Game & Format Knowledge

Aspects of Judging

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 to the Aspects of Judging lessons. As always, I’m your host Jonah, and this elective lesson series is going to cover the Aspects of Judging - just like it says on the box.

In the first lesson, we took a broad view at the aspects of a judge and glanced briefly at the huge quantity of qualities that are part of being a judge. Today, we’re going to start digging into the first of the six aspects, talking more about what makes up the different skills that are a part of Game and Format Knowledge.

We’re covering Game and Format Knowledge (GFK) first, not because of it is the most important, but because it’s the first thing most people think of when they think of what a judge is, and it’ll help provide context for what the rest of these lessons are going to be like.

We’ll go over each of the sub-categories and the details within them, discuss what they mean, talk about how you can improve them in a broad sense of the skill, and outline the expectations for judge levels one, two, and three.

Rules Knowledge

We’re going to start with possibly the least surprising aspect - Rules Knowledge.

Judges are expected to have an understanding of the Comprehensive Rules, and stay generally up to date as new sets roll out. The purpose of this knowledge is to be able to accurately and efficiently answer questions about card and game mechanics that players have.

Gaps in Personal Knowledge

Perfect knowledge is an impossible ideal, but this is one of the most objective areas we have - while Policy does have right and wrong answers, a lot of the time those answers begin with “well... it depends” whereas the timing of triggers or what “defeated” means remain constant.

There are a few key sub-traits to rules knowledge. First is knowing where you find yourself challenged by the rules - this could be areas that you know you struggle with, or areas that you know you don’t know. We try to cover a lot of the rules in the lessons, but as we just said, perfect knowledge isn’t a reasonable goal, and so you will have areas where you don’t know the answer. Knowing where you get questions wrong or have uncertainty will help prevent you from giving incorrect answers.

Finding the Rules

Second is knowing where to find things in the rules - this ties into the previous. When you don’t know the answer, know where you can find the answer. The Comprehensive Rules are not a short document, and they’re only getting longer and more detailed with each update.

Some of knowing where things are is easy - for example most of the information about triggers is section 7.6 - Abilities and Effects: Triggered Abilities. However, there’s an important carveout for triggered abilities coming from events in section 3.3 - Card Types: Events. Knowing where you can find the applicable rules can make it so that you can quickly find what you’re looking for and get the answer back to the players, and the players can return to their match.

Level One

For level one judges, there’s an expected understanding of the fundamentals of the rules - you have an understanding of the game concepts, card, and game structure, basic timing, and how abilities work on their own.

As an L1, you should be able to answer common, straightforward questions. These are questions that have a clear answer in a single place in the rules, and are the type that will come up regularly at events. What “comes up regularly” means, can change - being prepared for a prerelease is different than being prepared for a premier tournament late in the rotation cycle when everyone is familiar with the cards.

Level Two

As you advance to level two, the expectation advances. In addition to maintaining that core knowledge from above, you’re also expected to understand common but complex rules, interactions, and rarer scenarios that are nonetheless straightforward.

This means that you’re expected to be able to answer questions that require you to understand rules that are in different places in the Comprehensive Rules. A lot of these revolve around nested actions or modified abilities because those are the most common way multiple things are happening at the same time, but there are a variety of interactions that fall into these categories.

This falls a bit into Evaluation & Mentorship of Judges (you’ll see that there’s a lot of overlap between various aspects), but as an L2, you should also be able to teach the rules to the point where someone has an understanding expected of an L1.

That is to say, for common and straightforward questions, you should understand them to a point where someone you work with can not only know the answer, but can explain it to a player, and understand not just the individual interaction, but the underlying rules. For the more complex and rare questions ,however, you’re not expected to be able to teach or explain them to that level of detail (yet).

Level Three

By the time you reach L3, you’re expected to understand rare and complex rules interactions - the things that come up infrequently and require a closer reading of the Comprehensive Rules. This can also include some of the more esoteric questions that come up in the clarifications, but generally as an L3, you’re not yet expected to know or understand Corner Cases.

Like with L2 being expected to be able to teach and explain common and straightforward rules to another judge candidate or a particularly invested player, as an L3 you’ll be expected to be able to teach common complexities to an L2 and handle the education of less frequent rules.

Improving Your Rules Knowledge

So now that you know what you’re looking for - how do you get better? Well, there are a few classic practice routes:

Nexus Lessons

The Nexus Lessons are designed to cover the information you need for each level’s exam - this is the most straightforward way of getting the knowledge necessary to pass the exam and advance.

Live Call Channels

In the Nexus Judge Discord there are several live call channels (one casual play and one for tournament rules) that you can follow and see questions people have from ongoing events. This gives you better context for actual events than the lessons do, but you’re less likely to get see the most straightforward questions.

Engage with the Game

Playing the game, or otherwise interacting with the cards (building a cube, following along with preview season, etc...) will keep you up to date on what cards are doing, and as you read a card that does something that cards haven’t done before, it’ll raise questions in your mind, and you can begin to tackle them using the Comprehensive Rules or various discussion boards.

Teach the Rules

One of the best ways to ensure that you have knowledge squarely locked up is to teach it to a Judge candidate. If you’re pushing for L1, teach someone interested in taking the Apprentice exam. If you can explain those rules to them such that they can pass the exam, you have more than a foundational knowledge in those areas. Plus, judges (and judge candidates) are notorious for asking “why” or “can you show me in the rules?” which will push you to a better understanding of the rules.

Policy Knowledge

Policy Knowledge follows a similar trajectory to Rules Knowledge, but the categories are a bit more discrete, because of the separation of documents. Policy Knowledge is explicitly knowing what to do when an error occurs in the course of a tournament, and refers mostly to the Comeptitive Policy Guide (CPG) and Relaxed Policy Guide (RPG). There’s some policy in the Tournament Regulations (TR), discussing things like boardstate layout, communication and more, but there’s a little bit more flexibility in that, and is often more philosophical in nature.

Using the Right Document

This is a really easy one to get right, and can have a pretty severe impact on the event if you get it wrong.

If you’re at a Relaxed-tier event, use the Relaxed Policy Guide. If it’s a Competitive-tier event, use the Competitive Policy Guide. The CPG is a lot stricter than the RPG, and will lead to players having a worse experience at relaxed events - especially more casual or newer players. The RPG has a lot more handwaving, and results in a less consistent experience in the name of accessibility and ease for players, but will result in competitive players feeling like things may be unfair.

Identifying Infractions

This next element is very similar to finding the rules in the Comprehensive Rules. For example, Open Card Manipulation Error, Hidden Card Manipulation Errors and Mulligan Errors all have a fair amount of overlap and can be easily mistaken for each other if you don’t get the right information or misinterpret the documents.

One of the big goals of the CPG is to ensure consistency, and identifying infractions accurately is an important part of that, so that the fixes and penalties are accurate and reliable.

Level One

For Level One, the expectation is that you have a familiarity with the sections of the Tournament Regulations so that you can find more details if you need them, but generally don’t need any details other than basics like 55-minute rounds for best-of-three and 50-card minimum for decks in Premier.

Level One judges are also expected to be very comfortable with the Relaxed Policy Guide, but it’s only a two-page document, and most of it is about the ideals it’s trying to uphold, not specific infractions and remedies.

Level Two

Level Two judges should have a bit more familiarity with the Tournament Regulations, and should be able to assemble an event structure for a Competitive-tier event, with the correct number of rounds and playoffs.

They’re also expected to be comfortable with the most common of the Competitive Policy Guide, including all of the Gameplay Disruptions, Event Disruptions excluding Outside Assistance, Communication Policy Error, Limited Procedure Disruption and Insufficient Randomization. These infractions are relatively rare, and so while an L2 should be familiar with them, they don’t need to have total comfort.

An L2 should also understand the Unsporting Conduct infractions of Illegally Determining a Result, Bribery, Collusion & Gambling, and Cheating, while being familiar with the rest of the USC infractions. Those other infractions, while critical, are less technical and less common.

Level Three

By Level Three, a judge should not only be comfortable with the whole of the CPG, they should also be able to teach the contents expected of a Level Two to an L1 interested in advancement.

The expectations with regard to the Tournament Regulations are similar, but with a new expectation of understanding the significant differences between implementing the regulations at a local level event (PQs, Showdowns, etc...) and at destination events (Sectors, Regionals, etc...).

Improving Your Policy Knowledge

So now that you know what you’re looking for - how do you get better? Unsurprisingly, our recommendations have a lot of overlap with the recommendations for rules knowledge. In fact, some of it may have just been copied and pasted. There are a few classic practice routes:

Nexus Lessons

The Nexus Lessons are designed to cover the information you need for each level’s exam - this is the most straightforward way of getting the knowledge necessary to pass the exam and advance.

Live Call Channels

In the Nexus Judge Discord there is a live call channel for policy questions that you can follow and see questions people have from ongoing events. This gives you better context for actual events than the lessons do, but you’re less likely to get see the most straightforward questions.

Test Yourself With Real Scenarios

Play the game, and when things go wrong (because they will go wrong, because I have yet to meet someone who plays technically perfect always), treat the scenario like a judge call. Heck, if you’re hanging out with friends and they make an error have them call you over so you can treat it like a puzzle. You can even let them solve it themselves and keep playing so that you can take time looking up the documents and considering the error while not disrupting their game - this is a great way to reduce the stress of an actual call while getting that experience!

Teach Policy

One of the best ways to ensure that you have knowledge squarely locked up is to teach it to a Judge candidate. If you’re pushing for L1, teach someone interested in taking the Apprentice exam. If you can explain policy to them such that they can pass the exam, you have more than foundational knowledge in those areas. Plus, judges (and judge candidates) are notorious for asking “why” or “can you show me in the documents?” which will push you to a better understanding of policy.

Policy Philosophy

Closely related to an objective understanding of Policy is a subjective understanding, understanding the philosophy.

Sometimes, policy will say to do something crazy, because it doesn’t include every possible scenario. Rules can encompass everything that the cards do, because it’s a finite (although large and growing) system. Policy can’t cover everything that a person might do at an event, or the logistical challenges that might appear.

Understanding how to manage the things that happen that don’t fall neatly into the policy documents is cruical to being a very successful judge, which is why a portion of the Comprehensive Event Guide is devoted to explaining the thought process behind policy.

Gap Filling & Deviations

As mentioned, sometimes there are holes in policy - a player’s behavior isn’t covered by the documents or you have an exploratory event structure for a more relaxed event, and there isn’t guidance on how to handle situations for a four-player free-for-all match. Sometimes, you’ll have to come up with fixes or policy for your event, to better suit what’s actually happening.

For example, in multiplayer games, if a player takes an action, but another player says “Don’t waste your action, I’m going to take care of it anyways” would you allow the first player to reverse their decision? By policy, this is very clear - one player gave another information that makes them want to change their play and therefore the decision should not be allowed to be reversed. However, policy was written for one-vs-one play, and in this case, the player providing the information did so with the intention of getting their opponent to reverse their decision - policy doesn’t really cover this at all, and so for a multi-player tournament, you might need to flex your muscles a little bit more.

You may also feel like policy is instructing you to do something that undermines it fundamental goals. For example, if a player sees the top card of their deck, they should receive a penalty, even if it was accidental, but what if it was revealed because of a gust of wind as the door to the store opened? Policy is pretty clear here... but it makes no sense to penalize a player for the actions of the wind. Deviating here, or in other situations where policy doesn’t meet the goals of creating a positive experience, providing education and understanding, resulting in natural games, and treating players in good faith, you can deviate.

However, it’s also crucial to avoid deviating as often as you can. Policy is designed to create structure for events, so that players understand what’s happening, to remove bias and favoritism. When you deviate, because you feel things are “unfair for one player”, you’re tipping the balance in favor of that player and can make their opponent feel uncomfortable. If a player is dissatisfied with your ruling and you stuck to policy, the defense of “this is what policy says, and here’s the years of experience and thinking that went into that policy, and consequently that decision” is much stronger than “I didn’t like it, so I made something up that I felt was better.”

In general, you shouldn’t be deviating, but learning when to identify moments where deviation should be considered, and how to appropriately apply and communicate about deviations is critical.

“I don’t like this policy” is not a good reason to deviate.

Evolution

Now, while “I don’t like this policy” is not a good reason to deviate, it is a good reason to interrogate that policy and to have discussions with other judges. Highly experienced judges will be able to have converstions about existing and historical policy, and talk about the strengths and weaknesses of it. They’ll be able to identify where and how it can be improved, as well as the risks or consequences of their potential changes.

You don’t have to be a policy master to be able to participate in the evolution of policy - even if you’ve just started, it’s very possible to issue a ruling and feel that it doesn’t sit right. Bringing that up, even if you don’t have a comprehensive understanding of the consequences of changing it, is incredibly valuable.

Flexible Implementation

One of the further challenges of policy is that there are some things, often in the Tournament Regulations that aren’t as strictly enforced. For example, gamestate layout or communication, as long as both players are comfortable with the shortcuts or adjustments they’ve made, can deviate from the structure laid out in the official documents, without a judge needing to intervene.

Notably, if a player is uncomfortable with these changes or feels like their opponent may be gaining a strategic advantage by having a non-traditional game state layout, it is entirely within their rights and within the bounds of a judge to ask a player to adjust their actions to match policy.

Knowing what lines have flexibility (base damage tracking, game state layout, communication) and which don’t (bribery and collusion, artistic modifications, etc...) is critical. There are some that don’t meaningfully impact the integrity of the game or it’s outcome, or don’t damage the brand and image of the game - there’s more flexibility there. Learning what the lines are is something that comes with experience and conversation - allowing players more flexibility and freedom, especially in communication, makes it for comfortable for them to play the game, so they don’t feel held to very rigid structures.

Rewinds

Sometimes, in the course of gameplay, an error will occur, and a rewind or backup should be considered. They are a tool used to remedy errors, and a few elements should be evaluated for when considering performing one:

There are no hard limits on rewinds - there isn’t an action or piece of information that absolutely prevents a rewind from occurring - it’s always a question of what is least disruptive to a natural outcome for the game, and so it is always a question of relative impact.

The decision to rewind or leave as is (or resolve now), is one made by the judge, using their best judgment, not players.

Figuring out what the impact of a rewind would be is always a challenge, and understanding the relative impact is a skill that is developed predominantly through experience and through playing the game.

Reversing Decisions

Sometimes, in the course of gameplay, a player will take an action that they realize they didn’t want to take, and will ask to be able to reverse their decision. Reversing decisions can be granted by the opponent without restriction, or by a judge if the opponent declines, based on one factor:

Unlike rewinds, there is a hard limit on reversing decisions, and it’s a process prompted by the player, not the judge.

Evaluating for strategic information, however, is still a skill that evolves over time, and has a lot of similarities to the skills related to evaluating whether or not a rewind is a feasible remedy.

Level One

Level One judges are expected to understand the philosophy laid out in the Relaxed Policy Guide. This is actually even more important than understanding the actual infractions and remedies in the document, as relaxed events are... much more relaxed. To quote the document “Fix the game state as best as you can, explain the correct process, and encourage players to be mindful going forward.” The key element of Relaxed tournaments is the atmosphere and energy, not the precision of technical play.

Level Two

At Level Two, you should have a general understanding of the goals of policy, but it is not expected that you should deviate or need to fill gaps in policy. The two biggest areas are getting comfortable with rewinds and reversing decisions that you execute on your own.

Level Three

By the time you get to level three, a judge should begin to philosophically explore policy in more depth, and many will have a piece of policy that they don’t like and would like to see improved. It might not be that the perspective is well-founded, but having capital-O Opinions on policy is something that a level three judge should have.

Furthermore, in addition to being comfortable with rewinds and reversing decisions, they should be very comfortable walking players through those decisions - while ideally an L2 is comfortable with that, it’s a bit more contentious and can require some complex explanations.

Level three judges should also begin to consider deviations and should be prepared to have a bit more flexibility than other judges, as unusual circumstances are more likely to arise.

Improving Your Policy Philosophy

Unlike Rules and Policy Knowledge, Policy Philosophy is harder to learn. It’s covered somewhat in the lessons on Nexus, as well as in the CEG itself, but the goal is personal and subjective understanding, not knowing facts.

The best way to get better at Policy Philosophy is to challenge yourself - have conversations with your peers about policy, and what you think it can do better. Figure out why it’s written the way it is, why the decision points that are included are included. Most judge programs have policy philosophy confined to the higher ranks of judges, but it’s important that judges who are acting as independent Head Judges have an understanding of what can bend, and what can’t.

Judges are absolutely going to deviate, even if they’re told not to, because, well, judges generally deviate when a situation doesn’t feel right, and it’s a question of personal judgment. Consequently, there is a focus on understanding when to deviate (never), and how to do it (with careful consideration).

Expected Rules and Policy Knowledge

This chart helps quantify (generally) the expectations of rules and policy knowledge in very broad terms.

Question Type Common Rare Corner Cases
Straightforward L1 L2 L4
Complex L2 L3 L5


Straightforward questions have very clear answers in the rules and policy documents. Ie. “When can a player attack with a unit?”

Complex questions have an answer in the rules and policy documents but require putting together elements from two or three different places. “How does Guerilla Attack Pod’s “when played” ability interact with Energy Conversion Lab granting it ambush?”

Common questions are ones that a judge can expect to hear at many events. “I accidentally knocked over the top card of my deck. How do we fix this?”

Rare questions may not come up at many events but still are reasonable to prepare for. “If I play Bright Hope with the Aspect Tax, will it gain Ambush from Admiral Piett?”

Corner Cases are questions that don’t come up in any practical context. They usually have several cards or effects that don’t see play or unorthodox lines of play.

Game Knowledge

Beyond knowing the rules and policy for the game, it’s important to understand the game itself. If you’ve played other TCGs, you’ll have some familiarity with how the game flow works, and you may believe that you have an understanding of strategy and advantage, but every TCG is different, and consequently the policy is different, and the rules are different.

Knowing and being invested in the game are hugely important to being an effective judge. You don’t have to have the Comprehensive Rules and every card memorized, but knowing the cards that frequently create questions that see a lot of play gives you a leg up, and it makes you appear more professional and confident when you know the cards (or maybe even the question) as soon as you arrive at the table.

Card Knowledge

As mentioned, you don’t need to know every card. You don’t need to know every card that sees play in Premier or Eternal. You don’t even need to know any cards - but being familiar with them means that you can more quickly and efficiently answer questions.

Players will be more likely to have doubts, particularly if you’re not familiar with commonly played cards or mechanics. Knowing more immediately makes them more confident in your ruling and consequently leads to a better player experience.

Interaction Knowledge

We pretty explicitly avoid teaching specific interactions - one of our fundamental guidelines is that it is better for a judge to understand the underlying rules so that they can know why specific interactions work the way they do, and can solve any question, not just the handful that they’ve memorized the answer to.

However, that doesn’t mean that knowing the answer to specific interactions isn’t valuable. In fact, it’s incredibly valuable. If a player comes up and says “I have a question about Galen Erso - You’ll Never Win and Thermal Oscillator, if you can answer the question they’re going to ask before they can even ask the question, that’s going to give them great confidence in your answer, because you clearly know what you’re talking about.

On a more practical level, many players can sometimes struggle to phrase questions the way they are trying to, and while they clearly are asking a specific question, if you can anticipate what they’re trying to ask, you can more effectively and efficiently answer their question instead of several rounds of “What are you even trying to ask me?” This, again, leads to a more positive player experience.

Meta Knowledge

Going one step further it’s important to understand the shape of the metagame - what decks are good, why they’re good, what decks are bad, what aspects or leaders people prefer to draft, etc...

Players aren’t going to ask you questions about the metagame (and if they do, you probably shouldn’t give Outside Assistance), but it is still very valuable. Particularly as you advance in the program, you’re going to start to have to evaluate for strategic impact, and knowing what to expect from two decks is hugely important.

Furthermore, knowing what people are likely to be playing helps you prepare for events. If you know that nobody is playing Heroic Red, that means that you don’t need to spend time figuring out how to enforce Rey - With Palpatine’s Power, because it’s not going to come up, and you can focus your studies on cards and interactions that are more likely to occur.

Strategy & Advantage

Very tightly related to Meta Knowledge is understanding Strategy & Advantage, but these are less ethereal. While the metagame shifts with every set release, and can even shift with the results of major (or minor!) tournaments, the strategic concepts and what grants meaningful advantage generally don’t change.

Knowing how impactful an error is to a match is massively important to understanding how much you should investigate for cheating. Knowing how strategically important a piece of information is can allow you to determine whether or not to rewind.

As we’ve discussed in the other parts of this section, it can also help you understand what questions a player is asking - if you can evaluate the game and figure out what their line of play is, or what their out is, you may know what they want to know before they can express it.

Watching Tables

This is going to sound silly, but watching games of Unlimited is a skill! Being able to recognize when something has gone wrong isn’t hard, but it’s not the easiest thing either - very frequently, both players in a game will miss something that occurred right in front of them, or even something that they did, and so it’s reasonable that somebody who isn’t involved misses it.

When watching a game, it’s important to know what to look for - knowing what gives a player an advantage gives you one avenue to examine, and already knowing the cards means you don’t have to constantly look things up, which means you can more smoothly watch the game.

For example, with Han Solo - Audacious Smuggler, keeping track of the number of resources that need to be defeated is very important. Players who play with Force leaders may activate their leader or use an ability without the Force because they’re used to having it. Some cards may have surprising restrictions or riders such as “Superheavy Ion Cannon” requiring specifically a Capital Ship or Transport, not just any Vehicle or Constructed Lightsaber requiring a Force unit, not just a non-Vehicle unit.

Level One

At level one, knowing the common cards in the formats that you judge is generally where you’re expected to be. If you’re predominantly judging prereleases, that expectation is closer to knowing the weird cards in the format and being aware of the set mechanics, as opposed to the whole set.

Knowing some interactions and a bit about the metagame is ideal, but there aren’t particularly high standards.

Level Two

At level two, a judge is expected to know some fundamentals of strategy - they don’t need to know the specifics of every deck in the format (or even any decks), but knowing the broad strokes of control vs aggro or how tempo plays and what edges they look for is important.

Level Three

By level three, you should know the common interactions, and have some familiarity with the more obscure ones, as well as recognizing most of the cards played in the format.

While judges are never going to be expected to have an understanding of meta and strategy that players at the same tier of play have, an L3 judge should know what the key leaders and decks are in the format, as well as knowing many of the roleplayers.

Improving Your Game Knowledge

This sub aspect is one of the easiest and most fun skills to improve... Play the game! That’s all you have to do! Of course, talking to other players and consuming content on the game, whether it be coverage, deck techs, or card previews all help you engage on a deeper level and better understand the game.

For many, this is already a part of their usual routine. However, for many judges, particularly as they advance and get more involved, they spend more time judging the game and considering it from that perspective than actually playing it. Consequently, it’s very valuable to occasionally participate in a prerelease you’re not playing in or trying to find time to play in side events to broaden your knowledge. It’s “research”.

Investigations

Investigations are an area that every judge believes that they can improve in, and frankly, they’re right.

However, investigations aren’t just determining if a player is or was cheating. An investigation is any time the judge needs to figure out what happened in a game, and why it happened. This means that practically every call with an infraction is an investigation, and so the skills you learn have a huge amount of application.

Asking the Right Questions

Asking the right questions is the fundamental skill of investigations. You need information, and acquiring that information is the talent that we’re looking for. The challenge comes from several places:

There are lessons on investigations, but figuring out how to ask the questions you need to get the answers you need to make a judgment is a challenging skill and one that grows very slowly.

Card Counts

Some investigations are a bit more objective. Card Counts are dependent on how many cards a player has accessed from their deck over the course of the game - determining if a player has accidentally drawn too many cards, or if they’ve remembered to appropriately replace a card that they played with Smuggle or Plot.

Going through the game history and figuring out what cards were played, which triggers or abilities resolved (and how many times they resolved, if multiple), how cards went to Discard, etc... all of these are things that can be determined, and many of which the players will agree on objectively. This means that you can reconstruct games that look irreparable at first glance.

Base Damage Discrepancies

In a similar vein, base damage discrepancies can also be resolved through thorough investigation. You’ll have to determine where attacks went and how often bases were attacked. This is much more challenging if neither player is using written base damage totals, but even if they are, or if they both are, it is still a time-consuming and exacting process.

For both, it’s important to work with the players to identify what happened and to build a concrete explanation of the events of the game before providing a ruling.

Cheating - Opportunistic

The most frequent cheats are opportunistic - usually when a player makes an advantageous mistake, and then does not call attention to it. Investigating to determine if the player was aware of the error and their decision-making process is challenging - this is often a case of intuition, but it is important to continue to ask questions in order to have a complete explanation of events.

Many players who cheat opportunistically are players who feel like they would never cheat, and are more likely to answer straightforward questions like “did you draw an extra card?” “did you realize you draw an extra card?” “why didn’t you call a judge when you had that realization?”

Cheating - Premeditated

On the other hand, there are some players who have planned to take advantage of the game, and who are prepared. When there is an ongoing investigation, they’re aware that the judge may be concerned of foul play and are less likely to helpfully answer direct questions. Consequently, when investigating for cheating, before digging deeply into the player’s knowledge and intention, it’s important to identify if the player is aware of your investigation, without letting them know that you’re trying to gather that information.

Level One

At level one, a judge is expected to be able to work with very clear investigations, blatant cheating where a player confesses, card counts where the players both are pretty confident and only a few cards have been drawn outside of the regroup.

Level Two

Level Two has slightly higher expectations, and while training is provided on investigations for L2, it is not expected that Level Two judges have developed comprehensive investigation skills. They should be comfortable with the core concepts of card counts and damage discrepancies, but aren’t expected to be experts.

They should also be able to sense a disturbance and know when an investigation for cheating is needed, and have a few questions and lines to follow in their own investigation process when acting as Head Judge.

Level Three

At level three, judges will be acting has Head Judges of larger scale Planetary Qualifiers, and should be comfortable with card counts and damage discrepancies, able to walk both players and other judges through those situations.

Furthermore, in addition to identifying when investigations for cheating are required, they should be comfortable following a line of questioning and making a judgment based on the outcomes of their questions. This is a skill that many people will inaccurately evaluate in themselves, so consider it a work in process.

Improving Your Investigations

Handling the objective investigations - what happened in this game - is easier to manage than cheating investgations. Taking judge calls, or having your friends call you over can help give you practical experience. In fact, with card counts and discrepancies, the game doesn’t actually have to go awry - they can just say “Hey judge, can you figure out if I resourced off my plot yet or not?”

These scenarios are great because with friends, there is less pressure - and in these mock scenarios, they also know if they did or did not, and so you can get a confident evaluation of your accuracy.

Cheating investigations are much harder to get useful experience with. It’s hard to have mock investigations because the players, at best, are acting guilty or innocent, and it’s more performative than useful. It can be a good way to come up with lines of questions, but don’t take the outcome too seriously.

The more valuable way to gain experience is by being involved in practical cheating investigations. These are relatively rare, and you shouldn’t stick your nose into calls that you weren’t initially involved in, which means that you have to detect them yourself.

Notably, when working with Deck Checks, you’re more likely to have cheating investigations than with other teams. Deck and Decklist Errors, as well as Marked Cards all have serious ramifications and are very good opportunities for both premeditated and opportunistic (but predominantly premeditated) cheating - and consequently, when we’re issuing a game loss, it’s best practice to have some investigation to determine how the error occurred and the player’s thought process. Furthermore, since you’re already spending significant time on the call, and you have time away from the player during the check, it’s a place where more judges feel comfortable prompting an investigation than elsewhere. However, it’s far from the only place where you can get practice.

Also, as a reminder, don’t just investigate a player to get practice. Being questioned by a judge is a harrowing experience, and putting a player through just to learn a bit for yourself is self-centered and goes against the goals of creating positive experience for players at your events.

And that’s it!

Next up we’re going to break into Tournament Operations & Logistics, which, if you can believe it, has even more sub-aspects than Game & Format Knowledge.

If you’re watching this on YouTube, and you want more lessons in your feed, go ahead and subscribe. Join us after new lessons 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.

Until next time, good luck and have fun!

Previous Lesson Next Lesson