rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Investments

13 messages from 8 participants · 13 August 2002 – 15 August 2002
original thread on Google Groups

Jozxyqk

Now that the set has been pre-pre-released, and we've seen a few cards, I want to ask a question I buried in a reaction to some spoilers awhile back. Secret Horde now says "Investment" right on it. Short-term and Protracted are obviously also Investments. What other cards are considered to be Investments, for the purposes of Alan Sovereign's ability? Any cards that weren't reprinted in Camarilla? Will Slave Auction (I'm not sure if this has been reprinted or not, but I haven't seen one) be considered an Investment, for example?

LSJ

[ quoted text not captured ] Anything that says it is an investment is. Everything else is not. Like "gun" for ammo. If it says it is a gun, it is. If not, it isn't. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Jozxyqk

Quoth the wise LSJ: > Anything that says it is an investment is. > Everything else is not. > Like "gun" for ammo. If it says it is a gun, it is. If not, it isn't. Well, my question was if anything not reprinted was going to have a retroactive text change. I guess the answer to that part is no. However, since all the card texts for Camarilla are not easily accessible yet, and since alot of "official card texts" have changed (however minutely), can you tell us which cards now say they are Investments? Are there any cards other than Secret Horde which are Investments, but not intuitively from card name? It's not a huge deal since it only affects one card (right now), but it was a matter of curiosity. I don't mean to be annoying about it.

LSJ

Jozxyqk wrote: > Well, my question was if anything not reprinted was going to have a > retroactive text change. I guess the answer to that part is no. No errata has been issued for any as yet, right. > However, since all the card texts for Camarilla are not easily accessible > yet, and since alot of "official card texts" have changed (however minutely), > can you tell us which cards now say they are Investments? Are there > any cards other than Secret Horde which are Investments, but not intuitively > from card name? The complete list of cards (through the Camarilla Edition) which identify themselves as "investments": Protracted Investment Secret Horde Short-Term Investment [ quoted text not captured ]

Shawn D

Shane Hamish William Travis (sht...@duke.usask.ca) wrote... > Thus, if you have the ability to play two Masters (the most currently > allowable) you may take up to two blood total from any combination of > investments (yes, they may both be from the same investment) - one per > maeter card not played. and L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) wrote... > This typically means only one blood from investments per turn, > but could be two (one from two or two from one) if you have > Anson or Rumors of Gehenna. Forgive my ignorance, but why is two master phases "the most currently allowable"? Ok...maybe it's very UNLIKELY but if you had a Rumors and Sarrasine and/or Huitzilopochtli, you could have more. Rumors and Anson set your master phase to two where Sarrasine and Huitzilopochtli add a master phase action. It's fun having three master phase actions. Practically, it may be difficult to obtain them though. Don't mind me....just my $0.02. -Shawn

Roger Carhult

> Forgive my ignorance, but why is two master phases "the most currently > allowable"? > > Ok...maybe it's very UNLIKELY but if you had a Rumors and Sarrasine > and/or Huitzilopochtli, you could have more. Rumors and Anson set your > master phase to two where Sarrasine and Huitzilopochtli add a master > phase action. > > It's fun having three master phase actions. Practically, it may be > difficult to obtain them though. > > Don't mind me....just my $0.02. Well Parthenon is certainly not unseen together with Anson either, so that's 3 right there. Roger

Xian

[snip ancient posts from google] > Forgive my ignorance, but why is two master phases "the most currently > allowable"? It *was* when these posts were made. Check the dates. I'm not reading the newsgroup via Google, but you obviously are. LSJ rarely posts from his .edu account, and there was a point when 2 were the most currently allowable. So, in the future, when you read a thread, make sure you look at when it was posted before you respond. At a guess, those are from, like, 1994 or 1995, before the Parthenon came out in AH. Xian dated

Halcyan 2

>> Forgive my ignorance, but why is two master phases "the most currently >> allowable"? > >It *was* when these posts were made. Check the dates. I'm not reading the >newsgroup via Google, but you obviously are. LSJ rarely posts from his .edu >account, and there was a point when 2 were the most currently allowable. > Yep. Let's take a trip back in time to the wonderful year of 1995: From: L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) Subject: Re: Investments Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad View: Complete Thread (8 articles) | Original Format Date: 1995/06/05 DUE...@AC.GRIN.EDU (Duelist League) writes: >Can you take blood off of more than one Investment at a time? Assume no >master card has been played for the turn. >I think you can; there's nothing on the cards that say you can't. The card says "instead of playing a card, you may take a blood" You can only get one blood for each card you don't play. This typically means only one blood from investments per turn, but could be two (one from two or two from one) if you have Anson or Rumors of Gehenna. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) | These opinions are mine and Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rulemonger. | are subject to card text. Halcyan 2

Xian

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020813190644...@mb-fy.aol.com... > Yep. Let's take a trip back in time to the wonderful year of 1995: You were, what...*three* years old? :) Xian

salem

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D592611...@white-wolf.com>... > The complete list of cards (through the Camarilla Edition) which identify > themselves as "investments": > > Protracted Investment > Secret Horde > Short-Term Investment i assume that, barring any future errata, Ventrue Investment doesn't count, even though it has investment in the name? i am guessing investments now have "investment" in bold in their text, much like "contract" and "discipline". salem. i like ventrue investments.

Alex Broadhead

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D592611...@white-wolf.com>... > Jozxyqk wrote: > > Well, my question was if anything not reprinted was going to have a > > retroactive text change. I guess the answer to that part is no. > > No errata has been issued for any as yet, right. <snip> > The complete list of cards (through the Camarilla Edition) which identify > themselves as "investments": > > Protracted Investment > Secret Horde > Short-Term Investment Well, I guess it's up to me as occasional newsletteer to ask: Any chance Ventrue Investment will be added to the list of "investments" (via errata, I guess)? Not that anyone plays with them or anything, though if Mr. Sovereign does turn out to have the stats I've seen reported (AUS DOM for pre, Ven, 6) I suppose that might change, as he should fit in a !Ventrue deck pretty spiffily. Thanks, Alex

LSJ

salem wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3D592611...@white-wolf.com>... > > > The complete list of cards (through the Camarilla Edition) which identify > > themselves as "investments": > > > > Protracted Investment > > Secret Horde > > Short-Term Investment > > i assume that, barring any future errata, Ventrue Investment doesn't > count, even though it has investment in the name? The list above is complete, as stated. > i am guessing investments now have "investment" in bold in their text, > much like "contract" and "discipline". Correct. Like "gun". See previous messages in this thread. [ quoted text not captured ]

Shawn D

"Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote in message news:<ajc2lu$1aj6qv$1...@ID-123937.news.dfncis.de>... > So, in the future, when you read a thread, make sure you look at when it was > posted before you respond. At a guess, those are from, like, 1994 or 1995, > before the Parthenon came out in AH. Roger that and will do. Didn't notice the ancient dates. I think I've been taking the dates of all the posts for granted. -Shawn D