From: LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com)
Subject: Re: [LONG] Official Las Vegas Storyline Tournament Report
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
View this article only
Date: 2002-03-06 06:36:08 PST
Marty wrote:
> getd...@earthlink.net (Keith Thompson) wrote in message
> > Thank you for your considerable input, Marty. But next time, I'll
> > just listen to Mr. Coupe or LSJ himself! I'm sure YOU NEVER, EVER
> > made any mistakes EVER in any game you've EVER played in or judged.
> > At least I've got the cajones to fess up to my own mistakes regardless
> > how BAD they may be!
>
> Keith Thompson - Ranking 200th
> Martin Cubberley - Ranking 15th
>
> Obviously not as many as you have :)
One should not equate poor (legal) play with mistaken (illegal) play.
L. Scott Johnson - Ranking 152nd
I'm of the opinion that ranking is more related to deckbuiling and
gameplaying ability (and luck of draw and seating etc.) than it is
to rules judging ability or depth of rules knowledge.
(At least, I hope so :-)
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
From: James Coupe (ja...@zephyr.org.uk)
Subject: Re: [LONG] Official Las Vegas Storyline Tournament Report
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
View this article only
Date: 2002-03-06 07:23:28 PST
In message <3C86297C...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white-
wolf.com> writes:
>I'm of the opinion that ranking is more related to deckbuiling and
>gameplaying ability (and luck of draw and seating etc.) than it is
>to rules judging ability or depth of rules knowledge.
>
>(At least, I hope so :-)
You and me both. (#243 and I can't remember the last time I actually
got to sit down and play a game.)
--
James Coupe Oh, the poor folks hate the rich folks,
PGP 0x5D623D5D And the rich folks hate the poor folks.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 All of my folks hate all of your folks,
13D7E668C3695D623D5D It's American as apple pie.
I reread these previous posts to my Las Vegas Storyline Tournament
Report, and it got me to thinking. Just how many tournament VTES
games have some of you people played anyway? I currently have 85
tournament games under my belt (4 of which Todd has not processed yet
(OrcCon)), but most of the "Top 20" Players have less than 50. (Kudos
to Robert Goudie and Rob Treasure for not only being #2 and #1
(respectively), but also for having played in so many tournaments.)
And, if I count all my "friendlies" as well, I have played nearly 550
games of Jyhad/VTES. (I know this because I'm so anal I've kept a
tally since I started playing my favorite game on Sept. 29, 1994!)
So, when I look at Martin Cubberly's "17th" place ranking (which it
should be since ties are silly; "Top 20" Players my arse: there are
more than 20 players there!), I also notice Martin has played 28
tournament games. Not bad, I think, not bad, but nothing in
comparison to what Rob Treasure or Robert Goudie have done. And
certainly 28 tournament games doesn't even come close to 85 tournament
games. (While I'm at it, this is for the record: I have been in the
"Top 50" a few times, I placed 5th in the 1999 VTES "World
Championship" (with my Gangrel Bleed Deck, remember, David Tatu?), and
I won two tournaments outright (one constructed and one draft) and
took a 4th place in a third constructed tournament, all at Origins
2000. I guess I have my *moments*!)
Yes, my "ranking" is quite low now--and it'll be even lower after Todd
processes OrcCon--but rankings can and do fluctuate quite wildly.
Ratings (one's scaled score with the 3000 baseline) and game count are
what *really* matter. (Heck, you need 10 tournament games just to get
a rating, which will then also give you a "ranking".) I have to say,
though, that I like to "torpedo" people's ratings/rankings, which is
easy to do with my "sub"par rating/ranking.
One final comment: When, oh when, will we start getting ratings for
limited VTES? I know Ben Peal is a HUGE fan of limited, as I am, but
let's face it, folks, people *are* getting much more serious about
this game, and like it or not, it is becoming more and more like my
other favorite game, Magic. Embrace, yon Methuselahs, there is no
turning back! The NAC and EC have already turned VTES into a serious
competition. Single card prices are looking much more like Magic card
prices these days. Special promo cards. New sets on a relatively
frequent basis. Our game has evolved folks; it's no longer the
"friendly" game of VTES at the tournament. It's for REAL! So, let's
get on with getting limited ratings for people and creating composite
ratings as well (constructed/limited weighted average).
Keith M. Thompson
Prince of Las Vegas
"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:21430CDC6CD12E4F.9144AABC...@lp.airnews.net...
> >When will we start getting ratings for limited VTES?
When someone else volunteers to take over the arduous
task of keeping track of it. The current ratings are
reported so horribly (incomplete names, no VEKN numbers,
no identifying cities, no Archon sent in, assorted
additional BS) that it takes a full time investment
just to begin to attempt to keep up with them.
> What is limited VTES?
Draft events.
There also won't be ratings for them until there is
one, and only one, way to run a draft event, so that
the skills measured are the same.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
http://www.TheLasombra.com
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:<21430CDC6CD12E4F.9144AABC...@lp.airnews.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Sealed deck, booster draft, and variants thereof, I assume. That's
what 'limited' refers to in the other card game.
I'd really enjoy some sealed deck VTES...I think. I've never played
it.
> I'd really enjoy some sealed deck VTES...I think. I've never played
> it.
Oh, you WOULD enjoy it.
There was a tournament at the local store here about 4 years ago and I
still remember the final round: I took the early lead, bleeding my
prey like mad. His prey switches places with me via Dramatic
Upheaval, and when he ousts my former prey (now my predator), I Life
Boon him for 16, gaining me the one VP I needed to secure 2nd place!
MAN it was cool!
All the games before it were good, too...it's the ability to seriously
play Life Boon and Flamethrower and Gunther, Beast Lord etc. that
makes it so different. I would like to see much support for sealed.
------------
Hey community: in M:TG tourneys, Drafts are held widely, sealed decks
rarely. Why is that? It seems we are beginning that trend here, too?
(I greatly prefer sealed to draft--just deckbuilding and playing, no
additional non-game skills needed.)
"Brian" <firstco...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:80bafd85.02031...@posting.google.com...
>
> Hey community: in M:TG tourneys, Drafts are held widely, sealed decks
> rarely. Why is that? It seems we are beginning that trend here, too?
> (I greatly prefer sealed to draft--just deckbuilding and playing, no
> additional non-game skills needed.)
>
Deckbuilding skills don't do a lot for you with "sealed" decks. In a draft, you use
your deckbuilding skills to select the cards you need over the cards you need less.
Nobody can build a great deck out of a starter and 2 boosters with no ability to
select anything. Personally, I prefer limited drafts, where each player gets a
starter or a few boosters (actually, these days, you could get a preconstructed
starter, I guess), and then draft from a pool of about 3 boosters per player.
On Sun, 10 Mar 2002 01:30:48, The Lasombra wrote:
>There also won't be ratings for them until there is
>one, and only one, way to run a draft event, so that
>the skills measured are the same.
There is not one, and only one, way to run a constructed event either.
And constructed events measure factors other than playing skill, e.g.
the size of your collection. That's why Magic includes limited
formats such as drafts in their high-level championships - they are
thought to be the best test of skill.
Andrew
In message <FCFD5D0C1F3F367F.428721CF...@lp.airnew
s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes:
>There is not one, and only one, way to run a constructed event either.
>And constructed events measure factors other than playing skill, e.g.
>the size of your collection.
*yawn*
You know full well just how easy it is to create highly competitive
Jyhad decks from small card pools.
Rares don't just win games.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 13:29:27 +0000, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk>
wrote:
>In message <FCFD5D0C1F3F367F.428721CF...@lp.airnew
>s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes:>>There is not one, and only one, way to run a constructed event either.
>>And constructed events measure factors other than playing skill, e.g.
>>the size of your collection.>
>*yawn*
>
>You know full well just how easy it is to create highly competitive
>Jyhad decks from small card pools.
>
>Rares don't just win games.
Very true. A problem with many draft formats is that in a straight
booster draft you have some people just sit in to rare-draft.
They don't win or compete but walk out with a bunch of new stuff.
One Magic:TG draft I participated in a few years back had the players
break off into teams. Standard booster draft (with all players), no
trading, and the winning team received ALL the cards after the
event. All the players that did not win each received a couple of
booster packs for participating.
The above format worked out pretty well as people were more
interested in winning, rather than rare-drafting for stuff that they
might not be able to keep ahold of.
Bernie
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <3c8cc709...@netnews.attbi.com>,
berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM writes:
>One Magic:TG draft I participated in a few years back had the players
>break off into teams. Standard booster draft (with all players), no
>trading, and the winning team received ALL the cards after the
>event. All the players that did not win each received a couple of
>booster packs for participating.
A similar system that has been used in the past, as I understand it, is
to pool all the rares back in at the end, and allow the winners (or the
top 4 or 8 or whatever) to take their pickings from that.
--
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:<b9Xi8.20056$ZR2....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
> "Brian" <firstco...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:80bafd85.02031...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > Hey community: in M:TG tourneys, Drafts are held widely, sealed decks
> > rarely. Why is that? It seems we are beginning that trend here, too?
> > (I greatly prefer sealed to draft--just deckbuilding and playing, no
> > additional non-game skills needed.)
> >
There are two reasons for that, Brian.
First, draft is cheaper. You can play 5 drafts for the same
investment as 3 sealed decks.
Second, straight draft is somewhat less skill-intensive than sealed
deck, meaning that weaker players can often compete with stronger
players, which makes for better games all around. I know that seems
counter-intuitive, but I firmly believe it to be true - and I was
ranked in the top 100 Magic players in the world in limited formats
for more than 2 years, before I all but gave up the game. Rochester
draft is the format used for most high level draft events these days.
> Deckbuilding skills don't do a lot for you with "sealed" decks. In a draft, you use
> your deckbuilding skills to select the cards you need over the cards you need less.
>
Actually, my experience (in Magic) is that you pray you haven't
started drafting the wrong things (that is, the things being drafted
by the guys who are sending packs to you). In Jyhad, this is perhaps
slightly less likely...but I'm willing to bet that if three people are
fighting over Brujah, and one guy is scooping up all the obfuscate
cards at the table, the one guy is going to sweep. The resultant
imbalance in decks is unlikely to occur in sealed.
> Nobody can build a great deck out of a starter and 2 boosters with no ability to
> select anything. Personally, I prefer limited drafts, where each player gets a
> starter or a few boosters (actually, these days, you could get a preconstructed
> starter, I guess), and then draft from a pool of about 3 boosters per player.
I have a feeling that a preconstructed starter would be too much of a
good thing.
If you're going to have a starter and five boosters per player, why
not just play an all-out sealed deck with the product? Or,
alternately, have the judge seperate out the vampires, shuffle them
up, place twice as many vampires on the table face up as you have
players drafting, and Rochester draft the vampires - that way, at
least, you would be able to assess what each of your neighbours is
likely to be drafting, and will be able to put together some coherent
strategy. The draft for the remaining cards in the packs would be
normal - it's WAY too slow to completely Rochester 7 packs.
"Hannigan" <hanni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6143fc7b.0203...@posting.google.com...
> "Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message
news:<b9Xi8.20056$ZR2....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
>> > Nobody can build a great deck out of a starter and 2 boosters with no ability to
> > select anything. Personally, I prefer limited drafts, where each player gets a
> > starter or a few boosters (actually, these days, you could get a preconstructed
> > starter, I guess), and then draft from a pool of about 3 boosters per player.
>
> I have a feeling that a preconstructed starter would be too much of a
> good thing.
>
> If you're going to have a starter and five boosters per player, why
> not just play an all-out sealed deck with the product?
1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to use
deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
2) I didn't say anything about a starter and 5 boosters per player. Standard draft
seems to be something like 2 starters or a starter and 2-3 boosters per player.
Limited draft (which would also take less time) would be approximately the same
amount of cards, but with 40-60 of them that you are forced to keep.
Chris Berger wrote:
> 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to
> use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
their product.
Most sealed deck games give players more cards than required, allowing them
to build decks out of some sub-set of the cards.
You could, in theory, run sealed deck events in which each player gets a
box of Jyhad starters and a box of Jyhad boosters. Surely such an event
would allow the players a shot at using their deck-building skills.
In practice, sealed deck events should, IMO, give players /at least/ twice as
many cards as they're expected to build decks with.
> 2) I didn't say anything about a starter and 5 boosters per player.
> Standard draft
> seems to be something like 2 starters or a starter and 2-3 boosters per player.
> Limited draft (which would also take less time) would be approximately the same
> amount of cards, but with 40-60 of them that you are forced to keep.
I'm not following your terminology here, sorry.
The V:EKN rules classify all draft events as "limited" events.
Your description of "limited draft" sound more like, but exactly like, the
V:EKN Restricted Trade sealed format. [VEKN 7.4]
Is there something I'm missing?
[ quoted text not captured ]
>> 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance>to>> use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.>
>? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
>their product.
>
>Most sealed deck games give players more cards than required, allowing them
>to build decks out of some sub-set of the cards.
>
>You could, in theory, run sealed deck events in which each player gets a
>box of Jyhad starters and a box of Jyhad boosters. Surely such an event
>would allow the players a shot at using their deck-building skills.
I've played sealed box Jyhad. It was not significantly different from
constructed.
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3C8CFA79...@white-wolf.com...
> Chris Berger wrote:
> > 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to
> > use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
>
> ? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
> their product.
>
Not really. If I have 60-80 random cards to make a deck from, I basically choose the
40 which I can actually use and get rid of the rest. Your hypothetical format where
each player gets a box of starters and a box of boosters would surely allow you to
use deck-building skills, but it's unrealistic. I admit there are *some*
deck-building skills involved in sealed format, and the degree to which they are
involved increases as the card pool increases, but a lot of the more subtle
manifestations of deck-building are lost, as there's a pretty clear line between "I
can use this card" and "I cannot use this card".
A draft format gives you a choice between a lot more cards, except that you must
prioritize which cards are more important for your deck. The main problem is that
drafting an entire deck takes a huge amount of time. Also, if two players are
drafting the same types of cards, they will compete with each other until one
relents, weakening both players.
>
> I'm not following your terminology here, sorry.
>
> The V:EKN rules classify all draft events as "limited" events.
>
> Your description of "limited draft" sound more like, but exactly like, the
> V:EKN Restricted Trade sealed format. [VEKN 7.4]
>
> Is there something I'm missing?
>
Possibly. Restricted Trade format, IIRC, involves players choosing a certain number
of cards from their allotted number of cards to trade to others. So it's certainly
not exactly the same. The idea is to give each player a base of about 40-60 cards.
Then a pool of cards containing 20-40 cards per player is drafted in exactly the same
manner that a normal draft is run. This accomplishes two things:
1) It doesn't take as long as drafting ~80 cards per player (note these numbers are
for library cards... the corresponding numbers for vampires would be something like
6-8 to start with and 6-8 drafted, or more likely simply determined by pack
distribution (2-4 vampires per booster)). In theory, it should take approximately
half as long, however it may be actually shorter because players will know from the
get-go what type of cards they are in need of, because they have a base deck to build
off of.
2) Players are slightly less likely to compete for disciplines. Instead of everyone
at the table trying to get obfuscate/dominate/auspex, and no one bothering with
thaumaturgy/celerity/vicissitude (or whatever disciplines), which can often happen in
a draft, players will already have a set of disciplines that they can reasonably use,
and would be better served to build on those. Not that it will eliminate competition
for cards. People will still want the good masters, and people will likely still
have a few disciplines in common, but random chance should allow for a slightly
smoother distribution of cards.
This style would presumably end up with tuned decks somewhere between Restricted
Trade format (somewhat untuned, as you usually only select your worst cards to trade
away) and standard draft (usually pretty tuned, assuming you weren't competing for
cards too fiercely at your table).
> > > Nobody can build a great deck out of a starter and 2 boosters with no ability to
> > > select anything.
My experience would disagree. In the sealed I mentioned here, I built
a Ventrue with Obfuscate deck: Basic set Ventrue, Obfuscate skill
cards, and Dr. Jest, among others. I could bleed pretty well, and had
guns and some Fortitude and Presence for combat.
It's not good compared to most tournament decks, but it was good in
the environment.
> > > Personally, I prefer limited drafts, where each player gets a
> > > starter or a few boosters (actually, these days, you could get a preconstructed
> > > starter, I guess), and then draft from a pool of about 3 boosters per player.
> >
> > I have a feeling that a preconstructed starter would be too much of a
> > good thing.
Then, knowledge of what's in the starters comes into play. Everyone
would pick the best, or one of the best two, preconstructs for each
set, and every game would be won by the guy who contests least.
> > If you're going to have a starter and five boosters per player, why
> > not just play an all-out sealed deck with the product?
>
> 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to use
> deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
Are you using "true sealed deck" to mean "sealed deck in which you put
ALL of the cards you got into your deck"? Because nobody wants that.
> 2) I didn't say anything about a starter and 5 boosters per player. Standard draft
> seems to be something like 2 starters or a starter and 2-3 boosters per player.
> Limited draft (which would also take less time) would be approximately the same
> amount of cards, but with 40-60 of them that you are forced to keep.
We almost arranged for a Sealed Jyhad Box tournament, Jyhad being only
$20 per box, but it never happened (strange happenings). That would
have tested deckbuilding skill and luck, but surely the former more
than the latter.
berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 13:29:27 +0000, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk>
> wrote:
> >Rares don't just win games.
>
> Very true. A problem with many draft formats is that in a straight
> booster draft you have some people just sit in to rare-draft.
> They don't win or compete but walk out with a bunch of new stuff.
>
> One Magic:TG draft I participated in a few years back had the players
> break off into teams. Standard booster draft (with all players), no
> trading, and the winning team received ALL the cards after the
> event. All the players that did not win each received a couple of
> booster packs for participating.
>
> The above format worked out pretty well as people were more
> interested in winning, rather than rare-drafting for stuff that they
> might not be able to keep ahold of.
I've seen other places they did this. I always thought it was so lame.
Just rare draft yourself if you actually mind. One of the charms of
draft tournaments is knowing you're going home with the cards you draft.
This kind of format that you propose robs the exercise of one of the
major points of it for me.
Do I rare-draft? At times. If I'd see, say, something like a Mind Rape
or a Freak Drive go by that wasn't going to fit in my deck for shit, I'd
still grab that puppy. I'd even grab a great uncommon that way, too. I'd
also let the crap that happened to be rare (Ritual Challenge) go. And I
would more or less expect other players to do the same. To the extent
that it altered the outcome of the tournament - which I don't think was
very much - so what? I've always thought the concern over rare-drafting
was just plain overwrought.
Fred
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3C8CFA79...@white-wolf.com>...
> Chris Berger wrote:
> > 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to
> > use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
>
> ? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
> their product.
Indeed. Sealed deck involves more choices than draft does, at least
in Magic. In draft, I look at a pack, and I choose the 'best' card.
Then I look at the next pack; if there is a good card of the same
color, I choose that; if there is not, I choose a card of a different
color.
Generally speaking, that's about the last real choice I make. From
then on, I draft the best card available to me in the two colors I
picked from first. Sometimes you have to change colors, because there
are just no cards coming to you, but I've sailed through drafts where
I felt that I made maybe six decisions, none of them hard - and at the
end, I may have spent a little time cutting my deck down to size, but
I always knew 18 or so of the 23 cards I end up playing.
The first choice is blind - I have no idea what the guy who is passing
most of the cards to me is drafting. The second choice is not quite
blind - I know he took a card that he considered better than anything
else in the pack; and if he's an experienced drafter he _probably_
took a card that is in another color from the best card remaining in
the pack. But whether my deck turns out to be amazing, which will
happen if the right packs get opened and my neighbours are drafting
different stuff from me, average, or turns out to be disappointing,
which will happen if my neighbours make similar initial choices to me,
is actually not very much under my control.
Neither is sealed deck, you say? True - but in sealed deck, there
will not be nearly as many AMAZING decks as you'll find in draft, and
the games tend to be slower. Slower games result in more decisions;
and better players fare better as the number of decisions goes up and
up. As a result, it's my firm belief that sealed deck magic is a
better test of skill than booster draft is.
>
> Most sealed deck games give players more cards than required, allowing them
> to build decks out of some sub-set of the cards.
>
> You could, in theory, run sealed deck events in which each player gets a
> box of Jyhad starters and a box of Jyhad boosters. Surely such an event
> would allow the players a shot at using their deck-building skills.
>
> In practice, sealed deck events should, IMO, give players /at least/ twice as
> many cards as they're expected to build decks with.
In Magic, you get 75 cards in sealed, and play less than 25. VTES is
more complicated - I would think a 4 to 1 ratio would be more
appropriate, although, to be sure, I have never played sealed VTES.
This would seem to suggest that about 200 cards total would be 'right'
for sealed, or around 100 for booster draft.
>
> > 2) I didn't say anything about a starter and 5 boosters per player.
> > Standard draft
> > seems to be something like 2 starters or a starter and 2-3 boosters per player.
> > Limited draft (which would also take less time) would be approximately the same
> > amount of cards, but with 40-60 of them that you are forced to keep.
>
> I'm not following your terminology here, sorry.
>
> The V:EKN rules classify all draft events as "limited" events.
>
> Your description of "limited draft" sound more like, but exactly like, the
> V:EKN Restricted Trade sealed format. [VEKN 7.4]
>
> Is there something I'm missing?
Well, it's a draft, right? But it's not a full draft, because some of
the cards are randomly fixed.
So a 'limited' draft sounds like a descriptive, not a technical term,
to me. Maybe it's a confusing choice for a description, but I don't
think it's an inapt one.
[ quoted text not captured ]>Trade format (somewhat untuned, as you usually only select your worst cards** to trade>away) and standard draft (usually pretty tuned, assuming you weren't competing for
>cards too fiercely at your table).
** Wrong-O, if a player doesn't like anything that you have up for trade
you get stuck having to put it into your own deck. Hence, putting up
total crap for trade will most likely come back at you.
BernieTime
Chris Berger wrote:
>
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> news:3C8CFA79...@white-wolf.com...
> > Chris Berger wrote:
> > > 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a chance to
> > > use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
> >
> > ? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
> > their product.
> >
> Not really. If I have 60-80 random cards to make a deck from, I basically choose the
> 40 which I can actually use and get rid of the rest.
Yes. That being below to just at the minimum requirement for sealed that I
suggested (snipped).
> Your hypothetical format where
> each player gets a box of starters and a box of boosters would surely allow you to
> use deck-building skills, but it's unrealistic.
Likewise 60-80 is unrealistic (60 is probably low even for draft).
A realistic number would be 120-160.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3C8D8431...@white-wolf.com...
> Chris Berger wrote:
> >
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> > news:3C8CFA79...@white-wolf.com...
> > > Chris Berger wrote:
> > > > 1) Because true sealed-deck is silly, because you don't even get a
chance to
> > > > use deckbuilding skills. It simply tests luck and play skill.
> > >
> > > ? Only if you require players to use every single card they find in
> > > their product.
> > >
> > Not really. If I have 60-80 random cards to make a deck from, I basically
choose the
> > 40 which I can actually use and get rid of the rest.
>
> Yes. That being below to just at the minimum requirement for sealed that I
> suggested (snipped).
My experience with this is that with the amount of cards you are talking about,
you cannot create decks based around clans, you have to have decks based around
disciplines. That's fine, don't get me wrong, but it will cause some people to
not play, hence you should IMHO use more cards as a base of cards to draw from.
> > Your hypothetical format where
> > each player gets a box of starters and a box of boosters would surely allow
you to
> > use deck-building skills, but it's unrealistic.
>
> Likewise 60-80 is unrealistic (60 is probably low even for draft).
> A realistic number would be 120-160.
In the Sabbat War booster draft I ran last year at Origins, we used 10 packs
(of 11 cards each) per person, and it was *just* enough. I playtested this
format a fair amount before I asked for the product from White Wolf (as they
had to send me *9* boxes for the tournament), so I would petition for 100 cards
minimum if anyone from WW asked me for my opinion.
> LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
> Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Kevin M., Prince of Madison, WI (USA)
"Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier