Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
expect to see?
[ quoted text not captured ]
I hope it's 8 Starters. Blood Brothers, Daughters, Kiasyd, Samedi,
Ahrimane, !Salubri, Harbringer and Gargoyle. Though some bloodlines
could get the same starter. !sal + Harbringers= Aus, For
Samedi + Harbringer= For, Nec
Gargoyle + Blood Brothers= Pot, For (though I think this would be most
unthinkable.
If we only get 4 starters then I hope for: Blood Brothers, Samedi, !
Salubri and Daughters (Choir). I think these are the most common
bloodlines.
But we mustn't completely rule out Baali either. Since they are I
heavy focus in the Storylines.
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
>
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
If I had to pick 4....
Definite:
Ahrimanes ANI PRE
Blood Brothers POT FOR
Possible:
Salubri Antitribu (Or perhaps both, but not Salubri as a standalone)
AUS FOR
Samedi (Or maybe a 'Cappadocian Descendants' one of the three NEC
Bloodlines? Samedi give the opportunity for a more Camarilla aligned
Bloodline to go with the Sabbat ones though) OBF NEC
With the others in Boosters. The thinking is to spread the load
between the other Disciplines, so there's options for cards that
people are highly interested in obtaining that can be sourced through
the Starters as well. A (very) obvious example being Deep Song. Baali
got a Starter in KMW, so I don't think they need another right now,
and a Starter based on Scarce Vampires strikes me as a way to get
another Barons/Anarchs style starter, with very little personality. I
don't hold any opinion about whether it should be 8 or 4 starters, as
long as we don't have a situation where every store (*Cough Toreador
KOT*) has a load of one in stock which they can't shift, and as a
result don't order in the other more desirable Starters with power
cards in.
As for what should go in.... I'd hope to see a spread of cards that
were clearly desirable from KoT (Villein, Old Friends, Deep Song, etc)
with enough Bloodlines multi-use with realistic chances of those uses
appearing in the same deck. For example of what I'm getting at, Nose
of the Hound, when was the last time you saw a deck using AUS and SPI?
Don't get me wrong, it's a great card, and it's a staple of the game
now, but I'd like to see there be reasons to mix the Bloodlines into
mainline Crypts too.
Ramble over, and probably worth picking to pieces. :)
On Sun, 9 Aug 2009 06:25:01 -0700 (PDT), Baaliprimogen wrote:
>Blood Brothers, Samedi, !Salubri and Daughters (Choir).>I think these are the most common bloodlines.
What does that mean "most common bloodlines" ? Are you talking about
the RPG?
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/index.php?line=Checklist_Bloodlines
Ahrimanes have 27 tournament wins.
Baali have 12 tournament wins.
Blood Brothers have 2 tournament wins.
Daughters of Cacophony have 7 tournament wins.
Gargoyles have 20 tournament wins (mostly Tupdog).
Harbingers of Skulls have 2 tournament wins.
Kiasyd have 12 tournament wins.
Nagaraja have 0 tournament wins.
Salubri have 9 tournament wins.
Salubri Antitribu have 4 tournament wins.
Samedi have 7 tournament wins (mostly Fletcher!).
True Brujah have 1 tournament win.
http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/clan-twd.htm
(now with quick jumps to the clans)
From the list above, it seems probable that the most commonly played
Bloodlines are: Ahrimanes, Gargoyles, Baali, and Kiasyd.
Clearly the Scarce clans shouldn't be the source of starters,
escpecially as they don't mix with the other Scarce clans, but they
could certainly make guest appearances in the other starters.
As the Bloodlines set itself is long sold out, I would probably like
the starters to have mostly the original Bloodlines vampires, with
perhaps some new supporting group 3 vampires added. Two copies of
Howler would go a long way towards selling a starter.
What I would hope to see as starters:
1) Ahrimanes -- based on something David Qui�onero Santiago would
play. This would be a decent place to reprint essential Animalism and
Presence cards. Pack Alpha in particular. Fill in with Ahrimanes
specific cards and Spiritus specific cards.
2) Harbingers of Skulls + Salubri -- Auspex and Fortitude reprint
opportunity, with some Necromancy essentials. (Matthias could be the
cross-over and would help sell the deck.)
3) Kiasyd -- Dominate and Obtenebration reprint opportunity, like
Deflection and Shroud of Absence. Fill with clan and Mytherceria
cards.
4) Independent Gargoyles -- leave the Slave portion out of the
starter, it is their Achilles heel and the deck should not unbalance
release event games by being unable to act against their prey. Potence
and Fortitude reprint opportunity. Ferox, The Rock Lord should star,
along with his advanced version and reprints of Epiphany and similar
merging tech. Perhaps some new merge tech as well.
The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> writes:
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
Kiasyd, Ahrimanes, DoC, Salubri.
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
No thanks.
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Multiple Villein, multiple Embrace, DI, multiple Shroud of Absence,
multiple Eyes of Argus, Bobby Lemon, Pentex.
I'd also like to see Alia, Blanket of Night, Sensory Deprivation, Not
to Be, FBI Special Affairs Division, and Fortschritt Library reprinted
as fixeds. Could use another Unmasking as well :P.
cheers,
-jakob
[ quoted text not captured ]
I would vote for 8 starters featuring all of the non-scarce Bloodlines
(Ahrimanes, Baali, Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony, Harbingers
of Skulls, Kiasyd, Salubri antitribu and Samedi) and leaving out the
Gargoyles, since their slave trait complicates making a starter
centered around them (unless a contingent of non-slave Gargoyles are
made, perhaps grouped to work with Rocia). I recognize that it might
be difficult to have a sufficient number of vampires left for the
boosters, though. So, if I had to pick only four, I would definitely
pick the Ahrimanes, Blood Brothers, Daughters of Cacophony and
Kiasyd. That would allow for a wall deck, a combat deck, a vote deck
and bleed deck.
I know it might be a stretch to fill starters with members of a single
Bloodline and still have some to put in the boosters, so I would
assume there will have to be group bridge vampires in the form of
reprints or, better yet, advanced vampires. Another idea, perhaps
best for a 4-starter configuration, would be to print 1 vampire from
each scarce clan (Nagaraja, Salubri, True Brujah and Abomination) in
each starter with disciplines that might work well with each starter's
clan. Either way would help fill out the starters and leave a fair
number for the boosters.
As far as what to include as far as starter reprints, it has already
been said that obviously popular cards from KoT and others sets should
be reprinted in the starters. Eyes of Argus, Deep Song and Villein
are the most prominent examples to pop into my head from KoT.
Bloodlines cards that could do with a reprinting are Reanimated
Corpse, Contagion, Shroud of Absence, Elemental Stoicism and Feline
Saboteur, among others I am probably missing.
> What I would hope to see as starters:
I'll work on the hypothesis that we'll see a mix of Bloodlines and Sabbat
vampires, which sounds plausible for a big expansion.
> 3) Kiasyd -- Dominate and Obtenebration reprint opportunity, like
> Deflection and Shroud of Absence. Fill with clan and Mytherceria
> cards.
This is no doubt the first on my list, especially if it includes Lasombra.
Totally agree with your reprints ideas, + Governs of course.
> 2) Harbingers of Skulls + Salubri -- Auspex and Fortitude reprint
> opportunity, with some Necromancy essentials. (Matthias could be the
> cross-over and would help sell the deck.)
My second. I don't see Matthias there though, because I guess the vamps wil
be compatible with the boosters, and as such probably G4-G5. There might be
!Ventrue in there.
Could also be even more Nec oriented with just Harbingers and Nagaraja.
Probably just one of the options, not both, though.
Next I'd have liked Blood Brothers but that seems improbable as we got the
Hermana. Sort of the same with the Gargoyles and Tuppies.
So :
3) Daughters of Cacophony. Guess a few !Toreador could be included. Reprints
of the Opera Houses seem in order.
4) Ahrimanes -- based on something David Qui�onero Santiago would
> play. This would be a decent place to reprint essential Animalism and
> Presence cards. Pack Alpha in particular. Fill in with Ahrimanes
> specific cards and Spiritus specific cards.
Not what I'd long for, but I guess it's logical and I could make do with it.
Orpheus
The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
>Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
Although it's not impossible, I'd personally not be expecting 8
different starters in that box. The only time they did more than 4 was
in Camarilla Edition, some years ago. That makes me think something
about it wasn't so hot somewhere along the line - extra costs, or maybe
retailers don't like it, or something.
That's not to say I wouldn't welcome it, because it could be an awful
lot of fun, but I just wouldn't get my hopes up.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Aug 9, 8:06 am, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
8 starters
Ahrimanes block and vote perhaps with Black Hand tech
Blood Brothers multirush perhaps with diablerie (maybe some sort of
bloodhunt card for Sanguinus)
Daughters of Cacophony with Anarch Tech
Gargoyle Freak Drive deck with equips and retainers
Harbingers of Skulls Sabbat Vote deck with multiaction
Kiasyd toolbox with stealth/intercept/bleed/combat
Salubri Antitribu trophy deck.
Samedi dirty contract deck with Corpses with contract tech for them
(i.e. Provisions of Silsilia)
I personally would like to see 8 different starters. These are my
initial ideas...please criticise and refine.
Tremere/Gargoyle
Lasombra/Kiasyd
Harbinger/Ventrue Antitribu
Daughter/Ventrue
Abomination/Followers of Set (It doesn't seem to make sense until you
look at the abomination discipline spread)
True Brujah/Nos Anti
Salubri Anti/Ventrue Anti (please suggest a better fit if you can
think of one)
Blood Brothers/Brujah Anti (if you know a better fit, suggest away)
On Aug 9, 12:59 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
I'm not so hot on bloodlines, but I don't think I'd ever want to see
less than 2x each starter per box. Based on how much product I buy,
the prospect of getting two boxes of starters instead of one tips the
scales more to the "buy less" side than "buy more."
Blood Brothers are goofy and don't need a starter.
Brandon
On Aug 9, 11:02 am, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> As the Bloodlines set itself is long sold out, I would probably like
> the starters to have mostly the original Bloodlines vampires, with
> perhaps some new supporting group 3 vampires added. Two copies of
> Howler would go a long way towards selling a starter.
I'm not sure I can see going back as far as Group 2. Other cards
currently being sold are groups 4 + 5. Moreover, many of the Group 4
bloodlines are still short a member, compared to Group 2.
And if we get a set of Vampires for say, the Salubri, et al., aren't
they going to have to be Group 6?
Is the pressure starting to build to adopt an odd/even grouping rule?
"The Lasombra" <TheLa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48it75tjpgm95pd2v...@4ax.com...
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
I'd love to see 8 different ones. Even though that would undoubtably
mean I'd spend more on starters (assuming they had worthwhile cards).
Customers having to spend more mony on starters?!? Oh, woe is White
Wolf!
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Every useful reprint from that Bloodline. Or - since some will
undoubtedly raise some silly nit or other about making it too easy
to get good old rares - I'll say every useful reprint from that
Bloodlines White Wolf can justify to themselves. If that turned
out to be every single useful one, I personally wouldn't kick!
Fred
[ quoted text not captured ]
Villeins.
Scarce vampires should not appear even in supporting roles. It does
not fit the scarce theme. They are fine in the boosters.
The clans I would like to see (in order of preference) are:
!Salubri: Blissful Agony, Eye of Unforgiving Heaven,
Kiasyd: Deflection + Govern the Unaligned.
Ahrimanes: Some nice animalism reprints -- such as Tainted Spring
Samedi: Elemental Stoicism
Daughters:: Siren's Lure
Harbingers:
Gargoyles:
Baali:
Blood Bros:
Why the last 5 are low on the list:
Harbingers: They lack their own discipline, and so need the support
less.
Daughters: I'm not fond of them (thematically).
Gargoyles: Thematically, a support clan. I'm also not fond of them
(thematically).
Baali: Had their own starter in KMW (but I wd not mind seeing 'em
again).
Blood Bros: Never liked 'em (thematically).
Jakob Sievers wrote:
> The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> writes:>> What should go into those starters to best support
>> the Bloodlines you expect to see?>
> Multiple Villein, multiple Embrace, DI, multiple Shroud of Absence,
> multiple Eyes of Argus, Bobby Lemon, Pentex.
>
> I'd also like to see Alia, Blanket of Night, Sensory Deprivation, Not
> to Be, FBI Special Affairs Division, and Fortschritt Library reprinted
> as fixeds. Could use another Unmasking as well :P.
1x Villein and 1x Embrace in every starter for the rest of the life
of VTES would sell starters forever. I'd double the amount of the
starters I'd buy every expansion, and it would also assist the newbies
as they'd have much bigger "giveaway" boxes to take from. Minion Tap
is already borderline dead, so why not?
Hopefully Direct Intervention and Parity Shift not being reprinted
means a de facto banination, as D.I. is far more anti-fun than
strategic (see: PTO) and Parity Shift is way overpowered. D.I. could
still be banned on 9/9/09 but our hope for a Parity Shift fix is now
gone. Personally, I hope that Deflection will be reprinted since it's
so fundamental to the game.
I can see putting 1-2 Eyes of Argus in every AUS starter forever.
Pentex Subversion is due for a reprint, yes, most definitely.
Alia? What in blazes do you want her for? And why won't anyone
trade her to you, given how bad she is? :)
Blanket of Night could be reprinted in a Kiasyd/Lasombra starter.
And *please* put 1x Mon�ada and 1x Polonia in there, too. Maybe 2-4
Shadow Twin would be nice to see and pretty much fit ONLY here.
In general, there are a lot of SW-only vamps that should be reprinted.
You could put Black Forest Base, Regent, and Powerbase: Madrid
in there, too, if you liked. Or save those for a Sabbat-based
votey-starter later on.
Sensory Deprivation won't be reprinted unless there is a Ravnos
Starter, and I hope this piece of garbage is NEVER reprinted.
It'd be neat to see a deck with 2-4 Gehenna events and 1x FortLib.
Unmasking was just *re*printed, so no need to re*re*print it.
Although, if you made some sort of Samedi Reanimated Corpse starter,
you could put the FortLib as well as FBI Special Affairs Division
and Unmasking in it easily, maybe even with Dr. Marisa Fletcher and
Inconnu Tutelage.
Narrow Minds could be in the Lasombra/Kiasyd stealth/bleed starter,
NSA Trio or Rise of the Nephtali could be in a votey starter, and
Uncoiling could be in the other starter.
I'd *really* *desperately* like to see Carlton van Wyk reprinted.
Other cards I'd like to see in future (not necessarily HTTB) starters:
- Abbot
- Banishment
- Bonding
- Cardinal Benediction
- Catatonic Fear with Target Vitals in the same starter
- Coma
- Con Boon
- All the SW-only Crusades
- Cryptic Rider
- Decapitate
- Enhanced Senses
- Eternal Vigilance
- Forgotten Labyrinth
- Heidelberg Castle
- Homunculus
- Horrid Reality
- Legendary Vampire
- Parthenon
- POLICE DEPARTMENT OMG!!1!
- All the Dark Sovereigns-only Praxis Seizures
- Resilience
- Underbridge Stray
- Voter Captivation (although it may be on the de facto ban list now)
- Waste Management Operation
- Zip Gun
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
On Aug 9, 2:06 pm, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
Samedi
Daughters
!Salubri
Ahrimanes
That's just personal preference :) Seems like a lot of fortitude
going on there.. and no room for dominate reprints so the Kiasyd
should probably be there.
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
It would be nice but I don't think it's viable
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Samedi - Freak Drive, Reanimated Corpse, new stuff and maybe a good
supporting discipline like dom or aus.
Daughters - Siren's Lure.
!Salubri - Eyes of Argus,
Ahrimanes - Pack Alpha,
Kiasyd - Deflection, Shroud of Absence
> I'd *really* *desperately* like to see Carlton van Wyk reprinted.
I'm going to double up this particular one. With our new players,
they're noticing that a significant proportion of TWD's includes one
of a very small list of Allies (Notably, Mylan, Jake, Ossian &
Carlton) so then to have to tell them as a new player they simply
*cannot* obtain probably the single most popular without shelling out
a disproportionate amount of money sounds unfair to even my ears.
I often wonder if, to avoid reprints, we could have mutually exclusive
equivalents. A near identical Ally that burns Carlton when entering
Play, and is burnt by Carlton entering Play. But that's far beyond
this thread.
4 starters in a box. Containing bloodline clans supported with non-
exotic clans.
for example:
A Baali- Setite starter
An Arimanus-Gengrel/Guruhi starter
A Daughters of C- Ventrue deck
and now i think im out of obvious options. Maybe a Harbinger- ventrue
antitribute starter.
Gr,
Oortje
On 9 aug, 15:06, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
* Daughters of Cacofony - this clan deserves a starter; I think
playing Daughters can be fun, and therefore more peeps should have
access to them
* Samedi - seems just too limited at this moment; I'd like to see some
new additions to the crypt, as well as Thanatosis
* Ahrimanes - even if only for a reprint of Howler... please?
* Kiasyd - for no other reason than being my favorite clan from
Bloodlines. Work out the faerie / changeling concept - that would be a
nice twist!
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
To max out the attention each clan would, this would be for the
better. The question is then; which one would be left out? Baali for
already having a starter in KMW? Gargoyles for the slave-concept?
Harbingers for being a clan without a real focus (I HATE the Harbinger
mill-decks I encountered...).
I also like the idea that the scarce vampires remain in just the
boosters - they're scarce for a reason.
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
As mentioned before, some reprints of popular cards from KoT. If
Kiasyd makes it, that would be great for some nice Obtenebration
reprints! Deflection was mentioned before; I'll mention it again.
Plenty of opportunities here!
Looking forward to the expansion!
On Aug 9, 4:06 pm, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
Kiasyd : just to get Deflection, Govern the Unaligned and Shroud of
Absence reprinted.
Ahrimanes : probably the strongest bloodline on it's own and has room
for Deep Song reprint.
Blood Brothers : because they are the coolest.
Daughters of Cacophony : just to get a politics themed starter to
complement bleed, wall and rush.
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
Probably not so good an option.
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Shroud of Absence, all the most sought after non-unique cards from KoT
(incl. Villein, Deep Song, Eyes of Argus, ...).
The Lasombra schrieb:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Just a dumb question because I don�t know the canon too well: could
there be new bloodlines (=are those existent in the canon) or have all
been exploited allready?
Reprint vampires in starters only please !
Keep dumb reprints to a minimum please !!
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> writes:
> Alia? What in blazes do you want her for? And why won't anyone
> trade her to you, given how bad she is? :)
For rescuing my vampires... from torpor!
> And *please* put 1x Mon�ada and 1x Polonia in there, too.
[snip]
> In general, there are a lot of SW-only vamps that should be reprinted.
Yes, plus Howler in an Ahrimanes starter as mentioned up thread.
While we're at it, how about some Dan Murdocks, Mariana Gilberts &c.?
> It'd be neat to see a deck with 2-4 Gehenna events and 1x FortLib.
+1
> I'd *really* *desperately* like to see Carlton van Wyk reprinted.
Oh yeah - forgot Carlton.
> Other cards I'd like to see in future (not necessarily HTTB) starters:> - Target Vitals
> - Parthenon
+1
Here are some more cards which I don't have enough of^W^W^W^W^W would
be really useful to lots of people I'm sure:
Anarch Troublemaker
Jake Washington
Dreams
Liquidation
Last Stand
cheers,
-jakob
[ quoted text not captured ]
I think (and hope) that rather than clan-based starters we see clan
based combination starters. With some kind of description as the "deck
name". Perhaps even discipline focused starters.
Eg:
Scholars: Lasombra/Kiasyd. (maybe pirates!)
Arcanists: Gargoyle/Treme (or !Tremere)
Beasts: Ahrimanes/Gangrel or !Gangrel
and either:
? : !Ventrue /!Salubri or
Deadpeople: Harbringer/Giovanni
does not give much synergy for the discipline spread from deck to deck
but in terms of non-crypt reprints could make a lot of people happy.
Hopefully no Bloodlines era vampires get reprinted. Perhaps some
Legacy of Blood era bloodline vamps, but nothing further back.
John P.
Winnipeg
> Just a dumb question because I don´t know the canon too well: could
> there be new bloodlines (=are those existent in the canon) or have all
> been exploited allready?
Create-A-Clan is for YOU!
I would like to see 4 clans in specific get a starter deck and some
reprints:
Daughters
Kiasyd
Ahrimanes
Harbringers
Esp. the first three. Perhaps some reprints like Siren's Call, Shroud
of Absence, etc.
It would be nice to see some staple cards in here as well like Dreams,
Villein, DI, etc.
First of all. The new set will be there end October. That probably
means that the cards are already being printed as we speak. It seems
that there isn't much we can do about it anymore.
As an answer to the questions:
Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
Maybe non. Bloodlines consist of rare vampires with all kinds of rare
disciplines. One could argue that these do not belong in a STARTER
deck, which originally had the purpose to be bought by a player who is
new to the game. I for one was very surprised to see a Baali starter
being supplied with KMW.
Another scenario.
At the moment the Laibon clans have 13 group 4 vampires and only one
group 5 vampire, while the Independent and Camarilla clans have
already 10+ group 5 vampires.
Maybe the next set is a combined Laibon / Bloodlines set with 4 Laibon
starters, just like it was with "Legacies of Blood". If you look at
the number of Laibons per group (13) and compare this with the number
of Bloodlines (5 on average) per group, this could well be the case.
H
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
Eight would be great, but I'm not expecting it.
If there are four, I'd say it's even money whether they are mono-clan
or not. If they are mono-clan, I suppose we can expect Kiasyd and
Ahrimanes, which are well-established as viable clans. Daughters are
a good bet, Blood Brothers too, because those four could give a nice
variety of deck types -- sb, wall, vote, rush. I personally would
like to see Samedi and Harbingers.
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:9PPfm.73524$8B7....@newsfe20.iad...
> Jakob Sievers wrote:>> The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> writes:>>> What should go into those starters to best support
>>> the Bloodlines you expect to see?
...
> 1x Villein and 1x Embrace in every starter for the rest of the life
> of VTES would sell starters forever. I'd double the amount of the
> starters I'd buy every expansion, and it would also assist the newbies
> as they'd have much bigger "giveaway" boxes to take from. Minion Tap
> is already borderline dead, so why not?
Villein makes a lot of sense, given that it seems intended as a staple
and is currently way underprinted as such. I'm a little confused about
your reference to Embrace, though. I guess I'd prefer it to be an
uncommon to being a rare - or reprinting a few in starters strikes me
as appropriate. But why do you think it's so underprinted that it needs
to be in all the starters? That's a pretty strong statement. I don't
really see that many people using them, myself.
> Hopefully Direct Intervention and Parity Shift not being reprinted
> means a de facto banination, as D.I. is far more anti-fun than
> strategic (see: PTO) and Parity Shift is way overpowered. D.I. could
> still be banned on 9/9/09 but our hope for a Parity Shift fix is now
> gone. Personally, I hope that Deflection will be reprinted since it's
> so fundamental to the game.
Re: Parity Shift: You might be right about it being overpowered, although
I think there ought to be some advantages to being prince. It's
definitely not as overused as it used to be, so it strikes me as being a
lot more marginal nowadays.
Re: Direct Intervention: Although I still don't agree that it needs to be
banned, I appreciate the shift in your argument. DI-is-antifun is a lot
more defensible IMHO than DI-is-overpowered. However, it's still an
uncommon in a current base set so I'm not sure it makes sense to
conclude that it's on the verge of being banned every time it _could_
appear somewhere and doesn't.
> I can see putting 1-2 Eyes of Argus in every AUS starter forever.
Yep, agreed. Given the printing of this hyperuseful card, it should be
highly available to the masses.
> Sensory Deprivation won't be reprinted unless there is a Ravnos
> Starter, and I hope this piece of garbage is NEVER reprinted.
Bleh. You should know better than to advocate non-reprinting as a
means to deal with an unliked-but-useful card, Kevin. You know this
just leads to the good-rare-card problem. If a card is useful and
not banned, it needs to be reprinted for the exactly the same reasons
they should reprint Villein and Eyes of Argus. I agree, it is a
pretty rude card in the unfun-but-not-overpowered mode of Protect Thine
Own and the same arguments can be made for and against it as were made
in the PTO debates. But until you win the ban-this-card argument,
it needs to be reprinted so that newer players can have an equal shot
at trying to break it as older players have. (I daresay this is a
moot point for HttB starters, tho...)
> Unmasking was just *re*printed, so no need to re*re*print it.\
On the other hand, I don't think it would hurt anything to rereprint
The Unmasking. It's not like we're exactly swimming in copies of
them. They just EBAY for less than $30 now.
> I'd *really* *desperately* like to see Carlton van Wyk reprinted.
Yea, agreed on this. I bought so many of those tins to use as deck
holders that this card will never be a problem for me. But such a
generally useful card deserves to have another source than TAE at
this point. I think my Phoenix playgroup is sick of me putting this
card out over and over without the natural drawback it's supposed
to have: that someone else will often put it out first (or,
alternatively, that someone else will put it out to contest it).
Fred
On Aug 9, 12:38 pm, "Orpheus" <orpheus.TAKEOU...@free.fr> wrote:
> talonz wrote:
> > My only concern would be the amount of reprints in boosters. Sick to
> > death of those expansions. Keep them to the starters thanks.
>
> +1
Another thing. Enough with changing the art on cards already!
Seriouslly, its hard enough to remember every cardtext on sight or
name without the means of visual recognition changing completely as
well.
T
talonz wrote:
> Another thing. Enough with changing the art on cards already!
> Seriouslly, its hard enough to remember every cardtext on sight or
> name without the means of visual recognition changing completely as
> well.
Reprinting WotC-era art is no longer possible (in most cases; exceptions exist
to prove the rule), so reprinting cards that have only WotC-era art will involve
changing the art.
FYI.
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> Reprinting WotC-era art is no longer possible (in most cases; exceptions exist
> to prove the rule), so reprinting cards that have only WotC-era art will involve
> changing the art.> FYI.
I am at your service.
GRR.
On Aug 10, 4:06 pm, "John P." <jtpat...@mts.net> wrote:
> I think (and hope) that rather than clan-based starters we see clan
> based combination starters. With some kind of description as the "deck
> name". Perhaps even discipline focused starters.
>
I'd expect the starters to include two copies of each of the five G6
Vampires from the selected Clan, as well as two copies of the G5
Vampire. The remaining G4 Vampire could be placed in boosters. In
terms of getting desired reprints out, Kiasyd for Deflection etc. and
Harbingers for Spiritual Intervention seem like the best shots.
Daughters of Cacophony are the only Bloodline I can imagine getting
any use of Parity Shift, and that's a very outside chance. If they do
go multi-Clan and pair the Daughters with the Ventrue or Toreador then
this is much more likely.
Reprints of Bloodline Vampires would be lame. Old players already have
them, and new players wouldn't be able to use them with their other
G4/5 stuff. I'm not saying they should never be reprinted, but they
should go into a fixed only set.
Kevin Walsh
On 9 ago, 16:38, "Orpheus" <orpheus.TAKEOU...@free.fr> wrote:
> talonz wrote:
> > My only concern would be the amount of reprints in boosters. Sick to
> > death of those expansions. Keep them to the starters thanks.
>
> +1
+1
Johannes Walch <johanne...@vekn.de> wrote:
>Just a dumb question because I don�t know the canon too well: could
>there be new bloodlines (=are those existent in the canon) or have all
>been exploited allready?
There are other bloodline possibilities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitribu#Bloodlines
They split into a variety of options:
- Some are basically existing clans mechanically, but with a different
geographic focus. e.g. the Mariners from Blood Dimmed Tides are an
offshoot of the Gangrel with Gangrel disciplines. You could just
pretend they're Gangrel. In fact, this is what we already do with
some of the Laibon legacies - they're just the normal clan with a
different sect.
- There are various bloodlines who have 'normal' disciplines. Some are
Dark Ages bloodlines that may or may not be extinct, depending on your
view of canon. Example: the Noiad who have ANI/AUS/PRO, the Hajj
with AUS/PRE/THA, or the Tlacique with OBF/PRO/PRE.
- There are a few other bloodlines with their own special discipline,
like Grotequous or Ogham.
- There are also the Children of Osiris. Please ignore them.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
I would rather dont want to see reprinted vampires. Reprinted library
cards ? Some of them need to be reprinted like Baali Herald, Engling
Fury etc. But i would like to see mostly new cards (keep the reprints
in starters, if able).
"Lech Jot" <angel...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f6efc48d-b773-4dec...@a1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Huh? This discussion is only about the starters. See subject line.
Fred
On 11 Sie, 01:48, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> "Lech Jot" <angelofc...@gmail.com> wrote in message[ quoted text not captured ]
Huh ?
Most of my text is about starters (no reprinted crypt, and library
cards should be reprinted with starters).
On Aug 10, 8:11 pm, Kevin Walsh <hjal...@redbrick.dcu.ie> wrote:
> Daughters of Cacophony are the only Bloodline I can imagine getting
> any use of Parity Shift, and that's a very outside chance. If they do
> go multi-Clan and pair the Daughters with the Ventrue or Toreador then
> this is much more likely.
>
I shouldn't be replying to myself, but a Daughters of Cacophony
starter is probably the best place to reprint cards like the various
Fee Stakes and Firebrand, assuming there are no plans to do a Barons
starter mk II.
Kevin Walsh
The Lasombra wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
>> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
>
4 starters. 8 starters sucks for retailers who sell them individually,
and the sell through will be poor through that channel.
Don't care which ones per se, but probably wouldn't expect Baali, or
Scarce groups.
Villein, Deflection, Parity Shift need reprinting.
best -
chris
> Don't care which ones per se, but probably wouldn't expect Baali, or
> Scarce groups.
>
> Villein, Deflection, Parity Shift need reprinting.
I wouldn't bet on Parity Shift seeing a reprint in a bloodlines set.
Somehow I don't feel starters for individual bloodlines doesn't fit them.
Historically speaking, starters tend to have two copies of six different
vampires. If new starters would have that, that means there are either no
vampires of those clans in the boosters or there will be more than 6 new
vampires for the bloodlines which is more than any bloodline has gotten in a
single set.
I find it much more likely starters will combine bloodlines with some
crossover disciplines. Or heck, is it really far-fetched to say starters
will have bloodlines + proper clan support (Kiasyd/Lasombra, DoC/Ventrue,
Gargs/(!)Tremere, Brujah/Trujah etc.) with vampires reprinted from KoT and
Third?
[ quoted text not captured ]
Perhaps starters will be for sabbat clans that were boned in 3rd:
-Lasombra
-!Ventrue
-!Toreador
-!Nosferatu
-!Gangrel
or even leftover camarilla clans ?
[!Gangrel is parent clan for Ahrimanes, Lasombra is for Kiasyd, rest
are not connected - but tremere didn't get starters, so maybe they
will get one (gargoyle) and Nosferatu (connected with Samedi)]
> > I find it much more likely starters will combine bloodlines with some
> > crossover disciplines. Or heck, is it really far-fetched to say starters
> > will have bloodlines + proper clan support (Kiasyd/Lasombra, DoC/Ventrue,
> > Gargs/(!)Tremere, Brujah/Trujah etc.) with vampires reprinted from KoT and
> > Third?
>
> Perhaps starters will be for sabbat clans that were boned in 3rd:
> -Lasombra
> -!Ventrue
> -!Toreador
> -!Nosferatu
> -!Gangrel
>
> or even leftover camarilla clans ?
>
I think this is fairly likely (I was even saying so back before this
expansion was announced) and a good idea. Lasombra/Kiasyd is totally
natural. !Gangrel/Ahrimanes is viable if the right crypt selection is
made, ditto !Toreador/Daughters or !Nosferatu/Samedi. The !Ventrue
could accommodate any of several bloodlines. !Tremere/Gargoyle could
reprint Tupdog (assuming, as I do, that the decks are G4/5) -- boring,
maybe, but it'd sell product.
Leftover Camarilla clans or even Laibon clans could work, too.
Ventrue/Daughters would be solid, Guruhi/Ahrimanes too.
If they do go this route, what will the decks be named? Like, if
there's a Lasombra+Kiasyd deck, will the label it "Lasombra" or
"Kiasyd" or "Kiasyd & Lasombra" or something else?
I really hope we *don't* get mono-clan bloodlines decks with 6 new
vampires x 2 copies each. Why? (1) It removes those clans from the
boosters, which messes with drafting. (2) It means the grouping will
be 5/6. I really, really want 4/5.
> I think this is fairly likely (I was even saying so back before this
> expansion was announced) and a good idea. Lasombra/Kiasyd is totally
> natural. !Gangrel/Ahrimanes is viable if the right crypt selection is
> made, ditto !Toreador/Daughters or !Nosferatu/Samedi. The !Ventrue
> could accommodate any of several bloodlines. !Tremere/Gargoyle could
> reprint Tupdog (assuming, as I do, that the decks are G4/5) -- boring,
> maybe, but it'd sell product.
Tupdogs don't need reprint...
[ quoted text not captured ]
actually, yes they do.
Same as Anarch convert, they are highly useful, massively and widely
applicable vampires. I have 1. I need another 14. Getting through
secondary market means is not possible. Getting them in new product is
highly financially bad. Reprint please...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Yes, in the sence of deckbuilding and supply/demand. But what I said,
was solely a personal opinion. I just don't want to see a single
tupdog-deck ever.
[ quoted text not captured ]
I believe that's a good idea. As someone pointed, maybe the starter
crypts could be a mix of reprinted vamps from parent Clans and
Bloodline vampires. Then, in Boosters you can accommodate the
bloodline vampires only (doubling with the starters)...
That makes a good spread for old players (who can buy just one or two
copies of each deck and then can focus on buying boosters free of
reprints), and new players, who will get access to old vampires as
well as new ones...
Dan
[ quoted text not captured ]
Name is rather easy - Heirs of Ahriman, Heirs of Ennoia etc. It's not
the main problem.
While i actually think about such case before, i don't think that it's
good idea for at least two reasons:
- it make draft not really fair (as some clans are boned)
- it's wasted for the parent clans, so they gain suboptimal starter
(which do not include one of their main discipline/s)
I hope they mak mono-clan starters, and no mono-bloodline starters.
Lasombra ,!Ventrue, Nosferatu, Tremere seems like a perfect
candidates, but it's up to LSJ, as always.
The Lasombra wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
>
>
Why not 5 different starters in a 10 starter box?
best -
chris
"Akantes" <aka...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fc1c0c43-2735-454a...@h21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> "Malone" <kffo...@indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:80168fcc-c710-4855...@z31g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...> > !Tremere/Gargoyle could
> > reprint Tupdog (assuming, as I do, that the decks are G4/5) -- boring,
> > maybe, but it'd sell product.
>
> Tupdogs don't need reprint...
Why would you say that? Tupdog is a poster child as a need-to-reprint.
Fred
"Akantes" <aka...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6d5d0f1a-62c7-4199...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> "Blooded Sand" <sand...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:97237d41-7740-482e...@z31g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...> > > Tupdogs don't need reprint...
> >
> > actually, yes they do.
> >
> > Same as Anarch convert, they are highly useful, massively and widely
> > applicable vampires. I have 1. I need another 14. Getting through
> > secondary market means is not possible. Getting them in new product is
> > highly financially bad. Reprint please...
>
> Yes, in the sence of deckbuilding and supply/demand. But what I said,
> was solely a personal opinion. I just don't want to see a single
> tupdog-deck ever.
Then suggest a ban.
"Not reprinting" does not equal "de facto ban". It just creates badness
in the game.
Fred
On Aug 10, 3:54 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
> - Some are basically existing clans mechanically, but with a different
> geographic focus. e.g. the Mariners from Blood Dimmed Tides are an
> offshoot of the Gangrel with Gangrel disciplines. You could just
> pretend they're Gangrel.
Wrong. The aquatic vampires are Another. World. Entirely.
And with your attitude, that you could just pretend that they're
Gangrel? Yeah, well, that's a world that YOU clearly just aren't ready
for, Coupe.
John Eno
"In a world...where vampires have gills..."
On 11 elo, 20:02, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> "Akantes" <akan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6d5d0f1a-62c7-4199...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > "Blooded Sand" <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote in message> >news:97237d41-7740-482e...@z31g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> > > > Tupdogs don't need reprint...
>
> > > actually, yes they do.
>
> > > Same as Anarch convert, they are highly useful, massively and widely
> > > applicable vampires. I have 1. I need another 14. Getting through
> > > secondary market means is not possible. Getting them in new product is
> > > highly financially bad. Reprint please...
>
> > Yes, in the sence of deckbuilding and supply/demand. But what I said,
> > was solely a personal opinion. I just don't want to see a single
> > tupdog-deck ever.
>
> Then suggest a ban.
>
> "Not reprinting" does not equal "de facto ban". It just creates badness
> in the game.
>
> Fred
I don't want them banned, as it isn't exactly easiest deck to play.
Perhaps my choice of words was careless.
> I hope they mak mono-clan starters, and no mono-bloodline starters.
>
> Lasombra ,!Ventrue, Nosferatu, Tremere seems like a perfect
> candidates, but it's up to LSJ, as always.
If the starters are to be bloodlines clans I would like to see
Daughters of Cacophony(anarch vote) w/ x2 Anarch Converts; x2 Fee
Stakes(Los Angeles and Seattle), Anarch Railroad or Sirens Lure; Free
State Rant, Force of Personality(?), Undue Influence, Perfect Paragon
Ahrimnes(tool box) w/ Bobby Lemon,Lumumba or Sobayifa; Heart of the
City, Pentex Subversion, Engling Fury or Murder of Crows; Deep Song
Kyassid (bleed bruise and stealth) w/ Ermenegildo, The Rake, Shroud
of absence, Darkling Trickery; Deflection, Govern the Unaligned
Harbingers of Skulls (defense and allies)w/ Neighbor John or Owain,
Carlton van wick, Direct Intervention, Bowl of Convergence or
Unmasking; Eyes of Argus
Something like that, I believe would sell well. I don't how much would
need new art or the rare and uncommon guidelines for starters. I think
guidelines are 3 rares and 6 uncommon.
Matt
I would not be opposed to seeing a villien in each.
"Akantes" <aka...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ae0c84e4-3994-40a8...@r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On 11 elo, 20:02, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> > "Akantes" <akan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:6d5d0f1a-62c7-4199...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > "Blooded Sand" <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:97237d41-7740-482e...@z31g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > Tupdogs don't need reprint...
> >
> > > > actually, yes they do.
> >
> > > > Same as Anarch convert, they are highly useful, massively and widely
> > > > applicable vampires. I have 1. I need another 14. Getting through
> > > > secondary market means is not possible. Getting them in new product is
> > > > highly financially bad. Reprint please...
> >
> > > Yes, in the sence of deckbuilding and supply/demand. But what I said,
> > > was solely a personal opinion. I just don't want to see a single
> > > tupdog-deck ever.
> >
> > Then suggest a ban.
> >
> > "Not reprinting" does not equal "de facto ban". It just creates badness
> > in the game.
>> I don't want them banned, as it isn't exactly easiest deck to play.
> Perhaps my choice of words was careless.
I understand you don't want them banned. But if they are not banned, then
they should be reprinted. Because if they are not banned, then they are
very useful. And all useful cards should be available for people to use.
Fred
On 11 elo, 21:14, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> "Akantes" <akan...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ae0c84e4-3994-40a8...@r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...[ quoted text not captured ]
That classifies several cards, which haven't been reprinted lately,
but still are available for people to use.
"Akantes" <aka...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4be91884-dfd1-4251...@d32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On 11 elo, 21:14, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> > "Akantes" <akan...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:ae0c84e4-3994-40a8...@r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...> > > I don't want them banned, as it isn't exactly easiest deck to play.
> > > Perhaps my choice of words was careless.
> >
> > I understand you don't want them banned. But if they are not banned, then
> > they should be reprinted. Because if they are not banned, then they are
> > very useful. And all useful cards should be available for people to use.
>> That classifies several cards, which haven't been reprinted lately,
> but still are available for people to use.
Correct. But which cards are useful in comparison to how many copies exist
and how easily those copies can be obtained is a matter of opinion. Thus,
we are discussing our opinions about it. It would be valid to say, "There's
no need to reprint Tupdog because it's easy enough for people to get them."
It's not valid to say, "They shouldn't reprint Tupdog because I want it to
be hard to get Tupdogs so I won't have to play against decks containing
Tupdogs."
Tupdogs are particularly relevant since Heir to the Blood is an expansion
devoted to Bloodlines. It's likely there won't be another opportunity to
reprint Tupdogs for a while.
Fred
[ quoted text not captured ]
Lol...ya, with lots of Peace Treaty and Finding the Path please. New
players might get a hard time getting more than 50 of them...
On Aug 10, 11:33 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> talonz wrote:
> > Another thing. Enough with changing the art on cards already!
> > Seriouslly, its hard enough to remember every cardtext on sight or
> > name without the means of visual recognition changing completely as
> > well.
>
> Reprinting WotC-era art is no longer possible (in most cases; exceptions exist
> to prove the rule), so reprinting cards that have only WotC-era art will involve
> changing the art.
>
> FYI.
Well....thanks for that, I guess. Keep changes in art to the absolute
minimum then?
T
On Aug 11, 1:22 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote:
> I really hope we *don't* get mono-clan bloodlines decks with 6 new
> vampires x 2 copies each. Why? (1) It removes those clans from the
> boosters, which messes with drafting. (2) It means the grouping will
> be 5/6. I really, really want 4/5.
Look at it this way. There were 63 Vampires in the original Bloodlines
set. That had 5 Vampires for most of the Clans (10 for Blood Brothers,
8 for Gargoyles, 6 for Samedi). Heirs to the Blood can be expected to
have 7-8 per Clan. (one G4, one G5, five G6, possible G7), plus 2-3
Abominations. Assume there are no G7 Vampires. Imagine this possible
spread:
2 Abominations
7 Ahrimanes
7 Baali
7 Blood Brothers
7 Daughters of Cacophony
7 Gargoyles
7 Harbingers of Skulls
7 Kiasyd
3 Nagaraja
3 Salubri
7 Salubri Antitribu
7 Samedi
3 True Brujah
That's 74 Vampires. Which if you put 50 in the boosters and 24 in the
starters means 2 copies of 6 Vampires in the starters. Now there may
be some variation. Baali may have one less. Blood Brothers may have 2
less, or 3 more. Gargoyles may have more. But all that means is they
put some uncommon cards in the Vampire slots.
Kevin Walsh
Kevin Walsh <hja...@redbrick.dcu.ie> wrote:
>Heirs to the Blood can be expected to
>have 7-8 per Clan. (one G4, one G5, five G6, possible G7),
Earlier comments from LSJ about how grouping was grafted onto the game
suggest that - using your numbers - we might get two G5, instead of one
G4 and one G5.
Some of the earlier groups were a little fuller than he appeared to
want, but trying to split them up any other way was problematic to
implement.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Aug 11, 5:44 pm, Kevin Walsh <hjal...@redbrick.dcu.ie> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 1:22 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote:
>
> > I really hope we *don't* get mono-clan bloodlines decks with 6 new
> > vampires x 2 copies each. Why? (1) It removes those clans from the
> > boosters, which messes with drafting. (2) It means the grouping will
> > be 5/6. I really, really want 4/5.
>
> Look at it this way. There were 63 Vampires in the original Bloodlines
> set. That had 5 Vampires for most of the Clans (10 for Blood Brothers,
> 8 for Gargoyles, 6 for Samedi). Heirs to the Blood can be expected to
> have 7-8 per Clan. (one G4, one G5, five G6, possible G7), plus 2-3
> Abominations. Assume there are no G7 Vampires.
I feel pretty safe assuming that the vampires will not be spread over
more than 2 groups. No G7 vampires is a certainty. The question is
whether the second group will be 4 or 6. If the crypt cards are
exclusively bloodlines, it'll have to be 6, but if there are also a
couple of G5 from each Sabbat clan it'll more likely be 4. It's
really a matter of whether this is a bloodline expansion in the way
KMW was an indie expansion, or in the way LotN was an indie
expansion. I'm kind of more expecting the KMW style, but my
expectations are usually wrong.
Frederick Scott wrote:
> Because if they are not banned, then they are very useful.
Or very anti-fun and/or very overpowered.
Like Direct Intervention, Sensory Deprivation, and Parity Shift.
All of which I'd *love* to see banned or changed-and-reprinted,
but since they haven't been, then a de facto ban via nonreprinting
is ok by me.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:5Frgm.138251$Qg6....@newsfe14.iad...
> Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Akantes" <aka...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ae0c84e4-3994-40a8...@r38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
(re: Tupdogs)
>> Because if they are not banned, then they are very useful.>
> Or very anti-fun and/or very overpowered.
It all depends on your opinion. In any event, my point to
Akantes was simply that Tupdogs are certainly useful if not
banned.
> Like Direct Intervention, Sensory Deprivation, and Parity Shift.
Sure. All likewise certainly useful if not banned.
> All of which I'd *love* to see banned or changed-and-reprinted,
> but since they haven't been, then a de facto ban via nonreprinting
> is ok by me.
It's not a de facto ban. It's just a rich kid's paradise that turns
people off the game. Each good rare card is only a small blow to a
big game, I'll grant you. But keep up those small blows and you'll
eventually reduce your opponent population until the supply of good
rares is plenty to go around for all (remaining). Then you're back
where you started.
I cannot understand why some people will not grasp that this way
doesn't work. Even WotC understood that right from the start. And
they don't get much right.
Fred
Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message>> Like Direct Intervention, Sensory Deprivation, and Parity Shift.>> All of which I'd *love* to see banned or changed-and-reprinted,
>> but since they haven't been, then a de facto ban via nonreprinting
>> is ok by me.>
> It's not a de facto ban. It's just a rich kid's paradise that turns
> people off the game. Each good rare card is only a small blow to
> a big game, I'll grant you. But keep up those small blows and you'll
> eventually reduce your opponent population until the supply of good
> rares is plenty to go around for all (remaining). Then you're back
> where you started.
That argument is quite a stretch, especially given the recent willingness
in KoT to reprint LOTS of good cards. I don't buy it. Perhaps you
are talking about decades-long time in the CCG world? :P
[ quoted text not captured ]
[ quoted text not captured ]
Hmm. How about more modest expectations, merely filling out what's
left of groups 4 and 5.
2 Ahrimanes
5-6 Blood Brothers (new circle)
2 Daughters
6 Gargoyles, mostly Trem Slaves
2-3 Harbingers
2 Kiasyd
Throw in some advanced versions of existing vampires and we can easily
have over 25 new cards -- more than enough for a 20-vampire mini-set.
If we throw in an extra vamp for most bloodlines in groups 3 and 5, we
could approach 50 new vamps without touching Group 6.
Starter decks can feature Gr-4 reprints, with library cards as their
selling point. At least 1 starter will be Tremere-Gargoyes.
John Whelan wrote:
> 2 Ahrimanes
> 5-6 Blood Brothers (new circle)
> 2 Daughters
> 6 Gargoyles, mostly Trem Slaves
> 2-3 Harbingers
> 2 Kiasyd
I left off !Salubri -- who could get up to 4 new vamps vampires (extra
to make up Laibon diversity). Also Having a few extra members for
this groups does not seem thematically wrong. They should also have a
starter.
On Aug 9, 2:06 pm, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
Short version:
Daughters of Cacophony (Siren's Lure, Echo of Harmonies, Ensemble)
Blood Brothers (Coagulated Entity, New Blood Bros power card, Angelo)
New bloodline A
New bloodline B
Long version:
Bloodlines are distinct from clans in that there are noticeably fewer
members. Scarce vampires should be supporting cast and it's rightly
quite difficult to try and get a win will them on their own. For the
other clans, in game terms this should equate to less variation in
numbers of strategies that can be employed by the clan to win. Largely
that's happened (0
). The Ahrimanes are a good example, whilst successful in big
tournament environments, there is comparitively little variation in
the means employed to achive wins. Same with the Kiasyd, !Salubri and
the Samedi (to a lesser extent). I think this is a reasonable
situation. Cards may well be printed in later sets that will appeal to
these bloodlines and they will wax and wane around and common theme.
Daughters need a bit of help in that they rely on a lot of obscure
cards in multiple to get their startegy to work. A pre-con will help
players explore the clan from a standing start.
The Blood Brothers need a lot of help in that they have even greater
crypt restrictions and they are combat orientated. A pre-con steroid
boost and a bomb-rare would help to grease their wheels.
After that I think more bloodlines with different stratregies would be
more thematically and technically appealing than increasing the range
of startegies to the existing bloodlines (moving them slowly towards
being clans). James Coupe's post in this thread sketches out some of
the other bloodlines available (1) that have not been dealt with by
sect differences in existing clans. whether new disciplines should be
introduced is a sticky problem, and I think not, but equally I think
there is scope for new clans and discipline combinations.
Matt.
(0) The Baali are a noted and worthy exception. They got a KMW pre-con
and shouldn't get another one yet. I would like to think there may be
more Baali than other bloodlines, but that they are slightly removed
and a shadowy special case with all manner of chaotic members and
strategies.
(1) Dolphin Gangrel! Strike: Bucket o' Mackrel
[ quoted text not captured ]
I would like to see 4 starters of course, but in all fairness for
newer players they need to reprint some of the old Bloodlines cards in
either the starters or boosters so everyone can have equal access to
the cards. The key to growing VTES is A) The players being open to new
blood and willing to help them, and B) Making VTES accessible. I can't
tell you how many times in my short career did I hear someone say
"Good luck getting those cards" or "I nearly sold my soul to get the
ones I have." I know people who have quit the game simply due to the
fact once they got in and wanted to build some decks it seemed nearly
as hard and expensive to find certain cards for building a deck as
Magic is.
So for the sake of VTES I think and hope they will reprint some of the
hard to get cards and try to make others more accessible. Heck, I
bought a few boxes of KOT and I have maybe 2 Eyes of Argus and Deep
Song, yet they are listed as common.
Well as starters go, i would like to see 4 with a good spread of
disciplines and card that need to be reprinted, maybe:
Ahrimane: Animalism need some reprints and they would represent
Presence well.
Kiasyd: Dominate and Obtenebration need reprints.
Harbinger of Skulls: Auspex and Fortitude are nice to have in
starters, Necromancy needs reprints, good for new players as they have
no off the odd disciplines for new players.
?Shango?: Laibon with Celerity, Obfuscate and Dur-An-Ki ( a new
discipline would be cool) would fit wth last set and might fill out
thous laibon decks some more.
Please no group 2 vamps.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Yes. That's why I thought they might get 3 new vamps instead of 2.
But for the !Salubri, going as high as 4 seems easier to justify both
thematically and mechanically.
John Whelan wrote:
>
> Throw in some advanced versions of existing vampires and we can easily
> have over 25 new cards -- more than enough for a 20-vampire mini-set.
Is this a 60 card set here? Since there are starters, it seems like
it's one of the larger sets (esp since we just got a 60-card set).
Usually that means 100+ new vamps.
best -
chris
On Aug 12, 11:34 am, Pullen <mattp3...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please no group 2 vamps.
Out of curiosity, why? Just due to the incompatibility with the other
vamps currently available, and thus the lack of usefulness to new
players? (I can see those as valid; I'm just curious about the
statement, since I hadn't even noticed Group 2 getting discussed,
really.)
- D.J.
Oooh, my other request:
Growler
Clan: Ahrimane (group 4)
Capacity: 8
Disciplines: ANI PRE SPI obf
Sabbat: Growler gets 1 optional maneuver each combat. She cannot use
weapons. +1 strength. Sterile.
There. That'd make the entire G3-4 Crypt (Okay, it still wouldn't make
Maria Stone) worthwhile. :)
On Aug 12, 6:29 pm, Shockwave <d_knowles...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> There. That'd make the entire G3-4 Crypt (Okay, it still wouldn't make
> Maria Stone) worthwhile. :)
I have to admit that I prefer the G4 Crypt to the G2 Crypt. It has
cheaper superior Animalism and Janey Pickman and Stick are great
support Vampires.
Kevin Walsh
On Aug 12, 12:50 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> John Whelan wrote:
>
> > Throw in some advanced versions of existing vampires and we can easily
> > have over 25 new cards -- more than enough for a 20-vampire mini-set.
>
> Is this a 60 card set here?
I don't know. But I doubt it will be as large as some are assuming,
at least in terms of number of new bloodlines vampires.
Whatever else it may contain, about 24 new *bloodlines* vampires seems
a good minimal guess, 20 in boosters, and 4 more exclusive to the
starters.
> Since there are starters, it seems like
> it's one of the larger sets (esp since we just got a 60-card set).
Well, the new set is likely to include reprints, and so will be larger
for that reason alone. Moreover, even the new cards might be larger
if the set is not crypt focussed.
> Usually that means 100+ new vamps.
I can't see it going that high with bloodlines. They would have to go
to Group 6, and I cannot see that happening yet.
Players are practically begging for starters as an excuse to re-print
certain in-demand cards. I don't think WW needs a 100 vamp expansion
as an excuse
On Aug 12, 12:50 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
I'd think we're on schedule for a Lords of the Night sized set,
actually, if prior patterns hold. Wasn't LotN a 50 Rares / 50 Vamps +
starters / 50 Commons (approximately) setup?
- D.J.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Mainly the new player issue, and several people stated they wanted
Howler reprinted and one person said they wanted a reprint of Moncada,
which would be odd for a bloodlines set.
On Aug 12, 12:52 pm, "D.J." <dj...@comcast.net> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Mainly the new player issue, and several people stated they wanted
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Aug 12, 12:52 pm, "D.J." <dj...@comcast.net> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Mainly the new player issue, and several people stated they wanted
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Aug 12, 12:52 pm, "D.J." <dj...@comcast.net> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Mainly the new player issue, and several people stated they wanted
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:CRtgm.138262$Qg6.1...@newsfe14.iad...
> Frederick Scott wrote:>> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message>>> Like Direct Intervention, Sensory Deprivation, and Parity Shift.
>>> All of which I'd *love* to see banned or changed-and-reprinted,
>>> but since they haven't been, then a de facto ban via nonreprinting
>>> is ok by me.>>
>> It's not a de facto ban. It's just a rich kid's paradise that turns
>> people off the game. Each good rare card is only a small blow to
>> a big game, I'll grant you. But keep up those small blows and you'll
>> eventually reduce your opponent population until the supply of good
>> rares is plenty to go around for all (remaining). Then you're back
>> where you started.>
> That argument is quite a stretch, especially given the recent willingness
> in KoT to reprint LOTS of good cards. I don't buy it. Perhaps you
> are talking about decades-long time in the CCG world? :P
Don't conflate "good cards" and the well-known CCG term, "good rares".
A "good rare" is a useful card that is deliberately underprinted,
presumably in order to sell more packs to players who are creating a
demand for the "good rares" they need to use in their decks and have a
better chance to win games. The tactic has been decried by most smart
people as ultimately counter-productive because in the end, it's just a
back-door means of increasing the price of getting or staying in a
collectible card game. It's no different than increasing the price of
a booster, except that you waste more cardboard on useless bad common
cards. If the manufacturer isn't careful about this, it will wind up
increasing the price of the game to something the market won't support
and wind up going broke for the same reason any overpriced product goes
broke.
What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a different
reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't please you. Ergo,
I was talking about what the massed effect would be if White Wolf refrained
from reprinting useful cards which were otherwise in short supply (for
instance, Villein is one such useful-but-underprinted card) just because
those cards didn't happen to please somebody and those somebodies couldn't
win their "ban-this-card" debate on the marketplace of (game) ideas. It's
a different motivation but it creates the same effect: overpriced game,
product ultimately goes broke.
Fred
"D.J." <dj...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:875e679f-b405-4f84...@q23g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Yep. Should be a larger-than-miniexpansion this time. That's why we're
even discussing what would be in the starters. Miniexpansions don't have
starter decks.
Probably better understood as:
50 rares
50 split between vampires and uncommon library cards
50 commons
plus:
more new vampires available only in starters.
(In some expansions there had been something like a couple new library
cards available only in starters but that hasn't happened since Legacies
of Blood.)
Fred
On Aug 12, 5:27 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> (In some expansions there had been something like a couple new library
> cards available only in starters but that hasn't happened since Legacies
> of Blood.)
Nit: Vessel.
But yeah.
- D.J.
librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
>Is this a 60 card set here? Since there are starters, it seems like
>it's one of the larger sets (esp since we just got a 60-card set).
>Usually that means 100+ new vamps.
We've had 4 starters with 150 card sets, which have 50 vamps in the
boosters. Set it up so that you have 4 bloodlines with, say, 3 new
vampires in the starters, then 2 new vampires in the boosters. Another
44 vampires left for another 8 bloodlines. 3 * 3 scarce, so 35 vampires
left for 5 more bloodlines. 5 * 5 = 25, so still some left over. Add
another vampire for each of the 9 non-Scarce bloodlines and you'd 49
vampires in the boosters and 12 in the starters. Maybe an Abomination?
5 or 6 was a perfectly ordinary number for the non-scarce bloodlines in
Bloodlines, with the Blood Brothers and Gargoyles having a few more. I
could see that happening. e.g. print 5 Kiasyd and 5 Daughters and give
the "extra" vampires towards forming a second Blood Brother circle.
100 library cards, with 11 "disciplines" to cover. The Nagaraja bring
nothing new to the table, nor do the Harbingers, but the Gargoyles bring
Visceratika and Flight, but Flight has slightly fewer cards than other
bloodline traits/disciplines (7 vs 11-13ish). Possibly some cross-over
with Obeah and Valeren, possibly not. Roughly 5 new cards each = around
50-55 cards.
Most of the bloodlines didn't get many clan cards in Bloodlines. 22
overall (excluding the Tremere ones that are sort of Gargoyle-y). So
53+22 = 75.
25 cards left. Say, 12-15 dual-discipline cards, pad out the rest with
generically useful cards - equipment, events, allies, master cards etc.
Legacies of Blood introduced roughly 4 new cards per discipline, so drop
that down to 40-44-ish, and the extra 10 cards can go to other things.
It seems doable.
We haven't had a 150 cards + 4 starters set in a while, though, so maybe
White Wolf has gone off them.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Aug 12, 8:28 pm, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
> We've had 4 starters with 150 card sets, which have 50 vamps in the
> boosters. Set it up so that you have 4 bloodlines with, say, 3 new
> vampires in the starters, then 2 new vampires in the boosters.
I am, however, convinced we will not see Group 6, and most bloodlines
need only about 2 (possibly 3) vampires to complete a Group 4-5 set
(Gargoyles being an exception).
One way around this might be to add an extra vamps to the odd-numbered
groups, 3 and 5; so that odd-numbered groups ultimately get 2 vamps
for each non-scarce bloodline and 1 vamp for each scarce bloodline.
> Another
> 44 vampires left for another 8 bloodlines. 3 * 3 scarce,
I'm sure we won't see that; unless we get one scarce vamp each for
groups 1, 3, and 5??)
> so 35 vampires
> left for 5 more bloodlines. 5 * 5 = 25, so still some left over. Add
> another vampire for each of the 9 non-Scarce bloodlines and you'd 49
> vampires in the boosters and 12 in the starters. Maybe an Abomination?
For group 1? So far, the rule for abominations is 1 Abomination per
group. But they are not really a bloodline, thematically.
> 5 or 6 was a perfectly ordinary number for the non-scarce bloodlines in
> Bloodlines, with the Blood Brothers and Gargoyles having a few more. I
> could see that happening. e.g. print 5 Kiasyd and 5 Daughters
And put them in what groups?
> and give
> the "extra" vampires towards forming a second Blood Brother circle.
Yeah -- there's room for that in Gr 4-5.
On Aug 9, 8:06 am, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
>
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Having recently been on the ass-end of a Ebony Kingdom draft league I
think it is important that any starter deck be:
1) Able to oust
2) Contain cards (and enough of them) to entice players to actually
buy the Starter
3) Not be a wall concept
So for bloodlines we have:
Ahrimane Pre Ani Spi
Baali Pre Obf Dia
Blood Brother Pot Fort San
Daughter of Cacophony Pre Fort Mel
Gargoyle Pot Fort Vic
Harbinger of Skulls Aus Fort Nec
Kiasyd Dom Obt Myt
Nagaraja Dom Aus Nec
Salubri Aus Fort Obe
Salubri antitribu Aus Fort Val
Samedi Fort Obf Than
True Brujah Pre Pot Tem
Of those options 3 are scarce and not conducive to a Starter deck and
1 is dependant on Tremere.
That leaves Ahrimane, Baali, Blood Brother, Daughter of Cacophony,
Harbinger of Skulls, Kiasyd, Salubri antitribu and Samedi. Of these
options only the Ahrimane, Baali, Daughter of Cacophony, and Kiasyd
have ready, out of the box ousting abilities via Pre and Dom.
As to what should go in the decks:
Ahrimane:
8-10 Pre bleed actions
2-4 Squirrel balance or other stealth
10 good animalism combat cards (like crows)
2-3 Muricia's Call
5-6 animalism retainers
1 High Top
Baali:
8-10 Pre bleed actions
2 Call the great beast
2 D'habi revenant
6 Sense the sin
1 Ruins of Charizel
1-4 different condemnations or new ones
Daughter of Cacophony:
8-10 Pre bleed actions
6-8 Choir
4-8 freak drives
2 Conductors
2 Concert Tours
6-10 actions modifiers that give stealth
Kiasyd:
8-10 Dom bleed actions
1-2 Blanket of night
1-3 Shroud of absence
2 Riddle Phantastique
2 Covincraft (if there is a voting deck in the starters)
12-14 Obt or Myth stealth action modifiers
2 Entombments
The point is that a Starter deck needs to have cards that your player
base doesn't have by the handfuls already and the decks need to be
much more focused on oust mechanics than those that came before them
for the last decade. Throw in some good draft text on everything and
get us excited about Starter decks and draft tournaments. In the past
there have been 1 or 2 playable decks (malk stealth bleed, venture
vote bleed, etc) that are so overpowering compared to osebo walls and
such that draft tournaments become painful for the unlucky and people
feel robbed because that have to buy the Starter to get vamps.
High hopes for this edition.
On Aug 12, 4:57 pm, "Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message>
> news:CRtgm.138262$Qg6.1...@newsfe14.iad...
>
>
>
> > Frederick Scott wrote:> >> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message[ quoted text not captured ]
Well, as far as over priced VTES cards go there are quite limited. Not
to mention you can create many viable decks without going all out.
However, where I will agree is that due to the nature of the game and
how long it has been around reprints are essential to the game. It can
only turn people away from the game if something is not accessible.
Shroud of Absence or Siren's Lure anyone? And others even newer that
are not printed in great quantity such as Villein or supposed commons
like Deep Song and Eyes of Argus.
Getting back on track I think White Wolf needs to do something about
it along with some others like Sensory Deprivation and Parity
Shift.... again, those cards are few and far between, but it would
certainly help.
I hope Heirs has great reprints and new cards to assist the Bloodlines
and make them more viable options to play with.
On Aug 12, 10:00 pm, Pyrrhus of Epirus <macanudo1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having recently been on the ass-end of a Ebony Kingdom draft league I
> think it is important that any starter deck be:
> 1) Able to oust
> 2) Contain cards (and enough of them) to entice players to actually
> buy the Starter
> 3) Not be a wall concept
I'm not sure I much care whether starter decks can oust, as long as I
can have fun playing them for 1 or 2 hours. Ideally, of course, they
should be balanced, and have a reasonable chance at winning. But I
cannot contribute meaningfully to such issues, and must leave it in
the able hands of the designer.
I can, however, put in my 2 cents on #2. And that, in the final
analysis, is what will get me to buy the starter.
.
James Coupe wrote:
> librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote:>> Is this a 60 card set here? Since there are starters, it seems like
>> it's one of the larger sets (esp since we just got a 60-card set).
>> Usually that means 100+ new vamps.>
> We've had 4 starters with 150 card sets, which have 50 vamps in the
> boosters. Set it up so that you have 4 bloodlines with, say, 3 new
> vampires in the starters, then 2 new vampires in the boosters. Another
> 44 vampires left for another 8 bloodlines. 3 * 3 scarce, so 35 vampires
> left for 5 more bloodlines. 5 * 5 = 25, so still some left over. Add
> another vampire for each of the 9 non-Scarce bloodlines and you'd 49
> vampires in the boosters and 12 in the starters. Maybe an Abomination?
>
Angelo.
bes t-
chris
[ quoted text not captured ]
I'd actually be hoping they do more of what they have done for a long
time: Highlight the strengths of the clans.
- Ahrimanes: Pre + Ani Combat and "Wierd Crap + Maneuvers" from Spi
- Baali: S&B (Pre-Obf style w/ Spying missions?) plus Dai "Wierd
Effects" and nice pool management
- Blood Brothers: Walk of Elvis + Me and my 4 bros gonna mash u
good...
- Daughters oC: Pre Bleed + Mel manipulative stuff
- Harbingers: See All, Block All and use your corpses to wait tables
at my slaughterhouse...
- Kiasyd: Myt manipulation + Obt/Dom S&B + Maybe some fey allies??
- Salubri Anti: See All, Stab All with Flaming Stick... just maybe
some nicer melee weapon stuff for Val. SotR is awesome but suffers
the same issues as most "king hit" decks (screwed by maneuvers all
day...)
- Samedi: They are supposed to be thug/enforcer/assassins right? If I
ever get nominated for a vampiric assassins contract, I'd be fine with
them awarding it to Samedi.
There are 8 Starters... (1 each per box) so if they do a decent job of
highlighting strengths without giving the Bleeders WAAAAY too much
power (i.e. give them more wacky bloodline discipline tricks) then
Ahrimanes, Baali, DoC & Kiasyd won't crap all over everybody else.
Frederick Scott wrote:
> What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
> different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
> please you.
Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
because they deserve it. But, seeing as how that isn't happening,
a de facto ban by non-reprinting is fine by me.
> It's a different motivation but it creates the same effect: overpriced
> game, product ultimately goes broke.
You're making assumptions which aren't valid in VTES.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
On Aug 13, 7:21 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> Frederick Scott wrote:
> > What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
> > different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
> > please you.
>
> Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
> because they deserve it. But, seeing as how that isn't happening,
> a de facto ban by non-reprinting is fine by me.
>
> > It's a different motivation but it creates the same effect: overpriced
> > game, product ultimately goes broke.
>
> You're making assumptions which aren't valid in VTES.
As are you. Your assumptions, however, are along the lines of:
1) I hate this card
2) I never want to see this card again
3) If this card is never reprinted I will see it played less.
What you forget is that because of 3, 4) This cards trade / resale
value goes up dramatically.
Blooded Sand wrote:
> On Aug 13, 7:21 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>> Frederick Scott wrote:>>> What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
>>> different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
>>> please you.>>
>> Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
>> because they deserve it. But, seeing as how that isn't happening,
>> a de facto ban by non-reprinting is fine by me.
>>>>> It's a different motivation but it creates the same effect:
>>> overpriced game, product ultimately goes broke.>>
>> You're making assumptions which aren't valid in VTES.>
> As are you. Your assumptions, however, are along the lines of:
> 1) I hate this card
> 2) I never want to see this card again
> 3) If this card is never reprinted I will see it played less.
Ok.
> What you forget is that because of 3, 4) This cards trade / resale
> value goes up dramatically.
Nope, didn't forget that. But if there is some proof you can give
that VTES cards not being reprinted=>product ultimately goes broke,
I'd love to see them.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On 13 Sie, 04:00, Pyrrhus of Epirus <macanudo1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That leaves Ahrimane, Baali, Blood Brother, Daughter of Cacophony,
> Harbinger of Skulls, Kiasyd, Salubri antitribu and Samedi. Of these
> options only the Ahrimane, Baali, Daughter of Cacophony, and Kiasyd
> have ready, out of the box ousting abilities via Pre and Dom.
Trochomancy
Action Modifier
Auspex & Necromancy
[nec] Remove 13 cards in the target Methuselah's ash heap from the
game to get +1 bleed. Not usable if there aren't enough cards in that
ash heap. You cannot play another action modifier to increase this
bleed.
[aus] [nec] As [nec] above, but remove only 7 cards.
[AUS] [NEC] As [aus] [nec] above, but for +2 bleed.
If you cannot oust when you have telepatic misdirection and
trochomancy, there is something wrong with you.
About Parity Shift/Deflection issue. Single tweaks would make that
card much more balanced. Like:
-Parity Shift move pool equal to number of other player in game (1
less than current), so it never do 10 pool swing - just 8 pool swing.
-Deflection have text that increase it's cost by 1 if acting vampire
is older (to prevent so common weenie deflector).
And those cards would be perfectly fine.
Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>Nope, didn't forget that. But if there is some proof you can give
>that VTES cards not being reprinted=>product ultimately goes broke,
>I'd love to see them.
It's not the *only* cause, but in-demand, powerful cards not being
reprinted in a (more) accessible form, banned or rotated out of the
playable set has had a detrimental effect on a variety of CCGs in the
past.
At various points, Magic has had a lot of potential players put off from
joining because of the cost of the most powerful decks - although
clearly it survived those periods because, in part, of a significant
play-base to carry it through those periods. However, I'm sure we all
know people who've been put off Magic (either initially, or after a bit
of time playing) because of the money aspect,
Anecdotally, I can certainly say that ST:TNG had the same problem with
some ridiculously difficult to get hold of cards being obscenely good.
Me, I thought that the game being shit should kill it, but people seemed
to like it. The earliest versions didn't really have a 'cost' for
characters, like we do for vampires, although a later re-invention of
the game did something analagous, so a player who couldn't access the
powerful cards was just in a plain, vanilla worse situation.
Now, V:TES isn't in quite the same position. There are viable,
tournament winning decks that use easily accessible cards - although
Parity Shift and Deflection being reprinted would help! However, the
more often you have to tell new players "Oh yeah, you can't make this
deck that you obviously like because this card and this card haven't
been reprinted in 8 years", the more likely they are to not want to play
at all. In particular, for some strategies/clans, obtaining multiple
out-of-print cards may be the only way to play them. e.g. a player who
wants to play some Bloodlines is in a tricky position right now, with
some reprints being very hard to obtain, and similarly players are being
told that Parity Shift is about as available as rocking-horse shit.
This does not immediately and exclusively lead to V:TES implosion, but
it is clearly detrimental to the growth and success of the game if
players have no chance to make the decks other people can unless they
spend a hundred dollars on chase singles which only come up every six
months anyway.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe wrote:
> Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>> Nope, didn't forget that. But if there is some proof you can give
>> that VTES cards not being reprinted=>product ultimately goes broke,
>> I'd love to see them.
[snip effect-on-past-nonVTES-CCGs; I tend to agree]
> Now, V:TES isn't in quite the same position. There are viable,
> tournament winning decks that use easily accessible cards-although
> Parity Shift and Deflection being reprinted would help! However,
> the more often you have to tell new players "Oh yeah, you can't
> make this deck that you obviously like because this card and this
> card haven't been reprinted in 8 years", the more likely they are
> to not want to play at all.
I agree fully. That's a difficult position to be in as a veteran player,
to have to tell a newbie that he'll have to borrow cards instead of
owning them right now.
> This does not immediately and exclusively lead to V:TES implosion,
> but it is clearly detrimental to the growth and success of the game
> if players have no chance to make the decks other people can unless
> they spend a hundred dollars on chase singles which only come up
> every six months anyway.
I'd answer by saying that I've seen almost zero interest on the part
of White Wolf in having VTES succeed*and*grow. Instead, what I see
is WW continuing to produce a high-quality product and making efforts
to keep their current player base intact. These singles-market issues
are so small in comparison, really, that I just don't see using words
like "product ultimately goes broke" as relating to any part of the
current discussion, unless you're talking about decades-long time.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
Please buy my cards! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html
Kevin M. <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>I'd answer by saying that I've seen almost zero interest on the part
>of White Wolf in having VTES succeed*and*grow. Instead, what I see
>is WW continuing to produce a high-quality product and making efforts
>to keep their current player base intact. These singles-market issues
>are so small in comparison, really, that I just don't see using words
>like "product ultimately goes broke" as relating to any part of the
>current discussion, unless you're talking about decades-long time.
There doesn't seem to be any intent from White Wolf to turn the game
into the next earth-shatteringly huge game. In part, I think that's
probably just facing reality - a game that takes 6 hours to play (2+F,
or 3+F if you get knocked out) and isn't suitable for duel formats (so
you can't just play a quick game in your lunch hour) probably isn't
going to do it.
However, there certainly have been steps taken to make the game more
attractive to new players.
1) Grouping. As annoying at it might be at times, it helps to prevent
the power curve getting so steep that new players can't enter the game.
2) Blood Shadowed Court. For any players who weren't around during
Camarilla Edition, a cheap and easy way to get hold of vampires other
people have.
3) Base sets. Not that there haven't been problems with them (e.g. lack
of Deflection, production issues in 3rd) but the intent has been to
circulate cards back for new players. If you were only going after
existing players, you'd never need to print a whole bunch of cards - we
already have them.
Though the intent doesn't seem to be to turn the game into a billion
dollar money-spinner, attracting new players means that it can tick over
at about the same size - some players stop playing because of whatever
reasons, so some new players replace them. That sort of "growth" (to
offset the losses) is helpful.
[ quoted text not captured ]
This is my thought process as a relatively new player.
New cards are indeed reprinted on some level. However, Bloodlines
needs reprinted and I hope most of the better old cards are reprinted
along with some additional new stuff to make everyone happy. Beyond
that what about the cards like Parity Shift and Deflection everyone
always points out? No doubt they are staple cards, but I don't think
they are more powerful than many other staple cards. That being said
they need reprinted so both old and new players alike have access to
them. Even Blood Shadowed Court is hard to find in many brick and
mortar stores. And then there are the "commons" everyone wants like
Eyes of Argus and Deep song that obviously were not printed in a large
enough quantity. You say things like that are small mistakes, but I
still noticed 3rd edition is printed backwards so it is kind of hard
to fix what has already been done.
I don't see VTES imploding on itself, but the number one thing I hear
old players say they want more than anything else are new players. Not
just enough to offset old people playing less or quitting altogether,
but enough to have new experiences and more people to play with. In
that regard White Wolf should be be looking to grow the game.
All we can do is hope for the best at the end of the day and for White
Wolf to listen to us.
-------------
-Rodd
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:TpNgm.158468$eS5....@newsfe25.iad...
> Frederick Scott wrote:>> What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
>> different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
>> please you.>
> Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
> because they deserve it.
...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?
"I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION."
In other words, "...because they don't please you."
> But, seeing as how that isn't happening,
> a de facto ban by non-reprinting is fine by me.
Again, it's not a de facto ban, no matter how many times you
repeat the assertion. And what it would create is the worst
of all worlds: cards that are useful but underprinted.
>> It's a different motivation but it creates the same effect: overpriced
>> game, product ultimately goes broke.>
> You're making assumptions which aren't valid in VTES.
Since you won't identify what you mean, we'll have to agree to disagree
about that.
Fred
"RoddPrime" <rodd...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1477b72e-ffaf-4121...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> I don't see VTES imploding on itself, but the number one thing I hear
> old players say they want more than anything else are new players. Not
> just enough to offset old people playing less or quitting altogether,
> but enough to have new experiences and more people to play with. In
> that regard White Wolf should be be looking to grow the game.
VTES isn't imploding on itself because, in the main, it does not engage
in the kind of behavior Kevin is encouraging. The fallacy that's being
passed off here is that a bad behavior isn't a bad behavior if it's
minor enough and the person/entity engaging in it can afford it. Sure,
White Wolf can stop printing Direct Intervention or Parity Shift or any
other individual good, useful non-banned card and the game will not bleed
players out the wazoo. I'm just saying that it's a bad thing and it would
kill VtES if done lots and lots. And yes, it might take years even so -
although not decades.
Just to show how silly this is on multiple different levels, White
Wolf didn't reprint Conditioning from Camarilla Edition until Lords
of the Night. That's a fairly useful card to not get printed for 5
years but I guess it was in sufficiently good supply as of 2002 that
it could stand 5 years of non-reprinting without anyone really noticing
that much. At the same time, nobody was standing up and yelling, "GEE
I HATE CONDITIONING, I SURE HOPE THIS MEANS WHITE WOLF ISN'T GOING TO
REPRINT IT AGAIN EVER!" like a certain party is doing. Based on
Conditioning, one would expect people to minimally wait at least until
after the non-mini-expansion of 2011 came out before running their mouth
about how this must be a sign from on high that the gods have frowned
upon D.I. But, you know, that's just me.
Fred
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:rKQgm.118884$3m2....@newsfe06.iad...
> Nope, didn't forget that. But if there is some proof you can give
> that VTES cards not being reprinted=>product ultimately goes broke,
> I'd love to see them.
You're oversimplifying the assertion. To correct your misquotation:
"If enough useful cards are deliberately and significantly underprinted,
the product will ultimately go broke."
To correct my own bad phraseology, I will note that products do not
actually go broke. Companies do. I was really just using a shorthand
to suggest that were White Wolf to follow such a practice to a
sufficient degree, it would eventually drive off enough customers
that sales would be insufficient to make a profit from VtES.
Fred
Frederick Scott wrote:
> VTES isn't imploding on itself because, in the main, it does not
> engage in the kind of behavior Kevin is encouraging.
Still wrong, after all these posts! Sigh.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>> Frederick Scott wrote:>>> What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
>>> different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
>>> please you.>>
>> Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
>> because they deserve it.>
> ...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?
>
> "I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
> it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION."
>
> In other words, "...because they don't please you."
IMHO is completely unnecessary and redundant, since
*everything* a person says is their opinion.
I seriously hope this is the *last* time that anyone has
to explain this to you. :P
>> But, seeing as how that isn't happening,
>> a de facto ban by non-reprinting is fine by me.>
> Again, it's not a de facto ban, no matter how many times you
> repeat the assertion.
Sure it is!
/bait
> And what it would create is the worst of all worlds:
> cards that are useful but underprinted.
Which is why I don't prefer that it happen that way.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/[ quoted text not captured ]
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:YW7hm.65316$0z7....@newsfe07.iad...
> Frederick Scott wrote:>> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>>> Frederick Scott wrote:>>>> What you're proposing is to create a "good rare" situation for a
>>>> different reason: to create a de facto shortage of cards that don't
>>>> please you.>>>
>>> Nope, I wasn't. I'd prefer the cards were banned or de-powered
>>> because they deserve it.>>
>> ...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?
>>
>> "I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
>> it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION."
>>
>> In other words, "...because they don't please you.">
> IMHO is completely unnecessary and redundant, since
> *everything* a person says is their opinion.
Not true. A person could also be communicating facts. Your suggestion
that a card "deserved" banning appeared to be an allusion to some
non-existant factual evidence out their somewhere. I was just
clarifying that allusion. The two ways of saying amount to the same
thing, in the end.
Fred
On Aug 14, 2:58 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> Frederick Scott wrote:> > ...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?
>
> > "I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
> > it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION."
>
> > In other words, "...because they don't please you."
>
> IMHO is completely unnecessary and redundant, since
> *everything* a person says is their opinion.
Hear! hear! When a person takes the trouble to point out that his
opinion is ONLY his humble opinion, then he is perilously close to
saying that it is not his opinion at all.
I must, however, side with Frederick on the issue of "de-facto bans".
Not reprinting a problem card is no solution, if it is truly a problem
card.
But maybe, with respect to Tupdog, we could get a Tupdog hoser, such
as a group 5 !Tremere who can burn a blood during your untap phase to
take control of a Tupdog controlled by another Methuselah.
> But maybe, with respect to Tupdog, we could get a Tupdog hoser, such
> as a group 5 !Tremere who can burn a blood during your untap phase to
> take control of a Tupdog controlled by another Methuselah.
Let's make it easier, a vampire you influence out, can fetch your
library for a grand madre? :)
John Whelan wrote:
> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>> Frederick Scott wrote:>>> ...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?>>>>> "I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
>>> it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION.">>>>> In other words, "...because they don't please you.">>
>> IMHO is completely unnecessary and redundant, since
>> *everything* a person says is their opinion.>
> Hear! hear! When a person takes the trouble to point out that his
> opinion is ONLY his humble opinion, then he is perilously close to
> saying that it is not his opinion at all.
Nice. Thanks. :)
> I must, however, side with Frederick on the issue of "de-facto bans".
> Not reprinting a problem card is no solution, if it is truly a problem
> card.
Well then you aren't siding with Fred, you're siding with *us*. =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
"John Whelan" <jwjbw...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:660d6fb2-4a7c-4bf6...@v2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 14, 2:58 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> > Frederick Scott wrote:
> > > ...let's finish that sentence properly, shall we?
> >
> > > "I'd prefer the card wer banned or de-powered because they deserve
> > > it...IN (YOUR) HUMBLE OPINION."
> >
> > > In other words, "...because they don't please you."
> >
> > IMHO is completely unnecessary and redundant, since
> > *everything* a person says is their opinion.
>
> Hear! hear! When a person takes the trouble to point out that his
> opinion is ONLY his humble opinion, then he is perilously close to
> saying that it is not his opinion at all.
Hmmm. This doesn't sound like a sentiment I would agree with. But I
have to confess I don't even understand what you mean. Could you
elaborate? (Again, keeping in mind that Kevin is strictly wrong in
both his observation and his conclusion: when a poster seems to be
misrepresenting an opinion as fact, pointing out such a distinction is
both relevant and necessary.)
> I must, however, side with Frederick on the issue of "de-facto bans".
> Not reprinting a problem card is no solution, if it is truly a problem
> card.
>
> But maybe, with respect to Tupdog, we could get a Tupdog hoser, such
> as a group 5 !Tremere who can burn a blood during your untap phase to
> take control of a Tupdog controlled by another Methuselah.
Having been chewed up by a pretty nasty Tupdog deck, I sympathize with
the desire to see something done about it. But you have to be careful
about that kind of a hoser. I think most people find that having a
super-narrow hoser than totally kills the original problem card/deck is
not a good option in the run. (It reminds me of Blood Moon in Magic.
I *hated* that card, even though it made sense to me that multilands
needed some kind of hosing.) It's too drastic, like the complaints
about what PTO and Sensory Deprivation do when they're successfully
executed. Tupdog deck runs amok if your !Tremere isn't at the table,
or might as well commit Hari Kari if it is.
A better way of hosing Tupdog decks is print some sort of a staple-ish
card that severe hamstrings if used but doesn't absolutely prevent them
from having any chance of getting a VP - especially if they plan for it,
thus causing them to weaken their main deck theme.
Fred
On the whole banning cards issue I would rather see a good foil
( like a master card that could remove a card on a minion you
controlled would solve the sense dep issue to a point) printed then
making cards people might have spent money or traded to get a hold of
become worthless trash.
Also when you guys want to go off the topic off the post, please make
another post, its quite annoying and disrespectful to other posters.
My speculations.
1) Vampires
I bet the set's Vampires are Group 5 & 6.
* Group 3 is too old. (Can't be used with the current Base Set = KoT.)
* I think Group 4 is actually "full". (420 Vampires, according to the
Secret Library.)
* Bloodlines' Group 4 can only "handle" 1 more Vampire, if the current
pattern is followed. If the pattern is changed, it will make Group 3-4
significantly stronger than Group 2-3. If they add to Group 3, they
can change the Bloodlines' status (not made to be used as mono-Clan
decks) without unbalancing the two Group pairs, but as I wrote above,
I don't think they would add to Group 3.
* New Vampires of Scarce Bloodlines must be Group 6. Unless their
current status (only 3 Vampires per Group pair) is changed, which I
doubt.
Non-scarce: Group 5 x2, Group 6 x4. (On average. Specific Bloodline
may vary; eg. Blood Brothers.)
Scarce: Group 6 x3.
2) Starters
I will gladly have 8 starters, but I think it's going to be 4
starters.
(If they can do 8, why didn't they make 3rd or KoT 8 starters?)
3) Boosters
Either way, not every Bloodlines will get a Starter. Which means
reprints in Boosters.
Which means, the set will probably be larger than 150 cards.
4) Only other option I can think of is;
Starters: 8 Starters. All non-scarce Bloodlines except Baali.
Boosters: No reprints. No Scarce Vampires & their Disciplines.
Group: Then, maybe Group 4-5.
5) Surprise
Well, I'm prepared for total surprise.
LSJ might throw us something odd (and fun), like Anarch Convert
(Group: any).
On Aug 16, 10:02 pm, deadsloth <deadsl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My speculations.
>
> 1) Vampires
> I bet the set's Vampires are Group 5 & 6.
I very much doubt it. Bloodlines vampires are meant to function as
support vampires. How are you going to print Group 6 Gargoyles, when
Group 5 Tremere are not even complete yet?
> * Group 3 is too old. (Can't be used with the current Base Set = KoT.)
The current base set is 4-5. The latest Laibon expansion was very
heavily Group 4. Group 3 is just as compatible with KoT and other
current cards as Group 6 would be -- probably more so.
> * I think Group 4 is actually "full". (420 Vampires, according to the
> Secret Library.)
> * Bloodlines' Group 4 can only "handle" 1 more Vampire, if the current
> pattern is followed.
Well, if Group 4 were numbered to match Group 2 (not counting
advancements) we could get:
1 Ahrimanes
8 Blood Brothers
1 Daughter
6 Gargoyles
1 Harbinger
1 !Salubri
2 Samedi
That's 20 vamps. Throw in 1 vamp each for all of the above in group
5, and we get 27. Throw in some advanced versions, and we have
reached over 30 vamps. That's enough for a small set.
> If the pattern is changed, it will make Group 3-4 significantly stronger than
> Group 2-3.
More numerous is not always the same as "significantly stronger". For
instance, one reason Gargoyles and Samedi got extra vamps in Group 2
was because they were more diverse in terms of sects and/or
disciplines. Some of the Group 4 bloodlines face similar issues,
being further divided among Laibon sects. This diversity could be
enough to justify giving Group-4 1 or 2 extra members for such groups
as, say, the Harbingers, the !Salubri, and the Samedi.
> If they add to Group 3, they
> can change the Bloodlines' status (not made to be used as mono-Clan
> decks) without unbalancing the two Group pairs, but as I wrote above,
> I don't think they would add to Group 3.
I can easily see them adding an extra vamp per clain to the Group 3
set. But, as indicated above, they may not need to to come up with
enough vamps to fill a small expansion.
> * New Vampires of Scarce Bloodlines must be Group 6.
No. We could also have Group 3 or 5, which are empty. Or we could
have advanced versions of a Scarce vampire.
> Unless their
> current status (only 3 Vampires per Group pair) is changed, which I
> doubt.
4 vampires per Group pair would not change much, since the scarce
penalty would still be the real issue and limitation.
> 3) Boosters
>
> Either way, not every Bloodlines will get a Starter. Which means
> reprints in Boosters.
>
> Which means, the set will probably be larger than 150 cards.
I can't follow your logic. Nobody promised a standalone set.
Well, i think the probably starters that would appear is
1 - salubri mixed ones aus for obe/val
1 - Samedi obf, thn for (people forget that samedi losed nec and
gained obf in the third edition of V:tM)
1 - kiasyd
1 - Harbingers of skulls/nagaraja (aus nec for)
1 - Ahrimane
1 - Blood Brothers
Unless WW thinks to release more tremere, I think there'll no be a
gargoyle deck, because of the "slave" trait (for both tremere and
tremere antitribu).
On Aug 10, 12:01 pm, Jakob Sievers <cad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> writes:
> > Alia? What in blazes do you want her for? And why won't anyone
> > trade her to you, given how bad she is? :)
>
> For rescuing my vampires... from torpor!
>
> > And *please* put 1x Mon ada and 1x Polonia in there, too.
>
> [snip]
>
> > In general, there are a lot of SW-only vamps that should be reprinted.
>
> Yes, plus Howler in an Ahrimanes starter as mentioned up thread.
>
> While we're at it, how about some Dan Murdocks, Mariana Gilberts &c.?
>
> > It'd be neat to see a deck with 2-4 Gehenna events and 1x FortLib.
>
> +1
>
> > I'd *really* *desperately* like to see Carlton van Wyk reprinted.
>
> Oh yeah - forgot Carlton.
>
> > Other cards I'd like to see in future (not necessarily HTTB) starters:
> > - Target Vitals
> > - Parthenon
>
> +1
>
> Here are some more cards which I don't have enough of^W^W^W^W^W would
> be really useful to lots of people I'm sure:
>
> Anarch Troublemaker
> Jake Washington
> Dreams
> Liquidation
> Last Stand
>
> cheers,
> -jakob
[ quoted text not captured ]
What about Baltimore purge?
But thats not BL's.
A starter with shroud of absence, blissful agony or muricia call's
will sell in no time. Add some more goodies like howler or coagulated
entity's and you will have a best seller...
> What about Baltimore purge?
There are very few cards that I just generally dislike, but this is
certainly one of them. It is so random that it just turns games on
its head.
On Aug 9, 11:06 pm, The Lasombra <TheLasom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Potomac Distribution has been advertising Heir to the Blood as the
> next set to be released in October. CCP/WW marketing staff have
> confirmed that it is expected to be a Bloodlines based release.
>
> http://www.potomacdist.com/list.asp?code=1640
>
> Which 4 Bloodlines should get starters?
>
> Or should there be 8 different starters to fill that box?
>
> What should go into those starters to best support the Bloodlines you
> expect to see?
Hey guys,
Bloodlines starters should be interesting, I would like to see 8
different decks rather than the normal 4. A True Brujah/Brujah! deck
or Ahrimanes/City Gangrel concept might have been interesting.
Regards
Noel