Winning Deck for Event #1 (Was Re: [Report] Gateway ...
Brad Ward
Club. The first table I ended up using it to save myself from dying 3
different times. After paying my predator 1 pool to "borrow" her
rats, I had the set up to oust Steve Bucy with a Perfect
Clarity/Daring Dawn bleed. This burned Spiro and left me with no
minions. I worked a deal with Nat Hammond to help oust my predator.
The Succubus Club came in really handy letting me offer Nat and myself
unlimited card cycling using Succubus to trade the Elder Library back
and forth.
I don't remember much from the second round, except that Succubus came
in abusively helpful once again by being able to constantly trade
Milicent Smith back to myself at the begining of every turn. This
time Nat Hammond got to be on the recieving end of that horrible
succubus club card.
The Final had the following seating order:
#1 Brad Ward - Spiridonas Soul Gem/Perfect Clarity/Daring Dawn
#2 John Amato - Black Cat, Celerity Equipment !Brujah/Brujah
#3 Paul Johnson - ???
#4 Jason Dawson - Anarch Revolt Weenie Dominate/Bleed/Bleed Bouncer
#5 ??? -
Attention first went to Jason who had the Anarch heavy bleed
deflection deck. Paul and Jason’s prey (don’t recall who)
really tried to put the hurt on Jason. I was the only one with votes
on the table. Jason, seeing his demise offered to help me however he
could if I would vote to keep his Anarchs in play while he ousts his
prey. My prey (John) was putty in my hands, having neither bleed
bounce, intercept nor stealth. Jason’s prey fell first followed
by Paul Johnson. I then ousted John Amato and Jason followed through
with his deal and rolled over. The game was over in about an hour or
less thanks to the Anarch Revolts.
Note: The deck is only less than 90 cards because I had limited
number of Perfect Clarity. I plan to increase it to 90 as I acquire
more.
Crypt (18)
18 Spiridonas THA DOM
Total Library (69)
Masters(20)
2 Arcane Library
1 Dreams of the Sphinx
8 Fortitude
1 Contingency Planning
2 Milicent Smith Vampire Hunter
3 Parthenon
1 Barrens
1 Elder library
1 Succubus Club
Minion (60)
12 2nd Tradition
2 Soul Gem of Etrius
4 Blood Tears of Kephryn
5 Perfect Clarity
6 Magic of the Smith
15 Obediance
6 Bonding
6 Daring the Dawn
4 Force of Will
Jay Kristoff
>18 Spiridonas THA DOM
>Total Library (69)
>Masters(20)
>2 Arcane Library
>1 Dreams of the Sphinx
>8 Fortitude
>1 Contingency Planning
>2 Milicent Smith Vampire Hunter
>3 Parthenon
>1 Barrens
>1 Elder library
>1 Succubus Club
>Minion (60)
>12 2nd Tradition
>2 Soul Gem of Etrius
>4 Blood Tears of Kephryn
damage from Force of Will and Daring the Dawn.
>5 Perfect Clarity
>6 Magic of the Smith
>15 Obedience
Halcyan 2
>>2 Soul Gem of Etrius
>>4 Blood Tears of Kephryn
> I hope that you weren't useing the Blood Tears to prevent the agg.
>damage from Force of Will and Daring the Dawn.
Even if he isn't trying to use it to prevent (since he can't), the Blood Tears
still help allow an extra +2 bleed. First off, they tap Spiridonas (allowing
Force of Will). Now if Spiridonas at nine blood wants to play Force of Will
(inf) + Daring the Dawn + Perfect Clarity (and we'll throw in a Bonding too),
he can bleed for: 2 (Force of Will) + 1 (Bonding) + 4 (one blood spent on
Force, two spent on PC, leaving 6 blood to use for his special) --> only a
bleed of 7. But if he had equipped with the Blood Tears before Force of
Will'ing, he can burn them after playing the PC, allowing an extra 2 blood -->
2 bleed, meaning a total bleed of 9.
Halcyan 2
spinney99
reason to ban succubus from tournament play? please, wise leaders of
vekn! along with its incredible abuse potential, these kinds of
combos that are truly overpowered should point the need to monitor,
(and imho, ban) the Club...
-spinney sporemage
brad ward posted:
I abused the crap out of the Succubus
Club. The first table I ended up using it to save myself from dying 3
different times. After paying my predator 1 pool to "borrow" her
rats, I had the set up to oust Steve Bucy with a Perfect
Clarity/Daring Dawn bleed. This burned Spiro and left me with no
minions. I worked a deal with Nat Hammond to help oust my predator.
The Succubus Club came in really handy letting me offer Nat and myself
unlimited card cycling using Succubus to trade the Elder Library back
and forth.
I don't remember much from the second round, except that Succubus came
in abusively helpful once again by being able to constantly trade
Milicent Smith back to myself at the begining of every turn. This
time Nat Hammond got to be on the recieving end of that horrible
succubus club card.
==
"Jay Kristoff" <j...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:<T9xl7.46097$Iq4.21...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com>...
> >Crypt (18)
> >18 Spiridonas THA DOM
> >Total Library (69)
> >Masters(20)
> >2 Arcane Library
> >1 Dreams of the Sphinx
> >8 Fortitude
> >1 Contingency Planning
> >2 Milicent Smith Vampire Hunter
> >3 Parthenon
> >1 Barrens
> >1 Elder library
> >1 Succubus Club
> >Minion (60)
> >12 2nd Tradition
> >2 Soul Gem of Etrius
> >4 Blood Tears of Kephryn
> I hope that you weren't useing the Blood Tears to prevent the agg.
> damage from Force of Will and Daring the Dawn.
>
looks like it's equip with soul gem/get fortitude skill card, don't
try to prevent damage. keep millicent, then if you get blocked
leaving torpor, you get a new full spiradonas; but usually just burn
him with a combo of his skill emptying him for +bleed and taking
enough agg to burn.
Andrew S. Davidson
>isn't the succubus/library unlimited card cycling combo
>a good enough reason to ban succubus from tournament play?
No. A simple errata would be quite sufficient. But even that is not
necessary. Has nobody read the card?
"Master: unique location. Methuselahs can give you pool, and you can
give them pool. You can trade cards from your hand or in play. These
trades can only happen during your untap phase and cannot result in
any Methuselah having less than his or her hand size. Any additional
terms can be established, but none are enforced by the rules."
Trading the Elder Library by itself is not allowed because it would
result in the donor having fewer cards in hand than his hand size. He
must trade a card along with it and that stops the cycling combo.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
>Trading the Elder Library by itself is not allowed because it would
>result in the donor having fewer cards in hand than his hand size. He
>must trade a card along with it and that stops the cycling combo.
Correction - it's the recipient of the Library who ends up with fewer
cards than his hand size. You still can't do it without another card
to keep all hands in balance.
Andrew
Bradly Ward
"Jay Kristoff" <j...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:T9xl7.46097$Iq4.21...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> >4 Blood Tears of Kephryn
> I hope that you weren't useing the Blood Tears to prevent the agg.
> damage from Force of Will and Daring the Dawn.
No, I wanted Spiro to Burn every time I did FoW or DtD so that I could get a
NEW filled up Spiro to bleed next turn. The Blood Tears were in there so
that I had somthing to do with the other 5 Magic of the SMith cards. I
could just go Smith up a Blood Tears and Benefit a blood out of the whole
deal. I Would also be set up to Force of Will Bleed.
-Brad
Prince of NLV
Brad Ward
> I hope that you weren't useing the Blood Tears to prevent the agg.
> damage from Force of Will and Daring the Dawn.
No, The Tears are in there so that I dont clutter my hand up with the
other 5 Majic of the SMith. I get to Majic of the smith, get a tears,
im now tapped and can force of will and burn the tears for an
additional +2 blood. That lets me bleed for more. It's effectively a
way to hunt at 3 stealth.
-Brad
Frederick Scott
I'm pretty sure that clause of the Succubus Club merely means you're
supposed to trade cards in hand on a one-for-one basis, nothing more.
In particular, there's no indication that it wants you to take into
account the *indirect* implications of trading permanents. Drawing
another card for Elder Library (or discarding because one no longer
possesses the Elder Library) is just an indirect effect triggered by
the change of possession. (Nice try, tho...)
Fred
Brad Ward
> >Trading the Elder Library by itself is not allowed because it would
> >result in the donor having fewer cards in hand than his hand size. He
> >must trade a card along with it and that stops the cycling combo.
>
> Correction - it's the recipient of the Library who ends up with fewer
> cards than his hand size. You still can't do it without another card
> to keep all hands in balance.
I believe the trade is still valid. The trade makes you have a new
hand size. When you're hand size changes you must draw or discard to
the appropriate size. Otherwise you couldnt use the Succubus at all
once you run out of library cards.
-Brad
Pat Ricochet
> number of Perfect Clarity. I plan to increase it to 90 as I acquire
> more.
Didja ever run out of cards? I imagine with the Succubus Club
constantly rezoning the Elder Library that you could have plowed through a
lot of an 80 card deck, but for the other games?
--
Pat Ricochet
Soul Jar'rn Fool of Atlanta
spinney99
cassandra must also be accompanied by the trade of cards so that no
one violates the letter of the law. (Q. do i trust you to give me
back cassandra for that unlimited card-TRADING...) just a guess. and
probably very wrong.
lost the original thread, about the winning deck at event #1 in LA,
but i just want to add, the all-Spirodonas deck that inspired the
question is a thing of beauty. i just would never think of doing
that:+r (and other mere applause.)
-spin
=thanks=
oh, yeah, like that's the only reason to ban succuclub. doubt i'll
play a deck without it until it's banned, if only to contest it. of
course, it always seems to end up more valuable than just a contester.
spinney99
posts where this has been covered. slow server, slow brain after
work;/ the answers there are good answers. and i can look forward to
this retractpology hitting about the same time as the goof IN 3-9
hours.
peace,
spintoy
Andrew S. Davidson
>I'm pretty sure that clause of the Succubus Club merely means you're
>supposed to trade cards in hand on a one-for-one basis, nothing more.
>In particular, there's no indication that it wants you to take into
>account the *indirect* implications of trading permanents. Drawing
>another card for Elder Library (or discarding because one no longer
>possesses the Elder Library) is just an indirect effect triggered by
>the change of possession. (Nice try, tho...)
The change in hand size is a direct effect of the trade - it is
immediate and inevitable consequence. In any case, the Succubus Club
does not make such fine distinctions - you just made all that up.
This is transparent chicanery because you yourself think that using
the Club to cycle cards is abusive. You just want to build the card
up so that you can knock it down by banning it.
It still seems clear that the original designers of the card have got
this point covered. The card cycling combo with Elder Library
violates both the letter and the spirit of the restriction printed on
the Succubus Club.
Andrew
Andrew S. Davidson
>Otherwise you couldnt use the Succubus at all
>once you run out of library cards.
This doesn't follow. Again, you just have to read the card which
says, "These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less
than his or her hand size." If one player is already short of cards
then continuing shortness would not be a result of the trade and so
further trading would be legal. A player with a full hand would not
be able to give the short player cards though, as he would become
short too as a result of the trade and this is not allowed.
Andrew
LSJ
Good point.
So, when trading a card that alters a player's hand size, neither
trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
your hand as well.
There goes the "infinite" cycling problem.
Thanks for pointing that out, Andrew.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
GymNat1
>trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
>away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
>your hand as well.
>
so if i have a 7 card hand and the person i trade the elder library to has a 5
card hand. i have to give him one of my cards, well then he gets to play with
a 91 card deck and that is unfair as well. he is immediately disqualified. :
)
If i trade Christianus Lionel to someone, i also have to give them one of my
cards. this is ludicrous. when i trade the elder library away, my hand size
is reduced. i still meet the requirements of SC. my hand size is now 7 not 8
cause i don't have the library anymore. i do not have less than my hand size
because once the library is gone, my hand size is now 7 and i have MORE than my
hand size and per the rulebook, i must discard.
LSJ
>
> >So, when trading a card that alters a player's hand size, neither
> >trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
> >away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
> >your hand as well.
> >
>
> so if i have a 7 card hand and the person i trade the elder library to has a 5
> card hand. i have to give him one of my cards, well then he gets to play with
> a 91 card deck and that is unfair as well. he is immediately disqualified. :
> )
How do you figure that the card you trade him finds its way into his library?
> If i trade Christianus Lionel to someone, i also have to give them one of my
> cards. this is ludicrous.
This is card text.
> when i trade the elder library away, my hand size
> is reduced. i still meet the requirements of SC. my hand size is now 7 not 8
> cause i don't have the library anymore. i do not have less than my hand size
> because once the library is gone, my hand size is now 7 and i have MORE than my
> hand size and per the rulebook, i must discard.
Right. *You* don't violate the text of SC.
Your trading partner, however, is in violation of the explicit text on Succubus
Club, meaning that the trade was illegal, as has been stated already.
Frederick Scott
>
> On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 19:11:18 GMT, Frederick Scott wrote:
>
> >I'm pretty sure that clause of the Succubus Club merely means you're
> >supposed to trade cards in hand on a one-for-one basis, nothing more.
> >In particular, there's no indication that it wants you to take into
> >account the *indirect* implications of trading permanents. Drawing
> >another card for Elder Library (or discarding because one no longer
> >possesses the Elder Library) is just an indirect effect triggered by
> >the change of possession. (Nice try, tho...)
>
> The change in hand size is a direct effect of the trade - it is
> immediate and inevitable consequence. In any case, the Succubus Club
> does not make such fine distinctions - you just made all that up.
> This is transparent chicanery because you yourself think that using
> the Club to cycle cards is abusive. You just want to build the card
> up so that you can knock it down by banning it.
No, I actually think it's just silly to go around reading and figuring out
the effects of a permanents moving on one's hand size in order to interpret
a clause on Succubus Club. And I think there's plenty of reason to ban
the SC without Elder Library or Visit From the Capuchin.
Fred
Frederick Scott
>
> "Andrew S. Davidson" wrote:
> >
> > On 6 Sep 2001 13:17:00 -0700, Brad Ward wrote:
> >
> > >Otherwise you couldnt use the Succubus at all
> > >once you run out of library cards.
> >
> > This doesn't follow. Again, you just have to read the card which
> > says, "These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less
> > than his or her hand size." If one player is already short of cards
> > then continuing shortness would not be a result of the trade and so
> > further trading would be legal. A player with a full hand would not
> > be able to give the short player cards though, as he would become
> > short too as a result of the trade and this is not allowed.
>
> Good point.
>
> So, when trading a card that alters a player's hand size, neither
> trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
> away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
> your hand as well.
>
> There goes the "infinite" cycling problem.
Great. Just remember, when you stick this ruling into the C, R, & E
page to note whether it applies when one or both players has run out
of library, when Elder Library and Visit from the Cupuchin would no
longer affect them.
And please never design a card whose hand size effects would vary from
player to player in other ways.
Fred
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > "Andrew S. Davidson" wrote:
> > > This doesn't follow. Again, you just have to read the card which
> > > says, "These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less
> > > than his or her hand size." If one player is already short of cards
> > > then continuing shortness would not be a result of the trade and so
> > > further trading would be legal. A player with a full hand would not
> > > be able to give the short player cards though, as he would become
> > > short too as a result of the trade and this is not allowed.
> >
> > trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
> > away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
> > your hand as well.
> >
> > There goes the "infinite" cycling problem.
>
> Great. Just remember, when you stick this ruling into the C, R, & E
> page to note whether it applies when one or both players has run out
> of library, when Elder Library and Visit from the Cupuchin would no
> longer affect them.
It's explicit card text. There's not much to clarify there.
"These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less than his or
her hand size."
If a trade results in a Methuselah having less than his or her hand size, then
that trade is illegal. That's pretty simple.
> And please never design a card whose hand size effects would vary from
> player to player in other ways.
?
Card text would apply just as clearly then.
Frederick Scott
>
> Frederick Scott wrote:
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > So, when trading a card that alters a player's hand size, neither
> > > trader can end up needing to draw cards - that is, if you trade
> > > away your Elder Library, you have to trade away an extra card from
> > > your hand as well.
> > >
> > > There goes the "infinite" cycling problem.
> >
> > Great. Just remember, when you stick this ruling into the C, R, & E
> > page to note whether it applies when one or both players has run out
> > of library, when Elder Library and Visit from the Cupuchin would no
> > longer affect them.
>
> It's explicit card text. There's not much to clarify there.
>
> "These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less than his or
Seems to me like there is. A person has 7 cards, gets traded Elder Library,
his hand size is now 8. In order to make the trade legal, you're ruling that
the recipient of the Elder Library must receive one card from the person
donating it in order to get around the prohibition against a trade resulting
in a Methuselah having less than his or her hand size. Fine. But what if
the player only held 6 cards already due to playing a card when his library
was depleted. Must the other player give him card? Two cards? Or no cards?
In fact, he already has "less than his or her hand size" due to his library
depletion, the Elder Library only aggravated the problem. Perhaps it's
simply impossible to donate the Elder Library in this situation.
And if the person giving the Elder Library only has 7 cards in his hand, due
to playing a card with a depleted library, then donating a card with the
library - if he's allowed to do so - will cause him have less than his or her
hand size, which is now only seven. Of course, he already had less cards in
hand than hand size, but that number was 7 and 8 (respectively) before and is
now 6 and 7. What to do?
I'm just saying, whatever answer you apparently view as "obvious", please put
it in the C, R, & E, because it sure isn't obvious to me.
> > And please never design a card whose hand size effects would vary from
> > player to player in other ways.
>
> ?
> Card text would apply just as clearly then.
So a permanent that, say, increased the size of a Methuselahs hand by the
the number of ready Malkavians controlled could be traded to Bob (who has
no ready Malkavians) from Sam (who has three) but there's no way Sam could
ever give it back to Bob unless some other permanent which had the opposite
effect was included in a subsequent deal. When Sam got that permanent back,
his hand would contain three cards less than it's size which is illegal by
SC card text and Bob can't give him any cards in hand or the deal becomes
illegal from _his_ perspective. Is that correct?
Fred
LSJ
> LSJ wrote:
> > It's explicit card text. There's not much to clarify there.
> >
> > "These trades ... cannot result in any Methuselah having less than his or
> > her hand size."'
>
> Seems to me like there is. A person has 7 cards, gets traded Elder Library,
> his hand size is now 8. In order to make the trade legal, you're ruling that
> the recipient of the Elder Library must receive one card from the person
> donating it in order to get around the prohibition against a trade resulting
> in a Methuselah having less than his or her hand size. Fine. But what if
> the player only held 6 cards already due to playing a card when his library
> was depleted. Must the other player give him card? Two cards? Or no cards?
> In fact, he already has "less than his or her hand size" due to his library
> depletion, the Elder Library only aggravated the problem. Perhaps it's
> simply impossible to donate the Elder Library in this situation.
If the trade results in a Meth having fewer cards..., then it is illegal.
If the Meth had fewer cards than his or her hand size before the trade, then
the trade is not the thing that resulted in the situation.
> And if the person giving the Elder Library only has 7 cards in his hand, due
> to playing a card with a depleted library, then donating a card with the
> library - if he's allowed to do so - will cause him have less than his or her
> hand size, which is now only seven. Of course, he already had less cards in
> hand than hand size, but that number was 7 and 8 (respectively) before and is
> now 6 and 7. What to do?
He already had fewer cards, andthe trade didn't change this.
> I'm just saying, whatever answer you apparently view as "obvious", please put
> it in the C, R, & E, because it sure isn't obvious to me.
OK.
> > > And please never design a card whose hand size effects would vary from
> > > player to player in other ways.
> >
> > ?
> > Card text would apply just as clearly then.
>
> So a permanent that, say, increased the size of a Methuselahs hand by the
> the number of ready Malkavians controlled could be traded to Bob (who has
> no ready Malkavians) from Sam (who has three) but there's no way Sam could
> ever give it back to Bob unless some other permanent which had the opposite
> effect was included in a subsequent deal. When Sam got that permanent back,
> his hand would contain three cards less than it's size which is illegal by
> SC card text and Bob can't give him any cards in hand or the deal becomes
> illegal from _his_ perspective. Is that correct?
Yes.
....salem christ....
>
> If the trade results in a Meth having fewer cards..., then it is illegal.
> If the Meth had fewer cards than his or her hand size before the trade, then
> the trade is not the thing that resulted in the situation.
so, if i was on 6 cards because i had run out of library, i could trade
some or all of my cards away, and not need to get any in return,
because i was already below my full handsize?
salem.
LSJ
Yes.