More Antitribu!
Baaliprimogen
started playing during Sabbat War. Now I'm not talking about another
Brujah Antitribu. But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
Now in 3rd edition theses where the vampire spreads for the clans:
(inc Starter only)
Brujah A: 15
Gangrel: 14
Lasombra: 12
Malk: 16
Nosferatu: 13
Pander: 6
Toreador: 13
Tremere: 17
Tzimisce 14
Ventrue: 13
In a large set like that I don't think it would be wrong to give
Lasombra and Tzimisce the most vamps (as the parent clans). Then maybe
the rest could be like this:
Las: 15
Tzi: 15
Bru: 11
Gang: 13*
Malk: 11
Nos: 11
Pander: 6
Toreador: 11
Tremere: 11
Ventrue: 11
Assamite: 6
Ravnos: 6
Serpents: 6
*Since the Gangrel are two clans, they should get a bit more than the
rest.
Any thoughts?
GreenO
But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
> Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
> clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
> they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
>
I like the idea of making the 'missing' antitribu clans scarce. !Tzi
certainly would fit thematically. It could tie up a number of
cannonical loose ends without expanding crypt selection too much.
Add [adv] versions for those already printed. By making them scarce
there would also be no pressure to print hunting grounds for them. I
like it, and I would buy such cards.
Matt
Raziel
> Please. I have wanted or of the Antitribu clans in Vtes since I
> started playing during Sabbat War. Now I'm not talking about another
> Brujah Antitribu. But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
> Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
> clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
> they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
No, WotC already made huge mistake creating all those antitribu clans.
Gangrel is one clan. Just with 2 discipline sets.
There already are Assamites Antitribu (all sabbat assamites, tariq),
Ravnos Antitribu (all sabbat ravnos), Serpents of the Light (all
sabbat ravnos).
Gangrel, Nosferatu, Toreador and Brujah clans all have 3 playable
clans in the game - for Brujah it's "Osebo", "Brujah", "Brujah
antitribu".
Tremere, Ventrue and Malkavian clans have 2 playable clans in the game
Tzimisce, Lasombra, Assamite, Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni
have 1 playable clan in the game
If we count bloodlines too, Gangrel clan is on the lead, with their
Ahrimane descendants, followed by Brujahs with their true clan.
Clans most affected with lack of bloodlines are Tzimisce, Assamite,
Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni (well, at least someone share
their unique discipline - even 2 clans - their ancestors - Harbringers
of Skulls and scarce bloodline called Nagaraja).
If the game would be created from the ground, i would like to NOT see
any antitribu clan to be honest.
echia...@yahoo.com
> Gangrel, Nosferatu, Toreador and Brujah clans all have 3 playable
> clans in the game - for Brujah it's "Osebo", "Brujah", "Brujah
> antitribu".
I find your methodology flawed.
Osebo have a different discipline spread (Auspex-Celerity-Potence)
than the Brujah. Plus, what makes them a Brujah offshoot (trading
Presence for Auspex) when they could just as easily be a Toreador
offshoot (trading Presence for Potence)? Similarly, you could think of
the Guruhi as a Brujah offshoot (trading Celerity for Animalism) or a
Nosferatu offshoot (trading Obfuscate for Presence). Or the Ishtarri
as Brujah-descended (trading Potence for Fortitude) or Toreador-
descended (trading Auspex for Fortitude)?
I'd say Brujah have two (Brujah and Brujah Antitribu). Plus, you can
supplement them with clans that share two disciplines like the
Toreador, Toreador Antitribu, Osebo, Ishtarri, Guruhi, and True
Brujah.
Plus, even given official clan disciplines, there are often groupings
which have significantly different discipline spreads (Group 2
EuroBrujah lack Presence but have Dominate). So if you want to be
accurate, you should be factoring in this as well. Quite a lot of
Group 2 Lasombra have Presence, so maybe their POT/PRE should make
them essentially a Brujah advantage as well?
> Tremere, Ventrue and Malkavian clans have 2 playable clans in the game
Ventrue Antitribu have a different discipline spread than the Ventrue.
Group 1/2 Malkavians have a different discipline spread as well.
Tremere/!Tremere have only a single multi-discipline card available to
them (and Sound of a Breaking Oath is quite horrible).
> Tzimisce, Lasombra, Assamite, Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni
> have 1 playable clan in the game
But are already compensated with a combination of: more crypt cards,
better individual vampires and access to better titles, more clan
cards, better access to sect cards.
> If we count bloodlines too, Gangrel clan is on the lead, with their
> Ahrimane descendants
Thematically, the Ahrimanes are descended from the Gangrel Antitribu,
but it is questionable how useful they are in the card game.
They only share one discipline (Animalism). One Spiritus card has a
Fortitude outferior (Engling Fury) and none have a Protean outferior.
The only potential synergy is with Feral Spirit and Muricia. But
generally, the Ahrimanes are better off working with the Guruhi (since
they share Animalism & Presence) rather than the Gangrel.
> followed by Brujahs with their true clan.
They share Potence and Presence but Temporis is quite antithetical to
Celerity (and in fact all the True Brujah can't even play Celerity
cards even if you give them the discipline). True Brujah seem just as
helpful to the Guruhi, so why assign them to the Brujah?
> Clans most affected with lack of bloodlines are Tzimisce, Assamite,
> Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni (well, at least someone share
> their unique discipline - even 2 clans - their ancestors - Harbringers
> of Skulls and scarce bloodline called Nagaraja).
Assamites at least share two disciplines with the City Gangrel
(celerity/obfuscate). Ravnos share Animalism + Fortitude with the
Gangrel and the Country Gangrel. Giovanni share Dominate + Potence
with the Lasombra and Dominate + Necromancy with the Nagaraja. Plus
several clans have Necromancy (Harbingers, Samedi). A lot of the Group
2 Giovanni have Auspex, and many of their vampires also have Fortitude
(not to mention Proxy Kissed).
Furthermore, the main reason most of these clans share less
disciplines is because in each case they have a signature (unique
except for Necromancy) discipline. You seem to be neglecting the
benefits that come from having a unique discipline. If the Ravnos need
a little bit of a bump, the designers can either give them a new clan
card that addresses the issue, *or* fill that gap in with a new
Chimerstry card (since it's mainly Ravnos who have Chimerstry). If the
Brujah Antitribu are having problems, your main option is just clan
cards. You don't have the option of finetuning them through their
disciplines (since their disciplines are so common).
> If the game would be created from the ground, i would like to NOT see
> any antitribu clan to be honest.
Mainly a problem due to editions. Original WotC cards were made during
2nd Edition and consistent with that setting. 3rd Edition wanted to
redefine antitribu and has been butting heads with the legacies of the
original game design.
Raziel
> On Nov 27, 3:44 pm, Raziel <angelofc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Gangrel, Nosferatu, Toreador and Brujah clans all have 3 playable
> > clans in the game - for Brujah it's "Osebo", "Brujah", "Brujah
> > antitribu".
>
> I find your methodology flawed.
>
> Osebo have a different discipline spread (Auspex-Celerity-Potence)
> than the Brujah. Plus, what makes them a Brujah offshoot (trading
> Presence for Auspex) when they could just as easily be a Toreador
> offshoot (trading Presence for Potence)? Similarly, you could think of
> the Guruhi as a Brujah offshoot (trading Celerity for Animalism) or a
> Nosferatu offshoot (trading Obfuscate for Presence). Or the Ishtarri
> as Brujah-descended (trading Potence for Fortitude) or Toreador-
> descended (trading Auspex for Fortitude)?
It's in the lore. Ahrimanes also does not have exact same discipline
spread as their parent clan, and they are still gangrel offshot. They
are respective clan offshots. End of question.
> I'd say Brujah have two (Brujah and Brujah Antitribu). Plus, you can
> supplement them with clans that share two disciplines like the
> Toreador, Toreador Antitribu, Osebo, Ishtarri, Guruhi, and True
> Brujah.
4 'clans' (vtes term) have brujah's blood in their veins, they are of
his clan. Supplementing disciplines have nothing to do with it (but it
have with game balance, i admit).
> Plus, even given official clan disciplines, there are often groupings
> which have significantly different discipline spreads (Group 2
> EuroBrujah lack Presence but have Dominate). So if you want to be
> accurate, you should be factoring in this as well. Quite a lot of
> Group 2 Lasombra have Presence, so maybe their POT/PRE should make
> them essentially a Brujah advantage as well?
This is very different question. As i said, i only written about op
question - dividing clans (and creating more 'clans' from one clan).
> > Tremere, Ventrue and Malkavian clans have 2 playable clans in the game
>
> Ventrue Antitribu have a different discipline spread than the Ventrue.
> Group 1/2 Malkavians have a different discipline spread as well.
> Tremere/!Tremere have only a single multi-discipline card available to
> them (and Sound of a Breaking Oath is quite horrible).
This is also very different question than OP question.
> > Tzimisce, Lasombra, Assamite, Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni
> > have 1 playable clan in the game
>
> But are already compensated with a combination of: more crypt cards,
> better individual vampires and access to better titles, more clan
> cards, better access to sect cards.
Really ? I disagree with you there, but it's still irrelevant from op
perspective.
> > If we count bloodlines too, Gangrel clan is on the lead, with their
> > Ahrimane descendants
>
> Thematically, the Ahrimanes are descended from the Gangrel Antitribu,
> but it is questionable how useful they are in the card game.
As above, it does not really matter.
> They only share one discipline (Animalism). One Spiritus card has a
> Fortitude outferior (Engling Fury) and none have a Protean outferior.
> The only potential synergy is with Feral Spirit and Muricia. But
> generally, the Ahrimanes are better off working with the Guruhi (since
> they share Animalism & Presence) rather than the Gangrel.
>
> > followed by Brujahs with their true clan.
>
> They share Potence and Presence but Temporis is quite antithetical to
> Celerity (and in fact all the True Brujah can't even play Celerity
> cards even if you give them the discipline). True Brujah seem just as
> helpful to the Guruhi, so why assign them to the Brujah?
Cause they are Brujah ? Again, you look at it from very different
perspective than i do.
> > Clans most affected with lack of bloodlines are Tzimisce, Assamite,
> > Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni (well, at least someone share
> > their unique discipline - even 2 clans - their ancestors - Harbringers
> > of Skulls and scarce bloodline called Nagaraja).
>
> Assamites at least share two disciplines with the City Gangrel
> (celerity/obfuscate). Ravnos share Animalism + Fortitude with the
> Gangrel and the Country Gangrel. Giovanni share Dominate + Potence
> with the Lasombra and Dominate + Necromancy with the Nagaraja. Plus
> several clans have Necromancy (Harbingers, Samedi). A lot of the Group
> 2 Giovanni have Auspex, and many of their vampires also have Fortitude
> (not to mention Proxy Kissed).
>
> Furthermore, the main reason most of these clans share less
> disciplines is because in each case they have a signature (unique
> except for Necromancy) discipline. You seem to be neglecting the
> benefits that come from having a unique discipline. If the Ravnos need
> a little bit of a bump, the designers can either give them a new clan
> card that addresses the issue, *or* fill that gap in with a new
> Chimerstry card (since it's mainly Ravnos who have Chimerstry). If the
> Brujah Antitribu are having problems, your main option is just clan
> cards. You don't have the option of finetuning them through their
> disciplines (since their disciplines are so common).
It is non the issue, as i said above,
> > If the game would be created from the ground, i would like to NOT see
> > any antitribu clan to be honest.
>
> Mainly a problem due to editions. Original WotC cards were made during
> 2nd Edition and consistent with that setting. 3rd Edition wanted to
> redefine antitribu and has been butting heads with the legacies of the
> original game design.
Sure, thats why we have some Kiasyd with Necromancy, !Ventrue with
auspex and Assamites with blood curse.
Sure, i can discuss aforementioned problems with game design, but it's
not really thread for it. If you'll create one, i'll participate wit
joy.
echia...@yahoo.com
> > > Gangrel, Nosferatu, Toreador and Brujah clans all have 3 playable
> > > clans in the game - for Brujah it's "Osebo", "Brujah", "Brujah
> > > antitribu".
>
> > I find your methodology flawed.
>
> > Osebo have a different discipline spread (Auspex-Celerity-Potence)
> > than the Brujah. Plus, what makes them a Brujah offshoot (trading
> > Presence for Auspex) when they could just as easily be a Toreador
> > offshoot (trading Presence for Potence)? Similarly, you could think of
> > the Guruhi as a Brujah offshoot (trading Celerity for Animalism) or a
> > Nosferatu offshoot (trading Obfuscate for Presence). Or the Ishtarri
> > as Brujah-descended (trading Potence for Fortitude) or Toreador-
> > descended (trading Auspex for Fortitude)?
>
> It's in the lore. Ahrimanes also does not have exact same discipline
> spread as their parent clan, and they are still gangrel offshot. They
> are respective clan offshots. End of question.
In terms of VTES, the most important thing *is* the impact on game
design and game balance. And one of the most significant aspects of
that *is* overlap with clan disciplines. At the end of the day, it
doesn't matter if Sourcebook X says that ALL clans are descended from,
say, the Followers of Set. In practical terms, the (hypothetical)
theory that the Tzimisce are supposed to be offshoots of the Setites
(I'm making that up) is pretty useless in VTES since there isn't any
synergy between the two clans.
You're using a disingenuous method. If the Ventrue Antitribu "count"
for the Ventrue (even though they have Auspex instead of Presence) and
the Osebo "count" for the Brujah (even though they have Auspex instead
of Presence), then why shouldn't the Ishtarri count for the Brujah and
the Akunanse count for the Ravnos?
> > > Tzimisce, Lasombra, Assamite, Followers of Set, Ravnos and Giovanni
> > > have 1 playable clan in the game
Fine. If you actually want to get technical, then the Tzimisce
actually should get credit for at least FIVE clans:
Tzimisce
Tremere (technically a Tzimisce bloodline)
Tremere Antitribu (technically a Tzimisce bloodline)
Gargoyles (originally created from Tzimisce stock, and invented by the
Tremere who are Tzimisce offshoots)
Blood Brothers (jointly created by the Tremere Antitribu, who are
Tzimisce offshoots, and the main clan Tzimisce).
So you see, you have no standing to complain about the Tzimisce since
clearly they already have FIVE clans/offshoots represented in VTES.
Also, the Malks should get partial credit for the Daughters (sources
are split as to whether they come from the Malks or the Toreador).
And you know, there are some accounts that the Baali descended from
Ennoia. So maybe the Baali should be considered Gangrel offshoots just
like the Ahrimanes are.
> > > If we count bloodlines too, Gangrel clan is on the lead, with their
> > > Ahrimane descendants
>
> > Thematically, the Ahrimanes are descended from the Gangrel Antitribu,
> > but it is questionable how useful they are in the card game.
>
> As above, it does not really matter.
That's ALL that matters. This is VTES. Not VtM. (And I do enjoy the
VtM backstory and the canon material, but at the end of the day, since
the RPG line is over, any decisions should ultimately do what is best
for VTES).
Obtenebration
tribu when they were introduced, and it's too late to fix it without
changing quite a few other things. More hassle and errata than it is
worth.
The Traitor is a great example on what VTES should have done. A
Lasombra is a Lasombra, sect being untimately meaningless in that
regard.
echia...@yahoo.com
> Please. I have wanted or of the Antitribu clans in Vtes since I
> started playing during Sabbat War. Now I'm not talking about another
> Brujah Antitribu. But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
> Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
> clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
> they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
> In a large set like that I don't think it would be wrong to give
> Lasombra and Tzimisce the most vamps (as the parent clans). Then maybe
> the rest could be like this:
> Las: 15
> Tzi: 15
> Bru: 11
> Gang: 13*
> Malk: 11
> Nos: 11
> Pander: 6
> Toreador: 11
> Tremere: 11
> Ventrue: 11
>
> Assamite: 6
> Ravnos: 6
> Serpents: 6
>
> Any thoughts?
How about the Tzimisce? And the Giovanni? Aren't they getting screwed
over since the Lasombra and the other Independents are getting a
separate Antitribu clan?
Making the Antitribu into separate clans in the Sabbat expansion made
sense at the time. It was consistent with 2nd Edition, which was what
was current in 1996. (So I wouldn't call it a "mistake," but I do
think it is "unfortunate" that this previous design decision has led
to some complications. Calling it a mistake depends on your
perspective. I imagine that the Mark Rein-Hagen purists out there
could credibly argue that Third Edition was the mistake and that WotC
had the more "faithful" interpretation. Etc.).
But given the changes in paradigm shift in Third Edition, LSJ and
White Wolf have done an excellent job representing the Antitribu
concept (in the Third Edition way) as merely a difference in sect
(rather than clan).
I do *not* think that they should make those separate Antitribu's into
a clan, especially at this point. I think there was a small
opportunity where it might have made sense to do so (right around
2000-2001) but at this point, it doesn't make sense to backtrack on
the decision.
Using the current system, there have already been 2 Lasombra
Antitribu, 9 Assamite Antitribu (along with 2 Camarilla Assamites and
3 Shango), 2 Serpents of the Light (along with 3 Camarilla Setites and
2 Children of Damballah), and 4 Ravnos Antitribu (along with 1
Camarilla Ravnos and 2 Kinyonyi).
It just doesn't seem worthwhile to try and revamp the system at this
point.
I don't think these clans are significantly disadvantaged by not
having a separate Antitribu clan. In fact, I think it is a significant
*advantage* to have a diverse range of traits/sects because it allows
them to take advantage of more cards and mechanics.
For all the Camarilla clans, the Giovanni, and the Antitribu Sabbat
clans, the Ebony Kingdom expansion is mostly full of useless cards.
Lots of Laibon stuff that they can't really use. But the Lasombra,
Assamites, Setites, and Ravnos have clan members with that affiliation
(and they can effectively use Mozambique Allure and Bamba if needed),
so they can actually play with a lot of these toys.
If you look at things like the Eden's Legacy rule (allowing you to
search your library for your card when bringing out a Laibon), it's a
significant advantage for the Lasombra/Assamites/Setites/Ravnos
because they can actually actively benefit from it (compared to say
the Ventrue).
Sword of Caine wasn't that helpful for the Camarilla clans (because of
all the Black Hand stuff). But it's a gold mine for the Assamites, who
can actually use the tech even better than most of the actual Sabbat
clans.
Azel
the crypt selection) the 4 big indies and the 2 Sabbat leaders with
their Laibon equivalents would be a very neat and tidy way to address
the advantage the big original 7 get with crypt selection from the
antitribu mistake. and even then, i don't know how much of a mistake i
would call it -- outside of the duplication on some clan cards, it's
overall a good thing to have more crypt options.
outside of City Gangrel and !Ven, the other original Jyhad Camarilla
clans essentially have a much larger crypt pool to choose from. helps
flesh out concepts when you can select from more than one unique
vampire to essentially fill the same discipline role from the crypt.
it let's you field out more minions to buffer your concept.
since Assamite, Followers of Set, Lasombra, Ravnos, and Tzimisce
already are part of the Laibon sect, it's already a clean solution to
just expand that as a base set. throw in Ghiberti line Giovanni in
Africa and you got a nice happy family with the initial 4 Laibon
clans. so 6 major Camarilla clans, 9 major Sabbat clans, and 9 major
Laibon clans. sprinkle Gangrel and Giovanni to taste (or even better,
upgrade HoS, !Sal to full clan status, as they have representation in
both Sabbat and Laibon and let all 4 play their own special set).
it'd also be a tidy way to focus on those "specialized" disciplines,
and make them a bit more universal and spread out, as you have an
entire sect familiar with them. suddenly ABO, CHI, NEC, OBT, QUI, SER,
VIC have a greater excuse to spread around, sort of like how OBT VIC
spread around more in Sabbat sect.
lesse... leaving the Bloodlines outta this: Cam specialize in the
original big 10 disciplines, plus DEM (11). Sabbat get those and OBT
VIC (13). Laibon big 4 work AUS (minor), ANI, CEL, FOR, POT, PRE --
throw in ABO and the indie 4 and Sabbat 2 -- and you get roughly 13
focused (13), 14 if you count OBF. leaves DOM, PRO, THA as more
specialized disciplines for Camarilla and Sabbat. makes things sorta
interesting, i think. gets an excuse to make more cards for ABO, CHI,
NEC, OBT, QUI, SER, VIC at least -- instead of spare slots
automatically going to another DOM, PRO, THA card.
Mozambique Allure is nice, but really... making these Laibon clans
more fleshed out as a base set, would make things much more convenient
overall, especially for crypt construction.
Baaliprimogen
stay as they were. But in future sets, release these forgotten
Antitribus. The 3rd spread i proposed, I meant as an example for a
"4th ed" set. I would like, in future groups:
The "new" Antitribes.
Less of the old antitribes. (It's ridiculous that the Brujah Antitribu
have more vamps to choose from than the parent clan).
More Las and Tzi. If a release of Lasombra Antitribu. Just release
three vamps every other group, like the Salubri gets.
All of the African clans.
I don't see why we should not see more clans, and special cards for
these cards. I would make Vtes more diverse.
echia...@yahoo.com
> I don't see why we should not see more clans, and special cards for
> these cards. I would make Vtes more diverse.
Hey, if you want to see more clans, they could always introduce some
of the more obscure Bloodlines (maybe they survived their supposed
extinction!) like the Lamia, Lhiannan, and Children of Osiris.
The Lamia had Fortitude/Potence/Necromancy. They could supplement the
Giovanni (POT/NEC with FOR for Proxy Kissed), the Harbingers and
Samedi (both with FOR/NEC), and the Blood Brothers and Gargoyles (both
with FOR/POT). Scarce would be a given. But they'd especially fit well
with any sort of Lilith themed set.
The Lhiannan had Animalism/Ogham/Presence. Both the Ahrimanes and
Guruhi would benefit from the ANI/PRE overlap. Like the Lamia, they
also have a connection to Lilith (they revered the Crone, which some
sources argue was Lilith). Scarce would make sense as well.
Children of Osiris could be Scarce and Sterile. Their unique
discipline was Bardo (which could mimick Golconda or Redemption virtue
like abilities).
Oh oh. And how about the Nictuku bloodline? Scarce. Only available as
11-caps. Who doesn't want to see Grotequous as a discipline?
(I don't honestly think we really *need* any more clans. But I think
the Lamia and Lhiannan might have some potential. Children of Osiris
less so. And I think I'd probably pass on the Nictuku).
> First of all, I'm not for re-vamping the system. Let the Printed one
> stay as they were. But in future sets, release these forgotten
> Antitribus. The 3rd spread i proposed, I meant as an example for a
> "4th ed" set. I would like, in future groups:
> The "new" Antitribes.
> Less of the old antitribes. (It's ridiculous that the Brujah Antitribu
> have more vamps to choose from than the parent clan).
> More Las and Tzi. If a release of Lasombra Antitribu. Just release
> three vamps every other group, like the Salubri gets.
> All of the African clans.
So you're suggesting they should decrease support of the already
existing antitribu clans? A lot of players actually *like* the Sabbat
antitribu clans more than the Camarilla versions (the !Malks, !
Toreador, !Tremere, and !Ventrue have their followings).
Well, shouldn't it also be "ridiculous" that the Salubri Antitribu
have more vamps to choose from than their parent clan?
BTW, since when do the !Brujah have more vamps to choose from than the
Brujah? The Brujah have 50% more vampires. And in any given grouping,
the Brujah have more vampires to choose from. The Brujah also have
more clan cards. So I have no idea where you're getting your data.
And as partial compensation for their lack of antitribu clans, the
Independents do have *twice* as many clan cards as the Camarilla clans
(and almost three times as many compared to some of the Sabbat clans).
Not to mention top-notch breeding cards like Web of Knives / Waters of
Duat / Tumnimos.
Finally, you still haven't addressed what to do about the Giovanni.
Won't they still be disadvantaged (even more so) by not having an
Antitribu? Or maybe you think they should create a Giovanni Antitribu
clan as well?
Baaliprimogen
wrote:
> On Nov 28, 10:28 am, Baaliprimogen <vegardki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't see why we should not see more clans, and special cards for
> > these cards. I would make Vtes more diverse.
>
> Hey, if you want to see more clans, they could always introduce some
> of the more obscure Bloodlines (maybe they survived their supposed
> extinction!) like the Lamia, Lhiannan, and Children of Osiris.
>
> The Lamia had Fortitude/Potence/Necromancy. They could supplement the
> Giovanni (POT/NEC with FOR for Proxy Kissed), the Harbingers and
> Samedi (both with FOR/NEC), and the Blood Brothers and Gargoyles (both
> with FOR/POT). Scarce would be a given. But they'd especially fit well
> with any sort of Lilith themed set.
>
> The Lhiannan had Animalism/Ogham/Presence. Both the Ahrimanes and
> Guruhi would benefit from the ANI/PRE overlap. Like the Lamia, they
> also have a connection to Lilith (they revered the Crone, which some
> sources argue was Lilith). Scarce would make sense as well.
>
> Children of Osiris could be Scarce and Sterile. Their unique
> discipline was Bardo (which could mimick Golconda or Redemption virtue
> like abilities).
>
> Oh oh. And how about the Nictuku bloodline? Scarce. Only available as
> 11-caps. Who doesn't want to see Grotequous as a discipline?
>
> (I don't honestly think we really *need* any more clans. But I think
> the Lamia and Lhiannan might have some potential. Children of Osiris
> less so. And I think I'd probably pass on the Nictuku).
that would not be to bad. Nictuku could be a master card to be placed
on a Nosferatu/!Nos 11cap to give him some benefits.
> > First of all, I'm not for re-vamping the system. Let the Printed one
> > stay as they were. But in future sets, release these forgotten
> > Antitribus. The 3rd spread i proposed, I meant as an example for a
> > "4th ed" set. I would like, in future groups:
> > The "new" Antitribes.
> > Less of the old antitribes. (It's ridiculous that the Brujah Antitribu
> > have more vamps to choose from than the parent clan).
> > More Las and Tzi. If a release of Lasombra Antitribu. Just release
> > three vamps every other group, like the Salubri gets.
> > All of the African clans.
>
> So you're suggesting they should decrease support of the already
> existing antitribu clans? A lot of players actually *like* the Sabbat
> antitribu clans more than the Camarilla versions (the !Malks, !
> Toreador, !Tremere, and !Ventrue have their followings).
Yes. Less vampires to the existing Antitribu clans. Make it more
common for sabbat players to mix clans. There for maybe you could make
a vampire like Fred the Weak a Serpent of Light instead.
> Well, shouldn't it also be "ridiculous" that the Salubri Antitribu
> have more vamps to choose from than their parent clan?
Well, the Salubris are different. You know that. Lore vice there are
no more than about 6 or 8 in existence at any given time.
> BTW, since when do the !Brujah have more vamps to choose from than the
> Brujah? The Brujah have 50% more vampires. And in any given grouping,
> the Brujah have more vampires to choose from. The Brujah also have
> more clan cards. So I have no idea where you're getting your data.
Okay, I did not check the statistics of these. You might be very
right. Still for every 4 brujah you could make 1 brujah anti.
> And as partial compensation for their lack of antitribu clans, the
> Independents do have *twice* as many clan cards as the Camarilla clans
> (and almost three times as many compared to some of the Sabbat clans).
> Not to mention top-notch breeding cards like Web of Knives / Waters of
> Duat / Tumnimos.
Yeah, I know. I don't like that either.
> Finally, you still haven't addressed what to do about the Giovanni.
> Won't they still be disadvantaged (even more so) by not having an
> Antitribu? Or maybe you think they should create a Giovanni Antitribu
> clan as well?
No, no Giovanni antitribu. Or, well you could make a Ghiberthi or
Dunsirn clan. But I'm not so keen on that. If the vamps in Giovanni
have a strong focus on Necromancy. Finding Dominate and Potence
vampires to put in a Giovanni deck would not be that hard.
Another way to solve my "problems". Might be to bend a group towards a
different sect. Like make the Giovannis in group 6 belong to a special
family. Assamites to the Vizir cast. Setites to the Serpents of Light.
Tzimisce that are Koldunic.
Then release cards that require f.example Sabbat setites. Or a
Giovanni with the name Milliner in it.
Finally, I don't hate the existing Antitribus, or their support. I
support it. But I would love to see more. And to make room. I say
steal a future vampire slot from the already existing antitribus. Some
of these new antitrbus could be like this:
Horace the Horrid
Ravnos Antitribu
8 cap.
ANI CHI FOR PRO
Sabbat Black Hand
Jean-Marie
Serpent of Light
6 cap
cel obf pot pre ser
Sabbat
Jyhad
> Well, shouldn't it also be "ridiculous" that the Salubri Antitribu
> have more vamps to choose from than their parent clan?
Technically, the Salubri Antitribu are not a bloodline of the "parent"
Salubri. They are in fact that Warrior(caste) survivors while the
Salubri represent the pacifist Healer(Caste) survivors to the modern
nights. Valeren\Obeah were once one discipline.
echia...@yahoo.com
Actually, I believe the modern Salubri Antitribu *are* derived from
the parent clan.
IIRC, Adonai was descended from the group of 7 Salubri healers. He
decided to rebel and joined the Sabbat instead whereupon he Embraced
massive numbers of progeny and "rediscovered" Valeren. (So he was
Embraced into the Healer Caste even though he later found the Warrior
path).
If I remember right, Valeren/Obean are technically the same discipline
in the Dark Ages, but are still regarded as separate paths. (Healer
Caste Salubri learn Obeah while Warrior Caste Salubri learn Valeren,
though there are similarities between the two).
And if you really want to get technical, there really shouldn't be any
Laibon Salubri Antitribu. In Kindred of the Ebony Kingdom, the Nkulu
Zao have Obeah, NOT Valeren. So maybe they should have been from the
main Salubri clan rather than the Salubri Antitribu.
echia...@yahoo.com
> Hum... Lamia and Lhiannan I haven't though about before. Yeah maybe
> that would not be to bad. Nictuku could be a master card to be placed
> on a Nosferatu/!Nos 11cap to give him some benefits.
LOL. How about Advanced Harrod and Advanced Josef as Nictuku? "Oh
silly Nosferatu! We were just *pretending* that we really sucked! Now
we're kick-@ss vampires, but we want to DESTROY the
Nosferatu!" (Unless you think the Nictuku are sooooo devious that the
way they wanted to really destroy the Nosferatu was by giving them
really sucky 11-caps....).
> > So you're suggesting they should decrease support of the already
> > existing antitribu clans? A lot of players actually *like* the Sabbat
> > antitribu clans more than the Camarilla versions (the !Malks, !
> > Toreador, !Tremere, and !Ventrue have their followings).
>
> Yes. Less vampires to the existing Antitribu clans. Make it more
> common for sabbat players to mix clans. There for maybe you could make
> a vampire like Fred the Weak a Serpent of Light instead.
I don't think that's a good idea. Looking at other CCG's, you often
risk permanently losing/alienating players when you try to eliminate
(or significantly demote) a playable faction. I'll let the Marketing
folk run the numbers, but I don't think the benefits would outweigh
the costs (regarding this specific suggestion, which is cannibalizing
many Antitribu clans).
> > Well, shouldn't it also be "ridiculous" that the Salubri Antitribu
> > have more vamps to choose from than their parent clan?
>
> Well, the Salubris are different. You know that. Lore vice there are
> no more than about 6 or 8 in existence at any given time.
So then maybe that should be a hard cap? In fact, since there are
already 6 Salubri in the card game they should stop printing (and
supporting) them altogether. Cause "that's what the RPG says." As I've
said before, VTES takes precedence over old RPG stuff.
> > And as partial compensation for their lack of antitribu clans, the
> > Independents do have *twice* as many clan cards as the Camarilla clans
> > (and almost three times as many compared to some of the Sabbat clans).
> > Not to mention top-notch breeding cards like Web of Knives / Waters of
> > Duat / Tumnimos.
>
> Yeah, I know. I don't like that either.
Yeah. I mean the only way to address this is to stop printing new clan
cards for several years (until the rest of the clans equalize - which
may take a LONG time). That makes an interesting question. Would fans
of the Assamites/Setites/Ravnos be willing to give up all new clan
cards for the foreseeable future in exchange for some additional crypt
options (a separate antitribu clan)?
> > Finally, you still haven't addressed what to do about the Giovanni.
> > Won't they still be disadvantaged (even more so) by not having an
> > Antitribu? Or maybe you think they should create a Giovanni Antitribu
> > clan as well?
>
> No, no Giovanni antitribu. Or, well you could make a Ghiberthi or
> Dunsirn clan. But I'm not so keen on that. If the vamps in Giovanni
> have a strong focus on Necromancy. Finding Dominate and Potence
> vampires to put in a Giovanni deck would not be that hard.
But that's still screwing over the Giovanni. Cause now *every* other
major clan will have its own antitribu except them. "The book says so"
isn't a very good excuse. If your argument is that the Independent
clans are disadvantaged in the card game, then why are you proposing a
"solution" that will continue to leave some of those clans still
disadvantaged?
> Another way to solve my "problems". Might be to bend a group towards a
> different sect. Like make the Giovannis in group 6 belong to a special
> family. Assamites to the Vizir cast. Setites to the Serpents of Light.
> Tzimisce that are Koldunic.
> Then release cards that require f.example Sabbat setites. Or a
> Giovanni with the name Milliner in it.
Um, aren't they already doing that? Look at the Group 4 Assamites (so
many are Sabbat and Black Hand). Similar trend with the Ravnos. There
are a lot more Assamite Antitribu and Ravnos Antitribu then in the old
days. Similarly, Group 4/5 encompasses several Giovanni families (we
have Milliners, Rossilinis, Sardenzos, Ghibertis, Polernos, and
Detuonos).
Jyhad
wrote:
Agreed. Never read much of Adonai so didn't know he was embraced as a
Healer. Rebelling against the caste isn't unheard of in the WoD, even
the Assamites have Sorcerors who embrace a Warrior or even Vizier
mentality and they are still Assamites. Even VTES reflects that to a
small degree.
Baaliprimogen
Never mind on everything I've written. I just want to see these
Antitribus, Laibon clans and Kuei-jins. I don't really want to see
other clans lose their support...
Satrapa
light and so on. But I believe that Serpents of Light, casts of
Assamites, !Assamites, !Ravnos, Old Clan Tzimisce, laibon versions of
Assamites, Ravnos, Salubri (yes I think that they should be Salubri,
even if they use Obeah for self defence), and so one can be made
without destroying balance and making too many to support properly
clans.
We have read (don't remember where) that when dem reappeared in
malkavian clan some of malkavians avoided this change and technically
became new bloodline. We have this bloodline in vtes as 1/2 group of
malkavians. They are playable, fun and don't create new clan. I think
that the same should be made for all other bloodlines/clans that never
appeared properly in vtes.
In 2 group there are some assamites with thaumaturgy. If you are
determined you can make deck based upon them but I think that its not
enough (it doesn't make strong crypt). I think that it would be good
to make whole group (10-12 vampires) dedicated to sorcerers caste.
Other expansion could bring wholly sabbat group, and so one.
I would love to see all this clans as stand alone clans with their own
clan cards (and without access to clan cards that do not suit them)
but it would be still better than nothing.
Daneel
<vegar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please. I have wanted or of the Antitribu clans in Vtes since I
> started playing during Sabbat War. Now I'm not talking about another
> Brujah Antitribu. But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
> Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
> clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
> they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
[snip]
> Any thoughts?
You can argue whether it was a good decision to introduce the original
Antitribu clans in Sabbat (when they could have just as easily been
designated by their Sect descriptor, with some of the clan-dependent
cards requiring e.g. Camarilla Brujah, as indicated by card text or
both the sect and the clan symbols for example).
You can also argue whether it would have been better to go with the
system used by Sabbat afterwards since it was already out and a
pretty successfull set, and introduce the remaining Antitribu clans
to be consistent with the previous method. However, Scott's opinion
(and probably other people's whose opinions influenced the decision)
was that the inconsistency brought by keeping the legacy antitribu
clans, but not introducing any antitribu clans for the independent
for example, is dwarfed by the opportunity to do at least the
remaining clans as they should have been done (again, opinion).
It can also be argued that the grouping rule could have been used to
kind of "restart" the clan notations and go with the main clan + sect
descriptor, perhaps errating previous clan-dependent cards, but
this seemed too risky to the people making the decision (much less
so than changing the layouts and backgrounds completely).
Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure that the decision is kind of permanent
at this stage, with little hope to go back on it, so all of the
above is mostly a thought-experiment. :)
--
Regards,
Daneel
Raziel
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 13:09:05 -0800 (PST), Baaliprimogen
>
> > Please. I have wanted or of the Antitribu clans in Vtes since I
> > started playing during Sabbat War. Now I'm not talking about another
> > Brujah Antitribu. But why not release Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents of
> > Light and Assamite Antitribu. Yeah, yeah, I know the Sabbat of these
> > clans are the Antitribu. But I realy want them to become a clan like
> > they others. Maybe even Lasombra Antitribu (scarce).
>
> [snip]
>
> > Any thoughts?
>
> You can argue whether it was a good decision to introduce the original
> Antitribu clans in Sabbat (when they could have just as easily been
> designated by their Sect descriptor, with some of the clan-dependent
> cards requiring e.g. Camarilla Brujah, as indicated by card text or
> both the sect and the clan symbols for example).
I argue. It was big mistake. Best way was creating sect symbol, which
should be put right under clan symbol on vampire, and like clan symbol
on library cards. It would save some space, and would be easier to
spot for other players.
> You can also argue whether it would have been better to go with the
> system used by Sabbat afterwards since it was already out and a
> pretty successfull set, and introduce the remaining Antitribu clans
> to be consistent with the previous method. However, Scott's opinion
> (and probably other people's whose opinions influenced the decision)
> was that the inconsistency brought by keeping the legacy antitribu
> clans, but not introducing any antitribu clans for the independent
> for example, is dwarfed by the opportunity to do at least the
> remaining clans as they should have been done (again, opinion).
It was good decision imo. All clans should have to be done like FoS,
Lasombra, Assamites and Tzimisce. It's shame that those 7 antitribu
clans exist, breaking game balance right now (with more options than
all other clans).
> It can also be argued that the grouping rule could have been used to
> kind of "restart" the clan notations and go with the main clan + sect
> descriptor, perhaps errating previous clan-dependent cards, but
> this seemed too risky to the people making the decision (much less
> so than changing the layouts and backgrounds completely).
There is another reasoning, it would make groups 1-2 of those clans
very big. But it's shame it was not done (it should be done via errata
- creating cards for with both clan AND sect requirements - thus not
banning single card and keeping it true to the lore). It was not
risky, and it was real shame.
> Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure that the decision is kind of permanent
> at this stage, with little hope to go back on it, so all of the
> above is mostly a thought-experiment. :)
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Daneel
It's not fun that it's permanent.
Raziel
wrote:
Yes, vtes took bad path. But there was window of opportunity to undo
this mistake and it's real shame they didn't done this.
Raziel
They are already screwed. But creating more clans is not really
helpful atm.
> Making the Antitribu into separate clans in the Sabbat expansion made
> sense at the time. It was consistent with 2nd Edition, which was what
> was current in 1996. (So I wouldn't call it a "mistake," but I do
> think it is "unfortunate" that this previous design decision has led
> to some complications. Calling it a mistake depends on your
> perspective. I imagine that the Mark Rein-Hagen purists out there
> could credibly argue that Third Edition was the mistake and that WotC
> had the more "faithful" interpretation. Etc.).
>
> But given the changes in paradigm shift in Third Edition, LSJ and
> White Wolf have done an excellent job representing the Antitribu
> concept (in the Third Edition way) as merely a difference in sect
> (rather than clan).
It was done in Black Hand, not in 3rd. (Yazid Tamari). Possibly
earlier, i dunno right now.
> I do *not* think that they should make those separate Antitribu's into
> a clan, especially at this point. I think there was a small
> opportunity where it might have made sense to do so (right around
> 2000-2001) but at this point, it doesn't make sense to backtrack on
> the decision.
It was wise decision they didn't make separate clans for antitribu.
> Using the current system, there have already been 2 Lasombra
> Antitribu, 9 Assamite Antitribu (along with 2 Camarilla Assamites and
> 3 Shango), 2 Serpents of the Light (along with 3 Camarilla Setites and
> 2 Children of Damballah), and 4 Ravnos Antitribu (along with 1
> Camarilla Ravnos and 2 Kinyonyi).
>
> It just doesn't seem worthwhile to try and revamp the system at this
> point.
Sure, if we talk about creating more clans.
> I don't think these clans are significantly disadvantaged by not
> having a separate Antitribu clan. In fact, I think it is a significant
> *advantage* to have a diverse range of traits/sects because it allows
> them to take advantage of more cards and mechanics.
They are disadvantaged.
> For all the Camarilla clans, the Giovanni, and the Antitribu Sabbat
> clans, the Ebony Kingdom expansion is mostly full of useless cards.
> Lots of Laibon stuff that they can't really use. But the Lasombra,
> Assamites, Setites, and Ravnos have clan members with that affiliation
> (and they can effectively use Mozambique Allure and Bamba if needed),
> so they can actually play with a lot of these toys.
So what ? Cammy boys still have best stuff.
> If you look at things like the Eden's Legacy rule (allowing you to
> search your library for your card when bringing out a Laibon), it's a
> significant advantage for the Lasombra/Assamites/Setites/Ravnos
> because they can actually actively benefit from it (compared to say
> the Ventrue).
One storyline. Still - STORYLINE.
> Sword of Caine wasn't that helpful for the Camarilla clans (because of
> all the Black Hand stuff). But it's a gold mine for the Assamites, who
> can actually use the tech even better than most of the actual Sabbat
> clans.
Assamites antitribu are still sub-par bloodline in the game, they have
what ? 2 tournament wins, 0 tier 2 decks, 0 tier 1 decks. They are
very disadvantaged. Shongo have 2 wins too, they are actually bit
better than antitribus, but still nothing earthshaking. Tegyrius is
solid, true. But it's star - just as Tariq. It's not that schismatics
and antitribus as a whole have any advantage when playing with them.
echia...@yahoo.com
> You can argue whether it was a good decision to introduce the original
> Antitribu clans in Sabbat (when they could have just as easily been
> designated by their Sect descriptor, with some of the clan-dependent
> cards requiring e.g. Camarilla Brujah, as indicated by card text or
> both the sect and the clan symbols for example).
Yeah, in the WotC era they didn't really think things through
regarding Sect or Clan. If you recall, the original Independent clans
had "Non-Camarilla" as their sect ("Independent" was only introduced
much later). There are also some people that claim that PTO was
supposedly intended to affect just Independents (or that was a
suggested errata).
> You can also argue whether it would have been better to go with the
> system used by Sabbat afterwards since it was already out and a
> pretty successfull set, and introduce the remaining Antitribu clans
> to be consistent with the previous method. However, Scott's opinion
> (and probably other people's whose opinions influenced the decision)
> was that the inconsistency brought by keeping the legacy antitribu
> clans, but not introducing any antitribu clans for the independent
> for example, is dwarfed by the opportunity to do at least the
> remaining clans as they should have been done (again, opinion).
>
> It can also be argued that the grouping rule could have been used to
> kind of "restart" the clan notations and go with the main clan + sect
> descriptor, perhaps errating previous clan-dependent cards, but
> this seemed too risky to the people making the decision (much less
> so than changing the layouts and backgrounds completely).
Agreed. Since the game was brought back in 2000 (in the heyday of VtM
Revised/3rd Edition), it made sense for White Wolf to push for the
"not different clans, just different sect" interpretation.
Another interesting anecdote of "wished we had done it differently
back then but we'll just have to bite the bullet and correct things in
the future" is the Grouping rule and DS/AH/FN. It's been discussed
many times before on how the Group 2 Independents was too large
(leading to a small Group 3) and that in hindsight, the DS/AH
Independents probably should have been made Group 1 instead. But at
least with Group 4/5 you can see that White Wolf is already trying to
correct the imbalances from Group 2/3 (by better distributing between
the groupings).
echia...@yahoo.com
> > You can also argue whether it would have been better to go with the
> > system used by Sabbat afterwards since it was already out and a
> > pretty successfull set, and introduce the remaining Antitribu clans
> > to be consistent with the previous method. However, Scott's opinion
> > (and probably other people's whose opinions influenced the decision)
> > was that the inconsistency brought by keeping the legacy antitribu
> > clans, but not introducing any antitribu clans for the independent
> > for example, is dwarfed by the opportunity to do at least the
> > remaining clans as they should have been done (again, opinion).
>
> It was good decision imo. All clans should have to be done like FoS,
> Lasombra, Assamites and Tzimisce. It's shame that those 7 antitribu
> clans exist, breaking game balance right now (with more options than
> all other clans).
Uh, those antitribu clans have been around since 1996. So you're
saying that the game balance has been broken these past 13 years?
(Sidebarring discussion on whether many of the original Jyhad library
cards are "broken").
That depends on how you define "options." If you mean "more
combinations of potential crypts" then yes. But if you mean "more
combinations of potential libraries and deck types" then actually the
status quo system *helps* the FoS, Lasombra, Assamites, and Tzimisce.
With many of the standard Camarilla clans, there are only so many
viable deck archetypes. Due to the diversity in sect affiliation, you
can actually make a wider variety of decks with the FoS, Lasombra,
etc. crypts.
For example, in addition to the traditional Independent Assamite
decks, you can make Camarilla Assamite decks, Sabbat Assamite decks
(with Black Hand), Laibon Assamite decks, and Anarch Assamite decks.
Take something like Ventrue or Tremere. Your only options are
Camarilla decks (>95%) and maybe an occasional Anarch deck. You can't
reasonably try a Laibon-centered deck with those clans. Or a Sabbat
deck (without relying heavily on the Antitribus).
So there might be fewer crypt options, but this is partly compensated
by additional library options.
echia...@yahoo.com
> > Making the Antitribu into separate clans in the Sabbat expansion made
> > sense at the time. It was consistent with 2nd Edition, which was what
> > was current in 1996. (So I wouldn't call it a "mistake," but I do
> > think it is "unfortunate" that this previous design decision has led
> > to some complications. Calling it a mistake depends on your
> > perspective. I imagine that the Mark Rein-Hagen purists out there
> > could credibly argue that Third Edition was the mistake and that WotC
> > had the more "faithful" interpretation. Etc.).
>
> > But given the changes in paradigm shift in Third Edition, LSJ and
> > White Wolf have done an excellent job representing the Antitribu
> > concept (in the Third Edition way) as merely a difference in sect
> > (rather than clan).
>
> It was done in Black Hand, not in 3rd. (Yazid Tamari). Possibly
> earlier, i dunno right now.
Since the context clearly involved discussion of the RPG (VtM), the
reference to "Third Edition" meant VtM 3rd Edition (a.k.a. Revised),
not the Third Edition expansion of VTES. The Third Edition (VtM) way
treats antitribu as a difference in sect (rather than clan).
> > For all the Camarilla clans, the Giovanni, and the Antitribu Sabbat
> > clans, the Ebony Kingdom expansion is mostly full of useless cards.
> > Lots of Laibon stuff that they can't really use. But the Lasombra,
> > Assamites, Setites, and Ravnos have clan members with that affiliation
> > (and they can effectively use Mozambique Allure and Bamba if needed),
> > so they can actually play with a lot of these toys.
>
> So what ? Cammy boys still have best stuff.
Actually, I strongly disagree here.
Princes and Justicars have some really great cards (Second Tradition,
Parity Shift, Anathema, Archon), but the *sect* actually has really
lousy cards. Looking at the Secret Library (Monger), it looks like the
only cards that require "Camarilla" are the Praxis Seizures and a
bunch of fairly lame political cards (Camarilla Exemplary, Command of
the Harpies, Justicar Retribution). For non-Princes and non-Justicars,
there is almost no benefit to being Camarilla (which I'm not
necessarily complaining about. And for the RPG fans, it makes sense
thematically).
The Independents don't have many cards either, but they do have some
real gems with Free States Rant and Reckless Agitation (which are
easily accessible to non-titled vampires).
In contrast, even the lowliest Sabbat member has access to many
amazing cards: Abbot, Zillah's Tears, Yawp Court, Harvest Rites, Black
Forest Base, Church of the Order of St. Blaise. And Fiendish Tongue,
Games of Instinct, and Rumble offer advantages over their "no
requirement" equivalents.
The Laibon also clean up with Bamba, Earth-Feeder, Eldest Command
Undeath, Elephant Guardian, Ilomba, Kduva's Mask, Kerrie, Powerbase:
Luanda, Powerbase: Tshwane, Shaman, Strange Day, Swarm, Terra
Incognita, and Well-Marked.
So please don't generalize the awesomeness of the Prince/Justicar
cards to the 83% of Camarilla vampires who can't use any of those
cards.
> > If you look at things like the Eden's Legacy rule (allowing you to
> > search your library for your card when bringing out a Laibon), it's a
> > significant advantage for the Lasombra/Assamites/Setites/Ravnos
> > because they can actually actively benefit from it (compared to say
> > the Ventrue).
>
> One storyline. Still - STORYLINE.
The point is that it demonstrates how the greater flexibility (and
diversity) of the Lasombra/Assamites/Setites/Ravnos can be an
advantage. Suppose the next storyline is Black Hand based (then
Assamites get a significant advantage). Or it's Anathema focused with
an advantage to Red List vampires (the Independents have the most Red
List minions). Etc.
Raziel
> On Nov 29, 5:02 pm, Raziel <angelofc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > You can also argue whether it would have been better to go with the
> > > system used by Sabbat afterwards since it was already out and a
> > > pretty successfull set, and introduce the remaining Antitribu clans
> > > to be consistent with the previous method. However, Scott's opinion
> > > (and probably other people's whose opinions influenced the decision)
> > > was that the inconsistency brought by keeping the legacy antitribu
> > > clans, but not introducing any antitribu clans for the independent
> > > for example, is dwarfed by the opportunity to do at least the
> > > remaining clans as they should have been done (again, opinion).
>
> > It was good decision imo. All clans should have to be done like FoS,
> > Lasombra, Assamites and Tzimisce. It's shame that those 7 antitribu
> > clans exist, breaking game balance right now (with more options than
> > all other clans).
>
> Uh, those antitribu clans have been around since 1996. So you're
> saying that the game balance has been broken these past 13 years?
> (Sidebarring discussion on whether many of the original Jyhad library
> cards are "broken").
Sure, in some way it was (and there is many broken cards from orginal
jyhad as well, but it's not part of the discussion).
> That depends on how you define "options." If you mean "more
> combinations of potential crypts" then yes. But if you mean "more
> combinations of potential libraries and deck types" then actually the
> status quo system *helps* the FoS, Lasombra, Assamites, and Tzimisce.
> With many of the standard Camarilla clans, there are only so many
> viable deck archetypes. Due to the diversity in sect affiliation, you
> can actually make a wider variety of decks with the FoS, Lasombra,
> etc. crypts.
Wide variety - only if we skip all other factors. Worse crypt
selection often means that many of so called 'new archetypes' are fun
to play, but not competetive. For example, i never seen lasombra decks
that use laibon tech with good result.
> For example, in addition to the traditional Independent Assamite
> decks, you can make Camarilla Assamite decks, Sabbat Assamite decks
> (with Black Hand), Laibon Assamite decks, and Anarch Assamite decks.
Sure, but many of those are not very competetive (i'm going to skip
the part that i missed finals by 0,5 vp using assamites antitribu).
> Take something like Ventrue or Tremere. Your only options are
> Camarilla decks (>95%) and maybe an occasional Anarch deck. You can't
> reasonably try a Laibon-centered deck with those clans. Or a Sabbat
> deck (without relying heavily on the Antitribus).
There are many options within camarilla, and many of them are
competetive. Whats more, both those clans are very competitive (both
have top tier builds).
> So there might be fewer crypt options, but this is partly compensated
> by additional library options.
Additional library options are compensation for less sect card (indies
have no good sect card).
echia...@yahoo.com
> > That depends on how you define "options." If you mean "more
> > combinations of potential crypts" then yes. But if you mean "more
> > combinations of potential libraries and deck types" then actually the
> > status quo system *helps* the FoS, Lasombra, Assamites, and Tzimisce.
> > With many of the standard Camarilla clans, there are only so many
> > viable deck archetypes. Due to the diversity in sect affiliation, you
> > can actually make a wider variety of decks with the FoS, Lasombra,
> > etc. crypts.
>
> Wide variety - only if we skip all other factors. Worse crypt
> selection often means that many of so called 'new archetypes' are fun
> to play, but not competetive. For example, i never seen lasombra decks
> that use laibon tech with good result.
How about Ilomba in a Shadow Twin deck?
Shadow Twin decks have been a staple for years. Take a normal Shadow
Twin deck. Substitute Otieno and Onaedo as your mid-caps, and you can
use Ilomba to easily burn minions. Much better than before. I *wish*
the Tremere/!Tremere had some Laibon members so that I could use
Ilomba in my Cryptic Mission decks the way the Lasombra can use it
with Shadow Twin.
Or for another example, Assamites can benefit from the Laibon Kerrie,
because it won't get burned by Baal's Bloody Talons.
> > For example, in addition to the traditional Independent Assamite
> > decks, you can make Camarilla Assamite decks, Sabbat Assamite decks
> > (with Black Hand), Laibon Assamite decks, and Anarch Assamite decks.
>
> Sure, but many of those are not very competetive (i'm going to skip
> the part that i missed finals by 0,5 vp using assamites antitribu).
Well, when you get down to it, really how many competitive deck types
do the rest of the clans have? The Malkavian Antitribu have Kindred
Spirits bleed. It's ridiculously effective but that's pretty much all
they can really do in Tier 1.
> > Take something like Ventrue or Tremere. Your only options are
> > Camarilla decks (>95%) and maybe an occasional Anarch deck. You can't
> > reasonably try a Laibon-centered deck with those clans. Or a Sabbat
> > deck (without relying heavily on the Antitribus).
>
> There are many options within camarilla, and many of them are
> competetive. Whats more, both those clans are very competitive (both
> have top tier builds).
Yes. But they're also very predictable. Their competitive options are
strong, but limited in scope. Influence out Arika, and people can be
reasonably sure what kind of deck you are playing. Influence out
Olugbenga and you'll have a lot more people guessing (because it's
more ambiguous).
> > So there might be fewer crypt options, but this is partly compensated
> > by additional library options.
>
> Additional library options are compensation for less sect card (indies
> have no good sect card).
Free States Rant? Reckless Agitation?
The Camarilla has good Prince/Justicar cards, but no worthwhile sect
cards. (You could argue that technically Prince/Justicar is a subset
within the Camarilla, but then I'd respond how Anarchs are a subset of
the Independents).
Raziel
> On Nov 30, 3:56 am, Raziel <angelofc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > That depends on how you define "options." If you mean "more
> > > combinations of potential crypts" then yes. But if you mean "more
> > > combinations of potential libraries and deck types" then actually the
> > > status quo system *helps* the FoS, Lasombra, Assamites, and Tzimisce.
> > > With many of the standard Camarilla clans, there are only so many
> > > viable deck archetypes. Due to the diversity in sect affiliation, you
> > > can actually make a wider variety of decks with the FoS, Lasombra,
> > > etc. crypts.
>
> > Wide variety - only if we skip all other factors. Worse crypt
> > selection often means that many of so called 'new archetypes' are fun
> > to play, but not competetive. For example, i never seen lasombra decks
> > that use laibon tech with good result.
>
> How about Ilomba in a Shadow Twin deck?
>
> Shadow Twin decks have been a staple for years. Take a normal Shadow
> Twin deck. Substitute Otieno and Onaedo as your mid-caps, and you can
> use Ilomba to easily burn minions. Much better than before. I *wish*
> the Tremere/!Tremere had some Laibon members so that I could use
> Ilomba in my Cryptic Mission decks the way the Lasombra can use it
> with Shadow Twin.
Never seen it played with laibon tech.
> Or for another example, Assamites can benefit from the Laibon Kerrie,
> because it won't get burned by Baal's Bloody Talons.
It's not really best example. Combat is not very effective way to oust
players, and melee weapon combat is known for it's downsides for
years. Taking kerrie means you have OBF (to play mozambique allure) or
limited crypt choices (3 vampires, maybe 2 non-assamites too).
> > > For example, in addition to the traditional Independent Assamite
> > > decks, you can make Camarilla Assamite decks, Sabbat Assamite decks
> > > (with Black Hand), Laibon Assamite decks, and Anarch Assamite decks.
>
> > Sure, but many of those are not very competetive (i'm going to skip
> > the part that i missed finals by 0,5 vp using assamites antitribu).
>
> Well, when you get down to it, really how many competitive deck types
> do the rest of the clans have? The Malkavian Antitribu have Kindred
> Spirits bleed. It's ridiculously effective but that's pretty much all
> they can really do in Tier 1.
Tier 1 is very narrow. There is only few decks that are T1. Edward
powerbleed, Nocturn bleed, Carna, Speed shamblings and only few more.
But Malks have other decks that are T2.
> > > Take something like Ventrue or Tremere. Your only options are
> > > Camarilla decks (>95%) and maybe an occasional Anarch deck. You can't
> > > reasonably try a Laibon-centered deck with those clans. Or a Sabbat
> > > deck (without relying heavily on the Antitribus).
>
> > There are many options within camarilla, and many of them are
> > competetive. Whats more, both those clans are very competitive (both
> > have top tier builds).
>
> Yes. But they're also very predictable. Their competitive options are
> strong, but limited in scope. Influence out Arika, and people can be
> reasonably sure what kind of deck you are playing. Influence out
> Olugbenga and you'll have a lot more people guessing (because it's
> more ambiguous).
Well, thats the upside in playing decks with not best crypt selection.
> > > So there might be fewer crypt options, but this is partly compensated
> > > by additional library options.
>
> > Additional library options are compensation for less sect card (indies
> > have no good sect card).
>
> Free States Rant? Reckless Agitation?
>
> The Camarilla has good Prince/Justicar cards, but no worthwhile sect
> cards. (You could argue that technically Prince/Justicar is a subset
> within the Camarilla, but then I'd respond how Anarchs are a subset of
> the Independents).
Oh, true - those two are quite good. There are few default anarch
crypt card, and ton of default princes/justicar. Sure, camarilla by
itself have no meaningful sect card (require a camarilla vampire), but
powerful title cards more than make up for this.
Raziel
game.
One possible way is layout change:
-make all antitribu their parent clan members (and former vampires
will be issued errata to keep it cool)
-introduce sect symbols under clan (instead of current text in box
below the pic)
-make all cards currently used by parent clan requiring camarilla
(possibly without hunting grounds), and all antitribu cards requiring
sabbat (and ban their hunting ground) (of course, some cards could be
left without requirement - those that fit both sect)(done via sect
symbol under clan symbol on the card)
-balance number of vampires per clan, etc.
Juggernaut1981
Condensing the clans also increases the rate of contesting HG's.
Raziel
Sure. Such change would have it's consequences - like decreasing
efficiency of anarch decks by implementing sect requirement on cards,
increased contest rate on hg (how many decks use hg's anyway ?), and
others. Still, do you know better way to move vtes closer to it's rpg
roots ?
Juggernaut1981
Um, it's already based on oWoD? How close do you want? I'm not a VtM
player, just dabbled in the games. For me, this is a CCG that was
based on an RPG. Just like VtM:Bloodlines was an RPG-Game based on
the RPG books (which could have been soo much cooler if Troika didn't
go belly-up part-way through development!). The CCG is the New Canon
for oWoD. If the Sabbat are shown going around with blazing unicorn
tattoos on their head and the Camarilla all have large fob-watches and
the Indies all own "Indy 500 Racing Jackets" then you know what... It
is NOW Canon.
So, unless you've got some Funky Temporis Rewind Time shennanigans
going on... You're probably not going to be able to alter the current
"divided state".
Raziel
Sure, it is new canon. But it's new canon with little anachronistic
things, like !ventrue with AUS, malks with DOM, assamites still with
blood curse etc.
There is still room for development. Until Final Nights, malks had DOM
- it was redone. Until Anarchs, gangrels were part of camarilla - it
was redone.
Why couldn't WW redo antitribu clans, especially if they plan another
sabbat edition ? It's perfect time for layout change and reintroducing
antitribu clans back in their parent clans (updating !ventrue
discipline spreed) ? Why can't WW remove blood curse (not even
mentioning it, and banning card representing shulgi's deed)(look at
advanced Yazid - no mention of blood curse) ?
It could be done. It would change metagame a bit, but i think players
would adjust their playstyles to the new rules.
Brum
Yep. Storylines are stronger then ever. And that brings new interest
to the game since 100% of new canon is up to us, VtES players.
There is uncharted territory from 2000-2004.
Also not much story from Africa, South America, some countries in
Europe, post-Wall colonization of Russian States, etc. Lots still to
do.
Juggernaut1981
Raziel,
They have, there are plenty of minions without the Blood Curse and
there are ways to remove the Blood Curse... or, you just deal with it
when you build your Old-School Assamites. Gangrels left the Camarilla
(in story) and hence became an Independent Clan. That's why Old
Gangrels are Cams, and new Gangrels are Indies.
If suddenly the Lasombra en-masse turned Camarilla, then in future
expansions we'd see the Lasombra Vamps be labelled Camarilla and their
"default" Sect may need to be redefined.
All I'm saying is BUILD FORWARDS rather than trying to errata 10 years
worth of cards in a new expansion. Realistically trying to merge the
Anti-tribbu back into the clan is effectively doing that.
Raziel
Except that new indie Assamites have blood curse ...
I like the way they redone gangrels.
I dont think there should be 'default sect' anyway. I think embrace
cards should use current sect.
Reallisticaly there is slim chance that they merge those clans, and
include this mechanism. It does not prevent me from tryingy to change
their mind.
Juggernaut1981
Yes, but I suspect that as things go on we will see more Assamites
without the Curse and so on. Maybe the Gangrel will come back to "the
fold". Who knows. Play the storylines, change the future, enjoy the
new prints...
Raziel
Already in the game there is about dozen Assamites not affected by the
curse. Point is, all who stayed with the clan after signing convention
of thorns are affected, while in lore they are not.
I dont want gangrel to join camarilla again.
I play the storylines, and enjoy the game. It does not prevent me from
suggesting new ideas, and possible solutions to 'problems' (anything i
consider problematic).