What I played on Saturday at the London Storytelling event
hamdamcwa
day, and lots of new faces. The Meddling card is VERY COOL. I have 3
decks in mind for it already - better start trading!
Anyhow, I got into the final with the following "novelty" deck. It did
very well on the day, but I was scuppered by my predator having more
disposable allies than me. Curses! On reflection, I should have gone
backwards more to ease up the pressure, but I thought I have my prey
so I slightly overextended myself. Oops! Oh well, 4vp in three rounds
is still respectable:
Deck Name: Ghouled Street Thuggery
Crypt: (13 cards, Min: 4, Max: 14, Avg: 2.08)
---------------------------------------------
1 Basil obf 1, Pander
1 Christine Boscacci dom vic 2, Pander
1 Gillian Krader ani dem 2, Pander
1 Hasina Kesi pot 1, Caitiff
1 Huang pro 1, Pander
1 Hugo POT pre vic 4, Brujah Antitribu
1 Jacob Bragg cel pot 3, Brujah Antitribu
1 Jimmy Dunn CEL for POT 4, Pander
1 March Halcyon for 1, Pander
2 Mitchell obt pot 2, Pander
1 Rex pot pro vic 3, Pander
1 Royce dom 1, Pander
Library: (90 cards)
-------------------
Master (14 cards)
4 Blood Doll
2 Charisma
1 Fame
1 Haven Uncovered
1 Left for Dead
1 London Evening Star, Tabloid Newspaper
1 Powerbase: Montreal
1 Sudden Reversal
1 Tribute to the Master
1 Waste Management Operation
Action (16 cards)
3 Ambush
6 Bum's Rush
6 Computer Hacking
1 Rampage
Combat (43 cards)
8 Disarm
7 Fake Out
10 Immortal Grapple
4 Mighty Grapple
8 Torn Signpost
6 Undead Strength
Ally (10 cards)
9 Ghouled Street Thug
1 Vagabond Mystic
Equipment (7 cards)
7 Leather Jacket
As you can see, I chose Pander as the clan. The idea is to get lots of
Ghouled Street Thugs, Rush, Signpost, Grapple, Disarm. Immune to
Obedience, Majesty, and most things. With a Leather Jacket, you can
usually torporise any vampire, damage prevention allowing.
Vagabond Mystic is a useful guy for helping the GSTs recover (I used
him in every game). I actually managed to use the Left for Dead in one
game! Hilarious!
I wish I had another Jimmy Dunn to replace the utterly useless Rex.
However, when Rex did come up, I just Blood dolled him and used him as
a pool generator. Mitchell and Hasina are great in this deck - cheap
and effective. The Waste Management Op came up in all three games too,
but I never really had any benefit, since the deck was a little too
big. It couple probably be easily de-sized to about 75 cards with no
loss, but I made the deck in 5 mins and had never played it before the
event, so I erred on the side of caution.
Next time I play it, I'm playing to win, rather than playing a novelty
deck to help screw over White Wolf's creative team!
DH
Frederick Scott
>
> Had a great time on Saturday at the London Baltimore thingy. A good
> day, and lots of new faces. The Meddling card is VERY COOL. I have 3
> decks in mind for it already - better start trading!
Could you post what the card is? A card with a name like that sounds
very cool.
(By the way, I tried to access White Wolf's server yesterday for the
first time in a while. It appears to be down and is still down today.
Did it move, by any chance?)
Fred
Andrew S. Davidson
>Could you post what the card is?
>A card with a name like that sounds very cool.
Political Action - worth 1 vote
Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
Choose another Methusaleh. 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 Methuslaeh'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.
The art is by Mike Huddleston and looks ok.
Andrew
The Fanboy
> first time in a while. It appears to be down and is still down today.
> Did it move, by any chance?)
Noticed the same thing. They could be doing a massive overhaul. It
appeared to go down the this weekend - it worked fine when I looked at
it two days ago.
Fanboy
Peter D Bakija
Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
Choose another Methusaleh. 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 Methuslaeh'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.>>
Umm, yeah. Is it just me or is this card *wayyyyyyy* to powerful?
For cripes sake, you pass a single vote, and someone, for all intents and
purposes, ceases to be able to play the game. That is really not a good thing.
What exactly were they thinking here?
Peter D Bakija
PD...@aol.com
http://www.geocities.com/bakija6
"These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!"
-Zim.
The Fanboy
> card in play. Your hand size is one card smaller. The chosen
> Methuselah doesn't draw to replace cards during any Methuslaeh'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.
Having already been on the ass end of this card, I've decided that if
it's played against me, and passed, I am going to walk away from the
table.
The card effectively means that most decks can't play until its
removed.
My Ravnos/Smiling Jack deck had it played against it by a Brujah
toolbox predator - and was shut down and ousted within two turns. I
couldn't survive more than one action taken by me or against me in a
given turn, since a single combat/block drained my hand of useable
resources, and I didn't get them back until the acting player had
finished ALL their actions.
IMO, it is the single most damaging card for table balance I've ever
seen - worse even than Thoughts Betrayed before the errata.
Fanboy
Sorrow
> For cripes sake, you pass a single vote, and someone, for all intents and
> purposes, ceases to be able to play the game.
Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
The decks this card hurts the most are combat and intercept decks.
The two types that political decks have to fear the most.
> That is really not a good thing.
No, definitely not. Wasn't one of the arguments for TB being broken that
a player could play their hand/deck? And here we have something just a
step below that?
> What exactly were they thinking here?
*shrug*
Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...
Sorrow
---
"Just once I'd like a childhood memory I don't have to repress."
- Malcolm
Raille
Sorrow wrote:
>
> > Umm, yeah. Is it just me or is this card *wayyyyyyy* to powerful?
> > For cripes sake, you pass a single vote, and someone, for all intents and
> > purposes, ceases to be able to play the game.
>
> Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
> The decks this card hurts the most are combat and intercept decks.
> The two types that political decks have to fear the most.
Correction. You replace cards after each minion phase. The only decks
this is likely to shut down are those that are combo intensive.
It of course would completely wreck a POT combat deck. One combat are
your out of cards till the next players turn.
Raille
Sorrow
> > The decks this card hurts the most are combat and intercept decks.
> > The two types that political decks have to fear the most.
> Correction. You replace cards after each minion phase.
Notice my phrase: "They can still play their hand for a turn.". I understand
that you replace cards after each minion phase. But you still can't play any-
thing but whats in your hand for that current turn.
> The only decks this is likely to shut down are those that are combo intensive.
Umm, both combat and intercept decks are combo intensive.
> It of course would completely wreck a POT combat deck. One combat are
> your out of cards till the next players turn.
Yup.
Sorrow
---
Through the screams of falling steel. By the light of flares and wisdom.
All the doubts I could not face. All this time I wanted more.
With a line I'll mark the past as a symbol of beginning.
To the gods whose names we've lost and the names who gave in vain.
Reyda
"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:D9F2B61D122A1132.4C92A0DF...@lp.airnews.net...
The guy who created this card was on crack.
I was not really happy about the new "millstone" decks, now we'll face some
"Mind twist" decks... Gee, since Bloodlines, i'm playing magic again. We
even have flying vampires...
This new card is as cool as a Pentex Subversion affecting all of your prey's
vampire but one. Why do they errata Misdirection to create such cards the
next year ??
I just hope that the playtesters of this card have been shot.
reyda
Reyda
"Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote in message
news:u5rq38e...@corp.supernews.com...
(snip)
> No, definitely not. Wasn't one of the arguments for TB being broken that
> a player could play their hand/deck? And here we have something just a
> step below that?
you bet it's powerful.
> > What exactly were they thinking here?
>
> *shrug*
> Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...
Acceptable errata :
*Requires a Titled vampire*.Choose another Methusaleh. If this referendum
is successful, put this card in play. Your hand size is 1 card smaller.
*The chosen Methuselah's hand size is 1 card larger*. He doesn't draw to
replace cards during *his own*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.>>
it reflects the defensive position of the target meth. He can still react
normally with a, increased hand size.
comments ?
reyda
Rob Treasure
"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:D9F2B61D122A1132.4C92A0DF...@lp.airnews.net...
OUCH, that is powerful indeed. I'll have a closer look and post more
later......bloody hell it is nasty isn't it ?
Rob
Aramis
> > > Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
> > > The decks this card hurts the most are combat and intercept decks.
> > > The two types that political decks have to fear the most.
> > Correction. You replace cards after each minion phase.
>
> Notice my phrase: "They can still play their hand for a turn.". I understand
> that you replace cards after each minion phase. But you still can't play any-
> thing but whats in your hand for that current turn.
>
> > The only decks this is likely to shut down are those that are combo intensive.
>
> Umm, both combat and intercept decks are combo intensive.
>
> > It of course would completely wreck a POT combat deck. One combat are
> > your out of cards till the next players turn.
It wrecks any sort of combat deck. I get into combat (1 card), I play
at least one pre-range, manuver at least once, IG/Thin Blood, etc.
Strike card, possibly additionals and prevents. That's 5 cards
minimum for most combat decks. But here's the kicker, they all have
to be in my hand at one time. I can't draw into prevent, or top-deck
the IG I need. Exactly how does a combat deck stop this? Anyone can
call it too! Maybe I'm just over-reacting, but this seems so powerful
every vote deck will play at least 4-6. Shucks, their hand size goes
down by a couple cards (at least they can replace them).
I guess the big problem I have with this card (and its strategy) is
that it doesn't attack anything I can work around. Once nailed down
with one, you just have to sit there and twiddle your thumbs if you're
combo intensive. Try mixing this vote with Raptor combat or with the
new deck-depletion strategies. A double helping of madness.
I hope I'm over-reacting,
Aramis
>
> Yup.
>
> Sorrow
Tobias
Ermmm, is it just me, or were we not supposed to see this card before
the end of this month? (I'm assuming this is the promo for Storyline -
all previous messages indicate this, but I might've missed some
posts).
In that case, I'm not all that pleased that the players in my
Storyline Tournament which is still to be played already know what
they are getting. A little secrecy would've been nice here.
Unless this is a troll...
Tobias
Deventer
Raille
Sorrow wrote:
>
> Umm, both combat and intercept decks are combo intensive.
>
> > It of course would completely wreck a POT combat deck. One combat are
> > your out of cards till the next players turn.
>
> Yup.
And of course it seems like the masses were asking for a combat defense,
seems like they got it.
Raille
Raille
Tobias wrote:
>
> Ermmm, is it just me, or were we not supposed to see this card before
> the end of this month? (I'm assuming this is the promo for Storyline -
> all previous messages indicate this, but I might've missed some
> posts).
We weren't supposed to see this card until the 1st of Feb. Thats the
cards "release" date.
> In that case, I'm not all that pleased that the players in my
> Storyline Tournament which is still to be played already know what
> they are getting. A little secrecy would've been nice here.
True, but had to enforce in the newsgroups.
> Unless this is a troll...
*Looks under bridge*
Nope just a hairy old man!
Raille
pallando
"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:a3l75a$gvs$1...@quark.noos.net...
>
> I just hope that the playtesters of this card have been shot.
>
playtested? i don't think this card was playtested.
also, i won't be widely available. only players attending the storyline
tournaments will get one copy of it. some might trade to get a second or
third of it but that will be it. at least until the remaining copies of this
card will be released in a year from now.
it remains to be seen how powerful this card is. but i believe it gives all
decks with votes a huge lift. the only problem: can you get it out before
someone else plays it on you?
regards
pallando
Andrew S. Davidson
>In that case, I'm not all that pleased that the players in my
>Storyline Tournament which is still to be played already know what
>they are getting. A little secrecy would've been nice here.
At the London event, I was told that we could add the card to our
deck. I didn't use it myself and didn't see it used during the event.
Maybe that's because players weren't prepared for it.
And, if it's as good as people say, then maybe knowing this will
encourage players to go to the storyline events. That's the only way
to get the card, right?
The card carries a Bloodlines symbol so I assume that it's legal for
tournament play like the other Bloodlines cards, right?
What's the story behind this card? Who is Semsith? Does his meddling
take place in Baltimore?
Andrew
Sorrow
> > Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...
> Acceptable errata :
> normally with a, increased hand size.
Or hell, how about just cannot redraw during the current action.
I do like your idea about it requiring a titled vamp, though.
Sorrow
---
"I am Jack's wasted life."
- Narrator
Sorrow
> tournaments will get one copy of it. some might trade to get a second or
> third of it but that will be it. at least until the remaining copies of this
> card will be released in a year from now.
It doesn't matter. People who go to more than one event will have more
than one. Trading... How many times has it been said that (uber)rarity
shouldn't be a factor for how powerful a card should be? Just because
the average joe has only one, it won't stop people from getting a ton. Hell,
TheLasombra is offering $10 worth in trade of any card(s) he owns for
one.
> it remains to be seen how powerful this card is. but i believe it gives all
> decks with votes a huge lift. the only problem: can you get it out before
> someone else plays it on you?
Again, this shouldn't be a factor in how powerful a card is. And yes, it
does give vote decks a lift. At the expense of actual play. Isn't this what
TB did? Give a lift to Ventrue (and other DOM) decks?
Sorrow
---
I keep telling them that I think they're out to get me.
They ask me if I feel remose and I answer, "Why of course!
There's so much more I could have done if they'd let me!"
So it's Rorschach and Prozac and everything is groovy
hamdamcwa
>
> *Requires a Titled vampire*.Choose another Methusaleh. If this referendum
> is successful, put this card in play. Your hand size is 1 card smaller.
> *The chosen Methuselah's hand size is 1 card larger*. He doesn't draw to
> replace cards during *his own*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.>>
>
> it reflects the defensive position of the target meth. He can still react
> normally with a, increased hand size.
I would prefer a vampire with a capacity above 7 calling it. Otherwise
it is a weenie presence's best friend. Call the vote in turn 2, pass
with BO. Bleed, bleed, vote bleed. Call another vote. Rinse repeat.
With a titled vampire, you could end up with a 5 cap calling it (at
stealth if it's Calebros) in turn 2 with the right cards in play. Or
weenie presence getting the title to call the vote in turn 2, calling
it in turn 3, etc. Besides, I think that Semsmith (the vampire the
vote refers to) is unlikely to be titled!
I do like the "other players hand size goes up" clause. More balance.
DH
Kamel SENNI
> OUCH, that is powerful indeed. I'll have a closer look and post more
> later......bloody hell it is nasty isn't it ?
>
> Rob
Bloody hell, it IS nasty!
And, it's a promo card, that means few players will effectively use
it...
Only restriction : When you play succesfully this card, the chosen
meth have one objective : Oust you...(Fanboy reaction is clear...).
It limits its use cross table... (you don't want 3 enemies on a table,
dont't you ?).
Its a powerful defense against intercept and combat decks... Is vote
decks need this type of tools ?
I will wait someone post and/or test in play (is it different to play
test ??lol) a deck abusing of this vote before make a judgement.
Ah, it slow down a lot of decks, not only combat and/or intercept :
weenie vote/or bleed are very slowed down with a single succesful
vote...
In fact,... I WANT FOUR OF THEM!
Arg... I 'm betrayed by my own compulsion...
Kindred Spirit
(This is a Personnal Message : Hello reyda ! Do you want to be pre
registered to Cup of Paris ? already 35 players pre registered !)
James Coupe
s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes:
>The card carries a Bloodlines symbol so I assume that it's legal for
>tournament play like the other Bloodlines cards, right?
Except in specific tournaments, cards are not officially playable for a
period of 30 days after their release.
--
James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c.
PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti
pallando
"Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:u5ss2n9...@corp.supernews.com...
> > also, i won't be widely available. only players attending the storyline
> > tournaments will get one copy of it. some might trade to get a second or
> > third of it but that will be it. at least until the remaining copies of
this
> > card will be released in a year from now.
>
> It doesn't matter. People who go to more than one event will have more
> than one. Trading... How many times has it been said that (uber)rarity
> shouldn't be a factor for how powerful a card should be? Just because
> the average joe has only one, it won't stop people from getting a ton.
Hell,
> TheLasombra is offering $10 worth in trade of any card(s) he owns for
> one.
>
actually i wanted to say that limited availability is a problem with this
card. it doesn't really have anything to do with the power of this card. we
could consider it a different problem altogether.
regards
pallando
Andrew S. Davidson
>Only restriction : When you play succesfully this card, the chosen
>meth have one objective : Oust you...
The card goes into play and affects two Methusalehs. I assume that it
stays in play while either of them is in the game. Ousting the person
that played it isn't going to help the target, right?
Andrew
LSJ
Incorrect. [1.6.3]
It stays while the person who played it is in the game.
(Even if the target is ousted.)
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Andy Brown
>
> In message <DCE39F2A9FB129D4.2448B92D...@lp.airnew
> s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes:
> >The card carries a Bloodlines symbol so I assume that it's legal for
> >tournament play like the other Bloodlines cards, right?
>
> Except in specific tournaments, cards are not officially playable for a
> period of 30 days after their release.
>
What is the official release date for The Meddling of Semsith? I would
assume February 1st, making it legal for Standard Constructed play on
March 3rd. Is this correct?
Andy
Setite Ruler of Cambridge
VEKN Prince
--
Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of
outragous fortune, or get fat on chocolate cake, eat the cake, life
is too short to worry!
LSJ
> What is the official release date for The Meddling of Semsith? I would
> assume February 1st, making it legal for Standard Constructed play on
> March 3rd. Is this correct?
It was first released at Storyline London and Storyline Austin on
February 2nd. There were no storyline tournaments on February 1.
So it is legal for VEKN constructed play on March 4th.
GreySeer
Being a minion card it is in play until it's controller is ousted ( or by
card text ). Since it doesn't go onto any minion and has no text to change
who controlls it the controller is the Meth who played it. So, ousting the
Meth who plays it will burn it.
hamdamcwa
> > first time in a while. It appears to be down and is still down today.
> > Did it move, by any chance?)
>
> Noticed the same thing. They could be doing a massive overhaul. It
> appeared to go down the this weekend - it worked fine when I looked at
> it two days ago.
Honestly!!!
I slave away to make something worth looking at and all you boys can
do is complain about White Wolf's site and ask what the new card is.
Can't you see this deck is ART!!!
Philestines!!!
*flounce*
;)
DH
Yoritomo Jiriki
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 16:59:14 GMT, Frederick Scott wrote:
>
> >Could you post what the card is?
> >A card with a name like that sounds very cool.
>
> Political Action - worth 1 vote
> Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> Andrew
Well I hope it is only legal for the storyline tournament. Semsith
sounds like a Harbinger ;) hmmm... is Baltimore currently controlled
by the Giovanni? :)
Yoritomo Jiriki
> "Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote in message
> news:u5rq38e...@corp.supernews.com...
> (snip)
>
> > No, definitely not. Wasn't one of the arguments for TB being broken that
> > a player could play their hand/deck? And here we have something just a
> > step below that?
>
> you bet it's powerful.
>
> > > What exactly were they thinking here?
> >
> > *shrug*
> > Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...
>
> Acceptable errata :
...you might want to tack "Only one Meddling of Semsith can be played
in a game" to that errata and/or maybe "Meddling of Semsith can only
be played during the Baltimore Storyline Tournament"". :)
Noal McDonald
>> Political Action - worth 1 vote
>> Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
>>
>> Choose another Methusaleh. 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 Methuslaeh'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.
>
> The guy who created this card was on crack.
Maybe it was the Art Director. The same person that selected the
Christanus Lionel art and the "Which one of these is not like the
others?" Blood Brother.
> I was not really happy about the new "millstone" decks,
Our local group decided that whether you like them or not, something
new was defnitely needed. If new strategies weren't created, the only
thing you could to expand the game would be to escalate the existing
ones to ridiculous levels...something that would kill the game quicker
than WotC.
> I just hope that the playtesters of this card have been shot.
I'm not convinced that anyone playtested this card. However, if you
have to blame someone, blame Scott. After all, he is the head of the
design team and the playtesting. However, don't forget to applaud him
for the things he's done right, like trying to expand the game in new
directions. In this case, I just chalk it up to growing pains.
Regards,
Noal McDonald
VEKN PRince of Metro Detroit
Henrik
Weren't lot's of player complaining a while ago that there were no useful
votecards to use beside KRC and CA... And now the kind WW has given us this
lite toy!!! I like this card, what's so wrong with allowing a new voting
stretegy?? I you want to go boring, try the "weenie presence 40 Kine, 10
Majesty, 10 bewitching, 5 awe, 10 votercap, 15 praxis"-deck...
/Henrik Isaksson
LSJ
>
> > Umm, yeah. Is it just me or is this card *wayyyyyyy* to powerful?
> > For cripes sake, you pass a single vote, and someone, for all intents and
> > purposes, ceases to be able to play the game.
>
> Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
"a" turn?
They get to play their hand each turn. (card text).
Five players at a table: A, B, C, D, and E.
Meddling played (and passed) against player A.
For each player X (A-E in turn):
Player X's master phase, target (A) has a full hand.
During Player X's minion phase, cards the target (A) plays are not replaced.
At the end of Player X's minion phase, target (A) draws to replace the played
cards.
Ben Swainbank
> Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
>
> 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.
>
Interesting new card effect - direct cycling restriction. But it does
seem overpowered. Getting stuck with it is going to really strangle
your offense and defense. Yikes.
Anyone know when this thing becomes tournament legal?
-Ben Swainbank
LSJ
> Anyone know when this thing becomes tournament legal?
30 days after it is released: March 4th.
Sorrow
> "a" turn?
Yes. *A* turn.
> They get to play their hand each turn. (card text).
At which time the affected person has a new hand, yes?
> Player X's master phase, target (A) has a full hand.
Yup
> During Player X's minion phase, cards the target (A) plays are not replaced.
> At the end of Player X's minion phase, target (A) draws to replace the played
> cards.
Right. But that will be a new hand. My assertion is that a player can only play
the hand they have each turn. When cards are played, they can't redraw to
potentially play any new cards they might draw. How many times have we
played SoR for prevention hoping that we might be able to draw another? I
know I've done that many times. So basically, you are stuck with the hand you
have until the end of the current players turn. And that was the context of my
statement.
Tell me I'm wrong.
Sorrow
---
"Just once I'd like a childhood memory I don't have to repress."
- Malcolm
Doug
> Umm, yeah. Is it just me or is this card *wayyyyyyy* to powerful?
>
> For cripes sake, you pass a single vote, and someone, for all intents and
> purposes, ceases to be able to play the game. That is really not a good thing.
>
> What exactly were they thinking here?
>
HOLY CRAP!
This card will slow down almost every deck type that currently is
popular. Stealth bleed, intercept combat, rush combat, bruise and
bleed. This card will require folks to bring more vote defense and
permanents to the table.
About the only type of deck that won't care too much about the card is
the loping vote and bloat deck, which, consequently also benefits the
most from _playing_ the card.
A side effect of this is the person who has a Meddling of Semsith
targeting them will not be as effective against both predator and
prey. If played on one's prey, one's grand prey will not be getting
as much pressure and will consequently be stronger. If played on
one's predator, one's grandpredator will likewise gain an advantage.
I think that this is more destabilizing than the new deck
denial strategy.
My opinion is that anyone playing this card is seeking to destabilize
the table and therefore suggest the rest of the table should gang up
on them immediately, get them the hell out of the game, and then move
on.
Doug
Pepijn Kok
wrote:
>Political Action - worth 1 vote
>Called by any vampire at +1 stealth
>
>Choose another Methusaleh. 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 Methuslaeh'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.
How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
So this card might be destructive, there are ways around it
Chris Berger
"Pepijn Kok" <ka...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:3c5f02d5....@newszilla.xs4all.nl...
(Semsmith says "does not draw to replace cards", so it has no relevance on
the draw 5 cards part of Distraction's effect), however, Distraction also
says "replace this card." Since Distraction has specific card text telling
you to replace it, you might get to do that as well. I'm not sure.
There is precedence in the superior Sleeping Mind/Wake ruling. SM says that
tapped vampires cannot block, but specific card text of Wake that permits
blocking has been ruled to override that effect.
Gomi no Sensei
Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>Well, you will definitely get to draw your 5 cards for the Distraction
>(Semsmith says "does not draw to replace cards", so it has no relevance on
>the draw 5 cards part of Distraction's effect), however, Distraction also
>says "replace this card." Since Distraction has specific card text telling
>you to replace it, you might get to do that as well. I'm not sure.
>
>There is precedence in the superior Sleeping Mind/Wake ruling. SM says that
>tapped vampires cannot block, but specific card text of Wake that permits
>blocking has been ruled to override that effect.
Interestingly, the Seekrit Library of Alexandria also works well under
Semsith. For some values of 'well,' anyhow.
The Secret Library of Alexandria [AH]
Master
Nosferatu
1 pool
Unique location.
You may draw a card each time you successfully bleed your prey. Discard to
your maximum hand size afterward.
gomi
--
Blood, guts, guns, cuts
Knives, lives, wives, nuns, sluts
Halcyan 2
>Semsith. For some values of 'well,' anyhow.
>
>The Secret Library of Alexandria [AH]
>Master
>Nosferatu
>1 pool
>Unique location.
>You may draw a card each time you successfully bleed your prey. Discard to
>your maximum hand size afterward.
I think the question is whether cards that haven't been replaced due to
Meddling count as part of your hand size.
Just like when playing a Wake (which doesn't get replaced till later), the Wake
still counts as part of your hand, similarly, cards that haven't been replaced
by Meddling may still count. LSJ?
Halcyan 2
Peter D Bakija
>>Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
The two types that political decks have to fear the most.>>
Yeah, they can play what they have in their hand for a turn. If they have a
deck that generally uses, say, 3 cards an action (not at all an unreasonable
expectation for pretty much any strategy), they can, if they are lucky, perform
2 actions a turn. If they need more cards, they get one action a turn.
That is freaking insanity. This card is soooooo wrong. Redrawing during your
turn is the basic mechanic that makes the game go. Every deck in the game is
built around regular card flow. Having a card introduced that selectively
removes a basic mechanic from a single player is just stupid.
It is a vote card. Sure, there is a possibility that it might be affected by
table politics, but in most cases, this card is going to be passed by virtue of
vote lock. Meaning the only way to avoid it is to intercept the guy calling it.
Which means now *every* deck in the game is required to have intercept in it,
to avoid being preemptively removed from the game by this absurdly over powered
card. Up till now, there was no *neccessary* defensive addition to every deck.
You could survive without intercept or votes or bleed bounce by virtue of
diferent strategy options. This card, when successfully played, will end your
game (hmm. Kind of like RtI, which was banned from play...). Period. Thus,
*every* deck will need to include enough intercept to stop this card, 'cause if
they don't they are removed from play.
A single vote card that effectively prevents you from playing the game. That is
just dumb.
>>No, definitely not. Wasn't one of the arguments for TB being broken that
a player could play their hand/deck? And here we have something just a
step below that?>>
Yup. TB removed from your opponent the basic resource mechanic of the game.
That was deemed too powerful and errated down. And TB only affected one combat
at a time. And had a substantial cost. This card hamstrings your ability to
play any cards at all on your turn for effectively the same cost as, say, KRC
(which does nothing but make you lose 3 pool). This card is completely,
utterly, just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. And a *deeply* bad idea.
How did this get printed? All of the previous sets of cards from this
administration (SW, FN, BL) are all very well balanced and seem to be mostly
devoid of questionable cards.
This is a single card that is more dertimental to the game than any 5 previous
"broken" cards combined. Wha?
>>*shrug*
Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...>>
I can only hope immediately. If the card said "Everyone can't redraw until the
current turn's influence phase" or whatever (so that *everyone* was affected),
it would be reasonable--everyone will be screwed in the same fashion. As it is,
I can call a vote, that if is not intercepted, prevents my prey from playing
the game. They can only take one action a turn, if they are lucky. No card
cycling. No card flow. No drawing cards that you need to take actions Your
vampires can't really do anything without cards. You take one action a turn. If
you are playing any sort of active deck (S+B, tap-n-bleed, presence vote,
bruise and bleed, rush, well, *anything), you take one successful action a
turn. If you are a defensive deck, you can stop one action a turn.
Consequently, you lose. Due to a single card.
This card is a *huge* mistake. Huge.
Peter D Bakija
PD...@aol.com
http://www.geocities.com/bakija6
"These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!"
-Zim.
Halcyan 2
>They get to play their hand each turn. (card text).
>
>Five players at a table: A, B, C, D, and E.
>Meddling played (and passed) against player A.
>
>For each player X (A-E in turn):
>Player X's master phase, target (A) has a full hand.
>During Player X's minion phase, cards the target (A) plays are not replaced.
>At the end of Player X's minion phase, target (A) draws to replace the played
>cards.
Which pretty much means that Player A is screwed if his minions get attacked.
(His hand may keep him alive for one round or even one combat but then the
combat opponent gets to replace and he doesn't).
Halcyan 2
vermillian
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 16:59:14 GMT, Frederick Scott wrote:
Lets consider the typical decks that would use this card. S:CE bleed.
S:CE vote. Euro Brujah (maybe...). Other odd decks. Now most people
tend to hate these kind of decks anyhow... Cross table actions and a
deal make this card easily gone, right?
Nope, not if political dude has vote lock... Generally most Awe/vote
cap decks I've seen can't keep winning votes forever (they rely on
offensively passing votes).
It'd be better balanced if this baby could be canceled as a +1 stealth
action (not a political one... or at least a political one, but the
person calling to remove gets one vote...).
Regardless, this one might very well fit my voting reaction deck...
that I disassembled cause it sucked. :)
~SV
Chris Berger
"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message
news:20020204182618...@mb-cl.aol.com...
> Sorrow wrote:
>
> That is freaking insanity. This card is soooooo wrong. Redrawing during
your
> turn is the basic mechanic that makes the game go. Every deck in the game
is
> built around regular card flow. Having a card introduced that selectively
> removes a basic mechanic from a single player is just stupid.
>
A pity... it woulda been a really interesting card if it inflicted the same
punishment on everyone in the game, or at the very least on both yourself
*and* the chosen methuselah. The -1 hand size is not even close to enough
of a balancing factor. If it was burnable as a +1 stealth (D) action, maybe
it'd be okay, but expecting someone to be able to vote it away is crazy.
Reyda
"Henrik" <henri...@spray.se> wrote in message
news:a3mmnj$18pv4d$1...@ID-99227.news.dfncis.de...
> Weren't lot's of player complaining a while ago that there were no useful
> votecards to use beside KRC and CA... And now the kind WW has given us
this lite toy!!!
who was complaining ? politics is PLENTY of useful vote cards.
Hey ? presence bleed doesn't give you other people's location ! dominate
bleede doesn't allow you to banish vampires ! combat decks doesn't let you
choose your predator and prey !
There's many powerful political cards, but you have to meet requirements.
Protect thine own or Parity shift can't be called by any vampire... and if
you build a strong political deck, it will prove sufficient to win without
spoiling other poeple's chance.
> I like this card, what's so wrong with allowing a new voting
> stretegy?? I you want to go boring, try the "weenie presence 40 Kine, 10
> Majesty, 10 bewitching, 5 awe, 10 votercap, 15 praxis"-deck...
1- It's not only a new voting strategy. Every clan can use this card,
combined with a handful of delaying tactics it will prove perfectly usable.
Do you realise that used in conjunction with anarch troublemakers, changes
of target or form of mist, your prey (with meddling on him) will be unable
to block a single action after the first ??
2-it's not even a strategy. Okay, no matter what your deck is, you cannot
play your cards, so screw you. Very M:tg specific...
reyda
> /Henrik Isaksson
>
>
The Fanboy
> meth have one objective
Except if your deck is at all hampered by the card, then you CAN'T do
that.
Let's look at some deck types out there:
S&B: Your average S&B deck uses 3-4 cards an action - the action
card, a modifier, a stealth card, and sometimes a second stealth card,
a seduction, or a Command of the Beast (if you're using them). So you
get one, MAYBE two actions a turn once you're hit with it. More than
enough slowdown for your prey to be able to ignore you, unless you're
playing VERY recklessly.
Rush: You get one good combat per turn - assuming the ideal combat
hand is the hand you start with. You may not WANT to fight if it's
not, since that's all you're getting.
Intercept: Hmm, you can block, or you can fight. If you're lucky,
you MIGHT get away with both. Once a turn.
Only political decks can survive having this played against them,
because a) They're most likely to be able to get rid of it and b)
they're less dependent upon transients, unless you're going the weenie
route (in which case, you need a steady flow of BO and Awe to keep
moving).
If you're playing Intercept, you can block it before it hits the table
- but that's definitely an action worth Day Oping if I'm using it
against a rush or intercept deck.
And it's even worse if the person who hits you with it can fight as
well. Because he gets however many fights he needs in a turn - and
you get one.
No point in playing anymore once it's on the table. I'll save
everybody the greif of listing to my bitching about it until the shove
a Kit-Kat in my mouth to shut me up, and just walk away from the
table. And I'll keep doing it, until I trade every last one of them
into my collection so I can ritually destroy them during my next
Dragoncon appearance.
Fanboy
LSJ
> How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
You do not replace Distraction, correct.
You draw 5 cards.
Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
count against your hand size).
Peter D Bakija
>>Yep. I'm not quite as upset as you are, but this card is definitely wrong.>>
I'm not like quitting the game over it or anything--I'm just going to complain
till it gets changed or banned. I'm complaining 'cause A) this card *really*
deserves complaint and B) I haven't had a good ranting over some broken card
for a really long time. Luckily, this card is as rich a target as any I've ever
seen. Sadly, that means that this card has been introduced to the game. Which
is really, really bad.
>>A pity... it woulda been a really interesting card if it inflicted the same
punishment on everyone in the game, or at the very least on both yourself
*and* the chosen methuselah.>>
Sure--then it would have either a reasonable cost, or would give other folks at
the table incentive to help stop it. As it stands, there is limited incentive
to stop it if you are not being targeted by it, and even less incentive to stop
it if you are across the table from the guy calling it (i.e. players 3 and 5
when player 1 is calling it). That, and when vote decks work, it is 'cause they
have vote lock (lots of titles and/or vote boosters), so rarely will table
politics have anything to do with it. It will be called (unblockably, with
Daring the Dawn if someone tries to block), get passed, and never get unvoted
(due to vote lock on the part of the guy calling it). The target will be
quickly ousted, as he can no longer defend or act with any reasonable ability.
When he is dead, the vote deck will do it again to his next prey. And so on.
>>The -1 hand size is not even close to enough of a balancing factor.>>
Not even a little bit close. I'm trading 1 hand slot to make my prey completely
unable to play the game. If I'm including this card in my deck, I'm also
including Elder Libraries and Dreams of the Sphinx to make up for it (and
Daring the Dawns so my action to call this vote can't be blocked--this vote
will *always* be worth going to torpor over, as it makes your prey unable to
play the game. With 1 card). Is there a way for my prey to make up for it? If
they can't intercept it ('cause I played Daring the Dawn) and can't out vote it
('cause I have vote lock and they have the audacity to not play a vote deck),
they simply lose the game from a single vote getting called. That is just
stupid.
>>If it was burnable as a +1 stealth (D) action, maybe it'd be okay, but
expecting someone to be able to vote it away is crazy.>>
Exactly. The whole card is crazy as it is printed. How did this card get made?
LSJ
>
> > > Not quite. They can still play their hand for a turn. But that's about it.
> > "a" turn?
>
> Yes. *A* turn.
>
> > They get to play their hand each turn. (card text).
>
> At which time the affected person has a new hand, yes?
>
> > Player X's master phase, target (A) has a full hand.
>
> Yup
>
> > During Player X's minion phase, cards the target (A) plays are not replaced.
> > At the end of Player X's minion phase, target (A) draws to replace the played
> > cards.
>
> Right. But that will be a new hand. My assertion is that a player can only play
Ah.
Then you can only ever play your hand for "a" turn, MoS or no, if your
assertion is correct.
> the hand they have each turn. When cards are played, they can't redraw to
> potentially play any new cards they might draw. How many times have we
> played SoR for prevention hoping that we might be able to draw another? I
> know I've done that many times. So basically, you are stuck with the hand you
> have until the end of the current players turn. And that was the context of my
> statement.
> Tell me I'm wrong.
If that's the context of your statement as you give it, how can you possibly
be wrong?
Sorrow
The only person who can answer that is LSJ and it's an answer I'm
(and I'm sure alot of others are) very keen to hear...
Sorrow
---
"I am Jack's wasted life."
- Narrator
Curevei
>complain
>till it gets changed or banned. I'm complaining 'cause A) this card *really*
>deserves complaint and B) I haven't had a good ranting over some broken card
>for a really long time. Luckily, this card is as rich a target as any I've
>ever
>seen. Sadly, that means that this card has been introduced to the game. Which
>is really, really bad.
One complaint that I'm going to add that I haven't seen anyone else mention is
that promo cards, even if they will be in a normal set at some point in the
future, should *never* do something significantly different from an existing
card.
I've had to put up with this idiocy in B5, promos being the number one source
of complaint for much of its existence though not necessarily for play reasons,
where one promo had to be errataed, and in WoT, where the best card drawing
card in a game where card drawing is huge is a promo card.
If a company wants to do *good* promos, do foils, which have thematic
inconsistency with V:TES's look so probably aren't good here, or alternate
artwork which is my personal favorite. Alternate versions of Blood Doll,
Minion Tap, Wake, Bum's Rush - I could see it easily. As long as people
realize that the promo versions are, in fact, hard to acquire, they will chase
them even in a game where a number of cards have alternate artwork (Magic has
alternate art versions of staple cards that are worth decent dough).
Patrick van der Reest
news:8aa6db00.02020...@posting.google.com...
> > > card in play. Your hand size is one card smaller. The chosen
> > > Methuselah doesn't draw to replace cards during any Methuslaeh'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.
> >
> > it's played against me, and passed, I am going to walk away from the
> > table.
Tobias: as official organizer of the tourney I would suggest you 'coerce'
people not to use this card. I, personally, will attack
(rush/bleed/vote/whatever) the first player to try bring it into play,
cross-table if needs be. I will also mention this to every table I will play
during the tournament, and suggest people do the same. This is much, much
worse than four times The Slaughterhouse.
Maybe it's White Wolf's intention to change current popular strategies
towards more card-conservative ones, but there's no reason I've got to like
it and I'll make that plenty clear, should the card actually show up.
Note: I don't think it's actually all that damaging to many decks, but it
kicks most of the fun out of the game, as you have no options left but
quietly suffer half the time; I'll not stand for it.
Patrick
Primogen to Prince Tobias
Andy Brown
>
> Pepijn Kok wrote:
> > How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> > distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> > hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> > hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> > to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
>
> You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> You draw 5 cards.
> Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> count against your hand size).
Forgive me if I am wrong, but where does it state on the card that if
you have this played against you, your hand size is equal to the number
of cards left in your hand. From my understanding, only the Methuselah
who called the vote has a reduced hand size (by 1) and this remains
as long as that Methuselah is in the game.
Also, I can see this bringing in deal cutting again. If someone has
a severe vote lock, and starts to play this card, he may pass it, but
then surely deals can be made that will try to oust the Methuselah
playing the cardm as he will be seen as a threat by the table.
I will wait to reserve judgement on this card until I see it regularly
played. In my mind, the person who plays it is going to need one hell
of a strategy if he/she tries this route. It is probably going to
make that person target Number 1 exactly like a Setite Deck, pure S&B,
or Temptation of Greater Sleaze.
Errataring after just two tournaments (that I know of) and at one where
it was attempted to be played, but failed every time, is possibly a
little excessive, dontcha think.
To Scott, I think you have produced an interesting card, that will
change the metagame of a lot of groups, which will ultimately add
variety. It's a real shame that some people obviously can't abide
change. (This will now probably get me flamed to my eyeballs, at which
point I would like to mention that I can tell me browser to ignore
this thread, so you will be filling other peoples mail box, not mine.)
Andy
Setite Ruler of Cambridge
VEKN Prince
--
Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of
outragous fortune, or get fat on chocolate cake, eat the cake, life
is too short to worry!
evil_poot_cat
> 2-it's not even a strategy. Okay, no matter what your deck is, you cannot
> play your cards, so screw you. Very M:tg specific...
ok...if M:tG was a dice game, I might (but probably not) see a problem
with similar mechanics. However, M:tG, like V:TES, is a card game.
The cards and their flow are valuable resources and valid targets. So
you can draw the same comparison about discarding, replacing from your
library, recycling from the discard pile, etc.
And, btw, I don't think a single card has to constitute a strategy. I
could combine this Semsith card with
Lextalionifragilisticexpialidocious to screw over someone who just
collected a VP (and to use L. as something besides a bookmark.) :-)
Tobias
> "Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<a3l7go$b6i$1...@neon.noos.net>...
> > "Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote in message
> > news:u5rq38e...@corp.supernews.com...
> > (snip)
> >
> > > a player could play their hand/deck? And here we have something just a
> > > step below that?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Dunno. I wonder how quickly this one will be errata'd...
> >
>
> ...you might want to tack "Only one Meddling of Semsith can be played
> in a game" to that errata and/or maybe "Meddling of Semsith can only
> be played during the Baltimore Storyline Tournament"". :)
I like that last errata best. :)
Tobias
Deventer
Tobias
> > Exactly. The whole card is crazy as it is printed. How did this card get made?
>
> The only person who can answer that is LSJ and it's an answer I'm
> (and I'm sure alot of others are) very keen to hear...
Here's one of the lot of others. Consider me VERY keen indeed...
The card makes me sick. If it is unerrata'd, I will ask the players in
my tournament if they agree unanimously with me not giving it to them
all, and will send the whole lot back to WW.
Of course, there will always be a few who DO want the card... so then
I'll have to hand them all out.
Tobias
Deventer
Daz
> There is precedence in the superior Sleeping Mind/Wake ruling. SM says that
> tapped vampires cannot block, but specific card text of Wake that permits
> blocking has been ruled to override that effect.
Sleeping mind, The
Card Text:
SUP: Only usable when the acting vampire's action is announced.
Minions cannot untap during this action, and tapped minions cannot
block this action.
Why include the "tapped minions cannot block this action" if wakes
override it? Tapped minions aren´t allowed to block normally so I can
see no way for that part to have any effect at all.
To stay on topic though, this meddling card sounds very powerfull.
Thankfully there won´t be any storyline tournaments in Iceland so I
won´t be seeing this card played :)
Wouter Kuyper
a working weapon-deck, if everyones strategy is "you're screwed" then
that might be quite fun...
Wouter
Andrew S. Davidson
>To Scott, I think you have produced an interesting card, that will
>change the metagame of a lot of groups, which will ultimately add
>variety. It's a real shame that some people obviously can't abide
>change.
Indeed. I don't really see what all the fuss is about. If this card
would destroy someone's game-plan then maybe they should put some vote
defense into their deck. Cards like Delaying Tactics and Surprise
Influence can go in any deck and are useful against any other
political actions too. Players are being lazy and unethical if they
try to achieve the same game effect using illegal methods - boycotts
and bans, walking away from the table, mob rule, etc. This is not a
game where you make up your own political rules. It's a card game.
If you fear a card then use another card to counter it or make your
deck less vulnerable to it.
And complaints from fans of rush decks are just bare-faced cheek and
hypocrisy. Their game plan is to torporise the minions of any player
that they don't like the look of. This stops their victims playing
the game in a nastier way than this card does. I've noticed before
that rush decks are cowards and bullies - they can dish it out but
can't take it. That's why they run away from anything resembling a
fair fight. They deserve to be meddled with.
Andrew
Flux
wolf.com:
> Pepijn Kok wrote:
>> How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
>> distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
>> hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
>> hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
>> to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
>
> You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> You draw 5 cards.
> Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> count against your hand size).
Wouldn't this ruling go against the one concerning Visit from the Capuchin
and WWEF/'do not replace' cards?
What if you have both a VotC and a MoS on you? Which 'do not replace' rule
takes precedence?
(frankly I don't see a problem here now, but I just thought I'd ask anyway
;-)
Flux
James Coupe
evil_poot_cat <evilp...@yahoo.com> writes:
>ok...if M:tG was a dice game, I might (but probably not) see a problem
>with similar mechanics. However, M:tG, like V:TES, is a card game.
>The cards and their flow are valuable resources and valid targets. So
>you can draw the same comparison about discarding, replacing from your
>library, recycling from the discard pile, etc.
Jyhad's continuous replace mechanism vs Magic's slow replace/card
advantage system, together with Magic's automatic death when you empty
your library/can't draw a card, make such comparisons harder. Not
impossible.
--
James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c.
PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti
James Coupe
<a...@sanger.ac.uk> writes:
>Forgive me if I am wrong, but where does it state on the card that if
>you have this played against you, your hand size is equal to the number
>of cards left in your hand.
Cards you are not currently replacing count against your hand size.
(e.g. if you tap Fragment of the Book of Nod whilst in a combat from
having played Wake with Evening's Freshness, you would discard down to
6)
* The cards that you are currently not replacing count against your hand
size. [LSJ 19980803]
Reyda
> On Tue, 05 Feb 2002 07:21:47, Andy Brown wrote:
>
> >To Scott, I think you have produced an interesting card, that will
> >change the metagame of a lot of groups, which will ultimately add
> >variety. It's a real shame that some people obviously can't abide
> >change.
>
> Indeed. I don't really see what all the fuss is about. If this card
> would destroy someone's game-plan then maybe they should put some vote
> defense into their deck. Cards like Delaying Tactics and Surprise
> Influence can go in any deck and are useful against any other
> political actions too.
Oh my...
here are my thoughts : you can't be prepared for everything. In the first
days of jyhad, you had to be prepared to face combat decks -pak some
obedience, some prevention, some combat ends or maneuvers... to face bleed
decks -pack some deflexions, thelepatic counters, archon investigation,
whatever... to face political decks -pack delaying tactics, dread gaze or
surprise influence... Now, thanks to bloodlines, you have to pack some
defense against crypt and library destruction -arsons for those
slaughterhouses, blood hunt for agaitas and Gisela...
Okay, and when my deck is full of counter strategies card, where do i put
the card to play my own tactics ? Unless we play 180 cards tower decks, i'm
sorry but i can't see how we can be prepared for every threat.
Now, you just choose two strategies to fight against (say, library
destruction and combat) and if your didn't guess what your opponents will
play, you are royally screwed.
I don't say that new strategies are always bad. I just say that now the game
becomes more and more random, and skill is less important than luck in
guessing what kind of environnment you'll meet at tournament.
it's sad for the game. but maybe i'm whining without reason ?
comments anyone ?
reyda
Reyda
"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:92472F64505CFA51.5C14473F...@lp.airnews.net...
(snip)
excuse me but i wanted to reply this part in another post.
> And complaints from fans of rush decks are just bare-faced cheek and
> hypocrisy. Their game plan is to torporise the minions of any player
> that they don't like the look of.
wow. you seem to have a problem with combat decks. The game plan of a combat
deck is to torporise and/or burn his prey's key minions so he can bleed
through -without being stopped, in fact. A combat decks packing a handful
conditionning/Arie of elation will be as efficient as the regular stealth
bleed in hitting his prey's pool. In the process, the combat deck is quite
required to deal with his predator in a direct way, by torporizing his key
vampires. but he has to let him a chance to fight against his grand
predator.
Playing a combat deck efficiently requires skill. It also requires a good
experience in deck building and table strategics. If you don't believe me,
then just try to sweep a table with a combat deck.
>This stops their victims playing
> the game in a nastier way than this card does.
yeah... every deck has the purpose of stopping his prey in the nastier way.
let me remember...
A vote deck, on turn two, made me loose 8 pool with two consecutive
conservative agitation.
My old coma deck, on turn three, ate Genevieve (10 pool) alive by comating,
then amaranthing her.
A pal's Lambach deck can burn each of your vampires one by one, one vampire
per turn, and he gains blood in the process.
Mike C. 's deck will mind rape your vampires, and burn them one after the
other.
you are not required to be gentle to your prey. It's quite the opposite.
> I've noticed before
> that rush decks are cowards and bullies - they can dish it out but
> can't take it. That's why they run away from anything resembling a
> fair fight. They deserve to be meddled with.
>
> Andrew
I've noticed before that andrew is a coward and bully. He likes to criticize
this game and can't take it when he loses. That's why he run away from
anything resembling a fair argument. He deserves to be bashed with a big,
big stick.
reyda
Henrik
Hey, I can still play a total number of 7 cards during my turn, 7 cards
reacting to my preys turn and 7 cards reacting to my predators turn...
Granted, It'll be very hard for certain decks to handle this, it won't even
remotely cripple many decks... And think of the beuty of having this card
played against a lame weenie [insert Pre-bleed, S&B, Pre-vote], which I
think most people agrees has to be penalized a little for being to strong...
/Henrik Isaksson
Sten During
Reyda wrote:
> Okay, and when my deck is full of counter strategies card, where do i put
> the card to play my own tactics ? Unless we play 180 cards tower decks, i'm
> sorry but i can't see how we can be prepared for every threat.
> Now, you just choose two strategies to fight against (say, library
> destruction and combat) and if your didn't guess what your opponents will
> play, you are royally screwed.
> I don't say that new strategies are always bad. I just say that now the game
> becomes more and more random, and skill is less important than luck in
> guessing what kind of environnment you'll meet at tournament.
>
> it's sad for the game. but maybe i'm whining without reason ?
>
> comments anyone ?
>
> reyda
I don't know if it's bad for the game. I guess we'll see a greater
polarization between toolboxes and extremely focused decks, but
I don't see that as neither bad nor good - just different.
Hehe, I like decks with lots of permanents, and that vote sure
makes me happier *grin*
Sten During
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > Pepijn Kok wrote:
> > > How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> > > distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> > > hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> > > hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> > > to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
> >
> > You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> > You draw 5 cards.
> > Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> > count against your hand size).
>
> Forgive me if I am wrong, but where does it state on the card that if
> you have this played against you, your hand size is equal to the number
> of cards left in your hand. From my understanding, only the Methuselah
> who called the vote has a reduced hand size (by 1) and this remains
> as long as that Methuselah is in the game.
You hand size isn't dependent on the number of cards in your hand.
Quite the opposite.
Except in cases where your library is empty and you eventually
have fewer cards in your hand than your hand size would allow, you
always draw up to your hand size.
Cards you are not replacing (Bum's Rush, Wakey, cards played during
a referendum, cards played during a minion phase under Semsith, etc.)
count against your hand size (otherwise you'd be drawing up to you
hand size in the interim, which would defeat the "do not replace"
mechanism).
Under Semsith, when each minion phase is over, you get to replace the
cards you played during that minion phase. In the example given, the
victim of Semsith had played 3 cards on her minion phase prior to
playing Distraction (assuming no other effects were modifying her hand
size). She doesn't replace the Distraction (a 4th card, leaving her
with a hand size of 3 because of the 4 cards she's not replacing). She
draws five cards. She then discards down to her hand size (7 minus the
4 she's not replacing = 3).
Mike Nudd
> > > first time in a while. It appears to be down and is still down today.
> > > Did it move, by any chance?)
> >
> > Noticed the same thing. They could be doing a massive overhaul. It
> > appeared to go down the this weekend - it worked fine when I looked at
> > it two days ago.
>
> Honestly!!!
>
> I slave away to make something worth looking at and all you boys can
> do is complain about White Wolf's site and ask what the new card is.
> Can't you see this deck is ART!!!
>
> Philestines!!!
>
I have to admit that it was a very cool deck, and I was tempted to
compliment you and/or offer you a special prize, but I was worried
that it might go to your head... :)
Regards,
Mike Nudd
VEKN Prince of London
> *flounce*
>
> ;)
>
> DH
LSJ
>
> LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in news:3C5F49B1.EA0B1CBE@white-
> wolf.com:
>
> > Pepijn Kok wrote:
> >> How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> >> distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> >> hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> >> hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> >> to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
> >
> > You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> > You draw 5 cards.
> > Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> > count against your hand size).
>
> Wouldn't this ruling go against the one concerning Visit from the Capuchin
> and WWEF/'do not replace' cards?
No.
WWeF/'do not replace' cards function the same way.
Capuchin doesn't enter the picture at all - the cards there are simply
played to reduce your hand size (via counters). There's a distinction
between a card which is never replaced and a card which is not replaced
"until" such-and-such a time.
> What if you have both a VotC and a MoS on you? Which 'do not replace' rule
> takes precedence?
Neither. They are compatible.
The card played is not replaced (under both), and is never replaced
(under VftC) - you lose the hand size (in the form of a counter from
VftC) and that ends the tracking of the played card.
James Coupe
>Okay, and when my deck is full of counter strategies card, where do i put
>the card to play my own tactics ? Unless we play 180 cards tower decks, i'm
>sorry but i can't see how we can be prepared for every threat.
Go for more generic defence. Don't defend against votes, defend against
actions, for example.
Sten During
Henrik wrote:
>
> Hey, I can still play a total number of 7 cards during my turn, 7 cards
> reacting to my preys turn and 7 cards reacting to my predators turn...
> Granted, It'll be very hard for certain decks to handle this, it won't even
> remotely cripple many decks... And think of the beuty of having this card
> played against a lame weenie [insert Pre-bleed, S&B, Pre-vote], which I
> think most people agrees has to be penalized a little for being to strong...
> /Henrik Isaksson
>
>
>
Funny you should mention weenie. In my book it's the only kind of deck
that ought to gain greatly from this card against a large amount of
other decks. Mainly by denying them from cykling wake-cards into their
hands. The card actually doesn't seem THAT frightening in the hands of
the 'big bad monster' vampires deck.
Sten During
Henrik
I'd say: Weenie=many minions out=more actions=more cards used=more crippled
if meddled with!
/Henrik
Flux
news:3C5FD61D...@white-wolf.com:
> Under Semsith, when each minion phase is over, you get to replace the
> cards you played during that minion phase. In the example given, the
> victim of Semsith had played 3 cards on her minion phase prior to
> playing Distraction (assuming no other effects were modifying her hand
> size). She doesn't replace the Distraction (a 4th card, leaving her
> with a hand size of 3 because of the 4 cards she's not replacing). She
> draws five cards. She then discards down to her hand size (7 minus the
> 4 she's not replacing = 3).
Why won't the text on Distraction override MoS when it resolves,
Distraction specifies you should replace it (not 'draw up to your hand
size')?
Flux
Sten During
Henrik wrote:
>
>>Funny you should mention weenie. In my book it's the only kind of deck
>>that ought to gain greatly from this card against a large amount of
>>other decks. Mainly by denying them from cykling wake-cards into their
>>hands. The card actually doesn't seem THAT frightening in the hands of
>>the 'big bad monster' vampires deck.
>>
>>
>
> I'd say: Weenie=many minions out=more actions=more cards used=more crippled
> if meddled with!
>
> /Henrik
>
>
>
Yup, goes both ways I guess :)
Sten During
LSJ
> Why won't the text on Distraction override MoS when it resolves,
> Distraction specifies you should replace it (not 'draw up to your hand
> size')?
No. You replace Distraction when you play it, not when the
action resolves. Therefore the text cannot be anything but a
reminder (to replace it before drawing the five cards).
James Coupe
<henri...@spray.se> writes:
>I'd say: Weenie=many minions out=more actions=more cards used=more crippled
>if meddled with!
It depends. A weenie deck can often be going Computer Hacking, Computer
Hacking, Computer Hacking, Computer Hacking.... whereas the fattie deck
can be doing Govern, Lost in Crowds, Bonding etc.
James Coupe
writes:
>Why won't the text on Distraction override MoS when it resolves,
>Distraction specifies you should replace it (not 'draw up to your hand
>size')?
Distraction's text is reminder text.
(You would already have replaced the card anyway. But some people might
think the replacement formed one of those five and so only draw four.)
Jozxyqk
> Player X's master phase, target (A) has a full hand.
> During Player X's minion phase, cards the target (A) plays are not replaced.
> At the end of Player X's minion phase, target (A) draws to replace the played
> cards.
Does this mean that if you're the target of Meddling, you ignore "Do Not
Replace Until" clauses? Particularly, can you redraw to replace Wake
with Evening's Freshness at the end of the current minion phase, instead
of your next untap?
Ben Swainbank
> Weren't lot's of player complaining a while ago that there were no useful
> votecards to use beside KRC and CA... And now the kind WW has given us this
> lite toy!!!
I'm someone who has complained that V:TES Politics could use a little
refreshing. And this is exactly the KIND of thing I'd normally to be
excited to see. New. Interesting. Strong enough to play without being
another pool-drain card. It definately brings something new to the
game and stengthens and diversifies politics.
And I'll hold back on crying wolf until I see the card in play. But my
gut says, as is, the card is too strong. When dropped on someone it
seems like it'll instantly restrict their ability to play the game in
a unfun way.
If it had a few more restrictions...
Playable by a Titled vampire
Only playable once per game
Don't replace cards during actions (instead of the entire minion
phase)
it would scare me a lot less and I'd be happy to see it added to the
game.
-Ben Swainbank
James Coupe
<jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:
>Does this mean that if you're the target of Meddling, you ignore "Do Not
>Replace Until" clauses?
You still do not replace them, as per the text, but you then continue to
not replace them until the end of that minion phase, per Semsith.
Tobias
I like the two previous posts a whole lot better than the card they
are about, at first read. :)
While my immediate reaction to this card has been overwhelmingly
negative, I must admit it hasn't seen much play yet - and woe indeed
to the poor Methuselah who plays this card, for the table will indeed
try to eat him if they're smart. Semsith's meddling is nothing if not
as obvious as a 2-by-4 between the eyes.
Also, my reaction was largely inspired by my disappointment in that
the card text was posted BEFORE all tourneys were played - but I
should have known better than to harbor any hopes on that point.
As it stands, this card will shut down a target, and the targetter, as
he become a meta-target. Now only for people to have the power to hurt
the person calling this vote - some tables are remarkably low on D or
cross-table opportunities - which would make a cross-table player a
nice target for this card as well... (hmm, chain-voting a couple of
these into existance is fun - and you have only a few cards left
yourself). Interesting that the card should be self-defeating if used
heavily simultaneously.
What IS a shame, is that it does become a card for 'the table to
beat'.
Tobias
Deventer
LSJ
> In message <YQR78.78136$Ln2.17...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, Jozxyqk
> <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:
> >Does this mean that if you're the target of Meddling, you ignore "Do Not
> >Replace Until" clauses?
>
> You still do not replace them, as per the text, but you then continue to
> not replace them until the end of that minion phase, per Semsith.
Correct.
Similarly for Wake With Evening's Freshness - you do not replace it
during the minion phase and then you continue to not replace it
until your next untap.
Chris Berger
"Andrew S. Davidson" <a...@csi.com> wrote in message
news:92472F64505CFA51.5C14473F...@lp.airnews.net...
>
>
Chris Berger
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3C5F49B1...@white-wolf.com...
> Pepijn Kok wrote:
> > How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> > distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> > hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> > hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> > to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
>
> You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> You draw 5 cards.
> Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> count against your hand size).
>
hand size. Distraction also says draw up to your hand size. How come your
hand size is 7 (or whatever) when Semsmith tells you to do it, but only 3
when Distraction tells you to do it.
Also, how does one differentiate between "reminder" text and "specific card
text." Even if Distraction's "replace this card" text is normally just a
reminder, in this case it is relevant, and looks like specific card text
telling you to replace it. Normally, it doesn't make a difference, since
you already replace it, but in this case, you should follow the instructions
on the card that is played most recently.
LSJ
>
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> news:3C5F49B1...@white-wolf.com...
> > Pepijn Kok wrote:
> > > How does this effect cards like Distraction? Since card text on
> > > distraction states you draw cards and thereafter discard to maximum
> > > hand size. Now imagine I play distrcation with 3 cards left in my
> > > hand. I do not replace the distraction (card text of meddling) but get
> > > to draw 5 cards, leaving me with a hand of 7 right?
> >
> > You do not replace Distraction, correct.
> > You draw 5 cards.
> > Then you discard down to 3 (since the 4 cards you're not replacing still
> > count against your hand size).
> >
> But Semsmith says that at the end of each minion phase, you draw up to your
> hand size. Distraction also says draw up to your hand size. How come your
> hand size is 7 (or whatever) when Semsmith tells you to do it, but only 3
> when Distraction tells you to do it.
Distraction says to discard down to your hand size, but I know what you mean.
During Distraction, your hand size is unchanged. Distraction pumps extra
cards into your hand and then reminds you to discard (immediately) down to
your hand size (as you must always do).
During a Semsisth minion phase, your hand size is incrementally decreased by
each card that leaves your hand - the cards, being not replaced, count against
your hand size. After the minion phase, the cards qare replaced (and so no
longer count against your hand size) - you draw cards.
> Also, how does one differentiate between "reminder" text and "specific card
> text." Even if Distraction's "replace this card" text is normally just a
> reminder, in this case it is relevant, and looks like specific card text
> telling you to replace it. Normally, it doesn't make a difference, since
> you already replace it, but in this case, you should follow the instructions
> on the card that is played most recently.
It cannot be anything but a reminder. If it were not a reminder, then (under
normal ciscumstances) you'd replace the card twice. This is obviously not the
case.
hamdamcwa
> >
> > I slave away to make something worth looking at and all you boys can
> > do is complain about White Wolf's site and ask what the new card is.
> > Can't you see this deck is ART!!!
> >
> > Philestines!!!
> >
>
> I have to admit that it was a very cool deck, and I was tempted to
> compliment you and/or offer you a special prize, but I was worried
> that it might go to your head... :)
Mike,
My dear chap, you should know by now that I would never be so crass as
to let a compliment such as that "go to my head". I am only trying, in
my humble way, to provide a little innovation into the world of VTES.
The fact that I consistently do so is a testament to the diverse and
wonderful selection of cards that are available.
So, thank you for your kind words, but I can assure you that my ego is
sated enough knowing I made a final with a true no brainer of a deck
that had less thought put into it than my dinner the previous evening
(a takeaway).
However, about that prize...
;)
DH
Pepijn Kok
It seems that WW wants to get the political stuff back in the game,
and I for one am in favour of that.
These kind of cards, together with the newly introduced library denial
(I don't understand the fuss about Slaughterhouse as we allready had
aggrassive tactics, dirty little secrets and raptors but hey.. who am
I) and the specials on those two Harbinger just force creativity of
deck design. and I'm all for that... let us all stop whinig about
"broken" cards... The fact that we think they are disruptive only
comes from the fact that we have grown lazy and non creative. We are
affraid that cards like this will screw us over... and well.. that
might be the case if you try the age old S&B, Rush or whatever
decks.... If it screws that over.. well, then your deck concept sucks
and you have to change that... It only shows that focussed decks are
vulnerable, as it should be. Toolboxes are vulnerable as well since
they lead to possible hand jams, so basicly, these cards restore the
balance a bit... every body gets screwed.. the way it should be in a
STRATEGIC game....
If you want to make a power deck go play Magic!
Okay.. just had to vent this... I just get tired by all this whining
as of late...
Awaiting flames
Pepijn Kok
Prince of Amsterdam
"as primitive man afraid of fire, standing in the way of
progress....."
Pepijn Kok
below (previous) post. This post is not directed to anyone... Sorry to
Reyda that he is the one this is replied to, it could have been
anyone, this is NOT intended for any person as an individual, just my
frustration vented to the community.
Noal McDonald
> I've noticed before that andrew is a coward and bully. He likes to criticize
> this game and can't take it when he loses. That's why he run away from
> anything resembling a fair argument. He deserves to be bashed with a big,
> big stick.
Wow. Don't hold back. *grin*
What I find remarkable is the stark contrast between Andrew online and
offline. In person, he strikes me as a quiet, bookish and fairly
pleasant man that would avoid direct conflict. Whereas, in the
newsgroup, he comes off as a braying donkey. Perhaps he feels less
inhibited online and tends to overcompensate for his perceived
shortcomings.
*shrug*
Regards,
Noal
Emmit Svenson
is falling! The sky is falling!" Remember the uproar over The
Slaughterhouse? Well, that card has so far failed to turn the game on
its head, and I doubt Meddling of Sesmith will either.
I'm not saying this card isn't powerful--imagine the synergy between
it and inferior Revelations!--but it's not broken. Dramatic Upheaval
is a more powerful vote, and it lacks a built-in reversal clause, but
we're used to DU, so it doesn't boggle our minds like MoS does.
If MoS becomes a commonly used vote, it will shift the balance of the
game, true. It will strengthen permanents and weaken weenies. But it's
not going to break the game.
Cameron
> that I disassembled cause it sucked. :)
lol... I've got one that I'm thinking of making storyline legal now.
but it's only got 6 ventrue 2 tory 4 daughters now... wouldn't be that
hard to change I guess. Its even swept a few tables, but only on
occasion, as my group has gotten its trick already. Mmm... so very
very tempting, but to quote Faith as Buffy, "that would be wrong."
cameron
Flux
wolf.com:
> Flux wrote:
>> Why won't the text on Distraction override MoS when it resolves,
>> Distraction specifies you should replace it (not 'draw up to your hand
>> size')?
>
> No. You replace Distraction when you play it, not when the
> action resolves. Therefore the text cannot be anything but a
> reminder (to replace it before drawing the five cards).
What I don't see is precisely why this has to be reminder text. As you
say, the card should be replaced when it is played, not when the action
resolves, so that text seems out of place. Besides, it lacks the () that
you usually put on all reminder text, despite it's reprint in SW.
It could very well be an effect that would do nothing in most
circunstances, however would come in handy with MoS.
Flux
Flux
news:QuoQAIUD...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk:
> In message <YQR78.78136$Ln2.17...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, Jozxyqk
> <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:
>>Does this mean that if you're the target of Meddling, you ignore "Do Not
>>Replace Until" clauses?
>
> You still do not replace them, as per the text, but you then continue to
> not replace them until the end of that minion phase, per Semsith.
..or, in the case of WWEF, you do not replace it per Semsith, then at the
end of the minion phase you continue not to replace it, per WWEF.
Flux
Flux
news:3C600B37...@white-wolf.com:
> Chris Berger wrote:
>> Also, how does one differentiate between "reminder" text and "specific
>> card text." Even if Distraction's "replace this card" text is
>> normally just a reminder, in this case it is relevant, and looks like
>> specific card text telling you to replace it. Normally, it doesn't
>> make a difference, since you already replace it, but in this case, you
>> should follow the instructions on the card that is played most
>> recently.
>
> It cannot be anything but a reminder. If it were not a reminder, then
> (under normal ciscumstances) you'd replace the card twice. This is
> obviously not the case.
You'd attempt to replace the card twice, but would only succeed the first
time, the second attempt would fail because the card is already replaced.
'Replace' is not the same as 'draw a card', though it usually has the same
effect.
Flux
Flux
> Chris Berger wrote:
>> Also, how does one differentiate between "reminder" text and "specific
>> card text." Even if Distraction's "replace this card" text is
>> normally just a reminder, in this case it is relevant, and looks like
>> specific card text telling you to replace it. Normally, it doesn't
>> make a difference, since you already replace it, but in this case, you
>> should follow the instructions on the card that is played most
>> recently.
>
> It cannot be anything but a reminder. If it were not a reminder, then
> (under normal ciscumstances) you'd replace the card twice. This is
> obviously not the case.
You'd attempt to replace the card twice, but would only succeed the first
Peter D Bakija
>>And complaints from fans of rush decks are just bare-faced cheek and
hypocrisy. Their game plan is to torporise the minions of any player
that they don't like the look of.>>
Oh, Andrew. This card doesn't just screw Rush decks. It screws every deck.
Badly. In any situation, if this card is successfully played, and you are the
target, you are effectively removed from the game, regardless of your deck
strategy. You can only take, like, 1 action per turn. No deck can survive that.
Rush decks are screwed. Stealth and Bleed decks are screwed. Intercept decks
are screwed. Horde Bleed decks are screwed. Celerity/gun decks are screwed.
Minion Tap/5th decks are screwed. Presence vote decks are screwed. Tap and
Bleed decks are screwed. Bruise and Bleed decks are screwed. Animalism horde
decks are screwed. I can't think of a single, viable deck strategy that is not
completely screwed by this single card.
A single card that essentially destroys a player's ability to play the game. A
single card. Not a strategy. Not a collection of cards. A single card.
That is insane. Maybe I am just feeling charitable, but I can't even see how
*you* wouldn't see that.
Peter D Bakija
PD...@aol.com
http://www.geocities.com/bakija6
"These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!"
-Zim.
Peter D Bakija
>>Every time a new strategy enters the game, we get a chorus of "The sky
is falling! The sky is falling!" Remember the uproar over The
Slaughterhouse? Well, that card has so far failed to turn the game on
its head, and I doubt Meddling of Sesmith will either.>>
The problem with Slaughterhouse is that it doesn't make you win--it just makes
your prey lose. This was constantly brought up in all the Slaughterhouse
threads, primarily by the people complaining about the Slaughterhouse. It takes
so much effort to make a Slaughterhouse deck work that you can't actually oust
your prey with it. Thus, playing a Slaughterhouse deck is self defeating and
thus self regulating--sure, you can make your prey lose real bad, but you
aren't going to win either, so you are something of a fool to play a
Slaughterhouse deck.
Meddling, however, doesn't have such problems. Take any, currently viable vote
deck and add a handfull of Meddlings. You now have at your disposal a vote card
that essentially says "Your prey can no longer play the game", for no
significant additional cost or deck modification. Ok, sure, you lose a hand
slot. That is *nothing* to pay to screw your prey to such an extent.
The comparison between the new Discard "strategy" (which is both conceiveably a
new strategy and not particularly viable) and Meddling (which isn't a new
strategy, it is just a broken card conceived in a fit of delusional madness) is
not a valid one.
>>If MoS becomes a commonly used vote, it will shift the balance of the
game, true. It will strengthen permanents and weaken weenies. But it's
not going to break the game.>>
It is for the person it is played on. This isn't a matter of strategy shifting.
This is a matter of a single vote card that destroys a player's ability to play
the game. If the card said "If this vote passes, your prey is ousted", would
that also do little more than shift the balance of the game?