Cheapass weenie allies/vote deck

i made this deck with the contents of just over two boxes of Jyhad boosters, plus cards i have won in tourneys. i've already built two remarkably competitive decks from this pool - Nosferatu "Kagemusha" Happy Families deck, and Anam and Ian's wedding deck. This one used the leftovers, and positively STORMED to victory just now against Sarah's HF Ravnos and Michael's Anklebiter Goes Tactical deck. At the end i actually had over 30 pool, 6 vampires [1 in torpor], 2 outcast mages, loyal street gang, Arms dealer, Thadius Zho and a renegade garou armed with the assault rifle! CRYPT [15 vampires] 2 x Igo the Hungry Dre, Leader of the Cold dawn Roreca Quaid Uma Hatch Dr John Casey Rake Giuliano Vincenzi Lydia van Cuelen Lupo Angel Vliam Andor Anastasia Grey Jing Wei Ricki van Demsy LIBRARY [90 cards] MASTERS [18] Ascendance x 8 The Barrens Effective Management x 3 Information Highway Misdirection x 3 Presence x 2 DISCIPLINELESS [63] Arms Dealer x 2 Assault Rifle Autarkis Persecution x 7 Bribes x 5 Brujah Justicar Change of Target x 2 Computer Hacking x 10 Cryptic Rider Dramatic Upheaval The Embrace x 2 Praxis Seizure: Chicago Praxis Seizure: Cleveland Praxis Seizure: Dallas Praxis Seizure: Seattle Kine Resources Contested Lucky Blow x 4 Conservative Agitation x 4 Outcast Mage x 2 Renegade Garou x 3 Thadius Zho [Mage] Tremere Justicar x 2 The Knights Loyal Street gang x 2 Fake Out x 4 Zip Gun x 3 PRESENCE [9] Bewitching Oration x 4 Charming Lobby Disarming Presence x 2 Dread Gaze Legal Manipulations i actually didn't play ANY presence cards in this game, so they are probably questionable - i shall keep them at least until i've tested the deck in bigger/more competitive games. Lucky Blows might be better as extra fake Outs, dodges or Flak/leather jackets. Autarkis Persecution and recruiting allies worked a treat, misdirection and computer hacking and change of target all working smoothly together in their usual way. Could probably lose an effective management or two and thereby find space for SR and KRCG NEws Radio. Ascendance is GREAT in this deck. Not hard to devise a strategy to beat this deck, of course, but it does demonstrate that you can build a decent deck out of cheap and/or sucky cards. Buffer Line to Stop Message Tailing Another o Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

i used the above deck again for our Monday night playgroup games, twice. In the first [a 3-player] i got pretty much slaughtered by my predator John Eagles but then we both got rubbed out by Louisa. In the second [ a 4-player] i swept, but it was a VERY tough and interesting game. Mike [Louisa's boyfriend, and a new player] ALMOST got me by stealth-bleed but vigorous top-decking JUST got me the Autarkis Persecution i needed to stay alive. This game actually saw TWO assault rifles hit the table - one mine, in the hands of a renegade garou, and the other John's and weilded by Anton [Bauble on Wendy Wade]. So i rushed and ate Wendy to get rid of his one, and then gunned down a couple of war ghouls. GREAT fun! i made one change to the deck - Delilah Easton for one of the Igos. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t454i$462$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com wrote: [Snip] > This game actually saw TWO assault rifles hit > the table - one mine, in the hands of a renegade garou, and the other > John's and weilded by Anton [Bauble on Wendy Wade]. So i rushed and > ate Wendy to get rid of his one, So exactly how did you get rid of the Anton's gun? Eating Wendy doesn't do it. Note the card text Bauble, especially the 'may' part, "You may burn this card and the chosen equipment card when the vampire with the chosen equipment leaves the active region or during your untap phase." Just wondering, Joe Churchill - V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter www.warghoul.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t462j$4s9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > In article <8t454i$462$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > [Snip] > > This game actually saw TWO assault rifles hit > > the table - one mine, in the hands of a renegade garou, and the other > > John's and weilded by Anton [Bauble on Wendy Wade]. So i rushed and > > ate Wendy to get rid of his one, > > So exactly how did you get rid of the Anton's gun? Eating Wendy doesn't > do it. Note the card text Bauble, especially the 'may' part, "You may > burn this card and the chosen equipment card when the vampire with the > chosen equipment leaves the active region or during your untap phase." > > Just wondering, > Joe Churchill > - Erm, by incompetently failing to read the card properly? i blame John, since it was his card - it never OCCURED to either of us that once baubled into an assault rifle, always an assault rifle even once you get toasted. Sheesh. That makes the card a LOT better. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Joe C. wrote: > So exactly how did you get rid of the Anton's gun? Eating Wendy doesn't > do it. Note the card text Bauble, especially the 'may' part, "You may > burn this card and the chosen equipment card when the vampire with the > chosen equipment leaves the active region or during your untap phase." > Why not? If the Bauble card is on Wendy, then sending Wendy to the ash-heap should send Bauble (and the Rifle) along with it. Just because you *may* burn the card at some point shouldn't imply that that's the only way to burn the card. Marc G.

In article <Pine.SUN.3.96L.1001024110240.24890A- 100...@alycia.dementia.org>, Marc Gabriele <goo...@dementia.org> wrote: > On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Joe C. wrote: > > So exactly how did you get rid of the Anton's gun? Eating Wendy > > doesn't do it. Note the card text Bauble, especially the 'may' > > part, "You may burn this card and the chosen equipment card when > > the vampire with the chosen equipment leaves the active region or > > during your untap phase." > > > Why not? Because, there is no card text that specifically states the chosen equipment is burned when the vampire with the bauble leaves play. > If the Bauble card is on Wendy, then sending Wendy to > the ash-heap should send Bauble (and the Rifle) along with it. Burning Wendy sends her and cards on Wendy to the ash heap. It does not send cards on Anton to the ash heap. Why, bacause nothing in the card text of bauble states the equipment chosen is burned when the bauble leaves play. > Just because you *may* burn the card at some point shouldn't imply > that that's the only way to burn the card. But it doesn't imply, it states clearly the only ways to remove the chosen equipment. Joe Churchill - V:EKN Prince of Columbia, SC Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter www.warghoul.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t4910$7km$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8t462j$4s9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, [snip] > Erm, by incompetently failing to read the card properly? i blame John, > since it was his card - it never OCCURED to either of us that once > baubled into an assault rifle, always an assault rifle even once you > get toasted. Sheesh. That makes the card a LOT better. I just hope John will be informed of this. Thanks, Joe C. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 11:07:53 -0400, Marc Gabriele <goo...@dementia.org> wrote: >On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Joe C. wrote: >> So exactly how did you get rid of the Anton's gun? Eating Wendy doesn't >> do it. Note the card text Bauble, especially the 'may' part, "You may >> burn this card and the chosen equipment card when the vampire with the >> chosen equipment leaves the active region or during your untap phase." >> > Why not? If the Bauble card is on Wendy, then sending Wendy to the >ash-heap should send Bauble (and the Rifle) along with it. Just because >you *may* burn the card at some point shouldn't imply that that's the only >way to burn the card. What other way is there to burn the card, supported by card text? It's not so much an implication as it is a simple read - to burn the card and the chosen equipment card, do it either during your untap or when the vampire WITH the equipment leaves the active region. -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

[ quoted text not captured ] Hrm. The list of consequences of diablerie state that "the victim is burned...any cards and counters on him are also burned", which would burn Bauble, but I can't find anything to make the leap that the equipment generated by Bauble would also burn as a result. Bizarre. I suppose that Golcanda-ing or Banishing the vampire with Bauble would also not effect the equipment, then. btw, the "burn all cards on the victim" clause *does* hold when a vampire is burned through excessive agg as well, right? Marc G.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:15:46 -0400, Marc Gabriele <goo...@dementia.org> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I'm sure it does. The list of consequences you mentioned is there simply to clarify the obvious - that when a vampire goes away, everything on him of course goes away as well. But that doesn't include the equipment, which is on another vampire. In a "how is this happening?" sense, a vamp with Vicissitude basically turns ITSELF into the equipment and then gives itself to another vampire to use. So the left-over vampire doesn't even really "exist", in one sense - represented by "can't take actions, block, or vote." (CAN play Telepathic Counter/Misdirection, however, and can Rat's Warning to do the same.) But you can't remove the vampire from the game, since it can always be turned back INTO a vampire... and so, the "burn" clause on Bauble and why beating up the "non-existent" vampire doesn't actually affect the equipment. This also lends itself to a nasty little deck idea with the Brujah/Toreador, involving as many itty bitty cel/pre vampires as you can manage, VIC skill cards, and Assault Rifles out the wazoo. Bleed with Legal Manipulations, toss some Blur cards in there for the poor souls who get in your way, and toss some Flash in to be -sure- you stay away. And the biggest problem would be somehow being sure you could get the VIC card, THEN the Bauble, and not getting any ARs in your hand in the meantime. =) Or you could just include Christine Boscacci, Horatio, and Rex-the-not-quite-useless in your crypt in sufficient numbers. Then you can remove the VIC skill cards and do something useful with the master slots you've saved (and also have a much better hope of getting the Bauble before the AR.) [ quoted text not captured ]

Marc Gabriele wrote: > btw, the "burn all cards on the victim" clause *does* hold when a vampire > is burned through excessive agg as well, right? Yes. All cards on a burned card are burned. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

In article <39F5C1EA...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Marc Gabriele wrote: > > btw, the "burn all cards on the victim" clause *does* hold when a vampire > > is burned through excessive agg as well, right? > > Yes. > All cards on a burned card are burned. > > so does the baubled assult rifle go away too? cAmeron [ quoted text not captured ]

inr...@my-deja.com wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Marc Gabriele wrote: > > > btw, the "burn all cards on the victim" clause *does* hold when a > vampire > > > is burned through excessive agg as well, right? > > > > Yes. > > All cards on a burned card are burned. > > so does the baubled assult rifle go away too? You should describe your assumptions about a situation when asking questions about particular cases. If the minion it is on is burned, yes. If the instructions of a card say it is burned, yes. Otherwise (including the case where the "Baubled" vampire is burned), no. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t4alh$98e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > In article <8t4910$7km$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <8t462j$4s9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > [snip] > > Erm, by incompetently failing to read the card properly? i blame John, > > since it was his card - it never OCCURED to either of us that once > > baubled into an assault rifle, always an assault rifle even once you > > get toasted. Sheesh. That makes the card a LOT better. > > I just hope John will be informed of this. > > Thanks, > Joe C. > www.warghoul.com This very evening as is, though he may well have picked it up himself already through his own NG readings. And thank you very much for the heads-up on this! i think now that bauble may be the key card i've been lacking for my Pander vote-combat deck: turn Rex into assault rifle, diablerise Rex, activate new Rex, rinse, wash, repeat. Buffer line to stop message tailing. > Before you bu [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t4alh$98e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > In article <8t4910$7km$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <8t462j$4s9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > [snip] > > Erm, by incompetently failing to read the card properly? i blame John, > > since it was his card - it never OCCURED to either of us that once > > baubled into an assault rifle, always an assault rifle even once you > > get toasted. Sheesh. That makes the card a LOT better. > > I just hope John will be informed of this. > > Thanks, > Joe C. > www.warghoul.com > Just been talking to John and he DID know that the assault rifle aka Wendy Wade DOESN'T burn when the vampire burns. He thinks i lied in the second post of this thread when i said that he burned the assault rifle in response to the Final death of the fair Tzimisce aka M16. He could be right. We were on our second bottle of Red Enrager by that time. So basically no harm done, except that i essentially wasted an action in doing down Wendy. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t6e05$kl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8t4alh$98e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, [snip] > Just been talking to John and he DID know that the assault rifle aka > Wendy Wade DOESN'T burn when the vampire burns. He thinks i lied in > the second post of this thread when i said that he burned the assault > rifle in response to the Final death of the fair Tzimisce aka M16. > He could be right. We were on our second bottle of Red Enrager by > that time. So basically no harm done, except that i essentially > wasted an action in doing down Wendy. On the bottle during or after the game or both? :-) No harm no foul, but at least you too are now fully aware of the bauble. Good luck in your deck idea with Rex, I look forward to hearing about the outcome. Joe C. -- Editor: Tzimisce Clan Newsletter www.warghoul.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8t6j8t$4ko$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joe C. <tzimi...@my-deja.com> wrote: > In article <8t6e05$kl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <8t4alh$98e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > [snip] > > Just been talking to John and he DID know that the assault rifle aka > > Wendy Wade DOESN'T burn when the vampire burns. He thinks i lied in > > the second post of this thread when i said that he burned the assault > > rifle in response to the Final death of the fair Tzimisce aka M16. > > He could be right. We were on our second bottle of Red Enrager by > > that time. So basically no harm done, except that i essentially > > wasted an action in doing down Wendy. > > On the bottle during or after the game or both? :-) During. Monday night tends to be a bit silly. However, since i was driving i was being FAIRLY abstemious. Had a few more glasses when i got home, to make up for it. > > No harm no foul, but at least you too are now fully aware of the > bauble. Good luck in your deck idea with Rex, I look forward to hearing > about the outcome. Thanks, should be fun! [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Marc Gabriele wrote: > Why not? If the Bauble card is on Wendy, then sending Wendy to the > ash-heap should send Bauble (and the Rifle) along with it. Just because > you *may* burn the card at some point shouldn't imply that that's the only > way to burn the card. There is no other way, by card text, to burn the card, however. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "And all the while I'm thinking things that I can never share with him. I'm a bundle of confusion, yet it has a strange appeal. Did it all begin with him and the way he makes me feel?"

i won again with this deck on Wednesday night, taking 4/6 VP from a 6-player game. My victims were, in order, Philip playing Tremere [he IS a new guy, and to his credit he wasn't trying to play Tremere combat], John Keech playing presence-dominate vote, deflect and bleed, Garry playing dom/pro/for and MArk playing his notorious stonewall deck - aus/obf/dom with a bit of presence, vote, deflect and counter. i don't know if i would have got John Eagles - he was decked but still had a fair number of permanents and some pool, whereas i was down to 3 rather weedy minions. One of them was the Garou, so i suppose i would have, eventually. This deck really surprises me by its robustness. The individual components [allies, wee vamps and not-very-stealthy votes] are weak and fragile but overall the deck is amazingly tough. i'm sure there's the basis of something a bit more poky in this. Buffer line to stop message tailing Another one, j [ quoted text not captured ]