new preview up

majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum without cards played... nasty! /Henrik Isaksson

"Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > without cards played... nasty! I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp

XZealot <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:bTT_8.7001$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > > without cards played... nasty! > > I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! > Well, he is a Toreador, but he's a little Assamite too. Superior Celerity, inferior Quietus and Obfuscate. Does his additional strike count for the add. strike limit? Could he play Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Pursuit, then Taste of Death? That would be awesome.

"XZealot" <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:bTT_8.7001$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > > without cards played... nasty! > > I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! You know with his obfuscate, a disguised weapon and Submachine Gun don't seem so bad. Four pool for 8 damage first round guaranteed. Nice! XZ

"Martin Bruset Solberg" <tha...@online.no> wrote in message news:noU_8.1476$Py1....@news2.ulv.nextra.no... > > XZealot <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:bTT_8.7001$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > > > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message > > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > > > without cards played... nasty! > > > > I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! > > > Well, he is a Toreador, but he's a little Assamite too. Superior Celerity, > inferior Quietus and Obfuscate. > Does his additional strike count for the add. strike limit? Unless it says otherwise then it does count against his add. strike limit. Could he play > Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Pursuit, then Taste of Death? Nope That would be > awesome. It would. Try it with Jacko it works with him and a Black Metamorphosis. XZ

[ quoted text not captured ] Guaranteed? Canine Horde Terror Frenzy Soul Burn Maneuver + Grapple Maneuver + Blood Rage etc. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson

XZealot <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> skrev i diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:HlU_8.7011$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver. com... [ quoted text not captured ] This might seem good right now, until you realise that it's probably better to spend 7 pool on Felica Mostrom and a concealed Magnum than 13 pool on Murietta and a disguised submachine gun... heck, for those extra 6 pool, I could throw in a black cat with another concealed magnum! =) /Henrik Isaksson

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:19:04 GMT, sjoh...@math.sc.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: >Guaranteed? > >Canine Horde >Terror Frenzy >Soul Burn >Maneuver + Grapple >Maneuver + Blood Rage >etc. Does his +1 bonus also counts towards aggro dammage and ammo cards?? In other words, would he inflict 3 aggro damage with a flame thrower and 5 aggro damage with an assualt rifle with dragon breath rounds??? That would make him a vampire burner..:) First shoot for 5 with an assualt rifle and then burn the critter with 5 aggro's.... Not much vampires can stand that (unless dodged soaked or the above mentioned offcourse..:) )

Pepijn Kok wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:19:04 GMT, sjoh...@math.sc.edu (L. Scott > Johnson) wrote: > > >Guaranteed? > > > >Canine Horde > >Terror Frenzy > >Soul Burn > >Maneuver + Grapple > >Maneuver + Blood Rage > >etc. > > Does his +1 bonus also counts towards aggro dammage and ammo cards?? > In other words, would he inflict 3 aggro damage with a flame thrower > and 5 aggro damage with an assualt rifle with dragon breath rounds??? FT is not a gun. DBR doesn't make the gun's damage agg. It adds two agg to the damage. > That would make him a vampire burner..:) First shoot for 5 with an > assualt rifle and then burn the critter with 5 aggro's.... Not much > vampires can stand that (unless dodged soaked or the above mentioned > offcourse..:) ) Strike 1: 5 normal Strike 2: 5 normal + 2 agg Still quite the vampire burner. For 14 pool and a slagged Assault Rifle. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

"Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > without cards played... nasty! > ...one who is a 9-cap without votes, which I always find a disadvantage. On the other hand, he brings in some support for the Toreador/obfuscate deck. Now, if only one of them could have superior Obfuscate, for Cloaking his somewhat more obvious clan mates... Patrick

"L. Scott Johnson" <sjoh...@math.sc.edu> wrote in message news:ahh49a$s8in4$1...@ID-99714.news.dfncis.de... [ quoted text not captured ] Of course, but hell I was just excited to have a reason to play with the Submachine Gun. Xz

> This might seem good right now, until you realise that it's probably better > to spend 7 pool on Felica Mostrom and a concealed Magnum than 13 pool on > Murietta and a disguised submachine gun... heck, for those extra 6 pool, I > could throw in a black cat with another concealed magnum! =) All you weenie bastards can just jump off a dock. ;P XZ

"Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> ha scritto nel messaggio news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > majesty Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? ciao Emiliano, v:ekn prince of Rome <snip>

In message <NlZ_8.16769$s74.4...@twister1.libero.it>, tetragrammaton <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: >Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? Google is your friend. Majesty has regularly been cited as a card at the very top of the power curve. Rebalancing cards is (part of) what a base set is useful for. -- James Coupe PGP 0x5D623D5D You don't need to hear it but I'm dried up EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 and sick to death of love. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D

I was thinking of him as Toreador with oft, he will get votes to the table. He is usable with Klaus van der Veken and with Francois Villon, to make a big Toreador assult rifle parity shift deck. I think that titles will become increasingly less important with this new set but voter captivation will still be good for filling up vampires.

"Martin Bruset Solberg" <tha...@online.no> wrote in message news:noU_8.1476$Py1....@news2.ulv.nextra.no... > [ quoted text not captured ] I agree , this guy is really perfect for Assamites + Auspex decks !

"XZealot" <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:YoU_8.7013$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > "Martin Bruset Solberg" <tha...@online.no> wrote in message > news:noU_8.1476$Py1....@news2.ulv.nextra.no... > > > > XZealot <x_ze...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > news:bTT_8.7001$LS3.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > > > > > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message > > > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > > > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > > > > without cards played... nasty! > > > > > > I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! > > > > > Well, he is a Toreador, but he's a little Assamite too. Superior Celerity, > > inferior Quietus and Obfuscate. > > Does his additional strike count for the add. strike limit? > > Unless it says otherwise then it does count against his add. strike limit. > > Could he play > > Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Pursuit, then Taste of Death? Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Quickness, taste of Death. Course you could do that with Abd al-Rashid(CEL QUI) Blood Sweat, BLUR, blood sweat taste of death. -- Aaron The Nosferatu Stuff

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:ZYNS5Ipv...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <NlZ_8.16769$s74.4...@twister1.libero.it>, tetragrammaton > <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: > >Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? > > Google is your friend. > > Majesty has regularly been cited as a card at the very top of the power > curve. Rebalancing cards is (part of) what a base set is useful for. So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 23:09:31 -0400, "Nosferatu Stuff" <roans...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? >> Google is your friend. >> Majesty has regularly been cited as a card at the very top of the power >> curve. Rebalancing cards is (part of) what a base set is useful for. >So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next >most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple >decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( Form of Mist and Earth Meld. Don't expect them to arrive in the Anarch set unscathed. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com

"The Lasombra" <thela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3d3cce01...@text.giganews.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Although I agree these are at the top of the curve (after all, I love 'em), I'd add Immortal Grapple and especially Disarm. I really hope Disarm got the works... Patrick

roans...@yahoo.com writes: >So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next >most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple >decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( Probably none, as they haven't wallpapered any yet. If that new Toreador marksman is aiming at you with a submachine gun (and almost certainly a Flash in hand), Majesty at 1 blood will look REEEEAL nice. Way better than Dodge, that's for sure! It's just that Majesty/Catatonic Fear will no longer be the sole defensive cards for Toreador, Brujah, and presence-driven decks. Also, downgrading Combat Ends will upgrade presses, downgrade Immortal Grapple, and upgrade "cannot be dodged", which are nice side effects. IMO current Majesty is probably still too good. I proposed ages ago that it cost 1 at inferior and 2 at superior; even there it would see respectable use (compare to Skin of Steel + Freak Drive) But the new Majesty is certainly an improvement and more would have put it out of line with Oubliette and such. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com) "It is better to be wrong than to be vague" - Freeman Dyson

> >So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next > >most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple > >decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( > > Form of Mist and Earth Meld. > > Don't expect them to arrive in the Anarch set unscathed. > > Carpe noctem. > > Lasombra So you also think that protean is going to be "balanced" in anarch set. I am also waiting that they balance Protect Thine Own & Flesh of Marble somehow. Soon we have nice new errated cards that do nothing :) Best strike would be "Lovely huggins PRO, POT, DOM, PRE, DEM required, 4 blood, +1 damage" :P - Guzmo

> > > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> wrote in message > > > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > > > majesty and a big fat intercept/gun toreador... 6 damage with a magnum > > > > without cards played... nasty! > > > > > > I was thinking of 4 damage with a Zip Gun. Mmm, Mmm, good! > > > > You know with his obfuscate, a disguised weapon and Submachine Gun don't > > seem so bad. Four pool for 8 damage first round guaranteed. Nice! > > This might seem good right now, until you realise that it's probably better > to spend 7 pool on Felica Mostrom and a concealed Magnum than 13 pool on > Murietta and a disguised submachine gun... heck, for those extra 6 pool, I > could throw in a black cat with another concealed magnum! =) > Black Cat special only applies when equipping herself, I think you can't reduce the cost of a concealed gun, as it didn't apply when equipping via pier 13. Anyway, I'm with you on this topic, better two 5th caps with guns than a massika. This weekend, I've tested a magnum deck applying the new card text, and it was damn good. CEL vamps with a few pre/aus and most of those vamps 5th cap and below. 4 sport bikes, atonements, radios and 35 cel cards powerbases for pool gaining and retainers/laptops. And I don't think 5th caps are weenies at all. You still need 2 turns to influence them and if you equip them with a magnum the overall cost is 7 pool per minion. I've always beared in mind that a weenie is a vamp you are able to influence in a turn. Tom,Mad&Co > /Henrik Isaksson > >

> > Form of Mist and Earth Meld. > > Don't expect them to arrive in the Anarch set unscathed. > Although I agree these are at the top of the curve (after all, I love 'em), > I'd add Immortal Grapple and especially Disarm. I really hope Disarm > got the works... So where does it end? When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. When is "close enough" enough? Or do all the cards have to practically be wallpaper before the madness ends? Sorrow --- "I am Jack's wasted life." - Narrator

"Tom, Mad & Co" wrote: > Black Cat special only applies when equipping herself, I think you can't > reduce the cost of a concealed gun, as it didn't apply when equipping via > pier 13. It applies to both CW and P13. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=9119qj%24850%241%40nnrp1.deja.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <ahihl4$t9jun$1...@ID-125246.news.dfncis.de>, Nosferatu Stuff <roans...@yahoo.com> writes: >So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next >most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple >decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( There are two arguments here, which are separate. 1) should cards be rebalanced? - have a thread about that 2) has majesty been wallpapered? - have a thread about that I don't think that any of the reprints have been wallpapered so far, except perhaps Tomb of Rameses which is usable, but very difficult to use effectively. Unlike Lasombra, I don't think Form of Mist needs to be altered. Earth Meld *might*, but unlike Majesty, it's a defensive card in an offensive combat discipline, as opposed to a defensive card in a non-combat discipline, so I don't think it's out of line. Personally, I think Form of Mist is balanced. It can only Strike: Combat Ends at superior - like Staredown. It can't untap you as a defence to a rush. It can continue an action, but only once per turn, because of the action modifier restriction. And unlike Majesty, Form of Mist is in Protean again, which doesn't benefit quite so much from extra actions, because it can't do the whole bleed thing so well, and it needs to be used on a blocked action for that. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, James Coupe wrote: > Personally, I think Form of Mist is balanced. It can only Strike: > Combat Ends at superior - like Staredown. It can't untap you as a > defence to a rush. It can continue an action, but only once per turn, > because of the action modifier restriction. And unlike Majesty, Form of > Mist is in Protean again, which doesn't benefit quite so much from extra > actions, because it can't do the whole bleed thing so well, and it needs > to be used on a blocked action for that. FoM tends to be on the short list of cards I describe as broken. It's certainly not as odious as a similiar effect would be in a bleed discipline, or in a discipline possessed in-clan that coupled with a bleed discipline, as you remarked, but I don't think that puts it in the clear. The "FoM effect" has been mimicked several times, and in each case it was in a watered-down form. That seems to indicate that the current designers view it as being overpowered. It would have been obviously bad if the Lasombra had an unrestricted version to go with their dominate, but I can't see why Mirror Image is such a weaker version if the card isn't overpowered.... the really disgusting stuff they can do with it isn't really affected by the "no bleed" clause, and it /still/ costs one and lacks the stealth. As you noted in a different thread, Patronage warrants a pool cost, in part, because it yields an advantage in minion actions, which is strong. The fact that FoM leaves a blocker tapped while continuing the action leads to a relative action advantage. That the card is free, unrestricted in action type, and tacks on an extra stealth, seems I bit too much. Citing the weaknesses of the Gangrel clan doesn't strike me as a counterargument, since they are hardly the only vampires in the game that have protean; even if they were, there are still vampires like Ingrid who can do truly sick things all by their lonesome. David Cherryholmes Duke Radiology P.E.T. Facility (919) 684-7714 d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: : In message <ahihl4$t9jun$1...@ID-125246.news.dfncis.de>, Nosferatu Stuff : <roans...@yahoo.com> writes: :>So whats at the top of the power curve now? Because that makes it the next :>most likely to get "rebalanced" right? Just curious how many more staple :>decks white wolf is going to wall paper before this is over. =( : Unlike Lasombra, I don't think Form of Mist needs to be altered. Earth : Meld *might*, but unlike Majesty, it's a defensive card in an offensive : combat discipline, as opposed to a defensive card in a non-combat : discipline, so I don't think it's out of line. : Personally, I think Form of Mist is balanced. It can only Strike: : Combat Ends at superior - like Staredown. It can't untap you as a : defence to a rush. It can continue an action, but only once per turn, : because of the action modifier restriction. And unlike Majesty, Form of : Mist is in Protean again, which doesn't benefit quite so much from extra : actions, because it can't do the whole bleed thing so well, and it needs : to be used on a blocked action for that. I quite agree with this. I like the Majesty getting a cost of one blood just because its Discipline contains a number of methods of ousting. Protean, otoh, has no such cards or methods which would gain or do gain a definitive edge in the game. So far I haven't seen that many Protean weenie voters or bleeders that could've been nearly as effective or abused as the Presence archetypes. Of course Protean also packs some offensive with aggravated poking, but they are rarely combined except for the other method as a light backup. Even Dominate/Protean requires big caps or so heavy usage of Discipline masters that it becomes unwieldy. Granted, I've seen some scary Dominate/Protean bleeders but in general they are so few and far betweeen that I'd hate to see them crippled. Iirc there is one single deck in the Lasombra's tournament winning deck archive that uses Earth Melds (for walling with Smiling Jack). //T

> > Could he play > > > Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Pursuit, then Taste of Death? > > Blood Sweat, Blood Sweat, Quickness, taste of Death. Well, then why don't you just use a Blur instead of getting all fancy with your Quickness and instead use the quickness for something useful like playing it on top of the Blur you just played. I mean really... > Course you could do that with Abd al-Rashid(CEL QUI) > Blood Sweat, BLUR, blood sweat taste of death. Kudos. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp

"Sorrow" <jcb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ujqdau2...@corp.supernews.com... > > > Form of Mist and Earth Meld. > > > Don't expect them to arrive in the Anarch set unscathed. > > Although I agree these are at the top of the curve (after all, I love 'em), > > I'd add Immortal Grapple and especially Disarm. I really hope Disarm > > got the works... > > So where does it end? Never, the title "Eternal Struggle" was inserted to aptly describe the designer's fustration with balancing the cards. When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move > into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. > When is "close enough" enough? When disarm costs a blood or only functions at superior. Or do all the cards have to practically > be wallpaper before the madness ends? Then the specials on the vampires become the most important aspect of the game and then we have to rebalance those. I thought you quit. Good to see you haven't. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

On 23 Jul 2002, Teemu T Vilen wrote: > Even Dominate/Protean requires big caps or so heavy usage of Discipline > masters that it becomes unwieldy. Granted, I've seen some scary Granted, this is anecdotal, but I did watch this go down not too long ago: Info Highway Up comes Ingrid on Turn two Ingrid gets Legendary Turn three, Ingrid Governs, Conditions, Freaks, ConAgg. -> 12 pool to prey Turn four, same (maybe it was KRC this time) -> 9 or 10 pool -> dead prey Up comes Stanislava Turn five -> more of same, times two -> dead prey Yadda yadda, sweep. Or something close to that. Anyway, fortitude, dominate, titles, and stealth is mmmmh mmmmh good kung fu. Obfuscate isn't the only way to go, you know. Protean kicks dat ass, and FoM is a big part of that package. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.020723...@petsparc.mc.duke.ed u>, David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> writes: <Form of Mist> >That the card is free, >unrestricted in action type, and tacks on an extra stealth, seems I bit >too much. Personally, I don't find it too much, really, as I've said. But a minor restriction wouldn't weaken it terribly. That other disciplines, as you note, have mimicked it and weakened it isn't necessarily bad. Mimicking a Dominate card in a non-bleed or weaker-bleed discipline will do that sort of thing, for instance. That doesn't mean that the Dominate cards need to be weaker, too. Also, new Gangrel can be designed knowing this, making sure that potentially 'abusive' disciplines don't get scattered too easily - say, give one Gangrel Dominate, another Gangrel Presence, another Gangrel Dementation and so on, but don't make it easy for them to combine into one amorphous lump. (Gangrel with Dementation. Now, what would *they* do? The mind boggles.) Also, Majesty could effectively do the same thing. Okay, it couldn't continue that action, but you could take another. NRA applies (for most intents and purposes, NRA was part of the game rules anyway), but calling a vote instead of bleeding wasn't too bad, for many decks - except weenie focused Presence decks, which don't really need the help. Protean doesn't have the same weenie-ness to it. Most decks are using much bigger vampires for such, IME, so letting it 'escape' NRA in this fashion doesn't bother me too much. PRO kicks in at 3 (Chandler). Daliyah has obf (not terribly abusive). At 5, we have Mirembe with SER too. At 6, we get our first inferior Dominate. Whereas PRE has a lot more options, really, (no fours, I think, oh no, wait, Marianna). And it combos with Dominate a lot more easily. So no continue actions there is good, but I don't think it's so necessary with Protean. To be honest, I'd also rather *leave* some of the good cards as they are. There is a line beyond which bringing more cards into line is probably too much. I'd like to leave Form of Mist as, more or less, that line, I think. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <ujqdau2...@corp.supernews.com>, "Sorrow" <jcb...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm sorry, did you forget what weenie Presence bleed looks like? "madness"? What a crock. Majesty getting rewritten is no tragedy. The superior was used just as much as the inferior, and IT has suffered no change. Everyone bitching about the increased cost just hasn't really done the math... and has a really short memory. -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, James Coupe wrote: > Personally, I don't find it too much, really, as I've said. But a minor > restriction wouldn't weaken it terribly. I'm just kicking stuff around 'cause, frankly, I can afford to stare at Usenet a certain number of hours a day. I don't think it's a card that's causing problems in the game. When it gets right down to it, I don't think *any* cards are currently causing problems in the game; cards don't kill games, weenies kill games... but I think it's pretty obvious that's my cause-celebre. ;) But my favorite whoopun chile' segues nicely into why I think FoM is probably too good. Stripped down to the essentials, weenies are bad because they put more of an action stress on the game than the rules can adequately absorb; the checks and balances the rules structure provides disintegrates in a fit of runaway recursion (OK, technically, it's not recursion, but it seems kind of like a recursive algorithm with a crappy base case). FoM just rubs me as too much bang for the buck, too much like minion actions nobody is paying for. > Also, new Gangrel can be designed knowing this, making sure that > potentially 'abusive' disciplines don't get scattered too easily - say, > give one Gangrel Dominate, another Gangrel Presence, another Gangrel > Dementation and so on, but don't make it easy for them to combine into > one amorphous lump. This would be one alternative to changing the text on FoM, yes. Easier to just change the text, since we seem to be in a fix-fest anyway. > Also, Majesty could effectively do the same thing. Okay, it couldn't > continue that action, but you could take another. NRA applies (for most > intents and purposes, NRA was part of the game rules anyway), but > calling a vote instead of bleeding wasn't too bad, for many decks - > except weenie focused Presence decks, which don't really need the help. I think you are playing down the limiting effect of NRA perhaps too much here. I would assume that you would desire the action you were taking to succeed. FoM allows this, while Majesty + "do something else" requires lots of other variables with right values to gel into a successful action. You yourself have noted in refuting the bone-headed notion wrt to amaranth that passing a vote isn't trivial. In the end, Majesty and untap isn't anywhere near as good as playing FoM. And just about everybody who could play FoM at superior can go ahead and freak drive after it for more action-y, curve-breaking yumminess. > Protean doesn't have the same weenie-ness to it. Most decks are using > much bigger vampires for such, IME, so letting it 'escape' NRA in this > fashion doesn't bother me too much. PRO kicks in at 3 (Chandler). > Daliyah has obf (not terribly abusive). At 5, we have Mirembe with SER > too. At 6, we get our first inferior Dominate. Whereas PRE has a lot > more options, really, (no fours, I think, oh no, wait, Marianna). And > it combos with Dominate a lot more easily. So no continue actions there > is good, but I don't think it's so necessary with Protean. I think the fact that superior FoM is tightly coupled with Freak Drive mitigates any impact relative capacities between PRE decks and PRO decks might have upon the discussion. In any case, a crypt populated with superior in either can be built safely in the mid-cap range (a few threes and fours, lots of five's and six's); since these are both decks that hypothetically will loophole out of the 1:1 minion:action framework, midcaps should do fine. Presence is capable of more offensive actions, but it requires a support discipline to get any given action through. Protean can do that inherently, but requires a support discipline for the action to be worth doing. This, to me, seems to be the important distinction between the two, although I'm not sure what conlusions to draw from it, nor that I'm not just stating the obvious. ;) > To be honest, I'd also rather *leave* some of the good cards as they > are. There is a line beyond which bringing more cards into line is > probably too much. I'd like to leave Form of Mist as, more or less, > that line, I think. Leaving cards unchanged is intrinsically good. It requires an argument to reach a conclusion to change them. In the end, I don't think the actual play of the card leads inevitably to that argument in ways that certain other cards do, but the /idea/ of the card tantalizes me into pushing it into the same bin. [ quoted text not captured ]

David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> wrote: : On 23 Jul 2002, Teemu T Vilen wrote: :> Even Dominate/Protean requires big caps or so heavy usage of Discipline :> masters that it becomes unwieldy. Granted, I've seen some scary : Granted, this is anecdotal, but I did watch this go down not too long ago: : Info Highway : Up comes Ingrid on Turn two : Ingrid gets Legendary : Turn three, Ingrid Governs, Conditions, Freaks, ConAgg. -> 12 pool to prey : Turn four, same (maybe it was KRC this time) -> 9 or 10 pool -> dead prey : Up comes Stanislava : Turn five -> more of same, times two -> dead prey : Yadda yadda, sweep. : Or something close to that. Anyway, fortitude, dominate, titles, and : stealth is mmmmh mmmmh good kung fu. Obfuscate isn't the only way to go, : you know. Protean kicks dat ass, and FoM is a big part of that package. You could've done the same with lower caps, and Protean isn't even an integral part of the example you give. I usually does support it if the Vampire used are Ingrid and Stanislava. Which are big. I've seen the same, but more often I've seen the same with Ventrues. And with Arika and Obfuscate. Frankly, even though I've been able to accept the changes (to Majesty, traditions, etc) so far, I do fear where this line action may lead. I'm not at all sure what to think of the outcome and line of development in the game when cards like Baltimore Purge (based on rumor) and more powerful Vampires are printed in new sets while old cards are toned down. Dunno. I hope that the old cards that don't really need changes would be left untouched. //T

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio news:ZYNS5Ipv...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <NlZ_8.16769$s74.4...@twister1.libero.it>, tetragrammaton > <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: > >Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? > > Google is your friend. > > Majesty has regularly been cited as a card at the very top of the power > curve. If you referring to the fact that majesty has been cited as a very useful card i agree. However, since 7 years of playing and 3 of newsgroup, i didn't noticed at all the evidence of such majesty's "power curve" (leading to broken). To be errated, a card needs to be wrong or broken, and these two occourences never regarded majesty, imho. > Rebalancing cards is (part of) what a base set is useful for. > Still see no need to rebalance what isn't over-powered or broken. Emiliano, v:ekn prince of Rome <snip> > --

On 23 Jul 2002, Teemu T Vilen wrote: > You could've done the same with lower caps, and Protean isn't even an > integral part of the example you give. I usually does support it if the > Vampire used are Ingrid and Stanislava. Which are big. No, you couldn't. Lower caps can't get Legendary. Lower caps don't have a built in Info Highway. Any given lower cap would lack at least one of the following: a title, superior dominate, access to stealth. And I thought the use of Protean to enable all of those "I squash you like bug!" actions to actually succeed was obvious. > I've seen the same, but more often I've seen the same with Ventrues. And > with Arika and Obfuscate. Admit it. You didn't really read my post, did you? [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.020723...@petsparc.mc.duke.ed u>, David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> writes: >> Also, Majesty could effectively do the same thing. Okay, it couldn't >> continue that action, but you could take another. NRA applies (for most >> intents and purposes, NRA was part of the game rules anyway), but >> calling a vote instead of bleeding wasn't too bad, for many decks - >> except weenie focused Presence decks, which don't really need the help. > >I think you are playing down the limiting effect of NRA perhaps too much >here. I would assume that you would desire the action you were taking to >succeed. FoM allows this, while Majesty + "do something else" requires >lots of other variables with right values to gel into a successful >action. You yourself have noted in refuting the bone-headed notion wrt to >amaranth that passing a vote isn't trivial. In the end, Majesty and untap >isn't anywhere near as good as playing FoM. No no. What I mean is that FoM usage for high powered bleed actions will generally require bigger vampires - the obvious pro/dom combinations, for instance. Whereas with Presence, a bleed action is much easier with weenies. So Presence bleed goes like this: Legal Manipulations Block (Would play Aire of Elation if not) Majesty Can't play again because of NRA So maybe Kine Resources Contested? with little set-up. PRE is easy. So going somewhere else is a good compensating factor. A weenie bleed deck is kinda screwed, an inventive presence vote/bleed combination deck isn't. Whereas a Protean deck has more difficult set-up with the need for a Laptop, or an Inveraray or bigger vamps or combining with Dominate or something. So continuing the action is less powerful, in the context of the set-up needed. Yes, at the time of use, it's probably more powerful than Majesty. Gangrel vote decks? Yes, certainly a possibility. However, the rumoured changes to Fifth Tradition make them slower already - the big Gangrel votes tending to come from big caps, needing pool regeneration which Fifth/MT has been doing a lot. Also, the continue action effect can only be used by an acting minion, whereas the Majesty untap can be used for defence. ("Bleed me? Block, Majesty, Untap. Go again?") So who's going to be in combat with Form of Mist people? Blockers. Good blockers include the Toreador, the Tremere[0] (and antis) and the Tzimisce. Lots of Auspex provides Telepathic Tracking (and potentially Fast Reactions, if that floats your deck's boat). Celerity - from the Toreador or Mages on Speed - provides Psyche! Both are good S:CE defence cards *anyway*. They both just happen to stop the continue action effect of Form of Mist, too - which is necessary, to stop it being a one-for-one counter. Both are includable in a wide range of decks, whether Form of Mist (or similar continue action cards) are in play or not. LSJ and the Rules Team might have just done such things on purpose, I wouldn't know what goes on in LSJ's head. For the poor blockers, Form of Mist isn't so powerful. Okay, they might waste a Wake with Evening's Freshness. But you could play an Earth Control instead, which would work out to about the same effect. (Or Rapid Change. Or tap the backways.) They lose out on the chance to respond but, well, that's not terribly more powerful than, say, Elder Impersonation or Call of the Hungry Dead - cancelling a block and preventing that vamp from blocking again. Indeed, with such a comparison, it's kinda similar anyway, since a Woken vampire against Form of Mist can attempt to block again whereas an Elder Impersonation vampire can't. Swings and roundabouts. The (City) !Gangrel and the Assamites will both have Psyche! at their disposal for S:CE defence, if they block. Both benefit from it anyway, it being a useful, versatile card. (Of course, not all decks need it, not all decks want it. But it's a good, useful card.) The Brujah get Psyche! too, if they ever end up in combat with the Form of Mist deck. (And we have to assume they're blocking in the first place, or Form of Mist becomes an irrelevance.) The Brujah might have hit on the idea of using Immortal Grapple instead, but Psyche! isn't a bad option for a press and a usable superior, anyway - they're probably not going to have it if they're at close range though, granted. The Malkavians could get Telepathic Tracking if they were desperate, but they're not a great combat clan in the first place, so probably wouldn't. Similarly the !Ventrue. Of course, in both situations, other anti-S:CE defences will work in genral, by stopping the S:CE going off in the first place. The main blocking vampires who would seem to lose out are the Gangrel themselves - Animalism permanents, rather than Auspex. What goes around comes around. And stuff. Also, the Ravnos, potentially. (Animalism permanents, stealth reduction.) [0] Good at *blocking*, Mr Green. I didn't say good at doing anything once they've blocked. Quiet now. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <a3f%8.19866$s74.5...@twister1.libero.it>, tetragrammaton <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: >If you referring to the fact that majesty has been cited as a very useful >card >i agree. Lots of cards can be cited as "very useful" - flexible, versatile, obvious options for consistently seen game elements, whatever. >However, since 7 years of playing and 3 of newsgroup, i didn't >noticed at all the evidence of such majesty's "power curve" (leading to >broken). I think you misunderstand what I mean by power curve. (Put this in a monospaced font, if you use a proportional font. If it's easier, copy and paste it into Notepad or something, you'll see it better then. It's not *necessary*, because it's been written about sensibly, I hope. But it might be useful to visualise.) xxxx xx xx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx Return to xxxxxx xxxxxx Innocence ------------------------------------ Weak Balanced Powerful (Ish. I take no responsibility for being crap at drawing.) Imagine plotting a rough normal distribution curve (a bell curve - high in the middle, flat at each end). Cards which are roughly balanced go in the middle - that's most of them, hopefully. Cards which are too weak go at the left hand flat end - hopefully, there shouldn't be too many of these. (Mistakes are made, of course.) Cards which are better than average go further to the right. Really, really insanely broken cards - like Return to Innocence - go way to the right. Majesty is certainly useful. Strike: Combat Ends, with an optional untap at superior for one blood is nothing to be sniffed at. It's in a common discipline (whereas if it required an obscure clan, high capacity, or something, it'd be harder to access). It's cheap (no blood cost). That's certainly not doing badly so far. It pushes far to the right on that curve. Too far? Well, the Design Team think so. An alternative way to visualise this is to plot a graph (again, the monospace caveat): |a X P | X O | X W | X E | X R | X |X b +-------------- C O S T A card which is roughly balanced goes on the Capital X line. (It might be a curve, but plotting it as a straight line is easier for me - the mathematicians amongst us can pretend I'm plotting a log function, because my ability to do curves with ASCII sucks.) There's a bit of fluctuation around the line. Scribble a wobbly line around the X, roughly. (Note: I take no responsibility for using permanent markers on your monitor.) A card which moves close to "a" is a card with low cost and high power. This is moving towards 'broken'. (Cost includes all the restrictions and opportunity costs and things.) A card which is at "b" is high cost, low power - moving towards "wallpaper". Majesty has a low cost and a high power. It's certainly moving away from the line *towards* "a". Where is it actually? Well, that's arguable. Different metagames will represent it differently. Different members of the Rules Team, newsgroup, Design Team, White Wolf and so on will all have a slightly different view. But overall, the Design Team think it's a bit too far out of line. If Majesty was *broken*, it would likely have been addressed *well* before now. I'm quite sure that *someone* on the Rules Team would've argued for it convincingly. Like everyone else (barring LSJ and whoever), I've no idea who comprises the Rules Team. But I think we can all guess at the sorts of people whom LSJ asks for advice on his rulings and errata. We've seen the Rules Team 'overturn' some of the on-the- spot rulings LSJ issues. We've seen the Rules Team give a coherent - for better or for worse - set of rulings on a number of issues. LSJ and the Rules Team have re-written a number of cards in the past - LSJ's 6/23 and 7/7 rulings are obvious examples of such, in big batches. If the Rules Team thought the card was broken, I would expect to see such things happen before now. The Design Team, however, clearly has a policy of taking obviously powerful-but-cheap cards - in their view, which will probably take all sorts of views from the newsgroup and other locations into account, as well as their own personal experiences - and making them a little less so. >To be errated, a card needs to be wrong or broken, and these two >occourences never regarded majesty, imho. Majesty isn't being errata-ed. It's being played by latest printing. This is the same as reprinting - say - Ruins of Villars Abbey with a cheaper cost, to upgrade it. The card wasn't broken or wrong to start with. [ quoted text not captured ]

>So where does it end? When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move >into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. >When is "close enough" enough? Or do all the cards have to practically >be wallpaper before the madness ends? It depends upon what the problem is, but sometimes, the very best thing for the game is to nail a card or small group of cards. Lots of folks have issues with banning cards. But, good cards effectively ban inferior cards all of the time. When you can isolate a small number of problem cards and do something about them, you may be able to effectively unban - make playable - a significant number of other cards.

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, James Coupe wrote: > What I mean is that FoM usage for high powered bleed actions will > generally require bigger vampires - the obvious pro/dom combinations, > for instance. > > Whereas with Presence, a bleed action is much easier with weenies. > Whereas a Protean deck has more difficult set-up with the need for a > Laptop, or an Inveraray or bigger vamps or combining with Dominate or > something. So continuing the action is less powerful, in the context of > the set-up needed. Yes, at the time of use, it's probably more powerful > than Majesty. Hoho! Ha! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Thrust! In my original reply, I said something about not following your argument there. Guess what? Didn't follow your argument. Now that I get it, I think it follows soundly from your premises, but the argument seems to be artificially contained to comparing FoM vs. Majesty, and "vampires that have 'x'" vs. "vampires that have 'y'." I'm familiar with the response to spurious claims that a given card is broken, namely that cards cannot be examined in a vacuum; rather, the interactions of the set of cards as a whole needs to be considered. I'm sold on this being a sound thing to do. But is it necessary in every case? In other words, does a card need to be shown to be overpowered relative to some other card, or can we say that a card is too good intrinsically? One is highly utilitarian, perhaps empirical, while the other is a more theoretical approach. Theorists have a long history of making jerks of themselves by putting too much stock in their own reasoning from first principles, so I'm instinctively leery of throwing myself into that camp, but it seems like there should be some standards we can apply to cards that do not rely on relative merit. The reasons I ticked off for why FoM is "too good" were certainly made in this frame of mind. But if we were having a discussion over which was better, Majesty or FoM and, further, are vampires that tend to have access to the former better than vampires that tend to have access to the latter, I would agree with you. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.020723...@petsparc.mc.duke.ed u>, David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> writes: > Now that I get it, I >think it follows soundly from your premises, but the argument seems to be >artificially contained to comparing FoM vs. Majesty, and "vampires that >have 'x'" vs. "vampires that have 'y'." Constrained, yes, but I felt that Majesty was a good point of reference - given that I was fine with Majesty being re-written, don't particularly want FoM to be re-written and that the two cards have analogous effects, and both good cards. >But if we were having a discussion over which was better, Majesty or >FoM and, further, are vampires that tend to have access to the former >better than vampires that tend to have access to the latter, I would >agree with you. I do tend to view things in context, when it comes to rewrites. I'm fairly light on wanting to re-write cards (as opposed to adding a sentence or a few words to clarify things), so want to see how much effect such things will have on the game. If it's very little, I'm tempted to just keep hands off. I'd be tempted to re-write Rotschreck from scratch, keeping the effect but stopping it being so impenetrable. I *might* re-write Psyche! to put it in the same timing phase as Telepathic Tracking, but that's mostly to save my headaches when thinking about it. Aside from letting an acting Celeritous minion beat an Auspex minion to the use of the card, it wouldn't really affect matters much. Beyond that, there aren't really many cards I'd think about touching. Temptation of Greater Power, maybe. I *think* I wouldn't let you put the pool on tick. Hostile Takeover? I think the rumour is about right. Disarm? Hmm... I'm unsure. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > I'm sorry, did you forget what weenie Presence bleed looks like? No, I haven't. I've been on both the receiving and giving end of such a deck. > "madness"? What a crock. Majesty getting rewritten is no tragedy. The > superior was used just as much as the inferior, and IT has suffered no > change. Everyone bitching about the increased cost just hasn't really > done the math... and has a really short memory. I'm not talking about *just* Majesty. I'm talking about all the other cards that were "redone". It's looking more and more like the list that was leaked a few weeks ago is true. With that in mind, there were a great number of cards that just didn't need to be touched (if any of them did at all). So why were they? The endless tinkering to the cards just is never going to stop and that is what killed the game for me. Sorrow --- "Are they dead?" - Pugsly "Does it matter?" - Wednesday

XZealot wrote: > Never, the title "Eternal Struggle" was inserted to aptly describe the > designer's fustration with balancing the cards. I guess, from some fucked up perspective. >> When is "close enough" enough? > When disarm costs a blood or only functions at superior. It wouldn't surprise me at all if that eventually came to pass. > Then the specials on the vampires become the most important aspect > of the game and then we have to rebalance those. Indeed. And then it'll go right back to the library cards because there will be some that are "unbalanced" when used by certain vamps. *sigh* > I thought you quit. Good to see you haven't. :) Playing and posting are two different things. I've quit the former and cut down on the latter. Speaking of which, I'll be bringing a bunch of my good rares to D*C to sell. If anyone has anything in particular that they'd like to pick up, let me know. I'll make sure to definitely bring those. Oh, I'll be using Robert Goudie's price list as a guide for what I'll be charging for them, just FYI. Sorrow --- I told the priest - don't count on any second coming. God got his ass kicked the first time he came down here slumming. He had the balls to come, the gall to die and then forgive us. No, I don't wonder why, I wonder what he thought it would get us

In message <mZi%8.1054$7t.13...@newshog.newsread.com>, Sorrow <jcb...@yahoo.com> writes: >The endless tinkering to the cards just is never going to stop >and that is what killed the game for me. Honest question: If the game is dead, what are you doing here? [ quoted text not captured ]

> >The endless tinkering to the cards just is never going to stop > >and that is what killed the game for me. > Honest question: If the game is dead, what are you doing here? Asked and answered just recently. Keep up with the rest of the class, James. [ quoted text not captured ]

David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.4.21.020723...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu>... > On 23 Jul 2002, Teemu T Vilen wrote: > > > You could've done the same with lower caps, and Protean isn't even an > > integral part of the example you give. I usually does support it if the > > Vampire used are Ingrid and Stanislava. Which are big. > > No, you couldn't. Lower caps can't get Legendary. Lower caps don't have > a built in Info Highway. Any given lower cap would lack at least one of > the following: a title, superior dominate, access to stealth. And I > thought the use of Protean to enable all of those "I squash you like > bug!" actions to actually succeed was obvious. I believe he meant the same amount of damage could be done in a single turn with lower caps. Information Highway comes out. Ingrid Russo and Samson come out. Ingrid Govern+Command of the Beast+Conditioning, Freak Drives for a bleed of 6. Samson Govern+Conditioning for a bleed of 4. Ingrid calls a KRC or Conservative Agitation. On the second turn, 1 vote is usually enough. And there you go. Prey loses 13 pool the second turn. No protean, no large caps. Replace Ingrid with Ohana and Mustafa, and you can get 12 bleed without messing around with votes or Freak Drive. > > I've seen the same, but more often I've seen the same with Ventrues. And > > with Arika and Obfuscate. > > Admit it. You didn't really read my post, did you? I think he did, can you say the same? BTW, I think the best proof that Form of Mist needs no changing is that it doesn't win tournaments, and it's not dominating the game. Of course, I said that about Majesty, but I can grudgingly support changing Majesty. Form of Mist is good, but just isn't used enough to be worth changing. JSpektr

In message <ujrqccf...@corp.supernews.com>, Sorrow <jcb...@yahoo.com> writes: >> >The endless tinkering to the cards just is never going to stop >> >and that is what killed the game for me. >> Honest question: If the game is dead, what are you doing here? > >Asked and answered just recently. >Keep up with the rest of the class, James. But the game's dead. Hanging around won't make it less dead. Unless it's not dead. [ quoted text not captured ]

> >> Honest question: If the game is dead, what are you doing here? > >Asked and answered just recently. > >Keep up with the rest of the class, James. > But the game's dead. Hanging around won't make it less dead. Wow. How astute. Did you come up with that all by yourself? > Unless it's not dead. Only time will tell. As for me, I'm just "hanging around" while I inventory my cards in preparation for sale. Sorrow --- I keep telling them that I think they're out to get me. They ask me if I feel remose and I answer, "Why of course! There's so much more I could have done if they'd let me!" So it's Rorschach and Prozac and everything is groovy

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:h7Nsxwls...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.020723...@petsparc.mc.duke.ed > Also, new Gangrel can be designed knowing this, making sure that > potentially 'abusive' disciplines don't get scattered too easily - say, > give one Gangrel Dominate, another Gangrel Presence, another Gangrel > Dementation and so on, but don't make it easy for them to combine into > one amorphous lump. > > (Gangrel with Dementation. Now, what would *they* do? The mind > boggles.) Luckily, I just asked that to Jay Kristoff at our game last sunday. He didn't know either, though ;) > > Also, Majesty could effectively do the same thing. Okay, it couldn't > continue that action, but you could take another. NRA applies (for most > intents and purposes, NRA was part of the game rules anyway), but > calling a vote instead of bleeding wasn't too bad, for many decks - > except weenie focused Presence decks, which don't really need the help. > > Protean doesn't have the same weenie-ness to it. Most decks are using > much bigger vampires for such, IME, so letting it 'escape' NRA in this > fashion doesn't bother me too much. PRO kicks in at 3 (Chandler). > Daliyah has obf (not terribly abusive). At 5, we have Mirembe with SER > too. At 6, we get our first inferior Dominate. Whereas PRE has a lot > more options, really, (no fours, I think, oh no, wait, Marianna). And > it combos with Dominate a lot more easily. So no continue actions there > is good, but I don't think it's so necessary with Protean. I'm hoping, though, that between the CE's presence clans and the Anarch set, I can finally play a pre/pro deck. It even doesn't have to be votes! Patrick (J. Kristoff: "You really *are* Mr. Brujah, aren't you?" - at the sight of my newest vote deck)

On 23 Jul 2002, jspektr wrote: > I believe he meant the same amount of damage could be done in a single > turn with lower caps. Oh? That's so mind-numbingly irrelevant to the discussion that I hadn't considered it as a possibility. Glad to see you guys are tuned into the same channel. > And there you go. Prey loses 13 pool the second turn. No protean, no > large caps. Replace Ingrid with Ohana and Mustafa, and you can get 12 > bleed without messing around with votes or Freak Drive. Yeah, and any untapped one cap will fearlessly block it. Obviously I shouldn't have assumed that just because, oh, we were talking about PROTEAN STEALTH, protean stealth might've had some role in those ka-booms going through. Really, it's my mistake. Psst. Hey buddy, over here. They guy was playing with Form of Mist. And Earth Control. > > > I've seen the same, but more often I've seen the same with Ventrues. And > > > with Arika and Obfuscate. > > > > Admit it. You didn't really read my post, did you? > > I think he did, can you say the same? Actually, I'd just say there were two of you now. ********* snipped from my original post ********************** Or something close to that. Anyway, fortitude, dominate, titles, and stealth is mmmmh mmmmh good kung fu. Obfuscate isn't the only way to go, you know. Protean kicks dat ass, and FoM is a big part of that package. **************************************************************** Dork. David Cherryholmes Prince of Durham, NC

Sorrow wrote: > > > > Form of Mist and Earth Meld. > > > Don't expect them to arrive in the Anarch set unscathed. > > Although I agree these are at the top of the curve (after all, I love 'em), > > I'd add Immortal Grapple and especially Disarm. I really hope Disarm > > got the works... > > So where does it end? When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move > into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. > When is "close enough" enough? Or do all the cards have to practically > be wallpaper before the madness ends? I don't know if the current rewrites qualify. But there is a test for "good modifications" (including bans) vs. "bad modifications" (including bans as well). Cards can be looked it in terms of how strong they are. Of course, no two people will ever agree on just how to rate a given card, but clearly some cards are consensus favorites over others. If you can let go of the fact people disagree over the ratings and just concentrate on the concept that they _have_ differing strength ratings, they you can understand that like lots of randomly variable commodities, those ratings tend to fall into a bell-shaped curve. A relatively few things at the top tend to be much more noticeably stronger than the variation in most of the cards stuck in the big, fat area in the middle. Now, as Ian Lee (Curvei) points out, a card being significantly stronger than another card effectively "bans it". Like the card ratings themselves, it's not all that clear how much stronger that has to be but clearly at some point it happens. So that makes the answer to your question fairly clear, at least in my mind. When a card is strong enough that it's broken away from the pack in terms of strength and is preventing a lot of other cards from seeing use, then it needs to be modified or banned for the sake of the game as a whole. The end goal is to have a bell-shaped curve with no points. (Or at least, no point on the top. It's the overly strong cards that hurt the whole card population. A card being totally lame only makes itself worthless.) With all this subjective judgment going on, no one's ever going to completely agree with the designers about what's correct to modify or sufficiently damaging to make it worthwhile to modify vs. the benefit of keeping the card working as it's currently printed. But damaging cards harm the game whether we all perfectly agree about it or not. So it's better to have someone using their judgment and sometimes (in each of our humble opinions) screwing up than to eternally leave bad cards lay. To mangle a popular phrase, "I may disagree with the designers' decisions, but I will defend to the death their right to make them." Well, maybe not to the death, but I won't mind running my mouth off on Usenet however foolish it makes me look. Fred

tetragrammaton wrote: > "Henrik Isaksson" <hen...@nissamedia.net> ha scritto nel messaggio > news:ahh156$skrev$1...@ID-135400.news.dfncis.de... > > majesty > > Majesty that now costs 1 blood.....why ? > I feel that it should be pointed out that Majesty now costs 1*Pool*, not 1 blood. You may continue with your regularly scheduled balance debate... chris -- chris shorb <www.vtesinla.org> (A V:TES site in development) prince of torrance, california Ultimate Disc - Hockey - Vampire the Eternal Struggle Ebay page <http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/vtessingles/>

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:31:52 -0700, Chris Shorb <chr...@vtesinla.org> wrote: > > I feel that it should be pointed out that Majesty now costs 1*Pool*, not > 1 blood. > The pool and blood cost symbol are both in the lower-left corner now, but pool cost uses a skull-and-diamond symbol instead of a blood drop. If you were joking, sorry I didn't get it. Smilies help. :) Trey

In message <ujs1bbo...@corp.supernews.com>, Sorrow <jcb...@yahoo.com> writes: >> Unless it's not dead. > >Only time will tell. But you've already made up your mind about it. This seems mildly odd. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <R9o%8.5276$I14.9...@twister.columbus.rr.com>, Patrick van der Reest <pat...@vekn.net> writes: >> (Gangrel with Dementation. Now, what would *they* do? The mind >> boggles.) > >Luckily, I just asked that to Jay Kristoff at our game last sunday. He >didn't know either, though ;) The idea amuses me, and it doesn't seem quite so impossible. Perhaps that's *why* they left the Camarilla? :) >I'm hoping, though, that between the CE's presence clans and the Anarch set, >I can finally play a pre/pro deck. It even doesn't have to be votes! Last time I tried pre/pro was a couple of years ago. The biggest problem I had in it wasn't the general power of the deck, but blood management. I was trying to use Protean for stealth, and Presence gets expensive too - Legal Manipulations/Aire of Elation - or slow(er). Actually, looking through discipline selections now: 1 Igo the Hungry pre pro 1, Caitiff 1 Nettie Hale ani cel pre pro spi 5, Ahrimanes 1 Bear Paw ANI for pre pro 5, Gangrel 1 The Siamese ani PRE pro SPI 7, Ahrimanes The basis of a pre/pro deck is there, I think. Bruise and bleed, with a little animalism too (Carrion Crows, my obvious use for Animalism in any deck - combos with Taste of Vitae, which aggravated hand damage doesn't). >(J. Kristoff: "You really *are* Mr. Brujah, aren't you?" - at the sight of >my newest vote deck) Urgle. The lack of Presence is always so... frustrating. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, James Coupe wrote: > Actually, looking through discipline selections now: > > 1 Igo the Hungry pre pro 1, Caitiff > 1 Nettie Hale ani cel pre pro spi 5, Ahrimanes > 1 Bear Paw ANI for pre pro 5, Gangrel > 1 The Siamese ani PRE pro SPI 7, Ahrimanes > > The basis of a pre/pro deck is there, I think. Bruise and bleed, with a > little animalism too (Carrion Crows, my obvious use for Animalism in any > deck - combos with Taste of Vitae, which aggravated hand damage > doesn't). (Whips out the pre/pro deck he played last night) Don't forget Andreas, Kallista, and Miller. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: >>> Unless it's not dead. >>Only time will tell. >But you've already made up your mind about it. This seems mildly odd. My, aren't we being obtuse today? Let me spell it out for you, James, because you don't seem to be quick enough to pick it up. For me, game = dead Game truly dead (which would come only if/when everyone else stops playing) = only time will tell. Are you done playing catch-up? Sorrow --- "Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is a spiritual war. Our depression is our lives." - Tyler Durden

Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote: >Sorrow wrote: >> So where does it end? When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move >> into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. >> When is "close enough" enough? Or do all the cards have to practically >> be wallpaper before the madness ends? >I don't know if the current rewrites qualify. Qualify in what regards? >Of course, no two people will ever agree on just how to rate a given card, Granted. >but clearly some cards are consensus favorites over others. If you can let >go of the fact people disagree over the ratings and just concentrate on the >concept that they _have_ differing strength ratings, they you can understand >that like lots of randomly variable commodities, those ratings tend to fall >into a bell-shaped curve. A relatively few things at the top tend to be >much more noticeably stronger than the variation in most of the cards stuck >in the big, fat area in the middle. Agreed. And while the changes to ToGP and Hostile Takeover weren't warranted (certainly not to the degree that makes them wallpaper now), IMO, I conceed they were viewed as powerful. However, my issue isn't with those cards. >Now, as Ian Lee (Curvei) points out, a card being significantly stronger >than another card effectively "bans it". Ok, I guess. >it's not all that clear how much stronger that has to be but clearly at some >point it happens. So that makes the answer to your question fairly clear, >at least in my mind. When a card is strong enough that it's broken away >from the pack in terms of strength and is preventing a lot of other cards >from seeing use, then it needs to be modified or banned for the sake of the >game as a whole. Indeed? How was Delaying Tactics doing that? The Embrace? Majesty, even? Delaying Tactics has it's own problems with regards to opporunity cost. Now it's going to cost a blood? Huh? How did The Embrace overshadow the only other card that really did anything similar - 3rd Tradition? 3rdTrad was/is more useful in every way. Now, there isn't much point in using The Embrace because now it costs 2 (though, possibly less) blood, an action AND a MPA to make it so that the new vamp is even semi usable or worthwhile. The list goes on. >With all this subjective judgment going on, no one's ever going to >completely agree with the designers about what's correct to modify or >sufficiently damaging to make it worthwhile to modify vs. the benefit of >keeping the card working as it's currently printed. But damaging cards >harm the game whether we all perfectly agree about it or not. So it's >better to have someone using their judgment and sometimes (in each of >our humble opinions) screwing up than to eternally leave bad cards lay. But screwing up has other effects on the game than just messing up a few rewrites. Once you open the floodgates, it's never going to end. 7/7 cracked them but CE opened it fully. I completely expect that just about any and every card that makes a prominant showing in a large percentage of tourny winning decks to be rewritten to be powered down at some point in the future. If 7/7 was an isolated incident (and I thought it was, especially after 3 new sets have been released and no cards were really changed), it would have been fine. However, it now looks like it was just the start of a trend that has no sign of ending. He did it once, he did it twice, he can easily do it again and again. I'm sick of that and I'm sick of Scott fucking up the only game I'm really passionate about. Sorrow --- My dreams erupt while in my bed Innocence is innocence is innocence is dripping red In dreams I'll walk with you In dreams I'll talk with you In dreams you're mine All of the time

Sorrow wrote: > If 7/7 was an isolated incident (and I thought it was, especially after 3 new sets > have been released and no cards were really changed), it would have been fine. Substantive changes: SW: Antediluvian Awakening Blood of Acid Drawing Out the Beast Disarm Enchant Kindred Immortal Grapple Misdirection Pulled Fangs Terror Frenzy (Elysium: The Arboretum) FN: Acquired Ventrue Assets Banishment Blood Tears Fata Morgana Powerbase: Rome Purity of the Beast Ravnos Cache Ruins of the Villers Abbey Summon the Serpent BL: No reprints, so no changes to reprints -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: > > Sorrow wrote: > > If 7/7 was an isolated incident (and I thought it was, especially after 3 new sets > > have been released and no cards were really changed), it would have been fine. > > Substantive changes: > > SW: > Antediluvian Awakening > Blood of Acid > Drawing Out the Beast > Disarm > Enchant Kindred > Immortal Grapple > Misdirection > Pulled Fangs > Terror Frenzy > (Elysium: The Arboretum) Oops - forgot two: Caitlin Legacy of Pander [ quoted text not captured ]

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:IzXmTu4H...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... [ quoted text not captured ] Deck Name: Power to the Masses Created By: Patrick van der Reest Description: Low- to midcap presence vote deck, with celerity for maneuvers and guns and Second Tradition for defence. Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 10, Max: 22, Avg: 4.25) ---------------------------------------------- 1 Volker CEL pot 5, Brujah, Prince 2 Rake aus cel pot PRE 6, Brujah, Prince 1 Uma Hatch cel pre 3, Brujah 2 Brachah for CEL PRE 5, Brujah 1 Black Cat CEL pot pre 5, Brujah 1 Violette Prentiss dom PRE 4, Ventrue 1 Gideon Fontaine PRE 3, Ventrue 1 Ranjan Rishi DOM for PRE 5, Ventrue 1 Itzahk Levine cel pre 3, Ventrue 1 Antoinette DuChamp cel pre 1, Caitiff Library: (90 cards) ------------------- Master (19 cards) 1 Barrens, The 4 Blood Doll 2 Celerity 1 Creepshow Casino 1 Dreams of the Sphinx 3 Hostile Takeover 4 Presence 2 Sudden Reversal 1 Ventrue Headquarters Action (8 cards) 1 Entrancement 2 Judgment: Camarilla Segregation 5 Third Tradition: Progeny, The Action Modifier (12 cards) 1 Awe 5 Bewitching Oration 6 Voter Captivation Political Action (29 cards) 3 Brujah Justicar 5 Consanguineous Boon 5 Conservative Agitation 2 Disputed Territory 1 Kindred Restructure 7 Kine Resources Contested 1 Praxis Seizure: Berlin 1 Praxis Seizure: Cairo 1 Praxis Seizure: Geneva 1 Praxis Seizure: Rome 2 Ventrue Justicar Reaction (5 cards) 5 Second Tradition: Domain, The Combat (12 cards) 8 Flash 4 Pursuit Equipment (5 cards) 3 Improvised Flamethrower 1 Ivory Bow 1 Starshell Grenade Launcher Really, the biggest problem I've had so far is that people tend to gang up on me after or near the first oust! It doesn't start as a weenie presence deck, but it tends to end as one. Patrick

In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.02072...@petunia.mc.duke.edu> , David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> writes: >> 1 Igo the Hungry pre pro 1, Caitiff >> 1 Nettie Hale ani cel pre pro spi 5, Ahrimanes >> 1 Bear Paw ANI for pre pro 5, Gangrel >> 1 The Siamese ani PRE pro SPI 7, Ahrimanes >> >> The basis of a pre/pro deck is there, I think. Bruise and bleed, with a >> little animalism too (Carrion Crows, my obvious use for Animalism in any >> deck - combos with Taste of Vitae, which aggravated hand damage >> doesn't). > >(Whips out the pre/pro deck he played last night) > >Don't forget Andreas, Kallista, and Miller. The reason I mentioned these ones was because of the Animalism that turned up. Gotta love Animalism. The Siamese has +1 bleed, too. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <_ky%8.1097$7t.13...@newshog.newsread.com>, Sorrow <jcb...@yahoo.com> writes: >Delaying Tactics has it's own problems with regards to opporunity cost. Now >it's going to cost a blood? Note that any deck that wants vote defence (as opposed to generic action defence) is often better off using Delaying Tactics than practically any disciplined card. About the only time a deck can gain a significant advantage from failing a vote, rather than cancelling it for at least a turn and putting the caller on NRA duty too, is with Elder Kindred Network. Delaying Tactics is - currently - my baseline for vote defence. Would I put this card in, or would I put Delaying Tactics in? And Delaying Tactics can even form the basis of diplomacy, as counter votes can - "I've got a Delaying Tactics in my hand. I'd prefer that you Banish *that* vampire of my predator's, rather than that other one." "You're about to oust your prey this turn with two KRCs, right? I'll Delaying Tactics the first one unless you throw two pool damage at my prey, which will stop you calling it at all this turn." "Sorry, I can't let you do that. You'll get six pool and I won't be able to take you out quick enough after that." (which a paltry Dread Gaze is unlikely to be able to manage, with Closed Session, Private Audience, Awe, Madrigal, Ventrue HQ or whatever to hand) If you're playing Sabbat, Powerbase: Madrid can be useful, due to its automatic effect, but even then you need to be playing with titled Sabbat vampires (or hope they're on the table for negotiation). It can also "waste" actions from other people, since it has a built in burn for only the counters, not the location. It also lets you contest PB: Madrid if others play it - which is a similar tactic to that employed with Elysium: The Arboretum in ages past. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Sorrow wrote: >> If 7/7 was an isolated incident (and I thought it was, especially after 3 new sets >> have been released and no cards were really changed), it would have been fine. >Substantive changes: You're just furthering my point, which was (since you conveniently snipped it): "However, it* now looks like it was just the start of a trend that has no sign of ending. He did it once, he did it twice, he can easily do it again and again." * 'it' being 7/7 rewordings [ quoted text not captured ]

"Sorrow" <jcb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:OXx%8.1094$7t.13...@newshog.newsread.com... > James Coupe wrote: > >>> Unless it's not dead. > >>Only time will tell. > >But you've already made up your mind about it. This seems mildly odd. > > My, aren't we being obtuse today? > Let me spell it out for you, James, because you don't seem to be quick enough to > pick it up. > > For me, game = dead > Game truly dead (which would come only if/when everyone else stops playing) = only > time will tell. > > Are you done playing catch-up? This will be my one and ONLY response to Sorrow on this subject. Reply as you will...I will NOT respond to YOU. I apologize to others, but I feel I need to make a statement here. I've read in several threads how you no longer want to play this game, etc. All I have to say is that you don't need to be a prick to everyone on the newsgroup just 'cause you can't handle the new look and play of the game. Perhaps Jame's is being obtuse due to your repeated postings that don't say anything of value. In my estimation, you've still to explain yourself in an appropriate fashion which clearly exemplifies your point of why you no longer wish to play the game. Not that you need to explain yourself. To me, it would be fine if you didn't, cause I could give two shits why you don't want to play. But you seem to KEEP stating your opinions about the game, following them with a statement about the game being dead. If its dead for you, leave it as such. If your continued postings are an attempt for attention, then you need to find other more constructive outlets to express yourself and the rage you are feeling. If they are a test to see how much influence one person can have over the online player base of a CCG, then give it up already. All I can picture whenever I read ANY of your recent posts is the guy in the audience of a concert screaming out "you suck" to the band and trying to rally everyone else around them to start in the chant. Its not productive and, honestly, its a bit immature. V:TES is a game. I don't know about you, but the last time I checked games were there for amusement and enjoyment. You're opinion, as has been expressed several times, means nothing to me. Zero, zilch, nada. And I expect my opinion on this means nothing to you. If you're here to ride out the wave and sell off your cards, then just lurk and post your card list on the CCG sales newsgroup. If the game is TRULY DEAD TO YOU, then piss off and quit writing on the newsgroup. You obviously have nothing to contribute other than bitching, moaning and general bad karma. I've already placed a mental filter to ignore your posts when I see them so I no longer have to endure the whining. Because I, for one, am not interested in the opinion of someone who no longer wants to play the game. I can imagine several others feel this way as well...

Sorrow wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >Sorrow wrote: > >> If 7/7 was an isolated incident (and I thought it was, especially after 3 new sets > >> have been released and no cards were really changed), it would have been fine. > >Substantive changes: > > You're just furthering my point, which was (since you conveniently snipped it): > > "However, it* now looks like it was just the start of a trend that has no sign of > ending. He did it once, he did it twice, he can easily do it again and again." > > * 'it' being 7/7 rewordings Lending weight to your speculation on the existence of a trend was understood. I wasn't replying to the theory that there is a trend nor to the obvious fact that changes can easily be made again and again, so those parts were snipped. I was just correcting the assertion that 3 new sets were released with no cards being really changed. Since that was the point being addressed, that was the point quoted. That you would make such an assertion could lead one to speculate that you have less concern over changes in general but rather that you find certain specific changes to be not to your liking and tend to gloss over the others. Human nature. Alternatively, one could speculate that the changes made in SW and FN, though substantive and comotion-causing at the time, did not destroy the game and thus, with time, were forgotten. Such a speculator might extrapolate to the CE changes, being not much different than those forgotten changes found in SW and FN, and speculate that these will meet with a similar fate. Perhaps the 7/7 ones would have met the same fate, save for the fact that they were the first and served as a maypole for a time. Perhaps not, as they were errata instead of just MRP changes. In any event, I was just trying to correct the erroneous statement, as I usually do when some posts one. If doing so furthers or counters other points which I do not address, fine. Let time sort out the speculators. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <3D3EB7D1...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- wolf.com> writes: >Disarm Blimey, there's one set of changes I'd forgotten about. Hmm. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <3D3ECB93...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- wolf.com> writes: >Perhaps the 7/7 ones would have met the same fate, save for the fact >that they were the first and served as a maypole for a time. Actually, they weren't. (The first, that is. I agree about the maypole.) 6/23 precedes it by a fortnight, and contains some reasonably major re- writes. Form of Mist, Immortal Grapple, Living Manse, numerous bleed bounce re-writes (cannot bounce to self), Rutor's Hand, 2nd Tradition and Taste of Vitae are the obvious ones that present themselves. There are other ones, but all of those were pretty significant. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <SLz%8.6242$m7.6...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, Jon Stahler <sta...@ilir.uiuc.edu> writes: >But you seem to KEEP stating your opinions about the game, following them >with a statement about the game being dead. If its dead for you, leave it >as such. If your continued postings are an attempt for attention, then you >need to find other more constructive outlets to express yourself and the >rage you are feeling. If they are a test to see how much influence one >person can have over the online player base of a CCG, then give it up >already. <AOL /> That's summed up pretty much everything I'm wondering about. Is there some morbid fascination in picking over a dead corpse? [ quoted text not captured ]

"Sorrow" <jcb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:_ky%8.1097$7t.13...@newshog.newsread.com... > Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote: > > > When a card is strong enough that it's broken away > >from the pack in terms of strength and is preventing a lot of other cards > >from seeing use, then it needs to be modified or banned for the sake of > >the game as a whole. > > Indeed? > How was Delaying Tactics doing that? The Embrace? Majesty, even? > Delaying Tactics has it's own problems with regards to opporunity cost. Now > it's going to cost a blood? Huh? How did The Embrace overshadow the only > other card that really did anything similar - 3rd Tradition? 3rdTrad > was/is more > useful in every way. Now, there isn't much point in using The Embrace > because > now it costs 2 (though, possibly less) blood, an action AND a MPA to > make it so that the new vamp is even semi usable or worthwhile. There are ten decks in TheLasombra's tournament-winning deck list that used The Embrace and had more Embraces than skill cards in the deck. Several had no skill cards at all. A vampire without a skill is not unusable or worthless. Delaying Tactics gets a lot more use than all the other vote- defense reaction cards, even in decks that have the disciplines they require. How does that not suggest that it's at the top of its heap? > But screwing up has other effects on the game than just messing up a few > rewrites. Once you open the floodgates, it's never going to end. I feel the need here to repeat myself: "Oh, oh, this slope is so slippery! I'm sliding down it and I cannot stop!" ;-) Josh fucking up, schmucking up

In message <ahmo67$ub81i$1...@ID-121616.news.dfncis.de>, Joshua Duffin <jtdu...@yahoo.com> writes: >> But screwing up has other effects on the game than just messing up a few >> rewrites. Once you open the floodgates, it's never going to end. > >I feel the need here to repeat myself: "Oh, oh, this slope is so >slippery! I'm sliding down it and I cannot stop!" > >Josh > >fucking up, schmucking up Pah, I'm sure foxes could be slippery as well as crazy. Personally, what might be the best thing that can be done is for groups of players to sit down now (or at least when TCE is released), way in advance of The Anarchs and work out which cards are likely to be prime targets for thoughts of rebalancing and argue the case through, thoroughly, publishing the results of which cards are theoretically balanced and practically balanced (deck archives, play etc.) relative to the set. That way, coherent input and output can be formed which the Design Team (any of whom would be more than welcome to participate in a personal capacity) and LSJ can play with. Even with the rumoured re-writes, a lot of cards are still very efficient in terms of power/cost. Future reprints may well still be within those parameters. If people want to do such on the newsgroup, that's fine. If not, mailing lists can be set up (and might be better) and I have the facilities for such at my disposal, as do others, I'm sure. [ quoted text not captured ]

The card changes are so annoying. Now I have to play with the most current printing of the changed card or memorize extensive erratta on most of the cards. What makes this all the worse is that V:TES is an inherrently balanced game. The cards themselves set the standard of the balance. Are you saying that every tournament deck that has won with Majesty was overpowered and does not count as a win anymore? No! Balance has always been part of this game except for a few broken cards that did need fixing. The game has been "fixed" so many times, that I truly wonder if it was ever broken. I expect that many people that are fed up with this BS and are not posting here anymore because of it. Kudos to Sorrow who is toughing it out to try and save the game.

Sorrow wrote: > > Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote: > >Sorrow wrote: > >> So where does it end? When you rewrite tier 1 cards, new cards move > >> into tier 1. Rewrite those cards and a completely different set moves up. > >> When is "close enough" enough? Or do all the cards have to practically > >> be wallpaper before the madness ends? > >I don't know if the current rewrites qualify. > > Qualify in what regards? I was not presenting arguments that that the current rewrites were "good rewrites" or "bad rewrites". All I was doing was giving you my view of how to judge card rewrites and asserting that it was *possible* for rewrites to be a positive thing in a CCG. Therefore, to answer your question above, I don't know (or actually I'm just not choosing to state my opinion about) if the current rewrites qualify as "good rewrites". > >Now, as Ian Lee (Curvei) points out, a card being significantly stronger > >than another card effectively "bans it". Like the card ratings themselves, > >it's not all that clear how much stronger that has to be but clearly at some > >point it happens. So that makes the answer to your question fairly clear, > >at least in my mind. When a card is strong enough that it's broken away > >from the pack in terms of strength and is preventing a lot of other cards > >from seeing use, then it needs to be modified or banned for the sake of the > >game as a whole. > > Indeed? > How was Delaying Tactics doing that? The Embrace? Majesty, even? > Delaying Tactics has it's own problems with regards to opporunity cost. Now > it's going to cost a blood? Huh? How did The Embrace overshadow the only > other card that really did anything similar - 3rd Tradition? 3rdTrad was/is more > useful in every way. Now, there isn't much point in using The Embrace because > now it costs 2 (though, possibly less) blood, an action AND a MPA to make it > so that the new vamp is even semi usable or worthwhile. > The list goes on. And as per my paragraph above, I do not wish to enter the debate over the most recent rewrites. Indeed, I don't agree with (for instance) changing The Embrace, assuming it is being changed as per the posted rumors. As I've said several times (and you've conceded), a lot of this judgment is totally subjective. I'm just saying that such decisions have to made, no matter that we can never agree on which ones are correct. > >With all this subjective judgment going on, no one's ever going to > >completely agree with the designers about what's correct to modify or > >sufficiently damaging to make it worthwhile to modify vs. the benefit of > >keeping the card working as it's currently printed. But damaging cards > >harm the game whether we all perfectly agree about it or not. So it's > >better to have someone using their judgment and sometimes (in each of > >our humble opinions) screwing up than to eternally leave bad cards lay. > > But screwing up has other effects on the game than just messing up a few > rewrites. It sure does. Changing cards hurts the game, whether the change is good or bad. The question is whether changing a given card might help the game more than it hurts the game. It's quite possible that it may and in certain past cases I would assert that it most certainly has. > Once you open the floodgates, it's never going to end. No. That's is where you're wrong. That was the whole point of my post: to state why the designers may wish to modify certain cards right now but, at a certain point, will no longer have reason to do so. Of course, adding new cards to the game may alter the existing power level of previously printed cards and the designers may also discover that the new cards were more powerful than they intended. For that reason, future modifications of printed cards may continue. But the kind of "slippery slope" bogeyman you're raising is not a concern. When the cards which are the strongEST right now are reduced in power, there will certainly be other cards that will become the strongEST cards. That doesn't automatically mean they will likewise need to be cut down because the current cards being modified are NOT being modified merely because they're the strongest cards. They're being modified because of (this is the designers opinion, not necessarily mine) how _much_ stronger they are than the rest of the cards. This slippery slope argument you present is a very common one. However, in my opinion, it is an incorrect one and would lead to bad policy if the designers were concerned about it. Fred

"Sorrow" <jcb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:R2j%8.1055$7t.13...@newshog.newsread.com... > XZealot wrote: > > Never, the title "Eternal Struggle" was inserted to aptly describe the > > designer's fustration with balancing the cards. > > I guess, from some fucked up perspective. > > >> When is "close enough" enough? > > When disarm costs a blood or only functions at superior. > > It wouldn't surprise me at all if that eventually came to pass. And it would be a good thing TM too. > > Then the specials on the vampires become the most important aspect > > of the game and then we have to rebalance those. > > Indeed. And then it'll go right back to the library cards because there will > be some that are "unbalanced" when used by certain vamps. > *sigh* > > > I thought you quit. Good to see you haven't. :) > > Playing and posting are two different things. I've quit the former > and cut down on the latter. Then that seems inherently self-contradictory from the stand point of "why do you care so much as to get involved in internet arguements?" Sorrow, I know this stuff winds you up like a clock. If you are going to drop the game, then be a good sport about it and wish everyone well and be done with it. You hanging around the newsgroup seems odd. Why does it seem odd? 1) This is a newgroup solely devoted to a game 2) A game which you quit. 3) A game which you think is in danger of dying Unless you are trying to play good samaritan (i.e. trying to save the game), and I know you are not, then you should probably be done with it. How is the Rage and Netrunner coming? Do they have newsgroups as well? > Speaking of which, I'll be bringing a bunch of my good rares to D*C to > sell. If anyone has anything in particular that they'd like to pick up, let > me know. I'll make sure to definitely bring those. Oh, I'll be using Robert > Goudie's price list as a guide for what I'll be charging for them, just FYI. Good luck., since most of those rares are being reprinted in the next set, I doubt you will get the prices that Goudie has recorded over the past few years. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp

> : Personally, I think Form of Mist is balanced. It can only Strike: > : Combat Ends at superior - like Staredown. It can't untap you as a > : defence to a rush. It can continue an action, but only once per turn, > : because of the action modifier restriction. And unlike Majesty, Form of > : Mist is in Protean again, which doesn't benefit quite so much from extra > : actions, because it can't do the whole bleed thing so well, and it needs > : to be used on a blocked action for that. Actually, Action Modifiers may only be used once per action not once per Turn. The Gangrel do have access to Freak Drive. XZ

Doh! See LSJ! It is confusing, really it is! I knew that, I was just stooopid. Sorry for wasted bandwidth. chris Trey Morita wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] -- [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <20020724143220...@mb-fq.aol.com>, Awazzzz <awa...@aol.com> writes: >The card changes are so annoying. Now I have to play with the most current >printing of the changed card or memorize extensive erratta on most of the >cards. "Most" is entirely unsubstantiated. Please substantiate this. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<1OJ58Fd8...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > In message <SLz%8.6242$m7.6...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, Jon Stahler > <sta...@ilir.uiuc.edu> writes: > >But you seem to KEEP stating your opinions about the game, following them > >with a statement about the game being dead. If its dead for you, leave it > >as such. If your continued postings are an attempt for attention, then you > >need to find other more constructive outlets to express yourself and the > >rage you are feeling. > > That's summed up pretty much everything I'm wondering about. Is there > some morbid fascination in picking over a dead corpse? Well, this *is* a Vampire card game . . .

James (who is sick of people who have opinions) writes: >Message-id: <htvsStPJ...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk> > >In message <20020724143220...@mb-fq.aol.com>, Awazzzz ><awa...@aol.com> writes: >>The card changes are so annoying. Now I have to play with the "most" current >>printing of the changed card or memorize extensive erratta on most of the >>cards. > >"Most" is entirely unsubstantiated. Please substantiate this. You see James, the cards go by the "most" recent printing. If a card gets reprinted with a new text or cost, the players must use the text/cost of the "most" recent printing. My other reference of the word most - remembering errata on "most" of the cards I own - is unsubstantiated. I have to remember erratta on ALL of the cards - has the card been reworded? I need to remember this even if the card has no erratta.

In message <20020725144125...@mb-fz.aol.com>, Awazzzz <awa...@aol.com> writes: >My other reference of the word most - remembering errata on "most" of the cards >I own - is unsubstantiated. Exactly. Please don't repeatedly talk unsubstantiated bollocks. It gets you a reputation for repeatedly talking unsubstantiated bollocks. If it bugs you so much, print out the list of rollbacks/changes. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<og2+BHpt...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > In message <20020725144125...@mb-fz.aol.com>, Awazzzz > <awa...@aol.com> writes: > >My other reference of the word most - remembering errata on "most" of the cards > >I own - is unsubstantiated. > > Exactly. Please don't repeatedly talk unsubstantiated bollocks. It > gets you a reputation for repeatedly talking unsubstantiated bollocks. > > If it bugs you so much, print out the list of rollbacks/changes. And I am getting to know you as someone who misses the point of everything I say. You concentrate on the manner of how someone posts, tiny descrepencies, and the grammar used - but miss the content completely. Yes, it's true that we do develop reputations here - how's yours James? Now, the point I am getting at is: I not only have to memorize the great number of cards that have been errattaed, but I must memorize which card it is okay to play as written. This requires a great deal of cognizant effort to maintain because there are about 1000 cards in the game. To learn something (ie Jyhad) one must form new neural pathways. These pathways are very complex, they not only remeber how to use a card, but when to play it, how it is used with other cards or against other cards, it's relative position on the balance curve, it's rarity, etc. When the game changes, those pathways must be reconfigured into a newformat in order to play correctly. However, the old neural pathways still exist (you still remember how the game used to be played right?) Thenew pthways are formed and still more pathways will tell your brain wich patway to use. At least some of the time (relative to game intelligence and knowledge) these pathways will tell you how to play the game correctly. However, the more pathways we chnge, the more likely it is for a person to get confused and use a older pathway. This is a pretty complicated game already a far as CCGs go. It's not that I am too stupid to keep forming new pathways all the time, it's just that I really don't care to spend the energy rememorizing how this game is played. I have been playing it since its inception and still get caught from time to time using one of the many outdated pathways and thereby playing the game incorrectly. I make mistakes - everyone does. Is Jyhad a game where the cest rules lawyer should be able to win all the games by technicallity? It is really nearing that point. But,of course, you'll probably miss that point - won't you James?

In message <a8b0e61c.0207...@posting.google.com>, Sam <Awa...@aol.com> writes: >And I am getting to know you as someone who misses the point of >everything I say. You concentrate on the manner of how someone posts, >tiny descrepencies, and the grammar used - but miss the content >completely. Yes, it's true that we do develop reputations here - >how's yours James? I'd say I was somewhere around Derek Ray on the randomly offensive to people who shows themselves repeatedly to be idiots and won't actually give *reasons* and *proof* beyond "I like it" but expect the game to re- form around them because they say so scale, Noal on the crotchety scale, and somewhere around The Lasombra for accuracy. >Now, the point I am getting at is: I not only have to memorize the >great number of cards that have been errattaed, but I must memorize >which card it is okay to play as written. This requires a great deal >of cognizant effort to maintain because there are about 1000 cards in >the game. Don't. You don't have to memorise that at all. I'm sorry if this is too hard for you to understand. There are, of course, many cards which have clarifying rulings on them. This is true of many card games, however, as people wonder "How do I....?" "Can I try...?" and so on. Print out the migrations list. Then print out the errata from the RCE list. (Bear in mind the generally low proportion of red, a number of which could be effectively rulings/clarifications, but where card text is "re-written" solely for clarification purposes.) With a slightly reduced font size, that's about three sheets of A4 from here. Then all you ever need to do is glance down this list. A combined migrations/changed list would be utterly trivial to produce, with about 5 minutes of work. [ quoted text not captured ]

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio news:mqbdTMcY...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... [ quoted text not captured ] Well, you could aknowledge that is, at the very best, frustrating to print "a combined migrations changed list" every 4-5 months (major RTR rules change and/or expansions coming in), and that to play the beloved game, you need not only the cards and rules you spent money for, but also a pile of self-printed papers at hand. I'm not saying those things (lots of erratas/clarification) must not be there right now, but just that changing a notable amount of cards at given time (actually, the upcoming CE changed re-printings) makes many players to be uncomfortable with the game. ciao Emiliano > --

In message <Hnd09.5130$n04.1...@twister2.libero.it>, tetragrammaton <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: >Well, you could aknowledge that is, at the very best, frustrating >to print "a combined migrations changed list" every 4-5 months >(major RTR rules change and/or expansions coming in), What's frustrating? That you have to spend 5 minutes when you know there's been a rule change adding to a small list? I can't really acknowledge that. 5 minutes work to save you headaches seems to be extremely usefully spent. It would also be, at the very best, frustrating to play in a game with abusive strategies and broken cards. I've been there, done that. So, five minutes work if you can't remember a re-write, or a broken game that can't stand up to competitive play with multiple diverse strategies. I think I'll pick the lesser evil. If you'd rather have unbalanced cards but little intervention by a Rules Team where things go wrong, play, for instance, first edition Rage. Fun game, but absolutely useless for long term, developed, strategic play. >and that to play the beloved game, you need not only the cards >and rules you spent money for, but also a pile of self-printed papers at >hand. This isn't unique to Jyhad. All sorts of games get mis-prints, errata, reprints and so on. One could point to, say, Dungeons and Dragons, for which the printing errata is rather extensive and which can be equally significant (that d8 mis-printing in Delayed Blast Fireball is *extremely* annoying. Or Magic, where, for instance, Buyback's limitation got over-ruled within about a week of release for no reason that I could ever see other than that people complained. At least Jyhad's changes are for arguable, strategic, balance reasons, rather than whining. [ quoted text not captured ]

*Sigh* And another troll manages to drag me out of lurk mode in a vain attempt at sanity. So follows: awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020725144125...@mb-fz.aol.com>... > James (who is sick of people who have opinions) writes: > >Message-id: <htvsStPJ...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk> > > > >In message <20020724143220...@mb-fq.aol.com>, Awazzzz > ><awa...@aol.com> writes: > >>The card changes are so annoying. Now I have to play with the "most" current > >>printing of the changed card or memorize extensive erratta on most of the > >>cards. > > > >"Most" is entirely unsubstantiated. Please substantiate this. > > You see James, the cards go by the "most" recent printing. If a card gets > reprinted with a new text or cost, the players must use the text/cost of the > "most" recent printing. This is a mistaken and therefore easily misconstrued use of ironic quotation marks. The correct emphasis of meaning in the phrase "cards go by the most recent printing" is the word "recent", not the word "most". Trying to use quotes to indicate irony does not work if you use them on the wrong word. > My other reference of the word most - remembering errata on "most" of the cards > I own - is unsubstantiated. I have to remember erratta on ALL of the cards - > has the card been reworded? I need to remember this even if the card has no > erratta. Simple answer - you don't have to remember all the cards. No one does. When you build a deck, make sure you know how all of the cards you use work. Then you can explain them to people who are not familiar with them as you play. Meanwhile, others should do the same for you when playing cards with which you are less familiar. Everyone should be an expert on the cards in their deck and that's all. Play the deck a few times knowing the cards really well and you will get a pretty good sense of them. Then you build a different deck. If you take apart your old deck then you don't have to be an expert on those cards anymore, although if you play often enough you will get a fairly good sense of the more common cards. It is never wrong to ask someone else about their card - "What does that do again?" Volya42

In article <mqbdTMcY...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: >In message <a8b0e61c.0207...@posting.google.com>, Sam ><Awa...@aol.com> writes: >>And I am getting to know you as someone who misses the point of >>everything I say. You concentrate on the manner of how someone posts, >>tiny descrepencies, and the grammar used - but miss the content >>completely. Yes, it's true that we do develop reputations here - >>how's yours James? > >I'd say I was somewhere around Derek Ray on the randomly offensive to >people who shows themselves repeatedly to be idiots and won't actually >give *reasons* and *proof* beyond "I like it" but expect the game to re- >form around them because they say so scale, Noal on the crotchety scale, >and somewhere around The Lasombra for accuracy. Well, 2 of 3, anyway. I don't think that, even at your worst, you're in Noal's crotchety range. He used to be King Crotch, back before age and the cruel Detroit weather broke his spirit, leaving us with 'cute super-deformed anime-style Noal'. I guess you're about as crotchety as a provoked Bakija or rest-state Derek Ray. cheers, gomi -- Blood, guts, guns, cuts Knives, lives, wives, nuns, sluts

On 26 Jul 2002 12:07:22 -0400, go...@panix.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: >Well, 2 of 3, anyway. I don't think that, even at your worst, you're in >Noal's crotchety range. He used to be King Crotch, back before age >and the cruel Detroit weather broke his spirit, leaving us with 'cute >super-deformed anime-style Noal'. > Thank you. chibi Noal is not something I _ever_ wanted to envision. Mark Woodhouse Prince of Minneapolis (likes them kawaii bishonen)

In article <3d41aa63....@news.tcinternet.net>, W. Mark Woodhouse <shan...@tcinternet.net> wrote: >On 26 Jul 2002 12:07:22 -0400, go...@panix.com (Gomi no Sensei) wrote: > >>Well, 2 of 3, anyway. I don't think that, even at your worst, you're in >>Noal's crotchety range. He used to be King Crotch, back before age >>and the cruel Detroit weather broke his spirit, leaving us with 'cute >>super-deformed anime-style Noal'. >> >Thank you. chibi Noal is not something I _ever_ wanted to envision. Now I really want a T-shirt with chibi Noal on it, maybe saying 'naze nani V:tES!!' in front of a blackboard. Googly 'angry eyes' optional. >Mark Woodhouse >Prince of Minneapolis >(likes them kawaii bishonen) Mm. bishonen. I'm too heavy and swarthy for proper bishonen, but DAMN do I have the right hair. [ quoted text not captured ]

vol...@yahoo.com (Eric Simon) writes: >Everyone >should be an expert on the cards in their deck and that's all. Play >the deck a few times knowing the cards really well and you will get a >pretty good sense of them. Then you build a different deck. If you >take apart your old deck then you don't have to be an expert on those >cards anymore, although if you play often enough you will get a fairly >good sense of the more common cards. > Man, you have no idea what you are talking about. Everyone makes mistakes. If my opponent forgets or does not know to pay a blood for Majesty - then I must correct him/her. Not all players are so anal to get on line every 4 months and re-learn what all the cards are currently doing. (if I don't know which cards have changed, I will have to look at them all. I still come across games where a player puts fame on his own vamp and I have to explain to him/her that the card does not act the way (that printing) is written. Don't tell me I don't have to learn the changes. I have been putting up with this crap for too long. Majesty is an original card from the V:TES set. These are the cards that set the prescedence for what balance is. It has been a staple of the game for a long time now, and changing it proves that LSJ has a very warped sense of what balance is.

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020726184509...@mb-cd.aol.com... > have to learn the changes. I have been putting up with this crap for too long. > Majesty is an original card from the V:TES set. These are the cards that set > the prescedence for what balance is. It has been a staple of the game for a Majesty has been at the top of the power curve that *whole* time, too. I remember there were days when people claimed that decks with 30 Majesty would *always* win. I'm sure those people would have loved an increased cost for Majesty, and probably would have declared that it didn't do enough. Xian tapped

In message <ahsksc$vlb0v$1...@ID-123937.news.dfncis.de>, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> mumbled something about: [ quoted text not captured ] There were days when decks with 20 Majesty WOULD win, because too many players had a "block everything" reflex, and there just wasn't enough combat around to guarantee someone would run out. These days, there's been a big combat shift, and enough skilled players know to not block bleeds for 1... -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.

"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:knq3ku4hhaacpd9os...@4ax.com... > In message <ahsksc$vlb0v$1...@ID-123937.news.dfncis.de>, > "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> mumbled something about: > > I remember there were days when people claimed that decks with 30 Majesty > > would *always* win. I'm sure those people would have loved an increased cost > > for Majesty, and probably would have declared that it didn't do enough. > > There were days when decks with 20 Majesty WOULD win, because too many > players had a "block everything" reflex, and there just wasn't enough > combat around to guarantee someone would run out. :P You're not helping, Derek. > These days, there's been a big combat shift, and enough skilled players > know to not block bleeds for 1... Yes. Still, the reason that Majesty was seen as incredibly powerful was due both to its power as a card and the relative lack of strategies to deal with it. Xian

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020726184509...@mb-cd.aol.com>... > vol...@yahoo.com (Eric Simon) writes: > > >Everyone > >should be an expert on the cards in their deck and that's all. Play > >the deck a few times knowing the cards really well and you will get a > >pretty good sense of them. Then you build a different deck. If you > >take apart your old deck then you don't have to be an expert on those > >cards anymore, although if you play often enough you will get a fairly > >good sense of the more common cards. > > > > Man, you have no idea what you are talking about. Everyone makes mistakes. If > my opponent forgets or does not know to pay a blood for Majesty - then I must > correct him/her. Not all players are so anal to get on line every 4 months and > re-learn what all the cards are currently doing. (if I don't know which cards > have changed, I will have to look at them all. Well if you had quoted my entire post, then you would have my answer to this right here. It is every player's RESPONSIBILITY to know exactly what the cards in their deck do. Period. If you are not playing with responsible players, then play with someone else. If everyone in your area refuses to be responsible, then why should you bother being so? Play a few games with no errata - card text as written on every card - and show them how abusive that can be. They should sober up in a hurry. Or they won't, and you can rule the area with all the classic abusive decks. > I still come across games where > a player puts fame on his own vamp and I have to explain to him/her that the > card does not act the way (that printing) is written. Don't tell me I don't > have to learn the changes. I have been putting up with this crap for too long. So I guess you are the only one in your area who pays attention to the changes. Again, why bother? If no one is paying attention to changes but you, and you hate the changes, why play with them? It's your game, you can play it however you want. But when you go to a sanctioned tournament, follow my suggestions. Know the cards in your own deck, explain them if anyone asks, and trust others to be able to do the same. Anyway, if someone uses a card badly, SOMEONE at the tournament (the judge if no one else) will correct him or her. So you don't have to worry your pretty little head about it. > Majesty is an original card from the V:TES set. These are the cards that set > the prescedence for what balance is. It has been a staple of the game for a > long time now, and changing it proves that LSJ has a very warped sense of what > balance is. And here we see you going off on another topic that is irrelevant to my post. I do not care to argue your views on balance, and I will not be sucked into this, particularly since I feel that you are trying to convince others without being willing to be convinced. Please focus your replies to me on what I am actually saying. Volya42

Xian wrote: > Yes. Still, the reason that Majesty was seen as incredibly powerful was due > both to its power as a card and the relative lack of strategies to deal with > it. So now Majesty costs 1 blood all the time. This strikes me as perfectly reasonable, however, isn't Catatonic Fear something along the lines of "s:ce/S:CE, do a point of damage" with no cost? If Majesty costs 1 blood for S:CE at inferior presence, shouldn't Catatonic Fear also cost 1 blood now? Peter D Bakija PD...@bigplanet.com http://www.myplanet.net/pdb6 "Grr! Release the Monkey!" -Zim

On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Peter D Bakija wrote: > If Majesty costs 1 blood for S:CE at inferior presence, shouldn't Catatonic > Fear also cost 1 blood now? IMO, only if you equate one point of damage with untapping a minion in terms of effectiveness. I don't. David Cherryholmes Prince of Durham, NC

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> ha scritto nel messaggio news:ahsksc$vlb0v$1...@ID-123937.news.dfncis.de... > > "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message > news:20020726184509...@mb-cd.aol.com... > > have to learn the changes. I have been putting up with this crap for too > long. > > Majesty is an original card from the V:TES set. These are the cards that set > > the prescedence for what balance is. It has been a staple of the game for a > > Majesty has been at the top of the power curve that *whole* time, too. I > remember there were days when people claimed that decks with 30 Majesty would > *always* win. Well, 30+ majestys have been always an hard life here to prove they're a "game win". Consider this: against deck that don't rely on combat to win, majesty played by the opponent is just fine. Against decks that rely on combat to win, majesty has been always useless against immortal grapple and thoughts betrayed first, and always had a very hard time against decks with 10 psyche! or 10 telepathic tracking in. So, please, stop saying that 30+ majesty always win because that's very untrue. Majesty simply didn't had any need to be "re-balanced". At least in 7 years of the metagame experiences here. ciao Emiliano, v:ekn prince of Rome <snip>

>>Well, you could aknowledge that is, at the very best, frustrating >>to print "a combined migrations changed list" every 4-5 months >>(major RTR rules change and/or expansions coming in), > >What's frustrating? That you have to spend 5 minutes when you know >there's been a rule change adding to a small list? > >I can't really acknowledge that. 5 minutes work to save you headaches >seems to be extremely usefully spent. Well, what IS frustrating is when no one believes you about the rule change (hint, hint). =( Halcyan 2

>*Sigh* And another troll manages to drag me out of lurk mode in a >vain attempt at sanity. So follows: Well you see, that's the problem with trolls - they regenerate. Just when you think you've taken care of it, it comes back. (Or that severed hand that escaped regrows the rest of the troll and *then* he comes back). I'm not exactly familiar with some of the Internet slang words and origins, but is that possibly where the term "flaming" can from? Perhaps flaming trolls was developed so that they wouldn't be able to regenerate anymore? =P Halcyan 2

>> Yes. Still, the reason that Majesty was seen as incredibly powerful was >due >> both to its power as a card and the relative lack of strategies to deal >with >> it. > >So now Majesty costs 1 blood all the time. This strikes me as perfectly >reasonable, however, isn't Catatonic Fear something along the lines of >"s:ce/S:CE, do a point of damage" with no cost? > >If Majesty costs 1 blood for S:CE at inferior presence, shouldn't Catatonic >Fear also cost 1 blood now? While nothing official on Catatonic Fear has been released, having a 1 blood cost *is* the word on the street. In case you missed it Peter, a while back (July 7th) someone posted a spoiler list of Cam stuff along with card text changes. And so far, it has been *remarkably* accurate...: From: Jason (jung...@hotmail.com) Subject: New Cam Set Cards spoilers! Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad View: Complete Thread (32 articles) | Original Format Date: 2002-07-07 08:12:31 PST Here is a repost of a message posted in the Yahoo Jyhad group: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The new Malkavian vampires tend to have Dementation over Dominate, like their antitribu cousins, in following with the World of Darkness events. The Gangrel are not featured in this set, but will be prominently featured in the next expansion, The Anarchs. The Gangrel clan is still Camarilla in the card game, however. The set will include 6 precons (Brujah, Malkavian, Nosferatu, Toreador, Tremere, and Ventrue). Each precon contains 9 reprinted vampires (the signature characters from Final Nights plus the eight Camarilla vampires of each clan printed in Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts) and 3 new vampires. None of the base set (Group 1) vampires are reprinted here. All of the new vampires are also available in the boosters. In addition to the 100 new vampire cards, the set contains 15 new library cards. Sample cards: Jaroslav Pascek Brujah 10 for obf CEL POT PRE Camarilla Brujah Justicar: Jaroslav inflicts +2 damage with melee weapons. He can inflict 1 damage on each of your prey's Sabbat vampires as a (D) action. +1 intercept. Quentin King III Malkavian 7 obf pre AUS DEM Camarilla Prince of Boston. Alonzo Guillen Nosferatu 6 ani for pot OBF Camarilla: During your untap phase and your discard phase, if Alonzo is ready, you may burn the Edge to look at another Methuselah's hand. Edith Blount Toreador 5 aus cel pot vic Camarilla: If you also control Enid Blount and she is ready, Edith gets an optional maneuver and an optional press each combat. Lucas Halton Tremere 10 qui AUS CEL DOM THA Camarilla Prince of Houston: Once each turn, when Lucas blocks an action, he may burn a blood instead of tapping for the successful block (before combat occurs). Will of the Council Action Requires a ready primogen. +1 stealth action. Put this card on the acting primogen. During a political action, this primogen can burn 1 blood to gain 1 vote. This primogen can burn this card to play a card that requires a prince as if he or she were a prince. This primogen can burn this card when a prince enters torpor to receive (and contest) the same title as that prince. A vampire can have only 1 Will of the Council. There are a few cards inspired by the recent storyline tournaments as well. For example: Baltimore Purge Action Requires a ready vampire. If this vampire is Ravnos, this action is at +1 stealth. This vampire goes to torpor. Each other Methuselah chooses a ready vampire he or she controls who is not older than the acting vampire. If you control a ready Lasombra, you choose the vampires instead (when the action is announced). The chosen vampires go to torpor. Some of the reprinted cards have been updated (functionally changed). Note that some of these reprints are only available in the starter decks and some are only in the booster packs (and some are available in both): Blood Puppy: costs 2 pool. Blood Rage/Fury, Cauldron of Blood: do damage based on the striker's strength (and are therefore hand strikes) Catatonic Fear: costs 1 blood. Concealed Weapon: no discipline required, the weapon cannot be unique, cannot deal any aggravated damage and cannot deal more than 3 damage, and cannot cost more than 2 pool. Delaying Tactics: costs 1 blood. Derange: requires a Malk or Malk antitribu. Is placed on a younger vampire (using the former superior Dementation effect). Drain Essence: costs 1 blood. Embrace: doesn't receive a discipline card during action resolution. Fifth Tradition: cannot target the acting vampire. Blood gain is limited to 4 blood. Forest of Shadows: costs 1 pool. Hostile Takeover: target must have capacity less than 7. Illegal Search and Seizure: can also burn a weapon that does any amount of aggravated damage. Island of Yiaros: no inherent burn option. Judgment: Camarilla Segregation: Methuselah can burn a vampire during the master phase, not the minion phase. Louvre, Paris: no cost Majesty: costs 1 blood (no additional cost for superior). Monocle of Clarity: answers about the future are not binding Oxford University: no cost, X pool for X votes, no inherent burn option. Patagia: Allows the vampire to burn a blood to temporarily gain flight. Powerbase: Berlin: No cost. Powerbase: Washington, D.C.: Can move 2 blood back (instead of 1) during your untap phase. Protracted Investment: costs 2 pool, gets 5 counters (1 less pool and 1 fewer counter). Second Tradition: the effect costs 1 blood when used by a tapped P/J. Succubus Club: only one trade per untap phase. Tap to trade. Taste of Vitae: play at end of round. Only 1. Temptation of Greater Power: only 1 can be played in a game. Tremere Convocation: no cost. unique. Wasserschloss Anif, Austria: no cost. Weather Control: only 1 can be played each combat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds cool. Jason Halcyan 2

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio news:mjUNhfsk...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <Hnd09.5130$n04.1...@twister2.libero.it>, tetragrammaton > <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: > >Well, you could aknowledge that is, at the very best, frustrating > >to print "a combined migrations changed list" every 4-5 months > >(major RTR rules change and/or expansions coming in), > > What's frustrating? That you have to spend 5 minutes when you know > there's been a rule change adding to a small list? > > I can't really acknowledge that. 5 minutes work to save you headaches > seems to be extremely usefully spent. > > > It would also be, at the very best, frustrating to play in a game with > abusive strategies and broken cards. I've been there, done that. > > So, five minutes work if you can't remember a re-write, or a broken game > that can't stand up to competitive play with multiple diverse > strategies. > > > I think I'll pick the lesser evil. I mostly agree here with you. However, one should define what "lesser evil" should mean: having a (long term)well- balanced game is just fine. However, in the actual case, had been not a game with inferior majesty at no cost balanced for more than 7 years ? For what i have always seen, the "inferior-at-no-cost" majesty didn't gave any game balance problem since the first jyhad set. > This isn't unique to Jyhad. All sorts of games get mis-prints, errata, > reprints and so on. However, it's unique that in v:tes a couple of cards are subjected to a constant re-writing, and sometimes the reasons behind the re-writings appears so-not motivated (and inferior majesty is just the case). <snip agreed points> Emiliano > --

In message <e9619.13494$lu5.3...@twister1.libero.it>, tetragrammaton <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> writes: >However, it's unique that in v:tes a couple of cards are subjected >to a constant re-writing, and sometimes the reasons behind >the re-writings appears so-not motivated (and inferior majesty is >just the case). Not true. There's this little known game called Magic: The Gathering. You probably won't have heard of it, but lots of their cards shift writing, type and effect between printings. -- James Coupe PGP 0x5D623D5D you say one or two amusing things, but so EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 did Herman Goering (does that sidestep Godwin?) 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - SomeBlokeCalledRapunzelSyndrome

"tetragrammaton" wrote: > For what i have always seen, the "inferior-at-no-cost" majesty > didn't gave any game balance problem since the first jyhad set. I quite disagree. A couple of years ago, I posted a cost analysis of S:CE, Dodge and First Strike to show why First Strike was nearly useless in its current form because it is too expensive in blood and opportunity cost for what you get. While the premise that defense is, as a rule, cheaper and easier than offense in V:TES, free S:CE is obscenely overpowered, esp. in a discipline as strong as Presence. Protean is also strong, but you won't see Protean weenies bleeding for 5 and 6 at a shot without permanents. Making Majesty and Catatonic Fear cost 1 blood is fine by me. If nothing else, Staredown is now worth putting in a deck if you want free S:CE. Regards, Noal

(Gomi no Sensei) wrote: > Well, 2 of 3, anyway. I don't think that, even at your worst, you're in > Noal's crotchety range. He used to be King Crotch, back before age > and the cruel Detroit weather broke his spirit, leaving us with 'cute > super-deformed anime-style Noal'. Excuse me? Do I have to put your nuts in a vice? I'm just as antagonistic as always. I'm just usually too busy at work to spend the time on a really good rant these days. However, just for you, I'll read the newsgroup tomorrow morning before I have so much as a sip of coffee. May the gods have mercy on the the person who's babbling irritates me first. I won't. Regards, Noal

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20020729010551...@mb-fm.aol.com>... > Well you see, that's the problem with trolls - they regenerate. Dim and blubbery, trolls have the ability to reiterate 6 points a turn after being contradicted. Only flames or acid remarks cause permanent damage to a troll. :)

"Noal McDonald" <dhar...@my-deja.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:bb705c59.02072...@posting.google.com... > "tetragrammaton" wrote: > > For what i have always seen, the "inferior-at-no-cost" majesty > > didn't gave any game balance problem since the first jyhad set. > > I quite disagree. A couple of years ago, I posted a cost analysis of > S:CE, Dodge and First Strike to show why First Strike was nearly > useless in its current form because it is too expensive in blood and > opportunity cost for what you get. I agree, but that's seems a problem inherent to first strike being too de-powered, not to (free) S:CE being broken. Anyway i'm interested in such analisys, if you can post the URL. > While the premise that defense is, > as a rule, cheaper and easier than offense in V:TES, free S:CE is > obscenely overpowered, esp. in a discipline as strong as Presence. ? Sorry, i can't see the point. If a deck relies on combat as his main strategy, against majesty-presence strategy it has the usual immortal grapple/thoughts betrayed to hose it. If you play the block-monster tzimisce you'll likely screw the majesty playing vamp by playing the chiropteran/rothscreck combo. And so on. If a deck don't rely on combat (say, the dominate weenies), against majesty-presence based strategy it will work just fine (you blocked my dominate weenie ? oh, no combat ? just fine) > Protean is also strong, but you won't see Protean weenies bleeding > for 5 and 6 at a shot without permanents. Protean, for example, has stealth modifiers, a thing that presence lacks enitirely. Of all the clan disciplines combinations, just the setites have pre and a disc providing enough stealth (obf), but their inherent lack of bleed bouncers or intercepts make them relatively weak, counter-balancing the pre-obf combination. > > Making Majesty and Catatonic Fear cost 1 blood is fine by me. If > nothing else, Staredown is now worth putting in a deck if you want > free S:CE. Indeed, so almost all the people will play with superior presence and staredowns, making majesty & catatonic fear wallpaper enough :-) Emiliano

In message <bb705c59.02072...@posting.google.com>, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> writes: >Do I have to put your nuts in a vice? Where do we get to sign up? [ quoted text not captured ]

David Cherryholmes <d...@petsparc.mc.duke.edu> wrote: : On 23 Jul 2002, jspektr wrote: :> And there you go. Prey loses 13 pool the second turn. No protean, no :> large caps. Replace Ingrid with Ohana and Mustafa, and you can get 12 :> bleed without messing around with votes or Freak Drive. : Yeah, and any untapped one cap will fearlessly block it. Obviously I : shouldn't have assumed that just because, oh, we were talking about : PROTEAN STEALTH, protean stealth might've had some role in those ka-booms : going through. Really, it's my mistake. : Psst. Hey buddy, over here. They guy was playing with Form of Mist. And : Earth Control. :> > > I've seen the same, but more often I've seen the same with Ventrues. And :> > > with Arika and Obfuscate. :> > Admit it. You didn't really read my post, did you? I actually did, but maybe a bit sloppily ;) Anyways, the discussion about the überusefulness of the Protean-Dominate Combo made me finally device a Stanislava-Ingrid deck for the Ropecon 2002 tournament held here in Helsinki last weekend. 50 people attended and it was definately among the most entertaining and interesting tournaments I've been to. Basically I left out anything not directly relevant to ousting my prey and bringing out Vamps fast. I used 2nd trads for casual blokking and some Protect Thines for backups, but othervise it was pretty straightforward. As I didn't use wakes, I also left out Deflection as a tactical decision, counting on speed and some bloat. 1) Zillah, Infohighway or Dreams for speed, Ingrid up 2) Ingrid bleeds with Govern+conditioning, stealth from Rapid Change, Earth Control and past the first blocker with Form of Mist, Freak Drive and repeat with KRC or Conservative 3) Stanislava up, waste the table First game of the three rounds was horrible, as my starting uncontrolled region held exactly the three vamps which together make the absolutely useless. 1 VP still. Next two tables I swept. In the finals there were three Dominate-Protean decks sitting in a row. :) The amount of contesting was something.. absolutely wonderful. One of the ProDoms did win, but I had considered coming to the tournament with an all-Potence small-cap deck and it would've wasted the finals table and eaten every single deck there alive. Result? No results. The finals were much more interesting than some with more popular eurobrujah, ventrue vote&bloats or stealthy bleeding malkavians. //T