Well, I bought one pack & I know it is not a scientific representation of
what to expect......but....
I will not buy ANY more! I got so many "duplicates" (at least half) that I
feel like I just payed $4 for the rules.
Is WOTC going to do to Jyhad what they did to Magic (try to make it
sothat you HAVE to buy the new cards to compete)?
I didn't buy any Ancient Hearts either & don't plan on buying anything
else from WOTC EVER.
Ken Mikolaj wrote:
>
> Well, I bought one pack & I know it is not a scientific representation of
> what to expect......but....
Translation: What I'm about to say is really stupid and childish and
this is me trying to excuse it beforehand.
> I will not buy ANY more! I got so many "duplicates" (at least half) that I
> feel like I just payed $4 for the rules.
OK, are you familiar with the term "stand-alone" expansion? Obviously
not. This means that the card set is designed so that you can play the
game with just cards from that set, a la Ice Age or Mirage for Magic. In
order to make a "stand-alone" expansion playable most of the core cards
from the original set must be reprinted. This is why you had things like
COPs and Firebreathing and Counterspell and Disenchant in the Magic
stand-alones. They're cards requisite to basic gameplay. It would be
really difficult to play without them. The same thing must be done,
then, with THE SABBAT.
> Is WOTC going to do to Jyhad what they did to Magic (try to make it
> sothat you HAVE to buy the new cards to compete)?
I know plenty of people who compete in Magic without all the new cards.
This argument is a fallacy- there are plenty of competitive decks in
Magic that don't use the newest cards. The dominant Magic tourney deck
(at the moment) is characterized by a card (Necropotence, for those who
know what I'm talking about) that came out THREE sets ago. Another
prominent deck (Ernageddon) is based on cards from the basic set and a
card that is actually a reprint of one that came out many years ago.
> I didn't buy any Ancient Hearts either & don't plan on buying anything
> else from WOTC EVER.
From what you got out of one pack? Frankly, if I were WOTC, I wouldn't
want people that narrow-minded buying my product anyway.
--
John Kozempel 305 Warren Square E - (610)758-0846
"What the hell's THAT?!" -Arthur Dent
"With all due respect, bugs are way smarter than you." - Dilbert
* * http://www.lehigh.edu/~jlk2/jlk2.html * *
On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, John Kozempel wrote:
> Ken Mikolaj wrote:
> >
> > Well, I bought one pack & I know it is not a scientific representation of
> > what to expect......but....
>
> Translation: What I'm about to say is really stupid and childish and
> this is me trying to excuse it beforehand.
>
Not at all.
> > I will not buy ANY more! I got so many "duplicates" (at least half) that I
> > feel like I just payed $4 for the rules.
>
> OK, are you familiar with the term "stand-alone" expansion? Obviously
> not. This means that the card set is designed so that you can play the
> game with just cards from that set, a la Ice Age or Mirage for Magic. In
> order to make a "stand-alone" expansion playable most of the core cards
> from the original set must be reprinted. This is why you had things like
> COPs and Firebreathing and Counterspell and Disenchant in the Magic
> stand-alones. They're cards requisite to basic gameplay. It would be
> really difficult to play without them. The same thing must be done,
> then, with THE SABBAT.
>
Sabbat is NOT stand alone. You have to have a rule book to play it. Ice
Age & Mirage starters come with rule books. Sabbat does not. It is just
an excuse to reprint the same cards with different pictures.
> > Is WOTC going to do to Jyhad what they did to Magic (try to make it
> > sothat you HAVE to buy the new cards to compete)?
>
> I know plenty of people who compete in Magic without all the new cards.
> This argument is a fallacy- there are plenty of competitive decks in
> Magic that don't use the newest cards. The dominant Magic tourney deck
> (at the moment) is characterized by a card (Necropotence, for those who
> know what I'm talking about) that came out THREE sets ago. Another
> prominent deck (Ernageddon) is based on cards from the basic set and a
> card that is actually a reprint of one that came out many years ago.
>
Have you ever heard of Type II? As new sets come out, you have to buy
them to play in the tournaments. I think Ice Age goes out of play on Jan
1 (or something like that). So, if I would have bought into this STAND
ALONE game, I would be out of luck since I couldn't play Type II with it
any more. That was my point!
> > I didn't buy any Ancient Hearts either & don't plan on buying anything
> > else from WOTC EVER.
>
> From what you got out of one pack? Frankly, if I were WOTC, I wouldn't
> want people that narrow-minded buying my product anyway.
>
Not just from my one pack...from what others have said as well. If I
were WOTC, I would want EVERYONE (including us narrow-minded people)
buying my cards and I would do the same
things to screw over Jyhad & Magic players that they are doing. So, I
don't blame them for trying to make money. But, none of it is going to
be mine.
BTW...does "narrow-minded" mean someone that thinks for himself &
won't be sucked in to marketing ploys? If so....THANKS!!!!
[ quoted text not captured ]
Ken Mikolaj <ke...@eden.com> wrote:
>> > I will not buy ANY more! I got so many "duplicates" (at least half) that I
>> > feel like I just payed $4 for the rules.
>>
>> OK, are you familiar with the term "stand-alone" expansion? Obviously
>> not. This means that the card set is designed so that you can play the
>> game with just cards from that set, a la Ice Age or Mirage for Magic. In
>> order to make a "stand-alone" expansion playable most of the core cards
>> from the original set must be reprinted. This is why you had things like
>> COPs and Firebreathing and Counterspell and Disenchant in the Magic
>> stand-alones. They're cards requisite to basic gameplay. It would be
>> really difficult to play without them. The same thing must be done,
>> then, with THE SABBAT.
>>>
>Sabbat is NOT stand alone. You have to have a rule book to play it. Ice
>Age & Mirage starters come with rule books. Sabbat does not. It is just
>an excuse to reprint the same cards with different pictures.
Really? Are you sure about that? 'Cause I'm sitting here looking at the ad for The Sabbat
where the third paragraph says: "THE SABBAT is a stand-alone expansion for VAMPIRE: THE
ETERNAL STRUGGLE." Hmm, maybe if I change my glasses it'll say something else... but
here's an idea: I called WOTC Customer serivce, and you know what they said? They said it
was a stand-alone too! And considering that the rules for V:TES are widely available both
inprint and, IINM, online, that shouldn't be a problem for the resourceful gamer.
>>> > Is WOTC going to do to Jyhad what they did to Magic (try to make it
>> > sothat you HAVE to buy the new cards to compete)?
>>
>> I know plenty of people who compete in Magic without all the new cards.
>> This argument is a fallacy- there are plenty of competitive decks in
>> Magic that don't use the newest cards. The dominant Magic tourney deck
>> (at the moment) is characterized by a card (Necropotence, for those who
>> know what I'm talking about) that came out THREE sets ago. Another
>> prominent deck (Ernageddon) is based on cards from the basic set and a
>> card that is actually a reprint of one that came out many years ago.
>>>
>Have you ever heard of Type II? As new sets come out, you have to buy
>them to play in the tournaments. I think Ice Age goes out of play on Jan
>1 (or something like that). So, if I would have bought into this STAND
>ALONE game, I would be out of luck since I couldn't play Type II with it
>any more. That was my point!
Er... at the present time both the Necro and Ernageddon decks are still T2 viable. And
last I checked there weren't any set restrictions for V:TES tournaments and probably never
will be as the game, though I love it, isn't nearly popular enough to warrant it.
>> > I didn't buy any Ancient Hearts either & don't plan on buying anything
>> > else from WOTC EVER.
>>
>> From what you got out of one pack? Frankly, if I were WOTC, I wouldn't
>> want people that narrow-minded buying my product anyway.
>>>
>Not just from my one pack...from what others have said as well. If I
>were WOTC, I would want EVERYONE (including us narrow-minded people)
>buying my cards and I would do the same
>things to screw over Jyhad & Magic players that they are doing. So, I
>don't blame them for trying to make money. But, none of it is going to
>be mine.
Oh, so now you're not only basing your comments on the ONE pack you bought but on hearsay
from other people? That's much more intelligent. <snort>
>BTW...does "narrow-minded" mean someone that thinks for himself &
>won't be sucked in to marketing ploys? If so....THANKS!!!!
No, narrow-minded as in childish, immature, inflexible and generally bratty. YOU'RE
WELCOME!!!!
[ quoted text not captured ]
On 11 Nov 1996, John Kozempel wrote:
>
> >BTW...does "narrow-minded" mean someone that thinks for himself &
> >won't be sucked in to marketing ploys? If so....THANKS!!!!
>
> No, narrow-minded as in childish, immature, inflexible and generally bratty. YOU'RE
> WELCOME!!!!
>
Does your definition of "inflexible" mean "standing by your beliefs"? If
so, thanks once again!
And, if you think that not wanting to spend my money on something that I
think is a rip-off is childish...then I forever will be a child!
John Kozempel <jl...@lehigh.edu> wrote in article
<32877C...@lehigh.edu>...
(Snip)
> OK, are you familiar with the term "stand-alone" expansion? Obviously
> not. This means that the card set is designed so that you can play the
> game with just cards from that set, a la Ice Age or Mirage for Magic. In
> order to make a "stand-alone" expansion playable most of the core cards
> from the original set must be reprinted. This is why you had things like
> COPs and Firebreathing and Counterspell and Disenchant in the Magic
> stand-alones. They're cards requisite to basic gameplay. It would be
> really difficult to play without them. The same thing must be done,
> then, with THE SABBAT.
This is complete BS. In Ice Age you would have to print lands, but even
then you could have made them different (e.g. Snow covered plains). There
is absolutely _no_ excuse for reprinting cards, especially in Jyhad. It
would have been easy to print cards with similar effects that where still
different. Forced Awakening, Redirection, and Quick Meld are all examples
of Sabbat cards with similar effects that replaced cards in the original
set. These cards where well done and I give WotC credit for that. However,
trying to defend them for needlessly reprinting a bunch of cards is
complete _foolishness_.
--
Steve Bucy
I'd be better off undead...
"Hmmm. I notice the number of conditional phrases in there... _seems_ to
indicate a weakness, _may_ be vulnerable in theory." - G'Kar
Ken Mikolaj <ke...@eden.com> wrote:
>
>
>On 11 Nov 1996, John Kozempel wrote:
>>>
>> >BTW...does "narrow-minded" mean someone that thinks for himself &
>> >won't be sucked in to marketing ploys? If so....THANKS!!!!
>>
>> No, narrow-minded as in childish, immature, inflexible and generally bratty. YOU'RE
>> WELCOME!!!!
>>>
>Does your definition of "inflexible" mean "standing by your beliefs"? If
>so, thanks once again!
No, last I checked inflexible meant unwilling to listen to or lend
credence to anothers opinions, in effect covering one's ears and shouting
"I'm not listening!" And standing by one's "beliefs" isn't always a good
thing. Your continued attempts to turn insults into compliments is pretty
pathetic.
>And, if you think that not wanting to spend my money on something that I
>think is a rip-off is childish...then I forever will be a child!
Let's see.... you managed to determine that a 400 card set is worthless
from looking at 28 randomly selected cards, approximately 7% of the set.
In this case I believe the word childish should be perhaps changed to
just "stupid."
In regard to your remarks about forever being a child- since it's pretty
obvious you've yet to reach even remote adulthood, that shouldn't be a
problem.
I also notice that you failed to quote the part of my post where I
comlpetely dissassembled your other arguments. Rather convenient mincing
of words there.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Wow.
John, I could be wrong, but I'm willing to bet you are a Magic player
first, aren't you? Let's examine things...
On 11 Nov 1996, John Kozempel wrote:
> Ken Mikolaj <ke...@eden.com> wrote:> >> > I will not buy ANY more! [Re: Duplicates]> >> OK, are you familiar with the term "stand-alone" expansion? Obviously
> >> not. This means that the card set is designed so that you can play the
> >> game with just cards from that set, a la Ice Age or Mirage for Magic. In
> >> order to make a "stand-alone" expansion playable most of the core cards
> >> from the original set must be reprinted. This is why you had things like
> >> COPs and Firebreathing and Counterspell and Disenchant in the Magic
> >> stand-alones. They're cards requisite to basic gameplay. It would be
> >> really difficult to play without them. The same thing must be done,
> >> then, with THE SABBAT.
While this is true, a number of the staple cards were not reprinted, and a
number of others had alternatives (Ambush (???) for Bum's Rush, for
example). Alternatives could easily have been done.
> >Sabbat is NOT stand alone. You have to have a rule book to play it. Ice
> >Age & Mirage starters come with rule books. Sabbat does not. It is just
> >an excuse to reprint the same cards with different pictures.> Really? Are you sure about that? 'Cause I'm sitting here looking at the
> ad for The Sabbat where the third paragraph says: "THE SABBAT is a
> stand-alone expansion for VAMPIRE: THE ETERNAL STRUGGLE." Hmm, maybe if
> I change my glasses it'll say something else...
Don't believe everything you read. Were Sabbat to be truly stand-alone,
it should have been able to be played without buying anything else or
having to find the rules elsewhere. Do you buy Colonial Diplomacy and
expect to not find any rules because the rules are available elsewhere?
Of course not.
Still, Sabbat is close _enough_ to be considered a proto-Stand-Alone
expansion, so let's take issue with what Ken is really getting at: the
release was horribly inadequate, with not enough rarity distribution to
get enough of the new cards, stupid decision in rules release, and yet
another card back (making for Jyhad, VTES/DS, AH, Sabbat). Analyzing the
relative worth of the new cards is another issue altogether...
> but here's an idea: I called WOTC Customer serivce, and you know what
> they said? They said it was a stand-alone too! And considering that the
> rules for V:TES are widely available both inprint and, IINM, online,
> that shouldn't be a problem for the resourceful gamer.
<SIGH>
See the comment above regarding Diplomacy. As an aside, even White Wolf,
with its many fiascos in printing role-playing games, has the decency to
give the rules to its "Stand-Alones" (i.e, Dark Ages) and quickly provide
errata to problems in their products.
> >> > Is WOTC going to do to Jyhad what they did to Magic (try to make it
> >> > sothat you HAVE to buy the new cards to compete)?
(Note that Ken is asking if they will make Jyhad like Magic... (sorry to
be redundant))
> >> I know plenty of people who compete in Magic without all the new cards.
> >> This argument is a fallacy- there are plenty of competitive decks in
> >> Magic that don't use the newest cards. The dominant Magic tourney deck
> >> (at the moment) is characterized by a card (Necropotence, for those who
> >> know what I'm talking about) that came out THREE sets ago. Another
> >> prominent deck (Ernageddon) is based on cards from the basic set and a
> >> card that is actually a reprint of one that came out many years ago.
One thing to note about these examples, they are not really applicable to
Jyhad. In Magic, games are dominated by singular cards. In Jyhad, they
didn't used to be, they were dominated by strategies. Of course there
were singular old cards upon which decks could be built that don't _need_
the new ones to compete with. Note the cards you mention: Ehrnam Djinn,
an undercosted reprinted card, and NecroPotence, an overpowered card. In
a game based on mostly singularities, such cards do not need new sets to
invalidate them, they warp how new sets get played. Jyhad is(was?) not
like that.
> >Have you ever heard of Type II? As new sets come out, you have to buy
> >them to play in the tournaments. I think Ice Age goes out of play on Jan
> >1 (or something like that). So, if I would have bought into this STAND
> >ALONE game, I would be out of luck since I couldn't play Type II with it
> >any more. That was my point!> Er... at the present time both the Necro and Ernageddon decks are still
> T2 viable. And last I checked there weren't any set restrictions for
> V:TES tournaments and probably never will be as the game, though I love
> it, isn't nearly popular enough to warrant it.
Restrictions are now a modified version of the Golden Tenets. Nothing
else was needed, not because it wasn't popular enough, but because it
wasn't horribly broken, like Magic. I'm sure Sabbat will change that,
hopefully in the form of a banned list, rather than a restricted one.
[Back-and-forth on between Ken/John about not buying packs and why]
Ken has a valid point. WotC should not and likely does not want people to
not buy. It's sad that they are causing many of us to have little, if
any, desire to pick up a box. Many are buying, but many that would have
are not only not buying, but they are dropping the game.
(Hey, Neil. Now that you're on the group again, you might be interested
in knowing that nearly all interest in Jyhad around here has died since
Sabbat came out. A far cry from our league of 30 players, eh? (Sterling's
likely dropping. The drop count is probably around 6-8))
> Oh, so now you're not only basing your comments on the ONE pack you
> bought but on hearsay from other people? That's much more intelligent.
> <snort>
Most of these other people have built up a presence on this newsgroup over
the life of it. I have not yet bought any Sabbat, and despite the fact
that I have a full set of all the Jyhad in print (excepting a few VTES
cards), I'm not sure I will, due to a combination of concern about
distribution, but mostly out of frustration over WotC's treatment of the
game.
> >BTW...does "narrow-minded" mean someone that thinks for himself &
> >won't be sucked in to marketing ploys? If so....THANKS!!!!
:)
> No, narrow-minded as in childish, immature, inflexible and generally
> bratty. YOU'RE WELCOME!!!!
John, you've no call to put together the post as you did. You attacked a
pretty respectable contributor to the group, to distributing cards, with
no real record here. You did it without real backup. You did it
antagonistically. His response, while not in a pleasant tone, is far more
mannered than your own. Know your place. If you're going to attack
someone, know thy enemy and yourself first. Critique is acceptable, your
post really stretches the line.
-.sigless (over quota!!!)
The Corrupter
- You all know that absolute power rigamarole, don't ya? ;)
John Kozempel <jl...@lehigh.edu> writes:
>Ken Mikolaj <ke...@eden.com> wrote:>>Sabbat is NOT stand alone. You have to have a rule book to play it. Ice
>>Age & Mirage starters come with rule books. Sabbat does not. It is just
>>an excuse to reprint the same cards with different pictures.>here's an idea: I called WOTC Customer serivce, and you know what they said? They said it
>was a stand-alone too!
Call them and ask them if S:CE resolves when it is announced. ;-)
Then see if WotC Custserv passes as a reliable source around here.
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Only XT users know that
http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Jan 1, 1980 was a Tuesday.
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
John Kozempel wrote:
"In regard to your remarks about forever being a child- since it's pretty
obvious you've yet to reach even remote adulthood, that shouldn't be a
problem."
Alright John, you are clearly new around here. This, as opposed to most
Magic newsgroups, is a nice and friendly news group. Everyone appreciates
good debate and point vs. point arguments, but this baseless random
assaulting of people just has to go.
Ken is a fairly well known and regular poster here in Jyhad land. You?
Well, you are some new guy who bursts in with a rude and unpleasant tone.
It is generally a good idea to lurk on a new news group to figure out what
the proper netiquite for the said group is before posting. You clearly
either ommitted this step, or chose to ignore your findings. If you wish
to flame and attack, please return to a Magic group.
As to Sabbat being a Stand Alone expansion, well, ok, the box says it
stands alone. The adds say it is a Stand Alone. The highly suspect WotC
answer people say it is a Stand Alone.
In reality, there are way to few utilitarian vampires for each clan, not
enough basic use cards (in Sabbat, Potence pretty much blows without
Celerity, making the Nosferatu even more useless, for instance.), and
well, no rules. Trying to make a useful and efficient deck using only the
cards from the Sabbat set would be fairly difficult, especially when
compared to a deck made of just basic VTES cards. This is not the case
with Ice Age vs Mirage in Magic (the other game with Stand Alone for
comparison) The merits of the set as whole are clearly debateable, but as
a Stand Alone, it clearly fell flat.
Peter D Bakija
PD...@aol.com
"And the license said you had to stick around
until I was dead.
But if you're tired of looking at my face
I guess I already am."
-Liz Phair
theCorrupter (adr...@ducat.cs.wisc.edu) wrote:
: Ken has a valid point. WotC should not and likely does not want people to: not buy. It's sad that they are causing many of us to have little, if
: any, desire to pick up a box. Many are buying, but many that would have
: are not only not buying, but they are dropping the game.
: (Hey, Neil. Now that you're on the group again, you might be interested
: in knowing that nearly all interest in Jyhad around here has died since
: Sabbat came out. A far cry from our league of 30 players, eh? (Sterling's
: likely dropping. The drop count is probably around 6-8))
Hey, Adrian. I'm unhappy about the Sabbat for other reasons. The cards
excited me when I looked at the spoiler list, so I went out and bought four
packs -- and wasn't at all prepared for the art. Since I don't know the
Sabbat from having role-played with them (since I'm mainly a card, chess
and Go player, not a role-player; I do have to get through grad school), I
wasn't ready for the sheer amount of blood and guts on the cards. The new
Ascendance and Theft of Vitae still gross me out; I wish I could find a card
in the set that _scared_ me instead of turning my stomach. [Yeah, yeah, I
know there's supposedly a justification for it: vampires' lives revolve
around blood. Our lives revolve around food. Do we see pictures of
ourselves wallowing in frenchfries and hamburgers, or barfing pizza into each
others' mouths? I guess I prefer the dignified Camarilla to the "unruly
Sabbat."]
As for gaming uses of the Sabbat: since I haven't played against a
constructed Sabbat deck yet, I don't know how broken the cards are. The
allies the group has been complaining about still don't seem sicker to me
than, say, a Renegade Garou wearing a Flak Jacket and wielding Talbot's
Chainsaw. And I'm glad there's a reason for Kindred Segregation.
Sorry to hear your league is declining. Mine is slowly growing; we've got
six now, and by next week may be into double figures. Not bad considering
it's paper-writing and exam-cramming time.
- Neil