Gangrel are now Independent

The Gangrel Default Sect is now Independent, which is all fine and good. But, for some reason, it just doesn't make sense to me that the Gangrel Justicar, performing the Third Tradition, is going to come out with an Independent vampire. Why does there need to be a "default sect" rule for Embrace-type cards? I understand the need for default sect with Clan Impersonation, since you don't have much else to go on (and here is where Antitribu as separate clans helps out). But why would Angus the Unruled want to create anything but a Camarilla childer? Why would (old, Independent) Lucita want to embrace people into the Sabbat? I realize that this is probably never going to go to the Rules Team for review, as it isn't "broken" per se, and 90% of the time the Sect of your Embraces doesn't matter much in play. But it conceptually bugs me... and seems more "intuitive" to just have Embraced vampires inherit sect. And if you're going to go to the trouble of trying to mirror the "real" World of Darkness, why have this anomalous behavior?

"Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> escribió en el mensaje news:Zbvpa.582221$L1.168849@sccrnsc02... > The Gangrel Default Sect is now Independent, which is all fine and good. > But, for some reason, it just doesn't make sense to me that > the Gangrel Justicar, performing the Third Tradition, is going to come > out with an Independent vampire. This does not make sense to me either, but maybe this "problem" could be solved by specifying in the 3rd Tradition's text that the new vampire is a Camarilla vampire. Current card text says nothing about sect. Name: Third Tradition: Progeny [Jyhad, V:TES, CE] Cardtype: Action Cost: 1 blood Capacity: 1 Requires a ready prince or justicar. +1 stealth action. Put this card in play; it becomes a 1 capacity vampire. You may go through your library (shuffle afterward), ash heap or hand to find a Discipline card for this vampire. Move up to 2 blood from the acting vampire to this vampire. This vampire is not considered unique, cannot take any actions this turn, and is the same clan as the acting vampire. Greetings, Damnans

"Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<VJwpa.3141$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > "Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> escribió en el mensaje > news:Zbvpa.582221$L1.168849@sccrnsc02... > > The Gangrel Default Sect is now Independent, which is all fine and good. > > But, for some reason, it just doesn't make sense to me that > > the Gangrel Justicar, performing the Third Tradition, is going to come > > out with an Independent vampire. > > This does not make sense to me either, but maybe this "problem" Ah, Ginés, howcome? There's even a precedent for this: Lucita. As it's stated on the rules, Gangrel who say they're Camarilla are still Camarilla (Jyhad et al. has errata). All new Gangrel, though, are Independents. With Lucita, all Lasombra who say they're Independent, are. All new Lasombra, though, are Sabbat. No rule has changed, only the backdrop. > could be solved by specifying in the 3rd Tradition's text that the > new vampire is a Camarilla vampire. Current card text says > nothing about sect. > It doesn't need to. Since it states that the clan is inherited, and the rules say all <clan> are <sect> (barring specific card text like in Lucita), A+B=C. > Name: Third Tradition: Progeny > [Jyhad, V:TES, CE] > Cardtype: Action > Cost: 1 blood > Capacity: 1 > Requires a ready prince or justicar. +1 stealth action. > Put this card in play; it becomes a 1 capacity vampire. You may go through > your library (shuffle afterward), ash heap or hand to find a Discipline card > for this vampire. Move up to 2 blood from the acting vampire to this > vampire. This vampire is not considered unique, cannot take any actions this > turn, and is the same clan as the acting vampire. > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, since it could really be argued either way in this case. And next thing you know, you're ruling out damage prevention from Flak Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght strikes (eg.). Just an on-the-job rant. back to lurking David Pontes

"David Pontes" <dp...@mega.ist.utl.pt> escribió en el mensaje news:cac629d3.0304...@posting.google.com... > "Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<VJwpa.3141$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > > "Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> escribió en el mensaje > > news:Zbvpa.582221$L1.168849@sccrnsc02... > > > The Gangrel Default Sect is now Independent, which is all fine and good. > > > But, for some reason, it just doesn't make sense to me that > > > the Gangrel Justicar, performing the Third Tradition, is going to come > > > out with an Independent vampire. > > > > This does not make sense to me either, but maybe this "problem" > > Ah, Ginés, howcome? There's even a precedent for this: Lucita. > As it's stated on the rules, Gangrel who say they're Camarilla are > still Camarilla (Jyhad et al. has errata). They are Camarilla. But now, they are not Camarilla by default, which means that if the play the Embrace or Progeny, the new vampire is an Independent Gangrel. [...] > > could be solved by specifying in the 3rd Tradition's text that the > > new vampire is a Camarilla vampire. Current card text says > > nothing about sect. > > > > It doesn't need to. Since it states that the clan is inherited, and > the rules say all <clan> are <sect> (barring specific card text like > in Lucita), A+B=C. No. LSJ said: The Embrace "inherits" the acting vampire's clan. It takes on the default sect of that clan. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=lucita+embrace+independent++group:rec.game s.trading-cards.jyhad+group:rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad+group:rec.games.tr ading-cards.jyhad+group:rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&new window=1&group=rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&safe=off&scoring=d&selm=3D10B0A F.C9DFFDBC%40white-wolf.com&rnum=4 [...] > > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, since it could really > be argued either way in this case. And next thing you know, you're > ruling out damage prevention from Flak Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght > strikes (eg.). I am not saying this fact does not make sense from the RPG, but from the rules. I wonder if this group 1-2 Gangrel Embracing independent vampires issue was taken into account when making this new ruling. Greetings, Damnans

"David Pontes" <dp...@mega.ist.utl.pt> escribió en el mensaje news:cac629d3.0304...@posting.google.com... > "Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<VJwpa.3141$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > > "Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> escribió en el mensaje > > news:Zbvpa.582221$L1.168849@sccrnsc02... [...] > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, BTW, why are the Gangrel independent now? Because that makes sense from V:TES point of view ;-P ? No, they are independent because it makes sense from the RPG point of view ;-) Greetings, Damnans

> It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion [snip] I was just thinking of such a pointless issue. :) Suppose for just one minute that we *are* redesign the Clan/Sect/Minion relationships. What would be the theoretical drawbacks of the following system: Each Vampire has a Clan and a Sect. !Brujah just means Sabbat Brujah, and it's only a game-world notion, supposedly because a majority of Brujah Vampires are Camarilla. Some cards would require a Clan (eg Hunting Grounds), some a Sect (eg Traditions), or both (eg Toreador Justicar). Any "sired" new Vampire has both Clan and Sect after their Sire, unless explicitly set by card text (Create Gargoyle would set Clan=Gargoyle, but leave Sect open). One obvious problem with this is that in the current state of affairs, the number of Clan-specific cards for the 7 original Camarilla clans would be doubled (Asylum HG & Institution HG). Other than that, I can't see any real major balance shift. ~Gor

Goratrux <nos...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> It if you're contesting the actual written rules on >> the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, >> you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion > [snip] > I was just thinking of such a pointless issue. :) > Suppose for just one minute that we *are* redesign the Clan/Sect/Minion > relationships. What would be the theoretical drawbacks of the following > system: Each Vampire has a Clan and a Sect. !Brujah just means Sabbat > Brujah, and it's only a game-world notion, supposedly because a majority > of Brujah Vampires are Camarilla. Some cards would require a Clan (eg > Hunting Grounds), some a Sect (eg Traditions), or both (eg Toreador > Justicar). Any "sired" new Vampire has both Clan and Sect after their > Sire, unless explicitly set by card text (Create Gargoyle would set > Clan=Gargoyle, but leave Sect open). All that I was proposing, originally, was to make a change to Embraces and the like. Just that card. Not Clan Impersonation or other clan/sect changing effects. I *like* the fact that Antitribu are separate clans in the CCG. It's a necessary divergence from the storyline, for game balance in a card game. The Embrace of a respected titled Camarilla vampire becoming Independent just doesn't make sense. I don't think it's actually going to get changed, and I don't think that changing it or not changing it would have any major effect on the metagame. It was just to point out an oddity in the game (a Justicar siring a vampire through the normal "legal" Camarilla channels, and the new vampire turning out Independent). On the other hand, you can burn a Leather Jacket to withstand a blast from a Rocket Launcher at point blank range. So this is not a major issue ;)

*snip* > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, since it could really > be argued either way in this case. And next thing you know, you're > ruling out damage prevention from Flak Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght > strikes (eg.). Or a local favorite, "I throw a car at you." "My leather jacket is destroyed, but I am unscathed!" > Just an on-the-job rant. back to lurking > David Pontes -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] Isn't there also some wierdness about Gargoyles created by Slave Gargoyles are Independent Vampires, regardless of the creators sect? BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

berni...@attbi.comholdlespam wrote: > Isn't there also some wierdness about Gargoyles created by Slave > Gargoyles are Independent Vampires, regardless of the creators sect? Well, yeah, the Gargoyle default sect is Independent.. but somehow this one makes a little more sense. Since Gargoyles are mainly slaves to "The Man", if they get the opportunity to sire more (which is disgusting and bizarre if you visualize it :) ), they'll encourage their childe to run free and stay out of the chains of bondage to their masters.

In message <bgQpa.67583$Si4....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>, Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes: >berni...@attbi.comholdlespam wrote: > >> Isn't there also some wierdness about Gargoyles created by Slave >> Gargoyles are Independent Vampires, regardless of the creators sect? > >Well, yeah, the Gargoyle default sect is Independent.. Unless created with Create Gargoyle: "This Gargoyle is the same sect as the acting vampire and is not unique." I wonder what the mileage in getting a Gargoyle elected Prince and then having it create weenie non-slave Gargoyles would be. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Lucky that my breasts are small and humble, EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 So you don't confuse them with mountains. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

so what does this make stanislava(inner circle) from gangrel, is she independent or camarilla, same goes with all the other vampires from gangrel, would appreciate some input thanks mike

[ quoted text not captured ] They're Camarilla. See online card text. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3EA88FDE...@white-wolf.com>... > Mjminker wrote: > > so what does this make stanislava(inner circle) from gangrel, is she > > independent or camarilla, same goes with all the other vampires from gangrel, > > would appreciate some input > > They're Camarilla. > See online card text. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the Gangrel are going to get the same treatment as the clans in the CE pre-cons: Reprints of ALL Group 2s with current text (including group number and sect) in the pre-con. The fact that Ramona has an ADV version seems to support this. This will leave three other slots, two of which will be starter-only. So what ONE booster vamp do we think will be in the starter as well? Probably not Xaviar, since that would seem to go against his U1 rarity.

"Eric Simon" <vol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:6f81fa2c.03042...@posting.google.com... > I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the Gangrel are > going to get the same treatment as the clans in the CE pre-cons: > Reprints of ALL Group 2s with current text (including group number and > sect) in the pre-con. The fact that Ramona has an ADV version seems > to support this. This will leave three other slots, two of which will > be starter-only. So what ONE booster vamp do we think will be in the > starter as well? Probably not Xaviar, since that would seem to go > against his U1 rarity. Advanced Ramona, maybe? Not only is she U2, but having both the "regular" and Advanced versions in the starter would make it easy to demonstrate the concept. Josh speculifyin'

"Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<xDBpa.3198$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > > > could be solved by specifying in the 3rd Tradition's text that the > > > new vampire is a Camarilla vampire. Current card text says > > > nothing about sect. > > > > > > > It doesn't need to. Since it states that the clan is inherited, and > > the rules say all <clan> are <sect> (barring specific card text like > > in Lucita), A+B=C. > > No. > Apparently there was some miscommunication here: the "It doesn't need to" above was WRT the card saying something about sect, precisely because of the situation you state below - it's already covered by the rules and it's meant to be the way it is. > LSJ said: > > The Embrace "inherits" the acting vampire's clan. > It takes on the default sect of that clan. > > > > > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, since it could really > > be argued either way in this case. And next thing you know, you're > > ruling out damage prevention from Flak Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght > > strikes (eg.). > > I am not saying this fact does not make sense from the RPG, but > from the rules. > Now it's me not getting it. Why do you say the rules do not make sense in this case? Because it generates effects which are strange in the light of the RPG? I agree that to some it may be unintuitive, but any change would demand errata which is IMHO unnecessary. Regards, David Pontes

"Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<MIBpa.3200$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > > > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, > > BTW, why are the Gangrel independent now? Because that makes sense > from V:TES point of view ;-P ? No, they are independent because > it makes sense from the RPG point of view ;-) > Everything on all expansion was created with the RPG in mind. Alterations are another matter. Intuitiveness is IMHO a good grounding for a rule change. WoD canon and RPG reasoning per se, although desirable, isn't. My opinions David Pontes

David Pontes wrote: > > "Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<MIBpa.3200$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... > > > > > > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > > > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > > > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > > > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, > > > > BTW, why are the Gangrel independent now? Because that makes sense > > from V:TES point of view ;-P ? No, they are independent because > > it makes sense from the RPG point of view ;-) [...] > Intuitiveness is IMHO a good grounding for a rule change. WoD canon > and RPG reasoning per se, although desirable, isn't. However, intuitiveness is not precisely the grounding for many V:TES rules which are based on game specific mechanics. Greetings, Damnans

David Pontes wrote: > > "Damnans" <bel...@ono.com> wrote in message news:<xDBpa.3198$FN3.2...@news.ono.com>... [...] > > > All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making rules" is > > > another matter. It if you're contesting the actual written rules on > > > the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an RPG point of view, > > > you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, since it could really > > > be argued either way in this case. And next thing you know, you're > > > ruling out damage prevention from Flak Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght > > > strikes (eg.). > > > > I am not saying this fact does not make sense from the RPG, but > > from the rules. > > Now it's me not getting it. Why do you say the rules do not make > sense in this case? Because it generates effects which are strange in > the light of the RPG? I agree that to some it may be unintuitive, but > any change would demand errata which is IMHO unnecessary. I say this rule makes no sense not because it generates non-RPG effects, but because it generates effects that alters the spirit of prior rules. Princes and Justicars playing Third Traditions have always created Camarilla vampires, because there was no need to specify it otherwise, since the default sect of their respective clans was the Camarilla. I also admit that this issue has not an deep impact on the game, since it is only related to a few cornercase Gangrel strategies (e.g., weenie Camarilla Gangrel + Gangrel Justicar [Political action] + lots of Praxis Seizures + Third Traditions, etc.). But, what if another clan's default sect is changed in the future? What if the Lasombra join the Camarilla (he, he...)? Should their only-playable-by- Sabbat-Archbishops-Cardinals-Priscus Creation Rites make Camarilla vampires? What implications could this fact have? I still think that both Progeny's and Creation Rites's card texts should specify that the new vampire created by those cards is either Camarilla or Sabbat, respectively. Greetings, Damnans

Damnans wrote: > Princes and Justicars playing Third Traditions have always created > Camarilla vampires, because there was no need to specify it otherwise, > since the default sect of their respective clans was the Camarilla. Not since Ancient Hearts, when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes became possible: Writ of Acceptance + Praxis Seizure. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > > Damnans wrote: > > Princes and Justicars playing Third Traditions have always created > > Camarilla vampires, because there was no need to specify it otherwise, > > since the default sect of their respective clans was the Camarilla. > > Not since Ancient Hearts, when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes > became possible: Writ of Acceptance + Praxis Seizure. Oops! :) It's true. However, which was the designer's intent when creating Third Tradition: Progeny and Creation Rites? Greetings, Damnans

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3EABBE5...@white-wolf.com... > Damnans wrote: > > Princes and Justicars playing Third Traditions have always created > > Camarilla vampires, because there was no need to specify it otherwise, > > since the default sect of their respective clans was the Camarilla. > > Not since Ancient Hearts, when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes > became possible: Writ of Acceptance + Praxis Seizure. Actually, it was Dark Sovereigns when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes became possible with Giovanni Acceptance + Praxis Seizure, but your point is valid none the less. -- Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp

In message <3EABCF04...@ono.com>, Damnans <damna...@ono.com> writes: <Writ + Ravnos Prince + Third Tradition = Non-Camarilla Childe> >Oops! :) It's true. However, which was the designer's intent when >creating Third Tradition: Progeny and Creation Rites? When creating Third Tradition: Progeny? Only the Camarilla existed. Indeed, the concept of The Camarilla as a concept in the game didn't really exist, because everything was part of it. Sects didn't properly exist, so it's not a fair question. Creation Rites is different. The concepts did exist, of sect. The ability did exist to do exactly what was suggested. Whether the designers knew about it or not is separate. Some not-unreasonable amounts of Sabbat do seem to have been crack induced, with some of the designers not seeming to be part of the game the rest of us were playing. (c.f. Mind Rape) [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <vanrfhd...@corp.supernews.com>, XZealot <x_zealot@cox- internet.com> writes: >> Not since Ancient Hearts, when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes >> became possible: Writ of Acceptance + Praxis Seizure. > >Actually, it was Dark Sovereigns when the first non-Camarilla-clan Princes >became possible with Giovanni Acceptance + Praxis Seizure, but your point is >valid none the less. However, in the context of that non-Camarilla-clan Princes creating non- Camarilla progeny, that doesn't work. If you pass Giovanni Acceptance, all Giovanni are Camarilla. Including the one you just created. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > Some not-unreasonable > amounts of Sabbat do seem to have been crack induced, with some of > the designers not seeming to be part of the game the rest of us were > playing. (c.f. Mind Rape) you can add Disarm, Direct intervention, War Ghoul and Breath of the dragon to the nutty conceptors =)

Jozxyqk wrote: > The Embrace of a respected titled Camarilla vampire > becoming Independent just doesn't make sense. th vampire can come to life and choose to follow his true nature. All children do not obey ! (snip) > On the other hand, you can burn a Leather Jacket to withstand a > blast from a Rocket Launcher at point blank range. So this is not > a major issue ;) you never watched the anime captain harlock at the tv ? he threw is long cape/jacket in the air to make a diversion so the enemy fire is not aimed at him ;)

John Flournoy wrote: > *snip* > >> All this in in the "playing by the rules" domain. "Making >> rules" is another matter. It if you're contesting the actual >> written rules on the grounds that it "does not make sense" from an >> RPG point of view, you're into a big (IMHO pointless) discussion, >> since it could really be argued either way in this case. And next >> thing you know, you're ruling out damage prevention from Flak >> Jackets on Burst of Sunlinght strikes (eg.). this is quite strange, i must admit. does the vampire uses the jacket to protect his head and eyes from the burst ? maybe you have optional headger or riot helm that comes with it ? > Or a local favorite, "I throw a car at you." "My leather jacket is > destroyed, but I am unscathed!" again : you never watched the anime captain harlock at the tv ? he threw his long cape/jacket in the air to make a diversion so the enemy fire is not aimed at him. Let's pretend it's something similar ;)

reyda wrote: > this is quite strange, i must admit. does the vampire uses the jacket to > protect his head and eyes from the burst ? maybe you have optional headger > or riot helm that comes with it ? Nah--if you have a leather jacket, you look cool, and being cool is all you need to get out of any scrape... Peter D Bakija PD...@bigplanet.com http://www.myplanet.net/pdb6 "You were right, Roger. That's a big-ass worm." -Hellboy

[ quoted text not captured ] That was the scenario I started with in my reply, but corrected it after noticing that Giovanni Acceptance counters the non-Camarillaness of the newly-created Giovanni childe. Giovanni Acceptance makes the Giovanni a Camarilla clan, so the basis assumption (that a non-Camarilla-clan vampire is a prince) is violated, as well. [ quoted text not captured ]