Suspension of Disbelief and Star Wars Monopoly

This may not seem relevant at first but last weekend we got bored of playing vampire so my mate rifled through his cupoboard and pulled out a Monopoly Star Wars style. Now I've been playing Monopoly since I was knee high and once you know the ins and out of it and if you play the game with others who know the game then winning ultimately comes down to chance. Pretty boring. I found though when I played Star Wars version that the theme added a whole new dimension. I forgot about winning so much and had a lot of fun simply because I could buy and own the Death Star, Coruscant etc... It got me thinking. I enjoy VTES for much the same reason. The game mechanics are pretty good and I find building a deck challenging and satisfying if it wins, but the fun comes from the idea underlying the game, ie I'm an ancient methusela controlling vampires in a war against others. I'm assuming that deep down its the same for most of you. In terms of the new expansion, I'm wondering whether WW have developed anything interesting into the storyline (such that it is) to explain the restrictions on crypt construction. While we have been told that the rule is there to stop crypts from being 'overbalanced' there has been no convincing explanation that fits into the underlying premise of the game. In those terms, I simply cannot believe that two vampires from the same clan cannot fight side by side with each other because a little number 3 on the card says that they can't. Is this important to anyone else? Did anyone think about this when designing CE? Thoughts?

"John Alston Campbell" <jra...@bigpond.com> wrote > > I enjoy VTES for much the same reason. The game mechanics are pretty good > and I find building a deck challenging and satisfying if it wins, but the > fun comes from the idea underlying the game, ie I'm an ancient methusela > controlling vampires in a war against others. I'm assuming that deep down > its the same for most of you. Honestly, not really... My first exposure to the 'World of Darkness' was through Jyhad, and I was very impressed by the rich mythology that White Wolf had created. I even tried the RPG though I have never been a big 'gamer' (well, until that point). I still enjoy the occasional tabletop game of vampire, though it's difficult now to find players who aren't so bad that they make me physically ill. Although I do love the theme, and have always loved the mythology of vampires, it doesn't really have much to do with my enjoyment of V:tES any more. For example, I find the Daughters of Cacophany to be the most ridiculous waste of wordiage in the World of Darkness bestiary, but I still played them at the last tournament because I thought they'd be effective. I don't call a vote and think 'this is my vampire trying to raise a concern at a Conclave'. I just think in terms of the cards, the mechanics and what it takes to win. It's often been said here that the game could be about dogshit and people would still play. Now I don't think that I would have originally gotten into the game if it was about dogshit, but at this point I really do care more about the game mechanics than about the theme involved. But since White Wolf's goal is to attract new players (and I support them in this goal), I think it would be *unwise* to change the theme to dogshit, especially this late in the game's life (Though a Nosferatu named 'Dogshit' would be amusing). > In terms of the new expansion, I'm wondering whether WW have developed > anything interesting into the storyline (such that it is) to explain the > restrictions on crypt construction. While we have been told that the rule > is there to stop crypts from being 'overbalanced' there has been no > convincing explanation that fits into the underlying premise of the game. > In those terms, I simply cannot believe that two vampires from the same clan > cannot fight side by side with each other because a little number 3 on the > card says that they can't. What if one of those vampires has shuffled off their immortal coil? One thing that I really like about the latest White Wolf additions to the World of Darkness backstory is that it is *ongoing*. I really like that the Assamites found a way to rid themselves of their curse. I love that the Cappadocians have come back in the form of Harbingers of Skulls (or have they?) I love that the Gangrel left the Camarilla (and made the Brujah look like hypocrites :) (I don't like that the Malkavians inherited Dementation through a 'virus' in the Madness Network, but that's because I hate Malkavians in general) I don't know if this is a common thing for other RPGs, or if they mostly exist in a 'static' world. But I've actually purchased some of the latest RPG books just to find out what has changed, even though I haven't played the RPG for several years. It makes sense to keep V:tES current with the RPG where possible, though not at *any* cost. Careful consideration is needed. The Ventrue Antitribu in the RPG for example now have PRE DOM FOR (like the main clan) rather than the AUS DOM FOR (that was apparently a misprint in one of the old Sabbat books). People like having a different combination of disciplines to try and we already have enough PRE DOM FOR already that there's not much point duplicating them. I personally would rather see the !Ventrue in V:tES stay as they are and not change, though a few with PRE added are not unwelcome. On the other hand, the Malkavians who now have DEM instead of DOM only add to the utility of DEM in general (it was always one of the most underused disciplines I think). I'd also like to see more SER POT PRE (Warrior Setites) and other interesting combinations. The RPG should be used for inspiration, and the attraction of new players should be a consideration, but most definitely *not* if it ends up messing with the V:tES formula, which to my mind already works extremely well. If it ain't broke... Cheers, WES

"John Alston Campbell" <jra...@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:<HqUV8.29751$Hj3....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I share your point on the underlying game idea. I just dont see how WW could explain that now, it is possible for a DoC, a Baali, a Ravnos and a Ganrel to fight side-by-side, but not for a group of specific Brujah to do it (for example). The move WW made was to reflect the WOD changes, and avoid having to create a prince for Pawtuckett, or Homer Prince of Springfield...

I'm an ancient methusela > controlling vampires in a war against others. I'm assuming that deep down > its the same for most of you. My thoughts exactly. If I want to influence out Arika and Wynn to do my bidding, then who's to tell me otherwise? I am the ancient Methusela in charge, after all. I simply cannot believe that two vampires from the same clan > cannot fight side by side with each other because a little number 3 on the > card says that they can't. Again you hit the nail on the head. I got Duck, Ox and Beast in one deck and they mix just fine, unlike the other Cam clans who don't share the same discipline spread vs. their Sabbat counterparts. And if I happen to find a Nossie in the new set that fits in, I don't see why I shouldn't put the little sucker in, too. You're right -- unless there's a storyline condition, the new number 3 rule sure as hell doesn't make sense to me

John Alston Campbell wrote: > In terms of the new expansion, I'm wondering whether WW have developed > anything interesting into the storyline (such that it is) to explain the > restrictions on crypt construction. While we have been told that the rule > is there to stop crypts from being 'overbalanced' there has been no > convincing explanation that fits into the underlying premise of the game. > In those terms, I simply cannot believe that two vampires from the same clan > cannot fight side by side with each other because a little number 3 on the > card says that they can't. > > Is this important to anyone else? Did anyone think about this when > designing CE? Thoughts? One possible explanation (meant for those to whom this is important; this is not part of the official ruleset, obviously): A Methuselah's power doesn't extend to having his finger on the (dead) pulse of *every* vampire in existence. The group or pair of groups you choose represents the vampires you're aware of. The 12+ cards in your crypt represent the vampires you've spent the time to track down. The four you draw in your opening uncontrolled region are the ones you've put yourself in a position to begin influencing. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

> Again you hit the nail on the head. I got Duck, Ox and Beast in one > deck and they mix just fine, unlike the other Cam clans who don't > share the same discipline spread vs. their Sabbat counterparts. And if > I happen to find a Nossie in the new set that fits in, I don't see why > I shouldn't put the little sucker in, too. Like he said, your the big fat nasty and these clan mates will do what you tell them or get squashed. But who is to say that they are fighting side by side? One havens in Vegas, and the other lives in LA. > > You're right -- unless there's a storyline condition, the new number > 3 rule > sure as hell doesn't make sense to me How does this sound... On a dark and stormy night in late October (1996) Emarson Brydges pr got over run and torn to peices by a forward patrol of the sabbat roving through the streets of Dc. The new CamEd follows that back ground story of the WoD. The old school vtes apperently did as well (though I am told very losely). Times change and so has the Wod. I like the updated version better. I guess you have to ask yourself if the concept of 12 clone copies of Jimmy Dunn beating the hell out of you and ripping your arms off is an appealing Idea? Is the concept of that just awful weenie pres vote deck perhaps a little two degenerate with 12 clone copies of Giddion Fontain, and at least 6 Hostile takeovers? Before you answer that, remember that there are people out there like me who have been collecting cards from this game since it hit the shelfs and have 20+ copies of some rares, not to mention the ridiculas # of uncomons and commons. I tend to not build degenerate bs like this, but am completly capable of doing so when it suits me. The point behind this is that the sleeze (degenercy) only gets worse as you add in more highly tuned discipline sets. Thematically it makes sense as well. Is it possible to have the Bruja Justicar (the "Don") and the Bruja Justicar (Jaroslav) in the same deck? Last I heard the Justicar title is Singular. I guess that they were attempting to make an evolving groving (thriving ) thing out of the WoD. If you are unhappy with the changes you don't necessarily need to use the new cards. If you fear change, tuck your self back into your shell and party like it's still 1999. I for one Embrace the changes and look forward to the new CamEd. It is an exciting and refreshing change. I can't wait to see what the players in my group can build once they finally get some real cards. I am also very excited to not have to hear people whining about their inabillity to get access to 2nd's and 5th's ect. Just my $.03cdn

"Wes" <gh...@NYETSPAMmnsi.net> wrote in message news:<ag9j0...@enews1.newsguy.com>... > (I don't like that the Malkavians inherited Dementation through a 'virus' in > the Madness Network, but that's because I hate Malkavians in general) Not exactly true. Malkavians always had Dementation. As part of the treaty that formed the Camarilla, a couple of very old Malks did *something* (possibly using the Madness Network, which is actually Malkav himself) to change the Camarilla Malkavian discipline to Dominate, as that was less threatening to the other clans. The Sabbat Malks never got "fixed." Now it's wearing off, and they're going back to how they were, according to some of the White Wolf material. JSpektr

"jspektr" <jsp...@sprynet.com> wrote > > Not exactly true. Malkavians always had Dementation. As part of the > treaty that formed the Camarilla, a couple of very old Malks did > *something* (possibly using the Madness Network, which is actually > Malkav himself) to change the Camarilla Malkavian discipline to > Dominate, as that was less threatening to the other clans. The Sabbat > Malks never got "fixed." > > Now it's wearing off, and they're going back to how they were, > according to some of the White Wolf material. Ahhh... well this must have changed then. The story I had heard was different. I never did read the Malkavian Revised though because... well... I can't stand the &^%$ing Malks as I mentioned before. Your story is more plausible though. Cheers, WES

"Wes" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:<agchr...@enews1.newsguy.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Thanks. I'm not 100% on all the details, as I don't have the Malkavian Clanbook either, this is based on what friends told me was in it, and other snippets here and there. If someone else knows different, please post so. Malkav transending his physical form to become the psychic web that links his children certainly makes more sense than how the Network used to be explained (basically, it wasn't, but then Malkavians also used to be able to see Chimeric reality and go to Arcadia with a 6th level Obfuscate power). JSpektr - really liking recent White Wolf stuff, up until the last few months. Havens, Mafia and Possessed really didn't do much for me.

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D28A614...@white-wolf.com>... > John Alston Campbell wrote: > > In terms of the new expansion, I'm wondering whether WW have developed > > anything interesting into the storyline (such that it is) to explain the > > restrictions on crypt construction. While we have been told that the rule > > is there to stop crypts from being 'overbalanced' there has been no > > convincing explanation that fits into the underlying premise of the game. > > In those terms, I simply cannot believe that two vampires from the same clan > > cannot fight side by side with each other because a little number 3 on the > > card says that they can't. > > > > Is this important to anyone else? Did anyone think about this when > > designing CE? Thoughts? > > One possible explanation (meant for those to whom this is important; this is > not part of the official ruleset, obviously): > > A Methuselah's power doesn't extend to having his finger on the (dead) pulse > of *every* vampire in existence. The group or pair of groups you choose > represents the vampires you're aware of. The 12+ cards in your crypt represent > the vampires you've spent the time to track down. The four you draw in your > opening uncontrolled region are the ones you've put yourself in a position to > begin influencing. Here's my thoughts on the subject. As far as I know, WotC didn't use any of the World of Darkness storyline vampires when creating the jyhad set. They didn't include anyone in the storyline until Dark Sovereigns. Perhaps this is more a matter of White Wolf doing what they said they wanted (replacing the old base set with a new one), making the vamps match the story, and doing it in a way which doesn't piss off everyone (which would be the case if they just outright banned jyhad/vtes vamps). Now you can play a "More or less true to World of Darkness Deck" (2&3) or a "Not really true to World of Darkness Deck" (1&2). My thoughts... Instantiation of Absurdity Salubri Primogen of Northgate (Seattle)