rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Gang/Nos Deck. Critique?

11 messages from 6 participants · 21 January 1996 – 26 January 1996
original thread on Google Groups

Pit Fiend

In a fit of Masochism I decided to post a Gangrel/Nosferaty deck I've been using. What do you guys think I should change? Note that we generally play 4CL, and half the time start with 40 pool. The main idea is Potence/Protean combat, some intercept/untap, and I recently started actually using obfuscate since I found I had more combat ability than I really needed, and wanted a little more variety. (Hopefully at no loss...) I try to get the edge on sit on it, while slowly bleeding/burning my prey. Also, standard disclaimer: Some cards I just don't have. VAMPIRES Blood ***************************** Basila 10 Wynn 10 Zack North 6 Badger 6 Camille Devereaux 5 Chandler Hungerford 3 Ricky Van Dempsy 3 Selma the Repugnant 8 Ebenezer Roush 8 Nikolauds Vermeulen 7 Daliyah 4 Koko 2 LIBRARY ******* Mob Connections Spawning Pool Storm Sewers Labyrinth Slum HG Backways Eco Terrorists Zoo HG Gangrel Revel 2 Fortitude 2 Potence 4 Frenzy 3 Renegade Garou Palatial Estate Ritual Challenge PROTEAN ******* Humumculus 4 Wolf Claws 4 Claws of the Dead 4 Form of Mist FORTITUDE ********* 4 Skin of Steel 3 Indomitable 3 Unflinching Persistance 3 Skin of Rock ANIMALISM ********* 2 Raven Spy 3 Murder Of Crows 4 Cat's Guidance 4 Rat's Warning POTENCE ******* Fists of Death Immortal Grapple 3 Torn Signpost 4 Growing Fury 4 Mighty Grapple OBFUSCATE ********* 3 Hidden Lurker 3 Night Moves -- /\ Jasper Phillips (Pit Fiend) ______,....----, /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|==================="""""""""""" ___,..-' `^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|======================----------"""""" \/ http://www.cs.orst.edu/~philljas/

refp...@best.com

[ quoted text not captured ] > (how about some Gleam of Red eyes for Press & Maneuvers? ( Makes it more likely to use the spawning pool and your HTH) > FORTITUDE > ********* > 4 Skin of Steel > 3 Indomitable > 3 Unflinching Persistance > 3 Skin of Rock > > ANIMALISM > ********* > 2 Raven Spy > 3 Murder Of Crows > 4 Cat's Guidance > 4 Rat's Warning > (Wolf companion stacks with your hand damage and at 3 life, are really hard to kill. Of course I like the flexability of the crows. [ quoted text not captured ]

Pit Fiend

In article <4dve7d$q...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, PDB6 <pd...@aol.com> wrote: >It looks like a fairly straight forward Gangrel deck, with a couple of >Nosferatu in for spice. It looks like it will have trouble working, as it >doesn't have that much intercept, it has no way to make bleeds big (and >thus inspire your prey to block), and it can't get into fights directly That's fine, I'm not planning to bleed them out of existance, I have other decks that can do that. I just want to sit on the edge. >(no Bum Rush or Haven Uncovered). Because of the lack of OBF in the deck, Yah, my Rush is a little limited. I still manage to ussualy get one of either Winn, Ebenezer Roush, or a Renegade Garou out. >you would be better off to lose the Nosferatu all together, except for >Ebanezzer Roush and Daliyah, and then double up on Zack North and Badger >in the crypt. My advice: Yah, probably true. I find myself likeing the Nos's Master cards though. Not to mention I like the guy who can repeatedly but blood on uncontrolled Nos's > >-Loose the 6 Obf cards and replace them with either Earth Control (+1/+2 >stealth) or Form of Mist (S:CE continue action at +1 stealth). I have Form of mist, and I think Night Moves is far better than Earth Control, considering that I never bleed for more than one. Generally I actually play without Obfuscate. I think I'd like to have some Masks of 1,000 Faces though. > >-Lose the Nosferatu as discribed above (And I'm the one who loves the >Nosferatu). > >-Add some sort of direct attack abilities. No one is going to block your >bleeds, as you are only going to bleed for one, and if they do block you, >you will kill them, so they won't. With only 7 cards in an 80 card deck >to provide intercept, you won't be able to intercept all that much either. I'd like to have more Raven Spys as well. I don't want a whole lot of intercept, just enough for the threat of blocking +1 stealth actions. It's kind of hard to get a lot of intercept without playing auspex, and the Radio Tower is generally either contested out Sudden Reversaled. > >-Try to con all of your fellow players out of their Immortal Grapples. >This is the most important card you can get for a Pot combat deck, as it >makes you immune to S:CE (Strike: Combat Ends, like Majesty or Earth >Meld), your opponents can't Dodge you, and they can't use guns against >you. With Immortal Grapple, your deck will become an absolute terror >(especially if you are the only one using Fortitude). Just convince your >friends that they are useless, and then trade them good stuff for them. >Then make all their vamps dissapear in a hail of 5 point aggro hits. Clearly. But I only have one. :-( > >-Add some manuvers like Fake Outs and Form of the Ghost. Without >manuvers, a hand damage deck is useless against any deck with guns or >manuvers ("Boy, you certainly do have 5 aggro hand damage, WAY over there. > I guess I'll stay over by this deli..."). I disagree here, I have several Fortitue cards and Protean cards that can double as maneuvers (enough so that people can't count on me not having 'em, and they have other uses as well), and in any event, I plan to press to continue combat. Presses are good whether or not they maneuver. I don't think it's worthwhile to stock up on both maneuvers and pushes, and I think that pushes are more usefull. > >-While I am always a fan of the Garou, they very often just end up costing >you 5 pool, and get killed by another combat deck. In a game filled with >Malkavians and Toreadors, the Garou will eat well, but vs the Gangrel, >Nosferatu and Brujah, they will just end up dead. True. I'm just carefull who I attack. If I don't think the Garou will be usefull, I discard it. However in the Right situation they're nasty. Also, he often play 40 blood, so I have a little more room to bring them out. > >It looks like a basis for a good Pot/Pro "Burn'em Up" deck, but it needs >some focus to make the combat work well. Trying to get the Edge and >keeping it depends too much on the strength of the other players to avoid >being bled, so that is a crap shoot at best. Early in the game I agree... the edge is rarely kept. Later in the game, I completely disagree. I find that being able to sit on the edge when the game is close and it's difficult to spare someone to bleed has won me quite a few games. I can have trouble with a heavy obfuscate deck though if the right cards don't come up. > >I had a good Nosferatu (with a couple of Gangrel) Pot/Pro deck that would >regularly vaporize a couple of vamps a game for a while, but it was SO >card intensive that it was very hard to make it work. For maximum effect, >I needed to have in my hand (or manage to draw): > >Bums Rush (to get in combat with the victim of choice) >Some stealth card (to not get blocked) >An extra manuver card (just in case) >Immortal Grapple (Because it is the linch pin in the plan) >Torn Signpost (for 3 hand damage) >Undead Strength (total 5 hand damage) >Claws of the Dead (poof) > >This would make a vamp with 3 or less blood vanish (we use the Jyhad aggro Errr, are the V:TES aggro rules different!? >rules), as long as they didn't accidentally have Fortitude cards. It >happened occasionally, and was fun when it did, but was only a sure thing >against the (pre Thoughts Betrayed) Malkavians, anyone I know who wasn't >using Fortitude. A very difficult thing to make work. Yah, you have no way to avoid damage. Honestly sounds like a weaker version of my deck... Although you have the Bum's Rush and Immortal Grapple. > >Good Luck, > >-Peter D Bakija > You too! -Jasper [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6

It looks like a fairly straight forward Gangrel deck, with a couple of Nosferatu in for spice. It looks like it will have trouble working, as it doesn't have that much intercept, it has no way to make bleeds big (and thus inspire your prey to block), and it can't get into fights directly (no Bum Rush or Haven Uncovered). Because of the lack of OBF in the deck, you would be better off to lose the Nosferatu all together, except for Ebanezzer Roush and Daliyah, and then double up on Zack North and Badger in the crypt. My advice: -Loose the 6 Obf cards and replace them with either Earth Control (+1/+2 stealth) or Form of Mist (S:CE continue action at +1 stealth). -Lose the Nosferatu as discribed above (And I'm the one who loves the Nosferatu). -Add some sort of direct attack abilities. No one is going to block your bleeds, as you are only going to bleed for one, and if they do block you, you will kill them, so they won't. With only 7 cards in an 80 card deck to provide intercept, you won't be able to intercept all that much either. -Try to con all of your fellow players out of their Immortal Grapples. This is the most important card you can get for a Pot combat deck, as it makes you immune to S:CE (Strike: Combat Ends, like Majesty or Earth Meld), your opponents can't Dodge you, and they can't use guns against you. With Immortal Grapple, your deck will become an absolute terror (especially if you are the only one using Fortitude). Just convince your friends that they are useless, and then trade them good stuff for them. Then make all their vamps dissapear in a hail of 5 point aggro hits. -Add some manuvers like Fake Outs and Form of the Ghost. Without manuvers, a hand damage deck is useless against any deck with guns or manuvers ("Boy, you certainly do have 5 aggro hand damage, WAY over there. I guess I'll stay over by this deli..."). -While I am always a fan of the Garou, they very often just end up costing you 5 pool, and get killed by another combat deck. In a game filled with Malkavians and Toreadors, the Garou will eat well, but vs the Gangrel, Nosferatu and Brujah, they will just end up dead. It looks like a basis for a good Pot/Pro "Burn'em Up" deck, but it needs some focus to make the combat work well. Trying to get the Edge and keeping it depends too much on the strength of the other players to avoid being bled, so that is a crap shoot at best. I had a good Nosferatu (with a couple of Gangrel) Pot/Pro deck that would regularly vaporize a couple of vamps a game for a while, but it was SO card intensive that it was very hard to make it work. For maximum effect, I needed to have in my hand (or manage to draw): Bums Rush (to get in combat with the victim of choice) Some stealth card (to not get blocked) An extra manuver card (just in case) Immortal Grapple (Because it is the linch pin in the plan) Torn Signpost (for 3 hand damage) Undead Strength (total 5 hand damage) Claws of the Dead (poof) This would make a vamp with 3 or less blood vanish (we use the Jyhad aggro rules), as long as they didn't accidentally have Fortitude cards. It happened occasionally, and was fun when it did, but was only a sure thing against the (pre Thoughts Betrayed) Malkavians, anyone I know who wasn't using Fortitude. A very difficult thing to make work. Good Luck, -Peter D Bakija

Nicole Janine Purvis

Pit Fiend (phil...@monitor.CS.ORST.EDU) wrote: : In a fit of Masochism I decided to post a Gangrel/Nosferaty deck I've : been using. What do you guys think I should change? Note that we generally : play 4CL, and half the time start with 40 pool. : The main idea is Potence/Protean combat, some intercept/untap, and I recently : started actually using obfuscate since I found I had more combat ability : than I really needed, and wanted a little more variety. (Hopefully at no : loss...) I try to get the edge on sit on it, while slowly bleeding/burning : my prey. : Also, standard disclaimer: Some cards I just don't have. : VAMPIRES Blood : ***************************** : Basila 10 : Wynn 10 : Zack North 6 : Badger 6 : Camille Devereaux 5 : Chandler Hungerford 3 : Ricky Van Dempsy 3 : Selma the Repugnant 8 : Ebenezer Roush 8 : Nikolauds Vermeulen 7 : Daliyah 4 : Koko 2 Peter critiqued this, but one of the things I didn't see him mention is the cost of the vamps. True, the game will be longer, but I don't know about a 6, a 7, 2 8's and 2 10's for vamps, especially with no means to bring them out quicker [Info Highway]... -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | "What is a man without the beasts? If the beasts were gone, | | man would die from a great loneliness of spirit." | | "Confuse, annoy, and dee-STROY!!" Call me "Nicole" and I | | npu...@tiger.lsu.edu -- Jet...@aol.com will have to kill you. | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pit Fiend

In article <4e58jg$o...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, PDB6 <pd...@aol.com> wrote: >Yah, the VTES aggro rules are different from the Jyhad aggro rules. In >Jyhad, the first point of aggro damage a vamp takes does not cause any >blood loss, it just sends the vamp to torpor. Any extra aggro damage >removes blood, but the first point from a strike does not, so if a vamp >takes 3 aggro damage, they only lose 2 blood. If a vamp has no blood when >they take a point of aggro, they just go to torpor, rather than being >burned, like in VTES. Thus, to burn a vamp using Jyhad rules, you need to >do X+2 aggro damage, where X is the vamps current blood level, as the >first point will send them to torpor, and the rest will burn them. > >This is one of the main big differences between Jyhad and VTES, as in VTES >cards like Pulled Fangs and the Ivory Bow become very powerful burning >agents, where in Jyhad, they would just send you to torpor. The Ivory Bow >in Jyhad could never burn anyone, as it could only do 1 aggro. The same >with Pulled Fangs. In VTES, either of these cards will burn a vamp with >zero blood, which makes them much more powerful than they used to be. Hmmm. I suppose they tried to make aggravated damage more powerfull considering the strange ruling on Rotschreck? We play Jyhad aggro, and just ignore Rotschreck. > >Yes, that "Pot/Pro" aggro deck I had described had plenty of problems, >most of which stemmed from, as you pointed out, having no way to avoid >damage. Thus, I played it a couple of times and got a special little >thrill by vaporizing 2 or 3 vamps a game, even though I lost all the time. > As I feel it is my mission in life to make a good Nosferatu deck, I took >it apart and put together my "It only works if I get out Marty Lechtansi" >deck. It is a kind of brutal Pot/For combat deck, with some stealth for >unblockable rushes and bleeding, and some Dom for Conditioning and >Deflections. It works ok, but only if I get out Marty Lechtansi (thus, >the name...) :-) > >-Peter D Bakija I always had thoughts about making a Nos deck with concealed weapon and hand weapons... It sucks to have a mostly fighting deck that can't avoid damage though. [ quoted text not captured ]

CurtAdams

pd...@aol.com (PDB6) writes: > As I feel it is my mission in life to make a good Nosferatu deck, I took >it apart and put together my "It only works if I get out Marty Lechtansi" >deck. It is a kind of brutal Pot/For combat deck, with some stealth for >unblockable rushes and bleeding, and some Dom for Conditioning and >Deflections. It works ok, but only if I get out Marty Lechtansi (thus, >the name...) :-) Have you tried using Mask of 1000 Faces to link up unconnected disciplines (e.g., a Dominate or Presence Vampire bleeds, which is then Masked over to a Nossie to make it go through?) Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)

Pit Fiend

In article <4dvm1p$1g...@tiger1.ocs.lsu.edu>, [ quoted text not captured ] Hmmm. I never really gave much thought to that. The average vampire in this deck is a 6... so I generally have just enough pool to get all four starting vampires out. I'm ussualy able to get a vampire out the first turn, then reasonably often another the second... I've never had much problem with that -- perhaps it's just the way people play around here. I have played against quick decks though (A friend of mine seems to always start with the Information Highway!!), and I find the start is slow, but you come on in the middle. Personally I don't much like the Information Highway, since this isn't a quick start deck (I generaly don't like those anyway, so perhaps I'm biased), the Highway is only really usefull at the start of the game, and I may well have too many master cards already if I fight alot (that I'd rather have than the Highway). -Jasper PS I took out 4 of the Obfuscate Cards for Bum's Rushes. I've thought about changing the Vamps, but I think the only one I'd be likely to change is Selma. Two of 'em have protean, Koko wastes nothing, and I like the guy who can give blood to uncontrolled Nos's (and he only wastes 1 discipline anyway). Mostly I keep them so I can also play Nos Master cards. [ quoted text not captured ]

PDB6

Yah, the VTES aggro rules are different from the Jyhad aggro rules. In Jyhad, the first point of aggro damage a vamp takes does not cause any blood loss, it just sends the vamp to torpor. Any extra aggro damage removes blood, but the first point from a strike does not, so if a vamp takes 3 aggro damage, they only lose 2 blood. If a vamp has no blood when they take a point of aggro, they just go to torpor, rather than being burned, like in VTES. Thus, to burn a vamp using Jyhad rules, you need to do X+2 aggro damage, where X is the vamps current blood level, as the first point will send them to torpor, and the rest will burn them. This is one of the main big differences between Jyhad and VTES, as in VTES cards like Pulled Fangs and the Ivory Bow become very powerful burning agents, where in Jyhad, they would just send you to torpor. The Ivory Bow in Jyhad could never burn anyone, as it could only do 1 aggro. The same with Pulled Fangs. In VTES, either of these cards will burn a vamp with zero blood, which makes them much more powerful than they used to be. Yes, that "Pot/Pro" aggro deck I had described had plenty of problems, most of which stemmed from, as you pointed out, having no way to avoid damage. Thus, I played it a couple of times and got a special little thrill by vaporizing 2 or 3 vamps a game, even though I lost all the time. As I feel it is my mission in life to make a good Nosferatu deck, I took it apart and put together my "It only works if I get out Marty Lechtansi" deck. It is a kind of brutal Pot/For combat deck, with some stealth for unblockable rushes and bleeding, and some Dom for Conditioning and Deflections. It works ok, but only if I get out Marty Lechtansi (thus, the name...) :-) -Peter D Bakija

L. Scott Johnson

phil...@gila.CS.ORST.EDU (Pit Fiend) writes: >In article <4e58jg$o...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, PDB6 <pd...@aol.com> wrote: >>Yah, the VTES aggro rules are different from the Jyhad aggro rules. In >>Jyhad, the first point of aggro damage a vamp takes does not cause any >>blood loss, it just sends the vamp to torpor. Any extra aggro damage >>removes blood, but the first point from a strike does not, so if a vamp >>takes 3 aggro damage, they only lose 2 blood. If a vamp has no blood when >>they take a point of aggro, they just go to torpor, rather than being >>burned, like in VTES. Thus, to burn a vamp using Jyhad rules, you need to >>do X+2 aggro damage, where X is the vamps current blood level, as the >>first point will send them to torpor, and the rest will burn them. >> >>This is one of the main big differences between Jyhad and VTES, as in VTES >>cards like Pulled Fangs and the Ivory Bow become very powerful burning >>agents, where in Jyhad, they would just send you to torpor. The Ivory Bow >>in Jyhad could never burn anyone, as it could only do 1 aggro. The same >>with Pulled Fangs. In VTES, either of these cards will burn a vamp with >>zero blood, which makes them much more powerful than they used to be. >Hmmm. I suppose they tried to make aggravated damage more powerfull >considering the strange ruling on Rotschreck? We play Jyhad aggro, and >just ignore Rotschreck. The aggro rules were changed to simplify them, and to prevent some non-sensical effects. In Jyhad, when multiple batches of agg are done, each batch after the first 'wastes' a point of agg damage by re-sending the target to torpor. It wasn't always clear what constituted a separate batch. Also, someone with aggravated damage fighting an Undeadly Persistent vampire would do less damage than someone with normal damage (e.g., every punch from Basilia would have no effect, whereas every punch from Nik would cause a blood to be burned). In VtES, it doesn't matter how you lump or separate the agg damage (so long as you apply non-agg before agg) - the net result is always exactly the same. As an added bonus, agg damage is never inferior to normal. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | These opinions are mine and http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | are subject to card text. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

Pit Fiend

In article <4e84a3$9...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, [ quoted text not captured ] Strange, that's never been the way we played it. True, the first point didn't make you lose a blood, but rather sent you to torpor. In general, you couldn't have extra bouts of aggro damage, because the fight was over. In the few cases where torpor was delayed, we just counted all excess damage as normal damage, as the rules suggest. (Since the Vampire is already going to torpor. [ quoted text not captured ]