A requiem for the game formerly known as Jyhad

This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading over the spoiler list was enought for me. (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first place!? I mean, the two qualitiess that have always (until the two expansions started to gnaw at the foundations, and this latest monstrosity) set Jyhad (or Vampire, if you prefer) are game balance and a point-cost system, where powerful cards have expensive costs associated with them. Now, Sabbat has shattered the "envelope" and put certain clans on a higher plane of existence; there is no longer an even playing field. The Tremere, the Brujah, and the Tzimisce have vaulted to preeminence. A brief comment on vicissitude: it has too much stealth, too much aggravated damage, and is too flexible for too little cost. Cards like Reform Body and Fleshcraft are just the straw that breaks the camel's back. Comparing the Lasombra to the Tzimisce is a joke! Obtenebration is weak, with not enough efficient stealth, not enough combat or other cool effects. Vampires-hah! Dragos (Tz) is absolutely broken: a 7-cap whose special ability grants him *zero* cost for *any* combat card! Along with Meshenka who pays a reduced cost for vic. cards, a clear pattern emerges... In addition, the Tzimisce have ridiculously underpriced allies such as the War Ghoul Other broken vampires for the Tremere and Brujah include the popular Ian Forestal, Reverend Blackwood (Gee, a 6-cap with DOM THA who begs for the broken TB-WF combo with additional damage), and Jacko, not to mention the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the initiator?? And of course the Tremere and Brujah ramp up in an extraordinary manner when you consider the new version of an Art Museum that the Brujah receive, along with the insanely powerful unique equipment that they get (not to mention that the Tzimisce also get a clan-specific Sengir Dagger) relative to any other clan. The Tremere also get a weapon-hoser in Machine Blitz: now, if they can't block a gun-wielding Toreador or Ravnos deck, they can counter with x points of damage in return, for a cost of 1 blood. Ultimately, the Lasombra are in a similar plight to the Settites: they have an underpowered signature discipline that could add new spice to the game, relatively inefficient/unfocused vampires, and not enough support from the game designers. They even proceeded to make the Festivo a non-clan specific Master, for goodness' sake! The designers didn't learn from their mistake with TB from DS: they saw the need that Malkavians (albeit those without celerity, who are almost in a minority) had for combat defense, but didn't properly consider that DOM is a discipline possessed by those combat-mongering, intercepting Tremere. Well, now with Disarm and Decapitate, POT has gained two new effective cards that the Brujah can take advantage of besides the Lasombra. I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have missed. Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad. I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my allegiance to the Lasombra. A depressed Jyhad player, Sean Whittaker

You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest. It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and clans.

Scott Whittaker wrote: > > This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing > the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now > mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term > will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at > WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not > yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading > over the spoiler list was enought for me. > (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat > has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the > cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he > was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters > could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that > in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat > difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first > place!? > --------------------------------------------------------- Large portion of text cut. ---------------------------------------------------------- > I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have > missed. > Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad. > I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my > allegiance to the Lasombra. > A depressed Jyhad player, > Sean Whittaker I've only seen a few cards from the new Sabbat expansion, but from the three boosters I've opened and the few other cards I've seen it looks like WOTC dropped the ball again. I am fortunate in that my play group doesn't have access to a vast resevoir of cards and those that do prefer variety and fun over competent but boring strategies. Unfortunately, some people will be unable to resist using a few of these new cards. It's a shame but I think WOTC just decided to throw any kind of play balance out the door. ( Our group thought the two tremere vamps with +1 stealth were underpriced, but now there's a 6 cap vamp Jost werner PRE,AUS,ani with the same ability!!! And neither the Tremere or the Toreador have Obfuscate as a discipline. At least with Lucretia it was clan-justified. I happen to like playing Gangrel from time to time, now there is a Sabbat Gangrel with ANI,PRO,dom,aus at a cost of 5,... AND SHES A BISHOP!!!!!! What kind of drugs are the playtesters at WOTC smoking???? Suffice it to say that after rediscovering how fun Jyhad was, after years of magic the addiction, I find that WOTC has decided to turn Jyhad into another meat grinding money maker. Perhaps we were better off when Jyhad was ignored. A frustrated player, Karl

Sean... Thanks for your comments, you are RIGHT ON! Nothing like a real JYHAD game is there? Good luck, Jeff Scott Whittaker wrote: > > This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing > the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now > mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term > will do) and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at > WotC have brought us. Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not > yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading > over the spoiler list was enought for me. > (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat > has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the > cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he > was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters > could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that > in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat > difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first > place!? [ quoted text not captured ]

Karl Innes wrote: > > Suffice it to say that after rediscovering how fun Jyhad was, after years of magic the addiction, I > find that WOTC has decided to turn Jyhad into another meat grinding money maker. Perhaps we were better off > when Jyhad was ignored. > > A frustrated player, Karl I concur with your last statement. Just last week, one of my best friends, who like myself has played Jyhad from the beginning, commented that he was more than happy to wait a *long* time for a new expansion (Sabbat, in this case), just to ensure high quality. But of course now we have this product that was supposedly was playtested and developed for a year [yeah, right!]. I guess Magic munchkins are now in charge of Jyhad too, another frustrated player now working on an alternative Sabbat expansion, Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker

Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker writes: >I concur with your last statement. Just last week, one of my best >friends, who like myself has played Jyhad from the beginning, commented >that he was more than happy to wait a *long* time for a new expansion >(Sabbat, in this case), just to ensure high quality. But of course now >we have this product that was supposedly was playtested and developed >for a year [yeah, right!]. It looks like there were some playtesting defects in Sabbat, but there are fundamental design changes as well. The 2 biggest are the surrender of the vampire point costing system and the increasing reliance on high-cost high-effect cards. Improper playtesting can generally be fixed by banning the accaisional broken card, but you can't ban every cheap vampire or all the high-cost combat cards - you'd take out too much of the set. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)

[ quoted text not captured ] Although your point that *we* should playtest it might be valid-although I refuse to buy the cards-it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the list and see problems that apparently the design team ignored or were ignorant of (a scary thought, that). Equally, your final statement is both unsupported and largely irrelevant: previous problems are *nothing* compared to the can o' worms that the Sabbat has opened up. Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker

In article <Pine.BSI.3.91.961029...@tubby.pacificcoast.net> Malcolm McCallum <mcca...@pacificcoast.net> writes: >You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you >can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it >looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest. It's easy to see problems if you look at it through the lens of game theory. For instance, there are three chief strategies, and several counters for each. They are/were nicely balanced, with the exception of a few problem cards like Thoughts Betrayed and Return to Innocence. Something that breaks one of the strategies, or one of the defensive strategies, will break part of the game. For instance, Thoughts Betrayed breaks combat, while S:Combat Ends does not -- there are a few counters to S:CE, but none to Thoughts Betrayed except equipment. It is a trump card. For a more recent example, take Walk through Arcadia. It completely nullifies the Intercept defense for Malk bleed. Before, you at least had a chance, but now only two of the three main defenses (rush, deflection, and block) are available. Of course, this won't bother most CL groups, because they've informally banned Malk Bleed. (As I posted elsewhere, Change of Target keeps the 'failure' mode of the card from allowing interception.) Note that Toreador Grand Ball is similarly broken, but for the intercept defense to a Toreador Vote deck. (And, the Grand Ball is a master that costs pool, so it's a bit harder to use.) >It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and >clans. It had a handful of problem cards, and no lopsided clans, with perhaps the exception of weak Nosferatu. And, if you're playing CL, S&B is advantaged. There were very few power rares, too. -- Tom Doehne doe...@cse.ogi.edu

In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes: > Malcolm McCallum wrote: > > > > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you > > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it > > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest. > > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and > > clans. > > Although your point that *we* should playtest it might be valid-although > I refuse to buy the cards-it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the > list and see problems that apparently the design team ignored or were > ignorant of (a scary thought, that). Equally, your final statement is > both unsupported and largely irrelevant: previous problems are *nothing* > compared to the can o' worms that the Sabbat has opened up. > > Sean (aka Scott) Whittaker You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'. Right. This is up there with the guy who, after asking, with exclamation points "Why can't you see this card is broken!?", said that someone else didn't have to be so offensive. If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved has degenerated into, maybe the game is dead. Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently. Ritaxis

>> This, I suspect, will be the first of many posts severely criticizing >> the Sabbat expansion by diehard fans of Jyhad, a game we should now >> mourn as obsolete in face of this extremely broken (yes, no other term >> will do) WHY???? In what way is the sabbat expansion broken? barring a few powerful cards (but not game breakingly powerful cards, mind you) I can't see any reason why the set is broken! >> and disappointing new direction that the infallible minds at >> WotC have brought us. what direction would that be? do you object to having the game expanded full stop? >> Personally, living in Vancouver, BC, I have not >> yet had the dubious pleasure of seeing the cards, but two hours reading >> over the spoiler list was enought for me. I would have thought that playing the game would be required before any judgements can be made. There are also a few badly worded cards that seem a bit powerful, and then when you read them properly and see how the card actually plays, its not so bad (That celerity one with the X additional strikes is a good example) Perhaps you have misinterpreted, as we did, many of the cards on the cardlist and think, mistakenly, that there are a lot of over powered cards. >> (Do I recall the short-lived designer/netrep assuring me that "Sabbat >> has been extensively play-tested; we have polished the hell out of the >> cards and caught some brutal game-breaking cards..."?) Oh, pardon me, he >> was quoted in the latest Duellist as saying that unless playtesters >> could *prove* that a card was broken, it stayed in! Well, I guess that >> in the face of such overpowered expansion, it might be somewhat >> difficult to do, but didn't they compare it to Vampire in the first >> place!? >> I mean, the two qualitiess that have always (until the two expansions >> started to gnaw at the foundations, and this latest monstrosity) set >> Jyhad (or Vampire, if you prefer) are game balance and a point-cost >> system, where powerful cards have expensive costs associated with them. >> Now, Sabbat has shattered the "envelope" and put certain clans on a >> higher plane of existence; there is no longer an even playing field. The >> Tremere, the Brujah, and the Tzimisce have vaulted to preeminence. This isn't too bad a point, but I think that ancient hearts left the gangrel a bit unbalanced, and the brujah are now brought in to line. lets face it though - you're still talking about the combat clans - just because a clan is specifically designed for combat (as the four mentioned clans have)doesn't mean that its over powered - there are still as many ways to avoid combat as before (even more S:CE's available, more stealth). I can't see a well constructed vote or bleed deck having too much of a problem with these extra potent combat clans, you pretty much have to expect to loose a vampire to a combat deck (unless you are a combat deck yourself) unless you have a fist full of combat avoidance. >> A brief comment on vicissitude: it has too much stealth, too much >> aggravated damage, and is too flexible for too little cost. Cards like >> Reform Body and Fleshcraft are just the straw that breaks the camel's >> back. I don't think Vicissitude is as good as you think. its good at killing non combat vamps, but those fleshcraft type strikes are very difficult to use, I found. The stealth isn't that bad - its still no obfusctate, and not really as good a protean! Lets face it, the Tzimisce's two other clan disciplines mean that it is pretty much limited to intercept combat, so Vic could do with being a combat discipline. As for the stealth, I would have thought that it goes without saying that vic would get some stealth - and it's not got an overpowering amount, IMO. I would say that Vic is like an inferior protean for the most part, but "With knobs on" if you include cards like fleshcraft (which is surprisingly difficult to use!) >> Comparing the Lasombra to the Tzimisce is a joke! Obtenebration is >> weak, with not enough efficient stealth, not enough combat or other cool >> effects. Vampires-hah! Dragos (Tz) is absolutely broken: a 7-cap whose >> special ability grants him *zero* cost for *any* combat card! He, however, is just one in the many vampire in the set. He is perhaps a bit powerful, but then so can carlotta, or Muaziz be considered as such in the other sets... The Tzimisce got luck - this time! >> Along with Meshenka who pays a reduced cost for vic. cards, Thats not too powerful, surely? >> a clear pattern emerges... which is? >> In addition, the Tzimisce have ridiculously underpriced >> allies such as the War Ghoul Not seen this in play - the special action is 0 strealth, though, and will probably be blocked and the ghoul killed by most decks (perhaps at a cost, but even still). The ghould has no combat "control" abilities (such as the garou's manouver and additional strike) and will probably end up burnt! >> Other broken vampires for the Tremere and Brujah include the popular Ian >> Forestal, Reverend Blackwood (Gee, a 6-cap with DOM THA who begs for the >> broken TB-WF combo with additional damage) TB is broken whatever, its bad evough with tom thorne! Just ban it! >>, and Jacko, not to mention >> the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were >> making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the >> drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the >> initiator?? Most people won't put him in, or perhaps put him in to bring out only if someone else brings him out - 4 blood is a lot to loose! (a 4 cap with his abilities isn't hugely overpowered - he'll get beaten up by a combat deck fairly easily as he has only four blood on him. >> And of course the Tremere and Brujah ramp up in an extraordinary manner >> when you consider the new version of an Art Museum that the Brujah >> receive, along with the insanely powerful unique equipment that they get >> (not to mention that the Tzimisce also get a clan-specific Sengir >> Dagger) relative to any other clan. Why is this any different to what the assamites got - and they've got celerity! I haven't enountered any Brujah equipment that is game breaking, yet. >> The Tremere also get a weapon-hoser >> in Machine Blitz: now, if they can't block a gun-wielding Toreador or >> Ravnos deck, they can counter with x points of damage in return, for a >> cost of 1 blood. that one blood could put them in torpor, and the Toreador, having celerity, anre a lot better at controlling the combat than the tremere, so it'll probably be on their terms, so perhaps an anti gun card isn't that bad - it gives the tremere (as a primary combat clan) an edge over a clan that is not primarily a combat clan. >> Ultimately, the Lasombra are in a similar plight to the Settites: they >> have an underpowered signature discipline that could add new spice to >> the game, relatively inefficient/unfocused vampires, and not enough >> support from the game designers. This is a good point, however the settites (arguably) and the Giovanni were fairly useless when they came out at first (If you don't think the giovanni are good then add them to the Lassombra and they gain an additional bit of stealth and combat, that can't be bad, can it). If WotC need an Idea for a new expansion, they could make a "Masters of secrets" (or perhaps a slightly less corny name) set that brings the Giovanni, settites and Lasombra up to speed with the rest of them. >> Well, now with Disarm and Decapitate, POT has gained two new >> effective cards that the Brujah can take advantage of besides the >> Lasombra. They're not too deadly. I don't see the problem. >> I could go on, but I'm sure that others will take up anything I have >> missed. >> Let us observe a moment of silence for the game formerly known as Jyhad. >> I for one will not be playing with these new cards, despite my >> allegiance to the Lasombra. >> A depressed Jyhad player, >> Sean Whittaker I don't see what your problem is. please inform me.

rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote: > > In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes: > > Malcolm McCallum wrote: > > > > > > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you > > > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it > > > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest. > > > > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and > > > clans. [snip my previous remarks] > > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'. > > Right. Hold it right there. My comment is accurate as far as it goes. When someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence for his opinion. > > > Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up > and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In > Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a > more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently. Thank you, but I would never submit myself to the chaotic mayhem that Magic has become. I have spent several hours the past week reading the spoilers and discussin the expansion with the people I play with , and we all unanimously decided not to integrate Sabbat cards with Jyhad. This was not an unimformed decision; nor was it a hasty one. I still might like to simply watch other people play Sabbat by itself, or look at some of the cool pictures, but that's it. I firmly believe that there are more than ten broken cards in this set (including vampires), and that many undercosted/overcosted ones as well. Let me know if you'd like more evidence, Sean Whittaker

neve...@mind.com (Anonymous) >>, and Jacko, not to mention >> the stupid Pander, Jimmy Dunn: why didn't WotC just admit they were >> making a broken card when they gave a 4-cap POT CEL for, with the >> drawback of immediate resolution of a contestment in the favour of the >> initiator?? >Most people won't put him in, or perhaps put him in to bring out only if >someone else brings him out - 4 blood is a lot to loose! (a 4 cap with his >abilities isn't hugely overpowered - he'll get beaten up by a combat deck >fairly easily as he has only four blood on him. Well, let's do the math. If not contested, you've gained 1 pool for a POT CEL deck (I'll ignore him in other decks, as they are more exotic). If contested, you'll lose at most 4 pool (less if he does something before going away). So if he's uncontested 4 times for every time he's contested, you're ahead of the game. Let's suppose there are 5 players and that each player on average brings out (or at least chooses from) 5 vampires. That will be 20 opponent vampires in each game. Jimmy is a good deal if he is contested 1 time in 5; so if 1 out of 100 vampires is Jimmy, he's a good deal. That means Jimmy will show up at least once in every 8 decks, which is more often than you see pot-cel. So, yes, you would want a copy of Jimmy in every pot-cel deck. That's the hallmark of a broken vampire. Actually it's even worse than that. Half the time that he's contested, you'll be the one to bring him out second and you lose nothing! Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)

Hi Ritaxis, On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote: > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'. > > > Right. > > This is up there with the guy who, after asking, with exclamation > points "Why can't you see this card is broken!?", said that someone else > didn't have to be so offensive. > > If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved has > degenerated into, maybe the game is dead. > > > Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up > and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In > Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a > more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently. > Well, your right, of course. I think the cardback thing did enourmous damage to this newsgroup, LSJ has not been buying (or playing) the new cards, so he has been absent from some of the debates that could really use him. The Corrupter has pretty much picked up that tourch, but often he sounds like a lone voice of reason in a sea of emotional responses. A lot of the people chiming in with "this is broken" are playing 4cl, so of course it's broken.... Anyway, it's nice to see you posting here again :) Algustas *****The powers of ordinary men are circumscribed by the everyday worlds in which they live, yet even in these rounds of job, family, and neighborhood they often seem driven by forces they can neither understand or govern.***** C. Wright Mills, the Power Elite

Hi Scott, On Mon, 4 Nov 1996, Scott Whittaker wrote: > rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote: > > > > In article <327923...@unixg.ubc.ca>, Scott Whittaker <whit...@unixg.ubc.ca> writes: > > > Malcolm McCallum wrote: > > > > > > > > You mentioned something about playtesting extensively. Why is it that you > > > > can simply read the list and declare it broken? Yes, I agree that it > > > > looks grizzly but I think we owe it some serious playtest. > > > > > > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and > > > > clans. > [snip my previous remarks] > > > > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's > > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'. > > > > Right. > Hold it right there. My comment is accurate as far as it goes. When > someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original > game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe > there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence > for his opinion. I am reminded of one of my favorite old Nixon tricks, where you erase your comments, then accuse someone of taking them out of context... In general, your arguments will carry more weight if you don't delete the part someone is responding to :) Algustas *****Commanders of powers unwequalled in human history, they have succeded within the American system of organized irresponsibility.***** C. Wright Mills

Algustas wrote: > > > > > It isn't like Vampire didn't already have a host of lopsided cards and > > > > > clans. > > [snip my previous remarks] For the record, I stated that Sabbat is much more unbalancing and dangerous to the game than Jyhad/Vampire ever was. I commented that Sabbat opens a whole new can o' worms. > > > > > > You refuse to buy or play with the cards, and accuse people's > > > statements of being `unsupported and irrelevant'. > > > > > > Right. > > Hold it right there. My comment is accurate as far as it goes. When > > someone says that there are a slew of broken cards from the original > > game, I feel compelled to call them on that statement, because I believe > > there aren't. At the very least, someone should present some evidence > > for his opinion. Then, I said that I had decided not to purchase the new cards because I didn't think they would create a fair playing field; I was then attacked for being ignorant. I daresay that studying the spoiler list for several hours before writing about the new set, my views can be categorized as irrelevant... > I am reminded of one of my favorite old Nixon tricks, where you > erase your comments, then accuse someone of taking them out of context... > In general, your arguments will carry more weight if you don't > delete the part someone is responding to :) I was not doing so; this thread is becoming slightly garbled in translation. Please don't compare anyone to Nixon; them's fighting words:) [ quoted text not captured ]

Algustas <arob...@gladstone.uoregon.edu> writes: >On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 rit...@bbs.cruzio.com wrote: >> Go check a Magic newsgroup. You'll find `XXXXX will BREAK THWE GAME!!" all up >> and down it. They are almost always wrong, and one learns to ignore it. In >> Jyhad, one expects something more thouroughly researched. One hopes to find a >> more refined opinion. One gets dissapointed alot recently. >> > Well, your right, of course. I think the cardback thing did >enourmous damage to this newsgroup, LSJ has not been buying (or playing) >the new cards, so he has been absent from some of the debates that could >really use him. The Corrupter has pretty much picked up that tourch, but >often he sounds like a lone voice of reason in a sea of emotional >responses. A lot of the people chiming in with "this is broken" are >playing 4cl, so of course it's broken.... I'm here. I haven't chimed in on the debates because the Corrupter has done a better job than I could hope to do. I could "me too" his posts, but that would accomplish nothing (since I have no official capacity to lend weight to Corrupter's points). In summary, I have examined the spoiler list and, with the exception of approximately half of the vampires and a handful of MtG-style cards (Goth Band, etc.), most of the cards look interesting and playable. Most of the broken vampires are simply out of line w.r.t. capacity, and won't break the game outright (just as Democritus wouldn't break the game outright if he only had a 7 capacity. 7-Cap Democritus would simply be broken, as Tom Wylie noted). A few simply break basic paradigms of the game (like maneuvering during combat, or having card cost mean something), and cry out for errata or house rules. More time should've been spent on card texts (uniform templates, saying "your untap phase" instead of "untap phase", etc.) If WotC had a representative here reading the group, I'm sure I would feel like chiming in more often. As it is, I see no point in chasing our tails after the points have been made. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Only XT users know that http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Jan 1, 1980 was a Tuesday. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

[snip everything] Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her out. Just my .02. Ray Babbitt RBab...@Novell.COM Standard Disclaimer

Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote: : [snip everything] [ quoted text not captured ] : Just my .02. : Ray Babbitt : RBab...@Novell.COM : Standard Disclaimer I would agree, if Jimmy was broken then no one would play with him becasue EVERYONE would play with him so Jimmy would be lost real quickly, or not played until someone else played Jimmy. -- +------------Don't open your eyes you won't like what you see,--------------+ + The devils of truth steal the souls of the free, + + Don't open your eyes take it from me, + +____________I've found you can find happiness in slavery.__Nine Inch Nails_+

Samuel Stoddard wrote: > > Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote: > : [snip everything] > > : Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two > : superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really > : THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two > : superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the > : basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I > : can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing > : that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her > : out. > > : Just my .02. > > : Ray Babbitt > : RBab...@Novell.COM > > : Standard Disclaimer > > I would agree, if Jimmy was broken then no one would play with him > becasue EVERYONE would play with him so Jimmy would be lost real quickly, > or not played until someone else played Jimmy. Do the math. As someone has already pointed out, even if *everyone* plays a deck that uses cel/pot and has Jimmy in it, the chances are less than 10% that his special disadvantage will come into play. Meanwhile, even if it does, you will likely get a number of turns to smoke people with an extremely undercosted and efficient vampire. Sean Whittaker

Ray Babbitt (RBab...@Novell.COM) wrote: : [snip everything] : Excuse me for interupting, but Jimmy is a 4 capacity vampire with two : superiors, 1 inferior, and a "negative" ability, right? Is he really : THAT broken? After all, Camille/Raven is a 5 capacity with two : superiors, 1 inferior, and no extra abilities, and she is from the : basic set. If the abilities were the same, I'd rather have Raven as I : can feel confident investing the pool and transfer time on her, knowing : that she won't jump ship as soon as someone else at the table brings her : out. : Just my .02. Also remember that Catif and Pander suffer for being Catif and Pander because it exludes them from using any clan specific cards and therefore further hinders them. I think the rules on skills (as least for size 1 through 7) are pretty consistant and make sense. For size 1 through 4 you pay 1 pool for the vamp and 1 for each skill Catiff or other negative impact vamps get an extra skill. For size 5 some vamps were given an extra skill. This makes sense because it takes 2 turns to get these guys out and represents the very real transition from small to mid-sized vamps. I also think it's important to realize that some skills put together are worse than others and that's why not all 5's have 2 superior and a basic. For example, I would hate to see sup presence/dominate and sup obfuscate on a 5.

Algustas writes: >> If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved ^^^^^^^ Hey! What about us Jewish gamers? ;-) -- ________________ ______ ___@^^^^\ / \ I break for Craw Wurms! / \ @ \_____/ David Schwartz \__________________________/ > (^^^^^\ _______ ___/ \---\ / \ da...@schwartz.manawatu.gen.nz / \_____________/ \__________________________________/

Hi David, On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, David Schwartz wrote: > Algustas writes: > >> If this is what the gentile and polite Jyhad crowd I knew and loved > ^^^^^^^ > Hey! What about us Jewish gamers? ;-) > I've been framed! I was responding to this part... Algustas *****Has anyone tryed making coffee with Water Joe?***** Algustas

In article <56dmhv$5...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Yousef G Master <mas...@red.seas.upenn.edu> writes > >I also think it's important to realize that some skills put together are >worse than others and that's why not all 5's have 2 superior and a basic. >For example, I would hate to see sup presence/dominate and sup obfuscate >on a 5. Yeah, but sorry to be belligerent, but have you seen the Nosferatu antitribu Olivia? Bishop; 5 capacity, and with superior obfuscate, superior potence *and* regular vicissitude! Now that's Rampages that she can do at stealth, and in combat she can do body weaponry, fleshcraft, bonecraft, and Horrid Forms, and with superior potence to back up all that damage, she's phenomenal. And there are always disguised weapons...(Meat cleavers, Bastard Swords, Bang Nakhs, Brass Knuckles). I agree that the game Jyhad has died, but the game V:TES has risen from the ashes and taken its place. We should play the new game more, if only out of respect for the old game. (And because the old game had Monocles of Clarity and Rotschrecks!) -- Justin Grace