A requiem for the game formerly known as Jyhad
Scott Whittaker
This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing
the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now
mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term
will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at
WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not
yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading
over the spoiler list was enought for me.
(Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat
has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the
cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he
was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters
could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that
in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat
difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first
place!?
I mean, the two qualitiess that have always (until the two expansions
started to gnaw at the foundations, and this latest monstrosity) set
Jyhad (or Vampire, if you prefer) are game balance and a point-cost
system, where powerful cards have expensive costs associated with them.
Now, Sabbat has shattered the "envelope" and put certain clans on a
higher plane of existence; there is no longer an even playing field. The
Tremere, the Brujah, and the Tzimisce have vaulted to preeminence.
A brief comment on vicissitude: it has too much stealth, too much
aggravated damage, and is too flexible for too little cost. Cards like
Reform Body and Fleshcraft are just the straw that breaks the camel's
back. Comparing the Lasombra to the Tzimisce is a joke! Obtenebration is
weak, with not enough efficient stealth, not enough combat or other cool
effects. Vampires-hah! Dragos (Tz) is absolutely broken: a 7-cap whose
special ability grants him *zero* cost for *any* combat card! Along with
Meshenka who pays a reduced cost for vic. cards, a clear pattern
emerges... In addition, the Tzimisce have ridiculously underpriced
allies such as the War Ghoul
Other broken vampires for the Tremere and Brujah include the popular Ian
Forestal, Reverend Blackwood (Gee, a 6-cap with DOM THA who begs for the
broken TB-WF combo with additional damage), and Jacko, not to mention
the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were
making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the
drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the
initiator??
And of course the Tremere and Brujah ramp up in an extraordinary manner
when you consider the new version of an Art Museum that the Brujah
receive, along with the insanely powerful unique equipment that they get
(not to mention that the Tzimisce also get a clan-specific Sengir
Dagger) relative to any other clan. The Tremere also get a weapon-hoser
in Machine Blitz: now, if they can't block a gun-wielding Toreador or
Ravnos deck, they can counter with x points of damage in return, for a
cost of 1 blood.
Ultimately, the Lasombra are in a similar plight to the Settites: they
have an underpowered signature discipline that could add new spice to
the game, relatively inefficient/unfocused vampires, and not enough
support from the game designers. They even proceeded to make the Festivo
a non-clan specific Master, for goodness' sake!
The designers didn't learn from their mistake with TB from DS: they saw
the need that Malkavians (albeit those without celerity, who are almost
in a minority) had for combat defense, but didn't properly consider that
DOM is a discipline possessed by those combat-mongering, intercepting
Tremere. Well, now with Disarm and Decapitate, POT has gained two new
effective cards that the Brujah can take advantage of besides the
Lasombra.
I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have
missed.
Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad.
I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my
allegiance to the Lasombra.
A depressed Jyhad player,
Sean Whittaker
Malcolm McCallum
You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you
can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it
looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest.
It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and
clans.
Karl Innes
Scott Whittaker wrote:
>
> This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing
> the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now
> mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term
> will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at
> WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not
> yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading
> over the spoiler list was enought for me.
> (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat
> has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the
> cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he
> was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters
> could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that
> in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat
> difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first
> place!?
>
---------------------------------------------------------
Large portion of text cut.
----------------------------------------------------------
> I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have
> missed.
> Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad.
> I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my
> allegiance to the Lasombra.
> A depressed Jyhad player,
> Sean Whittaker
I've only seen a few cards from the new Sabbat expansion, but from the three boosters I've opened and
the few other cards I've seen it looks like WOTC dropped the ball again. I am fortunate in that my play group
doesn't have access to a vast resevoir of cards and those that do prefer variety and fun over competent but
boring strategies.
Unfortunately, some people will be unable to resist using a few of these new cards. It's a shame but I
think WOTC just decided to throw any kind of play balance out the door. ( Our group thought the two tremere
vamps with +1 stealth were underpriced, but now there's a 6 cap vamp Jost werner PRE,AUS,ani with the same
ability!!! And neither the Tremere or the Toreador have Obfuscate as a discipline. At least with Lucretia it
was clan-justified. I happen to like playing Gangrel from time to time, now there is a Sabbat Gangrel with
ANI,PRO,dom,aus at a cost of 5,... AND SHES A BISHOP!!!!!! What kind of drugs are the playtesters at WOTC
smoking????
Suffice it to say that after rediscovering how fun Jyhad was, after years of magic the addiction, I
find that WOTC has decided to turn Jyhad into another meat grinding money maker. Perhaps we were better off
when Jyhad was ignored.
A frustrated player, Karl
Jeff Merriman
Sean...
Thanks for your comments, you are RIGHT ON! Nothing like a real JYHAD
game is there?
Good luck,
Jeff
Scott Whittaker wrote:
>
> This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing
> the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now
> mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term
> will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at
> WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not
> yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading
> over the spoiler list was enought for me.
> (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat
> has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the
> cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he
> was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters
> could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that
> in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat
> difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first
> place!?
Scott Whittaker
Karl Innes wrote:
>
> Suffice it to say that after rediscovering how fun Jyhad was, after years of magic the addiction, I
> find that WOTC has decided to turn Jyhad into another meat grinding money maker. Perhaps we were better off
> when Jyhad was ignored.
>
> A frustrated player, Karl
I concur with your last statement. Just last week, one of my best
friends, who like myself has played Jyhad from the beginning, commented
that he was more than happy to wait a *long* time for a new expansion
(Sabbat, in this case), just to ensure high quality. But of course now
we have this product that was supposedly was playtested and developed
for a year [yeah, right!].
I guess Magic munchkins are now in charge of Jyhad too,
another frustrated player now working on an alternative Sabbat
expansion,
Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker
CurtAdams
Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker writes:
>I concur with your last statement. Just last week, one of my best
>friends, who like myself has played Jyhad from the beginning, commented
>that he was more than happy to wait a *long* time for a new expansion
>(Sabbat, in this case), just to ensure high quality. But of course now
>we have this product that was supposedly was playtested and developed
>for a year [yeah, right!].
It looks like there were some playtesting defects in Sabbat, but there are
fundamental design changes as well. The 2 biggest are the surrender of
the vampire point costing system and the increasing reliance on high-cost
high-effect cards. Improper playtesting can generally be fixed by banning
the accaisional broken card, but you can't ban every cheap vampire or all
the high-cost combat cards - you'd take out too much of the set.
Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
Scott Whittaker
Although your point that *we* should playtest it might be valid-although
I refuse to buy the cards-it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the
list and see problems that apparently the design team ignored or were
ignorant of (a scary thought, that). Equally, your final statement is
both unsupported and largely irrelevant: previous problems are *nothing*
compared to the can o' worms that the Sabbat has opened up.
Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker
Thomas Doehne
In article <Pine.BSI.3.91.961029...@tubby.pacificcoast.net>
>You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you
>can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it
>looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest.
It's easy to see problems if you look at it through the lens of
game theory. For instance, there are three chief strategies,
and several counters for each. They are/were nicely balanced,
with the exception of a few problem cards like Thoughts Betrayed
and Return to Innocence.
Something that breaks one of the strategies, or one of the defensive
strategies, will break part of the game. For instance, Thoughts
Betrayed breaks combat, while S:Combat Ends does not -- there
are a few counters to S:CE, but none to Thoughts Betrayed except
equipment. It is a trump card.
For a more recent example, take Walk through Arcadia. It completely
nullifies the Intercept defense for Malk bleed. Before, you
at least had a chance, but now only two of the three main defenses
(rush, deflection, and block) are available. Of course, this
won't bother most CL groups, because they've informally banned
Malk Bleed. (As I posted elsewhere, Change of Target keeps the
'failure' mode of the card from allowing interception.) Note
that Toreador Grand Ball is similarly broken, but for the
intercept defense to a Toreador Vote deck. (And, the Grand
Ball is a master that costs pool, so it's a bit harder to
use.)
>It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and
>clans.
It had a handful of problem cards, and no lopsided clans, with
perhaps the exception of weak Nosferatu. And, if you're playing
CL, S&B is advantaged. There were very few power rares, too.
--
Tom Doehne
doe...@cse.ogi.edu
rit...@bbs.cruzio.com
In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes:
> Malcolm McCallum wrote:
> >
> > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you
> > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it
> > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest.
> >
> > clans.
>
> I refuse to buy the cards-it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the
> list and see problems that apparently the design team ignored or were
> ignorant of (a scary thought, that). Equally, your final statement is
> both unsupported and largely irrelevant: previous problems are *nothing*
> compared to the can o' worms that the Sabbat has opened up.
>
> Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker
You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's
statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'.
Right.
This is up there with the guy who, after asking, with exclamation
points "Why can't you see this card is broken!?", said that someone else
didn't have to be so offensive.
If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved has
degenerated into, maybe the game is dead.
Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up
and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In
Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a
more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently.
Ritaxis
Anonymous
>> This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing
>> the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now
>> mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term
>> will do)
WHY???? In what way is the sabbat expansion broken? barring a few powerful
cards (but not game breakingly powerful cards, mind you) I can't see any
reason why the set is broken!
>> and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at
>> WotC have brought us.
what direction would that be? do you object to having the game expanded full
stop?
>> Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not
>> yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading
>> over the spoiler list was enought for me.
I would have thought that playing the game would be required before any
judgements can be made. There are also a few badly worded cards that seem a
bit powerful, and then when you read them properly and see how the card
actually plays, its not so bad (That celerity one with the X additional
strikes is a good example) Perhaps you have misinterpreted, as we did, many
of the cards on the cardlist and think, mistakenly, that there are a lot of
over powered cards.
>> (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat
>> has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the
>> cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he
>> was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters
>> could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that
>> in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat
>> difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first
>> place!?
>> I mean, the two qualitiess that have always (until the two expansions
>> started to gnaw at the foundations, and this latest monstrosity) set
>> Jyhad (or Vampire, if you prefer) are game balance and a point-cost
>> system, where powerful cards have expensive costs associated with them.
>> Now, Sabbat has shattered the "envelope" and put certain clans on a
>> higher plane of existence; there is no longer an even playing field. The
>> Tremere, the Brujah, and the Tzimisce have vaulted to preeminence.
This isn't too bad a point, but I think that ancient hearts left the gangrel
a bit unbalanced, and the brujah are now brought in to line. lets face it
though - you're still talking about the combat clans - just because a clan
is specifically designed for combat (as the four mentioned clans
have)doesn't mean that its over powered - there are still as many ways to
avoid combat as before (even more S:CE's available, more stealth). I can't
see a well constructed vote or bleed deck having too much of a problem with
these extra potent combat clans, you pretty much have to expect to loose a
vampire to a combat deck (unless you are a combat deck yourself) unless you
have a fist full of combat avoidance.
>> A brief comment on vicissitude: it has too much stealth, too much
>> aggravated damage, and is too flexible for too little cost. Cards like
>> Reform Body and Fleshcraft are just the straw that breaks the camel's
>> back.
I don't think Vicissitude is as good as you think. its good at killing
non combat vamps, but those fleshcraft type strikes are very difficult to
use, I found. The stealth isn't that bad - its still no obfusctate, and not
really as good a protean! Lets face it, the Tzimisce's two other clan
disciplines mean that it is pretty much limited to intercept combat, so Vic
could do with being a combat discipline. As for the stealth, I would have
thought that it goes without saying that vic would get some stealth - and
it's not got an overpowering amount, IMO. I would say that Vic is like an
inferior protean for the most part, but "With knobs on" if you include cards
like fleshcraft (which is surprisingly difficult to use!)
>> Comparing the Lasombra to the Tzimisce is a joke! Obtenebration is
>> weak, with not enough efficient stealth, not enough combat or other cool
>> effects. Vampires-hah! Dragos (Tz) is absolutely broken: a 7-cap whose
>> special ability grants him *zero* cost for *any* combat card!
He, however, is just one in the many vampire in the set. He is perhaps a bit
powerful, but then so can carlotta, or Muaziz be considered as such in the
other sets... The Tzimisce got luck - this time!
>> Along with Meshenka who pays a reduced cost for vic. cards,
Thats not too powerful, surely?
>> a clear pattern emerges...
which is?
>> In addition, the Tzimisce have ridiculously underpriced
>> allies such as the War Ghoul
Not seen this in play - the special action is 0 strealth, though, and will
probably be blocked and the ghoul killed by most decks (perhaps at a cost,
but even still). The ghould has no combat "control" abilities (such as the
garou's manouver and additional strike) and will probably end up burnt!
>> Other broken vampires for the Tremere and Brujah include the popular Ian
>> Forestal, Reverend Blackwood (Gee, a 6-cap with DOM THA who begs for the
>> broken TB-WF combo with additional damage)
TB is broken whatever, its bad evough with tom thorne! Just ban it!
>>, and Jacko, not to mention
>> the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were
>> making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the
>> drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the
>> initiator??
Most people won't put him in, or perhaps put him in to bring out only if
someone else brings him out - 4 blood is a lot to loose! (a 4 cap with his
abilities isn't hugely overpowered - he'll get beaten up by a combat deck
fairly easily as he has only four blood on him.
>> And of course the Tremere and Brujah ramp up in an extraordinary manner
>> when you consider the new version of an Art Museum that the Brujah
>> receive, along with the insanely powerful unique equipment that they get
>> (not to mention that the Tzimisce also get a clan-specific Sengir
>> Dagger) relative to any other clan.
Why is this any different to what the assamites got - and they've got
celerity! I haven't enountered any Brujah equipment that is game breaking,
yet.
>> The Tremere also get a weapon-hoser
>> in Machine Blitz: now, if they can't block a gun-wielding Toreador or
>> Ravnos deck, they can counter with x points of damage in return, for a
>> cost of 1 blood.
that one blood could put them in torpor, and the Toreador, having celerity,
anre a lot better at controlling the combat than the tremere, so it'll
probably be on their terms, so perhaps an anti gun card isn't that bad - it
gives the tremere (as a primary combat clan) an edge over a clan that is not
primarily a combat clan.
>> Ultimately, the Lasombra are in a similar plight to the Settites: they
>> have an underpowered signature discipline that could add new spice to
>> the game, relatively inefficient/unfocused vampires, and not enough
>> support from the game designers.
This is a good point, however the settites (arguably) and the Giovanni were
fairly useless when they came out at first (If you don't think the giovanni
are good then add them to the Lassombra and they gain an additional bit of
stealth and combat, that can't be bad, can it). If WotC need an Idea for a
new expansion, they could make a "Masters of secrets" (or perhaps a slightly
less corny name) set that brings the Giovanni, settites and Lasombra up to
speed with the rest of them.
>> Well, now with Disarm and Decapitate, POT has gained two new
>> effective cards that the Brujah can take advantage of besides the
>> Lasombra.
They're not too deadly. I don't see the problem.
>> I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have
>> missed.
>> Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad.
>> I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my
>> allegiance to the Lasombra.
>> A depressed Jyhad player,
>> Sean Whittaker
I don't see what your problem is. please inform me.
Scott Whittaker
rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote:
>
> In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes:
> > Malcolm McCallum wrote:
> > >
> > > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you
> > > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it
> > > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest.
> > >
> > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and
> > > clans.
>
> You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's
> statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'.
>
> Right.
someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original
game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe
there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence
for his opinion.
>
>
> Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up
> and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In
> Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a
> more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently.
Thank you, but I would never submit myself to the chaotic mayhem that
Magic has become. I have spent several hours the past week reading the
spoilers and discussin the expansion with the people I play with , and
we all unanimously decided not to integrate Sabbat cards with Jyhad.
This was not an unimformed decision; nor was it a hasty one. I still
might like to simply watch other people play Sabbat by itself, or look
at some of the cool pictures, but that's it. I firmly believe that
there are more than ten broken cards in this set (including vampires),
and that many undercosted/overcosted ones as well.
Let me know if you'd like more evidence,
Sean Whittaker
curt...@aol.com
neve...@mind.com (Anonymous)
>>, and Jacko, not to mention
>> the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were
>> making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the
>> drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the
>> initiator??
>Most people won't put him in, or perhaps put him in to bring out only if
>someone else brings him out - 4 blood is a lot to loose! (a 4 cap with
his
>abilities isn't hugely overpowered - he'll get beaten up by a combat deck
>fairly easily as he has only four blood on him.
Well, let's do the math. If not contested, you've gained 1 pool for a POT
CEL deck (I'll ignore him in other decks, as they are more exotic). If
contested, you'll lose at most 4 pool (less if he does something before
going away). So if he's uncontested 4 times for every time he's
contested, you're ahead of the game.
Let's suppose there are 5 players and that each player on average brings
out (or at least chooses from) 5 vampires. That will be 20 opponent
vampires in each game. Jimmy is a good deal if he is contested 1 time in
5; so if 1 out of 100 vampires is Jimmy, he's a good deal. That means
Jimmy will show up at least once in every 8 decks, which is more often
than you see pot-cel.
So, yes, you would want a copy of Jimmy in every pot-cel deck. That's the
hallmark of a broken vampire.
Actually it's even worse than that. Half the time that he's contested,
you'll be the one to bring him out second and you lose nothing!
Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
Algustas
Hi Ritaxis,
On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote:
> You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's
> statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'.
>
>
> Right.
>
> This is up there with the guy who, after asking, with exclamation
> points "Why can't you see this card is broken!?", said that someone else
> didn't have to be so offensive.
>
> If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved has
> degenerated into, maybe the game is dead.
>
>
> Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up
> and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In
> Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a
> more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently.
>
Well, your right, of course. I think the cardback thing did
enourmous damage to this newsgroup, LSJ has not been buying (or playing)
the new cards, so he has been absent from some of the debates that could
really use him. The Corrupter has pretty much picked up that tourch, but
often he sounds like a lone voice of reason in a sea of emotional
responses. A lot of the people chiming in with "this is broken" are
playing 4cl, so of course it's broken....
Anyway, it's nice to see you posting here again :)
Algustas
*****The powers of ordinary men are circumscribed by the everyday worlds
in which they live, yet even in these rounds of job, family, and
neighborhood they often seem driven by forces they can neither understand
or govern.***** C. Wright Mills, the Power Elite
Algustas
Hi Scott,
On Mon, 4 Nov 1996, Scott Whittaker wrote:
> rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes:
> > > Malcolm McCallum wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you
> > > > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it
> > > > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest.
> > > >
> > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and
> > > > clans.
> [snip my previous remarks]
> >
> > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's
> > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'.
> >
> > Right.
> Hold it right there. My comment is accurate as far as it goes. When
> someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original
> game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe
> there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence
> for his opinion.
I am reminded of one of my favorite old Nixon tricks, where you
erase your comments, then accuse someone of taking them out of context...
In general, your arguments will carry more weight if you don't
delete the part someone is responding to :)
Algustas
*****Commanders of powers unwequalled in human history, they have
succeded within the American system of organized irresponsibility.*****
C. Wright Mills
Scott Whittaker
Algustas wrote:
> > > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and
> > > > > clans.
> > [snip my previous remarks]
For the record, I stated that Sabbat is much more unbalancing and
dangerous to the game than Jyhad/Vampire ever was. I commented that
Sabbat opens a whole new can o' worms.
> > >
> > > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's
> > > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'.
> > >
> > > Right.
> > Hold it right there. My comment is accurate as far as it goes. When
> > someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original
> > game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe
> > there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence
> > for his opinion.
Then, I said that I had decided not to purchase the new cards because I
didn't think they would create a fair playing field; I was then attacked
for being ignorant. I daresay that studying the spoiler list for several
hours before writing about the new set, my views can be categorized as
irrelevant...
> I am reminded of one of my favorite old Nixon tricks, where you
> erase your comments, then accuse someone of taking them out of context...
> In general, your arguments will carry more weight if you don't
> delete the part someone is responding to :)
I was not doing so; this thread is becoming slightly garbled in
translation. Please don't compare anyone to Nixon; them's fighting
words:)
L. Scott Johnson
Algustas <arob...@gladstone.uoregon.edu> writes:
>On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote:
>> Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up
>> and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In
>> Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a
>> more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently.
>>
> Well, your right, of course. I think the cardback thing did
>enourmous damage to this newsgroup, LSJ has not been buying (or playing)
>the new cards, so he has been absent from some of the debates that could
>really use him. The Corrupter has pretty much picked up that tourch, but
>often he sounds like a lone voice of reason in a sea of emotional
>responses. A lot of the people chiming in with "this is broken" are
>playing 4cl, so of course it's broken....
I'm here. I haven't chimed in on the debates because the Corrupter has
done a better job than I could hope to do. I could "me too" his posts,
but that would accomplish nothing (since I have no official capacity
to lend weight to Corrupter's points).
In summary,
I have examined the spoiler list and, with the exception of approximately
half of the vampires and a handful of MtG-style cards (Goth Band, etc.),
most of the cards look interesting and playable.
Most of the broken vampires are simply out of line w.r.t. capacity, and
won't break the game outright (just as Democritus wouldn't break the game
outright if he only had a 7 capacity. 7-Cap Democritus would simply be
broken, as Tom Wylie noted). A few simply break basic paradigms of the
game (like maneuvering during combat, or having card cost mean something),
and cry out for errata or house rules.
More time should've been spent on card texts (uniform templates, saying
"your untap phase" instead of "untap phase", etc.)
If WotC had a representative here reading the group, I'm sure I would feel
like chiming in more often. As it is, I see no point in chasing our tails
after the points have been made.
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Only XT users know that
http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Jan 1, 1980 was a Tuesday.
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
Ray Babbitt
[snip everything]
Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two
superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really
THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two
superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the
basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I
can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing
that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her
out.
Just my .02.
Ray Babbitt
RBab...@Novell.COM
Standard Disclaimer
Samuel Stoddard
Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote:
: [snip everything]
: Just my .02.
: Ray Babbitt
: RBab...@Novell.COM
: Standard Disclaimer
I would agree, if Jimmy was broken then no one would play with him
becasue EVERYONE would play with him so Jimmy would be lost real quickly,
or not played until someone else played Jimmy.
--
+------------Don't open your eyes you won't like what you see,--------------+
+ The devils of truth steal the souls of the free, +
+ Don't open your eyes take it from me, +
+____________I've found you can find happiness in slavery.__Nine Inch Nails_+
Scott Whittaker
Samuel Stoddard wrote:
>
> Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote:
> : [snip everything]
>
> : Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two
> : superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really
> : THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two
> : superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the
> : basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I
> : can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing
> : that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her
> : out.
>
> : Just my .02.
>
> : Ray Babbitt
> : RBab...@Novell.COM
>
> : Standard Disclaimer
>
> I would agree, if Jimmy was broken then no one would play with him
> becasue EVERYONE would play with him so Jimmy would be lost real quickly,
> or not played until someone else played Jimmy.
Do the math. As someone has already pointed out, even if *everyone*
plays a deck that uses cel/pot and has Jimmy in it, the chances are less
than 10% that his special disadvantage will come into play. Meanwhile,
even if it does, you will likely get a number of turns to smoke people
with an extremely undercosted and efficient vampire.
Sean Whittaker
Yousef G Master
Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote:
: [snip everything]
: Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two
: superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really
: THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two
: superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the
: basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I
: can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing
: that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her
: out.
: Just my .02.
Also remember that Catif and Pander suffer for being Catif and Pander
because it exludes them from using any clan specific cards and therefore
further hinders them.
I think the rules on skills (as least for size 1 through 7) are pretty
consistant and make sense.
For size 1 through 4 you pay 1 pool for the vamp and 1 for each skill
Catiff or other negative impact vamps get an extra skill.
For size 5 some vamps were given an extra skill. This makes sense
because it takes 2 turns to get these guys out and represents the very
real transition from small to mid-sized vamps.
I also think it's important to realize that some skills put together are
worse than others and that's why not all 5's have 2 superior and a basic.
For example, I would hate to see sup presence/dominate and sup obfuscate
on a 5.
David Schwartz
Algustas writes:
>> If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved
Hey! What about us Jewish gamers? ;-)
--
________________ ______
___@^^^^\ / \ I break for Craw Wurms! / \
@ \_____/ David Schwartz \__________________________/ >
(^^^^^\ _______ ___/
\---\ / \ da...@schwartz.manawatu.gen.nz /
\_____________/ \__________________________________/
Algustas
Hi David,
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, David Schwartz wrote:
> Algustas writes:
> >> If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved
> ^^^^^^^
> Hey! What about us Jewish gamers? ;-)
>
I've been framed! I was responding to this part...
Algustas
*****Has anyone tryed making coffee with Water Joe?***** Algustas
Justin Grace
In article <56dmhv$5...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Yousef G Master
<mas...@red.seas.upenn.edu> writes
>
>I also think it's important to realize that some skills put together are
>worse than others and that's why not all 5's have 2 superior and a basic.
>For example, I would hate to see sup presence/dominate and sup obfuscate
>on a 5.
Yeah, but sorry to be belligerent, but have you seen the Nosferatu
antitribu Olivia? Bishop; 5 capacity, and with superior obfuscate,
superior potence *and* regular vicissitude!
Now that's Rampages that she can do at stealth, and in combat she can do
body weaponry, fleshcraft, bonecraft, and Horrid Forms, and with
superior potence to back up all that damage, she's phenomenal. And there
are always disguised weapons...(Meat cleavers, Bastard Swords, Bang
Nakhs, Brass Knuckles).
I agree that the game Jyhad has died, but the game V:TES has risen from
the ashes and taken its place. We should play the new game more, if only
out of respect for the old game. (And because the old game had Monocles
of Clarity and Rotschrecks!)
--
Justin Grace