Breaking the Events
Orpheus
During the 2 days of the tournament, I met several Gehenna decks. And I am
now convinced that something must be done. I'm not talking ban here. But a
really playable card that could break an event (maybe just a Gehenna, there
can be one later for Governments), and that can has an alternate use in case
there is no Gehenna (or you don't want to break it).
There might be a restriction of sorts. But there are a number of reasons why
I really find it necessary at that point :
- Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason. I've
been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she was
the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a vamp, or
requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
Anthelios is pure evil :
* Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another Justicar.
In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear before I
had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
* As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one rush
without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is bothersome,
I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell once
a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another minion
comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the game.
- Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2 in
the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time Limit,
players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness, and maybe
the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second game
the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the third
game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a long
time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH Ritual
isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
But maybe my prayers are already fullfilled and there is such a card in 3rd
Edition ? ;-)
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
I'm dead serious ! Well, mostly dead...
Nosferatu_3
I'm with you all the way on this one. I don't mind the events so much
as there is not a playable way to eliminate them. Black hand ritual is
okay, but its non-gehenna use is suspect. I would consider playing with
not-to-be if you could blow up an event already in play with it.
Emergency preparations only has non-Gehenna synergy with fatties and
sucks up you master phase. Not a fair trade to get rid of a discard
phase action. I find veil of darkness to be exceptionally disruptive,
along with blood weakens. Consequently, I rarely put them in my decks,
even imbued. I figure that they are not worth the table hate anyway.
_angst_
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
>
Congratualations :)
> - Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason. I've
> been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she was
> the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a vamp, or
> requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
> Anthelios is pure evil :
>
Yes, It is VERY strong. I see it alot, but I still don't think it's
strong enough to justify a change to it.
> * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another Justicar.
> In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear before I
> had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
Well, sometimes you loose. I don't think this specific example is very
likely to happend. And if it does. Well, shit happends.
> * As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one rush
> without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
> blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is bothersome,
> I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell once
> a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another minion
> comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
> A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the game.
>
A rushing combat deck not playing multiple rushes or stealth for their
rushes won't win any games. I can agree that this would be bothersome
when playing rush but not in anyway broken.
> - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2 in
> the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time Limit,
>
I can agree that it's very tiresome with players playing event decks
without any plan on actually ousting. But we've seen it several times
before without any events involved. Like blocking decks that don't have
any forward pressure, combat decks that only can fight and not inflict
any pool damage. I don't think bad deckbuilding is an argument for
something being to strong.
> players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness,
>
Err, if they can't remember the effect of a card in play they really
deserve the caution. Just like fame, anarch revolt, leandro etc.
> and maybe
> the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second game
> the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the third
> game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a long
> time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
>
I think it's a perfectly viable strategy to create a deck that thrives
in randomness. It's also a very strong one since most other decks
don't. The decks you're talking about, or well, atleast the first one
just seems like a bad deck.
> So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
> find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
> alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH Ritual
> isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
>
You forget mr Jan. His adv version is actually quite good. But face it.
We have 4 cards that kill different events. I don't think not playing
them is an excuse. If you really can't handle events, then just play
them. The only fact that make them less strong than a sudden is the
fact that you don't face events often enough.
Best wishes
Alex Ek
Prince of Gothenburg
FC
I can't say that I have had an experience like that with other events
than Anthelios in tournaments, but then again I don't play a lot of them.
The Red Star, however, have had me raving for months after its release.
The Fear of Mekhet is one thing. Same problem with with Golconda, the
non-unique haven, Sudden Reversals, DIs ... grr .. the list goes on and
it quite frankly feels like that other game.
Imo Anthelios is just too easy. Too hard to stop or remove. I agree with
you there. Nowadays i try to defend myself against Partheons with my own
copies or some anti location tech. Anson can be killed although he might
be slippery.
HOWEVER, Maris is a bitch and if anyone deserves chained Fear of Mekhet
she certainly does. And somehow you managed to win no? congrats :)
Frede
Orpheus
> > I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won.
:-)
> >
> Congratualations :)
Thanks.
> > - Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason.
I've
> > been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she
was
> > the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a
vamp, or
> > requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
> > Anthelios is pure evil :
> >
> Yes, It is VERY strong. I see it alot, but I still don't think it's
> strong enough to justify a change to it.
Strong doesn't bother me. Too strong might. But all other cards can be
countered in a viable way (if nothing alse, Sudden or Direct), even if it
doesn't make them less powerful or "broken". Anthelios doesn't have a viable
hoser yet.
> > * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another
Justicar.
> > In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear
before I
> > had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
>
> Well, sometimes you loose. I don't think this specific example is very
> likely to happend. And if it does. Well, shit happends.
Twice. In a 50+ Championship. How many didn't I meet ? The decktypes are
strong, posted all over forums, and copied by lots of players. Shit falls
like rain.
> > * As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one
rush
> > without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
> > blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is
bothersome,
> > I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell
once
> > a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another
minion
> > comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
> > A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the
game.
> >
>
> A rushing combat deck not playing multiple rushes or stealth for their
> rushes won't win any games. I can agree that this would be bothersome
> when playing rush but not in anyway broken.
The guy in question is one of the best players I know with a fight deck. He
rushed up to three times per turn, at no stealth except for Haven Unco
because he plays Brujahs / !Brujahs. Should he stop playing that clan, when
he succeeds in winning tables on a regular basis, or should he include 12
Not To Be in his well-tuned deck ? Should he forego the For which is the
4rth discipline in his deck, put lots of Mariano Pomposo and Wha Chun-Yen
and include X Black Hand rituals just in the eventuality that someone who
knows how to use Anthelios to its most powerful effect uses a 0-pool cost
Master to hose him ? Or do you have any more reasonnable suggestion I can
propose to him ?
> > - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2
in
> > the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> > tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time
Limit,
> >
> I can agree that it's very tiresome with players playing event decks
> without any plan on actually ousting. But we've seen it several times
> before without any events involved. Like blocking decks that don't have
> any forward pressure, combat decks that only can fight and not inflict
> any pool damage. I don't think bad deckbuilding is an argument for
> something being to strong.
Of course you are right on that precise point, and "random players" is a
bummer. The difference is that we're talking about the actions - or
inactions - of players having consequences on the game. This rarely happened
to me in tournament, because when you can play and talk you can show these
players the consequences of their acts more often than not, if they have a
brain - or another player, a better talker than you, proves soemthing else,
but then he just outplayed you. And if a player is brainless, the rest of
the table can agree to counter him, eventually to the point of ousting him.
This is quite different from non-removable cards in play having uncontrolled
consequences.
> > players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness,
> >
>
> Err, if they can't remember the effect of a card in play they really
> deserve the caution. Just like fame, anarch revolt, leandro etc.
Then I don't deserve my title. I made mistakes too (made lots of them
without the events anyway lol), and I think that a game is hard enough
without having to remember the cumulative effects of Veil of Darkness, Blood
Weakens, Slow Withering and New Inquisition, among others, eventually while
remembering or seeing all the powers and convictions on each hunter. If it's
easy for you, it isn't for me. And it's downright hard for relatively new
players.
> > and maybe
> > the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second
game
> > the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the
third
> > game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a
long
> > time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
> >
> I think it's a perfectly viable strategy to create a deck that thrives
> in randomness. It's also a very strong one since most other decks
> don't. The decks you're talking about, or well, atleast the first one
> just seems like a bad deck.
You're absolutely right, it was bad. It was made by the 2004 french champion
and he won a tournament with it, but it was pure shit (not kidding here). I
really can't draw a conclusion from that... Except that mass Gehenna is
disruptive, and that thriving on randomness sometimes is just... random !!
> > So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
> > find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
> > alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH
Ritual
> > isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
> >
>
> You forget mr Jan. His adv version is actually quite good.
I included him in the best deck I ever made (meaning the one that gave me
the more tournament victories), and he went out because his base version was
just much better, and the merging wasn't worth the place in the crypt. But I
agree that he can be nice in some specific decks. Quite marginal though.
Also, must all crypts be goddamn Ventrue ? Oh no, I forgot, you can also
play AAA...
> But face it.
> We have 4 cards that kill different events. I don't think not playing
> them is an excuse.
Kiss my Râ. What, you don't play Fortitude ? No excuse. Go to torpor, it's a
Rötschreck. You don't play Psyche, don't complain. No BH ritual ? Suck my
Gehenna. Ishtarri Black Hands just became the best combo ever !! Wait..
there aren't any, are there ? ;-)
> If you really can't handle events, then just play
> them.
If you have a good deck that doesn't have 2 Master Phases and Anthelios,
just throw it away and take an AAA. Or put all the useful cards in the
trashbin and put dozens of "magic bullets" in your deck. Sure. Don't want to
be mean, mate, but : _worst_argument_ever_ !!
> The only fact that make them less strong than a sudden is the
> fact that you don't face events often enough.
In 7 games over 2 days, I met events, let me see...
- decks with only Anthelios = 4 or 5
- decks with Unmasking / FBI = 1
- decks with mass events = 2
So that's an average of one per table !!
Of course I could have played a totally different deck, or taken many useful
cards from my deck, just to hose events.
But I didn't, right ? And I'm not even complaining that it made me loose,
because in the end I won.
I'm just saying they are disruptive. And nothing you said here made me
change my point of view yet.
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".
The Drummer, in Planetary.
Orpheus
> than Anthelios in tournaments, but then again I don't play a lot of them.
>
> The Red Star, however, have had me raving for months after its release.
>
> The Fear of Mekhet is one thing. Same problem with with Golconda, the
> non-unique haven, Sudden Reversals, DIs ... grr .. the list goes on and
> it quite frankly feels like that other game.
Absolutely, I didn't put all the things I saw but you're right. In the right
decks Erciyes is nearly as powerful, but a) you depend on what your prey
plays b) it can be suddened and c) it's stealable. So it IS powerful but
nowhere near Anthelios.
> Imo Anthelios is just too easy. Too hard to stop or remove. I agree with
> you there. Nowadays i try to defend myself against Partheons with my own
> copies or some anti location tech. Anson can be killed although he might
> be slippery.
He can, can't he ?
> HOWEVER, Maris is a bitch and if anyone deserves chained Fear of Mekhet
> she certainly does.
loooooooooooooooooooooooool. You're right about that, she's one of the most
abused vamps in the game, along with Arika, Anson and all the A gang (not
talking Aabt here...). What can I tell you, I have no excuse, I wanted to
win ! ;-)
> And somehow you managed to win no? congrats :)
Thanks mate. CR and decklists soon, and already on some french forums for
those who can understand this strange tongue. ;-)
Rehlow
Orpheus wrote:
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
>
> During the 2 days of the tournament, I met several Gehenna decks. And I am
> now convinced that something must be done. I'm not talking ban here. But a
> really playable card that could break an event (maybe just a Gehenna, there
> can be one later for Governments), and that can has an alternate use in case
> there is no Gehenna (or you don't want to break it).
>
Let me see ... You won the French Championship, Gehenna Events are too
strong, from the rest of your post I conclude you did not use Gehenna
Events yourself ... so how are Gehenna Events too strong, they didn't
make the people playing them win???
> There might be a restriction of sorts. But there are a number of reasons why
> I really find it necessary at that point :
>
> - Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason. I've
> been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she was
> the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a vamp, or
> requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
> Anthelios is pure evil :
>
This isn't pure recursion, its more like substitution. You have to
already have a Master Card in hand to switch out for one in the discard
pile. It is powerful because my second Master Phase action can be any
Master Card in my hand or any Master Card in my discard pile. Recursion
has always been strong, its just hard to do.
> * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another Justicar.
> In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear before I
> had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
If you can manage to call a vote and Voter Cap (or some other way to
regain massive amounts of blood each turn) you can keep the Fear of
Mekhet at bay for some time.
> * As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one rush
> without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
> blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is bothersome,
> I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell once
> a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another minion
> comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
As long as the person playing the combo has a Master Card in hand each
turn to swap out for Jake and can give up 2 Master Phase actions a
turn. If you only have 1 vampire in play, 1 Secure Haven stops any
number of rushes. Rampage destroys both Secure Haven and The Parthenon,
that will mess up either set-up. If Anson is fueling the 2nd Master
Phase action, then you'll need 2 rushes and you better make sure Anson
goes down.
> A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the game.
>
Actually it is a 4 card combo -> Anthelios, Anson or The Parthenon or
Rumors of Gehenna, Jake Washington, and a Master Card in hand to swap
out for Jake.
> - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2 in
> the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time Limit,
> players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness, and maybe
> the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second game
> the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the third
> game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a long
> time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
>
I tried playing Gehenna Events here and there before Imbued. After
Imbued several players in my playgroup now also play with Events. We
are getting quiet quick at playing the game with more then 3 Gehenna
Events in play because we are starting to memorize exactly how they
work.
> So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
> find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
> alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH Ritual
> isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
>
> But maybe my prayers are already fullfilled and there is such a card in 3rd
> Edition ? ;-)
>
Later,
~Rehlow
Wolflord
Orpheus wrote:
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
>
again, congratulations
:-)
>
> * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another Justicar.
> In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear before I
> had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
Yippee!! You lean someone in France was playing FoM, and it wasn't me?
Yippeee!! I am not alone!
> - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2 in
> the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> tournament !
Orpheus, have you been sleeping all these years? Ever since they came
out, I'd say there's at least 1 or 2 events on the almost every table
I've ever seen since then.
Usually the Unmasking, Anthelios, Veil of Darkness, ..
And in 90 % of the cases, played in weenie /ally decks
I agree that it's a pitty there is no easy way to remove them, while
they are available to almost everyone.
But I personally think the problem is not in the existence
/non-removability of events as such, but rather very specific events,
and specific effects they have.
I mean, "recalled to the founder is pure hell", only it never hits the
table.
Whereas evereyone playing shambling hordes ord war ghouls, will like,
automatically include an unmasking, and ultiply their chances at
winning by a big lot.
So yeah, I agree some cards are troublesome, but maybe not to such an
extent that they warrant specific countermeasures..
>
> But maybe my prayers are already fullfilled and there is such a card in 3rd
> Edition ? ;-)
>
Well well, your prayers?
Never would have picked you for a religious man!> --
/jo
atomweaver
news:1152639092.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>
> Orpheus wrote:
>>
>> But maybe my prayers are already fullfilled and there is such a card
>> in 3rd Edition ? ;-)
>>
>
>
> Well well, your prayers?
> Never would have picked you for a religious man!> --
...he didn't tell you _What_ he was praying to, did he? <shivers>
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Orpheus
> strong, from the rest of your post I conclude you did not use Gehenna
> Events yourself ... so how are Gehenna Events too strong, they didn't
> make the people playing them win???
looooooooooooool. Hum, can I say something like "I'm so good I don't need a
good deck" ?
No, seriously, I never said they were too strong, just that they were
disruptive. But yes, Anthelios is very strong, and if you go that way : the
first days, 3 of the 5 decks in the Last Chance Qualifier play Anthelios.
Only one deck plays Anthelios in the finals of the FC, but then the decks
simply aren't the "masters" type. The best uses I've seen of Anthelios are
in TGB, Palla Grande and Fattie vote decks. Yes, it is very strong, but
these archetypes were less played on sunday than on saturday, and people
were more cautious of such decks having seen what they did (I, for instance,
could predict which deck possibly played Anthelios / Parthenon / Fear of
Mekhet, and had my...fears confirmed soon enough).
Good enough answer ?
> > There might be a restriction of sorts. But there are a number of reasons
why
> > I really find it necessary at that point :
> >
> > - Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason.
I've
> > been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she
was
> > the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a
vamp, or
> > requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
> > Anthelios is pure evil :
> >
>
> This isn't pure recursion, its more like substitution. You have to
> already have a Master Card in hand to switch out for one in the discard
> pile. It is powerful because my second Master Phase action can be any
> Master Card in my hand or any Master Card in my discard pile. Recursion
> has always been strong, its just hard to do.
Agreed. Some decks used to play Carlotta just for that reason. But really,
in some decks, Anthelios isn't hard to use at all. Anson, Parthenon, Rumors
of Gehenna, Huitzi... Not hard at all really.
> > * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another
Justicar.
> > In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear
before I
> > had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
>
> If you can manage to call a vote and Voter Cap (or some other way to
> regain massive amounts of blood each turn) you can keep the Fear of
> Mekhet at bay for some time.
lol. Sure. You mean I shouldn't try to play vote without Presence ? Shit,
for once I win with something a tad original...
But seriously, when you play enough Masters, Direct is a good option on a
Voter Cap, you know... That or Scalpel Tongue + votes, or Confusion of the
Eye, or... Oh, and did I mention your Direct will be recursive and the Voter
Cap won't ?
> > * As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one
rush
> > without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
> > blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is
bothersome,
> > I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell
once
> > a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another
minion
> > comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
>
> As long as the person playing the combo has a Master Card in hand each
> turn to swap out for Jake and can give up 2 Master Phase actions a
> turn. If you only have 1 vampire in play, 1 Secure Haven stops any
> number of rushes.
If you have only 1 vampire in play, you're not even in what we call here
"Spencer Mode". ;-) One vamp doesn't cut it most of the time.
> Rampage destroys both Secure Haven and The Parthenon,
[pot] (D) Burn any location. If you control the location, this is a +1
stealth action.
Too bad we're not talking about Black Annis...
> that will mess up either set-up. If Anson is fueling the 2nd Master
> Phase action, then you'll need 2 rushes and you better make sure Anson
> goes down.
Thank you for the lesson. You are quite right on paper. And also maybe
neglecting a few (recurring) Master cards like Golconda for example...
> > A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the
game.
> >
>
> Actually it is a 4 card combo -> Anthelios, Anson or The Parthenon or
> Rumors of Gehenna, Jake Washington, and a Master Card in hand to swap
> out for Jake.
Granted. But we're talking about decks that play easily lots of Masters, and
have been thoroughly winning tournaments for years and years ; they just
became a whole lot better with the addition of these 2 cards (Jake also had
a side effect I hope was unintended : make the War Ghoul the best
cost/efficiency/recruit/condition ratio ally in the game, ever, as if it
wasn't too good already).
> > - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2
in
> > the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> > tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time
Limit,
> > players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness, and
maybe
> > the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second
game
> > the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the
third
> > game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a
long
> > time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
> >
>
> I tried playing Gehenna Events here and there before Imbued. After
> Imbued several players in my playgroup now also play with Events. We
> are getting quiet quick at playing the game with more then 3 Gehenna
> Events in play because we are starting to memorize exactly how they
> work.
Good. So you mean each player should play lots of tables with them "just in
case" ? What about the new players who have already much trouble not making
mistakes, should the judge give them game losses on a regular basis, or be
more lenient with them them with the oldbies, on what grounds, in which
proportions ?
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.
Echo
Orpheus
Justicar.
> > In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear
before I
> > had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
>
> Yippee!! You lean someone in France was playing FoM, and it wasn't me?
> Yippeee!! I am not alone!
lol. Actually it sees some play.
> > - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2
in
> > the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> > tournament !
>
> Orpheus, have you been sleeping all these years?
I WISH !!! I'm sooooo tired mate ! lol.
> Ever since they came
> out, I'd say there's at least 1 or 2 events on the almost every table
> I've ever seen since then.
> Usually the Unmasking, Anthelios,
Agreed.
> Veil of Darkness, ..
Only saw it in mass gehenna decks.
> And in 90 % of the cases, played in weenie /ally decks
If you talk about the later, sure. We know which decks play Anthelios.
Allies play Unmasking + FBI. Some intercept decks play Marisa Fletcher. Some
fighters (including Shamblings and Tupdogs) might play Dragonbound. Some
indies might play Rise of the Nephtali, and Fueled seems to be made for
Enkidu. See, learned my lesson. ;-)
> I agree that it's a pitty there is no easy way to remove them, while
> they are available to almost everyone.
It is the only point I want to make with this post.
> But I personally think the problem is not in the existence
> /non-removability of events as such, but rather very specific events,
> and specific effects they have.
I hear you.
> I mean, "recalled to the founder is pure hell", only it never hits the
> table.
You never play Necro, do you ? B)
> Whereas evereyone playing shambling hordes ord war ghouls, will like,
> automatically include an unmasking, and ultiply their chances at
> winning by a big lot.
Of course. As will Imbued.
> So yeah, I agree some cards are troublesome, but maybe not to such an
> extent that they warrant specific countermeasures..
I never proposed such a thing. But I'd say the complaints about events,
emanating from various people, tned to be divided in two categories : broken
= Anthelios, disruptive = Veil of Darkness and a whole bunch of others.
> > But maybe my prayers are already fullfilled and there is such a card in
3rd
> > Edition ? ;-)
>
> Well well, your prayers?
> Never would have picked you for a religious man!> --
>
> /jo
MUHAHAHAHAHA !!
Atom Weaver got that part right. B]
BTW, anyone got another virgin to sacrifice ? It becomes a hard thing to
find here, especially in the cities where Reyda roams...
--
Orpheus
-------------------
"- You got married ?
- Yes.
- Why ?
- Why do people get married ?
- Passive aggressive neurosis."
Matt Murdock and Natasha Romanovna
Slytherin
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
Congrats. Hope the deck decisions didn't take too much time away
watching the footy :) (as we discussed on JOL)
I've been thinking of a non-wallpaper card to put in a deck which
enables you to get rid of Events as well.
We have Cards to get rid of Locations (Arson...), Weapons (Peace
Treaty, Illegal Search...) and Minions (Kindred Seg, PTO...) but
nothing that really target a non-minion, non-location, non-weapon
permanent.
I thought that another political card would be good. Something along
the lines of
Destroy Permanent
Political Action
This card is worth one vote.
Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
Choose any non-minion, non-location, non-weapon permanent in play.
Successful referendum burns that permanent. If the permanent is an
Event, all Imbued get a sub referendum, and have 1 vote in that. Treat
this in the same way a a Prisci sub-referendum, with the same outcome.
This, therefore has other uses (burn non-location masters, laptop
computers, etc) but doesn't completely hose an Imbued decks opportunity
to protect events they want to play (although it may be hard for them,
they have some votes to help stop it).
In a political deck, this card could be very useful, but in a
non-political deck, it does give the option of attempting to get rid of
the events by pulling a deal or two. And you could always pitch it in
another referendum if you want.
Just an Idea
Andy
VEKN Setite Ruler of Cambridge
XZealot
....and it allows Arika to get rid of being Famous.
....and it gets rid of Dragonbound
....and it gets rid of Path of Lilith
Seems to hose combat ousting mechanisms way, way too much.
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Orpheus
> > I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won.
:-)
>
> Congrats. Hope the deck decisions didn't take too much time away
> watching the footy :) (as we discussed on JOL)
Did we ? Well, I don't like soccer so it didn't matter ! And deck decisions
were very, very hard, I'm of the undecided type ! ;-) I owe to a friend, who
sent me the statistics of our local league, and I saw that only 2 of the
decks I played this year weren't pure shite ! looool.
> I've been thinking of a non-wallpaper card to put in a deck which
> enables you to get rid of Events as well.
Good !
> We have Cards to get rid of Locations (Arson...), Weapons (Peace
> Treaty, Illegal Search...) and Minions (Kindred Seg, PTO...) but
> nothing that really target a non-minion, non-location, non-weapon
> permanent.
>
> I thought that another political card would be good. Something along
> the lines of
>
> Destroy Permanent
> Political Action
> This card is worth one vote.
> Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
> Choose any non-minion, non-location, non-weapon permanent in play.
A little complicated in wording. I'm not sure the fact that it can target
permanent Masters is a good thing - there is, after all, Sudden Reversal.
> Successful referendum burns that permanent. If the permanent is an
> Event, all Imbued get a sub referendum, and have 1 vote in that.
Maybe "all mortal allies" ?
> Treat
> this in the same way a a Prisci sub-referendum, with the same outcome.
3 votes ?
> This, therefore has other uses (burn non-location masters, laptop
> computers, etc) but doesn't completely hose an Imbued decks opportunity
> to protect events they want to play (although it may be hard for them,
> they have some votes to help stop it).
Yes they do !
> In a political deck, this card could be very useful, but in a
> non-political deck, it does give the option of attempting to get rid of
> the events by pulling a deal or two. And you could always pitch it in
> another referendum if you want.
>
> Just an Idea
Not a bad one in my book, Andy. Of course, there would have to be another
type of hoser for non-voters. I hate it when some unbalanced cards "force
you" to play such or such (Camarilla because of PTO, Fortitude for Kiss or
Rā, etc).
Thanks for the constructive input,
_angst_
> Orpheus wrote:
>
> Strong doesn't bother me. Too strong might. But all other cards can be
> countered in a viable way (if nothing alse, Sudden or Direct), even if it
> doesn't make them less powerful or "broken". Anthelios doesn't have a viable
> hoser yet.
>
What I don't get here is why cards like emergency preparations and not
to be don't count as viable hosers. They are imo.
>
> Twice. In a 50+ Championship. How many didn't I meet ? The decktypes are
> strong, posted all over forums, and copied by lots of players. Shit falls
> like rain.
>
That's just plain bad luck mate :)
But yes, they are very strong. But as you said, strong isn't enough for
a change being neccessary.
>
> The guy in question is one of the best players I know with a fight deck. He
> rushed up to three times per turn, at no stealth except for Haven Unco
> because he plays Brujahs / !Brujahs. Should he stop playing that clan, when
> he succeeds in winning tables on a regular basis, or should he include 12
> Not To Be in his well-tuned deck ? Should he forego the For which is the
> 4rth discipline in his deck, put lots of Mariano Pomposo and Wha Chun-Yen
> and include X Black Hand rituals just in the eventuality that someone who
> knows how to use Anthelios to its most powerful effect uses a 0-pool cost
> Master to hose him ? Or do you have any more reasonnable suggestion I can
> propose to him ?
>
If he rushes 2-3 times in a round then jake won't really be a problem,
will he? Yes, he will hose one rush, but the rest will end up were
they're targeted at. It seems to me that he don't have to change his
deck at all.
>
> Of course you are right on that precise point, and "random players" is a
> bummer. The difference is that we're talking about the actions - or
> inactions - of players having consequences on the game. This rarely happened
> to me in tournament, because when you can play and talk you can show these
> players the consequences of their acts more often than not, if they have a
> brain - or another player, a better talker than you, proves soemthing else,
> but then he just outplayed you. And if a player is brainless, the rest of
> the table can agree to counter him, eventually to the point of ousting him.
>
> This is quite different from non-removable cards in play having uncontrolled
> consequences.
>
Yes, I can agree that a player playing events without the skillz to
master it will be destructive for the game. But the thing is that there
always will be someone benefitting from his events. Thus hopefully
learning him that lesson.
And as soon as he gets ousted, the events will go away, never to be
seen again.
>
> Then I don't deserve my title. I made mistakes too (made lots of them
> without the events anyway lol), and I think that a game is hard enough
> without having to remember the cumulative effects of Veil of Darkness, Blood
> Weakens, Slow Withering and New Inquisition, among others, eventually while
> remembering or seeing all the powers and convictions on each hunter. If it's
> easy for you, it isn't for me. And it's downright hard for relatively new
> players.
>
Yes, everyone makes mistakes. I'm not perfect either. But I don't think
it's a good argument to use. Since the fact is that everyone should
know the rules good enough not to make these mistakes.
>
> You're absolutely right, it was bad. It was made by the 2004 french champion
> and he won a tournament with it, but it was pure shit (not kidding here). I
> really can't draw a conclusion from that... Except that mass Gehenna is
> disruptive, and that thriving on randomness sometimes is just... random !!
>
Yes I agree. It might be random. But it might also be perfectly
controlled. Most decks can be disruptive and random depending on the
player playing it. But I think that it is quite possible to do a deck
that thrives on the "randomness" generated by the events.
>
> I included him in the best deck I ever made (meaning the one that gave me
> the more tournament victories), and he went out because his base version was
> just much better, and the merging wasn't worth the place in the crypt. But I
> agree that he can be nice in some specific decks. Quite marginal though.
>
> Also, must all crypts be goddamn Ventrue ? Oh no, I forgot, you can also
> play AAA...
>
Yes, you can always play that....
> Kiss my Râ. What, you don't play Fortitude ? No excuse. Go to torpor, it's a
> Rötschreck. You don't play Psyche, don't complain. No BH ritual ? Suck my
> Gehenna. Ishtarri Black Hands just became the best combo ever !! Wait..
> there aren't any, are there ? ;-)
>
Yes, I think this grasps my point perfectly. You won't be able to
handle everything. And when you face that thing you can't handle. Then
you can't do much about it. But in a normal tourney this will happend
1/3 rounds. Thus leaving you the oppertunity to get 2 gw and get to the
finals.
> > If you really can't handle events, then just play
> > them.
>
> If you have a good deck that doesn't have 2 Master Phases and Anthelios,
> just throw it away and take an AAA. Or put all the useful cards in the
> trashbin and put dozens of "magic bullets" in your deck. Sure. Don't want to
> be mean, mate, but : _worst_argument_ever_ !!
>
It's not an argument really, more of a fact. It's the only thing you
can do if you really can't handle something. Like imbued stacking
suddens and their own copy of smiling jack just to get rid of him.
>
> In 7 games over 2 days, I met events, let me see...
>
> - decks with only Anthelios = 4 or 5
> - decks with Unmasking / FBI = 1
> - decks with mass events = 2
>
> So that's an average of one per table !!
>
Seems to me that not to be would be a quite good master for your deck
:)
> Of course I could have played a totally different deck, or taken many useful
> cards from my deck, just to hose events.
>
> But I didn't, right ? And I'm not even complaining that it made me loose,
> because in the end I won.
>
> I'm just saying they are disruptive. And nothing you said here made me
> change my point of view yet.
>
Discussions are not about changing someones point of view, it's about
informing them about different views. I'm not trying to convince you
about anything, I'm just trying to say that I don't fully agree with
you.
Best wishes
Alex Ek
Prince of Gothenburg, Sweden
Orpheus
> > Political Action
> > This card is worth one vote.
> > Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
> > Choose any non-minion, non-location, non-weapon permanent in play.
> > Successful referendum burns that permanent. If the permanent is an
> > Event, all Imbued get a sub referendum, and have 1 vote in that. Treat
> > this in the same way a a Prisci sub-referendum, with the same outcome.
> >
> > This, therefore has other uses (burn non-location masters, laptop
> > computers, etc) but doesn't completely hose an Imbued decks opportunity
> > to protect events they want to play (although it may be hard for them,
> > they have some votes to help stop it).
> >
> > In a political deck, this card could be very useful, but in a
> > non-political deck, it does give the option of attempting to get rid of
> > the events by pulling a deal or two. And you could always pitch it in
> > another referendum if you want.
>
> ....and it allows Arika to get rid of being Famous.
She already does that with Golconda. But yes. I don't think it should be
able to burn Masters.
> ....and it gets rid of Dragonbound
That's sort of the point : getting rid of an event. Could be that one or
another. Are you proposing a solution which could designate some Gehenna
rather than others ?
> ....and it gets rid of Path of Lilith
Anyone can get rid of it with a cardless D action, which might be why it's
so seldom seen on the tables. So it really wouldn't be very interesting.
But destroying a Blood Doll might...
> Seems to hose combat ousting mechanisms way, way too much.
Just the possibility of destroying Dragonbound ?
Certainly no more than recurring Jack.
Orpheus
to be don't count as viable hosers. They are imo.
Ok. Both take precious Master slots. Emergency Prep requires 2 Gehennas, and
is otherwise useful for untapping above 7 guys. It also takes a MPA. If
anything, it can be played in decks using Anthelios + let's say Blood Trade
and it will make those decks even better, and safe from Unmasking,
Dragonbound... Now, you won't include 2 Gehennas and a number of Masters
"just for fun" in any type of deck.
As for Not To Be, you must have it in hand to counter the Gehenna. Players
usually play an average of, let's say 14-20 masters, and both your prey and
pred and maybe a bothersome "ally" will play Masters that you don't want
them to. And already it's sometimes hard to see your hand reduced by Masters
OOT. Events can be very bothersome as most of them affect the whole table,
but outside of mass-events decks very few will be played. Let's say if
you're unlucky your table will include 4-6 of the most useful ones, and
there probably only willd be 1-2 (Anthelios or Unmasking + FBI - non
Gehenna - are the most frequent in my experience). So you will use slots in
your deck and your hand for something you might have no use for at all !
Which is why some of us believe that new cards with alternative uses are
needed.
> Twice. In a 50+ Championship. How many didn't I meet ? The decktypes are
> strong, posted all over forums, and copied by lots of players. Shit falls
> like rain.
> That's just plain bad luck mate :)
lol
> But yes, they are very strong. But as you said, strong isn't enough for
> a change being neccessary.
Sure. But strong and not counterable in any satisfying way requires changes
IMHO.
(snip the part about the rusher ; I'm not him ; but I can assure you that he
was hosed by that combo, + of course the other ways to survive rushes : Jake
was just too much on top of the rest).
> Of course you are right on that precise point, and "random players" is a
> bummer. The difference is that we're talking about the actions - or
> inactions - of players having consequences on the game. This rarely
happened
> to me in tournament, because when you can play and talk you can show these
> players the consequences of their acts more often than not, if they have a
> brain - or another player, a better talker than you, proves soemthing
else,
> but then he just outplayed you. And if a player is brainless, the rest of
> the table can agree to counter him, eventually to the point of ousting
him.
>
> This is quite different from non-removable cards in play having
uncontrolled
> consequences.
>
> Yes, I can agree that a player playing events without the skillz to
master it will be destructive for the game. But the thing is that there
always will be someone benefitting from his events. Thus hopefully
learning him that lesson.
And ruining games in the meantime.
> And as soon as he gets ousted, the events will go away, never to be
seen again.
Which makes players want to oust their pred or even crosstable ally. Neat.
> Then I don't deserve my title. I made mistakes too (made lots of them
> without the events anyway lol), and I think that a game is hard enough
> without having to remember the cumulative effects of Veil of Darkness,
Blood
> Weakens, Slow Withering and New Inquisition, among others, eventually
while
> remembering or seeing all the powers and convictions on each hunter. If
it's
> easy for you, it isn't for me. And it's downright hard for relatively new
> players.
>
> Yes, everyone makes mistakes. I'm not perfect either. But I don't think
it's a good argument to use. Since the fact is that everyone should
know the rules good enough not to make these mistakes.
Know the rules and not make any mistake when cards push you towards them are
two whole different issues in my book.
> You're absolutely right, it was bad. It was made by the 2004 french
champion
> and he won a tournament with it, but it was pure shit (not kidding here).
I
> really can't draw a conclusion from that... Except that mass Gehenna is
> disruptive, and that thriving on randomness sometimes is just... random !!
>
> Yes I agree. It might be random. But it might also be perfectly
controlled.
How do you control a Veil of Darkness ?
> Most decks can be disruptive and random depending on the
player playing it. But I think that it is quite possible to do a deck
that thrives on the "randomness" generated by the events.
Yes, this is called an Imbued deck. See the numerous flame posts about
Imbued using Mass Gehennas.
> I included him in the best deck I ever made (meaning the one that gave me
> the more tournament victories), and he went out because his base version
was
> just much better, and the merging wasn't worth the place in the crypt. But
I
> agree that he can be nice in some specific decks. Quite marginal though.
>
> Also, must all crypts be goddamn Ventrue ? Oh no, I forgot, you can also
> play AAA...
>
> Yes, you can always play that....
Like everyone else ? No thanks.
> Kiss my Râ. What, you don't play Fortitude ? No excuse. Go to torpor, it's
a
> Rötschreck. You don't play Psyche, don't complain. No BH ritual ? Suck my
> Gehenna. Ishtarri Black Hands just became the best combo ever !! Wait..
> there aren't any, are there ? ;-)
>
> Yes, I think this grasps my point perfectly. You won't be able to
handle everything. And when you face that thing you can't handle. Then
you can't do much about it. But in a normal tourney this will happend
1/3 rounds. Thus leaving you the oppertunity to get 2 gw and get to the
finals.
There are now a number of Gehennas or events that are often played, and
being able to play a good counter-card without filling your deck with
otherwise useless junk should be an option.
> > If you really can't handle events, then just play
> > them.
>
> If you have a good deck that doesn't have 2 Master Phases and Anthelios,
> just throw it away and take an AAA. Or put all the useful cards in the
> trashbin and put dozens of "magic bullets" in your deck. Sure. Don't want
to
> be mean, mate, but : _worst_argument_ever_ !!
>
> It's not an argument really, more of a fact. It's the only thing you
can do if you really can't handle something. Like imbued stacking
suddens and their own copy of smiling jack just to get rid of him.
You mean "I don't want Anthelios in play so I play it" ? Doesn't work lol.
And your example isn't great either, as if a "normal" Smiling deck really
wants to play his card he'll just burn yours, and probably has the fighting
means to do it. Suddens are the usual way of countering Masters. I'm just
looking for an equivalent way to counter Events.
> In 7 games over 2 days, I met events, let me see...
>
> - decks with only Anthelios = 4 or 5
> - decks with Unmasking / FBI = 1
> - decks with mass events = 2
>
> So that's an average of one per table !!
>
> Seems to me that not to be would be a quite good master for your deck :)
lol. Certainly not. But for the tables I have been on maybe. Except that I
would have to play enough to "not be", for example, that bothering Unmasking
in the first turns. And my deck would suck eggs.
> Of course I could have played a totally different deck, or taken many
useful
> cards from my deck, just to hose events.
>
> But I didn't, right ? And I'm not even complaining that it made me loose,
> because in the end I won.
>
> I'm just saying they are disruptive. And nothing you said here made me
> change my point of view yet.
>
> Discussions are not about changing someones point of view, it's about
informing them about different views. I'm not trying to convince you
about anything, I'm just trying to say that I don't fully agree with
you.
Understood and accepted. ;) I hope this discussion also makes my point
clearer to you.
as...@hotmail.com
Orpheus skrev:
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
Congrats!
> - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2 in
> the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time Limit,
> players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness, and maybe
> the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second game
> the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the third
> game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a long
> time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
Well, I guess this is the way WW (LSJ) wants us to play the game
nowadays, with lots of effects affecting the whole table, everybodies
decks distrupted, nobody having fun, games always going to time limit
and so on. God knows why though.
Orpheus
>
> > I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won.
:-)
>
> Congrats!
Thanks mate.
> > - Other events are played massively, and more so since Imbued. I met 2
in
> > the prelims on the day of the FC, as opposed to : never before in a big
> > tournament ! The bad consequences were : games going closer to Time
Limit,
> > players getting warning upon warning because of Veil of Darkness, and
maybe
> > the worst consequence : randomness all over the place !! In my second
game
> > the deck (no imbued) is just plain disruptive and doesn't win ; in the
third
> > game the deck (imbued) is bothering everyone, locking the game for a
long
> > time, and then dies and things can go much faster.
>
> Well, I guess this is the way WW (LSJ) wants us to play the game
> nowadays, with lots of effects affecting the whole table, everybodies
> decks distrupted, nobody having fun, games always going to time limit
> and so on. God knows why though.
lol. Hopefully not !! When VTES becomes totally random, I'll play dice
instead. Much cheaper.
XZealot
Orpheus wrote:
> > > Destroy Permanent
> > > Political Action
> > > This card is worth one vote.
> > > Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
> > > Choose any non-minion, non-location, non-weapon permanent in play.
> > > Successful referendum burns that permanent. If the permanent is an
> > > Event, all Imbued get a sub referendum, and have 1 vote in that. Treat
> > > this in the same way a a Prisci sub-referendum, with the same outcome.
> > >
> > > This, therefore has other uses (burn non-location masters, laptop
> > > computers, etc) but doesn't completely hose an Imbued decks opportunity
> > > to protect events they want to play (although it may be hard for them,
> > > they have some votes to help stop it).
> > >
> > > In a political deck, this card could be very useful, but in a
> > > non-political deck, it does give the option of attempting to get rid of
> > > the events by pulling a deal or two. And you could always pitch it in
> > > another referendum if you want.
> >
> > ....and it allows Arika to get rid of being Famous.
>
> She already does that with Golconda. But yes. I don't think it should be
> able to burn Masters.
agree, we already have Cleansing Ritual.
> > ....and it gets rid of Dragonbound
>
> That's sort of the point : getting rid of an event. Could be that one or
> another. Are you proposing a solution which could designate some Gehenna
> rather than others ?
Well, yeah, that is the problem is that some Gehenna events are okay,
and some just monkey-fuck up the whole game.
> > ....and it gets rid of Path of Lilith
>
> Anyone can get rid of it with a cardless D action, which might be why it's
> so seldom seen on the tables. So it really wouldn't be very interesting.
Buth can be done cross-table without the ability to block, dirty PTO
style.
> But destroying a Blood Doll might...
Possible with Malkavia Dementia/Mind Rape/Cleansing Ritual.
> > Seems to hose combat ousting mechanisms way, way too much.
>
> Just the possibility of destroying Dragonbound ?
Comments Welcome,
Johannes Walch
> So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
> find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
> alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH Ritual
> isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
Black Hand Ritual is a good card in MY book.
The effect it very strong because it breaks an important card for
somebody and that card can never be played again in the game.
The problem is, that it is just not usable by a lot of vampires and
therefore not usable by a lot of decktypes. There should just be more
anti-Event cards on about the power level of BH Ritual, but for other
clans/sects/traits.
In fact this card is getting me a little bit over the loss of my beloved
Succubus Club. "I don´t break your Anthelios and you get 2VP and I get
3. OK?" muhahahahaha
But apart from that I agree with your post.
Congratulations on the win, by the way. Could you write a report of the
final (for me)? I am just interested how you avoided getting dealbreaked
by the Kindred Spirit .. ;-)
--
johannes walch
Fred Scott
news:1152645605....@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> What I don't get here is why cards like emergency preparations and not
> to be don't count as viable hosers. They are imo.
Because they're not really usable. Just because a card counters
another card doesn't make it usable. You have take into account
what actual _good_ it does to consider whether a card is viable.
If there's a broken strategy based on some card, does it do me
any good to use a countering card? It may or may not depending
on a lot of things. If I have to be holding my countering card
in my hand at the exact moment my opponent is playing his
key, broken card, that's bad because I may not draw it. Or I
may draw it in my opening hand and wait 2/3rds of the game
before my opponent draws his key, broken card and tries to
play it - meaning I've stop his card but had the disadvantage
of a 6-card hand size for 2/3rds of the game. Or, of course,
I may draw it at some early on and no one in the game ever
even uses the card it counters.
And what happens to my opponent if I guess right and if I
get lucky enough to be holding my counter as he plays his
card? It depends on what makes his strategy so powerful. If
he's basing his whole advantage around the play of this one
card and countering it stops him in his tracks and makes him
utterly lose, then it may be worthwhile. That means I have
"punished" my opponent for making a bad metagame choice
and rewards me for outguessing him and packing a card that has
an opportunity cost risk to use. On the other hand, if
countering it just backs him down a bit, why am I bothering?
That's no punishment and therefore that's no reward. In a
circumstance like that, fuck it, I'll just play the broken
strategy *myself* to counter my opponent's broken strategy.
Never mind some half-assed way of sort of countering it.
Face facts, dude: Not To Be and Emergency Preparations
are terrible cards. They're not worth sitting around with in
your hand in case someone tries to play an event because you
won't use them enough of the time and because using them
doesn't "punish" your opponent in most cases. Although events
are frequently worthwhile to use, very few of them are the
sufficiently key to their deck's whole strategy such that it
will damaged enough to make the opportunity cost payoff
worthwhile when you can use them.
Have you noticed nobody ever uses these cards? Why did
you think that was?
Fred
Orpheus
> > So, as I'm no big fan of banning (except, you know, that one card...), I
> > find it really necessary to propose soon enough a card that can give an
> > alternative to players once a Gehenna in in play, and a valid one (BH
Ritual
> > isn't a good one in my book, nor is Not To Be).
>
> Black Hand Ritual is a good card in MY book.
> The effect it very strong because it breaks an important card for
> somebody and that card can never be played again in the game.
Agreed. What I mean is that, aside from what you say below, the other effect
isn't mildly interesting and just has cycling functions. The interest of
Reunion Kamut is that BH vamps can "Govern" on older vamps, that nice ! If
BHR wasn't on older vamps, it would actually be a very nice and usable card
even if you're not afraid of events : BH would be better, the card would be
useful, yes ?
> The problem is, that it is just not usable by a lot of vampires and
> therefore not usable by a lot of decktypes. There should just be more
> anti-Event cards on about the power level of BH Ritual, but for other
> clans/sects/traits.
Agreed.
> In fact this card is getting me a little bit over the loss of my beloved
> Succubus Club. "I don´t break your Anthelios and you get 2VP and I get
> 3. OK?" muhahahahaha
lol.
> But apart from that I agree with your post.
Ok.
> Congratulations on the win, by the way. Could you write a report of the
> final (for me)? I am just interested how you avoided getting dealbreaked
> by the Kindred Spirit .. ;-)
I did on a french (SIF) forum. Je crois que tu parles français ? ;-) But ok,
I'll write it for here if you want. As a matter of facts... I DON'T avoid
the break, just manage to survive it lol !! ;-)
x5m...@gmx.de
> Have you noticed nobody ever uses these cards? Why did
> you think that was?
The winner of the german qualifier had three (!) EP in his deck.
Frank
x5m...@gmx.de
> Destroy Permanent
> Political Action
What about that card:
Detroy goofy card ideas
Political action
This card is worth one vote.
Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
If this vote is succesful every card designer (including official WW
designers) is forbidden to design cards that have no connection to the
WOD, have no background idea, are absolutely meaningless and therefore
disturb imaginative game. Included are cards with silly names.
Frank
x5m...@gmx.de
All things you are listing include Master cards. Master cards are the
strongest cards in the game. That is why decks who have two
Masterphases (Anson, Huitzli ...) and use many master cards are so
strong. (The german qualifier winning deck was AAA with 30+ master
cards). Anthelios is a big boost for those decks.
There is already one card that can stop all of your examples: Sudden
reversal. Anthelios+Jake Washington => one SR will stop it.
In theory a prey and a predator with Sudden reversals can stop a two
master phases/Anthelios deck. They can recycle one SR every turn, he
can recycle one master card every turn and play but it will be
suddened.
In reality, if you dont have your own second master phases (or play
Truejah) you cannot counter a master card deck. That IMO is the problem
you are describing.
Frank
Orpheus
ROTFL !!!!!!
Orpheus
I am never sure of those things, my godlike qualities are a little down
lately. ;-)
That's what discussions here are for, ain't they ?
> All things you are listing include Master cards. Master cards are the
> strongest cards in the game. That is why decks who have two
> Masterphases (Anson, Huitzli ...) and use many master cards are so
> strong. (The german qualifier winning deck was AAA with 30+ master
> cards). Anthelios is a big boost for those decks.
Yes.
> There is already one card that can stop all of your examples: Sudden
> reversal. Anthelios+Jake Washington => one SR will stop it.
Yes. But decks including all these Masters will get more masters than you'll
get suddens. And Anthelios makes it so that even if you sudden a good card
it will come back. Anson isn't suddenable. This is why Anthelios is so
strong in such decks.
> In theory a prey and a predator with Sudden reversals can stop a two
> master phases/Anthelios deck. They can recycle one SR every turn, he
> can recycle one master card every turn and play but it will be
> suddened.
On the battlefield, it doesn't work. Decks who play many Masters might also
include Anson, and or / Rumors of Gehenna. Also, if you waste all your
Masters getting your Sudden back, you'll never play your own Masters, or
Sudden the other bothersome masters. Your adversary might lose, but you
won't win.
And let's not forget that Anthelios requires that you have a Master in hand.
These decks might play 30 Masters, you might have only 15. You lose. And do
you have your Sudden in the first hand ? Because they will have their worst
cards, including Parthenon, very fast !!
> In reality, if you dont have your own second master phases (or play
> Truejah) you cannot counter a master card deck. That IMO is the problem
> you are describing.
It is a part of it, yes. But as mentionned you also need lots of Masters
yourself. So, should all the decks play lots of Masters and Parthenon ? Do
we need another reason to throw combat decks in the trashbin ?
_angst_
> Orpheus wrote:
>
> Ok. Both take precious Master slots. Emergency Prep requires 2 Gehennas, and
> is otherwise useful for untapping above 7 guys. It also takes a MPA. If
> anything, it can be played in decks using Anthelios + let's say Blood Trade
> and it will make those decks even better, and safe from Unmasking,
> Dragonbound... Now, you won't include 2 Gehennas and a number of Masters
> "just for fun" in any type of deck.
EP only requires two gehenna events for the untap effect. Not for the
burn event effect. And I agree with you. The master slot effect is
harsh, that's why you sometimes leave di and sudden out of your deck
too. I actually like EP, but I rarely play it. It's got diversity and I
like that.
> As for Not To Be, you must have it in hand to counter the Gehenna. Players
> usually play an average of, let's say 14-20 masters, and both your prey and
> pred and maybe a bothersome "ally" will play Masters that you don't want
> them to. And already it's sometimes hard to see your hand reduced by Masters
> OOT. Events can be very bothersome as most of them affect the whole table,
> but outside of mass-events decks very few will be played. Let's say if
> you're unlucky your table will include 4-6 of the most useful ones, and
> there probably only willd be 1-2 (Anthelios or Unmasking + FBI - non
> Gehenna - are the most frequent in my experience). So you will use slots in
> your deck and your hand for something you might have no use for at all !
> Which is why some of us believe that new cards with alternative uses are
> needed.
>
I don't oppose a new hoser. Maybe an event that contests another event
when it is put into play :) you have to be careful though, a hoser that
is to good will render events useless. And even though many people want
just that, I'm not one of them. I love the events and think they bring
an intresting aspect of to the game.
>
> Sure. But strong and not counterable in any satisfying way requires changes
> IMHO.
>
I don't agree with you on the satisfying part, but you already know
that ;)
>
> And ruining games in the meantime.
>
Well, yeah, but you will always have your games ruined by bad play. i
don't think the events make it much worse.
> > And as soon as he gets ousted, the events will go away, never to be
> seen again.
>
> Which makes players want to oust their pred or even crosstable ally. Neat.
>
Hehe, they already have that urge :) When in doubt, backoust!
>
> How do you control a Veil of Darkness ?
>
You won't be able to control everything around it. But you can always
start by not playing disciplinbes yourself :)
>
> Yes, this is called an Imbued deck. See the numerous flame posts about
> Imbued using Mass Gehennas.
>
True, but I'm not the one ranting about it. I like the imbued and their
way of play. even if it sometimes is utterly annoying.
>
> There are now a number of Gehennas or events that are often played, and
> being able to play a good counter-card without filling your deck with
> otherwise useless junk should be an option.
>
So what kind oif counter would you like?
> You mean "I don't want Anthelios in play so I play it" ? Doesn't work lol.
> And your example isn't great either, as if a "normal" Smiling deck really
> wants to play his card he'll just burn yours, and probably has the fighting
> means to do it. Suddens are the usual way of countering Masters. I'm just
> looking for an equivalent way to counter Events.
>
smiling decks are usually low on stealth. but anyways, it was a bad
exapmle. But my point is: If you really really can't handle something
then you have to rely on luck not to face it or stack your deck with
hosers against that specific thing.
> Understood and accepted. ;) I hope this discussion also makes my point
> clearer to you.
yes, I think I get your point. I'm just alittle bit against adding more
and more hosers to the game. Cause that will essentially have the same
effect that the events have. You know that one thing that annoys the
hell out of everyone. They prevent you from playing your deck the way
you want to play it :)
_angst_
> Fred Scott wrote:
>
> Have you noticed nobody ever uses these cards? Why did
> you think that was?
>
I've seen EP in use, I've also used it myself. It's an ok card, not
great but it's diversity makes it ok imo. And since most deck can
handle events they won't have the need to add it. I've only been hosed
by events once, but I can't agree that they are strong enough to
deserve yet another hoser.
Yes, they are strong.
Yes, they are somewhat annoying.
Still, most times you see events hit the table you will be able to
handle it in one way or another. If you can't do it with your deck you
can always convince someone else to help you. And people ganging up on
something you want out of the game is a very strong hoser. And since
the events generate general table hate this won't be that hard to
accomplish.
Regards
Ector
Orpheus wrote:
> I just came back from the French Championship, which incidentally I won. :-)
Congrats!
> During the 2 days of the tournament, I met several Gehenna decks. And I am
> now convinced that something must be done. I'm not talking ban here. But a
> really playable card that could break an event (maybe just a Gehenna, there
> can be one later for Governments), and that can has an alternate use in case
> there is no Gehenna (or you don't want to break it).
>
> There might be a restriction of sorts. But there are a number of reasons why
> I really find it necessary at that point :
>
> - Anthelios + Parthenon / Anson / both is of course the main reason. I've
> been toying with recursivity for a while now, using Carlotta when she was
> the best way to do it, and I know how nice it can be when it taps a vamp, or
> requires that you're Anarch, or makes you use a few cards each time. But
> Anthelios is pure evil :
>
> * Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet, and you can never pull out another Justicar.
> In the finals I escapte that fate because my pred discarded a Fear before I
> had finised to influence my Justicar (Maris) ; in the prelims I didn't.
> * As pointed out by a friend, Jake Washington + Anthelios blocks one rush
> without stealth per turn. Add Unmasking or Maris and even stealth is
> blocked. At no cost at all, and even if using 2 MPA per turn is bothersome,
> I'm sure any good AAA will rather do that than get rushed by Theo Bell once
> a turn. Of course, when a Have Uncovered or a Bum's Rush for another minion
> comes, there is still Obedience, Majesty...
> A two-cards combo that "kills" a valid strategy can't be good for the game.
>
I really don't think that Anthelios needs any "fixing". Yes, its effect
is strong, but remember that it works for all players, and I'm sure
that ANY deck will find some opportunities to use it. This really
levels its power. Likewise, Dragonbound works for any combat-heavy
deck, but not all decks torporize vampires, while nearly all decks have
master cards.
Anthelios + Anson/Parthenon: The combo exists for several years. I
think that Anson and Parthenon aren't very good without Anthelios. Yes,
you may have a lot of master cards, but you will often have no masters,
or have masters you don't want to play, and price of having extra MPAs
isn't cheap.
Anthelios + Fear of Mekhet: I'd say that the problem is in the Fear,
not in the Anthelios. Fear of Mekhet should probably be removed from
the game after use.
Anthelios + Jake Washington: If you are REALLY going to spend 2 MPAs
and one master card to block one rush per turn, then the rush deck
should be proud, since he actually stopped your strategy. Anyway, a
good rush deck will perform more than one Rush action per turn.
Yours,
Ector
Orpheus
> >
> > Ok. Both take precious Master slots. Emergency Prep requires 2 Gehennas,
and
> > is otherwise useful for untapping above 7 guys. It also takes a MPA. If
> > anything, it can be played in decks using Anthelios + let's say Blood
Trade
> > and it will make those decks even better, and safe from Unmasking,
> > Dragonbound... Now, you won't include 2 Gehennas and a number of Masters
> > "just for fun" in any type of deck.
>
> EP only requires two gehenna events for the untap effect. Not for the
> burn event effect. And I agree with you. The master slot effect is
> harsh, that's why you sometimes leave di and sudden out of your deck
> too. I actually like EP, but I rarely play it. It's got diversity and I
> like that.
I do like it too, you know !! Just, the synergie between "needs 2 Gehenna"
and "counters a Gehenna" isn't tops, and adding the "above 8" requirement
makes it downright hard to include in a deck not built around "I want to use
that card".
> > Which is why some of us believe that new cards with alternative uses are
> > needed.
> >
> I don't oppose a new hoser. Maybe an event that contests another event
> when it is put into play :)
Very good idea. Except that of course if you win the contest the event is
burned, otherwise it's useless after 1 turn !!
> you have to be careful though, a hoser that
> is to good will render events useless. And even though many people want
> just that, I'm not one of them. I love the events and think they bring
> an intresting aspect of to the game.
So do I.
> > Sure. But strong and not counterable in any satisfying way requires
changes
> > IMHO.
> >
> I don't agree with you on the satisfying part, but you already know
> that ;)
Yes, we've established that.
> > And ruining games in the meantime.
> >
>
> Well, yeah, but you will always have your games ruined by bad play. i
> don't think the events make it much worse.
OMMV. I do.
> > > And as soon as he gets ousted, the events will go away, never to be
> > seen again.
> >
> > Which makes players want to oust their pred or even crosstable ally.
Neat.
> >
> Hehe, they already have that urge :) When in doubt, backoust!
lol. Back, cross, whatever. Sheer randomness isn't too far, though, and
that's dangerous.
> > How do you control a Veil of Darkness ?
> >
> You won't be able to control everything around it. But you can always
> start by not playing disciplinbes yourself :)
Yuck ! Weenie computer hack anyone ?
> > Yes, this is called an Imbued deck. See the numerous flame posts about
> > Imbued using Mass Gehennas.
> >
> True, but I'm not the one ranting about it. I like the imbued and their
> way of play. even if it sometimes is utterly annoying.
I'd be curious to know what you find annoying, and if it's the same kind of
things generating those "rants".
> > There are now a number of Gehennas or events that are often played, and
> > being able to play a good counter-card without filling your deck with
> > otherwise useless junk should be an option.
>
> So what kind oif counter would you like?
I like the counters with the sect symbols and that green synthetic grass
underneath. Oh, that's not what we're talking about ? ;-)
I'd like cards that you can reasonnably include in various decks and that
are useful if there are no events on the table, or can serve as Event
breakers if needed.
> > You mean "I don't want Anthelios in play so I play it" ? Doesn't work
lol.
> > And your example isn't great either, as if a "normal" Smiling deck
really
> > wants to play his card he'll just burn yours, and probably has the
fighting
> > means to do it. Suddens are the usual way of countering Masters. I'm
just
> > looking for an equivalent way to counter Events.
> >
> smiling decks are usually low on stealth. but anyways, it was a bad
> exapmle. But my point is: If you really really can't handle something
> then you have to rely on luck not to face it or stack your deck with
> hosers against that specific thing.
Sure. But there are too many things that can kill a deck now. That's why
people include Suddens and / or Directs depending on their type of game :
because the other players will play lots of Masters and Minion cards, and
those will always be at least marginally useful. This is why I strongly
believe one or more reasonnable but polyvalent Event hoser would be good for
the game.
> > Understood and accepted. ;) I hope this discussion also makes my point
> > clearer to you.
>
> yes, I think I get your point. I'm just alittle bit against adding more
> and more hosers to the game. Cause that will essentially have the same
> effect that the events have. You know that one thing that annoys the
> hell out of everyone. They prevent you from playing your deck the way
> you want to play it :)
Then the designers have to be careful, intuitive and clever. I'm sure with
the various inputs players provide here and elsewhere : they can do it ! :-)
Cheers,
Orpheus
The trouble is, if just a few of them are either "too powerful" (aka broken)
or too disruptive, and no satisfying way to remove them exists, the
complainers will just require for those precise events to be either errated
or banned.
More and better hosers is the way to go if you want to avoid that.
bluedevil
Johannes Walch wrote:
> The problem is, that it is just not usable by a lot of vampires and
> therefore not usable by a lot of decktypes. There should just be more
> anti-Event cards on about the power level of BH Ritual, but for other
> clans/sects/traits.
So you support the creation of a disciplineless bounce card? Just
curious.....
--
David Cherryholmes
Joshua Duffin
<x5m...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:1152698403.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
I like it! Does it also prohibit adding new card types to the game? I
think that's a big part of the problem with Events - they should have just
been master cards. They would have fit much better into the existing
framework of VTES that way.
How about this, too:
Rumors of Gehenna Revealed To Be Greatly Exaggerated
Master.
2 pool.
Put this card in play. Burn all Events. No Events may be put in play while
this card remains in play. This card may be burned as a (D) action that
costs 1 blood.
Josh
one vote in favor
Orpheus
> >> Political Action
> >
> > What about that card:
> >
> > Detroy goofy card ideas
> > Political action
> > This card is worth one vote.
> > Called by any vampire as a +1 Stealth Action
> > If this vote is succesful every card designer (including official WW
> > designers) is forbidden to design cards that have no connection to the
> > WOD, have no background idea, are absolutely meaningless and therefore
> > disturb imaginative game. Included are cards with silly names.
>
> I like it! Does it also prohibit adding new card types to the game? I
> think that's a big part of the problem with Events - they should have just
> been master cards. They would have fit much better into the existing
> framework of VTES that way.
I disagree strongly here. We had reached a point already where most of the
new Masters wouldn't be played because there were better oldies to play, and
few decks can include many masters. The Events being played in the discard
phase, it allowed the creation of cards like Unmasking or Dragonbound
without transforming all decks in Master decks, and that was a very good
idea, if we don't look at all the individual cards (or the "requires X
Gehenna" limitations, which as you noticed don't apply to Government cards,
at least for now).
> How about this, too:
>
> Rumors of Gehenna Revealed To Be Greatly Exaggerated
> Master.
> 2 pool.
> Put this card in play. Burn all Events. No Events may be put in play
while
> this card remains in play. This card may be burned as a (D) action that
> costs 1 blood.
>
> Josh
>
> one vote in favor
Nice idea, but if you're serious about it I find it too much of a hoser (if
you're kidding forget that last sentence). ;-)
x5m...@gmx.de
> How about this, too:
>
> Rumors of Gehenna Revealed To Be Greatly Exaggerated
> Master.
> 2 pool.
> Put this card in play. Burn all Events. No Events may be put in play while
> this card remains in play. This card may be burned as a (D) action that
> costs 1 blood.
I like the idea of Camarilla vampires ignoring that their end has come.
But I would prefer a weaker version.
Rumors of Gehenna Revealed To Be Greatly Exaggerated
Unique Master.
2 pool.
Put this card in play. The effects of all Gehenna events in play are
ignored. (Dont redraw your reduced hand size.) This card may be burned
as a (D) action that costs 1 blood.
Frank
x5m...@gmx.de
> > In reality, if you dont have your own second master phases (or play
> > Truejah) you cannot counter a master card deck. That IMO is the problem
> > you are describing.
>
> It is a part of it, yes. But as mentionned you also need lots of Masters
> yourself. So, should all the decks play lots of Masters and Parthenon ?
If i see it right, we agree in that point. Tata! So IMO master card
decks are the problem not Gehenna cards. And we dont need a better
defence against events, but a better defence against master cards.
(What about a retainer that can be burned to cancel a master card?)
Frank
Orpheus
> > > In reality, if you dont have your own second master phases (or play
> > > Truejah) you cannot counter a master card deck. That IMO is the
problem
> > > you are describing.
> >
> > It is a part of it, yes. But as mentionned you also need lots of Masters
> > yourself. So, should all the decks play lots of Masters and Parthenon ?
>
> If i see it right, we agree in that point. Tata!
lol
> So IMO master card
> decks are the problem not Gehenna cards. And we dont need a better
> defence against events, but a better defence against master cards.
We can have both, I wouldn't mind...
> (What about a retainer that can be burned to cancel a master card?)
Or an Event ?
Fred Scott
news:1152697735....@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Interesting. Do you know whether they were instrumental in his
success or not?
Fred (imagined he would never see Centralized Background Check
ever played in a tournament game, either)
Sten During
> If i see it right, we agree in that point. Tata! So IMO master card
> decks are the problem not Gehenna cards. And we dont need a better
> defence against events, but a better defence against master cards.
> (What about a retainer that can be burned to cancel a master card?)
>
What about Bleeding the Vine?
Sten During
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
x5m...@gmx.de
> What about Bleeding the Vine?
I think BtV is a good card, but i am the only one in my playgroup. But
first BtV is a master card, so the problem, that master cards interact
with the minion phase, but can only be stopped by master cards isnt
solved. And seconf BtV is only playable in bloat decks. So a minion
cards against masters is still needed IMO.
Frank
Appolonius
>
> So you support the creation of a disciplineless bounce card? Just
> curious.....
Not sure if this was a rhetorical question, and I'm not the person you
asked anyway, but I think a disciplineless bounce card is well overdue.
Of course it should be hamstrung wrt existing discipline-based bounce -
something like 2 blood plus tap AND do not replace until untap (maybe
reduce the bleed to 1 if bounced as well) could work.
Bleed bounce, like the ability to Wake with Evening's Freshness, is a
fundamental defensive tool. It should not be restricted to two
disciplines - doing so has created a massive underclass of clans without
one of the magic "bounce disciplines". IMHO anyway.
Appolonius.
cur...@aol.commetal
wrote:
Make it too weak in comparison to existing bounce and people* will
just play with existing bounce.
* Some will play with inferior cards out of choice. Happens all of
the time right now that people choose to play decks that don't run
bounce, for whatever reasons. But, to achieve balance or, at least, a
meaningful shift in the game, need to look at balancing the game at
the higher/highest levels.
Joshua Duffin
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 03:44:29 +1000, Appolonius <appol...@jyhad.com>
> wrote:
>
>>bluedevil wrote:
>>>
>>> So you support the creation of a disciplineless bounce card? Just
>>> curious.....
>>
>>Not sure if this was a rhetorical question, and I'm not the person you
>>asked anyway, but I think a disciplineless bounce card is well overdue.
>>Of course it should be hamstrung wrt existing discipline-based bounce -
>>something like 2 blood plus tap AND do not replace until untap (maybe
>>reduce the bleed to 1 if bounced as well) could work.
>>
>>Bleed bounce, like the ability to Wake with Evening's Freshness, is a
>>fundamental defensive tool. It should not be restricted to two
>>disciplines - doing so has created a massive underclass of clans without
>>one of the magic "bounce disciplines". IMHO anyway.
>
> just play with existing bounce.
>
> * Some will play with inferior cards out of choice. Happens all of
> the time right now that people choose to play decks that don't run
> bounce, for whatever reasons. But, to achieve balance or, at least, a
> meaningful shift in the game, need to look at balancing the game at
> the higher/highest levels.
Well, yes. But it shouldn't be quite as good as disciplined bounce
either. Compare, maybe, to Govern the Unaligned (or Scouting Mission?)
vs Computer Hacking. Or Legwork vs Enhanced Senses. Or Wake vs
Predator's Communion.
So yeah, I would think maybe 2 blood for bounce and it taps you could be
reasonable for a disciplineless card. It probably wouldn't have to
*also* be do not replace till untap. Or if it were "do not replace till
untap" it could probably cost just 1 blood. Or it could have a capacity
restriction on it (in fact, very possibly it should, since in my view
weenies hardly deserve to have disciplineless bounce added to *their*
arsenal) in place of, say, the 'do not replace', or maybe even in place
of the tapping (perhaps at a second level of high-capacityness).
I think any resistance to this idea (assuming there is resistance) would
have to be based on the assumption that bounce is *such* a strong effect
that it shouldn't be available so easily & cheaply. But that would
hardly explain why it *is* available easily and cheaply to Dominate and
Auspex...
Josh
egalitadisciplinarian
James Coupe
<appol...@jyhad.com> writes:
>Not sure if this was a rhetorical question, and I'm not the person you
>asked anyway, but I think a disciplineless bounce card is well overdue.
>Of course it should be hamstrung wrt existing discipline-based bounce -
>something like 2 blood plus tap AND do not replace until untap (maybe
>reduce the bleed to 1 if bounced as well) could work.
>
>Bleed bounce, like the ability to Wake with Evening's Freshness, is a
>fundamental defensive tool. It should not be restricted to two
>disciplines - doing so has created a massive underclass of clans
>without one of the magic "bounce disciplines". IMHO anyway.
To be honest, I'd rather see something other than bleed bounce. I'm not
100% sure what it would be, but something that provides usable or useful
bleed defence but without duplicating existing bleed defences. This
would do a few things:
a) provide interesting new tech to try out (so people buy whatever
expansion it's in, or Lasombra cracks open a few more starters
to sell off the singles, or whatever)
b) allow for an upgraded version of whatever the new idea is to go to
other requirements (Anarch, Laibon, non-Camarilla, titles,
disciplines etc.) so that other disciplines get an upgrade, but
it's been tried out in a weaker disciplineless way first
c) provide some competition for players' thoughts and considerations.
Here's a random suggestion. It's eleven thirty at night, so the finer
points would need work, but it's just a different idea. (Standard
disclaimers: all my own work, White Wolf welcome to steal etc.)
Propaganda Coup
Reaction
2 blood
Requires a ready vampire
Do not replace until your next discard phase
Play this card when a younger vampire, or any non-vampire, is attempting
to bleed you. If this bleed is successful, and resolves for more than
one pool, tap a minion controlled by the Methuselah who bled you. If
the bleed resolves for more than three pool, you may tap an additional
minion controlled by that Methuselah.
Would that provide an interesting bleed defence option? Maybe, maybe.
It could also provide an annoyance to weenie Computer Hackers.
As I say, I'm not too interested right now in how to best cost or
balance the card. There are all sorts of interesting things you could
do to make it more powerful or less powerful - once per turn, master out
of turn, a trifle-like master out of turn limitation (so you can play a
master card, but not a trifle, say), give it a pool cost, make it tap
other minions of yours as well, limit the number that can be played per
game, a Sibyl's Tongue style cost, make it require a vampire older than
a certain age, make it not affect allies, make it more powerful, make it
less costly, make it let you tap X-1 minions where X is the amount the
bleed resolved for, whatever.
And, of course, those sorts of tweaks could be the sort of thing to play
around with in a more powerful version for a sect or discipline or other
requirement.
Would a mechanic of this sort provide an interesting, useful and used
alternative to bleed bounce?
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Salem
> Propaganda Coup
> Reaction
> 2 blood
> Requires a ready vampire
> Do not replace until your next discard phase
> Play this card when a younger vampire, or any non-vampire, is attempting
> to bleed you. If this bleed is successful, and resolves for more than
> one pool, tap a minion controlled by the Methuselah who bled you. If
> the bleed resolves for more than three pool, you may tap an additional
> minion controlled by that Methuselah.
[snip]
> Would a mechanic of this sort provide an interesting, useful and used
> alternative to bleed bounce?
I think the major problem with this is: I am still bled.
If they just do a bunch of interesting actions, then as their last
action bleed you for 6 or 8 or something, it's not going to be much
consolation that they just tapped a tapped minion.
I guess it's good against deck types that do many multiple bleeds in a
turn (which bounce isn't so strong against as you'd need lots of bounce
cards), and not so good against decks that just lob one or two large
bleeds in there a turn, which bouce is already good at covering.
So I'd say it wouldn't really be the 'use instead of bounce' option for
those clans not using bounce, but rather a whole new option, for
everyone, including those who already have bounce (as written, it's
playable when you're being bled for 6. then you bounce the bleed with
the same vamp who played this card, your prey takes the pool loss, AND
you tap your predator's vamps...but that's obviously just a little
loophole from James being up late writing dodgy card texts. "or any
non-vampire" could also be written as "ally", for instance. :).
I like the idea of non-bounce bleed defence for those clans without
access to bounce. But i think i would prefer to see it save me some
pool, too, being the whole point of *defence*.
--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
pd...@lightlink.com
James Coupe wrote:
> To be honest, I'd rather see something other than bleed bounce. I'm not
> 100% sure what it would be, but something that provides usable or useful
> bleed defence but without duplicating existing bleed defences.
I gotta say, I'm kinda with James on this. I know everyone is all hot
on there being some sort of disciplinless bleed bounce card, but I
think, really, it probably isn't that good of an idea for the game.
If a discplineless bleed bounce card exists, unless it is so much worse
than Deflection so as to be virtually unplayable, it will be in *every*
deck in existance. So every single game of VTES will become little more
than "let's see if we can run everyone out of bounce before time runs
out". Currently, while only two displines have bounce, you at least
*know* those two disciplines have bounce, and can plan accordingly.
With disciplinless bounce, the only plan you can make is "Well, if I
bleed, I'm going to get bounced around the table 4 times". Which I
don't think makes the game necessarily better. Just much more random.
I'd be certainly in favor of more disciplinless bleed defense. And
maybe even more actually effective disciplinless bleed defense (or at
least, more actually effective non dominate/auspex bleed defense)--ways
to cancel bleeds or ways to punish folks who bleed you or some other
such whamdiggery. But I honestly don't think that a disciplinless bleed
bounce card is the way to go. 'Cause it will go a long way to
de-engineering deck building theory. As every single deck in the game
will have the option of saying "Oh, my bleed defense is simply this 8
card disciplinless bounce module...". Every single deck. And VTES
becomes little more than pinball.
-Peter
bluedevil
Appolonius wrote:
> Not sure if this was a rhetorical question, and I'm not the person you
> asked anyway, but I think a disciplineless bounce card is well overdue.
It was rhetorical. I'm not trying to commit one way or the other on
the creation of disciplineless bounce (it's complicated, as others have
pointed out). What I do find interesting is that it is a completely
blithe assumption that a blessed little subset of the game gets a
defense that is *SO* important that practically no deck can be
tournament viable without it, yet there is a call for more easily
available event defense. Maybe one of the toys you get for being Black
Hand *is* decent event defense. If events bother you that much, then
play Black Hand, just like the (admittedly shitty) answer is, if you
are so worried about being bled then play AUS or dom/DOM. Also, I
doubt that enough people have actually tried Emergency Preperation to
really say if it's good or not. I know from playtesting, among other
experiences, that the V:TES world is full of armchair savants.
Actually putting cards in decks and giving it a go can sometimes be a
humbling and instructive experience.
Dorrinal Blackmantle
Auspex? It requires superior, costs a blood, and taps the reacting
vampire. I wouldn't say that's easy or cheap. What's easy is the
number of 3-5 capacity vampires with superior Auspex who can be mixed
into various crypts.
I won't argue with you on Dominate, though. So many decks run on the
power of inferior Dominate...
> Josh
>
> egalitadisciplinarian
--
Dorrinal Blackmantle
Chantry Elder of Salt Lake City
We got both bounce disciplines :P
James Coupe
<salem_ch...@hotmail.com> writes:
>James Coupe wrote:
>
<snip - tap minions if you get bled for lots>
>
>> Would a mechanic of this sort provide an interesting, useful and used
>> alternative to bleed bounce?
>
>I think the major problem with this is: I am still bled.
Yeah. See, what I'm trying to do is think of something that would still
be attractive whilst being different.
I did start thinking about adding some sort of bleed reduction to it,
too, but thought that that would get into the realms of overkill -
largely because it would significantly weaken Telepathic Counter and
friends.
So then I started thinking could I add a clause that said something like
"If this bleed would have resolved for more than 1 pool, discounting any
reductions you have applied to the bleed" so that 3 bleed, 2 reduction
from Telepathic Counter -> 1, and still treat it as though it were for
3. But that seemed:
a) needlessly complex
b) not really a disciplineless defence anymore.
>If they just do a bunch of interesting actions, then as their last
>action bleed you for 6 or 8 or something, it's not going to be much
>consolation that they just tapped a tapped minion.
See, I'm not entirely convinced that that would necessarily be a bad
thing. If I shove in X Propaganda Coups (in whatever form it ended up
as!) and Y Archon Investigations, I get:
a) reasonable defence against solid but steady bleed
b) defence against massive bleed, by burning them.
Also, I don't know how Channel 10 has affected people's groups. Has it
really proved the end of stealth bleed, as certain parties predicted?
That is, would you be trying to get your stealth bleed done on the first
action, and doing other stuff later? (Which the suggested text for
Propaganda Coup would nerf - it triggers on bleeds, but taps minions.
It could, of course, with different text trigger on bleeds and prevent
bleeds from those minions instead.)
I'm also not interested in something that would be great against
everything - that would be silly. Deflection sucks when it gets down to
two players, for example. The question is would the downsides of an
alternative approach (whether in the style of Propaganda Coup or not) be
too big that the approach wouldn't be worthwhile in the end, I guess.
>So I'd say it wouldn't really be the 'use instead of bounce' option for
>those clans not using bounce, but rather a whole new option, for
>everyone, including those who already have bounce (as written, it's
>playable when you're being bled for 6. then you bounce the bleed with
>the same vamp who played this card, your prey takes the pool loss, AND
>you tap your predator's vamps...but that's obviously just a little
>loophole from James being up late writing dodgy card texts.
Yeah, I realised when I woke up this morning that it really should have
said "If that bleed resolves against you for..."
What I was trying to get was something that would be a whole new option
for everyone - but one that wouldn't stack with bounce. So you could
play it instead of bounce, or alongside bounce - but then you'd get the
same sorts of issues as, say, playing intercept as a vote defence,
whilst also playing Delaying Tactics. Both would have their uses, but
you'd also have the potential to have two conflicting defences to hand
at the same time, rather than the two intercept cards you really want,
or whatever. (It's not a perfect parallel, by any means, but you see
what I'm getting at.)
The bounce clans would still have bounce, of course. But a completely
different defence would also be possible, without necessarily screwing
over the S&B decks. Cos, like[0], I still want S&B to be a tip-top deck
style, with people playing it and winning with it.
> "or any non-vampire" could also be written as "ally", for instance.
>:).
Non-vampire was chosen specifically for the possibility that Werewolves
or Demons or whatever are invented in the future that are their own
minion type. Given the hassle there is by some things saying "vampire"
when, if they'd been written these days, they might say "minion" or
"vampire or Imbued" or whatever, I was being overly picky. Funny the
things you pick on when you're tired at nearly midnight, while
overlooking whole other things.
>I like the idea of non-bounce bleed defence for those clans without
>access to bounce. But i think i would prefer to see it save me some
>pool, too, being the whole point of *defence*.
Well, the idea is that it would save you pool. Sort of.
If I get bled by 2 vampires for 3, and I play bounce on one of them, I
get bled for three. Then my prey gets bled for three.
If I get bled by a vampire for 3 and I play Propagana Coup on it, I get
bled for 3. Then the other vampire can't bleed me for three. Now, of
course, seeing a Propaganda Coup and thinking "Oh crap, I'm already
playing Govern the Unaligned so to hell with it", they might throw
Command of the Beast and Conditioning on it. (And then I might Archon
Investigate them.) But how people react to what you play is part of the
game - the basic mechanic is still that you'd get half and half.
That's basically what I'm aiming for. Something people could use,
something that people would react to in good and bad ways, but that
wouldn't kill S&B in the process, or be ridiculously out-classed by
bounce. I'm not saying Propaganda Coup is it, but I think it's a
reasonable place to start thinking from.
[0] Uh-oh, I'm channeling Peter.
pd...@lightlink.com
James Coupe wrote:
> I did start thinking about adding some sort of bleed reduction to it,
> too, but thought that that would get into the realms of overkill -
> largely because it would significantly weaken Telepathic Counter and
> friends.
See, I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Telepathic Counter
is already fairly weak, simply because it is in the same discipline as
Telepathic Misdirection. I mean, yeah, there are some fringe decks
where Telepathic Counter is preferable ('cause you don't want to tap
and spend the blood), but that Telepathic Counter doesn't just save you
from the bleed, it also makes your prey take it instead, makes
Telepathic Counter, generally speaking, a neglected step child. I mean,
like, in an absolute sense, Telepathic Counter is a perfectly
reasonable card. But because it is in the context of Telepathic
Misdirection (and My Enemy's Enemy, which is a lot better than most
folks give it credit for), it seems woefully undereffectve. I suspect
that if Auspex didn't have bleed bounce (i.e. in the universe of "we
went back in time and fixed the game from square one"), Telepathic
Counter would see play all the time.
I think flexible bleed reduction is a very underexplored venue for
bleed defense in other disciplines. Or no disciplines. Look at
Confusion of the Eye, a fairly unassuming card that is very good
defensively--you can play it to reduce a bleed or to effectively cancel
a likely brutal vote. A good, flexible card. I mean, like, not huge in
terms of bleed defense, but still a good starting point. And Friend of
Mine (the anarch "pay a blood to reduce a bleed by 2 with for" card?)
also, in theory, is a pretty good bleed defense card with flexibility
(although it comes strapped with needing to be an anarch to use it).
Also a good starting point. If there were more non cards that let you
reduce bleeds while also doing something else, like an auspex "+1
intercept/reduce a bleed by 2" card (which I think Nergal got one of),
or an animalism "untap if you block/reduce a bleed by 2" card. Or an
Obfuscate "+1 stealth/reduce a bleed by 2" card. Yeah, slightly out of
character for these disciplines, but I think worth introducing into the
game to reduce the dependance on Bounce for bleed defense and give the
non bounce enabled disciplines more bleed defense options without
resorting to a disciplinless bounce card.
> Also, I don't know how Channel 10 has affected people's groups. Has it
> really proved the end of stealth bleed, as certain parties predicted?
As an aside, as it really isn't the point of your comment, not even
remotely. Mostly, Channel X gets used in decks that don't have much
other intercept (i.e. non intercept wall decks, although those
sometimes use it too) to get a bump up on the arms race. Mostly, I have
seen it tend to replace Rumor Mill or London Evening Star in decks that
are just using intercept locations as opportunistic defense.
> [0] Uh-oh, I'm channeling Peter.
Bwa! My influence is undue!
-Peter
James Coupe
pd...@lightlink.com writes:
>See, I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Telepathic Counter
>is already fairly weak, simply because it is in the same discipline as
>Telepathic Misdirection. I mean, yeah, there are some fringe decks
>where Telepathic Counter is preferable ('cause you don't want to tap
>and spend the blood), but that Telepathic Counter doesn't just save you
>from the bleed, it also makes your prey take it instead, makes
>Telepathic Counter, generally speaking, a neglected step child.
It's less that... Telepathic Counter is, as you say, somewhat inferior
to Misdirection, so typically gets overlooked. I don't want to outclass
bleed reduction generally, and I felt that trying to wedge it into a
disciplineless card would do that. Putting it into other disciplines
(or triggering off other traits, sects, titles, whatever) would be quite
different, and might help to liven it up a bit.
But, you still end up in the situation where, say, you're choosing
between including bounce and including reduction. And if TM outclasses
TC already, are we going to say that grafting in Dominate outclasses
whatever Obfuscate bleed defence we have? It might just still, because
of Dominate being so powerful. :-( But it might not, if you can focus
on efficient, available disciplines and not have to go to mid caps with
Dominate and Quietus, I guess.
I'd still be wary, though. Bounce is good, and bounce is already picked
over bleed reduction.
But then I have the problem that even if I'm not outright outclassing
bleed reduction, because I'm working in a very different area, I'm still
providing other options that aren't bleed reduction and that, by virtue
of being crafted to be a sensible alternative to bounce, are probably
outclassing it anyway. Gah. Not fun.
But still, I don't like wallpapering cards. So I felt working in a
different area was sensible.
>If there were more non cards that let you
>reduce bleeds while also doing something else, like an auspex "+1
>intercept/reduce a bleed by 2" card (which I think Nergal got one of),
>or an animalism "untap if you block/reduce a bleed by 2" card. Or an
>Obfuscate "+1 stealth/reduce a bleed by 2" card. Yeah, slightly out of
>character for these disciplines,
Well, you can do it in different ways.
1) Dual-discipline cards. Say, Obf/Pot or Ani/For or whatever. This
might get even more out of character storyline wise, though it might
give you some more ideas to play with. But it might help you avoid
colouring Obfuscate entirely, since Obf/Pot is clearly a nod towards the
Nosferatu (but not exclusively), as Ani/For would be towards Gangrel
(but not exclusively). Obf/Cel, Swift Secrecy (a picture of a vampire
quickly hiding the books inside the washing machine when the police come
knocking), obf/cel: Maneuver, OBF/CEL: Reduce a bleed against you by 2.
Useful for Assamites and !Gangrel (City), maybe, and seems less out of
character than just Obfuscate doing batshit things. (It being after
midnight, please allow for the fact that my creativity in naming is
fucked.)
2) Don't do it as a reaction. Shrouded Assets. +1 stealth action.
Obf: Put this card in play. (A Methuselah can only have one Shrouded
Assets in play at a time.) If you are being bled by a minion without
Auspex or Vision, you may tap this card to reduce the bleed by 1. Some
burn clause. OBF: As above, but you may also tap this card if the
minion has inferior Auspex. That's less out of theme for Obfuscate.
(I was, as you can probably tell, thinking of The Sleep Unseen.)
Salem
> In message <44b9a95e$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Salem
> <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>James Coupe wrote:
>>
> <snip - tap minions if you get bled for lots>
>>
>>> Would a mechanic of this sort provide an interesting, useful and used
>>> alternative to bleed bounce?
>>
>>I think the major problem with this is: I am still bled.
>
> Yeah. See, what I'm trying to do is think of something that would still
> be attractive whilst being different.
Yeah, I'm all for that. I just don't want to lose any pool in the mean
time. i mean _any_ pool. Maybe it's just some primal instinct telling me
losing pool is bad, I dunno, but i suspect it's been the cause of most
oustings (Brinksmanship aside).
> I did start thinking about adding some sort of bleed reduction to it,
> too, but thought that that would get into the realms of overkill -
> largely because it would significantly weaken Telepathic Counter and
> friends.
That is a good point. I'm really not sure what avenue would be available
to make a card good enough to play, that stops you losing pool, that
doesn't nerf other cards.
I'd definitely like something for large untitled vampires. when people
look at bit vamps, they often think "well, they have this and that, but
they're an X cap, and don't even have a title!". So I'd be happy to see
a card that is only usable when a younger vampire or ally (which covers
imbued, as they are allies once in play, and I assume werewolves or
demons from the crypt would also still be allies if they got created) is
acting, and requires an untitled or independent vampire to play.
Say:
Inconnu Connections
Reaction
Requires an untitled or Independent vampire.
Only usable when you are being bled by an ally or younger vampire.
Tap this reacting vampire to reduce the bleed by X/2 (round down), where
X is the capacity of this reacting vampire. If the acting minion is a
vampire, he or she burns 1 blood for every negative point that the bleed
resolves for.
Probably a bit over the top, but maybe not. All sorts of weird
counter-limiters in it. Maybe it's too weak? I dunno.
The "tap to" means no using it with wake, but you can use it with Rat's
and Black Sunrise, etc, which is a nice gift for clans with those discs.
(There are plenty of cool big untitled Nos, etc, that I would like to
see played more.)
> So then I started thinking could I add a clause that said something like
> "If this bleed would have resolved for more than 1 pool, discounting any
> reductions you have applied to the bleed" so that 3 bleed, 2 reduction
> from Telepathic Counter -> 1, and still treat it as though it were for
> 3. But that seemed:
>
> a) needlessly complex
> b) not really a disciplineless defence anymore.
It could be written like Protected Resources? You only burn a maximum of
1 pool for this bleed, regardless of the bleed amount. Or however it's
written.
>
>>If they just do a bunch of interesting actions, then as their last
>>action bleed you for 6 or 8 or something, it's not going to be much
>>consolation that they just tapped a tapped minion.
>
> See, I'm not entirely convinced that that would necessarily be a bad
> thing. If I shove in X Propaganda Coups (in whatever form it ended up
> as!) and Y Archon Investigations, I get:
>
> a) reasonable defence against solid but steady bleed
> b) defence against massive bleed, by burning them.
True. But with the solid and steady, you're still going to die. You
can't even play your minion-card defence unless they're already draining
your pool. Maybe i'm looking at it from too much of a 'complete
coverage' defence point (I lose no pool, ever), and should try and just
let my head accept that sometimes you'll get bled. But I just don't like
being bled. :)
> Also, I don't know how Channel 10 has affected people's groups. Has it
> really proved the end of stealth bleed, as certain parties predicted?
> That is, would you be trying to get your stealth bleed done on the first
> action, and doing other stuff later? (Which the suggested text for
> Propaganda Coup would nerf - it triggers on bleeds, but taps minions.
> It could, of course, with different text trigger on bleeds and prevent
> bleeds from those minions instead.)
Channel 10? I think i have seen it thrown into disciplineless intercept
decks that were already using KRCG, WMRH, London Evening, Sport Bikes
etc. It's just one other card, which could have easily been some other
location in their deck build. No effect on the playing or prevalence of
S&B, that I have seen (not that I have been playing much in the last 4
months, but Channel 10 has been out for much longer than that, and
_should_ have had an impact by then if it was going to).
>>I like the idea of non-bounce bleed defence for those clans without
>>access to bounce. But i think i would prefer to see it save me some
>>pool, too, being the whole point of *defence*.
>
> Well, the idea is that it would save you pool. Sort of.
>
> If I get bled by 2 vampires for 3, and I play bounce on one of them, I
> get bled for three. Then my prey gets bled for three.
And if I have two deflections?
> If I get bled by a vampire for 3 and I play Propagana Coup on it, I get
> bled for 3. Then the other vampire can't bleed me for three. Now, of
> course, seeing a Propaganda Coup and thinking "Oh crap, I'm already
> playing Govern the Unaligned so to hell with it", they might throw
> Command of the Beast and Conditioning on it. (And then I might Archon
> Investigate them.) But how people react to what you play is part of the
> game - the basic mechanic is still that you'd get half and half.
Yeah, but I still lost three pool, even if i was holding two Propoaganda
Coupes (see what I did there?) AND an Archon Investigation.
> That's basically what I'm aiming for. Something people could use,
> something that people would react to in good and bad ways, but that
> wouldn't kill S&B in the process, or be ridiculously out-classed by
> bounce. I'm not saying Propaganda Coup is it, but I think it's a
> reasonable place to start thinking from.
Well, it is a good thought. It's probably a good card, too, just not the
way I'd prefer my play style to work. But that doesn't mean others
wouldn't use it or like it. The main thing is, you're thinking outside
the box. And no-one has flamed anyone else yet.
Hmmm....if we did jump back to bleed reduction again, maybe something like:
"There's so many of the blighters I can see 'em coming a mile away."
Reaction.
Only usable when a younger vampire or ally is bleeding you.
Reduce the bleed by X+1, where X is the number of ready untapped minions
controlled by the bleeder's Methuselah.
chr...@comcen.com.au
>
> Channel 10? I think i have seen it thrown into disciplineless intercept
> decks that were already using KRCG, WMRH, London Evening, Sport Bikes
> etc. It's just one other card, which could have easily been some other
> location in their deck build. No effect on the playing or prevalence of
> S&B, that I have seen (not that I have been playing much in the last 4
> months, but Channel 10 has been out for much longer than that, and
> _should_ have had an impact by then if it was going to).
I use it in a disciplineless intercept deck and i've found it to be
very effective. Works great with KRCG, winthrop, raven spies and phased
motion detector.
[Aside] Don't you answer emails anymore?
Chris.
Salem
But has your metagame changed to accommodate it? Or is it just another
card that helps that strategy, but doesn't require anyone to really
change the way they build decks just to cope with it?
> [Aside] Don't you answer emails anymore?
sure i do. Sometimes. Umm...lemme go look.
chr...@comcen.com.au
Salem wrote:
> chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
> >>
> >> Channel 10? I think i have seen it thrown into disciplineless intercept
> >> decks that were already using KRCG, WMRH, London Evening, Sport Bikes
> >> etc. It's just one other card, which could have easily been some other
> >> location in their deck build. No effect on the playing or prevalence of
> >> S&B, that I have seen (not that I have been playing much in the last 4
> >> months, but Channel 10 has been out for much longer than that, and
> >> _should_ have had an impact by then if it was going to).
> >
> > I use it in a disciplineless intercept deck and i've found it to be
> > very effective. Works great with KRCG, winthrop, raven spies and phased
> > motion detector.
>
> But has your metagame changed to accommodate it? Or is it just another
> card that helps that strategy, but doesn't require anyone to really
> change the way they build decks just to cope with it?
No the metagame hasn't changed. It is just another card i suppose but i
do prefer it over London Evening Newspaper and WMRH.
Chris.
Sten During
> solved. And seconf BtV is only playable in bloat decks. So a minion
> cards against masters is still needed IMO.
>
> Frank
>
Rewind Time. Sure, Trujah only, but if you play them you should
include some copies.
_angst_
>
> I do like it too, you know !! Just, the synergie between "needs 2 Gehenna"
> and "counters a Gehenna" isn't tops, and adding the "above 8" requirement
> makes it downright hard to include in a deck not built around "I want to use
> that card".
>
Yeah, I can agree with you. But still, you don't want to see
disciplineless weenie lunatics with events multiacting :)
>
> Very good idea. Except that of course if you win the contest the event is
> burned, otherwise it's useless after 1 turn !!
>
LOL! Err, ok, you give up the contest. Err, well, now I have to
selfoust.
I was thinking more in contests but does not copy. Meaning that you
will have an event that does absolutly nothing when the contest is over
:)
>
> Yuck ! Weenie computer hack anyone ?
>
Heh! I don't think weenie computer will be the worst one using it.
Legacy of pander is far worse in my book. But still, you can include it
in a deck where you play few masters. Some 90 card decks only play 10
masters and they will benefit from the veil imo.
>
> I'd be curious to know what you find annoying, and if it's the same kind of
> things generating those "rants".
>
The most annoying thing with the imbued is their ability to stall.
Players not organizing their conviction cards in a special ash heap and
so on. I do think events are annoying when they lock me down. I can get
furious when someone pto's me.
But I accept it as a part of the game, and I don't really think it
destroys the game as a whole, it sometimes destroys the game for a deck
I play that can't handle what I face. But I think getting all my
vampires torporized is just as annoying as getting them mind raped. I'm
just not that emotional about these things and to quote Damnans:
"Swedes aren't very emotional when playing vtes".
>
> I like the counters with the sect symbols and that green synthetic grass
> underneath. Oh, that's not what we're talking about ? ;-)
>
Hah! You really should have a discussion with the incredibly drunk mrs
Düring about how nice those counters are ;)
> I'd like cards that you can reasonnably include in various decks and that
> are useful if there are no events on the table, or can serve as Event
> breakers if needed.
>
Give me an example, I know you want to :)
>
> Then the designers have to be careful, intuitive and clever. I'm sure with
> the various inputs players provide here and elsewhere : they can do it ! :-)
>
They've managed to do so this far imo :)
Best wishes
Alex Ek
Prince of Gothenburg, Sweden
LSJ
> If a discplineless bleed bounce card exists, unless it is so much worse
> than Deflection so as to be virtually unplayable, it will be in *every*
> deck in existance. So every single game of VTES will become little more
> than "let's see if we can run everyone out of bounce before time runs
> out". Currently, while only two displines have bounce, you at least
> *know* those two disciplines have bounce, and can plan accordingly.
> With disciplinless bounce, the only plan you can make is "Well, if I
> bleed, I'm going to get bounced around the table 4 times". Which I
> don't think makes the game necessarily better. Just much more random.
No. There is a wide margin between unplayable and in every deck -- a
simple cost of two blood and a tap, as per the original suggestion, is
one example -- it won't go in every deck (weenie, Baali, etc.). A pool
cost would be another example.
And even if it has gone into every deck at a particular table, bleeding
wouldn't be a matter of "I'm going to get bounced around the table four
times" -- the cost of bounce being non-trivial, there would be a clear
resource management angle involved.
pd...@lightlink.com
LSJ wrote:
> No. There is a wide margin between unplayable and in every deck -- a
> simple cost of two blood and a tap, as per the original suggestion, is
> one example -- it won't go in every deck (weenie, Baali, etc.). A pool
> cost would be another example.
Sure. But at a certain point, a card like this becomes so much worse
than Deflection as to be, as I mentioned, virtually unplayable. If such
a disciplinless bounce card cost 2 blood or a Pool, it seems likely
that such a card would not actually be particularly playable (or only
playable in a small number of decks which isn't what I think the people
who want disciplinless bleed bounce are looking for), and wouldn't be
any more effective, in terms of overall bleed defense, than simply
tacking Dominate onto any deck, which already exists as an option. For
one, I would much rather see more diverse bleed defense that isn't
simply worse than just adding Dominate.
> And even if it has gone into every deck at a particular table, bleeding
> wouldn't be a matter of "I'm going to get bounced around the table four
> times" -- the cost of bounce being non-trivial, there would be a clear
> resource management angle involved.
When someone bleeds *now* into a table of lots of Dominate, you get
bounced around 4 (4 being an arbitrary number that represents "more
than once") times. If a disciplinless bleed bounce card had a cost
similar to Deflection (such that it would see play), then it would be
generally not much different, and you wouldn't be able to see it
coming. If it had a significantly higher cost then Deflection, it
wouldn't see much play, so there wouldn't be as much arbitrary bouncing
around the table, no. But that would be because the card wouldn't be
used much.
Like, if a disciplinless bleed bounce card became available, assuming
it had an appropriate cost, I don't think it would ruin the game or
anything. But for my money, I'd much rather see more varied bleed
defense that wasn't just almost the same as, but strictly inferior to,
Deflection.
-Peter
XZealot
bluedevil wrote:
> Johannes Walch wrote:
>
> > The problem is, that it is just not usable by a lot of vampires and
> > therefore not usable by a lot of decktypes. There should just be more
> > anti-Event cards on about the power level of BH Ritual, but for other
> > clans/sects/traits.
>
> So you support the creation of a disciplineless bounce card? Just
> curious.....
I just got word of a shiny new disciplineless bounce card that they are
coming out with!
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
<Spoiler Space>
Major Boon
Type(s): Master
Out-of-Turn.
Play this card when another Methuselah is successfully bled. Not usable
if you control the acting minion. Modifiers to the bleed amount may be
played after you play this card. You burn pool for the bleed instead of
the target Methuselah (must be at least 1 pool) and give this card to
the target Methuselah. You may burn this card to have that Methuselah
burn pool instead of you when you are successfully bled.
Requires no discipline, and it doesn't have a cost (other than taking a
bleed).
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
pd...@lightlink.com
James Coupe wrote:
> I'd still be wary, though. Bounce is good, and bounce is already picked
> over bleed reduction.
Sure. 'Cause when you have the option of worthwhile reduction
(Telepathic Counter) you also have the option of bounce (Telepathic
Misdirection). And bounce is simply just better. So I think it would be
perfectly reasonable to accept that putting both bounce and reduction
in the same discipline was a bad idea, forget it was ever a design
concept, and move reduction into other disciplines. Yeah, it makes
Telepathic Counter outclassed. But it already is outclassed, and I'm ok
with wallpapering it even more in the name of fixing larger flaws in
the game. But then, as you point out below in your post, non Auspex
reduction doesn't have to be reactive--I really liked the idea of the
Obfuscate card you suggest (take an action to put card in play, tap
card to reduce a bleed by some amount). I'd be very happy with non
reaction bleed defense cards (as long as they were actually effective).
That being said, I'd also be very happy with effective reaction bleed
reduction for other disciplines than Auspex.
> But still, I don't like wallpapering cards. So I felt working in a
> different area was sensible.
It is sensible. But really, I think that the problem of "it is silly
that only Auspex and Dominate have any significant bleed defense" is a
much larger one than "It is sad that Telepathic Counter is
underutilized, and making similar, non Auspex based cards would make
Telepathic Counter even *more* underutilized", to the point that I'd be
totally fine with TC getting completelty wallpapered in the name of
more general bleed defense.
-Peter
XZealot
> It is sensible. But really, I think that the problem of "it is silly
> that only Auspex and Dominate have any significant bleed defense" is a
> much larger one than "It is sad that Telepathic Counter is
> underutilized, and making similar, non Auspex based cards would make
> Telepathic Counter even *more* underutilized", to the point that I'd be
> totally fine with TC getting completelty wallpapered in the name of
> more general bleed defense.
What's wrong with Major Boon?
bluedevil
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> Sure. But at a certain point, a card like this becomes so much worse
> than Deflection as to be, as I mentioned, virtually unplayable. If such
> a disciplinless bounce card cost 2 blood or a Pool, it seems likely
> that such a card would not actually be particularly playable (or only
> playable in a small number of decks which isn't what I think the people
> who want disciplinless bleed bounce are looking for)
So I pay a pool in order to:
A) not take a pool (obviously this just gets better if the bleed is 2+)
B) make my prey take a pool (or tap, expend resources et al.)
Why would I not take this deal all day long? Just in terms of bleed
defence it sound far better than bolting on dominate.
XZealot
You already can.
See: Major Boon
pd...@lightlink.com
XZealot wrote:
> What's wrong with Major Boon?
Nothing is wrong with Major Boon. But it is a farily limited defense
(really, most of the time, what is a MPA used on a Major Boon going to
accomplish that the same MPA used on a Minion Tap isn't?), and the
existance of Major Boon does not keep people from clamoring for a
disciplineless bleed bounce card (which is the context that this whole
discussion is in).
The game, still, probably does need more varied, flexible bleed defense
cards. Even 12 years down the road, sitting in front of a Malk '94 deck
is likely to just get you ousted quickly unless you are packing bounce,
as even with all the increased understanding of the game and new cards
and new strategies, most decks simply can't withstand being bled for 5
per action starting on T2. The end result is that decks tend to either
have bounce, and are competetive, or don't have bounce, and are much
less competetive. Yeah, I realize that this is a gross
oversimplification, but in reality, I don't think it is that far from
true.
So people, still, want a disciplinless bounce card. Which would
certainly help. But would also go a long way to making the game a lot
more homoginized and less varried. I, for one, would like to see more
viable bleed defense that is disciplineless, or comes in other
disciplines that lack such bleed defense. But find the idea of
disciplinless bounce to be unappealing.
-Peter
Merlin
How do you get your prey to take a pool (Scenario B above) with Major
Boon unless you're running bounce yourself? Beg the table to bounce
into your prey so that you can Boon it?
Merlin
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > No. There is a wide margin between unplayable and in every deck -- a
> > simple cost of two blood and a tap, as per the original suggestion, is
> > one example -- it won't go in every deck (weenie, Baali, etc.). A pool
> > cost would be another example.
>
> Sure. But at a certain point, a card like this becomes so much worse
> than Deflection as to be, as I mentioned, virtually unplayable. If such
> a disciplinless bounce card cost 2 blood or a Pool, it seems likely
> that such a card would not actually be particularly playable (or only
> playable in a small number of decks which isn't what I think the people
> who want disciplinless bleed bounce are looking for), and wouldn't be
> any more effective, in terms of overall bleed defense, than simply
> tacking Dominate onto any deck, which already exists as an option. For
> one, I would much rather see more diverse bleed defense that isn't
> simply worse than just adding Dominate.
It seems you have your "virtually unplayabe" line too close to your "in
every deck" line.
Either that, or you mean something like "only in decks that didn't use
another option" when you say "unplayable", which is true of every card.
> > And even if it has gone into every deck at a particular table, bleeding
> > wouldn't be a matter of "I'm going to get bounced around the table four
> > times" -- the cost of bounce being non-trivial, there would be a clear
> > resource management angle involved.
>
> When someone bleeds *now* into a table of lots of Dominate, you get
> bounced around 4 (4 being an arbitrary number that represents "more
> than once") times. If a disciplinless bleed bounce card had a cost
> similar to Deflection (such that it would see play), then it would be
> generally not much different, and you wouldn't be able to see it
> coming. If it had a significantly higher cost then Deflection, it
> wouldn't see much play, so there wouldn't be as much arbitrary bouncing
> around the table, no. But that would be because the card wouldn't be
> used much.
If it had a "reasonable" cost so as to allow it to see play but still
remain a strategic decision (a class you seem to be labelling
"unplayable"), then i would be a matter of resource management.
> Like, if a disciplinless bleed bounce card became available, assuming
> it had an appropriate cost, I don't think it would ruin the game or
> anything. But for my money, I'd much rather see more varied bleed
> defense that wasn't just almost the same as, but strictly inferior to,
> Deflection.
Variations on bleed defense already in place: cancel, intercept,
reduction, bounce, shift payor, damage bleeder, remove/burn bleeder.
What new variation are you imagining that isn't already present?
bluedevil
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> So people, still, want a disciplinless bounce card. Which would
> certainly help. But would also go a long way to making the game a lot
> more homoginized and less varried. I, for one, would like to see more
> viable bleed defense that is disciplineless, or comes in other
> disciplines that lack such bleed defense. But find the idea of
> disciplinless bounce to be unappealing.
I think the way to address the "bounce problem" is to print more things
that monkey with other people's attempt to bounce. If bounce became
less good (assuming you don't break the game some other way by doing
that), then the issue of lots of clans not having bounce is mitigated,
without needing to errata or ban existing cards. Judging from a few
cards we've seen recently, this at least seems to be on the design
team's radar.
XZealot
> How do you get your prey to take a pool (Scenario B above) with Major
> Boon unless you're running bounce yourself? Beg the table to bounce
> into your prey so that you can Boon it?
How about play Major Boon when your prey bleeds your grand prey, then
oust your prey? Now the Major Boon hits your prey, voila!
All it requires is for you to oust your prey. If you can't oust your
prey, then you really do have bigger problems.
sutekh_23
bluedevil wrote:
> I think the way to address the "bounce problem" is to print more things
> that monkey with other people's attempt to bounce. If bounce became
> less good (assuming you don't break the game some other way by doing
> that), then the issue of lots of clans not having bounce is mitigated,
> without needing to errata or ban existing cards. Judging from a few
> cards we've seen recently, this at least seems to be on the design
> team's radar.
I like this option. There have been others who state that not including
bounce, so dom or aus, (may) reduce the effectiveness of a deck. If
that is the case does that mean all non-dominate decks (as Telepathic
misdirection some consider wallpaper anyway) are sub-optimal deck
builds? Perfect clarity has been around for a while yet I very rarely
see it in play. Is it the 2 blood cost or is the opertunity cost
considered too high as opposed to bounce? Maybe if a cheaper version
made its way into the game or a more expensive, but undicsiplined
format say:
Enough of your Shenanigans
Type: Unique Master
Cost: 2 pool
Put this card into play. While this card is in play your prey cannot
play reactions that require dominate. During your discard phase burn 1
pool or remove Enough of your Shenanigans from the game.
Or maybe
Focussed Will
Type: Action
Cost: 2 blood
+1 stealth action. put this card on the acting vampire. While this
vampire is acting, reaction cards requiring dominate cannot be played.
During your influence phase, burn focussed will or this vampire burns
one blood.
Thoughts anyone?
Kevin Walsh
> Sure. But at a certain point, a card like this becomes so much worse
> than Deflection as to be, as I mentioned, virtually unplayable. If such
> a disciplinless bounce card cost 2 blood or a Pool, it seems likely
> that such a card would not actually be particularly playable (or only
> playable in a small number of decks which isn't what I think the people
> who want disciplinless bleed bounce are looking for),
Well, paying 2 blood is better than being bled for 3. I'd play it in
any deck that could easily get rid of the cards, such as a celerity
combat deck.
>and wouldn't be
> any more effective, in terms of overall bleed defense, than simply
> tacking Dominate onto any deck, which already exists as an option.
Well, that requires either dedicating crypt slots or Master cards,
potentially saddling you not only with cards you don't want to use, but
actually can't use.
As for Telepathic Counter, I don't think it's wallpaper. It doesn't tap
you, doesn't cost blood, and is often just as effective as Telepathic
Misdirection in terms of protecting your pool. In decks of mine that
use Auspex, I have frequently added more TCs as time went by.
Kevin Walsh
XZealot
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> XZealot wrote:
> > What's wrong with Major Boon?
>
> Nothing is wrong with Major Boon. But it is a farily limited defense
> (really, most of the time, what is a MPA used on a Major Boon going to
> accomplish that the same MPA used on a Minion Tap isn't?), and the
> existance of Major Boon does not keep people from clamoring for a
> disciplineless bleed bounce card (which is the context that this whole
> discussion is in).
What can Major Boon do that Minion Tap cannot:
1) It is playable when you control no minions
2) It is a persistant deterant to getting bled for lots because your
predator might be afraid to drop a bleed for 6 at 3 stealth if he knows
for a fact that you aren't going to take it.
3) It is playable when your minions have no blood
4) It is playable in multiples to target multiple methuselahs.
The fact that people are clamoring for disciplineless bleed bounce
means those people are wearing blinders. Major Boon is bleed bounce.
Major Boon requires no disciplines. It fits the criteria that you are
asking for. It already exists.
> The game, still, probably does need more varied, flexible bleed defense
> cards. Even 12 years down the road, sitting in front of a Malk '94 deck
> is likely to just get you ousted quickly unless you are packing bounce,
> as even with all the increased understanding of the game and new cards
> and new strategies, most decks simply can't withstand being bled for 5
> per action starting on T2. The end result is that decks tend to either
> have bounce, and are competetive, or don't have bounce, and are much
> less competetive. Yeah, I realize that this is a gross
> oversimplification, but in reality, I don't think it is that far from
> true.
Malk '94 can still be defeated by not blocking at letting them jam up
on stealth. Or you can proactively rush their minions into torpor
(you probably hadn't thought of that one :P ) .
> So people, still, want a disciplinless bounce card. Which would
> certainly help. But would also go a long way to making the game a lot
> more homoginized and less varried. I, for one, would like to see more
> viable bleed defense that is disciplineless, or comes in other
> disciplines that lack such bleed defense.
I think anti-bounce is a good alternative too, like Terra Incognita.
>But find the idea of
> disciplinless bounce to be unappealing.
I don't understand this fragment.
bluedevil
sutekh_23 wrote:
> I like this option. There have been others who state that not including
> bounce, so dom or aus, (may) reduce the effectiveness of a deck. If
> that is the case does that mean all non-dominate decks (as Telepathic
> misdirection some consider wallpaper anyway)
They are crackheads. TM is every bit as good, in its own way, as
Deflection.
> Perfect clarity has been around for a while yet I very rarely
> see it in play. Is it the 2 blood cost or is the opertunity cost
> considered too high as opposed to bounce?
No, it's the "nobody owns any" factor, compounded slightly by this
crazy notion that Tremere are somehow not competitive.
bluedevil
XZealot wrote:
> Malk '94 can still be defeated by not blocking at letting them jam up
> on stealth.
This shouldn't work against good players. If I were playing Malk94,
I'd have serious flush tech, starting with 4 Dreams and a few LearJets.
Even minus anti-jamming tech, "jam them" has always been of only
dubious worth. I mean, nobody thinks it's *good* defense, just that it
might be your only hope, and even that is debatable.
sutekh_23
bluedevil wrote:
> sutekh_23 wrote:
>
> > I like this option. There have been others who state that not including
> > bounce, so dom or aus, (may) reduce the effectiveness of a deck. If
> > that is the case does that mean all non-dominate decks (as Telepathic
> > misdirection some consider wallpaper anyway)
>
> They are crackheads. TM is every bit as good, in its own way, as
> Deflection.
>
viable "bounce or intercept" strategy.
> > Perfect clarity has been around for a while yet I very rarely
> > see it in play. Is it the 2 blood cost or is the opertunity cost
> > considered too high as opposed to bounce?
>
> No, it's the "nobody owns any" factor, compounded slightly by this
> crazy notion that Tremere are somehow not competitive.
Haha, I have 7+ of the things, and I haven't been collecting that long.
So, my question to you Bluedevil is, is it enough of a deterant/fix or
is more still needed? Imbued have a "fix" by canceling a card as it is
played, some few of us have access to DI and a Laibon vamp (ghanru?)
that can cancel a card as it it played, but is it enough considering
the cost of PC/DI/wholesale sect/clan choice, is it worth it as it
stands?
XZealot
Dreams of the Sphinx didn't exist in 1994. :P
And I can say that any deck could contest those Dreams or block the
learjets.
Jam them has worked for me numerous times, and with a few blood Dolls,
I endured being bled for 14 then just paced with my bloat until they
were ousted. Did I win? No. Did the Malk '94 win? No. It is a
defense which in and of itself is a deterant against the mindless
Malk'94.
All Malks must DIE!
Appolonius
>
> The fact that people are clamoring for disciplineless bleed bounce
> means those people are wearing blinders. Major Boon is bleed bounce.
> Major Boon requires no disciplines. It fits the criteria that you are
> asking for. It already exists.
OK, so my predator influences out Didi Meyers on turn 2. Next turn, as
her first action, she bleeds me for 6 at +2 stealth. Thank God I've got
a Major Boon in my hand!
Appolonius.
Matthew T. Morgan
>
> bluedevil wrote:
>> XZealot wrote:
>>
>>> Malk '94 can still be defeated by not blocking at letting them jam up
>>> on stealth.
>>
>> This shouldn't work against good players. If I were playing Malk94,
>> I'd have serious flush tech, starting with 4 Dreams and a few LearJets.
>> Even minus anti-jamming tech, "jam them" has always been of only
>> dubious worth. I mean, nobody thinks it's *good* defense, just that it
>> might be your only hope, and even that is debatable.
>
> Dreams of the Sphinx didn't exist in 1994. :P
>
> And I can say that any deck could contest those Dreams or block the
> learjets.
Ha. I'm going to jam you on stealth by not blocking you and I'll block
you getting a Learjet. You are DOOMED!
Matt Morgan
Appolonius
>
> So people, still, want a disciplinless bounce card. Which would
> certainly help. But would also go a long way to making the game a lot
> more homoginized and less varried. I, for one, would like to see more
> viable bleed defense that is disciplineless, or comes in other
> disciplines that lack such bleed defense. But find the idea of
> disciplinless bounce to be unappealing.
I too am all for a non-homogenous game. The problem is that the ability
to turn a stealthed bleed of 4-6 from your problem into your offence
with one card (as dom/AUS bounce does) is so monstrously good that it's
going to be difficult to come up with "varied" bleed defences that even
come close.
In fact IMHO dom/AUS bleed bounce as currently written is _too_ good. If
we could jump into our magical "go back to 1994 and fix the game from
square 1" time machine and reword the offending cards to "choose another
methuselah other than your prey", the game might be all the better for
it. But back to this reality...
bluedevil wrote:
> I think the way to address the "bounce problem" is to print more things
> that monkey with other people's attempt to bounce.
I'd like to see that too.
Appolonius.
pd...@lightlink.com
sutekh_23 wrote:
> There have been others who state that not including
> bounce, so dom or aus, (may) reduce the effectiveness of a deck. If
> that is the case does that mean all non-dominate decks (as Telepathic
> misdirection some consider wallpaper anyway) are sub-optimal deck
> builds?
In essence, yes, this is true. I mean, like, yeah, there are lots and
lots of ways to make decks that work and oust people and can win games.
But when it comes down to it, most of the time, you really can take
pretty much any deck and say "is this really going to be more
effective, in terms of winning games and ousting people, than some deck
that has dominate in it?". And the answer usually is no.
Again, gross oversimplification of a very complex issue. But also
again, probably not that far from true.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
bluedevil wrote:
> I think the way to address the "bounce problem" is to print more things
> that monkey with other people's attempt to bounce. If bounce became
> less good (assuming you don't break the game some other way by doing
> that), then the issue of lots of clans not having bounce is mitigated,
> without needing to errata or ban existing cards. Judging from a few
> cards we've seen recently, this at least seems to be on the design
> team's radar.
Sure, but that doesn't address the issue of "clans without bounce have
an uphill battle", which generally is still true. Yeah, you could spend
a lot of effort making bounce less effective, which would make other
bleed defenses more effective, but all that really does is take the
issue of "Hey. Look. I'm sitting in front of Malk '94" I am going to be
ousted very soon." and make it worse.
Yes, that bounce is *so* good makes other non bounce bleed defense less
worthwhile. But it also makes playing S+B a risky thing to do. Malking
bounce less good without making other bleed defenses actually better
would have a deleterious effect on the game as a whole, I'd think.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
sutekh_23 wrote:
> I like this option. There have been others who state that not including
> bounce, so dom or aus, (may) reduce the effectiveness of a deck. If
> that is the case does that mean all non-dominate decks (as Telepathic
> misdirection some consider wallpaper anyway)
Just to clarify my previous post--I in no way think Telepathic
Misdirection is wallpaper (are you sure you didn't read people talking
about Telepathic *Counter* in a negative sense and mistake it for
Telepathic Misdirection?). Telepathic Misdirection is as good a bleed
defense as Deflection is (primarily 'cause it is really easy to get AUS
in a crypt). In some ways better, as it cycles as Intercept when no one
is blleding you.
This being said, I don't think it lessens my previous post's point
about Dominate.
-Peter
bluedevil
sutekh_23 wrote:
> Haha, I have 7+ of the things, and I haven't been collecting that long.
> So, my question to you Bluedevil is, is it enough of a deterant/fix or
> is more still needed? Imbued have a "fix" by canceling a card as it is
> played, some few of us have access to DI and a Laibon vamp (ghanru?)
> that can cancel a card as it it played, but is it enough considering
> the cost of PC/DI/wholesale sect/clan choice, is it worth it as it
> stands?
No, I think there's still more to be done. DI is a bad answer. It's
just a bad card all around IMO, and anything that encourages/requires
its use is a step in the wrong direction. Things like the new temporis
card that gets the job done at mere inferior potence.... that's a step
in the right direction.
pd...@lightlink.com
XZealot wrote:
> What can Major Boon do that Minion Tap cannot:
(snipped all very good reasons that Major Boon is good)
Yes. Major Boon is good. Yet it doesn't keep S+B/weenie bleed/power
bleed from winning more often than not. Which is *still* the case.
Major Boon has been around since day 1. People have been using Major
Boon since day 1. And still, The People seem interested in
disciplinless bleed bounce. Which might be the result of everyone being
on crack. But I suspect not.
> Malk '94 can still be defeated by not blocking at letting them jam up
> on stealth. Or you can proactively rush their minions into torpor
> (you probably hadn't thought of that one :P ) .
Yes, yes. S+B can be beat. I know. However, how many times have you
played in a tournament where most of the people are good players, there
are lots of well designed, competetive decks in circulation, lots of
analysis of play styles and metagaming, and in the end, the answer
turns out to be "the guy playing the S+B deck won."? 'Cause even with
advanced play theory and intelligent deck design, and Major Boon, the
S+B deck is *still* the most effective (in a general sense--yes, sure,
sometimes the S+B deck sits next to a Rush deck and doesn't take a
single action all game) strategy in the game. As it is the most direct.
> I don't understand this fragment.
But (I) find the idea of (a) disciplinless bounce (card) unappealing
(as something to introduce into the game).
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
Appolonius wrote:
> I too am all for a non-homogenous game. The problem is that the ability
> to turn a stealthed bleed of 4-6 from your problem into your offence
> with one card (as dom/AUS bounce does) is so monstrously good that it's
> going to be difficult to come up with "varied" bleed defences that even
> come close.
I agree with this to some extent. But again, what I'd like to see is
viable, flexible bleed defense for disciplines *other* than Aus/Dom.
Which really, they don't currently--yeah, non Auspex decks can have
intercept (but intercept leads to "all defense, not much offense" and
has problems in and of itself). And fighty decks can have pre-emptive
killing. But in the end, decks that have no access to bounce are
fighting up hill. But I think that could be fixed by virtue of, ya
know, flexible bleed defense. Like, say, an Obfuscate card that was +1
stealth/reduce a bleed by 2. That would be a fantastic card that
cycles easy and would see play all the time, giving Obfuscate clans a
fighting chance without bounce. Make something similar for Fortitide
and/or Celerity. Maybe such a card is too good even (especially when
you think about it in the context of a Malkavian deck), but it is a
place to start from.
> In fact IMHO dom/AUS bleed bounce as currently written is _too_ good. If
> we could jump into our magical "go back to 1994 and fix the game from
> square 1" time machine and reword the offending cards to "choose another
> methuselah other than your prey", the game might be all the better for
> it. But back to this reality...
Oh, I agree with that too. Although I don't think removing your prey
from the equation is a good way to go--that just means that random
people cross table get ousted a lot more.
-Peter
bluedevil
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> Yes, that bounce is *so* good makes other non bounce bleed defense less
> worthwhile. But it also makes playing S+B a risky thing to do. Malking
> bounce less good without making other bleed defenses actually better
> would have a deleterious effect on the game as a whole, I'd think.
I know we've discussed this before, and your answer is "but it screws
Harrod!", but this is why I think opening up AI to be playable when
anybody is being bled for 4+ is good. Everybody would chuck one or two
in their decks and if somebody actually sits down at the table and
starts hucking bleeds for 6 on turn 3, then they are taking a very
real, very *blind* risk of getting burned, because they are clearly a
sweeping threat. It's not perfect, but it is the closest thing I have
come up with to getting in the way back machine and implimenting
Duffin's "make it hard to bleed for more than 3" which in an ideal
world would be our solution.
pd...@lightlink.com
bluedevil wrote:
> A) not take a pool (obviously this just gets better if the bleed is 2+)
> B) make my prey take a pool (or tap, expend resources et al.)
>
> Why would I not take this deal all day long? Just in terms of bleed
> defence it sound far better than bolting on dominate.
To refocus my argument, paying 2 blood and tapping is probably
ineffective enough that you are likely just going to bolt on dominate.
Or play dom/AUS. If such a card cost 1 pool, yeah, that would probably
be good to the point of it showing up in every deck (even ones *with*
dom/AUS), so it is unlikely to occur as a card. But maybe if it was 1
blood, 1 pool, tap a dude, it would be in the middle somewhere.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
LSJ wrote:
> What new variation are you imagining that isn't already present?
Giving disciplines that don't have bounce flexible bleed reduction
cards, for instance (like the aformetioned Obfuscate +1 stealth/reduce
a bleed by 2 example, which is possibly too good or just a bad idea,
but it is an example of the kind of thing I'd be interested in seeing).
Or something like what James had as an example (when you get bled, tap
vampires of your predator as a reaction).
Specific, flexible bleed defense. That gives decks without bounce more
bleed defense options. Which is why people would like to see
disciplinless bleed bounce. But personally, I'd like to see other
options instead.
-Peter
XZealot
Well, since we are in the land of "My Forcefield changes to stop
whatever your arguement is" I Direct Intervention your Learjet.
Ha! You can't do anything about DI. I win!
pd...@lightlink.com
bluedevil wrote:
> I know we've discussed this before, and your answer is "but it screws
> Harrod!", but this is why I think opening up AI to be playable when
> anybody is being bled for 4+ is good. Everybody would chuck one or two
> in their decks and if somebody actually sits down at the table and
> starts hucking bleeds for 6 on turn 3, then they are taking a very
> real, very *blind* risk of getting burned, because they are clearly a
> sweeping threat. It's not perfect, but it is the closest thing I have
> come up with to getting in the way back machine and implimenting
> Duffin's "make it hard to bleed for more than 3" which in an ideal
> world would be our solution.
Maybe. Like, again, I don't think making bounce harder to play is
necessarily a *bad* thing (although as I mentioned elsewhere, it might
be), but more importantly, making bounce harder to play doesn't
actually help the problem that people are discussing fixing here--i.e.
more viable bleed defense for non bounce enabled decks. Yeah, making
bounce harder might see more Telepathic Counters in play, and fewer
people relying solely on Deflection as bleed defense, but for the decks
that weren't using bounce in the first place, they find themselves
still just as screwed when they sit down as the prey of Malk94.
So sure, maybe making bounce harder to do is an appropriate measure for
some issues of the game. But it isn't addressing the same thing that,
say, making disciplinless bounce is adressing.
-Peter
XZealot
Wow, nice strawman arguement!
If you have a Major Boon in your hand and by turn 3 you haven't seen
another bleed on the table that would allow you to put the Major Boon
in play by the time it comes around to your turn then yes, you get to
eat a bleed for 6. The same thing happens if you put 90 Deflections
but haven't influenced out a vampire by turn three either. This is a
strawman arguement and is invalid.
The funny thing is that if someone chump bleeds for 1 when you don't
have a minion in play, then you can put the Major Boon in play WITHOUT
A MINION and save yourself from being bled for 6.
Wow! Look it's not only disciplineless bounce. It is minionless as
well.
XZealot
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> XZealot wrote:
> > What can Major Boon do that Minion Tap cannot:
>
> (snipped all very good reasons that Major Boon is good)
>
> Yes. Major Boon is good. Yet it doesn't keep S+B/weenie bleed/power
> bleed from winning more often than not. Which is *still* the case.
> Major Boon has been around since day 1. People have been using Major
> Boon since day 1. And still, The People seem interested in
> disciplinless bleed bounce. Which might be the result of everyone being
> on crack. But I suspect not.
Mainly, it doesn't get played because people don't play it. People
play Minion Taps, Blood Dolls, and Dreams of the Sphinx. They also
play Dominate so they don't need Major Boon, Well Comrade, since you
are the voice of The People obviously none of my arguements can stand
up against it. Major Boon sees play, and Major Boon wins tournaments.
I have seen it with my own two eyes.
> > Malk '94 can still be defeated by not blocking at letting them jam up
> > on stealth. Or you can proactively rush their minions into torpor
> > (you probably hadn't thought of that one :P ) .
>
> Yes, yes. S+B can be beat. I know. However, how many times have you
> played in a tournament where most of the people are good players, there
> are lots of well designed, competetive decks in circulation, lots of
> analysis of play styles and metagaming, and in the end, the answer
> turns out to be "the guy playing the S+B deck won."? 'Cause even with
> advanced play theory and intelligent deck design, and Major Boon, the
> S+B deck is *still* the most effective (in a general sense--yes, sure,
> sometimes the S+B deck sits next to a Rush deck and doesn't take a
> single action all game) strategy in the game. As it is the most direct.
I find that S&B is sloppy and inelegant weapon. Against veteran
players, it is just as disruptive as the guy shelling out Anarch
Revolts (pre-errata) onto the table. You can get a big payload into
the pipe, but because of bounce it could hit the wrong target. So yes
bounce is a good defense against Stealth Bleed.
> > I don't understand this fragment.
>
> But (I) find the idea of (a) disciplinless bounce (card) unappealing
> (as something to introduce into the game).
I am not going to make your arguement for you. Disciplineless bounce
already exists. It is Major Boon. For Better or Worse, it is already
here.
Merlin
XZealot wrote:
> pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> > XZealot wrote:
> > > What can Major Boon do that Minion Tap cannot:
> >
> > (snipped all very good reasons that Major Boon is good)
> >
> > Yes. Major Boon is good. Yet it doesn't keep S+B/weenie bleed/power
> > bleed from winning more often than not. Which is *still* the case.
> > Major Boon has been around since day 1. People have been using Major
> > Boon since day 1. And still, The People seem interested in
> > disciplinless bleed bounce. Which might be the result of everyone being
> > on crack. But I suspect not.
>
> Mainly, it doesn't get played because people don't play it. People
> play Minion Taps, Blood Dolls, and Dreams of the Sphinx. They also
> play Dominate so they don't need Major Boon, Well Comrade, since you
> are the voice of The People obviously none of my arguements can stand
> up against it. Major Boon sees play, and Major Boon wins tournaments.
> I have seen it with my own two eyes.
>
Were the TWDs playing Major Boon using bounce themselves? That seems to
be the most efficient use of the card to me (i've seen a Major
Boon/Parity Shift deck that was pretty good as well).
Obviously XZealot is willing to ride the "Disciplineless bounce already
exists, it's Major Boon!" horse around until it dies. So further
requests and arguements should include the phrase "minion card" to keep
things from becoming further conflated. Thank you,
Merlin
Appolonius
> Appolonius wrote:
>> XZealot wrote:
>>> The fact that people are clamoring for disciplineless bleed bounce
>>> means those people are wearing blinders. Major Boon is bleed bounce.
>> OK, so my predator influences out Didi Meyers on turn 2. Next turn, as
>> her first action, she bleeds me for 6 at +2 stealth. Thank God I've got
>> a Major Boon in my hand!
>
> Wow, nice strawman arguement!
Erm, so your position is that Major Boon is bleed bounce, but pointing
out it can't actually be used to bounce a bleed is a strawman argument?
> If you have a Major Boon in your hand and by turn 3 you haven't seen
> another bleed on the table that would allow you to put the Major Boon
> in play by the time it comes around to your turn then yes, you get to
> eat a bleed for 6.
'Nuff said really. Major Boon <> bleed bounce.
Appolonius.
Atom Weaver
Is disciplineless bounce really what needs to be added? I wonder if
this wouldn't be solved more readily by limiting the offender, weenie
bleed. Say, a rules variant with a maximum bleed related to capacity.
Say, ignore bleed quantity in excess of X/2, rounded up, from a minion
of capacity X.
DZ
AW
bluedevil
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> So sure, maybe making bounce harder to do is an appropriate measure for
> some issues of the game. But it isn't addressing the same thing that,
> say, making disciplinless bounce is adressing.
What does tweaking AI have to do with making bounce harder? I mean,
yeah, we're talking about hosing bounce over in some other part of the
thread, but it doesn't have to be an all or nothing thing. Here, I'm
talking about something else.
witness1
Appolonius wrote:
> XZealot wrote:
> > Appolonius wrote:
> >> XZealot wrote:
> >>> The fact that people are clamoring for disciplineless bleed bounce
> >>> means those people are wearing blinders. Major Boon is bleed bounce.
> [snip]
> >> OK, so my predator influences out Didi Meyers on turn 2. Next turn, as
> >> her first action, she bleeds me for 6 at +2 stealth. Thank God I've got
> >> a Major Boon in my hand!
> >
> > Wow, nice strawman arguement!
>
> Erm, so your position is that Major Boon is bleed bounce, but pointing
> out it can't actually be used to bounce a bleed is a strawman argument?
Meh. If you don't have a minion with dom or AUS out when Didi Bleeds
you for six, you eat the same bleed of six. Just because the card has
requirements and costs doesn't make it not-a-bounce.
> > If you have a Major Boon in your hand and by turn 3 you haven't seen
> > another bleed on the table that would allow you to put the Major Boon
> > in play by the time it comes around to your turn then yes, you get to
> > eat a bleed for 6.
>
> 'Nuff said really. Major Boon <> bleed bounce.
If a card read: "Only usable if a minion controlled by another
methuselah is bleeding you. Give a number of pool to a methuselah equal
to an amount that they were successfully bled for since your last turn.
The acting minion is now bleeding that methuselah."
Would this be bleed bounce? Why or why not?
Witness1
-ItE
Fred Scott
news:1153162943....@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
I can't - but my ally JUST COINCIDENTALLY holding a Sudden Reversal
can!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
;-)
Fred
"Er, what about the organist?"
"She's neutral."
-- Evil Roy Slade, 1972