Duffin Draft to the next level - 'Texas Draft'
texasjusticar
Duffin Draft all the time. One night while drinking at the pub we came
up with a 3+R format using Duffin Draft. We tried it last night and it
went over real well, although I think we still have some kinks to work
out. Maybe the community has some insights and comments that would
help:
Here's what we did:
- Bought 3 boosters each, completely random sets.
- Duffin Draft one random booster round 1 allowing infinite transfers
on turn 1, 12 pool. 4 pool for ousting.
- Tally VP/GW and put those cards aside.
- Change seating, Duffin Draft as above again with another booster for
round 2.
- Tally VP/GW and put those cards aside.
- Change seating, Duffin Draft as above again with last booster for
round 3.
- Deterimine finalists.
- Finalists play the final with Swainbank format with all cards drafted
in the previous rounds (ie no limit to reshuffle discard phase action
since our libraries were so small).
We ended up having a lot of fun, and the final decks were more playable
than you would think. Many times in round 2 or 3, when there was no
immediately useful card to pick, I would draft a card useful for cards
I already drafted. It made Duffin Drafting a bit more strategic, which
I liked.
We talked afterwards and were hoping to find a way to make more cards
available to you in the final, as the libraries ranged from 18-24 cards
which still didn't feel like enough.
1) Do 4+R since the non-final rounds go pretty quickly. Maybe even
5+R.
2) Draft 5 boosters, do 3 rounds of Duffin as normal and the final 2
can be added if wanted ala sealed.
3) During all Duffin Draft rounds, when you are ousted you pick one
card to keep from your 11 cards and give the rest to your predator
(like ante). So the finalists in theory have a lot of cards to choose
from and can then just build according to Internal Recursion format (7
crypt/40 library minimum). This version obviously will depend on a
minimum number of players to be viable.
Comments? What do you guys think of the format?
--------------------------------------------
Ethan Burrow - the pre/vic guy
http://presence.vekn.org
http://monger.vekn.org
texasjusticar
> Comments? What do you guys think of the format?
I forgot to mention the entire format took under 2 hours to play.
Ben Swainbank
texasjusticar wrote:
> So if everyone isn't aware, the Austin playgroup loves draft. We
> Duffin Draft all the time. One night while drinking at the pub we came
> up with a 3+R format using Duffin Draft. We tried it last night and it
That does sound like fun.
For your finals, did everyone have to use all their cards? Did you have
a lot that were useless? Or where people allowed to trim their decks?
Maybe a minimum of 1 crypt card and 5 library cards for each pack
drafted would be a good baseline?
Along similar lines, I've been thinking it would be fun to do a sealed
league where everyone starts with X packs (I was thinking 5-6, but
you've got me wondering why not start with 1 pack each). And then every
round you draft 1 more pack to get more cards for your deck - adjusting
the minumum crypt/library size as appropriate with every new round.
You could even continue the league over multiple nights, with decks
getting more and more functional as the league goes along...
-Ben Swainbank
texasjusticar
> For your finals, did everyone have to use all their cards?
Yes.
> Did you have a lot that were useless?
A fair amount, but I drafted Giotto and Shimulo Tarot so I honestly
didn't notice. The tarot started accumulating all the useless cards
allowing me to recycle to my good cards quicker.
> Or where people allowed to trim their decks?
We didn't play that way, but again that was because our decks were so
small to begin with.
> Maybe a minimum of 1 crypt card and 5 library cards for each pack
> drafted would be a good baseline?
Perhaps. I might be more inclined to somehow increase the card count
for the final using one of the other options I mentioned. I was trying
to gear the event towards using Duffin as a gradual draft process to
eventually reach a deck closely mirroring real VTES rather than the
combo madness of Duffin.
> Along similar lines, I've been thinking it would be fun to do a sealed
> league where everyone starts with X packs (I was thinking 5-6, but
> you've got me wondering why not start with 1 pack each). And then every
> round you draft 1 more pack to get more cards for your deck - adjusting
> the minumum crypt/library size as appropriate with every new round.
>
> You could even continue the league over multiple nights, with decks
> getting more and more functional as the league goes along...
We had a league system which used ante and trades to have starter decks
evolve. I must say this option seems more enticing as it includes
draft elements, although may not be as compelling for new players.
We're going to try another league when 3rd comes out, I think we may
try a variation of your suggestion and let you know how it goes.
Obsidianleciel
(snip)
>
> > Or where people allowed to trim their decks?
>
> We didn't play that way, but again that was because our decks were so
> small to begin with.
>
The reason that I like the fact that we couldn't trim our decks, is
that with trimming, you have the opportunity to trim to a super 7 card
hand. It would be like a long Duffin. The logic behind that is that
even with your 3 boosters, we still have a pretty crappy deck. Based
on what I drafted last night, if we could trim, I would have trimmed to
the following.
Crypt incuding:
5 cap Assimite
6 cap !Gangrel (superior Protean)
1 Undue Influence
1 Form of Mist
1 Feindish Tongue
1 Selective Silence
1 Black Sunrise
1 Blow Torch
1 Diversion
So the Assimite goes Anarch and gets the torch
The Gangrel Bleeds for 2 using FoM to stealth. (Consideration is that
since we drafted Anarchs, the Feindish Tongue was almost always already
a psuedo-stealth)
The Assimite uses Undue Influence to bloat for 1 and can still untap
(BS) and Torp a Vamp with the torch (Staying at close with SS or get
away using SS if low on blood) He can also additional with Diversion if
needed)
Rinse-Repeat
Now In a full game that is weaksauce, but in a really poor deck built
on Duffin x3 getting to pull all of that back in my hand on discard is
kinda dirty. Having to filter through some of the crap cards was part
of the fun. Unless of course you drew the Tarot. Grrrrrrr!
Ben Swainbank
Obsidianleciel wrote:
> (snip)
> >
> > > Or where people allowed to trim their decks?
> >
> that with trimming, you have the opportunity to trim to a super 7 card
> hand.
Sure. But you're playing with a hot-and-sexy deck you drafted from 3
packs. And you're playing against everyone elses super-hot draft deck.
Did they draft great combos as well? To me that sounds like more fun.
In draft I love finding killer combos (that would be less hot and
killer in constructed). I don't like spending my turn discarding
unplayble cards.
Did you see my suggestion in the post above of having a miniumum of 1
crypt and 5 library cards per drafted pack? With 3 packs that would put
you at a 3 card crypt and 15 card library. Not quite a 7 card super
hand, but a lot less chaff. I haven't tried it (with 3-4 packs) but it
might be a good way to fill the Duffin -> Internal Recursion middle
ground.
-Ben Swainbank
Joshua Duffin
"Ben Swainbank" <bswai...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1154537688.5...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
This sounds totally great! I'm going to have to try it myself. By the time
you got to, like, 20 packs or so, I bet you'd have reasonably good decks
(assuming you used packs with good cards :-) but they would probably look
*nothing* like constructed decks. (for one thing, there wouldn't be any
Blood Dolls at all, heh.)
I like the Texas Draft 3R + F idea too, we'll definitely have to try it when
we get a chance here. I can see your points, Ethan & Obsidian, about it
being good to force using all the cards even when you have all 3 packs,
since unlimited-reshuffle with tight libraries could be pretty combo-riffic.
I do wonder if Ben's 'minimum 5 cards per pack' idea would make 'em big
enough to limit the combo-rifficness .... maybe. More testing is probably
indicated. :-)
Josh
lover of all forms of draft
Ben Swainbank
> "Ben Swainbank" <bswai...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > I've been thinking it would be fun to do a sealed
> > league where everyone starts with X packs (I was thinking 5-6, but
> > you've got me wondering why not start with 1 pack each). And then every
> > round you draft 1 more pack to get more cards for your deck - adjusting
> > the minumum crypt/library size as appropriate with every new round.
> >
> > You could even continue the league over multiple nights, with decks
> > getting more and more functional as the league goes along...
>
> This sounds totally great! I'm going to have to try it myself.
After posting the initial idea, I fleshed out the rules a bit and
posted it as proposal to the Boston group. Since I've at least got
Josh's interest I'll post my updated draft league rules here...
We start by drafting 1 pack, and then draft one more pack per game to
add to our decks - making draft decks that get better and better for a
total of 10 games.
For each game the pool, crypt, and library size is adjusted
accordingly. So it looks like...
Game # Packs Crypt Library Pool Reshuffles VP Points GW Points
1 1 1 5 12 * 1 1
2 2 2 10 15 * 1 2
3 3 3 15 20 * 1 2
4 4 4 20 25 * 2 3
5 5 5 25 30 * 2 3
6 6 6 30 30 2 2 4
7 7 7 40 30 1 2 4
8 8 7 40 30 1 3 5
9 9 7 40 30 1 3 5
10 10 7 40 30 1 4 7
Clarifications:
Players provide their own packs which may be from any sets except
Nights of Reckoning.
Only one new pack is drafted before each game. You then modify your
existing draft deck as desired including the new cards.
Points are tallied based on the Points per VP and Points per Game Win
as described in the chart above. The person with the most points at the
end of the league is the winner and will recieve prizes.
Multiple games can be played on one night, and players can jump into
the League at any time. League players who miss a game can do a make-up
draft (drafting without playing a game) to get their deck the same size
as other players.
Draft pods can be of any size - including a draft pod of one. If you
are drafting alone you need to notify the league organizer, or another
league member, that you are opening a "league pack".
How does that look?
-Ben Swainbank
Salem
> We start by drafting 1 pack, and then draft one more pack per game to
> add to our decks - making draft decks that get better and better for a
> total of 10 games.
>
> For each game the pool, crypt, and library size is adjusted
> accordingly. So it looks like...
>
> Game # Packs Crypt Library Pool Reshuffles VP Points GW Points
> 1 1 1 5 12 * 1 1
> 2 2 2 10 15 * 1 2
> 3 3 3 15 20 * 1 2
> 4 4 4 20 25 * 2 3
> 5 5 5 25 30 * 2 3
> 6 6 6 30 30 2 2 4
> 7 7 7 40 30 1 2 4
> 8 8 7 40 30 1 3 5
> 9 9 7 40 30 1 3 5
> 10 10 7 40 30 1 4 7
>
> Clarifications:
>
> Players provide their own packs which may be from any sets except
> Nights of Reckoning.
why no NoR? too unbalancing?
> How does that look?
Does * in the "Reshuffles" mean unlimited?
--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
Pat
news:44d4...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Ben Swainbank wrote:
>
>> We start by drafting 1 pack, and then draft one more pack per game to
>> add to our decks - making draft decks that get better and better for a
>> total of 10 games.
>>
>> For each game the pool, crypt, and library size is adjusted
>> accordingly. So it looks like...
>>
>> Game # Packs Crypt Library Pool Reshuffles VP Points GW Points
>> 1 1 1 5 12 * 1 1
>> 2 2 2 10 15 * 1 2
>> 3 3 3 15 20 * 1 2
>> 4 4 4 20 25 * 2 3
>> 5 5 5 25 30 * 2 3
>> 6 6 6 30 30 2 2 4
>> 7 7 7 40 30 1 2 4
>> 8 8 7 40 30 1 3 5
>> 9 9 7 40 30 1 3 5
>> 10 10 7 40 30 1 4 7
>>
>> Clarifications:
>>
>> Players provide their own packs which may be from any sets except
>> Nights of Reckoning.
>
> why no NoR? too unbalancing?
>
Including NoR with regular sets would be interesting in one respect. In the
early rounds, with just a few packs, they probably wouldn't do so well, as
there wouldn't be nearly enough conviction to fuel their stuff. (Especially
if drafted in mixed pods where hate-drafting would be enabled.)
But as the number of packs expanded, they would gradually get beefier as the
selection of convictions expanded. I don't think they would be overpowering,
as some of the most effective stuff for them (lots of permanents, Gehenna
events, etc.) would not be available in draft (or would be drafted by the
other players, since they're good for vamp decks too), but they should be
competitive at least.
- Pat
Matthew T. Morgan
> Including NoR with regular sets would be interesting in one respect. In the
> early rounds, with just a few packs, they probably wouldn't do so well, as
> there wouldn't be nearly enough conviction to fuel their stuff. (Especially
> if drafted in mixed pods where hate-drafting would be enabled.)
I don't know if I agree with you there. Depending on what you get, a
single pack of NoR can have some really strong combos in it.
Consider:
Earl (+1 stealth) with a Strike with Conviction (add a rules card Laptop
and/or Second Sight for extra stealth bleed fun).
Travis with any conviction and 2-3 uncontrolled Imbued.
Jack Harmon with Angel of Berlin. Discern, Rejuvenate, Vigilance and any
conviction only makes it better, but just having a guy with a maneuver who
gets to untap as a reaction every turn is strong enough in a 1 pack
format.
None of this stuff requires many convictions and is very doable in a 1
pack format. I got the Travis engine rolling in a Duffin Draft not long
ago. I won pretty easily because of it.
As for hate-drafting, consider you're building a vampire deck. You get
passed a NoR pack with a Conviction and a .44 rules card in it. Neither
card could possibly come back to you. Which do you take? I'd take the
.44 every time, even if I knew I was passing the Conviction to an Imbued
player.
> But as the number of packs expanded, they would gradually get beefier as the
> selection of convictions expanded. I don't think they would be overpowering,
> as some of the most effective stuff for them (lots of permanents, Gehenna
> events, etc.) would not be available in draft (or would be drafted by the
> other players, since they're good for vamp decks too), but they should be
> competitive at least.
More than competative, I think. It remains to be seen how strong 3rd Ed
is in draft. I expect it'll be on level with NoR. NoR is just good in
limited. Look at the combos above and multiply by the number of packs
you've got. The only downside is every single Imbued player will want
Travis and Earl, so contesting is a big problem.
Matt Morgan
Ben Swainbank
Salem wrote:
> Ben Swainbank wrote:
>
> > We start by drafting 1 pack, and then draft one more pack per game to
> > add to our decks - making draft decks that get better and better for a
> > total of 10 games.
> >
> > For each game the pool, crypt, and library size is adjusted
> > accordingly. So it looks like...
> >
> > Game # Packs Crypt Library Pool Reshuffles VP Points GW Points
> > 1 1 1 5 12 * 1 1
> > 2 2 2 10 15 * 1 2
> >
> >
> > Players provide their own packs which may be from any sets except
> > Nights of Reckoning.
>
> why no NoR? too unbalancing?
>
NoR is potentially unbalancing in this kind of draft. I actually see
the incompatability as a bigger problem. If one player brings NoR
everyone else in the draft pod has to play imbued or accept a lot of
dead draft slots.
The set is so different from the others I am afraid it would throw off
an experimental format like this. Better to leave it out.
> > How does that look?
>
> Does * in the "Reshuffles" mean unlimited?
>
Yes. And I can see some potiential for abuse there. But I don't think
we want to get into tracking "have I reshuffled 5 times or only 4?".
Better just to let people shuffle as needed.
Also, after I posted the format rules I thought of some more things I
should have included:
In games 1 and 2 players get an unlimited number of transfers each turn
and collect 4 pool for an oust. Starting with games 3 and up, players
get the usual numer of transfers and collect 6 pool for an oust.
-Ben Swainbank