How do you deal with players not knowing the rules?

We had a rather unfortunate situation come up at our tournament over the weekend. One of our inexperienced players was convinced by the other players on his table that Theft of Vitae does not work against allies. Since one of the decks on the table was a Shambling Hordes deck, this rather changed how the game played out. There was no request for a ruling, though, so the judge wasn't called in for this and it only came out that it had happened in later discussions after the game, when it was far too late.

Any suggestions for how to avoid similar screw-ups in the future? Other than trying to encourage people to call for a judge if they're at all uncertain, I'm not sure what we can do, but that some of our experienced players are getting what is hardly a corner-case bit of the rules wrong is a cause for concern.

When in doubt about a rule / card / ruling / ..., call a judge.

It's also interesting to know that there is a penalty for misrepresenting the rules ( Judge's Guide - 114 ).

drnlmza wrote:

One of our inexperienced players was convinced by the other players on his table that Theft of Vitae does not work against allies.

That sounds like there was not only 1 inexperienced player at this table but 5. If you are sure that everyone acted in good faith, then there is not much to do. What happened happened, they will know the rules better next time.

If someone mislead the player who did not know the rules on purpose, then it is cheating of the worst kind.

@Pascal: maybe the wording of that rule 6.4.5 could be improved. With the parentheses, someone who does not know the cards might understand that there are Steal Life effects that work similarly to Steal Blood, not that Steal Blood can be used on allies. Also, it is not written that when a vampire steals from an ally (or conversely), the counters change kind. With the rule as written only, the counters should be lost since vampires do not have life. The example provided shows how both points work but it is not the role of an example to introduce new rules.

Suggested change: from

This effect moves blood counters (or life counters) from the target to the striking minion.

to

This effect moves blood counters from the target to the striking minion. It can also be used to steal life from an ally. The stolen counters become blood or life counters on the striking minion, whichever is relevant to him.

I think that the current ruling is really quite clear.
There is even an example of a combat between Cohn Rose and a mage ally. Making it extremely clear IMHO.


If the players are not familiar with the rulebook or that tule (6.4.5. Strike Effects/Steal Blood) obviously no amount of rewording/explaing will suffice...

If any player on the table was aware of the proper rulings and allowed the game to continue with an inaccurate set of rules they are guilty one or both these infractions from the Judge's Guide.


163. Cheating - Fraud

Definition:

A player intentionally misrepresents rules, procedures, personal information, or any other relevant tournament information.

164. Cheating - Collusion

Definition:

Players agree to alter, predetermine, or otherwise illegally establish the results of a game.

drnlmza wrote:

...., but that some of our experienced players are getting what is hardly a corner-case bit of the rules wrong is a cause for concern.

Boris and Wedge bring up some interesting points.

Did all five players not know the rule for theft of vitae verse allies?