Five New Sabbat War Card texts

Here are the card texts of five cards from Sabbat War which I believe are new in this release. I got them at the Pre-release event at Third Planet in Southern California, which was really big fun. Please forgive me, but I’m not conversant with the "official" way to do card data, so I hope this format may suffice: San Nicolas de los Servitas Equipment Location Requires Lasombra Cost, Two blood This equipment card represents a unique location and does not count as equipment while in play. Actions directed at this Lasombra cost an additional pool. If this location is burned, the Lasombra with this card takes two damage (damage not preventable). This card cannot be contested. Any card that would contest this location is immediately burned before contesting begins. Eternal Vigilance Action (no symbols) Cost, One blood Requires a ready Archbishop, Priscus, or Cardinal. +1 stealth Put this card on the acting vampire. During an action, the Sabbat vampire with this card can pay a blood to untap and attempt to block. Burn this card if this Sabbat vampire goes to torpor. Oubliette Combat strike Requires Otenebration Cost, One blood inf: Strike, Combat ends sup: As above, and the opposing minion burns one blood (or life) after combat. Templar Political action (no symbols) (no cost) Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Bishop, Archbishop, Priscus or Cardinal at +1 stealth. Choose a Sabbat vampire. Successful referendum makes the vampire a templar. A templar may enter combat with a ready vampire controlled by another Methuslah as a +1 stealth D action. Any Sabbat vampire may call a referendum to remove this ability as a +1 stealth political action. Waste Management Operation Master Requires Brujah Antitribu Cost , one pool Master: unique location. Tap during your discard phase to move a card from your ash heap to the bottom of your library. "Men choose as their prophets those who tell them that their hopes are true." - Lord Dunsany Chick...@aol.com 3930 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 USA day 818-718-1221 eve 818-784-8476

Thanks for the update. Those of us who have not yet seen the new stuff salute you. San Nicolas de los Servitas Actions directed at this Lasombra cost an additional pool. If this location is burned, the Lasombra with this card takes two damage > (damage not preventable). Not very exciting. > Eternal Vigilance > Requires a ready Archbishop, Priscus, or Cardinal. +1 stealth > Put this card on the acting vampire. During an action, the Sabbat vampire with > this card can pay a blood to untap and attempt to block. Burn this card if > this Sabbat vampire goes to torpor. Nice, if you play with the older Sabbat vampires. > Oubliette > Cost, One blood > inf: Strike, Combat ends > sup: As above, and the opposing minion burns one blood (or life) after combat. OK, I guess. > Templar > Political action > (no symbols) > (no cost) > Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Bishop, Archbishop, Priscus or > Cardinal at +1 stealth. > Choose a Sabbat vampire. Successful referendum makes the vampire a templar. A > templar may enter combat with a ready vampire controlled by another Methuslah > as a +1 stealth D action. Any Sabbat vampire may call a referendum to remove > this ability as a +1 stealth political action. Hey, this can be called by Bishops too. Good way to add +1 stealth rush. > Waste Management Operation > Master: unique location. Tap during your discard phase to move a card from > your ash heap to the bottom of your library. Hey, this must be abusable somehow. ;) Thanks again, Madman Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

madma...@my-deja.com wrote: >> Waste Management Operation >> Master: unique location. Tap during your discard phase to move >> a card from your ash heap to the bottom of your library. > > Hey, this must be abusable somehow. ;) It would be very handy in Black Cat/Vast Wealth/Saturday Night Special/Dragon Breath Rounds decks as it puts the weapons back into your library where you can use them. I can also see it coming in handy in decks that go through their entire deck rather quickly. The limitation to !Brujah keeps it from being too popular in Ravnos Horrid Reality decks and Tzimisce Bauble decks. Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

Could anyone post more card/vamps to drool over? :) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Noal McDonald wrote: > madma...@my-deja.com wrote: > >> Waste Management Operation > >> Master: unique location. Tap during your discard phase to move > >> a card from your ash heap to the bottom of your library. > > > > Hey, this must be abusable somehow. ;) > > It would be very handy in Black Cat/Vast Wealth/Saturday Night > Special/Dragon Breath Rounds decks as it puts the weapons back into your > library where you can use them. If a Horrid Reality deck could get a !Bru in there (weenie or Clan Imp), it could also be fun there. Helps you not get bothered about running out of weapons too early, and allows you to recycle both of them, since it's a "place on the bottom" not "exchange". -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "And all the while I'm thinking things that I can never share with him. I'm a bundle of confusion, yet it has a strange appeal. Did it all begin with him and the way he makes me feel?"

cantila <rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message news:8thl6h$ob9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Could anyone post more card/vamps to drool over? :) Sure. Powerbase Madrid Master: Unique Location. 1 pool During your untap phase, add one counter to this card from the blood bank if it has less than 4 counters. Tap to giva a titled Sabbat vampire X additional votes during a referendum, where X is the number of counters on this card. Any vampire controlled by another methuselah can take a D: action to burn all the counters on this card. Shadow Strike Obtenebration Combat card. 1 blood Strike: strenght ranged damage, with an optional maneuver SUPerior: as above, with an optional press Kindred Manipulation !Ventrue Action Modiefier. 1 blood Only usable during a referendum. Change the votes of a younger vampire to votes of your choice. I think all of these 3 cards are quite good. - Guzmo

Thank you very much, these were cool cards indeed! > > > Could anyone post more card/vamps to drool over? :) > > Sure. > > Powerbase Madrid > Master: Unique Location. 1 pool > During your untap phase, add one counter to this card from the blood bank if > it has less than 4 counters. Tap to giva a titled Sabbat vampire X > additional votes during a referendum, where X is the number of counters on > this card. Any vampire controlled by another methuselah can take a D: action > to burn all the counters on this card. I have a feeling this card is going to be included in most Sabbat decks. > > Shadow Strike > Obtenebration Combat card. 1 blood > Strike: strenght ranged damage, with an optional maneuver > SUPerior: as above, with an optional press I like this one a lot because it's cool. Hmmm Art of Pain and Depravity on a !Toreador with Obt/OBT :) > > Kindred Manipulation > !Ventrue Action Modiefier. 1 blood > Only usable during a referendum. Change the votes of a younger vampire to > votes of your choice. Not bad at all, !Ventrues might not have many votes on their vampires, but they surely have nice cards to disrupt any vote deck hehe. I like it. > > I think all of these 3 cards are quite good. > How many new vamps are there in a starter deck (and there's 12 vamps right?) and are there any vamps from the sterer deck clans in the boosters as well? Anyone know how many vamps outside the 4 PCD clans that has been printed of each clan? [ quoted text not captured ]

I personally like the following... Ox, Viceroy of the Hollows Nosferatu Antitribu 6 Capacity ANI, OBF, POT No special, but all three superior for 6, plain simple to the point! Rave Action Card +1 Stealth Action Move any amount of blood (or life) and/or equipment from the acting minion to any ready vampires you control. This card has HUGE possibilities ie. Black Cat... Storage Annex Master: Location Put a card from your hand facedown (out of play) on this card when you play it. You may look at the card at any time. During your master phase, you may exchange a card in your hand for the card on this Storage Annex. If the Storage Annex is stolen or burned, the card on it is stolen or burned as well. I'd like to know what other people think of this (I like it for reasons I'll keep to myself until I try the deck and post a report), and if your hand size is affected by the Annex or multiple Annex...(LSJ?) Courier Nosferatu Antitribu Ally 2 Blood from the recruiting vampire Ally with 1 life. 0 Strength. 1 bleed. Courier gets -1 intercept when attempting to block a vampire. When a minion you control successfully bleeds, you may look at the top card of the library of the Methuselah being bled, and you may tap the Courier to discard that card. Do I hear Steam Tunnels, Dirty Little Secrets getting a friend? ABUSE!!! Once again, I would like to thank White Wolf for a great time!! oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster Prince of Caledon "Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit Of that forbidden tree whose mortal taste Brought death into the world, and all our woe." John Milton Paradise Lost. Book i. Line 1. cantila <rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message news:8thl6h$ob9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

Here are some new vamps I drew from boosters (from the Atlanta pre-release jam) --Thanks and congrats go out to Todd for setting up and running the day's operations, to Steve for the confidence to undertake the project, and to LSJ for all the rulemonging :) Caliban (Tzi, 6-cap, Art: Christopher Shy) ANI AUS VIC. Comments: Ox (as posted by Oafloard) isn't the only 6-cap with all superior skills. I get a headache thinking of what Derek is going to do with this vamp. Contest with me, probably. :) Idalia, Prophet of Guadalahara ( !Malk, 4-cap, Art: Christopher Shy) AUS dem. If Idalia successfully performs an equip action, untap her at the end of the turn. Comments: wow. Peter Blaine ( !Ven, 4-cap, Art: William O'Connor) aus dom for Comments: One more gear for the Crypt Machine; except now there are just enough (at least 5) vamps with aus/dom to throw some Telepathic Counters into the library. Wren ( !Gan, 4-cap, Art: Leif Jones) cel obf pro I also picked up an Art Scam, a Precognition, and a Command of the Beast, so there are some nice cards that made it into reprint. Speaking of reprints, one thing I noticed about the set is that most of the art has a brighter, more vibrant look, that shows up nicely on the reprinted cards. I don't know if that's a result of printing or publishing, but it looks good. Also in response to Oaflord's reply...Storage Annex is entirely fun. Burn it or steal it (with the card it contains), or use it as a an extra discard. I think someone mentioned Powerbase:Montreal, which is another entirely fun card.

> Ox, Viceroy of the Hollows > Nosferatu Antitribu > 6 Capacity > ANI, OBF, POT > > No special, but all three superior for 6, plain simple to the point! I like plain and simple vamps like this, they're needed too. > > Rave > Action Card > +1 Stealth Action > Move any amount of blood (or life) and/or equipment from the acting minion > to any ready vampires you control. > > This card has HUGE possibilities ie. Black Cat... I don't know if you can call it HUGE possibilities. But surely it has it's uses. If you use it with Black Cat the disadvantage is that it takes 3 turns to equip her twice, while if you let another vamp takes her equipment you do it in two turns. The good thing is that if you want, you can always have an untapped vampire ready to block with an equipment Black Cat has brought out. In some cases this can be a very good thing. Too bad you cannot transfer blood to allies and turn it into life ;) Hmm I wonder how usable this card can be as a secondary HG sort of. Like using this card on Renegade Garou that heals himself anyway. But it probably not worth the risk. > > Storage Annex > Master: Location > Put a card from your hand facedown (out of play) on this card when you play > it. You may look at the card at any time. During your master phase, you > may exchange a card in your hand for the card on this Storage Annex. If the > Storage Annex is stolen or burned, the card on it is stolen or burned as > well. Wow THIS was a cool card! Awesome. > > I'd like to know what other people think of this (I like it for reasons I'll > keep to myself until I try the deck and post a report), and if your hand > size is affected by the Annex or multiple Annex...(LSJ?) > > Courier > Nosferatu Antitribu Ally > 2 Blood from the recruiting vampire > Ally with 1 life. 0 Strength. 1 bleed. > Courier gets -1 intercept when attempting to block a vampire. When a minion > you control successfully bleeds, you may look at the top card of the library > of the Methuselah being bled, and you may tap the Courier to discard that > card. > I like this card a lot too. Pretty nasty that it doesn't cost any pool to play and it isn't even unique. This opens up for some real nasty tactics with Night Moves :) > Do I hear Steam Tunnels, Dirty Little Secrets getting a friend? ABUSE!!! > > Once again, I would like to thank White Wolf for a great time!! > > oAFLORD > aka > Thomas Kuster > Prince of Caledon > Thanks for your contribution :) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39fcf23a...@news.atl.mediaone.net>, mike_p@a_van_a.net wrote: > Here are some new vamps I drew from boosters (from the Atlanta > pre-release jam) --Thanks and congrats go out to Todd for setting up > and running the day's operations, to Steve for the confidence to > undertake the project, and to LSJ for all the rulemonging :) > > Caliban > (Tzi, 6-cap, Art: Christopher Shy) > ANI AUS VIC. > Comments: Ox (as posted by Oafloard) isn't the only 6-cap with all > superior skills. I get a headache thinking of what Derek is going to > do with this vamp. Contest with me, probably. :) Sweet vampire, alhought I think the existing cap 6 Tzi is still very competitive and maybe generally more tempting to include, at least I think it will be for me. > > Idalia, Prophet of Guadalahara > ( !Malk, 4-cap, Art: Christopher Shy) > AUS dem. If Idalia successfully performs an equip action, untap her > at the end of the turn. > Comments: wow. > > Peter Blaine > ( !Ven, 4-cap, Art: William O'Connor) > aus dom for > Comments: One more gear for the Crypt Machine; except now there are > just enough (at least 5) vamps with aus/dom to throw some Telepathic > Counters into the library. Good to see some low cap vamps, they're always needed. > > Wren > ( !Gan, 4-cap, Art: Leif Jones) > cel obf pro I like this one, cel and pro can be quite nasty. But it costs mucho blood, so Feral Heart is certainly useful here. > > I also picked up an Art Scam, a Precognition, and a Command of the > Beast, so there are some nice cards that made it into reprint. Although I'm not sure about Command of the Beast (a card I'd like to have more of, but I think in general there's probably more useful dom cards to reprint that wasn't) the other cards are nice to see reprinted. > > Also in response to Oaflord's reply...Storage Annex is entirely fun. > Burn it or steal it (with the card it contains), or use it as a an > extra discard. I think someone mentioned Powerbase:Montreal, which is > another entirely fun card. What does Powerbase:Montreal do? [ quoted text not captured ]

"oaflord" <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote: > Storage Annex > Master: Location > Put a card from your hand facedown (out of play) on this card when > you play it. You may look at the card at any time. During your > master phase, you may exchange a card in your hand for the card on > this Storage Annex. If the Storage Annex is stolen or burned, the > card on it is stolen or burned as well. > > I'd like to know [...] if your hand > size is affected by the Annex or multiple Annex...(LSJ?) No. It says nothing about your hand size. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

> Rave > Action Card > +1 Stealth Action > Move any amount of blood (or life) and/or equipment from the acting minion > to any ready vampires you control. > > This card has HUGE possibilities ie. Black Cat... I thought that if weapons were equipped by Black Cat and passed on to another minion, the outstanding 1 pool has to be payed - i.e. the special only applies if Black Cat uses the weapon. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8tk23l$ib2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, hamd...@my-deja.com wrote the second part: > > Rave > > Action Card > > +1 Stealth Action > > Move any amount of blood (or life) and/or equipment > > from the acting minion to any ready vampires you control. > > > > This card has HUGE possibilities ie. Black Cat... > > I thought that if weapons were equipped by Black Cat and passed on to > another minion, the outstanding 1 pool has to be payed - i.e. the > special only applies if Black Cat uses the weapon. Wow, where'd you get that one? You only pay for equipment when it comes into play, or when required by another card, ie Peace Treaty. Moving/Transferring equipment cards has nothing to do with paying costs. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://lasombra.tripod.com http://legbiter.tripod.com [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > > Powerbase Madrid > > Master: Unique Location. 1 pool > > During your untap phase, add one counter to this card from the blood > bank if > > it has less than 4 counters. Tap to giva a titled Sabbat vampire X > > additional votes during a referendum, where X is the number of > counters on > > this card. Any vampire controlled by another methuselah can take a D: > action > > to burn all the counters on this card. > > I have a feeling this card is going to be included in most Sabbat decks. *pfeh* Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a relatively intercept heavy deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 mike_p@a_van_a.net wrote: > Speaking of reprints, one thing I noticed about the set is that most > of the art has a brighter, more vibrant look, that shows up nicely on > the reprinted cards. It is. Anam, were she around, would be able to confirm exactly what went wrong where but, basically, the printing of Sabbat under Wizards ended up with a *lot* of pictures (perhaps all) coming out very dark indeed. > Also in response to Oaflord's reply...Storage Annex is entirely fun. > Burn it or steal it (with the card it contains), or use it as a an > extra discard. Rob Treasure has already started making noises about its abusive potential. Be Afraid. (tm) > I think someone mentioned Powerbase:Montreal, which is > another entirely fun card. Not entirely fun, but potentially so, yes. It does have sensible uses. Myself, I rate the Museum of High Art, Atlanta, as mostly fun, except for heavy intercept decks. I might be tempted to throw it in a few decks, just because. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > > Ox, Viceroy of the Hollows > > Nosferatu Antitribu > > 6 Capacity > > ANI, OBF, POT > > > > No special, but all three superior for 6, plain simple to the point! > > I like plain and simple vamps like this, they're needed too. There are a lot of them. Myself, I'd have preferred a *little* variation. Maybe a Gitane clone for the Lasombra (give them a Bishopdom, say) at 7. A few sixes for the harder clans, a 7 with a special for some of the others. The Cookie Cutter Sixes are useful but kinda boring. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > > > > Powerbase Madrid > > > Master: Unique Location. 1 pool > > > During your untap phase, add one counter to this card from the blood > > > bank if it has less than 4 counters. Tap to giva a titled Sabbat vampire > X > > > additional votes during a referendum, where X is the number of > > > counters on this card. Any vampire controlled by another methuselah > > > can take a D: action to burn all the counters on this card. > > > > I have a feeling this card is going to be included in most Sabbat decks. > > *pfeh* > > Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that > popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a > relatively intercept heavy deck. I think the answer is that if folks want to spend minion actions going and raiding your votes and you don't have the minion free or the intercept in hand to stop them, then just let them. If you're running a heavy vote deck, presumedly this card isn't your only source of votes so you can sustain its temporary loss and still advance your position. On the other hand, if it's your only source, that should only be because you're not depending that heavily on your votes, so just do other things while you're waiting for the votes to regrow. It really is a good card, IMHO. I can it being contested frequently. Fred

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:55:20 +0000, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > >> > Powerbase Madrid >> > Master: Unique Location. 1 pool >> > During your untap phase, add one counter to this card from the blood >> bank if >> > it has less than 4 counters. Tap to giva a titled Sabbat vampire X >> > additional votes during a referendum, where X is the number of >> counters on >> > this card. Any vampire controlled by another methuselah can take a D: >> action >> > to burn all the counters on this card. >> >> I have a feeling this card is going to be included in most Sabbat decks. > >*pfeh* > >Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that >popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a >relatively intercept heavy deck. (shrug) Because you burn the counters, not the card, and it doesn't take any effort to put the counters on the card? :) Especially if you have a few cheap Bishops floating around. -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > I thought that if weapons were equipped by Black Cat and passed on to > another minion, the outstanding 1 pool has to be payed - i.e. the > special only applies if Black Cat uses the weapon. No. The cost is only paid when the card is played. The cost increases when passed along, but the increased cost is not paid, since the card is not being played at that time. The increased cost is only interesting for cards that care what the cost of the card is - like Peace Treaty and Illegal Search and Seizure. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Ox, Viceroy of the Hollows > Nosferatu Antitribu > 6 Capacity > ANI, OBF, POT > No special, but all three superior for 6, plain simple to the point! There are actually 2 others I've seen so far just like that, a 6 cap all superior disc (3 of them).. One for !Malkavian (Dolphin.. something like that), and one for the Tzimisce (Caliban).. I'm assuming, but maybe there's now one all sup, 6 cap for each clan.. Who knows.. good stuff though.. Rave is definitely a notable card... Adam [ quoted text not captured ]

>What does Powerbase:Montreal do? It's a clanless, zero-cost, stealable Eco-Terrorists: During your influence phase, you may move one blood from blood bank to one of your uncontrolled vamps. Any vamp can steal the location as a D action. Since influence comes after minion phase, the theiving methuselah should be able to use it in the influence phase of the same turn.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that > > popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a > > relatively intercept heavy deck. > > I think the answer is that if folks want to spend minion actions going > and raiding your votes and you don't have the minion free or the > intercept in hand to stop them, then just let them. However, if you are pretty sure you're deck isn't going to be able to defend it, why bother in the first place? Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > >Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that > >popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a > >relatively intercept heavy deck. > > (shrug) Because you burn the counters, not the card, and it doesn't > take any effort to put the counters on the card? :) Especially if > you have a few cheap Bishops floating around. Yeah, but a pool, a deck slot, a hand slot.... a lot of decks won't really want to have to waste those (e.g. the PDB6 rush decks, done Sabbat War-stylee [sic]). [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:11:11 +0000, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > >> >Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that >> >popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a >> >relatively intercept heavy deck. >> >> (shrug) Because you burn the counters, not the card, and it doesn't >> take any effort to put the counters on the card? :) Especially if >> you have a few cheap Bishops floating around. > >Yeah, but a pool, a deck slot, a hand slot.... a lot of decks won't really >want to have to waste those (e.g. the PDB6 rush decks, done Sabbat >War-stylee [sic]). But those are awful rare these days. Most decks on your side and on our little corner of the pond DO have the spare slot - and certainly a bruise-and-bleed deck would have a spare pool for this sort of thing, just to give itself a little help in the voting world. Also, as someone else pointed out, people taking an action to burn the counters off the card is an action that they aren't taking to bleed you or beat up your guys or actually do something USEFUL. =) Even if a hostile vote deck stops to burn the counters off your card so it can pass its next vote, it's better than it being able to drop TWO of that next vote with the other action. And if they never burn the counters off the card, well, look! you have some votes! [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > > Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that > > > popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a > > > relatively intercept heavy deck. > > > > I think the answer is that if folks want to spend minion actions going > > and raiding your votes and you don't have the minion free or the > > intercept in hand to stop them, then just let them. > > However, if you are pretty sure you're deck isn't going to be able to > defend it, why bother in the first place? Because you cost them multiple minion actions for only one pool and one M.P.A. That's not too bad for being the worst that could (normally) happen. > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. Are we talking about the same card? There's no such escape clause built into Power Base: Madrid. Sure, if you have a Kine Dominance or something, by all means use it. But choosing to steal PB:M (vs. any other location) is the same kind of judgement you'd use to put one in your deck in the first place. Fred

On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. > > Are we talking about the same card? There's no such escape > clause built into Power Base: Madrid. I didn't say there was. > Sure, if you have a Kine > Dominance or something, by all means use it. Disputed Territory works just as well, and PB: Madrid is likely to be a prime target for a political deck. Or just burn it. Arson etc. are frequently found cards, IME. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39FDB3D7...@netcom.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] These were exactly my thoughts too. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.001031...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > > Why waste a pool, a deck slot and a possible contest (if it's that > > > popular) on a card you probably can't defend unless you're paying a > > > relatively intercept heavy deck. > > > > I think the answer is that if folks want to spend minion actions going > > and raiding your votes and you don't have the minion free or the > > intercept in hand to stop them, then just let them. > > However, if you are pretty sure you're deck isn't going to be able to > defend it, why bother in the first place? > > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. With defend,, do you mean defend against Disputed Teritory or against the raids to brun the blood? If the latter, it's not really abig deal. My experience is that people rarily bother to take actions to burn a card unless it's really having an impact on the game. And the raids on this card only burns the counters that will automatically be renewed anyway, I think people will be pretty reluctant to waste an action on that. If they do, that's only good for you since most likely it was a your predator/prey that made the action and that means a tapped minion for them. And the best thing is, that they'll have to do it all over in a few turns. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.001031...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. > > > > Are we talking about the same card? There's no such escape > > clause built into Power Base: Madrid. > > I didn't say there was. > > > Sure, if you have a Kine > > Dominance or something, by all means use it. > > Disputed Territory works just as well, and PB: Madrid is likely to be a > prime target for a political deck. > > Or just burn it. Arson etc. are frequently found cards, IME. > IMO I think this is a flawed argument. If you think like this you could never include a useful location in your deck "out of fear for having it stolen". If you're so worried about it, then get intercept so you can block it or just never play with useful locations.... [ quoted text not captured ]

> Also, as someone else pointed out, people taking an action to burn the > counters off the card is an action that they aren't taking to bleed > you or beat up your guys or actually do something USEFUL. =) Even if > a hostile vote deck stops to burn the counters off your card so it can > pass its next vote, it's better than it being able to drop TWO of that > next vote with the other action. And if they never burn the counters > off the card, well, look! you have some votes! It amazes me how we *can* think alike sometimes ;) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0010301703090.10528- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, cantila wrote: > > > > Ox, Viceroy of the Hollows > > > Nosferatu Antitribu > > > 6 Capacity > > > ANI, OBF, POT > > > > > > No special, but all three superior for 6, plain simple to the point! > > > > I like plain and simple vamps like this, they're needed too. > > There are a lot of them. Myself, I'd have preferred a *little* > variation. Maybe a Gitane clone for the Lasombra (give them a Bishopdom, > say) at 7. A few sixes for the harder clans, a 7 with a special for some > of the others. > > The Cookie Cutter Sixes are useful but kinda boring. > Yes but before SW they were pretty rare (I think only 2 vamps). I don't think they should make many more of these though, if all clans had them it would be boring. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > > However, if you are pretty sure you're deck isn't going to be able to > > defend it, why bother in the first place? > > > > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. > > With defend,, do you mean defend against Disputed Teritory or against > the raids to brun the blood? Either is possible. > If the latter, it's not really abig deal. Not really. A weenie deck could really cause you havoc and whilst they're tempered by the new environment, they're still playable. > My experience is that people rarily bother to take actions to burn a > card unless it's really having an impact on the game. If it's good, it *will* have an impact on the game. If it's bad, why put it in your deck? [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > > > Sure, if you have a Kine > > > Dominance or something, by all means use it. > > > > Disputed Territory works just as well, and PB: Madrid is likely to be > a > > prime target for a political deck. > > > > Or just burn it. Arson etc. are frequently found cards, IME. > > > > IMO I think this is a flawed argument. If you think like this you could > never include a useful location in your deck "out of fear for having it > stolen". If you're so worried about it, then get intercept so you can > block it or just never play with useful locations.... Which is exactly what I've been saying. If you can't defend it with intercept, you don't want to hand a card that is useful to all decks onto the table. Something like, say, Backways is a different matter - it's specific to one clan, they may not be on the table, you balance the probabilities. There is no deck to which PB: Madrid can't add some benefit, since it is very, very rare not to have a political deck (that is, a deck with even minor politics in it) on the table. If you can defend it, cool. But I think any player just putting it in a deck because they can, as was suggested at the start, would be very, very foolish indeed. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > Yes but before SW they were pretty rare (I think only 2 vamps). I don't > think they should make many more of these though, if all clans had them > it would be boring. To the best of my knowledge, and the number of boosters I've opened suggests this to be likely, there is one for all of them. This is why I believed them "boring". [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0011011343291.24821- 100...@yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > > > However, if you are pretty sure you're deck isn't going to be able to > > > defend it, why bother in the first place? > > > > > > Just steal someone else's if it's that popular. > > > > With defend,, do you mean defend against Disputed Teritory or against > > the raids to brun the blood? > > Either is possible. > > > If the latter, it's not really abig deal. > > Not really. A weenie deck could really cause you havoc and whilst they're > tempered by the new environment, they're still playable. Yes but it's *still* a wasted action. If a weenie deck would try burn the counters I'd be only happy to let them (unless I desperately need the counters for a vote that I plan to call), because it means a mnion less to bleeed me with. > > > My experience is that people rarily bother to take actions to burn a > > card unless it's really having an impact on the game. > > If it's good, it *will* have an impact on the game. > > If it's bad, why put it in your deck? It's not bad. But the effect on the game isn't as easily perceived as Strained Vitae Supply for example, because you can't know what votes I intend to use the PB for (if any at all, I might use it only as a defence against other people's votes). [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0011011344410.24821- 100...@yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk>, [ quoted text not captured ] Why would it be? If you play a political deck you're not likely to have it votes away through a Disputed Territory, so then they'll have to take actions to burn the blood, which are more or less wasted actions. Only problem would be Arson, but there's usually tons of other locations that people rather consider to burn. The prey of a Meth using Backways would for example like to get rid of that one (esp if the Gangrel is playing with Dominate and the prey doesn't have that much intercept) than to try burn my PB if I were his prey since I could pull through my most critical votes even without my PB (because my deck is a political one). If I don't have a vote deck thenthe PB can be used to try disrupt votes directed against me, Disputed Territory included. If I still don't succeed, he's at least wasted an action to take control over my PB (an action he'd otherwise possibly use to take another of my locations like Elder Library. Thanks to PB he now needs to first take my PB or at least burn the vounters on it, in order to get the votes to take my EL). In a worst acse scenario he wasted an action and a DT (that he could have used for better purposes, since if he plays a political deck any actions trying to uphold his vote lock are wasted actions). If my PB helps him to get a vote lock then he could possibly have achieved it anyway through other means, and it should also be hard for him to pull through a DT when I have my PB to vote agaisnt it. Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put into play, and political decks usually can't pull out that much stealth for an Arson. In conclusion, you can never be safe. But that applies to every location, and IMO PB isn't powerful enough in *other* people's view to have them try get rid of it asap, whilst the PB is deifnately good enough to be included in most decks. When I said location having an impact I used the word "really" to emphasize that people don't bother to burn even good locations unless it affects them so much that they lose the game if they don't burn it. The PB could be such a card in *some* cases but in many other not, since when it comes to votes people tend to think "I block the political action instead when he tries to play it, instead of burning the blood on the PB all the time", a thought that's not so dumb either. Why waste actions trying to get rid of a card if you're not even sure the card will have an impact on the game? (i.e. if I inlcude it in a non-political deck, only a political deck would be interested in trying to get rid of it, adn even then it's quite doubtful since they will have BO's etc to help them get through their votes, PB or not). [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > > > > Sure, if you have a Kine > > > > Dominance or something, by all means use it. > > > > > > Disputed Territory works just as well, and PB: Madrid is likely to be > > > a prime target for a political deck. > > > > > > Or just burn it. Arson etc. are frequently found cards, IME. > > > > IMO I think this is a flawed argument. If you think like this you could > > never include a useful location in your deck "out of fear for having it > > stolen". If you're so worried about it, then get intercept so you can > > block it or just never play with useful locations.... > > Which is exactly what I've been saying. If you can't defend it with > intercept, you don't want to hand a card that is useful to all decks onto > the table. Something like, say, Backways is a different matter - it's > specific to one clan, they may not be on the table, you balance the > probabilities. Still a poor argument. Or at least, I don't know about your metagame, but if I was paranoid about Arsons, Unnatural Disasters, theivery, and the like, I'm pretty sure my play would suffer more than if I just lived with it. It just doesn't happen enough and I don't expect it to happen very often. (Not that it isn't irritating when it does happen. Especially Disputed Territory, that really sucks.) Fred

"cantila" <rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message news:8tp9nj$toi$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put > into play, No. Xian, jack-booted thug -- I'd tell the world and save my soul, But rain falls down and I feel cold. A cold that sleeps within my heart, It tears the earth and sun apart. --_Shellshock_, New Order www.waste.org/~xian

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:52:28 -0600, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > >"cantila" <rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message >news:8tp9nj$toi$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... >> Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put >> into play, > >No. > >Xian, jack-booted thug I have stationary intercept cards in all my decks. In a lot of them, they look just like the vampires. "Hugo, here, would like to take an action to intercept Sir Walter Nash before he gets to call any votes." Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we HAVE around here, anyway? -- Derek Jack-Booted Thug of Atlanta [ quoted text not captured ]

>> Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept >> cards to put into play, > > No. > Xian, jack-booted thug I agree with Xian. That's absolute hogwash. Noal, (another) Jack-booted thug -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Noal McDonald wrote: > >> Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept > >> cards to put into play, > > > > No. > > Xian, jack-booted thug > > I agree with Xian. That's absolute hogwash. Mostly hogwash. As an all round defence, intercept is useful against votes, against bleed etc. However, many decks have alternative and preferred ways (for that deck) to achieve the same ends. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7hn00tkms31vn2mbu...@4ax.com... > "Hugo, here, would like to take an action to intercept Sir Walter Nash > before he gets to call any votes." Hahaha!!! That made me smile. > Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we HAVE around > here, anyway? I'm not sure. I believe the term was originally applied a couple of years ago, before I took my sabbatical from the newsgroup. At the time, I believe included in the roll-call was Peter (of course), James Hamblin, myself, Josh Duffin, and a few of you Atlanta Crew, IIRC. I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained that many full converts since then, but I believe that we are more feared... Xian [ quoted text not captured ]

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote in message news:Jb_L5.689$q81.2...@news.uswest.net... > "Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:7hn00tkms31vn2mbu...@4ax.com... > > Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we HAVE around > > here, anyway? > > I'm not sure. I believe the term was originally applied a couple of years > ago, before I took my sabbatical from the newsgroup. At the time, I believe > included in the roll-call was Peter (of course), James Hamblin, myself, Josh > Duffin, and a few of you Atlanta Crew, IIRC. > > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained that many full > converts since then, but I believe that we are more feared... At GenCon I've traditionally made my championships deck choice based on whether James Hamblin or Peter were playing in the event. Let's just say I wouldn't have played a deck with 20 majesties in it if they were at the event. -Robert

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Xian wrote: > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained that many full > converts since then, but I believe that we are more feared... I think the fear is more of you destroying my vampires than sweeping a table. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Ew_L5.10307$Pw6.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, [ quoted text not captured ] Dammit! Why do I always get left out of these namedrops? Xian remembered me, which is some consolation. But I was playing the industry standard Bru/!Bru pot/cel rush deck at Nationals at GenCon this year... okay, so I totally sucked in terms of getting VPs for some reason, but still... never break up the Trinity; the Holy Ghost will get upset. ;-) Hey, while we're here: anyone have any luck with potence-only rush decks lately? I threw something together in an attempt to make my crypt even smaller and faster, but so far it hasn't been working all that well. It's only got a few Fake Outs for maneuvers, which could be a problem, but I'm not really sure that that's it... any ideas? Josh jack-booted blasphemer [ quoted text not captured ]

>> Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we >> HAVE around here, anyway? > > I'm not sure. I believe the term was originally applied a couple > of years ago, before I took my sabbatical from the newsgroup. > At the time, I believe included in the roll-call was Peter (of > course), James Hamblin, myself, Josh Duffin, and a few of you > Atlanta Crew, IIRC. I wear jack boots, too. I guess that makes me one since we all know how much of an asshole I can be when I don't get my coffee. *grin* Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained > that many full converts since then, but I believe that we are > more feared... Hrm. The closest thing I've come at a big tournament was that Brujah Amaranth Pitch Deck I played at Origins a few years back. I'm more of a Bruise & Bleed or Bruise & Graverob person. Maybe I'll make a pure-rush deck for Ravnos. With the new cards, I'm forseeing some great Lasombra Pitch Decks using Thoughts Betrayed, Potence pre-range and that Obtenebration card that does "strength ranged damage". Telepathic Tracking is going to be great for Tzimisce and Tremere decks. Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0011011354340.24821- 100...@yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, cantila wrote: > > Yes but before SW they were pretty rare (I think only 2 vamps). I don't > > think they should make many more of these though, if all clans had them > > it would be boring. > > To the best of my knowledge, and the number of boosters I've opened > suggests this to be likely, there is one for all of them. > > This is why I believed them "boring". > One for all Sabbat clans or just one for each of the PCD-clans? Of what I saw at Ethan's site there's not one for all clans I think (although the list isn't complete) but if that's the case then it's not fun at all. Even 4 such vamps is starting to get a bit too much since they're all sabbat. I think there should be a few for the Camarilla (say 2 or 3) and as many for Sabbat and then maybe one for each Independent (since they need it (but Ravnos have one already so they don't need another) unless they get spiced up a lot in the Final Nights. But too late to change now I guess. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8tq20j$klc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained > > that many full converts since then, but I believe that we are > > more feared... > > Hrm. The closest thing I've come at a big tournament was that Brujah > Amaranth Pitch Deck I played at Origins a few years back. I'm more of a > Bruise & Bleed or Bruise & Graverob person. Maybe I'll make a pure- rush > deck for Ravnos. > > With the new cards, I'm forseeing some great Lasombra Pitch Decks using > Thoughts Betrayed, Potence pre-range and that Obtenebration card that > does "strength ranged damage". Telepathic Tracking is going to be great > for Tzimisce and Tremere decks. > > Regards, > Noal Yeah I'm still excited over Telepathic Tracking! I can't wait to try it out with Tzimisce and Tremere (who happen to be my favourite clans as well (but I suspect Lasombra will be one now too)). [ quoted text not captured ]

"Joshua Duffin" <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote in message news:8tq0ov$jh7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... [clip] > > At GenCon I've traditionally made my championships deck choice > > based on whether James Hamblin or Peter were playing in the event. Let's > > just say I wouldn't have played a deck with 20 majesties in it if they > > were at the event. > > Dammit! Why do I always get left out of these namedrops? > Xian remembered me, which is some consolation. But I was > playing the industry standard Bru/!Bru pot/cel rush deck at > Nationals at GenCon this year... okay, so I totally sucked > in terms of getting VPs for some reason, but still... never > break up the Trinity; the Holy Ghost will get upset. ;-) Oh, I remembered you. I just don't think of you as being synonymous with Potence Rush. I'll be sure to get you in my next namedrop. -Robert

Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic Tracking in a precon deck, in boosters, or both? Mathieu

In article <Ul1M5.10745$Pw6.7...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, [ quoted text not captured ] Thank you. ;-) For the record, the Ithaca Jyhad group (at the Cornell games club) that developed the heavy-Immortal Grapple POT/CEL, POT/ OBF, POT/ANI, etc. rush combat theory (not to imply that we were necessarily the first, but it certainly didn't seem very prevalent at the time - back then we still had to repeatedly explain what Immortal Grapple did at most tournaments) included me, Peter Bakija, and James Hamblin. James actually didn't start playing POT rush until after I did (and long after Peter did - Peter was by far the first and put together his collection of Grapples by convincing us all to trade them to him because they were useless), but has since become a devoted rush guru and clearly has done a better job of staying in the public eye than I have. ;-) Maybe it's because I haven't been as bloody-minded in playing the deck all the time and everywhere, and instead using other things that I think might be better at winning. heh. I've heard that you West Coast types have had a fair amount of POT rush from time to time, but do you know what the history looked like out there? Did it develop independently of our versions, or was it inspired by them, or something else? I think the old Madison Wisconsin crew probably came up with the concept at least as early as we did too - that Adrian Sullivan has an impressive talent for deck design. later on, Josh [ quoted text not captured ]

Joshua Duffin wrote in message <8tq0ov$jh7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>... >In article <Ew_L5.10307$Pw6.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, (snip) >Hey, while we're here: anyone have any luck with potence-only >rush decks lately? I threw something together in an attempt >to make my crypt even smaller and faster, but so far it hasn't >been working all that well. It's only got a few Fake Outs for >maneuvers, which could be a problem, but I'm not really sure >that that's it... any ideas? Interestingly we have not seen much since our last Los Angeles tournament with Alex Harmon. I have been messing with a nasty potence/protean thing, Robert had an increased strength Burning Wrath deck a while back, and I believe Robyn Merril has been throwing some gates & sewer lids, but that's about it. I haven't even seen Robert's weenie potence deck recently. I think the revival of Obedience and the good amount of fortitude that is still hanging around our group has really has really killed the potence-only stuff. Steve Bucy -- "The only human commander to survive combat with the Minbari fleet is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives be somewhere else!" - Delenn Check out http://vtesinla.org/ for all V:TES information in Los Angeles area. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <3A00A4E5...@webmails.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] According to the decklists at http://members.tripod.com/~Lasombra/decks.htm the card ins't in any of the pre-cons. [ quoted text not captured ]

cantila wrote: > > > If you can defend it, cool. But I think any player just putting it > > in a deck because they can, as was suggested at the start, would be very, > > very foolish indeed. > > Why would it be? Because not every deck needs this card. > If you play a political deck you're not likely to have > it votes away through a Disputed Territory, so then they'll have to > take actions to burn the blood, which are more or less wasted actions. If you don't care that people are coming and taking the counters off of it, why are you playing with it in the first place? > Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put > into play, Wrong. You're saying "every deck needs this PB" and "every deck needs intercept" but you're just wrong. A rush combat deck has no use for either of these things, for example. A weenie presence bleed deck couldn't care less about having intercept or voting power. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." -- Shivaree

Robert Goudie wrote: > > At GenCon I've traditionally made my championships deck choice based on > whether James Hamblin or Peter were playing in the event. Let's just say I > wouldn't have played a deck with 20 majesties in it if they were at the > event. Aha! So I must have fooled people by playing with a dubious Gangrel deck instead of my tried-and-true rush deck. I'll know better next time. [ quoted text not captured ]

Joshua Duffin wrote: > > Dammit! Why do I always get left out of these namedrops? > Xian remembered me, which is some consolation. But I was > playing the industry standard Bru/!Bru pot/cel rush deck at > Nationals at GenCon this year... okay, so I totally sucked > in terms of getting VPs for some reason, but still... never > break up the Trinity; the Holy Ghost will get upset. ;-) I guess Peter is The Father and I'm The Son? Besides, Josh. Everybody knows I invented the rush combat deck. :) > Hey, while we're here: anyone have any luck with potence-only > rush decks lately? I threw something together in an attempt > to make my crypt even smaller and faster, but so far it hasn't > been working all that well. It's only got a few Fake Outs for > maneuvers, which could be a problem, but I'm not really sure > that that's it... any ideas? I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. That way it can be a lot more focused. For example, in my !Bru deck, a model combat looks like: Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, Immortal Grapple, Undead Strength, Blur, Taste of Vitae, Decapitate In a weenie Pot deck, you can dispense with the Blur, the US, and the Decapitate. I really want to make a deck with like 12 Disarms and see what kind of havoc I could wreak. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek wrote: >>Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we HAVE around here, anyway?>> Yeah, I'm still here, and my Pot Rush deck, completely devoid of untaps, intercept, vote defense, bleed bounce (and doesn't have any spare deck slots to spare...), and anything other than pure, unadulterated pre-emptive violence is still winning occasionally (heck, it swept the last time I played it :-) I figure the fewer people understand that pure Rush combat works, the better chance I have to win... Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/bakija6 "Why so many swords?" "I must kill many." -Kikuchiyo

>I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. What do people think of Disarm? Personal opinion - the card is cheesy (too easy relative to its power or too powerful relative to its ease, whichever).

In article <3A00BE6A...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: [first of multiple replys in this thread...bored at work] [weenie potence] > I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. > That way it can be a lot more focused. Yeah, Disarms are soooo good. I finally have four now, and I'm thrilled. Although my weenie potence deck is almost Peter's exactly...very very minor variations (Watenda, 2x Rampage, Hand of Conrad), the Disarms are so much nicer than PF or anything else. > For example, in my !Bru deck, a model combat looks like: > > Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, Immortal Grapple, Undead Strength, Blur, > Taste of Vitae, Decapitate > > In a weenie Pot deck, you can dispense with the Blur, the US, and the > Decapitate. Hmm. I don't know. I'd say weenie potence only should go: Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, [Increased Strength/Fists of Death], Immortal Grapple, Undead Strength, Disarm, Decapitate. The IS/FoD are completely optional, and I suppose if you had enough Disarms to replace them, you'd be fine. But still, dishing out 7 or 9 damage in one strike is always intimidating. > I really want to make a deck with like 12 Disarms and see what kind of > havoc I could wreak. holy god. That would be sheer madness. And fun. I'm planning on confusing everyone for the next couple of weeks and their all Sabbat decks with a Brujah Princes deck a la Josh (and to do so, I must disassemble the tried and true Nos/!Nos potence rush deck...oh well), but my next project is making as good a Lasombra Rush/GtU deck as can feasibly be managed. A few GtUs to bring in vampires, or as added bleed scare, but mainly Bum's Rush, Monomacy, Templar, and Political Struggle. Hmm. 6 BR, 2 Monomacy, 2 Templar, 4 Political Struggle, and 2 Haven Uncovered? Unfortunately a little less focused than I'd like, but the vote defense is likely to be better. Especially if I give up a master card slot or two for a Power Structure. And I need to play Black Metamorphosis in there. Yum. All I really have to say, though is...mmm...Talley-licious. He's what I've been waiting for...for ages... Xian [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0011012008050.25595- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Xian wrote: > > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained > > that many full > > converts since then, but I believe that we are more feared... > > I think the fear is more of you destroying my vampires than sweeping a > table. :) Eh...six of one, half a dozen of the other. Out of the last 4 times I've played the deck, I've got one sweep, one game with 2 of 3 VPs because I misjudged it, two games that were utter failures...one due to a well-timed Dramatic Upheaval, and the other because I rushed my predator too hard. I got a little too worried about the Setites and didn't consider my grand-predator until it was too late. I almost thrashed the last of my grand-predator's Tzimisce, but forgot to play IG at a critical juncture, thus tipping the balance of "vampires in torpor" in his favor instead of the other way around. This was, of course, on 3 hours of sleep and after 7 hours of playing. So, that's 6 out of 15 VPs...hmm...not great, but not awful either. I'll attribute it to getting readjusted to playing the deck. Xian [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <20001101201902...@ng-bg1.aol.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote: >Yeah, I'm still here, and my Pot Rush deck, completely devoid of untaps, >intercept, vote defense, bleed bounce (and doesn't have any spare deck slots to >spare...), and anything other than pure, unadulterated pre-emptive violence is >still winning occasionally (heck, it swept the last time I played it :-) So how does this happen? I'm asking not because I doubt you but out of sheer frustration. My combat decks come out, kill two to six vampires, and get ousted with 0 to 1 victory points. Do I just suck at table management, or is there some Deep Juju to playing combat I'm just totally oblivious to? gomi wants to start a regular ASK DR CARNAGE section in the newsgroup -- you say they taught you how to read and write yeah, they taught you how to count i say they taught you how to buy and sell your own body by the pound

Gomi no Sensei <go...@best.com> wrote in message news:8tqm11$2d5a$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com... <snip> > So how does this happen? I'm asking not because I doubt you but out > of sheer frustration. My combat decks come out, kill two to six vampires, > and get ousted with 0 to 1 victory points. Do I just suck at table > management, or is there some Deep Juju to playing combat I'm > just totally oblivious to? Practise makes perfect. FOCUS... > wants to start a regular ASK DR CARNAGE section in the newsgroup GO FOR IT!!!!! oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster Prince of Caledon "Of Man's first disobedience, and the fruit Of that forbidden tree whose mortal taste Brought death into the world, and all our woe." John Milton Paradise Lost. Book i. Line 1.

"Joshua Duffin" <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote in message news:8tqbeo$t4t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... [clip] > I've heard that you West Coast types have had a fair amount > of POT rush from time to time, but do you know what the > history looked like out there? Did it develop independently > of our versions, or was it inspired by them, or something else? I may have played the first IG based potence deck out this way. I'm sure someone will correct me if this ins't the case but I'm pretty sure it was me. I was online at the time and was aware of the concept. I don't recall ever downloading a decklist but I knew of a few players doing it. I now only use the IG + Potence combat decks as corrective forces when the metagame moves too far toward S:CE. It is when you can count on everyone at the table using S:CE that the decks really shine. Alex Harmon has now won 3 tournaments with smallish potence vampires. > I think the old Madison Wisconsin crew probably came up with > the concept at least as early as we did too - that Adrian > Sullivan has an impressive talent for deck design. Yes, Adrian had a Nosferatu Archon deck that made an impression on me. Having a weenie Nosf. vote-push deck at the time I was interested in the Nos. -Robert

"Steve Bucy" <tb...@lainet.com> wrote in message news:8tq9f...@enews3.newsguy.com... > Joshua Duffin wrote in message <8tq0ov$jh7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>... > >In article <Ew_L5.10307$Pw6.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, > (snip) > > >Hey, while we're here: anyone have any luck with potence-only > >rush decks lately? [clip] > Robert had an increased strength Burning Wrath deck a while back Yep. Massive numbers of Increased Strength + Burning Wrath. Taste when you're done. An excellent large vampire with S:CE killer. Its not worth the trouble for the little vamps. > I haven't even seen Robert's weenie potence deck recently. I think > the revival of Obedience and the good amount of fortitude that is still > hanging around our group has really has really killed the potence-only > stuff. I use the increased strength in the Burning Wrath deck. :-) They both don't appear on my playlist at the same time. I know people tell me there's ways around Obedience and fortitude, etc. but I happy enough waiting until people get too comfortable with the the lack of combat. Then I'll return! -Robert [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] It's comparable to what Pulled Fangs always _should_ have done, i.e., send people to torpor, not burn them. Now Pulled Fangs is worthless, and Disarm has replaced that functionality. I don't think it's "too easy", since it works the same as PF but requires Potence. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "Maybe it's time to wave goodbye now." -- Tori Amos

Xian wrote: > > In article <3A00BE6A...@math.wisc.edu>, > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > > [weenie potence] > > I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. > > That way it can be a lot more focused. > > Yeah, Disarms are soooo good. I finally have four now, and I'm > thrilled. I now have one, having yoinked it at the Sabbat draft at GenCon. And please, merciful Lord, let us not restart _that_ thread.... > Although my weenie potence deck is almost Peter's > exactly...very very minor variations (Watenda, 2x Rampage, Hand of > Conrad), the Disarms are so much nicer than PF or anything else. I like the whole Hand of Conrad angle. I have Sarah (Peach) Brando in my !Brujah deck, mainly so that she can go down to the Potence store and buy some superior Potence. Plus, she and Gaspare can resurrect Mitchell when he goes a-head hunting... > > For example, in my !Bru deck, a model combat looks like: > > > > Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, Immortal Grapple, Undead Strength, Blur, > > Taste of Vitae, Decapitate > > > > In a weenie Pot deck, you can dispense with the Blur, the US, and the > > Decapitate. Note: I meant "Taste" not "US". Oops. > Hmm. I don't know. I'd say weenie potence only should go: > > Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, [Increased Strength/Fists of Death], > Immortal Grapple, Undead Strength, Disarm, Decapitate. The IS/FoD are > completely optional, and I suppose if you had enough Disarms to replace > them, you'd be fine. But still, dishing out 7 or 9 damage in one > strike is always intimidating. My point is that you don't need the Decapitate at all. First, your little guys can't really afford the blood cost, and many of them won't have the superior necessary. You just punch them for three and rip their arms off. If all goes well, pretty soon all your prey's vampires are in torpor. If you're worried about rescues, have Hasina Kesi go diablerize. If she gets blocked, more carnage! > > I really want to make a deck with like 12 Disarms and see what kind of > > havoc I could wreak. > > holy god. That would be sheer madness. And fun. Bwa ha ha! > I'm planning on confusing everyone for the next couple of weeks and > their all Sabbat decks with a Brujah Princes deck a la Josh I saw a deck like this at Origins that had a lot of 2nd Traditions; you rush and kill, then untap, block, and kill. I don't have the 2nd's (or Donals and Constanzas) to make it work, but it looked impressive. Well, OK, the guy was using Bastard Swords, but the _idea_ looked impressive. :) > but my next project is making as good a Lasombra > Rush/GtU deck as can feasibly be managed. Man, I like the Lasombra a _lot_. They've got plenty of trickiness, and I really want to make them work. But their vampires are just _huge_. I haven't looked at the Monger list very closely yet. Did the Lasombra get some good little guys? That 5 with (I think) dom obf OBT is just _horrible_! And you have to use him, 'cause he's a 5! He'll almost be the smallest vampire in your crypt!! > A few GtUs to bring in > vampires, or as added bleed scare, but mainly Bum's Rush, Monomacy, > Templar, and Political Struggle. Hmm. 6 BR, 2 Monomacy, 2 Templar, 4 > Political Struggle, and 2 Haven Uncovered? Unfortunately a little less > focused than I'd like, but the vote defense is likely to be better. > Especially if I give up a master card slot or two for a Power > Structure. And I need to play Black Metamorphosis in there. Yum. That Power Structure card is really cool. Here's a deck idea I've been toying around with, but again don't have the cards for. Creation Rites, Blood Feast, Tribute to the Master, Power Structure, Consanguineous Boon. Monster pool gain, if you can get it rolling. Looking up Black Metamorphosis... ack! It's not on the Monger site. Card text, please? > All I really have to say, though is...mmm...Talley-licious. He's what > I've been waiting for...for ages... Yeah, he's good... but the Lasombra already had a couple decent 6's. They needed a 3 with obt pot, a 4 with OBT dom (or whatever), and a 5 with at least 4 points of in-clan disciplines. Ugh. Guido Luciano makes me want to vomit. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin wrote: > > cantila wrote: > > If you play a political deck you're not likely to have > > it votes away through a Disputed Territory, so then they'll have to > > take actions to burn the blood, which are more or less wasted actions. > > If you don't care that people are coming and taking the counters off of > it, why are you playing with it in the first place? In this case, so your opponent must spend valuable actions keeping your Powerbase: Madrid counter-free. As I've pointed out elsewhere, that's not too shabby for a worst-case scenario. (Though in fact, I suspect the real worst-case scenario is getting it contested or stolen.) > > Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put > > into play, > > Wrong. > > You're saying "every deck needs this PB" and "every deck needs > intercept" but you're just wrong. A rush combat deck has no use for > either of these things, for example. A weenie presence bleed deck > couldn't care less about having intercept or voting power. Actually, you can sell me on certain types of bleed decks not needing or really even wanting intercept. I disagree about rush combat decks. They may not specialize in reacting but a small amount of intercept and wake can go a long way towards making your opponents slow down and work carefully as they're trying to screw with you. And unlike a bleed deck, if you wind up in combat with an opposing minion, that's generally a good thing, a step in the right direction. Fred

On 2 Nov 2000 03:11:29 GMT, go...@best.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: >In article <20001101201902...@ng-bg1.aol.com>, >Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote: > >>Yeah, I'm still here, and my Pot Rush deck, completely devoid of untaps, >>intercept, vote defense, bleed bounce (and doesn't have any spare deck slots to >>spare...), and anything other than pure, unadulterated pre-emptive violence is >>still winning occasionally (heck, it swept the last time I played it :-) > >So how does this happen? I'm asking not because I doubt you but out >of sheer frustration. My combat decks come out, kill two to six vampires, >and get ousted with 0 to 1 victory points. Do I just suck at table >management, or is there some Deep Juju to playing combat I'm >just totally oblivious to? Table management is obnoxiously difficult with a hyper-combat deck. To make your combats 100% effective, you don't have room for intercept or untap - at least not the effective variety, where you can actually catch something other than the occasional +1 stealth action. The vampires in question don't have the disciplines for bleed bounce or vote defense, so your defenses MUST be subtracting any voters or bleeders that take actions you don't like, with extreme prejudice. Ideally, you beat up all of your prey's vampires as soon as they get influenced out, before they ever get to take an action - and with your spare vampires, you beat up any of your predator's vampires that look threatening, but you leave his defenders alone (out of Ozmo, Roland Bishop, and Zoe, you beat the crap out of Ozmo first, and then Roland if he ever takes a bleed action. Zoe is not a significant offensive threat without skill cards, so she can live until she bounces a bleed - then she'll need to go too.) Once you run out of vampires in your immediate vicinity that need to die, you bleed your defenseless prey for 1 with each vampire. Do this lots. As necessary, you will need to look around the table and see who is building up to be too strong - is your grand-predator making short work of your predator? That won't do. Go "adjust" one of his vampires. Is your grandprey building up a huge pool gain monster with the total lack of pressure? Go knock his Prince's block off so he'll quit 5th Traditioning. A lot of times, you'll win 3-1 or 4-1 - your predator will have been ousted at some point, and there's not a lot you can do about it. Someone who is bound and determined to hammer you with every vampire they can is just going to have to lose those vampires, and if that leaves them defenseless, bad cess to them. The problems with the deck come in when Obedience and Fortitude make an appearance. Obedience will wedge your hand horribly by making you waste a Rush action and not letting you move any cards - possibly leaving you Rushless. Fortitude is not AS bad, since you get to move cards, press, and get to the next Rush action, and they will eventually run out of Skin of Steel/Rolling with the Punches - possibly that combat since IG provides a press. Superior Mettle at superior is a real pain in the butt for POT/OBF decks - one card basically walls up the entire combat and you MUST burn down your hand in order to get to another Rush. POT/CEL decks ignore this, but since they rely on the extra strikes, sometimes Skin of Steel can be nastier - and the vamp selection for POT/OBF is much better. Especially with Ox, who removes the need for Potence skill cards in such a deck, IMO - think 2 Beast, 2 Ox, 2 Nigel, 2 Olivia, 2 Agatha, 1 Duck, 1 Koko. Hasina and Lupo can make an appearance in place of an Ox and a Nigel, but then you want a couple skill cards back again. The other problems come in when other people have combat decks, and now it's a question of who does their combat better. Close-range guys you can normally handle, except for the Gangrel and other POT decks (mutual annihilation! whee). Long-range guys can be trouble, as they often pack enough maneuvers to guarantee their range against POT decks. ...now to wait for Peter's response and see if I left anything out. [I'll admit that I prefer weenie THA rush for sheer fun, because there's nothing more amusing, IMO, than watching Blythe go jump on a 5 or 6-cap and burn him in 2 rounds. :) Unfortunately there are too many weak points with THA for it to sweep that often, but it's still always a nice surprise for the little buggers who are packing heavy maneuvers and Fortitude as their combat defense.] -- Derek Jack-Booted Thug of Atlanta "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

[ quoted text not captured ] Um, you just answered your own question, Ian. Fred

Gomi no Sensei wrote: > [Peter sweeps with Rush deck] > > So how does this happen? I'm asking not because I doubt you but out > of sheer frustration. My combat decks come out, kill two to six vampires, > and get ousted with 0 to 1 victory points. Do I just suck at table > management, or is there some Deep Juju to playing combat I'm > just totally oblivious to? There is some fairly deep Juju. The key is putting enough pressure on your predator so that they don't kill you. But not too much, because then you get a new, really strong predator. You have to put pressure on your prey (that's how you win) but not so much that you ignore your predator. Very rarely, you will need to kill something across the table (a) because it's threatening you or (b) because sometimes you need to threaten people across the table to get them to help you, and sometimes you need to follow up on your threats. If your deck is constructed right, then at any time on your turn, you should be able to point at a vampire and make it die by sheer force of having a monster combat deck (will factors in there somewhere). The tricky part is knowing who to kill. Sometimes, you bide your time, especially when the table is where you want it. Know when to stop killing everything and start bleeding. Have a long-term plan. Your deck is going to run out of cards before anyone else's. What do you do then? My decks tend to have a little pool gain, a little bleed bonus, and a little strength increase. _All_ permanent. Having a vampire with inherent +1 bleed (man, I love that Commander Sela) or having a random Tasha Morgan in your deck can make the difference between winning and not. Again, this must all be in moderation. The vast majority of your deck must be concentrated on kill, kill, kill. Note: If your group is wise to your combat-y ways, you may not be able to win with your deck. In this case, the strategy becomes "punish them for trying too hard". Make a deck against which all their Skins of Steel, Majesty, and Obedience are completely wasted; a stealth-bleed deck. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "We danced in graveyards with vampires till dawn We laughed in the faces of kings never afraid to burn" -- Tori Amos

On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 22:25:01 -0600, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> said: James> Ian Lee wrote: >> >> >I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. >> >> What do people think of Disarm? Personal opinion - the card is cheesy (too >> easy relative to its power or too powerful relative to its ease, whichever). James> It's comparable to what Pulled Fangs always _should_ have done, i.e., James> send people to torpor, not burn them. Now Pulled Fangs is worthless, PF is *not* worthless, it can be deadly if played right. Especially against weenies it's a great way of slowing them down. //Petri

On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:21:16 GMT, Mathieu <no.spam...@webmails.com> said: Mathieu> Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic Tracking in a precon Mathieu> deck, in boosters, or both? In the boosters. It's either an uncommon or a rare, I only got one after opening 1+ booster boxes. I hope it's an uncommon and I just had bad luck... //Petri

In article <3A00F053...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > I like the whole Hand of Conrad angle. I have Sarah (Peach) Brando in > my !Brujah deck, mainly so that she can go down to the Potence store > and buy some superior Potence. Plus, she and Gaspare can resurrect > Mitchell when he goes a-head hunting... Are you going to be in Madison over Christmas, James? I may be down for a couple of days *right* around Xmas, and if I don't bring my girlfriend, I'll have plenty of time to play Jyhad. :) > Note: I meant "Taste" not "US". Oops. Well, that did change the whole thing. Of course, I play the Taste too... [weenie potence] > My point is that you don't need the Decapitate at all. First, your > little guys can't really afford the blood cost, and many of them won't > have the superior necessary. You just punch them for three and rip > their arms off. If all goes well, pretty soon all your prey's True. But Decapitate is just *so* satisfying. And I usually get POT on most of my vampires with 4 skill cards in the deck. [Brujah Princes] > I saw a deck like this at Origins that had a lot of 2nd Traditions; > you rush and kill, then untap, block, and kill. I don't have the > 2nd's (or Donals and Constanzas) to make it work, but it looked > impressive. Well, OK, the guy was using Bastard Swords, but the > _idea_ looked impressive. Yeah...it sounds sooo nice. And (Mark...you can't tell anyone...) I'm planning to use Backstab with it! Think of it. 2nd Tradition. Torn Signpost. Backstab. Immortal Grapple. Undead Strength. Disarm. Dead. > Man, I like the Lasombra a _lot_. They've got plenty of trickiness, > and I really want to make them work. But their vampires are just > _huge_. I haven't looked at the Monger list very closely yet. Did > the Lasombra get some good little guys? That 5 with (I think) dom > obf OBT is just _horrible_! And you have to use him, 'cause he's a > 5! He'll almost be the smallest vampire in your crypt!! Screw Guido Luciano. He can...well, whatever. > That Power Structure card is really cool. Yah. It's nice. I'd like to put in some of the other Lasombra/Obtenebration cards like San Nicolas de las Servitas (check the Monger...it's there), and Shadow Strike would be great, but it would require Thoughts Betrayed to beat S:CE. Just not worth it. I'm considering Darkness Within, because it comes with a maneuver at superior. Darkness Within Combat Obtenebration 1 blood inf: Put this card into play before range is determined. Once each round, during strike resolution, move 1 blood (or life) from the opposing minion to this card (even at long range). Burn this card when combat ends. This vampire gains half of the blood (rounded up) from this card when it is burned. A minion can play only one Darkness Within each combat. sup: As above, with an optional maneuver. At first, I didn't realize how neat this card was. Upon the second or third reading, though, I noticed that it takes the blood off of the opposing minion...at first I just thought you added one per round from the blood bank for some reason. I also thought it was round down, but I was wrong again. I don't think my brain is working properly. I should do better when I'm working days again. Hmm...Bum's Rush/Political Struggle/Templar, Torn Signpost, Fists of Death, Darkness Within, [Shadow Step], Undead Strength, Taste of Vitae, Disarm [Decapitate]. Yum. Or...get the Black Metamorphosis, Bum's Rush, Torn Signpost, Fists of Death, strike, strike, Taste of Vitae, etc. > Looking up Black Metamorphosis... ack! It's not on the Monger site. > Card text, please? Sure...I posted it in a different thread, but I'll paraphrase it as best I can (should be correct except template wording might be off)... Black Metamorphosis Action Obtenebration 2 blood inf: This vampire gains an optional additional strike each round of combat. sup: As above, and this vampire gains an optional press once per combat. It's a Shadow of the Beast for Obtenebration! But better! Who needs maneuvers when you can set range with Shadow Step? [Talley] > Yeah, he's good... but the Lasombra already had a couple decent 6's. > They needed a 3 with obt pot, a 4 with OBT dom (or whatever), and a 5 > with at least 4 points of in-clan disciplines. Ugh. Guido Luciano > makes me want to vomit. Yeah, 3 obt pot would be great...of course Mitchell - Headhunter is that at 2...even if he does have the special disability of costing 1 more to rescue from torpor. All obtenebration needs now is damage prevention (and active first strike...). A 4 with POT obt would be the best. Or a 5 with POT obt dom. Talley is far better than the other two 6s though...Aurora is 6 dom for OBT pot and the 1R damage, Lisette is a 6 Bishop DOM POT pro and +1 int vs. diablerie. Talley kicks their asses any day of the week. Though Lisette is POT pro... Yeah, the Lasombra are mainly huge, but I think it can be done with some of the smaller ones and one of the Archbishops. Maybe one of either Aurora or Lisette... Xian -- But rain falls down and I feel cold A cold that sleeps within my heart It tears the earth and sun apart --New Order, "Shellshock" [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Myself, I rate the Museum of High Art, Atlanta, as mostly fun, except for > heavy intercept decks. I might be tempted to throw it in a few decks, > just because. > >In Columbus we've already dubbed the Museum of High Art, Atlanta the "Hot Potato". It seems fitting. Jay [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8tql0g$50h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: <snip> > I'm planning on confusing everyone for the next couple of weeks and > their all Sabbat decks with a Brujah Princes deck a la Josh Good luck! I was playing my Euro-Brujah Amaranth deck the other night against my esteemed and Sabbat War-happy friends, and apparently everybody here goes crazy with Tzimisce and !Gangrel – sat switched between two Tzimisce combat monsters, and although it was a bloody mayhem and loads of fun, times seem to be tough for good old potence combat because of all the aggravated damage floating around. One Card – Chiropteran Merauder (or whatever it's called) – really pissed me off: Either they manouver away from your IG, or they just take you with them to torpor. Thank Caine nobody played this new Vicissitude card – name ecapes me, something with "blood" – that makes you immune to non-aggravated damage, you can't strike, but your carrion crows, DotB etc. do the job for you – scary! Anyway, I'm determined to show that the Camarilla hasn't lost the upper hand. Guess there will be a very predictable shift in the meta game towards Sabbat War, so there are fewer deck archetypes to take into account. Regards Skaffen Chantry Elder Of Munich "Our hearts discern wild images of Death, Shadows and shoals that edge eternity." [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, James Hamblin wrote: > It's comparable to what Pulled Fangs always _should_ have done, i.e., > send people to torpor, not burn them. Now Pulled Fangs is worthless, > and Disarm has replaced that functionality. I don't think it's "too > easy", since it works the same as PF but requires Potence. The can't hunt functionality on Pulled Fangs is still useful, as is the extra damage for a disciplinless deck. For instance, a Gangrel deck sending people to torpor often has trouble acting dealing relatively large amounts of damage to them, compared to potence. Scorpion Sting and Gangrel Revel etc give you three, which only burns two blood when aggravated. Dropping another damage or two on top makes it harder for people to rescue themselves, or split costs etc. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "And all the while I'm thinking things that I can never share with him. I'm a bundle of confusion, yet it has a strange appeal. Did it all begin with him and the way he makes me feel?"

On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > Actually, you can sell me on certain types of bleed decks not > needing or really even wanting intercept. I disagree about rush > combat decks. The very specialised "Only-rush" decks don't. In fact, it hurts their play-style. The PDB6 rush and rush and rush decks don't need intercept and don't have intercept. Intercept counts detrimentally to their cards, which they need a lot of to guarantee the rushes. If you leave a vampire untapped, that's someone you didn't rush. If you put in a Wake, that's an Immortal Grapple (or whatever) you just removed. Myself, I find the deck style not my thing, and especially not good in the UK where the toolbox decks are more needed. [ quoted text not captured ]

Petri Wessman <or...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi> wrote: >> Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic >> Tracking in a precon deck, in boosters, or both? > > In the boosters. Actually, it's in the !Ventrue pre-con. Not sure why as it's horribly mismatched with that deck. Regareds, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 02 Nov 2000 14:24:58 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> said: Noal> Petri Wessman <or...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi> wrote: >>> Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic >>> Tracking in a precon deck, in boosters, or both? >> >> In the boosters. Noal> Actually, it's in the !Ventrue pre-con. Not sure why as it's horribly Noal> mismatched with that deck. You sure? As far as I know it wasn't in mine, and I got the impression that the pre-cons don't have any random cards. //Petri

In article <8trtfg$339$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Petri Wessman <or...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi> wrote: > >> Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic > >> Tracking in a precon deck, in boosters, or both? > > > > In the boosters. > > Actually, it's in the !Ventrue pre-con. Not sure why as it's horribly > mismatched with that deck. No, Noal. It is not in any of the pre-constructed decks. I still have all four uncorrupted, and double-checked, and it is not in any of the pre-constructed decks. Carpe Noctem. Lasombra http://lasombra.tripod.com/decks.htm#precon [ quoted text not captured ]

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > cantila wrote: > > > If you play a political deck you're not likely to have > > > it votes away through a Disputed Territory, so then they'll have to > > > take actions to burn the blood, which are more or less wasted actions. > > > > If you don't care that people are coming and taking the counters off of > > it, why are you playing with it in the first place? > > In this case, so your opponent must spend valuable actions keeping your > Powerbase: Madrid counter-free. As I've pointed out elsewhere, that's > not too shabby for a worst-case scenario. (Though in fact, I suspect > the real worst-case scenario is getting it contested or stolen.) But if the card is so marginal that you don't care if your opponents can make it useless, why even have it? Worst case scenario is it takes up a card spot in your deck (and a _master_ card at that), and you don't really need it. > > > Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put > > > into play, > > > > Wrong. > > Actually, you can sell me on certain types of bleed decks not > needing or really even wanting intercept. I disagree about rush > combat decks. They may not specialize in reacting but a small > amount of intercept and wake can go a long way towards making your > opponents slow down and work carefully as they're trying to screw > with you. And unlike a bleed deck, if you wind up in combat with > an opposing minion, that's generally a good thing, a step in the > right direction. My (considerable) experience with this kind of deck has shown me that this is simply incorrect. First, the card(s) which provide intercept take up slots in your deck, making your combat less effective. Second, you have to waste an action or a master phase getting the intercept out. Third, you then have to waste a minion _not_ rushing something to sit around waiting to block something. And very often, this leads to you beating up your predator instead of your prey, which is not always what you want. The key to winning with a rush deck is not "beat up everything you can". If my prey has a Ventrue deck with lots of anti-combat and my predator has some feeb deck with weak vampires, it might be tempting to vent my frustrations and obliterate all my predator's vampires. But that will lose me the game. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hjq10tsa77li135ck...@4ax.com... > Table management is obnoxiously difficult with a hyper-combat deck. I want to add something to what Derek and James had to say, but I think I'm far too tired. But yes, table management is horribly key to winning. Rule of thumb would be about 2/3 rushes directed at prey, 1/3 directed at predator. Maybe Haven Uncovereds cross-table. However, we *could* start an "Ask Dr. Carnage" thread or something...or even more fun, I'll set up a section on my webpage, and randomly farm any questions out to the gurus. Yay! Q & A email section! Xian

The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> wrote: > No, Noal. It is not in any of the pre-constructed decks. > I still have all four uncorrupted, and double-checked, and > it is not in any of the pre-constructed decks. *brow furrows* I could have sworn it was in the one I opened up. Pardon me, I haven't finished my coffee this morning. Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8tql0g$50h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, xi...@waste.org (Xian) wrote: > In article <3A00BE6A...@math.wisc.edu>, > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > > [first of multiple replys in this thread...bored at work] > > [weenie potence] > > I think that such a deck needs Disarms, Disarms, and more Disarms. > > That way it can be a lot more focused. > > Yeah, Disarms are soooo good. I finally have four now, and I'm > thrilled. Although my weenie potence deck is almost Peter's > exactly...very very minor variations (Watenda, 2x Rampage, Hand of > Conrad), the Disarms are so much nicer than PF or anything else. Ah. Yes. Disarms. Those would be good. Too bad I still don't have any (after one box of SW). Looks like I'm gonna have to make some effort to trade for 'em, and hopefully there will be some decent supply out there what with the reprint... > > I really want to make a deck with like 12 Disarms and see what kind of > > havoc I could wreak. > > holy god. That would be sheer madness. And fun. It would probably end up being really consistent and having very few different cards in it - maybe something like 12-15 Grapple, 12-15 Signpost, 12 Disarm, maybe some Undead Strength, Taste, what-have-you, and then the usual Ambushes, Bum's Rushes, and Havens. > I'm planning on confusing everyone for the next couple of weeks and > their all Sabbat decks with a Brujah Princes deck a la Josh (and to do > so, I must disassemble the tried and true Nos/!Nos potence rush > deck...oh well), but my next project is making as good a Lasombra > Rush/GtU deck as can feasibly be managed. A few GtUs to bring in > vampires, or as added bleed scare, but mainly Bum's Rush, Monomacy, > Templar, and Political Struggle. Hmm. 6 BR, 2 Monomacy, 2 Templar, 4 > Political Struggle, and 2 Haven Uncovered? Unfortunately a little less > focused than I'd like, but the vote defense is likely to be better. > Especially if I give up a master card slot or two for a Power > Structure. And I need to play Black Metamorphosis in there. Yum. Sounds like fun. I'm also excited about trying out the new cards for the more "Sabbat-only" clans (Lasombra, Tzimisce, !Malkavian, maybe City !Gangrel); now that I actually have a reasonable number of cards and vampires for them maybe I can put something good together... > All I really have to say, though is...mmm...Talley-licious. He's what > I've been waiting for...for ages... It's Talleyrific! Josh now, with thirty percent more Talley at the same low price! [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin wrote: > > Frederick Scott wrote: > > > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > > > cantila wrote: > > > > If you play a political deck you're not likely to have > > > > it votes away through a Disputed Territory, so then they'll have to > > > > take actions to burn the blood, which are more or less wasted actions. > > > > > > If you don't care that people are coming and taking the counters off of > > > it, why are you playing with it in the first place? > > > > In this case, so your opponent must spend valuable actions keeping your > > Powerbase: Madrid counter-free. As I've pointed out elsewhere, that's > > not too shabby for a worst-case scenario. (Though in fact, I suspect > > the real worst-case scenario is getting it contested or stolen.) > > But if the card is so marginal that you don't care if your opponents can > make it useless, why even have it? Worst case scenario is it takes up a > card spot in your deck (and a _master_ card at that), and you don't > really need it. I don't know where you're going off the track, here. Your reasoning seems to preclude the use of flexible cards. Just because I threw a card in the deck for a purpose and its immediate purpose might get thwarted doesn't make it a bad card - as long as it's doing _something_ for me. Making my opponent spend multiple minion actions to deal with something I spent one MPA and one pool seems like a good deal to me. And to respond directly to your comment, just because I'm OK with my opponents spending actions to neutralize my P:M does _not_ imply that I view the card as "marginal". > > > > Also, every deck should have some stationary intercept cards to put > > > > into play, > > > > > > Wrong. > > > > Actually, you can sell me on certain types of bleed decks not > > needing or really even wanting intercept. I disagree about rush > > combat decks. They may not specialize in reacting but a small > > amount of intercept and wake can go a long way towards making your > > opponents slow down and work carefully as they're trying to screw > > with you. And unlike a bleed deck, if you wind up in combat with > > an opposing minion, that's generally a good thing, a step in the > > right direction. > > My (considerable) experience with this kind of deck has shown me that > this is simply incorrect. Well, I think it amounts to our experience has shown the two of us conflicting lessons. There's all kinds of reasons for this: metagame, talking about different kinds of rush combat decks, using larger vs. smaller vampires, and personal strengths and weaknesses in play. > First, the card(s) which provide intercept take up slots in your > deck, making your combat less effective. Second, you have to > waste an action or a master phase getting the intercept out. Perhaps. But certain intercept cards go a long way. I don't think it's bad to have one copy of KCRG and maybe one or two of London Evening Star and/or Rumor Mill. They don't take up much room, if they don't come up you do without but if they do, you suddenly have the option to block stealth actions like votes and so forth. I think this is clearly a case of a small amount of something going a long, long way. > Third, you then have to waste a minion _not_ rushing something to > sit around waiting to block something. The occasional Forced Awakening is not going to cost you any rushes. It will occasionally take up hand space, which is bad. But the ability to surprise your predator or prey with a combat they hadn't expected will prevent them from playing their hand out with impunity. It makes a difference. It sure as hell makes a difference to me when I'm dealing with a combat deck and I see this happen. Again, a small amount of something goes a long way (I'm not talking about a lot of Wakes, only a sprinkling of them). It has a cost, but relative to the benefit, it's well worth it in my experience. > And very often, this leads to > you beating up your predator instead of your prey, which is not always > what you want. Granted, reactions are less control than actions. But if you don't want to beat someone up, don't use the Wake. It's an _option_. That's important if you find your predator attempt to sensory dep your Beast, Leatherface of Detroit. Fred

Robert Goudie wrote in message ... >"Joshua Duffin" <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote in message >news:8tqbeo$t4t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... >[clip] >> I've heard that you West Coast types have had a fair amount >> of POT rush from time to time, but do you know what the >> history looked like out there? Did it develop independently >> of our versions, or was it inspired by them, or something else? > >I may have played the first IG based potence deck out this way. I'm sure >someone will correct me if this ins't the case but I'm pretty sure it was >me. I was online at the time and was aware of the concept. I don't recall >ever downloading a decklist but I knew of a few players doing it. I now only >use the IG + Potence combat decks as corrective forces when the metagame >moves too far toward S:CE. It is when you can count on everyone at the >table using S:CE that the decks really shine. Alex Harmon has now won 3 >tournaments with smallish potence vampires. Robert definately came up with the first focused IG rush deck in out group. Myself and others and had experimented with IG, mainly in bruise and bleed, but didn't have enough focus or enough IG to really make the concept effective. I knew the possible effectiveness of IG but I was not really into combat and actually hoped it wouldn't be used to it's fullest effect. Robert of course had to spoil the relative peace with a very nasty Euro prince rush monster that was almost quaranteed to wipe out any vamp. This lead to my first affair with Obedience... Interestingly Robert, and to a much lesser extent I, are the only ones in our group to really use IG. There have been lots of rush decks, Brujah & Anti-Brujah pitch, animalism, Tzimisce, Assimite, etc. but very few plain old IG decks. Guess everyone figured Robert had done it so they would try something else. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <hjq10tsa77li135ck...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: >On 2 Nov 2000 03:11:29 GMT, go...@best.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: >> >>So how does this happen? I'm asking not because I doubt you but out >>of sheer frustration. My combat decks come out, kill two to six vampires, >>and get ousted with 0 to 1 victory points. Do I just suck at table >>management, or is there some Deep Juju to playing combat I'm >>just totally oblivious to? > >Table management is obnoxiously difficult with a hyper-combat deck. >To make your combats 100% effective, you don't have room for intercept >or untap - at least not the effective variety, where you can actually >catch something other than the occasional +1 stealth action. The >vampires in question don't have the disciplines for bleed bounce or >vote defense, so your defenses MUST be subtracting any voters or >bleeders that take actions you don't like, with extreme prejudice. You really have _zero_ room for intercept or untap. Trying to work in the number of cards necessary for this will kill you. >Ideally, you beat up all of your prey's vampires as soon as they get >influenced out, before they ever get to take an action - and with your >spare vampires, you beat up any of your predator's vampires that look >threatening, but you leave his defenders alone (out of Ozmo, Roland >Bishop, and Zoe, you beat the crap out of Ozmo first, and then Roland >if he ever takes a bleed action. Zoe is not a significant offensive >threat without skill cards, so she can live until she bounces a bleed >- then she'll need to go too.) This is backwards IMHO. Most good decks have a signifigant offensive threat, and you need to blunt this proactively. Your predator is your first target, unless he's playing some sort of defensive deck, when you can thank him for helping you win. You have to walk a fine line between keeping them from hurting you, and just setting him up for your grandprey. Your prey you want to actually let get started, so he can do some damage to your grandprey for you, both setting him up for after you've ousted your prey, and keeping him from getting to strong -- without the (yet) having to rush cross table. Also if you torporize all of his vampires right off the bat, he may well not influence out any more, figuring you can't bleed for much. This can be frustrating. At some point you'll have to go cross table as well, but that tends to be obvious. [snip] [snip problems with Obedience and Fortitude] Obedience sucks, and there's not really much you can do about it. Fortitude isn't nearly so threatening, and you can often blow through it provided it isn't supported by agg damage or something similar. In my experience maneuvers can be more of a pain in the ass than fortitude. >- and the vamp selection for POT/OBF is much better. Especially with >Ox, who removes the need for Potence skill cards in such a deck, IMO - >think 2 Beast, 2 Ox, 2 Nigel, 2 Olivia, 2 Agatha, 1 Duck, 1 Koko. >Hasina and Lupo can make an appearance in place of an Ox and a Nigel, >but then you want a couple skill cards back again. Smaller is _so_ much better. I'd double up a little less, and Hesina Kesi is the best, probably worth including twice. The number of actions you can take each turn is a big issue, and being able to smack your predator with Hesina before they can do _anything_ is great. :-) Besides, playing with skill cards lets your use Watenda! [snip the end] -Jasper

Xian <xi...@waste.org> wrote in message news:Jb_L5.689$q81.2...@news.uswest.net... > > "Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:7hn00tkms31vn2mbu...@4ax.com... > > Which makes me curious: how many jack-booted thugs do we HAVE around > > here, anyway? > > I'm not sure. I believe the term was originally applied a couple of years > ago, before I took my sabbatical from the newsgroup. At the time, I believe > included in the roll-call was Peter (of course), James Hamblin, myself, Josh > Duffin, and a few of you Atlanta Crew, IIRC. > > I don't think that the advocates of pure-rush decks have gained that many full > converts since then, but I believe that we are more feared... > Yer damn right you're feared. And the lack of converts probably stems from pure rush being (a) rare-intensive (IG is rare for many of us, since we got little or no Sabbat) and (b) tricky to win games with. !Tor bruise-bleed, now _ that _ I could get to like. Mark Shanewood Spike-heeled Thug

"Mark & Kathy ShaneWood" <shan...@tcinternet.net> wrote in message news:3a0206bb$0$28259$7f89...@newsreader.visi.com... > Yer damn right you're feared. And the lack of converts probably stems from Awww...kind words from the prince. Now I feel all mushy inside. :) > pure rush being (a) rare-intensive (IG is rare for many of us, since we got > little or no Sabbat) and (b) tricky to win games with. Point A is well-noted. Hopefully Sabbat War will clear that up to some extent. I will point out that most of my IGs are from Jyhad, and I traded my ass off for them. And point B is obvious from the threads currently running. But damn, it's fun. > !Tor bruise-bleed, now _ that _ I could get to like. I'm thinking of trying to work a Toreador ( + !Toreador?) cel/pre vote (with Scorn of Adonis & Alacrity) guns deck. With Telepathic Tracking and Psyche, S:CE should be less of a problem, and with presence, bleeding will still be nice too. Rather toolbox-ish, though. I just put together a mostly commons aus/pre Toreador deck for a newbie who may be coming on Sunday. Speaking of which, you free Mark? > Mark Shanewood > Spike-heeled Thug Hahahaha! I'm glad that you're comfortable enough with your sexuality to admit this, Mark. :) Most people aren't as brave... Xian -- I'd tell the world and save my soul, But rain falls down and I feel cold. A cold that sleeps within my heart, It tears the earth and sun apart. --_Shellshock_, New Order www.waste.org/~xian

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > But if the card is so marginal that you don't care if your opponents can > > make it useless, why even have it? Worst case scenario is it takes up a > > card spot in your deck (and a _master_ card at that), and you don't > > really need it. > > I don't know where you're going off the track, here. Your reasoning > seems to preclude the use of flexible cards. Just because a card is flexible doesn't mean I want to play with it. > Just because I threw a card > in the deck for a purpose and its immediate purpose might get thwarted > doesn't make it a bad card - as long as it's doing _something_ for me. _That's_ the point. There are many decks for which this card does nothing. I agree that every deck should have vote defense. But this ain't it, unless you're willing to try to protect it. > Making my opponent spend multiple minion actions to deal with something > I spent one MPA and one pool seems like a good deal to me. But if they out-vote you anyway, you just wasted that pool and that MPA. [intercept cards in rush decks] > > My (considerable) experience with this kind of deck has shown me that > > this is simply incorrect. > > Well, I think it amounts to our experience has shown the two of us > conflicting lessons. There's all kinds of reasons for this: metagame, > talking about different kinds of rush combat decks, For the record, I am referring to the Ithaca-style Potence rush combat deck. > using larger vs. > smaller vampires, and personal strengths and weaknesses in play. I'll not interpret that as a dig against me. Moving on... > > First, the card(s) which provide intercept take up slots in your > > deck, making your combat less effective. Second, you have to > > waste an action or a master phase getting the intercept out. > > Perhaps. But certain intercept cards go a long way. ...toward letting you intercept things. Sure! But what if you don't want to do that? Then there's no use having the card. > > Third, you then have to waste a minion _not_ rushing something to > > sit around waiting to block something. > > The occasional Forced Awakening is not going to cost you any rushes. But it costs yet more space in your deck, and yet more focus. > It will occasionally take up hand space, which is bad. Deadly. > But the > ability to surprise your predator or prey with a combat they hadn't > expected will prevent them from playing their hand out with impunity. > It makes a difference. It sure as hell makes a difference to me > when I'm dealing with a combat deck and I see this happen. Again, > a small amount of something goes a long way (I'm not talking about > a lot of Wakes, only a sprinkling of them). It has a cost, but > relative to the benefit, it's well worth it in my experience. You say this as if you think I haven't _tried_ having intercept and wakes in a combat deck. I have. It doesn't work. Sure, you can occasionally be all crafty and surprise somebody. But the whole point of having a rush deck is to have an active defense. Your vote defense? Rush the voters. Bleed defense? Rush the bleeders. This strategy, while it doesn't always work (vs. fortitude, etc.) is more consistent, and can't be foiled by yet other strategies like stealth. It would be terrible to sacrifice some combat effectiveness to have some light intercept, and then be foiled by some Malkavians that you would destroy if only the Wake in your hand were a Bum's Rush. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "Just put your feet down child 'Coz you're all grown up now." -- Kate Bush

James Hamblin wrote: > > Frederick Scott wrote: > > > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > > > But if the card is so marginal that you don't care if your opponents can > > > make it useless, why even have it? Worst case scenario is it takes up a > > > card spot in your deck (and a _master_ card at that), and you don't > > > really need it. > > > > I don't know where you're going off the track, here. Your reasoning > > seems to preclude the use of flexible cards. > > Just because a card is flexible doesn't mean I want to play with it. No, but *I* do. And you asked why a person would have it. That's why. The fact that *you* would choose not play with it is not per se a reason. Anyway, to get back to the issue at hand, I'm saying that the fact that it's OK with me that my opponents may choose to spend minion actions depriving me of the votes on the card does *not* mean - as you erroneously concluded - that "the card is ... marginal". It just gives them some latitude about whether they want me to have the votes or spend their minion actions. I assert that neither is a good choice for them; thus, the card is a good card - even if I never get a single vote from it. (In fact, the way it works, it's even *better* if I never get a single vote from it than it is if I occasional do.) > > Just because I threw a card > > in the deck for a purpose and its immediate purpose might get thwarted > > doesn't make it a bad card - as long as it's doing _something_ for me. > > _That's_ the point. There are many decks for which this card does > nothing. I agree that every deck should have vote defense. But this > ain't it, unless you're willing to try to protect it. I contradict. There are no decks for which this card does nothing. It is either vote defense or it is something that my opponents must expend minion actions on. The risk in the card - aside from contesting and the usual theivery/destruction risk that any location is subject to - is that if I have no votes and my opponents have no votes and no bloodhunts/Elysium destructions/etc. votes come up, *then* it is a useless card. This is obviously only possible if I have no votes in my deck, so that's when it behooves me to consider my metagame. But if political decks are popular with my local crowd, it's still likely to be worthwhile. > > Making my opponent spend multiple minion actions to deal with something > > I spent one MPA and one pool seems like a good deal to me. > > But if they out-vote you anyway, you just wasted that pool and that MPA. OK, sure, if one guy gets a table lock that's five votes greater than the rest of the field, it could be useless as well. That's seldom the case so I'm not going to take that into account in my thinking. If that makes you paranoid to think about, I guess our mileage does vary. > > [intercept cards in rush decks] > > > My (considerable) experience with this kind of deck has shown me that > > > this is simply incorrect. > > > > Well, I think it amounts to our experience has shown the two of us > > conflicting lessons. ... > I'll not interpret that as a dig against me. It was not intended as such. Just a reminder that experience may lead to different conclusions. > > > First, the card(s) which provide intercept take up slots in your > > > deck, making your combat less effective. Second, you have to > > > waste an action or a master phase getting the intercept out. > > > > Perhaps. But certain intercept cards go a long way. > > ...toward letting you intercept things. Sure! But what if you don't > want to do that? Then there's no use having the card. It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. > > > Third, you then have to waste a minion _not_ rushing something to > > > sit around waiting to block something. > > > > The occasional Forced Awakening is not going to cost you any rushes. > > But it costs yet more space in your deck, and yet more focus. Understood. This is a calculated risk. > > > It will occasionally take up hand space, which is bad. > > Deadly. I think you overstate this point. > > But the > > ability to surprise your predator or prey with a combat they hadn't > > expected will prevent them from playing their hand out with impunity. > > It makes a difference. It sure as hell makes a difference to me > > when I'm dealing with a combat deck and I see this happen. Again, > > a small amount of something goes a long way (I'm not talking about > > a lot of Wakes, only a sprinkling of them). It has a cost, but > > relative to the benefit, it's well worth it in my experience. > > You say this as if you think I haven't _tried_ having intercept and > wakes in a combat deck. I have. It doesn't work. Well, as I said, it works for me. And when I play the other side of it, it certainly slows me down when I see other combat decks do it. I'd sort of like the opinion of others, here. Anyone else have an opinion, one way or another? Does a small amount of wake and permanent intercept help a rush combat deck or does it just defocus it? > Sure, you can > occasionally be all crafty and surprise somebody. But the whole point > of having a rush deck is to have an active defense. Your vote defense? > Rush the voters. Bleed defense? Rush the bleeders. This strategy, > while it doesn't always work (vs. fortitude, etc.) is more consistent, > and can't be foiled by yet other strategies like stealth. Agreed, if you run into stealth actions greater than +1, it's a waste. It's just that the investment in this so *small* that I have no problem with the few occasions it misfires. (I don't understand why you think a couple of intercept locations and a few Forced Wakes are that much of a sacrifice.) And, to me anyway, the effect is very noticeable and usually worthwhile. Fred

In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: >> [intercept cards in rush decks] >It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very >very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and >prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a >striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go >balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you >perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally >draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from >it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. My general problem with this is that any delay is always to the detriment of the Rush deck. Rush, much more than other deck archetypes, relies on speed of execution (in both senses) to win (in my limited experience -- see my plaintive posts on a different thread). There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. In almost every case that I can think of where a Rush deck might want to block an action, they'd be better off attacking the entities benefited by that action -- vampires. gomi -- you say they taught you how to read and write yeah, they taught you how to count i say they taught you how to buy and sell your own body by the pound

Thank Caine nobody played this new Vicissitude > card – name ecapes me, something with "blood" – that makes you immune to > non-aggravated damage, you can't strike, but your carrion crows, DotB etc. do > the job for you – scary! > Haven't seen a description of this card anywhere, does anyone have the actual card text? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <3A02E1ED...@netcom.com>, fre...@netcom.com wrote: > Joshua Duffin wrote: > > > > The problem with "just throwing in a couple intercept masters > > and Forced Awakenings", to me, is mainly on the masters side. > > There are fourteen masters in my standard Brujah/!Brujah pot/ > > cel rush deck: 3 Blood Doll, 3 Potence, 3 Celerity, 4 Haven > > Uncovered, 1 Fragment of the Book of Nod. What do you take > > out to put in KRCG or Rumor Mill or London Evening Star? If > > you don't put in more than one, you're not even very likely > > to get any use out of it. And if you put them in without > > taking out other masters, you significantly increase your > > chances of master hand-jam, which is (no kidding) deadly for > > an all-rush deck. > > Yes, I see your point. It depends on the Rush deck, of course, > whether you think you need all of the Discipline cards. I'm > only proposing a couple of press locations, so a) it shouldn't > affect your master card selection that much; and b) you may take > from this that I don't consider the point of intercept to be > completely essential. In short, the press locations often won't > come up (or not early enough to get a lot of use out of them), > so you'll often have to do without. Even so, the Wakes are still > useful since the really really bad actions you usually want to > stop are often not at stealth (unless the stealth was provided > separately). I couldn't figure out why you kept calling them "press" locations, and then I just got it: because they're all news media. Funny! In my experience, most rush decks (though not all) rely on small vampires to (a) keep their vamps from biting too deeply into their starting pool, so that they have at least some cushion to work with when people start damaging them, and (2) make sure that they can get out vamps early in the game to start making carnage. Because of that, skill cards show up a lot (at least in my rush decks). In rush decks that use fewer skill cards (and bigger vampires), there is usually some other schtick being used - 2nd Traditions, 5ths, Minion Taps, Anathemas, or some such; these are already generally not pure rush decks and the wake/intercept angle is therefore less of a divergence for them. Also, the other piece of why I often find Wakes ineffective in rush decks is that most opposing decks that want to do bad things to me have already considered the possibility of being blocked, and are either playing with stealth or other means of getting their actions through, making it unlikely that I'll be able to block even if I do wake. There are exceptions of course - tap and bleed, etc - but even the Sensory Deprivation that you cited as being at no stealth can have +1 stealth added with Fata Morgana (fine if you have out an intercept location already, but if not, you're just as screwed as if you'd never had the Wake). > > Likewise, what do you take out for the Forced Awakenings? If > > you remove Rushes, you increase your chances of getting ousted > > because you didn't have a Rush when you needed it (if your > > FA didn't make you able to block the action that killed you). > > If you remove combat cards, your combat efficiency decreases. > > Yep, granted, it's sacrifice. I just think that as long as it's > kept to a minimum, it shouldn't be a big sacrifice. It's just > enough to cause doubt. If you're regularly getting hand jam > because of it - even with the combat flow going on - then > something's wrong. Maybe so. I think it does depend on the metagame environment you're looking at, as well as how intimidated your opponents can be by seeing that you may have an occasional Wake and +1 intercept. Josh caught! can I get a witness? [ quoted text not captured ]

"Robert Goudie" <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote: > Immortal Grapple combat vs. most other combat decks doesn't work > well at all from what I can tell. I could easily test that theory. The last Tuesday Night game, four of the five decks on the table were combat decks of one form or another. Pretty decent array, too. A Lasombra Thoughts Betrayed pitch deck, a Malk/!Malk Mind of a Child asassination/Graverob/Malk Time Auction deck, a Fortitude/Obfuscate/Assault Rifle deck, and a weenies with weapons deck. It was brutal. The one guy that had a vote deck got squashed. Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Robert Goudie wrote: > into a combat you have a certain kill! Immortal Grapple combat vs. most > other combat decks doesn't work well at all from what I can tell. Well, it does and it doesn't. If you play the weenie rush decks favoured by PDB6, Josh et al, no. I tend to find that they get hit hard and die. However, a number of decks in the UK that I've seen have had big vampires with Fortitude. I recall a very nice fortitude-potence deck I played a couple of years ago. Sheldon and Jimmy Dunn were luvverly in it. More recently, a number of the Southampton lot have played Gangrelly decks with animalism, fortitude, potence and protean. Carrion Crows et al provide nice damage on top, a close range punch with Immortal Grapple and Fortitude to stop your damage. Protean can do a little claw, or maybe a Flesh of Marble. Not an IG deck in the weenie sense, but a combat deck that uses IG well, certainly. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8ttne3$5d6$1...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, Gomi no Sensei <go...@best.com> wrote: >In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, >Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > >>> [intercept cards in rush decks] > >>It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very >>very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and >>prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a >>striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go >>balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you >>perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally >>draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from >>it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. > >My general problem with this is that any delay is always to the detriment >of the Rush deck. Rush, much more than other deck archetypes, relies >on speed of execution (in both senses) to win (in my limited experience -- >see my plaintive posts on a different thread). There are precious few >actions that are critical enough that blocking them makes up for >(a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a Forced Awakening >in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. In almost every >case that I can think of where a Rush deck might want to block an >action, they'd be better off attacking the entities benefited by that >action -- vampires. Moreover, even if you can untap, what if the person uses any stealth? You'll need at least +1 intercept to do you much good. This is even more cards held in your hand, equip actions, or perhaps some master cards -- all of which are at a huge premium in fast cycling deck. You end up needing to dedicate a signifigant portion of of your deck to something that usually won't do anything for you -- and that you may have a difficult time getting rid of when you can't. Sure, having 10% of your rush deck be dedicated to intercept doesn't seem like much, until you've been through a couple of combats and can't start another because you're sitting on several cards usefull for intercept, a couple of master cards, and a unbalanced selection of combat cards. The odd intercept can be usefull ocassionaly, but will more often jam your hand and kill you. You can only use a small number of non-combat cards and still be able to always rush with every action. These end up being master cards, because you can find ones that are always usefull, more powerfull, and are more easily gotten rid of than intercept.

In article <3A02D0E9...@netcom.com>, Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: >Gomi no Sensei wrote: >> In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, >> Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: >> >> >> [intercept cards in rush decks] >> >> >It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very >> >very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and >> >prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a >> >striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go >> >balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you >> >perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally >> >draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from >> >it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. >> >> My general problem with this is that any delay is always to the detriment >> of the Rush deck. Rush, much more than other deck archetypes, relies >> on speed of execution (in both senses) to win (in my limited experience -- >> see my plaintive posts on a different thread). > >I have already conceded this point. What I don't get is why anyone would >equate holding a few FAs with the term "delay". It doesn't delay. Rush >your little heart out. Just hold onto an FA every now and again. Thus >hurts your hand size, I concede. But it's not a delay. Not true. If you hand jams with cards so you can't rush, then you have been (probably fatally) delayed. >> There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking >> them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a >> Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. > >Oh, man, I really have trouble with that statement. Sensory Deprivation >is an obvious one. Another obvious one is if you happen to be forced to >leave a minion in torpor at the end of your turn for some reason, someone >can diablerize. Equipping with an Ivory Bow or a Sengir Dagger or >something equally mean. Actually, there's lots of opponents can do that >would make me want to dig my fingernails into the card table. IMHO these are all fairly worthless. Equip actions are horribly slow, and how the heck are you going to get a rush combat deck to use Sensory Deprivation without having _huge_ vampires? >> In almost every >> case that I can think of where a Rush deck might want to block an >> action, they'd be better off attacking the entities benefited by that >> action -- vampires. > >I'm not sure I see the difference. A combat is a combat; it's just that >you don't control the reaction combats as much. The advantage is that >you make them fail at whatever action they attempted, which is nothing >to sneeze at. There's a big difference between rushing something before it has a chance to act, and failling to intercept so you have to rush after the minion has acted. Often 6 pool of difference.

"cantila" <rogc...@student.luth.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:8tuskb$jru$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Thank Caine nobody played this new Vicissitude > > card - name ecapes me, something with "blood" - that makes you immune > to > > non-aggravated damage, you can't strike, but your carrion crows, DotB > etc. do > > the job for you - scary! > > > > Haven't seen a description of this card anywhere, does anyone have the > actual card text? > *evil smile* Since I am one of those two Tzimisce players who Skaffen had that fun with, I think it is fitting that I answer your request (Note, Skaffen: I got one now!!). The card seems to be rare... Bloodform Combat card, vic inferior: Strike: combat ends, only usable when in combat with an ally. superior: Play before range is chosen. This vampire is immune to non-aggravated damage for the current round. This vampire cannot strike this round. This vampire gets an optional press, usable only to end combat. -- Hardy Range "Gib mir wieder etwas Schönes, zieh mich aus dem Meer." The Sisters of Mercy, Marian hardy...@gmx.de

Jasper Phillips wrote: > > In article <3A02D0E9...@netcom.com>, > Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > >Gomi no Sensei wrote: > >> In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, > >> Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > >> > >> >> [intercept cards in rush decks] > >> > >> >It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very > >> >very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and > >> >prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a > >> >striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go > >> >balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you > >> >perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally > >> >draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from > >> >it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. > >> > >> My general problem with this is that any delay is always to the detriment > >> of the Rush deck. Rush, much more than other deck archetypes, relies > >> on speed of execution (in both senses) to win (in my limited experience -- > >> see my plaintive posts on a different thread). > > > >I have already conceded this point. What I don't get is why anyone would > >equate holding a few FAs with the term "delay". It doesn't delay. Rush > >your little heart out. Just hold onto an FA every now and again. Thus > >hurts your hand size, I concede. But it's not a delay. > > Not true. If you hand jams with cards so you can't rush, then you have > been (probably fatally) delayed. Yea, yea, yea. Non-combat cards = greater probability of hand jam = delay...in some sense of the word. That's kind of obvious. That's not really the semantics of the term, "delay" that I was referring to and not what I think Gomi really meant. I was assuming - and thought everybody understood - that the real delay is if you have to leave one of your combat monsters untapped to react or if you missed a Bum's Rush or the play of a Haven Uncovered to cover these possibilities. I agree, however, that if the few extra cards I'm talking cause a premature end to a combat, the development of your position is delayed to the extent that you have to spend another action finishing the opposing vamp off. Again, adding a few more cards and taking out a few combat cards is a calculated risk - though you will actually get in physically get in more combats (I believe) if you tap out rushing opposing minions AND wake and get in another combat. So there's at least some offset to this effect. > >> There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking > >> them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a > >> Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. > > > >Oh, man, I really have trouble with that statement. Sensory Deprivation > >is an obvious one. Another obvious one is if you happen to be forced to > >leave a minion in torpor at the end of your turn for some reason, someone > >can diablerize. Equipping with an Ivory Bow or a Sengir Dagger or > >something equally mean. Actually, there's lots of opponents can do that > >would make me want to dig my fingernails into the card table. > > IMHO these are all fairly worthless. Equip actions are horribly slow, > and how the heck are you going to get a rush combat deck to use Sensory > Deprivation without having _huge_ vampires? I think this is another point that misunderstands the argument I was trying to make. Sensory Dep/Ivory Bow/Sengir Dagger/etc. were things I was envisioning an opposing minion doing that you really really don't want to see. Of course, if you're running a Celerity dodge-with-additional- strikes or fortitude, you may not mind the aggravated damage weapons. But there's always stuff like this that's hard to cover. I just think you can often gain precious time, giving you sometimes whole turns worth of additional rushes by all your minions, if you risk the occasional wake in your deck. Fred

"Joshua Duffin" <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote in message news:8tut24$kan$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Josh > > caught! can I get a witness? It's been ages, and I could definitely be wrong, but that sounded like a line from Bring tha Noize. Xian

"Robert Goudie" <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:sHBM5.13551$rl.11...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > "Noal McDonald" <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote in message > news:8tuo1n$fjq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > > "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > [clip] > > > Most really tough combat centers around Immortal Grapple, > > > > I really should introduce you to the power of Thoughts Betrayed in Pitch > > decks. > [clip] > > Immortal Grapple combat decks are not even close to all powerful. The Well, I didn't quite mean all powerful, but I bow to your greater tournament experience. > reality is that most players aren't skilled enough to create a Sensory Dep. > deck or a Thought Betrayed pitch deck, etc. Most of your competition are Point taken. In my experience, which includes very little tournament play (stupid not having transportation for the last few years), Sensory Dep is used as a nasty surprise by Ravnos decks, and is not usually the primary focus of the deck. A deck focusing on it *would* be nasty. And I am in no way disagreeing with either Noal or yourself that a TB pitch deck would be brutal...again, most of the play I've seen recently seems to be at least 2 years behind the play which we usually discuss on the newsgroup. In other words, there isn't sufficient competitive combat to deal with my IG deck(s). Ask Josh...when he visited, his Brujah Rush deck tore up the place, and got him ganged up on, because it was so much more effective than most anything on the table. I was his lucky first prey, attempting one of the first iterations of the Raptor deck... Wow. That was a while ago. That *was* you, right Josh? > likely to be players who will rely on S:CE. I, like Peter, tend to use the > IG decks when the MetaGame shifts too far toward S:CE. THEN, when you get > into a combat you have a certain kill! Immortal Grapple combat vs. most > other combat decks doesn't work well at all from what I can tell. Again, my comments are certainly unduly influenced by my playgroup, where S:CE had been the be-all-end-all of combat until I started playing with them. Actually, it still is...I'm just trying to educate new players before they get stuck in the S:CE mindset. I'm not sure I have much hope with the older ones catching on soon...they just complain about IG being "broken". Though it's getting better. I think they're learning. The only other combat I've seen recently was Mark's Assamite deck (which took to town, and nearly beat my dom/for/tha deck), a couple of large minion potence decks, and a "Black Hand" theme deck which attempts to do cel/pro/qui combat...it's not the most effective, but it's pretty fun. Oh, and a fair amount of Gangrel combat, but most of those players forget to include the Bum's Rushes in their decks. Yeah, some of the play isn't all that evolved...but it's getting better every week. Xian

"Petri Wessman" <or...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:7x1ywul...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi... > On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:21:16 GMT, Mathieu <no.spam...@webmails.com> said: > > Mathieu> Maybe it was already mentioned, but is Telepathic Tracking in a precon > Mathieu> deck, in boosters, or both? > > In the boosters. It's either an uncommon or a rare, I only got one > after opening 1+ booster boxes. I hope it's an uncommon and I just had > bad luck... > > //Petri Well, it could be just the other way round for me: Perhaps the card is rare, and I was just very lucky... :-) But I think you should cheer up, Petri: I had a total of 4 Telepathic Trackings in 2 displays of boosters. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Frederick Scott" <fre...@netcom.com> wrote in message news:3A02539B...@netcom.com... > I'd sort of like the opinion of others, here. Anyone else have an > opinion, one way or another? Does a small amount of wake and permanent > intercept help a rush combat deck or does it just defocus it? Admittedly, I'm biased, but I think it de-focuses the deck. That said, I have just built a Brujah Princes deck that uses 2nd Tradition (and Backstab!!), and I'm hoping to test it out in the near future. > Agreed, if you run into stealth actions greater than +1, it's a waste. That's the problem. Unless you're using 2nd Tradition, you're spending at least two card slots...or that's my guess. It's foolish to leave anyone untapped in this style of deck if you can help it. People know you're in trouble if you do. This means then, that you must have Wakes/Forced and some form of intercept...KRCG, Sport Bike, Auspex, whatever. It's just asking for trouble. > It's just that the investment in this so *small* that I have no problem > with the few occasions it misfires. (I don't understand why you think a > couple of intercept locations and a few Forced Wakes are that much of a > sacrifice.) And, to me anyway, the effect is very noticeable and usually > worthwhile. Agreed, intercept is definitely not a *bad* thing, but in an efficient combat deck that is designed for combat only, it just tends to muck things up. Xian -- I'd tell the world and save my soul, But rain falls down and I feel cold. A cold that sleeps within my heart, It tears the earth and sun apart. --_Shellshock_, New Order www.waste.org/~xian

Forgot to add, re: Beast getting Sensory Dep'ed. If Beast gets hit with the big black tank, all you have to do is have one of your *other* minions go over and violate the Ravnos that had the cheek to try to pull a fast one on the poor little Leatherface. And if that just torporized him, Hasina can diablerize, no problem. [ quoted text not captured ]

Gomi no Sensei wrote: > > In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, > Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > > >> [intercept cards in rush decks] > > >It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very > >very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and > >prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a > >striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go > >balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you > >perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally > >draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from > >it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. > > My general problem with this is that any delay is always to the detriment > of the Rush deck. Rush, much more than other deck archetypes, relies > on speed of execution (in both senses) to win (in my limited experience -- > see my plaintive posts on a different thread). I have already conceded this point. What I don't get is why anyone would equate holding a few FAs with the term "delay". It doesn't delay. Rush your little heart out. Just hold onto an FA every now and again. Thus hurts your hand size, I concede. But it's not a delay. The only think I can think of is using the MPA for a press location rather than dropping a Haven Uncovered on one or two turns. That's so marginal though. > There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking > them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a > Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. Oh, man, I really have trouble with that statement. Sensory Deprivation is an obvious one. Another obvious one is if you happen to be forced to leave a minion in torpor at the end of your turn for some reason, someone can diablerize. Equipping with an Ivory Bow or a Sengir Dagger or something equally mean. Actually, there's lots of opponents can do that would make me want to dig my fingernails into the card table. As for holding the FA, usually it needn't be too long. The idea here isn't to completely eliminate the chance of someone taking an action you don't like. Even full blown intercept decks can never insure that. The idea is simply to seed your predator and prey with the notion that tapped minions aren't _necessarily_ harmless minions. So the first FA you draw, you actually may want to play fairly quickly just to put that in their mind that much quicker. > In almost every > case that I can think of where a Rush deck might want to block an > action, they'd be better off attacking the entities benefited by that > action -- vampires. I'm not sure I see the difference. A combat is a combat; it's just that you don't control the reaction combats as much. The advantage is that you make them fail at whatever action they attempted, which is nothing to sneeze at. Fred

Xian wrote: > > Forgot to add, re: Beast getting Sensory Dep'ed. > > If Beast gets hit with the big black tank, all you have to do is have one of > your *other* minions go over and violate the Ravnos that had the cheek to try > to pull a fast one on the poor little Leatherface. And if that just > torporized him, Hasina can diablerize, no problem. Maybe. Ravnos also tend to have Fortitude so it may not be as easy as all that. Point well taken, though, as far as it goes. Fred

"Frederick Scott" <fre...@netcom.com> wrote in message news:3A02D0E9...@netcom.com... [snip...let someone else respond about FA...need sleep soon...] > The only think I can think of is using the MPA for a press location rather > than dropping a Haven Uncovered on one or two turns. That's so marginal > though. Well, in a Nosferatu/!Nosferatu deck, Storm Sewers or Nosferatu Kingdom would be nice. > > There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking > > them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a > > Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. > > Oh, man, I really have trouble with that statement. Sensory Deprivation > is an obvious one. Another obvious one is if you happen to be forced to If you're playing a combat deck, getting rid of the Sensory Dep-ing minion shouldn't be a problem. If you haven't taken care of all of the likely Dep-ers by the time you're done with your turn, just nail them next turn. > leave a minion in torpor at the end of your turn for some reason, someone > can diablerize. Equipping with an Ivory Bow or a Sengir Dagger or It happens. And regarding equipment? Most really tough combat centers around Immortal Grapple, and the bow and dagger mean nothing. Fortitude and Animalism also feature in other rush decks, making them meaningless. I can't think of a combat deck archetype that should really fear either card. Even if you're talking gun-based combat, Sideslip to avoid the 1R agg from the bow. Otherwise, DotB or IG or any Fortitude will screw them up real good. > I'm not sure I see the difference. A combat is a combat; it's just that > you don't control the reaction combats as much. The advantage is that That's the problem with them. They're not under your control as much. The Wake or FA could just as well be another Bum's Rush that you needed last turn instead of having KoKo bleed for 1. > you make them fail at whatever action they attempted, which is nothing > to sneeze at. Again, I think that most of the pure rush advocates will state that putting much if anything into defense slows your offense down, weakening the deck. I do not disagree that Wake/FA/intercept has a place in many decks, but on the other hand, it just the same *does not* have a place in some decks. Playing an all-out offense deck offers thrills like no other deck does. You have to play as aggressive as you can, yet balance this with your ultimate goal, to be the one with the most VPs, not the one with the most vampires destroyed. [ quoted text not captured ]

Xian wrote: > > "Frederick Scott" <fre...@netcom.com> wrote in message > news:3A02D0E9...@netcom.com... > > > > There are precious few actions that are critical enough that blocking > > > them makes up for (a) not rushing and killing someone or (b) holding a > > > Forced Awakening in hand for n turns, for any value of n exceeding 2. > > > > Oh, man, I really have trouble with that statement. Sensory Deprivation > > is an obvious one. Another obvious one is if you happen to be forced to > > If you're playing a combat deck, getting rid of the Sensory Dep-ing minion > shouldn't be a problem. If you haven't taken care of all of the likely > Dep-ers by the time you're done with your turn, just nail them next turn. This seems an exaggeration to me. I agree, Sensory Dep presents less of a problem to a rush combat deck than to any other sort of deck. But I still think it's an overstatement to say it's not a problem. It still has a terrible effect. You just had one of your minions absolutely taken _out_. And you want to tell me that it's an _easy_ thing to take the remainder of your vamps and go totally take a minion that might have Fortitude out of the game?!? I don't think so. Even under the best of circumstances, it's hard for you guarantee that you won't lose the services of one of your vamps for at least one or two turns. If you're not at the height of your power, during the early game, or when some of your vamps are low on blood and you don't have a Taste in hand to fix the problem, or when you desperately need to do something else with your actions, or any number of other situations, you won't recover from a Sensory Dep nearly so easily. Fred

In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, fre...@netcom.com wrote: > James Hamblin wrote: [re the Sabbat War master:location that accumulates counters which can be burned for votes] > > _That's_ the point. There are many decks for which this card does > > nothing. I agree that every deck should have vote defense. But this > > ain't it, unless you're willing to try to protect it. > > I contradict. There are no decks for which this card does nothing. It > is either vote defense or it is something that my opponents must expend > minion actions on. The risk in the card - aside from contesting and the > usual theivery/destruction risk that any location is subject to - is that > if I have no votes and my opponents have no votes and no bloodhunts/Elysium > destructions/etc. votes come up, *then* it is a useless card. This is > obviously only possible if I have no votes in my deck, so that's when it > behooves me to consider my metagame. But if political decks are popular > with my local crowd, it's still likely to be worthwhile. You're right that there aren't any decks for which the card (always) does nothing. (if by some chance you put it in a non-vote deck and no one else happened to be playing with any votes, it might be useless in a particular game, but not *always* useless.) However, there are certainly decks in which the card doesn't do enough to justify a deck slot, a master card slot, a master phase action, and a pool. > > You say this as if you think I haven't _tried_ having intercept and > > wakes in a combat deck. I have. It doesn't work. > > Well, as I said, it works for me. And when I play the other side of > it, it certainly slows me down when I see other combat decks do it. > > I'd sort of like the opinion of others, here. Anyone else have an > opinion, one way or another? Does a small amount of wake and permanent > intercept help a rush combat deck or does it just defocus it? In Ithaca-style potence rush, it has never worked well for me. But I may try it again and see how it goes. The problem with "just throwing in a couple intercept masters and Forced Awakenings", to me, is mainly on the masters side. There are fourteen masters in my standard Brujah/!Brujah pot/ cel rush deck: 3 Blood Doll, 3 Potence, 3 Celerity, 4 Haven Uncovered, 1 Fragment of the Book of Nod. What do you take out to put in KRCG or Rumor Mill or London Evening Star? If you don't put in more than one, you're not even very likely to get any use out of it. And if you put them in without taking out other masters, you significantly increase your chances of master hand-jam, which is (no kidding) deadly for an all-rush deck. Likewise, what do you take out for the Forced Awakenings? If you remove Rushes, you increase your chances of getting ousted because you didn't have a Rush when you needed it (if your FA didn't make you able to block the action that killed you). If you remove combat cards, your combat efficiency decreases. If I were going to do it, I'd probably drop a Haven, go up to fifteen masters, and hope for the best; drop a Bum's Rush and a few combat cards, and keep hoping. But as I said, it's never worked well for me. But I may try it again sometime soon and see if I like it now. Josh "the ghost-faced killah..." Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > Just because a card is flexible doesn't mean I want to play with it. > > No, but *I* do. And you asked why a person would have it. That's why. > The fact that *you* would choose not play with it is not per se a reason. The argument that I'm refuting is that "every deck should include this card". > Anyway, to get back to the issue at hand, I'm saying that the fact that > it's OK with me that my opponents may choose to spend minion actions > depriving me of the votes on the card does *not* mean - as you erroneously > concluded - that "the card is ... marginal". It just gives them some > latitude about whether they want me to have the votes or spend their > minion actions. I assert that neither is a good choice for them; thus, > the card is a good card - even if I never get a single vote from it. > (In fact, the way it works, it's even *better* if I never get a single > vote from it than it is if I occasional do.) Let me put it this way. Let's say I have a Lasombra rush-combat deck. In theory, I could put in a couple Power Structures, since that's a good Lasombra vote card. But doing that will defocus the deck, and having the card will not directly help the deck win. A (potence) rush combat deck already gets screwed by the most effective combat defenses, like Fortitude. Putting in these vote cards, or intercept cards makes your combat inherently less effective (without your opponents having to do anything), and your cards' effectiveness is now vulnerable to even more strategies. Normally, I couldn't care less if my predator has a lot of stealth cards. ("You won't be Lost in Crowds when I rip your head off!", etc.). But if I put intercept and wakes in my deck, now I'm vulnerable to that, as well. If I put in a votey master card like this, I'm vulnerable to my opponents _not_ playing votes (making the card useless, and hence making my deck less effective for no reason) or playing too many votes. > > _That's_ the point. There are many decks for which this card does > > nothing. I agree that every deck should have vote defense. But this > > ain't it, unless you're willing to try to protect it. > > I contradict. There are no decks for which this card does nothing. You're right, I'm sorry. In many decks, it takes up space. :P > It > is either vote defense or it is something that my opponents must expend > minion actions on. No. _If_ it is vote defense, _then_ it _might_ be something your opponents expend actions on. And even if that becomes necessary, it probably won't be more than one action (assuming you're not defending it, which is where this all started) every three turns or so. > The risk in the card - aside from contesting and the > usual theivery/destruction risk that any location is subject to - is that > if I have no votes and my opponents have no votes and no bloodhunts/Elysium > destructions/etc. votes come up, *then* it is a useless card. This is > obviously only possible if I have no votes in my deck, so that's when it > behooves me to consider my metagame. But if political decks are popular > with my local crowd, it's still likely to be worthwhile. So you can't conceive of a metagame where you would (a) be playing a deck that does not vote and (b) not feel the need to play this card? > > But if they out-vote you anyway, you just wasted that pool and that MPA. > > OK, sure, if one guy gets a table lock that's five votes greater than the > rest of the field, it could be useless as well. That's seldom the case so > I'm not going to take that into account in my thinking. If that makes you > paranoid to think about, I guess our mileage does vary. You seem to be saying that this card is useful because it lets you stick your finger in the political pudding, regardless of whether it helps you win or defeat votes. That's absurd. I don't agree that this would never be useful, but it still seems really marginal for a number of decks. > > > Perhaps. But certain intercept cards go a long way. > > > > ...toward letting you intercept things. Sure! But what if you don't > > want to do that? Then there's no use having the card. > > It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very > very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and > prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a > striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go > balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you > perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally > draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from > it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. To sacrifice an active combat for a passive combat that may or may not happen (modulo stealth) and may or may not be directed at the right vampire? > > But it costs yet more space in your deck, and yet more focus. > > Understood. This is a calculated risk. Rush decks without Wakes/Intercept already have a problem with hand jam and card flow. This would exacerbate the problem. > > > It will occasionally take up hand space, which is bad. > > > > Deadly. > > I think you overstate this point. I must therefore assume that you don't play rush decks much. > > You say this as if you think I haven't _tried_ having intercept and > > wakes in a combat deck. I have. It doesn't work. > > Well, as I said, it works for me. And when I play the other side of > it, it certainly slows me down when I see other combat decks do it. You're saying "it sure does suck when some combat monster blocks one of my stealthy actions, so it must be a good strategy". That's faulty logic. I could say "it sure did suck when I got ousted that one time by Screw the Masquerade!" but that doesn't make it a good card. > Agreed, if you run into stealth actions greater than +1, it's a waste. > It's just that the investment in this so *small* that I have no problem > with the few occasions it misfires. (I don't understand why you think a > couple of intercept locations and a few Forced Wakes are that much of a > sacrifice.) And, to me anyway, the effect is very noticeable and usually > worthwhile. The reason you don't understand is that you clearly have not played rush combat decks as much as I have. They are very difficult to build and play. The less focused they are, the less able they are to kill, kill, kill. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." -- Shivaree

Joshua Duffin wrote: > > In article <3A02539B...@netcom.com>, > fre...@netcom.com wrote: > > > I'd sort of like the opinion of others, here. Anyone else have an > > opinion, one way or another? Does a small amount of wake and > permanent intercept help a rush combat deck or does it just defocus it? > > In Ithaca-style potence rush, it has never worked well for me. > But I may try it again and see how it goes. > > The problem with "just throwing in a couple intercept masters > and Forced Awakenings", to me, is mainly on the masters side. > There are fourteen masters in my standard Brujah/!Brujah pot/ > cel rush deck: 3 Blood Doll, 3 Potence, 3 Celerity, 4 Haven > Uncovered, 1 Fragment of the Book of Nod. What do you take > out to put in KRCG or Rumor Mill or London Evening Star? If > you don't put in more than one, you're not even very likely > to get any use out of it. And if you put them in without > taking out other masters, you significantly increase your > chances of master hand-jam, which is (no kidding) deadly for > an all-rush deck. Yes, I see your point. It depends on the Rush deck, of course, whether you think you need all of the Discipline cards. I'm only proposing a couple of press locations, so a) it shouldn't affect your master card selection that much; and b) you may take from this that I don't consider the point of intercept to be completely essential. In short, the press locations often won't come up (or not early enough to get a lot of use out of them), so you'll often have to do without. Even so, the Wakes are still useful since the really really bad actions you usually want to stop are often not at stealth (unless the stealth was provided separately). > Likewise, what do you take out for the Forced Awakenings? If > you remove Rushes, you increase your chances of getting ousted > because you didn't have a Rush when you needed it (if your > FA didn't make you able to block the action that killed you). > If you remove combat cards, your combat efficiency decreases. Yep, granted, it's sacrifice. I just think that as long as it's kept to a minimum, it shouldn't be a big sacrifice. It's just enough to cause doubt. If you're regularly getting hand jam because of it - even with the combat flow going on - then something's wrong. Fred

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > If you're playing a combat deck, getting rid of the Sensory Dep-ing > minion shouldn't be a problem. If you haven't taken care of all of > the likely Dep-ers by the time you're done with your turn, just nail > them next turn. Not always as easy as it sounds. Combat Decks have never been a match for my Ravnos Lock Down deck (which will be in the Ravnos Newsletter that I'm posting this weekend). If one manages to get through the barrage of Brainwash, Pentex Subversion, Sensory Deprivation and Tier of Souls (which is used to increase my bleed and suck them dry so they're forced to hunt) cards and acutally manages to attack, I've got Skin of Steel and Illusions of the Kindred to keep me safe. > Most really tough combat centers around Immortal Grapple, I really should introduce you to the power of Thoughts Betrayed in Pitch decks. > That's the problem with them. They're not under your control as much. > The Wake or FA could just as well be another Bum's Rush that you > needed last turn instead of having KoKo bleed for 1. More importantly, barring Obedience, Bums Rush is a guaranteed combat. WWEF/FA is not. Regards, Noal McDonald -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin wrote: > > Frederick Scott wrote: > > > > James Hamblin wrote: > > > > > > Just because a card is flexible doesn't mean I want to play with it. > > > > No, but *I* do. And you asked why a person would have it. That's why. > > The fact that *you* would choose not play with it is not per se a reason. > > The argument that I'm refuting is that "every deck should include this > card". Understood. Keep in mind that I concede that it depends on your metagame. > > Anyway, to get back to the issue at hand, I'm saying that the fact that > > it's OK with me that my opponents may choose to spend minion actions > > depriving me of the votes on the card does *not* mean - as you erroneously > > concluded - that "the card is ... marginal". It just gives them some > > latitude about whether they want me to have the votes or spend their > > minion actions. I assert that neither is a good choice for them; thus, > > the card is a good card - even if I never get a single vote from it. > > (In fact, the way it works, it's even *better* if I never get a single > > vote from it than it is if I occasional do.) > > Let me put it this way. Let's say I have a Lasombra rush-combat deck. > In theory, I could put in a couple Power Structures, since that's a good > Lasombra vote card. But doing that will defocus the deck, and having the > card will not directly help the deck win. Well, actually, I might tend to use ONE Power Structure in such a deck. Just me, I guess. Based on what I'm hearing from you and others, I'm just not as impressed by what a single extra master card will do to combat deck hand jam. (No reason to include two of them, certainly. That's another straw man argument. No one was suggesting using two or more Powerbase: Madrids in every deck, either.) > > > _That's_ the point. There are many decks for which this card does > > > nothing. I agree that every deck should have vote defense. But this > > > ain't it, unless you're willing to try to protect it. > > > > I contradict. There are no decks for which this card does nothing. It > > is either vote defense or it is something that my opponents must expend > > minion actions on. > > No. _If_ it is vote defense, Of course, it's vote defense. > _then_ it _might_ be something your > opponents expend actions on. And even if that becomes necessary, it > probably won't be more than one action (assuming you're not defending > it, which is where this all started) every three turns or so. ...and I think that's pretty good for an MPA and a pool. Period. > > > The risk in the card - aside from contesting and the > > usual theivery/destruction risk that any location is subject to - is that > > if I have no votes and my opponents have no votes and no bloodhunts/Elysium > > destructions/etc. votes come up, *then* it is a useless card. This is > > obviously only possible if I have no votes in my deck, so that's when it > > behooves me to consider my metagame. But if political decks are popular > > with my local crowd, it's still likely to be worthwhile. > > So you can't conceive of a metagame where you would (a) be playing a > deck that does not vote and (b) not feel the need to play this card? I can conceive of one, but that was never the question. I never said, "This card is ALWAYS useful in ALL circumstances." Just that I can believe that players may find it useful in all their decks - but it depends on the local metagame. If this the source of our dispute - you're saying some metagames may not call for this card in every deck and I'm saying that some metagames may - then we can probably end the debate. > > > But if they out-vote you anyway, you just wasted that pool and that MPA. > > > > OK, sure, if one guy gets a table lock that's five votes greater than the > > rest of the field, it could be useless as well. That's seldom the case so > > I'm not going to take that into account in my thinking. If that makes you > > paranoid to think about, I guess our mileage does vary. > > You seem to be saying that this card is useful because it lets you stick > your finger in the political pudding, regardless of whether it helps you > win or defeat votes. No. Please read what I wrote. I just got through saying, and I'll repeat, vote locks that don't care about four vote permanent showing up are extremely rare. > > > > Perhaps. But certain intercept cards go a long way. > > > > > > ...toward letting you intercept things. Sure! But what if you don't > > > want to do that? Then there's no use having the card. > > > > It's not so much that I want to that specifically. But it's very > > very useful to slow down the development of both your predator and > > prey's positions. And a little bit of stuff like this does have a > > striking effect towards that end. I understand your desire to go > > balls out as you do your rush combat. I'm just saying that if you > > perhaps sacrifice the odd master phase action, pool, and occasionally > > draw and hold a Forced Awakening, the amount of delay you reap from > > it has always seemed to me to be well worth the minor inconvenience. > > To sacrifice an active combat for a passive combat that may or may not > happen (modulo stealth) and may or may not be directed at the right > vampire? True. But I find stealthy decks to be uncommon enough that I don't have to worry about whether it happens. And a few combats directed against the "wrong vampire" aren't that bad a thing. And there are rather nice advantages to weigh against this. > > > But it costs yet more space in your deck, and yet more focus. > > > > Understood. This is a calculated risk. > > Rush decks without Wakes/Intercept already have a problem with hand jam > and card flow. This would exacerbate the problem. Agreed. > > > You say this as if you think I haven't _tried_ having intercept and > > > wakes in a combat deck. I have. It doesn't work. > > > > Well, as I said, it works for me. And when I play the other side of > > it, it certainly slows me down when I see other combat decks do it. > > You're saying "it sure does suck when some combat monster blocks one of > my stealthy actions, so it must be a good strategy". That's faulty > logic. I could say "it sure did suck when I got ousted that one time by > Screw the Masquerade!" but that doesn't make it a good card. It is not faulty logic. What's faulty logic is your comparing these two unlike statements, which is a total semantic straw man. When I say that it sure sucks when an action gets blocked, it's because this actually *definitately* hurts my game. Therefore it can be only good for my opponent. When someone laments about getting ousted by being unable to prevent the play of a marginal card, they would say such a thing due to a sense of irony. If you can't discern the difference and why this is a poor comparison, then we have little to discuss. Fred

"Noal McDonald" <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8tuo1n$fjq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: [clip] > > Most really tough combat centers around Immortal Grapple, > > I really should introduce you to the power of Thoughts Betrayed in Pitch > decks. [clip] Immortal Grapple combat decks are not even close to all powerful. The reality is that most players aren't skilled enough to create a Sensory Dep. deck or a Thought Betrayed pitch deck, etc. Most of your competition are likely to be players who will rely on S:CE. I, like Peter, tend to use the IG decks when the MetaGame shifts too far toward S:CE. THEN, when you get into a combat you have a certain kill! Immortal Grapple combat vs. most other combat decks doesn't work well at all from what I can tell. -Robert rob...@vtesinla.org http://vtesinla.org

Museum of High Art , Atlanta. I have yet to see one. What does it do? Let me guess... The controller of this location has -2 intercept vs. Sabbat and may be attacked by any Sabbat vampire or War Ghoul and die in a screaming mess without using any combat or ability cards to help themselves. Cost 2 Pool. Jeff Prince of Cleveland "Wake up sucker, we're thieves and we're bad guys! That's EXACTLY what we are!" Peter, "Dawn of the Dead"

In article <8tv3c0$7n8$1...@news.cityweb.de>, Hardy Range <hardy...@gmx.de> wrote: >*evil smile* > >Since I am one of those two Tzimisce players who Skaffen had that fun with, >I think it is fitting that I answer your request (Note, Skaffen: I got one >now!!). The card seems to be rare... It's rare. I've got two of 'em in two boxen of Sabbat War, but only three Telepathic Tracking. Dammit. gomi will degrade self, others for telepathic tracking -- you say they taught you how to read and write yeah, they taught you how to count i say they taught you how to buy and sell your own body by the pound

In article <473-3A0...@storefull-146.iap.bryant.webtv.net>, Trut...@webtv.net (Jeffrey Moore) wrote: > Museum of High Art , Atlanta. I have yet to see one. > What does it do? Lots. See card text below, or the Monger site. http://whitestar.ddg.com/vtes/monger/showcard.html?ID=935 > Let me guess... The controller of this location has -2 intercept vs. > Sabbat and may be attacked by any Sabbat vampire or War Ghoul and > die in a screaming mess without using any combat or ability cards to > help themselves. Cost 2 Pool. Only if you wrote it. Here's the actual text from the Monger Utilities search: High Museum of Art, Atlanta Master Unique location Gain 4 pool when you put this card into play or gain control of it. Any vampire can steal this location for his or her controller as a (D) action. Burn 4 pool when you lose control of the High Museum (including when it is burned or becomes contested). http://whitestar.ddg.com/vtes/monger/ Carpe Noctem. Lasombra http://lasombra.tripod.com http://legbiter.tripod.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <4nHM5.2240$if4.3...@news.uswest.net>, [ quoted text not captured ] Tell it, brutha! Josh I'm lampin', I'm lampin', I'm stone cold lampin' [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <_zHM5.2310$if4.3...@news.uswest.net>, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: > > "Robert Goudie" <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:sHBM5.13551$rl.11...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > > reality is that most players aren't skilled enough to create a Sensory Dep. > > deck or a Thought Betrayed pitch deck, etc. Most of your competition are > > Point taken. In my experience, which includes very little tournament play > (stupid not having transportation for the last few years), Sensory Dep is used > as a nasty surprise by Ravnos decks, and is not usually the primary focus of > the deck. A deck focusing on it *would* be nasty. And I am in no way > disagreeing with either Noal or yourself that a TB pitch deck would be > brutal...again, most of the play I've seen recently seems to be at least 2 > years behind the play which we usually discuss on the newsgroup. In other > words, there isn't sufficient competitive combat to deal with my IG deck(s). > Ask Josh...when he visited, his Brujah Rush deck tore up the place, and got > him ganged up on, because it was so much more effective than most anything on > the table. I was his lucky first prey, attempting one of the first iterations > of the Raptor deck... > > Wow. That was a while ago. That *was* you, right Josh? Yup, that was me. I think I brought my friends Tor and Aaron too? They haven't been playing as much lately, though. (and Aaron's not currently in MN.) Yeah, good old Brujah rush. Nothing beats Brujah rush. (Poor predictable Josh.) Didn't they used to be a 4CL group too or something? It was almost embarrassing how easy it was to beat up their vampires... game sure went slow, though, with, like, eight players on the table. ;-) Josh you got it: soul [ quoted text not captured ]

"Joshua Duffin" <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote in message news:8u71gc$pas$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > Yup, that was me. I think I brought my friends Tor and > Aaron too? They haven't been playing as much lately, though. > (and Aaron's not currently in MN.) Yep, you did. > Yeah, good old Brujah rush. Nothing beats Brujah rush. > (Poor predictable Josh.) Didn't they used to be a 4CL group > too or something? It was almost embarrassing how easy it They were in the process of converting to NCL. All of the heathen have been converted now. > was to beat up their vampires... game sure went slow, though, > with, like, eight players on the table. ;-) Haven't seen one of those games in a while either, thank god. Last night, I played a version of your Rush Deck NT, and though I had trouble in the first game (6 player...had 11 people at my apartment), what with not being able to control the votes due to a contested Atlanta (stupid Lasombra), the second game went really well. I was almost able to engineer a sweep. My grand-prey ousted my grand-predator in a 5-player game, and was looking mighty powerful. Then I ousted my prey, and before my predator could be ousted by the evil Ventrue vote/bleed deck, I torporized/burnt *all* of his vampires in one turn. Yum. Then it was just table management, and not that difficult at that. Sweet sweet Anathema on Jacko. Xian Soul on a roll, but you treat it like soap on a rope caus the beats in the lines are so dope.