2005 Tournament Rules
LSJ
The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
Restructure, and Succubus Club.
That's all.
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=veknRules
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Frederick Scott
news:41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com...
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
That's PLENTY! ;-)
I'll throw out the first comment, since I'm here...
Sigh...I'm going to miss the table restructuring cards. Stupidly, I
never used them enough but I thought they made the game interesting
that they even existed. Even so, I'm not shocked that they should be
banned: they _were_ very powerful cards and I find the suggestion that
they might be considered "not suited for competive play" palatable.
I don't know if I'd call them "unbalanced" or "broken", exactly, though.
Succubus Club, as I commented when it was previously discussed, hadn't
been abused or broken in my part of the world. Apparently, it must have
been causing a problem elsewhere. It still seems a bit premature to me
to ban it, but again, the suggestion that it's "not suited for competitive
play" strikes me as being arguable. Wholesale trading of cards in hand
and permanents is a pretty extreme mechanic given how the game is
otherwise play. I won't really miss it.
Both of these mechanics are actually pretty extreme. It leaves me to
wonder if we might them recreated in other cards in the future. In
the case of position-switching, perhaps it might reappear with a higher
cost, more limitations, more difficult to use or what not. In the case
of permanent and/or card trading, perhaps it might be reborn in a milder
form - perhaps a card that would allow two players to trade one single
permanent for one other single permanent once per turn, for instance (or
one card in hand for one card in hand).
Fred (nope, it's not April - can't be April Fools...)
Derek Ray
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about:
>The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
>The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
>The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
>not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
>Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Hurray for the death of DU and KR.
Finally, you don't have to do 10 pool in a single turn anymore to get a
frickin' VP; you can push your prey to the ropes WITHOUT having a DI in
hand for the table-switch vote.
-- Derek
a host is a host from coast to coast
and no one will talk to a host that's close
unless the host that isn't close
is busy, hung, or dead
Joscha Duell
>
>
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
>
> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=veknRules
WHAT?!!!! No seatswitching anymore?!! Why that? There are plenty of
cards against that. There was no need to ban DU and KR. Who wanted
that change? Even in the EC final the guy who played KR didn't win the
game (although it won the final to Ruben V.). It was nasty and
annoying, but there are more annoying cards in the game, namely
Warghoul ;O). I can't believe it.
A bit disappointed,
Joscha
Rob Treasure
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
A very very sad day for VTES. Totally unnecessary and a bad move imo.
Hmmmm the game has lost a lot of appeal for me today.
Frederick Scott
news:e904e39f.0412...@posting.google.com...
> Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<u9c2r09e5gigis03d...@4ax.com>...
>
>> >The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
>> >not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
>> >Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>>
>> Hurray for the death of DU and KR.
>>
>> Finally, you don't have to do 10 pool in a single turn anymore to get a
>> frickin' VP; you can push your prey to the ropes WITHOUT having a DI in
>> hand for the table-switch vote.
>
> point - a lot of strategies had been very hampered by having to assume
> that a table-switch to steal your imminent VP is coming...
Well, one thing good about it: I've been bitching these last few months
about how the game tends to discourage pro-active fast decks. Good
players inevitably seems to play a lot of reaction because it allows
them to build up their strength slowly with permanents and pool gain.
If you try to take your prey out fast the moment you're out of the gate,
you better be able to deliver the death blow VERY fast because if you
don't, your prey starts walling up and the rest of the table immediately
begins to gang up on you since _they're_ all playing slow build-up
games too. The chance someone would find a way to pass a Dramatic
Upheavel and "steal" the oust you've been working on was just one more
thing in that pattern. And least that's one thing you won't have to
worry about any more.
Fred
Mike
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Whilst I can understand Succubus Club, from my perspective banning DU and KR
seems rather unnecessary. Given that I've got to try and explain/justify
this to my players, would you mind please sharing some of your reasoning for
the change?
Regards,
Mike Nudd
VEKN Prince of London
Simon Klibisch
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
There is a lot of luck involved in playing V:tES in a tournament
environment. One part of that is seating order. I liked the cards that
change seating order because in that way players were able to "change their
luck". These cards are political actions so they are easily stopped by a
delayed tactics and votes around the table.
As for Succubus Club, I never liked that card. It supported table split
deals and deals in general. Deals are a good portion of the "social" part of
the game but are abused in tournaments, as they allow a bad deck with a
talkative player to end up way better. As we have seen in the "Silence of
Death" tournament at the EC in Heidelberg, not to talk during games also has
a special quality.
Well, let愀 see how things work out without these cards.
Simon Klibisch
Prince of Bremerhaven (does anyone else here actually know where this is?)
:-)
John Flournoy
> >The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> >not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> >Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> Hurray for the death of DU and KR.
>
> Finally, you don't have to do 10 pool in a single turn anymore to get a
> frickin' VP; you can push your prey to the ropes WITHOUT having a DI in
> hand for the table-switch vote.
I whole-heartedly agree with Derek here, because that's an excellent
point - a lot of strategies had been very hampered by having to assume
that a table-switch to steal your imminent VP is coming...
(Case in point, the most recent storyline I played, my prey was
begging me to help him pass a seat-switch to help him snipe a
cross-table VP, offering me the moon and the stars to do so.. and
little did he know that I was already planning to seat-switch on my
turn instead to take that cross-table VP before he could get a chance
to!)
I'll add this: it'll be nice to see someone play a vote deck that
DOESN'T have a DU or KR, as it had effectively gotten to the point
where (nearly if not) every tournament vote deck automatically
included one or both of the seat-switchers, and that's a clear sign
that a card is a problem.
> -- Derek
-John Flournoy
Peter D Bakija
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Blink. Blink. <mouth agape> Blink.
...
Yah! Yah! Hurrah! Hurrah for LSJ and the Rules Team! Woo!
Thank you.
Peter D Bakija
pd...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6
"How does this end?"
"In fire."
Emperor Turhan and Kosh
Henrik Klippstr?m
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
>
> http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=veknRules
VERY good! Even thought the tableswitching cards wasn´t that hardly
abused around here, I had a feeling they were being played more and
more and made the game weird. Thanks LSJ.
Johannes Walch
news:41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com...
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
I just fell off my chair. Dramatic Upheaval and Kindred Restructure were/are
cornerstones of V:TES.
Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
reason.
Who decides which cards are getting banned? Why isn´t there any discussion
about this? I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who work
countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
A sad, sad day for V:TES.
--
johannes walch
Daneel
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Most remarkable. I think SC is a great card but banning it from
tournament play was kind of necessary.
I'm not sure what the game will be without seat switching - I
haven't seen a vote deck without seat switching in a long time.
One of the most powerful effects, clearly.
So, can we get our hopes up that PTO will follow? ;)
> That's all.
Hmm... That's a lot, you know. It sure will change a lot of things IMHO.
Can we get some sort of explanation? I'm curious what the decisions
were based on, if for nothing else than to translate the arguments
for my local group. I'm not saying I oppose these changes, I just
wish I would know the official arguments.
--
Bye,
Daneel
Guzmo
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
I somehow understand SC, but why DU & KS? Okay, I lost one game at EC
because of DU, but still... I will miss those two cards, they made the
game special.
No reason to play vote decks anymore ;)
- Guzmo
Rob Treasure
news:e7dcd37e.04120...@posting.google.com...
>
> No reason to play vote decks anymore ;)
You jest but I think that is mostly true.
Yann Seroz
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
I can't understand why DU and KR.
I think we can say "good bye" to an important part of the game : political decks.
It's a sad day for the funny side of VtES... :-((
Damnans
LSJ wrote:
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
I am glad to read that :-)
At last, no one will get the VP you have worked so hard to get.
Greetings,
Damnans
--
Sten During
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
Good to see.
Was at first a bit surprised by table switching, but recalled how
irritated I was with myself for forgetting to add Dia de los Muertos
to my deck...
Sten During
Squidalot
sniping no jumping away from your beast predator, no splits by
shifting people about.
However I'm suprised that WW went for a ban on these cards rather than
perhaps limiting them to being played once per game per player or
other adjustments.
Will WW give a fuller description of their reasons of why they were
banned (none of these cards are particularly broken over here and
Succubus club i've not seen used at all in the UK)
Hugh
LSJ
>>not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
>>Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> I just fell off my chair. Dramatic Upheaval and Kindred Restructure were/are
> cornerstones of V:TES.
? Computer Hacking maybe. Or Wake. Or KRCG News. Or Skin of Steel.
Or Torn Signpost, Govern, Majesty, Bewitching Oration, Claws of the
Dead, Lost in Crowds, Aid from Bats, Theft of Vitae, Raven Spy, or
Flash.
By the time you'd add DU and KR as a cornerstone, VTES would be a circle.
> Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
> reason.
Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
> Who decides which cards are getting banned?
The V:EKN.
> Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
> I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
> game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who work
> countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
Those opinions are taken into account.
Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
And they do not all step lockstep all the time on all issues.
Tetragrammaton
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:8bisd.88887$7i4....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
> > reason.
>
> Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
>
Do the Vp deals not undermine that prey-predator foundation on a regular
basis ?
Take away Vp deals from the game too, then
EMiliano, v:ekn Prince of Rome
<snip>
Daneel
>> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
>> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
>> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
By the way, the greatest problem with politics is still unaddressed.
When talking about a multiplayer game it would probably be a good idea
to consider whether it would be beneficial to change political actions
to be blockable not by predator or prey but by the targets of the action.
Nuking a wall prey from behind an almost ousted meatshield is even more
problematic now that the VP from the meatshield is sure not to be sniped.
Also, there's the issue of deals. I know that many folks are busy little
bees breaking deals 24/7, but since the deals can be legally honored,
"amis" won't ever break them. Also there's a reduced awareness concerning
the legality of deals, meaning that you can easily deal a table away if
you wish to. That's not fair towards 3 people, instead of the 1 people
screwed with Upheaval. Also, if you can't rearrange a table, you can't
place the dealers beside one another.
--
Bye,
Daneel
Peter D Bakija
> I can't understand why DU and KR.
'Cause with table switch votes:
A) Mean that it is pointless to spend all your effort trying to whittle your
prey down to near dead, 'cause someone across the table, who you can't
block, is going to switch seats with you and steal your hard fought for VP.
As Derek pointed out, you can't, in competetive play, realistically drop
your prey below 10 pool if you can't kill them *that instant* simply because
someone is going to likely steal your seat and all your hard work. Table
switch votes make trying to kill your prey fruitless, unless you are packing
5 or so Direct Interventions.
B) They are a huge pain in the ass, in a practical sense (granted, this is
likely not a particularly significant issue, but for my money, good
riddance. But that is me.)
> I think we can say "good bye" to an important part of the game : political
> decks.
Why? Political decks can't kill their *own* prey? Political decks without
table switch votes do very well all the time.
> It's a sad day for the funny side of VtES... :-((
You can still play them at home. Or in your own non sanctioned-tournaments.
Jozxyqk
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
(This response was originally a lot more coherent, but it
got eaten before it got posted; reconstructing it from memory)
Banning Succubus Club, I don't care one way or the other.
But banning Dramatic Upheaval and Kindred Restructure?
I'm not personally too happy with that one.
I can see all the points in favor of banning DU and KR.
You're never quite sure who your prey is.
You can hop over and "steal" a VP.
It makes "play to win" a lot greyer to judge.
*However*, I also see DU (and to a lesser extent, KR) as
having legitimate defensive strategies. I'm sure many of
you would agree that there is some merit in using it to
"get away from" a predator that your deck simply wasn't
built to handle. It's part of the knowledge of the deck.
With DU banned, it means that you'll have to otherwise
devote more deckspace to handling a larger variety of
predators. (which, in a dedicated vote deck, is already
a pretty tight space)
I would much more have preferred a rewording of DU (and,
sure, ban KR if you must), than outright banning it.
Either that, or changing the VEKN scoring rules
mathematically, so that VP-stealing is somehow discouraged
(this second option is much harder).
Here's a simple example of a reword (don't harp on the
specifics too much, I'm just pointing out that it *could* be
changed with clear text):
Dramatic Upheaval
Political Action
Choose any other Methuselah.
Successful referendum means you switch places with that
Methuselah, end your minion phase, and put this card into
play.
The next time you gain a Victory Point, the chosen Methuselah
gains that Victory Point instead (even if that Methuselah was
already ousted) and burn this card.
I hope that Monocle of Clarity can serve as a precedent that
useful cards with questionable rulings can find their way
back off of the banned list.
Daneel
wrote:
> As Derek pointed out, you can't, in competetive play, realistically drop
> your prey below 10 pool if you can't kill them *that instant* simply
> because
> someone is going to likely steal your seat and all your hard work. Table
> switch votes make trying to kill your prey fruitless, unless you are
> packing
> 5 or so Direct Interventions.
Well, that's a bit overgeneralized. If you can kill someone on 9 pool, why
don't you kill your prey? It's more a problem with leaving your prey on 1-2
pool OR leaving him or her completely defenceless. Seat switching can hose
combat decks pretty well.
--
Bye,
Daneel
Reyda
"Rob Treasure" <robtreasure'remove'@ntlworld.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:31d6ccF...@individual.net...
thinking the same thing :(
DU/ KR, to politics have always been something special, like Fame could have
been to combat decks.
i don't see the need to hamper vote decks.
XZealot
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
HooRay! HooRay! Crosstable Hose Someone Who is Not Your Prey Cards
(CHoSoWiNYP) are gone. Now that CHoSoWiNYP cards are gone you can try
to oust your prey without Dominate, Presence, or Weenies. Direct
Intervention is not a must have card and Delaying Tactics don't have
to be built into every tournament deck.
Let's burn the CHoSoWiNYPs!
Burn Them! Burn the evil CHoSoWiNYPs! Burn the evil CHoSoWiNYPs!
(two peasants in the angy mob have their heads explode from trying to
pronouce 4 syllable CHoSoWiNYP over and over again)
All joking aside, this is great!
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Janne Hägglund
> However I'm suprised that WW went for a ban on these cards rather than
> perhaps limiting them to being played once per game per player or
> other adjustments.
I have never, ever played a game where a metuselah has switched seats more
than once. Once is plenty enough.
--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
LSJ
> Do the Vp deals not undermine that prey-predator foundation on a regular
> basis ?
> Take away Vp deals from the game too, then
The illegal ones do, and are already taken away (illegal).
The legal ones do not.
Derek Ray
Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> mumbled something about:
>I can see all the points in favor of banning DU and KR.
>You're never quite sure who your prey is.
>You can hop over and "steal" a VP.
>It makes "play to win" a lot greyer to judge.
>
>*However*, I also see DU (and to a lesser extent, KR) as
>having legitimate defensive strategies. I'm sure many of
>you would agree that there is some merit in using it to
>"get away from" a predator that your deck simply wasn't
>built to handle. It's part of the knowledge of the deck.
I would agree. However, the subset of decks that can use it to "get
away" is very limited compared to the set of decks that simply cannot
use it at all, because they cannot pass the vote.
Sadly, however, the abusive uses of the card can't be prevented while
still leaving the "bail out" option intact, and so the card had to go.
>With DU banned, it means that you'll have to otherwise
>devote more deckspace to handling a larger variety of
>predators. (which, in a dedicated vote deck, is already
>a pretty tight space)
Really? This recent year at DragonCon, I finished 2nd in one tournament
with a Group 1/2 Ventrue Law Firm/Daughters deck. It had no DU or KR in
it whatsoever. I don't see DU and KR being as crucial to the vote
deck's success these days as everyone thinks, honestly. I do think that
the option to snipe VP was super-powerful, and so everyone played with
it, but removing the DU/KR wouldn't hurt its chances of ousting prey
any.
>Dramatic Upheaval
>Political Action
>Choose any other Methuselah.
>Successful referendum means you switch places with that
>Methuselah, end your minion phase, and put this card into
>play.
>The next time you gain a Victory Point, the chosen Methuselah
>gains that Victory Point instead (even if that Methuselah was
>already ousted) and burn this card.
Makes the card worthless to play. VP are already hard enough to obtain
without voluntarily giving one away.
>I hope that Monocle of Clarity can serve as a precedent that
>useful cards with questionable rulings can find their way
>back off of the banned list.
If you can find a way to reword DU/KR without allowing it to subvert the
predator/prey relationship, go for it.
-- Derek
a host is a host from coast to coast
and no one will talk to a host that's close
unless the host that isn't close
is busy, hung, or dead
LSJ
> LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> I can see all the points in favor of banning DU and KR.
> You're never quite sure who your prey is.
> You can hop over and "steal" a VP.
> It makes "play to win" a lot greyer to judge.
There's at least one more, which you mention just below:
> *However*, I also see DU (and to a lesser extent, KR) as
> having legitimate defensive strategies. I'm sure many of
> you would agree that there is some merit in using it to
> "get away from" a predator that your deck simply wasn't
> built to handle. It's part of the knowledge of the deck.
> With DU banned, it means that you'll have to otherwise
> devote more deckspace to handling a larger variety of
> predators. (which, in a dedicated vote deck, is already
> a pretty tight space)
This is one aspect of circumventing the predator-prey
relationship that the game is designed on.
> I would much more have preferred a rewording of DU (and,
> sure, ban KR if you must), than outright banning it.
Agreed. No suitable rewording has been discovered/invented
at this time however (without wallpapering or completely
changing the cards).
> Either that, or changing the VEKN scoring rules
> mathematically, so that VP-stealing is somehow discouraged
> (this second option is much harder).
VP-sniping is only one aspect of the problem.
> Here's a simple example of a reword (don't harp on the
> specifics too much, I'm just pointing out that it *could* be
> changed with clear text):
>
> Dramatic Upheaval
> Political Action
> Choose any other Methuselah.
> Successful referendum means you switch places with that
> Methuselah, end your minion phase, and put this card into
> play.
> The next time you gain a Victory Point, the chosen Methuselah
> gains that Victory Point instead (even if that Methuselah was
> already ousted) and burn this card.
If that had been implemented instead of the ban, we'd now be
talking about why not just ban it instead of wallpaper the
card *and* increase the errata count.
(That's the larger "we", BTW -- not just the two of us in
isolation.)
> I hope that Monocle of Clarity can serve as a precedent that
> useful cards with questionable rulings can find their way
> back off of the banned list.
Absolutely. That avenue is always a possibility.
Some cards, like ante cards for example, would be very difficult
to re-word. Seat changers are similarly disadvantaged, given
the nature of changing seats.
Reyda
"Janne Hägglund" <h...@iki.fi.remove.these.invalid> a écrit dans le message de
news:m3d5xqk...@etemenanki.homelinux.net...
> squi...@hotmail.com (Squidalot) writes:
>
> > However I'm suprised that WW went for a ban on these cards rather than
> > perhaps limiting them to being played once per game per player or
> > other adjustments.
>
> I have never, ever played a game where a metuselah has switched seats
more
> than once. Once is plenty enough.
I did.. and yes, i was the switcheroo vote-monkey :)
Tetragrammaton
> Tetragrammaton wrote:
> > Do the Vp deals not undermine that prey-predator foundation on a regular
> > basis ?
> > Take away Vp deals from the game too, then
>
> The illegal ones do, and are already taken away (illegal).
> The legal ones do not.
>
if that was the point behind the ban of the DU and KR.
Common legal deal involve a truce between prey and
predator often, so i don't agree with your statement
(only illegal deals undermine the predator-prey relation)
greets
Emiliano
Mochuda
>> Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
>> reason.
>
>
> Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
>
<snip>
Well bums's rush (and any rush card) should be banished too as someone
can rush me crosstable and undermine my relations with my prey/predator
and eagle sight, sensory deprivation, temptation... too
really I don't get the point
banishing DU and KR is just making S&B far easier as these decks won't
have to care about table vision
and vote decks lose the main edge
vote is a hard strategy as it requires some skills and a good flow in
playing cards (i need the vote, eventually to stealth it by, then I need
vote lock or to negociate with the one who has it)
So this strategy should be able to do something other strategies are not
able too, and that is place switch.
Yes it is a powerful strategy but they are *SO MANY* things that can
spoil it and that is actually what the game is all about !
Now what... Just play KRCs ? really nice...
Mochuda
David Cherryholmes
> vote is a hard strategy as it requires some skills and a good flow in
> playing cards (i need the vote, eventually to stealth it by, then I need
> vote lock or to negociate with the one who has it)
I've always found it the easiest strategy. Inherently stealthy,
inherently blood-free (barring a few cornercases), and most importantly,
you can flap your lips and make things happen that shouldn't. I mean, 3
intercept just beats 2 stealth, that's it, but not having vote lock in
no way precludes a vote deck from functioning successfully.
> So this strategy should be able to do something other strategies are not
> able too, and that is place switch.
It does a mountain of things other strategies don't. Now it just does
one less.
> Yes it is a powerful strategy but they are *SO MANY* things that can
> spoil it and that is actually what the game is all about !
I won't really bother refuting the several refutable things in that
sentence. Maybe someone else feels like duck hunting. I will say that
I think the effect was ass, and I'm glad to see it gone.
Further, FWIW I'm very pleased that LSJ (yeah yeah, "V:EKN") had the
boldness to make this change. Inevitably some people are going to like
it and others won't. But I've been more concerned with what I feel is a
pervasive sense of over-cautiousness in current card design and rulings,
leaving the new stuff subpar compared to the crack-addled heady days of
WotC design. Anyway, I've spent a lot of time complaining about this or
that in the past, and I just wanted to go on record and say "good job"
to Scott.
--
David Cherryholmes
David Cherryholmes
> No reason to play vote decks anymore ;)
Right, because without seat switching, unbounceable pool damage is just
crap.
--
David Cherryholmes
Mochuda
<snip>
>> So this strategy should be able to do something other strategies are
>> not able too, and that is place switch.
>
>
> It does a mountain of things other strategies don't. Now it just does
> one less.
we could banish stealth cards from obfuscate and say that now obfuscate
"just does one less" thing.
I agree this is a bit of bad faith but you get the point (or not...)
>> Yes it is a powerful strategy but they are *SO MANY* things that can
>> spoil it and that is actually what the game is all about !
>
>
> I won't really bother refuting the several refutable things in that
> sentence. Maybe someone else feels like duck hunting. I will say that
> I think the effect was ass, and I'm glad to see it gone.
if you don't bother refuting then you dont need to post reply either
i'd love to hear what is refutable in saying that the game is based on
different strategies and each one has several specific ways to deal with it
<snip>
Mochuda
Janne Hägglund
> David Cherryholmes wrote:
>
> > It does a mountain of things other strategies don't. Now it just does one
> > less.
>
> we could banish stealth cards from obfuscate and say that now obfuscate "just
> does one less" thing.
> I agree this is a bit of bad faith but you get the point (or not...)
Seriously, what's going on? Some kind of official The Sky Is Falling-week?
All ante cards are vote cards. They have already been banned from
tournaments.
It's not that voting was considered to be too powerful, it's that table
switching has been ruled to be too disruptive. Think Madness of the Bard,
instead of Return to Innocence.
And if table switchers had been regular actions or masters instead of votes,
they'd still have been banned.
Snapcase
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Thank you.
--
-Snapcase
Aramis
While I figured that Succubus Club was going to get some sort of
treatment I didn't think it would get banned outright. I really liked
Succubus Club. As a player who enjoys the RPG background of the game,
I thought the card gave the game its flavor of the clandestine deals
and backroom negotiations of ancient Methuselahs. Also as a dedicated
Assamite player I lament losing the one card that allowed me to play
the clan in character with the RPG as hired assassins. As Kevin
Mergen alluded to in an earlier thread on Succubus Club, I have
regularly used the card in my tournament level Assamite decks to
extort protection money, arrange hits, and negotiate non-aggression
pacts. It's a shame that such a useful and characterful card has to
be banned because a few people used it spitefully to throw a game or
king-make.
I don't think banning Succubus Club really solves anything though. No
one puts it in their deck with the intention of throwing the game or
kingmaking. Like myself they probably have very good legitimate uses
for the Club in mind, after all a Master slot is never something you
can afford to just waste on a whim. The problem isn't Succubbus Club,
it's bad players. A player that bleeds/PTOs/torporizes minions
cross-table for spite is just as disruptive to the table, but we don't
ban Kindred Spirits, PTO, or (D) rush cards. Too make a bad analogy:
it's not guns that kill people, it's people who kill people. The gun
(Succubus Club) is not the problem, the problem is that people are
spiteful.
I don't understand why Succubus Club got such a narrow fix to it in
CE. Had the problem been addressed by putting a cap on how much you
can transfer (1 card for 1 card, no more than 10 pool) I think the
card would have been well-limited and still very useful for those of
us with legitimate uses in mind. I don't expect these arguments are
anything new or that anything will change as a result of my words
here, but I just have to post my lament this sad, sad day.
David "Aramis" Buerger
PS. The loss of table-switch votes is also very disappointing, but not
nearly as close to home. Although I imagine it is of much greater
importance to the game and will have far greater reprecussions than
the loss of Succubus Club.
Enrique San Mart?n
> Johannes Walch wrote:
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> >>The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> >>not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> >>Restructure, and Succubus Club.
> >
> > I just fell off my chair. Dramatic Upheaval and Kindred Restructure were/are
> > cornerstones of V:TES.
>
> ? Computer Hacking maybe. Or Wake. Or KRCG News. Or Skin of Steel.
> Or Torn Signpost, Govern, Majesty, Bewitching Oration, Claws of the
> Dead, Lost in Crowds, Aid from Bats, Theft of Vitae, Raven Spy, or
> Flash.
>
> By the time you'd add DU and KR as a cornerstone, VTES would be a circle.
>
> > Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
> > reason.
>
> Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
>
That's have no sense, why don't you ban kindred spirits, bum rush, KRC
or any card can you make damage to you grandprey or grandpredator????,
and you can ban to theo bell, tariq, etc etc...
You can make an errata to DU, choose a mathusalah, that's math can
block this political action too, if the referedum pass, change
position with that math., and for kindred restructure, all playes can
block the action...
Vtes it's was the best game of the world because a lot of thing's and
one of them was a few card's banned from tourneys, now you have banned
two card's because you thing that are too much powerful, why don't you
balance the game in another direction? banning card's it's the way
that magic the gathering get a lot of time... and you know where are
magic now.
A lot of time (when group rule was made) i say that vtes it's dying,
the gehenna it's soon, if you keep doing things like banning cards you
will see the wormwood very soon... :(
> > Who decides which cards are getting banned?
>
> The V:EKN.
including the princes???
>
> > Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
>
> There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
> on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
Why don't make a public list of this discution's?, that's sound like 3
people decided about all of the destiny of vtes.
>
> > I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
> > game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who work
> > countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
>
i agreed 100%
> Those opinions are taken into account.
> Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
> And they do not all step lockstep all the time on all issues.
There a difference about you and our's, you recive a salary for that,
we don't, we do free, and it's sad to see how the game it's killing by
a person who recive money for play vtes, make erratas with no sense
... i hope to be wrong, but i see the gehenna to vtes (yeah, the
gehenna, where all vampires die...)
sadly ... :(
Enrique San Martín W.
Decebalus
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<8bisd.88887$7i4....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> Johannes Walch wrote:
> > Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
> > reason.
>
> Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
LSJ [fantasy]: Per definition no. A card that changes your prey doesnt
undermine the predator-prey relationship in general.
Its IMO obvious that cards that hurt players apart from your prey
undermine the predator-prey relationship more than a card that
rearranges the table. Why should the predator-prey relationship from
the start be more important than other things? Manipulating the basic
rules (like a bleed is for one pool or the first player to the left is
your prey) is part of a trading card game. And VTEs has always been a
game about playing in the chain of predator-prey and at the same time
acting against it.
Making master cards that let votes pass automatically, and then weaken
the votes, doesnt look right.
Creating new winning strategies (depleting the deck of your prey) and
then killing one game strategie doesnt look right.
Enrique San Mart?n
> >
> > The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
> >
> > not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> > Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> tournament play was kind of necessary.
oh yeah :), and why don't change the name of vtes to mtes, magic the
ethernal struggle?, and why don't make another type of sudden
reversal? and master that burn your vampires in the unconroled
region?, and to potence call mountains and dementation call water...
>
> I'm not sure what the game will be without seat switching - I
> haven't seen a vote deck without seat switching in a long time.
> One of the most powerful effects, clearly.
>
> So, can we get our hopes up that PTO will follow? ;)
PTO it's a powerful card, but always you have solution...
>
> > That's all.
>
> Hmm... That's a lot, you know. It sure will change a lot of things IMHO.
>
yeah, like make a rules that the bleed deck's can't be rushed...
> Can we get some sort of explanation? I'm curious what the decisions
> were based on, if for nothing else than to translate the arguments
> for my local group. I'm not saying I oppose these changes, I just
> wish I would know the official arguments.
in that you are right...
LSJ
> No, legal deals do also undermine that factor,
> if that was the point behind the ban of the DU and KR.
> Common legal deal involve a truce between prey and
> predator often, so i don't agree with your statement
> (only illegal deals undermine the predator-prey relation)
No. If the deal doesn't violate Play To Win (or other
rules), then it doesn't undermine the predator-prey.
It may make use of predator-prey, of course.
LSJ
> That's have no sense, why don't you ban kindred spirits, bum rush, KRC
> or any card can you make damage to you grandprey or grandpredator????,
Because they don't undermine the predator-prey mechanic.
> and you can ban to theo bell, tariq, etc etc...
>
> You can make an errata to DU, choose a mathusalah, that's math can
> block this political action too, if the referedum pass, change
> position with that math., and for kindred restructure, all playes can
> block the action...
The list of errata that could have been made to DU is infinite, yes.
In that list are a great many that would not have alleviated the
problem, yes. If there are any in that list that would alleviate the
problem, I'll be glad to entertain them.
> Vtes it's was the best game of the world because a lot of thing's and
> one of them was a few card's banned from tourneys, now you have banned
> two card's because you thing that are too much powerful, why don't you
> balance the game in another direction? banning card's it's the way
> that magic the gathering get a lot of time... and you know where are
> magic now.
They are not banned for "things that are too powerful".
The banned list is still short. It's only two cards larger than it was
when the license changed hands. As a percentage, it's size is
smaller now than then.
Over time, at least three cards have come off of the list (two under
the DCI's hand). Now three others are added. How is this a catastrophe
of size or number?
> A lot of time (when group rule was made) i say that vtes it's dying,
> the gehenna it's soon, if you keep doing things like banning cards you
> will see the wormwood very soon... :(
>
>
>>>Who decides which cards are getting banned?
>>
>>The V:EKN.
>
> including the princes???
No. The princes are event (demo/tournament) coordinators primarily
and are, in general, people who volunteer to promote the game.
>>>Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
>>
>>There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
>>on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
>
> Why don't make a public list of this discution's?, that's sound like 3
> people decided about all of the destiny of vtes.
You want a public list of the things people approach me about face
to face at tournaments and otherwise?
I think there are some logistical details you've overlooked.
>>Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
>>And they do not all step lockstep all the time on all issues.
>
> There a difference about you and our's, you recive a salary for that,
I was, of course, not referring to myself in the above.
Or do you think that there are no others besides yourself and me?
Reyda
"Janne Hägglund" <h...@iki.fi.remove.these.invalid> a écrit dans le message
de news:m33bym2...@nothung.homelinux.net...
> All ante cards are vote cards. They have already been banned from
> tournaments.
which is not true :
Playing for Keeps
Type: Master
Cost: X pool
Unique Master. Only usable if playing for ante.
The cost of this card (X) represents the number of Methuselahs currently in
the game. When a Methuselah's prey is ousted, the surviving Methuselah wins
his or her prey's ante and antes an additional card.
Rarity: DS:U
> It's not that voting was considered to be too powerful, it's that table
> switching has been ruled to be too disruptive. Think Madness of the Bard,
> instead of Return to Innocence.
But i firmly believe what you called table disruption is part of the essence
of the game. the card was printed in 1994 and was clearly something that
made this game's personnality
> And if table switchers had been regular actions or masters instead of
votes,
> they'd still have been banned.
they have made those switchers vote for a reason, i guess ...
Joscha Duell
> > On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 02:17:14 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> >> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> >> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> >> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> By the way, the greatest problem with politics is still unaddressed.
> When talking about a multiplayer game it would probably be a good idea
> to consider whether it would be beneficial to change political actions
> to be blockable not by predator or prey but by the targets of the action.
> Nuking a wall prey from behind an almost ousted meatshield is even more
> problematic now that the VP from the meatshield is sure not to be sniped.
>
Huh? You must be kidding, man. If you have problems with votedecks
play rush and nuke'em. Play big eye. Play antivotecards. I mean, yeah,
ban Ventrue altogether, they tend to be too strong because they're are
the best voters. Why not making bleeds easier to block. Let's say
bleeds can be blocked by predators also. That is making these annoying
bleed decks less strong. And why not making vampires able to cancel
combat just by tapping. Beast is a too strong weapon.
By the way: Warghouls won in Heidelberg, not a votedeck.
Excuse me for being a bit over the top, Daneel. I can't believe what's
going on. EC was a wonderful experience. I had such cool games, met
good players, all was in check. Not a week later people want to change
ten year old cornerstones of the game just because they can't add
defensive cards to their decks (or why else?).
> Also, there's the issue of deals. I know that many folks are busy little
> bees breaking deals 24/7, but since the deals can be legally honored,
> "amis" won't ever break them. Also there's a reduced awareness concerning
> the legality of deals, meaning that you can easily deal a table away if
> you wish to. That's not fair towards 3 people, instead of the 1 people
> screwed with Upheaval. Also, if you can't rearrange a table, you can't
> place the dealers beside one another.
Concerning deals: As far as I know honoring deals was no problem at
all. Making deals is watched by the judges. If there are flawed deals
then it's not the problem of the game, it's the problem of the players
and/or the judges. Counterdealing is the way if you dislike deals. I
believe in the game mechanics as they are. Don't change them (at least
not this dramatically please).
John Flournoy
> I'm not sure what the game will be without seat switching - I
> haven't seen a vote deck without seat switching in a long time.
This statement right here, is one major reason why I'm in favor of the
cards being banned. When players can't even think of the last time you
saw a vote deck without seat-switching, because EVERY vote deck always
includes them, then those cards are definitely worth considering for
alteration/banning/etc.
And it certainly had gotten to the point where almost every deck HAD
to account for seat-switching by including DI, or Delaying Tactics, or
Dia, or whatever.
-John Flournoy
R?gis Cordier
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
>
When i saw it first, i felt like V:TES lost a great part of interest
for me. As these cards can easily be canceled (Direct, delaying
tactics, votes, intercept....)
I can't understand the real reason of such a decision.
"They undermine the foundation of the game"
They have a great influence on the game, but do not change it i
think..
Sad sad day for V:TES.
Fernando Costa
> "Guzmo" <gu...@postmaster.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:e7dcd37e.04120...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > No reason to play vote decks anymore ;)
>
Second Here.
Why bring the Political decks down ??
I find these (decks and cards) to be the most interesting ones, and
now what ??
Pack 999999 KRC on my deck ? Change to S/B ? Combat ?
Wheren't the deck walls enough ? Of course the ones who play combat
decks are happy...
...Come on !!!!
I'm getting anoyed at all these changes, though SC well banned.
James Coupe
<moc...@arfe.netNOSPAM> writes:
>Now what... Just play KRCs ? really nice...
Disclaimer: I am not, and have never been, part of the design and
playtest and whatnot for Kindred Most Wanted.
Given the political nature of some of the things like Bloodhunts and
Lextalionis and such (in the backstory), KMW strikes me as an expansion
where a number of political curve-balls might be appropriate.
Assuming that the ban change was discussed for some time (I don't know),
it strikes me that this might have fed into the design process also.
Additionally, it might be worth considering that if the only option left
is to play KRCs, the only option you had before was to play KRCs - but
to just move yourself into a position for a kill you hadn't actually
earned, and then play KRCs.
I don't think this is true, but then I also don't think that KRC is the
only remaining possibility.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Who's ever heard of that, though!
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Designing a deck that just calls votes.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D That's crazy talk, there.
James Coupe
<squi...@hotmail.com> writes:
>Will WW give a fuller description of their reasons of why they were
>banned (none of these cards are particularly broken over here and
>Succubus club i've not seen used at all in the UK)
I think you'll have problems getting LSJ to explain that in those terms,
since cards which are "broken" typically get errata-ed for casual play
too, IME.
Stefan Ferenci
> squi...@hotmail.com (Squidalot) writes:
>
>
>>However I'm suprised that WW went for a ban on these cards rather than
>>perhaps limiting them to being played once per game per player or
>>other adjustments.
>
>
> I have never, ever played a game where a metuselah has switched seats more
> than once. Once is plenty enough.
>
>
then you were lucky i think i switched 5 times in one game (2 different
political decks)
stefan
Stefan Ferenci
> WotC design. Anyway, I've spent a lot of time complaining about this or
> that in the past, and I just wanted to go on record and say "good job"
> to Scott.
>
> --
>
> David Cherryholmes
yeah good job LSJ and vekn
stefan
Stefan Ferenci
>
>
> By the way: Warghouls won in Heidelberg, not a votedeck.
>
> Excuse me for being a bit over the top, Daneel. I can't believe what's
> going on. EC was a wonderful experience. I had such cool games, met
> good players, all was in check. Not a week later people want to change
> ten year old cornerstones of the game just because they can't add
> defensive cards to their decks (or why else?).
>
>
why did this deck win, because a kr screwed the whole table, the
affected player could not block it (he was the grandpred) and his whole
game was screwed.
na i am not going to miss these cards.
Stefan
Johannes Walch
> > reason.
>
> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
Like other people have said there are a lot of other cards that undermine
the pred-prey relationship. Premium example : Eagle´s Sight. But that´s not
the problem. I think that undermination of the pred-prey relationship IS the
foundation of V:TES. It´s not the tunnel game it is a game of intriguing
politics. Banning KR and DU just seems random to me.
> > Who decides which cards are getting banned?
>
> The V:EKN.
Is The V:EKN = The V:EKN Inner Circle?
That would be (AFAIK) you, Steve Wieck, Robert Goudie, Robyn Tatu? Correct?
> > Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
>
> There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
> on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can actually
identify a consensus.
> > I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
> > game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who
work
> > countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
>
> Those opinions are taken into account.
> Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
I was not only referring to me but to the bunch of people who do this. They
were all rather surprised. And I have seen a common consensus that SC should
be banned but about the two other cards there was never THAT much of a
discussion.
> And they do not all step lockstep all the time on all issues.
Of course.
--
johannes walch
James Coupe
Costa <fko...@oninet.pt> writes:
>Why bring the Political decks down ??
>I find these (decks and cards) to be the most interesting ones, and
>now what ??
>Pack 999999 KRC on my deck ?
Are your current political decks 99999999 KRC and a few Dramatic
Upheavals?
Derek Ray
"Johannes Walch" <joha...@scram.de> mumbled something about:
>> > Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
>> > reason.
>>
>> Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
>> of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
>
>Like other people have said there are a lot of other cards that undermine
>the pred-prey relationship. Premium example : Eagle愀 Sight. But that愀 not
This "premium" example is incorrect.
After playing Eagle's Sight, your prey and predator remain the same.
This means that while it is possible to play Eagle's Sight and block
cross-table actions, you still have to oust your prey to gain VP and to
win. Eagle's Sight is a useful tool to prevent others from assisting
your prey or predator (ill-timed Political Strangleholds or Ancient
Influences, for example), but it now must be used to support ousting
your own prey if you want to win.
DU and KR, on the other hand, allow you to change (ie. undermine) the
predator/prey relationships that are set at the start of the game...
meaning that it's a better plan to sit, bloat, and wait for someone to
get low, and then snipe their VP. This means each deck must pack plenty
of Delaying Tactics (DI is insufficient, as Charming Lobby "hides" the
DU from DI), and have it in hand when they go for the oust, or lose.
>the problem. I think that undermination of the pred-prey relationship IS the
>foundation of V:TES. It愀 not the tunnel game it is a game of intriguing
>politics. Banning KR and DU just seems random to me.
Garfield's intent was to create a multiplayer game that wasn't just
"gang up on the leader", as all other multiplayer games are. V:TES has
become a game of "gang up on the leader", and has suffered greatly for
it. Removing KR and DU mean that political decks are just going to have
to oust their prey like all the rest of us, instead of disrupting and
stalling the game while waiting for someone to get low.
A political deck that just sits and waits to snipe *IS* disrupting the
table balance; its prey runs free, its grandpredator runs free.
>> > Who decides which cards are getting banned?
>>
>> The V:EKN.
>
>Is The V:EKN = The V:EKN Inner Circle?
>That would be (AFAIK) you, Steve Wieck, Robert Goudie, Robyn Tatu? Correct?
And what if it were?
Who among the people you have named do you not trust to make accurate
decisions about the game and its future?
Is it not really that you are not on that list, and because they have
made a decision you do not agree with, you think you can do better?
>> > Why isn愒 there any discussion about this?
>>
>> There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
>> on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
>
>Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can actually
>identify a consensus.
No. What you mean is "a public discussion where people can scream about
things they don't like, disrupting any orderly progress being made".
>> > I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
>> > game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who
>> > countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
>>
>> Those opinions are taken into account.
>> Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
>
>I was not only referring to me but to the bunch of people who do this. They
The bunch of people who do what, exactly?
Are you referring to the Princes? Most of the Princes are not fit to
make decisions of this nature, as they tend to think exclusively for
their own benefit, instead of the overall good of the game.
>were all rather surprised. And I have seen a common consensus that SC should
>be banned but about the two other cards there was never THAT much of a
>discussion.
Not that much of a public discussion, you mean.
-- Derek
a host is a host from coast to coast
and no one will talk to a host that's close
unless the host that isn't close
is busy, hung, or dead
Mechadick
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
>
That is the most stupid thing i ever heard in V:TES. You just banned 2
10 years old cards !!! I can understand for SC , but for the others ?
You just amputed political decks a lot ! I guess you must be a HUGE
fan of the tunnel vision ...
Well , i guess S/B decks will be able to do their VP quite easily now
without fear of somebody stealing it.
My 2 cents.
Emiliano Imeroni
...
...
Dramatic Upheaval BANNED?
...
...
Kindred Restructure BANNED?
...
...
Wow, I'm shocked... This is probably (maybe together with NRA) the
single major change in the history of V:TES. I'm left without words...
But most of all, it was completely unexpected to me. There goes my
best deck... :-(
It's difficult to judge how good or bad it'll be for the game before
actually trying... The only thing that comes to my mind at the moment
is that when people asked me what was V:TES, I used to start by
telling them that, at a table with 3-4 other players, you must kill
the guy at your left, avoid being killed by the one at your right, BUT
there are wicked cards which make people change their places!! Now
part of the poetry is gone...
Anyway, we'll get used to it, and stop talking about the new ban list
pretty soon. And... I'm relieved I won't see evil Succubus Club around
anymore...
Emiliano
Wes
"Johannes Walch" <joha...@scram.de> wrote
>
> Like other people have said there are a lot of other cards that undermine
I disagree that Eagle's Sight _undermines_ the effect. It merely steps
outside of it briefly. It is a transient effect and generally used to hurt
your prey, which is the very essence of predator-prey.
Most of the cards that *can* be targeted elsewhere on the table (Bum's Rush,
Kindred Spirits, etc) are also transient effects. There is little point
targeting your grandpredator with Kindred Spirits if you do not have a means
of taking advantage of it later, ie switching seats.
As a result of this change, the potential of such cards to be disruptive to
the predator-prey relationship has been indirectly weakened. But that's
acceptable to me.
Basically, the banning of DU and KR is going to force every player's head to
look left a bit more, and that will result in better games in the long run.
Probably faster games also, which I'm very much in favour of. I don't think
it's been mentioned yet, but the discussions caused by DU and KR refrendums
are some of the longest and most time-wasting. Not to mention the disruption
of actually moving cards physically. I imagine we'll see fewer timed-out
games as a result of this change.
> Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can
> actually
> identify a consensus.
I'm actually surprised by the negative reaction to this ruling. I've been in
many a discussion where people felt that DU and KR were bad for the game. Of
course, many more were about PTO, but that card is also _slightly_ weakened
by this change.
>> > I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
>> > game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who
> work
>> > countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
>>
>> Those opinions are taken into account.
>> Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
>
> I was not only referring to me but to the bunch of people who do this.
> They
> were all rather surprised. And I have seen a common consensus that SC
> should
> be banned but about the two other cards there was never THAT much of a
> discussion.
It was around my part of the world. And on this forum also, if I am not
mistaken.
I like to think that I have contributed to the game somewhat,
time-and-effortwise, and I wholeheartedly support this decision. Thanks
VEKN!
Cheers,
WES
Janne Hägglund
> Janne Hägglund wrote:
> > I have never, ever played a game where a metuselah has switched seats
> > more than once. Once is plenty enough.
> >
> then you were lucky i think i switched 5 times in one game (2 different
> political decks)
Holy crap! That's aerobic VTES. :-)
"You look so fit and healthy. Do you exercise regulary?"
"Yes, I play VTES with political decks every weekend."
Frederick Scott
news:cotean$ue$1...@stu1id2.ip.tesion.net...
> I think that undermination of the pred-prey relationship IS the
> foundation of V:TES.
I think undermination is a brand new word, the likes of which I've
never heard before.
Fred
Frederick Scott
""Janne Hägglund"" <h...@iki.fi.remove.these.invalid> wrote in message news:m3brd9o...@nothung.homelinux.net...
> Stefan Ferenci <a95+NO+58+NO+60no@SP+.unet.univie.+AM+.ac.at> writes:
>
>> Janne Hägglund wrote:
>> > I have never, ever played a game where a metuselah has switched seats
>> > more than once. Once is plenty enough.
>> >
>> then you were lucky i think i switched 5 times in one game (2 different
>> political decks)
>
> Holy crap! That's aerobic VTES. :-)
>
> "You look so fit and healthy. Do you exercise regulary?"
> "Yes, I play VTES with political decks every weekend."
Heh! Good thing this banning: if THAT kind of thing had continued, we'd
have had to invent the "card mat roller tray" to deal with position switching.
Believe me folks, this is probably better!!! :-)
Fred
Halcyan 2
>treatment I didn't think it would get banned outright. I really liked
>Succubus Club. As a player who enjoys the RPG background of the game,
>I thought the card gave the game its flavor of the clandestine deals
>and backroom negotiations of
>ancient Methuselahs. Also as a dedicated
>Assamite player I lament losing the one card that allowed me to play
>the clan in character with the RPG as hired assassins. As Kevin
Well, you can always convince other players to pack Bounty, Anathema, Blood
Hunt, War Party, and Haven Uncovered. That will sorta let you simulate that...
>The problem isn't Succubbus Club,
>it's bad players. A player that bleeds/PTOs/torporizes minions
>cross-table for spite is just as disruptive to the table, but we don't
>ban Kindred Spirits, PTO, or (D) rush cards. Too make a bad analogy:
>it's not guns that kill people, it's people who kill people. The gun
>(Succubus Club) is not the problem, the problem is that people are
>spiteful.
Yeah, but guns make it a helluva lot easier to kill people. Without guns, you'd
have to stab or club something to death. With guns, it's point and click.
Yeah, Bum's Rush, PTO, and Kindred Spirits can be misused by an incompetent
player. But Succubus Club was a frickin' Assault Rifle in comparion.
Yes, a gun (even an Assault Rifle like Succubus Club) needs a person in order
to be abused. But the gun really does facilitate the task.
>I don't understand why Succubus Club got such a narrow fix to it in
>CE. Had the problem been addressed by putting a cap on how much you
>can transfer (1 card for 1 card, no more than 10 pool) I think the
>card would have been well-limited and still very useful for those of
>us with legitimate uses in mind. I don't expect these arguments are
>anything new or that anything will change as a result of my words
>here, but I just have to post my lament this sad, sad day.
I don't understand why people are having such knee-jerk reactions to the
bannings. LSJ has already said that there's the potential for the cards to come
back in a revised format.
Why don't we all take a deep breath. Give the new environment (sans Succubus
Club and sans table-switching) a chance. And maybe this will give the Rule Team
/ VEKN / LSJ some time to better evaluate the effect of the cards and maybe
make a meaningful change.
Halcyan 2
salem
<david.che...@duke.edu> scrawled:
>Guzmo wrote:
>
>> No reason to play vote decks anymore ;)
>
>Right, because without seat switching, unbounceable pool damage is just
>crap.
oooh, good one. :D
hmm. this amounts to a 'me too' post.
better fill it with...ummm...
oh my god, that's it, i am quitting the game!!1!!!
salem
domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
salem
scrawled:
>LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com>...
>> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>>
>> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>>
>> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
>> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
>> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>>
>> That's all.
>>
>
>When i saw it first, i felt like V:TES lost a great part of interest
>for me. As these cards can easily be canceled (Direct, delaying
>tactics, votes, intercept....)
if they were so easy to counter, and thus were countered all the time,
having them in the game or not should make no difference....
Johannes Walch
> >>
> >> The V:EKN.
> >
> >Is The V:EKN = The V:EKN Inner Circle?
> >That would be (AFAIK) you, Steve Wieck, Robert Goudie, Robyn Tatu?
Correct?
>
> And what if it were?
Nothing.
> Who among the people you have named do you not trust to make accurate
> decisions about the game and its future?
Nobody. I was just interested to know. And I would like to see a few
european guys involved. That´s all.
> Is it not really that you are not on that list, and because they have
> made a decision you do not agree with, you think you can do better?
No. And I am even not yet sure that I do not agree to the change, but I feel
that it could have been discussed better.
> >> > Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
> >>
> >> There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
> >> on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
> >
> >Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can
actually
> >identify a consensus.
>
> No. What you mean is "a public discussion where people can scream about
> things they don't like, disrupting any orderly progress being made".
Interesting that you think you can read my mind. Unfortunately(?) you can
not.
I meant a discussion with more than 4(?) people (let´s say 10) where the
!results! of the discussion are laid open afterwards. The explanation should
be more extensive than "they are unsuitable for comp. play because they
undermine the pred-prey relationship".
> >> > I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
> >> > game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who
> >> > countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
> >>
> >> Those opinions are taken into account.
> >> Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
> >
> >I was not only referring to me but to the bunch of people who do this.
They
>
> The bunch of people who do what, exactly?
Coordinating the big tournaments like the EC, qualifiers and national
championships. Taking care of the pre-releases, prize support, promotion
(e.g in local magazines) and so on. The national coordinators for example.
> Are you referring to the Princes? Most of the Princes are not fit to
> make decisions of this nature, as they tend to think exclusively for
> their own benefit, instead of the overall good of the game.
Agreed, but I was not referring to them.
> >were all rather surprised. And I have seen a common consensus that SC
should
> >be banned but about the two other cards there was never THAT much of a
> >discussion.
>
> Not that much of a public discussion, you mean.
Yes. Public or semi-public.
--
johannes walch
Stefan Ferenci
>>>>>Who decides which cards are getting banned?
>>>>
>>>>The V:EKN.
>>>
>>>Is The V:EKN = The V:EKN Inner Circle?
>>>That would be (AFAIK) you, Steve Wieck, Robert Goudie, Robyn Tatu?
>
> Correct?
>
>>And what if it were?
>
>
> Nothing.
>
>
>>Who among the people you have named do you not trust to make accurate
>>decisions about the game and its future?
>
>
> Nobody. I was just interested to know. And I would like to see a few
>
>
those european guys being you or your buddys right?
>>Is it not really that you are not on that list, and because they have
>>made a decision you do not agree with, you think you can do better?
>
>
> No. And I am even not yet sure that I do not agree to the change, but I feel
> that it could have been discussed better.
>
but you create the impression that it is about you (or your buddys) not
beiing on this list. didn愒 you even write in the german forum, that the
VEKN IC has to be changed?
>>>>>Why isn愒 there any discussion about this?
>>>>
>>>>There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
>>>>on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
>>>
>>>Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can
>
> actually
>
>>>identify a consensus.
>>
more ordered means that you are involved?
>>No. What you mean is "a public discussion where people can scream about
>>things they don't like, disrupting any orderly progress being made".
>
>
> Interesting that you think you can read my mind. Unfortunately(?) you can
> not.
> I meant a discussion with more than 4(?) people (let愀 say 10) where the
> !results! of the discussion are laid open afterwards. The explanation should
> be more extensive than "they are unsuitable for comp. play because they
> undermine the pred-prey relationship".
>
and if it were discussed by 10 people you悲 ask for 15 as long as the
people you seem fit are not part of the discussion. be honest you don愒
complain about the system, you complain because you are not part of it.
>
>>>>>I am very disappointed by the fact that major things about this
>>>>>game are changed without taking into account the opinion of those who
>>>>>countless hours in their spare time to promote and run the game.
>>>>
>>>>Those opinions are taken into account.
>>>>Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
>>>
>>>I was not only referring to me but to the bunch of people who do this.
>
> They
>
>>The bunch of people who do what, exactly?
>
>
> Coordinating the big tournaments like the EC, qualifiers and national
> championships. Taking care of the pre-releases, prize support, promotion
> (e.g in local magazines) and so on. The national coordinators for example.
>
so here we are you want andreas and stephane involved (two very good
buddys of yours, and btw everybody knows that when it comes to vtes
andreas and you are like twinbrothers, so when andreas is part of the
discussion so are you) once again aren愒 you hypocritical, you complain
about thesystem because you are not part of it, as soon as you are the
system is fine.
stefan
James Coupe
<h...@iki.fi.remove.these.invalid> writes:
> Holy crap! That's aerobic VTES. :-)
John Eagles, who ran a lot of tournaments in Portsmouth a number of
years ago, told stories of turning up to games with his cards on a tea
tray so that he could play Dramatic Upheaval more easily.
Stone
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com...
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
>
> That's all.
Very good thing for SC. Most players from Paris have been waiting for it for
ages, even and especially the ones who used it very well. Thank you.
For DU and KR, the change is interesting-nothing will be the same. It will
be a different game from now on. The only negative comment is that the
explanation for this decision could be more detailed. I don't care if 2 or
200 people were part of the discussion, but I guess the decisive arguments
were examined carefully. It would have been a good thing if they were made
public.
Stone
Azel
jaw still slack from shock, but unfurling the banners of joy.
Tetragrammaton
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:ohg4r09v6n2odvq7p...@4ax.com...
> In message <cotean$ue$1...@stu1id2.ip.tesion.net>,
> "Johannes Walch" <joha...@scram.de> mumbled something about:
> A political deck that just sits and waits to snipe *IS* disrupting the
> table balance; its prey runs free, its grandpredator runs free.
>
Many decks adopts the same tactics - ban life boon sniping, then.
<snip>
> >Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can
actually
> >identify a consensus.
>
> No. What you mean is "a public discussion where people can scream about
> things they don't like, disrupting any orderly progress being made".
>
Which is the progress you refer to ?
The "disrupting predator prey " motivation behind banning the two cads is
just *very* arguable -
Many decks concepts/cards just don't care about that relation, relying on
table control
and, often, turning against predator just to deal with he/she after a while
(see walls deck).
>
> Are you referring to the Princes? Most of the Princes are not fit to
> make decisions of this nature, as they tend to think exclusively for
> their own benefit, instead of the overall good of the game.
>
Please support this with concrete examples.
<snip the rest>
Emiliano, v:ekn Princeof Rome
Tetragrammaton
news:vVnsd.89864$7i4....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Tetragrammaton wrote:
> > No, legal deals do also undermine that factor,
> > if that was the point behind the ban of the DU and KR.
> > Common legal deal involve a truce between prey and
> > predator often, so i don't agree with your statement
> > (only illegal deals undermine the predator-prey relation)
>
> No. If the deal doesn't violate Play To Win (or other
> rules), then it doesn't undermine the predator-prey.
>
I think that it's most assured that "play to win"
and "predator-prey relations " are two factor that are
very different and separate given the current state of the game, so i really
*don't* agree with your assumption.
A typical life boon deck, a wall heavy eagle-sighted deck, a multi rush
deck, are typical examples of this
non-relation between "play to win" and "predator->prey" mechanics tunnel
vision.
> It may make use of predator-prey, of course.
>
Can you clear what do you mean with this ?
greets
Emiliano
Derek Ray
"Tetragrammaton" <nos...@none.com> mumbled something about:
>"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:ohg4r09v6n2odvq7p...@4ax.com...
>> In message <cotean$ue$1...@stu1id2.ip.tesion.net>,
>> "Johannes Walch" <joha...@scram.de> mumbled something about:
><snip>
>
>> A political deck that just sits and waits to snipe *IS* disrupting the
>> table balance; its prey runs free, its grandpredator runs free.
>>
>
>Many decks adopts the same tactics - ban life boon sniping, then.
Life boon sniping doesn't guarantee a VP. Typically Life Booning
someone doesn't actually put them in a position to gain a VP, it just
slows down that player's death.
Many cards allow you to slow down another player's death, including
Consanguineous Boon. Your argument would have us ban it too.
><snip>
>> >Of course. I meant a probably more ordered discussion where you can
>actually
>> >identify a consensus.
>>
>> No. What you mean is "a public discussion where people can scream about
>> things they don't like, disrupting any orderly progress being made".
>>
>Which is the progress you refer to ?
The one where extensive discussions were had about the subject, avenues
were explored, and a decision was reached to ban DU, KR, and SC.
You aren't going to be foolish enough to say that extensive discussions
weren't had, now are you?
>The "disrupting predator prey " motivation behind banning the two cads is
>just *very* arguable -
And I'm sure it was argued. And I bet you, of the four people Johannes
listed, I know exactly which of them were on the "don't ban it" side,
and what their arguments for not banning it were. I can't speak for
anyone who wasn't listed.
>Many decks concepts/cards just don't care about that relation, relying on
>table control
>and, often, turning against predator just to deal with he/she after a while
>(see walls deck).
None of this "table control", however, alters the fundamental nature of
the game, which is that to gain a VP you must oust the player seated to
your left.
Ousting your predator is a tactical move, intended to gain you survival
time to oust your prey.
Rushing someone cross-table is a tactical move, intended to slow that
player's forward progress down... to give you survival time later in the
game, allowing you to oust your prey.
>> Are you referring to the Princes? Most of the Princes are not fit to
>> make decisions of this nature, as they tend to think exclusively for
>> their own benefit, instead of the overall good of the game.
>>
>Please support this with concrete examples.
The Conclave mailing list. Say no more.
Derek Ray
"Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> mumbled something about:
Hey, Fred, say "Undermining" in German.
Halcyan 2
>
>Life boon sniping doesn't guarantee a VP. Typically Life Booning
>someone doesn't actually put them in a position to gain a VP, it just
>slows down that player's death.
And I've also seen occasions where after being Life Boon'ed, the Life Booned
player goes after the player who Booned him (since any VP he gets would be
stolen and if the player who played the Life Boon is ousted, the Boon is
burned).
Halcyan 2
Noal McDonald
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
Dammit, Scott. You're plotting against me.
Every time I have a signature deck, you errata or ban the key cards.
First it was "Loyalty of Lunatics" (weenie Malk Derange/Clan Loyality)
and now my "Vertigo" deck is right out the window. What's next? Uriah
Winter? You going to make him go to your predator instead of your
prey? Why stop there? Maybe we can make Courier a Unique Ally?
It's all a secret plot to get me to stop playing poker, buy some of
the new sets and put together new decks. I just know it.
Regards,
Noal
Rob Treasure
> For DU and KR, the change is interesting-nothing will be the same. It will
> be a different game from now on. The only negative comment is that the
> explanation for this decision could be more detailed. I don't care if 2 or
> 200 people were part of the discussion, but I guess the decisive arguments
> were examined carefully. It would have been a good thing if they were made
> public.
You are not wrong there. Sweeping changes to the fundamental aspects of the
game like this should not be the remit of one person. New sets are
playtested and given a wide audience for approval, scrutiny and game
shifting/breaking effects, I fail to see how this is so different.
Possibly time to vote with my feet, dunno. Real shame though.
Emmit Svenson
> Daneel <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:<opsig9yl...@news.chello.hu>...
>
> > I'm not sure what the game will be without seat switching - I
> > haven't seen a vote deck without seat switching in a long time.
>
> This statement right here, is one major reason why I'm in favor of the
> cards being banned. When players can't even think of the last time you
> saw a vote deck without seat-switching, because EVERY vote deck always
> includes them, then those cards are definitely worth considering for
> alteration/banning/etc.
Best get rid of Blood Doll, then, 'cause you see it in just about
every deck.
IMHO, seat switching was an aspect of the game. I would rather have
seen it extended to non-voting actions than banned.
If the V:EKN position is that any card that rearranges seating
violates the nature of the game, there's not much point to offering
new versions. But if VP sniping is the main issue, I'm sure we could
come up with a limitation that makes sense. Maybe:
"Choose a Methuselah whose prey has more pool than you. If this
referendum is successful, move your table seat so that you are the
prey of the chosen Methuselah."
Or "Choose a Methuselah. If this referendum is successful, switch
seating with that Methuselah, and if you oust your new prey before the
chosen Methuselah ousts hers, award the VP to the chosen Methuselah."
Frederick Scott
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:0ma6r099dmkp9jrvs...@4ax.com...
> In message <nPtsd.83405$EZ.24071@okepread07>,
> "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> mumbled something about:
>
>>"Johannes Walch" <joha...@scram.de> wrote in message
>>news:cotean$ue$1...@stu1id2.ip.tesion.net...
>>> I think that undermination of the pred-prey relationship IS the
>>> foundation of V:TES.
>>
>>I think undermination is a brand new word, the likes of which I've
>>never heard before.
>
> Hey, Fred, say "Undermining" in German.
Well, "unterho(umlaut)hlen", or "unterminieren", or a couple of others
according to the online English-German dictionary I can find on the
net. (That's actually a translation of "to undermine". "Undermining"
could not be translated on this site.)
If your point is that it's not his native language, I understand that.
I was just particularly amused by the conjugation. (Really, I'm jealous
of people who can speak more than one language when I often suck at just
communicating in my native language.)
Fred
Johannes Walch
> > foundation of V:TES.
>
> I think undermination is a brand new word, the likes of which I've
> never heard before.
Isn愒 it just way more interesting to talk with each other when you invent
new words from time to time, just like V:TES gets it愀 new cards ;-) This
leads us to the interesting question if words can be broken and banned ;-)).
Just kidding, sorry for my not-so-perfect english.
--
johannes walch
Johannes Walch
Newsbeitrag news:41b2e395$0$11352$3b21...@usenet.univie.ac.at...
> didn´t you even write in the german forum, that the
> VEKN IC has to be changed?
I wrote that I would welcome a change to the IC, adding a few people from
Europe (and South America, Australasia).
--
johannes walch
Enrique San Mart?n
> Enrique San Mart?n wrote:
> > That's have no sense, why don't you ban kindred spirits, bum rush, KRC
> > or any card can you make damage to you grandprey or grandpredator????,
>
> Because they don't undermine the predator-prey mechanic.
>
The argument of the "undermine the prey-predator mechanic" (UtPPM)
it's very poor, because:
Allmost in vtes it's undermine (or overuled), many card's give the
posibily to do things that can't be done with the basic of the rules.
> > and you can ban to theo bell, tariq, etc etc...
> >
> > You can make an errata to DU, choose a mathusalah, that's math can
> > block this political action too, if the referedum pass, change
> > position with that math., and for kindred restructure, all playes can
> > block the action...
>
> The list of errata that could have been made to DU is infinite, yes.
> In that list are a great many that would not have alleviated the
> problem, yes. If there are any in that list that would alleviate the
> problem, I'll be glad to entertain them.
>
The problem is that you have based the ban in a poor argument...
> > Vtes it's was the best game of the world because a lot of thing's and
> > one of them was a few card's banned from tourneys, now you have banned
> > two card's because you thing that are too much powerful, why don't you
> > balance the game in another direction? banning card's it's the way
> > that magic the gathering get a lot of time... and you know where are
> > magic now.
>
> They are not banned for "things that are too powerful".
>
Ok, but the why the ban was proposed? it's because some players say
that DU and KR UtPPM??? i don't think so... the complaint i think IMHO
was made by players who cry for the unfair of that's cards... and that
complaint show the poor of the ability of the players to make change
to his deck for protection from political actions... or if you have
DOM don't you put bounce to your deck? if are many rush deck's don't
you put defecen against combat?? why don't you put defence against
political???
> The banned list is still short. It's only two cards larger than it was
> when the license changed hands. As a percentage, it's size is
> smaller now than then.
>
yeah right... but that it's another poor argument...
> Over time, at least three cards have come off of the list (two under
> the DCI's hand). Now three others are added. How is this a catastrophe
> of size or number?
>
It's not a crtastrophe of size, it's the precendent who is stablish
with the ban...
> > A lot of time (when group rule was made) i say that vtes it's dying,
> > the gehenna it's soon, if you keep doing things like banning cards you
> > will see the wormwood very soon... :(
> >
> >
> >>>Who decides which cards are getting banned?
> >>
> >>The V:EKN.
> >
> > including the princes???
>
> No. The princes are event (demo/tournament) coordinators primarily
> and are, in general, people who volunteer to promote the game.
>
Yeah, i do that, i teach to new players to play, i have to dealing
with support problems, financing the cost of the events (fotocopy of
the fliers, promoting, cost of transport to the local), i put many
money in doing things, paying the kit's, in some tourneys with the
fee, the cost of the kit's can't be coverage and i put he rest of the
money, for the event can be do... and i do free and i do happy :), and
for that i feel sadly with changes to the game like that... :(
> >>>Why isn´t there any discussion about this?
> >>
> >>There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
> >>on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
> >
> > Why don't make a public list of this discution's?, that's sound like 3
> > people decided about all of the destiny of vtes.
>
> You want a public list of the things people approach me about face
> to face at tournaments and otherwise?
>
> I think there are some logistical details you've overlooked.
>
Why don't put the discucion in the news group or WW forum or some
else... you start the topic ... like that: "Idea of ban KR & DU for
they UtPPM"... and the prince and the players have the posibility to
make his opinions before the ban will doit... so you can hear (if it's
that you hear) the opinion and arguments of pro or againts the ban...
> >>Surely you realize that there are others who work countless hours.
> >>And they do not all step lockstep all the time on all issues.
> >
> > There a difference about you and our's, you recive a salary for that,
>
> I was, of course, not referring to myself in the above.
> Or do you think that there are no others besides yourself and me?
Yeah, you must have colaborators (and maybe friends too), that help
you, but vtes it's a world game, and the players and prince of all the
world make that the game it's alive, was the players who make the
reborn in 99 (because with no player's it's have no sense to relaunche
a game who was dead years ago....) remember that... the players are
vtes... with no players... no vtes... :(
Sadly
Enrique San Martín W.
Enrique San Mart?n
Yeah, you see LSJ, all-around the world have waiting for a good
explanation, and arguments of why that undermine of an specific
mechanic was banned... there a lot of undermine of mechanics, and way
THAT and no other are banned....
>
> Stone
Enrique San Mart?n
Yeah... you see LSJ, are many people all-around that are waiting for a
good (and i say a good not the usual) explanation of why that card's
that undermine a specific mechanic of the game are banned, why that
mechanic and no other?... why?
Johannes Walch
"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:59h5r093u84cuf7ts...@4ax.com...
> On 4 Dec 2004 12:46:54 -0800, regisc...@yahoo.fr (R?gis Cordier)
> scrawled:
>
> >LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:<41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com>...
> >> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
> >>
> >> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
> >>
> >> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> >> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> >> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
> >>
> >> That's all.
> >>
> >
> >When i saw it first, i felt like V:TES lost a great part of interest
> >for me. As these cards can easily be canceled (Direct, delaying
> >tactics, votes, intercept....)
>
> if they were so easy to counter, and thus were countered all the time,
> having them in the game or not should make no difference....
i disagree. you had to include vote defense in your deck. now it´s not that
important anymore. that helps combat a little bit but it helps stealth/bleed
a lot, since they can focus even more on bleed? good? i am not sure.
--
johannes walch
Daneel
>>> There are. Such discussions are nearly continuous, here, in email,
>>> on forums, on chats, face to face, etc.
>>
>> Why don't make a public list of this discution's?, that's sound like 3
>> people decided about all of the destiny of vtes.
>
> You want a public list of the things people approach me about face
> to face at tournaments and otherwise?
Hmm... I underestimated the power of face to face communication.
Next time I'll pack a charming lobby and convince you that PTO should be
banned.
Beware... ;)
--
Bye,
Daneel
Brian
> > haven't seen a vote deck without seat switching in a long time.
>
> This statement right here, is one major reason why I'm in favor of the
> cards being banned. When players can't even think of the last time you
> saw a vote deck without seat-switching, because EVERY vote deck always
> includes them, then those cards are definitely worth considering for
> alteration/banning/etc.
I disagree.
I haven't seen a vote deck without Kine Resources Contested in a long
time.
Players can't even think of the last time they saw a vote deck without
KRC, because EVERY vote deck always includes them, and yet those cards
are not worth considering for alteration/banning/etc.
Prevalence != power level.
-- Brian
Daneel
> Huh? You must be kidding, man. If you have problems with votedecks
> play rush and nuke'em. Play big eye. Play antivotecards.
Please. Let's be serious.
Disk of Joy
Master
Put this card in play.
Tap to win the game.
Would this card be powerful? No, because SR and similar cards exist?
I think that the game should not be about having a problem with one deck
type and needing to play another to specifically counter it. I mean, yeah,
some deck types' weaknesses are matched by other deck types' strengths,
but *needing* Eagle's Sight to block a cross-table vote is pretty weird
and unhealthy for a competitive multiplayer game. IMHO.
> Excuse me for being a bit over the top, Daneel.
No problem, this is the forums... I'm over the top on occasion.
> Concerning deals: As far as I know honoring deals was no problem at
> all. Making deals is watched by the judges. If there are flawed deals
> then it's not the problem of the game, it's the problem of the players
> and/or the judges. Counterdealing is the way if you dislike deals.
Excuse me? Counterdealing is dealing, you know.
I have a pretty solid vision of what constitutes a good multiplayer game.
VTES is pretty cool. But, there are issues. One of them is related to how
politics can get around Intercept. If we are to play a serious multiplayer
game in a competitive fashion we should aim to minimize the effects of
misjudgement on a player's or judge's part. Noone can be assumed to
possess immaculate reasoning and judgement at all times.
--
Bye,
Daneel
Fernando Costa
> In message <dcb2a0b5.04120...@posting.google.com>, Fernando
> Costa <fko...@oninet.pt> writes:
> >Why bring the Political decks down ??
> >I find these (decks and cards) to be the most interesting ones, and
> >now what ??
> >Pack 999999 KRC on my deck ?
>
> Are your current political decks 99999999 KRC and a few Dramatic
> Upheavals?
Yes, of course ! ;)
But how to get a VP (the regular way)? KRC ? Cons. Agit.? Parity shift
? Domain Challenge ? Banishment?...and...and...Steal locations ? (DOM
has Kdominance) Tap minions ?... (these last will be fine, to CASUAL
play!)
Seriously, to the ones that argue something like "...someone called a
DU and stole my VP that was so hard to get, blablabla...", oh yes...as
if with ANY kind of deck it is easy to get a VP these days.
And how about this answer: "He Ambushed Monçada/or Blocked my +1
(duuuuh!) Stealth Pol. Action called by Monçada, and he costed me 10
POOL to get !!"
What this bane seems is: "Stand still right there while I rush every
single one of your 8, 9 or 10 cap titles"
If you want to bane DU and KR, then ban the cross table Rush/ambush,
the infamous Eagle's sight and so ever...
And let's not forget the essential...blocking DU and KR is by default
a +1 intercept reaction...! At the most a +2 or +3 or +4 stealth with
OBF or OBT...My Tzimisce wall deck LAUGHS at that !
Brian
> single major change in the history of V:TES. I'm left without words...
>
> But most of all, it was completely unexpected to me. There goes my
> best deck... :-(
Well, I'm sure glad I played it before this happened!
> It's difficult to judge how good or bad it'll be for the game before
> actually trying... The only thing that comes to my mind at the moment
> is that when people asked me what was V:TES, I used to start by
> telling them that, at a table with 3-4 other players, you must kill
> the guy at your left, avoid being killed by the one at your right, BUT
> there are wicked cards which make people change their places!! Now
> part of the poetry is gone...
Yes, Richard Garfield designed our game as a game that has rules, but
with cards that break those rules. In V:TES (or in Magic, or in any
Garfield game) he tried to break every rule in the first base set.
> Anyway, we'll get used to it, and stop talking about the new ban list
> pretty soon. And... I'm relieved I won't see evil Succubus Club around
> anymore...
Yeah, me too. I had 17 vampires in play in one game in the EC, and I
don't care if that never happens again.
-- Brian
XZealot
> undermine the predator-prey relationship more than a card that
> rearranges the table. Why should the predator-prey relationship from
> the start be more important than other things?
Because it is the framework that the whole game is built around rather
than a multi-player free-for-all. There are no other non-master cards
in the game that change who you gain Victory Points from.
Manipulating the basic
> rules (like a bleed is for one pool or the first player to the left is
> your prey) is part of a trading card game. And VTEs has always been a
> game about playing in the chain of predator-prey and at the same time
> acting against it.
>
> Making master cards that let votes pass automatically, and then weaken
> the votes, doesnt look right.
> Creating new winning strategies (depleting the deck of your prey) and
> then killing one game strategie doesnt look right.
Politics is still very healthy. It still has the two most damaging
cards in the game, Conservetive Agitation and Kind Resources
Contested.
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Stefan Ferenci
>
> And let's not forget the essential...blocking DU and KR is by default
> a +1 intercept reaction...! At the most a +2 or +3 or +4 stealth with
> OBF or OBT...My Tzimisce wall deck LAUGHS at that !
i play a pretty good tzimi wall myself but imagine the following
you have you´re prey down on 2 pool all his minions disposed. now your
nice grandpre/pred (your choice) calls a du with lets say gilbert duane.
you laugh because you have an eagle sight in your hand and proceed to
block it. then he plays a forgotten labyrinth, no prob, followed by a
lost in crowds, easy dude you´re playing a wall deck, but then he plays
and elder impersonation! still laughing?
stefan
Johannes Walch
news:opsijt2h...@news.chello.hu...
> I think that the game should not be about having a problem with one deck
> type and needing to play another to specifically counter it. I mean, yeah,
> some deck types' weaknesses are matched by other deck types' strengths,
> but *needing* Eagle's Sight to block a cross-table vote is pretty weird
> and unhealthy for a competitive multiplayer game. IMHO.
You don?t need Eagle?s Sight. Direct Intervention could be another choice,
or Delaying Tactics or Vampires with titles. I still cannot see that the
game has a problem with a certain deck type (=the voting deck).
--
johannes walch
Morgan Vening
wrote:
Another option?
"Choose a Methusalah. If this referendum is successful, switch seating
with that Methusalah and put this card into play with X counters,
where X is the number of Methusalahs in the game. During your untap,
remove a counter. When this card has zero counters, burn it. While
this card is in play, if your Prey is ousted you get 0 (or 0.5?) VP."
Or alternately...
"Choose a Methusalah. If this referendum is successful, switch seating
with that Methusalah and put this card into play. During your untap,
put a counter on this card. When this card has X counters (where X is
the number of Methusalahs in the game, burn it. While this card is in
play, if your Prey is ousted you get 0 (or 0.5?) VP."
The second one allows the timespan to be shortened if other people
make kills. But both will still not net any (full?) VP to a quick
snipe. Moving to get a softer prey, or to get away from a harder
predator, would both still be ideal uses of the card. Similar time
displacement usage for Kindred Restructure would allow putting the
Stealth Bleeder behind the Wall deck, or the Bruise Bleeder behind
your Predator. If you have to be around for 3-6 turns, does this not
re-establish the predator/prey mechanic somewhat?
Morgan Vening
Jeroen Rombouts
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> schreef in bericht
news:41B11E2D...@white-wolf.com...
> The 2005 season VEKN Tournament Rules are up.
>
> The nature of "randomness" in determining seating is clarified a bit.
>
> The Banned List is expanded to include three cards that are
> not suited for competitive play: Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred
> Restructure, and Succubus Club.
My first reaction was: yeah! gone with SC.
second reaction: huh? DU and KR?
third reaction: what the hell?
fourth: actually, when you think about it:
* Kindred restructure was certainly wrong. It's effect changes the game
state too much for a single vote. And there where decks who relied on it way
too much. frex: the Anson - Anneke Anarch Revolt deck and the First
tradition deck.
* Dramatic Upheaval: same thing actually, but a bit less so. What Derek
said is actually my problem with this card too. Only decks that can do a
massive damage turn could oust someone without a DI or DT in hand.
* Practically: the above 3 cards turn the game into a discussion match.
I've seen games where between the playing of the vote and the actual
changing of seats there was 20-30 minutes of discussion. And the actual
changing itself takes time too.
* Why IMO this will not make vote decks unplayable: simply because other
people will play less Delaying Tactics in their decks. Most decks only pack
it against 2 things: seat changers and PTO. And I think this will be better
for the game too. I've seen to many finals where every deck was packing 3-4
DI and 2-4 Delaying tactics. And they're booooooooooooooring as hell.
* Maybe vote decks will now start playing attrition decks too instead of
defending until they can get a shot a an easy oust?
Just my .02
Jeroen
Peter D Bakija
> Well, that's a bit overgeneralized. If you can kill someone on 9 pool, why
> don't you kill your prey?
'Cause if it is easier to kill someone elses pry than it is yours, for
whatever reason, table switch votes let you. Removing them from the
environment says "You have to kill your own prey--do your own hard work",
which is a lot closer to the main theme of the game--kill your prey.
> It's more a problem with leaving your prey on 1-2 pool
Which is, ya know, less than 10, making my point not invalid.
Peter D Bakija
pd...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6
"How does this end?"
"In fire."
Emperor Turhan and Kosh
Peter D Bakija
> Well bums's rush (and any rush card) should be banished too as someone
> can rush me crosstable and undermine my relations with my prey/predator
You don't gain VP's by Rushing cross table. In fact, more often that not,
Rushing cross table makes you *lose* VPs ('cause it usually compromises your
position and strengthens someone elses, providing built in disincentive to
Rush cross table).
Table switch votes got you VPs off of someone elses hard work. Now you just
have to do your own work.
scrote
> <snip>
>
> >> Care to explain why these cards were banned? I cannot see any apparent
> >> reason.
> >
> >
> > Not suited to competitive play, since they undermine the foundation
> > of the game (namely, the predator-prey relationship).
> >
>
> <snip>
>
> Well bums's rush (and any rush card) should be banished too as someone
> can rush me crosstable and undermine my relations with my prey/predator
>
No, they don't. You still have the same predator and prey. So what's
changed there?
> and eagle sight, sensory deprivation, temptation... too
Rubbish. The abiltiy to engage/interact outside the default
relationship is something different. It does not change the facts
about your predator and prey.
>
> really I don't get the point
> banishing DU and KR is just making S&B far easier as these decks won't
> have to care about table vision
Oh, and they cared sooo much about it before?
I think that you overestimate the average S&B player.
> and vote decks lose the main edge
I disagree. They lose one strategy, but there zare still plenty more
existing options, not too mention upcoming expansions.
>
> vote is a hard strategy as it requires some skills and a good flow in
> playing cards (i need the vote, eventually to stealth it by, then I need
> vote lock or to negociate with the one who has it)
> So this strategy should be able to do something other strategies are not
> able too, and that is place switch.
> Yes it is a powerful strategy but they are *SO MANY* things that can
> spoil it and that is actually what the game is all about !
>
> Now what... Just play KRCs ? really nice...
>
No, actually you get a couple of more cards, other than KRC....
Cheers
-scrote
Excommunication Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Archbishop. Successful
referendum means the chosen Archbishop loses his or her
title. Sabbat:U, SW:PB U/PB
Final Nights, The Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each vampire burns 1 blood.
If this referendum fails, the acting vampire burns 1 blood. FN:C2 C2
Honor the Elders Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means that each ready vampire
with a capacity above 7 gains 1 blood from the blood bank, and each
vampire with a capacity above 7 in any uncontrolled region gains 1
blood from the blood bank. FN:C2 C2
Anarchist Uprising Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah
burns 1 pool for each minion he or she controls. Sabbat:C, SW:C/PV,
Anarchs:PAB3 C/PV
Anathema Prince or Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. Choose a ready vampire. If the
referendum is successful, put this card on that vampire. If that
vampire is reduced to zero blood in combat, he or she is burned, and
the Methuselah controlling the opposing minion gains pool equal to the
burned vampire's capacity. DS:U2, CE:U/PB U
Ancient Influence Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah may choose
a ready vampire he or she controls. Each Methuselah gains an amount of
pool from the blood bank equal to his or her chosen vampire's
capacity. Each Methuselah also burns 5 pool. Only one Ancient
Influence can be played in a game. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, SW:PT/PV,
CE:C C/PT/PV
Ancilla Empowerment Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah
burns 1 pool for each minion he or she controls. Jyhad:C, VTES:C,
CE:C/PTo2 C
Archon Prince or Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. Choose a Camarilla vampire.
Successful referendum makes the vampire an Archon. An Archon may enter
combat with another vampire controlled by another Methuselah as a +1
stealth (D) action. Any vampire attempting to block an Archon burns 1
blood. A Blood Hunt cannot be called on an Archon. -Any vampire can
remove these abilities with a successful referendum; calling that
referendum is a +1 stealth political action-. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:U V
Autarkis Persecution Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah
gains 1 pool for each minion he or she controls. Jyhad:C, VTES:C,
SW:PB, CE:C C/PB
Banishment Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at +1
stealth. Choose a younger ready vampire. Successful referendum means
that the chosen vampire is moved to the uncontrolled region (place him
or her face down). The vampire is uncontrolled. The vampire's blood
counters, master cards and minion cards stay with that vampire, with
any counters they have on them (minion cards are out of play as long
as the vampire remains uncontrolled). DS:U2, FN:PS, CE:PTo/PV U
Beyond Reproach Prince Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Prince at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, put this card
in play. Primogen cannot attempt political actions and get one less
vote during political actions. This card may be burned by a referendum
called by any vampire as a +1 stealth political action. AH:R2 R2
Blood Siege Archbishop, Priscus or Cardinal Political Card-Worth 1
Vote. Called by any Archbishop, Priscus or Cardinal at +1 stealth. No
action modifiers can be played during or after this referendum. Choose
a ready Sabbat vampire and a ready Prince. Successful referendum means
that that Prince loses his or her title and the Sabbat vampire becomes
Archbishop of that city. Any ready vampire can gain votes during this
referendum by burning one blood per vote gained. SW:R R
Brujah Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Brujah. Successful referendum means he
or she is declared Brujah Justicar. In this referendum, each Brujah
gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested title. Jyhad:R,
VTES:R, CE:R R
Camarilla Exemplary Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a controlled Camarilla
vampire. Successful referendum means that for the remainder of the
game, any vampire attempting to block that vampire burns 1
blood. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, CE:C/PV2 C
Camarilla Threat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, put this card in
play. Each Methuselah discarding a card during his or her discard
phase burns one pool. Any vampire may call a referendum to burn this
card as a +1 stealth political action. Sabbat:R, SW:R, BH:PTo R
Cardinal Benediction Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a Sabbat vampire with a
capacity over 6. Successful referendum means that the vampire is given
the title of
Cardinal. Camarilla vampires cannot vote during this
referendum. Sabbat:U, SW:U U
Code of Milan Suspended Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Select the Methuselah with the Edge.
If this referendum is successful, that Methuselah burns 1
pool. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Command of the Harpies Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Prince. Put
this card on that vampire. Successful referendum means the Prince
loses his or her title. DS:U2, CE:PM/PTo U
Consanguineous Boon Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a clan. Successful referendum means each
Methuselah gains 1 pool for each member of that clan he or she
controls. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, Sabbat:C, SW:PL/PV3, FN:PG/PS, CE:PTo3/PV2,
BH:PTo4 C/PL/PV3
Consanguineous Condemnation Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a clan. Successful referendum taps
all vampires of that clan. Jyhad:C, VTES:C C
Conservative Agitation Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Allocate X points between two or more
Methuselahs, where X is the number of Methuselahs in the game.
Successful referendum means each Methuselah burns 1 pool for each
point assigned. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, SW:C/PV4, FN:PG/PS, CE:PTo4/PV4,
Anarchs:PAB2 C/PV4
Corruption's Purge Prince, Justicar or Inner Circle Political
Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Prince, Justicar, or Inner Circle
member at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, each Follower
of Set burns 2 blood. Each Follower of Set with zero blood then goes
into torpor. AH:V3 V3
Crusade: Atlanta Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Atlanta. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Crusade: Chicago Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Chicago. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, BH:PM R
Crusade: Detroit Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Detroit. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Crusade: Houston Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Houston. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Crusade: Mexico City Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared ArchBishop of Mexico City. This could lead
to a contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:PV R/PV
Crusade: Miami Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Miami. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, BH:PTo R
Crusade: New York Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of New York. This could lead to a
contested title. SW:R R
Crusade: Philadelphia Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared ArchBishop of Philadelphia. This could lead
to a contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Crusade: Pittsburgh Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Pittsburgh. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R, SW:PT R/PT
Crusade: Toronto Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the acting
vampire is declared ArchBishop of Toronto. This could lead to a
contested title. Sabbat:R R
Cunctator Motion Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Only usable if playing for ante. Choose how you would
rearrange the remaining ante cards among the surviving Methuselahs.
Successful referendum means you then rearrange the remaining ante
cards. Jyhad:R2, VTES:R R2/R
Disputed Territory Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a location and a Methuselah. Successful
referendum means the chosen Methuselah takes control of the chosen
location. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, Sabbat:C, SW:PL/PV2, FN:PG, CE:PN/PV,
Anarchs:PAB, BH:PTo C/PL/PV2
Domain Challenge Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah burns 1
pool for each tapped minion he or she controls. Jyhad:C, VTES:C,
CE:C/PV2, Anarchs:PAB C
First Tradition: The Masquerade, The Prince or Justicar Political
Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. If
this referendum is successful, put this card in play. While in play,
each Methuselah must skip a turn or burn 2 pool. Burn this card when
you have either skipped 3 turns or paid 6 pool in cumulative
penalties. Jyhad:R2, VTES:R, CE:R R2/R
Free States Rant Independent Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Independent vampire at +1 stealth. Allocate X points among one or
more ready vampires, where X is half the capacity of the acting
vampire (rounded up). No more than 3 points can be allocated to a
single vampire. Successful referendum means each vampire burns 1 blood
for each point assigned. In this referendum, titles are worth 1 less
vote each (even in the prisci sub-referendum), and burning the Edge
for a vote is worth an additional vote. FN:C2, Anarchs:PAB2 C2
Gangrel Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Gangrel. Successful referendum means he
or she is declared Gangrel Justicar. In this referendum, each Gangrel
gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested title. Jyhad:R,
VTES:R R
Giovanni Acceptance Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, all Giovanni
change their staus from Independent vampires to Camarilla vampires for
the rest of the game. All options available to Camarilla clans are now
open to the Giovanni. DS:U2 U
Investiture Cardinal Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Cardinal as a +1 stealth action. Choose a Sabbat vampire. If this
referendum is successful, the chosen vampire is given the title of
Priscus. In this referendum, each ready Cardinal gets one additional
vote. Camarilla vampires cannot vote during this referendum. Sabbat:R,
SW:R R
Invitation Accepted Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, all Followers
of Set are considered Camarilla vampires for the rest of the game. All
options available to Camarilla clans are now open to the Followers of
Set. AH:V3 V3
Justicar Retribution Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum burns all
vampires with a current bleed of 3 or more. VTES:U, CE:U U
Kindred Segregation Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means that all allies are
burned. Any Methuselah can keep an ally or allies he or she controls
by repaying -their pool cost to recruit-. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:PTo V
Kine Resources Contested Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Allocate 4 points between two or more
Methuselahs. Successful referendum means each Methuselah burns 1 pool
for each point assigned. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, CE:C/PTo2, Anarchs:PAB3,
BH:PM5 C
Legacy of Pander Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, put
this card in play. Each non-titled Pander has one vote. Any Sabbat
vampire may call a referendum to burn this card as a +1 stealth
political action. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Lextalionis Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at +1
stealth. Choose a Methuselah who has received a victory point since
your last turn. Successful referendum means the Methuselah must
immediately tap all of his or her minions; the minions do not untap
during the Methuselah's next untap phase. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:PTo V
Malkavian Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Malkavian. Successful referendum
means he or she is declared Malkavian Justicar. In this referendum,
each Malkavian gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested
title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Mark of the Damned Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, each
Methuselah burns X pool, where X is the number of vampires in his or
her prey's ash heap. AH:C2 C2
Masquerade Enforcement Prince or Justicar Political Card-Worth 1
Vote. Called by any Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. If this
referendum is successful, put this card in play. While in play, when
any Methuselah moves a vampire from uncontrolled to controlled, he or
she burns 1 additional pool. This card can be burned by a successful
referendum; calling that referendum is a +1 stealth political
action. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:U V
Might of the Camarilla Justicar or Inner Circle Political Card-Worth
1 Vote. Called by any Justicar or Inner Circle member at +1 stealth.
If this referendum is successful, each Methuselah chooses one vampire
in his or her uncontrolled region and burns him or her. AH:R2 R2
National Guard Support Title Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any titled vampire at +1 stealth. You may not play this card if
another
National Guard Support is in play. Successful referendum means that
this card is put into play. All minions get -1 stealth when performing
(D) actions. Put a counter on this card during each of your untap
phases. Any vampire can burn this card with a successful referendum
called as a +1 stealth political action; in that referendum, each
counter represents a vote in favor of burning the card. FN:R2 R2
Nosferatu Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Nosferatu. Successful referendum
means he or she is declared Nosferatu Justicar. In this referendum,
each Nosferatu gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested
title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Parity Shift Prince or Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. Choose a Methuselah who has
more blood in his or her pool than you do. Allocate X of that pool
between any of the other remaining Methuselahs (including you), where
X is the number of Methuselahs in the game. Successful referendum
means the chosen Methuselah loses that pool, and it is allocated as
you announced. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:U V
Peace Treaty Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at
+1 stealth. Successful referendum burns all weapons. A Methuselah may
keep any of his or her minions' weapons by repaying their -pool- cost
to equip. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, Sabbat:C, SW:PT/PV, CE:PV,
Anarchs:PAB C/PT/PV
Peace of Khetamon, The Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a vampire in torpor. Successful
referendum means that vampire is placed face down in his or her
controller's uncontrolled region. The vampire's blood counters, master
cards, and minion cards stay with that vampire. AH:C2 C2
Political Flux Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at
+1 stealth. Pick a number from 1 to 12. Successful referendum means
this is the amount of pool the next predator will earn for ousting his
or her prey (instead of the usual 6 pool). Jyhad:C, VTES:C, CE:C C
Political Stranglehold Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah
gains 3 pool for each vampire he or she controls with capacity above
7. Only one Political Stranglehold can be played during a
game. Sabbat:U, SW:U/PL, FN:PG U/PL
Praxis Seizure: Amsterdam Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Amsterdam. This could
lead to a contested title. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Athens Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
that the acting vampire is declared Prince of Athens. This could lead
to a contested title. If the Prince is Tremere, his or her capacity
increases by 1. AH:R2 R2
Praxis Seizure: Atlanta Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Atlanta. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Barcelona Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Barcelona. This could
lead to a contested title. If the Prince is Tremere, his or her
capacity increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Berlin Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Berlin. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Ventrue, his or her capacity
increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Boston Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Boston. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Brussels Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Brussels. This could
lead to a contested title. If the Prince is Nosferatu, his or her
capacity increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Cairo Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Cairo. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Ventrue, his or her capacity
increases by 1. AH:R2 R2
Praxis Seizure: Chicago Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Chicago. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Cleveland Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Cleveland. This could
lead to a contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Dallas Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Dallas. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Dublin Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Dublin. This could lead to a
contested title. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Frankfurt Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Frankfurt. This could
lead to a contested title. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Geneva Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Geneva. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Ventrue, his or her capacity
increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Glasgow Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Glasgow. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Gangrel, his or her capacity
increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Houston Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Houston. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Istanbul Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Istanbul. This could
lead to a contested title. Each Assamite gets one additional vote for
this political action. If the vampire declared Prince is not an
Assamite, tap all Assamites. AH:R2 R2
Praxis Seizure: London Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of London. This could lead to a
contested title. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Miami Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Miami. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Monaco Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Monaco. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Toreador, his or her capacity
increases by 1. AH:R2 R2
Praxis Seizure: Paris Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Paris. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Toreador, his or her capacity
increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Rome Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Prince of Rome. This could lead to a
contested title. If the Prince is Brujah, his or her capacity
increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Seattle Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Seattle. This could lead to a
contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Seizure: Stockholm Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Stockholm. This could
lead to a contested title. If the Prince is Malkavian, his or her
capacity increases by 1. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Venice Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means
the acting vampire is declared Prince of Venice. This could lead to a
contested title. Each Giovanni gets one additional vote for this
political action. If the vampire declared Prince is not Giovanni, tap
all Giovanni. DS:U2 U
Praxis Seizure: Washington, D.C. Camarilla Political Card-Worth 1
Vote. Called by any Camarilla vampire at +1 stealth. Successful
referendum means the acting vampire is declared Prince of Washington,
D.C. This could lead to a contested title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Praxis Solomon Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at
+1 stealth. Only usable if at least one card is contested. For each
contested card, choose which Methuselah should yield. Successful
referendum means that the chosen Methuselahs yield as you
selected. Jyhad:V, VTES:V V
Protect Thine Own 1 blood Justicar or Inner Circle Political
Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Justicar or Inner Circle member at +1
stealth. Choose a Non-Camarilla vampire with a capacity below 6. If
the acting vampire is a member of the Inner Circle, you may choose any
Non-Camarilla vampire instead. If this referendum is successful, burn
that vampire. AH:R2, CE:PV R2
Rabble Razing Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire at
+1 stealth. Successful referendum means all vampires with capacity
less than 4 burn one blood. SW:C/PV C/PV
Ravnos Acceptance Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, all Ravnos change
their status from Independent vampires to Camarilla vampires for the
rest of the game. All options available to Camarilla clans are now
open to the Ravnos. DS:U2 U
Regaining the Upper Hand Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a Methuselah. Successful referendum
means the chosen Methuselah gets the Edge. Jyhad:C, VTES:C, Sabbat:C C
Reinforcements Title Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
titled vampire at +1 stealth. Choose one or more Methuselahs.
Successful referendum means each chosen Methuselah selects up to 3
library cards from his or her ash heap and shuffles them into his or
her library. Remove this card from the game, even if the action is
canceled or blocked or the referendum fails. FN:R2 R2
Reversal of Fortunes Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means direction of play
is reversed. Prey is still to the left, however. Jyhad:V, VTES:V,
CE:PM V
Revocation of Tyre Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, all Assamites
are considered Camarilla vampires for the rest of the game. All
options available to Camarilla clans are now open to the
Assamites. AH:V3 V3
Rumors of Gehenna Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose 1 or more Methuselahs. If this referendum is
successful, put this card into play. While in play, each chosen
Methuselah receives 2 master phase actions during his or her master
phase (instead of 1). Any vampire can burn this card with a successful
referendum; calling this referendum is a +1 stealth political
action. Jyhad:R2, VTES:R, CE:R2 R2/R
Sabbat Inquisitor Archbishop or Cardinal Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Archbishop or Cardinal at +1 stealth. Choose any Sabbat
vampire who is not an Inquisitor. Successful referendum means that
vampire is an Inquisitor; put this card on that vampire. He or she
gets +1 bleed (). As a (D) action, he or she may look at the top
vampire of any Methuselah's crypt; if that vampire has Thaumaturgy,
burn that card. This card can be burned with a successful referendum
called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Sabbat:U U
Sabbat Priest Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Sabbat vampire.
Successful referendum means that for the remainder of the game, any
vampire attempting to block the chosen vampire burns 1
blood. Sabbat:C, SW:C/PV, BH:PM2 C/PV
Sabbat Threat Prince or Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called
by any Prince or Justicar at +1 stealth. Choose 1 or more Methuselahs.
Successful referendum means each chosen Methuselah gets 1 threat
counter. Each Methuselah burns 1 pool for each threat counter he or
she has during his or her untap phase. A Methuselah may never have
more than 2 threat counters, and he or she may burn the Edge to remove
all the threat counters he or she has. Jyhad:V, VTES:V, CE:U V
Sacrifice Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Sabbat
vampire with capacity above 7 at +1 stealth. Choose a vampire with a
capacity below 7 who belongs to the same clan as the acting vampire.
Successful referendum burns the chosen vampire. Sabbat:U U
Watchtower: Greatest Fall 1 pool Seraph Political Card - Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Seraph at +1 stealth. Watchtower. In this referendum,
each ready Seraph gets 2 additional votes. If this referendum is
successful, put this card in play. Tap this card to move 1 blood from
the blood bank to a Sabbat vampire in your ready region or your
uncontrolled region (not usable during combat). Burn this card if
another watchtower enters play. BH:R R
Screw the Masquerade! Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a Methuselah. Successful referendum
means each Methuselah burns 1 pool and the chosen Methuselah burns an
additional pool. Sabbat:C C
Templar Bishop, Archbishop, Priscus or Cardinal Political Card-Worth
1 Vote. Called by any Bishop, Archbishop, Priscus or Cardinal at +1
stealth. Choose a Sabbat vampire. Successful referendum make the
vampire a templar. A templar may enter combat with a ready vampire
controlled by another Methuselah as a +1 stealth (D) action. Any
Sabbat vampire may call a referendum to remove this ability as a +1
stealth political action. SW:C/PB, BH:PTo5 C/PB
Tithings Sabbat Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Sabbat
vampire with a capacity above 6 at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means you gain 1 pool from each Methuselah who does not a control a
vampire with a capacity above 6. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Toreador Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Toreador. Successful referendum means he
or she is declared Toreador Justicar. In this referendum, each
Toreador gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested
title. Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Tradition Upheld Prince, Justicar or Inner Circle Political
Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Prince, Justicar, or Inner Circle
member at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Caitiff. If this referendum is
successful, burn that Caitiff. DS:C2 C
Transfer of Power Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means you gain 1 pool from each
Methuselah who has more pool than you do. Sabbat:R, SW:R R
Treaty of Tyre Enforced Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, each
Methuselah burns X+1 pool, where X is the number of Assamites he or
she controls. AH:V3 V3
Tremere Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Tremere. Successful referendum means he
or she is declared Tremere Justicar. In this referendum, each Tremere
gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested title. Jyhad:R,
VTES:R, CE:R R
Ventrue Justicar Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose a ready Ventrue. Successful referendum means he
or she is declared Ventrue Justicar. In this referendum, each Ventrue
gets 1 extra vote. This could lead to a contested title. Alternate
card name: Venture Justicar Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R R
Wrath of the Inner Circle Inner Circle Political Card-Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Inner Circle member at +1 stealth. Choose a ready
Justicar. If the referendum is successful, put this card on that
Justicar. The Justicar loses his or her title, and his or her capacity
decreases by 1. (A vampire's capacity cannot go below 1.) DS:U U
Meddling of Semsith, The Political Action - Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any vampire at +1 stealth. Choose another Methuselah. If this
referendum is successful, put this card in play. Your hand size is one
card smaller. The chosen Methuselah doesn't draw to replace cards
during any Methuselah's minion phase. After each minion phase, he or
she draws back up to his or her hand size. Any vampire may call a
referendum to burn this card as a +1 stealth political
action. Promo-20020201 Promo
Firebrand Anarch Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any anarch
as a +1 stealth action. If this referendum is successful, put this
card on the acting anarch. This anarch gets 1 additional vote during a
political action. During your minion phase, this anarch can burn 1
blood to untap a ready younger anarch. Burn this card if this anarch
goes to torpor. An anarch may have only 1 Firebrand. Anarchs:C/PAB C
Anarch Salon Anarch Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any
anarch at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each ready anarch
gains 1 blood from the blood bank, and each Methuselah who controls at
least one anarch gains 1 pool from the blood bank. Anarchs:C2/PAB2 C2
Brinksmanship 1 pool Political card - worth 1 vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, put this card
in play. Any Methuselah who has exhausted his or her library and
begins his or her untap phase with less than a full hand must attempt
to withdraw. On that Methuselah's next untap phase, if the withdrawal
fails, that Methuselah is ousted. If any Methuselah successfully
withdraws, you are ousted. Anarchs:R R
Sweeper Baron Political Card - Worth 1 vote. Called by any baron at
+1 stealth. Choose a ready anarch vampire. If this referendum is
successful, put this card on the chosen anarch. During your untap
phase, if the anarch with this card is ready, you may look at the top
card of each Methuselah's library (including your own). Anarchs:R R
Reins of Power Political Card - Worth 1 vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah may choose
a ready vampire he or she controls. Each Methuselah gains 6 pool. Each
Methuselah also burns an amount of pool equal to the capacity of his
or her predator's chosen vampire. Only one Reins of Power can be
played in a game. Anarchs:C C
Snipe Hunt Political Card - Worth 1 vote. Called by any vampire at
+1 stealth. If this referendum is successful, put this card in play
and tap all vampires with a capacity less than 4. Vampires with a
capacity less than 4 do not untap as normal during the untap phase.
Burn this card during your next master phase. Anarchs:C C
Year of Fortune Political Card - Worth 1 vote. Called by any vampire
at +1 stealth. Choose one or more Methuselahs who are not chosen for
any other Year of Fortune in play. If this referendum is successful,
put this card in play. Each chosen Methuselah's hand size is increased
by one card. Any vampire can call a referendum to burn this card as a
+1 stealth political action. Anarchs:C C
Crusade: Barcelona Sabbat vampire Political Card - Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Barcelona. This
could lead to a contested title. If this vampire is Tremere antitribu,
he or she untaps during your next discard phase. BH:R R
Crusade: Brussels Sabbat vampire Political Card - Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Brussels. This
could lead to a contested title. If this vampire is Toreador
antitribu, he or she untaps during your next discard phase. BH:R R
Crusade: Rome Sabbat vampire Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Rome. This could lead to a
contested title. If this vampire is Brujah antitribu, he or she untaps
during your next discard phase. BH:R R
Deploy the Hand Archbishop or Cardinal Political Card - Worth 1 Vote.
Called by any archbishop or cardinal at +1 stealth. Choose one or more
Methuselahs who do not have a target counter. Successful referendum
means each chosen Methuselah gets a target counter. During his or her
untap phase, a Methuselah with a target counter chooses one of his or
her ready minions, who takes 2 unpreventable damage. A Methuselah may
burn the Edge to burn his or her target counter. BH:C/PTo C
Hand Intervention titled Sabbat vampire Political Card - Worth 1
Vote. Called by any titled Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a
Methuselah. If this referendum is successful, put this card in play.
The chosen Methuselah has -1 hand size. That Methuselah may burn this
card by burning the Edge. A Methuselah may be chosen for only one Hand
Intervention at a time. BH:C/PM C
Seraph Black Hand vampire Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by
any Black Hand vampire at +1 stealth. Choose a non-Seraph Black Hand
vampire with a capacity above 5. If this referendum is successful, put
this card on the chosen vampire. That Black Hand vampire gains 2 blood
and is a Seraph. Non-Sabbat vampires cannot vote in this
referendum. BH:U2 U2
Alastor Justicar or Inner Circle Political card - Worth 1 vote.
Called by any justicar or Inner Circle member at +1 stealth. Choose a
ready Camarilla vampire. If this referendum is successful, search your
library for an equipment card and place this card and the equipment on
the chosen vampire. Pay half the cost (round down) of the equipment.
This vampire may enter combat with any vampire controlled by another
Methuselah as a +1 stealth (D) action. This vampire cannot commit
diablerie. A vampire may have only one Alastor. G R
Crusade: Amsterdam Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote.
Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Amsterdam. This
could lead to a contested title. If this vampire is Ventrue antitribu,
he or she untaps during your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: Berlin Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called
by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Berlin. This could lead to a
contested title. If this vampire is Lasombra, he or she untaps during
your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: Dublin Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called
by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Dublin. This could lead to a
contested title. If this vampire is Gangrel antitribu, he or she
untaps during your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: Frankfurt Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote.
Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Frankfurt. This
could lead to a contested title. G R
Crusade: Geneva Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called
by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Geneva. This could lead to a
contested title. If this vampire is Malkavian antitribu, he or she
untaps during your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: Istanbul Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote.
Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum
means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Istanbul. This
could lead to a contested title. If this vampire is Tzimisce, he or
she untaps during your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: London Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called
by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of London. This could lead to a
contested title. If this vampire is Nosferatu antitribu, he or she
untaps during your next discard phase. G R
Crusade: Paris Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called
by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful referendum means the
acting vampire is declared Archbishop of Paris. This could lead to a
contested title. G R
Crusade: Washington, D.C. Sabbat vampire Political card - Worth 1
vote. Called by any Sabbat vampire at +1 stealth. Successful
referendum means the acting vampire is declared Archbishop of
Washington, D.C. This could lead to a contested title. If this vampire
is Ventrue antitribu, he or she untaps during your next discard
phase. G R
Diversity Political card - Worth 1 vote. Called by any vampire at +1
stealth. Successful referendum means each Methuselah gains X pool,
where X is the number of different clans to which his or her ready
vampires belong. G C
Finding the Path Political card - Worht 1 vote. Called by any
vampire at +1 stealth. Choose at least half of the Methuselahs in the
game. Successful referendum means each chosen Methuselah burns 1 pool
and each of the other Methuselahs gains 1 pool. G C