Hate to start a new thread since Lasombra was kind enough to post info
concerning the preview, but I've lost that thread (my newsgroup reader only
shows unread messages...).
For those too lazy to go to the White Wolf web-site, here's some of the more
interesting tid-bits:
"New Term: Scarce
When a Methuselah moves a vampire marked "scarce" from her uncontrolled region
to the ready region, she burns 3 pool for every other vampire in play of the
same clan."
"The Nagaraja cards mix well with the Giovanni, Ventrue antitribu, and
Harbingers of Skulls. Since the Nagaraja are all identified as "scarce" (see
note to the right), they are not really playable by themselves."
"The Stranger Among Us
Master. 1 pool.
Search your crypt for a scarce vampire. Show the card to all players and place
it face-down in your uncontrolled region.
Several cards in Bloodlines are designed to make mixing the Bloodlines
clans with other clans easier (since most of the Bloodlines clans are not
designed to be played on their own). This is one such card.
You'll generally want to bring out no more than one vampire of Clan
Nagaraja (or other scarce clan) due to the rising cost. This means that filling
your crypt with enough vampires of that clan to have a reasonable chance of
getting one into play can "clog" your uncontrolled region.
By putting a few copies of The Stranger Among Us in your library, you can
use fewer vampires of the clan (say, one) in your crypt (so that your
uncontrolled region remains fully utilized) and still have a good chance to get
the vampire into play. "
Well, I have to admit that the concept of scarce-ness is pretty cool (so that
you can actually represent the rarity of bloodlines). It'll be interesting if
(or when) different decks dual it out to get the bloodline vampires out first!
The new icon for bloodlines looks pretty cool, it's an ankh in a blood
splatter. I, like everyone else for that matter, will have problems memorizing
the clan symbols for all the bloodlines though!
The Stranger Among Us doesn't actually look like that cool of a card. It's sort
of like the "missing link" between Effective Management and Recruitment. Vs.
EM, you pay an extra pool but get to choose a scarce vampire. Vs. Recruitment,
it costs a pool less but instead of getting any vampire, you only get a scarce
one. Truth be told, I think Recruitment is a pretty good card but I rarely see
it get played (I guess 2 pool is a lot), and since Stranger Among Us doesn't
really seem that much better (pay an extra pool to greatly increase
versatility), I'm guessing (purely guessing of course) that it won't see that
much use... Hey, interestingly enough, this is one of the few "search your
library/crypt" cards that doesn't tell you to shuffle the library/crypt
afterwards. I'm guessing it's just an oversight but...
Interestingly enough, with the concept of scarceness, this seems to confirm
that each bloodline will be considered a "clan." This has *extremely*
interesting ramifications with cards such as Clan Impersonation. You want to
play with multiple Nagajara? Put one into play, have him Clan Impersonate into
another clan. Then since he's no longer Nagaraja, this won't trigger the scarce
cost of the next Nagaraja. Alternatively, if you're getting annoyed with
Nagaraja, have the Ventrue in your vote deck Clan Impersonate into Nagajara so
that it's harder to bring them out. This might also be interesting with cards
that move vampires back to the uncontrolled region (Banishment, Reality, and
the never-seen-played Peace of Khetamon).
As a final sidenote, I'm amused that the web-site says the Nagaraja will
complement the !Ventrue well (since they share Auspex/Dominate) but it doesn't
mention them meshing with the Malkavians, Tremere, and !Tremere. Hmmm...
Any other thoughts? =)
Halcyan 2
<< Hate to start a new thread since Lasombra was kind enough to post info
concerning the preview, but I've lost that thread (my newsgroup reader only
shows unread messages...). >>
Oops! No wonder I couldn't find the "thread." Lasombra posted the initial post
to the White Wolf forum, here's a transcript:
"White Wolf has released its first previews for [Bloodlines].
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/BLnag.html
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra "
Enjoy all!
Halcyan 2
On 15 Oct 2001 03:40:40 GMT, halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote:
>Interestingly enough, with the concept of scarceness, this seems to confirm
>that each bloodline will be considered a "clan." This has *extremely*
>interesting ramifications with cards such as Clan Impersonation. You want to
>play with multiple Nagajara? Put one into play, have him Clan Impersonate into
>another clan. Then since he's no longer Nagaraja, this won't trigger the scarce
>cost of the next Nagaraja. Alternatively, if you're getting annoyed with
>Nagaraja, have the Ventrue in your vote deck Clan Impersonate into Nagajara so
>that it's harder to bring them out. This might also be interesting with cards
>that move vampires back to the uncontrolled region (Banishment, Reality, and
>the never-seen-played Peace of Khetamon).
When I read the page I got the impression 'scarce' was going to be
text as the vampires ability/disadvantage. It may work like 'Blood
Curse' does for Assamites, but then again it might not.
LSJ, care to clarify? Or will we just have to wait for the 'updated
rulebook'? <g>
-------------------------------
Ethan Burrow - Prince of Austin
saa...@yahoo.com
http://whitestar.ddg.com/vtes/
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 08:00:35 GMT, saa...@yahoo.com (Ethan Burrow)
wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
I hope this isnt the case
A scarce vampire Clan Impersonates a brujah.
3 Brujah are on the table now.
Next person who wants a brujah must pay 6 MORE pool?
UGH
"Dimis" <Ali...@rr.nc.com> wrote in message
news:c28lstkg3on4p30jd...@4ax.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
No.
Next person who wants to bring out a Brujah with the text SCARCE
on it must pay 6 more pool.
> UGH
Read the Scarce explanation again.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
http://www.TheLasombra.com
--
Posted from rr-163-54-80.atl.mediaone.net [24.163.54.80]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
"Dimis" <Ali...@rr.nc.com> a écrit dans le message news:
c28lstkg3on4p30jd...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 08:00:35 GMT, saa...@yahoo.com (Ethan Burrow)
> wrote:
(snip)
>
> A scarce vampire Clan Impersonates a brujah.
> 3 Brujah are on the table now.
>
> Next person who wants a brujah must pay 6 MORE pool?
>
> UGH
I'm just figuring LSJ and the other playtesters reading your post,
scratching their heads and saying "oops... now we've missed something during
the tests..."
=)
reyda
Reyda <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:9qe8oj$gkv$1...@neon.noos.net...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Nope. The player getting the vampire marked scarce burns the pool. Since any
Brujah another player cares to get will not be 'scarce', they won't have to
burn pool for it (and it would be 9 pool in your example, it's 3 per clan
member). If, however, you got your scarce Brujah CI vampire Banished and
then tried to get him back, I believe you would have to pay 3 pool for each
Brujah in play.
Flux
[snip]
> Interestingly enough, with the concept of scarceness, this seems to confirm
> that each bloodline will be considered a "clan." This has *extremely*
> interesting ramifications with cards such as Clan Impersonation. You want to
> play with multiple Nagajara? Put one into play, have him Clan Impersonate into
> another clan. Then since he's no longer Nagaraja, this won't trigger the scarce
> cost of the next Nagaraja.
Hmmmn, I am not sure here. Wouldn't 'scarce' be cardtext? And not
bloodline-related? That also would discourage playing with several
different bloodline vampires in one crypt? Again I dunno...
Alternatively, if you're getting annoyed with
> Nagaraja, have the Ventrue in your vote deck Clan Impersonate into Nagajara so
> that it's harder to bring them out. This might also be interesting with cards
> that move vampires back to the uncontrolled region (Banishment, Reality, and
> the never-seen-played Peace of Khetamon).
How about Mind Rape/temptation Clan Impersonation against one clan
decks...one more reasom why I think it will be cardtext, not
clan/bloodline related. Were it bloodline related (e.g. a weakness) I
feel that it would be too easiliy abuseable. We'll see when the set
come out, right?
> As a final sidenote, I'm amused that the web-site says the Nagaraja will
> complement the !Ventrue well (since they share Auspex/Dominate) but it doesn't
> mention them meshing with the Malkavians, Tremere, and !Tremere. Hmmm...
Probably associated with the fact that WW also produced SW and FN. And
the !ventrue are one of the precon clans which would make the Nagaraja
be weel playeable by relative newbies. This gives an incentive for
newer players to buy Bloodlines as an enrichment to other decks they
might posses. Quite clever actually.
Tim Eijpe
Ethan Burrow wrote:
> When I read the page I got the impression 'scarce' was going to be
> text as the vampires ability/disadvantage. It may work like 'Blood
> Curse' does for Assamites, but then again it might not.
>
> LSJ, care to clarify? Or will we just have to wait for the 'updated
> rulebook'? <g>
No need to wait for the rulebook.
The rule, as Halcyan quoted:
"When a Methuselah moves a vampire marked "scarce" from her uncontrolled region
to the ready region, she burns 3 pool for every other vampire in play of the
same clan."
If Scarce Nag-A Clan Imps a Brujah, then you bring out Nag-B (who's marked
"scarce" and is a Nagaraja), you pay 3 pool for every other vampire of
the same clan - of which there are none, so you pay zero pool.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Dimis wrote:
> I hope this isnt the case
>
> A scarce vampire Clan Impersonates a brujah.
> 3 Brujah are on the table now.
>
> Next person who wants a brujah must pay 6 MORE pool?
No, since the Brujah the person wants isn't marked "scarce". See the
rule as Halcyan quoted, or as presented on the Web site.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <e96a9e4b.01101...@posting.google.com>, Tim Eijpe
<tim....@mailandnews.com> writes
>[snip]
>>> Interestingly enough, with the concept of scarceness, this seems to confirm
>> that each bloodline will be considered a "clan." This has *extremely*
>> interesting ramifications with cards such as Clan Impersonation. You want to
>> play with multiple Nagajara? Put one into play, have him Clan
>>Impersonate into
>> another clan. Then since he's no longer Nagaraja, this won't trigger
>>the scarce
>> cost of the next Nagaraja.>
>Hmmmn, I am not sure here. Wouldn't 'scarce' be cardtext?
It would. But he would be a scarce Brujah. Another scarce Nagaraja
would then not see him as being part of the same clan for burning 3
pool.
> And not
>bloodline-related? That also would discourage playing with several
>different bloodline vampires in one crypt? Again I dunno...
I think that's the idea. To compensate, however, I would expect the
Scarce vampires to be relatively high up on the power curve.
>How about Mind Rape/temptation Clan Impersonation against one clan
>decks...one more reasom why I think it will be cardtext, not
>clan/bloodline related.
According to the rule on the site, it will be card-text.
However, if I control Darius Styx and Clan Impersonate him to Nagaraja,
and *you* bring out Scarce Nagaraja 1, it looks round for other
Nagaraja. It *doesn't* have to find other *scarce* Nagaraja. "she
burns 3 pool for every other vampire in play of the same clan."
So you still burn 3 pool.
--
James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D
And if it's all right, I'd kind've like to be your lover EBD690ECD7A1F
'Cause when you're with me I can't help but be B457CA213D7E6
So desperately, uncontrollably happy 68C3695D623D5D
"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> a écrit dans le message news:
wUv8IwKU...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk...
(nsip)
> However, if I control Darius Styx and Clan Impersonate him to Nagaraja,
> and *you* bring out Scarce Nagaraja 1, it looks round for other
> Nagaraja. It *doesn't* have to find other *scarce* Nagaraja. "she
> burns 3 pool for every other vampire in play of the same clan."
>
> So you still burn 3 pool.
Quadir Rulez =p
reyda
On 15 Oct 2001 03:40:40 GMT, Halcyan 2 wrote:
>As a final sidenote, I'm amused that the web-site says the Nagaraja will
>complement the !Ventrue well (since they share Auspex/Dominate) but it doesn't
>mention them meshing with the Malkavians, Tremere, and !Tremere. Hmmm...
The antitribu Tremere ought to be considered scarce now too. That might
make a good effect for a hoser master card.
Andrew
Reyda <re...@noos.fr> wrote:
> "Dimis" <Ali...@rr.nc.com> a ecrit dans le message news:> c28lstkg3on4p30jd...@4ax.com...>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 08:00:35 GMT, saa...@yahoo.com (Ethan Burrow)
>> wrote:> (snip)>>
>> A scarce vampire Clan Impersonates a brujah.
>> 3 Brujah are on the table now.
>>
>> Next person who wants a brujah must pay 6 MORE pool?
No.
You only pay the cost if the vampire you're playing is Scarce.
Not if another vampire of the same clan on the table is Scarce.
Personally, I'm hoping that they have a generalized rule that
the Bloodlines are not considered "Clans", and, much like Caitiff,
can't be Clan Impersonated into, can't use Consang. Boon, etc etc.
I'd just like to take the opportunity to let everyone know that Bloodlines
is being released on December 3rd, which is my birthday. LSJ: does
White-Wolf offer birthday specials on boxes?
[ quoted text not captured ]
I don't think candles would be appropriate (Rotschreck and all), but do you
want a booster box with icing on it?
:-)
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 06:27:46 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com>
wrote:
>If Scarce Nag-A Clan Imps a Brujah, then you bring out Nag-B (who's marked
>"scarce" and is a Nagaraja), you pay 3 pool for every other vampire of
>the same clan - of which there are none, so you pay zero pool.
Let me rephrase my question based off your example.
Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?
[ quoted text not captured ]
Ethan Burrow wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 06:27:46 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If Scarce Nag-A Clan Imps a Brujah, then you bring out Nag-B (who's marked
> >"scarce" and is a Nagaraja), you pay 3 pool for every other vampire of
> >the same clan - of which there are none, so you pay zero pool.
>
> Let me rephrase my question based off your example.
>
> Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?
Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
only criterion.
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> Ethan Burrow wrote:>>
>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 06:27:46 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >If Scarce Nag-A Clan Imps a Brujah, then you bring out Nag-B (who's marked
>> >"scarce" and is a Nagaraja), you pay 3 pool for every other vampire of
>> >the same clan - of which there are none, so you pay zero pool.
>>
>> Let me rephrase my question based off your example.
>>
>> Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?> Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> only criterion.
Temptation on a Scarce vampire.
Clan Impersonate him to [most abundant clan in play].
Give him back.
Banish (or Reality, whichever) him.
Sure, it's a stretch of a strategy, but if it works, it'll keep him from
coming back.
:)
Only if you promise to make all the Bloodline symbols out of icing on it.
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:3BCAFCC1...@white-wolf.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
> > Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?
> Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> only criterion.
Would Seeds of Corruption override the scarce text? I can see an argument
for either way, but it's not entirely clear. The ERC says that the Assamites
still cannot diablerize, for example, but that is a special restriction and addressed
with that particular ERC. However, this doesn't seem to be so much of a
restriction, per se...
Sorrow
---
I don't want to be alone | I hurt, therefore I am
anymore |--------------------------------
I don't want to be anyone | "What are you looking at...?
anymore | you never seen anyone try to
I don't need a reason to kill myself | commit suicide before?" - Anon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorrow wrote:
>
> > > Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?
> > Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> > only criterion.
>
> Would Seeds of Corruption override the scarce text?
Yes. Burning the extra pool is something you do only because of card text.
But, of course, you'd have to bring out the scarce vampire first, have it Seeded,
then have it Banished *and* have another vampire of the same clan remain out in
order for this to matter...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Halcyon wrote:
>>As a final sidenote, I'm amused that the web-site says the Nagaraja will
>>complement the !Ventrue well (since they share Auspex/Dominate) but it>doesn't>>mention them meshing with the Malkavians, Tremere, and !Tremere. Hmmm...
Thematic considerations perhaps?
It may be noted, though, that the Ventrue Antitribu are more tightly focussed
on the Dom/Aus combo than are the other clans you mention. 12/15 (80%) of
their vampires have the combo, and only they have a 6-cap vampire with both at
superior. They have 5 vamps with both at superior, beating eveyone except the
Tremere, with whom they tie despite the Tremere's superior numbers. By
contrast the Malks have only 15/24 with the combo (62%), and many of these
allow Dom to languish at inferior even at extremely high capacities - only 3
have both at superior. The Tremere are too busy focussing on Thaumaturgy to
focus much on the Aus/Dom combo, and again have only 15/24 with both, and no
vampire with both is lower than 8 capacity.
These numbers may well have shifted further in favor of the Anti-Ventrue by the
time bloodlines is released. If Anatole is any indication, Malks will probably
not be focussing too strongly on Dominate in future releases.
Please also consider that Nagaraja are probably more likely to have fortitude
as an out-of-clan discipline than thaumaturgy.
-- John Whelan
>Temptation on a Scarce vampire.
>Clan Impersonate him to [most abundant clan in play].
>Give him back.
>Banish (or Reality, whichever) him.
>
>Sure, it's a stretch of a strategy, but if it works, it'll keep him from
>coming back.
>:)
>
Actually, I'm not sure this would work. When the vampire goes out of play to
the uncontrolled region, the Clan Impersonation isn't considered in play and
doesn't alter the clan (just as Discipline cards don't). So if you influence
out a Nagaraja (first one out), CI him to Ventrue, bring out another Nagaraja
("first" one out), and then Banish the "Ventrue" Nagajara, that guy is still
considered a Nagaraja and you have to burn 3 pool (for the other one you have
out), right?
Halcyan 2
[ quoted text not captured ]
If you move a "scarce" Ventrue (who's Ventrue only by the effect of a Clan
Impersonation - he's a Nagaraja in disguise, for example), from your uncontrolled
region (where he's a Nagaraja, since the CI is out of play) to your controlled
region (where he's a Ventrue, since the CI is back in play), you ask which clan
is counted, right?
Answer: the clan matching the card in play (not the uncontrolled card) - you
count Ventrue in this case.
In much the same way that extra blood won't "roll off" if you have the
Master Discipline cards to hold it.
[ quoted text not captured ]
>If you move a "scarce" Ventrue (who's Ventrue only by the effect of a Clan
>Impersonation - he's a Nagaraja in disguise, for example), from your
>uncontrolled
>region (where he's a Nagaraja, since the CI is out of play) to your
>controlled
>region (where he's a Ventrue, since the CI is back in play), you ask which
>clan
>is counted, right?
>
>Answer: the clan matching the card in play (not the uncontrolled card) - you
>count Ventrue in this case.
>
>In much the same way that extra blood won't "roll off" if you have the
>Master Discipline cards to hold it.
Thanks for the clarification!
Oops! I got that whole Discipline affair messed up! =)
Halcyan 2
LSJ wrote:
> Ethan Burrow wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 06:27:46 -0400, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >If Scarce Nag-A Clan Imps a Brujah, then you bring out Nag-B (who's marked
> > >"scarce" and is a Nagaraja), you pay 3 pool for every other vampire of
> > >the same clan - of which there are none, so you pay zero pool.
> >
> > Let me rephrase my question based off your example.
> >
> > Once Nag-A becomes Brujah, is he still 'scarce'?
>
> Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> only criterion.
>
>
Er, we rather recently had the opposite ruling for sects. Example,
Samat Ramal Ra, the Camarilla Setite, becomes Lasombra and
later becomes Setite again. Then he'd be independent even though
card text states Camarilla.
In what sense does card text differ as criterion in the scarce-case
and the sect-case?
Sten During
>Would a Naranja created by The Embrace be scarce? Sooner or later one
>will get Banished or Reality'd, I'm sure.
From what we know so far, no. Explicit card text is needed to be scarce so
unless they haven't revealed some special rule about passing on scarceness,
Embraces won't be scarce (though they will make getting out more bloodline
members harder).
This is all making me think about a theme deck revolving around Qadir changing
to various clans and Embracing various weenies (a Rutor's Hand might help for
more actions). It'll be titled, Qadir 'Gets Around'. ;)
Halcyan 2
>Er, we rather recently had the opposite ruling for sects. Example,
>Samat Ramal Ra, the Camarilla Setite, becomes Lasombra and
>later becomes Setite again. Then he'd be independent even though
>card text states Camarilla.
>In what sense does card text differ as criterion in the scarce-case
>and the sect-case?
Card-text is always the criterion but in the cases you described, there's the
situation of *over-riding* card-text. The Clan Impersonation card-text for
Setite (with the implicit Independent label) will indeed override Samat's
card-text regarding Camarilla affiliation. Similarly, a Writ of Acceptance will
override that CI's sect-affiliation as well.
So card text is the only criterion for scarceness. And if there's some master
card that says "Place on a scarce vampire. This vampire is no longer considered
scarce." Then that card text will override the card text of the vampire and the
vampire will no longer be scarce! Whew!
Halcyan 2
"Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:75bdf7ed.01101...@posting.google.com...
> Would a Naranja created by The Embrace be scarce? Sooner or later one
> will get Banished or Reality'd, I'm sure.
Depends how the rules are written, but from what we know so far, the answer
is no. Scarcity doesn't seem to be connected to clan per the rules like the
no diablerie is for Assamites. But it might very well be.
Roger
> Er, we rather recently had the opposite ruling for sects. Example,
> Samat Ramal Ra, the Camarilla Setite, becomes Lasombra and
> later becomes Setite again. Then he'd be independent even though
> card text states Camarilla.
> In what sense does card text differ as criterion in the scarce-case
> and the sect-case?
>
> Sten During
Sect change is specifically covered in the rules, and thus an exception.
Scarcity is AFAIK not in the same manner.
Roger
PS Sten check your @netg.se mail
Roger Carhult wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
After I posted I realised I might have made a bad choise of example.
Now I'm only speculating, but if scarceness is global for at least the
previewed bloodline, then Tariq, The Silent switching clan and back
again would be a better example. Blood Curse is global for assamites
so I assume that Tarik, The Assamite Once Again would be affected
by the Blood Curse.
PS just did check my mail. We're interested in such a tournament.
Sten During
In message <ByBy7.15935$e55.3...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,
jfeu...@lunarcity7.cx writes
>Personally, I'm hoping that they have a generalized rule that
>the Bloodlines are not considered "Clans", and, much like Caitiff,
>can't be Clan Impersonated into, can't use Consang. Boon, etc etc.
If you read the preview page, the Scarce rules *specifically* refer to
clans.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Emmit Svenson wrote:
>
> Would a Naranja created by The Embrace be scarce? Sooner or later one
> will get Banished or Reality'd, I'm sure.
As stated previously, card text is the only criterion for determining
if a vampire is scarce or not. An Embrace lacks such text.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Andrew wrote:
>The antitribu Tremere ought to be considered scarce now too. That might
>make a good effect for a hoser master card.
Problem is that in game terms, the Tremere Antitribu have no need for such a
hosing. Unlike the vampires of "Bloodlines" they were not designed to be
standalones -- they were not designed to be balanced when scarce. They are a
part of the game, and like all parts of the game in which players have invested
money, they deserve some level of continued support.
Though I can see "scarcity" being used as a general weapon against any clan, an
effect like "Name a clan. All members of that clan are considered scarce when
brought into play for the remainder of the game." Perhaps it could be called
"Consanguinous Catastrophe" or "Antidiluvian Munchies" or something, and might
fit with the Final Nights theme. The costs and conditions required to play it
would have to be high in order for such an effect to be remotely balanced. But
a single hoser that singed out one under-supported clan like the Anti-Tremere
would not be a good thing.
> Though I can see "scarcity" being used as a general weapon against any
clan, an
> effect like "Name a clan. All members of that clan are considered scarce
when
> brought into play for the remainder of the game." Perhaps it could be
called
> "Consanguinous Catastrophe" or "Antidiluvian Munchies" or something, and
might
> fit with the Final Nights theme.
Such a "Final Catastrophe" card could quite well fit the situation of the
Ravnos of late !!
--
Orpheus
http://cypheranima.free.fr
news://news.zoo-logique.org/VTES-francophone
audio...@yahoogroups.com
Sten During wrote:
> LSJ wrote:
> > Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> > only criterion.
>
> Er, we rather recently had the opposite ruling for sects. Example,
> Samat Ramal Ra, the Camarilla Setite, becomes Lasombra and
> later becomes Setite again. Then he'd be independent even though
> card text states Camarilla.
> In what sense does card text differ as criterion in the scarce-case
> and the sect-case?
In both cases, the rules are followed:
The scarce rule is written to be based on card text. It is.
The rulebook says that when a vampire changes clans, he changes sects to
the sect of the new clan. He does. [10]
[ quoted text not captured ]
Sten During wrote:
> Now I'm only speculating, but if scarceness is global for at least the
> previewed bloodline, then Tariq, The Silent switching clan and back
> again would be a better example. Blood Curse is global for assamites
> so I assume that Tarik, The Assamite Once Again would be affected
> by the Blood Curse.
Yes. Again, the rules hold: The rules say Assamites cannot commit
diablerie. So they can't. [6.5.5]
[ quoted text not captured ]
LSJ wrote:
> Sten During wrote:
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > Any vampire whose card text says he's scarce is scarce. Card text is the
> > > only criterion.
> >
> > Er, we rather recently had the opposite ruling for sects. Example,
> > Samat Ramal Ra, the Camarilla Setite, becomes Lasombra and
> > later becomes Setite again. Then he'd be independent even though
> > card text states Camarilla.
> > In what sense does card text differ as criterion in the scarce-case
> > and the sect-case?
>
> In both cases, the rules are followed:
>
> The scarce rule is written to be based on card text. It is.
> The rulebook says that when a vampire changes clans, he changes sects to
> the sect of the new clan. He does. [10]
>
>
Will there be an update of the rules when Bloodlines is reelased? As the
release is boosterpacks only there won't be a printed (on paper) set of
rules, so in order to avoid confusion I have a feeling that an updated
clarification/ruling/whatever in the official rules might come in handy
when handling new 'global' attributes.
Sten During
--
NetGuide Scandinavia AB http://www.netg.se/
Tankegangen 4 in...@netg.se
417 56 Goteborg Phone:+46 - (0)31 - 50 79 45
Sweden Fax: +46 - (0)31 - 50 79 39
Sten During wrote:
> Will there be an update of the rules when Bloodlines is reelased? As the
> release is boosterpacks only there won't be a printed (on paper) set of
> rules, so in order to avoid confusion I have a feeling that an updated
> clarification/ruling/whatever in the official rules might come in handy
> when handling new 'global' attributes.
You've got an assumption there. Assumptions are risky.
All will be clear when the time comes.
If you can't wait, the new rule appears on the BL preview page.
Print it out if you like.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Emmit Svenson <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Would a Naranja created by The Embrace be scarce? Sooner or later one
> will get Banished or Reality'd, I'm sure.
Not the Naranja!
The secret clan of Vampire Oranges!
...Sorry. :)
> After I posted I realised I might have made a bad choise of example.
> Now I'm only speculating, but if scarceness is global for at least the
> previewed bloodline, then Tariq, The Silent switching clan and back
> again would be a better example. Blood Curse is global for assamites
> so I assume that Tarik, The Assamite Once Again would be affected
> by the Blood Curse.
>
> PS just did check my mail. We're interested in such a tournament.
>
> Sten During
This is just another exception since that's covered in the rulebook as well.
Everything's that's not specifically dealt with in the rules/rulings is
treated like scarcity is, i.e. chenging clan doesn't affect the printed text
on the vampire. Just as much as changing to Ventrue doesn't make Bianca lose
her +1 strength :)
Roger
> Will there be an update of the rules when Bloodlines is reelased? As the
> release is boosterpacks only there won't be a printed (on paper) set of
> rules, so in order to avoid confusion I have a feeling that an updated
> clarification/ruling/whatever in the official rules might come in handy
> when handling new 'global' attributes.
>
> Sten During
Why could there not be an on paper printed set of rules in the boosters?
There was in the original Sabbat boosters.
Roger
On 16 Oct 2001 07:52:45 GMT, MSheafer33 wrote:
>a single hoser that singed out one under-supported clan like the Anti-Tremere
>would not be a good thing.
There are lots of cards which single out a particular clan - that's what
makes them a hoser. And it's obvious why the antitribu Tremere should
get this - they've all been wiped out and so are as scarce as they can
be. Currently their only hoser is Infamous Warlock but that's weak
compared with Letter from Vienna.
Andrew