Passing along quote from WOTC

Since we have no WOTC presence here (judging soley on the fact that any presence that WOTC may claim to have here has either bee absent for the last 12 days, or has been lurking for the same period of time while ignoring our pleas for answers/rulings/card texts), I thought I'd pass along this message from vtes-l: ----- From: Paul Peterson/#18 <ware...@WIZARDS.COM> To: Multiple recipients of list VTES-L <VTE...@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM> Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 12:50:37 -0800 Message-ID: <v01520d00aea6ce94b5dd@[199.238.211.27]> [Re: the new vampires aren't following the same formula that the Cam. vampires did] I think I see the big problem here. OK. Basically, you are all correct. The big Sabbat vampires (and the big Cam/non-cam vampires from DS/AH) are better than most of the big vampires in the basic set. This is on purpose. Basically, the big vampires in the basic set suck. They are practically useless. Not entirely, but basically this is true. They cost way too much for the benefits that you get from them, and paid too much for out of clan disciplines. So now we have created better vampires. The choice was to keep making lame big vampires or attempt to make vampires that were actually worth what you pay for them. We chose to make good vamps. In the future, there's a good chance that the standard vamps in the basic set will get an overhaul to bring them in line with the new vamps. I know that all of this upsets people, but people would also be upset if all of the big vampires we ever printed sucked. >There doesn't seem to be any sense whatsoever to the cost and pricing >of Sabbat vampires. Yes there is. See my comments at the top, but basically the scale is just different for the new vamps. All vamps now pay less for out of clan disciplines, and Big vamps get a discount on their abilities because they take soo long to get out and represent a large portion of your bit pool. ----- Just so you know what WOTC's position is on their escalation. (Thoughtful of them, eh?) -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Only XT users know that http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Jan 1, 1980 was a Tuesday. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

[ snip WOTC comments on Vampire costing issues ] > Yes there is. See my comments at the top, but basically the scale is just > different for the new vamps. All vamps now pay less for out of clan > disciplines, and Big vamps get a discount on their abilities because they > take soo long to get out and represent a large portion of your bit pool. Bit pool? I think the commenter has been playing a little too much Netrunner... - Drake

On 8 Nov 1996, L. Scott Johnson wrote: > Since we have no WOTC presence here (judging soley on the fact that > any presence that WOTC may claim to have here has either bee absent > for the last 12 days, or has been lurking for the same period of time > while ignoring our pleas for answers/rulings/card texts), > How long will they keep doing this? *sigh* > I thought I'd pass along this message from vtes-l: > That's funny... I don't remember getting that. [next is a brilliant quote from Mr. Paul Peterson, one of the Sabbat designers:] > [Re: the new vampires aren't following the same formula that the Cam. > vampires did] > > Basically, the big vampires in the basic set suck. I'm speechless. Please, tell me this isn't true. It can't be. It's total lack of respect towards the game and it's players. It's saying "throw away the old game and begin to play this one, for the old game sucked". Great attitude. > I know that all > of this upsets people, but people would also be upset if all of the big > vampires we ever printed sucked. > I'm upset because of your lack of respect for your customers. How can you do such a thing? How can you make something that makes the old game obsolete and ruin it? You may not like the game as it was, but I for one really liked it, and really think you had no need to do what you did. You screwed up really bad. > >There doesn't seem to be any sense whatsoever to the cost and pricing > >of Sabbat vampires. > > Yes there is. See my comments at the top, but basically the scale is just > different for the new vamps. All vamps now pay less for out of clan > disciplines, and Big vamps get a discount on their abilities because they > take soo long to get out and represent a large portion of your bit pool. This says it all. Go play Netrunner and leave VtES for those who like to play it. Are there so few people in WoTC that actually like VtES? I mean, it's obvious that you don't care shit about the game and are only interested in making money, but if there was even one individual who cared about the game I'm sure he'll do a much better job than you do -- and probably make more money than you will. > ----- > > Just so you know what WOTC's position is on their escalation. > (Thoughtful of them, eh?) > Screw Sabbat, screw WoTC, screw the designers who go along this stupid (not to say insulting) idea. I for one refuse to buy Sabbat and advise everyone I know not to buy it. Also I'll refuse to participate in any tournament it is allowed, and advise everyone to do the same. There's absolutely no reason I should throw away my old VtES game and start buying Sabbat (for that's the only way to play it). David Pontes 8[

From: Paul Peterson/#18 <ware...@WIZARDS.COM> > I think I see the big problem here. OK. Basically, you are all correct. > The big Sabbat vampires (and the big Cam/non-cam vampires from DS/AH) are > better than most of the big vampires in the basic set. This is on purpose. > Basically, the big vampires in the basic set suck. They are practically > useless. Not entirely, but basically this is true. They cost way too much > for the benefits that you get from them, and paid too much for out of clan > disciplines. Do people agree with this? I see the point, but have found that since we went to NL, it's not been true. With NL combat and a little untap, just one vampire can clean the clocks of a whole flock of weenies. However, our games are slow compared to those described by, say, Algustas. At least this indicates the improved vampires and combat of Sabbat are a directed attack on a perceived problem However, it was certainly released in a very self-serving fashion. A far fairer fix (if a fix is necessary) would be to release a "Vampire Wars" expansion of older vampires and nastier combat cards. That way older players wouldn't be required to purchase vast quantities of extra Bonding/ Social Charm/ Blood Rage etc. to add appropriate big vampires to their decks; rather, they would have to buy only the cards that should be added or changed. Another big way to weaken small vampires would be to weaken S:CE. Combat favors big vampires (actually, those with multiple superiors, but more-or-less the big ones). Get-out-of-combat-free cards help those without weak combat abilities, which includes all small vampires. S:CE at normal is a godsend for smaller vampires. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)

David Pontes (l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt) wrote: : On 8 Nov 1996, L. Scott Johnson wrote: : [next is a brilliant quote from Mr. Paul Peterson, one of the Sabbat : designers:] : > [Re: the new vampires aren't following the same formula that the Cam. : > vampires did] : > Basically, the big vampires in the basic set suck. : I'm speechless. Please, tell me this isn't true. It can't be. : It's total lack of respect towards the game and it's players. It's saying : "throw away the old game and begin to play this one, for the old game : sucked". Great attitude. Don't worry, the big vampires in the new set suck too. Look at Genevieve, the 10-cap Gangrel antitribu: only her three clan disciplines are superior; she's only a Priscus; and her special ability is nothing to write home about (one additional vote during each political action). I'll take Angus, The Unruled over her any day. Other vampires who don't have much bang for their blood-cap include Gratiano; Yong-Sun, Harmonist (by the time you get him out, who cares?); Matteus, Flesh Sculptor (I'd rather have a real Cardinal or Archbishop, wouldn't you?); Lambach (Basilia and Samantha do it normally!); Stravinsky (I'd rather he had superior potence than a conditional +2 bleed); Lazverinus, Thrall of Lambach (_just_ hand damage? He's got the Gwendolyn problem...); and Bronwen (with CEL and POT, why is she going to want to dodge?). What worries me more is what you get at the cheaper end of the spectrum: the unspeakably talented Jimmy Dunn; the already-complained about Dragos and Ian Forestal; Violet Tremain (all that AND she's a Bishop too); Dominique (as if Arson weren't already wallpaper); Dylan (the Thomas Thorne of Sabbat); and Jacko (a free additional strike on the first round without spending blood means SAVE THOSE PSYCHES! Combat need never go to second round.). - Neil

Hi Curt, On 11 Nov 1996 curt...@aol.com wrote: [Large Vamp WOTC master plan deleted] > > Do people agree with this? I see the point, but have found that since we > went to NL, it's not been true. With NL combat and a little untap, just > one vampire can clean the clocks of a whole flock of weenies. However, > our games are slow compared to those described by, say, Algustas. Most of our games force large vamps to clean whole flocks of Weenies, which they occasionally do. In general, though, it has been my experience that bringing out large vampires are a detriment, as we typically only use one or two disciplines in a deck anyway. This is by no means universal for my group, just a general rule of thumb. > > At least this indicates the improved vampires and combat of Sabbat are a > directed attack on a perceived problem However, it was certainly released > in a very self-serving fashion. A far fairer fix (if a fix is necessary) > would be to release a "Vampire Wars" expansion of older vampires and > nastier combat cards. That way older players wouldn't be required to > purchase vast quantities of extra Bonding/ Social Charm/ Blood Rage etc. > to add appropriate big vampires to their decks; rather, they would have to > buy only the cards that should be added or changed. > I agree. I am encouraged to see Immortal Grapple as a common though. > Another big way to weaken small vampires would be to weaken S:CE. Combat > favors big vampires (actually, those with multiple superiors, but > more-or-less the big ones). Get-out-of-combat-free cards help those > without weak combat abilities, which includes all small vampires. S:CE at > normal is a godsend for smaller vampires. > Correct. Strike:CE is the primary reason that large vampires aren't viable in my group. IG is the fix, of course, but until recently, I owned more IG's (eight) than the rest of my play group combined. Psyche helps, but doesn't jam your opponents hand with useless cards the way IG does. Now if we could just get Dog Pack as a common, maybe I would see some of those ferocious Gangrel decks again. I miss them.... Algustas *****It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV***** Oliver Wendell Holmes

Neil Bernstein <n...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote in article <56d8pk$a...@newsgate.duke.edu>... [ quoted text not captured ] I disagree with most of these. If Genevieve gets one additional vote on all political actions she is very powerful. Two votes in the Prisci vote makes it very possible she can win (or at least tie) the Prisci vote. This means she could be worth 4 votes. Only a I.C. can give you that much vote power. Yong-Sun has 9 points in skills, is a Cardinal, and has his special ability. Lambach has 9 points in skills, is a Cardinal, has +1 hand damage, and may pay 1 blood to make his hand damage aggravated. Lazverinus has 9 points in skills, is a Arch bishop, and has +2 hand damage. IMO these vamps beat the hell out of the vamps before them. -- Steve Bucy I'd be better off undead... "Hmmm. I notice the number of conditional phrases in there... _seems_ to indicate a weakness, _may_ be vulnerable in theory." - G'Kar

Steven Bucy (tb...@lainet.com) wrote: : If Genevieve gets one additional vote on all political actions she : is very powerful. It has been ruled that Prisci can ONLY vote in the Prisci vote. Therefore, Genevieve only gets an extra vote in the Prisci vote, and therefore isn't worth 4 votes. -spongy

On 11 Nov 1996 23:19:23 GMT, curt...@aol.com wrote: >At least this indicates the improved vampires and combat of Sabbat are a >directed attack on a perceived problem However, it was certainly released >in a very self-serving fashion. A far fairer fix (if a fix is necessary) >would be to release a "Vampire Wars" expansion of older vampires and >nastier combat cards. That way older players wouldn't be required to >purchase vast quantities of extra Bonding/ Social Charm/ Blood Rage etc. >to add appropriate big vampires to their decks; rather, they would have to >buy only the cards that should be added or changed. As to this the new art makes it worth it anyway and some of these new cards like Meat Cleaver which replaced Bastard sword but is the same add to the variety of theme decks. And the old cards in the new set that are the same except for the art make this set the best for the old Jhyad players since with a pack you will get a fair amount of new cards as well as some old. If you buy the Vampire set then you just get new backs and now and then a new card. >Another big way to weaken small vampires would be to weaken S:CE. Combat >favors big vampires (actually, those with multiple superiors, but >more-or-less the big ones). Get-out-of-combat-free cards help those >without weak combat abilities, which includes all small vampires. S:CE at >normal is a godsend for smaller vampires. >Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com) S:CE is weaker. The replacement for Majesty is Staredown and it does not untap. I have not seen all the new cards but so far the combat ends seem weaker in that I have not seen any that also untap you. The closest is the shadow body that is similar to the Form of Mist in that at superior the action continues and yet is weaker in that it dose not continue if the action is political or bleeding. Along those lines I like several of the new obfuscate cards and the bonus if nonbleeding or political to encourage more unusual strategies. And cards like Scorpian sting that prevent a dodge do more against weaker vampires then bigger ones. There is more political power in titles and cards. Awe is a real tough card and Treachery is enough to make a presence deck have a lot of potential, especially that one we talked about early this year. Rory The Ref at refp...@best.com

James Puzzo <jam...@dgii.com> wrote in article <56ft3f$g...@gw.dgii.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] True, however I have a feeling this ruling is incorrect. Genevieve doesn't make any sense when compared to Gratiano. If this ruling stands Genevieve is very powerful compared to some of the other new vamps. [ quoted text not captured ]

refp...@best.com (Rory) writes: (Hi Rory!) >On 11 Nov 1996 23:19:23 GMT, curt...@aol.com wrote: >>A far fairer fix (if a fix is necessary) >>would be to release a "Vampire Wars" expansion of older vampires and >>nastier combat cards. That way older players wouldn't be required to >>purchase vast quantities of extra Bonding/ Social Charm/ Blood Rage etc. >>to add appropriate big vampires to their decks. >As to this the new art makes it worth it anyway Not for most people. Many people don't like the new art, and I think most Jyhad players collect cards to play, not to look at. The print runs for CCGs far exceed those for collectible art cards. >If you buy >the Vampire set then you just get new backs and now and then a new >card. There never really was a particular reason to buy V:tES basic set except back compatibility, which is now a joke with 4 distinct backs. >>Another big way to weaken small vampires would be to weaken S:CE. Combat >favors big vampires (actually, those with multiple superiors, but >more-or-less the big ones). Get-out-of-combat-free cards help those >without weak combat abilities, which includes all small vampires. S:CE at >normal is a godsend for smaller vampires. >S:CE is weaker. >The replacement for Majesty is Staredown and it does not untap. >I have not seen all the new cards but so far the combat ends seem >weaker in that I have not seen any that also untap you. That's very good, but doesn't help as long as the old cards are around. Also, a free S:CE card should be Dodge at normal. Disciplinary cards at normal are normally more or less equivalent to disciplineless cards. S:CE is much better than Dodge. Perhaps Sabbat-only would be better than Jyhad/Sabbat; hard to say. >And cards like Scorpian sting that prevent a dodge do more against >weaker vampires then bigger ones. If they come attached to Wolf Claws, no, quite the reverse. If it's just a 1 point undodgeable strike then, yes, it will tend to help bigger vampires. Present ruling is that you can Claw a Sting. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)

On 15 Nov 1996 22:27:44 GMT, curt...@aol.com wrote: >refp...@best.com (Rory) writes: >(Hi Rory!) >>On 11 Nov 1996 23:19:23 GMT, curt...@aol.com wrote: Hello Curt, I add up all the little reasons when buying a set. To me the new art is a bonus. My Mad minds deck with the wackos is better with Meat cleavers then Bastard swords. That I like. >>If you buy >>the Vampire set then you just get new backs and now and then a new >>card. >There never really was a particular reason to buy V:tES basic set except >back compatibility, which is now a joke with 4 distinct backs. Agreed. The only reason to buy was if you wanted to use Jyhad with AH or DS and then you felt like you were throwing money out for a bunch of old cards. Now about half the cards in a pack are new. And with used cards the fading should even out the back problem. >>S:CE is weaker. >>The replacement for Majesty is Staredown and it does not untap. >>I have not seen all the new cards but so far the combat ends seem >>weaker in that I have not seen any that also untap you. >That's very good, but doesn't help as long as the old cards are around. >Also, a free S:CE card should be Dodge at normal. Disciplinary cards at >normal are normally more or less equivalent to disciplineless cards. S:CE >is much better than Dodge. Perhaps Sabbat-only would be better than >Jyhad/Sabbat; hard to say. Actually Staredown is dodge and combat ends at Superior. Sabbot is probably better alone but it does give the old Jhyad players an advantage. Your wake strategy for example will not work with Forced Awakening. >>And cards like Scorpian sting that prevent a dodge do more against >>weaker vampires then bigger ones. >If they come attached to Wolf Claws, no, quite the reverse. If it's just >a 1 point undodgeable strike then, yes, it will tend to help bigger >vampires. Present ruling is that you can Claw a Sting. >Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com) And it should be <g>. But your point is made. Still we cant have it both ways. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <56d8pk$a...@newsgate.duke.edu>, Neil Bernstein <n...@acpub.duke.edu> writes >David Pontes (l41...@alfa.ist.utl.pt) wrote: >: On 8 Nov 1996, L. Scott Johnson wrote: >: [next is a brilliant quote from Mr. Paul Peterson, one of the Sabbat >: designers:] >: > [Re: the new vampires aren't following the same formula that the Cam. >: > vampires did] >: > Basically, the big vampires in the basic set suck. >: I'm speechless. Please, tell me this isn't true. It can't be. >: It's total lack of respect towards the game and it's players. It's saying >: "throw away the old game and begin to play this one, for the old game >: sucked". Great attitude. > >Don't worry, the big vampires in the new set suck too. Look at Genevieve, >the 10-cap Gangrel antitribu: only her three clan disciplines are superior; >she's only a Priscus; and her special ability is nothing to write home about >(one additional vote during each political action). I'll take Angus, The >Unruled over her any day. Other vampires who don't have much bang for their >blood-cap include Gratiano; Yong-Sun, Harmonist (by the time you get him >out, who cares?); Matteus, Flesh Sculptor (I'd rather have a real Cardinal >or Archbishop, wouldn't you?); Lambach (Basilia and Samantha do it normally!); >Stravinsky (I'd rather he had superior potence than a conditional +2 bleed); >Lazverinus, Thrall of Lambach (_just_ hand damage? He's got the Gwendolyn >problem...); and Bronwen (with CEL and POT, why is she going to want to >dodge?). > >What worries me more is what you get at the cheaper end of the spectrum: >the unspeakably talented Jimmy Dunn; the already-complained about Dragos >and Ian Forestal; Violet Tremain (all that AND she's a Bishop too); Dominique >(as if Arson weren't already wallpaper); Dylan (the Thomas Thorne of Sabbat); >and Jacko (a free additional strike on the first round without spending blood >means SAVE THOSE PSYCHES! Combat need never go to second round.). > >- Neil Sorry to quote all that, but couldn't be bothered to shorten it. Ian Forestal - Mind of a Child him, or Seeds of Corruption - a bit of intercept will then make him go crazy (hmm.... Malkavian Tremere) Jimmy Dunn - Contest him Matteus, Flesh Sculptor - so you don't think a Toreador antitribu with superior Vicissitude is a little bit good then Yong - Sun Harmonist - Tomb of Ramses III him, watch your opponents scream. Genevieve - only a Priscus? Well, if your group thinks that just put her in and get 3 votes because no-one else has them. Oh well, can't be bothered to write any more. Just pointing out that the powerful vampires can be got round and the other vampires that are in there are so much for power gaming but more for a bit of variety - after all, you can only have so many toreador with the basic clan disciplines and that's it. James Coupe. (not my email address, by the way).

Justin Grace (Jus...@bgrace.demon.co.uk) wrote: : Jimmy Dunn - Contest him So we're all obligated to play with Jimmy Dunn? What if I don't want to play pot/cel? That means I'm disadvantaged, because my vampires aren't getting as much bang for their blood-cap. Also, read the post on why Jimmy is so much more often a good idea to play than not. : Matteus, Flesh Sculptor - so you don't think a Toreador antitribu with : superior Vicissitude is a little bit good then I'm not particularly impressed with Vicissitude as a discipline. Also, why should I have to pay _10_ just to get a discipline at the superior level? : Yong - Sun Harmonist - Tomb of Ramses III him, watch your opponents scream. I didn't buy any AH, so I don't know what the Tomb does (though I've heard it mentioned quite a few times on the newsgroup.) Could someone please cite it for me? Thanks very much. : Genevieve - only a Priscus? Well, if your group thinks that just put her in : and get 3 votes because no-one else has them. No, you miss the point. Prisci are good. Prisci are powerful. If you're running a political deck, you need to be able to win the Prisci vote when you have to. My point is, I should get _MORE_ abilities, titles, etc. for 10 blood than I get with Genevieve. Paying 10 blood for three superior disciplines and Priscus + 1 extra vote is not a good deal. Also, I feel obliged to point out that Genevieve is female, and hence should be a Prisc_A_ (the feminine ending of the adjective "priscus," which means "old" in Latin), not a Prisc_US_ (the masculine ending). But I'll stop being a Latin student now. : Oh well, can't be bothered to write any more. Just pointing out that the : powerful vampires can be got round and the other vampires that are in there : are so much for power gaming but more for a bit of variety - after all, you : can only have so many toreador with the basic clan disciplines and that's it. I do not argue that Ian, Dragos, Jimmy, and their friends can be "got round." My question is, why should they be so conspicuously superior to other vampires of the same blood capacity? If some vampires are much less powerful then others, they'll never get played with. And that leads to a less varied game. - Neil Bernstein

>As to this the new art makes it worth it anyway and some of these new >cards like Meat Cleaver which replaced Bastard sword but is the same >add to the variety of theme decks. >And the old cards in the new set that are the same except for the art >make this set the best for the old Jhyad players since with a pack you >will get a fair amount of new cards as well as some old. If you buy >the Vampire set then you just get new backs and now and then a new >card. I use many of the new card instead in my old decks... The new Fortitude skill card just HAD TO get in my Ventrue Deck, just to show how much he cares about that Toreador trying to pump him full of bullets and just manage to ruin his new clothes. And Theft Of Vitae does not really correspond with the original Vampire: The Masquerade on the picture (you do not pump the vitae mouth to mouth), but the art is damn cool anyway... And Potence skill, Blur, Celerity skill, Undead Strength and so on... >The replacement for Majesty is Staredown and it does not untap. >I have not seen all the new cards but so far the combat ends seem >weaker in that I have not seen any that also untap you. Just one question when I think about it... The second Prescence Combat End that you havn't seen yet is named "Catatonic Fear" and do the following Inferior: Strike:Combat Ends Superior: As above, and the opposing minion takes 1 damage during the strike resolution. A later errata on Dark Souverigns say that Riposte also deal the damage under strike resolution. Do there really exist an strike resolution if one vampire do "Combat Ends" !? IF there IS, then Wolf Companion do damage against a vampire using "Combat Ends" -- and I can use Disarm or Pulled Fangs on the opposing vampire, becouse I dealt more damage than him in the current round of combat. IF there AINT an strike resolution, then why do the card say do? >The closest is the shadow body that is similar to the Form of Mist in >that at superior the action continues and yet is weaker in that it >dose not continue if the action is political or bleeding. >Along those lines I like several of the new obfuscate cards and the >bonus if nonbleeding or political to encourage more unusual >strategies. Thats GREAT, the cards that is not usable during a bleed I mean... You can see that the one's making the Sabbat deck actually played Jyhad/vtes before and met a Malkavian bleed deck =) >And cards like Scorpian sting that prevent a dodge do more against >weaker vampires then bigger ones. I haven't seen the card you speak about (I have seen scorpion sting) and I have all sabbat cards... Which one do you mean?

Steven Bucy wrote: > > James Puzzo <jam...@dgii.com> wrote in article <56ft3f$g...@gw.dgii.com>... > > Steven Bucy (tb...@lainet.com) wrote: > > > > : If Genevieve gets one additional vote on all political actions she > > : is very powerful. > > > > It has been ruled that Prisci can ONLY vote in the Prisci vote. > Therefore, > > Genevieve only gets an extra vote in the Prisci vote, and therefore isn't > > worth 4 votes. > > True, however I have a feeling this ruling is incorrect. Genevieve doesn't > make any sense when compared to Gratiano. If this ruling stands Genevieve > is very powerful compared to some of the other new vamps. > I agree, I think the ruling is wrong. It is fairly clear what the card says. Why should it be changed? I need to bring along a laptop with a VTES database of card rulings to keep up with them... -- Jeffrey Endres Undergrad B. Eng (Aerospace Avionics) Queensland University of Technology "Cinnamon and sugary, with softly spoken lies, You never know just how you look through other peoples eyes." Butthole Surfers, 'Pepper'

On 19 Nov 96 23:54:11 -500, staffan....@mailbox.swipnet.se (staffan.bengtsson) wrote: >I use many of the new card instead in my old decks... The new Fortitude >skill card just HAD TO get in my Ventrue Deck, just to show how much he >cares about that Toreador trying to pump him full of bullets and just manage >to ruin his new clothes. >And Theft Of Vitae does not really correspond with the original Vampire: >The Masquerade on the picture (you do not pump the vitae mouth to mouth), >but the art is damn cool anyway... >And Potence skill, Blur, Celerity skill, Undead Strength and so on... Yes I would like to have the ventrue/Brujah use a clan impersonation just to use that innocent bystander card. And the Protean skill looks great for my Nos and the new blood doll is really good. >Just one question when I think about it... The second Prescence Combat End >that you havn't seen yet is named "Catatonic Fear" and do the following >Inferior: Strike:Combat Ends >Superior: As above, and the opposing minion takes 1 damage during the strike >resolution. >A later errata on Dark Souverigns say that Riposte also deal the damage under >strike resolution. >Do there really exist an strike resolution if one vampire do "Combat Ends" !? >IF there IS, then Wolf Companion do damage against a vampire using "Combat Ends" > -- >and I can use Disarm or Pulled Fangs on the opposing vampire, becouse I dealt >more damage than him in the current round of combat. >IF there AINT an strike resolution, then why do the card say do? I just saw the card today. Good question but I believe my group uses them taking the damage. Weather control will dish out the damage and then you could do a Taste and a Drawing out the Beast card would still allow you to use pulled fangs. But Wolf or the crows are during strike resolution. If not then according to one ruling you could not prevent thier damage <g>. >>And cards like Scorpian sting that prevent a dodge do more against >>weaker vampires then bigger ones. >I haven't seen the card you speak about (I have seen scorpion sting) and I have >all sabbat cards... Which one do you mean? Which card or comment are you refering to? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <56o0bu$5...@newsgate.duke.edu>, Neil Bernstein <n...@acpub.duke.edu> writes >Justin Grace (Jus...@bgrace.demon.co.uk) wrote: >: Jimmy Dunn - Contest him > >So we're all obligated to play with Jimmy Dunn? What if I don't want to play >pot/cel? That means I'm disadvantaged, because my vampires aren't getting as >much bang for their blood-cap. Also, read the post on why Jimmy is so much >more often a good idea to play than not. No, of course you're not obliged to play Jimmy Dunn. But you have to admit, it is *very* tempting to put him in (the disciplines are really quite astounding). And if you're that pressured to make sure he keeps returning to your controlled region, put the Hand of Conrad in your library and use its special ability to get him back - he only costs four, so he'll be out in a turn. And you don't have to waste pool getting Gaspare Giovanni out to get him back either. >: Matteus, Flesh Sculptor - so you don't think a Toreador antitribu with >: superior Vicissitude is a little bit good then > >I'm not particularly impressed with Vicissitude as a discipline. Also, why >should I have to pay _10_ just to get a discipline at the superior level? I don't agree. Vicissitude in not a Toreador clan discipline, and you have to ask what you can do with it. Horrid Forms, Changelings (with presence for additional bleeds), and so on. You can also play Baubles, Bonecrafts and Fleshcrafts, Blood of Acids, and Body Arsenals. AND you can back it up with Celerity in combat and Presence (Majesty and Staredowns) when things get hairy. Anyway, I should also point out that the V:TES Toreador were substantially worse for the same price (Anneke and Masika - need I say more). In fact, the only Toreador I'm pleased with is Francois Villon, as far as abilities go. >: Yong - Sun Harmonist - Tomb of Ramses III him, watch your opponents scream. > >I didn't buy any AH, so I don't know what the Tomb does (though I've heard it >mentioned quite a few times on the newsgroup.) Could someone please cite it >for me? Thanks very much. Basically, you play it on an uncontrolled vampire (it's a unique master location), and for each blood you transfer to a vampire in your uncontrolled region, the vampire with Tomb gets one as well (from the bank). This vamp even gains blood if you transfer to him/her (thus you get 2 blood on him for each blood you transfer to him). The only problem is the price - 3 pool. >: Genevieve - only a Priscus? Well, if your group thinks that just put her in >: and get 3 votes because no-one else has them. > >No, you miss the point. Prisci are good. Prisci are powerful. If you're >running a political deck, you need to be able to win the Prisci vote when >you have to. My point is, I should get _MORE_ abilities, titles, etc. for 10 >blood than I get with Genevieve. Paying 10 blood for three superior >disciplines and Priscus + 1 extra vote is not a good deal. What on earth are you talking about? Genevieve has got superior Obfuscate, superior Celerity, Superior Protean AND inferio auspex and inferior dominate. And although she is a Priscus, she also has the added bonus of acting just like a Bishop (giving you 1 vote) - without the messiness of conflicting titles. Angus the Unruled, by comparison, has +1 hand damage, and does not even have the three clan discs at superior level. However, he is a Justicar. Perhaps comparing her to Basilia would be more appropriate - Basilia has one vote, like Genevieve. Basilia has 3 superiors and two regular disciplines, so does Genevieve. The only difference is whether you want aggravated hand damage (Basilia) or a shot at an extra 3 votes (Genevieve). It's personal preference. >Also, I feel obliged to point out that Genevieve is female, and hence should >be a Prisc_A_ (the feminine ending of the adjective "priscus," which means >"old" in Latin), not a Prisc_US_ (the masculine ending). But I'll stop being >a Latin student now. Female Princes AREN't called Princesses Perhaps you should start being a V:TES vernacular student :-) >: Oh well, can't be bothered to write any more. Just pointing out that the >: powerful vampires can be got round and the other vampires that are in there >: are so much for power gaming but more for a bit of variety - after all, you >: can only have so many toreador with the basic clan disciplines and that's it. > >I do not argue that Ian, Dragos, Jimmy, and their friends can be "got round." >My question is, why should they be so conspicuously superior to other vampires >of the same blood capacity? If some vampires are much less powerful then >others, they'll never get played with. And that leads to a less varied game. > >- Neil Bernstein Ian Forestal is powerful, but isn't Justine - Elder of Dallas? Or Rebekka, Chantry Elder of Munich (I know Jost Werner is better at 6 capacity, but Rebekka has a conditional +bleed), or even Astrid Thomas? And what about Spiridonas? Playing the Fifth tradition on him is hilarious. Jimmy Dunn is not so superior - you've got Brachah for at 5 capacity. But I know what you mean - personally, out of all the Caitiff and Pander, I prefer Smudge (no disciplines, but when he diabs, he gets lots, so who cares?). Dragos - Yeah, his special ability is powerful, but there are less cards that you can play for free (Auspex combats are generally free, and Animalism ones are too. Vicissitude does not have much combat merit without Potence or Celerity). You haven't got the powerful combat disciplines like Potence (for Burning Wrath) or Protean for Body of Sun. -- Justin Grace

Justin Grace (Jus...@bgrace.demon.co.uk) wrote: : >So we're all obligated to play with Jimmy Dunn? What if I don't want to play : >pot/cel? That means I'm disadvantaged, because my vampires aren't getting as : >much bang for their blood-cap. Also, read the post on why Jimmy is so much : >more often a good idea to play than not. : No, of course you're not obliged to play Jimmy Dunn. But you have to : admit, it is *very* tempting to put him in (the disciplines are really : quite astounding). And if you're that pressured to make sure he keeps : returning to your controlled region, put the Hand of Conrad in your : library and use its special ability to get him back - he only costs : four, so he'll be out in a turn. And you don't have to waste pool : getting Gaspare Giovanni out to get him back either. [I agree] : >: Matteus, Flesh Sculptor - so you don't think a Toreador antitribu with : >: superior Vicissitude is a little bit good then : > : >I'm not particularly impressed with Vicissitude as a discipline. Also, why : >should I have to pay _10_ just to get a discipline at the superior level? : I don't agree. Vicissitude in not a Toreador clan discipline, and you : have to ask what you can do with it. Horrid Forms, Changelings (with : presence for additional bleeds), and so on. You can also play Baubles, : Bonecrafts and Fleshcrafts, Blood of Acids, and Body Arsenals. AND you : can back it up with Celerity in combat and Presence (Majesty and : Staredowns) when things get hairy. I forget what Matteus' cute pet power is (if he has one), but if I was making a Toreador AT/ Tzimisce (Anti Tribu b/c the Tzimisce have to play Politics or they can't kill their prey) deck I wouldn't pack a ten point Toreador AT just because he has visc. I'd way rather pack extra skill cards that burn 6 blood. And if you aren't playing Tzimisce it's _insane_ to try and put Visc in your deck so that a couple of your eight through ten point Brujah AT and Toreador AT can play bonecraft! : Anyway, I should also point out that the V:TES Toreador were : substantially worse for the same price (Anneke and Masika - need I say : more). In fact, the only Toreador I'm pleased with is Francois Villon, : as far as abilities go. But Anson is significantly better for less. In any case, as far as tens go (tens suck, as a rule - you can get just as much for an eight and have two more pool. Or you can get a _lot_ more, except for Stanislava and Harrod who just suck, for just 1 more pool), Masika is good. : >: Yong - Sun Harmonist - Tomb of Ramses III him, watch your opponents scream. : > : >I didn't buy any AH, so I don't know what the Tomb does (though I've heard it : >mentioned quite a few times on the newsgroup.) Could someone please cite it : >for me? Thanks very much. : Basically, you play it on an uncontrolled vampire (it's a unique master : location), and for each blood you transfer to a vampire in your : uncontrolled region, the vampire with Tomb gets one as well (from the : bank). This vamp even gains blood if you transfer to him/her (thus you : get 2 blood on him for each blood you transfer to him). The only problem : is the price - 3 pool. That is _not_ a problem! The "problem" is that it draws ever single anti location card in existence like a gigantic magnet. In any case, if you're going to bring out a tenish vampire, bring out somebody that can actually do some permanent death, like Wynn, not a ten point millstone. : >: Genevieve - only a Priscus? Well, if your group thinks that just put her in : >: and get 3 votes because no-one else has them. : > : >No, you miss the point. Prisci are good. Prisci are powerful. If you're : >running a political deck, you need to be able to win the Prisci vote when : >you have to. My point is, I should get _MORE_ abilities, titles, etc. for 10 : >blood than I get with Genevieve. Paying 10 blood for three superior : >disciplines and Priscus + 1 extra vote is not a good deal. : What on earth are you talking about? Genevieve has got superior : Obfuscate, superior Celerity, Superior Protean AND inferio auspex and : inferior dominate. And although she is a Priscus, she also has the added : bonus of acting just like a Bishop (giving you 1 vote) - without the : messiness of conflicting titles. Yippee. For ten blood I can get a hell of a lot more than 1 + (maybe) 3 votes. Or I could bring out an inner circle member and just get 4 votes, and more than those disciplines, which aren't that much, and a big extra bleed. : Angus the Unruled, by comparison, has +1 hand damage, and does not even : have the three clan discs at superior level. However, he is a Justicar. : Perhaps comparing her to Basilia would be more appropriate - Basilia has : one vote, like Genevieve. Basilia has 3 superiors and two regular : disciplines, so does Genevieve. The only difference is whether you want : aggravated hand damage (Basilia) or a shot at an extra 3 votes : (Genevieve). It's personal preference. Basilia sucks too! Tens suck! : >I do not argue that Ian, Dragos, Jimmy, and their friends can be "got round." : >My question is, why should they be so conspicuously superior to other vampires : >of the same blood capacity? If some vampires are much less powerful then : >others, they'll never get played with. And that leads to a less varied game. : Ian Forestal is powerful, but isn't Justine - Elder of Dallas? Or : Rebekka, Chantry Elder of Munich (I know Jost Werner is better at 6 : capacity, but Rebekka has a conditional +bleed), or even Astrid Thomas? : And what about Spiridonas? Playing the Fifth tradition on him is : hilarious. Astrid isn't. Tremere don't vote. Other than that, yes. And don't bother jumping on me with your tremere gimmick political deck, I have one to. I can't find my Spiridonas, but he sucks too. : Jimmy Dunn is not so superior - you've got Brachah for at 5 capacity. : But I know what you mean - personally, out of all the Caitiff and : Pander, I prefer Smudge (no disciplines, but when he diabs, he gets : lots, so who cares?). Personally, I think Dunn is cool, but hardly overpowered. He encourages people to run around and beat people up, but if this gets out of hand suddenly he sucks. It's this great self controlling thing. : Dragos - Yeah, his special ability is powerful, but there are less cards : that you can play for free (Auspex combats are generally free, and : Animalism ones are too. Vicissitude does not have much combat merit : without Potence or Celerity). You haven't got the powerful combat : disciplines like Potence (for Burning Wrath) or Protean for Body of Sun. Well, that something in the night card that lets dragos do 2 aggravated damage as a strike (it's animalism) for free is nice, but you're paying 2 pool for that, and for 2 pool you could have a vampire that just has aggravated hand damage all the time. And Dragos only has inferior visc. Garry

In article <8OmtxCAB...@bgrace.demon.co.uk>, >Anyway, I should also point out that the V:TES Toreador were >substantially worse for the same price (Anneke and Masika - need I say >more). In fact, the only Toreador I'm pleased with is Francois Villon, >as far as abilities go. Hi, I just want to answer this one point of your post. In my opinion, Anneke and Masika are two of the best Toreador in the game - both having amazing abilities! In an intercept combat deck Anneke with that permanent eagle's sight is phenomenal - not to mention her +1 bleed and Justicar status. Masika can effectively be used as two vampires for the price of one if used correctly. In fact in an intercept combat deck in particular, he may do three actions: 1. act in your turn - useful +1 bleed 2. untap between turns and intercept 3. untap again and block your predator Now you can't tell me that it's a bad ability - certainly at least as good as Villon's. Peter

Justin Grace (Jus...@bgrace.demon.co.uk) wrote: : In article <56o0bu$5...@newsgate.duke.edu>, Neil Bernstein : <n...@acpub.duke.edu> writes : >So we're all obligated to play with Jimmy Dunn? What if I don't want to play : >pot/cel? That means I'm disadvantaged, because my vampires aren't getting as : >much bang for their blood-cap. Also, read the post on why Jimmy is so much : >more often a good idea to play than not. : No, of course you're not obliged to play Jimmy Dunn. But you have to : admit, it is *very* tempting to put him in (the disciplines are really : quite astounding). And if you're that pressured to make sure he keeps : returning to your controlled region, put the Hand of Conrad in your : library and use its special ability to get him back - he only costs : four, so he'll be out in a turn. And you don't have to waste pool : getting Gaspare Giovanni out to get him back either. If you read my criticism carefully, you'll see that the Hand of Conrad or the GG solutions are irrelevant. What if I DON'T WANT TO PLAY pot/cel in the first place? In other words, what if I could care less how often I can resurrect Jimmy Dunn? Then anyone who IS playing pot/cel has received an advantage in being able to INCLUDE Jimmy Dunn, and anyone playing ANY OTHER set of disciplines is disadvantaged (not quite screwed) by comparison. That's Not Good. That makes for an unbalanced game. : >: Matteus, Flesh Sculptor : >I'm not particularly impressed with Vicissitude as a discipline. Also, why : >should I have to pay _10_ just to get a discipline at the superior level? : I don't agree. Vicissitude in not a Toreador clan discipline, and you : have to ask what you can do with it. Horrid Forms, Changelings (with : presence for additional bleeds), and so on. You can also play Baubles, : Bonecrafts and Fleshcrafts, Blood of Acids, and Body Arsenals. AND you : can back it up with Celerity in combat and Presence (Majesty and : Staredowns) when things get hairy. Yes, okay, suppose I tried to build this deck. Matteus would look awfully lonely (not to mention expensive) as the only Toreador with Vicissitude. A cheaper deck which could focus on Vicissitude, or a cheaper deck which could focus on Toreador clan disciplines, would have the Matteus/Vicissitude deck for breakfast. : Anyway, I should also point out that the V:TES Toreador were : substantially worse for the same price (Anneke and Masika - need I say : more). In fact, the only Toreador I'm pleased with is Francois Villon, : as far as abilities go. Cardless Eagle's Sight and free untap are good abilities, though perhaps not worth the extra cost. I'd really need stronger evidence that Anneke and Masika are SUBSTANTIALLY worse -- I just regard them as suffering the same overcosting problems as Genevieve and Matteus, when for two pool less you can get Anson and for one pool more you can get Alexandra. : >No, you miss the point. Prisci are good. Prisci are powerful. If you're : >running a political deck, you need to be able to win the Prisci vote when : >you have to. My point is, I should get _MORE_ abilities, titles, etc. for 10 : >blood than I get with Genevieve. Paying 10 blood for three superior : >disciplines and Priscus + 1 extra vote is not a good deal. : What on earth are you talking about? Genevieve has got superior : Obfuscate, superior Celerity, Superior Protean AND inferio auspex and : inferior dominate. What particular use to me are CEL, aus, and dom in a Gangrel deck? Are you proposing that I would put Genevieve in a deck that made extensive use of CEL, aus, and dom? Then why wouldn't I find a cheaper vampire who did all of these? : And although she is a Priscus, she also has the added : bonus of acting just like a Bishop (giving you 1 vote) - without the : messiness of conflicting titles. Yippee. Long live Gangrel politics. : Angus the Unruled, by comparison, has +1 hand damage, and does not even : have the three clan discs at superior level. However, he is a Justicar. : Perhaps comparing her to Basilia would be more appropriate - Basilia has : one vote, like Genevieve. Basilia has 3 superiors and two regular : disciplines, so does Genevieve. The only difference is whether you want : aggravated hand damage (Basilia) or a shot at an extra 3 votes : (Genevieve). It's personal preference. And thus you prove my point. Genevieve is as overcosted as Basilia. : >Also, I feel obliged to point out that Genevieve is female, and hence should : >be a Prisc_A_ (the feminine ending of the adjective "priscus," which means : >"old" in Latin), not a Prisc_US_ (the masculine ending). But I'll stop being : >a Latin student now. : Female Princes AREN't called Princesses : Perhaps you should start being a V:TES vernacular student :-) Ever hear about the British royal family? Say, on TV? Do they really talk about "Diana, Prince of Wales"? Didn't think so. One would think the undead would display a little more knowledge of English grammar and a little less sexism. : Jimmy Dunn is not so superior - you've got Brachah for at 5 capacity. : But I know what you mean - personally, out of all the Caitiff and : Pander, I prefer Smudge (no disciplines, but when he diabs, he gets : lots, so who cares?). Antoinette DuChamp is the best Caitiff for the blood-cap. She gives you an inferior discipline (pre) with no drawbacks. (Sure, there's a drawback on her ADDITIONAL discipline [cel], but no-one said you had to use her for cel.) Thus she makes Delilah Easton completely irrelevant, and puts every other two-cap vampire who only gives you an inferior discipline to shame -- even the terrifying, game-breaking Sasha Miklos (hi Adrian!). Her very existence is proof of the inability of the game designers to adhere consistently to even the simplest design rules. Yes, I'm ignoring the extremely weak argument that Delilah can use clan-based cards, and Antoinette can't, so Delilah should cost more. If that's the argument, then please tell me why Antoinette gets a free inferior discipline, and every other Caitiff DOESN'T. : Dragos - Yeah, his special ability is powerful, but there are less cards : that you can play for free (Auspex combats are generally free, and : Animalism ones are too. Vicissitude does not have much combat merit : without Potence or Celerity). You haven't got the powerful combat : disciplines like Potence (for Burning Wrath) or Protean for Body of Sun. So? Every time new cards join the set, Dragos will get more powerful. Other vampires might not. - Neil

Neil Bernstein <n...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote: >: >Also, I feel obliged to point out that Genevieve is female, and hence >: >should be a Prisc_A_ (the feminine ending of the adjective "priscus," >: >which means "old" in Latin), not a Prisc_US_ (the masculine ending). >: >But I'll stop being a Latin student now. >: Female Princes AREN't called Princesses >: Perhaps you should start being a V:TES vernacular student :-) > Ever hear about the British royal family? Say, on TV? Do they really talk > about "Diana, Prince of Wales"? Didn't think so. One would think the undead > would display a little more knowledge of English grammar and a little less > sexism. And if this were a game about the British Royal family, that'd be fine. But it says in the books, the source material for V:TES, that female Princes use the male form. (I don't remember anything about Priscus, though. I'll look it up later.) Jack Dracula would love a game about the British Royal Family