Friday, March 25, 2011

Deck Builder vs. Player

Deck Builders at WorkWhen JHattara (as author & administrator of the Secret Library website) was asked in the VEKN forum, if the author/deck builder should be named in the VtES tournament winning deck reports as well as the player who won the tournament, he said:
"Of course the original designer should be credited, but in TWDA the player goes before (and the designer should be mentioned in the Description field). No matter how good deck you play, the player himself plays a significant part in VTES."
I totally agree with the above statement. Most players (or maybe even some non-VtES players) can build a decent VtES decks that is capable of winning a tournament (large or small). But playing a deck is an entirely different matter, since it's not just about the mechanics or the theoretically best play in a given situation, but other things like the overall situation at the table and table talk between players have to be considered, too.

I even daresay, that the truly good players are able to win with really not overly good decks (to say the least). Examples for this are (in my opinion) some decks played by the American players Matt Morgan and Jay Kristoff, e.g. the Fuzzface deck by Matt or the Nosferatu Toolbox w/ Trophies by Jay.

So, while the original creator of the deck surely deserves some credits, the more significant part of making a deck a tournament winning one is done by the actual player.

3 comments:

mattgreen said...

http://www.anarchfreepress.com/vtesuk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=709&sid=bd3750db72f5996e2d4e887a8bf3e7bd

A good discussion on the topic from the UK forum years ago

wilsoros said...

I have to self nominate here, my deck suck, in fact Sebastian Maurer summed it up best "You seemed to win in spite of those cards you put in your deck".

Fun times
David

1stTrad said...

Hi folks.

Is a change in format for the deck reports in order?

For instance:

Deck Name: AAA
Played by (tournament winner): BBB
Based on/inspired by: CCC

Most players are pretty good about giving credit where it is due - but sometimes these things can slip through the cracks.

A more formal, specific line in the tournament report would remind people to help describe the origin of the deck - regardless of whether it was net-decked, a collaboration, inspired by a mid-tournament conversation or simply a whim that developed into a playable deck.

Kind regards.
Darby