I just realized suggested Tutorial decks do not comply with deckbuilding requirements...

Quote

Gather Tutorial Decks: Each player should
gather the cards listed to the right for their deck. ( It
is important to note that these decks do not follow
the standard deckbuilding rules and restrictions
found in “Deckbuilding” on page 30.)

Really? Was it necessary to confuse starter-players minds so soon?

I will try to look for some alternatives...

EDIT: Decks lists

Tutorial Corp Deck

• Weyland (108) ..................................................Identity
• 2x Rototurret (69)................................................... ICE
• 2x Biotic Labor (72) .................................... Operation
• 3x Green Level Clearance (73)................... Operation
• 3x Celebrity Gif (89) .................................. Operation
• 3x Pop-up Window (99) ........................................ ICE
• 2x Tollbooth (100).................................................. ICE
• 3x Project Atlas (110).......................................Agenda
• 1x The Cleaners (111) ......................................Agenda
• 2x Hive (118)........................................................... ICE
• 2x Ice Wall (119)..................................................... ICE
• 3x Beanstalk Royalties (121) ...................... Operation
• 2x Priority Requisition (125) ..........................Agenda
• 2x Private Security Force (126).......................Agenda
• 2x Melange Mining Corp (127)..........................Asset
• 3x PAD Campaign (128)......................................Asset
• 3x Enigma (129) ..................................................... ICE
• 3x Wall of Static (131)............................................ ICE
• 3x Hedge Fund (132) .................................. Operation

Tutorial Runner Deck

• Gabriel Santiago (19)......................................Identity
• 3x Mimic (13)..................................................Program
• 1x Ice Carver (15).......................................... Resource
• 3x Liberated Account (16)............................ Resource
• 1x Xanadu (18)............................................... Resource
• 3x Easy Mark (20)................................................ Event
• 2x Forged Activation Orders (22) ..................... Event
• 2x Doppelgänger (25) ..................................Hardware
• 1x HQ Interface (26) ....................................Hardware
• 3x Aurora (27).................................................Program
• 3x Peacock (30)...............................................Program
• 1x Sneakdoor Beta (32)..................................Program
• 2x Diesel (38) ....................................................... Event
• 3x Modded (40) ................................................... Event
• 1x The Maker’s Eye (43)...................................... Event
• 2x Tinkering (44)................................................. Event
• 1x The Personal Touch (47).........................Hardware
• 2x Infltration (55)............................................... Event
• 3x Sure Gamble (56)............................................ Event
• 3x Armitage Codebusting (59) .................... Resource

I don’t know, maybe it’s the case where you would want to teach new players the mechanics of the game and not overwhelm them with absolutely all of the information at one time.

FFG core sets commonly have starter decks that are below the normally required card count. This isn't anything new. Tutorial decks are designed to teach the game, not to play full, ongoing games.

Sorry, but I do not agree...

Teaching decks are made to teach the game/rules to new players in a controled enviroment (but real), not to expose them to false assumptions (you can have as much as 29-36 influence or required agenda points is unrelated with deck size...)

In L5R LCG decks, even though they have less cards and it is clearly indicated that way, they do not contain splash cards from multiple other clans, nor do they use more influence than allowed...

They did some starting decks with Core 1.0, it should be too difficult to do same with Core 2.0, otherwise we would be in the same situation as L5R LCG, where it is stated that you need two cores in order to be able to build a playable deck (according to rules).

FFG always does this and I'm not a fan either.

Two alternatives (they are not mine...):

https://netrunnerdb.com/en/decklist/47379/single-revised-core-teaching-decks-gabe-vs-weyland

https://netrunnerdb.com/en/decklist/47378/single-revised-core-teaching-deck-weyland-vs-gabe

15 Influence

45-49 Cards

EDIT: Also, I edited first post to include FFG proposed Tutorial decks for Core 2.0

On 12/21/2017 at 0:32 PM, Aingeru said:

Sorry, but I do not agree...

Teaching decks are made to teach the game/rules to new players in a controled enviroment (but real), not to expose them to false assumptions (you can have as much as 29-36 influence or required agenda points is unrelated with deck size...)

Except those assumptions are not at all going to come up in a strictly Learn-To-Play tutorial. Those are deckbuilding concerns, and if they’re not deckbuilding then it isn’t necessary information.

You want to use the toolbox of the Core Set cards to build the best platform for teaching gameplay mechanics , that is the only requirement. If you introduce any constraints other than those which directly contribute to that goal, then you’re decreasing the quality of those tutorial decks at fulfilling the requirement.

Did anybody complain when the Demo Decks FFG made a few years back were only played to 6 points, or that they were below minimum deck sizes? No.

if you want to avoid giving false impressions, all you have to do is make sure to put a sentence right in front of the tutorial lists that says something along the lines of, “ It is important to note that these decks do not follow the standard deckbuilding rules and restrictions found in ‘Deckbuilding’ on page XX.”

I don’t suppose they did anything like that? Darn it FFG, stop burying critical information!

14 hours ago, Grimwalker said:

(...)Did anybody complain when the Demo Decks FFG made a few years back were only played to 6 points, or that they were below minimum deck sizes? No.(...)

Those decks did not contain more influence that allowed...
They were only smaller (in same way L5R LCG starter decks)
They did not provided the false idea that you could use as much influence as wanted... (in the same way L5R LCG starter decks does not include dinasty cards from other clans, or splash conflict cards from multiple clans...)

14 hours ago, Grimwalker said:

(...)if you want to avoid giving false impressions, all you have to do is make sure to put a sentence right in front of the tutorial lists that says something along the lines of, “ It is important to note that these decks do not follow the standard deckbuilding rules and restrictions found in ‘Deckbuilding’ on page XX.”(...)

It was already indicated in first post...
So... no additional argument, no additional reply...

As previously stated, easier than adding such line is avoiding its necesity by making sure decks complain with basical deckbuilding (although no need in that phase to indicate such constraint/restraint)

14 hours ago, Grimwalker said:

(...)I don’t suppose they did anything like that? Darn it FFG, stop burying critical information!

Thank you very much!

Wish you Merry Christmas too, @Grimwalker !

On 12/23/2017 at 5:15 AM, Aingeru said:

It was already indicated in first post...
So... no additional argument, no additional reply...

I was hoping you’d notice the irony about the fact that you refuted your entire argument in your own first post. But apparently it was too subtle.

Shoehorning the Tutorial decks into standard influence rules is only going to make them less effective at providing a tutorial experience: teaching the game mechanics, no more and no less. Complexifying players’ very first exposure to the game with additional systems not related to learning the game mechanics is not only unnecessary, it’s actively counterproductive. The disclaimer pointing them toward the standard deckbuilding rules is entirely sufficient.