Terrain usage and placement at tournaments

[Mephisto]

5 hours ago, ClockworkGeo91 said:

This has been the argument throughout three threads now and again I don't see why this can be seen to be a strong  argument. Way too much thought and discussion is going into this, just so people don't need to say a simple word; no. 

You cannot agree to something, nod your head and give a thumbs up to something and then complain after the fact that you lost due to a factor which you agreed to.

Oh, I crushed my opponent. Table 2 in the final round and I won. He brought the hammer down, alpha struck his fanciful new Stormcast battalion, was dodgy with wounds, and was still no match for Nagash and His Millions. I thought it would be in poor form to insist he was playing incorrectly while he struggled to not kill 40 skeletons the entire game.  

If I'm losing because he was moving wounds around would I have been more insistent? Probably. But, as a competitor, I'd also think that I've done more wrong to get to the a point where someone being shifty with the rules is beating me. Like, I said, I've never been accused of lacking confidence.

Still, saying no isn't as easy as some think.  I think you're being disingenuous in claiming that everyone who plays this game is as assertive as you. It's awesome that you are. It's awesome that I am. Not everyone is. People are different and bring a multitude of their own experiences that have changed how they play. It would be awfully nice if the less confident and less assertive could just point at the table and say "those are the rules" or not even have to because it's predetermined. When two teams show up to a (american) football arena, they may flip a coin to see which way they're moving the ball. They don't also bring their own turf and goal posts, let alone get to shift the goal posts. 

[ClockworkGeo91]

4 minutes ago, Mephisto said:

Oh, I crushed my opponent. Table 2 in the final round and I won. He brought the hammer down, alpha struck his fanciful new Stormcast battalion, was dodgy with wounds, and was still no match for Nagash and His Millions. I thought it would be in poor form to insist he was playing incorrectly while he struggled to not kill 40 skeletons the entire game.  

Love this.

Hard to beat a peat bog of Skellies.

I understand what you are saying but I sometimes think a line has to be drawn when it comes to these sort of issues, as it strips down the social aspect of the game, just to make things easier for people. I also think that if you are getting tabled (i.e. the case of Ben tabling all opponents), I don't think a LoS blocking piece of terrain was the cause.

We'll agree to disagree.

[amysrevenge]

I loved Ben's terrain and think it was fine.

 

That said.  I'm a grown man, old enough to be the father of many of you,  with a family and a job and responsibilities, including the authority to fire/sack someone as required.  I would *NOT* have the jambags to tell Ben "No" if I didn't like his terrain.  If I didn't like it, I'd smile and pretend to be fine with it.

[paul7926]

only just getting back into the game so this may be a totally stupid idea but......

My assumption was that in a tournament the terrain would be set up by the TO and immovable.  So you walk up to your assigned table and that is what you play on, no changes.  

If that is not the case then how about an idea taken from way back in the day when I used to play tournament historical gaming.  

Each player can bring X terrain features.  They have a pre-determined size so no 4 foot long 2 foot deep woods for example.  The assortment of the terrain is down to the player bringing it.  So someone wanting to play on a board with lots of LOS blocking features would naturally bring more of them.  Also, counting as a terrain piece would be an area of 'open ground'.  So it's not terrain but the absence of terrain.  Therefore a person wanting a nice open battleground for their cavalry charges may just bring x lots of 'open ground'.  

Players take it in turns to place each of their terrain 'features' anywhere that does not overlap a piece already on the table.  

Last thing to do is to roll to see if the terrain stays in place.  The score needed is modified by where you put that terrain.  Anything in your own deployment zone always stays, anything in the enemy deployment zone is removed 50% of the time, anything placed on neutral ground is removed 1/6 of the time.  (adjust numbers if you like as I can't actually remember them it was so long ago).

It basically means you have a small mini game before the actual game where you try and build the battlefield to your advantage.  You have most control over your deployment zone and least control over your opponents deployment zone.

It simulates the generals moving around trying to engage on the most favourable terrain for their army.

EDIT:  Just to be clear now I think about it the amount of 'open ground' you could bring was limited because obviously placing 'open ground' means that nothing else can be placed there so losing it later to a roll has no negative effect at all.  "Oh that open ground is gone and now there is open ground in it's place!"

[Gaz Taylor]

21 minutes ago, relic456 said:

Does saying "no" have a chance of impacting my chances at getting a good sport vote?  Do I have to balance the potential advantage an opponent is asking for with them potentially docking me points? Still trying to wrap my head around what a competitive AoS tournament looks like in practice, so I might be misunderstanding the sportsmanship score side of things.  I checked the Blackout tournament pack but it wasn't clear how it worked.

Depends on how you say no. If you say no but have a fun game and get on well with your opponent, you will be fine.

If you say no by basically smashing your opponents models up and then throwing their drink in their face, you probably won’t get a sports vote (and get ejected from the event).

Basically what I’m saying is use some common sense!!! It’s a game with social interaction and it’s okay to say no, speak with your opponent, and generally have fun.

 

Why do you need this clarified?!?!? 

[ClockworkGeo91]

3 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

Depends on how you say no. If you say no but have a fun game and get on well with your opponent, you will be fine.

If you say no by basically smashing your opponents models up and then throwing their drink in their face, you probably won’t get a sports vote (and get ejected from the event).

Basically what I’m saying is use some common sense!!! It’s a game with social interaction and it’s okay to say no, speak with your opponent, and generally have fun.

 

Why do you need this clarified?!?!? 

I’m as baffled by this whole discussion as well. I’m not sure why people can’t just talk to their opponent and agree on the game board, without needing systems and rules in place that strip back any social interaction and pre game discussions

[Richelieu]

1 hour ago, relic456 said:

but I too was pretty shocked when I read about a tournament player being able to set up their own terrain layouts every game. 

Hold on a sec, nobody said anything about him being able to set up the terrain according to his own layout.  Just because his personal terrain was used doesn't mean he was the only one to set it up.  I would be utterly shocked if he didn't work with his opponents to create a configuration acceptable to both players.  Not only that, but you roll for choosing a side, so creating an imbalanced board is just as likely to hurt you as your opponent.

I think @Sleboda and others make good points about the stigma around saying 'no' but you're implying that he set up the boards without any input from his opponent which I think is way off base.  

[Dead Scribe]

With a lot of people I've played at tournaments, if you say no to them, you are getting tanked in your sportsmanship score.  Pretty much anything that requires player discussion, if you say no you run the risk of having your sportsmanship score tanked, and if you just go along with it then your opponent can gain pretty significant advantages.  This is why I prefer neutral judges setting up tables or basically removing anything that can cause a conflict.

I get that in the UK it seems you guys are a lot friendlier, but thats not the case over here.

[Mephisto]

5 hours ago, ClockworkGeo91 said:

Love this.

Hard to beat a peat bog of Skellies.

I understand what you are saying but I sometimes think a line has to be drawn when it comes to these sort of issues, as it strips down the social aspect of the game, just to make things easier for people. I also think that if you are getting tabled (i.e. the case of Ben tabling all opponents), I don't think a LoS blocking piece of terrain was the cause.

We'll agree to disagree.

Oh, you're not wrong. I don't even need to agree to disagree here. We're just like 15 degrees out of alignment from each other's perspective and not polar opposite. I don't think Ben's terrain was the cause of such definitive wins either. You don't go from "totally would've lost" to "tabled and obliterated everyone" because of terrain. Just like I wouldn't have gone from not losing a unit to completely crushed from my opponent being mistaken on wound tracking. 

I even agree with you on social aspects of the game. I've referenced MTG and even my stint with eSports (the latter portion of my career has been as a TO and shoutcaster but the former portion was playing for real cash money in CS: Source, Quake 1 & 2, and chasing whichever Fighter had the best prize support) but there is a reason AOS is the game that consumes me. Sure, I played WHFB all those years ago and 40k but it wasn't until AOS that I was completely committed. Don't get me wrong I still like shoutcasting (just the craft of it) and will still dust some kids at Soul Calibur 2 in whatever backwater gaming or anime convention I happen to be at. But I will drive seven hours to a crappy tournament with no prize support just for love of the game because AOS has struck the balance between my pure love of a game and a community. It has a healthy tournament scene which appeases that competitive itch but it more importantly has just awesome people. Mr. Mephisto at a fighter or MTG tournament? I leave my head phones in, blast some rock/metal (or some 80s hip hop if I'm feeling extra saucy that day). Shake your hand and say good luck the way a cashier asks how your day is. Then, win or lose, I shake your hand again and walk away. Mr. Mephisto at an AOS tournament is much different. I can barely contain my passion for the game. I joke with you and can't wait to tell you about my army. Depending on venue, I'll offer to buy you a beer or soda. Then I laugh and chat the entire game. Sure, I want to win, but I actually have fun when I'm not winning which is strange for me. It's the social aspect that makes me love the game as much as I do. It's one of the things that's missing from all those other games. 

It's strange because AOS is the place where all the voices (competitor, writer, social human, etc., etc.) in my head get to hang out and have fun and finally not be at odds with each other because everyone else shares the insanity too. Like, I randomly won the door prize of an Eidolon of Mathlann too at the Gen Con tournament and I threw it in the trash because I won a duct tape 3rd place trophy to go on the shelf. Such is my pride and enjoyment. 

Editor's Note: I did not actually throw the Eidolon away... I wouldn't do anything that silly. I posed with it half naked in my hotel bed and sent the photos to my friend who couldn't make the tournament. He's a sylvaneth player but a huge fan of IDK. My taunting was furious and amusing (to me). I'm going to take a couple more pictures on swings and stuff with my new best friend Eido-kun and then send it to my friend for him to just enjoy hobbying and/or as a gateway drug into him starting a second army. 

[Moonlightwolf]

The regular lack of LoS blocking terrain at tournaments is far more of a shock to me than Ben bringing his own. The game is very clearly designed to be played with plentiful terrain. To have a table that lacks any real LoS blocking terrain is to put any army that lacks ranged at a huge disadvantage. Some armies are designed to take advantage of choke points and terrain features, Hell it can even be argued that argued that core rules like keeping unit coherency only really have any impact once terrain is involved. I get that not every game can be on an amazing board but in a competitive setting, having no large LoS blocking terrain on a 6x4 table seems crazy to me. I understood back in the fantasy days when formations and movement trays made terrain an awkward pain in the ass but AoS is very intentionally designed with terrain in mind.

[Gaz Taylor]

29 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

With a lot of people I've played at tournaments, if you say no to them, you are getting tanked in your sportsmanship score.  Pretty much anything that requires player discussion, if you say no you run the risk of having your sportsmanship score tanked, and if you just go along with it then your opponent can gain pretty significant advantages.  This is why I prefer neutral judges setting up tables or basically removing anything that can cause a conflict.

I need to ask this, so please don’t take offence - Does this actually happen on a regular basis or is this just something you have experienced once or twice? Very surprised if this is something that happens a lot unless you game in an area that has a small player pool? 

[Skabnoze]

5 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I need to ask this, so please don’t take offence - Does this actually happen on a regular basis or is this just something you have experienced once or twice? Very surprised if this is something that happens a lot unless you game in an area that has a small player pool? 

I have found that this does indeed happen in smaller local areas where the player-base is particularly cutthroat.  I have seen it happen many times and not just for GW games.

While I have not been able to attend major events in a while (stupid kids, you take my model money AND all my spare time...), most of the people I do know that go to those events says that they usually have a very different feel than small local tournaments.  If you go to a big event it takes a serious investment of time and money simply to travel and attend and most people who attend seem to strive for a more fun environment - even if competition is fierce.  But these are just my anecdotal observations - your mileage may vary.

[Dead Scribe]

28 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I need to ask this, so please don’t take offence - Does this actually happen on a regular basis or is this just something you have experienced once or twice? Very surprised if this is something that happens a lot unless you game in an area that has a small player pool? 

It pretty much happens about once in every major I've ever been in.  So while its not common because most of my games are fine, I can count on it happening at least once in every event I play at.  Locally we all know each other and pretty much play by the same rules anyway and there is very little left for players to bicker over like terrain placement, etc.  

Most arguments we would have are rules interpretations not covered by an FAQ which a judge will resolve.  Though calling a judge over for a rules clarification can also hit your sports scores if you don't know the other person very well.

[relic456]

1 hour ago, Gaz Taylor said:

Depends on how you say no. If you say no but have a fun game and get on well with your opponent, you will be fine.

If you say no by basically smashing your opponents models up and then throwing their drink in their face, you probably won’t get a sports vote (and get ejected from the event).

Basically what I’m saying is use some common sense!!! It’s a game with social interaction and it’s okay to say no, speak with your opponent, and generally have fun.

 

Why do you need this clarified?!?!? 

I promise, I'm coming at this genuinely.  I literally just picked up the hobby in April and so far have only had games at home with my brother.  Like I said earlier, I'm still trying to wrap my head around what a competitive AoS tournament is like in practice.  My competitive gaming experience has solely been with MtG and obviously AoS is really different (since MtG has Comp REL and what not).  I'm just trying to better understand how this all works!  As the saying goes, common sense isn't so common and what's rude to you and I might not be rude to the next person.  My surprise is more that this stuff isn't codified in tournament packs and seems to be based off your local area's etiquette/culture. 

1 hour ago, Richelieu said:

Hold on a sec, nobody said anything about him being able to set up the terrain according to his own layout.  Just because his personal terrain was used doesn't mean he was the only one to set it up.  I would be utterly shocked if he didn't work with his opponents to create a configuration acceptable to both players.  Not only that, but you roll for choosing a side, so creating an imbalanced board is just as likely to hurt you as your opponent.

Fair enough! That was just the impression I got from the comments in the other thread, but it's entirely possible I misunderstood.  My concerns are more with the issue in general and less so about that one specific instance.

[LLV]

Ok this one's going to be interesting:

Firstly on terrain. Regardless of the quality of terrain I think you have to abide by the tournaments rules and use what is on the table. It's the only way to have a level playing field. If there is an issue with the terrain, you talk to the TO afterwards and maybe it becomes the norm for players to bring terrain with them but for this event the Black out pack was quite deliberate regarding terrain as far as I can see

The part specifically saying "terrain will be pre-arranged on the table beforehand and should NOT be moved by the players" I think is the key here. Regardless whether or not you and your opponent agreed you're basically breaking the rules. Now Chris as TO might have overridden the rule at the table each game, but then I ask if the pack tells you specifically NOT to bring terrain and is stringent in not moving or altering it - why would someone even bring their own terrain in the first place other than to garner a possible advantage? Is this not a clear intention to break the rules? I'm assuming Mr.BJ was the only player to bring the terrain here.

Now onto opponents consent. It has already been touched on that throwing someone a curve ball at the table like that can result in awkward interactions at the best of times. Now add to the fact that Sports was the first tie breaker in a 5 game tournament so you have to be as nice as possible to hopefully get first place with the possibility of more than 1 person ending on 5-0. Now add to that the fact the person asking you is known to be the lead on the game you're playing and has quite a tournament pedigree and is well known in the community for the last 10-12 years..... It takes a very brave person to say no under that pressure.

Which leads me to my final and departing point - the person who said no. Well he was tabled. No harm no foul the terrain wasnt an issue, Mr.Jonson would have won anyway right?

Well maybe not as the following things then apparently happened in the game where the terrain wasnt used (and please if the below is misrepresented I'd love to hear from BJs opponent that game to contradict this):

1. BJ questioned what the Brass Rune did and told the TO it didn't work that way - despite the fact it's always been played like that and the khorne player has been using their army for a VERY long time.  I guess the Lead on AoS knows the correct rules though - pity theyre not in an FAQ yet though....

2. BJ refused to let the khore player get extra attacks on his Blood letters due to the khorne player not indicating correctly what a Bloodsecrator could do. "you didnt tell me what the bloodsecrator does".

So it seems saying no to the terrain had just as much of an impact as the terrain itself.

Regardless of that one game though, I think my original point still stands. If terrain is at an event and there are clear rules on it's placement and usage, then doing anything outside of that is technically breaking the rules. To bring terrain to an event that tells you not to is intent. To 'ask' opponents at then table despite the first 2 points is intimidating. Just my 2 cents

 

 

[Euphanism]

I'm honestly surprised there are even tournaments that allow players to bring or place their own terrain. Every one I've been to (admittedly a small number) has the terrain set up by the TO, and they try to make it as even as possible for both sides of the table.

Personally I'd be ok with someone bring some terrain, especially if it was really cool, but I'm about the closest to a casual player you can get that still competes in tournaments. I'm just here to push little plastic monsters around! That being said, if I really felt like someone was stacking the board in their favor (like using a lot of stuff that breaks LoS, or allows their army some cheesy plays) I'd have no problem asking to switch it out. But I'm also pretty extroverted and love to have a conversation with my opponent while I play, ask them about their army ideas, favorite units, etc.

I can see an argument for having a TO officiate it all, though. Some of the players in my local group, two in particular, are very fresh to the game and absolutely non-confrontational people in general. If asked by someone to use their custom terrain, they'd agree even if it was giving them a disadvantage. Should it be up to them to button up and stand up for it? Part of me says yes, it's something you just have to prep for if you're in a tournament. But part of me wants everyone to have the most fun possible, and recognizes that this behavior might wear down players to a game that, unfortunately in the US at least, has a lot of negative stigma about communities of reeeeeal neckbeardy gits that are hostile to any new blood.

Honestly I think the TO determining this makes the most sense. In the same way, I wouldn't want my opponent to try and pick a realm that gives them a distinct advantage (like one where their endless spells originate from). If the TO calls it, it's objectively neutral, which is how a tournament should be handled. Now if the TO wants to take custom scenery and set it up themselves before sides are determined (which seems the most logical way) then I say bring on the custom stuff!

 

[ianob]

7 hours ago, relic456 said:

Does saying "no" have a chance of impacting my chances at getting a good sport vote?  Do I have to balance the potential advantage an opponent is asking for with them potentially docking me points? Still trying to wrap my head around what a competitive AoS tournament looks like in practice, so I might be misunderstanding the sportsmanship score side of things.  I checked the Blackout tournament pack but it wasn't clear how it worked.

Possibly, of course. But best sports votes are arbitrary at the best of times.

I think the more telling point that there IS social pressure to accept playing on an opponent's terrain is the fact that I heard multiple people talking about what a (expletive deleted) Dan Ford was for declining to play on Ben's board at Blackout. If there is no pressure to play on someone's home board then that's fine, but regardless of what people are saying in public now about how it's all well and good to just say no if you want to, the comments in reality certainly did not match that. And for the record I've never even met the guy, so I have no vested interest either way beyond not wanting to see the same happen in future (or have it happen to me in future, because I'd say no too) but I thought it was off hearing people comment that he was somehow in the wrong not wanting to play on a board that hugely disadvantaged his army.

Obviously this is hearsay so take it as you will, but if highly unusual terrain is going to be seen as acceptable, then at least we as a community should also consider it perfectly acceptable to decline to use it!

[Mephisto]

31 minutes ago, LLV said:

Firstly on terrain. Regardless of the quality of terrain I think you have to abide by the tournaments rules and use what is on the table. It's the only way to have a level playing field. If there is an issue with the terrain, you talk to the TO afterwards and maybe it becomes the norm for players to bring terrain with them but for this event the Black out pack was quite deliberate regarding terrain as far as I can see

The part specifically saying "terrain will be pre-arranged on the table beforehand and should NOT be moved by the players" I think is the key here. Regardless whether or not you and your opponent agreed you're basically breaking the rules.

 

Wait it was in the Pack that terrain was preset by the TO and an exception was made for a specific player(s)?

Nnnnngh. That's rather. Oof... I still don't think you go from "going to lose" to "tabling everyone" on terrain alone. I still don't think Mr. BJ was angleshooting or anything. I am suddenly not okay with this though.  It's not basically breaking the rules. It is breaking the rules. Furthermore, it is breaking the rules and making exceptions for a specific player. Almost as if a specific player was given an advantage, however minor, because of their station. 

Perhaps it's my dirty American hubris but Gary Gygax himself could rise from the grave and play in my D&D game right now and if he had a rules dispute, I'd still make him abide by my interpretations at my table. I'm not going to touch the second portion of your post regarding the Khorne player, @LLV because I wasn't there and this is the first I've ever heard of it.

My goal in joining this thread wasn't to gain an opinion on Mr. BJ specifically. I know that's what derailed the other thread and I simply was not prepared to think about it as I wasn't there and have some general notions about gamesmanship that lean toward optimism. So I do apologize. I really just wanted to weigh in on the greater subject of terrain and tournament play and now I understand why this has been so contentious.

[chord]

1 hour ago, LLV said:

 

Well maybe not as the following things then apparently happened in the game where the terrain wasnt used (and please if the below is misrepresented I'd love to hear from BJs opponent that game to contradict this):

1. BJ questioned what the Brass Rune did and told the TO it didn't work that way - despite the fact it's always been played like that and the khorne player has been using their army for a VERY long time.  I guess the Lead on AoS knows the correct rules though - pity theyre not in an FAQ yet though....

2. BJ refused to let the khore player get extra attacks on his Blood letters due to the khorne player not indicating correctly what a Bloodsecrator could do. "you didnt tell me what the bloodsecrator does".

 

I'm not in the UK, but this is why I was initially shocked when I was told the head of AoS would play in an AoS tournament.   Seems like a conflict of interest.  But maybe is normal in table top miniature games?

[relic456]

17 minutes ago, ianob said:

Possibly, of course. But best sports votes are arbitrary at the best of times.

Definitely one of my concerns about soft scores in general, especially as a tie breaker (as it was in Blackout).  But I guess that's probably a topic better suited to its own thread.

I guess my impression as a newer player is that there are going to be jerks in any group, no matter where you are.  The rules (and by extension, TOs) should be doing their best to prevent those kinds of people from taking advantage of others.  Terrain seems to be an area where this is lacking, but I admit that its impact is relatively minor when compared to other factors like list building and player skill.  None the less, in a competitive environment, if even small things like this aren't properly detailed and explained in the tournament pack, this will keep happening.  If the community decides that bringing your own terrain and trying to convince your opponent to use it is part of the game's skill cap, so be it.  But let's lay out the rules properly in the first place so people can be prepared.

[LLV]

1 minute ago, relic456 said:

I guess my impression as a newer player is that there are going to be jerks in any group, no matter where you are.  The rules (and by extension, TOs) should be doing their best to prevent those kinds of people from taking advantage of others.  Terrain seems to be an area where this is lacking, but I admit that its impact is relatively minor when compared to other factors like list building and player skill.  None the less, in a competitive environment, if even small things like this aren't properly detailed and explained in the tournament pack, this will keep happening.  If the community decides that bringing your own terrain and trying to convince your opponent to use it is part of the game's skill cap, so be it.  But let's lay out the rules properly in the first place so people can be prepared.

The terrain rules were laid out properly - Not sure how much more clear you could be:

[LLV]

18 minutes ago, chord said:

I'm not in the UK, but this is why I was initially shocked when I was told the head of AoS would play in an AoS tournament.   Seems like a conflict of interest.  But maybe is normal in table top miniature games?

GW staff playing in Tournaments is normal, what Mr.BJ allegedly did regarding over ruling rules in game is not normal and IMO an abuse of position.

[relic456]

13 minutes ago, LLV said:

The terrain rules were laid out properly - Not sure how much more clear you could be:

I was referring more to the general case, but to be clear I agree that there appears to be a difference between what was in the pack and what (reportedly) happened on the tables.  From the 1 or 2 pictures I saw, it looked like Ben's terrain was placed in similar positions to what was on the standard table and the issue was more about the size and volume of the pieces.  I wasn't there so I can't really say too much more, I think it's something the UK scene will have to sort out on their own.

All in all, I think it's good that we're talking about terrain.  It's definitely something I'll bring up with my local group and TOs to see what we can do to be as fair as possible.

[Sleboda]

11 hours ago, ianob said:

.Also TOs need to make it very clear that raising issues with your opponents terrain is fine and that no one is going to look at you like a ****** for doing so. Not everyone has a mind to object even if thy want to, especially in this hobby that often attracts introverts, socially awkward persons, or simply people who are too nice. 

The TO would indeed need to make that clear ... And it still wouldn't matter for exactly the reasons you said. 

No. A player should never, ever, have to take that risk, and no amount of assurance is going to mitigate it. In an event with dozens to hundreds of players, how can you take the chance and assume none of them will speak poorly of you and/or judge you harshly?

To answer the original post, my opinion is that all terrain should be provided and set up the same on each table, with the option for the event staff to quickly rearrange a few pieces after every other match (and still keep them all the same on each table).

[Sleboda]

7 hours ago, ClockworkGeo91 said:

and its fairly assumptive making out that people can't speak up for themselves. 

Not trying to be rude, just an honest question -

Have you played many people outside of you main group?

I've been playing Warhammer for 33 years now, in different states and different countries. It's been my repeated experience that this hobby, and gaming in general (whoa boy, just returned from GenCon), is packed to the gills with people who can't/won't/don't speak up for themselves.

Anxiety and awkwardness are very common in gamers. That's not me being mean, and I certainly don't judge these folks (heck, I play against a number of them regularly and count them as friends), but it's a real thing for a ton of people.