Author Topic: What is the official rule on Table Talk in multi player (Read 8645 times)

Korunks · « **Reply #50 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:04:41 PM »

I fail to see how fun and fellowship is accomplished when older players deliberately coach inexperienced players to perform actions that win the experienced player the game, especially through tricks and deception. I have participated in tournaments in 3 states now and have seen veteran players being underhanded in almost all of them, And I am sure I would see it if I came to many more around the country. When a newer player is finally understanding the game doing better and about to win, only to lose because of table talk by a veteran that causes him to lose the game. Ask that kid how much he feels like that was fun and fellowship. Maybe in some areas the veteran players are selfless and kind. But up in the parts I roll in I see RLK's get frustrated and quit because of table talk. Any one who think Unrestricted table talk. MY current lost player count is at 3 out of a group of usually only 7 people. Some one explain to me again how unrestricted talk is a good thing.

(Dayne I will pm you about the multi clinic idea)

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #51 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:08:42 PM »

Where was the host while this was happening?

lp670sv · « **Reply #52 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:16:42 PM »

I am assuming since no one replied or

/-1'd that my post is tl:dr; and thereby ignored. Remind me to not post about things with actual points again. i will resume posting nothing but memes that get deleted quickly.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #53 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:20:12 PM »

If they left because of table-talk in Multi, there's probably a bigger issue. Multi isn't like any other category, and new players should be informed about that fact going in. If you go in expecting diplomacy and huge amounts of luck, you're much less likely to be disgruntled when they inevitably show up. If someone teaches new players that table-talk is illegal, and it isn't, they're going to be frustrated when they get to a tournament and it happens.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #54 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:21:51 PM »

Quote from: lp670sv on April 22, 2012, 10:16:42 PM

I am assuming since no one replied or /-1'd that my post is tl:dr; and thereby ignored.

You posted?

Your points did not change my mind because I am foremost a host who tries to bring in new players. I also seem to reach very young players. Your points are more relevant to older players who have general TCG experience. I think 9-year-olds need coaching at the opportune times so that they can learn in context, since not everyone learns in retrospect.

lp670sv · « **Reply #55 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:23:32 PM »

Than teach them in casual games where you can't end up costing someone a tournament based on when you decide to teach.

Korunks · « **Reply #56 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 22, 2012, 10:08:42 PM

Where was the host while this was happening?

Host's cannot be every where at once. The most predominant case at my tournaments was when I was at one of the 5 other tables than where the event occured (States so I was swamped), trying to make sure that table talk wasn't wasn't happening there as well ( I had warned several people already), When I find out after the fact that a former Tournament host came into a multi-player game and played at least one hand for their child. RLK's don't often know they can call for a judge in that situation, especially when an adult is telling them that is alright. I was livid but I can do nothing after the fact(other than watch them like a hawk when they attend my tournaments). Another incident at a regionals where I saw two older players trying to get a younger player to block when it was apparent to my cursory glance that it would set one of them up for the win. I should have said something but it wasn't my tournament and was afraid to step on toes. The host was playing in a category, and the appointed "judge" was off talking to some one else. There comes a point where the host shouldn't have to hover over every multiplayer game to make sure teens and adults don't take advantage of RLK's. If players are unable to show the basic restraint needed to not be manipulative than by all means I am in support of dropping the hammer in the rules.

Korunks · « **Reply #57 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:32:13 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on April 22, 2012, 10:20:12 PM

If they left because of table-talk in Multi, there's probably a bigger issue. Multi isn't like any other category, and new players should be informed about that fact going in. If you go in expecting diplomacy and huge amounts of luck, you're much less likely to be disgruntled when they inevitably show up. If someone teaches new players that table-talk is illegal, and it isn't, they're going to be frustrated when they get to a tournament and it happens.

According to Rob, tournaments are supposed to be about fun and fellowship. I would be greatly impressed to find a RLK that even after being told to expect "Diplomacy"(Manipulation) and "luck" would shy because children are naturally optimistic. And when they get the inevitable backstab or they get drawn into losing some one the game, and the more "mature" Christians yell at them for it(which they will because the vast majority of redemption players I have met are ridiculously over competitive) , I doubt they will have had fun and fellowship. If they cannot have that why should I waste my time, my money to host the tournament?

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #58 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:33:37 PM »

Quote from: lp670sv on April 22, 2012, 10:23:32 PM

Than teach them in casual games where you can't end up costing someone a tournament based on when you decide to teach.

Casual games do not present every possible scenario. Besides, 9-year-olds can't just hop in the car and come over to my house for casual play. Balancing schedules of several different families of multiple children is hard enough for me to even sneak in tournaments. We do the best we can.

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM

Host's cannot be every where at once.

You had originally said 7 players, which is only two tables. That's why I was confused.

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM

The most predominant case at my tournaments was .... States ... Another incident at a regionals....

I see that you have had my types of experiences. This is why I will never attend or host a Natz. This is also the reason that I have no problem with having different rules for States and up, since that is where the win-at-any-cost players show up.

Korunks · « **Reply #59 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:41:15 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 22, 2012, 10:33:37 PM

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM
Host's cannot be every where at once.

You had originally said 7 players, which is only two tables. That's why I was confused.

have lost players from my regular playgroup

For the record I am not ripping on the people who come to my tournaments, with the exception of a few players over the years I have met several great and wonderful people. Unfortunately it only takes or to cause a problem.

Elders can we:
1. Get some official guidance on table talk.

2. Get that official guidance added to the host guide?

Once that is accomplished I will lock this thread.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #60 on:** April 22, 2012, 10:43:07 PM »

Quote

And when they get the inevitable backstab or they get drawn into losing some one the game, and the more "mature" Christians yell at them for it

This doesn't sound like a problem with table-talking. Granted I don't play Multi, but I've never been at a tournament where this kind of thing happened within earshot. If it did, the other players would be quick to call the yelling player down and encourage the new player. Getting tricked is part of the learning curve that kids will eventually have to learn. Banning table-talk to prevent it is like making movies illegal because some of them have bad things in them. It's all about expectations and player behavior. If young kids know they're going to be manipulated, it won't sting as hard when it happens, rather than expecting not to be and then being stabbed in the back. People are a lot more understanding of being lied to (situationally, I'm not condoning actual lying) in the course of a game that everyone is trying to win than when their "mentor" taught them to expect nothing of the sort. The only way that could be accurate is a rule on total silence; otherwise, manipulation will happen.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #61 on:** April 22, 2012, 11:06:07 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:04:41 PM

I fail to see how fun and fellowship is accomplished when older players deliberately coach inexperienced players to perform actions that win the experienced player the game, especially through tricks and deception...Maybe in some areas the veteran players are selfless and kind.

Just to throw in an experience from a tournament here yesterday...I was playing T1-mp at a table with 3 experienced players and 1 RLK. At one point in the game, the RLK had the chance to negate 1 player's fortress, and asked me what I recommended. It was local tournament, and the only people playing were all from my local playgroup. I pointed out facts such as the fact that 2 players had Wall of Protection out that was prohibiting his banding defense from being able to use their characters. I also pointed out that a player had Pithom which would cause him to lose cards off the top of his deck if he used dominants. And finally I pointed out that a couple players had Storehouse out that allowed them to avoid throwing away enhancements if their hand was too full. In the end, I basically recommended that he cancel one of the fortresses in my territory (which he did). And for you cynics who think that was all part of my sneaky plan to win anyway, I ended up losing that game. But I felt like everyone in the game had a fun time, and the RLK learned an important thought process for how to make decisions like that the next time.

Praeceps · « **Reply #62 on:** April 23, 2012, 12:05:25 AM »

If a rule is made, can we restrict it to States or higher? I know that when I play in my local group table talk is half the fun of a MP game. I will add, though, that all of my players are familiar with one another and we all take it in stride.

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM

Host's cannot be every where at once. The most predominant case at my tournaments was when I was at one of the 5 other tables than where the event occured (States so I was swamped), trying to make sure that table talk wasn't wasn't happening there as well ( I had warned several people already), When I find out after the fact that a former Tournament host came into a multi-player game and played at least one hand for their child. RLK's don't often know they can call for a judge in that situation, especially when an adult is telling them that is alright. I was livid but I can do nothing after the fact(other than watch them like a hawk when they attend my tournaments).

You couldn't void the win (if they won) or disqualify them from the rest of the games for blatant cheating?

Korunks · « **Reply #63 on:** April 23, 2012, 08:53:19 AM »

Quote from: Praeceps on April 23, 2012, 12:05:25 AM

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:25:15 PM
Host's cannot be every where at once. The most predominant case at my tournaments was when I was at one of the 5 other tables than where the event occured (States so I was swamped), trying to make sure that table talk wasn't wasn't happening there as well ( I had warned several people already), When I find out after the fact that a former Tournament host came into a multi-player game and played at least one hand for their child. RLK's don't often know they can call for a judge in that situation, especially when an adult is telling them that is alright. I was livid but I can do nothing after the fact(other than watch them like a hawk when they attend my tournaments).

You couldn't void the win (if they won) or disqualify them from the rest of the games for blatant cheating?

Thing is they didn't win, they almost won because of it. But it never should have happened.\

Quote from: Prof Underwood on April 22, 2012, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Korunks on April 22, 2012, 10:04:41 PM
I fail to see how fun and fellowship is accomplished when older players deliberately coach inexperienced players to perform actions that win the experienced player the game, especially through tricks and deception...Maybe in some areas the veteran players are selfless and kind.
Just to throw in an experience from a tournament here yesterday...I was playing T1-mp at a table with 3 experienced players and 1 RLK. At one point in the game, the RLK had the chance to negate 1 player's fortress, and asked me what I recommended. It was local tournament, and the only people playing were all from my local playgroup. I pointed out facts such as the fact that 2 players had Wall of Protection out that was prohibiting his banding defense from being able to use their characters. I also pointed out that a player had Pithom which would cause him to lose cards off the top of his deck if he used dominants. And finally I pointed out that a couple players had Storehouse out that allowed them to avoid throwing away enhancements if their hand was too full. In the end, I basically recommended that he cancel one of the fortresses in my territory (which he did). And for you cynics who think that was all part of my sneaky plan to win anyway, I ended up losing that game. But I felt like everyone in the game had a fun time, and the RLK learned an important thought process for how to make decisions like that the next time.

And how dd the other experienced players feel about your assistance? Just because it worked out well in your tourney with your experience does not mean that it will work out universally well.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #64 on:** April 23, 2012, 12:30:07 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on April 23, 2012, 08:53:19 AM

And how dd the other experienced players feel about your assistance? Just because it worked out well in your tourney with your experience does not mean that it will work out universally well.

They were fine with it. But I agree that my positive experiences don't discount other's negative experiences.

Wings of Music · « **Reply #65 on:** April 23, 2012, 01:16:20 PM »

Quote from: Praeceps on April 23, 2012, 12:05:25 AM

If a rule is made, can we restrict it to States or higher? I know that when I play in my local group table talk is half the fun of a MP game. I will add, though, that all of my players are familiar with one another and we all take it in stride.

This. I personally like table talk, it helps RLKs, keeps REPs attentive, and adds an element of diplomacy to the game that I find most exciting. There have been instances of abusing table talk however, so I understand the desire to make rules about what's allowed and what's not. Perhaps some loose rules could be made that apply to state/regional/national tournaments but not to district/local tournaments that way RLKs can still benefit at low level tournaments and the REPs who dislike table talk can have the rules they want for the tournaments that really matter.

Scoobug · « **Reply #66 on:** April 23, 2012, 02:38:22 PM »

What does RLK mean?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #67 on:** April 23, 2012, 02:49:12 PM »

Quote from: Scoobug on April 23, 2012, 02:38:22 PM

What does RLK mean?

Random little kid. I think the phrase was developed by Tim Maly in describing a significant demographic in the Twin Cities, MN playgroup.

Korunks · « **Reply #68 on:** April 23, 2012, 03:05:27 PM »

I think we should make the rules for State, Regional, and Nationals and leave it optional for host's to use them at their own tournament. That would allow hosts who have significant table talk issues to have an official set of rules to use, but allow others the flexibility to allow it some table talk if it is not an issue for them. But at this point what are the rules?

News:

Author Topic: What is the official rule on Table Talk in multi player (Read 8645 times)