curt...@aol.com (CurtAdams) writes:
>Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".>Now how does this affect allies?>Read literally, they can't block - the have no blood, only life.>Can they
>a) Not block
>b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
>c) Block without penalty>I favor c), on the grounds that Muddle wouldn't care WHAT some vampires
>rep in the Camarilla was. But this ain't what the cards say. Game
>balance would seem to favor a) as that card almost never sees use now.
I would favor c) as well. Game balance? You guys don't use Exemplary?
We put a few in our decks quite often (esp. in obfuscate decks). I think
it is a very worthwhile card already.
Shall I put you down for c) in the house rules list?
L. Scott
In article <3lteot$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, curt...@aol.com
(CurtAdams) wrote:
> Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".> Can they
> a) Not block
> b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
> c) Block without penalty
> I favor c), on the grounds that Muddle wouldn't care WHAT some vampires
> rep in the Camarilla was. But this ain't what the cards say. Game
> balance would seem to favor a) as that card almost never sees use now.
My group actually sees the Camarilla Exemplary fairly often. While we
haven't actually seen this situation (funny now that I think about it) I
would tend to think option b. The rules on Allies state that they should
be treated as vampires in most cases, except that they cannot renew their
life. So I would think that they would need to spend 1 life to attempt to
block. Perhaps the reason we have never seen this is that it is generally
easier to lose a blood of a vamp than to lose a life off an ally.
Just my opinion
stephen
curt...@aol.com (CurtAdams) wrote:
>
> Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".
>> Now how does this affect allies?
>
> Read literally, they can't block - the have no blood, only life.
>> Can they
> a) Not block
> b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
> c) Block without penalty
>
> I favor c), on the grounds that Muddle wouldn't care WHAT some vampires
> rep in the Camarilla was. But this ain't what the cards say. Game
> balance would seem to favor a) as that card almost never sees use now.
Peace Curt,
I believe that the card is supposed to be interpreted as b), but I can see
you point about most allies not caring about the vampire's reputation and
therefore c) could be valid, BUT then you could go on to say that most/all
allies could block a Day Operation (so, the sun is shining, big deal), so
I'll have to stick with b).
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>
In article <3lteot$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
CurtAdams <curt...@aol.com> wrote:
>Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".
>
>Now how does this affect allies?
>>Can they
>a) Not block
>b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
>c) Block without penalty
Hmm. I think I'm leaning toward b). It was my first instinct,
and while I like the rationale you gave for c), it still seems more in
the spirit of the card to go with b).
| If you've got a hot lead on a new | *--Joe--*
| PC game, call the announce line at | js...@vt.edu
| ** csi...@discus.ise.vt.edu ** |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------------------
"Carnivores, oy!" -- Timon, TLK
hi...@mail.utexas.edu (Stephen Beaulieu) writes:
>In article <3lteot$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, curt...@aol.com>(CurtAdams) wrote:>> Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".>> Can they
>> a) Not block
>> b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
>> c) Block without penalty>> I favor c), on the grounds that Muddle wouldn't care WHAT some vampires
>> rep in the Camarilla was. But this ain't what the cards say. Game
>> balance would seem to favor a) as that card almost never sees use now.>My group actually sees the Camarilla Exemplary fairly often. While we>haven't actually seen this situation (funny now that I think about it) I
>would tend to think option b. The rules on Allies state that they should
>be treated as vampires in most cases, except that they cannot renew their
>life. So I would think that they would need to spend 1 life to attempt to
>block. Perhaps the reason we have never seen this is that it is generally
>easier to lose a blood of a vamp than to lose a life off an ally.
12.3.1
Recruit Ally:
Allies are not spoken of as having blood points.
Cards that refer to vampires do not apply to allies.
So, it could be stretched into c). Especially when you consider that Kine
(allies) could care less for any social status a vampire has within the
Camarilla.
Hello there!
For my money, choice b) just sounds plain silly, this fromthe
VtG viewpoint. These vampires are deeply concerned with the Masquerrade, which
keeps not only their political structure under wraps, but their very existance
is supposed to be secret. Garou know about vamps but most know nothing of the
Camarilla and could care less if they did. My friends and I play with your
option c) block without penalty. Further, if they ever come out with antitribu
sabbat vamps they wouldn't be affected either. Or they may get bonuses on
attacking the exemplary....:)
Just my humble opinion,
Cliff Murphy
cb_m...@smcvax.smcvt.edu
In article <3lteot$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, curt...@aol.com
(CurtAdams) writes:
>Mine say "any blocker must pay 1 blood to attempt to block this vampire".
>>Now how does this affect allies?
>>Read literally, they can't block - the have no blood, only life.
>>Can they
>a) Not block
>b) Block by paying the appropriate number of life
>c) Block without penalty
>
>I favor c), on the grounds that Muddle wouldn't care WHAT some vampires
>rep in the Camarilla was. But this ain't what the cards say. Game
>balance would seem to favor a) as that card almost never sees use now.
>>Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
> For my money, choice b) just sounds plain silly, this fromthe
>VtG viewpoint. These vampires are deeply concerned with the Masquerrade, which
>keeps not only their political structure under wraps, but their very existance
>is supposed to be secret. Garou know about vamps but most know nothing of the
>Camarilla and could care less if they did. My friends and I play with your
>option c) block without penalty. Further, if they ever come out with antitribu
>sabbat vamps they wouldn't be affected either. Or they may get bonuses on
>attacking the exemplary....:)
From a role-playing standpoint, the card is damn confusing. Why do you
take damage by blocking someone popular? The best answer is that because
you are screwing around with such a well-known and well-liked figure,
Archons, concerned parties, Prince's minions, etc... take it upon
themselves to slap you around a bit.
It makes more sense to maybe take the damage _after_ the block, ("you
got in a fight with who?") but game mechanics-wise I like the way it
works now.
Anyway, a Garou, street gang, Sabbat, etc... messing around with such
a well-respected guy is certainly subject, or even moreso, to this same
abuse by all these concerned parties.
Role-playing wise I vote for, ummm, b(?) Everyone loses a life/blood
counter.