New set in 2012

KevinM wrote:

I'm curious by what reasoning people think that it's acceptable to defy the will of the people now running the game.

As nothing was ever said (or done) for the 15+ years prior to now, I can only hypothesize that there is a lack of respect, if not outright disregard, for the people now running the game.

Why is that, I wonder?

I suppose you speak of the initiators of the VEKN. Let me ask you then: are they 'running' the game now? Or do they provide a way to have some standard in tournament play and (used to) keep track of the participants' standings compared to other players over the world? Because on that matter, they do a pretty okay job.

I was not aware the VEKN owned all the rights to the game (necessary to be able to 'run' it, I think). We don't see many VEKN interference in our friday night games of V:tES, which occur far more often than the occasional VEKN event we join.

So even though the VEKN might 'run' the game on their own events, me and my friends 'run' it just as well on our own playnights.

I know you do not represent the VEKN in what you just posted, but please - read it back and smell the arrogance in what you stated there. It's posts like that one that keeps many players away from this forum.

The VEKN is not the 'endboss' of al things V:tES. It's a player-run organization. And we're all players, equally interested in the game and its future.

VEKN even asks for comments on their ideas on how to keep the game alive. Ofcourse they're going to get peoples' opinions on matters, and no, not everyone will agree on everything they propose. That's part of how it works, when a game gets carried by its community.

So there's my reason for 'defying the will of the people now running the game'. I think it's completely acceptable, and it has nothing to do with disrespect or disregard for the VEKN. I'm just asking questions and try to get a clear picture of the future of the game I have been playing for so many years.

Angel74 wrote:

So even though the VEKN might 'run' the game on their own events, me and my friends 'run' it just as well on our own playnights.

I politely disagree with you this in one way:
Do you take VEKN rulings into account when playing friendly games, like the errata on Villein?

That was a clear example of a problem the Community as a whole asked for VEKN's attention and it was solved in a way many found elegant.
My point is that VEKN's decisions take into account all aspects of the game and are to help all aspects of the game.
Even friendly games.

Brum wrote:

There IS a lack of respect and outright disregard for the people now running the game.

Since we're all 'running the game' now, that would mean we disrespect ourselves. i don't think that's the case.

I think it comes out of ignorance.

'Ignorance', in this case, comes forth out of bad or incomplete information, or statements that leave a lot of room for interpretation. you might confuse it with 'curiosity'.

LSJ had few "because I say so" moments. If Pascal follows Scott's steps we are very, very lucky.
I acknowledge he does some things even better, like answering questions with more words than "Correct" or "Cardtext".
Personally I never had problems with my interactions with Scott, as I knew he had a life outside of VtES and answering like that was the only way for him to be quick (and he was almost always very quick) in answering.

I have had no problems with LSJ myself. I think Pascal is an excellent choice for being his replacement (as I would think of everyone else crazy enough to take the job).

People disregard very easily that there might be good reasons for the way things are being implemented...

I think little is disregarded - you will just have to ask yourself if 'good reasons' is what they gave us. Not on everything, as far as I'm concerned, but I have already asked my questions about those things.

...and I've seen lots of offensive things here.

Agreed. Though very open to interpretation as well. Sometimes, you will have to try and read between the lines.

There are some users that seem to think that the VEKN officials build the worst and hardest policies possible because it somehow fancies them.

I'm not too sure about this. I don't think anyone in here thinks the VEKN tries to make the game unplayable. I just agree with some others who think it's silly, for example, to get DQ'd for all the wrong reasons.

They don't even give the benefit of the doubt. To me (not being Inner Circle and being little more than just a player), that is offensive.

Ofcourse they give the benefit of the doubt, but they also speak out their concerns and come with some valid ideas which might change some minds (no harm in trying that, it's what this forum is for, right?). People get frustrated if they get the idea their opinions don't matter at all (please note: not me, since I got most of my questions answered), and not everyone is good (or subtle) with words.

An official "Look guys, you can scream whatever you want, we're not going to change anything in our plans" would put an end to this discussion and help a great deal for people to decide to stay with the VEKN or leave (I would, after such a statement).

But I think such a statement won't come, hence the discussion will continue. This is what happens on a forum. After the PDF fan-made set somes out, and we get to see how it works out in tournament play (since in private play we can do whatever we please), things will cool down, or shatter the game.

That's the way the cookie crumbles.

Brum wrote:

Angel74 wrote:

So even though the VEKN might 'run' the game on their own events, me and my friends 'run' it just as well on our own playnights.

I politely disagree with you this in one way:
Do you take VEKN rulings into account when playing friendly games, like the errata on Villein?

That was a clear example of a problem the Community as a whole asked for VEKN's attention and it was solved in a way many found elegant.
My point is that VEKN's decisions take into account all aspects of the game and are to help all aspects of the game.
Even friendly games.

If we practise our decks for a tournament that is at hand, then yes, we abide by the VEKN rules. No one wants to join one only to be DQ'd straight away. But this does not mean we agree on every single rule. It's still fun to play with 'Madness of the Bard' in private play, even if only to piss off Izaak

The errata on Villein comes from the rarity of that card. We as a group don't have that problem - all of us have enough of the card - so don't really care about this piece of errata in general. For the 'flow of the game', it's a good decision.

I never stated that the VEKN did or does a crappy job. But as every other organization, I think some of the decisions they make are great, and others stink. And as long as they ask for it, I will ask questions about whatever rule they invent, and vent my opinion when I think it might matter.

Best example still being the way to treat the new cards; I disagree with them the chosen path is the right one.

nc-italy wrote:

So, if any doubt can still arise on the matter, maybe it's about the "quality standard" of such prints self made by the players (to me it's not: it's crystal clear that we must print in color the pdf cards ourselves on standard quality paper)
But i can bet that both Pascal and the other in the RT/IC will adress
the point on "quality of the print" if they deem the question worth to be further detailed at tournament rules level

4.5 already waves its hands in that direction, specifically regarding cards which have deteriorated in quality.

Non-existant user wrote:

If a card becomes excessively worn through play or accidentally damaged in the current sanctioned tournament, or if the owner of the card must leave prior to the conclusion of a game, the judge may provide a proxy replacement card or (in the case of damaged or worn cards) require the player to sleeve all of his or her cards before play continues.

The motivation for this is presumably - at least in part - that the card should be readable by all players. (I'm not saying that this is the only reason!) It would seem reasonable that a poor quality reproduction is treated in the same way as one excessively worn through play.