Because, since the beginning of ANR on our side of the Atlantic, it’s the first time they’re wrong (afaik).
You should stop assuming that you know everything about someone based on a particular event. I understand that this situation may be frustrating but it’s not a good reason to disrespect them and the things they’ve done for their local/national communities. :-/
Organizers need to realize that FFGOP isn’t a problem-solver, just someone that repeats the official line.
The Tori Hanzo ruling is official, that’s what the CtM v Slums behavior is based off of.
So you seriously comment on one statement and cut out exactly everything I wrote that supports the statement you are trying to shoot down?
Again, the point is, we do not need everything written out explicitly since most things are covered by the game rules/presedence in tha FAQ. This specific matter does not require an FAQ entry as it can be derived using the official game rules and official resources available. (See my absurd example in my last post that you “elegantly” cut out)
I assume nothing on their previous work, this is based on what is stated here, that they are telling people they will rule incorrectly, against Damon’s inofficial word that has support in official rules and no-one cares to take them out from their position as TO/judge.
You can’t live on old merits for ever, if you start applying your own made up rules you should not be allowed to rule any longer, regardless of how good you’ve been in years passed. I am not talking of making a mistake in a tournament, this is premeditated, going against everything they should be following.
I’d say anything even slightly confusing (and judging by all the comments and even it’s separate topic, this ruling is such) should be added to the FAQ. Heck, anything that gets asked often should go in there (there’s a reason it’s called FAQ I guess). What reason is there not to put things like this into it?
Are you serious? First of all, I do not know why they would not put this in the FAQ I am not FFGOP, but if I were to guess it is due to the simple fact that FFG does not update their FAQ every 5 minutes, or even every 5 months (I think), they have simply not gotten around to it. I could guess that this will be in the next FAQ, or it might not.
Secondly, the point is not that this should not be in the FAQ, the point is that is should not need to be in the FAQ for TOs to apply the correct ruling as everything needed is available already.
I’m sure it will get put in there eventually its just the FAQ only gets released like once maybe twice a year because of all the fancy art they feel needs to be in it, instead of there being a simple text file that’s constantly updated. I mean technically the uFAQS that get released with each data pack aren’t official but I feel like the community has had no issues abiding by whats there. I guess I still fail to understand why making up your own unofficial ruling is a better option than accepting the “unofficial” one stated by the designer.
I would appreciate if we cut split the Thread into one part for the rules and one for the organization of the event itself.
The question might be: “Why is it worse?” or: “Why should anyone even expect unofficial rulings to attempt to be similar to other unofficial rulings at all?”
The thing is, Damon isn’t giving a ‘new’ ruling, he’s answering what the outcome is given the existing rules. The outcome of CtM v Slums is derived from existing rules about trashing (core rules, page 18) and the Tori Hanzo FAQ.
To arrive at a different conclusion, one has to ignore at least part of those existing rules.
Net shield is a prevent action, not a replacement action 
Correct, the precedent is for an effect for which the trigger condition was met (the first net damage) but was not resolved (damage prevented by net shield), the triggered action also cannot resolve for either the prevented net damage, or any subsequent net damage.
CtM v Slums is:
Wether you agree with a particular TO or Judge 's decision about anything: it’s their call. They organise the event. They judge the event. Nobody else has the right to interfere.
Likewise whether or not the TO agrees with FFG on how to play the game they are organizing a tournament for is irrelevant.
So going against the rules is OK for a National FFG sanctioned event because “They organise the event. They judge the event.” If someone at a different national sanctioned FFG event decided to BAN NEH we should be ok with that because again “They organise the event. They judge the event”?
Ok everyone, we already had the discussion about germany’s rulings over in the dedicated thread for it. Let’s not revive it here please.
Oh, it was fun :’(
On the day FFG invests into a real judges System, like MTG has, we can talk about that. For today, they are just voluntary people doing their best to follow the official rules and gives us a good gaming experience. So unless you want to travel all over Europe, not getting paid for it (except TO price support), you have to accept they sometimes rule the wrong way. And maybe appreciate their hard, voluntary work instead.
But still, frequently asked questions are frequently asked for a reason. If a card was well designed and its rules are easy to follow, no need for that.
Slums, lots of questions asked, so thats a hint that its not well designed and should be a part of the FAQ.
Whatever about the ruling in Germany, it doesn’t really make sense for France to pick and choose in advance. Is the TO going to overrule other rules they might not necessarily agree with (I mean I still don’t really get why E. Kim “trashes” a card he finds in archives, but that’s just the way it is…)
Doesn’t really help the player (or players) who go to Worlds from France either - could develop bad habits or learn to lean too heavily on CtM’s ability (which now fires a click later, which could make a big difference).