Pentex(TM) Subversion Fix
XZealot
Type: Master
Cost: X pool
Unique master.
Put this card on any ready minion. X is the capacity of that vampire
or the cost of that ally. The minion with this card cannot take
actions and cannot block actions. This card may be burned by any other
minion as a (D) action.
It is quick and easy as a fix and costs more to lock down a large
minion and less to lock down a small minion.
What do you think?
Pendargon
Makes it wallpaper. Nobody will pay 9 pool to lock down a 9-cap, and
even less 4-5 pool to lock down a 4 or 5-cap.
Jozxyqk
> What do you think?
Pay 11 pool to lock down your own Inner Circle member, call Parity
Shift, burn the Pentex, repeat next turn?
Teeka
I can't comment on the wallpaper/brokenness very well, so I'll let
others do that. But I like the direction you're taking this. Very
fitting considering the idea of the card, and simple to implement as
errata.
Vincent
Better ban it than make it useless.
A good fix would be to make it unique... oops, seems like it is
already unique. Nothing to fix then.
XZealot
With the economic model of this game, it is an appropriate costing.
Kushiel
> What do you think?
I think that it's a categorically bad idea, because there shouldn't be
any more errata issued for cards, ever again. Since those cards will
never see a reprint with corrected text, any errata now means that
every copy of the errata'd card has incorrect card text. Better to ban
cards than play with imaginary cards.
Under that criterion, I don't think that Pentex needs banning.
John Eno
Legendre
make the cost the same.
Raise the cost to 4 pool and call it a day; this change alone will
turn it into a more situation-specific card (i.e., only good for
desperate situations, lunging, or dealing with large caps, rather than
good all the time every time). It's an easy fix and just requires a
little Sharpie work in the corner of a card, or a very thin label.
Izaak
"Legendre" <gla...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:a262ffea-49be-44d2...@n32g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> This card is about as good as Club Zombie, notwithstanding cost, so
> make the cost the same.
Given that Club Zombie is pretty horrible, I suppose you think Pentex
Subversion is pretty awful as well?
Izaak
>any more errata issued for cards, ever again. Since those cards will
>never see a reprint with corrected text, any errata now means that
>every copy of the errata'd card has incorrect card text. Better to ban
>cards than play with imaginary cards.
Agreed. Errata at this point are not the way to go.
>Under that criterion, I don't think that Pentex needs banning.
As I said in a previous thread, as much as I hate the card, the game does
need a way to get around superstar blockers that's not Call of the Hungry
Dead, Elder Impersonation, Evil Eye or Psychomachia. Pentex fills that bill
just fine and while it sucks to get your superstar locked down, it doesn't
suck more than getting bled for 12 before you have a guy out or Koko
Amaranthing your superstar after a Disarm.
Juggernaut1981
I almost completely agree with John, except that I encourage banning
it. Any card that people feel they must play purely to contest other
copies purely because of the metagame is a card that is distorting the
game.
Don't errata, ban from tournaments. It has been distorting the
metagame of this game for far too long.
brandonsantacruz
I agree. When those things happen to you, chock it up to "one of those
things from that long list out there that screws you." I could see
limiting the Pentexed minion to burning Pentex as an action, but
that's the only errata I've heard that is reasonable. It's OK to have
good cards.
Brandon
adam....@gmail.com
That's too expensive... But I really liked that other idea that
someone posted a little while ago.
Pentex(TM) Subversion
Type: Master
Cost: 2 pool
Unique master.
Put this card on any ready minion. If the minion is 8* capacity or
greater, burn an additional 2 pool.
The minion with this card cannot take actions and cannot block
actions. This card may be burned by any other
minion as a (D) action.
4 pool to lock down a big vampire. The 8 capacity was just based on
other card examples. Maybe 7 cap is better.
suoli
wrote:
>
> I agree. When those things happen to you, chock it up to "one of those
> things from that long list out there that screws you."
Pentex shouldn't be banned because it might screw you. It should be
banned because it warps the metagame in a completely uninteresting way
and adds a big lottery element to individual games.
> It's OK to have
> good cards.
As it is, Pentex is not a good card. It's powerful if that's what you
mean but not in a good way.
>
> Brandon
librarian
Frikkin' A right. Consider that a vote. I'll just give it a thumbs up...
oh wait.
Brum
There's nothing wrong with Pentex.
There's allot wrong with the way some people play and the way some
people do decks.
Bad play and bad decks enforce cards like Pentex, Imbued, etc.
If cards like Pentex force people to make smart choices like using
Suddens or Wash (seems a no brainer, but lots of decks I see use
none), then I'm happy that such a card exists.
Dreams is such a stronger card.
Tiago
salem
Secret Horde and Bounty ensure that's never going to be an optimal move ;)
--
salem
(replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email)
salem
I think there's already some cards with errata that haven't been reprinted
with their fixed text. So that's not a thing we're currently living under.
But you know, I think I still agree with you. I much prefer most-recent-
printing text over errata, and without any MRP in the near future, that
pretty much rules out errata....unless said errata is very easy to remember
and has fairly universal agreement (ahahahaha....)
suoli
>
> If cards like Pentex force people to make smart choices like using
> Suddens or Wash (seems a no brainer, but lots of decks I see use
> none), then I'm happy that such a card exists.
> Dreams is such a stronger card.
>
> Tiago
And that's the problem. No brainers are bad design. No brainers that
you must play because everybody else does, even when they have nothing
to do with the core of your deck, are even worse. Playing Pentex isn't
a smart choice. It doesn't display depth of strategic thinking. It's
just a stupid no brainer.
That said, I'll agree with Izaak on the necessity of keeping wall
decks on their toes. Pentex, however, is not the greatest solution.
Blooded Sand
> >I think that it's a categorically bad idea, because there shouldn't be
> >any more errata issued for cards, ever again. Since those cards will
> >never see a reprint with corrected text, any errata now means that
> >every copy of the errata'd card has incorrect card text. Better to ban
> >cards than play with imaginary cards.
>
> Agreed. Errata at this point are not the way to go.
>
> >Under that criterion, I don't think that Pentex needs banning.
>
> As I said in a previous thread, as much as I hate the card, the game does
> need a way to get around superstar blockers that's not Call of the Hungry
> Dead, Elder Impersonation, Evil Eye or Psychomachia.
Blood awakening. Done. Ban Pentex now pls.
Not to mention others
Vincent
Distorting the metagame? If it were the case, we wouldn't see any
"superstar" deck.
But if Pentex were banned, I guess we would see too many wall decks
(which sound boring).
Personnaly, I like Pentex because it makes the game move forward and
reduce stalled situations.
And it's certainly not a "no brainer card". I can't recall how many
times I kept one in hand until the right time had come, instead of
playing it right away.
Legendre
"cannot block" card? Keep it unique, and keep it at 2 pool.
That's an even easier change to make with a Sharpie, and we can keep
the "any other minion" language so it can't be removed by the target,
even though the target could act.
Tazar
vamp gets pentexed I know. Still it really sux to be predator of some
ultra wall star vampire deck and have no chance to get the game going.
Or to be predator of deck which gets villein giant's blood villein in
3rd and 4th turn.
If some errata should be done to this card than add text: "You can
play only 1 per game." So you have to choose if you want to pentex in
the beginning or wait for right time.
If any card should be banned it's lilith's blessing I hate it as much
as I love it.
suoli
>
> If any card should be banned it's lilith's blessing I hate it as much
> as I love it.
Lilith's Blessing isn't all that hot unless you build a deck around
it. It was strong in the storyline tournaments because it started on
the table. In regular deck construction it makes hunting grounds look
attractive by comparison.
Kushiel
> I think there's already some cards with errata that haven't been reprinted
> with their fixed text. So that's not a thing we're currently living under.
I'm pretty sure that Deflection is the only bleed bounce card that's
got the correct "after all blocks are declnied" text on it, due to
that errata being a pretty late one.
Still, better not to introduce any more of that unfortunate lack of
correct cards.
John Eno
Kushiel
> Frikkin' A right. Consider that a vote. I'll just give it a thumbs up...
> oh wait.
Good point - I saw Norm's post here first. I'm not sure that cross-
posting these things is the right way to go if we want people to
permanently migrate, but I'll play along for now.
John Eno
Izaak
"Kushiel" <invisibl...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:3dcca019-a059-41d4...@g26g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 11, 3:52 am, salem <kella...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I think there's already some cards with errata that haven't been reprinted
> with their fixed text. So that's not a thing we're currently living under.
>I'm pretty sure that Deflection is the only bleed bounce card that's
>got the correct "after all blocks are declnied" text on it, due to
>that errata being a pretty late one.
All bounce cards printed in sets after Camarilla Edition have the "after
blocks are declined" addition.
I can't think of any cards that have migrated text that have not been
reprinted with their new text. That's not to say there aren't any, but
adding more (or any at all) would IMO be bad.
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
might as well just start listing cards that are allowed. No need to
list the entirely crap half of the library, either, so better just
make VTE:S : mediocre edition with maybe ten different possible decks.
suoli
wrote:
> If you're going to ban Pentex, there's so many cards to ban that you
> might as well just start listing cards that are allowed.
No there's not. Direct Intervention is the only comparable one. Other
than that, no card is really nearly as boring, powerful and pervasive
as Pentex.
Haze
Not even Govern/Deflection?
Whether a card is boring or powerful is mostly opinion, but pervasive
can be backed up with evidence. I looked through the 100 recent decks
on the TWDA and did some counting.
56% had any copies of Pentex Subversion. that's almost a coin flip. I
thought it'd be higher.
61% included Dreams of the Sphinx, so that's even more pervasive. and
might I add that most decks using Dreams had multiple copies: 2 or 3
or sometimes even 4. Pentex rarely went above 2.
for Direct Intervention, along with its twin-hoser card Dark
Influences, together they only reached 34%. apparently it's not all
that popular, despite all the complaints it gets.
well, we might as well ban Dreams of the Sphinx first! or errata it to
cost 10 pool.
James Coupe
>For me Pentex is completly fine. It really sux when your first big
>vamp gets pentexed I know. Still it really sux to be predator of some
>ultra wall star vampire deck and have no chance to get the game going.
>Or to be predator of deck which gets villein giant's blood villein in
>3rd and 4th turn.
Why is a star vampire wall worse than any other wall that prevents you
from getting going?
Star vampire walls are already vulnerable to block denial cards -
Seduction, Elder Impersonation etc. And a well-played !Ventrue grinder
deck can block your actions similarly effectively to, say, a Howler
deck. A well-played Imbued wall can also cause issues, especially with
an early play of Unmasking.
A star-vampire deck can benefit from, say, Anima Gathering - but for the
cost of a minion or two doing that (2, 3 pool each?) you might be able
to just as easily bring out a few intercept locations instead. Or just
play a few more reaction cards - I've rarely seen 'running out of cards'
being the problem for a wall deck on a table. (It happens, but rarely.)
Basically, I don't understand why you want to be able to kill star
vampire walls, when more or less all the same problems can be seen
facing a more varied wall. The more varied walls are certainly
tournament viable.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe
If cross-posting to web forums, it can be helpful to say so. It means
that people who happen to be reading one rather than the other don't
spend time writing up a response that they'd rather went to the other
forum/group.
James Coupe
>On Jan 10, 12:10 pm, Pendargon <pendar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 10, 6:57 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Pentex(TM) Subversion
>> > Type: Master
>> > Cost: X pool
>> > Unique master.
>> > Put this card on any ready minion. X is the capacity of that vampire
>> > or the cost of that ally. The minion with this card cannot take
>> > actions and cannot block actions. This card may be burned by any other
>> > minion as a (D) action.
>>
>> > It is quick and easy as a fix and costs more to lock down a large
>> > minion and less to lock down a small minion.
>>
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> even less 4-5 pool to lock down a 4 or 5-cap.
>
>With the economic model of this game, it is an appropriate costing.
Could you provide some reasoning for that assertion?
I can just as easily write "With the economic model of this game, it is
not an appropriate costing" - which equally doesn't help progress the
discussion, because there's no reasoning. But without knowing what your
reasoning is, it's difficult to consider and discuss it.
Izaak
> from getting going?
<snip sound reasoning>
Because star-walls tend to include unlimited "untap" in the form of No
Secrets or Eternal Vigilance. On top of that, it being one minion, they can
stack every permanent on that minion. Multi-minion walls, while a bitch to
break, can actually be hurt because they cannot possibly put Sniper Rifles
on all their guys. If someone has Cesaweye with No Secrets and a Superbowl
on the table, then you better be playing block fails because you're *never*
going to get past that. In comparison, I think Neighbour John with the Bowl
is also extremely irritating, but at least he needs a wake for every block
attempt. I a sense, unlimited untap is as broken as unlimited Freak Drives.
Izaak
>Influences, together they only reached 34%. apparently it's not all
>that popular, despite all the complaints it gets.
The complaints it gets are, as far as I can tell, not really directed at the
card being a no-brainer or too strong. The complaints are geared towards the
interaction of the card with rest of the game mechanics. Ie, a Meth
interfering with a Minion action.
On top of that, DI discourages high-risk high-reward moves, because if your
ousing Conditioning gets DI'd during a lunge, you're done for. People DI
ousting cards all the time and it slows down the game. Which is bad.
suoli
> On Jan 11, 6:20 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 12 tammi, 00:39, Demnogonis Saastuttaja <vihako...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > If you're going to ban Pentex, there's so many cards to ban that you
> > > might as well just start listing cards that are allowed.
>
> > No there's not. Direct Intervention is the only comparable one. Other
> > than that, no card is really nearly as boring, powerful and pervasive
> > as Pentex.
>
> Not even Govern/Deflection?
>
> Whether a card is boring or powerful is mostly opinion, but pervasive
> can be backed up with evidence. I looked through the 100 recent decks
> on the TWDA and did some counting.
"And", not "or". Pentex is highly boring, powerful AND pervasive.
Vinicius Coelho de Almeida
Wyk (Hunter) in banning list. One single card that destroys most of
diablerie decks. Contesting it is not a reliable option; DI-ing it,
neither.
Carlton Van Wyk (Hunter)
Ally
2 pool
Unique mortal with 2 life. 0 strength, 0 bleed.
Carlton can strike for 1R damage, and he may dodge as a strike once each
combat. Carlton has +1 intercept when blocking vampires. During your
discard phase, you may burn Carlton to burn a vampire who has committed
diablerie since your last turn.
Haze
your point?
Govern, Deflection, and Dreams of the Sphinx are all more boring, more
powerful, and more pervasive than Pentex.
so's your mother.
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
I can only agree to it being powerful and used a lot, like a lot of
other cards. I just see it as another challenge to superstar decks, a
way to enable non-stealth actions and sometimes a nice delay to
stealth bleed or other decks that would ruin your game before you got
a chance to do anything about it with your minions, and so on. How is
that boring? Hey I play this pot/pro rush deck that burns your
minions, it's also pretty boring for whoever gets to be the target.
Could as well make a fun S&B deck that removes one player from the
game almost certainly, nice for him to wait for 1,5 hours or just go
home. So what's Pentex do, jam your minion for, what, one turn? Maybe
indefinitely in rare cases? One minion? Pffft.
elotar
+1. Statistics against u, pentex-hating losers.
suoli
I disagree.
>
> so's your mother.
Classy.
suoli
Demnogonis Saastuttaja kirjoitti:
> On 12 tammi, 02:20, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12 tammi, 00:39, Demnogonis Saastuttaja <vihako...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If you're going to ban Pentex, there's so many cards to ban that you
> > > might as well just start listing cards that are allowed.
> >
> > No there's not. Direct Intervention is the only comparable one. Other
> > than that, no card is really nearly as boring, powerful and pervasive
> > as Pentex.
>
> I can only agree to it being powerful and used a lot, like a lot of
> other cards. I just see it as another challenge to superstar decks, a
> way to enable non-stealth actions and sometimes a nice delay to
> stealth bleed or other decks that would ruin your game before you got
> a chance to do anything about it with your minions, and so on. How is
> that boring?
Mostly because every deck is always a Pentex deck, no matter what else
it's supposed to be. It starts to feel like you're always playing
against the same deck.
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
The same thing goes for Villein, used to go for Blood Doll. Don't
recall anybody ever talking about Blood Doll decks, though, or DotS
decks, or On the Qui Vive decks...
suoli
wrote:
>
> The same thing goes for Villein, used to go for Blood Doll. Don't
> recall anybody ever talking about Blood Doll decks, though, or DotS
> decks, or On the Qui Vive decks...
Villein, Blood Doll, On the Qui Vive etc. alone tend to not have the
impact that Pentex does. They're more like support structures that
meld into the deck whereas Pentex is a turning point when it gets
played. Do you understand what I mean?
Blooded Sand
> > Why is a star vampire wall worse than any other wall that prevents you
> > from getting going?
>
> <snip sound reasoning>
>
> Because star-walls tend to include unlimited "untap" in the form of No
> Secrets or Eternal Vigilance. On top of that, it being one minion, they can
> stack every permanent on that minion. Multi-minion walls, while a bitch to
> break, can actually be hurt because they cannot possibly put Sniper Rifles
> on all their guys. If someone has Cesaweye with No Secrets and a Superbowl
> on the table, then you better be playing block fails because you're *never*
> going to get past that.
yet one single block fails destroys the basis of his deck. One single
block stops his deck from getting going. Not the most solid point out
there really.
But one single card screws cesewayo, multi rush, star voter, star
trick, and many others. You dont see the difference in effect here?
Blooded Sand
Eloquent, well spoken and erudite, all you want from an intent
argument. Also, nyah nyah nyah :p
Izaak
"suoli" <suolir...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:a57137ac-5745-48ba...@c39g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
I by turning point you mean "Pentex actually allows people to oust" then
yes.
brandonsantacruz
> But one single card screws cesewayo
Horrific Countenance!
Brandon
The Lasombra
>On Jan 12, 4:13 pm, Blooded Sand wrote:
>> But one single card screws cesewayo
>Horrific Countenance!
No, Kiss of Ra, actually.
Juggernaut1981
> On 10 jan, 22:30, Juggernaut1981 <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 11, 5:54 am, Kushiel <invisibleking...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 10, 12:57 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > What do you think?
>
> > > I think that it's a categorically bad idea, because there shouldn't be
> > > any more errata issued for cards, ever again. Since those cards will
> > > never see a reprint with corrected text, any errata now means that
> > > every copy of the errata'd card has incorrect card text. Better to ban
> > > cards than play with imaginary cards.
>
> > > Under that criterion, I don't think that Pentex needs banning.
>
> > > John Eno
>
> > I almost completely agree with John, except that I encourage banning
> > it. Any card that people feel they must play purely to contest other
> > copies purely because of the metagame is a card that is distorting the
> > game.
>
> > Don't errata, ban from tournaments. It has been distorting the
> > metagame of this game for far too long.
>
> Distorting the metagame? If it were the case, we wouldn't see any
> "superstar" deck.
> But if Pentex were banned, I guess we would see too many wall decks
> (which sound boring).
>
> Personnaly, I like Pentex because it makes the game move forward and
> reduce stalled situations.
>
> And it's certainly not a "no brainer card". I can't recall how many
> times I kept one in hand until the right time had come, instead of
> playing it right away.
I never said it obliterated Superstar decks. I said it distorted the
metagame. And it's distortion is basically this: I must always assume
that someone will play Pentex Subversion on me. That means that
people feel they must either: pack 1 or 2 copies to contest the card
or pack 2 or more copies of Wash/SR.
From what I've seen, I don't think I would ever consider playing in
the NAC without 2 Wash/SR or 2 Pentex Subversions. It just seems
stupid to consider doing anything else. That is a distortion of the
metagame.
This is probably also the case for other cards like Carlton, Dreams &
Info H-way... but those cards do not have the scope to destroy a
person's game. Carlton is an irritation (especially if he is brought
out AFTER a diablerie). Dreams is powerful and provides big
advantages, but they go quickly enough. Info H-way provides some
early advantage but in the mid-to-late game can be basically useless.
Pentex should be banned, if anything at all is going to be done about
it. Errata-ing the card will probably just result in people incorrect
playing it and getting frustrated when rulings get made.
Vincent
> And it's distortion is basically this: I must always assume
> that someone will play Pentex Subversion on me.
So you're scared of playing, or paranoid? Because worse things can
happen that being pentexed, such as being burned by a 2-cap pot
vampire, or being Banished.
That's no big deal. Pentex is not definitive (can be burned).
> That means that
> people feel they must either: pack 1 or 2 copies to contest the card
> or pack 2 or more copies of Wash/SR.
No need, unless your deck is very sensitive to Pentex. In that case,
add countermeasures (such as including Pentex on your own), just like
you add some Delaying Tactics if you're sensible to votes.
> From what I've seen, I don't think I would ever consider playing in
> the NAC without 2 Wash/SR or 2 Pentex Subversions. It just seems
> stupid to consider doing anything else. That is a distortion of the
> metagame.
Just like Villein or Vessel/Blood Doll. I don't think I would ever
consider playing in the NAC without at least one of these cards. Are
they distorting the metagame? No, they're part of the metagame.
So is Pentex. Pentex is a good card, it doesn't mean it distorts the
metagame. If it were, it would mean only a few decks prevail because
of Pentex.
> This is probably also the case for other cards like Carlton, Dreams &
> Info H-way... but those cards do not have the scope to destroy a
> person's game.
? You should also banish Decapitate and Amaranth then, and ToGP. They
are much more definitive.
Vincent
Do you believe that 1161 out of 1549 TWD use either Blood Doll,
Vessel, Minion Tap or Villein? That a fabulous 74.95%
The decks that use none seems to be all pesky weenies.
extrala
> ..
> So is Pentex. Pentex is a good card, it doesn't mean it distorts the
> metagame. If it were, it would mean only a few decks prevail because
> of Pentex.
Usually I don't write "me-too" posts, but this one deserves it, since
Vincent in this (and other posts) has written down the same arguments
for keeping Pentex Subversion in exactly the same as I would have
argued too.
Pentex is a good card, yes, but banning the card is really not
necessary. Arguments? Read Vincent's posts again.
Best Regards, Ralf
P.S.: I will put a put a poll on banning Pentex Subversion on my blog
(http://extrala.blogspot.com). In addition read the poll results on
player's usage of Pentex Subversions by players:
http://extrala.blogspot.com/2009/12/poll-results-how-many-copies-of-pentex.html
Amenophobis
Did you post the link to your poll also on the VEKN website?
extrala
> On 13 Jan., 11:27, extrala <ralf.lamm...@gmx.de> wrote:
> > P.S.: I will put a put a poll on banning Pentex Subversion on my blog
> > (http://extrala.blogspot.com). In addition read the poll results on
> > player's usage of Pentex Subversions by players:http://extrala.blogspot.com/2009/12/poll-results-how-many-copies-of-p...
>
> Did you post the link to your poll also on the VEKN website?
suoli
> On 13 jan, 05:28, Juggernaut1981 <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And it's distortion is basically this: I must always assume
> > that someone will play Pentex Subversion on me.
>
> So you're scared of playing, or paranoid? Because worse things can
> happen that being pentexed, such as being burned by a 2-cap pot
> vampire, or being Banished.
> That's no big deal. Pentex is not definitive (can be burned).
Banishment or 2-cap murder machine doesn't get played in nearly every
game. Pentex does.
>
> > That means that
> > people feel they must either: pack 1 or 2 copies to contest the card
> > or pack 2 or more copies of Wash/SR.
>
> No need, unless your deck is very sensitive to Pentex. In that case,
> add countermeasures (such as including Pentex on your own), just like
> you add some Delaying Tactics if you're sensible to votes.
That's his complaint: need to pack countermeasures.
>
> > From what I've seen, I don't think I would ever consider playing in
> > the NAC without 2 Wash/SR or 2 Pentex Subversions. It just seems
> > stupid to consider doing anything else. That is a distortion of the
> > metagame.
>
> Just like Villein or Vessel/Blood Doll. I don't think I would ever
> consider playing in the NAC without at least one of these cards. Are
> they distorting the metagame? No, they're part of the metagame.
Villein, Vessel or Blood Doll don't need to be answered. Very few
decks pack Suddens just because someone might ruin their game by
playing a Villein. Pentex has to be answered.
>
> So is Pentex. Pentex is a good card, it doesn't mean it distorts the
> metagame. If it were, it would mean only a few decks prevail because
> of Pentex.
Pentex doesn't distort the metagame because it's good. It distorts the
metagame by being in every deck ever and being strong enough to force
people to have an answer.
>
> > This is probably also the case for other cards like Carlton, Dreams &
> > Info H-way... but those cards do not have the scope to destroy a
> > person's game.
>
> ? You should also banish Decapitate and Amaranth then, and ToGP. They
> are much more definitive.
Decapitate, Amaranth and ToGP are not in every deck.
Izaak
>Villein, Vessel or Blood Doll don't need to be answered. Very few
>decks pack Suddens just because someone might ruin their game by
>playing a Villein. Pentex has to be answered.
I've had more of my games ruined by my predator starting with 40 pool thanks
to Villein + GB than to Pentex. Villein *certainly* needs to be answered
(unlike Minion Tap). That why you see more and more Suddens and Washes being
played.
suoli
Was it the Villein or the GB? Either way, our experiences differ.
Brum
Indeed. For some reason people are traumatized by the experience they
had with Pentex.
I see Pentex giving VP's on its own very rarely. By on its own I
include players not wanting to break it to save a guy.
But when I see 3 superior Governs without block, or 2 Villeins without
cancel, I see the respective methuselah on a row for TW.
Yes, gentlemen. The meta will see more Suddens and Washes.
But not because of Pentex.
More and more people will use the delicious and broken cheese of
Lilith's Blessing, Villein, Heidelberg Castle or simply Minion Tap.
Free hordes of 8 caps is way stronger then the ability to pay 2 pool
to immobilize 1 minion for as long as the table wishes it.
Again, I think that cards like Pentex force players to play better and
build better decks. Nothing wrong with that.
Tiago
suoli
>
> Again, I think that cards like Pentex force players to play better and
> build better decks. Nothing wrong with that.
>
> Tiago
How does having Pentex promote better play and better deck building as
opposed to not having Pentex?
Juggernaut1981
is simple: If you think it needs significant changes (enough to
warrant a major errata) then it should be banned instead to make it
simple for everyone currently playing or who may join the game before
VTES is put into production again and Pentex Subversion gets a
reprint.
> Yes, gentlemen. The meta will see more Suddens and Washes.
> But not because of Pentex.
> More and more people will use the delicious and broken cheese of
> Lilith's Blessing, Villein, Heidelberg Castle or simply Minion Tap.
> Free hordes of 8 caps is way stronger then the ability to pay 2 pool
> to immobilize 1 minion for as long as the table wishes it.
Of course I would consider playing Wash/SR to stop all sorts of other
powerful master cards. It's something I would consider *on its own*.
Put in 2 copies of Wash/SR to stop: Golconda, Giant's Blood, Week of
Nightmares, Antidiluvian, etc.
If I went to the NAC, I'd feel compelled to put in *an additional 2
copies* of Wash/SR purely to deal with Pentex.
>
> Again, I think that cards like Pentex force players to play better and
> build better decks. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, I honestly don't think Pentex builds better predators or
preys. It's a silver-bullet for a Predator with a Star-Wall prey or
for a Prey with a Star-Bleed Predator. Pentex allows you to basically
remove a problem, it doesn't help you get around it, it doesn't help
you compensate against it, it doesn't help you utilise the vampires
you have more effectively against the minion you want to Pentex. It
basically just removes them from play until people run out of
intercept. It's a Sensory Deprivation as a Master Card. People are
regularly talking about banning Sensory Deprivation (or reprinting
it), and its the same sort of arguments surrounding Pentex.
In the end, my argument is this: If it is worth making **MAJOR**
changes to the text of Pentex Subversion, then ban it because it is
obviously causing a problem (i.e. it needs errata). The reason for
the ban and not the Errata is that there is no short-term likelihood
that Pentex will be reprinted.
Juggernaut1981
is simple: If you think it needs significant changes (enough to
warrant a major errata) then it should be banned instead to make it
simple for everyone currently playing or who may join the game before
VTES is put into production again and Pentex Subversion gets a
reprint.
> Yes, gentlemen. The meta will see more Suddens and Washes.
> But not because of Pentex.
> More and more people will use the delicious and broken cheese of
> Lilith's Blessing, Villein, Heidelberg Castle or simply Minion Tap.
> Free hordes of 8 caps is way stronger then the ability to pay 2 pool
> to immobilize 1 minion for as long as the table wishes it.
Of course I would consider playing Wash/SR to stop all sorts of other
powerful master cards. It's something I would consider *on its own*.
Put in 2 copies of Wash/SR to stop: Golconda, Giant's Blood, Week of
Nightmares, Antidiluvian, etc.
If I went to the NAC, I'd feel compelled to put in *an additional 2
copies* of Wash/SR purely to deal with Pentex.
>
> Again, I think that cards like Pentex force players to play better and
> build better decks. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, I honestly don't think Pentex builds better predators or
Brum
By better play, I mean that it forces players to reevaluate the table
and, when Pentex is played, ponder on what to do about it. Many times
this is the only way certain players start looking to the table as a
whole and not just at the Prey (or worse - Predator). It shifts table
dynamics and enhances the possibility of interaction or deals (usually
between the person having the Pentexed minion and someone else). That
adds fun.
By better deck making I mean that players that focus their decks too
much and don't use cards "that don't do nothing for their strategy,
directly" might reconsider making smarter choices in slots.
Sure with 9 Toreador Grand Balls you have a better chance of having
one in your hand, but guess what - the Toreador in the ballroom might
have the Pentex on his tail. And in a way he dislikes.
So now you use Suddens or a few Washes.
Maybe next time you might not cancel a Pentex, but because of your
smarter slot choices, you might cancel that Villein that would delay
you a VP for a couple more turns.
I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I still see bad plays / card
choices that enhance issues to the size of problems.
Tiago
Reyda !
> For some reason people are traumatized by the experience they
> had with Pentex.
> I see Pentex giving VP's on its own very rarely. By on its own I
> include players not wanting to break it to save a guy.
>
> But when I see 3 superior Governs without block, or 2 Villeins without
> cancel, I see the respective methuselah on a row for TW.
Best demonstration so far on this thread.
Thanks Tiago !
suoli
> On Jan 13, 9:27 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 13 tammi, 22:58, Brum <tiago.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Again, I think that cards like Pentex force players to play better and
> > > build better decks. Nothing wrong with that.
>
> > > Tiago
>
> > How does having Pentex promote better play and better deck building as
> > opposed to not having Pentex?
>
> By better play, I mean that it forces players to reevaluate the table
> and, when Pentex is played, ponder on what to do about it. Many times
> this is the only way certain players start looking to the table as a
> whole and not just at the Prey (or worse - Predator). It shifts table
> dynamics and enhances the possibility of interaction or deals (usually
> between the person having the Pentexed minion and someone else). That
> adds fun.
I would argue that the players that are most likely to need help from
the table as a result of Pentex are the ones that are least likely to
require that lesson. Superstars and walls tend to gather crosstable
hate. Conversely, the decks that traditionally don't get involved in
table politics can easily ignore or remove Pentex.
>
> By better deck making I mean that players that focus their decks too
> much and don't use cards "that don't do nothing for their strategy,
> directly" might reconsider making smarter choices in slots.
On the other hand, it provides a single, easy solution to several
problems that would otherwise require creative deck building. Why play
Mind Numb, Signet of King Saul, Burning Candle or Burden the Mind when
you can just play Pentex?
> Sure with 9 Toreador Grand Balls you have a better chance of having
> one in your hand, but guess what - the Toreador in the ballroom might
> have the Pentex on his tail. And in a way he dislikes.
> So now you use Suddens or a few Washes.
> Maybe next time you might not cancel a Pentex, but because of your
> smarter slot choices, you might cancel that Villein that would delay
> you a VP for a couple more turns.
I can agree with "better in the current environment" but "smarter"
would imply a higher degree of intelligence and creativity. I don't
think cards that fit any deck and answer a large number of deck
building problems at once promote higher deck building skills.
>
> I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I still see bad plays / card
> choices that enhance issues to the size of problems.
>
> Tiago
I know what you mean but the issues exist even in the absence of bad
play.
Reyda !
> On the other hand, it provides a single, easy solution to several
> problems that would otherwise require creative deck building. Why play
> Mind Numb, Signet of King Saul, Burning Candle or Burden the Mind when
> you can just play Pentex?
The same can be said about direct intervention, archon investigation
and a whole lot of other master cards.
Master cards are supposed to create a good effect on the game since in
theory you can play only one per turn.
that said, i play burning candle and signet of king saul an awful lot.
And i saw a lot of decks using Blind spot instead of Pentex for the
decisive blow.
suoli
> On 16 jan, 16:30, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, it provides a single, easy solution to several
> > problems that would otherwise require creative deck building. Why play
> > Mind Numb, Signet of King Saul, Burning Candle or Burden the Mind when
> > you can just play Pentex?
>
> The same can be said about direct intervention,
Yes, and I often do.
> archon investigation
This I don't agree with. AI is a very specific answer.
>
> and a whole lot of other master cards.
> Master cards are supposed to create a good effect on the game since in
> theory you can play only one per turn.
>
> that said, i play burning candle and signet of king saul an awful lot.
> And i saw a lot of decks using Blind spot instead of Pentex for the
> decisive blow.
You've obviously made a smart choice. Many other players fall for the
Pentex-crutch.
Izaak
As in, it targets one vampire and shuts it down from what it's been doing?
Given how common bleed is, that doesn't sound all too specific to me.
>> and a whole lot of other master cards.
>> Master cards are supposed to create a good effect on the game since in
>> theory you can play only one per turn.
>>
>> that said, i play burning candle and signet of king saul an awful lot.
>> And i saw a lot of decks using Blind spot instead of Pentex for the
>> decisive blow.
>
> You've obviously made a smart choice. Many other players fall for the
> Pentex-crutch.
That's because Blind Spot only helps one of your guys and requires you to
target a younger vampire. Neither of these limitations are very helpful when
trying to slot in a pentex-like effect. If Blind Spot were a trifle, sure,
it'd see more play. As printed? No thanks.
suoli
> > This I don't agree with. AI is a very specific answer.
>
> As in, it targets one vampire and shuts it down from what it's been doing?
> Given how common bleed is, that doesn't sound all too specific to me.
It doesn't "target one vampire and shut it down from what it's been
doing". AI burns a vampire that is currently bleeding you for more
than 3. It has one relatively small opportunity cost and one pretty
big opportunity cost that many decks can't even meet. The opportunity
cost for Pentex is that your opponent controls a minion. The two are
not in the slightest bit comparable in that regard.
Vincent
> On 17 tammi, 18:29, "Izaak" <nom...@usenet.plz> wrote:
>
> > > This I don't agree with. AI is a very specific answer.
>
> > As in, it targets one vampire and shuts it down from what it's been doing?
> > Given how common bleed is, that doesn't sound all too specific to me.
>
> It doesn't "target one vampire and shut it down from what it's been
> doing".
So Banishment should be banished too. For my part, I prefer being
Pentexed rather than Banished.
During the last tournament, Richter was pentex on round 1 and Banished
during the final round. The latest was far worse.
We should banish ToGP too and Sensory Deprivation which fail under
your categorization and are far worse.
suoli
You're comparing apples and orangutans. How many decks can play
Banishment? Or ToGP? Or Sensory Deprivation? Compare that number to
the number of decks that can play Pentex. What are the requirements
for a successful Banishment? Or ToGP? Or Sensory Deprivation? Compare
those requirements to those of successfully playing Pentex. Which of
those cards can be played in as many or more decks and as easily or
easier than Pentex?
Reyda !
> > We should banish ToGP too and Sensory Deprivation which fail under
> > your categorization and are far worse.
>
> You're comparing apples and orangutans.
which are so different ! i suck on apples, and love apple juice, but
same cannot be said about orang outang.
the point vincent was traying to prove : your own definition of "What
is the Mat... The Pentex ?" corresponds to other's people definition
of banishment or sensory deprivation. Then they would like to ban
those cards the same way you want to ban pentex. As Vincent said,
pentex is temporary, can be removed, wihle the effect of banishment or
archon investigation can't really be undone with a single successful
action.
Honnestly, i would say that a deck that is incapable of removing a
pentex wether by itself (stealth, brute force) or by asking for
compensated help (conboon, torp rescue etc), then too bad for him. :)
then you may say : the problem may be that the turn pentex is played,
usually it's too late. Then i would respond : play accordingly. If the
removing of a key vampire, wether by pente, banishment, spirit
marionnette/daring etc would lead your predator to suck 9 pools from
you, then do not get low on pool, and play cautiously. It's a thing
that saved me in many tournaments, pentex or not !
> Which of
> those cards can be played in as many or more decks and as easily or
> easier than Pentex?
it's funny, because the power of pentex has been discovered quite
rececently in the history of v:tes iirc :)
Who would think it would become such a big problem ? :)
suoli
> On 17 jan, 20:37, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > We should banish ToGP too and Sensory Deprivation which fail under
> > > your categorization and are far worse.
>
> > You're comparing apples and orangutans.
>
> which are so different ! i suck on apples, and love apple juice, but
> same cannot be said about orang outang.
>
> the point vincent was traying to prove : your own definition of "What
> is the Mat... The Pentex ?" corresponds to other's people definition
> of banishment or sensory deprivation. Then they would like to ban
> those cards the same way you want to ban pentex. As Vincent said,
> pentex is temporary, can be removed, wihle the effect of banishment or
> archon investigation can't really be undone with a single successful
> action.
No, he said that we should banish ToGP and Sensory Deprivation as
well, "which fail under your categorization". Sounds to me like he's
saying "these cards are equal to or worse than Pentex under your
definition of problematic". The statement you're ascribing to him
amounts to "if you want to ban something that falls under your
criteria for problematic you should ban something that falls under a
completely different set of criteria, as well". Which doesn't really
prove any point about my criteria.
>
> Honnestly, i would say that a deck that is incapable of removing a
> pentex wether by itself (stealth, brute force) or by asking for
> compensated help (conboon, torp rescue etc), then too bad for him. :)
>
> then you may say : the problem may be that the turn pentex is played,
> usually it's too late. Then i would respond : play accordingly. If the
> removing of a key vampire, wether by pente, banishment, spirit
> marionnette/daring etc would lead your predator to suck 9 pools from
> you, then do not get low on pool, and play cautiously. It's a thing
> that saved me in many tournaments, pentex or not !
So I'm bored with playing against Pentex and your solution is play
better? Don't worry about me, I know how to play. But Pentex still
bores me to death.
Vincent
> So I'm bored with playing against Pentex and your solution is play
> better? Don't worry about me, I know how to play. But Pentex still
> bores me to death.
Why exactly are you bored playing with Pentex?
I mean, it's a good card to unlock some situations, usually for 1
turn. It makes the game go forward, but maybe you're a very defensive
player?
Maybe it bores you because in your playgroup the one who plays Pentex
blocks all your attempts to burn it? Then, I think that it's more
playing against a wall deck that is boring, not the pentex itself.
Is it more boring than having one's key action being DIed?
Some said that it was boring because it was kind of "auto
include" (which is wrong because i've some decks without pentex). Is
it that point that bothers you, that some player perform brainless
deckbuilding?
Do you always play against the same kind of deck that plays Pentex?
Is it more boring than sitting as the prey of a Malkavian stealth
bleed (unless you play some Vignes deflection deck)?
Usually, one gets bored because he can't play. Either because being
ousted too quickly, or because during the whole game nothing works
(blocks, being rushed etc.) Once again, Pentex lasts usually one turn,
on one minion. So you should be partially bored, and not for a long
time. Less time than if you're being banished or sensorized. Mind Numb
should be boring too.
So, why are you bored playing with Pentex?
suoli
>
> So, why are you bored playing with Pentex?
I've discussed this earlier in this thread.
Rehlow
>
> Honnestly, i would say that a deck that is incapable of removing a
> pentex wether by itself (stealth, brute force) or by asking for
> compensated help (conboon, torp rescue etc), then too bad for him. :)
>
> then you may say : the problem may be that the turn pentex is played,
> usually it's too late. Then i would respond : play accordingly. If the
> removing of a key vampire, wether by pente, banishment, spirit
> marionnette/daring etc would lead your predator to suck 9 pools from
> you, then do not get low on pool, and play cautiously. It's a thing
> that saved me in many tournaments, pentex or not !
>
Just this past Sunday I saw Pentex directly responsible for an oust on
Turn 5 (by the player that had 1 transfer, so everyone else had 4
turns at that point).
Turn 3a Gratiano Governs down and Julia Prima comes out (Gratiano
already in play thanks for 1st turn Info Highway).
Turn 3b Cock Robin comes out.
Turn 4a Cock Robin gets Pentexed. Cock Robin Methesulah is bled for 10
by Gratiano and Julia Prima. CR Meth at 8 because of playing
Heidelberg on turn 1.
Turn 4b Blood Doll on CR. Washed. Second Blood Doll on CR. -1 blood,
+1 pool. Some 4 cap Nos comes out. CR Meth at 5 pool.
Turn 4c CR's prey agrees to remove Pentex for X amount of time of no
pressure. CR says whatever, he'll be fighting to stay alive the rest
of the game.
Turn 5a Gratiano bleeds for 5. CR attempts to block. Grat gets some
stealth, CR plays 2nd Tradition. Julia Prima plays that Obtenebration
block fails card. 4 cap Nos is unable to get enough intercept. Game
over.
Sure, a lot of other things could have happened, but to me the Pentex
seemed a crucial piece. Had the Blood Dolls been Villeins, the Cock
Robin player might have lived, but knowing more about his deck than I
revealed here, Blood Doll looks like the right choice. Maybe the 4 cap
should have come out first, but the deck plays a lot of 2nd Tradition
and it was a small tournament so the whole table already knew the
amount of stealth the bleed deck was capable of. In absence of Pentex,
Cock Robin was probably his best bet to block bleeds. I don't know
because Cock Robin was never able to act, but he might have had a Deep
Song for a rush and then would be untapped afterwards to be ready to
block. A lot of different choices could have been made, but this is
what happened.
Later,
~Rehlow
elotar
OMFG, guy was bleeded with stealth for 15 at the first turns and it's
the pentex, which is the problem!
In our last torney we got powerbleed with 8 brainwashes, which can
kill it's prey even before it got any minions out.
WE NEED TO BAN BRAINWASH!!!
Juggernaut1981
is directly affecting the mindset of players when they are building
decks.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/8fd0e5f30b40f538
The thing I noticed about that "Pentex Story" of Rehlows was this:
Pentex forced the prey to spend more pool when they were already under
serious pressure and the LAST thing they wanted to do was spend pool.
It effectively forced the Cock Robin player to spend 4 pool to get
hold of another minion to try keep themselves alive.
Kushiel
> I find this link a very telling statement about HOW Pentex Subversion
> is directly affecting the mindset of players when they are building
> decks.
>
For those who don't feel like reading an entire post to track down one
sentence fragment, here's the relevant text, in the context of how the
poster would change the deck if he was going to play it again:
"...and remove Narrow Mind in order to put Pentex Subversion."
I see a statement about removing a mediocre card and replacing it with
a good one. Nothing about how Pentex affects the mindset of the
poster.
> The thing I noticed about that "Pentex Story" of Rehlows was this:
> Pentex forced the prey to spend more pool when they were already under
> serious pressure and the LAST thing they wanted to do was spend pool.
> It effectively forced the Cock Robin player to spend 4 pool to get
> hold of another minion to try keep themselves alive.
Unless the Cock deck was basically made of wakes, I'm pretty sure that
the guy who got killed by a fast deck would probably have needed to
bring out a second vampire to try to survive anyway. The only insight
I gained into VTES from Rehlow's story is that Dominate Is Good, which
I'm pretty sure I've heard somewhere once before.
John Eno
Blooded Sand
> The only insight
> I gained into VTES from Rehlow's story is that Dominate Is Good, which
> I'm pretty sure I've heard somewhere once before.
>
> John Eno
Not the fact that one card negated someone's entire game? the EXACT
same way that if it had been an early PTO, their entire game is down
the tube?
Where are you not seeing the correlation? 2 pool allows someone to
remove a players ability to play. The point of any game is to play. If
one single element of a game allows one to remove a players ability to
play for a negligible cost, it is not conducive to playing. Is that
stating implicitly simply enough for you?
Aaron Clark
>the guy who got killed by a fast deck would probably have needed to
>bring out a second vampire to try to survive anyway. The only insight
>I gained into VTES from Rehlow's story is that Dominate Is Good, which
>I'm pretty sure I've heard somewhere once before.
It sounds like the Cock Robin deck had a decent chance of surviving
with 2nd Traditions if Cock Robin had been capable of blocking. 2nd
Tradition qualifies as a "wake", I think, and those Prince/Justicar
decks often seem to be made of them.
Obviously CR's predator got lucky with a first turn Information
Highway. But what this story tells me is that star vampire wall decks
are hosed by Pentex.
I think that a vampire with a Pentex should be able to take an action
to attempt to sneak past the van parked outside their apartment, that
is, to remove the Pentex. Pentex still would hose star vampire decks,
but at least the star would have a chance to do *something*.
Kushiel
> Not the fact that one card negated someone's entire game?
It didn't.
The oustee was ousted because his predator had out two vampires with
DOM and inherent +bleed. As a counter-example, imagine if the Pentex-
playing player had had out the same pool investment's worth of
vampires, but that they'd been in the form of George Frederick,
Lithrac and Wolfgang. Would Pentex have ruined the oustee's game in
that case?
> the EXACT
> same way that if it had been an early PTO, their entire game is down
> the tube?
1) PTO couldn't target Cock Robin, and 2) is banned from tournament
play. Stop feeding apples to my ouran outang.
> Where are you not seeing the correlation? 2 pool allows someone to
> remove a players ability to play.
...if that player has based his entire game on blocking with a single
minion, this is true. When that's the case, there are any number of
cards which don't even cost as much as two pool and an MPA to ruin
that deck's game.
Again, as a counter-example, if the oustee's pool investment had been
in Richard Tauber, Zoe and Isabel de Leon, would Pentex have removed
his ability to play?
> The point of any game is to play. If
> one single element of a game allows one to remove a players ability to
> play for a negligible cost, it is not conducive to playing. Is that
> stating implicitly simply enough for you?
It's simple, and it's true in a general sense, but it's not true in
the case of Pentex. Pentex hampers a player's ability to do certain
things if he's made certain choices, it doesn't prevent him from
playing, and the same can be said of every card in the game worth
playing in serious competition.
John Eno
Izaak
> Pentex forced the prey to spend more pool when they were already under
> serious pressure and the LAST thing they wanted to do was spend pool.
> It effectively forced the Cock Robin player to spend 4 pool to get
> hold of another minion to try keep themselves alive.
All I'm reading there is that someone who gets lucky with an Info Highway
bleeds for 15 in two turns with dominate. I also read how he stealthed past
the Second Tradition.
Clearly this is the fault of Pentex.
Kushiel
> Obviously CR's predator got lucky with a first turn Information
> Highway. But what this story tells me is that star vampire wall decks
> are hosed by Pentex.
Right. The same way that they're hosed by Blanket of Night, or
Seduction (which the Lasombra player's deck was almost certainly
running as well). Nobody seems to be calling for them to be banned or
eratta'd, unless I missed a thread here.
John Eno
Juggernaut1981
*sigh* [tone=sarcasm]
No, the fact that pentex made a 10-pool investment useless at the cost
of 2 pool clearly had nothing to do with the fact that the player got
ousted. Clearly just S&B is the only winner and every deck should
pack extra dominate, ivory bow, heart of cheating, pentex subversion,
Carlton and a handful of other cards everyone immediately suggests
should be in every deck.
Imagine if the Ousted Player had been able to declare blocks with
their 10-pool investment vampire?
Imagine if the Ousted Player had been able to recruit a Raven Spy,
untapped Cock Robin, then recruited a Raptor before playing 2nd
Tradition & Cat's Guidance to block before unloading a world of
Animalism Combat onto their predator...?
Imagine if the Ousted Player had brought out 10 pool of vampires with
AUS and had intercept packed to the eyeballs?
Imagine if the moon was in the house of Aquarius at the time when the
grand predator drew Carlton van Wyk and the grand prey drew a White
Nights Massacre....?
[/tone]
Imagine if people stopped recommending that EVERY deck should include
Pentex, Carlton or Dominate? Wouldn't that lead to a much more
interesting play environment?
One where we wouldn't have to expect that our predator WILL have
Pentex because 'everyone' advises you to have a copy of Pentex, even
if it is just so you can contest it and make sure your bigger vampires
aren't neutered permanently like a cat...
Will it happen while Pentex is a legal card play? NO
Are there ways to get around Star-Blockers? Yes (Seduction, Call of
the Hungry Dead, Neutral Guard, Elder Impersonation, etc...)
Will it suddenly hurt the chances of decks that would plan to use
Pentex as an 'offense' card if Pentex was banned? I very much doubt
it.
Would it potentially free up 1+ card slots in every deck that will end
up being played in events such as the EuroChamps & NAC? I'd be
thinking so... No need to pack a Pentex or an extra 2+ Wash/SRs to
neutralise Pentex...
librarian
Here's the key word. Player b should have had a Wash in his hand before he
agreed to not self oust (ie, before the game started).
:P
chris
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
Noooo somebody might have Pentex. Doesn't bother me. Say, this Enkidu
deck I have, preparing for Pentex also made me prepare for a ton of
other similar effects and occurrences (being beat up, having crap like
SD played on him). Now, what I do and what happens to me in an
ordinary game is just that, what happens to me. But if you can prepare
a big cap rush deck against Pentex so that it consistently works, I
just don't see where's the problem. Hey maybe SCE should be banned
since you see it everywhere and it has made combat so that only
Immortal Grapple is worth anything in combat and many other combat
disciplines simply suck balls as they don't have Immortal Grapple.
suoli
wrote:
> What's the big problem in having to prepare for the metagame, anyway?
In a previous episode of Pentex: The Eternal Debate.
> > I can only agree to it being powerful and used a lot, like a lot of
> > other cards. I just see it as another challenge to superstar decks, a
> > way to enable non-stealth actions and sometimes a nice delay to
> > stealth bleed or other decks that would ruin your game before you got
> > a chance to do anything about it with your minions, and so on. How is
> > that boring?
>
> Mostly because every deck is always a Pentex deck, no matter what else
> it's supposed to be. It starts to feel like you're always playing
> against the same deck.
Vincent
Let's have a look:
1/ "Banishment or 2-cap murder machine doesn't get played in nearly
every
game. Pentex does. "
2/ "Pentex doesn't distort the metagame because it's good. It distorts
the
metagame by being in every deck ever and being strong enough to force
people to have an answer. "
3/ "Playing Pentex isn't a smart choice. It doesn't display depth of
strategic thinking. It's just a stupid no brainer. "
Point 1 can't bother you. Because Villein, Blood Dolls and Giant's
Blood being played in nearly every game should also then. Also it
would mean you get bored every game you play.
I disagree with point 2. Pentex doesn't distort the metagame since
Pentex is strong against "big star" decks, but still there's plenty of
"big star" decks. If Pentex were distorting the metagame, we should
only see small cap vampires with stealth to remove the pentexes.So
maybe you're bored for another reason?
Point 3. It's not the Pentex that seems boring, it's the players you
play with.
The most boring games I played were those with a peculiar player who
would play always the same deck with Vampiric Disease, events, a lot
of table attrition and so on. (It was boring because he had to lose
deal frequently but the table was a mess). Still, Vampiric Disease
don't deserve to be ban (the player was banned in fact, but for other
reasons).
For my part, I'm not pissed off by any of these 3 points. Pentex is
played often? I don't care, even in my star decks (I take
countermeasures just as a weenie would against votes). I don't feel it
distorts the metagame any way. And players with bad deckbuilding
skills are easy to oust.
So I'm against changing Pentex.
suoli
> On 19 jan, 17:23, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 19 tammi, 16:49, Vincent <v.rip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > So, why are you bored playing with Pentex?
>
> > I've discussed this earlier in this thread.
>
> Let's have a look:
>
> 1/ "Banishment or 2-cap murder machine doesn't get played in nearly
> every
> game. Pentex does. "
> 2/ "Pentex doesn't distort the metagame because it's good. It distorts
> the
> metagame by being in every deck ever and being strong enough to force
> people to have an answer. "
> 3/ "Playing Pentex isn't a smart choice. It doesn't display depth of
> strategic thinking. It's just a stupid no brainer. "
>
> Point 1 can't bother you. Because Villein, Blood Dolls and Giant's
> Blood being played in nearly every game should also then. Also it
> would mean you get bored every game you play.
Yes it can. I'm not bothered by 3 distinct, individual points. I'm
bothered by the combined effect of those 3 points. In that light, it
doesn't make much sense to analyze them separately.
>
> I disagree with point 2. Pentex doesn't distort the metagame since
> Pentex is strong against "big star" decks, but still there's plenty of
> "big star" decks. If Pentex were distorting the metagame, we should
> only see small cap vampires with stealth to remove the pentexes.So
> maybe you're bored for another reason?
I disagree. Making big caps absolutely and plainly unplayable is not
the only possible way Pentex can distort the metagame. Deflection
clearly distorts the metagame against s&b (but arguably in a way that
benefits the game) but s&b is still playable.
>
> Point 3. It's not the Pentex that seems boring, it's the players you
> play with.
No, it's the Pentex. I can't blame tournament players for playing
Pentex. It's a strong choice at best and an absolute necessity at
worst.
>
> The most boring games I played were those with a peculiar player who
> would play always the same deck with Vampiric Disease, events, a lot
> of table attrition and so on. (It was boring because he had to lose
> deal frequently but the table was a mess). Still, Vampiric Disease
> don't deserve to be ban (the player was banned in fact, but for other
> reasons).
>
> For my part, I'm not pissed off by any of these 3 points. Pentex is
> played often? I don't care, even in my star decks (I take
> countermeasures just as a weenie would against votes). I don't feel it
> distorts the metagame any way. And players with bad deckbuilding
> skills are easy to oust.
> So I'm against changing Pentex.
In conclusion, you don't mind Pentex and I do mind Pentex.
Vincent
> Pentex, Carlton or Dominate? Wouldn't that lead to a much more
> interesting play environment?
Don't listen to people. I play very rarely Carlton, I do play some
deck with Pentex, most of my decks don't have dominate.
I like to crush the other's Carlton with some Boxed In. As it is, the
game is interesting (I'm more concerned by 3 MPA + Ashur decks), it
won't be more interesting without Pentex.
> One where we wouldn't have to expect that our predator WILL have
> Pentex because 'everyone' advises you to have a copy of Pentex, even
> Will it happen while Pentex is a legal card play? NO
Same thing for deflection. I always expect my prey playing dominate to
have deflections because everyone advised him to play some. ;) Will it
happen if deflection was banned? NO.
> if it is just so you can contest it and make sure your bigger vampires
> aren't neutered permanently like a cat...
Permanently?
> Are there ways to get around Star-Blockers? Yes (Seduction, Call of
> the Hungry Dead, Neutral Guard, Elder Impersonation, etc...)
> Will it suddenly hurt the chances of decks that would plan to use
> Pentex as an 'offense' card if Pentex was banned? I very much doubt
> it.
The Julia Prima guy could have played a Seduction instead. It wouldn't
have changed much to the result (oh yeah, I would require him to play
another block denial, saving 2 pool). It just happened that he had
pentex in hand.
> Would it potentially free up 1+ card slots in every deck that will end
> up being played in events such as the EuroChamps & NAC? I'd be
> thinking so... No need to pack a Pentex or an extra 2+ Wash/SRs to
> neutralise Pentex...
Well, even with Pentex legal, there's no "need" to.
I play a swarm deck. I may want to play Delaying Tactics or Poison
Pill not to get killed by an Ancilla, and the Uncoiling to thwart a
Scourge of the Enochians.
I play a deck without bounce or intercept. I may want to play Archon
Investigation or Protected Resources not to get killed by a stealth
bleed deck, and some delaying or votes not to get killed by a voting
predator.
I play a Cock Robin intercept deck. I may want to play DI to cancel
that Seduction or Banishment, or Wash to cancel that Brainwash, Pentex
It seems like you would like Cock Robin to be a super hero. It's just
another type of deck with its qualities and flaws.
suoli
>
> I play a swarm deck. I may want to play Delaying Tactics or Poison
> Pill not to get killed by an Ancilla, and the Uncoiling to thwart a
> Scourge of the Enochians.
>
> I play a deck without bounce or intercept. I may want to play Archon
> Investigation or Protected Resources not to get killed by a stealth
> bleed deck, and some delaying or votes not to get killed by a voting
> predator.
>
> I play a Cock Robin intercept deck. I may want to play DI to cancel
> that Seduction or Banishment, or Wash to cancel that Brainwash, Pentex
>
> It seems like you would like Cock Robin to be a super hero. It's just
> another type of deck with its qualities and flaws.
I play {deck}. I will want to play Pentex. Do you see how a general
answer applicable to every deck is different from a specific answer to
a specific threat in a specific deck?
Blooded Sand
You are conflating the effects of a transient card, that has the
effect once, with a card that has that effect permanently
Huge difference
Blooded Sand
> On Jan 19, 6:02 pm, Blooded Sand <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Not the fact that one card negated someone's entire game?
>
> It didn't.
>
> The oustee was ousted because his predator had out two vampires with
> DOM and inherent +bleed. As a counter-example, imagine if the Pentex-
> playing player had had out the same pool investment's worth of
> vampires, but that they'd been in the form of George Frederick,
> Lithrac and Wolfgang. Would Pentex have ruined the oustee's game in
> that case?
>
> > the EXACT
> > same way that if it had been an early PTO, their entire game is down
> > the tube?
>
> 1) PTO couldn't target Cock Robin, and 2) is banned from tournament
> play. Stop feeding apples to my ouran outang.
Replace Cock Robin with A NSftM packing cesewayo. PTO hoses his game.
Completely. The fact that it was Copck Robin is incidental to the fact
that one card negated his deck. One card that he would have to have a
specific silver bullet in hand to deal with when the negator is
played.
>
> > Where are you not seeing the correlation? 2 pool allows someone to
> > remove a players ability to play.
>
> ...if that player has based his entire game on blocking with a single
> minion, this is true. When that's the case, there are any number of
> cards which don't even cost as much as two pool and an MPA to ruin
> that deck's game.
Show me one other card please that has a permanent effect that has as
much iimpact. The only other 2 cards that have this much effect are
sens dep and its aus chi equivalent. And the still allow you to act if
you can untap. As far as i can see, there is no single other card that
causes as much disruption for as small an input as pentex.
>
> Again, as a counter-example, if the oustee's pool investment had been
> in Richard Tauber, Zoe and Isabel de Leon, would Pentex have removed
> his ability to play?
>
But it was not. Strawman. It would also not have had the same effect
if he had been playing any other group of small cap vampires. The
point here is that pentex destroys superstar decks to the same extent
that PTO destroyed superstar decks.
Vincent
> I play {deck}. I will want to play Pentex. Do you see how a general
> answer applicable to every deck is different from a specific answer to
> a specific threat in a specific deck?
display depth of strategic thinking. It's just a stupid no brainer."
Besides, Pentex is not a "general answer applicable to every deck" (or
prove it!). For instance, it doesn't work against a weenie deck, such
as weenie dbr or Legacy of Pander, and is not very good against a mid
cap fight deck or stealth deck.
And I surely won't play one in a non-big star combat deck for
instance.
Kushiel
> Replace Cock Robin with A NSftM packing cesewayo. PTO hoses his game.
Well, not in tournament play, since PTO is banned. Which is why PTO
was banned.
> Completely. The fact that it was Copck Robin is incidental to the fact
> that one card negated his deck. One card that he would have to have a
> specific silver bullet in hand to deal with when the negator is
> played.
?
One card didn't negate his deck. One card negated his ability to block
with one minion for one turn. If that was enough to get him ousted,
then I submit that his deck just might have sucked. "My deck sucks" =/
= "the cards used to beat my sucky deck are overpowered."
If you build a deck which is based around one minion blocking
everything, there's a whole host of popular cards that will fuck you
over mercilessly. It's not the fault of those cards that you chose to
build such a deck, and those cards aren't overpowered as a result.
> Show me one other card please that has a permanent effect that has as
> much iimpact.
Pentex isn't permanent. The only time I can recall seeing one last
more than one turn when when it was played on Una, and that's an
extreme weirdo case.
> The only other 2 cards that have this much effect are
> sens dep and its aus chi equivalent. And the still allow you to act if
> you can untap. As far as i can see, there is no single other card that
> causes as much disruption for as small an input as pentex.
Villein tends to have a much larger effect on games, just off the top
of my head.
> But it was not. Strawman.
No, it's not a strawman. A strawman would have been if I'd made up an
argument for you and then attacked it. By pointing out that particular
deckbuilding choices led to the Cock Robin playing being ousted, and
by pointing out alternate choices he could've made that would've led
to him not being ousted, I'm directly addressing your claim that
Pentex ruined the Cock Robin player's game. It didn't - his choice not
to build a resilient deck did.
> It would also not have had the same effect
> if he had been playing any other group of small cap vampires. The
> point here is that pentex destroys superstar decks to the same extent
> that PTO destroyed superstar decks.
I'm beginning to lose faith in your abilty to differentiate between
"can't block for one turn" and "burned."
But, yes, you're correct that superstar decks based around having one
minion block get shut down by Pentex. That doesn't, in and of itself,
make Pentex overpowered, because you aren't required to build and play
superstar decks based around having one minion block, any more than
Seduction or Destructive Secrets is overpowered because they mess up
such decks.
John Eno
Kushiel
> You are conflating the effects of a transient card, that has the
> effect once, with a card that has that effect permanently
> Huge difference
Pentex isn't permanent. If you're playing as though it is, I can
understand why you think it's overpowered.
John Eno
Kushiel
> I play {deck}. I will want to play Pentex.
Even ignoring that statistic already presented to you that about half
of the TWDA entries don't have Pentex in them, ubiquity isn't a
bannable offense.
John Eno
Brum
> I play {deck}. I will want to play Pentex. Do you see how a general
> answer applicable to every deck is different from a specific answer to
> a specific threat in a specific deck?
If you are saying that every deck can and should have Pentex
Subversion, I don't agree with you.
Many of my decks don't have simply because other cards are more
useful.
Many decks in TWDA are the same. Again, Pentex, Imbued or anything
else only dominate this game in environments where people play badly
or do bad decks.
Sorry, but I think the game is balanced, unlike other card games.
And talking about numbers - there's a vote going on at extrala's blog.
Tiago
Rehlow
I noticed the smilie, but sounds like the same kind of defense of why
PTO should not have been banned.
Later,
~Rehlow