I hate to start this discussion again, but I think I have a semi-new slant on
the matter. I should say that I a) don't think that OoTMs played on your own
turn unbalance the game, and b) think that they were never meant to be played
on your turn. Here's why:
Boons: The whole idea of doing a favor for your prey goes against the theme
of the game, I believe these were intended to be cross-table cards. If OoTMs
could be played on your turn, this would not be true.
Major Boon: This card is very similar in effect to deflection and telepathic
misderection, and these cards can not be used in a two player end-game. If
OoTMs are limited to "not your turn" this holds true for major boon as well,
which seems natural.
Brujah Frenzy: Of all the clan hosers, this is the only one which you would
ever want to play on your own vampires ( as an unblockable bum's rush ). You
can only do this if OoTMs are allowed on your turn. I think it's fairly
obvious that the clan hosers should not be benificial to the hosee, and
they're not, as long as OoTMs are restricted as per the revised rules.
And thus, I believe the original ( though badly worded ) version of the rules
meant to disallow OoTMs being played on your own turn.
Oh, and sorry to all the people who've heard too much about this.
Larrx...
In article <3njrfo$3...@news.bu.edu>, Larry Harriman <la...@bu.edu> wrote:
>I hate to start this discussion again, but I think I have a semi-new slant on
>the matter. I should say that I a) don't think that OoTMs played on your own
>turn unbalance the game, and b) think that they were never meant to be played
>on your turn. Here's why:
>
>Boons: The whole idea of doing a favor for your prey goes against the theme
>of the game, I believe these were intended to be cross-table cards. If OoTMs
>could be played on your turn, this would not be true.
The whole idea of doing *anybody* a favor is ultimately against the theme.
The idea of holding something (a debt) over someone is very much a part
of harrassing your Prey.
>
>Major Boon: This card is very similar in effect to deflection and telepathic
>misderection, and these cards can not be used in a two player end-game. If
>OoTMs are limited to "not your turn" this holds true for major boon as well,
Eh. Frenzy seems very much like a trap, but I don't see how that means
a rule is better than another.
>which seems natural.
>
>Brujah Frenzy: Of all the clan hosers, this is the only one which you would
>ever want to play on your own vampires ( as an unblockable bum's rush ). You
>can only do this if OoTMs are allowed on your turn. I think it's fairly
>obvious that the clan hosers should not be benificial to the hosee, and
>they're not, as long as OoTMs are restricted as per the revised rules.
Maybe that's why the card text says "...when a Brujah another Methuselah
controls takes an action..." If MooTs weren't intended to be played on your
own turn, why would they need this qualification? They obviously (heh!)
put it in there to prevent unblockable rushes *because* the design was to
let it be played at any time apprpriate (original rules).
>
>And thus, I believe the original ( though badly worded ) version of the rules
>meant to disallow OoTMs being played on your own turn.
And, thus, you have given me another argument to use. :-)
>
>Oh, and sorry to all the people who've heard too much about this.
Never too much :-=)
>
>Larrx...
>
--
-----
L. Scott Johnson (lsc...@crl.com)
Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rules' Monger
L. Scott Johnson (lsc...@crl.com) wrote:
: Maybe that's why the card text says "...when a Brujah another Methuselah: controls takes an action..." If MooTs weren't intended to be played on your
: own turn, why would they need this qualification? They obviously (heh!)
: put it in there to prevent unblockable rushes *because* the design was to
: let it be played at any time apprpriate (original rules).
Oh, hey it says that right there on the card text. Much apologies for
misremebering the card text. Maybe I just convinced myself that I was wrong
about OoTM cards...
Larrx...
In article <3nkc4v$h...@crl.crl.com>, L. Scott Johnson <lsc...@crl.com> wrote:
>In article <3njrfo$3...@news.bu.edu>, Larry Harriman <la...@bu.edu> wrote:>>Brujah Frenzy: Of all the clan hosers, this is the only one which you would
>>ever want to play on your own vampires ( as an unblockable bum's rush ). You
>>can only do this if OoTMs are allowed on your turn. I think it's fairly
>>obvious that the clan hosers should not be benificial to the hosee, and
>>they're not, as long as OoTMs are restricted as per the revised rules.>>Maybe that's why the card text says "...when a Brujah another Methuselah
>controls takes an action..." If MooTs weren't intended to be played on your
>own turn, why would they need this qualification? They obviously (heh!)
>put it in there to prevent unblockable rushes *because* the design was to
>let it be played at any time apprpriate (original rules).
This got me to thinking - the unblockable Bum's Rush still exists, although
it's hard to get to. You need a Brujah with Obfuscate and a Malkavian, and
Madness Network needs to be in play. Take an action with your Malkavian on
someone else's turn, Mask of 1000 Faces it to the Brujah, and Brujah
Frenzy him.
--
J. Hunter Johnson jhun...@io.com (Illuminati Online)
jeff.j...@columbiasc.attgis.com (Windows Desktop)
"Unlike entirely too many of what I'm told are members of my species,
I haven't opened my mind far enough for my brain to fall out." - D. Heffernan
J. Hunter Johnson <jhun...@pentagon.io.com> wrote:
>This got me to thinking - the unblockable Bum's Rush still exists, although
>it's hard to get to. You need a Brujah with Obfuscate and a Malkavian, and
>Madness Network needs to be in play. Take an action with your Malkavian on
>someone else's turn, Mask of 1000 Faces it to the Brujah, and Brujah
>Frenzy him.
This still doesn't work, because Brujah Frenzy specifies that you play it
on a Brujah another player controls.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
In article <3o3vu2$8...@nntp.msstate.edu>,
Charles Richard Robb <cr...@Ra.MsState.Edu> wrote:
>Thomas R Wylie (aa...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:>: J. Hunter Johnson <jhun...@pentagon.io.com> wrote:
>: >This got me to thinking - the unblockable Bum's Rush still exists, although
>: >it's hard to get to. You need a Brujah with Obfuscate and a Malkavian, and
>: >Madness Network needs to be in play. Take an action with your Malkavian on
>: >someone else's turn, Mask of 1000 Faces it to the Brujah, and Brujah
>: >Frenzy him.
>>Also Tom stated that you cannot play Bum's Rush or Arson with the Malk Network
>becauseaction cards can only be played on your turn. Sine you use the Network
>on someone elses turn, you lose the option to use action cards.
Unblockable Bum's Rush (TM) means playing a Brujah Frenzy on your own
acting Brujah, not playing the action card "Bum's Rush".
The effect of BF on your own Brujah is the same as an unblockable BR.
--
-----
L. Scott Johnson (lsc...@crl.com)
Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rulemonger
Thomas R Wylie (aa...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
: J. Hunter Johnson <jhun...@pentagon.io.com> wrote:
: >This got me to thinking - the unblockable Bum's Rush still exists, although
: >it's hard to get to. You need a Brujah with Obfuscate and a Malkavian, and
: >Madness Network needs to be in play. Take an action with your Malkavian on
: >someone else's turn, Mask of 1000 Faces it to the Brujah, and Brujah
: >Frenzy him.: This still doesn't work, because Brujah Frenzy specifies that you play it: on a Brujah another player controls.[ quoted text not captured ]
L. Scott Johnson <lsc...@crl.com> wrote:
>Unblockable Bum's Rush (TM) means playing a Brujah Frenzy on your own
>acting Brujah, not playing the action card "Bum's Rush".
>The effect of BF on your own Brujah is the same as an unblockable BR.
Except that you cannot play Brujah Frenzy on your own Brujah (card text,
and impossible given the out-of-turn card rules anyway).
[ quoted text not captured ]