"Most People" and Tourneys (was inconsistency with DC?)

In article <31684F...@halcyon.com>, Edward Tang <edt...@halcyon.com> wrote: > Mike Bohlmann wrote: > > Ok, a lot of people think that if the DC would just change and/or add some > > rules to V:tES, a very good tournament rule set would come out. This is my contention. See below... > > However, > > Tom Wylie says that that will not (cannot?) happen, because the DC will not > > change rules. So here are a few questions: > > Where does it say in the V:tES rulebook that I have to build my crypt of > > all Jyhad or all V:tES vampires? > > Where does it say in the V:tES rulebook that my deck has to consist of at > > least 40% of the 'minority' card backs? > > If you continue with this line of argument, you also get some other > > interesting questions. But I'm not trying to be an antagonist. I'm just > > saying that I believe there is a flaw in the logic of why the DC can't > > just change/add some rules to V:tES. While I disagree with your logic, your concerns I do agree with. I feel the DC Tournament Rules are just plain broken. > Your logic is waaaayyyyyyyy off! > You are thinking in terms of game mechanics. It is a rule for the TOURNAMENT > that crypts must be the same, or that 40% must be Jyhad or anything like that. > The DC will not change, like, how a vampire is contested. It is just a simple > fact that most people will follow the DC guidelines. I disagree with this one, Edward. I have met _two_ people (on the internet, and otherwise) who _like_ the DC tournament rules (not including WotC employees or DC tournament rules writers). Of the people I know who play DC, they do so only at tourneys, because it is a de facto standard. I am certain that there are _some_ people out there who play DC (I have heard mild whisperings...), but they are not "most people", I think. "Most people", I am sure, play with their own local brand of hodge-podge house rules, from the Golden Tenets, to X-CL, to no repeated unique cards, to Chainsaw is a melee weapon, and on and on and on. The problem with this, is that unlike Magic, there exists no true and widely accepted standard. It could be claimed that this is true in Magic, but not quite. Everyone plays 4CL Magic, or they are trying the new DC Magic (Type III?). Even if they don't know it, people are all playing Type I or Type II Magic, typically. If they aren't, they usually know it. "Most people" in Jyhad have few options. The support for Jyhad has been negligible. With most of the support on the Net, a vast group of players only have access to Jyhad information from game store releases (few and far between) and the rare articles in magazines. Duelists' Jyhad Tourney Rules are, from who I've talked to, laughable. (This is "old" history, please bear with me :) In the two major camps, CL and NL, the restricted list caused quite an uproar of distaste. The CL groups felt that the game was unbalanced by having the majority of cards in limitless supply. The NL group felt that the original restricted list (2CL!!!) was horrendous and completely eliminated valid, non-degenerate decks. Small groups of people in both camps pointed out how the restricted list made certain decks unplayable (political decks in particular). This caused a change in the restricted list from 2CL to 6CL. This eliminated _some_ of the problems (no longer a neutered/spayed vote deck), but new problems emerged: Jyhad was designed to be played NL after Richard Garfield learned his lessons about people's buying habits in CCGs from his Magic experience. However, to problems came into being with this designs, the limitless offensive untap deck (+Bleed, Freak Drive, etc..) and the weenie vote push deck. Broad CLs do stop the limitless untap, but have little if no impact on weenie vote push until about 2CL. NL without changes to the official rules does _nothing_ to curtail them. The Restricted 6CL list follows the worst of both. Like pure-NL, it does nearly nothing to curtail the limitless offensive untap deck (especially the Famous Bleed, Force of Will, Movement of the Slow Body, Rapid Healing combo. Throw in Fame and Ivenray, Scotland for flavor). Like pure-CL (over 2CL), it does nothing to curtail the weenie vote push problem. Without a change to the official rules of Jyhad, there is no set of tourney rules that really makes for a fair tournament. (End of "history lesson" :) So, we end up with "most people" playing slightly different games. A problem exists in that survival of Jyhad I would say partially depends on how uniformly it is played. New players can get discouraged if they go to other places, or stay where they are from, and play with people playing vastly different environments. In my own experience, me and another person I played with regularly creamed a table of players in their environment because we were more aggressive than they were. Later on, I found out that a discussion between the other person and some of those players turned them off to the game because of his comments about the environment they played in. Tournaments become difficult to run because people either play in what I consider a broken tournament (and broken tournaments are _not_ fun), or they play with some other home-brewed brand of tourney rules that others might not be prepared for (last years GenCon comes to mind). As a result, fewer people see Jyhad, learn about Jyhad, or want to play Jyhad. (Now, Up on my small soapbox :) My own idea is to have an alternative to the DC tournament rules, that (hopefully) will become at least somewhat known. To do so, I have written and garnered support from players for "The Sensible Player's Tournament Rules"(SPTR) for Jyhad, available at <http://cslab.uwlax.edu/~sulli_al/jyhad/SPTR.html>. These rules are written by and for players. Read them, and if you support them, let us know so I can add your list to the Supporter's list. Supporters recieve email on SPTR tournaments (only 2 so far...), and have a voice in deciding future changes to the SPTR. Read them, and if you don't support them, let us know why, and if enough people agree, your idea will be added into the rules. I feel that the SPTR provides a fair environment and promotes robust and versatile decks, while not eliminating any particular strategy. In addition, if enough people know about and support them, we can have a uniform game, which can only help it. Finally, the SPTR changes as the players do. To end my own propandizing statements, yes, I feel the DC tourney rules are lacking, and I urge you to read the SPTR and give us feedback. Thanks. "I can send and receive e-mail even over the Internet"-aol commercial @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ # Adrian Sullivan sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu Spoutingly yours 8^) # $ GAT/CS/O/WS R+++* tv&--- b++(+++)&+ t X++&-- 5->? e+*>++++ PS+&-+ @ # PE&++&- C(+++)$ UX+>+++$ N++(+) K+>++++ w---$>? M++$ r(+) y*+? 3.1# @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$

I am in the process of looking at your Sensible Rules, but I'd also like to know wath DC did with Jyhad's tourney rules. Could someone please post them to this group? Thanks, Mort

The DC rules, as per Morts Request --- Duelists' Convocation Official Vampire: The Eternal Struggle Tournament Rules Jan. 9 1995 A. Deck Construction 1. Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament decks may be built using cards from the Jyhad, Vampire: The Eternal Struggle and Dark Sovereigns card sets. Cards from new releases may not be inlcluded in sanctioned tournament play until thirty (30) days following the retail release date. If you use cards from more than one set, read the rules on marked decks (Section 5). OPTIONAL RULE: Prior to the beginning of a sanctioned tournament, the Judge may declare that players who build decks from cards from both Jyhad and Vampire: The Eternal Struggle sets should ensure that between forty and sixty percent of their library should be from the Jyhad set. The tournament coordinator must announce and advertise use of this rule prior to the start of the tournament. 2. The crypt must contain a minimum of 12 (twelve) vampire cards. The crypt can be made up of vampires from the Jyhad or Vampire: The Eternal Struggle card sets, but not both. There is no maximum on the number of vampires that can be in your crypt. The library can contain a minimum of 60 (sixty) cards and maximum of 90 (ninety) cards total. 3. The Restricted List: No more than 6 (six) of each of the cards on the Restricted List is allowed in aVampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament deck. If more than 6 (six) of any individual card from the Restricted List is found in a player's deck, that will be interpreted by the Judge as a Declaration of Forfeiture. The Restricted List may be modified by the Director of the Duelists' Convocation as necessary. The Restricted List is as follows: Vampire: The Eternal Struggle Restricted List * Ancilla Empowerment * Conservitive Agitation * Domain Challenge * Earth Meld * Fifth Tradition: Hospitality * Form of Mist * Freak Drive * Kine Resources Contested * Majesty * Parity Shift * Sabbat Threat 4. The Banned List: The following cards are banned from tournament play: * Cunctator Motion * High Stakes * Rowan Ring * Stake * Monocle of Clarity * Playing For Keeps (Dark Sovereigns) (The Wooden Stake card from Vampire: The Eternal Struggle is permissible.) Some cards on the Banned List are not allowed because they clearly state that they are only usable if playing for ante. Wagering an ante is not required in a Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament (see General Floor Rules, rule #C2). Any future cards that make the same statement will subsequently be banned. This list may be modified by the Director of the Duelists' Convocation as necessary. 5. Marked Decks If a contestant, referee, or Judge has reason to believe another contestant has marked his or her deck, the referee or Judge may inspect the deck. If any of the deck stacking restrictions described below are breached, this is considered a Declaration of Forfeiture, and the contestant will be removed from the tournament. * All library cards from the Jyhad or Vampire: The Eternal Struggle card sets must be of sufficiently mixed card types (e.g., All the Jyhad library cards in your deck cannot consist of master cards and Dominate cards. Instead, your master and Dominate cards must appear with both Jyhad backs and Vampire: The Eternal Struggle backs or your Jyhad cards must include at least three different card types). * All your crypt cards must either have backs that read Jyhad or backs that read Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. They cannot have both. B. Adjudication and Playing Areas 1. Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournaments will be presided over by a Judge, who may be assisted by as many Assistant Referees as necessary. NEITHER THE JUDGE NOR THE ASSISTANT REFEREES MAY PLAY IN A TOURNAMENT THAT HE OR SHE IS ADJUDICATING. A Judge may be required to interpret rules, interpret a Declaration of Forfeiture (see Closing, rule #G2 ), or make any other adjudication as necessary during the tournament. The Judge is also responsible for maintaining the tournament records. Assistant Referees will aid by answering rules questions on the floor, assisting with matching players for a new round, and making themselves available to the Judge for any other assistance they may require. In necessary cases, the Judge may overrule any decision made by an Assistant Referee. The decision of the Judge is always final. 2. A "table" is defined as a playing area where four or five players are competing in a game of Vampire: The Eternal Struggle in a Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament. 3. A Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament must have a minimum of 12 (twelve) players, and a minimum of 3 (three) tables per round (excluding finals). Each table must have a minimum of 4 (four) players at the start of the game. 4. An index card (or reasonable facsimile) will be prepared for each player in the tournament with that player's name and other tournament information. Cards will be shuffled and grouped randomly before tables are assigned in each round of the tournament (excluding finals). Alternatively, tournaments may use a computerized system for generating random groupings for each round, provided that the Judge can keep accurate records of each player's points throughout the tournament. 5. For each round, players will be randomly assigned in groups of five. In the likely event that the number of players is not evenly divisible by five, players should be assigned in groups of four and five; most groups should consist of five players. 6. Each table has five positions (numbered one through five) arranged clockwise around the table. The first player assigned to a table occupies position one, the second player occupies position two, and so on. When play begins for the round, the player in position one plays first (with one transfer allowed), followed by the player in position two (with two transfers allowed), and so forth. At tables with only four players, simply ignore the empty position for turn rotation. C. General Floor Rules 1. Players must use the same deck they have at the beginning of the tournament throughout the tournament. Changing or altering a tournament deck during the tournament may be interpreted by the Judge as a Declaration of Forfeiture. 2. Players are not required to wager ante during the tournament. Players may play for real ante, provided that all participants at the table give their consent, though this agreement does not allow the inclusion of banned ante cards in a tournament deck. Ante cards won in a tournament must be kept separate from the tournament deck and may not be used in the tournament in any capacity. If the loss of ante cards from a player's deck reduces the deck below 60 (sixty) cards, the player no longer has a legal tournament deck and will be removed from the tournament. 3. The use of plastic card sleeves or other protective devices on any player's cards will only be allowed if all players at the table agree to allow them in the round. If any player(s) at the table do not wish card sleeves to be used in the round for any reason, all sleeves must be removed from all decks at that table for the duration of the round. 4. The use of "proxy" cards in the tournament deck is not allowed. A proxy card is one that has been placed into the deck to represent another card the player doesn't want to play with for one reason or another; i.e. using a card with the words "Aaron's Feeding Razor" written on it because the player doesn't want to play with his actual Aaron's Feeding Razor. 5. Players must keep the cards in their hand above the level of the playing surface at all times. If a player is in violation, the Judge may issue a warning to the player or interpret the violation as a Declaration of Forfeiture (at the Judge's discretion). 6. Players may not have any outside assistance (i.e., coaching) during a match. If a player is in violation, the Judge may issue a warning to the player or interpret the violation as a Declaration of Forfeiture (at the Judge's discretion). 7. Unsportsmanlike conduct will not be tolerated at a tournament. Players, Judges, and Assistant Referees will conduct themselves in a polite, respectable, and sportsmanlike manner. Any player who is excessively belligerent, argumentative, hostile, or unsportsmanlike may receive a warning or have this behavior interpreted as a Declaration of Forfeiture (at the Judge's discretion). 8. Players must take their turns in a timely fashion. While taking time to think through a situation is acceptable, stalling for time is not. If the Judge feels that a player is stalling to take advantage of a time limit, the Judge may issue a warning or interpret the stalling as a Declaration of Forfeiture (at the Judge's discretion). D. Scoring 1. One player at each table will be appointed as that table's scorekeeper by a tournament official. At the conclusion of each round, a tournament official will collect the scores for that table from the scorekeeper and register the standings with the Judge. 2. There are three different types of points used in a Vampire: The Eternal Struggle tournament. They are listed here in descending order of importance. Victory points are awarded when a player's prey is ousted and when a player survives a round. Tournament points are awarded based on a player's table ranking at the end of a round. Blood points are awarded based on the amount of blood a player controls at the end of a round. Victory points are the primary indicator, with tournament points and blood points used as the first-degree and second-degree tie-breakers. 3. A player receives 1 (one) victory point each time he or she ousts his or her prey during the game. A player receives an additional half victory point if he or she has not been ousted by the end of the round, unless one player is the last one surviving at the table, in which case, that player gets a full victory point (as outlined in the Vampire: The Eternal Struggle rules). Players are then ranked at their table from First to Fifth (i.e., the player with the most victory points places First). 4. Tournament points are awarded each round as follows: First = 60 pts., Second = 48 pts., Third = 36 pts., Fourth = 24 pts., Fifth = 12 pts., provided that table had five players at the beginning of the round. If the table had four players, they are ranked as First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth -the third place slot is taken by the "table bye" (an empty position). If more than one player is tied for a certain table ranking, average the tournament points contended (see Scoring Examples below). Scoring Examples: a. Example 1: Five players are at the table. Players A and B each ousted one prey and survived the round. Players C and D were the unfortunates ousted by A and B, and they did not oust any prey. Player E ousted no one, but survived the round. Players A and B each receive one- and-one-half victory points (one oust plus survival each), player E receives one-half (for surviving), and players C and D receive no victory points. Players A and B tie for First (which really means First and Second), so they each receive 54 Tournament points ([60+48] / 2 = 54). Player E is clearly Third, and receives 36 Tournament points. Players C and D tie for Fourth (Fourth and Fifth), and each receive 18 tournament points ([24+12] / 2 = 18). b. Example 2: Four players are at the table. Player A ousts one prey and survives the round. Neither player B nor C ousted prey, but both survived. Player D was player A's victim. Player A receives one- and-one-half victory points, players B and C each get one-half of a point, and player D gets no points. Player A is clearly First, receiving 60 tournament points. Players B and C tie for Second (which is really Second and Fourth -remember that Third goes to the "table bye") and each receives 36 tournament points ([48+24 / 2 = 36]), and player D is in Fifth with 12 tournament points. 5. Additionally, at the end of the round, each player must count the number of blood points he or she has left: each player adds all of the blood left in his or her blood pool to the amount of blood on all of the active vampires he or she controls. Players report this number to the scorekeeper, who verifies that the count is accurate. In some cases, blood points may be used as a second-degree tie-breaker, though this may be rare. E. Rounds 1. Each round of the tournament must have a time limit declared by the Judge, with a minimum time limit of 2 (two) hours. The tournament coordinator must announce and advertise this time limit prior to the tournament. During the first twenty minutes, officials record any scoring >from the previous round and reassign players to new matches; this is followed by a playing period of one hour and forty minutes. All players begin play at the same time. If all of the twenty minute set-up time isn't used, the remainder of the time may be added to the playing period. At the one hour and fifty-five minute mark, the Judge should issue a warning that only five minutes of playing time remain in the round. 2. All play from a round will cease immediately when the Judge announces that the round is over. Players in mid-turn will be permitted to complete that turn before scores are calculated, up to a maximum time of one minute. "A player in mid-turn" is defined as a someone who has finished untapping all of his or her cards in play that could be untapped at that time during his or her turn. 3. Each tournament must consist of a number of rounds determined by the Judge, with a minimum of 3 (three) rounds. The five players with the highest total victory points from all three rounds advance to the final round. In a tie, the player with more tournament points from prior rounds advances to the final (first degree tie-breaker). If players are still tied, the player with the largest total blood pool from prior rounds advances (second degree tie-breaker). Finalists will be rated First through Fifth by victory points. Ties are resolved as above. F. Finals 1. Table positions are not assigned in the final round. Instead, the first finalist has his or her choice of position, then the second finalist, and so on. Play for the final round commences normally. 2. At the conclusion of the final round, the player with the most victory points from the final round alone is the winner of the tournament, with other players ranked accordingly by victory points. In case of ties, blood points from the final round alone are used as the tie-breaker. G. Closing 1. Failure to adhere to the above rules, or any other rules specific to a particular tournament, may be interpreted by the Judge as a Declaration of Forfeiture. Only the Judge may make an interpretation of a Declaration of Forfeiture. This is a more pleasant way of stating that if a player breaks the rules, the Judge will remove that player from the tournament. 2. Rules note: The Director of the Duelists' Convocation reserves the exclusive right to add, delete, alter, transmute, switch, revise in second edition, seduce, blood bond, Dominate, Obfuscate, vote in or out with any Primogen, Prince, or Justicar that ever has been or ever will be printed, or in any other way change these or any other official Duelists' Convocation rules, in whole or in part, with or without notice, at any time that it is deemed necessary or desirable. This right is non-negotiable. Tom Wylie | What is the difference between apathy and ignorance? aa...@cats.ucsc.edu | I don't know, and I don't care. ____________________________________________________________________________ [ quoted text not captured ]

In a message dated 96-04-10 17:43:59 EDT, you write: > The Solution of one of the GT is to restrict repeated actions. A >minion can only make one action of a particular type OK. I understand your concerns for infinite loop actions. Have you considered restricting repeat actions to some other number besides one--maybe two? I'm sure you've seen Rutor's Hand. Under normal rules, this would allow a vampire to do any given action twice a turn. And what about Madness Network? Also, if you attack to bleed your prey, loop, and then try to do a directed bleed against another Methuselah, you would be restricted under GT because you're taking another action to bleed. Couldn't this be an exception? It seems that the underlying concern is infinite bleeds on Methuselah's preys. This appears to be the main problem, why not say: "A given minion may bleed your prey only once a turn." > By only allowing one push, vote decks have to include political power >(through presence, dominate, built in titles, bribes, etc), if they want >to pass votes. The solution to this problem is also adversely affecting the non-weenie vote decks who wish to push certain votes. A more specific answer would be to direct the fix at the problem, not to do a broad adjustment affecting voting decks which are not degenerate. I would propose: No pushing votes called by a Caitiff. In this way the tenet is specifically directed at the problem of one capacity weenie pushers while still allowing decent vote decks to anti-push. Now this may still give one problems with weenie decks that also use 2 and 3 blood capacity vampires. Hmm. I would like to know what your thoughts on this one. Thanks for the DC post, Mort

morth...@aol.com (Morthalion) writes: >In a message dated 96-04-10 17:43:59 EDT, you write: >> The Solution of one of the GT is to restrict repeated actions. A >>minion can only make one action of a particular type >OK. I understand your concerns for infinite loop actions. Have you >considered restricting repeat actions to some other number besides >one--maybe two? I'm sure you've seen Rutor's Hand. Under normal rules, >this would allow a vampire to do any given action twice a turn. And what >about Madness Network? Madness Network is nearly unaffected by this GT. You can't take the same action with the same Malk during the same (other) Methuselah's turn, but this is hardly a change from the normal operation of the Net (since you can Freak Drive a MadNet action anyhow). Granted, if you're blocked and use Majesty or Earth Meld to untap, you'd be a little more restricted. But, since most Malks don't get blocked by Meth's who can't play reaction card, and if they do, they don't have the necessary (superior) level of Protean or Presence to untap anyhow. >Also, if you attack to bleed your prey, loop, and then try to do a >directed bleed against another Methuselah, you would be restricted under >GT because you're taking another action to bleed. Couldn't this be an >exception? It seems that the underlying concern is infinite bleeds on >Methuselah's preys. This appears to be the main problem, why not say: "A >given minion may bleed your prey only once a turn." That would be an acceptable derivation, but it looks too much like an exeception case that will be broken by future cards than a general rule. >> By only allowing one push, vote decks have to include political power >>(through presence, dominate, built in titles, bribes, etc), if they want >>to pass votes. >The solution to this problem is also adversely affecting the non-weenie >vote decks who wish to push certain votes. A more specific answer would >be to direct the fix at the problem, not to do a broad adjustment >affecting voting decks which are not degenerate. I would propose: No >pushing votes called by a Caitiff. In this way the tenet is specifically >directed at the problem of one capacity weenie pushers while still >allowing decent vote decks to anti-push. Now this may still give one >problems with weenie decks that also use 2 and 3 blood capacity vampires. >Hmm. I would like to know what your thoughts on this one. Again, this looks like an exception case rather than a general rule. Vote pushing itself was denied in the original rules, and there is no compelling reasoning or explanation as to why it should be allowed, neither from a game-world perspective nor a game perspective. ('course the VtES rulebook could easily be construed as a "compelling reason" from a rulemonger POV, but you'd have to think the Rules Team adequately playtested VtES, which some do not). -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Theater is life http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | Film is art Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | Television is furniture

sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) writes: >Madness Network is nearly unaffected by this GT. You can't take the >same action with the same Malk during the same (other) Methuselah's turn, >but this is hardly a change from the normal operation of the Net (since >you can Freak Drive a MadNet action anyhow). Granted, if you're blocked ^^^ can't, that is. Jeez, nothing like dropping negatives from your sentences. [ quoted text not captured ]

Morthalion <morth...@aol.com> wrote: > The Corruptor writes: >> By only allowing one push, vote decks have to include political power >>(through presence, dominate, built in titles, bribes, etc), if they want >>to pass votes. > >The solution to this problem is also adversely affecting the non-weenie >vote decks who wish to push certain votes. Non-weenie vote decks don't do much pushing. First, their whole library isn't vote cards, so the rule only costs them a potential extra vote or two (which they're likely to have sitting around in their hand). The lack of a bazillion political actions also means that "normal" vote decks are less likely to want to ditch PA's to get votes. At least, when I play a voting deck, I want to do several PA's a turn, so that I can draw out the blockers, making sure that at least one of my votes actually gets to the voting stage. Second, non-weenie vote decks have the ability to use skill or clan based things like Bewitching Oration and Scorn of Adonis, or titled vamps. These cards are getting them a goodly supply of votes. The issue for these decks isn't quantity of votes, but how to get past the blocking to the voting stage. The random extra push vote isn't much compared with a good Oration. Where pushing is really really useful is a deck that has a lot of PA's, and if other decks don't have their voting machines built up yet. This translates directly into a weenie vote deck. Anyway, seems to me that limiting vote pusing to one PA per vote is a solution which puts the crimp on super fast weenie vote decks, but doesn't really bother the more traditional "prince/presence/cool vote manipulation card/wheel-deal" vote deck. >A more specific answer would be to direct the fix at the problem, not to do a >broad adjustment affecting voting decks which are not degenerate. I would >propose: No pushing votes called by a Caitiff. In this way the tenet is >specifically directed at the problem of one capacity weenie pushers while >still allowing decent vote decks to anti-push. Now this may still give one >problems with weenie decks that also use 2 and 3 blood capacity vampires. >Hmm. I would like to know what your thoughts on this one. 2 capacity vampires seem to be the workhorses of weenie decks, actually, so I don't think that this would solve the problem. -- Alec Habig, Indiana University High Energy Astrophysics aha...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu http://www.astro.indiana.edu/home/ahabig/ Ban the Bomb: Make the world safe for conventional warfare!

Hi I just thought I would drop you a line saying that the backdrop on the page you have set-up these tourney rules makes it incredibly hard to read the red text or mabe it is because I'm using netscape??. Errol T.

[ quoted text not captured ] A. Deck Construction [ quoted text not captured ] 3. The Restricted List: [ quoted text not captured ] 5. Marked Decks [ quoted text not captured ] C. General Floor Rules [ quoted text not captured ] D. Scoring [ quoted text not captured ] Scoring Examples: [ quoted text not captured ] E. Rounds [ quoted text not captured ] F. Finals [ quoted text not captured ] G. Closing [ quoted text not captured ] Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.