Fame & Comabt Deck - Broken?

Quick thought about the Fame/Combat Decks. Aside from the obvious loss of 3 pool, let's not forget that each Methuselah loses 1 pool while it sits there. I don't have to be the person that rescues it from torpor or commits diablarie. I'd rather block that sucker when it tries to hunt (or Rush it) and send it back to torpor again for the obvious reasons. I'd think I could build a combat deck that does this with 5-6 fames, and might only have to discard one of them. True, this is speculation until proven. If I can make the time, I'll attempt to build this deck. Hmmm, Giovanni.. Bernard Bresnahan Bern...@yahoo.com -----Original Message----- From: Jasper Phillips <phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU> >In article <35C14CB6...@uswest.net>, >Eric Freeman <eric...@uswest.net> wrote: >>Jasper Phillips wrote: >> >>> I give up. If you honestly think this would work well, let alone >>> be broken, I don't think I can convince you of anything, because >>> I truly believe you simply have no grasp of the game. >> >> I now concede that it may not be broken, however your grasp ofthe game >>may be in >>question if you do not see that it is a viable >>concept. >> >>Eric > >My grasp of _NL_ Jyhad is in question by you? I can live with that. > >The new Fame _can_ be used effectively (though not brokenly), but I'll >stick by my guns that basing a deck around it won't work very well. >So far as I've been able to tell, only you and Legbiter think otherwise. > >Maybe my deck construction skills are simply limited, but I honestly >cannot come up with a way to manipulate Fame like you've described, >and still be able to effectively Rush. Furthermore I honestly believe >you are not a good judge of how a _NL_ combat deck works considering you're >playing 4CL, the fact that combat decks basicly suck under 4CL (since >they can't deal with S:CE), your past posts about the "Fearsome" >Toreador with Flamethrowers, the "benefits" of stealth in a Bruise >& Bleed deck, etc. > >To put it simply a good NL combat deck is not a matter of simply throwing >in large numbers of the relavent cards! It is considerably more difficult, >and takes up considerably more deck space than I think you realize -- >enough that there isn't enough room for the Fame combo you outlined. >Consider that the people who arguably know the most about Rush Decks, >Pater Bakija & James Hamblin, and have the most success with them that >I've ever heard of, have _also_ expressed their doubts that it would >work at all, and explained their reasons succintly for doubting. > >Now, if you can make such a deck work, more power to you. I would >like to see such a thing. > >-- > /\ Jasper Phillips > /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz > j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. > * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

In article <6q3ho4$omh$1...@server3.mich.com>, Bernie Bresnahan <ber...@mich.com> writes >Quick thought about the Fame/Combat Decks. Aside >from the obvious loss of 3 pool, let's not forget that each >Methuselah loses 1 pool while it sits there. I don't >have to be the person that rescues it from torpor or >commits diablarie. > I think a lot of the point about the Fame deck is to put it onto an inherently weak deck and keep them "alive" ie not burned/diablerised but just bounce them in and out of torpor. And make sure at the end of your turn that it's OUT of torpor, and don't let it go back in until your turn if it looks like someone is going to burn them UNLESS the pool loss it causes them is great or you have another Fame and weak vampire to play it on. >I'd rather block that sucker when it tries to hunt >(or Rush it) and send it back to torpor again for >the obvious reasons. I'd think I could build a combat >deck that does this with 5-6 fames, and might only >have to discard one of them. The problem is, it's still going to cost a fair amount of blood. Taking for the moment that the reason they're going to torpor is because of blood loss (from a potence deck rather than an aggro damage deck), then you're not going to be able to force them to pay for the rescue (which you could do normally). This means that you start losing blood from your vampires which isn't that easy to recoup in a combat deck. You can't really afford to "waste" actions on hunting. Taste of Vitae would be a viable thing to use but for two things. First of all, the vampires losing the blood are rescuing vampires not getting into combat - or when they do get into combat (ie you rotate vampires from combat-rescue and back again) they could be substantially weaker - a good 2 blood lost could hurt a combat deck rather a lot, especially if it has to pay for effects. Secondly, if you're using a weak vampire who is going to torpor from blood loss, they run out of blood for you to claim back. Damn. Then you have to start hitting on their other vampires to get the blood back. But this doesn't make the deck non-viable. Hell, no. I think the deck would be competitive and fun to play but far from broken. If you're doing it from aggravated damage, then you have similar problems. Aggro damage normally costs a bit from your blood which you'll find it hard to recoup. Same problems as above with getting it back but this time with, say, Gangrel, the first point of aggro damage doesn't actually inflict damage on them. Easier to force them to pay for the rescue, then, but you can't claim back the blood for your bone spur or claws or whatever with a Taste. And any substantial methods of reclaiming blood other ways (Restoration, for example) make it harder to pull off combat. Gangrel combat *can* be (rather than "is") pretty difficult anyway since they can barely deal with S:CE or Dodge. Dog Pack is expensive at best. -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia) Change nospam to obeah to reply Vampire: Elder Kindred Network madnessnetwork.hexagon.net

James Coupe <ve...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote: > [snip] > back but this time with, say, Gangrel, the first point of aggro damage > doesn't actually inflict damage on them. It does inflict damage on them. But, since it cannot be healed, they don't have to burn a blood trying to heal it. (I know you know how this works - I'm just trying to make sure no one gets confused by your "shorthand" :-). -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings: http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum