/*
** It occurs to me this probably never got posted, and people may have
** skipped the post where this was originally reposted, so here it is.
*/
Backing A New Look
Wizards of the Coast to Alter Card Backs in Vampire Game
Renton, Wash. (April 26, 1995) -- After reviewing customer comments,
Wizards of the Coast, Inc. has decided to change all card backs in the
newly named Vampire: The Eternal Struggle(TM) (V:TES) Deckmaster(TM) game.
When the game -- formerly titled Jyhad(TM) -- debuts this summer, the
cards will have the game's snake "biohazard" symbol and the new name on a
green marble background. The old card backs featured the word Jyhad on
green marble.
"Changing the card backs doesn't affect how the game is played. Although
you'll be able to see the back of the tail card in your opponent's hand
and the top vampire in the crypt, you won't know what the cards are," says
Matthew Burke, V:TES Project Coordinator. "Changing the card backs
doesn't make Jyhad cards obsolete."
The Duelists' Convocation will allow both Jyhad and V:TES cards in
tournament play. Under Convocation rules, players will be able to use any
combination of card backs during tournaments. The creator of the card
game, Richard Garfield, agrees with using the two sets in tournaments. "I
think the Duelists' Convocation rules allowing the use of both card backs
goes a long way toward making the [Jyhad and V:TES] cards compatible,"
says Garfield.
Wizards of the Coast realizes that by allowing both cards in tournaments,
some players will take advantage of the different card backs and use some
of one design to mark their cards. The Duelists' Convocation plans to
crack down on dishonest competitors. "We will instruct Judges to look for
this sort of behavior during tournaments. If the Judge finds a player is
cheating by marking cards, the Judge will interpret this as a declaration
of forfeiture," says Steve Bishop, Director of the Duelists' Convocation.
Besides changing the card backs, Wizards of the Coast is also adjusting
the game's rules. "We rewrote and reformatted the rules for easier
reading," says Burke. "We also have added new variant rules to increase
the pace of the game for those who want to play quick sessions." The new
version of the rules will appear in instructions that accompany each V:TES
starter deck and also in a new player's guide, Darkness Unveiled(TM). The
guide is due out this September.
One month prior to that, the game's first expansion set, Dark
Sovereigns(TM), will be released. More than 100 cards will make up this
expansion, which explores the rich myths and folklore of vampires in
Europe. The set will also introduce players to new vampires and new
categories of vampires.
Earlier this year, Wizards of the Coast signed a contract with White Wolf,
Inc. to change Jyhad's name to Vampire: The Eternal Struggle after
recognizing that the game's title wasn't always distinguishable as
vampiric. The card game, in which players are vampires fighting an
ancient war, is based on White Wolf's storytelling game Vampire: The
Masquerade(TM).
Wizards of the Coast is a young game company based in Seattle, Washington.
The company created a worldwide sensation when it released its first
trading card game, Magic: The Gathering(TM), in August 1993. Since then,
more than 500 million Magic cards have sold around the globe. In April
1994, Wizards of the Coast opened a second branch in Glasgow, Scotland.
Several months later, the company expanded into a third office in Antwerp,
Belgium. The company currently employs close to 200 people in its three
locales.
(Magic: The Gathering(TM), Jyhad(TM), Deckmaster(TM) and Darkness
Unveiled(TM) are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. Vampire: The
Masquerade(TM) is a trademark of White Wolf, Inc.(TM). Vampire: The
Eternal Struggle(TM) is a joint trademark of Wizards of the Coast and
White Wolf).
CONTACT:
Carrie Thearle
Media Relations
Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
(206)226-6500
>The Duelists' Convocation will allow both Jyhad and V:TES cards in
>tournament play. Under Convocation rules, players will be able to use any
>combination of card backs during tournaments. The creator of the card
>game, Richard Garfield, agrees with using the two sets in tournaments. "I
>think the Duelists' Convocation rules allowing the use of both card backs
>goes a long way toward making the [Jyhad and V:TES] cards compatible,"
>says Garfield.
>
>Wizards of the Coast realizes that by allowing both cards in tournaments,
>some players will take advantage of the different card backs and use some
>of one design to mark their cards.
Tom:
Maybe WotC ought to do what the Federal Govt. does with money when it
comes to these new V:TES: Offer a 1:1 swap of new cards for old!
If people are worried about cheating with the new backs at tourneys,
maybe WotC should (do they already?) send a rep to these events with
a stack of the new cards. Any participants in the event could then
simply go to the rep(s) before their match and swap cards on a 1:1
basis.
Personally, I'm both a collector and a player, so I'm saving a complete
set of Jyhad for later. I'm sure that players wouldn't object to
losing money on cards, since if you play with them, they're not worth
as much anyway to collect.
This seems the LEAST that WotC should do to keep their customers
happy and keep playability at a maximum.
Just my $0.02. Now back to our program...
Mark Evaniak
eva...@math.vt.edu
In article <3o44pv$h...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes:
>Wizards of the Coast realizes that by allowing both cards in tournaments,
>some players will take advantage of the different card backs and use some>of one design to mark their cards. The Duelists' Convocation plans to
>crack down on dishonest competitors. "We will instruct Judges to look for
>this sort of behavior during tournaments. If the Judge finds a player is
>cheating by marking cards, the Judge will interpret this as a declaration
>of forfeiture," says Steve Bishop, Director of the Duelists' Convocation.
How do you define exactly what is "a marked deck"? I cannot think
of any good, simpler way than evaluating some formula involving
20 or so variables. Also, any deck which uses expansion cards
will be necessarily `marked', since Jyhad-back cards can't be
expansion cards...
It is impractical to require players to spot marked libraries.
Cards are played face up; requiring a player to keep track of
which kind of (his opponents') card back turns out to be which
type of cards is highly distracting.
--
"Live Life with Heart."
Alan Kwan kw...@cs.cornell.edu
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
[the single most depressing post by Thomas R Wylie elided]
Boo!
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>
Deciding whether a deck with X cards of a different back is marked should
be no more or less difficult than deciding whether a deck with X scuffed
cards and the rest near-mint is marked. People determined to try and mark
their deck *will* try to mark their deck, and mixing card backs is one of
the more blindingly obvious ways of doing so. Changing the card backs won't
introduce marked decks to the game, it will simply provide an inefficient
option for those who are interested in doing so.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <3ob9lk$h...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>,
Thomas R Wylie <aa...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>the more blindingly obvious ways of doing so. Changing the card backs won't
>introduce marked decks to the game, it will simply provide an inefficient
>option for those who are interested in doing so.
In theory, maybe you're right. But if you change the backs, and
I can't *help* but have a marked deck because of it (ex: expansion cards
in my Jyhad decks), you're most definitely introducing marked cards to
my deck. In fact you're forcing them on me. I would have to go to
lengths to *not* mark my deck.
That's certainly introducing marked decks to *my* game.
| If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--*
| PC game, call the announce line at | js...@vt.edu
| ** csi...@discus.ise.vt.edu ** |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------
"Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK
On 4 May 1995, Thomas R Wylie wrote:
>
> Deciding whether a deck with X cards of a different back is marked should
> be no more or less difficult than deciding whether a deck with X scuffed
> cards and the rest near-mint is marked. People determined to try and mark
> their deck *will* try to mark their deck, and mixing card backs is one of> the more blindingly obvious ways of doing so. Changing the card backs won't
> introduce marked decks to the game, it will simply provide an inefficient
> option for those who are interested in doing so.
>
>> Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
> aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
>
Of course if this ridiculous change were not taking place, none of these
arguements would have a leg to stand on. If WotC were not introducing
(forcing) new backs into the game, one would not have to worry about how
a deck may be marked or if the game has (or has lost) a "uniform look and
feel."
Remy
leb...@u.washington.edu | It's not my fault!
Gambit at the U.W. | Laugh it up fuzzball!
| - Han Solo
"I don't want the world, I just want your half."
"Life is like a riddle, and I'm really stumped."