Reply to Wieck

First, my vote on the promo card. I think Lucita or Fatima would be the best choices. Both have the 'cool' factor that one wants in a promo card -- particularly if you get a nice slinky picture. And both belong to clans that I think you should release pre-constructed decks for. Second, pre-constructed decks. These are absolutely vital: the major problem with Jyhad/V:TES was the number of cards that one has to buy in order to construct an acceptable deck. Make sure these are constructed so as to be playable right out of the box, which is trickier than it sounds. I think it would be wise to include some random cards, as well as a fixed group -- it will make it more likely that people who get hooked will buy two starters for their favorite clan. The critical thing is the choice of clan. Your concern that the preconstructed decks offer a variety of playing styles is, I think, very appropriate. There are essentially 4 things V:TES decks do -- bleed, vote, fight, and block Decks can focus on any of these, and it would obviously be best if the pre-constructed decks covered the range of these types. Going just from the basic disciplines, the clans offer the following potential: Assamites: fight Brujah: fight, possibly vote Followers of Set: bleed, maybe vote (but probably not) Gangrel: fight Giovanni: Bleed, possibly fight Nosferatu: Possibly fight or bleed. Lasombra: Bleed, maybe fight or vote Malkavian: Bleed Ravnos: Fight, Intercept Toreador: Bleed, Intercept, Vote, maybe fight Tremere:Fight, Bleed, Intercept Ventrue: Bleed, Vote I think the wisest course would be to release at least 6 decks. Leaving aside the Sabbat for a moment, the clans I would pick would be Brujah, Toreador, Tremere, Ventrue, Assamites, and Giovanni. Here's my reasoning: 1 These clans are, along with the Followers of Set, probably the most active in vampiric society generally (excluding the Sabbat) as well as being active opponents of one another. The Nosferatu Gangrel, and Ravnos tend to stay out of things a bit more. A game about struggles between vampire Methuselahs can justify excluding those clans, but you could hardly justify leaving out the Ventrue or the Tremere. 2. They offer a good mix of abilities. The Ventrue and Toreador can both vote well, the Tremere and Toreador intercept, etc. 3. Nosferatu, Gangrel, and Ravnos are all weak clans, and it would be difficult to put together a strong enough pre-constructed deck. This is also something of a problem for the Assamites, but they can be fixed fairly easily and the background recommends their inclusion. The most likely substitution that would also work well, I think, would be replacing the Assamites with the Followers of Set. This has the advantage of including a stealth/bleed deck. The other advantage it has is that, as it stands, the Followers of Set are more playable than the Assamites: the assamites are a weak clan. The reason I think it would be better to include the Assamites is that their weakness can easily be fixed with a couple of well-thought out quietus cards, and Stealth/Bleed decks can be frustrating for new players to deal with. If you want the starter decks to be balanced against each other, it might be best to leave the Setites out. Disciplines: If you are only releasing 4 or 6 (six would be far better) pre-constructed decks, you'll have to decide what to do with the disciplines that none of the clans use. If you don't make a pre-con Gangrel deck, will you include protean cards in the boosters? What about chimerstry and serpentis? I would recommend only releasing disciplines for the clans you're releasing Pre-cons for --this is a MUST if you aren't putting vampires from the other clans in the booster packs, obviously. What's the point of getting protean cards if no-one can use them? The Sabbat: You have two main options. You can either re-release the Sabbat, or integrate Sabbat cards into the rerelease of V:TES. Either would be fine, I think. Either way, you should release pre-constructed Tzimisce and Lasombra decks. If you just re-release the Sabbat expansion, you should still release Tzimisce and Lasombra Pre-Cons. It will make the set much more accessible to a new player. When the expansion first came out, my V:TES group tried to entice new players, but failed, because we had to honestly tell them that buying a box of Sabbat boosters for a hundred dollars (canadian) would be the absolute minimum they would need to make a playable deck. I think the best option of all is to release the six clans I mentioned, as V:TES second edition, and then maybe a month later, re-release the Sabbat with appropriate Pre-constructed decks, bringing the total up to eight. New Cards: If you don't include the disciplines that are missing from the Pre-con clans, and take out some of the more useless cards, you'll have a fair amount of space for new cards. This is VERY IMPORTANT. If you don't include new cards in V:TES, established players won't buy 'em because they already have enough. Even a few useful cards at each rarity level, however, are likely to hook us because we're suckers for the game. There are some excellent card ideas available on the web, and I bet you could buy the rights fairly cheaply, if coming up with them in-house is a problem. If you include Assamites, you might consider printing all-new, or mostly all new Quietus cards. Simply put, they need to be able to kill vampires more efficiently. Also, there is the issue of whether Ancient hearts was a limited edition run. Something else to consider is 'Box Powers'. Some sort of power associated with each clan that they get access to at all times. People are familiar with the concept from other CCG's and like it. There is a perception among people I have talked to that V:TES didn't reflect the character of the World of Darkness sufficiently. Including more cards that deal with the relationship between the sects would be a good idea, but so would emphasizing the distinctiveness of the clans. Box powers would help you do this. Here's one suggestion: The assamite box power should allow assamites to Diablerize other vampires, and prevent any bloodhunt vote from being called on an Assamite vampire. This would reflect the metaplot -- and it makes no sense, in terms of the background, that Assamites should almost always have to refrain from Diablerie becasue they are afraid they will be burned due to their lack of political influence. This could be made a master card, too. You should definitely include cards that relate to the ongoing metaplot -- it's what will help hook Vampire players. There is also a lot of room for more useful political actions: the background suggests lots of possibilities. It's also important to clean up the rules -- and I don't think the current FAQ should be used as is, there are numerous rulings that are probably not best for the game. Regards, Eugene

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte wrote: > Brujah: fight, possibly vote Fight. Vote well (small princes, presence). Bleed well (Presence, Carthage Remembered, Alacrity at a push). > Something else to consider is 'Box Powers'. Some sort of power associated > with each clan that they get access to at all times. Retrofitting such a concept onto a set of cards already out there is very, very difficult. VERY. Lots of cards out there which look innocuous turn out to have a nasty streak to them, and playtesting is time-consuming. Also, by throwing in a few Clan Impersonations, I get *my* disciplines and another power from another clan thrown in for free. -- James Coupe

"Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: > Brujah: fight, possibly vote As James said, Fight, Vote, Bleed. They do all three well individually and can combine two elements with frightening efficiency. I have a Brujah vote/IG rush deck that makes great use of Anathema and Archon. > Followers of Set: bleed, maybe vote (but probably not) *sigh* I wasn't going to reply until I saw this. That's it. I'm gonna have to kick some ass with my Setite vote deck at one of the tournaments this year. "You have your votes and I have your votes." > Giovanni: Bleed, possibly fight Bruise & Bleed clan. Pure and simple. > Nosferatu: Possibly fight or bleed. Nosferatu aren't typically a bleed deck. > Lasombra: Bleed, maybe fight or vote Fight, Bleed and Vote. They can combine strategies almost as well as the Brujah. If they had action modifers that grant votes (possibly a Lasombra clan card) and younger titled vampires, they would be equal to the Brujah. > Malkavian: Bleed I've seen some good Malkavian combat decks and vote decks too...but they often make use of some rather nasty combos like "Madness Network/Bums Rush/Claws of the Dead/Rotschreck" or "Anarch Revolt/Malkavian Rider Clause". They can also use Mind Rape to steal vampires for suicide missions. Noal -- "I don't think that Witchcraft is a real religion." "There ought to be limits to freedom." --George W. Bush Don't vote for a son of a Bush. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

>> Something else to consider is 'Box Powers'. Some sort of power associated >> with each clan that they get access to at all times. > >Retrofitting such a concept onto a set of cards already out there is very, >very difficult. VERY. > >Lots of cards out there which look innocuous turn out to have a nasty >streak to them, and playtesting is time-consuming. Also, by throwing in a >few Clan Impersonations, I get *my* disciplines and another power from >another clan thrown in for free. well...new cards then.. something along the lines of Path of Blood perhaps. A removable master allowing Brujah to pay one less for celerity cards perhaps. Gangrel for protean etc. FC

> As James said, Fight, Vote, Bleed. They do all three well individually > and can combine two elements with frightening efficiency. I have a > Brujah vote/IG rush deck that makes great use of Anathema and Archon. Quite correct, both of you. I obviously wasn't thinking when I posted the bit about what Brujah do. > > > Followers of Set: bleed, maybe vote (but probably not) > > *sigh* I wasn't going to reply until I saw this. That's it. I'm gonna > have to kick some ass with my Setite vote deck at one of the tournaments > this year. "You have your votes and I have your votes." Setites CAN vote, so I have no doubt you could put together an acceptable voting deck. Not having seen your deck, I can't comment, but I find that Setites lack of votes on the board, inability to praxis seizure, and lack of access to the nasty prince-only votes make voting a poor option for them, when they can do bleeding so much easier. In any case, I don't think it would be that easy to put together a straight-out-of-the box setite voting deck, which was what this post was about. > > > Giovanni: Bleed, possibly fight > > Bruise & Bleed clan. Pure and simple. Perhaps I'm biased by my own experiences, but I don't consider clans with access to only one combat discipline really combat-worthy (the Tremere being a bit of an exception). Potence by itself is very vulnerable without fortitude or (maybe) celerity to back it up. Also, Giovanni vampires are very short on advanced potence, which is really necessary to put the hurt on anyone. It seems to me that the classic Giovanni strategy is bleeding at 1 or 2 stealth (bonding, spiritual intervention), and using potence as a supplement. > > > Nosferatu: Possibly fight or bleed. > > Nosferatu aren't typically a bleed deck. > I guess I shoud have said that they fight better than they bleed. > > Lasombra: Bleed, maybe fight or vote > > Fight, Bleed and Vote. They can combine strategies almost as well as > the Brujah. If they had action modifers that grant votes (possibly a > Lasombra clan card) and younger titled vampires, they would be equal to > the Brujah. They bleed better than they fight, and without presence they don't vote all that well. I admit that their fighting is pretty good. > > > Malkavian: Bleed > > I've seen some good Malkavian combat decks and vote decks too...but they > often make use of some rather nasty combos like "Madness Network/Bums > Rush/Claws of the Dead/Rotschreck" or "Anarch Revolt/Malkavian Rider > Clause". They can also use Mind Rape to steal vampires for suicide > missions. So have I, but their clan disciplines don't really encourage it. I can't see W-Wolf putting out a pre-constructed Malkavian combat deck. That would just be silly. :-) Eugene

> > Brujah: fight, possibly vote > > Fight. Vote well (small princes, presence). Bleed well (Presence, > Carthage Remembered, Alacrity at a push). I should have mentioned that they vote and bleed well. A case of tunnel vision. > > > Something else to consider is 'Box Powers'. Some sort of power associated > > with each clan that they get access to at all times. > > Retrofitting such a concept onto a set of cards already out there is very, > very difficult. VERY. > > Lots of cards out there which look innocuous turn out to have a nasty > streak to them, and playtesting is time-consuming. Also, by throwing in a > few Clan Impersonations, I get *my* disciplines and another power from > another clan thrown in for free. I don't agree that adding a box power would necessarily be THAT difficult, although I agree that one would have to be careful to balance the powers. Battletech is an example of a game that retrofitted box powers onto an existing system without any particular difficulty (although they didn't put as much thought into them as they should, they still worked fine). Box powers are typically available from the beginning of the game, so however they work, Clan Impersonation would probably be irrelevant. My suggestion would be to require that 2/3ds of a Methuselahs crypt be composed of Vampires from a clan in order to gain access to the clan's box power. The other advantage of including box powers is that it allows W-Wolf to go some way towards balancing the inherent strength of the clans. Some combinations of disciplines are more effective than others, and the clans with less effective combinations can be aided somewhat by a more effective box power, in order to balance the preconstructed decks against each other. This is particularly important if the pre-constructed decks are mostly or entirely fixed. They should be balanced so that they all have an equal chance of winning a game. Box powers can help that. They will also encourage clan-themed decks, which is probably good. My example box power was about the strongest I would hope any box power to be. I consider Assamites to be among the weakest clans at the present time, so their box power should ameliorate their weakness if they are made a pre-con deck. Allowing them to diablerise with impunity makes perfect sense from the viewpoint of the background, and it makes it substantially easier for them to take out other minions. Celerity and Quietus are very weak combat disciplines, so I think making burning minions easier for the Assamites is worthwhile. Also gives them something to use their obfuscate on. Just to anticipate objections, I'm not saying that Assamites aren't good at combat: I'm just saying that they are not as good as the competition. The good Quietus strikes cost blood and are hard to use. It's easy for Assamites to knock minions into Torpor (flash, Taste of death), but it isn't easy for Assamites to burn minions or seriously knock down their pool, beacause their cards don't stack (like potence) or do really large amounts of damage (like Thaumaturgy. The exception being The Khabar: Honor). Assamites are also have difficulty dealing with Strike: Combat Ends, and unlike the Tremere, lack the Bleed Bounce and intercept to keep themselves alive until the guy runs out of Majesty's (or whatever).

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 22:05:51 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >Just to anticipate objections, I'm not saying that Assamites aren't good at >combat: I'm just saying that they are not as good as the competition. The >good Quietus strikes cost blood and are hard to use. It's easy for Assamites >to knock minions into Torpor (flash, Taste of death), but it isn't easy for >Assamites to burn minions or seriously knock down their pool, beacause their >cards don't stack (like potence) or do really large amounts of damage (like >Thaumaturgy. The exception being The Khabar: Honor). Assamites are also have >difficulty dealing with Strike: Combat Ends, and unlike the Tremere, lack >the Bleed Bounce and intercept to keep themselves alive until the guy runs >out of Majesty's (or whatever). ??? Flash, Blood Sweat, Blur, Blood Sweat, Taste of Death, POOF - burns a full 6-cap. To go much higher is a little easier for the POT guys, but they can't burn that way, just torporize with either TS/IG/Blur (9), or TS/FoD/IG/Undead Strength (7). Seems less, but burning a vampire is a pretty permanent end, and I've torporized 9-caps just to see them get Giant's Blood and rescue-self. Ouch. They just really need something that stops S:CE and them wasting all those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't have to give it to CEL and the Brujah. -- Derek Deafness never kept composers from hearing the music. It only stopped them hearing the distractions.

> Something else to consider is 'Box Powers'. Some sort of power associated > with each clan that they get access to at all times. People are familiar > with the concept from other CCG's and like it. There is a perception among > people I have talked to that V:TES didn't reflect the character of the World > of Darkness sufficiently. Including more cards that deal with the > relationship between the sects would be a good idea, but so would > emphasizing the distinctiveness of the clans. Box powers would help you do > this. Here's one suggestion: The assamite box power should allow assamites > to Diablerize other vampires, and prevent any bloodhunt vote from being > called on an Assamite vampire. This would reflect the metaplot -- and it > makes no sense, in terms of the background, that Assamites should almost > always have to refrain from Diablerie becasue they are afraid they will be > burned due to their lack of political influence. This could be made a master > card, too. I have been thinking along the same lines. Just thinking mind you. You could call the box power an event card or something. Put it in to play before your first turn. I like an idea someone else come up with: Gangrel leave: Gangrel vamps you control with votes lose there votes and gain one hand damage. etc.. Malkavian curse: All malkavians exchange there current level of dom to dem etc... But your example of the Assamites scares me. Give them diablerie and a vote for each Assamite or something, but not free diablerie. =O. You could even give a/each clan more than one starting card over time. So the Giovanni might have one that helps with votes and another that helps with combat etc... Two players could have two different starting cards if it only changed the vamps you control. This way you can add the new RPG flavor with out changing the current vamps. I have dem malks and you have dom malks, but contest as normal. LSJ is going to have a field day with that one. I control your vamp so now he loses his title and get +1 hand damage. (I play PS:*that title* with another vamp) give vamp back contest title. Fun fun fun!!! This is something that could be tournament legal or not! Just thinking, but I ramble................ -- Conor Prince of Raleigh

>> "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >> Assamites are also have difficulty dealing with Strike: >> Combat Ends, and unlike the Tremere, lack the Bleed >> Bounce and intercept to keep themselves alive until the >> guy runs out of Majesty's (or whatever). > lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: > ??? Flash, Blood Sweat, Blur, Blood Sweat, Taste of Death, POOF > - burns a full 6-cap. Against a Presence based deck, the only "POOF" you're going to see is the disappearance of the vampire from combat after he layeth the sma...er the Majesty down. > those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't > have to give it to CEL and the Brujah. I agree. Making First Strike beat Dodge and S:CE is not only intuitive, it would help the Assamites a _lot_. Any help the Brujah get would be only incidental. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte wrote: > they work, Clan Impersonation would probably be irrelevant. My suggestion > would be to require that 2/3ds of a Methuselahs crypt be composed of > Vampires from a clan in order to gain access to the clan's box power. It involves checking decks to do that. V:TES generally has no need to check someone else's deck. I would also question the comparisons to Battletech. As Matt Green (ex-Wizards employee) is often prone to say, with not a little hyperbole, I admit, that Battletech took all the most random bits of Magic, and then added dice! > The other advantage of including box powers is that it allows W-Wolf to go > some way towards balancing the inherent strength of the clans. Which can always be done with cards. Give a clan viable cards to work a strategy, there's no problems. > This is particularly important if the pre-constructed decks are mostly or > entirely fixed. Why? Just make the decks equal. Since they're creating new cards, they can do that. > My example box power was about the strongest I would hope any box power to > be. I consider Assamites to be among the weakest clans at the present time, > so their box power should ameliorate their weakness if they are made a > pre-con deck. Allowing them to diablerise with impunity makes perfect sense > from the viewpoint of the background, True, but why do this with a "box power"? It can easily be done with a card. Also, for the decks that don't are about diablerie, this box power does nothing to help them. > and it makes it substantially easier > for them to take out other minions. Celerity and Quietus are very weak > combat disciplines, Quietus perhaps doesn't do what it should properly. Celerity is not a "weak" combat discipline, it is just not a combat discipline that is supposed to be able to strike out hard, but to provide maneuvers and so forth. > so I think making burning minions easier for the > Assamites is worthwhile. Also gives them something to use their obfuscate > on. They can use Obfuscate already - a Night Moves here and there is a great addition to a deck. It stops your prey keeping the edge (esp. if down to 2 players), gives you a chance at a bleed etc. Spying Mission similarly. Swallowed by the Night is a good maneuver/stealth, and a little stealth on your rushes is always useful, since it allows you to pick your vampire perfectly. -- James Coupe

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Noal McDonald wrote: > > lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: > > ??? Flash, Blood Sweat, Blur, Blood Sweat, Taste of Death, POOF > > - burns a full 6-cap. > > Against a Presence based deck, the only "POOF" you're going to see is > the disappearance of the vampire from combat after he layeth the > sma...er the Majesty down. I think the point was the possibility. We are all in agreement that the Assamites (somehow) need some anti-S:CE capability. Once that is there, the Assamites have no real problems hitting out at people in combat, though it is using essentially one combo. :( -- James Coupe

> > ??? Flash, Blood Sweat, Blur, Blood Sweat, Taste of Death, POOF - > burns a full 6-cap. To go much higher is a little easier for the POT > guys, but they can't burn that way, just torporize with either > TS/IG/Blur (9), or TS/FoD/IG/Undead Strength (7). Seems less, but > burning a vampire is a pretty permanent end, and I've torporized > 9-caps just to see them get Giant's Blood and rescue-self. Ouch. > They just really need something that stops S:CE and them wasting all > those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't have to > give it to CEL and the Brujah. > > -- Derek Dude, that's a FIVE CARD combo, and it costs 4 blood! And if they have a maneuver of their own, you're totally screwed. Typical situation: assamite finally gets the five cards required, enters combat, maneuvers to long range.... and opponent S;CE. Now 3 of the other 4 cards are totally useless until the assamite picks up another maneuver. I'm not saying that the cards are awful or anything, but Thaumaturgy strikes are better and potence cards stack. Other combat decks can do the same thing with fewer cards and for less blood. Far too often, an Assamite will find himself with, say 2 maneuvers, 2 blurs, and a blood sweat. Or no blurs. Or no maneuvers. Or no taste of death to finish it off. The more cards the combo needs, the less likely you'll actually get all the right cards in your hand. Not to mention how expensive it is to use all those blood sweats and blurs. You won't be getting blood back on you vampires very easily unless you are using Taste of Vitaes, and then there's another card you want, making it a six card combo... It's not that this won't work sometimes, but, generally, it won't work nearly often enough (particularly because of maneuvers and S:CE). And since Assamites don't really have intercept, bleed bounce, or significant pool-regaining capacity, they don't usually get a whole lot of time to build up a good hand or work through all of their opponents S:CE. Further, Assamites also tend to get the short end of the stick when they go up against other combat decks. An assamite's worst nightmare is a combat deck that uses animalism, because Drawing Out the Beast makes all of their long-range-only strikes useless. Immortal Grapples mess them up badly, obviously. They do pretty good against Tremere, in that they can knock the Tremere to torpor pretty consistently, but they can't actually finish the Tremere off usually, and the blood on their minions gets worn down by theft of vitae's until they can't fight effectively (remember how many of their combat cards cost blood). I think the easiest way to fix this is a Quietus pre-maneuver that adds to the damage of all Quietus strikes. A theft-of-vitae type strike (without the range) would also be good, since Quitus has one in the RPG (Leech). It would be good if Quitus was made more flexible, having both short-and long-range strikes. They should probably also have something to help deal with S;CE. My solution (which also deals with some other issues -- namely, the weakness of celerity), would be to add celerity card that cancels both your own strike and your opponents. Should probably cost 1 or 2 blood. It would serve to give celerity a way of surviving immortal grapples, and another way of dealing with S:CE. Eugene

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:13:00 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> said: >> those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't >> have to give it to CEL and the Brujah. Noal> I agree. Making First Strike beat Dodge and S:CE is not only intuitive, Noal> it would help the Assamites a _lot_. Any help the Brujah get would be Noal> only incidental. Agreed! (and yes, we had a fight about this on this group, what, a year ago?). Currently "First Strike" does not function as a first strike (i.e. resolved before anything else), which is *very* confusing to new players. In addition, having First Strike beat S:CE would give Assamites some (much needed) combat boost. In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. Sadly, FS as a mechanism is currently useless. //Petri

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:54:29 +0000, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> said: James> On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Noal McDonald wrote: >> > lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: >> > ??? Flash, Blood Sweat, Blur, Blood Sweat, Taste of Death, POOF >> > - burns a full 6-cap. >> >> Against a Presence based deck, the only "POOF" you're going to see is >> the disappearance of the vampire from combat after he layeth the >> sma...er the Majesty down. James> I think the point was the possibility. We are all in agreement that the James> Assamites (somehow) need some anti-S:CE capability. Once that is there, James> the Assamites have no real problems hitting out at people in combat, James> though it is using essentially one combo. :( I think capitalizing on their suprise attack skills might work, i.e. give them some more sources of First Strike, and have FS beat S:CE. That would turn them into deadly foes, and be in the spirit of the tabletop game. //Petri

Petri Wessman wrote: > Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> said: > >> those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't > >> have to give it to CEL and the Brujah. > > Noal> Making First Strike beat Dodge and S:CE [...] > > Agreed! (and yes, we had a fight about this on this group, what, a > year ago?). Beat it more than to death, as I recall. Not much to be gained here in light of that, but ... > Currently "First Strike" does not function as a first > strike (i.e. resolved before anything else), Changing it would mean that "S:CE" wouldn't function as "S:CE" (i.e., end combat before any strikes resolve). And that Dodge wouldn't function as a dodge (i.e., avoiding the opposing strike altogether). "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and "Strike: Combat Ends". > which is *very* confusing > to new players. In addition, having First Strike beat S:CE would give > Assamites some (much needed) combat boost. > > In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that > they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their > preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. In VTES, surprise attack translates into the sort of card text on Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker. As was pointed out in the last flare up of this topic. Before responding, please check out the arguments (on both sides) on Deja. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.geocities.com/vtesrep

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Petri Wessman wrote: > I think capitalizing on their suprise attack skills might work, > i.e. give them some more sources of First Strike, and have FS beat > S:CE. That would turn them into deadly foes, and be in the spirit of > the tabletop game. I would rather that First Strike and Preventing S:CE/Dodge were kept as separate mechanisms - possibly combined on one card, say, but as separate mechanisms. If kept separate, it makes it much easier to hit back at an Assamite - so, yeah, you can't S:CE (Earth Meld) but you can still 1 point claw them - as happens with the Brujah. I *do* advocate giving them proper ways around S:CE. It's needed. But I would prefer they had some vulnerabilities left to exploit at the end of it. No clan should be a god. -- James Coupe

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 08:28:34 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> said: Noal> Making First Strike beat Dodge and S:CE [...] >> >> Agreed! (and yes, we had a fight about this on this group, what, a >> year ago?). LSJ> Beat it more than to death, as I recall. Not much to be gained here LSJ> in light of that, but ... ...except that with the need for an updated set of rules for the WW launch of VTES, this is again a current topic. Among other things. A lot of the recent talk here has been about the fact that Assamites need a serious boost, and that they currently have next to nothing against S:CE. This makes "first strike" a very relevant topic, since that is precisely what Assamites do well in the tabletop game. Changing the rules for first strike would go a long way towards fixing the problem, expecially if the new set included some more sources of FS for Assamites. >> Currently "First Strike" does not function as a first >> strike (i.e. resolved before anything else), LSJ> Changing it would mean that "S:CE" wouldn't function as "S:CE" (i.e., LSJ> end combat before any strikes resolve). LSJ> And that Dodge wouldn't function as a dodge (i.e., avoiding the LSJ> opposing strike altogether). This is assuming that the "s:ce" and "dodge" should be interpreted as "end combat/dodge, even if you don't see the attack coming". Which I disagree with. Besides the fact that S:CE is too strong an effect in the game as it is, the above interpretation is not the most logical one. LSJ> "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the LSJ> opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the LSJ> defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and LSJ> "Strike: Combat Ends". Again, according to your interpretation. >> which is *very* confusing >> to new players. In addition, having First Strike beat S:CE would give >> Assamites some (much needed) combat boost. >> >> In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that >> they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their >> preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. LSJ> In VTES, surprise attack translates into the sort of card text on LSJ> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker. As was pointed out in the last LSJ> flare up of this topic. No, Fast Reaction and HL model *another minion* coming in to resume the fight (and doing it as a surprise attack). In your rules model, there is nothing in the game that models *one* minion surprising another and therefore getting some serious advantage from that. No, the current interpretation of first strike is not "serious advantage", it's more like a joke since the omnipresent S:CE hoses it totally. Having a minion be able to dodge or activate Majesty to avoid an attack he/she doesn't see coming makes no kind of game world sense, and is confusing to new players (and annoying to old players). //Petri

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Petri Wessman wrote: > This is assuming that the "s:ce" and "dodge" should be interpreted as > "end combat/dodge, even if you don't see the attack coming". Which I > disagree with. If you wish to argue the real world point of view (not really relevant), consider what most of the Strike: Combat Ends cards represent. Majesty and other Presence effects do not care for whether or not you can see the attack coming - turn on Presence, people bow down. Meld into the earth, you don't need to see the attack coming. Become gaseous, you don't need to see the attack coming. Get a spirit to come and get you, you don't need to see the attack coming. Responding with "But you might not know they were attacking" isn't relevant, nor correct. Pre-range, maneuvers, post range and so forth suggest that you d id know you were going to be attacked. > Besides the fact that S:CE is too strong an effect in the game as it > is, the above interpretation is not the most logical one. The most logical to whom? There are players for whom the current rules seem entirely logical. However, S:CE is too strong an effect, in most circumstances, I would agree. However, I believe that rather than messing with the fundamental rule, here, that giving people cards (like TB, IG, etc.) is the far better way to do it, rather than splicing a rules change onto another rule that was never supposed to do it. > LSJ> "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > LSJ> opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > LSJ> defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > LSJ> "Strike: Combat Ends". > > Again, according to your interpretation. Actually, it does seem fairly clear from the Rules Book *and* all previous rules teams. If the "interpretation" was wrong, it could have been altered in V:TES (as aggro damage was) or a ruling issued. That such was not done suggests that it isn't just LSJ who thinks this way. > another and therefore getting some serious advantage from that. No, > the current interpretation of first strike is not "serious advantage", > it's more like a joke since the omnipresent S:CE hoses it totally. Indeed, but if there are ways around S:CE, FS becomes more useful. FS itself doesn't have to be that way around. > Having a minion be able to dodge or activate Majesty to avoid an > attack he/she doesn't see coming makes no kind of game world sense, Any vampire can turn on Majesty, if they have the right level of Presence. That's how it works, in the game world too. It's not directed at anyone. Presence is group emotion 'control', whereas Dominate is individual mind control (mostly). As I stated above, they know they're being attacked - that's what the entire maneuver thing is before. Do vampires generally use Celerity to Flash away for no reason? They might be hit first, but with something like Majesty, they've had all of the time up until now to turn it on, which is really very easy indeed. Hitting you requires me to move to you and hit you. Thinking requires, well, thinking. > and is confusing to new players (and annoying to old players). I think you missed out the word "some". -- James Coupe

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 15:19:27 +0000, James Coupe <jr...@cam.ac.uk> said: James> Responding with "But you might not know they were attacking" James> isn't relevant, nor correct. Pre-range, maneuvers, post range James> and so forth suggest that you d id know you were going to be James> attacked. Ummm, yes, maybe. I still see it the other way round, but no use fighting over game world logic issues (otherwise we'll be here all night fighting over all the other logical weirdness in VTES as well ;). James> However, S:CE is too strong an effect, in most circumstances, I James> would agree. However, I believe that rather than messing with James> the fundamental rule, here, that giving people cards (like TB, James> IG, etc.) is the far better way to do it, rather than splicing James> a rules change onto another rule that was never supposed to do James> it. Yes, I guess... but I would still prefer to have the FS rule changed. But be that what may, it's fairly clear that the current rules/card set makes is much too easy to avoid combat - you need only one card to avoid combat, but need some very few and specific cards in order to counter the S:CE munchkin effect, *in addition* to cards which which you actually do damage. Currently, it's a no-brainer to make a non-combat deck, and extremely difficult to make a combat deck that has a chance of winning. I think that balance should be altered a bit. No, I don't want to see the game become all combat and nothing else, but currently the rules and card set are far too much tilted in favor of avoiding combat. >> another and therefore getting some serious advantage from that. No, >> the current interpretation of first strike is not "serious advantage", >> it's more like a joke since the omnipresent S:CE hoses it totally. James> Indeed, but if there are ways around S:CE, FS becomes more James> useful. FS itself doesn't have to be that way around. Possibly. In any case, I would like to see some more ways of getting the FS effect, at least for the Assamites, since it fits in so well with the game world scanario. Maybe an aggra strike that happens as FS with superior quietus or something like that? Together with a way for Assamites to combat S:CE, that would probably make them usable. >> and is confusing to new players (and annoying to old players). James> I think you missed out the word "some". :) Yup, I was commenting on the sentiment voiced by local players. Obviously, there are some people who are fine with the current rule for FS. I'm a bit worried about the complexity of the current rule set, even though it *is* the most clear version of rules this game has ever had. Maybe most of the problem is with the tons of errata and rewordings to the cards themselves, forcing you to carry around a ton of printouts in order to play the game - no new player will be too enchanted with that. Oh well, the only way to fix that would be to reprint everything with the new/current wordings, and that's probably not going to happen anyting soon. //Petri

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Petri Wessman wrote: > Currently, it's a no-brainer to make a non-combat deck, and extremely > difficult to make a combat deck that has a chance of winning. Definitely. A ventrue bleed and band-aid deck (presence/dominate bleed, presence/fortitude defence) is very good. > I think > that balance should be altered a bit. Agreed. > No, I don't want to see the game become all combat and nothing else, > but currently the rules and card set are far too much tilted in favor > of avoiding combat. Indeed. Combat is *always* going to be a more risky proposition. It's the entire primary resources (pool) vs. secondary resources (minions, equipment, master cards etc.) argument that comes up time and time again, but hasn't come up for ages, that I recall. Bleed hits primary resources, so you oust them quickly. Vote hits primary resources, so you oust them quickly. Combat hits secondary resources, which allows you to then hit primary resources, so you oust them more slowly. A heck of a lot more fun AND once you can get someone's vampires killed, they can't hit back. Bleed has the risk that, whilst you're bleeding someone oust, because they still have their vampires, they might be able to get you. Combat takes its time removing that risk, albeit at the expense of other people doing much better. > James> Indeed, but if there are ways around S:CE, FS becomes more > James> useful. FS itself doesn't have to be that way around. > > Possibly. In any case, I would like to see some more ways of getting > the FS effect, at least for the Assamites, since it fits in so well > with the game world scanario. Maybe an aggra strike that happens as FS > with superior quietus or something like that? Sounds pretty cool. Quietus definitely needs some help in the combat stakes, IMO. > Together with a way for > Assamites to combat S:CE, that would probably make them usable. IMO, the way to go. It makes them similar to the Brujah, but with their own flavour - they have some cards for striking with, and some cards for makign that strike count with, and some cards for getting into combat *BUT* it's all Assamite, not Brujah. I've made it known several times before that, were I to be doing the combo you've just suggested it would go: 1) Contract (like a Brujah using Haven) 2) Assamite card (or card requiring this minion who has a contract on another minion, in case, say, Assamite Antitribu were introduced and could use Contracts) which prevented S:CE (somehow, there are many mechanisms to allow this) - gives the Assamites power, and makes Contract more worthwhilel than Haven/BR - and so makes Violation of Trust *perhaps* enter into your thinking 3) Quietus strike, similar to that which you suggest -- James Coupe

Petri Wessman wrote: > A lot of the recent talk here has been about the fact that Assamites > need a serious boost, and that they currently have next to nothing > against S:CE. This makes "first strike" a very relevant topic, since > that is precisely what Assamites do well in the tabletop game. > Changing the rules for first strike would go a long way towards fixing > the problem, expecially if the new set included some more sources of > FS for Assamites. Giving the Assamites a Boost is not intrinsically tied to altering the current, original, and proper function of First Strike. > >> Currently "First Strike" does not function as a first > >> strike (i.e. resolved before anything else), > > LSJ> Changing it would mean that "S:CE" wouldn't function as "S:CE" (i.e., > LSJ> end combat before any strikes resolve). > > LSJ> And that Dodge wouldn't function as a dodge (i.e., avoiding the > LSJ> opposing strike altogether). > > This is assuming that the "s:ce" and "dodge" should be interpreted as > "end combat/dodge, even if you don't see the attack coming". Which I > disagree with. That assumes that First Strike is intended to model "attacks you don't see coming", which is not the case. As has been stated. You cannot "S:CE" or "Dodge" the first round Hidden Lurker strike (which is modelling an attack you don't see coming, unlike the First Strike mechanic). > LSJ> "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > LSJ> opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > LSJ> defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > LSJ> "Strike: Combat Ends". > > Again, according to your interpretation. According to everyone associated with the development of the game who has commented on the subject. The effect was explicitly stated in the Jyhad rulebook for S:CE in section 15.3 and the amibiguity for Dodge vs. First Strike was resolved in RTR 22-DEC-1994. This "interpretation" was reinforced with explicit statements in the V:TES rules. [8.3] > >> which is *very* confusing > >> to new players. In addition, having First Strike beat S:CE would give > >> Assamites some (much needed) combat boost. > >> > >> In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that > >> they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their > >> preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. > > LSJ> In VTES, surprise attack translates into the sort of card text on > LSJ> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker. As was pointed out in the last > LSJ> flare up of this topic. > > No, Fast Reaction and HL model *another minion* coming in to resume > the fight (and doing it as a surprise attack). In your rules model, ? Yes, they model two things: another minion and surprise attack. Obviously. That it models a surprise attack at all is the point. Q: If, as you insist, "surprise attack" translates to "First Strike", why do those two cards not use "First Strike", but instead come up with alternate card text? A: because first strike doesn't model a surprise attack, whereas the alternate card text does. > there is nothing in the game that models *one* minion surprising > another and therefore getting some serious advantage from that. No, Right. An example of a (fictitious) card that would properly model a (single minion) surprise attack would be something like: Suprise Attack Action Enter combat with a minion controlled by another Methuselah. The first round of combat, that minion cannot use any strikes. It would probably need additional restriction for game balance, but hopefully you get the idea. > the current interpretation of first strike is not "serious advantage", > it's more like a joke since the omnipresent S:CE hoses it totally. > Having a minion be able to dodge or activate Majesty to avoid an > attack he/she doesn't see coming makes no kind of game world sense, > and is confusing to new players (and annoying to old players). Since First Strike doesn't imply that the opposing minion doesn't see the strike coming, I can see where newbies would get confused when learning the game from "old players" who tell them it does. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 15:05:36 GMT, Petri Wessman <or...@termiitti.akumiitti.fi> wrote: >>> In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that >>> they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their >>> preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. > >LSJ> In VTES, surprise attack translates into the sort of card text on >LSJ> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker. As was pointed out in the last >LSJ> flare up of this topic. > >No, Fast Reaction and HL model *another minion* coming in to resume >the fight (and doing it as a surprise attack). In your rules model, >there is nothing in the game that models *one* minion surprising >another and therefore getting some serious advantage from that. No, >the current interpretation of first strike is not "serious advantage", >it's more like a joke since the omnipresent S:CE hoses it totally. Correct. There is nothing in the game that models one minion directly surprising another. Make a good new card, wouldn't it? First Strike, if you notice, comes from a couple Celerity cards, and is obviously intended to be "hitting you before you can hit me", not "hitting you while you don't see it." HL and FR model a second minion performing a surprise attack, and the victim gets NO strikes that round, not just a "next" strike as First Strike does. First Strike is obviously not meant to negate the opponent's strike totally - so perhaps they require a QUI or CEL card (an ACTION MODIFIER, so they could only use it while Rushing) which could cost 1-2 blood and say something like "Opposing minion loses his initial strike in the first round." The action modifier bit would mean that other combat decks wouldn't be totally screwed, and put the advantage on whoever Rushed first (a good thing). Also, the Brujah wouldn't be totally hosed since they could always generate some additional strikes and administer their own assbeating a little later. >Having a minion be able to dodge or activate Majesty to avoid an >attack he/she doesn't see coming makes no kind of game world sense, >and is confusing to new players (and annoying to old players). Majesty is just there. It's being too cool to get hit. But again, notice that attacks that someone doesn't see coming fall under HL/FR, not First Strike. [ quoted text not captured ]

OK, before James Coupe gets his hands on this, is it a potential copyright issue if LSJ posting from his White Wolf account posts explicit card texts on the net? ;) IF WE CAN'T, HE CAN'T! WAAAAHHHH. =) j/k. =) (sorry... i had to =) On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 10:45:48 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Right. >An example of a (fictitious) card that would properly model a >(single minion) surprise attack would be something like: > >Suprise Attack >Action >Enter combat with a minion controlled by another Methuselah. >The first round of combat, that minion cannot use any strikes. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > perhaps they require a QUI or CEL card (an ACTION MODIFIER, so they > could only use it while Rushing) which could cost 1-2 blood and say > something like "Opposing minion loses his initial strike in the first > round." Indeed, though I would prefer such a powerful card to go to QUI (standard rant about Contract goes here). CEL would give it to a few clans who aren't so good as the Assamites in combat. The Toreador *aren't* a *great* combat clan, but they should be a workable one. Such a card as the above would be quite nasty and, IMO, too nasty. However, I might gift the attacking minion an extra (previous) strike, rather than getting rid of the opponent's one, so that they can still hit back, if they're still around - damage prevention, and the like. Which seems fine. (e.g. Allow them a Choose Strike/Resolve Strike sequence at a similar sort of time to when IG would be playable i.e. after range, before strikes are chosen.) -- James Coupe

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:17:24 +0000, James Coupe <jr...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote: >On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: >> perhaps they require a QUI or CEL card (an ACTION MODIFIER, so they >> could only use it while Rushing) which could cost 1-2 blood and say >> something like "Opposing minion loses his initial strike in the first >> round." > >Indeed, though I would prefer such a powerful card to go to QUI >(standard rant about Contract goes here). Well, yes. CEL gives it to the Brujah - I wasn't thinking. Also worth noting that it needs an inferior/superior version, so you couldn't just toss Quietus skill cards on (insert clan here). Inferior should suck, say, "Opposing minion must spend one blood or lose his strike in the first round." Superior should be the good version. This makes the inferior corner-case effective (much like TB) if you're rushing an empty or 1-blood vamp, and pretty much restricts it to the Assamites. And it should probably match Thoughts Betrayed's errata, actually, about not playing strike cards as opposed to "no strike". I really WASN'T thinking, was I? > CEL would give it to a few clans who aren't so good as the Assamites in >combat. The Toreador *aren't* a *great* combat clan, but they should be a >workable one. Such a card as the above would be quite nasty and, IMO, too >nasty. Well... if it's only usable when rushing, and only usable by QUI, then it's not TOO bad. It doesn't stop maneuvers, and since both a Brujah or Gangrel deck pretty much rely on being at close range, they can neutralize the Assamite strikes simply by winning the maneuver war. If they lose the maneuver chase, they were going to eat a whole bunch of long-range bloodstuff anyway, and their hand-strike for 7 or 1 agg didn't really matter. It does mean the Assamites can pretty much Rush with impunity, as very few decks will be able to do much back. Hmm. :/ At least the Gangrel have DotB (the Assamite clan-hoser). So do the Nossies, so they can DotB, pummel, Taste. And the Brujah can generate their additional strikes to get some anyway. >However, I might gift the attacking minion an extra (previous) strike, >rather than getting rid of the opponent's one, so that they can still hit >back, if they're still around - damage prevention, and the like. Which >seems fine. (e.g. Allow them a Choose Strike/Resolve Strike sequence at a >similar sort of time to when IG would be playable i.e. after range, before >strikes are chosen.) OK, i could see this, but question: is it really different from the above? Any Assamite deck with this would probably load up on Taste of Death to guarantee that the opponent wouldn't be able to hit back, as opposed to using any of their other combat stuff. =/ With the opposing minion getting NO strike, they have a chance to go through the Blur/etc. routine and maybe actually burn the guy, and certainly use some of the OTHER Qui cards. Even with the opposing minion only being unable to play strike cards, they can probably work it out a little better. [ quoted text not captured ]

>Changing it would mean that "S:CE" wouldn't function as "S:CE" (i.e., >end combat before any strikes resolve). > >And that Dodge wouldn't function as a dodge (i.e., avoiding the opposing >strike altogether). The trouble is, the reverse situation is "First Strike" doesn't function as first strike, as S:CE and Dodge get to resolve first. This argument is quite circular, and the choice seems quite arbitrary to me. In the RPG an initiative roll is made using Wits + Alertness, and players act in order of most successes to least successes. A vampire with a faster initiative would get to strike *before* a slower vampire could attempt to dodge or activate a Discipline. A quick poll of the players I know in Essex (who are not familiar with the rulings) all assumed that First Strike would take precedence over other Strike actions. Given that combat decks need a severe helping hand against S:CE I really think that it would be good to see this particular ruling reversed... Mike Nudd VEKN Prince of London mi...@vekn.org.uk ; mi...@darkness.org.uk

mi...@vekn.org.uk wrote: > A quick poll of the players I know in Essex (who are not familiar with > the rulings) all assumed that First Strike would take precedence over > other Strike actions. You don't need familiarity with the rulings - just with the rules. The rules on S:CE and Dodge vs. First Strike are clearly stated in the V:TES rulebook, section 8.3 -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.geocities.com/vtesrep [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > [ Assamite combat abilities ] > They just really need something that stops S:CE and them wasting all > those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't have to > give it to CEL and the Brujah. You and James have brought this up a lot. What's the big deal in giving the Brujah another anti-S:CE card? "I Immortal Grapple you - you can only play hand strikes - and then I play this Celerity card which says you can't play S:CE." ooh, how butch :) Really, you can't speculate how helpful the card will be to the Brujah until you see the card. It would have to provide a significant advantage over Immortal Grapple, and such a powerful card isn't required to deal with S:CE.

Amen brother! I don't think tampering with combat ends would be a good thing. It already is dealt with and viciously with IG. Voting is already very very hard to do and have little defense against combat. Just my 2 votes. Jeff Prince of Cleveland

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 16:02:34 -0600, davey! <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: >On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > >> [ Assamite combat abilities ] >> They just really need something that stops S:CE and them wasting all >> those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't have to >> give it to CEL and the Brujah. > >You and James have brought this up a lot. What's the big deal in giving >the Brujah another anti-S:CE card? They don't need any help. I would prefer to select a discipline which gives the less-functional clans some help as opposed to the already-functional. >"I Immortal Grapple you - you can only play hand strikes - and then I play >this Celerity card which says you can't play S:CE." ooh, how butch :) I maneuver to long range with a Thrown Gate... oh look! You can't play S:CE. I Blur and throw two Lids at you, and I don't have to Taste of Vitae because you couldn't reach me. At one point I might have argued that Brujah thrown-junk combat needed help. Frankly, I'm not so sure anymore, since S:CE is about the ONLY way to get around the Frisbee Barrage. >Really, you can't speculate how helpful the card will be to the Brujah >until you see the card. It would have to provide a significant advantage >over Immortal Grapple, and such a powerful card isn't required to deal >with S:CE. It's not that it would provide a significant advantage over IG, it's that it would provide a REDUNDANCY to IG. A lot of our wallpaper cards are there because they're redundant - Open Grate is silly because there are so many other ways to press to end combat, and worrying about pressing to a 2nd round is very low on the list of "stuff someone worries about in a combat deck." [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > > CEL would give it to a few clans who aren't so good as the Assamites in > >combat. The Toreador *aren't* a *great* combat clan, but they should be a > >workable one. Such a card as the above would be quite nasty and, IMO, too > >nasty. > > Well... if it's only usable when rushing, and only usable by QUI, then > it's not TOO bad. Oh, yes. The above was supposed to mean "Such a card as the above would be quite nasty and, IMO, too nasty if given to CEL." I thought it was implicit. > >However, I might gift the attacking minion an extra (previous) strike, > >rather than getting rid of the opponent's one, so that they can still hit > >back, if they're still around - damage prevention, and the like. Which > >seems fine. (e.g. Allow them a Choose Strike/Resolve Strike sequence at a > >similar sort of time to when IG would be playable i.e. after range, before > >strikes are chosen.) > > OK, i could see this, but question: is it really different from the > above? Any Assamite deck with this would probably load up on Taste of > Death to guarantee that the opponent wouldn't be able to hit back, as > opposed to using any of their other combat stuff. =/ However, it can be prevented via Leather Jacket, Skin of Steel etc. A deck which isn't using S:CE would be able to defend against it, but not hit back. And I've never viewed Fortitude damage prevention as a big problem - the assamites can get round it, just not with aggro damage, such that they can tenderise me on the first strike, but I can hit back later. This is somewhat similar to one suggestion I made, which was to have a card that functioned in a similar fashion to Blood To Water, but on the first round - that is, damage done before S:CE can be chosen/resolve, so S:CE can't do anything about it. > With the > opposing minion getting NO strike, they have a chance to go through > the Blur/etc. routine and maybe actually burn the guy, and certainly > use some of the OTHER Qui cards. Certainly. But if I'm playing Brujah, and I IG you, if you're Gangrel, you can hit back with a claw and kill me - my Achilles Heel. If, with Assamites, I IG you (that is, stop you playing S:CE with this hypothetical card), there is no way that I can hit back at you. Yes, I could rush you on my turn... but Animalism/Auspex (either or both) would be nice to see in intercept decks, and if I'm having to rush you myself.... And my vampire's probably dead by the time I get to rush you, anyway. -- James Coupe

In article <38D0E182...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Petri Wessman wrote: > > Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> said: > > >> those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't > > >> have to give it to CEL and the Brujah. > > > > Noal> Making First Strike beat Dodge and S:CE [...] > > > > Agreed! (and yes, we had a fight about this on this group, what, a > > year ago?). > > Beat it more than to death, as I recall. Not much to be gained here > in light of that, but ... Yes, it was discussed extensively. As I was one of the major contributors to the discussion, I clearly recall that it stopped because at some point both sides couldn't back up their arguments, as it came down to "how it was intended to be". As we don't have relieable information about that, it's only speculation. But I think now would be a good opportunity to examine FS closely and see what can be done with it. :) > > > Currently "First Strike" does not function as a first > > strike (i.e. resolved before anything else), > > Changing it would mean that "S:CE" wouldn't function as "S:CE" (i.e., > end combat before any strikes resolve). > > And that Dodge wouldn't function as a dodge (i.e., avoiding the opposing > strike altogether). I think we should leave S:CE as it is. However, FS could indeed need a boost, as it is currently "3rd strike" as someone put it. ;) FS should not beat S:CE, but beat dodge. If someone would like to dodge FS, he'd have to FS: dodge. And no, I don't want this to be discussed in light of "real-live" or "RPG" comments. Let's just stick to this game: V:TES. > > "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > "Strike: Combat Ends". As I said above, nobody could verify that it was meant the way you mentioned, as well as any other way. :) We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. That would be some proof... > > > which is *very* confusing > > to new players. In addition, having First Strike beat S:CE would give > > Assamites some (much needed) combat boost. It might be confusing, yes. However, I don't think that the Assamites should get that much boost from FS. A bit yes, but not overpowering. I guess it comes down to game-balance. Would it be unbalancing to have FS beat dodge? Or alternatively, would it be unbalancing to have dodge resolve just like any other normal strike (i.e. not being able to foil FS)? I don't think so, and I seem to recall that LSJ was also inclined back then that it wouldn't be unbalancing. Am I erring LSJ? The concept of FS beating dodge was discarded, because "it wasn't worth to change the rules, as it would have no impact on game-play..." (or something like that). However, I *do* think that FS is a concept that shouldn't be foiled *that* easily. The Assamites have a large number of FS-sources. If they could make more out of it just by altering the rules on FS-dodge, then all the better: no re-writes of cards! The Assamites would then need some cards that beat S:CE. I could imagine a quietus card that requires opposing vampires burning one additional blood to use discipline based combat cards. Another card could deliver the Assamites strike, even though the other played S:CE; combat would end after the delivery of the strike, though, just as it is in the rules. Making dodge a normal strike, which follows the procedure of all other non-S:CE strikes would be beneficial. It would make the rules a bit easier, one less exception to the normal sequence. > > > > In the tabletop game, Assamites are deadly because of the fact that > > they nobody sees them coming, surprise attack/assasination is their > > preferred method. In VTES, that translates to First Strike. > > In VTES, surprise attack translates into the sort of card text on Fast > Reaction and Hidden Lurker. As was pointed out in the last flare up > of this topic. Maybe, maybe not. Depends on your view of the game and your imagination. I think that points are moot in the current discussion (I start). > > Before responding, please check out the arguments (on both sides) > on Deja. Well, I certainly have. :) Carl [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, davey! wrote: > You and James have brought this up a lot. What's the big deal in giving > the Brujah another anti-S:CE card? The Brujah have S:CE already. They still need holes that can be exploited by others, though. Giving them another S:CE card, which would cover a different situation, means that those holes become less easy to exploit. For instance, the Malkavians already have Bleed Bounce from Auspex and Dominate. I wouldn't be happy giving it to them via Obfuscate. However, you could just reply "What's the big deal in giving the Malkavians another anti-bleed card?" No man is an island, no clan is a god. Holes are supposed to be there to allow interaction. Give the Brujah too much power, and no-one can touch them. -- James Coupe

prea...@utanet.at wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > > opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > > defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > > "Strike: Combat Ends". > > As I said above, nobody could verify that it was meant the way you > mentioned, as well as any other way. :) > We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. That would be some > proof... The designers have spoken: Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.geocities.com/vtesrep

On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 20:35:45 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >mi...@vekn.org.uk wrote: >> A quick poll of the players I know in Essex (who are not familiar with >> the rulings) all assumed that First Strike would take precedence over >> other Strike actions. > >You don't need familiarity with the rulings - just with the rules. >The rules on S:CE and Dodge vs. First Strike are clearly stated >in the V:TES rulebook, section 8.3 I am indeed aware of this. I pointed this out to them, and although they were surprised, they are now playing correctly. I will continue to play, and will continue to ensure that people play, in this manner unless an official counter-ruling is made. This does, however, beg the question of whether to issue such a counter-ruling... Regards, [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <38D22D93...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > prea...@utanet.at wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > > > opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > > > defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > > > "Strike: Combat Ends". > > > > As I said above, nobody could verify that it was meant the way you > > mentioned, as well as any other way. :) > > We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. That would be some > > proof... > > The designers have spoken: > > Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 > Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT > Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > > 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. Unfortunatly, I don't think that that's from the *designers* of the game: Richard Garfield, Andrew Greenberg, Matt Burk, and others. I doubt that Tom Wylie was part of the original design team. And I also doubt that Garfield was part of the design team after the release of Jyhad anymore. As I stated, getting one of them to confirm it *now* would be proof enough for me, and all the others. Btw, I couldn't very your reference, deja.com produces an error message. :( [ quoted text not captured ]

>>> We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. >>> That would be some proof... >> >> The designers have spoken: >> >> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad >> Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 >> Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT >> Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> >> >> 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. > > Unfortunatly, I don't think that that's from the *designers* of the > game: Richard Garfield, Andrew Greenberg, Matt Burk, and others. Also unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint), the designers no longer appear to be involved in making rules decisions. At this point, isn't it pointless to worry about what the designers had in mind? We're not using the aggravated damage, the vote pushing rules or the Golden Rule of Card Ownership exactly as intended, either. What point is there in worrying about the original intent regarding First Strike? What matters isn't what was intended. The designers, being human, made a few mistakes that have since been corrected. If First Strike was intended to resolve after S:CE and Dodge, then IMO it is what is known in the IT industry as a "design flaw"...a concept based on faulty logic. What _does_ matter now is what is best for the game. It is my opinion that making First Strike resolve before S:CE and esp. Dodge is what is best for the game. It's intuitive and it would make it a more useful aspect and would provide a greater balance to the game as a whole. > Btw, I couldn't very your reference, deja.com produces an > error message. That's because the oldest posting to the newsgroup that Deja has a record of is 3/27/95. Noal -- "I don't think that Witchcraft is a real religion." "There ought to be limits to freedom." --George W. Bush Don't vote for a son of a Bush. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8au4of$224$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > >>> We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. > >>> That would be some proof... > >> > >> The designers have spoken: > >> > >> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > >> Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 > >> Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT > >> Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > >> > >> 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. > > > > Unfortunatly, I don't think that that's from the *designers* of the > > game: Richard Garfield, Andrew Greenberg, Matt Burk, and others. > > Also unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint), the > designers no longer appear to be involved in making rules decisions. > At this point, isn't it pointless to worry about what the designers > had in mind? We're not using the aggravated damage, the vote pushing > rules or the Golden Rule of Card Ownership exactly as intended, > either. What point is there in worrying about the original intent > regarding First Strike? > What matters isn't what was intended. The designers, being human, made > a few mistakes that have since been corrected. If First Strike was > intended to resolve after S:CE and Dodge, then IMO it is what is known > in the IT industry as a "design flaw"...a concept based on faulty > logic. I thought we called those "Undocumented Features" :-) > What _does_ matter now is what is best for the game. It is my opinion > that making First Strike resolve before S:CE and esp. Dodge is what is > best for the game. It's intuitive and it would make it a more useful > aspect and would provide a greater balance to the game as a whole. I don't see how this would really be _best_ for the game. If first strike did resolve before S:CE and Dodge, why even have the card? You're now almost forcing players into the damage prevention arena or play first strike as well. Cool look at the new card text on Majesty, "S:CE with First Strike..." I for one despise S:CE and those pesky dodges, but I just don't see how ham-stringing defensive cards serves to better the game. Also, I'm not too keen on an an ally, namely Muddles, being stronger than a 1-3 cap vamp. Joe Chuchill V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter [ quoted text not captured ]

carlos_...@my-deja.com writes: >In article <38D22D93...@white-wolf.com>, >LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> prea...@utanet.at wrote: >> > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> > > "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the >> > > opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the >> > > defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and >> > > "Strike: Combat Ends". >> > >> > As I said above, nobody could verify that it was meant the way you >> > mentioned, as well as any other way. :) >> > We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. That would be some >> > proof... >> >> The designers have spoken: >> >> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad >> Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 >> Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT >> Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> >> >> 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. > >Unfortunatly, I don't think that that's from the *designers* of the >game: Richard Garfield, Andrew Greenberg, Matt Burk, and others. Oh, FER CRYIN' OUT L... What if he got Richard Garfield, the entire WotC Board of Directors, all of their employees, past, present AND FUTURE, and anyone who's ever even known about Jyhad to swear on a STACK OF BIBLES that there was NEVER EVEN A THOUGHT OF *EVER* allowing first strike to preempt a dodge while on NATIONAL TV TESTIFYING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT TOTALLY ***NAKED***?!? Would *THAT* satisfy you?!? (sheesh) I don't know why I threw in the 'naked' part. I guess I was just on a roll...never mind about that. Just admit it: you were wrong. Fred

Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> writes: >What matters isn't what was intended. The designers, being human, made >a few mistakes that have since been corrected. If First Strike was >intended to resolve after S:CE and Dodge, then IMO it is what is known >in the IT industry as a "design flaw"...a concept based on faulty logic. "Faulty logic"?!? What "faulty logic"? It's just taste. Someone made a decision based on their taste of how a combat system in a card game should work and wound up figuring out that first strike only matters if the two parties are trying to hurt each other. If one is trying to run away, first strike doesn't mean beans. You may like the result or dislike it but you can't prove it's a "mistake" or any kind of logical error because there's no logic in it. Fred

> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte wrote: > > they work, Clan Impersonation would probably be irrelevant. My suggestion > > would be to require that 2/3ds of a Methuselahs crypt be composed of > > Vampires from a clan in order to gain access to the clan's box power. > > It involves checking decks to do that. V:TES generally has no need to > check someone else's deck. It just requires showing that one has a certain number of clan vampires in one's crypt. This doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. > > I would also question the comparisons to Battletech. As Matt Green > (ex-Wizards employee) is often prone to say, with not a little hyperbole, > I admit, that Battletech took all the most random bits of Magic, and then > added dice! Hey! As a Battletech player, I sort of resent that slightly. :-) > > > The other advantage of including box powers is that it allows W-Wolf to go > > some way towards balancing the inherent strength of the clans. > > Which can always be done with cards. Give a clan viable cards to work a > strategy, there's no problems. Quite true. I'm not saying that Box powers are necessary, just that they might be a good idea. They add a nice characterful element to the different clans: they give an easy way for a beginner to see what the clan is 'about'. The point is that people are familiar with box powers from other games, they can help to adress balance issues, they encourage people to play clan specific decks (without requiring it), and they add more flavour to the game, by adding character to the clans. > > > This is particularly important if the pre-constructed decks are mostly or > > entirely fixed. > > Why? Just make the decks equal. Since they're creating new cards, they > can do that. But making the decks equal might require bending the disciplines further than they should really go. Assamites can't block or bleed bounce, but the solution is not to give them a quietus version of deflection. Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT saying that box powers are the only way to go. Just that they might be a worthwhile option. > > > My example box power was about the strongest I would hope any box power to > > be. I consider Assamites to be among the weakest clans at the present time, > > so their box power should ameliorate their weakness if they are made a > > pre-con deck. Allowing them to diablerise with impunity makes perfect sense > > from the viewpoint of the background, > > True, but why do this with a "box power"? It can easily be done with a > card. Also, for the decks that don't are about diablerie, this box power > does nothing to help them. > It can indeed easily be done with a card. As for 'why do it with a box power', ask someone who plays battletech or Lo5R. It gives the clan an ability that is ALWAYS available, that doesn't rely on the luck of the draw. It differentiates the different factions by something more than just the cards in the deck. A lot of people like that. And if Assamites want to do other things than Diablerie, that's fine, but the box power is geared toward the main 'thing' the clan does. Assamites are known for Diablerie, so it stands to reason their box power deals with it. If an Assamite deck wants to do something else, that's fine, but they are kind of moving away from the clan focus. And so their box power is less helpful. Kind of like a Liao deck that doesn't use subterfuge cards -- you can do it, but it does move away from their strength. > > and it makes it substantially easier > > for them to take out other minions. Celerity and Quietus are very weak > > combat disciplines, > > Quietus perhaps doesn't do what it should properly. Celerity is not a > "weak" combat discipline, it is just not a combat discipline that is > supposed to be able to strike out hard, but to provide maneuvers and so > forth. This is really a whole other topic, but what is the point of a combat discipline that can't strike out hard? It would be okay if Celerity was good at, say saving your minions in combat, but really it only does a mediocre job of that. All the maneuvers and presses in the world aren't going to help if your opponent plays a drawing out the beast. All the dodges in the world won't help you against a scorpion sting or an immortal grapple. And all the celerity cards in the world (by themselves) won't be much help in knocking Arika into torpor before she bleeds you to death. Celerity is acceptable as a secondary combat discipline; it works fairly well if you also have potence, or thaumaturgy, and so forth. But it is virtually useless on its own, and it is generally a much weaker auxiliary combat discipline than, say, fortitude, or vicissitude. I strongly feel that celerity should be given a card that allows it to survive being immortal grappled, at the very least. > > > so I think making burning minions easier for the > > Assamites is worthwhile. Also gives them something to use their obfuscate > > on. > > They can use Obfuscate already - a Night Moves here and there is a great > addition to a deck. It stops your prey keeping the edge (esp. if down to > 2 players), gives you a chance at a bleed etc. Spying Mission > similarly. Swallowed by the Night is a good maneuver/stealth, and a > little stealth on your rushes is always useful, since it allows you to > pick your vampire perfectly. All quite true. They can use obfuscate. But, lets face it, all of this stuff is just gravy, and not very thick gravy, either. Obfuscate, like every discipline, is useful. It just isn't VERY useful to the Assamites, because they don't have many actions that they REALLY care whether or not they get through. I'm surprised you didn't mention disguised weapon or hidden lurker. More useful obfuscate for assamites. But still, not nearly as useful as a different discipline would be. And the obfuscate would be a lot more useful if Diablerie was an option for them. Which, background-wise, it darn well should be.

To make the card more balanced, just make it cancel your own strike too. If you make it a celerity card, you will have also just given celerity a way to survive being immortal grappled (maybe) which is a good thing, IMHO. Eugene

> The designers have spoken: > > Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 > Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT > Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > > 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. Fair enough, but given the potential re-release of the game, it seems like as good a time as any to look again at old rulings, based on whether or not they're best for the game. Appealing to a ruling by the designer is appropriate for settling disputes in play, but it's pretty much irrelevant to settling a dispute about what the design of a game SHOULD BE. This dispute is not about what the rules are. This dispute is about what the rules should be. Insofar as we on this list might have some small influence on any changes that might be made to the game, we should consider what rules would be best for the game, in terms of improving balance, fun, clarity, etc. I don't actually have a strong opinion about whether or not first strike should beat dodge: I lean towards thinking it would be best if it did, as the first-strike giving cards seem to me underpowered. But this particular debate cannot be and should not be settled by pointing to what the designers of the game intended. Game designers are all-too human, and it would be a shame to miss this opportunity to improve an already excellent game because of a misplaced respect for the long-ago intentions of people no longer involved in the game.

Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: >> If First Strike was intended to resolve after S:CE and Dodge, then >> IMO it is what is known in the IT industry as a "design flaw"...a >> concept based on faulty logic. > > I thought we called those "Undocumented Features" :-) Only if you work on Micro$oft machines. Being a Unix admin, I don't get plagued by "features". *grin* > I don't see how this would really be _best_ for the game. In terms of game balance and simplicity, I think it would be. > If first strike did resolve before S:CE and Dodge, why even have the > card? You're now almost forcing players into the damage prevention > arena or play first strike as well. Now I don't follow your logic here. Even if we did change First Strike to resolving before S:CE and Dodge, it would have very little impact...except to _possibly_ make equipment based combat a little more risky. Let's take a look at the cards that give First Strike and I'll show you why. Canine Horde, Fast Hands, Blessing of Durga Syn and Shattering Blow all only affect weapons and equipment. How often do you see equipment and weapons used in tournament decks? Not all that often. In fact, decks that make extensive use of equipment are few and far between. As a result, these cards don't get used all that often. Making them resolve before S:CE and Dodge is unlikely to have any real effect since the reason they don't get used now isn't likely to change. Silence of Death gives Assamites First Strike for hand and melee strikes. However, Assamites can't send someone to torpor using hand or melee strikes unless they are out of blood or are equipped with the Sengir Dagger or Kali's Fang, both of which are unique. What about Blood Agony? It gives Assamites agg hand damage...but not until the 2nd round of comabt. By then the the S:CE has already hit the table. Back Stab is the only card that allows a vampire to have First Strike without limiting the strike. However, it requires Celerity and costs two blood, a steep price, and the vampire must be blocking. First off, intercept combat is a strategy that's generally doomed to failure (as discussed in another thread) and the only vampires that can consistently be able to block and can use this card are the Toreador nd !Toreador. They're not the first clans to come to mind when I think of clans that are dangerous in combat. Assamite, !Gangrel and Brujah decks, because of lack of intercept ability, are almost always more pro-active and are not likely to use the card at all. Muddles is the only serious use of First Strike, striking with 4 hand damage. However, that's all he can do without more equipment. Being an Ally and a unique one to boot, he's vulnerable to a multitude of cards and since he only has one life, all it takes is someone to block him or rush him with damage prevention, ranged damage or just more than 4 blood. In the past, one of the arguments has been, "What if WotC comes out with a card that makes First Strike more abusable?" Well, with LSJ on board and with the attitude that WW is taking towards the game, I think that we're more likely to see a higher quality product that we did with WotC. I'm not expecting a Protean or Potence card that gives First Strike hand strikes for 1 blood any time soon. Now someone else had said something about "logic" of making First Strike resovle first. I'd like to repost a post I made over a year ago when this last came up. It's a statistical analysis of S:CE vs. Dodge. Now I realize that defensive cards are supposed to be cheaper than offensive cards. However, I found the disparity quite excessive. Noal ------------------------------------------------------------------- Joshua Duffin wrote: > in the absence of a compelling game-balance argument...I think > we're pretty much out of luck on this one. Let's see if I can tackle this issue. Readers be warned. This post may take a while and is likely to be about as intersting to read as Bills of Congress from 1872. To begin with, please note the fact that while the original VTES book does say, "A "dodge"...prevents the effect of the opponent's strike that round, even if the opponent's strike was delivered with First Strike," there was no such statement in the Jyhad rulebook. And as has been pointed out in the past, there were many problems in the translation from Jyhad to VTES. However, both books do say, "The damage inflicted by a minion with First Strike is resolved before the strike of the opposing minion begins," and can be used as a basis to declare that First Strike _does_ happen before S:CE and Dodges. When I examined the cards that gave First Strike and Dodge, I examined them based on effect and opportunity cost. The cost of opportunity can be summed up by the following factors: Inf./Sup. Discipline Requirement, Blood Cost, Restrictions of Usage, and Additional Benefits. I found that the cost of opportunity of First Strike was much higher (almost 3 times as much) than the cost of opportunity of Dodges. The fact that a Dodge can cancel most of the strikes that you may get from a First Strike leads me to believe that there is a serious game balance issue...esp. when you consider that _any_ minion can use Dodge and very few minions can use First Strike. Restrictions of Usage includes the following: DNR (do not replace until combat has ended), Equip (requires the opposing minion to have equipment), Weapon (requires equipment to be a weapon), Close (must be at close range), Blocking (must be blocking minion) and SL (Strike Limit) (places additional limits on the type of strike the minion is allowed). Additional Benifits offset the cost of opportunity and include: Press (additional press) Strike (additional strike) and Steal (opponent gets to keep stolen equipment). Destroying equipment was not included because the pool loss from the burned equipment is often less than the blood (and pool) loss from a damaged, torporized or burned minion. The headers will be abbreviations for: Discipline (inf=1, sup=2), Blood Cost, Restrictions (1 for every restriction on it use), Benefits (1 for every additional effect), Total and Notes. The points from Benefits will be subtracted from the total. Notes will have an abbreviation of the Restrictions and Benefits. At the end there will be a summary. (please note that if the columns don't line up, you need to change your font to one that uses normal text parameters) First Strikes: Name | Disc| B.C.| Rest| Ben |Total| Notes ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Canine Horde | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | equip, SL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Back Stab | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | block ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Back Stab(s) | 2 | 2 | 1 | (1) | 4 | block, strike ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Fast Hands | 2 | 1 | 4 | (1) | 6 | equip, weapon, | | | | | | close, SL, steal ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Blessing Durga Syn | 2 | 2 | 3 | (1) | 6 | eqip, close, | | | | | | SL, steal ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Shattering Blow | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | equip, close, SL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Silence of Death | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 | close, SL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Silence of Death(s)| 2 | 1 | 2 | (1) | 4 | close, SL, mnvr ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Muddled Vamp Hntr | 0 | 2pl | 2 | (2) | 2 | ally, clan | | | | | | 4dmg, rush ----------------------------------------------------------------------- average (out of 9) | 1.56| 1.22| 2.22| 0.67| 4.33| ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dodges: Name | Disc| B.C.| Rest| Ben |Total| Notes ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dodge | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DNR ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Primal Instinct | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Read Intentions | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Acrobatics | 2 | 1 | 0 | (1) | 2 | strike ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Preternat'l Evasion| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Sideslip | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Side Strike | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vampiric Speed | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vampiric Speed(s) | 2 | 0 | 0 | (1) | 1 | press ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Spiritual Interv'n | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Fade From View | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Quick Exit | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Arms of the Abyss | 2 | 0 | 0 | (1) | 1 | strike ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Staredown | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Form of Mist | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Plasmic Form | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- average (out of 16)| 1.38| 0.25| 0.06| 0.19| 1.50| ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 16:02:34 -0600, davey! > <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > >On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > > > >> [ Assamite combat abilities ] > >> They just really need something that stops S:CE and them wasting all > >> those cards for nothing, and it ought to be in QUI so we don't have to > >> give it to CEL and the Brujah. > > > >You and James have brought this up a lot. What's the big deal in giving > >the Brujah another anti-S:CE card? > > They don't need any help. I would prefer to select a discipline which > gives the less-functional clans some help as opposed to the > already-functional. Hey, I agree that the Brujah are good, I just don't think another anti-S:CE card available to them would make them significantly better. Provided it's well balanced, of course. > I maneuver to long range with a Thrown Gate... oh look! You can't > play S:CE. I Blur and throw two Lids at you, and I don't have to > Taste of Vitae because you couldn't reach me. > > At one point I might have argued that Brujah thrown-junk combat needed > help. Frankly, I'm not so sure anymore, since S:CE is about the ONLY > way to get around the Frisbee Barrage. Well, the typical defenses against Frisbee beyond S:CE are: Obedience, Elysium, damage prevention, fight back with your own long range strikes, maneuver back to close range. Compare with the defenses against Immortal Grapple/Blur: Obedience, Elysium, damage prevention, fight back with your own short range *hand* strikes, maneuver to long range. Pretty similar situation, except the IG strategy is probably more card efficient, which is why I don't think a Celerity anti-S:CE card gives the Brujah anything they don't already have. > >Really, you can't speculate how helpful the card will be to the Brujah > >until you see the card. It would have to provide a significant advantage > >over Immortal Grapple, and such a powerful card isn't required to deal > >with S:CE. > > It's not that it would provide a significant advantage over IG, it's > that it would provide a REDUNDANCY to IG. A lot of our wallpaper > cards are there because they're redundant [snip] Exactly my point - to the Brujah, a Celerity-based anti-S:CE card wouldn't be useful, thus it's not really helping them - so "don't help the Brujah" isn't a reason not to print it. On the other hand, to the Tories, the Assamites, and the Gangrel-Antitribu, such a card is not wallpaper at all, all the more reason to print it.

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, James Coupe wrote: > On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, davey! wrote: > > You and James have brought this up a lot. What's the big deal in giving > > the Brujah another anti-S:CE card? > > The Brujah have [anti-]S:CE already. They still need holes that can > be exploited by others, though. Giving them another [anti-]S:CE card, > which would cover a different situation, means that those holes become > less easy to exploit. Without knowing the text of the card, there's no way of knowing which currently open holes it would cover, except one: range, for the Assamites. So we have some Celerity card which stops S:CE at long range. If you look at the strategies that this would make available to the Brujah, hand strikes are still the most efficient, and IG is superior to this hypothectical card when using hand strikes.

On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 16:04:16 -0600, davey! <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: >On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > >> At one point I might have argued that Brujah thrown-junk combat needed >> help. Frankly, I'm not so sure anymore, since S:CE is about the ONLY >> way to get around the Frisbee Barrage. > >Well, the typical defenses against Frisbee beyond S:CE are: Obedience, >Elysium, damage prevention, fight back with your own long range strikes, >maneuver back to close range. And the actual useful defenses against frisbees are: Obedience, Elysium, S:CE, Drawing out the Beast. Since Lids provide a press, you'd better be packing a ton of prevention to survive. Maneuvering back to close range is a joke - the maneuvers available and naturally included in a thrown-stuff deck (Gate, Flash, Rush) will pretty much ensure it never gets caught. Not to mention Pursuit - better than Flash in this sort of deck since you can cycle it as a free strike to save a Blur/blood. The only other long range strikes out there worth a damn are the Assamites and Tremere, and if it's not THA/CEL, the Tremere will die. The Assamites have their own problems. >Compare with the defenses against Immortal Grapple/Blur: Obedience, >Elysium, damage prevention, fight back with your own short range *hand* >strikes, maneuver to long range. Pretty similar situation, except the IG >strategy is probably more card efficient, which is why I don't think a >Celerity anti-S:CE card gives the Brujah anything they don't already have. Again, damage prevention is going to be difficult against a good IG deck, since IG gives a press. Fighting back is a little easier since some clans and vamps have ways to make their hand strikes nasty, and maneuvering away from them is a lot easier since IG decks include fewer maneuvers. The card efficiency is much the same either way: Rush, Gate, Blur, Lid, Lid - 8 for POT/CEL Rush, Signpost, IG, Blur, Taste - 9 for POT/CEL Rush, Signpost, IG, Undead Strength, Taste - 5 for POT five cards each. Taste is necessary at close range since otherwise your guys may die. The reason IG decks work and frisbee decks don't is directly attributable to the ability of the IG deck to prevent S:CE from ever being played. Psyche! is functional, but wasteful of cards. >> It's not that it would provide a significant advantage over IG, it's >> that it would provide a REDUNDANCY to IG. A lot of our wallpaper >> cards are there because they're redundant [snip] > >Exactly my point - to the Brujah, a Celerity-based anti-S:CE card wouldn't >be useful, thus it's not really helping them - so "don't help the Brujah" >isn't a reason not to print it. On the other hand, to the Tories, the >Assamites, and the Gangrel-Antitribu, such a card is not wallpaper at all, >all the more reason to print it. No, NOT exactly your point. It WOULD be useful, but it would not provide an ADVANTAGE over IG. The Brujah need no help - let us not waste our time helping them excessively. The Gangrel-Anti need a lot more help than just an anti-S:CE card, and the Toreador don't rank -that- high on my list of "need combat help" clans. One card to Auspex and one card to Quietus would cover things nicely (since Harika Guljan is a laugher with only QUI.) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8au8b3$j2f$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>, fre...@netcom.com (Frederick Scott) wrote: > > > carlos_...@my-deja.com writes: > > >In article <38D22D93...@white-wolf.com>, > >LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> prea...@utanet.at wrote: > >> > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> > > "First Strike" functions as "first strike" in that it beats the > >> > > opposing offensive strike. It wasn't meant to circumvent the > >> > > defensive activities that are represented by "Strike: Dodge" and > >> > > "Strike: Combat Ends". > >> > > >> > As I said above, nobody could verify that it was meant the way you > >> > mentioned, as well as any other way. :) > >> > We would have to ask the *designers* of the game. That would be some > >> > proof... > >> > >> The designers have spoken: > >> > >> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > >> Subject: Design Team Rulings: 12/22/94 > >> Date: 23 Dec 1994 08:42:47 GMT > >> Message-ID: <3de2i7$4...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> > >> > >> 4) Dodge will cancel a first strike. > > > >Unfortunatly, I don't think that that's from the *designers* of the > >game: Richard Garfield, Andrew Greenberg, Matt Burk, and others. > > Oh, FER CRYIN' OUT L... > > What if he got Richard Garfield, the entire WotC Board of Directors, all > of their employees, past, present AND FUTURE, and anyone who's ever even > known about Jyhad to swear on a STACK OF BIBLES that there was NEVER EVEN > A THOUGHT OF *EVER* allowing first strike to preempt a dodge while on > NATIONAL TV TESTIFYING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT TOTALLY ***NAKED***?!? > > Would *THAT* satisfy you?!? (sheesh) Huh? You really brought forth constructive arguments here. If you don't have something substantially to say in this discussion, why bother? ;) Anyway, the reason I bring the designers up every time we have the FS argument is, that *neither* side can proove they are right. Period. So it's moot to say "the designers have spoken" or stuff like that. It counts nothing in light of refurbishing the rules. Carl [ quoted text not captured ]

> > It is my opinion > > that making First Strike resolve before S:CE and esp. Dodge is what is > > best for the game. It's intuitive and it would make it a more useful > > aspect and would provide a greater balance to the game as a whole. > > I don't see how this would really be _best_ for the game. > > If first strike did resolve before S:CE and Dodge, why even have the > card? You're now almost forcing players into the damage prevention > arena or play first strike as well. > > Cool look at the new card text on Majesty, "S:CE with First Strike..." > > I for one despise S:CE and those pesky dodges, but I just don't see how > ham-stringing defensive cards serves to better the game. Also, I'm not > too keen on an an ally, namely Muddles, being stronger than a 1-3 cap > vamp. Well, Muddled Vampire Hunter would be the only card that would be considerably stronger with FS beating dodge (and perhaps S:CE). However, I don't view it as a bad thing that weenies are about to get hard ride with Dr. Muddie. :) A bit off-topic: Honestly, how often do we see Muddles in play? A number of posters here constantly claim that allies, retainer and equipment is worthless, cause you waste an action. If it were that way, why worry about Muddled? Also, there should be a number of ways to hurt weenies, Muddled is a cool one. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8b330f$pgd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: [snip] > > If first strike did resolve before S:CE and Dodge, why even have the > > card? You're now almost forcing players into the damage prevention > > arena or play first strike as well. > > Now I don't follow your logic here. Even if we did change First > Strike to resolving before S:CE and Dodge, it would have very little > impact...except to _possibly_ make equipment based combat a little > more risky. Impact: Elisabetta Romano is now a killing machine. 2 blood/minion in torpor. Silence of Death + Claws Should this really be the most dominate combat scenerio? Vamps that would be even more hellishly strong: Husamettin Akram Thetmes, Calif of Alamut Ian Forestal Insert your Silence of Death + Potence Card combos here... Hopefully this shows my logic here :-) Joe Churchill V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter [ quoted text not captured ]

Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Elisabetta Romano is now a killing machine. 2 blood/minion in torpor. > Silence of Death + Claws Not enough vampires to make a Protean/Quietus deck. Romano is an extreme corner case and it's always easy to shut down a deck based on a single vampire. > Should this really be the most dominate combat scenerio? > Vamps that would be even more hellishly strong: > Husamettin > Akram > Thetmes, Calif of Alamut > Ian Forestal > Insert your Silence of Death + Potence Card combos here... Result: No difference. Currently, if they're using Potence for hand strikes they will be using IG which prevents Dodge and S:CE as it is. It's also a commonly accepted fact that the Assamites need help against S:CE and this would make it a little easier. > Hopefully this shows my logic here :-) Yep...in all its flawed glory. *grin* Noal McDonald The Cousin It of Farmington Hills, MI National Jyhad League -- "I don't think that Witchcraft is a real religion." "There ought to be limits to freedom." --George W. Bush Don't vote for a son of a Bush. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8b5bkc$bik$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > Elisabetta Romano is now a killing machine. 2 blood/minion in > > torpor. Silence of Death + Claws > > Not enough vampires to make a Protean/Quietus deck. Romano is an > extreme corner case and it's always easy to shut down a deck based > on a single vampire. Ian Forestal fits in the Protean/Quietus deck. Thetmes, Calif of Alamut could fit since his hand damage is always agg :-) That's three I could use... [snip the pot+qui stuff] "point taken" Joe Churchill V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter [ quoted text not captured ]

I hate to admit it, but I think that Noal is right on this one. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp > > What matters isn't what was intended. The designers, being human, made > a few mistakes that have since been corrected. If First Strike was > intended to resolve after S:CE and Dodge, then IMO it is what is known > in the IT industry as a "design flaw"...a concept based on faulty logic. > > What _does_ matter now is what is best for the game. It is my opinion > that making First Strike resolve before S:CE and esp. Dodge is what is > best for the game. It's intuitive and it would make it a more useful > aspect and would provide a greater balance to the game as a whole. > That's because the oldest posting to the newsgroup that Deja has a > record of is 3/27/95. > > Noal > -- > "I don't think that Witchcraft is a real religion." > "There ought to be limits to freedom." > --George W. Bush > Don't vote for a son of a Bush. > [ quoted text not captured ]

Frederick Scott wrote: > Oh, FER CRYIN' OUT L... > > What if he got Richard Garfield, the entire WotC Board of Directors, all > of their employees, past, present AND FUTURE, and anyone who's ever even > known about Jyhad to swear on a STACK OF BIBLES that there was NEVER EVEN > A THOUGHT OF *EVER* allowing first strike to preempt a dodge while on > NATIONAL TV TESTIFYING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT TOTALLY ***NAKED***?!? > > Would *THAT* satisfy you?!? (sheesh) > > I don't know why I threw in the 'naked' part. I guess I was just on > a roll...never mind about that. Just admit it: you were wrong. > > Fred :) Wow! I guess that would have to shown on the C-span, which NO BODY WATCHES. This means it would hold little more weight than an ancient deja post you can't access. But I don't think Noal is wrong. Richard started the game then quickly lost control and input. There WERE design flaws in the original game, LSJ has taken monumental steps to correct both the cards and rules as best he could within the context of the game. Perhaps FS was supposed to trump Dodge and SCE, we may never know. As Noal listed in another post, the cost (Notice that most people whine about cost here in the NG) is significantly higher to use employ FS compared to cards that can stop it. In the theme of fixing stuff like WWEF which was TOTALLY unballanced, the even high cost of FS should warrent a change in how the card is used in the game. Raille

On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:12:39 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: >Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: >> Elisabetta Romano is now a killing machine. 2 blood/minion in torpor. >> Silence of Death + Claws > >Not enough vampires to make a Protean/Quietus deck. Romano is an >extreme corner case and it's always easy to shut down a deck based on a >single vampire. Silence of Death only requires inferior Quietus to gain First Strike. Add eight Quietus skill cards to your favorite weenie Protean deck to produce THIS monster - and weenie Protean is real, REAL easy to get, not to mention its maneuvers are free, so you still only need 2 blood to catch someone and torporise them. With weenies, you have plenty of options to gain blood as well, since there are a ton of them and frankly, each weenie you bring out would cost your predator and/or prey a vampire. I know I'd tack at least 15 Rush actions into that deck... This is why I've argued in different threads that ANY stop-S:CE card needs to only take effect at superior, or have a limiting effect similar to IG (where you had better be playing hand strikes anyway). It's quite easy to get an inferior version of a discipline on a bunch of vampires. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Not enough vampires to make a Protean/Quietus deck. Romano is an > > extreme corner case and it's always easy to shut down a deck based > > on a single vampire. > > Ian Forestal fits in the Protean/Quietus deck. > Thetmes, Calif of Alamut could fit since his hand damage is always agg > :-) Well using these two examples of unstoppables each is size eight or over the use of large vampires in rush decks is slow and difficult to pay for since you cannot Minion Tap/ 5th on either of these two with out either first turning these non-Cam vamps into princes or using an outside prince to do so. Btw there are only 3 princes with protean (although there are justicars who have it, none of whom cost less than ten). It would be and interesting deck, but probably no easier to pull off than the Malk oot Rots deck. Comments Welcome Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

> > Silence of Death only requires inferior Quietus to gain First Strike. > Add eight Quietus skill cards to your favorite weenie Protean deck to > produce THIS monster - and weenie Protean is real, REAL easy to get, > not to mention its maneuvers are free, so you still only need 2 blood > to catch someone and torporise them. With weenies, you have plenty of > options to gain blood as well, since there are a ton of them and > frankly, each weenie you bring out would cost your predator and/or > prey a vampire. I know I'd tack at least 15 Rush actions into that > deck... how would this be any different from Hasina Kesi( 1 cap pot.) slap fortitude card on her and IG/ skin of steel/ disarm, amaranth (if you like) Why don't you make that deck and put 15 rush actions into that. There are a hell of alot more weenies with potence than there are with protean or quietus. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. X_Zealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8b5o92$l9r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: > > how would this be any different from Hasina Kesi( 1 cap pot.) slap > fortitude card on her and IG/ skin of steel/ disarm, amaranth (if you > like) Damage prevention isn't really the issue...I believe we were discussing FS beating S:CE and dodge. As I stated above, if FS beats S:CE and dodge then you are forced to play damage prevention. Joe Churchill V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 17:48:25 GMT, X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote: >> Silence of Death only requires inferior Quietus to gain First Strike. >> Add eight Quietus skill cards to your favorite weenie Protean deck to >> produce THIS monster - and weenie Protean is real, REAL easy to get, >> not to mention its maneuvers are free, so you still only need 2 blood >> to catch someone and torporise them. With weenies, you have plenty of >> options to gain blood as well, since there are a ton of them and >> frankly, each weenie you bring out would cost your predator and/or >> prey a vampire. I know I'd tack at least 15 Rush actions into that >> deck... > >how would this be any different from Hasina Kesi( 1 cap pot.) slap >fortitude card on her and IG/ skin of steel/ disarm, amaranth (if you >like) Because you can just outmaneuver Hasina Kesi or other little pot guys? Their discipline doesn't come with maneuvers, unlike Protean, and Fake Out really isn't very good (although handy for desperation). Also worth noting is that you can generate additional strikes v. Hasina, unlike the First Strike mechanic. (ALSO worth noting is that if you get superior QUI on anyone, they get a free maneuver from the Silence.) Not to mention that without Silence of Death, little Protean guys are still very nasty - so the deck works pretty well even without the QUI cards. An IG/prevent/Disarm deck is no good without the prevent, unless you've included a bunch of Torn Signposts/etc... in which case why did you bother with Fortitude? Potence already hits harder than anything else... >Why don't you make that deck and put 15 rush actions into that. There >are a hell of alot more weenies with potence than there are with protean >or quietus. First, because I don't have 15 Disarms and don't know anyone who has. Second, because Protean provides a lot more all-around usefulness than Potence or Fortitude - Form of Mist and Earth Control being two big examples, and i can go looking for others if you like. (Not to mention that if you raise the crypt size a little, there are 8 5-caps or under who have some form of PRO/ANI. Drawing out the Beast, so you CAN'T run away, SoD, Claw, Torpor. Since you never get hit, the DotB additional hand damage means nothing.) Third, the point was to show that it's not a good idea to create near unstoppable tactics. IG/Skin/Disarm can be pretty nasty as it stands, except for the shortage of Disarm and the ability to maneuver away. Relying on card availability is just not a good idea, though - which, while I don't have 15 Silence of Deaths either, is why I mentioned the deck. Someone has a lot better chance right now of getting 15 SoD than they do 15 Disarms. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sun, 19 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 16:04:16 -0600, davey! > <dhat...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > >Well, the typical defenses against Frisbee beyond S:CE are: Obedience, > >Elysium, damage prevention, fight back with your own long range strikes, > >maneuver back to close range. > > And the actual useful defenses against frisbees are: Obedience, > Elysium, S:CE, Drawing out the Beast. Since Lids provide a press, > you'd better be packing a ton of prevention to survive. Maneuvering > back to close range is a joke - the maneuvers available and naturally > included in a thrown-stuff deck (Gate, Flash, Rush) will pretty much > ensure it never gets caught. If we add a hypothectical Celerity card to stop S:CE, then the defenses are Obedience, Elysium, Drawing out the Beast. But, this mirrors IG+Celerity, against which the acual useful defenses are, Obedince, Elysium, Terror Frenzy. Just as many manevers are available from Celerity in either case. > The card efficiency is much the same either way: > > Rush, Gate, Blur, Lid, Lid - 8 for POT/CEL you forgot "hypothetecial Celerity card to stop S:CE" > Rush, Signpost, IG, Blur, Taste - 9 for POT/CEL A much better play, since it stops all non-hand strikes, and nets you up to 7 blood! wrt Taste... > Taste is necessary at close range since otherwise your guys may die. Your guys won't die unless your opponent is playing a similar deck - ie, increased hand damage. If you mirror strategies, then the frisbee deck needs taste as well, so it doesn't make sense bringing it up in one case but not the other. for POT/CEL, I count: Rush, Hypothetical Celerity card, Gate, Blur, Lid, Lid = 6 cards, 8 dmg Rush, IG, Signpost, Blur = 4 cards, 9 dmg IG works better. > >On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > >> It's not that it would provide a significant advantage over IG, it's > >> that it would provide a REDUNDANCY to IG. A lot of our wallpaper > >> cards are there because they're redundant [snip] > > [snip] > No, NOT exactly your point. It WOULD be useful, but it would not > provide an ADVANTAGE over IG. The Brujah need no help - let us not > waste our time helping them excessively. Sorry, I misunderstood; before you said 'wallpaper,' so I didn't think you thought it would be useful. Frankly, if it doesn't provide an advantage over IG, I don't see that it is helping them excessively. > One card to Auspex and one card to Quietus would cover things nicely This kind of combat support seems out of flavor for Auspex, and what about the Gangrel? Surely some anti-S:CE in Animalism should be there too. With Celerity and Thaumaturgy anti-S:CE cards, everybody's covered, using combat disciplines. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, and see what gets printed...

prea...@utanet.at writes: >In article <8au8b3$j2f$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>, >fre...@netcom.com (Frederick Scott) wrote: >Huh? You really brought forth constructive arguments here. If you don't >have something substantially to say in this discussion, why bother? Well, to point out that you seem just a tad stubborn about this. >Anyway, the reason I bring the designers up every time we have the FS >argument is, that *neither* side can proove they are right. Period. So >it's moot to say "the designers have spoken" or stuff like that. It >counts nothing in light of refurbishing the rules. If you don't want what LSJ gave you then what you are attempting to prove is essentially meaningless. At *some* point, I'm sure the designers did indeed consider whether the game is better with First Strike overruling Dodge/S:CE or the other way around. They may have even hedged back and forth about the issue once or twice or several times or endlessly. None of that means much talking about it now because the nature of designs is to begin with raw abstraction and only to make sure they're covered by the time the game is published. At *that* point, what Richard Garfield or the ones who came before is pretty much meaningless. The only ones who matter are the ones LSJ quoted. So what you're questioning is what someone may have thought about this issue before the game was published and in concrete form. Well, who cares? People undoubtably had opinions both ways so you must automatically be correct if that's all you're saying. But your point must also automatically *not* be the least bit profound, either. Fred

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 04:13:06 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >To make the card more balanced, just make it cancel your own strike too. Um, ok, so I'm going to pay a blood so that NOBODY may strike in this combat? I could just play S:CE, which works the same for free OR i get to untap...? This makes no sense. >If you make it a celerity card, you will have also just given celerity a way >to survive being immortal grappled (maybe) which is a good thing, IMHO. As if Celerity, with its tons of maneuvers, didn't already have a way to survive being immortally grappled? C'mon now. Really. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte wrote: > > It involves checking decks to do that. V:TES generally has no need to > > check someone else's deck. > > It just requires showing that one has a certain number of clan vampires in > one's crypt. This doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. > Part of the point of Jyhad is that the opponents don't know what is in your deck. > But making the decks equal might require bending the disciplines further > than they should really go. Assamites can't block or bleed bounce, but the > solution is not to give them a quietus version of deflection. > Indeed not. One of the best defences against bleed is a strong offence - look at the weenie Brujah decks. With that sort of offence (in their own way), the Assamites have a very strong defence. > It can indeed easily be done with a card. As for 'why do it with a box > power', ask someone who plays battletech or Lo5R. It gives the clan an > ability that is ALWAYS available Indeed, but ask a Lo5R player when such a concept was introduced. Retrofitting a box power onto 20-odd clans is not going to be easy. All the clans in Lo5R (or equivalanet) were designed around the concept of a box power. > And if Assamites want to do other things than Diablerie, that's fine, but > the box power is geared toward the main 'thing' the clan does. So what do you give the Vetnrute? More bleed? More votes? Or the Brujah? They already do their main thing very well. They don't need the help. > This is really a whole other topic, but what is the point of a combat > discipline that can't strike out hard? Confucius Say: It hard to hit out hard if not in right position. > job of that. All the maneuvers and presses in the world aren't going to help > if your opponent plays a drawing out the beast. Indeed. But all the damage in the world is not going to help against Skin of Steel. All the areas have holes to be exploited. If you don't cover the bases well enough, you don't get to do your stuff. Cover them too well, the deck becomes less focused. You choose where you draw your line. > celerity cards in the world (by themselves) won't be much help in knocking > Arika into torpor before she bleeds you to death. Celerity is acceptable as > a secondary combat discipline; That's what its supposed to be. > it works fairly well if you also have > potence, or thaumaturgy, and so forth. But it is virtually useless on its > own, and it is generally a much weaker auxiliary combat discipline than, > say, fortitude, or vicissitude. Depending on the cirumstance. > I strongly feel that celerity should be > given a card that allows it to survive being immortal grappled, at the very > least. How does a sdiscipline "survive" something? You soun, howevre, like you're trying to give disciplines things to do that they were never supposed to do. Why *not* give Quituetus a bleed bounce card that allows it to sruvive being bled, at the very least? > All quite true. They can use obfuscate. But, lets face it, all of this stuff > is just gravy, and not very thick gravy, either. No,but it is a useful game strategy. > Obfuscate, like every > discipline, is useful. It just isn't VERY useful to the Assamites, For some definition of "useful". In your decks, perhaps not. > because > they don't have many actions that they REALLY care whether or not they get > through. Therei s more to Obfuscate than just stealth. -- James Coupe

> >To make the card more balanced, just make it cancel your own strike too. > > Um, ok, so I'm going to pay a blood so that NOBODY may strike in this > combat? I could just play S:CE, which works the same for free OR i > get to untap...? This makes no sense. Celerity doesn't always go hand in hand with presence. And it should be obvious that a card like this is very different from S:CE -- for one thing it works when you're immortal grappled, for another it allows additional strikes and additional rounds of combat. It's DIFFERENT then S:CE -- not necessarily better or worse overall, just different. > > >If you make it a celerity card, you will have also just given celerity a way > >to survive being immortal grappled (maybe) which is a good thing, IMHO. > > As if Celerity, with its tons of maneuvers, didn't already have a way > to survive being immortally grappled? C'mon now. Really. Try maneuvering when the other guy has drawn out your beast. Or shadow stepped. Doesn't work very well. If the other guy has the right cards, the celerity user is screwed, no matter WHAT cards he has. Hence my suggestion we introduce a card to rectify that. Eugene

> > > > It just requires showing that one has a certain number of clan vampires in > > one's crypt. This doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. > > > Part of the point of Jyhad is that the opponents don't know what is in > your deck. Unless, maybe, you want to use a box power. Heck, with the color-coded backgrounds, they don't even have to see which vampires they are, necessarily. Just show the corners. And, outside of a tournament setting, generally you DO know what's in your opponents decks. I know my friends decks almost as well as I know my own. > > > But making the decks equal might require bending the disciplines further > > than they should really go. Assamites can't block or bleed bounce, but the > > solution is not to give them a quietus version of deflection. > > > > Indeed not. One of the best defences against bleed is a strong offence - > look at the weenie Brujah decks. With that sort of offence (in their own > way), the Assamites have a very strong defence. > Could have. Potentially. I have yet to see an Assamite deck that is actually any good. Not that I'm really disagreeing with you here, mind you. > > It can indeed easily be done with a card. As for 'why do it with a box > > power', ask someone who plays battletech or Lo5R. It gives the clan an > > ability that is ALWAYS available > > Indeed, but ask a Lo5R player when such a concept was > introduced. Retrofitting a box power onto 20-odd clans is not going to be > easy. All the clans in Lo5R (or equivalanet) were designed around the > concept of a box power. > Most people who've mentioned a preference seem to want pre-constructed decks in the new edition. Just put a box power on each of the pre-cons. If you want to give every clan one, post the rest on the website. This is exactly what was done with Battletech, and it worked fine. > > And if Assamites want to do other things than Diablerie, that's fine, but > > the box power is geared toward the main 'thing' the clan does. > > So what do you give the Vetnrute? More bleed? More votes? Or the > Brujah? They already do their main thing very well. They don't need the > help. > Whatever. Those are both possibilities. How about intercept against political actions/bleed? Deals with a weakness, but not overpowering, and makes sense from a background perspective. Just one possibility. > > This is really a whole other topic, but what is the point of a combat > > discipline that can't strike out hard? > > Confucius Say: It hard to hit out hard if not in right position. Sorry, you lost me. > > > job of that. All the maneuvers and presses in the world aren't going to help > > if your opponent plays a drawing out the beast. > > Indeed. But all the damage in the world is not going to help against Skin > of Steel. All the areas have holes to be exploited. If you don't cover > the bases well enough, you don't get to do your stuff. Cover them too > well, the deck becomes less focused. You choose where you draw your line. Lots of damage does fine against skin of steel. Blood of acid and blood fury spring readily to mind. > > > celerity cards in the world (by themselves) won't be much help in knocking > > Arika into torpor before she bleeds you to death. Celerity is acceptable as > > a secondary combat discipline; > That's what its supposed to be. I disagree. I think that disciplines can't (shouldn't) be designed to be primarily secondary. That might be what they get used as, but that shouldn't be the design. > > > it works fairly well if you also have > > potence, or thaumaturgy, and so forth. But it is virtually useless on its > > own, and it is generally a much weaker auxiliary combat discipline than, > > say, fortitude, or vicissitude. > > Depending on the cirumstance. I'm willing to say, generally. > > > I strongly feel that celerity should be > > given a card that allows it to survive being immortal grappled, at the very > > least. > > How does a sdiscipline "survive" something? You soun, howevre, like > you're trying to give disciplines things to do that they were never > supposed to do. Why *not* give Quituetus a bleed bounce card that allows > it to sruvive being bled, at the very least? I fail to see how canceling a strike (something dodges do, more or less) is outside the scope of celerity. > > > All quite true. They can use obfuscate. But, lets face it, all of this stuff > > is just gravy, and not very thick gravy, either. > > No,but it is a useful game strategy. > No argument. And open grate is useful for pressing to end combat, which is often a useful game strategy. Is it worth putting in the deck? > > Obfuscate, like every > > discipline, is useful. It just isn't VERY useful to the Assamites, > > For some definition of "useful". In your decks, perhaps not. > > > because > > they don't have many actions that they REALLY care whether or not they get > > through. > > Therei s more to Obfuscate than just stealth. No argument. But the most effective uses of obfuscate I have seen, generally, have been using the stealth it provides to make important actions succeed. This can't come as a shock to you.

On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:02:58 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >> >To make the card more balanced, just make it cancel your own strike too. >> >> Um, ok, so I'm going to pay a blood so that NOBODY may strike in this >> combat? I could just play S:CE, which works the same for free OR i >> get to untap...? This makes no sense. > >Celerity doesn't always go hand in hand with presence. And it should be >obvious that a card like this is very different from S:CE -- for one thing >it works when you're immortal grappled, for another it allows additional >strikes and additional rounds of combat. It's DIFFERENT then S:CE -- not >necessarily better or worse overall, just different. So... you want to give Celerity a card that can shut down any non-celeritous deck, basically. I don't approve. >> As if Celerity, with its tons of maneuvers, didn't already have a way >> to survive being immortally grappled? C'mon now. Really. > >Try maneuvering when the other guy has drawn out your beast. Or shadow >stepped. Doesn't work very well. (shrug) Shadow step is expensive. Drawing out a CEL deck's beast is generally considered a BAD THING if you don't have damage prevention, because you'll get handpummeled for LOTS. >If the other guy has the right cards, the celerity user is screwed, no >matter WHAT cards he has. Hence my suggestion we introduce a card to rectify >that. Every deck needs a weakness. Every discipline needs a weakness. That said, I don't like it. It makes Celerity hyper-powerful, which it doesn't need to be - it's combat SUPPORT, not uber-combat. Consider that only decks packing CEL themselves have a hope of survival against yours - especially if you make it a bleed deck. CEL/PRE is very common - Toreador and Brujah both have it. Let's include a bunch of Social Charm/Legal Manips, a bunch of this "nobody strikes" CEL card, a few Aire of Elations for style points, some Flash (in case you need to press to end combat) and some Misdirections, Blood Dolls and assorted other pool-gainers. Misdirect and bleed every turn. Anyone blocks you, you play the no-strikes card and nothing happens to you. It's better than Majesty! About the only thing that has a hope of stopping you is POT/CEL. Weenie POT doesn't work because you just cancel their strike, and they can't get additionals. This sort of possibility disturbs me. [ quoted text not captured ]

lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: >>Celerity doesn't always go hand in hand with presence. Maybe not...but the decks that use Celerity that don't use Presence are _always_ combat decks and will want to get in their licks. >> And it should be obvious that a card like this is very different >> from S:CE Meaning that the only damage that occurs during the _entire_ combat are not from strikes? I can see Cel/Ani and Cel/Tha decks having a field day with abusing this. Okay...I play this "non-strike" card and ten DotB cards. Ten non-preventable damage to you and none to me. Buh bye. For even more fun, how about Trap/Weather Control/"non-strike" celerity card/Blood to Water (on 2nd round)/Taste of Vitae? Using only CEL/THA, 5 cards and 5 blood plus cost of imaginary card, I just did a total of 8 non-preventable damage/loss of blood, which in most cases will send you to torpor, 7 of which I get back on the 2nd round Taste at absolutely no risk to me. All of which take place before maneuvers are declared on the 2nd round. Better have that press handy on the first round. Uh....no. >> It's DIFFERENT then S:CE -- not necessarily better or worse >> overall, just different. It's different, I'll grant you..but it _definitely_ is worse. Not to mention that since cel has a sh*tload of dodges and CEL has a S:CE, it really needs nothing that is this abusive. > So... you want to give Celerity a card that can shut down any > non-celeritous deck, basically. I don't approve. It's worse than that. *makes frightened look* Much worse. > (shrug) Shadow step is expensive. Yeah, but if it's used with a IG deck, the Taste will recoup the loss. > Drawing out a CEL deck's beast is generally considered a BAD > THING if you don't have damage prevention, because you'll get > handpummeled for LOTS. Only if you don't send them to torpor on the first strike. Nosferatu, Gangrel and Tzimisce should have little problem doing that. Ravnos...*shrug*...depends on the deck. >> If the other guy has the right cards, the celerity user is screwed, >> no matter WHAT cards he has. It's those _right_ cards that are an essential element to the game. >> Hence my suggestion we introduce a card to rectify that. By introducing an extremely abusive card for a discipline that doesn't need any more help? I'll have to catch the next bus, thanks. > Every deck needs a weakness. Every discipline needs a weakness. Exactly correct. VTES doesn't need a truly unstoppable deck or overly abusive cards. That's a lesson that RtI should have taught everyone. Noal -- "I don't think that Witchcraft is a real religion." "There ought to be limits to freedom." --George W. Bush Don't vote for a son of a Bush. [ quoted text not captured ]

The proposal was not for a card that cancels all strikes for a combat. That WOULD be silly. The proposal was for a card that would be played sometime around strike resolution, and cancel both your strike and the opponent's strike. Probably cost about 1 blood. This would be useful for a few things: 1. Dealing with S:CE. Assamites and Toreador trying combat would be thankful. 2. Dealing with being Immortal Grappled. As a defence, you could cancel both your strike and your opponent's. 3. Allowing potence/celerity to stand some chance against potence/fortitude. Note that this would not prevent additional strikes from being played, nor presses continuing the combat (thus granting both people more strikes). How would this card make celerity decks 'unstoppable'?Celerity by itself does worthless damage. Imagine a fight between a celerity deck a a potence deck. Potence plays Torn signpost, Immortal grapples. Celerity cancels both strikes, blurs. Net result: both minions have played two cards, lost 2 blood, and potence has a press. Unbalanced? I think not. In my gaming group we rarely see potence celerity rush decks because fortitude/potence (or Thaumaturgy!)works so much better. Celerity is, in my opinion, one of the weaker disciplines in the game, despite the number of cards it has. This card would just make it a bit more worthwhile.

On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:35:46 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >The proposal was not for a card that cancels all strikes for a combat. That >WOULD be silly. The proposal was for a card that would be played sometime >around strike resolution, and cancel both your strike and the opponent's >strike. Probably cost about 1 blood. This would be useful for a few things: I recommend going and rereading our posts. This is exactly what we took your card proposal to be. >1. Dealing with S:CE. Assamites and Toreador trying combat would be >thankful. OK, it deals with S:CE. There are better ways, but this at least is functional. >2. Dealing with being Immortal Grappled. As a defence, you could cancel both >your strike and your opponent's. There are already enough ways for CEL to deal with Immortal Grapple, specifically, RUNNING AWAY FROM IT. >3. Allowing potence/celerity to stand some chance against potence/fortitude. A POT/CEL deck should gratuitously outperform a POT/FOR deck. You must have superior Fortitude to use Skin of Steel and stop all strikes, and the vampire selection for this ranges from piss-poor to worse - the only two vampires which have POT/FOR both at superior are Lazverinus (10 cap) and Gwendolyn (11 cap). POT/for gives you a 4-cap and three 7's. This means skill cards. POT/CEL, on the other hand, has a 4, 6, 7, and 4 8-caps to work with - and that's not to mention what you can get from POT/cel (2 more 6's and Beast, a 7) or pot/CEL (several 5's and 6's). I also don't understand why it matters to the overall game that POT/CEL or POT/FOR be better. Either one is a combat deck. Neither one needs help against each other - they both need help against S:CE. >Note that this would not prevent additional strikes from being played, nor >presses continuing the combat (thus granting both people more strikes). Note that only CEL decks may gain additional strikes. Also note that any CEL deck is going to have more presses to continue than someone else has presses to end. >How would this card make celerity decks 'unstoppable'?Celerity by itself Go back and read my response with regards to PRE/CEL, and THINK about it. Jesus H. Buddha, it's not that the deck is going to beat people up, it's that it can no longer BE beaten up - one of the best defenses against fast bleed decks!! >does worthless damage. Imagine a fight between a celerity deck a a potence >deck. Potence plays Torn signpost, Immortal grapples. Celerity cancels both >strikes, blurs. Net result: both minions have played two cards, lost 2 >blood, and potence has a press. Unbalanced? I think not. Celerity also has any presses it needs, because it has Flash and assorted other cards. Combat will not continue to a 2nd round. Again, the deck has AVOIDED being beaten up by a deck that should normally pummel it silly. If you'd like a CEL deck to beat things up, however, equip it with a bunch of .44's. Now you rush someone, you cancel their strike, (you win the maneuver war because you have CEL and a gun and they don't), and you shoot them for 4. You press if necessary because you're CEL and have lots of presses handy. (i refer you to Flash, which is a maneuver *and* a press at superior.) This isn't unbalanced? Nothing except another CEL deck can stop it. BAD! BAD! BAD! >In my gaming group we rarely see potence celerity rush decks because >fortitude/potence (or Thaumaturgy!)works so much better. Celerity is, in my I'm going to assume you meant THA/FOR, and use that tired old Dawn Op/Skin of Night/Weather Control combo. Yippee. Doesn't work worth a crap if someone doesn't block. In any case, POT/CEL will be able to rush THA/FOR and pound it silly, multiple times, and carve its initials in the victim's forehead each time saying "JIMMY DUNN WAS HERE." I can't believe that a POT/FOR deck somehow has an easier time of it than a POT/CEL deck. I don't know what sort of decks your group uses, or what house rules, but I'm suspecting that SOMETHING is out of kosher with the tournament experiences I and others have had. >opinion, one of the weaker disciplines in the game, despite the number of >cards it has. This card would just make it a bit more worthwhile. Dear me. I think if we took a vote on the NG, Celerity would be at the top of "Best 2nd or support discipline to include in your deck." Possibly one of *the* best potential discipline pairs in the game is DOM/CEL - it bleeds for a shitload and can't be caught to be killed in combat. It doesn't have ANY vampires below 5 with this pair on them. If you want DOM/cel, you have a 5, a pair of 6's, and two 8's. If you want dom/CEL, you have roughly the same. It's just DIFFICULT to get this pair of disciplines on a vamp, and well it should be - when it can bleed you for 6 every action and just maneuver/dodge around anything you try to do to it... I think Celerity is one of the most powerful disciplines. The only thing keeping it from being a showstopper is that it is totally limited to combat. Otherwise, it would be too much. Alacrity is a VERY powerful card. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >> The proposal was not for a card that cancels all strikes >> for a combat. That WOULD be silly. >lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: > I recommend going and rereading our posts. This is exactly > what we took your card proposal to be. Can you imagine the rush of people trying to get Ghoul Retainer cards? No strikes for you, no strikes for me, but my buddy with the Flamethrower here... >> The proposal was for a card that would be played sometime >> around strike resolution, and cancel both your strike and >> the opponent's strike. Probably cost about 1 blood. *reads back* Actually, it started out a action modifier only applicable to the first round and applied to the first strike. Pretty much a modified Hidden Lurker card. That would be a much better implementation than your proposal. *ponders* Cel/Tha would still _love_ a card like that. >> 1. Dealing with S:CE. Assamites and Toreador trying combat would >> be thankful. Assamites, yes. Toreador, no. Toreador is _not_ a combat clan and doesn't need to be. This leads me to believe that if a card was made as originally proposed, it would be a defensive measure for Toreador and an offensive one for Assamites. >> 2. Dealing with being Immortal Grappled. As a defence, you could >> cancel both your strike and your opponent's. > There are already enough ways for CEL to deal with Immortal > Grapple, specifically, RUNNING AWAY FROM IT. I agree with Derek. CEL has maneuvers and a S:CE of its own. >> 3. Allowing potence/celerity to stand some chance against >> potence/fortitude. > I also don't understand why it matters to the overall game > that POT/CEL or POT/FOR be better. Either one is a combat > deck. Neither one needs help against each other 100% agree about they don't need help against each other. I disagree about whether one is inherently superior to the other. That's largely a factor of deck design. > - they both need help against S:CE. Not really. They both have maneuvers (FOR Indominability) and IG. >> Note that this would not prevent additional strikes from >> being played, nor presses continuing the combat (thus >> granting both people more strikes). If implemented as originally proposed, I'd agree. As you proposed, playable each round, this could get extremely abusive after you factor in environmental damage. > Note that only CEL decks may gain additional strikes. Sorry Derek, this is wrong. Protean, Obtenebration and Vial of Garou Blood (*wrinkle nose*) also gives additional strikes. But you are correct that unless you have additional strikes (which most non-cel decks don't use) you're pretty much hosed. > Go back and read my response with regards to PRE/CEL, and THINK about > it. Jesus H. Buddha, it's not that the deck is going to beat people > up, it's that it can no longer BE beaten up - one of the best defenses > against fast bleed decks!! Actually, by using environmental damage (Ghoul Retainer/Flame Thrower, Animalism, Thamaturgy) you _can_ use this card to beat people up relatively risk free. That's even more disturbing to me. >> does worthless damage. Imagine a fight between a celerity >> deck a potence deck. A Potence deck _should_ win. Potence is a primary combat discipline while Celerity is not. Celerity gets an Oscar for "Best Discipline in a Supporting Role". >> Potence plays Torn signpost, Immortal grapples. Celerity >> cancels both strikes, blurs. Net result: both minions have >> played two cards, lost 2 blood, No. One player has spent two blood, the other takes two damage. This leaves open the door for Disarm (or multiple Pulled Fangs) and Decaptitate. > Unbalanced? I think not. One specific case does not define whether a card is unbalanced. You have to examine how it can be combined with other cards and effects to determine that. > If you'd like a CEL deck to beat things up, however, equip it with a > bunch of .44's. Now you rush someone, you cancel their strike, (you > win the maneuver war because you have CEL and a gun and they don't), > and you shoot them for 4. Don't forget the Dragon Breath Rounds on the 2nd shot. > This isn't unbalanced? > BAD! BAD! BAD! Agreed. > I'm going to assume you meant THA/FOR, and use that tired old Dawn > Op/Skin of Night/Weather Control combo. Yippee. Doesn't work worth a > crap if someone doesn't block. That's why it makes a great Bruise and Bleed combo, but not a good rush combo. Even when I use it, I only put enough cards in the deck to pull if off about 6 times. After the first time, it's enough of a threat that the bleeds for 5-6 will pour forth like a red waterfall. > In any case, POT/CEL will be able to rush THA/FOR and pound it > silly, multiple times, and carve its initials in the victim's > forehead each time saying "JIMMY DUNN WAS HERE." Heh. Which is why I also add Skin of Steel and Lucky Blow cards for just such an occasion. > I can't believe that a POT/FOR deck somehow has an easier time > of it than a POT/CEL deck. A POT/FOR deck would work much better if it wasn't for the lack of available vampires. Discipline cards only go so far. Noal McDonald The Great Googily Moogily of Farmington Hills, MI [ quoted text not captured ]

Gee. I appear to have been cranky when I wrote this. (cough) Back to our normal "calm" self... On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:10:26 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: >Can you imagine the rush of people trying to get Ghoul Retainer cards? >No strikes for you, no strikes for me, but my buddy with the >Flamethrower here... *cringe* It's bad enough that you can have three Ghoul Retainers all firing the same .44 already. >*reads back* Actually, it started out a action modifier only applicable >to the first round and applied to the first strike. Pretty much a >modified Hidden Lurker card. That would be a much better implementation >than your proposal. *ponders* Cel/Tha would still _love_ a card like >that. That was one I suggested for AUS - an action modifier to cancel someone's initial strike. No good as defense, so you aren't a combat monster, but permits some clans to do their thing a lot better. (Tremere, Tzimisce..) >Toreador is _not_ a combat clan and doesn't need to be. This leads me >to believe that if a card was made as originally proposed, it would be a >defensive measure for Toreador and an offensive one for Assamites. Yeah. Any sort of combat Toreador get should have to come directly from the guns - if some cards happen to apply to them, fine, but I like that the best combat deck the Tories can make is "CEL/guns." >> I also don't understand why it matters to the overall game >> that POT/CEL or POT/FOR be better. Either one is a combat >> deck. Neither one needs help against each other > >100% agree about they don't need help against each other. I disagree >about whether one is inherently superior to the other. That's largely a >factor of deck design. True, but I would just expect POT/CEL to get started so much faster than POT/FOR, that it would tend to do better. That and POT/CEL is an excellent way to deal tons of damage in very few cards (TS/IG/Blur). >> Note that only CEL decks may gain additional strikes. > >Sorry Derek, this is wrong. Protean, Obtenebration and Vial of Garou >Blood (*wrinkle nose*) also gives additional strikes. But you are >correct that unless you have additional strikes (which most non-cel >decks don't use) you're pretty much hosed. Hm. Protean has Shadow of the Wolf to gain an additional strike with +1 hand damage, for 2 blood. Icky, but gets around Dodge, I suppose. Obtenebration has Arms of the Abyss, but you couldn't play it against this card, because it's strike: dodge with an additional strike - and you can't strike: dodge. So you're pretty much down to CEL, an expensive Protean card, or (cringe) equipment. Effectively, you only have CEL. Bleh. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:10:26 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> > wrote: > > >Can you imagine the rush of people trying to get Ghoul Retainer cards? > >No strikes for you, no strikes for me, but my buddy with the > >Flamethrower here... > > *cringe* It's bad enough that you can have three Ghoul Retainers all > firing the same .44 already. > You're right, that would be a nasty combo. Of course, it's a nasty combo that requires 2 actions to set up, costs 4 pool, and the damage can still be prevented. So I dunno if it's all that unreasonable. If it really worries you, I imagine the card could be worded so as to prevent retainers from doing their combat thing during that strike resolution phase. I don't know if I'd bother, but it's an option. > >*reads back* Actually, it started out a action modifier only applicable > >to the first round and applied to the first strike. Pretty much a > >modified Hidden Lurker card. That would be a much better implementation > >than your proposal. *ponders* Cel/Tha would still _love_ a card like > >that. Of course it would. Celerity Thaumaturgy can use the help, as far as I'm concerned. Would give it a fighting chance against Potence/whatever. > > That was one I suggested for AUS - an action modifier to cancel > someone's initial strike. No good as defense, so you aren't a combat > monster, but permits some clans to do their thing a lot better. > (Tremere, Tzimisce..) I dunno if the Tzimisce really need the help (they have blood of acid), but I admit it's the sort of thing the Tremere could really use. > > >Toreador is _not_ a combat clan and doesn't need to be. This leads me > >to believe that if a card was made as originally proposed, it would be a > >defensive measure for Toreador and an offensive one for Assamites. Probably true. One of the reasons I like the proposal is that it sort of kills 2 birds with one stone. > > Yeah. Any sort of combat Toreador get should have to come directly > from the guns - if some cards happen to apply to them, fine, but I > like that the best combat deck the Tories can make is "CEL/guns." > WHich is why we don't see to much Toreador combat. But it would be nice if celerity was actually helpul to them a bit more. Right now, it mostly seems to help in maneuvering to long range in order to avoid IG's. > >> I also don't understand why it matters to the overall game > >> that POT/CEL or POT/FOR be better. Either one is a combat > >> deck. Neither one needs help against each other > > > >100% agree about they don't need help against each other. I disagree > >about whether one is inherently superior to the other. That's largely a > >factor of deck design. > > True, but I would just expect POT/CEL to get started so much faster > than POT/FOR, that it would tend to do better. That and POT/CEL is an > excellent way to deal tons of damage in very few cards (TS/IG/Blur). > Huh? Did you guys just say that neither needs help against the other? Potence/Celerity is absolutely CRUSHED by Potence/Fortitude. A skin of steel makes all those additional strikes irrelevant. Immortal grapple makes all those dodges irrelevant. Potence/Celerity can only survive by trying to play the long-range game, which is less efficient at killing regular decks, and not that succesful against Potence/Fortitude, anyway. Part of my interest in this card is making pure potence/celerity combat more playable. POT/CEL is fine if no-one else can fight... (snip discussion of cards that give additional strikes) I think that Arms of the Abyss would still be playable, (depending on the wording of the proposed card), the dodge effect would just be canceled. Heh.Back before the errata to Horrid Reality, one of my buddies made a Ravnos deck where the only equipment was Vials of Garou blood. He would play illusions of the kindred, trap, and horrid reality -- then the illusory kindred would have two strikes with 2 damage each for every round of combat. Remarkably effective. I've been using shadow of the wolf in one of my decks recently. It's based around Lazverinus. An additional strike for 4 damage (at least) isn't so bad, even for 2 blood. And it seems to usually catch them by surprise. :-)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 21:37:51 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >I dunno if the Tzimisce really need the help (they have blood of acid), but >I admit it's the sort of thing the Tremere could really use. Blood of Acid is not the best card in the world. It's a good "OK, mr. potence deck, if you are gonna whack me, you're gonna burn"... but it's not real good offensively. The Tzimisce need desperate help against S:CE and Dodge, since they can gain no additional strikes and all the rest of their otehrwise-neat VIC cards remain unused. >WHich is why we don't see to much Toreador combat. But it would be nice if >celerity was actually helpul to them a bit more. Right now, it mostly seems >to help in maneuvering to long range in order to avoid IG's. (shrug) They bleed for a shitload and vote real well. Why do you want them to be combat monsters too? >> True, but I would just expect POT/CEL to get started so much faster >> than POT/FOR, that it would tend to do better. That and POT/CEL is an >> excellent way to deal tons of damage in very few cards (TS/IG/Blur). >> >Huh? Did you guys just say that neither needs help against the other? Yes... yes, we did. Twice, even. >Potence/Celerity is absolutely CRUSHED by Potence/Fortitude. A skin of steel You meant "a skin of steel at superior", which matters a lot since POT/FOR isn't found naturally on anyone below 10. >makes all those additional strikes irrelevant. Immortal grapple makes all >those dodges irrelevant. Potence/Celerity can only survive by trying to play The best POT/CEL uses Immortal Grapple itself. >the long-range game, which is less efficient at killing regular decks, and >not that succesful against Potence/Fortitude, anyway. Part of my interest in >this card is making pure potence/celerity combat more playable. POT/CEL is >fine if no-one else can fight... Actually, an Immortal Grapple POT/CEL deck beats up anything in sight pretty much. They catch you at close range because of CEL, then they grab you with IG, then they blur. You either prevent with SUPERIOR skin of steel, or die miserably. POT/for isn't going to cut it, and POT/CEL starts much, MUCH faster than POT/for. I'd expect your vamps to be dead before you could slap discipline cards on them, assuming you got the discipline cards out early enough... I've also found with POT/for, that there's a lot of trouble getting enough cards in hand to do a bunch of damage on the first strike. All that prevent clogs, see, and I assume you're using Unflinching Persistence for your maneuvers. Then there's the FURTHER problem that as slow as a POT/for deck starts, it is going to have a real problem ousting its prey or surviving a fast moving predator. No, I'm afraid that POT/CEL works much better. Using inferior Fortitude and relying on presses more might give you a faster-moving POT/for deck, but then it would definitely lose to POT/CEL - and there's the Immortal Grapple worry since IG doesn't last a whole combat. >(snip discussion of cards that give additional strikes) > >I think that Arms of the Abyss would still be playable, (depending on the >wording of the proposed card), the dodge effect would just be canceled. You may not even PLAY a strike card if you don't have a strike that round. Clarification to Thoughts Betrayed/Hidden Lurker/Fast Reaction was made regarding that, and so if you can't play strike: dodge, then you couldn't play Arms of the Abyss to gain an additional. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <co6C4.68794$632.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte <eugen...@sprint.ca> writes >> Part of the point of Jyhad is that the opponents don't know what is in >> your deck. > >Unless, maybe, you want to use a box power. Heck, with the color-coded >backgrounds, they don't even have to see which vampires they are, >necessarily. Just show the corners. An awkward, if not impossible, thing to do. However, by using a box power *anyway* you would automatically flash up a huge portion of your deck. >And, outside of a tournament setting, >generally you DO know what's in your opponents decks. I know my friends >decks almost as well as I know my own. Mostly, though, a lot of the balance of the game has to be considered *in* tournament settings. Individual groups can do many different things to balance the game one way or another. One of the most difficult is social pressure - something that the NJL seems to use extensively to limit the playing of Return to Innocence (since people such as Noal have noted that the card is rarely seen but there is good natured joshing when the card *is* played). Another way is the one you also have - that decks settle into routines. Also, if you know your friends decks well, there is an argument to be had about whether that is the most effective thing anyway, for playing, but also what if they change their deck? Let us say that I generally play Clan Hypothetical, and I want to use their box power. Fine. Everyone knows this. I come along, I show the bits of my deck necessary and then everything goes on as before. What about when I change my deck? If I *don't* claim the box power, you have an immediate (if slight) advantage, in knowing how my deck has changed. And if I claim a *different* box power, you know even more. And if I don't claim the box power, my deck would be sub-optimal, quite possibly - if, say, I can't claim the bonus stealth that Clan Hypothetical gets on its political actions, I am hampering myself. >> Indeed not. One of the best defences against bleed is a strong offence - >> look at the weenie Brujah decks. With that sort of offence (in their own >> way), the Assamites have a very strong defence. >> >Could have. Potentially. I have yet to see an Assamite deck that is actually >any good. > Not that I'm really disagreeing with you here, mind you. Sorry - this was meant more as an effective defence if/when the Assamites get effective combat powers. >Most people who've mentioned a preference seem to want pre-constructed decks >in the new edition. Just put a box power on each of the pre-cons. If you >want to give every clan one, post the rest on the website. This is exactly >what was done with Battletech, and it worked fine. Yes, but then you have to see how the pre-constructed decks interact. If you aren't planning on putting them exclusively against each other, each of the pre-constructed clans gets an unprecedented bonus. Why shouldn't, say, the Brujah Antitribu get a box power, just because they weren't lucky enough to get a pre-con? >> So what do you give the Vetnrute? More bleed? More votes? Or the >> Brujah? They already do their main thing very well. They don't need the >> help. >> >Whatever. Those are both possibilities. How about intercept against >political actions/bleed? The intercept against political actions is dealt with via Powerbase: Berlin, if they're really that bothered. >Deals with a weakness, but not overpowering, and >makes sense from a background perspective. Just one possibility. But there are several clans who are already *very* strong. The Brujah are probably the strongest clan in the game, covering virtually all bases. As offensive combat goes, they have celerity and potence. For combat defence, they have celerity and presence. For votes, they have presence, and a selection of young princes to take advantage of. For bleed, they have presence, and their selection of princes/justicars gives them access to Carthage Remembered. For intercept, they can use disciplineless cards like everyone else, but get the power of The Second Tradition to boot. For blood gain, they can use minion tap and Fifth Tradition. They don't really *have* a weakness. Any bonus you gave them would be just that, a bonus. >> > This is really a whole other topic, but what is the point of a combat >> > discipline that can't strike out hard? >> >> Confucius Say: It hard to hit out hard if not in right position. > >Sorry, you lost me. A combat discipline that cannot strike out hard can get you into the right position to strike out hard. If you are at long range, you are unable to play (effectively) your Undead Strength and Taste of Vitae. A discipline that gets you *into* that position will pay dividends. >> Indeed. But all the damage in the world is not going to help against Skin >> of Steel. All the areas have holes to be exploited. If you don't cover >> the bases well enough, you don't get to do your stuff. Cover them too >> well, the deck becomes less focused. You choose where you draw your line. > >Lots of damage does fine against skin of steel. Blood of acid and blood fury >spring readily to mind. there are many other fortitude cards to pick from - skin of steel is one of the better examples, but multiple Skin of Rocks are also popular. >> >> > celerity cards in the world (by themselves) won't be much help in >knocking >> > Arika into torpor before she bleeds you to death. Celerity is acceptable >as >> > a secondary combat discipline; >> That's what its supposed to be. > >I disagree. I think that disciplines can't (shouldn't) be designed to be >primarily secondary. That might be what they get used as, but that shouldn't >be the design. I note the use of the word "shouldn't". I can see a strong case for, if you were designing the game from the ground up, making each discipline intrinsically as playable as any other, on its own. However, I would contend that this isn't what was done. If we look through Celerity, there are a good number of cards providing many and various abilities. I posit that none of them are particularly effective on their own, save for combat defence - and whilst combat defence is a powerful skill to have, all the surviving in the world won't help your deck if it sticks around to do nothing. For instance, Celerity has access to maneuvers (as a first examples). Maneuvers are good combat defence, as those people like PDB6 and Josh Duffin have explored in the past, but in terms of offence, they're lacking. You can make sure you stay at close range, yes, but then what do you do? Hit for hands? Similarly, and most closely related, are presses. It would seem that in the original design, Strike: Combat Ends was not foreseen as the powerful force it is, and certainly not in the abusive quantities it is often seen. So, assuming that you got to the press phase, you could press. But what could you do next round? Exchange hand strikes for one? Strike: Dodge is combat defence again (with caveats as noted above). Additional strikes, with primarily or mono-celerity, are similarly poor - at inferior, you pay 1 blood to do 1 more damage - just exchanging hands again. Celerity *thrives* on being matched up with something else. Something else has to do the hitting out - be that Potence (Brujah), a gun, a flamethrower, Quietus (Assamites), Thaumaturgy (Mages on Speed), Protean (City Gangrel) and so forth. >> > I strongly feel that celerity should be >> > given a card that allows it to survive being immortal grappled, at the >very >> > least. >> >> How does a sdiscipline "survive" something? You soun, howevre, like >> you're trying to give disciplines things to do that they were never >> supposed to do. Why *not* give Quituetus a bleed bounce card that allows >> it to sruvive being bled, at the very least? > >I fail to see how canceling a strike (something dodges do, more or less) is >outside the scope of celerity. That *very* much depends on how define your card to "survive" being immortal grappled. However, one of the very good things about Jyhad is the strive for a cycle of balance between different strategies. If one strategy starts really hitting out at you, counter with alternate strategies e.g. if Wynn-combat really starts killing you, try and counter it with a banishment in your political deck, say. My bugbear is with the couple of disciplines, primarily Dominate (though I can see an argument for Fortitude too, certainly one or two facets), which do too much. Celerity is a superb combat defence discipline, if you want it to be. But if it can survive everything in combat, why play anything else? Fortitude starts to play second fiddle. Fortitude is an excellent combat defence discipline too - but in very different ways to Celerity. Celerity tries to avoid the strike in the first place - maneuvering to range, or dodging it. Fortitude cares not for your ability to strike it, but simply makes that strike do no damage. So, Celerity has a big problem with Immortal Grapple - Fortitude does not. Fortitude just soaks up the damage. However, Celerity can survive being hit with multiple theft of vitaes, which Fortitude cannot. Similar things exist in other facets of combat defence, I pick these two as fairly arbitrary examples. Each discipline should have its own intermeshing, overlapping skill. It shouldn't be able to do everything. >> >> > All quite true. They can use obfuscate. But, lets face it, all of this >stuff >> > is just gravy, and not very thick gravy, either. >> >> No,but it is a useful game strategy. >> >No argument. And open grate is useful for pressing to end combat, which is >often a useful game strategy. Is it worth putting in the deck? Open Grate is a counter-strategy i.e. you put it in to press to end combat, in the event that someone else plays a second round combat deck, or your trap goes wrong etc. Obfuscate can be a highly pro-active discipline, or at least support your proactive attacks. >> Therei s more to Obfuscate than just stealth. > >No argument. But the most effective uses of obfuscate I have seen, >generally, have been using the stealth it provides to make important actions >succeed. This can't come as a shock to you. No, indeed not. Obfuscate is a highly powerful stealth discipline. However, the Assamites *can* benefit from its other abilities, too, and also its stealth. If you are using Bum's Rush, a Swallowed by the Night (or similar) makes an effective way of guaranteeing the rush on the vampire *you* want, with the maneuver (especially useful for some clans, of course). The idea of adding a little stealth to rushes has long been seen to be a useful possibility, especially in decks which utilise single vampires highly. If I can only rush you once or twice a turn, I need to target my rushes a lot more effectively than if I have 5 weenies to rush you with. That's partly why Wynn's +1 stealth (D) rush is so highly prized - you get to pick the problem, and then deal with it, unless they can get intercept. If you want to get a Kali's Fang out, say, you could also use obfuscate to equip it - either a couple of stealth cards here and there, or a disguised weapon. Since you need to oust your prey, a few stealth cards will add to a few computer hackings to expedite their demise. And so on. If you play CEL/QUI combat *and only CEL/QUI combat* with the Assamites, no, Obfuscate won't do much for you - but the Presence on the Brujah won't do much for a CEL/POT deck, either. If you alter your deck, you can exploit a highly useful skill, with many rewards. -- James Coupe

> > >And, outside of a tournament setting, > >generally you DO know what's in your opponents decks. I know my friends > >decks almost as well as I know my own. > > Mostly, though, a lot of the balance of the game has to be considered > *in* tournament settings. Individual groups can do many different > things to balance the game one way or another. One of the most > difficult is social pressure - something that the NJL seems to use > extensively to limit the playing of Return to Innocence (since people > such as Noal have noted that the card is rarely seen but there is good > natured joshing when the card *is* played). Another way is the one you > also have - that decks settle into routines. > > Also, if you know your friends decks well, there is an argument to be > had about whether that is the most effective thing anyway, for playing, > but also what if they change their deck? > > Let us say that I generally play Clan Hypothetical, and I want to use > their box power. Fine. Everyone knows this. I come along, I show the > bits of my deck necessary and then everything goes on as before. What > about when I change my deck? If I *don't* claim the box power, you have > an immediate (if slight) advantage, in knowing how my deck has changed. > And if I claim a *different* box power, you know even more. And if I > don't claim the box power, my deck would be sub-optimal, quite possibly > - if, say, I can't claim the bonus stealth that Clan Hypothetical gets > on its political actions, I am hampering myself. Admittedly, using a box power would be a trade off: it would come at the cost of revealing information about your deck. If one feels that the gain is not worth the sacrifice, one wouldn't, presumably, be obligated to make use of the box power. This sort of potential trade-off seems quite fair to me: one makes this sort of decision all the time in deck-construction, for example. > > > >> Indeed not. One of the best defences against bleed is a strong offence - > >> look at the weenie Brujah decks. With that sort of offence (in their own > >> way), the Assamites have a very strong defence. > >> > >Could have. Potentially. I have yet to see an Assamite deck that is actually > >any good. > > Not that I'm really disagreeing with you here, mind you. > > Sorry - this was meant more as an effective defence if/when the > Assamites get effective combat powers. And I await that glorious day as eagerly as anyone... :-) > > >Most people who've mentioned a preference seem to want pre-constructed decks > >in the new edition. Just put a box power on each of the pre-cons. If you > >want to give every clan one, post the rest on the website. This is exactly > >what was done with Battletech, and it worked fine. > > Yes, but then you have to see how the pre-constructed decks interact. > If you aren't planning on putting them exclusively against each other, > each of the pre-constructed clans gets an unprecedented bonus. Why > shouldn't, say, the Brujah Antitribu get a box power, just because they > weren't lucky enough to get a pre-con? Well, they probably should. Publish it on the website, like I said. Or, heck, you can make a card for these poweres. A card that begins the game in play, but counts against your deck size. BAttletech, again, introduced cards like these (Alliance cards, I believe they are called). > > >> So what do you give the Vetnrute? More bleed? More votes? Or the > >> Brujah? They already do their main thing very well. They don't need the > >> help. > >> > >Whatever. Those are both possibilities. How about intercept against > >political actions/bleed? > > The intercept against political actions is dealt with via Powerbase: > Berlin, if they're really that bothered. I know few ventrue who are bothered enough to put worthless Powerbase: Berlin in their deck, (a sportbike or KRCG is really much more practical) but it's still an ability that could be useful. > > >Deals with a weakness, but not overpowering, and > >makes sense from a background perspective. Just one possibility. > > But there are several clans who are already *very* strong. The Brujah > are probably the strongest clan in the game, covering virtually all > bases. As offensive combat goes, they have celerity and potence. For > combat defence, they have celerity and presence. For votes, they have > presence, and a selection of young princes to take advantage of. For > bleed, they have presence, and their selection of princes/justicars > gives them access to Carthage Remembered. For intercept, they can use > disciplineless cards like everyone else, but get the power of The Second > Tradition to boot. For blood gain, they can use minion tap and Fifth > Tradition. > Kind of amusing how different gaming groups can be. I haven't seen a really good Brujah deck in a while. Lots of adequate ones, but no outstanding ones. In my experience, combat decks kill them, as do good bleeding decks. They don't have enough stealth to vote very well, and most of their princes lack presence. > They don't really *have* a weakness. Any bonus you gave them would be > just that, a bonus. One weakness: lack of bleed bounce (a moderately common weakness, I admit). Another: lack of damage prevention. Another: Lack of stealth. Not that I think Brujah should be given any of these things, mind you. > > A combat discipline that cannot strike out hard can get you into the > right position to strike out hard. If you are at long range, you are > unable to play (effectively) your Undead Strength and Taste of Vitae. A > discipline that gets you *into* that position will pay dividends. If you can capitalise on it... but there are more maneuvers and such in potence and thaumaturgy than there used to be. Celerity is really only a necessary adjunct to Quietus -- and still doesn't really do the trick. I'm not saying that Celerity isn't a valuable adjunct: it can be. But the need for it has lessened, making it only moderately valuable, and only in an auxiliary role. (snip discussion of fortitude) (snip lengthy analysis of the capabilities of celerity). I agree entirely with this discussion of celerity's capabilities, but, my interest is in what it SHOULD be, not what it is. I feel that every discipline should be useful on its own. Celerity is the poor cousin of the combat disciplines. By itself, all celerity can do is defense -- but, most disciplines (any discipline with a S:CE) can do defense basically as well as celerity, and a heck of a lot more, on top. Presence is the most egregious example of this. I'm aware that Celerity, as it stands, can't fight by itself. I think this should be changed. Only a couple of cards are needed: one, that gives celerity something useful to do if it's immortal grappled, and one, that works like a much weaker version of fists of death, to allow Celerity to actually dish out a bit of damage. Celerity by itself shouldn't be as nasty as potence or Thaumaturgy, because it is a more useful adjunct, but it should be stronger than it is now. > > >> > I strongly feel that celerity should be > >> > given a card that allows it to survive being immortal grappled, at the > >very > >> > least. > >> > >> How does a sdiscipline "survive" something? You soun, howevre, like > >> you're trying to give disciplines things to do that they were never > >> supposed to do. Why *not* give Quituetus a bleed bounce card that allows > >> it to sruvive being bled, at the very least? > > > >I fail to see how canceling a strike (something dodges do, more or less) is > >outside the scope of celerity. > > That *very* much depends on how define your card to "survive" being > immortal grappled. > > However, one of the very good things about Jyhad is the strive for a > cycle of balance between different strategies. If one strategy starts > really hitting out at you, counter with alternate strategies e.g. if > Wynn-combat really starts killing you, try and counter it with a > banishment in your political deck, say. My bugbear is with the couple > of disciplines, primarily Dominate (though I can see an argument for > Fortitude too, certainly one or two facets), which do too much. My difficulty is with 'winning combos': that is, card combinations that particular disciplines/clans have NO way of dealing with (not just difficulty dealing with). See dawn operation/weather control/skin of night, and drawing out the beast/immortal grapple. I just think Celerity is a very weak discipline. It's a nice adjunct in a few situations, its additional strikes are great if you also have a REAL combat discipline, and if your vampires have it already, you might consider throwing a few cards in, but mostly, it's just worthless. > > Celerity is a superb combat defence discipline, if you want it to be. No, it's not. It's adequate, barely. It gives you many ways of doing two, moderately effective things: dodging, and maneuvering (oh, and it has the one S:CE). But dodges are easily countered by IG (a very common card, somehow) and maneuvers are easily countered by ranged damage, among other things. A combat deck that has gotten lazy and skimped on maneuvers and ranged damage can be succesfully defended against. Defence using celerity, however, just isn't reliable, because it is so easy to overcome. > But if it can survive everything in combat, why play anything else? > Fortitude starts to play second fiddle. Fortitude is an excellent > combat defence discipline too - but in very different ways to Celerity. > Celerity tries to avoid the strike in the first place - maneuvering to > range, or dodging it. Fortitude cares not for your ability to strike > it, but simply makes that strike do no damage. So, Celerity has a big > problem with Immortal Grapple - Fortitude does not. Fortitude just > soaks up the damage. However, Celerity can survive being hit with > multiple theft of vitaes, which Fortitude cannot. So can any discipline with dodges or S:CE, of which there are many. Fortitude is, admittedly, weak against Thaumaturgy (and, to a much lesser extent, Quietus). But damage prevention is relatively difficult to come by, which makes fortitude relatively valuable. Dodges and Maneuvers are relatively easy to come by, which makes celerity relatively worthless. > Similar things exist in other facets of combat defence, I pick these two > as fairly arbitrary examples. Each discipline should have its own > intermeshing, overlapping skill. It shouldn't be able to do everything. > I agree entirely. But some disciplines are stronger than others, and this is a gamebalance issue that can be addressed without making the weak disciplines (like Celerity) 'do everything'. I'm not suggesting that Celerity start to bounce bleeds, or prevent damage, or even give stealth. I think it should be able to do moderately more damage, and have stronger defense. In other words, it should be able to do what it already does, just a bit better. (snip discussion of how useful or otherwise obfuscate is to Assamites). When, in a fit of optimism, I yet again attempt to construct an Assamite deck, I do not generally leave obfuscate out (unless I'm doing Assamite/Thaumaturgy -- Parnassus doesn't have it). I just don't put very much of it in. I was just saying that 1) Obfuscate is less useful to Assamites than it is to everyone else, except maybe Nosferatu, and 2) It would be a cool use for it if Assamites could Diablerise without fear of a bloodhunt. That's all. cheers, Eugene

In article <8ED5D97314737E58.FE93189E...@lp.airnew s.net>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>WHich is why we don't see to much Toreador combat. But it would be nice if >>celerity was actually helpul to them a bit more. Right now, it mostly seems >>to help in maneuvering to long range in order to avoid IG's. > >(shrug) They bleed for a shitload and vote real well. Why do you >want them to be combat monsters too? IME, the Toreadors don't do all *that* well, though on paper they might. They lack the low capacity princes of the Brujah to exploit voting, don't have a Ventrue Headquarters or any natty cards to really help them vote - something that they really should do, since they often form keepers of the Elysium and members of the Harpies, and so forth. Their princes are hampered by slightly sub-optimal discipline mixes, too - look at Tatiana, for instance. :( Not, for my money, a great prince - she has AUS, when she would really benefit from PRE. Sure, she has +1 bleed, but that's not good for the vote side of things. Rake makes a much better prince, with PRE and a Praxis. For bleed, they could do quite well, if played properly. However, when compared with weenie Dominate bleed, they only have 1 action modifier, which costs a blood (though is admittedly very potent in Toreador hands). It provides great defence at superior, giving them the ability to gain pool, but it has problems hitting out fast and hard, IME. However, I've never really seen anyone try and do a weenie Toreador PRE Aire of Elation/Misdirection feast, which I think could work really rather well, especially with a couple of hunting ground type cards around (maybe even a Gird Minions if you can get the PRE for Social Charm/Legal Manipulations). One of the decks that I've seen many people try and build is Toreador intercept with guns. It looks like it should be possible on paper, but it really isn't that easy to pull off, because of the vulnerabilities of guns. I'd love to see it done properly. Voting, I guess, is my bug bear. They have some nice cards like Scorn of Adonis, to discourage people from failing their votes, but nothing to proactively help them pass it which other clans don't already have access to. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net http://www.obeah.demon.co.uk

In article <nRTC4.1555$q5.7...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte <eugen...@sprint.ca> writes >Kind of amusing how different gaming groups can be. I haven't seen a really >good Brujah deck in a while. Lots of adequate ones, but no outstanding ones. >In my experience, combat decks kill them, This should never happen. A well constructed Brujah deck dealing with combat should be able to accomplish mutual annihilation at worst. > as do good bleeding decks. They >don't have enough stealth to vote very well, and most of their princes lack >presence. >> They don't really *have* a weakness. Any bonus you gave them would be >> just that, a bonus. > >One weakness: lack of bleed bounce (a moderately common weakness, I admit). Very common. >Another: lack of damage prevention. Sideslip is a very under-rated card. I commend it to you all. Also, Leather Jackets turn up frequently. >Another: Lack of stealth. With Carthage Remembered and Alacrity, they can often get enough stealth if you play it that way. The other way is just to trounce the people blocking you - you care not for intercept if no-one can intercept you. <snip - lots of stuff - For my money, Celerity occupies a separate niche to other combat disciplines, but occupies it superbly, and is better or worse depending solely on your situation, since it's one of the few disciplines that can help a vampire defend itself and then go on the offensive, with multiple additional strikes> >2) It >would be a cool use for it if Assamites could Diablerise without fear of a >bloodhunt. They do. It's called Sacrificial Lamb, and a damn fine card it is too. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 18:19:44 +0000, James Coupe <ve...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In article <8ED5D97314737E58.FE93189E...@lp.airnew >s.net>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>>WHich is why we don't see to much Toreador combat. But it would be nice if >>>celerity was actually helpul to them a bit more. Right now, it mostly seems >>>to help in maneuvering to long range in order to avoid IG's. >> >>(shrug) They bleed for a shitload and vote real well. Why do you >>want them to be combat monsters too? > >IME, the Toreadors don't do all *that* well, though on paper they might. > >They lack the low capacity princes of the Brujah to exploit voting, >don't have a Ventrue Headquarters or any natty cards to really help them >vote - something that they really should do, since they often form >keepers of the Elysium and members of the Harpies, and so forth. Their >princes are hampered by slightly sub-optimal discipline mixes, too - >look at Tatiana, for instance. :( Not, for my money, a great prince - >she has AUS, when she would really benefit from PRE. Sure, she has +1 >bleed, but that's not good for the vote side of things. Rake makes a >much better prince, with PRE and a Praxis. The princes aren't perfect, but they do have either PRE or AUS - more on that later. Fortunately, they have enough low-capacity PRE to help them shovel through Praxis Seizures as necessary for the little guys, almost as much as the Ventrue. Fighting a Ventrue vote deck, they will lose, sure, because the Ventrue have all the +vote masters. There's no way to match that, but that's fine. >However, I've never really seen anyone try and do a weenie Toreador PRE >Aire of Elation/Misdirection feast, which I think could work really >rather well, especially with a couple of hunting ground type cards >around (maybe even a Gird Minions if you can get the PRE for Social >Charm/Legal Manipulations). I've seen a couple weenie Toreador PRE thugaroonies, and it's brutally effective if built right - the trick is Social Charm/Aire. Wasting blood on Legal Manip is just not as effective, so you end up bleeding for 5 per action, costing 1 blood and gaining 1 pool - which means that Delilah Easton is a brute if you get PRE on her. Gird Minions isn't that necessary, just slap Blood Dolls around and you can move pool as need be. Ugly, ugly, ugly. >One of the decks that I've seen many people try and build is Toreador >intercept with guns. It looks like it should be possible on paper, but >it really isn't that easy to pull off, because of the vulnerabilities of >guns. I'd love to see it done properly. It'd be nice, but nobody ever lets them equip with the guns in the first place. +1 intercept is too easy to come by. If they had something like Concealed Weapon they'd be in great shape, but making THAT disciplineless is excessive... so they're more or less screwed. >Voting, I guess, is my bug bear. They have some nice cards like Scorn >of Adonis, to discourage people from failing their votes, but nothing to >proactively help them pass it which other clans don't already have >access to. Telepathic Vote Counting works great. Two of their princes have AUS, and two have PRE. Table votes are a vote deck's biggest enemy, so you just cancel the biggest thug out there and that frequently is enough to get the vote by. This ALSO is very important since both Isabel de Leon and Dorian Strack become useful in a vote deck - they can sneak through Praxis Seizures of their own if you have almost-enough votes. =) Combined with Bribes and Scorn of Adonis, this is often enough to make disinterested players just go away, or vote your way for the free pool. =) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <0B5BF01ACBDDB9E8.790D5EDB...@lp.airnew s.net>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >Telepathic Vote Counting works great. Two of their princes have AUS, >and two have PRE. Table votes are a vote deck's biggest enemy, so you >just cancel the biggest thug out there and that frequently is enough >to get the vote by. Ooh... very true. A card I have woefully few of, and so always forget about. It would certainly help, since I'm seeing a few decks at the moment with Inner Circle (mostly Stanislava, but also some Arika a while back - I burned her twice in one game with Potence/Protean) in them where they're not there for pro-active political action, but have a habit of cramping your politics when they do show up. [ quoted text not captured ]

> >Kind of amusing how different gaming groups can be. I haven't seen a really > >good Brujah deck in a while. Lots of adequate ones, but no outstanding ones. > >In my experience, combat decks kill them, > > This should never happen. A well constructed Brujah deck dealing with > combat should be able to accomplish mutual annihilation at worst. > It happens every time they meet a deck with FOR. Pot/Cel is pretty helpless against fortitude. In my experience, a well constructed Tzimisce deck also tends to destroy them in combat. > > as do good bleeding decks. They > >don't have enough stealth to vote very well, and most of their princes lack > >presence. > >> They don't really *have* a weakness. Any bonus you gave them would be > >> just that, a bonus. > > > >One weakness: lack of bleed bounce (a moderately common weakness, I admit). > > Very common. Well, less common among decks that people actually play. Of the 4 decks I have constructed at the moment, 3 can bounce. The last just relies on gaining pool faster than it can be bled. > > >Another: lack of damage prevention. > > Sideslip is a very under-rated card. I commend it to you all. > I don't underrate it. It's excellent. But preventing 1 damage is doesn't go very far against a combat deck. Anyone who can dish out agg, can dish out 2 agg, pretty much. > Also, Leather Jackets turn up frequently. And deservedly so. They do fill a much needed gap. In my experience, however, they don't save Brujah in the long run. > > >Another: Lack of stealth. > > With Carthage Remembered and Alacrity, they can often get enough stealth > if you play it that way. The other way is just to trounce the people > blocking you - you care not for intercept if no-one can intercept you. Carthage remembered can be burned as a D action, and Brujah don't have any intercept, either. Alacrity is very expensive, too expensive in most circumstances to be useful. > > <snip - lots of stuff - For my money, Celerity occupies a separate niche > to other combat disciplines, but occupies it superbly, and is better or > worse depending solely on your situation, since it's one of the few > disciplines that can help a vampire defend itself and then go on the > offensive, with multiple additional strikes> For my money, Celerity is underpowered and ought to be improved. > > >2) It > >would be a cool use for it if Assamites could Diablerise without fear of a > >bloodhunt. > > They do. It's called Sacrificial Lamb, and a damn fine card it is too. A card clearly designed with Assamites in mind, and admittedly worthwhile, if expensive and often difficult to employ.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 05:15:54 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >It happens every time they meet a deck with FOR. Pot/Cel is pretty helpless >against fortitude. In my experience, a well constructed Tzimisce deck also >tends to destroy them in combat. How? Once you're IG'd, your only recourse is Blood of Acid, which falls under "Mutual Annihilation." The Tzimisce have a -real- problem with Potence decks. >Well, less common among decks that people actually play. Of the 4 decks I >have constructed at the moment, 3 can bounce. The last just relies on >gaining pool faster than it can be bled. Others just rely on vaporizing any vampire that makes noises like it'll bleed for more than 2 at a time. >I don't underrate it. It's excellent. But preventing 1 damage is doesn't go >very far against a combat deck. Anyone who can dish out agg, can dish out 2 >agg, pretty much. As difficult as Gangrel combat currently is, it's even MORE difficult when you start chucking Ritual Challenges and Gangrel Revels around. They do better to stick with Lucky Blow/Claws, frankly... Just not tidy. >> With Carthage Remembered and Alacrity, they can often get enough stealth >> if you play it that way. The other way is just to trounce the people >> blocking you - you care not for intercept if no-one can intercept you. > >Carthage remembered can be burned as a D action, and Brujah don't have any >intercept, either. Alacrity is very expensive, too expensive in most >circumstances to be useful. Alacrity isn't as expensive as you think when it's the bleed-for-the-oust. An Alacrity/Whackrity deck could certainly get people's attention. As far as the Brujah having no intercept: Volker, Rake, Donal, and Constanza can all 2nd tradition. Donal and Constanza can extensively abuse whoever they just blocked, too (as can Volker to a small degree.) >> <snip - lots of stuff - For my money, Celerity occupies a separate niche >> to other combat disciplines, but occupies it superbly, and is better or >> worse depending solely on your situation, since it's one of the few >> disciplines that can help a vampire defend itself and then go on the >> offensive, with multiple additional strikes> > >For my money, Celerity is underpowered and ought to be improved. However underpowered you think it may be, it works extremely well currently. Improving it will toss the game out of balance - therefore it does NOT need to be improved. >> They do. It's called Sacrificial Lamb, and a damn fine card it is too. > >A card clearly designed with Assamites in mind, and admittedly worthwhile, >if expensive and often difficult to employ. Sacrificial Lamb is a Dark Sovereigns card, I believe. Expensive... somewhat. Requires a vampire with 3 blood on them, and as long as you're using it on a 3-cap or greater, you come out at least even on the deal. If you're that worried about 2-caps... =/ If you're blocked, the action fails so it's free. Difficult to employ... no. Tansu Bekir goes to Sac.Lamb someone, gets blocked. Mask of a Thousand Faces... Woops! That was really Melek, and I play it at INFERIOR so you successfully block (you cannot retract your attempt). Add one more vamp to the list in torpor. Try to block Tansu again, and THIS time he has some stealth.. or maybe you just send him to Sac Lamb first thing every turn. Almost as good as a Rush action. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <97A4145DB0543035.C13713D9...@lp.airnew s.net>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>> They do. It's called Sacrificial Lamb, and a damn fine card it is too. >> >>A card clearly designed with Assamites in mind, and admittedly worthwhile, >>if expensive and often difficult to employ. > >Sacrificial Lamb is a Dark Sovereigns card, I believe. Indeed. But it *does* look like it was put in without any real cause at the time - who could *really* use it? Well, the Nosferatu were the only real combat clan, I guess. It feels like it was put in in advance of the Assamites being deployed, whether it was or not. I have similar thoughts about Justicar Retribution and the Inner Circle. >Expensive... somewhat. Requires a vampire with 3 blood on them, and >as long as you're using it on a 3-cap or greater, you come out at >least even on the deal. If you're that worried about 2-caps... =/ If >you're blocked, the action fails so it's free. Indeed. The blood = capacity rather than, as with diablerie, blood = blood is actually very powerful, and much more useful, IMO. > >Difficult to employ... no. Tansu Bekir goes to Sac.Lamb someone, gets >blocked. Mask of a Thousand Faces... Woops! Or just throw a Lost in Crowds... What were we saying just a few posts ago about the Assamites not having any use for their Obfuscate? *grin* >That was really Melek, >and I play it at INFERIOR so you successfully block (you cannot >retract your attempt). Add one more vamp to the list in torpor. Try >to block Tansu again, and THIS time he has some stealth.. or maybe you >just send him to Sac Lamb first thing every turn. Almost as good as a >Rush action. Hmmm... I wonder if that's a potential way around lifting the curse, rather than just an outright master card lifting the curse. Maybe a card like Spirit Summoning Chamber. Or perhaps an ally - Random Arabic Name, Thrall of Whoever Is Lifting The Curse - which allows you to search your deck for Sacrificial Lambs and bring them into hand. It fits neatly with the way Terrorists works too, or someone like Dan Murdock (though I think an ally would be a better way to do a card like this). If that is too corner case, allow him to do something similar with other important cards - say, like fetching Contracts, too. And since he's an Assamite ally, he doesn't have to be blocked if you don't want him to be - Cloak the Gathering is a Good Thing (tm). [ quoted text not captured ]

> >It happens every time they meet a deck with FOR. Pot/Cel is pretty helpless > >against fortitude. In my experience, a well constructed Tzimisce deck also > >tends to destroy them in combat. > > How? Once you're IG'd, your only recourse is Blood of Acid, which > falls under "Mutual Annihilation." The Tzimisce have a -real- problem > with Potence decks. It's a much more even fight than one against a fortitude deck that deals agg, but Tzimisce actually fear potence not very much. It's fortitude (again) that really messes them up. The reason Tzimisce seem to come out on top against brujah (in the games I've played, anyway) is because of the agg damage, and the fact that Dragos and Meshenka pay little or nothing for their combat cards. The Tzimisce saves Blood of acid for when he is immortal grappled, and uses scorpion sting/body arsenal when he isn't (the Brujah may well not IG so as to be able to dodge). And a properly constructed Tzimisce deck has a carrion crows operating in almost every fight. Drawing out the beast may be used to prevent the Brujah from using his leather jacket. Note also that damage from blood of acid isn't a strike, so it can't be prevented with the jacket. Using a blood of acid can might be thought of as 'mutual annihilation', but the Tzimisce usually comes out ahead -- one strike isn't usually enough to send the Tzimisce to torpor, but the Brujah is taking agg, so he goes down -- and then the Tzimisce can play Taste of Vitae. This obviously works better with Meshenka and Dragos (once he has advanced vicissitude). > > >Well, less common among decks that people actually play. Of the 4 decks I > >have constructed at the moment, 3 can bounce. The last just relies on > >gaining pool faster than it can be bled. > > Others just rely on vaporizing any vampire that makes noises like > it'll bleed for more than 2 at a time. Yup. I don't have one of those put together at the moment. So, at a conservative estimate, maybe a third of constructed decks use bounce. I'd wager the figure might hover closer to half. > > As difficult as Gangrel combat currently is, it's even MORE difficult > when you start chucking Ritual Challenges and Gangrel Revels around. > They do better to stick with Lucky Blow/Claws, frankly... Just not > tidy. > Why lucky blow, when you can use scorpion sting? > >> With Carthage Remembered and Alacrity, they can often get enough stealth > >> if you play it that way. The other way is just to trounce the people > >> blocking you - you care not for intercept if no-one can intercept you. > > > >Carthage remembered can be burned as a D action, and Brujah don't have any > >intercept, either. Alacrity is very expensive, too expensive in most > >circumstances to be useful. > > Alacrity isn't as expensive as you think when it's the > bleed-for-the-oust. An Alacrity/Whackrity deck could certainly get > people's attention. It's expensive when that bleed gets bounced. That's what typically happens with bruise and bleed decks, in my experience -- the big bleeds get deflected/countered, the small ones get ignored. If the bruise and bleeder starts putting in more bleed, he starts getting killed by combat decks. Not that it can't be done, of course, it's just that it's not really a very difficult strategy to deal with. > As far as the Brujah having no intercept: Volker, Rake, Donal, and > Constanza can all 2nd tradition. Donal and Constanza can extensively > abuse whoever they just blocked, too (as can Volker to a small > degree.) Donal and Constanza are only very useful to Brujah with Dominate, and I don't know many Brujah who put in second tradition just for Anvil and Volker to use. A voting deck would, of course, but those are also difficult to construct, because both voting well and fighting well tend to require largish card combos. > > >For my money, Celerity is underpowered and ought to be improved. > > However underpowered you think it may be, it works extremely well > currently. Improving it will toss the game out of balance - therefore > it does NOT need to be improved. > Improving it will definitely not toss the game out of balance, if it is done carefully. Only a few additions are required. The most pressing is a method by which a deck that relies on celerity for defence can survive being immortal grappled. Before people bring up 'celerity should never be caught at close range', I would like to again mention Drawing out the Beast: Potence/Animalism is a common discipline pairing. Shadow step also defeats Celerity's vaunted ability to maneuver. Another addition I feel would be valuable is a card that, while being expensive, gives +1 hand damage at advanced. While potence or Thaumaturgy would still be much stronger in combination, it would allow celerity by itself to be moderately effective in combat. The assamites can use the help. the Brujah wouldn't care, and it would be fun to see a Toreador trying combat. Toreador can't bleed as well as Seites or Makavians, can't vote as well as Ventrue. Adding a bit more potential for combat to celerity might make them actually use the discipline, rather than being basically Auspex/Presence machines. (snip discussion of Sacrificial Lamb). It's a reasonably worthwhile card, but, like I said, difficult to employ properly. It's hard to get the right balance for how many to put in the deck (judging from my attempts at constructing assamite decks). Tends to take up space in your hand, or else not be around when you actually want it. And many of your good minions don't have advanced obfuscate, which makes the card worthless, essentially. And, since assamites go through blood quickly, often your minions won't have enough blood to play it. That's what I meant by 'difficult to employ'. And in your example, Cardano probably uses obedience on Melek (or Anson uses majesty, or Crusher kicks his sorry ass), and then Tansu Bekker gets blocked with a second tradition domain. At least, that seems more representative of what I'd be likely to actually see in play. :-) And, yes, it is one of the few actions Assamites can perform (along with Arson and Bum's rush) that obfuscate is quite useful at getting through succesfully.

> > Hmmm... I wonder if that's a potential way around lifting the curse, > rather than just an outright master card lifting the curse. Maybe a > card like Spirit Summoning Chamber. Or perhaps an ally - Random Arabic > Name, Thrall of Whoever Is Lifting The Curse - which allows you to > search your deck for Sacrificial Lambs and bring them into hand. It > fits neatly with the way Terrorists works too, or someone like Dan > Murdock (though I think an ally would be a better way to do a card like > this). If that is too corner case, allow him to do something similar > with other important cards - say, like fetching Contracts, too. > > And since he's an Assamite ally, he doesn't have to be blocked if you > don't want him to be - Cloak the Gathering is a Good Thing (tm). > Ur-Shulgi and Al-Ashrad (of 9 pool fame) jointly lifted the curse. Actually, one cool way of doing it (rather than an ally, which doesn't make too much sense in terms of background) would be as card text on a new Assamite Vampire: Ur-Shulgi. He would be 11 pool, and if he comes into play, all assamite vampires... you know the rest. He would have to be damn nasty, but that's fine -- it would be cool to see some 11 pool vamps for the Non-Camarilla clans. Another possibility would be an action card, assamite only, that in the card text specifies that only a vampire with advanced Thaumaturgy could perform it. Would be quite appropriate, since the only Assamites with Advanced Thaumaturgy are Al-Ashrad, and, possibly, Ur-Shulgi. I don't know if I like doing Assamite Diablerie by means of Sacrificial lamb. Whatever's going on with Sacrificial lamb, it isn't Diablerie. Maybe a card somewhat like it, but without the pool cost, assamite only, that is like diablerie without the bloodhunt vote -- perhaps it can only be used on a contracted minion. The hassle of having to include several in the deck would make up for it's power, and the lack of pool cost wuld be balanced by it not having the advantages of Sac. Lamb.

> >Telepathic Vote Counting works great. Two of their princes have AUS, > >and two have PRE. Table votes are a vote deck's biggest enemy, so you > >just cancel the biggest thug out there and that frequently is enough > >to get the vote by. > > Ooh... very true. A card I have woefully few of, and so always forget > about. It would certainly help, since I'm seeing a few decks at the > moment with Inner Circle (mostly Stanislava, but also some Arika a while > back - I burned her twice in one game with Potence/Protean) in them > where they're not there for pro-active political action, but have a > habit of cramping your politics when they do show up. Well, it is a rare card, so it's tough to get your hands on very many -- it's not going to be the backbone of very many decks. I recommend Justicar retribution or banishment for dealing with IC members -- everyone else on the table will often vote in favour, because they will hate the IC members too. Toreador voting is quite doable, but you do have the twin problems of little stealth (alacrity is expensive, and doesn't go very far) and a slight deficiency in getting votes on the table. Ventrue voting (weenie or otherwise) or Large minion voting is probably easier and more effective. Always keep Leandro in mind as a potential addition to a Toreador voting deck. Eugene

"Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: > Well, it is a rare card, so it's tough to get your hands on > very many -- it's not going to be the backbone of very many > decks. *nods* I only have three TVCs myself. > I recommend Justicar retribution or banishment for > dealing with IC members -- everyone else on the table will > often vote in favour, because they will hate the IC members > too. Banishment works well with Masquerade Enforcement and Memory's Fading Glimpse. But if I want to gun down IC members and I'm not using an IC member myself (which should be the case if I'm using Justicar Retribution) my card of choice is Fear of Mekhet. Since it's a master card, I don't have to worry about those 4 votes getting in my way. Noal [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 20:48:06 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: >"Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >> Well, it is a rare card, so it's tough to get your hands on >> very many -- it's not going to be the backbone of very many >> decks. > >*nods* I only have three TVCs myself. My, my. This explains why I got the pointy end of the stick on the IG and Torn Signpost front - all my rares were taken up by TVC. I have something like 10-12, MORE than enough for a vote deck. This is BEFORE looking at Mark Korshavn's stock as well - i suspect this is one of those cards he WON'T be out of. [ quoted text not captured ]

lor...@yahoo.com (Derek Ray) wrote: > My, my. This explains why I got the pointy end of the stick on the IG > and Torn Signpost front - all my rares were taken up by TVC. I have > something like 10-12, MORE than enough for a vote deck. This is > BEFORE looking at Mark Korshavn's stock as well - i suspect this is > one of those cards he WON'T be out of. He's got 4 Jyhad copies. Hrm. I might have to reserve them. I just wish I could get my paws on more than 1 copy of Derange. It's a great card to use with Madness Network and Malkavian Derangement: Paranoia. Noal [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 19:36:02 GMT, "Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: >> How? Once you're IG'd, your only recourse is Blood of Acid, which >> falls under "Mutual Annihilation." The Tzimisce have a -real- problem >> with Potence decks. > >It's a much more even fight than one against a fortitude deck that deals >agg, but Tzimisce actually fear potence not very much. It's fortitude >(again) that really messes them up. The reason Tzimisce seem to come out on >top against brujah (in the games I've played, anyway) is because of the agg >damage, and the fact that Dragos and Meshenka pay little or nothing for >their combat cards. The Tzimisce saves Blood of acid for when he is immortal >grappled, and uses scorpion sting/body arsenal when he isn't (the Brujah may But against POT/CEL, you will be IG'd every time - it's no fun to end up with Bonecraft or Fleshcraft or any OTHER toys the Tzimisce can toss at you. Safest course for Potence is always IG -except- against aggravated hand damage. >well not IG so as to be able to dodge). And a properly constructed Tzimisce Dodge what? Your hand strike for 1? >Using a blood of acid can might be thought of as 'mutual annihilation', but >the Tzimisce usually comes out ahead -- one strike isn't usually enough to >send the Tzimisce to torpor, but the Brujah is taking agg, so he goes >down -- and then the Tzimisce can play Taste of Vitae. This obviously works >better with Meshenka and Dragos (once he has advanced vicissitude). I've seen this in a tournament... Agatha (4-cap, POT) rushed Meshenka, played Torn Signpost, Increased Strength, IG, and Pushing the Limit. Meshenka went bye-bye to torpor while Agatha burned. I say the POT deck just came out ahead, myself. A POT/CEL deck can also choose to put all its eggs in one basket and strike for tons on the first strike if need be, but obviously it will prefer TS/IG/Blur just for simplicity. The problem is that the strong Tzimisce vamps cost SO much that if you end up with one in torpor, it can be difficult to get him back out. Lupo and Hasina do the "diablerie" thing well. =) >> As difficult as Gangrel combat currently is, it's even MORE difficult >> when you start chucking Ritual Challenges and Gangrel Revels around. >> They do better to stick with Lucky Blow/Claws, frankly... Just not >> tidy. >> >Why lucky blow, when you can use scorpion sting? Requires animalism? When I think of Gangrel combat, I prefer to head towards the weenie PRO style, or PRO/FOR. Chandler can use Lucky Blow, but not Scorpion Sting. Raven and Camille can't use it at superior to stop dodges. >> As far as the Brujah having no intercept: Volker, Rake, Donal, and >> Constanza can all 2nd tradition. Donal and Constanza can extensively >> abuse whoever they just blocked, too (as can Volker to a small >> degree.) > >Donal and Constanza are only very useful to Brujah with Dominate, and I >don't know many Brujah who put in second tradition just for Anvil and Volker >to use. A voting deck would, of course, but those are also difficult to >construct, because both voting well and fighting well tend to require >largish card combos. Donal and Constanza are useful to ANY Brujah deck, as they come with a Prince title, a special ability, and POT/CEL. The Dominate is a bonus. Just because you don't know many Brujah who do this doesn't mean it doesn't happen - see the "Volker, May I?" deck archive. 2nd tradition *stops the action*, which is exactly what you want if you're tossing around Carthage Remembered. It's worth it to lose Volker sometimes. >> >For my money, Celerity is underpowered and ought to be improved. >> >> However underpowered you think it may be, it works extremely well >> currently. Improving it will toss the game out of balance - therefore >> it does NOT need to be improved. >> >Improving it will definitely not toss the game out of balance, if it is done >carefully. Only a few additions are required. The most pressing is a method >by which a deck that relies on celerity for defence can survive being >immortal grappled. Before people bring up 'celerity should never be caught But this is not necessary, and would make the Toreador quite overpowered, frankly. Right now, the Tories can use Majesty for defence, which works very well -except- against IG. Or they can use Flash/Sideslip, which works very well against IG but falls over against the occasional odd-freaky-combat deck, and doesn't let you untap. Giving CEL a defense against IG makes a PRE/CEL deck a hideous bleed monster that you can't get rid of easily. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean the rest of us haven't ALREADY. >at close range', I would like to again mention Drawing out the Beast: >Potence/Animalism is a common discipline pairing. Shadow step also defeats Not THAT common, because the vamps end up being too big to make it work. It also falls over brutally and suddenly to any clan that can provide its own hand damage, and you had BETTER torporize them on the first strike or a CEL deck will eat you alive with Blur and the free hand damage you just gave it. >Celerity's vaunted ability to maneuver. Another addition I feel would be Shadow Step is also expensive as hell, making it balanced. >valuable is a card that, while being expensive, gives +1 hand damage at >advanced. While potence or Thaumaturgy would still be much stronger in >combination, it would allow celerity by itself to be moderately effective in >combat. The assamites can use the help. the Brujah wouldn't care, and it The Assamites need the help given to their OTHER strikes, not their hand damage. Why have QUI when you're just going to be a CEL hand damage machine? The Brujah would be helped - there are a lot of pot/CEL vampires out there who need skill cards to be fearsome. This would make them worthwhile out of the gate. >would be fun to see a Toreador trying combat. Toreador can't bleed as well >as Seites or Makavians, can't vote as well as Ventrue. Adding a bit more >potential for combat to celerity might make them actually use the >discipline, rather than being basically Auspex/Presence machines. nobody plays with Aire of Elation in your group? Toreador bleed -very- well. Nothing bleeds as well as Malkavians, obviously. Why do you want a clan who is second-best at two of the basic styles to be any good at ALL at the third? This isn't unbalancing? If the Malks had any -good- way to save their butts in combat, it would be VERY broken. Right now, they pretty much are soft mooshy bags to be smacked around by any combat deck nearby. >And in your example, Cardano probably uses obedience on Melek (or Anson uses >majesty, or Crusher kicks his sorry ass), and then Tansu Bekker gets blocked >with a second tradition domain. At least, that seems more representative of >what I'd be likely to actually see in play. :-) Heh. Most likely result: Anyone with PRE uses Majesty on him. But if it's this case, then you always have the option to Mask with +1 stealth, to get the action past. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8bohe1$qu8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Noal McDonald <dharzhak@my- deja.com> writes >Banishment works well with Masquerade Enforcement and Memory's Fading >Glimpse. Ow! Now *there's* a use for Memory's Fading Glimpse. A few big Ventrue will do it.... [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <PUOD4.9740$q5.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte <eugen...@sprint.ca> writes >I don't know if I like doing Assamite Diablerie by means of Sacrificial >lamb. Whatever's going on with Sacrificial lamb, it isn't Diablerie. Maybe a >card somewhat like it, but without the pool cost, Blood cost, not pool cost. And you will get the blood back, almost certainly. Yes, you need three blood to start with, but that's not so hard. But if you burn a 3 capacity vampire, you won't lose any blood, and you'll probably end up gaining some. And if you send someone to torpor from attrition, rather than agg damage, it's a much better deal anyway. > assamite only, that is >like diablerie without the bloodhunt vote We call that burning, normally. The only real difference with SacLamb is no skill card, since as I recall you can pick up the equipment, too. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> writes: >> Banishment works well with Masquerade Enforcement >> and Memory's Fading Glimpse. >James Coupe <ve...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Ow! Now *there's* a use for Memory's Fading Glimpse. A few big > Ventrue will do it.... I can't claim authorship of the Banishment/MFG combo. The credit goes to Robb Dudock, a fellow NJL guy. He tried to unleash it as part of a Pentex Subversion, Brainwash deck at our last get together. The reason he didn't pull it off was I was playing a Brujah Anethema/IG deck and I controlled the politics and the combat...a very tough balance to pull off effectively, as you know. My idea would be to try to implement it in a Setite (with a hint of Ventrue) vote deck since they have the Presence to pass the Banishment and the Obfuscate to play the MFG. When I saw the combo it got me to thinking about reworking my Setite vote deck a bit. The tough part is keeping the deck from having too many moving parts. Noal [ quoted text not captured ]

Hmm. I have a large-minion voting deck constructed right now, that uses lots of banishments, as well as obfuscate. I don't own a memory's fading glimpse, so putting it in didn't occur to me. Maybe I should try to hunt one down...

> >It's a much more even fight than one against a fortitude deck that deals > >agg, but Tzimisce actually fear potence not very much. It's fortitude > >(again) that really messes them up. The reason Tzimisce seem to come out on > >top against brujah (in the games I've played, anyway) is because of the agg > >damage, and the fact that Dragos and Meshenka pay little or nothing for > >their combat cards. The Tzimisce saves Blood of acid for when he is immortal > >grappled, and uses scorpion sting/body arsenal when he isn't (the Brujah may > > But against POT/CEL, you will be IG'd every time - it's no fun to end > up with Bonecraft or Fleshcraft or any OTHER toys the Tzimisce can > toss at you. Safest course for Potence is always IG -except- against > aggravated hand damage. I find it best to go very light on the bonecrafts and fleshcrafts with Tzimisce. The people you want to bonecraft IG you, and the rest majesty, with the result that they sit in your hand for lengthy periods of time. Carrion crows, aid from bats, blood of acid, body arsenal, horrid form and possibly drawing out the beast, song of serenity, and scorpion sting, are the core combat cards for Tzimisce, in my opinion. And IG is more risky against Tzimisce than against anyone else, because of Body arsenal, and espescially, Blood of Acid. > > >well not IG so as to be able to dodge). And a properly constructed Tzimisce > > Dodge what? Your hand strike for 1? There are two very good reasons you might want to dodge: if a blood of acid is played, to avoid sending yourself to torpor/burning yourself, or if you're afraid the Tzimisce has a body arsenal. Body arsenal grants +1 hand damage, so a the damage prevention from a sideslip isn't going to save your minion. > > >Using a blood of acid can might be thought of as 'mutual annihilation', but > >the Tzimisce usually comes out ahead -- one strike isn't usually enough to > >send the Tzimisce to torpor, but the Brujah is taking agg, so he goes > >down -- and then the Tzimisce can play Taste of Vitae. This obviously works > >better with Meshenka and Dragos (once he has advanced vicissitude). > > I've seen this in a tournament... Agatha (4-cap, POT) rushed > Meshenka, played Torn Signpost, Increased Strength, IG, and Pushing > the Limit. Meshenka went bye-bye to torpor while Agatha burned. I > say the POT deck just came out ahead, myself. A POT/CEL deck can also > choose to put all its eggs in one basket and strike for tons on the > first strike if need be, but obviously it will prefer TS/IG/Blur just > for simplicity. It certainly is a less even exchange against a small minion, if you're going to torpor. My solution is to generally fight at long range, using aid from bats, carrion crows, and fake-outs. I find I generally have a blood of acid when they manage to catch me. Weenie-potence rush tends to be short on maneuvers. And my deck is full of leather jackets, which also helps greatly against straight potence. > > The problem is that the strong Tzimisce vamps cost SO much that if you > end up with one in torpor, it can be difficult to get him back out. > Lupo and Hasina do the "diablerie" thing well. =) > Mm-hmm. That used to happen to me all the time. I admit, getting a Tzimisce deck properly tuned is a real challenge. They have so many different combat cards, it's easy to have an unfocused deck that does nothing well. > >Why lucky blow, when you can use scorpion sting? > > Requires animalism? When I think of Gangrel combat, I prefer to head > towards the weenie PRO style, or PRO/FOR. Chandler can use Lucky > Blow, but not Scorpion Sting. Raven and Camille can't use it at > superior to stop dodges. Fair enough. My group tends towards larger minions than is standard, I think. . > > Donal and Constanza are useful to ANY Brujah deck, as they come with a > Prince title, a special ability, and POT/CEL. The Dominate is a > bonus. Just because you don't know many Brujah who do this doesn't > mean it doesn't happen - see the "Volker, May I?" deck archive. 2nd > tradition *stops the action*, which is exactly what you want if you're > tossing around Carthage Remembered. It's worth it to lose Volker > sometimes. Considering you're paying 3 cost more than Volker in order to gain advanced potence and a moderately useful power, it doesn't seem like the best deal, to me. But then, I'm a bit biased because I keep multiple decks constructed at once, and generally I find my 2nd-and-fifth traditions can be used in other decks that don't have to use substandard minions just to gain the prince title. > >> > >Improving it will definitely not toss the game out of balance, if it is done > >carefully. Only a few additions are required. The most pressing is a method > >by which a deck that relies on celerity for defence can survive being > >immortal grappled. Before people bring up 'celerity should never be caught > > But this is not necessary, and would make the Toreador quite > overpowered, frankly. Right now, the Tories can use Majesty for > defence, which works very well -except- against IG. Or they can use > Flash/Sideslip, which works very well against IG but falls over > against the occasional odd-freaky-combat deck, and doesn't let you > untap. Giving CEL a defense against IG makes a PRE/CEL deck a hideous > bleed monster that you can't get rid of easily. Just because you > don't see it doesn't mean the rest of us haven't ALREADY. I've seen PRE/CEL plenty. Played it myself. And, I admit, the celerity is moderately more useful than just putting in fake-outs and dodges. But, only moderately. A defense against IG shouldn't be a get-out-of jail-free card. It should save you from one strike in one round. The vampire is hardly out of the woods yet, particularly since IG gives a press and sets range to close next round... I don't find toreador bleed decks to be espescially powerful. They don't have much stealth to get through, and IG + the rulings about multiple actions really hamper their ability to get through with majesty. And they can't fight well either. Can't Fight + Can't get through makes for a sad deck. Not that they're helpless, (misdirections are a godsend) they just aren't 'monsters', so far as I've noticed. And giving them a card along the lines of the one suggested wouldn't change that, it would just make them less pitifully helpless against potence (or, god forbid, POT?ANI. Shudder.) > > >at close range', I would like to again mention Drawing out the Beast: > >Potence/Animalism is a common discipline pairing. Shadow step also defeats > > Not THAT common, because the vamps end up being too big to make it > work. It also falls over brutally and suddenly to any clan that can > provide its own hand damage, and you had BETTER torporize them on the > first strike or a CEL deck will eat you alive with Blur and the free > hand damage you just gave it. I believe the deck that one the Portsmouth Tournament just this (last?) week was Pot/Ani. And there's a 5 pool minion (Nigel the Shunned) with POT/ANI. I see the combination all the time (slight exaggeration). > >valuable is a card that, while being expensive, gives +1 hand damage at > >advanced. While potence or Thaumaturgy would still be much stronger in > >combination, it would allow celerity by itself to be moderately effective in > >combat. The assamites can use the help. the Brujah wouldn't care, and it > > The Assamites need the help given to their OTHER strikes, not their > hand damage. Why have QUI when you're just going to be a CEL hand > damage machine? That they do. I envision this proposed card as being weaker at advanced then fists of death at basic, so if the Assamites were given some more useful Quietus strikes, they wouldn't have to rely on it, but it would remain a potentially valuable option. AT best, with a blur, you'll be doing six damage while losing 3-4 blood if the opponent strikes just with hand, so it won't really be the most efficient combat mechanism. > > The Brujah would be helped - there are a lot of pot/CEL vampires out > there who need skill cards to be fearsome. This would make them > worthwhile out of the gate. Pot cel doesn't need skill card to be fearsome (torn signpost/blur does 6 damage). CEL/pot should still be more effective than just the CEL by itself. > nobody plays with Aire of Elation in your group? Uh, no, pretty much all of us use the card. Particularly when we're playing Toreador. >Toreador bleed > -very- well. Nothing bleeds as well as Malkavians, obviously. Setites can, pretty much (except for problems with the disciplines on their minions) >Why do > you want a clan who is second-best at two of the basic styles to be > any good at ALL at the third? This isn't unbalancing? If the Malks > had any -good- way to save their butts in combat, it would be VERY > broken. Right now, they pretty much are soft mooshy bags to be > smacked around by any combat deck nearby. 2nd best? Malkavians, Setites, Giovanni, Lasombra, and Ventrue all bleed better than Toreador. Brujah can bleed almost as well, and Tremere aren't particularly far behind (if they're trying). They bleed better than the clans that lack dementation, presence, and dominate. That isn't saying all that much. Heck, even Gangrel can bleed better than Toreador, if they use dominate. They might be second best at voting, but only if you don't count all the voting decks that don't rely on a particular clan. Adding the potential to fight to the Toreador doesn't strike me as unbalancing. The more combat cards they put in, the less well they'll bleed/vote/do other stuff. It just gives them the potential to be slightly more well-rounded if they want -- which seems good, since they don't really specialise at anything. Eugene

In article <ZsZD4.440$m5.3...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>, Eugene Earnshaw- Whyte <eugen...@sprint.ca> writes >I find it best to go very light on the bonecrafts and fleshcrafts with >Tzimisce. The people you want to bonecraft IG you, and the rest majesty, >with the result that they sit in your hand for lengthy periods of time. >Carrion crows, aid from bats, blood of acid, body arsenal, horrid form and >possibly drawing out the beast, song of serenity, and scorpion sting, are >the core combat cards for Tzimisce, in my opinion. But if the people you want to bonecraft IG you, and the rest Majesty, they'll just do the same with these, especially Aid from Bats. And if the rest are just Majestying anyway.... [ quoted text not captured ]

"Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: > I find it best to go very light on the bonecrafts and > fleshcrafts with Tzimisce. The people you want to bonecraft > IG you, and the rest majesty, with the result that they sit > in your hand for lengthy periods of time. I would tend to agree with this. Bonecraft and Fleshcraft, while amusing cards, don't tend to be all that useful. > Carrion crows, aid from bats, blood of acid, body arsenal, > horrid form and possibly drawing out the beast, song of > serenity, and scorpion sting, are the core combat cards for > Tzimisce, in my opinion. And IG is more risky against Tzimisce > than against anyone else, because of Body arsenal, and > espescially, Blood of Acid. I'd say it's more risky against the Gangrel. They're more likely to prevent the damage and pop claws on a Scorpion Sting. The only good thing about Blood of Acid is that, like IG, it is played before strikes are chosen, but after range is determined to be close. So it does make a good response card. Personally, I've not gotten around to Tzmisce combat since my "Transformers" deck using Bauble and more Ghoul Retainers, Assault Rifles and Flamethrowers than god. > Considering you're paying 3 cost more than Volker in order to > gain advanced potence and a moderately useful power, it doesn't > seem like the best deal, to me. I tend to agree. Donal and Costanza never go in my Brujah political decks for two reasons. They're over 6 cap and they don't have Presence. In political decks, I find it's better to use smaller vampires so you can get things going much faster. What I did find a good use for them was a Lasombra/Giovanni/Brujah DOM/POT deck that was fairly vicious. > A defense against IG shouldn't be a get-out-of jail-free card. > It should save you from one strike in one round. The vampire > is hardly out of the woods yet, particularly since IG gives a > press and sets range to close next round... As noted above, IG may only be played after range has been deterrmined to be close. If combat is at long range, IG may not be played and you will get no press from it. If you want to count on having a press, pack Trap or Mighty Grapple. > I don't find toreador bleed decks to be espescially powerful. > They don't have much stealth to get through, They don't need it. A Toreador bleed deck isn't going to use large cap vampires. All they need to do is come at you en masse and use S:CE for the vampires that get blocked. Bernie had a variation on that theme using multiple Aching Beauty/Change of Target where he'd bleed you with Social Charm. If you blocked, you lost the pool from the Aching Beauty cards and never got a shot at him because Change of Target cancels combat altogether. If you didn't block, he layed down Aire of Elation. Using Flash/Majesty kept the occasional IG deck from ruining his day. > Setites can, pretty much (except for problems with the > disciplines on their minions) While I agree 100%, liberal use of discipline cards does help. >> you want a clan who is second-best at two of the basic styles >> to be any good at ALL at the third? This isn't unbalancing? If >> the Malks had any -good- way to save their butts in combat, it >> would be VERY broken. Right now, they pretty much are soft >> mooshy bags to be smacked around by any combat deck nearby. Uh...my OOC Malk deck had even the IG decks running for cover. I'd pack Obedience to deal with rush combat until the end of my predator's minion phase and then lay waste to a vampire that annoyed me with White Phosphorous Grenade/Rotschreck and then play Graverobbing to steal it. And occasionally, just for fun, I'd use Malkavian Time Auction to give the player a chance to buy it back. In terms of keeping my predator off of my back and still be able to work over my prey, it was one of the most highly successful decks I've ever made. > 2nd best? Malkavians, Setites, Giovanni, Lasombra, and > Ventrue all bleed better than Toreador. Giovanni?!? They have a _horrible_ discipline spread. They also don't have the small cap vampires that can pull off the mass assault the Toreador can. Same goes for the Lasombra. Setites suffer a little as well. Malkavian and Ventrue, I'll grant you since, being Camarilla, they have access to a lot more small cap vampires. > Heck, even Gangrel can bleed better than Toreador, if they use > dominate. Since they don't have Dominate as a common discipline, this is a pointless observation. A PRO/DOM deck is not a Gangrel deck. While you are, of course, entitled to your belief that the Toreador is a substandard clan, my fairly extensive experience does not bear this out. [ quoted text not captured ]

>But if the people you want to bonecraft IG you, and the rest Majesty, >they'll just do the same with these, especially Aid from Bats. And if >the rest are just Majestying anyway.... Since you can't be immortal grappled at long range, it is less of a problem for me -- and Blood of Acid, like I said, makes a very nice counter if they actually catch me. A deck can majesty against these -- but that isn't actually a huge problem, because your cards cycle through your hands either way. And aid from bats/carrion crows are free, so it doesn't really cost you anything to play them, as long as you have plenty in the deck. Ideally (and this actually does happen fairly often) the cards you cycle in combat (whether or not they accomplish anything) allow you to pick up more blocking cards, which promptly cycle, and by then you have some more combat cards... It's a defeasible strategy (Theft of Vitae's are a problem, actually), but it deals very well with POT, and tends to come out ahead against POT/CEL in my experience. You just have to rely more on scorpion stings than aid from bats against POT/CEL, is all.

In article <q4aE4.1278$m5.5...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte <eugen...@sprint.ca> writes >Since you can't be immortal grappled at long range, it is less of a problem >for me -- and Blood of Acid, like I said, makes a very nice counter if they >actually catch me. > The Tzimisce don't have enough maneuvers to guarantee the range. If you're seeing Brujah decks that can't guarantee the close range, you're not seeing good enough Brujah POT/CEl decks. With Bum's Rush, Flash and miscellaneous other cards, range against the Tzimisce should effectively be set. Granted, different people play different decks, but the Brujah can easily guarantee range (against a non-Cailean type deck) if they want. -- James Coupe

> > And IG is more risky against Tzimisce > > than against anyone else, because of Body arsenal, and > > espescially, Blood of Acid. > > I'd say it's more risky against the Gangrel. They're more likely to > prevent the damage and pop claws on a Scorpion Sting. The only good > thing about Blood of Acid is that, like IG, it is played before strikes > are chosen, but after range is determined to be close. So it does make > a good response card. Ah, hyperbole. You are quite correct -- Gangrel DO deal with it better than Tzimisce. But my original point was that POT/CEL gets the short end of the stick when it takes on most combat decks (THA being the exception) -- Gangrel, Pot/FOR, Tzimisce, and Ravnos all kill it. And even Assamites are on pretty even terms, amusingly. > > Personally, I've not gotten around to Tzmisce combat since my > "Transformers" deck using Bauble and more Ghoul Retainers, Assault > Rifles and Flamethrowers than god. Heh. I don't have the cards to do that -- and it seems sort of 'un-Tzimisce' to me. But it would still be fun. > I tend to agree. Donal and Costanza never go in my Brujah political > decks for two reasons. They're over 6 cap and they don't have Presence. > In political decks, I find it's better to use smaller vampires so you > can get things going much faster. > > What I did find a good use for them was a Lasombra/Giovanni/Brujah > DOM/POT deck that was fairly vicious. I've seen a fair number of DOM/POT/CEL decks using those two. Particularly back before the errata to Thoughts Betrayed. > > > A defense against IG shouldn't be a get-out-of jail-free card. > > It should save you from one strike in one round. The vampire > > is hardly out of the woods yet, particularly since IG gives a > > press and sets range to close next round... > > As noted above, IG may only be played after range has been deterrmined > to be close. If combat is at long range, IG may not be played and you > will get no press from it. If you want to count on having a press, pack > Trap or Mighty Grapple. > Frankly, I don't see how this is relevant. If combat is at long range, the minion can S:CE anyway, so presses are moot. My point was that a CEL card that allows you to potentially avoid the effects of one strike while immortal grappled (however it works) hardly guarantees you're going to survive the combat. It just gives you a chance. > > I don't find toreador bleed decks to be espescially powerful. > > They don't have much stealth to get through, > > They don't need it. A Toreador bleed deck isn't going to use large cap > vampires. All they need to do is come at you en masse and use S:CE for > the vampires that get blocked. Sounds more like a weenie minion PRE deck to me. Why bother with celerity? Just use fake-outs. > > Bernie had a variation on that theme using multiple Aching Beauty/Change > of Target where he'd bleed you with Social Charm. If you blocked, you > lost the pool from the Aching Beauty cards and never got a shot at him > because Change of Target cancels combat altogether. If you didn't > block, he layed down Aire of Elation. Using Flash/Majesty kept the > occasional IG deck from ruining his day. I had a deck that did basically the same thing. I used the flashes only because all my vampires had celerity anyway. Hardly a ringing endorsement for the power of the discipline. > >> you want a clan who is second-best at two of the basic styles > >> to be any good at ALL at the third? This isn't unbalancing? If > >> the Malks had any -good- way to save their butts in combat, it > >> would be VERY broken. Right now, they pretty much are soft > >> mooshy bags to be smacked around by any combat deck nearby. > > Uh...my OOC Malk deck had even the IG decks running for cover. I'd pack > Obedience to deal with rush combat until the end of my predator's minion > phase and then lay waste to a vampire that annoyed me with White > Phosphorous Grenade/Rotschreck and then play Graverobbing to steal it. > And occasionally, just for fun, I'd use Malkavian Time Auction to give > the player a chance to buy it back. In terms of keeping my predator off > of my back and still be able to work over my prey, it was one of the > most highly successful decks I've ever made. Ah, Rotschreck. Is that still how it's being played, or does it send the user of the Agg to torpor. I always thought it was sad that gangrel would run in terror at the sight of their own claws... > > > 2nd best? Malkavians, Setites, Giovanni, Lasombra, and > > Ventrue all bleed better than Toreador. > > Giovanni?!? They have a _horrible_ discipline spread. They also don't > have the small cap vampires that can pull off the mass assault the > Toreador can. Same goes for the Lasombra. Setites suffer a little as > well. Malkavian and Ventrue, I'll grant you since, being Camarilla, > they have access to a lot more small cap vampires. They aren't going to do a weenie minion bleed, if that's what your thinking, but those decks tend to be multi-clan anyhow. The giovanni discipline spread sucks for fighting, but it works fine for bleeding. I direct your attention to Gloria Giovanni, a 4 pool minion who can bleed for 6 at +1 stealth, or for 4 at +2 stealth. Stefano, Carlotta, and Enzo also make excellent bleeders. The primary advantage of Giovanni as bleeders, however, is that Whispers from the Dead, together with Carlotta Giovanni, make them essentially immune to hand clog. Whatever card they currently lack can easily be procured by Rudolpho Giovanni as a +1 stealth action. > > > Heck, even Gangrel can bleed better than Toreador, if they use > > dominate. > > Since they don't have Dominate as a common discipline, this is a > pointless observation. A PRO/DOM deck is not a Gangrel deck. > Dominate isn't a clan discipline, but it is moderately common among Gangrel. Stanislava, Iliana, Faruq, and Ingrid Rossler all have it. One of the decks I regularly see is Gangrel with dominate. It is designed so that it is very effective with only basic dominate on a minion -- and Stanislava is truly fearsome. > While you are, of course, entitled to your belief that the Toreador is a > substandard clan, my fairly extensive experience does not bear this out. > > Noal I never said that the Toreador are substandard. Nosferatu, Assamites are substandard. Toreador have a good discipline, an average discipline, and a weak discipline, so one would expect them to be kind of middle of the pack. Their large selection of vampires, and the general excellent quality of those vampires improves them somewhat. I said that they weren't exceptionally good at anything, and (more importantly) that Celerity is virtually useless to them. I further maintained that making them somewhat more capable in combat would not make them unstoppable, or even unusually good. If we follow a general policy of making all the weak disciplines better (much easier than trying to make the strong disciplines weak), along with improving the vampire selection for those clans which are currently shortchanged, we shall find that, miraculously, all the clans will be on a much more even footing. Any improvement in Celerity should be accompanied by a corresponding improvement to all the weakest disciplines. I've discussed Celerity mostly because I think I have a pretty good idea of what needs to be changed. A discipline like animalism is tougher. Eugene

James Coupe <ja...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote: > The Tzimisce don't have enough maneuvers to guarantee the range. They don't need them. DotB or Terror Frenzy/Fake Out pretty much set the range to whatever they want to, barring Nos/!Nos effects. Celerity can't stop a deck using Animalism from setting whatever range it likes. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte wrote: [snip] > And being caught once in a while isn't usually a disaster, because of > Leather Jackets and Blood of Acid. Perhaps you already know this, but just to clarify, these two cards don't make a very good combo (though they can be nice on their own...) -davey! so why not post the deck already?

What he said. :-) Also, Bum's rushes are easily blocked (cancelling the maneuver), and most nasty CEL/POT decks will have fewer maneuvers than me, since between a third and half of my combat cards grant a maneuver -- fake outs combine very well with breath of the dragon.(see also Spirit's touch and Gaurd dogs). And being caught once in a while isn't usually a disaster, because of Leather Jackets and Blood of Acid. It isn't as sure a thing as a gangrel with a scorpion sting, a wolf claws, and a skin of steel, but it works pretty well. Brujah aren't a big worry for me. Tremere are much more of a hassle.

Yeah, I'm aware that they don't really complement each other -- but it's nice to have options. Why not post? Aside from that I'm lazy? Sure, here goes -- this is the current version of my Tzimisce Deck. A warning: my gaming group plays with some house rules, among them that one can equip with as much equipment/summon as many retainers as you have cards in your hand. So you'll see some more retainers and equipment than you otherwise might expect (although I cut down a bit recently). Crypt: Lambach Meshenka Anton Dragos x2 Corine Marcon x2 Devin Bisley Lolita Houston Wendy Wade Vliam Andor Gillian Krader Master Cards: 2x Library Hunting Ground 4x Blood Doll 2x Animalism 2x Vicissitude Giants Blood Sudden Reversal Direct Intervention Powerbase Chicago Fragment of the Book of Nod The Barrens Combat Cards 9x Carrion Crows 7x Aid from Bats 3x Blood of Acid 2x Dodge 1x Fake Out 2x Body Arsenal 2x Taste of Vitae Action Cards 4x Pulse of the Canaille Action Modifiers 5x Changeling 2x Plasmic Form (also a combat card) Reaction Cards Wake with Evening's Freshness x2 Forced Awakening x4 Gaurd Dogs x4 Cat's Guidance x5 Telepathic Misdirection x6 Equipment Leather Jacket x6 Palatial Estate Living Manse Femur of Toomler Retainers J.S. Simmons, Esq. Tasha Morgan 2x Revenant Raven Spy Murder of Crows Allies War Ghoul 90 cards, total. This particular deck doesn't fight as well as it could, because it bleeds. If combat with CEL/POT is likely to be a problem, throw in some scorpion stings, possibly some Taste of Vitaes, and maybe more Terror Frenzy's. A few more Body arsenal might also be valuable. It is quite easy to take out the bleed cards and add more combat and untapping cards. Or some of the retainers could go.

"Eugene Earnshaw-Whyte" <eugen...@sprint.ca> wrote: > Ah, Rotschreck. Is that still how it's being played, or does it send > the user of the Agg to torpor. I always thought it was sad that > gangrel would run in terror at the sight of their own claws... Rotschreck - Master Out-Of-Turn * Should be played as written - that is, played on the vampire whose opponent in combat attempts to use aggravated damage against him. [RTR 19980623] -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.geocities.com/vtesrep Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.