Are these decks tournament legal?

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).