[SPOILER] Two new cards from the 10th anniversary set

Hello all Here is the spoiler of two of the new cards of the 10th Anniversary set. They have been published in a french magazine Lotus Noir (I think it has or will have a US version) Channel 10 2 Pool Master : unique location Tap to give a minion you control +2 Intercept for the current action. Bot usable on the first action in a minion phase. Caiaphas Smith 1 pool Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your turn, your predator takes control of him. Mathieu DEWAVRIN Baron of Nantes - Bretagne

Mathieu Dewavrin <mathieu.dewa...@ifrance.com> wrote: > Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. Yikes. Any D actions on the table? Caiaphas burns your Path. Steals the Powerbase. etc. Any blockers?

"Jozxyqk" <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> escribió en el mensaje news:B8a9d.83430$He1.3089@attbi_s01... [ quoted text not captured ] Powerbases can only be stolen/burned/discharged by vampires (except rome) But caiaphas might do a good job working for the local council( Zoning Board ) or being a filthy rich partner (vast wealth)

Smiling Tom <tma...@almadrava.net> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Or equipping with Starshell Grenade Launcher. No D actions for Caiaphas to take? OK, I tap him to give -1 stealth to my own vampire. :)

"Mathieu Dewavrin" <mathieu.dewa...@ifrance.com> wrote: > Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. Pretty weird since you lose control of him the turn right after summoning it (unless you intend to block with him). Your predator will be more than happy to see you summoning that guy. The "cannot bleed" is a huge drawback. IMHO not worth spending an action and 1 pool... JPh

[ quoted text not captured ] Note that the predator won't get a chance to use him either (unless he manages to block some action with it). The best way to get control of Caiaphas during your minion phase is to steal him, but that's probably more trouble than he's worth. Flux

"Flux" <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in message news:2sksj5F...@uni-berlin.de... > Jippi wrote: > > "Mathieu Dewavrin" <mathieu.dewa...@ifrance.com> wrote: > > > >>Caiaphas Smith > >>1 pool > >>Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > >>Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > >>each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > >>(if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > >>turn, your predator takes control of him. > > > Pretty weird since you lose control of him the turn right after summoning it > > (unless you intend to block with him). > > Your predator will be more than happy to see you summoning that guy. > > The "cannot bleed" is a huge drawback. > > IMHO not worth spending an action and 1 pool... > > Note that the predator won't get a chance to use him either (unless he > manages to block some action with it). Wow, somehow I hadn't caught that either. Yeah, someone has to manage to block with him for him to be able to take actions, unless he gets tapped some other way. You could play with Remover, for example, and tap him the same turn you recruit him, so that you'll get to keep him yourself on your next turn. But that does seem like a fair amount of setup for an ally who seems pretty tricky to use very effectively... > The best way to get control of Caiaphas during your minion phase is to steal > him, but that's probably more trouble than he's worth. Yeah, exactly. Josh caiaphas smith brown jones?

> Channel 10 > 2 Pool > Master : unique location > Tap to give a minion you control +2 Intercept for the current action. > Not usable on the first action in a minion phase. This is insulting. As if Intercept wasn´t allready powerfull enough, I guess stealth decks will have to resort to more "block fails" cards with all the huge amount of cheap intercept flying around, but then again all of those cards cost blood. I really don´t like that the game is pushed to a "non-moving" game by the developer, because intercept gets more and more powerfull and stealth (which actually keeps the game moving) isn´t improved at all. Soon enough we will have fabulous games of 5 intercept players without any sucessfull action, actually probably without any attempted action because everybody plays with Rotschrecks and the others know it :-((( -- johannes walch

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Johannes Walch wrote: > > Channel 10 > > 2 Pool > > Master : unique location > > Tap to give a minion you control +2 Intercept for the current action. > > Not usable on the first action in a minion phase. > > This is insulting. As if Intercept wasn´t allready powerfull enough, I guess > stealth decks will have to resort to more "block fails" cards with all the > huge amount of cheap intercept flying around, but then again all of those > cards cost blood. I don't really see what difference it makes. You can already get KRCG, Rumor Mill, London Evening Star, Club Zombie and WMHR. A bargain at only 11 pool! What's one more media outlet? If anything, it'll make bounceless clans that want to block things (just to stay alive) a little more viable. When I get annoyed by intercept, I just play combat. > I really don´t like that the game is pushed to a "non-moving" game by the > developer, because intercept gets more and more powerfull and stealth (which > actually keeps the game moving) isn´t improved at all. Soon enough we will > have fabulous games of 5 intercept players without any sucessfull action, > actually probably without any attempted action because everybody plays with > Rotschrecks and the others know it :-((( I'm not exactly sure the cause, but the local metagame has become a lot more intercepty in the last year. Not too long ago +1 stealth was often enough to see an action through. I used to run a stealth vote deck that had about 12 stealth cards and that sometimes seemed like too many. Now I'll put something like 24 stealth cards in a deck. That's really much more of a deck than I'd like to devote to seeing an action through, but it's great for frustrating intercept decks. Matt Morgan

"Johannes Walch" <johanne...@vekn.de> writes: > > Channel 10 > > 2 Pool > > Master : unique location > > Tap to give a minion you control +2 Intercept for the current action. > > Not usable on the first action in a minion phase. > > This is insulting. As if Intercept wasn´t allready powerfull enough, I guess > stealth decks will have to resort to more "block fails" cards with all the > huge amount of cheap intercept flying around, but then again all of those > cards cost blood. Actually, it looks like it could be kinda fun in that the stealth deck can just completely ignore it for the first action. Want to play stealth vote and call a Banishment? Do that first, call the KRC second. There's cool potential for jostling decks into making sure they do things... properly. Also, unlike several of the similar locations, it's only for minions you control. The intercept locations - at least when I've seen them used - often get passed around the table. And certainly, having the option to do so is fun for negotiation points. Since I'm not going to care too much about some actions in a turn - usually! - if people do just order the action I really, really want to block first (equipping the Soul Gem of Etrius, say), I can't use it. And I can't trade it. Don't get me wrong, I think it could be a really useful card in the right situations. But I think there's plenty of potential for it to not be as good as it might look at first. > I really don´t like that the game is pushed to a "non-moving" game by the > developer, because intercept gets more and more powerfull and stealth (which > actually keeps the game moving) isn´t improved at all. Soon enough we will > have fabulous games of 5 intercept players without any sucessfull action, > actually probably without any attempted action because everybody plays with > Rotschrecks and the others know it :-((( Well. First of all, intercept isn't as good as stealth. It's just one of those things. Sure, you can block his action. But that doesn't help you oust him, nine times out of ten, except for the occasional spate of Fame or Millicent. Intercepting his actions stops you losing (now). It doesn't make you win, ninety nine times out of a hundred. If you are packing enough intercept etc. to reliably block someone's every action (bear in mind he gets a bit of a bonus here, in that he can be bleeding in a cardless fashion whereas most intercept decks tend to use up a card or two at least), you probably can't advance. Also, I don't think it's true to say that stealth hasn't been improved - there *are* new stealth cards lurking around since WW took over. Creepshow Casino, for instance, is one of the cards I really think is cool without being stupid. There's also a fair amount of stealth - not loads, admittedly - knocking around in some cards for some disciplines. Disciplined stealth isn't doing too badly at all. Chimerstry, for example, has picked up a fair bit of stealth around the place, with a little work. Oh, and Rotschreck. If you know you're going into combat, try to play Telepathic Tracking or Psyche. (A couple of other options lurking around the place, too - Illusions of the Kindred, say.) Stops Rotschreck being a pain. (If you're playing Auspex for the TT, an Aura Reading now and then to find out what they're packing might help too!) -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Who's ever heard of that, though! EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Designing a deck that just calls votes. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D That's crazy talk, there.

Mathieu Dewavrin <mathieu.dewa...@ifrance.com> wrote in message news:<416528ae$0$25731$636a...@news.free.fr>... > Channel 10 > 2 Pool > Master : unique location > Tap to give a minion you control +2 Intercept for the current action. > Bot usable on the first action in a minion phase. Great for blocking hunts. Certain to pull lots of stealth out of S&B decks. Either that or the first minion to bleed gets trashed in combat (save those mods until after the first blocker taps).

Me: I attempt to roll for "disbelieve". Story teller: ok that a inteligence roll with a -2 "AWE-modifier" Me: My int is 11 so I need to roll a 13 to beat the BULLSHIT. Storyteller: correct Me: Well here goes nothing [throwing a D20 at the optic des-illusion called Caiaphas Smith] The die: [keeps on rolling for far to long making "Me" having sweaty hands and still keeps on rolling] Me: AAAARGG to much preasure!!!! The die: [falls under the table and comes to a final stop] Me: [looks for the result...... 15] Yes!!! [put my hands on my ears, close my eyes, shouting] LALALALALA!!! I DONT BELIEVE!!! LALALALA!!! http://oortje.bravehost.com/vampire.htm Oortje face it the card is too strong, maybe you dont see the power yet, but thrust me it only takes a few minutes (probably less) to figure out what kind of horrible combo's you can make with it.

> Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. Kudos for the developers for realizing that what VTES really needs is more ways to burn vampires. Yes. I already feel better knowing that poor Goratrix, Advanced and Protect Whine Own will be briefly joined by other burn effects. [/sarcasm] Frankly, I kind of hope this is a fake (even though its ability does not seem extremely powerful at all). I just dislike such demoralizing effects. Burning stuff is never good, things should be nice and do damage instead. [sarcasm] Proposed card for fanset: Card Title: Let God sort them out. Requires: A ready vampire. Card Type: Action Text: +2 stealth action. (D) Burn any card in play or pay a pool and (D) oust any Methuselah. ...and I never went near Disk of Joy. ;) -- Bye, Daneel

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsfjx2f...@news.chello.hu... > Frankly, I kind of hope this is a fake (even though its ability does not > seem > extremely powerful at all). I just dislike such demoralizing effects. > Burning > stuff is never good, things should be nice and do damage instead. Um, so don't block. Then you have the same effect as "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" (only you actually have an additional option you can choose). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Mathieu Dewavrin wrote: > Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. I'm assuming this text is correct and this card is included in the 10th anniversary set. If a vampire blocks Caiaphas and burns him in combat will the "Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat" effect still take place? What if the blocking vampire doesn't burn Caiaphas but plays Psyche! to restart combat? To put it more simply, if a vampire blocks Caiaphas, is there any way to avoid that vampire burning? For that matter, what if Alia plays an Auspex card "as a vampire" and blocks Caiaphas? Would she burn after combat? Matt Morgan

LSJ wrote: >> Frankly, I kind of hope this is a fake (even though its ability does not >> seem >> extremely powerful at all). I just dislike such demoralizing effects. >> Burning >> stuff is never good, things should be nice and do damage instead. >Um, so don't block. Yeah, but when Caiaphas Smith get enchanted with Lure, we're all screwed! :) Jay PS: sorry

"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@fnord.io.com> wrote in message news:Pine.LNX.4.44.04100...@fnord.io.com... > On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Mathieu Dewavrin wrote: > > > Caiaphas Smith > > 1 pool > > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > > turn, your predator takes control of him. > > I'm assuming this text is correct and this card is included in the 10th > anniversary set. > > If a vampire blocks Caiaphas and burns him in combat will the "Any vampire > blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat" effect still take place? Yes. > What if the blocking vampire doesn't burn Caiaphas but plays Psyche! to > restart combat? The new combat ends immediately -- when the vampire is burned by Caiaphas's effect. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3E79B9D6.20409%40white-wolf.com http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3F83FED1.9080007%40white-wolf.com > To put it more simply, if a vampire blocks Caiaphas, is there any way to > avoid that vampire burning? You can avoid *that* burning by burning the vampire prior to that effect (with some other effect, like agg damage), sure. But I don't think that's what you're looking for. When combat ends, the "burn that vampire" effect will find (and burn) "that vampire" if he's still in play. > For that matter, what if Alia plays an Auspex card "as a vampire" and > blocks Caiaphas? Would she burn after combat? She still blocks as an ally and is unaffected by Caiaphas's ability. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@fnord.io.com> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.44.04100...@fnord.io.com>... > To put it more simply, if a vampire blocks Caiaphas, is there any way to > avoid that vampire burning? Reform Body would work, if the vampire was untapped or could play reaction cards as if untapped.

Flux <fl...@netc.pt> wrote in message news:<2sksj5F...@uni-berlin.de>... > Jippi wrote: > > Pretty weird since you lose control of him the turn right after summoning it > > (unless you intend to block with him).... > > Note that the predator won't get a chance to use him either (unless he > manages to block some action with it). A Remover would help a methuselah hold on to him.

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:01:22 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > "Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message > news:opsfjx2f...@news.chello.hu... >> Frankly, I kind of hope this is a fake (even though its ability does not >> seem >> extremely powerful at all). I just dislike such demoralizing effects. >> Burning >> stuff is never good, things should be nice and do damage instead. > > Um, so don't block. > > Then you have the same effect as "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" > (only you actually have an additional option you can choose). I know. In fact, I don't think the card would be too strong in the average deck even with that text ("Vampires cannot block Caiaphas"). I still do not like it, however. Just as I don't like the rest of the burn vampire effects (except for stuff like Decapitate and Amaranth, which usually require significant combat setup, and have significant costs). Also, there may be cases when "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" would be actually better. Especially given the lack of mental infallibility the general human player has. If you can't block and forget, you will be reminded and the erroneous block attempt will be simply canceled. With the current text, if you forget, you may squander away a vampire for almost nothing. -- Bye, Daneel

Daneel wrote: > On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:01:22 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> Um, so don't block. >> >> Then you have the same effect as "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" >> (only you actually have an additional option you can choose). > > I know. In fact, I don't think the card would be too strong in the average > deck even with that text ("Vampires cannot block Caiaphas"). > > I still do not like it, however. Just as I don't like the rest of the burn > vampire effects (except for stuff like Decapitate and Amaranth, which > usually require significant combat setup, and have significant costs). Forcing a player to block would fall under "significant set up". > Also, there may be cases when "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" would be > actually better. Especially given the lack of mental infallibility the > general > human player has. If you can't block and forget, you will be reminded > and the > erroneous block attempt will be simply canceled. With the current text, > if you > forget, you may squander away a vampire for almost nothing. Heh. OK. That's at least a foolproof argument (for almost anything, actually). Those fools are so clever. :-) -- 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/

> Heh. OK. That's at least a foolproof argument (for almost anything, > actually). Those fools are so clever. :-) Speaking of Foolishness, how does "Caiphais o'lay" work when combined with Change of Target? Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

XZealot wrote: > Speaking of Foolishness, how does "Caiphais o'lay" work when combined > with Change of Target? Um, it follows card text? [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 02:25:44 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> I still do not like it, however. Just as I don't like the rest of the >> burn >> vampire effects (except for stuff like Decapitate and Amaranth, which >> usually require significant combat setup, and have significant costs). > > Forcing a player to block would fall under "significant set up". Indeed. But would lack "significant cost". ;) >> Also, there may be cases when "Vampires cannot block Caiaphas" would be >> actually better. Especially given the lack of mental infallibility the >> general >> human player has. If you can't block and forget, you will be reminded >> and the >> erroneous block attempt will be simply canceled. With the current text, >> if you >> forget, you may squander away a vampire for almost nothing. > > Heh. OK. That's at least a foolproof argument (for almost anything, > actually). Those fools are so clever. :-) Regardless of the pointed riposte, a repost regarding the point: more powerful effects are generally worse for (among other things) allowing a greater margin of error. Another issue might be an increased disappointment vs. satisfaction ratio. Burning a vampire may feel good, but the extent of disappointment from getting one's vampire burned probably exceeds the satisfaction of doing the burning. ;) -- Bye, Daneel

> > For that matter, what if Alia plays an Auspex card "as a vampire" and > > blocks Caiaphas? Would she burn after combat? > > She still blocks as an ally and is unaffected by Caiaphas's ability. Although using an Aus card ? How come ?? -- Deadly yours, Orpheus

Orpheus wrote: >>>For that matter, what if Alia plays an Auspex card "as a vampire" and >>>blocks Caiaphas? Would she burn after combat? >> >>She still blocks as an ally and is unaffected by Caiaphas's ability. > > > Although using an Aus card ? How come ?? She is only considered a vampire when playing the Aus card and for any related effects - ie, if the card said "this vampire gains +1 intercept". But in fact she remains an ally, and is treated as such for all other (unrelated) effects. Flux

Flux wrote: > She is only considered a vampire when playing the Aus card and for any > related effects - ie, if the card said "this vampire gains +1 > intercept". But in fact she remains an ally, and is treated as such for > all other (unrelated) effects. Correct. Playing a card as a vampire doesn't make one a vampire. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news: Fk8ad.683560$Gx4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Flux wrote: > > She is only considered a vampire when playing the Aus card and for any > > related effects - ie, if the card said "this vampire gains +1 > > intercept". But in fact she remains an ally, and is treated as such for > > all other (unrelated) effects. > > Correct. Playing a card as a vampire doesn't make one a vampire. But the Rafastio can still get damage from the Burst played as a vampire, or has there been a ruling reversal ? -- Deadly yours, Orpheus

"Orpheus" <orphe...@DEADSPAM.free.fr> a écrit dans le message de news:41697461$0$22568$636a...@news.free.fr... [ quoted text not captured ] see new card text,you dummy =)

[ quoted text not captured ] Cards an ally plays "as a vampire" are played "as a vampire". Blocking is not a card. It is therefore not a card the ally plays as a vampire. It doesn't treat the ally as a vampire. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Joshua Duffin" <duff...@bls.gov> writes: > Wow, somehow I hadn't caught that either. Yeah, someone has to manage > to block with him for him to be able to take actions, unless he gets > tapped some other way. You could play with Remover, for example, and > tap him the same turn you recruit him, so that you'll get to keep him > yourself on your next turn. But that does seem like a fair amount of > setup for an ally who seems pretty tricky to use very effectively... I was wondering about this over the weekend. Tap and Bleed used to be a moderately popular strategy. Of course, Misdirection helped out here. There are a few cards lurking around still, though, which are either multifunctional or which would allow you to tap him. I wonder if any of those could provoke an attempt to revive some of the tap and bleed decks, which seem to have been rather unpopular of late. Being able to draw through a deck's contingency of Wakes could be fun, though... Of course, the difficulty is working out good things that Caiaphas could be doing to supplement those decks. Jar the Soul and Nightmare Curse are possibilities. As is Remover, of course, as you say. Hmm. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:59:56 GMT, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> scrawled: >Orpheus wrote: >> "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news: >> Fk8ad.683560$Gx4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... >> >>>Flux wrote: >>> >>>>She is only considered a vampire when playing the Aus card and for any >>>>related effects - ie, if the card said "this vampire gains +1 >>>>intercept". But in fact she remains an ally, and is treated as such for >>>>all other (unrelated) effects. >>> >>>Correct. Playing a card as a vampire doesn't make one a vampire. >> >> But the Rafastio can still get damage from the Burst played as a vampire, or >> has there been a ruling reversal ? > >Cards an ally plays "as a vampire" are played "as a vampire". >Blocking is not a card. It is therefore not a card the ally plays >as a vampire. It doesn't treat the ally as a vampire. as another further possible clarification: the auspex card is the only thing that is treating Alia (the 'she' above) as a vampire. Caiphas is not. salem domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm (replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)

Mathieu Dewavrin <mathieu.dewa...@ifrance.com> wrote in message news:<416528ae$0$25731$636a...@news.free.fr>... > Hello all > > Here is the spoiler of two of the new cards of the 10th Anniversary set. > They have been published in a french magazine Lotus Noir (I think it has > or will have a US version) > > Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire blocking Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. > The best use for him, that i can think of right now, is to make him rich (vast wealth), equip cheap equipment each turn and then let him play rave to move the equipment to your other minions. Leather jackets would be great, as they are quite usefull a lot of times and especially when you just let Caiaphas do all the work and you don't lose valuable vampire actions, but Caiaphas equiping with a leather jacket would possibly mean that you will lose control of him at the begining of your next untap phase. So, i guess equiping him with a leather jacket doesn't worth the trouble.

emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote in message news:<75bdf7ed.04100...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I wanted to get a clarification on this. As far as I understand it, when you recruit an ally, he is immediatly put in your uncontrolled region. So can Remover be used to tap him the same turn you bring him out? He is a minion, but he is considered uncontrolled. If you could untap him, the same logic would entail that you could use Remover to untap one of your face down crypt cards in your uncontrolled region, which seems slightly silly. Eldacar

Eldacar wrote: > emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote in message news:<75bdf7ed.04100...@posting.google.com>... >>A Remover would help a methuselah hold on to him. > > I wanted to get a clarification on this. As far as I understand it, > when you recruit an ally, he is immediatly put in your uncontrolled > region. So can Remover be used to tap him the same turn you bring him > out? He is a minion, but he is considered uncontrolled. He is controlled and is considered controlled. He is only placed in the uncontrolled region to indicate that he cannot act. He is placed there face up to indicate that he is controlled. Remover can target him just fine. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Eldacar wrote: >> emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote in message news:<75bdf7ed.04100...@posting.google.com>... >>>A Remover would help a methuselah hold on to him. >> >> I wanted to get a clarification on this. As far as I understand it, >> when you recruit an ally, he is immediatly put in your uncontrolled >> region. So can Remover be used to tap him the same turn you bring him >> out? He is a minion, but he is considered uncontrolled. > He is controlled and is considered controlled. > He is only placed in the uncontrolled region to indicate that he cannot > act. He is placed there face up to indicate that he is controlled. But it's also important for the card text of Abomination :)

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<hMU9d.681026$Gx4.5...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > XZealot wrote: > > Speaking of Foolishness, how does "Caiphais o'lay" work when combined > > with Change of Target? > > Um, it follows card text? Which means, that the combat and action end, but not cancelled, so the vamp burns, yes? Or is it because of the errata that says 'use after a successful block', so the vamp gets burn. blah, Jamie Seppo Prince of Gawler First Come, First Staked What the Hell is that?!?! Some kind of sick vampire humour?

Jamie The Seppo wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<hMU9d.681026$Gx4.5...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > >>XZealot wrote: >> >>>Speaking of Foolishness, how does "Caiphais o'lay" work when combined >>>with Change of Target? >> >>Um, it follows card text? > > > Which means, that the combat and action end, but not cancelled, so the > vamp burns, yes? > Or is it because of the errata that says 'use after a successful > block', so the vamp gets burn. There is no errata for CoT that says "use after a successful block' -- that's card text, not errata. [ quoted text not captured ]

Well the thirst thing i was think about was using him with an bum's rush or with and amubush. just add in some manuevers and dodges and your off to make the world being covered in ashes. try getting him with an madness network action and your off to have some fun. he really is to powerfull

----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Wiggers" <borgi...@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:27 AM Subject: Re: [SPOILER] Two new cards from the 10th anniversary set Caiaphas Smith 1 pool Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver each combat. Any vampire *blocking* Caiaphas is burned after the combat (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your turn, your predator takes control of him. > Well the thirst thing i was think about was using him with an bum's > rush or with and amubush. Ok, no block. > just add in some manuevers and dodges and your off to make the world > being covered in ashes. Or people just don't block and play a ranged strike, killing the poor bugger. > try getting him with an madness network action and your off to have > some fun. Unless you realize he is an ally, and not a malkavian, so can't act out of turn, and thus will be untapped at the start of your turn, and will therefore be moving to your pred. > he really is to powerfull Except if other people realize not blocking him is a good idea. Also the setup to actually keep him is kinda extensive for what he does. -Bram Vink

borgi...@hotmail.com (Paul Wiggers) wrote in message news:<87f0fbf9.04101...@posting.google.com>... > Well the thirst thing i was think about was using him with an bum's > rush or with and amubush. > > just add in some manuevers and dodges and your off to make the world > being covered in ashes. > Nah, put him in a Brujah deck and Ghoul him so that he can play Thrown Sewer Lids. Fun! Fun! [ quoted text not captured ]

On 20 Oct 2004 01:55:44 -0700, jja....@hccnet.nl (Darky) scrawled: >> try getting him with an madness network action and your off to have >> some fun. > >Unless you realize he is an ally, and not a malkavian, so can't act out >of turn, and thus will be untapped at the start of your turn, and will >therefore be moving to your pred. i think he means when someone else has used him and he's tapped, you steal him OOT with a madness network action far mastery or restructure. then he untaps in your untap phase, and you get to...umm...yeah. do that thing that everyone will want to block. whatever that is. Arson Montreal or something. hardly broken, but at least the method was viable. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

salem <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<iguen0liic491ifsh...@4ax.com>... > On 20 Oct 2004 01:55:44 -0700, jja....@hccnet.nl (Darky) scrawled: > > >> try getting him with an madness network action and your off to have > >> some fun. > > > >Unless you realize he is an ally, and not a malkavian, so can't act out > >of turn, and thus will be untapped at the start of your turn, and will > >therefore be moving to your pred. > > i think he means when someone else has used him and he's tapped, you > steal him OOT with a madness network action far mastery or > restructure. then he untaps in your untap phase, and you get > to...umm...yeah. do that thing that everyone will want to block. > whatever that is. Arson Montreal or something. I actually doubt he means stealing it with a madness action. Even Paul wouldn't think that was a viable/reliable way of getting your 'broken' ally in play :) Even if it would be stealing-the-guy-after-you-lose-it-and-someone-got-it-to-work the madness bit would still be rather obsolete. :) > hardly broken, but at least the method was viable. :) Or maybe just not thought out well :) -Bram Vink

jja....@hccnet.nl (Darky) wrote in message news:<93148a54.04102...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] I think he thought (great conversation this) that recruiting it out of your turn would get rid of the moving...but as it moves at the start of your turn, instead of at the end of your turn that won't work either... W

jja....@hccnet.nl (Darky) wrote in message news:<93148a54.04102...@posting.google.com>... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Wiggers" <borgi...@hotmail.com> > Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:27 AM > Subject: Re: [SPOILER] Two new cards from the 10th anniversary set > > Caiaphas Smith > 1 pool > Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > each combat. Any vampire *blocking* Caiaphas is burned after the combat > (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > turn, your predator takes control of him. It's obvious this card is to be used with Wave of Insanity. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 22 Oct 2004 09:48:15 -0700, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com (XZealot) wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Lobotomy, actually. http://monger.vekn.org/showcard.html?ID=950 Lobotomy Type(s): Action Modifier Discipline(s): Vicissitude Rarity: Rare Artist(s): Drew Tucker Set(s): Sabbat War Card Text: Only usable when recruiting an ally. If the action is successful, put this card on the ally and tap the ally. Actions that require Dominate or Presence do not affect this ally. This ally has -1 bleed and cannot use maneuvers.

A ravnos stealth reducer deck "could" make a good use of him

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:29:48 -0400, The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> scrawled: >On 22 Oct 2004 09:48:15 -0700, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com (XZealot) >wrote: >>> Caiaphas Smith >>> 1 pool >>> Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed >>> Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver >>> each combat. Any vampire *blocking* Caiaphas is burned after the combat >>> (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your >>> turn, your predator takes control of him. > >>It's obvious this card is to be used with Wave of Insanity. > >Lobotomy, actually. oooooh. and here i was thinking my lobotomies weren't that great, right next to my malleable visages. hang on. malleable visage. someone blocks caiphas, you malleate it over to a vic guy...there is no block combat, the blocker burns before the malleable combat can occur. could i get a confirmation on this, lsj? or would the blocker burn after the malleable combat instead? (malleable visage being normally screwed by the malleator not becoming the acting minion, unlike mask 1000 faces, but in this case it's all gold!) [ quoted text not captured ]

"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:mscsn05i005vbtht0...@4ax.com... > >On 22 Oct 2004 09:48:15 -0700, X_Ze...@cox-internet.com (XZealot) > >>> Caiaphas Smith > >>> 1 pool > >>> Unique mortal with 2 life 1 strength 0 bleed > >>> Caiaphas may strike for 1R damage. Caiaphas get an optional maneuver > >>> each combat. Any vampire *blocking* Caiaphas is burned after the combat > >>> (if any). Caiaphas cannot bleed. If he is untapped at the start of your > >>> turn, your predator takes control of him. > hang on. malleable visage. > > someone blocks caiphas, you malleate it over to a vic guy...there is > no block combat, the blocker burns before the malleable combat can > occur. > > could i get a confirmation on this, lsj? Yes. It is correct. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

In message <2u6sprF...@uni-berlin.de>, "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about: >"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:mscsn05i005vbtht0...@4ax.com... >> someone blocks caiphas, you malleate it over to a vic guy...there is >> no block combat, the blocker burns before the malleable combat can >> occur. >> >> could i get a confirmation on this, lsj? > >Yes. >It is correct. Now you just need to figure out something worth blocking for a minion that can't bleed and can't diablerize to do. =) -- Derek a host is a host from coast to coast and no one will talk to a host that's close unless the host that isn't close is busy, hung, or dead

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: > In message <2u6sprF...@uni-berlin.de>, > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> mumbled something about: > > >"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >news:mscsn05i005vbtht0...@4ax.com... > >> someone blocks caiphas, you malleate it over to a vic guy...there is > >> no block combat, the blocker burns before the malleable combat can > >> occur. > >> > >> could i get a confirmation on this, lsj? > > > >Yes. > >It is correct. > > Now you just need to figure out something worth blocking for a minion > that can't bleed and can't diablerize to do. =) Go get Powerbase: Montreal Arson Cairo Int'l Airport (anyone ever played this card?) Bring out Aranthebes, the Immortal Get equipment and then Rave Scrounging There's a few off the top of my head. None are probably worth losing a vampire over, although maybe weenies or embraces might sacrifice themselves. I wouldn't stack the deck full of Malleable Visages. Matt Morgan

In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.04102...@eris.io.com>, "Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@eris.io.com> mumbled something about: >On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: > >> Now you just need to figure out something worth blocking for a minion >> that can't bleed and can't diablerize to do. =) > >Go get Powerbase: Montreal Not a big deal since you can just take it back. >Arson No location is worth a vampire. >Cairo Int'l Airport (anyone ever played this card?) Equates to a bleed for 1. >Bring out Aranthebes, the Immortal Can be removed with a built-in action. >Get equipment and then Rave Only good if you can find equipment that Must Be Blocked(tm) -- but a lot of that stuff requires a specific clan. Dangerous, as enough equipment on the minion can end up reading "Block this action to cause your prey to have wasted 5 pool. Burn the blocker." >Scrounging People put this card in decks? >There's a few off the top of my head. None are probably worth losing a >vampire over, although maybe weenies or embraces might sacrifice >themselves. I wouldn't stack the deck full of Malleable Visages. Embraces are there to be imploded, but getting them to block is sometimes tricky. 1- and 2-caps are also there to be imploded, so that even makes him slightly worse -- he'll be ignored until he does something that matters, then someone will ditch Franciscus or Feo Ramos. Can't figure out a reason to put Caiaphas in a deck, personally. The requirement of including insta-tap tech puts him in the "rather have cards that win" category... especially since there's always a chance that you accidentally come up with nothing for him to do on a turn. Oops. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:41:28 -0400, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> scrawled: >In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.04102...@eris.io.com>, >"Matthew T. Morgan" <far...@eris.io.com> mumbled something about: > >>On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: >> >>> Now you just need to figure out something worth blocking for a minion >>> that can't bleed and can't diablerize to do. =) >> >>Go get Powerbase: Montreal > >Not a big deal since you can just take it back. i'm not going to bother looking it up, but off the top of my head i'm pretty sure all the powerbases* require a vampire to do the action. allies aren't good enough. * and by this i mean all the ones that actually see play. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: >> > > Can't figure out a reason to put Caiaphas in a deck, personally. The > requirement of including insta-tap tech puts him in the "rather have > cards that win" category... especially since there's always a chance > that you accidentally come up with nothing for him to do on a turn. > Oops. > What everyone has been saying, is that Caiaphas is a) Hard to use, b) Hard to keep. Let’s assume that you would put some ok things for Caiaphas to do in a deck, if you were going to include him at all. Now let’s look at what happens if he doesn't get to block something. He goes around the table acting as a free blocker for everyone, at the same rate as the Coven generally, minus turns where he actually gets to block stuff. For some decks (slow moving decks that need defense), that could be an advantage. For any deck that doesn't have the best answer for swarm bleed, that’s an advantage. With this setup, if your deck has some reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff then I'd say he's a pretty good play. But that’s the best reason I've got. Colin Strauss Riggs

In message <opsgjmquckrt49mu@navarroxp>, "Colin Riggs" <colin...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: >>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: >>> >> Can't figure out a reason to put Caiaphas in a deck, personally. The >> requirement of including insta-tap tech puts him in the "rather have >> cards that win" category... especially since there's always a chance >> that you accidentally come up with nothing for him to do on a turn. >> Oops. > >For some decks (slow moving decks that need defense), that could be an >advantage. For any deck that doesn't have the best answer for swarm bleed, >that’s an advantage. With this setup, if your deck has some reasonable >plan of having Caiaphas do stuff then I'd say he's a pretty good play. But the point I'm trying to make is that any set of cards you include that generate a "reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff" is also going to cut way too heavily into the "playing a deck that can win" portion of your deck. pesky 90 card rule. :) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:19:22 -0400, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > In message <opsgjmquckrt49mu@navarroxp>, > "Colin Riggs" <colin...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: > >>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Derek Ray wrote: >>>> >>> Can't figure out a reason to put Caiaphas in a deck, personally. The >>> requirement of including insta-tap tech puts him in the "rather have >>> cards that win" category... especially since there's always a chance >>> that you accidentally come up with nothing for him to do on a turn. >>> Oops. >> >> For some decks (slow moving decks that need defense), that could be an >> advantage. For any deck that doesn't have the best answer for swarm >> bleed, >> that’s an advantage. With this setup, if your deck has some reasonable >> plan of having Caiaphas do stuff then I'd say he's a pretty good play. > > But the point I'm trying to make is that any set of cards you include > that generate a "reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff" is also > going to cut way too heavily into the "playing a deck that can win" > portion of your deck. > > pesky 90 card rule. :) > Everyone hates it, don't worry. I'm saying, for certain types of decks, all you need are 4-5 cards for Caiaphas usage. Now it's true, those should probably all be conditioning, but if your deck wants to give the table an extra blocker, and you can get can get some side use out of him, then he (and the 5 card slots) worth it. Colin Strauss Riggs

> But the point I'm trying to make is that any set of cards you include > that generate a "reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff" is also > going to cut way too heavily into the "playing a deck that can win" > portion of your deck. Not necessarily. I think this "unwallpapers" a number of cards which can be (D) actioned, but not removed by that (D) action. Powerbases that wouldn't otherwise be played because of their disadvantage now have a reason to hit the table if you include him. If Caphaias has nothing to do, go (D) your own location. If he does, well, do it. Now you've always got him when you need him. Seems easy enough to me, and it doesn't require more than say, 2-3 card slots total (including Caphaias). Ankur Gupta Prince of West Lafayette, IN

In message <2so1o0lk9jgnbd11o...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes: >But the point I'm trying to make is that any set of cards you include >that generate a "reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff" is also >going to cut way too heavily into the "playing a deck that can win" >portion of your deck. Assuming that a "Memories of Mortality" ally deck were still to be viable, I wonder if Caiaphas would be a worthy inclusion. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Who's ever heard of that, though! EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 Designing a deck that just calls votes. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D That's crazy talk, there.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, James Coupe wrote: > Assuming that a "Memories of Mortality" ally deck were still to be > viable, I wonder if Caiaphas would be a worthy inclusion. Hah! Now my ally who can't bleed but burns your vampires if they block can't be blocked by your vampires. You lose. I win. Matt Morgan P.S. It's a winner provided you don't buy any vampires and get Jake to recruit your other allies. Wendell Delburton, Akhenaten...Hellhound. Ooooh yeah!

In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.041028...@fnord.io.com>, Matthew T. Morgan <far...@io.com> writes: >On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, James Coupe wrote: >> Assuming that a "Memories of Mortality" ally deck were still to be >> viable, I wonder if Caiaphas would be a worthy inclusion. > >Hah! Now my ally who can't bleed but burns your vampires if they block >can't be blocked by your vampires. You lose. I win. I was thinking more "Maneuever + Ranged Damage" = A way to annoy a vampire if insufficient Memories of Mortality turn up at a given point. e.g. You finish off Ozmo who has a Memories on him, but you can't start on Roxanne just yet because you haven't played one on her. Oh, rush card (potentially another maneuver off that), maneuever to long, 1R ping. Also, if you put something sufficiently nasty on him (e.g. an Ivory Bow) and have him hunt down the vampire with a Memories on them, it's also an interesting trade off of "Do I let him torporise that Memories-ed vampire, or do I block with someone else and have them burn?" Currently, you'd probably just block such a rush with another vampire - if you could. I'm not saying it's the greatest possibility in the world, mind, but it might be an interesting avenue to explore. [ quoted text not captured ]

Ankur Gupta <agu...@cs.duke.edu> wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.4.60.04...@peso.cs.duke.edu>... > > But the point I'm trying to make is that any set of cards you include > > that generate a "reasonable plan of having Caiaphas do stuff" is also > > going to cut way too heavily into the "playing a deck that can win" > > portion of your deck. > > Not necessarily. I think this "unwallpapers" a number of cards which can > be (D) actioned, but not removed by that (D) action. Powerbases that > wouldn't otherwise be played because of their disadvantage now have a > reason to hit the table if you include him. If Caphaias has nothing to do, > go (D) your own location. If he does, well, do it. Now you've always got > him when you need him. most powerbases require "a minion another methuselah controls" or a vampire or something...i couldn't find a lot of useful things (at first sight) W