Are these decks tournament legal?

My question is simple, is it legal to bring this decks to a tournament? Mostly from a PTW/sportmanship point of view. This deck as no way of making pool damage to it's prey Warning: Spoiler! Deck Name : blubb 1 Author : Isak Esbjornsson Bjarmark Description : Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 4 max: 4 average: 4 12x Aabbt Kindred 4 for pre ser Follower :2 Library [60 cards] Action [13] 10x Mesu Bedshet 3x Temptation Action Modifier [8] 2x Faceless Night 6x Lost in Crowds Action Modifier/Combat [5] 5x Form of the Serpent Combat [9] 4x Glaser Rounds 5x Magazine Equipment [9] 6x Flak Jacket 3x Saturday-Night Special Master [16] 2x Dreams of the Sphinx 2x Lilith's Blessing 1x Opium Den 1x Pentex(TM) Subversion 5x Presence 5x Vessel This deck needs to be very lucky to be able to do damage to its prey. It needs to draw chaudice and clan impersonation to get around the salve issue. Warning: Spoiler! Deck Name : blubb 2 Author : Isak Esbjornsson Bjarmark Description : Crypt [13 vampires] Capacity min: 1 max: 8 average: 1.53846 12x Tupdog 1 POT VIS Gargoyle:3 1x Chaundice 8 FOR POT VIS vic Gargoyle:4 Library [60 cards] Action [13] 1x Clan Impersonation 12x Raw Recruit Action Modifier [12] 12x As the Crow Combat [32] 10x Brick by Brick 12x Immortal Grapple 10x Raking Talons Event [1] 1x Dragonbound Master [2] 2x Pentex(TM) Subversion Isak Esbjörnsson Bjärmark

Well, the rules allow you to play those decks. The tournament rules demand that you play to win and doesn't mention the quality of decks beside their size. But as you mention correctly the decks can't win tables. So I'd find it bad to encounter those decks. It is okay to get flattened by any Tupdogs, if the guy wins the table afterwards. But it is awful if he just destroys your game and your prey wins in the end. The same goes with a heavy bloat deck, which has no means to win and just stays alive. But you have to differ: If the deck is brought along by an unexperienced player you can point out the problems of the deck after the game and give him tips, how to improve (or make it work at all in these cases). If some experienced player brings that decks just to wreck havoc I'd intervene. Baron of Frankfurt

All correct. But am I, as a organizer, allowed to DQ the ones playing these decks? Isak Esbjörnsson Bjärmark

> Forhead wrote: > All correct. But am I, as a organizer, allowed to DQ the ones playing these decks? > The rules give no clear hint on that problem. But as a judge you can dq the player if you think he just wants to destroy other's games. You organized the event, you can enforce rules (here PTW). I'd do. Unless it is an unexperienced player, who built those bad decks because he can't build better ones because of lack of experience. Just my 2 cents. Baron of Frankfurt

The decks are interesting, but i dont see how the decks will win much less get that first VP. The 2nd deck has a crypt size of 13 with only 1 Chaundice and 1 Clan Impersonation im afraid it wont do much of anything. The chances to draw Chaundice in the first few influences is slim, will take 3 rounds at least maybe more. I doubt it will be able to rush really anything. Then the chances of you drawing into the clan impersonation is highly dubious at best. The 1st deck relies on 8-9 stealth cards to bring down a form of corruption which usually wont do anything as the prey will just avoid bleeding and prevent him from pushing forward which will prob make your predator even more anxious to finish you off. My rule is that if a player wants to make a fool of himself, let him make an ass of himself. Its his "street cred" on the line after all, so to speak.

If this can get VPs, anything can: www.vekn.net/index.php/forum/9-event-reports-and-twd/12839-polish-league-krakow-poland-october-22-2011-twd I wouldn't worry too much about the decks you showed: the crypt alone costs more than the entire collection of a new player.

> Forhead wrote: > My question is simple, is it legal to bring this decks to a tournament? Mostly from a PTW/sportmanship point of view. > If a player is actively trying to screw around with the PTW rules - turning up with a deck that for all practical purposes can never win, just so they can say "Well, I can lose in any fashion I choose, suckers" and proceeds to mess with the table - then you can award the player a Game Loss or Disqualification. DQ is more likely in a tournament where players use the same deck for every round, Game Loss where they can change decks between rounds. (Although if the player has three different decks, all with the same 'screw the tournament HAHAHA' composition, use your discretion.) [LSJ 20070418] > LSJ wrote: > James Coupe wrote: > > I can't find the post where LSJ points out that a player seriously > > attempting to subvert/undermine/something a tournament by turning up > > with the stupidest deck ever, purely so he can [screw] with play-to-win > > requirements, could be excluded. If anyone remembers the post I mean... > > I have some vague recollection of such a post, but cannot find it myself, either. > > Anyway, such a player (one actively attempting to disrupt the tournament) would > be in violation of the sportsmanship rule, and would be subject to Game Loss. In > formats where switching decks between rounds is not allowed, it would be > reasonable to upgrade the penalty to Disqualification (rather than continue to > seat him and then GL him at the beginning of each round). > A player who is trying earnestly to win but simply turns up with bad decks probably shouldn't be penalised. (For example, they might simply have very few cards, or have a wild misunderstanding of a particular card.) Similarly, a player who wants to play a tougher deck to show people that Toreador with Dementation is a viable deck type.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > .... a player who wants to play a tougher deck to show people that Toreador with Dementation is a viable deck type. > It can win! I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would.

> TorranceCircle wrote: > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > How could the settite deck win? Isak Esbjörnsson Bjärmark

> Forhead wrote: > > > TorranceCircle wrote: > > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > > > How could the settite deck win? > bleeding with temptated vampires? It has a chance... a VERY small one, but has it... sorry, my bad... thay actually can't win... i dunno, i think there is a corner case in the rules...

> miketheknife wrote: > > > Forhead wrote: > > > > > TorranceCircle wrote: > > > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > > > > > > > > How could the settite deck win? > > > bleeding with temptated vampires? > > It has a chance... a VERY small one, but has it... > To temptate is a directed action, so he can´t temp another vampire that is not his own.

> sorry, my bad... thay actually can't win... > > i dunno, i think there is a corner case in the rules... > Sure they can. The deck's strategy may be to wait until someone else influences up Nefertiti.

> Forhead wrote: > > > TorranceCircle wrote: > > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > > > How could the settite deck win? > Somebody backousts his prey because his prey is too agressive, and he bloats enough to survive... twice??? It is possible, in theory Also, Chaundice deck has excellent chance of drawing chaundice, as tupdogs recycle crypt Point is : you cannot really punish players for bringing decks that they like, and playing to their obvious weakness. What is next, no Abomination decks, or Samedi without LMC??? Or worse...

> Smaul wrote: > > > miketheknife wrote: > > > > > Forhead wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TorranceCircle wrote: > > > > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > > > > > > > > > > > How could the settite deck win? > > > > > > > > bleeding with temptated vampires? > > > > It has a chance... a VERY small one, but has it... > > > To temptate is a directed action, so he can´t temp another vampire that is not his own. > My mistake, I thought it was the card that gets a counter when your prey gains the edge anew. I think someone in the thread mentioned it was in there. Again the deck in the original post is different then the given example of someone trying to see if Tore/DEM is viable in a tournament. In a toreador dementation deck someone would at least be trying to bleed at some stealth or wall and bounce or some combination of the two. (suspiciously, I know a lot about Dementation and Toreadors ) If a person was playing this settite deck I would be bothered for one of two reasons I think. First, if it is an inexperienced player they may not get that the 4-caps can't take direct actions. This would be upsetting but at least it is forgivable because in this case the player would be saying how he screwed up and his deck doesn't work. If they genuinely didn't understand, I would be frustrated but forgiving (that's just me, I know others would still be mad at them). Second, and more to the point of the original post, if a more experienced player played the deck it would seem to be only to screw around and mess with the other players. I have an example from another game. A group of friends were playing Pit. It is a game where you trade cards to each other without revealing what you are trading. You would trade two cards for two cards not knowing what you would get back. The goal was to collect all of the same card before anyone else. One player thought it would be funny to trade and keep one of each card so no one would be able to win. Eventually we figured out why the game was taking so long. He thought it was funny. We didn't invite him to gamenight anymore.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > > > Forhead wrote: > > My question is simple, is it legal to bring this decks to a tournament? Mostly from a PTW/sportmanship point of view. > > > If a player is actively trying to screw around with the PTW rules - turning up with a deck that for all practical purposes can never win, just so they can say "Well, I can lose in any fashion I choose, suckers" and proceeds to mess with the table - then you can award the player a Game Loss or Disqualification. DQ is more likely in a tournament where players use the same deck for every round, Game Loss where they can change decks between rounds. (Although if the player has three different decks, all with the same 'screw the tournament HAHAHA' composition, use your discretion.) > > [LSJ 20070418] > > > LSJ wrote: > > James Coupe wrote: > > > I can't find the post where LSJ points out that a player seriously > > > attempting to subvert/undermine/something a tournament by turning up > > > with the stupidest deck ever, purely so he can [screw] with play-to-win > > > requirements, could be excluded. If anyone remembers the post I mean... > > > > I have some vague recollection of such a post, but cannot find it myself, either. > > > > Anyway, such a player (one actively attempting to disrupt the tournament) would > > be in violation of the sportsmanship rule, and would be subject to Game Loss. In > > formats where switching decks between rounds is not allowed, it would be > > reasonable to upgrade the penalty to Disqualification (rather than continue to > > seat him and then GL him at the beginning of each round). > > > A player who is trying earnestly to win but simply turns up with bad decks probably shouldn't be penalised. (For example, they might simply have very few cards, or have a wild misunderstanding of a particular card.) Similarly, a player who wants to play a tougher deck to show people that Toreador with Dementation is a viable deck type. > That's how far I would go, if the case ever happened to me. I'm just hoping no one would actually do that - or something similar to it (like turning up with a March Halcyon Freak Drive Withdraw deck).

> Forhead wrote: > > > TorranceCircle wrote: > > I was thinking along the same lines, but even with a deck like tore/dem there would be some offensive threat. The settite deck from the OP is different and it is something I would say is screwing with the tournament. The deck could win theoretically, but we know it never would. > > > How could the settite deck win? > Get in a position where its preys vampires cant get any vps, so he can loose however he wants to, including selfoust, repeate and repeate and you got yourself 3 vp and a game win

Realistically speaking the decks cant really oust, its just an expensive but albeit bad example of deck construction gone bad. Yes it does have form of corruption but thats all it can do, the deck doesnt have Nefertiti so its bound to fail. The only succesful pure aabt kindred i saw was made by an old player i know in Manila, who uses vote cards and cryptic rider and embrace to win. If that was the deck then yes by all means it can win. Unfortunately its not, im not one to prejudge people and say "this cant poss win". But sadly if it does win, it will be so corner case, that i think you should report it as the Best Win of the Decade.

Btw, the deck posted in Poland can win though its difficult as its a combat centered interecpt, with very little forward push. But the important difference its minions can take D actions, and given sufficient waiting in the late game can win with a bleed of 2-4/turn. The 2 deck posted by the author of this thread, show no D action capability (deck 1), to almost none (deck 2).

> Pascal wrote: > (like turning up with a March Halcyon Freak Drive Withdraw deck). > Is that deck even too much of a problem? Once the sequence is clear for everyone, the player can empty his library and withdraw in less than 2 minutes with a bit of good will. Then he leaves with his 0.5vp and has caused little disruption to the other players. Of course he can also take the 2 hours to do the same, but isn't that a problem with stalling rather than PTW?