List Of Reprinted Cards

I have just received a Camarilla Edition Card List and some people may be annoyed or happy about the reprints. Derange is back and I hope you didn't spend too much on it. Freak Drive is back and is now an uncommon! Infernal Familiar, Apportation (still common) and Raptor. The Monocle of Clarity is back ( who knows how it works now?!). The Rowan Ring (glad I didn't throw mine out) and the Succubus Club (oh, just go away). The Portrait, Archon Investigation (uncommon!) and Secret Horde ( only significance of this is the fact that the spelling is still wrong, should be hoard not horde, look it up). There are a few others of interest but I am already tired of typing. Well, watch your Ebay bids! Robert Scythe

Robert Scythe wrote: > > I have just received a Camarilla Edition Card List and some people may > be annoyed or happy about the reprints. ... > Archon Investigation (uncommon!) Why the surprise? Archon Investigation was always uncommon. No Disarm? Fred

Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. The fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the intention of the card's effect. The general feeling was: where does this end? Here we are now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL set!!!! Now, a Daugther of Caucophany going on a concert tour is more powerful than a PRINCE PERFORMING THE FIFTH TRADITION!!!! Should we now change Concert Tour to only gain 4 blood? Again I ask where does this end. This is a collectible card game and not all cards are the same. deal with it. If you don't like the fifth tradition, block it!! I have had it with LSJ, this game is so hard to teach people - they get into it and then they get upset when their decks don't work the way they think they will. My friend Greg has enough good nature to stick with it and is a player now - everyone else that I've treid to teach the game to recently hasn't stuck with it, because of complications. The game was designed, the cards were printed and changing them now - and continuing to change them on this constant basis - is making me angry. This is my favorite game, and even i get confused as to what the cards do now, because MOST of them do something different than what the card says they do. You should have heeded my warnings during 7/7. LSJ, you will KILL this game and I hate you because of it. Wouldn't you hate someone that ruined your favorite game and made it next to impossible to easily play?? I am not going to buy this camarilla set - where before I was very excited about it. Why? Because it keeps me from playing with cards that I have been BUYING for many years now. Catatonic Fears that I BOUGHT in the Sabbat War set only one year ago are now not playable as they are written - to play them I need to remember how they are supposed to work. This is a pain in the butt when it is the case for MOST OF THE CARDS!! People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing with Jyhad Vamps are WRONG!!! When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! Again, LSJ - I have had it with you. I am NOT GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET and therefore I think LSJ should be FIRED from his job!!!!! I can't take it any more!! I own 50-100 copies of the card Majesty and now I need to collect them all again???? NO!!! I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET and I am asking others NOT TO BUY THIS NEW SET!!! I don't think we the fans, who helped bring this game "back from the dead" should suffer like this!! If White-Wolf has to lose some money to get this point - then that's what needs to happen. It might kill the game altogether, but I would rather kill the new cards than my own. I'm sorry if you think I a freak, but I really love my VTES cards and am prepared to fight for them. This will not be my last rant. Thank you, Sam (formerly Fantasy 15)

"Robert Scythe" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:66e41881.02070...@posting.google.com... > > Secret Horde ( only significance of this is the fact that the spelling > is still wrong, should be hoard not horde, look it up). > horde - a teeming crowd or throng It's just a *secret* teeming crowd of people that you feed on. It could make sense... really... no wait, come back... ;)

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. The > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the intention > of the card's effect. The general feeling was: where does this end? Here we are > now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL set!!!! The 6/28 and 7/7 rulings were a problem for most people because they were extensive rewrites in the form of errata. I believe the great majority of people, including the formers of the NJL, were at least *mainly* upset that this would be a barrier for new players. Also, in an effort to REDUCE errata, wallpaper cards like Concealed Weapon were never errata and were instead left unplayable. Reprinting a card has been understood to be the *right way* to change a card. LSJ is just continuing on in that tradition. > When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with > ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! Maybe you misunderstand how the types work. First of all, there isn't any reason to believe that the next set will be type 4 or even type 3 for that matter. When and if a type four does evetually appear, every card you own will still be playable. -Robert

In message <20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com>, awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) mumbled something about: >VTES cards and am prepared to fight for them. This will not be my last rant. Shut the fuck up, you puling child. *plonked* -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.

> Maybe you misunderstand how the types work. First of all, there isn't any > reason to believe that the next set will be type 4 or even type 3 for that > matter. It would seme logical that you can't play new gangrels with the old ones, so I'd say Type 3 at least. I hope there will NEVER be a type 4, that would really kill the game once and for all (what, no Giovannis with the Whatsoeveryoucallem ?!!). When and if a type four does evetually appear, every card you own will > still be playable. Not in any satysfying manner. Not ype 4, ever, pleaaaaase !!!

Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote in message news:<3D246459...@removethis.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Actually I did not know that. I never had very many Vampire released cards and thought that due to the type of card it is (cannot see the use of more than 1 ,maybe 2 but i doubt it, in any deck) and the prices it was going for on Ebay it seemed like a rare. > No Disarm? > No Disarm. A Few others are: Protected Resources Carthage Remembered Island of Yiaros Patagia (no IR Goggles, wonder if anyone will use this now) Mind of a Child Ankara Citadel, Turkey Toreador Grand Ball (without Masika is not as cool, but still usable) Memories of Mortality > Fred

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. this coincided at the time where i just bought some Pulled fangs for 9 bucks each =/ but anyway , it was for the sake of the game. > Here we are > now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL set!!!! you got the point on this one ! > Now, > a Daugther of Caucophany going on a concert tour is more powerful than a PRINCE > PERFORMING THE FIFTH TRADITION!!!! i also really disagree about the new 5th tradition. yes, Minion Tap/Fifth was powerful, but there was many ways to make it change, even through errata+reprint, without making it a useless card. The "only to another vampire" clause or the "up to 5 blood " would have been engouh already. Now i'll eagerly swap my 5th for *Restorations* in any ventrue deck. > The game was > designed, the cards were printed and changing them now - and continuing to > change them on this constant basis - is making me angry. I understand your feelings. > People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing with Jyhad > Vamps are WRONG!!! When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with > ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! i hope time will make your statement wrong, but i fear that the next step is to banish jyhad backed cards from the tournament scene. > Again, LSJ - I have had it with you. I am NOT > GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET i'm still wondering ... does this set deserves my support ? i don't think even one quarter of the players would chose to boycott the camarilla set. We cannot fall back now since we have put a lot of money in v:tes since sabbat wars. > and therefore I think LSJ should be FIRED from his > job!!!!! you're going too far, and besides this LSJ is not the only person at WW !! > This will not be my last rant. i'mafraid this kind of rant will not change things. maybe we should try this camarilla set just to see how the game is with it. We then can still decide if we'll continue playing the game with the former rules, which will become house rules. (say, oldschool vtes). If your playgroup share your vision and is ready to play with the old rules, maybe that's the way to go ? reyda

On Thu, 4 Jul 2002 19:23:27 +0200, "Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> Maybe you misunderstand how the types work. First of all, there isn't any >> reason to believe that the next set will be type 4 or even type 3 for that >> matter. > >It would seme logical that you can't play new gangrels with the old ones, so >I'd say Type 3 at least. > Even at type 3, you could still play them with the EuroGangrel Princes and whatnot. Awfully weird interaction. So they would likely have to be type 4, removing them further from type 2.... That's the problem once you start seperating sets like this, it just snowballs. T

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3d24b112$0$2251$79c1...@nan-newsreader-03.noos.net... > > "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message > news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken > cards. > > this coincided at the time where i just bought some Pulled fangs for 9 bucks > each =/ > but anyway , it was for the sake of the game. > and now you sold your deranges for a lot of francs sorry euros. :-))))))) stefan [ quoted text not captured ]

"Stefan Ferenci" <a950...@nospamunet.univie.ac.at> wrote in message news:3d24b25c$0$18836$3b21...@news.univie.ac.at... > > "reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:3d24b112$0$2251$79c1...@nan-newsreader-03.noos.net... > > > > "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message > > news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > > > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > > > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken > > cards. > > > > this coincided at the time where i just bought some Pulled fangs for 9 > bucks > > each =/ > > but anyway , it was for the sake of the game. > > > and now you sold your deranges for a lot of francs sorry euros. :-))))))) hell i did't know !! it also seems they will be usable by camarilla malkavian, but how ????

> >It would seme logical that you can't play new gangrels with the old ones, so > >I'd say Type 3 at least. > > > > Even at type 3, you could still play them with the EuroGangrel Princes > and whatnot. Same way you can play Eurobrujahs, so I don't see why not. > Awfully weird interaction. So they would likely have to > be type 4, removing them further from type 2.... > > That's the problem once you start seperating sets like this, it just > snowballs. It is a path one has to thread carefully, I do agree, and I think / hope WW gets the recurrent message. Yours, Orpheus

> it also seems they will be usable by camarilla malkavian, but how ???? > They may have changed its text, something like "the vampire keeps it's former sect" or the like.Or "If acting vamp is Malk,then you become malk, else you become !malk"

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com VTES cards and am prepared to fight for them. This will not be my last rant. This was a very interesting rant. Well done. You have eloquently vented your spleen so that your peers could offer replies. It shows how much you love the game in the depth of feeling that was shown through in the above rant. it was even a really good example of written English. Thanks. You have made your point, thank you. -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Awazzzz wrote: > [snip rant] > I own 50-100 copies of the card Majesty > and now I need to collect them all again???? No. If (assuming Majesty gets changed in the CE) we had instead printed "More Jesty" (with the same text as the rumored Majesty changed text) and banned Majesty, then you would have to collect them all again. All VTES cards are played (officially) by the MRP, so you don't "need" to collect them all again. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:3D24C6EE...@white-wolf.com... > If (assuming Majesty gets changed in the CE) we had instead printed "More Jesty" Surely you "Jest" ;) we need more Jests. Jest you wait and see. Well I better Jest get going now. Sorry this is bad.... Todd

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote > I have had it with LSJ, this game is so hard to teach > people - they get into it and then they get upset when their decks don't work > the way they think they will <snip> > This is my favorite > game, and even i get confused as to what the cards do now, because MOST of them > do something different than what the card says they do. New players have the advantage of buying mostly new cards (I assume) so the card text should be fairly accurate. > I am not going to buy this camarilla set - > where before I was very excited about it. Why? Because it keeps me from > playing with cards that I have been BUYING for many years now. That doesn't seem to be true. You can keep playing with your old cards even if you never buy a single booster of CE. I know a fellow who has bought hardly anything since Dark Sovereigns, and he plays regularly. > People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing with Jyhad > Vamps are WRONG!!! Yes, they are. It doesn't prevent you from playing with *any* vampires, it just prevents you from *mixing* some of them. I like the new rule, I think it will work well. You know hiow hard it is to get a copy of Raven because she's identical to Camille? Obviously there is a big advantage to mixing identical vampires. Multiply that by 90 times, that's the situation that CE is trying to avoid. > When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with > ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! Yes you will - all of them, in fact. (unless they retroactively move Raven into a new group! ;) > I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THIS > NEW SET and I am asking others NOT TO BUY THIS NEW SET!!! Ummm... no. Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > This will not be my last rant. Of course not. james o'rance http://www.geocities.com/dragon-dreamer/wraith

>Ummm... no. >Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have more power. 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only new ones. I hope this is simple enough for you. Not my last rant, Sam

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com... > >Ummm... no. > > >Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > > I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! > > 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. > Of course, such is the nature of reprints. > 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have > more power. And you have arrived at this conclusion how? How do you know what sort of power curve the new cards have been designed on? Were you a member of playtest? > 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. Again, you arrive at this how? LSJ (nor anyone else official) has never said anything about new cards being limited in Tournament play other than the standard number mixing rule. Your conclusion that tournaments somehow require new cards comes from? > 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because > of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) Honestly, I think the players of this game need to give themselves a bit more credit. I know you can tell the difference between the layouts. Given a few weeks of playing with the newset (assuming you get over this and actually buy some), you will be able to tell the difference. Trust me on that. If you really believe that you can't or won't be able to tell the difference, then you're just plain out of luck and no one can help you. > 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only > new ones. Aside from the fact that issues of desirability are opinion and not fact as you have attempted to state it here, I seriously doubt that people will treat you differently as a player of this game based on the fact that you like your old cards better. So other than that, why should it be undesirable? It's not as if there will be a devious plot designed against those who don't play with the new set. > I hope this is simple enough for you. > > Not my last rant, > Sam Here's an idea. Why don't you just let me know which one of these WILL be your last rant. Peteo

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:<ag2elr$7k6$1...@wanadoo.fr>... [ quoted text not captured ] In a different thread, LSJ has already stated that set and grouping number are not neccesarily identical - thus allowing the possibility that upcoming sets are not just all numbered in ascending fashion. After a little thought, I think the following scenario is likely: given that the grouping mechanism was introduced to balance the combination possibilities of 200+ cam vampires (in fairness to the Sabbat, and to keep Crypt selection a real choice), it will also be neccesary (out of symmetry rules and fairness) to introduce a '4' for the sabbat set that will make sure there are not 200+ sabbat to combine. (Sorry for the long sentence). After that though, it certainly isn't manadatory to go above that 4. I'm not sure where the Anarch Set will be in numbering (combination of 3 and 4? Both Gangrel, Caitiff, Anarchs, and Sabbat in the mix?). After the Anarch set and the presumable new Sabbat set after that, it becomes a bit of guesswork what the sets will be. We're a couple of years further at that point, and WW will probably review the need to assign group number to the vampires again. But, most probably, they'll be 3's and 4's. They've probably thought of this at WW, but if this specific thought has not crossed someone's mind, I hope they will take it in account. Tobias Deventer

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com>... > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. The > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the intention > of the card's effect. The general feeling was: where does this end? Here we are > now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL set!!!! Yes. > Now, > a Daugther of Caucophany going on a concert tour is more powerful than a PRINCE > PERFORMING THE FIFTH TRADITION!!!! Should we now change Concert Tour to only > gain 4 blood? Again I ask where does this end. This is a collectible card > game and not all cards are the same. deal with it. If you don't like the fifth > tradition, block it!! If you buy the list posted by Eyes Only, yes. It could be, sure, but nobody official has said so. Hmmm, let me be the one to ask LSJ this then. LSJ, is the list of cards and their changes as given by Eyes Only (first post in thread http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=nl&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3D242E9D.9010908%40attbi.com&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Dnl%26group%3Drec.games.trading-cards.jyhad) correct? > I have had it with LSJ, this game is so hard to teach > people - they get into it and then they get upset when their decks don't work > the way they think they will. My friend Greg has enough good nature to stick > with it and is a player now - everyone else that I've treid to teach the game > to recently hasn't stuck with it, because of complications. The game was > designed, the cards were printed and changing them now - and continuing to > change them on this constant basis - is making me angry. This is my favorite > game, and even i get confused as to what the cards do now, because MOST of them > do something different than what the card says they do. You should have heeded > my warnings during 7/7. It's too bad it's that way for you when you teach people. More power to Greg. How many people that you say did not continue did so out of the 'difficulty' of having the errata? Here's my end of it: 1. With the new set, I will have a good new base to teach new players from. All the cards it has are correct, post-errata, and I will teach all new players that 'their' set is the correct one. If ever an old player shows up with other cards, all he needs to know is that his new cards are the correct ones. (Of course, the old player could possibly (depending on which cards are re-released) come with non-reprinted cards that were errata'd, and thus a card which the newbie has not seen yet, and does something else than printed. That's a shame, but that problem can only be lessened by the new set, and not increased.) 2. The people that I have already taught the game I tell not to worry about the cards and errata's too much. Just play the card the way it says (of course, I generally pick only 'new' versions of the cards). Once they get the grasp of all the mechanisms (stealth vs. intercept, combat order, phase order, etc.), that's the time they can learn about the errata and what it can mean for them. It's an added hassle, sure, but they already have to 'learn' hundreds of cards, and the people that can handle that can also handle the errata. (Hell, even I don't know all of them - before I go to tourney, I just check my list). And before you ask how many people I taught this game: about 7 (together with others), I think, and none off them 'failed' because of the errata. > LSJ, you will KILL this game and I hate you because of > it. I suggest you re-evaluate that thought. And especially the hate. > Wouldn't you hate someone that ruined your favorite game and made it next > to impossible to easily play?? Hate? No. Bothered? Yes. Like many here, I play this game to interact with friends, not out of a higher purpose or a roleplaying/wannabe aspect. I choose this game because I like it's tension and mechanisms, and the setting/mood is fun/appropriate. As has been said before: you can still play your decks (barring possible card effect changes). > I am not going to buy this camarilla set - > where before I was very excited about it. Why? Because it keeps me from > playing with cards that I have been BUYING for many years now. Catatonic Fears > that I BOUGHT in the Sabbat War set only one year ago are now not playable as > they are written - to play them I need to remember how they are supposed to > work. If, indeed, this is so. Ben Peal (I believe) has already pointed out that there are no CF's in the CE. > This is a pain in the butt when it is the case for MOST OF THE CARDS!! Yes. > People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing with Jyhad > Vamps are WRONG!!! When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with > ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! Sigh. You have not been reading. I will tell you one more time, but I guess you won't read it either: ALL CRYPTS COMBINING VAMPIRES YOU OWN NOW ARE LEGAL. Same thing for when type 4 appears. > Again, LSJ - I have had it with you. I am NOT > GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET and therefore I think LSJ should be FIRED from his > job!!!!! I think he should be promoted too. ;) > I can't take it any more!! I own 50-100 copies of the card Majesty > and now I need to collect them all again???? NO!!! You're right: no. > I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THIS > NEW SET and I am asking others NOT TO BUY THIS NEW SET!!! Ok, ok, you made your point. Just make sure to be a bit less aggressive when you ask those others, or you won't achieve your intended purpose but scare them away from you. > I don't think we the > fans, who helped bring this game "back from the dead" should suffer like this!! > If White-Wolf has to lose some money to get this point - then that's what > needs to happen. It might kill the game altogether, but I would rather kill the > new cards than my own. I'm sorry if you think I a freak, but I really love my > VTES cards and am prepared to fight for them. This will not be my last rant. You're entitled to your opinion, of course. I, part of 'we the fans', am not suffering. If you kill the game altogether, you will also kill your own cards - since nobody will be playing any more. Goodbye players, goodbye use for all cards, goodbye high prices on eBay. I don't think you're a freak, but I think you might have a little too much emotion invested in your cards. I would prefer it, if instead of a rant, you would just reply to this post. It would give me the feeling I have not just been feeding a troll. Tobias Deventer

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com>... > >Ummm... no. > > >Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > > I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! Better. (I just reply'd in another place, but Google timing showed this a bit after my previous post). > 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. Very probably. > 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have > more power. Still not sure about that count. But even is some older cards have been toned down, this does not mean newer cards need to exceed that power. Also, OTHER old cards (not toned down) will gain relative power. > 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. Well, with every expansion, a few cards at least become part of the 'staple' or oft-seen cards. I expect those cards in this expansion as well. Maybe a little more than normal, because this is a new base set, but I do not think the new cards will blow the old ones out of the water. > 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because > of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) Disagree. The last person I thought is a collegue, he's played for only 2.5 months now. He likes and fully comprehends the new layout. > 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only > new ones. ? > I hope this is simple enough for you. For me it was. > Not my last rant, I thought this was a list. Tobias Deventer

reyda wrote: > "Stefan Ferenci" <a950...@nospamunet.univie.ac.at> wrote in message > news:3d24b25c$0$18836$3b21...@news.univie.ac.at... >> >>and now you sold your deranges for a lot of francs sorry euros. :-))))))) > > > hell i did't know !! > > it also seems they will be usable by camarilla malkavian, but how ???? Simple, with the '3' mechanic there's nothing preventing them from having all the new Malks with Dem instead of Dom. ...of course, that also means that we won't be seeing new Dom+Obf S&B decks, which I'm sure few people will complain about. :-) Flux

Tobias wrote: > LSJ, is the list of cards and their changes as given by Eyes Only > (first post in thread > http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=nl&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3D242E9D.9010908%40attbi.com&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Dnl%26group%3Drec.games.trading-cards.jyhad) > correct? You'll have to wait until the information is officially released. BTW, the most recent WW press release regarding the Camarilla Edition is from mid-April. http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/pr_cam_01.html [ quoted text not captured ]

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message > 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. Which is bad because? > 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have > more power. How on earth did you come to that conclusion? > 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. I didn't see any restriction on which library cards to use, and many of the new ones will be reprints anyway. Besides, if you use non-reprinted cards from the old sets along with good new cards (which I hope will be some), you should be able to maximize your decks potential. > 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because > of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) I admit that it will look strange to have different layouts on the table or in hand at the same time, but it will not affect gameplay at all. > 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only > new ones. As far as I can see, this conclusion is derived from a flawed set of assumptions, so I can't agree with it. > I hope this is simple enough for you. Simple, yes, but still flawed.

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com>... > >Ummm... no. > > >Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > > I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! > Try me. > 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. If you mean:'Cards are played with the text of their last printed version.' OK > > 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have > more power. fuzzy Logic. Why? RtI was toned down on power, and the newer card that should have more power is.... ? They try to tone down cards that are at the high end of the powerspectrum, to balance things out. (eg balance between Read the Winds and 2nd trad) Why would they introduce new powercards? > > 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. False premises => false conclusion > > 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because > of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) WTF? because the new cards have a green border on the left hand side you can't mix them? In our non-tourney games we us a lot of Proxies (ie small notes with the name of the card it repesents, in a sleeve with another card behind it) and it never gave us difficulties. I would agree if they changed, for example, the icons for the disciplines. Or Clan symbols, no wait... they did that already and no-one complained. No wait, everyone complained, but not for long :-) > > 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only > new ones. Again: why? If you play with sleeves you can even put little notes in them with the text changes on them. > > I hope this is simple enough for you. I'm not convinced, so: no, not simple enough :-) > > Not my last rant, > Sam Jeroen

awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) wrote in message news:<20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com>... > >Ummm... no. > > >Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > > I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! > > 1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. > ...and old cards are STILL PLAYABLE, just with Most Recent Text. You don't need to collect the new cards again, just play with updated text. > 2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have > more power. > Wrong, and stupid. One doesn't necessarily follow (or cause) the other. > 3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. > WTF? I'd suggest that, even with the recent spate of cards (through Bloodlines), that a highly tournament competitive deck may still be made from one booster box of Jyhad, using mostly the commons. Heck, I've made the finals in a 15 player tournament using a deck built from 12 Jyhad boosters (post-Sabbat era). > 4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because > of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) > Does the additional excercise your eyes get from looking in two different locations cause cramping? See a doctor. I'll agree that the aethetics of the new layout are poor, but the mechanics; moving symbols around to different spots on the card is no big deal. You'll adapt, or drop out of the gene pool... > 5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only > new ones. > ? Maybe when first teaching a newbie, it would be best to keep the old cards out of sight. I'm buying a set of Cam pre-cons for just this purpose. Other than that, the red sheen over your eyes is clouding your vision. > I hope this is simple enough for you. > Exceedingly simple, but still wrong... > Not my last rant, Of course not... You got a lot of issues. Rant away :-) DaveZ Atom Weaver

In message <20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com>, awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) mumbled something about: >>Ummm... no. > >>Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > >I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! Oh, good! I bet you're wrong 5 times out of 5. >1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. It's called MRP. It was done in Bloodlines, Final Nights, and Sabbat War. It's done in order to move errata from a list on the Internet to actual printed material. It is commonly accepted among everyone with any clue as a Good Thing, especially in cases where errata has been found necessary. Reason #1: subtracted. >2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have >more power. Flat-out wrong. Sir Ralph Hamilton is a weak third behind both Anvil AND Bianca. >3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. Again wrong -- see above. >4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because >of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) Completely incorrect. The old cards will be ANNOYING to use with the new cards, but if you've been playing this game for any length of time, it'll take you all of a week to adjust to looking for discipline symbols in multiple places. Of course, if you're some unknown fuckup named Sam who can't tell his ass from his elbow with a written set of directions, then maybe you won't be able to use the old with the new. But that problem is going to be limited to unknown fuckups. >5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only >new ones. This is also false, and I notice you don't even pretend to provide a reason... because you can't. Rest assured, my obf/AUS intercept deck is still perfectly viable. So is my pot/CEL face-slapper. So is the Omaya Wall. I can go on for a very long time -- I've built an awful lot of decks. All of these are still in great shape. Some of them could stand to be rebuilt and have Read the Winds, etc. added, in fact. None of these decks are undesirable to play with. In fact, depending on the content available in the new set, some of these decks may still be MORE desirable, simply because of discipline combos. Congratulations, Sam, you're batting a thousand... in wrong guesses. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > >1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. > > It's called MRP. It was done in Bloodlines, Final Nights, and Sabbat > War. It's done in order to move errata from a list on the Internet to > actual printed material. It wasn't done in Bloodlines - Bloodlines contains no reprints. It was also done in V:TES (1995 base set). That is: it was done in every set that included any reprints at all with the exception of "The Sabbat" (unless The Sabbat includes a card text change that I've overlooked). [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D25A8E4...@white-wolf.com>... > Derek Ray wrote: > > >1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. > > > > It's called MRP. It was done in Bloodlines, Final Nights, and Sabbat > > War. It's done in order to move errata from a list on the Internet to > > actual printed material. > > It wasn't done in Bloodlines - Bloodlines contains no reprints. > > It was also done in V:TES (1995 base set). > > That is: it was done in every set that included any reprints at all with > the exception of "The Sabbat" (unless The Sabbat includes a card text change > that I've overlooked). Obedience. Your Friendly Neighborhood Atom Weaver

In message <20020705030207...@mb-bh.aol.com>, awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) mumbled something about: **yes, I love mumbling, or especially to deaf ears!! >>Ummm... no. > >>Ranting is very ugly, you're not going to convince me that way. > >I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! Oh, good! I bet you're wrong 5 times out of 5. *** You can try to refute me, but we will see who is wrong. >1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. It's called MRP. It was done in Bloodlines, Final Nights, and Sabbat War. It's done in order to move errata from a list on the Internet to actual printed material. It is commonly accepted among everyone with any clue as a Good Thing, especially in cases where errata has been found necessary. *** It is commonly a good thing, so common in fact that a great deal of cards no longer do what they say they do. Reason #1: subtracted. >2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have >more power. Flat-out wrong. Sir Ralph Hamilton is a weak third behind both Anvil AND Bianca. *** Not all new cards will have more power, but if you think that white-wolf is not going to make any more power cards - like call the great beast, blood of the sabbat, khobar towers, aabt kinderd, sutekh, etc, I think you are mistaken. And since the old cards ave een de-powered, the new cards will out power them until the continuing errata list comes out. >3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. Again wrong -- see above. *** Again RIGHT >4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because >of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) Completely incorrect. The old cards will be ANNOYING to use with the new cards, but if you've been playing this game for any length of time, it'll take you all of a week to adjust to looking for discipline symbols in multiple places. Of course, if you're some unknown fuckup named Sam who can't tell his ass from his elbow with a written set of directions, then maybe you won't be able to use the old with the new. But that problem is going to be limited to unknown fuckups. *** To me ANNOYING is less desirable >5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only >new ones. This is also false, and I notice you don't even pretend to provide a reason... because you can't. *** article #5 is a conclusion based on the above reasons 1-4 Rest assured, my obf/AUS intercept deck is still perfectly viable. So is my pot/CEL face-slapper. So is the Omaya Wall. I can go on for a very long time -- I've built an awful lot of decks. All of these are still in great shape. Some of them could stand to be rebuilt and have Read the Winds, etc. added, in fact. None of these decks are undesirable to play with. In fact, depending on the content available in the new set, some of these decks may still be MORE desirable, simply because of discipline combos. Congratulations, Sam, you're batting a thousand... in wrong guesses. *** then go agead and play your old deck, go ahead lose for your lack of stance. -- "There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P. *** you got that right - and it is VERY GRUBBY!! thank you, Sam

On Thu, 4 Jul 2002 23:28:28 +0200, "Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> >It would seme logical that you can't play new gangrels with the old ones, >so >> >I'd say Type 3 at least. >> > >> >> Even at type 3, you could still play them with the EuroGangrel Princes >> and whatnot. > >Same way you can play Eurobrujahs, so I don't see why not. > Yes but the new Gangrel arent' supposed to be Camarilla, and this does preclude any new Euroother cam vamps then. >> Awfully weird interaction. So they would likely have to >> be type 4, removing them further from type 2.... >> >> That's the problem once you start seperating sets like this, it just >> snowballs. > >It is a path one has to thread carefully, I do agree, and I think / hope WW >gets the recurrent message. > I bloody well hope so. T

In message <20020705154758...@mb-ma.aol.com>, awa...@aol.com (Awazzzz) mumbled something about: >>I would like to convince you in another way - a list!! > >Oh, good! I bet you're wrong 5 times out of 5. >*** You can try to refute me, but we will see who is wrong. So far, you have been. You provide no reasons to back up anything; you simply provide noise and tears. Still batting a thousand, Sammy. Time for you to STFU. >>1. The new cards will pre-empt text on older cards. > >It's called MRP. It was done in Bloodlines, Final Nights, and Sabbat >War. It's done in order to move errata from a list on the Internet to >actual printed material. > >It is commonly accepted among everyone with any clue as a Good Thing, >especially in cases where errata has been found necessary. >*** It is commonly a good thing, so common in fact that a great deal of cards >no longer do what they say they do. I'm glad we agree that it's a good thing. One point my way. >>2. Since older cards have been toned down on power - newer cards will have >>more power. > >Flat-out wrong. Sir Ralph Hamilton is a weak third behind both Anvil >AND Bianca. >*** Not all new cards will have more power, but if you think that white-wolf >is not going to make any more power cards - like call the great beast, blood of >the sabbat, khobar towers, aabt kinderd, sutekh, etc, I think you are mistaken. Yeah, great, that's wonderful. You think ALLLL you want. Meantime, I'm gonna point out that the only card in your list that's an actual power card is Khobar Towers. The others are all tier-2 at best. This sort of says something about your game knowledge. So much for your point... not to mention that the evidence is still against you. Two cards, neither of which is more powerful than original Jyhad stuff. >>3. To win the tournament - one must then use the new cards. > >Again wrong -- see above. >*** Again RIGHT mmm, sorry, you're still 0-for-3 here. thanks for playing though. >>4. The old cards are hard (or impossible) to use with the new cards (because >>of text and layout changes and they vampire typing) > >Completely incorrect. The old cards will be ANNOYING to use with the >new cards, but if you've been playing this game for any length of time, >it'll take you all of a week to adjust to looking for discipline symbols >in multiple places. > >Of course, if you're some unknown fuckup named Sam who can't tell his >ass from his elbow with a written set of directions, then maybe you >won't be able to use the old with the new. But that problem is going to >be limited to unknown fuckups. > >*** To me ANNOYING is less desirable But it's not hard or impossible, which is what you originally claimed. Zero for four, sammy boy. You're losing ground here rapidly, and you're visibly changing your stance already. >>5. The new set makes it so that it is undesirable to play with my cards, only >>new ones. > >This is also false, and I notice you don't even pretend to provide a >reason... because you can't. > >*** article #5 is a conclusion based on the above reasons 1-4 But you were wrong in 1-4, so you really don't have any reasons. >Rest assured, my obf/AUS intercept deck is still perfectly viable. So >is my pot/CEL face-slapper. So is the Omaya Wall. I can go on for a >very long time -- I've built an awful lot of decks. All of these are >still in great shape. Some of them could stand to be rebuilt and have >Read the Winds, etc. added, in fact. > >None of these decks are undesirable to play with. In fact, depending on >the content available in the new set, some of these decks may still be >MORE desirable, simply because of discipline combos. > >Congratulations, Sam, you're batting a thousand... in wrong guesses. >*** then go agead and play your old deck, go ahead lose for your lack of >stance. Are you a gambling man, Sammy? Are you willing to gamble that no old decks with old crypts and old cards will be competitive once the new set comes out? That tournaments will become the exclusive property of decks built under the Camarilla Edition, and us old-schoolers will have no chance? Or are you just all talk... Yeah, I thought so. STFU already. [ quoted text not captured ]

<snip Sam's lithium-addled statements and Derek's responses:> Y'know, I love to read Derek fucking with people. It's highly entertaining, revealing much creativity and wit on Derek's part, and making me feel as though I'm not alone in thinking that these people he's tearing new assholes into are complete and utter fuckwits. But gosh, isn't it sad to read these morons attempt comebacks? --heslin, derek ray fanclub president

> If (assuming Majesty gets changed in the CE) we had instead printed "More Jesty" > (with the same text as the rumored Majesty changed text) and banned Majesty, > then you would have to collect them all again. A HA! I knew you were going to reprint Dr. Jest, but under a new name. :P XZ

On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 14:53:09 GMT, Frederick Scott <freds64_at_...@removethis.com> wrote: >Robert Scythe wrote: >> >> I have just received a Camarilla Edition Card List and some people may >> be annoyed or happy about the reprints. >... >> Archon Investigation (uncommon!) > >Why the surprise? Archon Investigation was always uncommon. > >No Disarm? > >Fred My guess is that Disarm is not reprinted as it's a key rare from "The Sabbat/Sabbat War" sets. Camarilla Edition is self proclaimed to be a tighter set allowing for better sealed/draft play, Would have loved to see it myself, but can just as easily live without. If we ever see a "group 4" alternate base set for The Sabbat, I would expect to see Disarm returning. Now if only they would change Twisting the Knife to do a point of agg damage it would be worthwhile in tournament play. BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

"Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. The > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the intention > of the card's effect. They were?? I don't remember the 6/23/1998 and 7/7/1998 rulings getting "toned down" in response to "fan uproar". The way I remember it, the upset fans were either mollified by having the affected cards reprinted with corrected text or came to realize that the changes were, on the whole, a good idea. (I'm sure there were some who left the game and never returned, too, but from my experience that doesn't seem to have been all that many.) > The general feeling was: where does this end? Here we are > now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL > set!!!! Well, the process of balancing a game may never end. Change is part of life. :-) > Now, a Daugther of Caucophany going on a concert tour is more > powerful than a PRINCE > PERFORMING THE FIFTH TRADITION!!!! Should we now change Concert > Tour to only gain 4 blood? Not "more powerful". Different. Assuming that alleged 5th Tradition change is accurate, it won't give as much potential blood as Concert Tour (if you do a Clan Impersonation combo; otherwise Concert Tour can only do 6 blood max, net 5, for Gael). That doesn't make the Daughter "more powerful" than the Prince. And, did it *ever* make sense for a Prince to be able to give *himself* the 5th Tradition: Hospitality? Isn't hospitality about how you treat guests, not yourself? > Again I ask where does this end. This is a collectible card > game and not all cards are the same. deal with it. If you don't > like the fifth tradition, block it!! You could say the same thing about Return to Innocence. If you don't care about balance in the game, that's fine, but some people do, and apparently they're the ones making the decisions. :-) > I have had it with LSJ, this game is so hard to teach > people - they get into it and then they get upset when their > decks don't work the way they think they will. My friend Greg has > enough good nature to stick with it and is a player now - everyone > else that I've treid to teach the game > to recently hasn't stuck with it, because of complications. This doesn't make sense. If you teach people the game with the White Wolf cards - Sabbat War and forward - they pretty much all work exactly as they say they do. The game has only gotten easier to teach people in the last two years. All the "hard" parts are baggage left over from the original WotC printings. > The game was designed, the cards were printed and changing them > now - and continuing to change them on this constant basis - is > making me angry. This is my favorite game, and even i get confused > as to what the cards do now, because MOST of them > do something different than what the card says they do. Not most of them. Not even close. Enough to be annoying, sure, if most of your cards are the old printings. > You should have heeded my warnings during 7/7. LSJ, you will KILL > this game and I hate you because of it. Wouldn't you hate someone > that ruined your favorite game and made it next to impossible to > easily play?? I have had no problem easily playing the game under all the rulings. Am I really that much smarter than you? I kind of doubt it. :-) > I am not going to buy this camarilla set - where before I was very > excited about it. Why? Because it keeps me from playing with > cards that I have been BUYING for many years now. No, it doesn't. If you want to play with official rules, it'll make your old copies work a little differently than they say they do (if, again, the alleged changes are correct). But in return for that, you'd get a more balanced game that more people might be interested in playing, since balanced games are more interesting than unbalanced ones. > Catatonic Fears that I BOUGHT in the Sabbat War set only one year ago > are now not playable as they are written - to play them I need to > remember how they are supposed to work. This is a pain in the butt > when it is the case for MOST OF THE CARDS!! It's not for most of the cards. Just a few specific cards. They are some of the most-used cards, sure, but shouldn't that make them *easier* to remember? I mean, you'll be playing them all the time; how many times will you have to be reminded "oh yeah, that costs a blood now" before it comes naturally? It's easy for new players, too, because *their* cards would have the new, corrected text printed right on them. > People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing > with Jyhad Vamps are WRONG!!! When Type 4 comes out then I will not > be able to play with ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! No, you're wrong there. If Group 4 vampires were printed, they would not be usable *in the same crypt* as any Group 1 and 2 vampires, yes. But you could still use all the Group 1 and 2 vampires in all the Group 1 and 2 crypts you wanted - just not *at the same time* as you were using your Group 4 vampires. > Again, LSJ - I have had it with you. I am NOT GOING TO BUY THIS > NEW SET and therefore I think LSJ should be FIRED from his > job!!!!! Somehow I don't think they're going to fire LSJ just because *you* aren't going to buy the new set. :-) > I can't take it any more!! I own 50-100 copies of the card Majesty > and now I need to collect them all again???? Not if you can remember a less-than-one-sentence change to the text, which will actually be printed on any new copies of Majesty that you got. > NO!!! I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET and I am asking others NOT > TO BUY THIS NEW SET!!! I don't think we the fans, who helped bring > this game "back from the dead" should suffer like this!! To me, it's not suffering. To you apparently it is, and I'm sorry for that. But I don't think you're going to accomplish anything productive by yelling and screaming and trying to talk people into not buying the cards. The cards are already at the printers by now. We can't change what's going to be on them. We can buy them or not as we choose, and we can keep playing the game or not as we choose. > If White-Wolf has to lose some money to get this point - then > that's what needs to happen. It might kill the game altogether, but > I would rather kill the new cards than my own. Honestly, that sounds pretty selfish. If other people like the "new game" then why not be happy for them? You can keep playing it the "old way" with anyone who feels the same way you do. > Thank you, > Sam > (formerly Fantasy 15) You're welcome. Josh trying not to rant

Joshua Duffin wrote: > "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message > > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken > cards. The > > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the > intention > > of the card's effect. > > They were?? I don't remember the 6/23/1998 and 7/7/1998 rulings > getting "toned down" in response to "fan uproar". The way I The 7/7 errata on ToRIII was changed as a result of the response (namely, the response that suggested a better fix for the card). There may have been others, but that's the first one that jumped to mind. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:41:52 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Joshua Duffin wrote: >> "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message >> > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 >> > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken >> cards. The >> > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the >> intention >> > of the card's effect. >> >> They were?? I don't remember the 6/23/1998 and 7/7/1998 rulings >> getting "toned down" in response to "fan uproar". The way I > >The 7/7 errata on ToRIII was changed as a result of the response >(namely, the response that suggested a better fix for the card). > >There may have been others, but that's the first one that jumped >to mind. Same here. Can't say as I still agree with all the 7/7 rulings, that's been so long ago that it's moot to bicker about something which is obviously not going to change. One of these days I'll put together a list of things that still bug me. Such as; Vampire calls a political action and the Methuselah cannot play a PA out of hand during the referendum (like everyone else) Cloak the gathering being played by other tapped Vampires on an acting minion Vampires in torpor using their special abilities (Lady Muriel for instance) And so on.. >LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: > Same here. Can't say as I still agree with all the 7/7 rulings, that's > been so long ago that it's moot to bicker about something which is > obviously not going to change. One of these days I'll put together a > list of things that still bug me. Such as; > > Vampire calls a political action and the Methuselah cannot play a PA out > of hand during the referendum (like everyone else) Sure she can. Call a vote to burn the Anarch Revolt, for example. What she can't do, however, is gain 2 votes from 2 PAs (just like everyone else cannot). > Cloak the gathering being played by other tapped Vampires on an acting > minion Action modifiers are playable by tapped vampires in general. Cloak adds no "requires untapped vampire" restriction in superior. Why errata it? (Errata bad) > Vampires in torpor using their special abilities (Lady Muriel for > instance) If the special requires a "ready" vampire, then the vampire need only be ready. Why errata the others? Mitchell's special wouldn't make much sense if it "turned off" when he was in torpor. Likewise Ankla Hotep's. At any rate, the current designers intended their vampiric specials to be usable from torpor except where noted by a "ready" stipulation. Changing the default and then adding "usable in torpor" to all of those wouldn't change anything. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D2B1250...@white-wolf.com>... > > The 7/7 errata on ToRIII was changed as a result of the response > (namely, the response that suggested a better fix for the card). > > There may have been others, but that's the first one that jumped > to mind. Well, let me make a comment about this specific card. The change in ToRIII turned a very powerfull card into a USELESS one ! It's hard to imagine a deck where you would use this card in the current format. Maybe if you use Tariq (Assamite)... The only way ToRIII could be at least worth to use, and even then it would not be a great card, is an unofficial rule that says if you use a ToRIII in your deck, you can choose it to be the first card in your library, adding it to the deck after the initial shuffling. What do you players around the world think of that ?

On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 15:21:06 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: >> Same here. Can't say as I still agree with all the 7/7 rulings, that's >> been so long ago that it's moot to bicker about something which is >> obviously not going to change. One of these days I'll put together a >> list of things that still bug me. Such as; >> >> Vampire calls a political action and the Methuselah cannot play a PA out >> of hand during the referendum (like everyone else) > >Sure she can. > >Call a vote to burn the Anarch Revolt, for example. > >What she can't do, however, is gain 2 votes from 2 PAs (just like everyone >else cannot). As was argued eons ago, the now-current voting rule entirely favors presence based vote decks. A non-presence minion attempts to call a vote (lets assume no titles on the table), even if I could throw a PA towards the vote, it would be stopped cold by a suprise influence. I'll grant that the existing rule is much more balanced than it used to be years ago. It still seems incongruous that My Vampire attempts a political action, other METHUSELAH's can throw a card into the mix. Why not the acting Methuselah? Methuselahs and Vampires being seperate entities. The political action coming into play, and the referendum are entirely seperate events. It really wouldn't make much difference to decks which are based on presence (got a Bewitching Oration? Thought so), but it would make a world of difference to non-presence based voters. In a nutshell, I fail to see how allowing ALL methuselahs to be able to play a PA during referendum somehow creates an imbalance. >> Cloak the gathering being played by other tapped Vampires on an acting >> minion > >Action modifiers are playable by tapped vampires in general. >Cloak adds no "requires untapped vampire" restriction in superior. >Why errata it? (Errata bad) It bugs me but I can live with it. Errata is only bad if there is no future possibility of a reprint (Blythe Candelaria??) >> Vampires in torpor using their special abilities (Lady Muriel for >> instance) > >If the special requires a "ready" vampire, then the vampire need only >be ready. Why errata the others? > >Mitchell's special wouldn't make much sense if it "turned off" when >he was in torpor. Likewise Ankla Hotep's. Mitchell's special is conditional, Muriel's requires an activation. Another instance of an annoying situation that I can live with as it doesn't (appear to) break the game. >At any rate, the current designers intended their vampiric specials >to be usable from torpor except where noted by a "ready" stipulation. That's cool then, I know you've tried to bring the game back closer to original game design. >Changing the default and then adding "usable in torpor" to all of those >wouldn't change anything. > >-- >LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

> At any rate, the current designers intended their vampiric specials > to be usable from torpor except where noted by a "ready" stipulation. > > Changing the default and then adding "usable in torpor" to all of those > wouldn't change anything. So in this case, why is a vampire with a title not allowed to use there title from torpor? In other words, why don't you count their votes if they get gaked?

[ quoted text not captured ] They can use the title (if there were anything to do with it - most title-requiring effects are actions, which aren't usable from torpor in general, and reactions which are likewise not usable from torpor in general. Some are action modifiers that are only usable on a political action, which is something a vampire in torpor cannot perform). As for casting votes, that's covered by 6.3.3. [ quoted text not captured ]

<berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM> wrote in message news:3d2b9fa...@netnews.attbi.com... > I'll grant that the existing rule is much more balanced than it used to > be years ago. It still seems incongruous that My Vampire attempts a > political action, other METHUSELAH's can throw a card into the mix. > Why not the acting Methuselah? Methuselahs and Vampires being seperate > entities. So as not to give the acting methuselah an advantage? You *can* play one if you didn't use one to take the action, so it's not like you're being shorted something that the other Methuselahs get. If you play Parity Shift, there's your vote. If you're calling the vote to get rid of Anarch Revolt/Legendary Vampire/Archon, you can play one from your hand. I don't really see the problem. One of the primary themes of V:tES is stagnation and decay (that whole using your pool/"life" to gain control of minions, etc.), and according to the backstory, vampiric society is inherently resistant to change. Could you provide a good mechanics *and* backstory reason why the acting minion should gain an advantage, rather than just becoming the uneven nail that gets hammered down? :) Xian

berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: > On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 15:21:06 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: > >> Vampire calls a political action and the Methuselah cannot play a PA out > >> of hand during the referendum (like everyone else) > > > >Sure she can. > > > >Call a vote to burn the Anarch Revolt, for example. > > > >What she can't do, however, is gain 2 votes from 2 PAs (just like everyone > >else cannot). > > As was argued eons ago, the now-current voting rule entirely favors > presence based vote decks. A non-presence minion attempts to call a > vote (lets assume no titles on the table), even if I could throw a PA > towards the vote, it would be stopped cold by a suprise influence. Um, so how is your proposed change going to fix that? > I'll grant that the existing rule is much more balanced than it used to > be years ago. It still seems incongruous that My Vampire attempts a > political action, other METHUSELAH's can throw a card into the mix. > Why not the acting Methuselah? Methuselahs and Vampires being seperate > entities. Again: the acting METHUSELAH can. Either during the referendum if she hasn't played one already (just like the other Methuselahs) or at the start as part of announcing the action. Or do you propose that the PA played to take the action no longer give the acting Methuselah a vote (that the acting Methuselah would have to "burn a PA" if she wanted a vote, just like the other Methuselahs) in the interest of congruity? -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 08:54:08 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: >> On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 15:21:06 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> >berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: >> >> Vampire calls a political action and the Methuselah cannot play a PA out >> >> of hand during the referendum (like everyone else) >> > >> >Sure she can. >> > >> >Call a vote to burn the Anarch Revolt, for example. >> > >> >What she can't do, however, is gain 2 votes from 2 PAs (just like everyone >> >else cannot). >> >> As was argued eons ago, the now-current voting rule entirely favors >> presence based vote decks. A non-presence minion attempts to call a >> vote (lets assume no titles on the table), even if I could throw a PA >> towards the vote, it would be stopped cold by a suprise influence. > >Um, so how is your proposed change going to fix that? It doesn't. Although it would make a difference if I were able to gain the edge prior to the vote, whereby I had 3 votes for the PA called (allowing me to beat that pesky Suprise Influence). >> I'll grant that the existing rule is much more balanced than it used to >> be years ago. It still seems incongruous that My Vampire attempts a >> political action, other METHUSELAH's can throw a card into the mix. >> Why not the acting Methuselah? Methuselahs and Vampires being seperate >> entities. > >Again: the acting METHUSELAH can. Only if the acting Vampire doesn't use a Political Action card. This is really where my take differs from the official one. If a Vampire is calling a Political Action (PA), it is understood to be on the Methuselah's behalf. The PA called is as a result of the Methuselah's manipulation of said vampire, not from exerting influence into the outside world. Political Action cards thrown from a Methuselah's hand during a referendum is an act of direct influence from the methuselah itself. A different state of affairs from a Vampire's actions. Needless to say, I think there is a difference between Vampires exerting influence in the outside world and Methuselahs exerting influence in the outside world. In the case of a Vampire calling a vote, it's the Vampire extending influence through it's myriad of personal contacts. PA cards tossed from hand are representative of Methuselahs exerting influence into the world at large. >Either during the referendum if she hasn't played one already (just >like the other Methuselahs) or at the start as part of announcing >the action. > >Or do you propose that the PA played to take the action no longer give >the acting Methuselah a vote (that the acting Methuselah would have to >"burn a PA" if she wanted a vote, just like the other Methuselahs) in >the interest of congruity? Though the issue could have easily been adjusted for in the rulebook. Let's just say that I have a different "world-view" and believe that the change suggested would actually simplify the process (though not by much). Your suggestion above would require errata to all the PA's in print. That of course would be "bad". ;-) >LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

[ quoted text not captured ] No, as per the next paragraph of mine (quoted some distance below). The acting Methuselah can use a PA to gain a vote. In a referendum called by playing a PA, the acting Methuselah gains her vote from that PA. She cannot burn a second PA to gain a second vote (just like the other Methuselahs). In a referendum called via an action allowed by a card in play, the acting Methuselah can gain a vote by burning a PA (just like the other Methuselahs) and can still not burn a second PA to gain a second vote (just like the other Methuselahs). She either throws her "card into the mix" at the start (to take the action) or during the referendum, as appropriate. > If a Vampire is calling a Political Action (PA), it is understood to be > on the Methuselah's behalf. The PA called is as a result of the > Methuselah's manipulation of said vampire, not from exerting influence > into the outside world. So you propose that the Methuselah doesn't gain a vote from doing this (i.e., no influence is exerted)? > Political Action cards thrown from a Methuselah's hand during a > referendum is an act of direct influence from the methuselah itself. > A different state of affairs from a Vampire's actions. The current rules allow the acting Methuselah to gain a vote (exert her influence) from the original PA or from a PA burned during the referendum. But the limit of one applies to her, just as to the other Methuselahs. > Needless to say, I think there is a difference between Vampires exerting > influence in the outside world and Methuselahs exerting influence in the > outside world. But you don't seem to want to effect that difference, as I understand your proposal - you want to keep the PA played to call the referendum as a method of exerting the Methuselah's influence (she still gains a vote from it, as I understand your proposal). > In the case of a Vampire calling a vote, it's the Vampire extending > influence through it's myriad of personal contacts. PA cards tossed > from hand are representative of Methuselahs exerting influence into the > world at large. No. The vote from the PA comes from the Methuselah only. Not from the vampire. Unless you wish to change this rule as well, which you haven't so far stated as part of your proposal. > >Either during the referendum if she hasn't played one already (just > >like the other Methuselahs) or at the start as part of announcing > >the action. > > > >Or do you propose that the PA played to take the action no longer give > >the acting Methuselah a vote (that the acting Methuselah would have to > >"burn a PA" if she wanted a vote, just like the other Methuselahs) in > >the interest of congruity? > > Though the issue could have easily been adjusted for in the rulebook. > Let's just say that I have a different "world-view" and believe that the > change suggested would actually simplify the process (though not by > much). > > Your suggestion above would require errata to all the PA's in print. > That of course would be "bad". ;-) Not my suggestion. I was inquiring about what rule it is you propose, since you keep bandying the "conguity" goal about, and yet the rule you propose as I understand it would allow the acting Methuselah to use 2 PAs to gain votes in a single referendum while other Methuselahs are restricted to only 1 each. If your proposal is to eliminate the vote gained from the PA played to start the action, then you would be achieving the congruity you seem to hold dear. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

<berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM> wrote in message news:3d2b9fa...@netnews.attbi.com... > As was argued eons ago, the now-current voting rule entirely favors > presence based vote decks. A non-presence minion attempts to call a > vote (lets assume no titles on the table), even if I could throw a PA > towards the vote, it would be stopped cold by a suprise influence. So... you're saying the second vote (from a PA from hand in addition to the one used to call) wouldn't help much, if it would still be stopped by Surprise Influence? :-) > I'll grant that the existing rule is much more balanced than it used to > be years ago. It still seems incongruous that My Vampire attempts a > political action, other METHUSELAH's can throw a card into the mix. > Why not the acting Methuselah? Methuselahs and Vampires being seperate > entities. The vote from the card used to call the referendum *also* comes from the Methuselah (you), though. Which is why it can't be cancelled by, say, Quentin's ability. That card is played by the vampire, yes, but the vote it provides is granted to the playing Methuselah, just like the ones burned for votes from other Meths' hands. > The political action coming into play, and the referendum are entirely > seperate events. It really wouldn't make much difference to decks which > are based on presence (got a Bewitching Oration? Thought so), but it > would make a world of difference to non-presence based voters. I dunno, it would make a little difference, but in the games I see it would mostly be irrelevant to passing votes after the first few turns (since *someone* will probably have out at least one title). In those first few turns, it could matter (vs, say, an opposing Edge-throw or single PA card), but granting help to non-Presence vote decks in those first turns is mostly helpful to... weenie Praxis Seizure decks. Do you really want to help *them* out again? :-) Agree with the rest of what you wrote - it might be nice if Cloak required an untapped vamp at superior, and if not so many vamp specials (freaking Alexandra, grrr ;-) worked from torpor. But given that they've been the way they are so long, I don't know if they're worth the fixin'. Josh with all the fixins

[ quoted text not captured ] So when a vampire (let's say Gideon) calls a Political Action and gains one vote from the PA card it's a vote of that Methuselah during the referendum. From that last line of logic; effects like Quentin (cancel one vampires votes) or Kindred Coercion which would cancel/change the target vampire's votes should have no effect on the 1 vote gained by the PA card itself based on your definition that a PA is of the Methuselah, and not the Vampire.. >> If a Vampire is calling a Political Action (PA), it is understood to be >> on the Methuselah's behalf. The PA called is as a result of the >> Methuselah's manipulation of said vampire, not from exerting influence >> into the outside world. > >So you propose that the Methuselah doesn't gain a vote from doing this >(i.e., no influence is exerted)? >> Political Action cards thrown from a Methuselah's hand during a >> referendum is an act of direct influence from the methuselah itself. >> A different state of affairs from a Vampire's actions. > >The current rules allow the acting Methuselah to gain a vote (exert >her influence) from the original PA or from a PA burned during the >referendum. But the limit of one applies to her, just as to the other >Methuselahs. > >> Needless to say, I think there is a difference between Vampires exerting >> influence in the outside world and Methuselahs exerting influence in the >> outside world. > >But you don't seem to want to effect that difference, as I understand >your proposal - you want to keep the PA played to call the referendum >as a method of exerting the Methuselah's influence (she still gains a >vote from it, as I understand your proposal). Correct. However the distinction between Vampire/Methuselah vote influence becomes apparent via gameplay per my example earlier of Quentin/Kindred Coercion. >> In the case of a Vampire calling a vote, it's the Vampire extending >> influence through it's myriad of personal contacts. PA cards tossed >> from hand are representative of Methuselahs exerting influence into the >> world at large. > >No. The vote from the PA comes from the Methuselah only. Not from the >vampire. Unless you wish to change this rule as well, which you haven't >so far stated as part of your proposal. The vote from the Political Action comes from the card (via card text) as it always has. The only thing that would change is for the acting Methuselah to be able to throw in a generic vote during referendum like everyone else. >> >Either during the referendum if she hasn't played one already (just >> >like the other Methuselahs) or at the start as part of announcing >> >the action. >> > >> >Or do you propose that the PA played to take the action no longer give >> >the acting Methuselah a vote (that the acting Methuselah would have to >> >"burn a PA" if she wanted a vote, just like the other Methuselahs) in >> >the interest of congruity? >> >> Though the issue could have easily been adjusted for in the rulebook. >> Let's just say that I have a different "world-view" and believe that the >> change suggested would actually simplify the process (though not by >> much). >> >> Your suggestion above would require errata to all the PA's in print. >> That of course would be "bad". ;-) > >Not my suggestion. >I was inquiring about what rule it is you propose, since you keep >bandying the "conguity" goal about, and yet the rule you propose >as I understand it would allow the acting Methuselah to use 2 PAs >to gain votes in a single referendum while other Methuselahs are >restricted to only 1 each. If your proposal is to eliminate the >vote gained from the PA played to start the action, then you would >be achieving the congruity you seem to hold dear. Yes it would be possible for a Vampire to have a net gain of 2 votes on a given action (1 from the Vote being called by a vampire, 1 from Acting Methuselah exerting world influence assuming a PA card in hand). You could use an example of Thompson (fictional) running for office. Thompson gets votes on his on cognizance, and additional votes due to influence from the Democratic party. In your method, Thompson has no personal influence and is entirely dependent on the Democratic party. Not a great example, but hopefully enough to provide distinction. [ quoted text not captured ]

berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:33:45 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >She either throws her "card into the mix" at the start (to take the > >action) or during the referendum, as appropriate. > > So when a vampire (let's say Gideon) calls a Political Action and gains > one vote from the PA card it's a vote of that Methuselah during the > referendum. Gideon takes a Political Action to call a referendum and his controller (not Gideon himself) gains one vote from the PA card. > From that last line of logic; effects like Quentin (cancel one vampires > votes) or Kindred Coercion which would cancel/change the target > vampire's votes should have no effect on the 1 vote gained by the PA > card itself based on your definition that a PA is of the Methuselah, and > not the Vampire.. Correct. [RTR 09-MAY-1995] > >No. The vote from the PA comes from the Methuselah only. Not from the > >vampire. Unless you wish to change this rule as well, which you haven't > >so far stated as part of your proposal. > > The vote from the Political Action comes from the card (via card text) > as it always has. The only thing that would change is for the acting > Methuselah to be able to throw in a generic vote during referendum like > everyone else. These are the same thing. The vote from the PA (played or burned) is the vote from the PA. It is the representation of the Methuselah's influence being exerted. This is why the Methuselah doesn't get an automatic vote when her minion calls a vote to burn the Anarch Revolt, for example. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 11:51:36 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >berni...@attbi.comHOLDLeSPAM wrote: >> On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 10:33:45 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> >She either throws her "card into the mix" at the start (to take the >> >action) or during the referendum, as appropriate. >> >> So when a vampire (let's say Gideon) calls a Political Action and gains >> one vote from the PA card it's a vote of that Methuselah during the >> referendum. > >Gideon takes a Political Action to call a referendum and his controller >(not Gideon himself) gains one vote from the PA card. > >> From that last line of logic; effects like Quentin (cancel one vampires >> votes) or Kindred Coercion which would cancel/change the target >> vampire's votes should have no effect on the 1 vote gained by the PA >> card itself based on your definition that a PA is of the Methuselah, and >> not the Vampire.. > >Correct. [RTR 09-MAY-1995] Wow. You have no idea how many times I've seen this played incorrectly then, even by old-timers at the big tournaments (Origins/GenCon) <Snip: Get back to you later on the rest, places to go, things to do..> >LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. BernieTime Lansing, Michigan

> > As for casting votes, that's covered by 6.3.3. Thanks

I am really sorry you feel this way.... I am at best an advanced beginner, still twisting my brain to make my Brujah Antitribu deck work properly.. But, even though I'm usually ousted I find the game to be most interesting and sometimes REALLY FUNNY to play. Whenever a more experienced player throw a card inmy face that I've never seen before, sending my trusted Jacko into to torpor with, in this case, "protect thine own",. it hurts, but it's funny as hell.Really ;-) But, I do agree on the rules getting confusing.... That only makes me try harder though.. have fun!! -kenneth- "Awazzzz" <awa...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020704112749...@mb-ma.aol.com... > Back a couple of years ago, LSJ came up with some errata called the 7/7 > rulings. These rulings completely changed text on a number of broken cards. The > fans went into an uproar and the rulings were changed to more fit the intention > of the card's effect. The general feeling was: where does this end? Here we are > now and they are STILL making changes to cards from the ORIGINAL set!!!! Now, > a Daugther of Caucophany going on a concert tour is more powerful than a PRINCE > PERFORMING THE FIFTH TRADITION!!!! Should we now change Concert Tour to only > gain 4 blood? Again I ask where does this end. This is a collectible card > game and not all cards are the same. deal with it. If you don't like the fifth > tradition, block it!! I have had it with LSJ, this game is so hard to teach > people - they get into it and then they get upset when their decks don't work > the way they think they will. My friend Greg has enough good nature to stick > with it and is a player now - everyone else that I've treid to teach the game > to recently hasn't stuck with it, because of complications. The game was > designed, the cards were printed and changing them now - and continuing to > change them on this constant basis - is making me angry. This is my favorite > game, and even i get confused as to what the cards do now, because MOST of them > do something different than what the card says they do. You should have heeded > my warnings during 7/7. LSJ, you will KILL this game and I hate you because of > it. Wouldn't you hate someone that ruined your favorite game and made it next > to impossible to easily play?? I am not going to buy this camarilla set - > where before I was very excited about it. Why? Because it keeps me from > playing with cards that I have been BUYING for many years now. Catatonic Fears > that I BOUGHT in the Sabbat War set only one year ago are now not playable as > they are written - to play them I need to remember how they are supposed to > work. This is a pain in the butt when it is the case for MOST OF THE CARDS!! > People who are saying that this set only prevents me from playing with Jyhad > Vamps are WRONG!!! When Type 4 comes out then I will not be able to play with > ANY VAMPIRE I OWN NOW!!!!! Again, LSJ - I have had it with you. I am NOT > GOING TO BUY THIS NEW SET and therefore I think LSJ should be FIRED from his > job!!!!! I can't take it any more!! I own 50-100 copies of the card Majesty > and now I need to collect them all again???? NO!!! I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THIS > NEW SET and I am asking others NOT TO BUY THIS NEW SET!!! I don't think we the > fans, who helped bring this game "back from the dead" should suffer like this!! > If White-Wolf has to lose some money to get this point - then that's what > needs to happen. It might kill the game altogether, but I would rather kill the > new cards than my own. I'm sorry if you think I a freak, but I really love my > VTES cards and am prepared to fight for them. This will not be my last rant. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <lEf09.2287$U32....@news01.chello.no>, Kenneth Kristiansen <ken...@chello.no> writes: >I am at best an advanced beginner, still twisting my brain to make my Brujah >Antitribu deck work properly.. Smaller vampires, more taste of vitae. Minion Tap or Blood Doll for blood gain. Minion Tap can be useful if you have a couple of "key" big vampires. Waste Management Operation and Gang Territory are good solid master cards. Ignore the Sword of Judgement - you'll be wanting to play Immortal Grapple more often. Watch out for your rush actions. A few Haven Uncovereds helps. Include some Bum's Rushes - which is generally better than Ambush. Also, include a few Computer Hackings, or similar. You might do well with a Pentex Loves You (tm) because you're playing Sabbat, which is slightly more flexible for a blood cost. And don't be afraid to include a couple of out-of-clan vampires, if they have the right disciplines, capacity and style for your deck. -- James Coupe PGP 0x5D623D5D you say one or two amusing things, but so EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 did Herman Goering (does that sidestep Godwin?) 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - SomeBlokeCalledRapunzelSyndrome