"The New NRA" implications
Jozxyqk
it seems to me like someone could find a way to break it.
But since cards have been (presumably) created thus far under the
assumption that NRA was optional, I can't find any strategies that are
particularly broken.
The two True Brujah who can untap themselves (in different circumstances),
Blanche Hill, Domain of Evernight at TEM, [all of which so far, for the most
part, deal with Scarce vampires], and Freak Drive, are really the only way
that you can repeat a non-bleed action anyway. (am I missing anything?)
Change of Target and Red Herring explicitly prohibit it by card text.
So you can have Hesha with Fortitude continually hunt at an extra stealth,
untap with freak drive, and continue until he's full, still netting one
blood per action...
Or you can have Black Cat with Fortitude (or some Ravnos, or whatever) equip
a few .44s, with freak drives in between, then Rave it all to your other
minions... (which is still far more expensive than letting them all use the
new Concealed Weapon and letting them get blocked)
Or somebody with ani/for can stack a bunch of Raven Spies on themselves...
Or you can keep attempting to encounter a vampire in torpor (for rescue
or diablerie), and possibly pay the cost of the Freak Drive with blood gained
from diablerizing...
But overall, these things all seem pretty harmless.
Can someone figure out a way to take advantage of this modification of
the rule, in which something particularly horrible would happen?
Just curious, and trying to make a point that this wouldn't be a bad
official change to tourney play.
Halcyan 2
>Blanche Hill, Domain of Evernight at TEM, [all of which so far, for the most
>part, deal with Scarce vampires], and Freak Drive, are really the only way
>that you can repeat a non-bleed action anyway. (am I missing anything?)
>Change of Target and Red Herring explicitly prohibit it by card text.
Other untap capabilities:
Rutor's Hand
Temptation (multiple on other vampires or just play some on your own)
Hag's Wrinkles (equipment)
Gift of Bellona (equipiment)
Alexandra's special
Majesty/Earth Meld/Bond with the Mountain/Mummify (don't laugh) (if at first
you don't suceed, untap and try again)
Blessing of the Name
Precognitive Mobility
Patronage
Halcyan 2
Jozxyqk
> Other untap capabilities:
OK OK, so I missed a couple :)
But still.. anything broken about it?
James Coupe
<jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:
>If the "new NRA" actually becomes the official tournament rule, at first
>it seems to me like someone could find a way to break it.
As I pointed out when NRA changes were being debated, the current rules
system has some potential problems with allies. I am not 100% sure that
I like the options available, but since they cannot be repeated
individually (i.e. you can't bring out multiple of the same non-unique
ally with the same vampire) this should be less of a problem than it
could have been.
--
James Coupe
PGP 0x5D623D5D I am woman. Here, me raw.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2
13D7E668C3695D623D5D
Nystulc
>As I pointed out when NRA changes were being debated, the current rules
>system has some potential problems with allies. I am not 100% sure that
>I like the options available, but since they cannot be repeated
>individually (i.e. you can't bring out multiple of the same non-unique
>ally with the same vampire) this should be less of a problem than it
>could have been.
And you can't bring out multiples of the same unique ally either :)
But seriously, I'm wondering if you have not misread the rules posted. They
only say one cannot repeat the same "action card", and I am not sure what this
means. Are ally cards "action cards"? They are actions, but they do not have
the "action card symbol" on them, and their type is "ally card", not "action
card".
Furthermore, this seems to be clarifed where it says "no restrictions on, for
example, hunting or equipping." This implies to me that, as long as I can
untap, I can get another flak jacket (and the same principles would presumably
apply to "Retainer Cards" and "Ally Cards")
To my mind, allies, retainers and equipment have been an underpowered aspect of
the game for a long time, and these changes are therefore welcome. We could
have a big argument about it, or we could just play the new rules upon release
and see how things fall out.
I am not experiencing any premonitions of disaster. In fact, I suspect that my
efforts to build decks making heavy use of allies, equipment and/or retainers
will remain weak ... but perhaps not quite so hopeless as before.
-- John Whelan
Joshua Duffin
"Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote in message
news:KECW8.338642$6m5.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> Can someone figure out a way to take advantage of this modification of
> the rule, in which something particularly horrible would happen?
>
> Just curious, and trying to make a point that this wouldn't be a bad
> official change to tourney play.
The most immediately-effective idea I've heard so far is:
1. Fortitude master on Sargon.
2. Sargon hunts, Freak Drives.
3. SER vampire Entices.
4. GOTO 2.
This only goes as far as you have SER vampires, though. And
requires not hand-jamming or getting blocked too much. But
it could be nasty, if it works.
Credit to YoritomoJiriki for the idea.
Also, if you can repeat "same retainer recruit", you could
pick up any number of D'Habi Revenants in a single turn with
Giotto Verducci. (Oliver Stacey thought of that one.)
Josh
or "garou, freak, garou", if not restricted by title on employs
lehrbuch
$6m5.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
> rescue or diablerie), and possibly pay the cost of the Freak
> Drive with blood gained from diablerizing...
Although by no means broken, a fortitude (freak drive) capable Archon
could be quite brutal with repeated diablerie.
1. archon rushes a vamp.
2. archon torpors a vamp. freak drives.
3. archon diablerises. freak drives.
repeat until you run out of rushes (as you can only use the archon
rush once) or freakdrives or whatever you're doing aggravated damage
with.
LSJ: Legacy of Caine, states that when the affected vampire hunts they
instead steal a blood as a (D) action. Does the new NRA (without
restriction on hunting) mean:
a) this vampire can only hunt once, because of the restriction on
repeating an action allowed by a card in play; or
b) this vampire can take the steal blood action many times (assuming
it can untap), because it is "hunting"?
Similarly, Ravnos during a Week of Nightmares?
* lehrbuch
Dave Brereton
Nystulc <nys...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20020709163014...@mb-de.news.cs.com...
> James Coupe wrote:
>
> >As I pointed out when NRA changes were being debated, the current rules
> >system has some potential problems with allies. I am not 100% sure that
> >I like the options available, but since they cannot be repeated
> >individually (i.e. you can't bring out multiple of the same non-unique
> >ally with the same vampire) this should be less of a problem than it
> >could have been.
>
> And you can't bring out multiples of the same unique ally either :)
>
> But seriously, I'm wondering if you have not misread the rules posted.
They
> only say one cannot repeat the same "action card", and I am not sure what
this
> means. Are ally cards "action cards"? They are actions, but they do not
have
> the "action card symbol" on them, and their type is "ally card", not
"action
> card".
Can't preform the same card twice in a turn. Same as can't Govern with a
Conditoning then Freak Drive and Govern on Down.
Henrik Isaksson
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:agfl3q$ljsq0$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de...
I'd like to make a deck based on Baltomores purge and tariq... With one
Purge, he's got 4 vampires to munch! =)
/henrik isaksson
LSJ
> LSJ: Legacy of Caine, states that when the affected vampire hunts they
> instead steal a blood as a (D) action. Does the new NRA (without
> restriction on hunting) mean:
> a) this vampire can only hunt once, because of the restriction on
> repeating an action allowed by a card in play; or
> b) this vampire can take the steal blood action many times (assuming
> it can untap), because it is "hunting"?
>
> Similarly, Ravnos during a Week of Nightmares?
a) action by card in play
The rule isn't that hunting is unrestricted. It is that actions
granted by cards in play are (as well as the other 3 things that
are). The comment on hunting is just a comment.
--
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/
James Coupe
Brereton <Brer...@shaw.ca> writes:
>Can't preform the same card twice in a turn. Same as can't Govern with a
>Conditoning then Freak Drive and Govern on Down.
The new rule doesn't state that, hence the concerns.
It references: "# use the same action card twice in a turn"
Action card is a term which can only apply to actions and political
actions, rather than equipment and retainers and allies and stuff.
I'd be grateful for clarification.
LSJ
>
> In message <28RW8.46871$8H1.2...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca>, Dave
> Brereton <Brer...@shaw.ca> writes:
> >Can't preform the same card twice in a turn. Same as can't Govern with a
> >Conditoning then Freak Drive and Govern on Down.
>
> The new rule doesn't state that, hence the concerns.
>
> It references: "# use the same action card twice in a turn"
>
> Action card is a term which can only apply to actions and political
> actions, rather than equipment and retainers and allies and stuff.
>
> I'd be grateful for clarification.
The new rulebook clarifies that.
An action card is a card played to take an action.
As in Jyhad, equipment cards, ally cards, and retainer cards are
action cards.
So while equipping isn't restricted, equipping the same equipment
(a second Flak Jacket) is, by the action card restriction.
Frederick Scott
>
> lehrbuch wrote:
> > LSJ: Legacy of Caine, states that when the affected vampire hunts they
> > instead steal a blood as a (D) action. Does the new NRA (without
> > restriction on hunting) mean:
> > a) this vampire can only hunt once, because of the restriction on
> > repeating an action allowed by a card in play; or
> > b) this vampire can take the steal blood action many times (assuming
> > it can untap), because it is "hunting"?
> >
> > Similarly, Ravnos during a Week of Nightmares?
>
> a) action by card in play
>
> The rule isn't that hunting is unrestricted. It is that actions
> granted by cards in play are (as well as the other 3 things that
> are). The comment on hunting is just a comment.
If it's just a comment, can my vampire with LoC on it hunt the normal
way (once or multiple times) if it chooses?
The way the card is worded, it appears to change the effect that occurs
when a vampire hunts. You seem to be saying that the actual effect is
to permit this card action (apparently limited to once per turn) and
(assuming the answer to my first question was 'no') eliminate its ability
to do a normal hunt action. To me, this is a surprising interpretation.
Fred
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > lehrbuch wrote:
> > > LSJ: Legacy of Caine, states that when the affected vampire hunts they
> > > instead steal a blood as a (D) action. Does the new NRA (without
> > > restriction on hunting) mean:
> > > a) this vampire can only hunt once, because of the restriction on
> > > repeating an action allowed by a card in play; or
> >
> >
> > The rule isn't that hunting is unrestricted. It is that actions
> > granted by cards in play are (as well as the other 3 things that
> > are). The comment on hunting is just a comment.
>
> If it's just a comment, can my vampire with LoC on it hunt the normal
> way (once or multiple times) if it chooses?
No, since he cannot hunt the normal way at all, by card text on LoC.
> The way the card is worded, it appears to change the effect that occurs
> when a vampire hunts. You seem to be saying that the actual effect is
> to permit this card action (apparently limited to once per turn) and
> (assuming the answer to my first question was 'no') eliminate its ability
> to do a normal hunt action. To me, this is a surprising interpretation.
"instead of performing the usual hunting action"
The text seems clear that it denies the vampire the ability to do a
normal hunt action. That's the effect of the "instead" wording.
It also clearly enables an action (and, being a card in play that
enables an action, the enabled action is restricted by the rule
that restricts actions "allowed by card in play"). That the action
is a hunt action isn't pertinent. Just as Vast Wealth's allowed
action cannot be repeated, even though normal (non-card-in-play
action) equipping is not restricted.
Frederick Scott
>
> Frederick Scott wrote:
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > lehrbuch wrote:
> > > > LSJ: Legacy of Caine, states that when the affected vampire hunts they
> > > > instead steal a blood as a (D) action. Does the new NRA (without
> > > > restriction on hunting) mean:
> > > > a) this vampire can only hunt once, because of the restriction on
> > > > repeating an action allowed by a card in play; or
> > >
> > > a) action by card in play
> > >
> > > The rule isn't that hunting is unrestricted. It is that actions
> > > granted by cards in play are (as well as the other 3 things that
> > > are). The comment on hunting is just a comment.
> >
> > If it's just a comment, can my vampire with LoC on it hunt the normal
> > way (once or multiple times) if it chooses?
>
> No, since he cannot hunt the normal way at all, by card text on LoC.
>
> > The way the card is worded, it appears to change the effect that occurs
> > when a vampire hunts. You seem to be saying that the actual effect is
> > to permit this card action (apparently limited to once per turn) and
> > (assuming the answer to my first question was 'no') eliminate its ability
> > to do a normal hunt action. To me, this is a surprising interpretation.
>
> "instead of performing the usual hunting action"
>
> The text seems clear that it denies the vampire the ability to do a
> normal hunt action. That's the effect of the "instead" wording.
I guess I assumed that "instead of performing the usual hunting
action" referred to the *effect* of hunting. The part of your interpretation
that disturbs me is the text of the first part of that sentence: "When
the vampire with this card hunts...". This seems to imply that new the
specified effect should be thought of as what happens when this vampire
hunts, as opposed to what usually happens. It seems strange to rule that
the card "denies" something that seems to be the trigger for using ability
it is permitting.
> It also clearly enables an action (and, being a card in play that
> enables an action, the enabled action is restricted by the rule
> that restricts actions "allowed by card in play"). That the action
> is a hunt action isn't pertinent. Just as Vast Wealth's allowed
> action cannot be repeated, even though normal (non-card-in-play
> action) equipping is not restricted.
It really depends on which way you want to look at it. If you look
at it as changing the rules BY WHICH a vampire hunts, then it wouldn't
seem to me like it would fall under the new NRA rule. If it's creating
an entirely new action, then I can your point. But let me ask you this,
then: Does Festive dello Estinto's modification of how Sabbat Vampires
hunt prevent them from doing so more than once by the NRA rule? (Never
mind the implication of hunting with a full vampire. I suppose you
could assume he got hit with Tainted Vitae the first time if that's a
problem.)
Fred
Joshua Duffin
"Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message
news:agh1a4$m069g$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de...
> I'd like to make a deck based on Baltomores purge and tariq... With one
> Purge, he's got 4 vampires to munch! =)
Sure... as long as they're all capacity 3 or less. :-) Or did
you mean doing the Purging with someone else? Might be a good
idea, though you'd have to have made a pretty substantial pool
investment in "Tariq plus someone big" to do it.
Could be nice... err, nasty...
Josh
miss jackson if you're nasty
Joshua Duffin
"lehrbuch" <ri...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5fee5473.02070...@posting.google.com...
> Although by no means broken, a fortitude (freak drive) capable Archon
> could be quite brutal with repeated diablerie.
> 1. archon rushes a vamp.
> 2. archon torpors a vamp. freak drives.
> 3. archon diablerises. freak drives.
> repeat until you run out of rushes (as you can only use the archon
> rush once) or freakdrives or whatever you're doing aggravated damage
> with.
You can already do this with Tariq and Amaranth, though. And
he even comes complete with superior Fortitude. :-)
Only advantage I can see to doing it the above way would be,
instead of needing Amaranths in your hand, you'd only need more
Freak Drives. But then you also need to not be blocked on the
diableries.
Josh
brutalized
XZealot
> an entirely new action, then I can your point. But let me ask you this,
> then: Does Festive dello Estinto's modification of how Sabbat Vampires
> hunt prevent them from doing so more than once by the NRA rule? (Never
> mind the implication of hunting with a full vampire. I suppose you
> could assume he got hit with Tainted Vitae the first time if that's a
> problem.)
Dude, that kicks ass!! Play Festivo del Estinio, Lazverius hunts, Lazvernius
Governs at superior, freaks, rushes, freaks, calls Templar on himself,
freaks, rushes with Templar, freaks, Scouting Mission at Superior, freaks,
Arson or Rampages something, freaks, and hunts again. Now you have a full
Lazvernius.
Yeah!
XZ
John B. Whelan
The new NRA does not say you "can't perform the same card twice in a
turn." They restrict the same "action card", which apparently in this
case refers only to cards with the "action card" symbol on them, but
not intenting to refer those with other symbols, such as ally,
retainer, or equipment.
> Same as can't Govern with a
> Conditoning then Freak Drive and Govern on Down.
Not the same. Govern is covered TWICE by the newly posted NRA, as it
is both a bleed and an action card, both of which are restricted to
once per turn.
Best as I can tell, none of the restrictions in the new NRA cover
equipment, allies, etc. Indeed, it specifically says that they are
not restricted.
Joshua Duffin
"John B. Whelan" <nys...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:fd166f83.02071...@posting.google.com...
> Best as I can tell, none of the restrictions in the new NRA cover
> equipment, allies, etc. Indeed, it specifically says that they are
> not restricted.
LSJ has now said, though, that in the new rulebook "action cards"
will be defined to include allies, retainers, and equipment cards.
So you'll be able to get multiple allies/equips/retainers in the
same turn with the same minion, but not multiple of *the same*
ally/etc.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D2C351D.7D10767D%40white-wolf.com
Josh
no garou, garou, garou for you
jspektr
> Can someone figure out a way to take advantage of this modification of
> the rule, in which something particularly horrible would happen?
>
> Just curious, and trying to make a point that this wouldn't be a bad
> official change to tourney play.
!Tremere with Rutor's Hand or any Sabbat with Freak Drive could get 4
blood a turn if the Hungry Coyote is in play. Six if they also have
Aaron's Feeding Razor.
If someone plays the new Baltimore Purge (or some other way of
torporing lots of vampires simultaneously), a vampire with means of
untapping could diablerize multiple torpored vampires in the same
turn.
A Gangrel Freak Driving could get out the Renegade Garou and the
Werewolf pack in the same turn, or recruit a Raptor and a Raven Spy
and a Murder of Crows and...
A Settite with Fortitude could recruit multiple Bane Mummies in one
turn.
Add Charisma to the vampire recruiting, and it becomes easier.
None of those are horrible, but they do change the balance of things a
bit. I suspect someone will come up with something unpleasant
eventually.
JSpektr
jspektr
> Can someone figure out a way to take advantage of this modification of
> the rule, in which something particularly horrible would happen?
>
Okay, here's one:
Saqqaf, Keeper of the Grand Temple of Set could employ J. S. Simmons,
Esq.
Then Freak Drive.
Then, seeing that you don't have enough intercept (maybe with the
assistance of Faceless Night) he could employ Tasha Morgan.
And Freak Drive again.
He could follow up with a Priestess of Sekhmet or Marijava Ghoul,
Freak Drive, and then bleed you for a whole lot using your choice of
Presence cards.
Yes, very unusual circumstances, but I think the one possible abuse
lies in the idea that if no one can block one action, it usually means
they don't have extra intercept handy to block other actions that
turn. If you had nasty retainers or equipment you wanted to pile onto
a single vampire, and you had methods of untapping, there might be an
advantage in piling everything on in one turn. If nothing else, it
would speed up the development of decks that are built around "tooling
up" their minions.
Rutor's Hand with Vast Wealth and Magic of the Smith leaps to mind as
well.
JSpektr
Montripus
Before NRA a vampire could bleed freak, bleed and force of will, NRA was
only a tournament floor rule until now(although I play with it at home) oh
my god how horrible. maybe someone needs too be eternally vigilente.
Niko
"jspektr" <jsp...@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:196f2577.02071...@posting.google.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Derek Ray
jsp...@sprynet.com (jspektr) mumbled something about:
>Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote in message news:<KECW8.338642$6m5.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
>
>> Can someone figure out a way to take advantage of this modification of
>> the rule, in which something particularly horrible would happen?
Not mentioning that someone else has noted that retainers and such are
likely to get tagged with the "action card" status, instead of just a
"retainer card" status (therefore making them fall under NRA)...
>Saqqaf, Keeper of the Grand Temple of Set could employ J. S. Simmons,
>Esq.
>
>Then Freak Drive.
>
>Then, seeing that you don't have enough intercept (maybe with the
>assistance of Faceless Night) he could employ Tasha Morgan.
>
>And Freak Drive again.
>
>He could follow up with a Priestess of Sekhmet or Marijava Ghoul,
>Freak Drive, and then bleed you for a whole lot using your choice of
>Presence cards.
And get Deflected.
Anyone wishing to bleed me for 6 and 8 at one go, at stealth, with Great
Big Vampires is welcome to. But you must be prepared for the
ever-so-rare eventuality that I may be including 8 Deflections in my
deck.
--
"There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.
James Coupe
<jsp...@sprynet.com> writes:
>Yes, very unusual circumstances, but I think the one possible abuse
>lies in the idea that if no one can block one action, it usually means
>they don't have extra intercept handy to block other actions that
>turn. If you had nasty retainers or equipment you wanted to pile onto
>a single vampire, and you had methods of untapping, there might be an
>advantage in piling everything on in one turn.
True.
However, this does require you having all the equipment and retainers in
your hand during a single turn (not all at the same time, but passing
through, say, the seven cards in your hand and the following seven as
you play, untap, play, untap and so on). Having them there is likely to
be, partially, luck, unless you make a deck extremely equipment/retainer
heavy. And they're likely to clog your hand once you have a number of
them.
My worries are related slightly to allies, rather than equipment or
retainers, since you can bring those out again and again with your
vampires. With some of them, they'll be able to bring out the allies
themselves (nasty), and even if you leave your vampires bringing out
more allies, leaving the currently in play allies to do their best.
Thankfully, the current ally set is fairly limited with regards this -
the cheap, non-unique allies don't have in-built bleeds, but bleeding
with Computer Hacking...
Hopefully, nothing will break.
Hollowboy
drive, also Earth Meld, Restoration, etc.
Couple it all the obvious stuff, and use Heidelberg Castle to move
equipment & blood between Raven and Camille... and some rude bleed
becomes possible. One vampire could give it three counters the turn
they equip it!
************
Hesha Ruhadze, Heidelberg and temptation will definately be a cute
combo, though I doubt it would be called outright abusive...
I already have a mixed clan bloat steal deck: 3*Hesha and 3*Francois +
ventrue, Amadeo and others. Steals via Temptation / Hostile, bloats
via Minion tap + votes + 5th + abilities.
It's fave trick is:
1) Minion Tap Francois, tempt a vampire with Hesha
2) Nick the tempted vampire's blood with Francois
3) Borrow the vampire, act with it
4) Nick it's last blood by Heidelberging it to Francois - send it home
empty
...and repeat. Requires some setup, but it is relatively easy to keep
rolling. It can be bloat, protection and offence all in one (eg. if
you steal your predators Jost, and bleed with him).
With the new NRA, I can, with Temptation, hunt twice a turn with Hesha
or Amadeo (on turns when the castle is not otherwise occupied).
It's not massive, fuck-off good, and it does require some set-up.
But using one vampire to put two blood on two different vampires is
cute. And it's a natural part of a pre-existing deck. Also, once set
up, it's totally cardless, and the hunts are at 2 stealth. Joy.
It's just a pity I over-tweaked this deck, and now it sucks. I must
get it working again :-)
************
It gives PRO sabbat a cute bloat option: Make a hunting / swarming
deck using Hungry Coyote. If anyone blocks a hunt, untap with Earth
Meld, and just try again.
jspektr
> Inverary, Scotland could be used brutally in combo with a lot of Freak
> drive, also Earth Meld, Restoration, etc.
The new rules disallow repeating actions granted by cards, so I don't
think you could put more than one blood on Inveraray, Scotland in a
single turn with the same vampire. Unless that's not what you're
suggesting?
>
> Couple it all the obvious stuff, and use Heidelberg Castle to move
> equipment & blood between Raven and Camille... and some rude bleed
> becomes possible. One vampire could give it three counters the turn
> they equip it!
Location equipment doesn't count as equipment once it is in play, so I
don't believe you can transfer Inveraray using Heidelberg.
> It gives PRO sabbat a cute bloat option: Make a hunting / swarming
> deck using Hungry Coyote. If anyone blocks a hunt, untap with Earth
> Meld, and just try again.
That has some possibilities, but you'll end up using a lot of cards
just to gain a little extra blood.
I suppose a sabbat vampire with Aaron's Feeding Razor and with Hungry
Coyote out could multi-hunt, the 2 blood net (3 for hunting -1 for
freaking) might just be worth it.
Hmmmm....
What about a multi-rush (Haven Uncovered/Ambush/Nose of the
Hound/Bum's Rush) deck using a sabbat with fortitude, with Festivo
dello Estinto out? It'd require lots of Freak Drive, but the vampire
could rush, untap, hunt to full, rush, untap, hunt to full, rush,
untap, hunt to full, etc. etc.
Too card intensive, no doubt, but it could have some possibilities.
JSpektr
James Coupe
<jsp...@sprynet.com> writes:
>icantbelievehollow...@hotmail.com (Hollowboy) wrote in message news:<614f2a39.02072...@posting.google.com>...
>> Inverary, Scotland could be used brutally in combo with a lot of Freak
>> drive, also Earth Meld, Restoration, etc.
>
>The new rules disallow repeating actions granted by cards, so I don't
>think you could put more than one blood on Inveraray, Scotland in a
>single turn with the same vampire. Unless that's not what you're
>suggesting?
Using it *and* bleeding is potentially useful. Inverarararaaray Action,
Freak Drive, Bleed. Repeat next turn. (Throw in a laptop somewhere.)
Blood intensive and whilst Computer Hacking is usually seen to be a
better option, you can't Computer Hack/Freak/Computer Hack.
Inveraray Action, Force of Will, {Freak, Leave Torpor.
or {Rescue
could be even sicker. Urgle.
--
James Coupe
PGP 0x5D623D5D You don't need to hear it but I'm dried up
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 and sick to death of love.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D
jspektr
> In message <196f2577.0207...@posting.google.com>, jspektr
> <jsp...@sprynet.com> writes:
> >icantbelievehollow...@hotmail.com (Hollowboy) wrote in message news:<614f2a39.02072...@posting.google.com>...
> >> Inverary, Scotland could be used brutally in combo with a lot of Freak
> >> drive, also Earth Meld, Restoration, etc.
> >
> >The new rules disallow repeating actions granted by cards, so I don't
> >think you could put more than one blood on Inveraray, Scotland in a
> >single turn with the same vampire. Unless that's not what you're
> >suggesting?
>
> Using it *and* bleeding is potentially useful. Inverarararaaray Action,
> Freak Drive, Bleed. Repeat next turn. (Throw in a laptop somewhere.)
> Blood intensive and whilst Computer Hacking is usually seen to be a
> better option, you can't Computer Hack/Freak/Computer Hack.
That would certainly be unpleasant, but you can do that under normal
VEKN NRA rules, can't you? No sarcasm implied, I'm really wondering.
> Inveraray Action, Force of Will, {Freak, Leave Torpor.
> or {Rescue
>
> could be even sicker. Urgle.
Yeah, that could be gross. If it's Ventrue, they can be adding
standard Dominate nastiness to that (or Fortitude Nos, to toss a
Psychic Veil or two over the proceedings). Gangrel and you can do
Movement of the Slow Body/Rapid Healing or self-rescue.
JSpektr
Hollowboy
> icantbelievehollow...@hotmail.com (Hollowboy) wrote in message news:<614f2a39.02072...@posting.google.com>...
> > Inverary, Scotland could be used brutally in combo with a lot of Freak
> > drive, also Earth Meld, Restoration, etc.
>
> The new rules disallow repeating actions granted by cards, so I don't
> think you could put more than one blood on Inveraray, Scotland in a
> single turn with the same vampire. Unless that's not what you're
> suggesting?
That *is* what I was thinking - with a whole pile of freaks.
>
> >
> > Couple it all the obvious stuff, and use Heidelberg Castle to move
> > equipment & blood between Raven and Camille... and some rude bleed
> > becomes possible. One vampire could give it three counters the turn
> > they equip it!
>
> Location equipment doesn't count as equipment once it is in play, so I
> don't believe you can transfer Inveraray using Heidelberg.
So that idea is scuppered. I'm not bothered - I wasn't going to try it
myself
>
>
> > It gives PRO sabbat a cute bloat option: Make a hunting / swarming
> > deck using Hungry Coyote. If anyone blocks a hunt, untap with Earth
> > Meld, and just try again.
>
> That has some possibilities, but you'll end up using a lot of cards
> just to gain a little extra blood.
Ay? A lot of cards? It only requires one card, the Hungry Coyote. You
only need another card if your hunt is blocked: the Earth Meld that
lets you untap and try the hunt again.
>
> I suppose a sabbat vampire with Aaron's Feeding Razor and with Hungry
> Coyote out could multi-hunt, the 2 blood net (3 for hunting -1 for
> freaking) might just be worth it.
Hunting twice for 5 blood profit is cute, but the set-up is tricky,
and it needs a card and two 1-stealth actions per turn.
My Hesha / Temptation / Heidelberg idea has a similar set-up and would
net only four blood a turn, but is at +2 stealth, and it runs withoud
playing further cards.
>
> Hmmmm....
>
> What about a multi-rush (Haven Uncovered/Ambush/Nose of the
> Hound/Bum's Rush) deck using a sabbat with fortitude, with Festivo
> dello Estinto out? It'd require lots of Freak Drive, but the vampire
> could rush, untap, hunt to full, rush, untap, hunt to full, rush,
> untap, hunt to full, etc. etc.
>
> Too card intensive, no doubt, but it could have some possibilities.
>
> JSpektr
You could use the Festivo in a hunt / rave / freak / hunt combo. You
could use one or two Sabbat vampires in a mixed clan deck to fill
others, and take a flurry of expensive actions like mind rape /
sensory deprivation / whatever.
Eg in a Jost with Fortitude + uncle Hotep tag team. All kinds of
craziness are possible...
Halcyan 2
>Esq.
>
>Then Freak Drive.
>
>Then, seeing that you don't have enough intercept (maybe with the
>assistance of Faceless Night) he could employ Tasha Morgan.
>
>And Freak Drive again.
>
>He could follow up with a Priestess of Sekhmet or Marijava Ghoul,
>Freak Drive, and then bleed you for a whole lot using your choice of
>Presence cards.
And this is much worse than:
#1. Saqqaf employs J.S. Simmons and Freak Drives, equips with Laptop Computer
and Freak Drives, Clan Impersonates to Ravnos, and Freak Drives.
#2. Vampire A equips with Inveraray, Scotland, Freak Drives, adds a blood to
Inveraray, Freak Drives, Disputes Scotland to some one else's minion.
#3. Vampire B Disputed Scotland to himself (B), Freak Drives, takes the action
to add a blood to it.
#4. Vampire C Disputes Scotland to someone else's minion.
#5. Vampire D Disputes Scotland to himself (D), Freak Drives, takes the action
to add a blood to it.
#6. Vampires E & F Dispute Scotland to another Methusaleh's minion then on to
Saqqaf.
#7. Vampire G employs Tasha Morgan, Freak Drives, equips with Treasured
Samedji. Tap Heidelburg to transfer Tasha and the Treasured Samedji to Saqqaf.
Saqqaf now has +7 bleed, not to mention the Legal Manipulations + Aire of
Elation for another 4 or so.
All of this is possible (under the current rules too).
Alternatively, you could also throw in Pulse of the Canaille + Tier of Souls
for some additional bleed. Add an Ankara Citadel at the beginning or some 5th
Traditions here and there and you're all set.
Of course it's hard to pull all of this off, but giant bleeds like this are
already possible under the current NRA so I really don't see what the problem
is.
Halcyan 2
Jozxyqk
> Inveraray, Freak Drives, Disputes Scotland to some one else's minion.
You can't move "Loquipment" to a different minion with Disputed Territory,
can you?
Halcyan 2
Yes you can. But it only moves to another minion if the controlling Methusaleh
changes (thus why you have to swap it on to another person's minion
occasionally).
From: LSJ (vte...@wizards.com)
Subject: Re: Loquipments and Rack questions
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
View: Complete Thread (2 articles) | Original Format
Date: 1999/09/28
Mikko Saari wrote:
>
> What happens to loquipments when they are stealed with a) Disputed
> territory or b) Dominate Kine? Can the Methusaleh choose which vampire
> gets them or do they go to the acting vampire?
Equipments which are Locations (Loquipment)
* Loquipment may be put on any ready minion if moved in an ambiguous
fashion (by Disputed Territory, e.g.). If the new controller has no
minions, the locquipment is burned. (Note: currently all moves are
ambiguous - TOM). [RTR 19960112]
> Is it possible to choose a new target for The Rack if the vampire using
> it is lost?
Only by having it stolen (by another Methuselah's minion).
--
LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp
Halcyan 2