Taking Bets, Anyone?
Unde...@vnet.net
I am curious - does it appear to others that WotC is still giving Jyhad
(excuse me, V:tES) the short end of the stick? I see that the Ancient Hearts
release has been pushed back *again*. Now, it MIGHT be out in July, or so.
And, I suspect, this will also push back the release of the Sabbat.
Oh, don't get me wrong; I am *eagerly* awaiting these releases, but wonder
if I shouldn't tell my friends that I am giving them Ancient Hearts for
Christmas (look, here's a great new release; *just* out)? And the Sabbat?
I have written WotC with some of my concerns about why they made a great
game, and then treated it like a red-headed stepchild. I got a pat reply,
saying something to the effect of: (going from memory here) "Sorry that we
haven't supported it in the past, but *now* we are very excited. Look at all
the great support coming up - Ancient Hearts in March, then the Sabbat, and a
players guide." So far, I have seen the Players Guide, and had the first
release pushed back twice since then.
What about the idea of getting tournament support for the game? I got a
copy of the *official* tourney rules as soon as I could, and was completely
*underwhelmed* by their lack of playability. There is an irrational list of
cards that are restricted, and don't get me started on how to actually run a
tournament (BTW, since the games appear to go back to back, I suppose you play
until someone faints?). Now, I was considering a running a Jyhad game at a
local convention, but to get sanctioning, I have to agree to use those rules.
Looks like there won't be any sanctioned tournament, after all. And to
think, I wondered for the longest time why there was no official tournament
list or rankings - now I know.
Anyhow, that's just my $.02 worth. Thanks for reading.
Unde...@vnet.net
L. Scott Johnson
> I am curious - does it appear to others that WotC is still giving Jyhad
>(excuse me, V:tES) the short end of the stick? I see that the Ancient Hearts
>release has been pushed back *again*. Now, it MIGHT be out in July, or so.
>And, I suspect, this will also push back the release of the Sabbat.
>game, and then treated it like a red-headed stepchild. I got a pat reply,
>saying something to the effect of: (going from memory here) "Sorry that we
>haven't supported it in the past, but *now* we are very excited. Look at all
>the great support coming up - Ancient Hearts in March, then the Sabbat, and a
>players guide." So far, I have seen the Players Guide, and had the first
>release pushed back twice since then.
Yeah,
I wrote the support staff in regards to the lack of playtesting for DS and
the lack of support in general for VtES, and I got the same pat marketing
reply, plus a reprimand for making vague statements about the lack of
playtesting (the reply had deleted my list of non-vague complaints -
a popular tactic among WotC on-line personalities).
I sent back a list of very specific line-item complaints about the (many)
unplayable DS cards.
No reply (it's been over two months - the first (pat) reply was sent in
less than 12 hours).
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | We have enough youth,
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | how about a fountain of SMART?
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
The Corrupter
> I wanted to share some thoughts & musings:
> I am curious - does it appear to others that WotC is still giving
Jyhad
> (excuse me, V:tES) the short end of the stick? I see that the Ancient
Hearts
> release has been pushed back *again*. Now, it MIGHT be out in July, or
so.
> And, I suspect, this will also push back the release of the Sabbat.
Hopefully this will allow them to playtest the release. But wait, I
forgot, they already have the cards printed... (The Caravan Tour showed
some/many)
> Oh, don't get me wrong; I am *eagerly* awaiting these releases, but
wonder
> if I shouldn't tell my friends that I am giving them Ancient Hearts for
> Christmas (look, here's a great new release; *just* out)? And the Sabbat?
Let's Hope for more.
> I have written WotC with some of my concerns about why they made a
great
> game, and then treated it like a red-headed stepchild. I got a pat
reply,
> saying something to the effect of: (going from memory here) "Sorry that
we
> haven't supported it in the past, but *now* we are very excited. Look
at all
> the great support coming up - Ancient Hearts in March, then the Sabbat,
and a
> players guide." So far, I have seen the Players Guide, and had the
first
> release pushed back twice since then.
I am in the middle of writing my own letter... :)
> What about the idea of getting tournament support for the game?
There are other options than the official ones. See below.
>I got a
> copy of the *official* tourney rules as soon as I could, and was
completely
> *underwhelmed* by their lack of playability. There is an irrational
list of
> cards that are restricted, and don't get me started on how to actually
run a
> tournament (BTW, since the games appear to go back to back, I suppose
you play
> until someone faints?). Now, I was considering a running a Jyhad game
at a
> local convention, but to get sanctioning, I have to agree to use those
rules.
> Looks like there won't be any sanctioned tournament, after all. And
to
> think, I wondered for the longest time why there was no official
tournament
> list or rankings - now I know.
As an alternative to the Duelist Convocation rules, check out the
Sensible Player's Tournament Rules for Jyhad at
<http://cslab.uwlax.edu/~sulli_al/jyhad/SPTR.html>. If you don't have a
webbrowser, I can mail you a copy. If you like what you see and want to
join a list of supporter's, e-mail me at <sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu>.
Supporter's of the SPTR get mail about upcoming tournaments, will have
their own SPTR tournaments advertised on the net and in the Real World at
various SPTR supporter populated locations, and have a hand in decided
and proposing new changes to the SPTR. The SPTR is written by the
people, for the people.
(So it's a bunch of propoganda, the game at least deserves a decent set
of tourney rules :). It can't be said enough, read the SPTR and join the
supporter's list.
> Anyhow, that's just my $.02 worth. Thanks for reading.
Hope you didn't mind my soapbox.
"I can send and receive e-mail even over the Internet"-aol commercial
@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$
# Adrian Sullivan sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu Spoutingly yours 8^) #
$ GAT/CS/O/WS R+++* tv&--- b++(+++)&+ t X++&-- 5->? e+*>++++ PS+&-+ @
# PE&++&- C(+++)$ UX+>+++$ N++(+) K+>++++ w---$>? M++$ r(+) y*+? 3.1#
@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$
Thomas R Wylie
<Unde...@vnet.net> wrote:
> I am curious - does it appear to others that WotC is still giving Jyhad
>(excuse me, V:tES) the short end of the stick? I see that the Ancient Hearts
>release has been pushed back *again*. Now, it MIGHT be out in July, or so.
Ancient Hearts is being pushed back because the retailers don't want
to buy it yet. Yes, we think it's a good set. Yes, we think you'll think
it's a good set. But none of that matters if we only sell 5% of the
print run coming out of the gate.
>And, I suspect, this will also push back the release of the Sabbat.
Possibly. I don't know.
> What about the idea of getting tournament support for the game? I got a
>copy of the *official* tourney rules as soon as I could, and was completely
>*underwhelmed* by their lack of playability. There is an irrational list of
>cards that are restricted, and don't get me started on how to actually run a
>tournament (BTW, since the games appear to go back to back, I suppose you play
>until someone faints?). Now, I was considering a running a Jyhad game at a
>local convention, but to get sanctioning, I have to agree to use those rules.
> Looks like there won't be any sanctioned tournament, after all. And to
>think, I wondered for the longest time why there was no official tournament
>list or rankings - now I know.
None of your concerns are new to VTES - people can and do make similar
complaints about Magic's DC rules - so I'm not sure why you think VTES,
is specifically getting the shaft as far as tournaments are concerned.
Agreed that it would be nice if the DC published guidelines on how to
run a tournament, but it's a second-order fire, and there are too many
first-order fires around here. And I'd like to hear what you think is so
"irrational" about the restricted list; if you think that the DC rules
should change the rules of play rather than restricting cards, the DC
simply doesn't do that. Also, there's no particular reason rounds have
to be run back-to-back-to-back, as far as I know.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.