Rules Precedent

[quindraco]

Reference Infernal post here: http://privateerpressforums.com/show...=1#post1556197

It seems I have an inaccurate understanding of rules precedence, which I thought basically went TO > Infernal > Errata > Rulebook, so my question is, how does rule precedence work? Linked Infernal post suggests both 1) that I'm wrong about TOs being able to take precedence, and 2) that I'm wrong about Infernals being able to take precedence.

Starting with the latter, I'd like to relink to the post I cited: http://privateerpressforums.com/show...ll=1#post24429 Specifically, "their words are official". Does an Infernal ruling which contradicts the rulebook and/or errata hold precedence or not?

As for the former, a TO *can't* run a tournament any way they like?

[Crate123]

A TO can not run a tournament any way they like and claim its an official tournament: http://privateerpressforums.com/show...nd-tournaments as an example.
However for questions that can not be resolved otherwise I think they are free to rule on stuff, at least thats how I interpret the "official" statement from poeticruse.

[Wishing]

I'm not sure this question belongs in the rules forum, since the rules forum is only for questions about official rules technicalities, and individual TO decisions do not fall within this area.

As I see it, there are two different levels of operation here.
1 - The abstract rules level. What are the currently most up to date rules for the game as laid out by developers.
2 - The practical rules level. How TOs choose to rule in their tournaments and what effect this has on the tournament's status of official or not official.

The infernals here can only answer questions to do with level 1. Whether a TO has a right to break the rules from level 1 or not is a level 2 question. Level 2 questions can only really be answered by the PG quartermasters and whoever else at PP is related to organised play.

The post that Crate links to is an example of an infernal answering a level 2 question, but to quote a different infernal, "the rules don't tell you what to do when you don't follow the rules". The only level 1 answer to the base size question is "bases have to be the sizes that the rules indicate". Anything about whether playing with larger bases than indicated is OK or not is a question about what to do when you are not following the rules, which is not an issue for the infernals.

[quindraco]

A TO can not run a tournament any way they like and claim its an official tournament: http://privateerpressforums.com/show...nd-tournaments as an example.
However for questions that can not be resolved otherwise I think they are free to rule on stuff, at least thats how I interpret the "official" statement from poeticruse.

I agree, and in the linked thread, I actually reference the exact same post. However, poeticruse seems to indicate that my understanding is deeply flawed, and further that Infernal rulings aren't binding (which means we can't reference Valander's post as a rules source? I don't know). Since you and I seem to agree, but I seem to be wrong, that might mean you're wrong too.

[Wishing]

Infernal rulings are entirely binding in the level 1 sphere of "official rulebook rules". However, what you are asking is whether PG TOs are bound by the level 1 rules or whether they are allowed to override them, and the infernals do not have authority over what TOs do.

[Crate123]

Im not quite following you where you say that the Infernal ruling dont hold precedence according to Poeticruse's post.
I just see him saying that they make mistakes from time to time.

[DrFish]

The way I understand it is that Infernal rulings are as the word of the developers and so what they post is not only the most accurate RAW, but also RAI until such a time an official errata document has been released to change that (if it is indeed changed).

At a tournament, however, a TO's word is law. Official or unofficial notwithstanding, the judgements they make are what should happen. Consider your opponent has a rules dispute, and you know for a fact there has been an Infernal ruling. The TO makes a different ruling, even after you point out the Infernal post. You can't exactly call up PP Hungerford and force them to force the TO to rule in any specific way. You just deal with the TO ruling and move on. That may take the tourney out of "legal" status, but it is what it is and there may be steps to follow with PP about TOs who make gross rule errors.

I think the other bit that poetcruise was trying to explain is that Infernals, outside of asking the devs about every question that comes up, can make mistakes as well. They are not infallable, but that's why theyve been know to either correct or over rule eachother. Their posts are not binding in the sense that TOs aren't bound by law or death to follow those rulings. Again, there may be reprocussions for such things, but it's their decision there and then and players should follow them.

[PG_Agamemnon]

PP has a set of rules that will receive errata from time to time. These are the rules to the game.

Infernals help clarify rules and take possible problems to PP proper for clarification.

PG's generally have an above average base knowledge of the rules. Some more some less. They generally run events in an official capacity using PP's rules to the absolute best of their knowledge.

A TO is anyone that runs an event be it store owner, employee, convention rep or avid player.

PG's and TO's are expected to uphold the rules to the best of their knowledge and ability. 99% of us do not understand every rule interaction and application to the fullest extent of every possible combination possible in the game. It happens that at times a TO or PG may make an incorrect call on a rules at an event. This does not over rule any Infernal or printed rule set at any time other than the specific organized event that the ruling was made.

My view is that a PG and TO can in most instances answer rules questions. When they are not 100% sure of the correct answer their answer is the same as a Die Roll per the rules on Prime MKII page 30. Keep the game going and research the correct answer later for future events. It may be right (in most cases) or could be wrong. For sake of keeping an event going though their ruling is blanket for the event.

There are times when certain rules are changed/modified by a TO/PG for specific events to provide a unique experience. Examples of these might be a format change like Highlander or Who's the boss. Could be a team tournament letting opposing factions work together. Or something even more wacky like something I have wanted to do... when you are paired up with an opponent you exchange casters.

At no time is a PG/TO supposed to disregard official rules because the PG/TO does not like it. Shield Guard is a prime example of this (pre 7.24.12 errata).

All that said Infernal's, PG's and TO's are all human and make mistakes. They are not to be put above the rules.

This is the same general idea to me as why I do not put a pastors opinion above the Bible.

[Iff]

It seems I have an inaccurate understanding of rules precedence, which I thought basically went TO > Infernal > Errata > Rulebook, so my question is, how does rule precedence work? Linked Infernal post suggests both 1) that I'm wrong about TOs being able to take precedence, and 2) that I'm wrong about Infernals being able to take precedence.

I don't think you're wrong.

1) If a TO has to make a spot ruling in case of a discussion between players, then for that tournament the TO's spot ruling will supersede anything in the rulebook, errata or infernals. You can give your (correct) arguments to the TO, but the TO might still make the wrong call (for instance, because he didn't know about a recent Inferal ruling). Still, TO's have a right to be wrong. Mistakes happen and the TO's word is final at an event. Once a TO ruling has been made, you can't appeal that ruling by providing proof in the form of an Infernal post and expect a reversal of the ruling. You could get en excuse (and if it happens a lot, you could take it up with the Press Gang), but the TO's ruling is still final at the event.

2) I don't see any discussion here. If there's discussion or uncertainty about a rule, the Inferal's answer if official. It does supersede Errata and the Rulebook (in the cases where the ruling is directly opposite a rule in the Errate of Rulebook).


As for your last question: A TO could run an event any way he likes, but all kinds of silly rules changes. It wouldn't be an actual Warmachine tournament, but the Infernals have no way to stop such a TO. That would again be a case for the Press Gang and the Quartermaster.

[Valander]

To add a little bit of clarity, realize that it is impossible to have someone monitor and enforce every tournament everywhere to make sure the TO is doing everything perfectly by the book. Add to that the fact that no TO likely has a perfect understanding of the game, which is where the "the TO ruling during an event is final" comes into play. In order to keep things moving, they have to be able to make a ruling if needed, and carry on. During a timed tournament there is not the time to take it to the rules forum, and possibly wait for clarification from dev, etc.

A TO who knowingly makes a ruling that goes against RAW (which does include the errata and Infernal rulings), risks not only losing any "official" support for that tournament, but if they are a PG as well, other possible disciplinary actions (or so I've been told).

There isn't a "tier" structure for the "correct rules." It isn't a matter of, "oh, well a TO said this, so it automatically overrides everything in the book." Consider the unlikely scenario where a TO decides they rather use d10 instead of d6 when rolling dice. This is clearly against the rules, but if they really want to do something like that as an experiment, and all their participants are willing, then we can't stop them, but it would mean they could not get any kind of official support for that event.

My comment about the non-standard sized bases was meant in this fashion. It was not a statement of any kind that people are free to use whatever size base if the TO wants, but more of a tongue in cheek nod to the fact that we cannot show up at someone's event and break their arms if they happen to make a wrong ruling.

[quindraco]

To add a little bit of clarity, realize that it is impossible to have someone monitor and enforce every tournament everywhere to make sure the TO is doing everything perfectly by the book. Add to that the fact that no TO likely has a perfect understanding of the game, which is where the "the TO ruling during an event is final" comes into play. In order to keep things moving, they have to be able to make a ruling if needed, and carry on. During a timed tournament there is not the time to take it to the rules forum, and possibly wait for clarification from dev, etc.

A TO who knowingly makes a ruling that goes against RAW (which does include the errata and Infernal rulings), risks not only losing any "official" support for that tournament, but if they are a PG as well, other possible disciplinary actions (or so I've been told).

There isn't a "tier" structure for the "correct rules." It isn't a matter of, "oh, well a TO said this, so it automatically overrides everything in the book." Consider the unlikely scenario where a TO decides they rather use d10 instead of d6 when rolling dice. This is clearly against the rules, but if they really want to do something like that as an experiment, and all their participants are willing, then we can't stop them, but it would mean they could not get any kind of official support for that event.

My comment about the non-standard sized bases was meant in this fashion. It was not a statement of any kind that people are free to use whatever size base if the TO wants, but more of a tongue in cheek nod to the fact that we cannot show up at someone's event and break their arms if they happen to make a wrong ruling.

Ok, good. This is how I thought it worked. Thanks for clarifying.

[PG_Dawnlord Ed]

A TO who knowingly makes a ruling that goes against RAW (which does include the errata and Infernal rulings), risks not only losing any "official" support for that tournament, but if they are a PG as well, other possible disciplinary actions (or so I've been told).

I can confirm that the Quartermaster has said in no uncertain terms that a PG may not make an official ruling that they know to be wrong.

[Wishing]

I can confirm that the Quartermaster has said in no uncertain terms that a PG may not make an official ruling that they know to be wrong.

And the point I was trying to make earlier is that this is an issue between the PG and PP, not anything to do with the game rules. Following the rules of the game is an interaction that takes place between individual players and TOs, and following the regulations for being a PG is an interaction that takes place between individual PGs and PP. These different interactions cannot be treated as part of the same system, which is what the OP seemed to be confused about. Whether or not PGs are allowed to run events using non-official rules is not part of the WM rulebook.

That said, we seem to now know that PP officially do not like it when PGs ignore rulings or errata, so PGs who state "in tournaments I run, I will rule it my own way" (as in one of the threads linked to in the OP) should probably be warned of this fact.

[Valander]

I think this thread probably has run its course. Locking, since there isn't technically a rules question here.