"The Grind" deck

Since it's become the subject of conversation long enough, I might as well post the deck. The group I play in uses 6 card limit. If you don't wish to use 6CL, you may trade the 3 Peace of Khetamon for 3 Banishments. I have yet to try the variation of trading the 3 Peace cards for 3 1st Trad's, but I would be interested in what it does for the dynamic of the deck. Further commentary will be posted separately. Noal CRYPT Ranjan Rishi, Camarilla Scholar-Ventrue-5 cap-PRE Jazz Wentworth-Ventrue-5 cap-PRE Violette Prentiss-Ventrue-4 cap-PRE Gideon Fontaine-Ventrue-3 cap-PRE Roland Loussarian-Ventrue-3 cap-pre Itzahk Levine-Ventrue-3 cap-pre Ramiel DuPre-Toreador-5 cap-PRE Mariana Gilbert-Toreador-4 cap-PRE Delilah Easton-Toreador-2 cap-pre Brachah-Brujah-5 cap-PRE Uma Hatch-Brujah-3 cap-pre Vasilis, Traitor of Don Cruez-Brujah-2 cap-pre (x2) Lazar Dobrescu-Ravnos-3 cap LIBRARY -Master Cards (16) (x6) Presence (x3) Effective Management Secure Haven (x2) Elysium: The Arboretum Elysium: The Palace of Versaille Ventrue Headquarters Cairo Int'l Airport The Barrens -Actions (6) (x2) Judgement: Camarilla Segregation (x4) The Embrace -Action Mods (18) (x3) Scorn of Adonis (x5) Bribes (x6) Bewitching Oration (x4) Voter Captivation -Combat (11) (x6) Majesty (x5) Catatonic Fear -Political Actions (39) (x4) Ventrue Justicar Brujah Justicar Toreador Justicar Praxis Seizure: Berlin Praxis Seizure: Cairo Praxis Seizure: Geneva Praxis Seizure: Monaco Praxis Seizure: Paris Praxis Seizure: Rome (x2) Ravnos Acceptance (x5) Masquerade Enforcement (x5) Camarilla Threat (x3) Protect Thine Own (x3) Might of the Camarilla (x6) Banishment (x3) Peace of Khetamon -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

In article <76timp$evh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: [snip a little...] I like it, and wish I had the cards to test it IRL. However, I'm a little...intrigued by the crypt... > > CRYPT > Ranjan Rishi, Camarilla Scholar-Ventrue-5 cap-PRE > Jazz Wentworth-Ventrue-5 cap-PRE > Violette Prentiss-Ventrue-4 cap-PRE > Gideon Fontaine-Ventrue-3 cap-PRE > Roland Loussarian-Ventrue-3 cap-pre > Itzahk Levine-Ventrue-3 cap-pre > Ramiel DuPre-Toreador-5 cap-PRE > Mariana Gilbert-Toreador-4 cap-PRE > Delilah Easton-Toreador-2 cap-pre > Brachah-Brujah-5 cap-PRE > Uma Hatch-Brujah-3 cap-pre > Vasilis, Traitor of Don Cruez-Brujah-2 cap-pre > (x2) Lazar Dobrescu-Ravnos-3 cap I assume you are aware that there are 14 vampires in the crypt, but I'm curious why. It seems that Lazar is, if not a critical part of the deck, a useful one. Might it not be more worthwhile to play with 12, including 12 Lazar? Personally, I'd take out Brachah and Ramiel...losing the 2 non-Ventrue 5-caps, making it less likely that the Toreador & Brujah Justicar cards will be worthwhile, but maybe you could replace them with a couple of others...I would think 2 each Toreador & Brujah would be okay, and having Lazar make up 1/6 ot the crypt wouldn't be all bad. Otherwise, it looks like a lot of fun, <poke, tease> even with 6CL </poke, tease> Hehe. Xian "they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain lion on crack" --greensea [ quoted text not captured ]

Xian wrote: > I assume you are aware that there are 14 vampires in the crypt, but I'm > curious why. It seems that Lazar is, if not a critical part of the deck, a > useful one. Might it not be more worthwhile to play with 12, including > Lazar? Actually, it started out as a 12 vampire crypt. Since the deck in both its original and current form has 4 Ventrue Justicar cards, 1 Toreador Justicar card and 1 Brujah Justicar card (mostly because of IRL limitations) I needed a similar amount of vampires in my crypt. To get the proportions right, I needed 6 Ventrue, 3 Brujah and 3 Toreador. Lazar was a later addition because of his ability and the extra two vampires hasn't hurt the crypt any. And to be honest, while Lazar is useful, he really only gets the opportunity to use his ability once or twice in a game. The rest of the time, either I don't have a vampire in my inactive region or he gets blocked. The fact that he doesn't have Presence is also another strike aganst increasing the percentage of him in the deck. > Personally, I'd take out Brachah and Ramiel...losing the 2 > non-Ventrue 5-caps, making it less likely that the Toreador & Brujah Justicar > cards will be worthwhile, but maybe you could replace them with a couple of > others...I would think 2 each Toreador & Brujah would be okay, and having > Lazar make up 1/6 ot the crypt wouldn't be all bad. Perhaps, but with 6 cards that require a Justicar and 7 other cards that require a Prince or Justicar, the extra Justicars are needed to maintain card flow...esp. since the deck is very harsh on discards. If I ever go with 1st Tradition instead of Peace of Khetamon, it will be even more neccessary since those 7 P/J cards become 10 in number. Also the average vampire capacity in the current crypt is 3.57, which means that on the average it will take me 3 1/2 turns to get out all of my vampires. The worst case is if I draw all four 5 caps, and then it will take me 5 turns to get them all out. All in all, not too bad. The best case scenario is drawing 1 of each clan, and letting The Embrace cards make up the rest of the force. The other reason to keep the 5 cap Brujah and Toreador vamps is that they have superior Presence to make the Voter Caps pay off and they have the blood to needed to play The Embrace and not have to hunt the next turn. > Otherwise, it looks like a lot of fun, <poke, tease> even with 6CL </poke, > tease> *grin* Well, if I ever play it at Origins or GenCon, odds are that I may forgo the 6CL and play with 9 Banishments Thanks for the feedback. It keeps me thinking about other possibilites. Noal -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <76tu2m$pel$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Xian <xi...@waste.org> wrote: >In article <76timp$evh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, [snipped: pretty much all the context] >It seems that Lazar is, if not a critical part of the deck, a >useful one. Might it not be more worthwhile to play with 12, including 12 >Lazar? Ah yes, the much famed "Lazarus" deck. ;-) -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

In article <76tu2m$pel$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: > useful one. Might it not be more worthwhile to play with 12, including 12 > Lazar? I *really* meant '2 Lazar' Not 12. But I hope most of you guessed that. Xian "they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain lion on crack" --greensea -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <76timp$evh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com writes *snip* - pretty cool deck The only problem I see with it is getting the votes passed. You don't have any inherent votes and all it would take would be to get Rob Treasure's Pander deck sitting at the table with you to ruin all your hard work. :( And just out of interest, do you know if there's a copy of the Devil's Dictionary on-line anywhere? I'll check Project Gutenberg but it's something I'd love to get hold of. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

James Coupe wrote: > *snip* - pretty cool deck *beams* thank you. > The only problem I see with it is getting the votes passed. You don't > have any inherent votes and all it would take would be to get Rob > Treasure's Pander deck sitting at the table with you to ruin all your > hard work. :( Actually, it's not very hard to get the votes passed. Since almost all of the vampires have Presence and I have 12 cards in the deck to give titles, I'm usually able to get a Prince or Justicar by turn 2 or 3. Bewitiching Oration helps a lot too. But, yeah...another weenie presence vote deck might give it some hassle. If needed, I could always work in some Awe. Fortunately, the Embrace cards give me the extra votes needed to pass a Justicar vote early in the game. It's a good thing that Panders are too young to be Cardinals or it would be a _really_ big pain. The other big problem is intercept decks...for obvious reasons. The deck can't generate any extra stealth. When that happens, I'll throw out a few things I expect to be intercepted and then throw out the important stuff. Disputed Territory might be a possible way of dealing with locations that give intercept...but there's no easy way to deal with Auspex other than Majesty and try something else. *nods* While there's no such thing as an "unbeatable" deck, this one certainly makes it tough. It's really a matter of tuning a deck to fit with your play group. Tournaments are going to have a fair share of weenie presence voter decks and I'll have to wait to see how this goes up against them. > And just out of interest, do you know if there's a copy of the Devil's > Dictionary on-line anywhere? I'll check Project Gutenberg but it's > something I'd love to get hold of. Why...yes I do! *smile* It's where I got my signature from. It's at the following location: http://rabi.phys.columbia.edu/~matmat/html/devils.html It's actually a very nice presentation of Ambrose Bierce's work. Regards, Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Let me throw another spin on this deck, since I have been victim to it twice now. *grin* Even if you do not think that it is effective by looking at it on print, it is indeed effective. The only thing that would do it hard would be some kind of heavy intercept/combat deck, or a heavy rush/ combat deck. Once he gets his vamps out and made princes, gets a couple masquarade endangered cards to make you pay 1 pool each to discard. A banishment on your vamp, and the a couple of the vote card that requires anyone to pay 1 pool to bring a vamp from inactive to active, that hurts a lot. They are easy to get rid of, with a vote. But usually when he has then in play, he has superior vote dominance on the table. Paul Just a guy in Canton, MI [ quoted text not captured ]

---som...@somewhere.net (Me) wrote: What happened to your "Vryce" account, Paul? *grin* > Even if you do not think that it is effective by looking at it on > print, it is indeed effective. Thanks. *smiles* > The only thing that would do it hard > would be some kind of heavy intercept/combat deck, or a heavy rush/ > combat deck. *nods* Although the intercept/combat would be more of a problem because I wouldn't be able to get my actions off. The rush combat is less of a problem since I have 11 S:CE cards and 2 Arboretums...a change from 6 and 1 due to the thrashing I took at the hands of my bloodthirsty play group. *grin* That and I'll start Banishing rush combat mosters. A weenie combat deck would be less hurt by this than one that uses mid-range capacity vampires. > Once he gets his vamps out and made princes, gets a > couple masquarade endangered cards to make you pay 1 pool each to > discard. That's "Camarilla Threat" you're thinking of here. "Masquerade Endangered" is a Master Card. > A banishment on your vamp, and the a couple of the vote card > that requires anyone to pay 1 pool to bring a vamp from inactive to > active, that hurts a lot. The card you're thinking of is Masquerade Enforcement. You going to be at Monster Bob's on Monday night? I promise I won't take up the whole evening with the "Transformers" deck again. *grin* I've got a fun Anarch deck I threw together. It's got every card with "Anarch" in the title in the deck. I meant to play it last week, but the game took forever for some reason. Noal [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <7737mk$gn7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com writes >But, yeah...another weenie presence vote deck might give it some >hassle. If needed, I could always work in some Awe. Fortunately, >the Embrace cards give me the extra votes needed to pass a >Justicar vote early in the game. It's a good thing that Panders >are too young to be Cardinals or it would be a _really_ big pain. > Heh. You obviously have never run into a variant upon Rob Treasure's Legacy of Pander deck: First turn: Info Highway, probably 2 vampires out (if going first he has three transfers, so probably a one and a two). Second turn: Vote called, probably making sure he used a vampire with presence - Legacy of Pander (seven in the deck). Bring out more vampires. Wash, rinse, repeat. It stopped my vote deck *dead* at Portsmouth in both the first round and the final :( The first round was due to a couple of miscalculations by me which *could* have held him up slightly, but I stood no chance in the final. >The other big problem is intercept decks...for obvious reasons. The >deck can't generate any extra stealth. Well, dedicated intercept is normally onto a loser. I'd love to see a dedicated intercept deck that works but it'd require a hell of a lot of Eagle's Sight, as I see it :( But a deck with intercept in it could cause you a few problems early on. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <7737mk$gn7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > James Coupe wrote: > > *snip* - pretty cool deck > > *beams* thank you. I like this one a lot too, Noal. I did a variation which I need to play soon (much like many other decks...sigh...) using slightly smaller vampires (I think...should look at your original crypt again...) and since I only have 1 Camarilla Threat...well. I kept in the Anarch Revolts you mentioned you had tossed, and just messed around with it in general. But I like it. Very much. Oh yeah. I did Prince babies. I don't remember if you had many in your deck, and I'm just too lazy to check while I'm in the middle of posting. They're fun...and don't cost pool to bring into play once the Masquerade Enforcements begin stacking up. And they help on the Ventrue Justicar votes. Took out the other Justicar votes, as I have like 4 from other clans...Delilah, Igo, Vasilis...and maybe one other... Xian "they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain lion on crack" --greensea -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Xian wrote: > I like this one a lot too, Noal. I did a variation which I need to play soon > (much like many other decks...sigh...) using slightly smaller vampires (I > think...should look at your original crypt again...) and since I only have 1 > Camarilla Threat...well. I kept in the Anarch Revolts you mentioned you had > tossed, and just messed around with it in general. But I like it. Very > much. Thanks, Xian. Actually, it wasn't Anarch Revolts, it was Brainwash that I tossed to add more S:CE cards. You might want to try replacing the Camarilla Threats with Consanguineous Boon and First Trad if you only have the one. A couple of each could be a devastating combo. > Oh yeah. I did Prince babies. Actually, no. I realize they cost more, but if I don't have a titled vampire in play, I can still play The Embrace. I had thought about it, though. > I don't remember if you had many in your > deck, and I'm just too lazy to check while I'm in the middle of posting. > They're fun...and don't cost pool to bring into play once the Masquerade > Enforcements begin stacking up. And they help on the Ventrue Justicar votes. > Took out the other Justicar votes, as I have like 4 from other > clans...Delilah, Igo, Vasilis...and maybe one other... *nods* The original idea I had was to get a Justicar from every clan, but I ended up with just the ones with Presence. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77d1on$jk9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > Xian wrote: > > I like this one a lot too, Noal. I did a variation which I need to play soon > > (much like many other decks...sigh...) using slightly smaller vampires (I > > think...should look at your original crypt again...) > Thanks, Xian. Actually, it wasn't Anarch Revolts, it was Brainwash that I > tossed to add more S:CE cards. You might want to try replacing the > Camarilla Threats with Consanguineous Boon and First Trad if you only > have the one. A couple of each could be a devastating combo. I think I put in a couple Cons Boons and there's about 4-6 1st Trads. Mmm... > > Oh yeah. I did Prince babies. > > Actually, no. I realize they cost more, but if I don't have a titled vampire > in play, I can still play The Embrace. I had thought about it, though. No? I sure *did* :) I don't have enough Embraces. I think I've got...2. I double-checked your crypt & I only went a little smaller, but I did do Igo & stayed away from the 5-cap non-Ventrue. I didn't even put in Ranjan. Went with all of the little (Camarilla) guys with pre, the two smallest FoS with pre and I think Gideon & Violette. I figured that if I couldn't get one of the 10 or 11 Praxis Seizures in my hand near the start with a Bewitching Oration, I'm probably screwed anyway...probably not the *best* attitude to start with, but I think the mix is about right. I feel a little high on votes, but the Prince babies should make that less of a factor. If yours cycles okay, I'm not horribly worried about mine. Oh yeah...Brainwash. God...if someone could get a Brainwash deck to work, that would be just way too cool. Maybe a Presence-bleed Brainwash deck, in order to pass the Rumors of Gehenna, and to hit the remaining minions with Mind Numb, Pre bleeds to bleed faster & regain pool... Xian, "Kiss my Ra!" "they look at you funny when you attack things like a hungry mountain lion on crack" --greensea -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: > I think I put in a couple Cons Boons and there's about 4-6 1st Trads. Mmm... Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent Smith/Reversal of Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about doing with a Setite voter deck) > No? I sure *did* :) I don't have enough Embraces. I think I've got...2. I > double-checked your crypt & I only went a little smaller, but I did do Igo & > stayed away from the 5-cap non-Ventrue. Hrm. I like being able to use all of the Justicar votes without fear of having to discard...but since you aren't using as many Camarilla Threats, it's not likely to be a problem. > I figured that if I couldn't get one of > the 10 or 11 Praxis Seizures in my hand near the start with a Bewitching > Oration, I'm probably screwed anyway... It depends. I really haven't suffered too much either way. I have 12 cards that give titles (6 Justicar cards and 6 Praxis Seizures) so it's not usually a problem. Chances are that if you draw a Justicar or Praxis Seizure in the opening draw, you won't need a Oration to pass it since most of the voting power shouldn't be out yet. I've also been thinking about Closed Session to keep Sabbat voters from annoying me. We'll have to see. > I feel a little high on > votes, but the Prince babies should make that less of a factor. If yours > cycles okay, I'm not horribly worried about mine. It hasn't been a problem for me, but I suppose you could drop a few of the votes in favor of Closed Session. However, using Might of the Camarilla (after Banishment) and Protect Thine Own to burn vampires is pretty rude. > Oh yeah...Brainwash. God...if someone could get a Brainwash deck to work, > that would be just way too cool. Maybe a Presence-bleed Brainwash deck, in > order to pass the Rumors of Gehenna, and to hit the remaining minions with > Mind Numb, Pre bleeds to bleed faster & regain pool... I thought about a Malk voting deck that uses Madness Network to call Banishment on your prey during your predator's turn and then Brainwash on your master phase. I could see the masters being something like: (3x) Malkavian Madness Network (6x) Banishment (6x) Anarch Revolt (5x) Pentex Subversion (optional) and using Malk Rider Clauses to pass your votes. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77dqet$aov$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent Smith/Reversal of >Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about doing with a Setite voter >deck) Speaking of which has anyone ever had luck with such a deck. I have a Nosferatu deck with Stealth/Intercept/Bats that makes use of Millicent, but nobody would ever vote for Reversal of Fortune. ;-) Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent without stealth in my deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 12 Jan 1999 01:34:22 GMT, phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: >In article <77dqet$aov$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent Smith/Reversal of >>Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about doing with a Setite voter >>deck) > >Speaking of which has anyone ever had luck with such a deck. I have >a Nosferatu deck with Stealth/Intercept/Bats that makes use of Millicent, >but nobody would ever vote for Reversal of Fortune. ;-) > >Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat >defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and >Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I >don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent >without stealth in my deck. I have a deck called "Muddles, the Enforcer" which makes use of about four Millicents in it - Muddles isn't a vampire so even if you block him, Millicent won't burn him, and my vampires take almost NO actions unless my prey is tapped out and helpless (and even then they mostly just bleed for 1.) The deck runs with ten Eagle's Sights and a pile of intercept cards and Fast Reactions. (Not to mention a few Ivory Bows and Sengir Daggers.), and of course it's weenie-hostile since Muddles is around. If I get the draw, I try to get the Madness Network out first and then summon Muddles during "Malkavian Time" (since it's an action that then, only "Any untapped Malkavian" may attempt to block, and I don't have to worry about casual next-door blocks who might object to Muddles.) With ten Eagle's Sights, the only sort of deck I have a real problem stopping as my prey is either hard-core Presence bleed or hard-core stealth bleed, since those decks do NOTHING but (D)-prey actions. :( -- Derek (replying by email? remove the nospam from my domain :)

Derek S. Ray wrote: > [... snip ...] > If I get the draw, I try to get the Madness > Network out first and then summon Muddles during "Malkavian Time" > (since it's an action that then, only "Any untapped Malkavian" may > attempt to block, and I don't have to worry about casual next-door > blocks who might object to Muddles.) > [... snip ...] Actions attempted by Malkavians through the Madness Network are subject to the standard (and only the standard) blocking. For Recruiting the Muddled Vampire Hunter, this means the ready, untapped minions of your Prey and Predator can attempt to block, whether they are Malkavians or not. Other players' minions cannot attempt to block, whether they are Malkavians or not. You are thinking of the action to burn the Madness Network. Even so, though, that action can be blocked by any ready, untapped Malkavian *in addition to* the normal set of blockers (i.e., the ready, untapped minions of the controller of the Madness Network). -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html

In article <77e8qu$29s$1...@news.NERO.NET>, phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: > Speaking of which has anyone ever had luck with such a deck. I have > a Nosferatu deck with Stealth/Intercept/Bats that makes use of Millicent, > but nobody would ever vote for Reversal of Fortune. ;-) See jol84. Although I haven't actually gotten to draw a Millicent yet even though I have like 6 in the deck. > Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat > defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and > Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I > don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent > without stealth in my deck. Ahhh, but stealth isn't necessary with Toreador Grand Balls. I basically don't plan on bleeding with the deck because of the Millicent threat. It uses Minion Taps and Fifth Tradition for pool gain. Uses damaging votes to kill my prey. All of it unblockable if I get out the Toreador Grand Ball. I currently have out 3 in that game. Also, with all the pool I've gained through MT/FT and ousting my prey, I have out Alexandra, Anneke, Anson, Francois Villon, and two progeny with about 15 pool remaining. Of course, my prey is playing a Malkavian Madness Network deck with Reversal of Fortune. It would appear that he has the rest of the table convinced that I will sweep if I'm allowed a turn. So the Reversals come just before I should get a turn. Last time, I blocked two of his three Reversals before he was able to get one through. Btw, if you look at the state for jol84, it is all out of wack. It hasn't been updated in like 3 months. Mike -- Mike Bohlmann, MAIP - Prince of Urbana-Champaign http://www.shout.net/~mbohlman/ [ quoted text not captured ]

phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: > <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent Smith/Reversal of > >Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about doing with a Setite voter > >deck) > > Speaking of which has anyone ever had luck with such a deck. I have > a Nosferatu deck with Stealth/Intercept/Bats that makes use of Millicent, > but nobody would ever vote for Reversal of Fortune. ;-) > > Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat > defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and > Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I > don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent > without stealth in my deck. Which is why Setites would be great. They have the stealth to not get burned by Millicent and the Presence to push the votes through. Since I already have a Setite voting deck, it wouldn't take that much to re-work it. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 05:45:02 -0800, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote: >You are thinking of the action to burn the Madness Network. Even >so, though, that action can be blocked by any ready, untapped >Malkavian *in addition to* the normal set of blockers (i.e., the >ready, untapped minions of the controller of the Madness Network). Oops. you're right, I am being brain dead. "Aw.. poop." [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77fsva$35u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] I have a Malk. vote deck that uses her. It's a brutal deck it kills everybody on the table at once but with my abilty to bleed. I taken the whole table out in 3 rounds once my prey was out. Here are some of the combo's in my deck. Major Boon/Malkavian Time Auction, Mind Rape/ Golconda. Those are the way I make blood to support my suicide deck. Then since I control the votes most of the time. I put in multiple Anarch Revolts, Antediluvian Awekening, Curse of Nitocris,Madness of the Bard and last but not least Smiling Jack the Anarch. I have used Millicent in the deck and she works very well. I have more combo's in the deck but I don't want to reveal everything. With the above cards when a Methuselah untaps they lose between 2-6 pool before they even take an action. This deck has only lost once and that was because it killed itself. That is why I call it my Malkavian Suicide Deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

cgoold wrote: > I have a Malk. vote deck that uses her [M. Smith]. It's a brutal deck it > kills everybody on the table at once but with my abilty to bleed. I taken the > whole table out in 3 rounds once my prey was out. Here are some of the > combo's in my deck. Major Boon/Malkavian Time Auction, Mind Rape/ > Golconda. Those are the way I make blood to support my suicide deck. > Then since I control the votes most of the time. I put in multiple Anarch > Revolts, Antediluvian Awekening, Curse of Nitocris,Madness of the Bard > and last but not least Smiling Jack the Anarch. Sounds like a lot of master cards for one deck. If I'm going to base my deck off of master cards, I try to keep it simple by limiting my master to about 3 or 4 different ones. Too much variety makes for a wildly inconsistent deck. If my master cards are just icing on the cake, that's another matter entirely. The problems that I see with the two combos above are: -Major Boon/Malkavian Time Auction: Major Boon is a strong card for bleed defense and is good in it's own right. Malkavian Time Auction, however, is worthless if nobody wants to bid...especially once they realize that if you are the last person bidding, you collect the 2nd highest bid, pay nothing (since you bid highest, you pay yourself) and keep the card that was auctioned. -Mind Rape/Golconda: While this combo will work in a MJL (Michigan Jyhad League) sponsored tournament because we play Mind Rape as printed, it will not work in a DCI sanctioned tournament due to errata. Currently, Mind Rape taps the target vampire (which doesn't untap on the next untap phase) and then on your next minion phase, it untaps and you get control of it during your turn. Mind Rape pretty much works like a Mind Numb and one-shot Temptation wrapped up in one card. Since the minion nailed by Mind Rape is only under your control during your minion phase, Golconda can't hit it. A Graverobbing/Golconda combo, on the other hand, will work just fine. Going back to Reversal of Fortune..a Malkavian voting deck almost needs Anarch Revolts to make its votes pass (by using Malk Rider Clause). The problem with the Anarch Revolt/Malk Rider Clause combo will work once in a game if the players are smart. What _should_ happen is that players will call the vote to burn the Revolt and wait to see if you play a Malk Rider Clause or not before deciding to pass the vote. If you play one, they should fail the vote and try again until you run out of Malk Rider Clauses. The other strategy with Malks is to either try to get Presence on them or use Telepathic Vote Counting. While TVC can cancel the votes of one vampire, there's usually a lot more out there, so you're going to need titles yourself...and that will be tough without Presence. So... IMO, getting the Millicent Smith/Reversal of Fortune into play consistently with a Malk voting deck is going to be tough, if not impossible. A Setite voting deck, on the other hand, isn't nearly as dependent on an opportunistic strategy. To begin with, Reversal of Fortune is a vote that any vampire may call. Since the Setites have Obfuscate, calling the vote without being blocked has just as high a probability as the Malks. Since they have Presence as well, they have the ability to use Bewitching Oration and Awe to generate huge amounts of votes. With the Awe/Voter Cap combo, they don't even need to worry about losing blood. > I have used Millicent in the deck and she works very well. I have more > combo's in the deck but I don't want to reveal everything. With the above > cards when a Methuselah untaps they lose between 2-6 pool before they even > take an action. This deck has only lost once and that was because it killed > itself. That is why I call it my Malkavian Suicide Deck. I'd be interested to see the deck, but it's obvious you want to keep it to yourself. I would be curious to see if your deck is based on the master cards or the minion cards. From the earlier list of master cards, it looks like a deck with good pool gain could weather your storm until you kill yourself. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League http://kite.eecs.umich.edu/MIRT/ [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77fspj$2t6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <mboh...@shout.net> wrote: >In article <77e8qu$29s$1...@news.NERO.NET>, > phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: [snip] >> Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat >> defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and >> Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I >> don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent >> without stealth in my deck. > >Ahhh, but stealth isn't necessary with Toreador Grand Balls. I basically >don't plan on bleeding with the deck because of the Millicent threat. >It uses Minion Taps and Fifth Tradition for pool gain. Uses damaging votes >to kill my prey. All of it unblockable if I get out the Toreador Grand >Ball. I currently have out 3 in that game. Also, with all the pool I've >gained through MT/FT and ousting my prey, I have out Alexandra, Anneke, Anson, >Francois Villon, and two progeny with about 15 pool remaining. Doh! I'd kind of forgotten about that card, since I don't have one, nor anyone else I play with for that matter. That almost makes for a usefull Toreador deck. ;-) I wonder if 6 is really enough Millicent for such a deck... [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77fsva$35u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: > phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: >> <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent Smith/Reversal of >> >Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about doing with a Setite voter >> >deck) >> >> Speaking of which has anyone ever had luck with such a deck. I have >> a Nosferatu deck with Stealth/Intercept/Bats that makes use of Millicent, >> but nobody would ever vote for Reversal of Fortune. ;-) >> >> Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat >> defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and >> Masika plus some Eagles Sight would terrorize people -- although I >> don't know how you'd ever oust your prey. Somehow I feel uneasy Millicent >> without stealth in my deck. > >Which is why Setites would be great. They have the stealth to not get >burned by Millicent and the Presence to push the votes through. Since >I already have a Setite voting deck, it wouldn't take that much to re-work >it. True (although they don't have Obf/Pre as much as you'd like), however they don't have the Auspex neccesary for Eagles sight to truly get the most out of the Millicent/Reversal of Fortune. Perhaps a Settite/Toreador mix, acting with the Settites, and blocking with the Toreador? I think the Toreador Grand Ball idea might be better though, as you could get away with smaller vampires (although you'd probably want Anneke and Masika). [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <77gqho$20e$1...@news.NERO.NET>, Jasper Phillips <phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU> wrote: >In article <77fsva$35u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote: >>> <Dhar...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >Yikes. Time stops faster than a deck that does a Millicent >>> >Smith/Reversal of Fortune combo. (something I've been thinking about >>> >doing with a Setite voter deck) >>> Perhaps some sort of Malkavian voting deck, with the Millicents as combat >>> defense. Or better yet, a Toreador Vote/Intercept deck... Anneke and >>Which is why Setites would be great. They have the stealth to not get >>burned by Millicent and the Presence to push the votes through. >True (although they don't have Obf/Pre as much as you'd like), however >they don't have the Auspex neccesary for Eagles sight to truly get >the most out of the Millicent/Reversal of Fortune. > <lots of snips above to placate my newsreader > Again, I'm probably repeating someone here. The Malkavian vote deck mentioned above with the addition of some Madness Networks seems like the optimal way to go. Since you (hopefully) will have been able to push a Reversal through in whatever way, and gotten out a Millicent, Millicent will be following the current player around the table. When she gets to you, you just let your Vamps untap, and wait until the end of your predators turn to act with them. You predator controls Millicent, so you don't have to worry about getting burned. Plus you can add a little agg daamge and use Rotschrek if you're blocked. Throw in a few dramatic upheavals, and you can make sure it's your turn right after some poor fool gets burned by Millicent, and put down a new one. Bye, Cy Myers Madness Network Advocate

In article <77gei0$4go$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] I'm sorry I ment to tell you that we don't play by the errata rulings or the RTR rulings, we play with a 5 card limit on all cards. So we felt as a group that cards aren't that strong. So if I mind Raped some one you would be able to use Golconda. Back to the Major Boon once it has been used either the person whoowes the Major boon will most likly bid as will his pred. for the obvious reasons. When I geet a chance I will email you my deck so if you want to put it together and play you can. Also with the Anarch Revolts it can only be destroyed by calling a vote most of the time if I play this deck I do control votes so they do stay because I never vote them out. "live by the sword I also die by the sword" I have 5 in my deck & I usually get 3 out. I do use the usual vote cards for people to loose pool. The reason we don't follow the errata or the RTR rulings we felt that it made Jyhad more like Magic. For if you set a limit to the # of cards it does take away from the lethalness of the cards. The one rule we adopted was the ownership rule. The rulings and errata total destroyed my Giovanni deck because of the rulings to TB,Golconda,Mind Rape. For with this deck I can bring up and back every vampire in my crypt plus usuall make more blood than a stealth & bleed deck can take from it. [ quoted text not captured ]

(TO REPLY VIA E-MAIL, STRIP 'XYXYX' FROM THE ADDRESS) phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) writes: >Doh! I'd kind of forgotten about that card, since I don't have one, nor >anyone else I play with for that matter. That almost makes for a usefull >Toreador deck. ;-) I wonder if 6 is really enough Millicent for such >a deck... "SHE'S BAAAA-A-A-A-A-A-A-ACKKKK!!!!!!!!! Doodootdoodoootdoodooot..." (you know, the Shark Music from "Jaws"...) ;-) Fred

Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > cgoold wrote: > > Here are some of the > > combo's in my deck. Major Boon/Malkavian Time Auction, Mind Rape/ > > Golconda. Those are the way I make blood to support my suicide deck. > > Then since I control the votes most of the time. I put in multiple Anarch > > Revolts, Antediluvian Awekening, Curse of Nitocris,Madness of the Bard > > and last but not least Smiling Jack the Anarch. > > [...snip...] > > -Major Boon/Malkavian Time Auction: Major Boon is a strong card for > bleed defense and is good in it's own right. Malkavian Time Auction, > however, is worthless if nobody wants to bid...especially once they > realize that if you are the last person bidding, you collect the 2nd > highest bid, pay nothing (since you bid highest, you pay yourself) and > keep the card that was auctioned. "You" cannot bid at all: Malkavian Time Auction - Master (Mal) * The Methuselah playing the Time Auction cannot bid. [RTR 950209] -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

vte...@wizards.com (LSJ) wrote: > "You" cannot bid at all: > > Malkavian Time Auction - Master (Mal) > * The Methuselah playing the Time Auction cannot bid. [RTR 950209] Ah. Wasn't aware of that bit of trivia. Ok....the Major Boon/Time Auction combo would work. I think I'd like the Graverobbing/Time Auction combo better. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League -- DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors. -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Jasper Phillips wrote: > True (although they [Setites] don't have Obf/Pre as much as you'd like), > however they don't have the Auspex neccesary for Eagles sight to truly > get the most out of the Millicent/Reversal of Fortune. > > Perhaps a Settite/Toreador mix, acting with the Settites, and blocking > with the Toreador? I think the Toreador Grand Ball idea might be > better though, as you could get away with smaller vampires (although > you'd probably want Anneke and Masika). You make some very valid points about the Setites. A Setite/Toreador mix would certainly be possible. Maybe a Obf/Pre/Aus deck. A Toreador deck with Grand Ball (I think I have 2, maybe 3) would work as well. Anneke and Masika would be great, but a 2 capacity Toreador would do just as well. And since Grand Ball is _not_ a unique master, you could use multiples to make more than one Toreador unblockable and name the same vampire to be the one that gets tapped. [ quoted text not captured ]

lor...@nospam.nineball.org (Derek S. Ray) wrote: >I have a deck called "Muddles, the Enforcer" which makes use of about >four Millicents in it - Muddles isn't a vampire so even if you block >him, Millicent won't burn him, and my vampires take almost NO actions >unless my prey is tapped out and helpless (and even then they mostly >just bleed for 1.) The deck runs with ten Eagle's Sights and a pile >of intercept cards and Fast Reactions. (Not to mention a few Ivory >Bows and Sengir Daggers.), and of course it's weenie-hostile since >Muddles is around. If I get the draw, I try to get the Madness >Network out first and then summon Muddles during "Malkavian Time" >(since it's an action that then, only "Any untapped Malkavian" may >attempt to block, and I don't have to worry about casual next-door >blocks who might object to Muddles.) ?? I believe that you misunderstand that particular line of card text. Only Malkavians may block the (card provided) action to burn the MadNet (any Methuselah's untapped Malks, not just the owner of MadNet). Actions taken on "Malkavian Time" are blockable by any minion, just like any other action. Regards, R. David Zopf guenh...@mindspring.com Atom Weaver and V:EKN Prince of Charlotte, NC