Govern(superior) and other Ventrue questions.

Kraus wrote:

I'm just making sure here:

Do you have a troublesome amount of experience with cheaters, and it's a problem thus, or is this a strictly theoretical dilemma?

I've done it. More than once. And nobody suspected a thing any of the times. I won many of those games too. Mind you, this was 20 or so years ago, and I wouldn't cheat like that nowadays. So, to me, it's a problem with the game that I was allowed to exploit it.

Lönkka wrote:

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Lönkka wrote:

Bloodartist wrote:

But, its what we have to live with. As long as there are no big prizes, I guess there is not enough incentive to cheat.

In casual games this really doesn't matter (and you can always ask the player to reveal the card he Governed down to after the game...)

Why would the be cheater obligated to reveal it? The game is over at that point. What rule says they have to reveal it after the game?

You know the answers to these questions.

There is no rule.
And of course the cheater isn't obliged to reveal anything.
However, what motivation other than to hide his cheating would a player have to not reveal the target of a Govern (or similar) now that the casual game is over? (in tournament environment it would be divulging info, but like said, that is what there are judges for.)

My reaction to such suspicious activity would be:
"Hey, now that the game is over, could you please let us see that/those uncontrolled minion(s)?"
"No."
"K." (=this reads: "Nice playing with you. No need to bother coming over ever again, mate")

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Lönkka wrote:

In tournament games you can always ask a judge to come over to check legality of the target of Govern/ first equipment / whatever. No biggie.

Wouldn't calling the judge over for every single superior govern in a game totally be a hassle and definitely annoy other players?

You tell me.
When I'm judging I certainly wouldn't be annoyed by it.

However I think that in most instances Governs (etc) which are used for bloating tend to be targeting same uncontrolled minion so after judge checks the minion out there probably wouldn't be any need to check the same target again.

And it is not like in vast majority of tournaments judges do not have plenty of spare time to take care of this if needed.


And for my part I'm ending this discussion, which is closing in on nitpickery, right here.
Hard pressed for time already...

Lonnka, I appreciate your responses. I understand that you don't like my posts, but please, you don't have to reply saying you're ending the discussion. If you're that put off about a complete stranger's opinion about some dumb game you play, you need to get a life. Either respond to or ignore the posts.

I think you misunderstood Lönka, I read his post as follow: HE will end the discussion for himself, not end the discussion in general.

Sorry forgot a n in Lönnka!!!

I've been following this thread but haven't posted 'till now, so STORYTIME!

OK I was a city prince for about 5 years in the early/mid 2000s (Dallas, TX), back then there were several active playgroups and several tournaments a year.

I personally organized 12 or 15 tourneys (constructed, draft and every storyline during my run).

One time, out of the blue, a previously unknown-to-us playgroup showed up for a storyline event (Eye of Hazimel). It was interesting in that we thought we knew all the active groups in Texas and Oklahoma (Austin, College Station, Houston, us, Oklahoma City, Ardmore OK briefly, even a small group in San Antonio that was too far to ever really get in on the action but we'd bump into them at conventions sometimes) but this group (who I'd rather not name) showed up with 6 players (IIRC).

At first we were pretty excited for the influx of players but it turned a little ugly pretty quickly as they were rather openly colluding. Well OK no openly but there were all manner of "that doesn't make sense" plays from the standpoint of trying to actually win.

For example Malkie player A, bleeds into Torrie player B (A and B are both part of said group, players C and D are not), torrie bounces into Brujah player C. Brujah attempts to block and asks malkie player, "we're playing nice here right" (which is to say, "I won't torpor your minion in combat if you allow this block"). Malkie player commences to stealth over their grand-prey and THEN pile on a bleed modifier... when asked, "why would you do that", player A responds "that's what I do".

And this sort of stuff went on ALL DAY, players voting in favor of votes that didn't benefit them (quite the opposite), players rescuing their prey's minions, etc. but in every instance it was players from this same group helping each other out, often to their own detriment. (Brujah player C, commenced to cross-table rush malkie player A btw, torporing all his vamps while saying, "remember, you MADE me do this!" lol - I didn't mention grp-2 Baali player D, some college kid named Oscar who went on to sweep that table and every other table he sat at that day, only to withdraw from the tournament prior to the final because he had dinner plans... legendary IMO).

Anyway only one member of this playgroup, playing euro-brujah, was tied for 5th going into the final and lost the die roll to get the final seat.

They colluded yet managed to NOT put a single player into the final... but as the organizer i had several reports of it during the day. But how can you prove it definitively? How do you throw players out of a tournment in a game that's perpetually starved for players?

Plus it was just a storyline event (so didn't impact rankings for those that cared about such things).

So we let it slide, none of them made the final and we just moved on.

Soonerborn wrote:

They colluded yet managed to NOT put a single player into the final... but as the organizer i had several reports of it during the day. But how can you prove it definitively? How do you throw players out of a tournment in a game that's perpetually starved for players?

First, you don't have to prove it definitively. It is not a court of law, there are no mind-reading probes. You will always be making a judgment. If, in your judgment, two players are colluding, you act on that.

Second, if you are unsure that they are colluding, there is still the likely possibility that they are violating other rules. In particular, if a player is playing to their own detriment - intentionally, and not just an inexperienced/naive/bad player - they are probably violating the rules on play-to-win. In preliminary rounds, players must:
- attempt to win (get the game win), or
- to maximize their VPs if they can't reasonably get the game win, and
- if they have all the VPs they can get, they are entitled to (but not compelled to) maximize their TPs after that to help in tie-breaks.

If you see a player doing things that are: they are very likely not doing this. This is also relevant in the situation where you have a player turn up who is a k00ky roleplayer who is playing a Malkavian deck and rolling dice to decide what to do or a Toreador who commits suicide through heartbreak (or some such other non-V:TES activity) - they aren't playing to win. You don't need to establish collusion to your own satisfaction, you just have a player who is violating play-to-win by doing something that is in your opinion not maximising their ability to get the game win or VPs, and you can act on that: reverse the play, correct the table state etc.

There will always be some grey area here, and many judges are going to give most players the benefit of the doubt much of the time, because (for example) a player intentionally choosing to play much more passively or much more aggressively may be worried about their table image, and trying to get people to lay off them or back down. But when a player is egregiously punching themselves in the nuts, they're pretty definitely not playing to win.

The penalties you apply don't have to be ousting them from the tournament immediately. It might be appropriate to start with a warning or caution, particularly when you are not accusing anyone of collusion.


Third, assuming you do get to the point of having to award a game loss or DQ, consider the situation for everyone else in the game. Your tournaments are starved for players? Consider the honest player who is thinking "Jesus H Christ on a bike, I drive for a couple of hours to come here and play this, and the judge is letting people openly cheat and won't do a single thing to stop it? Pretty sure I won't waste my time with this bunch of crap."