LSJ: Dragon Con Tourneys

It would be reccomendation that the Draft Tourney be Thursday Night and the Constructed be on Saturday. It would make it more likely that people would be able to participate in the Constructed Tourney, and frankly, I believe that the constructed tourney is the main V:TES reason everyone is showing up for DragonCon. Now I know there is alot to see at Dragon Con, but everyone, who goes there for V:TES that I know, would prefer to play the Constructed Tourney on Saturday. Besides wouldn't we have more time to play and be fresher by starting in the afternoon rather than in the evening. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > > It would be reccomendation that the Draft Tourney be Thursday Night and > the Constructed be on Saturday. It would make it more likely that people > would be able to participate in the Constructed Tourney, and frankly, I > believe that the constructed tourney is the main V:TES reason everyone > is showing up for DragonCon. Now I know there is alot to see at Dragon > Con, but everyone, who goes there for V:TES that I know, would prefer to > play the Constructed Tourney on Saturday. I was under the impression that the Sabbat Draft would be more popular, given the scarcity of the Sabbat boosters, and the resulting scarcity of draft tournaments in general. Most of V:TES players get to play constructed deck tournaments all the time. I'd hate to deny someone the chance to play a Sabbat Draft event by scheduling that rare event on Thursday. Last year's Dragon*Con had more players at the Friday Sabbat Sealed tournament (which was a Bring-Your-Own event, unlike the upcoming Sabbat Draft) than at the Saturday Constructed Deck. Given that hard data, and the fact that the Dragon*Con books have already been printed (AIUI), I'd say it would be better to stick to the current schedule. > Besides wouldn't we have more > time to play and be fresher by starting in the afternoon rather than in > the evening. You'd get the same amount of time, regardless of starting time. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Any technology distinguishable http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | from magic is insufficiently Graphics Specialist and V:TES Rulemonger | advanced.

> Given that hard data, and the fact that the Dragon*Con books have already > been printed (AIUI), I'd say it would be better to stick to the current > schedule. LSJ, If we can a get some hard data for Dragon*Con 2000 will you move the tournament to Sat, or is this a lost cause? If so can we get a show of hands for moving the tournament back, because it looks like me, Sorrow, Norman, and at least 4 people from L.A. were thinking about showing up on Fri. Personally I like constructed much much better. -- Conor Prince of Raleigh

> LSJ, > If we can a get some hard data for Dragon*Con 2000 will you move the > tournament to Sat, or is this a lost cause? > If so can we get a show of hands for moving the tournament back, because it > looks like me, Sorrow, Norman, and at least 4 people from L.A. were thinking > about showing up on Fri. Personally I like constructed much much better. I was pretty close to not showing up at all because the constructed tournament was on Thursday. However, by a simple twist of fate, I am not going to have to get a room and that makes the con look all the more appealing. I'm going to like playing in the Sabbat Draft, but would much rather play in the constructed. Perhaps, LSJ, you can see who shows up on Thursday and if there aren't that many (or even if there are), you could tell them that the tourny has been rescheduled. That would mean *at least* 6 more players participating. Sorrow

Celt wrote: > > > Given that hard data, and the fact that the Dragon*Con books have already > > been printed (AIUI), I'd say it would be better to stick to the current > > schedule. > > LSJ, > If we can a get some hard data for Dragon*Con 2000 will you move the > tournament to Sat, This schedule has been up on Dragon*Con's web site since Feb 10, 2000. I would be reluctant to change that, since I know of several people who have made their plans based on that information (and I'm sure there are more that I don't know). > or is this a lost cause? ? > Personally I like constructed much much better. Great - fortunately there are many constructed deck tournaments that happen all over the area throughout the year. I believe Todd Banister (Prince of Atlanta) has a constructed event scheduled in Atlanta for Saturday, May 13th. Or feel free to run a constructed deck tourney at Dragon*Con. http://www.dragoncon.net/dc/gaming/dcformes.htm Sunday's still open if you're interested in avoiding conflicts with the other V:TES tournaments already scheduled. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Any sufficiently advanced bug is http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | indistinguishable from a feature. Graphics Specialist and V:TES Rulemonger | -- Kulawiec

Sorrow wrote: > I'm going to like playing in the Sabbat Draft, but would much rather play in > the > constructed. Perhaps, LSJ, you can see who shows up on Thursday and if > there aren't that many (or even if there are), you could tell them that the > tourny > has been rescheduled. And what would you then have me tell the players that show up on Saturday to play Sabbat Draft? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <38F2259F...@math.sc.edu>, "L. Scott Johnson" <sjoh...@math.sc.edu> wrote: > Sorrow wrote: > > I'm going to like playing in the Sabbat Draft, but would much rather play in > > the > > constructed. Perhaps, LSJ, you can see who shows up on Thursday and if > > there aren't that many (or even if there are), you could tell them that the > > tourny > > has been rescheduled. > > And what would you then have me tell the players that show up on Saturday > to play Sabbat Draft? How about "didn't you hear that it was switched to thursday so everyone could play in the constructed tourney" Or could you move the Constructed tourney to Friday, possibly before/after the other one? Thursday is just a bad day for everyone who doesn't live in Atlanta and can't take Friday off Comments Welcome [ quoted text not captured ]

>LSJ > This schedule has been up on Dragon*Con's web site since Feb 10, 2000. > I would be reluctant to change that, since I know of several people who > have made their plans based on that information (and I'm sure there are > more that I don't know). I was asking, if you would be willing to change the date. It looks like your answer is no? Will the several people who you know of that have made their plans based on that information, be at the con on Sat? It looks like the tournament has already lost 8 people (and I'm sure there are more that I don't know) due to the fact that they may not get to the Con until Fri. My point is if here are more people at the con on Fri or Sat you may have better attendance. Usually more important events are held later in a convention (fantasy or other wise) for this very reason. And people that did not plan on playing could be convinced to do so etc... > Great - fortunately there are many constructed deck tournaments that happen > all over the area throughout the year. I believe Todd Banister (Prince of > Atlanta) has a constructed event scheduled in Atlanta for Saturday, May 13th. Dragon*Con will attract a lot of people, I do not normally play against. I can not say the same for a regional event. The fact that there will be other tournaments is beside the point. > Or feel free to run a constructed deck tourney at Dragon*Con. > http://www.dragoncon.net/dc/gaming/dcformes.htm There will only be one official WW supported event at each Con. I am only interested in that event, and as you are the one running it I was just trying to see if there was a way for me (and some others) to attend. Conor Prince of Raleigh

"L. Scott Johnson" wrote: > Sunday's still open if you're interested in avoiding conflicts with the > other V:TES tournaments already scheduled. Well, IMO more Jyhad = good. I'd be willing to stick around and finish the weekend with a constructed tourney. Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu

In article <8ctp26$enk$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>, Celt <tirn...@mindspring.com> writes >I was asking, if you would be willing to change the date. It looks like >your answer is no? I think LSJ's answer is a little more complex than that - a "Yes, I would like to be able to swap the tournaments round because it looks like it would be better for a significant number of people but I don't think, in all conscience, that I could because of the fact that there are bound to be a lot of players who have already planned and booked around the schedule that's been up for the last two months." -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net http://www.zephyr.org.uk

Celt wrote: > Will the several people who you know of that have made their plans based on > that information, be at the con on Sat? It looks like the tournament has Yes. > already lost 8 people (and I'm sure there are more that I don't know) due to > the fact that they may not get to the Con until Fri. My point is if here > are more people at the con on Fri or Sat you may have better attendance. > Usually more important events are held later in a convention (fantasy or > other wise) for this very reason. And people that did not plan on playing > could be convinced to do so etc... Right. Which is why I'm holding the more important event on Saturday. > > Or feel free to run a constructed deck tourney at Dragon*Con. > > http://www.dragoncon.net/dc/gaming/dcformes.htm > > There will only be one official WW supported event at each Con. I am only > interested in that event, and as you are the one running it I was just > trying to see if there was a way for me (and some others) to attend. Sure. The Saturday event is the one I presume WW will be officially supporting, so feel free to attend. If you'd like to attend the Thursday evening event as well, you'd be welcome there also. It's up to you. [ quoted text not captured ]

X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > "L. Scott Johnson" <sjoh...@math.sc.edu> wrote: > How about "didn't you hear that it was switched to thursday so everyone > could play in the constructed tourney" How about: "the draft event is on Saturday so everyone can play in it, since Sabbat draft tourneys are relatively rare compared to constructed tourneys"? > Or could you move the Constructed tourney to Friday, possibly > before/after the other one? Thursday is just a bad day for everyone who > doesn't live in Atlanta and can't take Friday off Sorry, but I'm booked on Friday as well. [ quoted text not captured ]

> I think LSJ's answer is a little more complex than that - a "Yes, I > would like to be able to swap the tournaments round because it looks > like it would be better for a significant number of people but I don't > think, in all conscience, that I could because of the fact that there > are bound to be a lot of players who have already planned and booked > around the schedule that's been up for the last two months." James, Are you attending Dragon Con? [ quoted text not captured ]

> Well, IMO more Jyhad = good. I'd be willing to stick around and finish the > weekend with a constructed tourney. > > Rob Grau > rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu I appreciate all the effort that is going into Dragon Con. I just wish that we could make concessions for those players that do not live so near to the Atlanta Metro Area. I would second a early constructed tourney on Saturday prior to the Sabbat Draft occuring. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

>LSJ said: > Right. Which is why I'm holding the more important event on Saturday. More important? I was under the impression that constructed events were more important. I may be wrong, and I am sure you will point it out if I am. I believe the game was created with the constructed game in mind. Most tournaments are constructed. We keep score only in constructed events. We argue incessantly over rules for constructed play. When play groups get tougher they mostly play constructed. We seem to value constructed more. This Sabbat draft is rarer true, and while I very much enjoy a good draft game I do not think it is more important. The climax of Dragon*Con (for me) was going to be playing with all the people from other places in one big, huge, giant constructed event. Da da da.... > Sure. The Saturday event is the one I presume WW will be officially > supporting, so feel free to attend. So there will not be an "official" WW supported constructed event at Dragon*Con? > If you'd like to attend the Thursday evening event as well, you'd be > welcome there also. It's up to you. Thank you for the invitation. I will take it under advisement. [ quoted text not captured ]

Celt wrote: > > >LSJ said: > > Right. Which is why I'm holding the more important event on Saturday. > > More important? I was under the impression that constructed events were > more important. I may be wrong, and I am sure you will point it out if I > am. I believe the game was created with the constructed game in mind. True. But not constructed tournaments in particular. It was also created to be playable in a limited environment. > Most tournaments are constructed. Thereby reducing the importance of a given constructed deck event on the whole. > We keep score only in constructed events. Score is kept at all DCI events. > We argue incessantly over rules for constructed play. In my experience, the incessant arguments are over the rules - the rules that apply equally to constructed play and draft play. > When play groups get > tougher they mostly play constructed. Perhaps this is a result of the scarcity of resources available for limited play. There are some groups that play limited whenever they can. > We seem to value constructed more. see above. You may also wish to check with New Jersey, where the most recent (American, at any rate) Sabbat Limited event took place. > This Sabbat draft is rarer true, and while I very much enjoy a good draft > game I do not think it is more important. The climax of Dragon*Con (for me) > was going to be playing with all the people from other places in one big, > huge, giant constructed event. Da da da.... Sunday's still open. > > Sure. The Saturday event is the one I presume WW will be officially > > supporting, so feel free to attend. > > So there will not be an "official" WW supported constructed event at > Dragon*Con? ? If there is only one "official" event at a given convention, and if the "one" for D*C is the Saturday event, then that would seem to be an obvious conclusion. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8cvd5r$nvf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes >James, Are you attending Dragon Con? Unfortunately, no. Plane fares are prohibitively expensive for me, currently. I'm looking into the possibility of coming over for something in the summer months - July, August, September sort of time. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8cvkqn$u08$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>, Celt <tirn...@mindspring.com> writes >More important? I was under the impression that constructed events were >more important. The draft is the one that can get attention for people - especially people who just drift by and say "Wow, cool, I remember playing that." A constructed affair can get that response, but the people can't do anything because they don't have any cards with them. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <50Jdl$Eng28...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ve...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In article <8cvd5r$nvf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes > >James, Are you attending Dragon Con? > > Unfortunately, no. Plane fares are prohibitively expensive for me, > currently. > > I'm looking into the possibility of coming over for something in the > summer months - July, August, September sort of time. > Well, if you would like to visit Louisiana, you are more then welcome here. Come and check out the Big Easy. We will try to scedule a tourney while you are here Comments Welcome [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.sc.edu> wrote in message news:38F35DD8...@math.sc.edu... > Celt wrote: > > > > >LSJ said: > > > Right. Which is why I'm holding the more important event on Saturday. > > > > More important? I was under the impression that constructed events were > > more important. I may be wrong, and I am sure you will point it out if I > > am. I believe the game was created with the constructed game in mind. > > True. But not constructed tournaments in particular. It was also created > to be playable in a limited environment. > > > Most tournaments are constructed. > > Thereby reducing the importance of a given constructed deck event on > the whole. > > > We keep score only in constructed events. > > Score is kept at all DCI events. > > > We argue incessantly over rules for constructed play. > > In my experience, the incessant arguments are over the rules - > the rules that apply equally to constructed play and draft play. > > > When play groups get > > tougher they mostly play constructed. > > Perhaps this is a result of the scarcity of resources available for > limited play. > > There are some groups that play limited whenever they can. > > > We seem to value constructed more. > > see above. You may also wish to check with New Jersey, where the most > recent (American, at any rate) Sabbat Limited event took place. Nit-pick all you like, but I continue to state that constructed is the premier (most important or preferred) way to play V:TES. And I will go one step farther, I believe you are under the same impression. Please correct me if I am wrong. That said, the most important event should be held later in the convention. Is there no way to convince you to change the schedule? > If there is only one "official" event at a given convention, and if > the "one" for D*C is the Saturday event, then that would seem to be an > obvious conclusion. Nice. [ quoted text not captured ]

Prelude: I am amazed that people would complain about having tournaments for this game. Please try and put this into perspective. Celt wrote: > Nit-pick all you like, but I continue to state that constructed is the > premier (most important or preferred) way to play V:TES. And I will go one > step farther, I believe you are under the same impression. Please correct > me if I am wrong. > That said, the most important event should be held later in the convention. The 4th-previous post should've made it clear to anyone who read it. Again for your consumption: A single, standard constructed event is not more important than a single Sabbat Draft event, in my impression. > Is there no way to convince you to change the schedule? Not at the inconvenience of the people who have read it, no. Unless you can convince me that your convenience is more important than theirs. If all the people who get tickets for the Sabbat event unanimously agree to forego the event in favor of a constructed event, I'd be happy to serve as judge, sure. Such an event would be non-sanctioned, of course, given the DCI rules on publicity. I'm running two (lengthy) V:TES tournaments at Dragon*Con. Dragon*Con runs for four days, not three or two. The schedule of events has been up for over two months (and still two months before the convention) in order to allow players to make plans appropriate to their levels of interest in particular events. I'm taking time out of my schedule at Dragon*Con to judge when there are plenty of things to see and games to play at Dragon*Con. I've procured (from WotC) quantities of a product that many players (used to, at least) seem eager to get. I have not limited anyone's ability to run any other tournaments they like. Please explain how I have done you such a disservice. Also, while we're on it: The Origins schedule is up as well: WotC has scheduled the following events, which I've agreed to run: July 13-16, 2000 Thursday, 10:00 am: V:TES constructed tournament. Friday, 12:00 noon: V:TES sealed deck tournament. Saturday, 09:00 am: V:TES Sabbat draft tournament. Sunday, 09:00 am: V:TES constructed tournament. For those who can't make it to some event or another at Dragon*Con, you might consider some of the events at Orgins as alternatives. If not, try the Gen*Con schedule (again by WotC and to be run by me): August 10-13, 2000 Thursday, 12:00 noon: V:TES constructed tournament. Friday, 10:00 am: V:TES Sabbat draft tournament. Saturday, 12:00 noon: V:TES US National constructed deck championship. Sunday, 10:00 am: V:TES (non-standard) two-player duel tournament. [ quoted text not captured ]

> If all the people who get tickets for the Sabbat event unanimously > agree to forego the event in favor of a constructed event, I'd be > happy to serve as judge, sure. Such an event would be non-sanctioned, > of course, given the DCI rules on publicity. First of all, this is very unfair of you to say. We have petitioned for the schedule to be changed so that more players will attend this convention with the express purpose of playing V:TES, and you have presented us with an option that is not really an option at all (we can change the tourney the day of the tourney, but it won't be a real tourney because we didn't give eveyone enough notice). Well, I think that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. I firmly believe and I have proof that more players will attend Dragon Con if the Constructed Tourney is Saturday. If you can prove to me that less people will show up to Dragon Con if the Sabbat Draft is not on Saturday, I will accept that. But, as it is, you have not. The only thing you have cited it the massive turnout of players for the New Jersey Draft Event. As far as I know this is not an annual event. Many of the players who plan on attending Dragon Con are doing so because they heard what a great turnout last year was. I honestly believe that it was the Constructed Tourney not the Sabbat Sealed that created most of the goodwill towards Dragon Con. > I'm running two (lengthy) V:TES tournaments at Dragon*Con. Dragon*Con runs > for four days, not three or two. The schedule of events has been up for > over two months (and still two months before the convention) in order to > allow players to make plans appropriate to their levels of interest in > particular events. I'm taking time out of my schedule at Dragon*Con to > judge when there are plenty of things to see and games to play at > Dragon*Con. I've procured (from WotC) quantities of a product that many > players (used to, at least) seem eager to get. I have not limited anyone's > ability to run any other tournaments they like. Please explain how I have > done you such a disservice. Scott, I want you to know that we all appreciate all that you are doing. We think you have done alot to keep this game alive. But none of us want to run a tournament that competes in time or for players with the other tournaments that are running, and therefore split the pool of players. Unforturately I will not be making it to the other major gaming conventions this year. Comments Welcome, [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8d23l7$m95$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: <--snip LSJ Sabbat for constructed swap--> > First of all, this is very unfair of you to say. We have petitioned for > the schedule to be changed so that more players will attend this > convention with the express purpose of playing V:TES, and you have > presented us with an option that is not really an option at all (we can > change the tourney the day of the tourney, but it won't be a real > tourney because we didn't give eveyone enough notice). Well, I think > that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. I firmly > believe and I have proof that more players will attend Dragon Con if the > Constructed Tourney is Saturday. As far as I can tell, we have your word that you have proof of such. > > If you can prove to me that less people will show up to Dragon Con if > the Sabbat Draft is not on Saturday, I will accept that. But, as it is, > you have not. We have LSJ's word on this. Perhaps the Rules Team is planning on making the Thursday Constructed event? :) I don't see how your proof is any more convincing than Scott's proof. Beyond someone's word what proof is there anyway? Afadavits? Ticket Stubs? Stained Dresses? Isn't this a little too he said/she said? Anyway, I preceive the problem to be that many people were not going to take Thursday off from work to make D*C, and are going to show up late. Since bickering over swapping tourneys is going nowhere, why don't we take LSJ up on his offer to host a Sunday morning constructed? Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8d23l7$m95$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes >Well, I think >that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. I know people who have to plan way more in advance than that for getting time off work, organising transport and money for hotels etc. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > First of all, this is very unfair of you to say. We have petitioned for > > the schedule to be changed so that more players will attend this > > convention with the express purpose of playing V:TES, and you have > > presented us with an option that is not really an option at all (we can > > change the tourney the day of the tourney, but it won't be a real > > tourney because we didn't give eveyone enough notice). Well, I think > > that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. I firmly > > believe and I have proof that more players will attend Dragon Con if > > the Constructed Tourney is Saturday. > As far as I can tell, we have your word that you have proof of such. I wasn't going to go because of this and wouldn't be if it weren't for the fact that the room I'm going to be staying in is free. There was someone who posted from LA who said that he and 3 or 4 others weren't going because of this. I believe that there may have been a few other posts indicating as much as well. So it's not just Norm's word. Sorrow

In article <Xqq2SPCt...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ve...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In article <8d23l7$m95$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes > >Well, I think > >that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. > > I know people who have to plan way more in advance than that for getting > time off work, organising transport and money for hotels etc. Good for you! I know people who have gone and landed on the Moon, and it still has as little importance as you comment. Two months is a resonable enough time to get vacation time by American Labor Law, and as for the other things that is why you save your money, so that you can afford to travel; if that is what you like to do. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

> I don't see how your proof is any more convincing than Scott's proof. The Group from Los Angeles that wants to attend a Constructed Tourney is cancelling if all they are going to attend is a Sabbat Draft. See above post by JediMike > Anyway, I preceive the problem to be that many people were not going to > take Thursday off from work to make D*C, and are going to show up late. > Since bickering over swapping tourneys is going nowhere, why don't we > take LSJ up on his offer to host a Sunday morning constructed? I think a Sunday morning tournament is an excellent idea. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Yy1J4.1783$%L6.1...@monger.newsread.com>, "Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote: > > I wasn't going to go because of this and wouldn't be if it weren't for > the fact that the room I'm going to be staying in is free. There was > someone who posted from LA who said that he and 3 or 4 others > weren't going because of this. I believe that there may have been a > few other posts indicating as much as well. So it's not just Norm's > word. I was setting up the parallel between Norm's word and LSJ's word. To be technical we have Norm's word and JediMike's word that the same group of LA (the city) people were not going to show up. If there was another group of LA (the state) people that Norm was refering to, it was not clear. I saw the conversation digressing into you said/I said and tried to redirect it. I cannot say that I know whether or not the number of people from LA (the city) who might un-cancel to make a saturday game would be worth the number of people we lose becase of people planning on making the Thursday tourney and doing other games on Saturday _plus_ the number of people lost because the books would then have incorrect info. Is there anyone interested in a Sunday game? It could probably be DCI sanctioned, right LSJ? Would that be an acceptable soultion? Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu [ quoted text not captured ]

X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > > > If all the people who get tickets for the Sabbat event unanimously > > agree to forego the event in favor of a constructed event, I'd be > > happy to serve as judge, sure. Such an event would be non-sanctioned, > > of course, given the DCI rules on publicity. > > First of all, this is very unfair of you to say. We have petitioned for You put your inconvenience ahead of other players' inconvenience and call me unfair? > the schedule to be changed so that more players will attend this > convention with the express purpose of playing V:TES, and you have > presented us with an option that is not really an option at all (we can > change the tourney the day of the tourney, but it won't be a real > tourney because we didn't give eveyone enough notice). Well, I think > that two months is enough notice to change the schedule. I firmly And how do you propose to reach all of the people who have already seen the schedule to notify them of the change - and if any of them then feel as inconvenienced as you do now, would you then yield? > believe and I have proof that more players will attend Dragon Con if the > Constructed Tourney is Saturday. What proof? You've actually counted the number of players that won't show up if they are informed that the Sabbat Draft isn't run on Saturday as advertised? > If you can prove to me that less people will show up to Dragon Con if > the Sabbat Draft is not on Saturday, I will accept that. But, as it is, > you have not. Such things are no more provable for me than for you, I'm afraid. > The only thing you have cited it the massive turnout of > players for the New Jersey Draft Event. And the turnout of the BYO Sabbat Sealed vs. regular constructed tournaments at last year's D*C - data that is directly indicative of why the schedule was made the was it is. > As far as I know [New Jersey Draft] is not an annual event. Neither is the D*C Sabbat Draft. It didn't happen last year. It may not happen next year. > Many of the players who plan on attending Dragon Con are > doing so because they heard what a great turnout last year was. I And turnout was greater at the Sabbat Bring-Your-Own event than at the constructed event at D*C last year. > honestly believe that it was the Constructed Tourney not the Sabbat > Sealed that created most of the goodwill towards Dragon Con. OK, you're entitled. I believe that the attendence at each event is indicative of players' interests in each event (and that the attendance at the Sabbat Sealed was lower than the interest due to the BYO nature of that event). Since that is the only hard data to work with, the schedule is as you have found it. Players have been searching rather emphatically for Sabbat product, leading me to believe that providing that product (at a discount, even) would create some goodwill as well. And how much goodwill will be generated by changing the schedule and having people show up on Saturday for a tournament that is already over? > [...] none of us > want to run a tournament that competes in time or for players with the > other tournaments that are running, and therefore split the pool of > players. Sunday is still open, as has been mentioned. [ quoted text not captured ]

rfg...@my-deja.com wrote: > Is there anyone interested in a Sunday game [at Dragon*CON 2000]? > It could probably be DCI sanctioned, right LSJ? Sure. As far as I know, the DCI is still in the habit of sanctioning V:TES events. If not, contact the V:EKN for alternate arrangements. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.geocities.com/vtesrep

> Is there anyone interested in a Sunday game? It could probably be DCI > sanctioned, right LSJ? Would that be an acceptable soultion? Unfortunately, I would not be able to stay for a Sunday game. I'm going to have to spend Sunday driving back home so that I can be at work on Monday. :( Sorrow -I may actually end up not going to D*C at all... *sigh* --- no hate no wars no ignorance no politics no pain no force no weapons no oppression no sorrow no chemicals no dust no leaders no violence no dust no leaders no leaders now it's time for the world to see a man with open eyes now it's time to realize we tell ourselves the best of lies

In article <8d2a22$tvk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes >I know people who have gone and landed on the Moon, and it still has as >little importance as you comment. Crap, and you know it. You cannot give people several months notice - expecting them to organise around the details you give - and then say "Oh, sorry, changing it - so all that extra time we gave you to organise was a waste." If you give people the time to organise, expect them to use it. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Yy1J4.1783$%L6.1...@monger.newsread.com>, Sorrow <cbo...@apdi.net> writes > There was >someone who posted from LA who said that he and 3 or 4 others >weren't going because of this. And regarding the Sunday event? [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson wrote in message <38F4B39C...@math.sc.edu>... [clip] >I believe that the attendence at each event is indicative of players' >interests in each event (and that the attendance at the Sabbat Sealed >was lower than the interest due to the BYO nature of that event). >Since that is the only hard data to work with, the schedule is as you >have found it. We have never run sealed events at our Los Angeles conventions so I was quite surpised by the turnout for GenCon's sealed event last year. The sealed-deck event had quite a few more players than the Constructed World Championships. I greatly prefer constructed personally but sealed does seem to draw more players. -Robert

In article <Ly4J4.11285$q67.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Robert Goudie <rrgo...@earthlink.net> writes >I greatly prefer constructed personally but sealed does seem >to draw more players. Indeed. I know a number of players who won't play constructed tournaments, viewing themselves at a disadvantage because of relative numbers of cards. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Crap, and you know it. You cannot give people several months notice - > expecting them to organise around the details you give - and then say > "Oh, sorry, changing it - so all that extra time we gave you to organise > was a waste." > > If you give people the time to organise, expect them to use it. How much is enough time? 6 months... a year... What you are posting is such garbage. If what you are saying is true then the airlines have it all wrong, They should be charging huge fees 3 months out, but the reality, at least here in the USA, is that the price break happens at the 4th week when everyone finalizes their plans. I expect people to be able to cope with change especially when you give them two months to reorganize . Change happens here in the USA. Welcome to a dynamic reality. Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8cvdm6$ohv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > > > > Well, IMO more Jyhad = good. I'd be willing to stick around Thats the bottom line! Sealed, constructed, draft, whatever. I believe LSJ is doing a TREMENDOUS job in taking the time and effort to coordinate these tournys, it's NOT easy I know! Truth be told I would not want (or expect) LSJ to change the schedule ESPECIALLY to accommodate the LA players. I would still love to make it but I'm currently coming up on 15 day trip to Germany and that pretty well takes up my vacation for the year. So if I take a V:TES trip I would like to go back to Gencon because it was such a great time had by all, and our group would all like to go together. So even if the schedule was changed there is no guarantee LA would make it at this point. Hell, I'd run a Fri. night AND a Sun. morning tournament if I could guarantee we could make it. But if we only make one trip this year it will probably be Gencon. I know at Gencon there were more constructed games outside of tournys than I could count! Some we kept playing ALL NIGHT till the sun came up (Daring the Dawn, ahhh, that was great fun), And I suspect the same will come out of D*C. The most fun for me is the camaraderie and hanging with fellow V:tes players and telling war stories. What kind of tourny is played is just semantics, I truly wish I could see you guys at EVERY tourny, unfortunately life gets in the way. LSJ, thanks for your support and keep up the good work. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8d2s03$ih9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com writes >What you are posting is such garbage. Your choice. I'm not saying what is enough time to give people. However, the fact remains that 2 months previously, 4 months was given for people to organise things - people may have booked transport, holiday, and so forth based around such things. Sure, they could do that in 2 months. Some of them will have already done it. Should they be expected to undo that for you? [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ: > Sunday is still open, as has been mentioned. Sunday is not open. The finials of the Sabbat draft will be held Sunday morning from 9:00 am to 1:00pm. This leaves only one time slot open on Sunday and 4 hours in not enough time to hold a full tournament. [ quoted text not captured ]

Celt wrote: > LSJ: > > Sunday is still open, as has been mentioned. > > Sunday is not open. The finials of the Sabbat draft will be held Sunday > morning from 9:00 am to 1:00pm. This leaves only one time slot open on > Sunday and 4 hours in not enough time to hold a full tournament. I don't think having five people unable to attend will have a serious impact, especially given your group's vocal desire to play a constructed deck vs. other players from around the country - and that's assuming that the finals actually need to be held on Sunday - the game might go fast enough to go ahead and hold the finals on Saturday - Sunday was scheduled merely to meet the DCI minimum per-round time allotment. [ quoted text not captured ]

L. Scott Johnson wrote > Also, while we're on it: The Origins schedule is up as well: WotC has > scheduled the following events, which I've agreed to run: > > July 13-16, 2000 > Thursday, 10:00 am: V:TES constructed tournament. > Friday, 12:00 noon: V:TES sealed deck tournament. > Saturday, 09:00 am: V:TES Sabbat draft tournament. > Sunday, 09:00 am: V:TES constructed tournament. > > For those who can't make it to some event or another at Dragon*Con, you > might consider some of the events at Orgins as alternatives. > > If not, try the Gen*Con schedule (again by WotC and to be run by me): > > August 10-13, 2000 > Thursday, 12:00 noon: V:TES constructed tournament. > Friday, 10:00 am: V:TES Sabbat draft tournament. > Saturday, 12:00 noon: V:TES US National constructed deck championship. > Sunday, 10:00 am: V:TES (non-standard) two-player duel tournament. I will make my opinion very clear. I think the idea to emphasize draft play at two of the three biggest conventions is a poor one. We should be emphasizing constructed play. If we are going to be taken seriously by gamers, trade rags, and the general demographics that WW and V:TES appeals to we need to push skill over luck..collecting over opportunity. I am not saying that we should not have draft play at con's we should, but not at the expense of constructed. Draft play may bring in more people, but if it does, it is because draft is less intimidating. The player does not have to have a lot of cards or worry about the meta-game in draft. It is too luck based and it does not encourage collecting. We need players with good sized card collections that are putting some thought in the game as a whole. We should be using draft play to encourage new players, not as an end to itself. I think it is more important to have 10 new people at a constructed event than 20 new people at a draft! [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8d52ua$o0b$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>, Celt <tirn...@mindspring.com> writes >I think the idea to emphasize draft play at two of the three biggest >conventions is a poor one. We should be emphasizing constructed play. And excluding anyone who happens to turn up and thinks "Oh, that sounds nice - I remember playing that ages ago." V:TES needs new players. Constructed may keep people with the game, but a large number of constructed tournaments will do nothing to get people *playing* the game, there and then. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:u3+oV2A$1094...@obeah.demon.co.uk... > In article <8d52ua$o0b$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>, Celt > <tirn...@mindspring.com> writes > >I think the idea to emphasize draft play at two of the three biggest > >conventions is a poor one. We should be emphasizing constructed play. > > And excluding anyone who happens to turn up and thinks "Oh, that sounds > nice - I remember playing that ages ago." emphasizing...not excluding! [ quoted text not captured ]

What he said... Makes me proud to be an Angeleno (sniff!)... Chris [ quoted text not captured ] -- Tammy Martin 5'7" Alexander Shorb 2'10" Chris Shorb 5'11" Shameless plug: <http://www.graphicnovels.com/>

In article <8d8k02$9o9$1...@slb1.atl.mindspring.net>, Celt <tirn...@mindspring.com> writes >> And excluding anyone who happens to turn up and thinks "Oh, that sounds >> nice - I remember playing that ages ago." > >emphasizing...not excluding! Given the need to get new players into the game, I would still posit that emphasising a form of play, at large conventions, which excludes new people from playing is a bad thing. More players = Important, therefore Sealed/Draft > Constructed, IMO [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message > Given the need to get new players into the game, I would still posit > that emphasising a form of play, at large conventions, which excludes > new people from playing is a bad thing. > > More players = Important, therefore Sealed/Draft > Constructed, IMO > I have addressed these issues. See my previous posts. This thread has run its course, so unless there are any new points made I will remove myself from it. [ quoted text not captured ]