Werewolves Set Idea

Alright... everyone by now is familiar with Imbued. What about making an expansion that gave Werewolves their own sect, etc.? I would think if done right they would be outright fun. Yes they could be combat monsters, but they could arguably have some cool stuff done to them or even incorporated the from source material. Just an idea without too much of specifics right now, but I think it could be really cool. I know the game is called VAMPIRE The Eternal Struggle, but they did make imbued and do make many kinds of allies. Personally I think Imbued can be cheesy at times (ie. Table Poison), but they can also be a solid deck that isn't table poison or mix with vampires, etc. Thoughts?

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT), RoddPrime wrote: >Alright... everyone by now is familiar with Imbued. What about making >an expansion that gave Werewolves their own sect, etc.? What is the market for it? Nights of Reckoning is the only set to sell less than half of its print run.... Rage was appropriately discontinued.... >I would think if done right they would be outright fun. Yes they could be combat >monsters, but they could arguably have some cool stuff done to them or >even incorporated the from source material. Perhaps. Have you tried the Rage - to - Jyhad variants? http://www.thelasombra.com/variants/rage_jyhad_crossover.txt http://www.thelasombra.com/variants/ragejyhad.htm >Just an idea without too much of specifics right now, but I think it >could be really cool. I know the game is called VAMPIRE The Eternal >Struggle, but they did make imbued and do make many kinds of allies. >Personally I think Imbued can be cheesy at times (ie. Table Poison), >but they can also be a solid deck that isn't table poison or mix with >vampires, etc. >Thoughts? I tried to avoid those after midnight. Carpe noctem. The Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com Your best source of V:TES information. Now also selling boxes and individual cards.

The Lasombra wrote: > On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT), RoddPrime wrote: > >> Alright... everyone by now is familiar with Imbued. What about making >> an expansion that gave Werewolves their own sect, etc.? > > What is the market for it? > > Nights of Reckoning is the only set to sell less than half of its > print run.... > > Rage was appropriately discontinued.... Why appropriately ? I thought you liked that game...

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT), RoddPrime <rodd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alright... everyone by now is familiar with Imbued. Unfortunately, yes. > What about making an expansion that gave Werewolves their own sect, etc.? Don't. Not a good idea. -- Regards, Daneel

[ quoted text not captured ] Use some card creation tool, read the RPG source books of Werewolf, build new cards, print them, try to come up with new rules, have fun with your friends playing this new game. Thanks, Tiago

On Oct 23, 5:23 am, "Orpheus" wrote: > > Rage was appropriately discontinued.... > Why appropriately ? I thought you liked that game... You mis-remember. Rage was broken. It might have gotten better in later sets or in the remakes, but I got out after a month or two of the original release.

Rage was broken. And beside, hunters had rather cold welcome. In fact, most players hate that set. But, i would rather like to see werewolf expansion than hunters.

Raziel wrote: > hunters had rather cold welcome. In fact, > most players hate that set. Fact, eh? I'd be interested in that citation.

On 23 Paź, 19:07, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Raziel wrote: > > hunters had rather cold welcome. In fact, > > most players* hate that set. > > Fact, eh? > I'd be interested in that citation. *in playgroups i know in person.

On 23 Okt, 06:22, RoddPrime <roddpr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thoughts? I have suggested this a couple times, but if you look at what the designers did with Nights of Reckoning... No thanks. Maybe if the designers bothered to keep the werewolves more in line with the vamps, instead of it´s own little broken, diffuse game (see multiple rant posts about NoRs suckiness).

[ quoted text not captured ] Did you guys sell much of NoR? Was there much demand for the set? Not counting the boosters that are forced apon us in prize support, of course. ;) Did it have many complaints? One can quantify all those things.

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Brum wrote: > Did you guys sell much of NoR? Was there much demand for the set? Not > counting the boosters that are forced apon us in prize support, of > course. ;) > Did it have many complaints? One can quantify all those things. People all over actually had wildly different reactions to the set. Yeah, it's probably the most controversial set ever printed, but there are plenty of people who like Imbued or just see them as another strong archetype. It's worth pointing out that (as well as this humble reporter can tell) the playgroups that didn't hate the Imbued on sight learned how to beat them long before anyone else did. As for sales, it's a 60 card set and the best and most useful cards in the set are common. You can do just fine with one box (maybe trading for/buying a few extra rares). Me, I like the set, but two boxes was just too much as I'm not likely to have multiple Imbued decks in circulation at once. I still have half a box unopened. Can't imagine what I'll ever do with it. Also, it's a boutique set. You don't need it (except Break the Code) if you aren't playing Imbued. A few NoR packs will not enhance your lawfirm or weenie dem deck. So it's only going to sell to players who want to play Imbued. All that being said, I wouldn't put a werewolf set high on my list of things I'd like to see. I'd rather see vtes jump over to the new WoD. Seems rather easy to me, since the new dudes could just be in a different group. Have some new sects, give the Ventrue Animalism, have a new clan called Daeva, etc. What's the problem? The crossover between old a new? Yeah, that's so much weirder than snakes on motorcycles, etc., etc., etc. Matt Morgan

[ quoted text not captured ] It would need to be different game - even with same mechanic. Key: Covenants. They need to be done right. I have my thoughts about possible redesign.

On Oct 23, 8:46 pm, "Matthew T. Morgan" <farq...@io.com> wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Brum wrote: > > Did you guys sell much of NoR? Was there much demand for the set? Not > > counting the boosters that are forced apon us in prize support, of > > course. ;) > > Did it have many complaints? One can quantify all those things. > > People all over actually had wildly different reactions to the set. Yeah, > it's probably the most controversial set ever printed, but there are > plenty of people who like Imbued or just see them as another strong > archetype. It's worth pointing out that (as well as this humble reporter > can tell) the playgroups that didn't hate the Imbued on sight learned how > to beat them long before anyone else did. > > As for sales, it's a 60 card set and the best and most useful cards in the > set are common. You can do just fine with one box (maybe trading > for/buying a few extra rares). Me, I like the set, but two boxes was just > too much as I'm not likely to have multiple Imbued decks in circulation at > once. I still have half a box unopened. Can't imagine what I'll ever do > with it. > > Also, it's a boutique set. You don't need it (except Break the Code) if > you aren't playing Imbued. A few NoR packs will not enhance your lawfirm > or weenie dem deck. So it's only going to sell to players who want to > play Imbued. > > Matt Morgan Again, wise words. Specially the part of groups that used Imbued, thus knowing their weaknesses and strengths. We didn't have that. The only players in Portugal that bought NoR were: a) Colectors that never used the cards, or didn't understand how it works. b) 2 Players that are in a closed playgroup and only use Imbued in Tournaments. We had an example of something that went terribly wrong because one tournament was won with a deck that used an illegal combo. It's very hard for non-Imbued players to know all the special details of the rules and mechanics they use. That also brought problems to the set, I think. At least prior to you monumental help that Jeff put aside for future reference. Once again, thanks for sharing your insight. Tiago

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Raziel wrote: > It would need to be different game - even with same mechanic. Key: > Covenants. They need to be done right. Why? What is it about covenants that they can't be represented as a sect or a trait? I haven't played the game, but my understanding was there are five main covenants, which basically are like sects but without the constant war. So you have a covenant named Invictus, right? Just put that on a vampire. Ted the vampire 2 cap Mekhet aus Invictus. Ted gets +5 bleed when bleeding a Methuselah who controls a ready Ordo Dracul. And then a library card: Invivctus bleed a lot! 8 pool. Master. Put this card in play. Invictus get +9 bleed. How is that so hard? Why wouldn't it work? Shouldn't I be a game designer? Those cards are sweet! > I have my thoughts about possible redesign. Tossing out the old is a bad idea. The great thing about vtes is you can still play most of the Jyhad cards and they are still very competative. It would be better to merge the two and just have new sets. Matt Morgan

[ quoted text not captured ] To RoddPrime (the OP): every reaction to your topic has been to shoot it down out of hand or to discuss Nights of Reckoning. Personally I would rather see a discussion about how a Werewolves set for Vampire might be implemented by people who are at least mildly open to the idea. I don't think there is a chance in the world of such a set ever being produced, so this discussion would only be an intellectual exercise. That said, I would challenge you, the OP, to give at least 3 ideas of how your Werewolves expansion would work with the current VTES rules. I am not familiar with the RPG nor with Rage, so I have no idea how any of it works. I, at least, would be interested in knowing a little bit about what such an expansion might look like, but I think you might have to take the lead.

[ quoted text not captured ] I would not make vampires this way. Rather like: Bob, the Angry Daeva Circle of the Crone (icon right below clan icon - to save card text - i'm sure it would be designed this way, if only orginal game designer would like to introduce those 8 sects) 4 capacity (or blood potency, or just potency - does not matter) maj vig (new disciplines, need new cards - celerity also work bit different and need to be adjusted ) Regent: (it's title - worth 1 vote, so it have to be bold)Ted may enter combat with tapped [ordo dracul icon - to save card text] as a (D) action. (this is card text - Tossing the old cards - well, there is 10 basic disciplines (11 if you include one that allow you to speak with spirits, 12 if you include also Mortuus) - and only Auspex, Obfuscate, Protean, Dominate and Celerity kept their old names. 5. And even those changed a lot (so cards based on those could change too). Disciplines are one thing. Gehenna event are another. There were no gehenna in nWoD, so to include new WoD, all gehenna events - and minions with gehenna special should be banned. Another thing are non-vampire changes. There is a card named 'Black Spiral Buddy' - but there is no such werewolf tribe in nWoD, there is no Order of Hermes too. So those card need a ban too. Also, there should be mechanism to prevent mixed oWoD/nWoD decks, and even tables. Otherwise we will end with two different ventrue/gangrel/ nosferatu clans, and cards that hose them (like cultivated blood shortage - nWoD ventrue does not have such flaw, possible nuventrue hoser, that is related to their new flaw - that old clan ventrue does not have at all!). Final thing - titles - oWoD is a game of worldwide conspiracy, when nWoD attempt to create local conspiracy (city as besieged castle, with few unsafe ways to leave). This need to be reflected in new titles philosophy - my idea is to use 5/6 cities of the east coast - prince of (insert city)/seneshal of (insert city)/(insert clan) primogen of (insert city)/ regent (non unique, worth 1 vote). Possibly (insert clan) priscus (insert city - or even not, i'm not sure). As you can see, such titles would be not the same as old ones, creating possible balancing issues (as nWoD prince would have more votes than oWoD prince). So simply it would be BASED on VtES, but would require new cards (and it would possibly be better balanced than current, where dominate > other disciplines and prince > any other 2 vote title).

In article <20b153e6-6f1f-4537...@33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, The Lasombra <thela...@hotmail.com> wrote: > You mis-remember. > Rage was broken. Heh. Oh, Rage. It was hysterical. If a bad game. The original problems with the game were: A) Rare cards were just plain better than not Rare cards (i.e. common attack X cost Y and did N damage; rare attack Z cost Y-1 and did N+1 damage with no other differences). B) The Super Rare Chase cards were incredibly powerful and had no additional cost to use. If you owned one, you just started with it in play. And it gave you huge advantages with zero penalties or cost. > It might have gotten better in later sets or in the remakes, but I got > out after a month or two of the original release. Oh, goodness no. I never saw the relaunch, but the expansions of the original game just kept adding extra rules and extra play areas, and the game collapsed under its own complexity. And inability to ever actually fight, when the whole purpose of the game was to fight. But the art was great! And the card names were fantastic! I still use Rage werewolf cards as dividers in my VTES deck boxes. Oh, Syntax. You are so sexy. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?" -Gaff

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, Raziel wrote: > I would not make vampires this way. Rather like: > > Bob, the Angry > Daeva > Circle of the Crone (icon right below clan icon - to save card text - > i'm sure it would be designed this way, if only orginal game designer > would like to introduce those 8 sects) > 4 capacity (or blood potency, or just potency - does not matter) > maj vig (new disciplines, need new cards - celerity also work bit > different and need to be adjusted ) Why does it need to be different? Keep the old cards and print some new ones. Make new rules: Potence is also called Vigor. Fortitude is also called Resilience. What's the problem? We already have discipline effects that don't appear in the RPG. I never heard of Celerity powers called "Flash" or "Blur" in WoD 1.0, but they work just fine in vtes. > Regent: (it's title - worth 1 vote, so it have to be bold)Ted may > enter combat with tapped [ordo dracul icon - to save card text] as a > (D) action. (this is card text - Well, that's a little confusing if the same term is repeated, but you can have "Sabbat Regent" and "Circle of the Crone Regent." A little clunky perhaps. There might be a better solution. > Tossing the old cards - well, there is 10 basic disciplines (11 if you > include one that allow you to speak with spirits, 12 if you include > also Mortuus) - and only Auspex, Obfuscate, Protean, Dominate and > Celerity kept their old names. 5. And even those changed a lot (so > cards based on those could change too). Great. New cards that do new stuff. That's what players like. > Disciplines are one thing. Gehenna event are another. There were no > gehenna in nWoD, so to include new WoD, all gehenna events - and > minions with gehenna special should be banned. Why? Why does that matter? > Another thing are non-vampire changes. There is a card named 'Black > Spiral Buddy' - but there is no such werewolf tribe in nWoD, there is > no Order of Hermes too. So those card need a ban too. Again, who cares? Banning a bunch of cards would just kill the game. > Also, there should be mechanism to prevent mixed oWoD/nWoD decks, and > even tables. Otherwise we will end with two different ventrue/gangrel/ > nosferatu clans, and cards that hose them (like cultivated blood > shortage - nWoD ventrue does not have such flaw, possible nuventrue > hoser, that is related to their new flaw - that old clan ventrue does > not have at all!). No, this is a terrible idea. I'm not proposing vtes type 2. I'm proposing mix and match in order to rebrand vtes and to get it a little marketing attention, attract new players and keep it alive. To ban half the cards and make up a bunch of rules about mixing and matching would only alienate existing players. Matt Morgan

On 24 Paź, 22:53, "Matthew T. Morgan" <farq...@io.com> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, Raziel wrote: > > I would not make vampires this way. Rather like: > > > Bob, the Angry > > Daeva > > Circle of the Crone (icon right below clan icon - to save card text - > > i'm sure it would be designed this way, if only orginal game designer > > would like to introduce those 8 sects) > > 4 capacity (or blood potency, or just potency - does not matter) > > maj vig (new disciplines, need new cards - celerity also work bit > > different and need to be adjusted ) > > Why does it need to be different? Keep the old cards and print some new > ones. Make new rules: Potence is also called Vigor. Fortitude is also > called Resilience. What's the problem? We already have discipline > effects that don't appear in the RPG. I never heard of Celerity powers > called "Flash" or "Blur" in WoD 1.0, but they work just fine in vtes. Very confusing solution, especially if we already have cards like resillience and majesty. Still, physical disciplines are easiest to transfer - they basicly stayed the same. But it's perfect opportunity to rebalance the game. > > Regent: (it's title - worth 1 vote, so it have to be bold)Ted may > > enter combat with tapped [ordo dracul icon - to save card text] as a > > (D) action. (this is card text - > > Well, that's a little confusing if the same term is repeated, but you can > have "Sabbat Regent" and "Circle of the Crone Regent." A little clunky > perhaps. There might be a better solution. There is Circle of the Crone Regent, Invictus Regent, Lancea Sanctum Regent, Unaligned Regent, Ordo Dracul Regent, perhaps even Belial's Brood Regent. It interfere with Rosa's special, and perhaps others. > > Tossing the old cards - well, there is 10 basic disciplines (11 if you > > include one that allow you to speak with spirits, 12 if you include > > also Mortuus) - and only Auspex, Obfuscate, Protean, Dominate and > > Celerity kept their old names. 5. And even those changed a lot (so > > cards based on those could change too). > > Great. New cards that do new stuff. That's what players like. Sure. > > Disciplines are one thing. Gehenna event are another. There were no > > gehenna in nWoD, so to include new WoD, all gehenna events - and > > minions with gehenna special should be banned. > > Why? Why does that matter? Well, for some odd people like me it matter. Why ? gehenna is strictly linked with endgame metaplot. With generations. With Caine. New vampires does not have generations, and are not Caine descendents. > > Another thing are non-vampire changes. There is a card named 'Black > > Spiral Buddy' - but there is no such werewolf tribe in nWoD, there is > > no Order of Hermes too. So those card need a ban too. > > Again, who cares? Banning a bunch of cards would just kill the game. Mixing nWoD with oWoD could kill the game too, some folks grab pitchforks when anyone even thinks about it ;) > > Also, there should be mechanism to prevent mixed oWoD/nWoD decks, and > > even tables. Otherwise we will end with two different ventrue/gangrel/ > > nosferatu clans, and cards that hose them (like cultivated blood > > shortage - nWoD ventrue does not have such flaw, possible nuventrue > > hoser, that is related to their new flaw - that old clan ventrue does > > not have at all!). > > No, this is a terrible idea. I'm not proposing vtes type 2. I'm > proposing mix and match in order to rebrand vtes and to get it a little > marketing attention, attract new players and keep it alive. To ban half > the cards and make up a bunch of rules about mixing and matching would > only alienate existing players. > > Matt Morgan Sure, rebranding is one of two ways. Others is create vtes 2.0. Mixing is 100% likely to be controversy. Creating vtes 2.0 (with other name, say Danse Macabre) would at least do not suffer internal fluff issues. I bet quite a lot of people like vtes for keeping oWoD alive, introducing nWoD creatures would kill the game for those people. Thats why i oppose mixed WoD approach.

On Oct 23, 11:50 pm, Brum <tiago.br...@gmail.com> wrote: > We had an example of something that went terribly wrong because one > tournament was won with a deck that used an illegal combo. Which had nothing to do with the imbued or their cards. It's been illegal to play more than one event card per turn since event cards were first printed, i.e., before Nights of Reckoning was printed. > It's very > hard for non-Imbued players to know all the special details of the > rules and mechanics they use. What? The rules for them fit on five cards. If the set had as small an impact on your playgroups as you claim, the people who do play imbued should certainly be bringing those cards to your tournaments. Read those cards, and then you know all the rules you need to know. John Eno

Brum wrote: > We had an example of something that went terribly wrong because one > tournament was won with a deck that used an illegal combo. It's very > hard for non-Imbued players to know all the special details of the > rules and mechanics they use. Ignorance of the rules is not a defense. There are a lot of players that don't know how library-card combos work, fr.ex. Charming Lobby+vote. Does that mean they should be pitied, or does that mean they should know the cards available to be played against them? If you want to play at an expert level, you learn the game. Period. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/ Please buy my cards! http://shop.ebay.com/kjmergen/m.html

[ quoted text not captured ] Just off the top of my head. 1) Rage + Gnosis are key concepts 2) Rage is a combat concept (maneuvers, strikes, presses) 3) Gnosis is a non-combat concept (stealth, bleed, votes) 4) Auspices are key text like Black Hand or Anarch while combining with Event type cards for phases of the moon 5) Dead is dead Anyone else have any ideas.

XZealot <xze...@cox.net> wrote: >Just off the top of my head. > >1) Rage + Gnosis are key concepts >2) Rage is a combat concept (maneuvers, strikes, presses) >3) Gnosis is a non-combat concept (stealth, bleed, votes) >4) Auspices are key text like Black Hand or Anarch while combining >with Event type cards for phases of the moon >5) Dead is dead > >Anyone else have any ideas. I sketched out some basic ideas in http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/c8775ce1ec10f7ee Having Rage and Gnosis as two Conviction cards makes most sense. Or, more generally, have potentially several Conviction cards with a keyword on. So, "Fury" and "Flare" would be two Conviction cards with the Rage keyword or symbol on them. Gnosis would be the same. Each card would have some sort of interesting abilities like the Imbued Convictions. e.g. Fury might grant additional strikes, agg damage etc. Rage and Gnosis only go on werewolves, existing Conviction only goes on Imbued etc. Werewolves heal fast. Interesting to think about how to allow for that. Moots are a problem. Adding titled werewolves who interact with a Praxis Seizure is orders of magnitude weirder than the Sabbat influencing a Praxis Seizure. Titled/prestigious werewolves who got cool cards - like Seraph works - might be a feasible option, but leave out the politics angle altogether. I've spent some time trying to concoct a political angle that works, and am stumped. Cairns turn up as a series of locations. Auspices might spice up a card, rather than being abilities in their own right. e.g. one card might grant you +1 stealth in exchange for burning a Gnosis, but a Ragabash might be able to do it for free, or do it for free if he wins a coin toss, or something. One of the 'prestige' type cards for werewolves might do more if you're Philodox. An intercept reaction might be easier for a Theurge. An Ahroun might deal an additional damage at the end of the round when you burn a Fury rage. Totems could be a unique ally, or possibly an Event. Unique, but also one per Methuselah to represent the totem for the pack. Implicitly, all your werewolves would be one pack. "Disciplines" or "Edges" are a tricky concept to map. The obvious thing is that you want them, and then Gifts would function like Powers. Some Powers would use Rage or Gnosis as costs. However, there isn't the same real concept of a discipline in Werewolf. What you could, potentially, do is map some of the other features to discipline-like Edges. For example, each Werewolf can have up to four different Edges, for lack of a better term - one each from one of four categories. No Edge of any category is mandatory. This might be glitchy from a W:tA point of view, but you can pretend that in some cases they're simply not developed enough or skilled enough, or something. - Edge category one: Breed form. Homid (human), lupus (wolf) or metis (hybrid). This is based on how the werewolf was born and brought up. This offers Werewolves one set of gifts. - Edge category two: Auspice. Ragabash (trickster), Ahroun (warrior), Galliard (bard), Theurge (shaman), Philodox (judge). - Edge category three: Tribe. Lots of these. - Edge category four: Renown. This could replace titles - Honor, Glory, Wisdom. So you might have a small werewolf for 2 pool who has the Homid Edge, and a 7 pool werewolf who has the Lupus, Philodox, Shadow Lord, and Wisdom Edges and some nice special ability. Some cards might work in a Keystone Kine-like fashion. e.g. (D) Bleed. [HOMID] This action is at +1 stealth. [AHROUN] This werewolf gets an optional maneuver if blocked. [GALLIARD] If this werewolf has three or more Gnosis, this action is at +1 bleed. [THEURGE] Choose a minion controlled by your prey and burn a Gnosis. That minion cannot block this action. That's not properly thought-through or costed, obviously, but you'd add together the various options that you met. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[ quoted text not captured ] I can understand that. To me it doesn't matter. If the next set of vtes used the Eve setting, I wouldn't miss a beat equipping Lazverinus with a star cruiser (or something - I know nothing about Eve) only to have Bobby Lemon blow it up with Canine Horde. "Dogs ate my start cruiser!" Is that worse than "Dogs ate my learjet!" Anyway, the point of the suggestion is that vtes has a branding problem. WW/CCP don't really want to promote OWoD materials. They want people to buy and enjoy the new RPGs. If vtes represented the new setting, I bet we'd get more promotion and support. Just starting a new incompatible game with similar rules would probably split the player base and both games couldn't survive. We'd probably lose more players than we'd gain. People hate having all their old cards obsoleted. So the solutions that I see are: 1) Continue on as before and learn to like not getting much in the way of promotion. 2) Figure out a way to transition to NWoD without trashing all the existing cards. Matt Morgan

> Werewolves heal fast. Interesting to think about how to allow for that. I was thinking that during your untap phase if a werewolf has less life than his initial amount then he gains a life. Also, in addition to doing damage, aggravated damage permanently lowers a werewolf's initial amount of life.

[snipped all the sweet card/rules concepts] James Coupe wrote: > "Edges" are a tricky concept to map. Confusion. "Edge" already has a specific use in VTES. best - chris

[ quoted text not captured ] I think Werewolves are more popular than Hunters, and so a Werewolf set would sell better, if the rules are thought through. Maybe not sell enough however. best - chris

librarian <auct...@superfuncards.com> wrote: >James Coupe wrote: >> "Edges" are a tricky concept to map. > >Confusion. "Edge" already has a specific use in VTES. Apologies. I blame it having been 1.30 in the morning. Switch that over to "Virtues" - which is the term Nights of Reckoning uses for its discipline-like attributes. These were called Edges in the Hunter RPG. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Option 3... From what I've heard VTES is one of WW's bigger revenue streams. Why shouldn't we get treated with our "own niche"? I mean sure, the books VTES was based on are now relegated to collector's shelves in the minds of the WW RPG people, BUT VTES can have and should have a life of its own. Why isn't VTES getting greater recognition in advertising as ITS OWN ENTITY rather than just some kind of "CCG Bastard Child of oWoD"? Also, with the huge volume of cards to be developed now that VTES appears to be on a 9month-cycle of new sets, where is the design TEAM? (I understand that LSJ is 'the VTES dude' but seriously... 150cards per 9 months balanced, tested and printed must be starting to build up as a challenge beyond just one guy) So Matt> Why Can't We Have Werewolves/Wraiths/Zombies/Imbued AND Advertising? Because WW maybe aren't yet willing to say that VTES stands up on its own "VTES-WoD" Feet.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Juggernaut1981 wrote: > So Matt> Why Can't We Have Werewolves/Wraiths/Zombies/Imbued AND > Advertising? Because WW maybe aren't yet willing to say that VTES > stands up on its own "VTES-WoD" Feet. I don't work for WW/CCP and don't have any special inside information, but I would say this isn't it. I would say that the main problem is the branding problem I outlined before. It could also be that prior marketing/promotional strategies haven't proven their worth. vtes sells when it doesn't get much promotion. It could be that it doesn't sell much more when it does get promotion. Why then would they spend money promoting it? I would like for this to be a third option, but it doesn't seem likely. WW/CCP certainly has had the opportunity to throw some more promotional weight behind vtes in its current form. Clearly they don't want to do that. Matt Morgan

[ quoted text not captured ] That's exactly what I would expect to hear from someone who had insider information about WW/CCP and also had a control chip embedded in their skull. EXACTLY!