Announcing the 3rd Expansion from White Wolf

We will be announcing this formally next week at a trade show, but thought you should hear it here first: "Bloodlines" will follow Final Nights and become the third expansion from White Wolf for Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's unique vampiric powers. Booster packs only. December 2001 release. All new disciplines, major new deck strategies... better stay on Santa's nice list! Steve Wieck White Wolf

Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: > Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, > Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, > Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's > unique vampiric powers. With only 120 or so new cards, detailing all of these would be an absolute nightmare. I would *strongly* recommend that White Wolf consider limiting the scope of the expansion so that several bloodlines can be fleshed out, rather than skimping on all of them. I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a personal opinion. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "Definitely a woman" - www.thespark.com/ Standard disclaimers apply to this post. Full written details available upon request. Your statutory rights are not affected.

"James Coupe" <jr...@srcf.ucam.org> ha scritto nel messaggio news:2w1yrxi...@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk... > Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: > > > Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, > > Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, > > Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's > > unique vampiric powers. > > With only 120 or so new cards, detailing all of these would be an > absolute nightmare. > > I would *strongly* recommend that White Wolf consider limiting the > scope of the expansion so that several bloodlines can be fleshed out, > rather than skimping on all of them. > > I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a > personal opinion. I agree 99% with James Coupe. The only 1% is about the True Brujah. Why not the True Brujah? Best Emiliano, Vekn Prince of Rome [ quoted text not captured ]

"tetragrammaton" <aedip...@hotmail.com> writes: > Why not the True Brujah? Temporis. The most fundamentally stupid discipline ever. "Let's go back and kill Caine!" *slap* [ quoted text not captured ]

I'd like to comment a little on the "Temporis sux" point of view, although it might be more rpg related.Temporis is surely one of the more powerful disciplines vampires could have, but there are some considerations to be taken into perspective. First of all the number of True Brujah in existence is extremely limited. Most of them are also Methuselahs or at least well established elders.Creatures of such stature would certainly have antagonists that'd be powerful enough to keep them at bay.As in the ccg, if anyone is overly powerful, others might join forces to destroy such a threat, as they fear him.In my experience, games that are obviously unbalanced towards one player are rarely won by him/her just because of the above reason.I believe that to be a realistic definition of things. Secondly, if one was to measure merely the "power" of a given special ability, be it a discipline, sphere, numina or whatever, he'd say that there are creatures far more powerful than vampires. Mages in the WW sense fall into that category and I'd say perhaps mummies too. It would be shame though to just ignore them and their role in the shaping of the World of Darkness just because they happen to be powerful. Finally, if we'd induldge on the example "let's go back in time and kill Caine", things wouldn't be so easy for three main reasons. That is if we consider the writings of the Book of Nod accurate. a) Caine has the ability to cancel the effect of any given discipline. b) He can create new disciplines on the spot so I'm sure he wouldn't mind creating one which would block the powers of Temporis. After all, it's not that it would be a pain in the ass for him ;-) c) If you'd assume that you could go back in time when Caine was still mortal you can't: everything has a limit, including Temporis. You can't go as far back in time as you want. If I remember correctly, that limit was a couple of thousand years, but then again I could be totally wrong about the exact number. Aris Lambrianidis

I will be writing my Brujah Antitribu newsletter tomorrow night at work. I thought some of you non-rpg players might appreciate some background information on the bloodlines mentioned by Steve, so I will spend part of that newsletter describing them and their potential for Jyhad. I have to say I agree with James somewhat, but am still really excited by the possibilities. Personally, I think White Wolf needs to reissue the unlimited set to allow newer players access to old standbys and the Camarilla clans. I have introduced MANY new players to the game, and most of them want to have access to cards like Eagle's Sight or the Tradition cards. Unless they are willing to order boxes online they are out of luck. Many of them are NOT able to do this, either because they do not keep credit cards or are discouraged by the ridiculous 'international' shipping charges to Canada (come on Potomac, Windsor is across a RIVER from the U.S.). Still, as someone who HAS the original cards, a greedy part of me wants to make a Blood Brothers deck. Cheers, WES

Wes wrote: > > Unless they are willing to order boxes online they are out of luck. Many of > them are NOT able to do this, either because they do not keep credit cards > or are discouraged by the ridiculous 'international' shipping charges to > Canada (come on Potomac, Windsor is across a RIVER from the U.S.). > Better bring it up with the US Postal service, the Canadian postal service, UPS, FedEx, the Canadian Customs office. Potomac is only passing along charges to you. I can send a 3 pound (1.5kg) - about the weight of a box of boosters - package to Detroit for only $4.76, and expect it to arrive in 6 days. I send a package to anywhere in Canada, and for it to arrive in 6 days, I have to use Airmail Parcel, which would cost $14.25. I dont' know why it is so much more expensive, and I don't even like Potomac that much, but I just thought the record should be set straight. Best - Chris -- chris shorb <www.vtesinla.org> (A V:TES site in development) prince of torrance, california Ultimate Disc - Hockey - Vampire the Eternal Struggle Ebay page <http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/vtessingles/> Selling singles <http://www.arcanelibrary.com> (LSJ said it was cool).

Steve Wieck wrote: > > > Booster packs only. I guess this is ok. Time to hurry up and reprint a Camarilla set... > > December 2001 release. 2 releases a year is perfect. Thanks Steve! [ quoted text not captured ]

>"Bloodlines" will follow Final Nights and become the third expansion from >White Wolf for Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. > >Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, >Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, >Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's >unique vampiric powers. Uh-oh. No offense, but this is my worst nightmare come true! While I'll give you guys at White Wolf the benefit of the doubt as to exactly what you're doing, but this is some razor thin ice that's being tread on. Jyhad is a very delicately balanced game (though you obviously know this). Adding even a single clan requires a great deal of analysis and forethought. But now we're adding...how many again? Maybe these new guys will just be ally cards? Or there will just be two or three vampires of such bloodlines (surely we couldn't handle a bunch of entirely new comprehensive clans!). Was this a well-thought plan or is it (what it "sounds" like) an attempt to cater to more of the RPG fans at the expense of the card game? I know you guys at White Wolf probably can't say anything more about this, but I REALLY REALLY REALLY think the players out there would like some sort of reassurance. I just read the announcement myself so I'll need more time to digest all the info. But after reading this, I think it's literally time for me to reconsider exactly how much time, money, and effort I want to be putting into Jyhad/VTES. I've stayed loyal to the game for the past 6-7 years but after this announcement, I'm seriously wondering if the game is going to be going downhill. And if the game is going to go bust, is it worth ordering a box of Final Nights or is it time to move on? (Just thinking aloud right now). As a sidenote to the True Brujah thing, it shouldn't be too bad anymore. Yeah, 2nd Edition Temporis was pathetic (the "Let's go kill Caine" thing). But from what I've seen, 3rd Edition Temporis is much more managable. Keeping my fingers crossed, - Halcyan 2 P.S. I honestly hope to whatever divinities are listening that maybe, just *maybe* there's been a messup from White Wolf. Maybe their calendar got screwed up and they think it's April 1st?

Halcyan 2 <halc...@aol.com> wrote: :>"Bloodlines" will follow Final Nights and become the third expansion from :>White Wolf for Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. :>Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, :>Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, :>Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's :>unique vampiric powers. : P.S. I honestly hope to whatever divinities are listening that maybe, just : *maybe* there's been a messup from White Wolf. Maybe their calendar got screwed : up and they think it's April 1st? I certainly hope so, adding Vampires from the fringe groups does not sound like a good idea, especially with that many Bloodlines and that limited card set. Count what you can fit into it? For my part, I could accept a set with Harbringers, Salubri and maybe even Baali because of the fact that they play a part in the RPG. Blood Brothers? Some Tzimisce creations here and there. What's the importance? None. Same applies to Ahrimanes, DoC, Gargoyles, Nagaraja and Trujah. They have absolutely no importance in WoD (imho), they do exist but they are not a major, not even a minor power - just random wanderers and freaks fit for interesting NPCs and players who want to go for the exotic value. As such, I don't like the idea of a Clan deck based around any of the Bloodlines mentioned above. The unfortunate result may be that a discipline combination will prove so succesful that we get to see a lot of decks based around the combination and frankly a Metuselah winning the Jyhad with Gargoyles, Ahrimanes, Samedi, True Brujah or what have you doesn't strike me as an idea that would fit into WoD. It's like.. like.. someone winning with Panders. Drat, moot point. Oh well, so far Jyhad's been balanced. I guess there's no reason why WW shouldn't do a good job even with Bloodlines. I'm also a bit curious how well will for instance the Salubri (of whom most are young neonates) and Harbringers (who are in the Metuselah class and should be able to eat most of the umm.. anyones for light midnight snack) balance? //T Hmm.. Baali stealth-bleed with the extra kick of Daimonion, Gargoyle fortitude/potence rush with extra kick from Visceratika, Blood Brothers bruise&bleed horde with extra kick from Sanguinus.. "My Trujah will bleed..", "I'll block.", "Whoops sorry, my Trujah bled you yesterday".

"James Coupe" <jr...@srcf.ucam.org> wrote > With only 120 or so new cards, detailing all of these would be an > absolute nightmare. > > I would *strongly* recommend that White Wolf consider limiting the > scope of the expansion so that several bloodlines can be fleshed out, > rather than skimping on all of them. It might work if the vampires have their 'special' disciplines represented not by additional cards or symbols but by text on the vampire themselves. Wes-rael Baali 6 capacity OBF PRE Can spend 1 blood to do 1R aggravated as a strike Daimonion need only be symbolically represented with the ability. This would work for me, again as long as a balance is maintained. > I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a > personal opinion. I have to agree here but I am REALLY curious how they will make a Temporis card that doesn't mess things up. Of all the new disciplines, Sanguinus seems like it would have the most interesting potential: Share the Pain Combat Sanguinus Cost: 1 blood This vampire can give any damage taken to any other vampire controlled by the same Methuselah who also has Sanguinus. That vampire must be able to spend the blood, take damage, be controlled, etc. I'm really excited by this news. I think the cards they have made for Sabbat War show both an honest attempt to maintain the game's balance and an appreciation for suggestions that have been made on this newsgroup. Whoever ends up designing these cards will have the collective wisdom of everyone here and I doubt their goal would be to alienate their biggest fans. Frankly, I doubt the bloodlines would be as big a draw for new players as the main clans anyway... If you look at vamps like the one I invented above, they would make for nice supplements to the existing clans. They don't HAVE to be as numerous as the existing clans. There's no reason why there need be the same number of Baali as there are Ventrue. You could have two Salubri and that's it. Keep them rare... keep them exotic... but make them useful for filling in 'gaps' or tweaking strategies. I think it is vital that White Wolf listen to what we say here... many of us know the game inside-out and could probably contribute a lot to the design of the new cards... directly or indirectly, with or without credit. I'd like to know that White Wolf will at least consider the potential ramifications of these new cards. I don't know how White Wolf decides who will assist in the design of these cards, but since I know that at least LSJ will be reading this post... I recommend that you include some of the more visual members of this forum. I'm sure through debate and proper playtesting these new cards will make the game better for their inclusion. Cheers, WES

Praise NAFTA. "Chris Shorb" <chr...@vtesinla.org> wrote in message news:3AB2FCB5...@vtesinla.org... [ quoted text not captured ]

I'd love to reply to the origional post by my crap news server has not picked it up yet. "James Coupe" <jr...@srcf.ucam.org> wrote in message news:2w1yrxi...@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk... > Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: > > > Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, > > Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, > > Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's > > unique vampiric powers. > > With only 120 or so new cards, detailing all of these would be an > absolute nightmare. Wow. I am blown away. Got over the initial excitement, disappointment and sat and thought about it for a while and I have come out 50 / 50. I do agree that 120 cards would seem too few to detail all of the above clans and their respective disciplines. Possibly concentrate on half of the above if they break into 2 semi-neatly (don't know the WoD that well). The process behind the above idea, I would guess is to include 3-5 of each clan as additions to other decks and stand alone strategies to complement cards and clans already existing, as opposed to 7-8 stand alone 'new clans'. Maybe one new full clan and 'support' vampires for the others ???? If produced this way, the fractious clan vampires would IMO function in the game as semi-allies (as someone mentioned) or gap-spanning vamps that add new flavour and disciplines to the game. An immediate problem that i can see in producing 'a few' vamps for each clan is that their new disciplines would be hard to cover. Do three or four Salubri warrant a full range of discipline cards, equipment and other goodies ? I honestly don't know. In one way it would encourage a LOT of new deck ideas and cross clan stuff but would the new expansion 'slots' be wasted with 10 - 12 new cards for each lost discipline ?? I am also of the opinion that VTES is the fine wine of the CCG world, it needs to sit and mature after change. Half of me thinks that stalling the release of further expansions after Final Nights would be a good thing. I think Final Nights _will_ change VTES for the better but it will also take time to settle down after this change. Hopefully, Final Nights will be the shot in the arm that will add 4 semi-new re-vamped, competitive clans to the tournament scene. Not sure how long it will take the game to find it's equilibrium after this. A lot of the appeal (for myself) about VTES is the fact that the card base is semi-limited so you are 'forced' to innovate and expand on new ideas or go back to old decks and add a new angle. It would be great to suddenly have a huge influx of new cards and toys to digest but I reckon it would dilute the game too much. > I would *strongly* recommend that White Wolf consider limiting the > scope of the expansion so that several bloodlines can be fleshed out, > rather than skimping on all of them. > > I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a > personal opinion. I totally understand why James, but surely Temporis could be tempered to include additional strikes, presses, discard pile sorting and other freakish time-related stuff rather than uberpowered timetwister, back in time and screw with creation type cards ? As a side note ~ Potence, Fortitude AND another potentially super powerful discipline. Owch. Rob <.........busting to write more but having to go out drinking for St Patricks Day with Barny Baker, William Lee, Jon Cooper and Steve Wright. I'ts a hard life> --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.237 / Virus Database: 115 - Release Date: 07/03/01

On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:04:49 -0500, Steve Wieck wrote: >Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, >Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, >Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's >unique vampiric powers. This sounds much more interesting than Final Nights for which you'll be lucky if I buy more than a starter. The appeal for a new player is that it's a chance to get in on the ground floor of something new. >Booster packs only. How will you handle the new stuff without a new rulebook/reference card? Will the new symbols be included in Final Nights? Andrew

Steve Wieck wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I think that these new blood lines will be perfect to enrich the functionality of the existing clans, because they actually share lots of disciplines with them. In addition the are great chances for combining two or more bloodlines in a single deck. Lets take a look, for instance, at the comparison between some of the following clans and bloodlines: Baali (PRE OBF dai ) => Followers of Set (PRE OBF ser) Kiasyd (OBT DOM myt) => Lasombra (OBT DOM pot) Nagaraja (DOM NEC aus) => Giovanni (DOM NEC pot) True Brujah (PRE POT tem) => Brujah or Brujah Antitribu (PRE POT cel) Blood Brothers (FOR POT san) => Gargoyles (FOR POT vik) Harbingers of Skulls (AUS FOR nec) => Salubri (AUS FOR val) ETC... On the other hand, I am sure that WW will keep the game balanced. The appearance of the bloodlines in V:TES is mainly a way of empowering the current clans and some types of decks (e.g., POT + FOR; PRE + OBF, and so on). Congratulations for your decision. Greetings, Damnans

To address a few concerns/points made here: 1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get my back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the set. 2. We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to make the appearence of these bloodlines and such be relatively representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint. 3. We are strongly considering having a new Camarilla base set be the first release of 2002, but there are a couple other contenders as well. I would be happy for anyone to start a new post and let us know the merits or demerits of such an idea based on anecdotal evidence of play in your area. We have some information which has led us to believe the old Jyhad base set is still widely available and relatively inexpensive, something that would make printing a new base set seem superfluous relative to other options. Did I miss anything? Regards, Steve

In article <uPIs6.104$qu2....@news1.atl>, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: >To address a few concerns/points made here: > >1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get >my >back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the >set. But even 160 cards sound way too few if you want to cover these bloodlines so that you can play a bloodline stand-alone without having to combine them with another bloodline/clan. This is how I want it to be. I very mcuh dislike the diea of ahving to mix with other clans to make them playable. I'd like them to be like any other clan is in VTES. If this will be the case, then I'm all happy and really looking forward to this new expansion! But if not, I'm not as happy. I don't see much of a point in having say 6 vampires of each bloodline couples with say 8 new discipline cards. If this is WW's idea, then I hope they will reconsider and cut down on new bloodlines introduced to say, only 4-5 new ones (for now) and make them fully playable as stand-alone. I've never understood the idea of making things half-done. >2. We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to >make the appearence of these bloodlines and such be relatively >representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them >make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new >strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint. I have strong faith in WW and believe you when you say it :-) I've not been disappointed before when it comes to VTES, and I doubt I will in the future either. Just don't do wallpaper cards like Twisting the Knife and the like ;-) (and pleease do not reprint wallpaper cards in Final Nights). >3. We are strongly considering having a new Camarilla base set be the first >release of 2002, but there are a couple other contenders as well. I would be >happy for anyone to start a new post and let us know the merits or demerits >of such an idea based on anecdotal evidence of play in your area. We have >some information which has led us to believe the old Jyhad base set is still >widely available and relatively inexpensive, something that would make >printing a new base set seem superfluous relative to other options. I'm not too sure. I think our most of our playgroup would like it to be reprinted, although I myself don't really care if it is or not (but the enw players do). However I think it pretty much depends on what the other option is really! :-) > >Did I miss anything? > >Regards, >Steve > > > > > > > ----- Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free (anonymous) Usenet News via the Web ----- http://newsone.net/ -- Free reading and anonymous posting to 60,000+ groups NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam. If this or other posts made through NewsOne.Net violate posting guidelines, email ab...@newsone.net

>I thought some of you non-rpg players might appreciate some background >information on the bloodlines mentioned by Steve, so I will spend part of >that newsletter describing them and their potential for Jyhad. It's greatly appreciated, I'll look forward to your newsletter! [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <_Pxs6.37754$6W.37...@news.infostrada.it>, tetragrammaton <aedip...@hotmail.com> writes: > >"James Coupe" <jr...@srcf.ucam.org> ha scritto nel messaggio >news:2w1yrxi...@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk... >> Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: >> >> > Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, >Baali, >> > Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, >> > Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each >faction's >> > unique vampiric powers. >> >> With only 120 or so new cards, detailing all of these would be an >> absolute nightmare. >> >> I would *strongly* recommend that White Wolf consider limiting the >> scope of the expansion so that several bloodlines can be fleshed out, >> rather than skimping on all of them. >> >> I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a >> personal opinion. > > >I agree 99% with James Coupe. >The only 1% is about the True Brujah. >Why not the True Brujah? >Best >Emiliano, Vekn Prince of Rome >> I agree here as wel. True Brujah should be included I think. However I'm not so sure some of the other bloodlines would be that great to play (like daughters of cacaphony) but maybe... As long as all bloodlines are fully fleshed out they can all be included, but else I hope WW cut down on the number of new bloolines cut down. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <20010317012204...@ng-fe1.aol.com>, Halcyan 2 <halc...@aol.com> writes: >>"Bloodlines" will follow Final Nights and become the third expansion from >>White Wolf for Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. >> >>Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, >>Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, >>Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's >>unique vampiric powers. > >Uh-oh. No offense, but this is my worst nightmare come true! > >While I'll give you guys at White Wolf the benefit of the doubt as to exactly >what you're doing, but this is some razor thin ice that's being tread on. > >Jyhad is a very delicately balanced game (though you obviously know this). >Adding even a single clan requires a great deal of analysis and forethought. >But now we're adding...how many again? Maybe these new guys will just be ally >cards? Or there will just be two or three vampires of such bloodlines (surely >we couldn't handle a bunch of entirely new comprehensive clans!). Was this a >well-thought plan or is it (what it "sounds" like) an attempt to cater to more >of the RPG fans at the expense of the card game? Err exactly why couldn't we handle new comprehensive clans? I don't see any reason why not. Each new bloodline have only one new discipline, and as long as it's balanced (which I am totally sure it will be) I don't see how this is bad at all. The thing I'm actually worried about is that the bloodlines aren't comprehensive. If you have to mix them with other clans to play them then this isn't a good idea really because you loose the "feeling" of the game and the bloodlines won't be that special. > >I know you guys at White Wolf probably can't say anything more about this, but >I REALLY REALLY REALLY think the players out there would like some sort of >reassurance. I just read the announcement myself so I'll need more time to >digest all the info. But after reading this, I think it's literally time for me >to reconsider exactly how much time, money, and effort I want to be putting >into Jyhad/VTES. I've stayed loyal to the game for the past 6-7 years but after >this announcement, I'm seriously wondering if the game is going to be going >downhill. And if the game is going to go bust, is it worth ordering a box of >Final Nights or is it time to move on? (Just thinking aloud right now). Well there's a lot of new and old players who would like to buy this new set I'm sure. If you don't want to spenbd more money then I don't think you should stop others from doing so still. I mean, nothing prevents you from still playing with the cards you have and enjoy the game. Assuming the new bloodlines won't unbalance the game then you will eb able to fight the new bloodlines under the same equal conditions as you fight Sabbat with the Camarilla for example. I very much doubt these new bloodlines will unbalance the game, simply because 67% of the bloodlines' disciplines will consist of already existing disciplines (who aren't unbalanced) and I can't see how the new ones will be more powerful if they're playtested well. The history of SW shows this I think, there wasn't any new cards that were too powerful IMO, and the new disciplines that came with Sabbat were all balanced as well. > >As a sidenote to the True Brujah thing, it shouldn't be too bad anymore. Yeah, >2nd Edition Temporis was pathetic (the "Let's go kill Caine" thing). But from >what I've seen, 3rd Edition Temporis is much more managable. Exactly my thoughts too. Even if Temporis were super-almighty-powerful in RPG it doesn't mean the cards in VTES will be. I am convinced they won't be. > >Keeping my fingers crossed, >- Halcyan 2 > >P.S. I honestly hope to whatever divinities are listening that maybe, just >*maybe* there's been a messup from White Wolf. Maybe their calendar got screwed >up and they think it's April 1st? [ quoted text not captured ]

A few question to mr. Stewart Wieck So, we're talking about the introduction of: Ahrimanes Baali Blood Brothers Daughters of Cacophony Gargoyles Harbingers of Skulls Kiasyd Nagaraja Salubri Samedi True Brujah thats 11 new bloodlines. We know from the past that it is difficult to make a good deck based on Assamite and Setites because of the low number (10) of vampires available. Thus, I think it is a fairly safe bet to assume that introducing clans/bloodlines with fewer vampires than 10 will make it virtually impossible to make a deck based on just that clan (like making a City Gangrel deck before SW). So, if it is the intention that players should be able to make single-clan decks at least 110 of the cards in bloodlines should be vampires (and even at that, it would be difficult). My first question is whether this is the intention or not? My second question is - and I know that many players are dying to know - will the disciplines introduced in bloodlines get their own cards or will they be represented as special abilities. Or both? (Andrew Weston has written about this) Final question: Why no Cappadocian? You can't print Alicia without printing Lameth. And to tell you the truth - I cannot think of anything that would get more players into the game than you printing the characters from Robert Weinberg's two trilogies! Every roleplayer I know (and I know a few) has loved 'Masquerade of the Red Death'. Thank you for your time Lasse

"Rob Treasure" <Rob.Tr...@btinternet.com> writes: > disciplines. Possibly concentrate on half of the above if they break into 2 > semi-neatly (don't know the WoD that well). They kind of do. There are a few Sabbat related clans there, which could be used extensively. > I am also of the opinion that VTES is the fine wine of the CCG world, it > needs to sit and mature after change. Half of me thinks that stalling the > release of further expansions after Final Nights would be a good thing. I > think Final Nights _will_ change VTES for the better but it will also take > time to settle down after this change. Indeed. What might be better is: Final Nights: Mid 2001 Camarilla Base Set: February 2002 Bloodlines Expansion: Halloween 2002 Such that we get new cards, but nothing *huge*, next year. > > I'd also ask that the True Brujah are nuked from orbit, but that's a > > personal opinion. > > I totally understand why James, but surely Temporis could be tempered to > include additional strikes, presses, discard pile sorting and other freakish > time-related stuff rather than uberpowered timetwister, back in time and > screw with creation type cards ? It could. But it's just an instinctive reaction to the True Brujah. > As a side note ~ Potence, Fortitude AND another potentially super powerful > discipline. Owch. Indeed. [ quoted text not captured ]

Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes: > This sounds much more interesting than Final Nights for which you'll > be lucky if I buy more than a starter. The appeal for a new player is > that it's a chance to get in on the ground floor of something new. With almost nothing. Do the maths. 120 cards. 8-10 "clans". A new player is utterly, utterly screwed by such. > >Booster packs only. > > How will you handle the new stuff without a new rulebook/reference > card? Will the new symbols be included in Final Nights? How it was done in Sabbat seems fine - a small rules insert in boosters. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Andrew 'Wes' Weston" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:98va3...@enews3.newsguy.com... > Praise NAFTA. The crummy Canadian postal service was like this before NAFTA you clueless guy. It has always been crummy. Sheesh. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Lasse Winther Wehner" <l...@get2net.dk> wrote in message news:AEMs6.126$fz2....@news.get2net.dk... > A few question to mr. Stewart Wieck Steve or Stephan, Stewart's my brother. Confusingly similar I know; sadistic parents I suppose. > > So, we're talking about the introduction of: >So, if it is the intention that players should > be able to make single-clan decks at least 110 of the cards in bloodlines > should be vampires (and even at that, it would be difficult). My first > question is whether this is the intention or not? I understand this concern but...we're really focusing on Final Nights still, so I'm not going to go into too much detail on Bloodlines design yet beyond what I've already said. > > My second question is - and I know that many players are dying to know - > will the disciplines introduced in bloodlines get their own cards or will > they be represented as special abilities. Or both? (Andrew Weston has > written about this) > No comment yet. > Final question: Why no Cappadocian? You can't print Alicia without printing > Lameth. And to tell you the truth - I cannot think of anything that would > get more players into the game than you printing the characters from Robert > Weinberg's two trilogies! Every roleplayer I know (and I know a few) has > loved 'Masquerade of the Red Death'. Cappadocians? We have to save something for V:TES Dark A... whoops! was that my out-loud voice? Steve

"Lasse Winther Wehner" <l...@get2net.dk> wrote > Final question: Why no Cappadocian? You can't print Alicia without printing > Lameth. And to tell you the truth - I cannot think of anything that would > get more players into the game than you printing the characters from Robert > Weinberg's two trilogies! Every roleplayer I know (and I know a few) has > loved 'Masquerade of the Red Death'. I didn't particularly like that series though I did read all three. It is not considered World of Darkness canon, which is probably a good thing considering the revelations from the last book. If you do like the series though, I do recommend the clan novels... a lot of people poo-poo them but I enjoyed the run. Cheers, WES

"Kevin M." <kjme...@PLEASENOSPAMMEhome.com> wrote > The crummy Canadian postal service was like this before NAFTA you > clueless guy. It has always been crummy. Sheesh. Canadian customs is crummy. Canadian customs are the reason for a lot of the surcharges, and were 'supposed' to be either eliminated or lowered by NAFTA... So I don't think the postal service is really the problem in this case, but thanks for the unnecessary flame anyway.

On Sat, 17 Mar 2001 04:17:07 +0200, "Sithlord" <sith...@hol.gr> wrote: > I'd like to comment a little on the "Temporis sux" point of view, >although it might be more rpg related.Temporis is surely one of the more >powerful disciplines vampires could have, but there are some considerations >to be taken into perspective. > The whole concept of True Brujah was cool, from a philosophical point of view. But why they had to go and give them a new discipling, let alone something as silly and munchkinable as Temporis, is ridiculous. Ruins the flavour of the clan, and way to open to power abuse. Besides, what the heck is a vampire game doing with time travel disciplines????? Bah. T [ quoted text not captured ]

Not considered WoD canon by whom? They are by me, and most people around here knows who really runs clan "Tremere". And the clan novels? Come on... Lasse "Andrew 'Wes' Weston" <gh...@mnsi.net> skrev i en meddelelse news:990fg...@enews3.newsguy.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

"Lasse Winther Wehner" <l...@get2net.dk> wrote in message news:BgRs6.304$fz2....@news.get2net.dk... > Not considered WoD canon by whom? They are by me, and most people around > here knows who really runs clan "Tremere". And the clan novels? Come on... > > Lasse They are not considered canon by White Wolf... but that doesn't mean a heck of a lot really. If you use that background for a game, I doubt White Wolf is going to stop you. However, for things like Jyhad they would be unlikely to be used. Some of the information from the Weinberg novels has been directly contradicted by later WW material, like it or not. I liked the clan novels personally, but as I said, many did not. A few of them didn't appeal to me, but for the most part I enjoyed them. If I had a complaint it would be that each novel was too short and the overall story did not conclude to my satisfaction (or really conclude at all for that matter). Cheers, WES

Wes <gh...@nospammnsi.net> wrote: : "Lasse Winther Wehner" <l...@get2net.dk> wrote in message : news:BgRs6.304$fz2....@news.get2net.dk... :> Not considered WoD canon by whom? They are by me, and most people around :> here knows who really runs clan "Tremere". And the clan novels? Come on... : They are not considered canon by White Wolf... but that doesn't mean a heck : of a lot really. If you use that background for a game, I doubt White Wolf : is going to stop you. The books we're hilarious and amusing to read. Epic to the top and in my opinion had very little to do with the spirit of WoD. They could be a prime example of "Ok, let's play some high power game for change. Make yourselves solid concepts and.. Yes? Umm.. You want to play an Ante ghoul? Eh.. Yes? And you want to play a cool Assamite bodyguard chick? With some special but-kicking powers since ordinary Assimites suck? Hey, guys.." As much as I dislike the endless discussions of the importance (and the lack of such importance) with Red Death I'm relieved that WW has declared the trilogy Anathema :) //T

>It might work if the vampires have their 'special' disciplines represented >not by additional cards or symbols but by text on the vampire themselves. I agree that this method is perhaps the best and most practical at least for the short term. Sort of how the Assamites have a diablerie restriction due to card text, special disciplines (and penalties) could be represented through the card text. However this might cause a problem if one day White Wolf does want to make the bloodline a full-fledged clan. It's sort of like the present situation with Gargoyle Slave and Blood Brother Ambush (which I think might have been created without complete forethought). If they print Daimonion as card text, that means that it would be extremely difficult if they ever want to make Daimonion a *true* discipline. But then again, it'll make Seeds of Corruption all the more powerful, eh? I'm curious as to how these bloodlines will be treated in regards to "clan" status. Do they have a clan? Does the bloodline count as a clan for Clan Impersonation? Also want happens when the Baali with Daimonion text uses The Embrace. In a situation analogous to the Assamites, the new Embracee wouldn't have the penalty or beneficial text. Now I'm not adverse to eventually having the bloodlines as full-fledged "clans" that you can make a deck around. But the problem I have with Bloodlines is that it introduces way too many of them and way too soon. I would have preferred introducing new "clans" in a style similar to previous expansions (around two new clans at a time). Halcyan 2

>Well there's a lot of new and old players who would like to buy this new set >I'm sure. If you don't want to spenbd more money then I don't think you >should stop others from doing so still. I mean, nothing prevents you from >still playing with the cards you have and enjoy the game. While I admit I might have jumped the gun a bit, I did make it explicitly clear that I was simply posting my *initial* reaction. And I didn't think that by, making some valid points and posting some valid concerns, that I would be instantly accused of "[stopping] others from [buying the new set]." In fact, I am actually quite offended by such a baseless accusation of selfishness. Similarly, I don't really need a lecture about how to spend my money. Guess what? I already *know* that I don't HAVE to spend my money on VTES if I don't want to. Halcyan 2

>Err exactly why couldn't we handle new comprehensive clans? I don't see any >reason why not. Each new bloodline have only one new discipline, and as long >as it's balanced (which I am totally sure it will be) I don't see how this is >bad at all. Well the main problem I have with this is the discipline spread. From Damnan's later posting: Baali (PRE OBF dai ) => Followers of Set (PRE OBF ser) Kiasyd (OBT DOM myt) => Lasombra (OBT DOM pot) Nagaraja (DOM NEC aus) => Giovanni (DOM NEC pot) True Brujah (PRE POT tem) => Brujah or Brujah Antitribu (PRE POT cel) Blood Brothers (FOR POT san) => Gargoyles (FOR POT vik) Harbingers of Skulls (AUS FOR nec) => Salubri (AUS FOR val) Currently, in regards to vampire selection, most clans have primarily their clan and the respective anti-clan (though not for Lasombra, Tzimisce, and the Independents) to draw from. Also, you can also get good vampires from a clan that shares two disciplines you have (Brujah, and Toreador if you go cel/pre, or Giovanni/Lasombra if you go dom/pot.). Now by adding all these bloodlines, some clans are going to benefit a lot more than the others, which may make vampire selection a bit skewed. While the Independents and the Sabbat clans could use the help, how about the !Ventrue that benefit from both the Salubri and Harbringers (all three share aus/for). And the True Brujah, while lacking Celerity, will still significantly bolster the Brujah and !Brujah in terms of pot/pre. On the other hands, some clans like the Gangrel and !Malks are completely left out, which may further disadvantage them. Also, unless the Kiasyd or Nagaraja are intentionally made to intertwine with the Lasombra or Giovanni, the two latter clans may start to lose some of their prestige since their signature disciplines aren't so special or unique anymore. Necromancy, in particular, is quite common on many bloodlines (the Harbringers also have it), so this might really detract from the theme of the Giovanni. To be honest, if new clans/bloodlines were to be introduced, I think it would have been best to start with the antitribu of the Independent and Sabbat clans. Assamite antitribu, Ravnos antitribu, Serpents of the Light, and something for the Giovanni. And similarly, we could have Lasombra antitribu, and (?) maybe a couple Tzimisce antitribu (though they're really rare). This way, you don't worry about adding any new disciplines, and you don't have to worry about unbalancing the other clans too much as well. As an additional sidenote, I'm wondering how they handle Valeren if they're going to use it as a discipline. Are they going to bother with the Warrior vs. Healer paths? Also, I'm actually kind of surprised they went with Salubri (as opposed to something like Salubri Antitribu). I can just see the text on all the Salubri "Any Tremere may enter combat with the Salubri as a (D) action..." Halcyan 2

>1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get >my >back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the >set. I was going to say that Steve originally said "over 120 new cards" as well, but he already cleared it up. Thanks for the clarification! >2. We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to >make the appearence of these bloodlines and such be relatively >representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them >make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new >strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint. Thanks for the assurance as well. While I understand that you don't want to make the new cards wallpaper, I'm just worried that you might make too many old cards wallpaper instead. I'm just worried that this might go the route of Magic, where in order to attract more and more people, every expansion has all these *new* powers and all these new power cards that are so much better than the old-new power cards introduced by the last expansion. This situation is just too analagous to an upwards spiraling arms race. I know that White Wolf is in business to make money, but as I said before, I'm just slightly worried whether this introduction of "newer, better, larger" stuff might get out of hand. Well, it's nice to know that you're staying involved with this thread Mr. Wieck. Keep up the good work! Halcyan 2

>> Final question: Why no Cappadocian? You can't print Alicia without >printing >> Lameth. And to tell you the truth - I cannot think of anything that would >> get more players into the game than you printing the characters from >Robert >> Weinberg's two trilogies! Every roleplayer I know (and I know a few) has >> loved 'Masquerade of the Red Death'. > >Cappadocians? We have to save something for V:TES Dark A... whoops! was that >my out-loud voice? I wouldn't mind seeing a Cappadocian myself. Anyway, Bloodlines is already inculding both Baali and the Salubri, which are mainly Dark Ages clans as well. On a completely different note, I'm curious as to how they handle the Baali. The Sabbat Inquisitor card (which is supposed to combat infernalism) currently burns crypt cards with Thaumaturgy. And all these "Infernal" cards already deal with Tremere and Thaumaturgy. So are the Baali going to be given the Thaumaturgy discipline. It seems kind of silly that the Sabbat Inquisitor could burn some Gangrel or Tremere who just happens to have Thaumaturgy, while the actual infernalist 8-cap Baali (who doesn't technically have "Thaumaturgy") gets off scot-free. I know the card game isn't supposed to be realistic but still... Halcyan 2

>Not considered WoD canon by whom? They are by me, and most people around >here knows who really runs clan "Tremere". And the clan novels? Come on... The Masquerade of the Red Death Triology is not considered to be canon material by White Wolf. (Though interestingly enough, they still used a lot of the characters, etc.). The clan novels are officially considered quasi-canon. They aren't supposed to be canon word by word, but overall what happens in them is supposed to have happened in the WoD. Thus far, the only fiction that is considered canon is indeed the clan novels (though the new Tremere clan trilogy might be canon as well). Halcyan 2

>What might be better is: > >Final Nights: Mid 2001 >Camarilla Base Set: February 2002 >Bloodlines Expansion: Halloween 2002 > >Such that we get new cards, but nothing *huge*, next year. I actually like this (James') schedule a lot better. It's just that there's this conservative aspect of me that would really rather prefer to take things nice and slow as opposed to sudden and drastic. Anyway, vampires (especially elders) ARE rather static anyway... Halcyan 2

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote [ quoted text not captured ] I third this motion... I sooooo badly want to see some of these Bloodlines, but ultimately I'd really rather see more new players, and I think based on what we have so far discussed, a schedule like this makes more sense. Actually, if Mr. Wieck was not just teasing us heh, using a Dark Ages base set might be a happy medium too. If it contained the same basic cards such as the traditions and had some new vampires of all clans (or at least the Cammie core seven), that might make a good introduction to the game as a whole. I'm not sure if it would have the same appeal to new players but I suspect it would. Most of the RPG players I know have a lot of respect for the Dark Ages WoD setting and would probably get off on seeing it portrayed in cards. You could even re-print the cards with medieval themes heh... Sport Bike = Fast Horse, Thrown Car = Thrown Wagoncart, RPG Launcher = Hand-Held Ballista. Ok, now I'm just being silly. Need sleep. WES

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> > Now by adding all these bloodlines, some clans are going to benefit a lot more > than the others, which may make vampire selection a bit skewed. While the > Independents and the Sabbat clans could use the help, how about the !Ventrue > that benefit from both the Salubri and Harbringers (all three share aus/for). > And the True Brujah, while lacking Celerity, will still significantly bolster > the Brujah and !Brujah in terms of pot/pre. On the other hands, some clans like > the Gangrel and !Malks are completely left out, which may further disadvantage > them. Also, unless the Kiasyd or Nagaraja are intentionally made to intertwine > with the Lasombra or Giovanni, the two latter clans may start to lose some of > their prestige since their signature disciplines aren't so special or unique > anymore. Necromancy, in particular, is quite common on many bloodlines (the > Harbringers also have it), so this might really detract from the theme of the > Giovanni. I'm thinking of vampires like Jimmy Dunn. The Baali example I used could be used much the same way in Setite decks as Jimmy shows up in any !Brujah/Brujah decks. You wouldn't NEED a whole bunch of vampires; just the ones that fit in with your theme. This can only help some clans I think. > To be honest, if new clans/bloodlines were to be introduced, I think it would > have been best to start with the antitribu of the Independent and Sabbat clans. > Assamite antitribu, Ravnos antitribu, Serpents of the Light, and something for > the Giovanni. And similarly, we could have Lasombra antitribu, and (?) maybe a > couple Tzimisce antitribu (though they're really rare). This way, you don't > worry about adding any new disciplines, and you don't have to worry about > unbalancing the other clans too much as well. I agree completely. Though thematically the Ravnos Antitribu, Serpents et al would be just as rare as !Tzimisce and !Lasombra. For the game mechanics sake, this makes sense though. I mean, the Harbingers will fit in with the Giovanni, even though they are (im)mortal enemies, just because they share the same key discipline. Come to think of it, there isn't much reason for Brujah and !Brujah to work together either. > As an additional sidenote, I'm wondering how they handle Valeren if they're > going to use it as a discipline. Are they going to bother with the Warrior vs. > Healer paths? Also, I'm actually kind of surprised they went with Salubri (as > opposed to something like Salubri Antitribu). I can just see the text on all > the Salubri "Any Tremere may enter combat with the Salubri as a (D) action..." > > Halcyan 2 I'd be interested in seeing a 'healing' discipline myself. Sometimes in this game it would be nice to have a good doctor available. Cheers, WES

"Andrew 'Wes' Weston" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:990f8...@enews3.newsguy.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Well, let's see. I've been sending packages to Canada and receiving them from Canada since *BEFORE* NAFTA, and the service hasn't changed notably. So, IMHO, you began the conversation by giving out incorrect information, and I corrected the information, albeit possibly tersely. Kevin J. Mergen, Prince of Madison, WI (remove PLEASENOSPAMME for direct reply) "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

"Kevin M." <kjme...@PLEASENOSPAMMEhome.com> wrote > Well, let's see. I've been sending packages to Canada and receiving them > from Canada since *BEFORE* NAFTA, and the service hasn't changed notably. > So, IMHO, you began the conversation by giving out incorrect information, > and I corrected the information, albeit possibly tersely. You're right. I shouldn't have blamed Potomac for my shipping woes... it just sucks that I can't get my Jyhad fix without paying through the nose, put it that way. However, I can admit to being wrong without having to be insulted. Oh well, let's just agree that the situation sucks and it's unlikely to change, unless you want to help me smuggle game-supplies across the Detroit river? Nah... Cheers, WES

>I'm just worried that this might go the route of > Magic, where in order to attract more and more people, every expansion has all > these *new* powers and all these new power cards that are so much better than > the old-new power cards introduced by the last expansion. This situation is > just too analagous to an upwards spiraling arms race. I know that White Wolf is > in business to make money, but as I said before, I'm just slightly worried > whether this introduction of "newer, better, larger" stuff might get out of > hand. With the caveat that I am still by no means an expert on V:TES game play, I do believe that the game has a lot of major deck strategies yet to be fully explored. It seems to me that 90% of the constructed decks fall into a handful of strategies and then find wonderful and endless tactical permutations of those strategies. The other 10% try to utilize other strategies but there just aren't the card designs out there to make them effective, yet. So, I think that there are plenty of ways to explore and bolster alternate deck strategies rather than going in and one-upping the current strategies with the type of expansion after expansion arms race you're talking about. New can be different not better. For example, while new expansions might offer new tactical possibilities to Weenie Stealth/Bleed deck strategies, I can't imagine releasing cards that would provide mathematically superior, but otherwise essentially identical, tactics to those already in print for this basic deck strategy. However, I do believe there are aspects of the game, such as the Edge, that can be the basis of competitive deck strategies if the cards are available to explore them. Steve

Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:tY3t6.68$045....@news1.atl... > However, I do believe there are aspects of the game, such as the Edge, that > can be the basis of competitive deck strategies if the cards are available > to explore them. > > Steve Hmmm... did we just give something away.... ideas, people??? oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster VEKN Prince of Caledon

"Wes" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:991h3...@enews2.newsguy.com... [ quoted text not captured ] So, if I buy you some product here in the US, then ship it up to Canada, do you have to pay customs on it? I mean, I can get you boxes of Jyhad here for ~$30 US. How is it that they know to charge you a tariff on a box that simply has your name on it? Is there some way Canadians get around this, other than driving to the USA? If so, let me know. :) > Cheers, > WES > -- Kevin J. Mergen, Prince of Madison, WI (remove PLEASENOSPAMME for direct reply) "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, "The Art of War" "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

"Steve Wieck" <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:uPIs6.104$qu2....@news1.atl... > To address a few concerns/points made here: [snip solid reassuring answers] Great news all round Steve, thanks again from myself and some good friends who don't have NG access, for all the work since the takeover. > Did I miss anything? Only the question of flooding. A few people have voiced the concern that VTES could become a 'different' game if too many (if there is such a thing) expansions are released in too short a time. I am sort of arguing with myself here a little as I personally think the changes that future expansions inevitably bring _will_ be a good thing (as you have proven to the player base that WW have both the tools and inclination to further VTES) but at the same time, I am apprehensive that the next year or two may see too many expansions effectively diluting the game into early days Magic. Basically I think I know the answer to my own question as you guys obviously need to make the game financially viable but I guess I am just after a bit of reassurance. Thanks again Steve Rob. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.237 / Virus Database: 115 - Release Date: 07/03/01

>1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get >my >back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the >set. Cut the bloodlines in half and increase the size of the set to 300 and you probably fit what people want. >2. We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to >make the appearence of these bloodlines and such be relatively >representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them >make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new >strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint. I don't have the original post, so I'm responding to this one about the expansion in general. Keeping in mind that details are highly likely to change, here's what I'm looking at based on what I've noticed so far. I figure that there needs to be at least 8 vampires to play a mono-"clan" deck. I foresee approximately zero chance of this many vampires of each bloodline coming in. Therefore, the bloodlines are not currently intended to be used to build mono-bloodline decks. So, they could serve one of several purposes. They could be a first look and be filled out later. As a primary strategy, that seems unlikely. There could be some concept of "all bloodline" decks mixing the various bloodlines together to build cohesive decks. *Bloodline* could be a trait on the new vamps, with specific rules or cards that apply to them, which would make it easier to field a bloodline deck. My current leaning is towards them being introduced as supplements, with little sense of them standing on their own. A secondary strategy could be to fill the specific bloodlines out or just add more bloodlines later, but at first, they offer a twist to decks that use their "disciplines". The biggest drawback to this would seem to be any new disciplines. Is it worth adding the disciplines to the game if they disciplines amount to about 5 cards plus a skill card? Jyhad had 10 disciplines. This one expansion is adding how many? While it's possible to not add some of them, I think there would be enormous disappointment if the bloodlines didn't have their RPG disciplines. I could see not having 10 cards for each discipline, but it seems to me that there's little point to having a new discipline with less than 4 cards. One person noted that !Ravnos, SoL, !Assamites were missing. This suggests to me that there is a possibility that all of these might be found in Final. This, in fact, would be my preference. I never understood why there wasn't an enormous pressure to finish off the 13 clans of the Sabbat (first edition). Besides finishing off the Sabbat, it would have been a massive boost to three underdeveloped clans. I never understood why killing two birds wasn't in everyone's best interest. Speaking of killing some birds, since Thaum is a back up discipline for at least the Assamites (I vaguely recall maybe the Settites), a number of Final vamps could have Thaum as an offclan and we could see some new Thaum cards, which would be nice. I have to agree with a few other posters. V:TES seems to lend itself to orderly expansion. For instance, while adding a couple new disciplines in a small expansion and double that amount in a large expansion don't raise an eyebrow, adding 8? in a small expansion seems reckless. Seems to me that the V:TES player base is interested in new stuff but is not quite as fickle or short sighted as the player bases of other games. Summary: Final Nights (as it affects further expansion) - Hope for the completion of the Sabbat sect and supplement to Thaumaturgy. Bloodlines - What is the purpose? How can it fulfill that purpose? How revolutionary rather than evolutionary is it? Hope that the disciplines and the vamps fit smoothly into the existing game. Reprints - Hope that certain cards unique to the Jyhad/V:TES base set get reprinted at some point. Tired of hunting for cards like Eagle Sight.

Ian Lee wrote: > Summary: > Final Nights (as it affects further expansion) - Hope for the completion of the > Sabbat sect and supplement to Thaumaturgy. From previous official statements: Final Nights is for the rounding out of the four main independent clans and their unique disciplines. There will, however, be some Camarilla and Sabbat vampires in the set, as well as a few cards for the rest of the disciplines. It will not serve as a completion of the Sabbat sect (if anything could - nothing's really ever "complete" in a CCG), nor will it serve as a supplement to Thaumaturgy (although there may be one or a couple of thaumaturgy cadrs in there, just like there may be one or a couple of animalism cards). -- 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/

"Kevin M." <kjme...@PLEASENOSPAMMEhome.com> wrote > So, if I buy you some product here in the US, then ship it up to Canada, > do you have to pay customs on it? I mean, I can get you boxes of Jyhad > here for ~$30 US. How is it that they know to charge you a tariff on a > box that simply has your name on it? Is there some way Canadians get > around this, other than driving to the USA? If so, let me know. :) On this, I claim to be a 'clueless guy'. AFAIK, any item that comes across the border is subject to customs, and therefore subject to tariffs. The PC government that placed Canada in NAFTA lied to the Canadian people (not a surprise surely... but still irks me). We were told that NAFTA would allow free access across the border of both people and merchandise. So you were right in saying that it is the same shit before as it was after NAFTA. I don't know what Canada Customs' system is for putting tariffs/customs charges on stuff coming across the border is. I know they can do something but I've never ordered stuff unless I have a friendly Michigander to assist me. If I recall correctly, the box needs to be labeled clearly as to the contents... and certain things receive heavier scrutiny than others. Fruit is one such item for some weird reason. Another is certain types of literature. The archaic laws/mores about homosexuality still exist in the form of restricting homoerotic literature/film from entering Canada (this may be old news... not sure). An old girlfriend of mine used to get mailed drugs by people from England, which I always found bizarre and kind of funny. Not much customs can do to a well-sealed small envelope. I have traded Jyhad cards with people from across the world, but always less that 4 cards per trade so the packages were never 'suspect' enough to be torn open (or whatever it is they do). I'll see if I can get any more answers for you. Maybe Oaflord or any other lurking Canadian players can comment on this. Cheers, WES

Always a good idea to have the packager list the item as a gift on the Customs tag. This way you don't pay the tax/tariff. Don't know how well you could get a storefront to do it though... By the way Wes, I have had a 4-card trade opened on me at customs and a 16 card trade left alone... go figure... oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster VEKN Prince of Caledon Wes <gh...@NOSPAMmnsi.net> wrote in message news:993e9...@enews4.newsguy.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

"oaflord" <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote in message news:A0dt6.2369$9N4....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca... [ quoted text not captured ] Well, Wes, I would be happy to send you several 'gifts' of Jyhad card boxes, if you like. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

"Kevin M." <kjme...@PLEASENOSPAMMEhome.com> > Well, Wes, I would be happy to send you several 'gifts' of Jyhad card > boxes, if you like. :) I would be happy to accept a 'gift' like that... I would even be happy to send you a monetary 'gift' in exchange :) Seriously though... getting stuff across the border is not as hard for me NOW as it used to be. Three of our regular Jyhad players come over from Detroit weekly to play. I can get things mailed to one of them and then have them bring it over as regular merchandise. That's perfectly legal (if declared) but still a pain in the ass. People like Oaflord who do not live as close to the border probably have a harder time of it. My house is a two minute walk from the Detroit river. Sometimes I even hear gunshots! A few years back, there were some students at the University of Windsor (my alma mater) who organized a small smuggling operation involving the Ambassador Bridge. They would drive From the U.S. to Canada, passing through the Detroit border easily enough by paying their $2.25 to cross the bridge. They would then stop before getting to the Canadian Customs and toss their contraband (drugs, weapons, Ancient Hearts boosters) to a person waiting beneath the bridge (The Bridge basically goes over some of the student housing). This was complicated one night when a professor was wandering to his car and a package landed beside him. The guys waiting for the package to fall were dismayed when the professor picked up what was meant for them. They apparently rushed him and ended up hospitalizing the poor guy... since then I haven't heard anything but presumably they either stopped or found less conspicuos ways to smuggle. Interesting story anyway. We now retturn to you to our regularly scheduled card talk. Cheers, WES

"Steve Wieck" <steve...@white-wolf.com> > However, I do believe there are aspects of the game, such as the Edge, that > can be the basis of competitive deck strategies if the cards are available > to explore them. > > Steve Sometimes when we are forced to play two-player games we use the Edge as a way to keep things balanced. I think I may have mentioned this before but I'll repeat it just in case. If you have the Edge, it can be used not only as a throwaway vote, but you can also sacrifice it to end combat Elysium: the Arboretum style. In practice, this was rarely used, but it was implemented after my !Brujah deck found it way too easy to destroy the other guy's minions (pretty easy when your predator IS your prey). I agree though. The Edge can be a more important part of the game than it is right now. The only problem I foresee is that the Edge favours Bleed decks slightly since you do not receive it for successful combats or successful votes. That's not really a major issue though. If the Edge was more powerful than it is now, I think bleeding just to stop someone else from having it might give the game an interesting tempo. Cheers, WES

> > "Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote >>> Final Nights: Mid 2001 >>> Camarilla Base Set: February 2002 >>> Bloodlines Expansion: Halloween 2002 >>> >>> Such that we get new cards, but nothing *huge*, next year. >> >> I actually like this (James') schedule a lot better. It's just that > there's >> this conservative aspect of me that would really rather prefer to take > things >> nice and slow as opposed to sudden and drastic. >> >> Anyway, vampires (especially elders) ARE rather static anyway... >> >> Halcyan 2 > > I third this motion... I sooooo badly want to see some of these Bloodlines, > but ultimately I'd really rather see more new players, and I think based on > what we have so far discussed, a schedule like this makes more sense. To add to the mix: I'm less excited than some about having a base reprint before Bloodlines, but do agree in preferring the releases to be a bit more spread out. As said elsewhere, one of the enjoyments of V:TES is the amount of NEW clever ideas that have come out in the absence of new cards. Also, the core of V:TES players appear to be old players, and it sounds like Bloodlines is going to be a bad set for new players (point them to unsold packs of Sabbat War, say). As such, while 6 months seems like a decent pause between expansions, that seems way too fast for (some of) the oldtimers. Final Nights is going to have *162* new cards. That's a LOT to digest in only 6 months. Now, if Bloodlines has 121 new cards (the minimum of Steve's "promise" =) That's even MORE piled on. Printing a base set after that at least gives some "breathing room" for the old players, who know the old cards extremely well, but would be a hammerload of stuff for new players. (Well, less so if they're new to the game but playing with veterans. Painfully so if they bought some Sabbat War off the shelf with no guidance but are now into it.) I'm sure White Wolf has a MUCH better idea than I do how often they need to put out game expansions to keep a game alive and keep it profitable, but I would point out that V:TES has done extremely well without new cards for so long because it IS so complex, and as such, needs special consideration in publishing. Every 6 months seems a bit frantic for V:TES. Sabbat War being out Halloween and Final Nights in June (~8 months) seems more manageable. Hm. I note that James's schedule ALSO runs in 8 month cycles. There's *some* consensus that I'm not just blathering on myself. I can't decide whether a base set reprint is a good thing or not. If White-Wolf has the art already, and isn't making ANY new cards (i.e., JUST a reprint) maybe a small print run would help. Certainly people have expressed the want for V:TES backed cards, and the consensus also appears to be "if it's not in the local gaming store, it's not really available." Enforce this with the idea that V:TES is such a social game. If the V:TM books were out-of-print, and only available online, but at $4-8 each, would a reprint make sense? Would it help sales? I'd think so. But, personally, I might save my money if it came out. Not worth sorting through all those Aid From Bats (whoever it is doesn't have enough, I've got a dozen "extra" Jyhad ones I could as soon flush down the toilet as mail away) to hope for another Embrace. And, to disagree with another post: The Bloodlines do not have to be playable as "full clans" to be printed. Sure, they could be, but I'm sure it could be done otherwise. To quote Steve: "We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to make the appearance of these bloodlines and such be relatively representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint." Keywords being "representative of their prominence." These aren't full fledged clans, like the Lasombra or the Malkavians. Warring Methuselahs don't care who's working for them. Some players do, and prefer (or even insist on) mono-clan decks, but those are in the minority. And if they *really* want to play mono-clan, even 4 of each bloodline and you can make a deck with 3 of each of the 4 vamps. It's also "representative of the interest in them." (to paraphrase) Personally, I found Wes's background for us V:TES-only no-WoD-clue players EXTREMELY useful, and was excited by the possibilities, but certainly not by all the bloodlines; not enough to want 10+ vamps of each bloodline and 10+ of each new discipline. I think they're each minor enough that they *shouldn't* have the "clan" feeling. Just a few vamps of each gives the correct idea of rare and/or nearly wiped out bloodlines. As a sidenote: if they are going to be "thin-blooded"ly rare, having only 3-5 vamps (or whatever...just "not enough for a real clan deck"), please don't take up many, if any, cardslots with Masters specific to that bloodline. Skill cards for new disciplines are good; Hunting Grounds for the Baali are a waste. New unique cards are a different matter, of course, like a "Gates of Hell" Unique Location or "Demon Familiar" retainers for the Baali. But cards that are "Roses by another name" clan-specific to a new bloodline are a bad idea unless you really CAN play a variety of decks of a single bloodline (i.e., having enough vamps to fill it out and give that bloodline enough options). That brings up another issue *WAY* ahead of it's time, but for the designers to note: Are bloodlines clans? If not, can you Clan Impersonate to a Bloodline? Do they belong to any sects? (some of them? none of them?) -- Pat Ricochet Soul Jar'rn Fool of Atlanta

Forgot to mention... We also do not gain one pool per turn every time we have the Edge. This is TOO much of an advantage for some decks. We play it that the first time you have the Edge you gain 1 Pool. The second time or after you gain 1 Blood to one of your vampires. Therefore, sometimes it is advantageous to lose the Edge and then gain it right back, but that doesn't hurt the game too much.

rogc...@student.luth.se wrote: > > In article <uPIs6.104$qu2....@news1.atl>, Steve Wieck > <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: > >To address a few concerns/points made here: > > > >1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially > >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's > >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will > >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will > >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get > >my back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the > >set. > > But even 160 cards sound way too few if you want to cover these bloodlines so > that you can play a bloodline stand-alone without having to combine them with > another bloodline/clan. This is how I want it to be. I very mcuh dislike the > diea of ahving to mix with other clans to make them playable. The same is basically true of every Pander and Caitiff in the game. No one seems to complain about this as a major weakness. Likewise, vampires from a smaller clan _may_ be playable if they fit into existing existing clans in terms of disciplines or some other characteristic the deck builder finds useful. Granted, clan-based cards then become harder to use. But it's not absolutely necessary that such cards (where they exist) be easy to play to make them useful. Fred

<rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message news:9900hg$77p$1...@news.netmar.com... > In article <uPIs6.104$qu2....@news1.atl>, Steve Wieck > <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: > >To address a few concerns/points made here: > > > >1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially > >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's > >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will > >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will > >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get > >my > >back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the > >set. > > But even 160 cards sound way too few if you want to cover these bloodlines so > that you can play a bloodline stand-alone without having to combine them with > another bloodline/clan. This is how I want it to be. I very mcuh dislike the > diea of ahving to mix with other clans to make them playable. I'd like them > to be like any other clan is in VTES. If this will be the case, then I'm all > happy and really looking forward to this new expansion! But if not, I'm not > as happy. I don't see much of a point in having say 6 vampires of each > bloodline couples with say 8 new discipline cards. If this is WW's idea, then > I hope they will reconsider and cut down on new bloodlines introduced to say, > only 4-5 new ones (for now) and make them fully playable as stand-alone. I've > never understood the idea of making things half-done. > What if the bloodlines had pander/caitiff background. These vamps are used to give an extra to existing clans. > <snip>

"Wes" <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:9944h...@enews3.newsguy.com... > > "Steve Wieck" <steve...@white-wolf.com> > > However, I do believe there are aspects of the game, such as the Edge, > that > > can be the basis of competitive deck strategies if the cards are available > > to explore them. > > > > Steve > <...> > > I agree though. The Edge can be a more important part of the game than it is > right now. The only problem I foresee is that the Edge favours Bleed decks > slightly since you do not receive it for successful combats or successful > votes. When the edge becomes more important, maby my heaps of Regaining the Upper Hand will come in handy. That's not really a major issue though. If the Edge was more powerful > than it is now, I think bleeding just to stop someone else from having it > might give the game an interesting tempo. > You consider the 'Can I bleed you for one just so X loses the edge'-thingy new? I think this is the sentence I use most during any game I play. Jeroen BTW Why no new starters in 'Bloodlines'? They don't have to be 'Bloodline starters, just 4 other Precon clan starter (eg !Malk, !Gangrel, !Brujah.....) to make the row complete or to give a smal preview of the Cammie expansion that's probably to come.

<snip> >What if the bloodlines had pander/caitiff background. These vamps are used >to give an extra to existing clans. > >> ><snip> But they didn't have disciplines of their own, nor did they have their own Hunting Grounds etc...not siure if they'll have in this expansion either, but still there's some big differences since a bloodlines also have a consistent set of three disciplines and a background history etc just like real clans. In the RPG they don't really fit into the support concept (gargoyles may be the exception to this). At least not according to the little knowledge I have of the WoD. ----- Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free (anonymous) Usenet News via the Web ----- http://newsone.net/ -- Free reading and anonymous posting to 60,000+ groups NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam. If this or other posts made through NewsOne.Net violate posting guidelines, email ab...@newsone.net

<rogc...@student.luth.se> wrote in message news:995r8i$hoi$1...@news.netmar.com... > In the RPG they don't really fit into the support concept (gargoyles may be > the exception to this). At least not according to the little knowledge I have > of the WoD. Most of the bloodlines are off-shoots of another clan in the RPG. The Kiyasid (in 2nd edition, at least) were a creation of the Lasombra, and the same relationship exists with the Blood Brothers/Tzimisce and Gargoyles/Tremere. The Nagaraja are unknown, and the Ahrimanes are a weird Gangrel subset, sorta; same with the Daughters and the Toreador. In other words, they are basically support for a main clan, which is how I hope to see the release happen. I don't want to see an all-Daughters of Cacaphony deck (though it might be interesting)...I'd much rather see the incoming vampires/bloodlines/disciplines add new dimensions to the game without necessarily being mono-clan. Xian

Ahhh... the Ambassador Bridge... I actually saw a guy try to jump from the bridge in '91 when I habitated the 5th floor of Macdonald Hall... Anyhow Wes, since I have only ever won booster boxes on eBay (where I can get them to say gift on the box), and not purchased from the States, I know not your struggle. oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster VEKN Prince of Caledon Wes <gh...@mnsi.net> wrote in message news:9943v...@enews3.newsguy.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

> Cappadocians? We have to save something for V:TES Dark A... whoops! was that > my out-loud voice? > > Steve Awwwww man.....I would so buy that game. That'd be a cool way to re-release the base set..... See Democritus, Walter Nash, Anneke in the Dark Ages, equip them with chain mail, recruit apothecaries... of course, you'd really want that as a separate game so you could have those cool purple card backs! (And so you didn't have templars firing glaser rounds) Wow! Vampire:Dark Ages! Cool!

> The same is basically true of every Pander and Caitiff in the game. No one > seems to complain about this as a major weakness. Likewise, vampires from a > smaller clan _may_ be playable if they fit into existing existing clans in > terms of disciplines or some other characteristic the deck builder finds useful. > Granted, clan-based cards then become harder to use. But it's not absolutely > necessary that such cards (where they exist) be easy to play to make them useful. The reason no-one complains about pander & caitiff is that hardly anyone uses their disciplines.....but with bloodlines, presumably you'll have 5, 6, 7 pool vamps...and you don't get a vamp like that without wanting to use its discs.

"oaflord" <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote > Ahhh... the Ambassador Bridge... I actually saw a guy try to jump from the > bridge in '91 when I habitated the 5th floor of Macdonald Hall... That's interesting... I was on the 5th floor of Mac the year before you! I didn't realize you went to the U of W. I was in #519 and that year was probably one of the weirdest of my life. Thirty immature guys who are finally away from their strict small-town families and most of them turning drinking age within the first few months. Our don was the biggest alcoholic of the bunch. It was like the fucking Lord of the Flies in there, man... *shudders* My particular year of Hell 1990, Mac Hall (the guy-only res) had the lowest GPA in North America; meanwhile Laurier Hall (the girl-only res) had the highest pregnancy rate in North America. I think I was like the only guy on my floor that managed to graduate. Cheers, WES

Wes <gh...@NOSPAMmnsi.net> wrote in message news:996d1...@enews4.newsguy.com... > > My particular year of Hell 1990, Mac Hall (the guy-only res) had the lowest > GPA in North America; meanwhile Laurier Hall (the girl-only res) had the > highest pregnancy rate in North America. I think I was like the only guy on > my floor that managed to graduate. > I can vouch for all of the above, I forget much of my frosh week, and well... Laurier Hall was my home away from home, just don't tell Judy! Let's end this VERY OFF TOPIC thread here, and we'll catch up at Shotgun Ritual on May 13th. Check the calendar at Yahoo for details... I'll post the official invitation soon! [ quoted text not captured ]

Hugh wrote: > > > The same is basically true of every Pander and Caitiff in the game. No one > > seems to complain about this as a major weakness. Likewise, vampires from a > > smaller clan _may_ be playable if they fit into existing existing clans in > > terms of disciplines or some other characteristic the deck builder finds useful. > > Granted, clan-based cards then become harder to use. But it's not absolutely > > necessary that such cards (where they exist) be easy to play to make them useful. > > The reason no-one complains about pander & caitiff is that hardly anyone > uses their disciplines..... I don't agree. That happens now and then, but usually the Pander/Caitiff is selected for its discipline, even if it's only a minor. > but with bloodlines, presumably you'll have > 5, 6, 7 pool vamps...and you don't get a vamp like that without wanting > to use its discs. So use its disciplines. I'm assuming most of them will have at least one and very possibly two disciplines in common with some major clan. To the extent that they have special/new disciplines, the cards playable with them may well be hard to play as I stated. So balance this effect by making them high payoff cards and you have useful pieces for a viable deck. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > Hugh wrote: > > The reason no-one complains about pander & caitiff is that hardly anyone > > uses their disciplines..... > I don't agree. That happens now and then, but usually the Pander/Caitiff is selected > for its discipline, even if it's only a minor. I was referring more to the fact that the primary use of caitiff as a group is for their low blood cost. This would be why few would complain about them. > > but with bloodlines, presumably you'll have > > 5, 6, 7 pool vamps...and you don't get a vamp like that without wanting > > to use its discs. > So use its disciplines. I'm assuming most of them will have at least one and very > possibly two disciplines in common with some major clan. To the extent that they > have special/new disciplines, the cards playable with them may well be hard to play > as I stated. So balance this effect by making them high payoff cards and you have > useful pieces for a viable deck. Yes, but I believe the point was that people would want to be able to play them as a stand alone clan, not using other clan vampires. You can play all caitiff by primarily ignoring their disciplines, and using their low cost, but if the caitiff were invented as vampires with eclectic disciplines, and they all cost 5, 6 or 7 pool, people certainly would complain about how hard they are to use. > Fred Hugh

Hugh wrote: > > Frederick Scott wrote: > > Hugh wrote: > > > > The reason no-one complains about pander & caitiff is that hardly anyone > > > uses their disciplines..... > > > > I don't agree. That happens now and then, but usually the Pander/Caitiff is selected > > for its discipline, even if it's only a minor. > > I was referring more to the fact that the primary use of caitiff as a > group is for their low blood cost. This would be why few would complain > about them. I don't really agree with that, either. That happen to have a low blood cost and are therefore popular in decks that focus on weenies. But the _reason_ the particular one is chosen is that its discipline(s) match the focus of their deck. If mid-level or high-level vampires from an off-clan had the same attributes as a deck's focus, they get used too. At least they do in my decks. The fact that a vampire is off-clan is a disadvantage in a clan-focused deck (whether the deck is clan-focused by design or simply turns up that way because it's following a set of disciplines which steer it in that direction) because any clan-related cards won't apply to it or only partially apply to it. But it's usually not a very bad disadvantage. > > > but with bloodlines, presumably you'll have > > > 5, 6, 7 pool vamps...and you don't get a vamp like that without wanting > > > to use its discs. > > > > So use its disciplines. I'm assuming most of them will have at least one and very > > possibly two disciplines in common with some major clan. To the extent that they > > have special/new disciplines, the cards playable with them may well be hard to play > > as I stated. So balance this effect by making them high payoff cards and you have > > useful pieces for a viable deck. > > Yes, but I believe the point was that people would want to be able to > play them as a stand alone clan, not using other clan vampires. That's exactly it. Who told you that was the point? Why do people need to be able to play any clan standalone to make them worthwhile? Pander is a clan and with the loss of Legacy of Pander, it's extremely difficult to play them standalone. I'm still glad they exist, however - just because they're weenie adjuncts to other decks. If you create a clan that you can use only 4 or 5 vampires of in a deck, you can still sprinkle action cards or master cards or some such requiring that clan into the deck. They just won't get used as often. Therefore, to compensate for the difficulty of using such cards, make them somewhat more powerful to balance. Fred

From my several experiences with buying items from US retailers via credit cardand winning auctions on eBay, I can say the following with relative confidence. Canadian Customs is a fickle and arbitrary institution, but there are some basic rules they apparently follow. Items coming in to the country are not charged duty if the declared value is under $20 Canadian. This is their lower limit and it's not worth their time to charge for low value things. If you're in Canada, DO NOT, for the love of God, your mother and country, have your merchandise shipped via UPS. If the value is over $20 Canadian, they will charge you not only the shipping fees, but Customs prep fees, COD fees and tax on those fees. I ordered a box of three plastic card cases from a place in the States and they cost $6 US, and about the same or a little less to ship. Total to me, around $20 Canadian. No problem, right? The next time, I purchased 3 boxes totalling about $18 US. This time, I got nailed by fees galore, and ended up paying close to $75 Canadian (that's about $50 US at the time). Never, ever again. Everyone from UPS can collectively rot in the lower circles of hell along with every petty miserable sneak taxation thief in Revenue Canada as far as I'm concerned. Canada Post will charge a flat fee of $5 for dealing with the duty and Customs fees when an item crosses the border. While it's technically a crime to fill out a false form for Customs declaration, I don't see any way of enforcing it. "We took a look, and those cards are clearly worth more than the $8 you paid for them. Cough up." I've had items opened that were under the limit, and items waaaay over the limit pass through unmolested with no duty charges. I've also had items stuck in Customs for several weeks while charges got sorted out. You can also (apparently) appeal the duty and GST charged on incoming items, although I wouldn't recommend it unless you like playing INWO (and therefore have a rather healthy appreciation of absurd government, shipping company and post office conspiracies). With cards in envelopes (protected by hard sleeves) I've never had a problem. YMMV Sean Harvey, Irate pawn of the global shipping-government taxation-post office conspiracy

In article <3AB7631D...@netcom.com>, Frederick Scott [ quoted text not captured ] Well the point is that the Panders adn Caitiff already exist to function as acomplement to other clans. I don't see the point of having 11 different bloodlines doing the same thing. I like to play clans as stand-alone and I nmight be in minority but we're still a big minority :) To e it's jsut not cool to mix clans, weenie deck being an exception. If I mix clans I usually take 6 vamps of one clan and 6 of the other. But I don't like to have say 2 of one clanand 10 of the rest, because I don't only play to win but also for the theme that the clans represent. For example it doesn't really fit to have a Tremere work with a bunch of !Tremeres only because their disciplines happen to match... And then there's also the clan-specific cards that has a big impact on at least for me. In a vote deck it's great to have some Consangenous Boons but it's not that great if my minions are all of different clans (etc etc). I don't mind if people mix their clans, but I don't want to be forced to do it myself to make the bloodlines playable. Then I simply won't buy them. If many other people think the same, then why not release only half of the bloodlines planned but make twice as many vamps for them? Why's this such a bad idea? I really don't see it... It will make everyone happy. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] > >and ith the loss of Legacy of Pander, it's extremely difficult to play them > >standalone. I'm still glad they exist, however - just because they're weenie > >adjuncts to other decks. If you create a clan that you can use only 4 or 5 > >vampires of in a deck, you can still sprinkle action cards or master cards or > >some such requiring that clan into the deck. They just won't get used as often. > >Therefore, to compensate for the difficulty of using such cards, make them > >somewhat more powerful to balance. > > Well the point is that the Panders adn Caitiff already exist to function as > acomplement to other clans. I don't see the point of having 11 different > bloodlines doing the same thing. It wouldn't be the "same thing". Panders and Caitiff are small and weak. I can see lots of different things you could do with "minor clans" which would be fun. > I like to play clans as stand-alone and I > nmight be in minority but we're still a big minority :) To e it's jsut not > cool to mix clans, weenie deck being an exception. How would you know? The concept of a small "minor clan" has never been done before. It strikes me as rather anal to state that the only way you'd ever want to build decks if focused around a specific clan. But if that's something you're pretty much stuck on, then the situation may be one where you're just not likely to enjoy how this expansion comes out, but that's a personal thing. It still has merit and there's no reason why plenty of others might see it differently. I don't think your desire to make clan-based decks is unusual or even a minority opinion. But I do think that your viewpoint that *only* clan-based decks are fun to play is pretty far outside the norm. Or at least I would hope so because it seems rather narrow to me. > If I mix clans I usually > take 6 vamps of one clan and 6 of the other. But I don't like to have say 2 > of one clanand 10 of the rest, because I don't only play to win but also for > the theme that the clans represent. > This way of breaking things down (6/6) happens a lot. But 10/2 happens a lot also; in my humble opinion probably more often than 6/6. 10/2 kinds of splits are good for when you find a vampire of another clan that fits into the specifics of what you want out of your main clan better than anything left in the main clan. For instance, if you're looking for Toreadors period, you might well find 12 of them. But if you're looking for smaller Toreadors focusing mostly on presence as opposed to celerity or auspex, you may very well find one or two Brujah or Ventrue or Pander or Caitiff or anti-Toreador, etc., that fit in with the other Toreadors better than what's left after you select the 10 best Toreador. And you're still likely to be able to play Toreador Hunting Ground and use the other Toreador advantages with good effect even with a couple off-clan vampires. > For example it doesn't really fit to have > a Tremere work with a bunch of !Tremeres only because their disciplines > happen to match... That's a very odd statement. Actually, I find just the opposite. The match up of disciplines works quite well. I can't understand why you would have a problem with it...unless the role-playing aspect bothers you, which should be kind of irrelevant in the design of a board game. > I don't mind if people mix their clans, but I don't want to > be forced to do it myself to make the bloodlines playable. Then I simply > won't buy them. That may turn out to be the answer, here. If you kind of have a persnickety attitude about the stuff you like and don't like, then you may have to pass on some of the offerings. All I'm saying is that it's possible to create minor clans and make them balanced and playable. Therefore, there's nothing wrong with the concept. Now, if WW turns out an expansion that simply can't be used because they don't do anything to balance the disadvantages of small clans with advantages, _that_ would be a different story. Fred

> That's a very odd statement. Actually, I find just the opposite. The match up > of disciplines works quite well. [a whole bunch of snipittey snip] My initial problem with the Bloodlines expansion idea is that there will be too few vampires that have the new disciplines to make them worthwhile to include in a deck. Sure, I'd include some of the bloodlines vamps in my current decks if they fit the skills they were using, but that is about it. I'm not going to put 2 or 3 vamps that have a shared, new, discipline when my old vamps will have little or no way of playing cards that require them. Why bother? Sure, you can have less than a full allotment of vamps much the same way it was in AH. But you are going to need to have enough vamps/library cards to where if you want to build a deck strategy around the new disciplines/abilities, you can. So what if you have new vamps with similar disciplines as your old vamps, that can fit in old decks. You can find those vamps with what we have right now. If a new set of abilities/disciplines are going to be introduced, it needs to be done is such a way that they themselves are usable, not just the current, matching, disciplines. This is my primary concern. However, that said (and as oddly enough as it sounds coming from me), I do have faith in LSJ with regards to making new cards. SW was very balanced and introduced some really great cards. I expect nothing less from FN. If the trend in quality and diversity continues, then I think that the Bloodlines expansion could come out very well. Though, I still think that the viability of abilities/disciplines (not clans, per se) on their needs to be something of a primary concern. Sorrow --- I keep telling them that I think they're out to get me. They ask me if I feel remose and I answer, "Why of course! There's so much more I could have done if they'd let me!" So it's Rorschach and Prozac and everything is groovy

> Well the point is that the Panders adn Caitiff already exist to function as > acomplement to other clans. I don't see the point of having 11 different > bloodlines doing the same thing. I like to play clans as stand-alone and I > nmight be in minority but we're still a big minority :) You are, in all likelyhood, in a financially insignificant minority. [snip] > I don't mind if people mix their clans, but I don't want to > be forced to do it myself to make the bloodlines playable. Then I simply > won't buy them. If many other people think the same, IF many other people think the same, and from every VTES player I've ever talked to or played with, you're the first I've met. As Fredrick Scott said it: "I don't think your desire to make clan-based decks is unusual or even a minority opinion. But I do think that your viewpoint that *only* clan-based decks are fun to play is pretty far outside the norm." If there are enough people that ONLY play PURE clan-based decks, than sales would suffer. I find this hypothesis absurd. Not only is it a narrow-minded "role-player's" view, it's an even narrower subset of THAT, assuming that immortally devious Methuselahs give a pile of dog-poo who does their dirty work for them. > then why not release > only half of the bloodlines planned but make twice as many vamps for them? > Why's this such a bad idea? I really don't see it... It will make everyone > happy. Except those people who got half of what they wanted, or worse yet, got the half the Bloodlines they didn't care as much about but didn't get any of the one they really wanted. Perhaps you meant to say "It will make everyone who thinks like I do happy." And, as usual with the announcement of any new set, there will be people who will be unhappy. ("You can't make all the people happy all the time.") It appears this time around that person will be you. However, White Wolf is still a business, and they have to make money, so they do have to lean toward majority demand. Keep in mind on top of that that majority demand does NOT mean "majority view of rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad," so calling a vote isn't going to make you OR me "right." [ quoted text not captured ]

"Sean Harvey" <sean....@on.aibn.com> <snip useful stuff I was too lazy to research for myself> > Canada Post will charge a flat fee of $5 for dealing with the duty and > Customs fees when an item crosses the border. While it's technically a > crime to fill out a false form for Customs declaration, I don't see any > way of enforcing it. "We took a look, and those cards are clearly worth > more than the $8 you paid for them. Cough up." Heh. I can see the border guards going through price guides for each pack they open: "I'm sorry sir. SCRYE magazine says that this here Twistin' the Knife is a rare card and worth $5.00" Well... if anyone on this list is having similar problems, privately email me and we'll see if there's anything we can do to get past this silliness. As someone who lives so close to the border I might be able to offer some cheaper ways to do this. It looks like I'll be heading over to play with the Detroit crew every two weeks so it might be easier for me to just bring stuff over in person. A bit of a logistical nightmare but we can talk about it. Cheers, WES P.S. Sean, where are you based out of?

"Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote <snip> I agree with you on this. I think my example of a Baali with only a textual representation of Daimonian would make it easier to find reasons to include him in a Setite deck. But as soon as you add disciplines that are only appearing on a select vew vampires... things will get messy. Pat's example of why Giovanni don't work well with just POT and DOM (and ignoring NEC) is exactly why these new bloodlines might end up being square-pegs-for-round-holes. Unless their cost is such that the new discipline is just a bonus. For example, using the old Jyhad vampire-points system and correct me if I get this wrong: Wes-Rael (version A) 6 Capacity OBF PRE May strike for 1R agg damage This guy has 4 points of disciplines, a nasty special and NO extra discipline. He takes no work to include in any deck that focuses on OBF or PRE and obviously fits quite nicely into a Setite deck. You could make him <OBF pre aus> or something as well. Wes-Rael (version B) 5 Capacity OBF pre DAI No special This guy has the new discipline, but valued at slightly less than the core disciplines. His OBF and PRE are still useful, and his capacity is one less to compensate for the lack of a special. Because Daimonian would be so rare, I think giving the him either superior DAI or keeping DAI as one-level cards might help in this regard. Also, Daimonian should probably NOT have a skill ard IMHO. That would just fragment the expected problems even more (If it's rare, keep it rare). This guy can still complement a Setite deck, and the new Daimonian cards if any can help to offer some surprise oomph to a deck nobody expects oomph from. If White Wolf intends the Baali to be playable vampires (albeit few in number), I can't see any other way to do this without making them complete corner-cases. Any other ways that you can see to do this? Cheers, WES

Sorrow wrote: (You need to do something with your posting interface so it doesn't break up the lines of your posts automatically. Or write smaller lines.) > My initial problem with the Bloodlines expansion idea is that there will be > too few vampires that have the new disciplines to make them worthwhile to > include in a deck. ... > I'm not going to put 2 or 3 vamps that have a shared, new, discipline when > my old vamps will have little or no way of playing cards that require them. > Why bother? I've answered that question several times in this thread: make the new discipline's cards more powerful to make up for the fact they're harder to play. Fred

Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes: > How would you know? The concept of a small "minor clan" has never been done > before. It strikes me as rather anal to state that the only way you'd ever > want to build decks if focused around a specific clan. It's not the *only* way overall, but it's a very popular way. It makes a lot of sense, too, when you're playing with clan cards (which, of course, you don't have to be doing). Having a *lot* of one clan in a crypt (say, 7) is really helpful when you want to get a few Hunting Grounds or Ecoterrorists or whatever out. That, of course, depends on how the Bloodlines were implemented. However, since, I think, we all agree that introducing Bloodlines is going to be "problematic", with all sorts of things to be considered, I'd rather we had something like this: Final Nights Mid 2001 Camarilla Base Set (say) Early 2002 A small bloodlines expansion Late 2002 (say, Halloween as per usual) with, say, the Salubri, Daughters of Cacophony and Samedi along with a few Caitiff and Pander and a few other toys[0] *then* Some time for reflection and introspection, as well as adjusting to all these new cool cards. If we get the Bloodlines wrong, we still have another half dozen we can get it *right* with, in 2003 (or whenever). If we get it right, we can just do it all again the next time round. [0] With, say a set of 130 cards, this gives us space for about 40 vampires (say, 9 Bloodline vamps - some Salubri Antitribu, maybe (* 3), a couple of Caitiff, a couple of Pander and a few other neat vampires - say, a (!)Nosferatu with Thanatosis, the Toreador with Melpominee, the Tremere Salubri basher and so on). With 90 cards left, you can then have (roughly) 30 common cards, 30 uncommon, 30 rare (seeming to be a nice set of numbers). Or maybe just make it extra small as an expansion, maybe. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "Definitely a woman" - www.thespark.com/ Standard disclaimers apply to this post. Full written details available upon request. Your statutory rights are not affected.

Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes: > > I'm not going to put 2 or 3 vamps that have a shared, new, discipline when > > my old vamps will have little or no way of playing cards that require them. > > Why bother? > > I've answered that question several times in this thread: make the new > discipline's cards more powerful to make up for the fact they're harder to > play. Rarity of playing a card does not make giving it uber-power a good idea. Do we make the most difficult of all card to play one that says "Game ends. You win the tournament." ? Such arguments - rarity -> greater power - have long been debunked from where I stand. Making the disciplines uber-powerful also makes it difficult to expand in the long run. What happens if we decide, in the future, that we want a whole clan of Gargoyles? Shit, we've made their discipline stupidly good. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes: > > > I'm not going to put 2 or 3 vamps that have a shared, new, discipline when > > > my old vamps will have little or no way of playing cards that require them. > > > Why bother? > > > > I've answered that question several times in this thread: make the new > > discipline's cards more powerful to make up for the fact they're harder to > > play. > > Rarity of playing a card does not make giving it uber-power a good > idea. He's not talking about rarity. He's talking about the opportunity cost of the card. The paradigm already exists in V:TES. > Do we make the most difficult of all card to play one that says "Game > ends. You win the tournament." ? Not unless it was balanced. Such an effect would be impossible to balance, no matter how great the opportunity cost. I supposed you could make the opportunity cost greater than what is achievable, but then the card is wallpaper. > Such arguments - rarity -> greater power - have long been debunked > from where I stand. Those arguments have been debunked, true. But that has nothing to do with Fred's argument. > Making the disciplines uber-powerful also makes it difficult to expand > in the long run. What happens if we decide, in the future, that we > want a whole clan of Gargoyles? Shit, we've made their discipline > stupidly good. -- 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/

James Coupe wrote: > > Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes: > > > > I'm not going to put 2 or 3 vamps that have a shared, new, discipline when > > > my old vamps will have little or no way of playing cards that require them. > > > Why bother? > > > > I've answered that question several times in this thread: make the new > > discipline's cards more powerful to make up for the fact they're harder to > > play. > > Rarity of playing a card does not make giving it uber-power a good > idea. > > Do we make the most difficult of all card to play one that says "Game > ends. You win the tournament." ? You could, I suppose. From a play balance standpoint, that might well work. Whether it would be fun to play or not is a different question. But even if a "win game" (or even "win tournament") card is no fun does not automatically prove what I'm talking about would likewise be no fun. They're different types of cards. > Such arguments - rarity -> greater power - have long been debunked > from where I stand. And from where I stand as well. I'm curious who you think was talking about anything like that. You may need to reread my post. Sorrow was complaining that if only 2 or 3 vampires had the new discipline, it's hard to play cards that require it. I replied that because the new discipline is harder to play (you don't know if you're going to draw one of the vampires in your crypt or will need "Recruitment" card or something to get one into your inactive area), the cards requiring the discipline should be give more benefit. E.g., be more "powerful" in relation to normal discipline cards requiring a like amount of blood. That's all. No one said anything about the rarity of the cards implying greater power. > Making the disciplines uber-powerful also makes it difficult to expand > in the long run. What happens if we decide, in the future, that we > want a whole clan of Gargoyles? Shit, we've made their discipline > stupidly good. Absolutely correct. So don't make more Gargoyles later. Or the other thing you can do is make a rule against having more than X Gargoyles in your crypt, printed on all the Gargoyle cards. Or make a rule against having more than one in your active/torpor area at the same time, again, printed on the card. The latter rule would prevent people from ever wanting too many in their crypt since they might draw too many and not be able to activate more than one, thus allowing for the same thing without requiring judges to check peoples' crypts for violations. There's all sorts of tools a clever designer can use to fix problems like this. Fred

Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes: > > Making the disciplines uber-powerful also makes it difficult to expand > > in the long run. What happens if we decide, in the future, that we > > want a whole clan of Gargoyles? Shit, we've made their discipline > > stupidly good. > > Absolutely correct. So don't make more Gargoyles later. That's the problem. Cutting off options like that *now* seems very, very silly. IMO, better to have the options for later. > one, thus allowing for the same thing without requiring judges to check > peoples' crypts for violations. There's all sorts of tools a clever designer > can use to fix problems like this. True, of course. But I'd rather not have to impose new, arbitrary limits which aren't already in the game design on new vampires. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <B6DD7F41.2F09%sp...@socrates.gatech.edu>, Pat Ricochet <sp...@socrates.gatech.edu> writes: >> Well the point is that the Panders adn Caitiff already exist to function as >> acomplement to other clans. I don't see the point of having 11 different >> bloodlines doing the same thing. I like to play clans as stand-alone and I >> nmight be in minority but we're still a big minority :) > You are, in all likelyhood, in a financially insignificant minority. > >[snip] >> I don't mind if people mix their clans, but I don't want to >> be forced to do it myself to make the bloodlines playable. Then I simply >> won't buy them. If many other people think the same, > > IF many other people think the same, and from every VTES player I've >ever talked to or played with, you're the first I've met. As Fredrick Scott >said it: >"I don't think your desire to make clan-based decks is unusual or even a >minority opinion. But I do think that your viewpoint that *only* clan-based >decks are fun to play is pretty far outside the norm." > If there are enough people that ONLY play PURE clan-based decks, than >sales would suffer. I find this hypothesis absurd. Not only is it a >narrow-minded "role-player's" view, it's an even narrower subset of THAT, >assuming that immortally devious Methuselahs give a pile of dog-poo who does >their dirty work for them. This might be true, but if you've read the replies and reaction to Steve's announcement you also know that the majority have in a way or another complained about how the expansion is too small and that they'd rather see fully flushed out bloodlines. As for if they Meth would care who works for them, no, but the people that work for the Meth does. IF it wasn't so, then there would never be any clan hostilities but it would instead be based on who works for what Methuselah. > >> then why not release >> only half of the bloodlines planned but make twice as many vamps for them? >> Why's this such a bad idea? I really don't see it... It will make everyone >> happy. > Except those people who got half of what they wanted, or worse yet, got >the half the Bloodlines they didn't care as much about but didn't get any of >the one they really wanted. I don't see the point in this arguement. It will always be the case no matter what. Even with the bloodlines realeased as stand-alone there will be people who'd rather seen !Ravnos etc etc. This sin't the point. The point is whether the players want the bloodlines to be released like the clans have been (i.e. with at least 10 vamps for each bloodline etc) or if they want bloodlines with only 4-6 vamps for each but to make up for it there would be more bloodlines released. I personally don't know *anyone* where I live who supports the latter option and judging the first reaction on usenet it seems like most people here think the same. > Perhaps you meant to say "It will make everyone who thinks like I do >happy." > And, as usual with the announcement of any new set, there will be people >who will be unhappy. ("You can't make all the people happy all the time.") >It appears this time around that person will be you. However, White Wolf is >still a business, and they have to make money, so they do have to lean >toward majority demand. > Keep in mind on top of that that majority demand does NOT mean "majority >view of rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad," so calling a vote isn't going to >make you OR me "right." No petitions are just silly. WW may do like they wish of course, but I still have a right to voice my opnion just like do, and that's what I'm doing :) [ quoted text not captured ]

>However, since, I think, we all agree that introducing Bloodlines is >going to be "problematic", with all sorts of things to be considered, >I'd rather we had something like this: > >Final Nights Mid 2001 >Camarilla Base Set (say) Early 2002 >A small bloodlines expansion Late 2002 (say, Halloween as per usual) > with, say, the Salubri, Daughters of Cacophony and Samedi > along with a few Caitiff and Pander and a few other toys[0] > >*then* > >Some time for reflection and introspection, as well as adjusting to >all these new cool cards. If we get the Bloodlines wrong, we still >have another half dozen we can get it *right* with, in 2003 (or >whenever). If we get it right, we can just do it all again the next >time round. > This sounds like a good suggestion. > > >[0] With, say a set of 130 cards, this gives us space for about 40 >vampires (say, 9 Bloodline vamps - some Salubri Antitribu, maybe (* >3), a couple of Caitiff, a couple of Pander and a few other neat >vampires - say, a (!)Nosferatu with Thanatosis, the Toreador with >Melpominee, the Tremere Salubri basher and so on). With 90 cards >left, you can then have (roughly) 30 common cards, 30 uncommon, 30 >rare (seeming to be a nice set of numbers). Or maybe just make it >extra small as an expansion, maybe. > This is something along the lines of how I'd like to see it too, but preferrably with 12 vampires for each bloodline since it gives options for more variety when combining the vamps or including them together with other clans. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <3AB89754...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> writes: [ quoted text not captured ] The problem with all this, as I see, is that it makes it impossible (or at least very difficult) to include more vampires of the bloodline in an expansion later on without making that bloodline too powerful (because then you can play it as stand-alone if you have enough of vampires). [ quoted text not captured ]

rogc...@student.luth.se wrote: > > In article <B6DD7F41.2F09%sp...@socrates.gatech.edu>, Pat Ricochet > <sp...@socrates.gatech.edu> writes: > > If there are enough people that ONLY play PURE clan-based decks, than > >sales would suffer. I find this hypothesis absurd. Not only is it a > >narrow-minded "role-player's" view, it's an even narrower subset of THAT, > >assuming that immortally devious Methuselahs give a pile of dog-poo who does > >their dirty work for them. > > This might be true, but if you've read the replies and reaction to Steve's > announcement you also know that the majority have in a way or another > complained about how the expansion is too small and that they'd rather see > fully flushed out bloodlines. I think the reason for that is that they're concerned about the same thing happening with these bloodlines that happened with the independent and especially the Sabbat clans after the initial expansions containing them: that the clans are far less playable in part because of the lack of variety of usable vampires. That's certainly a valid concern. But I just don't think many people realize that playable mini-clans could be created - as long as it's not done the way new, (at the time) smaller clans were introduced before. Another possibility is to introduce certain clans by way of master card effects or some such. There is similar to the discussion about the nature of ur-Shulgi in the game, whether it's an old vampire crypt card or just some master card effect similar to Antediluvian Awakening. More interesting to me is the concept of bringing a vampire on as a master card. It has definite advantages over a crypt card (don't have to bring into the inactive region and use transfers to bring it into play) but has some definite disadvantages (using a master phase action, too many copies or too few in your library can have adverse consequences) and can potentially have other disadvantages written into the rules (pool cost greater than capacity, delaying capabilities before it becomes fully active, not brought in a full capacity, etc.). The use of master cards might be a much more natural way to handle truly small clans/bloodlines. Or single, very special vampires. > As for if they Meth would care who works for > them, no, but the people that work for the Meth does. IF it wasn't so, then > there would never be any clan hostilities but it would instead be based on > who works for what Methuselah. I'm confused what you're talking about. The secret war of Methuselahs assumes exactly that: that the clan boundaries are misleading at times in terms of which vampires are working with and against one another. The outward hostilities between various clans still exist, nonetheless. Very few of my decks contain 100% vampires from the same clan, though many of them are dominated by a single clan. Fred

>>> I don't mind if people mix their clans, but I don't want to >>> be forced to do it myself to make the bloodlines playable. Then I simply >>> won't buy them. If many other people think the same, >> >> IF many other people think the same, and from every VTES player I've >> ever talked to or played with, you're the first I've met. As Fredrick Scott >> said it: >> "I don't think your desire to make clan-based decks is unusual or even a >> minority opinion. But I do think that your viewpoint that *only* clan-based >> decks are fun to play is pretty far outside the norm." >> If there are enough people that ONLY play PURE clan-based decks, than >> sales would suffer. I find this hypothesis absurd. Not only is it a >> narrow-minded "role-player's" view, it's an even narrower subset of THAT, >> assuming that immortally devious Methuselahs give a pile of dog-poo who does >> their dirty work for them. > > This might be true, but if you've read the replies and reaction to Steve's > announcement you also know that the majority have in a way or another > complained about how the expansion is too small and that they'd rather see > fully flushed out bloodlines. Well, I've read the COMPLAINTS about the Bloodlines expansion, a majority of *those* posts have been about the probable size of each Bloodline, and concerned they won't be playable with only a few members. I think this idea is easy to get from, say, Ancient Hearts, that introduced 2 nearly unplayable clans, by having so few vamps that can work together. However, that was not enough members of what WAS supposed to be a full-fledged clan. The Bloodlines sound like they're being designed from the ground up to be members of various Bloodlines, with relative importance and relative numbers. "Cookie Cutter" complaints aside, the additional vamps in Sabbat War show that the current design team has a feel for what it takes to make vamps worth playing with, the complete antithesis of the Ancient Hearts design team. > As for if they Meth would care who works for > them, no, but the people that work for the Meth does. IF it wasn't so, then > there would never be any clan hostilities but it would instead be based on > who works for what Methuselah. Vampires do not "work for" Methuselahs. They have no knowledge of their being manipulated, nor through how many levels of deceit. That aside, clan hostilities don't preclude them working together, without their knowledge, toward a common goal (namely, the destruction of a Methuselah's prey). When Jacko rescues Anvil from torpor, don't think of it as Brujah and !Brujah being drinking buddies. Consider it more as Jacko be ordered to rouse and interrogate Anvil, but then to get let him go so he can be followed, or to send a message back to the Camarilla. And it's not Jacko's boss that's the Methuselah, not even his boss's boss's boss. It's someone influencing through a blood bond to drop a hint to make a plan to order someone to plan an ambush to frame someone to ... and so on. The subtleties of the machinations of Methuselah's are supposed to be beyond immortal ken, much less mortal. >>> then why not release >>> only half of the bloodlines planned but make twice as many vamps for them? >>> Why's this such a bad idea? I really don't see it... It will make everyone >>> happy. >> Except those people who got half of what they wanted, or worse yet, got >> the half the Bloodlines they didn't care as much about but didn't get any of >> the one they really wanted. > > I don't see the point in this arguement. It will always be the case no matter > what. Even with the bloodlines realeased as stand-alone there will be people > who'd rather seen !Ravnos etc etc. This sin't the point. The point is whether > the players want the bloodlines to be released like the clans have been (i.e. > with at least 10 vamps for each bloodline etc) or if they want bloodlines > with only 4-6 vamps for each but to make up for it there would be more > bloodlines released. I personally don't know *anyone* where I live who > supports the latter option and judging the first reaction on usenet it seems > like most people here think the same. Well, you don't "personally know" me, but I do support it. Come visit Atlanta, and the whole playgroup is cautiously optimistic about it. Wes' immensely useful breakdown was similarly optimistic, though he certainly had favorite Bloodlines, and some Bloodlines that he could do without. Should that be the ones that we choose? For that matter, how many Bloodlines do you support having? And, specifically, which ones? Do the rest get published later, in another set? The current White Wolf plan appears to be Bloodlines, base set reprint, and then Dark Ages. That's quite a bit of wait for, say, the Harbingers of Skulls. To add to that, note that the World of Darkness is constantly evolving, so it would make sense for White Wolf to print some of all the Bloodlines, and if the want to further flesh out the Bloodlines later, they can "keep with the times" of the WoD when they do so. (say, actually revealing that the Harbingers of Skulls are or are not the Cappadocians) >> Perhaps you meant to say "It will make everyone who thinks like I do >> happy." >> And, as usual with the announcement of any new set, there will be people >> who will be unhappy. ("You can't make all the people happy all the time.") >> It appears this time around that person will be you. However, White Wolf is >> still a business, and they have to make money, so they do have to lean >> toward majority demand. >> Keep in mind on top of that that majority demand does NOT mean "majority >> view of rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad," so calling a vote isn't going to >> make you OR me "right." > > No petitions are just silly. WW may do like they wish of course, but I still > have a right to voice my opnion just like do, and that's what I'm doing :) Believe me, I never expect USENET to give me a "you're right, I'll shut up now." =) But, the point I want to stress is that the opinion, even the majority opinion, of this newsgroup does not necessarily reflect the opinion of "the market" that White Wolf is selling to. Probably the best indicator that they have but "diehards with internet access that are newsgroup savvy" != "all gamers." [ quoted text not captured ]

On 21 Mar 2001 18:14:33 GMT, rogc...@student.luth.se wrote: >I don't see the point in this arguement. It will always be the case no matter >what. Even with the bloodlines realeased as stand-alone there will be people >who'd rather seen !Ravnos etc etc. This sin't the point. The point is whether >the players want the bloodlines to be released like the clans have been (i.e. >with at least 10 vamps for each bloodline etc) or if they want bloodlines >with only 4-6 vamps for each but to make up for it there would be more >bloodlines released. I personally don't know *anyone* where I live who >supports the latter option and judging the first reaction on usenet it seems >like most people here think the same. Be that as it may, Steve Wieck wasn't canvassing opinion - he was giving advance notice of what is being announced at GAMA. I'd have thought the announcement would go down well with retailers and distributors - a set with lots of cool-sounding stuff in it and with good tie-ins to the other WoD merchandise. And, if they're fine with it, then that's pretty much a done deal. Andrew

<snip> > Well the point is that the Panders adn Caitiff already exist to function as > acomplement to other clans. I don't see the point of having 11 different > bloodlines doing the same thing. I like to play clans as stand-alone and I > nmight be in minority but we're still a big minority :) I think clan based decks are the majority, probably because they're easier to build. To e it's jsut not > cool to mix clans, weenie deck being an exception. If I mix clans I usually > take 6 vamps of one clan and 6 of the other. But I don't like to have say 2 > of one clanand 10 of the rest, because I don't only play to win but also for > the theme that the clans represent. For example it doesn't really fit to have > a Tremere work with a bunch of !Tremeres only because their disciplines > happen to match... If you're *that* concerned about the story. IMO the vamps in your deck don't know the're working together. And a real Methuselah wouldn' t really care if the calns (dis)like each other. <...> Jeroen

I for one am looking forward to it. I thought that when the Giovanni, Set, Ravnos, etc was released, I wanted more... to flesh them out. I have a feeling that the same thing might happen with "Bloodlines". Always have them coming back for more. Personally, I think the Jyhad game should have as much Vampire The Masquerade world in it. It's odd that there is this much complaining going on. Start your own card game, right? It's only one of those 120 card sets. I'm sure they're concerned about making things balance, and I doubt that there will 7 new full fledged clans coming out in a 120 cards. Oh well, I'm going back to waiting for June (Final Nights) and now a great christmas gift for myself in December. Bring it all on!! On Sat, 17 Mar 2001 07:34:22 -0500, "Steve Wieck" <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >To address a few concerns/points made here: > >1. "over 120 new cards" means just that. If you recall, we initially >announced Final Nights as having "over 120 new cards" as well and now it's >over 160 new and a ton more reprinted (in Starters only). Probably we will >need to increase the size of Bloodlines to account for everything it will >include, but I would rather promise at least 120 and go up, rather than get >my >back-bacon fried by flaming posts later for starting high and reducing the >set. > >2. We believe we can accomplish the best of both worlds here which is to >make the appearence of these bloodlines and such be relatively >representative of their prominence in the WOD setting AND still have them >make valuable contributions to certain deck strategies or facilitate new >strategies so as not to be wallpaper from the game-play strategy standpoint. > >3. We are strongly considering having a new Camarilla base set be the first >release of 2002, but there are a couple other contenders as well. I would be >happy for anyone to start a new post and let us know the merits or demerits >of such an idea based on anecdotal evidence of play in your area. We have >some information which has led us to believe the old Jyhad base set is still >widely available and relatively inexpensive, something that would make >printing a new base set seem superfluous relative to other options. > >Did I miss anything? > >Regards, >Steve > > > > > >

>We will be announcing this formally next week at a trade show, but thought >you should hear it here first: > > >"Bloodlines" will follow Final Nights and become the third expansion from >White Wolf for Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. > >Bloodlines will contain over 120 new cards, detailing the Ahrimanes, Baali, >Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Gargoyles, Harbingers of Skulls, >Kiasyd, Nagaraja, Salubri, Samedi, and True Brujah along with each faction's >unique vampiric powers. I can see this working, IF they only release action cards, etc. that are related to the weird disciplines. Of course, I wonder just how the heck Salubri are going to work... can they bleed without apologizing first? How can they really get in the game when their goal is Golconda, a decidedly non-aggressive ideal? And True Brujah are ridiculous. It's an okay idea, but dumb power. As for the others, well, the Daughters are really lame, IMO, and I know little about most of the others. Also, it seems impossible to make any kind of deck revolving around any of these clans, since there are so many here that to have a good selection of each would mean you'd have an expansion of only vampires! Admittedly most of these guys can mix with the other clans fairly easily. It'll be interesting, whatever happens. I want Baali!! Zarathustra