[LSJ] Ecstatic Agony

I'm not sure of the correct procedure for Ecstatic Agony. Simply, do multiple Ecstatic Agony's accumulate? It would seem so, given that Laptop Computer has a conditional regards multiples. And multiple Raven Spies are useful. Morgan Vening

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes, they accumulate. (They stack.) -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<el12e0dsr85skk1so...@4ax.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] All cards stack by default, unless stated otherwise on the card (or in the rulings/card migration).

Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<el12e0dsr85skk1so...@4ax.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] yes, so do multiple masochism.

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:54:08 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Morgan Vening wrote: >> I'm not sure of the correct procedure for Ecstatic Agony. Simply, do >> multiple Ecstatic Agony's accumulate? It would seem so, given that >> Laptop Computer has a conditional regards multiples. And multiple >> Raven Spies are useful. > >Yes, they accumulate. (They stack.) Oh well, there goes my budget. Finally figured out a way of getting my !Ven to work. Most suggestions I've seen require either multiple Lazvernius (which I'm not comfortable with), or cards I don't have access to, or can't acquire through reasonable fiscal means ($10US for 2 Freak Drives in a Ventrue starter). Morgan Vening

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Morgan Vening wrote: > Oh well, there goes my budget. Finally figured out a way of getting my > !Ven to work. Most suggestions I've seen require either multiple > Lazvernius (which I'm not comfortable with), or cards I don't have > access to, or can't acquire through reasonable fiscal means ($10US for > 2 Freak Drives in a Ventrue starter). You really think multiple Ecstatic Agonies will be that great a blocking deterrant? What if they want to block your action to get the Ecstatic Agony? What if they have lots of s:ce and aren't worried you might press and punch for 2? I've always considered Ecstatic Agony a card best suited for trick decks. I'm sure others agree with me and you wouldn't have too much trouble trading for them. Have you tried Crocadile's Tongue? I've got a !Ventrue bleed/vote deck that uses it and Kiss of Ra as blocking deterrant. Yeah, it's subtle and you'll still get blocked (this is good as you'll be able to cycle your combat), but it might allow you to get a few crucial actions through later in the game. My deck uses a .44 Magnum and Joseph O'Grady for added bruise. Matt Morgan

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 13:54:21 -0500, "Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@eris.io.com> wrote: >On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Morgan Vening wrote: > >> Oh well, there goes my budget. Finally figured out a way of getting my >> !Ven to work. Most suggestions I've seen require either multiple >> Lazvernius (which I'm not comfortable with), or cards I don't have >> access to, or can't acquire through reasonable fiscal means ($10US for >> 2 Freak Drives in a Ventrue starter). > >You really think multiple Ecstatic Agonies will be that great a blocking >deterrant? What if they want to block your action to get the Ecstatic >Agony? What if they have lots of s:ce and aren't worried you might press >and punch for 2? I've always considered Ecstatic Agony a card best suited >for trick decks. I'm sure others agree with me and you wouldn't have too >much trouble trading for them. That's the thing. It's going to be a trick deck. Mainly because with my card pool/access, I can't think of a unique way of doing it. I was thinking of something along the lines of lots of Fort prevent, Undead Persistence, Rapid Healing, Ecstatic Agony, Force of Will, and the few Dawn/Day, Freak Drives and Kiss of Ra I have. I'm aware of the problem a S:CE deck will do to me, but they aren't hugely prelevant in our metagame, which tends towards Assamite/Brujah/Toreador/Nos style bruise decks. At a table of 5, you can expect 3 hitty decks in some fashion. Stealth/Bleed gets caned in general due to general dislike (lack of cross table assistance), concept decks (Anarch Revolt, Slaughterhouse) just don't get played (former due to table hate, latter due to lack of cards), and Vote tends to have problems due to the prelevance of higher cap vampires (dedicated Vote usually needs Bewitching to even hope to get a vote off). So I'm working on that basis. I'm probably looking at 6-7 Ecstatics (as opposed to the 3-4 if they weren't stackable), of which I have 3, and know I can trade for fairly easily. >Have you tried Crocadile's Tongue? I've got a !Ventrue bleed/vote deck >that uses it and Kiss of Ra as blocking deterrant. Yeah, it's subtle and >you'll still get blocked (this is good as you'll be able to cycle your >combat), but it might allow you to get a few crucial actions through later >in the game. My deck uses a .44 Magnum and Joseph O'Grady for added >bruise. I was planning on using Croc Tongue, and some weapons might be useful. I was thinking of Vote originally, but without Presence, and without a substantial number of cheaper voting Vamps, it seemed too difficult to push votes through. !Ven seems to be the hardest clan to get a real definitive list for. Most clans are fairly obvious. But of the several deck concepts, Vote, Stealth, Bruise, !Ven just seem to be supplemental. I am thinking of a lot of Scouting Mission/Govern for poolgain/numbers. Not sure if that will work as well as I think. And of course, the one thing !Ven do well, bleed bounce. I do like the idea of weapons, and it might give me an opportunity to use Sawed-Off Shotguns (I'd rather at close, but if at long, I get a boom, and the subsequent rounds the Ecstatics work). Morgan Vening

> You really think multiple Ecstatic Agonies will be that great a blocking > deterrant? What if they want to block your action to get the Ecstatic > Agony? What if they have lots of s:ce and aren't worried you might press > and punch for 2? I've always considered Ecstatic Agony a card best suited > for trick decks. I'm sure others agree with me and you wouldn't have too > much trouble trading for them. trick decks? yeah, I'm considering one at the moment based around a for/THA/AUS combo; Ecstatic Agony + Weather Control + Undead Persistance (operating under a Trap). Very silly but could be a lot of fun. If you want to go crazy, you could add DOM for Thoughts Betrayed. Not many ways out of that one. Almost guaranteed to bin any vamp in the game within a few rounds of combat; the loony ecstatic guy punching you for 4 or 5 (or more) can be prevented if you have lots of fortitude, but the Weather Control can't.

dasei...@hotmail.com (Dasein) wrote in message news:<655bbe0f.04062...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I have tried this already, Thoughts Betrayed, Ecstatic Agony, Weather Control, Masochism, Blood Fury, Trap, Taste. In theory it seems devastating, because you use weather control to deal enviromental damage, while you "benefit" from it having masochism, you get + strength and a press from ecstativ agony, no s:CE with thoughts betrayed, you have for to prevent the nasty aggro damage, trap for an extra press and blood fury to deal unpreventable by for damage. But, the fact that you need to use high-cap vampires, combos that need a lot of cards and they can always block your ecstatic agony/masochism makes this deck very hard to work. I have even come to the conclusion that you don't need ecstatic agony, it is not that crucial for such a deck.

weather control... interesting, but i wouldn't have worried about it much in an aus/tha deck. also you already have a great advantage against fortitude - tha anti-for strikes. i still like the idea, it entertains me and that's worth kudos to me. WC guarantees the needed successful damage - cool. i'd rather waste my opponent's combat defense though and hold the weather control for retainers or other tricks. blood fury, blood rage, cauldron of blood (especially cauldron of blood) would go well with ecstatic agony aus/tha combat module. short, sweet, and nasty. taste, take a hit, use a press somehow, strike for at least 2 unpreventable (rage at inferior and free) or 4 unpreventable (fury at superior for 1 blood) or 4 to 6 damage from the cauldron. and that's just assuming 1 point hit-back. that's nice 2 card synergy. now stackable ecstatic agonies makes things really nice. Which brings me to my questions. if both Ecstatic Agonies are played at superior they'd also add 1 press per card, right? Can both presses be used in the same round? Can they be paced out one each round assuming you take at least 1 pt. hit each round? by the way, this is some good news. Assamites have a smattering of auspex and a bit of permanent and free +x strength is a great thing to add with our celerity. that and al-ashrad, parnassus, ur-shulgi have thaumaturgy and auspex, so assamite cel/tha decks can mix in some ecstatic agony to good use. :D stackable ecstatic agonies! yay!

it sounds really cool, but does seem a bit comborrific. have you tried a smaller combat package? something along the lines of: theft of vitae blood rage/blood fury/cauldron of blood apportation/IR goggles as needed about the blocking of ecstatic agony though... well yeah, that'd not be fun. but all decks kinda have to live with that. when things get comborrific you start to become a bigger target, even if you aren't the scariest thing on the table. for some reason it's a psychological thing that multiple cards sitting on a vampire tends to get other players worried. maybe the masochism/ecstatic stacking brings too much attention? they are great fun cards and i wonder why they don't see more play, especially in !ven decks.

> about the blocking of ecstatic agony though... well yeah, that'd not be fun. > but all decks kinda have to live with that. when things get comborrific you > start to become a bigger target, even if you aren't the scariest thing on > the table. for some reason it's a psychological thing that multiple cards > sitting on a vampire tends to get other players worried. maybe the > masochism/ecstatic stacking brings too much attention? they are great fun > cards and i wonder why they don't see more play, especially in !ven decks. Generally, !Ventrue like to prevent damage, not take it. I'd say this would be more appropriate in a whacky Tremere/!Tremere deck (there's a few with fortitude). That discipline combo also has synergy with another staple, weather control/dawn operation. A friend of mine has a for/tha weenie deck based around that comboo which can be quite nasty. As far as multiple ecstatics providing multiple presses, I can't think of any reason why they won't, and I can't think of any reason why you can use your presses in whichever way of combat you like. As far as I understand it, if a non-combat card gives you a press or a manuever (say a Bum's Rush), you can use the press or maneuever in any round you like. But if a combat card gives you it (say an Unflinching Persistence), you have to use it in that round. So I'd say a vamp with two ecstatics gets two presses which he can use in any round he likes.

Dasein wrote: > As far as I understand it, if a non-combat card gives you a press or a > manuever (say a Bum's Rush), you can use the press or maneuever in any > round you like. But if a combat card gives you it (say an Unflinching > Persistence), you have to use it in that round. > > So I'd say a vamp with two ecstatics gets two presses which he can use > in any round he likes. Card text: "current round". So, even though it isn't a combat card, the press you "may" use in the current round is only usable in the current round. [ quoted text not captured ]

Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Oh well, there goes my budget. Finally figured out a way of getting my > !Ven to work. Most suggestions I've seen require either multiple > Lazvernius (which I'm not comfortable with), or cards I don't have > access to, or can't acquire through reasonable fiscal means ($10US for > 2 Freak Drives in a Ventrue starter). US$10 for a starter is unreasonable? OrUS$10 for 2x Freak Drive is unreasonable? > Morgan Vening Kevin M., Prince of Henderson, NV (USA) "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

yes, this is what i thought. but i was thinking longer combat. perhaps an example would help to explain what i'm thinking. vampire A has 2 ecstatic agonies, both played at superior vampire B doesn't maneuver to long, press to end, S:CE, dodge, nothing but plain ol' hitback (because i wanna keep this simple - it is the control - or the dummy! :) take your pick) round 1: range is close A hits for one B hits for one press to continue round 2 range is close A hits for three B hits for one damage triggers superior of EA1 and EA2 ~ [AUS] As above, and once per combat, this vampire may press to continue combat if any damage has been successfully inflicted on him or her in the current round. Chooses to use only EA1's press, this is the once per combat use of this press for EA1 press to continue round 3 range is close A hits for three B hits for one damage triggers only EA2 (damage from current round satisfied, once per combat restriction not reached yet on this card) [AUS] As above, and once per combat, this vampire may press to continue combat if any damage has been successfully inflicted on him or her in the current round. Chooses to use EA2's press. once per combat use of this press from EA2 has been reached, there are no more presses provided by EAs, either EA1 or EA2. press to continue (to last round...) Is this example not correct? Can we no spread out the EA's presses? Must we receive and blow (or let fizzle) all the presses on the 2nd round? If that was so how come it says current round instead of 2nd round? Hopefully this explains my question better. Ecstatic Agony Type: Action Requires: Auspex +1 stealth action. [aus] Put this card on this acting vampire. Each round of combat, this vampire gets +X strength, where X is the amount of damage successfully inflicted on this vampire in the previous round of this combat. [AUS] As above, and once per combat, this vampire may press to continue combat if any damage has been successfully inflicted on him or her in the current round. Rarity: FN:R2 Anarchs:PAG

Azel wrote: > yes, this is what i thought. but i was thinking longer combat. perhaps an > example would help to explain what i'm thinking. Longer combat won't help you press with Ecstatic Agony based on damage received in a prior round. If you don't use the once-per-combat effect in a given round, you are free to use it in a later round (provided the conditions for use are met), of course. > Is this example not correct? No. :-) > Can we not spread out the EA's presses? You can. What you cannot do is carry the press over to another round. > Must we > receive and blow (or let fizzle) all the presses on the 2nd round? No. > If that > was so how come it says current round instead of 2nd round? "instead of 1st round", you mean. And, while the question is moot ("that" isn't so), there's no guarantees that the first damage inflicted on a vampire in a given combat will be inflicted on a particular round. > Hopefully this > explains my question better. It explains a different question. As it is your first post in the thread, I don't know what previous explanation of your question this post is improving. The question (assertion) I was responding to prior to your follow-up was: "a vamp with two ecstatics gets two presses which he can use in any round he likes [based on the fact that presses generated from non-combat cards can be used in any round.]" by Dasein. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 20:03:19 -0700, "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: >Morgan Vening <mor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >> Oh well, there goes my budget. Finally figured out a way of getting my >> !Ven to work. Most suggestions I've seen require either multiple >> Lazvernius (which I'm not comfortable with), or cards I don't have >> access to, or can't acquire through reasonable fiscal means ($10US for >> 2 Freak Drives in a Ventrue starter). > >US$10 for a starter is unreasonable? OrUS$10 for 2x Freak Drive is >unreasonable? The latter. With the exception of Kiss of Ra, there is nothing in it that I have any real use for. I don't mind spendin the money if there are a lot of useful cards, even if they are not so hard to get. I'm contrary that way sometimes. Morgan Vening

ahh, now i see - if you choose to let both presses activate in that round they must be used in that round, they cannot carry over. though you may choose to only activate 1 press and leave the other EA card effect in hopes for another round. but like everything in life, there is no guarantee that your plans will pan out, in this case for another point of damage in a future round. thank you for clearing that up. sometimes i find myself speaking less clearly in the dead of night. you undid my "gordian knot" very well, heh, sorry about that.