Tournament Report Moonlightning in Gothenburg

Here's the report for the V:EKN sanctioned constructed tournament held in Gothenburg 2002-03-10 (tenth of march this year). 13 players were present so games proceeded under the multijudge system. The regional trend towards more combatorientated decks continued and several tables saw more vampires in torpor than ready ones. Games were fierce and with two decks featuring Anarch Revolts no table timed out. Potence rush and Assamites made short work of the unhappy noncombat decks next to them but with another four decks featuring ranged combat combined with the capacity to deal out heavy pool-loss their day turned sour. With so many decks being able to torporize tablewins were evenly spread, and only one deck with a tablewin failed to make it to the finals. It soon became clear that ranged combat ruled the day and the final saw the followng players in order of play: Torbjorn Tzimisce ranged aggravated damage. Sten Toreador toolbox Assault Rifle intercept. Bea aus,ani,dom ranged combat press with some heavy bleed. Mattias Tremere anti theft and aggravated damage. Bakken Malkavian stealth voter. Of these players only Bea had managed to grab two tablewins. The final started with an alliance between Bakken and me (Sten) before the first vampire was influenced. Both of us depended on bloating and surrounded by intercepters we agreed upon playing Fifth Tradition crosstable rather than risk getting intercepted. Two Anarch Revolts quickly hit the table and people started stalling, mostly because bleeds were too simply rendered impotent or just soaked. After that the Malkavians and Toreador had a solid votelock and Torbjorn and Bea were quickly ousted by means of voting. That also ended the alliance between Malkavians and Toreador. What followed is best described as the tedious game from hell. Bakkens Malkavians managed to vote one of their members to Justicar, forced a Reversal of Fortune after which a seemingly endless number of Millicent Smith hit the table. A total of five vampires were sacrificed to her, and four of those were killed on purpose just to get the game moving. In the end the 50+ turn long game was won by the Toreador, not because of splendid play, but because permanent bloatingeffects combined with permanent bloodgain made me lose less pool during one turn of play than Bakkens one and a half KRC on average could take away. When his library was depleted it was simply impossible not to bleed him out, and I had been further helped by his switching places with Mattias during the process. At that time Mattias were out of vampires and as I had access to unblockable rescues from torpor I bled him out. The winning deck is a concept and to say that it needs tuning would be a grave understatement. I just wanted to prove that Toreador Grand Ball and Freak Drive was a viable option. Creator: Sten During Deckname: Mastering the unblockable loop Crypt Anneke Tor 10 Justicar AUS, CEL, PRE, dom +1 bleed. May attempt to block a vampire after other have failed or declined to do so. Francois Villon Tor 10 Prince CEL, AUS, PRE, chi, obf, pot +1 bleed. May steel two blood from a younger vampire as a +1 stealth D-action. Anson 4 Tor 8 Prince PRE, CEL, aus, dom While ready you get 2 master phase actions. Fatima al-Faqadi Ass 8 CEL, OBF, QUI, aus, for Once per combat before range may equip with a weapon from hand. Pay as normal. Felicia Mostrom Tor 5 AUS, CEL, pre Dorian Strack Tor 4 AUS, cel Colin Flynn Tor 3 aus, cel Isabel de Leon Tor 3 AUS Dieter Kleist Tor 2 aus Library 90 cards Masters 31 Fortitude 5 Blood Doll 8 Aching Beauty 2 Toreador Grand Ball 4 The Parthenon 3 Society Hunting Ground 1 Powerbase: Montreal 1 Information Highway 1 The Rack 1 Elysium: The Palace of Versailles 1 KRCG News Radio 1 Art Museum 1 Club Zombie 1 London Evening Star, Tabloid Newspaper 1 Actions 9 Graverobbing 2 Entrancement 1 The Third Tradition: Progeny 1 The Fifth Tradition: Hospitality 5 Political Actions 5 Parity Shift 3 Anathema 2 Action modifiers 6 Freak Drive 6 Reactions 18 The Second Tradition: Domain 8 Forced Awakening 3 Telepathic Misdirection 5 My Enemy's Enemy 1 Eagle's Sight 1 Equipment 9 Assault Rifle 5 Pier 13, Port of Baltimore 1 Palatial Estate 1 Sport Bike 1 IR Goggles 1 Retainers 4 J.S. Simmons, Esq. 1 Tasha Morgan 1 Resplendent Protector 1 Mr. Winthrop 1 Combat 8 Pursuit 3 Side Strike 3 Taste of Vitae 2 Sit tight and wait until you have brought out Anson and one small vampire and succesfully played both a Fortitude skillcard on Anson and a Toreador Grand Ball. Start playing unblockable actions with the help of Freak Drive, bloat, influence out more pairs of vampires and repeat until you tire of yourself. The next tournament in Gothenburg will be Swedish Open march 30. That tournament is also an EC qualifier and I bid you welcome to attend. Sten During

>Sit tight and wait until you have brought out Anson and one small >vampire and succesfully played both a Fortitude skillcard on Anson >and a Toreador Grand Ball. Start playing unblockable actions with >the help of Freak Drive, bloat, influence out more pairs of >vampires and repeat until you tire of yourself. > Influence out more pairs of vampires? Just to make sure, but you do know that the same vampire can serve as the tapper for multiple Grand Balls, right? Sounds like a cool deck. And I really liked the special guest appearance of Fatima! =) Halcyan 2

Halcyan 2 wrote: >>Sit tight and wait until you have brought out Anson and one small >>vampire and succesfully played both a Fortitude skillcard on Anson >>and a Toreador Grand Ball. Start playing unblockable actions with >>the help of Freak Drive, bloat, influence out more pairs of >>vampires and repeat until you tire of yourself. >> > >Influence out more pairs of vampires? Just to make sure, but you do know that >the same vampire can serve as the tapper for multiple Grand Balls, right? > Yep, but if haven't got the rules incorrectly I have to create a means to untap the tapper first, and this specific version doesn't include such cards. > > >Sounds like a cool deck. And I really liked the special guest appearance of >Fatima! =) > >Halcyan 2 > Heh :) I think it can be rebuilt into something that is actually really efficient. Probably remove all Parthenon and Aching Beauty in favour of, let's say, two Skin of Steel, two more Pursuit and either one additional Progeny or one Fast Reaction. After that I think the deck has reached a stage were 'tweaking' becomes an accurate term *grin*. Sten During

>Yep, but if haven't got the rules incorrectly I have to create a means >to untap the tapper first, >and this specific version doesn't include such cards. > ? Toreador Grand Ball [DS] Cardtype: Master Clan: Toreador Cost: 1 pool Master. Put this card in play. Choose two ready Toreador you control. The first Toreador cannot be blocked unless he or she attempts to bleed. The second Toreador does not untap as normal during the untap phase; tap the second Toreador. This card may be burned by any minion as a (D) action; Nosferatu get -1 stealth when attempting that action. I don't really see a untapped requirement. You play the Ball and have to choose two ready Toreador (not necessarily untapped). The "tapper vampire" becomes tapped by the card (effect) but does not need to "tap to" cause the effect to happen. Even if you did need to untap the "tapper," I'd suggest maybe Precognizant Mobility instead of wasting more time influencing out more "tappers." You already have plenty of Auspex and it can always serve as a poor man's Freak Drive (if you have none in your hand). Halcyan 2

Halcyan 2 wrote: >>Yep, but if haven't got the rules incorrectly I have to create a means >>to untap the tapper first, >>and this specific version doesn't include such cards. >> > >? > >Toreador Grand Ball [DS] >Cardtype: Master >Clan: Toreador >Cost: 1 pool >Master. >Put this card in play. Choose two ready Toreador you control. The first >Toreador cannot be blocked unless he or she attempts to bleed. The second >Toreador does not untap as normal during the untap phase; tap the second >Toreador. This card may be burned by any minion as a (D) action; Nosferatu get >-1 stealth when attempting that action. > As written above, 'tap the second Toreador'. It might be that I'm not allowed to chose an already tapped Toreador (ie then I wouldn't be able to tap it). > > > >I don't really see a untapped requirement. You play the Ball and have to choose >two ready Toreador (not necessarily untapped). The "tapper vampire" becomes >tapped by the card (effect) but does not need to "tap to" cause the effect to >happen. > See above. > > >Even if you did need to untap the "tapper," I'd suggest maybe Precognizant >Mobility instead of wasting more time influencing out more "tappers." You >already have plenty of Auspex and it can always serve as a poor man's Freak >Drive (if you have none in your hand). > >Halcyan 2 > Hmm, never thought of that card :) Another unblockable action to run in the loop. Two or three of those in the deck, and that would make it faster, so I can probably ditch yet some cards and make room for another two Freak Drive in order to make it even faster. Cutting away three Forced Awakening in favour of three Precoignizant Mobility. I think that will speed the deck up close to an enture turn during the course of an average game. Thanks :) Sten During

Sten During wrote: > Halcyan 2 wrote: > >Put this card in play. Choose two ready Toreador you control. The first > >Toreador cannot be blocked unless he or she attempts to bleed. The second > >Toreador does not untap as normal during the untap phase; tap the second > >Toreador. This card may be burned by any minion as a (D) action; Nosferatu get > >-1 stealth when attempting that action. > > As written above, 'tap the second Toreador'. It might be that I'm not > allowed to chose an already > tapped Toreador (ie then I wouldn't be able to tap it). "Choose two ready Toreador". Either or both "ready Toreador" may be tapped already. Then tap the second (if it is tapped already, leave it in its tapped state) as directed. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: >Sten During wrote: > >>Halcyan 2 wrote: >> >>>Put this card in play. Choose two ready Toreador you control. The first >>>Toreador cannot be blocked unless he or she attempts to bleed. The second >>>Toreador does not untap as normal during the untap phase; tap the second >>>Toreador. This card may be burned by any minion as a (D) action; Nosferatu get >>>-1 stealth when attempting that action. >>> >>As written above, 'tap the second Toreador'. It might be that I'm not >>allowed to chose an already >>tapped Toreador (ie then I wouldn't be able to tap it). >> > >"Choose two ready Toreador". >Either or both "ready Toreador" may be tapped already. >Then tap the second (if it is tapped already, leave it in its tapped state) as directed. > Wow, great, that sure speeds up the deck a LOT :) Sten During

> The final started with an alliance between Bakken and me (Sten) > before the first vampire was influenced. Both of us depended > on bloating and surrounded by intercepters we agreed upon playing > Fifth Tradition crosstable rather than risk getting intercepted. i don't understand the reason for this... you'd get intercepted anyway regardless who controlled the vampire being fifth'd... please explain, jds

freakdrivr wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm chosing a vampire that I'm not controlling, which ought to make it a D-action. Sten During

"Sten During" <ya...@netg.se> wrote in message news:3C93A6E4...@netg.se... > > >>The final started with an alliance between Bakken and me (Sten) > >>before the first vampire was influenced. Both of us depended > >>on bloating and surrounded by intercepters we agreed upon playing > >>Fifth Tradition crosstable rather than risk getting intercepted. > >> > > > >i don't understand the reason for this... you'd get intercepted anyway > >regardless who controlled the vampire being fifth'd... > > > > I'm chosing a vampire that I'm not controlling, which ought to make it a > D-action. > I wanna say you're wrong, as I can't remember 5th ever being used as a (D) action, and was always under the impression that it was undirected. However, since the ruling that an action could be dircted even if it didn't say (D) on it (a very old ruling), I can't think of any reason to fault your logic on it. That sucks.