LoB Preview: Aye

Aye Master: trifle. Put this card on a Laibon. This Laibon may tap this card to cancel a Frenzy card played on him or her as it is played. This Laibon may burn a blood and tap three of his or her Aye to be able to play rection cards and attempt to blcok as if untapped for the current action. If this Laibon burns a minion, equipment, or location in play, he or she burns one Aye. Burn this card if this Laibon has more Orun and Aye than his or her capacity. Illus: Brad Williams

[ quoted text not captured ] Now the spoiler given by LSJ for the card High Aye in his article in the WW Quarterly makes more sense: High Aye Action Modifier Requires a Laibon vampire with 3 or more Aye. +1 stealth, +2 stealth if this action is undirected. Hardy

[ quoted text not captured ] LSJ, regarding the last sentence, a timing question: If somehow a Laibon winds up with more Orun and Aye than his capacity, do I burn one of the Aye cards at a atime, and then check again if I still have more Orun and Aye than his capacity (so usually, I will burn only one of the cards)? Or do I have to burn all of those cards at the same time, leaving my laibon "naked"? Hardy Range

[ quoted text not captured ] IANLSJ, but it seems to me that card text implies burning *all* Aye (and Orun) cards, since the last sentence will trigger at the same moment for all cards. But I might be mistaken... And notice that Aye can be played on other controllers' vampires too... Emiliano

What does Aye mean in RPG terms? It seems to be hampered by destruction or violence. I'm curious if there are vampires who start out with 1 or 2 Aye. They couldn't tap those to block while tapped but it would be easier for them to get the stealth from High Aye. -- regards pallando --------------------- pallando(at)gmx(dot)at

> ... Burn this card if this Laibon has more Orun and Aye than > his or her capacity. So, theoretical laibon 5 cap with 2 Orun and 3 Aye burns all (Aye trifle) cards when gaining another Aye?

from wikipedia: "Unlike Kindred (who are most commonly defined in their adherence or violation of "Humanity"), the Laibon owe a dual loyalty to their mortal counterparts (called Aye) and loyalty to the spirit world (called Orun). Failure on both loyalties leads to monstrous degeneration and feral predatory behavior. High Aye causes a Laibon to appear alive, while high Orun causes a Laibon to appear unearthly and often demonic. Those few Laibon who can maintain high Aye and high Orun simultneously appear angelic, possibly transcendent." nice card....frenzy never will be the same ;)

[ quoted text not captured ] A few questions: It was ruled that if Tegyrius plays Protect Thine Own to burn a vampire, he can not play Draught of the Soul. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c160a3e36236e260 By that logic, it should be true that if a Laibon with Aye burns a minion/equipment/location during an undirected action (i.e. Kindred Segregation or Peace Treaty), he does not burn any Aye. Is this correct? Also, if a Laibon with Aye burns more than one minion in the same action (i.e. Edged Illusion), does he burn one Aye for each minion burned, or just one Aye?

[ quoted text not captured ] Seeing a lot of parallels to KotE here. KotE are more exotic than regular kindred, but these laibon are about the halfwaypoint between the two. Perhaps, someday, KotE after all.

On 8 Nov 2005 04:15:14 -0800, "Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano...@gmail.com> wrote: >> LSJ, regarding the last sentence, a timing question: >> >> If somehow a Laibon winds up with more Orun and Aye than his capacity, >> do I burn one of the Aye cards at a atime, and then check again if I >> still have more Orun and Aye than his capacity (so usually, I will burn >> only one of the cards)? >> >> Or do I have to burn all of those cards at the same time, leaving my >> laibon "naked"? >> >> Hardy Range > >IANLSJ, but it seems to me that card text >implies burning *all* Aye (and Orun) cards, >since the last sentence will trigger at the >same moment for all cards. >But I might be mistaken... > >And notice that Aye can be played on other controllers' >vampires too... > >Emiliano hi, well IANLSJT but i think that anytime the sum of ayes and oruns or the cap of the vampire changes, you would then go into a serial check of the aye or orun cards on that vampire (as almost nothing (except strike resolution) is simultaneous-> see multiple anathemas), which you could order as you want. that would also mean, that its up to you if you burn aye or orun (or multiples if applicable) but never all of them. one could also guess, that if LSJ had inteded to have all aye and orun burn if they exceed capacity, the card woud have said: If the number of Aye and Orun on this Vampire exceed his or her capacity, burn all Aye and Orun on this Vampire. regards, Chris.QJ

Hardy Range wrote: > Hardy Range wrote: > > Aye > > Master: trifle. > > Burn this card if this Laibon has more Orun and Aye than > > his or her capacity. > > LSJ, regarding the last sentence, a timing question: > If somehow a Laibon winds up with more Orun and Aye than his capacity, > do I burn one of the Aye cards at a atime, and then check again if I > still have more Orun and Aye than his capacity (so usually, I will burn > only one of the cards)? > Or do I have to burn all of those cards at the same time, leaving my > laibon "naked"? > Hardy Range I believe you get to burn all the Aye cards. Each has the same text that triggers when condition X is fullfilled. But then again, I'm not sure and often end up misleaded by the nuances of a foreign language. What I'm asking myself is this: does "this Laibon has more Orun and Aye" means that a 5-cap vampire with 3 Orun and 3 Aye gets to burn all its Aye cards (assuming the "burn clause" triggers for all of them), or he needs to have 6+ Orun *and* get a 6th Aye to fulfill the "burn this card" clause? In short, "more Orun and Aye" means the sum of the two? I'd say no, since the text could be "more Orun and more Aye" instead. best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote: > I believe you get to burn all the Aye cards. Each has the same text > that triggers when condition X is fullfilled. But then again, I'm not > sure and often end up misleaded by the nuances of a foreign language. Indeed these language nuances MISLEAD me :-) > What I'm asking myself is this: does "this Laibon has more Orun and > Aye" means that a 5-cap vampire with 3 Orun and 3 Aye gets to burn all > its Aye cards (assuming the "burn clause" triggers for all of them), or > he needs to have 6+ Orun *and* get a 6th Aye to fulfill the "burn this > card" clause? In short, "more Orun and Aye" means the sum of the two? > I'd say no, since the text could be "more Orun and more Aye" instead. Erm, I meant "I'd say YES"... I really did. :-) best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote: > > I believe you get to burn all the Aye cards. Each has the same text > that triggers when condition X is fullfilled. But then again, I'm not > sure and often end up misleaded by the nuances of a foreign language. > > What I'm asking myself is this: does "this Laibon has more Orun and > Aye" means that a 5-cap vampire with 3 Orun and 3 Aye gets to burn all > its Aye cards (assuming the "burn clause" triggers for all of them), or > he needs to have 6+ Orun *and* get a 6th Aye to fulfill the "burn this > card" clause? In short, "more Orun and Aye" means the sum of the two? > I'd say no, since the text could be "more Orun and more Aye" instead. > "More Orun and Aye" definitely means the sum of the two. If a 5 cap has 3 Orun and 3 Aye, he'll need to burn one of them (or all of them - I'm still confused over which one it is). If it meant one or the other, it would be "More Orun *or* Aye".

[ quoted text not captured ] Sure. But just clearing up: we could also have a third option, that the vampire could end up with more Aye AND more Orun than its capacity. But then again, I believe that option would lead to the text "more Orun *and more* Aye", as stated above. best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

[ quoted text not captured ] Man, I hope not - don't get me wrong, I like the KotE setting; but the KotE vampires have about as much in common with Western Kindred as do Mummies or Wraiths, and I don't particularly think any of those should be represented in game as more than allies and/or retainers. When you say 'KotE are more exotic than regular kindred', if by 'more exotic' you mean 'almost entirely, completely different', then yes. I mean, they're both sort-of-dead, and they both feed on energy from the living in one way or another.. but beyond that, there's almost nothing in common aside from the most basic WW RPG rules framework. (Kuei-Jin don't even care about tracking/using blood points, which is one of the absolute basic, core elements of the Vampire/VTES setting, as is another thing Kuei-Jin lack: "Generation/Capacity".) I mean, yes, you could invent a whole conversion system where 'the counters on a Kuei-Jin represent Chi points, and if you put them on the top half they're Yin and the bottom is Yang' and so on, but that's a really kludgy forced-compatability effort - if you're going to cram Kuei-Jin rules to fit VTES, why not cram Call of Cthulhu RPG rules into the CCG? "I hit you with Undead Strength for 3" "Well, I can't prevent that, so I burn 3 Sanity points from my Investigator.." Why not Street Fighter rules, or Buffy RPG rules, or Shadowrun? "My vampire Thefts your Elf for 2!" -John Flournoy

John Flournoy wrote: > Man, I hope not - don't get me wrong, I like the KotE setting; but the > KotE vampires have about as much in common with Western Kindred as do > Mummies or Wraiths, and I don't particularly think any of those should > be represented in game as more than allies and/or retainers. > > When you say 'KotE are more exotic than regular kindred', if by 'more > exotic' you mean 'almost entirely, completely different', then yes. I > mean, they're both sort-of-dead, and they both feed on energy from the > living in one way or another.. but beyond that, there's almost nothing > in common aside from the most basic WW RPG rules framework. (Kuei-Jin > don't even care about tracking/using blood points, which is one of the > absolute basic, core elements of the Vampire/VTES setting, as is > another thing Kuei-Jin lack: "Generation/Capacity".) > > I mean, yes, you could invent a whole conversion system where 'the > counters on a Kuei-Jin represent Chi points, and if you put them on the > top half they're Yin and the bottom is Yang' and so on, but that's a > really kludgy forced-compatability effort - if you're going to cram > Kuei-Jin rules to fit VTES, why not cram Call of Cthulhu RPG rules into > the CCG? "I hit you with Undead Strength for 3" "Well, I can't prevent > that, so I burn 3 Sanity points from my Investigator.." Why not Street > Fighter rules, or Buffy RPG rules, or Shadowrun? "My vampire Thefts > your Elf for 2!" I understand your objections. KotE are more compatible with the WoD universe than Cthulhu or (shadowrun) elves, though. A matter of taste, in the end. I don't see any reason to not simplify the KotE until they fit into V:TES as well as the Laibon do, though. Since the old WoD is dead, and V:TES carries on the torch, no problem treating them differently in V:TES.

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > John Flournoy wrote: > > > Man, I hope not - don't get me wrong, I like the KotE setting; but the > > KotE vampires have about as much in common with Western Kindred as do > > Mummies or Wraiths, and I don't particularly think any of those should > > be represented in game as more than allies and/or retainers. > > I understand your objections. KotE are more compatible with the WoD > universe than Cthulhu or (shadowrun) elves, though. A matter of taste, > in the end. I don't see how they are inherently 'more compatible', given that KotE have almost nothing in common with the western Kindred. Kuei-jin lack clan, capacity/generation, blood, don't care about western politics/sects, can't learn existing VTES disciplines nor can their powers ever be on a western Kindred.. How is that any different than (for instance) Shadowrun or Cthulhu? If you're having to make up conversion rules to allow a Kuei-Jin's card to have an equivalent of all the attributes on a crypt card, how is that any easier or harder than making up conversion rules for any other system? Here, let me give a concrete example: D&D characters. Clan == Alignment. Capacity == HP/10. Sect: Independent. Heck, maybe we make up a sect called 'Greyhawk.' Disciplines: Classes/feats/etc, low level/high level. So my LG FTR 10/WIZ 2 with 66 HP? He can be represented as follows: Grarg the Slayer of Kings Clan: Lawful Good Adventurers Capacity: 6 Disciplines: FTR wiz rog (we'll give him rog cause he has a couple of cross-class skills.) Greyhawk. +1 Strength. (he's a half-orc with a 20 Str.) That's not so hard, is it? We can represent the FTR discipline by making a bunch of combat cards to represent fighter feats - Cleave can provide an additional strike, Power Attack can function like a better Haymaker.. we can have his Plate Mail be equipment that prevents 2 points of damage per combat except from guns; the Wizard discipline can be a mixed bag of card types representing spells - heck, we can create Retainer cards for the familiars, etc etc etc. That took me 3 minutes. What makes KotE 'more compatible' than this, necessarily? -John Flournoy

John Flournoy wrote: > I don't see how they are inherently 'more compatible', given that KotE > have almost nothing in common with the western Kindred. Except that they resent the Kindred's influence in their sphere, and are invading the (Kindred's) American West coast? > How is that any different than (for instance) Shadowrun or Cthulhu? If > you're having to make up conversion rules to allow a Kuei-Jin's card to > have an equivalent of all the attributes on a crypt card, how is that > any easier or harder than making up conversion rules for any other > system? They are printed by the same developer to be in the same WoD (as opposed to SR or Cth). They use the same WoD basic system (attributes, skills, etc.) and scale. They are present in the same setting. They perform a somewhat similar role in that setting. They have factions and kewl powerz. Chi is very similar to Blood, P'o very to 'the beast'. Both Kindred and KotE have a Gehenna prophecy. Need more? I'd have to get the books. <snip character> > That took me 3 minutes. What makes KotE 'more compatible' than this, > necessarily? See above.

[ quoted text not captured ] Sure. But just clearing up: we could also have a third option, that the [ quoted text not captured ]

> That took me 3 minutes. What makes KotE 'more compatible' than this, > necessarily? > > -John Flournoy Other than being in the same world/background? Probably not much. This would be like implementing Werewolves, Mages or Mummies as Library cards. Interesting but would add too much complication to the game. Sathriel

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > I understand your objections. KotE are more compatible with the WoD > universe than Cthulhu or (shadowrun) elves, though. A matter of taste, > in the end. > > I don't see any reason to not simplify the KotE until they fit into > V:TES as well as the Laibon do, though. Since the old WoD is dead, and > V:TES carries on the torch, no problem treating them differently in > V:TES. I'll be a little more serious. At the moment, VTES vampires have the following: Name - no problem here regardless of setting. Clan - any setting where the characters are easily grouped by similar traits works here. Blood capacity - okay, this is harder, and the place where stuff gets kludged a lot. Disciplines - any setting with distinct power/ability groupings for characters, where each group has an ascending scale is an easy translation. Group - no brainer. whatever you want. Advancement - again, no-brainer, you can skip that. Sect - either cram it into an existing sect, or make a new one up. Ability - hundreds of choices here, it's an easy fit. So the real sticking points in terms of 'simplifying until they fit into VTES' are Clan, Blood Capacity and Disciplines. Kuei-Jin (for instance) have no Clan or Capacity, and Disciplines that are totally incompatible with existing VTES ones - not a big deal, as you can create new disciplines and discipline-required cards that translate the specific levels of these powers. Small problem with 'why can't my Tremere use an infernal familiar or Infernal Pact to do Kuei-jin stuff', but that's errata-able. So if you fake a system for Clan/Capacity, it's not that hard of a conversion. D&D Wizards (for instance) have no Clan or Capacity, and Schools of Magic that are totally incompatible with existing VTES disciplines - not a big deal, as you can create a new discipline for each school (Abjuration, Enchantment, etc) and discipline-required cards that translate the specific levels of these powers ("spells"). Small problem with 'why can't my Tremere use an infernal familiar or Infernal Pact to do D&D WIzard stuff', but that's errata-able. So if you fake a system for Clan/Capacity, it's not that hard of a conversion. Shadowrunners (for instance) have no Clan or Capacity, and magic spells and cyberware that are totally incompatible with existing VTES powers - not a big deal, as you can create new disciplines (shaman magic, cyberware, decker programs) and discipline-required cards that translate the specific uses of these abilities. Small problem with 'why can't my Tremere use an infernal familiar or Infernal Pact to use Cyberware/Shamanistic Magic', but that's errata-able. So if you fake a system for Clan/Capacity, it's not that hard of a conversion. Battletech Mechs (for instance) have Clans/Houses but no Capacity, and components that are totally incompatible with existing VTES powers - not a big deal, as you can create new disciplines (armor, weapons, heat sinks, sensors, mobility, etc) and discipline-required cards that translate the specific components into VTES powers. Small problem with 'why can't my Tremere use an infernal familiar or Infernal Pact to use BattleMech components', but that's errata-able. So if you fake a system for Capacity (tonnage!) - Clan is trivial, it's not that hard of a conversion. Heck, there's even two easy-to-convert sects, "Inner Sphere" and "Clan Warriors"! So basically, if you're going to 'simplify' KotE into VTES, the _only_ reason why this system would be better than a wide range of completely unrelated settings is a thematic one - the rules and mechanics are actually _harder_ to simplify for KotE than they would be for some other settings. And a big, non-exaggerated part of my point is this: if you are going to add in new settings, the deciding factor is really going to be 'thematic'; and while KotE has the thematic advantage of being part of the World of Darkness, other games also share that advantage (Wraith, Werewolf, Mage, Mummies, Gypsies, Demon: the Fallen, Changeling, etc etc) while being just as easy to simplify into VTES. And aside from the word "Kindred", Kuei-jin have about as much in common with western vampires as do Mummies or Wraiths - they're all in the World of Darkness, they're all dead-and-yet-still-active, they all have some sort of power reserve(s) that need constant replenishing, etc. Beyond that, the thematic material for Kuei-jin really _isn't_ that similar to Vampire - they have radically different motivations, social groupings, histories, origins, sources of their powers and uses for them, etc. So thematically, there's not a lot of reason why Wraiths would be a worse new crypt choice than Kuei-jin - aside from 'personal taste'. And my own personal taste is this: Why is the game _better_ if we include other largely-incompatible, thematically different game settings that have to be simplified and/or converted to fit the existing rules, and will require a _lot_ of 'because we say so for 'game balance'' statements about why the very, very different thematic elements that shouldn't mesh do work in the CCG (for instance, why should a Kuei-Jin care about the effects of the First Tradition? Uh, cause we say so for game balance.)? How is this a beneficial addition to the game, especially when there are plenty of still-untapped parts of the existing Vampire setting that haven't been included yet that require zero conversion? Why dilute the game outside the existing setting (Old WoD Cainite Vampire) in the first place? -John Flournoy

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > John Flournoy wrote: > > > I don't see how they are inherently 'more compatible', given that KotE > > have almost nothing in common with the western Kindred. > > Except that they resent the Kindred's influence in their sphere, and > are invading the (Kindred's) American West coast? Werewolves resent Kindred's influence in their sphere. So do Wraiths, Mummies, Gypsies, and Changelings. Why are Kuei-jin preferable? > > How is that any different than (for instance) Shadowrun or Cthulhu? If > > you're having to make up conversion rules to allow a Kuei-Jin's card to > > have an equivalent of all the attributes on a crypt card, how is that > > any easier or harder than making up conversion rules for any other > > system? > > They are printed by the same developer to be in the same WoD (as > opposed to SR or Cth). They use the same WoD basic system (attributes, > skills, etc.) and scale. They are present in the same setting. They > perform a somewhat similar role in that setting. They have factions and > kewl powerz. Chi is very similar to Blood, P'o very to 'the beast'. > Both Kindred and KotE have a Gehenna prophecy. See my other post. Chi is sort of similar to blood, except that you don't have capacity, and Chi _isn't_ blood; it doesn't have to come from blood, and draining the blood from a Kuei-jin doesn't affect their blood. P'o is similar to 'the beast', but 'the beast' isn't in and of itself game mechanic in VTES, so that's irrelevant for converting crypt cards. Gehenna works, but the specifics of the Gehenna stuff for the Kuei-jin is not identical to Vampire, just as the Garou Apocalypse is similarly-end-of-the-world-but-different-because-they're-different-creatures from Vampire - I don't recall the Kuei-jin Gehenna scenarios caring one whit if Caine shows up, for instance. And again, in all seriousness - Kuei-jin are equally compatible (or incompatible) with Vampire as Mummies, Gypsies, Wraiths, Changelings, Garou, etc etc. Why include _any_ of these, when any of them would require 'simplification', errata, and scores of 'well, this overlaps because we say so despite it making no sense logically' rulings? Why would this be a positive addition to the game instead of a dilution of the thematic focus (since the themes of these other WoD settings, including KotE, are so distinct and different from Vampire?) And why Kuei-Jin over one of the others, since Kuei-jin have almost no relevant traits in common with Vampire - not in parallel, in common - every WoD setting has tons of stuff in parallel, but Kuei-jin share basically nothing with Vampire that isn't also shared by every other WoD setting? -John Flournoy

John Flournoy wrote: > So basically, if you're going to 'simplify' KotE into VTES, the _only_ > reason why this system would be better than a wide range of completely > unrelated settings is a thematic one - Yes. > the rules and mechanics are > actually _harder_ to simplify for KotE than they would be for some > other settings. So you say. I don't find it that hard - but I'm willing to simplify (more?). > And a big, non-exaggerated part of my point is this: if you are going > to add in new settings, the deciding factor is really going to be > 'thematic'; and while KotE has the thematic advantage of being part of > the World of Darkness, other games also share that advantage (Wraith, > Werewolf, Mage, Mummies, Gypsies, Demon: the Fallen, Changeling, etc > etc) while being just as easy to simplify into VTES. I disagree with the 'just as simple' for at least a few of these. > And aside from the word "Kindred", Kuei-jin have about as much in > common with western vampires as do Mummies or Wraiths - they're all in > the World of Darkness, they're all dead-and-yet-still-active, they all > have some sort of power reserve(s) that need constant replenishing, > etc. And the Keui-Jin's reserve is replenished, for the majority of them, by drinking blood. > Beyond that, the thematic material for Kuei-jin really _isn't_ > that similar to Vampire - they have radically different motivations, > social groupings, histories, origins, sources of their powers and uses > for them, etc. The first 4 reasons are also true for the Laibon. Sources of their powers - true (but demonic powers could be grasped by a discipline - see daimonion). Uses of their powers - there's a lot of functional overlap with kindred powers, even if the names are different. Didn't you get the 'same vampires, different coat of paint' feel with KotE? I did. Even White-Wolf thought so (even if only from a marketing point) when they named the book KINDRED of the East. > So thematically, there's not a lot of reason why Wraiths would be a > worse new crypt choice than Kuei-jin - aside from 'personal taste'. Other than wraiths having precedent as an ally type, and the fact they're mostly incorporeal and have a very different type of interaction with mortals than kindred? > And my own personal taste is this: Why is the game _better_ if we > include other largely-incompatible, thematically different game > settings that have to be simplified and/or converted to fit the > existing rules, and will require a _lot_ of 'because we say so for > 'game balance'' statements about why the very, very different thematic > elements that shouldn't mesh do work in the CCG (for instance, why > should a Kuei-Jin care about the effects of the First Tradition? Uh, > cause we say so for game balance.)? How is this a beneficial addition > to the game, especially when there are plenty of still-untapped parts > of the existing Vampire setting that haven't been included yet that > require zero conversion? Why dilute the game outside the existing > setting (Old WoD Cainite Vampire) in the first place? As to the 'why is it better if we include this new stuff' part - because fresh is fun, witness the bloodlines, the laibon, new allies over expansions, etc. As to the simplified/converted/game balance - laibon, scarce, etc., were concepts introduced without a problem (I think - bit early for Laibon, of course). The 'because we say so for game balance' argument isn't a bad one (witness vampire design) to start with, and also may not be needed in case of the example you pose: 'The first tradition is being actively enforced by camarilla and the methuselah's backing it. So much so, that even the KotE are restricted.' Arguing that KotE wouldn't be restricted because they are so thematically different is the same as arguing that Laibon wouldn't be hit (they're a whole continent away too!) or mortal allies, werewolves, etc. And they are.

John Flournoy wrote: <a while series of arguments, similar to the previous ones>. John refers to the 'other post'. I replied to it, and will continue replying there, to keep this tidy. I think it's going to come down to a preference of taste. Tobias

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > John Flournoy wrote: > > > So basically, if you're going to 'simplify' KotE into VTES, the _only_ > > reason why this system would be better than a wide range of completely > > unrelated settings is a thematic one - > > Yes. (pulled in from another thread for simplicity) > I think it's going to come down to a preference of taste. I agree - it's very much a matter of taste, and yours is clearly more liberal than mine. Which is fine, I can certainly accept that you'd like to see KotE added to the game. I wouldn't, but that's me. I just have a knee-jerk reaction these days to people who make claims about doing so 'because it fits' or for reasons beyond preference of taste - not you necessarily, but other people in other conversations have recently claimed to me that other settings 'should' be added primarily because they came up with 'cool' conversion rules for it. And I'm much more concerned with questions of 'should a specific new setting be added to the game in the first place' than 'can it be converted' - just about any setting _can_ be converted, no matter how thematically ludicrous. (And as far as personal taste goes, I'd _much_ rather see an expansion covering elements of Victorian Era Vampire before seeing Kindred of the East or other non-vampire settings added.) -John Flournoy

John Flournoy wrote: > I agree - it's very much a matter of taste, and yours is clearly more > liberal than mine. Which is fine, I can certainly accept that you'd > like to see KotE added to the game. I wouldn't, but that's me. I didn't start out this conversation by saying that I would (but I do) - I just noticed that the Laibon are a half-way point (which I didn't know, not having any WoD knowledge of them, really). > (And as far as personal taste goes, I'd _much_ rather see an expansion > covering elements of Victorian Era Vampire before seeing Kindred of the > East or other non-vampire settings added.) Which has problems all of it's own - what's that assault rifle doing in the hand of mr. gaslight vampire? (Although a version with full Victorian Art and look and specific cards would be ultracool - but of thematic necessity not very compatible with the current cards, and thus missing out on a rich already availble set of cards).

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > John Flournoy wrote: > > > I agree - it's very much a matter of taste, and yours is clearly more > > liberal than mine. Which is fine, I can certainly accept that you'd > > like to see KotE added to the game. I wouldn't, but that's me. > > I didn't start out this conversation by saying that I would (but I do) > - I just noticed that the Laibon are a half-way point (which I didn't > know, not having any WoD knowledge of them, really). > > > (And as far as personal taste goes, I'd _much_ rather see an expansion > > covering elements of Victorian Era Vampire before seeing Kindred of the > > East or other non-vampire settings added.) > > Which has problems all of it's own - what's that assault rifle doing in > the hand of mr. gaslight vampire? It's doing the same thing it's doing in the hands of mr. 1000-years-old Etrius, or any of the other dozens of existing VTES vampires that in canon were sired centuries and millenia ago. I'm suggesting using some of the gaslight-setting-created vampires, not necessarily saying 'they only exist in the past', cause that's dumb. > (Although a version with full Victorian Art and look and specific cards > would be ultracool - but of thematic necessity not very compatible with > the current cards, and thus missing out on a rich already availble set > of cards). I dunno, I think it could be extremely compatible thematically, if you're creative. There are already cards in the set that aren't necessarily limited to modern times - Polaris Coach or Opium Den, for instance. Easy enough to use outdated-but-still-functional pieces of the setting - crossbows, Masonic cabals, opera glasses, elephant guns, horses (modern mounted cops, anyone?) etc. -John Flournoy

A few tidbits about the KotE setting... tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > John Flournoy wrote: > > And aside from the word "Kindred", Kuei-jin have about as much in > > common with western vampires Not even that - they don't use that word to define themselves, as far as I can remember. as do Mummies or Wraiths - they're all in > > the World of Darkness, they're all dead-and-yet-still-active, they all > > have some sort of power reserve(s) that need constant replenishing, > > etc. > > And the Keui-Jin's reserve is replenished, for the majority of them, by > drinking blood. "The majority" being all Kuei-Jin who either didn't make it far in their Dharma and do have a Dharma to progress by at all. So yes, the average Kuei-Jin replenishes Chi by drinking blood. But the older, advanced ones (say, translating to VTES, the higher caps) and the recently changed (again, translating to VTES, the weenies) do not drink blood at all. The "high-caps" take Chi from the air, and the "weenies" need to consume flesh to get chi - and the latter are usually beast-minded, uncontrolled beings. Long story short, blood is only one source for Chi. It can be the most commonly used, but it's far from the best one - if they could, all Kuei-Jin would prefer to get chi from the air. Not translating it to the CCG would be a desservice to KotE's background. It can be done, though, via vampire's specials or a new mechanic. > > Beyond that, the thematic material for Kuei-jin really _isn't_ > > that similar to Vampire - they have radically different motivations, > > social groupings, histories, origins, sources of their powers and uses > > for them, etc. > > The first 4 reasons are also true for the Laibon. It depends on the point of view. Different motivations? Yes. But they also share many concerns (Masquerade Tradition/Secret Must be Kept, Domain/No Secrets from the Magaji, etc.) Social groupings? Not as different as the dharmas or the way Kuei-Jin organize themselves. The Legacies are local versions of the main western clans. The titles/positions of honour (magaji, kholo) are local versions of western positions (magaji is way closer to prince or baron than any position hold by the Kuei-Jin could ever be). Histories? Of course they're different, it's a different culture. But *still*, all Legacies ultimately come from Caine. The Kuei-Jin Dharmas do not. The Kuei-Jin as a race come from both the material and the spirit world alike; they're akin to Risen wraiths in that respect. Sources of their > powers - true (but demonic powers could be grasped by a discipline - > see daimonion). Uses of their powers - there's a lot of functional > overlap with kindred powers, even if the names are different. You can translate each Kuei-Jin power into any western discipline you want. That's the whole point of the debate - it *can* be done. But that wouldn't do justice to the setting. > Didn't you get the 'same vampires, different coat of paint' feel with > KotE? I did. Even White-Wolf thought so (even if only from a marketing > point) when they named the book KINDRED of the East. Despite the book's name, I recall that they do not refer to themselves using that term. "Kindred" is just a way to market it to the player base. If they called the book "The Kuei-Jin [of the East]", no player would have a clue of what the book is about. > Other than wraiths having precedent as an ally type, and the fact > they're mostly incorporeal and have a very different type of > interaction with mortals than kindred? Kuei-Jin have different corporeal functions (depending on the balance of yin/yang chi, they can even breed with humans and eat food - and it can happen for any Kuei-Jin no matter if they're "young" or not, so it's not the same thing as being thin-blooded) and interact with mortals in a different way, too. Shouldn't they be allies too? That's the whole point in this debate... Myself, I'd love to see Kuei-Jin as crypt cards. But the practical part sounds that it would require either too much twinking, or oversimplification. For the former, I don't want more complexity than necessary. For the latter, we can always do allies. There's already oversimplificated ally versions of hunters, werewolves, mortals anyway. > As to the 'why is it better if we include this new stuff' part - I think it's a little more complicated than that. There are tons of "new stuff" to include using the western vampires' background of the game still. Of course, that does not mean that KotE should *ever* be included. > because fresh is fun, witness the bloodlines, the laibon, new allies > over expansions, etc. ... all of which didn't require more than just a few twists. The Laibon required (up to this point in the preview) a new sect that works much the same way any other does; a new icon/rule (reflex) to simulate the effects of one (just *one*, not several) new discipline; and that's all. How could we adapt the Kuei-Jin just by creating a new sect and *one* discipline with a new mechanic into it? > As to the simplified/converted/game balance - laibon, scarce, etc., > were concepts introduced without a problem (I think - bit early for > Laibon, of course). The 'because we say so for game balance' argument > isn't a bad one (witness vampire design) to start with, and also may > not be needed in case of the example you pose: 'The first tradition is > being actively enforced by camarilla and the methuselah's backing it. > So much so, that even the KotE are restricted.' Yeah, the Tradition part is not a problem since we already have strange representantions of sect interaction in the game as it is now - Priscus voting during Praxis Seizures and all that. > Arguing that KotE wouldn't be restricted because they are so > thematically different is the same as arguing that Laibon wouldn't be > hit (they're a whole continent away too!) or mortal allies, werewolves, > etc. And they are. I think the Laibon do not bring to the game any more background-to-rules weirdness than the game already has, as pointed out by the Priscus example above. best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

Chris.QJ wrote: > well IANLSJT but i think that anytime the sum of ayes and oruns or the > cap of the vampire changes, you would then go into a serial check of > the aye or orun cards on that vampire (as almost nothing (except > strike resolution) is simultaneous-> see multiple anathemas), which > you could order as you want. that would also mean, that its up to you > if you burn aye or orun (or multiples if applicable) but never all of > them. Correct. -- That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet. Keep a little and let a little come back to me. LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Jozxyqk wrote: > It was ruled that if Tegyrius plays Protect Thine Own to burn a vampire, > he can not play Draught of the Soul. > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c160a3e36236e260 > > By that logic, it should be true that if a Laibon with Aye burns a > minion/equipment/location during an undirected action (i.e. Kindred > Segregation or Peace Treaty), he does not burn any Aye. Is this > correct? "That logic" involves referendums, not simply "undirected actions", but yes. (And it is the same logic that makes, say, Kindred Segregation or Disputed Territory undirected in the first place, even when only one Methuselah controls any allies or locations.) > Also, if a Laibon with Aye burns more than one minion in the same action > (i.e. Edged Illusion), does he burn one Aye for each minion burned, or > just one Aye? One per minion. [ quoted text not captured ]

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > > I understand your objections. KotE are more compatible with the WoD > universe than Cthulhu or (shadowrun) elves, though. A matter of taste, > in the end. No way, man. Cthulhu is compatible with ALL universes. "I play Undead Strength and strike for 5." "Cthulhu eats you and prevents your damage." "damn." -- Derek insert clever quotation here

Derek Ray wrote: > > No way, man. Cthulhu is compatible with ALL universes. > > "I play Undead Strength and strike for 5." > "Cthulhu eats you and prevents your damage." > "damn." IA! IA!

Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote: > How could we adapt the Kuei-Jin just by creating a new sect and *one* > discipline with a new mechanic into it? Since you asked: Create the sect and vampire type called 'Kuei-Jin'. Add 1 discipline that's too unique to map to anything already covered by the disciplines we have. (P'o/Tapestry/X?). Give the new clans 2 disciplines each and P'o/X (or 3 and P'o/X, X is then like flight). Add a whole bunch of cards of the regular disciplines (like 'black wind' which could be a celerity card) with the text 'requires a Kuei-Jin'. Ugly, and would make the new set hard to sell (low compatibility), but possible. But I'm sure we can both think of some way to do it 'better', with looser restrictions than the one you posed above? (I did say the Laibon were about the halfway point, I don't deny KotE will be more difficult). Tobias

> Long story short, blood is only one source for Chi. It can be the most > commonly used, but it's far from the best one - if they could, all > Kuei-Jin would prefer to get chi from the air. I tried to cover that in my virtual expansion. Blood is standard for hunts, however elder KJ can get funky action modifiers on hunt actions. Perhaps 1-cap KJ get -1 stealth when hunting to represent the flesh-eating? > How could we adapt the Kuei-Jin just by creating a new sect and *one* > discipline with a new mechanic into it? It'd be a disservice to the source material if we did. Do them well or don't do them at all. For those unfamiliar with the RPG, Laibon are, essentially, variations on existing clans. They have generation, disciplines, etc. Different culture, and one new mechanic (Orun/Aye), but otherwise essentially physiologically identical. KOTE are a different species entirely, although one that mirrors 'western' vampires in many ways. Think thylacine vs. canine - cosmetic similarities but very different creatures. Disco