Okay, the new game coming out this summer is the "revised" edition of
Jyhad, except they're renaming it Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. The
library card backs will remain unchanged, but the crypt (vampire) card
backs will be changed to read "Vampire: The Eternal Struggle". Several
cards have been removed, but I am not sure which ones. Lastly, the rules
have been "streamlined". They've gotten rid of torpor and aggrivated
damage, which seem to me like integral parts of the game.
If anyone has any contradictory or otherwise new info out there, please
let me know.
Frustratedly,
Admael
Admael (adm...@aol.com) wrote:
: Okay, the new game coming out this summer is the "revised" edition of: Jyhad, except they're renaming it Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. The
: library card backs will remain unchanged, but the crypt (vampire) card
: backs will be changed to read "Vampire: The Eternal Struggle".
This is in line with what we have been told trough Official Responses
from WotC.
: Several cards have been removed, but I am not sure which ones.
This is possible. Unlike Magic, however, they would have to replace them
with entirely new (and therefore untested) cards, as there have been no
expansion sets (yet) to choose non-unbalancing cards from. Personally, I
think the card mix will stay the same with maybe a few card fixes.
: Lastly, the rules: have been "streamlined". They've gotten rid of torpor and aggrivated
: damage, which seem to me like integral parts of the game.
This would indeed be a major change, and does not fit in with what has
been officially conveyed. WotC has assured players that all current
cards will be 100% compatable with the V:TES rules. If agravated damage
and torpor were to be removed, this would break/make useless at least a
dozen cards. Do you have a source for this last bit of information, or
is it just a rumor?
Shane Travis | Natives who beat drums to drive off evil spirits
sht...@duke.usask.ca | are objects of scorn to Americans who blow horns
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | to break up traffic jams.
| -- Mary Ellen Kelly
Well, kids, it looks like our worst fears have been realized; Jyhad has now
become Magic, Jr.
Ignore the fact that it's a fundamentally better game than Magic; the sad truth
is that it didn't sell very well. In the eyes of WotC, this makes it a worse
game (since it's not making them gazillions of dollars)
Therefore, in order to entice all the twelve-year olds who are dropping all of
their allowances on Magic into buying Jyhad, they had to (in essence) "stupid
the game up". You know what I mean: faster play, take away those "confusing"
rules like torpor ("You mean, it's like, not dead?"), and redesign the game so
that it requires little or no thought to play. Oh, joy!
All I have to say is that if I ever hear about V:TES adding a "Black Coffin" or
a "Mox Stake" to the game, I'm going to scream...
RIP Jyhad,
-Joe
Man, if that happens, I'm out.
(well, technically, I'll play Jyhad the old way as long as I can find
players)
I'll buy ONE starter to read the new rules.
Until Vampire comes out I'll assume this is an inaccurate rumor. (no
disparagement to the source intended; call it wishful thinking.)
WARNING TO WOTC:
Naturally this is just a rumor and may well be false. If true, Jyhad is
dead. What makes a CCG is its players (not its marketing); if you so
disappoint the existing players so many will drop out that there will not
be a critical mass to keep it going.
Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
Admael <adm...@aol.com> wrote:
>Okay, the new game coming out this summer is the "revised" edition of
>Jyhad, except they're renaming it Vampire: The Eternal Struggle. The
>library card backs will remain unchanged, but the crypt (vampire) card>backs will be changed to read "Vampire: The Eternal Struggle". Several
>cards have been removed, but I am not sure which ones. Lastly, the rules>have been "streamlined". They've gotten rid of torpor and aggrivated
>damage, which seem to me like integral parts of the game.
This looks like a serious dose of misinformation.
Yes, the name of the game is changing. But as far as I know, we aren't
removing huge numbers of cards. While the rules are being streamlined
somewhat, I really doubt we're getting rid of basic concepts like torpor
and aggravated damage. It is true that the rulebook will have an introductory
rules set, followed by the full-fledged rules, and it's possible the basic
rules wouldn't have (say) aggravated damage, but it's not being junked
entirely.
Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote:
> This looks like a serious dose of misinformation.
>
> Yes, the name of the game is changing. But as far as I know, we aren't
> removing huge numbers of cards. While the rules are being streamlined
> somewhat, I really doubt we're getting rid of basic concepts like torpor
> and aggravated damage. It is true that the rulebook will have an introductory
> rules set, followed by the full-fledged rules, and it's possible the basic
> rules wouldn't have (say) aggravated damage, but it's not being junked
> entirely.
Peace Tom,
Thanks for the rumor control. I was worried, for a second.
Nil carborundum illigitimi,
James R. McClure Jr.
The OS/2 Apostle
<insert disclaimer here>