Vampire Costing

So how do they do it? How does WW determine what a Vampire should cost? Granted it is based on disciplines, titles, special abilities etc., but what is the best formula? I grew frustrated trying to figure it out when looking at certain assamites like Tariq. Seeing the recent discussion on out of clan disciplines on large vampires, I figured such disciplines should count as half when calculating cost. Tariq AUS cel FOR OBF QUI 7 -capacity reduced by 4 while in play -can enter combat as D action -No bloodhunts -no blood curse Ok so the way I see it thats 5 points of clan disciplines, and 4 points of out of clan, which should be worth 2 points then. + 2 points of special abilities That's 9 So if you payed 7 saving 2, he should be cap 5 in play not cap 3. But if out of clan dis were payed at full, that would be 11, and that would match the in play cap of 3. Which seems ridiculous imo as we almost never use the out of clan disciplines, why pay full cost for them? Of course some do (myself included) but that usually means dropping an in clan dis almsot completely. Anyways, curious to see if anyone can shed more light on this process.... T

<Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3c77b1cc.228372422@news... > > > I grew frustrated trying to figure it out when looking at certain > assamites like Tariq. Seeing the recent discussion on out of clan > disciplines on large vampires, I figured such disciplines should count > as half when calculating cost. > Costing out-of-clans at half price is ludicrous. For example, you would say that a Tremere with AUS DOM THA would be valued the same as a Settite with AUS DOM obf pre ser THA. There are a bunch of vampires who have the appropriate disciplines for 2 different clans, or who actually fit better into a clan that is not their own. For example, should Suhailah be valued as a Ventrue (4 points of disciplines), a Nosferatu (4.5), a Settite (4.5), a Blood Brother/Gargoyle (4.5), or a Samedi (5)? It's clear that considering her OBF pot ser to all be "out-of-clan" would be silly. There's very little reason to be forced to play each vampire with their own clan (clan-based cards, which tend to be better for the Independent clans as a general rule, are good, but you can always throw in a couple of odd vampires for their disciplines). Further, there are some disciplines which are very common in a clan, like tha and aus for Assamites, for for Nosferatu, pot for Gangrel, etc... It seems to be the general rule to charge vampires 1 for each inferior and 2 for each superior. 4 caps and below get capacity - 1 points. 9 caps and above get capacity +1 points. 7 and 8 caps seem to get approximately capacity + .5. Nosferatu and Gangrel from Jyhad pay .5 additional points for titles. You probably know all this already. Vampires who have very odd discipline mixes, and small vampires with out-of-clans often get a bonus, usually in the form of a marginal special ability. Some vampires, such as Salbatore Bokkengro, get an out-of-clan as a completely free discipline (I still think the little bastard is slightly overpowered). > Tariq > > AUS cel FOR OBF QUI 7 > > -capacity reduced by 4 while in play > -can enter combat as D action > -No bloodhunts > -no blood curse > > Ok so the way I see it thats 5 points of clan disciplines, and 4 > points of out of clan, which should be worth 2 points then. > 9 points of disciplines. > + 2 points of special abilities > > That's 9 > > So if you payed 7 saving 2, he should be cap 5 in play not cap 3. > Why? It's not clear that minus 4 capacity should be worth 4 points... Reduced capacity that does not come at a price of reduced disciplines (i.e. pay 3 for a 3 cap with 2 disciplines, pay 3 for a 3 cap with 7 disciplines - it doesn't add up) should not be worth the same cost. Perhaps 2 points. > Which seems ridiculous imo as we almost never use the out of clan > disciplines, why pay full cost for them? Of course some do (myself > included) but that usually means dropping an in clan dis almsot > completely. > If you play a straight Assamite clan deck with OBF CEL QUI, Tariq is not really worth it (Melek may be better, depending on your strategy). If you play an AUS/Assamite deck, or something weird like AUS/FOR/cel or FOR/OBF/cel, he fits in a little better (primarily due to there being fewer available vampires with those disciplines). If you play a "Tariq Eat World" deck with him Freak Driving and Contracting and Nose of the Hounding and Draught of the Souling and generally whipping a lot of ass, then he is worth every point, and then some. It's true that after the first 6 points of disciplines (actually, more like after the first 3 distinct disciplines), the marginal value of each additional point is reduced. This could probably be better taken into account in the vampire formula, but it is, to some extent, taken into account already. A 4 cap can have 3 disciplines. After those 3, the marginal value goes down, so a 5 cap gets 5 disciplines. A good portion of 8 caps have all 3 clan disciplines at superior (as opposed to very few 6's, and a medium number of 7's), after which the value of disciplines is reduced drastically. Thus, all 9's and 10's gain an extra point. 11's seem to follow their own formula that nets them anywhere between 10.5 and 14 points.

Talonz wrote: >>So how do they do it? How does WW determine what a Vampire should cost?>> The original cost formula was something along the lines of: -Inferior discipline: 1 point. -Superior discipline: 2 points. -Title: 1 point (or .5/1/1.5, depending on who you talk to). -+1 bleed or +1 hand damage: 2 points. -Weird special abilities: 1 or 2 points. A 2-4 point vampire got capacity -1 in stuff. A 5-8 point vampire got capacity in stuff. A 9-10 point vampire got capacity +1 in stuff. Caitif generally got one discipline (+1 point) and one disadvantage (-1 point). Uriah got 2 disciplines (+2 points) and a severe disadvantage. The new (since Sabbat) formula seems to be: -Inferior Discpline, in clan: 1 point -Superior Discipline, in clan: 2 points -Out of clan discplines: half cost (i.e. .5 or 1 point) -Title: 1 point. -+1 bleed or +1 hand damage: 1 point. -Weird special abilities: 1 or 2 points. The vampires seem to get the same amount of stuff for their capacity as they used to, but the larger ones (9 and 10) probably get extra stuff. What you'll discover, comparing Jyhad vampires to Sabbat vampires, is that certain old vampires are simply suck when compared to similar new vampires. For instance, go look at Adrianne (a 6 with pre, aus, cel, pot, +1 bleed) to Sheila Mezzarin (a 6 with PRE, AUS, cel, for, +1 bleed). They both are 6's. Both get +1 bleed. Both have 3 in clan and 1 out of clan discipline. But Sheila gets 2 superiors when compared to Adrianne. There is a lot of that between the sets. Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/bakija6 "These streets are filled with danger and madness! MADNESS!" -Zim.

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020219175900...@mb-mn.aol.com... > Talonz wrote: > >>So how do they do it? How does WW determine what a Vampire should > cost?>> > > The original cost formula was something along the lines of: > -Inferior discipline: 1 point. > -Superior discipline: 2 points. > -Title: 1 point (or .5/1/1.5, depending on who you talk to). > -+1 bleed or +1 hand damage: 2 points. > -Weird special abilities: 1 or 2 points. > +1 bleed or hand damage has always been 1.5 points. Many Sabbat vampires are undercosted, however, and get +bleed virtually for free.

Chris wrote: >>+1 bleed or hand damage has always been 1.5 points. Many Sabbat vampires are undercosted, however, and get +bleed virtually for free.>> While I am never one to quibble over .5 of a point (oh, wait, of course I am :-), look at: Zack North: (6) pro, for, ani, pot, +1 hand damage Sebastian Marley: (7) ANI, pot, obf, aus, +1 hand damage Bianca: (6) CEL, pot, pre, +1 hand damage Adrianne: (6) cel, pre, aus, pot, +1 bleed Lydia Van Culen: (6) aus, tha, dom, pre, +1 bleed Lucia Pacciola: (6) DOM, pre, for, +1 bleed If there is any logic at all behind the costing of the Jyhad vampires, that logic dictates that +1 hand damage and +1 bleed were originally priced at 2 points. Going with the current pricing scheme (where out of clans cost half, +1 bleed or hand damage costs 1), vampires with such an advantage are paying about the right amount: Richter: (7) POT, CEL [4 points], pre, for [1.5 points], +1 strength [1 point]=6.5, rounded up to 7. Sheila Mezzarin: (6) AUS, PRE [4 points], cel, for [1.5 points], +1 bleed [1 point]=6.5 rounded down to 6. If anything, it is apparent that the Sabbat vampires are kind of slipshod in terms of how they are priced out. [ quoted text not captured ]

>The original cost formula was something along the lines of: >-Inferior discipline: 1 point. >-Superior discipline: 2 points. >-Title: 1 point (or .5/1/1.5, depending on who you talk to). >-+1 bleed or +1 hand damage: 2 points. >-Weird special abilities: 1 or 2 points. Yep. Old school. >The new (since Sabbat) formula seems to be: >-Inferior Discpline, in clan: 1 point >-Superior Discipline, in clan: 2 points >-Out of clan discplines: half cost (i.e. .5 or 1 point) >-Title: 1 point. >-+1 bleed or +1 hand damage: 1 point. >-Weird special abilities: 1 or 2 points. Yep. Bizarre, undercosted Sabbat formula. Most recently though, LSJ shed light on the current point scheme: Inferior: 1 point Superior: 2 point Title: 1/2 point per vote. (Bishop/Primogen = 0.5, Prince/Archbishop/Priscus/2 votes = 1, Cardinal/Justicar = 1.5, IC = 2). +1 bleed or +1 hand damage = 1 point Weird specials: Typically 1 or 2 points. Corner-case specials are often free. Points: 1-4 caps: Capacity - 1 5-6 caps: Capacity 7-8 caps: Capacity + 1 9-10 caps: Capacity + 2 Here are some Google links to LSJ's previous comments: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=7-8+9-10+group:rec.games.trading-cards.j yhad+author:LSJ&hl=en&selm=3B028520.AFE96296%40white-wolf.com&rnum=1 http://groups.google.com/groups?q=vampire+point+system+group:rec.games.tra ding-cards.jyhad+author:LSJ&hl=en&selm=3AD70C03.8931D7EA%40white-wolf.com& rnum=2 Halcyan 2

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020219192431...@mb-fj.aol.com... > Chris wrote: > >>+1 bleed or hand damage has always been 1.5 points. Many Sabbat vampires > are undercosted, however, and get +bleed virtually for free.>> > > While I am never one to quibble over .5 of a point (oh, wait, of course I am > :-), look at: > Actually, the designers were never ones to quibble over .5 of a point. The formula was, of course, determined after the vamps were released, and was never confirmed by the original design team, but it was considered correct because it generally determined the quality of vampires within .5 points. Basically, any vampire that is over- or under- costed by .5 points is considered okay. > > If there is any logic at all behind the costing of the Jyhad vampires, that > logic dictates that +1 hand damage and +1 bleed were originally priced at 2 > points. > Or they were rounded down. > If anything, it is apparent that the Sabbat vampires are kind of slipshod in > terms of how they are priced out. > That is certainly true. Regardless of the way the vampires were designed (slipshod as it has obviously been), I believe it was at some point (my memory's a little hazy) agreed that 1.5 points was the proper cost of +1 bleed and +1 strength. It seems like a similar cost may have been given to +1 intercept and +1 stealth. This was some time ago, and only really "agreed upon" by newsgroup denizens (as much as such can be said to agree), so it's possible that the design team now thinks that +1 strength or bleed is only worth a point (although +1 bleed seems to be worth more on small vamps, for good reason).

Chris wrote: >>Regardless of the way the vampires were designed (slipshod as it has obviously been), I believe it was at some point (my memory's a little hazy) agreed that 1.5 points was the proper cost of +1 bleed and +1 strength. It seems like a similar cost may have been given to +1 intercept and +1 stealth.>> Where it got hazy was with the large vampires who had titles (which some claimed were 1 point regardless, and some claimed were .5 per vote). Looking at a few big sized vampires: Quinton McDonnell: (8) FOR, ani, pro, cel, Primogen, +1 hand damage. As an 8, he should have capacity in points (per the old system). He's got: FOR (2) ani (1) pro (1) cel (1) for 5 points in disciplines, leaving 3 points to spend on something. If Primogen is worth .5, and +1 hand damage is worth 1.5, he is still only at 7 points. If primogen is 1 point and +1 hand damage is worth 2, he is at 8. Either way, he sucks :-) With Titania Romanov (7) AUS, cel, pre, Prince, +1 bleed. She gets 4 points in disciplines, and 3 points of something else. Prince costs 1 point regardless (either 1 point for title or .5 per vote), leaving her with 2 points, that is either 2 for +1 bleed or 1.5 for +1 bleed, rounded up. Either way (2 points for +1 bleed/hand damage or 1.5 and then rounding up), most vampires with +1 bleed or +1 hand damage ended up with 2 points less stuff than other vampires without +1 bleed or hand damage (compare Zack North to Badger--they have the exact same discplines and the same cost, but Badger gets 2 superiors where Zack gets +1 hand damage. Sad). And as a result, they kinda suck, certainly when compared to the new Sabbat vampires who pay less for the same ability, and then pay half for out of clan disciplines. I hope they make the new Camarilla vampires better. I'd like to see a good version of Sebastian Marley :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020219225339...@mb-cp.aol.com... > > Where it got hazy was with the large vampires who had titles (which some > claimed were 1 point regardless, and some claimed were .5 per vote). Looking at > a few big sized vampires: > > Quinton McDonnell: (8) FOR, ani, pro, cel, Primogen, +1 hand damage. > Gangrel and Nosferatu appeared to pay .5 extra points for their titles (which were generally accepted as costing .5 per vote). I'll admit, it's all kind of hazy, but the fairest scheme IMO (i.e. the one that *should* have been followed), and the one that seemed to have the most acceptance on the newsgroup was 1.5 for +bleed or strength, .5 per vote, Gangrel and Nos with votes paid an extra .5. Camarilla vampires seemed to round *down* most of the time, and occasionally lost a point entirely, whereas Sabbat vampires seemed to round up, and often got bonus points for no good reason. There was also a scheme written up for weapons at one point. It was even more speculative, but it was used to show how underpowered Chainsaw really was (not that you really needed a complicated diagram to show that).

"Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:OcFc8.95496$Pz4.385621@rwcrnsc53... > > "Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message > news:20020219225339...@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > Where it got hazy was with the large vampires who had titles (which some > > claimed were 1 point regardless, and some claimed were .5 per vote). > Looking at > > a few big sized vampires: > > > > Quinton McDonnell: (8) FOR, ani, pro, cel, Primogen, +1 hand damage. > > > Gangrel and Nosferatu appeared to pay .5 extra points for their titles > (which were generally accepted as costing .5 per vote). (snip) How strange.. I always thought there was a special "hidden" rule in the first jyhad set which made all the gangrel with 2 hand damage to have crappy discipline distribution : they were overcosted because at this time the only way to burn vampires in combat (barring amaranth) was to inflict them 2 agg while they were on zero blood. So you ended up on Dragon breath rounds, superior walk of flame, and the famous lucky blow+ wolf claws poke. If you wanted to be effective at burning vampires in combat, you had to use overcosted vampires... or maybe it's just a brainfart =) > There was also a scheme written up for weapons at one point. It was even > more speculative, but it was used to show how underpowered Chainsaw really > was (not that you really needed a complicated diagram to show that). I'd be glad to hear it =) reyda

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote in message news:<20020219225339...@mb-cp.aol.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Hey hey hey - no dissin' Sebastian Marley (even though I never use him in decks.) Why? 'Cause he's the vampire I most resemble. (Bald head, long arms, affinity with animals, yadda yadda). Check 'me' on http://deventerbynight.freewebspace.com ("What's New' area") and discover that 'my' sire is Marty L., and Childe is Sebastian M. Oh, and, as an exercise to the interested reader, see if "I" am costed right. (I'd love to use that version of myself in a Nos*for*atu princes deck.) Tobias Deventer [ quoted text not captured ]

Chris wrote: (really, I'm not being quibbly here--I'm just having a good time pricing out all the old vampires :-) >>Gangrel and Nosferatu appeared to pay .5 extra points for their titles (which were generally accepted as costing .5 per vote).>> Possibly. Lemme go look: Gitaine (7) ANI, PRO, FOR, Primogen Chester (7) ANI, POT, obf, for, Primogen Both of them are equivelant under the old system--6 points in disciplines, 1 point in title. Could be .5 for the title, rounded up just as easily. Selma (8) POT, OBF, ani, for, Prince, corner case ability. She has the same discipline spread as Chester, but is a Prince, and gets a special ability that on other vampires would have probably cost nothing (like Rake). However, she costs 8, indicating that either she is paying 1.5 for the Princeness and .5 for the lame special, or she is rounded up. Now comparing to similar non Gangrel/Nosferatu: Elliot Sinclair (7) PRE, aus, cel, Primogen, 2 hand damage. 4 points in abilities, leaving 3 to be sucked up by his specials. If he is paying .5 for Primoben and 1.5 for +1 hand damage, he is overcosted by 1. If he is paying 1 and 2 respectively, he is right at 7. Either way, he is suck when compared to Gitaine or Chester--he trades 2 points of disciplines for +1 hand damage when placed next to either. Sir Walter Nash (7) FOR, PRE, DOM, Prince When compared to Gitaine or Chester, Nash is roughly equivelant-the same discipline spread (6 points) and a title. Granted, the title is worth 2 votes and affords all the Prince bonuses, but can be contested--possibly a trade off. I'm still under the impression that any title at all was costed at 1 point--Primogen had only one vote, but couldn't be contested. Princes got 2 votes, but could be contested (something I suspect that the desginers originally considered significant--look at the compicated rules involving contesting a title). Justicars got 3 votes, but could be contested and only could go on huge vampires. But then I was never real confident about the blanket 1 point plan. Emmerson Bridges (8) FOR, PRE, DOM, pot, Prince. Possibly just better than Selma, considering the uselessness of her special ability. Emerson gets a third superior where Selma gets a corner case special. Not a good trade. Anson (8) CEL, PRE, aus, dom, Prince, very good special. Again, compared to Selma, Anson is just better--same discipline spread, same title, but his special ability is always going to be good and very useful, as opposed to Selma's, who would have been just as effective if her special was nothing at all. >>I'll admit, it's all kind of hazy,>> Yeah--I susepct that we have put much more thought into it than the original designers did :-) >>but the fairest scheme IMO (i.e. the one that *should* have been followed), and the one that seemed to have the most acceptance on the newsgroup was 1.5 for +bleed or strength,>> Very possibly the original intention, but the reality of the situation is that considering that generally the .5 got rounded up, the vast bulk of the vampires with +1 bleed or +1 hand damage (all the guys in the 6-7 point range) ended up with 2 points less in disciplines than their non so bonused counterparts (again, look to the comparison between Zack and Badger; Lydia Van Cullen and Thomas Thorne). When you start mucking around with the larger vampires, everything becomes unclear once you start factoring in all the weird special abilities they carry around, and so it all becomes mostly moot. >>.5 per vote, Gangrel and Nos with votes paid an extra .5. >> Perfectly possible. I was always a little unclear on the vote pricing--I always adhered to the simple plan, where every title cost a vampire 1 point, but in many cases, .5 per vote with the Nos and Gangrel paying an extra .5 seems perfectly solid. >>Camarilla vampires seemed to round *down* most of the time, and occasionally lost a point entirely,>> By round down, you mean round down how much stuff they got, correct? Assuming the +1 hand damage/+1 bleed was costed at 1.5 rather than 2, all the vampires who were so blessed ended up costing .5 more than they should, and as such, got screwed (which is why I always assume that +1 Bleed/Hand Damage was costed at 2--there are far more examples of vampires ending up paying 2 points for the ability than vampires who actually only pay 1.5 :-) >>whereas Sabbat vampires seemed to round up, and often got bonus points for no good reason.>> The Sabbt vampires are a whole different kettle of fish. As far as I can tell, they are pretty consistient, assuming that they paid half for out of clan disciplines (which someone official outright stated was the case at some point), and most of them paid nothing at all for their mostly corner case special abilities (like Peter Blaine). Again, I hope they upgrade the Camarilla vampires accordingly :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:a4vlbr$67u$1...@neon.noos.net... > > > There was also a scheme written up for weapons at one point. It was even > > more speculative, but it was used to show how underpowered Chainsaw really > > was (not that you really needed a complicated diagram to show that). > > I'd be glad to hear it =) > Here it is... The only thing I really don't agree with is the Ivory Bow. Although Bastard Sword/Meat Cleaver has always been overcosted too, and it's nice to see Poker taking its place, even if it says "Cold Iron" instead of "does aggravated damage to Kiasyd." L. Scott Johnson, 1995/09/21: > > The costs for weapons follows a simple formula (not that such a formula > was used): > > Maybe my formula is unbalanced in favor of some aspects of game > play, or not (I haven't seen weapons abused too much) but it seems to lend > support to the statement "Maybe WotC attempted to balance the weapons > without regard to rarity". > > Weapon Cost = F * ( damage - 1 ) > > F = 3/4 for normal weapons > F = 4/4 for Melee weapons > F = 5/4 for Ranged weapons > F = 6/4 for Guns (Ranged, ammo-using weapons) > > treat aggravated damage as ( 2 * damage ) > If (damage-1) is negative, use zero instead. > > Note: the real formula shouldn't treat a 1-damage normal weapon the > same as a 1-damage gun, but my equation does (by multiplying by zero). > > Combat Modifiers: > ----------------- > + 1 per maneuver > + 1 if damage modifiers are also aggravated > - 0.5 if unique (not a combat effect, but rather: a generic effect). > > Round fractions to nearset whole number. > (one .5 is rounded down, but this is necessary for the jump between > 2 and 5 for .44 and Assault Rifle (2 and 4 damage, resp.). I suppose I > could've found an exponential (parabolic) curve to fit, but...) > > NOTE: with this equation, being unique did not affect the rounded result > for any of the weapons. > > Basic examples: > --------------- > Bastard Sword: (1.00 * (2-1)) = 1 (= 1) > Sengir Dagger (1agg->2) (1.00 * (2-1) +1 -0.5) = 1.5 (= 2) > Ivory Bow (1agg->2) (1.25 * (2-1) -0.5) = 0.75 (= 1) > Flame Thrower (2agg->4) (1.25 * (4-1)) = 3.75 (= 4) > Saturday Night Special: (1.50 * (1-1) +1) = 1 (= 1) > Deer Rifle: (1.50 * (1-1) +1 +1) = 2 (= 2) > .44 Magnum: (1.50 * (2-1) +1) = 2.5 (? 2) > Submachine Gun: (1.50 * (3-1) +1) = 4 (= 4) > Assault Rifle: (1.50 * (4-1) +1) = 4.5 (= 5) > > > Special effects: > ---------------- > (These modifiers are chosen to fit a particular weapon) > > If weilder can initiate Combat, use (2*damage) for damage. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > > +1 per optional press. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > +2/S for paralyzation with S unmodified strikes. (Stake, Rowan Ring) > -1 if paralyzation transfers the weapon to the victim. (Stake, Rowan Ring) > -X if a weapon does X damage to its owner. (Grenade, Bomb) > -X/2 if a weapon deals X damage to friendly minions. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > +X if a weapon prevents X damage to its owner. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > > > Halve total cost for each of: > only use at long range. (RPG) > no use on first round of combat. (RPG) > only use once per combat. (Chainsaw, Shotgun, Grenade, Bomb) > use burns the weapon. (Grenade, Bomb) > > Double total cost for each of: > can be eqipped during combat. (Zip Gun) > > Modifiers for out of combat effects (after all combat costs are computed): > +1 Arson. (Bomb) > +0.5 per action-specific stealth. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > +1 per generic stealth. (?) > -1 if owner cannot hunt. (Talbot's Chainsaw) > > > Examples: > --------- > Chainsaw: (0.75 * (3-1)) / 2 = 0.75 (= 1) > Talbot's Chainsaw: (0.75 * (6-1) +1 +1 -1.5 -0.5) > (Rush3->6) + 0.5 - 1 = 3.25 (= 3) > Stake: (1.00 * (1-1) +1 -1) = 0 (= 0) > Rowan Ring: (1.00 * ( 0 ) +2 -1 -0.5) = 0.5 (= 1) > Grenade: (1.25 * (3-1) -1) / 4 = 0.375 (= 0) > Bomb: (1.25 * (5-1) -5) / 4 +1 = 1 (= 1) > RPG Launcher: (1.25 * (6-1) / 4 = 1.563 (= 2) > Zip gun: (1.50 * (1-1) +1 -1) * 2 = 0 (= 0) > Shotgun: (1.50 * (3-1)) / 2 = 1.5 (= 2) > > > The only thing which comes out wrong is the chainsaw, but we all know that > no formula should have the chainsaw equivalent in cost to the Shotgun. > > House Chainsaw: > Melee: (1.00 * (3-1)) / 2 = 1 (someone posted this) > Once per Round: (0.75 * (3-1)) = 1.5 (= 2) > > (Actually, once per round should have some modifier as well, but...) > >

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020219225339...@mb-cp.aol.com... > Where it got hazy was with the large vampires who had titles (which some > claimed were 1 point regardless, and some claimed were .5 per vote). Looking at > a few big sized vampires: The .5 per vote with .5 extra for Gangrel/Nosferatu always made sense to me. > Quinton McDonnell: (8) FOR, ani, pro, cel, Primogen, +1 hand damage. [snip] > Either way, he sucks :-) Exactly. I really really want to like him, but I just can't. > With Titania Romanov (7) AUS, cel, pre, Prince, +1 bleed. Another one of the vampires that got screwed, IMO. I really loved the Toreador back in the day, but although they got most of the cool abilities, they got screwed on disciplines, both in "levels" and variety. Sigh. > I hope they make the new Camarilla vampires better. I'd like to see a good > version of Sebastian Marley :-) I'd like to see a *better* version of Cardano. Hehehe. Oh wait, he didn't have any of those crazy overcosted specials. Well, I'd still like to see a better version. :) Xian

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020220094912...@mb-mc.aol.com... > >>Gangrel and Nosferatu appeared to pay .5 extra points for their titles > (which were generally accepted as costing .5 per vote).>> > > Possibly. Lemme go look: > > Gitaine (7) ANI, PRO, FOR, Primogen > Chester (7) ANI, POT, obf, for, Primogen 8 capacity might have been a better choice, as there are a more available to look at, though not one each of Gangrel and Nosferatu, I suppose. Turan Vaughn CEL dom POT PRE, Primogen, +1 int. vs. Brujah = 2+1+2+2+.5+.5 = 8 Sylvester Simms ani AUS dom OBF pre, Primogen, if in torpor, everyone burns a pool = 1+2+1+2+1+.5+.5 = 8 Selma the Repugnant [see below] Quinton McDonnell [see elsewhere in the thread] Miranda Sanova aus CEL obf pot PRE, Primogen, Brujah get -1 int. = 1+2+1+1+2+.5+.5 = 8 Justine, Elder of Dallas AUS DOM obf THA, Primogen, doesn't tap vs. weenies = 2+2+1+2+.5+.5 = 8 Emerson Bridges [see below] Dr. Jest aus dom for OBF pre, Primogen, annoying special = 1+1+1+2+1+.5+1.5? = 8 (Dr. Jest got *really* screwed...interestingly, he has aus for OBF to play with Egottha) Anson aus CEL dom PRE, Prince, 2 masters = 1+2+1+2+1+1= 8 (the luckiest of the bunch) > Selma (8) POT, OBF, ani, for, Prince, corner case ability. > > She has the same discipline spread as Chester, but is a Prince, and gets a > special ability that on other vampires would have probably cost nothing (like > Rake). However, she costs 8, indicating that either she is paying 1.5 for the > Princeness and .5 for the lame special, or she is rounded up. That special totally sucks. Either the Nosferatu *want* to be intercepted, and then they're probably just Bum's Rushing anyway, or they *don't* want to be intercepted, and she's got no chance in hell. It's kinda sad, really. Not that I don't love Selma just the same. > Now comparing to similar non Gangrel/Nosferatu: > > Elliot Sinclair (7) PRE, aus, cel, Primogen, 2 hand damage. Again, the Toreador get screwed. :) If only he had the big eyeball instead of PRE...or even had CEL instead. > 4 points in abilities, leaving 3 to be sucked up by his specials. If he is > paying .5 for Primoben and 1.5 for +1 hand damage, he is overcosted by 1. If he > is paying 1 and 2 respectively, he is right at 7. Either way, he is suck when > compared to Gitaine or Chester--he trades 2 points of disciplines for +1 hand > damage when placed next to either. Agreed. > I'm still under the impression that any title at all was costed at 1 > point--Primogen had only one vote, but couldn't be contested. Princes got 2 I never really looked at the "not contesting" bit as being all that important, because as an extra downside, they don't get access to the incredibly useful Traditions. I suspect you knew this, though. :) In fact, on looking back, you mention this in the sentence I snipped. > Emmerson Bridges (8) FOR, PRE, DOM, pot, Prince. > > Possibly just better than Selma, considering the uselessness of her special > ability. Emerson gets a third superior where Selma gets a corner case special. > Not a good trade. Yup. I am firmly of the opinion that all of the specials in the original set that weren't +1 bleed, +1 stealth, or +1 strength had equal costs, whether or not they were insanely good (Anneke, Anson, Merrill) or insanely useless (Selma, Tura Vaughn, Sylvester Simms, Miranda Sanova). [Chris wrote] > >>I'll admit, it's all kind of hazy,>> > > Yeah--I susepct that we have put much more thought into it than the original > designers did :-) Ya think? :) [+1.5 for the "good specials"] > Very possibly the original intention, but the reality of the situation is that > considering that generally the .5 got rounded up, the vast bulk of the vampires > with +1 bleed or +1 hand damage (all the guys in the 6-7 point range) ended up > with 2 points less in disciplines than their non so bonused counterparts Definitely seems to be the case from my analysis as well. > The Sabbt vampires are a whole different kettle of fish. As far as I can tell, > they are pretty consistient, assuming that they paid half for out of clan Except for Commander "Broken" Sela, right? :) > Again, I hope they upgrade the Camarilla vampires accordingly :-) I'm not sure on this one. To some extent I agree, but as far as game balance goes, assuming the Sabbat and independents don't step up with anything like the Traditions, it might not be necessary. As well, from a backstory perspective, the Sabbat vampires tend to be a little more "practiced" in their discipline-having. Or something. Beginning characters get more disciplines if you're Sabbat. Xian, not sure if he's adding to the discussion, but wanted to join in...

xian writes: >> Elliot Sinclair (7) PRE, aus, cel, Primogen, 2 hand damage. >Again, the Toreador get screwed. :) If only he had the big eyeball >instead of PRE...or even had CEL instead. Ehh, Elliot's OK in my book. 2 hand/cel is enough to scare off interceptors and so he's nice in a bruise-and-vote deck. He's also good for getting that first gun out. I like him better with more offense than I would with more defense. But, then, I run pretty aggressive decks. I agree Tatiana's not so good - primarily as she *is* AUS cel pre. She'd be way better with PRE. >As well, from a >backstory perspective, the Sabbat vampires tend to be a little more >"practiced" in their discipline-having. Or something. Beginning >characters get more disciplines if you're Sabbat. True, but Camarilla vampires get more points in skills. Not sure how to implement that but I'd like to - It'd be a shame if the only way to have a good Cam deck was if it's a prince deck. Maybe you could have some Cam sect cards (besides the votes) or more Cam clan cards. Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com) "It is better to be wrong than to be vague" - Freeman Dyson

I don´t understand this discussion. Some vampires are better and some are waiting for the release of cards that will make them better. However, this just makes the game more intresting. How do I build my crypt (3,4 or 5 Anson), what are the odds of being contested (Siw Walter vs. Aabt Kindred) and will sect/clan-mixing be a problem for example? But the contesting part will be less likley the more sets that are released, of course. While on the subject, are Prince & Archbishop really worth the same value? The AB has 15 cards. Some can only be used Sabbat vs. Sabbat, and the rest of them are descent cards, not more. The Prince has 20 cards, with some of the most overpowered cards in the game. /Mathias

In message <a51h23$3vgv2$1...@ID-123937.news.dfncis.de>, Xian <xi...@waste.org> writes: >I'd like to see a *better* version of Cardano. Hehehe. Oh wait, he didn't >have any of those crazy overcosted specials. Well, I'd still like to see a >better version. :) Cardano may play Strike: Bitch Xian (usable at long range) during combat. ? -- James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c. PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti

Xian wrote: >>8 capacity might have been a better choice, as there are a more available to look at, though not one each of Gangrel and Nosferatu, I suppose.>> Yeah, I went with the 2 seven's just to look at the costing of titles on Gangrel and the Nosferatu. Sadly, all I discovered is that either: -They paid .5 for the Primogen and .5 for being Nosferatu/Gangrel. -They paid flat 1 point for the Primogen. -They paid .5 for the Promgen, and then their costs were rounded up. Basically, I determined nothing :-) >>I never really looked at the "not contesting" bit as being all that important, because as an extra downside, they don't get access to the incredibly useful Traditions. I suspect you knew this, though. :) In fact, on looking back, you mention this in the sentence I snipped.>> I don't think the not contesting angle actually is important, but as I mentioned in that other post, I'm under the (possibly crack induced) impression that the contestation of Prince-hood was considered more significant originally than it actually turned out to be. Given that this is the case (at least in my little world :-), it makes sense that Prince and Primogen cost the same. Well, until you factor in the Traditions. Which makes my whole angle pretty much moot. Oh well. >>Yup. I am firmly of the opinion that all of the specials in the original set that weren't +1 bleed, +1 stealth, or +1 strength had equal costs, whether or not they were insanely good (Anneke, Anson, Merrill) or insanely useless (Selma, Tura Vaughn, Sylvester Simms, Miranda Sanova).>> Ya think? There are vampires that have real corner case abilities that seem like they are free, and then vampires with moderately useful specials that seem like they cost 1 or 2 points. For instance, my favorite: Marty Lechtansi: (9) POT, OBF, DOM, ani, for, Primogen, pay blood for a press. He has 8 points in disciplines, a point invested in being a Primogen (in some manner or another), and then another point invested in his press ability (as 9 point vampires get 10 points of stuff). Then you got Mr. Suck himself, Appolonius: (10) CEL, PRE, pot, for, Primogen, +1 bleed, Optional Press. 6 points in disciplines, 1 point in Primogen (we'll just assume), 2 points in +1 bleed (again, just go with it...), and *then* he blows 2 points on his press. At least that way, he is spending all of his points. If the Primogen was .5 and the +1 bleed was 1.5, he'd be spending 3 points on his press. I don't even wanna think about that anymore. >>Except for Commander "Broken" Sela, right? :)>> Oh yeah. Commander Sela. She has some rediculous amount of stuff, right? Let me go look... Sela (6) POT, PRE, cel, obt, Bishop, +1 bleed, corner case special. By the accepted Sabbat plan, she gets 5.5 in disciplines, a title (.5 or 1 point), +1 bleed (generally accepted as costing 1 point), and *then* a (admittedly very obscure) goofy special. In best case, she is undercosted by 1. I guess the !Bru were jealous of Anvil... >>I'm not sure on this one. To some extent I agree, but as far as game balance goes, assuming the Sabbat and independents don't step up with anything like the Traditions, it might not be necessary.>> You mentioned that before, and you might have a good point, but I can't really see them reprinting (or making alltogether new) vampires who don't work under the new pricing system. Suffice to say, I'd be very surprised to see an identical reprint of Sebasatian Marley. Maybe give him a second superior, and I could see it, but as he is, he is just plain suck, especially when compared to all the newer guys. [ quoted text not captured ]

Mathias wrote: >>I don´t understand this discussion.>> What don't you understand? We are hashing out game design principals, as they exist in some sense or another, and it is fun to hash out. >> Some vampires are better and some are waiting for the release of cards that will make them better.>> See, this is a game, where if the game is founded upon completely arbitrary design (as opposed to well though out balanced design theory), it doesn't work so well. As a result, the game desingers decided it would be a good idea to make vampires with a pricing scheme, such that vampires of the same cost (i.e. age) would have roughly equivelant abilities. What we are doing is disecting the minutae of this system (mostly 'cause it is fun), especially in light of the fact that the system changed at some point, so vampires that were built with the old system are just plain worse than equivelant vampires built under the new system. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe writes: >Cardano may play Strike: Bitch Xian (usable at long range) during >combat. Nah. Xian: Cardano's Bitch should be an ally card. 2 pool, 1 life, 1 hand, 0 bleed. Little cameo of Cardano on the left side to indicate only Cardano can recruit. [ quoted text not captured ]

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM writes: >I don't think the not contesting angle actually is important, but as I >mentioned in that other post, I'm under the (possibly crack induced) impression >that the contestation of Prince-hood was considered more significant originally >than it actually turned out to be. Given that this is the case (at least in my >little world :-), it makes sense that Prince and Primogen cost the same. Well, >until you factor in the Traditions. Which makes my whole angle pretty much >moot. Oh well. I don't think it was moot in the original set. Pre-DS, it was hard to make a prince deck, so the traditions were less critical. Plus, not only were the titles contestable with a small set of seizures, the princes themselves were contested a lot, especially Anson and Rake. Only after DS doubled the number of princes did Primogen become an ability which generated sniggers. >You mentioned that before, and you might have a good point, but I can't really >see them reprinting (or making alltogether new) vampires who don't work under >the new pricing system. Suffice to say, I'd be very surprised to see an >identical reprint of Sebasatian Marley. Maybe give him a second superior, and I >could see it, but as he is, he is just plain suck, especially when compared to >all the newer guys. As I mentioned before, I'd rather see Camarilla-only cards which make the old vampires comparable to the Sabbat vampires. I certainly don't want a suite of Camarilla princes under the new costing system. It's probably too late in the Cam set design, though, and I imagine WW is looking for ways to make people buy the Cam set anyway. [ quoted text not captured ]

pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote in message news:<20020221091240...@mb-fs.aol.com>... > Xian wrote: > >>8 capacity might have been a better choice, as there are a more available to > look at, though not one each of Gangrel and Nosferatu, I suppose.>> > > Yeah, I went with the 2 seven's just to look at the costing of titles on > Gangrel and the Nosferatu. Sadly, all I discovered is that either: [snip] > Basically, I determined nothing :-) Pretty much like usual, huh? :) > I don't think the not contesting angle actually is important, but as I > mentioned in that other post, I'm under the (possibly crack induced) Probably. > impression that the contestation of Prince-hood was considered more > significant originally than it actually turned out to be. I meant to look at the Jyhad rulebook I just found to see if the original rules had anything extra about contesting, but I don't recall that they actually did anything different than currently. It's true, lots of things were initially considered more important than they eventually turned out to be. Presses, for example. > Given that this is the case (at least in my little world :-), > it makes sense that Prince and Primogen cost the same. Well, Your world makes sense to me most of the time, so I'm willing to go with it. > until you factor in the Traditions. Which makes my whole angle pretty much > moot. Oh well. ...up until this point. :) > >>Yup. I am firmly of the opinion that all of the specials in the original > set that weren't +1 bleed, +1 stealth, or +1 strength had equal costs, > whether or not they were insanely good (Anneke, Anson, Merrill) or insanely > useless (Selma, Tura Vaughn, Sylvester Simms, Miranda Sanova).>> > > Ya think? There are vampires that have real corner case abilities that seem > like they are free, and then vampires with moderately useful specials that > seem like they cost 1 or 2 points. For instance, my favorite: Amend assertion to: *Straight up +1 bleed, +1 stealth, +1 strength costs 2 points *Optional combat specials as well as pay 1 blood for X specials (Andreas, etc.) cost 1 point *Conditional specials cost .5 points Still probably incorrect, but it makes sense in my head, without actually reviewing the cards too thoroughly. :) > Marty Lechtansi: (9) POT, OBF, DOM, ani, for, Primogen, pay blood for a press. > > He has 8 points in disciplines, a point invested in being a Primogen (in some > manner or another), and then another point invested in his press ability (as 9 > point vampires get 10 points of stuff). Ahh...sweet sweet Mary Lechtansi. Yeah, that looks about right. > Then you got Mr. Suck himself, Appolonius: (10) CEL, PRE, pot, for, Primogen, > +1 bleed, Optional Press. > > 6 points in disciplines, 1 point in Primogen (we'll just assume), 2 points in > +1 bleed (again, just go with it...), and *then* he blows 2 points on his > press. At least that way, he is spending all of his points. If the Primogen was > .5 and the +1 bleed was 1.5, he'd be spending 3 points on his press. I don't > even wanna think about that anymore. Heh. 3 point press. Man, I forgot about Appolonius. I think I saw him in a decklist though recently, and was really scared. He's pretty much always sucked, hasn't he? I think that I just forgot about him because no one ever plays him. Ever. I even saw Crusher a little while ago, but haven't seen Appolonius in *ages*. My new theory (since you reminded me of his existence) is that Anvil got some of Appolonius' disciplines. I mean, they're both funny-looking longhairs, right? Both start with 'A'. Seems easy enough to confuse them. Anvil has what, dom CEL POT pre tha, Primogen? At least 7.5, maybe 8 on a 6 capacity vampire? I wonder what would happen if we modified Anvil to CEL POT pre Primogen (5.5 or 6, depending), and gave Appolonius his dom tha? Appolonius becomes CEL dom for pot PRE tha +1 bleed, combat special, Primogen which is 11 or so, counding his special as .5 and the vote as .5. Hmm. Maybe just give Appolonius the dom *or* the tha? That evens both of them out, I think. Heh. Ah well, maybe I should step out of Neverland and get back to the real world. > >>I'm not sure on this one. To some extent I agree, but as far as game > balance goes, assuming the Sabbat and independents don't step up with > anything like the Traditions, it might not be necessary.>> > > You mentioned that before, and you might have a good point, but I can't really > see them reprinting (or making alltogether new) vampires who don't work under > the new pricing system. Suffice to say, I'd be very surprised to see an Have Camarilla titles cost more, maybe? I'm not saying I'd *mind* the Camarilla vampires using the same pricing scheme. (And it is a scheme, really.) Just think of what my beloved Tremere would get out of it. :) I'm just not sold that it's a good idea. Hmmm...Cardano... "old" version: 9 ani aus cel DOM FOR THA, Prince current pricing: 9 ani aus cel DOM FOR pot? THA, Prince alternatively: 9 ani aus cel DOM FOR THA, Prince, useful special Though giving him: 9 ani aus cel DOM FOR THA, Prince and either obf or nec would be pretty awesome. Aren't there a lot of Giovanni in the WoD in Boston? :) > identical reprint of Sebasatian Marley. Maybe give him a second superior, > and I could see it, but as he is, he is just plain suck, especially when > compared to all the newer guys. Yeah, he totally sucks. I never understood why they gave most of the vampires that have potence as a clan discipline and +1 strength the baby fist. Though under the current pricing scheme, Sebastian would probably end up with only one more point of disciplines. Or a vote. :) Though I definitely wouldn't complain about: ANI aus obf POT, +1 strength -or- ANI aus for obf pot, +1 strength Xian increasingly speculative

> See, this is a game, where if the game is founded upon completely arbitrary > design (as opposed to well though out balanced design theory), it doesn't work > so well. My point: It doesn´t matter how you count. Some vampires are always going to better, since the disciplines and the clans aren´t equal and hard to compare and cards come out and changes the balance. I´ll take a point in dominate before a point of chimerstry/animalism/quiteus/necromancy/vicissitude/serpentis/whatever bloodlines disc any day of the week as an out-of-clan disc on almost any vampire. And I don´t just like playing bleed-decks. Example: How would you value this vampire? Evert ,Toreador 7-cap aus PRE OBT Prince of Novosibirsk Doesn´t seem to good. But with Moncada/Polonia/Alvaro/Jessica/Sela/Jacko/Ayela is gets a little better, right? Personally, I wouldn´t mind some overpowered vamps with good common disciplines as long as they don´t power up just a single deck type. But who knows what the future holds regarding deck types? Another example: Sune, Ventrue 5-cap for DOM pre THA Sune can not attempt political actions. > What we are doing is disecting the > minutae of this system (mostly 'cause it is fun), especially in light of the > fact that the system changed at some point, so vampires that were built with > the old system are just plain worse than equivelant vampires built under the > new system. This is what I don´t like. Bitching about the old vampires. Can someone honestly say that the camarilla doesn´t make in todays game because of bad vampires? I´m afraid that the cam set will offset the balance (but that is, in theory, impossible). As the game stands now the cam has better library and worse crypt than the sabbat and the independants are somewhere in between. What´s wrong with that? If the cam vamps should be powerful, Sune is a good example. Go Sune! /Mathias

In message <6f108788.02022...@posting.google.com>, agzocgud <per_m...@hotmail.com> writes: >> See, this is a game, where if the game is founded upon completely arbitrary >> design (as opposed to well though out balanced design theory), it >>doesn't work >> so well. > >My point: It doesn´t matter how you count. From a fun, purely theoretical point of view, it does. >Some vampires are always >going to better, since the disciplines and the clans aren´t equal and >hard to compare and cards come out and changes the balance. That's a slightly separate issue, but certainly one that forms part of the basis of many such discussions. >This is what I don´t like. Bitching about the old vampires. Can >someone honestly say that the camarilla doesn´t make in todays game >because of bad vampires? There is a difference between "the Camarilla" and a number of old vampires who are very, very poor indeed, relative to modern sets. Sure, there are large parts of the Camarilla which turned out very well. The Toreador, by contrast, have a mid range death - both Tatiana Romanov(a) and Elliott Sinclair are rubbish, compared to modern vampires, for instance. >I´m afraid that the cam set will offset the >balance (but that is, in theory, impossible). This very much depends on how it's done. From my own point of view, I was both shocked and intrigued by the diverse ways that Bloodlines was balanced against the set, relative to how it could have been. Concepts like Scarce, for instance, aren't something I would have readily thought up myself - but it would have been so easy to over-power them in order to make their small numbers worthwhile. These sorts of things, to my mind, show a Design Team who are very focused on making things balanced yet accessible. >As the game stands now >the cam has better library and worse crypt than the sabbat and the >independants are somewhere in between. What´s wrong with that? I think you have missed the difference between an abstract, theoretical discussion and an outright "The c4m4r1ll4 sux0rs 455" set of statements. [ quoted text not captured ]

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:qWHe+jbW...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > > I think you have missed the difference between an abstract, theoretical > discussion and an outright "The c4m4r1ll4 sux0rs 455" set of statements. > Elliot Sinclair sUx0rz 4$$!

curt...@aol.com (CurtAdams) wrote in message news:<20020221123351...@mb-cv.aol.com>... > As I mentioned before, I'd rather see Camarilla-only cards which make the > old vampires comparable to the Sabbat vampires. I certainly don't want > a suite of Camarilla princes under the new costing system. It's probably > too late in the Cam set design, though, and I imagine WW is looking for > ways to make people buy the Cam set anyway. I *knew* I forgot to mention something in my last post (not an address). Yeah, it would be nice to see Camarilla cards, along the lines of: [foo] [cardtype] [cost] Requires a titled Camarilla vampire. [blah] Rather than the current Prince/Justicar thing. Ideally, something a little less powerful than the Traditions, but interesting and new. Too bad I don't have any specific ideas, huh? Well, I'm sure something can be thought of. :) Xian

On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 02:27:48 GMT, "Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >> If anything, it is apparent that the Sabbat vampires are kind of slipshod >in >> terms of how they are priced out. >> >That is certainly true. But is it possible that the greater sabaat vamps were designed to do this, simply because the Camarilla still had greater cards to comepnasate with? (2nd trad/5th trad etc.) T

On 20 Feb 2002 14:49:12 GMT, pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote: >>>whereas Sabbat vampires seemed to round up, and often got bonus points for >no good reason.>> > >The Sabbt vampires are a whole different kettle of fish. As far as I can tell, >they are pretty consistient, assuming that they paid half for out of clan >disciplines (which someone official outright stated was the case at some >point), and most of them paid nothing at all for their mostly corner case >special abilities (like Peter Blaine). What about the independent and bloodlines vamps guys? Any thoughts on how they have been costed out? T

On 20 Feb 2002 02:39:58 -0800, tobiasop...@hotmail.com (Tobias) wrote: >Check 'me' on http://deventerbynight.freewebspace.com ("What's New' >area") and discover that 'my' sire is Marty L., and Childe is >Sebastian M. > >Oh, and, as an exercise to the interested reader, see if "I" am costed >right. Cool site. You seem to be costed at 10, but if out of clans were half, you'd be about 8.5 which is reasonable. T

Xian writes: >Yeah, it would be nice to see Camarilla cards, along the lines of: >[foo] >[cardtype] >[cost] >Requires a titled Camarilla vampire. >[blah] Well, that's good too, but I was thinking along the lines of "requires a [non-titled] Camarilla vampire" or just plain ol' clan cards. Things like +bleed for larger gangrel or maybe some herd cards to compensate for Hungry Coyote. In the WOD Sabbat vampires get more disciplines but Cam vampires get more skills. I think the game could and should mimic that, as it wouldn't require wallpapering 50%+ of the original vampires. [ quoted text not captured ]

Xian writes: >My new theory (since you reminded me of his existence) is that Anvil >got some of Appolonius' disciplines. I mean, they're both >funny-looking longhairs, right? Both start with 'A'. >I wonder >what would happen if we modified Anvil to CEL POT pre Primogen (5.5 or >6, depending), and gave Appolonius his dom tha? Appolonius becomes >CEL dom for pot PRE tha +1 bleed, combat special, Primogen which is 11 >or so, counding his special as .5 and the vote as .5. Hmm. Have you considered a career in detective work or research? I feel a decade-old mystery has been solved. [ quoted text not captured ]

"CurtAdams" <curt...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020221121957...@mb-cv.aol.com... > Nah. Xian: Cardano's Bitch should be an ally card. 2 pool, 1 life, > 1 hand, 0 bleed. Little cameo of Cardano on the left side to indicate > only Cardano can recruit. You'd think I'd at least get a special power or something. "Xian may take a +1 stealth action to put 2 blood from the blood bank on Cardano. If this action is successful, you must say 'Cardano is king. Hail to the king, baby.'" Xian

"CurtAdams" <curt...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020221181629...@mb-ba.aol.com... > > In the WOD Sabbat vampires get more disciplines but Cam > vampires get more skills. I think the game could and > should mimic that, as it wouldn't require wallpapering > 50%+ of the original vampires. > People keep saying that Sabbat vampires get more disciplines, but I don't think that's true. As far as I can tell from the 3rd edition book, there is no longer any difference in creation for Sabbat or Cam. But even using the old rules (IIRC), any Camarilla vampire that wants more disciplines can have as many as a Sabbat vampire. Basically, Sabbat vampires are forced to spend 7 points on a 4th discipline. So they don't have more disciplines, they have less flexibility.

Talonz wrote: >>What about the independent and bloodlines vamps guys? Any thoughts on how they have been costed out?>> I think they are all pretty standard, accepting the reprints of earlier independants that were built under system A as opposed to system B, but I don't think many of them had +1 bleed/strength, which is where the real damage lies. Let me go look at some random Independant examples: Pootchie: (8) POT, OBF, NEC, dom, cel, significant special. He gets 6.5 in disciplines (POT, NEC, dom = 5; OBF, cel = 1.5), and a significant special. As we are under the impression that 8 point vampires currently get 9 points of abilities (7 and 8 get X+1), he is either slightly over costed, or paying a lot forhis special. As it is a very significant special, that seems reasonable. Ankla Hotep: (9) PRE, OBF, FOR, CHI, pre, 2 significant specials. He gets 6.5 in disciplines (FOR, CHI = 4; PRE, OBF, pre = 2.5) and ends up spending 4.5 on his specials (as we are led to believe that 9 point vampires get X+2 points of stuff). This seems steep, leading me to believe that the whole "out of clan disciplines cost half" system is a vague one, at best. Sarisha Veliku: (6) FOR, ANI, chi, dom. She was designed pre-Sabbat, and is perfectly comperable to all the other pre Sabbat 6 point vampires (like Badger). She has 2 in clan superiors, 1 in clan inferior, and an out of clan inferior. Just like Badger. And just like Badger, she costs 6. Sarrasine: (7) PRE, OBF, ser, nec, aus, significant special. This guy gets 6 points in disciplines (PRE, OBF, ser = 5; nec, aus = 1) and then apparently pays 2 points for his good special. Seems reasonable. Qufur am Heru: (7) SER, PRE, OBF, tha, cel, not real significant special. He's got 7 points in disciplines and a special, that, if 7 point vamps under the current system get X+1 points of stuff, he pays a point for. Seems pretty much industry standard. Bajazet al Nasir: (8) ASS, OBF, pre, for, cel, significant special. He gets 6 points in disciplines (ASS is whatever discipline the Assamites get--I don't remeber the blood discipline name) and a good special. Again, if 8's get X+1 in stuff, he is paying 3 points forhis special ability, which is good, but that seems steep. At this cursory inspection, it looks like the random sampling of independant vampires I have checked out are all (well, except Sarisha) a tad over costed. This could be because: A) I am over estimating the amount of stuff 7 and 8 point vampires get (they used to get X points of stuff, I was under the impression that they now got X+1 points of stuff. This could be incorrect). B) The whole "out of clan disciplines cost half" thing could be incorrect, or at least, no longer part of the pricing plan. Someone said flat out that in the Sabbat vampires, out of clans cost half, and the Sabbat (not Sabbat War) vamps seem to live up to this, but maybe this has been changed, ignored, or was never actually the case. C) The whole idea of a vampire costing system could be a complete pipe dream, and we usenet folks have found a coincidental pattern where none was intended (I don't think this is actually the case, but I just watched Pi this morning...) [ quoted text not captured ]

Mathias wrote: >>My point: It doesn´t matter how you count. Some vampires are always going to better, since the disciplines and the clans aren´t equal and hard to compare and cards come out and changes the balance.>> Clearly you misunderstand what is going on in this discussion. This isn't a discussion of what vampires are better than others in a subjective sense. It is a discussion about how the designers originally built vampires, as opposed to how they build them now. When they designed the Jyhad/VTES vampires, a vampire of X capacity got X points worth of abilities, where inferior disciplines were worth some points, superior disciplines were worth some points, titles were worth some points, and special abilities were worth some points. As a result, all 6 point vampires were roughly equivelant, in terms of how much stuff they got, based on how the designers originally priced stuff out. Notice how all the VTES set 4 point vampires have 3 points of disciplines (where an inferior is worth 1 and a superor is worth 2)? Notice how all the 6 point VTES vampires (well, except Anvil) have 6 points of stuff (assuming +1 bleed and +1 hand damage are worth 2 points)? That is 'cause that is how they designed the set. The Sabbat vampires, however, were designed under a different set of costs (mostly similar, but vampires were only charged half for out of clan disciplines and +1 bleed/+1 strength were costed less than in the VTES set). As a result, you get similar vampires where one is simply better than the other (for example, Shelia Mezzarin and Adrianne). No one is complaining about this here. We are just discussing the pricing scheme, as it entertains us. >>Example: How would you value this vampire? Evert ,Toreador 7-cap aus PRE OBT Prince of Novosibirsk>> He is overcosted by 2 points, as all other (more or less) 7 point vampires get 7 points of stuff. This guy gets a superior and an inferior in clan (3 points), a superior out of clan (1 point), and a title (1 point). Compared to other 7 point vampires designed using similar rules, he should have 2 more points of something. >>Doesn´t seem to good.>> Good isn't really an issue here. The issue we are discussing is how vampires get designed and priced. This guy wouldn't get built (in all likelyhood, but there are always a few weirdos falling through the cracks), as he doesn't even pretend to adhere to the basic vampire design precepts. Sure, he *might*, but seems unlikely. >>This is what I don´t like.>> Umm, good to know? >>Bitching about the old vampires.>> No one is bitching about anything. We are discussing game design. >>Can someone honestly say that the camarilla doesn´t make in todays game because of bad vampires?>> No one is saying that. [ quoted text not captured ]

Xian wrote: >>I meant to look at the Jyhad rulebook I just found to see if the original rules had anything extra about contesting, but I don't recall that they actually did anything different than currently.>> I don't think it is different than it is now, but the rules for contesting titles are different that contesting unique cards, and where someone is always contesting some unique card, can't remember the last time anyone ever contested a title. Thus, special rules not getting used much. The reasons are obvious (there are *lots* more Praxis available now and different princes than when Jyhad first came out), but I guess someone, somewhere along the line said "Hmm. This whole contestation of titles deal isn't all we thought it would be. Hows about we make it essentially a non issue by including these 20 extra Praxis Seizure cards..." >>Man, I forgot about Appolonius. I think I saw him in a decklist though recently, and was really scared. He's pretty much always sucked, hasn't he? I think that I just forgot about him because no one ever plays him. Ever. I even saw Crusher a little while ago, but haven't seen Appolonius in *ages*.>> I've been in discussions with people actually defending their choice of Crusher for reasons other than simple aesthetics. Yeah, that Apolonious is such ass, I can't even think of every seeing him used in any deck, anywhere, that I have ever seen. No wonder he went off to work with Prince that time... Oh, wait. Never mind. >>My new theory (since you reminded me of his existence) is that Anvil got some of Appolonius' disciplines.>> As I have said before and I will say again--I like the cut of your jib, baby. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020221202029...@mb-fs.aol.com... > > {snip about cost of Final Nights vamps} > > This seems steep, leading me to believe that the > whole "out of clan disciplines cost half" system is a vague one, at best. > Really, I hope that they no longer use that system, if they ever did. Giving a vampire extra points if he/she has really odd disciplines is all right (like perhaps a single half-cost or even free out-of-clan discipline), but costing all out-of-clans at half leads to way over-powered vamps like we saw in Sabbat. Luckily most clans only had one such broken vamp, two max, so it didn't lead to hugely overpowered decks, but half-cost out-of-clans can just lead to such abuse (Three cheers for Sela and Sheila... hell, I use Sheila for her fortitude). There is evidence that that system is not followed for SW, FN, and Bloodlines. All of the Blood Brothers have at least one out of clan (other than Tom), and all seem appropriately costed if all disciplines are worth 1. The two vampires you mentioned seem to pay normal price for out-of-clans. Melisande obviously pays 1 point per discipline. I haven't noticed too many vampires with way too many disciplines lately (as I almost always count disciplines, and never even considered that vamps might pay less for out-of-clans until recently), so if they used that system it seems they have abandoned it. The thing is, if you pay half for out-of-clans, you end up with vampires that are horribly broken in decks that don't use strict clan disciplines. Melisande pays full for her tha and DOM because with those and AUS, she fits really well into Tremere decks. If she paid half-price for those, she could have been an 8 cap with the same disciplines, or even with THA instead of tha. Similarly, a Settite with AUS DOM obf pre ser THA would have the same capacity as a Tremere with AUS DOM THA. That's really silly.

"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message news:20020221202656...@mb-fs.aol.com... > > I've been in discussions with people actually defending their choice of Crusher > for reasons other than simple aesthetics. Yeah, that Apolonious is such ass, I > can't even think of every seeing him used in any deck, anywhere, that I have > ever seen. No wonder he went off to work with Prince that time... > Crusher has 9.5 points. That's not so bad. Not that I'd ever use him in a deck... He does have for, and before the Blood Brothers, it wasn't too easy to get pot/for... Appolonius, on the other hand, is just Crusher with inferior potence, essentially. And he costs one more. What a jerk.

I've gotten the impression that they *don't* use the "half-cost for out-of-clan disiciplines" anymore. Let's evaluate those vampires without it: >Pootchie: (8) POT, OBF, NEC, dom, cel, significant special. > Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 8 Special = 1 8 + 1 = 9 Just right for an 8-cap (capacity + 1) >Ankla Hotep: (9) PRE, OBF, FOR, CHI, pre, 2 significant specials. Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 9 Specials: 1 + 1 9 + 2 = 11 Just right for a 9-cap (capacity + 2) >Sarisha Veliku: (6) FOR, ANI, chi, dom. Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 6 6 = 6 Just right for a 6-cap (capacity) >Sarrasine: (7) PRE, OBF, ser, nec, aus, significant special. Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 7 Special = 1 7 + 1 = 8 Just right for a 7-cap (capacity + 1) >Qufur am Heru: (7) SER, PRE, OBF, tha, cel, not real significant special. Discipllines: 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 +1 = 8 Special: Corner-case and not very useful so he gets it free (lots of vampires get corner-case specials for free) --> 0 8 + 0 = 8 Just right for a 7-cap (capacity + 1) >Bajazet al Nasir: (8) ASS, OBF, pre, for, cel, significant special. Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 7 Special: 2 points (agg hand damage seems to cost around 2 points. See vampires like Mary and Samantha). 7 + 2 = 9 Just right for an 8-cap (capacity + 1) >A) I am over estimating the amount of stuff 7 and 8 point vampires get (they >used to get X points of stuff, I was under the impression that they now got >X+1 >points of stuff. This could be incorrect). LSJ has confirmed that 7 and 8-caps get capacity + 1 points. Please see the links I posted earlier. >B) The whole "out of clan disciplines cost half" thing could be incorrect, or >at least, no longer part of the pricing plan. Someone said flat out that in >the >Sabbat vampires, out of clans cost half, and the Sabbat (not Sabbat War) >vamps >seem to live up to this, but maybe this has been changed, ignored, or was >never >actually the case. I'm not sure if half for out-of-clan was "officially" done in Sabbat, but I think it's pretty clear that it isn't done anymore. So you shouldn't use that in calculating formulas. >C) The whole idea of a vampire costing system could be a complete pipe dream, >and we usenet folks have found a coincidental pattern where none was intended >(I don't think this is actually the case, but I just watched Pi this >morning...) Always possible... Halcyan 2

xi...@waste.org writes: >> Nah. Xian: Cardano's Bitch should be an ally card. 2 pool, 1 life, >> 1 hand, 0 bleed. Little cameo of Cardano on the left side to indicate >> only Cardano can recruit. >You'd think I'd at least get a special power or something. Oh of course! I just hadn't thought of anything appropriate and funny enough yet. Hand size increases by 1 when Big C is acting or blocking? Tap when Big C plays a reaction card to gain 1 pool? Burn to prevent Big C from going to torpor or burning? >"Xian may take a +1 stealth action to put 2 blood from the blood bank on >Cardano. If this action is successful, you must say 'Cardano is king. Hail >to the king, baby.'" Duh. Flavor text for humor. "If the Big C is still ready at the end of a combat, all Methuselahs must say 'Cardano is da vampire!' or lose one pool." [ quoted text not captured ]

>Then you got Mr. Suck himself, Appolonius: (10) CEL, PRE, pot, for, Primogen, >+1 bleed, Optional Press. > >6 points in disciplines, 1 point in Primogen (we'll just assume), 2 points in >+1 bleed (again, just go with it...), and *then* he blows 2 points on his >press. At least that way, he is spending all of his points. If the Primogen >was >.5 and the +1 bleed was 1.5, he'd be spending 3 points on his press. I don't >even wanna think about that anymore. Don't even get us started on the 9-10-cap Primogens. It's been re-hashed over and over again. Some, though still a bit overcosted, are decent (Masika, Cassandra, Basilia, Wynn) while others are downright laughable (King Appolonius most notably). And don't *anyone* dare diss Cassandra! She's cool! >Oh yeah. Commander Sela. She has some rediculous amount of stuff, right? Let >me >go look... > >Sela (6) POT, PRE, cel, obt, Bishop, +1 bleed, corner case special. Awful case of brokenness! Using the current system: Disciplines: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 6 Title = 0.5 Special #1: Corner-case enough to be free Special #2: Bleed bonus is 1 6 + 0.5 + 1 = 7.5 for a 6-cap. Ouch! Sheila Mezarin and old-school Caitlin also fall into this sort of undercosted-ness. And Jimmy Dunn and Rigby are pretty bad too (with not particularly significant "disadvantages.") Halcyan 2

Chris wrote: >>There is evidence that that system is not followed for SW, FN, and Bloodlines.>> That may very well be the case. Lemme check out some BL vamps... Karl: (6) POT, FOR, san, pre Karl fits perfectly under the pre-Sabbat pricing scheme. Exactly like Badger, he has 2 in clan superiors, 1 in clan inferior, and one out of clan inferior. And just like Badger, he costs 6. A good sign. George Fredrick: (6) THN, FOR, obf, nec And again, a standard 6 point vampire. Granted, I think nec is essentially an in clan discipline for the Samedi (who, as I understand it, get 4 in clans), but still, a 6 pointer with 2 superiors and 2 inferiors is pure industry standard, leading me to believe (along with my look at the new Independant vamps) that maybe the "out of clans cost half" idea has , in fact, gone away. Which would be good. I'll keep looking. Reg Driscoll: (8) THN, OBF, for, pre, aus, +1 bleed, ok special. Assuming no half cost for out of clans, Reg gets 7 points in disciplines, a point for +1 bleed, and a point for his special (seems reasonable). Thus, 9 points of stuff (X+1 for 7's and 8's). Bartholomew: (8) NEC, MYT, AUS, obt, dom, ok special. He has 8 points of disciplines (again, assuming that there is no more "half cost" deal going on) and a special Ican see as being worth a point. Math works. Saxum, Master of Slaves: (6) FOR, SKP, pre, pot, Flight, Slave. Assuming that Flight is considered an advantage that is equivelant to being a Slave as a disadvantage (seems reasonable), Saxum again falls perfectly under the standard, pre Sabbat 6 point vampire template (SKP is shorthand for superior Sock Puppet...) Gael Pilet: (6) FOR, MEL, pre, chi, minor disadvantage. She is falling a bit under the standard 6 pointer template, but only by virtue of her disadvantage, that is fairly minor, considering how her disciplines don't hand out a ton of intercept, and her chi allows her to subtract stealth, which gets around her disadvantage. Cynthia Ingold (6) SPI, pre, for, ani, ok special. Again, she falls under the 6 pointer mark--she is trading a second superior for conditional +1 hand damage. As she should have been able to get basic +1 hand damage for 1 point (which is what she gets back by losing a second superior), she comes out looking a tad shy. Nettie Hale: (5) spi, pro, pre, cel, ani, ok special. She seems fairly standard--5 points of disciplines for a 5 point vampire. But then she gets a bonus special that is easily equivalent to her pal Cynthia's, making Nettie a tad undercosted where Cynthia is a tad overcosted. Maybe Nettie got to keep Cynthia's extra half point. Gisela Harden, The Winnower: (6) NEC, FOR, dem, aus, title, significant special. Assuming that 7 point vampires do, in fact, get X+1 points of stuff, Gisela seems pretty much on track. 6 points in disciplines, a point for her title, and a point for her special. Granted, her getting charged only a point for her pretty serious special seems a bit low compared to what other folks get charged for, like, a press or something, so I'd think she was a tad undercosted, but that is me. Basically, it looks like the post Sabbat vampires (Sabbat War, FN, BL) were designed assuming that all disciplines cost 2 points for a superior and 1 point for an inferior (i.e. they killed off the "half cost for out of clan disciplines" from the Sabbat set), which is good. And the vampires all look pretty balanced with each other. [ quoted text not captured ]

>People keep saying that Sabbat vampires get more disciplines, but I don't >think that's true. As far as I can tell from the 3rd edition book, there is >no longer any difference in creation for Sabbat or Cam. But even using the >old rules (IIRC), any Camarilla vampire that wants more disciplines can have >as many as a Sabbat vampire. Basically, Sabbat vampires are forced to spend >7 points on a 4th discipline. So they don't have more disciplines, they >have less flexibility. > Really? I'm still pretty sure that 3rd Edition has some slightly different character creation rules: Cam vs. Sabbat 1. Sabbat get a fourth dot in Disciplines 2. However, Sabbat get *no* dots in Backgrounds (unlike the five the Cammies get). In addition, there are some limitations to Sabbat getting backgrounds (you can't let other Sabbat know about Allies and Contacts for example since they are prey). 3. In addition, since most Sabbat aren't on Humanity (or perhaps irregardless of that), most Sabbat don't get an automatic dot in each of their Virtues. And of course, Camarilla and Sabbat vampires each get access to sect-specific categories. Halcyan 2

Halcyan2 wrote: >>I'm not sure if half for out-of-clan was "officially" done in Sabbat, but I think it's pretty clear that it isn't done anymore. So you shouldn't use that in calculating formulas.>> Yeah, I'm fairly certain this is correct. After looking at your math, and pricing out some BL vamps up above somewhere, it seems apparent that the "half cost for out of clans" is, in fact, no longer a concept to think about. Yaa! As to the half price out of clans in Sabbat, I am pretty sure that someone involved in designing Sabbat (don't remember who--it was a long time ago) stated flat out in this forum that in that expansion, the "new" pricing scheme involved half cost for out of clans (which I remember quite well, as I was deeply involved in complaining about it :-) Luckily, all is well again in vampire costing land. If only Sebastian Marley wasn't still screwed by his having to pay 2 points for his +1 strength :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

Chris Berger wrote: > "Peter D Bakija" <pd...@aol.comANTISPAM> wrote in message > > This seems steep, leading me to believe that the > > whole "out of clan disciplines cost half" system is a vague one, at best. > > > Really, I hope that they no longer use that system, if they ever did. The current DT never has (and never will). The current DT system recognizes no "in clan" or "out of clan" distinctions. > That's really silly. Correct. :-) -- 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/

>The thing is, if you pay half for out-of-clans, you end up with vampires >that are horribly broken in decks that don't use strict clan disciplines. And, you end up with a lot of bad decks because you often have a limited number of vampires to choose from that fit your disciplines. Sure, if a vampire has all of the inclans of some other clan, it fits well with them. But, for the most part, you are getting worthless tack ons instead of far more useful inclan disciplines.

"Curevei" <cur...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020221215348...@mb-mg.aol.com... [ quoted text not captured ] You'll notice that the off disciplines of big vampires are being geared more and more toward either a) making them useful for a second or even third clan, or b) one to three very common off disciplines for a clan... for example, a fair number of big Assamites have aus, pre, or tha. A fair number of the newer big Assamites seem to be designed with that it mind. This makes the idea of "out-of-clan" disciplines a little hazy.

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020221212755...@mb-cg.aol.com... > > > > As far as I can tell from the 3rd edition book, there is > > no longer any difference in creation for Sabbat or Cam. > > Really? I'm still pretty sure that 3rd Edition has some slightly different > character creation rules: > Well, there may be special rules in the 3rd Edition Sabbat book, however the main rule book now combines Sabbat and Cam, and allows you to create a vampire for either sect. The basic rules have no special creation for Sabbat (or they're *really* well hidden). If there *are* special creation rules (which means any player who creates their Tzimisce from the base rules is doing it *wrong*), that's kind of annoying of WW. But then, they've always done a *few* things that just annoyed the piss out of me.

>That may very well be the case. Lemme check out some BL vamps... > >Karl: (6) POT, FOR, san, pre > >Karl fits perfectly under the pre-Sabbat pricing scheme. Exactly like Badger, >he has 2 in clan superiors, 1 in clan inferior, and one out of clan inferior. >And just like Badger, he costs 6. A good sign. Yeah, overall Bloodlines does an excellent job with point costing. The only quirk of the system is the presence of various disadvantages. Some, like Infernal are considered serious enough that the Baali are compensated with in other points. Similarly, in most cases, Slave is enough of a disadvantage that Flight is there to make up for it. However, Sterile (Blood Brothers and Ahrimanes), Cold Iron Vulnerability (Kiasyd), and intercept penalties (DoC) are just sort of "there." Similarly, Scarceness doesn't actually give most of the Scarce vampires extra points. (Though just about all of the Scarce vampires actually get a nifty special to compensate I guess). And the no-Celerity handicap for Trujah seems to be just tacked on. In most of these cases, the penalties are corner-case enough to not warrant extra points but it still seems a bit fair, especially since the Harbingers, Samedi, and !Salubri luck out by not having any disadvantages at all! >Saxum, Master of Slaves: (6) FOR, SKP, pre, pot, Flight, Slave. > >Assuming that Flight is considered an advantage that is equivelant to being a >Slave as a disadvantage (seems reasonable), Saxum again falls perfectly under >the standard, pre Sabbat 6 point vampire template (SKP is shorthand for >superior Sock Puppet...) Of course the coolest Gargoyle is definitely Pugfar! The !Tremere's pet Rhino! =P Pugfar [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Gargoyle Capacity: 5 Discipline: aus for vis POT Sabbat Tremere Antitribu Slave: Pugfar can burn one blood to give a Tremere antitribu you control a press. Flight. 5 points of disciplines (and aus is pretty good for the !Tremere), the Flight and the Slave balance out, *plus* he gets a nifty special. Much better than Luma and Obsiddian. >She seems fairly standard--5 points of disciplines for a 5 point vampire. But >then she gets a bonus special that is easily equivalent to her pal Cynthia's, >making Nettie a tad undercosted where Cynthia is a tad overcosted. Maybe >Nettie >got to keep Cynthia's extra half point. Agreed. Cynthia's a bit overcosted with her conditional strength bonus costing a full point (just like Dedefra). And Nettie's a bit undercosted, probably getting her special for free (similar to Joaquina's free special). I guess in Nettie's case, the free special is to compensate for her bad discipline-spread. Similarly, I recall someone mentioning how in Sabbat, discipline-spread was also a (not-exact) factor. So Jost was considered balance because lacking an in-clan (Celerity) was considered enough of a balancing factor. >Gisela Harden, The Winnower: (6) NEC, FOR, dem, aus, title, significant >special. > >Assuming that 7 point vampires do, in fact, get X+1 points of stuff, Gisela >seems pretty much on track. 6 points in disciplines, a point for her title, >and >a point for her special. Granted, her getting charged only a point for her >pretty serious special seems a bit low compared to what other folks get >charged >for, like, a press or something, so I'd think she was a tad undercosted, but >that is me. While I hate to admit (because they're loser Cappadocian scum!), the Harbingers ended up with the best vampires point-wise IMHO. No disadvantages, and, in addition to the nifty decking clan cards, the Harbingers have some very powerful specials too. Everyone but Unre is pretty kick-ass and Unre's special is kinda corner-case but potentially powerful. Evil evil Harbingers!!! Halcyan 2

Halcyan 2 wrote: > However, [...] intercept penalties (DoC) are just sort of "there." ? 3 of 5 DoC intercept penalties are costed at a point. The other two are minor enough to be either rounded off or offset by other sub-point advantages. [ quoted text not captured ]

curt...@aol.com (CurtAdams) wrote in message news:<20020221182119...@mb-ba.aol.com>... > Xian writes: [snip theory] > Have you considered a career in detective work or research? Research, yes. I eventually mean to get back to grad school for work in psycholinguistics. (Gotta love how that sounds so much more Orwellian than "psychology of language".) If the whole rock star thing doesn't pan out. :) and Peter wrote: > I've been in discussions with people actually defending their choice > of Crusher for reasons other than simple aesthetics. That's crazy talk. Crusher is so not worth it, unless you're using his fortitude as well. I suppose you could get some sort of mileage out of a themed "ugly biker guys" deck, but still... > Yeah, that Apolonious is such ass, I can't even think of every seeing him > used in any deck, anywhere, that I have ever seen. The last time I recall seeing him used was back in the (early) fall of 1994, possibly during the first week or so after the game was released, and a friend got out Appolonius and put an Assault Rifle on him. That was scary. Until they saw my Anneke with THA a couple of games later. :) > As I have said before and I will say again--I like the cut of your jib, > baby. Heh. Thanks...and I gotta shout out to my homie Peter, who taught me all about rush. Now if only LSJ had amazing powers over time and space and could verify the theory based on probably now-destroyed WotC documents. Or maybe it's a big conspiracy, right from the start. "We'll make these high-capacity primogen really sucky, so that no one will play them. Yeah, that's the ticket!" Totally looking forward to (finally) meeting up with you at Origins. :) Xian "I like the cut of his jib, Smithers."

>> However, [...] intercept penalties (DoC) are just sort of "there." > >? >3 of 5 DoC intercept penalties are costed at a point. The other two are >minor enough to be either rounded off or offset by other sub-point >advantages. Sorry, just a quick generalization. (Back to that recent thread about how you shouldn't post in a hurry!). Muse [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Daughter of Cacophony Capacity: 3 Discipline: ani for mel Sabbat: -1 intercept. Disciplines: 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 Special: Intercept is enough for a penalty. -1 3 - 1 = 2 Just right for a 3-cap (capacity - 1) Céleste, The Voice of a Secret [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Daughter of Cacophony Capacity: 3 Discipline: pre mel Independent: Céleste gets -1 intercept when attempting to block a bleed action. Céleste gets +1 bleed when bleeding a Methuselah who controls a ready Toreador. Disciplines: 1 + 1 = 2 Special: I guess it kinda evens out. The intercept penalty is even more restricted than Muse's and Delilah's (just on bleeds) and the bleed bonus is very conditional as well. The two are probably tacked on for free. 0 2 + 0 = 2 Just right for a 3-cap (capacity - 1) Delilah Monroe [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Daughter of Cacophony Capacity: 4 Discipline: for pre MEL Independent: Delilah gets -1 intercept when attempting to block an older vampire. Disciplines: 1 + 1 + 2 = 4 Special: Though not as bad as Muse's intercept penalty, it is enough to warrant a -1. 4 - 1 = 3 Just right for a 3-cap. Angela Preston [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Daughter of Cacophony Capacity: 5 Discipline: for PRE MEL Camarilla: Angela must burn 1 blood to attempt to block an older vampire. You may tap Angela during your influence phase to untap any other vampire. Disciplines: 1 + 2 + 2 = 5 Special: She gets a really cool special (untap other vamps) which is balanced with an annoying intercept penalty. The two balance each other out. 1 - 1 = 0 5 + 0 = 5 Just right for a 5-cap. Overall, Angela's the best DoC IMHO. Not only does she have a pretty pic, a really nifty special, but she's also Cam! =P Gaël Pilet [BL] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Daughter of Cacophony Capacity: 6 Discipline: chi pre FOR MEL Independent: Gaël can never have more than 1 intercept. Any additional intercept she gains is lost. Disciplines: 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 Special: Pretty nasty intercept penalty. At least -1, IMHO. 6 - 1 = 5 Seems to be overcosted. A typical 6-cap should have an additional point. Now Gael was what I had in mind with my previous comment. She sort of gets shafted by having the DoC intercept penalty. She doesn't have a positive special and her discipline-spread isn't even that great either. My apologies for my lack of clarity earlier. Halcyan 2

Halcyan 2 wrote: > Gaėl Pilet [BL] > Cardtype: Vampire > Clan: Daughter of Cacophony > Capacity: 6 > Discipline: chi pre FOR MEL > Independent: Gaėl can never have more than 1 intercept. Any additional > intercept she gains is lost. > > Disciplines: 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 > Special: Pretty nasty intercept penalty. At least -1, IMHO. Hmm. I don't see how her special can be seen as worth a point, especially given her disciplines (although that isn't all that important). I wouldn't even score it at half a point. YMMV, of course. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020222132913...@mb-mq.aol.com... > > Gaël Pilet [BL] > Cardtype: Vampire > Clan: Daughter of Cacophony > Capacity: 6 > Discipline: chi pre FOR MEL > Independent: Gaël can never have more than 1 intercept. Any additional > intercept she gains is lost. > > > Now Gael was what I had in mind with my previous comment. She sort of gets > shafted by having the DoC intercept penalty. She doesn't have a positive > special and her discipline-spread isn't even that great either. > Her particular intercept penalty has never meant anything to me. The only in-clan intercept card she gets is Tourette's Voice (she also has access to chimerstry which has like 1 intercept card (I forget what it is), and a few -stealth cards) . Personally I never use it, because Daughters are crap for intercept (which is probably why my DoC deck is no longer together. It needs 2 or 3 Archon Investigations, and then forward momentum should be enough to keep it alive against small non-horde bleed). She could have otherwise used Sport Bike and media locations, etc., to get higher than 1 intercept, but the thing is, most actions by focused decks will either be 0 stealth, 1 stealth, or essentially unblockable (enough stealth that it doesn't matter, in which case intercepting is counter-productive, or else literally unblockable). Granted, the more toolboxed decks will have many +2 or +3 stealth actions, but if you're packing a lot of intercept in your Daughters deck, you're just fighting a losing battle. The Daughters will always be worse at blocking than everybody else (except Moncada, that worthless sack of crap... *grin*), and it's usually better to play to your strengths rather than your weaknesses. IMO, Gael's disadvantage is about 0 to .5 points, but closer to 0 because of the decks she will be played in - DoC: none of your vamps can intercept, so don't bother; and Ravnos with pre - you have very little intercept anyway, because even if you're blocking, you tend to do it with Ignorant Fatass and Draba (and to a lesser extent, Veiled Sight).

>IMO, Gael's disadvantage is about 0 to .5 points, but closer to 0 because of >the decks she will be played in - DoC: none of your vamps can intercept, so >don't bother; and Ravnos with pre - you have very little intercept anyway, >because even if you're blocking, you tend to do it with Ignorant Fatass and >Draba (and to a lesser extent, Veiled Sight). I still think it's worth a full minus point because it really limits her potential. Don't over-estimate how useful even cross-table RCG/London/RumourMill/ Masquer Wraith can be. Halcyan 2

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20020222143007...@mb-mq.aol.com... [ quoted text not captured ] You think that max of 1 intercept is as bad as -1 intercept? -1 means you can't even block 0 stealth actions. And cross-table media locations aren't that useful if you're tapped out with no wakes (and why include wakes if you have no bleed bounce and can't block for shit?)... Even if you're untapped, all it'll usually get you is a predator who has cycled his extra stealth. Daughters aren't a combat clan either, so all you can do once you've blocked is prevent/majesty.

On 22 Feb 2002 01:20:29 GMT, pd...@aol.comANTISPAM (Peter D Bakija) wrote: >Bajazet al Nasir: (8) ASS, OBF, pre, for, cel, significant special. > >He gets 6 points in disciplines (ASS is whatever discipline the Assamites >get--I don't remeber the blood discipline name) and a good special. Again, if >8's get X+1 in stuff, he is paying 3 points forhis special ability, which is >good, but that seems steep. But what about the blood curse? Shouldn't that be -1 or -.5 at least? Or do you feel that this negative is somehow counterbalanced by assamite only cards or something? T

>But what about the blood curse? Shouldn't that be -1 or -.5 at least? >Or do you feel that this negative is somehow counterbalanced by >assamite only cards or something? > > Oh no. The Assamites' Blood Curse definitely shouldn't be worth extra points. The thing is, Assamites have such an easy time torporizing vampires. With easy access to agg (Taste of Vitae or various agg hand damage) and the various unpreventable, etc. nasty Quietus strikes, Assamites torporize other vampires quite easily. If they *didn't* have the Blood Curse, they'd be too good at permanently eliminating vampires because then they could munch them if they weren't burned. If you're thinking "if the Assamites are so scary in combat then why don't they win or are played more often," it's because they don't do too much besides fight. They can't bleed very well and only recently (FN) did they manage to get decent intercept/weapon decks possible... Halcyan 2

>My point: It doesn´t matter how you count. Some vampires are always >going to better, since the disciplines and the clans aren´t equal and >hard to compare and cards come out and changes the balance. A point system is insufficient, yes, for producing balance. Any of the point systems could be manipulated to produce particularly good or bad vampires. But, as a guideline, it's important to have a solid point system as part of the checklist for producing good cards. A card that strays too far suggests a possible bad design. >I´ll take a point in dominate before a point of >chimerstry/animalism/quiteus/necromancy/vicissitude/serpentis/whatever >bloodlines disc any day of the week as an out-of-clan disc on almost >any vampire. And I don´t just like playing bleed-decks. Sure, Dominate is far stronger, so strong, in my system, I value it differently than other disciplines. But, that's just an argument for rebalancing the disciplines in the game. >Example: How would you value this vampire? > >Evert ,Toreador 7-cap >aus PRE OBT >Prince of Novosibirsk Weak. Even though interesting to see some play, not a good design. Add cel, and it's significantly better. Upgrade to AUS, ditto. Lots of things that could be done that wouldn't turn it into an overpowered or less interesting card. >Doesn´t seem to good. But with >Moncada/Polonia/Alvaro/Jessica/Sela/Jacko/Ayela is gets a little >better, right? But, not good enough. Don't want to design a bunch of vampires that fit into only one deck. >Personally, I wouldn´t mind some overpowered vamps with good common >disciplines as long as they don´t power up just a single deck type. >But who knows what the future holds regarding deck types? > >Another example: > >Sune, Ventrue 5-cap >for DOM pre THA >Sune can not attempt political actions. Not overpowered, IMO, if that's what you are getting at. Probably wouldn't get made because it fits Trem/!Trem a bit too closely for a wrong clan 5 cap. But, this will likely never get made either: Sho'nuff Malkavian - 5 cap aus, DOM, OBF This is perfectly reasonable by a point system, but feeding stealth bleed is not a priority. >> What we are doing is disecting the >> minutae of this system (mostly 'cause it is fun), especially in light of >the >> fact that the system changed at some point, so vampires that were built >with >> the old system are just plain worse than equivelant vampires built under >the >> new system. > >This is what I don´t like. Bitching about the old vampires. Can >someone honestly say that the camarilla doesn´t make in todays game >because of bad vampires? I´m afraid that the cam set will offset the >balance (but that is, in theory, impossible). As the game stands now >the cam has better library and worse crypt than the sabbat and the >independants are somewhere in between. What´s wrong with that? If the >cam vamps should be powerful, Sune is a good example. Go Sune! There are good Cam vampires. The good ones hide the fact that there are also a lot of not so good ones. Sure, the Cam has traditions, but not every Cam vampire can play them. A lot of Cam vampires would see regular play if they didn't suck so bad. And, that doesn't strike me as a bad thing.

On 24 Feb 2002 03:43:36 GMT, halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote: >>But what about the blood curse? Shouldn't that be -1 or -.5 at least? >>Or do you feel that this negative is somehow counterbalanced by >>assamite only cards or something? >> >> > >Oh no. The Assamites' Blood Curse definitely shouldn't be worth extra points. > >The thing is, Assamites have such an easy time torporizing vampires. Well so do Gangrel and Brujah. Assamites have funkier combat but they pay for it usually with blood costs or requirments like 'second round, only usuable long' etc. T [ quoted text not captured ]

[Please post properly. This includes snipping text you're not referring to, like all the stuff you didn't snip at the end.] In message <3c79335a.350190169@news>, Talo...@nospam.hotmail.com writes: >>Oh no. The Assamites' Blood Curse definitely shouldn't be worth extra points. >> >>The thing is, Assamites have such an easy time torporizing vampires. > >Well so do Gangrel and Brujah. Assamites have funkier combat but they >pay for it usually with blood costs or requirments like 'second round, >only usuable long' etc. The point is rather than the Assamites, damage wise, have a much easier time. They can generate additional strikes far more easily than the Gangrel (Blur) and they can generate aggravated damage much more easily than the Brujah (Taste of Death). And they generate unpreventable damage rather more easily than either. The Gangrel will leave you in torpor with blood, if you didn't already do minor damage prevention. The Brujah will hit you hard, but can't "guarantee" torpor because of the lack of agg damage, and if you play fight-back, disarm is tricky. The Gangrel are compensated rather by their damage prevention and superb maneuvering (Quick Meld, if they choose) - neither the Brujah nor the Assamites are very good at it. This means that when the Assamites strike, they can practically annihilate anything they choose, with good enough deck construction. S:CE is their big weakness. But when they strike, you should blow up - because you take damage from unpreventables, or you take agg damage if not. With the Brujah and the Gangrel, damage prevention is a big, big option as well as everything else. [Large snip.] -- James Coupe but I lust after the raw pow0r of c. PGP 0x5D623D5D together with the humping great EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 elephant arse of gnome. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D - Vashti