HTTB Spoilers

Some guy's website: http://manituan.blogspot.com/2010/01/heirs-to-blood-hos-spoilers.html

"Nicodemes aus for nec vic 5 Sabbat. Black Hand. Once each of your turns you may burn a blood to suffle your hand into your deck." I like this guy. I think. Perhaps he can work well with the Research and Development cards? best - chris

Kevin M. wrote: > Some guy's website: > http://manituan.blogspot.com/2010/01/heirs-to-blood-hos-spoilers.html > > > Also, this card has no requirements? "Din of the Damned Action modifier. Only usable on an undirected action as the action is announced. Equipment and conviction cards cannot grant intercept this action (any intercept the grant is lost). Rection cards that grant intercept cost 1 more blood or life." best - chris

[ quoted text not captured ] Possible, given that they claim to be HoS spoilers, that it's got a clan requirement of HoS? They're obviously typed by hand - easy to leave something like that out. - D.J.

"librarian" <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote in message news:hjvq5g$gf5$1...@news.eternal-september.org... [ quoted text not captured ] Perhaps he would be the perfect catalyst for a "many-moving- parts-deck". Fred

"Meej" <dj...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:aadce7a4-f795-4ad4...@l19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Not sure whether you missed it or they changed it between the time you guys look at it and now, but the version I'm looking at includes the words, "Require HoS" after "Action modifier." Fred

On 29 jan, 23:42, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > Some guy's website:http://manituan.blogspot.com/2010/01/heirs-to-blood-hos-spoilers.html Oi! It's gone!?

To LSJ. Can I publish the spoilers or not? Some internet stores have mail me saying not to publish them. I don´t know if I can or not. Greetings.

[ quoted text not captured ] This posting here from LSJ seems to confirm that spoilers are not forbidden: http://groups.google.at/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/8cf82445b474cd63?hl=de

[ quoted text not captured ] If you got the spoilers from me (or by requesting spoilers from WW for the purpose of releasing them), then sure. If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before they are released, no. Well, technically, you can (since you're not personally under any NDA for those cards), but doing so will expose someone's error along the line that led to you getting the packs early. And that error may get someone in trouble (depending on the error).

[ quoted text not captured ] I don't understand why WW is opposed to some spoilers leaking into the internet and thereby raising the level of discussion and excitement. Really, how is this different to other sets which got spoiled weeks before the release date? Did that hurt sales in any way?

Ok, thanks LSJ for answer me. Then, I will not publish them until 3th february. Greetings.

On Jan 30, 7:24 am, Mani <manit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, thanks LSJ for answer me. Then, I will not publish them until 3th > february. Greetings. I say Spoil them and teach the person who sent them early a lesson:) I really think the community could use the shot in arm ,as I am clammering for a reason to promote the game at my LGS some of these new cards could be just what the doctor ordered for my fragile fledgling playgroup and the community as whole. You want to help promote the game world wide don't you?

[ quoted text not captured ] I have never really understood this policy... WotC with their M:tG doesn't have a problem with spoilers before release date so I guess it's good for buisness.

On Jan 30, 7:00 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > I don't understand why WW is opposed to some spoilers leaking into the > internet and thereby raising the level of discussion and excitement. ??? How are they opposed to spoilers? They put up previews. LSJ just said "If you have spoilers from a source that gave them to you for spoilers, put them up". He just also said that if you have cards early for some reason, and you spoil them, it will become apparent that you got cards early. Which isn't supposed to happen. And if you have cards early, and put out spoilers, and someone finds out where you got your cards from early, that person/distributor could get in trouble, not for spoilers, but for releasing cards before the release date, which is a no-no in the world of game distribution. At what point did WW indicate that they were opposed to some spoilers? There are spoilers. -Peter

On Jan 30, 7:50 am, Pawel Kukielczynski <p.kukielczyn...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have never really understood this policy... WotC with their M:tG > doesn't have a problem with spoilers before release date so I guess > it's good for buisness. What "policy" are you talking about, exactly? WW has spoiled all sorts of VTES cards in the past. WW has spoiled some of the VTES cards this time around. Where is there a "policy" that indicates that WW is opposed to spoilers? WW is opposed to distributors selling cards before the release date, 'cause that is just an industry standard. What indicates that they are opposed to spoilers? -Peter

[ quoted text not captured ] You are definitely right. There is the official WW-preview page. Check. LSJ said: "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before they are released, no." So what does this mean? It means, that WW doesn't like actual contents of the boosters and starters spoiled. Can it be interpreted in another way? Looking back at releases of previous sets, very often the entire cardlists with complete texts have been spoiled well before the release date. What is the difference here? I mean, did it hurt in the other circumstances that the community knew what cards would be in the set? Did it? I don't think so. On the contrary, we had lenghty threads here in the newsgroup discussing all the new goodies sparking all kinds of deck ideas and whetting the appetite of the players (buyers). So - why is it bad, if some cards get "unofficially" spoiled a mere couple of days before the release date (which has been postponed several times already). It's understandable, that there are players out there who are eager for news about the set. I think this set is one of the most highly anticipated ones from the last couple of years, because of the Bloodlines content. Yet, instead of letting the hype grow, WW actively discourages spoilers. Again - what does it hurt to know a couple cards early? This seems to be the most anti-climactic release for a set of VTES in history. Can we call that a fact? :)

On Jan 30, 10:52 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > LSJ said: > "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before > they are released, no." > > So what does this mean? It means, that WW doesn't like actual contents > of the boosters and starters spoiled. Can it be interpreted in another > way? Yes. It can be interpreted in another way by reading the sentences that I gave immediately following that bit you quoted: "you can post the spoilers"

[ quoted text not captured ] I agree with that, in the past there was lots of spoilers and nothing, NOTHING happened. So if u have the cards and want to spoil it, i dont see any problem in doing that. White Wolf will not do anything to the retailers (and less if they dont know who they are) because that means going against their own clients.

[ quoted text not captured ] Ok. Then why did you write in the first sentence that he couldn't? Is this your personal take on the matter, or WW's? Why is it bad to spoil cards for those who want to read it? How does that hurt WW? And why is it different to previous releases?

The confusion stems from uncertainty as to whether Mani was asking for permission in the sense of "by your leave" or "Would you mind", in which case LSJ just said "No - we would mind", or whether he was asking if White Wolf would proceed legally against him for issuing spoilers, in which case LSJ just said "No -- we have no claims against you." (Which is probably true, though I'm not offering an official legal opinion here.) LSJ seems to have contradicted himself, saying "No, but technically yes". Meaning: No we don't want you to spoil, but no we can't do anything to stop you. It was an ambiguous question, and the answer didn't do anything to help sort it out, either. Can we go back to leaking things now?

I don´t want to "get someone in trouble", that´s all.

[ quoted text not captured ] If you received then at a tournament, for example, it is perfectly okay to spoil them here. If your best friend works for Diamond Thundarbault Distributing in Helsinki, Iowa and let you buy then before he was supposed to then if you spoil them here and they figure out that you are friends with someone at Diamond Thundarbault Distibuting in Helsinki, Iowa then they might not ship any more expansions to that distributor. Does that make sense? Now print your spoilers.

On Jan 30, 11:20 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > On 30 Jan., 16:55, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 30, 10:52 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > > > > LSJ said: > > > "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before > > > they are released, no." > > > > So what does this mean? It means, that WW doesn't like actual contents > > > of the boosters and starters spoiled. Can it be interpreted in another > > > way? > > > Yes. It can be interpreted in another way by reading the sentences > > that I gave immediately following that bit you quoted: "you can post > > the spoilers" > > Ok. Then why did you write in the first sentence that he couldn't? To answer the question as the questioner likely meant it. And the second part was, per my want, to answer the actual question asked, with additional clarification as to the difference. For those who missed it: "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before they are released, no. Well, technically, you can (since you're not personally under any NDA for those cards), but doing so will expose someone's error" Obviously my attention to such minutia sometimes works against me. > Is this your personal take on the matter, or WW's? It is simply the truth. If someone makes an error, on purpose or accidentally, then doing something to expose that error may or may not get that someone in trouble for making it. Whether there is actually any trouble depends on the nature of the error, of course. > Why is it bad to spoil cards for those who want to read it? How does > that hurt WW? And why is it different to previous releases? Non-sequitur. No one has said it was bad or that it hurts.

On Jan 30, 9:03 am, Mani <manit...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don´t want to "get someone in trouble", that´s all. Good Call!

[ quoted text not captured ] Aha, he must have changed it, since I just cut-and-pasted from the blog there. Ok, so specifically for HOS. Seems strong, and with all their NEC block fails stuff, good combo potential. best - chris

"Mani" <mani...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:6ad933a4-416f-4988...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > I don�t want to "get someone in trouble", that�s all. It seems unlikely that anyone will get into any more trouble at this point than is already the case. Basically, the fact that you opened booster packs that you shouldn't have been able to obtain before Wednesday (had everyone in the chain of your suppliers complied with their various agreements) is already public knowledge. For what it's worth. Fred

Peter D Bakija wrote: > On Jan 30, 7:50 am, Pawel Kukielczynski <p.kukielczyn...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> I have never really understood this policy... WotC with their M:tG >> doesn't have a problem with spoilers before release date so I guess >> it's good for buisness. > > What "policy" are you talking about, exactly? > > WW has spoiled all sorts of VTES cards in the past. Most spoiled card I think is a WotC card - Eyes of the Dead... Or maybe Cardinal Sin Failure of Mission... best - chris Oh, you mean spoil the surprise! I thought... never mind...

[ quoted text not captured ] Basically, most distributors, especially overseas distributors, have the product already in hand, so they can ship to retailers on Monday so they can release on release day, Wednesday. Actually, some shipments to retailers in the US probably went out yesterday (3 day ship). Many many times, distributors get product in, and ship it out - a distributor's main goal is after all to distribute, and storing product costs money. Very likely this was completely a mistake by some warehouse monkey at some distributor somewhere. So they shipped it out to their retailers. Retailer gets it, doesn't know there is a "street date", or is friendly with their prince (Mani), and gives him the product. MAni, like any player of this game, is so amped to receive product that he opens it immediately. And like a good member of the community, he wants to share his knowledge. Et voila, here we are. best - chris

On Jan 30, 11:20 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > Ok. Then why did you write in the first sentence that he couldn't? For the exact articulated reason that he already wrote. And I then reiterated. If you have cards before the set release date, it means you got cards before you were supposed to. If you got cards before you were supposed to, that means that someone is selling cards before they were supposed to. If you sell/distribute things like cards, you aren't supposed to sell them before the official release date (as this results in unfair sales advantages--if you know you can reliably get cards from someone before the release date, you'll buy them from the retailer/distributor that will sell them early. At which point the retailers/distributors that are following the rules are placed at a disadvantage). If you get cards before the official release date, and then post spoilers, and someone says "Cool! Where did you get your cards?" and you say "Oh, from Card Store X! They are awesome!" and then it gets back to WW that Card Store X is selling cards before the official release date, and then Card Store X gets in trouble. Which could be bad. > Is this your personal take on the matter, or WW's? It is simply the business of selling things like cards. > Why is it bad to spoil cards for those who want to read it? Who has *ever* indicated that it is bad to spoil cards for those who want to read it? A few random, not connected to WW folks indicated that *they* didn't want things like decks spoiled as they wanted to be surprised. Which is a kind of irrational stance to take, as you can easily avoid spoilers. The issue here is not "spoilers are bad" And never has been. WW has liberally spoiled their own cards in the past. This time around, there have been fewer spoilers. Why? Who knows. Maybe the one employee that WW has handling VTES has had other stuff to do. Or someone never sent the right files to post to the web site. Or whatever. Yes, it is kind of a drag that there have been limited spoilers for this set. But I'm not sure how this indicates that White Wolf has a "no spoilers" policy that people seem to be imagining is the case. The issue that LSJ addressed this morning in this here thread involved "it is bad that people sell cards before the release date. If spoilers come from this, that could have unfortunate consequences for someone". To repost what LSJ wrote: "f you got the spoilers from me (or by requesting spoilers from WW for the purpose of releasing them), then sure." (this indicates that WW/LSJ/Whatever is not opposed to spoilers as a policy). "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before they are released, no. Well, technically, you can (since you're not personally under any NDA for those cards), but doing so will expose someone's error along the line that led to you getting the packs early. And that error may get someone in trouble (depending on the error). " (this indicates exactly what I just wrote a couple paragraphs up). > How does that hurt WW? And why is it different to previous releases? No one has said that spoilers hurt WW. Anywhere. Why is this release different than other ones? Who knows? Maybe something went wrong. Maybe people have been busy. Yes. A drag. But not a "policy" that people seem to be imagining. -Peter

On Jan 30, 11:42 am, Legendre <glav...@gmail.com> wrote: > The confusion stems from No, the confusion apparently stems from people being incapable of, or unwilling to, actually read what was posted. > LSJ seems to have contradicted himself, saying "No, but technically > yes". Meaning: No we don't want you to spoil, but no we can't do > anything to stop you. No, it means exactly what he wrote: If you have spoilers to post 'cause you got cards early, you shouldn't post them as it could have negative consequences for the people you got cards from. As they sold you cards before they were supposed to. > It was an ambiguous question, and the answer didn't do anything to > help sort it out, either. No, the answer was completely and utterly clear. -Peter

On Jan 30, 10:57 am, Ashenbach <ashenbach...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with that, in the past there was lots of spoilers and nothing, > NOTHING happened. And again, the issue is not the spoilers. It is negative consequences to people who are making errors/breaking rules in the chain of distribution. > So if u have the cards and want to spoil it, i dont see any problem in > doing that. Of course you don't. You have nothing to lose by doing so. People who sell/distribute cards, on the other hand, do have things to lose by doing so. I have, in the past, been sold cards by retailers before the official release date (which was a combination of efficiency and courtesy), but also was specifically asked by these retailers to not spoil cards before the official release date. For the very reasons mentioned in this discussion. 'Could I have spoiled them? Sure. But as much as these retailers were doing me a courtesy in getting me my cards a few days early, I was returning the courtesy by not potentially exposing them to hassle. -Peter

So can we get the damn spoilers already? Nobody will get in any more trouble then they already may or may not be in for posting them.

> > WW has spoiled all sorts of VTES cards in the past. > > Most spoiled card I think is a WotC card - Eyes of the > Dead... Or maybe Cardinal Sin Failure of Mission... > > best - > > chris > > Oh, you mean spoil the surprise! I thought... never mind... Or spawning pool, it just looks so useful, Kind of like Those eggs you bought at the store looking forward to mushrooms, toms', and eggs for breakfast. Then, when you go to cook them you notice they're cracked on the bottom.......ugh spoiled! -Andy

On Jan 30, 9:49 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > > It was an ambiguous question, and the answer didn't do anything to > > help sort it out, either. > > No, the answer was completely and utterly clear. > > -Peter You're right. I'm sorry for questioning the transparency of what was "completely and utterly clear." All the people on this board who weren't immediately ushered into the halls of revelation are obviously just to stupid to appreciate what resounding syntactical precision is contained in the clause "no, well technically yes". If only we could have had what seems to be your extensive grammatical and semantic training, then we, too, might have had our minds impressed at once with the clear and distinct light of natural reason. I really should have known better. "Card text." "Forum text." Same thing.

On Jan 30, 1:32 pm, Legendre <glav...@gmail.com> wrote: > You're right. I'm sorry for questioning the transparency of what was > "completely and utterly clear." Really? Did you *read* the response LSJ posted? Really? I mean, yes, he certainly can be oblique in the best of circumstances. But did you read the answer to the question?: "If you got the spoilers from me (or by requesting spoilers from WW for the purpose of releasing them), then sure." Here LSJ says "if you have the spoilers through a legitimate source, feel free to post them. As if WW has no policy against spoilers. "If you have spoilers from opening packs that you somehow got before they are released, no. Well, technically, you can (since you're not personally under any NDA for those cards), but doing so will expose someone's error along the line that led to you getting the packs early. And that error may get someone in trouble (depending on the error). " And here he explains in complete clarity why it is a bad idea to post spoilers that you got from cards you acquired early. Very clear. > All the people on this board who weren't immediately ushered into the > halls of revelation are obviously just to stupid to appreciate what > resounding syntactical precision is contained in the clause "no, well > technically yes". The answer is right there. And very clear. I just reposted it. "No [as it is a bad idea for the reasons that follow", well, technically yes [as you aren't covered by an NDA, so it is legal for you to do so, but still not a good idea. For the reasons that follow and are clearly articulated]." > If only we could have had what seems to be your extensive grammatical > and semantic training, then we, too, might have had our minds > impressed at once with the clear and distinct light of natural > reason. Did you read the second paragraph of the message. The one where he clearly and articulately explains why the answer was "No, well, technically yes", and that explanation makes complete sense? -Peter

[ quoted text not captured ] Someone misunderstood something LSJ said and LSJ clarified. These things happen. Maybe it's time to let it go.

On Jan 30, 2:06 pm, suoli <suoliruse...@gmail.com> wrote: > Someone misunderstood something LSJ said and LSJ clarified. These > things happen. Maybe it's time to let it go. Let what go? Someone asked a question. LSJ answered it. Multiple people failed to actually read the answer. It was clarified by LSJ and others. They continued to fail to actually read the answer. So it was further clarified. And here we are. -Peter

On Jan 30, 9:52 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: > > > I don't understand why WW is opposed to some spoilers leaking into the > > > internet and thereby raising the level of discussion and excitement. > So what does this mean? It means, that WW doesn't like actual contents > of the boosters and starters spoiled. Can it be interpreted in another > way? > > Looking back at releases of previous sets, very often the entire > cardlists with complete texts have been spoiled well before the > release date. What is the difference here? I mean, did it hurt in the > other circumstances that the community knew what cards would be in the > set? Did it? I don't think so. On the contrary, we had lenghty threads > here in the newsgroup discussing all the new goodies sparking all > kinds of deck ideas and whetting the appetite of the players (buyers). > > So - why is it bad, if some cards get "unofficially" spoiled a mere > couple of days before the release date (which has been postponed > several times already). It's understandable, that there are players > out there who are eager for news about the set. I think this set is > one of the most highly anticipated ones from the last couple of years, > because of the Bloodlines content. Yet, instead of letting the hype > grow, WW actively discourages spoilers. Again - what does it hurt to > know a couple cards early? > > This seems to be the most anti-climactic release for a set of VTES in > history. Can we call that a fact? :) I think several people just need to get a grip and relax a bit. I just want to highlight the following points: #1. White Wolf has already spoiled plenty of the set through its official previews. It seems likely that they intended to release the previews a bit at a time (rather than revealing everything all at once). The fact that they released all the previews at once should be seen as an unexpected boon rather than an excuse to get greedy. Some might complain "but it's been oh so long since we got any new spoilers" (which seems to support the idea of gradually releasing the previews rather than releasing them all at once). Similarly, there was a great deal of initial newsgroup discussion about the new previewed cards but then everyone quickly moved on. Which indicates that a gradual process of releasing previews might be best in the future (to maintain interest and suspense, plus you'd have less to complain about). #2. There's a big difference between White Wolf releasing info/cards on its own terms vs being spoiled due to the actions of others. White Wolf's official previews, the tidbit released by LSJ at the EC, releasing sets early at the EC (as was the case a few years back with Third Edition IIRC), or offering spoilers in magazines - these are all cases where White Wolf (or agents thereof) decide to release information in a conscious, deliberate decision. It's different when a third party circumvents rules/standards/norms to get an early peek. #3. People shouldn't be abusing the privilege of receiving their cards in time. White Wolf decides on a street date for release, for a reason. If people consistently open their cards and spoil them early, then you seem to be suggesting that White Wolf should be going back to their *old* model. With some of their early sets, there actually were official "pre-release" events. But a lot of non-U.S. players were constantly complaining that they wouldn't receive the product in time to actually hold a "pre-release" event. It's great that White Wolf has addressed this issue by shipping the product out earlier (so people are better able to get it ahead of time). But if people are still opening things early, then this policy seems to have backfired (and maybe they should stop shipping things early). #4. Obviously, White Wolf (and any other business for that matter), is going to feel obligated to say one thing (even if they really don't care). If they casually turn a blind eye, then really what's the purpose of even setting a street date in the first place? Cause then you set a precedent that it's okay to open things and spoil info early. Of course the official company line will likely be "we'd rather that you not." (As an analogy, look at intellectual property rights. Oftentimes, the holder of IP is obligated to enforce them, even if they personally don't care about that particular instance. Failing to speak out can potentially erode credibility or allow the IP to enter public domain). So don't take it personally if White Wolf has to "officially" disapprove of such spoilers. #5. And stop trying to make White Wolf look like the big bad guy. Lots of companies don't appreciate it when their product is distributed before the street date and spoilers become available too early. For example, it's a common issue that AEG deals with, for L5R. Occasionally, stores get the product early and sell it before they're supposed to. AEG does NOT like that, and in fact the AEG boards have strict policies against releasing spoilers before the street date. (AEG approved spoilers are okay, spoilers from people who got the set early are not). #6. Finally, some people might actually prefer fewer spoilers. Part of the fun with playing in a pre-release event is being surprised by all the new cards and exploring their uses. It's kind of lame if one or two of the players at the event has spent the past X days studying all the spoiler lists and knows everything about the set already. Kind of creates an unbalanced playing field.

<echia...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:45e05e1a-a20e-45ab...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... (mostly ellided but...) > #2. There's a big difference between White Wolf releasing info/cards > on its own terms vs being spoiled due to the actions of others. White > Wolf's official previews, the tidbit released by LSJ at the EC, > releasing sets early at the EC (as was the case a few years back with > Third Edition IIRC), or offering spoilers in magazines - these are all > cases where White Wolf (or agents thereof) decide to release > information in a conscious, deliberate decision. It's different when a > third party circumvents rules/standards/norms to get an early peek. > > > #3. People shouldn't be abusing the privilege of receiving their cards > in time. White Wolf decides on a street date for release, for a > reason. ... This stuff may have been in response to something that itself was not quite reasonable but I think it's a little off track in and of itself anyway. To be sure, the people who are the ones releasing card text may or not be doing anything really wrong. And if they are it isn't releasing card text - unless contrary to an NDA, trade secret law, or copyright outside of fair use exception (the latter two being unlikely to apply here). Otherwise, the only "wrong thing" has to do with how they got the cards in the first place - and that was likely through someone else's wrongdoing, not their own (assuming they're just somebody's customers). And, as I and one or two others have pointed out, that secret has been broken anyway. The only thing stopping a person in such a position is courtesy to White Wolf, pure and simple. I don't happen to think it's a very important courtesy but YMMV. Courtesy to players who don't want to see spoilers? They should tag the subject line and you shouldn't look. Fred

"echia...@yahoo.com" <echia...@yahoo.com> wrote: >#1. White Wolf has already spoiled plenty of the set through its >official previews. It seems likely that they intended to release the >previews a bit at a time (rather than revealing everything all at >once). I'm not sure. It appears from his posts that LSJ has much less access to the White Wolf website as it is set up these days. Presumably, the index.php page goes on to read files from a database or similar bit of the website that LSJ can't access. Back when it was just plain files in the /vtes/ directory, no problem. Since CCP took over White Wolf, it seems to me that website updates have been even more painful - as I understand it, a lot of WW resource has been redeployed or lost. So sending things out in one go might just be easier. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

echia...@yahoo.com wrote: > On Jan 30, 9:52 am, Amenophobis <preache...@gmx.at> wrote: >>>> I don't understand why WW is opposed to some spoilers leaking into the >>>> internet and thereby raising the level of discussion and excitement. >> So what does this mean? It means, that WW doesn't like actual contents >> of the boosters and starters spoiled. Can it be interpreted in another >> way? >> >> Looking back at releases of previous sets, very often the entire >> cardlists with complete texts have been spoiled well before the >> release date. What is the difference here? I mean, did it hurt in the >> other circumstances that the community knew what cards would be in the >> set? Did it? I don't think so. On the contrary, we had lenghty threads >> here in the newsgroup discussing all the new goodies sparking all >> kinds of deck ideas and whetting the appetite of the players (buyers). >> Snip 6 very cogent points. Nice post Eric, very nice. I hear that there is a new post opening up at UC Santa Barbara in <your field>, and that it pays <significantly more than you are making now>. We need reasonable players here. Or any players that is. best - chris

You know what ? I'm sick of that discussion. The spoiled pages have been copied on a french forum so here they come for all to enjoy. FYI I didn't open any boost to get them, just did some stupid copy'n'paste. HoS spoilers : Threading the Path of Orpheus Action. +1 stealth. Burn a card controlld by another methuselah on a vampire you control. Tap that vampire. Din of the Damned Action modifier. Only usable on an undirected action as the action is announced. Equipment and conviction cards cannot grant intercept this action (any intercept the grant is lost). Rection cards that grant intercept cost 1 more blood or life. Nicodemes aus for nec vic 5 Sabbat. Black Hand. Once each of your turns you may burn a blood to suffle your hand into your deck. La viuda blanca AUS NEC for obf 6 Sabba: La viuda may draw up to two cards from your library as a +1 stealth action. Mordechai Ben-Nun ANI AUS FOR NEC 8 Sabbat: +1 intercept Alcoan NEC CEL AUS for 7 Sabbat: Look at the opposing hand before range is determiated on the first round. You're welcome. ;)

[ quoted text not captured ] I fail to see how it is possible to "clarify" or "further clarify" what was already "utterly" and "completely" clear. I think my head just exploded.

On Jan 30, 7:04 pm, Legendre <glav...@gmail.com> wrote: > I fail to see how it is possible to "clarify" or "further clarify" > what was already "utterly" and "completely" clear. Ya got me. It struck me as utterly and completely clear in the first post. That people didn't understand what was going on is completely baffling to me. And yet people read the completely clear explanation and were all like "I don't understand! What does it mean?" > I think my head just exploded. I hear there is an ointment for that. -Peter

FYI, I've just put online the preview of the Promo Card Claudio Severino that will be in the release kits of Heirs to the Blood. The blog of the Domain Lisboa is in Portuguese, but the text roughly explains that this is a promo coming in the new expansion, sent to me by LSJ and illustrated by Ginés Quiñonero. Also, the black and white version was a prize for the winner of the Storyline Friday 13th. http://domainlisboa.blogspot.com/2010/01/heirs-to-blood-spoiler-claudio-severino.html Cheers, Tiago Brum Domain Lisboa Team

[ quoted text not captured ] Right, those questions were non-sequitur. Though I never claimed that they should be. I merely wanted them answered. Which you did. In your way. But not the last one. :)

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 05:54:43 -0800 (PST), Brum wrote: >FYI, I've just put online the preview of the Promo Card Claudio >Severino that will be in the release kits of Heirs to the Blood. No, there was no such card in the launch kits. I had to repackage them for my customers and there were absolutely zero individual cards. The launch kit is 3 boxes, 36 loose boosters, and a table cloth. Carpe noctem. The Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com Your best source of V:TES information.

[ quoted text not captured ] Believe me, Scott showed me the card in Palma, I created it to be a Promo and Ben confirmed it was going to come out in HttB. Yesterday Scott sent the scan so I could put it up for Preview and it has no expansion symbol. Until now all souces indicated this was one of the Promos. Of course, Claudio -could- be one of the vampires in the Gargoyle/ Tremere starter... Cheers, Tiago

Brum <tiago...@gmail.com> wrote: >Believe me, Scott showed me the card in Palma, I created it to be a >Promo and Ben confirmed it was going to come out in HttB. >Yesterday Scott sent the scan so I could put it up for Preview and it >has no expansion symbol. That doesn't mean it will be in the launch kits. It could just as easily mean it will end up tournament kits that are released from now on. Indeed, that's been a pretty usual way of distributing promos. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jan 31, 10:57 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I saw the card alongside the other HttB vampires in Scott's ebook. Of course he was quick enough so I could only see glimpses. Good artwork on the vamps I saw... :) Since he kept them in the same folder and the reason it was not a promo in Palma was "it is delayed like everything else in HttB..." Still, gotta wait and see (or read) the puzzle of Claudio's disapearence. Well... if you read the story, Anneke rescues him.

Brum <tiago...@gmail.com> wrote: >I saw the card alongside the other HttB vampires in Scott's ebook. Of >course he was quick enough so I could only see glimpses. Good artwork >on the vamps I saw... :) >Since he kept them in the same folder and the reason it was not a >promo in Palma was "it is delayed like everything else in HttB..." Yes, that would be a perfectly ordinary problem. Promos (and other special cards) are almost always going to be printed at the same time as another release, because printing is expensive. That doesn't mean that they have to be distributed in the same set. Certainly, in the past, we've seen promos *accidentally* end up in starters or boosters because a few weren't removed after printing. The vast bulk of the promos were then released later in tournament kits, or in another normal fashion. However, since those promos were being printed on the same sheets as another release, they couldn't be released before that release - unless you have a flux capacitor to hand. None of this requires promos to be added to launch kits by White Wolf. [ quoted text not captured ]

We are still waiting for the 3 missing vampires from KoT, the Toreador from the Toreador Starter, the Ventrue and the Malkavian. Those were supposed to be promos too but no news so far. Any one as an hint on that? Ricardo Marta Prince of Lisboa Portugal

Well well, it's time to rock and roll!!! I will post the contents of the HTB Decks: SPOILERS IN 4 3 2 1 0 LAST WARNING DONT LOOK DOWN... !VENTRUE-!SALUBRI 1 Titus Camille 1 Polly Kay Fisher 1 Jefferson Foster 1 Mariel St. John 1 Jephta Hester 1 Neighbor John 1 Aredhel 1 Langa 1 Nkechi 1 Rashiel 2 Uriel Uriel !Salubri, G4, cap 8 AUS FOR VAL ani obe Sabbat bishop: In combat, the controller of the opposing minion plays with an open hand. 2 Villein 2 Vessel 2 Blooding by the Code 1 Path of Retribution, The 1 Corporate Hunting Ground 1 Information Highway 1 Fame 1 Fortitude 1 Auspex 4 Govern the Unaligned 3 Abbot 2 Brother in Arms 2 Rumble 2 Sense of Death 1 Graverobbing 1 Blessing of the Name 5 Baseball Bat 2 Dawn Operation 5 Indomitability 5 Unflinching Persistence 3 Vengence of Samiel 3 Sword of the Righteous 3 Target Vitals 2 Death Seeker 1 Blissful Agony 1 Eye of Unforgiving Heaven 5 Wake with Evening's Freshness 3 Eyes of Argus 3 Enhanced Senses 3 Precognition 2 Telepathic Counter 2 Hide the Heart 1 Melange 1 Dragonbound Hide the Heart Reaction, aus/val, no cost [aus] Reduce a bleed against you by 1. [val] The action ends (unsuccessfully). The acting minion may burn 1 blood to cancel this card as it is played. Onle one Hide the Heart may be played ay [val] each action. [VAL] Reduce a bleed against you by 2, or tap to reduce a bleed against any Methuselah by 2. Death Seeker Combat, !Salubri, costs 1 pool Cancel a combat card played by the opposing minion as it is played (no cost is paid). A vampire can play only one Death Seeker each round. ----------------------------- NOSFERATU-SAMEDI 1 Federico di Padua 1 Shahid 1 Topaz 1 Harold Tanner 1 Petra 1 Slag 1 Troglodytia 1 Tanginé 1 Macoute 1 Abebe 2 Baroque Baroque Samedi, G5, cap 7 NEC THA aus for obf Independent: Baroque can enter combat with a younger vampire who is not Giovanni or Nosferatu as a (D) action. 4 Agent of Power 2 Villein 2 Vessel 2 Coroner's Contact 1 Warsaw Station 1 Dummy Corporation 1 Dreams of the Sphinx 1 Houngan 4 Computer Hacking 3 Night Moves 2 Little Mountain Cemetery 2 Deep Song 2 Horseshoes 2 Off Kilter 1 Divine Sign 1 Rampage 1 Patagia: Flaps Allowing Limited Flight 3 Sport Bike 3 Camera Phone 3 Reanimated Corpse 1 Underbridge Stray 4 Lost in Crowds 4 Veil the Legions 4 Cloak the Gathering 2 Mask of a Thousand Faces 2 Freak Drive 2 Under my Skin 1 Marked Path 1 Hag's Wrinkles 2 Cold Aura 2 Compress 2 Soak 4 On the Qui Vive 3 Steadfastness 2 Elder Intervention Off Kilter Action, Samedi, no cost +1 stealth action Gain 1 pool. If you do not have the Edge, you get the Edge. Otherwise, you may burn the Edge to gain 1 additional pool. Under my Skin Action Modifier, obf/thn, 1 blood [obf] +1 stealth [thn] +1 stealth and put this card on this vampire. On any action after this one, this vampire may burn this card to get +1 stealth. [THN] As [thn] above, but for +2 stealth when played. ---------------- LASOMBRA-KIASYD 1 Luca Italicus 1 Lord Vauxhall 1 Black Wallace 1 Virginie, Prodigy 1 Ermenegildo, the Rake 1 Andrew Emory 1 Pherydima 1 Omme Enberbenight 1 Roderick Phillips March 1 Dame Hollerton 2 Isanwayen Isanwayen Kiasyd, G4, cap 6 DOM MYT OBT Sabbat: While ready Isanwayen may tap to give you an additional master phase action. Recuing him from torpor costs an additional blood. Cold iron vulnerability. 2 Villein 2 Wider View 2 Blind Spot 2 Capitalist 1 Vessel 1 Obtenebration 1 Dominate 1 Political Hunting Ground 1 Channel 10 1 Sudden Reversal 6 Govern the Unaligned 1 Eternal Vigilance 1 Goblinism 1 Song of Pan 2 Tinglestripe 1 Zaire River Ferry 2 Nocturn 1 Mr. Winthrop 6 Bonding 6 Stone Travel 4 Shadow Play 1 Shroud of Absence 1 Blanket of Night 4 Aura Absorption 4 Murmur the False Will 3 Fae Contortion 3 Absob the Mind 3 Oubliette 2 Darkness Within 1 Autonomic Mastery 3 Obedience 3 On the Qui Vive 2 Covincraft 2 Folderol Wider View Master, no requirements, 1 pool Master: Trifle Put this card in play. You may use a transfer to move the top card from your crypt to your uncontrolled region and then remove a crypt card in your uncontrolled region from the game. You may use four transfers to burn this card and gain 2 pool. Tinglestripe Equipment, requires Mytherceria, no cost Weapon. [myt]Strike: 2R damage. This weapon can be used as a strike only once each round. [MYT] As above, or strike: 1R damage, with an optional maneuver each combat. --------------------------- TREMERE-GARGOYLE 1 Lord Ephraim Wainwright 1 Muhsin Samir 1 Claus Wegener 1 Hector Trelane 1 Tarrence Moore 1 Frank Weisshadel 2 Cedric 2 Rocia 2 Rusticus Rusticus Gargoyle, G5, cap 4 VIS for Camarilla. Tremere Slave: Flight. 2 Villein 2 Effective Management 1 Thaumaturgy 1 Fame 1 Guardian Angel 1 Depravity 1 Antediluvian Awakening 1 Barrens, The 1 Wasserschloss Anif, Austria 1 Chantry 3 Bum's Rush 1 Defender of the Haven 1 Create Gargoyle 1 Soul of the Earth 1 Hatchling 1 Rock Cat 3 Razor Bat 1 J.S. Simmons, Esq. 4 Conditioning 4 Stonestrength 4 Rockheart 4 Slam 4 Soak 3 Torn Signpost 3 Immortal Grapple 3 Raking Talons 2 Pounce 2 Lead Fist 6 Wake with Evening's Freshness 4 Scry the Hearthstone 4 Patrol 4 Deflection 2 Voices of the Castle Voices of the Castle Reaction, tha/vis, no cost [tha] This vampire burns 1 blood to get +1 intercept. [vis] +1 intercept, or give +1 intecept to a vampire to whom this vampire is enslaved. [VIS] Reduce a bleed against you by 2. Lead Fist Combat, tha/vis, no cost [tha] Strike: hand strike at +1 damage. [vis] As [tha] above, an once this round this vampire can burn a blood to get a press, only usable to continue combat. [VIS] As [vis] above, but at +2 damage. You are welcome. :)

On Feb 1, 12:21 pm, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: !VENTRUE-!SALUBRI 2 Villein 3 Target Vitals 3 Eyes of Argus NOSFERATU-SAMEDI 2 Villein 1 Warsaw Station 1 Dreams of the Sphinx 2 Deep Song 2 Freak Drive LASOMBRA-KIASYD 2 Villein 1 Shroud of Absence 1 Blanket of Night 3 Obedience TREMERE-GARGOYLE 2 Villein 1 Soul of the Earth 1 Rock Cat 3 Raking Talons 4 Deflection To spoil or not to spoil aside, anon posting protects most people in the chain so hopefully there are no repercussions. Above I've list what I'm really happy to see, and based on that I think I'm most excited about Nos/Sam. I did not think I was going to say that prior to this list coming out. Looking forward to launch kits arriving on time. John P. Winnipeg

On Feb 1, 7:21 pm, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Isanwayen > Kiasyd, G4, cap 6 > DOM MYT OBT > Sabbat: While ready Isanwayen may tap to give you an additional master > phase action. Recuing him from torpor costs an additional blood. Cold > iron vulnerability. > I <3 MPA's!

[ quoted text not captured ] Great jobs set and deck designers!

"Spoiler Man" <spoilerma...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:b75e5bd5-8f83-4945...@b36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > Well well, it's time to rock and roll!!! > > I will post the contents of the HTB Decks: ... Biggest disappoints - no: Carlton Van Wyck (!!!) YET another prime opportunity and no Camarilla Vitae Slave. Spiritual Intervention - although given the choices of precon clans, that would have been a stretch (the Samedi deck was the only real hope for that). ...and no Direct Intervention. Not that it's really important, what with it being an uncommon in 3E. But the annoyance to Kevin alone would have been priceless! ;-) > You are welcome. :) Thank you indeed. Fred

On 1 Feb, 19:21, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > You are welcome. :) Thanks. And Death Seeker rocks! / Stefan

On Feb 1, 3:29 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > Biggest disappoints - no: > YET another prime opportunity and no Camarilla Vitae Slave. > > Spiritual Intervention - although given the choices of precon > clans, that would have been a stretch (the Samedi deck was the > only real hope for that). If I had to guess, I'd assume CVS and SI, if they were considered, fell victim to the limited "reprints needing new art" budget again, as happened to Deflection in past sets per LSJ. (Speaking of which, Deflections!) - D.J.

[ quoted text not captured ] This is good starter for Kiasyd and bad for lasombra, it lacks: -Arms of the Abyss (not reprinted since SW) -Eyes of the Night (not reprinted since SW) -Shadow Body (not reprinted since SW) -Entombment (not reprinted since SW) -Camarilla Vitae Slave (not reprinted since sabbat) -Abyssal Hunter (not reprinted since BH) -Shadow Twin (not reprinted since SW) I hope Lasombra will get proper starter in upcoming expansion, or the card will be available in booster. Upcoming expansion is possibly sabbat themed.

On Feb 2, 5:12 am, "John P." <jtpat...@mts.net> wrote: > On Feb 1, 12:21 pm, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > !VENTRUE-!SALUBRI > 2 Villein > NOSFERATU-SAMEDI > 2 Villein > LASOMBRA-KIASYD > 2 Villein > TREMERE-GARGOYLE > 2 Villein I think it is fair to say that Minion Tap is now officially wallpaper.

On 1 helmi, 20:21, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hide the Heart > Reaction, aus/val, no cost > [aus] Reduce a bleed against you by 1. > [val] The action ends (unsuccessfully). The acting minion may burn 1 > blood to cancel this card as it is played. Onle one Hide the Heart may > be played ay [val] each action. > [VAL] Reduce a bleed against you by 2, or tap to reduce a bleed > against any Methuselah by 2. So it's usable during any action? And doesn't tap you at val? Oh man, you could do a reaally retarded blood denial deck with about 20 of those and a Neighborhood Watch Commander.

[ quoted text not captured ] Dude, think about all the time you spend trying to BLOCK things... Just toss in these and you can cancel the action... spend your combat on your prey and watch your predator have fits. I'd like to know when you can play it during the action, because you may be able to dump this thing during a referendum after an Awe... *insert choir of angels singing*... Plus you can cross-table save people's ass... It's reduce bleed, cancel actions and is FREE... it's SCHWEEEEET.

"Meej" <dj...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:7f7196f2-237c-4712...@z26g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] You may have a point about CVS. But Spiritual Intervention was reprinted in 10th AE and I thought it had different art (albeit, I don't have my cards with me at the moment to tell). It just isn't very common reprint since it only appears in one of the two decks. Fred

"Juggernaut1981" <brassc...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:e62fbc7d-53da-461b...@k6g2000prg.googlegroups.com... On Feb 2, 9:44 am, Aleksi Nuora <aleksinu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 1 helmi, 20:21, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hide the Heart > > > Reaction, aus/val, no cost > > > [aus] Reduce a bleed against you by 1. > > > [val] The action ends (unsuccessfully). The acting minion may burn 1 > > > blood to cancel this card as it is played. Onle one Hide the Heart may > > > be played ay [val] each action. > > > [VAL] Reduce a bleed against you by 2, or tap to reduce a bleed > > > against any Methuselah by 2. > > > > So it's usable during any action? And doesn't tap you at val? Oh man, > > you could do a reaally retarded blood denial deck with about 20 of > > those and a Neighborhood Watch Commander. Nasty - but obviated with Blood Dolls or Vessels with good pool management or with Hunting Grounds. > Dude, think about all the time you spend trying to BLOCK things... > Just toss in these and you can cancel the action... spend your combat > on your prey and watch your predator have fits. Um, you _did_ notice the cancel clause, right? > I'd like to know when > you can play it during the action, because you may be able to dump > this thing during a referendum after an Awe... *insert choir of angels > singing*... I'm pretty sure that doesn't work. The Awe is played while voting is taking place. I'm pretty sure you'd have to play it before the vote because I think it's effect is to stop the vote from ever taking place. Otherwise, why can't I hold this in hand while you rush me and if I don't like the results of the combat from the Bum's Rush, I play Hide the Heart...and.... "WAKE UP, DOROTHY! YOU WERE ONLY HAVING A BAD DREAM!!!..." > Plus you can cross-table save people's ass... ...as long as the card isn't canceled. Fred

On Feb 1, 11:03 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > You may have a point about CVS. But Spiritual Intervention was > reprinted in 10th AE and I thought it had different art (albeit, I don't > have my cards with me at the moment to tell). It just isn't very common > reprint since it only appears in one of the two decks. > > Fred the 10th SI is the same picture as the DS one Fred so yes price attached to new art I guess.. Yes it'd be useful and hopefully it'll come round next nec based starter. What the are you going to do with a CVS that realisitcally makes it more useful than a Zaire River Ferry (which does useful stuff) , goblinism (lotsa uses) channel 10 (again actually very useful), mr winthrop (ok i have one or two more than I need but still actually a useful card for a new player) or erm blanket of night and shroud of absence......these last two are only slightly useful I guess....... I think it's pretty reasonable to get 6 decent rares in a starter these days.....

On 2 helmi, 01:11, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > "Juggernaut1981" <brasscompo...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:e62fbc7d-53da-461b...@k6g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 2, 9:44 am, Aleksi Nuora <aleksinu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 1 helmi, 20:21, Spoiler Man <spoilermanforthe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hide the Heart > > > > Reaction, aus/val, no cost > > > > [aus] Reduce a bleed against you by 1. > > > > [val] The action ends (unsuccessfully). The acting minion may burn 1 > > > > blood to cancel this card as it is played. Onle one Hide the Heart may > > > > be played ay [val] each action. > > > > [VAL] Reduce a bleed against you by 2, or tap to reduce a bleed > > > > against any Methuselah by 2. > > > > So it's usable during any action? And doesn't tap you at val? Oh man, > > > you could do a reaally retarded blood denial deck with about 20 of > > > those and a Neighborhood Watch Commander. > > Nasty - but obviated with Blood Dolls or Vessels with good pool management > or with Hunting Grounds. I wouldn't say nasty, just something really, really stupid and annoying that you already know you'll have to play against at some point. Sort of like a Bartholomew/Folderol deck. Not saying it doesn't have real uses, of course. Like hosing allies.

On Feb 1, 6:11 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > I'm pretty sure that doesn't work. The Awe is played while voting is > taking place. Yeah. It's already successful at that point.

[ quoted text not captured ] Thanks for the decks, Scott. They seem pretty good, specially for new players. About Claudio: A future promo, right? If so, I apologise to everybody for saying it was a Promo for HttB. I really though it was. Cheers, Tiago

[ quoted text not captured ] Great work on these starter! Kudos to WW! I will buy bunch of them...happy, no complaints.

On Feb 1, 11:03 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote: > You may have a point about CVS. But Spiritual Intervention was > reprinted in 10th AE and I thought it had different art (albeit, I don't > have my cards with me at the moment to tell). It just isn't very common > reprint since it only appears in one of the two decks. > Nope. Spiritual Intervention had the same art in the 10th Anniversary Edition as it did in Dark Sovereigns. Kevin Walsh

[ quoted text not captured ] You could also use Burning Touch to help you get Gregory Winter, Impundulu and Young Bloods out. Kevin Walsh

<echia...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:45e05e1a-a20e-45ab...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... (mostly ellided but...) > #2. There's a big difference between White Wolf releasing info/cards > on its own terms vs being spoiled due to the actions of others. White > Wolf's official previews, the tidbit released by LSJ at the EC, > releasing sets early at the EC (as was the case a few years back with > Third Edition IIRC), or offering spoilers in magazines - these are all > cases where White Wolf (or agents thereof) decide to release > information in a conscious, deliberate decision. It's different when a > third party circumvents rules/standards/norms to get an early peek. > > > #3. People shouldn't be abusing the privilege of receiving their cards > in time. White Wolf decides on a street date for release, for a > reason. ... This stuff may have been in response to something that itself was not quite reasonable but I think it's a little off track in and of itself anyway. To be sure, the people who are the ones releasing card text may or not be doing anything really wrong. And if they are it isn't releasing card text - unless contrary to an NDA, trade secret law, or copyright outside of fair use exception (the latter two being unlikely to apply here). Otherwise, the only "wrong thing" has to do with how they got the cards in the first place - and that was likely through someone else's wrongdoing, not their own (assuming they're just somebody's customers). And, as I and one or two others have pointed out, that secret has been broken anyway. The only thing stopping a person in such a position is courtesy to White Wolf, pure and simple. I don't happen to think it's a very important courtesy but YMMV. Courtesy to players who don't want to see spoilers? They should tag the subject line and you shouldn't look. Fred