Random Questions About KoT (not rules)

So not that there are any (likely) actual answers to these questions, but maybe some folks have some clever insight: A) Why no Parity Shift reprint? It is one of the most powerful cards (if not the most powerful card) available to the Camarilla. Not reprinting it doesn't leave it out of play, it just makes it that much harder for newer players to get ahold of them. Not that they are particularly hard to get, but still. Makes limited sense to me. B) Why reprint IR Goggles when printing Light Intensifier Goggles in the same set? They do essentially the same thing. Or at least they aren't different enough really to justify needing both of them in the set. C) Alonso Petrodon. Why does he just look like, ya know, a guy? Baron Diudonne looks mostly like a normal guy, but with a definite "creepy 1940's little kid" vibe. And Nichodemus is kinda gnarly and at least young. But the Nosferatu Justicar? Really? D) Why do the Inner Circle hate the Nosferatu? Harrod is the suckiest of the original IC members. And Josef von Bauren? DEM and cel? Are you kidding me? No bounce discipline. No fortitude. There is one other Nosferatu with dem. Man. I tell ya. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?" -Gaff

Would be hard to agree with you more. The Nosferatu got the shaft, Parity Shift should have been printed, it is a major card

On Nov 23, 2:25 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > So not that there are any (likely) actual answers to these questions, > but maybe some folks have some clever insight: > > C) Alonso Petrodon. Why does he just look like, ya know, a guy? Baron > Diudonne looks mostly like a normal guy, but with a definite "creepy > 1940's little kid" vibe. And Nichodemus is kinda gnarly and at least > young. But the Nosferatu Justicar? Really? > > Peter D Bakija In the novels Petrodon apparently was quite vain and "good-looking" when alive. I think he used his obfuscate to disguise himself and had a sculpture or something done in it.

In article <a6de06c0-3a20-4b05...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com>, vladc...@gmail.com wrote: > In the novels Petrodon apparently was quite vain and "good-looking" > when alive. I think he used his obfuscate to disguise himself and had > a sculpture or something done in it. Ah, good enough. I was secretly hoping he had, like, bat wings or something. But then he'd probably have flight... [ quoted text not captured ]

Nosferatu are not shafted. They get best new card - Warsaw Station is great [untap effect on location ? great :D - so what if i have to tap it as i announce the action ? i have OBFUSCATE and LABIRYNTH anyway] Also, do not underestimate DEM. Check Touch of Clarity first. No bounce ? yeah - no conditioning for you :>

On Nov 23, 5:07 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > Nosferatu are not shafted. I didn't say they were shafted. I just said that their IC member is, once again, the Mayor of Lamesville. > Also, do not underestimate DEM. Check Touch of Clarity first. No > bounce ? yeah - no conditioning for you :> Meh. I'd have taken AUS or dom or even for *wayyyy* before DEM on that guy. And then inferior celerity as, like, a pity discipline? Yaa? He can play Flash? Woo! He couldn't have gotten pre? Or something remotely useful? Blergh.

On Nov 23, 2:25 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > So not that there are any (likely) actual answers to these questions, > but maybe some folks have some clever insight: > D) Why do the Inner Circle hate the Nosferatu? Harrod is the suckiest of > the original IC members. And Josef von Bauren? DEM and cel? Are you > kidding me? No bounce discipline. No fortitude. There is one other > Nosferatu with dem. Man. I tell ya. No clever insight here, but the Nos are probably only there because of equal rights legislation. I realize the gripe because there's absolutely no reason to run him as a star. His power isn't bad, the stealth is fine, if unnecessary for someone with OBF, but things like cel are lame because it may as well not even be there. Only thing you can do is not use him. He's rush bait.

[ quoted text not captured ] be grateful he does not get inferior quietus - THAT is crap discipline :P also he does get +1 stealth and +1 bleed and nice special.

[ quoted text not captured ] It isn't like Adana De Sforza is much better, defensive-wise... As was her ancestor ! But then, I feel like any 11-Cap without integrated untap possibilities is lame, and that goes for the Malk IC too. Mistress Fanchon having access to Rutor's Hand and OBF is obviously much better (as was Etrius, who still didn't see as much play as some others) and Raphael de Corazon at least can Flurry. But of course Josef is the only one with Hardestadt who has only +1 bleed, and I suppose the +1 stealth is supposed to compensate that somehow ? (of course one can argue that Warsaw Station will give the Nossies some untap, but then the old, "good" nossie voters can benefit from it too...). -- Orpheus -- "Cynicism isn't maturity. Callousness isn't strength. Pretending you don't care so you don't have to try isn't "winning" What you do with your life matters." Luther Manning.

On Nov 23, 8:57 pm, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@NOSPAMfree.fr> wrote: > It isn't like Adana De Sforza is much better, defensive-wise... Well, sure, but she is much better offensively; CEL gives her limited untap, PRO gives her potential untap (Dual Form) and Flesh of Marble in a fight. And plays Blur for free. Which isn't horrible either. And she has a *much* better picture... -Peter

[ quoted text not captured ] But he can block an inferior Speed of Thought! AND it makes his +1 stealth useful against someone who wants to play an inferior Rooftop Shadow! or The Mole! Pure Gold! -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email) "In *my* Assamite deck, this would pwn you in teh FAEC, so shut up." "Thats only cos u've never sene mi Gionavvi PUNCHnMUCNH u asshat." - James Coupe

On 23 Nov, 21:25, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > A) Why no Parity Shift reprint? It is one of the most powerful cards (if > not the most powerful card) available to the Camarilla. Not reprinting > it doesn't leave it out of play, it just makes it that much harder for > newer players to get ahold of them. Not that they are particularly hard > to get, but still. Makes limited sense to me. That is very strange. I *really* *really* hope this doesnt mean its about to be added to the ban list. Please dont take away our toys Scott! Anthony

Anthony Coleman schrieb: [ quoted text not captured ] Agreed. If Parity Shift and/or Deflection and/or D.I gets banned I will be seriously pissed off. We shouldn´t change things because a handful of people has nothing better to do than whine on the newsgroup. -- If playing against Cock all you need to remember is: Don´t get caught by Cock.

On Nov 24, 10:42 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > That is very strange. I *really* *really* hope this doesnt mean its > about to be added to the ban list. Please dont take away our toys > Scott! I'm hoping with you. Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition are more or less the 2 reasons to play camarilla, and removing one of those would cripple the sect more than needed.

[ quoted text not captured ] Hey, hey, heyheyhey, don't disrespect the Anathema + Red list combo, strongness, there it is man, sheesh... ;)

[ quoted text not captured ] Joking aside I think its important for the Cam to have strong votes generally - without Parity Shift what exactly do they have vote wise? Archon is good sure, but nothing special, 1st trad is one of my favourite cards in the game but I wouldn't say it was particularily strong. And the sabbat have the best clan specific vote in the game: code of milan suspended. Parity shift is needed to counter balance that powercard. More seriously though, with cards like Reckless Agitation and Revolutionary Council Available to other groupings, the Cam need shift to remain comparable vote wise let alone stronger. Ant

Anthony Coleman schrieb: [ quoted text not captured ] Camarilla is the 1.0 of V:TES. Get over it. Play Revolutionary Council. 20 pool swings are cooler than 10 pool swings. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] > remember is: Don´t get caught by Cock.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Although understanding that your joking :) I will address one point. Its only ten pool swing in relation to one player, and only when there are 5 players on the table. Its not 10,8 or whatever multiple of 2 in relation to the table. Also Johannes: i think you need to revise your sig :O) Ant

[ quoted text not captured ] Same thoughts here. Althought parity shift is really strong, it's not overpowered, and without it the camarilla would lose most of its strong strategies. The cam already suffered from the loss of PTO, which was fine for me, but losing parity shift would make it lose most of its interest at all compared to the Sabbat or the Anarchs. In other words I do think that PS is a very, very strong card, but I hope it will stay to make the cam vote decks still attractive and not only as stupid swarm vote decks. Arthur

On Nov 24, 2:16 pm, Huruem <Huruem_cate...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Same thoughts here. Althought parity shift is really strong, it's not > overpowered, > and without it the camarilla would lose most of its strong strategies. I think part of the problem here, if it is that, is the fact that there is very, very little advantage to being a Camarilla member -- as opposed to being Sabbat or even Independent. Sure, there are some few power cards if you're a Prince, Justicar etc (with Parity Shift being easily the best vote in the game)... but for just "Camarilla"? Not much worth mentioning. Compare to Sabbat. Of course, this is pretty much in line with the rpg, where unlife sucks for the Camarilla rank & file. But still... for the purposes of the CCG, it would be nice to see some useful/strong cards that benefitted Camarilla vampires (as a sect). I was hoping for such in this expansion, actually. :( //Petri

Cammy have enough toys without parity shift. I'm for ban. Also, every IC member who play vote have cheap option to untap Play Alastor + Helicopter - It doesnt even waste an action!

The banning of Protect Thine Own has shown the whole playerbase that any card can be banned if enough people are collected to bitch. The beauty of VTES was that it had thousands of cards spanning over a decade of work and only a sparse handful of them were banned. M:TG is considered confusing for its expansive and amorphous ban list, and I always appreciated VTES for being able to keep the game in balance by making new material rather than banning everything. Now with Parity Shift and Direct Intervention appearently on the way out, and no Deflection or Voter Capitvation being reprinted, I do have to ask how large the ban list will grow and at what point will other players stop bitching about cards being "too powerful". The slippery slope will stop somewhere and I just pray that those of us who have played since 94 will still have a majority of the good cards we used at that point available to our disposal. Please stop caving into whiny people and stop banning cards. Please balance the game instead of dismantling it.

[ quoted text not captured ] Please, tell me what these toys are, and then show me how the toys you list are compared to the toys for Sabbat & Independants. Anthony

On Nov 24, 1:51 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > Cammy have enough toys without parity shift. I'm for ban. I'm guessing/hoping you're joking, but anyway.. 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th traditions are nice. 1st is kinda tricky to use, but powerful for sure. 2nd is one of the best cards in the game imo. 3rd and 4th aren't really anything that other sects can't do, but nice nonetheless. Other than that, there's Alastor, Judgment: Camarilla Segregation (which didn't get reprinted either) and what?

[ quoted text not captured ] You're tilting at windmills. Nothing was banned because of the weight of whine pressed against it. There is no evidence that Di is on the way out. And there is only the spider-web-thin line of "evidence" that Parity Shift is on the way out. Lots of cards were not reprinted in KoT. There's a big difference between not being reprinted in a particular set and being banned. The description you give in the past tense of the beauty of VTES still applies in the present tense.

On Nov 24, 1:51 pm, "dog$" <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > Now with Parity Shift and Direct Intervention appearently on the way > out, and no Deflection or Voter Capitvation being reprinted, I do have > to ask how large the ban list will grow and at what point will other > players stop bitching about cards being "too powerful". Has there been whining about Parity Shift? I've seen the DI thread/s but haven't really noticed any larger quantity of complaints regarding Parity Shift (someone mentioning it now and then sure, but that goes for loads of cards). > Please stop caving into whiny people and stop banning cards. > > Please balance the game instead of dismantling it. Indeed. If Parity Shift goes I guess GtU, Freak Drive and Ventrue Headquarters are next in line :\

[ quoted text not captured ] > in the present tense.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I find this post very enccouraging :) Anthony

As do I. Thank you for that (and all else you do for the game) LSJ. I personally don't like the concept of banning in general, no matter what the card does. To me, once a card is printed it is permanently part of the game.

[ quoted text not captured ] May I add my thanks to this list Meester Scott. You awesome. Really, love this game, and you are a large part it is awesome.

On Nov 24, 7:51 am, "dog$" <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > Now with Parity Shift and Direct Intervention appearently on the way > out, Uh, wha? How are Parity Shift and DI "apparently on the way out"? I was just commenting on it being questionable that Parity Shift was not being reprinted in this set. Somehow, it turned into a "Aggghhhh! They are going to ban everything!!!!!" discussion. For reasons that are beyond me. The very existence of Dark Influences indicates that there is no plan to get rid of DI in and of itself (as why print a magic bullet to stop something that is just going to be banned anyway?) And It is silly that Parity Shift isn't reprinted. But that doesn't mean that it is going anywhere. It is just as silly that Deflection wasn't reprinted (even more so, really). I doubt that is going anywhere either. > Please stop caving into whiny people and stop banning cards. Over-react much? -Peter

On Nov 24, 1:51 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > On Nov 24, 7:51 am, "dog$" <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Now with Parity Shift and Direct Intervention appearently on the way > > out, > > Uh, wha? How are Parity Shift and DI "apparently on the way out"? I > was just commenting on it being questionable that Parity Shift was not > being reprinted in this set. Somehow, it turned into a "Aggghhhh! They > are going to ban everything!!!!!" discussion. For reasons that are > beyond me. When looking at the list of reprints it seemed very very strange to me that Parity Shift was not on there. The only other cam vote I could see not reprinted was Archon but that was easily explained by the presence of Alastor - so it seemed reasonable to me to mention concern that it might be about to be banned or something. > The very existence of Dark Influences indicates that there is no plan > to get rid of DI in and of itself (as why print a magic bullet to stop > something that is just going to be banned anyway?) And It is silly > that Parity Shift isn't reprinted. But that doesn't mean that it is > going anywhere. Re:Shift, It doesnt no, but it's reasonable to be a bit worried I think. No one would argue that its not a powerfull card, probably the best cam card in the game atm, so to not include it strongly hints at a banning to me (or did untill scotts post) as it would seem crazy to try and address perceived problems with specific cards by making them hard to get hold of by not reprinting. > It is just as silly that Deflection wasn't reprinted (even more so, > really). I doubt that is going anywhere either. I guess, but there are dom bounce cards printed in recent sets, so it's a little bit different to the Parity Shift situation. Ant

On Nov 24, 9:06 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > When looking at the list of reprints it seemed very very strange to me > that Parity Shift was not on there. The only other cam vote I could > see not reprinted was Archon but that was easily explained by the > presence of Alastor - so it seemed reasonable to me to mention concern > that it might be about to be banned or something. Fair enough. I'd figure though, that if anything were going to be done to, say Parity Shift or Voter Cap (neither of which were strangely reprinted), rather than banning either, this would have been a perfect opportunity to reprint them with adjusted text one way or the other. But they didn't do that. So I can only assume that Parity Shift was not reprinted, not 'cause it is going to be banned, but for obtuse reasons I don't understand. -Peter

[ quoted text not captured ] We don't. And by the same token, we don't leave things alone just because a handful of people tilt at strawmen. We like to use real reasons for both activity and inactivity, not mob rule.

[ quoted text not captured ] > We like to use real reasons for both activity and inactivity, not mob rule.- Zitierten Text ausblenden - > > - Zitierten Text anzeigen - Ok. But what was the reason to not reprint Parity Shift, Govern the Unaligned and Deflection? Deliberate choice (if this, what exactly was the reason?), oversight or printing error? Not that it makes any difference now, but I'm quite curious. Thanks LSJ. :)

preac...@gmx.at wrote: > But what was the reason to not reprint Parity Shift, Govern the > Unaligned and Deflection? > Deliberate choice (if this, what exactly was the reason?), oversight > or printing error? Many cards were not reprinted. Save the one already mentioned on the checklist page, none were printing errors or oversights.

In message <c9785503-7ddc-4531...@k41g2000yqn.googlegroup s.com>, www.h...@gmail.com writes: >Indeed. If Parity Shift goes I guess GtU, Freak Drive and Ventrue >Headquarters are next in line :\ Ventrue HQ? I can see the logic in the others - that is, if you think Parity Shift is ban-worthy, you might have thoughts about the others - but Ventrue HQ? 3 votes, once per turn? (Twice with House of Sorrows.) Really? I wouldn't ban any of them myself. My main beef with Dominate isn't any one card being good in and of itself, but the accumulation of so much game-winning stuff in one discipline. On their own, each card is pretty much fine - it's just really annoying that mono-Dominate is so damn good. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

On Nov 24, 5:43 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > >Indeed. If Parity Shift goes I guess GtU, Freak Drive and Ventrue > >Headquarters are next in line :\ > > Ventrue HQ? > > I can see the logic in the others - that is, if you think Parity Shift > is ban-worthy, you might have thoughts about the others - but Ventrue > HQ? 3 votes, once per turn? (Twice with House of Sorrows.) Really? > I wouldn't ban any of them myself. Nah.. I just meant that Parity Shift isn't more broken than Ventrue HQ, and that banning Parity Shift would be about as silly as banning the HQ. But yeah, the other ones I mentioned are a bit stronger I guess. Anyway, I wouldn't ban any of them either and I hope noone will. >My main beef with Dominate isn't any > one card being good in and of itself, but the accumulation of so much > game-winning stuff in one discipline. On their own, each card is pretty > much fine - it's just really annoying that mono-Dominate is so damn > good. My only "beef" would be that kinda any deck/decktype gets much better if you can manage to throw in a few Governs and some Deflections, which is kinda sad in some ways.

Ventrue HQ is not entire concept of the deck. it's it support. Parity Shift IS concept of the deck. It's insane poolgain and pooldamage. Check TWDA for Parity Shift. In fact, the design team try hard to create good counter. PS make vote defense required to win.

On Nov 24, 9:28 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > Ventrue HQ is not entire concept of the deck. it's it support. > > Parity Shift IS concept of the deck. It's insane poolgain and > pooldamage. Yeah, as I said it was an overstatement. > Check TWDA for Parity Shift. I don't care about Parity Shift in TWDA tbh. It's not a broken card in my world, and this ain't the thread to discuss whether it should or should not be banned either way. > In fact, the design team try hard to create good counter. PS make vote > defense required to win. There are loads of good counters against vote decks. And in certain metas, vote defense is required to win.

You maybe dont care about parity shift, but people who play do. It's great card, but it's also the reason why camarilla does not get many new toys. This is why design team cannot futher increase camarilla power level [it's already tier 1] with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for example] I dont think that banning cards is ideal solution.In fact i'm glad LSJ ban only a few, and i dont want him to ban GtU or freek drive [and i'm also glad he make other cards to prevent bounce reliability - it's healhy for the game - thats why i like touch of clarity]. But PS power level is too high to deal with ... now with scrouge of enochians we have good swarm counter ... so there is not possible to create good utility card which cancel parity shift and not make voting bad strategy ...

On Nov 24, 10:45 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > You maybe dont care about parity shift, but people who play do. It's > great card, but it's also the reason why camarilla does not get many > new toys. I play quite a lot, and I do care about Parity Shift. I even care so much that I wished for it to get reprinted so more people in my playgroup would be able to create decks with it. > This is why design team cannot futher increase camarilla power level > [it's already tier 1] with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for > example] I wouldn't call camarilla tier 1 at this point, really. At least not with any large margin compared to the other sects. Independents' might be slightly weaker cardwise, but Reckless Agitation is a great card. > I dont think that banning cards is ideal solution.In fact i'm glad LSJ > ban only a few, and i dont want him to ban GtU or freek drive [and i'm > also glad he make other cards to prevent bounce reliability - it's > healhy for the game - thats why i like touch of clarity]. But PS power > level is too high to deal with ... now with scrouge of enochians we > have good swarm counter ... Now we have a good swarm counter? Good swarm counters have existed for ages. Nightmares Upon Nightmares, Thirst, Aranthebes, Attonement, Domain Challenge/Anarchist uprising/Ancilla Empowerment etc. If people don't play with those it's not due to the design team. And Parity Shift isn't harder to deal with than Kine Resources Contested really. I'd even say it's easier due to the pool and title requirement on Parity Shift. Delaying Tactics on a Parity Shift can very well get a player ousted if xe counted on getting the pool to survive. It also goes down in power quite fast once players gets ousted, and in the duel it's more or less crap imo (due to the pool setup needed). > so there is not possible to create good utility card which cancel > parity shift and not make voting bad strategy ... Well, yeah.. Since Parity Shift is a vote it'd be kinda hard to create an anti-card that doesn't affect voting in general. But the anti-vote cards are good and available, and I'd say Parity Shift has enough requirements to make up for the powerful effect.

In article <769b6cf3-0d8f-4c8a...@v38g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, AcheronNi...@gmail.com wrote: > so there is not possible to create good utility card which cancel > parity shift and not make voting bad strategy ... ??? Confusion of the Eye. A good utility card which specifically cancels Parity Shift. Confusion of the Eye is a fantastic, easily cycleable, powerful defense card (it reduces bleeds, so it is pretty much always playable to some good effect if no one is voting at you) and good against all votes (as it cancels the votes of the acting vampire) and generally foils Voter Cap. And outright cancels votes that require titled vampires (Parity Shift, Alastor, Auto de Fa, whatever). Confusion of the Eye is a specific anti-Parity Shift silver bullet *and* a generally useful, virtually always playable defense card. I can't think of a single obfuscate heavy deck I have that doesn't use at least a couple. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?" -Gaff

On Nov 24, 10:45 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for > example] Many questions typed and deleted. All that is left is WTF?

On 24 Nov, 21:45, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > You maybe dont care about parity shift, but people who play do. It's > great card, but it's also the reason why camarilla does not get many > new toys. You need to learn to read dude :) He doesnt care about TWDA statistics != doesn't care about any given card or game balance in general. The usefullness of using the TWDA to prove that cards are overpowered has been debated before (at great length) and its a whole seperate issue. > This is why design team cannot futher increase camarilla power level > [it's already tier 1] with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for > example] You do not speak for the design team - please do not pretend to. To suggest that PS is a reason that the design team can't make new cards is pretty ludicrous. > I dont think that banning cards is ideal solution.In fact i'm glad LSJ > ban only a few, and i dont want him to ban GtU or freek drive [and i'm > also glad he make other cards to prevent bounce reliability - it's > healhy for the game - thats why i like touch of clarity]. But PS power > level is too high to deal with ... now with scrouge of enochians we > have good swarm counter ... There is an abundance off weenie defence availaible. > so there is not possible to create good utility card which cancel > parity shift and not make voting bad strategy ... It doesnt need a magic bullet, the restrictions on the card itself suffice. Any deck playing delaying tactics can quite likely get the shifting player ousted, the fact you need to include vote defense in a deck to win sometimes is quite right and how it should be. Voting is one of the main strategies in the game, and a question you should always ask in deck design is how do I deal with a voter. Anthony

In message <56177cc7-58e1-46e2...@k19g2000yqg.googlegroup [ quoted text not captured ] The suggestion was that it was hard to create some cool Camarilla-only cards, using Abbot as an example of an effect that would be cool for the Camarilla. However, Acheron thinks the Camarilla are already too powerful, so the Design Team can happily design Abbot for the Sabbat but don't want to design a similar card for the Camarilla (because it would overpower them). I don't agree with this, but that's what I think he's suggesting. I disagree on two levels: 1) I don't agree that Abbot would be overly powerful for the Camarilla. I wouldn't want a cookie cutter copy, though, just because I like variation, but if Abbot had never been printed, I think it would be okay as a Camarilla card. 2) Even if the Camarilla are too powerful to take an Abbot-like card, there are holes in the Camarilla, and I don't think it would beyond the wit of LSJ to design interesting cards that address such issues without overpowering the other parts. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 24 Nov, 22:06, www.hen...@gmail.com wrote: >and I'd say Parity Shift has enough requirements to make up for the powerful effect. I think the requirments are what makes Parity Shift a beautifully designed card (and of course I agree with you that they are enough). There are _so_ many things to consider when making a dedicated shift deck. Deck design is tricky as you know its not going to take you the whole way and you need another source of damage, you need to make sure you have enough to draw them at the right times but not too much to choke on them when you need another route, how low are you prepared to go to keep shift working, what happens if you get delayed and dont get that 4 pool (or whatever) you were expecting.. its pure brinksmanship and real fun to play.. Ant

On 25 Lis, 10:27, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In message <56177cc7-58e1-46e2-9913-b97adf6d0...@k19g2000yqg.googlegroup > s.com>, Blooded Sand <sandm...@gmail.com> writes: > > >On Nov 24, 10:45 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > >> with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for > >> example] > > >Many questions typed and deleted. All that is left is WTF? > > The suggestion was that it was hard to create some cool Camarilla-only > cards, using Abbot as an example of an effect that would be cool for the > Camarilla. However, Acheron thinks the Camarilla are already too > powerful, so the Design Team can happily design Abbot for the Sabbat but > don't want to design a similar card for the Camarilla (because it would > overpower them). Yeah, thats my PoV > I don't agree with this, but that's what I think he's suggesting. > > I disagree on two levels: > > 1) I don't agree that Abbot would be overly powerful for the Camarilla. > I wouldn't want a cookie cutter copy, though, just because I like > variation, but if Abbot had never been printed, I think it would be > okay as a Camarilla card. > > 2) Even if the Camarilla are too powerful to take an Abbot-like card, > there are holes in the Camarilla, and I don't think it would beyond > the wit of LSJ to design interesting cards that address such issues > without overpowering the other parts. > > -- > James Coupe > PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. > EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. > 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. 1) Camarilla would end up as 'dominate' style sect of choice. All eggs in one basket ... 2) Imo it's hard to do that when Parity Shif exist. It's doable as long it would not empower prince and justicars. Anything that make primogen more powerful would be good [to make them better - now they suffer from 'it's better to be prince' syndrome]. Also, non titled cammy could be target of new card.

On Nov 24, 5:06 pm, www.hen...@gmail.com wrote: > On Nov 24, 10:45 pm, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > > > You maybe dont care about parity shift, but people who play do. It's > > great card, but it's also the reason why camarilla does not get many > > new toys. > > I play quite a lot, and I do care about Parity Shift. I even care so > much that I wished for it to get reprinted so more people in my > playgroup would be able to create decks with it. > > > This is why design team cannot futher increase camarilla power level > > [it's already tier 1] with cool camarilla only cards [like abbot for > > example] > > I wouldn't call camarilla tier 1 at this point, really. At least not > with any large margin compared to the other sects. Independents' might > be slightly weaker cardwise, but Reckless Agitation is a great card. > Camarilla have lots of tier 1 deck builds. Nos Royalty. Arika & Friends. Anson/Anneke/Alexandra. Ventrue Law Firm. Malk '94. These are solid deck archtypes that haven't been invalidated by recently printed cards. -Merlin

Anthony Coleman schrieb: > On 24 Nov, 11:33, Johannes Walch <johannes.wa...@vekn.de> wrote: >> Anthony Coleman schrieb: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 24 Nov, 10:44, Blooded Sand <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Nov 24, 10:56 am, www.hen...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> On Nov 24, 10:42 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> That is very strange. I *really* *really* hope this doesnt mean its >>>>>> about to be added to the ban list. Please dont take away our toys >>>>>> Scott! >>>>> I'm hoping with you. >>>>> Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition are more or less the 2 reasons to play >>>>> camarilla, and removing one of those would cripple the sect more than >>>>> needed. >>>> Hey, hey, heyheyhey, don't disrespect the Anathema + Red list combo, >>>> strongness, there it is man, sheesh... ;) >>> Joking aside I think its important for the Cam to have strong votes >>> generally - without Parity Shift what exactly do they have vote wise? >>> Archon is good sure, but nothing special, 1st trad is one of my >>> favourite cards in the game but I wouldn't say it was particularily >>> strong. >>> And the sabbat have the best clan specific vote in the game: code of >>> milan suspended. Parity shift is needed to counter balance that >>> powercard. More seriously though, with cards like Reckless Agitation >>> and Revolutionary Council Available to other groupings, the Cam need >>> shift to remain comparable vote wise let alone stronger. >>> Ant >> Camarilla is the 1.0 of V:TES. Get over it. >> Play Revolutionary Council. >> 20 pool swings are cooler than 10 pool swings. >> >> -- >> If playing against Cock all you need to >> remember is: Don´t get caught by Cock.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Although understanding that your joking :) I will address one point. > > Its only ten pool swing in relation to one player, and only when there > are 5 players on the table. Its not 10,8 or whatever multiple of 2 in > relation to the table. > > Also Johannes: i think you need to revise your sig :O) Why? New players need to learn the basics of the game, e.g how to play against Cock Robin. -- If playing against Cock all you need to remember is: Don´t get caught by Cock.

LSJ schrieb: [ quoted text not captured ] Awesome. Although the definition of a "real reason" can be rather subjective, but I figure someone has to decide in the end. Is it possible to include the reasoning in the announcement of the rules changes this time (if there are any)? At least I would appreciate it very much. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Nov 25, 1:58 pm, Merlin <hallofhadesco...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > I wouldn't call camarilla tier 1 at this point, really. At least not > > with any large margin compared to the other sects. Independents' might > > be slightly weaker cardwise, but Reckless Agitation is a great card. > > Camarilla have lots of tier 1 deck builds. Nos Royalty. Arika & > Friends. Anson/Anneke/Alexandra. Ventrue Law Firm. Malk '94. These are > solid deck archtypes that haven't been invalidated by recently printed > cards. Sure. I didn't say that camarilla had 0 tier 1 deck builds. I just meant that camarilla, as a sect, isn't really more tier 1 than the other sects. I haven't really made any heavy research on the subject, but it's a feeling and a quick browse through TWDA doesn't seem to prove it totally wrong.

On Nov 25, 2:58 pm, Merlin <hallofhadesco...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Camarilla have lots of tier 1 deck builds. Nos Royalty. Arika & > Friends. Anson/Anneke/Alexandra. Ventrue Law Firm. Malk '94. These are > solid deck archtypes that haven't been invalidated by recently printed > cards. My own (small) complaint that there are very few cards that benefit general Camarilla members. Almost all the Camarilla good-to-powerful cards require titles. If you're just "Camarilla", you don't get much at all. Compare to Sabbat, where you get tons of nifty stuff by just belonging. As mentioned before, this *does* conform to the rpg background. Still, it would be nice to get even a few nice new toys for the Camarilla rank&file :) //Petri

[ quoted text not captured ] Sure, I'll buy that. But then, there are also a lot of weenie-type Cam decks that benefit from Praxis Seizures and then can play those awesome Prince cards. The Cam's all about social mobility, baby. -Merlin

Peter D Bakija schrieb: > So I can only assume that Parity Shift was > not reprinted, not 'cause it is going to be banned, but for obtuse > reasons I don't understand. > > -Peter Perhaps there wasn´t enough space in the set, you need to deal with necessities like National Guard Support or Year of Fortune before including extras like Parity Shift. ;-) [ quoted text not captured ]

Anthony Coleman schrieb: >> so there is not possible to create good utility card which cancel >> parity shift and not make voting bad strategy ... > > It doesnt need a magic bullet, the restrictions on the card itself > suffice. Any deck playing delaying tactics can quite likely get the > shifting player ousted, the fact you need to include vote defense in a > deck to win sometimes is quite right and how it should be. Voting is > one of the main strategies in the game, and a question you should > always ask in deck design is how do I deal with a voter. Also there is a good utility card that cancels Parity Shift: Confusion of the Eye. And it doesnt make voting a bad strategy. And you can even use it in non-vote situations to reduce bleed. If someone cares about Parity Shift this card is a nice option. Among many others especially those w/o requirement: Delaying Tactics, Poison Pill or Direct Intervention). Bum愀 Rush has also been proven to be efficient, hehe. -- If playing against Cock all you need to remember is: Don愒 get caught by Cock.

[ quoted text not captured ] Why do you make that leap? Isn't it more logical that they weren't reprinted because they are going to be banned? I agree with your first conclusion though - if they were going to reword the cards, they would have reprinted them with new text in this set. VC and PS have been towards the top of the "complaint curve" in the past year or so, since the Imbued were nerfed last year. Only DI has beaten them, and DI received an answer in KoT with DI2. With those two facts in mind (high complaint level; not reprinted in new base set), my conclusion is it's more logical to think that PS and VC were not reprinted because they will get banned on 01-01-09; as opposed to "obtuse reasons I don't understand". Or human error. But LSJ has already responded to other errors in the set, yet has been mum on this issue, again leading me to think that they will be banned on the 1st. "Banned, banned, banned, cos they don't like punks, banned, banned, banned, they treat us like drunks." Peter and the Test Tube Babies - Banned from the Pubs best - chris

librarian wrote: > VC and PS have been towards the top of the "complaint curve" in the past > year or so, since the Imbued were nerfed last year. Only DI has beaten > them, and DI received an answer in KoT with DI2. > > With those two facts in mind (high complaint level; not reprinted in new > base set), Which complaints are you counting to reach this "high level" tally for PS?

On Nov 25, 10:08 am, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > On Nov 24, 9:06 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> When looking at the list of reprints it seemed very very strange to me > >> that Parity Shift was not on there. The only other cam vote I could > >> see not reprinted was Archon but that was easily explained by the > >> presence of Alastor - so it seemed reasonable to me to mention concern > >> that it might be about to be banned or something. > > > Fair enough. I'd figure though, that if anything were going to be done > > to, say Parity Shift or Voter Cap (neither of which were strangely > > reprinted), rather than banning either, this would have been a perfect > > opportunity to reprint them with adjusted text one way or the other. > > But they didn't do that. So I can only assume that Parity Shift was > > not reprinted, not 'cause it is going to be banned, but for obtuse > > reasons I don't understand. > > Why do you make that leap? Isn't it more logical that they weren't > reprinted because they are going to be banned? I agree with your first > conclusion though - if they were going to reword the cards, they would > have reprinted them with new text in this set. Why would his 'leap' be any less valid than yours? The simplest reason for Parity Shift not being in the set is that it just didn't make the cut. Now, perhaps there is more reasoning behind it, like a potential banning (highly doubtful in my mind), or perhaps plans for it in a future realease, or an 'updated' version, or who knows (beyond LSJ)? > VC and PS have been towards the top of the "complaint curve" in the past > year or so, since the Imbued were nerfed last year. Only DI has beaten > them, and DI received an answer in KoT with DI2. What complaints have been made about Parity Shift? I've seen some grousing on Voter Captivation, but Parity Shift? And technically, VC has a counter now, if a bit roundabout, in the form of Final Loosening. > With those two facts in mind (high complaint level; not reprinted in new > base set), my conclusion is it's more logical to think that PS and VC > were not reprinted because they will get banned on 01-01-09; as opposed > to "obtuse reasons I don't understand". Or human error. But LSJ has > already responded to other errors in the set, yet has been mum on this > issue, again leading me to think that they will be banned on the 1st. There are a lot of Camarilla oriented cards that weren't reprinted. Are we to assume that they're all to be banned too? Now some people may consider PS to be _the_ Camarilla card, I'm sure others do not. It's certainly a powerful vote card, in a voting deck. Just like Absolution of the Diablerist would be potent in a diablerie deck, and that wasn't reprinted either. I don't think the level of complaints is a good basis to decide whether a card is likely to get banned, as the DI case shows. Chris, Thrall of Arika

In message <d5927790-3585-4aca...@j39g2000yqn.googlegroup s.com>, Merlin <hallofha...@sbcglobal.net> writes: >On Nov 25, 10:27 am, Petri Wessman <or...@orava.org> wrote: >> My own (small) complaint that there are very few cards that benefit >> general Camarilla members. Almost all the Camarilla good-to-powerful >> cards require titles. If you're just "Camarilla", you don't get much >> at all. Compare to Sabbat, where you get tons of nifty stuff by just >> belonging. >> >> As mentioned before, this *does* conform to the rpg background. Still, >> it would be nice to get even a few nice new toys for the Camarilla >> rank&file :) > >Sure, I'll buy that. But then, there are also a lot of weenie-type Cam >decks that benefit from Praxis Seizures and then can play those >awesome Prince cards. The Cam's all about social mobility, baby. But you can do that with the Sabbat and Crusades just as well - indeed, better with Legacy of Pander helping out, sometimes - and then it's only really Parity Shift that's a big, obvious power card. For me, I wouldn't mind seeing a few cards that benefit the Camarilla more. If we don't want to overpower the titles, we might - for example - give something to untitled Camarilla vampires, or perhaps let you have a star titled vampire who benefits from having Camarilla minions to rule. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <28847b68-3ece-4925...@x14g2000yqk.googlegroup s.com>, AcheronNi...@gmail.com writes: >On 25 Lis, 10:27, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: >> 2) Even if the Camarilla are too powerful to take an Abbot-like card, >> there are holes in the Camarilla, and I don't think it would beyond >> the wit of LSJ to design interesting cards that address such issues >> without overpowering the other parts. > >1) Camarilla would end up as 'dominate' style sect of choice. All eggs >in one basket ... I don't think there's any reason to worry about that. Any given deck will likely have some huge holes in it - 90 cards isn't enough to cover everything well. It's also possible to imagine cards that cut across other cards, and make them hard to combine. e.g. cards that benefit untitled vampires, cards that trigger on combat or bleeding (not politics), cards that don't work if you're playing politics, and so on. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Ah good point. I am probably misremembering a thread wherein VC was roundly discussed as broken, and one other card, and people were sort of split on whether it was Voter Cap or this other card. Here is a post by Peter in July stating Parity Shift on the edge of broken. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0dd5894bec43dbba?hl=en But perhaps that isn't a high enough tally? Either way, Parity Shift seems like it would be a good candidate for reprinting in a Camarilla set. It wasn't reprinted. Therefore to me, I would assume it's on the soon to be banned list. best - chris

Thrall of Arika wrote: > On Nov 25, 10:08 am, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: >> Peter D Bakija wrote: >>> On Nov 24, 9:06 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> When looking at the list of reprints it seemed very very strange to me >>>> that Parity Shift was not on there. The only other cam vote I could >>>> see not reprinted was Archon but that was easily explained by the >>>> presence of Alastor - so it seemed reasonable to me to mention concern >>>> that it might be about to be banned or something. >>> Fair enough. I'd figure though, that if anything were going to be done >>> to, say Parity Shift or Voter Cap (neither of which were strangely >>> reprinted), rather than banning either, this would have been a perfect >>> opportunity to reprint them with adjusted text one way or the other. >>> But they didn't do that. So I can only assume that Parity Shift was >>> not reprinted, not 'cause it is going to be banned, but for obtuse >>> reasons I don't understand. >> Why do you make that leap? Isn't it more logical that they weren't >> reprinted because they are going to be banned? I agree with your first >> conclusion though - if they were going to reword the cards, they would >> have reprinted them with new text in this set. > > Why would his 'leap' be any less valid than yours? Because mine is based on logic, and his is based on, I don't know, gut feeling? (or something) The simplest reason > for Parity Shift not being in the set is that it just didn't make the > cut. What does that mean exactly? Nice idiom, but what criteria do you think the design team/LSJ would base this on? I think one criteria might be: It's going to be banned soon. > Now, perhaps there is more reasoning behind it, like a potential > banning (highly doubtful in my mind), or perhaps plans for it in a > future realease, or an 'updated' version, or who knows (beyond LSJ)? > Hmmm, yes. Let's take your 2 other reason's it might not be reprinted beyond banning and "who knows" (like "obtuse reasons"). Future realeases: Following recent methodologies of release, the next set will be a 60 card mini set (probably in April) based on this set/sect. That would be a set with no reprints. Then after that, if we continue with this release methodology; we can probably expect either a Laibon expansion, a Bloodlines expansion, or something else entirely. Which would most likely have reprints, but I doubt would have Parity Shift - not part of the theme. Thus, I don't see Parity Shift coming out anytime soon. So, since we won't see it anytime soon, why not reprint it now? Updated Version: Well, yes, perhaps. But if you agree my logic above regarding future releases is sound, then again, why would it be reprinted in out of theme with some random other set? Wouldn't KoT be the set to reprint it in? Or do we wait another 5 or so years for the next Cam set to be printed? The only evidence that I can give that Parity Shift won't be banned is a "meta-reason". I.e., LSJ has posted asking for more evidence that the complaint level was high against Parity Shift; indicating that he didn't feel that the complaint level was high. Which might mean that LSJ doesn't consider it an egregious enough card for banning. I could see Parity Shift not being banned for many reasons, and I hope it isn't, especially with Reckless Agitation and Constant Revolution in the environment. But if it isn't banned, then I am with Peter (OP): "Why wasn't Parity Shift reprinted?" Why, why why? Ah, I just thought of a reason - it may be a reprint promo card in upcoming tournament packs... best - chris

In message <iwYWk.938$QX3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> writes: >Here is a post by Peter in July stating Parity Shift on the edge of broken. > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0dd589 >4bec43dbba?hl=en > >But perhaps that isn't a high enough tally? I think you're missing the point. Cards aren't banned because they reach a "high enough" tally, which will make it hard to find one. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <QaXWk.860$us6...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>, librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > Why do you make that leap? Isn't it more logical that they weren't > reprinted because they are going to be banned? Nope. Well, not for my money. This game has a long history of trying to avoid banning things, and a long history of changing cards instead of banning them when an appropriate opportunity arises if there is a reasonable way to change them (see: Anarch Revolt, say). So we had a perfect opportunity to change Parity Shift--we get a new Camarilla set. We could easily have had Parity Shift in the set with some sort of minor tweak (you have to give the pool to at least 2 players, say. Or you take X-1 pool, where X is the number of players. Or something) that would have been vastly better than banning it (which I suspect is wildly uneccessary, but I wouldn't pooh pooh a minor tweak). And this was the perfect opportunity to do so. But it wasn't done. So maybe it is 'cause Parity Shift is going to be banned (which I don't think is actually the case). But then, if Parity Shift is going to be banned 'cause it wasn't reprinted, then why not think the same thing about Govern and Deflection (which I also don't think are going to be banned)? > I agree with your first > conclusion though - if they were going to reword the cards, they would > have reprinted them with new text in this set. Exactly. But it wasn't done. So rather than jumping to the conclusion of "they are getting banned", I'd much rather jump to the conclusion of "they weren't reprinted for reasons that seem obscure. But they aren't going anywhere"/ > VC and PS have been towards the top of the "complaint curve" in the past > year or so, since the Imbued were nerfed last year. Only DI has beaten > them, and DI received an answer in KoT with DI2. Well, to be fair, both Voter Cap and Parity Shift have been given a couple of very specific, generally useful hosers (Confusion of the Eye, which is fantastic and should see play all the time and hoses *both* Parity Shift and Voter Cap; Final Loosening which is a good, generally useful anarch hoser which totally foils Voter Cap). I'd figure that these would have some effect somewhere. > With those two facts in mind (high complaint level; not reprinted in new > base set), my conclusion is it's more logical to think that PS and VC > were not reprinted because they will get banned on 01-01-09; as opposed > to "obtuse reasons I don't understand". It is certainly possible. But maybe the "obtuse reasons I don't understand" are that LSJ wanted them to not muck up sealed play or something. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > In message <iwYWk.938$QX3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, librarian > <auct...@superfuncards.com> writes: >> Here is a post by Peter in July stating Parity Shift on the edge of broken. >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0dd589 >> 4bec43dbba?hl=en >> >> But perhaps that isn't a high enough tally? > > I think you're missing the point. Cards aren't banned because they > reach a "high enough" tally, which will make it hard to find one. > I miss points a lot. However I don't think I have this time. I agree with you - a card isn't banned *because* it has a high complaint level. On the other hand, looking at all of the cards that have been banned, one characteristic of most of them is that they had high complaint levels. The exceptions are the ante cards and Madness of the Bard. So I conclude that high complaint levels leads LSJ to look at the card and analyze if it should be banned or not. He doesn't look at Undead Strength and check to see if it should be banned. Or Gird Minions. Or Slaughtering the Herd. A high complaint level puts it on LSJ's "short list" for cards to receive consideration to either ban or change text, or create a trump card. My memory is poor, but it seems to me that all cards that receive a high complaint level on the NG eventually either get their texts changed, get banned, or a trump card is created for it. Wait, no that's not true. Govern and Deflection. Which also weren't reprinted. And may also be banned... I think I'm heading towards smiley territory here... :-) Either way, we'll know in about 6 weeks. best - chris

In article <iwYWk.938$QX3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > Here is a post by Peter in July stating Parity Shift on the edge of broken. > > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/0dd5894bec43d > bba?hl=en Heh. See, I do think it is one of the most powerful cards in the game. And certainly teetering on the edge of broken. But I don't think it needs banning by any stretch of the imagination. I would have been happy to see it get a minor tweak in this set as a reprint (X-1 pool or you have to give the pool to at least 2 players, so you need to give 1 away and can't play it when there are only 2 players), but banned? Nah. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Nov 25, 12:08 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > > With those two facts in mind (high complaint level; not reprinted in new > base set), my conclusion is it's more logical to think that PS and VC > were not reprinted because they will get banned on 01-01-09; as opposed > to "obtuse reasons I don't understand". Or human error. But LSJ has > already responded to other errors in the set, yet has been mum on this > issue, again leading me to think that they will be banned on the 1st. Perhaps we'll get a new, special 'constructed format for those who think certain cards are too powerful', wherein cards like Parity Shift, Govern, Deflection and Voter Cap are all prohibited... > chris -John Flournoy

www.h...@gmail.com wrote: > Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition are more or less the 2 reasons > to play camarilla, and removing one of those would cripple > the sect more than needed. To say that only Prince and/or Justicar decks are "more or less the 2 reasons to play camarilla" might qualify as the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard anyone say here. Do you not have a playgroup? Do you need help with non-P/J Camarilla decks? We'll all be happy to help you, really. Oh wait. There is that big liar from years ago that said he didn't need to know the rules to program an online version of VTES (which we're still waiting for, btw). I forgot about him. LOLL Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Las Vegas NAQ 2009! http://members.cox.net/vtesinlv/

On Nov 25, 11:19 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > www.hen...@gmail.com wrote: > > Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition are more or less the 2 reasons > > to play camarilla, and removing one of those would cripple > > the sect more than needed. > To say that only Prince and/or Justicar decks are "more or less the 2 > reasons to play camarilla" might qualify as the most ridiculous thing I > have ever heard anyone say here. Do you not have a playgroup? Do you > need help with non-P/J Camarilla decks? We'll all be happy to help you, > really. I have a playgroup, but yeah.. apart from some camarilla vampires with good specials, I'd love some good reasons to play camarilla, yes. Do mind that I was talking about camarilla as a sect, and as a sect they don't really have much except the traditions and Parity Shift. Also, I'm not saying that you can't make a good/playable/winning camarilla deck without Parity Shift and/or 2nd Tradition. I know that's very possible. But without those two cards, chances are that the deck could've used vampires from other sects instead and done exactly the same thing.

dog$ <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > I personally don't like the concept of banning in general, no matter > what the card does. To me, once a card is printed it is permanently > part of the game. You obviously didn't play back in the Return To Innocence days. Good to know what your point-of-view is. Thanks. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Nov 25, 2:04 pm, John Flournoy <carne...@gmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps we'll get a new, special 'constructed format for those who > think certain cards are too powerful', wherein cards like Parity > Shift, Govern, Deflection and Voter Cap are all prohibited... Sad for me to think this will probably never happen. Would be really interesting.

[ quoted text not captured ] I think it'd be sad if it happened to the rated tournaments. I love the fact that you can both use and face so many different cards during a tournament.

[ quoted text not captured ] Temptation of Greater Power. Alastor. Judgement: Camarailla Segregation. Blood hunt. Archon. Anaethema. Closed Session. Not to mention the dozens of Camarilla clan-based cards which such a deck *couldn't* have used vampires from other sects instead and done exactly the same thing. Everyone: Look, we all know Parity Shift, et.al., didn't get reprinted. Get them on eBay or some trade site, if you need them so badly. Get them to your new players somehow. Heck, you could even *loan* your copies to your friends if they won't let you play with proxies. For people to use Parity Shift not being reprinted to co-opt a thread with baseless claims and false assertions and fear-mongering strikes me as either naively foolish or an attempt to troll the newsgroup. Please, don't. Lasombra: Perhaps we should put this in the FAQ? ;) =) :) 8-) [ quoted text not captured ]

librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > Either way, Parity Shift seems like it would be a good candidate > for reprinting in a Camarilla set. It wasn't reprinted. Therefore > to me, I would assume it's on the soon to be banned list. Do you have a precedent for thinking that "X seems like a good candidate for reprinting in a Y set"? If not, why would you assume such a thing? [ quoted text not captured ]

Kevin M. wrote: > librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: >> Either way, Parity Shift seems like it would be a good candidate >> for reprinting in a Camarilla set. It wasn't reprinted. Therefore >> to me, I would assume it's on the soon to be banned list. > > Do you have a precedent for thinking that "X seems like a good candidate > for reprinting in a Y set"? If not, why would you assume such a thing? > Well, I thought that Disarm would be a good card to reprint in 3rd. And it was. That said, I also thought Mind Rape would be good to reprint in 3rd. And it wasn't. And now here it is. So. I'm willing to change my position. The worst part is - I don't care! I've got exactly enough Parity Shifts for me. I'd be sad if it was banned. I'd also think it was weird. It's not even un-fun. best - chris

On Nov 26, 12:25 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > > Temptation of Greater Power. Alastor. Judgement: Camarailla Segregation. > Blood hunt. Archon. Anaethema. Closed Session. Not to mention the > dozens of Camarilla clan-based cards which such a deck *couldn't* have > used vampires from other sects instead and done exactly the same thing. "To say that only Prince and/or Justicar decks are "more or less the 2 reasons to play camarilla" might qualify as the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard anyone say here." Instead of giving personal opinions on each of those cards, I'll just agree that some of those are good. My point with quoting your earlier post though, is that I (and many with me I suspect/hope) wouldn't use those cards without the aid of Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition. Anyway, my statement was a bit strong but I still think that Parity Shift and 2nd Tradition are what defines the camarilla in the game even if there are a few other cards that are usable. That's the Ivory Tower for me, and most of my playgroup as well. > Everyone: > Look, we all know Parity Shift, et.al., didn't get reprinted. Get them on > eBay or some trade site, if you need them so badly. Get them to your new > players somehow. Heck, you could even *loan* your copies to your friends > if they won't let you play with proxies. I've got my share. My friends don't. We allow proxies for casual games though, but none of us thinks it's really funny to use them. And for tournaments we lend stuff if needed and available. The problem I see though, and that got me into this thread at all, is that unless a card gets reprinted every once in a while, the value keeps going up until it reaches a point where it just gets silly and some people can't afford to get enough copies for a deck. This leads to a game where money gives a great advantage to rich people, and while I realise that it's a part of the essence with tcg/ ccg's I think it's good to keep it down as much as possible. White Wolf has been using reprints to keep older cards in rotation, instead of banning them or introducing a block format similar to how M:tG works (worked at least, I have no clue anymore). At least this is the picture I've gotten through the years. Not reprinting certain cards in this camarilla edition could mean that they won't be printed again until several years from now (last time Parity Shift got printed was in 2002), and that would be a bad move from White Wolf imo. Assuming that it's not about to be banned, which was a natural follow-up thought for some of us. Of course, it could be reprinted in an upcoming, smaller expansion but that didn't cross my mind until recently. > For people to use Parity Shift not being reprinted to co-opt a thread with > baseless claims and false assertions and fear-mongering strikes me as > either naively foolish or an attempt to troll the newsgroup. Please, > don't. Trolling was not at all what I wanted here, and I'm kinda sorry that the thread turned out this way. It might have been foolish though, but I really expected Parity Shift to get reprinted since it's been such a long time now.

On Nov 25, 5:50 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > > Either way, Parity Shift seems like it would be a good candidate > > for reprinting in a Camarilla set. It wasn't reprinted. Therefore > > to me, I would assume it's on the soon to be banned list. > > Do you have a precedent for thinking that "X seems like a good candidate > for reprinting in a Y set"? If not, why would you assume such a thing? > Hah! I've enjoyed reading your posts in this thread, and I mostly agree with you, Kevin. Well, on this subject, anyway. But to say that one can't possibly know what cards might be good reprints in a base set seems a little out there... For a Camarilla base set, some cards that are among the best cards Camarilla vampires have access to certainly seem like good candidates for inclusion, no? Not that there couldn't be infinitely more plausible reasons than imminent banning for *why* they weren't included, but if you're going to disallow conjecture, then what are any of us doing on this newsgroup anyway? Is it only for rules questions now?

I'll just add that I think that Keepers of Traditions is a great set, and it's not my intent to whine about how crappy the camarilla is atm. I don't think camarilla is crap. I think it's on roughly the same level as other sects, which is great imo. I play the game, and I'll keep playing it no matter what happens to Parity Shift.

www.h...@gmail.com wrote: > The problem I see though, and that got me into this thread at all, is > that unless a card gets reprinted every once in a while, the value > keeps going up until it reaches a point where it just gets silly and > some people can't afford to get enough copies for a deck. > This leads to a game where money gives a great advantage to rich > people, and while I realise that it's a part of the essence with tcg/ > ccg's I think it's good to keep it down as much as possible. What you say about (good) cards not being reprinted => value increasing => value "too" high => somewhat unaffordable Card, is true. But, your MtG background might be causing you to become unduly biased towards VTES -- a NCL game which has no "block" formats -- where (good) cards becoming unaffordable happens very rarely, and therefore the advantage the rich player has is severely reduced, to the point where it isn't really a factor in VTES. > Not reprinting certain cards in this camarilla edition could mean that > they won't be printed again until several years from now (last time > Parity Shift got printed was in 2002), and that would be a bad move > from White Wolf imo. I tend to agree, re: Parity Shift, Govern, and Deflection. I do not think that any of them will be (or should be) banned but I would have liked them to have been reprinted, if even only in starters and in limited quantities. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Nothing is preventing anyone from running an unsanctioned tournament using whatever banned list they prefer as a standalone experiment (that sort of thing is how the 'Rapid Thought' format came about, that explicitly banned Blood Doll, Minion Tap and a few other poolgaining cards.) -John Flournoy

On Nov 26, 1:59 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > What you say about (good) cards not being reprinted => value increasing => > value "too" high => somewhat unaffordable Card, is true. But, your MtG > background might be causing you to become unduly biased towards VTES -- a > NCL game which has no "block" formats -- where (good) cards becoming > unaffordable happens very rarely, and therefore the advantage the rich > player has is severely reduced, to the point where it isn't really a > factor in VTES. Well, my MtG background is that I played it 2-3 years back in 96-98 or so, and I don't particulary dislike the game (it was probably more the players that got me to focus on vtes than MtG). But yeah, I like vtes more obviously. Otherwise I'd kept playing MtG aswell or instead. I don't really see your point here though. I mean, the NCL and the fact that I can play with any of the cards in my collection (except for a few copies of the banned stuff) are two things that makes me love vtes but are you saying that there's something wrong with that?

librarian schrieb: > I could see Parity Shift not being banned for many reasons, and I hope > it isn't, especially with Reckless Agitation and Constant Revolution in > the environment. But if it isn't banned, then I am with Peter (OP): > "Why wasn't Parity Shift reprinted?" Why, why why? And that puts us in a lose-lose situation. Either we lose a strong but perfectly reasonable card which is a staple in the game or that card hasnt been reprinted for 5+ years which makes it very hard for new players to get hold of it. > Ah, I just thought of a reason - it may be a reprint promo card in > upcoming tournament packs... Ah thats a tiny ray of light, but I doubt it: reprints as promos didnt happen a lot so far. Also there might be the possibility that it was to be reprinted but someone confused it or forgot to put it on the sheet. Has happened to other cards ... -- If playing against Cock all you need to remember is: Don´t get caught by Cock.

On Nov 25, 2:22 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In message <d5927790-3585-4aca-b982-d86b15b24...@j39g2000yqn.googlegroup > > s.com>, Merlin <hallofhadesco...@sbcglobal.net> writes: > >On Nov 25, 10:27 am, Petri Wessman <or...@orava.org> wrote: > >> My own (small) complaint that there are very few cards that benefit > >> general Camarilla members. Almost all the Camarilla good-to-powerful > >> cards require titles. If you're just "Camarilla", you don't get much > >> at all. Compare to Sabbat, where you get tons of nifty stuff by just > >> belonging. > > >> As mentioned before, this *does* conform to the rpg background. Still, > >> it would be nice to get even a few nice new toys for the Camarilla > >> rank&file :) > > >Sure, I'll buy that. But then, there are also a lot of weenie-type Cam > >decks that benefit from Praxis Seizures and then can play those > >awesome Prince cards. The Cam's all about social mobility, baby. > > But you can do that with the Sabbat and Crusades just as well - indeed, > better with Legacy of Pander helping out, sometimes - and then it's only > really Parity Shift that's a big, obvious power card. > Yeah i don't see weenie crusade at the same level i see weenie praxis seizure, but maybe ymmv. Maybe Caitiff are just that much cheaper than Panders on average? Maybe it's Parity Shift? I'm not sure. "PTO Protection" used to be a valid reason for playing all-cams in weenie decks. Not so much anymore. > For me, I wouldn't mind seeing a few cards that benefit the Camarilla > more. If we don't want to overpower the titles, we might - for example > - give something to untitled Camarilla vampires, or perhaps let you have > a star titled vampire who benefits from having Camarilla minions to > rule. > I can get behind some non-titled Cam cards. Those neonates need love too. Perhaps, like the 3E/SoC twosome, we'll see a Cam miniset in the near future with some new toys for the kids. -Merlin

John Flournoy schrieb: [ quoted text not captured ] V:TES Type I/II. OMG. Thats the *only* thing that could happen which would cause me to stop playing V:TES tournaments. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija schrieb: > It is certainly possible. But maybe the "obtuse reasons I don't > understand" are that LSJ wanted them to not muck up sealed play or > something. That could have been easily solved by putting them into a starter. [ quoted text not captured ]

Kevin M. wrote: > You obviously didn't play back in the Return To Innocence days. > > Good to know what your point-of-view is. Thanks. > > Looks like we have something to argue when you come back to #vtes. Good to know some people still equate having an opinion to trolling.

"dog$" <011...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:f89e713d-e8b4-4274...@13g2000yql.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Eh? Did someone accuse you of trolling? I didn't see it. You should be aware that the view that once a card is printed, the game should stuck with it forever and ever, no matter how bad the mistake is a "Magic-ism" that's considered by most in this newsgroup to be a discredited idea, at least to some extent or another. We all have our opinions about how much or little a card should be broken to merit errata or total banishment, and which of the two is better in what situation, and what are and are not good reasons to invoke one of the two solutions. But in my observation, very few in this newsgroup would agree with the flat statement that, "once a card is printed it is permanently part of the game". In fact, when the game was abandoned by WotC and landed in White Wolf's hands, the pigheaded pursuit of that philosophy was also abandoned. And the game was suddenly reborn - resulting 17 more expansions after VtES had been left for dead by the company that invented CCGs. I don't have a problem with heresy in the newsgroup but be prepared to get your ideas beaten on a bit. Fred

"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:ggi305$emq$1...@aioe.org... > librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: >> Either way, Parity Shift seems like it would be a good candidate >> for reprinting in a Camarilla set. It wasn't reprinted. Therefore >> to me, I would assume it's on the soon to be banned list. > > Do you have a precedent for thinking that "X seems like a good candidate > for reprinting in a Y set"? If not, why would you assume such a thing? How about, "X is an important card, powerful, popular card to use when playing with the sect for which Y set was printed?" Like, all the traditions got reprinted and all the justicar cards - seemingly emblematic of the political power of the Camarilla. (Admittedly no praxis seizures, however - which surprised me. At least not in the boosters. On the other hand, Crusades didn't get reprinted in the 3E boosters, either.) Parity Shift, a card which requires a high-level Camarilla title, would seem to fit that pattern to me. Fred

www.h...@gmail.com wrote: > "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: >> What you say about (good) cards not being reprinted => value >> increasing => value "too" high => somewhat unaffordable Card, is >> true. But, your MtG background might be causing you to become unduly >> biased towards VTES -- a NCL game which has no "block" formats -- >> where (good) cards becoming unaffordable happens very rarely, and >> therefore the advantage the rich player has is severely reduced, to >> the point where it isn't really a factor in VTES. > > Well, my MtG background is that I played it 2-3 years back in 96-98 or > so, and I don't particulary dislike the game (it was probably more the > players that got me to focus on vtes than MtG). > But yeah, I like vtes more obviously. Otherwise I'd kept playing MtG > as well or instead. > I don't really see your point here though. I mean, the NCL and the > fact that I can play with any of the cards in my collection (except > for a few copies of the banned stuff) are two things that makes me > love vtes but are you saying that there's something wrong with that? I'm saying that what you said a few posts ago about VTES being "a game where money gives a great advantage to rich people, and while I realise that it's a part of the essence with tcg/ccg's" isn't correct, for the reasons I listed above. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Nov 27, 1:55 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > I'm saying that what you said a few posts ago about VTES being "a game > where money gives a great advantage to rich people, and while I realise > that it's a part of the essence with tcg/ccg's" isn't correct, for the > reasons I listed above. Oh.. I didn't say that. At least I hope I didn't, because that wasn't at all what I meant. I meant that by reprinting cards, White Wolf have kept VtES from becoming that way. And I think that's a good thing, which is why the whole not reprinting Parity Shift got me worried for a while.

dog$ <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin M. wrote: >> You obviously didn't play back in the Return To Innocence days. >> >> Good to know what your point-of-view is. Thanks. > > Looks like we have something to argue when you come back to #vtes. There isn't anything to argue. RtI, even the stupid second version, needed to be banned because it was broken, otherwise the game would have died *right then and there*. If you believe that, as you stated "I personally don't like the concept of banning in general, no matter what the card does. To me, once a card is printed it is permanently part of the game", then you obviously didn't play back in the Return To Innocence, PTO, Edge Explosion, or 'seat-switcher' days (or the Necropotence days in MtG), didn't see how bad it was, and don't have the first-hand experience to see the need to ban a card once in a while for the right reasons. Note that I'm not saying this is a bad thing that you don't have this experience, I'm just saying that you obviously don't have this experience and it is crucial. It is possible that you do have this experience and are seriously confused. I would choose not to believe this, however, as that would indicate something wrong that I am unable to help you with. Now, if you're open-minded enough to believe that it is possible that there is a need to ban a card once in a while for the right reasons, despite your lack of experience in cards which are either broken or against the spirit of the game, i.e. 'anti-fun', then we can talk all you want. > Good to know some people still equate having an opinion to trolling. Who would those people be? Or were you fishing for red herring? [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Perhaps I should have more clearly stated my position, since it seems to have been misunderstood by you and Fred. I should have said: Do you have a precedent for thinking that "X seems like a good candidate for reprinting in a Y set, and since it wasn't, I'd assume it's on the soon to be banned list?" If not, why would you assume such a thing? [ quoted text not captured ]

On Nov 27, 2:10 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > dog$ <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Kevin M. wrote: > >> You obviously didn't play back in the Return To Innocence days. > > >> Good to know what your point-of-view is. Thanks. > > > Looks like we have something to argue when you come back to #vtes. > > There isn't anything to argue. RtI, even the stupid second version, > needed to be banned because it was broken, otherwise the game would have > died *right then and there*. If you disagree, Howabout we play a game, we allow all the broken cards, and I will show you in one turn why it is bad? If you think Turbo Arika/Arika Purge is bad, Innocent Arika will make you cry. Really..... > Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas > "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles > you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* > "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier > Please visit VTESville daily!http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ > Las Vegas NAQ 2009!http://members.cox.net/vtesinlv/ I am agreeing with Kevin. The shame, the horror, the humanity!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!one!!!11!

Frederick Scott wrote: But in my observation, very few in > this newsgroup would agree with the flat statement that, "once a card > is printed it is permanently part of the game". I like all printed cards to be playable, myself. However, I'd like to see the cards errata'd/MRP'd into a semblance of balance if they're broken (or wallpaper). -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'gmail' to email) "In *my* Assamite deck, this would pwn you in teh FAEC, so shut up." "Thats only cos u've never sene mi Gionavvi PUNCHnMUCNH u asshat." - James Coupe

On 27 Nov, 09:04, Salem <kella...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Frederick Scott wrote: > > But in my observation, very few in > > > this newsgroup would agree with the flat statement that, "once a card > > is printed it is permanently part of the game". > > I like all printed cards to be playable, myself. However, I'd like to > see the cards errata'd/MRP'd into a semblance of balance if they're > broken (or wallpaper). I think some cards are just so far off that its just not possible however.. for my money Succubus Club and RtI just cannot be changed into a playable format and still retain any resemblance of the original card - in these very few cases banning was correct imo. Also, although I disagree that seat switching should have left the game, there is no way to adjust the text on that to make it palletable when you decide the concept has to go. The ban list for vtes is very small and quite reasonable IMO (even switchers that I disagree with, I can certainly see the reaons why it happened and thing the game plays just fine without them - just ddifferently). Also Im not in favour of errataing wallpaper cards, just leave em, we really dont need a bigger errata list. Only adjust down imo. Anthony

On Nov 27, 3:41 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Also Im not in favour of errataing wallpaper cards, just leave em, we > really dont need a bigger errata list. Only adjust down imo. > Wallpaper cards are never (almost never?) errata'd. I guess you're thinking of when they are reprinted, usually with lower cost. And that, I tend to like. It doesn't hurt anyone who has the old ones and decides not to play with them, but when you get the new ones and/or find out that the new versions aren't as crappy anymore, suddenly you have some new options. And it's not like Oxford University for 0 pool or Blood Puppy for 2 pool is really tearing up the tournament scene...

On Nov 26, 11:49 am, Johannes Walch <johannes.wa...@vekn.de> wrote: > That could have been easily solved by putting them into a starter. Starters are often used in sealed/limited play (i.e. you get a starter and X boosters to make a deck). If the intention of not reprinting Parity Shift, say, was to not have them be nuclear bombs in limited play, putting them in starters would have not helped. Not that I know that this is why PS and whatever wasn't reprinted. -Peter

[ quoted text not captured ] Reprinting with different costs is the same as errata no? Anyhow, if thats true or not its not a big deal either, I just think having as small a list of cards that dont do what the printed card says it does is good. Sometimes making a card playable if its cool enough will be worth making the list bigger, somtimes (chainsaw - most broken card int he game) its probably not but generally there should be a desire to keep the list breif. Ant

On Nov 27, 10:06 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 Nov, 15:31, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > > > On Nov 27, 3:41 am, Anthony Coleman <Buntina...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Also Im not in favour of errataing wallpaper cards, just leave em, we > > > really dont need a bigger errata list. Only adjust down imo. > > > Wallpaper cards are never (almost never?) errata'd. I guess you're > > thinking of when they are reprinted, usually with lower cost. And > > that, I tend to like. It doesn't hurt anyone who has the old ones and > > decides not to play with them, but when you get the new ones and/or > > find out that the new versions aren't as crappy anymore, suddenly you > > have some new options. And it's not like Oxford University for 0 pool > > or Blood Puppy for 2 pool is really tearing up the tournament scene... > > Reprinting with different costs is the same as errata no? > Errata is changes issued to correct errors in printed cards. MRP's are cards that are printed differently from the original. Errata is bad because there is no physical card with that text on it. MRP isn't so bad because you can actually physically have the cards, and the existence of the new physical cards is what creates the change. MRP'ing in the case of cards that are too strong is sometimes a problem because plenty of people are still playing with the old cards and often have no idea that there even exists a newer "nerfed" version of the card. Even though it's a problem, it's preferable to most of us over having lots of broken cards and over outright banning. MRP'ing cards that were too weak to ever see play doesn't cause a problem because usually the old versions aren't in decks anyway, and if an old player is playing and finds out that a card he's playing with is *better* than what it says, it doesn't cause hurt feelings.

Chris Berger wrote: > MRP'ing cards that were too weak to ever see play doesn't cause a > problem because usually the old versions aren't in decks anyway, and > if an old player is playing and finds out that a card he's playing > with is *better* than what it says, it doesn't cause hurt feelings. this is why i would like to see more MRPing of wallpaper to bring it up to not-wallpaper levels. heck, they can stay 'not so great' if the design team is worried about accidentally bringing them up too high an then having to errata a MRP to bring it back down again, but you know i would like to be able to actually play with my Mehemet, Tara the Hollow One, etc. without breaching PTW rules at the deckbuilding stage ;) [ quoted text not captured ]