Camarilla Vitae Slave?

Was it not reprinted? Do my eyes deceive me? Someone please tell me I'm wrong... -KB Prince O[f Harrisburg]

"isaphrael" <id77...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1101838502.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > Was it not reprinted? > Do my eyes deceive me? > Someone please tell me I'm wrong... Hmm? Why would you think it wouldn't be? I don't recall it being reprinted before and I got the impression White Wolf was going to reprint everything up to and including The Sabbat that hadn't been reprinted before except for Camille Devereux, Marianna Gilbert, and Dan Murdock. If you weren't expecting it, you should have been. Fred

[ quoted text not captured ] Be that as it may, it doesn't seem to have been included in this set. Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to play turbo-Lucita? Matt Morgan

[snipped] > Be that as it may, it doesn't seem to have been included in this set. > > Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come > up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to > play turbo-Lucita? > > Matt Morgan > Well, I've seen it work quite well in a MindRape/Baltimore's Purge deck with 6 copies of it.

"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@io.com> wrote in message news:Pine.LNX.4.44.041130...@fnord.io.com... > On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Frederick Scott wrote: > >> "isaphrael" <id77...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:1101838502.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >> > Was it not reprinted? >> > Do my eyes deceive me? >> > Someone please tell me I'm wrong... >> >> Hmm? Why would you think it wouldn't be? I don't recall >> it being reprinted before and I got the impression White >> Wolf was going to reprint everything up to and including >> The Sabbat that hadn't been reprinted before except for >> Camille Devereux, Marianna Gilbert, and Dan Murdock. If >> you weren't expecting it, you should have been. > > Be that as it may, it doesn't seem to have been included in this set. Ah! He meant it wasn't reprinted and it should have been. Sorry, I didn't get that. Well, you know, they have only so many slots and had to satisfy the pent-up demand for things like 'Vanish From the Mind's Eye' and all... No, I really don't know. Certainly, there was no reason that all the things that fell under the category of needing reprinting would necessarily come to the nice even number of 180. Still, I would think they could make a better choice for a card to leave out than Camarilla Vitae Slave. (Sigh...a new "chase card", I guess, to replace Shadow Step and Nephandus.) > Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come > up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to > play turbo-Lucita? I don't know exactly. But any card that conceivably grants a vampire the ability to gain any discipline on the map (let alone at superior, let alone changable from one turn to the next) must be highly useful as long as its cost isn't prohibitive (which CVS is certainly not). Come to think of it, I haven't used it either - but probably more because I forget to than that it's not useful, I think. Forgetting useful cards is a major reason my decks suck. Not sure what your excuse is. (Er, for not coming up with a use for CVS, I mean.) Fred

"Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message news:AB3rd.79888$EZ.9048@okepread07... > I don't know exactly. But any card that conceivably grants a vampire > the ability to gain any discipline on the map (let alone at superior, let > alone changable from one turn to the next) must be highly useful as long > as its cost isn't prohibitive (which CVS is certainly not). Come to > think of it, I haven't used it either - but probably more because I forget > to than that it's not useful, I think. DOH! Now I remember: it only gives you superior of a discipline you have at basic. Not what I was thinking. OK, that explains it. (To preempt a bunch of other posts!) Probably of limited utility, I agree. Fred

> I got the impression White Wolf was going to reprint everything up to and including The > Sabbat that hadn't been reprinted before except for Camille Devereux, Marianna Gilbert, > and Dan Murdock. If you weren't expecting it, you should have been. Every VAMPIRE, yes. Reprinting every previously-unprinted library card, like Camarilla Vitae Slave, was not what White Wolf had announced or even suggested. > Fred -John Flournoy

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Smiling Tom wrote: > > Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come > > up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to > > play turbo-Lucita? > > Well, I've seen it work quite well in a MindRape/Baltimore's Purge deck with > 6 copies of it. You mean to gain capacity so as to be better able to Mind Rape or Purge other fatties? I guess I can see that, but both Mind Rape and CVS cost 2 blood. Seems like it might be easier to play skill cards. My Purge decks always have blood management problems (although it's usually the table-hate problems that can cause them to lose). Matt Morgan

"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@io.com> escribió en el mensaje news:Pine.LNX.4.44.041130...@fnord.io.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Fueled by heart's blood is your friend then

"isaphrael" <id77...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<1101838502.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] No, your eyes do not deceive you. Neither was Spirit Summoning Chamber. Sigh.

"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@io.com> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.44.041130...@fnord.io.com>... > > Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come > up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to > play turbo-Lucita? > I have 3 of them and i want more. How about trading yours for some cards you want and i have :) ? As you say, you don't even use it... George

On 30 Nov 2004, Jyhad_addict wrote: > "Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@io.com> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.44.041130...@fnord.io.com>... > > > > Why are they so sought-after anyway? I have a few and haven't ever come > > up with a deck I've wanted to put them in. Is it just people who want to > > play turbo-Lucita? > > > > I have 3 of them and i want more. How about trading yours for some > cards you want and i have :) ? Sorry, but I'm sure inspiration will strike some day. I can't think of any impossible to get cards I'd want to trade them for anyway. Matt Morgan

Damn, what do they have against ridiculous cards for the sabbat clans? Oh well, at least we'll see some amusing !tremere ally decks...[instead of more efficient !tremere decks...]

On 30 Nov 2004 13:59:30 -0800, mrsa...@hotmail.com (SABR2TH) wrote: >> Was it not reprinted? >> Do my eyes deceive me? >> Someone please tell me I'm wrong... >> -KB Prince O[f Harrisburg] > >No, your eyes do not deceive you. Neither was Spirit Summoning Chamber. Sigh. This has actually been bothering me for a while. Unless I've been really shafted on card distribution (1 Box of everything from after VTES original, except orig Sabbat, + extra 1.5 of Sab War), that !Tremere seem to have the smallest amount of clan specific cards and Vampires. Was this a fluff based thing (!Trem are so small in the WoD universe, we don't need to support them much), a power based initiative (Well, they have Aus, Dom, Tha, we don't need to help them out anymore), or a lack of conceptuals (Got anything new for !Tremere? No? Well, maybe next set then). Morgan Vening

[ quoted text not captured ] How about 1 Caiphas ? :PPP George

Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<f0gqq01ggjkgrhf18...@4ax.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I concur. !Tremere are still sorta screwed: - They only have 1/2 of an Advanced Vampire (I figure that Goratrix and Marcus Vitel should each count as 1/2 for each of their respective Basic/Advanced clans). The Brujah, Gangrel, and Tzimisce each have 2 full Advanced vampires while the !Tremere only have 1/2 and the Toreador, Giovanni, Ravnos, and Setites have none. =( - Just about all of the major Sabbat clans have 24 non-Advanced vampires. The !Tremere only have 23. Although this is slightly mitigated by the fact that they have the same number of choices in 2/3 and the !Tremere might have an initial edge in Group 3/4, it's still frustrating that the !Tremere are down a vamp. Not to mention they are far far weaker in Group 1/2. Maybe they can compensate with a fullblooded Group 2 Advanced vamp for the !Tremere. - Pugfar is so lonely! There's only a single Tremere Antitribu Gargoyle slave while there are FOUR Tremere Gargoyle Slaves. We want our pets! - The !Tremere are still down a clan card (this is because all the other Sabbat clans got a new clan card in Sabbat War and the !Tremere were never given one to compensate). The average Sabbat clan has 8 clan cards (the Lasombra and Tzimisce have 9) while the !Tremere only have 7. BTW: I am excluding Create Gargoyle, Defender of the Haven, and Soul of the Earth from this count because they should not count towards the !Tremere's quota any more than Derange (formerly a Dementation card) should count against the !Malks or Feral Spirit should count against the !Gangrels. C'mon! Give us a break and let the !Tremere finally catch up with the other Sabbat clans for once. Stop the hate'in! - Eric Chiang P.S. The only thing I am REALLY grateful for is that Dauntain Black Magician was NOT reprinted. Having Goratrix Advanced around is already bad enough... :'(

> DOH! Now I remember: it only gives you superior of a discipline you have > at basic. Not what I was thinking. OK, that explains it. (To preempt > a bunch of other posts!) Probably of limited utility, I agree. > > Fred Hum, wait. It also gives you one more level of capacity. And they are stackable ? And they require a Lasombra but the card text now seems to be "the vampire with this card", implying you could transfer it to another (Heidelbergh...) ? I have 2 and want more... -- Orpheus ------------------------------- Come suffer with me (man can only rape his mother for so long) (will time erase the human race ?)

echia...@yahoo.com (Eric Chiang) wrote in message news:<7814d3af.04120...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I wish the !TRE received a permanent effect master card like Chantry (Recure isn't even close). A !TRE version of Arcane Library would also be nice. A quick Monger search reveals a healthy favoritism of TRE to !TRE library cards. That's always been a bummer :(

[ quoted text not captured ] Not every Vampire was reprinted. I'm missing the 4 !Brujah: Bronwen, Sela, Dodd, Hugo. Did nobody notice they're missing? Strange. WW reprinted the !Gangrel, though there will be a Starter for them in KMW. Perhaps a mistake and !Gangrel were put in instead of the planned !Brujah? Carl

[ quoted text not captured ] The 4 !Brujah (Bronwen, Sela, Dodd, Hugo) were not reprinted, while the !Gangrel (who get a Starter in KMW) were... Strange nobody noticed that yet. Carl

On 2 Dec 2004 01:02:25 -0800, Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@aon.at> wrote: > The 4 !Brujah (Bronwen, Sela, Dodd, Hugo) were not reprinted, while the > !Gangrel (who get a Starter in KMW) were... > Strange nobody noticed that yet. They were in the preconstructed Brujah Antitribu deck. -- Bye, Daneel

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:25:51 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > "Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message > news:opsidwmi...@news.chello.hu... >> Might I inquire whether in the name of consistency (or >> somesuch) WW ever plans to release [with the new layout] >> those crypt cards which were reprinted by them before >> adapting the new layout? 'cause I still can only play my >> G2-3 Ventrue Antitribu deck with my illegal, unofficial >> old layout remakes of the newer G2-3 cards (Muchas gracias, >> Damnans!), if I want my crypt to have a uniform look. >> >> Just curious. > > It's possible. Good to know. >> On a similar note, is it legal on a tournament to completely >> cover a card with a thin sheet of paper that has both the >> original artwork and all the detailed abilities of the card? >> For example, lets say I use a copy of Blackhorse Tanner. He >> is in a thick opaque-backed sleeve. I slide a thin piece of >> paper in front of him that has his name, original art, clan >> symbol, capacity, group, illustrator name, exact disciplines >> and most recent text box, but uses the old Ventrue Antitribu >> layout (golden background, no status bar). > > Sure. So long as the real card is in there and the extra stuff > (sleeve, etc.) isn't misleading. Cool. Whining's over for me. ;) Where was that FileMaker... >> Since some cards are printed in two layouts and some even with >> multiple art, I'm sure the layout wouldn't confuse anyone. >> Also, since some cards got massive errata, I'm sometimes using >> little pieces of paper with the most recent text anyway (no >> art, just text for clarity). These two points seem to yield a >> logical and reassuring conclusion... > > Correct. Thanks! -- Bye, Daneel

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsidwmi...@news.chello.hu... > Might I inquire whether in the name of consistency (or > somesuch) WW ever plans to release [with the new layout] > those crypt cards which were reprinted by them before > adapting the new layout? 'cause I still can only play my > G2-3 Ventrue Antitribu deck with my illegal, unofficial > old layout remakes of the newer G2-3 cards (Muchas gracias, > Damnans!), if I want my crypt to have a uniform look. > > Just curious. It's possible. > On a similar note, is it legal on a tournament to completely > cover a card with a thin sheet of paper that has both the > original artwork and all the detailed abilities of the card? > For example, lets say I use a copy of Blackhorse Tanner. He > is in a thick opaque-backed sleeve. I slide a thin piece of > paper in front of him that has his name, original art, clan > symbol, capacity, group, illustrator name, exact disciplines > and most recent text box, but uses the old Ventrue Antitribu > layout (golden background, no status bar). Sure. So long as the real card is in there and the extra stuff (sleeve, etc.) isn't misleading. > Since some cards are printed in two layouts and some even with > multiple art, I'm sure the layout wouldn't confuse anyone. > Also, since some cards got massive errata, I'm sometimes using > little pieces of paper with the most recent text anyway (no > art, just text for clarity). These two points seem to yield a > logical and reassuring conclusion... Correct. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:11:55 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > "Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message > news:opsidkjr...@news.chello.hu... [ quoted text not captured ] > Correct. The tins do not contain any cards that WW has already printed. Might I inquire whether in the name of consistency (or somesuch) WW ever plans to release [with the new layout] those crypt cards which were reprinted by them before adapting the new layout? 'cause I still can only play my G2-3 Ventrue Antitribu deck with my illegal, unofficial old layout remakes of the newer G2-3 cards (Muchas gracias, Damnans!), if I want my crypt to have a uniform look. Just curious. On a similar note, is it legal on a tournament to completely cover a card with a thin sheet of paper that has both the original artwork and all the detailed abilities of the card? For example, lets say I use a copy of Blackhorse Tanner. He is in a thick opaque-backed sleeve. I slide a thin piece of paper in front of him that has his name, original art, clan symbol, capacity, group, illustrator name, exact disciplines and most recent text box, but uses the old Ventrue Antitribu layout (golden background, no status bar). Since some cards are printed in two layouts and some even with multiple art, I'm sure the layout wouldn't confuse anyone. Also, since some cards got massive errata, I'm sometimes using little pieces of paper with the most recent text anyway (no art, just text for clarity). These two points seem to yield a logical and reassuring conclusion... -- Bye, Daneel

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsidkjr...@news.chello.hu... [ quoted text not captured ] Correct. The tins do not contain any cards that WW has already printed. -- [ quoted text not captured ]

mrsa...@hotmail.com (SABR2TH) wrote in message news:<4112c5a.04113...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Same goes for Lyndhurst Estate - why? who would choose to NOT print that card? over say... writ of acceptance.? anyone have a lyndhurst they want to trade? takecare, jds

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsidwmi...@news.chello.hu... > Might I inquire whether in the name of consistency (or > somesuch) WW ever plans to release [with the new layout] > those crypt cards which were reprinted by them before > adapting the new layout? 'cause I still can only play my > G2-3 Ventrue Antitribu deck with my illegal, unofficial > old layout remakes of the newer G2-3 cards (Muchas gracias, > Damnans!), if I want my crypt to have a uniform look. *snrk* "...in the name of consistency..."?!? Ah, I love how we react to this. (And make no mistake, I do it too.) "SCREW YOU WHITE WOLF FOR CHANGING THE CARD LAYOUT!!!...Now we have to rebuy our entire collection to get that 'uniform look'." My, aren't we just the perfect little angry consumers? That'll show 'em! Hoo, boy, can't mess with us! Fred, your cranky cynicism awareness counselor

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:05:21 -0700, Frederick Scott <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > *snrk* "...in the name of consistency..."?!? Just the sugar-coating. I mean, I can't just say that... > Ah, I love how we react to this. (And make no mistake, I do it too.) > "SCREW YOU WHITE WOLF FOR CHANGING THE CARD LAYOUT!!!...Now we have > to rebuy our entire collection to get that 'uniform look'." ...yeah, this. I said it a coupla' times but the shitty stick phenomenon is pretty obvious. I mean, it's not like I (or anyone) could rewind time for VTES. We were screwed, yes, but we might as well just dress up and go on with our lives else we catch a cold. ;) > My, aren't we just the perfect little angry consumers? That'll > show 'em! Hoo, boy, can't mess with us! Yeah! I'll show them! They think they can shove it down my throat but NO! I'll be asking more! ;) Really, IMHO tolerating WW's lack of aesthetic sense is the price to pay for great rules and cards. In addition to the cost of the boosters, of course. ;) That, and I'll print LSJ's response to my question, and use my unofficial card fabrications on tournaments with impunity, basically avoiding the problem altogether. I don't care how Blackhorse Tanner looks originally, on my fabricated card he still has the old layout, my aesthetic sense is satisfied, and I'm happy again. ;) (Plus, it is interesting how most people _don't notice_ that his background has changed. They see his familiar picture, the clan background, and never realize that this background is not that background... Odd. Maybe I'm too sensitive to this kind of crap.) > Fred, your cranky cynicism awareness counselor ;) -- Bye, Daneel

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsifpt7...@news.chello.hu... > Really, IMHO tolerating WW's lack of aesthetic sense is the price > to pay for great rules and cards. In addition to the cost of the > boosters, of course. ;) It's not White Wolf's "lack of aesthetic sense" that annoys me about this. I think I liked the old layout better than the new but the difference isn't much and it's really not the point. The point is that WHITE WOLF chose to change the layout so in the "interests of consistency" WE go out and buy a bunch more cards. In fact, this demonstrates the real reason the layout change was bullshit: the old layout couldn't possibly be so bad that it was worth causing the mixing of two different layouts in the same deck. We demonstrate this every time we vote with our feet and buy a new card only because we want to avoid mixed layout decks. So in the end, we reward them for doing something that was an incredibly bad thing they did to us. Of course, to be accusatory about this, one would have to have telepathic knowledge that it was done for this reason and not the ones they gave at the time. I am no telepath and so cannot make that accusation. So instead, I just resign myself to being cranky and cynical. Fred

freak...@gmail.com (freakdrivr) wrote in message news:<5b657965.04120...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] This is a joke right? Lyndhurst Estate is the equipment equivalent to AWE, but isn't that good without the Voter Cap to back it up. I think I've used it in 1 Tremere Prince/Archon Deck. Writ of Acceptance is useful for a variety of reasons, although just as equally marginal. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

In message <5b657965.04120...@posting.google.com>, freakdrivr <freak...@gmail.com> writes: >Same goes for Lyndhurst Estate - why? who would choose to NOT print >that card? over say... writ of acceptance.? anyone have a lyndhurst >they want to trade? Perhaps they thought "Oh, actually, one of the decks for the next expansion would be good for that." Of course, they might not have, but it's a possibility. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Who's ever heard of that, though! EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Designing a deck that just calls votes. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D That's crazy talk, there.

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:07:57 -0700, Frederick Scott <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > It's not White Wolf's "lack of aesthetic sense" that annoys me about > this. I think I liked the old layout better than the new but the > difference isn't much and it's really not the point. The point is > that WHITE WOLF chose to change the layout so in the "interests of > consistency" WE go out and buy a bunch more cards. In fact, this > demonstrates the real reason the layout change was bullshit: the old > layout couldn't possibly be so bad that it was worth causing the mixing > of two different layouts in the same deck. We demonstrate this every > time we vote with our feet and buy a new card only because we want to > avoid mixed layout decks. I don't think WW really had this chain of thought. I'm not psychic either, so I cannot be sure, but given how a lot of players (dare I risk the vast majority?) simply don't give a rat's ass about layout or backgrounds, I doubt it. Also, the very players who were pissed by the change (and strive for consistency even if that means having two sets of each vampire) were culled by the changes. I know people who looked at the new layout and stopped playing; I'm sure I did not buy that much more as they would have bought had they remained active players. -- Bye, Daneel

> > Really, IMHO tolerating WW's lack of aesthetic sense is the price > > to pay for great rules and cards. In addition to the cost of the > > boosters, of course. ;) > The Post-Anarchs layout is my favourite, followed immediately by the Jyhad layout. > The point is that WHITE WOLF chose to change the layout so in the > "interests of consistency" WE go out and buy a bunch more cards. I always figured it had more to do with having to pay royalties to Wizards or grumpy artists for the old art.

"Gregory Stuart Pettigrew" <ethe...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net> wrote in message news:2004120519...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net... [ quoted text not captured ] Well, 'grumpy artists' aren't the issue. WW can and did change card art whenever they choose while using the old layout. In fact, they've frequently used old art on the new layout. So I'm confused why these two issues would be connected. I have no information that WW was paying Wizards any royalties for using the old layout. If true and if that were the reason they discontinued it, I would certainly be more sympathetic. Fred

XZealot wrote: > freak...@gmail.com (freakdrivr) wrote in message news:<5b657965.04120...@posting.google.com>... > > mrsa...@hotmail.com (SABR2TH) wrote in message news:<4112c5a.04113...@posting.google.com>... > > > "isaphrael" <id77...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<1101838502.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>... > > > > Was it not reprinted? > > > > Do my eyes deceive me? > > > > Someone please tell me I'm wrong... > > > > -KB Prince O[f Harrisburg] > > > > > > > > > No, your eyes do not deceive you. Neither was Spirit Summoning Chamber. Sigh. > > > > Same goes for Lyndhurst Estate - why? who would choose to NOT print > > that card? over say... writ of acceptance.? anyone have a lyndhurst > > they want to trade? > > This is a joke right? Lyndhurst Estate is the equipment equivalent to > AWE, but isn't that good without the Voter Cap to back it up. > No - i'm serious - regardless how crappy the card is (yeah it's not the best voter card by a long shot) i'd still like to trade for it would you trade me a copy? hit me up at freakdrivr at gmail.com thanks jds