VEKN Salubri Antitribu Newsletter - April 2002
or, for the more martially inclined minions out there:
OFFICIAL VEKN SALUBRI ANTITRIBU NEWSLETTER! FIRST ISSUE EVER!!
WELCOME TO THE TERRORDOME!!!
Volume 1, Issue 1
April 2002
Author: Atrovent the German Chainsaw
===================================================
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Card of the Moment - Sword of the Righteous
Salubri Antitribu Tactics - Melee Weapons
Deck of the Moment - North American Chainsaw Massacre
Sign Off
===================================================
INTRODUCTION
Use the Edge (of your melee weapon) to get the Edge!
Here we are, the Salubri Antitribu. Oh, we were here all the time, but
we chose not to be seen. Now, with Bloodlines, this has changed. We
are strong enough to let the world know we are there. It's time to get
our revenge on the Baali and on the Tremere, who killed Saulot. Know
fear, magicians, if you see someone with a melee weapon, for it may be
someone of us or our allies. We won't use stealth, we choose to fight
openly with pure steel, like the Sword of the Righteous. Fear the
Vengeance of Samiel!
Atrovent, the German Chainsaw.
===================================================
CARD OF THE MOMENT: Sword of the Righteous
Name: Sword of the Righteous [BL]
Cardtype: Combat
Cost: 1 blood
Discipline: Valeren/Animalism
Only usable before range is determined.
[ani] Choose a melee weapon on this vampire. This vampire inflicts an
additional point of damage each strike with that weapon for the
remainder of the combat. A vampire can play only one Sword of the
Righteous each combat.
[val] As [ani] above, and the damage inflicted by the weapon is
aggravated.
[VAL] As [val] above, and prevent 1 damage this round.
Animalism: Only one of the blessed fighters of Clan Salubri Antitribu
has animalism, and since he has Valeren too, I'll ignore the animalism
possibilities right now and go straight to Valeren.
The inferior Valeren is an option all of our five clan vampires may
use, since all of them know at least a bit of Valeren. If need be even
some Progeny may learn it quickly with a single Sanguine Instruction.
But what does it do? It's simple: Aggravated damage for simple Melee
Weapons! That's something no clan has discovered before us, and the
few weapons with aggravated damage inborn are few (unique) and far
between, or did you ever tried to get a Sengir dagger? Others are of
specific clans only, the dreaded Femur of Toomler and Kali's Fang. Do
we need this things? Not any longer! Here is your
out-of-the-supermarket Meat Cleaver aggravated! Now we know where the
mad grinning on the artwork comes from. Even if you don't have a Sword
of the Righteous in your hand, your opponents will be thinking twice
before choosing to fight with an armed minion of yours, once he had
made the necessary experience. The sad thing is the clause "Only
usable before range is determined" so everyone will know what's going
to happen from the first moment of combat on. So some opponents will
try to outmaneuver you and a pesky S:CE will waste a great card.
Luckily, a Dodge may be countered with Vengeance of Samiel. Fortitude
may try to avoid the damage, but we have some tricks to further
increase it. This doesn't help vs Superior Mettle, Skin of Steel and
somesuch, but it's a start. If our opponent avoids blocking, we have
some bleeding actions and modifier for him.
Combat with !Salubri is a entire theme for itself (i.e. fighting vs
Drawing out the Beast, Thaumaturgy like Blood Rage and so on) and
can't be covered right here, but you get the direction (I hope). Just
to end this threat, you may play Fast Reaction to stop a first round
strike from your opponent and some of the nastyness mentioned before.
Superior Valeren does the same like the inferior version and prevents
a point of damage, so we won't need our Fortitude cards for simple
handshakes, Bat-Aids, Thrown Gates or something like that. Not bad at
all and maybe a livesaver on top of a livestealer!
The next section, Tactics, will be written with the Sword of the
Righteous in mind.
===================================================
SALUBRI ANTITRIBU TACTICS: Melee Weapons
The Melee Weapon - a lost Art. In the beginning of the Jyhad, the
Brujah were meant to be the clan using weapons for they had the might
(potence) and the speed (celerity) to use them well. Now there is
another clan who make use of those little toys, our clan, the Salubri
Antitribu. Here are some melee weapon helpers for our hands only:
Valeren cards:
- Sword of the Righteous (more damage, aggravated, see card
analysis above),
- Vengeance of Samiel (more damage, no dodge),
- Gift of Bellona (help equipping)
Salubri Vampire:
- Thomas Steed, the Angry (fetch weapons)
Salubri clan cards:
- Blessing of the name (more damage)
All of those cards use melee weapons, so guns or undefined weapons
like Bomb, Chainsaw, Flamethrower, Grenade, Improvised Flamethrower,
Ivory Bow, RPG Launcher, Smoke Grenade, Starshell Grenade Launcher,
Talbot's Chainsaw and White Phosphorus Grenade won't do the trick for
us. So, to get things started, lets look at the melee weapons
currently available at Al's Army Apparatus and other trademark shops
in your neighborhood.
Melee Weapons vary in three aspects: The cost in pool, the damage they
are capable of and the uses you get out of them, i.e. once per strike,
once per round and so on.
Some have restrictions regarding clans and/or being unique. The famous
Sword of Judgment is only usable by a Brujah antitribu, so we'll have
difficulties enhancing it. Kali's Fang or the Femur of Toomler need
Assamites or Tzimisce to bring into play, but could then be
transferred to a Salubri Antitribu to be enhanced, so we'll have a
look at them.
With only two exceptions all melee weapons are useable each strike, so
we'll first check these out.
Leading in the High-price section with 3 pool is the unique Kali's
Fang of clan Assamite (strength+1 aggravated damage each strike). It's
the same like the less expensive Femur of Toomler, import taxes from
the Near East must be higher than from the Balkans. If we don't need
the Assamites in our house, we should whore in the Tzimisces to save
some money. Or we'll do the same aggravating trick with, say, a Meat
Cleaver and a Sword of the Righteous.
Cost-intensive (and mainly unique) weapons are with 2 pool to pay the
Bang Nakh (strength +2 damage each strike), the unique Crimson
Sentinel (strength +1 damage each strike plus soul counters), the
unique Femur of Toomler of Clan Tzimisce (strength+1 aggravated damage
each strike) and last but not least the unique Sengir Dagger (strength
aggravated damage each strike).
Keeping Sword of the Righteous in mind we don't need aggravated damage
that much. The Crimson Sentinel is unique and may be used by others,
so the Tiger Claws are an option, but if you like it aggravated it's
not that important whether you do one or two points of damage.
In the one pool section we got the Bastard Sword and it's modern
counterpart, the Meat Cleaver (both strength+1 damage each strike) and
the very rare Rowan Ring, which you loose at the end of the combat and
who is therefor not an overwhelming option. The Garrote is only
useable at close range (which melee weapon isn't, but it's mentioned
on the card, and so I'll repeat it faithfully) and may be used to burn
an opponent, thereby being lost. She is an interesting option, with
aggravated damage from, say it with me, Sword of the Righteous
(thanks), there's always the chance for torpor and burning.
In the more-than-cheap section for nothing are the Wooden Stake,
who'll send the opponent to torpor (like the aggravated damage we'll
try to do anyway) and lost in the process, and the vulnerable Meat
Hook (to Potence) and Poker (to Fortitude). Both do strength +1
damage, Poker likes fighting Kyasids, Meat Hook gives you a press you
hopefully won't need.
Like I said before, almost all melee weapons are useable "each
strike", only two weapons are useable once each combat (and therefor
less expensive): Brass Knuckles cost nothing for strength +1 damage,
the Gas-powered Chainsaw, by the way the only chainsaw out of three to
count as melee weapon, costs one pool and does three damage. Since we
don't have additional strikes easily available, for no Salubri
Antitribu has got Celerity, the once per combat clause will only
hinder us if the fighting go to further rounds with presses (but not
Psyche and some such, this starts an entire new combat). Is this a
problem? Not really, since we do have Sword of the Righteous (you
guessed it) to do aggravated damage and other cards to increase the
damage to such heights that an opposing vampire will probably not
survive the first round - with the exception of S:CE, in which case
there won't be presses either. Dodges can be countered with Vengeance
of Samiel, Maneuvers with Fake Out if nothing better comes to mind. A
Gas-powered Chainsaw of the Righteous can do 4 points of aggravated
damage, an amount even Fortitude can't easily compensate, and
more-than-cheap Brass Knuckles of the Righteous do two points of
aggravated damage like the dreaded, but unique and expensive Sengir
Dagger.
Conclusion: With the possible exception of the Garotte and the Brass
Knuckles, the Gas-powered Chainsaw will be my weapon of choice for
this stage of the Eternal Struggle!
===================================================
Deck of the Moment: North American Chainsaw Massacre
(I named it for the powerbases, Baltimore and so on, and of course for
the chainsaws mentioned above!)
Crypt:
Doris McMillon 2 val
2 Wolf Valentine 4 VAL for press to continue
combat vs. Tremere
2 Thomas Steed, The Angry 4 val aus ani melee weapon searcher
2 Kervos, The Lietenant 3 val aus
2 Iadala, Prophet of Guadalajara !Malk 4 AUS dem if
successfully equipping, untap her at end of turn
3 Adonai 7 VAL AUS for D action to attack
camarilla, +1 bleed, +1 strength vs. Tremere
Library (60 cards)
11 Combat Starter:
3 Fast Reaction (use Sword of the Righteous after playing this card,
not before: No first round strike, so no S:CE, Dodge …)
Telepathic Tracking (does not work well with Chainsaws, so I'll remove
it)
2 Nose of the Hound
4 Forced Awakening
Wake with Evening's Freshness (usually you have Intercept due to
auspex, sport bike or Blessing of the name, so I'll change it for an
additional Forced Awakening)
11 Combat winner:
6 Sword of the Righteous
2 Vengeance of Samiel
Blissful Agony (if something goes wrong or if you want to have fun,
use at superior)
2 Taste of Vitae (do 6 aggrevated with chainsaw of the righteous,
vengeance of samiel and get more blood back then you could handle,
except on Adonai maybe)
Sense Vitality (if you don't win or in conjunction with Fame)
4 Bleed:
2 Pulse of the Canaille (on Iadala, put it on Adonai if you'd like to
gamble with Archons. No one else can use it, so maybe only 1 is
enough)
2 Burning Touch
9 Equipment (non-melee-weapon):
2 Leather Jacket
Flak Jacket (more of these?)
2 Laptop Computer
Pier 13, Port of Baltimore (key for an equipment deck)
2 IR Goggles (maneuvers are a weak point without them, no cost, very
Baltimore-friendly)
Sport Bike
4 Equipment (melee-weapon)
4 Gas-Powered Chainsaw (shall be enough, if more are needed, use
Heidelberg to recycle)
9 Master:
Elder Library
2 Powerbase: Mexico City
Powerbase: Chicago
2 Blood Doll
Fame (the Fame-Sense Vitality - Angle is to be explored in a further
newsletter. You tend to burn a victim rather then sending him into
torpor, so it may be dropped in this kind of deck)
Heidelberg Castle, Germany (it's HeidelbUrg, of course, it's a castle
(burg), not a mountain (berg). Trust a German on this.)
Vast Wealth
5 Intercept:
Melange
2 Enhanced Senses
2 Spirit's Touch
2 Equipper:
2 Gift of Bellona
4 Combo:
4 Blessing of the Name
60 cards for a deck, a concept like the one discussed in the Brujah
Newsletter of the esteemed Skaffen, doesn't work for a combat deck
(like he mentioned). Since I couldn't believe a Brujah, I had to try
myelf and got a bloody nose (okay, some of the blood was from my
preys, but who cares). In one game with five players I was out of deck
after ousting my prey, but was still able to oust my grandprey, too,
since the permanents are great on themselves. But you get very
calculable, and my third prey managed to stop me, though getting out
of deck himself. Never saw this happen before in any game (we played
without time limit for nearly six hours).
To avoid playing with no surprises, you could simple double the
Library cards with the exception of the permanent equipment, which
shall be enough already. I'm not sure if the availability of the
equipment is still good enough if you do this, but it's a start.
===================================================
SIGN OFF
Okay, this was the first newsletter for the Salubri Antitribu. I hope
you enjoyed it. The topics of the next letters are weapon fetching,
cards to make melee weapons even more devasting, helpful vampires from
other clans, a view on allies we could use and melee weapon hosers.
The order may vary. Quite a way to go!
Comments, congratulations, help and other positive stuff is always
welcome,
negative stuff is to be send to your favourite Tremere or Baali.
Atrovent the German Chainsaw,
Oliver....@gmx.net
"If it's true that the Tremere you murdered haunt you wherever you go
- may you never walk alone!" Song of the Chainsaw, Volume 1
"Atrovent" <oliver....@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:3cb73cde...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> But what does it do? It's simple: Aggravated damage for simple Melee
> Weapons! That's something no clan has discovered before us,
Ancient hearts, 1995, Quietus, Blood Agony =)
(snip)
> Or we'll do the same aggravating trick with, say, a Meat
> Cleaver and a Sword of the Righteous.
maybe you're better off with a garrote which allows you to burn a vampire
and play Ritual of the bitter rose on top of that ? =)
> The Garrote is only
> useable at close range (which melee weapon isn't, but it's mentioned
> on the card, and so I'll repeat it faithfully)
some people may try to use it with shadow strike =)
> and may be used to burn
> an opponent, thereby being lost. She is an interesting option, with
> aggravated damage from, say it with me, Sword of the Righteous
> (thanks), there's always the chance for torpor and burning.
you bet it's interesting? Bitter rose, bitter rose, bitter rose ! =)
> Conclusion: With the possible exception of the Garotte and the Brass
> Knuckles, the Gas-powered Chainsaw will be my weapon of choice for
> this stage of the Eternal Struggle!
meat hook is a good option too, since you can strike and use the press as
many time as you want and then throw a sword of the righteous for the last
round for that burning blow.
otherwise, congrats and good luck for your future newsletters =)
reyda
(still working on the giovanni newsletter ;p )
oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) wrote in message news:<3cb73cde...@news.cis.dfn.de>...
<Snip over exhagerated praise for Sword of Righteousness and a failure
to recognize Garrottes>
> Deck of the Moment: North American Chainsaw Massacre
> (I named it for the powerbases, Baltimore and so on, and of course for
> the chainsaws mentioned above!)
>
> Crypt:
>
> Doris McMillon 2 val
> 2 Wolf Valentine 4 VAL for press to continue
> combat vs. Tremere
> 2 Thomas Steed, The Angry 4 val aus ani melee weapon searcher
> 2 Kervos, The Lietenant 3 val aus
> 2 Iadala, Prophet of Guadalajara !Malk 4 AUS dem if
> successfully equipping, untap her at end of turn
She's pretty good, but as equipping her wiht a weapon is rediculous as
she can't fight without aid from blessing of the name, I don't know
what ELSE she does...
> 3 Adonai 7 VAL AUS for D action to attack
> camarilla, +1 bleed, +1 strength vs. Tremere
>
> Library (60 cards)
>
> 11 Combat Starter:
> 3 Fast Reaction (use Sword of the Righteous after playing this card,> not before: No first round strike, so no S:CE, Dodge ?)> Telepathic Tracking (does not work well with Chainsaws, so I'll remove
> it)
> 2 Nose of the Hound
> 4 Forced Awakening
> Wake with Evening's Freshness (usually you have Intercept due to
> auspex, sport bike or Blessing of the name, so I'll change it for an
> additional Forced Awakening)
That's only 10 intecept in 60... Sure, its a sixth of your deck, two
are permanent... (melange and sport bike), but both cost you, a blood
(harsh for low capacity kids) and a pool (tough cause you're spending
lots on the chain saw(s)). Stick with WWEF really. You can't afford
the blood.
> 11 Combat winner:
> 6 Sword of the Righteous
> 2 Vengeance of Samiel
> Blissful Agony (if something goes wrong or if you want to have fun,
> use at superior)
> 2 Taste of Vitae (do 6 aggrevated with chainsaw of the righteous,
> vengeance of samiel and get more blood back then you could handle,
> except on Adonai maybe)
Sure, but how likely are you to have this? And what do you do against
a Torn Signpost undead strength shit? Animalism long rang? Two very
popular tournament deck types.
> Sense Vitality (if you don't win or in conjunction with Fame)
>
> 4 Bleed:
> 2 Pulse of the Canaille (on Iadala, put it on Adonai if you'd like to
> gamble with Archons. No one else can use it, so maybe only 1 is
> enough)
> 2 Burning Touch
>
> 9 Equipment (non-melee-weapon):
> 2 Leather Jacket
> Flak Jacket (more of these?)
> 2 Laptop Computer
> Pier 13, Port of Baltimore (key for an equipment deck)
> 2 IR Goggles (maneuvers are a weak point without them, no cost, very
> Baltimore-friendly)
> Sport Bike
Sweet, you're golden. Now spend the 6 turns equipping with all these
things, getting blocked, and not having a sword of righteousness on
hand to knock them into torpor, cause you're over loaded with
equipment.
> 4 Equipment (melee-weapon)
> 4 Gas-Powered Chainsaw (shall be enough, if more are needed, use
> Heidelberg to recycle)
If you get it out.
> 9 Master:
> Elder Library
> 2 Powerbase: Mexico City
> Powerbase: Chicago
> 2 Blood Doll
> Fame (the Fame-Sense Vitality - Angle is to be explored in a further
> newsletter. You tend to burn a victim rather then sending him into
> torpor, so it may be dropped in this kind of deck)
> Heidelberg Castle, Germany (it's HeidelbUrg, of course, it's a castle
> (burg), not a mountain (berg). Trust a German on this.)
Isn't two pool pricey?
> Vast Wealth
>
> 5 Intercept:
> Melange
> 2 Enhanced Senses
> 2 Spirit's Touch
>
> 2 Equipper:
> 2 Gift of Bellona
>
> 4 Combo:
> 4 Blessing of the Name
This deck has no heavy bleed defense, no heavy bleed, no voting
capacity, no way around SCE (fast reactions hit your predator, NOT
your prey), and really isn't an aggresive intercept deck (that is, it
doesn't intercept its PREY)...
How the WORLD did you oust your prey with this?
~SV
vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian) wrote in message >
-snipped-
> > Blissful Agony (if something goes wrong or if you want to have fun,
> > use at superior)
-Snippetysnip-
>
> ..., no way around SCE (fast reactions hit your predator, NOT
> your prey),
> ~SV
Blissful agony is actually one of the better SCE hosers in the game,
but obviously only works if you are blocking (and have more than one
in your library)
[ quoted text not captured ]
OK, I'll bite. How does Blissful Agony hose SCE if you are blocking and
have more than one in your library? (Assuming that the opponent using
SCE is likely to have more SCE in _his_ library.)
Fred
In message <3CB9015B...@removethis.com>,
Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
something about:
>Daz wrote:>>
>> Blissful agony is actually one of the better SCE hosers in the game,
>> but obviously only works if you are blocking (and have more than one
>> in your library)>
>OK, I'll bite. How does Blissful Agony hose SCE if you are blocking and
>have more than one in your library? (Assuming that the opponent using
>SCE is likely to have more SCE in _his_ library.)
If you're blocking, you can wait until you see the opposing minion play
S:CE before deciding to Blissful Agony him.
If you have more than one in your library, well, I don't know where that
bit comes in, unless it's a reference to the rarity thereof. But
basically, it ends up looking like Psyche! -- the opponent spends two
S:CE cards to your one Blissful Agony... except for the prerange crap
you toss around making your melee weapons aggravated.
I find it much more effective to take the person that I'm in combat with
and throw them to their predator or prey, as appropriate -- whoever is
inclined to kick their ass ANYWAY.
--
"There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.
Derek Ray wrote:
>
> In message <3CB9015B...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
> something about:
>
> >Daz wrote:
> >>
> >> Blissful agony is actually one of the better SCE hosers in the game,
> >> but obviously only works if you are blocking (and have more than one
> >> in your library)
> >
> >OK, I'll bite. How does Blissful Agony hose SCE if you are blocking and> >have more than one in your library?.)>
> If you're blocking, you can wait until you see the opposing minion play
> S:CE before deciding to Blissful Agony him.
Sure, and he just plays another SCE. Not exactly what I'd call 'hosing'.
>
> If you have more than one in your library, well, I don't know where that
> bit comes in, unless it's a reference to the rarity thereof. But
> basically, it ends up looking like Psyche! -- the opponent spends two
> S:CE cards to your one Blissful Agony... except for the prerange crap
> you toss around making your melee weapons aggravated.
Exactly. If the other guy doesn't do anything fearsome, you don't have to
bother avoiding it. Psyche! is not much of an SCE-hoser for the same reason.
When someone talks about an SCE-hoser, I'm expecting something like Immortal
Grapple or Fast Reaction or Hidden Lurker, etc - generally, some deal where
you have to stare at your bountiful hand overflowing with SCE and can only
hate the guy who's pounding your boy into a piece of unrecognizable vampire
pulp.
> I find it much more effective to take the person that I'm in combat with
> and throw them to their predator or prey, as appropriate -- whoever is
> inclined to kick their ass ANYWAY.
I agree.
Fred
On 13 Apr 2002 10:54:39 -0700, vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian)
wrote:
>oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) wrote in message news:<3cb73cde...@news.cis.dfn.de>...
>
><Snip over exhagerated praise for Sword of Righteousness
use them with care, if you're quite sure they take the hit and don't
run away, SCE or something. Good after a Fast reaction.
>and a failure
>to recognize Garrottes>
I talked about Garrottes. I'll test them and tell about it.
>
(snip)
>> 2 Iadala, Prophet of Guadalajara !Malk 4 AUS dem if
>> successfully equipping, untap her at end of turn>
>She's pretty good, but as equipping her wiht a weapon is rediculous as
>she can't fight without aid from blessing of the name, I don't know
>what ELSE she does...
She can Pulse of the Canaille, Heidelburg, intercept and prepare a
fast reaction ... Don't underestimate a simple Gas-powered chainsaw
for blocking weenies or intercepting vampires with low blood level.
And she's cheap for her abilities.
>
(snip)
>
>That's only 10 intecept in 60... Sure, its a sixth of your deck, two
>are permanent... (melange and sport bike), but both cost you, a blood
>(harsh for low capacity kids) and a pool (tough cause you're spending
>lots on the chain saw(s)). Stick with WWEF really. You can't afford
>the blood.
Yeah, some more WWEF won't hurt. Blessing upon the name to have
blockers may not be enough.
>>> 2 Taste of Vitae (do 6 aggrevated with chainsaw of the righteous,
>> vengeance of samiel and get more blood back then you could handle,
>> except on Adonai maybe)>
>Sure, but how likely are you to have this?
As I mentioned, you don't need the combo, it's overdoing things. For
most vampires in this deck, a taste of vitae for the chainsaw damage
is enough to get them to full most of the time.
> And what do you do against
>a Torn Signpost undead strength shit?
So they do +x hand damage vs Doris McMillian. Okay, we'll both go to
torpor (aggrevated damage). How long do they do it? If you don't want
to fight, stake up some additional Blissful Agonies and let him have
fun with someone else (his prey or predator, whatever you are not, if
you are at superior valeren of course)
>Animalism long rang? Two very
>popular tournament deck types.
IR-Googles, two auspex maneuvers. May not be enough, I'll have to see.
(snip)
>
>Sweet, you're golden. Now spend the 6 turns equipping with all these
>things, getting blocked, and not having a sword of righteousness on
>hand to knock them into torpor, cause you're over loaded with
>equipment.
Yeah, if this happens you're toast. It did sometimes (usually some
early blocker stopped the equipping actions, though Gift of Bellona
helps) until I took Baltimore in the deck. This one is key, so there
should be some more of it in the deck, but even in the case you
described you usually have a few vampires out there to equip and maybe
to Heidelburg. Most of the items are good on themselves to survive
early battles even with the wrong cards. But I never experienced an
equipment-hand jam with the deck so far. Usually I'm done with most of
the equipping actions I need after the first three turns, then
redistributing starts...
>>> 4 Equipment (melee-weapon)
>> 4 Gas-Powered Chainsaw (shall be enough, if more are needed, use
>> Heidelberg to recycle)>
>If you get it out.
Heidelburg? In the game I mentioned it was the last card in the deck,
so I tapped vampires to move equipment and Blessing of the name.
Awful, sometimes, but it worked.
>>> Heidelberg Castle, Germany (it's HeidelbUrg, of course, it's a castle
>> (burg), not a mountain (berg). Trust a German on this.)>
>Isn't two pool pricey?
It's worth it's bucks, in my opinion. It may give you a very strong
blocker and/or attacker.
>>This deck has no heavy bleed defense,
Intercept, Blessing of the name, fast reaction to remove
stealth/bleeder...
>no heavy bleed,
Pulse of the Canaille on Adonai, +1 Bleed inbred and Burning Touch is
a bleed of 5.
>no voting capacity,
Yeah, intercept will have to do it, since no !Sal has votes
> no way around SCE (fast reactions hit your predator, NOT
>your prey),
Strength of numbers. Vs. heavy SCE it's a problem I haven't resolved
yet.
>and really isn't an aggresive intercept deck (that is, it
>doesn't intercept its PREY)...
Why not? Auspex intercepts, Sport Bike, Blessing of the Name... My
prey in the game I mentioned was a Brujah with Magnums and somesuch.
He never got a gun to one of his Ladies.
>
>How the WORLD did you oust your prey with this?
Two preys. Brujah guns and !Ven/Harbringers. I did it with a weenie
flow. Constantly attack with four !Sal a round, each equipped like an
arsenal. I'll write about Blessings of the name in the next
newsletter. Kill the blockers if you see some, if something goes
wrong, use Sense Vitality. Use Sword of the Righteous only if you're
quite sure the opponent won't run away or SCE.
Naturally, this deck is not tested vs. every kind of opponent or
combinations of prey- and predatordecks. There are some constellations
where It'll die most horribly, i'm sure of this (Ravnos Weapon Stealth
deck or Fast Hands, anyone?) . What deck isn't? An early version was
smacked down very quickly, but lacked some key cards. Please try the
deck and tell me of the results.
>
>~SV
Thanks for the criticism, it'll all be thought over and may rework
some parts of the deck.
Atrovent
[ quoted text not captured ]
You'll toss him on his prey or predator (whatever you are not). If
it's a combat deck, he will have his cards vs. S:CE. Throw him on
Guard Dogs or something!
Atrovent
In message <3CB9905C...@removethis.com>,
Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
something about:
>Derek Ray wrote:>>>Sure, and he just plays another SCE. Not exactly what I'd call 'hosing'.
If he has one in hand. They will almost NEVER have more than two in
hand -- so even if your first combat goes splat, you know the rest are
safe.
>> If you have more than one in your library, well, I don't know where that
>> bit comes in, unless it's a reference to the rarity thereof. But
>> basically, it ends up looking like Psyche! -- the opponent spends two
>> S:CE cards to your one Blissful Agony... except for the prerange crap
>> you toss around making your melee weapons aggravated.>
>Exactly. If the other guy doesn't do anything fearsome, you don't have to
>bother avoiding it. Psyche! is not much of an SCE-hoser for the same reason.
Psyche! kicks S:CE's ass all over the place, and I rarely put more than
8 in a deck. 8 Psyche against 12 S:CE mean that they'll only manage to
end combat against you 4 times... and if those don't show up early on,
they won't have any vampires to end combat with.
Try a pot/CEL "flung stuff" deck sometime. Use Gates to maneuver to
long and force them to end combat against only 1 point of damage, and
plenty of Sewer Lids and additional strikes as backup for people who
fail to get out of the way. 8 Psyche! will do you well here. You won't
need POT skill cards, so use some Havens as well; that'll wipe someone's
hand clean of S:CE in a heartbeat. Most of the pot/CEL vampires have
Presence, so you can bleed with Legal Manipulations; if you want to lean
a bit more heavily to the cheap side, you can include Jimmy Dunn and
Victor Tolliver, and just use Computer Hackings instead. Mix bleed and
Rush about half-and-half; Rush backwards as defense, bleed forward as
offense OR Rush forward to cycle to bleed cards. Bouncing your
zero-stealth bleeds of 2 will rarely hurt your grandprey, and you can
always maneuver away with an inferior Gate to protect your own guy.
Really pisses off people who were relying on Anaesthetic Touch. =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Sat, 13 Apr 2002 00:26:38 +0200, "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Atrovent" <oliver....@gmx.net> wrote in message
>news:3cb73cde...@news.cis.dfn.de...
>>> But what does it do? It's simple: Aggravated damage for simple Melee
>> Weapons! That's something no clan has discovered before us,>
>Ancient hearts, 1995, Quietus, Blood Agony =)
Arrgh. Okay, ahem, like I said, we were here a long time, and chose to
poise as Assamites and somesuch... wurcks...
>
>(snip)>> Or we'll do the same aggravating trick with, say, a Meat
>> Cleaver and a Sword of the Righteous.>
>maybe you're better off with a garrote which allows you to burn a vampire
>and play Ritual of the bitter rose on top of that ? =)
I'll try it. In a weenie concept it may be not that great, but on the
other hand, maybe someone didn't feel that urge for hunting after
sniffing the rose! My local group will be most grateful for the
suggestion!
>>> The Garrote is only
>> useable at close range (which melee weapon isn't, but it's mentioned
>> on the card, and so I'll repeat it faithfully)>
>some people may try to use it with shadow strike =)
Okay. Obtenebration and Valeren is hard to achieve, but I recognize
your point.
>>> and may be used to burn
>> an opponent, thereby being lost. She is an interesting option, with
>> aggravated damage from, say it with me, Sword of the Righteous
>> (thanks), there's always the chance for torpor and burning.>
>you bet it's interesting? Bitter rose, bitter rose, bitter rose ! =)
Say it with me ... ;)
>
>>> Conclusion: With the possible exception of the Garotte and the Brass
>> Knuckles, the Gas-powered Chainsaw will be my weapon of choice for
>> this stage of the Eternal Struggle!>
>meat hook is a good option too, since you can strike and use the press as
>many time as you want and then throw a sword of the righteous for the last
>round for that burning blow.
I'll try this, too. The big question will be if those cude litte !Sal
can survive repeated punching by some angry muscular undead... ;)
>
>otherwise, congrats and good luck for your future newsletters =)
I'll be your humbly servant (if I'm out of character). Thanks!
>
>reyda
>(still working on the giovanni newsletter ;p )
Good luck! I'll try to fill some graveyards for your field studies! ;)
Atrovent
>
>
>
In message <3cb9ede...@news.cis.dfn.de>,
oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) mumbled something about:
>I'll try this, too. The big question will be if those cude litte !Sal
>can survive repeated punching by some angry muscular undead... ;)
Undead Persistence. And give them Fortitude skill cards.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Derek Ray wrote:
>
> In message <3CB9905C...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
> something about:
>
> >Derek Ray wrote:
> >>
> >Sure, and he just plays another SCE. Not exactly what I'd call 'hosing'.
>
> If he has one in hand. They will almost NEVER have more than two in
> hand -- so even if your first combat goes splat, you know the rest are
> safe.
??? I don't know. I sure have SCE decks where I'd draw another one. And
another and another and another. Remember, when your only combat is SCE,
you can stick in a *lot* of SCE - as opposed to combat decks that both have
to pin you down with something and pummel you with something else - which
works because they only have to do it once score a kill. But if their "pin"
only means you have to play another SCE, it's not usually going to do much.
> Exactly. If the other guy doesn't do anything fearsome, you don't have to
> >bother avoiding it. Psyche! is not much of an SCE-hoser for the same reason.
>
> Psyche! kicks S:CE's ass all over the place, and I rarely put more than
> 8 in a deck.
Well, I can't help who you're playing against. If 8 Psyche!s are "kicking"
a deck, it's not SCE. It's a mild taste of SCE and a prayer.
> 8 Psyche against 12 S:CE
So folks need to stick in more SCE than that, obviously.
Typical stupid cross-metagame argument. You set up your "punching bag" SCE
deck and tell me Psyche! works against it, when you've used 2/3rds as many
Psyche!s as the total number of combat cards in the other guy's deck - without
even worrying about what you're going to do to him if he can't play the SCE.
Against a deck with 12 SCEs, a weeny potence rush deck wouldn't even need
Immortal Grapples. Just stick in enough Haven Uncovered to run 'em out of
SCEs. I was talking about an SCE _hoser_.
Fred
In message <3CBA14F2...@removethis.com>,
Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
something about:
>Derek Ray wrote:>>
>> If he has one in hand. They will almost NEVER have more than two in
>> hand -- so even if your first combat goes splat, you know the rest are
>> safe.>
>??? I don't know. I sure have SCE decks where I'd draw another one. And
>another and another and another. Remember, when your only combat is SCE,
And you lose against decks that don't enter combat with you, because
then you'll have a handful of S:CE and nothing else.
The exact same problem applies to S:CE as combat -- if you have a
handful of combat OR combat defense and can't get into combat, you're
reduced to "bleed for 1" and hoping someone blocks.
Someone is a lot more likely to block when you're an S:CE deck (it's
safer), but I know that I consider "bleed for 1" actions to be a sign of
critical deck failure, and I won't give a player doing nothing but
bleeding for 1 any way to cycle cards. Especially if I know he's using
S:CE (generally pretty damn easy to spot).
>> Exactly. If the other guy doesn't do anything fearsome, you don't have to
>> >bother avoiding it. Psyche! is not much of an SCE-hoser for the same reason.
>>
>> Psyche! kicks S:CE's ass all over the place, and I rarely put more than
>> 8 in a deck.>
>Well, I can't help who you're playing against. If 8 Psyche!s are "kicking"
>a deck, it's not SCE. It's a mild taste of SCE and a prayer.
I think the people I'm playing against want to win, not just look at a
handful of S:CE and say "boy, my minions sure are safe while bleeding
for 1".
>> 8 Psyche against 12 S:CE>
>So folks need to stick in more SCE than that, obviously.
And then they get crunched when they sit next to Potence IG (which is
highly likely) and hand-jammed horribly when they sit next to people who
don't get into combat with them.
>Typical stupid cross-metagame argument. You set up your "punching bag" SCE
>deck and tell me Psyche! works against it, when you've used 2/3rds as many
You think it's a punching bag, but I see the decks with 16+ S:CE always
looking at 4 Majesty in hand when they're trying to DO something, and a
whole lot of people at the table saying "gee, the big bad Presence vote
deck can't pass its votes because it has no BO in hand... that's a
shame."
>Psyche!s as the total number of combat cards in the other guy's deck - without
>even worrying about what you're going to do to him if he can't play the SCE.
>Against a deck with 12 SCEs, a weeny potence rush deck wouldn't even need
>Immortal Grapples. Just stick in enough Haven Uncovered to run 'em out of
>SCEs. I was talking about an SCE _hoser_.
Missing the point entirely. A person who designs a deck with 20 S:CE in
it is hoping like hell he's going to sit next to combat, or that somehow
he's going to get blocked a lot. Usually a deck with 20 S:CE is a
weenie PRE bleed deck -- I can't imagine putting 20 S:CE in any other
type of deck and not getting instantly crushed by hand jam.
Do you really think the 20 S:CE are what makes such a deck win, or the
fact that the deck is composed of 40 bleed cards, 20 S:CE cards, and 10
token Masters, with a weenie crypt to get 6+ actions per turn? 20 S:CE
is functional in this deck because it doesn't actually ever play more
than one- or two-card combos, and doesn't NEED its hand size.
I stand by my statement. A reasonable amount of S:CE in a deck is 12.
More, and you are simply asking for hand jam when you fail to get into
combat.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Derek Ray wrote:
>
> In message <3CBA14F2...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
> something about:
>
> >Derek Ray wrote:
> >>
> >> If he has one in hand. They will almost NEVER have more than two in
> >> hand -- so even if your first combat goes splat, you know the rest are
> >> safe.
> >
> >??? I don't know. I sure have SCE decks where I'd draw another one. And
> >another and another and another. Remember, when your only combat is SCE,
>
> And you lose against decks that don't enter combat with you, because
> then you'll have a handful of S:CE and nothing else.
No, I don't. I do just fine. You can have more than 12 SCEs AND do
plenty with the rest of your deck. I didn't say it had to 80% SCEs.
Just more than 12.
> The exact same problem applies to S:CE as combat -- if you have a
> handful of combat OR combat defense and can't get into combat, you're
> reduced to "bleed for 1" and hoping someone blocks.
No, it doesn't. Combat and combat defense are not equal. Pretending they
are is cracked. Combat defense has only one working part. It doesn't need
something to get in combat, something to stay in combat, and something to smash
them up now that you're stuck in combat, not to mention other various odds and ends
like Decapitates to burn, and Tastes to replenish blood and so forth.
> >Well, I can't help who you're playing against. If 8 Psyche!s are "kicking"
> >a deck, it's not SCE. It's a mild taste of SCE and a prayer.
>
> I think the people I'm playing against want to win, not just look at a
> handful of S:CE and say "boy, my minions sure are safe while bleeding
> for 1".
What can I say? This just isn't what happens with a true SCE deck in my experience.
Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
Fred
"Atrovent" <oliver....@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:3cb9ede...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> >
> >(snip)
> >> Or we'll do the same aggravating trick with, say, a Meat
> >> Cleaver and a Sword of the Righteous.
> >
> >maybe you're better off with a garrote which allows you to burn a vampire
> >and play Ritual of the bitter rose on top of that ? =)
>
> I'll try it. In a weenie concept it may be not that great, but on the
> other hand, maybe someone didn't feel that urge for hunting after
> sniffing the rose! My local group will be most grateful for the
> suggestion!
what is interesting is, as salubri are <5 cap they can be considered as
"expandable"... so if you manage to send to torpor arika with the 2 cap,
play amaranth + bitter rose to finish the job and gain the blood lost on
previous tributes to the master ;)
reyda
In message <3CBA299C...@removethis.com>,
Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> yapped:
>Derek Ray wrote:>>
>> And you lose against decks that don't enter combat with you, because
>> then you'll have a handful of S:CE and nothing else.>
>No, I don't. I do just fine. You can have more than 12 SCEs AND do
>plenty with the rest of your deck. I didn't say it had to 80% SCEs.
>Just more than 12.
Deck list, please. Or at least something other than vague statements
such as "more than 12".
>> The exact same problem applies to S:CE as combat -- if you have a
>> handful of combat OR combat defense and can't get into combat, you're
>> reduced to "bleed for 1" and hoping someone blocks.>
>No, it doesn't. Combat and combat defense are not equal. Pretending they
They're not. It's easier to defend against combat. However, this
doesn't mean you won't run into a problem if you have combat defense and
then never manage to get into combat.
I played in the Lafayette tournament in January with a Harbingers
Slaughterhouse deck based around Scrying of Secrets. I put in about 16
Fortitude cards, because I figured on combat not only being present, but
directed heavily at me due to the nature of the deck (stealing people's
cards REALLY pisses them off).
In one game, I never got into combat despite having a Pulsed minion and
two others bleeding every turn. I spent most of that game trying to get
the Fortitude out of my hand so that I could do anything else. S:CE
would have been even worse; I can generate multiple rounds of combat
(and multiple prevent opportunities) with Hidden Strength's press.
In the recent Atlanta Storyline tournament, I played a !Ventrue deck
with about 16-20 Fortitude cards, figuring again that I'd be making
myself a target by bleeding for 3-6 with each action. And then nobody
brought combat, and everyone brought Deflections, and I wedged up AGAIN
on Fortitude.
So yes, Fred, I will continue to say with authority AND experience that
if you start putting 16+ S:CE cards in your deck, you're running a great
risk of getting fucked if you never sit next to combat, and it's
piss-poor deck building on your part. I would never consider doing so
unless I could guarantee myself 16+ combats per game; an Earth
Meld/Animalism intercept deck, for example, would rate 16+ S:CE at
MINIMUM.
I would consider doing so even less in a tournament environment, where
there will be less combat than normal, and you're even LESS guaranteed
to have opportunities to use your S:CE; and worse, the combat you DO see
is likely to be Potence Immortal Grapple, which will fuck you up for
even relying on S:CE in the first place.
>are is cracked. Combat defense has only one working part. It doesn't need
>something to get in combat, something to stay in combat, and something to smash
You're wrong. It MUST get into combat, or you never get to play the
cards. However, it doesn't need all the rest of that crap, no.
>them up now that you're stuck in combat, not to mention other various odds and ends
>like Decapitates to burn, and Tastes to replenish blood and so forth.
>>> I think the people I'm playing against want to win, not just look at a
>> handful of S:CE and say "boy, my minions sure are safe while bleeding
>> for 1".>
>What can I say? This just isn't what happens with a true SCE deck in my experience.
So Fred, why don't you give us a deck listing of this "true" S:CE deck?
And what DOES happen with this deck when it sits next to someone who
doesn't block it? How about someone who reduces all its bleeds, or
someone who Minion Taps for 8, then calls three votes with Voter
Captivation, one of which was a Consanguineous Boon, and totally ignores
your bleeding?
Why don't you enlighten us, Oh Mighty S:CE Guru?
>Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
And fuck you too, Fred.
Sorry logic and rational thought couldn't get you to take the blinders
off and open your eyes. Try playing your 20+ S:CE deck against players
who DON'T habitually try to block everything, and who DON'T play
nothing-but-combat decks to guarantee you an endless supply of
opportunities to play S:CE.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <3cba2f91$0$7521$79c1...@nan-newsreader-03.noos.net>,
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> mumbled something about:
>what is interesting is, as salubri are <5 cap they can be considered as
>"expandable"... so if you manage to send to torpor arika with the 2 cap,
>play amaranth + bitter rose to finish the job and gain the blood lost on
>previous tributes to the master ;)
Currently, this doesn't work though; I'm trying to ignore the diablerie
thread because it's very annoying, but from what I can gather, RotBR is
only playable right now if you survive the blood hunt.
I could be wrong; I'm not reading it very closely as it's a lot of
foot-stamping and shouting, and some of it is a non-English speaker
trying to argue English semantics, which SHOULD be an obvious no-brainer
but seems to have been bypassed.
This isn't to say that non-English speakers are "bad" in any way, but
how much trust would you put in my ability to accurately translate the
V:TES rules into French? (my level of fluency in that language is, um,
pidgin at best. =) And how seriously would you take me if I tried to
argue over the literal translation of "il y a"? =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
Derek Ray wrote:
> "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> mumbled something about:
> >what is interesting is, as salubri are <5 cap they can be considered as
> >"expandable"... so if you manage to send to torpor arika with the 2 cap,
> >play amaranth + bitter rose to finish the job and gain the blood lost on
> >previous tributes to the master ;)
>
> Currently, this doesn't work though; I'm trying to ignore the diablerie
> thread because it's very annoying, but from what I can gather, RotBR is
> only playable right now if you survive the blood hunt.
Correct. RotBR is not playable before the diablerie, only after (and the
diaberlie includes the Blood Hunt, by the current rules).
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
> Heidelberg Castle, Germany (it's HeidelbUrg, of course, it's a castle
> (burg), not a mountain (berg). Trust a German on this.)
IIRC, it was a German (Austian?) who suggested the Change from
Heidelburg to Heidelberg. I know Berg means mountain and Burg means
fort. But I think this is the castle of the city of Heidelberg.
Jeroen
a Belgian with some knowledge about Germany
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<v8cibuk8o0lo3tsk6...@4ax.com>...
> In message <3CB9015B...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
> something about:
>
> >Daz wrote:
> >>
> >> Blissful agony is actually one of the better SCE hosers in the game,
> >> but obviously only works if you are blocking (and have more than one
> >> in your library)
> >
> >OK, I'll bite. How does Blissful Agony hose SCE if you are blocking and
> >have more than one in your library? (Assuming that the opponent using
> >SCE is likely to have more SCE in _his_ library.)
>
> If you're blocking, you can wait until you see the opposing minion play
> S:CE before deciding to Blissful Agony him.
And waste a blood on our prerange card, super...
I still don't see how !Sal are surviving grappled combats, or longe range madness...
~SV
In message <f987c6cd.02041...@posting.google.com>,
vermil...@yahoo.com (vermillian) mumbled something about:
>Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<v8cibuk8o0lo3tsk6...@4ax.com>...>> In message <3CB9015B...@removethis.com>,>> If you're blocking, you can wait until you see the opposing minion play
>> S:CE before deciding to Blissful Agony him.>
>And waste a blood on our prerange card, super...
>
>I still don't see how !Sal are surviving grappled combats, or longe range madness...
Mine play Trap and Undead Persistence and wait until you run out of
Grapples and maneuvers. Then they hit you for 5 agg and go to torpor,
where someone else can play Sense Vitality on them.
They're weenies. Treat them like weenies... ie. disposable.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfbkbuc83tcln8ik7...@4ax.com...
> In message <3CBA299C...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> yapped:
>> >No, I don't. I do just fine. You can have more than 12 SCEs AND do
> >plenty with the rest of your deck. I didn't say it had to 80% SCEs.
> >Just more than 12.
>
> Deck list, please. Or at least something other than vague statements
> such as "more than 12".
How about:
Crypt (14, avg = 2.93):
Igo the Hungry
Antoinette DuChamp
Angela Decker
Frederick the (not) Weak
Vasilis, The Traitor of Don Cruez
Delilah Easton
Roland Loussarian
Gideon Fontaine
Itzahk Levine
Mariana Gilbert
Violette Prentiss
Ramiel DuPre
Ranjan Rishi, Camarilla Scholar
Jazz Wentworth
Library (90):
4x Presence
3x Anarch Troublemaker
2x Effective management
2x Information Highway
The Barrens
The Coven
Hostile Takeover
Archon Investigation
14x Catatonic Fear
14x Enchant Kindred
10x Mind Numb
8x Aire of Elation
6x Media Influence
6x Majesty
4x Intimidation
4x Change of Target
3x Entrancement
2x Arson
2x Delaying Tactics
The Summoning
Political Ally
(tourney-winning deck in Madison WI on Nov 18 2001 with
20 S:CE)
or:
Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 9, Max: 16, Avg: 3.33)
2 Mariana Gilbert cel PRE 4, Toreador
1 Delilah Easton pre 2, Toreador
2 Gideon Fontaine PRE 3, Ventrue
2 Remilliard AUS pre 4, Toreador Antitribu
1 Lolita for pre 3, Toreador Antitribu
1 Demetrius Slater aus cel pre 4, Toreador
1 Igo the Hungry pre pro 1, Caitiff
2 Violette Prentiss dom PRE 4, Ventrue
Library: (90 cards)
Master (9 cards)
2 Aching Beauty
2 Auspex
3 Blood Doll
1 Information Highway
1 Misdirection
Action (24 cards)
10 Enchant Kindred
1 Entrancement
3 Legal Manipulations
2 Media Influence
4 Mind Numb
4 Social Charm
Action Modifier (20 cards)
8 Aire of Elation
12 Change of Target
Reaction (14 cards)
2 Telepathic Counter
5 Telepathic Misdirection
7 Wake with Evening's Freshness
Combat (23 cards)
23 Majesty
(tourney-winning deck in Los Angeles CA on Feb 17 2002
with 23 S:CE)
Blissful Agony probably isn't going to hose either of these
very much... certainly not like Immortal Grapple would. I
think that's what Fred meant by BA not being much of an S:CE
*hoser*?
[snip two tournaments where 16+ Fortitude cards sucked]
How are your Fortitude experiences arguments that S:CE causes
hand jam? You weren't using Fortitude S:CEs, were you? :-)
Seriously, S:CE is often easier to move than fortitude prevention.
You can play S:CE against someone else's Dodge or S:CE, where
fortitude isn't usable. Likewise against someone else's "maneuver
away and wave".
> >What can I say? This just isn't what happens with a true SCE deck in my
experience.
>
> So Fred, why don't you give us a deck listing of this "true" S:CE deck?
> And what DOES happen with this deck when it sits next to someone who
> doesn't block it? How about someone who reduces all its bleeds, or
> someone who Minion Taps for 8, then calls three votes with Voter
> Captivation, one of which was a Consanguineous Boon, and totally ignores
> your bleeding?
There's a counter deck for everything. What does a deck with
12 S:CE do when it sits next to one with 8 Psyches? And then,
why are they bothering with S:CE at all?
> >Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
>
> And fuck you too, Fred.
>
> Sorry logic and rational thought couldn't get you to take the blinders
> off and open your eyes. Try playing your 20+ S:CE deck against players
> who DON'T habitually try to block everything, and who DON'T play
> nothing-but-combat decks to guarantee you an endless supply of
> opportunities to play S:CE.
Wha? Logic and rational thought? You can think yourself in
circles all day long with decks and counterdecks. At some
point you have to decide what's actually likely and what you've
seen work. All Fred did, that I could see, was say that his
experience hasn't matched yours. That's not very surprising
since you don't play in the same group. Does he need to get
sworn at for that?
Josh
american civil discourse union
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3CBAAAB0...@white-wolf.com...
> Derek Ray wrote:
> > "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> mumbled something about:
> > >what is interesting is, as salubri are <5 cap they can be considered as
> > >"expandable"... so if you manage to send to torpor arika with the 2
cap,
> > >play amaranth + bitter rose to finish the job and gain the blood lost
on
> > >previous tributes to the master ;)
> >
> > Currently, this doesn't work though; I'm trying to ignore the diablerie
> > thread because it's very annoying, but from what I can gather, RotBR is
> > only playable right now if you survive the blood hunt.
>
> Correct. RotBR is not playable before the diablerie, only after (and the
> diaberlie includes the Blood Hunt, by the current rules).
Well >:(
this is pure CRAP ! the card was *never* intended to be played this way. why
would you change today the functionality of a card released in 1994, ad
which is far from being broken ?
I diablerize, i share the blood, then blood hunt occurs. This is logical.
Why change this now ?
Ridiculous to the xtreme : is there a special "diablerie police who catch a
diablerist in the act and make him swear he's a friend of mr justicar over
there ? then release him so he can bring cans of blood to his friends
waiting for him to party ?
Reyda wrote:
> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message> > Correct. RotBR is not playable before the diablerie, only after (and the
> > diaberlie includes the Blood Hunt, by the current rules).
>
> Well >:(
> this is pure CRAP ! the card was *never* intended to be played this way. why
> would you change today the functionality of a card released in 1994, ad
> which is far from being broken ?
>
> I diablerize, i share the blood, then blood hunt occurs. This is logical.
> Why change this now ?
See the diablerie thread(s) for complete, exhaustive, and often-repeated
explanations.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:16:53 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In message <3cb9ede...@news.cis.dfn.de>,
>oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) mumbled something about:
>>>I'll try this, too. The big question will be if those cude litte !Sal
>>can survive repeated punching by some angry muscular undead... ;)>
>Undead Persistence. And give them Fortitude skill cards.
Fortitude as a third clan speciality is a little joke from the
designers, with two vampires with inferior for and non at superior.
Animalism is close with one inferior! Exploring the Fortitude Angel is
therefor an entire new angle, to be analysed in a (far away)
newsletter. Contributors are welcome!
[ quoted text not captured ]
>I still don't see how !Sal are surviving grappled combats, or longe range
>madness...
I ditched melee weapons for guns. Still loses to most things but not quite as
many.
Note that Gift of Bellona does work with nonmelee weapons.
jtdu...@yahoo.com writes:
>Seriously, S:CE is often easier to move than fortitude prevention.
>You can play S:CE against someone else's Dodge or S:CE, where
>fortitude isn't usable. Likewise against someone else's "maneuver
>away and wave".
In addition, the S:CE that josh mentions comes attached to
significant additional benefits: untap for Majesty and a ping
for Catatonic fear. Even when FOR is just wasted, they're not
wasted. I find Majesty is one of the least jammable cards
in the game. I can almost always either incite my prey to
block or intercept my predator.
I doubt S:CE decks would be as much trouble if they had to
be composed of Oubliette or Spiritual Intervention. But,
they don't.
Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
"It is better to be wrong than to be vague" - Freeman Dyson
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3CBB25EA...@white-wolf.com...
> Reyda wrote:
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> > > Correct. RotBR is not playable before the diablerie, only after (and
the
> > > diaberlie includes the Blood Hunt, by the current rules).
> >
> > Well >:(
> > this is pure CRAP ! the card was *never* intended to be played this way.
why
> > would you change today the functionality of a card released in 1994, ad
> > which is far from being broken ?
> >
> > I diablerize, i share the blood, then blood hunt occurs. This is
logical.
> > Why change this now ?
>
> See the diablerie thread(s) for complete, exhaustive, and often-repeated
> explanations.
why don't you clarify that Ritual of the Bitter Rose is playable even if
your minion is not ready after combat / action ? =)
reyda
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3cbb4622$0$11506$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net...
[ quoted text not captured ]
I'm not sure if you're kidding, but what text would you use
to make this possible? "Playable by a burned vampire"? :-)
Josh
rewriting the diablerie rules sounds more plausible to me
(or making RotBR say "play when about to diablerize a
vampire.")
"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a9fhch$2rq1d$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3cbb4622$0$11506$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net...
> >
> > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
> > news:3CBB25EA...@white-wolf.com...
> > > Reyda wrote:
>
> > > > I diablerize, i share the blood, then blood hunt occurs. This is
> > logical.
> > > > Why change this now ?
> > >
> > > See the diablerie thread(s) for complete, exhaustive, and
often-repeated
> > > explanations.
> >
> > why don't you clarify that Ritual of the Bitter Rose is playable even if
> > your minion is not ready after combat / action ? =)
>
> I'm not sure if you're kidding, but what text would you use
> to make this possible? "Playable by a burned vampire"? :-)
there is a precedent : some combat cards are playable even if one of your
vampire is not in combat. Nosferatu putrescence, Save face, Octopod.
reyda
In message <3cbb28fc...@news.cis.dfn.de>,
oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) mumbled something about:
>On Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:16:53 GMT, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>In message <3cb9ede...@news.cis.dfn.de>,
>>oliver....@gmx.net (Atrovent) mumbled something about:
>>>>>I'll try this, too. The big question will be if those cude litte !Sal
>>>can survive repeated punching by some angry muscular undead... ;)>>
>>Undead Persistence. And give them Fortitude skill cards.>
>Fortitude as a third clan speciality is a little joke from the
>designers, with two vampires with inferior for and non at superior.
You only need inferior Fortitude to play Undead Persistence.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <a9f6pc$2i2aa$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:
>Blissful Agony probably isn't going to hose either of these
>very much... certainly not like Immortal Grapple would. I
>think that's what Fred meant by BA not being much of an S:CE
>*hoser*?
It's not a hoser. But it's also not a complete waste of time like he
thinks it is.
I also note that you listed two weenie PRE bleed decks for me. A couple
messages ago,... I said...
"Missing the point entirely. A person who designs a deck with 20 S:CE
is hoping like hell he's going to sit next to combat, or that somehow
he's going to get blocked a lot. Usually a deck with 20 S:CE is a
weenie PRE bleed deck -- I can't imagine putting 20 S:CE in any other
type of deck and not getting instantly crushed by hand jam."
Point still remains. So far, if it isn't a weenie PRE bleed deck, it
isn't a real S:CE deck, according to Fred.
>[snip two tournaments where 16+ Fortitude cards sucked]
>
>How are your Fortitude experiences arguments that S:CE causes
>hand jam? You weren't using Fortitude S:CEs, were you? :-)
*I* can see the parallel that combat defense is difficult to move when
you don't get into combat, no matter what type it is. If I had been
getting into combat and people were playing S:CE, that'd have been one
thing. I couldn't even get into combat.
>Seriously, S:CE is often easier to move than fortitude prevention.
>You can play S:CE against someone else's Dodge or S:CE, where
>fortitude isn't usable. Likewise against someone else's "maneuver
>away and wave".
By the same token, S:CE is a one-per-combat thing, and you can often
cycle multiple Fortitude prevent cards in a single combat, clearing your
entire hand out in one swoop.
Swings and roundabouts, here.
>> >What can I say? This just isn't what happens with a true SCE deck in my>experience.>>
>> So Fred, why don't you give us a deck listing of this "true" S:CE deck?
>> And what DOES happen with this deck when it sits next to someone who
>> doesn't block it? How about someone who reduces all its bleeds, or
>> someone who Minion Taps for 8, then calls three votes with Voter
>> Captivation, one of which was a Consanguineous Boon, and totally ignores
>> your bleeding?>
>There's a counter deck for everything. What does a deck with
>12 S:CE do when it sits next to one with 8 Psyches? And then,
>why are they bothering with S:CE at all?
Because 12 S:CE is not an INeffective number? It's enough to keep light
interceptors from killing your vampires. It's enough so that you can
bleed into Animalism untap and figure you won't get dead if you're
blocked. It serves a lot of purpose, not the least of which being that
it keeps card slots free for doing what your deck does.
A deck with 8 Psyches and no way to get into combat will lose just as
badly as the heavy S:CE deck. I just don't see 20 S:CE as a viable
strategy in most instances where you're going to want S:CE, because you
have to KNOW that you're going to get into combat/get blocked that much.
Weenie PRE can pretty much guarantee this, because eventually someone
will just leave all their minions untapped.
>> >Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
This doesn't look very much like "his experience doesn't match mine".
This looks like Fred being a mouthy bitch and refusing to consider any
other possibilities.
>> And fuck you too, Fred.
>>
>> Sorry logic and rational thought couldn't get you to take the blinders
>> off and open your eyes. Try playing your 20+ S:CE deck against players
>> who DON'T habitually try to block everything, and who DON'T play
>> nothing-but-combat decks to guarantee you an endless supply of
>> opportunities to play S:CE.>
>Wha? Logic and rational thought? You can think yourself in
>circles all day long with decks and counterdecks. At some
>point you have to decide what's actually likely and what you've
Yeah, that was where I generally try to start from. I suppose I'm
assuming competent players who don't consistently play into the hands of
their opponent.
>seen work. All Fred did, that I could see, was say that his
>experience hasn't matched yours. That's not very surprising
>since you don't play in the same group. Does he need to get
>sworn at for that?
No, he gets sworn at for being a jerkoff and implying that clearly, if
people in my group doesn't use 20+ S:CE in a deck, that I'm just not
playing against good enough players. Yeah, whatever; fuck that noise.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gjrmbusd72b2fbss5...@4ax.com...
> In message <a9f6pc$2i2aa$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
> "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:
>> Point still remains. So far, if it isn't a weenie PRE bleed deck, it> isn't a real S:CE deck, according to Fred.
Well, I'd certainly imagine that the majority of "real S:CE
decks" are indeed weenie Presence bleed decks. Or weenie
presence vote decks. Or weenie Protean decks. That sort of
thing. I sort of agree with Fred that if you're using 12
S:CE as your combat defense, that doesn't make you a "S:CE
deck". A deck that uses S:CE, sure. But 12 cards isn't
usually enough for a major strategy. 12 intercept cards
doesn't necessarily make an "intercept deck" either.
> *I* can see the parallel that combat defense is difficult to move when
> you don't get into combat, no matter what type it is. If I had been
> getting into combat and people were playing S:CE, that'd have been one
> thing. I couldn't even get into combat.
It's a parallel, sure, but it's not the same thing...
> By the same token, S:CE is a one-per-combat thing, and you can often
> cycle multiple Fortitude prevent cards in a single combat, clearing your
> entire hand out in one swoop.
>
> Swings and roundabouts, here.
I think Curt's right, though, that one of the big things making
S:CE so good is that it's often attached to good side-effects:
untap for Majesty and Earth Meld, continue action for Form of
Mist, damage for Catatonic Fear. Fortitude hardly ever gets
you side-effects that good. (King of the Mountain, at 2 blood,
hardly counts. :-) You can only "often" cycle multiple For
cards if (a) your opponent is trying really hard to beat you
up, or (b) all your For cards come with presses (and you have
superior Fortitude).
> Because 12 S:CE is not an INeffective number? It's enough to keep light
> interceptors from killing your vampires. It's enough so that you can
> bleed into Animalism untap and figure you won't get dead if you're
> blocked. It serves a lot of purpose, not the least of which being that
> it keeps card slots free for doing what your deck does.
It is taking up 12 of your card slots, but yeah, it's the most
efficient way of dealing with people who aren't trying very hard
to beat you up but might anyway if you let them. If that's what
you mean. :-) 12 is even too many for some decks, but not
enough for others...
> A deck with 8 Psyches and no way to get into combat will lose just as
> badly as the heavy S:CE deck. I just don't see 20 S:CE as a viable
> strategy in most instances where you're going to want S:CE, because you
> have to KNOW that you're going to get into combat/get blocked that much.
> Weenie PRE can pretty much guarantee this, because eventually someone
> will just leave all their minions untapped.
Well, half the time you can cycle your S:CEs just by leaving
your own guys untapped, too, or by having some Wakes for them
to play. And people do block zero-stealth actions quite a
bit, at least in my experience...
> >> >Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
>
> This doesn't look very much like "his experience doesn't match mine".
> This looks like Fred being a mouthy bitch and refusing to consider any
> other possibilities.
I dunno, he was certainly being a bit snide, but the message
I took here was "your [VTES] universe isn't mine, so there's
no point further discussing our incompatible experiences with
S:CE".
> No, he gets sworn at for being a jerkoff and implying that clearly, if
> people in my group doesn't use 20+ S:CE in a deck, that I'm just not
> playing against good enough players. Yeah, whatever; fuck that noise.
See, I just thought he was implying that your playgroup was a
lot different from his, so you're not seeing 16-20 S:CE decks
much. But swings and roundabouts, right? :-)
Josh
on the teeter totter
"Reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3cbb4edd$0$21357$79c1...@nan-newsreader-03.noos.net...
>
> "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:a9fhch$2rq1d$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de...
> >> > I'm not sure if you're kidding, but what text would you use
> > to make this possible? "Playable by a burned vampire"? :-)
>
> there is a precedent : some combat cards are playable even if one of your
> vampire is not in combat. Nosferatu putrescence, Save face, Octopod.
Ah, good point. I hadn't thought of that. So yeah, RotBR could
be made an action modifier "playable after diablerie even if there
is no acting vampire". That'd be nice. :-)
Josh
has a soft spot for the ritual
In message <a9hdie$38aif$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:
>
>"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:gjrmbusd72b2fbss5...@4ax.com...>> In message <a9f6pc$2i2aa$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
>> "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:>>> Point still remains. So far, if it isn't a weenie PRE bleed deck, it
>> isn't a real S:CE deck, according to Fred.>
>Well, I'd certainly imagine that the majority of "real S:CE
>decks" are indeed weenie Presence bleed decks. Or weenie
>presence vote decks. Or weenie Protean decks. That sort of
Hm. I think weenie PRE vote would start WELL crossing the risk line
with more than 12 S:CE in it. Inherent +1 stealth actions mean that you
have to start bleeding instead of voting, since it's possible that
nobody will be able to block you. And then you're not voting anymore.
>thing. I sort of agree with Fred that if you're using 12
>S:CE as your combat defense, that doesn't make you a "S:CE
>deck". A deck that uses S:CE, sure. But 12 cards isn't
>usually enough for a major strategy. 12 intercept cards
>doesn't necessarily make an "intercept deck" either.
Staying alive forever isn't a major strategy though. The 40 bleed cards
in a weenie Presence deck are the major strategy. The 20 S:CE are what
help keep it alive when the table turns on it.
>> *I* can see the parallel that combat defense is difficult to move when
>> you don't get into combat, no matter what type it is. If I had been
>> getting into combat and people were playing S:CE, that'd have been one
>> thing. I couldn't even get into combat.>
>It's a parallel, sure, but it's not the same thing...
But it's so close as to make no REAL difference.
>>> By the same token, S:CE is a one-per-combat thing, and you can often
>> cycle multiple Fortitude prevent cards in a single combat, clearing your
>> entire hand out in one swoop.
>>
>> Swings and roundabouts, here.>
>I think Curt's right, though, that one of the big things making
>S:CE so good is that it's often attached to good side-effects:
>untap for Majesty and Earth Meld, continue action for Form of
>Mist, damage for Catatonic Fear. Fortitude hardly ever gets
Right. You don't see much Catatonic Fear these days, either; the point
of damage is negligible compared to the untap from Majesty. Spiritual
Intervention gets seen (and overlooked) in Necromancy decks,
Oubliette/Shadow Body occasionally make an appearance with OBT, and
someone was all gaga over Bond with the Monkey, I recall.
But that really doesn't affect whether or not S:CE can jam your hand.
In a PRE deck, you have to find another action to take that someone will
block. In an Earth Meld/intercept deck it works because you're
conducting all the blocking yourself; if you're unable to block actions,
the deck is failing for other reasons than the 20 S:CE. But S:CE, by
itself, isn't always that easily cyclable (Spiritual Intervention, for
example. Put 20 of those in a deck?)
>you side-effects that good. (King of the Mountain, at 2 blood,
>hardly counts. :-) You can only "often" cycle multiple For
>cards if (a) your opponent is trying really hard to beat you
>up, or (b) all your For cards come with presses (and you have
>superior Fortitude).
Or (c) you get swatted for a generic 3 points of damage in a semi-failed
combat and choose to play all your FOR cards at inferior to prevent 1
point of damage at a time. Or (d) you choose to take some points by
playing everything at inferior to move it. Or you prevent 1 with
Resilience and THEN play Rolling with the Punches to prevent the whole
strike (legal, I believe). Heck, I bet you don't even need the mix;
play Rollings at inferior as long as there's still damage, and play the
last at superior to prevent all the remaining damage.
Fortitude cycles well, IF you can manage to get hit. It's kind of rare
to not get hit, unless everyone realizes that you have a lot of FOR in
hand instead of a lot of DOM, and voluntarily inverting that is simply
going to ramp you up to "zoom!" status on the table. This is exactly
what happened with the !Ventrue deck in question; it got the first oust
in all 3 rounds, then jammed on Fortitude because nobody was blocking it
and/or Rushing it, and then everyone looked and said "It's bleeding for
1, ...don't let it move cards." And that was about it. One round I
managed to pull off the above trick (Hidden Strength, press, Rolling
inferior, Resilience superior), and that helped me get back up and
moving again for another couple VP. But people aren't stupid around
here. If your deck is card-fucked AND is a visible threat (Gustav, Jan
Pieterzoon, and Ranjan Rishi), nobody is going to help you fix it by
doing what you want it to do.
>> Because 12 S:CE is not an INeffective number? It's enough to keep light
>> interceptors from killing your vampires. It's enough so that you can
>> bleed into Animalism untap and figure you won't get dead if you're
>> blocked. It serves a lot of purpose, not the least of which being that
>> it keeps card slots free for doing what your deck does.>
>It is taking up 12 of your card slots, but yeah, it's the most
>efficient way of dealing with people who aren't trying very hard
>to beat you up but might anyway if you let them. If that's what
>you mean. :-) 12 is even too many for some decks, but not
>enough for others...
...such as weenie PRE bleed. We keep coming back to weenie decks here;
I will gladly point out that weenie decks aren't even 50% of what you'll
face in a tournament, and aren't even 50% of the S:CE you'll see in a
tournament.
The Ventrue Law Firm, for example; how much S:CE does it carry? 12?
More than 12? It's a vote deck with big vamps and not-so-many actions;
what will it do if nobody can block it? Worse, what if nobody blocks it
and it takes a bunch of actions all at once with Freak Drive? Big old
pile of Majesty staring it straight in the face. That'll put the hot
iron up your weasel.
>> A deck with 8 Psyches and no way to get into combat will lose just as
>> badly as the heavy S:CE deck. I just don't see 20 S:CE as a viable
>> strategy in most instances where you're going to want S:CE, because you
>> have to KNOW that you're going to get into combat/get blocked that much.
>> Weenie PRE can pretty much guarantee this, because eventually someone
>> will just leave all their minions untapped.>
>Well, half the time you can cycle your S:CEs just by leaving
>your own guys untapped, too, or by having some Wakes for them
(?) Zero-stealth actions happen that much? Peter Bakija used to rant
about this; he refused to put Wakes in his Rush deck because it simply
wasn't worth trying to block zero-stealth actions. And for the most
part, he's right.
>to play. And people do block zero-stealth actions quite a
>bit, at least in my experience...
That's not good play, though. Someone taking a zero-stealth action
wants you to block them, for whatever reason -- maybe they want to blow
your head off, maybe they want to add stealth, maybe they're trying to
tap you out. You have to decide if it's worth blocking or not, and
sometimes it's just better to let it go by. Weenie PRE bleed has a
pretty good "worth blocking" test with Legal Manipulations. But once
you run out of "worth-blocking" actions, then what? I routinely ignore
zero-stealth bleeds for 1, as obviously something has gone wrong with
the guy's deck and i'm supposed to help him fix it.
I guess I'm one step ahead here in some regards. I don't ever see decks
that bleed at zero stealth without some means to handle blockers. That
means adding stealth, Majesty untap, eat-your-face combat, Hidden Lurker
eat-your-face combat, Faceless Night/Elder Impersonation, or any of a
host of other annoying things that could happen, including "now that
you're tapped, I play Nose of the Hound on that minion you keep blocking
with." That goes along with the best Deflection-counter offense for
decks that want to leave one DOM guy up and bounce bleeds at stealth;
LET HIM BLOCK YOU. So much for untapped. Now he gets to burn twice as
many resources (Wakes) for all that nice bounce he has, and if you
caught him being too clever, you might just oust him. Sure, maybe it's
Lisette Vizquel, you've guessed wrong, and you get a vampire dead for
letting him block. But if he doesn't have any Wakes, it might have been
worth a vampire.
And if you haven't got rid of your "auto-block" reflex, then you might
just get your face et. =) If you're not blocking for a reason (ie,
your deck is designed both to block things and do something after it
blocks), you should maybe rethink "plan A". Tossing 8 Wakes in a deck
can be a recipe for...
"I block the Computer Hack from Blaise! Successful? OK, pre-range I
get a Zip Gun, and maneuver to long!"
"I play Flash, Sideslip to prevent the Zip Gun, and Blur." *splat*
--
(snip rest of Josh giving Fred a lot more credit than he deserves)
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:g8mpbu0rintkhdt40...@4ax.com...
> In message <a9hdie$38aif$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
> "Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:> >Well, I'd certainly imagine that the majority of "real S:CE> >decks" are indeed weenie Presence bleed decks. Or weenie
> >presence vote decks. Or weenie Protean decks. That sort of
>
> Hm. I think weenie PRE vote would start WELL crossing the risk line
> with more than 12 S:CE in it. Inherent +1 stealth actions mean that you
> have to start bleeding instead of voting, since it's possible that
> nobody will be able to block you. And then you're not voting anymore.
Point is, most real S:CE decks will be weenie decks because
otherwise you can't count on having enough actions to need/be
able to use that many S:CE. And yeah, weenie vote won't want
as many as weenie bleed.
[fortitude vs s:ce]
> But it's so close as to make no REAL difference.
Not at all. It's a whole different discipline with a whole
different effect. Plus you were apparently at the 16-20
level in non-weenie decks.
> You don't see much Catatonic Fear these days, either; the point
> of damage is negligible compared to the untap from Majesty.
Not against Muddles... and surely you know how much this is a
game of math and blood advantage? 1 to 0 is always good,
especially if you avoid getting beat up at the same time.
> But that really doesn't affect whether or not S:CE can jam your hand.
No, it just explains why it's worth playing 16+ of some S:CE in
some decks.
> >You can only "often" cycle multiple For
> >cards if (a) your opponent is trying really hard to beat you
> >up, or (b) all your For cards come with presses (and you have
> >superior Fortitude).
>
> Or (c) you get swatted for a generic 3 points of damage in a semi-failed
> combat and choose to play all your FOR cards at inferior to prevent 1
> point of damage at a time. Or (d) you choose to take some points by
> playing everything at inferior to move it. Or you prevent 1 with
> Resilience and THEN play Rolling with the Punches to prevent the whole
> strike (legal, I believe). Heck, I bet you don't even need the mix;
> play Rollings at inferior as long as there's still damage, and play the
> last at superior to prevent all the remaining damage.
Those are both (a); you don't need (and can't use) more than one
prevent card unless somebody's trying to beat you up.
> Fortitude cycles well, IF you can manage to get hit.
For more than 1. Otherwise it only cycles as well as S:CE.
> If your deck is card-fucked AND is a visible threat (Gustav, Jan
> Pieterzoon, and Ranjan Rishi), nobody is going to help you fix it by
> doing what you want it to do.
Well no, of course not.
> ...such as weenie PRE bleed. We keep coming back to weenie decks here;
> I will gladly point out that weenie decks aren't even 50% of what you'll
> face in a tournament, and aren't even 50% of the S:CE you'll see in a
> tournament.
If people cared more about having strong decks than having
innovative or funny ones, they would be... but that's a whole
'nother argument. :-)
> The Ventrue Law Firm, for example; how much S:CE does it carry? 12?
> More than 12?
Probably less than 12, but some fortitude to back it up since it
hates losing vampires to Immortal Grapple. The Ventrue Law Firm
does lose horribly to intercept, though, even light intercept.
Which is probably why I haven't seen as many Ventrue Law Firms
as weenie decks at local tournaments lately. :-)
> >Well, half the time you can cycle your S:CEs just by leaving
> >your own guys untapped, too, or by having some Wakes for them
>
> (?) Zero-stealth actions happen that much? Peter Bakija used to rant
> about this; he refused to put Wakes in his Rush deck because it simply
> wasn't worth trying to block zero-stealth actions. And for the most
> part, he's right.
No, I really think he's wrong. I mean, he's right that Wakes
don't usually go in a weenie-potence-rush deck, but that's
not because there aren't any actions they can block. It's
because (a) weenie potence needs all 90 of its cards for beating
stuff up and (b) it doesn't really need to block since it's
planning to proactively keep bad actions from happening (by
beating people up).
(And note that I did say "half the time", that being a vague
approximation of how often this kind of cycling will work/be
a reasonable plan.)
> But once
> you run out of "worth-blocking" actions, then what? I routinely ignore
> zero-stealth bleeds for 1, as obviously something has gone wrong with
> the guy's deck and i'm supposed to help him fix it.
Of course you ignore zero-stealth bleeds for 1, unless you're
playing weenies and jammed on Majesties and have left your
guys untapped so you can cycle. The only strategies that'll
fuck you up for doing this are Immortal Grapple combat and
stealth-bleed that draws the perfect blend of stealth and bleed
while playing 1 stealth card per action.
But people *routinely* attempt actions that *are* worth blocking
at zero stealth. Sometimes you're helping them as much by
blocking as you would be by not blocking, but most of the time
that's not the case, because *their* decks don't totally suck
either, so they have actions worth blocking. If they have stealth
to add, that only makes you worse off than if you didn't try to
block if they manage to draw the perfect mix of "more stealth"
and "more nasty actions" each time you try.
> And if you haven't got rid of your "auto-block" reflex, then you might
> just get your face et. =) If you're not blocking for a reason (ie,
> your deck is designed both to block things and do something after it
> blocks), you should maybe rethink "plan A".
I know all this. I'm not saying "block everything" nor am I
saying that everyone's actions are always at no stealth with
no plan to deal with being blocked. I'm saying that enough of
the time, enough people's actions are worth trying to block
that it's reasonable to try to cycle your S:CE handjam by
leaving your weenies untapped, if you're playing weenie S:CE
and have become handjammed. And if they don't take actions,
they're not hurting you either.
> Tossing 8 Wakes in a deck can be a recipe for...
>
> "I block the Computer Hack from Blaise! Successful? OK, pre-range I
> get a Zip Gun, and maneuver to long!"
>
> "I play Flash, Sideslip to prevent the Zip Gun, and Blur." *splat*
Gee, and I thought "Computer Hack from Blaise" was a recipe for
"OK, I get bled for two, and two more from your other vampire,
and you get ousted in six turns by the person not playing a
bruise-bleed deck with giant vampires and only ever +1 bleed."
;-)
Josh
has tried +1 strength/CEL before
In message <a9ju84$3p29g$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>,
"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about:
(snip rest, more later, but this one comes to mind)
>> "I block the Computer Hack from Blaise! Successful? OK, pre-range I
>> get a Zip Gun, and maneuver to long!"
>>
>> "I play Flash, Sideslip to prevent the Zip Gun, and Blur." *splat*>
>Gee, and I thought "Computer Hack from Blaise" was a recipe for
>"OK, I get bled for two, and two more from your other vampire,
>and you get ousted in six turns by the person not playing a
>bruise-bleed deck with giant vampires and only ever +1 bleed."
It wasn't solely a bruise-bleed deck. It did have a good bit of Bum's
Rush in it too, for pesky people behind you -- and since it had the card
slots available and all. I used:
Parmenides (4)
Bianca (6)
Richter (7)
Blaise (7)
Parnassus (7)
Miller (8)
The crypt average is a bit heavy, but at the same point in time, the
cards-required-to-thump-stuff goes way down, and when THAT happens you
can stack the deck in your favor against opposing combat as WELL as
S:CE, and when THAT happens it's no longer fun to pick a fight with any
of your guys.
>has tried +1 strength/CEL before
I used 12 Psyche! in mine, and about 8 Blood Dolls. "ridiculous bloat"
lets you get out 3 vampires to start with, and Parmenides really helps
the deck go as well since he's a CHEAP bugger with +1/CEL. I found that
damn near every time I played it I wedged up on CEL cards rapidly; the
fact that an entire successful combat can consist of "Bum's Rush. Blur.
Taste" (and FORGETTING that fact) leads to putting way too many
Pursuits, Flashes, and Blurs in the deck.
I'll admit that I did use PRE bleed in mine though, too, as well as the
Computer Hacks, since Binaca (sic), Richter, and Miller all have it.
And I threw a couple PRE skill cards in... and yes, I did use two
Alacrity. =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
What a nice argument I“ve caused :)
Maybe I could have worded my reply a bit better, when I said "S:CE
hoser" I obviously meant "Card playable to counter other players S:CE,
not a card to stop the other player playing S:CE" but that was a bit
long winded. I call any card that can counter S:CE in a combat deck, a
S:CE hoser.
Blissfull agony is rather good at stopping S:CE-users, at least it
makes them use more of them. But I would like the wording to be
changed to "...controlled by a Methusalah other then the opposing
vampires controller." But I can“t have everything can I?
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9s0rbussmv84tqa0n...@4ax.com...
[+1 strength/CEL deck]
> The crypt average is a bit heavy, but at the same point in time, the
> cards-required-to-thump-stuff goes way down, and when THAT happens you
> can stack the deck in your favor against opposing combat as WELL as
> S:CE, and when THAT happens it's no longer fun to pick a fight with any
> of your guys.
The crypt average is *huge*! :-) 6.5! OK, Blood Dolls,
fine, but you only get so many actions per turn. My version
of this deck never worked well at all, largely because of
this. Also because when there was other combat at the table,
it was often combat that would fuck me up (eg agg damage,
large single IG'd strikes, that sort of thing). But mainly
because it wasn't fast enough as rush or fast enough as bleed.
Josh
of course, now you can use alacrity *and* siren's lure to get
+2 stealth (!) with celerity... which will doubtless catapult
this deck to instant-death ferocity. ;-)
(Hokay, I'm back. And having found this, I must reply.)
Derek Ray wrote:
>
> In message <3CBA299C...@removethis.com>,
> Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> yapped:
>
> >Derek Ray wrote:
> >>
> >> And you lose against decks that don't enter combat with you, because
> >> then you'll have a handful of S:CE and nothing else.
> >
> >No, I don't. I do just fine. You can have more than 12 SCEs AND do
> >plenty with the rest of your deck. I didn't say it had to 80% SCEs.
> >Just more than 12.
>
> Deck list, please. Or at least something other than vague statements
> such as "more than 12".
I'm not posting decks. No way in hell. I am *NOT* getting into a war
of, "this-deck-sucks", "no-it-doesn't", "yes-it-does-It-would-NEVER-work-
in-OUR-GODLIKE-group!", "no-it-doesn't-It-works-just-fine-in-OUR-HYPERGODLIKE-
GROUP!!!", and so forth. Arguments like that get completely conjectural
and are utterly worthless in terms of resolving anything. Certainly they
are not conducive to the kind of "logic and rational thought" that you rant
about.
Look:
> >No, it doesn't. Combat and combat defense are not equal. Pretending they
>
> They're not. It's easier to defend against combat. However, this
> doesn't mean you won't run into a problem if you have combat defense and
> then never manage to get into combat.
...
> >Sorry. Give your universe my regards. Over and out.
>
> And fuck you too, Fred.
>
> Sorry logic and rational thought couldn't get you to take the blinders
> off and open your eyes.
If you call the previous post "logic and rational thought", we have nothing to
talk about. You simply make assertions about "what works" and what doesn't that
comes from *your* particular experience in your playgroups and tournaments.
"In the recent Atlanta Storyline tournament, I played a !Ventrue deck..."
"...I will continue to say with authority AND experience that if you start
putting 16+ S:CE cards in your deck, you're running a great risk of getting
fucked..."
"You're wrong. It MUST get into combat, or you never get to play the cards."
This is *NOT* "logic and rational thought". This is Derek Ray pontificating about
his personal experience. My experience differs. In *your* experience, putting
in too many S:CEs results in hand jam. In my experience it does not. You can
discard the S:CEs if you don't need them. At least, you can to a sufficient
extent that it never seems to be a difficult problem. I don't know why exactly
our history with it differs but it clearly does.
One thing I suspect is that I tend to play a lot of very simple, weeny swarm
decks. Take about 7 or 8 or more presence weenies and start bleeding without
bleed modifiers and you give your prey little choice: he either blocks as much
as he can or starts taking lots of bleed damage. You can also block yourself
to dump an S:CE. It doesn't matter if your opponent has no combat, as long as
you can get to strike resolution phase and play a strike card. It seems to
work well enough in the environments I play in which is all I care about.
I also think you and I have strayed from the original and more cogent issue
here: do Psyche!s really fuck over S:CE? When it comes down to it, I'll give
you that if your combat deck can afford to stick in 2/3rds as many Psyche!s
as I have S:CEs in my entire S:CE-based combat defense deck, that will probably
neutralize my defense - however we disagree about S:CE hand jam issues. To
me, that seems like a lot of deckspace just to cover S:CE but if you can
afford it, I suppose it's reasonable enough. But that's not really what
I call "hosing" S:CE. When I think of the term "hosing", I think of a card
that just totally punishes you for using S:CE at all, not simply neutralizes
a single S:CE card so you run out of combat defense. Immortal Grapple is
much cooler: all I can do is sit there and look at my S:CEs. Now my minion
is in torpor and none of my S:CEs have left my hand (that many more to discard)
and my combat opponent has only had to burn through only one set of combat cards
to do it, so more of his precious library is left. If we can agree on nothing
else, can you at least see why I'm considerably less impressed with Psyche! than
Immortal Grapple?
Fred
In message <3CCE493D...@removethis.com>,
Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled
something about:
>(Hokay, I'm back. And having found this, I must reply.)
But I mustn't.
[ quoted text not captured ]
>> Deck list, please. Or at least something other than vague statements
>> such as "more than 12".>
>I'm not posting decks. No way in hell. I am *NOT* getting into a war
>of, "this-deck-sucks", "no-it-doesn't", "yes-it-does-It-would-NEVER-work-
>in-OUR-GODLIKE-group!",
>"no-it-doesn't-It-works-just-fine-in-OUR-HYPERGODLIKE-
>GROUP!!!", and so forth. Arguments like that get completely conjectural
>and are utterly worthless in terms of resolving anything. Certainly they
>are not conducive to the kind of "logic and rational thought" that you rant
>about.
I don't agree with this at all. Without showing instead of telling, regional
variation will never go away. People will be arguing apples and oranges all
day. (What other trite phrase can I use now?)
Having someone say your deck (that's won like every game you've ever played)
list is crap can be useful. Not likely in such an extreme case. But, it's
possible. Could be a matter of heavy regional variation; knowing that there is
a heavy regional variation facilitates analysis and, in the long run, should
reduce regional variation. Put another way, one of the causes of regional
variation is *not* having something to compare your deck to.
Ideally, instead of saying deck XYZ is crap, people will ask questions like
"how does it deal with deck ABC?" A possible answer such as "no one plays ABC
around here" can lead to the player trying ABC in his local metagame. Another
answer such as "the problem with ABC is that it gets crunched by DEF which is
common" may encourage the other player to look at DEF. And, so on.
Without deck lists, people have little sense of what the other person is
talking about either generally or specifically. Using my annoying letter
system, someone is talking about ABC but the other person is thinking of ACQ.
I don't very often post deck lists, not because I'm concerned with someone
saying it sucks (I generally know whether it does or not and my last tournament
winning deck certainly blows) but because I'm rarely looking for someone to
analyze my decks. I do that on my own and usually get bored with the deck
anyway after playing it a couple of times.
But, if there's some point to be made, such as trying to convince someone
something is overpowered or what not, then I consider it important to post deck
lists. For example, I've done CCG playtesting in the past. What drove me nuts
was how our cell was the only one that would post deck list*s* (others might do
it once while playtesting an expansion, a lot of folks would never do it).
Gee, besides trying to help each other brainstorm how to break the cards, maybe
we can get an idea of what the next tier 1 decks will be or maybe we can reduce
the work that each cell has to do because we have a gamut of playtest decks
already set up to test rather than every cell having to build every playtest
deck they plan on testing. Anyway, putting aside one of my rants about how
much playtesting sucks, knowing what's good or bad is "kind of" important when
you're playtesting. If you aren't confident in your ability to determine
what's good or bad, you aren't going to be of much help to anyone else.
Finally, expanding on that last clause, I don't see the reason to post
comments, including deck lists, to be "look at me, I'm a genius"; rather, the
reason should be "maybe you can use something I have to offer so that you can
become a genius".
I already know I'm a super-genius (as he steps off the edge of the cliff while
the roadrunner beeps).
Curevei wrote:
>
> Derek Ray wrote:
> >> Deck list, please. Or at least something other than vague statements
> >> such as "more than 12".
> >> Frederick Scott wrote:
> >I'm not posting decks. No way in hell. I am *NOT* getting into a war
> >of, "this-deck-sucks", "no-it-doesn't", "yes-it-does-It-would-NEVER-work-
> >in-OUR-GODLIKE-group!", "no-it-doesn't-It-works-just-fine-in-OUR-HYPERGODLIKE-
> >GROUP!!!", and so forth. Arguments like that get completely conjectural
> >and are utterly worthless in terms of resolving anything. Certainly they
> >are not conducive to the kind of "logic and rational thought" that you rant
> >about.
>
> I don't agree with this at all. Without showing instead of telling, regional
> variation will never go away. People will be arguing apples and oranges all
> day. (What other trite phrase can I use now?)
>
> Having someone say your deck (that's won like every game you've ever played)
> list is crap can be useful. Not likely in such an extreme case. But, it's
> possible. Could be a matter of heavy regional variation; knowing that there is
> a heavy regional variation facilitates analysis and, in the long run, should
> reduce regional variation. Put another way, one of the causes of regional
> variation is *not* having something to compare your deck to.
The problem is, people *ARE* arguing apples and oranges all day. And I've never
noticed that posting decks stops them. I agree, it likely is a question of regional
variation. It could also be difference in style of play, likes and dislikes in the
course of play, that sort of thing. (For instance, I instinctive prefer to build up and
overwhelm my opponents even though such strategies have distinct shortcomings in
this game. Others like the quick take-out strike a lot more than I do.) Or it could
be that I suck and Derek doesn't or even vica versa.
Regional variation WILL never go away. Were we trying to make it go away? Stop.
It's a fool's errand. I think it's also a fool's errand trying to understand it
by looking at deck lists. All you get is - which is why I talked about "godlike"
and "hypergodlike" local playing groups - claims that, "Your deck wouldn't work for
shit in our metagame." I think this was basically the point Ben Peal was making
with his "Blah, blah..." comment that got him flamed. I get tired of reading
comments like that.
Anyway, the bottom line is that I've never sensed posting a deck would reveal
anything Derek or anyone else needed to know about the nature of how effective
Psyche! is against SCE. Had I, I would have been happy to post one.
> Ideally, instead of saying deck XYZ is crap, people will ask questions like
> "how does it deal with deck ABC?"
Ideally, that's true. But under the circumstances, I rate those chances very
low. And we don't even need a deck list to ask that question.
> Without deck lists, people have little sense of what the other person is
> talking about either generally or specifically. Using my annoying letter
> system, someone is talking about ABC but the other person is thinking of ACQ.
I guess I don't see how this can be in terms of this issue. How much SCE is in
a deck is a pretty simple, straightforward issue as far as I can see. At other
times (e.g. how a card can be broken or various playtest situations), I can
certainly see your point. This is not such an instance, however.
Fred
"Frederick Scott" <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote in message
news:3CDDB59E...@removethis.com...
> Regional variation WILL never go away. Were we trying to make it go away?
Stop.
> It's a fool's errand.
I don't think it's actually *impossible* for it to go away.
If everyone played with lots of people from other regions
all the time, it *would* go away. This would require either
very cheap and popular travel, or a lot of Internet play or
some such. But it could happen. (It's what's happened, more
or less, to regional dialect variation in the US, since we
got radios and TVs and airplanes. Yeah, variation isn't
entirely gone, but it's a lot less than it used to be.)
> > Ideally, instead of saying deck XYZ is crap, people will ask questions
like
> > "how does it deal with deck ABC?"
>
> Ideally, that's true. But under the circumstances, I rate those chances
very
> low. And we don't even need a deck list to ask that question.
True, but having deck lists makes it easier (in theory) to get
to the analysis of how thing 1 works against thing 2 and so
on. In practice it probably takes too much work - and is subject
to too much variation just from the different people who'd be
playing the decks - for this kind of analysis to get a whole lot
of play; who has that much time? Not even me, most of the time.
:-)
Josh
double-timing