Tourney Results, Jyhad Underground Charlotte, NC
R. David Zopf
Well it was a long time in coming, but here is the general idea of what
went on with our tournament on 1/15/00
We had 16 players in attendance, and fielded four tables of four each.
The three preliminary rounds saw frequent use of the Life Boon trick to
self-oust and retreat with a VP. The led to frequent table splits on VP's,
and thus a low threshold of tolerance for sweeps. basically, if you could
get one sweep in across three rounds, it would guarantee you a seat in the
finals, as the other tables tended to be split so much.
In the finals were the following individuals;
Derek Ray, 7vp, 168 tourney pts, playing a small cap. dominate bleed
deck
Justin Lacey, 7vp, 150 tp, Anarch Revolts and Aus/Dom
L. Scott Johnson, 7vp, 148 tp, Prince dom Deck with light stealth, vote,
& bloat (see below)
Conor Key, 3.5 vp, 126 tp, animalism stonewall deck
Tracy Bitonti, 3.5 vp, 108 tp, Toreador showcase deck
Seating went Justin (with first transfer), Tracy, Conor, LSJ, Derek
The finals saw L.Scott Johnson take 3 vp, as he dropped Derek, Justin
and Tracy, with Conor stonewalling him at the end for the oust and second
place (2vp). A key early play was when Justin placed an Anarch Revolt
out... LSJ left Derek at one the following turn, when Justin attempted the
Life Boon Trick, LSJ had a Sudden Reversal at the ready... Justin withers
away to his own AR and LSJ's bleed in subsequent rounds. Tracy had trouble
getting going under the sway of Anarch Revolt, but had to deal with LSJ once
it went away. Conor's small animalism minions allowed him to weather the
Anarchs, and he had enough punch left to torporize everything LSJ threw at
the "wall" he had created.
As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times this
tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets to
the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were denied
in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
home.
That aside, all had a great time, with lots of side games, etc. Thanks to
all who attended.
Oh, and you'll find below the updated VEKN ratings, for those of you who
can't wait for the VEKN site
Oh, oh. And I'll post LSJ's winning deck, too..
Name, DCI #, New Rating, New total # of Games, Location (*if new to list)
*Justin Lacey, 1601805, 3076, 4, North Carolina
Rob Grau, 1601800, 3059, 10
Jason Daniel, 1330370, 2889, 9
*Thomas Piscetello, 22710973, 2967, 3, North Carolina
*Scott Strange, 81706973, 2948, 3, North Carolina
Derek Ray, 1601808, 3032, 10
*Steve Coombs, 635697, 2996, 3, North Carolina
*Isaac Pomper, 22710978, 2918, 3, North Carolina
Joe Churchill, 1285053, 2969, 21
Robert (BJ) Campbell, 1609754, 2998, 6
*Jeff Dai, 71706991, 3002, 3, North Carolina
L. Scott Johnson, 1330201, 3110, 7
Conor S. Key, 1330373, 3111, 19
Tracy Bitonti, 1330369, 2955, 10
*Scott Martin, 22710987, 2921, 3, North Carolina
Jose LaFuente, L-516073, 2959, 10
--
Regards,
R. David Zopf
Atom Weaver
V:EKN Prince of Charlotte, NC
Jasper Phillips
R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times this
>tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets to
>the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
>victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were denied
>in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
>home.
I've heard many people complain about Life Boon recently, and I'm curious:
have you seen it make people win over often? For example, do the people
who use it tend to win tournaments, or even generally make it into
the finals? My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
As such, it doesn't seem to really warrant change to me -- Sure, used to
self oust it's annoying, and is going to screw someone, but there are
many ways to do that. One could argue that playing an intercept deck
does just this, for example. It's annoying to have an intercept deck
as prey, but does that mean they should be banned? There general lack
of effectiveness is good enough in my book.
IYHO is Life Boon "just plain wrong" because it's too good, or
because it's "cheezy"?
--
/\ Jasper Phillips
/VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz
j^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--.
* http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`
Derek Ray
<guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>To All,
> Well it was a long time in coming, but here is the general idea of what
>went on with our tournament on 1/15/00
*snip*
> In the finals were the following individuals;
> Derek Ray, 7vp, 168 tourney pts, playing a small cap. dominate bleed
>deck
Clarification, lest anyone think I pulled Weenie Dominate Cheese out
of my ass -- this was the Crypt Machine, which consists of (the) 12
4-cap inferior dominate vampires, who are supposed to get skill cards
and Govern each other out for 1 pool each. As it turned out in this
tourney, 8 DOM skill cards is NOT enough, apparently, to ensure that
you get one within the first 20 cards of an 80-card library, and for 2
of the 3 rounds (and the finals) i was forced to bring my whole crypt
out manually. (16 pool! ow!) =) Justin playing an SR on my first DOM
skill card didn't help either, although it was only fair revenge for
my dropping an SR on his first-turn Parthenon. =)
OK, pride moment over. ;)
> Justin Lacey, 7vp, 150 tp, Anarch Revolts and Aus/Dom
> L. Scott Johnson, 7vp, 148 tp, Prince dom Deck with light stealth, vote,
>& bloat (see below)
> Conor Key, 3.5 vp, 126 tp, animalism stonewall deck
> Tracy Bitonti, 3.5 vp, 108 tp, Toreador showcase deck
>
> Seating went Justin (with first transfer), Tracy, Conor, LSJ, Derek
As it turns out, I picked the exactly correct and exactly INcorrect
seating position. I was behind Justin, which meant I could remove the
Anarchs from the game as fast as possible and stabilise the table. I
was, unfortunately, square in FRONT of LSJ, who had Constanza (+2
bleed against Ventrue) and Queen Anne (+1 bleed, +1 more against
Tremere) out behind me... and my crypt was two Ventrue and two
Tremere. ARGH. I deflected more bleeds of 4-to-me, 2-to-Justin than
I cared to count. =) Ow. Ow. Ow.
> As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times this
>tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets to
>the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
>victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were denied
>in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
>home.
*nod* Absolutely. If Justin had been able to successfully Life Boon
and save me, I would've had eight pool, five minions (three with 1
blood on them, two with Blood Dolls I could've blown through), and a
HANDFUL of bleed cards with one Misdirection. With a good redraw, I
could've conceivably gotten through Tracy that turn, and that would
have completely turned the table upside down. Very, very bad card,
Life Boon. But it was quite amusing to see LSJ leap in and SR it. =)
-- Derek
Deafness never kept composers from hearing the music.
It only stopped them hearing the distractions.
Derek Ray
Phillips) wrote:
>In article <8757db$27h$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
>R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times this
>>tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets to
>>the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
>>victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were denied
>>in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
>>home.
>
>I've heard many people complain about Life Boon recently, and I'm curious:
>have you seen it make people win over often? For example, do the people
>who use it tend to win tournaments, or even generally make it into
>the finals? My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
>used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
Well, BJ Campbell (the other Atlanta player) opted NOT to use Life
Boon in the cheese-fashion during the last round, and got 0 VP in that
round as a result, I think. Had he done so, the extra 1 he would've
gotten would have put him into the finals - and his deck would
probably have fared pretty well against the ones that were in, since
it was a Hideous Bloat/Prevent deck. It's not that it lets people WIN
so much, it's that it does hose the table horribly and upset the
"balance" that we all talk about so much. =) And you never know - 1
extra VP from a bad seating position can often be enough to squeak in.
What it ALSO does is provide a "pretty good" deck a potential 'out'
from the vagaries of fate that everyone else must suffer -- a bad
seating position, or whatever, all at the cost of ONE CARD. Having
your predator be ousted is often not that difficult to achieve - set
all your resources to stopping your predator while ignoring your prey,
and he will often be hosed. Does it help you? No, ...unless you are
trying to salvage one "freebie"... but... :)
Atlantans used to/still does have a phrase: "Must Put One Life Boon
in Every Tournament Deck." I know BJ and I both had one, and I think
everyone from Atlanta has packed at least one in the past few
tournaments. It's rare when the opportunity isn't present at least
once to use it - I know that I had my predator ousted in two of the
three rounds, and one of those times I had a Life Boon in hand. I had
my prey on the ropes at the time, so I didn't bail... but the point
is, the opportunity shows itself a lot. is a card that's so good it's
virtually MANDATORY qualifying for rewrite? well... IOHO, yes (our).
X_Ze...@email.msn.com
>
> > As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times
this
> >tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who
gets to
> >the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the
worst
> >victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were
denied
> >in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long
ride
> >home.
>
> *nod* Absolutely. If Justin had been able to successfully Life Boon
> and save me, I would've had eight pool, five minions (three with 1
> blood on them, two with Blood Dolls I could've blown through), and a
> HANDFUL of bleed cards with one Misdirection. With a good redraw, I
> could've conceivably gotten through Tracy that turn, and that would
> have completely turned the table upside down. Very, very bad card,
> Life Boon. But it was quite amusing to see LSJ leap in and SR it. =)
>
> -- Derek
>
> Deafness never kept composers from hearing the music.
> It only stopped them hearing the distractions.
I have yet to be the victim of the Life Boon Fraudulent Cheese Hoser,
but I definantly see the potential for abuse. Perhaps the best errata
for this card would be to add that" you may not reduce yourself to less
than one pool". It would allow you to still play the card, and with the
possibility of a self-oust remaining if there is a anarch revolt or
antedelluvian awakening in play. I believe that this card is
unbalancing in that it allows a self-oust for a victory point, but with
errata it becomes a reasonable card. I welcome all comments.
Sincerely
Norman S. Brown Jr,
X_Zealot
Archon of the Swamp
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
James Coupe
> I have yet to be the victim of the Life Boon Fraudulent Cheese Hoser,
> but I definantly see the potential for abuse.
Annoyance, yes. Abuse, no, in the sense that I can proactively use Life
Boon to help myself. If it happens, it happens. What if I have a weak
grand-predator? All those slots on Life Boon are wasted.
--
James Coupe
Jasper Phillips
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 1 Feb 2000 00:23:01 GMT, phil...@eel.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper
>Phillips) wrote:
>>In article <8757db$27h$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
>>R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets to
>>>the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
>>>victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were denied
>>>in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
>>>home.
>>
>>have you seen it make people win over often? For example, do the people
>>who use it tend to win tournaments, or even generally make it into
>>the finals? My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
>>used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
>
>Well, BJ Campbell (the other Atlanta player) opted NOT to use Life
>Boon in the cheese-fashion during the last round, and got 0 VP in that
>round as a result, I think. Had he done so, the extra 1 he would've
>gotten would have put him into the finals - and his deck would
>probably have fared pretty well against the ones that were in, since
>it was a Hideous Bloat/Prevent deck. It's not that it lets people WIN
>so much, it's that it does hose the table horribly and upset the
>"balance" that we all talk about so much. =) And you never know - 1
>extra VP from a bad seating position can often be enough to squeak in.
I can see that happening. However, how is this any different from
any other deck? Seating plays a very strong determing factor in Jyhad,
and the kind of "hosing" you're talking about is IMHO common.
>What it ALSO does is provide a "pretty good" deck a potential 'out'
>from the vagaries of fate that everyone else must suffer -- a bad
>seating position, or whatever, all at the cost of ONE CARD. Having
>your predator be ousted is often not that difficult to achieve - set
>all your resources to stopping your predator while ignoring your prey,
>and he will often be hosed. Does it help you? No, ...unless you are
>trying to salvage one "freebie"... but... :)
One card in hand slot, to be more accurate. Considering the difficulty
of getting it to actually work, and the fact that the point everyone
is complaining about is only usable when you're getting trashed,
I just don't see it. I've quite often seen the game turn on whether
someone has "one card": Is my opponent out of Immortal Grapple? Bleed
Modifiers? etc. These cards are nearly always usefull.
>Atlantans used to/still does have a phrase: "Must Put One Life Boon
>in Every Tournament Deck." I know BJ and I both had one, and I think
>everyone from Atlanta has packed at least one in the past few
>tournaments. It's rare when the opportunity isn't present at least
>once to use it - I know that I had my predator ousted in two of the
>three rounds, and one of those times I had a Life Boon in hand. I had
>my prey on the ropes at the time, so I didn't bail... but the point
>is, the opportunity shows itself a lot. is a card that's so good it's
>virtually MANDATORY qualifying for rewrite? well... IOHO, yes (our).
I don't see it being that effective. The oppurtinity cost of holding
it until you need it is high, the master slot it takes up in your
deck is expensive, and you dare not increase your chances of getting
one by including lots.
R. David Zopf
Jasper Phillips wrote in message <875915$1lp$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
>In article <8757db$27h$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>,
>R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> As I said before, I saw the Life Boon Trick used about five times this
>>tournament, and it is just plain wrong... The dramatic swing in who gets
to
>>the finals was totally determined by this card. Jeff Dai was the worst
>>victim of this loophole, as three vp which should have been his were
denied
>>in this fashion, turning a sweep and a seat in the finals into a long ride
>>home.
>
>I've heard many people complain about Life Boon recently, and I'm curious:
>have you seen it make people win over often?
>For example, do the people
>who use it tend to win tournaments, or even generally make it into
>the finals?
Yes, they tend to make it to hte finals. Tournament "winners" tend to
include it in a deck, because it makes no sense not to.
>My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
>used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
>
Two made it to the finals using the over-powered effect of the self oust
(Justin and Tracy), two were denied the finals (Jeff Dai (2 vp) and BJ
Campbell (3 vp)), and the finals themselves would have been dramatically
changed if it weren't for a niche case, described below.
Okay, real circumstances and hard numbers now. Consider the following real
tournament situation (Jyhad Underground tournament, Jan 15th, 2000, Round 2,
Table 3):
Four player table, seated: Jeff Dai, Isaac Pomper, Justin Lacey, Tracy
Bitonti. From early on, Jeff had a bead on Isaac. That he had a lock on
him, and was going to get the oust sooner or later was not in question.
Justin, seeing his prospects grim seated between Jeff and Tracy, decides to
go for the self oust while at 11 pool. Justin gets 1 vp, and Isaac nets 17
POOL. Since Jeff was in the process of ousting Isaac during his own turn,
there is absolutely nothing he can do but watch. Several turns later (after
whittling down that 17 pool) Tracy does the same thing while at 5 pool,
netting Isaac _another_ 11 POOL. Two cards played for a total of 28 pool
and 2 vp swing at a single table, with NO POSSIBLE COUNTER in the standard
game mechanics is what I call "just plain wrong". Your comparison to an
intercept deck does not compare, as intercept has several counters within
the game, and does not result directly in pool swings of this magnitude, or
in the direct manipulation of victory point distribution, and takes up a
significant amount of deck resources. So, instead of an earned sweep, 4 vp,
and a seat at the finals, Jeff got 2 vp off the table, despite successfully
ousting his prey three times over...
Lets move on to the final round, five player table
Seating: LSJ, Derek Ray, Justin Lacey, Tracy Bitonti, and Conor Key
LSJ gets Derek within striking distance. Justin plays an Anarch
Revolt... The following turn, LSJ bleeds Derek to one pool. In Derek's
untap, Justin attempts to jump the Life Boon Loophole, and gets Sudden
Reversal-ed by LSJ. Note that an out-of-turn oust through Anarch Revolt,
Antediluvian Awakening, Army of Rats, or the like is the only way to use SR
as a means of counter.
If not for this, Justin leaves with 1 vp, often enough for second place
in a finals, and Derek gets 8 pool net, and no Anarch to worry about in the
future. Even a quantity like 8 pool is a very large amount in a finals. I
don't doubt that Derek would have a fair chance at making that gain into a
vp or two.
I take issue with a single master card that can have such a dramatic
pool and vp swing without some conventional means of counter (anyone see
parallels to RTI in net pool effect, yet?). In almost every circumstance
(barring an out-of-turn oust) a player can do _absolutely nothing_ but
watch. I don't like having too much errata, but I do support the RTI
tournament ban, and I'd liek to see this card either fixed, or banned too.
Suggested fix: Life Boon is not burned for a victory point gained by ousting
the Methuselh who played it.
(ie. vp goes to the ousting player, as normal, and LB's effect is reserved
for the _next_ VP, if any)
or just ban it...
fu...@mindstorm.com
Hey, Dave, to what extent do you think the number of players in
the tournament had on the effectiveness of Life Boon? With only
16 players, you had people make the finals with only 3.5 VP, and
the eventual winner had a total of 7VP. Since you were using
4-player tables (until the finals), there were substantially
fewer victory points to be had.
What does this mean? It means that every VP you get means a lot
more, and you can score 1 VP then oust yourself 3 times with
Life Boon and likely make the final round.
If you're playing with 5-player tables, I'm not sure if just getting
3.5-4VP is going to get you in. Furthermore, once you're in the
finals, I really don't think that Life Boon will help you win unless
you're dealing with a tie-breaker situation, and even then you don't
have control over what happens with the other 4 players.
From the two constructed-deck tournaments I've played at DragonCon
(coincidentally enough, in Atlanta), I rarely saw Life Boon played,
and it didn't have a significant impact on who qualified for and
who won the finals.
I didn't put it in my decks, and I did just fine.
However, this isn't to say that I don't have a problem with Life
Boon. Apart from the fact that it can be used as a spoiler, I
think that it violates the spirit of the game by allowing a
Methuselah to directly and immediately affect the scoring of
the game. For that reason alone, I think the card should be
changed or banned. Preferably banned, because I'm getting
sick of having to look up the actual text of cards (which is
even more aggravating in sealed deck play).
- Ben Peal, Prince of Boston
fu...@mindstorm.com
Jasper Phillips
R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Jasper Phillips wrote in message <875915$1lp$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
[Life Boon lead in snipped]
>>I've heard many people complain about Life Boon recently, and I'm curious:
>>have you seen it make people win over often?
>In short, yes. I'm sure you want hard data, though, so read on...
>
>>My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
>>used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
>>
>Two made it to the finals using the over-powered effect of the self oust
>(Justin and Tracy), two were denied the finals (Jeff Dai (2 vp) and BJ
>Campbell (3 vp)), and the finals themselves would have been dramatically
>changed if it weren't for a niche case, described below.
So Justin and Tracy had both gotten enough VPs earlier that one extra point
was enough to get them into the finals.
>Okay, real circumstances and hard numbers now. Consider the following real
>tournament situation (Jyhad Underground tournament, Jan 15th, 2000, Round 2,
>Table 3):
>
>Four player table, seated: Jeff Dai, Isaac Pomper, Justin Lacey, Tracy
>Bitonti. From early on, Jeff had a bead on Isaac. That he had a lock on
>him, and was going to get the oust sooner or later was not in question.
>Justin, seeing his prospects grim seated between Jeff and Tracy, decides to
>go for the self oust while at 11 pool. Justin gets 1 vp, and Isaac nets 17
>POOL. Since Jeff was in the process of ousting Isaac during his own turn,
>there is absolutely nothing he can do but watch. Several turns later (after
>whittling down that 17 pool) Tracy does the same thing while at 5 pool,
>netting Isaac _another_ 11 POOL. Two cards played for a total of 28 pool
>and 2 vp swing at a single table, with NO POSSIBLE COUNTER in the standard
>game mechanics is what I call "just plain wrong". Your comparison to an
>intercept deck does not compare, as intercept has several counters within
>the game, and does not result directly in pool swings of this magnitude, or
>in the direct manipulation of victory point distribution, and takes up a
>significant amount of deck resources. So, instead of an earned sweep, 4 vp,
>and a seat at the finals, Jeff got 2 vp off the table, despite successfully
>ousting his prey three times over...
I will buy that it's possible to screw other people with such
decks (and many others as well). The intercept deck comparison is still
apt IMHO, as if Jeff had a diehard intercept deck as his prey, he would
have been unlikely to oust anyone, although since intercept decks have a hard
time getting VPs, his prey wouldn't likely win either; Similarily for
some sort of backbleeding deck.
Such life boon tactics fall into the same boat IMHO. I certainly don't buy
them as broken or unbalanced. In particular, I'm not at all convinced
that the people who Life booned themselves away wouldn't have gotten
a VP, or perhaps more, with out Life Boon.
IMHO the cases where the benefit from Life Boon (Your predator is being
bleed out, but had almost finished you off) are hard enough (and
undesireable enough) to set up that it's cost (master card library slot,
space in hand) is balanced.
> I take issue with a single master card that can have such a dramatic
>pool and vp swing without some conventional means of counter (anyone see
>parallels to RTI in net pool effect, yet?). In almost every circumstance
>(barring an out-of-turn oust) a player can do _absolutely nothing_ but
>watch. I don't like having too much errata, but I do support the RTI
>tournament ban, and I'd liek to see this card either fixed, or banned too.
The parallels to RTI don't really hold (not even remotely IMHO), since it's
not the card player getting the pool: I've never seen anyone sweep the table
with Life Boon. RTI was very clearly broken, I've seen no indication that
Life Boon is, despite it's potentially dramtic effect on game play.
>Suggested fix: Life Boon is not burned for a victory point gained by ousting
>the Methuselh who played it.
>(ie. vp goes to the ousting player, as normal, and LB's effect is reserved
>for the _next_ VP, if any)
>or just ban it...
I agree that abusing Life Boon is distastefull, and am nearly convinced
that it's effect on the game is bad enough to warrent banning it (especially
considering it only takes one card)... I certainly don't like it's practical
use.
However, is it's effect bad enough to warrent beginning to ban cards based
on such subjective terms? What would be next, Directed Bleeds?
Intercept Combat decks? Minion Tap? These are all much more likely to
screw players than Life Boon IMHO; Minion Tap is a more powerfull card
to boot! If you're to neuter Life Boon, why not Minion Tap too?
James Coupe
> Such life boon tactics fall into the same boat IMHO. I certainly don't buy
> them as broken or unbalanced. In particular, I'm not at all convinced
> that the people who Life booned themselves away wouldn't have gotten
> a VP, or perhaps more, with out Life Boon.
Indeed.
Life Boon seems to fall into the same category as things like SR and DI.
If you don't like them thematically, well.... But I don't see it as
unbalanced, boring and cheesy, maybe.
--
James Coupe
fu...@mindstorm.com
> Life Boon seems to fall into the same category as things
> like SR and DI.
Except for the fact that Life Boon has a direct and immediate
effect on the allocation of victory points as an out-of-turn
master.
Derek Ray
Phillips) wrote:
>In article <0B0125D693FEB4BA.FB01092A...@lp.airnews.net>,
>Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>What it ALSO does is provide a "pretty good" deck a potential 'out'
>>from the vagaries of fate that everyone else must suffer -- a bad
>>seating position, or whatever, all at the cost of ONE CARD. Having
>>your predator be ousted is often not that difficult to achieve - set
>>all your resources to stopping your predator while ignoring your prey,
>>and he will often be hosed. Does it help you? No, ...unless you are
>>trying to salvage one "freebie"... but... :)
>
>One card in hand slot, to be more accurate. Considering the difficulty
>of getting it to actually work, and the fact that the point everyone
But this is my point. From my experience, I've seen it work SO often
that it's not even funny anymore - it obviously is NOT that difficult
to get to work. In the recent tournament, it was five times in
thirteen games (counting the final since one was tried there). I
submit that something which so sharply upsets the table balance (card
text could read: your predator gains 6+X pool where X is your current
pool. You gain one VP, and are removed from the game.) happens too
often when it's 1/3 of the time.
>is complaining about is only usable when you're getting trashed,
but it's not only usable when YOU're getting trashed. It's usable
when your PREDATOR is getting trashed - and if you're forced to defend
for a time, you may well be in good shape yourself, but just unable to
oust your prey. If you're behind a fast-moving deck that ousts two
people rapidly, for example? Sure, you might get him if his
prey/grandprey had any defense, but with the extra 12 pool you may
just not be able to...
>I just don't see it. I've quite often seen the game turn on whether
>someone has "one card": Is my opponent out of Immortal Grapple? Bleed
>Modifiers? etc. These cards are nearly always usefull.
It's not that he's out of a card, it's that he HAS a card. There's a
significant difference.
>>my prey on the ropes at the time, so I didn't bail... but the point
>>is, the opportunity shows itself a lot. is a card that's so good it's
>>virtually MANDATORY qualifying for rewrite? well... IOHO, yes (our).
>
>I don't see it being that effective. The oppurtinity cost of holding
>it until you need it is high, the master slot it takes up in your
Minimal. You can usually assess the situation and determine if you
need it or not - if you think you can oust your prey, you ditch the
Boon. If you don't think you can, you hang on to it and defend,
increasing the chances of your predator being ousted.
>deck is expensive, and you dare not increase your chances of getting
>one by including lots.
But we HAVE seen it be that effective. =) I'm not speaking
theoretically here - I'm speaking from an environment where I'm
literally almost EXPECTING someone to throw a Life Boon when I oust
someone.
X_Ze...@email.msn.com
> > I have yet to be the victim of the Life Boon Fraudulent Cheese
Hoser,
> > but I definantly see the potential for abuse.
> Annoyance, yes. Abuse, no, in the sense that I can proactively use
Life
> Boon to help myself. If it happens, it happens. What if I have a
weak
> grand-predator? All those slots on Life Boon are wasted.
>
> --
>
> James Coupe
"What if" is the most powerful phrase in the English language when it
comes to philisophical discussion. It opens a can of worms every time.
The subject at hand is a card used in a game; a game that is enjoyable
because of the web of tension created by the interaction of prey and
predator in a multiplay environment. This card effectively allows a
player to almost guarantee himself a victory point in every game
(granted I am sure someone is going to use an example to prove me
wrong), but no other card in the game allows you to shift the balance
of play on a table so dramatically. This single card when abused
properly allows you to gain a victory point, not from superb play or
inventive deck construction, but merely by your predator being ousted.
Exactly how often does ones predator get ousted. Right off the top of
my head I would say in about 50% of the games your predator will be
ousted before you are. That means, if for no other reason I can walk
away with a victory point by merely treading water. All I have to do
is build a total defense deck and include some life boons. I do not
have to act pro-actively to gain any victory points. I merely keep my
ace tucked up my sleeve until the opportunity presents itself. This is
boring and non-intuitive, and unlike every other example that has been
listed, there is no counter to it but a well timed sudden reversal. A
one card victory that has only a one card counter is not fun. This is
a game and should be enjoyable. I should hope that this in not the
first trick newbies learn when they begin to play Jyhad, but when they
are denied victory points in tournaments by it, they will cling to it
like a one-card messiah. We will raise a whole new generation of Jyhad
players who will use this as a crutch. Are we better players because
of it?
R. David Zopf
Jasper Phillips wrote in message <877f6s$p4r$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
>In article <8776vn$7v0$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>,
>R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>Jasper Phillips wrote in message <875915$1lp$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
>
>[Life Boon lead in snipped]
>
>>>I've heard many people complain about Life Boon recently, and I'm
curious:
>>>have you seen it make people win over often?
>>In short, yes. I'm sure you want hard data, though, so read on...
>>
>>>My impression from your tournament recap was that it was
>>>used alot, but ony one user got to the finals, and he got 0 VP.
>>>
>>Two made it to the finals using the over-powered effect of the self oust
>>(Justin and Tracy), two were denied the finals (Jeff Dai (2 vp) and BJ
>>Campbell (3 vp)), and the finals themselves would have been dramatically
>>changed if it weren't for a niche case, described below.
>
>So Justin and Tracy had both gotten enough VPs earlier that one extra point
>was enough to get them into the finals.
>
could have, but opted for the high ground and didn't self-oust...
Its not a deck, its a single card. Neither Justin nor Tracy built a
strategy around the concept, they just included it as a "back door". I
should also say that I take issue with a card that allows a player to
effectively withdraw for free without any recourse allowed the other
players, _and_upset the table dynamic with a large pool swing in the
process.
>The intercept deck comparison is still
>apt IMHO, as if Jeff had a diehard intercept deck as his prey, he would
>have been unlikely to oust anyone, although since intercept decks have a
hard
>time getting VPs, his prey wouldn't likely win either; Similarily for
>some sort of backbleeding deck.
>
Thats "if->then" hypothesizing about what might have happened, which I
loathe in just about every Jyhad thread :-) To reverse it, your
hypothetical intercept deck would be foolish not to use LB in this manner,
as it may be his only way of gaining VP. Backbleeding decks are no longer
the norm for the game. Both these are niche issues. My point about
Intercept being an unfair comparison is that you are using an entire deck
strategy and game tactic and comparing it's effect to _one_ card. There can
be no comparison... Come to think of it, I'm glad you actually did, as you
_do_ need to compare this card to a general tactic to get a game effect in
the same proportion :-) Yes, I agree that a whole deck idea can have the
same game impact as this single card, even a crappy one like dedicated
intercept :-)
>Such life boon tactics fall into the same boat IMHO. I certainly don't buy
>them as broken or unbalanced. In particular, I'm not at all convinced
>that the people who Life booned themselves away wouldn't have gotten
>a VP, or perhaps more, with out Life Boon.
>
Ahh but LBSO (self oust, I'm getting tired of writing it ;-) makes playing
out the round just about moot, doesn't it? Its the Jyhadly equivalent of
taking your bases with you and running home from the playground ;-)
>IMHO the cases where the benefit from Life Boon (Your predator is being
>bleed out, but had almost finished you off) are hard enough
As Derek said, it happened five times in thirteen games, six if you count BJ
Campbell's decision not to SO. And there is nothing that says you need to
be "almost finished off", you just have to weigh the odds of getting more
than one pool with the _guarantee_ of one pool immediately...
> (and
>undesireable enough) to set up that it's cost (master card library slot,
>space in hand) is balanced.
Maybe for a very few decks (Rush Combat, in particular), holding a Master
for a time is tough, but just as many wouldn't have a problem holding such a
card on the off chance things go in a way that warrants it's (ab)use.
>
>> I take issue with a single master card that can have such a dramatic
>>pool and vp swing without some conventional means of counter (anyone see
>>parallels to RTI in net pool effect, yet?). In almost every circumstance
>>(barring an out-of-turn oust) a player can do _absolutely nothing_ but
>>watch. I don't like having too much errata, but I do support the RTI
>>tournament ban, and I'd liek to see this card either fixed, or banned too.
>
>The parallels to RTI don't really hold (not even remotely IMHO), since it's
>not the card player getting the pool: I've never seen anyone sweep the
table
>with Life Boon. RTI was very clearly broken, I've seen no indication that
>Life Boon is, despite it's potentially dramtic effect on game play.
>
Name another single card that represents a 28 pool swing at a single game
when played twice. That was the main inference I was really trying to get
at. By no means do I consider LB as bad, but I put its effect in the same
category. In my gaming groups, unblockable RTI often worked the same way.
It forced heavy bounce, and became known as "The Random Thermoneucular
Device" because it bombed out the one who wasn't holding bounce. The
victim's prey went on his happy way. It really dosen't matter that the pool
gain/loss goes down in an odd manner, one card shouldn't pack that much
impact _and_ be effectively unstoppable...
I'm curious, Jasper, of your thoughts on this being an effect that can
generate such large pool swings... Doesn't the effect heavily outweigh the
cost?
What about the fact that it belies conventional means of counter strategy?
Again, excluding the reliance on an out of turn oust, a player can do
absolutely nothing about this effect.
>>Suggested fix: Life Boon is not burned for a victory point gained by
ousting
>>the Methuselh who played it.
>>(ie. vp goes to the ousting player, as normal, and LB's effect is reserved
>>for the _next_ VP, if any)
>>or just ban it...
>
>I agree that abusing Life Boon is distastefull, and am nearly convinced
>that it's effect on the game is bad enough to warrent banning it
(especially
>considering it only takes one card)... I certainly don't like it's
practical
>use.
>
>However, is it's effect bad enough to warrent beginning to ban cards based
>on such subjective terms?
>What would be next, Directed Bleeds?
Tactic, not a single card.
>Intercept Combat decks?
Tactic, not a single card. Remember, I like you comparing whole tactics to
the use of this card <grin>. Pray continue to do so
> Minion Tap? These are all much more likely to
>screw players than Life Boon IMHO; Minion Tap is a more powerfull card
>to boot! If you're to neuter Life Boon, why not Minion Tap too?
Because (1) There are a myriad of ways with dealing with a Minion Tap
(including Sudden, damaging potential targets, additional bleed, etc, etc)
and (2) Minion Tap doesn't _directly_ meddle with Victory Points... the
criteria by which, supposedly, you judge who wins in a round.
Hey, I'm enjoying this <grin>... I usually don't go in as the one railing
against a card, so this is really out of character for me :-) By example, I
personally find ToRIII and Mind Rape played by card text to be not as
insurmountable as some proposed, and in general, I'm a minimalist for
errata... Really, the wide ranging impact that five off-hand plays of this
card had on the outcome of a tournament was amazing. I'm pretty confident
Minion Tap was played dozens of time, without a similar direct impact on the
outcome.
R. David Zopf
fu...@mindstorm.com wrote in message <877hhq$2j2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>
>
> Hey, Dave, to what extent do you think the number of players in
> the tournament had on the effectiveness of Life Boon? With only
> 16 players, you had people make the finals with only 3.5 VP, and
> the eventual winner had a total of 7VP. Since you were using
> 4-player tables (until the finals), there were substantially
> fewer victory points to be had.
>
> What does this mean? It means that every VP you get means a lot
> more, and you can score 1 VP then oust yourself 3 times with
> Life Boon and likely make the final round.
>
after the self oust, though. Even in a circumstance where one VP doesn't
matter, the swing effect you leave at a table after an LBSO is tremendous.
Even at a modest SO, say you're at 4 pool when you do it, you leave your
predator 10 pool!!! That has a really imbalancing effect on shifting
outcomes in addition to manipulating your own VP total...
> If you're playing with 5-player tables, I'm not sure if just getting
> 3.5-4VP is going to get you in. Furthermore, once you're in the
> finals, I really don't think that Life Boon will help you win unless
> you're dealing with a tie-breaker situation, and even then you don't
> have control over what happens with the other 4 players.
>
> From the two constructed-deck tournaments I've played at DragonCon
> (coincidentally enough, in Atlanta), I rarely saw Life Boon played,
> and it didn't have a significant impact on who qualified for and
> who won the finals.
>
At Dragon Con 98, if I had LBSO'ed in the finals as the grand prey of your
weenie horde deck, I would have either a) guaranteed 2nd place if you had
swept anyway or b) given Jared enough time to smoosh you, since you were
playing the pool totals pretty close.... How would seating have changed if
I had one more VP going into the finals? I had one VP taken away from me in
Round 2 by LBSO that time (David Davila was LBSO'ed by his prey, whose name
escapes me). Yes I barely made it to the finals (4th overall), but I needed
two sweeps for the other two rounds, and had no choice in seating.
> I didn't put it in my decks, and I did just fine.
>
Neither did I. I have a problem with the aftermath of LBSO, though...
> However, this isn't to say that I don't have a problem with Life
> Boon. Apart from the fact that it can be used as a spoiler, I
> think that it violates the spirit of the game by allowing a
> Methuselah to directly and immediately affect the scoring of
> the game. For that reason alone, I think the card should be
> changed or banned. Preferably banned, because I'm getting
> sick of having to look up the actual text of cards (which is
> even more aggravating in sealed deck play).
>
The Quiverring Messiah Strikes Again!!! Congrats on Blood Feast, friend :-)
>
> - Ben Peal, (substitute) Prince of Boston
^^^^^^^^^^^ ;-)
> fu...@mindstorm.com
Celt
<fu...@mindstorm.com> wrote in message news:877hhq$2j2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
>
>
> Hey, Dave, to what extent do you think the number of players in
> the tournament had on the effectiveness of Life Boon? With only
> 16 players, you had people make the finals with only 3.5 VP, and
> the eventual winner had a total of 7VP. Since you were using
> 4-player tables (until the finals), there were substantially
> fewer victory points to be had.
>
> What does this mean? It means that every VP you get means a lot
> more, and you can score 1 VP then oust yourself 3 times with
> Life Boon and likely make the final round.
>
> 3.5-4VP is going to get you in. Furthermore, once you're in the
> finals, I really don't think that Life Boon will help you win unless
> you're dealing with a tie-breaker situation, and even then you don't
> have control over what happens with the other 4 players.
>
> From the two constructed-deck tournaments I've played at DragonCon
> (coincidentally enough, in Atlanta), I rarely saw Life Boon played,
> and it didn't have a significant impact on who qualified for and
> who won the finals.
Ben I LB you in the second round two years ago at Dragon*Con. You were
getting voted and bleed out by you predator, and I played LB on his killing
bleed and gave you 7 or 8 pool plus the 6 for the oust. (I was going down
and I know it) I think you went on to sweep that table. You Jyhad Stud
you.
I hope to see you there this year.
Conor
Prince of Raleigh
Jasper Phillips
[large snip]
It's true, you can rely on Life Boon to quite probably get you a VP
half the time (Doesn't work to well if your your predator ousts you).
You can pretty easily relly on an intercept deck to get you nearly
2 VPs on average -- however this isn't enough to win most tournaments.
The main thing holding me back from jumping ship to argue against LB
is that it's IMHO not really worth including. Sure it's an easy out
to half a VP, but it's not too hard to do better.
The facts that I find important are that it can completely screw table
balance, unduly effecting players who can do nothing about it, and that
it doesn't take much deck investment (although IMHO it takes much more than
most people give it credit for as it takes a master slot, and a hand slot).
Hmmmm. Actually, the more I muse about it the fact that the effect is
heinous, and is "against the spirit of Jyhad" (in that it unduly lets
you screw other players, as a deck afterthought) is enough to make
me jump ship. Similar arguments were used to neuter WwEF IMHO.
Ban Life Boon. No point in neutering it, since it'd just be too weak
without the self oust.
Jasper Phillips
R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Jasper Phillips wrote in message <877f6s$p4r$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
>>In article <8776vn$7v0$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>,
>>R. David Zopf <guenh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>Jasper Phillips wrote in message <875915$1lp$1...@news.NERO.NET>...
[comparison of other annoying, table screwing (and IMHO not effective)
strategies to Life Boon snipped]
>>The intercept deck comparison is still
>>apt IMHO, as if Jeff had a diehard intercept deck as his prey, he would
>>have been unlikely to oust anyone, although since intercept decks have a
>hard
>>time getting VPs, his prey wouldn't likely win either; Similarily for
>>some sort of backbleeding deck.
>>
>Thats "if->then" hypothesizing about what might have happened, which I
>loathe in just about every Jyhad thread :-) To reverse it, your
>hypothetical intercept deck would be foolish not to use LB in this manner,
>as it may be his only way of gaining VP. Backbleeding decks are no longer
>the norm for the game. Both these are niche issues. My point about
>Intercept being an unfair comparison is that you are using an entire deck
>strategy and game tactic and comparing it's effect to _one_ card. There can
>be no comparison... Come to think of it, I'm glad you actually did, as you
>_do_ need to compare this card to a general tactic to get a game effect in
>the same proportion :-) Yes, I agree that a whole deck idea can have the
>same game impact as this single card, even a crappy one like dedicated
>intercept :-)
Sometimes that's what playing the devil's advocate is all about. ;-)
To an extent I don't like Life Boon, and think the game would be better
without it; however I try not to make game balance judgements based solely
on my taste. I'm not exactly unwilling to be convinced.
>>Such life boon tactics fall into the same boat IMHO. I certainly don't buy
>>them as broken or unbalanced. In particular, I'm not at all convinced
>>that the people who Life booned themselves away wouldn't have gotten
>>a VP, or perhaps more, with out Life Boon.
>>
>Ahh but LBSO (self oust, I'm getting tired of writing it ;-) makes playing
>out the round just about moot, doesn't it? Its the Jyhadly equivalent of
>taking your bases with you and running home from the playground ;-)
Except that you could do better by including a different master card, IMHO.
Why take your bases home, when you could give yourself a better shot at
winning?
>>IMHO the cases where the benefit from Life Boon (Your predator is being
>>bleed out, but had almost finished you off) are hard enough
>As Derek said, it happened five times in thirteen games, six if you count BJ
>Campbell's decision not to SO. And there is nothing that says you need to
>be "almost finished off", you just have to weigh the odds of getting more
>than one pool with the _guarantee_ of one pool immediately...
That's a pretty small sample though. I haven't seen it used much, because
most of the serious gamers I know locally thought (haven't played in a
while :-/) there were better things to do, and the others never thought
of it. No offense, but I suspect the reason you saw it so used was
simply that most people had it. Similar argument could "show" that nearly
any given card is broken.
>> (and
>>undesireable enough) to set up that it's cost (master card library slot,
>>space in hand) is balanced.
>Maybe for a very few decks (Rush Combat, in particular), holding a Master
>for a time is tough, but just as many wouldn't have a problem holding such a
>card on the off chance things go in a way that warrants it's (ab)use.
Perhaps. Master slots are exceptionaly scarce for Rush Combat, but I've
never found them to be easy to come by for any deck -- It's just that
decks that don't cycle as fast can afford to have more.
[comparing RtI and LB snipped]
>Name another single card that represents a 28 pool swing at a single game
>when played twice. That was the main inference I was really trying to get
>at. By no means do I consider LB as bad, but I put its effect in the same
>category. In my gaming groups, unblockable RTI often worked the same way.
>It forced heavy bounce, and became known as "The Random Thermoneucular
>Device" because it bombed out the one who wasn't holding bounce. The
>victim's prey went on his happy way. It really dosen't matter that the pool
>gain/loss goes down in an odd manner, one card shouldn't pack that much
>impact _and_ be effectively unstoppable...
>
>I'm curious, Jasper, of your thoughts on this being an effect that can
>generate such large pool swings... Doesn't the effect heavily outweigh the
>cost?
>What about the fact that it belies conventional means of counter strategy?
>Again, excluding the reliance on an out of turn oust, a player can do
>absolutely nothing about this effect.
The effect is large, but it doesn't help the responsible player much --
most of the benefit goes elsewhere. You can see similar effects from
giving nearly any deck to a bad player; as such this isn't enough.
The fact that there really isn't much one can do about it does have
a certain synergy with the large (and fairly random) effect of the card
though... One of the nice things about Jyhad is that it generally
does away with alot of the bad parts of multi-player dynamics;
one could argue that this card lets you effect the non prey/pred players
at the table too much.
>>>Suggested fix: Life Boon is not burned for a victory point gained by
>ousting
>>>the Methuselh who played it.
>>>(ie. vp goes to the ousting player, as normal, and LB's effect is reserved
>>>for the _next_ VP, if any)
>>>or just ban it...
>>
>>I agree that abusing Life Boon is distastefull, and am nearly convinced
>>that it's effect on the game is bad enough to warrent banning it
>(especially
>>considering it only takes one card)... I certainly don't like it's
>practical
>>use.
>>
>>However, is it's effect bad enough to warrent beginning to ban cards based
>>on such subjective terms?
>>What would be next, Directed Bleeds?
>Tactic, not a single card.
Not true. I'm talking about a single directed bleed. Or for that
matter reordering the table. Single cards can easily have nearly
the effect of LB, but are much more generaly usefull, and less
expensive.
>>Intercept Combat decks?
>Tactic, not a single card. Remember, I like you comparing whole tactics to
>the use of this card <grin>. Pray continue to do so
True.
>> Minion Tap? These are all much more likely to
>>screw players than Life Boon IMHO; Minion Tap is a more powerfull card
>>to boot! If you're to neuter Life Boon, why not Minion Tap too?
>Because (1) There are a myriad of ways with dealing with a Minion Tap
>(including Sudden, damaging potential targets, additional bleed, etc, etc)
>and (2) Minion Tap doesn't _directly_ meddle with Victory Points... the
>criteria by which, supposedly, you judge who wins in a round.
Also true, but Minion Tap is far, far more generally usefull. LB
can be cheesed to get you a point. Minion Tap can quite possible let
you sweep.
>Hey, I'm enjoying this <grin>... I usually don't go in as the one railing
>against a card, so this is really out of character for me :-) By example, I
>personally find ToRIII and Mind Rape played by card text to be not as
>insurmountable as some proposed, and in general, I'm a minimalist for
Ug. I'm guessing a large part of your arguement there is that they
can be countered. That really isn't a big issue in my mind.
>errata... Really, the wide ranging impact that five off-hand plays of this
>card had on the outcome of a tournament was amazing. I'm pretty confident
>Minion Tap was played dozens of time, without a similar direct impact on the
>outcome.
Fair enough. Life Boon is definitely on my short List of cards I'd
think about neutering. Along with Banishment, and a few others I've
forgotten.
Richard D. Zopf
>snip
>Ban Life Boon.
>snip
Gee. You were right. You do change your mind :-) That's rare and
fine quality for this newsgroup...
Regards,
R. David Zopf
guenh...@mindspring.com
Atom Weaver
Derek Ray
Phillips) wrote:
>Ban Life Boon. No point in neutering it, since it'd just be too weak
>without the self oust.
I object! =) It can be used to save your grand-prey, gaining you a
victory point in a much less table-disruptive fashion. Let's not ban
it, just forbid the gaining of a VP for your OWN oust in that fashion.
situation: prey ousts grand-prey with cardless bleed of 1 on his last
minion. How often does this happen? Lots, as anyone who plays for
awhile well knows - after your deck has Done Its Business, often a few
bleeds of 1 are all it takes to finish the job - ESPECIALLY if you
don't want to waste another KRC or GtU that you may need for the "next
victim".
Your play: lob Life Boon, give grand-prey 2 pool, leaving him with 1.
prey FAILS to gain 6 pool, a VERY nice benefit almost-but-not-quite
equivalent to a bleed of 6. prey also probably has left himself
relatively defenseless, counting on a free 6 pool to help tide him
over. Grandprey does whatever, and you roll over your prey next turn,
and your new grand-prey only has 1 pool (that you gave him and that
you may collect on your next untap, ousting him with no effort!). You
stand to gain 2 VPs from a well-played card. Sort of large? Yes, but
there's very little benefit in DELIBERATELY permitting your prey to
gain 6 pool in hopes of being able to "stick" him this way, as opposed
to deliberately ignoring your prey and waiting for your predator to be
ousted.
It can also be used to save your predator in a less obnoxious fashion,
especially if you have a predator who is not putting much pressure on
you, while your grandpredator would be a REAL pill to deal with.
fu...@mindstorm.com
> Ben wrote:
> > From the two constructed-deck tournaments I've played at DragonCon
> > (coincidentally enough, in Atlanta), I rarely saw Life Boon
> > played, and it didn't have a significant impact on who qualified
> > for and who won the finals.
>
> Ben I LB you in the second round two years ago at Dragon*Con. You
> were getting voted and bleed out by you predator, and I played LB on
> his killing bleed and gave you 7 or 8 pool plus the 6 for the oust.
> (I was going down and I know it) I think you went on to sweep that
> table. You Jyhad Stud you.
I'm pretty sure the table sweep I got wasn't until the third round.
It was the same table as Jared, and I think got 5 points for that
table. If I'm wrong, I'll gladly put my foot in my mouth. :)
> I hope to see you there this year.
I'll be there. I'm gonna have a bull's eye target on my forehead,
but I'll be there. :)
Looking forward to seeing you guys again,
- Ben Peal, Prince of Boston
fu...@mindstorm.com
James Coupe
> because of the web of tension created by the interaction of prey and
> predator in a multiplay environment. This card effectively allows a
> player to almost guarantee himself a victory point in every game
Rubbish.
> (granted I am sure someone is going to use an example to prove me
> wrong),
Such as if they get ousted to start with, because their predator rolls the
table. If your predator doesn't get ousted whilst you're on the table,
you don't get to do the victory point trick. That happens a fair amount.
> but no other card in the game allows you to shift the balance
> of play on a table so dramatically. This single card when abused
> properly allows you to gain a victory point,
I fundamentally object to the term "abused". IMO, you cannot abuse a card
where you cannot proactively determine the circumstances - which was
always the case with, say, Return to Innocence (oh, look, I bleed and
throw Day Op) or Thoughts Betrayed (Rush, oh look you can't do anything,
bang, bang, bang) - so they were fixed/banned.
I have seen no-one provide a situation where I can reliably and
definitively abuse Life Boon. The *only* situation I can think of would
be a fairly hefty back bleed out of turn deck - meaning that, really, you
have to combine Dementation (for the "any methuselah" bleed) and Madness
Netowrk. And if I can reliably get the bleeds in to do it, I might as
well oust my prey and get a couple more - and if I am doing that, well,
just go round the table, rather than back bleeding - and if I *do* oust
myself, it provides more VPs for the rest of the table, when I could have
gone for a few more. Which doesn't really seem a problem to me.
--
James Coupe
James Coupe
> Ban Life Boon. No point in neutering it, since it'd just be too weak
> without the self oust.
And that is a sentiment I cannot agree with. We don't ban cards because
they're too weak, r they would be too weak, do we? We banned RtoI because
we couldn't make it weak enough.
Let's ban Masquerade Endangered. It's just too weak.
--
James Coupe
James Coupe
> Except for the fact that Life Boon has a direct and immediate
> effect on the allocation of victory points as an out-of-turn
> master.
Which cannot be controlled by the player taking advantage of it, merely
utilised.
--
James Coupe
fu...@mindstorm.com
Controlled or uncontrolled, do you really think this is an
ability that Methuselahs should have?
On top of that, the circumstances in which the card could be
"merely utilised" aren't particularly rare. In a tournament
environment, it mostly likely won't help you win the final
round, but it can go a long way towards getting you there in
the qualifying rounds.
X_Ze...@email.msn.com
100...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>,
James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote:
> > The subject at hand is a card used in a game; a game that is
enjoyable
> > because of the web of tension created by the interaction of prey and
> > predator in a multiplay environment. This card effectively allows a
> > player to almost guarantee himself a victory point in every game
>
> Rubbish.
I would say that in about 50% of the games played your predator will be
ousted before you. If you are putting pressure on your prey and are
trying to oust them, you may gain a victory point in the proper
fashion, or if you see that you are not going to be able to oust your
prey, you can just sit there and play defense( bleed reductions,
upstream politics, outright rushing your predator). I have seen very
few decks that can handle getting pounded on by two other decks. BTW,
you don't have to oust your predator; all you have to do is weaken him
enough to make it easy for your grandpredator to do so.
> Such as if they get ousted to start with, because their predator
rolls the
> table. If your predator doesn't get ousted whilst you're on the
table,
> you don't get to do the victory point trick. That happens a fair
amount.
Your predator sweeping the table does not prevent the use of this card
in a abusive fashion. It just prevents you from abusing it in such a
fashion. Your prey may then use it on you in the abusive fashion.
> > but no other card in the game allows you to shift the balance
> > of play on a table so dramatically. This single card when abused
> > properly allows you to gain a victory point,
>
> I fundamentally object to the term "abused". IMO, you cannot abuse a
card
> where you cannot proactively determine the circumstances - which was
> always the case with, say, Return to Innocence (oh, look, I bleed and
> throw Day Op) or Thoughts Betrayed (Rush, oh look you can't do
anything,
> bang, bang, bang) - so they were fixed/banned.
I would point out that you have provided the arguement against your
above statement refering to the term abused
> I have seen no-one provide a situation where I can reliably and
> definitively abuse Life Boon. The *only* situation I can think of
would
> be a fairly hefty back bleed out of turn deck - meaning that, really,
you
> have to combine Dementation (for the "any methuselah" bleed) and
Madness
> Netowrk. And if I can reliably get the bleeds in to do it, I might as
> well oust my prey and get a couple more - and if I am doing that,
well,
> just go round the table, rather than back bleeding - and if I *do*
oust
> myself, it provides more VPs for the rest of the table, when I could
have
> gone for a few more. Which doesn't really seem a problem to me.
>
James, you must play alot of two player Jyhad for the only way to
remove your predator out of turn is to use a out of turn bleed
upstream. All you have to do is weaken your predator while staying
alive. Your grandpredator should do the rest for you. It is a tread
water tactic which is a spoiler, and should be errata'd
Carpe Noctum,
Norman S. Brown Jr.
X_Zealot
Archon of the Swamp
Jasper Phillips
>
>>Ban Life Boon. No point in neutering it, since it'd just be too weak
>>without the self oust.
>
>victory point in a much less table-disruptive fashion. Let's not ban
>it, just forbid the gaining of a VP for your OWN oust in that fashion.
[How to use Life Boon snipped]
Right. It can work, but in practice it's pretty difficult to pull off,
enough so that Life Boon wouldn't be even close to worth it's oppurtunity
cost IMHO. So I still lean towards banning, because it's simpler,
less confusing, and in this case I don't think would make a practical
difference.
Jasper Phillips
James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>On 2 Feb 2000, Jasper Phillips wrote:
>> Ban Life Boon. No point in neutering it, since it'd just be too weak
>> without the self oust.
>
>they're too weak, r they would be too weak, do we? We banned RtoI because
>we couldn't make it weak enough.
Errr, that's not quite what I'm arguing... First, assume Life Boon is
too good, or at least too disruptive. To fix it you can errata it,
or ban it. Any errata removing the option to self oust would make
it wallpaper IMHO, so take the simpler solution, and simply ban it.
Definitely much easier than getting any sort of consensus on which
fix to make.
James Coupe
> Controlled or uncontrolled, do you really think this is an
> ability that Methuselahs should have?
Why not? They can't actively abuse it, because they can't actively
generate the circumstances to play the card.
--
James Coupe
fu...@mindstorm.com
You're aboslutely right. We've all determined that in order to
actively and consistently generate the circumstances to play the
card, they'd have to sacrifice attempting to score points from
their prey and instead assault their predator. They score 1VP
from Life Boon, 3 VPs for the tournament, and go home with some
promo vamps.
It's not the active abuse that concerns me and others. It's the
fact that the card is passively abusable. You can put a Life
Boon into any deck, go about your usual business with the deck,
and it won't be rare occurence that you'll be able to use the
card. How often do you see your predator get ousted? That's
about how often you'll be able to use Life Boon, and it's rather
commonplace.
- Ben Peal, Prince of Boston
fu...@mindstorm.com
James Coupe
> James, you must play alot of two player Jyhad for the only way to
> remove your predator out of turn is to use a out of turn bleed
> upstream. All you have to do is weaken your predator while staying
> alive. Your grandpredator should do the rest for you. It is a tread
> water tactic which is a spoiler, and should be errata'd
One of us is working with the idea that I have to be able to control the
situation to abuse it - not merely utilise it when it comes up. To
*control* the situation, you need to be pro-actively working, not waiting
for a (possibly already neutured/shafted/whatever) predator to do
something. The other person is working around the idea that weakening
your predator is going to automatically mean that your grand-predator
ousts him. "Oh, look," thinks canny predator, "why's he being so
helpful?" And anyone who can't imagine exactly why you're weakening
someone so much is, well, stupid. The rules are not designed for stupid
people.
And if you have reliable ways to weaken someone, direct them at your prey
- it's in *your* interests. You get more victory points and a safer seat.
--
James Coupe
James Coupe
> It's not the active abuse that concerns me and others. It's the
> fact that the card is passively abusable.
So are many cards. I don't have to play the game properly. I can screw
around, and do what I like. I could give all my pool to you with a
Succubus Club, if I wanted. I could KRC cross-table. I can be "abusive"
as a player with many cards. Why not ban them all?
> You can put a Life
> Boon into any deck, go about your usual business with the deck,
> and it won't be rare occurence that you'll be able to use the
> card. How often do you see your predator get ousted? That's
> about how often you'll be able to use Life Boon,
If you draw it. *IF*
> and it's rather
> commonplace.
In some circles.
--
James Coupe
fu...@mindstorm.com
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 fu...@mindstorm.com wrote:
> > It's not the active abuse that concerns me and others. It's the
> > fact that the card is passively abusable.
>
> So are many cards. I don't have to play the game properly. I can
> screw around, and do what I like. I could give all my pool to you
> with a Succubus Club, if I wanted. I could KRC cross-table. I can
> be "abusive" as a player with many cards. Why not ban them all?
You don't directly and immmediately give yourself a victory point
outright by "abusing" any other card in the game.
> > You can put a Life Boon into any deck, go about your usual business
> > with the deck, and it won't be rare occurence that you'll be able
> > to use the card. How often do you see your predator get ousted?
> > That's about how often you'll be able to use Life Boon,
>
> If you draw it. *IF*
Arguments about your likelihood to draw a given card and the
degree to which you should include "card flow" type cards in
your deck aside, the fact of the matter is that you can put
a Life Boon (or two) into your deck with negligible impact on
its performance. The circumstances under which you can play it
if you happen to have it in your hand are quite common.
> In some circles.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it's rather commonplace
to see someone's predator ousted in every Jyhad circle in
existence.
James Coupe
> You don't directly and immmediately give yourself a victory point
> outright by "abusing" any other card in the game.
The VP swing is negligible. You withdraw 1 VP from the pot. 3 VPs, in a
big tournament, will not get you into the final.
People had been arguing over the pool swing it gives you. There are other
ways to generate that, or a similar, pool swing.
--
James Coupe
James Coupe
>
> Easy. Just use Anarch Revolt, Antidiluvian Awakening, etc. Big
> titled vamps with DOM/obf/AUS (That would be Gilbert, Justine,
> Roxanne, Lucian, and Etrius - throw in Arika and Leandro with Skill
> cards...). Gain pool. Deflect to whomever, not necessarily your
Erm, and when someone the other side of the table dies? If you're going
to say "Life Boon them", then you're using it "properly". If you're not
going to say Life Boon them, you can't get that many VPs.
And just out of interest, what happens when you run up against a blood
hoarding deck. And you say "Gain pool" like it's easy. Not if you're
having to ensure those master cards it isn't, since you're going to *need*
Minion Tap to work with those vampires.
--
James Coupe
fu...@mindstorm.com
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 fu...@mindstorm.com wrote:
> > You don't directly and immmediately give yourself a victory point
> > outright by "abusing" any other card in the game.
>
> The VP swing is negligible. You withdraw 1 VP from the pot. 3 VPs,
> in a big tournament, will not get you into the final.
Thank you for re-iterating what I wrote two posts ago in this thread.
Add those three VPs to the VPs you're already getting from whatever
it is your usual deck does, and they don't look negligible anymore.
It doesn't even have to be three. Even one or two is going to have
a significant impact towards qualifying for the finals.
> People had been arguing over the pool swing it gives you. There are
> other ways to generate that, or a similar, pool swing.
Can you do them and get a victory point in the process, all as an
out-of-turn master action?
That's the part that irritates me the most about Life Boon. It's
a direct action by the Methuselah that affects the scoring of the
game. The object of the game is to control lesser vampires, and
use those vampires to reduce the influence of the other Methuselahs.
davey!
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, James Coupe wrote:
> The other person is working around the idea that weakening your
> predator is going to automatically mean that your grand-predator ousts
> him. "Oh, look," thinks canny predator, "why's he being so helpful?"
> And anyone who can't imagine exactly why you're weakening someone so
> much is, well, stupid.
Stupid, huh? And what's he supposed to do, given that he realizes what's
going on? Let's see, he could:
1) "stupidly" try to oust his prey, maybe getting a victory point, maybe
facing a Life Boon.
2) "smartly" not try to oust his prey - which means he definitely won't
get a victory point... unless he withdraws (unlikely), or plays a Life
Boon self-oust as well.
Considering the options available, it seems like the best counter to Life
Boon is, you guessed it, your own Life Boon. The hallmark of a broken
card.
> And if you have reliable ways to weaken someone, direct them at your
> prey - it's in *your* interests. You get more victory points and a
> safer seat.
Only if your grand-prey isn't holding a Life Boon...
Chris Shorb & Tammy Martin
James Coupe wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Chris Shorb & Tammy Martin wrote:
> >
> > Easy. Just use Anarch Revolt, Antidiluvian Awakening, etc. Big
> > titled vamps with DOM/obf/AUS (That would be Gilbert, Justine,
> > Roxanne, Lucian, and Etrius - throw in Arika and Leandro with Skill
> > cards...). Gain pool. Deflect to whomever, not necessarily your
>
> Erm, and when someone the other side of the table dies? If you're going
> to say "Life Boon them", then you're using it "properly". If you're not
> going to say Life Boon them, you can't get that many VPs.
Right. The question was how to abuse the card. This is close as I
have seen, although its a deck based around LB. Perhaps it's not
abuse.
>
> And just out of interest, what happens when you run up against a blood
> hoarding deck. And you say "Gain pool" like it's easy. Not if you're
> having to ensure those master cards it isn't, since you're going to *need*
> Minion Tap to work with those vampires.
>
Don't get you here. Of course you will need Minion Tap. What Master
cards are you "having to ensure"? Sure the deck is about 35% master
cards, no prob. The rest is Obedience, Stealth, Deflect, and Eagle's
Sight.
Chris
--
Tammy Martin 5'7"
Alexander Shorb 2'10"
Chris Shorb 5'11"
Shameless plug:
<http://www.graphicnovels.com/>
James Coupe
> Don't get you here. Of course you will need Minion Tap. What Master
> cards are you "having to ensure"?
The minion tap then fights against the other master slots you intend to
play.
> Sure the deck is about 35% master
> cards, no prob.
Never regarded it as one, in a well designed deck. It simply fights at
the rest of your minion phase actions. Note that in DCI NL tournaments,
Robert Goudie had average play down at about 8-12 turns - seriously
limiting the number of MPAs you will ever get.
--
James Coupe
Chris Shorb & Tammy Martin
about what we started arguing about, this will probably be my last
post about this.
James Coupe wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Chris Shorb & Tammy Martin wrote:
> > Don't get you here. Of course you will need Minion Tap. What Master
> > cards are you "having to ensure"?
>
> The minion tap then fights against the other master slots you intend to
> play.
>
I don't understand why you are quibbling re: Minion Tap. My original
post was to whether there was a deck that would abuse Life Boon. I
posted a quick re-cap of a deck I saw played that was based around
Life Boon. It used Minion Taps. It worked. Your original question:
"I have seen no-one provide a situation where I can reliably and
definitively abuse Life Boon."
The deck I briefly outlined took a total of 3-4 VP in the tournament.
I'm not sure it actually "Abused" Life Boon. In fact, I could be
swayed with arguments indicating it used the card as intended (which
does not mean it wasn't abused). I don't recall if he LBSO'd for any
of the VP's. I didn't build the deck, all I know was that it worked -
the guy gained pool, using Minion Tap, and tossed a few LB's around.
> > Sure the deck is about 35% master
> > cards, no prob.
>
> Never regarded it as one, in a well designed deck. It simply fights at
> the rest of your minion phase actions. Note that in DCI NL tournaments,
> Robert Goudie had average play down at about 8-12 turns - seriously
> limiting the number of MPAs you will ever get.
I was at a few of the tables at which he was counting, and yes indeed,
there are games where the first oust takes only 10 or so turns.
However, with the deck I described, one of the things it does do is
slow down the game. Calling Political Stranglehold and Ancient
Influence will do that. It seemed that most of the tables it was at
lasted much longer than 8-12 turns; however, I was not counting - not
expecting to have to defend the deck several years thence. I am not
talking theory, just observed reality.