Expansion #2?

We are beginning development on White Wolf's second expansion for V:TES. This expansion is only going into development and possibly on to playtest right now. We will not be contracting art, marketing, or printing it unless and until Sabbat War meets its sales targets. I've discussed this before, but just wanted to reiterate for clarity. L. Scott Johnson will once again be lead designer. The set will be called "Final Nights", and as promised, it will primarily flush out the independent clans to give them equal standing with the more developed clans (other clans will find the odd goodie in the set as well). Although this is subject to change, right now the set will have all new cards (at least 120) and be sold in booster format only. We may add pre-constructed starters, but they're not part of the initial plan. We are aiming at April or May 2001 release. Since I don't want to detract from attention on Sabbat War's release, that's all the news I'll offer on this for now. Regards, Steve Wieck White Wolf ---------- Want V:tES Prize Support? See http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/veknPrizeSupport.html ----------

Great, will there be new disciplines and new clans too? In article <B5EBBD9A.19D5%steve...@white-wolf.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

> Great, will there be new disciplines and new clans too? No. Note the following part of Steve's post: > > L. Scott Johnson will once again be lead designer. The set will be > > called "Final Nights", and as promised, it will primarily flush out the > > independent clans to give them equal standing with the more developed > > clans (other clans will find the odd goodie in the set as well). So no, no new clans, no new disciplines. Sorrow --- I told the priest - don't count on any second coming. God got his ass kicked the first time he came down here slumming. He had the balls to come, the gall to die and then forgive us. No, I don't wonder why, I wonder what he thought it would get us

In article <K%px5.13$0d....@monger.newsread.com>, "Sorrow" <cbo...@apdi.net> wrote: > > Great, will there be new disciplines and new clans too? > > No. Note the following part of Steve's post: > > > > L. Scott Johnson will once again be lead designer. The set will be > > > called "Final Nights", and as promised, it will primarily flush out the > > > independent clans to give them equal standing with the more developed > > > clans (other clans will find the odd goodie in the set as well). > > So no, no new clans, no new disciplines. Correct, Clans Giovanni, Ravnos, Followers of Set, and Assimites as well as the disciplines of Necromancy, Chimerstry, Serpentis, and Quietus. Rock on! Norman S. Brown Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

"Steve Wieck" <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:B5EBBD9A.19D5%steve...@white-wolf.com... > We are beginning development on White Wolf's second expansion for V:TES. Holy crap, V:TES is going into overdrive - I like it. > This expansion is only going into development and possibly on to playtest > right now. We will not be contracting art, marketing, or printing it unless > and until Sabbat War meets its sales targets. I've discussed this before, > but just wanted to reiterate for clarity. > > L. Scott Johnson will once again be lead designer. The set will be called > "Final Nights", and as promised, it will primarily flush out the independent > clans to give them equal standing with the more developed clans Once again, excellent. All of the AH and DS clans need help to make them competitive in regular and tourney play (I don't ever hear of a independant clan deck ranking high or winning a tourney, a good litmus test I think). The Giovanni could possibly get a 'Strike:Go to torpor' in the form of Ashes to Ashes or whatever it's called and a few more vamps with NEC. Assamites need to be made more efficient and effective in combat. Setites need more good vamps and different deck possibilities (I can only think of 4/5 different possible types of Setite deck). Ravnos are not too bad but possibly need access to an anti S:CE? They just never seem to do well ! > (other clans will find the odd goodie in the set as well). Cool, more sleaze for old timers. >Although this >is subject to change, right now the set will have all new cards (at least 120) >and be sold in booster format only. We may add pre-constructed starters, but they're >not part of the initial plan. > We are aiming at April or May 2001 release. > > Since I don't want to detract from attention on Sabbat War's release, that's > all the news I'll offer on this for now. > > Regards, > > Steve Wieck > White Wolf Once again 1000 thanks from me and the other Southampton players for finally doing the game proud. Rob T --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.166 / Virus Database: 79 - Release Date: 20/06/00

Excellent. Lets make sure Sabbat War exceeds all sales expectations. Steve Bucy -- "The only human commander to survive combat with the Minbari fleet is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives be somewhere else!" - Delenn Steve Wieck wrote in message ... >We are beginning development on White Wolf's second expansion for V:TES. >This expansion is only going into development and possibly on to playtest >right now. We will not be contracting art, marketing, or printing it unless >and until Sabbat War meets its sales targets. I've discussed this before, >but just wanted to reiterate for clarity. > >L. Scott Johnson will once again be lead designer. The set will be called >"Final Nights", and as promised, it will primarily flush out the independent >clans to give them equal standing with the more developed clans (other clans >will find the odd goodie in the set as well). Although this is subject to >change, right now the set will have all new cards (at least 120) and be sold >in booster format only. We may add pre-constructed starters, but they're not >part of the initial plan. > >We are aiming at April or May 2001 release. > >Since I don't want to detract from attention on Sabbat War's release, that's >all the news I'll offer on this for now. > >Regards, > >Steve Wieck >White Wolf [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <B5EBBD9A.19D5%steve...@white-wolf.com>, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes > Although this is subject to >change, right now the set will have all new cards (at least 120) and be sold >in booster format only. We may add pre-constructed starters, but they're not >part of the initial plan. > >We are aiming at April or May 2001 release. I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts are becoming progressively harder to find, and so new players couldn't pick up Final Nights and find usable clans in them, it seems. With 120 cards, you only have 30 cards per clan. And since other clans are finding things in there, you'll find fewer cards per clan, along with general political actions, master cards, reactions and so forth all taking their pound of flesh. Whilst new cards will, of course, help, some of the "bread and butter" cards for each of the clans are already out there, and won't be accessible to new players, only old ones. No problems with boosters only, since picking which of the four clans to do as starters would be problematic, or you'd have to do all four - which is unlikely to be profitable *and* you'd need to include cards from the V:TES/Sabbat War sets. I'd be happier if *some* of the old cards and vampires came in. Making it a reprint of the Independent bits of Ancient Hearts and Dark Sovereigns would possibly inflate the set too much, but if we could have, say, 5 old vampires and 5 old discipline cards from each clan, taking the set up to 160, it'd be a much better base for new players to work from. e.g. from the Giovanni, take Carlotta Giovanni, Rudolpho Giovanni, Francesca Giovanni, Regina Giovanni and Gaspare Giovanni, along with Whispers from the Dead, Possession, Soul Stealing (reprinted with the superior Combat effect), Spectral Divination and Compel the Spirit (along with a nice new range of allies/retainers for the vampires) (alter to taste, of course, these are merely semi-random suggestions). This way, you can bring back some of the "bread and butter" things for the clan, along with cards like Necromancy, Chimerstry (the skill cards etc.), and probably the Hunting Grounds too. These cards *need* to be around for new players to find the clans competitive. Having it as "all new" cards, means that you end up losing the opportunity to use the old cards that did work. Otherwise, we either lose all the cards needed or, to support the "all- new" status, we have to repeat a lot of the old cards in new ways, which doesn't really seem of benefit. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D | ja...@zephyr.org.uk (New e-mail) "Who'd have ever predicted the moment would come when I find myself grateful they've kept women dumb? She's an innocent maiden but then so am I, that's why it's possible I could get by."

Folks: While I do think that the Honorable Mr. Coupe far exaggerates the difficulty in finding Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts (e.g. there are usually auctions on eBay for AH, stating at $80 US), I do agree that this second, smaller WW expansion does present some problems. Me? I like the concepts behind Sabbat War, in particular the pre- constructed decks and the abilty to use SW for draft and sealed deck competition. The latter quality is important, IMHO, for boosting sales. Unfortunately, both of these qualities would be missing from the Independent expansion. I would like to suggest, although I suspect I'm too late, that this new expansion be beefed up to the point where pre- constructed decks *could* be made and where the expansion could be used for sealed or draft play. Doing this, of course, would require a couple things. First, some previously published cards from Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts (and likely V:tes and Sabbat/Sabbat War) should be included in the expansion. Second, some additional clans would need to be added. I understand that there are a number of independent clans in the World of Darkness not represented in V:tes. Maybe two of these clans could be added, along with a decent quantity of non-aligned vampires. This (i.e. 6 clans and some non-aligned) should provide enough critical mass for draft or sealed -- by way of comparison, Jyhad had 7 clans and the Caitiffs. Now, this, of course, would certainly increase the effort involved in a new expansion, but it would allow for a larger market, too, for the cards: (a) it would be purchased for its pre-constructed decks, (b) it would be purchased for its reprinted cards, and (c) boxes upon boxes would be purchased for sealed and constructed use. So, anyway, that's my $0.02. I'm sure I'll get flamed by some folks upset at the idea of adding new clans, but I've equipped with a Flak Jacket. Madman [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <B5EBBD9A.19D5%steve...@white-wolf.com>, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > The set will be called "Final Nights", and as promised, it will > primarily flush out the independent > clans to give them equal standing with the more developed clans Just to echo Rob T.'s sentiments that WW are doing wonder for the support of the game and it's great to see the inkling of new cards. Two good posts from James C and Madman both of which have some very relevant points and i'd tend to agree with Madman's thoughts on the PreConstructed decks being a very important part of the SW release. PCDs containing worthwhile cards from DS and AH would go along way to improving sales to new or newer players. Although a lot of this is conjecture until SW is released and the sales figures come in I think that PCD play will account for a worthwhile amount of the sales (as they do for M:TG). A couple of other things: 1) New Ravnos or no? (ref: !tremere and WoD storyline) 2) More vampires with off-clan (idependent) disiplines could help make discipline-based decks more playable. Really interesting. Remeber to pre-order your Sabbat War Y'all. matt [ quoted text not captured ]

"I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts are becoming progressively harder to find, and so new players couldn't pick up Final Nights and find usable clans in them, it seems..." i do agree - if there is an expansion for independent clans with their basics cards from old expansions no available, that would be problem... "I'd be happier if *some* of the old cards and vampires came in. Making it a reprint of the Independent bits of Ancient Hearts and Dark Sovereigns would possibly inflate the set too much..." inflate? who cares!?! VtES is game about thinking, not about "which cards i have been able to get in time..." reprint! add new cards! let are all existing clans well balanced! greetings to all Bartok Daniak Paradox walker of Prague [ quoted text not captured ]

> "I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark > Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts are becoming progressively harder to > find, and so new players couldn't pick up Final Nights and find usable > clans in them, it seems..." Just because no one has said it yet, I want to chime in for NOT including old cards from DS and AH. Many of the exsisting play base have plenty of DS and AH cards. I don't want to pay a lot to get a pack of cards and have half (or what ever) be cards I already have 15 of. I think that the next set should give a second good base to the Independant clans, enought to get people interested and to make them playable by themselves to old timers. Then, once people are interested, reprint the AH and DS sets (maybe combined) with reveised text. That why you can create a market for them. May not be feasible, but if the percentage of old cards is too high, older players will not buy as much. The reprints will work with Sabbat because there are very few (in my opinion) people that have plenty of Sabbat. Also, preconstructed decks are not a requirment. They can be nice and good to get people in the game, but should be limited to base sets. When (I hope) they reprint the Jyhad/V:TES set they should make Pre-con decks. ALos, not every set needs to be able to stand in sealed deck by itself. That would cause to much reprinting of cards. (Sealed deck with Assimite deck with no Celerity or Obfuscate master skill cards?) One last note, I think that the new Assimite cards should have the may not Diablerize text and a Master (?) card should be included to remove that text. That why they can follow the WOD story line better. Similarly for other major WOD events. Ravnos, Gangrel, etc. That is my mad rableings for now. Sorry avout the spelling errors. :) McEWEn tHE Mad Malkavian Elder of Toledo (Ohio, not Spain) [ quoted text not captured ]

> From: James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> > > I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll listen. Ideally all the cards for the Independent Clans would be represented in Final Nights so that new V:TES players would have access to all of the older set cards as well as the new designs that together will gives these clans equal footing with the other clans for game balance. To do that however might require another 100 old cards (vamps and discipline based cards) which would mean the average booster would approach 1/2 new design and 1/2 old design cards. While we felt going into Sabbat War that the older Sabbat cards were in enough demand to warrant their inclusion in a set, both LSJ and I are concerned that veterans would be too put out at getting more AH and DS cards in their Final Nights boosters. As pointed out already in this thread though, including old designs in Final Nights would be a service to new players and would make draft tournaments with Final Nights much better. Veteran V:TES players may know where to special order AH and DS, but I am concerned that the more casual/new player does not. And here I promised myself to shut up on Final Nights until after Sabbat War released... [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:57:46 GMT, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >Ideally all the cards for the Independent Clans would be represented in >Final Nights so that new V:TES players would have access to all of the older >set cards as well as the new designs that together will gives these clans >equal footing with the other clans for game balance. It`s great to ear that. We really need an expansion that will focus exclusively on putting the Independent Clans on the map for tournaments. >To do that however might require another 100 old cards (vamps and discipline >based cards) which would mean the average booster would approach 1/2 new >design and 1/2 old design cards. While we felt going into Sabbat War that >the older Sabbat cards were in enough demand to warrant their inclusion in a >set, both LSJ and I are concerned that veterans would be too put out at >getting more AH and DS cards in their Final Nights boosters. And you guessed well. The AH and DS cards are far more easy to find than the Sabbat cards. To maintain a good selling rate, both old and new players have to buy boosters. I won`t be mad if I see the Tomb of Ramses III reprinted with the erratumed text on it ; ) >And here I promised myself to shut up on Final Nights until after Sabbat War >released... And there I was sitting still, trying to calm myself waiting for Sabbat War to arrive, and then BANG ! ; you, talking of a new expansion... : ) Remy ra...@videotron.ca pages.infinit.net/rafid/

> And there I was sitting still, trying to calm myself waiting for > Sabbat War to arrive, and then BANG ! ; you, talking of a new > expansion... : ) Exciting? Hell yes!!! BUT - as mentioned before - we will ONLY see the 'Final Nights' IF the Sabbat War set sells well/out. Remi, push everyone you know into buying as many new cards as possible. We have to make sure that the Sabbat War is profitable for WW. They have gone out on a limb for us and are promising great things in the future (like more Assamites!!!!!) and its time for all of us to pay up. I'm planning on buying at _least_ 5 boxes myself and here in Atlanta we are making sure that we have preordered from each local comic/gaming store in order to promote this wonderful game. Everyone - go out and get some newbies into the game (since they can buy lots of cards too) and buy from your local retailers. This is the ONLY way we can guarantee that future sets will be printed. The future of our favorite game - for once - is completely in OUR hands. Man, I've got myself so worked up - you can mark my ass down for another box! :) Just my thoughts, Todd Banister Prince of Atlanta Scribe of the Assamites

Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> writes: >Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so >anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll listen. ... >both LSJ and I are concerned that veterans would be too put out at >getting more AH and DS cards in their Final Nights boosters. As a veteran with a fine collection of all the expansions, I would have no concern whatsoever about reprints. The way I look at it, what good is my collection if I have no one to *against*. I'm not sure every single card in AH and DS actually deserves reprinting is the only thing. While I don't mind getting more Thoughts Betrayed in my packs so the newbies can have them too, I might look sidewise a bit at, say, The Trick of Danya showing up again in a common slot. Let the newbies trade for those...if they dare! :) Anyway, yea, I think any and every useful and interesting card from an old expansion should be reprinted. Fred

> time for all of us to pay up. I'm planning on buying at _least_ 5 boxes > myself Yeah, I'm planning on at least 4 boxes out of the chute, possibly more. The wife is going to kill me when she sees the credit card bill... :P Sorrow --- "Are they dead?" - Pugsly "Does it matter?" - Wednesday

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:57:46 GMT, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> From: James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> >> >> I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark > >Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so >anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll listen. Oh, cool. Except that's like bleeding myself for 2, and I could use the pool to pay for a Hunting Grounds... wait, nevermind, I hate Hunting Grounds. OK, on with the show! =) >Ideally all the cards for the Independent Clans would be represented in >Final Nights so that new V:TES players would have access to all of the older >set cards as well as the new designs that together will gives these clans >equal footing with the other clans for game balance. > >To do that however might require another 100 old cards (vamps and discipline >based cards) which would mean the average booster would approach 1/2 new >design and 1/2 old design cards. While we felt going into Sabbat War that >the older Sabbat cards were in enough demand to warrant their inclusion in a >set, both LSJ and I are concerned that veterans would be too put out at >getting more AH and DS cards in their Final Nights boosters. A good base guess to start from. Obviously the idealistic approach is not terribly feasible - an extra 100 cards is a lot, and if Final Nights boosters are half new, half old, I expect veterans will be a LITTLE annoyed by having to wade through effectively twice as many boxes. However, a good option would be to reprint only SOME of the cards from AH and DS. It shouldn't be difficult to select which cards are totally pants, and which cards will actually add some benefit to the set to reprint. The vampires should take priority over the library cards, as well - since the lack of vampires is one of the prime things making the Independent clans unplayable. If all the vampires, along with several new additions, were reprinted in Final Nights, then that would really help things out a lot. I realize that reprinting all the vampires adds approximately 40 cards to the set, but I think that would probably be the key in making the set functional for newbies as well as vets. Or, as someone else mentioned, you could make preconstructed decks with crypts of 12 individual vampires, and people could gain the original DS vampires in *that* fashion. Thinking about it a bit more, I really like the idea of having a preconstructed deck for -every- clan eventually. It provides a good hook for people coming into the game, much the same way the clan-shirts have done so well with sales. Everyone has their favourite clan, and will lean a little bit towards them. So maybe just make sure that most of the "old" vampires are in the crypts for the pre-con decks, and then you have the Final Nights boosters that hte veterans can go hog-wild over, and the newbies can buy a precon deck or two and mix-n-match with boosters as need be. (And vampires like Patrizia Giovanni can be accidentally "lost" in the shuffle.) -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

Ok, here are some more Malkavian rambeling son this topic. How about a compreomise? Proposal FIanial nights has 120 new cards in booster packs of say 9 or 11 cards. All cards in the booster pack are new and generally geared towards the independant clans. Alternatly there could be a few reprints in each booster pack. (Maybe 25%) Final Nights would then have 4 preconstructed starter decks. These decks would be made from both new and old cards. The decks would focus on a clan and include all nessassarry cards for that clan. THis would include reprinting cards, from DS AH or event V:TES. Example: An Assamite (seems popular) pre con deck would have all (or most) of the AH vampires in the crypt with extra new ones from final nights. The library would then contain all the essesnsial cards for an Assamite deck, even from former expansions. Quiteus, Celerity, and Obfiuscate master skill cards, Clan hunting ground, any nifty and needed masters, other useful cards and a good smatering of the new cards too. In a pinch WW could put one exclusive new card in each starter deck to encourage the old timers to buy at least one. This setup give the best of both worlds with out making AH and DS worthless (which they may already be...) I like it as a long time player as I can buy just the booster and get new cards exclusivly (or mostly). New players can then buy both boosters and a couple of starters to get all the old cards they need. This also provides pre-con decks for newbie and sealed deck play. (Warning: Another game has shown that sealed deck with Pre-Con is generally bad except for brand new players. There is very little deck diversity, even with booster packs added in.) The new card set should also have enought depth that you can add the packs to another base set for booster draft, or use them alone, just with out certian basic cards. Well, there you have it. I hope this seems like an acceptable compromise because I really don't want to get a ton of AH and DS reprints. I still favor a possible reprint of those sets at a future time. (See my previous post.) Let me know what you think. mcEweN The maD [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qagq6$lr7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes >While I do think that the Honorable Mr. Coupe far exaggerates the >difficulty in finding Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts I think you assume that new players will happily go to eBay, and that access to cards is uniform around the globe. I dispute both these assertions. I'm *not* talking about the veterans. White Wolf are clearly out to indoctrinate^wgain new players. Those new players won't necessarily even *know* old expansions exist. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <B5EE64BE.1BD9%steve...@white-wolf.com>, Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > From: James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> > > > > I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark > > Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so > anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll listen. [snip] I think I pretty much agree with Derek Ray here: the most important thing for new players picking up the indie clans is vampires. Many of the DS/AH library cards weren't that good in the first place and even the new players would be just as happy not to get them. ;-) But enough vampires to build a decent crypt is key. Beyond that, I would approve of reprinting some of the good stuff from DS/AH, but I'd rather not see the useless bits of junk show up again. I do think preconstructed decks would be a good way to get the old vamps to the new players, if that's a reasonable way to go. Josh trying to cut back on deja.com abuse [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:52:50 -0400, "Todd Banister" <T_Ban...@Premier-Lending.com> wrote: >Exciting? Hell yes!!! BUT - as mentioned before - we will ONLY see the >'Final Nights' IF the Sabbat War set sells well/out. Remi, push everyone you >know into buying as many new cards as possible. We have to make sure that >the Sabbat War is profitable for WW. Now your talking, Todd ! I have a couple of pre-ordered boxes myself and you can bet that Quebec will brake the world record for buying boxes of Sabbat War. I`ll go door-to-door in my free time if it`s necessary. (it likely won`t be necessary... I hope : ) Yes, now is the time to kick some Camarilla butts with our brand new Sabbat forces. There will be a war. There will be a Sabbat War ! Remy Auclair, VEKN prince of Quebec city ra...@videotron.ca pages.infinit.net/rafid/

> I think you assume that new players will happily go to eBay, and that > access to cards is uniform around the globe. I dispute both these > assertions. No, I'm not saying this. I'm just saying that DS and AH are very available in the spectrum of V:tes expansions. By your criteria, *any* Jyhad/V:tes expansion is unavailable to the new players if a newbie can't walk into their local shop and buy a booster off the shelf. Madman [ quoted text not captured ]

> And here I promised myself to shut up on Final Nights until after Sabbat War > released... > > Regards, > > Steve Wieck > White Wolf I have a habit of not controlling my somewhat volitile posts. So I will try to exert a wee bit of self-control (especially difficult after a few martinis). While what I am saying may have been said before, I would like to put my two pool in. The Starters and the Boosters should contain separate mixes of material. Starters should have some basic VTES cards in them to get the new players started (Cloak the Gathering, Threats, Restoration, Blur) and maybe even some Sabbat Cards (Hidden Pathways, Pursuit, Masochism, Slaughtering the Herd). Whilst on the other hand the Boosters should contain original material specifically geared for the independent clans themselves although reprinting hards to get rares should not be overlooked (Temptation being a good example of a nearly impossible card to get). Just my two pool. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qbneg$5o5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes >By your criteria, *any* Jyhad/V:tes expansion is unavailable to the new >players if a newbie can't walk into their local shop and buy a booster >off the shelf. And? New players need to be catered for. If White Wolf sell new players something they can't use, because they don't have $80 to go and buy a *box* on eBay, when they actually want a few boosters, it's more than likely to piss them off. [ quoted text not captured ]

X_Ze...@email.msn.com wrote in message <8qbs2m$b06$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>... > > >> And here I promised myself to shut up on Final Nights until after >Sabbat War >> released... >> >> Regards, >> >> Steve Wieck >> White Wolf > >I have a habit of not controlling my somewhat volitile posts. So I will >try to exert a wee bit of self-control (especially difficult after a few >martinis). While what I am saying may have been said before, I would >like to put my two pool in. The Starters and the Boosters should >contain separate mixes of material. Starters should have some basic >VTES cards in them to get the new players started (Cloak the Gathering, >Threats, Restoration, Blur) and maybe even some Sabbat Cards >(Hidden Pathways, Pursuit, Masochism, Slaughtering the Herd). Whilst on > the other hand the Boosters should contain original material >specifically geared for the independent clans themselves although >reprinting hards to get rares should not be overlooked (Temptation being >a good example of a nearly impossible card to get). Just my two pool. I ditto this opinion. The starters should contain all reprints needed to make the clan work. The boosters should be 100% new stuff (possibly with the inclusion of hard to get reprinted rare cards). It's the best of both worlds. The newbies can get into the clan by just buying the starter and the veterans can buy the boosters to get the new stuff. Seems like the best solution. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qbbkc$nth$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joshua Duffin <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote: >In article <B5EE64BE.1BD9%steve...@white-wolf.com>, > Steve Wieck <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> >> > From: James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> >> > >> > I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark >> >> Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so >> anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll >listen. > >[snip] > >I think I pretty much agree with Derek Ray here: the >most important thing for new players picking up the >indie clans is vampires. Many of the DS/AH library cards >weren't that good in the first place and even the new >players would be just as happy not to get them. ;-) But >enough vampires to build a decent crypt is key. > I agree that the indies ned vampires. But, a number of people have put forward reprinting the DS/AH vamps with new vamps as "filler." I disagree with this. Why reprint old vampires when we'fve the opportunity for new ones? It's just as easy for WW to print a new vamp as an old one, and we need them. I don't see any of the old vamps as filling a vital role that could not be filled with a slightly different, _new_ vamp. I'm all for reprinting some of the independent's old utility cards, but PLEASE give them all new vampires. Every old vamp reprinted is one less opporunity to help these clans out, with no particular benefit to the new players. Bye, Cy Myers Let's hear it for the Madness Network!!

cym...@ecst.csuchico.edu (Cy H. Myers) writes: >In article <8qbbkc$nth$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, >>I think I pretty much agree with Derek Ray here: the >>most important thing for new players picking up the >>indie clans is vampires. Many of the DS/AH library cards >>weren't that good in the first place and even the new >>players would be just as happy not to get them. ;-) But >>enough vampires to build a decent crypt is key. >> > I agree that the indies ned vampires. But, a number of people have >put forward reprinting the DS/AH vamps with new vamps as "filler." I disagree >with this. Why reprint old vampires when we'fve the opportunity for new ones? >It's just as easy for WW to print a new vamp as an old one, and we need them. >I don't see any of the old vamps as filling a vital role that could not be >filled with a slightly different, _new_ vamp. I'm all for reprinting some of >the independent's old utility cards, but PLEASE give them all new vampires. >Every old vamp reprinted is one less opporunity to help these clans out, >with no particular benefit to the new players. I'm not sure it's "just as easy" to print new vampires as it old ones. All new cards - including vampires - need to be playtested for their effect on the whole environment so each new card is an additional effort expended. (Each old vampire needs to be retested with the new cards too. But that would need to be regardless of whether you're reprinting them or not.) That issue isn't that important, though. What's a lot more important is that I strongly disagree that not reprinting an old vampire has no value for newer players. It's just as crucial to the new players to get as wide an assortment of vampires to choose from as the older players. Here you are stating that each new vampire is a serious opportunity to help its clan out. If that's true, then access to each older vampire he can use must also likewise be important to the newer player for the exact same reason. (And I agree with that choice of vamps is important.) Let's not risk our opportunity to recruit new players by sticking them with a significant disadvantage when they have to make out their crypts. The game will be a lot more fun to play with some (heh) "new blood" (so to speak :) ) to fill out our tournaments and playgroups! Fred

>>It's just as crucial to the new players to get as wide an assortment of vampires to choose from as the older players. << Well, it's never been hard for a new player to find extra vampires. For example, vampires can be purchased from Lasombra at a dime a dozen (OK, more like 3 for $1, but you get the idea). It's much harder to find the key clan/discipline cards for the Independents, such as Temptation. But, in any case, I do like the idea of the Madman of Toledo (no relation) and the Swamp Archon, which is to print boosters of all new cards and preconstructed with a mix of new and reprints. I checked with my local retailer, and he indicated that the Prophecy preconstructed decks (Magic of course) where the top sellers 'round here, and indeed he was sold out of 2 of the 4 Prophecy precons. My second 2 pool, Madman (of Chicago) [ quoted text not captured ]

On 21 Sep 2000 21:03:25 GMT, cym...@ecst.csuchico.edu (Cy H. Myers) wrote: > I agree that the indies ned vampires. But, a number of people have >put forward reprinting the DS/AH vamps with new vamps as "filler." I disagree >with this. Why reprint old vampires when we'fve the opportunity for new ones? Because some of the old vampires are actually quite good. Rudolpho Giovanni (3, NEC) is an excellent vamp. So is Carlotta. So is Enzo, and Gaspare. I don't want them reprinted as "filler", I want them reprinted so that everyone has the same opportunity to use the Independent clans. If you don't reprint Rudolpho, either nobody who doesn't have Dark Sovereigns has access to a 3-cap with NEC, or you create a new 3-cap vampire with NEC, which means that anyone with Dark Sovereigns can have TWO of those at the same time - witness the Camille/Raven thing going on. We have the opportunity for new ones. Print some new ones, enough to fill the "holes" in the clan and add some new toys. But you MUST reprint some of the old ones, or the new players are screwed. >It's just as easy for WW to print a new vamp as an old one, and we need them. Negative. WW must contract artwork for the vampire, come up with a name, and playtest the vampire's disciplines. We don't need a 4-cap vampire with POT/dom, but that vampire fits the Giovanni skillset, and without adequate playtesting, one could accidentally arrive. This is just one example, of course. >I don't see any of the old vamps as filling a vital role that could not be >filled with a slightly different, _new_ vamp. I'm all for reprinting some of Carlotta. Rudolpho. Gaspare. Mario and Cristofero, the "thug brothers". Gloria. And these are just the Giovanni. >the independent's old utility cards, but PLEASE give them all new vampires. >Every old vamp reprinted is one less opporunity to help these clans out, >with no particular benefit to the new players. You have incorrectly assumed that the old vampires were somehow all "bad" for the clans. It wasn't that the vamps were so bad - it was that there were only ten of them, and some of them DID blow chunks, making it very difficult to compete with other clans' much smaller (but similarly-disciplined) crypts. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <2kvhss4dg161ogklh...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:57:46 GMT, Steve Wieck > <steve...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > > > >> From: James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> > >> > >> I'm slightly unsettled by the fact that it's "all new cards". Dark > > > >Putting some old cards in is something we are currently considering so > >anyone who would like to throw in their 2 pool of the topic, we'll listen. > [ quoted text not captured ] i think this is the way to go, and the way to make it profitable is to provide each of the precon decks with a Must Have card in one of the rare slots and maybe a few tempting uncommons. That way, both newbies and old players will get something nice out of the deck. i'd suggest: Giovanni - Ambrosius the ferryman, Wraith; Thoughts Betrayed Setites - Temptation [or just maybe Form of Corruption]; Heart of Darkness Assamites - Blood Agony; new card that gives them a present for carrying out a contract [Sacrificial Lamb would be an inferior alternative] Ravnos - Sensory Deprivation; Force of Will. > (And vampires like Patrizia Giovanni can be accidentally "lost" in the > shuffle.) > > -- Derek > > "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." > - C. Darwin, 1871 > [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qeklt$jv9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes >Well, it's never been hard for a new player to find extra vampires. >For example, vampires can be purchased from Lasombra at a dime a dozen >(OK, more like 3 for $1, but you get the idea). It's much harder to >find the key clan/discipline cards for the Independents, such as >Temptation. How many new players - and I mean *new* players in *new* playgroups, who don't have an established mentor to do such things for them - either: 1) Know who Lasombra is? 2) Are prepared to send money to someone they don't even know? [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > On 21 Sep 2000 21:03:25 GMT, cym...@ecst.csuchico.edu (Cy H. Myers) > wrote: > > > Why reprint old vampires when we'fve the opportunity for new ones? > > Because some of the old vampires are actually quite good. Rudolpho > Giovanni (3, NEC) is an excellent vamp. So is Carlotta. So is Enzo, > and Gaspare. I don't want them reprinted as "filler", I want them > reprinted so that everyone has the same opportunity to use the > Independent clans. If you don't reprint Rudolpho, either nobody who > doesn't have Dark Sovereigns has access to a 3-cap with NEC, or you > create a new 3-cap vampire with NEC, which means that anyone with Dark > Sovereigns can have TWO of those at the same time - witness the > Camille/Raven thing going on. I think that they can print enough Giovanni to make them playable without having to reprint anybody. A 3 with NEC is good, but not worlds better than a 4 with NEC pot. If they print ten more Giovanni (and none of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. I'd rather have a bunch of new vampires than more copies of the old ones. > We have the opportunity for new ones. Print some new ones, enough to > fill the "holes" in the clan and add some new toys. But you MUST > reprint some of the old ones, or the new players are screwed. Only if the new vampires _only_ fill the holes. You're right; if the new set has only, say, the good 5's and 6's that the Giovanni need, then that by itself wouldn't be enough to play with. I'm hoping that they'll print a range of new vampires and capacities. But I don't see the need for reprints. > Negative. WW must contract artwork for the vampire, come up with a > name, and playtest the vampire's disciplines. We don't need a 4-cap > vampire with POT/dom, but that vampire fits the Giovanni skillset, and > without adequate playtesting, one could accidentally arrive. This is > just one example, of course. What's wrong with a 4 with POT dom? That's perfectly reasonable, and would help make a Giovanni combat deck actually work. It doesn't seem much different than Agatha (POT obf), Hector Sosa (POT pre), or Hugo (POT pre vic). > >I don't see any of the old vamps as filling a vital role that could not be > >filled with a slightly different, _new_ vamp. I'm all for reprinting some > >of > > Carlotta. Rudolpho. Gaspare. Mario and Cristofero, the "thug > brothers". Gloria. And these are just the Giovanni. I agree that Carlotta fills a vital role... in a Carlotta-type deck. But why reprint her? Why not print a different 7 with slightly different disciplines and another cool ability? Diversify! > >the independent's old utility cards, but PLEASE give them all new vampires. > >Every old vamp reprinted is one less opporunity to help these clans out, > >with no particular benefit to the new players. > > You have incorrectly assumed that the old vampires were somehow all > "bad" for the clans. I don't think that's his point. The point is, the old vampires are old. The more different vampires the Giovanni have, the easier it is to make a good deck with them. Each reprinted vampire is a new vampire that wasn't printed. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." -- Shivaree

In article <39CB6C9A...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > > I think that they can print enough Giovanni to make them playable > without having to reprint anybody. A 3 with NEC is good, but not worlds > better than a 4 with NEC pot. If they print ten more Giovanni (and none > of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with > those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. I'd rather have a > bunch of new vampires than more copies of the old ones. So would I, but I think my reasoning was the same as Derek's and Frederick Scott's: that new players should have access to the old vampires, because otherwise the old players have a big advantage in terms of vamps to choose from for the indie clans. So it seems to me like a good idea to put the (good) old vamps into preconstructed starters for the new players. Sure, print a couple metric assloads of new vamps too, but the new players shouldn't get Raven/Camille screwed. It was annoying enough when it happened once... I'm advocating reprinting old vamps *in addition* to new ones, btw, in case that wasn't clear. Like, they could put together a sheet of the good old vamps for all the indie clans, and just use it for the precons... If this isn't economically feasible, then of course it's up to White Wolf, and it might be better to just print new vamps and hope that the new players can find old ones one way or another. Josh carlotta, wa-oh volatta, wa-oh [ quoted text not captured ]

> I'm advocating reprinting old vamps *in addition* to new > ones, btw, in case that wasn't clear. Like, they could > put together a sheet of the good old vamps for all the > indie clans, and just use it for the precons... If this > isn't economically feasible, then of course it's up to > White Wolf, and it might be better to just print new > vamps and hope that the new players can find old ones > one way or another. Here is where I would like to draw the line between Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts. Since very well understood market forces (Supply and Demand) are at work on the prices of these still availible expansions. The real question is whether we treat Ancient Hearts and Dark Sovereign availibility equally or treat them differencially as per effect of the current market forces. I can understand a reprint of alot of the key Ancient Hearts vampires (Parnassus, Hadrian Garrick, etc.), but I really can not understand a reprint of the Dark Sovereign Vampires. You do not want the Final Nights expansion to have to compete with a previously release and less expensive expansion that people still have access to. Why not encourage stores to buy both the Final Nights and the remaining Dark Sovereigns expansion and allow a little more weight to go behind the Giovanni and the Ravnos in the form of new cards being avalible beside the old cards. Ancient Hearts is more difficult to plan out the same way as this set is less availible. Perhaps a reprinting of key cards is nessasary. Any way that is my 2 pool. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:04:16 GMT, legb...@my-deja.com said: legbiter> i'd suggest: Assamites - Blood Agony; new card that gives legbiter> them a present for carrying out a contract [Sacrificial Lamb legbiter> would be an inferior alternative] I agree. Something that would give a bonus (small pool gain? vampire capacity gain? whatever) when a Contract is completed would both fit in with the clan theme, and make Contract a lot more useful. Actually, something else that also combos with a Contract might be nice, in the form of (say) a card that gives a maneuver normally, but a maneuver plus an additional strike when pursuing a Contract. Or something of that sort. //Petri

In article <39CB6C9A...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >If they print ten more Giovanni (and none >of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with >those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. Ten Giovanni weren't good enough in DS. What you do with such is to give old players a workable base for the Giovanni, and new players just a new variation on the old unworkable base. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 09:28:42 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >I think that they can print enough Giovanni to make them playable >without having to reprint anybody. A 3 with NEC is good, but not worlds >better than a 4 with NEC pot. If they print ten more Giovanni (and none The Giovanni need BOTH a 3 with NEC, and a 4 with NEC pot. That way you can have two small NEC vampires within easy access - making it possible to create hybrid Possession/Whispers of the Dead decks with many other strategies. Or Jar the Soul/whatever else you want. And frankly, I find it appropriate to see the Undead Mafia in a bunch of otherwise-clan decks ... "The Family is doing you a Favor." =) (Giovanni/Tremere bruise and bleed with Burst of Sunlight and other toys come to mind - Minion Tap your guys to 1, then send them to bleed with Conditioning. If blocked, they play Burst at superior, burning themselves and sending someone to torpor - then the Giovanni Possess them back out into play with 1 blood. =) Obviously runs into problems against pesky Dodge decks, but the concept is still rough. =) >of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with >those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. I'd rather have a >bunch of new vampires than more copies of the old ones. Well, I was definitely suggesting AGAINST reprinting Patrizia! Yeesh. What a horrible thought. And there's no -need- to reprint Francesca-the-poster-child, or Vittorio-the-other-poster-child. But I would definitely like to be sure that a preconstructed deck, say, would include Carlotta, Rudolpho, Regina, Enzo, and Cristofero - and then if there were a bunch of new vamps as well, new players wouldn't be TOTALLY screwed by not having the old toys. Old players might be a bit frosted at having yet another Carlotta from the precon deck, but they could trade them off to the new players in their group so that the new players could have dupes and trips of the old DS vamps without having to buy Dark Sovereigns, OR without having to go too hog-wild buying multiple precon decks. >> We have the opportunity for new ones. Print some new ones, enough to >> fill the "holes" in the clan and add some new toys. But you MUST >> reprint some of the old ones, or the new players are screwed. > >Only if the new vampires _only_ fill the holes. You're right; if the >new set has only, say, the good 5's and 6's that the Giovanni need, then >that by itself wouldn't be enough to play with. I'm hoping that they'll >print a range of new vampires and capacities. But I don't see the need >for reprints. Well, Dark Sovereigns isn't that easily available right now. I mean, sure, you can chase down Potomac, but the feet-in-store crowd won't have the slightest idea what to do. If we get eight new vampires for the Giovanni, and reprint 6 old ones, that'll be 14 available to the newbie directly, and 21 available to someone who has both DS and Final Nights. That works out well - the newbie will be able to make a *decent* clan deck (and if he wishes, he can make a crypt of all Giovanni with no duplicates), and the veteran will have plenty of toys to play with if he wants to figure out how to make Patrizia go. Eight new vampires gives us PLENTY of room to fill the obvious holes (at least two vamps between 4 and 6 with NEC and any variant of in-clan stuff), and also gives us a couple vamps to "play" with in the crossover. >> Negative. WW must contract artwork for the vampire, come up with a >> name, and playtest the vampire's disciplines. We don't need a 4-cap >> vampire with POT/dom, but that vampire fits the Giovanni skillset, and >> without adequate playtesting, one could accidentally arrive. This is >> just one example, of course. > >What's wrong with a 4 with POT dom? That's perfectly reasonable, and >would help make a Giovanni combat deck actually work. It doesn't seem >much different than Agatha (POT obf), Hector Sosa (POT pre), or Hugo >(POT pre vic). Ugh. Right now, to get POT and dom/DOM, you have to go all the way up to a 6-cap. POT is the best fighter - DOM is the best bleeder. (PRE is a close second, but its only non-action bleed mod is Aire of Elation, which only bleeds for 3 total at superior - POT/pre decks usually do much better to use Legal Manipulations for the pool gain.) A POT/dom deck is a nasty thing, since its bleeds are always for 1 initially, and any one could have a Conditioning, Foreshadowing, or even Bonding dropped on it. Obviously, these last 2 require superior DOM, but if POT/dom becomes too common, making a crypt of all POT/dom and adding 4 skill cards would solve the problem handily. Not to mention that including Lisette, Donal, and Constanza early on give you Govern potential. pot/dom can be found on a 3 and three 4's, and while pot isn't POT, any pot/dom deck is already pretty damn solid. Giving it a POT/dom vampire at 4 ... well, i'd hesitate to initially create that vamp, and if I did I'd want to make sure it wasn't -too- much of a monster. A 4-cap with POT/nec, however, I'd have absolutely no problem with. It's just that nasty " monster bleed, monster fighter" capability I step carefully around. >> Carlotta. Rudolpho. Gaspare. Mario and Cristofero, the "thug >> brothers". Gloria. And these are just the Giovanni. > >I agree that Carlotta fills a vital role... in a Carlotta-type deck. >But why reprint her? Why not print a different 7 with slightly >different disciplines and another cool ability? Diversify! Diversification screws the feet-in-store newbie, when he discovers that if he doesn't have ALL the old sets, he's hosed. I wouldn't want to reprint EVERY vampire, by a long shot, but definitely some of the most common ones. Carlotta and Rudolpho first. Mario -or- Cristofero (Guido or Nunzio, really). Gaspare -or- Gloria. Then you still have plenty of room for others. Also, Carlotta makes an excellent addition to ANY Giovanni deck - her skillset is just what you want! POT/NEC/dom/obf. NEC - she can take all the cool actions at full strength. POT - if you block her, she can beat your ass if she wants. dom - she can bleed. She can't Govern, but that's the only flaw. obf - with Rafaele and some skill cards, a NEC/obf deck becomes fairly viable, and adds some needed stealth on Possessions, etc. Even without a NEC/obf focus, it can't hurt to toss in a Forgotten Labyrinth or two just for her use. >> You have incorrectly assumed that the old vampires were somehow all >> "bad" for the clans. > >I don't think that's his point. The point is, the old vampires are >old. The more different vampires the Giovanni have, the easier it is to >make a good deck with them. Each reprinted vampire is a new vampire >that wasn't printed. see above - if we reprint 6, and print 8 new, that's 14 cards from the set to vampires - and a total of 21 total vampires for the Giovanni/Ravnos, and 18 total vamps for the Assamite/Setites. Assuming this happens for the other 3 clans, that's 56 cards out of a 120-card set that will be vampires. That seems a bit steep at first, but since you're only catering to four disciplines with the reprint (NEC, CHI, QUI, SER), that leaves room for 16 new cards for each clan/discipline combo. That's a LOT, considering Jyhad started with only 10 cards per discipline. If you want to toss in one or two cards for the other clans, that's fine - assume only room for 13-14 new cards per, then, and you're still not HURTING. There are a lot of old cards that are wallpaper now, but could be very cool if a couple utility cards were added to support them - effectively increasing the card pool to draw on. If you run into trouble with card space, drop the reprints to 5, although you run the risk of expansion-only players being hosed on total unique vampires available - must be at LEAST 12 without having to buy DS. The Assamites and Setites only have 10, and that's a slight problem right now. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qfu9m$37d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Joshua Duffin <jt...@cornell.edu> wrote: >> those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. I'd rather >have a >> bunch of new vampires than more copies of the old ones. > >So would I, but I think my reasoning was the same as >Derek's and Frederick Scott's: that new players should >have access to the old vampires, because otherwise the >old players have a big advantage in terms of vamps to >choose from for the indie clans. If new players are playing against old players, won't they be able to trade? I've never known anyone to have trouble getting vampires from sets they don't have -- it's the related clan/discipline cards that are hard to get. Vampires aren't rare, and you generally don't need more than a couple of each. So, I'd defnintely rather see new vampires, as this benifits new and old players, as well as the _game_ itself. -Jasper

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:kMUa7wAq...@obeah.demon.co.uk... > In article <8qbneg$5o5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes > >By your criteria, *any* Jyhad/V:tes expansion is unavailable to the new > >players if a newbie can't walk into their local shop and buy a booster > >off the shelf. > > And? > > New players need to be catered for. If White Wolf sell new players > something they can't use, because they don't have $80 to go and buy a > *box* on eBay, when they actually want a few boosters, it's more than > likely to piss them off. > I can confirm that one. In the last couple months, I've spent nearly $600 on product, mostly to re-sell [at cost] to local players who CAN'T FIND Jyhad anywhere except one local store who have VTES (no DS, no AH, no SAB, no Jyhad) )at full original retail. I can do that, coz' I'm one of those obnoxious IT guys who makes more money than I need and I have good credit. I think making CARDS available to people who've been out of the game for a while is essential to getting them back, and definitely to bringing newbies in. I can tell y'all that when I came back to VTES (I'd missed Sabbat, AH, and DS) I felt very intimidated by all the cool cards other people had that I couldn't easily get my hands on. I think me having cards available to buy, and pointing people in the direction to other sources for cards, and GIVING AWAY cards is probably the single biggest recruiting advantage I've had in getting people playing! Once Sabbat War hits the shelves, some of this phenomenon will be mitigated. But for the Clans not represented in that set, are new players forever to be at a disadvantage unless they hunt down out-of-print sets? Let's try not to do that. Pre-constructed decks are probably the cheap and easy way to handle slowly reissuing older cards. Mark Shanewood Prince of Minneapolis

"Joshua Duffin" wrote: > So it seems to me like a good idea to put the (good) > old vamps into preconstructed starters for the new > players. Sure, print a couple metric assloads of new > vamps too... I'm in favor of reprinting some/all old vamps by some method or another. If preconstructed decks are a go, this is a good way to go about it, if not, I'd rather see some old vamps than none. The Camarilla clans are all at about 23 or 24...if enough of the independents were reprinted in an upcoming expansion to make a totally new, non-duplicate crypt, there would be more/nearly the same number of the independents than the original Cam clans. (Gio/Rav at 13 + 12 each = 25, Ass/FoS at 10+12 = 22) Okay...this technically isn't a problem, but I don't think it makes much sense...backstory-wise, or from a printing/feasibility perspective. That's at least 12 new vampires you have to playtest...why not just print about 6 to 8 new ones, and reprint some/all of the old. And what, no Patrizia? Come on! There's so much you can do with...qui nec tha...ummm...yeah...that's the ticket. Maybe that should be my newsletter instead. QUI THA NEC. Our motto: "All Patrizia, all the time!" Hmm. Xian, off to a sealed Jyhad (non-sanctioned) tourney...yay! Madison League play, you're next, baby! -- I'd tell the world and save my soul, But rain falls down and I feel cold. A cold that sleeps within my heart, It tears the earth and sun apart. --_Shellshock_, New Order www.waste.org/~xian

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:27:30 -0500, "Xian" <xi...@waste.org> wrote: >And what, no Patrizia? Come on! There's so much you can do with...qui nec >tha...ummm...yeah...that's the ticket. Necromagic! First, you get a Death Pact on Patrizia by diablerizing your own March Halcyon. Then you can Burst of Sunlight at inferior as often as you like, and only take 1 point of damage! Yeah! She r00lz! Nobody will dare block her bleeds for 1! [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <s8knsssq9dmcka1c7...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >Necromagic! First, you get a Death Pact on Patrizia by diablerizing >your own March Halcyon. Then you can Burst of Sunlight at inferior as >often as you like, and only take 1 point of damage! > >Yeah! She r00lz! Nobody will dare block her bleeds for 1! Like Patrizia would need to worry. She'd just get a massive +1 stealth from Spectral Divination, silly. [ quoted text not captured ]

> How many new players - and I mean *new* players in *new* playgroups, who > don't have an established mentor to do such things for them - either: > > 1) Know who Lasombra is? > 2) Are prepared to send money to someone they don't even know? Well, frankly, we aren't going to be getting any new players or new playgroups without a mentor. No player will be able to buy a booster or even a preconstructed and start playing. No store is going to stock Final Nights or Sabbat War without already-established players requesting it. Period. End of transmission. By your definition, anything, even the original Jyhad, is hard to find. My point is simply that some cards are more difficult to find than others and *they* need to be reprinted more so than, say, one more copy of Lalitha. What's your point?? Madman [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qgtv9$a35$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes >Well, frankly, we aren't going to be getting any new players or new >playgroups without a mentor. Well, let's not have any new cards or anything, then. Pre-constructed starters are clearly irrelevant, since a mentor can help there. Playmats are irrelevant since mentors can help there. We don't need to tell people about newsgroups via the starter instructions because mentors can do that. We don't need an on-line demo because mentors can teach people the game. We don't need any demo games at tournaments because a mentor will teach new players. Mentors can do everything for them. White Wolf can just give up on all their work because Madman2000 has decreed that we won't be getting new players without mentors who already know everything anyway. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Well, let's not have any new cards or anything, then. Pre-constructed > starters are clearly irrelevant, since a mentor can help there. > Playmats are irrelevant since mentors can help there. We don't need to > tell people about newsgroups via the starter instructions because > mentors can do that. We don't need an on-line demo because mentors can > teach people the game. We don't need any demo games at tournaments > because a mentor will teach new players. > > Mentors can do everything for them. White Wolf can just give up on all > their work because Madman2000 has decreed that we won't be getting new > players without mentors who already know everything anyway. My, my, are we a bit cranky today?? You have cited examples (above) of mentoring. Being mentored, broadly defined, is being taught and guided by someone or something with more experience. Folks in this newsgroup can act as mentors, for example. And playgroups and players won't spring up without mentors, without teachers, without sources of information to which they can turn. This is particularly true when you have a complex, multi-player game like V:TES. And, getting back to my point, since these new players will have this source (or, hopefully, sources) of information, of help, of mentoring, then these players will learn how to obtain previously-published cards. Some of these previously-published cards are difficult to obtain, some are not. Previously-published vampires are easier to obtain. Therefore, it would seem to be counterproductive to reprint, say, Lalitha unless there were an overriding reason, such as the need to fill out a Settite preconstructed deck or the need to beef up Final Nights for sealed deck or draft play. We should not reprint cards just because a newbie might not know (yet) how to obtain a copy of Patrizia Giovanni. This is a waste, pure and simple. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39CB6C9A...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >If they print ten more Giovanni (and none > >of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with > >those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. > > Ten Giovanni weren't good enough in DS. > > What you do with such is to give old players a workable base for the > Giovanni, and new players just a new variation on the old unworkable > base. I don't think it should be too hard to make a set of ten vampires that make the Giovanni playable. Of the original 10 Giovanni, Gaspare is kind of marginal (he should have dom instead of cel), Rudolpho's useless (but only because NEC is nearly useless), Vittorio's overcosted (he should in theory have been a 5 with, say, DOM NEC pot), and that's pretty much it. Looking at the spread of just those Giovanni, it looks like you could easily make a good Giovanni deck... except that Necromancy sucks. That's the reason 10 Giovanni weren't good enough in Dark Sovereigns. There were only 7 or so good ones (and Regina's a 10), and there isn't much you can do with NEC. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39CCB8B1...@math.wisc.edu>, [ quoted text not captured ] I think that the next expansion should have pre-constructed starters. This way the older vamps could be introduced, and the veterans can simply buy the boosters with the all-new vamps. My take is, that 15 good, playable vamps are a good start for new players. Take VTES: each clan had 15, and it played rather smoothly. :) Some of the vamps from DS and AH could be reprinted, but some should be left out (Patrizia, Teresa Rostas, Kanya Akhtar, Aisha, Kemintiri, Rafaele, Regina, Vittorio, Andrei Puxon, Darius Styx). Some 10 cap vamps are simply too expensive and have not so good abilities. Another question arises: if the set should be playable in draft as a stand alone, the set *has* to include the other disciplines (obf, pre, dom, pot, cel, ani, for) as well! *Or* they would only appear in pre-constructed starters. About reprinting some library cards from AH and DS. First of all, all the errataed cards should be reprinted (Tomb, Force of Will, etc.). The wallpaper cards that belong to the Independents could be beefed up a bit, don't know if that's a good thing though. ;) Hm, perhaps all the old vamps should be reprinted, with "Independent" on them instead of "Non-Camarilla". That would go a great way of helping newbies. Also, what if all the old vamps would have new art (besides being expensive), they look a bit "dusty" compared to Sabbat... So long [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 09:28:42 -0500, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > > >I think that they can print enough Giovanni to make them playable > >without having to reprint anybody. A 3 with NEC is good, but not worlds > >better than a 4 with NEC pot. If they print ten more Giovanni (and none > > The Giovanni need BOTH a 3 with NEC, and a 4 with NEC pot. That way > you can have two small NEC vampires within easy access - making it > possible to create hybrid Possession/Whispers of the Dead decks with > many other strategies. Or Jar the Soul/whatever else you want. And > frankly, I find it appropriate to see the Undead Mafia in a bunch of > otherwise-clan decks ... "The Family is doing you a Favor." =) OK, I think you're misunderstanding the assumptions I'm making in my posts. Let me make it clear. People who buy just cards from this expansion should be able to play with the Giovanni effectively. I agree that, depending on the vampires printed, you may not be able to make super-tricky theme decks like you describe. That's not my point. People should have the cards to make a solid Giovanni pot/dom/nec deck. _That_ should be the focus of the vampires in the set. [preconstructed decks] I agree that if old vampires are going to be reprinted, it makes more sense to put them into the preconstructed decks. As you say, oldies like us won't like getting more vampires we already have, but we'll like it less in the boosters than in the precon's. > Well, Dark Sovereigns isn't that easily available right now. I mean, > sure, you can chase down Potomac, but the feet-in-store crowd won't > have the slightest idea what to do. If we get eight new vampires for > the Giovanni, and reprint 6 old ones, that'll be 14 available to the > newbie directly, and 21 available to someone who has both DS and Final > Nights. That works out well - the newbie will be able to make a > *decent* clan deck (and if he wishes, he can make a crypt of all > Giovanni with no duplicates), and the veteran will have plenty of toys > to play with if he wants to figure out how to make Patrizia go. You're assuming that there's room for 14 Giovanni in the set, which I think is totally unreasonable. > >What's wrong with a 4 with POT dom? [snip: pot/dom decks are good] So? Why is that a reason not to print such a vampire? By that logic, the Malkavians just shouldn't exist at all. > Giving it a POT/dom vampire at 4 ... well, i'd hesitate to > initially create that vamp, and if I did I'd want to make sure it > wasn't -too- much of a monster. This reminds me of one time that I was playing in another group. I brought out Richter (you know, the Templar of DuMont). They hadn't had too much Sabbat exposure, so I figured they'd complain that he's broken (undercosted). They didn't seem to care that he has 8 "points" for 7 capacity; their complaint was that he has Fortitude. Their logic was that the combination of Potence and Fortitude is "too good" and that it should be reserved for very large vampires. I just don't understand that argument. > >I agree that Carlotta fills a vital role... in a Carlotta-type deck. > >But why reprint her? Why not print a different 7 with slightly > >different disciplines and another cool ability? Diversify! > > Diversification screws the feet-in-store newbie, when he discovers > that if he doesn't have ALL the old sets, he's hosed. Only if that's actually true. Print 10 vampires (and despite what you think, there's no way we'll get 14) which give a nice spread to a new player and more options for an old player. You're right; a new player (under my scheme) might not be able to play an all-NEC all the time deck. I'm not concerned about that. I want them to have a good range. I hesitate to do this because I know this will have unexpected flaws (plus I'm not 100% familiar with the Giovanni, so there might be repeats here), but here's an idea: Anna Giovanni 2 nec Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom Chris Giovanni 4 NEC pot David Giovanni 4 pot DOM Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC POT dom Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom [other] Greg Giovanni 6 nec POT DOM [other] Harry Giovanni 7 NEC pot DOM [other] Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM [other] Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM [other] Where [other] can mean other disciplines or abilities. The only vampire it might be worth reprinting is the 4 with nec pot dom. Two's with pot and dom exist in other clans/sets. There are 3's with dom pot, so give the Giovanni "Beth" and "Chris" to fill that out. Feel free to replace "David" with the 4 with nec pot dom. Two fives with all the in-clans. One each of 6-9 to have weird abilities and votes. > I wouldn't want > to reprint EVERY vampire, by a long shot, but definitely some of the > most common ones. Carlotta and Rudolpho first. Mario -or- Cristofero > (Guido or Nunzio, really). Gaspare -or- Gloria. Then you still have > plenty of room for others. Well, you have room for 6 (in theory). > Also, Carlotta makes an excellent addition to ANY Giovanni deck - her > skillset is just what you want! POT/NEC/dom/obf. I'm not saying Carlotta isn't good. But the only reason she's better than some other 7 with lots of in-clan disciplines is her card-recycling trick. And her being tricky is (to my mind) not reason enough to reprint her. [14 vampires each clan] > Assuming this happens for the other 3 clans, that's 56 cards out of a > 120-card set that will be vampires. That's way too many. > That seems a bit steep at first, > but since you're only catering to four disciplines with the reprint > (NEC, CHI, QUI, SER), that leaves room for 16 new cards for each > clan/discipline combo. Except that Weick said there will be stuff for other clans as well. Now you open up the big can of worms to _all_ the other disciplines and _all_ the other clans. And this is a good move on their part. If someone couldn't care less about the 4 independent clans, there's no reason for them to buy the set under your plan. There should be a scattering of cards (and possibly vampires) from other clans to widen the appeal. These don't have to restrict the advantages to the independent clans, either. A Brujah with Nec, a Gangrel with Chi, a Tremere or City Gangrel with Qui, and a Malkavian with Ser would make a whole bunch of new decks possible if it were done right. > If you run into trouble with card space, drop the reprints to 5, > although you run the risk of expansion-only players being hosed on > total unique vampires available - must be at LEAST 12 without having > to buy DS. The Assamites and Setites only have 10, and that's a > slight problem right now. Again. It's a problem because too many of those vampires are bad, and the strategies for using them have not been fleshed out. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Only if that's actually true. Print 10 vampires (and despite what you > think, there's no way we'll get 14) which give a nice spread to a new > player and more options for an old player. You're right; a new player > (under my scheme) might not be able to play an all-NEC all the time > deck. I'm not concerned about that. I want them to have a good range. > I hesitate to do this because I know this will have unexpected flaws > (plus I'm not 100% familiar with the Giovanni, so there might be repeats > here), but here's an idea: > > Anna Giovanni 2 nec > Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom > Chris Giovanni 4 NEC pot > David Giovanni 4 pot DOM > Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC POT dom > Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom [other] > Greg Giovanni 6 nec POT DOM [other] > Harry Giovanni 7 NEC pot DOM [other] > Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM [other] > Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM [other] I'd like to see something like this too. > > Well, you have room for 6 (in theory). > > > Also, Carlotta makes an excellent addition to ANY Giovanni deck - her > > skillset is just what you want! POT/NEC/dom/obf. > > I'm not saying Carlotta isn't good. But the only reason she's better > than some other 7 with lots of in-clan disciplines is her card- recycling > trick. And her being tricky is (to my mind) not reason enough to > reprint her. I agree on this, and there's also the Whispers of the Dead card (that maybe should be reprinted). I think it would work well to only reprint maybe 2 vamps/clan from the old sets, and the rest being new ones. There's really not that many old vamps that "you cannot do without". If you replace the old vamps with a new alternative that is as good, I don't think you'll miss the old vamps too much. Sure, players with old sets will have some advantage, but that's always going to be the case. I think that if you print 10 new *usable* vamps and make necromancy a better discipline, you'll really do fine. Then there'a also a chance that people with vamps from the old sets have some for trade as well. > > [14 vampires each clan] > > Assuming this happens for the other 3 clans, that's 56 cards out of a > > 120-card set that will be vampires. > > That's way too many. > > > That seems a bit steep at first, > > but since you're only catering to four disciplines with the reprint > > (NEC, CHI, QUI, SER), that leaves room for 16 new cards for each > > clan/discipline combo. > > Except that Weick said there will be stuff for other clans as well. Now > you open up the big can of worms to _all_ the other disciplines and > _all_ the other clans. And this is a good move on their part. If > someone couldn't care less about the 4 independent clans, there's no > reason for them to buy the set under your plan. There should be a > scattering of cards (and possibly vampires) from other clans to widen > the appeal. These don't have to restrict the advantages to the > independent clans, either. A Brujah with Nec, a Gangrel with Chi, a > Tremere or City Gangrel with Qui, and a Malkavian with Ser would make a > whole bunch of new decks possible if it were done right. This is *really* somehting I'm hoping for. I think there's way too few vampires outside the clans having AH or DS specific disciplines. Like Chimerstry for example, there's only one outside Ravnos having it. I'd really like to see some more diversity wihtout making the vamps having these new disciplines bad unless you play with that discipline. For example, I wouldn't want ot see a Brujah cap 4 having Pot and nec, then you could as well make a Giovanni with it because you'd only play with Brujah with Giovannis and then he won't even be of the clan. But it would be cool to see say a cap 6 vamp Brujah with nec, CEL, PRE and pot or an ability. > > > If you run into trouble with card space, drop the reprints to 5, > > although you run the risk of expansion-only players being hosed on > > total unique vampires available - must be at LEAST 12 without having > > to buy DS. The Assamites and Setites only have 10, and that's a > > slight problem right now. > > Again. It's a problem because too many of those vampires are bad, and > the strategies for using them have not been fleshed out. I agree, eventhough I don't think it would hurt to reprint 2 of the old sets most useable vamps of each clan. But I don't think even that is necessary. > > James > -- > James Hamblin > ham...@math.wisc.edu > > "She does raindances and she knows the score / > All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." > -- Shivaree > [ quoted text not captured ]

> My, my, are we a bit cranky today?? > > You have cited examples (above) of mentoring. Being mentored, broadly > defined, is being taught and guided by someone or something with more > experience. Folks in this newsgroup can act as mentors, for example. > > And playgroups and players won't spring up without mentors, without > teachers, without sources of information to which they can turn. This > is particularly true when you have a complex, multi-player game like > V:TES. I beg to... well heck (no swearing at work) I differ on this one. My play group had no mentor. Lots of us (not me, but others) hadn't played TCG's before, but a few of us heard about Jyhad. It was cheap, magic wasn't, so we convinced the non-card players to try this out, and if it sucks, well it's only like $10 each. We learned the hard way to play, through trial and error. Now the point of this charming human interest story: > We should not reprint cards just because a newbie might not know (yet) > how to obtain a copy of Patrizia Giovanni. This is a waste, pure and > simple. yes you should. Ok so Patrizia is a bit silly, although I'm still trying to find a use for her. In general however, expecting a new player to learn playing the independent clans without the staples of those clans: Carlotta Giovanni, Joquina Amaya, etc. is cruel for them and would turn them off game play. Similiarly, were new vampires, that fit into the niche that these two do, printed they would hurt gameplay. The Ravnos don't need another 6-cap with all superior, but a new player of the ravnos does need this vampire. [extend to other indy clan vamps] It is not a waste, it is a way to make the indy clans viable, without making them dominant. They don't need 12 new vamps each, they need enough vamps to make them playable, which for newbies includes access to the best of the old sets. finally think about this: even the lasombra will run out of vampires to trade eventually (no offence) when this pool of vampires runs out, what does a newbie do then? Out of Napalm, Cameron Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Hmm. > > Xian, off to a sealed Jyhad (non-sanctioned) tourney...yay! Madison League > play, you're next, baby! > really, i'm humbled that you'll be stoping by our fair city. When? Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:50:29 GMT, inr...@my-deja.com wrote: >yes you should. Ok so Patrizia is a bit silly, although I'm still >trying to find a use for her. In general however, expecting a new >player to learn playing the independent clans without the staples of >those clans: Carlotta Giovanni, Joquina Amaya, etc. is cruel for them >and would turn them off game play. Similiarly, were new vampires, that >fit into the niche that these two do, printed they would hurt gameplay. >The Ravnos don't need another 6-cap with all superior, but a new player >of the ravnos does need this vampire. [extend to other indy clan >vamps] Yes, exactly. SOME vampires need to make it back in. Salbatore Bokkengro. Joaquina. Not ALL of them - Lazar doesn't NEED to be reprinted. But *some* of them. >finally think about this: even the lasombra will run out of vampires to >trade eventually (no offence) when this pool of vampires runs out, what >does a newbie do then? He's already completely missing several vampires that I would like to have more of, actually. I didn't want to post this earlier because it sounds like a bash against TheLasombra - which it's NOT, it's just that no single person will EVER be able to serve as a "centralized card trading post" and satisfy everyone. Mark Korshavn tried and did fairly well for awhile, but... Many of the veterans prefer to keep a certain number of each vamp on hand - I try to hang onto a minimum of two, and an ideal of four to six, depending on the likelihood of it being the central vamp of a deck. Carlotta, I keep six of. Rudolpho, only four. And a number of Sabbat and AH vampires I only have two of, from trading internally with my playgroup to try to make sure everyone has at least one or two of all the vampires. I don't see a newbie being able to easily track down individual vampires, frankly. And you CAN'T screw the hell out of a newbie by not giving him the "keystone" vamps for a clan - or he's going to run into a veteran somewhere and his eyes will bug out when Joaquina and Sarisha come out - and then the first words out of his mouth will be "Oh, like Magic. If you don't have the old stuff you lose." [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qiemr$t3k$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes >You have cited examples (above) of mentoring. No, I have cited examples of White Wolf doing one hell of a lot of work for the game, to get new players in - irrespective of whether they have a playgroup already or not. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39CCB8B1...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> What you do with such is to give old players a workable base for the >> Giovanni, and new players just a new variation on the old unworkable >> base. > >I don't think it should be too hard to make a set of ten vampires that >make the Giovanni playable. I actually really like the idea of different starter contents and booster contents. Have all new cards in the boosters, and have a mix in the starters. Have, say, 6 old vampires in the crypt, and some new vampires. That way, you can also bring some of the "basic" cards in as well, justifiably, without having to print them in the boosters - Blood Doll, Computer Hacking etc. Re-prints, of course, must included errata-ed cards - Soul Stealing and one of the Chimerstry cards (the one that can be used for stealth at inferior, but only on bleeds at superior) spring to mind. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39CCC125...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >People who buy just cards from this >expansion should be able to play with the Giovanni effectively. Erm, I think they're likely to need some from Sabbat War, too - as the de facto (for new players) basic set. However, I am of the opinion that a new player shouldn't *need* to go to Dark Sovereigns/AH to get a workable deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 09:05:37 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > >James Coupe wrote: >> >> In article <39CB6C9A...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin >> <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> >If they print ten more Giovanni (and none >> >of those incredibly shitty ones like Patrizia) then you can play with >> >those ten, or play with a mix of the old and the new. >> >> Ten Giovanni weren't good enough in DS. >> >> What you do with such is to give old players a workable base for the >> Giovanni, and new players just a new variation on the old unworkable >> base. > >I don't think it should be too hard to make a set of ten vampires that >make the Giovanni playable. > >Of the original 10 Giovanni, Gaspare is kind of marginal (he should have >dom instead of cel), Rudolpho's useless (but only because NEC is nearly >useless), Vittorio's overcosted (he should in theory have been a 5 with, Correction. Inferior Necromancy can be pretty damned useless because of its total lack of inherent stealth. But I draw your attention to Possession, Whispers of the Dead, Compel the Spirit, Jar the Soul - all good cards at superior. Rudolpho can recruit any of the Giovanni allies, most of whom are actually fairly decent. (Scapelli can bleed. Ambrosius is a permanent blocker. Leonardo is an end-of-minion-phase hunting ground, for the guy you didn't realize was going to land at 0 blood.) And he has access to an extra stealth OR intercept in Spectral Divination if necessary - and if he's going to take a bunch of NEC actions, he can always go get Giuseppe. And he only costs 3 to bring out! Rudolpho kicks ass, sorry. Gaspare is good if you have a deck that intends to fight a lot, or if you have a deck that intends to get its own guys burned a lot (which is a viable part of any Giovanni strategy). To make his special good instead of so-so, it should have moved the vamp from the ash heap into your uncontrolled region, frankly, but too late now, I suppose. Vittorio fits the classic Jyhad 5-cap template perfectly. (I draw your attention to Sabine, Tiberius, etc.) He's not OVERcosted - he's just what the 4-cap "poster children" are, a stock template to drop a skill card on. Remember when he was designed. >say, DOM NEC pot), and that's pretty much it. Looking at the spread of >just those Giovanni, it looks like you could easily make a good Giovanni >deck... except that Necromancy sucks. That's the reason 10 Giovanni >weren't good enough in Dark Sovereigns. There were only 7 or so good >ones (and Regina's a 10), and there isn't much you can do with NEC. No, the problem is that the vampires with superior NEC didn't have any other useful disciplines, and the vampires with useful disciplines didn't have NEC. (Rafaele? OK, he bleeds for two and all, but NEC obf cel means that he's basically a 6-cap Rudolpho with +1 bleed. Great if you take a ton of NEC actions and are going down the OBF angle. Not so good if you want to, say, have a necropotence deck.) The cheapest two "good" vamps you get are Rudolpho and Carlotta - a 3 and a 7, meaning that if you want to play with the Giovanni right now you have to load them down with NEC skill cards, and CREATE "good" vamps. Gloria with DOM/NEC is significantly better. Francesca with dom/nec/POT is a lot meaner - now she takes all the cool NEC actions at 0 stealth, and beats your ass if you stop her. They -desperately- need some more superior NEC at 4 and 5, and a couple guys with POT and DOM scattered through there wouldn't hurt either. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 09:41:41 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> The Giovanni need BOTH a 3 with NEC, and a 4 with NEC pot. That way >> you can have two small NEC vampires within easy access - making it > >OK, I think you're misunderstanding the assumptions I'm making in my >posts. Let me make it clear. People who buy just cards from this >expansion should be able to play with the Giovanni effectively. I agree Not entirely. I used a wack example there, but it's also worth noting that a 3 with NEC and a 4 with NEC pot make an all-Giovanni deck eminently playable - you can have a couple small vamps handy to take the cool NEC actions, and you can have some other, larger vamps to take your "meaningful" actions. Having only Rudolpho tends to hurt a lot, unless you get Leonardo or a HG out early. And having Carlotta play Jar the Soul instead of bleeding for 3 with her big POT is kind of painful. But yes, we agree completely that the base assumption, no matter what we argue it out as beyond that, must remain "People who buy cards from JUST Final Nights MUST be able to play each clan effectively." >that, depending on the vampires printed, you may not be able to make >super-tricky theme decks like you describe. That's not my point. >People should have the cards to make a solid Giovanni pot/dom/nec deck. >_That_ should be the focus of the vampires in the set. Correct. Rudolpho and Carlotta both contribute. =) >[preconstructed decks] > >I agree that if old vampires are going to be reprinted, it makes more >sense to put them into the preconstructed decks. As you say, oldies >like us won't like getting more vampires we already have, but we'll like >it less in the boosters than in the precon's. Yep. I figure, although WW might not agree with me, that nobody should feel like they HAVE to buy more than one of the preconstructed decks for each clan. Newbies OR veterans. >You're assuming that there's room for 14 Giovanni in the set, which I >think is totally unreasonable. There needs to be room for at least 12 Giovanni in the set. A newbie should be able to make an all-Giovanni crypt WITHOUT duplicating any vampires. Bumping it up to 14 didn't seem too unreasonable, IMO. >> >What's wrong with a 4 with POT dom? > >[snip: pot/dom decks are good] > >So? Why is that a reason not to print such a vampire? By that logic, >the Malkavians just shouldn't exist at all. If Garfield had foreseen how strong the Malkavians would be, I suspect that he would have toned down either the bleeding power of inferior Dominate, or the sneaking power of inferior Obfuscate. But the V:TES DOM and OBF cards are already printed, so we have to take them into consideration when designing vamps. Ohanna, Royce, and Samson should never have been printed. As a side note, I don't consider the Malks to have overpowered DISCIPLINES inherently at all - if you look, there was definitely some care taken to ensure that there was no easy access to a vampire with OBF DOM. The cheapest DOM Malkavian is a 5-cap and has inferior OBF. The cheapest OBF Malk is a 5-cap and has inferior DOM. Ozmo has inferior in BOTH for his +1 bleed - he would be undercosted if you actually counted out his discipline points. So the original designers obviously knew what they were doing when they created the Malks with that discipline set - they just didn't fully realize that the inferior versions of OBF and DOM were still pretty damn kick-ass, and that obf/DOM and OBF/dom might as well be OBF/DOM in most cases. >> Giving it a POT/dom vampire at 4 ... well, i'd hesitate to >> initially create that vamp, and if I did I'd want to make sure it >> wasn't -too- much of a monster. Applying the logic above to my own statement, as far as sheer amount of bleed is concerned, this vampire is effectively POT/DOM. Plain old Govern at inferior OR Conditioning at inferior are both bleeds for 3, which is an excellent amount to bleed - you can't be Archoned, and while you CAN be bounced, it's more anti-bounce-effective to bleed twice for 3 than it is to bleed once for 6. If you really want the cool stuff that DOM can bring (Threats, Bonding, Foreshadowing), then you can afford to wait around for the skill card - POT/dom can still do the basic concept just fine. >This reminds me of one time that I was playing in another group. I >brought out Richter (you know, the Templar of DuMont). They hadn't had >too much Sabbat exposure, so I figured they'd complain that he's broken >(undercosted). They didn't seem to care that he has 8 "points" for 7 >capacity; their complaint was that he has Fortitude. Their logic was >that the combination of Potence and Fortitude is "too good" and that it >should be reserved for very large vampires. And they didn't think 7 was a very large vampire? I agree with the thought that we shouldn't have multiple 4-caps running around with POT/for or pot/FOR, or 3-caps running around with pot/for, but we DON'T! Jimmy exists, but his "contesting" disadvantage is huge - he is inherently self-limiting. Same with Uriah. Once you get up to the 5-caps, I don't consider very many discipline combos much of a problem anymore - you can't get a 5-cap out in one turn without SOME sort of help. I wouldn't print an OBF/DOM/aus Malkavian, of course, but those instances will be extremely rare and extremely obvious. Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't broken, and look what he comes with. >I just don't understand that argument. Ohanna, Samson, and Royce give you a pretty good idea as to that argument. A Malkavian 3-cap with obf/dom would also give you a pretty good understanding. Some discipline combos shouldn't be TOO cheaply available. >Only if that's actually true. Print 10 vampires (and despite what you >think, there's no way we'll get 14) which give a nice spread to a new We had better get at least 12 though. >player and more options for an old player. You're right; a new player >(under my scheme) might not be able to play an all-NEC all the time >deck. I'm not concerned about that. I want them to have a good range. >I hesitate to do this because I know this will have unexpected flaws >(plus I'm not 100% familiar with the Giovanni, so there might be repeats >here), but here's an idea: > >Anna Giovanni 2 nec >Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom >Chris Giovanni 4 NEC pot Chris Giovanni 4 nec POT >David Giovanni 4 pot DOM David Giovanni 4 NEC dom >Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC POT dom Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC pot dom (+GOOD special) >Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom [other] >Greg Giovanni 6 nec POT DOM [other] Greg Giovanni 6 NEC pot DOM [other] >Harry Giovanni 7 NEC pot DOM [other] Harry Giovanni 7 NEC POT DOM >Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM [other] >Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM [other] > >Where [other] can mean other disciplines or abilities. The only vampire >it might be worth reprinting is the 4 with nec pot dom. Two's with pot I absolutely -hate- leaving poster children out of any expansion aimed at newbies. The stock 4-cap is one of the most important vamps to any clan, since it can use your entire deck. Not WELL, usually, - but just being able to play the card matters sometimes. >and dom exist in other clans/sets. There are 3's with dom pot, so give >the Giovanni "Beth" and "Chris" to fill that out. Feel free to replace >"David" with the 4 with nec pot dom. Two fives with all the in-clans. >One each of 6-9 to have weird abilities and votes. I altered a few above in accordance with my own personal tweaks, and just for shits and grins, in a way. They ought to have some POT available at 4, and POT/nec would be *such* an appropriate vampire for them. Altering Chris meant I had to alter David to be sure they got superior NEC at 4, and NEC/dom is still a good vamp. I dislike giving people two superiors at a 5-cap- the original Jyhad set avoided doing this for the most part (Felicia, Camille), and it was only with Sabbat that we started seeing a whole bunch of "broken-discipline-cost" vampires. So I stole Eddie's POT, but I gave him a good special to make up for it - which opens the door to cool stuff. Actually, giving him +1 hand damage would work very well in concert with my Chris and your Fiona - gives enough "thuggishness" to the Giovanni without giving them too much POT. I stole Greg's POT and swapped it for NEC because if I didn't, the clan would have more POT than even the Nosferatu Antitribu - who have POT on every vampire 4 and above. Mafia or not, these guys are necromancers, not street brawlers, and NEC needs to be their focus. I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a 7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. The Ventrue and Malks have one, which contributes largely to their superiority. The Gangrel have one, and SHE is a meanie - but the Gangrel are hard to win with so you don't see her as much. The Toreador do not have one until 9, making it difficult to produce an AUS/CEL/PRE deck. The Nossies, Tremere, and Brujah get one at 8, and there are plenty of decks that could use one at 7. (Anvil is a 6 - who wouldn't want to pay the extra for a 7 with superior PRE?) Now since we have ten, let's assume we reprint Rudolpho and Carlotta, easily the best two "keystone" Giovanni: Anna Giovanni 2 nec Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom Rudolpho Giovanni 3 NEC OR Francesca Giovanni 4 nec pot dom Chris Giovanni 4 nec POT David Giovanni 4 NEC dom Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC pot dom, +1 strength Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom xxx Greg Giovanni 6 NEC pot DOM xxx Harry Giovanni 7 NEC POT DOM Carlotta Giovanni 7 NEC POT dom obf [+special] Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM xxx [+special] Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM XXX xxx [+special] So this is the adjusted version. A little heavier on NEC, but the clan's big deficiency originally was the total lack of NEC available to it, and I wouldn't want to accidentally repeat that mistake. Is this playable? You betcha. Two or three guys with NEC by the time you hit 5. Two guys with POT. DOM available at 6 or 7 to Govern out little guys. Four little guys with dom so they can bleed while you Govern. Legbiter's Happy Families formula should be able to have a field day with these 12. With so much NEC available, it is possible that you could jerk Rudolpho out and reprint Francesca instead, so I left that in as an alternative. Four separate spots to include wacky disciplines (xxx), and Julie ought to have a random superior discipline (XXX) - she's a 9-cap and needs all the help she can get. Maybe OBF, since there's some OBF in the clan already with Carlotta and Rafaele, and they've been known to need the stealth in the past. I've probably pissed away an hour or so doing this, since I'm not part of the design team and they probably won't use these ideas. But it kept me entertained. =) >I'm not saying Carlotta isn't good. But the only reason she's better >than some other 7 with lots of in-clan disciplines is her card-recycling >trick. And her being tricky is (to my mind) not reason enough to >reprint her. The only 7 that would be better than her is POT/NEC/DOM. See my version of Harry, above. And if you don't reprint Carlotta, new players will SHRIEK when they see her get used - I'm trying to avoid shrieks. >[14 vampires each clan] >> Assuming this happens for the other 3 clans, that's 56 cards out of a >> 120-card set that will be vampires. > >That's way too many. Vampires were the most important thing the clans needed. Many of the cards were decent, you just couldn't find a vamp to play them. 14 may be too many, but the absolute minimum has to be 12. >> That seems a bit steep at first, >> but since you're only catering to four disciplines with the reprint >> (NEC, CHI, QUI, SER), that leaves room for 16 new cards for each >> clan/discipline combo. > >Except that Weick said there will be stuff for other clans as well. Now Yes, but "the occasional goodie" isn't a whole bunch of cards, frankly. Ancient Hearts offered ONLY one new discipline card for all the old disciplines. I don't see that there would be much problem with doing the same thing in Final Nights - it definitely makes the set appealing to the vets. So one for each of the ten original disciplines - and you can ignore the Sabbat three since Sabbat War will be in stores. BUT, if you must, add one for VIC, DEM, and OBT - that brings it up to 13 and leaves room for 13 new cards for each Independent clan. Actually more, since we're now working off of a 12-vampire assumption instead of 14 - so probably 15 new cards per. >the appeal. These don't have to restrict the advantages to the >independent clans, either. A Brujah with Nec, a Gangrel with Chi, a >Tremere or City Gangrel with Qui, and a Malkavian with Ser would make a >whole bunch of new decks possible if it were done right. True, but I'd prefer to just do it in the Ancient Hearts fashion, really - focus on the DISCIPLINES. Although AH did contribute a number of vampires back to the original set, this excessive focus on the original set is what hosed the Assamites and Setites. Some of the AH vamps were just pants, frankly, even though QUI and SER were scattered among them like water. [ quoted text not captured ]

> The only 7 that would be better than her is POT/NEC/DOM. See my > version of Harry, above. And if you don't reprint Carlotta, new > players will SHRIEK when they see her get used - I'm trying to avoid > shrieks. You think that causes shrieks with the new players. You ought to see their faces when Muaziz comes out of your uncontrolled region. Now, that is priceless. :) Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39CCC125...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >People who buy just cards from this > >expansion should be able to play with the Giovanni effectively. > > Erm, I think they're likely to need some from Sabbat War, too - as the > de facto (for new players) basic set. > > However, I am of the opinion that a new player shouldn't *need* to go to > Dark Sovereigns/AH to get a workable deck. Point taken. I agree. But I don't want/expect to see Necromancy cards in Sabbat War. SW should, however, have sufficient Dom/Pot cards to make the Giovanni work, together with Exp.#2's Nec cards. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "I can choose to walk the fine line between Self-control and self-abuse." -- Barenaked Ladies

> > The only 7 that would be better than her is POT/NEC/DOM. See my > > version of Harry, above. And if you don't reprint Carlotta, new > > players will SHRIEK when they see her get used - I'm trying to avoid > > shrieks. > > You think that causes shrieks with the new players. You ought to see > their faces when Muaziz comes out of your uncontrolled region. Now, > that is priceless. :) > evil, very evil... ToR3 is good for that too... it does what? You have out WHO? <evil grin> Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

I'm enjoying having a discussion where I'm not being crucified... let's keep this up. :) Derek Ray wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 09:41:41 -0500, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > Let me try to summarize your point; you tell me if I'm wrong. You're saying that since Necromancy is the Giovanni's discipline that they should have it at superior as much (and on as small vampires) as possible. I think I would support a more balanced approach. I would rather the Giovanni get a nice spread of all three of their disciplines than just concentrating on the one. > But yes, we agree completely that the base assumption, no matter what > we argue it out as beyond that, must remain "People who buy cards from > JUST Final Nights MUST be able to play each clan effectively." Yes. (As someone else pointed out, this assumes that people have the non-independent discipline cards from Sabbat War.) > >that, depending on the vampires printed, you may not be able to make > >super-tricky theme decks like you describe. That's not my point. > >People should have the cards to make a solid Giovanni pot/dom/nec deck. > >_That_ should be the focus of the vampires in the set. > > Correct. Rudolpho and Carlotta both contribute. =) :) I'm not saying they don't. But why not make both old and new players happy? Why not print all-new vampires (for the old people) with balanced and effective disciplines (for the new people)? > >[preconstructed decks] > > > >I agree that if old vampires are going to be reprinted, it makes more > >sense to put them into the preconstructed decks. As you say, oldies > >like us won't like getting more vampires we already have, but we'll like > >it less in the boosters than in the precon's. > > Yep. I figure, although WW might not agree with me, that nobody > should feel like they HAVE to buy more than one of the preconstructed > decks for each clan. Newbies OR veterans. Right. I don't think anyone would go nuts if Carlotta and a couple old vampires ended up in the precons. But they should 100% NOT be in the boosters. That will make many many people upset. > >You're assuming that there's room for 14 Giovanni in the set, which I > >think is totally unreasonable. > > There needs to be room for at least 12 Giovanni in the set. A newbie > should be able to make an all-Giovanni crypt WITHOUT duplicating any > vampires. Bumping it up to 14 didn't seem too unreasonable, IMO. I don't see why having 12 different vampires is so necessary. As long as _all_ 10 are playable *cough*Patrizia*cough* it shouldn't be a problem. > >So? Why is that a reason not to print such a vampire? By that logic, > >the Malkavians just shouldn't exist at all. > > If Garfield had foreseen how strong the Malkavians would be, I suspect > that he would have toned down either the bleeding power of inferior > Dominate, or the sneaking power of inferior Obfuscate. But the V:TES > DOM and OBF cards are already printed, so we have to take them into > consideration when designing vamps. Ohanna, Royce, and Samson should > never have been printed. You haven't really answered my question. Why is a POT/DOM deck better than a OBF/DOM deck? I agree that both are effective, but I don't think any discipline combinations should be considered more "expensive" in terms of vampire selection. > The cheapest OBF Malk is a 5-cap and has inferior DOM. Ozmo has > inferior in BOTH for his +1 bleed - he would be undercosted if you > actually counted out his discipline points. Actually, Ozmo is just right. 4 points of disciplines plus 2 for +1 bleed. I agree with you to some extent. Clearly a 6 with DOM OBF +1 bleed is too good. But mostly it's the +1 bleed that's the problem. > I wouldn't print an > OBF/DOM/aus Malkavian, of course, but those instances will be > extremely rare and extremely obvious. I don't think it's that big of a problem. You deal with this vampire in the same ways that you deal with the deck in general. The card itself isn't a problem if the strategy isn't. > Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't > broken, and look what he comes with. Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. > >Where [other] can mean other disciplines or abilities. The only vampire > >it might be worth reprinting is the 4 with nec pot dom. Two's with pot > > I absolutely -hate- leaving poster children out of any expansion aimed > at newbies. The stock 4-cap is one of the most important vamps to any > clan, since it can use your entire deck. Not WELL, usually, - but > just being able to play the card matters sometimes. Like I said, I can totally see reprinting that one... in the precon. > I dislike giving people two superiors at a 5-cap- the original Jyhad > set avoided doing this for the most part (Felicia, Camille), and it > was only with Sabbat that we started seeing a whole bunch of > "broken-discipline-cost" vampires. But vampires like Nigel (5 !Nos with POT ANI obf) aren't broken. It's vamps like Sela (6 !Bru with POT PRE cel obt, +1 bleed, 1 vote, and weird advantage) that are broken. > So I stole Eddie's POT, but I gave > him a good special to make up for it - which opens the door to cool > stuff. Actually, giving him +1 hand damage would work very well in > concert with my Chris and your Fiona - gives enough "thuggishness" to > the Giovanni without giving them too much POT. Then he'd be undercosted (a 5 with 4 points of disciplines and +1 hand damage). How much is too much POT? You're afraid the Giovanni would be too good? > I stole Greg's POT and swapped it for NEC because if I didn't, the > clan would have more POT than even the Nosferatu Antitribu - who have > POT on every vampire 4 and above. Mafia or not, these guys are > necromancers, not street brawlers, and NEC needs to be their focus. Well, that's a RPG concern, so I can't really say anything about that. > I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a > 7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. ...which would be undercosted. I have heard a rumor that Sabbat War is going to include a 6 for each clan with each discipline at superior. > Now since we have ten, let's assume we reprint Rudolpho and Carlotta, > easily the best two "keystone" Giovanni: I don't know that Rudolpho's all that good. I don't like having 3's with one discipline at superior. > Anna Giovanni 2 nec > Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom > > Rudolpho Giovanni 3 NEC > OR Francesca Giovanni 4 nec pot dom > > Chris Giovanni 4 nec POT > David Giovanni 4 NEC dom > Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC pot dom, +1 strength > Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom xxx > Greg Giovanni 6 NEC pot DOM xxx > Harry Giovanni 7 NEC POT DOM > Carlotta Giovanni 7 NEC POT dom obf [+special] > Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM xxx [+special] > Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM XXX xxx [+special] > > So this is the adjusted version. A little heavier on NEC, but the > clan's big deficiency originally was the total lack of NEC available > to it, and I wouldn't want to accidentally repeat that mistake. Well, I think that, and NEC sucks really bad. Nearly all the Nec cards are just abysmal. Death Pact? Please. > Is > this playable? You betcha. Two or three guys with NEC by the time > you hit 5. Two guys with POT. DOM available at 6 or 7 to Govern out > little guys. Four little guys with dom so they can bleed while you > Govern. Legbiter's Happy Families formula should be able to have a > field day with these 12. Eddie's undercosted, as I mentioned above. I don't think we want "Francesca with +1 hand damage", so something needs to change there. I don't see the problem with a 5 with NEC DOM pot. > Four separate spots to include wacky disciplines (xxx), and Julie > ought to have a random superior discipline (XXX) - she's a 9-cap and > needs all the help she can get. Maybe OBF, since there's some OBF in > the clan already with Carlotta and Rafaele, and they've been known to > need the stealth in the past. Or something that overlaps with another clan which shares one of their disciplines. Obf (Malk/Nos), Cel (Bru), For (Ven), Obt (Las), Ani (Nos) are all good options. > The only 7 that would be better than her is POT/NEC/DOM. See my > version of Harry, above. And if you don't reprint Carlotta, new > players will SHRIEK when they see her get used - I'm trying to avoid > shrieks. Fine. Put her in the precons. > >That's way too many. > > Vampires were the most important thing the clans needed. Many of the > cards were decent, you just couldn't find a vamp to play them. 14 may > be too many, but the absolute minimum has to be 12. I disagree. Necromancy desperately, desperately needs good cards. The Assamites need better support cards to make them more effective outside of combat. The Ravnos need... something. The Setites need better minion cards other than "I steal your vampire". Serpentis is pretty ass-tacular. > >> That seems a bit steep at first, > >> but since you're only catering to four disciplines with the reprint > >> (NEC, CHI, QUI, SER), that leaves room for 16 new cards for each > >> clan/discipline combo. > > > >Except that Weick said there will be stuff for other clans as well. Now > > Yes, but "the occasional goodie" isn't a whole bunch of cards, > frankly. Ancient Hearts offered ONLY one new discipline card for all > the old disciplines. I don't see that there would be much problem > with doing the same thing in Final Nights - it definitely makes the > set appealing to the vets. So one for each of the ten original > disciplines - and you can ignore the Sabbat three since Sabbat War > will be in stores. BUT, if you must, add one for VIC, DEM, and OBT - > that brings it up to 13 and leaves room for 13 new cards for each > Independent clan. Actually more, since we're now working off of a > 12-vampire assumption instead of 14 - so probably 15 new cards per. Except that there could (and IMO should) be vampires from other clans. > >the appeal. These don't have to restrict the advantages to the > >independent clans, either. A Brujah with Nec, a Gangrel with Chi, a > >Tremere or City Gangrel with Qui, and a Malkavian with Ser would make a > >whole bunch of new decks possible if it were done right. > > True, but I'd prefer to just do it in the Ancient Hearts fashion, > really - focus on the DISCIPLINES. Although AH did contribute a > number of vampires back to the original set, this excessive focus on > the original set is what hosed the Assamites and Setites. Some of the > AH vamps were just pants, frankly, even though QUI and SER were > scattered among them like water. The point is to scatter the disciplines intelligently. Make a couple Gangrel with Chimerstry. Make a Brujah with CEL obf qui. Make a Malkavian with OBF pre ser. Make a Lasombra with Necromancy. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "It's time to throw off those chains, addle our brains with madness." -- Barenaked Ladies

Looked at the numbers: Assuming 12 vamp crypts for each indy clan 48 vamps one bonus card for each discipline 13 cards we still get: 14 clan/discipline cards for each of the indy clans. Bump that to fifteen by losing the DEM, VIC, OBT, AUS? cards (non of the indy's have these disciplines.) left over are three card slots, maybe for regular clans with these disciplines: (just examples.) Gangrel with CHI Brujah with NEC Tremere with NEC or QUI or maybe lose the PRO card as well and get 16 clan/discipline cards. That ought to be enought to give diversity of play, and by making some of them masters, we get cards other clans can use too (more goodies). Ok, so the point: 12 vamps per clan, enought space to reprint old vampires without giving an adequite selection of new ones. I'm thinking 3-6 old vamps, depending on how much help the clan needs. IMHO the Ravnos need less extra vamps than the others, their 4-7's are very strong where as the Giovanni need lots of clan discipline vampires. Same goes for the Setities. I dont know about the assamites. See my other post on why this wouldn't be a waste of space. Cameron Look- a cow! [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:49:39 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 09:41:41 -0500, James Hamblin >> <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > >Let me try to summarize your point; you tell me if I'm wrong. You're >saying that since Necromancy is the Giovanni's discipline that they >should have it at superior as much (and on as small vampires) as >possible. I think I would support a more balanced approach. I would >rather the Giovanni get a nice spread of all three of their disciplines >than just concentrating on the one. That's roughly what I'm saying, although I wouldn't say AS much as possible - there's no need to go completely hog-wild and make every vampire have NEC. The Giovanni do need a good "spread" of their disciplines - but they are the only clan who come with NEC. You can get POT and DOM elsewhere (out of multiple clans), and you can even get POT/DOM on the Lasombra. But you shouldn't have to play with skill cards for your clan's primary discipline, and so you want a lot of NEC out there. >> There needs to be room for at least 12 Giovanni in the set. A newbie >> should be able to make an all-Giovanni crypt WITHOUT duplicating any >> vampires. Bumping it up to 14 didn't seem too unreasonable, IMO. > >I don't see why having 12 different vampires is so necessary. As long >as _all_ 10 are playable *cough*Patrizia*cough* it shouldn't be a >problem. Um, a lot of people out there don't like to use duplicates, as crazy as it sounds. Some people object to being able to re-influence a vamp once it has been burned. Some people like the wacky "theme" influence that comes with 12 different vamps in your crypt. And some people just don't want to worry about only being able to bring out 3 of their first 4 vamps. For whatever reason, that 12 is fairly critical to new players. >You haven't really answered my question. Why is a POT/DOM deck better >than a OBF/DOM deck? I agree that both are effective, but I don't think >any discipline combinations should be considered more "expensive" in >terms of vampire selection. Hm, I don't think that's what you asked, but anyway: a POT/DOM deck isn't necessarily better than an OBF/DOM deck. I objected to a 4-cap with POT/dom, and I'd object to a 4-cap with either OBF/dom or obf/DOM. Absolutely too strong. Maybe you don't think they SHOULD be considered more expensive - but they HAVE to be, or you end up shooting yourself in the foot. One of the "gotchas" about Malkavian S&B right now is that you end up using slightly bigger vampires - the 5's and 6's. That costs it some speed, and some actions as well - it isn't bright to bring out more than two 5's and a 6 early on. And it makes beating up one of its minions more viable as a defense. If you give it some 4-caps with OBF/dom and DOM/obf, then you increase its speed AND the number of vamps it can bring out - two 4's and two 5's wouldn't be very risky at all, esp. with bleed bounce available. The typical counters ("not blocking", etc.) become less viable, as being bled for 4 every turn is painful no matter what. And despite what a lot of people will say, a well-built Malk deck is still one of the nastier things out there to face as your predator - especially when you build it *knowing* what people will do to try to counter you. (include plenty of Swallowed by the Night to run away, include plenty of Obedience, rely on Bonding as much as possible for quick stealth, remember to not include THAT many additional stealth cards as most people will just quit blocking, don't go crazy and use too many Conditionings as people will be bouncing you a lot, feel free to include some Spying Missions to obviate the bounce, since they can be either stealth OR bleed as you need, and you can always "save" your grandprey from being nuked by dropping a Spying Mission - it'll be there by the time you get to him...) >> The cheapest OBF Malk is a 5-cap and has inferior DOM. Ozmo has >> inferior in BOTH for his +1 bleed - he would be undercosted if you >> actually counted out his discipline points. > >Actually, Ozmo is just right. 4 points of disciplines plus 2 for +1 >bleed. I agree with you to some extent. Clearly a 6 with DOM OBF +1 >bleed is too good. But mostly it's the +1 bleed that's the problem. The Jyhad vampire formula was 2 for a superior, 1 for an inferior, 1 for the vampire itself, and 1 for a special, actually. But the math does still work out - 4 + 1 + 1 = 6. My bad. It was Sabbat that broke the formula by not charging for the vampire anymore, and then going insane with vampires like Sela, apparently by just assuming that out-of-clan disciplines and titles are "free". >> I wouldn't print an >> OBF/DOM/aus Malkavian, of course, but those instances will be >> extremely rare and extremely obvious. > >I don't think it's that big of a problem. You deal with this vampire in >the same ways that you deal with the deck in general. The card itself >isn't a problem if the strategy isn't. OBF/DOM = Swallowed by the Night + Obedience, and a second 5-cap with DOM that can Govern backwards? OUCH. Remember that the superior text on Govern the Unaligned actually reads "+1 stealth action. Gain 3 pool if you have a younger vampire than this in your uncontrolled region." =) The strategy is only not a problem because it requires just enough moving parts right now, or just big enough vampires, that you can't really roll over someone with weight of minions - you have to do it with weight of bleed, and when someone nukes one of your minions, it actually HURTS you. When someone bounces one of your bleeds, you don't have that many more actions left. Adding more minions of the necessary skillset within easy reach (low transfers, low pool cost) means you get closer and closer to making some counters for the strategy non-viable. Weenie DOM bleed wasn't a problem until Ohanna, Samson, Mustafa, and Royce came along - an excellent example of careless vampire creation, all from two expansions. Weenie PRE bleed was already halfway functional, but adding Angela, Frederick, Vasilis, Lena, Khalil, and Lolita didn't help matters out at all. We can't let this expansion create any more "problem" decks that have to be "solved". >> Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't >> broken, and look what he comes with. > >Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. Yes, but realistically, he's not broken because he can't DO anything but one thing with all those neat toys he has. Interestingly, according to the apparent Sabbat formula, he's fine: 2 (POT) + 2 (OBF) + 1 (ani) + 1 (rush) + 1 (strength) = 7. His cel is 'free' as an out-of-clan, and he doesn't cost 1 for just being a vampire in the Sabbat. Actually, he might be undercosted, since he has a big-ass special disability, which is usually -1. But the "free out of clan" stuff seems to be haphazard. >> I dislike giving people two superiors at a 5-cap- the original Jyhad >> set avoided doing this for the most part (Felicia, Camille), and it >> was only with Sabbat that we started seeing a whole bunch of >> "broken-discipline-cost" vampires. > >But vampires like Nigel (5 !Nos with POT ANI obf) aren't broken. It's >vamps like Sela (6 !Bru with POT PRE cel obt, +1 bleed, 1 vote, and >weird advantage) that are broken. Nigel is an -extremely good- vampire. Not broken in practice because, like Beast, it's hard for him to do much but beat people up. But he suffers from the Sabbat undercost as a whole, where 1 for a vamp didn't cost you. (Sela is way out of hand, and someone should be shot for designing her.) >> So I stole Eddie's POT, but I gave >> him a good special to make up for it - which opens the door to cool >> stuff. Actually, giving him +1 hand damage would work very well in >> concert with my Chris and your Fiona - gives enough "thuggishness" to >> the Giovanni without giving them too much POT. > >Then he'd be undercosted (a 5 with 4 points of disciplines and +1 hand >damage). How much is too much POT? You're afraid the Giovanni would be >too good? 4 points of disciplines and 1 for a special ability = 5, fitting the Sabbat template. I hate matching new vamps up to the Sabbat formula, but it's probably better than having them piss-ass weak in comparison. +1 hand damage serves a more limited purpose than POT, keeping it somewhere reasonable. Why not too much POT? Thematically - see below. The +1 hand damage will serve him in even decks that don't want to use POT. >> I stole Greg's POT and swapped it for NEC because if I didn't, the >> clan would have more POT than even the Nosferatu Antitribu - who have >> POT on every vampire 4 and above. Mafia or not, these guys are >> necromancers, not street brawlers, and NEC needs to be their focus. > >Well, that's a RPG concern, so I can't really say anything about that. *shrug* The game shouldn't slavishly follow the World of Darkness in every single bit, no. But there are enough reasons to point the Giovanni more towards NEC than towards POT - not the least of which being that we already have two POT clans, the Brujah and Nosferatu (and their antitribu as well.) >> I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a >> 7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. > >...which would be undercosted. I have heard a rumor that Sabbat War is >going to include a 6 for each clan with each discipline at superior. 2 + 2 + 2 = 6, plus one for the vampire is 7. Not even undercosted by the Jyhad formula, and they gave Gilbert and Nash a Prince title too! >> Now since we have ten, let's assume we reprint Rudolpho and Carlotta, >> easily the best two "keystone" Giovanni: > >I don't know that Rudolpho's all that good. I don't like having 3's >with one discipline at superior. Rudolpho OWNS. Actually, all the 3's with one discipline kick ass, except for poor Harika Guljan (QUI) who can't maneuver and can't additional-strike, and is mostly screwed. Gideon (PRE) is a brute. Chandler (PRO) is very nasty. Blythe (THA) is pretty damn good. Agrippina and Tansu (OBF) are 4-caps and are -still- very good in mono-OBF decks. Anyone with POT at a 3-cap would be incredibly good. Hm, what else... ANI, FOR, DOM, and VIC would all be excellent, and DOM would be -too- excellent. >> Anna Giovanni 2 nec >> Beth Giovanni 3 nec dom >> >> Rudolpho Giovanni 3 NEC >> OR Francesca Giovanni 4 nec pot dom >> >> Chris Giovanni 4 nec POT >> David Giovanni 4 NEC dom >> Eddie Giovanni 5 NEC pot dom, +1 strength >> Fiona Giovanni 5 nec POT dom xxx >> Greg Giovanni 6 NEC pot DOM xxx >> Harry Giovanni 7 NEC POT DOM >> Carlotta Giovanni 7 NEC POT dom obf [+special] >> Irving Giovanni 8 NEC POT DOM xxx [+special] >> Julie Giovanni 9 NEC POT DOM XXX xxx [+special] >> >> So this is the adjusted version. A little heavier on NEC, but the >> clan's big deficiency originally was the total lack of NEC available >> to it, and I wouldn't want to accidentally repeat that mistake. > >Well, I think that, and NEC sucks really bad. Nearly all the Nec cards >are just abysmal. Death Pact? Please. Wow, I can't believe you think this. I repeat: Possession, Whispers of the Dead, Compel the Spirit, Jar the Soul, Spectral Divination, and Spectral Intervention are all eminently playable - IF you have superior NEC. That's six out of 11 cards right there. Release of the Shackled Soul is good for tossing one in any deck just to fry an ally/retainer you don't like, and that's a seventh. Death Pact and Eyes of the Dead suck, bad cess to them. Torment the Soul is a mind-boggler - why would anyone with POT available even bother going to a 2nd round? And if you just have NEC, how do you press while not DYING in the first round? Spectral Intervention/Boxed In? *cringe*. Soul Stealing is on the edge. If you have superior NEC, you can play it as a combat card and that makes it half worthwhile - but you do have to burn someone to use it. I tried to make a deck once that used a lot of POT/NEC. It got people out, Minion Tapped them down to 2, then Rushed vamps and used Amaranth/Soul Stealing. If the vampire burned in the bloodhunt, there were Possessions in the deck to get it back at 1 blood, ready to Rush again. If it DIDN'T burn, it was usually almost full up. Effective? Not especially, partly due to there being almost NO way to get NEC out cheaply, and certainly not in combination with POT. (Carlotta was *it*.) I would have had a lot easier time making that deck if I'd had the crypt above. So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their masters are kinda assy too, I believe. But they just really, really need vampires with NEC. >Eddie's undercosted, as I mentioned above. I don't think we want >"Francesca with +1 hand damage", so something needs to change there. I >don't see the problem with a 5 with NEC DOM pot. That's just as undercosted: 2 + 2 + 1 = 5, and one for the vampire, whereas mine was 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 (special) = 5. But I don't want to make a 5-cap with NOTHING but one superior and two inferiors, and making him a 6 skews the scale a bit. >> Four separate spots to include wacky disciplines (xxx), and Julie >> ought to have a random superior discipline (XXX) - she's a 9-cap and >> needs all the help she can get. Maybe OBF, since there's some OBF in >> the clan already with Carlotta and Rafaele, and they've been known to >> need the stealth in the past. > >Or something that overlaps with another clan which shares one of their >disciplines. Obf (Malk/Nos), Cel (Bru), For (Ven), Obt (Las), Ani (Nos) >are all good options. OBF or CEL, I think - they have a couple guys who got stuck with CEL already, so that wouldn't be bad either. obt or ani would be a bit silly. >> Vampires were the most important thing the clans needed. Many of the >> cards were decent, you just couldn't find a vamp to play them. 14 may >> be too many, but the absolute minimum has to be 12. > >I disagree. Necromancy desperately, desperately needs good cards. The See above - they already HAVE plenty, they just had nobody who could use them since *everyone* was willing to throw away a weenie to block Whispers from the Dead at 0 stealth. (And if you used Spectral Divination, you still got whacked by a KRCG.) >Assamites need better support cards to make them more effective outside >of combat. The Ravnos need... something. The Setites need better >minion cards other than "I steal your vampire". Serpentis is pretty >ass-tacular. Serpentis is hurting the worst out of all the disciplines, I think. Its stuff is scattered all over the road, and that's just bad. The Assamites need pool gain. The Ravnos need something to get blood back ONTO their vampires - every single Chimerstry card costs blood. Bad. They have cool stuff, it just burns them away completely. =) >> Yes, but "the occasional goodie" isn't a whole bunch of cards, >> frankly. Ancient Hearts offered ONLY one new discipline card for all >> the old disciplines. I don't see that there would be much problem >> with doing the same thing in Final Nights - it definitely makes the >> set appealing to the vets. So one for each of the ten original >> disciplines - and you can ignore the Sabbat three since Sabbat War >> will be in stores. BUT, if you must, add one for VIC, DEM, and OBT - >> that brings it up to 13 and leaves room for 13 new cards for each >> Independent clan. Actually more, since we're now working off of a >> 12-vampire assumption instead of 14 - so probably 15 new cards per. > >Except that there could (and IMO should) be vampires from other clans. So toss in one vampire for each of the original 7 and the Lasombra/Tzimisce. Or maybe two. Depends on how many "new card ideas" there are for each clan. >The point is to scatter the disciplines intelligently. Make a couple >Gangrel with Chimerstry. Make a Brujah with CEL obf qui. Make a >Malkavian with OBF pre ser. Make a Lasombra with Necromancy. Perhaps. Although you can look at vampires like that and ask "Why even bother calling it a Brujah? It's an Assamite." Perhaps a Brujah with CEL pot qui so it's not totally useless to the Brujah, or a Malkavian with AUS obf ser - giving the Setites something they desperately need, INTERCEPT. The Gangrel and Lasombra would be better off, since they share two disciplines with the clan to begin with, but again, why keep it TOO close? Why not a Ventrue with FOR pre chi? Or a Tremere with DOM tha nec? Um. THA dom nec? Nevermind, not a Tremere. A Nosferatu with POT obf nec? Actually, that would do VERY well linked in with the "obf" stuff I mentioned earlier for the Giovanni. =) Scattered intelligently, yes. But not TOO scattered. =) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8uspsso3etlekeo5l...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a >7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. Erm, well, look at the Ravnos one, who's 6 with a special. 7 with a minor special is fine - a la Gitane St. Clair. Whilst large numbers of votes, for the Giovanni, is probably not a good thing, something similarly weak (but useful)[0] wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. 7 NEC POT DOM Zebedee Giovanni gets an additional +1 stealth when rescuing a vampire from torpor or when leaving torpor That's fine, from where I stand. [0] In the sense that +1 stealth on equip actions is useful, but not overly so. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39CD3383...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't >> broken, and look what he comes with. > >Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. The concepts of broken don't translate well into vampires. A vampire may be seriously undercosted, but it is difficult to "break" a vampire. A vampire may be powerful, yes, it may be too powerful, yes, but it is one vampire. Many people, myself included, have problems with Ian Forestal. He's not "broken" and no-one has ever managed to really abuse him. Since he's only one vampire, he is vulnerable to all the problems of one vampire - a Banishment, attacks, limited actions and so forth. Whilst a vampire stays within the realms of sensibleness (e.g. not a 2 capacity NEC POT DOM FOR OBT OBF PRE), it's difficult to *seriously* abuse them. Do we have a better term for "broken" vampires? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <7neqssou7jkp9nfpg...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their >masters are kinda assy too, I believe. Acquired Ventrue Assets sucks hairy donkey dick. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39CD3383...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. [snip] > Do we have a better term for "broken" vampires? I prefer overcosted/undercosted or underpowered/overpowered. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "If I were you (and I wish that I were you)..." -- Barenaked Ladies

On Sun, 24 Sep 2000 01:44:40 +0100, James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: >In article <8uspsso3etlekeo5l...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray ><lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a >>7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. > >Erm, well, look at the Ravnos one, who's 6 with a special. Well, yes. That's a foo-foo on whoever designed the Ravnos, although frankly, the Ravnos with only 10 vampires really needed it a lot. It's worth noting that the Ravnos don't have a "my vampires suck" problem, they have a "my discipline cards cost too fucking much" problem. Their 6 is a bit powerful, but like you said, it's only one vampire - and the Ravnos are great for demonstrating just how useless one vampire can be once it's been Sense Depped. =) >7 with a minor special is fine - a la Gitane St. Clair. Whilst large >numbers of votes, for the Giovanni, is probably not a good thing, >something similarly weak (but useful)[0] wouldn't necessarily be a bad >thing. > >7 NEC POT DOM >Zebedee Giovanni gets an additional +1 stealth when rescuing a vampire >from torpor or when leaving torpor > >That's fine, from where I stand. That would work for me too. (shrug) A token minor is fine. I prefer the baseline of "absolutely nothing", so that people don't get encouraged to create any more vamps like Gilbert without having a good think first. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, James Coupe wrote: > Many people, myself included, have problems with Ian Forestal. He's not > "broken" and no-one has ever managed to really abuse him. Since he's > only one vampire, he is vulnerable to all the problems of one vampire - > a Banishment, attacks, limited actions and so forth. One factor that may, in the long run, make Ian seem less overcosted, could be the increased prevalence of cards like "Kiss of Ra" or "Speed of Thought" (are there any others of this variety that I cannot think of at the moment). Ian is only treated as posessing the discipline for purposes of cards *he* plays, not for purposes of cards played by others. I would like to see more of such cards, not for Ian's sake, but rather on account of all those large 6-discipline vamps that are so hard to make use of, and are in practice underpowered as a result (ie. Lucretia). It would be nice to know, when you put a large vamp in a deck (or a small one, for that matter), that those extra discipline slots are still a potential benefit, even if you have not been so incredibly ingenious as to design a deck around all of them. I think it would make the game interactive in a new kind of way, if vampiric disciplines interact not only with the cards you play, but with the cards played by other Methuselahs as well. -- John Whelan

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Sep 2000 01:44:40 +0100, James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> > wrote: > > >In article <8uspsso3etlekeo5l...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray > ><lor...@yahoo.com> writes > >>I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a > >>7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. > > > >Erm, well, look at the Ravnos one, who's 6 with a special. > > Well, yes. That's a foo-foo on whoever designed the Ravnos, although > frankly, the Ravnos with only 10 vampires really needed it a lot. I think you don't understand the standard vampire "points" system. Here it is in a nutshell: Cap. 1-4 get Cap - 1 points. Cap. 5-8 get Cap points. Cap. 9-10 get Cap + 1 points. Cap. 11+ get Cap + 2 points. You spend a point on each discipline, two for superiors. +1 hand damage and +1 bleed cost 2 points. There's some disagreement as to how much votes are worth. Let's just say a title is worth 1 point. Extra stuff can be worth anywhere from -2 (i.e., -1 stealth when hunting) to +2. Thus Joaquina is a 6 with 6 disciplines and a fairly minor special. So she's got 6.5 for 6. Not too shabby. > That would work for me too. (shrug) A token minor is fine. I prefer > the baseline of "absolutely nothing", so that people don't get > encouraged to create any more vamps like Gilbert without having a good > think first. There's nothing wrong with Gilbert Duane. He's a 7 with 6 points of disciplines and a title. 7 = 6 + 1. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "If I were the sun, you would be its shadow If I had a gun, there'd be no tomorrow." -- Barenaked Ladies

<inr...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8qin4p$641$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... > really, i'm humbled that you'll be stoping by our fair city. When? Actually, I was just there *last* Friday, on my way down to Chicago... But I was really referring to the "Madison League" rules designed by The Corrupter... it's explained here: http://www.io.com/~mlangsdo/RPGs/Jyhad/Variants/MadLeague.html But it might be nice to play Jyhad next time I'm in Madison...whenever that is... I'll mention it before my next trip down that way. Xian

> Actually, I was just there *last* Friday, on my way down to Chicago... > thats to bad, we just had league today, lots of fun, although the games went a bit long. > But it might be nice to play Jyhad next time I'm in Madison...whenever that > is... do let us know if you can stop in for a game Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <t2B4lpB5...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In article <7neqssou7jkp9nfpg...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray > <lor...@yahoo.com> writes > >So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their > >masters are kinda assy too, I believe. > > Acquired Ventrue Assets sucks hairy donkey dick. > i see that as a Valid Lifestyle Choice. i've been reading this thread with a wry smile since Michael [!Tremere HF] and i [Setite HF] got our arses roundly kicked by Sarah [Giovanni HF] last night. She didn't indulge in any donkey-fellating on her remorseless way to victory but she did activate Patrizia who then got into a bit of zombie-shagging - also a valid, if messy, lifestyle choice. While i'm not disputing that the Giovanni don't really cut it at tournament level i do think that precon HF-type Giovanni decks are a lot of fun to play and quite balanced against other precon decks. And i find that Donkey-Dick-Sucking is actually very useful in a Giovanni deck - an efficient way to get blood back to your vampires since people almost never take the action to burn it. > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D | ja...@zephyr.org.uk (New e-mail) > "Who'd have ever predicted the moment would come when I find myself grateful > they've kept women dumb? She's an innocent maiden but then so am I, that's why > it's possible I could get by." > [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes > >So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their > >masters are kinda assy too, I believe. I think a bit more than that suck. > Acquired Ventrue Assets sucks hairy donkey dick. This, OTOH, is quite excellent. :) -- offNet: Adrian Sullivan @#$ Web Consultant - Game Theorist $#@ EFNet: Corrupter @#$ Writer - Eccentric - Hedonist $#@ USENET: The Corrupter @#$ Geek - Coffee Addict - HSTHSTS $#@ e-mail: thecor...@yahoo.com TaLeNa FOREVER! ;) [ quoted text not captured ]

This post is mostly a sniping at Derek. Sorry, Derek, but sometimes the gun is the only answer. Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> and James <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: Quoth Derek: > There needs to be room for at least 12 Giovanni in the set. A newbie > should be able to make an all-Giovanni crypt WITHOUT duplicating any > vampires. James returned: >I don't see why having 12 different vampires is so necessary. As long >as _all_ 10 are playable *cough*Patrizia*cough* it shouldn't be a >problem. To which, Derek replied: > Um, a lot of people out there don't like to use duplicates, as crazy > as it sounds. Some people object to being able to re-influence a vamp > once it has been burned. Some people like the wacky "theme" influence > that comes with 12 different vamps in your crypt. And some people > just don't want to worry about only being able to bring out 3 of their > first 4 vamps. For whatever reason, that 12 is fairly critical to new > players. "Critical"? No. There is absolutely no reason that the design of a new set should cater to people who want to play "wackily". The design of a new set should be: fair - cards are all appropriate (to please card players) interesting - cards are all significantly different to encourage use flavorful - cards are all "correct" from a World of Darkness viewpoint (to appease and please role-players, as opposed to card players) While someone may enjoy having all of their unique cards only exist ONCE in their deck, that doesn't mean that design should cater to it. If a "role-playing" element of uniqueness is somehow stiffled by someone crying "Hey! We already killed Duck! How do you have him out!", one can always reply, "Ah, Rumors of his death were greatly exaggerated. The plans within plans of the Methuselahs can be a confusing thing to behold." For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from previous expansions, B) use off-clan vampires. My god, a clever roleplayer should be able to explain why Cameron, the Lasombra (dom/pot) is working with the Giovanni! [snip to Derek about Ozmo being undercosted] To which, James replies: >Actually, Ozmo is just right. 4 points of disciplines plus 2 for +1 >bleed. I agree with you to some extent. Clearly a 6 with DOM OBF +1 >bleed is too good. But mostly it's the +1 bleed that's the problem. And then, Derek spouts: > The Jyhad vampire formula was 2 for a superior, 1 for an inferior, 1 > for the vampire itself, and 1 for a special, actually. UM. No. The Jyhad formula is actually tiered. Disciplines count 1 at inferior, 2 at superior. Special abilities cost 2 (+1 bleed/hand damage, hugely powerful ability), 1 (title, very useful ability), or ".5" (minimally useful ability). The .5 often gets rounded down. Disadvantages usually weigh in at -.5 to -1. Capacity Points Example 1-4 Capacity -1 Anastasia Gray, 3, ani pro (1+1=2) 5-8 Capacity Anson, 8, aus dom CEL PRE, Prince, useful power (1+1+2+2+1+1=8) 9-10 Capacity +1 Democritus, 10, aus cel for DOM PRE, Justicar +1 bleed, useful power (1+1+1+2+2+1+2+1=11) 11+ Capacity +2 Leandro, 11, OBF AUS PRE dom cel, Inner Circle +2 bleed, hugely powerful (2+2+2+1+1+1+2+2) This formula is used throughout every expansion (with a few "mistakes"), up until Sabbat, when designer Paul Peterson claimed that "the vampires just weren't good enough". Blech. [snip] > Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't > broken, and look what he comes with. >Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. > Yes, but realistically, he's not broken because he can't DO anything > but one thing with all those neat toys he has. You do not justify this claim. Most combat decks exist to "get into combat" and then "fight well". He does both, at a significantly undercosted amount. OBF(2) POT(2) cel(1) ani(1) +1Str(2) Attack(1 or 2) DisAd(-1 or -2[but not more than the attack]) for a total of 8 to 9 points of powers in a 7. My version would probably cut down to NO Celerity, and inferior Obfuscate. > Interestingly, according to the apparent Sabbat formula, he's fine: The Sabbat vampires don't seem to really follow any particular formula. > 2 (POT) + 2 (OBF) + 1 (ani) + 1 (rush) + 1 (strength) = 7. His cel > is 'free' as an out-of-clan, and he doesn't cost 1 for just being a > vampire in the Sabbat. Out of clan disciplines still cost points, and Strength is worth 2. [snip to Eddie as: inf inf SUP +1 Hand] > 4 points of disciplines and 1 for a special ability = 5, fitting the > Sabbat template. Hand damage is worth 2. [To Derek] > I altered Harry because I think every single clan ought to have a > 7-cap with all in-clan superiors and no special. [back to James] >...which would be undercosted. I have heard a rumor that Sabbat War is > >going to include a 6 for each clan with each discipline at superior. > 2 + 2 + 2 = 6, plus one for the vampire is 7. This "+1 for the vampire" doesn't exist. > Not even undercosted by the Jyhad formula, and they gave Gilbert and > Nash a Prince title too! "a title too" implies you feel that they got a special bonus. They didn't. Both are correct according to the point system. Gilbert Duane, 7, AUS (2) DOM (2) OBF (2), Prince (1) = 7... Sir Walter Nash, 7, DOM (2) FOR (2) PRE (2), Prince (1) = 7... [snip to Derek with converation on Giovanni viability/inviability ] > A little heavier on NEC, but the clan's big deficiency originally was > the total lack of NEC available to it, and I wouldn't want to > accidentally repeat that mistake. James replies with: >Well, I think that, and NEC sucks really bad. Nearly all the Nec cards >are just abysmal. Death Pact? Please. An astonished Derek writes: > Wow, I can't believe you think this. I repeat: Possession, Whispers > of the Dead, Compel the Spirit, Jar the Soul, Spectral Divination, and > Spectral Intervention are all eminently playable - IF you have > superior NEC. Possession isn't playable. While torpored vampires are common, Possession requires that YOUR vampires be BURNED. This usually does not happen by design for most decks. About the only deck that Possession would be good in is a Diablerie deck, and even then, Decapitate would serve the purpose much more well. Possession SHOULD have been able to take ANY vampire that has been burned, and reward a Giovanni deck for being able to destroy its enemies. As it is, it is less useful than any torpor specific card. Compel the Spirit is similarly garbage. It only works the turn after a retainer or ally dies, and unfortunately, there aren't enough good allies for this to matter. The timing of the card ruins it. If it didn't have the silly "last turn" text, it would probably be barely playable. If there were enough good Allies, it might be different. Whispers of the Dead is fine, as are Spectral Divination and Spiritual Intervention. Jar the Soul is "okay". > That's six out of 11 cards right there. That's more like 4 of 11. > Release of the > Shackled Soul is good for tossing one in any deck just to fry an > ally/retainer you don't like, and that's a seventh. Doesn't make the cut in my book. There aren't enough Allies/Retainers to really be a problem commonly. The Allies you can beat up with Potence, and the Retainers can have their master vampires killed. > So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their > masters are kinda assy too, I believe. But they just really, really > need vampires with NEC. See above. James, using the point system: >Eddie's undercosted, as I mentioned above. I don't think we want >"Francesca with +1 hand damage", so something needs to change there. I >don't see the problem with a 5 with NEC DOM pot. Derek, not using the point system, tries with: > That's just as undercosted: 2 + 2 + 1 = 5, and one for the vampire, > whereas mine was 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 (special) = 5 See above. The point system doesn't count like you think it does. [snip to:] James on what is wrong with Necromancy: >I disagree. Necromancy desperately, desperately needs good cards. > See above - they already HAVE plenty, they just had nobody who could > use them since *everyone* was willing to throw away a weenie to block > Whispers from the Dead at 0 stealth. (And if you used Spectral > Divination, you still got whacked by a KRCG.) See my retort. Only 4 (reusing a card, stealth/intercept, combat AVOIDANCE, and tapdown). Not a very strong base to build from. The Giovanni ARE hurt by their vampire selection and their Necromancy powers. Their Necromancy powers are so weak as to be nearly ineffectual, and their vampires' abilities are spread such that they can't take advantage of the MUCH more broad DOM/POT that they might otherwise be able to. Hopefully, THIS will change. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qo60c$4o9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, thecor...@yahoo.com wrote: > (Somebody said, I got all confused with his attributions: ) > > > Interestingly, according to the apparent Sabbat formula, he's fine: > > The Sabbat vampires don't seem to really follow any particular formula. A lot of points in this posts are you pointing out that +1 hand damage is worth 2 points. My impression was always that this was true up until Sabbat; in Sabbat, it appeared that +1 hand damage (or +1 bleed) was changed to be worth 1 point instead. This explains the calculations. -- William Burke, passenge...@hotmail.com. HTH. HAND. * <--- Perth Support peer pressure -- kick a lemming off a cliff. Go Slugs! Visit my web page! Current essay: Happiness. http://come.to/passenger-pigeon/

On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:37:04 GMT, thecor...@yahoo.com wrote: >This post is mostly a sniping at Derek. Sorry, Derek, but sometimes >the gun is the only answer. Pot away. I rarely take potting personally, I just pot back. =) >To which, Derek replied: >> Um, a lot of people out there don't like to use duplicates, as crazy >> as it sounds. Some people object to being able to re-influence a vamp >> once it has been burned. Some people like the wacky "theme" influence >> that comes with 12 different vamps in your crypt. And some people >> just don't want to worry about only being able to bring out 3 of their >> first 4 vamps. For whatever reason, that 12 is fairly critical to new >> players. > >"Critical"? > >No. > >There is absolutely no reason that the design of a new set should cater >to people who want to play "wackily". The design of a new set should >be: Not using duplicates in one's crypt so that one can bring out all 4 of one's initial vamps is not "wacky". Many new players' view of the game doesn't include using duplicates in your crypt - it doesn't even OCCUR to them that vampires are anything other than unique. Library cards are just cards, but vampires represent a more concrete "something" to them. >fair - cards are all appropriate (to please card players) >interesting - cards are all significantly different to encourage use >flavorful - cards are all "correct" from a World of Darkness viewpoint >(to appease and please role-players, as opposed to card players) Also note that the role-players are going to be more "theme" oriented, and indeed, I think this is what WW would like to see a little more of, instead of the veterans' tendency to focus on game-only considerations and discipline-oriented decks that produce five and six-clan crypts. =) We have several LARPers in our playgroup who we see twice a month at Red Light. The theme aspect is THEIR approach towards V:TES, and they actually will occasionally mock us for ignoring that aspect of the game to the degree we sometimes do. If you want the role-players, you can't ignore the "clan theme" that much. >While someone may enjoy having all of their unique cards only exist >ONCE in their deck, that doesn't mean that design should cater to it. Cater to it? No. But making sure that 12 unique vampires exist in the boosters is hardly catering to it - more just acknowledging one twist, and moving on from there. >If a "role-playing" element of uniqueness is somehow stiffled by >someone crying "Hey! We already killed Duck! How do you have him >out!", one can always reply, "Ah, Rumors of his death were greatly >exaggerated. The plans within plans of the Methuselahs can be a >confusing thing to behold." And speaking from experience, BOY will they ever unscrew your head for it, for they recognize it for what it is - a "deus ex machina" evasion of the situation. =) These are role-players - the good ones CREATE stories. =) "deus ex machina" is a very weak story mechanic. >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from >previous expansions, B) use off-clan vampires. My god, a clever A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) [v:tes formula snipped] >> Complaining that a 7 is broken is almost always silly. BEAST isn't >> broken, and look what he comes with. > >>Actually, Beast is quite "broken" in the sense that he is undercosted. > >> Yes, but realistically, he's not broken because he can't DO anything >> but one thing with all those neat toys he has. > >You do not justify this claim. Most combat decks exist to "get into >combat" and then "fight well". He does both, at a significantly >undercosted amount. Yes, but beatings things up will only get you so far, and the only thing he can do is beat things up. Oh, wait, and he can play Spying Missions, because those are action modifiers and can be played on his bleed for 1. Sure, he beats things up well, but combat itself isn't inherently overpowered - so he ends up not being broken in practice. Strong? Yes. But Fortitude, maneuvers, and Obedience still stuff him, and you can always poke him in the eye with claws, or haul off and punch him for 7 yourself. I've Rushed Beast before and torporized him, while living myself. =) [more formulae snipped] >An astonished Derek writes: >> Wow, I can't believe you think this. I repeat: Possession, Whispers >> of the Dead, Compel the Spirit, Jar the Soul, Spectral Divination, and >> Spectral Intervention are all eminently playable - IF you have >> superior NEC. > >Possession isn't playable. While torpored vampires are common, This is simply an incorrect statement. I've made Possession decks. They do work. They require some effort, but they DO work. >Possession requires that YOUR vampires be BURNED. This usually does >not happen by design for most decks. About the only deck that Drop Fortitude skill cards on Giovanni... Minion Tap to 1, hunt, bleed with Force of Will (inferior!) and Conditioning to empty the vampire, take 2 agg, burn to a crisp. Possess back out with 1 blood, hunt... And since you take the FoW damage even if you block, you can make sure that your guys never accidentally go to torpor instead of burning. Vittorio has a use finally! Yay! Although it takes a lot of FOR skill cards since those go poof when they burn. Hmm. Vittorio and Regina, or bust - at least they get to take the action more than once per turn. >Possession would be good in is a Diablerie deck, and even then, >Decapitate would serve the purpose much more well. Possession SHOULD Amaranth works pretty well, since it ensures that either your guy lives and is out of torpor, or is burned. If your own vampire ends up in torpor as a result of the combat, Decapitate doesn't work either. Actually, Decapitate doesn't work if your guy is down to 1 blood! Messy. >have been able to take ANY vampire that has been burned, and reward a >Giovanni deck for being able to destroy its enemies. As it is, it is >less useful than any torpor specific card. Yes, Possession would have been MUCH better as an "any vampire" card. But it is FAR from unplayable. >Compel the Spirit is similarly garbage. It only works the turn after a >retainer or ally dies, and unfortunately, there aren't enough good >allies for this to matter. The timing of the card ruins it. If it >didn't have the silly "last turn" text, it would probably be barely >playable. If there were enough good Allies, it might be different. ...Ghoul Escort, Scapelli, and Leonardo are all good for the Giovanni. All of them are likely to be burned at some point - Scapelli can just keep bleeding for 1 or blocking until he goes away, Leonardo will eventually be intercepted and shot at, and the Ghoul Escort merely requires that you choose to burn it - which leaves you untapped for the Compel action. Ambrosius is better than Compel the Spirit, but also more expensive. >Whispers of the Dead is fine, as are Spectral Divination and Spiritual >Intervention. Jar the Soul is "okay". superior: "as above, and that minion burns one blood." This isn't strong? Especially if that happens to be his bleed bouncer, who just ended up tapped and short on blood? You wouldn't ever make the 20-Jar deck, but having 6-8 in can't hurt. >> That's six out of 11 cards right there. > >That's more like 4 of 11. Back to 6. =) >> Release of the >> Shackled Soul is good for tossing one in any deck just to fry an >> ally/retainer you don't like, and that's a seventh. > >Doesn't make the cut in my book. There aren't enough Allies/Retainers >to really be a problem commonly. The Allies you can beat up with >Potence, and the Retainers can have their master vampires killed. I repeat: ONE in any deck. Some cards are like that. Besides, what if you aren't playing with that much Potence? It takes a good chunk more cards to kill an ally or vampire(for the retainer) with Potence than with one +1 stealth action. And I wouldn't want to waste one of my Rush actions on an ally anyway... especially something like a Rom Gypsy, which now costs me a maneuver as well, or worse, a Renegade Garou, which can either run away from me OR start hitting me back. And both of THOSE are fairly common allies. >> So really, only 3 library cards SUCK for the Giovanni. Some of their >> masters are kinda assy too, I believe. But they just really, really >> need vampires with NEC. > >See above. See above! =) >See above. The point system doesn't count like you think it does. Then I'll just ignore it, since it's not really that relevant anymore anyway since Sabbat was released. =) >See my retort. Only 4 (reusing a card, stealth/intercept, combat >AVOIDANCE, and tapdown). Not a very strong base to build from. Retort retorted to. You can reuse allies and vampires as well as just cards. You just need a very anti-materialistic view of both. >The Giovanni ARE hurt by their vampire selection and their Necromancy >powers. Their Necromancy powers are so weak as to be nearly >ineffectual, and their vampires' abilities are spread such that they >can't take advantage of the MUCH more broad DOM/POT that they might >otherwise be able to. The appropriate concept, from what I can judge Necromancy to be in the WoD, would be to focus on the DOM/POT, and use Necromancy as a strong support discipline. Instead, it is currently a very limited support discipline, so it will certainly need more cards to be added, but that's what the whole Final Nights expansion is for. =) [ quoted text not captured ]

thecor...@yahoo.com writes: >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from >previous expansions, I think it's kind of arguable whether it's very "nice" to make new players do that. It's certainly reasonable enoung when you're looking at kind of specialized cards that help a player make very specific types of decks. I'd take a much more dim view of starting in on a game that made me find three-year old cards that are frequently basic building blocks of the game, which is a category in which I'd place most vampires. >B) use off-clan vampires. You skewer your own argument here. Can't have it both ways: >The Giovanni ARE hurt by their vampire selection and their Necromancy >powers. Their Necromancy powers are so weak as to be nearly >ineffectual, and their vampires' abilities are spread such that they >can't take advantage of the MUCH more broad DOM/POT that they might >otherwise be able to. If the old Giovanni are hurt by their vampire selection then you'd have to assume that a new subset would be as well, which would be a bad bad bad bad bad thing to hand the new players. Of course, if the assumption about the new set of Giovanni kindred were wrong (they were much more playable as is than the old set), this may not be as much of problem. But I find it hard to picture that old vampires plus new vampires wouldn't be a substantial advantage over just new vampires to choose from. Fred

thecor...@yahoo.com writes: >To which, Derek replied: >> Um, a lot of people out there don't like to use duplicates, as crazy >> as it sounds. Some people object to being able to re-influence a vamp >> once it has been burned. Some people like the wacky "theme" influence >> that comes with 12 different vamps in your crypt. And some people >> just don't want to worry about only being able to bring out 3 of their >> first 4 vamps. For whatever reason, that 12 is fairly critical to new >> players. > >"Critical"? > >No. > >There is absolutely no reason that the design of a new set should cater >to people who want to play "wackily". By the way, I also never design a deck that doesn't have 12 different vampires in the crypt. Once in while, when the selection is just too small or one or two vamps are just too perfect for the theme of the cards in the library. But I usually hate myself in the morning. Fred

thecor...@yahoo.com writes: >To which, Derek replied: >> Um, a lot of people out there don't like to use duplicates, as crazy >> as it sounds. Some people object to being able to re-influence a vamp >> once it has been burned. Some people like the wacky "theme" influence >> that comes with 12 different vamps in your crypt. And some people >> just don't want to worry about only being able to bring out 3 of their >> first 4 vamps. For whatever reason, that 12 is fairly critical to new >> players. > >"Critical"? > >No. > >There is absolutely no reason that the design of a new set should cater >to people who want to play "wackily". By the way, I almost never design a deck that doesn't have 12 different [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:37:04 GMT, thecor...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >There is absolutely no reason that the design of a new set should cater > >to people who want to play "wackily". The design of a new set should > >be: > > Not using duplicates in one's crypt so that one can bring out all 4 of > one's initial vamps is not "wacky". Many new players' view of the > game doesn't include using duplicates in your crypt - it doesn't even > OCCUR to them that vampires are anything other than unique. Library > cards are just cards, but vampires represent a more concrete > "something" to them. If they're new players, explain to them that you can have duplicates in your crypt. They'll need to know the contesting mechanic anyway. > Also note that the role-players are going to be more "theme" oriented, > and indeed, I think this is what WW would like to see a little more > of, instead of the veterans' tendency to focus on game-only > considerations and discipline-oriented decks that produce five and > six-clan crypts. =) It's a game. People are going to play the game and make game-only considerations because it's a game. If other people decide to play with different kinds of decks, more power to them. But if people want to play so that their game success is maximized, that shouldn't be frowned upon. This would be like someone playing the Middle Earth CCG and saying "you can't do that because on page 247 of The Two Towers, it clearly states that <blah, blah, blah>". People should feel free to play a single-clan deck or a twelve clan deck (Peter Bakija's "Kindred Embassy" deck comes to mind). > We have several LARPers in our playgroup who we see twice a month at > Red Light. The theme aspect is THEIR approach towards V:TES, and they > actually will occasionally mock us for ignoring that aspect of the > game to the degree we sometimes do. If you want the role-players, you > can't ignore the "clan theme" that much. "Occasionally mock" sounds pretty mild. I used to "occasionally mock" people who play with counterspells in Magic. But that doesn't mean I stopped playing the game when counterspells got printed. > >While someone may enjoy having all of their unique cards only exist > >ONCE in their deck, that doesn't mean that design should cater to it. > > Cater to it? No. But making sure that 12 unique vampires exist in > the boosters is hardly catering to it - more just acknowledging one > twist, and moving on from there. But what about more important factors like "there isn't room in the set for 12 new Giovanni" and "we don't need to print 12 new Giovanni"? > >If a "role-playing" element of uniqueness is somehow stiffled by > >someone crying "Hey! We already killed Duck! How do you have him > >out!", one can always reply, "Ah, Rumors of his death were greatly > >exaggerated. The plans within plans of the Methuselahs can be a > >confusing thing to behold." > > And speaking from experience, BOY will they ever unscrew your head for > it, for they recognize it for what it is - a "deus ex machina" evasion > of the situation. =) These are role-players - the good ones CREATE > stories. =) "deus ex machina" is a very weak story mechanic. You can say something happens and give a reason for it. If I choose not to believe your reason, I may very well call it a "deus ex machina". But that doesn't mean your reason wasn't valid. And it's certainly not a reason to, say, not allow Duck to come back from his untimely demise. This is, first and foremost, a card game. RPG concerns must play second (or higher ordinals) fiddle to CCG concerns. > >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from > >previous expansions, B) use off-clan vampires. My god, a clever > > A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. > B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still available on Ebay and cheap. B) Too bad. You want an all Giovanni deck, but you don't want to use any duplicates? Sorry. [Beast] > >You do not justify this claim. Most combat decks exist to "get into > >combat" and then "fight well". He does both, at a significantly > >undercosted amount. > > Yes, but beatings things up will only get you so far, and the only > thing he can do is beat things up. Oh, wait, and he can play Spying > Missions, because those are action modifiers and can be played on his > bleed for 1. Who cares if he can't do anything but beat things up? You don't put him in a deck that doesn't beat things up! And in that deck, he does so with extreme intensity. > Sure, he beats things up well, but combat itself isn't inherently > overpowered - so he ends up not being broken in practice. Strong? > Yes. But Fortitude, maneuvers, and Obedience still stuff him, and you > can always poke him in the eye with claws, or haul off and punch him > for 7 yourself. I've Rushed Beast before and torporized him, while > living myself. =) Well, congratulations. You're such a good player. What you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't matter if he can be dealt with or not. You could deal with a hypothetical 2-cap vampire with DOM and +6 stealth on all actions with bleed bounce and heavy intercept. That doesn't make it not broken. > >Possession isn't playable. While torpored vampires are common, > > This is simply an incorrect statement. I've made Possession decks. > They do work. They require some effort, but they DO work. That doesn't make it a good card. > >Possession requires that YOUR vampires be BURNED. This usually does > >not happen by design for most decks. About the only deck that [snip Force of Will deck] Hooray. You can make some goofy-ass deck that requires lots of skill cards from an out-of-clan discipline. How does that make it a good card for the Giovanni? It doesn't. > >Possession would be good in is a Diablerie deck, and even then, > >Decapitate would serve the purpose much more well. Possession SHOULD > > Amaranth works pretty well, since it ensures that either your guy > lives and is out of torpor, or is burned. If your own vampire ends up > in torpor as a result of the combat, Decapitate doesn't work either. > Actually, Decapitate doesn't work if your guy is down to 1 blood! > Messy. Decapitate works better because it's one card (instead of Amaranth + Possession or diablerie action + Possession) in the discipline you're using to torporize the other vampire. So you only need POT, not one vampire with POT and another with NEC. The "1 blood" argument isn't enough of a drawback to make the Possession "combo" (I use the word lightly) more advantageous. > >have been able to take ANY vampire that has been burned, and reward a > >Giovanni deck for being able to destroy its enemies. As it is, it is > >less useful than any torpor specific card. > > Yes, Possession would have been MUCH better as an "any vampire" card. > But it is FAR from unplayable. "There is a deck which can use Possession" is FAR from "Possession is playable." To me, "playable" means "generally useful". > >Compel the Spirit is similarly garbage. It only works the turn after a > >retainer or ally dies, and unfortunately, there aren't enough good > >allies for this to matter. The timing of the card ruins it. If it > >didn't have the silly "last turn" text, it would probably be barely > >playable. If there were enough good Allies, it might be different. > > ...Ghoul Escort, Scapelli, and Leonardo are all good for the Giovanni. Scapelli is pretty garbage-y. Like almost all allies, he's easy to kill, and he doesn't have any good abilities that make him worth playing. If you're playing with Leonardo, he's either going to never exist or never die. If someone can kill him (and wants to), they'll just block the recruit action. If they don't care (and I don't see why they should), they'll never block him, and your Compel the Spirit is useless. I don't see why Ghoul Escort is good for anyone, much less the Giovanni. > >Whispers of the Dead is fine, as are Spectral Divination and Spiritual > >Intervention. Jar the Soul is "okay". > > superior: "as above, and that minion burns one blood." This isn't > strong? Especially if that happens to be his bleed bouncer, who just > ended up tapped and short on blood? You wouldn't ever make the 20-Jar > deck, but having 6-8 in can't hurt. I agree that it's "okay". Cryptic Mission is better (for the "screw up a bleed bouncer" effect) and Mind Numb is better (for the "tap their vampire" effect). > >Doesn't make the cut in my book. There aren't enough Allies/Retainers > >to really be a problem commonly. The Allies you can beat up with > >Potence, and the Retainers can have their master vampires killed. > > I repeat: ONE in any deck. Some cards are like that. (A) Why would you put one in a deck that, say, doesn't care what allies are out there? (B) Necromancy doesn't need cards that are so marginally useful that you MIGHT put ONE in a deck. > Besides, what > if you aren't playing with that much Potence? It takes a good chunk > more cards to kill an ally or vampire(for the retainer) with Potence > than with one +1 stealth action. But Potence is more useful, since it can kill vampires. There are always vampires to kill, so your Potence cards are always useful. There's hardly ever an ally or retainer that needs to die so badly that you need to put a card in your deck expressly for that purpose. > And I wouldn't want to waste one of > my Rush actions on an ally anyway... especially something like a Rom > Gypsy, which now costs me a maneuver as well, or worse, a Renegade > Garou, which can either run away from me OR start hitting me back. > And both of THOSE are fairly common allies. If the allies are there and you need to kill them, you go kill them. If someone makes a Renegade Garou and you go kill it, you just bled them for 5! > >See above. The point system doesn't count like you think it does. > > Then I'll just ignore it, since it's not really that relevant anymore > anyway since Sabbat was released. =) It is completely relevant. It is the benchmark by which most vampires (including Sabbat) are judged. Just because some new vampires are overcosted and undercosted (and quite a few Sabbat vampires are overcosted) doesn't mean you throw out the baby with the bathwater. I am sure that with LSJ behind the wheel, the new Sabbat War vampires (if any) will be properly costed. > >See my retort. Only 4 (reusing a card, stealth/intercept, combat > >AVOIDANCE, and tapdown). Not a very strong base to build from. > > Retort retorted to. You can reuse allies and vampires as well as just > cards. You just need a very anti-materialistic view of both. And you need to be willing to play with crappy cards just for the sake of playing with them. You need to lower your standards of what a "good" card is to make you even want to play with the Giovanni. > The appropriate concept, from what I can judge Necromancy to be in the > WoD, would be to focus on the DOM/POT, and use Necromancy as a strong > support discipline. Instead, it is currently a very limited support > discipline, so it will certainly need more cards to be added, but > that's what the whole Final Nights expansion is for. =) What would be wrong with making the vampires which would allow a strong Giovanni POT/DOM deck? That's like saying "In the world of darkness, the Brujah are much more Present than Potent or Celeritous, so we shouldn't print any more vampires like Dre or Anvil". More strategies = better game. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." -- Shivaree

Frederick Scott wrote: > > thecor...@yahoo.com writes: > > >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from > >previous expansions, > > I think it's kind of arguable whether it's very "nice" to make new > players do that. Reread Adrian's post. He suggests this as an option to those players too stubborn to accept the possibility of multiples of the same vampire in a crypt. > It's certainly reasonable enoung when you're looking > at kind of specialized cards that help a player make very specific types > of decks. I'd take a much more dim view of starting in on a game that > made me find three-year old cards that are frequently basic building > blocks of the game, which is a category in which I'd place most vampires. Anyone should be able to open a preconstructed deck and play. They shouldn't have to buy any more packs, much less trade, to simply play the game. If they want their deck to improve, they'll have to do both. > >B) use off-clan vampires. > > You skewer your own argument here. Can't have it both ways: > > >The Giovanni ARE hurt by their vampire selection and their Necromancy > >powers. Their Necromancy powers are so weak as to be nearly > >ineffectual, and their vampires' abilities are spread such that they > >can't take advantage of the MUCH more broad DOM/POT that they might > >otherwise be able to. > > If the old Giovanni are hurt by their vampire selection then you'd have to > assume that a new subset would be as well, which would be a bad bad bad > bad bad thing to hand the new players. Only if you assume that the reason the Giovanni are hurt by their vampire selection is that they have a small selection. No, in fact, the Giovanni selection is simply BAD. > But I find > it hard to picture that old vampires plus new vampires wouldn't be a > substantial advantage over just new vampires to choose from. Well, of course. If I have five expansions worth of cards to choose from and you only have one, then I have a significant advantage over you. The issue is not whether old + new > new. That's obvious. The issue is whether just "new" is enough. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:06:11 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> Not using duplicates in one's crypt so that one can bring out all 4 of >> one's initial vamps is not "wacky". Many new players' view of the >> game doesn't include using duplicates in your crypt - it doesn't even >> OCCUR to them that vampires are anything other than unique. Library >> cards are just cards, but vampires represent a more concrete >> "something" to them. > >If they're new players, explain to them that you can have duplicates in >your crypt. They'll need to know the contesting mechanic anyway. Of course. But if they don't FEEL good about the game, they won't keep playing. They don't have to be HAPPY that duplicates can exist, but they have to at least not be disdainful - and we can't FORCE them to use duplicates! >> Also note that the role-players are going to be more "theme" oriented, >> and indeed, I think this is what WW would like to see a little more >> of, instead of the veterans' tendency to focus on game-only >> considerations and discipline-oriented decks that produce five and >> six-clan crypts. =) > >It's a game. People are going to play the game and make game-only >considerations because it's a game. If other people decide to play with >different kinds of decks, more power to them. But if people want to >play so that their game success is maximized, that shouldn't be frowned >upon. This would be like someone playing the Middle Earth CCG and It's not frowned upon at all, and actually some clan decks are among the most powerful (Ventrue who?) But I believe that White Wolf would PREFER a more "theme" oriented game, as that would help increase the crossover between V:tM-the-LARP, V:tM-the-RPG, and V:TES. There's a subtle difference - if the option is "play or not play", WW will say "PLAY!" every time. But if the option is "play theme or not", I believe they would want you to play clan-theme. >saying "you can't do that because on page 247 of The Two Towers, it >clearly states that <blah, blah, blah>". People should feel free to >play a single-clan deck or a twelve clan deck (Peter Bakija's "Kindred >Embassy" deck comes to mind). And nobody's saying they shouldn't feel free. But. >> We have several LARPers in our playgroup who we see twice a month at >> Red Light. The theme aspect is THEIR approach towards V:TES, and they >> actually will occasionally mock us for ignoring that aspect of the >> game to the degree we sometimes do. If you want the role-players, you >> can't ignore the "clan theme" that much. > >"Occasionally mock" sounds pretty mild. I used to "occasionally mock" >people who play with counterspells in Magic. But that doesn't mean I >stopped playing the game when counterspells got printed. "Occasionally mock" is, in fact, pretty mild. But these are newish players, and we want them to be ENTHUSIASTIC about the game, not vaguely entertained by it. If we can provide one aspect that will get them enthused, then please, god, DO IT. We need new players desperately. >> >While someone may enjoy having all of their unique cards only exist >> >ONCE in their deck, that doesn't mean that design should cater to it. >> >> Cater to it? No. But making sure that 12 unique vampires exist in >> the boosters is hardly catering to it - more just acknowledging one >> twist, and moving on from there. > >But what about more important factors like "there isn't room in the set >for 12 new Giovanni" and "we don't need to print 12 new Giovanni"? except there's PLENTY of room in the set for 12 new Giovanni, and the issue of whether we need to print 12 new Giovanni is still under debate. The issue above influences both of those factors. >> And speaking from experience, BOY will they ever unscrew your head for >> it, for they recognize it for what it is - a "deus ex machina" evasion >> of the situation. =) These are role-players - the good ones CREATE >> stories. =) "deus ex machina" is a very weak story mechanic. > >You can say something happens and give a reason for it. If I choose not >to believe your reason, I may very well call it a "deus ex machina". Um. It's not that they don't believe your reason, but do you understand the reference to "deus ex machina"? It translates literally as "god from the machine", and dates to ancient theatre, where a complicated pulleys-and-platforms system (the machine!) was often used to permit a "god" to appear and miraculously resolve all the complicated issues in the storyline. Many movies today are STILL guilty of this. The phrase is often used, accurately, to describe any situation where the heroes/heroines are totally screwed, and suddenly, an event external to the ENTIRE MOVIE occurs to save their butts. It does NOT describe Han Solo returning to save Luke's butt in Star Wars, but it WOULD describe a meteor suddenly, conveniently striking the Death Star and knocking out their automated defenses, such that Luke could manage to sneak through and make it go kaboom. Experienced writers know that the "deus ex machina" technique of resolving a plot crisis is extremely weak; a way of unpainting yourself from a corner. LARP/RPG gamemasters are even MORE familiar with it, because it's not possible to draw attention away from the mechanic with special effects or clever writing - so any stunt like that is EXTREMELY obvious to the players, and VERY poor form. Blaming Duck's mysterious resurrection on "ah, rumors were greatly exaggerated and the plans of methuselahs are beyond immortal ken", etc. etc., ad nauseam, is -technically- valid, but certainly nothing to be proud of creative-wise. The CCG vets will just ignore it and say "who cares, it's a game", as you or I do. The players we want to attract are going to either need a better reason, or are going to need to be distracted. Putting 12 vampires in the crypt means that they can satisfy their OWN creative desires, while not stifling ours in any way, shape, or form - and everyone is happy, for what really is a minor cost. (breathes) Whew. >But that doesn't mean your reason wasn't valid. And it's certainly not >a reason to, say, not allow Duck to come back from his untimely demise. >This is, first and foremost, a card game. RPG concerns must play second >(or higher ordinals) fiddle to CCG concerns. No one would EVER suggest that Duck should not be ALLOWED to! That would drastically change the current game. But nobody should be forced to subscribe to the "duplicate" mechanic if they don't want to... especially not new players! You must realize, we are going to have to seduce countless newbies into the fold. We HAVE to cater to them for awhile! >> >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from >> >previous expansions, B) use off-clan vampires. My god, a clever >> >> A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. >> B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) > >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still >available on Ebay and cheap. Most people, believe it or not, still are Internet-illiterate. Even a great number of gamers still are. Many people who are Internet-literate would NEVER trust a trade over the net! We cannot -force- people to get old boxes, or trade via the Internet, because this excludes the feet-in-stores crowd who could care less about the 'net community. >B) Too bad. You want an all Giovanni deck, but you don't want to use >any duplicates? Sorry. Not a functional answer for a game that is going to have to draw new players by the truckload. >[Beast] >> >You do not justify this claim. Most combat decks exist to "get into >> >combat" and then "fight well". He does both, at a significantly >> >undercosted amount. >> >> Yes, but beatings things up will only get you so far, and the only >> thing he can do is beat things up. Oh, wait, and he can play Spying >> Missions, because those are action modifiers and can be played on his >> bleed for 1. > >Who cares if he can't do anything but beat things up? You don't put him >in a deck that doesn't beat things up! And in that deck, he does so >with extreme intensity. Um, I think you missed who was saying what here. The Corrupter was the one saying he's undercosted, etc. etc. I'm the one pointing out that no matter how undercosted he is, he's still not BROKEN. >> Sure, he beats things up well, but combat itself isn't inherently >> overpowered - so he ends up not being broken in practice. Strong? >> Yes. But Fortitude, maneuvers, and Obedience still stuff him, and you >> can always poke him in the eye with claws, or haul off and punch him >> for 7 yourself. I've Rushed Beast before and torporized him, while >> living myself. =) > >Well, congratulations. You're such a good player. Matter of fact, I am. =P >What you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't matter if he can be >dealt with or not. You could deal with a hypothetical 2-cap vampire >with DOM and +6 stealth on all actions with bleed bounce and heavy >intercept. That doesn't make it not broken. Such a vampire as you describe WOULD be broken. And probably undercosted too. And it very much matters if he can be dealt with - if Beast coming out means that one vampire goes to torpor every turn, with no recourse, then Beast is broken and needs to be fixed. However, Beast coming out doesn't mean this, for the reasons I mentioned above - and so Beast isn't broken. >> >Possession isn't playable. While torpored vampires are common, >> >> This is simply an incorrect statement. I've made Possession decks. >> They do work. They require some effort, but they DO work. > >That doesn't make it a good card. *snort* It surely makes it playable. >> >Possession requires that YOUR vampires be BURNED. This usually does >> >not happen by design for most decks. About the only deck that > >[snip Force of Will deck] > >Hooray. You can make some goofy-ass deck that requires lots of skill >cards from an out-of-clan discipline. How does that make it a good card >for the Giovanni? It doesn't. Oh, use some fucking imagination, for god's sake. Jesus Christ. I ONLY detailed RIGHT afterwards a way to make Possession work in an all-Giovanni deck. My point was that it was certainly PLAYABLE, which it remains, and that the reason it doesn't "go" now is because there are fuck-all vampires available to the Giovanni who have NEC (3 and 7, and a 6 with NEC cel obf!), and there are fuck-all vampires available who have POT (cheapest is 6!) so less than half the clan can Possess at a natural +1 stealth without skill cards, and less than half the clan can beat people up without skill cards. Is it obvious yet? Sheesh. >> >Possession would be good in is a Diablerie deck, and even then, >> >Decapitate would serve the purpose much more well. Possession SHOULD >> >> Amaranth works pretty well, since it ensures that either your guy >> lives and is out of torpor, or is burned. If your own vampire ends up >> in torpor as a result of the combat, Decapitate doesn't work either. >> Actually, Decapitate doesn't work if your guy is down to 1 blood! >> Messy. > >Decapitate works better because it's one card (instead of Amaranth + >Possession or diablerie action + Possession) in the discipline you're >using to torporize the other vampire. So you only need POT, not one Amaranth is disciplineless, so if you can manage to torporize someone with pot, then go for it. (Torn Signpost + Disarm can do it best.) Decapitate requires POT and 2 extra blood for the same result - a burned vampire. Interestingly, you do not even need to Possess the minion back out on the same turn - he remains in your ash heap forever until you draw the card or get the action off. And if all he's doing is beating things up and Amaranthing them, then you don't really need him out for defense or Deflections. >vampire with POT and another with NEC. The "1 blood" argument isn't >enough of a drawback to make the Possession "combo" (I use the word >lightly) more advantageous. You are missing something. The Possessed vampire comes out of the ash heap untapped, with 1 free blood on him, and may then take, you guessed it: ANOTHER ACTION. I believe he may even take another Rush action, because I think actually being burned removes the whole "repeat actions" thing. I can't find a ruling on it, though, so hold that half of the thought. So if you have one vampire with POT/dom and another with NEC, then the vampire with POT rushes someone, kills them, is burned, is Possessed back into play by the other vampire, and then bleeds for 3 - all for 1 blood off the NEC vampire and a few card slots. Is this not good? And let's not even imagine if he were able to take multiple Rush actions in this manner. It could be considered a slightly more complicated version of Freak Drive. Amaranth + Possession = Decapitate + Freak Drive, except A+P is three blood cheaper, and D+F only requires one vampire (with POT/FOR) to pull off. It is MORE equivalent to Precognizant Mobility, which is itself somewhere in the vague "It seems good but is it too many moving parts?" mist. (Yes, 3 blood. Amaranth is free, Possession costs 1 but gives 1 to the minion. Decapitate costs 2 and Freak Drive costs 1.) >> Yes, Possession would have been MUCH better as an "any vampire" card. >> But it is FAR from unplayable. > >"There is a deck which can use Possession" is FAR from "Possession is >playable." To me, "playable" means "generally useful". Better take cards like Cryptic Mission off the playable list then. It isn't useful in very many decks at all. >> ...Ghoul Escort, Scapelli, and Leonardo are all good for the Giovanni. > >Scapelli is pretty garbage-y. Like almost all allies, he's easy to >kill, and he doesn't have any good abilities that make him worth >playing. If you're playing with Leonardo, he's either going to never >exist or never die. If someone can kill him (and wants to), they'll >just block the recruit action. If they don't care (and I don't see why >they should), they'll never block him, and your Compel the Spirit is >useless. I don't see why Ghoul Escort is good for anyone, much less the >Giovanni. Scapelli has a bleed, and smacks people for 4 unless they end combat or otherwise fail to hurt him. (Fortitude sucks for Garou, too.) He is a real nuisance after he's been around for awhile. He's got 3 life, which makes him more difficult to kill than you think, unless you never play anything but POT decks, which I'm beginning to suspect. And if you play nothing but POT decks, please DO waste the cards on Scapelli, especially if I can Compel him back for free. The statement that "they'll just block the recruit action" for Leonardo is very, very unrealistic. We KNOW what Leonardo will do for a Giovanni deck down here, and we still don't block the recruit action that much - partly because sometimes there just isn't the intercept handy, and partly because sometimes it just isn't worth it at the time (stop predator recruiting Marijava Ghoul, or stop prey recruiting Leonardo? Hmm). You don't see why they SHOULD block it, because you haven't had to play against Patrick O'Shea and the Giovanni Horde of Wack Decks That Work. Card text for Ghoul Escort: "All Kindred. 4 life. When blocked, the vampire can choose to burn the ghoul and untap instead of entering combat. This does not untap the blocker." I am going to leave it up to you to consider why it might be "good" to take an action, be blocked, and untap instead of entering combat (not even Obedience will work here, as the acting minion's effect takes precedence), while the blocker remains tapped and his Wake, if used, is wasted. Again, it works best when Ambrosius can just take an action to re-fetch the Ghoul, but Compel the Spirit works as well. >I agree that it's "okay". Cryptic Mission is better (for the "screw up >a bleed bouncer" effect) and Mind Numb is better (for the "tap their >vampire" effect). Cryptic Mission doesn't tap a vampire. Mind Numb only works on untapped vampires and doesn't cause them to burn a blood. It is easily turned into hand jam once you see the first one hit the table. Jar the Soul does BOTH, and can be played on a tapped vampire. Again, you need to see Jar the Soul used properly to understand just how effective it can be. The 20-Jar deck would be stupid. 6 Jars saved until opportune moments, however... >> >Doesn't make the cut in my book. There aren't enough Allies/Retainers >> >to really be a problem commonly. The Allies you can beat up with >> >Potence, and the Retainers can have their master vampires killed. >> >> I repeat: ONE in any deck. Some cards are like that. > >(A) Why would you put one in a deck that, say, doesn't care what allies >are out there? Why would you ever play with Far Mastery? I didn't say one in EVERY deck, I said one in ANY deck, ie. one in ANY deck that might want an ally-remover. >(B) Necromancy doesn't need cards that are so marginally useful that you >MIGHT put ONE in a deck. Why does Dominate need Far Mastery? You sure as hell don't put one of THOSE in every Dominate deck, and you never put more than one in. c'mon, you can do better than that. >> Besides, what >> if you aren't playing with that much Potence? It takes a good chunk >> more cards to kill an ally or vampire(for the retainer) with Potence >> than with one +1 stealth action. > >But Potence is more useful, since it can kill vampires. There are >always vampires to kill, so your Potence cards are always useful. >There's hardly ever an ally or retainer that needs to die so badly that >you need to put a card in your deck expressly for that purpose. AGAIN, but what if you aren't playing with Potence? Why should I have to include Potence cards in a NEC/DOM stealth/bleed deck? I'd much rather just include one Release the Shackled Soul and not worry about it. Do you ever play with Far Mastery? Wouldn't you rather include POT skill cards in your Malk deck so you can just kill those allies, beacuse then you could kill vampires too? POTENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING. If it were, POT decks would win. They don't. Keep in mind that I am the howling combat fiend down here in Atlanta, too - I LIKE beating things up. But I've learned that thinking you can beat everything up is the recipe for a bunch of losing decks. >> And I wouldn't want to waste one of >> my Rush actions on an ally anyway... especially something like a Rom >> Gypsy, which now costs me a maneuver as well, or worse, a Renegade >> Garou, which can either run away from me OR start hitting me back. >> And both of THOSE are fairly common allies. > >If the allies are there and you need to kill them, you go kill them. If >someone makes a Renegade Garou and you go kill it, you just bled them >for 5! And if the Garou torporizes your ass while you're killing it, you just bled yourself for lots too, and if it was your predator's Garou, they probably figure that was an even trade - a POT vampire and one of your valuable Rush actions for a Garou. >> Then I'll just ignore it, since it's not really that relevant anymore >> anyway since Sabbat was released. =) > >It is completely relevant. It is the benchmark by which most vampires >(including Sabbat) are judged. Just because some new vampires are >overcosted and undercosted (and quite a few Sabbat vampires are >overcosted) doesn't mean you throw out the baby with the bathwater. I >am sure that with LSJ behind the wheel, the new Sabbat War vampires (if >any) will be properly costed. I am not as certain that it is as relevant as you wish to believe. Once enough vampires break the formula, one must simply deal with things as they stand now, as opposed to a "formula" that is no longer accurate. And an awful lot of Sabbat vampires are undercosted - the Camarilla still hold even in comparison because they have the advantage in numbers. (23 Brujah as compared to 11 Brujah Antitribu? Even Sela (POT PRE cel obt +1 bleed Bishop) is accounted for by the presence of Anvil, who is POT CEL pre dom tha Primogen. I wonder if maybe that's part of why Sela got by in the first place?) >> Retort retorted to. You can reuse allies and vampires as well as just >> cards. You just need a very anti-materialistic view of both. > >And you need to be willing to play with crappy cards just for the sake >of playing with them. You need to lower your standards of what a "good" >card is to make you even want to play with the Giovanni. Well, we can't all play Immortal Grapple/Govern/Form of Mist decks all the time, now can we? We'd get very bored down here, let me tell you. >> The appropriate concept, from what I can judge Necromancy to be in the >> WoD, would be to focus on the DOM/POT, and use Necromancy as a strong >> support discipline. Instead, it is currently a very limited support >> discipline, so it will certainly need more cards to be added, but >> that's what the whole Final Nights expansion is for. =) > >What would be wrong with making the vampires which would allow a strong >Giovanni POT/DOM deck? That's like saying "In the world of darkness, >the Brujah are much more Present than Potent or Celeritous, so we In the World of Darkness, the Brujah are all about beating the living crap out of things, so it's not surprising that their discipline focus in V:TES is CEL/POT/PRE, in that order. >shouldn't print any more vampires like Dre or Anvil". More strategies = >better game. Because there is enough POT, and enough DOM in the game, that we do not need to cater to it, hence creating no additional strategies. We even already have another POT/DOM clan, the Lasombra. Sure, they have OBT, but OBT is even more of a support discipline than NEC is. Oh, while I'm going here, the Lasombra don't have enough OBT, either - a 5, a 6, and an 8?! And the 5 doesn't even have POT? And the 6 doesn't have ANY other superiors? Anyway. The Lasombra need more OBT (and OBT cards that do things). The Giovanni need more NEC (and NEC cards that do things). If you make a discipline for one specific clan, the clan ought to be able to get the discipline at superior without kicking itself in the nuts - witness the Tremere, who have THA at 2, 3, 4, 5, and *everyone* from 7 and up. (Ok, it's Magdalena at 2, but a superior discipline at 2 is more than any other clan has!) And the Tremere can even backfill from their Antitribu with Reverend Blackwood, to plug that pesky hole at 6. [ quoted text not captured ]

<snip interesting stuff. Thanks, Adrian!> > > An astonished Derek writes: > > Wow, I can't believe you think this. I repeat: Possession, Whispers > > of the Dead, Compel the Spirit, Jar the Soul, Spectral Divination, and > > Spectral Intervention are all eminently playable - IF you have > > superior NEC. > > Possession isn't playable. While torpored vampires are common, > Possession requires that YOUR vampires be BURNED. This usually does > not happen by design for most decks. About the only deck that > Possession would be good in is a Diablerie deck, and even then, > Decapitate would serve the purpose much more well. <snip> i don't agree. Here's a repost of a deck which uses it to bring out big vamps cheaply after you have dumped them in your ash-heap using Goodnight, Sweet Prince [Redeem the Lost Soul is there so that you have the option of removing the Goodnight, sweet prince'd vampire from the game for pool-gain]. It's not a great deck [fairly summarised by James Hamblin elsewhere in this thread as a "Wack-shit deck"] but i think the concept is sound and that it could, nay, WILL, be made scary. CRYPT [12 vamps] Regina giovanni Enzo giovanni Rafaele Giovanni Carlotta Giovanni Rudolpho Giovanni Alexandra Francois Villon Gwendolyn Harrod Arika Queen Anne Leandro LIBRARY 5 Blur 13 Clan Impersonation 3 Cloak the Gathering 2 The Death of my Conscience 4 Deflection 2 Disputed Territory Dreams of the Sphinx Fortune Teller Shop Golconda - Inner Peace 6 Goodnight, Sweet Prince Guiseppe, Gravedigger 2 Information Highway 10 Kine Resources Contested Leonardo, Mortician 8 Majesty Park Hunting Ground 7 Possession 2 Protect Thine Own Ravnos Acceptance 6 Redeem the Lost Soul Rom Gypsy 3 Spectral Divination 3 Thrown Gate 2 Thrown Sewer Lid 4 Wake with Evening's Freshness As it is, it is > less useful than any torpor specific card. Nah, Eyes of the Dead is easily the worst torpor-specific card. <another snip> [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > The Possessed vampire comes out of the ash > heap untapped, with 1 free blood on him, and may then take, you > guessed it: ANOTHER ACTION. I believe he may even take another Rush > action, because I think actually being burned removes the whole > "repeat actions" thing. I can't find a ruling on it, though, so hold > that half of the thought. True. A burned card doesn't remember anything (except possibly the manner in which it was burned, for cases like Compel the Spirit). In particular, a vampire retrieved via Possession doesn't remember what actions (if any) it had taken prior to being burned. -- 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/

Derek wrote: >>Of course. But if they don't FEEL good about the game, they won't keep playing. They don't have to be HAPPY that duplicates can exist, but they have to at least not be disdainful - and we can't FORCE them to use duplicates!>> We also can't FORCE them to play with the actual rules (like no card limits, for instance), but it is always good to encourage the actual rules. If you make 10 Giovanni vampires, and put 10 Giovanni vampires in the crypt of a Giovanni Starter (including 2 duplicates so there are 12...), the deck is perfectly playable, and the new players explicitly see that you *can* have duplicate vampires in their deck. If they decide they don't like this, they can very well swap them out for 2 different, non Giovanni vampires (or 2 old Giovanni if they have access to older cards). >>Putting 12 vampires in the crypt means that they can satisfy their OWN creative desires, while not stifling ours in any way, shape, or form - and everyone is happy, for what really is a minor cost.>> I fail to see how it is creatively stifling to have some duplicates in a fixed crypt--it makes the crypt generally more effective (if you have, say, two each of a 5 and a 6, rather than an extra 9 and an extra 10...), and provides a concrete example of an important game mechanic--that you can (and probably should) use duplicates in your crypt. This answers a common newbie question without it being asked ("can I have more than one of each vampire in my crypt?"), tends to make the decks more playable, and requires only finding space to print 10 new vampires rather than 12. Again, if this offends a player's sensebilities, they can easily swap in two different non Giovanni vampires. >>No one would EVER suggest that Duck should not be ALLOWED to!>> Well, actually, people would and do suggest such a thing. Some would also suggest that the game be played with a card limit. I think it is best to encourage the actual rules through concrete examples--i.e. starter decks should come with more than 4 of a given card (maybe 6 or 7 of at least one of them) and a few duplicate vampires in the crypt. >>That would drastically change the current game. But nobody should be forced to subscribe to the "duplicate" mechanic if they don't want to... especially not new players!>> How is it difficult to include 2 non Giovanni vampires in their crypt? Clans work together--hey, man, I watched Vampire: 90210. There were Ventrue and Nosferatu hanging out together. >>You must realize, we are going to have to seduce countless newbies into the fold. We HAVE to cater to them for awhile!>> I fail to see how only having 10 of a given clan is either not seducing nor catering. One of the important, non initially intuitive rules about crypt building is that you *can* include duplicates. Having duplicates in a fixed starter makes this clear. having only 10 of a clan means you have to either A) double up a couple vampires, B) put in a few out of clan friends, or C) find some of the older vampires. Non of these strike me as a bad thing. >>We cannot -force- people to get old boxes, or trade via the Internet, because this excludes the feet-in-stores crowd who could care less about the 'net community.>> How is having only 10 new Giovanni *forcing* them to do anything? They can double up in their crypt. They can add out of clan friends. If they are really interested in having 12 unique Giovanni, they have incentive to seek out older players or other resources to find them. How is this bad? >>POTENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING. If it were, POT decks would win. They don't. Keep in mind that I am the howling combat fiend down here in Atlanta, too - I LIKE beating things up. But I've learned that thinking you can beat everything up is the recipe for a bunch of losing decks.>> I always find this an amusing concept. Can it be that I am the *only* person in the world who is capable of making and playing a Rush deck that wins on a consisitient basis in a number of different environments? No, wait, James can too. POT decks do win. >>And if the Garou torporizes your ass while you're killing it, you just bled yourself for lots too, and if it was your predator's Garou, they probably figure that was an even trade - a POT vampire and one of your valuable Rush actions for a Garou.>> How is the Garou going to torporize the ass of a POT vampire? You Rush him with a vampire that is capable of taking 4 damage. What, he is weilding a surprise Meat Cleaver? Yeah, umm, ok. Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/bakija6 "Why so many swords?" "I must kill many." -Kikuchiyo

James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> thecor...@yahoo.com writes: >> >> >For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from >> >previous expansions, >> >> I think it's kind of arguable whether it's very "nice" to make new >> players do that. > >Reread Adrian's post. He suggests this as an option to those players >too stubborn to accept the possibility of multiples of the same vampire >in a crypt. If that's the point, then why are we so worried about docking the set a few extra vampires to squeeze some older ones in? Again, you can't have it both ways. You can't argue it's that important for older players to have the maximum variety of vampires and then turn around and poopoo the same concept when it comes to newer players. >> It's certainly reasonable enoung when you're looking >> at kind of specialized cards that help a player make very specific types >> of decks. I'd take a much more dim view of starting in on a game that >> made me find three-year old cards that are frequently basic building >> blocks of the game, which is a category in which I'd place most vampires. > >Anyone should be able to open a preconstructed deck and play. They >shouldn't have to buy any more packs, much less trade, to simply play >the game. If they want their deck to improve, they'll have to do both. Sure, buying packs or trading for more or less current cards. Not three year old cards that you have to do Net searches for. Look, get something straight: this expansion won't do diddly squat for recruiting new blood to the game if new players need go find old cards to have much chance to play. If new players wanted to do _that_, they'd already be playing this game because that's all it takes to get into it now. And please don't give me "trading". Some players like it, some don't and would prefer to stick to pack buying (at least for the most part). Even the ones that do are subject to the whims of whether they had any trading partners who had what they wanted were willing to trade for something the new player had. >> >B) use off-clan vampires. >> >> You skewer your own argument here. Can't have it both ways: >> >> >The Giovanni ARE hurt by their vampire selection and their Necromancy >> >powers. Their Necromancy powers are so weak as to be nearly >> >ineffectual, and their vampires' abilities are spread such that they >> >can't take advantage of the MUCH more broad DOM/POT that they might >> >otherwise be able to. >> >> If the old Giovanni are hurt by their vampire selection then you'd have to >> assume that a new subset would be as well, which would be a bad bad bad >> bad bad thing to hand the new players. > >Only if you assume that the reason the Giovanni are hurt by their >vampire selection is that they have a small selection. No, in fact, the >Giovanni selection is simply BAD. Well, yea, the *usuable* selection, I mean. But then, that's why I added the part you cut out: >>Of course, if the assumption about the new set of Giovanni kindred were >>wrong (they were much more playable as is than the old set), this may >>not be as much of problem. Which conintinued with: >> But I find it hard to picture that old vampires plus new vampires >>wouldn't be a substantial advantage over just new vampires to choose from. > >Well, of course. If I have five expansions worth of cards to choose from >and you only have one, then I have a significant advantage over you. The >issue is not whether old + new > new. That's obvious. The issue is whether >just "new" is enough. No. The issue is whether the advantage is "substantial", which you just conceeded. If it's a substantial advantage, this is bad for all us: new players because they'd have a substantial disadvantage to overcome and old players because the new players aren't going to like overcoming a substantial disadvantage and just not bother with game. By the way, with respect Giovanni, it's not five expansions worth of cards but only one, Dark Sovereigns. Fred

In article <39D021C1...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >Only if you assume that the reason the Giovanni are hurt by their >vampire selection is that they have a small selection. No, in fact, the >Giovanni selection is simply BAD. It is a case of six of one, half a dozen of the other. Their current selection *is* bad. That does not mean that there are sufficient Giovanni, however. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qpqv9$263$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com writes >i don't agree. Here's a repost of a deck which uses it to bring out big >vamps cheaply after you have dumped them in your ash-heap using >Goodnight, Sweet Prince [Redeem the Lost Soul is there so that you have >the option of removing the Goodnight, sweet prince'd vampire from the >game for pool-gain]. My favoured version of this - the "get in ash-heap, Possession back" - is Chris Berger's deck using Might of the Camarilla to burn vampires in your crypt. It suffers from lack of ability to get stealth, unfortunately, but then, so does this deck. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39D020B3...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. >> B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) > >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still >available on Ebay and cheap. I am a new player. I want to try a good Ravnos deck. I can't find enough cards in Final Nights. I want to buy a few DS boosters. Why on earth would I want to buy a box? I've only been playing this game for a few weeks. I'm not spending 80 dollars! [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39D020B3...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >> A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. > >> B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) > > > >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still > >available on Ebay and cheap. > > I am a new player. I want to try a good Ravnos deck. I can't find > enough cards in Final Nights. I want to buy a few DS boosters. The point is that you should be able to play a good Ravnos deck with the cards in Final Nights. These options were suggestion for those players who insist on playing a single-clan crypt with no duplicates. If you're that stubborn, then I don't think it's unreasonable to tell you "go buy or trade for some cards". > Why on earth would I want to buy a box? I've only been playing this > game for a few weeks. I'm not spending 80 dollars! DS boxes don't cost that much. Closer to $30-$40, I think. For now, anyway. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "And the tide rushes by where we stand / And the earth underneath turns to sand" -- Sheryl Crow

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: > > >Reread Adrian's post. He suggests this as an option to those players > >too stubborn to accept the possibility of multiples of the same vampire > >in a crypt. > > If that's the point, then why are we so worried about docking the set a > few extra vampires to squeeze some older ones in? Because the old players don't want to open new packs and see the same old vampires. Because you don't _need_ to print old vampires for the new players to have a good set of vampires to choose from. > Again, you can't have > it both ways. You can't argue it's that important for older players > to have the maximum variety of vampires and then turn around and poopoo > the same concept when it comes to newer players. Regardless of _which_ vampires are printed in Final Nights, there will be the same number of vampires for the new players to choose from. Both new players and old players need new Giovanni. In Sabbat War, for example, it is perfectly reasonable to expect that most of the vampires will be old. That's because the Sabbat clans for the most part don't need new vampires. But the Giovanni do need new vampires, and lots of them. Derek Ray is basing his arguments on the assumption that there will be 14 new vampires for each clan, which I think is unreasonably high. Since the space for vampires in the set will be limited, why not make all-new vampires; this helps the old players _and_ the new players. > >Anyone should be able to open a preconstructed deck and play. They > >shouldn't have to buy any more packs, much less trade, to simply play > >the game. If they want their deck to improve, they'll have to do both. > > Sure, buying packs or trading for more or less current cards. Not three > year old cards that you have to do Net searches for. Why do you necessarily assume that the preconstructed decks plus Sabbat War and Final Nights cards won't be competitive? > Look, get something straight: this expansion won't do diddly squat > for recruiting new blood to the game if new players need go find old > cards to have much chance to play. If the people designing this game don't have the presence of mind to realize this, then you're right. But I'm assuming that LSJ has a modicum of sense and has designed an expansion (Sabbat War I'm talking about now) that will let people be competitive with ONLY Sabbat War cards. > >> But I find it hard to picture that old vampires plus new vampires > >>wouldn't be a substantial advantage over just new vampires to choose from. > > > >Well, of course. If I have five expansions worth of cards to choose from > >and you only have one, then I have a significant advantage over you. The > >issue is not whether old + new > new. That's obvious. The issue is whether > >just "new" is enough. > > No. The issue is whether the advantage is "substantial", which you just > conceeded. You're right. The advantage will be substantial. But you're misinterpreting what I mean by "advantage". I mean "I have more cards than you, so I can build more different kinds of decks". You're saying "I have more cards than you, so I can build better decks". Assuming the expansions are designed well, this definitely need not be the case. > By the way, with respect Giovanni, it's not five expansions worth of cards > but only one, Dark Sovereigns. The Giovanni have three disciplines, not just one. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39D0E00F...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> I am a new player. I want to try a good Ravnos deck. I can't find >> enough cards in Final Nights. I want to buy a few DS boosters. > >The point is that you should be able to play a good Ravnos deck with the >cards in Final Nights. Exactly. Which is why I think the differing starters and boosters (all new cards in boosters, some old cards in starters) is a good way to go. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39D0E315...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> By the way, with respect Giovanni, it's not five expansions worth of cards >> but only one, Dark Sovereigns. > >The Giovanni have three disciplines, not just one. True. But with both Sabbat War and Final Nights freely available to new players (thus making Sabbat War the de-facto basic set for new players), they can do the same things we did - buy some V:TES and some DS, but they buy Sabbat War (for a lot of basic cards) and FN for Giovanni (or whoever) cards. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:55:33 +0000, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >need new vampires. But the Giovanni do need new vampires, and lots of >them. Derek Ray is basing his arguments on the assumption that there >will be 14 new vampires for each clan, which I think is unreasonably >high. Since the space for vampires in the set will be limited, why not >make all-new vampires; this helps the old players _and_ the new players. I object! I have since relented and backed down to 12, which I consider the bare minimum. 14 would be nice though. ;) [ quoted text not captured ]

>> James Hamblinwrote >> But the Giovanni do need new vampires, and lots of them. Derek Ray >> is basing his arguments on the assumption that there will be 14 new >> vampires for each clan, which I think is unreasonably high. Since >> the space for vampires in the set will be limited, why not make >> all-new vampires; this helps the old players _and_ the new players. > Derek Ray wrote: > I object! I have since relented and backed down to 12, which I > consider the bare minimum. 14 would be nice though. ;) I believe Steve's statement, "the set will have all new cards (at least 120)" makes the assumption that the vampires will all be new ones fairly safe. If the numbers of the previous Independent Clan expansions (DS, AH) stay conistent in Final Nights and there are 120 cards total, we can expect 36 new vampires, 9 for each clan. Regards, Noal -- "I was probably pretty young, when I realised that I had come from what you might call a family, a clan, a race, maybe even a species, of pure sons of bitches." --Faulkner, "The Mansion" [ quoted text not captured ]

> >> A) Not so easy if you don't know anyone with previous expansions. > >> B) Can't be done if you want an all Giovanni deck. =) > > > >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still > >available on Ebay and cheap. > > I am a new player. I want to try a good Ravnos deck. I can't find > enough cards in Final Nights. I want to buy a few DS boosters. > > Why on earth would I want to buy a box? I've only been playing this > game for a few weeks. I'm not spending 80 dollars! > ummm... DS costs from 25-40 Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:21:51 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> wrote: >> Derek Ray wrote: >> I object! I have since relented and backed down to 12, which I >> consider the bare minimum. 14 would be nice though. ;) > >I believe Steve's statement, "the set will have all new cards (at least >120)" makes the assumption that the vampires will all be new ones fairly >safe. If the numbers of the previous Independent Clan expansions (DS, >AH) stay conistent in Final Nights and there are 120 cards total, we can >expect 36 new vampires, 9 for each clan. OK, there's a good baseline to START from, really, so let's do that. The four Independent clans each started with 10 vamps, and a quick search on ELDB for Assamite or Setite reveals that they had 20 cards printed for them - so 10 discipline cards and 10 Master/Clan Toys. Same search done on Giovanni and Ravnos shows that they STILL only have 20 cards available to them (oddly enough), even with what Ancient Hearts added - and they have 11 discipline cards each now. A comparison to Thaumaturgy/Tremere shows 30 cards - difference of 10. A comparison to Protean/Gangrel shows 32 - difference of 10. A comparison to just other disciplines shows that most disciplines have approximately 20 cards currently, some a few more. Trying to compare with clan-toys added in, although it's tricky, shows PRE/Ventrue at 29, PRE/Toreador at 29, and PRE/Brujah at 31 - still a difference of about 10. This means that almost every clan has the same amount of clan toys available to it presently - so it is entirely possible that we do not need to print THAT many 'new' clan toys, we just need to ways of making the existing ones worthwhile. It shows that we absolutely should print 10 new discipline cards per clan, so there's 40 off the top right there, and we have 80 cards left. The V:TES clans have either 23 or 24 vampires. (Since Sabbat War is not yet out, I cannot compare accurately to anything but V:TES - the Sabbat numbers will depend heavily on what gets printed in SW.) This leaves a deficiency of 14 vampires for the AH pair, and 11 vampires for the DS pair. Some of the DS vamps suck too badly to be used in ANY deck, whereas vamps like Kalinda and Hadrian Garrick (while they are no good to the clan itself because of lack of the clan discipline) at least are playable and will be seen in other decks. My observations also lead me to believe one thing, as a side note: whoever created the Ravnos was obviously drinking heavily, ignored the design guidelines, and should be commended. They are the ONLY Independent clan with 13 perfectly playable vampires as they stand now - the weakest is probably Lazar, and he has a cool special. (He should then have his commendation revoked for making NO (zero) free discipline cards, and for making cards like Far Fatass.) Anyway, taking the low average of 11 and 14 gives us 12 new vampires each to bring the Independent clans in line. 48 more cards gone, leaving us with 32 to play with out of 120. We haven't added any clan toys yet, but let's come back to that in a second. Ancient Hearts added two new discipline cards for each discipline, I think - so with 10 disciplines (NOW counting Sabbat War), we lose another 20 cards. Down to 12, but 20 out of 120 is a lot of goodies even for people who don't give a flip about the Independents. That leaves us 3 new clan toys for each Independent Clan, and presto. This leaves no new clan toys for the Camarilla 7, or for the Sabbat Ten. This could be a problem, but the Sabbat Ten are about to get a bunch of new clan toys themselves. There are other considerations. How many Ravnos will be printed, given their situation in the World of Darkness? This could give us a few extra card slots to toss around. And what about the Assamites' diablerie - will new Assamites be able to, or should one of their clan toys be something about Ur-Shulgi? Anyway. Something for everyone to chew on, and not incidentally some pretty solid support for including 12 new vampires per clan - there really IS plenty of room for them. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > But if the option is "play theme or not", I > believe they would want you to play clan-theme. I don't give a flying foot about whether White-Wolf would prefer me to play a single clan deck. > >saying "you can't do that because on page 247 of The Two Towers, it > >clearly states that <blah, blah, blah>". People should feel free to > >play a single-clan deck or a twelve clan deck (Peter Bakija's "Kindred > >Embassy" deck comes to mind). > > And nobody's saying they shouldn't feel free. But. But what? > "Occasionally mock" is, in fact, pretty mild. But these are newish > players, and we want them to be ENTHUSIASTIC about the game, not > vaguely entertained by it. If we can provide one aspect that will get > them enthused, then please, god, DO IT. We need new players > desperately. You can't have a card game that perfectly models a role-playing game. There are going to be limitations inherent in the discrete nature of a card game. You can have infinitely diverse situations in an RPG, but there is a finite number of cards and rules in a card game. People who don't understand and accept that shouldn't be playing card games. > >You can say something happens and give a reason for it. If I choose not > >to believe your reason, I may very well call it a "deus ex machina". [snip explanation of "deus ex machina"] I know what deus ex machina means. Sheesh. But calling something a deus ex machina is subjective. That was my point. I think Adrian's explanation (Methuselah's work in mysterious ways) is perfectly reasonable. Just because someone thinks that explanation is insufficient doesn't mean Adrian is forced to come up with a "better" one. > >But that doesn't mean your reason wasn't valid. And it's certainly not > >a reason to, say, not allow Duck to come back from his untimely demise. > >This is, first and foremost, a card game. RPG concerns must play second > >(or higher ordinals) fiddle to CCG concerns. > > No one would EVER suggest that Duck should not be ALLOWED to! That > would drastically change the current game. But nobody should be > forced to subscribe to the "duplicate" mechanic if they don't want > to... especially not new players! > > You must realize, we are going to have to seduce countless newbies > into the fold. We HAVE to cater to them for awhile! Not to the extent that we ignore or neglect to teach them valid rules and strategies. > >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still > >available on Ebay and cheap. > > Most people, believe it or not, still are Internet-illiterate. Even a > great number of gamers still are. Many people who are > Internet-literate would NEVER trust a trade over the net! We cannot > -force- people to get old boxes, or trade via the Internet, because > this excludes the feet-in-stores crowd who could care less about the > 'net community. People are not forced to get cards over the internet. Just as they're not forced to play with a single-clan crypt. > >B) Too bad. You want an all Giovanni deck, but you don't want to use > >any duplicates? Sorry. > > Not a functional answer for a game that is going to have to draw new > players by the truckload. It is a function answer for someone who wants to play a card game with cards from one expansion and for whatever reason doesn't want to use out of clan or duplicate vampires. > >Who cares if he can't do anything but beat things up? You don't put him > >in a deck that doesn't beat things up! And in that deck, he does so > >with extreme intensity. > > Um, I think you missed who was saying what here. The Corrupter was > the one saying he's undercosted, etc. etc. I'm the one pointing out > that no matter how undercosted he is, he's still not BROKEN. No, I know exactly who said what. You're saying that a reason why he's not broken is that he can "only" beat things up. > >What you don't seem to understand is that it doesn't matter if he can be > >dealt with or not. You could deal with a hypothetical 2-cap vampire > >with DOM and +6 stealth on all actions with bleed bounce and heavy > >intercept. That doesn't make it not broken. > > Such a vampire as you describe WOULD be broken. And probably > undercosted too. And it very much matters if he can be dealt with - > if Beast coming out means that one vampire goes to torpor every turn, > with no recourse, then Beast is broken and needs to be fixed. > However, Beast coming out doesn't mean this, for the reasons I > mentioned above - and so Beast isn't broken. Beast coming out means that a vampire goes to torpor at least every other turn, unless someone is playing heavy anti-combat. Your statement leads me to believe you have never played a competent potence rush deck. > >> This is simply an incorrect statement. I've made Possession decks. > >> They do work. They require some effort, but they DO work. > > > >That doesn't make it a good card. > > *snort* It surely makes it playable. Reread my post. "There exists a deck which uses this card" does not equal "this card is playable". > >[snip Force of Will deck] > > > >Hooray. You can make some goofy-ass deck that requires lots of skill > >cards from an out-of-clan discipline. How does that make it a good card > >for the Giovanni? It doesn't. > > Oh, use some fucking imagination, for god's sake. Jesus Christ. I > ONLY detailed RIGHT afterwards a way to make Possession work in an > all-Giovanni deck. My point was that it was certainly PLAYABLE, which > it remains, and that the reason it doesn't "go" now is because there > are fuck-all vampires available to the Giovanni who have NEC (3 and 7, > and a 6 with NEC cel obf!), and there are fuck-all vampires available > who have POT (cheapest is 6!) so less than half the clan can Possess > at a natural +1 stealth without skill cards, and less than half the > clan can beat people up without skill cards. Is it obvious yet? > Sheesh. Actually, I'm positive that the reason it isn't more successful is that the Giovanni are pot/dom/nec, not for/dom/nec. Explain how someone could use this card effectively in a pot/dom/nec Giovanni deck, where other cards would be less useful. Remember that I'm talking about how NEW players will be able to use the Giovanni. In this case, they will need more/better Necromancy cards, since the existing ones are horrendous. > So if you have one vampire with POT/dom and another with NEC, then the > vampire with POT rushes someone, kills them, is burned, is Possessed > back into play by the other vampire, and then bleeds for 3 - all for 1 > blood off the NEC vampire and a few card slots. Is this not good? > And let's not even imagine if he were able to take multiple Rush > actions in this manner. It requires two vampires, three disciplines, more cards, bleed cards (which makes the combat less effective), and all of the blood off of the potence vampire. Taste of Vitae (disciplineless) all but eliminates the blood cost of Decapitate. > >"There is a deck which can use Possession" is FAR from "Possession is > >playable." To me, "playable" means "generally useful". > > Better take cards like Cryptic Mission off the playable list then. It > isn't useful in very many decks at all. It's not like Thaumaturgy has only a few playable cards like Nec. > Scapelli has a bleed, and smacks people for 4 unless they end combat > or otherwise fail to hurt him. (Fortitude sucks for Garou, too.) Anyone who has the cards to deal with vampires in combat can also deal with allies. Except the allies die. Being able to bring them back would be good if the allies were good in the first place, which is the problem. > He > is a real nuisance after he's been around for awhile. He's got 3 > life, which makes him more difficult to kill than you think, unless > you never play anything but POT decks, which I'm beginning to suspect. > And if you play nothing but POT decks, please DO waste the cards on > Scapelli, especially if I can Compel him back for free. Whatever. > Card text for Ghoul Escort: Do you think I didn't go look up the text of the card? Geez... > >(A) Why would you put one in a deck that, say, doesn't care what allies > >are out there? > > Why would you ever play with Far Mastery? I didn't say one in EVERY > deck, I said one in ANY deck, ie. one in ANY deck that might want an > ally-remover. Who mentioned Far Mastery? Most decks don't care if you have an ally. They'll either kill it or ignore it. I would never, ever, put an anti-ally card in a deck. People don't play with allies very often. And if they do, you deal with them just like you deal with vampires. Avoid them or kill them. > AGAIN, but what if you aren't playing with Potence? Why should I have > to include Potence cards in a NEC/DOM stealth/bleed deck? You shouldn't. > I'd much > rather just include one Release the Shackled Soul and not worry about > it. Have fun discarding that Release the Shackeld Soul every game. If you need to put in a card _just_ to deal with allies, then you probably can't even deal with vampires. > Do you ever play with Far Mastery? Wouldn't you rather include > POT skill cards in your Malk deck so you can just kill those allies, > beacuse then you could kill vampires too? No, and no. > POTENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING. I never said it was. I'm reading your posts. Mind returning the favor? > If it were, POT decks > would win. They don't. Then you're not playing them right. Maybe because you're using allies... [point system] > I am not as certain that it is as relevant as you wish to believe. > > Once enough vampires break the formula, one must simply deal with > things as they stand now, as opposed to a "formula" that is no longer > accurate. And an awful lot of Sabbat vampires are undercosted - the > Camarilla still hold even in comparison because they have the > advantage in numbers. (23 Brujah as compared to 11 Brujah Antitribu? > Even Sela (POT PRE cel obt +1 bleed Bishop) is accounted for by the > presence of Anvil, who is POT CEL pre dom tha Primogen. I wonder if > maybe that's part of why Sela got by in the first place?) First of all, many Sabbat vampires are well-balanced or even undercosted. Look at the Anti-Brujah Dodd. He's a 5 with 4 points of abilities. You can compare Anvil to Sela; Sela has the same number of disciplines and the same voting power. AND +1 bleed AND a special advantage. Sela got by in the first place because the people who designed Sabbat vampire didn't know what the hell they were doing. > >And you need to be willing to play with crappy cards just for the sake > >of playing with them. You need to lower your standards of what a "good" > >card is to make you even want to play with the Giovanni. > > Well, we can't all play Immortal Grapple/Govern/Form of Mist decks all > the time, now can we? We'd get very bored down here, let me tell you. So you're not disagreeing with me? You're saying that it's okay to be forced to play crappy decks with the Giovanni for the sake of _variety_? I want to be able to play a good deck with the Giovanni, and so will the new players you're so concerned about. > >What would be wrong with making the vampires which would allow a strong > >Giovanni POT/DOM deck? That's like saying "In the world of darkness, > >the Brujah are much more Present than Potent or Celeritous, so we > > In the World of Darkness, the Brujah are all about beating the living > crap out of things, so it's not surprising that their discipline focus > in V:TES is CEL/POT/PRE, in that order. Look at Brachach. She's a 5 that doesn't even have Potence. It doesn't bother me that RPG concerns influence the game; that's inevitable when you have a card game based on an RPG. But the card game concerns MUST be more important. I don't care if something is a little inconsistent with the "World of Darkness" if it makes the card game better. > If you make a > discipline for one specific clan, the clan ought to be able to get the > discipline at superior without kicking itself in the nuts They should be able to get EVERY in-clan discipline at superior without having to use enormous vampires. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "And the tide rushes by where we stand / [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39D0E00F...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >> I am a new player. I want to try a good Ravnos deck. I can't find > >> enough cards in Final Nights. I want to buy a few DS boosters. > > > >The point is that you should be able to play a good Ravnos deck with the > >cards in Final Nights. > > Exactly. > > Which is why I think the differing starters and boosters (all new cards > in boosters, some old cards in starters) is a good way to go. I have agreed with the statement already. :) James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "And the tide rushes by where we stand / [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:21:51 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> > wrote: > > >> Derek Ray wrote: > >> I object! I have since relented and backed down to 12, which I > >> consider the bare minimum. 14 would be nice though. ;) > > > >I believe Steve's statement, "the set will have all new cards (at least > >120)" makes the assumption that the vampires will all be new ones fairly > >safe. If the numbers of the previous Independent Clan expansions (DS, > >AH) stay conistent in Final Nights and there are 120 cards total, we can > >expect 36 new vampires, 9 for each clan. > > OK, there's a good baseline to START from, really, so let's do that. [snip] > Anyway. Something for everyone to chew on, and not incidentally some > pretty solid support for including 12 new vampires per clan - there > really IS plenty of room for them. Do you understand the calculation Noal has made? Dark Sovereigns had 51 vampires out of 173 cards, or 29.48%. If the new set has 120 cards, this gives room for 35.38 vampires. Let's call that 36. In your plan, we get 12-14 vampires per clan, or 40-47% of the new set being vampires. That seems exceptionally high. Note that this wouldn't even include possible crossover vampires (a Lasombra with Nec, Gangrel with Chi, City Gangrel with Qui, etc.) James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "And the tide rushes by where we stand / And the earth underneath turns to sand" -- Sheryl Crow

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:38:11 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:21:51 GMT, Noal McDonald <dhar...@my-deja.com> >> wrote: >> >> >I believe Steve's statement, "the set will have all new cards (at least >> >120)" makes the assumption that the vampires will all be new ones fairly >> >safe. If the numbers of the previous Independent Clan expansions (DS, >> >AH) stay conistent in Final Nights and there are 120 cards total, we can >> >expect 36 new vampires, 9 for each clan. >> >> OK, there's a good baseline to START from, really, so let's do that. >[snip] >> Anyway. Something for everyone to chew on, and not incidentally some >> pretty solid support for including 12 new vampires per clan - there >> really IS plenty of room for them. > >Do you understand the calculation Noal has made? Dark Sovereigns had 51 >vampires out of 173 cards, or 29.48%. If the new set has 120 cards, >this gives room for 35.38 vampires. Let's call that 36. I understand them perfectly. There is absolutely NO reason, however, to either assume that the percentile numbers will match the previous expansion sets, or that they SHOULD in the first place. There is a lot of reason to assume they SHOULDN'T, because the expansion clans are currently all fucked up and weak, and Dark Sovereigns is loudly decried as having included a large amount of useless glop. Ancient Hearts was better, partly because they CHOSE to narrow their focus and not go crazy producing piles of cards for every clan in existence. Also, both Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts dealt with only TWO clans, as opposed to four. One would expect a certain percentile increase in certain aspects - for example, the percentage of new-clan discipline cards and clan toys in Dark Sovereigns was 40 out of 173, or 23%. In my explanation, it would be 52 out of 120, or 43%. And I don't think I'm very far off at ALL as to how many new discipline cards/toys we ought to be printing. I should probably have been more specific as to what I was using as a baseline, because I certainly didn't intend to set out and reproduce the previous expansions' percentiles exactly. I was merely starting from 120 cards and going backwards according to the exact amounts that the original clans had available to them. >In your plan, we get 12-14 vampires per clan, or 40-47% of the new set Actually, we get 12 in my plan (pretty clearly stated too), so 40%, an increase of ten percent. It is sort of amusing that the numbers worked out exactly to my current position of "12 vampires", which was based on much different reasons. The other increase in my plan is twenty percent and it is on MUCH more solid ground. >being vampires. That seems exceptionally high. Note that this wouldn't >even include possible crossover vampires (a Lasombra with Nec, Gangrel >with Chi, City Gangrel with Qui, etc.) I think we have to bag the thought of crossover vampires until the future, however. -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >> >> >Reread Adrian's post. He suggests this as an option to those players >> >too stubborn to accept the possibility of multiples of the same vampire >> >in a crypt. >> >> If that's the point, then why are we so worried about docking the set a >> few extra vampires to squeeze some older ones in? > >Because the old players don't want to open new packs and see the same >old vampires. Of course. I do understand the incentive but... >Because you don't _need_ to print old vampires for the >new players to have a good set of vampires to choose from. Well, that depends on the new set of vampires. Perhaps you'll be correct at that. (Or you can certainly say, "*If* they do it correctly, the new players will have a good set.") But this isn't the issue. The issue is the differential in advantage. Anything you give new players you must give older players (obviously) and they already have a set to work with which at least includes some usuable vampires. Tagging the new set as "competitive" doesn't address this point unless the new set is so much larger and/or better than the existing set that the older ones become mostly irrelevent. I doubt that's going to happen in any circumstances. >> >> But I find it hard to picture that old vampires plus new vampires >> >>wouldn't be a substantial advantage over just new vampires to choose from. >> > >> >Well, of course. If I have five expansions worth of cards to choose from >> >and you only have one, then I have a significant advantage over you. The >> >issue is not whether old + new > new. That's obvious. The issue is >> >whether just "new" is enough. >> >> No. The issue is whether the advantage is "substantial", which you just >> conceeded. > >You're right. The advantage will be substantial. But you're >misinterpreting what I mean by "advantage". I mean "I have more cards >than you, so I can build more different kinds of decks". You're saying >"I have more cards than you, so I can build better decks". Assuming the >expansions are designed well, this definitely need not be the case. I believe it must be the case. I could possibly buy an argument along these lines concerning library cards as long as basic building block cards are either reprinted or functionally duplicated (fairly closely). I do not see how this would be possible with vampires. The nature of vampires makes each additional selection which is usable in a competitive deck a great boon - which is why I think you care about it in the first place. (Well, besides the fact that we all want Giovanni decks to be competitve with, say, Ventrue decks.) >> By the way, with respect Giovanni, it's not five expansions worth of cards >> but only one, Dark Sovereigns. > >The Giovanni have three disciplines, not just one. All right, point taken. But I think in large measure Dark Sovereigns (and Ancient Hearts a little bit) are much more important than the others since there are a lot more cards that are directly relevent to Giovanni, especially the vamps. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: > > >Because you don't _need_ to print old vampires for the > >new players to have a good set of vampires to choose from. > > Well, that depends on the new set of vampires. Perhaps you'll be > correct at that. (Or you can certainly say, "*If* they do it correctly, > the new players will have a good set.") I think that since the set is being designed by LSJ & friends (i.e., not a big bunch of dumbasses), we can be fairly confident that the set will be designed competently. > But this isn't the issue. The > issue is the differential in advantage. Anything you give new players you > must give older players (obviously) and they already have a set to work > with which at least includes some usuable vampires. Tagging the new set > as "competitive" doesn't address this point unless the new set is so > much larger and/or better than the existing set that the older ones become > mostly irrelevent. I doubt that's going to happen in any circumstances. Recall that the new players will have Sabbat War, which will have the "bread and butter" cards needed to make new players competitive. New players may not be able to make the most specialized kinds of decks, those requiring large quantities of out-of-print cards, but that doesn't mean they can't be competitive. > >You're right. The advantage will be substantial. But you're > >misinterpreting what I mean by "advantage". I mean "I have more cards > >than you, so I can build more different kinds of decks". You're saying > >"I have more cards than you, so I can build better decks". Assuming the > >expansions are designed well, this definitely need not be the case. > > I believe it must be the case. I could possibly buy an argument along these > lines concerning library cards as long as basic building block cards are > either reprinted or functionally duplicated (fairly closely). ...which should be the case with Sabbat War. > I do not > see how this would be possible with vampires. The nature of vampires makes > each additional selection which is usable in a competitive deck a great > boon - which is why I think you care about it in the first place. (Well, > besides the fact that we all want Giovanni decks to be competitve with, > say, Ventrue decks.) That's why I want all of the vampires to be solid, playable Giovanni. None of this "lots of out-of-clan disciplines" or "out-of-clan instead of in-clan" crap. Make ten completely functional vampires with disciplines taken first and foremost from {pot, dom, nec}. That should be plenty (you know, along with some decent library cards for them to play) to make a good deck. > >The Giovanni have three disciplines, not just one. > > All right, point taken. But I think in large measure Dark Sovereigns (and > Ancient Hearts a little bit) are much more important than the others since > there are a lot more cards that are directly relevent to Giovanni, > especially the vamps. The Giovanni didn't really get too many good clan specific cards. This argument can be made for other clans, however. It may be necessary to reprint cards like Corruption and Contract. I certainly wouldn't want to open them in Final Nights packs, but just putting them in starters might not be enough. Any thoughts on this? James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "I guess it's over now, 'cause I've never seen so much blood." -- Barenaked Ladies

In article <enFHkGCl...@obeah.demon.co.uk>, James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In article <8qpqv9$263$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com writes > >i don't agree. Here's a repost of a deck which uses it to bring out big > >vamps cheaply after you have dumped them in your ash-heap using > >Goodnight, Sweet Prince [Redeem the Lost Soul is there so that you have > >the option of removing the Goodnight, sweet prince'd vampire from the > >game for pool-gain]. > > My favoured version of this - the "get in ash-heap, Possession back" - > is Chris Berger's deck using Might of the Camarilla to burn vampires in > your crypt. > > It suffers from lack of ability to get stealth, unfortunately, but then, > so does this deck. > VERY nice. <leafs through collection and finds not NEARLY enough Mights> Carlotta, Arika and harrod .... hmmmm ...... > -- > James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D | ja...@zephyr.org.uk (New e-mail) > "Who'd have ever predicted the moment would come when I find myself grateful > they've kept women dumb? She's an innocent maiden but then so am I, that's why > it's possible I could get by." > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> But this isn't the issue. The >> issue is the differential in advantage. Anything you give new players you >> must give older players (obviously) and they already have a set to work >> with which at least includes some usuable vampires. Tagging the new set >> as "competitive" doesn't address this point unless the new set is so >> much larger and/or better than the existing set that the older ones become >> mostly irrelevent. I doubt that's going to happen in any circumstances. > >Recall that the new players will have Sabbat War, which will have the >"bread and butter" cards needed to make new players competitive. New >players may not be able to make the most specialized kinds of decks, >those requiring large quantities of out-of-print cards, but that doesn't >mean they can't be competitive. In terms of Giovanni (and other independent clan) vampires, however, I believe SW will be worthless. >> I could possibly buy an argument along these >> lines concerning library cards as long as basic building block cards are >> either reprinted or functionally duplicated (fairly closely). I do not >> see how this would be possible with vampires. The nature of vampires makes >> each additional selection which is usable in a competitive deck a great >> boon - which is why I think you care about it in the first place. (Well, >> besides the fact that we all want Giovanni decks to be competitve with, >> say, Ventrue decks.) > >That's why I want all of the vampires to be solid, playable Giovanni. You keep missing the point. The point is that with vampires, if the new players have new set X and the old players have new set X PLUS old set Y, the DIFFERENTIAL in power is too much to ever claim ANYTHING you give the new players is "competitive". And I mean competitive in terms of power. >The Giovanni didn't really get too many good clan specific cards. This >argument can be made for other clans, however. It may be necessary to >reprint cards like Corruption and Contract. I certainly wouldn't want >to open them in Final Nights packs, but just putting them in starters >might not be enough. Any thoughts on this? I disagree. Again, these are (supposedly) useful bread and butter building block cards and it's going to make too big a difference if you don't print cards like that in Final Nights. But why the big kick? I'm assuming the number of these would be fairly modest and if you get a few extra commons you've seen before, big deal. It's worth it. Alternatively, I suppose you could turn to the same concept as many have suggesting for old vampires, which is to print them in precons only. Fred

> > My favoured version of this - the "get in ash-heap, Possession back" - > > is Chris Berger's deck using Might of the Camarilla to burn vampires in > > your crypt. > > > > It suffers from lack of ability to get stealth, unfortunately, but then, > > so does this deck. > > > VERY nice. <leafs through collection and finds not NEARLY enough Mights> > Carlotta, Arika and harrod .... hmmmm ...... don't forget a prince in there for the 5th Trad. Free Arika == nice. Full and Free Arika == better. Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

I've been reading this thread over the last few days and thought that I'd stick in my 0.02$ just around here. I have to say that I was first introduced to Jyhad just about the time were Sabbat came out. At the time, a flipped over the game and bought a box of Sabbat boosters. So, even after a few trades, my card base was about 90% Sabbat with the odd Jyhad card thrown in. I couldn't build a decent Giovanni deck, nor any camarilla clan deck for that matter, but Sabbat being a stand alone expansion, it let me build very competitive decks. Later, I wanted to get new cards, so I bought some of the older sets. Sure I came up with a bunch of Ravnos, Giovanni,Setite, Assamite, and Camarilla vampires that I couldn't really use. But I knew a people who were more than willing to trade my "useless" cards for stuff I really needed. I eventually got crazy with the game and bought a bunch of boxes (so now I can be somewhat considered as an old-timer), but looking back at my Sabbat decks I find that they were up to par with most of my current decks. My point is that new players should get all that they need in Sabbat War to not only start playing Jyhad, but compete at a decent level. A further expansion might not suit them directly, but whatever they can't use can be traded. If the new expansion has half a dozen new Giovannis and a new player wants to build a Giovanni deck, it should be pretty easy trading old-timers for the older cards. I know it was pretty easy for me. I also know that when I meet a new player, I normally trade quite generously in his favor (allowing him to take the cards needed to build a decent deck). Are new players going to be able to build decks from every available clan without purchasing old cards? I don't think so, but that doesn't mean that they won't be competitive. In any case, if someone wants to build decks from every clan, that person has to buy massive amounts of cards. In my play group, most people only play a few clans. They trade away the cards from the clans that they don't play to get the cards they need. Trading is an important part of the game and its also very fun and stimulating. Anyways, this was my 0.02$. Flame me if you will ;) Andrei Rublev [ quoted text not captured ]

andrei...@my-deja.com writes: >I've been reading this thread over the last few days and thought that >were Sabbat came out. At the time, a flipped over the game and bought a >box of Sabbat boosters. So, even after a few trades, my card base was >about 90% Sabbat with the odd Jyhad card thrown in. I couldn't build a >decent Giovanni deck, nor any camarilla clan deck for that matter, but >Sabbat being a stand alone expansion, it let me build very competitive >decks. > >Later, I wanted to get new cards, so I bought some of the older sets. >Sure I came up with a bunch of Ravnos, Giovanni,Setite, Assamite, and ... >My point is that new players should get all that they need in Sabbat >War to not only start playing Jyhad, but compete at a decent level. Not to discredit your observations but you're talking about a time when all the expansions came within approxmiately a year or a year and a half from one another and from the second version of the main set. There's a huge difference. Now you're talking about filling in with cards from three years ago. For instance, retailers who have Sabbat War and Final Nights sitting side-by-side on their shelves are far less likely to have a display box of Dark Sovereigns next to them. >A further expansion might not suit them directly, but whatever they can't >use can be traded. If the new expansion has half a dozen new Giovannis >and a new player wants to build a Giovanni deck, it should be pretty >easy trading old-timers for the older cards. I dispute that. It may be easy or it may not. It depends on who they play with and know who might have the cards. One thing I've noticed about people who trade a lot. It's frequently very difficult to convince them that there's a lot of other people who a) really don't like to trade; or b) are not really in a good position to trade. Please try not to forcefeed your way of enjoying the game to others. It doesn't usually work and the consequences might not be good. >Are new players going to be able to build decks from every available >clan without purchasing old cards? I don't think so, but that doesn't >mean that they won't be competitive. That's one way to look at it, I suppose. But I would point out to you that the whole point of Final Nights is independent clans. If a new player can't build independent clan decks from it alone and doesn't want to (or know how to) go find Dark Soverigns nor trade with a willing older player who has them, then there's not much incentive for him to ever buy much of it. Maybe a little, if there's library cards or off-clan vampires in it he can use for other clan decks. But I wouldn't think it would be enough make much of a difference. And if only older players buy FN, how will sell enough to be worthwhile? Fred

In article <tqs1tsssuu1bpjg45...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >I object! I have since relented and backed down to 12, which I >consider the bare minimum. I think there need to be twelve vampires for each clan, but not necessarily 12 new ones. I'm not so bothered about teaching players about the ability to duplicate their crypt - a note in the rules book can point that out - but 10 vampires, as we had with Ancient Hearts, was just, in my opinion, too few, especially when you try and cover a range of capacities. The ability to have approximately 5 or 6 vampires between 3 and 5 capacity (I'm not convinced that multiple 2 capacity vampires is necessary) is very useful and contributes greatly to the strength of a clan. For example, in Jyhad, the Nosferatu had 5 vampires between 3 and 5 (Duck, Agrippina, Sammy, Grendel, Tiberius) and now have 8 (Daliyah, Regilio, Laurent). That way, you can have low to mid-range vampires, and have sufficient selection to allow different discipline focuses to be chosen and, especially with the Independents, you don't *have* to load up with big vampires when you don't have the Fifth Tradition/Minion Tap or Festivo dello Estinto trick to play with. If we had the different starters and boosters, something like 6 of the old vampires, 6 new vampires in the starters, and 4 other new vampires not in the starters. That gives all new players access to 16 Giovanni (good), and another 4 to 6 for the Independents if they *do* get access to the old boosters. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qtb0i$d81$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>, [ quoted text not captured ] Well actually, I only started getting Ancient Hearts cards about two months ago, a few years after the original set came out. I finally found a store that has a few boxes in stock. Buying the box has had two effects on my game: 1)I now can play clans I had only seen other people play and 2)I have cards that Old-Timers are willing to trade for, thus improving my existing decks. > >A further expansion might not suit them directly, but whatever they can't > >use can be traded. If the new expansion has half a dozen new Giovannis > >and a new player wants to build a Giovanni deck, it should be pretty > >easy trading old-timers for the older cards. > > I dispute that. It may be easy or it may not. It depends on who they > play with and know who might have the cards. > > One thing I've noticed about people who trade a lot. It's frequently > very difficult to convince them that there's a lot of other people who > a) really don't like to trade; or b) are not really in a good position > to trade. Please try not to forcefeed your way of enjoying the game to > others. It doesn't usually work and the consequences might not be good. > I agree that trading is not something everybody enjoys. Some people are extremely stingy when it comes to cards and don't want to trade anything. In my case, if I don't play with it, I'll trade it for something that I might or will play with. Possession of cards for me is not a big thing. What do I care about the shitload of conditionings and bondings that I own if I don't play dominate bleed decks? But I don't force anything on people. If someone doesn't like a trade he/she has made with me, even a month or two down the road, I don't see any reason why I wouldn't reverse it. The name of the game is to have fun and play. Winning is something that people worry about in tournaments, even then I worry more about my deck concept and feel than actually winning or losing. > >Are new players going to be able to build decks from every available > >clan without purchasing old cards? I don't think so, but that doesn't > >mean that they won't be competitive. > > That's one way to look at it, I suppose. But I would point out to you that > the whole point of Final Nights is independent clans. If a new player can't > build independent clan decks from it alone and doesn't want to (or know how > to) go find Dark Soverigns nor trade with a willing older player who has > them, then there's not much incentive for him to ever buy much of it. Maybe > a little, if there's library cards or off-clan vampires in it he can use for > other clan decks. But I wouldn't think it would be enough make much of a > difference. And if only older players buy FN, how will sell enough to be > worthwhile? > > Fred > Well, if FN is anything like Dark Sovereigns or Ancient Hearts, there should be a few general discipline and master cards thrown in, enough to add flavor to any deck. The new discipline cards from AH and DS made a lot of people happy. But I have to agree that in an environment which has only new players, an expansion solely based on non-aligned clans would probably not be of interest to them. Shelling out the extra cash to hopefully catch one or two useful cards (that is if none of the old cards are reprinted of course) is not going to be attractive for new players. My point is that trading is a definite option for players willing to do so. The card that I traded for the most proffit over the last years ws Carrion Crows. An extremely good card, and a common, but I was trading them for uncommons and rares. Just food for thought: what would an Old- Timer be willing to trade for really good new Giovanni or Setite cards? My guess is that such a trade would be worth a new player's while, not to mention his investment... Andrei Rublev. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:25:54 -0500, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> But if the option is "play theme or not", I >> believe they would want you to play clan-theme. > >I don't give a flying foot about whether White-Wolf would prefer me to >play a single clan deck. And nobody will expect you to. But they believe that the clan themes are the way to market the game and gain more new players. So for the cost of eight extra cards in an expansion, we can appeal to players who believe in this sort of thing, and appeal to the LARPers and RPG players more. >> "Occasionally mock" is, in fact, pretty mild. But these are newish >> players, and we want them to be ENTHUSIASTIC about the game, not >> vaguely entertained by it. If we can provide one aspect that will get >> them enthused, then please, god, DO IT. We need new players >> desperately. > >You can't have a card game that perfectly models a role-playing game. Nor am I suggesting that it perfectly model the RPG - just that it permit those players who wish to TRY to perfectly model their decks in this fashion to feel like they're succeeding, however dismally they may be actually failing and/or losing games. >There are going to be limitations inherent in the discrete nature of a >card game. You can have infinitely diverse situations in an RPG, but >there is a finite number of cards and rules in a card game. People who >don't understand and accept that shouldn't be playing card games. We do not have the option to say this to new players, at least not in that fashion. We are trying to resurrect the dead here - you, as well as all the veterans we have, know VERY well the condition our game was in for many years. We must do what we can to draw new players into the fold. If this means bending a little, then we need to bend. If this means 12 new discrete vampires per clan, so be it. >I know what deus ex machina means. Sheesh. But calling something a >deus ex machina is subjective. That was my point. I think Adrian's >explanation (Methuselah's work in mysterious ways) is perfectly >reasonable. Just because someone thinks that explanation is >insufficient doesn't mean Adrian is forced to come up with a "better" >one. It's not as subjective as all THAT, actually. Especially for gratuitously obvious instances such as Adrian's explanation. But again you're missing the point - we don't need to leave a bad taste in ANY new player's mouth, and something like that does NOT look good to the RPGer/LARPer type, who's used to creating/telling stories and making them look good. He expects better from White Wolf - I mean, the Company are the premier storytellers right? They created the universe in which he creates his stories... >> No one would EVER suggest that Duck should not be ALLOWED to! That >> would drastically change the current game. But nobody should be >> forced to subscribe to the "duplicate" mechanic if they don't want >> to... especially not new players! >> >> You must realize, we are going to have to seduce countless newbies >> into the fold. We HAVE to cater to them for awhile! > >Not to the extent that we ignore or neglect to teach them valid rules >and strategies. So we teach them, by playing our OWN multiple-vampire crypts, that it is perfectly permissible to do such a thing. Then if they want to never dupe vampires in their own crypts, they don't have to. I found out last night that one of our long-term players almost never uses dupes in his crypt, because he never wants to ever be stuck looking at duplicates in his uncontrolled region. Who are we to force newbies to do so, just because they want to play a "clan" deck? >> >A) Net trading is easy and widespread. Dark Sovereigns boxes are still >> >available on Ebay and cheap. >> >> Most people, believe it or not, still are Internet-illiterate. Even a >> great number of gamers still are. Many people who are >> Internet-literate would NEVER trust a trade over the net! We cannot >> -force- people to get old boxes, or trade via the Internet, because >> this excludes the feet-in-stores crowd who could care less about the >> 'net community. > >People are not forced to get cards over the internet. Just as they're >not forced to play with a single-clan crypt. Um, my original question was "What if they're brand new and don't know any other players, much less older ones, in their area?" And you said "Net trading is easy." And now you say they're not forced to get cards over the Internet. >> >B) Too bad. You want an all Giovanni deck, but you don't want to use >> >any duplicates? Sorry. >> >> Not a functional answer for a game that is going to have to draw new >> players by the truckload. > >It is a function answer for someone who wants to play a card game with >cards from one expansion and for whatever reason doesn't want to use out >of clan or duplicate vampires. All you do with that answer is piss off a new player, though. "I can do it with OTHER clans... why didn't they print enough vampires? Oh, you mean there are these old out of print expansions? How the hell am I supposed to get those? I don't see those in stores? What do you mean I have to buy a whole BOX over the Internet? I just want like 5 or 6 boosters." Much easier just to print 12 vamps per clan and have done with it. >> >Who cares if he can't do anything but beat things up? You don't put him >> >in a deck that doesn't beat things up! And in that deck, he does so >> >with extreme intensity. >> >> Um, I think you missed who was saying what here. The Corrupter was >> the one saying he's undercosted, etc. etc. I'm the one pointing out >> that no matter how undercosted he is, he's still not BROKEN. > >No, I know exactly who said what. You're saying that a reason why he's >not broken is that he can "only" beat things up. Er, well, yes. If he could beat things up and had superior DOM instead of superior OBF, well, that would be a broken vampire (especially at only 7!) But since he only beats things up, and because combat has its own problems (secondary instead of primary resources, etc.), he's not broken in practice. He may be undercosted, but he's a perfectly balanced vampire. >> Such a vampire as you describe WOULD be broken. And probably >> undercosted too. And it very much matters if he can be dealt with - >> if Beast coming out means that one vampire goes to torpor every turn, >> with no recourse, then Beast is broken and needs to be fixed. >> However, Beast coming out doesn't mean this, for the reasons I >> mentioned above - and so Beast isn't broken. > >Beast coming out means that a vampire goes to torpor at least every >other turn, unless someone is playing heavy anti-combat. Your statement >leads me to believe you have never played a competent potence rush deck. Every other turn is exactly HALF the frequency of "every turn", which in a game that rarely lasts more than 12 turns total begins to really matter. A vampire that reliably makes 6 vampires dead every game is a damn good vampire. A vampire that reliably makes one vampire every turn dead, no matter what, is broken. However good Beast is, he can't guarantee this - Fortitude stuffs him. So he's not broken. What you believe is sort of amusing, frankly, since my playgroup has taken to looking at vampires I bring out and saying things like "that vampire has Potence. Shit." It is my experience that even playing with a competent POT rush deck (let's use the Nosferatu Hate You as an example, since i bet we can get everyone to agree that it is an excellent example of its kind), it is definitely not a guaranteed thing that you will make vampires dead. We see a lot of ranged combat. We see a lot of REAL combat defense. We see a lot of maneuvers. We see all SORTS of wacky shit, frankly. About three weeks ago, Tatu built Peter's deck and played it in our group. He got steamrolled. And I don't think ANYONE would suggest that David Tatu is a bad player. POT Rush works fairly well in a tournament environment because it takes advantage of the usual metagame - that people will be going light on combat defense, and heavy on ways to oust people. It generally zips right through the holes in the common strong tourney decks (ventrue vote, weenie bleed of any kind, malk bleed) and whacks them on the forehead with a mallet to shake some sense into them. Then it runs into something like Stu Pieloch's "Bi" deck (War Room tourney winner), which has enough Fortitude to give a POT player a permanent wedgie, and in fact DID, since LSJ was playing POT rush (and was in the finals.) >Actually, I'm positive that the reason it isn't more successful is that >the Giovanni are pot/dom/nec, not for/dom/nec. Explain how someone Well, of COURSE. Fortitude provides any number of ways to get your own vampires burned, with both Force of Will and Daring the Dawn. It also provides piles of ways to get your guys back out of torpor usefully if they DON'T get burned somehow. >could use this card effectively in a pot/dom/nec Giovanni deck, where >other cards would be less useful. Remember that I'm talking about how Did that - you snipped it, but I'm sure you read it first. Decapitate would be less useful since it requires POT, and you know perfectly well that pot is often more than enough to torporize a vampire... Torn Signpost/IG/Disarm usually works pretty well since not many vampires are going to hit you with hands for more than 1. POT is better, obviously, but sometimes you can't get POT, which the Giovanni currently have a real bitch of a time doing in-clan. >NEW players will be able to use the Giovanni. In this case, they will >need more/better Necromancy cards, since the existing ones are >horrendous. I'm sure Mo'Better Necromancy cards are in the works with Final Nights. >> So if you have one vampire with POT/dom and another with NEC, then the >> vampire with POT rushes someone, kills them, is burned, is Possessed >> back into play by the other vampire, and then bleeds for 3 - all for 1 >> blood off the NEC vampire and a few card slots. Is this not good? >> And let's not even imagine if he were able to take multiple Rush >> actions in this manner. > >It requires two vampires, three disciplines, more cards, bleed cards >(which makes the combat less effective), and all of the blood off of the >potence vampire. Taste of Vitae (disciplineless) all but eliminates the >blood cost of Decapitate. The usual scenario is to Minion Tap the POT/dom guy first, which is also a good thing since you no longer give a damn what happens to him. I don't want to step very far into the "bleed cards don't belong in a combat deck" argument other than to state that my experience has shown otherwise - and a brief check of the Lasombra's tournament archive shows three beat-em-up, no bleed, POT decks. One was Peter Bakija, in April '99 - a year and a half ago. One was some "James Hamblin" guy in May 1998 - WELL over two years ago. And Josh Duffin has an entry for April 1997. One could assume that POT decks just haven't been played very much since then. One could assume that, but one would be tragically wrong, since I think there's been POT rush of some form at almost every tournament. But I note that the Powerbase Watford deck in July 2000, (by Rob "what sleaze?" Treasure) contains both a good chunk of combat, and a good chunk of bleed. I think the days when POT decks could afford to just Rush forward and bleed for 1 repeatedly have passed - too much combat defense out there these days and people KNOW what to do against POT decks now. >> >"There is a deck which can use Possession" is FAR from "Possession is >> >playable." To me, "playable" means "generally useful". >> >> Better take cards like Cryptic Mission off the playable list then. It >> isn't useful in very many decks at all. > >It's not like Thaumaturgy has only a few playable cards like Nec. But Cryptic Mission isn't "generally useful", so it apparently isn't "playable", according to your definition. >> is a real nuisance after he's been around for awhile. He's got 3 >> life, which makes him more difficult to kill than you think, unless >> you never play anything but POT decks, which I'm beginning to suspect. >> And if you play nothing but POT decks, please DO waste the cards on >> Scapelli, especially if I can Compel him back for free. > >Whatever. (shrug) they're YOUR zero-stealth Rush actions. Scapelli will be untapped and waiting, although having a good look at him, you can IG him and not be touched since his strike is inherently ranged and therefore CAN'T be a hand strike. So about all he will do is get in the way of the first guy, force you to waste a Rush and Grapple, and then come back on my turn for free, where he will do it again. And you can't Taste off Scapelli, so you DO need to grab him to keep him from hitting you. >> Card text for Ghoul Escort: > >Do you think I didn't go look up the text of the card? Geez... I'd thought that if you HAD looked closely at the text, it would have been immediately obvious that "take an action, tap one of their blockers, and untap without letting your prey use any combat cards" is a pretty strong mechanic. Contrast with Change of Target, which leaves their blocker untapped if he was originally. Ghoul Escort may not be very good in other decks, but when Ambrosius or a CtS can get him right back out of your ash heap... >> >(A) Why would you put one in a deck that, say, doesn't care what allies >> >are out there? >> >> Why would you ever play with Far Mastery? I didn't say one in EVERY >> deck, I said one in ANY deck, ie. one in ANY deck that might want an >> ally-remover. > >Who mentioned Far Mastery? Most decks don't care if you have an ally. >They'll either kill it or ignore it. I would never, ever, put an >anti-ally card in a deck. People don't play with allies very often. >And if they do, you deal with them just like you deal with vampires. >Avoid them or kill them. Disagreement of basic principle, I think. One card slot really isn't much, and having Ambrosius or a Garou sitting around near you can really be a pain. Being able to make them go away is a very convenient thing, especially if you don't actually have to get into combat to do it. >> AGAIN, but what if you aren't playing with Potence? Why should I have >> to include Potence cards in a NEC/DOM stealth/bleed deck? > >You shouldn't. Then how am I going to beat ANYTHING up, even an ally? It isn't like NEC is a combat-monster discipline. I can S:CE away from a Garou, but this doesn't make it dead and it will just be coming again next turn. I could include Far Mastery, but I'd rather have my guys with NEC taking the "support actions", and let the DOM guys bleed. >> I'd much >> rather just include one Release the Shackled Soul and not worry about >> it. > >Have fun discarding that Release the Shackeld Soul every game. If you >need to put in a card _just_ to deal with allies, then you probably >can't even deal with vampires. (shakes head) Marijava Ghoul... Renegade Garou... Ambrosius... Muddled Vampire Hunter... Succubus... Escaped Mental Patient... Tasha Morgan... J.S Simmons... yes, people DO play with allies and retainers far more than you think. And worse, it's usually the GOOD allies that they play with. Sometimes you have the stuff on hand to ignore vampires, but would rather not waste it pissing around with the allies. I would never include more than 1 in a deck, because allies ARE so rare. But they just aren't as rare as you think. What IS your playgroup like, anyway? >> POTENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING. > >I never said it was. I'm reading your posts. Mind returning the favor? Well, your first response to a lot of things is "Bah. I kill it." This leads me to believe that you're looking at Potence, because this is the POT deck's response to anything that offends it - it goes and kills it. >> If it were, POT decks >> would win. They don't. > >Then you're not playing them right. Maybe because you're using >allies... See above, from Lasombra's tournament page. No POT deck has won in a year and a half. I don't think it's my play that's the problem. I think it's just that POT is no longer new or unexpected, and people are habitually including things like Zip Guns, prevention, and other ways to foil POT. And they're learning how to deal with the POT deck better. This is why I started creating things like the POT/pre deck - it gets you coming OR going, so you eventually HAVE to let it beat your ass. >> >And you need to be willing to play with crappy cards just for the sake >> >of playing with them. You need to lower your standards of what a "good" >> >card is to make you even want to play with the Giovanni. >> >> Well, we can't all play Immortal Grapple/Govern/Form of Mist decks all >> the time, now can we? We'd get very bored down here, let me tell you. > >So you're not disagreeing with me? You're saying that it's okay to be >forced to play crappy decks with the Giovanni for the sake of >_variety_? I want to be able to play a good deck with the Giovanni, and >so will the new players you're so concerned about. *sigh* Variety is, in fact, the spice of life. As such, sometimes for that variety you sacrifice quality. But I merely was attempting to point out that your standards of "good" card are extremely high and not necessarily accurate. Govern the Unaligned easily makes everyone's "top 5 cards in the game" list, and IG and Form of Mist aren't far behind. (All you card limit momos out there yappin' about power rares, take note: Govern is a COMMON.) I do not feel that the -only- thing the Giovanni can produce are crappy decks. However, I think that the number of effective decks that they can produce is sharply limited, hence they are a much weaker clan than others. Hence they need support. >> >What would be wrong with making the vampires which would allow a strong >> >Giovanni POT/DOM deck? That's like saying "In the world of darkness, >> >the Brujah are much more Present than Potent or Celeritous, so we >> >> In the World of Darkness, the Brujah are all about beating the living >> crap out of things, so it's not surprising that their discipline focus >> in V:TES is CEL/POT/PRE, in that order. > >Look at Brachach. She's a 5 that doesn't even have Potence. It doesn't ...not every vampire needs Potence. Not every BRUJAH needs Potence. Looking at the Brujah, we find that every 5-cap vampire or above (except Rake) has superior CEL - 14 vamps. 8 vampires have POT. 8 vampires have PRE. Now you see why I listed it as CEL/POT/PRE - and I could easily have gone CEL/PRE/POT, which makes Brachah's discipline set VERY appropriate. But most people see the Brujah as nothing but assbeaters, so Brachah looks terrible at first glance, although pre/CEL makes a pretty damn effective bleed deck. (it is incredibly difficult to actually damage a vampire who is using CEL as -defense- and is willing to put the necessary cards in his deck to avoid getting hit.) A 5-cap vampire with NEC POT obf, NEC DOM cel, or POT DOM tha is hardly a "poor" addition to the Giovanni - and such a vampire would match Brachah's template. I think you may be a touch POT-centric, and it is blinding you to alternatives. =) >bother me that RPG concerns influence the game; that's inevitable when >you have a card game based on an RPG. But the card game concerns MUST >be more important. I don't care if something is a little inconsistent >with the "World of Darkness" if it makes the card game better. There is, of course, more than one way to make the card game better. There is the way which increases variety, and the way which provides more of the same ole, same ole. POT/DOM decks are around, and have been for some time. Giving the Giovanni a bunch of POT/DOM vampires merely makes that deck type better. No variety. Giving the Giovanni a bunch of NEC vampires, some who have POT and some who have DOM (and some who have all three), ALSO caters to that deck type, but adds NEC in. >> If you make a >> discipline for one specific clan, the clan ought to be able to get the >> discipline at superior without kicking itself in the nuts > >They should be able to get EVERY in-clan discipline at superior without >having to use enormous vampires. Correct, nor did I violate that concept in our little list. I just ordered the disciplines as "NEC/POT/DOM" in order of priority, as opposed to POT/DOM/NEC, which would be silly for the only clan with NEC. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qr0go$cn8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, inr...@my-deja.com writes >ummm... DS costs from 25-40 40 dollars? On a game I've only just started and don't even know if I like it or not? And I have to send money through eBay? I don't trust those stinking Internet scum[0]. My money will go missing. [0] Used as an example of attitudes about eBay, not an accurate representation of their business practises. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <g572tsk3sr5t38bj3...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>being vampires. That seems exceptionally high. Note that this wouldn't >>even include possible crossover vampires (a Lasombra with Nec, Gangrel >>with Chi, City Gangrel with Qui, etc.) > >I think we have to bag the thought of crossover vampires until the >future, however. Not really. Just drop them on the big vampires. e.g. 8 Capacity Random Giovanni DOM NEC pot obt Random gets +1 bleed against a Methuselah who controls a ready Lasombra. Random may rush any Lasombra as a (D) action. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qt248$bri$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net>, Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes >In terms of Giovanni (and other independent clan) vampires, however, I >believe SW will be worthless. Worthless? Not entirely, I would have thought. They all have 3 disciplines, 2 of which are in SW, and there are likely, I would have thought, to be a number of generic cards (combat, master, political etc.) which could be of use. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:30:59 +0100, James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: >In article <g572tsk3sr5t38bj3...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray ><lor...@yahoo.com> writes >>>being vampires. That seems exceptionally high. Note that this wouldn't >>>even include possible crossover vampires (a Lasombra with Nec, Gangrel >>>with Chi, City Gangrel with Qui, etc.) >> >>I think we have to bag the thought of crossover vampires until the >>future, however. > >Not really. Just drop them on the big vampires. > >e.g. > >8 Capacity >Random Giovanni >DOM NEC pot obt >Random gets +1 bleed against a Methuselah who controls a ready Lasombra. >Random may rush any Lasombra as a (D) action. I was referring more to not creating any new Camarilla or Sabbat vampires with "toys", and sticking with nothing but Independents for the set. =) Obviously, Random helps out the Giovanni plenty, but creating something like a POT obt nec vampire for the Lasombra, or a FOR chi pro Gangrel, wouldn't QUITE cut the mustard. (And I firmly believe that if you're going to create crossovers, that they be appropriate to their own clan; a pot/dom/nec Lasombra is, in practice, a Giovanni and ought to have been created as one.) [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> writes: >In article <8qt248$bri$1...@slb0.atl.mindspring.net>, Frederick Scott ><fre...@netcom.com> writes >>In terms of Giovanni (and other independent clan) vampires, however, I >>believe SW will be worthless. > >Worthless? > >Not entirely, I would have thought. They all have 3 disciplines, 2 of >which are in SW, and there are likely, I would have thought, to be a >number of generic cards (combat, master, political etc.) which could be >of use. Agreed. But that's why I preferaced it with the clause, "In terms of Giovanni vampiress". I'm assuming there will be none in Sabbat War. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: > > >Recall that the new players will have Sabbat War, which will have the > >"bread and butter" cards needed to make new players competitive. New > >players may not be able to make the most specialized kinds of decks, > >those requiring large quantities of out-of-print cards, but that doesn't > >mean they can't be competitive. > > In terms of Giovanni (and other independent clan) vampires, however, I > believe SW will be worthless. I would be very shocked if there were no Lasombra in SW worthy of putting into a Giovanni crypt. A smallish vampire with Pot and Dom, for example. > >That's why I want all of the vampires to be solid, playable Giovanni. > > You keep missing the point. The point is that with vampires, if the new > players have new set X and the old players have new set X PLUS old set Y, > the DIFFERENTIAL in power is too much to ever claim ANYTHING you give the > new players is "competitive". And I mean competitive in terms of power. I think we just disagree on this point. I think that a well-designed set can give players using just SW and FN cards competitive decks. Especially if the precon's include some of the more fundamental cards from DS as reprints. > >The Giovanni didn't really get too many good clan specific cards. This > >argument can be made for other clans, however. It may be necessary to > >reprint cards like Corruption and Contract. I certainly wouldn't want > >to open them in Final Nights packs, but just putting them in starters > >might not be enough. Any thoughts on this? > > I disagree. What part do you disagree with? > Again, these are (supposedly) useful bread and butter > building block cards and it's going to make too big a difference if > you don't print cards like that in Final Nights. That was my point. Do you agree that many people won't want to have them in the boosters? Do you think just having such cards in starters will be enough? > But why the big kick? Huh? I don't know what this means. > I'm assuming the number of these would be fairly modest and if you get > a few extra commons you've seen before, big deal. It's worth it. The set is going to be small enough that this will be a problem. > Alternatively, I suppose you could turn to the same concept as many > have suggesting for old vampires, which is to print them in precons > only. Right. Reread my paragraph above. Do you think that just having these cards in precons will be enough? I think it will _definitely_ be enough for the vampires. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "Why does everything I do confound you?" -- Barenaked Ladies

Derek Ray wrote: > > I was referring more to not creating any new Camarilla or Sabbat > vampires with "toys", and sticking with nothing but Independents for > the set. =) Obviously, Random helps out the Giovanni plenty, but > creating something like a POT obt nec vampire for the Lasombra, or a > FOR chi pro Gangrel, wouldn't QUITE cut the mustard. (And I firmly > believe that if you're going to create crossovers, that they be > appropriate to their own clan; a pot/dom/nec Lasombra is, in practice, > a Giovanni and ought to have been created as one.) But a Lasombra 6 with DOM POT obt nec would be great for both the Lasombra and the Giovanni. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / All the back alley banjo boys lie down and die on the floor." -- Shivaree

Derek Ray wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:25:54 -0500, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > > >I don't give a flying foot about whether White-Wolf would prefer me to > >play a single clan deck. > > And nobody will expect you to. But they believe that the clan themes > are the way to market the game and gain more new players. Hence the preconstructed decks. > So for the > cost of eight extra cards in an expansion, we can appeal to players > who believe in this sort of thing, and appeal to the LARPers and RPG > players more. I think it might seem a little counterintuitive to new players, but it takes a fractional amount of effort to explain this rule to them. I don't see bending the expansion over backwards being worthwhile. > >There are going to be limitations inherent in the discrete nature of a > >card game. You can have infinitely diverse situations in an RPG, but > >there is a finite number of cards and rules in a card game. People who > >don't understand and accept that shouldn't be playing card games. > > We do not have the option to say this to new players, at least not in > that fashion. We are trying to resurrect the dead here - you, as well > as all the veterans we have, know VERY well the condition our game was > in for many years. We must do what we can to draw new players into > the fold. If this means bending a little, then we need to bend. If > this means 12 new discrete vampires per clan, so be it. Having twelve new vampires per clan isn't going to make as much of a dent as you seem to think. People are still going to say "But in the RPG you need to have level 7 in Protean before you can use Form of Mist to do <blah, blah, blah>." While I'm mildly interested in the game universe, I certainly don't really know the first thing about it. > >I know what deus ex machina means. Sheesh. But calling something a > >deus ex machina is subjective. That was my point. I think Adrian's > >explanation (Methuselah's work in mysterious ways) is perfectly > >reasonable. Just because someone thinks that explanation is > >insufficient doesn't mean Adrian is forced to come up with a "better" > >one. > > It's not as subjective as all THAT, actually. Especially for > gratuitously obvious instances such as Adrian's explanation. Well, clearly it is that subjective, by your statement right there. To me, Adrian's explanation was perfectly reasonable. To you, it's deus ex machina. > But > again you're missing the point - we don't need to leave a bad taste in > ANY new player's mouth, and something like that does NOT look good to > the RPGer/LARPer type, who's used to creating/telling stories and > making them look good. He expects better from White Wolf - I mean, > the Company are the premier storytellers right? They created the > universe in which he creates his stories... Then they'd also expect such a thing (Duck's "resurrection") to be explicitly disallowed by the rules, instead of obscured by the card distribution. You can't have it both ways. [playing with duplicates] > Who are we to force > newbies to do so, just because they want to play a "clan" deck? We are people talking about the design of a card game expansion. There are real issues involved here, including whether 12 new vampires are necessary for the game and whether printing 12 new vampires for each clan is feasible. Once again let me state that I don't have a problem with reprinting vampires as long as they only appear in the preconstructed decks. So if someone buys both precons and boosters, they should have (at least) 12 distinct Giovanni, though not all new ones. > >People are not forced to get cards over the internet. Just as they're > >not forced to play with a single-clan crypt. > > Um, my original question was "What if they're brand new and don't know > any other players, much less older ones, in their area?" And you said > "Net trading is easy." And now you say they're not forced to get > cards over the Internet. Well, they're not. If they only want to play with the cards they can buy in the store, they can. And the expansions should be designed so that they can do so successfully. [Beast] > >No, I know exactly who said what. You're saying that a reason why he's > >not broken is that he can "only" beat things up. > > Er, well, yes. If he could beat things up and had superior DOM > instead of superior OBF, well, that would be a broken vampire > (especially at only 7!) Huh? So is Constanza Vinti broken? If I put a Dominate master on Beast, does he suddenly become uber-powerful? > But since he only beats things up, and > because combat has its own problems (secondary instead of primary > resources, etc.), he's not broken in practice. He may be undercosted, > but he's a perfectly balanced vampire. He has the same disadvantages as any other combat-oriented vampire. But he's significantly better than EVERY other combat vampire in the game. Just because there are standard strategies for dealing with combat doesn't mean "anything goes" when you design a combat vampire. > >Beast coming out means that a vampire goes to torpor at least every > >other turn, unless someone is playing heavy anti-combat. Your statement > >leads me to believe you have never played a competent potence rush deck. > > Every other turn is exactly HALF the frequency of "every turn", Wow. And I'M a mathematician? I should give up my day job. I said AT LEAST every other turn, allowing for a heavy anti-combat deck at the table. In my experience, against a deck with Obedience and/or Fortitude, about every other combat ends successfully. As opposed to against decks without such cards, where about 95% of combats end successfully. The problem is that you run out of rush actions. Except Beast doesn't. > We see a lot of ranged > combat. We see a lot of REAL combat defense. We see a lot of > maneuvers. Then by all means, play a non-combat deck and clean up. I will be the first one to admit that if the table "sees you coming" with your Pot combat deck, you'll have mixed success at best. That's what the metagame is about. But if you're smart, they'll have Majesty, Skin of Steel, and Obediences in their hand while you're bleeding for 7 at +2 stealth. > We see all SORTS of wacky shit, frankly. About three > weeks ago, Tatu built Peter's deck and played it in our group. He got > steamrolled. And I don't think ANYONE would suggest that David Tatu > is a bad player. I met David over the summer and would not say that. But such decks are tricky to play, especially in a heavily anti-combat environment. > Then it runs into something like Stu Pieloch's "Bi" deck (War Room > tourney winner), which has enough Fortitude to give a POT player a > permanent wedgie, and in fact DID, since LSJ was playing POT rush (and > was in the finals.) The problem is that all that Fortitude does no good against many other decks. Look. Potence decks are "Rock". They'll win as long as they're playing "Scissors". They lose when they play against "Paper". That doesn't mean that they _can't_ win. > >Actually, I'm positive that the reason it isn't more successful is that > >the Giovanni are pot/dom/nec, not for/dom/nec. Explain how someone > > Well, of COURSE. Fortitude provides any number of ways to get your > own vampires burned, with both Force of Will and Daring the Dawn. It > also provides piles of ways to get your guys back out of torpor > usefully if they DON'T get burned somehow. MY POINT was that this wasn't really a Giovanni deck, and certainly not the kind of thing I think people who buy SW/FN will be inclined to make. > >could use this card effectively in a pot/dom/nec Giovanni deck, where > >other cards would be less useful. Remember that I'm talking about how > > Did that - you snipped it, but I'm sure you read it first. Decapitate > would be less useful since it requires POT, and you know perfectly > well that pot is often more than enough to torporize a vampire... Torn > Signpost/IG/Disarm usually works pretty well since not many vampires > are going to hit you with hands for more than 1. POT is better, > obviously, but sometimes you can't get POT, which the Giovanni > currently have a real bitch of a time doing in-clan. That's an issue with the vampire selection, not the card itself. > I don't want to step very far into the "bleed cards don't belong in a > combat deck" argument other than to state that my experience has shown > otherwise - and a brief check of the Lasombra's tournament archive > shows three beat-em-up, no bleed, POT decks. One was Peter Bakija, in > April '99 - a year and a half ago. One was some "James Hamblin" guy > in May 1998 - WELL over two years ago. And Josh Duffin has an entry > for April 1997. It is arguable that Peter, Josh, and I are some of the few "experts" on potence combat decks. For the last couple of years, Peter and I have hardly played Jyhad at all. But at Origins '99 Peter made it to the finals. I don't know what Josh's excuse is... :) > One could assume that POT decks just haven't been played very much > since then. One could assume that, but one would be tragically wrong, > since I think there's been POT rush of some form at almost every > tournament. Just because the decks were present and did not win doesn't mean they aren't effective. They are very difficult to play well. > But I note that the Powerbase Watford deck in July 2000, > (by Rob "what sleaze?" Treasure) contains both a good chunk of combat, > and a good chunk of bleed. I think the days when POT decks could > afford to just Rush forward and bleed for 1 repeatedly have passed - > too much combat defense out there these days and people KNOW what to > do against POT decks now. If you are correct and the metagame has switched to decks having much more combat defense, it would seem that some clever person should play a deck designed to take advantage of this fact and win lots of tournaments. > >It's not like Thaumaturgy has only a few playable cards like Nec. > > But Cryptic Mission isn't "generally useful", so it apparently isn't > "playable", according to your definition. OK. I guess we agree. > >> is a real nuisance after he's been around for awhile. He's got 3 > >> life, which makes him more difficult to kill than you think, unless > >> you never play anything but POT decks, which I'm beginning to suspect. > >> And if you play nothing but POT decks, please DO waste the cards on > >> Scapelli, especially if I can Compel him back for free. > > > >Whatever. Note that "whatever" was meant to shut down this pointless bluster. I guess that didn't work. > (shrug) they're YOUR zero-stealth Rush actions. Scapelli will be > untapped and waiting, although having a good look at him, you can IG > him and not be touched since his strike is inherently ranged and > therefore CAN'T be a hand strike. So about all he will do is get in > the way of the first guy, force you to waste a Rush and Grapple, and > then come back on my turn for free, where he will do it again. And > you can't Taste off Scapelli, so you DO need to grab him to keep him > from hitting you. Oh, yeah, and all that combat defense the Giovanni have... do you really want to waste one of the few actions your minions have left by getting back a generally useless ally? Or do you want to try to actually oust your prey while you still have a chance? <whew> Is that the kind of childishness you were trying to get out of me? > >Do you think I didn't go look up the text of the card? Geez... > > I'd thought that if you HAD looked closely at the text, it would have > been immediately obvious that "take an action, tap one of their > blockers, and untap without letting your prey use any combat cards" It's the "go out and buy this retainer" action that I don't think is worth it. And the only deck you'll be preventing from using combat cards would be an intercept deck, which has its own problems. An active combat deck is unaffected by this card. > is > a pretty strong mechanic. Contrast with Change of Target, which > leaves their blocker untapped if he was originally. Ghoul Escort may > not be very good in other decks, but when Ambrosius or a CtS can get > him right back out of your ash heap... You're still taking two actions to tap a blocker and untap. Instead of buying (or reviving) your retainer, you could take some active action, get blocked, and have the same result. > Disagreement of basic principle, I think. One card slot really isn't > much, It's very significant. > and having Ambrosius or a Garou sitting around near you can > really be a pain. If you say so. I'd say a Garou is certainly less of a problem than, say, Beast. And since you can so handily deal with Beast without using sucky Necromancy cards, I don't see why you can't do the same with a Garou. > Being able to make them go away is a very > convenient thing, especially if you don't actually have to get into > combat to do it. Assuming they ever exist in the first place. I don't think I ever saw an ally on the table at the contructed events at Origins or GenCon. > >> AGAIN, but what if you aren't playing with Potence? Why should I have > >> to include Potence cards in a NEC/DOM stealth/bleed deck? > > > >You shouldn't. > > Then how am I going to beat ANYTHING up, even an ally? Duh, you don't. You don't have to beat up allies. They cost a lot of pool and they suck. When your prey goes out and gets an ally, you do a little happy dance because they just bled themselves for a lot. > >Have fun discarding that Release the Shackeld Soul every game. If you > >need to put in a card _just_ to deal with allies, then you probably > >can't even deal with vampires. > > (shakes head) Marijava Ghoul... Renegade Garou... Ambrosius... > Muddled Vampire Hunter... Succubus... Escaped Mental Patient... Tasha > Morgan... J.S Simmons... yes, people DO play with allies and retainers > far more than you think. And worse, it's usually the GOOD allies that > they play with. You need to put in a card to deal with retainers? Let's take Marijava Ghoul for example. Either you can deal with stealth bleed, or you can't. Having a card or two to randomly kill a retainer is (a) not a consistent way to deal with the stealth-bleed strategy and (b) going to be useless more often than not. > Sometimes you have the stuff on hand to ignore vampires, but would > rather not waste it pissing around with the allies. I would never > include more than 1 in a deck, because allies ARE so rare. Then why include it at all? It's not going to show up when you want it (since you only have 1) and it will often show up when it's not useful (since allies are rare). > But they just aren't as rare as you think. What IS your playgroup like, > anyway? People don't use allies. Go figure. > >> POTENCE IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING. > > > >I never said it was. I'm reading your posts. Mind returning the favor? > > Well, your first response to a lot of things is "Bah. I kill it." You don't need Potence to kill most allies. You just block them a couple of times and they're dead. The non-sucky allies have some cool way to keep themselves alive (like that one immune to non-agg. damage). But those ones usually have other problems, like being costly or having 0 bleed. > This leads me to believe that you're looking at Potence, because this > is the POT deck's response to anything that offends it - it goes and > kills it. That is the Pot decks response, yes. But most decks would just ignore it. > This is why I started creating things like the POT/pre deck - > it gets you coming OR going, so you eventually HAVE to let it beat > your ass. And, of course, decks like this are MORE susceptible to the anti-combat strategies because it necessarily has fewer combat cards. > *sigh* Variety is, in fact, the spice of life. As such, sometimes > for that variety you sacrifice quality. I'm sorry. I thought people wanted to play GOOD Giovanni decks. Clearly we're operating under wildly different assumptions. > >> In the World of Darkness, the Brujah are all about beating the living > >> crap out of things, so it's not surprising that their discipline focus > >> in V:TES is CEL/POT/PRE, in that order. > > > >Look at Brachach. She's a 5 that doesn't even have Potence. It doesn't > > ...not every vampire needs Potence. Not every BRUJAH needs Potence. Oh, but every Giovanni needs superior Necromancy? > But most people see the Brujah as nothing but > assbeaters, so Brachah looks terrible at first glance, although > pre/CEL makes a pretty damn effective bleed deck. (it is incredibly > difficult to actually damage a vampire who is using CEL as -defense- > and is willing to put the necessary cards in his deck to avoid getting > hit.) Yeah, but it's really easy to block them. Oh, no... not ALACRITY!!!?!?!? Who cares if I can't hurt you? > There is, of course, more than one way to make the card game better. > There is the way which increases variety, and the way which provides > more of the same ole, same ole. POT/DOM decks are around, and have > been for some time. Giving the Giovanni a bunch of POT/DOM vampires > merely makes that deck type better. How does it not make Giovanni decks better? You have this tunnel-vision view that the only Giovanni deck is a Necromancy deck because that's what happens in the RPG. But what if I want to play a Pot/Dom Giovanni deck? > >They should be able to get EVERY in-clan discipline at superior without > >having to use enormous vampires. > > Correct, nor did I violate that concept in our little list. I just > ordered the disciplines as "NEC/POT/DOM" in order of priority, as > opposed to POT/DOM/NEC, which would be silly for the only clan with > NEC. In my vampires, I gave no discipline any such preference. Why shouldn't all the clans be like that? (I agree that some are not, but it shouldn't be the case.) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qthpq$ivu$1...@slb1.atl.mindspring.net>, Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> writes >Agreed. But that's why I preferaced it with the clause, "In terms of >Giovanni vampiress". I'm assuming there will be none in Sabbat War. My apologies. I mis-read that as thinking that SW would be useless to the Giovanni. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >> >> >Recall that the new players will have Sabbat War, which will have the >> >"bread and butter" cards needed to make new players competitive. New >> >players may not be able to make the most specialized kinds of decks, >> >those requiring large quantities of out-of-print cards, but that doesn't >> >mean they can't be competitive. >> >> In terms of Giovanni (and other independent clan) vampires, however, I >> believe SW will be worthless. > >I would be very shocked if there were no Lasombra in SW worthy of >putting into a Giovanni crypt. A smallish vampire with Pot and Dom, for >example. Perhaps. Then maybe "worthless" is an overstatement but only a slight one. If we're only talking about an off-clan vampire or two, this is not what I'd call "having the 'bread and butter cards needed to make new players competitive". >> >That's why I want all of the vampires to be solid, playable Giovanni. >> >> You keep missing the point. The point is that with vampires, if the new >> players have new set X and the old players have new set X PLUS old set Y, >> the DIFFERENTIAL in power is too much to ever claim ANYTHING you give the >> new players is "competitive". And I mean competitive in terms of power. > >I think we just disagree on this point. I think that a well-designed >set can give players using just SW and FN cards competitive decks. >Especially if the precon's include some of the more fundamental cards >from DS as reprints. We can not disagree on this point unless you don't think it's an important point. If you think the difference between new and old-plus-new is not significant, then you can't think the extra new vampires that would be sacrificed to reprint old ones that important. The only way I perceive you could slip by both points to a coherent position is if you conjecture that the set of new vampires *so* much better (and/or larger) than the old set that the old set is of rather modest value by comparison. I don't think that's likely to be true. >> >The Giovanni didn't really get too many good clan specific cards. This >> >argument can be made for other clans, however. It may be necessary to >> >reprint cards like Corruption and Contract. I certainly wouldn't want >> >to open them in Final Nights packs, but just putting them in starters >> >might not be enough. Any thoughts on this? >> >> I disagree. Again, these are (supposedly) useful bread and butter >> building block cards and it's going to make too big a difference if >> you don't print cards like that in Final Nights. > >That was my point. Do you agree that many people won't want to have >them in the boosters? Do you think just having such cards in starters >will be enough? I meant that it's going to make too big a difference to newer players. It shouldn't make that much difference to us. >> But why the big kick? > >Huh? I don't know what this means. Why would you put up such a fuss about it? >> I'm assuming the number of these would be fairly modest and if you get >> a few extra commons you've seen before, big deal. It's worth it. > >The set is going to be small enough that this will be a problem. Not *that* small. I imagine we're only talking about a handful of cards, here. I'm thinking maybe 20% at most, on all rarity levels. >> Alternatively, I suppose you could turn to the same concept as many >> have suggesting for old vampires, which is to print them in precons >> only. > >Right. Reread my paragraph above. Do you think that just having these >cards in precons will be enough? I'm not sure. It depends on how many there are and of these, how many of a each a new player would need for a reasonable deck. I wouldn't want to hazard a guess, myself, but if he can cover the needs for a basic independent clan deck by buying no more than 2 of the appropriate precon, that might not be a bad solution. >I think it will _definitely_ be enough for the vampires. If they reprint every old vampire of the clan or at least every old one of consequence, I'd agree with that. It does seem to be the convenient compromise for everyone. Fred

James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > In article <8qr0go$cn8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, inr...@my-deja.com writes > >ummm... DS costs from 25-40 > > 40 dollars? On a game I've only just started and don't even know if I > like it or not? And I have to send money through eBay? I don't trust > those stinking Internet scum[0]. My money will go missing. > > [0] Used as an example of attitudes about eBay, not an accurate > representation of their business practises. > Granted... it's a lot, or wait, it's how much each of us shell out for Vamp 3rd Edition.... we need that to play this new game that we don't know about.... What I'm saying is that a) 40 isn't much for a game, especially for what SW will go for. DS is *half* as much per box. 2) Only people who look for DS will find it. Only people willing to spend time to find it... they're probably willing to spend some money. D) they will need to find out about the DS expansion... they wont do that if they're coming in off the street. Cameron, who can't count. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <39D29527...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >But a Lasombra 6 with DOM POT obt nec would be great for both the >Lasombra and the Giovanni. I would tend to put such cards in Final Nights, rather than Sabbat War *anyway*. Sabbat War should be playable for new players in and of itself and "hampering" a vampire with a discipline they don't even have cards for would be silly. Within the four clans in Final Nights, there is certainly scope for giving a few disciplines at a high level. A high level Setite with Dementation would be kind of cool, I think, as well as the DOM POT obt nec that you put forward for a Giovanni (or the version I suggested - however you want to do it). An Assamite with Vicissitude for combat fun. Drop something on a Ravnos, too. Were I White Wolf, the things I would give to older clans, to benefit them, would primarily be given to Sabbat clans, especially the under- represented ones. A few cross-over bits would fit here thematically for the set, give the new players another vampire for their clan (though not really for their clan, of course) and so on. A Country !Gangrel at 5 capacity with ani for chi pro (or something like that, similar to Vittorio Giovanni) would be useful to Gangrel, !Gangrel, Ravnos or a cross-over. That sort of thing would be cool. [ quoted text not captured ]

Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: : James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: :>I would be very shocked if there were no Lasombra in SW worthy of :>putting into a Giovanni crypt. A smallish vampire with Pot and Dom, for :>example. : Perhaps. Then maybe "worthless" is an overstatement but only a slight : one. If we're only talking about an off-clan vampire or two, this is not : what I'd call "having the 'bread and butter cards needed to make new : players competitive". By "bread and butter" I meant non-Giovanni-specific cards like Potence cards, Dominate cards, and disciplineless cards like Computer Hacking and masters like Blood Doll. All the Giovanni-specific cards will necessarily be reserved for Final Nights. But the main batch of Potence and Dominate cards will be printed in Sabbat War. I also think you're overestimating the advantage that a larger vampire selection gives the older players. :>I think we just disagree on this point. I think that a well-designed :>set can give players using just SW and FN cards competitive decks. :>Especially if the precon's include some of the more fundamental cards :>from DS as reprints. : We can not disagree on this point unless you don't think it's an important : point. If you think the difference between new and old-plus-new is not : significant, then you can't think the extra new vampires that would be : sacrificed to reprint old ones that important. The reason I think it is important to print as many new vampires as possible is to stimulate interest for old players. I think that if the right kind of new vampires are printed, the old players will have a wider selection, but not necessarily a better selection. : The only way I perceive : you could slip by both points to a coherent position is if you conjecture : that the set of new vampires *so* much better (and/or larger) than the old : set that the old set is of rather modest value by comparison. I don't : think that's likely to be true. I don't think that the new set has to be "so much better", per se. It needs to be balanced, and it needs to allow new players to use most/all of them to make a good deck. The new players should be in the position where they "could" use, say, Carlotta, but they have an alternative which is just as good (if not better) of a Giovanni. The old player may be able to play more and varied Giovanni decks, but the new player should be able to play a good Giovanni deck. :>That was my point. Do you agree that many people won't want to have :>them in the boosters? Do you think just having such cards in starters :>will be enough? : I meant that it's going to make too big a difference to newer players. : It shouldn't make that much difference to us. I think it will make a difference to us. Sabbat War will be mainly reprints, but many people didn't get "enough" Sabbat for various reasons. Thus SW appeals to old and new players alike. But I feel like I have "too much" of DS/AH cards already, and I'll be less likely to buy a lot of FN if it's mostly reprints. :>> But why the big kick? :> :>Huh? I don't know what this means. : Why would you put up such a fuss about it? Because I wouldn't want to buy the boosters, depending on their expected content. That's a huge issue. (And I don't think I'm alone.) :>> I'm assuming the number of these would be fairly modest and if you get :>> a few extra commons you've seen before, big deal. It's worth it. :> :>The set is going to be small enough that this will be a problem. : Not *that* small. I imagine we're only talking about a handful of cards, : here. I'm thinking maybe 20% at most, on all rarity levels. But because the set is relatively small, there are going to be a lot of repeats just out of one box. I don't know if 20% reprints (on library cards) is going to be that much of a deterrent. That's what I'm trying to determine. :>Do you think that just having these :>cards in precons will be enough? : I'm not sure. It depends on how many there are and of these, how many : of a each a new player would need for a reasonable deck. I wouldn't want to : hazard a guess, myself, but if he can cover the needs for a basic independent : clan deck by buying no more than 2 of the appropriate precon, that might : not be a bad solution. OK... I'm curious to get other people's opinions. Do you think expecting new players to buy, say, 2 of a clan's precon's in order to get enough of important cards like Contract and Corruption is too much? Will it be a deterrent? :>I think it will _definitely_ be enough for the vampires. : If they reprint every old vampire of the clan or at least every old one of : consequence, I'd agree with that. It does seem to be the convenient : compromise for everyone. I would prefer if the precon vampire reprints were limited to at most, say, three. The reason being that the precons should still be mostly new cards. We definitely need to give new players access to some of the vitally important old cards, but the precons should have room for new cards to make them more competitive. (I'm assuming that since the whole intent of FN is to make the independent clans better, a FN precon should be of higher quality than a pre-FN independent clan deck.) James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "And the tide rushes by where we stand / [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8qufa5$6r4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, inr...@my-deja.com writes >2) Only people who look for DS will find it. Yes, but this is the point. New players won't necessarily know about it. So: 1) You create an expansion which will let new players play the Giovanni without needing old cards. They buy cards they can use. If you don't put them, the old cards, in the boosters, everyone is happy. or 2) You put only new cards in the expansion, and have clans that are unplayable for new players. They either don't know about DS/AH or don't want to spend 40 dollars on something they don't even know if they'll like. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe wrote: > > In article <39D29527...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin > <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes > >But a Lasombra 6 with DOM POT obt nec would be great for both the > >Lasombra and the Giovanni. > > I would tend to put such cards in Final Nights, rather than Sabbat War > *anyway*. Sabbat War should be playable for new players in and of > itself and "hampering" a vampire with a discipline they don't even have > cards for would be silly. We agree. I think such a vampire should definitely be in Final Nights. My point is that there should be room for interesting crossover vampires in the set. > Within the four clans in Final Nights, there is certainly scope for > giving a few disciplines at a high level. A high level Setite with > Dementation would be kind of cool, I think, as well as the DOM POT obt > nec that you put forward for a Giovanni (or the version I suggested - > however you want to do it). An Assamite with Vicissitude for combat > fun. Drop something on a Ravnos, too. Absolutely. But what I don't want to see is an Assamite 4 with obf qui vic. Because the independent clans for the most part desperately need good vampires with their in-clan disciplines, reserve the crossover independents to be large ( >= 5 or 6 ) vampires which have all their in-clans already. > A Country !Gangrel at 5 capacity with ani for chi pro (or something like > that, similar to Vittorio Giovanni) would be useful to Gangrel, > !Gangrel, Ravnos or a cross-over. That sort of thing would be cool. Well, you might as well make the vampire not suck and give her 5 points of abilities. How about [ani for chi pro cel] or [ani for chi PRO]? I definitely think it would be cool, and it would be a shame to not take this opportunity to make such interesting vampires. I think it would add a lot to the game. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "Never was a cornflake girl Thought that was a good solution" -- Tori Amos

James Coupe wrote: > > New players won't necessarily know about it. So: > > 1) You create an expansion which will let new players play the Giovanni > without needing old cards. They buy cards they can use. If you don't > put them, the old cards, in the boosters, everyone is happy. This is optimal. > 2) You put only new cards in the expansion, and have clans that are > unplayable for new players. They either don't know about DS/AH or don't > want to spend 40 dollars on something they don't even know if they'll > like. The independent clans 100% MUST be playable with only SW and FN cards. If not, then recruitment of new players will be a resounding failure. We may all disagree on how to make this happen, but we must not disagree that it is necessary. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "I've got your mind I said / she said I've your voice / I said you don't need my voice girl you have your own" -- Tori Amos

In article <39D38D8C...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes >> A Country !Gangrel at 5 capacity with ani for chi pro (or something like >> that, similar to Vittorio Giovanni) would be useful to Gangrel, >> !Gangrel, Ravnos or a cross-over. That sort of thing would be cool. > >Well, you might as well make the vampire not suck and give her 5 points >of abilities. With something like that, I'd be tempted to go all minors with a special ability. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin <ham...@grad4a.math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > >: James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: > >:>I would be very shocked if there were no Lasombra in SW worthy of >:>putting into a Giovanni crypt. A smallish vampire with Pot and Dom, for >:>example. > >: Perhaps. Then maybe "worthless" is an overstatement but only a slight >: one. If we're only talking about an off-clan vampire or two, this is not >: what I'd call "having the 'bread and butter cards needed to make new >: players competitive". > >By "bread and butter" I meant non-Giovanni-specific cards like Potence >cards, Dominate cards, and disciplineless cards like Computer Hacking and >masters like Blood Doll. Yes, but it came in response to a comment I made about *vampires*. So if that's what you meant by it, it missed the point as a response. >:>I think we just disagree on this point. I think that a well-designed >:>set can give players using just SW and FN cards competitive decks. >:>Especially if the precon's include some of the more fundamental cards >:>from DS as reprints. > >: We can not disagree on this point unless you don't think it's an important >: point. If you think the difference between new and old-plus-new is not >: significant, then you can't think the extra new vampires that would be >: sacrificed to reprint old ones that important. > >The reason I think it is important to print as many new vampires as >possible is to stimulate interest for old players. I think that if the >right kind of new vampires are printed, the old players will have a wider >selection, but not necessarily a better selection. Then I wouldn't think it would be a very important thing. The only reason it's so important (and actually, I feel it is pretty crucial to have some new vampires) is due to the nature of vampires. The fact that they're all unique and contest themselves when duplicated (whether in your own or in another player's deck) and that much of the library card play only occurs through them using their particular abilities just makes them really important, pivatol game elements. Even the larger clans yield a rather noticable advantage with each new vampire made available, let alone the small ones. I personally notice a distinct advantage to having both both Raven and Camille, for instance. >: The only way I perceive >: you could slip by both points to a coherent position is if you conjecture >: that the set of new vampires *so* much better (and/or larger) than the old >: set that the old set is of rather modest value by comparison. I don't >: think that's likely to be true. > >I don't think that the new set has to be "so much better", per se. It >needs to be balanced, and it needs to allow new players to use most/all of >them to make a good deck. The new players should be in the position where >they "could" use, say, Carlotta, but they have an alternative which is >just as good (if not better) of a Giovanni. If they do, why wouldn't it be yet even significantly better to use both that just-as-good-if-not-better alternative *AND* Carlotta instead of just the alternative. In fact, I strongly believe it would be. Trying to suggest that something like this is just a question of the older players having access to "more variation in deckbuilding" is disingenuous. It's positively better. >:>Do you think that just having these >:>cards in precons will be enough? > >: I'm not sure. It depends on how many there are and of these, how many >: of a each a new player would need for a reasonable deck. I wouldn't want to >: hazard a guess, myself, but if he can cover the needs for a basic independent >: clan deck by buying no more than 2 of the appropriate precon, that might >: not be a bad solution. > >OK... I'm curious to get other people's opinions. Do you think expecting >new players to buy, say, 2 of a clan's precon's in order to get enough of >important cards like Contract and Corruption is too much? Will it be a >deterrent? > >:>I think it will _definitely_ be enough for the vampires. > >: If they reprint every old vampire of the clan or at least every old one of >: consequence, I'd agree with that. It does seem to be the convenient >: compromise for everyone. > >I would prefer if the precon vampire reprints were limited to at most, >say, three. The reason being that the precons should still be mostly new >cards. We definitely need to give new players access to some of the >vitally important old cards, but the precons should have room for new >cards to make them more competitive. (I'm assuming that since the whole >intent of FN is to make the independent clans better, a FN precon should >be of higher quality than a pre-FN independent clan deck.) Why would you limit it to three?!? If buying precons is something for the new players and we're going to eliminate any reprinting from the boosters using precons as a pretext for doing this, then damn it, let's fill the precons with old stuff. Only to the extent that the old stuff was truly bad stuff is there any reason not to reprint it. I don't think you get it: if they assume the market is existing players and if they print stuff with the philosophy that pleasing old players is paramont, this product is going exactly *nowhere*! You may not like it, James, but you and I *aren't* that big a priority here. If the likes of us were enough to keep a CCG alive, WotC would never have dropped it in the first place. This thing has got to pander to new players or the whole thing's gonna be a failure. Just MHO, of course, but I think White Wolf would do well to consider it. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin <ham...@grad4a.math.wisc.edu> writes: > > >By "bread and butter" I meant non-Giovanni-specific cards like Potence > >cards, Dominate cards, and disciplineless cards like Computer Hacking and > >masters like Blood Doll. > > Yes, but it came in response to a comment I made about *vampires*. So > if that's what you meant by it, it missed the point as a response. I guess that was just a miscommunication then. > >I don't think that the new set has to be "so much better", per se. It > >needs to be balanced, and it needs to allow new players to use most/all of > >them to make a good deck. The new players should be in the position where > >they "could" use, say, Carlotta, but they have an alternative which is > >just as good (if not better) of a Giovanni. > > If they do, why wouldn't it be yet even significantly better to use both > that just-as-good-if-not-better alternative *AND* Carlotta instead of just > the alternative. In fact, I strongly believe it would be. Only if putting two Carlotta-type vampires in your crypt is appropriate for whatever deck we're talking about. > Trying to suggest > that something like this is just a question of the older players having > access to "more variation in deckbuilding" is disingenuous. It's positively > better. I still don't think it's as hopeless as you make it seem. You're saying that it would be impossible for a new player (with only SW/FN) to compete with an older player with cards from all the expansions. I think that the set can be designed in such a way (with strategic reprints in the precons) so that this is not the case. > >I would prefer if the precon vampire reprints were limited to at most, > >say, three. The reason being that the precons should still be mostly new > >cards. We definitely need to give new players access to some of the > >vitally important old cards, but the precons should have room for new > >cards to make them more competitive. (I'm assuming that since the whole > >intent of FN is to make the independent clans better, a FN precon should > >be of higher quality than a pre-FN independent clan deck.) > > Why would you limit it to three?!? If buying precons is something for > the new players and we're going to eliminate any reprinting from the boosters > using precons as a pretext for doing this, then damn it, let's fill the > precons with old stuff. Why? There's a lot of stuff that just doesn't need to be reprinted. I'm not talking about just the bad cards. But even if you like, say, Heartblood of the Clan, it's not vital to an Assamite deck. It's a good card, but I don't see any reason to reprint it. Similarly, putting a few old vampires in the precons (to bump up the total vampires available to new players) is important. But why have the precons be all old? What's the point? > Only to the extent that the old stuff was truly > bad stuff is there any reason not to reprint it. I don't think you get it: > if they assume the market is existing players and if they print stuff with > the philosophy that pleasing old players is paramont, this product is going > exactly *nowhere*! You may not like it, James, but you and I *aren't* > that big a priority here. I think that if White Wolf wants this to be a success, they have to generate interest for both old players and new players. They would be extremely foolish to ignore the existing player base in an attempt to woo an entirely new group of players. We don't have to be the #1 priority, but we should still be high on the list. > If the likes of us were enough to keep a CCG > alive, WotC would never have dropped it in the first place. Wizards dropped the game for a number of reasons. First, the game didn't make as much money as Magic. Also, things like card-back changes, Sabbat screw-ups, etc. turned a lot of people off of the game. > This thing > has got to pander to new players or the whole thing's gonna be a failure. > Just MHO, of course, but I think White Wolf would do well to consider it. That doesn't mean Final Nights needs to be a veritable reprint of Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts just so (in your opinion) they won't be disadvantaged against players who have those cards. The new players won't care if all the cards they get are reprints; they're all new to the new players. But _we_ know that the independent clans need new cards. Reprint the absolutely necessary cards (like Contract) and a few important vampires, but make the majority of the set new cards. It's things like the existence of preconstructed decks and marketing strategies that are going to make the game appeal to new players. It's the game-specific content of the expansion that will make us old players want to buy it. If White Wolf does both, they win on both counts. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "She does raindances and she knows the score / [ quoted text not captured ]

James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> James Hamblin <ham...@grad4a.math.wisc.edu> writes: >> >I would prefer if the precon vampire reprints were limited to at most, >> >say, three. The reason being that the precons should still be mostly new >> >cards. We definitely need to give new players access to some of the >> >vitally important old cards, but the precons should have room for new >> >cards to make them more competitive. (I'm assuming that since the whole >> >intent of FN is to make the independent clans better, a FN precon should >> >be of higher quality than a pre-FN independent clan deck.) >> >> Why would you limit it to three?!? If buying precons is something for >> the new players and we're going to eliminate any reprinting from the >> boosters using precons as a pretext for doing this, then damn it, let's >> fill the precons with old stuff. > >Why? There's a lot of stuff that just doesn't need to be reprinted. >I'm not talking about just the bad cards. But even if you like, say, >Heartblood of the Clan, it's not vital to an Assamite deck. It's a good >card, but I don't see any reason to reprint it. Similarly, putting a >few old vampires in the precons (to bump up the total vampires available >to new players) is important. But why have the precons be all old? >What's the point? The point is that the difference in variety is power, which as you said, we just disagree about. As I've said in the past, you can possibly convince me some of the non-building-block library cards might be OK to leave out, even if they're not dreck either. I'm not certain it's all that crucial that newer players need Heartblood of the Clan, either. But the additional variety in vampires is a different thing. Anything that's vaguely usuable should be included. >> I don't think you get it: if they assume the market is existing players >> and if they print stuff with the philosophy that pleasing old players >> is paramont, this product is going exactly *nowhere*! You may not >> like it, James, but you and I *aren't* that big a priority here. > >I think that if White Wolf wants this to be a success, they have to >generate interest for both old players and new players. They would be >extremely foolish to ignore the existing player base in an attempt to >woo an entirely new group of players. We don't have to be the #1 >priority, but we should still be high on the list. Sure. But let's face it. You and I are already interested. We'll buy the boosters no matter what they print in the precons. I think it makes a lot of sense to just sacrifice the precons to newer players in the interest of attracting their business. It's not like they're going to sell a huge number of precons to older players anyway. And it might make a huge difference in recruiting new players or holding on to those they recruited with Sabbat Wars - both for buying Final Nights booster and future product. >> This thing has got to pander to new players or the whole thing's gonna >> be a failure. Just MHO, of course, but I think White Wolf would do well >> to consider it. > >That doesn't mean Final Nights needs to be a veritable reprint of Dark >Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts just so (in your opinion) they won't be >disadvantaged against players who have those cards. No one's asking it to be. Just the precons. Personally, I can't see the harm if a bit of the stuff in the boosters is, too. But I'm not talking about it being a "veritable reprint of DR and AH". If you think so, then we misunderstand each other. I think the older vampires need to be there (for the most part) and some of absolute best tournament cards and what I've been calling the "building block cards". This needn't be a large part of the old sets. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > > James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: > > >Frederick Scott wrote: > >> > >> [...] let's > >> fill the precons with old stuff. > > > >Why? There's a lot of stuff that just doesn't need to be reprinted. > >I'm not talking about just the bad cards. But even if you like, say, > >Heartblood of the Clan, it's not vital to an Assamite deck. > > The point is that the difference in variety is power, which as you said, > we just disagree about. As I've said in the past, you can possibly > convince me some of the non-building-block library cards might be OK to > leave out, even if they're not dreck either. I'm not certain it's all > that crucial that newer players need Heartblood of the Clan, either. My point being that there are a lot of cards you can say this about. Fringe strategy cards, cards that aren't vitally necessary to the _standard_ clan strategy. > But the additional variety in vampires is a different thing. Anything > that's vaguely usuable should be included. That number is going to be different for each clan. I would say that there are at most 3-4 Giovanni that are worth reprinting. But most of the existing Ravnos (except for, say, Tsigane and Lazar) are actually quite good. I think it's important that each clan get the same number of new vampires. > >I think that if White Wolf wants this to be a success, they have to > >generate interest for both old players and new players. They would be > >extremely foolish to ignore the existing player base in an attempt to > >woo an entirely new group of players. We don't have to be the #1 > >priority, but we should still be high on the list. > > Sure. But let's face it. You and I are already interested. We'll buy > the boosters no matter what they print in the precons. You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of the expansions came out. A lot of people don't currently play, but might pick up some cards again _if_ those cards appeal to older players. And if the expansions totally ignore the older players, we risk pissing off the existing player base. And that would be a huge mistake. > I think it makes > a lot of sense to just sacrifice the precons to newer players in the > interest of attracting their business. It's not like they're going to > sell a huge number of precons to older players anyway. The preconstructed decks will be popular with old players for at least one specific reason. It's a sure-fire way to get specific cards, instead of getting random booster cards. And if there are good cards that everyone will want in the precon's, you make them desirable to both old and new players. The point is that White Wolf wants to make as much money as possible on this thing. And if they ignore either the existing or prospective consumer base, they will be making a grave error. And the game will suffer because of it. > >That doesn't mean Final Nights needs to be a veritable reprint of Dark > >Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts just so (in your opinion) they won't be > >disadvantaged against players who have those cards. > > No one's asking it to be. Just the precons. Then old players will definitely not buy the precon's. And there's a whole lot of potential profit straight down the drain. > Personally, I can't see the > harm if a bit of the stuff in the boosters is, too. Then the older players will buy fewer boosters because they don't want to get more old cards. They'll be more likely to just trade with new players to get the new cards they want, instead of buying more boosters. That might seem good for the new players, but (a) old players will trade with them anyway, and (b) there's more profit WW didn't get. [ quoted text not captured ]

>Frederick Scott wrote: >> >> James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> writes: >> >> >I think that if White Wolf wants this to be a success, they have to >> >generate interest for both old players and new players. They would be >> >extremely foolish to ignore the existing player base in an attempt to >> >woo an entirely new group of players. We don't have to be the #1 >> >priority, but we should still be high on the list. >> >> Sure. But let's face it. You and I are already interested. We'll buy >> the boosters no matter what they print in the precons. > >You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of the >expansions came out. A lot of people don't currently play, but might >pick up some cards again _if_ those cards appeal to older players. And >if the expansions totally ignore the older players, we risk pissing off >the existing player base. And that would be a huge mistake. I guess the bottom line is that I do not believe just about everything you wrote in the above paragraph. Not to say there might not be some players who've left the game in disgust and are waiting for a sign that it's in good hands again. But I don't see a thing in what I'm proposing that would put them off. Old cards in precons? They just don't buy the precons, just like older players who are in the game. I don't see the difference unless they've already gotten rid of their collections, in which case the precons with well-chosen older stuff would be godsend. I don't get what needle you're trying to thread, here, frankly. >> I think it makes >> a lot of sense to just sacrifice the precons to newer players in the >> interest of attracting their business. It's not like they're going to >> sell a huge number of precons to older players anyway. > >The preconstructed decks will be popular with old players for at least >one specific reason. It's a sure-fire way to get specific cards, >instead of getting random booster cards. Oh, for crying out loud. This is just trying to have *everything* for the older players and nothing much at all for the newer players. Take this attitude and it's just not going to work. Nothing much more to say. I think you're overestimating what older players need and how much they'll support a new expansion with their own money and how much they care about getting a few older cards in the mix. And underestimate what newer players need to be reasonably competive with existing players and how important their recruitment is to supporting the game. Older players can't have absolutely everything including a "sure-fire way to get specific cards" and whip cream and a cherry on top if this is going to work. And we don't need it, either. Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > > >You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of the > >expansions came out. A lot of people don't currently play, but might > >pick up some cards again _if_ those cards appeal to older players. And > >if the expansions totally ignore the older players, we risk pissing off > >the existing player base. And that would be a huge mistake. > > I guess the bottom line is that I do not believe just about everything you > wrote in the above paragraph. Have Adrian Sullivan tell you what happened to the Madison Jyhad group. A few people in Madison are just now starting to play again because (1) we started a sealed league and (2) when the new cards come out, we want to give the game a chance again. If the new expansion(s) come out and they're crappy, we'll just stop playing again. > But I don't see a thing in what I'm proposing that would > put them off. Let's say I'm someone who used to play and quit (for whatever reason). If I see a new expansion, I might get excited, but if I find out it's got a high proportion of old cards (that I already lots of dust-covered copies of), what's the incentive to buy these cards? > Old cards in precons? They just don't buy the precons, just > like older players who are in the game. Preconstructed decks can be good for both new and old players. Look at the recent Shadowfist release. The preconstructed decks were (1) competitive, (2) had previously hard-to-find cards, and (3) had precon-deck-exclusive cards. The company putting this game out realize that they need to attract both old and new players to the precons in order to make money. While (1) makes the decks appeal to new players, (2) and (3) make the decks appeal to old players. It was a very good marketing move on Z-Man Games' part. And this all boils down to profits and marketing. > >The preconstructed decks will be popular with old players for at least > >one specific reason. It's a sure-fire way to get specific cards, > >instead of getting random booster cards. > > Oh, for crying out loud. This is just trying to have *everything* for > the older players and nothing much at all for the newer players. Take > this attitude and it's just not going to work. Nothing much more to say. Clearly there is more to say, since I have no idea what you're saying here. > And underestimate what newer players > need to be reasonably competive with existing players and how important > their recruitment is to supporting the game. Why is it so hard to make a preconstructed deck that is competitive? Doesn't that immediately solve the "new players can't compete" problem? > Older players can't have > absolutely everything including a "sure-fire way to get specific cards" > and whip cream and a cherry on top if this is going to work. And we don't > need it, either. Maybe you misunderstand what I mean by "sure-fire way to get specific cards." The preconstructed decks (by virtue of being pre-constructed) have a specific list of cards in them. If some of those cards happen to be desirable to older players (for example, they can only be found in precon's, they are previously hard-to-find cards, they are good new cards, etc.), then older players may opt to go for the "sure thing" -- buying the precon since they know exactly what they're going to get -- instead of (or in addition to) buying boosters. This isn't really an issue for new players, who will mostly just want a deck they can play with. Both can be satisfied. But making the precon's 100% old cards makes them completely worthless for older players (who have already got enough DS/AH cards). Again, I say that White Wolf would be crazy to make this mistake. James -- James Hamblin ham...@math.wisc.edu "I'm so cool... too bad I'm a loser." -- Barenaked Ladies

> >> >> >You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of the >> But I don't see a thing in what I'm proposing that would >> put them off. > >Let's say I'm someone who used to play and quit (for whatever reason). >If I see a new expansion, I might get excited, but if I find out it's >got a high proportion of old cards (that I already lots of dust-covered >copies of), what's the incentive to buy these cards? If they're all in the precons, nothing. So they buy only boosters, simple as that. >Why is it so hard to make a preconstructed deck that is competitive? >Doesn't that immediately solve the "new players can't compete" problem? No, it doesn't. Not if it leaves older players significant numbers of 1) excellent tournament cards; 2) basic clan cards that tend to be useful in every deck of that clan; 3) useful vampires that newer players can't find short of going back and buying old boxes. This is not variety. This is power. The new stuff you put in the expansion will aid both newer and older players, which is something that's only good to a point. I guess our point of contention is that I believe you absolutely *NEED* a fair amount of stuff that's good *only* for newer players and not at all for older players or the power balance will discourage recruitment. (And if the very existance of such stuff in precons only discourages some overly canterous older players, so be it. They're not being the least bit reasonable anyway.) Since you can't seem to see the importance of that, I guess we're not going to see eye to eye on this. >Maybe you misunderstand what I mean by "sure-fire way to get specific >cards." No, I don't think I do. I understand what precons can be useful for besides serving as the repository for reprinted cards. I just think they can also serve the purpose of isolating most of the reprinting as well, but I do concede that this will make them far less useful to older players. So be it. Cards must be reprinted and if this allows for it while keeping the boosters very attractive to older players, then I think this is the way to go. Fred

In article <39D38F1F...@math.wisc.edu>, James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote: > James Coupe wrote: > > > > New players won't necessarily know about it. So: > > > > 1) You create an expansion which will let new players play the Giovanni > > without needing old cards. They buy cards they can use. If you don't > > put them, the old cards, in the boosters, everyone is happy. > > This is optimal. > > > 2) You put only new cards in the expansion, and have clans that are > > unplayable for new players. They either don't know about DS/AH or don't > > want to spend 40 dollars on something they don't even know if they'll > > like. > > The independent clans 100% MUST be playable with only SW and FN cards. > If not, then recruitment of new players will be a resounding failure. > We may all disagree on how to make this happen, but we must not disagree > that it is necessary. > > James > -- Thanks James, the crux of my point was that a new player shouldn't need the DS/AH box to play the indy clans. However, if they get enough into the game to want an all giovanni crypt, or the older giovanni or whatever, then they will more than likely be willing to go and find DS/AH. I was. Certainly no new player should need the old expansions to play, but if they want to play in a certian way they are, at that point 'into' the game, and will, more than likely be willing to shell out cash or time into finding that copy of Patriza Giovanni. [still thinking of a deck for her.] Cameron [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 thecor...@yahoo.com wrote: > While someone may enjoy having all of their unique cards only exist > ONCE in their deck, that doesn't mean that design should cater to it. > > If a "role-playing" element of uniqueness is somehow stiffled by > someone crying "Hey! We already killed Duck! How do you have him > out!", one can always reply, "Ah, Rumors of his death were greatly > exaggerated. The plans within plans of the Methuselahs can be a > confusing thing to behold." Absolutely. In fact, dead vampires who turn out later not to be dead are a staple of vampire fiction. How many times has Dracula been killed, anyway? And was not Lestaat killed at least twice? With all sorts of wierd vampiric powers running around, mistaken identity can be a big problem. > For the person unswayed by that, they can A) Trade for Giovanni from > previous expansions, B) use off-clan vampires. My god, a clever > roleplayer should be able to explain why Cameron, the Lasombra > (dom/pot) is working with the Giovanni! That one is pretty easy. Obviously, Cameron does not know he is working with the Giovanni, any more than the Giovanni know they are working with Cameron. Each think they are pursuing their own ends, ignorant of the manipulation of the unseen Methuselah that controls each. Competing Methuselahs also understand the true nature of the situation, but no-one else does. -- John Whelan

>>James Hamblin wrote: >>>You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of >>>the expansions came out. [snip] >>>if the expansions totally ignore the older players, we risk pissing >>>off the existing player base. And that would be a huge mistake. > Frederick Scott wrote: >> I guess the bottom line is that I do not believe just about >> everything you wrote in the above paragraph. > Have Adrian Sullivan tell you what happened to the Madison Jyhad > group. A few people in Madison are just now starting to play again > because (1) we started a sealed league and (2) when the new cards > come out, we want to give the game a chance again. If the new > expansion(s) come out and they're crappy, we'll just stop playing > again. For posterity, I'll tell the tale. Be brave of heart, dear readers, for this tale is full of woe... ;) You can go to Judith and Mark's Jyhad page and see the "Madison Jyhad League Rules", a set of rules that was used by the 34 member Jyhad league of Madison, Wisconsin. At the time (1996ish), the MJL was the largest Jyhad organization that I'm aware of, and I'm not sure that there has ever been as large a group in a city. Generally speaking, we would have League nights every Wednesday, and additional play every other weekend, as well as pick-up games at random times during the week. Typically, about 10 times a month would be some form of League play. At the Wednesday night group, typically 3 tables of 5-6 would be playing at once. Dark Sovereigns generally was annoying for most people. The release of Dark Sovereigns was, though disheartening, not crippling in terms of play. People continued to be enthusiastic about the game despite the slight underpowered nature of the card set. The biggest issue of the DS release was that of the card backs, which increased frustration of some of the more die-hard players. Ancient Hearts was another story. Cards like Return to Innocence were simply frustrating, and the group had its first faltering. With yet another set of differentiable card backs (for 3 different backs), and an erratic card base, the group started losing a few of the less die- hard members who weren't interested in playing against honed decks that used Return to Innocence. The re-release of VTES wasn't as bad. Containing new cards that caused most of the group to sneer, poor card stock (similar to the poor stock from Dark Sovereigns) and a few silliness like Raven, the morale of the group dropped slightly. WIth YET ANOTHER card back, we now had 4 to choose from. These slides in morale were quite gradual, and were contributed to by a number of factors. There was a lot of frustration with Wizards of the Coast's handling of the game, there was a lot of frustration built up over time by the inability of the subsequent designers to do even close to as good a job on the expansions as was done on the original, and a small number of other factors. The Madison Jyhad League may have been somewhat unique in the sense that its members were generally very interested in the game because of the quality and balance it provided, and every time that this was hurt, it was taken as an affront. To put it simply, there was a gradual build-up of frustration from all of the players, except those who were primarily interested in the role- playing aspects of the game. The release of the Sabbat was looked forward to as a chance to get the ball rolling again. Instead, it crushed the League. Nearly all of the players were tired of dealing with the mistakes of WotC, and the "ruining" of the elegant quality of the game. While a few continued playing, most players shifted to other games. The comments of Paul Peterson regarding the design of vampires ("we thought the old vampires sucked") showed such a callous disregard for the game, that most of the group was disgusted. At this point, even smallish issues (like a general dislike of the art) became blown out of proportion. The 34 member league disintegrated. Before the disbanding of the league, there were certainly a couple of other groups, but even 2 of these died off. Today, I know of 3-4 groups: our new small league (5 people), another players playgroup (ircirc 5ish people), and the LARP group that plays about once every other month (about 6ish people). Generally speaking, game quality DOES impact the number of people that play a game. -- offNet: Adrian Sullivan @#$ Web Consultant - Game Theorist $#@ EFNet: Corrupter @#$ Writer - Eccentric - Hedonist $#@ USENET: The Corrupter @#$ Geek - Coffee Addict - HSTHSTS $#@ e-mail: thecor...@yahoo.com TaLeNa FOREVER! ;) [ quoted text not captured ]

thecor...@yahoo.com wrote: > >>James Hamblin wrote: > >>>You're wrong. Lots of people left the game in disgust after some of > the expansions came out. > [snip] > >>>if the expansions totally ignore the older players, we risk pissing > off the existing player base. >>>> And that would be a huge mistake. > > Have Adrian Sullivan tell you what happened to the Madison Jyhad > > group. A few people in Madison are just now starting to play again > > because (1) we started a sealed league and (2) when the new cards > > come out, we want to give the game a chance again. If the new > > expansion(s) come out and they're crappy, we'll just stop playing > > again. > > For posterity, I'll tell the tale. Be brave of heart, dear readers, > for this tale is full of woe... ;) > .... > Generally speaking, game quality DOES impact the number of people that > play a game. I'll certainly grant that it does. However, none of this has a lot to do with the kind of stuff that James and I are arguing about. (Actually, that's directed at James, not Adrian, who never claimed it did.) It sounds to me like you're talking about a bunch of the stuff that's ticked everyone off over the years: the cardback changes, the inability of WotC designers to do a good job playtesting and balancing a CCG (which has shown up in Magic over the years to an equal degree but seems to be a lot more critical in V:tES), their refusal to admit when they'd made a mistake and thus do anything to fix it, and their tendency to print too many "good rares" (which seemed to affect Sabbat a lot more than the other expansions) to strongarm players into buying more product than the market would normally bear. But this is the year 2000 and, to put it bluntly, that was then and this is now. And, yea, if White Wolf does a bunch of the same stuff, it'll kill the game the all over again. But what James and I are talking about is a reprinting issue that's basically balancing the interests of new players vs. old. And it's not like a standard situation where a CCG like Magic has been printed continuously for years. We're now in a state where we have a small and moribund group of hardcore oldtimers hanging on with their 3-year old collections of cards despearately needing new blood for the game to go on. Though the idea of picking reprinted cards out of new product is distasteful for folks like us, it's still far more palatable than having WW give up the ghost for lack of sales and the rest of us just wind up sitting back, waiting for time to do it's thing and kill the game. And the counterargument raised by James - the conjecture that there's this sizable faction of people out there who left the game in disgust but still have collections and are just chomping at the bit to get back in as long as they aren't "insulted" by reprints - just isn't very believable. I have no doubt that quite a few people in Madison and elsewhere became disenchanted and left. I just don't think there are many of them still hovering around waiting to throw cash at new product. If the market proves viable, it's going to be new players, not old, who are going ultimately going to make the difference. As for people who are still playing, I can say it sure will piss me off a lot more if I can't get anyone new to play because they perceive they need to go find 3-year old cards to have a shot. And I think the kind of limits James is endorsing leads to that place. Fred

All I can say, is I am so glad we share the same play group Mark :-) I have taken advantage of your generous at cost per pack sales before! Ken Mark & Kathy ShaneWood <shan...@tcinternet.net> wrote in message news:39cbc723$0$28240$7f89...@newsreader.visi.com... > > James Coupe <ve...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message > news:kMUa7wAq...@obeah.demon.co.uk... > > In article <8qbneg$5o5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, madma...@my-deja.com writes > > >By your criteria, *any* Jyhad/V:tes expansion is unavailable to the new > > >players if a newbie can't walk into their local shop and buy a booster > > >off the shelf. > > > > And? > > > > New players need to be catered for. If White Wolf sell new players > > something they can't use, because they don't have $80 to go and buy a > > *box* on eBay, when they actually want a few boosters, it's more than > > likely to piss them off. > > > I can confirm that one. In the last couple months, I've spent nearly $600 > on product, mostly to re-sell [at cost] to local players who CAN'T FIND > Jyhad anywhere except one local store who have VTES (no DS, no AH, no SAB, > no Jyhad) )at full original retail. I can do that, coz' I'm one of those > obnoxious IT guys who makes more money than I need and I have good credit. > I think making CARDS available to people who've been out of the game for a > while is essential to getting them back, and definitely to bringing newbies > in. I can tell y'all that when I came back to VTES (I'd missed Sabbat, AH, > and DS) I felt very intimidated by all the cool cards other people had that > I couldn't easily get my hands on. I think me having cards available to > buy, and pointing people in the direction to other sources for cards, and > GIVING AWAY cards is probably the single biggest recruiting advantage I've > had in getting people playing! > > Once Sabbat War hits the shelves, some of this phenomenon will be mitigated. > But for the Clans not represented in that set, are new players forever to be > at a disadvantage unless they hunt down out-of-print sets? Let's try not to > do that. > > Pre-constructed decks are probably the cheap and easy way to handle slowly > reissuing older cards. > > Mark Shanewood > Prince of Minneapolis > >