Final Nights Poll

Just a quick question and mini poll.... If only new cards will be in boosters, and reprints only available in precons... Which Precon (if any) will have Dreams of the Sphinx in it? Any speculation? The obvious(?) choice is either Assamites or Setites, but which one? oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster Vekn Prince of Caledon

Not knowing a whole lot about the WoD, aren't the setites supposedly from egypt? (wasn't Set an egyptian god?). and the sphinx, at least the one that is pictured, is from egypt therefore i guess that it will be in the setite starter. "oaflord" <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote in message news:jQsD6.3288$Ar3....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca... [ quoted text not captured ]

>Not knowing a whole lot about the WoD, aren't the setites supposedly from >egypt? (wasn't Set an egyptian god?). and the sphinx, at least the one that >is pictured, is from egypt therefore i guess that it will be in the setite >starter. I was actually thinking about which starter Dreams would be in a while ago and in one of the previous threads displayed some concern since it could give a heavy advantage to one of the clans. Similarly, if a card like The Parthenon was printed, this could also heavily shift the balance between the four Independents. Yes, the Set was an Egyptian god and the sphinx was Egyptian as well. But then again, since the entire Ancient Hearts expansion (with both Setites and Assamites) was themed in that area, the Assamites could get it as well. Thematically, I think it would be most appropriate for the Setites, though the Giovanni and Assamites could really use it. If The Parthenon was reprinted, though I'm tempted to give it to the Giovanni (who really need a boost), I think the Assamites should have it, if only to help make Contracts more usable. Halcyan 2

It will be interesting to see who gets what. The Assamites will surely get Alamut, possibly kali's fang and hopefully silence of death and blood agony so how many more rares would they give them? "Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20010419000346...@ng-fo1.aol.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

oaflord <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote in message news:jQsD6.3288$Ar3....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca... > Just a quick question and mini poll.... > > If only new cards will be in boosters, and reprints only available in > precons... > > Which Precon (if any) will have Dreams of the Sphinx in it? Hopefully none of them :o) Rob [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:54:30 +0100 "shsoton" <shs...@dircon.co.uk> wrote: > >oaflord <oaf...@sprint.ca> wrote in message >news:jQsD6.3288$Ar3....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca... >> Just a quick question and mini poll.... >> >> If only new cards will be in boosters, and reprints only available in >> precons... >> >> Which Precon (if any) will have Dreams of the Sphinx in it? > >Hopefully none of them :o) > >Rob > Seconded. i'm all for each precon getting a power rare [insofar as that means anything in VTES] but there's a clutch of cards that i think SHOULD be leaving the game as the new base set works up to being the standard. i think this list includes: DoTS ToGP Majesty [but replace by a card which does something similar for big vampires] Govern the Unaligned Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] Pentex Subversion Archon Investigation KRC i'd like to see the following as the "power-rares" for the precons, one clan-specific and one not: Assamites: Blood Agony or Silence of Death PLUS Anarch Troublemaker Setites: Temptation PLUS Awe Ravnos: Sensory Deprivation PLUS Kiss of Ra Giovanni: Ambrosius the Ferryman, Wraith PLUS Burning Wrath

<...> but there's a clutch of cards that i think > SHOULD be leaving the game as the new base set works up to being the > standard. i think this list includes: > I don't think this is a good idea. IMO this would creare the same problems as M:TG has: the old cards were better (or more broken) than the new. That means that only long-time players have these. Now the gates to Type I and Type II tournaments are open wide. And this goes especially for the cards you list below. Some of them are really crucial to a certain deck type and cannot be removed without unbalancing the rock-paper-siccor thingy in V:TES. > DoTS good card but not broken > ToGP very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially weenie vote) > Majesty [but replace by a card which does something similar for big > vampires] why remove Majesty and not Earth Meld or Form of mist? > Govern the Unaligned OK, this one IS very powerful, but crucial in a lot of bleed decks. > Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] > Pentex Subversion > Archon Investigation toss, all 3 of em. I don't mean 'remove' but 'change text' > KRC removing this one would be as crippling to most vote decks as removing Bum's Rush would be for Rush decks.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:04:06 GMT "jeroen rombouts" <jeroen....@pandora.be> wrote: ><...> >but there's a clutch of cards that i think >> SHOULD be leaving the game as the new base set works up to being the >> standard. i think this list includes: >> >I don't think this is a good idea. IMO this would creare the same problems >as M:TG has: the old cards were better (or more broken) than the new. That >means that only long-time players have these. Now the gates to Type I and >Type II tournaments are open wide. Sorry, i'm not following you here. i'm advocating BANNING these cards from tournament play. How does that connect to the Magic system where there are several different levels of tournament play? And this goes especially for the cards >you list below. Some of them are really crucial to a certain deck type and >cannot be removed without unbalancing the rock-paper-siccor thingy in V:TES. > While i accept that you may be right about this, i don't think the cards listed are REALLY crucial to the deck-types i assume you're thinking of - though they do, of course, help. Alternatives to Majesty: Catatonic Fear, Staredown Superior, Mercy for the Weak Alternatives to GtU: Scouting Mission, Enchant Kindred, 4th Tradition Alternatives to KRC: Consangiuneous Condemnation/Domain challenge, Good Ol' Boys [Conservative Agitation], Anarchist Uprising/Ancilla Empowerment > > >> DoTS >good card but not broken >> ToGP >very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially weenie >vote) Or indeed weenie anything. But as things currently stand the card creates a VERY great disincentive to playing big vampires. This i find highly undesirable. > >> Majesty [but replace by a card which does something similar for big >> vampires] >why remove Majesty and not Earth Meld or Form of mist? It's the combination of Majesty's untap ability AND presence vote pushing AND heavy presence bleeds which creates the problem as i see it. The card by itself is less good than Earth Meld or superior Form of Mist, as you imply. >> Govern the Unaligned >OK, this one IS very powerful, but crucial in a lot of bleed decks. >> Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] >> Pentex Subversion >> Archon Investigation >toss, all 3 of em. I don't mean 'remove' but 'change text' Respectfully disagree with you there, brother. i REALLY don't like text changes, because of the demoralising effects they have on newbies. >> KRC > removing this one would be as crippling to most vote decks as removing >Bum's Rush would be for Rush decks. i don't think ANY of the above cards is 'broken' and i won't be HORRIBLY unhappy if they stay in the game. i just think that cycling them out might subtly shift the balance of deck power and open up some new avenues. ToGP and Pentex Subversion however are truly GHASTLY cards to be on the receiving end of, and i think Pentex at least ought to take a Bath for tournament play because it is basically a stupid card. > > >

legbiter <legb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:3adfff67$1...@news.nntpserver.com... <snip> > Seconded. i'm all for each precon getting a power rare [insofar as that > means anything in VTES] but there's a clutch of cards that i think > SHOULD be leaving the game as the new base set works up to being the > standard. i think this list includes: > > DoTS > ToGP > Majesty [but replace by a card which does something similar for big > vampires] > Govern the Unaligned > Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] > Pentex Subversion > Archon Investigation > KRC > > i'd like to see the following as the "power-rares" for the precons, one > clan-specific and one not: > > Assamites: Blood Agony or Silence of Death PLUS Anarch Troublemaker > Setites: Temptation PLUS Awe > Ravnos: Sensory Deprivation PLUS Kiss of Ra > Giovanni: Ambrosius the Ferryman, Wraith PLUS Burning Wrath Nice to see a good response to my poll, and I agree that no one should get DotS, as it would be unbalancing to any sealed tourneys if only one deck had it. But, does that not make DotS an "uber-rare" to newbies? I have a nice collection of DotS, but that is because I like to have them in all my decks and not have to substitute. This is a card that new players should have access to, but I guess they can trade the good cards from SW and FN they don't need to get it. Thoughts?? oAFLORD aka Thomas Kuster VEKN Prince of Caledon

<...> > > Sorry, i'm not following you here. i'm advocating BANNING these cards > from tournament play. How does that connect to the Magic system > where there are several different levels of tournament play? > communication problem: I tought you were advocating removing them from the (future ?) basic set. Sorry. On the other hand, I hate the concept of banning. For the designers it's like saying:" were terrribly sorry, but this card is broken and we've got no idea to fix it." > And this goes especially for the cards > >you list below. Some of them are really crucial to a certain deck type and > >cannot be removed without unbalancing the rock-paper-siccor thingy in V:TES. > > > While i accept that you may be right about this, i don't think the > cards listed are REALLY crucial to the deck-types i assume you're > thinking of - though they do, of course, help. > > Alternatives to Majesty: Catatonic Fear, Staredown Superior, > Mercy for the Weak I don't think Majesty in a vote deck is the real trouble, IMO, vote pushing with presence is a bit too easy. The untap effect isn't really that big a problem with NRA-rules. > Alternatives to GtU: Scouting Mission, Enchant Kindred, 4th Tradition > Alternatives to KRC: Consangiuneous Condemnation/Domain challenge, > Good Ol' Boys [Conservative Agitation], Anarchist Uprising/Ancilla > Empowerment > > These are alternatives, but are they really good enough? what happens, eg, to a vote deck with vastly more minions than others, a prey without more than 1 vamp of any clan when there only 2 players left? > >> DoTS > >good card but not broken > >> ToGP > >very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially weenie > >vote) > > Or indeed weenie anything. But as things currently stand the card > creates a VERY great disincentive to playing big vampires. This i > find highly undesirable. Wouldn't it be better to include incentives to playing with big vamps? You probabely remember the Arika/ Etrius - Soul gem - Return to Innocence Era (or was that only in Belgium?) Only 1 (one!) card was enough for everyone to begin playing with IC's. (And I know RtI was hiddiously overpowered.) This is just an example of the metagame in motion. another one: Everyone is playing with big vamps, suddenly Legbiter comes along with his ToGP deck. Result: the metagame will shift towards weenies until another genius brings out his atonement deck, back to bigger vamps,.......( repeat ad nauseum) I know this is simplified, because it happens on more "axes" than big - smal. Jeroen PS insert numerous IMO's

On 20-APR-01, legbiter wrote: > [Remove these cards:] > Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] There is no rule that prevents multiple bleed modifiers. That's handled by card text (and it's a good thing, too, even without Conditioning in the mix). (And could you fix the date on your system? Your clock is set to tomorrow). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

>Nice to see a good response to my poll, and I agree that no one should get >DotS, as it would be unbalancing to any sealed tourneys if only one deck had >it. But, does that not make DotS an "uber-rare" to newbies? I have a nice >collection of DotS, but that is because I like to have them in all my decks >and not have to substitute. This is a card that new players should have >access to, but I guess they can trade the good cards from SW and FN they >don't need to get it. Thoughts?? On the bright side, DotS IS unique. So if everyone has one and includes them in their decks, you have the serious problem of contesting. And the high occurance of seeing it might just be enough for people to NOT play with the Dreams. At least until the metagame shifts the other way around... Halcyan 2

>On the other hand, I hate the concept of >banning. For the designers it's like saying:" were terrribly sorry, but >this card is broken and we've got no idea to fix it." That there are as many players who get up in arms about errata as there are those who do about banning cards leads me to believe it's simpler to ban cards that cause severe problems. Course, this game is already burdened with skads of errata, so a few more probably won't have much impact. However, as has been pointed out, there are close substitutes for most of the cards suggested, so I doubt banning those cards will have much of a positive impact. And, companies hate banning cards, even more than errata, as it is more dramatic and provides a focal point for criticism of the game. I don't think it is realistic to expect a wave of bannings to eliminate good cards just to shake up the environment. The same effect could be achieved by fully sanctioning variant formats (Sabbat/SW constructed?) without generating the same sort of negative feedback. As for Dreams, I see no reason not to reprint it. It exists. People have use for some/more. I don't see it breaking sealed in and of itself. As for Assamite precon v. Settite precon, we don't know how good the new cards will be.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:38:18 GMT "jeroen rombouts" <jeroen....@pandora.be> wrote: > ><...> >> >> Sorry, i'm not following you here. i'm advocating BANNING these cards >> from tournament play. How does that connect to the Magic system >> where there are several different levels of tournament play? >> >communication problem: I tought you were advocating removing them from the >(future ?) basic set. Sorry. Actually you understood me perfectly correctly - i'm the one being dim here. i AM advocating NOT reprinting a small list of cards in the upcoming new base set. i AM suggesting that this would be the first step towards BANNING the unreprinted cards from tournament play. i DO accept that this is a controversial and possibly wrong strategy. The bit i'm not getting in your argument is why if we didn't reprint and banned the cards there would be a Magic-like problem. i'd have thought that would occur only if we didn't reprint the cards and DIDN'T ban them. On the other hand, I hate the concept of >banning. For the designers it's like saying:" were terrribly sorry, but >this card is broken and we've got no idea to fix it." Is it, i wonder, necessarily as stark as that? i don't think the cards on my list are broken. i don't think they NEED to be banned to "fix" some awful problem with the game. i merely speculate that if they weren't in the game then it would become a richer experience for all of us because a load of new deck-types would become competitive. i'll acknowledge that my thinking here is heavily influenced by a throwaway remark once made by David Pontes that change for change's sake can be good for the game. > >> And this goes especially for the cards >> >you list below. Some of them are really crucial to a certain deck type >and >> >cannot be removed without unbalancing the rock-paper-siccor thingy in >V:TES. >> > >> While i accept that you may be right about this, i don't think the >> cards listed are REALLY crucial to the deck-types i assume you're >> thinking of - though they do, of course, help. >> >> Alternatives to Majesty: Catatonic Fear, Staredown Superior, >> Mercy for the Weak > >I don't think Majesty in a vote deck is the real trouble, IMO, vote pushing >with presence is a bit too easy. The untap effect isn't really that big a >problem with NRA-rules. Agreed. it's when Majesty is in a MIXED vote/bleed deck that its true horror becomes apparent. Also [pace James Coupe and David Zopf] i always feel SLIGHTLY queasy about an Ancilla being able to use Majesty which in the RPG requires a HORRENDOUS number of spots in presence. i hasten to add that i KNOW that is a weak argument, RPG not same as CCG sorta thing, but it's just a matter of my taste. > >> Alternatives to GtU: Scouting Mission, Enchant Kindred, 4th Tradition >> Alternatives to KRC: Consangiuneous Condemnation/Domain challenge, >> Good Ol' Boys [Conservative Agitation], Anarchist Uprising/Ancilla >> Empowerment >> > >These are alternatives, but are they really good enough? what happens, eg, >to a vote deck with vastly more minions than others, a prey without more >than 1 vamp of any clan when there only 2 players left? O, i never said that the presence vote machine would still work just the way it used to if those cards went bye-byes. But you could still build a pretty dam' fine presence vote/bleed deck if they did. > >> >> DoTS >> >good card but not broken >> >> ToGP >> >very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially >weenie >> >vote) >> >> Or indeed weenie anything. But as things currently stand the card >> creates a VERY great disincentive to playing big vampires. This i >> find highly undesirable. > >Wouldn't it be better to include incentives to playing with big vamps? Yes. You >probabely remember the Arika/ Etrius - Soul gem - Return to Innocence Era >(or was that only in Belgium?) Only 1 (one!) card was enough for everyone to >begin playing with IC's. (And I know RtI was hiddiously overpowered.) Testify brother, testify. i got RtI'd twice in my first tournament. >This is just an example of the metagame in motion. another one: >Everyone is playing with big vamps, suddenly Legbiter comes along with his >ToGP deck. Result: the metagame will shift towards weenies until another >genius brings out his atonement deck, back to bigger vamps,.......( repeat >ad nauseum) I know this is simplified, because it happens on more "axes" >than big - smal. Trusting the metagame and peoples' creativity is a good policy. i think nudging people towards MORE creativity could also be fun. Maybe a little judicious banning would help. What WOULD be questionable IMO is if the cards AREN'T reprinted and AREN'T banned. Then all the old sods and soddesses would have access to strategies that aren't available to the new sod[desses]. Tell you what, maybe i will run a non-sanctioned tournament where those cards ARE banned and we will see experimentally if a better time is had by all. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 19 Apr 2001 17:34:41 GMT cur...@aol.com (Ian Lee) wrote: >>On the other hand, I hate the concept of >>banning. For the designers it's like saying:" were terrribly sorry, but >>this card is broken and we've got no idea to fix it." > >That there are as many players who get up in arms about errata as there are >those who do about banning cards leads me to believe it's simpler to ban cards >that cause severe problems. Course, this game is already burdened with skads >of errata, so a few more probably won't have much impact. > >However, as has been pointed out, there are close substitutes for most of the >cards suggested, so I doubt banning those cards will have much of a positive >impact. And, companies hate banning cards, even more than errata, as it is >more dramatic and provides a focal point for criticism of the game. i hadn't thought of that, and good point. I don't >think it is realistic to expect a wave of bannings to eliminate good cards just >to shake up the environment. The same effect could be achieved by fully >sanctioning variant formats (Sabbat/SW constructed?) without generating the >same sort of negative feedback. That's a wholly sensible compromise and i'd be 100% for that. > >As for Dreams, I see no reason not to reprint it. It exists. People have use >for some/more. I don't see it breaking sealed in and of itself. As for >Assamite precon v. Settite precon, we don't know how good the new cards will >be. Going further, i'd say if the cards are going to stay legal then all the bread-n-butter cards SHOULD be reprinted, to avoid new people becoming resentful of not being able to get hold of them.

<...> Actually you understood me perfectly correctly - i'm the one being dim > here. i AM advocating NOT reprinting a small list of cards in the > upcoming new base set. i AM suggesting that this would be the first > step towards BANNING the unreprinted cards from tournament play. i DO > accept that this is a controversial and possibly wrong strategy. The > bit i'm not getting in your argument is why if we didn't reprint and > banned the cards there would be a Magic-like problem. i'd have thought > that would occur only if we didn't reprint the cards and DIDN'T ban > them. Yup, your right here. But this will probably create a big 'chism' (for lack of a better word) between tournament play and regular play. Which IMO is not a good thing. > > On the other hand, I hate the concept of > >banning. For the designers it's like saying:" were terrribly sorry, but > >this card is broken and we've got no idea to fix it." > > Is it, i wonder, necessarily as stark as that? i don't think the cards > on my list are broken. i don't think they NEED to be banned to "fix" > some awful problem with the game. i merely speculate that if they > weren't in the game then it would become a richer experience for all > of us because a load of new deck-types would become competitive. i'll > acknowledge that my thinking here is heavily influenced by a throwaway > remark once made by David Pontes that change for change's sake can be > good for the game. That's what expansions are for. They *can* make certain deck-types competitive and *will* change the game. eg Telepathic Tracking in SW has done something for both the Tremere (esp. for second round combat) and the Tzimisce, it's not really enough, but on my last tourney there were 2 tremere decks so it's a start. (BTW one made it to the final.) <...> > >I don't think Majesty in a vote deck is the real trouble, IMO, vote pushing > >with presence is a bit too easy. The untap effect isn't really that big a > >problem with NRA-rules. > > Agreed. it's when Majesty is in a MIXED vote/bleed deck that its true > horror becomes apparent. Also [pace James Coupe and David Zopf] i > always feel SLIGHTLY queasy about an Ancilla being able to use Majesty > which in the RPG requires a HORRENDOUS number of spots in presence. i > hasten to add that i KNOW that is a weak argument, RPG not same as > CCG sorta thing, but it's just a matter of my taste. Yup: Majesty is the fifth power of Presence (PC maximum) and Awe is the lowest presence power. Hey, weren't you the one who disliked the WoD RPGs in favour of D&D? ;-) The untap power doesn't really bother me, even in a vote/bleed deck. Most of the time when having a vote deck as a predator i keep on discarding my bounce cards, if they bleed there's no hand jam problem here. Jeroen

At one point, I went through the precons for the sole purpose of looking for cards useful to my collection. While 3 of the SW precons are okay decks well suited for getting someone into the game, I was amazed by how few of the cards were useful to someone who has lots of cards. In the !Brujah deck, there were about 3. In the Tzimisce deck, about 2. In one of the others, about 2. And, the last, 1. I'm not talking about having cards like Disarm in the precons. What started to really get on my nerves were things like the Tzimisce starter having 1 Horrid Form. Didn't help that every starter had to have a useless clan hoser wasting a slot. With reprints only in the precons for Final, it would be preferred if enough copies of the old cards (the ones that don't suck) were in so that people could build decks around particular cards. Corruption comes to mind. My guess is that no more than 4 Corruptions will be in the precon. Six is about the minimum to bother with any. Eight starts to become a strategy.

> With reprints only in the precons for Final, it would be preferred if enough > copies of the old cards (the ones that don't suck) were in so that people > could > build decks around particular cards. Corruption comes to mind. My guess is > that no more than 4 Corruptions will be in the precon. Six is about the > minimum to bother with any. Eight starts to become a strategy. Well, how many do you need total, though? If you really want a Corruption deck, you might be well served by buying 2 FoS Precons, no matter how many Corruptions it has. I personally hope they'll add at least on Temptation...I mean, how could they not? That would be TOTALLY unfair to new players to not have access to such a key Serpentis card. But if there is one (or even two, but I'm not holding my breath), it's certainly worth it to have 2 FoS precons. Even if the FoS precon has only 4 Corruptions, that's 8 that you have, and then you should easily be able to trade with other players who don't really care about making a Corruption deck to get another 4 or 8. Now, if the FoS precon has only 2 Corruptions, or just 1, then it's going to be a lot tougher, so let's hope there's 3 or 4. -- Pat Ricochet Soul Jar'rn Fool of Atlanta "You can't make a fact out of an opinion by raising your voice."

In message <B705F11E.372A%sp...@socrates.gatech.edu>, Pat Ricochet <sp...@socrates.gatech.edu> writes > Now, if the FoS precon has only 2 Corruptions, or just 1, then it's >going to be a lot tougher, so let's hope there's 3 or 4. This assumes that Final Nights will not have another card that could work in tandem with Corruption, of course. (I do not know, I wasn't involved with it at all.) -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D EBD690ECD7A1F What's the meaning when you speak with so much feeling? B457CA213D7E6 Is it over when you're sober? Is it junk? 68C3695D623D5D

>===== Original Message From legbiter<legb...@my-deja.com> ===== >On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:04:06 GMT "jeroen rombouts" <jeroen....@pandora.be> wrote: >><...> >>but there's a clutch of cards that i think >>> SHOULD be leaving the game as the new base set works up to being the >>> standard. i think this list includes: >>> >>I don't think this is a good idea. IMO this would creare the same problems >>as M:TG has: the old cards were better (or more broken) than the new. That >>means that only long-time players have these. Now the gates to Type I and >>Type II tournaments are open wide. > As the supply of Jyhad cards still exist, gaining some of these cards (KRC, ToGP, Majesty, GtU and Conditioning) will remain accessable. With the increase interest in V:TES the price of these cards has risen (so I have been informed), but not drastically. >Sorry, i'm not following you here. i'm advocating BANNING these cards >from tournament play. How does that connect to the Magic system >where there are several different levels of tournament play? I am unsure if banning all these cards is necessary. Though Pentex, as mentioned below, is a real pain in the arse when you have it placed on you and can completely screw a strategy for the price of 2 pool. (Example would be Cooper's Wynn Combat Hurricane deck he played at the last Portsmouth Tourny, which like an idiot I removed too early.) > And this goes especially for the cards >>you list below. Some of them are really crucial to a certain deck type and >>cannot be removed without unbalancing the rock-paper-siccor thingy in V:TES. >> >While i accept that you may be right about this, i don't think the >cards listed are REALLY crucial to the deck-types i assume you're >thinking of - though they do, of course, help. > >Alternatives to Majesty: Catatonic Fear, Staredown Superior, >Mercy for the Weak Based upon what WW and LSJ did with SW, I think Majesty is being worked out of circulation as none appeared in the expansion. >Alternatives to GtU: Scouting Mission, Enchant Kindred, 4th Tradition >Alternatives to KRC: Consangiuneous Condemnation/Domain challenge, >Good Ol' Boys [Conservative Agitation], Anarchist Uprising/Ancilla >Empowerment >> Kine Resources Contested is a powerful card as it essentially allows a 3 point bleed from one minion to occur against your prey with the remaining point going somewhere else. SW seems to also did not have this included and may be a preclude of things to come where they will be gradually pushed out of circulation. >> >>> DoTS >>good card but not broken Completely confused on this one. Dreams of the Sphinx has seemed to be a main stay in the Portsmouth community. It is (IMO) a really powerful card for just 1 pool, but it is contestable and does possess a built in number of uses. Will have to wait until FN to see if WW and LSJ are planning phasing it out as well. >>> ToGP >>very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially weenie >>vote) Having been on the receiving end of this from you, I can see how it is a powerful card but only in the hands of a player who is experienced playing it properly. If it isn't played properly, it usually ends up screwing someone else and the player in the end. It does push people to shy away from large minions, but it only appeared in the Jyhad set and from the looks of things WotC were trying to phase the card out of circulation on their own. WW and LSJ may follow suit. Pushing for the card to be banned is a bit extreme, however, as I have only heard of 3 times where GoGP decks have been at major conventions (i.e. Gencon...). >Or indeed weenie anything. But as things currently stand the card >creates a VERY great disincentive to playing big vampires. This i >find highly undesirable. >> >>> Majesty [but replace by a card which does something similar for big >>> vampires] >>why remove Majesty and not Earth Meld or Form of mist? > >It's the combination of Majesty's untap ability AND presence vote >pushing AND heavy presence bleeds which creates the problem as i see >it. The card by itself is less good than Earth Meld or superior Form >of Mist, as you imply. > I can see Majesty being reintroduced, but with the requirement based on capacity and discipline rather than just discipline. But again, it appears that WW and LSJ are moving toward cycling these out (something I think would be impossible to do based upon the vast quantities printed in the Jyhad and first V:TES sets). >>> Govern the Unaligned >>OK, this one IS very powerful, but crucial in a lot of bleed decks. Govern the Unaligned is not something I would exactly what removed, but it too also appears to be moving toward the out of circulation as none appeared in the expansion. >>> Conditioning [but remove the rule that prevents multiple bleed-modifiers] I don't know about the removal of the rule preventing multiple bleed modifiers. I would think this would just give bleed decks too much strength, especially with Obfuscate backing it up. >>> Pentex Subversion see above >>> Archon Investigation Archon Investigation is not something usually seen at tournaments, too hit or miss IMO. Besides many people have grown use to the idea of keeping their bleed actions at the 3 point level to discourage it's use. Of course there are others that just go for it and bleed for as much as they are worth, but Deflections also appear to have a hand in keeping bleeds down to a respectable level. >>toss, all 3 of em. I don't mean 'remove' but 'change text' > >Respectfully disagree with you there, brother. i REALLY don't like >text changes, because of the demoralising effects they have on >newbies. > >>> KRC >> removing this one would be as crippling to most vote decks as removing >>Bum's Rush would be for Rush decks. > >i don't think ANY of the above cards is 'broken' and i won't be >HORRIBLY unhappy if they stay in the game. i just think that cycling >them out might subtly shift the balance of deck power and open up >some new avenues. ToGP and Pentex Subversion however are truly >GHASTLY cards to be on the receiving end of, and i think Pentex at >least ought to take a Bath for tournament play because it is basically >a stupid card. >> >> >> Michael Eichler Prince of Ramstein

>>Sorry, i'm not following you here. i'm advocating BANNING these cards >>from tournament play. How does that connect to the Magic system >>where there are several different levels of tournament play? > >I am unsure if banning all these cards is necessary. Though Pentex, as >mentioned below, is a real pain in the arse when you have it placed on you >and >can completely screw a strategy for the price of 2 pool. (Example would be >Cooper's Wynn Combat Hurricane deck he played at the last Portsmouth Tourny, >which like an idiot I removed too early.) Handy hint for everyones future reference - Pentex Subversion can save unlives! Yes it's sleazy, but with Wynn, Beast and Amelia showing up all the time nowadays, it's one way of at least getting a turn without intrusion! >>> >>> DoTS >>>good card but not broken > >Completely confused on this one. Dreams of the Sphinx has seemed to be a >main >stay in the Portsmouth community. It is (IMO) a really powerful card for >just >1 pool, but it is contestable and does possess a built in number of uses. >Will have to wait until FN to see if WW and LSJ are planning phasing it out >as >well. DoS is not what I'd call a power-rare. It's effects, whilst useful, are hardly game-breaking - all of them can be found elsewhere. The fact that it is inherently limited makes it a useful tool at best. It is only such a desirable card because it is flexible, saving a couple of card slots. I'll wager that most people only ever use it for the extra hand size anyway. >>> ToGP >>>very powerful but grinds to a halt against weenie decks (especially weenie >>>vote) > >Having been on the receiving end of this from you, I can see how it is a >powerful card but only in the hands of a player who is experienced playing >it >properly. If it isn't played properly, it usually ends up screwing someone >else and the player in the end. It does push people to shy away from large >minions, but it only appeared in the Jyhad set Nope. It also appeared in VTES - at least I am 99% sure, since I had about 3 and traded them to Leggy. >>Or indeed weenie anything. But as things currently stand the card >>creates a VERY great disincentive to playing big vampires. This i >>find highly undesirable. Yes, however others have still played with bigger minions, but just added more Suddens instead. >I can see Majesty being reintroduced, but with the requirement based on >capacity and discipline rather than just discipline. But again, it appears >that WW and LSJ are moving toward cycling these out (something I think would >be impossible to do based upon the vast quantities printed in the Jyhad and >first V:TES sets). > >>> Govern the Unaligned >>>OK, this one IS very powerful, but crucial in a lot of bleed decks. > >Govern the Unaligned is not something I would exactly what removed, but it >too >also appears to be moving toward the out of circulation as none appeared in >the expansion. Unless you count the !Ventrue precon - I'm sure there were a couple in there. >>> Archon Investigation > >Archon Investigation is not something usually seen at tournaments, too hit >or >miss IMO. Besides many people have grown use to the idea of keeping their >bleed actions at the 3 point level to discourage it's use. Of course there >are others that just go for it and bleed for as much as they are worth, but >Deflections also appear to have a hand in keeping bleeds down to a >respectable >level. I have seen a lot more Archons pop up lately. At watford, there were quite a few people with them in their hands, only to chuck them when they realised they were going to get beaten, not bled, to death. >>>toss, all 3 of em. I don't mean 'remove' but 'change text' >> >>Respectfully disagree with you there, brother. i REALLY don't like >>text changes, because of the demoralising effects they have on >>newbies. I bloody hate text changes. The amount of my life I have wasted explaining text changes to people.... Mr Davidson also has many "issues" on text changes (no suprise there). I believe that in Shadowfist, they change the text on subsequent cards, but you can only play the text change if you have that edition of the card. That couldn't work with VTES though, since nearly all text changes are de-powering changes to stop unbalanced cards. >>> KRC >>> removing this one would be as crippling to most vote decks as removing >>>Bum's Rush would be for Rush decks. >> >>i don't think ANY of the above cards is 'broken' and i won't be >>HORRIBLY unhappy if they stay in the game. i just think that cycling >>them out might subtly shift the balance of deck power and open up >>some new avenues. ToGP and Pentex Subversion however are truly >>GHASTLY cards to be on the receiving end of, and i think Pentex at >>least ought to take a Bath for tournament play because it is basically >>a stupid card. No, Pentex is a great card. It is expensive, limited in what it does, and it is burnable. All a Pentex does is buy you time. Unlike ToGP, which shags your whole strategy in 9/10 decks (unless you are playing CHEAP weenies - even weenies cost pool). It is nasty to be on the recieving end of a Pentex, but rarely the end of the game. I would hate ot see Pentex be depowered to the state the now laughably poor Misdirection is. I would rather see Misdirection just banned than in its current state. DH ------------------------------------------------------------ Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at: http://MailAndNews.com Create a new mailbox, or access your existing IMAP4 or POP3 mailbox from anywhere with just a web browser. ------------------------------------------------------------

> DoS is not what I'd call a power-rare. It's effects, whilst useful, are > hardly > game-breaking - all of them can be found elsewhere. The fact that it is > inherently limited makes it a useful tool at best. It is only such a > desirable > card because it is flexible, saving a couple of card slots. I'll wager that > most people only ever use it for the extra hand size anyway. funny.. That's the only function of Dreams of the Sphinx that I *haven't* seen it used for. The thing I've seen it most for is its Eco-Terrorist/Nosferatu Kingdom/etc ability, popping a free blood onto uncontrolled vamps. And even then, it's usually just so that blood can be siphoned off into that Meth's pool during the influence phase... It's been suggested that a cross-table buddy with a Goth Band is very advantageous to the DoS-holder.. especially if that Goth Band can be feeding a Palla Grande with the DoS counters.. ;)

David Hammond <hamd...@MailAndNews.com> writes: > I would hate ot see Pentex be depowered to the state the now laughably > poor Misdirection is. I would rather see Misdirection just banned than > in its current state. The new Misdirection works great! At least in our playgroup. It gets rid of your preys "designated blocker" - the one combat monster riding a sport bike and/or employing Mr. Winthrop. He is left untapped to hold the fort while the other minions are decimating your grandprey. "Don't you do no bad voting, Mr. Ventrue-meister, or else Jimmy Dunn here with his bike is gonna whup yer ass!" (Misdirect Jimmy Dunn) "D'OH!" Also, it screws up part of your prey's strategy. Namely, how many minions should he leave untapped to block your actions. As a result, it makes the game less predictable - which is great in my book. In my opinion, the new Misdirection gives +1 fun! :-) HG -- hg | The brain does process all sensation, Crowley said. If the brain @iki | is fully awake and conscious of what it is doing, why on earth .fi | should it treat any sensation as a less than orgasmic experience? | - Robert Anton Wilson, "Masks of the Illuminati"

Dreams of the Sphinx is worded so that its burned when 'the third counter is added'. If counters are being moved off it, does it have to have 3 counters at one time on it to burn it, or do you just keep track mentally of how many counters HAVE been added to it? T

On 25 Apr 2001 21:57:10 +0300, jhag...@siba.fi (Janne Hagglund) wrote: >David Hammond <hamd...@MailAndNews.com> writes: > >> I would hate ot see Pentex be depowered to the state the now laughably >> poor Misdirection is. I would rather see Misdirection just banned than >> in its current state. > > > The new Misdirection works great! At least in our playgroup. > I have to agree. The old misdirection was an absolute monster! T