I recently joined a new playgroup, and they use different rules for
applying aggrivated damage. I“ve always used it like it is explained
in the online rulebook (the vampire doesn“t burn blood for the first
point of aggrivated damage, it just goes straight to torpor, unless it
was already on its way to torpor, then it is burned). Well this new
playgroup of mine insists on removing one blood for every point of
aggrivated damage inflicted, saying it is an official tournament rule.
Well I read through the tournament rules on the white-wolf webpage,
and obviously there was no mention of this there.
So my question is, is there really such a rule, or does it just
classify as a house rule?
[ quoted text not captured ]
You are correct in that one point of agg won't burn an empty vampire (it will
send him to torpor).
For a vampire with 0 blood: Either 1 point of normal damage or 1 point of
aggravated damage sends him/her to torpor. If more than 1 normal damage is
inflicted (say 10 damage), than the vampire is just sent to torpor (like if he
took 1). However, 2 points of aggravated damage will burn him (the first point
makes him "wounded" and since he doesn't have any blood, any other agg damage
will burn him). Similarly, if the vampire takes 1 damage and 1 aggravated
damage (say from a Crows and a Claws), the normal damage is applied first and
will wound him and the aggravated damage will then burn him.
Hope this explains things a bit. There might be a bit of confusion about
aggravated damage because there was a period of time where 1 agg would burn an
empty vampire (but was later changed). So maybe your group just missed an
update?
Halcyan 2
wb...@hotmail.com (Daz) wrote in
news:b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com:
[ quoted text not captured ]
For a long time that was how agg. damage worked, but now it has gone back
to how you play it: the first point of agg damage will not make a vampire
burn a blood, it will only send him to torpor (unless he's already
wounded).
Flux
"Daz" <wb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
It's not really a house rule.
The first edition of Jyhad had a rule that is similar to the one currently
used : a single point of Aggravated damage could not burn a vampire.
The game changed a little, when it became renamed V:Tes and the rule was now
in favor of maximizing the chances of vampires burning (maybe it was a Rage
influence ;) ) So you could burn an empty vamp with only one point of
aggravated damage.
Recently, the rule moved back to old principles. So Halcyan says, your
playgroup has missed the rule "rollback". Maybe they are also still thinking
you can bleed any methuselah with Computer Hacking or Govern the Unaligned ?
tell them they are wrong and send them to this newsgroup or the official
vtes website (at white wolf)
reyda
"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:a26dg5$lq0$1...@hadron.noos.net...
> tell them they are wrong and send them to this newsgroup or the official
> vtes website (at white wolf)
> reyda
I'm providing the link of the explanation from the people responsible of all
those crappy changes =)
reyda
http://www.wizards.com/duelist/industry/7-Jyhad_to_VTES.asp
Thanks for the replies and clarifications, but I´m not sure if I´ll
notifiy my playgroup of this rulechange, with my playing a assamite
deck that relies on aggrivated damage to burn the oposing minions
(just got my hands on Tariq the silent today, and I don´t really have
the cards for anything else then an assamite deck)
But the strange thing is that this playgroup consists of most of the
active players in my region, and they are very up to date on all other
rules and most of them have a bloodline deck or two handy... And since
no of us is going to any VEKN tournament in the forseeable future I
don´t think it will matter which rule we´ll choose to follow.
Thanks again.
Daz, from Iceland
Daz wrote:
>
> Thanks for the replies and clarifications, but I惴 not sure if I惻l> notifiy my playgroup of this rulechange, with my playing a assamite
> deck that relies on aggrivated damage to burn the oposing minions> (just got my hands on Tariq the silent today, and I don愒 really have> the cards for anything else then an assamite deck)
>
> But the strange thing is that this playgroup consists of most of the
> active players in my region, and they are very up to date on all other
> rules and most of them have a bloodline deck or two handy... And since
> no of us is going to any VEKN tournament in the forseeable future I> don愒 think it will matter which rule we惻l choose to follow.
You should probably let your playgroup know what the official rules are
(of course I'd say that).
It doesn't matter which rules you use (official or house), but it might
matter to some of your group that they be allowed to make informed
decisions as to which house rules they use.
--
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/
In message <b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com>, Daz
<wb...@hotmail.com> writes:
>Thanks for the replies and clarifications, but I´m not sure if I´ll
>notifiy my playgroup of this rulechange, with my playing a assamite
>deck that relies on aggrivated damage to burn the oposing minions
>(just got my hands on Tariq the silent today, and I don´t really have
>the cards for anything else then an assamite deck)
Burning the minions can usually be done with carefully timed strikes and
additional strikes.
Additionally, using Sacrificial Lamb (potentially difficult to get hold
of) is likely to boost your strengths. And Provisions of the Silsila
provides options for when you don't burn them.
>But the strange thing is that this playgroup consists of most of the
>active players in my region, and they are very up to date on all other
>rules and most of them have a bloodline deck or two handy... And since
>no of us is going to any VEKN tournament in the forseeable future I
>don´t think it will matter which rule we´ll choose to follow.
Bear in mind that the current card set is balanced using this set of
rules, rather than the old set from V:TES. This would, for instance,
affect Poker/Kiasyd interaction, Improvised Flamethrower, Compress (3
aggravated damage being pretty pokey...) and so on.
Also, since you are playing the old rule, it is likely that you will
find yourself playing Brother's Blood wrong (since one point of
aggravated damage will send you to torpor, being neither blood burnt to
prevent destruction nor damage that you heal). Similarly, you may find
yourself over-powering Regenerative Blood if not careful.
--
James Coupe "Never give in to them," she whispered. "No matter what
PGP 0x5D623D5D EB they do or how important you feel it is to get their accep-
D690ECD7A1FB457CA21 tance. Never kill part of yourself for them. Because other
3D7E668C3695D623D5D people will notice that part is missing before you do."
"Daz" <wb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com...
> Thanks for the replies and clarifications, but I´m not sure if I´ll
> notifiy my playgroup of this rulechange, with my playing a assamite
> deck that relies on aggrivated damage to burn the oposing minions
> (just got my hands on Tariq the silent today, and I don´t really have
> the cards for anything else then an assamite deck)
>
Don't listen to LSJ. Come over to the Dark Side. After a month or so of
burning all of your opponents' vampires, *then* you should consider telling
them the truth, and how you have been playing them all for fools.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha.
wb...@hotmail.com (Daz) wrote in message news:<b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Don't play contrary to how other's play. You travel out of town and
you'll soon find yourself at a disadvantage at sometimes, un prepared
for the fact that 1 agg won't burn an empty vampire.
Just give Thetmes a garrotte. That'll burn them.
~SV
"Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:<k0G18.47975$JF.4...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
God I miss the days when Pulled Fangs *really* meant something...
I'm in agreement with Chris. After a month of burning your opponents'
vampires, one of them will probably cop to knowing the real rules all
along.
Steve
"vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f987c6cd.02011...@posting.google.com...
> wb...@hotmail.com (Daz) wrote in message
news:<b57b2dc9.02011...@posting.google.com>...
> Don't play contrary to how other's play. You travel out of town and> you'll soon find yourself at a disadvantage at sometimes, un prepared
> for the fact that 1 agg won't burn an empty vampire.
>
> Just give Thetmes a garrotte. That'll burn them.
hell no ! striking with the Garrote is different from striking with Thetmes'
mighty hands... be careful ;)
reyda
vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian) wrote in message news:<f987c6cd.02011...@posting.google.com>...
>
> Don't play contrary to how other's play. You travel out of town and
> you'll soon find yourself at a disadvantage at sometimes, un prepared
> for the fact that 1 agg won't burn an empty vampire.
Well, considering that there are none other citys in my contry with
active players (or just no other citys at all ;) ) I don´t think it
will matter much.
> Just give Thetmes a garrotte. That'll burn them.
>
> ~SV
I don´t play with Thetmes, for his cost, I want a vamp with Auspex...