives to the tournament for specific outcomes, and is not allowed.

Furthermore, fraud is when one player registers as another, or plays for another player. Players must represent themselves. Committing fraud is one of the more serious infractions, as a suspended player may enter events under a false identity. Similarly, a player cannot register for a Qualifier event as another player, and earn that player an invite.

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.

Previous Lesson Lessons