rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Golden Rule of Card Ownership

8 messages from 8 participants · 17 March 1998 – 20 March 1998
original thread on Google Groups

SirTemple

I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally hoses the already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get going, and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal my prey's vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? Just my opinion, Jason

Jasper Phillips

In article <19980317040...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] I agree from a game balance perspective, but can see why this rule was made -- people often don't want to wait for what can be along game to end if they get ousted early, but would like to leave. Personally, I always play that they stay, using proxies if neccesary. -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

John Whelan

You wrote: >SirTemple <sirt...@aol.com> wrote: >>I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally hoses the >>already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get going, >>and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal my prey's >>vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? >I agree from a game balance perspective, but can see why this rule was >made -- people often don't want to wait for what can be along game to >end if they get ousted early, but would like to leave. > >Personally, I always play that they stay, using proxies if neccesary. Well, naturally WOTC does not want to encourage the use of proxies. But I think some official allowance for keeping stolen cards could be made by slight alterations of the rules, without contradicting the Golden Rule of Card Ownership. First: Instead of ruling that a Methuselah's cards are burned automatically once he is ousted, rule instead that those cards he does not control remain in play. However, he may choose to burn all cards at once at any point. Thus the golden rule of card ownership is in no way violated. Second: An ousted Methuselah, though ousted, is still considered to be "in the game" to a certain extent as long as his cards remain in play. He may receive some fraction of a victory point if his cards are still in play when the game ends. In casual play, persons would be bound by the standards of good sportsmanship to leave cards in play unless they *really* have to go somewhere. In Tournament play, even a fraction of a victory point might make a difference as far as entering the finals, and so might be adequate incentive. -- Lupus Australis ____ ____ \ \----/ / |()__()| __\ __ /__ / __\()/__ \ |/ \==/ \| | || |

Michael Beer

Jasper Phillips wrote: > In article <19980317040...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, > SirTemple <sirt...@aol.com> wrote: > >I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally > hoses the > >already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get > going, > >and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal > my prey's > >vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? > > > >Just my opinion, > >Jason > > I agree from a game balance perspective, but can see why this rule was > > made -- people often don't want to wait for what can be along game to > end if they get ousted early, but would like to leave. > > Personally, I always play that they stay, using proxies if neccesary. > Have you ever thought about a Cryptic Rider'ed Kindred Restructure or Dramatic Upheaval after a Consangineous Boon on your prey and (after seating place switching) now predator? You get a weak predator as a wall between the real powerful forces behind you, you keep his corrupted minions and you will catch your new prey by surprise... Michael Beer

rai...@mich.com

In article <19980317040...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, sirt...@aol.com (SirTemple) wrote: > > I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally hoses the > already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get going, > and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal my prey's > vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? > > Just my opinion, > Jason > The Sabbat rules overturn the Golden rule of card ownership. The cards remain in play until the game is over. However most people do not use this rule and keep the original Golden rule. Raille -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

James Coupe

In article <6eod5r$8jj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, rai...@mich.com writes >In article <19980317040...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, > sirt...@aol.com (SirTemple) wrote: >> >> I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally hoses the >> already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get going, >> and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal my >prey's >> vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? >> >> Just my opinion, >> Jason >> >The Sabbat rules overturn the Golden rule of card ownership. The cards remain >in play until the game is over. However most people do not use this rule and >keep the original Golden rule. >Raille > WRONG! :) The Sabbat rules only overturn what happens if you *withdraw* - not if you are ousted. -- James Coupe (change "nospam" to "obeah" to reply by e-mail) You were my strength when I was weak. You were my voice when I couldn't speak. You were my eyes when I couldn't see. You saw the best there was in me. Lifted me up when I couldn't reach. You gave me faith because you believed. I'm everything I am because you loved me.

LSJ

rai...@mich.com wrote: > The Sabbat rules overturn the Golden rule of card ownership. The cards remain > in play until the game is over. However most people do not use this rule and > keep the original Golden rule. The Sabbat (optional) rules do not address ousting, merely withdrawing from a lack of cards. -- L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) Official VtES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. (*) - Subject to review by Rules Team

Christopher Chew

I understand you opinion completely (and agree with the Setite analysis) for my group it has always been something that has just stuck as a hard and fast rule. You just plan for that contigency (maybe you string your prey out, who knows). I havent really noticed any major problems, except I forget to either get or give cards back. Jasper Phillips wrote: > In article <19980317040...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, > SirTemple <sirt...@aol.com> wrote: > >I feal that the golden rule of card ownership sucks! It totally hoses the > >already weak Settites. It takes forever for a corruption deck to get going, > >and when it does, it can't keep the fruits of it's labor. Why steal my prey's > >vamps, when I have to give them back after I oust him? > > > >Just my opinion, > >Jason > > I agree from a game balance perspective, but can see why this rule was > made -- people often don't want to wait for what can be along game to > end if they get ousted early, but would like to leave. > > Personally, I always play that they stay, using proxies if neccesary. > [ quoted text not captured ]