Broken Cards & Fixes (2nd Revision)

Here's another revision of my list of suggested game-balancing fixes. Card Suggested Fix ----------------------------- Zip Gun Cannot use ammo Tomb of Rameses III Requires ready Settite Pulled Fangs Cannot burn vampires Thoughts Betrayed Not usable against older vamp Return to Innocence Blood cost equals capacity Day Operation Allies may still block Banishment Requires Justicar or IC Member Mind Rape Does not function during your master phase Majesty/Eathmeld, etc (see below) ----------------------------- Helping to Salvage Wallpaper Allies and Weapons Concealed Weapon is disciplineless Diablerie Cards Use old Agro rules (or similar anti-burn fix) Press Cards and more S:CE now means "S:Round Ends". One may still press ----------------------------- Lupus Australis ____ ____ "Quick, Watson, the needle," cried Holmes, \ \----/ / "I am bored with my test tubes and tomes, |()__()| And my mind at such times __\ __ /__ Starts to dwell on bad rhymes, / __\()/__ \ And ridiculous limmerick poems." |/ \==/ \| | || |

Hey, I haven't been around here awhile but thought I'd post a quick response to some of your proposed "fixes". Zip Gun: Dude, if it weren't for the zip gun hardly anyone would play with ammo. I don't see the problem. Tomb of Ramses: Was errata'd at Origins last year so that the Tomb recieved "Tomb Counters" matching blood placed on Tomb instead of blood. Good fix. Pulled Fangs: I agree, though this needs to be approached carefully. Instead of being burned - straight to torpor? Return To Innocence: I disagree - too drastic a change. Unfortunately I don't have any solid ideas on this one. Day Op: I agree Banishment: I disagree. Work that table politics. Mind Rape: I agree Strike:CE :: Not a bad idea. There are many things that need to be addressed in the rulebook. Combat Timing is a real stinker. First Strike is inconsistant with other WOTC games - Duh, stupid.. Hope you viewed this as constructive response as intended. -- Bernie John Whelan wrote: > > Here's another revision of my list of suggested game-balancing fixes. > > Card Suggested Fix > ----------------------------- > Zip Gun Cannot use ammo > Tomb of Rameses III Requires ready Settite > Pulled Fangs Cannot burn vampires > Thoughts Betrayed Not usable against older vamp > Return to Innocence Blood cost equals capacity > > Day Operation Allies may still block > Banishment Requires Justicar or IC Member > Mind Rape Does not function during your master phase > Majesty/Eathmeld, etc (see below) > > ----------------------------- > Helping to Salvage Wallpaper > > Allies and Weapons Concealed Weapon is disciplineless > Diablerie Cards Use old Agro rules (or similar anti-burn fix) > Press Cards and more S:CE now means "S:Round Ends". One may still > press.

Bernard M. Bresnahan (ber...@mich.com) wrote: : Zip Gun: Dude, if it weren't for the zip gun hardly : anyone would play with ammo. I don't see the problem. Zip Gun is an excellent card. I play it all the time for combat defence, though I have never used any ammo with it. I play it as a defensive card as it was intended DBR is another excellent card, though I don't have too many of them. It was one of the few cards of the original set capable of burning vampires (under the old agro rules) but it came with a big price -- you lose your weapon. It would be an excellent card to use (as intended) with Saturday Night Special or Sawed-Off Shotgun. Unfortunately, with Zip Guns around, it would be madness to use DBR on anything else. DBR and Zip Gun together are just WAY too abusive. If my horde of Brujah Weenies brings out a Horde of expendible 0-cost Arms dealers, and the Arms Dealers bums rush with DBR and Zip Guns, then I am hosing a whole lot of your vamps with no risk or blood cost to my vamps and no pool cost either. : Tomb of Ramses: Was errata'd at Origins last year so : that the Tomb recieved "Tomb Counters" matching blood : placed on Tomb instead of blood. Good fix. Sounds exactly like a fix I posted last year (and last week). I even used the term "Tomb Counters" in my earlier post. I wonder if Origens adopted my fix or if someone else came up with it independendly. Anyway, I replaced it with "Requires ready Settite" in my most recent revision because I was trying to keep any revisions as short and simple as possible. I do like the "Tomb Counters" fix, however, because it completely eliminates the blood generating potential of the card. I am curious about the precise wording of the Origins fix. Can anyone get it for me? : Pulled Fangs: I agree, though this needs to be approached : carefully. Instead of being burned - straight to torpor? : Return To Innocence: I disagree - too drastic a change. : Unfortunately I don't have any solid ideas on this one. Others have recommended more drastic changes than this one, including banning it outright. My fix still leaves plenty of potential for abuse. Bring out Lucretia, equip with Soul Gem, then RTI.... : Day Op: I agree : Banishment: I disagree. Work that table politics. I'm not sure I understant the comment. The intent of the fix is to prevent its abuse in weenie horde political decks. : Mind Rape: I agree : Strike:CE :: Not a bad idea. There are many things that need : to be addressed in the rulebook. Combat Timing is a real stinker. : First Strike is inconsistant with other WOTC games - Duh, stupid.. Glad someone agrees with a few things. I'm trying for some sort of consensus. Lupus Australis

>Zip Gun is an excellent card. I play it all the time for combat defence, >though I have never used any ammo with it. I play it as a defensive card >as it was intended How do you know what was intended. If the adopted fix of concealed weapon that you came up with is ratified, than any small gun will be more efective than this. If CW should have been discaplineless, than any minion can whip out a gun and shoot with ammo, just like zippy is now used. Furthermore, the vamp, or ally won't take damage. Sometimes that is important. >DBR is another excellent card, though I don't have too many of them. It >was one of the few cards of the original set capable of burning vampires >(under the old agro rules) but it came with a big price -- you lose your >weapon. It would be an excellent card to use (as intended) with Saturday >Night Special or Sawed-Off Shotgun. Unfortunately, with Zip Guns around, >it would be madness to use DBR on anything else. I disagree, If and when CW is changed it would become madness to use a zip gun, when you could use a Shotgun. A lot more likey that a vamp will die with 5 agg, than 3 agg. (I know that all of the damage isn't agg, but this was simple.) >DBR and Zip Gun together are just WAY too abusive. If my horde of Brujah >Weenies brings out a Horde of expendible 0-cost Arms dealers, and the Arms >Dealers bums rush with DBR and Zip Guns, then I am hosing a whole lot of >your vamps with no risk or blood cost to my vamps and no pool cost either. Yes but al of your allies are dieing from the zip guns. That is a real waste. My vamp takes an action to higher a thug. Next Round. my thug takes an action to kill himself, and possibly another vamp. Not very scary. Jason

Jason Wrote: "How do you know what was intended. If the adopted fix of concealed weapon that you came up with is ratified, than any small gun will be more efective than this." That is kind of the point. Compare Zip Gun to Saturday Night Special. They both give you a manuver and both do 1R damage. The SNS costs one pool and takes an action to equip. The ZG does one damage to you when you use it. The cost of the SNS is far greater (one pool and equiping action) than the cost of the ZG (one damage when used). When ammo cards (DBR in particular) is taken into account, the cost of ZG becomes completely negligible, as you can use a ZG and DBR, taking no actions and spending no pool to do a great deal of damage. What possible reason is there to use a SNS whan you can have a ZG? "I disagree, If and when CW is changed it would become madness to use a zip gun, when you could use a Shotgun. A lot more likey that a vamp will die with 5 agg, than 3 agg. (I know that all of the damage isn't agg, but this was simple.)" Zip Gun still costs zero pool, is one card, _and_ gives you a manuver. A Shotgun with with concealed weapon takes two cards (i.e. is less reliable), costs two pool, and gives you no manuver. I'd still rather use ZG with DBR than a Shotgun, even if CW is considered disciplinless. "Yes but al of your allies are dieing from the zip guns. That is a real waste. My vamp takes an action to higher a thug. Next Round. my thug takes an action to kill himself, and possibly another vamp. Not very scary." How is that a waste? I am spending zero pool and risking nothing to burn your vampires. I go out and recruit free Arms Dealers, send them on attacks against your vampires, whip out Zip Guns, and shoot you with Dragon's Breath Rounds, sending you to torpor and possibly burning you. This costs me absolutely nothing. No pool, no blood, no damage. Just free allies, free guns, and free ammo that my deck is packed with. In the right circumstances, this deck could be very scary. Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com "They come at night. Mostly." -Newt

Bernard M. Bresnahan wrote: > Hey, I haven't been around here awhile but thought I'd > post a quick response to some of your proposed "fixes". > > Zip Gun: Dude, if it weren't for the zip gun hardly > anyone would play with ammo. I don't see the problem. > I see the problem. I'm sick of weenies with dragonbreaths and zips burning me. The fix of the concealed weapon or disguised weapon or whatever it is will see the use of a lot more equipment and guns, and therefore more people would find a use for ammo in their decks, methinks... > Pulled Fangs: I agree, though this needs to be approached > carefully. Instead of being burned - straight to torpor? > I am a fan of changing to the Disarm template, as suggested by PDB... > Mind Rape: I agree > I have a problem with mind rape. Only because I have a problem with fitting any intercept into most of my decks after all the cards I really need go in :-) My problem. The card is fine. > Strike:CE :: Not a bad idea. There are many things that need > to be addressed in the rulebook. Combat Timing is a real stinker. > First Strike is inconsistant with other WOTC games - Duh, stupid.. > I don't like that you can dodge a first strike. But then, I'd hate it if you couldn't... I like the S:CE fix, myself. We play in a fairly limited card environment (can't get any cards in Sydney anymore, didn't even see the Sabbat re-release...) and we don't have unlimited numbers of many cards to counter virtually unlimited S:CE. I like the fixes presented here. I will try to get them instituted in my playgroup, methinks... David Naseby

In article <19980315174...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, SirTemple <sirt...@aol.com> wrote: >>Zip Gun is an excellent card. I play it all the time for combat defence, >>though I have never used any ammo with it. I play it as a defensive card >>as it was intended > >How do you know what was intended. If the adopted fix of concealed weaponthat >you came up with is ratified, than any small gun will be more efective than >this. >If CW should have been discaplineless, than any minion can whip out a gun and >shoot with ammo, just like zippy is now used. Furthermore, the vamp, or ally >won't take damage. Sometimes that is important. Except that zip guns cost _no_ pool -- which is especially a factor when you plan on burning the gun. In general I would _far_ rather burn a pool than a blood, and having the "Concealed Weapons" effect without needing a combo is a very signifigant advantage. -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

>> Strike:CE :: Not a bad idea. There are many things that need >> to be addressed in the rulebook. Combat Timing is a real stinker. >> First Strike is inconsistant with other WOTC games - Duh, stupid.. >you couldn't... I like the S:CE fix, myself. What's the proposed fix for S:CE? I don't think it's broken let alone necessitating a fix... Sorrow

[ quoted text not captured ] I agree. Some say that S:CE is too powerful and that we've simply gotten used to it. That's possible. However, it's been shown that S:CE *can* be gotten around, and with S:CE the way it is, combat decks and combat-avoidance are about on equal footing. A dedicated combat deck *will* burn your vampires. The best that S:CE can do is keep them around for a little while to do some damage. The only errata I'm really in favour of on this whole fix-kick is to fix the Tomb, RtI, and Pulled Fangs. Mind Rape and Thoughts Betrayed are certainly overpowered, but I don't think they're quite *broken.* And fixing Zip Gun is just plain silly. It's funny that Sleeping Mind and Archon Investigation haven't come up in discussion. I don't think they're that strong, but they *are* JOL-banned, so a bunch of people must hate them. -Chris -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

On Mon, 16 Mar 1998, Chris wrote: > What's the proposed fix for S:CE? > I don't think it's broken let alone necessitating a fix... Before I tell you what my proposed fix was, let me try to explain why I think S:CE is broken. I realize that the position requires some defense. since we have all gotten used to the card and to the enormous effect that it has on the game environment. I define a card as broken if it so dominates the game environment that it turns alot of other cards into wallpaper. This is true to some extent of any overpowered card. You can only put so many cards in an 80 card deck, out of some 800+ minion cards printed. If a card is extremely popular, and played often, then other cards tend to become unpopular and played rarely because of the simple fact that if you put one card in you must leave another out. However, this is especially true of S:CE as exemplified by Majesty. Majesty is largely responsible for entire classes of cards becoming devalued almost to the point of never being played at all. Though we have gotten used to Majesty's effect on the game environment, I cannot think of any card that is not, in this sense, more broken. S:CE (exemplified by cards such as Majesty and Earth Meld) is an extremely powerful form of combat defence. As such it is used with an inordinant frequency as combat defence by any vote deck or bleed deck that uses presence. Combat decks, in order to compete in this environment, must rely on multiple copies of a highly limitted variety of cards. Most importantly, they need Immortal Grapple. Other ways of dealing with S:CE include Psyche, Fast Reaction, Hidden Lurker, Drawing out the Beast/Dawn Operation, and perhaps a few others. You can also use multiple weenies doing repeated rushes again and again to wear out the supply of Majesties, with ZipGun/DBR being particularly useful since the DBR is always saved until the Majesties run out. Anti S:CE strategies all tend to rely on multiple copies of a limitted number of cards. I am not so much upset that certain cards are played frequently and repeatedly, as I am that whole classes of cards are rarely played or never played at all. The list of cards that have been seriously devalued by the S:CE environment is truly enormous. What follows is a catalog of those hapless victems that have been either consigned to Wallpaper Hell, or are teetering on the brink of the Abyss, because of the power of S:CE. PRESS CARDS: Presses to continue combat are completely pointless in an environment where your major problem is that you might not even make it to the first strike resolution. Because of S:CE, presses simply do what they were designed for. You never even make it to the press phase, so they just stay and clog your hand. The most common "continue combat" card is absolutely no match for the most popular "end combat" card. Occasionally you will see a press card played, but usually as an bonus side effect of a card that was included for another reason. Because presses to continue combat are so rare, presses to "end combat" are at the top of everyone's wallpaper list -- there is almost nothing for them to counter. Occasionally you will hear of presses being used in a Tremere deck because of the power of 2nd-round Thaumaturgy cards, but I'm sure you have also heard of the "serious weakness" of the Tremere -- that they have no reliable means of dealing with S:CE. DAMAGE-DEALING RETAINERS I'm talking about guys like Murder of Crows, Wolf Companion, Ghoul Retainer, and others. Like most permanents, their disadvantage is that they cost time and blood to equip with. Part of their advantage and value lies in the fact that they do not merely function once per combat, but once each round. Thus their value is increased in a heavy-press combat environment. Unfortunately, a heavy-press environment is just not strategically feasible, because of S:CE. As it is, everyone complains that they are just too slow, waste of an action, not worth the cost. ALLIES: Since allies don't use disciplines, no ally has any means of dealing with S:CE. WEAPONS: The same is true for most weapons. Because of the low-press environment, weapons are just not seen as worth the cost to equip with. The benefit of being usable once each round is wasted on an environment where combat devotes all of its energies into being able to complete the first round. Weapons are devalued for another reason. Immortal Grapple is the most popular method of dealing with S:CE, and weapons simply do not work in conjunction with IG, nor do they work against it. And weapons are absolutely no help against S:CE. WEAPON HOSERS: If Weapons were actually to become a significant part of the game then there might be some point to cards like Canine Horde or Illegal Search and Siezure or Fast Hands or Peace Treaty. You could say the same for Ally Hosers and Retainer Hosers like Far Mastery or Kindred Segregation. ANY STRIKE THAT IS NOT A HAND STRIKE: Because IG is the most reliable way of dealing with S:CE, potence rush combat with hand strikes is one of the few options available. Long Range combat is almost completely hosed as an attack strategy. The only decks that typically try Ranged combat are weenie decks who can make their opponents run out of Majesties by the sheer number an frequency of their assaults. The only others that might stand a chance with it are big Brujah who can continue combat even after a S:CE by means of Psyche. Particularly damaged are any attacks that are not usable first round, practically pointless in an environment where you can barely finish the first. I'm not saying there are not ways of dealing with S:CE. There are quite a few options and strategies possible. But the options permitted are few compared to the options and variety that are lost and prevented. My fix: S:CE really means "S: Round Ends"-- one may still press This fix allow S:CE to remain an extremely potent form of combat defence, completely nullifying almost anything opponent can do in a single round. It is prevents much more than a dodge (which tends to require higher discipline levels or blood cost), yet has the disadvantage that it cannot be combined with offensive stragegies -- making it in balance an equivalent power rather than a vastly superior one. It can still deal with presses, since, if an opponent presses, one can still play another S:CE...though you might wan to have a Police Station in play in case he plays a Trap. Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and become more playable: Al's Army Apparatus Arms Dealer Frenzy Illegal Search and Siezure Mob Connections The Knights Loyal Street Gang Muddled Vampire Hunter Outcast Mage Police Department Rengegade Garou The Slashers The Spawning Pool Thadius Zho, Mage Vast Wealth .44 Magnum Aid from Bats Assault Rifle Bastard Sword Blood Rage Body of Sun Bomb Boxed In Burst of Sunlight Canine Horde Cauldron of Blood Conquer the Beast Dead End Ally Deer Rifle Disguised Weapon Drain Essence Entrancement Far Mastery Fast Hands Flamethrower Flash Form of the Ghost Ghoul Escort Ghoul Retainer Glaser Rounds Gleam of Red Eyes Grenade Growing Fury Hawg Infernal Pursuit Indomitability Ivory Bow Magic of the Smith Manstopper Rounds Mighty Grapple Movement of the Mind Murder of Crows Nimble Feet Open Grate Rat's Warning Read Intentions RPG Launcher Saturday Night Special Sengir Dagger Shattering Blow Stake/Wooden Stake Submachine Gun Talbot's Chainsaw Theft of Vitae Thrown Gate Thrown Sewer Lid Trap Undead Persistence Vampiric Speed Vanish from the Mind's Eye Walk of Flame Weather Control Well Aimed Car Wolf Companion Kindred Segregation Peace Treaty That's 76 cards from the original set only, or about 25% of the library set. Not all of them are complete wallpaper, but I doubt you see many of them all that often. A few, like Renegade Garou, are well known for decks that like to go out with a Bang, but not too good for decks that want to win. All would become significantly more playable were the fix I recommended adopted. Lupus Australis ____ ____ \ \----/ / |()__()| __\ __ /__ / __\()/__ \ |/ \==/ \| | || |

In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980316233031.22768D-100000@amanda>, Lupus Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> wrote: >Before I tell you what my proposed fix was, let me try to explain why I >think S:CE is broken. I realize that the position requires some defense. >since we have all gotten used to the card and to the enormous effect that >it has on the game environment. [well thought out arguments snipped] I think you exaggerate the effect majesty has, and the ineffectiveness of presses a bit (although they really only work as an extension to Immortal Grapple). Still you do have a point, S:CE has a dominant effect on what goes into decks, and probably the only thing that has more of an effect are bleed bonus cards. Still, alot of the powerfull cards I dislike, I think it does balance out fairly well and lead to deck diversity. I'm not even sure weakening it would help with deck diversity, since while without S:CE to deal with more kinds of combat decks would be viable, several _general kinds_ could become greatly weakened. Then again I'm not sure it would be a bad idea either. I think the main reason the power of S:CE is accepted is that it is an inherent part of the theme. If you've ever played a Vampire rpg, you know what I mean. This is the main reason I don't like your fix, it's just what the power should do: Someone with Majesty just can't be attacked, if someone disappears into the earth, or turns into mist, how do you attack them? Combat shouldn't just be delayed. These methods of combat avoidance are an essential part of the game, and prevent it from degenerating into a free for all brawl. They are a "meta game" decision to the effect that rather than forcing everyone to be able to defend themselves in combat, everyone is forced to deal with politics a bit. The other reason I don't feel like changing S:CE is that it isn't that broken, and changes should be kept to a minimum given the way the rules (i.e. the cards) are distributed. Of course, in the rpg/larp there _are_ ways around Majesty, etc. It varies from game to game, but these include Frenzying, following people down into the earth, etc. IMHO all of the S:CE end cards should have included a specific way around the CE clause. E.G. doesn't work against older vampires, doesn't work against those with Protean, etc. It's a bit late for that though. :-( I would certainly consider house rules to weaken S:CE and move it more in line with the theme of the game, but it's not so bad that I'd propose errata. [ quoted text not captured ]

>I think the main reason the power of S:CE is accepted is that it is >an inherent part of the theme. If you've ever played a Vampire rpg, >you know what I mean. This is the main reason I don't like your fix, >it's just what the power should do: Someone with Majesty just can't >be attacked, if someone disappears into the earth, or turns into >mist, how do you attack them? Combat shouldn't just be delayed. >These methods of combat avoidance are an essential part of the game, >and prevent it from degenerating into a free for all brawl. They >are a "meta game" decision to the effect that rather than forcing >everyone to be able to defend themselves in combat, everyone is >forced to deal with politics a bit. Well, if you want a justification for presses being able to continue the combat... I don't know what kind of time scale most of you are imagining for the game, but I think that any given action taking a week or so is reasonable, or at least a few days. So if you get into a fight with someone and they S:CE (or S:RE) you can just wait around for another opportunity to beat them up more. In any case, there are already a lot of discrepancies with the rpg. Just the whole idea of weenie vamps being able to use the level 6-10 powers of a discipline is silly. And that getting an assault rifle is as costly as a decent vampire. In the rpg any vamp can go grab at least some kind of gun with almost no effort. I'm pretty sure, though, that if there was no S:CE and it was introduced, say, in Sabbat, everyone would be bitching about how broken it was, much more so than any of the cards currently at the top of that list. It would be like adding a reaction card to a few disciplines that just outright made a bleed unsuccessful and then adding a few cards to other disciplines that could get around it. It would take one whole strategy (bleed) and make it so that any effective bleed decks had to be based around the few cards that could get past the new uber-defense. Just like now combat decks have to be based around the few cards that can deal with S:CE.

I agree with you on a lot of points, S:CE totally pumps up the power of Ventrue and Toreador, and with Dominate makes the former the strongest clan in the game. But I could imagine with your fix we would see a general shift to combat decks. I would like to see more solutions (in hitherto unmade cards) to solve the problem. But I think the fix would be large and instead we should just try to shame our playgroups away from such cards in quantity. It isn't a perfect solution, but I know our playgroup has quite a few cards that just don't get played regularly for the shame factor. Tournament play is another ballgame. Lupus Australis wrote: > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > become more playable: > > Muddled Vampire Hunter Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a suicide mission?)

In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980316233031.22768D-100000@amanda>, Lupus Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> writes >ALLIES: Since allies don't use disciplines, no ally has any means of >dealing with S:CE. Teeny tiny contradiction here. Ghouled Street Thug can play Immortal Grapple. -- James Coupe (change "nospam" to "obeah" to reply by e-mail) You were my strength when I was weak. You were my voice when I couldn't speak. You were my eyes when I couldn't see. You saw the best there was in me. Lifted me up when I couldn't reach. You gave me faith because you believed. I'm everything I am because you loved me.

daniel frey <daniel_fr...@bcpress.com> wrote: > I agree with you on a lot of points, S:CE totally pumps up the power of > Ventrue and Toreador, and with Dominate makes the former the strongest > clan in the game. But I could imagine with your fix we would see a > general shift to combat decks. > I would like to see more solutions (in hitherto unmade cards) to solve > the problem. But I think the fix would be large and instead we should > just try to shame our playgroups away from such cards in quantity. It > isn't a perfect solution, but I know our playgroup has quite a few cards > that just don't get played regularly for the shame factor. > Tournament play is another ballgame. > Lupus Australis wrote: > > > > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > > become more playable: > > > > Muddled Vampire Hunter > Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack > will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a > suicide mission?) No, because S:CE is considered to be First Strike (same as Dodge). Muddles is extremely ineffective against S:CE. I like changing S:CE to S:RE. It makes Brujah pitch decks, all forms of gun decks, Gangrel combat decks, and Tremere decks more effective. It means that I don't need Immortal Grapple to be able to initiate a combat and have it be a useful combat, which means dodges will become more useful. All in all, I think it's a really good idea. -Mark Langsdorf Jyahd Archivist http://www.io.com/~mlangsdo/RPGs/Jyhad/

> In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980316233031.22768D-100000@amanda>, Lupus > Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> writes > >ALLIES: Since allies don't use disciplines, no ally has any means of > >dealing with S:CE. > > Teeny tiny contradiction here. > > Ghouled Street Thug can play Immortal Grapple. > Yeah, but it would be painful, since the Street Thug has no hand strike. Although, I suppose you could play Torn Signpost to get hand damage... [ quoted text not captured ]

> > > > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > > become more playable: > > > > Muddled Vampire Hunter > > Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack > will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a > suicide mission?) > No. S:CE and Dodge are dealt with before first strike. [ quoted text not captured ]

You must be kidding me, that strikes (no pun) me as a really stupid rule. How can S:CE and Dodge be dealt before first strike when the damage has already been done before the opponent gets a strike? [ quoted text not captured ]

ber...@cco.caltech.edu wrote: > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > > > become more playable: > > > > > > Muddled Vampire Hunter > > > > Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack > > will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a > > suicide mission?) > > > No. S:CE and Dodge are dealt with before first strike. > You got to be kidding me!! I thought Dodge and S:CE could be played to trump first strike only if the 2nd vamp ever got to use their strike, but if the 2nd vamp was going to torpor it resolved immediately. Say it ain't so, otherwise that is the stupidest ruling yet.

Chris <beb...@newave.net.au> wrote: > You must be kidding me, that strikes (no pun) me as a really stupid rule. > How can S:CE and Dodge be dealt before first strike when the damage has > already been done before the opponent gets a strike? ALL Dodge and S:CE cards are considered to be First Strike. WotC didn't put reminder text on the cards, but nevertheless, all Strike:Dodges and Strike:Combat Ends are considered to be First Strike. So they resolve at the same time as other First Strike cards. Does that clear it up for you? -Mark Langsdorf Jyhad Archivist http://www.io.com/~mlangsdo/RPGs/Jyhad/

In article <6eoaj7$sg9$1...@pinah.connect.com.au>, "Chris" <beb...@newave.net.au> wrote: > > > You must be kidding me, that strikes (no pun) me as a really stupid rule. > How can S:CE and Dodge be dealt before first strike when the damage has > already been done before the opponent gets a strike? The damage hasn't been done. Both strikes are declared before either strike resolves. And then the strikes resolve. S:CE resolves first, before any other type of strike. Rulebook: section 8.3 Dodge negates the effects (on the Dodging minion and non-Retainer cards on him) of the opposing strike regardless of the timing of that opposing strike. Rulebook: section 8.3 -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <350FE2...@bcpress.com>, daniel frey <daniel_fr...@bcpress.com> wrote: > You got to be kidding me!! I thought Dodge and S:CE could be played to > trump first strike only if the 2nd vamp ever got to use their strike, > but if the 2nd vamp was going to torpor it resolved immediately. > > Say it ain't so, otherwise that is the stupidest ruling yet. It is so, by rulebook text - not a ruling. Section 8.3 [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > > In article <350FE2...@bcpress.com>, > daniel frey <daniel_fr...@bcpress.com> wrote: > > You got to be kidding me!! I thought Dodge and S:CE could be played to > > trump first strike only if the 2nd vamp ever got to use their strike, > > but if the 2nd vamp was going to torpor it resolved immediately. > > > > Say it ain't so, otherwise that is the stupidest ruling yet. > > It is so, by rulebook text - not a ruling. Section 8.3 It is?! ...oh... did I say 'stupidest ruling yet' out-loud?! I had a little error with punctuation and tense. What I *meant* to say was, "Say! It ain't so! Otherwise *that* would be the stupidest ruling. Yet." I can see how people misunderstood.

2 cents. S:RE seems to go a little far. My playgroup kicked around this idea for while though: A first strike is a first strike is a first strike, and comes before S:CE and Dodge. Unless they are played with a first strike modifier (of course). Interesting isn't it? Jaysen my e-mail address is jay...@compusmart.ab.ca [ quoted text not captured ]

He is a Malkavian ally (insane), suicide is not out of the question. Perhaps doing the 4 damage is an acceptable sacrifice even if the ally dies (this is all conjecture). The vampire hunter must be used strategically otherwise he will die (that is the main point). First strike goes "first", if you are still kicking then you may respond with you're strike otherwise sorry you're out of luck (torpor, die, whatever). Otherwise strikes are resolved simultaneously. First strike negates your ability to respond if the damage done to you is such that it will incapacitate or kill you. daniel frey wrote: > ber...@cco.caltech.edu wrote: > > > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > > > > become more playable: > > > > > > > > Muddled Vampire Hunter > > > > > > Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack > > > will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a > > > suicide mission?) > > > > > No. S:CE and Dodge are dealt with before first strike. > > > > You got to be kidding me!! I thought Dodge and S:CE could be played to > trump first strike only if the 2nd vamp ever got to use their strike, > but if the 2nd vamp was going to torpor it resolved immediately. daniel frey wrote: > ber...@cco.caltech.edu wrote: > > > > > Were this fix adopted, the following cards would increase in value and > > > > become more playable: > > > > > > > > Muddled Vampire Hunter > > > > > > Doesn't his first strike effectively deal with S:CE. Assuming his attack > > > will be enough to torporize someone? (otherwise why send him on a > > > suicide mission?) > > > > > No. S:CE and Dodge are dealt with before first strike. > > > [ quoted text not captured ]

Lets look at end combat from the perspective of V:TES the tabletop game What is Majesty for instance You cower before the prescence of the other vampire unable to think of harming them (please excuse the paraphrasing). My general advice is this to people do not make one-dimensional decks. If all you can do is combat as your competitor I will certainly capitalize upon your single minded strategy. Remeber when it comes to cards because it is powerful does not make it broken. [ quoted text not captured ]

Christopher Chew (c...@id4.telecom.fedex.com) wrote: : Lets look at end combat from the perspective of V:TES the tabletop game : What is Majesty for instance : You cower before the prescence of the other vampire unable to think of harming : them (please excuse the paraphrasing). : My general advice is this to people do not make one-dimensional decks. If all : you can do is combat as your competitor I will certainly capitalize upon your : single minded strategy. : Remeber when it comes to cards because it is powerful does not make it broken. Cards that are over-powerful are the very definition of broken. If you don't care about in-game balance, that's fine, but I don't think it's very helpful to tell anyone else that they should also not care about in-game balance. Josh doesn't understand all these people with their 'if it doesn't bother me, don't fix it' theories

In article <3512C811...@id4.telecom.fedex.com>, Christopher Chew <c...@id4.telecom.fedex.com> wrote: >Lets look at end combat from the perspective of V:TES the tabletop game > >What is Majesty for instance > >You cower before the prescence of the other vampire unable to think of harming >them (please excuse the paraphrasing). > >My general advice is this to people do not make one-dimensional decks. If all >you can do is combat as your competitor I will certainly capitalize upon your >single minded strategy. Well, If all I can do is combat, you certainly won't capitalize with S:CE. You'll be Immortal Grappled and Burned. Decks that are fairly one dimensional can be quite powerfull. >Remeber when it comes to cards because it is powerful does not make it broken. In order to make this argument stick you have to counter the fairly powerfull arguments that have been put forth, not state irrelevent truisms. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <6f0qtg$r...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, du...@newton.ruph.cornell.edu (Joshua Duffin) wrote: > Christopher Chew (c...@id4.telecom.fedex.com) wrote: > : Lets look at end combat from the perspective of V:TES the tabletop game > > : What is Majesty for instance > > : You cower before the prescence of the other vampire unable to think of harming > : them (please excuse the paraphrasing). > > : My general advice is this to people do not make one-dimensional decks. If all > : you can do is combat as your competitor I will certainly capitalize upon your > : single minded strategy. > > : Remeber when it comes to cards because it is powerful does not make it broken. > > Cards that are over-powerful are the very definition of broken. If you > don't care about in-game balance, that's fine, but I don't think it's > very helpful to tell anyone else that they should also not care about > in-game balance. > > Josh > > doesn't understand all these people with their 'if it doesn't bother me, > don't fix it' theories hmmm, up to point Lord Copper ... but I certainly agree that there's a basic philosophical difference between us which is getting in the way of understanding, so I've written a lengthy defense of our point of view on a post further down this list ["Why we are against card fixes."] Maybe that will help! May you never lack for a wake-up card, Legbiter.