LSJ: picky questions
DHollis915
Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have come
up in our playgroup.
A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both for
the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his strike?
(what if he says please really nicely? 8-) )
A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a
combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use it, and
then play another combat card for a manuever?
A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into
such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive.
Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in
by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated
damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but
I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about.
Please also reply by email...
Dan
adz...@dartmouth.edu
Jeff Endres
DHollis915 <dholl...@aol.com> wrote:
> Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have
come
> up in our playgroup.
> A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both
for
> the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his
strike?
> (what if he says please really nicely? 8-) )
I am pretty sure you can only use one weapon special each round, or wording
to that effect.
> A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a
> combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use
it, and
> then play another combat card for a manuever?
Yes. Optional means it is your choice. You might want to use a card which
has another special and save the other manuever for a later time.
> A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming
into
> such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline
abusive.
> Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage
(as in
> by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into
aggravated
> damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's
unfair), but
> I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about.
Well the combo you mention provides a way of doing that. I can't see how a
combat deck can be _that_ abusive. Now a Misdirection, Sleeping Mind combo
in a bleed deck.....
> Please also reply by email...
> Dan
> adz...@dartmouth.edu
--
Jeff Endres
LSJ
DHollis915 wrote:
>
> A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both for
> the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his strike?
> (what if he says please really nicely? 8-) )
No. Once you lock yourself into a strike, you cannot use an effect
that would lock you into using a different strike.
> A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a
> combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use it, and
> then play another combat card for a manuever?
Yes.
> A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into
> such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive.
> Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in
> by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated
> damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but
> I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about.
This combo is legal. The unpreventable damage can be converted to
normal damage (with Skin of Night or by Merrill's special ability,
for example).
> Please also reply by email...
> Dan
> adz...@dartmouth.edu
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com)
Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
(*) - Subject to review by Rules Team
Robert Goudie
Jeff Endres wrote:
>
>DHollis915 <dholl...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have
>>come up in our playgroup.
> I'm L. Scott but I'll answer your Questions.
No, *I'm* the real LSJ!
-Robert
PDB6
Dan wrote:
"A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into
such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive.
Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in
by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated
damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but
I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about."
As Jeff Endres wrote somewhere below, it is very difficult to envision _any_
combat deck as abusive, as combat decks are so fundamentally screwed from the
get go. If a good combat deck can utilize a cool angle (like Drawing out the
Beast+Dawn Opps), all it is doing is its job, yet it still will probably have
trouble actually winning a game.
In this particular instance, the only clan who can reliably use DotB+DO are the
Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way to deal
with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy and
extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by S:CE
cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly
concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning.
Plus, Dawn Opperations only works if you block the acting vampire. As the
Gangrel are pretty much the only clan who can use this combo (other than some
large Nosferatu), and the Gangrel really can't do anything that you need to
block _don't block them_. If you really don't want a particular vampire to get
torporized, don't use them to block any vampire with superior Fortitude (as
with inferior for, you can back out after they play DO). What could the
Gangrel be doing that you so desperately need to block them? Bleeding for 1?
Not trying to block will stop this combo totally dead, regardless of what deck
you are playing, and as it is highly likely that the vampires who can pull this
combo off probably aren't doing anything that you need to block from the
beginning, it probably won't hurt much, and probably much less than getting
your vampire torporized.
To summarize:
Don't block!
Use S:CE cards.
Don't block!
Peter D Bakija
PD...@aol.com
"I was satisfied with my life
before I ate Strawberry Cream Puff."
-Shonen Knife
Robert Goudie
PDB6 wrote:
>
> Dan wrote:
> "A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into
> such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive.
> cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly
> concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning.
The combo still works perfectly with S:CE! I built my first one a
couple of years ago a a S:CE screw deck. The DotB deals its one
unpreventable [agg due to DO] damage at the *end of the round*. A
Strike of S:CE ends the round. Look at L. Scott's Rules Outline to see
that S:CE takes you to the End of Round section where you *apply end of
round effects*.
In fact, my version has my acting minion playing a FoM for a strike
which allows me to continue with the action in the first place at +1
stealth while the blocking minion takes an unpreventable agg and goes to
torpor. Opponents usually realize very quickly that they the action
will succeed anyway so there is no sense losing a vampire over it. Soon
they stop blocking.
> To summarize:
>
> Don't block!
This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise +
Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately,
the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls,
Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious
abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a
difficult deck to play and win with.
-Robert Goudie
PDB6
Robert Goudie wrote:
"The combo still works perfectly with S:CE! I built my first one a
couple of years ago a a S:CE screw deck. The DotB deals its one
unpreventable [agg due to DO] damage at the *end of the round*. A
Strike of S:CE ends the round. Look at L. Scott's Rules Outline to see
that S:CE takes you to the End of Round section where you *apply end of round
effects*."
Goodness, you are correct. I completely spaced on that angle when I was
writing this morning. Doh. Regardless, the main point is don't block this
sort of deck. If it is bleeding you, either ignore it or deflect it. If they
are really bothering you, Rush them and kill them. All you have to do to avoid
getting killed by this deck is to not block a vampire with both superior ANI
and superior FOR, and you'll be just fine.
Michael Beer
PDB6 wrote:
> In this particular instance, the only clan who can reliably use
> DotB+DO are the
> Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way
> to deal
> with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy
> and
> extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by
> S:CE
> cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are
> particularly
> concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning.
>
1st: Ravnos have a lot of mid-size vamps with ANI FOR, so they are also
very good at playing this combo
2nd: S:CE shuts down this combo? Are you sure?
See this article from LSJ: (Dejanews: Search for LSJ and Drawing out the
Beast)
Subject: Re: S:CE and DotB
From: vte...@wizards.com (LSJ (VtES Rep))
Date: 1997/09/15
Message-ID: <5vjh6o$7...@news.wizards.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
[More Headers]
Jeffrey Endres wrote:
> > Quicksilver <michae...@lmco.com> wrote:
> > > Will Drawing out the Beast at superior
> > > still deal damage when a S:CE is played?
> Drawing out the Beast is an end of _round_ effect, not an end of
combat
> effect.
>
> Ending combat will take you past the resolution of end of round
effects.
End of Round is *not* a phase of combat that only occurs after the
Press phase.
If DotB's damage was applied during a set phase (like "during the
Press step, take a damage"), then it would be bypassed by S:CE, etc.
But it is not. The round cannot continue past the end of combat. If
combat ends, then the round must also end. DotB's damage will occur
at that time.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com)
Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
(*) - Subject to review by Rules Team
So the damage from DotB is STILL applied even when S:CE is played!!!
*******************************
The one question which remains is:
When under the effect of Dawn Op and DotB a S:CE is played, is the
damage from
DotB still aggravated?
*******************************
This could lead to an abusive Gangrel loop strategy:
1st action (blocked)
Dawn Op + DotB + Form of Mist or Earth Meld
2nd action ....
Just make sure that your prey wants to block your actions (use Laptops,
Invernary Castle, Dominate,... whatever hurts most)
Michael Beer
LSJ
Michael Beer wrote:
> The one question which remains is:
>
> When under the effect of Dawn Op and DotB a S:CE is played, is the
> damage from
> DotB still aggravated?
Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round).
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com)
Justin Fang
In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote:
>Michael Beer wrote:
>Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round).
Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from DotB
damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play it at
the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after Majesty?
Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented damage
done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks.
--
Justin Fang (jus...@ugcs.caltech.edu)
This space intentionally left blank.
David Naseby
Justin Fang wrote:
> In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com>
> wrote:
> >Michael Beer wrote:
> >Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the
> round).
>
> Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from
> DotB
> damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play
> it at
> the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after
> Majesty?
>
You cannot, because the taste of vitae will not recover environmental
damage like DOTB or Weather Control, only damage caused by the vampire
playing the card.
> Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented
> damage
> done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks.
>
Yes, from card text:
"Whenever damage is successfully inflicted upon, put X rush counters on
this card, where X is the amount of damage inflicted."
It does not specify damage inflicted by anybody, just damage inflicted
to.
David Naseby
LSJ
David Naseby wrote:
> Justin Fang wrote:
> > Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from
> > DotB
> > damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play
> > it at
> > the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after
> > Majesty?
>
> You cannot, because the taste of vitae will not recover environmental
> damage like DOTB or Weather Control, only damage caused by the vampire
> playing the card.
Taste of Vitae recovers all blood lost by the opposing minion to damage,
environmental damage or otherwise.
LSJ
Justin Fang wrote:
>
> In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote:
> >Michael Beer wrote:
> >Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round).
>
> damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play it at
> the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after Majesty?
The end of the round is after strike resolution, so you can play ToV at
that time. You cannot play it after Majesty, I believe, since Majesty
interrupts strike resolution.
> Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented damage
> done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks.
Yes.
DHollis915
>
>Dan wrote:
>"A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into
>such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline
>abusive.
>by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated
>damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair),
>but
>I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about."
>
>As Jeff Endres wrote somewhere below, it is very difficult to envision _any_
>combat deck as abusive, as combat decks are so fundamentally screwed from the
>get go. If a good combat deck can utilize a cool angle (like Drawing out the
>Beast+Dawn Opps), all it is doing is its job, yet it still will probably have
>trouble actually winning a game.
>
>the
>Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way to deal
>with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy and
>extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by S:CE
>cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly
>concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning.
>
I thought that unpreventable damage could not be changed from aggro to
normal. Our playgroup plays Jyhad Online rules, so no thoughts betrayed.
I've actually found that animalism combat is one of the only combat types
that can handle a good celerity guns deck. The one around here is built around
acrobatics, side strike, and persuit rather than blur, so it can 1) always be
able to play its combat cards at minor or superior, thereby virtually
eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many manuevers that it rarely gets
immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge. Carrion crows,
animalism retainers, and drawing out the beast especially (for the equipment
prevention) are about the only things that can beat it in combat.
Lastly, S:CE doesn't prevent the damage. In fact, the Gangrel can of mist to
continue their action ....
>Plus, Dawn Opperations only works if you block the acting vampire. As the
>Gangrel are pretty much the only clan who can use this combo (other than some
>large Nosferatu), and the Gangrel really can't do anything that you need to
>block _don't block them_. If you really don't want a particular vampire to
>get
>torporized, don't use them to block any vampire with superior Fortitude (as
>with inferior for, you can back out after they play DO). What could the
>Gangrel be doing that you so desperately need to block them? Bleeding for 1?
>
Nah, the Anti-Gangrel have dominate. There are enough with ani-dom that make
bruise-bleed extremely effective. And note how useful form of mist is with
the combo, and then also think about how the high precentage of S:CE in this
deck makes it strong against rush combat. Then you've got an effective bleed
deck which gets unblockable actions against 0 and nearly unblockable against
low intercept decks, with the added bonus of putting blockers in torpor, and
being strong against rush combat. Take any effective stealth bleed deck, and
it can't get this much return for so few cards. As I see it, only bleed bounce
is an effective counter strategy. I admit, it's not outright disgusting, but
it has made me think about just how effective a combination can be before it's
game unbalancing, especially if fortitude didn't prevent it as I thought.
DHollis915
>
>This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise +
>Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately,
>the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls,
>Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious
>abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a
>difficult deck to play and win with.
Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses
Stanislava and dominate.
Hand jam might be an issue, but one of the combo cards, dawn op, is playable
regardless of the block. Rush combat has a hard time, except for immortal
grapple (which, as another independent subject is a card that we all just have
decided to play without. It feels like cheese when playing it, and makes the
game unpleasant for anyone near it since it is so difficult to defend against.
The Brujah's thoughts betrayed, only it costs 2 less) because of the high S:CE
density. And, even the grapple needs to be wary of the possibility of a
protean stike, which can be used with S:CE just to cycle the card.
Robert Goudie
DHollis915 wrote:
>
> >
> >This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise +
> >Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately,
> >the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls,
> >Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious
> >abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a
> >difficult deck to play and win with.
>
> Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses
> Stanislava and dominate.
My deck used For/ANI/PRO. The Superior Animalism was an absolute
requirement as was the superior Protean. I had to do DotB at superior
and be able to Form of Mist or Earth Meld. It is a difficult deck to
play because it required a lot of skill in dealing with its many areas
of weekness. The deck has been damaged pretty badly by votes, big
bleeds, and rush combat. Hand Jam wasn't an issue because the Dawn Ops
can be cycled, and the S:CE can be played after a block when I
defended. In the end, the low bleeds that build slowly throughout the
game seem to help it. You don't attract too much attention when you're
bleeding for one-even if you have a killer combo (since it never gets
played!).
-Robert Goudie
PDB6
dhollis wrote:
"Nah, the Anti-Gangrel have dominate. There are enough with ani-dom that make
bruise-bleed extremely effective. And note how useful form of mist is with
the combo, and then also think about how the high precentage of S:CE in this
deck makes it strong against rush combat."
Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti Gangrel
have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior? It seems a
very precarious combo of disciplines to build an effective deck around. You
can probably get a crypt of multiple 8+ sized vampires with the appropriate
disciplines, and then throw in alot of Skill cards, but that makes for a very
uncertain deck from the get go.
As to S:CE against Rush combat-a Rush combat deck that cannot deal with S:CE
will be a very poor Rush deck. A Rush deck pretty much needs to have Immortal
Grapple or Psyche!, otherwise it won't ever work.
"Then you've got an effective bleed deck which gets unblockable actions against
0 and nearly unblockable against low intercept decks, with the added bonus of
putting blockers in torpor, and being strong against rush combat."
The strong against Rush combat seems very iffy. If you have enough Drawing out
the Beast/Dawn Opps, as well as dominate bleed modifiers, and S:CE, you won't
have much in the way of offense, and again, a Rush deck that can't stop S:CE
isn't even worth playing.
"Take any effective stealth bleed deck, and it can't get this much return for
so few cards. As I see it, only bleed bounce is an effective counter
strategy."
In most situations, the same can be said about regular S+B (i.e. intercepting a
determined stealth deck is very difficult). The Dom/Ani/For deck probably
won't do much better against Rush combat than a Malk S+B deck.
"I admit, it's not outright disgusting, but it has made me think about just how
effective a combination can be before it's game unbalancing, especially if
fortitude didn't prevent it as I thought."
It is clearly an effective combo (the DotB/DO), but it is little more than a
clever angle. The vampires needed to build such a deck (including Dominate)
effectivley are few and far between, the deck is completely shut down by the
very common Bleed Bounce defense, is pretty soft in the face of a good Rush
deck, and will end up with awful hand jam if no one ever blocks it.
He also wrote:
"The one around here is built around acrobatics, side strike, and persuit
rather than blur, so it can 1) always be able to play its combat cards at minor
or superior, thereby virtually eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many
manuevers that it rarely gets
immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge."
Use the Nosferatu and Drawing out the Beast and the Immortally Grapple him. He
will be complete meat. And everyone laughed at Animalism...
And then:
"Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses Stanislava
and dominate."
Why does Stanislava survive? Apparently your opponents aren't trying hard
enough.
"Hand jam might be an issue, but one of the combo cards, dawn op, is playable
regardless of the block. Rush combat has a hard time, except for immortal
grapple (which, as another independent subject is a card that we all just have
decided to play without. It feels like cheese when playing it, and makes the
game unpleasant for anyone near it since it is so difficult to defend against.
The Brujah's thoughts betrayed, only it costs 2 less) because of the high S:CE
density. And, even the grapple needs to be wary of the possibility of a
protean stike, which can be used with S:CE just to cycle the card."
While always entitled to your opinion, Immortal Grapple is an incredibly
important card for the balance of the game. Without Immortal Grapple, combat
decks are close to useless. S:CE/Dodge are way to common and easy to use, and
without a way to stop them, Rush combat decks shift from simply difficult to
win with into the realm of nigh impossible to win with.
David Naseby
PDB6 wrote:
> Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti
> Gangrel
> have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior?
A quick search of the Crypt Monger (Drew's is down for me right now)
reveals a semi crypt, with (at least) ANI for dom, of:Genevieve (GANANT
10), Natalia (RAV 7), Sarisha Veliku (RAV 6), Konstantin (RAV 9), Faruq
(GAN 8), Stanislava (GAN 11), Ingrid Rossler (GAN 9).
Thats 7 vampires, the lowest a 6. A lot of Ravnos. Try saying "Okay, I
won't block your sensory deprivation". Now say it again. Now stop
sweating.
As for those with just ANI for, there are a further 12 vampires. The low
level ones of interest to round out a crypt :
Luther (GANANT 6), Gitane St. Claire (GAN 7), Bear Paw (GAN 5), Chester
DuBois (NOS 7).
It is certainly a high level crypt, but if you are not afraid of
multiples, you could go for a lot of 6 to 7 level vampires.
I'd be thinking 3 Sarisha, 2 Konstantin, 2 Bear Paw, 3 Natalia, 1 Faruq,
1 Stanislava, average 7.2, worst 37 (pretty bad but could be worse).
Some dominate and chimmerstry master cards, need Info Highway, Govern
the Unaligned to bleed or get out your high level vamps. Then the nasty
combo. Put in a few act. mod bleeds, mostly for intimidation (make them
block). Sensory Deprivations, as mentioned before, is also a fairly
strong incentive to block. It would be a tough deck to play, but it
would be fun.....
David Naseby
LSJ
DHollis915 wrote:
> I thought that unpreventable damage could not be changed from aggro to
> normal.
You can convert unoreventable aggravated damage to normal damage, since
doing so clearly isn't preventing the damage.
PDB6
David Naseby wrote:
"A quick search of the Crypt Monger (Drew's is down for me right now) reveals a
semi crypt, with (at least) ANI for dom, of:Genevieve (GANANT 10), Natalia (RAV
7), Sarisha Veliku (RAV 6), Konstantin (RAV 9), Faruq (GAN 8), Stanislava (GAN
11), Ingrid Rossler (GAN 9).
Thats 7 vampires, the lowest a 6. A lot of Ravnos. Try saying "Okay, I won't
block your sensory deprivation". Now say it again. Now stop
sweating."
Again, sure, you can do it, but it will be incredibly sketchy. You are
building a crypt out of large vampires for a 4 discipline deck (For, Ani, Dom,
Chi) that has very little in the way of intercept or Bleed defense. To make
the deck work, you will need to have Bleed modifiers, enough Drawing out the
Beast and Dawn Opps to be consistently threatening, Sensory Deprivations, and a
metric buttload of Master Skill cards. If it is going to have any defenses
(like intercept or Bleed bounce, and then WWEF to make it work...), this deck
will be incredibly tenious.
Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to try, but as
actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be
considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this whole
thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting deck,
for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going.
David Naseby
PDB6 wrote:
> Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to
> try, but as
> actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be
>
> considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this
> whole
> thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting
> deck,
> for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going.
"Determined" decks are generally frowned upon in our group, and the
offending "playing to win from template" person is castigated, scorned,
tarred and feathered, then stoned, drawn (and, on at least one occasion)
quartered. We tend to play with decks that say what can this card do. We
recently had a newbie join our group who consistently won, and he thinks
the game is very easy, and has gained something of a god complex. We,
however, dismissed S'n'B decks about 2 years ago as the ultimate in
boredom.
I am swiftly coming to the conclusion that my isolation in Sydney from
tournament play, stuck alone in the gaming wilderness with my little
group of 4 to 5 regular players surrounded by the human detritus that
call themselves Magic players, has led to a longevity in Jyhad.
But this discussion probably belongs on another thread, or another
newsgroup, away from people who really enjoy the tournament metagame.
David Naseby
DHollis915
>Well the combo you mention provides a way of doing that. I can't see how a
>combat deck can be _that_ abusive.
Also see my post to PBD ...
This is not actually a combat deck. It's a bruise bleed deck which puts
blockers into torpor almost every time (everytime barring skin of night
effects, which are not that common and at least special cases) for 2 cards.
With the addition of one more to the combo, Form of Mist, it also succeeds in
its action which doing the above and gets to defend itself exceedingly well
against combat.
>Now a Misdirection, Sleeping Mind combo
>in a bleed deck.....
Yeah, I know there are worse, and they're right out in our playgroup (which
follows JOL rules) . Everyone's idea of what's broken and what's unfair is
different, and we have to decide, individually, on some line. It's going to
come down to a judgement call on "fairness" - meaning whether a combo is
inherently cheaper than the norm, which is the case of the misdirection +
sleeping mind that you mentioned. It's the combos like soul gem + return to
innocence + day op that are outright broken - because they force decks to
address them specifically.
T.W.Malisch
Does anyone have the list of the cards that are in the VTES run but not
the Jyhad Run?
T.W.Malisch
Mark Langsdorf
> > Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to
> > try, but as
> > actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be
> >
> > considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this
> > whole
> > thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting
> > deck,
> > for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going.
> "Determined" decks are generally frowned upon in our group, and the
> offending "playing to win from template" person is castigated, scorned,
> tarred and feathered, then stoned, drawn (and, on at least one occasion)
> quartered. We tend to play with decks that say what can this card do. We
> recently had a newbie join our group who consistently won, and he thinks
> the game is very easy, and has gained something of a god complex. We,
> however, dismissed S'n'B decks about 2 years ago as the ultimate in
> boredom.
I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush
and vote decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting.
-Mark Langsdorf
Jyhad Archivist
http://www.io.com/~mlangsdo/RPGs/Jyhad/
DHollis915
>Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti Gangrel
>have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior? It seems
>a
>very precarious combo of disciplines to build an effective deck around. You
>can probably get a crypt of multiple 8+ sized vampires with the appropriate
>disciplines, and then throw in alot of Skill cards, but that makes for a very
>uncertain deck from the get go.
>
I'm guessing that your playgroup has a lot of combat. So does mine,
actually. Many of the combat decks are getting to be larger vampires, because
they're more effective in combat (as they are also more effective out of
combat) . Better disciplines, more blood and therefore damage to soak, the
addition often of votes or bleed ... But anyway, I'd be more willing to argue
against the idea that multiple large vampires or skill cards make a deck
uncertain than I'd be willing to argue that dotb + dawnop is broken.
Especially in larger (5+ table size) games, they provide so much more
versatility than their higher cost. In fact, I use skill cards exclusively
with smaller vampires to get past that.
>As to S:CE against Rush combat-a Rush combat deck that cannot deal with S:CE
>will be a very poor Rush deck. A Rush deck pretty much needs to have
>Immortal
>Grapple or Psyche!, otherwise it won't ever work.
...
>The strong against Rush combat seems very iffy. If you have enough Drawing
>out
>the Beast/Dawn Opps, as well as dominate bleed modifiers, and S:CE, you won't
>have much in the way of offense, and again, a Rush deck that can't stop S:CE
>isn't even worth playing.
Yes, but the ability to surpass S:CE isn't an all or nothing thing. What is
a deck strong against rush combat, aside from another potence deck or protean
combat (typically seen as inferior to most other combat forms)? A very heavy
manuever deck might be able to beat the grapple, but a brujah rush deck can
contain just as many as the more manuevering tremere or toreador deck.
So what exactly is a deck that's strong against rush, then? I do contend
that it's a deck packing lots of s:ce . A rush deck with the right hand can
level any vampire, yes. But in actual play, when hand jam becomes more of an
issue, lots of s:ce's work fairly well. I'd say even better than lots of
manuevers, since I'd wager that a rush deck is more likely to contain more
manuevers than grapples - meaning it's more likely to hold a manuever than a
grapple - meaning it's more likely to hold defense against long range combat
than s:ce. That makes sense, simply because long range combat is more danerous
to the grapple deck than s:ce.
>In most situations, the same can be said about regular S+B (i.e. intercepting
>a
>determined stealth deck is very difficult). The Dom/Ani/For deck probably
>won't do much better against Rush combat than a Malk S+B deck.
Right, but a high stealth deck can be (easily for its ueberprey) hand jammed.
The dtob/dawnop bruise bleed cannot be so easily.
>He also wrote:
>"The one around here is built around acrobatics, side strike, and persuit
>rather than blur, so it can 1) always be able to play its combat cards at
>minor
>or superior, thereby virtually eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many
>manuevers that it rarely gets
>immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge."
>
>Use the Nosferatu and Drawing out the Beast and the Immortally Grapple him.
>He
>will be complete meat. And everyone laughed at Animalism...
Tough, but perhaps possible. The dotb only cancels one manuever, and this
deck has gobs of manuevers. It's contents are about 5 or 6 guns, maybe 6-8
intercept cards, a few permo-cept locations and a fast reaction and a few
wakes, and the rest is celerity (that's about 85%), using only the celerity
cards that have different uses at minor and superior (ir no blurs, rapid
though, etc.) That last fact means that at any time, 7 cards * 85% celerity *
2 uses / card is somewhere around, effectively, 12 celerity abilities. And
those are only manuevers, dodges, extra strikes, and presses, nothing else. On
average, that's 3 of each in the hand assuming no jam. Hand jam's easy to
avoid because each card can be played 2 different ways. I'm convinced that it
cannot be caught by a grapple unless the brujah or nosferatu packs his deck
with so many manuevers that he clogs on them. chimerstry combat ( illusions of
the kindred; always works) and non-strike damage are the only effective
strategies, I've found. If you have any other suggestions, I'd love to hear
them, but I've tried the heavy manuever grapple and it didn't work.
>"Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses Stanislava
>and dominate."
>
>Why does Stanislava survive? Apparently your opponents aren't trying hard
>enough.
>
Please, I know that rush combat is the ultimate defense against just about
any strategy, but this seems to be rhetoric. You can't just chalk up something
like a vampire surviving to lack of effort. If what you're saying is valid,
then that means no strategy but rush combat can possibly work.
>While always entitled to your opinion, Immortal Grapple is an incredibly
>important card for the balance of the game. Without Immortal Grapple, combat
>decks are close to useless. S:CE/Dodge are way to common and easy to use,
>and
>without a way to stop them, Rush combat decks shift from simply difficult to
>win with into the realm of nigh impossible to win with.
>
I disagree here, and I just knew I'd get an argument. :) I have to go now,
but I will respond tomorrow. For now I'll just say that I have my reasons,
mainly: 1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3)
it provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have
psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better than
the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast reaction
and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has
exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed, except it costs one less
(counting the hand strike for 1) and provides a press. I think it's very
difficult to argue that restricting TB to decks which will S:CE (if it could be
done ...) makes TB a fair card.
Okay, so I did say something. One last thing: I used to think Immortal
Grapple was fair, until I was playing my eurobrujah deck, and I noticed that it
won far more often than it should. I noticed that he only combats it ever lost
were against the celerity guns deck I listed above, and I noticed that I was
the only one using the card. That last point may not seem important, but if no
one else wants to see a card used against him nor wants to use it himself, then
maybe I shouldn't use the card. After all, no one wants to play the game if
it's not fun.
dh
PDB6
dhollis wrote:
"So what exactly is a deck that's strong against rush, then? I do contend that
it's a deck packing lots of s:ce ."
I would say that decks that do well against Rush combat are decks that fight
back, use Fortitude, or don't care about combat.
A-a good combat deck can fight a good combat deck. If they are planning on
Immortally Grappling you and beating you down, beat them back. Use Potence or
Protean (with Pro, however, you will probably need extra hand damage as the
Brujah can prevent one per round). If there is a good Brujah combat deck
around, make a good Gangrel deck.
B-Use Fortitude. Skin of Steel, in a high combat enviornment, is usually much
more effective than S:CE. Assuming Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, S:CE cards
will just clog up your hand.
C-If you can't fight, don't even try. Make a deck that does something other
than fight, Minion Tap all of your vampires down to 1 or 2 blood, and look sad
when you are killed. Hopefully, though, all your extra pool and deck space not
taken up by combat will make up for it.
Having lots of S:CE is simply not the answer. Again, against Immortal Grapple
or Psyche!, it is useless, and if you are not near a combat deck and no one
blocks you, you will end up with a handfull of Majesty very quickly.
"The dotb only cancels one manuever, and this deck has gobs of manuevers."
This is incorrect. Drawing out the Beast:
"Only usable before range is determined on the first round. During this combat,
opposing vampire gets +1 hand damage, but he or she can only use manuvers to
cancel manuvers, can only use presses to continue combat, and connot use
equipment."
This means that if the vampire who plays the DotB doesn't play any manuvers,
the opposing minion cannot play any manuvers either. The vampire with its
beast drawn out may not manuver to long range, as manuvering to long range is
not canceling a manuver, it is manuvering to long range. Basically, if your
opponent plays DotB, you cannot manuver the entire combat, unless he manuvers
to long range, at which point you can cancel his manuver to go to close.
"I'm convinced that it cannot be caught by a grapple unless the brujah or
nosferatu packs his deck with so many manuevers that he clogs on them."
Or, he plays Drawing out the Beast.
"If you have any other suggestions, I'd love to hear them, but I've tried the
heavy manuever grapple and it didn't work."
Well, if the deck has no Bum's Rush, it can only get into combat by either
blocking or being blocked. Don't block him, or play enough stealth to not get
blocked. Then he will be useless and overflowing with Flashes.
"1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3) it
provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have
psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better than
the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast reaction
and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has
exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed"
Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with one,
and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in
comparison. The biggest problem with TB is that is breaks a fundamental tenent
of the game, namely the use of cards. Immortal Grapple, while occasionally has
a similar effect (to a much lesser extent), still allows its opponents to
manuver away, press to end, use potence, use fortitude, use protean, and
generally fight back. TB prevents you from playing the game. Immortal Grapple
just prevents a few key cards from making an entire strategy impossible to use.
LSJ
T.W.Malisch wrote:
> Does anyone have the list of the cards that are in the VTES run but not
> the Jyhad Run?
Wholly new cards:
* Archon Investigation
* Elder Intervention (also in the Sabbat run as Pack Tactics)
* Justicar Retribution
* Protected Resources
* Shadow of the Beast (also in the Sabbat run)
Reworked card:
* Wooden Stake (like Stake, but without using Paralyze rule)
Reillustrated (and, oddly enough, renamed) card:
* Raven (was Camille Devereux)
Renamed cards:
* Dominate Kine (was Kine Dominance)
* Gangrel Atavism (was Gangrel De-evolution)
ber...@cco.caltech.edu
> A-a good combat deck can fight a good combat deck. If they are planning on
> Immortally Grappling you and beating you down, beat them back. Use Potence or
> Protean (with Pro, however, you will probably need extra hand damage as the
> Brujah can prevent one per round). If there is a good Brujah combat deck
> around, make a good Gangrel deck.
>
Brujah can only really prevent 1 per round with Flak Jackets(wasted
actions) or Sideslip(wasted cards). Every thing they do that isn't
beating you means one more thing that you can do to oust them. Brujah
aren't generally known for their intercept. They also aren't known for
agg damage, which the Gangrel have in abundance. Compare Burning Wrath
to Uncontrollable Rage and the various Claw cards. Sure, the Brujah have
Acrobatics, which can make a killing in a high-combat, low S:CE
environment, but the City Gangrel can add that as well. Not to mention
the Gangrel have Fortitude, which is a much better combat defense than
Celerity, and Animalism, which is another good combat discipline, where
the Brujah have only Presence. Presence, while not terrible for Bruise &
Bleed, is weak at best in any combat deck.
> B-Use Fortitude. Skin of Steel, in a high combat enviornment, is usually much
> more effective than S:CE. Assuming Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, S:CE cards
> will just clog up your hand.
>
My problem with Skin of Steel was always the blood cost. Sure, it seems
odd that I'm worried about losing 1 blood, whereas a hand strike would do
the same, but I've recently learned to prefer Skin of Night, as long as I
have superior Fortitude. Since I rarely play a game with more than 3
combat decks, Skin of Steel often clogs my hand, as the other decks
either don't block me (Bruise&Bleed), or end combat or dodge on me. Not
to mention, often when I *do* get hit, it's for 1 hand damage, which Skin
of Steel nominally prevents, but not in a cost effective way. Superior
Skin of Night can deal with hand damage equally well, and you can stack
enough of 'em to stop that Assault Rifle (assuming a good replacement
draw). Plus, when you have 7 of them in your hand, you can use them all
at inferior at the beginning of combat. Not to mention, it does wonders
at stopping Dawn Op combos. I do concede however, that I'd rather face a
snarling Brujah combat monster with one Skin of Steel than a handful of
Skin of Night, but hey... there are always trade-offs.
Also, you say that with Psyche or IG, S:CE will clog your hand. I've
noticed that combat decks never have a high enough concentration of IG,
and when they do, they can never get into combat due to hand jam. So,
even with lots of IG, you can usually waste a couple of S:CE. And with
Psyche, you simply get more combats with which to use S:CE. The problem
with using Psyche as a counter to S:CE is that it's a 1-to-1 tradeoff.
You need as many Psyches as they have Majesties. Not so good in my book.
Give me Hidden Lurker any day.
> C-If you can't fight, don't even try. Make a deck that does something other
> than fight, Minion Tap all of your vampires down to 1 or 2 blood, and look sad
> when you are killed. Hopefully, though, all your extra pool and deck space
not
> taken up by combat will make up for it.
>
That's always interesting. Of course, the cost and time for getting new
vampires from your crypt could be prohibitive, but an Information Highway
and/or a couple of Effective Managements certainly help.
>
> "1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3) it
> provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have
> psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better
than
> the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast
reaction
> and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has
> exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed"
>
I disagree highly that the Brujah and Nos are better at combat than the
Gangrel. I've always seen the Gangrel as a sort of super clan that can
do anything effectively (well, not vote, but they can bleed and fight),
which was why I always hated them.
> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with
> one,
> and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in
> comparison.
Whoa... I don't agree at all that Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck.
The opposing minion doesn't even get to strike against the second
combatant! That rocks in my book. I used to play that Hidden Lurker was
an action (as it says on the card), and it was still very annoying to my
opponents. Sure, it takes two vampires, but your vamps untap next turn,
while his moulders in the ash heap. Not to mention, if you pack your own
S:CE, you never have to worry about the first vamp getting hurt.
-Chris
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
James Coupe
In article <885001314....@dejanews.com>, ber...@cco.caltech.edu
writes
>I disagree highly that the Brujah and Nos are better at combat than the
>Gangrel. I've always seen the Gangrel as a sort of super clan that can
>do anything effectively (well, not vote, but they can bleed and fight),
>which was why I always hated them.
>
Well, they didn't used to be able to bleed really. Bloody Force of
Will.
But any clan who have a moderate amount of stealth can bleed using
disciplineless - Computer Hacking, Laptop, Legendary Vampire and the
like. And the Gangrel don't do too badly for stealth - Rapid Change,
Earth Control and Backways for starters. Probably some others (doesn't
really matter what).
>> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with
>> one,
>> and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in
>> comparison.
>
>Whoa... I don't agree at all that Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck.
>The opposing minion doesn't even get to strike against the second
>combatant! That rocks in my book. I used to play that Hidden Lurker was
>an action (as it says on the card), and it was still very annoying to my
>opponents. Sure, it takes two vampires, but your vamps untap next turn,
>while his moulders in the ash heap. Not to mention, if you pack your own
>S:CE, you never have to worry about the first vamp getting hurt.
Well, I don't think, even when it was an action, that we blocked it
generally anyway (because we were stupid). But I am from the group that
didn't realise who could hunt (and I am moderately proud to say that I
am the one who worked out what actually happened - look, it wasn't my
fault, the rest of the group taught me how to play and I didn't go
through the rules book myself that much at first).
--
James Coupe (remove some crap to reply)
Pah!! I hope it shits in your jogging suit!
VampChamp1
>I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush and vote
decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting.
Probably becuase they require immediate and undivided attention to stop; even
moreso than votes. To stop a vote you have 2 chances: intercept or outvoting
(or some reaction or DI) For S&B, if you don't have the intercept (or
Deflection because DI isn't really practical against a deck with lots of S&B)
you are sh*t out of luck. It just seems like the Magic players way of screwing
up a table.
As for my group, it is not banned and even frowned upon is not the right word.
All of us have basic defenses against it, but bleeding for 5 at +2 or more
stealth each turn is not a whole bunch of fun for the player or victim and
really, hasn't it been done to death? We play along, but no one really takes
the game seriously after somebody does that.
Has it occurred to anyone but me that the Malkavians were never intended to be
the cheese producers of the game but the fun wackos? The fear that most groups
have of the Malkies is that if they ever got their sh*t together, they'd be
bloody hard to stop.
Unfortunately for us all, in the card game, there are woefully few fun cards
and the mechanics of the game have put their sh*t together all too well, and
repetitvely.
Mark Langsdorf
VampChamp1 <vampc...@aol.com> wrote:
> Mark Langsdorf <mlan...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush and vote
> decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting.
> Probably becuase they require immediate and undivided attention to stop; even
> moreso than votes. To stop a vote you have 2 chances: intercept or outvoting
> (or some reaction or DI) For S&B, if you don't have the intercept (or
> Deflection because DI isn't really practical against a deck with lots of S&B)
> you are sh*t out of luck. It just seems like the Magic players way of screwing
> up a table.
> As for my group, it is not banned and even frowned upon is not the right word.
If you think the only way to stop S&B is to Intercept or Deflect,
you're missing the third viable strategy for playing Jyhad, as well as two
more sub-strategies for dealing with S&B.
The 3 basic strategies of Jyhad are bleed, vote, and COMBAT. There
are two forms of combat: intercept (which you know about) and rush (which
you neglected to mention). A good Brujah deck doesn't fear a Malk S&B deck
because Hector Sosa can Bum's Rush and pummel Ozmo before Ozmo gets to take
his first action. (On the off chance that an S&B deck has enough combat
defense to survive m'boy Hector, it won't have enough Stealth and Bleed to
be too much of a threat). Similarly, although I've seen Gangrel and Assamite
decks die before the Malks, it was a lot closer of a contest that you would
expect, and I've seen a lot of Assamites, Gangrels, and Brujah cripple Malk
decks before destroying their prey.
Oh, and by the way, there are two other ways of dealing with S&B.
You can race them ("I don't care if I lose 5 blood this turn, 'cause my prey
lost 7") or gain so much blood each turn as to make your losses irrelevant
(the Weenie blood gain strategy).
In the last game I played, I used a Weenie blood gain deck. No
damaging votes (only Autarkis Persecutions and Consanginious Boons), some
presence, a lot of Blood Dolls. My girlfriend was playing a VERY fast Malk
S&B deck, easily capable of bleeding for 6-8 per turn. After about Turn
4, I let her bleed me whenever she wanted. With 13 minions, I only needed
to let a few of them hunt each turn and call a few ConsanBoons to soak up
all the damage she could do. Her predator (a rush deck) finally eliminated
all her vamps for me, then started trying to do the same to me... pointless,
since I could bring out 1-2 weenies a turn. We quit the game when I
accumulated over 60 bloods.
S&B is not a threat if you play in a competitive environment and
think how to deal with Bleed, Vote, and Combat decks.
> All of us have basic defenses against it, but bleeding for 5 at +2 or more
> stealth each turn is not a whole bunch of fun for the player or victim and
> really, hasn't it been done to death? We play along, but no one really takes
> the game seriously after somebody does that.
> Has it occurred to anyone but me that the Malkavians were never intended to be
> the cheese producers of the game but the fun wackos? The fear that most groups
> have of the Malkies is that if they ever got their sh*t together, they'd be
> bloody hard to stop.
> Unfortunately for us all, in the card game, there are woefully few fun cards
> and the mechanics of the game have put their sh*t together all too well, and
> repetitvely.
Malkavians are too narrowly focused (and Nosferatu, too widely spread),
but Malks are not the threat you make them out to be.
By the way, do you play under a 4-card limit?