No draftferior in CSV :-(

There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for download :'( why? did anyone knows?

In message <1158100198.3...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, Omael <omael....@gmail.com> writes: >There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for >download :'( why? did anyone knows? http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0e945c0 13f72b19c -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

Also, see if you can find ABBOTT in the .CSV. Its not there. [ quoted text not captured ]

gwil...@storageannex.com wrote: > Also, see if you can find ABBOTT in the .CSV. Its not there. > > > > > James Coupe wrote: > > In message <1158100198.3...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, Omael > > <omael....@gmail.com> writes: > > >There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for > > >download :'( why? did anyone knows? > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0e945c0 > > 13f72b19c > > Not sure what that has to do with draftferiors, but ABBOT (one 'T') is in the .csv file.

Omael wrote: > There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for > download :'( why? did anyone knows? I figure that having draftferiors available in a computer database is more or less irrelevent for most intended uses of that database. Namely, if you're building a constructed deck, it doesn't matter what the draftferior does. The text only applies when you draft the card, in which case it should be right in front of you at all stages of the process. Additionally, the draftferior applies only to the individual copy of the card that lists it. It's even the case that some cards in the 3rd Ed boosters have Draftferiors, while the same card in the starter does not.

CthuluKitty wrote: > Omael wrote: > > There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for > > download :'( why? did anyone knows? > > I figure that having draftferiors available in a computer database is > more or less irrelevent for most intended uses of that database. > Namely, if you're building a constructed deck, it doesn't matter what > the draftferior does. The text only applies when you draft the card, > in which case it should be right in front of you at all stages of the > process. True, but you might want or need it for other reasons, such as quickly compiling a list of all cards with draft text for collection purposes, or to quote/check current card [draft] text if you want to discuss it (as James pointed out in the other thread). > Additionally, the draftferior applies only to the individual copy of > the card that lists it. It's even the case that some cards in the 3rd > Ed boosters have Draftferiors, while the same card in the starter > does not. This is why it's probably appropriate to keep draft effect information separated from the official card list. Doesn't mean that such a compilation wouldn't be useful, though. (Thinking about it, I just realised that it is entirely possible that a card is released in the future with a different draft effect than it had in a previous set. Weird idea, and most likely a terrible one, given how much unnecessary confusion it could cause in mixed-sets draft events. Possible scenario, however). Abraços, Luiz Mello

CthuluKitty wrote: // Omael wrote: // > There is no listed Draft Effect in the CSV that white-wolf offers for // > download :'( why? did anyone knows? // // I figure that having draftferiors available in a computer database is // more or less irrelevent for most intended uses of that database. // Namely, if you're building a constructed deck, it doesn't matter what // the draftferior does. The text only applies when you draft the card, // in which case it should be right in front of you at all stages of the // process. There are three main reasons for including it: - completeness (nice but not necessary) - the online files are the official source for the current text... and we already have errata involving them - some of us like to write scripts to extract interesting things out of the database... so although you may have the text in front of you during the game, it's also interesting to consider doing statistical and data analysis of the set before you draft so you can develop your drafting strategy to accomidate the fact that some cards are less likely to be available (grabbed up because of an easier to use drafterior) and some disciplines are going to be more playable because they have more usable cards. Even if you consider this "spoiler" info, it's not really such a spoiler given the fact that much of the drafterior effects are already out there and being put into unofficial lists... an official list would actually be an equalizing force by freeing that information to everyone. Brent Ross

Clément wrote: // (Thinking about it, I just realised that it is entirely possible that a // card is released in the future with a different draft effect than it // had in a previous set. Weird idea, and most likely a terrible one, // given how much unnecessary confusion it could cause in mixed-sets // draft events. Possible scenario, however). Maybe not such a terrible one (except for the problems for the database)... different sets are going to have different focused disciplines both in the vampires and in the cards in the set. For example, a new Camarilla base set would probably be served better with different drafteriors than the current Sabbat set for Claws of the Dead (vic as pro), Stunt Cycle (obt 2R strike), or Theft of Vitae (obt as tha). Although they would probably still be usable in the current form, they probably wouldn't be serving the design purpose of the draft text because their bonus effects would be pretty corner case. Brent Ross

bwr...@mail.com wrote: > Clément wrote: > // (Thinking about it, I just realised that it is entirely possible that a > // card is released in the future with a different draft effect than it > // had in a previous set. Weird idea, and most likely a terrible one, > // given how much unnecessary confusion it could cause in mixed-sets > // draft events. Possible scenario, however). > > Maybe not such a terrible one (except for the problems for the > database)... different sets are going to have different focused > disciplines both in the vampires and in the cards in the set. For > example, a new Camarilla base set would probably be served better with > different drafteriors than the current Sabbat set for Claws of the Dead > (vic as pro), Stunt Cycle (obt 2R strike), or Theft of Vitae (obt as > tha). Yes, that's exactly why I thought of the above (but didn't have any actual examples, as I don't have access to Third Edition cards yet). It does make a lot of sense that, say, Theft of Vitae has a draftferior requiring a Discipline other than obt if it is released in a new Camarilla base set. But that would pose some problems to mixed-set draft events, wouldn't it? Well, maybe not big problems, as all you'd have to do is to read the draft effect on each card to know what it does and what requirement it has. Sounds somewhat counter intuitive to have the same card (by name) do two different things in the same context, however. Just a thought, anyway. Maybe this possibility sounds weird to me because I'm the kind of player who would like to have those draftferior cards listed on a database? Also, I plan to promote draft formats heavily around here in the future, when we are able to receive/buy cards again <crosses fingers>. Some players don't actually know any english, so they just memorize the game terms and rely on card names to recall what they do. > Although they would probably still be usable in the current > form, they probably wouldn't be serving the design purpose of the > draft text because their bonus effects would be pretty corner case. I totally agree. Abraços, Luiz Mello Brazil VTES NC

bwr...@mail.com wrote: > There are three main reasons for including it: > > - completeness (nice but not necessary) > > - the online files are the official source for the current text... and > we already have errata involving them > > - some of us like to write scripts I think, more importantly, that future prereleases are likely to have 40/40 Drafts (even though Internal Recursion is way better) and therefore, people might be inclined to construct decks using the Draftferiors. -- - Gregory Stuart Pettigrew

Gregory Stuart Pettigrew wrote: > I think, more importantly, that future prereleases are likely to have > 40/40 Drafts (even though Internal Recursion is way better) and > therefore, people might be inclined to construct decks using the > Draftferiors. Not permitted. 40/40 only uses draft rules for the drafted portion. The constructed portion follows the constructed rules (grouping, &c.). At least, that's how it has gone historically for 40/40. Given the idea of "draftferior", that should remain the case for draftferiors as well.

Clément wrote: > But that would pose some problems to mixed-set draft events, wouldn't > it? Well, maybe not big problems, as all you'd have to do is to read > the draft effect on each card to know what it does and what requirement > it has. Sounds somewhat counter intuitive to have the same card (by > name) do two different things in the same context, however. Actually another oft-called "problem" might be the solution to this. Typically when you mix different art versions of the same card you can run into the problem of accidentally not noticing how many of that card you're actually holding (especially if you're the type of person who avoids sorting the cards in hand because you don't want to risk giving away information). A new overall style for the cards would also help but is much more unlikely to be done. The set logo certainly doesn't work well as an indicator because: (a) it has no other use in the game so isn't typically even noticed, (b) it's small, and (c) it's on the right side of the card and so is only noticed when holding your cards "left handed"... which doesn't work well because everything else about the card is designed for "right handed" use. So if a set with a different draft effect were to also have new art (or even an older art in the cases where that exists) the problem of mistaking which draft version you hold would be alleviated. IMHO, that solves the bigger problem... I'd rather be able to recognise the cards with different play abilities by sight, even if it does mean that I should slow down a bit and carefully look at what's in my hand... which, in draft you generally want and have to do anyway since the deck you're playing is essentially unfamiliar in comparison to a playing tuned constructed deck. Brent Ross

Brent Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> wrote: > So if a set with a different draft effect were to also have new art (or > even an older art in the cases where that exists) the problem of > mistaking which draft version you hold would be alleviated. But what if a single set has multiple different draft effects for the same card? Currently, there's a 'starter version' and 'booster version' of some cards, one without and one with draftferior, in 3E. But theoretically, you could have 6 different versions of Undead Strength, all in the same set, with different draft effects. Would you want different art for every single version of the card?

[ quoted text not captured ] No, the only thing that i wanted was the draftferior in the card to help webvtes handle it... you know why.

Jozxyqk wrote: > Brent Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So if a set with a different draft effect were to also have new art (or > > even an older art in the cases where that exists) the problem of > > mistaking which draft version you hold would be alleviated. > > But what if a single set has multiple different draft effects for the > same card? That's just starting to get into hypotheticals that are pretty irrelevant and certainly avoidable. > Currently, there's a 'starter version' and 'booster version' of some cards, > one without and one with draftferior, in 3E. The difference in starter vs booster versions is always going to exist in any set with starter and booster versions because draft effects are designed and intended for the cards you're drafting... so they'll only be on the booster cards, the starter cards will always be free from the additional clutter of the DRAFT bubble. See LSJs post on 40/40 draft in this thread... the 40 card base deck you bring in can't use any draft effects that happen to be on the card. Those draft effects are designed and balanced for drafting with boosters... any constructed use of those effects is disallowed. > But theoretically, you could have 6 different versions of Undead Strength, > all in the same set, with different draft effects. You could, but it would be a nightmare to consider the balance implications of such a move and you'd have to wonder why they didn't just use the DRAFT bubble to make a single disciplineless "strike: 2 damage" card instead of going through the trouble of carefully doling things out piece by piece. It's not like draft effects include radical innovations that warrant a large selection of options... they typically just hand out the same or similar ability to a wider audience and so make the card more draftable (one of the problems that has kept people from considering VTES draft is that there's so many different disciplines and clans that the end decks just don't mesh as well as drafting with a simpler TCG with fewer limitations... draft effects reduces that pressure, and so drafting VTES should be more palatable to a wider audience that would previously simply not bothered to try it). Given the design intent there's simply no need to ever give a second draft effect option to a single card inside a single set. Since the first one was designed to expand it's usefulness given the set it's in, a second would just be redundant... that additional effect would be better put to use on a different card. In fact, most cards with draft effects probably don't need more than two... one involving a standard discipline and one involving an uncommon discipline that occurs only in sets featuring that discipline. In extremely rare cases I could see a third version showing up restricted to something like an independants set (but it's almost certainly not a necessity). So you really should never need 6 different draft effects for a specific card in a specific set (let alone 6 ever)... they could do it, but then again they could also include a Caine crypt card in the next set. > Would you want different art for every single version of the card? Given that the cards that would desire even a second different draft effect are already few and far between and it's likely to remain that way... sure, why not? Brent Ross

Brent Ross wrote: > Jozxyqk wrote: > Would you want different art for every single version of the card? I would like a new art for cards that were reprinted thousand of times(i.e. Blood Doll, Redirection, Minion Tap etc.) but this oly so often. Man, it would be cool if WW had the same amount of money to invest in the game as WotC and make a new art for a card with each printing... Well, one can always dream :P Sathriel

[ quoted text not captured ] So now players are going to have to look at the expansion symbol in order to know whether they can play a card? Sounds kind of problematic to me. [ quoted text not captured ]

Gregory Stuart Pettigrew <gpett...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Not permitted. 40/40 only uses draft rules for the drafted portion. The > > constructed portion follows the constructed rules (grouping, &c.). At > > least, that's how it has gone historically for 40/40. Given the idea of > > "draftferior", that should remain the case for draftferiors as well. > So now players are going to have to look at the expansion symbol in > order to know whether they can play a card? Sounds kind of problematic > to me. 40/40 is a non-sanctioned format. Not problematic at all, organizers can just say "Draftferiors are A-OK with me!"

Gregory Stuart Pettigrew wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > Not permitted. 40/40 only uses draft rules for the drafted portion. The > > constructed portion follows the constructed rules (grouping, &c.). At > > least, that's how it has gone historically for 40/40. Given the idea of > > "draftferior", that should remain the case for draftferiors as well. > > So now players are going to have to look at the expansion symbol in > order to know whether they can play a card? Sounds kind of problematic > to me. Or the players just pick their 40 cards appropriately (including cards that have unusable draftferiors only when non-draftferior versions are unavailable and for only those cards which are so vital to the low-competition/preference-to-fun-value prerelease events' deck choice that a substitution cannot be made). For *all* the 40/40 events they attend. Problematic. Yep. A virtual quagmire.

> 40/40 is a non-sanctioned format. > Not problematic at all, organizers can just say "Draftferiors are A-OK with > me!" 40/40 is also a format that in my opinion is pretty dumb, at least as it was presented last time around. I certainly agree that Internal Recursion draft is much better. I've heard from an undisclosed source within the Iraqi military that the next set is going to be a 60 card Black Hand expansion. I'd imagine that some mix of 3rd Edition and Sword of Caine would make for an excellent IR draft, and I hope that White Wolf chooses that format as recommended for the prerelease.

In message <1158161370....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, Brent Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> writes: >Jozxyqk wrote: >> Brent Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > So if a set with a different draft effect were to also have new art (or >> > even an older art in the cases where that exists) the problem of >> > mistaking which draft version you hold would be alleviated. >> >> But what if a single set has multiple different draft effects for the >> same card? > >That's just starting to get into hypotheticals that are pretty >irrelevant and certainly avoidable. It strikes me as quite possible in a 60 card set like Nights of Reckoning. With 20 cards on a given sheet (common, minion, rare) or whatever, you might be tempted to double up some cards. Then you get the option of making the set more interesting for draft by differentiating the different draft effects, if you wanted, which might be quite fun. The constructed players would have a nice, small 60 card set to collect. The draft players would have a varied, interesting set to draft with. The collectors would have more cards to collect, so they buy more. Seems to work well on a number of levels. [ quoted text not captured ]

sath...@o2.pl wrote: > Jozxyqk wrote: > Would you want different art for every single version of the card? > > I would like a new art for cards that were reprinted thousand of > times(i.e. Blood Doll, Redirection, Minion Tap etc.) but this oly so > often. Man, it would be cool if WW had the same amount of money to > invest in the game as WotC and make a new art for a card with each > printing... Well they have done it for a few (Blood Doll for one) but they don't do it very often. I was expecting a lot more new art in 3rd Ed than there actually was given the fact that some of the promos made reference to new art for old cards so I was anticipating most of the old stand-bys would be redone. Instead they seem to be few and far between and carefully selected for replacement art... for instance, Ne Ne Thomas cards suffered another attrition hit (Effective Management), leaving only Business Pressure and Political Flux. New card art is often a double edged sword... it can confuse players if mixed in the same deck, and the new art isn't necessarily better art (and opinions on that are always going to vary... hopefully you can find someone with opposing tastes and swap back and forth to get the art you want). New art alone wouldn't really impress me so much on cards like Blood Doll... I've got enough of them to build my Blood Doll one card deck[1] and then some. I might be interested in them if they were to do really fancy full-card art versions of the very common cards (title and picture and nothing else... we all know what a Blood Doll is and does, and if you don't someone can probably pull out a slightly mangled one they were using as a card divider). One of the things I really didn't like about the new card layout we have now was that the art on crypt cards is smaller to make room for the side bar... I really liked the big pictures. Brent Ross [1] 60 blood dolls, crypt of weenies and midcaps with useful abilities to taste. Bloat, swarm, try to put pressure on your prey as much as possible while trying to prevent a stealth/bleed predator from catching on to your lack of deflection and Archon Investigation too soon.

James Coupe wrote: > In message <1158161370....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, Brent > Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> writes: > >Jozxyqk wrote: > >> Brent Ross <bwr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > So if a set with a different draft effect were to also have new art (or > >> > even an older art in the cases where that exists) the problem of > >> > mistaking which draft version you hold would be alleviated. > >> > >> But what if a single set has multiple different draft effects for the > >> same card? > > > >That's just starting to get into hypotheticals that are pretty > >irrelevant and certainly avoidable. > > It strikes me as quite possible in a 60 card set like Nights of > Reckoning. With 20 cards on a given sheet (common, minion, rare) or > whatever, you might be tempted to double up some cards. Then you get > the option of making the set more interesting for draft by > differentiating the different draft effects, if you wanted, which might > be quite fun. But not as fun as say, printing more different cards with the same or similar draft effect on them to make draft work better. The draft effect has to be in a small little bubble, and is intended to be a slight lessening of restrictions, not a cornucopia for new card play options. A pile of options for a single card like Undead Strength is essentially saying that Undead Strength is usable for additional damage for just about anybody but only if you were lucky to draft your exact flavour and then draw it... not terribly effective and troublesome. As I pointed out, it's simpler, cleaner, less confusing, and better accomplished by just making one disciplinless draft effect for the card. What you're describing would include all the problems with multiple different versions mentioned (database, confustion while drafting, confusion while playing) with no easy way to alleiviate them. As something that's needless and pointless and more trouble than it's worth... we probably won't see the likes of that unless a Malkavian gets involved in the design process. > The constructed players would have a nice, small 60 card set to collect. Personally, I'm not too happy with the 60 card sets being used to keep the brand name on the shelf while weaseling them as not "full sets" and thus not in breach of the promised delay between full sets. Especially if it means we continue these weenie 60 card sets (too few cards) interspaced between monster 300+ card sets (too many... rarity becomes pointless)... I'm hoping that this 300/60/390/60 pattern ends with the Sword of Caine. I'd rather that White Wolf make a new covenant with the players where we accept slightly more frequent sets of middling size (130-200 tops... just right for variety of cards while allowing for enough difference between commons and other cards to make it worthwhile to bother with the distinction)... and the occasional monster base set. I'd be happy if Sword of Caine boosters were to not happen at all in favour of filling store shelf space with the "missing" Sabbat precons at that time with the SoC cards showing up later in a nice 150 card Black Hand set. > The draft players would have a varied, interesting set to draft with. More variety does not automatically mean more interesting. When the variety is just adding randomness and confusion and not dramatically benefiting game play then it's more trouble than it's worth. You need to show more than that it just "adds something" you need to show a benefit that cannot be better achieved in a different way. I don't see that here... what I see is fiddliness that's not giving me a substanially different experience than multiple different cards with different draft effects. > The collectors would have more cards to collect, so they buy more. > > Seems to work well on a number of levels. But not enough quality ones to make up for the trouble. Brent Ross