LSJ: picky questions

Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have come up in our playgroup. A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both for the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his strike? (what if he says please really nicely? 8-) ) A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use it, and then play another combat card for a manuever? A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive. Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about. Please also reply by email... Dan adz...@dartmouth.edu

DHollis915 <dholl...@aol.com> wrote: > Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have come > up in our playgroup. I'm L. Scott but I'll answer your Questions. > A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both for > the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his strike? > (what if he says please really nicely? 8-) ) I am pretty sure you can only use one weapon special each round, or wording to that effect. > A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a > combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use it, and > then play another combat card for a manuever? Yes. Optional means it is your choice. You might want to use a card which has another special and save the other manuever for a later time. > A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into > such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive. > Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in > by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated > damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but > I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about. Well the combo you mention provides a way of doing that. I can't see how a combat deck can be _that_ abusive. Now a Misdirection, Sleeping Mind combo in a bleed deck..... > Please also reply by email... > Dan > adz...@dartmouth.edu -- Jeff Endres

DHollis915 wrote: > > A minion has 2 weapons, both of which grant manuevers. Can he use both for > the manuevers, thereby forcing himself to use both, and losing his strike? > (what if he says please really nicely? 8-) ) No. Once you lock yourself into a strike, you cannot use an effect that would lock you into using a different strike. > A minion cannot cancel his own manuevers. However, if a minion plays a > combat card that grants an optional manuever, can he choose not to use it, and > then play another combat card for a manuever? Yes. > A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into > such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive. > Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in > by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated > damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but > I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about. This combo is legal. The unpreventable damage can be converted to normal damage (with Skin of Night or by Merrill's special ability, for example). > Please also reply by email... > Dan > adz...@dartmouth.edu -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team

Jeff Endres wrote: > >DHollis915 <dholl...@aol.com> wrote: >>Hi LSJ. I'd like to get a couple rulings on a few situations that have >>come up in our playgroup. > I'm L. Scott but I'll answer your Questions. No, *I'm* the real LSJ! -Robert

Dan wrote: "A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive. Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), but I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about." As Jeff Endres wrote somewhere below, it is very difficult to envision _any_ combat deck as abusive, as combat decks are so fundamentally screwed from the get go. If a good combat deck can utilize a cool angle (like Drawing out the Beast+Dawn Opps), all it is doing is its job, yet it still will probably have trouble actually winning a game. In this particular instance, the only clan who can reliably use DotB+DO are the Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way to deal with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy and extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by S:CE cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning. Plus, Dawn Opperations only works if you block the acting vampire. As the Gangrel are pretty much the only clan who can use this combo (other than some large Nosferatu), and the Gangrel really can't do anything that you need to block _don't block them_. If you really don't want a particular vampire to get torporized, don't use them to block any vampire with superior Fortitude (as with inferior for, you can back out after they play DO). What could the Gangrel be doing that you so desperately need to block them? Bleeding for 1? Not trying to block will stop this combo totally dead, regardless of what deck you are playing, and as it is highly likely that the vampires who can pull this combo off probably aren't doing anything that you need to block from the beginning, it probably won't hurt much, and probably much less than getting your vampire torporized. To summarize: Don't block! Use S:CE cards. Don't block! Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com "I was satisfied with my life before I ate Strawberry Cream Puff." -Shonen Knife

PDB6 wrote: > > Dan wrote: > "A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into > such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline abusive. >The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by S:CE > cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly > concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning. The combo still works perfectly with S:CE! I built my first one a couple of years ago a a S:CE screw deck. The DotB deals its one unpreventable [agg due to DO] damage at the *end of the round*. A Strike of S:CE ends the round. Look at L. Scott's Rules Outline to see that S:CE takes you to the End of Round section where you *apply end of round effects*. In fact, my version has my acting minion playing a FoM for a strike which allows me to continue with the action in the first place at +1 stealth while the blocking minion takes an unpreventable agg and goes to torpor. Opponents usually realize very quickly that they the action will succeed anyway so there is no sense losing a vampire over it. Soon they stop blocking. > To summarize: > > Don't block! This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise + Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately, the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls, Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a difficult deck to play and win with. -Robert Goudie

Robert Goudie wrote: "The combo still works perfectly with S:CE! I built my first one a couple of years ago a a S:CE screw deck. The DotB deals its one unpreventable [agg due to DO] damage at the *end of the round*. A Strike of S:CE ends the round. Look at L. Scott's Rules Outline to see that S:CE takes you to the End of Round section where you *apply end of round effects*." Goodness, you are correct. I completely spaced on that angle when I was writing this morning. Doh. Regardless, the main point is don't block this sort of deck. If it is bleeding you, either ignore it or deflect it. If they are really bothering you, Rush them and kill them. All you have to do to avoid getting killed by this deck is to not block a vampire with both superior ANI and superior FOR, and you'll be just fine. [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6 wrote: > In this particular instance, the only clan who can reliably use > DotB+DO are the > Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way > to deal > with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy > and > extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by > S:CE > cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are > particularly > concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning. > 1st: Ravnos have a lot of mid-size vamps with ANI FOR, so they are also very good at playing this combo 2nd: S:CE shuts down this combo? Are you sure? See this article from LSJ: (Dejanews: Search for LSJ and Drawing out the Beast) Subject: Re: S:CE and DotB From: vte...@wizards.com (LSJ (VtES Rep)) Date: 1997/09/15 Message-ID: <5vjh6o$7...@news.wizards.com> Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad [More Headers] Jeffrey Endres wrote: > > Quicksilver <michae...@lmco.com> wrote: > > > Will Drawing out the Beast at superior > > > still deal damage when a S:CE is played? > Drawing out the Beast is an end of _round_ effect, not an end of combat > effect. > > Ending combat will take you past the resolution of end of round effects. End of Round is *not* a phase of combat that only occurs after the Press phase. If DotB's damage was applied during a set phase (like "during the Press step, take a damage"), then it would be bypassed by S:CE, etc. But it is not. The round cannot continue past the end of combat. If combat ends, then the round must also end. DotB's damage will occur at that time. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@regency.wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team So the damage from DotB is STILL applied even when S:CE is played!!! ******************************* The one question which remains is: When under the effect of Dawn Op and DotB a S:CE is played, is the damage from DotB still aggravated? ******************************* This could lead to an abusive Gangrel loop strategy: 1st action (blocked) Dawn Op + DotB + Form of Mist or Earth Meld 2nd action .... Just make sure that your prey wants to block your actions (use Laptops, Invernary Castle, Dominate,... whatever hurts most) Michael Beer

Michael Beer wrote: > The one question which remains is: > > When under the effect of Dawn Op and DotB a S:CE is played, is the > damage from > DotB still aggravated? Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round). -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote: >Michael Beer wrote: >Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round). Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from DotB damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play it at the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after Majesty? Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented damage done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks. -- Justin Fang (jus...@ugcs.caltech.edu) This space intentionally left blank.

Justin Fang wrote: > In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> > wrote: > >Michael Beer wrote: > >Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the > round). > > Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from > DotB > damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play > it at > the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after > Majesty? > You cannot, because the taste of vitae will not recover environmental damage like DOTB or Weather Control, only damage caused by the vampire playing the card. > Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented > damage > done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks. > Yes, from card text: "Whenever damage is successfully inflicted upon, put X rush counters on this card, where X is the amount of damage inflicted." It does not specify damage inflicted by anybody, just damage inflicted to. David Naseby

David Naseby wrote: > Justin Fang wrote: > > Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from > > DotB > > damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play > > it at > > the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after > > Majesty? > > You cannot, because the taste of vitae will not recover environmental > damage like DOTB or Weather Control, only damage caused by the vampire > playing the card. Taste of Vitae recovers all blood lost by the opposing minion to damage, environmental damage or otherwise. [ quoted text not captured ]

Justin Fang wrote: > > In article <34BA15...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> wrote: > >Michael Beer wrote: > >Yes, the DotB's damage is done during combat (at the end of the round). > > Which reminds me: can you play Taste of Vitae to gain 1 blood from DotB > damage, or does "play after strike resolution" not allow you to play it at > the end of the round? What about playing Taste of Vitae after Majesty? The end of the round is after strike resolution, so you can play ToV at that time. You cannot play it after Majesty, I believe, since Majesty interrupts strike resolution. > Another question: Masochism gains rush counters from all unprevented damage > done to the vampire, including enviromental damage, right? Thanks. Yes. [ quoted text not captured ]

> >Dan wrote: >"A nasty combination of Drawing out the beast + dawn operation is coming into >such common usage that the combo is revealing itself to be boarderline >abusive. > Aggravated, unpreventable damage can't be changed to normal damage (as in >by skin of night), yes? Can unpreventable damage be changed into aggravated >damage? I don't know of any reason why not (besides I think it's unfair), >but >I'm asking because I hope there is some rule I don't know about." > >As Jeff Endres wrote somewhere below, it is very difficult to envision _any_ >combat deck as abusive, as combat decks are so fundamentally screwed from the >get go. If a good combat deck can utilize a cool angle (like Drawing out the >Beast+Dawn Opps), all it is doing is its job, yet it still will probably have >trouble actually winning a game. > >In this particular instance, the only clan who can reliably use DotB+DO are >the >Gangrel, and they suck at combat anyway, as they have no reliable way to deal >with the uber-common Strike:Combat Ends (except for the very sketchy and >extremely rare Dog Pack). The DotB+DO combo is completely put down by S:CE >cards, Skin of Night, and Thoughts Betrayed, so if you are particularly >concerned about this combo, plan to stop it from the beginning. > I thought that unpreventable damage could not be changed from aggro to normal. Our playgroup plays Jyhad Online rules, so no thoughts betrayed. I've actually found that animalism combat is one of the only combat types that can handle a good celerity guns deck. The one around here is built around acrobatics, side strike, and persuit rather than blur, so it can 1) always be able to play its combat cards at minor or superior, thereby virtually eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many manuevers that it rarely gets immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge. Carrion crows, animalism retainers, and drawing out the beast especially (for the equipment prevention) are about the only things that can beat it in combat. Lastly, S:CE doesn't prevent the damage. In fact, the Gangrel can of mist to continue their action .... >Plus, Dawn Opperations only works if you block the acting vampire. As the >Gangrel are pretty much the only clan who can use this combo (other than some >large Nosferatu), and the Gangrel really can't do anything that you need to >block _don't block them_. If you really don't want a particular vampire to >get >torporized, don't use them to block any vampire with superior Fortitude (as >with inferior for, you can back out after they play DO). What could the >Gangrel be doing that you so desperately need to block them? Bleeding for 1? > Nah, the Anti-Gangrel have dominate. There are enough with ani-dom that make bruise-bleed extremely effective. And note how useful form of mist is with the combo, and then also think about how the high precentage of S:CE in this deck makes it strong against rush combat. Then you've got an effective bleed deck which gets unblockable actions against 0 and nearly unblockable against low intercept decks, with the added bonus of putting blockers in torpor, and being strong against rush combat. Take any effective stealth bleed deck, and it can't get this much return for so few cards. As I see it, only bleed bounce is an effective counter strategy. I admit, it's not outright disgusting, but it has made me think about just how effective a combination can be before it's game unbalancing, especially if fortitude didn't prevent it as I thought.

> >This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise + >Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately, >the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls, >Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious >abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a >difficult deck to play and win with. Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses Stanislava and dominate. Hand jam might be an issue, but one of the combo cards, dawn op, is playable regardless of the block. Rush combat has a hard time, except for immortal grapple (which, as another independent subject is a card that we all just have decided to play without. It feels like cheese when playing it, and makes the game unpleasant for anyone near it since it is so difficult to defend against. The Brujah's thoughts betrayed, only it costs 2 less) because of the high S:CE density. And, even the grapple needs to be wary of the possibility of a protean stike, which can be used with S:CE just to cycle the card.

DHollis915 wrote: > > > > >This is really the crux of things. It is essentially another Bruise + > >Bleed deck. I'm gonna bleed you and you better not block. Fortunately, > >the bleeds are very small. My deck makes use of Laptops, Tier of Souls, > >Computer Hacks, Retainers, etc. Despite the deck's obvious obvious > >abilities when it is blocked, there are enough weeknesses that make it a > >difficult deck to play and win with. > > Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses > Stanislava and dominate. My deck used For/ANI/PRO. The Superior Animalism was an absolute requirement as was the superior Protean. I had to do DotB at superior and be able to Form of Mist or Earth Meld. It is a difficult deck to play because it required a lot of skill in dealing with its many areas of weekness. The deck has been damaged pretty badly by votes, big bleeds, and rush combat. Hand Jam wasn't an issue because the Dawn Ops can be cycled, and the S:CE can be played after a block when I defended. In the end, the low bleeds that build slowly throughout the game seem to help it. You don't attract too much attention when you're bleeding for one-even if you have a killer combo (since it never gets played!). -Robert Goudie

dhollis wrote: "Nah, the Anti-Gangrel have dominate. There are enough with ani-dom that make bruise-bleed extremely effective. And note how useful form of mist is with the combo, and then also think about how the high precentage of S:CE in this deck makes it strong against rush combat." Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti Gangrel have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior? It seems a very precarious combo of disciplines to build an effective deck around. You can probably get a crypt of multiple 8+ sized vampires with the appropriate disciplines, and then throw in alot of Skill cards, but that makes for a very uncertain deck from the get go. As to S:CE against Rush combat-a Rush combat deck that cannot deal with S:CE will be a very poor Rush deck. A Rush deck pretty much needs to have Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, otherwise it won't ever work. "Then you've got an effective bleed deck which gets unblockable actions against 0 and nearly unblockable against low intercept decks, with the added bonus of putting blockers in torpor, and being strong against rush combat." The strong against Rush combat seems very iffy. If you have enough Drawing out the Beast/Dawn Opps, as well as dominate bleed modifiers, and S:CE, you won't have much in the way of offense, and again, a Rush deck that can't stop S:CE isn't even worth playing. "Take any effective stealth bleed deck, and it can't get this much return for so few cards. As I see it, only bleed bounce is an effective counter strategy." In most situations, the same can be said about regular S+B (i.e. intercepting a determined stealth deck is very difficult). The Dom/Ani/For deck probably won't do much better against Rush combat than a Malk S+B deck. "I admit, it's not outright disgusting, but it has made me think about just how effective a combination can be before it's game unbalancing, especially if fortitude didn't prevent it as I thought." It is clearly an effective combo (the DotB/DO), but it is little more than a clever angle. The vampires needed to build such a deck (including Dominate) effectivley are few and far between, the deck is completely shut down by the very common Bleed Bounce defense, is pretty soft in the face of a good Rush deck, and will end up with awful hand jam if no one ever blocks it. He also wrote: "The one around here is built around acrobatics, side strike, and persuit rather than blur, so it can 1) always be able to play its combat cards at minor or superior, thereby virtually eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many manuevers that it rarely gets immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge." Use the Nosferatu and Drawing out the Beast and the Immortally Grapple him. He will be complete meat. And everyone laughed at Animalism... And then: "Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses Stanislava and dominate." Why does Stanislava survive? Apparently your opponents aren't trying hard enough. "Hand jam might be an issue, but one of the combo cards, dawn op, is playable regardless of the block. Rush combat has a hard time, except for immortal grapple (which, as another independent subject is a card that we all just have decided to play without. It feels like cheese when playing it, and makes the game unpleasant for anyone near it since it is so difficult to defend against. The Brujah's thoughts betrayed, only it costs 2 less) because of the high S:CE density. And, even the grapple needs to be wary of the possibility of a protean stike, which can be used with S:CE just to cycle the card." While always entitled to your opinion, Immortal Grapple is an incredibly important card for the balance of the game. Without Immortal Grapple, combat decks are close to useless. S:CE/Dodge are way to common and easy to use, and without a way to stop them, Rush combat decks shift from simply difficult to win with into the realm of nigh impossible to win with. [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6 wrote: > Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti > Gangrel > have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior? A quick search of the Crypt Monger (Drew's is down for me right now) reveals a semi crypt, with (at least) ANI for dom, of:Genevieve (GANANT 10), Natalia (RAV 7), Sarisha Veliku (RAV 6), Konstantin (RAV 9), Faruq (GAN 8), Stanislava (GAN 11), Ingrid Rossler (GAN 9). Thats 7 vampires, the lowest a 6. A lot of Ravnos. Try saying "Okay, I won't block your sensory deprivation". Now say it again. Now stop sweating. As for those with just ANI for, there are a further 12 vampires. The low level ones of interest to round out a crypt : Luther (GANANT 6), Gitane St. Claire (GAN 7), Bear Paw (GAN 5), Chester DuBois (NOS 7). It is certainly a high level crypt, but if you are not afraid of multiples, you could go for a lot of 6 to 7 level vampires. I'd be thinking 3 Sarisha, 2 Konstantin, 2 Bear Paw, 3 Natalia, 1 Faruq, 1 Stanislava, average 7.2, worst 37 (pretty bad but could be worse). Some dominate and chimmerstry master cards, need Info Highway, Govern the Unaligned to bleed or get out your high level vamps. Then the nasty combo. Put in a few act. mod bleeds, mostly for intimidation (make them block). Sensory Deprivations, as mentioned before, is also a fairly strong incentive to block. It would be a tough deck to play, but it would be fun..... David Naseby

DHollis915 wrote: > I thought that unpreventable damage could not be changed from aggro to > normal. You can convert unoreventable aggravated damage to normal damage, since doing so clearly isn't preventing the damage. [ quoted text not captured ]

David Naseby wrote: "A quick search of the Crypt Monger (Drew's is down for me right now) reveals a semi crypt, with (at least) ANI for dom, of:Genevieve (GANANT 10), Natalia (RAV 7), Sarisha Veliku (RAV 6), Konstantin (RAV 9), Faruq (GAN 8), Stanislava (GAN 11), Ingrid Rossler (GAN 9). Thats 7 vampires, the lowest a 6. A lot of Ravnos. Try saying "Okay, I won't block your sensory deprivation". Now say it again. Now stop sweating." Again, sure, you can do it, but it will be incredibly sketchy. You are building a crypt out of large vampires for a 4 discipline deck (For, Ani, Dom, Chi) that has very little in the way of intercept or Bleed defense. To make the deck work, you will need to have Bleed modifiers, enough Drawing out the Beast and Dawn Opps to be consistently threatening, Sensory Deprivations, and a metric buttload of Master Skill cards. If it is going to have any defenses (like intercept or Bleed bounce, and then WWEF to make it work...), this deck will be incredibly tenious. Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to try, but as actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this whole thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting deck, for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going. [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6 wrote: > Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to > try, but as > actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be > > considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this > whole > thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting > deck, > for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going. "Determined" decks are generally frowned upon in our group, and the offending "playing to win from template" person is castigated, scorned, tarred and feathered, then stoned, drawn (and, on at least one occasion) quartered. We tend to play with decks that say what can this card do. We recently had a newbie join our group who consistently won, and he thinks the game is very easy, and has gained something of a god complex. We, however, dismissed S'n'B decks about 2 years ago as the ultimate in boredom. I am swiftly coming to the conclusion that my isolation in Sydney from tournament play, stuck alone in the gaming wilderness with my little group of 4 to 5 regular players surrounded by the human detritus that call themselves Magic players, has led to a longevity in Jyhad. But this discussion probably belongs on another thread, or another newsgroup, away from people who really enjoy the tournament metagame. David Naseby

>Well the combo you mention provides a way of doing that. I can't see how a >combat deck can be _that_ abusive. Also see my post to PBD ... This is not actually a combat deck. It's a bruise bleed deck which puts blockers into torpor almost every time (everytime barring skin of night effects, which are not that common and at least special cases) for 2 cards. With the addition of one more to the combo, Form of Mist, it also succeeds in its action which doing the above and gets to defend itself exceedingly well against combat. >Now a Misdirection, Sleeping Mind combo >in a bleed deck..... Yeah, I know there are worse, and they're right out in our playgroup (which follows JOL rules) . Everyone's idea of what's broken and what's unfair is different, and we have to decide, individually, on some line. It's going to come down to a judgement call on "fairness" - meaning whether a combo is inherently cheaper than the norm, which is the case of the misdirection + sleeping mind that you mentioned. It's the combos like soul gem + return to innocence + day op that are outright broken - because they force decks to address them specifically.

Does anyone have the list of the cards that are in the VTES run but not the Jyhad Run? T.W.Malisch

David Naseby <d.na...@unsw.edu.au> wrote: > PDB6 wrote: > > Not to say it isn't a hysterical idea, and wouldn't be great fun to > > try, but as > > actual effective decks go, I just can't see it happening (let alone be > > > > considered in any way abusive, which was the opinion that started this > > whole > > thread...). Any determined Bleed deck, or Rush combat deck, or voting > > deck, > > for that matter, will probably axe it even before it gets going. > "Determined" decks are generally frowned upon in our group, and the > offending "playing to win from template" person is castigated, scorned, > tarred and feathered, then stoned, drawn (and, on at least one occasion) > quartered. We tend to play with decks that say what can this card do. We > recently had a newbie join our group who consistently won, and he thinks > the game is very easy, and has gained something of a god complex. We, > however, dismissed S'n'B decks about 2 years ago as the ultimate in > boredom. I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush and vote decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting. -Mark Langsdorf Jyhad Archivist http://www.io.com/~mlangsdo/RPGs/Jyhad/

>Ok, the Anti Gangrel might be able to pull it off, but how many Anti Gangrel >have Ani, For, and Dom, let alone two or three of them at superior? It seems >a >very precarious combo of disciplines to build an effective deck around. You >can probably get a crypt of multiple 8+ sized vampires with the appropriate >disciplines, and then throw in alot of Skill cards, but that makes for a very >uncertain deck from the get go. > I'm guessing that your playgroup has a lot of combat. So does mine, actually. Many of the combat decks are getting to be larger vampires, because they're more effective in combat (as they are also more effective out of combat) . Better disciplines, more blood and therefore damage to soak, the addition often of votes or bleed ... But anyway, I'd be more willing to argue against the idea that multiple large vampires or skill cards make a deck uncertain than I'd be willing to argue that dotb + dawnop is broken. Especially in larger (5+ table size) games, they provide so much more versatility than their higher cost. In fact, I use skill cards exclusively with smaller vampires to get past that. >As to S:CE against Rush combat-a Rush combat deck that cannot deal with S:CE >will be a very poor Rush deck. A Rush deck pretty much needs to have >Immortal >Grapple or Psyche!, otherwise it won't ever work. ... >The strong against Rush combat seems very iffy. If you have enough Drawing >out >the Beast/Dawn Opps, as well as dominate bleed modifiers, and S:CE, you won't >have much in the way of offense, and again, a Rush deck that can't stop S:CE >isn't even worth playing. Yes, but the ability to surpass S:CE isn't an all or nothing thing. What is a deck strong against rush combat, aside from another potence deck or protean combat (typically seen as inferior to most other combat forms)? A very heavy manuever deck might be able to beat the grapple, but a brujah rush deck can contain just as many as the more manuevering tremere or toreador deck. So what exactly is a deck that's strong against rush, then? I do contend that it's a deck packing lots of s:ce . A rush deck with the right hand can level any vampire, yes. But in actual play, when hand jam becomes more of an issue, lots of s:ce's work fairly well. I'd say even better than lots of manuevers, since I'd wager that a rush deck is more likely to contain more manuevers than grapples - meaning it's more likely to hold a manuever than a grapple - meaning it's more likely to hold defense against long range combat than s:ce. That makes sense, simply because long range combat is more danerous to the grapple deck than s:ce. >In most situations, the same can be said about regular S+B (i.e. intercepting >a >determined stealth deck is very difficult). The Dom/Ani/For deck probably >won't do much better against Rush combat than a Malk S+B deck. Right, but a high stealth deck can be (easily for its ueberprey) hand jammed. The dtob/dawnop bruise bleed cannot be so easily. >He also wrote: >"The one around here is built around acrobatics, side strike, and persuit >rather than blur, so it can 1) always be able to play its combat cards at >minor >or superior, thereby virtually eliminating hand jam and 2) has so many >manuevers that it rarely gets >immortally grappled, and thus it pretty much can always dodge." > >Use the Nosferatu and Drawing out the Beast and the Immortally Grapple him. >He >will be complete meat. And everyone laughed at Animalism... Tough, but perhaps possible. The dotb only cancels one manuever, and this deck has gobs of manuevers. It's contents are about 5 or 6 guns, maybe 6-8 intercept cards, a few permo-cept locations and a fast reaction and a few wakes, and the rest is celerity (that's about 85%), using only the celerity cards that have different uses at minor and superior (ir no blurs, rapid though, etc.) That last fact means that at any time, 7 cards * 85% celerity * 2 uses / card is somewhere around, effectively, 12 celerity abilities. And those are only manuevers, dodges, extra strikes, and presses, nothing else. On average, that's 3 of each in the hand assuming no jam. Hand jam's easy to avoid because each card can be played 2 different ways. I'm convinced that it cannot be caught by a grapple unless the brujah or nosferatu packs his deck with so many manuevers that he clogs on them. chimerstry combat ( illusions of the kindred; always works) and non-strike damage are the only effective strategies, I've found. If you have any other suggestions, I'd love to hear them, but I've tried the heavy manuever grapple and it didn't work. >"Why was the deck difficult to win with? The one around here uses Stanislava >and dominate." > >Why does Stanislava survive? Apparently your opponents aren't trying hard >enough. > Please, I know that rush combat is the ultimate defense against just about any strategy, but this seems to be rhetoric. You can't just chalk up something like a vampire surviving to lack of effort. If what you're saying is valid, then that means no strategy but rush combat can possibly work. >While always entitled to your opinion, Immortal Grapple is an incredibly >important card for the balance of the game. Without Immortal Grapple, combat >decks are close to useless. S:CE/Dodge are way to common and easy to use, >and >without a way to stop them, Rush combat decks shift from simply difficult to >win with into the realm of nigh impossible to win with. > I disagree here, and I just knew I'd get an argument. :) I have to go now, but I will respond tomorrow. For now I'll just say that I have my reasons, mainly: 1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3) it provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better than the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast reaction and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed, except it costs one less (counting the hand strike for 1) and provides a press. I think it's very difficult to argue that restricting TB to decks which will S:CE (if it could be done ...) makes TB a fair card. Okay, so I did say something. One last thing: I used to think Immortal Grapple was fair, until I was playing my eurobrujah deck, and I noticed that it won far more often than it should. I noticed that he only combats it ever lost were against the celerity guns deck I listed above, and I noticed that I was the only one using the card. That last point may not seem important, but if no one else wants to see a card used against him nor wants to use it himself, then maybe I shouldn't use the card. After all, no one wants to play the game if it's not fun. dh

dhollis wrote: "So what exactly is a deck that's strong against rush, then? I do contend that it's a deck packing lots of s:ce ." I would say that decks that do well against Rush combat are decks that fight back, use Fortitude, or don't care about combat. A-a good combat deck can fight a good combat deck. If they are planning on Immortally Grappling you and beating you down, beat them back. Use Potence or Protean (with Pro, however, you will probably need extra hand damage as the Brujah can prevent one per round). If there is a good Brujah combat deck around, make a good Gangrel deck. B-Use Fortitude. Skin of Steel, in a high combat enviornment, is usually much more effective than S:CE. Assuming Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, S:CE cards will just clog up your hand. C-If you can't fight, don't even try. Make a deck that does something other than fight, Minion Tap all of your vampires down to 1 or 2 blood, and look sad when you are killed. Hopefully, though, all your extra pool and deck space not taken up by combat will make up for it. Having lots of S:CE is simply not the answer. Again, against Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, it is useless, and if you are not near a combat deck and no one blocks you, you will end up with a handfull of Majesty very quickly. "The dotb only cancels one manuever, and this deck has gobs of manuevers." This is incorrect. Drawing out the Beast: "Only usable before range is determined on the first round. During this combat, opposing vampire gets +1 hand damage, but he or she can only use manuvers to cancel manuvers, can only use presses to continue combat, and connot use equipment." This means that if the vampire who plays the DotB doesn't play any manuvers, the opposing minion cannot play any manuvers either. The vampire with its beast drawn out may not manuver to long range, as manuvering to long range is not canceling a manuver, it is manuvering to long range. Basically, if your opponent plays DotB, you cannot manuver the entire combat, unless he manuvers to long range, at which point you can cancel his manuver to go to close. "I'm convinced that it cannot be caught by a grapple unless the brujah or nosferatu packs his deck with so many manuevers that he clogs on them." Or, he plays Drawing out the Beast. "If you have any other suggestions, I'd love to hear them, but I've tried the heavy manuever grapple and it didn't work." Well, if the deck has no Bum's Rush, it can only get into combat by either blocking or being blocked. Don't block him, or play enough stealth to not get blocked. Then he will be useless and overflowing with Flashes. "1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3) it provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better than the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast reaction and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed" Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with one, and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in comparison. The biggest problem with TB is that is breaks a fundamental tenent of the game, namely the use of cards. Immortal Grapple, while occasionally has a similar effect (to a much lesser extent), still allows its opponents to manuver away, press to end, use potence, use fortitude, use protean, and generally fight back. TB prevents you from playing the game. Immortal Grapple just prevents a few key cards from making an entire strategy impossible to use. [ quoted text not captured ]

T.W.Malisch wrote: > Does anyone have the list of the cards that are in the VTES run but not > the Jyhad Run? Wholly new cards: * Archon Investigation * Elder Intervention (also in the Sabbat run as Pack Tactics) * Justicar Retribution * Protected Resources * Shadow of the Beast (also in the Sabbat run) Reworked card: * Wooden Stake (like Stake, but without using Paralyze rule) Reillustrated (and, oddly enough, renamed) card: * Raven (was Camille Devereux) Renamed cards: * Dominate Kine (was Kine Dominance) * Gangrel Atavism (was Gangrel De-evolution) [ quoted text not captured ]

> A-a good combat deck can fight a good combat deck. If they are planning on > Immortally Grappling you and beating you down, beat them back. Use Potence or > Protean (with Pro, however, you will probably need extra hand damage as the > Brujah can prevent one per round). If there is a good Brujah combat deck > around, make a good Gangrel deck. > Brujah can only really prevent 1 per round with Flak Jackets(wasted actions) or Sideslip(wasted cards). Every thing they do that isn't beating you means one more thing that you can do to oust them. Brujah aren't generally known for their intercept. They also aren't known for agg damage, which the Gangrel have in abundance. Compare Burning Wrath to Uncontrollable Rage and the various Claw cards. Sure, the Brujah have Acrobatics, which can make a killing in a high-combat, low S:CE environment, but the City Gangrel can add that as well. Not to mention the Gangrel have Fortitude, which is a much better combat defense than Celerity, and Animalism, which is another good combat discipline, where the Brujah have only Presence. Presence, while not terrible for Bruise & Bleed, is weak at best in any combat deck. > B-Use Fortitude. Skin of Steel, in a high combat enviornment, is usually much > more effective than S:CE. Assuming Immortal Grapple or Psyche!, S:CE cards > will just clog up your hand. > My problem with Skin of Steel was always the blood cost. Sure, it seems odd that I'm worried about losing 1 blood, whereas a hand strike would do the same, but I've recently learned to prefer Skin of Night, as long as I have superior Fortitude. Since I rarely play a game with more than 3 combat decks, Skin of Steel often clogs my hand, as the other decks either don't block me (Bruise&Bleed), or end combat or dodge on me. Not to mention, often when I *do* get hit, it's for 1 hand damage, which Skin of Steel nominally prevents, but not in a cost effective way. Superior Skin of Night can deal with hand damage equally well, and you can stack enough of 'em to stop that Assault Rifle (assuming a good replacement draw). Plus, when you have 7 of them in your hand, you can use them all at inferior at the beginning of combat. Not to mention, it does wonders at stopping Dawn Op combos. I do concede however, that I'd rather face a snarling Brujah combat monster with one Skin of Steel than a handful of Skin of Night, but hey... there are always trade-offs. Also, you say that with Psyche or IG, S:CE will clog your hand. I've noticed that combat decks never have a high enough concentration of IG, and when they do, they can never get into combat due to hand jam. So, even with lots of IG, you can usually waste a couple of S:CE. And with Psyche, you simply get more combats with which to use S:CE. The problem with using Psyche as a counter to S:CE is that it's a 1-to-1 tradeoff. You need as many Psyches as they have Majesties. Not so good in my book. Give me Hidden Lurker any day. > C-If you can't fight, don't even try. Make a deck that does something other > than fight, Minion Tap all of your vampires down to 1 or 2 blood, and look sad > when you are killed. Hopefully, though, all your extra pool and deck space not > taken up by combat will make up for it. > That's always interesting. Of course, the cost and time for getting new vampires from your crypt could be prohibitive, but an Information Highway and/or a couple of Effective Managements certainly help. > > "1) no cost in blood 2) it beats combat as well as non combat decks 3) it > provides a press at superior, helping it beat fortitude 4) the brujah have > psyche, and the nosferatu have hidden lurker. Either clan is still better than > the gangrel without the card. 5) it only takes one minion, unlike fast reaction > and hidden lurker, comparable anti-s:ce cards 6) against non-combat, it has > exactly the same effect as thoughts betrayed" > I disagree highly that the Brujah and Nos are better at combat than the Gangrel. I've always seen the Gangrel as a sort of super clan that can do anything effectively (well, not vote, but they can bleed and fight), which was why I always hated them. > Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with > one, > and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in > comparison. Whoa... I don't agree at all that Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck. The opposing minion doesn't even get to strike against the second combatant! That rocks in my book. I used to play that Hidden Lurker was an action (as it says on the card), and it was still very annoying to my opponents. Sure, it takes two vampires, but your vamps untap next turn, while his moulders in the ash heap. Not to mention, if you pack your own S:CE, you never have to worry about the first vamp getting hurt. -Chris -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

In article <885001314....@dejanews.com>, ber...@cco.caltech.edu writes >I disagree highly that the Brujah and Nos are better at combat than the >Gangrel. I've always seen the Gangrel as a sort of super clan that can >do anything effectively (well, not vote, but they can bleed and fight), >which was why I always hated them. > Well, they didn't used to be able to bleed really. Bloody Force of Will. But any clan who have a moderate amount of stealth can bleed using disciplineless - Computer Hacking, Laptop, Legendary Vampire and the like. And the Gangrel don't do too badly for stealth - Rapid Change, Earth Control and Backways for starters. Probably some others (doesn't really matter what). >> Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck (they require 2 vampires to deal with >> one, >> and Hidden Lurker only works if you are blocked), so they shouldn't be used in >> comparison. > >Whoa... I don't agree at all that Fast Reaction and Hidden Lurker suck. >The opposing minion doesn't even get to strike against the second >combatant! That rocks in my book. I used to play that Hidden Lurker was >an action (as it says on the card), and it was still very annoying to my >opponents. Sure, it takes two vampires, but your vamps untap next turn, >while his moulders in the ash heap. Not to mention, if you pack your own >S:CE, you never have to worry about the first vamp getting hurt. Well, I don't think, even when it was an action, that we blocked it generally anyway (because we were stupid). But I am from the group that didn't realise who could hunt (and I am moderately proud to say that I am the one who worked out what actually happened - look, it wasn't my fault, the rest of the group taught me how to play and I didn't go through the rules book myself that much at first). -- James Coupe (remove some crap to reply) Pah!! I hope it shits in your jogging suit!

>I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush and vote decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting. Probably becuase they require immediate and undivided attention to stop; even moreso than votes. To stop a vote you have 2 chances: intercept or outvoting (or some reaction or DI) For S&B, if you don't have the intercept (or Deflection because DI isn't really practical against a deck with lots of S&B) you are sh*t out of luck. It just seems like the Magic players way of screwing up a table. As for my group, it is not banned and even frowned upon is not the right word. All of us have basic defenses against it, but bleeding for 5 at +2 or more stealth each turn is not a whole bunch of fun for the player or victim and really, hasn't it been done to death? We play along, but no one really takes the game seriously after somebody does that. Has it occurred to anyone but me that the Malkavians were never intended to be the cheese producers of the game but the fun wackos? The fear that most groups have of the Malkies is that if they ever got their sh*t together, they'd be bloody hard to stop. Unfortunately for us all, in the card game, there are woefully few fun cards and the mechanics of the game have put their sh*t together all too well, and repetitvely.

VampChamp1 <vampc...@aol.com> wrote: > Mark Langsdorf <mlan...@io.com> wrote: > > >I don't know why so many people hate S&B decks. Against good rush and vote > decks, they're very challenging to play, and very exciting. > Probably becuase they require immediate and undivided attention to stop; even > moreso than votes. To stop a vote you have 2 chances: intercept or outvoting > (or some reaction or DI) For S&B, if you don't have the intercept (or > Deflection because DI isn't really practical against a deck with lots of S&B) > you are sh*t out of luck. It just seems like the Magic players way of screwing > up a table. > As for my group, it is not banned and even frowned upon is not the right word. If you think the only way to stop S&B is to Intercept or Deflect, you're missing the third viable strategy for playing Jyhad, as well as two more sub-strategies for dealing with S&B. The 3 basic strategies of Jyhad are bleed, vote, and COMBAT. There are two forms of combat: intercept (which you know about) and rush (which you neglected to mention). A good Brujah deck doesn't fear a Malk S&B deck because Hector Sosa can Bum's Rush and pummel Ozmo before Ozmo gets to take his first action. (On the off chance that an S&B deck has enough combat defense to survive m'boy Hector, it won't have enough Stealth and Bleed to be too much of a threat). Similarly, although I've seen Gangrel and Assamite decks die before the Malks, it was a lot closer of a contest that you would expect, and I've seen a lot of Assamites, Gangrels, and Brujah cripple Malk decks before destroying their prey. Oh, and by the way, there are two other ways of dealing with S&B. You can race them ("I don't care if I lose 5 blood this turn, 'cause my prey lost 7") or gain so much blood each turn as to make your losses irrelevant (the Weenie blood gain strategy). In the last game I played, I used a Weenie blood gain deck. No damaging votes (only Autarkis Persecutions and Consanginious Boons), some presence, a lot of Blood Dolls. My girlfriend was playing a VERY fast Malk S&B deck, easily capable of bleeding for 6-8 per turn. After about Turn 4, I let her bleed me whenever she wanted. With 13 minions, I only needed to let a few of them hunt each turn and call a few ConsanBoons to soak up all the damage she could do. Her predator (a rush deck) finally eliminated all her vamps for me, then started trying to do the same to me... pointless, since I could bring out 1-2 weenies a turn. We quit the game when I accumulated over 60 bloods. S&B is not a threat if you play in a competitive environment and think how to deal with Bleed, Vote, and Combat decks. > All of us have basic defenses against it, but bleeding for 5 at +2 or more > stealth each turn is not a whole bunch of fun for the player or victim and > really, hasn't it been done to death? We play along, but no one really takes > the game seriously after somebody does that. > Has it occurred to anyone but me that the Malkavians were never intended to be > the cheese producers of the game but the fun wackos? The fear that most groups > have of the Malkies is that if they ever got their sh*t together, they'd be > bloody hard to stop. > Unfortunately for us all, in the card game, there are woefully few fun cards > and the mechanics of the game have put their sh*t together all too well, and > repetitvely. Malkavians are too narrowly focused (and Nosferatu, too widely spread), but Malks are not the threat you make them out to be. By the way, do you play under a 4-card limit? [ quoted text not captured ]