Card Idea: Jerking your Chain
XZealot
Action Modifier
Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect that would
change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled, and the acting
minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
John McGlynn
Hilarious, and at first glance, not over powered. Such a card would
become the bruise bleed staple. :)
--
John McGlynn
what else are you going to do with dom/tha?
Juggernaut1981
Oooooh.... furn...
Malk Coma-Amaranth Bleed Here We Come...
wumpus
I like it, though you typically want to rush bouncers, so I suppose
you could get a similar effect by just putting in rush cards. Still,
no chump blocker can get in the way of this, so it's got an advantage
to the disadvantage of having less flexibility.
Alex
Kevin M.
Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
Jerking Your Chain
Action Modifier/Reaction
2 blood
Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
that would change the target of a bleed.
AM: The bleed is canceled, and this acting minion
enters combat with the reacting minion.
RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled,
and this reacting minion enters combat with the acting minion.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
Please bid on my auctions! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html
XZealot
> XZealot wrote:
> > Jerking Your Chain
> > Action Modifier
> > Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
> > that would change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled,
> > and the acting minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>
> Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
>
> Jerking Your Chain
> Action Modifier/Reaction
> 2 blood
You might as well stop right there. No card that costs 2 blood is
anything other than wallpaper unless you are doing alot of damage
(Reckless Agitation) or you are stealing a permanent (Dominate Kine/
Mind Rape). Sure there are some random cards that cost 2 blood that
don't fit in this catagory, but spending 2 blood and THEN entering
combat is so suicidal as to be worthless. There is an implied cost of
1 (i.e. hands for 1), but could be much worse such as you play this
card after Enkidu bounces you with Lost in Translation.
Entering combat is such a crap-shoot in VTES, that any card where the
successful end result is "I am in combat" shouldn't have a cost.
John McGlynn
Just to pick your brain... What about other costs? Would all the
enter combat cards be too good without their restrictions?
--
John McGlynn
yay someone to talk to besides that whelan guy
XZealot
Bloodlust is too expensive.
Covenant of Blood is too expensive
Imperial Decree is too expensive
The Five Fingers of the Fist (Ambush, Big Game, Bum's Rush, Harass and
the card-less Red List Rush) are all very good. They don't require
disciplines so they have other restrictions which is okay with me.
The best two of them I think are Ambush and Harass which have the
lowest level of restrictions. 90% of the time the restriction is a
non-issue. The do not replace of the Bum's Rush and the Big Game are
something to be worked around. The card-less Red List Rush has the
highest restriction (a Red List Minion), but you don't need a card in
hand, so it is nice.
But, to answer your questions, no, I do not think they would be broken
if you removed their restrictions. But the only real difference
between them is their restrictions. The result is the same.
John McGlynn
My two favorite targets of rush can't be hit by Ambush or Harass: the
fresh vampire waiting for next turn's Minion Tap, and the untapped
vampire with superior dominate waiting to deflect my bleeds. Rarely
do I find that tapped vampires are my ideal target for removal, so I
rarely like to play Ambush or Harass. Why do you think they're the
best?
--
John McGlynn
more of a bruise-bleed player than a rusher anyway
XZealot
I agree that is is best to knock their pool off the vampire, but
putting their vampire in torpor costs them two blood and an action.
While this is techically not the same, it is quite a substancial cost.
On the other hand, the number one job of a rush deck is to stop your
prey from ousting his prey (it's really the job of every deck but
doubly so for the rush deck) then to survive to the 1 on 1. If you
prey isn't tapping then your prey isn't taking actions required to
oust his prey. This buys you time to clobber him.
Kevin M.
> On Jul 26, 5:13 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>> XZealot wrote:
>>> Jerking Your Chain
>>> Action Modifier
>>> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
>>> that would change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled,
>>> and the acting minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>>
>> Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
>>
>> Jerking Your Chain
>> Action Modifier/Reaction
>> 2 blood
>
> You might as well stop right there. No card that costs 2 blood is
> anything other than wallpaper unless you are doing alot of damage
> (Reckless Agitation) or you are stealing a permanent (Dominate Kine/
> Mind Rape).
I'm saying that making it a free "I don't get bled" is way undercosted.
XZealot
> XZealot wrote:
> > On Jul 26, 5:13 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> >> XZealot wrote:
> >>> Jerking Your Chain
> >>> Action Modifier
> >>> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
> >>> that would change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled,
> >>> and the acting minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>
> >> Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
>
> >> Jerking Your Chain
> >> Action Modifier/Reaction
> >> 2 blood
>
> > You might as well stop right there. No card that costs 2 blood is
> > anything other than wallpaper unless you are doing alot of damage
> > (Reckless Agitation) or you are stealing a permanent (Dominate Kine/
> > Mind Rape).
>
> I'm saying that making it a free "I don't get bled" is way undercosted.
How is it a free "I don't get bled"? Did you read the card? It is an
action modifier.
Kevin M.
What I was trying to say is that making MY card a free
"I don't get bled" card is way undercosted. Sorry.
Obtenebration
It's potentially multiple rush actions over several turns. Sure it
has two restrictions, the first is meaningless to me, the second is
more restrictive. But I'll wager you'll see more tables with a
troublesome Cammy than not. Also note that it is any non-Camarilla
that can rush, not just yours.
The only issue I see with Jerking Your Chain is why would I even want
to enter combat if I am bleeding for an amount that is worth
bouncing. I'd rather just play cards that cancel the bounce and win.
James Coupe
>How is Covenant of Blood overcosted?
You'd do better to actually respond to the poster who asked this
question, and quote some of their post in your reply.
>It's potentially multiple rush actions over several turns. Sure it
>has two restrictions, the first is meaningless to me, the second is
>more restrictive. But I'll wager you'll see more tables with a
>troublesome Cammy than not.
Requiring a large vampire and being restricted to only rushing Camarilla
vampires are not costs that you can trivially dismiss.
>Also note that it is any non-Camarilla
>that can rush, not just yours.
Yes, it is. Making other decks on the table better isn't generally
something you want to do. Your grand-prey can now rush your grand-
predator more easily and oust him? Yeah, I'd rather that didn't happen.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Teeka
> 2 blood
> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
> that would change the target of a bleed.
> AM: The bleed is canceled, and this acting minion
> enters combat with the reacting minion.
> RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled,
> and this reacting minion enters combat with the acting minion.
>
Would it be a good idea to change this so you enter combat with the
bouncer instead of the bleeder?
-> "RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled, and
this minion enters combat with the REacting minion.
That would (imho) be better since you're punishing the guy who's
actually hurting you, instead of a possible cross-table ally. Plus,
this way it's not only a bleed-defense card, but also an overall
bounce-discourager.
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
Make it a Brujah Antitribu clan card and I'm sold.
Izaak
> The only issue I see with Jerking Your Chain is why would I even want
> to enter combat if I am bleeding for an amount that is worth
> bouncing. I'd rather just play cards that cancel the bounce and win.
Oh I dunno..
I find my Eurobrujah's Governs get bounced all the time.
I find my inferior Deep Songs get bounced all the time.
I find my Palla Grande bleeds in AUS/CEL get bounced all the time.
YMMV.
Shockwave
> > The only issue I see with Jerking Your Chain is why would I even want
> > to enter combat if I am bleeding for an amount that is worth
> > bouncing. I'd rather just play cards that cancel the bounce and win.
>
> Oh I dunno..
> I find my inferior Deep Songs get bounced all the time.
'
>
> YMMV.
Rather my issue with the idea of such a card. Deep Song is already the
'staple' ANI action, why would we want to see it get better?
Izaak
"Shockwave" <d_know...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:a5177101-bfba-4360...@q2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
The proposal here is twofold:
1) Make it possible for fighty decks to avoid being the bleedsink without
grafting dominate onto your deck or blindly backrushing any minion with
dom/DOM or AUS.
2) Make bruise and bleed more viable.
Also, ironically Deep Song actually doesn't gain anything out of it, because
you *can already* enter combat with Deep Song.
Mostly, however, I was just pointing out that your original argument against
the card, being:
<start quote>.
why would I even want to enter combat if I am bleeding for an amount that is
worth bouncing.
<end quote>
is abolute nonsense.
Any bleed for more than 1 is worth bouncing (and sometimes even bleeds for 1
are). Bruise/Bleed gives their prey a choice: fight me or take the bleed for
3. Bounce foils this whole gameplan and given that bounce is so common,
Bruise/Bleed subsequently suffers. The only Bruise/Bleed you see do good
competitively is Eurobrujah and that's because they are princes, have
dominate and have crypt synergy with permarushing Theo Bell. Oh and did I
mention they have dominate.
Shockwave
> Also, ironically Deep Song actually doesn't gain anything out of it, because
> you *can already* enter combat with Deep Song.
In a 'Glass Half Empty' vibe:
Unless the target is famous, I'll just play Deep Song at ani, because
with this card the worst case is they do nothing, and I get to bleed
them for two. Else, I get to enter combat with a Minion of the
Methuselah I wanted to hurt anyway.
Izaak
Except currently your inferior Deep Song get deflected to your grandprey.
Obtenebration
> Obtenebration <pa...@obtenebration.org> wrote:
> >How is Covenant of Blood overcosted?
>
> You'd do better to actually respond to the poster who asked this
> question, and quote some of their post in your reply.
>
Thank you for the enlightening point. You'd do better to stay on
topic and advance the discussion by the way.
> >It's potentially multiple rush actions over several turns. Sure it
> >has two restrictions, the first is meaningless to me, the second is
> >more restrictive. But I'll wager you'll see more tables with a
> >troublesome Cammy than not.
>
> Requiring a large vampire and being restricted to only rushing Camarilla
> vampires are not costs that you can trivially dismiss.
Quite a few good non Cam 8 caps that make excellent multirushers. If
I include Covenant of Blood in a deck that can't play it reliably
(building a deck that won't always have a 7+ out) then I lose for bad
deck design.
> >Also note that it is any non-Camarilla
> >that can rush, not just yours.
>
> Yes, it is. Making other decks on the table better isn't generally
> something you want to do. Your grand-prey can now rush your grand-
> predator more easily and oust him? Yeah, I'd rather that didn't happen.
>
Well I'll assume in my deck design that another combat deck will
already have the ability to rush his prey, but sure they may benefit
from my Covenant of Blood. That also assumes they are a non Cam
rushing deck with a Cam prey, or that I even care if they are rushing
him. The card certainly has its ups and downs, but easily is better
than Bloodlust or Imperial Decree which were listed next to it which
provoked my defense of the card in the first place.
XZealot
wrote:
Do the Tremere not deserve any love?
XZealot
Right, a reaction that cancels a bounce is pretty sweet. Your card is
good, but I would say that it is doing too much for a disciplineless
card even though it has an exorbitant cost. Your card is pretty much
only usable by the Tremere in conjunction with Ankara Citadel.
XZealot
> How is Covenant of Blood overcosted?
>
> It's potentially multiple rush actions over several turns. Sure it
> has two restrictions, the first is meaningless to me, the second is
> more restrictive. But I'll wager you'll see more tables with a
> troublesome Cammy than not. Also note that it is any non-Camarilla
> that can rush, not just yours.
It's a metagame choice and not really a good one at that. You are
spending an action by a 8+ capacity combat vampire to put an effect
into play which is really only good for the turn that you play it.
You know why? I will tell you because if any player is actually
bothered by the Covenant of Blood then they will just take an action
to burn it.
> The only issue I see with Jerking Your Chain is why would I even want
> to enter combat if I am bleeding for an amount that is worth
> bouncing.
The obvious answer is "you would want to enter combat with your prey's
vampire rather than bleeding your grandprey, especially if you have a
handful of combat cards."
Any more questions?
James Coupe
>On Jul 27, 1:38 am, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
>> Obtenebration <pa...@obtenebration.org> wrote:
>> >How is Covenant of Blood overcosted?
>>
>> You'd do better to actually respond to the poster who asked this
>> question, and quote some of their post in your reply.
>>
>
>Thank you for the enlightening point. You'd do better to stay on
>topic and advance the discussion by the way.
I did. You responded to my advancement of the discussion. See below.
>> >It's potentially multiple rush actions over several turns. Sure it
>> >has two restrictions, the first is meaningless to me, the second is
>> >more restrictive. But I'll wager you'll see more tables with a
>> >troublesome Cammy than not.
>>
>> Requiring a large vampire and being restricted to only rushing Camarilla
>> vampires are not costs that you can trivially dismiss.
>
>Quite a few good non Cam 8 caps that make excellent multirushers. If
>I include Covenant of Blood in a deck that can't play it reliably
>(building a deck that won't always have a 7+ out) then I lose for bad
>deck design.
No, you lose for bad deck design by including Covenant of Blood.
Do you know how many TWDA entries include Covenant of Blood? One.
Ever. Those non-Cam 8 caps that make excellent multirushers? They
aren't using it, or they're not that excellent.
>The card certainly has its ups and downs, but easily is better
>than Bloodlust or Imperial Decree which were listed next to it which
>provoked my defense of the card in the first place.
You're defending a card that's basically not turning up in tournament
winning decks at all. Imperial Decree, which is easily worse (in your
judgment), turns up in three - which is still pretty much just
statistical noise.
They're both just pretty crappy cards. You might as well argue over
whether Eyes of the Dead is better than Nosferatu Putrescence.
Kushiel
> Do the Tremere not deserve any love?
Not as much as the !Brujah, no. Tremere win all the time.
But !Brujah? For a clan with an awful discipline spread, it'd be great
if their clan cards picked up some of the slack. Unexpected Coalition
is good, Gang Territory is freeness and therefore hot, and WMO allows
for goofy trick decks. The rest of their cards, not so much with the
helping to gain wins.
John Eno
Kushiel
> Jerking Your Chain
>
> Action Modifier
>
> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect that would
> change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled, and the acting
> minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
Too good as a disciplineless card. Give it a discipline requirement,
give it a cost of one blood, and have the superior version cost one
less.
Which discipline? Potence could use some good cards, and JYC would
certainly supplement its main use.
John Eno
XZealot
I don't think that this card should be restricted at all; so that the
Non-Tupdog Gargoyle, Tremere, Tremere Antitribu, Non Dominate
Gangrel, Non-Prince Brujah and the Brujah Antitribu would all get some
love.
Izaak
>"XZealot" <xze...@cox.net> schreef in bericht
>news:c7a86734-6272-44ff...@e20g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
Tremere come with dominate. And auspex.
Do they need love?
XZealot
> >"XZealot" <xzea...@cox.net> schreef in bericht
I would say yes. This card doesn't help stealth-Bleeders. It helps
bruise bleeders.
Kushiel
> On the other hand, the number one job of a rush deck is to stop your
> prey from ousting his prey (it's really the job of every deck but
> doubly so for the rush deck) then to survive to the 1 on 1. If you
> prey isn't tapping then your prey isn't taking actions required to
> oust his prey. This buys you time to clobber him.
Huh. In an environment which isn't super-fighty, the rush decks I see
trying to use this strategy end up getting 1 VP and then giving the
rest of the table to their grandprey. Does this strategy work for you?
John Eno
XZealot
Yes, I have succeeded at giving the rest of the table to my grandprey.
Francis Plamondon
I would see something akin to Yawp Court: If the bleed would be
redirected, play (or tap if made as a permanent card) this card to
enter combat with the reacting minion before resolving the effect of
the effect used to change the target of the bleed (any cost for the
card/effect is returned to the reacting minion before combat). After
combat, resume the bleed action as normal.
Kushiel
> Yes, I have succeeded at giving the rest of the table to my grandprey.
Heh heh!
No, I meant does preventing your prey from ousting then lead to you
winning the game? I'm not interested in arguing with your experience,
I'm just curious what it is, since it contrasts so sharply with my own
if the "clamp down on your prey to prevent him from taking actions"
has worked in games you've played.
John Eno
John McGlynn
> On Jul 26, 7:17 pm, John McGlynn <john.mcgl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 26, 6:01 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 26, 5:59 pm, John McGlynn <john.mcgl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 26, 4:23 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 26, 5:13 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>
> > > > > > XZealot wrote:
> > > > > > > Jerking Your Chain
> > > > > > > Action Modifier
> > > > > > > Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
> > > > > > > that would change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled,
> > > > > > > and the acting minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>
> > > > > > Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
>
> > > > > > Jerking Your Chain
> > > > > > Action Modifier/Reaction
> > > > > > 2 blood
>
> > > > > You might as well stop right there. No card that costs 2 blood is
> > > > > anything other than wallpaper unless you are doing alot of damage
> > > > > (Reckless Agitation) or you are stealing a permanent (Dominate Kine/
> > > > > don't fit in this catagory, but spending 2 blood and THEN entering
> > > > > combat is so suicidal as to be worthless. There is an implied cost of
> > > > > 1 (i.e. hands for 1), but could be much worse such as you play this
> > > > > card after Enkidu bounces you with Lost in Translation.
>
> > > > > Entering combat is such a crap-shoot in VTES, that any card where the
> > > > > successful end result is "I am in combat" shouldn't have a cost.
>
> > > > Just to pick your brain... What about other costs? Would all the
> > > > enter combat cards be too good without their restrictions?
>
> > > Bloodlust is too expensive.
> > > Covenant of Blood is too expensive
> > > Imperial Decree is too expensive
>
> > > The Five Fingers of the Fist (Ambush, Big Game, Bum's Rush, Harass and
> > > the card-less Red List Rush) are all very good. They don't require
> > > disciplines so they have other restrictions which is okay with me.
> > > The best two of them I think are Ambush and Harass which have the
> > > lowest level of restrictions. 90% of the time the restriction is a
> > > non-issue. The do not replace of the Bum's Rush and the Big Game are
> > > something to be worked around. The card-less Red List Rush has the
> > > highest restriction (a Red List Minion), but you don't need a card in
> > > hand, so it is nice.
>
> > > But, to answer your questions, no, I do not think they would be broken
> > > if you removed their restrictions. But the only real difference
> > > between them is their restrictions. The result is the same.
>
> > My two favorite targets of rush can't be hit by Ambush or Harass: the
> > fresh vampire waiting for next turn's Minion Tap, and the untapped
> > vampire with superior dominate waiting to deflect my bleeds. Rarely
> > do I find that tapped vampires are my ideal target for removal, so I
> > rarely like to play Ambush or Harass. Why do you think they're the
> > best?
>
> I agree that is is best to knock their pool off the vampire, but
> putting their vampire in torpor costs them two blood and an action.
> While this is techically not the same, it is quite a substancial cost.
>
> On the other hand, the number one job of a rush deck is to stop your
> prey from ousting his prey (it's really the job of every deck but
> doubly so for the rush deck) then to survive to the 1 on 1. If you
> prey isn't tapping then your prey isn't taking actions required to
> oust his prey. This buys you time to clobber him.
Okay going back to cost:
Let's compare Jerking Your Chain to a similar card I sometimes include
to foil deflection: Change of Target. At first glance they seem
balanced with each other because Change of Target permits other
actions like hunting, calling a vote, etc. But consider the bruise
bleed deck that would prefer to follow up with an Ambush (indeed, the
deck you've created this card for). Since the only other type of
action you prefer to bleed is rush, this card effectively saves deck
space, mostly replacing rushes. Perhaps it would be better balanced
with a cost, maybe a discipline, or if disciplineless, a "do not
replace" clause would be appropriate. Eno's suggestion to make it a
potence card is okay and goes with most bruise-bleed clans, but it
leaves the Tremere out in the cold and makes me very sad.
Izaak
>Let's compare Jerking Your Chain to a similar card I sometimes include
>to foil deflection: Change of Target.
Can you enlighten me how exactly Change of Target foils deflections?
James Cass
The person to whom the bleed is bounced blocks and then the Change of
Target is played.
Not quite Contingency Planning, but cheaper and usable in more
situations. Two Wrongs is another bounce foiler, but unlikely to be
in any deck unless there is significant amounts of bounce in the play
environment.
I would suggest comparing the suggested card to Strix
XZealot
I think there is a certain amount of "Let my prey take a big chunk out
of my grand-prey, then hamstring my prey" strategy that is good to
employ.
XZealot
Right, but Jerking your Chain is only useful when you bleed, which
admittedly is the most common action in the game. It's useless unless
you run into bleed bounce. Change of Target is really good on any
action where you are trying to avoid getting killed in any ensuing
blocks (i.e. hunting at zero blood).
Change of Target in my opinion is a stronger card than Jerking the
Chain, or rather from the standpoint of universal usage it is much
easier to cycle for positive effect. Jerking the Chain is going to
get your hand jammed up if you run into a deck that blocks. Why would
it need a restriction? You already can't bleed twice in a turn so
there is a certain self-limiting factor built into the rules. Against
decks that block, it is like having a "Do Not Replace" clause because
you can't play it in the first place.
XZealot
When you get bounced into one of your grandprey's blocker's you can
play Change of Target to untap and NOT tap the blocker.
XZealot
wrote:
I think that is a good idea too, but a better card than Jerking the
Chain. It would need some sort of Restriction like requiring a Red
List vampire and entering combat with a Red List Vampire (Tiger Pit!).
suoli
> On Jul 26, 5:14 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > Jerking Your Chain
>
> > Action Modifier
>
> > Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect that would
> > change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled, and the acting
> > minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>
> Too good as a disciplineless card. Give it a discipline requirement,
> give it a cost of one blood, and have the superior version cost one
> less.
I'm going to disagree with that. It's just a limited Bum's Rush with
an opportunity cost that will keep it sitting in your hand against non-
bouncers or if you can't muster enough bleed. I'd suggest something
more like this:
Action
Cost: 1 blood
Requires a vampire with capacity above 4. -3 stealth action. Bleed at
+2 bleed. Action modifiers or reactions that require disciplines or
virtues cannot be played during this action.
James Coupe
>On 27 heinä, 17:56, Kushiel <invisibleking...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Too good as a disciplineless card. Give it a discipline requirement,
>> give it a cost of one blood, and have the superior version cost one
>> less.
>
>I'm going to disagree with that. It's just a limited Bum's Rush with
>an opportunity cost that will keep it sitting in your hand against non-
>bouncers or if you can't muster enough bleed.
Well, it's sort of better than a limited Bum's Rush anyway. You could
potentially have just had the player throw away a Wake of some sort, and
a bounce card, and it doesn't look like the cost is repaid - so the
vampire going into combat may well be one blood down. So you may well
get to toast a vampire, and they then can't block your next bleed.
Compare with playing Bum's Rush first, and your prey may still have
bouncers around to bounce your follow-up action. So, the opportunity
cost is a con - but there are some hidden pros.
I do, however, quite like the idea of doing something along these lines
in a discipline. You get to do something like:
Punch Them On The Nose, Action Modifier/Combat, 1 blood
[pot] Play bounce, enter combat, blah blah blah.
[POT] Strike: 2R damage, with an optional press.
Or whatever.
John McGlynn
I see, so you have an anti-bounce card in hand where you need another
combat card to foil a player who is unafraid to block you. Stop being
so convincing!
Kushiel
> I'm going to disagree with that. It's just a limited Bum's Rush with
> an opportunity cost that will keep it sitting in your hand against non-
> bouncers or if you can't muster enough bleed.
Which downsides are neatly counterbalanced against the fact that this
is a "rush" card which can't be blocked, and which also gets a bleed
bounce card out of your prey's hand.
> I'd suggest something
> more like this:
>
> Action
>
> Cost: 1 blood
> Requires a vampire with capacity above 4. -3 stealth action. Bleed at
> +2 bleed. Action modifiers or reactions that require disciplines or
> virtues cannot be played during this action.
You don't think this is unbalanced compared to Computer Hacking, the
other disciplineless bleed card, or Cheat the Fates, the other bleed
card that comes to mind with a similar effect?
John Eno
suoli
> On Jul 27, 12:52 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm going to disagree with that. It's just a limited Bum's Rush with
> > an opportunity cost that will keep it sitting in your hand against non-
> > bouncers or if you can't muster enough bleed.
>
> Which downsides are neatly counterbalanced against the fact that this
> is a "rush" card which can't be blocked, and which also gets a bleed
> bounce card out of your prey's hand.
Weell, I wouldn't say counterbalanced. Alleviated, maybe. With a rush
card you have a chance of choosing your target. With Jerking your
Chain you have a chance of getting to accept your prey's choice of
target. For fishing out bounce cards, see Change of Target and Tangle
Atropos' Hand.
> > I'd suggest something
> > more like this:
>
> > Action
>
> > Cost: 1 blood
> > Requires a vampire with capacity above 4. -3 stealth action. Bleed at
> > +2 bleed. Action modifiers or reactions that require disciplines or
> > virtues cannot be played during this action.
>
> You don't think this is unbalanced compared to Computer Hacking, the
> other disciplineless bleed card,
No, I don't. I do think it's better for a b&b deck than a Computer
Hacking but I don't think it's unbalanced. Up the capacity requirement
if you don't believe me.
> or Cheat the Fates, the other bleed
> card that comes to mind with a similar effect?
>
> John Eno
Cheat the Fates is unblockable and bounceable. This is highly
blockable and unbounceable. The effects aren't really comparable.
Juggernaut1981
Oh no, whatever will I do with my Mylan Horseseed, or Carlton, or...
any damned chump cheap ass blocker with a Sniper Rifle. That bleed
card will see more use by Kleenex than it will in VTES decks.
Determination
Action Modifier
1 blood
Only usable by during a bleed action.
Cards that would change the target of this bleed or would reduce this
bleed cost an additional blood.
Stubborn Fury
Action Modifier
Only usable during a bleed action.
If the target of this bleed is changed, this vampire may burn 1 blood
to enter combat with any vampire that played a reaction which changed
the target of this bleed action.
Kevin M.
> "Kevin M." wrote:
>> Jerking Your Chain
>> 2 blood
>> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
>> AM: The bleed is canceled, and this acting minion
>> enters combat with the reacting minion.
>> and this reacting minion enters combat with the acting minion.
>>
>
> Would it be a good idea to change this so you enter combat with
> the bouncer instead of the bleeder?
> -> "RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled,
> and this minion enters combat with the REacting minion."
>
> That would (imho) be better since you're punishing the guy who's
> actually hurting you, instead of a possible cross-table ally. Plus,
> this way it's not only a bleed-defense card, but also an overall
> bounce-discourager.
Oooooo yeah, that's far better! I like it. >:)
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
Please bid on my auctions! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html
Kevin M.
> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>> XZealot wrote:
>>> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>>>> XZealot wrote:
>>>>> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> Jerking Your Chain
>>>>>>> Action Modifier
>>>>>>> and the acting minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
>>
>>>>>> Seems a bit undercosted. How about this?
>>
>>>>>> Action Modifier/Reaction
>>>>>> 2 blood
>>
>>>>> anything other than wallpaper unless you are doing alot of damage
>>>>> (Reckless Agitation) or you are stealing a permanent (Dominate
>>>>> Kine/ Mind Rape).
>>
>>>> undercosted.
>>
>>> How is it a free "I don't get bled"? Did you read the card?
>>> It is an action modifier.
>>
>> What I was trying to say is that making MY card a free
>> "I don't get bled" card is way undercosted. Sorry.
>
> Right, a reaction that cancels a bounce is pretty sweet. Your card is
> good, but I would say that it is doing too much for a disciplineless
> card even though it has an exorbitant cost. Your card is pretty much
> only usable by the Tremere in conjunction with Ankara Citadel.
Or players that leave 2-3 blood on their bleeding,
Taste'ing vampires, right? ;)
suoli
>
> Oh no, whatever will I do with my Mylan Horseseed, or Carlton, or...
> any damned chump cheap ass blocker with a Sniper Rifle. That bleed
> card will see more use by Kleenex than it will in VTES decks.
Why are you acting like an asshole?
James Coupe
Well, sort of. I could see some sorts of stealth bleed actually liking
it, for responsible purposes - and also possibly untapping.
I bleed you for 3 at 2 stealth. You bounce me to my grand-prey. Maybe
I play JYC and Majesty to avoid bleeding my grand-prey and untap to do
something else. Maybe I could have played Spying Mission, but that
wouldn't untap me.
This is unlikely to appeal to hyper-focused obf/dem weenies, or similar,
where any cards that can't be cycled extremely quickly can be a
liability, but I could see some other decks at least considering it.
A simple fix, if such were needed, might be to add the line "The acting
minion cannot strike: dodge or strike: combat ends in this combat."
Blooded Sand
wrote:
> play (or tap if made as a permanent card) this card to
> enter combat with the reacting minion before resolving the effect of
> the effect used to change the target of the bleed (any cost for the
> card/effect is returned to the reacting minion before combat). After
> combat, resume the bleed action as normal.
Bruisers Bar.
Unique master
Requires a vampire with a capacity above 6.
1 pool
You may burn a pool during a d action against you to either allow one
your ready, untapped vampires to enter combat with that minion, or
with a minion who plays a card to redirect a d action to you. If the
opposing minion is not ready at the end of combat, the action ends
unsuccessfully.
Bit wordy, but could be tightened up.
Might allow bruise breed :)
Kushiel
> Weell, I wouldn't say counterbalanced. Alleviated, maybe. With a rush
> card you have a chance of choosing your target. With Jerking your
> Chain you have a chance of getting to accept your prey's choice of
> target.
Successfully rushing the target doesn't get the bleed bounce card out
of of the rushee's hand. Jerking does. It's entirely possible to rush
the target you wanted to and still have your next bleed bounced.
Successfully Jerking your target (ahem) reduces that chance
substantially.
> For fishing out bounce cards, see Change of Target and Tangle
> Atropos' Hand.
Those plus a rush card are half as efficient as Jerking, and require
your grandprey to be able to block. The latter's not a big deal,
though it does make Jerking marginally better, but that first part is
very important. Bruise/bleed decks are infamous for having hand
management issues, so having one card that replaces the function of
two cards is extremely valuable for them.
> > > Cost: 1 blood
> > > Requires a vampire with capacity above 4. -3 stealth action. Bleed at
> > > +2 bleed. Action modifiers or reactions that require disciplines or
> > > virtues cannot be played during this action.
> Cheat the Fates is unblockable and bounceable. This is highly
> blockable and unbounceable. The effects aren't really comparable.
They're not direct variants of each other the way that, say,
Deflection and Redirection are, no. But they're definitely comparable.
Since bleed bounce is so prevalent, they both effectively parse down
to a bleed action with "mess with your prey's normal bleed defense"
built into it. By that point of comparison, your disciplineless card
is way better than Cheat the Fates, in spite of Cheat costing three
times as much and being the purview of not just a discipline, but what
people assure me is meant to be some kind of super-discipline, as a
result of it belonging to one of the scarce clans.
John Eno
Kushiel
But the idea of Mylan Horseed as a chump blocker is hilarious!
John Eno
Jozxyqk
Aside from the "Mylan cannot block vampires" part?
suoli
suoli
> On Jul 27, 5:38 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Weell, I wouldn't say counterbalanced. Alleviated, maybe. With a rush
> > card you have a chance of choosing your target. With Jerking your
> > Chain you have a chance of getting to accept your prey's choice of
> > target.
>
> Successfully rushing the target doesn't get the bleed bounce card out
> of of the rushee's hand. Jerking does. It's entirely possible to rush
> the target you wanted to and still have your next bleed bounced.
> Successfully Jerking your target (ahem) reduces that chance
> substantially.
>
> > For fishing out bounce cards, see Change of Target and Tangle
> > Atropos' Hand.
>
> Those plus a rush card are half as efficient as Jerking, and require
> your grandprey to be able to block. The latter's not a big deal,
> though it does make Jerking marginally better, but that first part is
> very important.
I acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses you see in Jerking Your
Chain and disagree with the values you appoint to them. Not much more
to say about it.
> Bruise/bleed decks are infamous for having hand
> management issues, so having one card that replaces the function of
> two cards is extremely valuable for them.
My opinions could be influenced by the fact that I never try to build
any sort of focused combat decks unless they have some form of
permanent rush.
> > > > Cost: 1 blood
> > > > Requires a vampire with capacity above 4. -3 stealth action. Bleed at
> > > > +2 bleed. Action modifiers or reactions that require disciplines or
> > > > virtues cannot be played during this action.
> > Cheat the Fates is unblockable and bounceable. This is highly
> > blockable and unbounceable. The effects aren't really comparable.
>
> They're not direct variants of each other the way that, say,
> Deflection and Redirection are, no. But they're definitely comparable.
> Since bleed bounce is so prevalent, they both effectively parse down
> to a bleed action with "mess with your prey's normal bleed defense"
> built into it. By that point of comparison, your disciplineless card
> is way better than Cheat the Fates, in spite of Cheat costing three
> times as much and being the purview of not just a discipline, but what
> people assure me is meant to be some kind of super-discipline, as a
> result of it belonging to one of the scarce clans.
>
> John Eno
First of all, Cheat the Fates isn't all that hot. I definitely
wouldn't play it without an Ankara Citadel, Heart of the City and a
high number of Vaticinations.
Secondly, any deck with a ready minion can block a -3 stealth action.
Many decks with ready minions and *the right library card* can bounce
Cheat the Fates. To me this is a huge difference.
If you're afraid of tap&bleeding it might be a good idea to swap the
-3 stealth for "any ready minion controlled by your prey can cause the
action to fail by entering combat with the acting minion".
Kushiel
> Jerking Your Chain
>
> Action Modifier
>
> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect that would
> change the target of a bleed, the bleed is canceled, and the acting
> minion enters combat with the reacting minion.
Though I do like this card, it did occur to me last night that the
wording needs to be tightened up, or else it can be abused with the
Form of Mist family of cards. Just add a line about the action failing
and the acting minion entering combat and you should be all set.
John Eno
Kushiel
> I acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses you see in Jerking Your
> Chain and disagree with the values you appoint to them. Not much more
> to say about it.
Okay.
This seems like a good segue for me to point out that though you and I
often disagree, I find your participation in those discussions to be
genteel. Thanks for that.
> My opinions could be influenced by the fact that I never try to build
> any sort of focused combat decks unless they have some form of
> permanent rush.
Fair enough. For card design, though, you need to keep in mind that
other people besides yourself will potentially be playing the card, in
decks which you yourself wouldn't build. :)
> First of all, Cheat the Fates isn't all that hot. I definitely
> wouldn't play it without an Ankara Citadel, Heart of the City and a
> high number of Vaticinations.
I agree. This is why I wouldn't want to see a disciplineless card
that's even better than it is. Call me old-fashioned, but I think that
disciplineless cards should be less good than cards which require
disciplines.
> Secondly, any deck with a ready minion can block a -3 stealth action.
> Many decks with ready minions and *the right library card* can bounce
> Cheat the Fates. To me this is a huge difference.
Okay. I think that bounce is prevalent enough that the difference in
the wild isn't that great. But I understand what you're saying.
> If you're afraid of tap&bleeding it might be a good idea to swap the
> -3 stealth for "any ready minion controlled by your prey can cause the
> action to fail by entering combat with the acting minion".
I think the negative steath is fine. It won't matter in play unless
someone is using Erciyes Fragments or a similar effect, since people
simply won't put your card into decks that care about how much stealth
is on their bleeds, so it only matters during the deckbuilding phase.
That's fine. I think it's less elegant than Norm's card, which plays
into bruise/bleed's attempt to make its prey choose poorly, but it's
not mechanically unsound.
I'm more concerned about the existence of any disciplineless card
which allows vampires to bleed for three. It's not the reaction-
cancelling part of this card that bothers me - I think there's a neat
balance there with disallowing the acting vampire to play action mods
- but coupling that with better disciplineless bleed than is currently
available in the game pushes it over the top of the power curve, as
far as I'm concerned.
John Eno
suoli
> On Jul 28, 11:47 am, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses you see in Jerking Your
> > Chain and disagree with the values you appoint to them. Not much more
> > to say about it.
>
> Okay.
>
> This seems like a good segue for me to point out that though you and I
> often disagree, I find your participation in those discussions to be
> genteel. Thanks for that.
I try.
> I'm more concerned about the existence of any disciplineless card
> which allows vampires to bleed for three. It's not the reaction-
> cancelling part of this card that bothers me - I think there's a neat
> balance there with disallowing the acting vampire to play action mods
> - but coupling that with better disciplineless bleed than is currently
> available in the game pushes it over the top of the power curve, as
> far as I'm concerned.
>
> John Eno
In practice it's "enter combat or burn 3 pool". It replaces the DNR-
clause of Bum's Rush with giving your prey two options. To be over the
power curve I feel it would need to be playable by a stealth bleed
deck or weenies.
Kushiel
> In practice it's "enter combat or burn 3 pool".
Stanislava, if no one else, disagrees.
> It replaces the DNR-
> clause of Bum's Rush with giving your prey two options. To be over the
> power curve I feel it would need to be playable by a stealth bleed
> deck or weenies.
Is there some reason that you'd prefer it to be a disciplineless card
only usable by larger vampires rather than a card with a discipline
requirement?
John Eno
suoli
>
> Is there some reason that you'd prefer it to be a disciplineless card
> only usable by larger vampires rather than a card with a discipline
> requirement?
>
> John Eno
Without the cap restriction it would be broken or need to belong to a
bloodline-discipline. With the cap restriction I don't see a reason
for a discipline requirement, except for maybe flavor or making some
weak discipline more useful.
Kushiel
> Without the cap restriction it would be broken or need to belong to a
> bloodline-discipline. With the cap restriction I don't see a reason
> for a discipline requirement, except for maybe flavor or making some
> weak discipline more useful.
Here's the reason to give it to a discipline rather than have it be
disciplineless: As it's currently written, midcap POT/dom, ANI/dom,
and to a lesser extent AUS/POT and AUS/CEL suddenly become
terrifyingly good. Not having to pay pool for your vampires to have a
bleed discipline AND not having to use card slots to beat bounce is
well worth using midcap vampires rather than weenies. But there's not
much use for the card in other decks.
On the other hand, if it looked like this...
Hypermobility
Action
Cost: 1 blood
[cel] Bleed at +2 bleed. This bleed is at -3 stealth.
[CEL] As above, but action modifiers and reactions that require
disciplines or virtues cannot be played during this action.
...it's playable by weenies, but not in any power-curve-threatening
way, because Celerity still sucks in combat without spending pool to
support it (effectively raising the capacity of the vampire playing
this card), and weenie CEL has no defense. (And if you prefer, you can
substitute any crappy discipline which isn't good in combat in for
Celerity, and the argument holds.) It's better for cards to be
designed such that they can be played by a wide variety of decks, even
if some of those decks aren't the best use of the card, than to be
designed for only a very few specific decks.
John Eno
suoli
> On Jul 28, 3:19 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Without the cap restriction it would be broken or need to belong to a
> > bloodline-discipline. With the cap restriction I don't see a reason
> > for a discipline requirement, except for maybe flavor or making some
> > weak discipline more useful.
>
> Here's the reason to give it to a discipline rather than have it be
> disciplineless: As it's currently written, midcap POT/dom, ANI/dom,
> and to a lesser extent AUS/POT and AUS/CEL suddenly become
> terrifyingly good. Not having to pay pool for your vampires to have a
> bleed discipline AND not having to use card slots to beat bounce is
> well worth using midcap vampires rather than weenies. But there's not
> much use for the card in other decks.
You seem to be focusing on the fact that it's a bleed card whereas I
see it as a rush card that can be canceled by paying 3 pool. The only
thing that would make it worth playing to me is the fact that it could
be used to finish off a torporized prey while still being playable in
the early game.
> On the other hand, if it looked like this...
>
> Hypermobility
> Action
> Cost: 1 blood
> [cel] Bleed at +2 bleed. This bleed is at -3 stealth.
> [CEL] As above, but action modifiers and reactions that require
> disciplines or virtues cannot be played during this action.
>
> ...it's playable by weenies, but not in any power-curve-threatening
> way, because Celerity still sucks in combat without spending pool to
> support it (effectively raising the capacity of the vampire playing
> this card), and weenie CEL has no defense. (And if you prefer, you can
> substitute any crappy discipline which isn't good in combat in for
> Celerity, and the argument holds.)
I dunno. Even Dominate-weenies with Zip Guns and Target Vitals can be
pretty sick. I'd be careful with combining big bleed with an actual
combat discipline.
> It's better for cards to be
> designed such that they can be played by a wide variety of decks, even
> if some of those decks aren't the best use of the card, than to be
> designed for only a very few specific decks.
>
> John Eno
That's why I would keep it disciplineless.
Kushiel
> You seem to be focusing on the fact that it's a bleed card whereas I
> see it as a rush card that can be canceled by paying 3 pool.
?
I'm focusing on that because it IS a bleed card. You might not be able
to get My Enemy's Enemy or Murmur of the False Will to see it as a
bleed card, but Archon Investigation, Protected Resources, Aksinya
Daclau (and probably other cards not springing to the top of my head
right this second) can all see it for what it is.
If you want to design a rush card that's cancel-able by its target
paying pool, do that. Otherwise, we're still talking about a bleed
card.
> The only thing that would make it worth playing to me is the fact that it could
> be used to finish off a torporized prey while still being playable in
> the early game.
Fair enough. That's not the purpose of the card that XZealot designed,
though, so it's a bit curious that you would bring up this card you
designed in response to his.
> I dunno. Even Dominate-weenies with Zip Guns and Target Vitals can be
> pretty sick. I'd be careful with combining big bleed with an actual
> combat discipline.
Me too (that's why I didn't suggest Potence for this), but Celerity
isn't much good as a combat discipline. It's a top-rate combat
delivery system, but it doesn't hurt people much more than
disciplineless combat, on its own.
> That's why I would keep it disciplineless.
Okay. It seems pretty obvious to me that a card which only helps
midcap bruise/bleed decks is exponentially narrower in terms of how
many decks it will see play in than a card which helps decks using
Discipline X, but YMMV.
John Eno
XZealot
> XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
> >On Jul 27, 9:59 am, "Izaak" <nom...@usenet.plz> wrote:
> >> Tremere come with dominate. And auspex.
>
> >> Do they need love?
>
> >I would say yes. This card doesn't help stealth-Bleeders. It helps
> >bruise bleeders.
>
> Well, sort of. I could see some sorts of stealth bleed actually liking
> it, for responsible purposes - and also possibly untapping.
>
> I bleed you for 3 at 2 stealth. You bounce me to my grand-prey. Maybe
> I play JYC and Majesty to avoid bleeding my grand-prey and untap to do
> something else. Maybe I could have played Spying Mission, but that
> wouldn't untap me.
>
> This is unlikely to appeal to hyper-focused obf/dem weenies, or similar,
> where any cards that can't be cycled extremely quickly can be a
> liability, but I could see some other decks at least considering it.
>
> A simple fix, if such were needed, might be to add the line "The acting
> minion cannot strike: dodge or strike: combat ends in this combat."
Sure, that is another strategic option. So now you need a Stealth-
Bleed deck that fights as well. Sounds interesting.
suoli
> On Jul 28, 4:47 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You seem to be focusing on the fact that it's a bleed card whereas I
> > see it as a rush card that can be canceled by paying 3 pool.
>
> ?
>
> I'm focusing on that because it IS a bleed card. You might not be able
> to get My Enemy's Enemy or Murmur of the False Will to see it as a
> bleed card, but Archon Investigation, Protected Resources, Aksinya
> Daclau (and probably other cards not springing to the top of my head
> right this second) can all see it for what it is.
You seemed to argue that the card would be too powerful because it
would formally be a disciplineless +2 bleed card. I argued that it's
functionally a Bum's Rush that can be canceled by burning 3 pool and,
therefore, is actually slightly less powerful in some ways than a
standard rush card. The fact that Archon Investigation and some other
fringe cards hurt it only supports my position that it's not too
powerful.
> If you want to design a rush card that's cancel-able by its target
> paying pool, do that. Otherwise, we're still talking about a bleed
> card.
Yes. A bleed card that is functionally a rush card.
> > I dunno. Even Dominate-weenies with Zip Guns and Target Vitals can be
> > pretty sick. I'd be careful with combining big bleed with an actual
> > combat discipline.
>
> Me too (that's why I didn't suggest Potence for this), but Celerity
> isn't much good as a combat discipline. It's a top-rate combat
> delivery system, but it doesn't hurt people much more than
> disciplineless combat, on its own.
CEL/Stick is perfectly fine and, if you're committed to it, much
better than just disciplineless combat. If you're using weenies the
occasional Grapple + Slam matters even less.
> > That's why I would keep it disciplineless.
>
> Okay. It seems pretty obvious to me that a card which only helps
> midcap bruise/bleed decks is exponentially narrower in terms of how
> many decks it will see play in than a card which helps decks using
> Discipline X, but YMMV.
>
> John Eno
I don't agree that there are more b&b decks with Discipline X than
there are b&b decks with 4+ caps.
Juggernaut1981
> Action
> Cost: 1 blood
> [cel] Bleed at +2 bleed. This bleed is at -3 stealth.
> [CEL] As above, but action modifiers and reactions that require
> disciplines or virtues cannot be played during this action.
>
> ...it's playable by weenies, but not in any power-curve-threatening
> way, because Celerity still sucks in combat without spending pool to
> support it (effectively raising the capacity of the vampire playing
> this card), and weenie CEL has no defense. (And if you prefer, you can
> substitute any crappy discipline which isn't good in combat in for
> Celerity, and the argument holds.) It's better for cards to be
> designed such that they can be played by a wide variety of decks, even
> if some of those decks aren't the best use of the card, than to be
> designed for only a very few specific decks.
>
> John Eno
Problem is that the tournament level weenie-CEL decks are usually cel/
CEL + WWS. Then potentially using either Rush or Flurry of Actions &
Rush as their cards of choice.
I see that discipline-less -3 stealth +2 bleed card as the ultimate
replacement in Weenie Form of Mist decks. Who needs Tasha, Phones,
Laptops or anything else like that... I just pack a pile of these
cards in and keep on trucking.
The card, at its core, needs to either:
a) Redirect the action back as an Action Mod
b) Disallow redirection as an Action
c) If redirected, punish the vampire redirecting the bleed
Example of a):
I know your tricks
Action Modifier
1 blood
Only usable after a reaction card changes the target of a bleed or
reduces a bleed.
Put this card in play and put the reaction card played onto this
card. Cancel the effects of the reaction card on this card. Vampires
of the Methuselah playing the reaction on this card cannot play copies
of that reaction. Move this card to your ashheap after this action is
resolved, after combat if any.
Example of b):
Stubborn Destruction
Action
2 blood
Bleed at +1 bleed. Cards may not be played that change the target of
this bleed.
Example of c):
Stubborn Destruction (v2)
Action
1 blood
Bleed at +1 bleed. If the target of this bleed is changed, this
acting vampire may cancel this action (as an unsuccessful action) and
enter combat with the reacting vampire.
Despite the wordiness, I like example a)'s intent. As a fallback
position, I like c). b) seems too... "trumpy" of a tactic.
Teeka
> Teeka wrote:
> > "Kevin M." wrote:
> >> Jerking Your Chain
> >> Action Modifier/Reaction
> >> 2 blood
> >> Only usable when a reacting minion uses a card or effect
> >> that would change the target of a bleed.
> >> AM: The bleed is canceled, and this acting minion
> >> enters combat with the reacting minion.
> >> RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled,
> >> and this reacting minion enters combat with the acting minion.
>
> > Would it be a good idea to change this so you enter combat with
> > the bouncer instead of the bleeder?
> > -> "RE: If the bleed is redirected to you, the bleed is canceled,
> > and this minion enters combat with the REacting minion."
>
> > That would (imho) be better since you're punishing the guy who's
> > actually hurting you, instead of a possible cross-table ally. Plus,
> > this way it's not only a bleed-defense card, but also an overall
> > bounce-discourager.
>
> Oooooo yeah, that's far better! I like it. >:)
>
...Uhm, it that a "yeah, that's cool" smiley, or a "I'm being
sarcastic, cause your idea sucks" smiley? I'm not sure...
I was kinda surprised that no one else commented on this, since I
really liked the idea of a card that enables me to directly punish
people/specific minions for bouncing bleeds to me, without needing to
rush them (which might get blocked/hit the wrong minion/require
stuff). You'd need Taunt the Caged Beast style rulings, though, since
no-one's acting.
..But maybe it's a crap idea, I don't know.
-Teeka
(sorry for the late response)
Kushiel
> Problem is that the tournament level weenie-CEL decks are usually cel/
> CEL + WWS. Then potentially using either Rush or Flurry of Actions &
> Rush as their cards of choice.
I was unable to find even a single instance in the TWDA substantiating
the truth of your claim.
John Eno
Azel
> replacement in Weenie Form of Mist decks. Who needs Tasha, Phones,
> Laptops or anything else like that... I just pack a pile of these
> cards in and keep on trucking.
Weenie FoM with this sounds ferocious at first, but is not possible
due to card text (only usable by vampires over 4). Fielding oodles of
5+ caps and this card is possible, but then pool cost issues would
likely arise. Further, FoM at PRO pays 1 blood (not a cost), and the
card (here after christened "Damned if You Do" ;) ) costs 1 blood as
well; 2 blood for a 3 bleed gets expensive soon.
> The card, at its core, needs to either:
> a) Redirect the action back as an Action Mod
> b) Disallow redirection as an Action
> c) If redirected, punish the vampire redirecting the bleed
Let me reword this and include it in my concept of methods of
punishment:
a) Effect Cancel, reactive response (+: Eliminates 1 copy of offending
card. -: 1-for-1 trade off against offending card; often allows
another copy to be played.)
b) Deny Play, proactive response (+: Prevents interference of all
copies of offending card. -: Still leave copies available for later
play)
c) Damage Resources, reactive response (+: Long-term damage, slowed
momentum, closer to exposure; Resource already paid for. -: Indirect)
d) Expense Increases, proactive response (+: Prices out playing
additional card copies; Discourages interference. -: Cards still
playable; Copies still kept, often hard to judge pain threshold.)
I think we need to return to (or clearly restate) what the Goals and
Objectives are.
Xzealot creates a card that is geared to thwart bounce and get into
combat. However, the main goal is to give more arsenal to B&B decks.
So, if the main goal is more power to B&B decks, then creative
solutions should do one of two things: 1) look toward empowering a
Catch-22 mechanic, and 2) support combat module construction and flow.
I as well do not think the card is overly powerful -- it immediately
reads to me as a hoser hand anchor. When it works well, like all
hosers, it'll be the bees' knees. But since the target is so specific
(and bloat is so readily available as an alternate defense) I just
don't see it locking prey down in such an overpowering manner (as some
fear here). Further, since it can easily be responded to, a la Hidden
Lurker or Dawn Op by not blocking, it runs the risk of being a hand
anchor. Extra copies soon become chaff (perhaps better than HL, but
still none too hot in high quantities), and worse still combat decks
suffer the most from hand anchors. I like the premise -- a way to seek
a Catch-22 for B&B -- but I do not find this card to be that boon, let
alone overpowered threat.
> Example of a):
>
> I know your tricks
> Action Modifier
> 1 blood
> Only usable after a reaction card changes the target of a bleed or
> reduces a bleed.
> Put this card in play and put the reaction card played onto this
> card. Cancel the effects of the reaction card on this card. Vampires
> of the Methuselah playing the reaction on this card cannot play copies
> of that reaction. Move this card to your ashheap after this action is
> resolved, after combat if any.
cleaning up:
I Know Your Tricks
Act Mod
1 blood
Only usable after a reaction card changes the target of a bleed or
reduces a bleed.
Ignore the reaction card's effects and further copies of this reaction
cannot be played
by the reacting methuselah for the rest of the action.
> Example of b):
>
> Stubborn Destruction
> Action
> 2 blood
> Bleed at +1 bleed. Cards may not be played that change the target of
> this bleed.
Interesting. Still worrying about DOM weenies with this, however.
Bounce's existence isn't the main threatening imbalanced issue in
VtES, low caps bleeding for lots is. Needs more consideration,
refining...
> Example of c):
>
> Stubborn Destruction (v2)
> Action
> 1 blood
> Bleed at +1 bleed. If the target of this bleed is changed, this
> acting vampire may cancel this action (as an unsuccessful action) and
> enter combat with the reacting vampire.
All examples are forms of punishment, but two are necessary mechanics
to respond to B&B's biggest achilles heel, and the third is a B&B
thematic response. All 3 cards can be reread as:
a) Effect Cancel with a Denial of Play finish.
b) Denial of Play upfront.
c) Effect Cancel (with your action as a cost) with a Damage Resource
opportunity as consolation prize.
B&B is thematically a reactive strategy -- but this does not preclude
it from making use of proactive punishment components in card design.
In fact, with B&B dependent upon combat, where card draw and flow is
important to the combos, proactive cards help get out of the way from
all the reactivity expected from the strategy. Ideally you want to
place your opponent in a situation where no options are good. This is
where I do not have a problem with "Damned if You Do" card design.
It explicitly front loads proactive Denial of Play against bounce and
increases the pool damage to non-ignorable levels. In this way it
directly cuts out the achilles heel of B&B. However, to mitigate this
power potential for B&B strategy it has its Expenses Increased: 1
blood cost, no weenies, no act mods, etc. Further, to make the choice
to block enticing, a stealth penalty makes blocking very easy. The end
result is both sides are punished, with just enough to favor the
acting player -- and enough of a looming Resource Risk decision that
is the heart of B&B. Thus the psychological battle is front loaded,
letting the reacting player choose his own bad path. As a card that
specializes towards Bruise Bleed, instead of being as versatile as
Comp Hack for all bleed strategies, it is thematically new territory
and seemingly balanced. I dig it.
The big core of B&B is Bruise, as this is what defines it as different
from other bleed strategies. Bruise is a Resource Risk sub-category
using combat (instead of blood denial, minion theft). So it is
reactive, working with the fear factor of an unknown quality of combat
capability. Therefore B&B cards need to highlight the Resource Risk
unknown threat in card design -- there needs to be an option for the
prey. Regular Rush decks work on minion Resource Risk as a method of
Denial of Play, an indirect method to proactively Deny Play, so as to
freely pool damage later. In such combat decks there does not need to
be an option for the prey.
If wanting to make B&B better the bounce Achilles heel needs to be
addressed, therefore Effect Cancel or Deny Play against bounce must be
present in any version of cards to help this strategy. However, bounce
is pretty much the only thing holding big bleed in check, therefore
the cards must be narrowed out from supporting top level big bleed
strategies, like weenies or S&B. Thus card cost modifiers must be
restrictive and lead to Resource Risk: Combat. Since disciplines do
nothing from restricting such cards for S&B vampires or low capacity
vampires, then it must come down to capacity and act mod limitations.
So the Goal and Objectives is better served when we focus on how to
achieve B&B Catch-22s that are strategically costed to narrowly
support the B&B strategy, instead of getting lost on how to optimally
cost another hoser that eats up slots. Therefore consolidating rush &
bleed into one action is a strategic way to do the former -- however
it is not necessarily the only design way. If an action modifier could
reach the same goal of placing the prey in a bind, all the better.
Here's an example (doing this in an act mod is hard!):
Components: Deny Play: bounce, Threat: Resource Risk-unknown bleed
increase or Resource Risk-unknown combat
Action Modifier
Only usable by a vampire with a capacity more than 4. The action is
now reset to -2 stealth with no more stealth increases playable.
This bleed may not be redirected to another Methuselah. After no more
blocks are declared, you may burn up to 3 combat cards, increasing
this bleed by 1 for each card burned this way.
Horrifying either way, but that's the point. Also not playable by
weenies or stealth. The card cycling either way is a major evil, but
combat could use a bone tossed its way lately...
Juggernaut1981
Major contenders in the "weenie CEL" decks in Sydney and Australia are
usually the Weenie WWS type decks. Do they tend to win tournaments?
Probably not. Do they royally trash the chances of numerous other,
frequently. What usually gets them dead? Vote, S&B... Same two things
that kill everyone else anyway.
Demnogonis Saastuttaja
> On Jul 27, 9:55 am, Kushiel <invisibleking...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 27, 9:26 am, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > Do the Tremere not deserve any love?
>
> > Not as much as the !Brujah, no. Tremere win all the time.
>
> > But !Brujah? For a clan with an awful discipline spread, it'd be great
> > if their clan cards picked up some of the slack. Unexpected Coalition
> > is good, Gang Territory is freeness and therefore hot, and WMO allows
> > for goofy trick decks. The rest of their cards, not so much with the
> > helping to gain wins.
>
> I don't think that this card should be restricted at all; so that the
> Non-Tupdog Gargoyle, Tremere, Tremere Antitribu, Non Dominate
> Gangrel, Non-Prince Brujah and the Brujah Antitribu would all get some
> love.
Tremere/Tremere Antitribu have dominate, Nephandi and whatnot and are
infinitely better than Brujah Antitribu. Gangrel are likewise better,
with better vampires, clan cards and discipline spread that allows
some defense which seems to be important in this game, and besides,
what would they B&B with, Computer Hacking? A weenie Computer Hacking
deck is probably better than any !Brujah deck anyway. Gargoyles maybe
need some love, but they are a bloodline anyway and somehow I don't
see them being able to use this card, as they don't have a bleed
discipline. And I think the princes are enough to carry the Brujah
flag. With this card, you could make the Brujah Antitribu into an
insanely offensive clan, offering either bleed of five or death. I'd
like to see the Brujah antitribu as the consummate bruise-bleeders.
The others already have their toys.
Kushiel
> Major contenders in the "weenie CEL" decks in Sydney and Australia are
> usually the Weenie WWS type decks. Do they tend to win tournaments?
> Probably not.
Then they're not tournament-level. That people play a deck in
tournaments doesn't make it tournament-viable.
> Do they royally trash the chances of numerous other, frequently.
Not a reasonable way to rate how good a deck is, I'm afraid.
John Eno