Question about banned cards

Are DU/KR/SC banned for V:EKN tournaments only, or the regular ones also? sinaath

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:49:45 +0100, sinaath <sin...@kill.this.gmail.com> wrote: > Are DU/KR/SC banned for V:EKN tournaments only, or the regular ones also? > > sinaath VEKN sanctioned tournaments are the official "constructed" tournaments. You can have an unsanctioned tournament that has "house rules" but whose results do not contribute to VEKN player ratings. You should communicate that in advance though as most people will prepare their decks accourding to the latest version of the VEKN tournaments rules. -- Bye, Daneel

[ quoted text not captured ] Can I just check, in VEKN sanctioned rated limited format, if you open a booster/starter with any of these cards in them, have you essentially got a useless unplayable card, or can you still use them, because it is a limited format? Cheers Andy VEKN Setite Ruler of Cambridge

Slytherin wrote: > Can I just check, in VEKN sanctioned rated limited format, if you open > a booster/starter with any of these cards in them, have you essentially > got a useless unplayable card, or can you still use them, because it is > a limited format? VEKN 4.1: "The following cards are banned in all V:EKN tournaments:" -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Doh, should have learnt my own native language by now! Thanks for the clarification though! [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 12:10:57 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Slytherin wrote: >> Can I just check, in VEKN sanctioned rated limited format, if you open >> a booster/starter with any of these cards in them, have you essentially >> got a useless unplayable card, or can you still use them, because it is >> a limited format? > >VEKN 4.1: "The following cards are banned in all V:EKN tournaments:" That's actually fairly interesting. The other card game that I'm familiar with that has banned cards (yes, *that* other card game) still allows them to be used in Limited (if, of course, you open them and/or draft them). I suppose the philosophy here is that they are just *that* unbalanced. -- pseudosoldier

> >VEKN 4.1: "The following cards are banned in all V:EKN tournaments:" > > That's actually fairly interesting. The other card game that I'm > familiar with that has banned cards (yes, *that* other card game) > still allows them to be used in Limited (if, of course, you open them > and/or draft them). > I suppose the philosophy here is that they are just *that* unbalanced. VTES has roughly 9 banned cards. How many does "that other game" have? How many restricted cards does "that other game" have? Doesn't "that other game" ban every copy of a card beyond the 4th to appear in any given deck? Ever thought of it that way? Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

"pseudosoldier" <pseudo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:41b8e90e...@news-server.hot.rr.com... [ quoted text not captured ] The alternative is to introduce a second standard constructed format to VTES... Is that what you are suggesting/supporting? ;-) As Normie pointed out, its the (trivial) price to pay for a game built on the NCL principle. DaveZ Atom Weaver

On 10 Dec 2004 06:42:31 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: >VTES has roughly 9 banned cards. How many does "that other game" have? Supposing that you're talking about Magic, I just checked. In that game's Standard format, only one card in banned - Skullclamp. In that game's Vintage format (what they seem to be calling Type 1 now), they ban the ante cards plus Chaos Orb and Falling Star. VTES effectively uses the Vintage format and bans more cards now. Tsk. But there's a new kid on the block for the serious competitive player - Vs. So far as I know, that doesn't ban any cards. Other CCGs that I play are Shadowfist and Doomtown - again they have no banned cards. Andrew

"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:o5hds0d8ceg4slkom...@4ax.com... > On 10 Dec 2004 06:42:31 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: > > >VTES has roughly 9 banned cards. How many does "that other game" have? > > Supposing that you're talking about Magic, I just checked. In that > game's Standard format, only one card in banned - Skullclamp. In that > game's Vintage format (what they seem to be calling Type 1 now), they > ban the ante cards plus Chaos Orb and Falling Star. VTES effectively > uses the Vintage format and bans more cards now. Tsk. Black Lotus is allowed in Standard format? -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

Andrew S. Davidson wrote: > On 10 Dec 2004 06:42:31 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: > > >VTES has roughly 9 banned cards. How many does "that other game" have? > > Supposing that you're talking about Magic, I just checked. In that > game's Standard format, only one card in banned - Skullclamp. In that > game's Vintage format (what they seem to be calling Type 1 now), they > ban the ante cards plus Chaos Orb and Falling Star. VTES effectively > uses the Vintage format and bans more cards now. Tsk. So how many decks are you allowed to play with 5 of the same card? So how many Channels can you put in a Standard Tourney Deck? How many Lightning Bolts? Tsk,Tsk... Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:57:30 -0500, LSJ wrote: >Black Lotus is allowed in Standard format? Standard format restricts the expansions which can be used but that's a separate concept. VEKN also allows tournaments to be run using only a subset of the available expansions - it just hasn't got a formal name for this, right? Magic has lots of different formats now. To compare like with like, I reckon their Vintage format corresponds most closely with what's usually done in VEKN constructed events - allowing all expansions. You can play any card in that except Falling Star, Chaos Orb and the ante cards. That's still enough to put me off. I still have 4 Chaos Orbs and am not much interested in playing a format that bans them. Five Color Magic seems to be the best format for old-timers but I've not tried that yet. Andrew

On 20 Dec 2004 06:16:25 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: >So how many decks are you allowed to play with 5 of the same card? So >how many Channels can you put in a Standard Tourney Deck? How many >Lightning Bolts? Tsk,Tsk... VTES has various arbitrary limits on how you can combine and play your cards, e.g. deck size limits and grouping. It also has a strong uniqueness rule. You get a different slant on these issue playing HeroClix. In that game you can field as many copies of most characters as you like - an outlandish equivalnet of NCL when applied to superhero miniatures. That game's equivalent of LSJ recently shocked the community by winning a high-profile event using many copies of Spider-Man's girlfriend: Mary-Jane. This was shocking because most groups limit such abuse by means of a no-dupes house rule. This isn't necessary in VTES because the game already has such a limit. One Anson on the table at a time is quite enough. Anyway, being smug about NCL when you're banning cards altogether seems contradictory. If the game really had no limits then it might be a genuine triumph. But that's not the case, alas. Andrew

Andrew wrote: >But there's a new kid on the block for the serious competitive player >- Vs. So far as I know, that doesn't ban any cards. It is fairly new, so I expect that something will happen at some point--someone will find something that falls through the cracks. And something will be done about it. >Other CCGs that I play are Shadowfist and Doomtown - again they have no banned cards. True. But doesn't Doomtown use "silver bullet" game balance extensively? I seem to remember that there is a silver bullet fix with your picture on it :-) Shadowfist also has no banned cards, but does have very extensive errata, much like VTES--half of my Fist cards don't actually do what they say they do. -Peter

"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:aunds0l71qup8jk70...@4ax.com... > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:57:30 -0500, LSJ wrote: > >>Black Lotus is allowed in Standard format? > > Standard format restricts the expansions which can be used but that's > a separate concept. Separate, how? Standard format bans the use of Unhinged Scourge Legions Onslaught Judgment Torment Odyssey Apocalypse Planeshift Invasion 7th Edition Prophecy Nemesis Mercadian Masques Urza's Destiny Urza's Legacy Urza's Saga Classic 6th Edition Exodus Stronghold Tempest Weatherlight 5th Edition Visions Mirage Alliances Homelands Chronicles Ice Age 4th Edition Fallen Empires The Dark Legends Revised Antiquities Arabian Nights Unlimited Beta Alpha Promotional Cards Vanguard Anthologies Unglued Portal Three Kingdoms Portal Second Age Portal Not calling it "banning" is simply a semantic trick. They're cards you cannot use. They're banned. If I show up to a tournament with a deck containing any of these 1000's of cards, I'd be disqualified... > VEKN also allows tournaments to be run using only > a subset of the available expansions - it just hasn't got a formal > name for this, right? > No. That only applies in VTES Limited (ie. draft or sealed) formats. > Magic has lots of different formats now. According to the players I talk with, Standard remains the only format which "matters"... > To compare like with like, I > reckon their Vintage format corresponds most closely with what's > usually done in VEKN constructed events - allowing all expansions. Vintage is an esoteric and less than popular format. One might more fairly compare a typical VTES tournament with a typical MTG tournament. In that case, you'd be comparing VTES Constructed to MTG Standard. > You can play any card in that except Falling Star, Chaos Orb and the > ante cards. That's still enough to put me off. I still have 4 Chaos > Orbs and am not much interested in playing a format that bans them. One can reasonably argue that MTG is better for not seeing Chaos Orb in tournament play. In this case, you seem to be in the same minority position as Enrique, seeing _any_ banning as bad? Why so? If the game which is left is better for the ban, why nix the concept on principle? Would you rather they issue a full text re-write on your Chaos Orb(s)? DaveZ Atom Weaver

> But there's a new kid on the block for the serious competitive player > - Vs. It is easy to not have any banned cards when your game is brand-new and only a few months old. > So far as I know, that doesn't ban any cards. Other CCGs that > I play are Shadowfist and Doomtown - again they have no banned cards. With regards to Doomtown, it's easy to have no banned cards when the game is out of production and barely holds tournaments anymore - and sadly, Doomtown has/had the problem of cards of extreme power that are effectively mandatory if you want to be competitive in tournament play. (DHJ, anyone?) > Andrew -John Flournoy

> VTES has various arbitrary limits on how you can combine and play your > cards, e.g. deck size limits and grouping. I'm not familiar with any CCG that has no deck size limits at all. > It also has a strong uniqueness rule. With the Updated rules for Legends, Magic has much the same rule. > Anyway, being smug about NCL when you're banning cards altogether > seems contradictory. If the game really had no limits then it might > be a genuine triumph. But that's not the case, alas. > Please note that all unofficial cards are also banned.

Andrew S. Davidson wrote: > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 07:57:30 -0500, LSJ wrote: > > >Black Lotus is allowed in Standard format? > > Standard format restricts the expansions which can be used but that's > a separate concept. VEKN also allows tournaments to be run using only > a subset of the available expansions - it just hasn't got a formal > name for this, right? Yes, VEKN allows sanctioned constructed tournaments to be run using specific expansions instead of the entire set. There isn't a formal name for it, mainly because this format is almost never, ever done. I can't remember the last time anyone even mentioned running such an event anywhere. > Andrew -John Flournoy

Andrew S. Davidson wrote: > On 20 Dec 2004 06:16:25 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: > > >So how many decks are you allowed to play with 5 of the same card? So > >how many Channels can you put in a Standard Tourney Deck? How many > >Lightning Bolts? Tsk,Tsk... > > Anyway, being smug about NCL when you're banning cards altogether > seems contradictory. If the game really had no limits then it might > be a genuine triumph. But that's not the case, alas. Answer the questions, or don't participate, you troll. Your semantics have no place here. I thought we had gotten rid of you years ago, but someone apparently had to mention your name and get you posting here again. What a waste of bandwidth your comments are. You are deliberately misleading, and subsequent attempts to discuss reasonable only cause you to change the subject. You are the single biggest troll to ever inhabit this newsgroup, and you were busted bragging about trolling this newsgroup on another newsgroup. You have no credibility here, and your comments are irrelavent to and useful conversation. Perhaps they enjoy speaking with you on the shadowfist/doomtown newsgroups, but I do not. I am sure many poster here would agree that your comments are definantly not welcome here. Go Away, Norman S. Brown, Jr [ quoted text not captured ]

"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:jiqds0l8qufncbl9t...@4ax.com... > On 20 Dec 2004 06:16:25 -0800, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: > > Anyway, being smug about NCL when you're banning cards altogether > seems contradictory. Actually, their completely congruous. To preserve NCL, you may occasionally have to alter or sacrifice cards, either through errata or as a last resort, banning. It happens when your game is healthy and growing, but not based on a rotating expansion (ala MTG). Being that Shadowfist is your vehicle of choice, its understandable that the simple volume of enough game play necessary to generate sufficient "epidemiology", if you will, hasn't yet occurred. > If the game really had no limits then it might > be a genuine triumph. But that's not the case, alas. > More ASD semantics... A game without limits is a game not worth playing. VTES never aspired to be a game free of limits, it always has aspired to be a game with its limits in the right places. DaveZ Atom Weaver

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:42:36 GMT, David Zopf wrote: >> VEKN also allows tournaments to be run using only >> a subset of the available expansions - it just hasn't got a formal >> name for this, right? > >No. That only applies in VTES Limited (ie. draft or sealed) formats. You are mistaken. As before, the 2005 tournament rules say: ----------------------------------------------------- 6.1. Constructed Formats The V:EKN sanctions only one constructed format: Standard Constructed. 6.1.1. Set Restrictions The tournament organizer may limit players to the use of one or more card sets. For example, the tournament organizer may require players to restrict their decks to cards from the Dark Sovereigns and Final Nights card sets. ---------------------------------------------------------- A format which used just the new-style cards would make some sense. I don't like the idea of mixing them with the old but a fresh start would perhaps be interesting. Andrew

"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:ikres0tpta7ov6p27...@4ax.com... > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:42:36 GMT, David Zopf wrote: > >>> VEKN also allows tournaments to be run using only >>> a subset of the available expansions - it just hasn't got a formal >>> name for this, right? >> >>No. That only applies in VTES Limited (ie. draft or sealed) formats. > > You are mistaken. As before, the 2005 tournament rules say: > So I am. > ----------------------------------------------------- > 6.1. Constructed Formats > > The V:EKN sanctions only one constructed format: Standard Constructed. > > 6.1.1. Set Restrictions > > The tournament organizer may limit players to the use of one or more > card sets. For example, the tournament organizer may require players > to restrict their decks to cards from the Dark Sovereigns and Final > Nights card sets. > ---------------------------------------------------------- I've never heard of an event ever using this option... Has there ever been one? LSJ? Robyn? DaveZ Atom Weaver

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:57:48 GMT, "David Zopf" <david...@snet.net> scrawled: [ quoted text not captured ] and i'm appalled to think that if such an event did occur, it would get rated in with 'normal' tournaments. or is sanctioning slightly different to rating? urgh. salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm (replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:02:59 -0500, Gregory Stuart Pettigrew wrote: >I'm not familiar with any CCG that has no deck size limits at all. Shadowfist has no deck size limits. Your deck can be as small or large as you like. There may be other TCGs like this too but most of them seem to just copy Magic. I was always amused that Magic tournaments didn't actual play Magic as the rulebook specified a deck minimum of 40 cards but DCI events changed the limit to 60 for some reason. Vampire follows this WotC tradition by having a formal deck size formula in the rulebook but then not using it for tournaments. Attitudes to ante seem similar. You guys don't seem to like the games that Garfield designs. I can understand taking issue with the dubious additions that came later but feel that the original design of the core set ought to be respected. Andrew

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:33:57 +1100, salem wrote: >and i'm appalled to think that if such an event did occur, it would >get rated in with 'normal' tournaments. > >or is sanctioning slightly different to rating? Odd that you guys don't actually read these rules. They go on to say that such events are not rated. I can't see why though. Such a restricted event might be more skillful than the usual as it would tend to make players build their own new decks rather than relying upon net-decks from the more standard metagame. Andrew

"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:klqis09tv2cegjhk3...@4ax.com... > On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:33:57 +1100, salem wrote: > >>and i'm appalled to think that if such an event did occur, it would >>get rated in with 'normal' tournaments. >> >>or is sanctioning slightly different to rating? > > Odd that you guys don't actually read these rules. Odder than the fact that you did, but for the sole purpose of trolling? > They go on to say > that such events are not rated. Since they aren't rated its fair to say that the section was probably read, and then promptly forgotton as irrelevant... > I can't see why though. Such a > restricted event might be more skillful than the usual as it would > tend to make players build their own new decks rather than relying > upon net-decks from the more standard metagame. > True or not, such a format would be sufficiently different from standard constructed as to not merit being included in those ratings. DaveZ Atom Weaver

[ quoted text not captured ] well stated norm... though i can't believe anyone would even respond to this loser after all the years of wasted bandwidth jds

freakdrivr wrote: > X_Ze...@cox-internet.com wrote: > > You > > are deliberately misleading, and subsequent attempts to discuss > > reasonable only cause you to change the subject. You are the single > > biggest troll to ever inhabit this newsgroup, and you were busted > > bragging about trolling this newsgroup on another newsgroup. You > > have > > no credibility here, and your comments are irrelavent to and useful > > conversation. Perhaps they enjoy speaking with you on the > > shadowfist/doomtown newsgroups, but I do not. I am sure many poster > > here would agree that your comments are definantly not welcome here. > > Go Away, > well stated norm... though i can't believe anyone would even respond to > this loser after all the years of wasted bandwidth Sadly, the juvenile pleasure he gets from deliberately misleading people or having them angrily respond to his posts, usually destroys his credibility in those rare instances when he's not trolling. -Robert

[ quoted text not captured ] We have so many new faces here that you don't want anyone thinking that ASD was a credible source. Comments Welcome, [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 15:04:03 GMT, "David Zopf" <david...@snet.net> scrawled: > >"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message [snip] >> Odd that you guys don't actually read these rules. > >Odder than the fact that you did, but for the sole purpose of trolling? > >> They go on to say >> that such events are not rated. > >Since they aren't rated its fair to say that the section was probably read, >and then promptly forgotton as irrelevant... that's pretty much what i do. i read the rules, try to memorise as much as possible that's relevant to the events that i am actually running, don't bother to remember bits that aren't applicable to my event, and then have a copy of the rules on hand anyway during such events in case something needs clarifying. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> 6.1.1. Set Restrictions >> >> The tournament organizer may limit players to the use of one or more >> card sets. For example, the tournament organizer may require players >> to restrict their decks to cards from the Dark Sovereigns and Final >> Nights card sets. >> ---------------------------------------------------------- > >I've never heard of an event ever using this option... Has there ever been >one? I'd like to (sort of*), but I can't seem to generate the interest, though whether that is because there isn't much interest in anything or specifically this is hard to determine. * I want to play a tournament where only cards that had a version printed in Sabbat could be played. In other words, you could play a Scouting Mission from any set because it was printed in Sabbat. The reason doing this sort of event isn't so wonderful, though, is that the way cards have been distributed in sets, there's a lot of inability to control what you are trying to edit out from the card pool. Allowing SW, for instance, allows a number of cards I was trying to get rid of by restring to "Sabbat".