[LSJ] Meddling of Sensmith?

LSJ, As you are probably the only person on this list who has insight to this, you might be willing to shed some light on this here card issue. A) Meddling of Sensmith is a very powerful card. Whether or not it is a broken card is certainly debateable, but not at issue in this here question. I think it is clear, however, that it is a very powerful card, being a single card with a limited cost that puts a *huge* restriction on the target. Thus, powerful. It is also a card that provides a completely new mechanic to the game--no other card in print provides such a power that is provided by Meddling. B) Given that it is a powerful card, and a card that provides a completely new mechanic to the game, how does anyone justify this card being released as a *promo* card? Cards that are a good idea for promos are alternate art versions of cards, preview cards that are going to be released soon anyways, or slightly altered yet mostly equivelant versions of other cards--basically, cards that aren't particularly neccessary for play purposes, but are fun to get and have some collection value (Dan Murdock and Mariana Gilbert, for example, aren't really much different than many other similar vampires, and while fun to have, aren't really neccessary to any particular strategy). Cards that are not a good idea for promos are powerful cards that provide a completely new mechanic to the game, as they move a game (such as VTES) rapidly away from "$$$$ does not = success" towards "$$$$=success", which is never good for a game. Ever. Meddling is a powerful card that provides a new mechanic. It is only availaible to a limited pool of people (those that attend this particular event). That it is both powerful and providing a new effect means that people are going to want many of them. Those who manage to accuire many of them will have a substantial advantage over those who do not, in an environment where accuiring many of these cards will be difficult due to how these cards are distributed as only promos (although certainly not impossible, provided enough cash to spend). This way leads to madness. Regardless of the perceived inappropriateness of the power and ability of this card by many, how did this card get designed and how was it decided that it would only exist as a promo? Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/bakija6 "These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!" -Zim.

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > LSJ, > > As you are probably the only person on this list who has insight to this, you > might be willing to shed some light on this here card issue. Any rules questions? Any problems you've found in play? -- 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/

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3C632FBE...@white-wolf.com... > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > > > LSJ, > > > > As you are probably the only person on this list who has insight to this, you > > might be willing to shed some light on this here card issue. > > Any rules questions? > Any problems you've found in play? > So you're saying that there is no justification for releasing the card as a promo?

In message <uyG88.10235$bh3....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: >So you're saying that there is no justification for releasing the card as a >promo? Erm, I think you're deliberately mis-reading his post. People are suggesting that there are huge over-powered problems with the card. LSJ appeared to be asking for empirical proof of what these problems are. If these cannot be established - which thus far they have not - it is unlikely that further 'justification' of the card is needed. -- James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c. PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:6yBaXaSa...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <uyG88.10235$bh3....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, Chris > Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: > >So you're saying that there is no justification for releasing the card as a > >promo? > > Erm, I think you're deliberately mis-reading his post. > > People are suggesting that there are huge over-powered problems with the > card. LSJ appeared to be asking for empirical proof of what these > problems are. > I think what people are suggesting is not that the card is over powered, but that either a) the card is unique and would expand deck construction if available in larger quantities or b) the card is unique and would greatly shift the metagame if available in larger quantities Thus they feel this card is one which should have been available in larger quantities because of the play value it adds to the game. Cheers, Janus the Judgment [ quoted text not captured ]

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:6yBaXaSa...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <uyG88.10235$bh3....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>, Chris > Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: > > >So you're saying that there is no justification for releasing the card as a > >promo? > > Erm, I think you're deliberately mis-reading his post. > > People are suggesting that there are huge over-powered problems with the > card. LSJ appeared to be asking for empirical proof of what these > problems are. > Oh, is that what he's saying? Coulda fooled me. Good thing I have you to translate for me, or I would always be going around misinterpreting LSJ. I woulda guessed he was just saying that he had no intention of commenting on the card. He might say something along the lines of it's not his job to explain the design team's intentions, or that there's no need to comment, or what have you. It is at least possible that the reason he gave no justification for the card is that there is no justification and it should never have been printed. I'll choose to believe that until he contradicts me. (Wouldn't be surprised if that contradiction were forthcoming, however.)

James wrote: >>People are suggesting that there are huge over-powered problems with the card. LSJ appeared to be asking for empirical proof of what these problems are.>> No, no, what I am suggesting is that this is a powerful card that provides an unprecidented ability, and consequently has no real place being a promo card, and I am wondering why it is. >>If these cannot be established - which thus far they have not - it is unlikely that further 'justification' of the card is needed.>> That it is potentially very powerful and provides an unprecidented new ability isn't really a question, it is pretty much reality--the card provides an ability that is both new and powerful. Why it was a good idea to make such a card a promo is a question. The only justification I am looking for (in this here instance) is why it was a good idea to make a card that provides a powerful and new ability a difficult to attain promo card. [ quoted text not captured ]

Jason wrote: >>I think what people are suggesting is not that the card is over powered, but that either>> No, no, I have clearly suggested that the card is overpowered, but that is neither here nor there in this context. The question I am asking here is that assuming this card is both powerful and provides a new, unprecidented ability (which it is and it does), there is no real justification for it being released only as a promo card. >>Thus they feel this card is one which should have been available in larger quantities because of the play value it adds to the game.>> Nope. I feel that if a card is going to be produced that is both powerful and provides a unprecidented, new ability, there is no good rational for it only being released as a promo card, which is apparently the case in this instance. [ quoted text not captured ]

> The only justification I am looking for (in this here instance) is why it was a > good idea to make a card that provides a powerful and new ability a difficult > to attain promo card. Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can attain the promotional card. A promotional card that attains it goal... getting people to an event. And as for the idea that a promotional card should duplicate existing powers or be "new" art... where exactly and in what holy book of cards is this written? I can think of several powerful cards that have appeared in other games as promotional and they accomplished their goal also. Double Overtime from the Battletech CCG comes to mind as perhaps the strongest example. (Ack... I admit it.... I used to play BT...forgive me... I'm reformed) I know of several people in my local group who will be attending their first organized tournament at the local storyline event (for the card). I have seen posts here about others heading to their first tournament shortly. And while not everybody who goes to a storyline tournament is going just for a card... they are out there. We may not appreciate the effects that Meddling may bring into the game. This remains to be seen. But to criticize White Wolf for producing effective (ie successful in promoting the game) promotional cards that create interest in events is counter productive. Respectfully, John

>A promotional card that attains it goal... getting people to an event. And >as for the idea that a promotional card should duplicate existing powers or >be "new" art... where exactly and in what holy book of cards is this >written? I can think of several powerful cards that have appeared in other >games as promotional and they accomplished their goal also. Double Overtime >from the Battletech CCG comes to mind as perhaps the strongest example. Promos aren't remotely as evenly distributed as cards in sets are. By making a promo significantly different than a normal card, you create a fairness issue. Alternate artwork promos (of staple cards) do not create a fairness issue. And, IME, customers - player/collectors and collectors - value them highly. I see no argument for putting out promos that do something different from normally available cards.

John wrote: > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > The only justification I am looking for (in this here instance) is why it > > was a good idea to make a card that provides a powerful and new ability a > > difficult to attain promo card. > > Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just > maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can > attain the promotional card. > > A promotional card that attains it goal... getting people to an event. I suppose we have to give you your due and admit you did answer Peter's question above. But Peter's question is poorly chosen for the point I think he's trying to make: not that there isn't a purpose that the card positively fulfills, but that it was a poor choice for a promo card due to some of the negative impact it may have on the game. The fact is, no matter how much incentive you provide people, a fair number of them will not be able to attend a storyline tournament this month. A promo card that was unique (that is, identifiable from all the other cards in the game) and has only a mild effect on the metagame or even none at all (e.g. a reprinted card with new art) is likely to have only marginally less impact on motivating players to come to the tournaments. I'd be surprised if many players make the final decision about whether to show up based on just the play text of this card. (If nothing else, not that many of the players will likely know what the card is before they show so it _can't_ affect their decisions.) So if the card turns out to be something that makes much difference in a metagame, then it will truly be an unfortunate choice for a promo card, given that supply of them which get distributed to players will likely be extremely limited. For me, the jury's still out on whether it will make much of an effect on the game. Still, I think I'm surprised at the choice for same reasons that Peter is giving. It just seems like it was a lot more risk than they should be taking with a promo card. Fred

> Promos aren't remotely as evenly distributed as cards in sets are. By making a > promo significantly different than a normal card, you create a fairness issue. Fairness aside. The goal of a promo card is to PROMOTE. White wolf wants to interest and encourage people to attend the Storyline events. Would as many people come out if they were promised an alternate artwork Blood doll? I do not think so (IMO). While alternate art has some appeal to some type of collectors its virtually worthless to others. Given the choice that white wolf has in selecting a promotional card its in their best interest to select a card that will encourage the most people to come out to games. A new, different card will beat a card where the only thing new is artwork. > I see no argument for putting out promos that do something different from > normally available cards. I'll give you an example. A player in my local group is attending Storyline here JUST for the card. No other reason. If you offered an alternate blood doll art or a card that duplicated blood doll he would probably not attend (or if he did attend not knowing what the card would and received a reworked card be he would be a little pissed off. Now is he the average player? Probably not. Is he the only person out there thinking this way - no. White wolf want people playing and attending events. A new card idea (which of course would have new artwork) as compared to an old card with just new artwork or a new card that duplicates an existing card will draw less people. Is this not a clear concept? Try not to look at the problem from the players point of view. As we all know we do not make the decision. White Wolf makes the decision based on its own criteria. I suspect its number one criteria for this promotional card is to create interest and encourage participation at Storyline events. New card accomplishes this better than a reworked card. Hands down. -John

> The fact is, no matter how much incentive you provide people, a fair number > of them will not be able to attend a storyline tournament this month. <<sniped>> > less impact on motivating players to come to the tournaments. I'd be > surprised if many players make the final decision about whether to show up > based on just the play text of this card. (If nothing else, not that many > of the players will likely know what the card is before they show so it > _can't_ affect their decisions.) Maybe its a rare case but I'll tell you that somewhere in the neighborhood of 15-20 people are expected to show up at the tournament here. At least three that I have talked to are showing up for the promotional card - all were uncertain as to wether they would attend until they discovered the card text. Now all three will be in attendance. Thats a minimum of 15% of the attendance with less than 25% (5) of the expected population sampled) I agree with you that some people will be unable to attend a storyline tournament and if whitewolf never releases Meddling in a future set these people may never get the card. Is this unfair - yes. Is it unreasonable or avoidable - no. I myself do not have either of the two earlier promo only cards - Dan and Mariana Gilbert. As I collect for the collecting, not necessarily usefulness I would really like to have these cards. Being unwilling to trade heavily or pay money for them I have accepted that I will probably never have these cards. To me it is the exact same situation with Meddling. For my purposes it does not matter the power of the card when determining if I want it. I don't have one - therefore I want. But if I wasn't a rabid collector I wouldn't care about a reworked card (eg: new art). <to be honest I was not aware at the time (and still not) of where and how the two earlier promo cards were available. Had I known, and known what the cards were it would not have motivated me to put a whole heck of a lot of effort into attending whatever I had to as the cards meet your definition of a good promo card - nothing really new or game changing. If they had offered dramatically new cards my motivation would have been higher. Heck its a moot point though as I wasn't aware of their existance until after the fact> If I should break my leg tomorrow and be unable to attend the storyline tournament while those in my playgroup do, that's my misfortune and I'll add Meddling to the list of cards I expect to never have. Its the nature of the game. Having or not having one card will not destroy Jyhad. But for the new player, the introductory player, who has bought a few decks and isn't big into the collecting thing (yet) a reworked art card has next to no value. ("I've got enough of them") These are the players that White Wolf is after and wants to draw them into the tournament scene. They know we're likely to plunk down our money set after set (until we run out of money ;-D ) while a beginner may not. A card that the player knows that they cannot get (and cannot get a card that duplicates it) anywhere else is a definite motivator to attend the tournament. > So if the card turns out to be something that makes much difference in a > metagame, then it will truly be an unfortunate choice for a promo card, > given that supply of them which get distributed to players will likely be > extremely limited. We'll just have to disagree here as I feel a card that has no use, or that duplicates an existing card (or is similar) does not fulfil the intention of a PROMOtional card. I do see your point. And I am concerned about the effects of Meddling. But I will not condem White Wolf for attempting to encourage attendance until I've seen the effects that Meddling actually has - as opposed to the effects we believe we see in the future. If Meddling does prove to have an adverse effect its easily correctable. White Wolf can errata, restrict or ban its use in tournament play, and as always we are free to use whatever house rules we like. (our group has house rules a page long). But without the risk taken the game will not progress. Consider this: Which is a worst case: A. White Wolf promos a powerful new card, ensuring that only a certain number of cards hit the marketplace. If the card has to be restricted or banned only those with the card will be annoyed (and only if they disagree with the decision) and for the most part people will only lose the use of one card in their massive library of cards. The effect on the game a whole is limited by the small release of the card If the card turns out to not be too powerful it could then be included in the next set. or B. White Wolf buts a powerful new card in their next expansion, in starters and boosters and everybody and their dog has ten to twenty copies (if not more) of the card if they like. The card unbalances play dramatically at first until restricted/banned, etc. Now we all have a whack of useless cards in our libraries and the game may suffer the effects of the card potentially driving people away prior to any needed correction. The promotional release is the perfect place (IMO) to try a radical new card as the effects of this card are limited by the nature of the distribution method. Ideally the card won't unbalance play but if it does it can be removed with less commotion than release in a full set would cause. Sorry about the length... -John

John wrote: > > > Promos aren't remotely as evenly distributed as cards in sets are. By > > making a promo significantly different than a normal card, you create a > > fairness issue. > > Fairness aside. The goal of a promo card is to PROMOTE. White wolf wants to > interest and encourage people to attend the Storyline events. Would as many > people come out if they were promised an alternate artwork Blood doll? Maybe not quite as many but it would still motivate people - which allows it to fulfill its goal. It's just a question of balancing priorities. It's not worth a potential fiasco to motivate a few more people. Fred

"John" <verg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:YJH88.37141$2x2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca... > > The only justification I am looking for (in this here instance) is why it > was a > > good idea to make a card that provides a powerful and new ability a > difficult > > to attain promo card. > > Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just > maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can > attain the promotional card. Yes, this is well and good > <snip> they are out there. > > We may not appreciate the effects that Meddling may bring into the game. > This remains to be seen. But to criticize White Wolf for producing effective > (ie successful in promoting the game) promotional cards that create interest > in events is counter productive. However the fact remains that it will be a limited availablity card, therefore to get 4 for a deck will be difficult, perhaps if it was reprinted in a years time in which ever is the next set after Camarilla, then there would be less complaints because: a) its worth going to the promo to get card early and play it b) if you can't get there, there is hope of getting said card in future, the artwork could be changed so the promo is unique Jazzbeaux > > Respectfully, > John > > >

[ quoted text not captured ] No, I'm not. What's the justification for releasing Mariana Gilbert as a promo? [ quoted text not captured ]

On 08 Feb 2002 03:53:45 GMT, Curevei wrote: >Alternate artwork promos (of staple cards) do not create a fairness issue. >And, IME, customers - player/collectors and collectors - value them highly. If the card is valued highly then you still have a fairness issue. But the real issue is not the method of distribution - that seems fairly good spread. It's the number of cards in circulation. I suppose that this card was printed on the rare sheet but was it an R1 an R2 or what? Has anyone seen an uncut sheet for Bloodlines? Andrew

"Andrew S. Davidson" wrote: > > On 08 Feb 2002 03:53:45 GMT, Curevei wrote: > > >Alternate artwork promos (of staple cards) do not create a fairness issue. > >And, IME, customers - player/collectors and collectors - value them highly. > > If the card is valued highly then you still have a fairness issue. The "fairness issue" is about playing the card in future games, not about the value of the card itself. > But the real issue is not the method of distribution - that seems > fairly good spread. Actually, it's extremely unlikely to be. Fred

Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote in news:6F346A0E45EBB929.DD057EBE...@lp.airnews.net: > But the real issue is not the method of distribution - that seems > fairly good spread. It's the number of cards in circulation. I > suppose that this card was printed on the rare sheet but was it an R1 > an R2 or what? Has anyone seen an uncut sheet for Bloodlines? All rare slots were accounted for in BL (and I believe so were uncommons and commons). It's more likely that all promos were printed in a sheet of their own, repeated several times to fill the sheet. Flux

In message <TII88.37698$Jq.19...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>, John <verg...@hotmail.com> writes: >Fairness aside. The goal of a promo card is to PROMOTE. White wolf wants to >interest and encourage people to attend the Storyline events. Would as many >people come out if they were promised an alternate artwork Blood doll? I do >not think so (IMO). While alternate art has some appeal to some type of >collectors its virtually worthless to others. What *can* work is providing fairly unique cards - Dan and Mariana - but making sure that they're still fairly "ordinary". [ quoted text not captured ]

I believe that Peter's question was a good one, and that it deserves an actual answer. I don't think that Meddling of Sensmith is too powerful/needs errata/should be banned. It has the same hindrances that all votes have. It does seem like a very odd choice as a promo only card. I have seen several tournament players get quite frustrated to see that I have a 4 count Toreador with PRE and cel, and that they don't. I can't help but wonder about the unhappy faces a few years from now when a handful of us will be able to prevent a player from replacing cards during any minion phase. I think that a better promotional card for these storyline events would have been: Too Many Crabs + 1 Stealth action Put this card on a vampire you control. The vampire with this card gains 1 capacity during your influence phase. When the capacity of that vampire reaches 12 burn him. Jay Kristoff, V:EKN Prince of Columbus OH PS: anyone want to volunteer to do the art for TMC?

WHOOPS! Immediate errata for Too Many Crabs: >Too Many Crabs >+ 1 Stealth action >Put this card on a vampire you control. The vampire with this card gains 1 >capacity during your influence phase. When the capacity of that vampire >reaches 12 <remove him from the game>. Sorry, I am not here to provide more cheese for the Soul Gem Jay

LSJ wrote: > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > > > LSJ, > > > > As you are probably the only person on this list who has insight to this, you > > might be willing to shed some light on this here card issue. > > Any rules questions? > Any problems you've found in play? Dodging the question is an answer in itself. Thomas

Frederick Scott schrieb: > John wrote: > > > > > Promos aren't remotely as evenly distributed as cards in sets are. By > > > making a promo significantly different than a normal card, you create a > > > fairness issue. > > > > Fairness aside. The goal of a promo card is to PROMOTE. White wolf wants to > > interest and encourage people to attend the Storyline events. Would as many > > people come out if they were promised an alternate artwork Blood doll? > [Sorry for cutting in in the wrong place, but my newsserver doesn't list all the responses in the thread.] Alternate art Blood Dolls might not draw huge crows. Alternate art [insert card you consider a power rare of your choice] would, just as much as a power promo, while still being less unfair toward those who can't/won't attend events. Thomas

>White wolf want people playing and attending events. I see no reason why they wouldn't if they didn't give out unique promos. Meanwhile, I want a fair game. >A new card idea (which of course would have new artwork) as compared to an >old card with just new artwork or a new card that duplicates an existing >card will draw less people. Is this not a clear concept? Have you played CCGs with promos? Let's see: 1) Promos aren't very good marketing. Latest issue of Scrye had 4 promo cards for 4 different games. Most of these are thrown out, another bunch are put on eBay, they sell a few more mags to people who follow those games *already*. The storyline tournaments are largely an existing player base phenomenon. The true draw for those who don't play that often is the storyline format. 2) Promos aren't useful to newbies unless they are tournament level cards and the newbies realize that holding on to them is worthwhile. Promos are a way to turn off newbies. Babylon 5 got a reputation (inaccurate) for being a game where you had to chase promos to compete. People would tell you they wouldn't try B5 because they thought they'd never be able to compete without the promos. 3) What draws people is perceived value. I've played CCGs with alternate artwork promos and ones without. I've seen no evidence that people didn't value the alternate artwork (from a cash aspect, which I trust a lot more than what people say). >Try not to look at the problem from the players point of view. As we all >know we do not make the decision. White Wolf makes the decision based on its >own criteria. I suspect its number one criteria for this promotional card is >to create interest and encourage participation at Storyline events. New >card accomplishes this better than a reworked card. Hands down. First, why would I not *want* to think of it from a player's POV? Promotions only work if players or potential players care about them. As for your conclusion that a new card is a better promotion, I don't agree (obviously). And, you are still ignoring the downside. If you don't care about fairness, then there's no argument here.

"Thomas Pichler" <tom.p...@aon.at> wrote in message news:3C642361...@aon.at... > Frederick Scott schrieb: > Alternate art Blood Dolls might not draw huge crows. Good. I hate crows. -Brian

Thomas Pichler wrote: > > > John wrote: > > > > > > > Promos aren't remotely as evenly distributed as cards in sets are. By > > > > making a promo significantly different than a normal card, you create a > > > > fairness issue. > > > > > > Fairness aside. The goal of a promo card is to PROMOTE. White wolf wants to > > > interest and encourage people to attend the Storyline events. Would as many > > > people come out if they were promised an alternate artwork Blood doll? > > [Sorry for cutting in in the wrong place, but my newsserver doesn't list all the > responses in the thread.] (You should also remove attributions to people who you've snipped entirely from your quoted text - saves confusion.) > Alternate art Blood Dolls might not draw huge crows. Alternate art [insert card > you consider a power rare of your choice] would, just as much as a power promo, > while still being less unfair toward those who can't/won't attend events. I don't think anything less than a foil card would draw huge crows. (They like the shiny things, doncha know?) As for huge crowds, it's still a moot point unless the nature of the promo is going be advertised well in advance. Having it leaked out by means of Usenet once the tournaments start is not really going to get the word out that well. Even then, the difference is likely to be marginal. That said (and with the usual official denials that any card as a "power rare" truly exists), that actually wouldn't be a bad thought in my humble opinion. Fred

John wrote: >>Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can attain the promotional card.>> I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event specifically to get a promo card. Ever. Sure, everyone appreciates promo cards at events, and it makes for a nice memento of the occasion, and everyone appreciates the game company that hands out promo cards, but I have never spoken to anyone, ever, who said "I'm just going to this event to get the promo card." Granted, this is completely anecdotal evidence (as is everything on this newsgroup), but I'm not seeing that "power-promo" = "tournament attendance". People go to tournaments because they like the game and have both the time and money to go. People don't go to tournaments because they may or may not like the game, and don't have either the time or money to go. Promo's, I suspect, rarely, if ever, have an impact upon tournament attendance. >>A promotional card that attains it goal... getting people to an event. And as for the idea that a promotional card should duplicate existing powers or be "new" art... where exactly and in what holy book of cards is this written?>> It is written in the book of "experience with various card games and companies over the years dictates that promos that differ from this format tend to alientate and piss off just as many people as not", which is a pretty long and well regarded book. As Curevei already mentioned elsewhere, Precidence (who made the B5 CCG, a good game that went bad) *constantly* fought battles with their player base over their use of promo cards. The ones that were farily mundane, but fun, variant cards, everyone loved and were perfectly happy with. The ones that were powerful and provided unique abilities caused a great deal of unrest amongst the player base, to the point of driving people away from the game, as well as creating a situation where people would stay away from trying the game, as there was a perception of B5 being a game with "power-promos" that were neccessary for competetive play, but impossible for newer players to get. >>And while not everybody who goes to a storyline tournament is going just for a card... they are out there.>> I suspect that such folks are very few and far between, and that the number of people who will become disgruntled by a company releasing "power-promos" far outweighs the number of folks who go to tournaments specifically for the promo cards. That, and do we *want* people going to tournaments just to get the promo cards? People who do this generally have very little invested in the tournament and often play for a single round and then leave. There was a huge thread recently about just this sort of thing, and the general consensus was that no one liked people who show up at a tournament just to get cards, play one round, and then bail. >>But to criticize White Wolf for producing effective (ie successful in promoting the game) promotional cards that create interest in events is counter productive.>> How does creating a "power-promo" successfully promote the game? Most people going to these tournaments don't know what the promo card does before they get there, and I suspect that the vast majority of them aren't going to the tournament to specifically get the promo card. Critisizing a company, however, for making a very questionable decision in terms of both game design and customer relations is often very productive. Heck, there are those who would say that my (and others with the same opinion) criticism of such things was directly responsible for Dadelus games offering a trade in program for their Flashpoint Shadowfist expansion... [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>What's the justification for releasing Mariana Gilbert as a promo?>> Mariana Gilbert is not a powerful card that provides an unprecidented new ability not reflected elsewhere in the game. Mariana Gilbert is a 4 point vampire with an in clan superior and an in clan inferior. Is there another vampire exactly like Mariana? No, but for 5 points, you can get very similar vampires, and for 4 points, you can also get very similar vampires. Is it nice to have Mariana? Sure--she fits very nicely in a few different deck types, but if you don't have access to her, you can easily replace her with various comperable vampires. Dan Murdock is very similar--he has the exact same capacity and skills as an already existing vampire (Doll Face), and trades having no clan (a minor disadvantage) for a sometimes useful, corner case special ability. And a cool picture. Sure, he is nice to have, but if your opponent plays one in a tournament, you reaction is going to be "Cool! I haven't seen him yet!", rather than "Man, that card is sooooo powerful. Why the hell is it only a promo?" Meddling, however, provides a powerful ability (how powerful is up to deabte--there are those who would claim it provides *too* powerful of an ability, such a perception is problem enough, regardless of whether it is true for a promo card) and it provides an ability that is not reflected elsewhere in the game. Mariana and Dan are interesting but not particularly powerful or neccessary, and fairly mundane. Meddling is both powerful and unusual. Making a card that is both powerful and unusual as a promo is a really good way to irritate one's player base--it makes new players unhappy, as they have no access to such cards. It makes older players unhappy, as they often percieve that their well balanced game environment is being thrown out the window for $$$=success. It is just a bad idea. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > >>What's the justification for releasing Mariana Gilbert as a promo?>> > > Mariana Gilbert is not a powerful card that provides an unprecidented new > ability not reflected elsewhere in the game. > [...] Hmm. I couldn't find any official justifications when I did a search. Please cite your source(s) for my edification, thanks. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3C64532A...@white-wolf.com... > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > > Mariana Gilbert is not a powerful card that provides an unprecidented new > > ability not reflected elsewhere in the game. > > [...] > > Hmm. > I couldn't find any official justifications when I did a search. > Please cite your source(s) for my edification, thanks. > Please cite where any justification was requested for Mariana, other than by yourself (as you are, of course, in a better position to know the answer than any of the rest of us).

[ quoted text not captured ] I was not associated with WotC when they were released, sorry. I had no part in developing, releasing, or justifying either of them. Incidentally, for those who make claims regarding unique abilities being mutually exclusive with promo-only, how did you search your library for a Giant's Blood without using a promo-only card? [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>I couldn't find any official justifications when I did a search. Please cite your source(s) for my edification, thanks.>> There is no official justification, as no one ever requested one. Perhaps if someone felt justification was neccessary, there may have been one. Who knows. The justification I gave was one of rationalization. Such rationalization is supported by the fact that very few, if any, folks were perturbed by the existance of Dan Murdock or Mariana Gilbert, for reasons I mentioned above. This is simply not the case with Meddling of Sensmith. Plenty of folks seem perturbed by the very existance of the card, let alone the fact that it is a promo. What we have here is a situation where there are a good number of people looking for such a justification--which says something in and of itself--when there were not similar folks looking for a justification for Mariana Gilbert. I don't however, expect to see a justification. It couldn't hurt to ask, though. What my belief and hope is, however, is that someone other than you (LSJ) was responsible for both the design of and decision to release this card in the manner it was released. Knowing your track record with the design of and ruling of this game, I find it difficult to conceive that this was the result of your work. I could be wrong, however, and if so, I apologize for the presumption. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>Incidentally, for those who make claims regarding unique abilities being mutually exclusive with promo-only, how did you search your library for a Giant's Blood without using a promo-only card?>> You don't, and you don't worry about it. Such an ability is certainly occasionally effective, but hardly one that is particularly powerful. The effect of Meddling is incredibly powerful, and one that will have a great effect on the game environment as a whole (given enough people buying Meddlings off e-bay for $20.00 each...). I doubt anyone would say the same of Dan Murdock's ability. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3C6458B7...@white-wolf.com... > > Incidentally, for those who make claims regarding unique abilities being > mutually exclusive with promo-only, how did you search your library for > a Giant's Blood without using a promo-only card? > The Barrens, Deal With the Devil, Fragment of the Book of Nod, Elder Library... You just have to search more slowly.

>The justification I gave was one of rationalization. Such rationalization is >supported by the fact that very few, if any, folks were perturbed by the >existance of Dan Murdock or Mariana Gilbert, for reasons I mentioned above. >This is simply not the case with Meddling of Sensmith. Plenty of folks seem >perturbed by the very existance of the card, let alone the fact that it is a >promo. BTW, I am perturbed by the existence of Dan and Mariana. But, I don't consider them at issue given that that was a long time ago and was a decision by a different publisher. Actually, Meddling isn't even what I'm addressing when I rant about bad promos. What I'm addressing is decisions to be made.

Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020208165649...@mb-cl.aol.com... > John wrote: > >>Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just > maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can > attain the promotional card.>> > > I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event > specifically to get a promo card. Ever. Sure, everyone appreciates promo cards > at events, and it makes for a nice memento of the occasion, and everyone > appreciates the game company that hands out promo cards, but I have never > spoken to anyone, ever, who said "I'm just going to this event to get the promo > card." > My Storyline event is a 1 1/2 hour drive away (and I'm not a morning person). I wouldn't be going if it wasn't for the Promo.

>As Curevei already mentioned elsewhere, Precidence (who made the B5 CCG, a >good >game that went bad) *constantly* fought battles with their player base over >their use of promo cards. The ones that were farily mundane, but fun, variant >cards, everyone loved and were perfectly happy with. The ones that were >powerful and provided unique abilities caused a great deal of unrest amongst >the player base, to the point of driving people away from the game, as well >as >creating a situation where people would stay away from trying the game, as >there was a perception of B5 being a game with "power-promos" that were >neccessary for competetive play, but impossible for newer players to get. Never been a big fan of Precedence Entertainment myself. You might be amused that to "solve" the problem of unequal distributions in promos, Precedence is *kind enough* to offer many promos through its on-line store. At a very hefty cost of course... Halcyan 2

Wow, lots of posts. Powerful card? Maybe so. But what is it, it's an action. Can be blocked. Powerful things usually are. What is it more, vote. Usually, even though there are vote cards for the acting minion, there are even more vote cards for the reacting minions. For each action there is at least one counter action. In my experience I personally seem to make actions for which most people use the counter actions but I can't go around crying about it. It is a promo only card, so what? This is a special event which White Wolf invited its players of V:TES to participate in, an event which most likely will have an impact on the game itself, with changes in the Vampire history and possibly coming books. So they hand out a special card for those who want have such an event. You don't have to be a Prince to host an event, I know, I hosted events before I became Prince. If you want a card then start hosting events. If you can't because your're too busy (or lazy if that actually happens to be the case) then you're going without one. So you will have to do like everyone else, buy them from eBay when someone most likely will sell them. Will they be in the game-winning decks even if they are all powerful? Nopes, and I suggest you all read the Malkavian Newsletter for February to see why. Archibald Zimonyi Malkavian Prince of Gothenburg

>Powerful card? Maybe so. But what is it, it's an action. Can be blocked. >Powerful things usually are. What is it more, vote. Usually, even though >there are vote cards for the acting minion, there are even more vote >cards for the reacting minions. Yes, but once again it requires all the other players to play with those specific counters. It forces other players to be reactive and to build decks defensively. It is much easier on the other hand to build an assertive deck relying on cards to get the vote through. >For each action there is at least one counter action. In my experience I >personally seem to make actions for which most people use the counter >actions but I can't go around crying about it. Yes, but to dredge up the Return to Innocence example, yet again, there were also counters. Deflection and Telepathic Misdirection would foil Return to Innocence. But one card (such as Return or Meddling) shouldn't *force* all the other players to pack their decks full of counters. >t is a promo only card, so what? This is a special event which White >Wolf invited its players of V:TES to participate in, an event which most >likely will have an impact on the game itself, with changes in the >Vampire history and possibly coming books. So they hand out a special >card for those who want have such an event. You don't have to be a >Prince to host an event, I know, I hosted events before I became Prince. >If you want a card then start hosting events. If you can't because >your're too busy (or lazy if that actually happens to be the case) then >you're going without one. So you will have to do like everyone else, buy >them from eBay when someone most likely will sell them. Will they be in >the game-winning decks even if they are all powerful? And what if, say, it's because there's not much of a playgroup around? Hope White Wolf is kind enough to send promos to your 4-person or even maybe 1-person storyline tournament? Halcyan 2

"Jay Kristoff" <j...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:<WOT88.29797$s43.8...@typhoon.columbus.rr.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I hardly saw the original as cheese for the gem, I thought it was quite amusing, and may make an interesting trick deck. As you have it now the card is pointless. Can't even use it to get around an obediancing Etrius, so whats the point. Cameron

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > >>Incidentally, for those who make claims regarding unique abilities being > mutually exclusive with promo-only, how did you search your library for > a Giant's Blood without using a promo-only card?>> > > You don't, and you don't worry about it. Such an ability is certainly > occasionally effective, but hardly one that is particularly powerful. I thought someone was complaining about unique abilities being found on promo-only cards. > The effect of Meddling is incredibly powerful, and one that will have a great > effect on the game environment as a whole (given enough people buying Meddlings > off e-bay for $20.00 each...). I doubt anyone would say the same of Dan > Murdock's ability. As always, if there is a problem, it will be addressed. So far, of course, there is no problem. See also the many claims that Rewind Time was broken (which appeared immediately after the card text was avaiable). Rewind Time has failed to require fixing as yet. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > John wrote: > >>Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just > maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can > attain the promotional card.>> > > I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event > specifically to get a promo card. Ever. Me neither. I dare say a number of players have only bothered constructing decks for some tourneys in the past because they wanted to get Dan/Mariana, but afaik all of those actually tried to do well once they were there. [As opposed to the BL pre-release, where one person was specifically there to get the new cards.] > Promo's, I suspect, rarely, if ever, have an impact upon tournament attendance. I'm pretty sure they had some impact at the local "last chance" Dan/Mariana tournament, but again, seems everyone that did show did with a deck and intent to actually do well in the tournament, too. > >>And while not everybody who goes to a storyline tournament is going just for > a > card... they are out there.>> > > I suspect that such folks are very few and far between, and that the number of > people who will become disgruntled by a company releasing "power-promos" far > outweighs the number of folks who go to tournaments specifically for the promo > cards. As is, I'll be going if time permits as I originally planned. Knowing of course that if I can't make it I will be missing out on what will be an impossible [loosely defining impossible as "if I had the money to have the trades people will want for it, I could just go buy it instead] to trade for power-promo card instead of some promo that it might actually be possible to trade for [like alternate art, or like "just another vampire" Mariana] means I'm (once again) not pleased with the direction VTES is taking. > That, and do we *want* people going to tournaments just to get the promo cards? > People who do this generally have very little invested in the tournament and > often play for a single round and then leave. By the looks of it that's what I'll wind up having to do, probably not having time for the entire tournament but not willing to put up with having to try to trade for a fragging power promo. Hopefully if it comes to this, it will be possible to not play a round at all, which at least wouldn't (most likely negatively) influence the course of the tournament. Thomas

Thomas Pichler wrote: > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event > > specifically to get a promo card. Ever. > > Me neither. I dare say a number of players have only bothered constructing decks > for some tourneys in the past because they wanted to get Dan/Mariana, but afaik all > of those actually tried to do well once they were there. ? There are quite a few people going to tournaments for the first time and only because of the promo card. In fact, there are several first-time tournament organizers who are organizing tournaments in order to give their players access to the promo. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>I thought someone was complaining about unique abilities being found on promo-only cards.>> No, no. Someone is complaning about *significant* unique abilities being found on only promo cards. Someone was fairly clear about this in previous posts. Dan Murdock's special ability is almost completely insignificant, in terms of overall play and game environment. Meddling, not so much. >>As always, if there is a problem, it will be addressed. So far, of course, there is no problem.>> I'd like to think that such obvious problems would be avoided before they became problems. >>See also the many claims that Rewind Time was broken (which appeared immediately after the card text was avaiable). Rewind Time has failed to require fixing as yet.>> And see also the many claims that Return to Innocence and Thoughts Betrayed were broken. Such claims were made within virtual minutes of these cards being released. Sadly, it took years to fix them. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>There are quite a few people going to tournaments for the first time and only because of the promo card. In fact, there are several first-time tournament organizers who are organizing tournaments in order to give their players access to the promo.>> I find it difficult to fathom that this is as big of a factor as some folks here seem to be trying to make it--no one knew what the card did before the tournaments were arranged, no one knew what the card did before a week ago, and no one knew what the card did before they decided to run such an event. Most players don't know what the card does before they decide to go to a torunament. Are you honestly trying to tell me that someone, somewhere out their said "Hmm, I have never run a tournament before. If I run this one, my play group will get access to an unknown, possibly good, possibly useless promo, and many of them will come out of the woodwork to come to this tournament that wouldn't normally, simply because I am offering this possibly good, possibly useless mystery card. I shall do that now!" Umm, yeah. [ quoted text not captured ]

Halcyan 2 wrote: >>Never been a big fan of Precedence Entertainment myself. You might be amused that to "solve" the problem of unequal distributions in promos, Precedence is *kind enough* to offer many promos through its on-line store. At a very hefty cost of course...>> I'm right there with you, man. I liked the B5 game--it was a fun clever game with a great license, but between the stupid power promos and the highly questionable last expansion, our player base of 8-10 local players have dwindled to zero of late. Sad. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> ha scritto nel messaggio news:20020208165649...@mb-cl.aol.com... > John wrote: <snip> > I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event > specifically to get a promo card. Ever. Actually, as many as 4 person, coming from very far, will attend at the storyline tournament here in Rome just to get the meddling of semsith. <snip>

Yup, forgot my signature.....:) Emiliano, vekn prince opf Rome > <snip> >

On 09 Feb 2002 16:36:05 GMT, pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote: >Are you honestly trying to tell me that someone, somewhere out their said "Hmm, >I have never run a tournament before. If I run this one, my play group will get >access to an unknown, possibly good, possibly useless promo, and many of them >will come out of the woodwork to come to this tournament that wouldn't >normally, simply because I am offering this possibly good, possibly useless >mystery card. I shall do that now!" Speaking for Austin, most of the new players showed up because of the Storyline aspect. They wanted to influence the WoD storyline, and the promo card was just a bonus. Hell, we saw 2 Ravnos decks out of 14 <g> However that was before the text of Meddline of Semsith hit the net. Dunno if that'll actually increase attendence for later Storyline Tournaments or not, although I know it'll probably convince some veterans to attend as many Storyline tournaments as possible to accumulate as many Meddlings as they can. Ethan Burrow - Prince of Austin saa...@yahoo.com http://whitestar.ddg.com/vtes/

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020209113325...@mb-fs.aol.com... > LSJ wrote: > >>I thought someone was complaining about unique abilities being found > on promo-only cards.>> > > No, no. Someone is complaning about *significant* unique abilities being found > on only promo cards. Someone was fairly clear about this in previous posts. > > Dan Murdock's special ability is almost completely insignificant, in terms of > overall play and game environment. Meddling, not so much. > > >>As always, if there is a problem, it will be addressed. > So far, of course, there is no problem.>> > > I'd like to think that such obvious problems would be avoided before they > became problems. I don't think he's saying that they just release any old card and let our play decide whether or not its overpowered. When Scott (if he's the designer) releases a card he is saying that the card is balanced and that there are, and will be, no problems. > >>See also the many claims that Rewind Time was broken (which appeared > immediately after the card text was avaiable). Rewind Time has failed to > require fixing as yet.>> > > And see also the many claims that Return to Innocence and Thoughts Betrayed > were broken. Such claims were made within virtual minutes of these cards being > released. Sadly, it took years to fix them. Yeah, but we all know those cards were created under WotC by a completely different design team. So far we've seen Sabbat War, Final Nights, and Bloodlines without any card needing errata or banning to reduce its power. I hope we wouldn't have as difficult a time convincing Scott to address a broken card. To date he hasn't given us an opportunity to test him. -Robert rob...@vtesinla.org

In message <3C64EF92...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about: >See also the many claims that Rewind Time was broken (which appeared immediately >after the card text was avaiable). Rewind Time has failed to require fixing >as yet. The claims that Rewind Time were broken were based largely on a number of people initially either misreading the card, outright failing to understand it, or having "Counterspell" reflexes from Magic kick in. Once people apprehended that RT's SR feature could only be played by an untapped vampire (can't Wake, there's no action), the "broken" remarks dwindled rapidly into the distance. And once people realized that you couldn't play RT against an action modifier (pesky card text, again), the "broken" remarks all but stopped -- it's generally more effective to DI the Conditioning, the Freak Drive, and the stealth. However, a far different situation applies with Meddling. I believe that most people have correctly read the card and understand its effect. I have even pointed out that the card does NOT go away when its target is ousted, adding yet another disadvantage to playing Meddling. I probably have a deck or two that would function under the influence of Meddling, but I can't think of many. It's my experience that I generally only have the cards-in-hand for one action at the start of my turn. Since I generally have 4 vampires out, this means that 75% of my game stops dead -- I simply won't have any cards to play. My vampires bleed for 3 at no stealth and get killed, or call a vote that they can't pass, or remain untapped with nothing to do except idle pointlessly (since I haven't been able to cycle to any reaction cards). Similarly, I rarely have more than one Wake in hand at any given time. But many people have seen me play 3 and 4 on a single turn, through cycling reaction, intercept, and combat cards against minions. No longer -- I will only be able to defend against one action, and then I will have an empty hand. Suggestions that I take actions with those "spare vampires" and use the built-in mechanic to remove the card are a laugher, because such cards as Elder Kindred Network, Kindred Coercion, and Delaying Tactics exist... even if the defending deck DOESN'T have vote lock already. DT is even better in this deck than in an Anarch Revolt deck, because there is only one card in play providing the action. DT it once and nobody else can try to remove it, unlike just removing the "2nd" Anarch Revolt. So what do we end up with? A card that says "You don't get to play." I don't like such cards in principle, especially when they can be slotted into an already-effective strategy. -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.

In message <3C64D034...@netg.se>, Archibald Zimonyi <arc...@netg.se> mumbled something about: > >Wow, lots of posts. > >Powerful card? Maybe so. But what is it, it's an action. Can be blocked. The Ventrue have Fortitude, and expect Daring the Dawn to see use. Alternatively, my example uses Forgotten Labyrinth. +3 stealth. Now you must be playing a heavy intercept deck to catch me. >Powerful things usually are. What is it more, vote. Usually, even though >there are vote cards for the acting minion, there are even more vote >cards for the reacting minions. None of the vote cards for reacting minions stands up to Awe/Voter Captivation when played by a 10-cap. Either you have a 10-cap yourself to play Kindred Coercion, you DI the Awe, or you play Delaying Tactics (which just means you get hit with it next turn). I do not like being forced to include 6-8 Delaying Tactics in my deck simply to guarantee that I will be able to play my deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > >>There are quite a few people going to tournaments for the first time and only > because of the promo card. In fact, there are several first-time tournament > organizers who are organizing tournaments in order to give their players access > to the promo.>> > > I find it difficult to fathom that this is as big of a factor as some folks > here seem to be trying to make it--no one knew what the card did before the > tournaments were arranged, no one knew what the card did before a week ago, and > no one knew what the card did before they decided to run such an event. Most > players don't know what the card does before they decide to go to a torunament. I think there's the difference between what Scott's saying and what you're saying. There may be a real draw for these tournaments due to the prospect of getting a unique, interesting promo card that can't be obtained elsewhere. If so, it probably is a thing that works sight unseen. In fact, it may work even *better* when the players don't know what it is because their hopes for it may outstrip the reality, each person wanting a card that enhances their favorite area of the game. By the time they realize it wasn't the type of card they had hoped for, they're already at the tournament. I think you're correct in saying that any particular card is not likely to be a draw for its own sake unless White Wolf advertises what it is beforehand, in whatever literature announces the tournament itself. But I'm thinking Scott was not claiming that players are going to tournaments for the first time for *this* promo card - only for "a promo card". Much as the use of promos for this kind of a purpose disturbs me - especially when there aren't alternate means of getting them, such as SASE offers - I still think he may be right. Fred

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > LSJ wrote: > >>There are quite a few people going to tournaments for the first time and only > because of the promo card. In fact, there are several first-time tournament > organizers who are organizing tournaments in order to give their players access > to the promo.>> > > I find it difficult to fathom that this is as big of a factor as some folks > here seem to be trying to make it--no one knew what the card did before the > tournaments were arranged, no one knew what the card did before a week ago, and > no one knew what the card did before they decided to run such an event. Most > players don't know what the card does before they decide to go to a torunament. Many princes decided to run an event because there would be a promo card available. Many players decided to go to the events to get the promo. The nature of the promo is immaterial to them and their decisions (since they made those decisions without knowing the nature of the promo). > Are you honestly trying to tell me that someone, somewhere out their said "Hmm, > I have never run a tournament before. If I run this one, my play group will get > access to an unknown, possibly good, possibly useless promo, and many of them > will come out of the woodwork to come to this tournament that wouldn't > normally, simply because I am offering this possibly good, possibly useless > mystery card. I shall do that now!" Yes. That's what the players/princes in question have claimed themselves. The world is a big place. It takes many kinds. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > Once people apprehended that RT's SR feature could only be played by an > untapped vampire (can't Wake, there's no action), the "broken" remarks ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > dwindled rapidly into the distance. Wait a minute! When did this get ruled? If you can't use a WwEF to allow for a Rewind Time based on the logic that no action has yet occurred to allow the Wake to allow the RT, then by the same logic, you cannot use a Rewind Time against an action even when untapped. By the time an action exists to allow one to play *ANY* reaction card, be it WwEF, Rewind Time, or any other, then it much be too late to cancel the action. Fred

Peter D Bakija wrote: > >>As always, if there is a problem, it will be addressed. > So far, of course, there is no problem.>> > > I'd like to think that such obvious problems would be avoided before they > became problems. Obvious problems are. Meddling doesn't qualify. > >>See also the many claims that Rewind Time was broken (which appeared > immediately after the card text was avaiable). Rewind Time has failed to > require fixing as yet.>> > > And see also the many claims that Return to Innocence and Thoughts Betrayed > were broken. Such claims were made within virtual minutes of these cards being > released. Sadly, it took years to fix them. Well, that was with a different RT/DT. And you'll forgive the current RT/DT if they don't jump to errata every card that a few people claim is broken before even playing with it (or not, that's up to you, of course). [ quoted text not captured ]

Frederick Scott wrote: > > Derek Ray wrote: > > > > Once people apprehended that RT's SR feature could only be played by an > > untapped vampire (can't Wake, there's no action), the "broken" remarks > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > dwindled rapidly into the distance. > > Wait a minute! When did this get ruled? If you can't use a WwEF to allow Not sure. It's just a clarification. Can't Wake in torpor to play, say, Reform Body (since you can't play reaction cards in torpor). Can't Wake in a master phase to play Rewind (since you can only play reaction cards when another Methuselah's minion is acting). [1.6.3.5] > for a Rewind Time based on the logic that no action has yet occurred to allow > the Wake to allow the RT, then by the same logic, you cannot use a Rewind > Time against an action even when untapped. By the time an action exists to > allow one to play *ANY* reaction card, be it WwEF, Rewind Time, or any other, > then it much be too late to cancel the action. No. There's an action (described on the card played - the acting minion tapped to start it). [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>Obvious problems are. Meddling doesn't qualify.>> Ahh, see. Many disagree here, and see Meddling as an obvious problem. >>Well, that was with a different RT/DT.>> Clearly. Never claimed otherwise. >>And you'll forgive the current RT/DT if they don't jump to errata every card that a few people claim is broken before even playing with it (or not, that's up to you, of course).>> Not not forgiving. Simply disapointed that such a glaring exception has slipped through the cracks. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: >>The nature of the promo is immaterial to them and their decisions (since they made those decisions without knowing the nature of the promo).>> Many have claimed (not you, but others involved in this discussion) that it is good to make "power-promos", as it gets people to want to go to tournaments to get them. As the nature of the promo is immaterial, it stands that making promos that are simply alternate art or slight variations on mundane cards will be just as successful at attracting players to events and organizers to run them. Thus, no need to produce powerful cards that provide significant, unique effects as promos, as folks are going to run and attend tournaments due to promo incentive regardless of the actual card involved. Wouldn't it make sense, then, to insure that future promos be benign, rather than potentially incindiary, given the reaction in just a week to this particular card? >>Yes. That's what the players/princes in question have claimed themselves. The world is a big place. It takes many kinds.>> Crazy. Who woulda thought. I still don't buy it that promos are a significant factor in tournament attendance, but as others claim it is, I don't have much to stand on here. Simply as anecdotal evidence, I am attatched to a fairly large VTES playgroup. When we go to tournaments, it is because we can arrange the time off and have the money to do so. When we can't, it is 'cause we don't. The existance of a promo card has zero bearing on the ability or desire to go to a given tournament--there is a nearby storyline tournament that no one around here can go to do to conflicting events and work/family schedules. After the text of the promo incentive was revealed, a bunch of local players said "Crazy, I'd like to get that stupidly powerful promo card!", but regardless, still no one is going. If the promo card was simply an alternate art version of, say, Tourtured Confession, it wouldn't have made any difference either. We can go or we can't, promos play no role. Promo cards are a fun bonus, but in no way incentive in either direction. But that is just us, I guess. [ quoted text not captured ]

tetragrammaton wrote: > Actually, as many as 4 person, coming from very far, > will attend at the storyline tournament here > in Rome just to get the meddling of semsith. > Check all that appy: [ ] Most of the locals would still have come if there only were an alternate art promo. [ ] You don't really want the 2 guys who wouldn't to disrupt the tournament by bringing "well I do have to play a game eh?"-decks, anyway. [ ] None of those 4 would have come without knowing the awesome power of Meddling of Semsith beforehand. [ ] Those 4 must consider MoS uber-powerful and ultra-valueable to make the trip. [ ] It's not good for a card to be considered uber-powerful by players. [ ] Better start praying MoS isn't as powerful as people seem to think. [ ] Why the hell did WW print something like MoS, anyway? [ ] Next time, foil Freak Drives will do just nicely. Thomas

Robert wrote: >>I don't think he's saying that they just release any old card and let our play decide whether or not its overpowered. When Scott (if he's the designer) releases a card he is saying that the card is balanced and that there are, and will be, no problems.>> Oh, I got that. I just think that this particular instance does not fall under that particular rubric. For whatever reason, this card was released, and it was a mistake, both in the way it was relased (as a promo only card) and in the effect of the card (in that it is overly powerful with an effect greatly outweighing its cost). I completely agree that the last few expansions were very solid and mercifully free of damaging cards. That is why I am so taken aback by this particular instance. >>Yeah, but we all know those cards were created under WotC by a completely different design team. So far we've seen Sabbat War, Final Nights, and Bloodlines without any card needing errata or banning to reduce its power. I hope we wouldn't have as difficult a time convincing Scott to address a broken card. To date he hasn't given us an opportunity to test him.>> Oh, I know. The expansions have been great, solid, and free of problems. I simply don't believe that Meddling is a continuation of this positive trend. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: > > Frederick Scott wrote: > > > > Derek Ray wrote: > > > > > > Once people apprehended that RT's SR feature could only be played by an > > > untapped vampire (can't Wake, there's no action), the "broken" remarks > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > dwindled rapidly into the distance. > > > > Wait a minute! When did this get ruled? If you can't use a WwEF to allow > > Not sure. It's just a clarification. > Can't Wake in torpor to play, say, Reform Body (since you can't play reaction > cards in torpor). > Can't Wake in a master phase to play Rewind (since you can only play reaction > cards when another Methuselah's minion is acting). [1.6.3.5] OK, I'm still confused then. Is what Derek said accurate? Is there some reason that a tapped Time Lord can't react to a carded action taken by another player's minion to first Wake with Evening's Freshness and then, since he can now play reaction cards as if untapped, play a Rewind Time and cancel the action? If so, then by what reasoning? And by what reasoning would that not apply to simply playing a Rewind Time if the Time Lord actually is untapped? Fred

In message <3C657D12...@removethis.com>, Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> mumbled something about: >LSJ wrote: >> > Derek Ray wrote: >> > > Once people apprehended that RT's SR feature could only be played by an ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> Can't Wake in a master phase to play Rewind (since you can only play reaction >> cards when another Methuselah's minion is acting). [1.6.3.5] > >OK, I'm still confused then. Is what Derek said accurate? Is there some reason Yes, it is. I said that Rewind Time's "Sudden Reversal" feature... etc. >that a tapped Time Lord can't react to a carded action taken by another player's >minion to first Wake with Evening's Freshness and then, since he can now play >reaction cards as if untapped, play a Rewind Time and cancel the action? If He certainly can play Wake and then RT against a carded action, yes. He couldn't do it against a Master card being played, though. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <3C657D12...@removethis.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] You can definitely play WWEF to Rewind an Action; no-one's disputing that. What is prohibited is Waking to Rewind a Master card, since there is no action ongoing and Wake lacks Rewind's specific 'usable even though there's no action' text. gomi -- Blood, guts, guns, cuts Knives, lives, wives, nuns, sluts

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3C6568BD...@white-wolf.com... > > And you'll forgive the current RT/DT if they don't jump to errata every card that > a few people claim is broken before even playing with it (or not, that's up to > you, of course). > Forgiven. And you'll forgive the players if we don't, in the future, trust the current RT/DT, after they have "playtested" and subsequently released this particular card.

>OK, I'm still confused then. Is what Derek said accurate? Is there some >reason >that a tapped Time Lord can't react to a carded action taken by another >player's >minion to first Wake with Evening's Freshness and then, since he can now play >reaction cards as if untapped, play a Rewind Time and cancel the action? If >so, then by what reasoning? And by what reasoning would that not apply to >simply >playing a Rewind Time if the Time Lord actually is untapped? First off, I *resent* your usage of the term "Time Lord." Krassimir, Nu, and Synesios are not even in the ballpark compared to the likes of The Doctor and The Master. The True Brujah are not true Time Lords in any sense of the term! Heaven forbid, they don't even use a TARDIS!!! BTW: Back to the topic of Meddling, I'm also in the camp of those who fear that it is overpowered and may really mess things up. HOWEVER, I do agree with LSJ that we should at the very least give it a chance. LSJ made a good point with Rewind Time, so let's stop the bellyaching and *try* Meddling for a little bit. And, if it turns out to be as broken as we all think it is (which it probably will), we'll complain about it *then*. But I do think most people really are jumping the gun right now... Halcyan 2

>LSJ made a good point with Rewind Time, so let's stop the bellyaching and >*try* Meddling for a little bit. And, if it turns out to be as broken as we >all think it is (which it probably will), we'll complain about it *then*. But >I do think most people really are jumping the gun right now... There's a huge difference here. Rewind Time has a highly prohibitive cost, can only be played by three vampires in the game, and it only effects one card ever. You have to play a second to affect a second card, etc. Meddling can be called by any vampire, can only be removed by the same mechanic that puts it into play, effects the target for the remainder of the game or until someone gets the referendum to remove it off, and shuts down the target's ability to play during that time. The first time I saw Rewind Time, I thought "nice card. SR and DI for no master card slot, and it's costed such that they can't totaly stop someone from playing." The first time it was played against me, I was slightly annoyed. The first time I saw Meddling, I thought "that seems a little powerful." Then I read it again - and realized it effects EVERY turn, not just the target's turn. Then I thought "um...they don't like people playing this game anymore." The first time it was played against me, I was unable to play the game. If it hadn't been a tournament, i would've simply walked away from the game - the outcome, for me at least, was quite clear. I was ousted two turns later because the person who played it on me had brujah princes, and i was relying on fortitude to stay alive. Game over. In a friendly game, this is the kind of card that will cause me to leave the table until the person who played it is ousted. AFter all, once I'm rendered unable to play - what's the point of sticking around. Might as well not be there so the game moves that much faster for everyone else - because I'm just going to be bored sitting there watching them play. Fanboy

> None of the vote cards for reacting minions stands up to Awe/Voter > Captivation when played by a 10-cap. Either you have a 10-cap yourself > to play Kindred Coercion, you DI the Awe, or you play Delaying Tactics > (which just means you get hit with it next turn). Wouldn't it be easier to just DI the Meddling? If I'm goign to pay a pool to make sure I don't get made not able to play, I'm going to make absolutely sure it sticks. But you do have the right point - I'm so angered by this card that I'm half inclined to pack 6 Direct Interventions and 8 Delaying Tactics in my next deck - which will of course be a heavy intercept deck. I was entirely unable to play the game after being hit with it at the Austin storyline. There shouldn't EVER be a card that forces people to play with certain other cards. It starts to take away from the fun of the game. Heavily. Anyone here who played that other card game several years ago might remember Necro Summer. The summer where if your deck couldn't deal with Necropotence, you might as well just concede every game, because they were %80 of the tournament scene? Well - looks like we're approaching Meddling Summer. Gentelme, prepare your Direct Interventions. Fanboy

In message <20020209140940...@mb-mn.aol.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> writes: >>>Yes. That's what the players/princes in question have claimed themselves. >The world is a big place. >It takes many kinds.>> > >Crazy. Who woulda thought. I still don't buy it that promos are a significant >factor in tournament attendance, but as others claim it is, I don't have much >to stand on here. There is a reason that non-magazine promos were asked for in the first place. -- James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c. PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti

In message <f99d61c5.02021...@posting.google.com>, texas...@yahoo.com (The Fanboy) mumbled something about: >> None of the vote cards for reacting minions stands up to Awe/Voter >> Captivation when played by a 10-cap. Either you have a 10-cap yourself >> to play Kindred Coercion, you DI the Awe, or you play Delaying Tactics >> (which just means you get hit with it next turn). > >Wouldn't it be easier to just DI the Meddling? That would be just about as effective, I imagine. I prefer to not DI action cards, as this leaves the minion untapped and they can take either another action, or the original action all over again if they have a second card. Obviously, if there aren't enough table votes to fail the Meddling, then I'm going to have to DI the Meddling. In most cases, though, I prefer to DI the action modifier -- since you then can't play a second action modifier of that type, your action generally fails, and your minion doesn't have recourse to a second action. I will usually make exceptions to this for "corner-case" action cards such as Disputed Territory, Far Mastery, and other cards that people likely won't have more than 1 or 2 of in their deck. >If I'm goign to pay a pool to make sure I don't get made not able to >play, I'm going to make absolutely sure it sticks. As I mentioned elsewhere, after the first time someone did that, I would certainly make sure I had 2 Meddlings in hand next time I tried to call one. =) But it should certainly kill the first one. [ quoted text not captured ]

James wrote: >>There is a reason that non-magazine promos were asked for in the first place.>> 'Cause it is incentive to attend a tournament? I don't really understand how promos increase attendance or make it more desireable to go to an event. As I mentioned elsewhere, when I go to a tournament, it is because I have the time and money to go. When I don't, it is 'cause I don't. The existance of a promo card has no bearing whatsoever. Sure, I like getting free cards at events (unique promos or not), but I'm not going to go to an event that I woudn't have gone to anyway just because of a promo give away, and I wouldn't not go to an event that I normally would have because there is no promo give away. Are there actually people out there who are (dare I say) shallow enough to go to a tournament that they would not have otherwise due to a promo give away? Don't these people have more influential factors in their lives that govern their ability to attend such events or not (like families, work, money, transportation issues, etc) such that the existance of a promo is essentially a non issue in terms of "Will I go to this event or not?" I go to tournaments and events 'cause I like the game, I like playing the game, I like the competition, and I like meeting new players (or hanging out with ones I already know). I don't go just to win fabulous cash prizes, nor would I go just to get pre-release cards a week early or just to get a promo card. If there is a promo give away, I happily accept it and think "Cool. Free stuff!", but such a give away isn't going to affect my experience such that I'd be more likely to go to the next tournament if there was another give away, nor would it make me less likely to go to the next tournament if there was not a give away. I'm just not seeing it, still. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Well Fanboy, there are options. You could play Big Vampires with Superior Dominate (doesn't everyone anyway?) and shoot down the votes with Kindred Coercion. Honestly, I don't know what deck type you were playing at the Storyline event but EVERY time Meddling came into play the effects were negligible. In fact, I placed the card on my predator and going to a 6-card hand screwed MY game. Personally I think there's a lot of overreacting going on right now. Reminds me of all the bitching that came about when people first learned of Ian Forrestal's ability. He's *So* Broken people would say. Yet I can count the number of times Uncle Ian has hit the table on one hand, after all these years.. When I read the card text for Meddling of Semsith before actually playing it, I too thought it was Uber-strong. Not thinking so anymore. BernieTime

<berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM> wrote in message news:3c67370a....@netnews.attbi.com... [ quoted text not captured ] There is a difference between Ian Forrestal and Meddling, just as there is a difference between Rewind Time and Meddling. The difference is that the people who complained about Ian and Rewind Time were wrong and their complaints were unfounded. They were also in the minority. Most of the people who have a problem with Meddling are not the people who had problems with Ian and Rewind Time (I certainly had no problem with either... they're both balanced cards, although RT is an annoying kick in the pants), but the people who had problems with RtI, ToRIII, Pulled Fangs, etc. Those cards were broken, and complaints against them were warranted. Regardless of whether or not the current design team had anything to do with those previous broken cards, know that the critics on this newsgroup had a fair bit to do with their fixing, and the brokenness was seen both before and after the cards were used in play. Of course, there are probably some who were against RtI who are on the opposite side of this argument, but the number of people who agree on this issue is probably some sort of sign.

> Anyone here who played that other card game several years ago might > remember Necro Summer. The summer where if your deck couldn't deal > with Necropotence, you might as well just concede every game, because > they were %80 of the tournament scene? > > Well - looks like we're approaching Meddling Summer. Gentelme, > prepare your Direct Interventions. There's one advantage Jyhad still has over Magic. If 80% of decks become Meddling decks... that means potentially a LOT of votes on the table. How often do you think Meddling will actually pass at that rate? Another advantage over magic: no matter how hard this card is, by itself it is far from an INSTANT win. If such decks dominate game, players will forcibly shut them down cross-table. It's not too hard to do, especially since their hand size is reduced. Sure, I'm sitting here with a bigger disadvantage for a while, but if it's so bad as to be unbalancing, well, nobody wants Necro to win AGAIN... Looking at the text of the card, I'd say that the two potentially most aided parties by the card are predator and grandpredator of the person who plays it. If I play it on my prey, and fail to take him out before my predator finishes me off (quite possible, especially since I've made myself quite a cross-table target), predator gains 6 pool and a VP, and takes advantage of the fact that I've slowed down his *new* prey so much to get more quickly. Even if I do oust my prey, I still have to deal with the -1 hand size until I call another political action to burn Semsmith - my predator might take advantage of this by blocking, out-voting, delaying THIS, instead of the original vote. If I play it on my predator, my grandpredator soon becomes my predator, and the benefit of the card is lost, while the penalty still applies, so I'm an even better target for the player who just gained six pool for my lunacy (again, he may now delay, block, etc. my attempts to burn it... what an intriguing way to win) After thinking about it... I'd have to say it's more like Lord of the Pit than Necropotence. Maybe it's not as harsh as the pitlord, but it's not as much of a boon as the 'potence. Lactamaeon "Never, NEVER, skip your draw phase unless the reason starts with N and ends with ecropotence."

In message <20020210214456...@mb-co.aol.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> writes: >Are there actually people out there who are (dare I say) shallow enough to go >to a tournament that they would not have otherwise due to a promo give away? Yes. Attracting players to tournaments with things like Dan Murdoch and Marianna has been done in the past. This is often extra-true of new players. [ quoted text not captured ]

>>Are there actually people out there who are (dare I say) shallow enough to >go >>to a tournament that they would not have otherwise due to a promo give away? > >Yes. Attracting players to tournaments with things like Dan Murdoch and >Marianna has been done in the past. > >This is often extra-true of new players. I don't think that it's as simple as "people attend the tournaments just because the promo is offered." It's not like the promo is the *only* factor, but in many cases where a person is on the fence between going and not going, the promo may very well be the deciding factor to convince the person to go. Which isn't a problem at all IMHO. Halcyan 2

Should that not be: A) Meddling of Semsith is potential a very powerful card. Raille

newq...@rose-hulman.edu (lactamaeon) wrote in message news:<786c1f73.02021...@posting.google.com>... > > Anyone here who played that other card game several years ago might > > remember Necro Summer. The summer where if your deck couldn't deal > > with Necropotence, you might as well just concede every game, because > > they were %80 of the tournament scene? > > > > Well - looks like we're approaching Meddling Summer. Gentelme, > > prepare your Direct Interventions. > <snip> > > After thinking about it... I'd have to say it's more like Lord of the > Pit than Necropotence. Maybe it's not as harsh as the pitlord, but > it's not as much of a boon as the 'potence. > > Lactamaeon > > "Never, NEVER, skip your draw phase unless the reason starts with N > and ends with ecropotence." Ok, it's off-topic, but what the heck was necropotence? Thanks Tobias Deventer

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > John wrote: > >>Because everybody will want said powerful and new ability and maybe... just > maybe... they will decide to attend the promotional event where they can > attain the promotional card.>> > > I dunno, man. I don't know a single person who has ever gone to an event > specifically to get a promo card. Ever. Sure, everyone appreciates promo cards > at events, and it makes for a nice memento of the occasion, and everyone > appreciates the game company that hands out promo cards, but I have never > spoken to anyone, ever, who said "I'm just going to this event to get the promo > card." Me. I not onlyplay on going to two other events simply to get cards, play Vtes and have a good time. I held a Storyline event also. There, now you know at least one player. This will net me 3 cards, one for my collection, and 2 to file away, since I'm not too keen on playing them. Raille

In message <8aa6db00.02021...@posting.google.com>, Tobias <tobiasop...@hotmail.com> writes: >> "Never, NEVER, skip your draw phase unless the reason starts with N >> and ends with ecropotence." > >Ok, it's off-topic, but what the heck was necropotence? It was a card - called Necropotence - that allowed the generation of lots of cards. http://www.magic4you.nu/magic/community/judge/necroarmor.htm Because of Magic's slow card generation relative to V:TES - where you can tear through your deck if you want to/have built it like that - drawing extra cards has always been a Big Thing. [ quoted text not captured ]

> > "Never, NEVER, skip your draw phase unless the reason starts with N > > and ends with ecropotence." > > Ok, it's off-topic, but what the heck was necropotence? > > Thanks > > Tobias > Deventer A Magic card. Enchantment. It cost 3 black to cast. Reads: Skip your draw phase. If you discard a card from your hand, remove that card from the game. (0) {that's an activation cost, since you've apparently not played much if any Magic} Pay one life to set aside the top card of your library. At the beginning of your next discard phase, put that card in your hand. Effects that prevent or redirect damage cannot be used to counter this loss of life. Essentially, a card that breaks one of the most fundamental mechanisms of Magic. In any game where you generally get to draw one card a turn, the potential to draw seven or more is...terrifying. One life per card was not enough of a cost. Necro Summer refers to the time when the full potential of this card dawned on the tournament crowd in Magic. IIRC, about 40-50% of all tournaments were won by necropotence powered decks that summer. They eventually decided to ban the card for most formats, and restrict it in the others.

> Ok, it's off-topic, but what the heck was necropotence? An enchantment that forced you to skip your draw step. During your upkeep, you paid X life, and moved X cards from the top of your library to the side. At the end of your turn, you took those cards into your hand. It's a very efficient way to maintain a card advantage over your opponent, and for a period of several months, was the dominant deck archtype in the game. Fanboy

Thomas Pichler wrote: >[ ] Better start praying MoS isn't as powerful as people seem to think. I doubt it is nearly as powerful as people think. But I do think it was designed to SEEM powerful. Helps the promo aspect, y'know. One of the tricks used to make it seem powerful was to actually make it "extra powerful" (in a sense) but give it a cost to balance its extra effect. Many players will often consider only the powerful effect, while taking inadequate account of the cost. One can have nightmares about Renegade Garous, while failing to consider that he who plays the card is usually destroying himself through pool loss. In the case of Semsith, the cost to the player is less than that to the victim. But that is as it should be. Conservative Agitation has no extra cost, but can cost your victim 4 pool. ConAg is arguably a better option for ousting your prey than Semsith,, for a wide number of reasons. For one thing, you need vote-lock to keep Semsith in play, whereas ConAg is irreversible once you push it through. For another, you cannot be too sure it will have much effect on your victim. Depending on the design of his deck, he may be minimally effected. You may even induce him to spend less effort attacking his prey, and leave more minions untapped for blocking you, which is not what you want.

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote in message news:<20020210214456...@mb-co.aol.com>... > I'm just not seeing it, still. Well, I have noticed that for the most part in my dealings with the current/ex-Ithaca crowd (and especially you, Peter) that there is definitely less of an emphasis on having lots of cards available, rather than having cards you want to build the decks you like the most (or are currently highly interested in). Which is probably influencing your take on this. On the other hand, here in Minnesota, virtually everyone wants to be a collector, and they have to have one of each card that they can get their hands on, won't trade away a card if they have only one copy (no matter if it's only useful in multiples, like, say, Derange or whatever). So anyway, pretty much everyone does this, even if they're nowhere near close to completing "a set" (whatever that is). I can guarantee you that there are people here that would go to a tournament just to get a unique promo card that they can't get elsewhere. And yes, it's kind of sad, IMO, but getting more people to play competitively isn't all bad either. This weekend, I went to the Madison Storyline tournament (had a great time, btw, and am anxiously anticipating the tournament report in order to comment on it. Placed 6th, and I am (as always) Cardano's bitch. I almost certainly would have gone anyway, as it's my hometown, got to see my family, etc. but I think there was some extra effort by some of the other Minnesota players to make it down for the tournament because of the promo. So yeah, I agree with you that it's weird, but I definitely see this sort of thing around. Seems like 'Fist does it a lot, too...though generally the promo cards aren't nearly as huge as Meddling is. Xian

"Nystulc" <nys...@cs.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:20020211135416...@mb-fk.news.cs.com... > Thomas Pichler wrote: <snip> > In the case of Semsith, the cost to the player is less than that to the > victim. But that is as it should be. Conservative Agitation has no extra > cost, but can cost your victim 4 pool. Conservative agitation is a pain when you remain 1 VS 1, since you'll be forced to damage yourself. On the other hand, MoS would be still quite powerful, above all in such a 1 vs 1 situation. Just my thought Emiliano, v:ekn Prince of Rome <snip>

Xian wrote: >>So yeah, I agree with you that it's weird, but I definitely see this sort of thing around. Seems like 'Fist does it a lot, too...though generally the promo cards aren't nearly as huge as Meddling is.>> Yeah, I still think it is a pretty weird concept that someone would go to a tournament that they wouldn't have otherwise just to get a promo card. I mean, if they can afford the time and money to go, and can get there, wouldn't they go anyways? I just don't understand. But that is me. Yeah, Fist has promo cards, but I have been playing for a long time, and haven't run into that many, in terms of tournament incentive. The most buff Fist promo ever was the New White Ninja (who is powerful, sure, but very expensive), and she was a give away from buying the players guide originally, and at this point, she just gets given away by the handfull to anyone who shows up at any event. [ quoted text not captured ]

Raille wrote: >>Me. I not onlyplay on going to two other events simply to get cards, play Vtes and have a good time. I held a Storyline event also.>> You are honestly telling me that you would not have gone to the other two tournaments anyway, if there wasn't a promo give away? Why not? Too expensive? Too far away? Not enough time? If any of these are the reason, how does getting a free card nullify these reasons? If there were no reasons to prevent you from going, why wouldn't you have gone anyway? >>There, now you know at least one player.>> I'm just not seeing it. Sure, getting the card is good and all, but you really would not have gone to these tournaments but for the promo card? [ quoted text not captured ]

> In the case of Semsith, the cost to the player is less than that to the > victim. But that is as it should be. Conservative Agitation has no extra > cost, but can cost your victim 4 pool. ConAg is arguably a better option for > ousting your prey than Semsith,, for a wide number of reasons. True - it doesn't inflict direct pool loss. But, if I've got vote lock (which is generally a variable of who else is at the table more than deck construction - most political decks are designed to get vote lock), and I have to worry about getting my votes on the table because either predator or prey is playing dedicated intercept - and I know I can pass the next vote, and I've got the Daring the Dawn in my hand, guess which one I'd choose. I'd Meddle the intercept deck. Let him try to stop me cold now - he has enough cards in his hand to block one political action, play through the resulting combat - and he's done for the turn. Meanwhile, I've got one less card in my hand. Very few decks suffer that badly from one less card in their hand - and those that do are generally Rube Goldberg decks that are constantly cycling through 5 or 6 different kinds of moving parts. The vote deck only needs two types of cards to work: referendums and Vote Push (sometimes they don't even need that). If you shut down the person who can block your actions - the push will never jam your hand, and you're free to steamroll them off the table. Vote lock means it doesn't leave until you're ready to let it go. Your only X-Factor is making sure you've got the card(s) to survive the resulting combat from the one action that gets blocked in a turn. If both predator and prey are blocking you easily - go for the Con Ag (preferably to oust one or the other), but intercept decks don't seem that common. Tzimice, Ravnos, and Ahrimane walls are totally hamstrung by this card. The two decks most hampered by Meddling are highly reactive decks (the aforementioned walls, for example) and rush decks (one action a turn = never ousting). It will slow down, but not cripple, your standard S&B deck, bruise bleed becomes so tooloboxy that it either fights or bleeds - that's a big slowdown, but it doesn't stop you cold. Vote decks only marginally notice, unless they've weenie politics, and then they simply run out of cards each turn. If a rush deck depends on transient rush, then they have no turn unless they have that rush card in their hand after their master phase. Intercept decks get to block one action, maybe two, before they're sitting ducks. Sadly - these are the two deck types I enjoy playing. This means that whenever the card comes out - I can't play. This is not doing much to encourage my support of the product. Fanboy

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > Umm, yeah. > Yeah. I ran my first tourneyment just for the Storyline event. Raille

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > 'Cause it is incentive to attend a tournament? > > I don't really understand how promos increase attendance or You don't have to understand it, just accept the fact that it has happened. Raille

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > Raille wrote: > >>Me. I not onlyplay on going to two other events simply to get cards, > play Vtes and have a good time. I held a Storyline event also.>> > > You are honestly telling me that you would not have gone to the other two > tournaments anyway, if there wasn't a promo give away? Probably only one of the other two. > Why not? Too expensive? Too far away? Not enough time? If any of these are the > reason, how does getting a free card nullify these reasons? If there were no > reasons to prevent you from going, why wouldn't you have gone anyway? Variation of Not enough time. The reason for going, means time away from the family and I burn up a LOT of brownie points. The Promo card gained is iceing on the cake. I love simply playing, but the long drive to go is harder to bargin out on the home from, however having a rather understanding wife, the addition of the Promo card, gains me the edge, which I burn to attend the game(s). > >>There, now you know at least one player.>> > > I'm just not seeing it. Sure, getting the card is good and all, but you really > would not have gone to these tournaments but for the promo card? Maybe, maybe not. Like I said going without the Promo is a hard sell, here at Daves House. Raille

Peter D Bakija wrote: > The effect of Meddling is incredibly powerful, and one that will have a great > effect on the game environment as a whole (given enough people buying Meddlings > off e-bay for $20.00 each...). I doubt anyone would say the same of Dan > Murdock's ability. Have you seen any for sale on Ebay Yet? Raille

Raille wrote: >>Have you seen any for sale on Ebay Yet?>> Not yet. Give it time. [ quoted text not captured ]

Raille wrote: >>Maybe, maybe not. Like I said going without the Promo is a hard sell, here at Daves House.>> Kooky. So you can use "But there is a promo card!" as a legitimate excuse? Man. My wife would never buy that :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] That actually tends to support what Peter is saying. Had it been a card valued in the moderate range, I expect we would have. The fact that no one has chosen to put his card up for auction very quickly suggests that they're rather coveted by those who own them so far. If so, demand is likely to outstrip supply and we'll likely see some truly stunning prices for a single slab of cardboard - at least at first. Of course, all this is mere speculation. Reality frequently has a way of doing whatever I least expect. (And often screams, "Nyuk, nyuk!!!", after doing it to me...) Fred

Peter D Bakija wrote: > > Raille wrote: > >>Maybe, maybe not. Like I said going without the Promo is a hard sell, > here at Daves House.>> > > Kooky. So you can use "But there is a promo card!" as a legitimate excuse? Man. > My wife would never buy that :-) > Well I have a half/gamer for a wife. And while it maybe kooky, I ain't complaining! Raille

>>>Me. I not onlyplay on going to two other events simply to get cards, >play Vtes and have a good time. I held a Storyline event also.>> > >You are honestly telling me that you would not have gone to the other two >tournaments anyway, if there wasn't a promo give away? > >Why not? Too expensive? Too far away? Not enough time? If any of these are >the >reason, how does getting a free card nullify these reasons? If there were no >reasons to prevent you from going, why wouldn't you have gone anyway? I'll admit that this month, I'll be going to a lot more tournaments than I normally go to in a month (2 vs. a typical 0). Truth be told, my primary motivating factor is the fact that they are storyline tournaments (go !Tremere!). The secondary factor would be for the promo. If both of these two factors were not present, I probably wouldn't make (or have made) the extra effort to go to the tourneys (but I'm glad I went to the Madison one so far...). Halcyan 2

Peter D Bakija wrote: > LSJ wrote: > >>Yes. That's what the players/princes in question have claimed themselves. > The world is a big place. > It takes many kinds.>> > > Crazy. Who woulda thought. I still don't buy it that promos are a significant > factor in tournament attendance, but as others claim it is, I don't have much > to stand on here. > > Simply as anecdotal evidence, I am attatched to a fairly large VTES playgroup. > When we go to tournaments, it is because we can arrange the time off and have > the money to do so. When we can't, it is 'cause we don't. The existance of a > promo card has zero bearing on the ability or desire to go to a given > tournament--there is a nearby storyline tournament that no one around here can > go to do to conflicting events and work/family schedules. For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. (December's numbers are artificially low due to the number of BL pre-release events being held at the beginning of that month, however.) -- 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 message <3C693A9F...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- wolf.com> writes: >For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN >tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 >Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. Out of interest, do you have the numbers for January and February 2001, just to prove (or not) that these things don't just happen to be related to the fact that we always triple the number of tournaments held in February. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > In message <3C693A9F...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ <vtesrep@white- > >For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN > >tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 > >Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. > > Out of interest, do you have the numbers for January and February 2001, > just to prove (or not) that these things don't just happen to be related > to the fact that we always triple the number of tournaments held in > February. I switched over to tha Yahoo! calendar around January 2001, so not all of January's data is available, I'm afraid. The Calendar shows 10 events for January and 31 for February 2001 (and 0 for November and December 2000). Perhaps Todd still has those records... -- 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/

>For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN >tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 >Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. >(December's numbers are artificially low due to the number of BL pre-release >events being held at the beginning of that month, however.) I'm sure this is beating a dead horse by now, but here's my take on the storylines and "marketing". A: Storylines will draw more people than normal tournaments. Having storylines is more desirable to people than having normal tournaments. B: The primary reason will be the idea that the players may have some influence on the direction of the WoD and/or (indirectly) the CCG. C: Having a hard to get promo is a draw. D: Having the promo be a new card versus some other hard to get promo version of an existing card might have some trivial effect on attendance. I've never argued that storylines wouldn't be more popular or that having a promo unique to them wouldn't be a draw (unlike Peter). I only suggest that the effect of one sort of promo over another is not worth creating a play imbalance due to (additional) inequities in availability should the promo be useful. There's one other comment I'd like to make about marketing and promos. Not so much a rant against promos, even though they are primarily only of interest to existing players. But, there are far better ways to market CCGs. Best thing to do is gather a group of volunteers and have them run frequent *demos* and tournaments and compensate them for their efforts. Best visibility is having games going on in stores and having events at cons. These happen anyway, though I don't see that many demos (kind of a pain in the ass to demo). But, once you have a volunteer structure in place, you have a lot more of it going on and greater consistency. Though usually prohibitively expensive, having the company give away *starters* at demos is the way to go if feasible.

In message <f99d61c5.02021...@posting.google.com>, The Fanboy <texas...@yahoo.com> writes: >But, if I've got vote lock (which is generally a variable of who else >is at the table more than deck construction - most political decks are >designed to get vote lock), And when two irresistible forces sit down at the same table... -- James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c. PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti

>I've never argued that storylines wouldn't be more popular or that having a >promo unique to them wouldn't be a draw (unlike Peter). I only suggest that >the effect of one sort of promo over another is not worth creating a play >imbalance due to (additional) inequities in availability should the promo be >useful. You know, I really don't think that promos will be *that* difficult to get even if you don't make the storyline tourney. At the Madison Tourney, the Prince had a really thick stack of undistributed promos (which I suppose he gets to distribute at later tournaments at his discretion). If every tournament organizer gets that many copies of Meddling, you should probably be able to get a copy if you manage to attend any tournament in the next year or so... Halcyan 2

LSJ wrote: >>For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. (December's numbers are artificially low due to the number of BL pre-release events being held at the beginning of that month, however.)>> Which is fair, but the vast increase in tournaments in February could easily be attributed to the fact that people like being a part of a well organized, well publicized global event like a Storyline tournament (which helps to draw in the roleplaying crowd as well as the less hard core competetive crowd, due to the non sanctioned storyline format), which strikes me as far more of an enticement than a promo card give away. But that is just me. I bet there is also an upswing of tournaments (compared to "normal") when pre-release events are available to run (which only gets you new cards a week early) that don't include unique promo give aways. And I bet if there were another well organized, well publicized global event, such as another Storyline tournament, say, in 6 months, and it did not have a unique promo give away, there would still be a substantial upswing in the number of tournaments run in that given month. But as this is all pure speculation, it is completely moot. That, and this brings us back to the idea that the promo could very well have been something mundane, like the foil Freak Drive someone mentioned, or a mostly inconsequential new vampire or something, as all of those 74 storyline tournaments were organized before anyone knew what the particular promo card was, as opposed to some new, arguably very powerful and highly significant card with unique abilities. There still would have been those 74 Storyline tournaments. Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/bakija6 "These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!" -Zim.

LSJ wrote: > > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > Simply as anecdotal evidence, I am attatched to a fairly large VTES playgroup. > > When we go to tournaments, it is because we can arrange the time off and have > > the money to do so. When we can't, it is 'cause we don't. The existance of a > > promo card has zero bearing on the ability or desire to go to a given > > tournament--there is a nearby storyline tournament that no one around here can > > go to do to conflicting events and work/family schedules. > > For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN > tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 > Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. > (December's numbers are artificially low due to the number of BL pre-release > events being held at the beginning of that month, however.) Oh, comparing February to any month is obviously meaningless evidence in terms of finding any direct evidence of the lure of a promotional card. Clearly, White Wolf is promoting an entire package with its Storyline Tournaments, including not just the card but the also tournament concept (clan-based), the opportunity to have your game featured in a book, and focusing a marketing campaign of sorts around getting out the word that these things are going on. So you can't really know what the draw is, exactly, from looking at such numbers. Not that you're wrong about your ultimate point. I just thought that was a particularly poor argument, even as anecdotal evidence goes. Fred

Halcyan 2 wrote: > You know, I really don't think that promos will be *that* difficult to get even > if you don't make the storyline tourney. At the Madison Tourney, the Prince had > a really thick stack of undistributed promos (which I suppose he gets to > distribute at later tournaments at his discretion). If every tournament > organizer gets that many copies of Meddling, you should probably be able to get > a copy if you manage to attend any tournament in the next year or so... Don't bet on it. What a tournament organizer does with his stack of unused cards will vary greatly. And this is *still* no help for people who live hundreds of miles away from the nearest stack, no matter how benevolent its holder might be. I still remember stories of people gushing about how easy it was to get hold of Marianna and Dan at tournaments in New York while no one had one to spare in the Bay Area. (If they were ever handed out at any tournament around there, I never heard of it. Though granted, I wasn't playing Jyhad when they were first published.) That was an extremely frustrating thing and a good reason companies like White Wolf should avoid such types of promos like the plague. Like Ian, I don't disagree that promo cards are a draw - just that their overall effect is highly questionable if the goal is to create *good* feeling about your game... Fred

Peter D Bakija wrote: > That, and this brings us back to the idea that the promo could very well have > been something mundane, like the foil Freak Drive someone mentioned, or a > mostly inconsequential new vampire or something, as all of those 74 storyline > tournaments were organized before anyone knew what the particular promo card > was, as opposed to some new, arguably very powerful and highly significant card > with unique abilities. There still would have been those 74 Storyline > tournaments. To this, I have to concur. There would have been 74 story line events regardless of the utility of the card. Raille

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote in message news:<20020209113605...@mb-fs.aol.com>... > LSJ wrote: > >>There are quite a few people going to tournaments for the first time and only > because of the promo card. In fact, there are several first-time tournament > organizers who are organizing tournaments in order to give their players access > to the promo.>> > > I find it difficult to fathom that this is as big of a factor as some folks > here seem to be trying to make it--no one knew what the card did before the > tournaments were arranged, no one knew what the card did before a week ago, and > no one knew what the card did before they decided to run such an event. Most > players don't know what the card does before they decide to go to a torunament. > Are you honestly trying to tell me that someone, somewhere out their said "Hmm, > I have never run a tournament before. If I run this one, my play group will get > access to an unknown, possibly good, possibly useless promo, and many of them > will come out of the woodwork to come to this tournament that wouldn't > normally, simply because I am offering this possibly good, possibly useless > mystery card. I shall do that now!" > > Umm, yeah. Ermmm Peter? Yes, there IS someone out there like that - namely me. I'll dilute that statement by saying that the local situation really cried out for a 'centralised' event in my area - since THE local store that tied together 2 seperate play groups, and offered space to play went belly-up, and people got scattered to the wind (and yes, we'd been discussing appointing a prince from this region for a while before we even heard the whole Storyline thing.) So, the Storyline event was the 'clincher' - not enough reason in and of itself, but enough reason, given the previous circumstances. The thoughts you describe happened almost literally in my head. It's working, too. Since then, I've been in touch with players I did not know the existence of, and VTES has taken a big upswing again. Now only to convince those pesky 4CL players that it CAN be fun to attend a NCL Storyline event... ;) Greets, Tobias Deventer

cur...@aol.com (Curevei) wrote in message news:<20020212150747...@mb-mj.aol.com>... > >For further anecdotal evidence (to the other side), there were 35 VEKN > >tournaments sanctioned for January. There are 103 for February (including 74 > >Storyline tournaments). Each of December and November 2001 had 31. > >(December's numbers are artificially low due to the number of BL pre-release > >events being held at the beginning of that month, however.) > > I'm sure this is beating a dead horse by now, but here's my take on the > storylines and "marketing". Here are the local answers, as far as I can see them as Prince/organizer. > A: Storylines will draw more people than normal tournaments. Having storylines > is more desirable to people than having normal tournaments. Part one of this statement: True, since it is 'new' and 'fresh', more laid-back and spurring some new creativity. Second part: unsure. > B: The primary reason will be the idea that the players may have some influence > on the direction of the WoD and/or (indirectly) the CCG. A strong draw, from what I see here. > C: Having a hard to get promo is a draw. Yes. Even if only as memento, a Deal With the Devil with alternate art. > D: Having the promo be a new card versus some other hard to get promo version > of an existing card might have some trivial effect on attendance. As long as it differs a little from all other cards, it's worthwile. Greets, Tobias Deventer

Tobias wrote: >>So, the Storyline event was the 'clincher' - not enough reason in and of itself, but enough reason, given the previous circumstances. The thoughts you describe happened almost literally in my head.>> No, no, you misunderstand me. I'm not talking about the Storyline event--I'm specifically talking about the existance of a promo card. The situation you present indicates that the organized *Storyline* event was the draw for a tournament in your particular area. I accept that. Would you not have held that Storyline event if there hadn't been a promo give away? >>It's working, too. Since then, I've been in touch with players I did not know the existence of, and VTES has taken a big upswing again.>> Organized international events that are attaractive to players (like Storyline events, for instance) have that effect. What I am not seeing, however, is that the existance of a promo card has much bearing on the situation. And that the particular utility and ability of the promo card has even less bearing on the situation. I completely accept that players and/or organizers were sucked in by the existance of a Storyline event, and found it appealing enough that people were running and attending tournaments that they might not have had it not been attatched to a well organized, well publicized, international event, like the Storyline event. It seems likely to me that: A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give away, just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. B) If there had to be a promo give away, and that promo give away had been, say, a Foil Freak Drive or a new 6 point Toreador with PRE, AUS, pot, cel and a goofy corner case special ability, it would have been just as successful, just as many would have run, and just as many folks would have attended. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 13 Feb 2002 23:51:27 GMT, pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote: >Tobias wrote: >>>So, the Storyline event was the 'clincher' - not enough reason in and >of itself, but enough reason, given the previous circumstances. The >thoughts you describe happened almost literally in my head.>> > >No, no, you misunderstand me. I'm not talking about the Storyline event--I'm >specifically talking about the existance of a promo card. The situation you >present indicates that the organized *Storyline* event was the draw for a >tournament in your particular area. I accept that. Would you not have held that >Storyline event if there hadn't been a promo give away? > >>>It's working, too. Since then, I've been in touch with players I did >not know the existence of, and VTES has taken a big upswing again.>> > >Organized international events that are attaractive to players (like Storyline >events, for instance) have that effect. > >What I am not seeing, however, is that the existance of a promo card has much >bearing on the situation. And that the particular utility and ability of the >promo card has even less bearing on the situation. > >I completely accept that players and/or organizers were sucked in by the >existance of a Storyline event, and found it appealing enough that people were >running and attending tournaments that they might not have had it not been >attatched to a well organized, well publicized, international event, like the >Storyline event. > >It seems likely to me that: > >A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give away, >just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. Back when Dan Murdock first came out as a Promo, you could only get it by mailing in the coupon from the back of a specific Vampire novel. Had the coupon not been the only way to obtain those cards (at the time), I would not have bought the book. Didn't matter that the book was marginal in content. Never underestimate Greed or Collectors >B) If there had to be a promo give away, and that promo give away had been, >say, a Foil Freak Drive or a new 6 point Toreador with PRE, AUS, pot, cel and a >goofy corner case special ability, it would have been just as successful, just >as many would have run, and just as many folks would have attended. I agree with this, though don't buy into the idea of reprints with different art. Bernie [ quoted text not captured ]

Well, I played in the PHX tournament and every single deck had the promo card added (the tourney organizer said that we should do this). My friend played an Assamite deck and had this card played on him on the second turn. He had to pull out thetmes to get rid of it (it was obviously not played by a vote deck). There *were* vote strong decks at the tournament and none of them either played it, or used it successfully. To be honest anybody I see playing meddlings in a tournament is likely to spanked real fast. I mean REAL fast. That in itself is going to be a control. Its hard to defend when your voters are in torpor from cross table rush. If I was a rusher on the other side of the table from a meddling deck I would make it my mission (barring killing my prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could play one on me. I am not afraid of this card enough to change my deck building one iota. Sure, if my predator is a meddling deck, and I am a combat deck I expect to take some hurting. I also expect to spend all my time going backwards, and very little time bleeding my prey. I would do everything to help the meddling decks predator. The very mechanics of the multiplayer game work against the card. Also it will never ever instantly kill anyone (the obvious reason for issues with return to innocence for instance). It will be a large pain in the arse, but not an broken card or a game winner by any stretch!

> I mean REAL fast. That in >itself is going to be a control. Its hard to defend when your voters >are in torpor from cross table rush. If I was a rusher on the other >side of the table from a meddling deck I would make it my mission >(barring killing my prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could >play one on me. Well, if he just played it, it's rather unlikely that he'll be able to play another one anytime soon. Unless he's playing Giovanni (or some other NEC clan), Reinforcements, Sargon Fragment, and/or just threw Carlotta in the crypt. In addition, you'd think that it would be nicer to have it out without targeting you (because then they can't even fetch it from the ash heap and play it again). Halcyan 2

swcrusader wrote: > > Well, I played in the PHX tournament and every single deck had the > promo card added (the tourney organizer said that we should do this). > My friend played an Assamite deck and had this card played on him on > the second turn. By the way, I was the culprit in this, too. I drew my Meddling in my opening hand and had a 3-cap out on the first turn. (I went third that game.) Played it without a dissenting vote. I'm not sure if it really had much effect on the Assamite combat deck or not. The whole game, the Assamites were unable to do anything to be because I never ran out of combat-ends cards of one sort or another. Meddling probably wouldn't have affected that point. > He had to pull out thetmes to get rid of it (it was > obviously not played by a vote deck). I think he could have called the vote earlier had he wanted to and felt he had a good opportunity to. CJ, his grandprey (my prey) had Kite out on the second turn and either he or CJ owned the edge on some of his turns. By all appearances, CJ probably would have happily voted to burn the meddling without demanding any concessions or probably even giving it a second thought. When the Meddling *did* burn, I wasn't at all unhappy either. I got my seventh card back in hand. Both effects "felt" minor and I'm very unsure of who was actually hurt more from the deal. Of course, it didn't really stay on the board long enough to draw much of a conclusion. Fred

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote in message news:<20020213185127...@mb-me.aol.com>... > Tobias wrote: > >>So, the Storyline event was the 'clincher' - not enough reason in and > of itself, but enough reason, given the previous circumstances. The > thoughts you describe happened almost literally in my head.>> > > No, no, you misunderstand me. I'm not talking about the Storyline event--I'm > specifically talking about the existance of a promo card. The situation you > present indicates that the organized *Storyline* event was the draw for a > tournament in your particular area. I accept that. Would you not have held that > Storyline event if there hadn't been a promo give away? Ahhh - indeed. You expressed yourself clearly, my response did not go into the extra level of cranial activity. Would I not have held the event? Tough call to make, as I know that the existence of the promo was a slight boost to make an affirmative decision, and I was at that time see-sawing rather a lot. In the end, I guess I still would have, because the major draws were the 'fun' aspect (a little lighter-hearted than most straight tourneys), and the 'influence storyline' aspect. The promo card pushed it form the realm of... "Hmmm, ok, will be fun" to "heck, let's do that, make a lot of people happy, maybe I won't play (having to judge and all), but it'll be fun anyways, and I'll get one of those cards (whatever silly thing they might be) for my own as well." Where, for me, it was not really neccessary, for some others it may have been. > > >>It's working, too. Since then, I've been in touch with players I did > not know the existence of, and VTES has taken a big upswing again.>> > > Organized international events that are attaractive to players (like Storyline > events, for instance) have that effect. 3 weeks previously, there was a tourney in Tilburg (which was well-run, nothing wrong with it), but, besides me and my faithful primogen, no-one crawled out of the woodworks. Now, they have. (Tilburg is a 2 hour drive - almost negligable). Storyline does offer a 'plus', yes. > > What I am not seeing, however, is that the existance of a promo card has much > bearing on the situation. And that the particular utility and ability of the > promo card has even less bearing on the situation. > > I completely accept that players and/or organizers were sucked in by the > existance of a Storyline event, and found it appealing enough that people were > running and attending tournaments that they might not have had it not been > attatched to a well organized, well publicized, international event, like the > Storyline event. > > It seems likely to me that: > > A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give away, > just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. Think not. At least the amount of players attending would have been lower. > B) If there had to be a promo give away, and that promo give away had been, > say, a Foil Freak Drive or a new 6 point Toreador with PRE, AUS, pot, cel and a > goofy corner case special ability, it would have been just as successful, just > as many would have run, and just as many folks would have attended. That is probably true. Tobias Deventer

Peter D Bakija wrote: > A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give away, > just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. As stated before, some (>2) people are running tournaments solely for the reason of getting (or making available to their players) the (then undisclosed) promo-only card. Similarly some players planned to attend solely to get said promo card. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3C6B9BC4...@white-wolf.com... > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give away, > > just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. > > As stated before, some (>2) people are running tournaments solely for the > reason of getting (or making available to their players) the (then > undisclosed) promo-only card. Similarly some players planned to attend > solely to get said promo card. > Is that supposed to be a good thing? Or does that just go to show how over-powerful the promo is?

In message <_QSa8.59673$AV5.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>, Chris Berger <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: >> As stated before, some (>2) people are running tournaments solely for the >> reason of getting (or making available to their players) the (then >> undisclosed) promo-only card. Similarly some players planned to attend >> solely to get said promo card. >> >Is that supposed to be a good thing? Or does that just go to show how >over-powerful the promo is? Erm, I believe that the point of this particular sub-thread has been about whether (potentially unknown) promos draw people to tournaments. YMMV. [ quoted text not captured ]

Chris Berger wrote: > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message > > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > > A) If all other things were identical, but there was no promo card give > away, > > > just as many Storyline tournaments would have been run and attended. > > > > As stated before, some (>2) people are running tournaments solely for the > > reason of getting (or making available to their players) the (then > > undisclosed) promo-only card. Similarly some players planned to attend > > solely to get said promo card. > > > Is that supposed to be a good thing? It's just a fact. If you want it to be a negative, fine. > Or does that just go to show how > over-powerful the promo is? Read the statement again to find out. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <_QSa8.59673$AV5.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>, Chris > Is that supposed to be a good thing? Or does that just go to show how > over-powerful the promo is? I don't think it's a reflection on how powerful people thing Semsith is, but rather because this is the only way to get Semsith. If the promo card was anything else, say a foil or alternate art, there would still be a desire to go to the tournaments, because this is the only way to get the card. -Sam

Tobias wrote: >>3 weeks previously, there was a tourney in Tilburg (which was well-run, nothing wrong with it), but, besides me and my faithful primogen, no-one crawled out of the woodworks. Now, they have. (Tilburg is a 2 hour drive - almost negligable).>> Why not? That makes no sense to me. If people are willing to go to a tournament (i.e. they have access to transportation, funds, and time) to get a promo card, why wouldn't they go if there was no promo card? Is it simple greed? Are we stuck having to appeal to the lowest common denominator--bribery? >>Think not. At least the amount of players attending would have been lower.>> (due to a lack of promo support). Honestly speaking, I think that is really sad. Why are people more likely to show up for a tournament because they get free stuff? Isn't the draw of a good game of VTES enough? [ quoted text not captured ]

swcrusader wrote: >> Its hard to defend when your voters are in torpor from cross table rush. If I was a rusher on the other side of the table from a meddling deck I would make it my mission (barring killing my prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could play one on me.>> And as a result, you would lose, due to wasting effort on someone who is not your predator or prey. You honestly think it is a good idea to rush from across the table to get someone just for playing this card? >>It will be a large pain in the arse, but not an broken card or a game winner by any stretch!>> But wait a second--you just stated that if anyone played this card in a situation where you could attack them from across the table, you would sacrifice your own position just to punish them for playing Meddling on someone who isn't even you. If the card isn't either broken or a game winner, why would you do this? By your own statement, you indicate that this card is powerful enough that it is a good idea to attack someone across the table, at the expense of your own position, just to, I believe you wrote, "make it my mission (barring killing my prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could play one on me." Why would you sacrifice your own position and attack across table in retributuion for playing a card that is neither broken nor a game winner? [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <20020214180840...@mb-cl.aol.com>, Peter D Bakija <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> writes: >Why not? That makes no sense to me. If people are willing to go to a tournament >(i.e. they have access to transportation, funds, and time) to get a promo card, >why wouldn't they go if there was no promo card? Because (many) people are inherently 'greedy' and irrational. You appear to be trying to make people act rationally. [ quoted text not captured ]

> And as a result, you would lose, due to wasting effort on someone who is not > your predator or prey. You honestly think it is a good idea to rush from across > the table to get someone just for playing this card? > You think a rush deck never rushes cross table for something that may later become a threat? This is analagous to me to a political deck voting with another player or two to breat down something it may later see as a threat. There are any number of cards I'd cross table rush as soon as I saw them smacked down - Mariel Lady Annoying, Arika are two vamps I'd do instantly. If my predator is spending his time fighting off a nasty opponent, isn't it my job to make that last as long as possible (or if necessary pre-emptively strike someone *about* to become my predator?). Its strategy man. No I wouldn't like this card played on me, but I also wouldn't like a Smiling Jack, Aggresive Tactics, Anything that gives someone +1 stealth a turn, any vampire that has a permanent +1 stealth yadda yadda yadda.... > >>It will be a large pain in the arse, but not an broken card or a game winner > by any stretch!>> > > But wait a second--you just stated that if anyone played this card in a > situation where you could attack them from across the table, you would > sacrifice your own position just to punish them for playing Meddling on someone > who isn't even you. If the card isn't either broken or a game winner, why would > you do this? For the same reason I'd do the same thing for the cards I mentioned above. While they aren't game winners, they will hurt me, or annoy me or I fear them. Following human nature I must mutilate that I fear :-) > > By your own statement, you indicate that this card is powerful enough that it > is a good idea to attack someone across the table, at the expense of your own > position, just to, I believe you wrote, "make it my mission (barring killing my > prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could play one on me." > > Why would you sacrifice your own position and attack across table in > retributuion for playing a card that is neither broken nor a game winner? > You seem to assume cross table actions sacrifice my position. Why would it? My reasoning is sound. If it *could* hurt me in the near future then I will try to take care of it. Tournament Vampire isn't a 3 player game, its a 4 or 5 player game. I have more considerations than just my prey and predator. I fear Meddling sure - well played it could hurt my deck. But as I said above there are any number of cards that 'well played' could hurt me just as much, and most of them give me less advance warning too. Thats why Return was 'fixed'. Maybe you and I disagree on how strategic Vampire is. I just honestly don't believe that this card is ban-necessary, or even errata necessary.

"swcrusader" <swcru...@crownambassador.com> wrote in message news:95cd23dc.02021...@posting.google.com... > If I was a rusher on the other > side of the table from a meddling deck I would make it my mission > (barring killing my prey) to crush him into the dirt for fear he could > play one on me. > This just doesn't make sense to me. The Meddling is affecting only one player, and that's not you. In fact, if the Meddler is your grand-predator, the Meddling is helping you considerably. I should think you would be ecstatic that someone cross-table has played a Meddling, because it essentially hurts one methuselah a whole lot, and hurts the one who played it a little. If two players at the table have lost strength, that's equivalent to you gaining strength. Also, that's one less Meddling that they will be able to use against you, if it comes down to that. This is why I don't understand people saying that table dynamics will take care of this card. The only person hurt by the card is the person it's played on, generally the prey or predator of the person who played it. The only person who would care or try to get rid of it is the other person next to the Meddler. That is, if it's played on the Meddler's prey, the only other person at the table who might care is the Meddler's predator. The Meddler's grand-prey would be happy that the card is in play, and the meddler's grand-predator would not care much one way or the other. This leaves 2 in favour, 2 against, and 1 ambivalent, where one of the 2 against is *crippled* by the Meddling and won't be able to do much about it, and one of the 2 that is in favour of it has built their deck knowing that they would have a Meddling in play.

swcrusader wrote: >>You think a rush deck never rushes cross table for something that may later become a threat?>> Not one that wins. Rushing across table is a waste of your actions and a waste of your resources. That, and it draws undue attention to you and makes people want to act against you as you are a loose cannon. I play a Rush deck at pretty much every tournament I go to, and I have never successfully gotten anywhere by Rushing across the table (well, except that time I killed Aaron out of spite, but A) that was funny and B) I wasn't going to win anyways, as he stole my VP...). I have, however, gotten quite far by not rushing across table as policy. >>There are any number of cards I'd cross table rush as soon as I saw them smacked down - Mariel Lady Annoying, Arika are two vamps I'd do instantly.>> Foolish and impulsive. A jedi craves not such things. Sure, ok, occasionally there might be a viable reason to Rush across table, but those instances are very few and far between. You are much better off simply killing your prey and your predator, in that order. >>If my predator is spending his time fighting off a nasty opponent, isn't it my job to make that last as long as possible (or if necessary pre-emptively strike someone *about* to become my predator?).>> Nope. It is your job to kill your prey. Messing with your grand predator to slow him down against your predator is a waste of your effort, and gets an extra person on your back. >>You seem to assume cross table actions sacrifice my position. Why would it?>> It pretty much always does. Spending an action to rush across table is wasting effort that could be either killing your prey or hamstringing your predator. Then, you also incur the wrath of someone across the table who should have been your ally to begin with. Certainly a sacrifice of position. >>Tournament Vampire isn't a 3 player game, its a 4 or 5 player game. I have more considerations than just my prey and predator.>> Of course you do, but working across table isn't usually the way to deal with them. Make friends and allies. Kill your prey. Slow down your predator. Threaten, but rarely act. That is the way of the rush deck. >>Maybe you and I disagree on how strategic Vampire is. I just honestly don't believe that this card is ban-necessary, or even errata necessary.>> Back to the Meddling, you don't believe that the card is overpowered, but you believe someone playing it is justification to do away with the standard predator/prey relationship that is the heart of the game. When a card is so powerful that it makes folks do questionable things (like rush across table), that is indication that there is something wrong. You seem willing to rush across table to "punish" someone for playing Meddling, even if they don't play it on you. This is an indication of something wrong. [ quoted text not captured ]

> This just doesn't make sense to me. The Meddling is affecting only one > player, and that's not you. In fact, if the Meddler is your grand-predator, > the Meddling is helping you considerably. I should think you would be > ecstatic that someone cross-table has played a Meddling, because it > essentially hurts one methuselah a whole lot, and hurts the one who played > it a little. If two players at the table have lost strength, that's > equivalent to you gaining strength. Also, that's one less Meddling that > they will be able to use against you, if it comes down to that. > > This is why I don't understand people saying that table dynamics will take > care of this card. The only person hurt by the card is the person it's > played on, generally the prey or predator of the person who played it. The > only person who would care or try to get rid of it is the other person next > to the Meddler. That is, if it's played on the Meddler's prey, the only > other person at the table who might care is the Meddler's predator. The > Meddler's grand-prey would be happy that the card is in play, and the > meddler's grand-predator would not care much one way or the other. This > leaves 2 in favour, 2 against, and 1 ambivalent, where one of the 2 against > is *crippled* by the Meddling and won't be able to do much about it, and one > of the 2 that is in favour of it has built their deck knowing that they > would have a Meddling in play. Well, nothing happens in isolation. If my grandpredator is strong, and my predator is weak, it is in my benefit to weaken the grandpredator enough so he doesn't oust my predator too quick. Its my benefit to make sure my weakened predator doesn't get replaced by a strong predator with an extra 6 pool. I mean don't you ever keep an eye on your grandprey??? especially when you may oust your prey in a turn or two, you want to keep an eye on them! While yes, the card only hurts those it is played on, someone playing a sesmith deck is likely to have several sesmiths. Odds are one will eventually be winging my way. You may also want to note that meddling can be played on any methuselah in the game, and in a deck based around it the player is likely to use them all over the place. Its not a matter of if I'm going to recieve a meddling, its *when* I am going to get hit. Its in my best interest to kick the player so he doesn't have vote lock. I think you may be thinking under the old VP thinking of tourney play. Me - I'm after table wins. Everyones a threat and everyones a friend - I aim to be the last one standing :-).

> Why not? That makes no sense to me. If people are willing to go to a tournament > (i.e. they have access to transportation, funds, and time) to get a promo card, > why wouldn't they go if there was no promo card? Some people are very happy playing in their own playgroup(such as myself). I myself do not go to a lot of tournaments. Why? Because I play one or two games a week with good friends and do not feel any real need to play any more then that. But I do not get a promo card for playing within my playgroup. So to get a promo card I will venture to the local tournament, try and forget all the house rules that my group plays with (most of which I enjoy), and try to figure out what deck might have a fun chance of winning in a metagame that I may be entirely unfamiliar with. > Is it simple greed? Are we stuck having to appeal to the lowest common > denominator--bribery? no - it is complacency (in my case, and in the othe case of the other members of the playgroup). We require motivation to play in an environment that is unfamiliar to us as opposed to playing in our own friendly and comfortable environment. (hmmm... maybe it is bribery but its not because of greed and I prefer "motivation" or "encouragement") > Honestly speaking, I think that is really sad. Why are people more likely to > show up for a tournament because they get free stuff? Isn't the draw of a good > game of VTES enough? But many of us can get a good game of VTES without going to the bother of attending a tournament. Additionaly going to a tournament is an unknown where I may be subjected to boring, repetitive (although frighteningly effective) decks. My own group avoids such decks looking for variety, innovation, and avoiding what WE consider "boring" - weenie hordes or Malkavian stealth-bleed to identify a couple of generic types. We've been there - done that - and will not go back to playing that deck type. Its an essential unspoken agreement within our group that allows us to play the same players on a regular basis while keeping the games interesting (in our activity). Further, in our regular play we rarely play the same deck twice in a row. All of us bring several decks when we are going to play in order to provide variety. Being forced to play the same deck several times in a row can be annoying - especially if in an early game in a tournament you notice a prevalent weakness not previously seen, but are forbidden from modifying the deck to correct the problem. Having said this I believe I will have a good time at the storyline tournament. My experience there may encourage me to attend more local tournaments. But if I want a good game of VTES, I *know* I can get that within my own playgroup. To get me to a tournament and to drag my playgroup into the potentially harsh light of the tournament scene took one thing - a promo card with potential impact on the game. (The entire group decided to attend after learning what the card did). I realize that this may make no sense to you. But it does not have to - as it makes sense to us for our reasons. We applaud White Wolf's decision to use a powerful promocard. We hope that it does not unbalance the game and see the potential for Meddling's abuse, but are willing to adopt a wait and see approach before screaming about it being too powerful. Again sorry about the length of the post. Respectfully, -John

John wrote: >>Some people are very happy playing in their own playgroup(such as myself). I myself do not go to a lot of tournaments. Why? Because I play one or two games a week with good friends and do not feel any real need to play any more then that. But I do not get a promo card for playing within my playgroup.>> Going to a tournament requires expenditures of: A) Time. B) Money. C) Effort. Some of which may be substanial in any given circumstance. Given that this is the case, getting one promo card makes it worth it to go to such an event, when it wasn't worth the time, money, and effort without the promo card? >>So to get a promo card I will venture to the local tournament, try and forget all the house rules that my group plays with (most of which I enjoy), and try to figure out what deck might have a fun chance of winning in a metagame that I may be entirely unfamiliar with.>> But if you don't like the rules being used at the tournament, don't have practice playing in the tournament environment, and don't feel the need to play anymore than the couple games a week you play, you probably aren't going to have a particularly good time. Is getting a single promo card worth the outlay of time, money, and effort, considering how you probably aren't going to have that good a time anyways? I'm not saying you need to love tournament VTES--if you are happy playing with houserules in your group, and have a great time, more power to you. It doesn't make sense to me, however, that getting a promo card will outweigh the other expenditures as well as counteract the fact that you aren't really interesting in tournament VTES. >>no - it is complacency (in my case, and in the othe case of the other members of the playgroup). We require motivation to play in an environment that is unfamiliar to us as opposed to playing in our own friendly and comfortable environment. (hmmm... maybe it is bribery but its not because of greed and I prefer "motivation" or "encouragement")>> But given that you are in a complacent group who have no real interest in tournament play, and don't really enjoy tournament play, is a promo card going to make you enjoy tournament play? Probably not--in all likelyhood, you'll go to the tournament, get the promo card, play in what is possibly a not particularly friendly (relatively speaking) and uncomfortable environment, not have a good time, and spend time, money, and effort for a mostly forgettable, if not regrettable experience. Thus, what we have is people going to tournaments who don't really want to be there, just to get promo cards. People who don't really want to be at tournaments don't generally have a good time, and often compromise the good time of others--not neccessarily by being unpleasant, but by not enjoying themselves or playing poorly (due to being unfamiliar with the environment) or by leaving after the first round ('cause they didn't really want to be there to begin with, only showed up for the promo, and didn't really have much fun in the first round using rules that they are unfamiliar with in an environment they are not used to). >>But many of us can get a good game of VTES without going to the bother of attending a tournament.>> So then why go even to get the promo card? You don't want to play at the tournament and you probably aren't going to have a good time. Is it good to attract people to events with promo cards who don't actually want to be there and aren't going to have a good time anyway? >>Additionaly going to a tournament is an unknown where I may be subjected to boring, repetitive (although frighteningly effective) decks.>> Which is a reasonable viewpoint. These decks are a possibility, promo or no, Storyline format or no. Why spend the time, money, and effort to go to a torurnament, when you probably aren't going to have a good time, and you are not going to enjoy playing against many of the decks you are going to see, just to get a promo card? Is the card worth that much? >>My own group avoids such decks looking for variety, innovation, and avoiding what WE consider "boring" - weenie hordes or Malkavian stealth-bleed to identify a couple of generic types. We've been there - done that - and will not go back to playing that deck type. Its an essential unspoken agreement within our group that allows us to play the same players on a regular basis while keeping the games interesting (in our activity). Further, in our regular play we rarely play the same deck twice in a row. All of us bring several decks when we are going to play in order to provide variety. Being forced to play the same deck several times in a row can be annoying - especially if in an early game in a tournament you notice a prevalent weakness not previously seen, but are forbidden from modifying the deck to correct the problem.>> All of this indicates that you probably won't have that good of a time at a given tournament, which is perfectly reasonable--I'm not saying that you have to like tournament VTES. I simply don't see how it is beneficial to either you or those at the event you are going to that you are going just to get the promo card, don't really like the rules, environment, or decks that you are likely to face, and are likely to not have a good time, which will be not so good for you or the tournament as a whole. >>Having said this I believe I will have a good time at the storyline tournament. My experience there may encourage me to attend more local tournaments.>> But if you have a bad experience, which isn't that unlikely given your expectations and your reasons for going (not 'cause you wanna play in a tournament, but because you are willing to give a tournament a go so you can get a promo card), it'll be a bust for you and those around you. >>But if I want a good game of VTES, I *know* I can get that within my own playgroup. To get me to a tournament and to drag my playgroup into the potentially harsh light of the tournament scene took one thing - a promo card with potential impact on the game. (The entire group decided to attend after learning what the card did).>> What difference does the impact on the game of the card have? You aren't a competetive player (which is not meant as a slight--just as an observation based on your own descriptions), and your group doesn't play at tournaments--having a "power" card (which is apparently is, as your entire group felt the power of the card justified the expenditure of time, money, and effort, as well as overcoming your lack ot interest in tournament VTES just to get one of each) isn't really important. >>I realize that this may make no sense to you.>> None whatsoever, but cei la vie. >>But it does not have to - as it makes sense to us for our reasons. We applaud White Wolf's decision to use a powerful promocard.>> Because it convinces folks who have little or no interest in tournament VTES to spend time, money, and effort going to an event that they have only limited interest in attending, so they can have not such a good time, which is a drag for them as well as the other tournament attendees? >>We hope that it does not unbalance the game and see the potential for Meddling's abuse, but are willing to adopt a wait and see approach before screaming about it being too powerful.>> And if it turns out to be too powerful, in all likelyhood, your group will have a tacit agreement to not use it, much like Malk S+B and weenie hordes. So you are going to a tournament that you don't really want to go to, spending time, money, and effort that you would not have normally spent, so you can have probably not such a good time in an environment that is neither comfortable nor friendly, submitting yourself and possibly those around you to the negative effects of all of these factors, just so you can get ahold of a card that is very possibly powerful enough that you probably won't play with it anyways. Check. Why not simply wait a few weeks for them to show up on e-bay, and get one for $10.00? [ quoted text not captured ]

>"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message > Going to a tournament requires expenditures of: > > A) Time. > B) Money. for my purposes Money=0$ as our local tournament apparently has no monetary cost. > C) Effort. > > Some of which may be substanial in any given circumstance. Given that this is > the case, getting one promo card makes it worth it to go to such an event, when > it wasn't worth the time, money, and effort without the promo card? I am not saying it was not worth the cost (total cost=A+B+C+other) to go to a tournament without a promo card (IMHO) in return. I sincerely doubt that one card will be worth the time spent in straight evaluation (7 hours). However the opportunity cost [the cost of using resources for a certain purpose, measured by the benefit given up by not using them in their best alternative] is considerably lower. What else am I going to do this Sunday? Not much laundry maybe. Was I going to be paid for my time if I was not attending this tournament - no. Do I have something better to spend my effort on - no since its a pretty small effort. This gives a pretty low opportunity cost which is what the value of a promo card overcomes. This results in my motivation to attend. > Is getting a single promo card worth the outlay > of time, money, and effort, considering how you probably aren't going to have > that good a time anyways? Please do not put words into my mouth. I did not say that I do not like the rules being used at a tournament. I said I enjoyed my group's house rules. While making a tournament worthy deck (I hope) I simply had to expend a small amount of brain matter to recall the differences between house rules and tournament rules. The card is not worth the cost of my time - it never can be. Even at minimum wage 7 hours = somewhere near 42$ around here. But making an evaluation on cost is irrelevant. No one is offering to pay me for any other activity I have planned on Sunday. I make my decision based on Opportunity cost. I do not live in a vacuume. My decision is based on the cost of the next best alternative as compared to the cost of going to the tournament. I believe I will have a good time at the tournament. As I said the rules are not THAT hard to remember and in addition the tournament organizer expects a variety of decks as this is considered by the locals to be a "fun" event. > I'm not saying you need to love tournament VTES--if you are happy playing with > houserules in your group, and have a great time, more power to you. It doesn't > make sense to me, however, that getting a promo card will outweigh the other > expenditures as well as counteract the fact that you aren't really interesting > in tournament VTES. Expenditures are small enough (see above) that a card will cover them (and I value the card I will receive at about 2$ to 5$ Canadian. That is not what I would sell it for mind you, but that is about the maximum that I would pay - the cost to cover about 1.5 boosters). Again I never said I was not interested in tournament VTES or it would make no sense for me to go to a tournament. I never bothered to go to a tournament as the opportunity cost was too high as I was gaurunteed nothing in return to outweigh it. With a decent (read - new and possibly useful ie: not new art) promo card it tips the scale in favour of going by increasing the opportunity cost of NOT going. I am going. The opportunity cost of not going is higher than the opportunity cost of going. Therefore I will select tyhe lower opportunity cost and attend. Makes sense to me. > But given that you are in a complacent group who have no real interest in > tournament play, and don't really enjoy tournament play, is a promo card going > to make you enjoy tournament play? Probably not--in all likelyhood, you'll go > to the tournament, get the promo card, play in what is possibly a not > particularly friendly (relatively speaking) and uncomfortable environment, not > have a good time, and spend time, money, and effort for a mostly forgettable, > if not regrettable experience. As already stated I do not agree with YOUR belief that I have no interest in tournament play, don't enjoy tournament play, or that I will spend money at the event. I am willing to attend an event in the hope of having a good time as my opportunity cost has been covered by the promo card (as I deem it worthy). If as you believe I will have a bad time, no fun, etc... this will factor into my next decision to attend or not attend a tournament. If I have a bad experience the opportunity cost of attending the tournament will increase (as I assess a cost for putting up with a potential bad experience) and perhaps I will not make the same decision next time (or will require an even MORE powerful promo card - :-D. By the same repect a good experience may increase the opportunity cost of Not going to the next tournament - thus encouraging me to attend ) > Thus, what we have is people going to tournaments who don't really want to be > there, just to get promo cards. People who don't really want to be at > tournaments don't generally have a good time, and often compromise the good > time of others--not neccessarily by being unpleasant, but by not enjoying > themselves or playing poorly (due to being unfamiliar with the environment) or > by leaving after the first round ('cause they didn't really want to be there to > begin with, only showed up for the promo, and didn't really have much fun in > the first round using rules that they are unfamiliar with in an environment > they are not used to). Just to be clear: I am going to the tournament I want to be there I expect to have a good time (call me an optimist) I expect to play well (paint me humble) I will be there for all rounds including the final even if I don't make it Did I show up for the promo - yes. But it accomplished its goal of getting me to the tournament to see if I will enjoy it. Life's a dice game and to play you gotta throw. > So then why go even to get the promo card? You don't want to play at the > tournament and you probably aren't going to have a good time. See above for my accessment of this statment. Low opportunity cost. Value of card higher than opportunity cost. Rational choice = go. > Is it good to attract people to events with promo cards who don't actually want > to be there and aren't going to have a good time anyway? No but this is not the case. >Additionaly going to a tournament is an unknown where I may be subjected to > boring, repetitive (although frighteningly effective) decks.>> > > Which is a reasonable viewpoint. These decks are a possibility, promo or no, > Storyline format or no. Why spend the time, money, and effort to go to a > torurnament, when you probably aren't going to have a good time, and you are > not going to enjoy playing against many of the decks you are going to see, just > to get a promo card? Is the card worth that much? See above. Little money. Low effort. Will have good time. Might be surprised by the decks. In addition as I have not played against the decktypes I do not enjoy in the recent past it may even no longer bother me to the same degree that inspired our group to remove those decktypes from common play. > All of this indicates that you probably won't have that good of a time at a > given tournament, which is perfectly reasonable--I'm not saying that you have > to like tournament VTES. I simply don't see how it is beneficial to either you > or those at the event you are going to that you are going just to get the promo > card, don't really like the rules, environment, or decks that you are likely to > face, and are likely to not have a good time, which will be not so good for you > or the tournament as a whole. I think that the storyline event will have a fair amount of variety as compared to normal tournaments. Was just informed that 50% more players than was originally expected will be attending the tournament. Thats 50% more than attend a normal tournament on a good day. Why? Probably the promo card. Because lets face it the chance to affect the storyline of WoD is minimal for any given deck. Although some of the clans such as Ravnos have been doing pretty well so far (2 wins of 10 or something). Although I will concede that most people have not rationally thought this through and so believe in their minds that them winning the tournament will have some great single handed effect on the WoD. The only possible motivator is the card (IMHO). Meddling. Whether these people know what it does (and I suspect that they do) or not, they came to collect a promo. I believe (and I know that you apparently do not) that they would not have come for an alternate art Blood Doll or Deal with the Devil. More likely that they would attend for any new promo (new as in entirely new) but I think that they are there because its a new power promo (or has potential to be or at least is conceived to have potential to be) > But if you have a bad experience, which isn't that unlikely given your > expectations and your reasons for going (not 'cause you wanna play in a > tournament, but because you are willing to give a tournament a go so you can > get a promo card), it'll be a bust for you and those around you. Disagree as per above. And I also believe that I have the maturity to let my enjoyment not affect those around me negatively. > What difference does the impact on the game of the card have? You aren't a > competetive player (which is not meant as a slight--just as an observation > based on your own descriptions), Agreed but I might someday become one (I can dream can't I) >But it does not have to - as it makes sense to us for our reasons. We applaud > White Wolf's decision to use a powerful promocard.>> > > Because it convinces folks who have little or no interest in tournament VTES to > spend time, money, and effort going to an event that they have only limited > interest in attending, so they can have not such a good time, which is a drag > for them as well as the other tournament attendees? Disagree based on my own experiences as noted above > > >>We hope that it does not unbalance the game and see the potential for > Meddling's abuse, but are willing to adopt a wait and see approach before > screaming about it being too powerful.>> > > And if it turns out to be too powerful, in all likelyhood, your group will have > {{snip}} > effects of all of these factors, just so you can get ahold of a card that is > very possibly powerful enough that you probably won't play with it anyways. In all likelyhood we would intenally modify either the removal method or increase the cost. Another possiblity is that it may not prove broken in our environment as we will all be restricted to having one and our local group is pretty intercept intensive. > > Why not simply wait a few weeks for them to show up on e-bay, and get one for > $10.00? Because I would not pay more than 5$ CND for one. Tell you what. Storyline here is tomorrow. Will let you know how I feel about it after the fact. But we obviously have very different outlooks on the situation and are probably in different circumstances. I in no way mean to be insulting to you so if I have by chance I would like to apologize, but while I can see your points they have little meaning in my situation to my perspective. -John

John wrote: >>for my purposes Money=0$ as our local tournament apparently has no monetary cost.>> Well, you know, travel costs, Gas, eating lunch, whatever. >>I am not saying it was not worth the cost (total cost=A+B+C+other) to go to a tournament without a promo card (IMHO) in return. I sincerely doubt that one card will be worth the time spent in straight evaluation (7 hours). However the opportunity cost [the cost of using resources for a certain purpose, measured by the benefit given up by not using them in their best alternative] is considerably lower. What else am I going to do this Sunday? Not much laundry maybe. Was I going to be paid for my time if I was not attending this tournament - no. Do I have something better to spend my effort on - no since its a pretty small effort. This gives a pretty low opportunity cost which is what the value of a promo card overcomes. This results in my motivation to attend.>> What I am simply not understanding is if it doesn't cost you anything, you have nothing else to do, the effort to attend is very limited, and you like the game, yet you wouldn't have gone anyways if there wasn't a promo card? >>The card is not worth the cost of my time - it never can be. Even at minimum wage 7 hours = somewhere near 42$ around here. But making an evaluation on cost is irrelevant. No one is offering to pay me for any other activity I have planned on Sunday. I make my decision based on Opportunity cost. I do not live in a vacuume. My decision is based on the cost of the next best alternative as compared to the cost of going to the tournament.>> And without the promo card as incentive, you would not have gone to this tournament, even though you had nothing else to do, the cost was negligible, and the effort required to go was minimal? >>I believe I will have a good time at the tournament. As I said the rules are not THAT hard to remember and in addition the tournament organizer expects a variety of decks as this is considered by the locals to be a "fun" event.>> So you think you *will* have fun at this tournament--why would you have not gone if there was no promo card? >>Again I never said I was not interested in tournament VTES or it would make no sense for me to go to a tournament. I never bothered to go to a tournament as the opportunity cost was too high as I was gaurunteed nothing in return to outweigh it.>> The fun of playing in a tournament isn't something in return? >>I am going. The opportunity cost of not going is higher than the opportunity cost of going. Therefore I will select tyhe lower opportunity cost and attend. Makes sense to me.>> But if there was no promo card, you would choose not to go, correct? >>As already stated I do not agree with YOUR belief that I have no interest in tournament play, don't enjoy tournament play, or that I will spend money at the event.>> I don't neccessarily think that you have no interest in tournament play--I was just making suppositions based on what you wrote. What I don't understand is that if you do have interest in tournament play and are likely to enjoy tournament play, combined with the low opportunity cost of the event, why would you not have gone if there was no promo card? >>Just to be clear: I am going to the tournament I want to be there I expect to have a good time (call me an optimist) I expect to play well (paint me humble) I will be there for all rounds including the final even if I don't make it>> Given all of these points, you still maintain that if there was no promo card as incentive, you would not have gone. Why not? >>Did I show up for the promo - yes. But it accomplished its goal of getting me to the tournament to see if I will enjoy it. Life's a dice game and to play you gotta throw.>> And you wouldn't have thrown those dice if there was no promo card. Check. >>See above. Little money. Low effort. Will have good time. Might be surprised by the decks. In addition as I have not played against the decktypes I do not enjoy in the recent past it may even no longer bother me to the same degree that inspired our group to remove those decktypes from common play.>> So again, why would you have not gone if there was no promo card? >>Tell you what. Storyline here is tomorrow. Will let you know how I feel about it after the fact. But we obviously have very different outlooks on the situation and are probably in different circumstances.>> I simply can't understand how someone can be willing to play in a tournament, not opposed to playing in a tournament, be likely to have a good time playing at a tournament, have nothing else to do during the time frame of the tournament, be unconcerned about the money and effort expended on the tournament, yet still be unwilling to go to the tournament unless there is a promo give away as incentive. >>I in no way mean to be insulting to you so if I have by chance I would like to apologize,>> Not insulted. >>but while I can see your points they have little meaning in my situation to my perspective.>> I simply don't understand. But that is me. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Well, you know, travel costs, Gas, eating lunch, whatever. I'll give you that my case was an exception but it literally cost me nothing. > What I am simply not understanding is if it doesn't cost you anything, you have > nothing else to do, the effort to attend is very limited, and you like the > game, yet you wouldn't have gone anyways if there wasn't a promo card? I'm not saying I was dead set against going to a tournament prior to storyline and its promo. But the fact of the matter is that I did not go to a tournament. Why? I felt no motivation to do so. Why was there no motivation? I don't know ask a shrink. Had no motivation. Promo card motivated me. End of story. > And without the promo card as incentive, you would not have gone to this > tournament, even though you had nothing else to do, the cost was negligible, > and the effort required to go was minimal? I know this may seem strange but that is exactly the case. > So you think you *will* have fun at this tournament--why would you have not > gone if there was no promo card? Because a card tournament is not the only way I can have fun. While the effort to attend a tournament is minimal for myself I can find something fun to do with even less effort. >>Again I never said I was not interested in tournament VTES or it would make >> no sense for me to go to a tournament. I never bothered to go to a >> tournament as the opportunity cost was too high as I was gaurunteed nothing >> in return to outweigh it.>> >> > The fun of playing in a tournament isn't something in return? Fun is something in return but it is not guaranteed. Promo card was guaranteed. > But if there was no promo card, you would choose not to go, correct? This is probably correct. I was not planning on attending. > I don't neccessarily think that you have no interest in tournament play--I was > just making suppositions based on what you wrote. What I don't understand is > that if you do have interest in tournament play and are likely to enjoy > tournament play, combined with the low opportunity cost of the event, why >would you not have gone if there was no promo card? its that minimal effort that had to be balanced and complacency to overcome. > I simply can't understand how someone can be willing to play in a tournament, > not opposed to playing in a tournament, be likely to have a good time playing > at a tournament, have nothing else to do during the time frame of the > tournament, be unconcerned about the money and effort expended on the > tournament, yet still be unwilling to go to the tournament unless there is a > promo give away as incentive. call me an enigma. Its always been a close thing to attend or not attend a tournament. The decision always just came down against attending. ------------------ For the record the storyline event here was pretty good. My deck was not adequately prepared and in the two preliminary rounds I exited second in both (4 player games). Still had an okay time. I will probably give the next regular tournament a shot (without the incentive of a promo) before deciding wether its worth it to continue or not. I was disapointed with the number of stealth/bleed there. Was hoping for more variety. (perhaps they all just showed up at my tables though) Meddling came out once in the two prelim rounds. (20 players) Didn't see the end of the final. It appeared to have a significant effect but not overwhelming. General concensus was concern over the card's power. ------------------- -John

Raille wrote: > To this, I have to concur. There would have been 74 story line events > regardless of the utility of the card. Yes and no. Had the promo card been different from existing cards or had been an alternate art version of an existing card that's high in demand, this would be true. Were it a foil card of Twisting the Knife (2 big strikes against it IMHO) I doubt the reaction would have been anything but derisive laughter. After all, if you're using a card to promote a tournament, it's got to be something people will want. As far as whether this card is too much or not, I can't say as of yet. It didn't have a huge impact in the two storyline tournaments I've been in. The only way we'll know for sure is when a constructed deck uses it as a key part of its strategy. Regards, Noal McDonald VEKN Prince of Metrtro Detroit

[ quoted text not captured ] I think you missed the point there Noal. The Comment was that The Sotry line events would still have had 74, or whatever amount its at, tourneys. The change to a Foil Twisting the Knife would not change the number of Storylines played, but would have reduced the amount of player turn out. The two things, games/players, are not interchangable. Raille

"John" <verg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%Q%b8.57259$A44.3...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca... > For the record the storyline event here was pretty good. My deck was not Good to hear. > adequately prepared and in the two preliminary rounds I exited second in > both (4 player games). Still had an okay time. I will probably give the next > regular tournament a shot (without the incentive of a promo) before deciding > wether its worth it to continue or not. Also a good idea. Don't give up after the first time. :) > I was disapointed with the number of stealth/bleed there. Was hoping for > more variety. (perhaps they all just showed up at my tables though) Could be. I saw more S&B at the storyline tournament in Madison than I have in other recent tournaments. I suspect this is due to lots of people feeling restricted by the "single-clan" crypt, and not knowing what else to play, other than something that is pretty classically effective. I don't think that I've heard of a true S&B deck winning a storyline tournament yet, though. IME, S&B will make a showing at any tournament, but it rarely wins, because it's unable to work its position very well. Xian

John wrote: >>I'm not saying I was dead set against going to a tournament prior to storyline and its promo. But the fact of the matter is that I did not go to a tournament. Why? I felt no motivation to do so. Why was there no motivation? I don't know ask a shrink. Had no motivation. Promo card motivated me. End of story.>> Kooky. A world view I simply can't wrap my head around, but it takes all kinds to populate this nutty world. See, I see the world (and by world, I mean occasionally playing in VTES tournaments :-) like this--if I can go to a tournament, I go, 'cause I like going. I like meeting new players, I like playing against folks I don't normally play against, I like the competition, I like supporting events that folks put the effort into running (nothing sucks more than putting the time and effort into running a tournament and having no one show up), and I like playing VTES. When I can go, meaning I have the time to blow, money to spend, people to go with, a way to get there, and nothing else I gotta do, I go. The existance of a promo card would have absolutely no bearing on my desire or ability to go. But again, that is me. Clearly, this is not the case for you. Which I find weird, but we have already covered that. >>Because a card tournament is not the only way I can have fun.>> Certainly not, which was not my intention. I don't go to that many tournaments--maybe 4 or 5 a year--as I am married with a full time job and lots of other stuff to do, and the ones that I go to, I go to 'cause I can arrange the various factors in my life such that I can go. This being said, I can't imagine being in a situation where I would have decided to not go to a particular tournament for whatever reason, but discovering the existance of a promo give away would facilitate me rearranging my life so that whatever was keeping me from going to the tournament to begin with would no longer keep me from going. >>This is probably correct. I was not planning on attending.>> So you knew about the tournament and had no desire to go at all, in fact had decided specifically *not* to go, but then after reading the spoiler for Meddling, changed your mind and decided to go? That is soooo deeply weird to me. Don't get me wrong here--I'm not saying that playing in a VTES tournament is the most important thing in the world, or even a particularly high priority in life, but given a situation where there is a nearby tournament that is essentially free, transportation isn't an issue, you have nothing better to do, and you like playing the game, you wouldn't show up without promo incentive? Sure, if there was something better to do (go to a show, have plans go out with non VTES related friends, work, spending time with family, whatever), the tournament would be out, but if there *was* something better to do that was going to keep you from the tournament, you would cancel these plans so as to facilitate attending the tournament just to get the promo card? If there wasn't something better, doing nothing in particular is more attractive than playing in a VTES tournament that has limited cost in terms of money, time, and effort that does not get you a promo card? Given the opportunity to go, I'd be incilned to go just to support the guy running the show. >>call me an enigma. Its always been a close thing to attend or not attend a tournament. The decision always just came down against attending.>> An enigma you are. I'll simply chalk this up to the never ending mystery that is life. >>I was disapointed with the number of stealth/bleed there. Was hoping for more variety. (perhaps they all just showed up at my tables though)>> S+B is always popular, as it is fairly straight forward and effective, but difficult to actually win with as it has a few serious weaknesses (Rush combat; Bleed Bounce; inflexibility). Certainly in a restricted clan based tournament, S+B is probably going to be seen as one of the most viable options, as a few clans are simply built for the strategy (Malks; !Malks; Setites; Baali) from the get go, where many other clans aren't as effective at anything as a whole. [ quoted text not captured ]

>Could be. I saw more S&B at the storyline tournament in Madison than I have >in other recent tournaments. I suspect this is due to lots of people >feeling restricted by the "single-clan" crypt, and not knowing what else to >play, other than something that is pretty classically effective. I don't >think that I've heard of a true S&B deck winning a storyline tournament yet, >though. Really Xian? I didn't think there was that much S&B at Madison, truth be told. In fact, I thought that *many* players were deliberately trying to *not* play S&B decks at the Madison Tourney. For example, Boris barely had any bleed in his Malkavian deck (focused on Protean instead). Chris made it clear that he had very few bleed modifiers in his !Malk deck as well. If anything, I saw too much of you and Dax doing nasty Seductive PC bleeds! =P Halcyan 2

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020218160121...@mb-ba.aol.com... [snip that I saw more S&B in Madison than in the past] > Really Xian? I didn't think there was that much S&B at Madison, truth be told. There were at least 3 S&B decks there, which is more than there has been in the past...the tournament was somewhat bigger than past events have been (by a table), but not insanely bigger. 1 Malk S&B deck 1 !Malk S&B deck 1 Kiasyd S&B deck (and I really mean to get around to writing the *other* Kevin about those trades, but I've been busy all weekend) maybe one more? In the past, there have been only one or two S&B decks at each Madison tournament that I can recall. > In fact, I thought that *many* players were deliberately trying to *not* play > S&B decks at the Madison Tourney. Perhaps. I'm not sure. > For example, Boris barely had any bleed in his Malkavian deck (focused on > Protean instead). Chris made it clear that he had very few bleed modifiers in > his !Malk deck as well. Boris' deck is in *no* way an S&B deck. :) It's a weenie swarm deck. And really annoying. But good. I didn't see Chris' deck, so I have no clue. > If anything, I saw too much of you and Dax doing nasty Seductive PC bleeds! =P Hey, it's not S&B now, is it? :P Xian

On 15 Feb 2002 21:43:30 GMT, Peter D Bakija wrote: >You seem willing to rush across table to "punish" someone for playing Meddling, >even if they don't play it on you. This is an indication of something wrong. And the thing that's wrong is the idea of rushing someone across table. I see Meddling as a good way of punishing players that do this. Andrew

On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 14:53:48 GMT, John wrote: >The only possible motivator is the card These events have had several motivating factors for me: 1. the promo card 2. the storyline effect 3. not rated 4. only two rounds before the final 5. more of a fun, role-playing atmosphere (due to the 75% rule) Andrew

In message <C7AA0597EED6CF3E.A301EAC6...@lp.airnew s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes: >And the thing that's wrong is the idea of rushing someone across >table. No, this is the thing that you don't like. In the right circumstances, it can be completely "right". [ quoted text not captured ]

Andrew wrote: >>And the thing that's wrong is the idea of rushing someone across table. I see Meddling as a good way of punishing players that do this. >> You seem to be under the impression that people who know what they are doing Rush across the table all the time, which they don't. Rushing cross table is akin to Conservative Agitating across table (i.e. calling a CA where you do 4 damage to a guy across the table and 1 damage to someone else across the table, neither of which are your predator or prey)--most of the time a waste of effort, a good way to destabilize the table, and the fast track to making someone else win. Rushing across the table is generally just a bad idea. People who do so on a regular basis rarely win, and as such, are playing poorly. Sure, once in a blue moon it will be a very good idea, but the same goes for Conservative Agitating someone across the table--it comes up sometimes, but not often enough to justify "punishing" it. Justifying a card as being "a good way of punishing" players who play poorly, which is self defeating anyway, is just silly. Why not make a card that is "a good way of punishing" people who play stupid in the name of being a "crazy Malkavian"? That is just as likely. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 20 Feb 2002 14:57:07 GMT, Peter D Bakija wrote: >You seem to be under the impression that people who know what they are doing >Rush across the table all the time, which they don't. >Rushing cross table is akin to Conservative Agitating across table (i.e. >calling a CA where you do 4 damage to a guy across the table and 1 damage to >someone else across the table, neither of which are your predator or >prey)--most of the time a waste of effort, a good way to destabilize the table, >and the fast track to making someone else win. I agree that going cross table is a bad thing but that doesn't stop it happening to me quite frequently. At the London event, Pierre kept rushing me cross table with his war ghouls. In LA game 2, I had trouble with both my "allies". Keith put a Pentex Subversion on my best minion and defended it to the death while Gary called a Parity Shift on me for 5 pool while only taking 1 for himself. My impression is that you get more trouble of this kind with veteran players than the newbies. I played with a comparatively green crowd at the Cambridge event last night and it was a refreshing change to have minimal deal-making and cross-table action - everyone just focussed on ousting their prey while watching their back, just as they should. >Justifying a card as being "a good way of punishing" players who play poorly, >which is self defeating anyway, is just silly. Why not make a card that is "a >good way of punishing" people who play stupid in the name of being a "crazy >Malkavian"? That is just as likely. I've yet to come across any crazy Malkavians apart from myself. A lot more players seem in love with the idea of making killer combat decks - you say yourself that's all you ever play. Hosers have some value in forcing players out of a rut - why don't you just try playing a vote deck for a change and make Meddling work for you rather than against you? Andrew

Andrew wrote: >>I agree that going cross table is a bad thing but that doesn't stop it happening to me quite frequently.>> Hmm. I don't know what to tell you. Do these people just not like you? >>At the London event, Pierre kept rushing me cross table with his war ghouls.>> I bet he didn't win. >>In LA game 2, I had trouble with both my "allies". Keith put a Pentex Subversion on my best minion and defended it to the death while Gary called a Parity Shift on me for 5 pool while only taking 1 for himself.>> This sounds either like A) idiocy or B) "Let's honk off Andrew". Did these people attempt to justify their actions, or were they simply playing stupid? I rarely see any sort of cross table action. Sure, occasionally someone will come up with some convoluted way that ousting the guy across the table will win them the game, and occasionally they are even right, but most of the games I play (locally and away) are very much "kill your prey" games. What do you gain by wasting effort on folks across the table when you could just oust your prey and deal with them later when you have a VP and 6 more pool? >>My impression is that you get more trouble of this kind with veteran players than the newbies.>> Or, folks that know you... >>I played with a comparatively green crowd at the Cambridge event last night and it was a refreshing change to have minimal deal-making and cross-table action - everyone just focussed on ousting their prey while watching their back, just as they should.>> That is pretty much what every game I play is like. Sure, there is smack talk and threats, but the vast majority of action occurs between the appropriate people. >>I've yet to come across any crazy Malkavians apart from myself. A lot more players seem in love with the idea of making killer combat decks - you say yourself that's all you ever play.>> No, no. I play them in tournaments, 'cause I like to, 'cause no one expects to see them, and 'cause no one prepares for them. In casual play, however, I almost never play Rush decks, 'cause I like playing other stuff. I currently have about 10 active decks ready to play that I cycle thorough. Of them, 2 are actually Rush decks, and I can't even remember the last time I played the good Rush deck of the two. Most recently, I have been playing Nosferatu/Samedi Politics/Bloat; weenie celerity Arms Deallers and Guns; and a mostly bad bruise/bleed Gargoyle deck. >>Hosers have some value in forcing players out of a rut>> Hosers never have any value when simple strategy changes accomplish the same goal is a far more balanced way. [ quoted text not captured ]

>These events have had several motivating factors for me: > >1. the promo card >2. the storyline effect >3. not rated >4. only two rounds before the final >5. more of a fun, role-playing atmosphere (due to the 75% rule) Regarding #5, based on what I saw, I thought the level of competition was higher and the decks were stronger for the storyline than for the constructed we had at a con this past weekend. Only complaint lodged was in the storyline tournament, and there was blatant stalling that wasn't brought to the judge. I'm not sure that's surprising so much as interesting.

In message <C0711B1C38819BB0.400237E3...@lp.airnew s.net>, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> writes: >I played with a comparatively green crowd >at the Cambridge event last night and it was a refreshing change to >have minimal deal-making and cross-table action - everyone just >focussed on ousting their prey while watching their back, just as they >should. Your assertion that this is what people "should" do is not the same as it being true. People want to get most VPs. The tactics of the above will often ensure a split table, whereas a well-timed rush can destabilise a strong force cross-table just long enough for you to get those VPs. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020220151633...@mb-fs.aol.com... > > I rarely see any sort of cross table action. Sure, occasionally someone will > come up with some convoluted way that ousting the guy across the table will win > them the game, and occasionally they are even right, but most of the games I > play (locally and away) are very much "kill your prey" games. What do you gain > by wasting effort on folks across the table when you could just oust your prey > and deal with them later when you have a VP and 6 more pool? > Not to contradict your argument (which I agree with), but I actually had a game where I screwed up by *not* ousting my predator. He was playing a nasty discard/bloat deck, and I was playing Lasombra/Kiasyd S&B. My prey was an anti-Malk S&B. My prey and I each had 1 VP. I was struggling with the notion of having Julia Prima bleed my predator for 7 (enough to oust him). Even if he bounced me, there would be no real problem. Instead, I told him that I would bleed him if he played any Feline Saboteurs or Revelations on me that turn. He refrained from those, I ousted my prey next turn, and then he proceeded to run me out of cards (I lost a good 15-20 cards off the top of my library after I could have ousted him). He had only 2 pool left, but he had an extra minion on me as well as minor stealth, and thus he ousted me. Instead of a 3-2 table split with my prey (presumably with me winning... as long as my prey didn't pull another AI like the one that burned poor Marconius), I instead settled for a 2-2-1 table split. My point is just that going backwards ("cross-table") would have probably won me the game. Which means it was a good idea, strategy-wise, regardless of whether or not Andrew likes it. And further, there is absolutely no indication that Meddling discourages cross-table action anymore than there is indication that it increases such action. Meddling, quite simply, makes your prey lose. You can play it cross-table if you like, but you can do the same with KRC. If you Meddling the whole table, then you have become the bad guy (and a bad guy with only 3 cards in his hand, to boot). Meddling just your prey, and who cares? You're not aggressively ousting your prey, you're simply causing them to not win, which helps out *everyone* at the table.

On 20 Feb 2002 20:16:33 GMT, Peter D Bakija wrote: >I bet he didn't win. >This sounds either like A) idiocy or B) "Let's honk off Andrew". Did these >people attempt to justify their actions, or were they simply playing stupid? None of this cross-tablerie was justified by results but all concerned were reasonably experienced players and had their reasons for what they did. My point is that a fair bit of this goes on and so it's reasonable to provide counter-measures for players who want to deter it. >>I've yet to come across any crazy Malkavians apart from myself. A lot >>more players seem in love with the idea of making killer combat decks >>- you say yourself that's all you ever play.>> > >No, no. I play them in tournaments, 'cause I like to, 'cause no one expects to >see them, and 'cause no one prepares for them. You have a different metagame. Here's what I've seen so far in the storyline events (clockwise starting with my prey) London #1: Warghoul rush ? Rush Ventrue vote/bleed Gangrel rush London #2: Lasombra toolbox? Warghoul rush ? Los Angeles #1: Antitribu-Malkavian toolbox Blood Brothers rush Brujah rush Tremere rush Los Angeles #2: Lasombra stealth/bleed Ally intercept Ventrue vote Antitribu-Toreador Embrace/Palla Grande Cambridge #1: Gangrel rush/intercept Gangrel rush/intercept Tremere rush/intercept Malkavian bleed Cambridge #2: ? Giovanni bruise/bleed? Malkavian bleed Gangrel rush/intercept I figure that about 60% of these decks had combat as the major part of their strategy. And this is pretty much what I expected and prepared for. Punishing combat is a significant part of my Antitribu Malkavian deck - lots of "gotcha" cards like Disguised Weapon, Coma and Reality Mirror. Meddling would be a mediocre addition to these as it's a two-edged sword, far from a sure thing and the ally-based decks can shrug it off. >Hosers never have any value when simple strategy changes accomplish the same >goal is a far more balanced way. What do you mean by "simple strategy changes"? Andrew

On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 21:40:40 GMT, Chris Berger wrote: >My point is just that going backwards ("cross-table") would have probably >won me the game. Which means it was a good idea, strategy-wise, regardless >of whether or not Andrew likes it. Going backwards is not the same as going cross-table. It's reasonable when used in the sense of "the best defense is a good offense" but is rather perverted when used as the sole strategy with the aim of being the last-man-standing. One should at least have something like Smiling Jack/Army of Rats to put some pressure on your prey too. Andrew

Chris wrote: >>My point is just that going backwards ("cross-table") would have probably won me the game. Which means it was a good idea, strategy-wise, regardless of whether or not Andrew likes it.>> Sure--occasionally, it is a good idea to do something non-standard, like get your predator ousted, or get someone across the table ousted. Sometimes it is the best option, and given that it is the best option, it is something you should do, but still, these circumstances are pretty few and far between--hardly the epidemic that Andrew seems to think it is. Sure, there was the time that Steve Wampler won a tournament by bleeding his grand prey (back when you could do that...), so that everyone was ousted in order by his predator's Anarch Revolts, but generally speaking, it isn't a good idea to willy-nilly attack across table. Why those guys decided it was a good idea to Pentex Subvert or Con Ag Andrew from across the table is a total mystery to me, but then I wasn't there. [ quoted text not captured ]

Andrew wrote: >>None of this cross-tablerie was justified by results but all concerned were reasonably experienced players and had their reasons for what they did. My point is that a fair bit of this goes on and so it's reasonable to provide counter-measures for players who want to deter it.>> How are you going to deter it? As far as I can tell, the actions taken against you were either A) completely justified by something I don't understand or B) totally random and malicious. In either case, logical deterrent isn't going to make any difference. >>You have a different metagame.>> Just lucky, I guess. Most tournaments I go to, my Rush deck is very effective, due to low combat and low combat defense. Why? I dunno. Around here, however, it kinda sucks, due to there being a lot of combat defense or manuvers (primarily due to the fact that I used to play that deck a lot), so I don't play it much. >>I figure that about 60% of these decks had combat as the major part of their strategy.>> That is *very* unusual as far as my experience goes. Maybe it is because all the new Bloodlines clans have a lot of combat or something. >>What do you mean by "simple strategy changes"?>> Adjusting your strategy and play to take advantage of what you expect to see (i.e. "metagaming"). If there are a lot of combat decks around, for instance, play a slow, anti-combat deck (which will do very well in a combat heavy environment, but suck in a speedy bleed environment). Win a lot until people start changing their decks. When you stop winning all the time, change your deck to something else. Back in the day when our entire play group was doing nothing by playing IG Rush decks, Josh, one day, showed up with a Ventrue Bonding Bleed deck with 20% combat defense. He killed us over and over again until we changed decks. And then he changed his deck. This is much more effective, and much less arbitrary than hoser cards. [ quoted text not captured ]