rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Mystery keywords

22 messages from 13 participants · 16 February 2010 – 17 February 2010
original thread on Google Groups

Dasein

Well in this new set we have another instance of a "mystery" keyword: the event Hunger Moon is labelled "Transient". As far as I know, the only other cards with this keyword are Waiting Game and White Nights Massacre. Does anyone have any idea what this might mean? (yes I realise that at the moment, Transient means nothing since there are no cards or rules that refer to Transient cards, but I was wondering if anyone had any clues or speculation? something relating to a storyline, or obscure WoD lore, or anything?) There are some other mystery keywords too. Didn't the Port Authority promo card have the keyword Government? Along with I think NSA Trio and maybe something else? And I believe the card Inconnu Tutelage has the Inconnu keyword, and is all on its ownsome lonesome :( The one thing tying all these cards together is that they are all events, and there is already a big set of events that have another important keyword: Gehenna, and there are many, many cards and effects that refer to Gehenna cards. My theory is that at some point there will be a set based around one of these keywords. For example, a set where the government decides to move against the Camarilla; this could introduce new Government cards and effects that refer to them. A set based around the rise of the Inconnu could be great. But what the hell does "Transient" mean? Very mysterious. Maybe they are just red herrings, and we will never have cards that refer to these keywords :)

echia...@yahoo.com

On Feb 15, 10:24 pm, Dasein <dasein2...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Well in this new set we have another instance of a "mystery" keyword: > the event Hunger Moon is labelled "Transient". As far as I know, the > only other cards with this keyword are Waiting Game and White Nights > Massacre. Does anyone have any idea what this might mean? (yes I > realise that at the moment, Transient means nothing since there are no > cards or rules that refer to Transient cards, but I was wondering if > anyone had any clues or speculation? something relating to a > storyline, or obscure WoD lore, or anything?) > > My theory is that at some point there will be a set based around one > of these keywords. For example, a set where the government decides to > move against the Camarilla; this could introduce new Government cards > and effects that refer to them. A set based around the rise of the > Inconnu could be great. But what the hell does "Transient" mean? Very > mysterious. Maybe they are just red herrings, and we will never have > cards that refer to these keywords :) Well, all the Transient events have innate clauses (card text) whereupon they eventually burn themselves after so many turns. So while other Events are more or less permanent, Transient events are, by their nature, transient. Right now, it's more of a reminder than anything. But who knows. Maybe some future card will allow a Transient Event to be played again.

Dasein

On Feb 16, 3:30 pm, "echiang...@yahoo.com" <echiang...@yahoo.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] True dat. But yeah it seems a bit odd to put a reminder on the events, but not on say Palla Grande or Reanimated Corpse, which are also thoroughly transient. I suppose Alan Sovereign could be a clue; we could get cards that add to or remove counters to or from Transient cards. Waiting Game and Hunger Moon use counters. White Nights Massacre admittedly does not. Maybe we'll get cards that burn Transient cards or put them out of play or back into people's hands or something? All just speculation at this stage I guess.

Juggernaut1981

[ quoted text not captured ] Transients are "Not Gehenna" and "Not Government" events.

Janne Hägglund

Dasein <dasei...@hotmail.com> writes: > There are some other mystery keywords too. Didn't the Port Authority > promo card have the keyword Government? Along with I think NSA Trio > and maybe something else? Dr. Marisa Fletcher, CDC2 FBI Special Affairs Division NRA PAC NSA Trio Port Authority > And I believe the card Inconnu Tutelage has the Inconnu keyword, and is all > on its ownsome lonesome :( Inconnu Tutelage Narrow Minds Urban Jungle The Secret Library is your friend. Trust the Secret Library. http://www.secretlibrary.info HG

Amenophobis

[ quoted text not captured ] There are two other new keywords in the new HttB set: Moon Sigil (or New Moon Sigil?) Nod Fragment Now I think that new keywords are good to have because other cards can key in on them. But, those 2 new keywords happen to have no other cards referencing to them. What purpose does it have to categorize Shaal Fragment as "Nod Fragment"? (Similar question for the Sigil keyword.) Right now it seems that the game gets cluttered with unwarranted keywords. Do we really need keywords which are only repeated on 1 card? Wouldn't it have more purpose that *if* a keyword is introduced, it has some meaning, too? I mean, the Aim-cards are a good example of a new keyword successfully implemented. Sigil would be fine if there were at least 2 of those types. I know that it's possible to print future Sigils, but why miss the opportunity in this set? This way it adds unnecessary complexity (which some players would like to avoid I gather from various web-sources). And what about the "Nod fragment"? Does this make sense to you?

Dasein

[ quoted text not captured ] I'd forgotten those, good point. So it's not just events. We've had some equipment declared to be "electronic equipment", without any references to that anywhere else either. Maybe LSJ just likes messin' wif our heads :)

Amenophobis

[ quoted text not captured ] > Maybe LSJ just likes messin' wif our heads :)- Zitierten Text ausblenden - > > - Zitierten Text anzeigen - In the meantime, "electronic equipment" got some meaning, but I can't remember right now which cards refer to that keyword.

Janne Hägglund

Amenophobis <preac...@gmx.at> writes: [ quoted text not captured ] Secret Library continues to be your friend: 1 Camera Phone [Equipment] 2 IR Goggles [Equipment] 3 Laptop Computer [Equipment] 4 Light Intensifying Goggles [Equipment] 5 Phased Motion Detector [Equipment] 6 Smite [Combat] Come on people, it's the Google of VTES cards. Use it. HG (Spreading propaganda while waiting for the rice to cook)

Vincent

[ quoted text not captured ] The question is : is it a problem? Let's say a new card will come in the next expansion that allows you to search for "Nod fragments". Is it a good idea to introduce now a card with that key word so it won't need any reprinting? The answer is yes.

Jozxyqk

Dasein <dasei...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > Does this make sense to you? > I'd forgotten those, good point. So it's not just events. > We've had some equipment declared to be "electronic equipment", > without any references to that anywhere else either. > Maybe LSJ just likes messin' wif our heads :) Did you also forget "hunter-list"? Sometimes, a keyword is just a keyword.

Raziel

[ quoted text not captured ] Sure. Those are just keywords, that might be used in future expansions. I'm all for new keywords that raise WTF, and i fully support dev team in this case. I want even more such keywords !

LSJ

On Feb 16, 4:01 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > This way it > adds unnecessary complexity (which some players would like to avoid I > gather from various web-sources). It adds no complexity. Well, other than adding to the body of card text, which every new card does. > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > Does this make sense to you? You prefer errata (to ret-con keywords onto cards after they're been printed), like werewolf, grapple, electronic, etc.? Some players would like to avoid errata (or so I gather from various web-sources).

Amenophobis

On 16 Feb., 13:55, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > On Feb 16, 4:01 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > > > This way it > > adds unnecessary complexity (which some players would like to avoid I > > gather from various web-sources). > > It adds no complexity. Well, other than adding to the body of card > text, which every new card does. It is additional keyword-matching. Which I consider added complexity. I personally have no problems with new keywords when they are needed. But it might be an additional inch for the threshold of prospective new players trying the game. > > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > Does this make sense to you? > > You prefer errata (to ret-con keywords onto cards after they're been > printed), like werewolf, grapple, electronic, etc.? Did I say that? Adding keywords where necessary is fine. > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? Let's take this for example. Why was the keyword added? What was the purpose, did you have something specific in mind that didn't make it into HttB? And if it was added just in case for future options, why not go ahead and add a keyword to other equipments as well? Journal of Hroth could have "parchment" or whatever. So, can we expect Fragment of the Book of Nod have "Nod Fragment" on it in it's next printing? What purpose does a group-indicator have if nothing refers to that group? New Moon Sigil is a "sigil", where you can have only one per cardtext. Check. But why is there then only one "sigil" in the set? I mean, how many different sigils will there ever be? Why not go ahead and print the second (or third, if any) in the same set, just for completeness? I know that there is not infinite space on a given print sheet, yes. Could the card not have been put into the next BL-set with it's counterparts, where it would have had *more* meaning than just printing this sole "sigil"? > Some players would like to avoid errata (or so I gather from various > web-sources). Correct. See e.g. latest VTES review on boardgamegeek forum. Thanks for using my words. You are welcome. :)

LSJ

On Feb 16, 8:19 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > On 16 Feb., 13:55, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 16, 4:01 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > > > > This way it > > > adds unnecessary complexity (which some players would like to avoid I > > > gather from various web-sources). > > > It adds no complexity. Well, other than adding to the body of card > > text, which every new card does. > > It is additional keyword-matching. Which I consider added complexity. Keyword matching is no more or less complex than other forms of reading comprehension. > > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > > Does this make sense to you? > > > You prefer errata (to ret-con keywords onto cards after they're been > > printed), like werewolf, grapple, electronic, etc.? > > Did I say that? Adding keywords where necessary is fine. Waiting until they're necessary means ret-con errata. cf. above (werewolf, grapple, etc.) > > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > Let's take this for example. Why was the keyword added? What was the > purpose, did you have something specific in mind that didn't make it > into HttB? Um. See above (re: werewolf, electronic, etc.). Argent Baton was not included with Renegade Garou in the 1994 base set. Smite was not included with Laptop Computer in the 1994 base set. > And if it was added just in case for future options, why not go ahead > and add a keyword to other equipments as well? Journal of Hroth could > have "parchment" or whatever. ? Clearly, you can't put all possible descriptors on all cards. So, equally clearly, a descriptor might be included if it seems like it has potential. > So, can we expect Fragment of the Book of Nod have "Nod Fragment" on > it in it's next printing? Sure. > What purpose does a group-indicator have if nothing refers to that > group? The ability to be referred to. cf. werewolf, grapple, etc. If the various sources of aggravated damage had been nicely labeled (sun, claw, fire), we could have a richer (and less eyebrow-raising) set of effects regarding it. > New Moon Sigil is a "sigil", where you can have only one per cardtext. > Check. But why is there then only one "sigil" in the set? I mean, how > many different sigils will there ever be? What answer would have been given in 1994 to the question "How many grapples will there ever be? How many werewolves?". It comes as no surprise to anyone that card game designers do not have perfect knowledge of future events for all time. > Why not go ahead and print > the second (or third, if any) in the same set, just for completeness? Why not plan for the future? > I know that there is not infinite space on a given print sheet, yes. > Could the card not have been put into the next BL-set with it's > counterparts, where it would have had *more* meaning than just > printing this sole "sigil"? Sure. Renegade Garou could have been postponed until all werewolves ever to be printed were ready to be printed. It's a TCG. All sorts of arrangements could've been.

Frederick Scott

"Amenophobis" <preac...@gmx.at> wrote in message news:67e68b82-e44a-45e0...@d2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > > Does this make sense to you? > > > > You prefer errata (to ret-con keywords onto cards after they're been > > printed), like werewolf, grapple, electronic, etc.? > > Did I say that? Adding keywords where necessary is fine. You didn't say that. Others (like me) don't like it. Every time a card is given errata or reprinted with something significant added, changed, or removed in a different set (effectively causing the old versions of a card to have the equivalent of errata) it causes confusion that hurts the game. People play old versions of the card and forget or never know they've been changed. New players buy older cards, put them in decks, and don't realize until later that they don't do exactly what it says on the card. I think sometimes errata or reprinting with changes is better than alternative ways of handling a bad situation that arises (when a card's text as printed turns out to cause a worse problem in the game than the errata would) so it should be a tool that card designers are free use. But it should be avoided when not strictly necessary. Scott is right: printing keywords that don't seem to do anything for the moment is far more benign than changing a card after the fact. I'm really confused why you think non-functional keywords cause a problem. Fred

Amenophobis

On 16 Feb., 17:40, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > "Amenophobis" <preache...@gmx.at> wrote in message > > news:67e68b82-e44a-45e0...@d2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > > > > Does this make sense to you? > > > > You prefer errata (to ret-con keywords onto cards after they're been > > > printed), like werewolf, grapple, electronic, etc.? > > > Did I say that? Adding keywords where necessary is fine. > > You didn't say that. Others (like me) don't like it. Every time a > card is given errata or reprinted with something significant added, > changed, or removed in a different set (effectively causing the old > versions of a card to have the equivalent of errata) it causes > confusion that hurts the game. People play old versions of the card > and forget or never know they've been changed. New players buy older > cards, put them in decks, and don't realize until later that they > don't do exactly what it says on the card. Sorry. Maybe I should have chosen my words more carefully. (You know, English being not native language standard disclaimer. *g*) What I meant to say was that I have no problem if keywords are printed on new cards whenever needed. I wasn't encouraging retroactively adding keywords. > > I think sometimes errata or reprinting with changes is better than > alternative ways of handling a bad situation that arises (when a > card's text as printed turns out to cause a worse problem in the game > than the errata would) so it should be a tool that card designers are > free use. But it should be avoided when not strictly necessary. > Scott is right: printing keywords that don't seem to do anything > for the moment is far more benign than changing a card after the > fact. I'm really confused why you think non-functional keywords > cause a problem. > > Fred Of course there are no problems per se if you print new keywords that don't have meaning on their own. I understand that it could be good for later use. I'm merely pointing out that the implementation could be done a trifle better wrt words like "sigil" and "Nod Fragment". I find it curious that nobody ever seems to have problems with noobs who ask what the purpose of some of the seemingly unnecessary new keywords is. Of course it's a minor thing. We are matching symbols for clan and disciplines (and non-disciplines), we are using variables for number of votes, and keywords to designate groups and doing (somtimes) things to those groups. Old time players have no problem with this, new players might have.

Kushiel

On Feb 16, 12:15 pm, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > I'm merely pointing out that the implementation could be done a trifle > better wrt words like "sigil" and "Nod Fragment". Like how? John Eno

LSJ

On Feb 16, 12:15 pm, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > I find it curious that nobody ever seems to have problems with noobs > who ask what the purpose of some of the seemingly unnecessary new > keywords is. Like when everyone was asking "What does having the '(Mage)' designation mean for Thadius Zho? It looks like an unnecessary designation." back in 1995?

echia...@yahoo.com

On Feb 16, 3:01 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > There are two other new keywords in the new HttB set: > Moon Sigil (or New Moon Sigil?) > Nod Fragment > > Now I think that new keywords are good to have because other cards can > key in on them. But, those 2 new keywords happen to have no other > cards referencing to them. > What purpose does it have to categorize Shaal Fragment as "Nod > Fragment"? (Similar question for the Sigil keyword.) > Right now it seems that the game gets cluttered with unwarranted > keywords. Do we really need keywords which are only repeated on 1 > card? > Wouldn't it have more purpose that *if* a keyword is introduced, it > has some meaning, too? I mean, the Aim-cards are a good example of a > new keyword successfully implemented. Sigil would be fine if there > were at least 2 of those types. I know that it's possible to print > future Sigils, but why miss the opportunity in this set? This way it > adds unnecessary complexity (which some players would like to avoid I > gather from various web-sources). > And what about the "Nod fragment"? > Does this make sense to you? I think it's good for the developers to think ahead. Other posters have already given anecdotes about allies. Other examples include Abomination (introduced in Final Nights, far before their official debut as crypt cards in KMW). Final Nights also introduced Week of Nightmares and Tajdid, which would probably be more appropriate as Events nowadays (but there was no realistic way they could have predicted what would come in Gehenna). Key words are useful for flavor and thematic reasons. And they make it simpler when certain cornercase cards have cornercase specials. Instead of having to list a comprehensive and exhaustive list of cards (which may need to be errata'ed as new cards are printed), sorting such cards into a keyword makes things far more elegant. For example, look at Bindusara, Historian of the Kindred, who can retrieve: Arcane Library, Elder Library or Fragment of the Book of Nod. If we were to do this again, it might make sense to have the Fragment be a "Nod Fragment," and Arcane/Elder Library have the "Library" keyword, so that Bindusara could simply retrieve Libraries and Nod Fragments. Suppose Smite simply said "IR Goggles, Laptop Computer, or Phased Motion Detector" (instead of an Electronic keyword). Then things get complicated when Camera Phone and Light Intensifying Goggles are printed. They wouldn't be on the list of cards, so you'd have to either change Smite, or deal with some logical inconsistencies. Thus, the Electronic keyword simplifies the process (even though it's only for a single card - Smite).

Haze

On Feb 16, 11:15 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > I find it curious that nobody ever seems to have problems with noobs > who ask what the purpose of some of the seemingly unnecessary new > keywords is. Good thing we can tell noobs to look in their handy dandy rulebook for section 11 http://white-wolf.com/vtes/rulebook/rulebook.html#sec11 and learn that those ten keywords are the only ones that mean anything special by themselves.

Kevin M.

Frederick Scott wrote: > Every time a card is given errata or reprinted with something > significant added, changed, or removed in a different set > (effectively causing the old versions of a card to have the > equivalent of errata) it causes confusion that hurts the game. > People play old versions of the card and forget or never know > they've been changed. New players buy older cards, put them > in decks, and don't realize until later that they don't do exactly > what it says on the card. I can't think of an instance where adding a keyword to a card ever impacted what the card did. How OTHER cards could affect the newly-keyworded card in question, sure, but not the original card. But I agree somewhat with your assertion that it hurts the game, if only because these kinds of changes are not consistently listed somewhere and posted in a timely manner. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Please buy my cards! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html