Deck: !Tremere [advice appreciated]

Hi all. I'm currently working on a couple of clanbased decks, evolving around clans i usually do not play a lot. This is the first creation, and as I said, I really like some advice... Crypt: all!Tremere: 2x Kij Dansi and all !Tremere once Library Masters: 5x Blood Doll 1x Giant's Blood 1x The Rack 1x The Hungry Coyote 3x Thaumaturgy 1x Infernal Pact 1x Communal Haven: Temple 1x University Hunting Ground 2x Spirit Summoning Chamber 1x Dreams of the Sphinx ------------------------- 17 Non-Disciplined: 8x Forced Awakening 3x Fire Dance ------------------------- 11 Equipment & Such: 1x Mr Wintrop 1x Ivory bow ------------------------- 2 Auspex: 2x Enhanced Senses 2x Eagle Sight 2x Spirit's Touch 3x Precognition ------------------------- 9 Dominate: 2x Deflection 4x Govern the Unaligned 3x Scouting Mission 2x Threats 2x Conditioning 2x Thought's Betrayed ------------------------- 15 Thaumaturgy: 7x Theft of Vitae 2x Soul Burn 2x Blood To Water 5x Walk of Flame 2x Cauldron of Blood 14 Apportiation 4x Burst of Sunlight ------------------------- 36 ------------------------- 90 cards, NL Ehm, some cards need explaining. The Fire Dances are in there of course for the Burst of Sunlight [and that's why Kij is doubled] but also because I see a lot of Gangrel aggro damage. Threats are in here because I really have never used it before.... Well, knock yourself out on this one. Be gentle:) Tim Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

next to each sections are my suggestions t_e...@my-deja.com wrote: > Hi all. > > I'm currently working on a couple of clanbased decks, evolving around > clans i usually do not play a lot. This is the first creation, and as I > said, I really like some advice... > > Crypt: all!Tremere: > > 2x Kij Dansi > and all !Tremere once > > Library > > Masters: > 5x Blood Doll > 1x Giant's Blood > 1x The Rack > 1x The Hungry Coyote > 3x Thaumaturgy > 1x Infernal Pact > 1x Communal Haven: Temple > 1x University Hunting Ground > 2x Spirit Summoning Chamber > 1x Dreams of the Sphinx > looks pretty good, but dreams of the sphinx may be unecessary, you alreay > have a good deal of masters, 2nd hg my be preferrable, this deck looks > like it could eat blood > ------------------------- 17 > Non-Disciplined: > 8x Forced Awakening > 3x Fire Dance > you really don't have the titled vamps in quanity to depend on getting one > for fire dances, you may want to drop them, and if you are really that > worrieed about agg add a few leather jackets instaed, besides most gangrel > agg is close range, w/ 15 apportations you should be able to man out when > necc. > ------------------------- 11 > Equipment & Such: > 1x Mr Wintrop > 1x Ivory bow > you have auspex, mr winthrop is just a wasted action, and ivory bow while > cool, is only a +1 stealth equip that everyone will want to block. > ------------------------- 2 > Auspex: > 2x Enhanced Senses > 2x Eagle Sight > 2x Spirit's Touch > 3x Precognition > more enhanced sences +1, maybe. > ------------------------- 9 > Dominate: > 2x Deflection > 4x Govern the Unaligned > 3x Scouting Mission > 2x Threats > 2x Conditioning > 2x Thought's Betrayed > unless you play in an archon ivestigation free envioment drop the > conditiong, and replace with bonding (stealth can be nice), and i would > consider replaceing scouting missions with goverign's. also if you see alot of stelth bleed maybe replace 4 forced with wwef and replace some auspex with more deflections. > ------------------------- 15 > Thaumaturgy: > 7x Theft of Vitae > 2x Soul Burn > 2x Blood To Water > 5x Walk of Flame > 2x Cauldron of Blood > 14 Apportiation > 4x Burst of Sunlight > unless you see alot of weapon soul burn is inferior to theft, theft is > free and gets you blood, soul costs you one. and if you drop fire dance > obviously drop burst of sunlight, beside burst and fire is another multi > card combo in a deck w/ thau, that already has alot of combos, instead > maybe 4 blood to waters [ quoted text not captured ]

You use Tremere and are worried about agg. damage? I asume you fight lots of Gangrels. They are the easiest to deal with when using the blood thieves. Add some Drain Essence and traps. You might need a couple more thefts too, like 9. Just trap the aggrivator, Theft of vitae, press (trap) , Drain essence in the second round,press, drain etc etc. until they are charred husks!! I've seen little ol" Sarah Cobbler take out Stanislava this way many times. They can't prevent thefts with fortitude either, so why use cauldron of blood? It is only damage. If they do more than 2 aggrivated in one strike, you might have some trouble though. Just my 2 cents. Jeff Prince of Cleveland

On Mon, 7 Feb 2000 16:21:05 -0500 (EST), Trut...@webtv.net (Jeffrey Moore) wrote: >You use Tremere and are worried about agg. damage? I asume you fight >lots of Gangrels. They are the easiest to deal with when using the >blood thieves. Add some Drain Essence and traps. You might need a >couple more thefts too, like 9. Just trap the aggrivator, Theft of >vitae, press (trap) , Drain essence in the second round,press, drain etc >etc. until they are charred husks!! I've seen little ol" Sarah Cobbler i'm failing to understand this one - you have that many maneuvers in your deck so that you're never caught at close range and have your eye poked out? Theft of Vitae is *the* Tremere staple card, and Drain Essence is a slightly inferior Theft (only good if you are facing someone with 6+ blood on them) - but there's a couple things here I can't figure. first, if you don't stay at long range, you'll get your eye poked out by those pesky claws - Theft will get you the blood, sure, but then you'll just have a vampire in torpor with 2 additional blood. that means a LOT of maneuvers, if you're using Trap - I've never been able to cram that many in my Tremere decks. I just second, i hope you pack some Walk of Flame cards as well, since TV and DE can't ever torporize a vampire - you just end up stealing 0 blood. Even something as simple as theft, theft, theft, theft, punch works, but you are going to need to deal with a punch at least once. =) >take out Stanislava this way many times. They can't prevent thefts with >fortitude either, so why use cauldron of blood? It is only damage. If >they do more than 2 aggrivated in one strike, you might have some >trouble though. Just my 2 cents. Can't follow here how more or less than 2 aggravated is relevant. ANY agg damage will toss you into torpor if you don't dodge or prevent it - something Tremere aren't real good at doing. -- Derek Deafness never kept composers from hearing the music. It only stopped them hearing the distractions.

On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Derek Ray wrote: > i'm failing to understand this one - you have that many maneuvers in > your deck so that you're never caught at close range and have your eye > poked out? Theft of Vitae is *the* Tremere staple card, and Drain Indeed. Versus Gangrel Quick Meld, maneuvers are going to be needed in droves. -- James Coupe

On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Jeffrey Moore wrote: > You use Tremere and are worried about agg. damage? I asume you fight > lots of Gangrels. They are the easiest to deal with when using the > blood thieves. Add some Drain Essence and traps. You might need a > couple more thefts too, like 9. Just trap the aggrivator, Theft of > vitae, press (trap) , Drain essence in the second round,press, drain etc > etc. until they are charred husks!! You need a lot of maneuvers, else you'll take a Claw first round (assuming Gangrel) and go to torpor. Stealing blood won't do anything about that, and the Tremere don't do Damage Prevention well (certainly, not against Gangrel using Scorpion Sting/Claw). -- James Coupe

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes but only Basilia and Samantha can poke an eye, without a blood on them! Enter cel/CEL and Blur/Flash/TV tremere decks. A gangrel without a blood for AGG is useless.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, student wrote: > > Indeed. Versus Gangrel Quick Meld, maneuvers are going to be needed in > > droves. > > Yes but only Basilia and Samantha can poke an eye, without a blood on > them! Enter cel/CEL and Blur/Flash/TV tremere decks. A gangrel without a > blood for AGG is useless. But they have the blood to pay for the agg hand damage before the steal. So you go to torpor, and only take two blood tops. Situation currently: Gangrel -3 blood, Tremere in torpor. Eek! -- James Coupe

On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 14:37:36 +0700, student <stu...@canberra.edu.au> wrote: >James Coupe wrote: >> >> On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Derek Ray wrote: >> > i'm failing to understand this one - you have that many maneuvers in >> > your deck so that you're never caught at close range and have your eye >> > poked out? Theft of Vitae is *the* Tremere staple card, and Drain >> >> Indeed. Versus Gangrel Quick Meld, maneuvers are going to be needed in >> droves. > >Yes but only Basilia and Samantha can poke an eye, without a blood on >them! Enter cel/CEL and Blur/Flash/TV tremere decks. A gangrel without a >blood for AGG is useless. While announcing hand strikes, I pay a blood from my vampire and play my Claws - BEFORE the steal happens. If I had only one blood, this is an excellent solution for me - you steal zero, and I poke your eye out, and I DON'T go to torpor. Also, THA/CEL is neat, but you better have a lot of Flash. If you ever get caught at close range, the first pair of strikes resolve first, and Blur won't matter much while you're in torpor. [ quoted text not captured ]

I see the confusion. We play that stealing blood works the same as damage prevention. Seeing how combat is "supposed" to be simultaneous but the vamp gets a chance to play fortitude cards instead of going straight to torpor, we play the stolen blood is gained after damage is dealt. This way, aggravated damage is prevented. It may be wrong, but oh well. Jeff

[ quoted text not captured ] Stealing blood doesn't prevent damage, since damage is not simply the loss of blood. For the timing of damage vs. steal blood, here's a quote from the rulebook [6.4.3]: When a minion or retainer takes damage (either from a strike or from other means), he must burn blood or lose life, as appropriate (see Resolving Damage, sec. 6.4.6). Note that the effects of a strike are applied and then damage is resolved. This timing is important for some special strikes, like steal blood (see Strike Effects, sec. 6.4.5). -- LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp

On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Jeffrey Moore wrote: > dealt. This way, aggravated damage is prevented. It may be wrong, but > oh well. The point of aggravated damage is that it isn't how much blood you lose that sends you to torpor, merely the fact that you took some at all. The shock of it (even if you end up on lots of extra blood) shocks the system into shutting down, causing torpor. -- James Coupe

Hi all, It looks like this has gone from a couple of ideas and questions, to a "debate" about Gangrel vs Tremere. But while we're on the subject..how about Gangrel vs brujah, giovanni, lasombra, nosferatu and more. Basically all clans that do not combat end or prevent are screwed by a scorpion sting followed by a wolf claw. And they just have to live with it, IMO. I can of course rebuild the deck especially against gangrel, but they are NOT the only clan being played plus the fact that I find those so-called anti-decks very, very uncreative. I'd rather play a deck and see how it does against any deck than build any anti-deck. There are numerous way to handle 2 aggro damage, but putting those in a deck which I already have trouble with keeping under 90 cards [cardslot vs utility] is something I generally dislike. I mean i'd rather have any card that has a benefit against any clan [e.g. GtU] than put in, say Leather jackets just in case I see a gangrel-deck next to me. I tend to build decks that have to work in any enviroment and against any other deck. So it has to go out from it's own strenghts and not it's weaknesses. And boy, do tremere have weaknesses!! But IMO there is nothing more satisfying [cardwise speaking] than playing a deck thatn you know has problems with any aspect of the game, and still play it to the best of it's potential. I that weren't so we'd all be playing the standard combat/bleed/vote engines. And that would not be fun, right. But these are all my opinions.... Greetz:) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 18:37:21 -0500 (EST), Trut...@webtv.net (Jeffrey Moore) wrote: >I see the confusion. We play that stealing blood works the same as >damage prevention. Seeing how combat is "supposed" to be simultaneous well, this certainly gets my vote for "unique house rule". >but the vamp gets a chance to play fortitude cards instead of going >straight to torpor, we play the stolen blood is gained after damage is >dealt. This way, aggravated damage is prevented. It may be wrong, but >oh well. well, it certainly makes a Tremere/Thoughts Betrayed bruise-bleed deck HIDEOUSLY powerful... only thing that can properly counter it would be a good Potence rush deck. Yech. [ quoted text not captured ]

I see the timing point, but you can't say damage prevention is not "healing." The rules say you can play "damage prevention" after taking aggravated damage. Despite this, IMO, if aggravated is SO dangerous, then fortitude folk should be in torpor where they could "then" play damage prevention. Another twist would be to play damage prevention "before" combat like "come on, I can take it!" perhaps before range is chosen. This would be more like prevention then healing. Do the responders play agg damage like 'no damage, just go to torpor (like the original rules)' or '1 damage and go to torpor?' I play the later, btw (more dangerous and hateful, hee hee!!). As you read from my earlier molotov cocktail-like posts, I don't keep up with nor agree with every new ruling so I'm not sure of the "official" way agg damage is handled, so don't be offended. Jeff

Sure flesh of marble and others differentiate between regular and aggravated, but their effects with basic skill are usually monstrous against regular damage i.e. 1 dam. the rest of combat! That's huge. Going by my way, a skin of rock or something similar would be needed to then cancel the 1 damage you had to take. This would require another card thus another space in your deck. I'm afraid it's too late to change the way our group has been doing it. Stealing blood this way makes the Tremere not so whimpy. They are castrated played the official way. I never use them, but they are supposed to be one of the most vicious clans and in our games they are nightmares. Also, this makes the Gangrels not so overwhelming so the loop or repeated action deck scheiße is allowed in our group. A superior thaum Tremere could easily burn him by blocking or bum rushing him if given a chance. It does make for some nasty fights. Again I say it may be wrong, but we came to the conclusion that "hey, it's a strike. Resolve it at the the same time just like any other strike." You won't see us at any big DCI event because of things like this and certain rule changes, so when you win that box of cards you have thousands of already, please drink a beer for me. Oh, about the ivory bow issue. I did not see the debate on it. I assume they made it a special case in regards to the agg. damage rules. No need to go into it. Jeff Prince of Cleveland

On Sat, 12 Feb 2000 15:04:03 -0500 (EST), Trut...@webtv.net (Jeffrey Moore) wrote: >I see the timing point, but you can't say damage prevention is not >"healing." The rules say you can play "damage prevention" after taking Damage prevention is being too tough to take damage... ie Fortitude. The bullet bounces off your chest because you're just one burly bastard. Healing is different - a vampire burns blood to heal damage. The damage is still taken, ie a bullet goes through your chest, but you expend some of your mystical magical vampire blood to heal the damage, and the shooter sees the wound mysteriously stop bleeding and close up. >aggravated damage. Despite this, IMO, if aggravated is SO dangerous, >then fortitude folk should be in torpor where they could "then" play >damage prevention. Another twist would be to play damage prevention See Resilience (prevent 3 non-agg), Flesh of Marble (agg may not be prevented at inferior), etc. etc. Several damage prevention cards DO distinguish between the two. Some cards (Weather Control, Daring the Dawn, etc.) specify "unpreventable", so the fortitude buggers will still go to torpor. >"before" combat like "come on, I can take it!" perhaps before range is >chosen. This would be more like prevention then healing. Yes, but this puts Fortitude at a SEVERE disadvantage, and in fact makes Fortitude worthless - why bother playing with it since nobody is going to do anything but "strike hands, for one" when it would just be a waste? Yech. > Do the responders play agg damage like 'no damage, just go to >torpor (like the original rules)' or '1 damage and go to torpor?' I - Aggravated damage cannot be healed, only prevented. - A healthy vampire who takes a point of aggravated damage becomes wounded. - A wounded vampire who takes a point of aggravated damage must burn a blood or be destroyed. - Wounded vampires are "on their way to torpor" and will end up there at the conclusion of the action, if not destroyed first. If you get poked in the eye by Igo, the Hungry, you just go to torpor with no blood loss. Igo goes too, since he got punched AND spent a blood to be aggaravating. If you get poked in the eye by Don Cruez who has played a Torn Signpost, Increased Strength, and Undead Strength, that'll be 7 agg. The first point wounds you. The next 6 require you to burn 6 blood (one for each) or be destroyed. If you play Force of Will at superior and get blocked, and then, say, Agatha smacks you for 7 normal points of damage, emptying you and sending you to torpor... you will actually burn, since you are wounded and taking a point of agg with no blood to burn. >play the later, btw (more dangerous and hateful, hee hee!!). As you also somewhat unbalanced, since under the new rules the Ivory Bow can burn vampires. Ick. (Dejanews has the entire argument that went on over "new agg v. old agg" about nine months ago. I'm not going into details on it again.) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2000, Jeffrey Moore wrote: > Going by my way, a skin of rock or something similar would be needed to > then cancel the 1 damage you had to take. No, it wouldn't. Flesh of Marble means that you cannot prevent the final 1 point of damage, part of its downside. > This would require another > card thus another space in your deck. Yes, lots of cards require you to add another card to your deck to work around their problems or exploit their possibilities. Combos, to whatever degree, are part of the essential nature of the game. > I'm afraid it's too late to > change the way our group has been doing it. Why? The only reason I can see is "Because we don't want to" rather than any actually reason preventing you from changing. > Stealing blood this way > makes the Tremere not so whimpy. They are castrated played the official > way. They are still castrated this way. They just get a slight benefit versus agg damage. You are also castrating the Gangrel, whose prime function is the ability to send people to torpor easily. > I never use them, but they are supposed to be one of the most > vicious clans and in our games they are nightmares. Also, this makes > the Gangrels not so overwhelming so the loop or repeated action deck > scheiße is allowed in our group. The loop deck is nothing to do with agg damage/steal blood. It's an entirely different deck strategy. Just out of interest, do your players really like just waiting for a Gangrel to pull off one bleed and then have 27 bleeds come their way, which is what playing without NRA allows? You effectively castrate anyone not playing a bounce deck. > A superior thaum Tremere could easily > burn him by blocking or bum rushing him if given a chance. There are many problems. One involves getting to the second round, or having enough blood to pay for Shotgun Ritual - or even having a Shotgun Ritual. The second is presses. A lot of the Gangrel cards provide presses - Wolf Claws, for instance, Form of the Ghost, Gleam of Red Eyes, all of which form a staple part of many decks. > It does make > for some nasty fights. > Again I say it may be wrong, but we came to the conclusion that > "hey, it's a strike. Resolve it at the the same time just like any other > strike." You do. However, strike resolution, for damage dealing strikes, merely sets the amount and types of damage being done. You then get to prevent the damaeg and heal blood > You won't see us at any big DCI event because of things like this What, playing by the rules? These have been the rules since Jyhad, that steal blood doesn't equate to prevent damage. Aggravated damage has never worked based around what blood yuo end up on, merely that taking aggravated damage sends you to torpor. > Oh, about the ivory bow issue. I did not see the debate on it. I > assume they made it a special case in regards to the agg. damage rules. The Jyhad rules did. Ivory Bow couldn't burn you. The changes made in V:TES were much for the worse, though they amde some things slightly simpler. -- James Coupe

You are entitled to your opinion. The Gangrel still do very very well even in our games. And yes, we don't want to change this aspect of the game. House rules, baby. Jeff Prince of Cleveland

On Sun, 13 Feb 2000, Jeffrey Moore wrote: > You are entitled to your opinion. You might want to quote some of the previous post. It makes it substantially easier for people to find out what on earth you're referencing. > The Gangrel still do very very well > even in our games. Yes, you allow the Gangrel infinite loop deck. Of course they do well. > And yes, we don't want to change this aspect of the > game. Given the time delay between my post and your response, this "we" appears to be "I". > House rules, baby. *shrug* House rules are fine. If you come here, though, you will almost certainly always get the official set of rules. -- James Coupe

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes, my second fave Gan trick. Strike: hands, Strike: not Combat ends/Dodge, did I mention mine was Agg? The assumption was a range setting, until you could wack them for 1 hands or that X+2 at long.

I was referring to all your points, they are fine and valid. I'm to lazy to go highlight everything. Jeff Prince of Cleveland