Enrage question (at superior)

Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat?

On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? Enrage Action Presence +1 stealth action. Frenzy. [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. Burn this card at the end of this turn. [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action performed by that vampire.

On 4 juin, 14:56, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? +1 stealth action. Frenzy. [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 strength and may enter combat with another minion as (D) action. Burn this card at the end of this turn. [PRE] Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 bloods to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action. Yes, it burns.

On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: > On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? > > Enrage > Action > Presence > +1 stealth action. Frenzy. > [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 > strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. > Burn this card at the end of this turn. > [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood > to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. > _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ > > Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action > performed by that vampire. Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be resolved.

On Jun 4, 11:23 am, CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: > On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: > > On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? > > > Enrage > > Action > > Presence > > +1 stealth action. Frenzy. > > [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 > > strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. > > Burn this card at the end of this turn. > > [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood > > to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. > > _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ > > > Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action > > performed by that vampire. > > Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be resolved. So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or effect... seems like the lamest card ever?

> So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? maybe you want him to hunt...or maybe there is restricted vitae over here so he cannot hunt... or maybe you just want to make him lose one action...

On Jun 5, 10:15 am, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > effect... seems like the lamest card ever?- Hide quoted text - Hmm. Arika can either: A) Bleed me unblockably for 7. or B) Hunt. I know which I would take... (Yeah, yeah, she is just going to Freak Drive, but ya know, it is the principal of the thing. That, and the inferior version of the card is way more likely to be used--the superior is an extra option if you are in a bad situation.) -Peter

On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 4, 11:23 am, CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: > > > On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? > > > > Enrage > > > Action > > > Presence > > > +1 stealth action. Frenzy. > > > [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 > > > strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. > > > Burn this card at the end of this turn. > > > [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood > > > to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. > > > _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ > > > > Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action > > > performed by that vampire. > > > Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be resolved. > > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? At superior, it also stacks. So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, or loses 3) Cheers, Bram

On Jun 5, 2:03 pm, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 4, 11:23 am, CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: > > > > On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: > > > > On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? > > > > > Enrage > > > > Action > > > > Presence > > > > +1 stealth action. Frenzy. > > > > [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 > > > > strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. > > > > Burn this card at the end of this turn. > > > > [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood > > > > to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. > > > > _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ > > > > > Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action > > > > performed by that vampire. > > > > Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be resolved. > > > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? > > At superior, it also stacks. > So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's > Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on > her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, > or loses 3) > > Cheers, > Bram- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yup. Making/made a deck based on that. :-)

crobert@gmail.com wrote: > On Jun 4, 11:23 am, CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: >> On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: >>> On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter combat? >>> Enrage >>> Action >>> Presence >>> +1 stealth action. Frenzy. >>> [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 >>> strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. >>> Burn this card at the end of this turn. >>> [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 blood >>> to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter combat. >>> _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ >>> Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action >>> performed by that vampire. >> Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be resolved. > > > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? > I like the inferior for Brujah/!Brujah decks. Frederick the Weak Enrages Richter, Templar of DuMont, who now rushes you with +2 strength. Not too bad. And then Richter Freak Drives, and then Dre plays Enrage on him, and he rushes again. And so on, and so on. Works really well if you can get FOR on Richter so he can Freak or Forced March, even when a block attempt is made. Once all prey's vamps are dead, you can then presence bleed. best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auctions@superfuncards.com

In article <9Pl9i.424778$115.189864@newsfe10.phx>, librarian <auctions@superfuncards.com> wrote: > I like the inferior for Brujah/!Brujah decks. Frederick the Weak > Enrages Richter, Templar of DuMont, who now rushes you with +2 strength. > Not too bad. And then Richter Freak Drives, and then Dre plays Enrage > on him, and he rushes again. And so on, and so on. Works really well > if you can get FOR on Richter so he can Freak or Forced March, even when > a block attempt is made. > > Once all prey's vamps are dead, you can then presence bleed. Yeah, I just put together a Pre/For/Cel deck (heloooo Fishtari!) that is all about the inferior Enrage/Force March, have your enraged buddy Enrage Rush for a +1 strength/Blur killing, followed by the first guy bleeding with Presence. Seems unlikely to work well, but at least it looks good on paper... Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

librarian wrote: > I like the inferior for Brujah/!Brujah decks. Frederick the Weak > Enrages Richter, Templar of DuMont, who now rushes you with +2 strength. > Not too bad. And then Richter Freak Drives, and then Dre plays Enrage > on him, and he rushes again. And so on, and so on. Works really well > if you can get FOR on Richter so he can Freak or Forced March, even when > a block attempt is made. Note that if your predator or prey can generate a single point of intercept, and decides to stop the Enrage action, you lose. Game over. Even if Enrage couldn't be blocked, which it surely can, I still don't see how it's inferior version is worth playing. You sacrifice an action (and may have payed for dedicated weenies to take that action) in order to get +1 strength for a single rush. You're much better off just playing Bum's Rush (or whatever) and one more potence card. Bringing out Frederick to play Enrage will never be less expensive than just playing 2 cards instead of one, if the extra point of strength is even necessary. > Once all prey's vamps are dead, you can then presence bleed. Good luck with that.

In article <1181088901.209028.253310@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, CthuluKitty <vtanarchist@riseup.net> wrote: > Note that if your predator or prey can generate a single point of > intercept, and decides to stop the Enrage action, you lose. Game over. Heh. See, that is why *I* have Uncontrolled Impulse... > Even if Enrage couldn't be blocked, which it surely can, I still don't > see how it's inferior version is worth playing. Well, I'm figuring that it gives you +1 strength and a rush all at the same time. If your combat package is Enrage (Uncontrolled Impulse for stealth) and Celerity/Fortitude, you can do ok--first guy Enrage/Forced March; second guy rush/blur with +1 strength and press as needed; first guy bleed through the hole. Yeah, not perfect (shut down, at least in my case, by S:CE), but not totally out of the realm of potentially useful. Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

<adam.hulse@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1181074609.469558.203000@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 5, 2:03 pm, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: >> On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Jun 4, 11:23 am, CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: >> >> > > On Jun 4, 9:36 am, JH <jhatt...@tenerdo.org> wrote: >> > > > On Jun 4, 3:56 pm, "adam.hu...@gmail.com" <adam.hu...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > Does the enrage burn if they hunt or do an action to enter >> > > > > combat? >> >> > > > Enrage >> > > > Action >> > > > Presence >> > > > +1 stealth action. Frenzy. >> > > > [pre] Put this card on a vampire you control. This vampire has +1 >> > > > strength and may enter combat with another minion as a (D) action. >> > > > Burn this card at the end of this turn. >> > > > [PRE] (D) Put this card on any vampire. This vampire must burn 2 >> > > > blood >> > > > to attempt any action except for hunting and actions to enter >> > > > combat. >> > > > _Burn this card after resolving this vampire's action._ >> >> > > > Nothing there to say it wouldn't burn after any successful action >> > > > performed by that vampire. >> >> > > Nor does the action have to be successful. It just has to be >> > > resolved. >> >> > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or >> > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? >> >> At superior, it also stacks. >> So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's >> Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on >> her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, >> or loses 3) >> >> Cheers, >> Bram- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Yup. Making/made a deck based on that. :-) > You made a deck based on Rachel being unable to act? Seems suboptimal to me. - Pat

On 5 , 21:03, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > At superior, it also stacks. > So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's > Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on > her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, > or loses 3) I think that he burns 2 blood, but not pay for action. See also Seeds of Corruption.

IC-Oddish@yandex.ru wrote: > On 5 , 21:03, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: >> On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> At superior, it also stacks. >> So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's >> Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on >> her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, >> or loses 3) > > I think that he burns 2 blood, but not pay for action. See also Seeds > of Corruption. Seeds is a "if attempts action, then burn 2 blood" type effect. Enrage is the other way around. Burn 2 blood _to attempt_ to do something. If you don't do the former, the latter may not occur. -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

Salem wrote: > IC-Oddish@yandex.ru wrote: >> On 5 , 21:03, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: >>> On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> At superior, it also stacks. >>> So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's >>> Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on >>> her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, >>> or loses 3) >> >> I think that he burns 2 blood, but not pay for action. See also Seeds >> of Corruption. > > > Seeds is a "if attempts action, then burn 2 blood" type effect. Enrage > is the other way around. Burn 2 blood _to attempt_ to do something. If > you don't do the former, the latter may not occur. Correct.

On Jun 6, 3:53 am, Salem <salem_christ....@hotmail.com> wrote: > IC-Odd...@yandex.ru wrote: > > On 5 , 21:03, Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > >> On 5 jun, 16:15, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> At superior, it also stacks. > >> So if you have Restricted Vitae in play, and say, your predator's > >> Rachel Brandywine is at 3 Blood, and you put 2 superior enrages on > >> her, she cannot act unless it is to enter combat. (or gains a blood, > >> or loses 3) > > > I think that he burns 2 blood, but not pay for action. See also Seeds > > of Corruption. > > Seeds is a "if attempts action, then burn 2 blood" type effect. Enrage > is the other way around. Burn 2 blood _to attempt_ to do something. If > you don't do the former, the latter may not occur. > > -- So at 1 blood, sup Enrage can actually lock a vamp in place with restricted vitae on the table, presuming it has no way to enter combat as well. Interesting. There may be a nifty FSR/Enrage deck in there. Remote, but there. G

On Jun 5, 7:32 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1181088901.209028.253...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > > CthuluKitty <vtanarch...@riseup.net> wrote: > > Note that if your predator or prey can generate a single point of > > intercept, and decides to stop the Enrage action, you lose. Game over. > > Heh. See, that is why *I* have Uncontrolled Impulse... > > > Even if Enrage couldn't be blocked, which it surely can, I still don't > > see how it's inferior version is worth playing. > > Well, I'm figuring that it gives you +1 strength and a rush all at the > same time. If your combat package is Enrage (Uncontrolled Impulse for > stealth) and Celerity/Fortitude, you can do ok--first guy Enrage/Forced > March; second guy rush/blur with +1 strength and press as needed; first > guy bleed through the hole. > > Yeah, not perfect (shut down, at least in my case, by S:CE), but not > totally out of the realm of potentially useful. > Vamp1 - Enrage Vamp2. Uncontrolled Impulse if needed. Freak Drive or Forced March optional, but nice. Vamp3 - Enrage Vamp2. Freak Drive or Forced March optional again, but nice. Probably skip this step if they tried to block step 1, unless you don't think they can get intercept again. Vamp2 - Rush with +2 strength now. Probably don't have to play any cards until you see if they S:CE. Blur if no S:CE, Psyche if they do (never liked playing Torn Signpost and Psyche, since you have to play another signpost, but that is a non-issue in this case). Freak Drive or Forced March is technically optional, but probably mandatory here to make the whole thing worth doing. Rush with other Enrage now. Vamp1 and/or Vamp2 (possibly even Vamp3) - presence bleed now that you crushed your prey. Sounds reasonable to me. Later, ~Rehlow

In article <1181152243.937765.121370@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Rehlow <newsgroup@rehlow.com> wrote: > Sounds reasonable to me. Yeah--that is what I'm thinking--I have a lot of PRE, some FOR, and mostly cel. With, say, Ganhuru as the main rusher (he has FOR and a free point of damage prevention), the combat is really quite card efficient--someone Enrages him, he rushes, (Flash to close as needed), strikes with hands for 2, prevents by himself (with extra fortitude if necessary), if they don't S:CE, blur for 2 more, Taste as needed, press as needed. Once he gets a CEL skill card, the killing is even better. Again, I'm unconvinced that it'll tear up tables or anything, but it seems like it should work pretty well, what with the Uncontrolled Impulses and sometimes Forced March for stealth on the Enrages, the fortitude to stay alive, and the Celerity to make it all work. I think the basic deck currently looks like this: 2x Ganhuru (7) FOR, PRE, cel 2x Ubende (7) CEL, PRE, for 2x Honorine Ateba (6) FOR, PRE, cel 1x Shasa Abu Badir (5) PRE, cel, for 1x Victor Pelletier (5) PRE, cel, for 2x Kenyatta (4) cel, for, pre 1x Fairuza (4) CEL, pre 1x Panya the Wicked (3) cel, pre I'm not totally sold on the crypt yet--Victor could be any number of other folks, but I'm just flaunting him now; Fairuza is certainly dubious, but I think she is kinda funny and possibly effective. There are a lot of other 6-7 caps from other clans I could use with the right disciplines, but I like the potential for a Ganhuru/Ubende combo. I've considered the 6 point Fishtari guy with FOR and +1 bleed, but the only 1 superior discipline keeps me putting him down. 3x Blood Doll 3x Celerity 2x Fame 1x Depravity 1x Dreams 12x Enrage 10x Enchant Kindred 12x Flash 12x Blur 6x Forced March 4x Freak Drive 6x Soak 4x Rolling with the Punches 4x Hidden Strength 6x Taste 4x Uncontrolled Impulse Probably not totally optimal (I kinda wanna get 6 Uncontrolled Impulse in there; no Psyches; probably not enough Flash), but at least on paper, it seems like it should do ok--pretty efficient combat, 10 untap cards, crypt acceleration/pool gain that doubles as good bleed (I probably should have a second Shasa in there too). Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

On Jun 6, 3:55 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > I'm not totally sold on the crypt yet--Victor could be any number of > other folks, but I'm just flaunting him now; Fairuza is certainly > dubious, but I think she is kinda funny and possibly effective. There > are a lot of other 6-7 caps from other clans I could use with the right > disciplines, but I like the potential for a Ganhuru/Ubende combo. I've > considered the 6 point Fishtari guy with FOR and +1 bleed, but the only > 1 superior discipline keeps me putting him down. I've got a similar deck idea floating around half-finished (unfortunately at home, so no decklist available right now) that's focused on Count Germaine; seems promising, or at least not totally off-the-wall bad. He might be one to consider. I know the rest of my crypt is mostly Ishtarri and is focusing on for/pre, with cel being a bonus where I can find it. I'm liking some of the other possibilities this thread has brought up, though, and I'm thinking I want to tune it even before it's 100% baked to fit in Restricted Vitae and some FSR tech. Anyhow, I'm definitely intrigued by the parallel evolutions of deck ideas from this. - D.J.

On Jun 6, 3:55 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > I'm not totally sold on the crypt yet--Victor could be any number of > other folks, but I'm just flaunting him now; Fairuza is certainly > dubious, but I think she is kinda funny and possibly effective. There > are a lot of other 6-7 caps from other clans I could use with the right > disciplines, but I like the potential for a Ganhuru/Ubende combo. I've > considered the 6 point Fishtari guy with FOR and +1 bleed, but the only > 1 superior discipline keeps me putting him down. I've got a similar deck idea floating around half-finished (unfortunately at home, so no decklist available right now) that's focused on Count Germaine; seems promising, or at least not totally off-the-wall bad. He might be one to consider. I know the rest of my crypt is mostly Ishtarri and is focusing on for/pre, with cel being a bonus where I can find it. I'm liking some of the other possibilities this thread has brought up, though, and I'm thinking I want to tune it even before it's 100% baked to fit in Restricted Vitae (and some FSR tech, if I can figure out how to get more Independents in there). Anyhow, I'm definitely intrigued by the parallel evolutions of deck ideas from this. - D.J.

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > > I'm not totally sold on the crypt yet--Victor could be any number of > other folks, but I'm just flaunting him now; Now see, didn't you hear, it's "Be Nice to Belarusians Day?" best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auctions@superfuncards.com

In article <e4F9i.405865$g24.17576@newsfe12.phx>, librarian <auctions@superfuncards.com> wrote: > Now see, didn't you hear, it's "Be Nice to Belarusians Day?" I offered to give him one for free! And then when he was all like "I can't get US postage...", I was like "Get an IRC! Or heck, send me money for postage with pay pal!" and that was that. I was as nice as possible! Man... :-) Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

In article <1181161491.875653.225580@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Meej <djc30@comcast.net> wrote: > I've got a similar deck idea floating around half-finished > (unfortunately at > home, so no decklist available right now) that's focused on Count > Germaine; seems promising, or at least not totally off-the-wall bad. Yeah, Germaine is totally a good option too, but for some reason, in my head, 8 caps always seem so much bigger than 7 caps. And I like the Fishtari/Uncontrolled Impulse angle to boot. Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

On Jun 6, 5:39 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1181161491.875653.225...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > Meej <d...@comcast.net> wrote: > > I've got a similar deck idea floating around half-finished > > (unfortunately at > > home, so no decklist available right now) that's focused on Count > > Germaine; seems promising, or at least not totally off-the-wall bad. > > Yeah, Germaine is totally a good option too, but for some reason, in my > head, 8 caps always seem so much bigger than 7 caps. And I like the > Fishtari/Uncontrolled Impulse angle to boot. I can see that; I'm running a (few? bunch?) of Uncontrolled Impulses myself. It's nearly never going to be the "big dog" rusher that takes that first action, though, since you're looking to typically Enrage him with the first one, so his clan isn't nearly as critical. Anyhow, I'll keep ya posted once I get a chance to run it, if I manage to get it whipped into shape.

On Jun 6, 3:55 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1181152243.937765.121...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > Rehlow <newsgr...@rehlow.com> wrote: > > Sounds reasonable to me. > > Yeah--that is what I'm thinking--I have a lot of PRE, some FOR, and > mostly cel. With, say, Ganhuru as the main rusher (he has FOR and a free > point of damage prevention), the combat is really quite card > efficient--someone Enrages him, he rushes, (Flash to close as needed), > strikes with hands for 2, prevents by himself (with extra fortitude if > necessary), if they don't S:CE, blur for 2 more, Taste as needed, press > as needed. Once he gets a CEL skill card, the killing is even better. > > Again, I'm unconvinced that it'll tear up tables or anything, but it > seems like it should work pretty well, what with the Uncontrolled > Impulses and sometimes Forced March for stealth on the Enrages, the > fortitude to stay alive, and the Celerity to make it all work. I think > the basic deck currently looks like this: > > 2x Ganhuru (7) FOR, PRE, cel > 2x Ubende (7) CEL, PRE, for > 2x Honorine Ateba (6) FOR, PRE, cel > 1x Shasa Abu Badir (5) PRE, cel, for > 1x Victor Pelletier (5) PRE, cel, for > 2x Kenyatta (4) cel, for, pre > 1x Fairuza (4) CEL, pre > 1x Panya the Wicked (3) cel, pre > > I'm not totally sold on the crypt yet--Victor could be any number of > other folks, but I'm just flaunting him now; Fairuza is certainly > dubious, but I think she is kinda funny and possibly effective. There > are a lot of other 6-7 caps from other clans I could use with the right > disciplines, but I like the potential for a Ganhuru/Ubende combo. I've > considered the 6 point Fishtari guy with FOR and +1 bleed, but the only > 1 superior discipline keeps me putting him down. > > 3x Blood Doll > 3x Celerity > 2x Fame > 1x Depravity > 1x Dreams > 12x Enrage > 10x Enchant Kindred > 12x Flash > 12x Blur > 6x Forced March > 4x Freak Drive > 6x Soak > 4x Rolling with the Punches > 4x Hidden Strength > 6x Taste > 4x Uncontrolled Impulse > > Probably not totally optimal (I kinda wanna get 6 Uncontrolled Impulse > in there; no Psyches; probably not enough Flash), but at least on paper, > it seems like it should do ok--pretty efficient combat, 10 untap cards, > crypt acceleration/pool gain that doubles as good bleed (I probably > should have a second Shasa in there too). > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html Might consider some Kerries/Concealed Weapon. Gives you something to do at range (so you can use fewer maneuvers) and better damage up close (you may not need as many extra strikes). They also stick around even if you get majestied. witness1

In article <1181166728.798158.309560@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, witness1 <jwnewquist@bellsouth.net> wrote: > Might consider some Kerries/Concealed Weapon. Gives you something to > do at range (so you can use fewer maneuvers) and better damage up > close (you may not need as many extra strikes). They also stick around > even if you get majestied. Might be a good idea in theory, but I am *soooo* way out on Concealed/Weapon tech. 'Cause it sucks too much. Too often. Like, I keep trying these Concealed/Weapon decks, and start with 9 of each, and never get them at the same time till I have gone half way through my deck. And so then I increase to, like, 12 of each. And then I still never get both of them till I am half way through my deck. And then when I finally *do* get a Concealed and a Gun (or whatever) at the same time, I then end up with a handful of concealds and guns and nothing else in my hand. I hate that stuff... But yeah, maybe that might be a good idea too :-) Peter D Bakija pdb6@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <1181166728.798158.309560@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, > witness1 <jwnewquist@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > >> Might consider some Kerries/Concealed Weapon. Gives you something to >> do at range (so you can use fewer maneuvers) and better damage up >> close (you may not need as many extra strikes). They also stick around >> even if you get majestied. > > Might be a good idea in theory, but I am *soooo* way out on > Concealed/Weapon tech. 'Cause it sucks too much. Too often. Like, I keep > trying these Concealed/Weapon decks, and start with 9 of each, and never > get them at the same time till I have gone half way through my deck. And > so then I increase to, like, 12 of each. And then I still never get both > of them till I am half way through my deck. And then when I finally *do* > get a Concealed and a Gun (or whatever) at the same time, I then end up > with a handful of concealds and guns and nothing else in my hand. I hate > that stuff... > > But yeah, maybe that might be a good idea too :-) > > Peter D Bakija > pdb6@lightlink.com > http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html In my Pack Alpha/Raptor deck, the magic number was 15 of each, or maybe 15 of the Raptors, 14 Pack Alphas... Yeah, and it still sucked... best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auctions@superfuncards.com

On Jun 6, 6:44 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1181166728.798158.309...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, > > witness1 <jwnewqu...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > Might consider some Kerries/Concealed Weapon. Gives you something to > > do at range (so you can use fewer maneuvers) and better damage up > > close (you may not need as many extra strikes). They also stick around > > even if you get majestied. > > Might be a good idea in theory, but I am *soooo* way out on > Concealed/Weapon tech. 'Cause it sucks too much. Too often. Like, I keep > trying these Concealed/Weapon decks, and start with 9 of each, and never > get them at the same time till I have gone half way through my deck. And > so then I increase to, like, 12 of each. And then I still never get both > of them till I am half way through my deck. And then when I finally *do* > get a Concealed and a Gun (or whatever) at the same time, I then end up > with a handful of concealds and guns and nothing else in my hand. I hate > that stuff... Heh. My own experience with Concealed Weapon is that 20 tends to be sufficient. > But yeah, maybe that might be a good idea too :-) In theory you could equip a Kerrie (with Uncontrolled Impulse if need be) and untap with Forced March/Freak Drive, and not need the Concealed. > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html witness1

On Jun 5, 4:15 pm, "crob...@gmail.com" <crob...@gmail.com> wrote: > So you just hunt at +1 stealth and get rid of it with no penalty or > effect... seems like the lamest card ever? This card has "Follow the Blood" written all over it. -- -bur