Even more LotN Spoilers

The forces of IRC and the Croatian Republic presents: A link I got of the IRC: http://klubzmaj.org.yu/forum/viewtopic.php?p=50804#50804 I includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist OMG OMG OMG //Alex Ek

[ quoted text not captured ] A Wash in the Settite starter, nice. best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auct...@superfuncards.com

is CtG the first card with a third art now? WMRH! Quick - buy 20

On Sep 16, 7:21 pm, dog$ <011...@gmail.com> wrote: > is CtG the first card with a third art now? Nope. Infernal Familiar, at least. Aching Beauty also lists three artists, don't have it handy to look at. -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] OMG indeed. So. -Indies do get their G3/G4 crypts (which is nice) -some hard-to-get cards become widely available (I already see Wash, WMRH Talk Radio and to lesser extent, Temptation ) -Indies will get quite nice political options (Can't take with you, Jericho Founding, that vote that deals 6 pool damage) -Mercury's Arrow wallpapers ranged QUI strikes? Then again, MA to go to long range, Blood Sweat/ToD to finish does not look too bad especially when there will be Can't take with you to punish meths that pack loads of equipment -There will be more Ravnos with anti-equipment special -Forearm Block, Quick Jab: Vampire: The Lunch Money. Hail Mary the Black ;) -Antero

[ quoted text not captured ] I have to admit that I'm a bit underwhelmed. I really hoped for reprints of Phobia (with updated cardtext), Path of Typhoon, Realm of the Black Sun, Grand Temple of Set (with updated cardtext), Mummify (with updated cardtext), Thrones Crumble, Dismemberment of Osiris, Edge Vitiation (which is really cool). Instead we get Form of Corruption, which is cool by itself, but it works mostly as a destabilizer as preys mostly tend to not bleed any more (at least in my limited experience). Temptation with new artwork? I don't know - get another Brian LeBlanc? I'm of the opinion that the old artwork was really good. Only 6 different vampires in the starter? Why? Less diversity? Why not mix in reprints of G4 vamps? I really don't understand the design- intent in this. Does it make the starter better if there are only 6 different vamps in it? I don't think so. New players with no access to vamps like Nefertiti, Black Lotus, Amenophobis? Great. (In theory KMW and Gehenna should be still available, but you know...) Wash and WMRH is nice. Ok, I'll grant that. What about Priestess of Sekhmet, Mummy's tongue, Canopic Jar? Where is Tongue of the Serpent (which is *really* good)? Another Dummy Corporation. As if that card is a must have in Indie-decks. No really, all things considered, the Setite starter tends to be more of a disappointment for my taste. YMMV, though.

> I have to admit that I'm a bit underwhelmed. > I really hoped for reprints of Phobia (with updated cardtext), Path of > Typhoon, Realm of the Black Sun, Grand Temple of Set (with updated > cardtext), Mummify (with updated cardtext), Thrones Crumble, > Dismemberment of Osiris, Edge Vitiation (which is really cool). > Instead we get Form of Corruption, which is cool by itself, but it > works mostly as a destabilizer as preys mostly tend to not bleed any > more (at least in my limited experience). Corruption ???? It used to be a C2, there were 4 in the FN setite starter, and now none ? Is that new card supposed to totally replace it ? In which case I'll just say it : they're not the same, and this gives old players access to a strategy new players don't ! Same as : if no Shamblings get printed in the new giovanni starter. Of course, all this would be fine if Final Nights was still available... Are we going to see weird consequences of the "you can play all the cards" like : - you can play your old cards but the new ones will totally own you (Vessel) - you can play all your new cards but the old players will do things you never can (Corruption and Caine knows what else...) ?? -- Orpheus ---------------- Top of Ban / Fix List : PTO, Champion, Memories of Mortality.

On 17 Sep., 11:54, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: > > I have to admit that I'm a bit underwhelmed. > > I really hoped for reprints of Phobia (with updated cardtext), Path of > > Typhoon, Realm of the Black Sun, Grand Temple of Set (with updated > > cardtext), Mummify (with updated cardtext), Thrones Crumble, > > Dismemberment of Osiris, Edge Vitiation (which is really cool). > > Instead we get Form of Corruption, which is cool by itself, but it > > works mostly as a destabilizer as preys mostly tend to not bleed any > > more (at least in my limited experience). > > Corruption ???? It used to be a C2, there were 4 in the FN setite starter, > and now none ? Is that new card supposed to totally replace it ? In which > case I'll just say it : they're not the same, and this gives old players > access to a strategy new players don't ! Ah yes, forgot about the Corruptions. Not good, indeed. :( > Are we going to see weird consequences of the "you can play all the cards" > like : > - you can play your old cards but the new ones will totally own you (Vessel) > - you can play all your new cards but the old players will do things you > never can (Corruption and Caine knows what else...) I think that the sky is not (yet) falling. :) It may be hard to get commons of non-reprinted cards, but ebay may be of help here (or some generous old-timers). But in principle I agree that cards which are important for certain deck types (and I assume all can agree that Corruption-counters are a played and moderatly successful concept) need to be in circulation. What the reason behind not including Corruption is, is beyond my understanding. 1 less Majesty, 1 more Corruption?

Orpheus schrieb: > - you can play your old cards but the new ones will totally own you (Vessel) WTF? Vessel needs 3 turns before it pays off (it costs a pool and you can´t take one off the first turn). In 70-80% of the situations I would still prefer Blood Doll (when you have a S&B at your ass you don´t really care about the BD of your prey). > - you can play all your new cards but the old players will do things you > never can (Corruption and Caine knows what else...) So you can´t play a Shambling Hordes deck if you don´t have them, you will be stuck with the 30-40 (or more?) other decks you can play with the new cards. And they can´t play a Corruption deck which has never really worked that well anyway. No problem from my point of view. In a TCG (*Trading* Card Game) not all of the cards will be available in unlimited quantities, at no cost to absolute newbie players. That is one of the *concepts* of such game. V:TES has been very nice in this regard to newbie players, so they really can´t complain. -- Johannes Walch

-- > Orpheus schrieb: >> - you can play your old cards but the new ones will totally own you >> (Vessel) > > WTF? Vessel needs 3 turns before it pays off (it costs a pool and you > can´t take one off the first turn). In 70-80% of the situations I would > still prefer Blood Doll (when you have a S&B at your ass you don´t really > care about the BD of your prey). Yes, sure. BD is better. But the "destroy a BD" condition makes it so that BDs will progressively be retired from the game, which is the looked-for effect. What is better : a Vessel or _no_ Blood Doll ? ;-) >> - you can play all your new cards but the old players will do things you >> never can (Corruption and Caine knows what else...) > > So you can´t play a Shambling Hordes deck if you don´t have them, you will > be stuck with the 30-40 (or more?) other decks you can play with the new > cards. Shambling Hordes is currently the Giovanni archetype with the best results, one of the 2 main clan strategies. So it is important to me that it be made widely available. > And they can´t play a Corruption deck which has never really worked that > well anyway. No problem from my point of view. With all the cards relying on corruption counters, Corruption is an important clan card. > In a TCG (*Trading* Card Game) not all of the cards will be available in > unlimited quantities, at no cost to absolute newbie players. That is one > of the *concepts* of such game. V:TES has been very nice in this regard to > newbie players, so they really can´t complain. Sure, but the problem comes from out-of-stock expansions : the core cards that you can't get anymore should, IMO, be made available in new expansions of the same themes. [ quoted text not captured ]

Orpheus wrote: > -- > Orpheus schrieb: >>> - you can play your old cards but the new ones will totally own you >>> (Vessel) >> WTF? Vessel needs 3 turns before it pays off (it costs a pool and you >> can´t take one off the first turn). In 70-80% of the situations I would >> still prefer Blood Doll (when you have a S&B at your ass you don´t really >> care about the BD of your prey). > > Yes, sure. BD is better. But the "destroy a BD" condition makes it so that > BDs will progressively be retired from the game, which is the looked-for > effect. What is better : a Vessel or _no_ Blood Doll ? ;-) VTES doesn't use a 1-card limit.

[ quoted text not captured ] you guys either do not read the card or ... blood doll net you 1 pool when it is played. vessel net you 1 pool loss for destroy doll. if you want fast pool recoup use doll or grooming or tap. still most decks will NOT use only vessels IMO

>> Yes, sure. BD is better. But the "destroy a BD" condition makes it so >> that BDs will progressively be retired from the game, which is the >> looked-for effect. What is better : a Vessel or _no_ Blood Doll ? ;-) > > VTES doesn't use a 1-card limit. ??? Vessel : "Put this card on a vampire, and you may burn a Blood Doll in play (if any)." So every time you play a Vessel you can destroy a BD. How does that involve any card limit ?!? [ quoted text not captured ]

> you guys either do not read the card or ... Or we see different things when we read it. > blood doll net you 1 pool when it is played. > vessel net you 1 pool loss for destroy doll. AND it is a trifle. > if you want fast pool recoup use doll or grooming or tap. Except that BDs are now officially hosed, unless most people decide not to play Vessel. Which I don't think will be the case any time soon, if only because of the trifle part. Maybe a mix of both, as with Wash and Sudden ? > still most decks will NOT use only vessels IMO Time will tell, but I strongly disagree as of now. [ quoted text not captured ]

3 temptations... kidding. That's a joke, really. :(

[ quoted text not captured ] i'll use mainly groomings for sure - this card is offensive and slow way to recoup pool.

Orpheus wrote: >>> Yes, sure. BD is better. But the "destroy a BD" condition makes it so >>> that BDs will progressively be retired from the game, which is the >>> looked-for effect. What is better : a Vessel or _no_ Blood Doll ? ;-) >> VTES doesn't use a 1-card limit. > > ??? > > Vessel : "Put this card on a vampire, and you may burn a Blood Doll in play > (if any)." > > So every time you play a Vessel you can destroy a BD. > > How does that involve any card limit ?!? You said "no BD" as if you couldn't play another one.

[ quoted text not captured ] No, I just meant that most of the time BDs will get hosed, that's all.

[ quoted text not captured ] now BD is safest poolgain option - now it will require more thoughts. anyway blood doll will give you at least some pool back.

AcheronNi...@gmail.com schrieb: [ quoted text not captured ] Well you could actually *mix* BD and Vessel since Vessel is a trifle. That makes a net 0 in the first turn with a destroyed BD on your preys part and you can recover 2 in the next turn. But then again he will have his own Vessel ;-) -- Johannes Walch

preac...@gmx.at wrote: > Only 6 different vampires in the starter? Why? Less diversity? Why not > mix in reprints of G4 vamps? I really don't understand the design- > intent in this. Does it make the starter better if there are only 6 > different vamps in it? I don't think so. New players with no access to > vamps like Nefertiti, Black Lotus, Amenophobis? Great. (In theory KMW > and Gehenna should be still available, but you know...) Personally Carl, I really like this. I don't like getting reprints of vamps in the starter, and I don't like different numbers of new vamps in the starters either (a la 3rd Ed). You get 2 of each vamp, you buy 3 of each starter, you have 6 of each vamp. It's nice for me as a collector/player. Whether it makes the starter more playable out of the box isn't so critical to me or even a new player I would think, since they can and probably will buy a few boosters and voila, they have diversified their crypt. I would be surprised to see any G1 or G2 vamps being printed again from here on out. Even in advanced form. They just won't jibe with the current new crypts coming out. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 17 Sep., 18:15, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote: > > Only 6 different vampires in the starter? Why? Less diversity? Why not > > mix in reprints of G4 vamps? I really don't understand the design- > > intent in this. Does it make the starter better if there are only 6 > > different vamps in it? I don't think so. New players with no access to > > vamps like Nefertiti, Black Lotus, Amenophobis? Great. (In theory KMW > > and Gehenna should be still available, but you know...) > > Personally Carl, I really like this. I don't like getting reprints of > vamps in the starter, and I don't like different numbers of new vamps in > the starters either (a la 3rd Ed). You get 2 of each vamp, you buy 3 of > each starter, you have 6 of each vamp. It's nice for me as a > collector/player. Whether it makes the starter more playable out of the > box isn't so critical to me or even a new player I would think, since > they can and probably will buy a few boosters and voila, they have > diversified their crypt. You know Chris, on one hand, it isn't critical to me either, cause I've ordered 3 boxes of starters. :) On the other hand, I plan to play a draft event with 1 starter and 4 boosters to draft with 3 of my friends. Here I hope that things won't get too predictable (as has been with the LoB starters), cause we will be playing more than 3 games with those cards... However, I don't mind doubling key-vampires. But having only 6 vampires in the crypt of a starter is a bit ... repetitive. ;) > I would be surprised to see any G1 or G2 vamps being printed again from > here on out. Even in advanced form. They just won't jibe with the > current new crypts coming out. Agreed. I just hoped for some reprints from G4. That would have increased options. Well, I guess I won't have to buy the starter vamps as singles on ebay... ;) Carl

On Sep 16, 5:55 pm, Alex Ek <a...@student.chalmers.se> wrote: > The forces of IRC and the Croatian Republic presents: > > A link I got of the IRC: You know, the formatting of that Setite spoiler list looks *awfully* familiar. Ben? -- Jason

> In a TCG (*Trading* Card Game) not all of the cards will be available in > unlimited quantities, at no cost to absolute newbie players. That is > one of the *concepts* of such game. V:TES has been very nice in this > regard to newbie players, so they really can´t complain. Agreed. Still, while some cards get reprinted in every other base set as well as in various starters, the basic cards of the four indy clans and their respective proprietary disciplines (or near-proprietary in the case of Neromancy) get reprinted in starters or not at all. That means in these LotN starters, more than usual, choosing needed reprints should have been a priority. We'll see what happens in the other three, but it looks like some poor choices were made in the FoS deck (if the criterion is reprinting card that need reprinting). Form of Corruption and Temptation were already reprinted in the Baali deck, which is still available. Omitting Corruption and the Path of Typhon seems hard to justify. And what about Eyes, Form, Lure, or Tongue of the Serpent? They're not great cards, but just as useful as a bunch of stuff that got reprinted in 3rd Edition. Mark of Damnation has new potential with Bupe Q and Ezekiel, it should merit a reprint.

[ quoted text not captured ] I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. Or improve the card. And you are all incorrect about corruption-tokens; they are available in the starter: Revelation of Ecstasy Serpentis action, no cost +1 stealth Action ser Tap one of your prey's ready minions. SER As above, and place a corruption counter on that minion. If the number of your corruption counters on the minion equals or exceeds his or her capacity or cost, you may burn those counters to take control of him or her. Art by Jon DiBartolo This is a good example of my initial point. Corruption, the original, was pathetic. This is an improvement. This should be printed. The original corruption can rot -- though, again, a reprint with an improvement would be laudable. Further, I agree with the poster above that held that starters are better with all-new vampires as opposed to reprints. The reprints are still very available. I want new vampires in a new starter. I will agree with you on one point: there is no good reason why Path of Typhon isn't in this box. That was a mistake on WW's part, imo.

On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay > for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant > stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. > > Or improve the card. You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Stealth/maneuver in one card is never bad. Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? Mark of Damnation? Can be real fun in decks designed to use it. Not all cards that are not used are garbage. Some need tweaking, though, here we agree (Phobia, Mummify, Grand Temple of Set, Eyes of the Serpent). Others are fine and give Setites more options apart from stealth/bleed, stealth/vote, minion-theft. > And you are all incorrect about corruption-tokens; they are available > in the starter: We already knew that. Still no excuse to not reprint a good card. > > Revelation of Ecstasy > Serpentis action, no cost > +1 stealth Action > ser Tap one of your prey's ready minions. > SER As above, and place a corruption counter on that minion. If the > number of your corruption counters > on the minion equals or exceeds his or her capacity or cost, you may > burn those counters to take > control of him or her. > Art by Jon DiBartolo You notice that you need SER to play this, and in the starter only 3 vampires have SER (ok, there is the skill-card, but 1 in 90?). Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's uses. Period. > This is a good example of my initial point. Corruption, the original, > was pathetic. This is an improvement. This should be printed. The > original corruption can rot -- though, again, a reprint with an > improvement would be laudable. See my comment above. > Further, I agree with the poster above that held that starters are > better with all-new vampires as opposed to reprints. The reprints are > still very available. I want new vampires in a new starter. I also want new vampire in the starter. I also would wish for a couple reprints (say 4 reprints), so the options increase for new players and the starter is more diversified cryptwise. > I will agree with you on one point: there is no good reason why Path > of Typhon isn't in this box. That was a mistake on WW's part, imo. So we at least agree on one point. All is not lost. ;)

On Sep 18, 4:15 am, preache...@gmx.at wrote: > On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay > > for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant > > stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. > > > Or improve the card. > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Did I say it was garbage? I suspect you are creating a disagreement where there is none. >Stealth/maneuver in one card > is never bad. > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? They are not terribly good but not bad. And again, I did not mention them. To compare any of these with Eyes of the Serpent is close to inanity. Tongue of the Serpent can actually swing a game here and there. Eyes of the Serpent is simply horrible. > Not all cards that are not used are garbage. Some need tweaking, And without said tweaking it's insulting to print the card. Note that chaning the card is, in effect, printing a new card. > > And you are all incorrect about corruption-tokens; they are available > > in the starter: > > We already knew that. Still no excuse to not reprint a good card. As I pointed out, Corruption is not good. If it were, corruption would be a viable tourney option. It is not good. I do not want it. I do not want to pay for it. If Corruption filled the FoS starters, I might buy some singles from it but I wouldn't buy the starter itself. I hate that waste of paper that much. > > Revelation of Ecstasy > > Serpentis action, no cost > > +1 stealth Action > > ser Tap one of your prey's ready minions. > > SER As above, and place a corruption counter on that minion. If the > > number of your corruption counters > > on the minion equals or exceeds his or her capacity or cost, you may > > burn those counters to take > > control of him or her. > > Art by Jon DiBartolo > > You notice that you need SER to play this, and in the starter only 3 > vampires have SER (ok, there is the skill-card, but 1 in 90?). I don't care. Starters are not made only for sealed play; a monomaniacal obsession with sealed play is absurd. For those of use who will actually build decks -- including yourself -- we care about the cards in constructed. Whether or not the FoS deck plays well sealed is irrelevant. > Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's > uses. Period. The word "period" is no escape from absurdity. Eyes of the Serpent has its uses. So does Appolonius. Phobia can be used as well. "It has it's [sic] uses" does not negate, attack, or undermine the assertion that "Eyes of the Serpent is garbage." If you want a completely useless card, trade for it. Tell you what, you give me the new cads from this set and I'll give you Phobia. > > > Further, I agree with the poster above that held that starters are > > better with all-new vampires as opposed to reprints. The reprints are > > still very available. I want new vampires in a new starter. > > I also want new vampire in the starter. I also would wish for a couple > reprints (say 4 reprints), so the options increase for new players and > the starter is more diversified cryptwise. This still makes no sense to me: A) all group 4 vampires are painfully available, as yet. You are arguing for reducing the value of the starter and increasing the value of the individual vampires in it so players have to either buy more singles or more starters to get the _new_ vampires. The net effect is we spend more cash to get the same cards. It is difficult to understand how new players will fail to be able to buy any Group 4 minions o' Sutekh with the exceptions of Zhenga and Bupe (Bupe! Bupe! Bupe! -- it's fun to say, try it) who were in LoB, a completely clusterphuqed set that was -- wait for it -- so full of reprints that it was impossible to get anything you wanted without hard trading and luck or mass buying. THOSE vamps could be reprinted, I suppose, but the others are more than available enough. And that still does not negate the fact that a new vampire is _still_ of higher, general utility than an old Zhenga to the average person buying this starter. B) Again, [quality of starter for constructed play] >> [quality of starter for sealed play] I have been pessimistic about many of the card mix decisions WW has made of late. This is the first time I'm happy about a starter. Even the lack of Path of Typhon isn't enough to shoot down the quality of this box.

preac...@gmx.at wrote: > You notice that you need SER to play this, and in the starter only 3 > vampires have SER (ok, there is the skill-card, but 1 in 90?). Six. Out of Twelve. Odds of having one in your opening uncontrolled region: 97% > Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's > uses. Period. And you need no requirements to use the original Chainsaw. So that argument looks a little suspicious.

On Sep 18, 1:38 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's > > uses. Period. > > And you need no requirements to use the original Chainsaw. So that argument > looks a little suspicious. Well, to be fair, he has a point. The "new Corruption" card is more powerful than Corruption, but requires SER. The old Corruption only requires a clan, which is *usually* less of an issue than SER in corruption-themed decks (which tend to be Settites anyway). I could see myself using a mix of the cards, were I to do a Corruption deck. //Petri

On 18 Sep., 11:30, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 18, 4:15 am, preache...@gmx.at wrote: > > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? > > Did I say it was garbage? I suspect you are creating a disagreement > where there is none. You were the one designating the group of cards garbage. The original poster mentioned Form, Lure, Eyes IIRC. > > >Stealth/maneuver in one card > > is never bad. > > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? > > They are not terribly good but not bad. And again, I did not mention > them. To compare any of these with Eyes of the Serpent is close to > inanity. Tongue of the Serpent can actually swing a game here and > there. Eyes of the Serpent is simply horrible. You mentioned that you don't want garbage in direct response to those cards named. What do I miss? > > Not all cards that are not used are garbage. Some need tweaking, > > And without said tweaking it's insulting to print the card. Note that > chaning the card is, in effect, printing a new card. It is not. Players can use their old copies of the changed cards. That's an added bonus for some. > As I pointed out, Corruption is not good. If it were, corruption would > be a viable tourney option. It is not good. I do not want it. I do not > want to pay for it. If Corruption filled the FoS starters, I might buy > some singles from it but I wouldn't buy the starter itself. I hate > that waste of paper that much. You are arriving at wild conclusions when assuming that I wanted Corruption to fill the FoS Starter. That is simply not true. A single copy would have been sufficient, IMO. And still, Corruption is a good card, even if *you* don't see it used. > > You notice that you need SER to play this, and in the starter only 3 > > vampires have SER (ok, there is the skill-card, but 1 in 90?). > > I don't care. Starters are not made only for sealed play; a > monomaniacal obsession with sealed play is absurd. For those of use > who will actually build decks -- including yourself -- we care about > the cards in constructed. Whether or not the FoS deck plays well > sealed is irrelevant. You are right, starters are not only made for sealed play, but it's nonetheless one of their uses. >From what you write, starters shouldn't cater to you, as they contain *gasp* reprints. > > Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's > > uses. Period. > > The word "period" is no escape from absurdity. Eyes of the Serpent has > its uses. So does Appolonius. Phobia can be used as well. Just because you don't see decks using Corruption doesn't mean the card is bad. There can be decks in which Corruption sucks. There can also be decks in which Revelation of Ecstasy sucks. Both have different requirements and cater to different crypts. Forget Appolonius. You will feel better. (Phobia could work, if it gave counter in each players masterphase...) > "It has it's uses" does not negate, attack, or undermine the > assertion that "Eyes of the Serpent is garbage." In current form, Eyes of the Serpent is very limited in use. Maybe in Imbued-heavy environments. Garbage. Hm. You certainly like that word. :) > This still makes no sense to me: > A) all group 4 vampires are painfully available, as yet. Are they? This really depends. I'd say for new players it's easier to acquire a starter and have all you need, than to hunt those cards down on ebay. I would also be fine with 12 different *new* vampires in the starters. But only 6 different? What's the reason? > B) Again, [quality of starter for constructed play] >> [quality of > starter for sealed play] No. This equation may be true for you. But it certainly is not true for everyone. For constructed play, it would be more reasonable to buy boosters, if you want no reprints. > I have been pessimistic about many of the card mix decisions WW has > made of late. This is the first time I'm happy about a starter. Even > the lack of Path of Typhon isn't enough to shoot down the quality of > this box. See, for others the lack of Path is a bummer. There are other Serpentis/Setite cards that have never been reprinted (or have not been in print since FN). Those would have been some good candidates as reprints. Nobody is asking for truckloads of those older cards, but a single copy of one or the other of them wouldn't seem so bad at all. There are also players who care about the layout of their cards. Some want those old cards in the new layout. But I disgress...

On 18 Sep., 12:38, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote: > > You notice that you need SER to play this, and in the starter only 3 > > vampires have SER (ok, there is the skill-card, but 1 in 90?). > > Six. > Out of Twelve. Should have written 3 of the 6 distinct vampires. Ok. > Odds of having one in your opening uncontrolled region: > 97% You are the math guru. ;) > > Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's > > uses. Period. > > And you need no requirements to use the original Chainsaw. So that argument > looks a little suspicious. It does, when you repeat it out of context. Sure. It was a comparison of the requirements of SER vs FoS. Therefore the Chainsaw statement is a bit unwarranted and unnecessary. :)

Petri Wessman wrote: > On Sep 18, 1:38 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >>> Whereas you only need to be a Setite to use Corruption. It has it's >>> uses. Period. >> And you need no requirements to use the original Chainsaw. So that argument >> looks a little suspicious. > > Well, to be fair, he has a point. I didn't say he didn't have a point. I said the argument was flawed. Flawed arguments tend to detract from the point, no matter how valid the point.

Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote in news:1190077177.311618.196270@ 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > >> In a TCG (*Trading* Card Game) not all of the cards will be available in >> unlimited quantities, at no cost to absolute newbie players. That is >> one of the *concepts* of such game. V:TES has been very nice in this >> regard to newbie players, so they really can´t complain. > > Agreed. > > Still, while some cards get reprinted in every other base set as well > as in various starters, the basic cards of the four indy clans and > their respective proprietary disciplines (or near-proprietary in the > case of Neromancy) get reprinted in starters or not at all. That > means in these LotN starters, more than usual, choosing needed > reprints should have been a priority. We'll see what happens in the > other three, but it looks like some poor choices were made in the FoS > deck (if the criterion is reprinting card that need reprinting). > > Form of Corruption and Temptation were already reprinted in the Baali > deck, which is still available. Omitting Corruption and the Path of > Typhon seems hard to justify. Corruption is the single poorest way to get a corruption counter on a minion, and the Path of Typhon was a _common_ Unique master in Ancient Hearts. All but maybe 6 of the >100 of those in my collection are available to any newbies who feel they need them. If the same holds true for the other >1000 old timers with reams of that card, then we've got the next ~50,000 new VTES players covered on Path of Typhon. You can ask for a reprint again, once they're all on board ;-) > And what about Eyes, Form, Lure, or > Tongue of the Serpent? They're not great cards, but just as useful as > a bunch of stuff that got reprinted in 3rd Edition. Weak reprints don't justify yet more weak reprints. That cycle must be broken. I now see why you ask for a Path reprint, though. Almost none of these cards (except maybe Lure) are worthwhile if you have to pay for them ;-) > Mark of Damnation > has new potential with Bupe Q and Ezekiel, it should merit a reprint. > Man, we finally (_finally_!!!) get a set where the majority of the cards show some potential for the tournament scene without being overpowered, and the next thing I see is stuff like this (...pining for the ass cards of yore). Mark of Damnation..? You're actually really kidding here, aren't you? DaveZ

preac...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190103350.008534.89250 @y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com: > On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay >> for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant >> stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. >> >> Or improve the card. > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Stealth/maneuver in one card > is never bad. For one blood? Yes, it is. > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? For the setites? Yes, having to stay at close range is usually pretty bad. > Mark of Damnation? Can be real fun in decks designed to use it. > I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) DaveZ AW

On 18 Wrz, 15:16, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190103350.008534.89250 [ quoted text not captured ] well steal 2 blood for serpentis is good card - whatever you think about it. it is good in SER PRE OBF - probably not. it is slightly worse theft of vitae - probably best strike card in vtes

On 18 Sep, 14:23, AcheronNightStal...@gmail.com wrote: > On 18 Wrz, 15:16, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190103350.008534.89250 > > @y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com: > > > > On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay > > >> for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant > > >> stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. > > > >> Or improve the card. > > > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Stealth/maneuver in one card > > > is never bad. > > > For one blood? Yes, it is. > > > > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? > > > For the setites? Yes, having to stay at close range is usually pretty > > bad. > > > > Mark of Damnation? Can be real fun in decks designed to use it. > > > I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) > > > DaveZ > > AW > > well steal 2 blood for serpentis is good card - whatever you think > about it. Yes Mr. Acheron Sir :O) > it is good in SER PRE OBF - probably not. So, it's no good in a Setite deck? your confusing me now - do you think its a good card or not? > it is slightly worse theft of vitae - probably best strike card in vtes- Hide quoted text - Its a LOT worse than theft...

> > Mark of Damnation? Can be real fun in decks designed to use it. > > I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) Your sources are correct regarding IS. On MoD, however, you seem to be misinformed. Referrendum? In any case, IS is irrelevant to a discussion of MoD, as it is a Potence card whose only affecting Potence strikes in the current combat.

On 18 Sep., 15:16, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190103350.008534.89250 > @y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com: > > > On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay > >> for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant > >> stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. > > >> Or improve the card. > > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Stealth/maneuver in one card > > is never bad. > > For one blood? Yes, it is. A number of Serpentis cards cost one blood. You will notice that Serpentis (back in the WotC era) got cards that did out-of-the-box stuff with a substantial blood cost. Path of Typhoon was created to mitigate that cost. Vampire without Obfuscate can use it to gain stealth with a reasonable price attached. It is not the bad card you would like it to appear. > > > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? > > For the setites? Yes, having to stay at close range is usually pretty > bad. Not more or less than for any other clan without access to the more combat-oriented disciplines (pot, cel, vic, pro, ani, etc.). Stealing 1/2 blood (with no blood cost, yeah!) is not bad. It's a bit weaker than Theft, because of being close range only, but both are not handstrikes, which is why they are considered not too hot. > > Mark of Damnation? > I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) Referendum? Are you mistaking Mark of Damnation for Mark of the Damned? ;) It seems to me that a lot of players are completely disregarding a couple of the old (and some newer) Serpentis cards. I agree that some are weak, but that had to do with WotC screwing up *after* the playtest process. WW had the chance to rectify this (in any case, with or without knowledge of the old playtest, respectively non-misprinted versions) as has been done in many cases in FN and subsequent expansions (Ravnos Cache, Gangrel Revel, Concealed Weapon, e.a.). And what is wrong about the desire to have old cards in the new layout? Most of us have enough of the old cards, but they are in the *old* layout, which isn't really appreciated anymore by a lot of players because we have adapted to the new one...

On 18 Sep., 14:49, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote in news:1190077177.311618.196270@ [ quoted text not captured ] > DaveZ- Zitierten Text ausblenden - > > - Zitierten Text anzeigen - Did you consider that those non-reprinted cards are in the old layout, and some players would like them in the new one?

[ quoted text not captured ] like me (but i dont play setites - quietus cards bar foul blood,taste of death and thin blood suck anyway :D) i'd like to see market square,khabar:loyality and upgraded contract :D

preac...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190124505.208189.198960@ 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > On 18 Sep., 15:16, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190103350.008534.89250 >> @y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com: >> >> > On 18 Sep., 09:31, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> I, unfortunately, am glad you are disappointed. I do not want to pay >> >> for garbage. I do not want garbage reprinted. Eyes of the Serpant >> >> stank when first printed. Make the hurting stop. >> >> >> Or improve the card. >> >> > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? Stealth/maneuver in one card >> > is never bad. >> >> For one blood? Yes, it is. > > A number of Serpentis cards cost one blood. You will notice that > Serpentis (back in the WotC era) got cards that did out-of-the-box > stuff with a substantial blood cost. Path of Typhoon was created to > mitigate that cost. Again, expensive bad cards do not justify the need for reprints of a common unique master. PoTyphon has uses, but their existing abundance is more than sufficient to cover the need for the next 20,000-50,000 new VTES players. > Vampire without Obfuscate can use it to gain stealth with a reasonable > price attached. It is not the bad card you would like it to appear. > Paying a blood for +1 stealth, for a clan that has Obf as an in-clan discipline is bad. Paying a blood for a maneuver? Also bad, compared to the cost of either IR goggles or Swallowed by the Night (both of which are readily available to Setites). Bad bad bad bad baddity bad, despite your protests to the contrary. If the card were free, it might become good, or very good, even. >> >> > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? >> >> For the setites? Yes, having to stay at close range is usually pretty >> bad. > > Not more or less than for any other clan without access to the more > combat-oriented disciplines (pot, cel, vic, pro, ani, etc.). > Stealing 1/2 blood (with no blood cost, yeah!) is not bad. It's a bit > weaker than Theft, because of being close range only, but both are not > handstrikes, which is why they are considered not too hot. > So what you're saying is, its a good card, but the setites cannot use it well, so its a bad card... >> > Mark of Damnation? > >> I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) > > Referendum? Are you mistaking Mark of Damnation for Mark of the > Damned? ;) > Uhps, yes I was... Sorry. Still, a weak card for a not-fighty clan. > It seems to me that a lot of players are completely disregarding a > couple of the old (and some newer) Serpentis cards. I agree that some > are weak, but that had to do with WotC screwing up *after* the > playtest process. > WW had the chance to rectify this (in any case, with or without > knowledge of the old playtest, respectively non-misprinted versions) > as has been done in many cases in FN and subsequent expansions (Ravnos > Cache, Gangrel Revel, Concealed Weapon, e.a.). > Burden of card text changes doesn't help the games popularity or ease of entry. However many changes you make, new players will have to learn. Let the crap cards die, already, and let newer, better cards take their place (which seems to be happening, given the quality of the cards spoilt thus far) > And what is wrong about the desire to have old cards in the new > layout? Most of us have enough of the old cards, but they are in the > *old* layout, which isn't really appreciated anymore by a lot of > players because we have adapted to the new one... > [sarcasm] Oh, I agree with this. Tortured Confession would see _so_ much more tournament play, if only it had a face lift... [/sarcasm] DaveZ AW

On 18 Sep., 16:37, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190124505.208189.198960@ > 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > > > A number of Serpentis cards cost one blood. You will notice that > > Serpentis (back in the WotC era) got cards that did out-of-the-box > > stuff with a substantial blood cost. Path of Typhoon was created to > > mitigate that cost. > > Again, expensive bad cards do not justify the need for reprints of a common > unique master. PoTyphon has uses, but their existing abundance is more > than sufficient to cover the need for the next 20,000-50,000 new VTES > players. This is hyperbole (again). It was common, but surely not C1. However, I doubt that there are tons upon tons out there which are quite easily obtainable. > > > Vampire without Obfuscate can use it to gain stealth with a reasonable > > price attached. It is not the bad card you would like it to appear. > > Paying a blood for +1 stealth, for a clan that has Obf as an in-clan > discipline is bad. Paying a blood for a maneuver? Also bad, compared to > the cost of either IR goggles or Swallowed by the Night (both of which are > readily available to Setites). Bad bad bad bad baddity bad, despite your > protests to the contrary. If the card were free, it might become good, or > very good, even. You seem to blatantly ignore the fact that there are vampires in the clan that don't have Obf. Aabt Kindred, anyone? When I build FoS decks, I try and mix Swallowed by the Night and Form of the Serpent. Diversity in stealth, you know... > >> > Tongue of the Serpent? Steal 1/2 blood at no cost is bad? > > >> For the setites? Yes, having to stay at close range is usually pretty > >> bad. > > > Not more or less than for any other clan without access to the more > > combat-oriented disciplines (pot, cel, vic, pro, ani, etc.). > > Stealing 1/2 blood (with no blood cost, yeah!) is not bad. It's a bit > > weaker than Theft, because of being close range only, but both are not > > handstrikes, which is why they are considered not too hot. > > So what you're saying is, its a good card, but the setites cannot use it > well, so its a bad card... Are you telling me, that because S:CE, dodge and IG exist, non- handstrikes cannot be used well? If you do, then ... yeah, sure. Otherwise you missed the point. You realize, that Serpentis *does* have the option of handling combat quite well? (Though, mono-serpentis could be a bit challenging, I admit.) > >> > Mark of Damnation? > > >> I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) > > > Referendum? Are you mistaking Mark of Damnation for Mark of the > > Damned? ;) > > Uhps, yes I was... Sorry. Still, a weak card for a not-fighty clan. Skin of the Adder, Grasp the Python, Typhonic Beast, The Jones, Tongue of the Serpent, Heart of Darkness, ... Non-fighty. I'll grant you that if you only tier-1 combat decks as "fighty". > Burden of card text changes doesn't help the games popularity or ease of > entry. However many changes you make, new players will have to learn. Let > the crap cards die, already, and let newer, better cards take their place > (which seems to be happening, given the quality of the cards spoilt thus > far) There are bad cards. But not all the cards you name bad are really bad. Some players manage to get mileage out of them, YMMV. > > And what is wrong about the desire to have old cards in the new > > layout? Most of us have enough of the old cards, but they are in the > > *old* layout, which isn't really appreciated anymore by a lot of > > players because we have adapted to the new one... > > [sarcasm] Oh, I agree with this. Tortured Confession would see _so_ much > more tournament play, if only it had a face lift... [/sarcasm] Your sarcasm is not warranted here. Who brought up Tortured Confession? It was you. I was talking about Serpentis/FoS cards in general. You realize that you are ridiculing a portion of the players out there? If you intend to do that, fine, I thought you were above that. *shrug* Still, all of the initial points I made are valid. Did you want to refute them in a constructive way? I guess so. :)

On Sep 18, 7:35 am, preache...@gmx.at wrote: > On 18 Sep., 11:30, Defender of Ra <ruleslaw...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sep 18, 4:15 am, preache...@gmx.at wrote: > > > > You think Form of the Serpent is garbage? > > > Did I say it was garbage? I suspect you are creating a disagreement > > where there is none. > > You were the one designating the group of cards garbage. The original > poster mentioned Form, Lure, Eyes IIRC. . . What do I miss? I mentioned Eyes. > > And without said tweaking it's insulting to print the card. Note that > > chaning the card is, in effect, printing a new card. > > It is not. Players can use their old copies of the changed cards. > That's an added bonus for some. As with the point LSJ made, you obfuscated the point here. The fact that there is an "added bonus" in no way alters my point that changing the card is, in effect, printing a new card. Spontaneously, older players now have a "new card" in their collections. > > As I pointed out, Corruption is not good. If it were, corruption would > > be a viable tourney option. It is not good. I do not want it. I do not > > want to pay for it. If Corruption filled the FoS starters, I might buy > > some singles from it but I wouldn't buy the starter itself. I hate > > that waste of paper that much. > > You are arriving at wild conclusions when assuming that I wanted > Corruption to fill the FoS Starter. Straw man argument. I obviously did not mean that every card in the FoS starter would be corruption. Nevertheless, any number of copies of corruption would be unacceptable. The card is crap. >That is simply not true. A single > copy would have been sufficient, To make the starter suck, yes, a single copy is sufficient. > IMO. And still, Corruption is a good > card, even if *you* don't see it used. I see it used from time to time. It's garbage. I suspect you're being deliberately obtuse here: if Corruption is a good card I am literally hard-pressed to find a bad one. I have no idea what good/bad means in your world. Merely because a card has a game effect doesn't make it "good." I suspect that this is your view because you seem to conflate the use of a card with quality. > You are right, starters are not only made for sealed play, but it's > nonetheless one of their uses. A use which doesn't justify screwing over constructed. Again, this distracts from my point but doesn't refute it. It's entirely possible to make a starter that is fun to play sealed and useful to, well, um _buy_ -- and the latter is the main way WW makes money. But if a clan concept is simply impossible to support in sealed and makes for crappy sealed play as a result, I just don't see how customers will refuse to buy the starter. They'll want the starter. They just won't want to draft it. > Just because you don't see decks using Corruption doesn't mean the > card is bad. Again, that twisted confusion. Lack of Use =! Bad. I don't see a lot of Legal Manipulations used. The card is tremendously strong. I don't see it used much because people here don't like stealth bleed and usually don't play Presence bleed when they do go for it. I have no idea why you're sticking with this formulation. > There can be decks in which Corruption sucks. All of them. This is a flat evaluation. It's weak. It can work. When it does, _it's_still_weak. > (Phobia could work, if it gave counter in each players masterphase...) But the powers that be have foolishly ruled it doesn't, so it sucks. No hypotheticals are needed to evaluate these cards. > > "It has it's uses" does not negate, attack, or undermine the > > assertion that "Eyes of the Serpent is garbage." > > In current form, Eyes of the Serpent is very limited in use. More importantly, it's generally weak even when it can be played. Again, this response doesn't change my point. > > This still makes no sense to me: > > A) all group 4 vampires are painfully available, as yet. > > Are they? This really depends. I'd say for new players it's easier to > acquire a starter and have all you need, than to hunt those cards down > on ebay. And we'd then have to argue the particulars as to why new players "need" Bupe or Zhenga or Seren or Neferu. . . Before your argument here can even be considered you'd need to show that this new FoS starter doesn't give new players what they "need." At first blush, it certainly does: it gives them a set of vampires with which they can create a playable deck. A starter deck is not meant to emulate a constructed deck. > I would also be fine with 12 different *new* vampires in the starters. > But only 6 different? What's the reason? I can speculate as to the reason, but the fact of the matter is, I don't see this as a problem in the first place. Indeed, it can reduce the number of starters a new player has to buy since newbies need duplicates of new vampires. > > B) Again, [quality of starter for constructed play] >> [quality of > > starter for sealed play] > > No. This equation may be true for you. But it certainly is not true > for everyone. > For constructed play, it would be more reasonable to buy boosters, if > you want no reprints. This is silly: you are aware that there are plenty of cards in starters that do not appear in boosters. Starters are _far_ more important for constructed for some sets if you need a certain card from that set. And even if that weren't true it wouldn't support the amazing claim that sealed play is anything near as important as constructed play. > > I have been pessimistic about many of the card mix decisions WW has > > made of late. This is the first time I'm happy about a starter. Even > > the lack of Path of Typhon isn't enough to shoot down the quality of > > this box. > > See, for others the lack of Path is a bummer. Others have addressed this. Temptation is harder to get and far more important, and it's there. This is still a good starter. And I dislike the new layout(s), anyway.

preac...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190124635....@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > Did you consider that those non-reprinted cards are in the old layout, > and some players would like them in the new one? > I did, for a moment. Then I asked myself; why I would want weak cards to take the place of potentially better cards in the set... just so that more of the same old weak cards can sit in a box with the new layout, beside all of the other weak cards with the old layout? No. I don't want that. There's no Twisting the Knife in the new layout, either, and the game is better for it. DaveZ

preac...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190115345.829149.200700 @r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > I would also be fine with 12 different *new* vampires in the starters. > But only 6 different? What's the reason? > The reason for this is so that players only need to buy half the number of starters, in order to gain sufficient access to the starter-only vampires for their constructed-deck endeavors. DaveZ AW

On 18 Wrz, 17:26, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: > preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190115345.829149.200700 [ quoted text not captured ] point

On Sep 16, 11:55 pm, Alex Ek <a...@student.chalmers.se> wrote: > The forces of IRC and the Croatian Republic presents: > > A link I got of the IRC: > > http://klubzmaj.org.yu/forum/viewtopic.php?p=50804#50804 > > I includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist > > OMG OMG OMG > > //Alex Ek It's forum of players from Serbian republic ;) I found FoS starter here: http://ashheap.storageannex.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1056

preac...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190128027.4...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com: > On 18 Sep., 16:37, atomweaver <atomwea...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> preache...@gmx.at wrote in news:1190124505.208189.198960@ >> 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: >> >> > A number of Serpentis cards cost one blood. You will notice that >> > Serpentis (back in the WotC era) got cards that did out-of-the-box >> > stuff with a substantial blood cost. Path of Typhoon was created to >> > mitigate that cost. >> >> Again, expensive bad cards do not justify the need for reprints of a >> common unique master. PoTyphon has uses, but their existing >> abundance is more than sufficient to cover the need for the next >> 20,000-50,000 new VTES players. > > This is hyperbole (again). It is not. Especially considering that the average player may (_may_) need 3-6 copies, at most, for 95+% of his deckbuilding needs. This is the same argument that works against the "commons reprinted as rares" from LoB. > It was common, but surely not C1. It was common in AH. C1/C2 is meaningless, as all commons in AH had C2 rarity (equal relative abundance to any other AH common). The Lasombra's sales site is offline for the NAC, but I'd be willing to bet that there's at least 100 of Path of Typhon for $0.10, there, if he hasn't bundled them off with Playgroup Starter sets on ebay. I saw 20 or 30 in the Boston playgroup's freebie box a couple of weeks ago, and i know that its only that small, because the players don't want to overwhelm the freebie box with too much junk. There is no need to reprint cards that are easily accessed, just by asking in a multittude of places. > However, I doubt that there are tons > upon tons out there which are quite easily obtainable. > *shrug* You get the hundreds of newbies to start asking, and we'll see how far the currently available stock of cards can be stretched. ;-) If I'm wrong, I'll apologize then... snip the turns around the mulberry bush. We've each had our say. >> >> > Mark of Damnation? >> >> >> I hear Increased Strength doesn't require a referendum... ;-) >> >> > Referendum? Are you mistaking Mark of Damnation for Mark of the >> > Damned? ;) >> >> Uhps, yes I was... Sorry. Still, a weak card for a not-fighty clan. > > Skin of the Adder, Weak, in that it costs a blood and doesn't stack. > Grasp the Python, This almost makes the case for a Mark of Damnation Ser weenie deck... but there's already enough Mark of Damnation printed for those few who would like to take a shot at such a trick deck... > Typhonic Beast, The Jones, These are actually more of an arugment in favor of new cards being printed, not reprinting old ones. If one can make Serpentis do more of this, Setites will be better for it. > Tongue > of the Serpent, Addressed elsewhere > Heart of Darkness, ... A good card, but not mentioned ever as mediocre by me. > Non-fighty. I'll grant you that if you only tier-1 combat decks as > "fighty". > Aye, but reprints that take the place of other, potentially better cards _aren't_ the way to upgrade Ser combat. New, better cards are the way, as evidenced by examples of the better cards coming out of the WW-era expansions. > >> Burden of card text changes doesn't help the games popularity or ease >> of entry. However many changes you make, new players will have to >> learn. Let the crap cards die, already, and let newer, better cards >> take their place (which seems to be happening, given the quality of >> the cards spoilt thus far) > > There are bad cards. But not all the cards you name bad are really > bad. Some players manage to get mileage out of them, YMMV. > The opinions expressed above represent the views of their author (me), and may not represent the position of our broadcasting network... >> > And what is wrong about the desire to have old cards in the new >> > layout? Most of us have enough of the old cards, but they are in >> > the *old* layout, which isn't really appreciated anymore by a lot >> > of players because we have adapted to the new one... >> >> [sarcasm] Oh, I agree with this. Tortured Confession would see _so_ >> much more tournament play, if only it had a face lift... [/sarcasm] > > Your sarcasm is not warranted here. Who brought up Tortured > Confession? Its junk on the level of Eyes of the Serpent, only available in the old layout. Consider it a litmus test for whether the 'new layout' argument is sufficient on its own. If you don't want Tortured Confession in the new layout, there's no reason to want similarly poor cards to take the place of potentially better ones. 'New layout' is an insufficient motivation to reprint junk, especially when there are better cards out there. > It was you. I was talking about Serpentis/FoS cards in > general. > You realize that you are ridiculing a portion of the players out > there? If you're talking about the portion of players who make use of sub-grade tech, then I am _among_ that portion of players. :-) But then, I'm not beyond self-ridicule, either... http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/rdz.htm#dna > If you intend to do that, fine, I thought you were above that. > *shrug* > I've got a clear idea of what I want for Serpentis; better cards than the old AH stuff. I've got no nostalgia for it, because I've used it eight ways to Sunday, and it is sub-par tech. If anyone wants to give that old tech a spin, they can ask any old-timer to give them the cards to do so, and they'll be happily accomodated by the existing VTES community. Given that space in every set and every starter is limited, I'd rather see upgraded serpentis tech in the form of new cards, rather than the old, weak cards. On-Thread arguments about the utility of stuff like Corruption, Eyes, Tongue, etc, are simply insufficient to change that opinion, because its empirically grounded in game play among strong groups (Boston, Altanta, Columbia). Sorry if that hurts your feelings... > Still, all of the initial points I made are valid. Did you want to > refute them in a constructive way? I guess so. :) > Yeah, i'm in a goofy posting mood today, so my comments are a bit colored by that. But the point remains, I'm un-convinced that the cards originally mentioned are at all worth reprinting, given their already prodigious abundance (Path of Typhon), and their limited utility, and also given that Serpentis and the Setites would clearly be better served by newer, more powerful cards being more readily available. DZ AW

AK-47 Equipment Gun 5 pool 2R dmg Maneuver Additional strike Ilustration is upper left part of LotN image on ww's preview page. (guy with half of the head and ak47 *duh* :D )

> It includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist You know, what strikes me as the weirdest is that people mentionned all the core missing cards, but no one complained that their slots were taken by... 3x The Jones !! Or the very redundant True Love's Face x4... -- Orpheus ---------------- Top of Ban / Fix List : PTO, Champion, Memories of Mortality.

On Sep 18, 11:19 am, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: > > It includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist > > You know, what strikes me as the weirdest is that people mentionned all the > core missing cards, but no one complained that their slots were taken by... > 3x The Jones !! Or the very redundant True Love's Face x4... The Jones is really quite good. It is both trumpy to cancel dodges and SCE and combat defense in the form of a dodge w/ press to end. Now it is limit to use with 8+ caps to be effective, but we all know that they can be good. True Love's Face is HOt! HOt! HOT! Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

[ quoted text not captured ] Please tell me this is fake. Cos it sucks.....

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 12:59:27 -0700, Blooded Sand <sand...@gmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Not so sure about that. I mean, if you plan on using Celerity, then AK-47 sucks. But if you don't, you are more-or-less there with AR: sure, you need to survive your opponent's initial strike to deal full damage, but in return the damage is split into 2 strikes, making it harder to dodge and prevent. Also, if you use ammo, but not Celerity, AK really starts to shine. -- Regards, Daneel

On Sep 18, 10:19 pm, Daneel <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 12:59:27 -0700, Blooded Sand <sandm...@gmail.com> [ quoted text not captured ] well on the amo front, i take it you are gonna mean either glaser or manstopper rounds? cos scattershot is gonna hose for a optional manuever gun, and dragonsbreath is a weeeeeeee bit pricey... :) So lets take manstopper, then glaser Manstopper deals a total of 6, 2 strikes of 3 Glaser deals 6, one of 2, one of 4 so far so equal. Difference by round 2? lets see. Remember the comparison is for a non CEL deck, so presses from other sources would be required. Would be nice with AUS maybe... And obf to drop it. Hey, malk/!malks.... round 2. Manstopper deals 6, 2 of 3 Glaser deals 8, 2 of 4 Only by the second round of ombat is the ammo gonna differentiate, so i would say that if you are using ammo, use manstopper, as there is a higher chance of actually landing the damage, and each strike in your first round will do more damage. So yeah, you right, can see uses for it. Just, you know, when compared to Cel-gun, it sucks in relation to Assault rifle. But pretty much what i thought it would do though.

On Sep 18, 4:42 pm, Blooded Sand <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote: > So yeah, you right, can see uses for it. Just, you know, when compared > to Cel-gun, it sucks in relation to Assault rifle. > > But pretty much what i thought it would do though. *nod* Makes Swiss cheese of Carlton Van Wyck, too. -- Jason

In article <1190152574.7...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote: > Your arguments are spurious in so many ways... or maybe you're just > confused. Whose arguments are spurious? (i.e. you should quote the relevant text that you are replying to--most newsreaders don't save read posts). Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html "Find hungry samurai." -The Old Man

In article <1190145567.4...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Blooded Sand <sand...@gmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Uh, isn't it virtually identical to an Assault Rifle? It costs the same (5 pool). They both give you a maneuver. They both do 4R damage in a vaccum. If you have Celerity, yeah, Assault Rifle is better. If you don't, they are a wash, although AK-47 is harder to shrug off with a single Dodge or Skin of Steel. And with Ammo, AK-47 gets a benefit (with Manstopper, AR does 5 damage; AK does 6 damage; with Glaiser, AR does 4 damage; AK does 6 damage) over the AR (again, assuming no celerity in play). It strikes me as a perfectly reasonable alternative to AR. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sep 18, 6:26 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1190152574.758167.281...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, > > Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: > > Your arguments are spurious in so many ways... or maybe you're just > > confused. > > Whose arguments are spurious? > > (i.e. you should quote the relevant text that you are replying to--most > newsreaders don't save read posts). > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html > > "Find hungry samurai." > -The Old Man Sorry, I use google groups, which displays a stacked thread. Anyway, the person or people making spurious arguments are the person or people who were arguing that old weak cards shouldn't be reprinted because they'd rather have new cards, or that Serpentis cards should be judged in the context of Presence and Obfuscate (or some other SER=FoS claim), or that Eyes of the Serpent is like Tortured Confession, that's who... (specifically, but not necessarily limited to, atomweaver)

[ quoted text not captured ] If there's so many of these cards around send tham Australia's way. We've got relatively few players compared to the world scene and therefore even getting 1 box of boosters into stores can be really tough. Therefore reprints for me are golden. Sure I've got a collection for >40,000 card but I've got relatively few cards of set pre Black Hand. So a reprint of several key FN, DS or AH cards would be fantastic for me, 'useless' or otherwise, Paths would be invaluable. I've argued before that entire print runs are needed for older sets (see several when will CE be reprinted posts from me), I continue to stand by that opinion, I don't see why if cards are not superceeded (yes I know there's errata und updated printing for several cards) and they are still tournament legal, why they shouldn't be in print still? Sure there's lots of players out there thirsting for new cards, hey so am I, but don't discount the older cards as, I've got 100+ of them so they don't need to be reprinted (not a direct quote). I think there's a huge market for print runs of the older sets, look how much a CE booster sells for on ebay or a box of Jyhad now starting at $40US, even DS is selling around the $100US mark now, and it's a weaker set IMO. Sorry to hijack the topic, I just want reprints of the older sets. Keep all tournament legal cars in print let us, the consumer, decide what is needed and what isn't. I'll now hand the soap box to the next person.

In article <1190155217....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>, Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote: > Sorry, I use google groups, which displays a stacked thread. Sure--which is reasonable, except that it is important to realize that (likely) the majority of folks reading this newsgroup *don't* use google groups (as it mostly sucks the ass...). And even with a stacked thread, it is a good idea to quote relevant text you are responding to--even with a threaded reader, folks don't always read messages in order or just jump to the newest message, and if you make folks go back and check to see what you are talking about, the will often just skip over your post all together. Just helpful advice for the world. > Anyway, the person or people making spurious arguments are the person > or people who were arguing that old weak cards shouldn't be reprinted > because they'd rather have new cards, or that Serpentis cards should > be judged in the context of Presence and Obfuscate (or some other > SER=FoS claim), or that Eyes of the Serpent is like Tortured > Confession, that's who... (specifically, but not necessarily limited > to, atomweaver) Those don't strike me as spurious at all--how is it a good idea to reprint old, weak cards? Especially when you could use the opportunity to make newer, improved versions of the card? For instance, why reprint, like, Form of the Serpent (which is generally not so good a card) when instead you could print a card that is free but at inferior gives you +1 stealth if you burn 1 blood and at superior gives you a manuver? That is a *much* better card--the inferior is virtually identical (or totally identical if you word it right) and the superior is much more useful (a free manuver for SER seems not at all unreasonable)? I mean, like, they *could* have reprinted Chainsaw (the old Jyhad version which was just simply worse than Sawed Off Shotgun) at some point, but they didn't, but did effectively replace it with Gas Powered Chainsaw, which was a wise choice. Why argue that bad cards should be reprinted? And Eyes of the Serpent *is* just like Tortured Confessions--they are both generally ass cards that don't need to ever be reprinted, and while they are good once in a blue moon, there are enough in circulation that getting the few of them you'll ever need is no difficulty. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sep 18, 8:51 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1190155217.309157.91...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>, > > Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: > > Sorry, I use google groups, which displays a stacked thread. > > Sure--which is reasonable, except that it is important to realize that > (likely) the majority of folks reading this newsgroup *don't* use google > groups (as it mostly sucks the ass...). And even with a stacked thread, > it is a good idea to quote relevant text you are responding to--even > with a threaded reader, folks don't always read messages in order or > just jump to the newest message, and if you make folks go back and check > to see what you are talking about, the will often just skip over your > post all together. > > Just helpful advice for the world. > > > Anyway, the person or people making spurious arguments are the person > > or people who were arguing that old weak cards shouldn't be reprinted > > because they'd rather have new cards, or that Serpentis cards should > > be judged in the context of Presence and Obfuscate (or some other > > SER=FoS claim), or that Eyes of the Serpent is like Tortured > > Confession, that's who... (specifically, but not necessarily limited > > to, atomweaver) > > Those don't strike me as spurious at all--how is it a good idea to > reprint old, weak cards? Especially when you could use the opportunity > to make newer, improved versions of the card? WTF??? Huh? Hello? There is no "either / or". Starters contain reprints. That's what starters contain. > And Eyes of the Serpent *is* just like Tortured Confessions--they are > both generally ass cards that don't need to ever be reprinted, and while > they are good once in a blue moon, there are enough in circulation that > getting the few of them you'll ever need is no difficulty. I'm not saying I can't live without Eyes being reprinted. I am saying that it has ABSOLUTELY NO characteristics in common with Tortured Confession. If you think a card is 'bad', you must think so for a particular reason or reasons. If you listed specific reasons you think TC is bad, and specific reasons you think EotS is bad, those lists wouldn't have anything in common. Unless your lists each just consisted of the word "ass", in which case yeah, whatever, but you're not actually saying anything. A card that can be helpful and has absolutely no cost (including no opportunity cost) cannot be compared to a genuinely unusable card like TC. I happen to disagree with the opinion that EotS is too bad for reprinting in the long-established context of a game where most disciplines get just about everything reprinted (and not just in starters), including much, much, much worse cards that EotS. But my point is NOT that EotS needs to be reprinted, I really don't care much about it either way. The point is that Serpentis (and FoS) cards don't get a chance at a reprint except in starters, and that should have be an important criterion in determining the contents of the LotN starters. >>> For instance, why reprint, >like, Form of the Serpent (which is generally not so good a card) when >instead you could print a card that is free but at inferior gives you +1 >stealth if you burn 1 blood and at superior gives you a manuver? Except they're not printing such a card, as far as I know. If they're going to replace an underpowered or overcosted card with a similar, strictly better one, yeah, ok. But in the meantime (which is likely to be forever), I'd like a new-layout Form of the Serpent (or some other card that hasn't been reprinted in forever) in place of a reprint of Hierophant (in a deck with no votes at all) or a reprint of some other recently printed, not-out-of-print card.

-- > On Sep 18, 11:19 am, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: >> > It includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist >> >> You know, what strikes me as the weirdest is that people mentionned all >> the >> core missing cards, but no one complained that their slots were taken >> by... >> 3x The Jones !! Or the very redundant True Love's Face x4... > > The Jones is really quite good. It is both trumpy to cancel dodges > and SCE and combat defense in the form of a dodge w/ press to end. - younger vampire or ally condition makes it a poor combat card - inferior is much weaker than Presence S:CE - superior isn't very good, seriously. Psyche is a good post-strike anti-S:CE and already it is criticised ; this isn't half as good. And in a clan with (as of now) no really good combat card and nothing serious for prevention, it sucks as a strategy. Of course Typhonic Beast is a good combat strategy (even if I've never seen such a deck win, it really needs a POT/SER guy who pays Serpentis one less to be as effective as Horrid Form) but it involves Pot and you'll use Immortal Grapple... In short, I'm sure you could do a hundred decks with it Norm, but I'm really not a fan of the card. > Now it is limit to use with 8+ caps to be effective, but we all know > that they can be good. In FoS combat, can they ? > True Love's Face is HOt! HOt! HOT! You mean, the art, right ? ;-) For vamps who can use better Pre bleeds and have access to Elder Impersonation, a block denial that can be cancelled (yes, even at the cost of a pool, if you don't want to be blocked there's a reason) is a bad card, even if it offers both possibilities. ---------- Orpheus ------------- All Hail the Lords of the Night !

So does AK47 do effectivly 8 damage in the first round if used with scattershot? That is 1 permanent + plus one no cost combat card to do 4 + 4. Are you sure the AK has an additional? because this sounds kinda strong.

On Sep 18, 9:54 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: > WTF??? Huh? Hello? There is no "either / or". Starters contain > reprints. That's what starters contain. So you reprint the good older cards and don't reprint the bad ones. > I'm not saying I can't live without Eyes being reprinted. I am saying > that it has ABSOLUTELY NO characteristics in common with Tortured > Confession. They both suck. That is a common characteristic. > A card that can be helpful and has > absolutely no cost (including no opportunity cost) cannot be compared > to a genuinely unusable card like TC. Eyes of the Serpent has opportunity cost--for it to do anything, you need to be upstream from a deck full of allies. Imbued or no, that is a pretty steep opportunity cost. There are very few situations where it would be worth including this card in your deck blind (i.e. you don't know that your buddy plays the Imbued every game), even on a tournament level, as it is too corner case. Use more stealth instead. It is a bad card. > The point is that Serpentis (and FoS) cards > don't get a chance at a reprint except in starters, and that should > have be an important criterion in determining the contents of the LotN > starters. It is also important that one of the criterion for determining the content of starts to be "will people want to actually buy this?", and if it is a pile of jank ("Ooh! 5x Form of the Serpent! And 2x Eyes of the Serpent! Score!"), they won't. > Except they're not printing such a card, as far as I know. If they're > going to replace an underpowered or overcosted card with a similar, > strictly better one, yeah, ok. But in the meantime (which is likely > to be forever), I'd like a new-layout Form of the Serpent (or some > other card that hasn't been reprinted in forever) in place of a > reprint of Hierophant (in a deck with no votes at all) or a reprint of > some other recently printed, not-out-of-print card. Fair enough. But if your issue is "I don't want Crappy Reprint A; I want crappt Reprint B instead!", why demand crappy reprints? Why not demand, ya know, actually *good* reprints? It doesn't cost the company any more to reprint, like, Form of Corruption or Corruption than it does for them to reprint Form of the Serpent. -Peter

Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote in news:1190155217.309157.91410@ 57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com: > On Sep 18, 6:26 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: >> In article <1190152574.758167.281...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, >> >> Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: >> > Your arguments are spurious in so many ways... or maybe you're just >> > confused. >> >> Whose arguments are spurious? >> >> (i.e. you should quote the relevant text that you are replying to--most >> newsreaders don't save read posts). >> >> Peter D Bakija >> p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html >> >> "Find hungry samurai." >> -The Old Man > > Sorry, I use google groups, which displays a stacked thread. > Upper Right corner of the message you wish to reply to: Click "More Options"... choose "Reply" from the dropdown list, and all text will be quoted for editing per correct Usenet usage. (Note: The fact that you can use Google Groups and follow proper Usenet guidelines in no way detracts from Google Groups general suckage. Please search on the "Usenet Improvment Project" for further details... :) DaveZ Atom Weaver

Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote in news:1190152574.758167.281340@ 50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > Your arguments are spurious in so many ways... or maybe you're just > confused. > > Starters are not a vehicle for the release of new cards. Which old > cards get reprinted in the starters has nothing to do with the release > of new cards. There are 53 reprints in the FoS decklist; Is the new FoS starter _all_ reprints? Is there anything _mandating_ that starters contain only reprints, or even mostly reprints? Is there anything prohibiting the starter designer from choosing better reprints over junk? No to all. > whether one > of them is Summon the Serpent or Form of the Serpent (or whatever > else) instead of Confusion of the Eye or Revelation of Despair (or > whatever else) has *absolutely nothing* to do with the appearance, or > lack thereof, of new, 'better' cards. > So then, you'd rather the starters be diluted with older, weaker reprints, rather than be enriched with better, new cards. Got it. You're loon-crazy, but OK... > Serpentis is not Setite, Setite is not Serpentis. Sorry...? Tell me of another VTES clan that has Serpentis as an in-clan discipline. For all intents and purposes, the two go hand in hand. That's what you'd call context. > Form of the Serpent > is not weak just because Setites tend to have Obfuscate (and thus > access to Swallowed by the Night), for example. On the contrary, Form > is a reasonably-costed card. Whether Corruption is reprinted or > consigned to posterity has, a priori, nothing to do with a card like > Revelation of Ecstasy. > OK. My points on Corruption were that Corruption should not be reprinted because 1) there's lots of Corruption cards in print and 2) Corruption sucks as a method of delivery for Corruption counters. > Eyes of the Serpent ~ Tortured Confession ?!?!?!? Please! Eyes of > the Serpent has no blood cost, no pool cost, and no opportunity cost > beyond 'take an action'. It also has no other characteristics in > common with TC... Except that they both stink, which was my only point. And more, the context of preacher99's comment was about having old cards in the new layout; "It [Tortured Confession] is junk on the level of Eyes of the Serpent, only available in the old layout. Consider it a litmus test for whether the 'new layout' argument is sufficient on its own. If you don't want Tortured Confession in the new layout, there's no reason to want similarly poor cards to take the place of potentially better ones. 'New layout' is an insufficient motivation to reprint junk, especially when there are better cards out there." Give my "how-to" on quoting in Google Groups a spin, and reply again to the comment in context, please... The point was not about equating Eyes and TC, it was about the validity of using "new layout" as an argument in favor of printing old, weak cards. > A better comparison would be Command, which at > least is anti-ally tech. Command has a huge opportunity cost (and is > universally considered to be shite, no?), and yet somehow merited a > reprint in 3E *boosters*! ...and I thought that was a bone-headed move, as well. Again, the fact that crap cards have been reprinted is NO justification for contining to reprint crap cards. DaveZ AW

Benird <ben...@gmail.com> wrote in news:1190158837.1...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com: [ quoted text not captured ] I'd suggest going through a site like mahasamatman and just ask for somoene to throw in the commons you're looking for, so that individual players get what they're after. Just shipping off a bunch of random cards to Australia doesn't strike me as a particularly good solution to the problem of distribution. > We've got relatively few players compared to the world scene and > therefore even getting 1 box of boosters into stores can be really > tough. Therefore reprints for me are golden. Yeah, but you can understand how being a small group doesn't generate a lot of motivation for reprinting old sets, right? I sympathize, but your plight is probably better solved at a grassroots level of each player seeking out that which they want. > Sure I've got a > collection for >40,000 card but I've got relatively few cards of set > pre Black Hand. So a reprint of several key FN, DS or AH cards would > be fantastic for me, 'useless' or otherwise, Paths would be > invaluable. > Email atomweaver at sbcglobal dot net with your mailing address. I'll check out shipping to Oz, and if you're willing to cover shipping, I'll send you a 'care package' of Path of Typhon, Path of Blood, Eyes, etc AH commons, as long as they get distributed to people that will use them. > I've argued before that entire print runs are needed for older sets > (see several when will CE be reprinted posts from me), I continue to > stand by that opinion, I don't see why if cards are not superceeded > (yes I know there's errata und updated printing for several cards) and > they are still tournament legal, why they shouldn't be in print still? > Because there is little demand for them. > Sure there's lots of players out there thirsting for new cards, hey so > am I, but don't discount the older cards as, I've got 100+ of them so > they don't need to be reprinted (not a direct quote). I think there's > a huge market for print runs of the older sets, look how much a CE > booster sells for on ebay or a box of Jyhad now starting at $40US, > even DS is selling around the $100US mark now, and it's a weaker set > IMO. > Yeah, there's a pretty big difference between a few collectors pushing up auction prices on ebay, and having an actual market for a reprint, each set of which would likely involve thousands of boxes of product. Reprinting on even the smallest scale would likely just end up as product sitting on the shelf... > Sorry to hijack the topic, I just want reprints of the older sets. NP > Keep all tournament legal cars in print let us, the consumer, decide > what is needed and what isn't. > Untenable, as a busines model, as much as I'd like it not to be. DZ AW

> > Fair enough. But if your issue is "I don't want Crappy Reprint A; I > want crappt Reprint B instead!", why demand crappy reprints? Why not > demand, ya know, actually *good* reprints? It doesn't cost the company > any more to reprint, like, Form of Corruption or Corruption than it > does for them to reprint Form of the Serpent. Who demanded any particular reprint, crappy or otherwise? Not I. Form of the Serpent is just one of a list of overlooked candidates. Not everyone agrees on what's 'good'. If there's a couple of people in my playgroup that frequently play Imbued, Eyes of the Dead starts to look a little bit, uh, good. (And it has NO opportunity cost beyond taking an action -- that the situations where it is helpful are limited is different than if the situations where you could play it were limited.) VTES, to the extent it is a rich, fun game, is not so just because of the cards that tournament-oriented, newsgroup-posting players call good. The game built only of those cards would get old fast. It seems obvious to me that the criteria for being reprinted should include [1] is the card still part of the game (maybe they've decided to let Eyes fade into oblivion, but surely the Path is still part of the game) and [2] is this card currently out of print. That the card may be available from oldtimers or eBay shouldn't, in my opinion, be much of a factor in the decision. Not everyone has access to oldtimers, and not everyone likes to play a game that they have to go to eBay to buy pieces of. For the indy clans and disciplines, the precons are the only source of reprints. Any Serpentis (or FoS or Chimerstry or ...) card that doesn't get reprinted here and now probably gets to wait another six years for its next possible printing.

On 19 Wrz, 15:39, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: > For the indy clans and disciplines, the precons are the only source of > reprints. Any Serpentis (or FoS or Chimerstry or ...) card that > doesn't get reprinted here and now probably gets to wait another six > years for its next possible printing. not really - in 10th box there was some qui and nec cards as well as crap. i'd like to see 13-15th aniversary box with -reprints of playable ser,nec,chi,qui cards -reprint of 2nd independent group vampires

Malone <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote in news:1190209173.924594.137400 @n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > >> >> Fair enough. But if your issue is "I don't want Crappy Reprint A; I >> want crappt Reprint B instead!", why demand crappy reprints? Why not >> demand, ya know, actually *good* reprints? It doesn't cost the company >> any more to reprint, like, Form of Corruption or Corruption than it >> does for them to reprint Form of the Serpent. > > Who demanded any particular reprint, crappy or otherwise? Not I. Uhh... dude? Message-ID: <1190077177.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> > Form of the Serpent is just one of a list of overlooked candidates. > > Not everyone agrees on what's 'good'. If there's a couple of people > in my playgroup that frequently play Imbued, Eyes of the Dead starts > to look a little bit, uh, good. I think you mean Eyes of the Serpent.. What makes conditional unblockable better than just another obf stealth card? What makes ally- conditional S:CE better than just another PRE S:CE? (Both of which the Setites have easy access to). Eyes adds nothing to the game. > (And it has NO opportunity cost > beyond taking an action -- that the situations where it is helpful are > limited is different than if the situations where you could play it > were limited.) VTES, to the extent it is a rich, fun game, is not so > just because of the cards that tournament-oriented, newsgroup-posting > players call good. The game built only of those cards would get old > fast. > Starters stuffed with mediocre cards already in abundance, plus a few chase extras to compel those with established collections to buy them are getting old, too. > It seems obvious to me that the criteria for being reprinted should > include [1] is the card still part of the game (maybe they've decided > to let Eyes fade into oblivion, but surely the Path is still part of > the game) and [2] is this card currently out of print. Ughn. Can we move forward and improve the game a bit instead, please..? > That the card > may be available from oldtimers or eBay shouldn't, in my opinion, be > much of a factor in the decision. Not everyone has access to > oldtimers, If they have access to this NG, they do. I think the larger point here is that, people _can_ easily get their hands on these cards(Eyes, Form, Lure, or Tongue of the Serpent), but they simply choose not to, because, you know... they either generally suck (eyes, FOrm, Tongue) or you just don't need that many, and have what you need (Lure, Paths). > and not everyone likes to play a game that they have to go > to eBay to buy pieces of. > Heh. What does the first C in CCG stand for? This whole exchange started when you tacitly recognized that comment by Johannes, but went on to ignore it in your further comments; Johannes; >> In a TCG (*Trading* Card Game) not all of the cards will be available in >> unlimited quantities, at no cost to absolute newbie players. That is >> one of the *concepts* of such game. V:TES has been very nice in this >> regard to newbie players, so they really can´t complain. Malone; > Agreed. > Still, No, not "still". VTES is a CCG. Full stop. Wishing otherwise won't make it so. Maintaining every card (or even most of the cards) in print is an untenable model for a CCG (see INWO: "One, with Everything"). Given that WW _must_ choose what to create and to reprint, reprinting Good Cards, and making better cards to replace mediocre ones is generally a Good Idea(TM). > For the indy clans and disciplines, the precons are the only source of > reprints. Better that new players get cards that are _useful_ in most game play settings, than shoot for having every last card ever made remain in print, and dilute out the starters. > Any Serpentis (or FoS or Chimerstry or ...) card that > doesn't get reprinted here and now probably gets to wait another six > years for its next possible printing. > You're a bit late to be agitating for change to the starter contents now... :-) Hypothetically, if the cards mentioned (Eyes, Form, Lure, or Tongue of the Serpent) are integral enough to Setite or Serpentis strategies that some or all of them should be included in the precon, what should be discarded from the FoS precon to make room for them? DO you think the starter deck play better than it does now, for having them in it? DZ AW

On Sep 19, 9:39 am, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote: > Who demanded any particular reprint, crappy or otherwise? Not I. > Form of the Serpent is just one of a list of overlooked candidates. Well, you said "I'd rather see Form of the Serpent instead of Hireophant", or whatever. Which is not unreasonable to describe how I described it. > Not everyone agrees on what's 'good'. If there's a couple of people > in my playgroup that frequently play Imbued, Eyes of the Dead starts > to look a little bit, uh, good. Sure. So pick up a handful on the interweb for a quarter a piece somewhere. They are easy to get. They have the appropriate back. There is no need to reprint them. > (And it has NO opportunity cost > beyond taking an action -- that the situations where it is helpful are > limited is different than if the situations where you could play it > were limited.) Yes. But that doesn't mean it has no opportunity cost. The opportunity for it to be useful is limited. Thus, including it in your deck (which means you are not putting something else useful in, as your deck is a limited resource) is a risk with a high chance of not paying off (unless you are playing a loaded game, i.e. you are playing with Frank and you know that Frank only ever plays the Imbued). If you are playing a loaded game, and you know card X is going to pay off, then it is worth including, sure. But if you don't? Not so much, Even if you can play it for free on any action just to get it out of your hand. The opportunity cost is "this card could have been something more generally useful". > VTES, to the extent it is a rich, fun game, is not so > just because of the cards that tournament-oriented, newsgroup-posting > players call good. The game built only of those cards would get old > fast. I'm not saying it is *never* going to be useful. Once and a while (which I said eariler), it will be useful to have. Just like Tortured Confessions will, once and a while, be useful to have. But the usefulness of such a card is limited enough to not really warrant it being reprinted. Especially if other cards that do something comprable, but better, are being printed elsewhere. Which may very well be the case. > It seems obvious to me that the criteria for being reprinted should > include [1] is the card still part of the game (maybe they've decided > to let Eyes fade into oblivion, but surely the Path is still part of > the game) and [2] is this card currently out of print. That the card > may be available from oldtimers or eBay shouldn't, in my opinion, be > much of a factor in the decision. Not everyone has access to > oldtimers, and not everyone likes to play a game that they have to go > to eBay to buy pieces of. And for most cards that get reprinted, this logic is totally sound. But cards that are not really good get to fall out of this logic. Tortured Confessions is still part of the game. It is currently out of print. Heck, it might even be worth playing once and a while. It doesn't need to be reprinted, however. > For the indy clans and disciplines, the precons are the only source of > reprints. Any Serpentis (or FoS or Chimerstry or ...) card that > doesn't get reprinted here and now probably gets to wait another six > years for its next possible printing. Sure. But you still don't need to reprint cards that are way below the power curve. Eyes of the Serpent is such a card. Form of the Serpent is pretty close. We haven't seen all the spoilers yet. It is perfectly possible that in the new cards selection, there will be a card that effectively replaces Form of the Serpent, but is actually good. Or a card that gives Serpentis a good, actually useful effect for dealing with allies. Such that reprinting Form and Eyes (as they are good examples) wasn't deemed necessary. -Peter

On Sep 19, 7:38 am, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: > For vamps who can use better Pre bleeds and have access to Elder > Impersonation, a block denial that can be cancelled (yes, even at the cost > of a pool, if you don't want to be blocked there's a reason) is a bad card, > even if it offers both possibilities. You know, you could use both. In my experience, TLF at OBF PRE is basically +1 bleed that counts against your Prey even if bounced, and doesn't prevent you from playing other bleed boost. -- - Gregory Stuart Pettigrew

Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in news:1190213412.823955.235660@ 22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > We haven't seen all the spoilers yet. It is perfectly possible that in > the new cards selection, there will be a card that effectively > replaces Form of the Serpent, but is actually good. Or a card that > gives Serpentis a good, actually useful effect for dealing with > allies. Such that reprinting Form and Eyes (as they are good examples) > wasn't deemed necessary. > Also, even if they aren't functionally replaced, if one or more coherent, competitive strategies for Serpentis and the Setites emerges from the cards that are printed, then the Design Team will have done its job IMNSHO. DZ AW

In article <46f10a10$0$32047$426a...@news.free.fr>, "Orpheus" <orphe...@free.fr> wrote: > For vamps who can use better Pre bleeds and have access to Elder > Impersonation, a block denial that can be cancelled (yes, even at the cost > of a pool, if you don't want to be blocked there's a reason) is a bad card, > even if it offers both possibilities. Dude. True Love's Face is *awsome*. And not just 'cause it make you feel dirty inside. It gives you +1 bleed when the tricksiness fails. And when the tricksiness doesn''t fail, you do stuff like make them burn a pool and sneak through anyway or get blocked and then Change of Target or Majesty and do something else horrible. Totally +8 fun. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1190202944.3...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, Oortje <interne...@hotmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I dunno, man--in a vaccum, yeah, if you have an AK and a Magazine and Scattershot, yeah, you can do 8 damage. But that is a pretty big vaccum--you need to be at close range which generally means: A) Your opponent is going to IG you. B) Your opponent is going to Majesty anyway. C) Your opponent is going to maneuver to long and foil the Scattershot bonus. And really, what is the difference between the 8 damage you get here and the 6 you'd be gettiing by doing the same thing with the AR? Like, if you can kill folks with 8 damage with a gun at close range, you'll probably do the same with 6 damage most of the time. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sep 19, 6:38 am, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: > -- > On Sep 18, 11:19 am, "Orpheus" <orpheus...@free.fr> wrote: > > >> > It includes, old spoilers, new spoilers and the FoS starter decklist > > >> You know, what strikes me as the weirdest is that people mentionned all > >> the > >> core missing cards, but no one complained that their slots were taken > >> by... > >> 3x The Jones !! Or the very redundant True Love's Face x4... > > > The Jones is really quite good. It is both trumpy to cancel dodges > > and SCE and combat defense in the form of a dodge w/ press to end. > > - younger vampire or ally condition makes it a poor combat card Yes, so know that you are going to be using it with 8 caps or bigger. > - inferior is much weaker than Presence S:CE but is free. > - superior isn't very good, seriously. Psyche is a good post-strike > anti-S:CE and already it is criticised ; this isn't half as good. See that's where you are wrong. This is actually superior to Psyche as it "cancels" the strike card. The major problem with Psyche is that you have wasted resources to set up the combat only to be able to restart it and then have to spend those same resources. This allows you to conserve resources. Hmmm...maybe a Aziz deck with the Jones. > And in a > clan with (as of now) no really good combat card and nothing serious for > prevention, it sucks as a strategy. Of course Typhonic Beast is a good > combat strategy (even if I've never seen such a deck win, it really needs a > POT/SER guy who pays Serpentis one less to be as effective as Horrid Form) > but it involves Pot and you'll use Immortal Grapple... I have seen good combat decks that use The Jones (Nehsi Multirush by Robert Scythe being one of them) > In short, I'm sure you could do a hundred decks with it Norm, but I'm really > not a fan of the card. Don't knock it until you have tried it. > > Now it is limit to use with 8+ caps to be effective, but we all know > > that they can be good. > > In FoS combat, can they ? Have you tried FoS combat? > > True Love's Face is HOt! HOt! HOT! > > You mean, the art, right ? ;-) > > For vamps who can use better Pre bleeds and have access to Elder > Impersonation, a block denial that can be cancelled (yes, even at the cost > of a pool, if you don't want to be blocked there's a reason) is a bad card, > even if it offers both possibilities. Yes, but you can use it to get your prey to pay a pool then play Elder Impersonation on top of it. Elder Impersonation doesn't preclude the use of the card. They actually work quite well together. Plus the flexiblity of being +bleed is really, really good. Did I mention that it is free which neither Elder Impersonation nor Aire of Elation can say? Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

[ quoted text not captured ] Don't setites already have a card better than Form of the Serpent, that effectively replaces it? Being Swallowed by The Night? Sure, it's obf instead of ser, but it does EXACTLY the same thing, just 1 blood cheaper. -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

Anthony Coleman <Bunti...@gmail.com> writes: > Giovannie Starter Spolier: > > 45 copies of Zombie > 45 Eyes of the Dead > > 12 Gaspere > > Happy now? :O) Wow, the Giovanni starter has a 90-card library! What a bargain, compared to the other starters which have less than 80 library cards! That starter is going to sell like ice water in Sahara. HG ;-) -- hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience, iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey

In message <46f385a9$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Salem <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> writes: >Don't setites already have a card better than Form of the Serpent, that >effectively replaces it? Being Swallowed by The Night? Sure, it's obf >instead of ser, but it does EXACTLY the same thing, just 1 blood >cheaper. More or less, which is why other people (fairly reasonably) tend to evaluate Serpentis in the context of Obfuscate and Presence, and all other things Setite-y. If there were either: - a non-Setite clan with Serpentis (such as the Harbingers are for the Giovanni) - a substantial subsect of the Setites without Obfuscate then things would be fairly different. In the RPG, there are warrior Setites who have POT/PRE/SER, which would be a fairly interesting combination for the game. I wouldn't mind seeing a fairly concentrated clutch of warrior Setites in one group[0], where perhaps only one or two vampires (out of, say, 6 to 8) had a level or two of Obfuscate, and the other vampires were all combative - other disciplines which help in combat, +strength specials, additional abilities in combat vs allies (+strength against allies, set range against allies, -strength for opposing allies), that sort of thing. It would be interesting, and might give some of the lesser bits of Serpentis reason to turn up in a deck, too. [0] The current smattering is high-capacity and difficult to use. And, to be honest, POT/PRE/SER strikes me as less overtly powerful than OBF/PRE/SER (stealth-bleed, stealth-vote), so I'm not sure that a 3 cap pot/ser, a 4 cap with pot/pre/ser, a 5 cap with POT/SER/pre (and so on) would be a power problem. And it would give people something different to do. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

Bakr [LotN:V] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Assamite Capacity: 8 Group: 5 Disciplines: pro dem QUI OBF CEL Independent: Bakr may enter combat with a minion controled by another Methuselah as a +1 stealh action that cost 1 blood. Blood cursed. Djuhah, The Bronze Bow [LotN:V] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Assamite Group: 5 Capacity: 7 Disciplines: aus cel pre OBF QUI Sabbat. Black Hand Seraph: The Blood Curse does not affect Djuhah. Kashan [LotN:V] (*) Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Assamite Group: 4 Capacity: 7 Disciplines: obt pre CEL OBF QUI Independent: Kashan has 1 vote (titled). Blood cursed. Poison the Well of Life Rare. Action +1 stealth qui: burn a hunting ground QUI: burn all hunting grounds controlled by other methuselahs. Ready minion controlled by controllers of the hunting grouds may attempt to block as if this were a d action (instead of the usual blockers. - Bloodlust Rare. +1 stealth action. frenzy Cost: x blood pre: choose x minons and put this card in play. Each choosen minion gets an optional press each combat and may enter combat with any minion as a D action. burn this card at the end of the turn. PRE: same, but choose x+1 minons - Precision rare +1 stealth action cel: D. Choose a card by name. your prey must discard a copy of that card, if possible CEL: as above and if your prey discards a copy, this vampire may burn 1 blood to burn 1 of your prey's pool. - Trophy Library master, trophy rare the controller of this vampire gets +2 hand size. a vampire may have no more than 2 trophy: libraries. (whoopedoo. we're getting trophys again =) - Sheepdog rare aciton this vampire gains 4 blood. this vampire does not untap as normal during your next untap phase. - Sense the Savage Way common reaction,requires a vamp with capacity above 6 ani: +1 intercept ANI: this vampire untaps and attempts to block. usable by a tapped vampire. - flesh bond common combat cost 1 blood ani:strike: 2r damage ANI: strike: combat ends - street cred common combat cost 1 blood Only usable at the end of a round of combat in which this vampire successfully inflicted more damage than the opposing minion. pot: move 1 blood from the blood bank to a younger vampire in your uncontrolled region. POT: move 2 blood.. a vampire may play only 1 street cred /turn Another combat ends for animalism, I believe it's great for ahrimanes (or at least for my ahrimanes deck concept).

Vragozakas <vrago...@2die4.com> writes: > Bloodlust > Rare. > +1 stealth action. frenzy > Cost: x blood > pre: choose x minons and put this card in play. Each choosen minion > gets an optional press each combat and may enter combat with any > minion as a D action. burn this card at the end of the turn. > PRE: same, but choose x+1 minons Drroooooooool! I'm *so* going to make a wall deck that quite suddendly goes apeshit and rushes everybody in sight. A great card! It enables whole new kinds of decks. More versatile than Frontal Assault. > Precision > rare > +1 stealth action > cel: D. Choose a card by name. your prey must discard a copy of that > card, if possible > CEL: as above and if your prey discards a copy, this vampire may burn > 1 blood to burn 1 of your prey's pool. Precede this action with inferior Revelations or Le Dinh Tho for that extra annoyance... > flesh bond > common > combat > cost 1 blood > ani:strike: 2r damage > ANI: strike: combat ends An incredible versatile card. Beat up weak opponents, run away from strong ones. > street cred > common > combat > cost 1 blood > Only usable at the end of a round of combat in which this vampire > successfully inflicted more damage than the opposing minion. > pot: move 1 blood from the blood bank to a younger vampire in your > uncontrolled region. > POT: move 2 blood.. > a vampire may play only 1 street cred /turn :-D :-D :-D Beat up and bloat! I don't care if it's useful or not, this card is at least +5 fun. HG [ quoted text not captured ]

Janne Hägglund wrote: > >> street cred >> common >> combat >> cost 1 blood >> Only usable at the end of a round of combat in which this vampire >> successfully inflicted more damage than the opposing minion. >> pot: move 1 blood from the blood bank to a younger vampire in your >> uncontrolled region. >> POT: move 2 blood.. >> a vampire may play only 1 street cred /turn > > :-D :-D :-D Beat up and bloat! I don't care if it's useful or not, > this card is at least +5 fun. Plus, this card has possibly the best picture in history. Appolonius.

[ quoted text not captured ] cannot agree more :D

[ quoted text not captured ] You two suck, you know that? :) Smug bastiches...

On 22 Sep., 01:33, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In message <46f385a...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Salem [ quoted text not captured ] Good point, James. I'd like to add to the reprint discussion, that some players would love to have old cards in new layout. Only the Followers getting no reprint of their path is a bummer, and contradicts somewhat some points about "not reprinting crappy" cards some posters brought up.

[ quoted text not captured ] Totally. best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auct...@superfuncards.com