New Cards

Hello all, Anyone have the spoilers on the new cards released in V:TES? Thanks, Gary

Gary S Cerefice (cere...@athena.mit.edu) wrote: : Hello all, : Anyone have the spoilers on the new cards released in V:TES? Hi Gary, I saw one of the new cards at the Spiel 95 in Essen on Thursday. It is an out of turn Master, costs 3 Pool and has the following effect: If you are bled for three or more (or more than three, don't remember), you may play Archon Investigation (cards name, of course). This will burn the bleeding Vampire. BTW, the new cards look great. Every type of card now has a different Background, they still have black borders, but now there is a thin ca. 1 mm red line between the border an the background. Oh, and the background of the reaction cards is IMO the best looking. It is not white, as some might have feared, it looks like a shattered window. Before anyone askes: the cards were from a test run, they are not available yet. The WoTC rep sait that the unlimited version would hit the stores in mid-november, with the DS expansion following three weeks later. Let's wait and see (and hope). Happy bleeding, Martin -- Martin Engelhardt mer...@fim1.informatik.uni-mannheim.de GB/GCS d? p+ c++++(++) l u+ e++/* m+(-) s /+ !n h f++ !g w- t++ r++ y@

Here's a few of the new card from Dork Sovereigns... Pentium Laptop equipment 2 pool +1.999999999873415 bleed THC Laced Blood Master out-of-turn (Picture; a spaced-out guy smoking a joint, Duck sneaking up behind him) Play when a vampire successfully hunts. The vampire immediatly untaps and attempts to bleed a random Methuselah. On subsequent turns, the vampire must hunt until she is at full capacity. (Munchies!) Overeaters Anonymous Master - Unique Location 2 pool (Picture; a stream of really, *really* fat people walking out of a building. Igo- the Hungry lurks in an alley nearby with a huge grin...) All your vampires gain +1 blood when hunting. Any vampire can burn Overeaters Anonymous as a (D) action, gaining 1 blood if successful. Abstract art painting unique equipment 1 pool (Picture; Uriah Winter holding a bizzare painting in front of him, hiding behind it. Anneke is staring at it raptly, an assault rifle lying at her feet.) Bearer may strike; combat ends if in combat with a Toreador. If so, the Toreador gains possession of the Painting. The Count Malkavian 6 capacity FOR DOM PRE tha 2... 2... 2 wonderful hand damage! Haa haa haa... Pizza Shift Political action Prince/Justicar Select a Methuselah who has more pizza than you. Divide up to # slices among the Methuselahs as you see fit. # is the number of Methuselahs currently in the game. Successful vote means the pizza is apportioned as you announced.

Mr JA Chapman thoughtfully stated: : This had better be a bad joke . Whats the point of pulse of the : Canaille or Conditioning if theyre gonna be a suicide attempt . Try a big : bleed and either your predator or prey is gonna toast one of youre vamps . : Everyone is gonna stock up on these , and real fast youre gonna see malk : and ventrue bleed decks disappear . SO what are they gonna do - limit a : deck to 2 cards of these ? Just what we need - more cards that are gonna : be unbalancing enough to require a fix . (and i hate limits especially low ones I wonder if the card only works if the user accepts the bleed first. If so, it isn't as powerful, they still have to lose at least six pool. It might force the heavy bleed deck to save up cards for a big bleed (although that is difficult given the restriction on conditioning/bonding/threats). But I agree that people would probably still use it, and it's gonna suck. Losing a vampire can be a mortal blow to a deck. Ewok -- //\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\\//\\ / Ewok Juan Burwell \ \ jmbu...@unix.amherst.edu jmbu...@amherst.edu / \\///\\///\\///\\///\\///\\///\\///\\///\\///\\//

Hi, I can confirm what Martin has posted. I was with him in Essen and saw this card! Martin Mauve (... I won't bleed no more ...)

Martin Jamieson <mm32...@minmet.uq.oz.au> wrote: >Either way its an out of turn master so anyone could use it (including >the people not being bled), a 3 pool burn by two methusalahs isn't too >much to pay to get rid of a nasty justicar or something. Then there's the >problem of the new 11 blood inner circle members they are bringing in >with dark soveriegns, a base bleed of 3...... why bother if you can't >bleed with them anyway... First, Archon Investigation can only be played if you are the one being bleed. Second, the minion has to be attempting a bleed in excess of 3 to use AI, not of 3, so the Inner Circle members can bleed normally without fear of it. Third, AI doesn't make the Inner Circle members' bleeds obselete any more than it makes superior Conditioning obsolete. If you're totally paranoid about AI, then you never bleed for more than 3, but if you take a chance occasionally, or catch someone when they've already burned their next master phase action, then you should be fine. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

: First, Archon Investigation can only be played if you are the one being : bleed. Second, the minion has to be attempting a bleed in excess of 3 : to use AI, not of 3, so the Inner Circle members can bleed normally : without fear of it. Third, AI doesn't make the Inner Circle members' : bleeds obselete any more than it makes superior Conditioning obsolete. : If you're totally paranoid about AI, then you never bleed for more than 3, : but if you take a chance occasionally, or catch someone when they've already : burned their next master phase action, then you should be fine. : : : Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc. This means that the inner circle vamps cant use ANY bleed modifier though . Eg the Tremere IC member cant safely use bonding to bleed at even a fairly mediocre level of stealth . And god help poor ozmo if he gets given a pulse of the canaille - a sure sign of a death wish . Your argument about using it when the master phase has been burned doesnt work either . This is because either your predator OR your prey is likely to want to take the opportunity to toast even a moderately good vamp . How often are BOTH of them going to be without their next master phase ? Hint guys , cut it back to something like putting bleeder into torpor . Or maybe make the minimum bleed something higher - even 4 or 5 would be MUCH more reasonable .Instant death for this sort of paltry bleed is ridiculous . And YOU CANT EVEN SUDDEN REVERSAL IT AS IT IS ON YOUR OWN TURN . This seems to be a spoiler to big bleed (esp S&B decks) . In environments without harsh card limits these decks are good but there are many ways to beat them - bounce , rush ,intercept . This cuts many types of bleed decks severely and unjustly . Whats gonna be next , a card which burns vamps with too many votes (damn , wish i hadnt played that Bewitching oration with Democritus) or gets a free burn of a vamp that does too much damage or aggro damage in combat (oops Rake shouldnt have blurred , now the archons are coming to get him) . This card spells the end of bleed decks using large vamps . Expect to see more weenie - mid sized bleed decks where the 3 pool just isnt worth it . Boy does Lucian feel like wallpaper now . anyone wanna buy a malk deck going cheap JA Chapman

jac...@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Mr JA Chapman) wrote: > This means that the inner circle vamps cant use ANY bleed modifier >though . Eg the Tremere IC member cant safely use bonding to bleed at even >a fairly mediocre level of stealth . And god help poor ozmo if he gets given >a pulse of the canaille - a sure sign of a death wish . Your argument about >using it when the master phase has been burned doesnt work either . This is >because either your predator OR your prey is likely to want to take the >opportunity to toast even a moderately good vamp . How often are BOTH of them >going to be without their next master phase If you read the beginning of what Tom said you'd notice that he said only the person being bled can use Archon Investigation. This was one thing that was a bit unclear before and certainly does make it a little fairer. Its still going to be a real pain in the ass though (especially since its only uncommon, ie. not that hard to get a few of them). Martin.

V:TES is now appearing in game stores (hopefully everywhere). I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who knows of the exact wording of the new additions (those cards not printed in Jyhad, including any wording changes from Jyhad cards to V:TES) would post them on the news group. And if anyone is selling V:TES singles yet please e-mail me. I would also like to know what the artwork is like as well (though I know this is harder to post than wordings, a description would be nice). Thanks in advance. ~Biomechanoid

In article <s291.99....@nmu.edu>, s2...@nmu.edu (Dave Andrews) writes: >I've started putting either Owl Companion or Aura Reading in my Agg. Dam. >decks because I'm starting to see Rotschreck all the time, and I can use >these cards to avoid it. Maybe Archon Investigation will put 2-3 Aura Readings >into the Malk decks. I'd say making a non-exciting card more useful is an >added bonus for AI besides just hosing those twisted S&B decks. ?! Aura Reading is a fantastic card for any deck with Auspex which gets into combat on a regular basis. You can use it to see what you're up against, or cycle your hand and increase your options for the combat. Plus you can always play it - it's never a hand jammer.

Mr JA Chapman <jac...@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote: >: First, Archon Investigation can only be played if you are the one being >: bleed. Second, the minion has to be attempting a bleed in excess of 3 >: to use AI, not of 3, so the Inner Circle members can bleed normally >: without fear of it. Third, AI doesn't make the Inner Circle members' >: bleeds obselete any more than it makes superior Conditioning obsolete. > This means that the inner circle vamps cant use ANY bleed modifier >though . Eg the Tremere IC member cant safely use bonding to bleed at even >a fairly mediocre level of stealth . Saying that the IC members with Dominate can never use bleed modifiers safely because of Archon Investigation is like saying a vampire without Fortitude can never engage a Gangrel in combat safely because of Protean. Yes, you will get hosed sometimes, but you'll be fine at other times. You have to look at the situation and decide what the risk is. People are not going to be loading up their decks with Archon Investigation, because it only helps in a relatively limited situation, so big bleeders will be ok much of the time. >...Your argument about >using it when the master phase has been burned doesnt work either . This is >because either your predator OR your prey is likely to want to take the >opportunity to toast even a moderately good vamp . How often are BOTH of them >going to be without their next master phase ?... Reread the first part of what I posted: Archon Investigation can only be played by the person who is being bled. [ quoted text not captured ]

Dave Andrews <s2...@nmu.edu> wrote: >I have a question, though, although an exact wording from the card will >probably answer my question. Is it a vampire that attempts 1 bleed for >greater than 3, or if the same vampire bleeds you with a laptop for 2, then >uses Freak Drive and comes back for 2 more, does that make him a legal target >for AI? Archon Investigation is only usable during a bleed in action in which you are being bled for more than 3 pool. In the example you give, AI cannot be played. [ quoted text not captured ]

rit...@cruzio.com wrote: : You are missing something major, however. If your opponent has no : cards in their hand with the new backs, you know that they can't have this : card. Furthermore, as Tom pointed out, if they already used their next master : phase, you are safe. : Now you are missing something major - like the 40% minimum - we want you to buy lotsa redundant VTES cards (ok thats a convocation rule so i may be being a bit unfair to WOTC here (a first!)) so the odds that you having no VTES cards are pretty poor.But like magic , how many non-tourney deck exist out there (note i will be happy to see them given current rules) : But, I must be playing a LOW power game... 4 Bleed for one action has : never been considered "Paltry". : 4 Bleed in one action - any vampire with sup Dom and conditioning.... Geee that took a lot of work to do - hence my argument for a greater minimum. : However, something to hose Earth-Meld wouldn't be out of line. (Maybe : a Thamaturgy card, you can't use Protean, Nyeah-Nyeah!) : : WHINE! Does this mean that SOMETHING HAD THE NERVE TO CHANGE THE : PLAYING FIELD?!? Has some asshole DARED to make things that you have to : prepare for and plan against?!? Just who do they think they are forcing you to : THINK when making a deck????? I dont mind the playing field changing , in fact something probably needed to be done about bleeding . What I would like to see is a game where bleed , combat and vote decks all have a reasonable chance of winning . I still think that this card is probably going to badly hurt bleed decks . Because of this , relatively combat and voting will improve. What I am hoping for is that this improvement is not excessive in order to promote a wider variety of strategies in use . The actual wording on the card may help this , but hows this for a timing question . When does deflection have to get played w.r.t AI ? Is the actual wording on the card 'attempting a bleed' or 'has already bled' . If it is the former as suggested by Tom's post ("attempting a bleed in excess of 3") why cant you burn the vamp (as the bleed is being attempted, and then deflect the bleed . (or does the bleed just disappear if the vamp is burned)You might want to check that there wording....... : : > anyone wanna buy a malk deck : > going cheap : > : > JA Chapman : > : : Ritaxis : -- : As to aura reading is that a combat or action mod ? As a combat card it wouldnt really help here....and youre gonna require a lot of them... In game world terms though (ok so its really got nothing to do with how VTES is played...) how is this meant to work . Like an archon finds a vamp being naughty and frags him - sorry i just cant see many vampires with archon status fragging Democritus so easily...... I still think WOTC needs to consider this card before it is released, as it is easier to fix now rather that later . Increase the bleed required or else reduce the penalty (vamp takes aggro equal to attempted bleed?,or maybe it should be played if the vampire was blocked but before combat occurs (like Millicent smith)).As of the moment only a bloodhunt or Millicent SMith will cause instant burning.Considering how severe a penalty this can be it needs to be thoughroughly considered before introduction . This has not always been the case in the past , but needs to be in the future. JAC

: : Saying that the IC members with Dominate can never use bleed modifiers safely : because of Archon Investigation is like saying a vampire without Fortitude can : never engage a Gangrel in combat safely because of Protean. Yes, you will : get hosed sometimes, but you'll be fine at other times. You have to look : at the situation and decide what the risk is. People are not going to be : loading up their decks with Archon Investigation, because it only helps : in a relatively limited situation, so big bleeders will be ok much of the time. Wrong - the penalty for facing a gangrel is your vampire going to torpor , or else the gangrel is likely to get bloodhunted . Also flack jackets dogdges , S:CE and sideslip also present methods to avoid this , as do Mariel and the Elysium . There isnt such a method of avoiding AI than just not bleeding for much or else making a deal with someone else to use a sudden reversal (yeah right!) . Not only does it stop the bleed but it wastes a vampire . If a big vampire is killed one card is all that is necessary . Kill Lucian and that Malk deck has got to do a lot to make up for the 10 loss . As much as it does for S&B , tap and bleed and bash and bleed gets it worse as it usually has to rely on only one vamp getting through and to make it work this one vamp needs to do a decent amount of damage - not just 3 points . : : >...Your argument about : >using it when the master phase has been burned doesnt work either . This is : >because either your predator OR your prey is likely to want to take the : >opportunity to toast even a moderately good vamp . How often are BOTH of them : >going to be without their next master phase ?... : : Reread the first part of what I posted: Archon Investigation can only be : played by the person who is being bled. : I missed that part , am sorry and have been flamed for it having deserved it over this point. : : Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for : aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc. : The best part of jyhad was the variety , but with the advent of VTES I can see some of this variety being lost due to poorly considered additions to the game which hose legitimate strategies far too easily for the cost and risk involved . Yes bleeding needed to be cut back . Elder Intervention (+2 int against bleeds) was a reasonable way to do this . AI and Justicar Retribution as they are , are not . Heck J.Ret is gonna make people really think about taking the inner circle members without votes to back them up . And the cost that this is going to be to many decks , is just too much (Gangrel bash and vote-just-to-keep-one-guy-alive - i dont think so ) hoping the game doesnt get munchkinised JAC

"Archon Investigation: Master (out of turn) (pay 3 pool) Only usable when a minion attempts to bleed you for more than 3 pool. The action is not successful. Burn the acting minion. This is not considered an act of diablerie." (c) 1995 Wizards of the Coast, Inc. yada yada Okay, to all you big bleeders out there: suck it up and take it like a real vamp! "omigod, check out Sudden Reversal! Might as well not play any Master cards, they might get Reversaled! Thanx again WotC" pfft! -scott (scott...@aol.com) "Fraudulent Misrepresentation!" - Zippy

In article <483gd0$9...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) writes: >Saying that the IC members with Dominate can never use bleed modifiers >safely because of Archon Investigation is like saying a vampire without > Fortitude can never engage a Gangrel in combat safely because of Protean. No, it's not, because that's not true. Celerity can Dodge/Additional Strike, Tremere can maneuver. You can determine your chances based on what's in your hand. > Yes, you will ,get hosed sometimes, but you'll be fine at other times. But you'll never know which is which (unless you're checking those irrelevant card backs).

ScottDiBer (scott...@aol.com) wrote: : Okay, to all you big bleeders out there: suck it up and take it like a : real vamp! : : "omigod, check out Sudden Reversal! Might as well not play any Master : cards, they might get Reversaled! Thanx again WotC" pfft! : : : -scott : (scott...@aol.com) : "Fraudulent Misrepresentation!" - Zippy Spoken like a true aol'er - no clues no vision . Get a master sudden reversed and you lose nothing - not even the pool payed for the master . I can see that youll just love the game when its cut down to a single viable strategy . Wow lookslike myvote deck is just sooooo ace it is unbeatable , now i just wish all those other weenies would get a life and not play exactly the same deck as me ...... Degenerate decks withstanding , its a sad loss for the game every time a type of deck becomes realistically unviable due to changes that werent necessary ,or do not add something positive and balanced to the game. Win Game -Moot Gives player 5 Vps and ousts everyone . I'd like to see that JAC ps : yeah i know WG is a:ridiculous and b: unlikely to work cos everyone would just keep stockingup on S.R's- but why have a normal sig when you can have a stoopid one . pps - and yeah madness net might save them malks- but bad luck to anyone else who wants to bleed much .

Stuart J. Pieloch (dsa...@prism.gatech.edu) wrote: : JA- : Read the above Line : If everything about this card is as I believe : it Requires that you HAVE BEEN BLED (past tense that action is concluded : and done and oh you actually burned the pool already) Ummm if the posted quoted text is correct then no the bleed only has to have been 'attempted' and will not 'be successful' . Thats right the card stops the bleed from happening AND burns the bleeder . : : Then YOU : (The person being bled, not you predator's predator, not anyone else) : need to burn 3 more pool (more than any current master) : (exc. Misd. if you really want to do that) : : That means say Didi Bleed with a Govern and Conditioning : That's 6 pool loss followed by a 3 pool loss : that's nine pool that you've lost That would be a fair way of doing it , but no the loss to the player of AI is only 3 pool . Even then you could telepathic counter the bleed to 4 and then burn Didi , but thats not the way the card was written so it is irrelevant(sp?) . ANd no Im not trying to go out of my way to point out that you didnt read the other postings properly , It is a failing Im regularly guilty of. : : Stu : -- : Stu Pieloch TLTT Players-Lord High And Mighty Potentate of the Known Universe JA Chapman

dsa...@prism.gatech.edu (Stuart J. Pieloch) wrote: >That means say Didi Bleed with a Govern and Conditioning >That's 6 pool loss followed by a 3 pool loss >that's nine pool that you've lost > >Not terribly poweful now is it? The card says that the bleed is not considered successful, therefore in your example above you only lose 3 blood. Sounding a little more powerful yet?...... Hmmmmm. should I take a 6 bleed, or pay 3 and burn their vampire...... It is a little supprising though that 3 of the new cards attempt to balance out stealth bleed decks, yet there are no new cards to balance out weenie vote decks? Oh well, I'm sure WotC have some master plan (yeah right). Martin.

>That means say Didi Bleed with a Govern and Conditioning >That's 6 pool loss followed by a 3 pool loss >that's nine pool that you've lost > Sorry but you don't take the bleed it says right on the card that the bleed is not successful so you only take the 3 pool loss. Errol

Has anyone thought of the fact that playing a bleed deck that never chooses to bleed more than three can cause/aggravate a hand jam in a prey that hold Archon Investigation? TJH

It might not hand jam,but as far as I'm concerned it would take up valuable room in the Library. Errol

[ quoted text not captured ] If you really shuffled your deck, AI doesn't jam. This is assuming he isn't stupid, and would discard an AI whenever he has 2 in his hand. In general, an OOT master at about 5% would hardly cause a hand jam, but the opponent's efficiency is reduced because he cannot bleed for more than 3. Meanwhile, he can still use bleed bounce on your smaller bleeds. -- "Live Life with Heart." Alan Kwan kw...@cs.cornell.edu

In article <48juug$1...@texas.nwlink.com>, "T.J. Hull" <t...@nwlink.com> writes: > Has anyone thought of the fact that playing a bleed deck that never >chooses to bleed more than three can cause/aggravate a hand jam in a >prey that hold Archon Investigation? I don't think AI is a card you would have in enough numbers to case a hand jam.

In article <s291.109...@nmu.edu>, s2...@nmu.edu (Dave Andrews) wrote: > In article <48a829$j...@mo6.rc.tudelft.nl> jo...@pa.twi.tudelft.nl (Johan Meijdam) writes: > >In a lot of gaming groups bleeding one bleed with +much bleed and +much > >stealth is enough to focus everyone's attention to you. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > A good sign that a deck type is out of control. If the whole table has to > team up against you, destroying the predator/prey relationship this game that > is a foundation for this game, then something needs to be done to check this > deck. > I'll agree with "gang up" being a sign of degeneracy, but as Johan said, "In a lot of gaming groups". In the places I've been, S&B "gang up" has only been the case under 4-card limits. There are many other instances that "gang up" is legitimately(sp?) needed. If there is only one political deck at a table, it has a free hand. The TABLE better stop it before it gets out of control. If there is a monster combat deck eating up its prey, and it has a weak grandprey, the TABLE better stop it. Why? With the vote deck, having a free hand to do whatever it wants whenever a vote gets to the table is handing the Methuselah a ton of power. Similarly with combat monster destroying its preu with the weak grandprey. Its virtually guaranteed 2 VP and 12 pool unless the table does something to stop it. The same with a S&B in the same position as the combat deck. > Realistically, how many Archon Investigation's would you pack in your deck? I > myself would pack 1, maybe 2. There are so many other decks than S&B, if I > draw it and my predator is not S&B, that equals wasted resources in my deck. >I don't know about you, but whenever I've built an S&B deck (which just got ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > too sick to do any more), I could stand to lose a vamp, even 2 or 3, because ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Please elaborate. I don't understand. > I'm still chopping away 6-8 pool per turn. I feel that Archon Investigation would be fine if it didn't nullify the bleed. Out of 7 decks, I don't play S&B, but I don't feel that S&B is degenerate. As written Archon Investigation is quite powerful. Perhaps if a Prince/Justicar were required to call it? I don't know. It might help if I saw the _exact_ text on the new cards, though. :) (As an aside, could someone start a thread on the _exact_ wording of the new V:tES cards, and _exact_ wording on text changes. I haven't bought any of the new cards, don't plan to, but do plan to play with new texts [and house rules :] ) "I can send and receive e-mail even over the internet"-aol commercial @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ # Adrian Sullivan "<insert favorite quote here>" # $ sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu -<insert name of those quoted here> @ @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ GAT/CS/O/WS d-(---) h++ s: a--- C(+++)$ UX+>+++$ P+ L E- W+>++ N++(+) o?> K+>++++ w--->? O? M++ V-->? PS+(-+) PE&++&- Y+>++ PGP(--) t 5->? X++&-- R+++&* tv&--- b++(+++)&+ DI D(+)&--- G+>+++ e+*>++++ h(+) r(+) y*+? /* Version 3.1 */ @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ Spoutingly yours 8^)

I think this will be like Golconda Inner Peace, we used to play big Vampires when we First started, then we all started using GIP then the trend to lower Vamps everyone stoped using GIP because it was a waste to have ubless you were using it on yourself, Now I'm starting to see a trend back to large Vamps but still seeing smaller ones to, I think this will also happen with AI. Errol

T.J. Hull (t...@nwlink.com) wrote: : Has anyone thought of the fact that playing a bleed deck that never : chooses to bleed more than three can cause/aggravate a hand jam in a : prey that hold Archon Investigation? : : TJH Problem is even 1 AI can wreck an opponents day if hes using mid sized to large vamps....Its not the sort of card you need a lot of and if you end up with a predator whos only doing <=3 bleeds you can just toss any multiples that come out . After someones had a big vamp burnt a few times theyll just stop trying (unless theyre playing malks because of perceived similarities in personality) . How stupid would it be if there was another OOTM that prevented damage and burnt a vampire if it did more than 2 damage in a single strike in combat . Yes you could still have a combat deck...theoretically - but it would suck pretty badly . The closest thing we had to this was Rotschreck an aggro - but this was just so popular in its 'spoiler' interpretation that it was ignored in favour of house rules . And surprise,surprise what card disappeared in VTES?........... The card is an attempt to hose rampant bleed decks . The problem is that malks S&B was the main tactic that needed to be limited , but this is probably the least affected . Using the madness network to bleed the person in their own turn (unless the card has changed significantly - I havent been able to view the new ones) Malks can still bleed for heaps without worrying about AI . ALso it furthers the trend towards using lots of small vamps . Most of the successful decks that ive seen are already based on <6 vampires . This card will see even fewer decks with large vampires , both cutting down the penatly if one gets burnt and allowing multiple small bleeds rathe than just one big one . This once again cuts back on the number of possible strategies and decreasing the variety . It does wreck decks like torreador and tremere bash and bleed and tap and bleed decks which typically rely on one large bleed a round . It was not needed especially with the other , somewhat fairer bleed killers . The new intercept card (whatever its name is ) is a much better response to S&B and specifically targets this tactic (ie it was the sort of card required) . JUsticar retribution can also be used to get rid of bleed monsters , but can both be defeated by a vote or intercepted . Cross table votes which cant be intercepted (by the victim) were the big danger here,but most of the targetted vamps (ie PUlse of The Canaille or IC members) have auspex and as such can use Eagles sight to stop this happening in most cases . What we have here is a spoiler whose effects are in no way reflected by its cost . Unbalanced cards like this IMO are the most detrimental to game balance (though some only become unbalanced in combos like zipgun -DBR) . For a small cost we have a method to dissuade people from big bleeds or to throw an unjust and painful penalty at the bleeder . Jyhad used to (in most cases) require more than a 'insert this one card to wreck entire strategy' solution . This made for better , more thinking , games . JA Chapman

[ quoted text not captured ] True. This was somewhat facetious :) TJH

In article <Pine.NXT.3.91.951119185731.518C-100000@pentode> The Corrupter <sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu> writes: >I'll agree with "gang up" being a sign of degeneracy, but as Johan said, >"In a lot of gaming groups". In the places I've been, S&B "gang up" has >only been the case under 4-card limits. There are many other instances >that "gang up" is legitimately(sp?) needed. If there is only one >political deck at a table, it has a free hand. The TABLE better stop it >before it gets out of control. If there is a monster combat deck eating >up its prey, and it has a weak grandprey, the TABLE better stop it. > >Why? > >With the vote deck, having a free hand to do whatever it wants whenever a >vote gets to the table is handing the Methuselah a ton of power. >Similarly with combat monster destroying its preu with the weak >grandprey. Its virtually guaranteed 2 VP and 12 pool unless the table >does something to stop it. The same with a S&B in the same position as >the combat deck. That still somewhat depends on how the player view `victory'. If they see the player with the most VP as winner and everybody else loses, then they will gang up in the described situations. But if they view 0 VP as a loss, 1 VP as a draw, 2VP as a marginal victory and more than 2 VP a big win, then it might be better to concentrate on your prey and guarantee a VP or 2 while ignoring the other side of the table. (Even if I contribute to ganging-up and knowck down that biggie, I may well end up with 0 VP, especially if the biggie is my grand-prey.) My conjecture is that the `one vote/push per meth' (with the stricter rule that the calling Meth. cannot push above his one vote on the P.A. card) rule will really restrict the power of vote decks. It might even encourage every player to put a few votes in his deck, since a random vote or two is more significant when there are simply less votes cast. We'll also see more negotiated votes, and some more intelligent use of cards like Bewitching Orations, etc. (Now, you can't use BO to pass a vote in a non-voting deck if there's another vote deck at the table.) [ quoted text not captured ]