TB + AGGRO Deck to comment

-> TB + AGGR Deck to comment The main idea of this deck was to try the combination DOM+pro, with Thoughts Betrayed and aggravated damage. All vampires in the crypt have Superior Dominate, so all can play TB in superior. Even if they still don't have protean, they still have more chances to control the combat. If an opposing vampire goes into torpor, it has Amaranth (if safe) or Graverobbing. If you can bleed, then play some "Threats" to increase the bleeding. It was only used against a "Tremere with TB" Deck, and it wasn't very sucessful since the opponent had also plenty of TB's...! Post your comments and suggestions. Thanks! .- Luis....@ip.pt (aka The Gothlord) ------ ( http://pc-h1.dcea.fct.unl.pt/Gothic/Gothlord ) ------ ---------- TB + Aggr Deck --------- Crypt: 1 Sir Walter nash, 7, DOM PRE FOR, Prince, Ventrue 2 Luccia Paciola, 6, DOM pre for, +1 hand dam, Ventrue 2 Ranjan Rishi, 5, DOM PRE for, ..., Ventrue 1 Marlene, 6, DOM for AUS tha obt, Ventrue Anti-tribu 1 Vanessa, 6, DOM FOR pre aus, Ventrue Anti-tribu 1 Ingrid Russo, 4, DOM for, Ventrue Anti-tribu 1 Iliana, 7, DOM FOR PRO tha, Gangrel 2 Ian Forestal, 8, DOM AUS THA <all basic disc>, Tremere Anti-tribu 1 Gloria Giovanni, 4, DOM nec, Giovanni Library: Master (23): 7 Protean 2 Parthenon 1 University HG (Tre-AT) 1 Uptown HG (Ven) 1 Corporate HG (Ven-AT) 2 Blood Doll 1 Rumor Mill, Tabloid Newspaper 1 KRCG News Radio 2 Sudden Reversal 1 Secure Haven 1 Elysium: The Arboretum 1 Tomb of Rameses III 1 Information Highway 1 Golgonda: Inner Peace Minion: Action (10): 6 Bum's Rush 3 Graverobbing 1 Regeneration Action Modifiers (9): 4 Threats 3 Earth Control 1 Kiss of Ra 1 Uncontrollable Rage Combat (35): 10 Thoughts Betrayed 2 Claws of the Dead 3 Bone Spur 2 Wolf Claws 4 Lucky Blow 2 Amaranth 4 Skin of Rock 2 Open Grate 2 Flesh of Marble 2 Taste of Vitae Political (2): 1 Ventrue Justicar 1 Praxis Seizure: Berlin Equipment (2): 2 Flak Jacket Reaction (9): 4 Wake with Evening's Freshness 5 Deflection

Luis P. Duarte wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] What an exhausting deck. Your vampires are going to keel over after their first fight and pass out. You are going to need some serious blood management to pull this one off. Taste of Vitae will not cut it as your blows are too small. Aaron's Feeding Razor The Hungry Coyote Giant's Blood Restoration Too bad you do not have more princes as 5th Tradition would do the trick quite well.

Luis P. Duarte wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] kinda pricey dont ya think > Library: > Master (23): > 7 Protean > 2 Parthenon > 1 University HG (Tre-AT) > 1 Uptown HG (Ven) > 1 Corporate HG (Ven-AT) too many hunting grounds. With all the different clans you have represented the odds of actualy getting the right one at the right time is gonna be tough untill you've gone through half your library and by then it probably wont do much good.To remedy that I'd add a couple of clan impersonations to insure you can get the HG in your hand on to the table > 2 Blood Doll > 1 Rumor Mill, Tabloid Newspaper > 1 KRCG News Radio > 2 Sudden Reversal I always run 4 suddens figuring 2 to stop opponents and 2 to push my masters through and theres always rotzcheck to deal with > 1 Secure Haven with all the aggr you have no ones gonna mess with you vampires anyway and if they do then that just saves you a bums rush > 1 Elysium: The Arboretum > 1 Tomb of Rameses III best card in the game get one in your opening draw and your off and running I use 2 > 1 Information Highway > 1 Golgonda: Inner Peace > > Minion: > Action (10): > 6 Bum's Rush I'd go with 4 BR and add 4 Haven uncovered they work well because they give the added stealth to the attack and if you can send them to topor with no blood thell never get the damn thing off because when they get out they have to hunt and all your vamp's can hit it at will. the other meth will soon figure this out and just leave it there . in a large game a haven means a dead vampire period > 3 Graverobbing > 1 Regeneration > > Action Modifiers (9): > 4 Threats I always run 4 bonding before any other bleed modifiers because you can combine with Govern the unaligned for a 4 bleed at one stealth added to the fact that you can send your preys main Intercept to topor with a bums rush or haven before you bleed your odds of getting it off improve dramaticly given all your sup DOM and everybodys love of wakes 4 sleeping minds seems kinda obvious > 3 Earth Control go with 4 > 1 Kiss of Ra > 1 Uncontrollable Rage > > Combat (35): > 10 Thoughts Betrayed I know it's the theme but the folks I play with use a 4 card limit and with this deck it should be more of a sideline than the force behind it . I'd use some of this space for some havens and freak drive > 2 Claws of the Dead > 3 Bone Spur > 2 Wolf Claws > 4 Lucky Blow > 2 Amaranth > 4 Skin of Rock > 2 Open Grate > 2 Flesh of Marble > 2 Taste of Vitae > > Political (2): > 1 Ventrue Justicar given that you only have 4 ventrue in your crypt getting this one off is gonna be tough > 1 Praxis Seizure: Berlin I'd add one more praxis seizure and 2 crusades > > > Equipment (2): > 2 Flak Jacket given that protean is pretty much your only offence I'd add some IR goggles otherwise a simple 44mag will eat you up [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <35432A60...@pop.mpls.uswest.net>, lk...@uswest.net wrote: > Luis P. Duarte wrote: > > 2 Sudden Reversal > > I always run 4 suddens figuring 2 to stop opponents and 2 to push my > masters through and theres always rotzcheck to deal with You cannot use Sudden Reversal to push your own Masters through, since Sudden Reversal cannot be played on your own turn. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

In article <35432A60...@pop.mpls.uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: >Luis P. Duarte wrote: >> -> TB + AGGR Deck to comment [snip crypt -- sixes, fives, sevens, bigger] >kinda pricey dont ya think *shrug* not really. You only really need 2 to 3 vampires out -- Thoughts Betrayed makes it a sure kill. >> Library: >> Master (23): >> 7 Protean >> 2 Parthenon >> 1 University HG (Tre-AT) >> 1 Uptown HG (Ven) >> 1 Corporate HG (Ven-AT) >too many hunting grounds. With all the different clans you have >represented the odds of actualy getting the right one at the right time >is gonna be tough untill you've gone through half your library and by >then it probably wont do much good.To remedy that I'd add a couple of >clan impersonations to insure you can get the HG in your hand on to the >table Clan Impersonations might help, but I'm more concerned with ditching the Parthenons and using more Blood Dolls. There's lots of pool-intensive Masters here, and combined with the expensive (but worth it) crypt, Blood Dolls (or some other pool gain) become important. >> 2 Blood Doll >> 1 Rumor Mill, Tabloid Newspaper >> 1 KRCG News Radio >> 2 Sudden Reversal >I always run 4 suddens figuring 2 to stop opponents and 2 to push my >masters through and theres always rotzcheck to deal with I've yet to pack a Sudden in any deck I make, and they rarely (if ever) get played -- about once per 3-4 games in my experience. Around here they're perceived as too expensive. >best card in the game get one in your opening draw and your off and ^^^^ I'm sorry, but you seem to have misspelled 'most broken.' hope this helps. >running I use 2 on the other hand, the deck already packs Thoughts Betrayed -- may as well throw in TORIII to get the full gamut o'cheese. >I'd go with 4 BR and add 4 Haven uncovered they work well because they >give the added stealth to the attack and if you can send them to topor >with no blood thell never get the damn thing off because when they get >out they have to hunt and all your vamp's can hit it at will. the other >meth will soon figure this out and just leave it there . in a large game >a haven means a dead vampire period Maybe in your gaming group. Around here, Havens are primarily used for intercept decks (see, you can intercept when they try to burn it, and if you're low on intercept, you can use it to directly go pound). >> 3 Graverobbing >> 1 Regeneration >> Action Modifiers (9): >> 4 Threats >I always run 4 bonding before any other bleed modifiers because you can >combine with Govern the unaligned for a 4 bleed at one stealth added to >the fact that you can send your preys main Intercept to topor with a >bums rush or haven before you bleed your odds of getting it off improve >dramaticly A strong combat deck is best advised to eschew stealth. You *want* to get blocked; putting your prey in a position where it's take a big bleed or get into a combat on your terms is an advantageous thing indeed. >given all your sup DOM and everybodys love of wakes 4 sleeping minds >seems kinda obvious Again, a combat deck *wants* to be blocked. Sleeping Mind would kind of work against that. >I know it's the theme but the folks I play with use a 4 card limit and >with this deck it should be more of a sideline than the force behind it >. I'd use some of this space for some havens and freak drive Um, the deck won't work without reliable access to thoughts betrayed. And 4card limits make a hollow travesty of the game. Sans TB, potence/ protean will get hosed by fortitude or dodge/blur/smack decks. >> Political (2): >> 1 Ventrue Justicar >given that you only have 4 ventrue in your crypt getting this one off is >gonna be tough given 4 ventrue in the crypt, there's an excellent chance of getting one in the opening draw. but i'd be in favor of dumping the votes entirely. >> Equipment (2): >> 2 Flak Jacket >given that protean is pretty much your only offence I'd add some IR >goggles otherwise a simple 44mag will eat you up Possibly. I'd ditch the Jackets for some anti-equipment cards instead. gomi

Gomi no Sensei wrote in message <6i3afr$h6p$1...@shell3.ba.best.com>... >In article <35432A60...@pop.mpls.uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: <snip lots of stuff about crypt...hunting grounds> > >Clan Impersonations might help, but I'm more concerned with ditching the >Parthenons and using more Blood Dolls. There's lots of pool-intensive >Masters here, and combined with the expensive (but worth it) crypt, Blood >Dolls (or some other pool gain) become important. I'd agree...Clan Impersonation is pretty cool...cut down to about 2 hunting grounds...and Blood Dolls are excellent in just about any deck. <snip masters> >>I always run 4 suddens figuring 2 to stop opponents and 2 to push my >>masters through and theres always rotzcheck to deal with You might want to take note that Gangrel Conspiracy & Absolution of the Diabolist are the only Master:Out of Turn cards that explicitly state that they can be used on *your* turn. I believe that this implies that M:OOT means exactly that, they can not be used on your turn to "push [your] masters through"... >>best card in the game get one in your opening draw and your off and > ^^^^ >I'm sorry, but you seem to have misspelled 'most broken.' hope this helps. Hehehehe...agreed... >>I'd go with 4 BR and add 4 Haven uncovered they work well because they >>give the added stealth to the attack and if you can send them to topor >>with no blood thell never get the damn thing off because when they get >>out they have to hunt and all your vamp's can hit it at will. the other >>meth will soon figure this out and just leave it there . in a large game >>a haven means a dead vampire period To reiterate a point Gomi has been making, a good combat deck doesn't want stealth. I'd go 4 Bum's Rushes & 4 Ambushes if you're playing 4CL, Haven Uncovered is nice, but only if you *really* need to get rid of one specific vampire... Xian

Gomi no Sensei wrote: > In article <35432A60...@pop.mpls.uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: > >Luis P. Duarte wrote: > >> -> TB + AGGR Deck to comment > > [snip crypt -- sixes, fives, sevens, bigger] > > >kinda pricey dont ya think > > *shrug* not really. You only really need 2 to 3 vampires out -- Thoughts > Betrayed makes it a sure kill. > > >> Library: > >> Master (23): > >> 7 Protean > >> 2 Parthenon > >> 1 University HG (Tre-AT) > >> 1 Uptown HG (Ven) > >> 1 Corporate HG (Ven-AT) > > >too many hunting grounds. With all the different clans you have > >represented the odds of actualy getting the right one at the right time > >is gonna be tough untill you've gone through half your library and by > >then it probably wont do much good.To remedy that I'd add a couple of > >clan impersonations to insure you can get the HG in your hand on to the > >table > > Clan Impersonations might help, but I'm more concerned with ditching the > Parthenons and using more Blood Dolls. There's lots of pool-intensive > Masters here, and combined with the expensive (but worth it) crypt, Blood > Dolls (or some other pool gain) become important. True but, the late game argument still holds one big bleed early and a contested HG makes blood dollsa tempoary fix at best and, at 2 blood a shot TB will hurt you as much as your pool shortage.With clan impersonation you can run with more, and varried HG'S which will make your blood dolls more effective. > > > >> 2 Blood Doll > >> 1 Rumor Mill, Tabloid Newspaper > >> 1 KRCG News Radio > >> 2 Sudden Reversal > > >I always run 4 suddens figuring 2 to stop opponents and 2 to push my > >masters through and theres always rotzcheck to deal with > > I've yet to pack a Sudden in any deck I make, and they rarely (if ever) get > played -- about once per 3-4 games in my experience. Around here they're > perceived as too expensive. > > >best card in the game get one in your opening draw and your off and > ^^^^ > I'm sorry, but you seem to have misspelled 'most broken.' hope this helps. *shrug* I can't disagree with that. > > > >running I use 2 > > on the other hand, the deck already packs Thoughts Betrayed -- may as well > throw in TORIII to get the full gamut o'cheese. > > >I'd go with 4 BR and add 4 Haven uncovered they work well because they > >give the added stealth to the attack and if you can send them to topor > >with no blood thell never get the damn thing off because when they get > >out they have to hunt and all your vamp's can hit it at will. the other > >meth will soon figure this out and just leave it there . in a large game > >a haven means a dead vampire period > > Maybe in your gaming group. Around here, Havens are primarily used for > intercept decks (see, you can intercept when they try to burn it, and if > you're low on intercept, you can use it to directly go pound). I have to Disagree here. one haven is worth at least 3 bums rush adding stealth to the bargin.Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk you know he can kill first. leaving him the choice of tapping and taking out a punk that you won't miss anyway to leave him open to the real killers and if the punk knows PRO he goes to topor weather he blocks or not.or as an alternate option send in a couple guy's with guns burn all his blood then send in the punk PRO with a lucky blow and burn it. > > > >> 3 Graverobbing > >> 1 Regeneration > > >> Action Modifiers (9): > >> 4 Threats > > >I always run 4 bonding before any other bleed modifiers because you can > >combine with Govern the unaligned for a 4 bleed at one stealth added to > >the fact that you can send your preys main Intercept to topor with a > >bums rush or haven before you bleed your odds of getting it off improve > >dramaticly > > A strong combat deck is best advised to eschew stealth. You *want* to > get blocked; putting your prey in a position where it's take a big bleed > or get into a combat on your terms is an advantageous thing indeed. Hearty dissagrement here . A strong combat deck without any other options(i.e. a little S.B.)is screwed if after earning a VP or two now has an all majesty deck as his prey. your march to victorycomes to an abrupt halt.and if your running sup dom all over the place might as well get some use out of it. > > > >given all your sup DOM and everybodys love of wakes 4 sleeping minds > >seems kinda obvious > > Again, a combat deck *wants* to be blocked. Sleeping Mind would kind of > work against that. sure you want to get blocked sometimes but if you really need the edge or your prey is really low on pool might as well take them out and save the combat for the next unfortunate fellow to face your wrath. in my opinion the deck needed some versatility. > > > >I know it's the theme but the folks I play with use a 4 card limit and > >with this deck it should be more of a sideline than the force behind it > >. I'd use some of this space for some havens and freak drive > > Um, the deck won't work without reliable access to thoughts betrayed. > And 4card limits make a hollow travesty of the game. Sans TB, potence/ > protean will get hosed by fortitude or dodge/blur/smack decks. but if my other advice had been taken then you could switch to SB mode roast em and move on. > > > >> Political (2): > >> 1 Ventrue Justicar > > >given that you only have 4 ventrue in your crypt getting this one off is > >gonna be tough > > given 4 ventrue in the crypt, there's an excellent chance of getting one > in the opening draw. but i'd be in favor of dumping the votes entirely. dumping votes entirely is foolhardy in my group as soon as it's known you have none and no intercept(two unique's are not real reliable ) the ventrue will eat you alive. [ quoted text not captured ]

Lklee wrote: "Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk you know he can kill first." If you are under the impression that Tapped vampires cannot fight, you are incorrect. Tapped vampires can fight just like any other vampire, they just can't block or play reaction cards. Also, combat does not Tap necessarily Tap a vampire. If I Bum's Rush you, and you don't block it, you do not become tapped when combat is over. Vampires are Tapped by taking actions, blocking, or some affect that specifically taps them. As combat does not specifically tap a vampire, nor is it an Action or a Block, combat does not tap you. "Hearty dissagrement here . A strong combat deck without any other options(i.e. a little S.B.)is screwed if after earning a VP or two now has an all majesty deck as his prey. your march to victorycomes to an abrupt halt.and if your running sup dom all over the place might as well get some use out of it." This is a misconception that comes from playing with Card Limits. Pure combat decks can be both completely effective and perfectly capable of winning without any stealth, any bleed, or any intercept. If your opponent is packed with Majesty, you had better be playing a combat deck that can deal with Majesty. Immortal Grapple or Psyche based decks do just fine and eat Majesty decks alive. "sure you want to get blocked sometimes but if you really need the edge or your prey is really low on pool might as well take them out and save the combat for the next unfortunate fellow to face your wrath. in my opinion the deck needed some versatility." Having stealth in a Rush deck means that you will draw Lost in Crowds when you need a Torn Signpost or an Undead Strength when you need a Faceless Night. "dumping votes entirely is foolhardy in my group as soon as it's known you have none and no intercept(two unique's are not real reliable ) the ventrue will eat you alive." Unless the Ventrue are consistently Rushed and beaten to a pulp (as they were relying on Majesty to save them...) Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com "We are vain and we are blind I hate people when they're not polite." -Talking Heads

Hi I really hope to become welcome on the group. I'm not trying to flame anyone. PDB6 wrote: > Lklee wrote: > "Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk > you know he can kill first." > > If you are under the impression that Tapped vampires cannot fight, you are > incorrect. Tapped vampires can fight just like any other vampire, they just > can't block or play reaction cards. Also, combat does not Tap necessarily Tap > a vampire. If I Bum's Rush you, and you don't block it, you do not become > tapped when combat is over. Vampires are Tapped by taking actions, blocking, > or some affect that specifically taps them. As combat does not specifically > tap a vampire, nor is it an Action or a Block, combat does not tap you. on page 26 of the VTES rule book, and page 29 of the jyhad rule book. under the heading COMBAT both rule books imply that the only time combat can begin is after a successful block nowhere else in either rule book is anything said about combat occurring at any other time. at least that I can find. I would love to get a ruling on this as it has become a major debate in our group. however one member said he called WOTC and "according to him" combat can only ensue after a successful block.therefore tapped minions cannot fight back.So that's how we play. > > > "Hearty dissagrement here . A strong combat deck without any other options(i.e. > a little S.B.)is screwed if after earning a VP or two now has an all majesty > deck as his prey. your march to victorycomes to an abrupt halt.and if your > running sup dom all over the place might as well get some use out of it." > > This is a misconception that comes from playing with Card Limits. Pure combat > decks can be both completely effective and perfectly capable of winning without > any stealth, any bleed, or any intercept. If your opponent is packed with > Majesty, you had better be playing a combat deck that can deal with Majesty. > Immortal Grapple or Psyche based decks do just fine and eat Majesty decks > alive I agree that they can however its my contention that versatility improves any deck. > . > > "sure you want to get blocked sometimes but if you really need the edge or your > prey is really low on pool might as well take them out and save the combat for > the next unfortunate fellow to face your wrath. in my opinion the deck needed > some versatility." > > Having stealth in a Rush deck means that you will draw Lost in Crowds when you > need a Torn Signpost or an Undead Strength when you need a Faceless Night. not necessarily as with any CCG its not what cards you play its when you play those cards that counts I'm not saying you mix 50/50. I'm saying that pulling off a big bleed out of an otherwise all combat deck. is a supprise that your prey will never see coming giving you the advantage of when to play it and on which prey. I think the misconception NCL players have is that their decks have to be one dimensional to win and that's just not the case. > > > "dumping votes entirely is foolhardy in my group as soon as it's known you have > none and no intercept(two unique's are not real reliable ) the ventrue will eat > you alive." > > Unless the Ventrue are consistently Rushed and beaten to a pulp (as they were > relying on Majesty to save them...) the ventrue are not the only voters out there I have a nasty toreador combat/vote deck which can go blow for blow with any combat deck and still vote you out of the game. thanx for your time Eric Prince of Minneapolis > >

lk...@uswest.net wrote: > PDB6 wrote: > > Lklee wrote: > > "Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk > > you know he can kill first." > > > > If you are under the impression that Tapped vampires cannot fight, you are > > incorrect. Tapped vampires can fight just like any other vampire, they just > > can't block or play reaction cards. Also, combat does not Tap necessarily Tap > > a vampire. If I Bum's Rush you, and you don't block it, you do not become > > tapped when combat is over. Vampires are Tapped by taking actions, blocking, > > or some affect that specifically taps them. As combat does not specifically > > tap a vampire, nor is it an Action or a Block, combat does not tap you. > > on page 26 of the VTES rule book, and page 29 of the jyhad rule book. > under the > heading COMBAT both rule books imply that the only time combat can > begin is after > a successful block nowhere else in either rule book is anything said > about combat > occurring at any other time. at least that I can find. I would love to > get a ruling > on this as it has become a major debate in our group. > > however one member said he called WOTC and "according to him" combat can > only ensue > after a successful block.therefore tapped minions cannot fight back.So > that's how > we play. Neither section (VTES: 8, Jyhad: 15) suggests that being blocked is the *only* way to enter combat. But even if they do: they would be correct, since you cannot enter combat any other way (card text excepted, of course, as noted in VTES: 12, Jyhad: 10). But this has nothing to do with "tapped minions cannot fight back" - since being tapped hasn't come up at all. And - important - *both* minions (the acting minion and the blocking minion) are tapped during the combat that results from a block (right?). If it were true that combat could only occur after a block (regardless of card text to the contrary) *and* that tapped minions couldn't fight (despite a complete lack of any rule addressing that issue), then combat would be pretty boring, eh? Being tapped has no effect on being able to play combat cards or maneuver or strike or press or whatever. > [snip CL vs. NL] > I agree that they can however its my contention that versatility > improves any deck. Versatility can be achieved just as easily under NL as CL, if not more so, since NL decks are a superset of CL decks. [ quoted text not captured ]

lk...@uswest.net wrote in message <3546F132...@uswest.net>... >Hi I really hope to become welcome on the group. I'm not trying to flame >anyone. I don't think anyone is unwelcome here, as long as they stay on-topic. This is one of the best flame-free ng's around, as far as I know. Mainly just genteel discussion among the "members." As long as you accept this, I think you'll feel welcome. <snip discussion about tapping & combat> >on page 26 of the VTES rule book, and page 29 of the jyhad rule book. >under the >heading COMBAT both rule books imply that the only time combat can >begin is after >a successful block nowhere else in either rule book is anything said >about combat >occurring at any other time. at least that I can find. I would love to >get a ruling >on this as it has become a major debate in our group. I don't want to speak for anyone, but at the very least, this is a case of card text overruling game basics. Normally, you can only enter combat after blocking. However, most of the other cards that mention combat (Bum's Rush, Haven Uncovered, Ambush, Blood Hunt, Wild Hunt) say "enter combat <with x minion y>" where x is a descriptor (tapped, with this card on it, etc.) and y is any modifiers (one maneuver, at +1 stealth, etc.). The there is no implication that combat is not resolved as normal otherwise. So...it seems to me that the cards simply provide additional ways to get into combat, not affect it in the manner suggested. <snip stuff about CL, versatility> >> Having stealth in a Rush deck means that you will draw Lost in Crowds when you >> need a Torn Signpost or an Undead Strength when you need a Faceless Night. > >not necessarily as with any CCG its not what cards you play its when you >play those >cards that counts I'm not saying you mix 50/50. I'm saying that pulling I agree that sometimes it's nice to have a couple of surprises. However, most rush decks aren't designed to bleed for lots...the argument here is that it's not useful to have tricks, but that having your hand jammed with useless cards is not helpful. Having the cards is all fine & dandy, but if you don't cycle them at the appropriate speed, you're going to have a hand full of useless cards and would commit the ultimate sin of actually wanting to use Deal with the Devil (wallpaper in a well-designed deck, IMHO...) >off a big >bleed out of an otherwise all combat deck. is a supprise that your prey >will never >see coming giving you the advantage of when to play it and on which >prey. I think >the misconception NCL players have is that their decks have to be one >dimensional >to win and that's just not the case. > Not true, it's simply that focus in a deck makes it easier to get the cards you need. This is true in NCL and CL play. Xian

In article <3546F132...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: >Hi I really hope to become welcome on the group. I'm not trying to flame >anyone. No sweat, neither are we. ;-) However I think you'll find that most of the regulars here disagree with you about how the game plays. It also doesn't help to boast about how your varioius decks will show people the "true way" to play the game. I'm not so easily convinced, especially when your comments show you don't know the rules to the game, and your deck designs sound implausible (A toreador combat deck that won't get crushed?) >PDB6 wrote: > >> Lklee wrote: >> "Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk >> you know he can kill first." [Peter correctly pointing out that tapped vampires can fight snipped] >on page 26 of the VTES rule book, and page 29 of the jyhad rule book. >under the >heading COMBAT both rule books imply that the only time combat can >begin is after >a successful block nowhere else in either rule book is anything said >about combat >occurring at any other time. at least that I can find. I would love to >get a ruling >on this as it has become a major debate in our group. >however one member said he called WOTC and "according to him" combat can >only ensue >after a successful block.therefore tapped minions cannot fight back.So >that's how >we play. Um, you guys are just wrong. No where does it say you can't be in combat without a block (bum's rush being the standard means to go straight to combat), and I have no clue where you get the idea that tapped vampires in combat can't fight (especially if you're under the impression that only tapped vampires can get into a fight. wow.) Anyway, there are clearly plenty of ways to get into combat without blocking. Bum's Rush, Ambush, Haven Uncovered, Hidden Lurker, and Fast Reaction for starters. >> "Hearty dissagrement here.Astrong combat deck without any other options(i.e. >> a little S.B.)is screwed if after earning a VP or two now has an all majesty >> deck as his prey. your march to victorycomes to an abrupt halt.and if your >> running sup dom all over the place might as well get some use out of it." >> >> This is a misconception that comes from playing with Card Limits.Pure combat >> decks can be both completely effective and perfectly capable of winning >>without >> any stealth, any bleed, or any intercept. If your opponent is packed with >> Majesty, you had better be playing a combat deck that can deal with Majesty. >> Immortal Grapple or Psyche based decks do just fine and eat Majesty decks >> alive > >I agree that they can however its my contention that versatility >improves any deck. It think you'll find that people here agree that versatility is good, but simply having a wider assortment of cards doesn't garuntee versatility, and in the examples you suggest seems far more likely to me to garuntee paralysis. >> "sure you want to get blocked sometimes but if you really need the edge >>or your >> prey is really low on pool might as well take them out and save the >>combat for >> the next unfortunate fellow to face your wrath. in my opinion the >>deck needed >> some versatility." >> >> Having stealth in a Rush deck means that you will draw Lost in Crowds >>when you >> need a Torn Signpost or an Undead Strength when you need a Faceless Night. > >not necessarily as with any CCG its not what cards you play its when you >play those >cards that counts I'm not saying you mix 50/50. I'm saying that pulling >off a big >bleed out of an otherwise all combat deck. is a supprise that your prey >will never >see coming giving you the advantage of when to play it and on which >prey. I think >the misconception NCL players have is that their decks have to be one >dimensional >to win and that's just not the case. Good NCL decks aren't one dimensional -- that seems to be your misconception. Have you ever played NCL? Have you read any of the archived stuff about why CL sucks? The problem with throwing bleed randomly into a combat deck is that it takes a lot of space to make a combat deck, and more importanly card flow. Anyway, you have no choice about when to play your cards really, since you can ill afford to jam your hand with cards on the off chance they might be usable in the future -- your either play them, discard them, or die from hand jam. The hand jam part is the key thing that you seem to be ignoring from peter's post. Stealth in particular is a dangerous thing to play in a combat deck, since a competent opponent will simply not block, and you'll be stuck with tons in your hand when you want to be playing 4-5 cards per combat. Now having bleed cards in a combat deck can be fine, but not random ones, e.g. those adding +1 stealth (which you seem to be under the random impression is always good). You're much better off going with ones that will work _with_ your main strategy, not against. If I can kick the shit out of my prey in combat, why in the hell would I want to play bonding over conditioning? >the ventrue are not the only voters out there I have a nasty toreador >combat/vote >deck which can go blow for blow with any combat deck and still vote you >out of the >game. Now that I don't believe, and would like to see. Post it. -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

LSJ wrote: > lk...@uswest.net wrote: > > PDB6 wrote: > > > Lklee wrote: > > > "Add to that the fact that tapped vamp's can't fight back you send in a punk > > > you know he can kill first." > > > > > > If you are under the impression that Tapped vampires cannot fight, you are > > > incorrect. Tapped vampires can fight just like any other vampire, they just > > > can't block or play reaction cards. Also, combat does not Tap necessarily Tap > > > a vampire. If I Bum's Rush you, and you don't block it, you do not become > > > tapped when combat is over. Vampires are Tapped by taking actions, blocking, > > > or some affect that specifically taps them. As combat does not specifically > > > tap a vampire, nor is it an Action or a Block, combat does not tap you. > > > > on page 26 of the VTES rule book, and page 29 of the jyhad rule book. > > under the > > heading COMBAT both rule books imply that the only time combat can > > begin is after > > a successful block nowhere else in either rule book is anything said > > about combat > > occurring at any other time. at least that I can find. I would love to > > get a ruling > > on this as it has become a major debate in our group. > > > > however one member said he called WOTC and "according to him" combat can > > only ensue > > after a successful block.therefore tapped minions cannot fight back.So > > that's how > > we play. > > Neither section (VTES: 8, Jyhad: 15) suggests that being blocked is > the *only* way to enter combat. But even if they do: they would be > correct, since you cannot enter combat any other way (card text > excepted, of course, as noted in VTES: 12, Jyhad: 10). > > But this has nothing to do with "tapped minions cannot fight back" - > since being tapped hasn't come up at all. And - important - *both* > minions (the acting minion and the blocking minion) are tapped during > the combat that results from a block (right?). If it were true that > combat could only occur after a block (regardless of card text to the > contrary) *and* that tapped minions couldn't fight (despite a > complete lack of any rule addressing that issue), then combat would > be pretty boring, eh? > > Being tapped has no effect on being able to play combat cards or > maneuver or strike or press or whatever. > > > [snip CL vs. NL] > > I agree that they can however its my contention that versatility > > improves any deck. > > Versatility can be achieved just as easily under NL as CL, if > not more so, since NL decks are a superset of CL decks. > > -- > L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) > Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. > (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team Thank you for the ruling you have proved my case "to my friend" you stated the same argument I was trying to make to him at the time now I have hard copy HAHA. you are correct that versatility can be achieved under NCL however it is rarely if ever done (in my experience I played under NCL for 2 years before switching) Because in order to remain competitive with the guy who uses 30 Majesty for example. you need 30 thoughts betrayed et. al. and in my experience there is always going to be at least one guy at the table playing a degenerate deck. so in order to win you have to be one of those guys , and what fun is that? again thanx for the ruling its gonna come in handy friday night. Eric Prince of Minneapolis

Jasper Phillips wrote: > In article <3546F132...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: > >Hi I really hope to become welcome on the group. I'm not trying to flame > >anyone. > > No sweat, neither are we. ;-) However I think you'll find that most > of the regulars here disagree with you about how the game plays. > It also doesn't help to boast about how your varioius decks will show > people the "true way" to play the game. I'm not so easily convinced, > especially when your comments show you don't know the rules to the > game, and your deck designs sound implausible (A toreador combat deck > that won't get crushed?) Well about the sudden reversal comment I made in another posting. I knew it was wrong as soon as I sent it, but the reason it happened is we play under a house rule where suddens can be played on your turn. So I'm used to thinking that way when tuning a deck. About the tapped vamp stuff I explain that in another posting. and my Toreador Deck does work it works well and I will post it. suffice for now to say flame thrower IR goggles additional strikes Majesty when it doesn't look like it will be going your way. Paying for the flame throwers isn't that tough when the vamps are cheap and and your voting Cboons. Getting a three card combo isn't that tough when two of the cards are Equipment. while it does take two turns to get rolling once it does nothing much can stand against it. The reason I play 4CL is because it makes for longer more strategic games, and in that environment my toreador deck is very strong. [ quoted text not captured ] You are correct about having more cards not equating versatility that requires planning and good play. > > > >> "sure you want to get blocked sometimes but if you really need the edge > >>or your > >> prey is really low on pool might as well take them out and save the > >>combat for > >> the next unfortunate fellow to face your wrath. in my opinion the > >>deck needed > >> some versatility." > >> > >> Having stealth in a Rush deck means that you will draw Lost in Crowds > >>when you > >> need a Torn Signpost or an Undead Strength when you need a Faceless Night. > > > >not necessarily as with any CCG its not what cards you play its when you > >play those > >cards that counts I'm not saying you mix 50/50. I'm saying that pulling > >off a big > >bleed out of an otherwise all combat deck. is a supprise that your prey > >will never > >see coming giving you the advantage of when to play it and on which > >prey. I think > >the misconception NCL players have is that their decks have to be one > >dimensional > >to win and that's just not the case. > > Good NCL decks aren't one dimensional -- that seems to be your misconception. > Have you ever played NCL? yes played it for about 2 years > Have you read any of the archived stuff about > why CL sucks? yes I did but I tend to form my own opinions, and in my opinion the only thing NCL does is make for faster more tactical games ie.MAGIC. I believe that vampire is a strategic game that should not be rushed we are immortal we've got time :-) > > > The problem with throwing bleed randomly into a combat deck is that it > takes a lot of space to make a combat deck, and more importanly card > flow. Anyway, you have no choice about when to play your cards really, > since you can ill afford to jam your hand with cards on the off > chance they might be usable in the future -- your either play them, > discard them, or die from hand jam. The hand jam part is the key > thing that you seem to be ignoring from peter's post. Stealth > in particular is a dangerous thing to play in a combat deck, since > a competent opponent will simply not block, and you'll be stuck with > tons in your hand when you want to be playing 4-5 cards per combat. > > Now having bleed cards in a combat deck can be fine, but not random > ones, e.g. those adding +1 stealth (which you seem to be under > the random impression is always good). You're much better off going > with ones that will work _with_ your main strategy, not against. > If I can kick the shit out of my prey in combat, why in the hell > would I want to play bonding over conditioning? what if you can't. I know from experience that 7 blurs in your hand can be just as deadly in regards to hand jam and besides stealth bleed IS a good thing. my main problem with NCL is overkill. It gets to the point you don't play your deck it plays itself. Knowing what and when to discard is just a mark of good play and bonding in a combat deck has saved my ass countless times. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <354757B0...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: [snip] >you are correct that versatility can be achieved under NCL however it is >rarely if >ever done (in my experience I played under NCL for 2 years before switching) >Because in order to remain competitive with the guy who uses 30 Majesty for >example. >you need 30 thoughts betrayed et. al. and in my experience there is always >going to be >at least one guy at the table playing a degenerate deck. so in order to win >you have >to be one of those guys , and what fun is that? > again thanx for the ruling its gonna come in handy friday night. > >Eric Prince of Minneapolis Actually, a deck with 30 majestys isn't terribly effective, and even if it were you don't need, nor do you even want, a comparable number of Thoughts Betrayed or Immortal grapple. You simply want 1 per fight you get into. I would be interested in seeing the decks you claim to be degenerate under NCL. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <354763E3...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: >Jasper Phillips wrote: >> game, and your deck designs sound implausible (A toreador combat deck >> that won't get crushed?) [snip] [This following part quoted instead of >'d since it line wrapped so badly] "and my Toreador Deck does work it works well and I will post it. suffice for now to say flame thrower IR goggles additional strikes Majesty when it doesn't look like it will be going your way. Paying for the flame throwers isn't that tough when the vamps are cheap and and your voting Cboons. Getting a three card combo isn't that tough when two of the cards are Equipment. while it does take two turns to get rolling once it does nothing much can stand against it. The reason I play 4CL is because it makes for longer more strategic games, and in that environment my toreador deck is very strong." Heh. That will be the day, when I fear a toreador weapon deck -- weapon decks are pretty much the definition of sorry, card limit or no. The few almost exceptions to this rule aren't even possible under 4CL. [stuff about not wanting to put random cards in a combat deck for fear of stealth snipped] >what if you can't. I know from experience that 7 blurs in your hand can >be just as >deadly in regards to hand jam and besides stealth bleed IS a good thing. No, having blurs jam your hand is no where near as bad a problem as having stealth jam your hand. Stealth cannot be gotten rid of unless your prey cooperates (and a decent opponent won't), while extra strike cards can always be gotten rid of in combat, which you can force. As a result it is _far_ easier to get stuck with 7 stealth cards in your hand than 7 additional strike cards -- no comparison really. >my main >problem with NCL is overkill. It gets to the point you don't play your deck it >plays itself. Knowing what and when to discard is just a mark of good play and >bonding in a combat deck has saved my ass countless times. Knowing what and when to discard is hardly a phenomenom belonging solely to 4CL. I frankly don't see how a NCL deck plays itself either. And I'm not even going to bother beating a dead horse over bonding. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <354757B0...@uswest.net>, lk...@uswest.net writes >you are correct that versatility can be achieved under NCL however it is rarely >if >ever done (in my experience I played under NCL for 2 years before switching) >Because in order to remain competitive with the guy who uses 30 Majesty for >example. >you need 30 thoughts betrayed et. al. and in my experience there is always going >to be >at least one guy at the table playing a degenerate deck. so in order to win you >have >to be one of those guys , and what fun is that? Well, how's that guy using those 40 Majesties? If the only thing he can do is end your combat, stay out of combat. Stealth your bleeds past, pass your votes with ease, etc. And you don't need 30 Thoughts Betrayed to attack him back. Think about it this way. If I have one Thoughts Betrayed in my hand, I should easily be able to rule that combat. Yeah? In a well constructed combat deck I should find it very easy to torporise my opponent. Once he's in torpor, his 30 Majesties aren't going to be much use, are they? And you could do that with 1 Thoughts Betrayed and a Burning Wrath, say. Two cards and 30 cards in his deck become useless. A little Amaranth or Decap and he goes away. Or you can pull a few weenies out to diablerise them. The problem of degenerate decks is not exclusive to NCL. I would agree that under NCL, people do play degenerate decks. A tourney deck which does very well may very well have lots and lots of bleed in it or something. But you can do just the same in 4CL. Let's just try something like: 4 Lost in Crowds 4 Faceless Night 4 Cloak the Gathering 4 Lost in Crowds 4 Mask 1KF 4 Threats 4 Bonding 4 Conditioning 4 Foreshadowing Destruction 4 Command the Beast 4 Dominate Kine 4 Govern the Unaligned 4 Slaughtering the Herd 4 Scouting Mission 4 Mind Rape 4 Dominate 4 Obfuscate 4 Asylum Hunting Ground Now, that's a pretty horrid deck. Obviously, it could be tweaked as far as necessary to make it more competitive but surely that is a horrid deck which proves that 4CL can be just as bad as NCL for degenerate decks. > again thanx for the ruling its gonna come in handy friday night. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia) Change nospam to obeah to reply Vampire: Elder Kindred Network madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

Jasper wrote: "Heh. That will be the day, when I fear a toreador weapon deck -- weapon decks are pretty much the definition of sorry, card limit or no. The few almost exceptions to this rule aren't even possible under 4CL." Man, Jasper, you kill me :-) I was gonna post something just like this, but you beat me to it. Oh well. Yeah, the Toreador just suck. They can't fight, and they have no ability to get stealth, so they get blocked when they try something, and get killed, cause they can't fight. The Toreador suck more than the Nosferatu... Ok, maybe with a Grand Ball out, they are viable, but on the whole, they just sre stink-o-tastic. Hmmm. A Toreador with a Flamethrower, huh? Sounds to me like a prime victim for Drawing out the Beast and Immortal Grapple. Ooh. What a mess. I'd like to say something more useful at this point, but LSJ has answered all the relevant rules questions, and Jasper et al have addressed all other relevant points. What can ya do? [ quoted text not captured ]

Jasper Phillips wrote: > In article <354757B0...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: > > [snip] > > >you are correct that versatility can be achieved under NCL however it is > >rarely if > >ever done (in my experience I played under NCL for 2 years before switching) > >Because in order to remain competitive with the guy who uses 30 Majesty for > >example. > >you need 30 thoughts betrayed et. al. and in my experience there is always > >going to be > >at least one guy at the table playing a degenerate deck. so in order to win > >you have > >to be one of those guys , and what fun is that? > > again thanx for the ruling its gonna come in handy friday night. > > > >Eric Prince of Minneapolis > > Actually, a deck with 30 majestys isn't terribly effective, and even if > it were you don't need, nor do you even want, a comparable number of > Thoughts Betrayed or Immortal grapple. You simply want 1 per fight you > get into. > > I would be interested in seeing the decks you claim to be degenerate under > NCL. first let us define degenerate "any deck that rely's on a specific card or combo in order to win"well thats any (or close to) NCL deck which makes NCL a degenerative environment. [ quoted text not captured ]

> "Heh. That will be the day, when I fear a toreador weapon deck -- weapon > decks are pretty much the definition of sorry, card limit or no. The few > almost exceptions to this rule aren't even possible under 4CL." > > Man, Jasper, you kill me :-) I was gonna post something just like this, but > you beat me to it. Oh well. > > Yeah, the Toreador just suck. They can't fight, and they have no ability to > get stealth, so they get blocked when they try something, and get killed, > cause they can't fight. The Toreador suck more than the Nosferatu... > > Ok, maybe with a Grand Ball out, they are viable, but on the whole, they > just sre stink-o-tastic. > > Hmmm. A Toreador with a Flamethrower, huh? Sounds to me like a prime > victim for Drawing out the Beast and Immortal Grapple. Ooh. What a mess. > First you say the Nos suck, then you mention DoTB and IG. The Nos are the only clan that can reliably get out that combo. Make up your mind. The Nos are by far the premiere combat clan, surpassing even the Brujah and Gangrel, who both clean up around here. If you can't get a winning deck with the Nos, then obviously you haven't tried very hard. As for the Toreador, you're missing out on two strategies that, while difficult to pull off in 4CL, are nasty in NL. The Toreador are the best clan to get off pool gain decks, mainly because of Anson, but also because Presence, Auspex, and Scorn of Adonis are good at pool gain voting. Plus, a Toreador vote/bleed/Majesty deck is nearly unstoppable if your prey doesn't have intercept *and* Immortal Grapple. And even that won't save them if you get the Grand Ball out. The bleeds are really just there for if your opponent taps out or if you get blocked while voting. So more votes than bleed. In any case, while the Tories are far from my favorite clan, and certainly not as awesome as the Nossies, they still hold their own. -Chris [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6 wrote: > Jasper wrote: > "Heh. That will be the day, when I fear a toreador weapon deck -- weapon decks > are pretty much the definition of sorry, card limit or no. The few almost > exceptions to this rule aren't even possible under 4CL." > > Man, Jasper, you kill me :-) I was gonna post something just like this, but > you beat me to it. Oh well. > > Yeah, the Toreador just suck. They can't fight, and they have no ability to > get stealth, so they get blocked when they try something, and get killed, cause > they can't fight. The Toreador suck more than the Nosferatu... > > Ok, maybe with a Grand Ball out, they are viable, but on the whole, they just > sre stink-o-tastic. not so not so they just require better playing timing your moves is everything > > > Hmmm. A Toreador with a Flamethrower, huh? Sounds to me like a prime victim > for Drawing out the Beast and Immortal Grapple. Ooh. What a mess. When I'm on offense I pick who I fight and on defense there's divine intervention in 4CL he's not gonna have the grapple or beast every combat anyway. While the grapple argument is plausible I've have Drawing out the beast covering my bedroom wall, and have never seen it played in a game. > > > Eric Prince of Minneapolis

In article <3548D282...@uswest.net>, <lk...@uswest.net> wrote: > >PDB6 wrote: >> Hmmm. A Toreador with a Flamethrower, huh? Sounds to me like a prime victim >> for Drawing out the Beast and Immortal Grapple. Ooh. What a mess. > >When I'm on offense I pick who I fight and on defense there's divine >intervention >in 4CL he's not gonna have the grapple or beast every combat anyway. While the >grapple argument is plausible I've have Drawing out the beast covering my >bedroom >wall, and have never seen it played in a game. What, do you have stealth in your toreador deck so you can choose who you fight? Against competent combat decks, even under 4CL, Immortal Grapple and Drawing out the Beast are going to happen often enough to hose you -- hardly allowing you to stand toe to toe with all, or even any combat decks. Weapons just suck! And if you think drawing out the beast is wallpaper, you're definitly missing something (either that, or you're thinking of Drawing out the Beast). >> Eric Prince of Minneapolis [ quoted text not captured ]

lk...@uswest.net wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] (accidently sent this to quick)The compatition in my group is very fierce my experiance in NCL IS limited in that respect in my group you have to take your deck to the limit or you flatly get pummeled I'd probably be concidered a "suitcase"collector, but my buddy is "mr. vault" he acctualy bought out 4 yes 4 stores when sabbat came out requiring me to drive accross town just to find a booster pack.So my experiance with NCL was quite degenerative.I know a lot of you don't play that way, but that is kinda my point you could.I mean you could play type one magic with a type two deck but you wouldnt get very far. Thats why we had to impose limits in order to keep the game fun . Eric Prince of Minneapolis > >

Eric wrote: "When I'm on offense I pick who I fight and on defense there's divine intervention in 4CL he's not gonna have the grapple or beast every combat anyway. While the grapple argument is plausible I've have Drawing out the beast covering my bedroom wall, and have never seen it played in a game." This paragraph portrays many problems with 4CL in one easy to read section. First, yes, in 4CL, your opponent is not going to have Immortal Grapple every combat. This makes combat very inneffective, as there are far more S:CE and Dodge cards than there are Immortal Grapples, just cause you can only have 4 of each. The reason there is only 1 Immortal Grapple card is because it is very specific, and there do not need to be any variations of it, not because it is too powerful to have more than 4 of in your deck. There are multiple S:CE/Dodges because there are many possible useful variations of such a card, not so you can have lots of them in your deck. Thus Potence combat becomes incredibly unlikely to actually work, and consequently Rush combat becomes a non contender under 4CL, making Jyhad a game of Paper-Scisors-Rock, but without the Rock. Second, it points out that 4CL makes certain cards _way_ more useful than they should be. Direct Intervention, under NL, is annoying and occasionally effective, but not a game killer, as you could very easily have many, many more of the card that was DI'd away, and just play it again. Under 4CL, DI becomes amazingly useful, as say you have 12 S:CE cards (perfectly viable under 4CL) and 4 DI, while my pathetic Nosferatu Rush deck only has 4 IG. I have a 2/3 less chance of having the card I need to kill you than you have of having the card you need to not be killed by me. Even if I do manage to have a IG, you can always play DI to kill it, and it is amazingly unlikely that I will draw another one to combat the DI. Thus, I lose on a vast strategic level, and it is not even worth building a combat deck. Third, with 4CL, many specific cards that are really only useful in weird combos never get used, because you can't draw them reliably enough to make the combos work. On its own and in small numbers, Drawing out the Beast is not particularly useful (although it still really screws Toreadors with Flamethrowers...), but DotB is an incredibly powerful card in combination with Immortal Grapple, and an incredibly powerful card in large numbers. In combination with IG, Drawing out the Beast insures that you cannot manuver away, and IG prevents you from doing anyhting but punching back, making for a very powerful killer combat combo. With only 4 IG and 4 DotB in your deck, you will never actually have both of them in your hand at the same time, and thus the combo does not work, and DotB seems worthless. In large numbers (like 10-15 in a deck), DotB is a very powerful S:CE hoser, as DotB does an unpreventable point of damage at superior when the round ends. If I play 6 DotB, and you play a S:CE, you take 6 points of unpreventable damage, making your S:CE probably worthless. Again, this is a use of DotB that never is seen under 4CL. Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com "We dress like Students. We dress like Housewives. Or in a shirt and a tie." -Talking Heads

PDB6 wrote: > Eric wrote: > "When I'm on offense I pick who I fight and on defense there's divine > intervention in 4CL he's not gonna have the grapple or beast every combat > anyway. While the grapple argument is plausible I've have Drawing out the beast > covering my bedroom wall, and have never seen it played in a game." > > This paragraph portrays many problems with 4CL in one easy to read section. > > First, yes, in 4CL, your opponent is not going to have Immortal Grapple every > combat. This makes combat very inneffective, as there are far more S:CE and > Dodge cards than there are Immortal Grapples, just cause you can only have 4 of > each. The reason there is only 1 Immortal Grapple card is because it is very > specific, and there do not need to be any variations of it, not because it is > too powerful to have more than 4 of in your deck. There are multiple > S:CE/Dodges because there are many possible useful variations of such a card, > not so you can have lots of them in your deck. Thus Potence combat becomes > incredibly unlikely to actually work, and consequently Rush combat becomes a > non contender under 4CL, making Jyhad a game of Paper-Scisors-Rock, but without > the Rock. Rush combat (in my group) is best as an aspect of a deck rather than a deck in and of itself. I truely belive if you add a stealth bleed or voting aspect to any of your rush decks and play it a few times I think you'll agree that you did indeed improve the deck. Our decks are more like PAPER/rock, or SCISSORS/paper, ect....I belive that distilling a deck down to one aspect increases it's weanesses more than it improves it's strenghs because, while you do increase the chance of getting your combo you equally increase the power of your particular hoser.and leave yourself open to other things ie. with no intercept and no votes a voter deck will end your combat or send you away (banishment) after you play your wrath and with no way to protect your self from this your vulnerable stuck with cards you cant play and watching them vote you away while this is extreme(i'm sure you will kill some vamps)It illistrates the point. > > > Second, it points out that 4CL makes certain cards _way_ more useful than they > should be. Direct Intervention, under NL, is annoying and occasionally > effective, but not a game killer, as you could very easily have many, many more > of the card that was DI'd away, and just play it again. Under 4CL, DI becomes > amazingly useful, as say you have 12 S:CE cards (perfectly viable under 4CL) > and 4 DI, while my pathetic Nosferatu Rush deck only has 4 IG. I have a 2/3 > less chance of having the card I need to kill you than you have of having the > card you need to not be killed by me. Even if I do manage to have a IG, you > can always play DI to kill it, and it is amazingly unlikely that I will draw > another one to combat the DI. Thus, I lose on a vast strategic level, and it > is not even worth building a combat deck. But if you take those spots filled by the excess(in my opinion)rush and replace them with Tasha,Simmons, and laptops increase your stealth (the nosferatu don't have OBF just for lurker you know)then your deck becomes multi-purpose and the use of the DI becomes a choice for your oponent based on where he's weaker at the time.so your IG has a much better chance of going off. Eric Prince of Minneapolis > > >

Well...this may all be settled soon anyway. Eric ("Prince of Minneapolis") & I are drawing together a small collection of people in the Twin Cities area who haven't met before to get a few roaring games of Jyhad together, and we're going to play both 4CL and NCL just to be fair to all involved... And after a little while, I believe that we'll figure out which we feel is better. Xian

Some notes: In regards to adding versatility to your TB/aggro deck: 1. A few laptops will do the job without screwing with your deck mix much 2. Going so far as to try to add stealth/bleed aspects is simply going to far. To make it even marginally effective 'would' water down the deck. In regards to Havens vs. Bums' Rushes: It comes down to the overall design of your combat deck. i.e. if I am using some form of weenie-rush, then I want Havens because I generally lack disciplines at superior level. I may not be able to take him down with just one vamp, in one round, with one shot - as I can typically do with a larger vamp like Lazverinus or Wynn. If I am using larger vamps then I want the Bum's to Rush. I regards to your welcome on this group: Please don't go anywhere, you may be the lightning rod in this current NL / CL debate, but people willing to say and do the unpopular make any group healthier - even if just for the debate. You are wrong however....nyah, nyah, nyah :) In regards to NL/CL: I play NL, and believe in NL. If it wasn't for the Sabbat expansion I would be thinking you were nuts for advocating CL. However, Sabbat printed enough 'variations on the theme' (Ambush, for example) that I can at least see where CL would be bearable. Time to go now, where did I put that damn lurking switch anyways....? Jaysen [ quoted text not captured ]