Sirohk
Commander
3800 Posts
    
USA
 | | 04/21/2007 1:54 PM |
| From Guy posted on Hordelings:
I got a phone call from Kevin Melstrom with some pre-tournament details...
12Â Participants
After 1st round:
1-0 Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom)
Dwayne Stupack (Tried)
Darien Stupack
Dan Udwary (Dr X)
Graydon Schlichter
Kevin Cleveland (Kevizoid)
If the tournament does indeed only have 12 attendees, It's interesting to note that if nobody from So Cal had "invaded," the qualifier would have been canceled due to too few participants.Â
I'll post more as I hear about them.Â
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3800 Posts
USA
| | 04/21/2007 2:49 PM |
| Update: Â Latest results, with round two complete except for one match (Dwayne vs. Kevin C): 2-0 Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom) - Storm; 2x Bralani; 2x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
2-0 (bye) Darien Stupack - 2x Ultroloth; Large Green Dragon
1-0 Dwayne Stupack (Tried) - Couatl; Arcane Ballista; Shield Guardian
1-0 Kevin Cleveland (Kevizoid) - Storm; 4x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
1-1 Dan Udwary (Dr X) - Mind Flayer; Fire Giant Forgepriest; 2x Duergar Champ
1-1 Noah Martinez - Battle Plate Marshal; Slaughterstone Eviscerator; Gith Monk; 2x Gold Dwarf Fighter
1-1 (bye) Jim Cook (Pegasus Knight) - Storm; Asura; Virtuous Charger
1-1 Robert Beachler (robbdaman?) - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
1-1 David Gish - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
0-2 Graydon Schlichter - Storm; 3x Virtuous Charger
0-2 Steven Roy - Count Strahd
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3800 Posts
USA
| | 04/21/2007 7:12 PM |
| Another update: Â Standings after swiss... 5-0 Dwayne Stupack (Tried) - Couatl; Arcane Ballista; Shield Guardian
4-1 Kevin Cleveland (Kevizoid) - Storm; 4x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
3-2 Dan Udwary (Dr X) - Mind Flayer; Fire Giant Forgepriest; 2x Duergar Champ
3-2 Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom) - Storm; 2x Bralani; 2x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
3-2 Robert Beachler (robbdaman?) - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
3-2 (bye) Jim Cook (Pegasus Knight) - Storm; Asura; Virtuous Charger
2-3 (bye) Darien Stupack - 2x Ultroloth; Large Green Dragon
2-3 (bye) Graydon Schlichter - Storm; 3x Virtuous Charger
2-1?? (bye) Noah Martinez - Battle Plate Marshal; Slaughterstone Eviscerator; Gith Monk; 2x Gold Dwarf Fighter
1-1 (drop?) David Gish - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
0-2 (drop?) Steven Roy - Count Strahd Then, Dwayne, Kevin C, and Dan all dropped at the end of swiss, which means the top 4 qualifiers are: Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom) - Storm; 2x Bralani; 2x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
Robert Beachler (robbdaman?) - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
Jim Cook (Pegasus Knight) - Storm; Asura; Virtuous Charger
Darien Stupack - 2x Ultroloth; Large Green Dragon
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
alepulp
Underboss
1529 Posts
Manchester, England
| | 04/22/2007 4:07 AM |
| Hehe - I was trying out SG, Ballista online - it's brutal... you get either one extra SS or something else cool  | |
One of these days WoTC will update their tournament page when I'm in the top 5... they never seem to do when I'm in that bracket :(
My Collection My DDM Website And My Trade Refs Be a part of the UK DDM Forum
| |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3800 Posts
USA
| | 04/22/2007 4:30 AM |
| Finals Update: Â Standings after Swiss: 5-0 (drop) Dwayne Stupack (Tried) - Couatl; Arcane Ballista; Shield Guardian
4-1 (drop) Kevin Cleveland (Kevizoid) - Storm; 4x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
3-2 (drop) Dan Udwary (Dr X) - Mind Flayer; Fire Giant Forgepriest; 2x Duergar Champ
3-2 Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom) - Storm; 2x Bralani; 2x Shadowdancer; Wild Elf Warsinger
3-2 Robert Beachler (robbdaman) - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
3-2 (bye) Jim Cook (Pegasus Knight) - Storm; Asura; Virtuous Charger
2-3 (bye) Darien Stupack - 2x Ultroloth; Large Green Dragon
2-3 (bye) Graydon Schlichter - Storm; 3x Virtuous Charger
2-1?? (bye) Noah Martinez - Battle Plate Marshal; Slaughterstone Eviscerator; Gith Monk; 2x Gold Dwarf Fighter
1-1 (drop?) David Gish - Ryld; 3x Large Black Dragon
0-2 (drop?) Steven Roy - Count Strahd
Dwayne, Kevin C, and Dan all dropped at the end of swiss, which means places 3 through 7 qualify and go to the single elimination finals.Â
Semis: Jim beat Robert. Darien beat Kevin.
Finals: Jim beat Darien (on a concession, I believe).
1st: Jim Cook (Pegasus Knight)
2nd: Darien Stupack
3rd: Robert Beachler (robbdaman)
3rd: Kevin Melstrom (kmelstrom)
CG does it again. Congrats to all.Â
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
10283 Posts
United States
|
| 04/22/2007 5:21 AM |
| Weird, 34 players go to Montreal and the top 4 make it through a grueling process to qualify. And, only 11 players go to Mesa, and everyone in the top 7 qualifies or qualified already.
If you go to the right qualifier, you don't even have to be in the top half to qualify.
Look, don't anybody flame me. I'm proud of the guys who dropped to allow others to qualify--that's classy. I just wish it would happen at a place where there are tons of players rather than few players. I have nothing against the people who ended up qualifying in Mesa, heck, I count some of them as my friends. I just have mixed feelings about the whole qualifier process and the juxtaposition of Mesa and Montreal leaves me with a bad feeling.
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
Turboman
Warrior
212 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 9:15 AM |
| | Unfortunately Dave that's kind of the reality of qualifiers. I will say that overall attendance is down for some qualifiers. Last year Mesa had 20 participants and it was much more grueling. I'm not sure what Montreal was like last year but I do remember one of the Canadian qualifiers last year had even less than Mesa did this year. If I remember correctly Balor was in the top 4 at that Canadian qualifier. | |
| |
|
forkedmoon
Underboss
1305 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 10:03 AM |
| Yes it was alberta that only had 8 like Oklahoma did this year. But neither Alberta or Oklahoma had three drops to put losing records into the prizes. Not faulting those who qualified but I would have rather seen just the five who wanted to qualify to have played, I can't comment on the other three who dropped before the end of swiss. I wonder if they thought they had a chance after losing a couple if they would have stayed. Was it announced at the outset that those three (who finished 1,2 & 3) would drop at the end of swiss regardless of where they stood?
Comparing what occurred in Alberta to Montreal is like comparing Oklahoma to Milford not really fair comparison if you look at the geography. And there was quite a few comments about that qualifier last year.
My personal feeling is while many call the dropping of players to let others in classy, I see it as other - Maybe it should be set up that if someone can multiply qualify they can just hand off their extra tickets to whoever they want. I have never liked the idea of pass-downs or drops to let someone else in. Accept your winnings. | |
Champion of Cyclops
| |
|
Turboman
Warrior
212 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 12:10 PM |
| | Don't know what to tell you there. I think of it as if the three who dropped were never entered, making it so there were only 8 participants. The others who dropped did so because they were either 1-2 or 0-3. Only Noah stayed in the whole time because he just wanted to play, even though he lost all but one match. | |
| |
|
Temysry
Sergeant
462 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 4:23 PM |
| Another thing to note is that for many of the Canadian qualifiers, the players are not playing in other qualifers. Even last year when Mesa had 20 players, people have mentioned that 12 of them were all from SoCal and had at least played in 1 other qualifier. So, Mesa really only contributed 8 player even when they're turnout shows 20. Here in Halifax, for instance, I would have to drive to Montreal as my closest qualifier which is something like 20 hours by car. As a result, no player from Eastern Canada (that I know of) has participated in any qualifier. This is quite a shame since we have a big following - consistently getting 24+ players at every pre-release and enough of a local following to support at least 8 sanctioned tournaments every month.
It doesn't seem like there's any rules that were broken, but it doesn't quite sit well with me that players from SoCal can all come to Mesa and get their numbers above the minimum required to run the event, then drop after swiss. If you look at the results, there were only 6 players who hadn't dropped before the cut to the top 4. The 7th player had a 2-3 record, and one of his wins was a bye. So, winning only 1 of the 4 games played is good enough for an invite? Congratulations to him for getting in, but I think WotC should really re-think where their qualifiers are being held and perhaps the rules regarding minimum players. | |
A Proud Gelatinous Dude
www.gelatinousdudes.com
| |
|
stephengroy
Underboss
1354 Posts
Tempe AZ Beeyotch
| | 04/22/2007 6:05 PM |
| I didn't drop, Third round I again lost, so figured with 0-3, I figured it was time for that hour bus ride back to Tempe.
| |
Waiting for Chainmail Equivalencies since 2005
| |
|
Tried
Sergeant
497 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 6:38 PM |
| Posted By Vrecknidj on 04/22/2007 5:21 AM Weird, 34 players go to Montreal and the top 4 make it through a grueling process to qualify. And, only 11 players go to Mesa, and everyone in the top 7 qualifies or qualified already. If you go to the right qualifier, you don't even have to be in the top half to qualify. Look, don't anybody flame me. I'm proud of the guys who dropped to allow others to qualify--that's classy. I just wish it would happen at a place where there are tons of players rather than few players. I have nothing against the people who ended up qualifying in Mesa, heck, I count some of them as my friends. I just have mixed feelings about the whole qualifier process and the juxtaposition of Mesa and Montreal leaves me with a bad feeling. Dave
Kevizoid mentioned that he felt it was a harder qual than Utah. Three states were represented. Every one of the top 8 had qualed for a championship before.Â
The 2/3 player was my son and could have easily won 1st in the Norcal qual last year - he prize split in the finals with Rational Monkey.Â
This year, he lost to me, Kevizoid and Kmelstrom - who finished 1, 2, and 4 respectively, in close games.Â
He turned around and beat Kmelstrom in the finals, and certainly would have been a large threat to Pegasus Knight had we decided to stay for the finals. Instead we again prize split.  This is easier for us, as we are not american citizens, and Darien has no SSN.Â
So bash away all you want.Â
Next year I'll invite 20 friends to sign up, because that will make this qualifier much "more difficult."
And as far as Tem's statement goes, there are quals in new england that are the same distance from you as Salt lake city is from us. It's easy to talk. but now its time to put up. or.....
| |
Let it be. | |
|
DrX
Sergeant
408 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 8:54 PM |
| Posted By Tried on 04/22/2007 6:38 PM
Every one of the top 8 had qualed for a championship before.Â
Not true! I've only ever played one qualifier tournament before (Mesa
last year), and came in something like third from last in a field of
twenty. It was nice pulling good tie-breaks this year and coming third
in the swiss rounds. Unfortunately, there's just no way that I'm going
to be able to go to GenCon this year, so I chose to drop to let others
who can, qualify.
| |
HW List: http://www.maxminis.com/hwlist.asp?user=DrX
References: http://www.maxminis.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12409
| |
|
Tried
Sergeant
497 Posts
| | 04/22/2007 10:29 PM |
| True Dan. I thought you had qual'd in limited though. My mistake.
I will double check on the others then - I know PK, D, and I have, and Kmelstrom was at gencon last year, Rob I think has qual'd in limited, as I saw him at XP, but now that you bring this up I'm not 100% positive. The 8th place player qualified in Utah this year.
| |
Let it be. | |
|
DrX
Sergeant
408 Posts
| | 04/23/2007 5:36 AM |
| Posted By forkedmoon on 04/22/2007 10:03 AM
My personal feeling is while many call the dropping of players to let others in classy, I see it as other - Maybe it should be set up that if someone can multiply qualify they can just hand off their extra tickets to whoever they want. I have never liked the idea of pass-downs or drops to let someone else in. Accept your winnings.
I don't see how this makes sense at all.
I went to AZ with the intention of playing in a high level tournament, not ncessarily to qualify. In fact I wouldn't have gone at all if a lot of other people from SoCal weren't pilng into a car and making the drive with me. Why should I take a qualifier slot if I have no intention of using it? Give it to somebody else who will actually be at the championships.
Would it really be a more fair situation if I was able to give my slot to the guy who had dropped earlier in the day at 0-3, or better yet to some guy who didn't show up at the tournament at all?
| |
HW List: http://www.maxminis.com/hwlist.asp?user=DrX
References: http://www.maxminis.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12409
| |
|
forkedmoon
Underboss
1305 Posts
| | 04/23/2007 7:08 AM |
| I understand the desire to play top competition but I feel the qualifiers have a special purpose - to in a sense get your golden ticket. When competitors play in events with ramifications beyond that event such as a qualifier (spots for championship event) I feel the players should stand by their results. How many times have you heard players say if only I had won that first match then I would have been ... Yet we all know that if one match had gone a different way the pairings would have been different for the next game and so on. When players enter events where they plan to drop if they do well it is not fair to the folks they beat. I drew a top ten ranked player as my first match in the NC qualifier, was soundly crushed and went into the losers side where I got what I considered a poor match-up for me and was suddenly 0-2 (or not so suddenly since the second match went to time). I won out from there (4-2 and 9th place). I would have been a bit irked had this player dropped from the tournament after the swiss rounds and not claimed his rightful qualifying spot. If he didn't want the top spot so he could play another qualifier I would have no issue with that but to have played and hurt my chances without claiming a prize would have irked me. Yes it is the luck of the draw in pairings and I could have just as easily benefitted from his beating of other players if I didn't draw him in the swiss rounds.
Is it really the classy thing to do to drop after affecting the outcome of the event to let another player whose day didn't go as well qualify. I am not questioning the credentials of those who qualified as a result of these drops. I believe I have played all of them at one time or another and know them as talented players. Just because you have the credentials as a good player though doesn't entitle one to a spot or should we consider a once qualified always qualified status? Many folks who have qualified in the past will probably miss this year.
Sorry if I sound like I am railing against any of the players who qualified, I am not. I am against the idea of playing and then dropping out to allow others to qualify. If you played you affected the outcome and by dropping later a player could further compound that. The system either needs to be once qualified you can not play another qualifier of if you play and finish the swiss your dropping only puts in the fourth spot if you were higher. Of course just my opinion. | |
Champion of Cyclops
| |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
10283 Posts
United States
| | 04/23/2007 9:33 AM |
| My gripe mostly comes down to one thing: not enough qualifying spots. If events with 33+ people had the top 8 get invitations, I'd be elated.
I have no problem with people dropping or any of that.
I have no problem with all different sizes of qualifiers. Heck, I'm happy we have as many qualifiers as we do. Sure, I'd like more, and I know there are a lot of folks who get to go to one, and it's hours and hours away by car.
But, the disparity bugs me.
Still, congrats to all who do qualify. It's a tough thing to do anywhere.
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
smyrin
Skirmisher
6 Posts
| | 04/23/2007 3:14 PM |
| I suppose that changing the DDM rating system to something like Dreamblade is now would solve the problem. Then qualifying would be a matter of acquiring a number of points to get above a certain threshold. If this were the case, no one would likely have dropped from the AZ event. Also, going to "DDM 1K" events would be not seem like one's local qualifier was invaded since everyone wants to acquire big points. Â
That aside, I see nothing wrong with dropping from the event. If the top four players had not even competed, then places 5-8 may have just as likely been the top four anyways.  | |
-7 | |
|
tundrin
Sergeant
408 Posts
Randolph, NJ
| | 04/23/2007 5:49 PM |
| Never having qualified I propose this scenario. If you already qualified and just want "practice" then play to 199points or 59 minutes and then concede.
Or make qualifiers inelegible for the cut, or something like that.
If its striclty a points system, then there can be no cinderella player - "If you cant play and do well in x number of touneys, you will never qualify"
Or make it a state or regional thing.
There is no perfect system. Just be happy they even make these pieces and we can spend all this time with them.
What did we do before Harbinger? (me - NWN all alone sigh) | |
Champs 2007 Top 16, Team Amish Class of 2007
Seeking Northern NJ DDM'ers - "There can be only one" (I hope not)
Champion of the Doppleganger | |
|
Turboman
Warrior
212 Posts
| | 04/23/2007 6:42 PM |
| Posted By tundrin on 04/23/2007 5:49 PM Never having qualified I propose this scenario. If you already qualified and just want "practice" then play to 199points or 59 minutes and then concede.
Or make qualifiers inelegible for the cut, or something like that.
If its striclty a points system, then there can be no cinderella player - "If you cant play and do well in x number of touneys, you will never qualify"
Or make it a state or regional thing.
There is no perfect system. Just be happy they even make these pieces and we can spend all this time with them.
What did we do before Harbinger? (me - NWN all alone sigh)
Conceeding makes people lose points. Losing points makes people go down on ranking. Going down on ranking makes people not qualify by rank. | |
| |
|
Tried
Sergeant
497 Posts
| | 04/23/2007 7:54 PM |
| And one more thing. What if there were a darker purpose? What if socal were LE, not CG like they pretend?
Maybe we play as a team for a reason.
Maybe we go even if we don't want to qualify, so that we can control who does....
What if we do that - on purpose, not by accident?
Would that be bad?
| |
Let it be. | |
|
Kevizoid
Sergeant
373 Posts
Southern California
| | 04/23/2007 9:38 PM |
| | Yeah, but that would be silly... | |
SoCal Colluder | |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3800 Posts
USA
| | 04/24/2007 3:46 AM |
| That would be very funny.Â
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Tried
Sergeant
497 Posts
| | 04/24/2007 5:00 AM |
| ...As cool as that would be....
I only aspire to be LE. I mean, I really think it would be great. But I'm mostly NG, sadly.
In any event, Mesa is our "home qual" being only what, 6 hours from San Diego?
(Bay area is about the same from LA/North LA, on traffic)
I am actually a little suprised we only had 6there. Normally we would try to have 8-10 from our group alone.
Socal should still show up for about 3 more qualifiers. Next year, we will try to send a handful to a really big qual out east. Niles is most convenient, but I have a soft spot for Montreal.
| |
Let it be. | |
|
forkedmoon
Underboss
1305 Posts
| | 04/24/2007 5:53 AM |
| Posted By smyrin on 04/23/2007 3:14 PM I suppose that changing the DDM rating system to something like Dreamblade is now would solve the problem. Then qualifying would be a matter of acquiring a number of points to get above a certain threshold. If this were the case, no one would likely have dropped from the AZ event. Also, going to "DDM 1K" events would be not seem like one's local qualifier was invaded since everyone wants to acquire big points. Â
That aside, I see nothing wrong with dropping from the event. If the top four players had not even competed, then places 5-8 may have just as likely been the top four anyways. Â
I really don't like the idea of the dreamblade system unless there are events that by placing top four I would get enough points to qualify (kinda like having qualifiers). Otherwise the Dreamblade system rewards playing not as much winning and remote locations and players would be hurt by such a system.
As to the top four remaining the same, yes it might have been the same but more likely the placings would have been different and some who dropped might not have if playing a different set of matches. I think it is admirable that players play in events to allow them to sanction. I've done it myself for Magic events when they needed an extra player to sanction (I got stomped and dropped after a round) but these top three who dropped were not needed in this event to sanction. Without them there still would have been eight, the minimum required. | |
Champion of Cyclops
| |
|
SYB
Warrior
328 Posts
| | 04/24/2007 6:55 AM |
| Posted By forkedmoon on 04/24/2007 5:53 AM Posted By smyrin on 04/23/2007 3:14 PM I suppose that changing the DDM rating system to something like Dreamblade is now would solve the problem. Then qualifying would be a matter of acquiring a number of points to get above a certain threshold. If this were the case, no one would likely have dropped from the AZ event. Also, going to "DDM 1K" events would be not seem like one's local qualifier was invaded since everyone wants to acquire big points. Â
That aside, I see nothing wrong with dropping from the event. If the top four players had not even competed, then places 5-8 may have just as likely been the top four anyways.  I really don't like the idea of the dreamblade system unless there are events that by placing top four I would get enough points to qualify (kinda like having qualifiers). Otherwise the Dreamblade system rewards playing not as much winning and remote locations and players would be hurt by such a system. As to the top four remaining the same, yes it might have been the same but more likely the placings would have been different and some who dropped might not have if playing a different set of matches. I think it is admirable that players play in events to allow them to sanction. I've done it myself for Magic events when they needed an extra player to sanction (I got stomped and dropped after a round) but these top three who dropped were not needed in this event to sanction. Without them there still would have been eight, the minimum required.Â
That isn't entirely true. One of those top three was the ride for one of the 4-7 group. If Dwayne hadn't shown up, Darien clearly could not have shown up (it is a VERY long walk).
There is simply no mathematical way to show what would have happened if those three had not played, therefore, for all intents and purposes, everyone in the qualifier had an equal chance to qualify (based on their individual skill level) as they would have had if those three had not shown up. And despite Dwayne's insidious implication above, there is no way, short of collusion (which is cheating and something I am confident that the So Cal crew would never do) for the So Cal crew to "fix" the results of the tournament. They are just highly skilled players playing the game. If you are playing in a qualifier, you should expect to play players of that caliber.
-SYB | |
| |
|
CSchroder
Sergeant
407 Posts
| | 04/24/2007 7:43 AM |
| | And let's not forget that my SoCal friends are highly competitive, especially amongst themselves. They likely travel to hone their skills and frankly because it gets a bit boring beating on each other all the time. If they come out East, they will be welcome in Amish country! | |
Charles AKA The Beardless One, Proud Member of Team Amish | |
|
Kevizoid
Sergeant
373 Posts
Southern California
| | 04/24/2007 12:41 PM |
| | Well it would have been the 3 of us PLUS graydon since he qualified already as well, so it would have been 7. Oh look, no qualifier. | |
SoCal Colluder | |
|
Foxman
Sergeant
417 Posts
Calgary, AB, Canada
| | 04/24/2007 12:55 PM |
| Could someone please tell me the Full Warband/Map for the second place finisher?
(Darien Stupack - 2x Ultroloth; Large Green Dragon) | |
It would be very unlikely for unlikely events not to occur.
- J. A. Paulos "Innumeracy" | |
|
Kevizoid
Sergeant
373 Posts
Southern California
| | 04/24/2007 1:00 PM |
| he had a sneak, kobold monk, gobo skirmisher, kobobld miner, bat familiar on kings road its 8 acts with 198 but he didn't have the pieces he wanted so he ran the subpar fodder version. | |
SoCal Colluder | |
|
Foxman
Sergeant
417 Posts
Calgary, AB, Canada
| | 04/24/2007 4:00 PM |
| | Thanks! | |
It would be very unlikely for unlikely events not to occur.
- J. A. Paulos "Innumeracy" | |
|
Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
7146 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 04/25/2007 4:08 PM |
| Kudos to the sportsmanship that was displayed!
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|