MJL Tournament errata

Since we're not using WotC and DCI rules at the tournament on Saturday, I need to post a list of what we are using. This is a list of current MJL Rules Team rulings. Due to the length of this, I will post the temporary solutions for issues still under debate in a separate list. Please note that many of the rulings are in line with WotC errata and many are not. Noal MIRT-980914-1.0: Betrayer The original text stands as-is with the following clarifications for its use: -If the controlled vampire leaves the controlled region, or if the uncontrolled vampire leaves the uncontrolled region, the card's effects are suspended until the original condition is restored. The targeted Methuselah can still pay the extra pool to make an attempt to burn the Betrayer. -The controller of the controlled vampire is the target of the Betrayer's effects, regardless of whether he/she is the originally targeted Methuselah. -It is recommended that players use the Betrayer card to mark which vampire is the Betrayer. MIRT-980921-1.0: Ritual of the Bitter Rose Clarified card text: All your ready vampires gain the amount of blood from the blood bank that is on a vampire you are destroying by diablerie. Usable in combat if an opposing vampire is diablerized. Blood Hunt can only be called on the vampire who committed the diablerie. MIRT-980928-1.1: Second Tradition: Domain Revised card text: Requires ready Prince or Justicar. Only usable by a tapped vampire. Untap this vampire to block. This reacting vampire gets +2 intercept. [This ruling supercedes and combines both the Jyhad and the V:teS versions of this card.] MIRT-981202-1.0: Aggravated Damage MIRT agrees that the rules in the V:tES rulebook regarding Aggravated Damage are the proper variation to adhere to. In a nutshell, this means that all damage, aggravated and otherwise, removes blood from the vampire. If the vampire is unable to pay for aggravated damage, it is burnt. MIRT-81202-2.0: The "Golden Rule" of card ownership MIRT agrees that the rules in the V:tES rulebook regarding what to do if you leave the game are the proper variation to adhere to. If you leave the game, you take your cards with you. Most alternatives are riddled with holes ready for abuse. MIRT-90119-1.0: Tomb of Ramses, III New card text: "When this card is brought into play or the controller of this card changes, you (the new controller) choose a vampire in your uncontrolled region. For each blood counter you transfer to the chosen vampire, put a tomb counter on the Tomb from the Blood Bank. At the end of your influence phase, if the total number of counters on the chosen vampire and on the Tomb equals or exceeds that vampire's capacity, you may move the vampire to the ready region. Burn the Tomb (and the tomb counters on it) when the chosen vampire leaves the uncontrolled region." MIRT-90119-2.0: Beast, Leatherface of Detroit Play as printed MIRT-90119-3.0: Golconda Removes the selected vampire from the game instead of burning him. MIRT-90119-4.0: Immortal Grapple Play as printed (explicity lasts all combat) MIRT-90119-5.0: Kalinda New card text: "As a (D) action, Kalinda may bleed with +1 bleed and +1 stealth. This action costs 2 blood." ***Note: This does not affect her restriction from diablerie. MIRT-90119-6.0: Living Manse Play as printed MIRT-90119-7.0: Reform Body Can be played in combat (as a combat card) by either combatant, acting or reacting/blocking. Can also be played (as a reaction card) from Torpor, even though only Ready vampires can play reaction cards by default. (To match the original intent of the card as verified by one of the playtesters of the Sabbat expansion). ***Note: This is a clarification and not card text change MIRT-90119-8.0: Return to Innocence Play as printed, except no action modifiers MIRT-90119-9.0: Rutor's Hand A vampire can only have one Rutor's Hand. Otherwise, play as printed. MIRT-90119-10.0: Taste of Vitae: Is not cumulative. A Taste of Vitae will not count any blood loss counted by a previous Taste of Vitae. MIRT-90119-11.0: Blood of Acid Only lasts for the current round. MIRT-90119-12.0: Justicar Retribution Counts the bleed each minion would have when bleeding his prey. MIRT-90119-13.0: Mask of a Thousand Faces Cannot be used to mask an action if the Masking vampire is not capable of taking that action, nor if any action modifiers have been played on this action that could not have been played if the Masking vampire were the acting minion. (also can't have someone mask an inherent ability) MIRT-90119-14.0: Darius Styx play as printed MIRT-90119-15.0: Fame Play as printed (VTES version) MIRT-90119-16.0: Mind Rape Play as printed MIRT-90119-17.0: Pulled Fangs Play as printed, but you may not play more than one per round (see taste of vitae) MIRT-90119-18.0: Thoughts Betrayed "Superior: Opposing minion cannot play strike cards for the rest of combat." MIRT-90119-19.0: Treatment, The The action to burn this card is directed (unless the Prince and the Treatment somehow come to be controlled by the same Methuselah), by the definition of a directed action. ***Note: Master cards are controlled by the player that played them unless stolen (like the Rack) and actions that affect tem are generally assumed to be directed. (See Haven Uncovered as a similar card) MIRT-90119-20.0: Wake with Evening's Freshness Play as printed MIRT-90119-21.0: Zip Gun Play as printed MIRT-90119-22.0: Powerbase: New York The action to steal the blood cannot be taken by your own Sabbat vampires. (The WotC spoiler list has text to this effect, but the actual card does not.) MIRT-90119-23.0: Rotschreck Cannot be used if the "attempt to use aggravated damage" is not applicable at the current range. The most common example is an aggravated hand strike done at long range. MIRT-90119-24.0: Ammo (Dragon's Breath Rounds, Glaser Rounds, Manstopper Rounds) Are played "before resolution of a gun's strike", not "when damage from a gun is being resolved". That is, it is played after the strike is announced, but before the strike resolution phase. MIRT-90119-25.0: White Phosphorous Grenade Change "if White Phosphorous Grenade inflicts damage at close range..." to "if White Phosphorous Grenade is used at close range..." MIRT-90119-25.0: Wooden Stake Play as printed -- "Is my ponytail doing anything for you?" -Wally, "Jan 19 Dilbert" (by Scott Adams) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

In article <78njn6$aoj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com writes >Please note that many of the rulings are in line with WotC errata and >many are not. > Hmm... most of them aren't bad. A few I disagree with, say, RtoI, because I don't feel it restricts them enough (which cannot, sometimes, I feel, be done whilst keeping to card text if card text was bust in the first place), but, overall, I don't think there's much difference between the cards you change and the cards that are officially changed - some, but not much earth-shattering, really. >MIRT-90119-14.0: Darius Styx >play as printed I'd be interested to know quite what this means. How does MJL handle (D) actions? Can you do it to yourself, basically? -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia, England) Vampire: Elder Kindred Network http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

James Coupe: > >MIRT-90119-14.0: Darius Styx > >play as printed > > I'd be interested to know quite what this means. How does MJL handle > (D) actions? Can you do it to yourself, basically? Nope. We decided that a (D) action can't be taken against cards that you control It's in line with the original rulebook and we didn't see a need to change it. Allowing (D) actions against yourself could get into loopholes that we really didn't want to deal with...that and there wasn't a compelling game balance argument to change the way (D) actions work. Your concern about RtI is noted. The decision on what to do with RtI was a difficult one to make. The choice of "no action modifiers" narrowly beat out "cost = capacity" when the Rules Team vote was taken on the issue. We're still playtesting the issue on JOL on gmaes MJL1 and MJL2. Personally, I prefer "no action modifiers" because it requires multiple actions or master cards to give it stealth, make it unblockable or add more pool loss to the bleed. This has the result in someone having to resort to a complex strategy to get it the bleed through without being blocked...and to quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing." Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78q04k$bgr$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > Personally, I prefer "no action modifiers" because it requires multiple > actions or master cards to give it stealth, make it unblockable or add > more pool loss to the bleed. This has the result in someone having to > resort to a complex strategy to get it the bleed through without being > blocked...and to quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing." But that changes to force everyone to play some intercept or rush combat. Marked Path and Concoction of Vitality are two things that come to mind as still being able to do RtI. With Marked Path, you don't know it's coming until it's too late. So have got to have enough Intercept for the RtI. With Concoction, you had better intercept it everytime or be able to rush the vampire with it. Otherwise, you die. The true problem with RtI, in my opinion, is the quantity of the bleed vs. number of cards. With RtI, you can get a 17 point bleed with an IC member and Conditioning. Without the Conditioning, it's a 14 point bleed. Without permanents, the biggest bleed you can get is 3 (IC) + 2 (Any +2 bleed action card) + 3 (Conditioning or Aire of Elation) or 8 which requires 2 cards. The pool loss from RtI, even if not on the prey, is too much of a swing effect. Without RtI in the picture, I feel pretty secure when I have 17 pool sitting around. Mike -- Mike Bohlmann, MAIP - Prince of Urbana-Champaign http://www.shout.net/~mbohlman/ [ quoted text not captured ]

mboh...@shout.net wrote: > But that changes to force everyone to play some intercept or rush > combat. And how is that different from the current errata? First you have to block the initial bleed. Even if you bounce it, you'll still lose the pool on the next turn when the vampire gets burned. It's not hard to give the initial bleed +1 stealth. It gets much harder if you disallow action modifiers. If you fail to block the initial bleed, you have to cause damage or blood loss of some sort to the vampire that played RtI. Under most circumstances, that would require a rush combat deck. Other minions controlled by that player can block the rush and unless the rushing minion can defeat S:CE, there's no guarantee it will be successful. > Marked Path and Concoction of Vitality are two things that > come to mind as still being able to do RtI. However, both require an extra action as does the current WotC errata. While Marked Path may be done with an action that causes pool loss, Concoction of Vitality may not. > With Marked Path, you don't know it's coming until it's too late. > So have got to have enough Intercept for the RtI. Same thing with current errata. > With Concoction, you had better intercept it everytime or be able > to rush the vampire with it. Otherwise, you die. Also true with current errata. > The true problem with RtI, in my opinion, is the quantity of the > bleed vs. number of cards. With RtI, you can get a 17 point bleed > with an IC member and Conditioning. However, if you disallow action modifiers, you also disallow Conditioning. There are only a few cards that allow you to pump up the bleed without using action modifiers: Pentex Loves You, Spying Mission, Melange, Laptop Computers, Living Manse, Sabbat Inquisitor, J.S.Simmons, Tasha Morgan, Tier of Souls, Pulse of Canaille and inherent bleed bonuses. All of which can still be used to contribute to the initial bleed under the WotC RtI. Also, keep in mind that under current errata that you are still free to modify the inital bleed from RtI with Conditioning and so forth. > Without the Conditioning, it's a 14 point bleed. Without permanents, > the biggest bleed you can get is 3 (IC) + 2 (Any +2 bleed action card) > + 3 (Conditioning or Aire of Elation) or 8 which requires 2 cards. Incorrect. Spiridonas at full can play Social Charm (2), spend 8 blood (+6), play Command the Beast (+1) and spend 1 blood for Conditioning (+3) for a total of 12, requiring 3 cards. If he had the Ankara Citadel on him, the total bleed could be 14 (Legal Manip instead of Social Charm and spend the blood saved from Conditioning to spend on an additional +1 bleed). If he also has a Prince playing the 5th Tradition Hospital, he could possibly do it every turn. (hey! there's the 30 card deck! *grin*) > The pool loss from RtI, even if not on the prey, is too much of a swing > effect. Without RtI in the picture, I feel pretty secure when I have 17 > pool sitting around. If you disallow action modifiers, it makes it much easier to block, which in my opinion, makes it much more balanced than current errata. Besides, if your predator has permanents in play that give stealth or unblockable actions, you would be wise to not feel so secure. Noal McDonald Michigan Jyhad League [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78qdea$o7g$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > First you have to block the initial bleed. Even if you bounce it, you'll > still lose the pool on the next turn when the vampire gets burned. Nope. You can also reduce the bleed to zero if it's not large. Decks not playing rush or some kind of deflection or cards like Charnas or Cryptic Mission are still hosed if they don't block or deflect the initial bleed. ]Bleed. If you successfully bleed your Prey for one or more, put this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ]card on the acting vampire. Burn this card if this vampire loses any blood ]or goes to torpor, or if your Prey is ousted. During your next untap, ]this vampire is removed from play and your Prey burns X pool, where ]X is the capacity of this vampire. So if it's bounced, the Return to Innocence doesn't go into play and the burn and remove effect never happens. Btw, I'm working on a way to still abuse this as I just want the darn card banned. :) > It's not hard to give the initial bleed +1 stealth. It gets much > harder if you disallow action modifiers. I wouldn't say much. Psychic Veil, Enchanted Marionette, vampires with inherent stealth, +stealth locations, etc. > If you fail to block [or deflectthe initial bleed, you have to cause damage or > blood loss of some sort to the vampire that played RtI. Under most > circumstances, that would require a rush combat deck. Other minions > controlled by that player can block the rush and unless the rushing > minion can defeat S:CE, there's no guarantee it will be successful. Yep. Which is why I don't think the current errata goes far enough. And the MJL errata is even weaker. > However, [Marked Path and Concoction of Vitality] require an > extra action as does the current WotC errata. While Marked > Path may be done with an action that causes pool loss, > Concoction of Vitality may not. Exactly. Under MJL errata, you have no idea the RtI is coming. The effect of unmodified RtI is just the same under MJL RtI - you have to be prepared to the point of paranoia. That means trying to block everything. > > With Marked Path, you don't know it's coming until it's too late. > > So have got to have enough Intercept for the RtI. > > Same thing with current errata. Deflection works fine. But as I said, it doesn't go far enough. > > With Concoction, you had better intercept it everytime or be able > > to rush the vampire with it. Otherwise, you die. > > Also true with current errata. See above. :) > > The true problem with RtI, in my opinion, is the quantity of the > > bleed vs. number of cards. With RtI, you can get a 17 point bleed > > with an IC member and Conditioning. > > However, if you disallow action modifiers, you also disallow Conditioning. Sorry, 14 bleed instead of 17. > There are only a few cards that allow you to pump up the bleed without ... > All of which can still be used to contribute to the initial bleed under the > WotC RtI. Yes, the net pool loss under RT RtI can be much greater. However, the opportunity of stopping it are better because you know what you have to do to stop it. > Also, keep in mind that under current errata that you are still free to > modify the inital bleed from RtI with Conditioning and so forth. Yep. > > Without the Conditioning, it's a 14 point bleed. Without permanents, > > the biggest bleed you can get is 3 (IC) + 2 (Any +2 bleed action card) > > + 3 (Conditioning or Aire of Elation) or 8 which requires 2 cards. > > Incorrect. Spiridonas at full can play Social Charm (2), spend 8 blood (+6), > play Command the Beast (+1) and spend 1 blood for Conditioning (+3) for > a total of 12, requiring 3 cards. Spiridonas gives me the same icky feeling as RtI. I had forgotten about him. His high cost actually almost serves as a benefit. > If he had the Ankara Citadel on him, the total bleed could be 14 (Legal > Manip instead of Social Charm and spend the blood saved from > Conditioning to spend on an additional +1 bleed). If he also has a Prince > playing the 5th Tradition Hospital, he could possibly do it every turn. > (hey! there's the 30 card deck! *grin*) Still gotta get it through every turn. :) > If you disallow action modifiers, it makes it much easier to block, which > in my opinion, makes it much more balanced than current errata. Besides, > if your predator has permanents in play that give stealth or unblockable > actions, you would be wise to not feel so secure. But you're making the error that deflection or reduction of the initial bleed does nothing. You have to successfully bleed your _prey_. I will, admit, however, that I don't think it goes far enough and is only slightly better than the no-action-modifier rule. Mike -- Mike Bohlmann, MAIP - Prince of Urbana-Champaign http://www.shout.net/~mbohlman/ -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote in message >Personally, I prefer "no action modifiers" because it requires multiple >actions or master cards to give it stealth, make it unblockable or add >more pool loss to the bleed. This has the result in someone having to >resort to a complex strategy to get it the bleed through without being >blocked...and to quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing." > >Noal McDonald >Michigan Jyhad League And I Prefer the Cost=Capacity. The cost of playing this card become justifiable. If I were to bleed with a vampire 9cap say. And in doing so I oust my prey, I am still down 3 pool. You, to quote Noal, still need "multiple actions modifiers or master cards to give it stealth, make it unblockable or add more pool loss to the bleed. This has the result in someone having to resort to a complex strategy" and to quote Martha Stewart, "That's a good thing." Like Noal and Martha said to make the Cost=Capacity card viable you need to pump it up in some fashion. Raille.

Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > mboh...@shout.net wrote: > > But that changes to force everyone to play some intercept or rush > > combat. > > And how is that different from the current errata? > > First you have to block the initial bleed. Even if you bounce it, you'll > still lose the pool on the next turn when the vampire gets burned. It's No. If you bounce the initial bleed (or reduce it to zero or less), the RtI is merely burned like any other action card (and the acting vampire still pays the 4-blood cost if the action isn't blocked). Return to Innocence [AH] - action (4) * New card text: "Bleed. If you successfully bleed your Prey for one or more, put this card on the acting vampire. Burn this card if this vampire loses any blood or goes to torpor, or if your Prey is ousted. During your next untap, this vampire is removed from play and your Prey burns X pool, where X is the capacity of this vampire." [RTR 980707] -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and DCI (tournament) rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/VTES_Rules.html [ quoted text not captured ]

"Raille" <rai...@mich.com> wrote: > And I Prefer the Cost=Capacity. > You, to quote Noal, still need "multiple actions modifiers or master cards > to give it stealth, make it unblockable or add more pool loss to the bleed. Not true, Dave. Obfuscate has a half-billion cards that gives stealth at no cost and Fortitude has Daring the Dawn to make the action unblockable (by vampires) so as I see it, the Cost=Capacity doesn't require an extra action at all. Noal [ quoted text not captured ]

mboh...@shout.net wrote: > Nope. You can also reduce the bleed to zero if it's not large. *grin* Like it's all that hard to pump it up. > ]Bleed. If you successfully bleed your Prey for one or more, put this > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ oops. missed that nuance. > Btw, I'm working on a way > to still abuse this as I just want the darn card banned. :) I'm with ya brother. I refuse to play with the card outside of playtesting because I think it's a damned silly card. However, back in the day when I thought it was cool, I used a Setite "steal and RTI" deck. You could steal your prey's vampires and bleed him with it. On his untap, he loses the vampire and his prey loses the pool, paving the way for you to sweep. You might want to pack some Life Boons to prevent your prey from getting the easy victory point...*ponders* This could actually work. *wanders off to the drawing board* > I wouldn't say much. Psychic Veil, Enchanted Marionette, vampires > with inherent stealth, +stealth locations, etc. All of the above require a lot more planning that a Lost in Crowds. No to mention that most are unique or extremely rare and cost blood or pool. I would say "much". > Exactly. Under MJL errata, you have no idea the RtI is coming. > The effect of unmodified RtI is just the same under MJL RtI - you > have to be prepared to the point of paranoia. That means trying > to block everything. You wouldn't try to block an action that gives someone an unblockable action later?!? Besides, knowing whether the RtI is coming or not isn't going to make it easier to stop it if your deck isn't prepared for it. > > Same thing with current errata. > Deflection works fine. But as I said, it doesn't go far enough. *shrug* While it's hard to debate what does "go far enough", I have a standard of trying to stay as close to card text as possible. While I agree that RtI is flawed in its conception, I'd argue that MJL errata is as close as possible to "fixing" it without deviating severely from text. > But you're making the error that deflection or reduction of the initial > bleed does nothing. You have to successfully bleed your _prey_. I will, > admit, however, that I don't think it goes far enough and is only slightly > better than the no-action-modifier rule. Okay...I concede that I missed the point of deflections being an effective way to stop RtI, but if they had a Misdirection and Sleeping Mind in hand, you had better have a wake _and_ a deflection in hand. Most decks simply can't stand up to that. At least if you prevent action mods, they can't play Sleeping Mind (another damned card I refuse to use). I'd argue that the no-action-modifiers rule is as balanced as current errata but in different ways. But it does boil down to the fact that RtI is just a crappy card to begin with. Noal -- "Is my ponytail doing anything for you?" -Wally, "Jan 19 Dilbert" (by Scott Adams) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78skc2$khu$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > could steal your prey's vampires and bleed him with it. On his untap, > he loses the vampire and his prey loses the pool, paving the way for > you to sweep. You might want to pack some Life Boons to prevent > your prey from getting the easy victory point...*ponders* This could > actually work. *wanders off to the drawing board* This is almost exactly what I had in mind. Using Dominate and Obfuscate, with Leandro probably being the main vampire in the deck. Arika the other. Put Dominate and Obfuscate on target vampire of Prey. Mind Rape. RtI with a Conditioning and stealth. Include some damaging votes so your prey doesn't get too ambitious. > > I wouldn't say much. Psychic Veil, Enchanted Marionette, vampires > > with inherent stealth, +stealth locations, etc. > > All of the above require a lot more planning that a Lost in Crowds. > No to mention that most are unique or extremely rare and cost > blood or pool. I would say "much". I say tomato, you say tomato. Errrr.... > You wouldn't try to block an action that gives someone an unblockable > action later?!? First, I don't put intercept in all my decks. Second, I don't always have intercept available in a deck with intercept. Third, I might not block it. Sunrise Service is one that I rarely block if I can. I'll block the rescue from torpor and put two vampires in there. :) > Besides, knowing whether the RtI is coming or not isn't going to make it > easier to stop it if your deck isn't prepared for it. You might get pity from the other players though? > *shrug* While it's hard to debate what does "go far enough", I have > a standard of trying to stay as close to card text as possible. While > I agree that RtI is flawed in its conception, I'd argue that MJL errata > is as close as possible to "fixing" it without deviating severely from text. That's why I just say ban it. Leave the text as written and eliminate the flame wars. > Okay...I concede that I missed the point of deflections being an effective > way to stop RtI, but if they had a Misdirection and Sleeping Mind in hand, > you had better have a wake _and_ a deflection in hand. Most decks simply > can't stand up to that. At least if you prevent action mods, they can't > play Sleeping Mind (another damned card I refuse to use). The number of cards needed keeps creeping up.... > I'd argue that the no-action-modifiers rule is as balanced as current errata > but in different ways. But it does boil down to the fact that RtI is just a > crappy card to begin with. Maybe we could set out to buy all the RtI out there and burn them.... I know I'll never trade someone the 3 I have....well maybe if I got down to only needing one more card from Sabbat. As it stands, I need about 10 to complete my collection. [ quoted text not captured ]

Noal> Incorrect. Spiridonas at full can play Social Charm (2), spend 8 Noal> blood (+6), play Command the Beast (+1) and spend 1 blood for Noal> Conditioning (+3) for a total of 12, requiring 3 cards. Mike> Spiridonas gives me the same icky feeling as RtI. I had forgotten about Mike> him. His high cost actually almost serves as a benefit. *nods* And to use Dreams or ToRIII to get him out...*shakes head* He is a Prince and entitled to use 5th Tradition Hospital after he comes out. If you put a Fortitude card and a Soul Gem on him and played Daring the Dawn... *shakes head* That's just sick and wrong. But then, I've seen that sort of deck before with the old RtI...this just does the same thing with a lot more complex mix of cards. Noal -- "Is my ponytail doing anything for you?" -Wally, "Jan 19 Dilbert" (by Scott Adams) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

mboh...@shout.net wrote: > This is almost exactly what I had in mind. Using Dominate and Obfuscate, > with Leandro probably being the main vampire in the deck. Arika the > other. Of course when someone drops a Fear of Mekhet... Actually, I'd go with a Malk/Setite combo. Kemintiri would be a good start. Temptation/Mind Rape deck would be ill. > I say tomato, you say tomato. Errrr.... The scary thing was I heard the different pronunciations when I read this... > First, I don't put intercept in all my decks. Second, I don't always have > intercept available in a deck with intercept. Third, I might not block it. > Sunrise Service is one that I rarely block if I can. I'll block the rescue > from torpor and put two vampires in there. :) Well, without any intercept you're hosed anyway. Sunrise Service, I'll grant you...if you have an intercept/combat deck. Which few people play. However, as you pointed out earlier, there are ways of making an action unblockable without going to topor. > > Besides, knowing whether the RtI is coming or not isn't going to make it > > easier to stop it if your deck isn't prepared for it. > > You might get pity from the other players though? heh. > That's why I just say ban it. Leave the text as written and eliminate > the flame wars. Flame wars? > > Okay...I concede that I missed the point of deflections being an effective > > way to stop RtI, but if they had a Misdirection and Sleeping Mind in hand, > > you had better have a wake _and_ a deflection in hand. Most decks simply > > can't stand up to that. At least if you prevent action mods, they can't > > play Sleeping Mind (another damned card I refuse to use). > > The number of cards needed keeps creeping up.... *shrug* A tap and bleed strategy isn't all that uncommon. > Maybe we could set out to buy all the RtI out there and burn them.... > I know I'll never trade someone the 3 I have....well maybe if I got down > to only needing one more card from Sabbat. As it stands, I need about 10 > to complete my collection. I think I have 10 RtI's and I believe I have a complete collection. Now if I can just find my lighter... Noal -- "Is my ponytail doing anything for you?" -Wally, "Jan 19 Dilbert" (by Scott Adams) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78t0j7$m8$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > Of course when someone drops a Fear of Mekhet... Bah! That's what Golconda is for. "Oh, my IC member is screwed? I'll Golconda him." > Actually, I'd go with a Malk/Setite combo. Kemintiri would be a good start. > Temptation/Mind Rape deck would be ill. Temptation should work every players' master phase, darnit! > > I say tomato, you say tomato. Errrr.... > > The scary thing was I heard the different pronunciations when I read this... dooDooDOOdoo If you get that one, then I'll really be scared. > > That's why I just say ban it. Leave the text as written and eliminate > > the flame wars. > > Flame wars? Don't know why I said that. In fact, I don't think I've even used those words. I had another DejaNews thing in another window and saw flame wars... and.....I'm soooo tired. Need beer. Is it 5 o'clock yet? I'm starting to lean towards getting a good buzz going and heading over to the Illini vs. Iowa State hockey game. You suck! What?! Am I rambling??? > > The number of cards needed keeps creeping up.... > > *shrug* A tap and bleed strategy isn't all that uncommon. True. > > Maybe we could set out to buy all the RtI out there and burn them.... > > I know I'll never trade someone the 3 I have....well maybe if I got down > > to only needing one more card from Sabbat. As it stands, I need about 10 > > to complete my collection. > > I think I have 10 RtI's and I believe I have a complete collection. > Now if I can just find my lighter... Try sticking the cards in your mouth with a Life Saver (I almost wrote lightsaber). Bite hard. The Life Saver will spark just as you start to drool all over yourself. Mike, who's darn ready for happy hour after a heck of a long week [ quoted text not captured ]

Noal> Of course when someone drops a Fear of Mekhet... Mike> Bah! That's what Golconda is for. "Oh, my IC member is screwed? Mike> I'll Golconda him." Fear of Mekhet happens during untap... Noal> Actually, I'd go with a Malk/Setite combo. Kemintiri would be a good Noal> start. Temptation/Mind Rape deck would be ill. Mike> Temptation should work every players' master phase, darnit! Naah...that's too rude. However, there's nothing saying that you can't pile multiple Temptations on the same vampire... > dooDooDOOdoo > > If you get that one, then I'll really be scared. hrm. sounds familiar....*starts humming* Mike> Don't know why I said that. In fact, I don't think I've even used those Mike> words. I had another DejaNews thing in another window and saw flame Mike> wars...and.....I'm soooo tired. Need beer. Is it 5 o'clock yet? I'm starting Mike> to lean towards getting a good buzz going and heading over to the Illini Mike> vs. Iowa State hockey game. You suck! What?! Am I rambling??? heh. > Try sticking the cards in your mouth with a Life Saver (I almost wrote > lightsaber). Bite hard. The Life Saver will spark just as you start > to drool all over yourself. *laughs* I think my gf would look at me strangely... Noal -- "Is my ponytail doing anything for you?" -Wally, "Jan 19 Dilbert" (by Scott Adams) -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78tac1$a0j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com wrote: > Noal> Of course when someone drops a Fear of Mekhet... > > Mike> Bah! That's what Golconda is for. "Oh, my IC member is screwed? > Mike> I'll Golconda him." > > Fear of Mekhet happens during untap... Of course. I'm assuming that my IC member had at least 5 blood on it before the first turn with Fear. > Mike> Temptation should work every players' master phase, darnit! > > Naah...that's too rude. However, there's nothing saying that you can't pile > multiple Temptations on the same vampire... Ohhhh, I wish I had more than 2. I actually bought a box of AH hoping to get more. Got 4 Foul Blood (which works nicely in my Assamite deck), 2 RtI, and 3 Kiss of Ra for rares. Oh well. > > Try sticking the cards in your mouth with a Life Saver (I almost wrote > > lightsaber). Bite hard. The Life Saver will spark just as you start > > to drool all over yourself. > > *laughs* I think my gf would look at me strangely... No comment....errr....can't resist. "I hereby take this vow of celebacy by swallowing these Return to Innocence while chewing a Life Saver!" And yes, I know I spelled celebacy wrong. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <78qdea$o7g$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Dhar...@yahoo.com writes > mboh...@shout.net wrote: >> But that changes to force everyone to play some intercept or rush >> combat. > >And how is that different from the current errata? Bleed reduction. Votes. [ quoted text not captured ]