"James R. McClure Jr." <jrmc...@ulkyvm.louisville.edu> writes:
>Peace Jyhad players,>My roommate & I were testing decks Sunday and noticed that the revision
>on how many transfers you get in the two player game isn't fair. He went
>first (one transfer), then I took a turn (two transfers), then he took
>his second turn (total of four transfers), then I took my second turn
>(total of six transfers). That puts the first player two transfers
>behind early in the game. I just crushed him, I actually felt bad about
>it, as it was so unbalanced. Why did they change the ruling on number
>of transfers in a two player game? TO: Tom W. & the DTR, put the two
>player game back the way it was. It was more balanced before.
His turn: 1 (1 ahead)
Your turn: 2 (Now you're 1 ahead)
His: 3 -> 4 (Now he's two ahead)
You: 4 -> 6 (Now you're two ahead)
His: 4 -> 8 (Now he's two ahead)
You: 4 -> 10 (Now you're two ahead)
His: 4 -> 12 (Now he's two ahead)
You: 4 -> 14 (Now you're two ahead)
His: 4 -> 16 (Now he's two ahead)
You: 4 -> 16 (Now you're two ahead)
His: 4 -> 20 (Now he's two ahead)
This puts each player two transfers ahead, alternately. What could be fairer?
Putting the second player alternately even and then 4 transfers behind?
I don't think so.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Peace Scott,
But the first player is never truely ahead. You can't count how much
pool has been spent until all players have had a turn. I think that
the way that it has been changed to is terribly unfair to the first
player.
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>
James R. McClure Jr. (jrmc...@ulkyvm.louisville.edu) wrote:
:
: My question: I don't own a Movement of the Slow Body, but have read the
: card. Can someone explain this card to me and give me a good use for it?
:
:
it's good for a couple things in a protean/fortitude (i.e. gangrel) deck
1) if you just used a day/dawn operation then you can untap the vampire
then have it play a rapid healing to get it out of torpor befor another
players turn.
2) (note: this is sick and wrong)
put fame on a vampire with protean and fortitude then have it go on
a day operation, go into torpor, movement of the slow body, have it
go on a day operation, go into torpor, ... , continue until you have
famed away your prey on one turn.
i'm sure there's more but those are the two most apparent to me
dan edelman
James R. McClure Jr. <jrmc...@ulkyvm.louisville.edu> wrote:
>sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote:>> His turn: 1 (1 ahead)
>> Your turn: 2 (Now you're 1 ahead)
>> His: 3 -> 4 (Now he's two ahead)
>> You: 4 -> 6 (Now you're two ahead)
>> His: 4 -> 8 (Now he's two ahead)
>> You: 4 -> 10 (Now you're two ahead)
>> His: 4 -> 12 (Now he's two ahead)
>> You: 4 -> 14 (Now you're two ahead)
>> His: 4 -> 16 (Now he's two ahead)
>> You: 4 -> 16 (Now you're two ahead)
>> His: 4 -> 20 (Now he's two ahead)
>>
>> This puts each player two transfers ahead, alternately. What could be fairer?
>> Putting the second player alternately even and then 4 transfers behind?
>> I don't think so.>>But the first player is never truely ahead. You can't count how much
>pool has been spent until all players have had a turn. I think that
>the way that it has been changed to is terribly unfair to the first
>player.
Say what? Assuming arithmatic works the same on both sides of the Ohio :
Look carefully at the above sequence. It alternates who's had the most
transfers. It varies back and forth by 2, which is exactly 1/2 the size of one
turn's transfers. How could it possibly be more even?
On the other hand, if everyone gets 4 transfers each turn, the players are
either even or player 1 has had 4 more transfers than player 2. That's not
balanced. Poor player 2 is screwed.
Alec
--
Alec Habig, Indiana University High Energy Astrophysics
aha...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu
http://astrowww.astro.indiana.edu/personnel/ahabig/
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns.
Peace Jyhad players,
My roommate & I were testing decks Sunday and noticed that the revision
on how many transfers you get in the two player game isn't fair. He went
first (one transfer), then I took a turn (two transfers), then he took
his second turn (total of four transfers), then I took my second turn
(total of six transfers). That puts the first player two transfers
behind early in the game. I just crushed him, I actually felt bad about
it, as it was so unbalanced. Why did they change the ruling on number
of transfers in a two player game? TO: Tom W. & the DTR, put the two
player game back the way it was. It was more balanced before.
My question: I don't own a Movement of the Slow Body, but have read the
card. Can someone explain this card to me and give me a good use for it?
[ quoted text not captured ]
> My question: I don't own a Movement of the Slow Body, but have read the
> card. Can someone explain this card to me and give me a good use for it?
>
>
> Nil carborundum illigitimi,
>
> James R. McClure Jr.
> The OS/2 Apostle
>
> <insert disclaimer here>
>
>
One of your vamps tries to do something and gets blocked. He ends up in
torpor. Now he uses movement of the slow body to untap. If he has at
least 2 blood on him, he can leave torpor now. If not, he can use rapid
healing to come out anyway. Normally, it is more useful to put prevent
damage cards in instead to avoid going to torpor.
---------
Paul Schaaf
sch...@u.washington.edu
James McClure writes:
My roommate & I were testing decks Sunday and noticed that the
revision on how many transfers you get in the two player game isn't
fair. He went first (one transfer), then I took a turn (two
transfers), then he took his second turn (total of four transfers),
then I took my second turn (total of six transfers). That puts the
first player two transfers behind early in the game. I just crushed
him, I actually felt bad about it, as it was so unbalanced. Why did
they change the ruling on number of transfers in a two player game?
TO: Tom W. & the DTR, put the two player game back the way it was.
It was more balanced before.
If you would have continued your analysis you would see that on the
first player's next turn he is now two transfers ahead of the second
player. Why do you not consider this an advantage to the first player,
then? The answer is that each player will end his turn being two
transfers "ahead" and you just got lucky in your game by getting an
initial crypt draw that fit your transfer sequence well. I regard this
method of escalation as being superior, but you are of course free to
enact a house rule to do it the old way.
My question: I don't own a Movement of the Slow Body, but have read
the card. Can someone explain this card to me and give me a good use
for it?
Normally a torpored vampire can leave torpor by itself or be rescued by
another; paralysis can only be escaped by another vampire rescuing. The
primary purpose of this card is to allow a paralyzed vampire to rescue
itself. Also, this card does give one protean vampire the ability to go
into combat, lose but do some amount of damage to the opponent, and pop
back out of torpor in the same minion phase.
Happy Hacking!
--
-- Jon Ferro Einsprachigkeit ist heilbar.
James R. McClure Jr. (jrmc...@ulkyvm.louisville.edu) wrote:
: Peace Jyhad players,: My roommate & I were testing decks Sunday and noticed that the revision
: on how many transfers you get in the two player game isn't fair. He went
: first (one transfer), then I took a turn (two transfers), then he took
: his second turn (total of four transfers), then I took my second turn
: (total of six transfers). That puts the first player two transfers
: behind early in the game. I just crushed him, I actually felt bad about
: it, as it was so unbalanced. Why did they change the ruling on number
: of transfers in a two player game? TO: Tom W. & the DTR, put the two
: player game back the way it was. It was more balanced before.
It's balanced by the fact that the first player gets to put out his
masters earlier. Getting out a Prot.Invest. a turn before you can be a
big help.
: My question: I don't own a Movement of the Slow Body, but have read the: card. Can someone explain this card to me and give me a good use for it?
Sure.
+2 Stealth
Useable by a vampire in torpor. This vampire untaps.
* The vampire also gains one blood from the bank. *
A use for it? In a Gangrel deck, MotSB + Rapid Healing equals a "Get out
of torpor free" card, and you can get up to 2 blood from the bank (w/Sup
Protean and Fortitude). You use MotSB to give yourself the opportunity to
leave torpor by yourself, without having someone have to rescue you.
--
Meow!