New SoC preview: Trophy:Chosen

Trophy: Chosen Master When this card is moved to a vampire, that vampire gains 4 blood, becomes sabbat and untaps or that vampire can choose to burn this card instead. The vampire with this card is Black Hand. If he or she was already Black Hand when receiving this card, he or she is Seraph. Draft: (Master, not a Trophy) Add 2 blood to a Black Hand vampire. Yay!!!!! Finally a way to make seraphs, and at the same time an absolutely awesome Trophy!!!!! Wickedness, this card is gonna rock my world!!!

On Mar 9, 2:08 pm, "Blooded Sand" <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yay!!!!! Finally a way to make seraphs Don't forget the Seraph political action. Although I've never figured out a way to use it efficiently. That card should've been printed with Seraphs having votes in that referendum.

[ quoted text not captured ] Which us kinda why i said a way to make, not vote into being, Seraphs ;) But fully get where you coming from.

On 9 Mar, 12:08, "Blooded Sand" <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Trophy: Chosen > Master > When this card is moved to a vampire, that vampire gains 4 blood, > becomes sabbat and untaps or that vampire can choose to burn this card > instead. The vampire with this card is Black Hand. If he or she was > already Black Hand when receiving this card, he or she is Seraph. > > Draft: (Master, not a Trophy) > Add 2 blood to a Black Hand vampire. Question: How should this be read exactly: 1) Vampire gains 4 blood, becomes Sabbat (losing any sect based titles/ anarch if appropriate), and then either untaps or burns the card (but keeps sabbat status) 2) Vampire gains 4 blood and either can untap and become sabbat, or burn the card and keep original sect 3) Vampire burns the card and gains no effect, or gains 4 blood, becomes sabbat and untaps. (Obviously gaining BH and/or Seraph status where appropriate after deciding to burn the card or not). I assume 2 is the card intent, but 1 or 3 could very easily be read, as the punctuation is not set to which will happen otherwise. If 2 is not the intent, then I don't quite see how it will see play in anything other than a BH rush using Red-list for Trophies deck. (The red-list being a Camarilla held list, although I know that the game and WOD1 do not necessarily run exactly together). Andy VEKN Setite Ruler of Cambridge

Slytherin wrote: > On 9 Mar, 12:08, "Blooded Sand" <sandm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Trophy: Chosen >> Master >> When this card is moved to a vampire, that vampire gains 4 blood, >> becomes sabbat and untaps or that vampire can choose to burn this card >> instead. The vampire with this card is Black Hand. If he or she was >> already Black Hand when receiving this card, he or she is Seraph. >> >> Draft: (Master, not a Trophy) >> Add 2 blood to a Black Hand vampire. > > Question: > > How should this be read exactly: > > 1) Vampire gains 4 blood, becomes Sabbat (losing any sect based titles/ > anarch if appropriate), and then either untaps or burns the card (but > keeps sabbat status) > > 2) Vampire gains 4 blood and either can untap and become sabbat, or > burn the card and keep original sect > > 3) Vampire burns the card and gains no effect, or gains 4 blood, > becomes sabbat and untaps. > > (Obviously gaining BH and/or Seraph status where appropriate after > deciding to burn the card or not). 3). > I assume 2 is the card intent, but 1 or 3 could very easily be read, > as the punctuation is not set to which will happen otherwise. No, the punctuation is clear. There are two clauses (you can tell by the two subject/predicate pairs). The first predicate has three parts. The second has one.

On 9 Mar, 14:06, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > 3). > > > I assume 2 is the card intent, but 1 or 3 could very easily be read, > > as the punctuation is not set to which will happen otherwise. > > No, the punctuation is clear. > > There are two clauses (you can tell by the two subject/predicate pairs). > The first predicate has three parts. The second has one. I agree that 3 is the most clear way to read it, but thanks for clarification though. As such, my feeling is this card really will not see play outside of a Sabbat BH red-list/trophy deck then (which matches the set at least). Bit of a shame though that Non-Sabbat don't get any benefit from this trophy. I was disappointed that some of the Archetypes were related purely to a sect, and clearly this is the way it will go with trophies. This is losing potential playability of a "cardtype" to deckbuilding. I don't expect all clans/sects to get something of everything, but a Trophy or an Archetype is not something that I would have expected to see be specific to a sect (or trophies to be Camarilla at least if you were to play strictly to cannon) as anyone should be able to "win" and gain a benefit from a Trophy, and anyone could potentially have a particular archetype trait to their personality, regardless of what clan/sect they belong to. (Before anyone says, yes anyone can gain this trophy, and gain it's benefit of becoming Sabbat, BH and gain 4 blood, but becoming Sabbat/ BH may be detrimental to your game plan, and you can't even use it in a hosing way, as you could give it to a vampire (say Arika) controlled by someone else, to make them Sabbat/BH, but they would then just say, I'll burn the card instead). Just a small rant, you can get back to normal service now. Andy

One thing that came to my mind from this card was that wouldn't it be really cool to make a big bad Camarilla vampire, let's say Karsh, into an Archon or Alastor and then give him that trophy to make him Sabbat. After that you could make him also a Templar. Think of him with three innate rushes and an Assault Rifle :)

[ quoted text not captured ] Any chance of making cards that are easier to read?

[ quoted text not captured ] Given the space available and the limitations of printing technology, the cards have to assume a knowledge of English grammar.

On Mar 10, 11:35 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I can read this card fine, but in defense of the confused, it would be much clearer if the two halves of the OR conjuction where switched around. So: When this card is moved to a vampire, that vampire can choose to burn this card or else that vampire gains 4 blood, becomes sabbat and untaps. else is even shorter than instead. real text: [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1173538820.3...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "d" <david.cor...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can read this card fine, but in defense of the confused, it would be > much clearer if the two halves of the OR conjuction where switched > around. In further defense of the confused, I am a fairly well educated native English speaker, and I'm not completely sure what the card is supposed to do in an absolute sense. But then, I am well known to use double negatives... > So: When this card is moved to a vampire, that vampire can choose to > burn this card > or else that vampire gains 4 blood, becomes sabbat and untaps. If this is what the card actually does (i.e. you can choose to have the card either do A: Nothing or B: Gain you 4 blood, make you Sabbat, and untap you), what possible reason is there to have option A on the card? Aren't Trophies completely optional? In what circumstance would you burn a Red List vampire, gain yourself Trophy: Chosen, and then just burn it? On first read, I assumed that the card gave you 4 blood and then either made you Sabbat and untapped you *or* it didn't (as you chose the "burn this card" aspect instead of the "become Sabbat and untap" option). But in either case, you gained 4 blood. Is this *not* how the card works? Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

On Mar 10, 3:36 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1173538820.379453.184...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > If this is what the card actually does (i.e. you can choose to have the > card either do A: Nothing or B: Gain you 4 blood, make you Sabbat, and > untap you), what possible reason is there to have option A on the card? > Aren't Trophies completely optional? In what circumstance would you burn > a Red List vampire, gain yourself Trophy: Chosen, and then just burn it? LSJ confirms this is how it works above in the thread (ie. option 3). You've possibly never seen more than 1 trophy deck at a table: here's the rulebook: "When any vampire burns a Red List minion in combat or as a (D) action (including diablerie), the controller of the trophy may choose to move the trophy to that vampire." So someone else can reward your vamp-burning vampire with one of their trophies (that they've already played, not from their library), fyi.

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 10:36:03 -0500, Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote: >Aren't Trophies completely optional? Yes and no. The controller of Trophy Master cards in play can apply them to a vampire, or not, when the condition of burning a Red List minion in combat or as a (D) action is fulfilled. You (my grand-predator) burn the Red-Listed minion of my predator (that I probably made Red List). I can give you my in-play Trophies for that action. Or not. At my discretion. You, in this example, have no choice in the matter. I can give you this Trophy that makes your Inner Circle member Sabbat. You can only turn down this wonderful promotion via card text.

In article <m4n5v2t4p4fh94u5g...@4ax.com>, The Lasombra <TheLa...@hotmail.com> wrote: > You (my grand-predator) burn the Red-Listed minion of my predator > (that I probably made Red List). I can give you my in-play Trophies > for that action. Or not. At my discretion. You, in this example, > have no choice in the matter. I can give you this Trophy that makes > your Inner Circle member Sabbat. > > You can only turn down this wonderful promotion via card text. Oh, ok. That makes sense then. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1173543443.5...@c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "d" <david.cor...@gmail.com> wrote: > You've possibly never seen more than 1 trophy deck at a table: > here's the rulebook: > "When any vampire burns a Red List minion in combat or as a (D) action > (including diablerie), the controller of the trophy may choose to move > the trophy to that vampire." Heh. I've never actually seen a single Trophy deck at a table, really. But now that I realize that I can give you a Trophy, then the burn option of Chosen makes sense. [ quoted text not captured ]

On 10 Mar, 12:35, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I agree with "d" below. And I have to say that White Wolf should take into account that very many players do not have english as native language.

[ quoted text not captured ] Yes, it is especially good for making Independant Assimites into Black Hand Assimtes. Can you say Thetmes with a Shakar? Commments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

[ quoted text not captured ] perhaps a colon and semi colon could clearly separate them