Jasper, here comes the POT OBF SER deck:
Unholy marriage
Nosferatu / Setite / Ventrue, Traditional Corruption deck
Have fun with it.
Anyone has ideas how to improve it?
Michael Beer
Crypt
Name Clan and Capacity Disciplines Specials
Suheila Ventrue, 9 pot OBF ser Prince, +1 bleed, +1 stealth on each of her actions if your prey controls a ready Prince or Justicar
Suheila
Murat Nosferatu, 7 POT OBF ser Prince
Murat
Dedefra Setite, 5 obf SER Non-Camarilla, +1 hand damage vs. Camarilla vamps
Dedefra
Agrippina Nosferatu, 4 pot OBF
Agatha !Nosferatu, 4 POT obf
Nikolaus Nosferatu, 7 POT obf Prince, during your untap you can move 1 blood to an uncontrolled Nosferatu
Koko Nosferatu, 2 pot
Dimple Nosferatu, 2 obf
Duck Nosferatu, 3 pot obf
Library
Master: 15
2x Potence
2x Obfuscate
2x Serpentis
1x The Labyrinth
1x Opium Den
1x Ventrue Headquarters
3x Minion Tap
3x Blood Doll
Actions: 20
3x 3rd Tradition
4x 4th Tradition
3x 5th Tradition
4x Night Moves
2x Form of Corruption
2x Temptation
1x Lure of the Serpent
1x Rampage
Political Actions
none
Equipment: 5
2x Laptop Computer
1x Senguir Dagger
1x Sport Bike
1x Flack Jacket
Retainers
none
Allies
none
Modifiers: 20
5x Cloak the Gathering
5x Mask of 1k Faces
5x Lost in Crowds
5x Faceless Nights
Reactions: 10
6x 2nd Tradition
2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
2x Delaying Tactics
Combat: 20
5x Torn Signpost
5x Undead Strength
4x Thrown Sewer Lid
1x Shattering Blow
5x Taste of Vitae
Total number of cards: 90
Tactic: Have fun and surprise your opponents with an unusual deck
Bleed defense: Traditional intercept, Blood machine
Vote defense: own votes
Combat defense: fight back with Potence
House rules: Official DCI-rules, Concealed Weapon is skill-less
Deck by: Michael Beer, Dortmund, Germany
In article <35DEC8AE...@leila.ping.de>,
Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
>
>Crypt
>
> Name Clan and Disciplines Specials
> Capacity
> Suheila Ventrue, 9 pot OBF ser each of her actions if your prey> Suheila
> Murat Nosferatu, 7 POT OBF ser Prince
> Murat
> Dedefra Setite, 5 obf SER Non-Camarilla, +1 hand damage> Dedefra
> AgrippinaNosferatu, 4 pot OBF> Agatha !Nosferatu, 4 POT obf> Nikolaus Nosferatu, 7 POT obf can move 1 blood to an> Koko Nosferatu, 2 pot
> Dimple Nosferatu, 2 obf
> Duck Nosferatu, 3 pot obf
You might want to consider Olivia, who I'd prefer over Agrippina at
least: 5 !Nos Bishop w/ POT OBF
> * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
Seems to me there aught to be something better here, since you don't
have any of your own votes. The Grand Temple of Set could be fun,
although you don't have much intercept.
Actually, on second thought with all that stealth you need some Hand
cycling -- badly. The Secret Library of Alexandria and perhaps a Barrens.
> * 4x Night Moves
> * 2x Form of Corruption
> * 2x Temptation
> * 1x Lure of the Serpent
> * 1x Rampage
Hmmm, which locations are you scared of? I'd probably ditch the Lure and
the Rampage for another Temptation + Form of Corruption. What else
are the Settites really for? ;-)
>Equipment: 5
>
> * 2x Laptop Computer
> * 1x Senguir Dagger
> * 1x Sport Bike
> * 1x Flack Jacket
This is more equipment then I normally care for, but this is a rather
slowly developing deck, so maybe it's not so bad.
>Modifiers: 20
>
> * 5x Cloak the Gathering
> * 5x Mask of 1k Faces
> * 5x Lost in Crowds
> * 5x Faceless Nights
Why not lose some of this for some more corruption stuff? This is enough
to cause serious problems with hand jam, and the only thing you have
that people will really be wanting to block is the corruption --
which you don't have much of. I would probably ditch the Faceless
Nights. Also, consider that you have 4 Night Moves in addition; those
are probably good to keep -- or even increase, since they'll get
you the edge to "tempt" your prey when he bleeds, and they're more easily
cyclable.
>Reactions: 10
>
> * 6x 2nd Tradition
> * 2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
> * 2x Delaying Tactics
Why Wakes instead of more 2nd Tradition, or something else?
>Combat: 20
>
> * 5x Torn Signpost
> * 5x Undead Strength
> * 4x Thrown Sewer Lid
> * 1x Shattering Blow
> * 5x Taste of Vitae
Wheres the Immortal Grapple! Just kidding. ;-) Actually, a few just
for suprise value might come in handy. Also, I'd ditch the Sewer Lids,
since you have no way to get to long range by yourself; They're not
enough of a deterent to stop a serious ranged attack deck anyway.
This should give you a little bit more room for some of the other
potence goodies.
Actually, what might _really_ work well here is Death of My Conscience!
It would help cycle those unused stealth cards (since any decent
opponent won't try to block once he realizes what's going on),
and quite possibly shock your opponent. Besides, the name seems
rather fitting somehow in a Serpentis deck...
Also, do you really fear Equipment? I'd ditch the Shattering Blow.
All in all, a pretty cool deck. I'm tempted to give something similar
a try, if only because I've always wanted to try to make Serpentis work.
Thanks for posting it. :-)
--
/\ Jasper Phillips
/VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz
j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--.
* http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`
Jasper Phillips wrote:
> In article <35DEC8AE...@leila.ping.de>,
> Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> >
> >Crypt
> >
> > Name Clan and Disciplines Specials> > AgrippinaNosferatu, 4 pot OBF>
> You might want to consider Olivia, who I'd prefer over Agrippina at
> least: 5 !Nos Bishop w/ POT OBF
>
Good point.
>
>
>
> > * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
>
> Seems to me there aught to be something better here, since you don't
> have any of your own votes. The Grand Temple of Set could be fun,
> although you don't have much intercept.
>
Diablerie. Vote defense. Diplomacy.
>
>
>
> Actually, on second thought with all that stealth you need some Hand
> cycling -- badly. The Secret Library of Alexandria and perhaps a Barrens.
>
Hm. My environment is often intercept-heavy, and if some aggressive boy /
girl is spotted hurling a decent deck, often other players ally so that the
good deck gets toasted.
This takes often the form of: I don't bleed you for the next 5 turns (your
grandpredator's voice)
I am glad that now crosstable bleeding is forbidden (too often some strong
deck without bleed defense were bled crosstable by those who were intimidated
by piles of pool and complete vote dominance. One of the reasons that votes
decks are not so popular here),
but often extreme boon mongering shows up if someone else can do you any harm
crosstable ("I will do anything you want if you destroy my predator.")
So serious stealth is needed if you want to act successfully long term. After
all, with 3rd and 4th Tradition you can activate hordes of minions in a very
short period of time.
But since I want to go with permanent stealth (by location or vampire), I
could use less stealth cards. The Secret Library is a worthy addition. I will
test it out which card is better in actual game play. Succubus Club may be
good too: You can trade away your surplus cards during untap and get some
cool cards to waste during that turn...
>
>
>
> > * 4x Night Moves
> > * 2x Form of Corruption
> > * 2x Temptation
> > * 1x Lure of the Serpent
> > * 1x Rampage
>
> Hmmm, which locations are you scared of? I'd probably ditch the Lure and
> the Rampage for another Temptation + Form of Corruption. What else
> are the Settites really for? ;-)
>
Scared? Of none. But to see an Art Museum of your prey burning down to the
ground is always satisfying AND helps you. The main reason that I didn't put
in more of those serpentis corruption cards is - that I own only two of each.
They're rares. Possible replacements for the Rampage and Lure of the Serpent
are Heart of Darkness (unlikely because you need SER to gain maximum effect),
Mark of Damnation (cool in this deck. Setites are NOT only for corruption ;),
Sacrificial Lamb (one may be ok) and Computer Hacking (You don't block: you
die.)
>
>
>
> >Equipment: 5
> >
> > * 2x Laptop Computer
> > * 1x Senguir Dagger
> > * 1x Sport Bike
> > * 1x Flack Jacket
>
> This is more equipment then I normally care for, but this is a rather
> slowly developing deck, so maybe it's not so bad.
>
Especially since this is a minion-generating deck which will have a huge
action recource.
>
>
>
> >Modifiers: 20
> >
> > * 5x Cloak the Gathering
> > * 5x Mask of 1k Faces
> > * 5x Lost in Crowds
> > * 5x Faceless Nights
>
> Why not lose some of this for some more corruption stuff? This is enough
> to cause serious problems with hand jam, and the only thing you have
> that people will really be wanting to block is the corruption --
> which you don't have much of. I would probably ditch the Faceless
> Nights. Also, consider that you have 4 Night Moves in addition; those
> are probably good to keep -- or even increase, since they'll get
> you the edge to "tempt" your prey when he bleeds, and they're more easily
> cyclable.
>
good points. Will ditch 5x Faceless Nights for 5x Night Moves. No powerpunch,
but nearly irresistable.
>
>
>
> >Reactions: 10
> >
> > * 6x 2nd Tradition
> > * 2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
> > * 2x Delaying Tactics
>
> Why Wakes instead of more 2nd Tradition, or something else?
Sometimes even your princes need some peace, for example when they are low on
blood. Then you might want someone else to do the dirty work. And the number
of available princes is limited.
>
>
>
>
> >Combat: 20
> >
> > * 5x Torn Signpost
> > * 5x Undead Strength
> > * 4x Thrown Sewer Lid
> > * 1x Shattering Blow
> > * 5x Taste of Vitae
>
> Wheres the Immortal Grapple! Just kidding. ;-) Actually, a few just
> for suprise value might come in handy. Also, I'd ditch the Sewer Lids,
> since you have no way to get to long range by yourself; They're not
> enough of a deterent to stop a serious ranged attack deck anyway.
> This should give you a little bit more room for some of the other
> potence goodies.
>
Ditch 4x Thrown Sewer Lid for 3x Death of my Concience + 1x Amaranth. I will
keep the Shattering Blow since annoying equipment shows up often enough and I
want to get rid of enemy's Flack Jackets and Sport Bikes. I love their face
expression when they see their sport bike spit all over the street in pieces.
>
>
>
> Actually, what might _really_ work well here is Death of My Conscience!
> It would help cycle those unused stealth cards (since any decent
> opponent won't try to block once he realizes what's going on),
> and quite possibly shock your opponent. Besides, the name seems
> rather fitting somehow in a Serpentis deck...
>
yep. see above.
>
>
>
> All in all, a pretty cool deck. I'm tempted to give something similar
> a try, if only because I've always wanted to try to make Serpentis work.
> Thanks for posting it. :-)
>
No prob.
Michael Beer
To start off, I really like this concept...of course I'm very fond of unusual
combinations...I've got a couple brief suggestions, but I think Jasper covered
most of them...
In article <6rmkvo$gvj$1...@news.NERO.NET>,
phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote:
> In article <35DEC8AE...@leila.ping.de>,
> Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> >
> >Crypt> > * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
>
> Seems to me there aught to be something better here, since you don't
> have any of your own votes. The Grand Temple of Set could be fun,
> although you don't have much intercept.
Personally, I like Realm of the Black Sun, but for this one card slot it's
probably a matter of personal preference...
> >Equipment: 5
> >
> > * 2x Laptop Computer
> > * 1x Senguir Dagger
> > * 1x Sport Bike
> > * 1x Flack Jacket
>
> This is more equipment then I normally care for, but this is a rather
> slowly developing deck, so maybe it's not so bad.
I'd recommend ditching the laptops for a couple of Spying Missions...and
although the Sengir Dagger is always a bonus, I don't think 1 Sport Bike and
1 Flak Jacket in even a 90 card deck is enough to be useful. I'd say put
more in or ditch them.
>
> >Modifiers: 20
> >
> > * 5x Cloak the Gathering
> > * 5x Mask of 1k Faces
> > * 5x Lost in Crowds
> > * 5x Faceless Nights
>
> Why not lose some of this for some more corruption stuff? This is enough
> to cause serious problems with hand jam, and the only thing you have
> that people will really be wanting to block is the corruption --
> which you don't have much of. I would probably ditch the Faceless
> Nights. Also, consider that you have 4 Night Moves in addition; those
> are probably good to keep -- or even increase, since they'll get
> you the edge to "tempt" your prey when he bleeds, and they're more easily
> cyclable.
Yup. I'd knock most of those down to 3 each with 5 Lost in Crowds as the sole
exception. Swallowed by Night is also good.
>
> >Reactions: 10
> >
> > * 6x 2nd Tradition
> > * 2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
> > * 2x Delaying Tactics
>
> Why Wakes instead of more 2nd Tradition, or something else?
Hmm...I'm intrigued by the Delaying Tactics. I've never found the card very
useful...and I'd like to hear your reasoning for including it. I could see
it in an intercept deck when you just don't have enough intercept right now,
or at endgame, but otherwise, it has struck me as being close to wallpaper.
>
> >Combat: 20
> >
> > * 5x Torn Signpost
> > * 5x Undead Strength
> > * 4x Thrown Sewer Lid
> > * 1x Shattering Blow
> > * 5x Taste of Vitae
>
> Wheres the Immortal Grapple! Just kidding. ;-) Actually, a few just
> for suprise value might come in handy. Also, I'd ditch the Sewer Lids,
> since you have no way to get to long range by yourself; They're not
> enough of a deterent to stop a serious ranged attack deck anyway.
> This should give you a little bit more room for some of the other
> potence goodies.
>> Actually, what might _really_ work well here is Death of My Conscience!
> It would help cycle those unused stealth cards (since any decent
> opponent won't try to block once he realizes what's going on),
> and quite possibly shock your opponent. Besides, the name seems
> rather fitting somehow in a Serpentis deck...
There's never enough Death of My Conscience. Although you need the big boys
to play it, it is *so* worthwhile. Sweet sweet Death of My Conscience. Boon
to the Maximum Aggravated Hand Damage deck...
> Also, do you really fear Equipment? I'd ditch the Shattering Blow.
>> All in all, a pretty cool deck. I'm tempted to give something similar
> a try, if only because I've always wanted to try to make Serpentis work.
> Thanks for posting it. :-)
Agreed...
Xian
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
On 22 Aug 1998, Jasper Phillips wrote:
> In article <35DEC8AE...@leila.ping.de>,
> Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> >Crypt
> >> > Name Clan and Disciplines Specials> > Capacity
> > Suheila Ventrue, 9 pot OBF ser each of her actions if your prey> > Suheila
> > Murat Nosferatu, 7 POT OBF ser Prince
> > Murat
> > Dedefra Setite, 5 obf SER Non-Camarilla, +1 hand damage> > Dedefra
> > AgrippinaNosferatu, 4 pot OBF> > Agatha !Nosferatu, 4 POT obf> > Nikolaus Nosferatu, 7 POT obf can move 1 blood to an> > Koko Nosferatu, 2 pot
> > Dimple Nosferatu, 2 obf
> > Duck Nosferatu, 3 pot obf
>> You might want to consider Olivia, who I'd prefer over Agrippina at
> least: 5 !Nos Bishop w/ POT OBF
Don't listen to him! Those Sabbat vampires are EVIL SCUM!!!
Lupus Australis
____ ____
\ \----/ /
|()__()|
__\ __ /__
/ __\()/__ \
|/ \==/ \|
| || |
Cool. Very unorthodox. You could probably play this deck two or
three times before people figure out exactly what it does. Whether it
works or not....who cares, still cool. My suggestions are below.
Sorry about the slight reformatting.
Michael Beer wrote:
>
> Jasper, here comes the POT OBF SER deck:
>
> Unholy marriage
> Nosferatu / Setite / Ventrue, Traditional Corruption deck
>
> Have fun with it.
>
> Anyone has ideas how to improve it?
>
> Michael Beer
>
>
>
> Crypt
>
>
>
>> Name Clan/Cap Disciplines Specials> Suheila Ventrue, 9 pot OBF ser Prince, +1 bleed, +1 stealth on> x2 each of her actions if your
> prey controls ready Pr. or Jst.>
> Murat Nosferatu, 7 POT OBF ser Prince> x2>
> Dedefra Setite, 5 obf SER Non-Camarilla, +1 hand damage> x2 vs. Camarilla vamps>
> Agrippina Nosferatu, 4 pot OBF
> Agatha !Nosferatu, 4 POT obf
> Nikolaus Nosferatu, 7 POT obf Prince, during your untap you
> can move 1 blood to an
> uncontrolled Nosferatu
> Koko Nosferatu, 2 pot
> Dimple Nosferatu, 2 obf
> Duck Nosferatu, 3 pot obf
>
Would Carlotta be a viable option in this deck? I think so. The
recycle option is nice and I believe she has 'pot/obf'.
>
>
> Library
>
> Master: 15
>
>
> * 2x Potence
> * 2x Obfuscate
> * 2x Serpentis
> * 1x The Labyrinth
> * 1x Opium Den
> * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
> * 3x Minion Tap
> * 3x Blood Doll
>
> Actions: 20
>
The Ventrue Headquarters isn't really an option, you only have the one
Ventrue. Replace with Spawning Pool, Dreams of the Sphinx, another
SER discipline card, etc. Yup, love that DotS - the Swiss Army Knife
of master cards.
>
> * 3x 3rd Tradition
> * 4x 4th Tradition
> * 3x 5th Tradition> * 4x Night Moves
> * 2x Form of Corruption
> * 2x Temptation> * 1x Lure of the Serpent
> * 1x Rampage
>
A lot of Night Moves, is there something better? I might do some
research on this. Quick note, if you are going for the assured bleed,
then 'The Secret Library' might be an option.
>
> Political Actions
>
>
> * none
>
A lot of Prince stuff in your deck. Are you sure that throwing in a
Nos Justicar or some Prince vote might not be a good idea - maybe put
in two prayer votes?
>
> Equipment: 5
>
>
> * 2x Laptop Computer
> * 1x Senguir Dagger
> * 1x Sport Bike
> * 1x Flack Jacket
>
Definite need. Throw in a Changeling Skin Mask and a Hand of Conrad.
Instant OBF or POT. 'enuff said. This is the biggest suggestion I
can make for this deck.
>
> Retainers
>
>
> * none
>
> Allies
>
>
> * none>
> Modifiers: 20
>
>
> * 5x Cloak the Gathering
> * 5x Mask of 1k Faces
> * 5x Lost in Crowds> * 5x Faceless Nights
>
> Reactions: 10
>
>
> * 6x 2nd Tradition
> * 2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
> * 2x Delaying Tactics
>
> Combat: 20
>
>> * 5x Torn Signpost
> * 5x Undead Strength
> * 4x Thrown Sewer Lid
> * 1x Shattering Blow> * 5x Taste of Vitae>
> Total number of cards: 90
>
> Tactic: Have fun and surprise your opponents with an unusual deck
>
> Bleed defense: Traditional intercept, Blood machine
>
> Vote defense: own votes
>
> Combat defense: fight back with Potence
>
> House rules: Official DCI-rules, Concealed Weapon is skill-less
>
> Deck by: Michael Beer, Dortmund, Germany
>
Good Luck.
xi...@waste.org wrote:
>
> Hmm...I'm intrigued by the Delaying Tactics. I've never found the
> card very useful...and I'd like to hear your reasoning for including
> it. I could see it in an intercept deck when you just don't have
> enough intercept right now, or at endgame, but otherwise, it has
> struck me as being close to wallpaper.
Nah. Delaying Tactics is pretty solid vote defense. It may seem like
only a one turn stay of execution, but it keeps the vote from being
called for the whole turn, and with NRA they can't vote with that
vampire again either. It's more efficient than trying to vote the vote
down, and hardly anyone can play with reliable intercept and still hope
to win.
> There's never enough Death of My Conscience. Although you need the
> big boys to play it, it is *so* worthwhile. Sweet sweet Death of My
> Conscience. Boon to the Maximum Aggravated Hand Damage deck...
Maybe so, but I can't see it being very useful, especially in this deck.
How worthwhile is it to spend all that blood, ditch cards out of your
hand, and then they just Dodge? And if you're playing a serious potence
combat deck (which this is not), Torn Signpost and Fists of Death are
much better choices. No one ever has to have 10 hand damage; it just
isn't worth it.
James
--
James Hamblin
ham...@math.wisc.edu
V:EKN FAQ Maintainer
http://www.math.wisc.edu/~hamblin/faq.html
"We _do_ kill people... that's sort of our
raison d'etre" -- Spike
xi...@waste.org wrote:
> To start off, I really like this concept...of course I'm very fond of unusual
> combinations...I've got a couple brief suggestions, but I think Jasper covered
> most of them...
>
> In article <6rmkvo$gvj$1...@news.NERO.NET>,> phil...@tx.ENGR.ORST.EDU (Jasper Phillips) wrote:
> > In article <35DEC8AE...@leila.ping.de>,
> > Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >Crypt> > > * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
> >
> > Seems to me there aught to be something better here, since you don't
> > have any of your own votes. The Grand Temple of Set could be fun,
> > although you don't have much intercept.
>
> Personally, I like Realm of the Black Sun, but for this one card slot it's
> probably a matter of personal preference...
>
I thought of it too. I have to figure out which master cards are most effective in
this deck.
Currently my master card slots are these:
3x Potence
2x Obfuscate
1x The Labyrinth
1x Opium Den
1x Ventrue Headquarters
1x The Secret Library Alexandria
3x Minion Tap
3x Blood Doll
>
>
>> > >Equipment: 5
> > >
> > > * 2x Laptop Computer
> > > * 1x Senguir Dagger
> > > * 1x Sport Bike
> > > * 1x Flack Jacket
>> I'd recommend ditching the laptops for a couple of Spying Missions...and
> although the Sengir Dagger is always a bonus, I don't think 1 Sport Bike and
> 1 Flak Jacket in even a 90 card deck is enough to be useful. I'd say put
> more in or ditch them.
>
I want to have lots of minions and equipment offers permanent effects, Spying
Mission a transitory effect after a second successful action.
The Sport Bike, the Dagger and the Flack Jacket are in there as bonus cards for
special "hero" vampires who are dedicated to special tasks.
The brunt "soldiers" will act anyway, and don't be caught in it, so they don't
need this equipment.
I think that I will leave it as is.
>
>
>
> >
> > >Modifiers: 20
> > >
> > > * 5x Cloak the Gathering
> > > * 5x Mask of 1k Faces
> > > * 5x Lost in Crowds
> > > * 5x Faceless Nights
> >
>
I exchanged the Faceless Nights for Night Moves.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > >Reactions: 10
> > >
> > > * 6x 2nd Tradition> > > * 2x Wake of Evening's Freshness
> > > * 2x Delaying Tactics
> >
> > Why Wakes instead of more 2nd Tradition, or something else?
>> Hmm...I'm intrigued by the Delaying Tactics. I've never found the card very
> useful...and I'd like to hear your reasoning for including it.
Simple: most vote decks gather around a small variety of vote cards, mostly Kine
Recources Contested. With only 1 skill less, non-tapping reaction card you can
prevent a Methusalah from letting his minions calling a particular type of vote
in the turn you play it. So you can slow them down significantly with incredible
low effort. I played the card twice during Praxis: Seizure Portsmouth and showed
the crowd how to stop hostile weeny voters... Blocking 0 stealth actions is easier
than blocking +1 stealth actions, and bleed was his only option after I denied him
his KRC.
> I could see
> it in an intercept deck when you just don't have enough intercept right now,
> or at endgame, but otherwise, it has struck me as being close to wallpaper.
>
It gives you time. Time to oust your prey, time for your minion on your sport bike
to untap during your next turn or else.
Michael Beer
Jaysen Knight wrote:
> Cool. Very unorthodox. You could probably play this deck two or
> three times before people figure out exactly what it does. Whether it
> works or not....who cares, still cool. My suggestions are below.
> Sorry about the slight reformatting.
>
thanx
>
>
>
> Michael Beer wrote:
> >
(crypt snipped)
>
>
>
> >
> Would Carlotta be a viable option in this deck? I think so. The
> recycle option is nice and I believe she has 'pot/obf'.
> >
Even POT obf. Yes. But she's a 7 cap and no prince. On the other side, her
special *does* make her a valuable addition. I will add her. (heck, she
recycles the Minion Tap and the 5th Trad to pay for her cost herself)
>
>
>
> >
> > Library
> >
> > Master: 15
> >
> >
> > * 2x Potence
> > * 2x Obfuscate
> > * 2x Serpentis
> > * 1x The Labyrinth
> > * 1x Opium Den
> > * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
> > * 3x Minion Tap> > * 3x Blood Doll
> >
> > Actions: 20
> >> The Ventrue Headquarters isn't really an option, you only have the one
> Ventrue.
An important Ventrue. V HQ is the weakest master card slot.
> Replace with Spawning Pool,
You must reach the 2nd round of combat while blocking with a Nosferatu.
Too unlikely in this deck.
> Dreams of the Sphinx,
good card. Perhaps the best idea 'cause you can cycle cards AND gain
influence with it.
> >
> > Political Actions
> >
> >
> > * none
> >
> A lot of Prince stuff in your deck. Are you sure that throwing in a
> Nos Justicar or some Prince vote might not be a good idea - maybe put
> in two prayer votes?
It shall be a 90 card deck. Where should I take all those card slots from?
>
>
>
> >
> > Equipment: 5
> >
> >
> > * 2x Laptop Computer
> > * 1x Senguir Dagger
> > * 1x Sport Bike
> > * 1x Flack Jacket
> >> Definite need. Throw in a Changeling Skin Mask and a Hand of Conrad.
> Instant OBF or POT. 'enuff said. This is the biggest suggestion I
> can make for this deck.
again: good ideas but no card slots.
Michael Beer
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980822131206.9995A-100000@amanda>,
Lupus Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> wrote:
>>
>> You might want to consider Olivia, who I'd prefer over Agrippina at
>> least: 5 !Nos Bishop w/ POT OBF>
>Don't listen to him! Those Sabbat vampires are EVIL SCUM!!!
>
>Lupus Australis
Excuse me while I chant "Nigel! Nigel! Nigel!". It's true they
aren't very nice -- which is why it's great to get them to
do your dirty work!
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <35DF3043...@math.wisc.edu>,
James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote:
>xi...@waste.org wrote:
>>> There's never enough Death of My Conscience. Although you need the
>> big boys to play it, it is *so* worthwhile. Sweet sweet Death of My
>> Conscience. Boon to the Maximum Aggravated Hand Damage deck...>
>Maybe so, but I can't see it being very useful, especially in this deck.
>How worthwhile is it to spend all that blood, ditch cards out of your
>hand, and then they just Dodge? And if you're playing a serious potence
>combat deck (which this is not), Torn Signpost and Fists of Death are
>much better choices. No one ever has to have 10 hand damage; it just
>isn't worth it.
Well, a couple of points.
-Ditching cards out of your hand can very easily be a _good_ effect,
especially in a stealth deck.
-Most Potence decks I've seen don't use much dodge, and in order
for it to matter, it'd have to be a dodge with an extra strike.
-Torn Signpost is already in there, and Fist of Death costs blood too.
-10 Hand Damage isn't the issue (although I've seen that be usefull!),
but being able to easily do 5 or 7, or have a vampire with only pot
do 6, can be quite usefull.
Plus, while it's true that if it doesn't work it sucks, if you're
in combat against someone like that, you're going to _lose_ badly
anyway and the extra blood isn't going to save you.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <35DF0FCC...@internorth.com>,
Jaysen Knight <jay...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:
>Would Carlotta be a viable option in this deck? I think so. The
>recycle option is nice and I believe she has 'pot/obf'.
Oh no, shes POT/obf.
>The Ventrue Headquarters isn't really an option, you only have the one>Ventrue. Replace with Spawning Pool, Dreams of the Sphinx, another
>SER discipline card, etc. Yup, love that DotS - the Swiss Army Knife
>of master cards.
Looking back over the deck, you also only have one Settite. I'd ditch
the Opium den, and since you only have 5 Serpentis cards in the deck
I'd lose the Serpentis Masters too.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Jasper Phillips wrote:
> >The Ventrue Headquarters isn't really an option, you only have the one
> >Ventrue.> Looking back over the deck, you also only have one Settite. I'd ditch
> the Opium den, and since you only have 5 Serpentis cards in the deck
> I'd lose the Serpentis Masters too.
>
I DOUBLED both my one Ventrue and my one Setite because I want both of them
to show up. When they show up, both cards may be useful.
Opium Den is immediately useful, Ventrue HQ *may* be useful, Dreams of the
Sphinx is probably the better choice. I will definitely keep the Den.
Michael Beer
Jasper Phillips wrote:
>
> >Maybe so, but I can't see it being very useful, especially in this deck.
> >How worthwhile is it to spend all that blood, ditch cards out of your
> >hand, and then they just Dodge? And if you're playing a serious potence
> >combat deck (which this is not), Torn Signpost and Fists of Death are
> >much better choices. No one ever has to have 10 hand damage; it just
> >isn't worth it.
>
> Well, a couple of points.
> -Ditching cards out of your hand can very easily be a _good_ effect,
> especially in a stealth deck.
I don't know. There are better ways to cycle your hand than with DoMC.
> -Most Potence decks I've seen don't use much dodge, and in order
> for it to matter, it'd have to be a dodge with an extra strike.
No, no. Your _opponent_ dodges. After you've spent 3 blood and ditched
half your hand.
> -Torn Signpost is already in there, and Fist of Death costs blood too.
But Fists is _so_ much better than Death. The only advantage Death
gives you is the ability to have a _very_ high base hand damage, which
is only really cost-effective when you get to about +6.
> -10 Hand Damage isn't the issue (although I've seen that be usefull!),
> but being able to easily do 5 or 7, or have a vampire with only pot
> do 6, can be quite usefull.
Try Pushing the Limit or Increased Strength. Both of these are much
better alternatives.
> Plus, while it's true that if it doesn't work it sucks, if you're
> in combat against someone like that, you're going to _lose_ badly
> anyway and the extra blood isn't going to save you.
It's certainly not uncommon for an opponent to play with Dodge or S:CE.
It's very, very common. My point is that in a not-very-dedicated combat
deck, it's not worthwhile to put so much effort into getting a big
strike when you can't guarantee that it will connect (i.e., with
Immortal Grapple). In a dedicated combat deck, there are many less
costly and better alternatives to Death.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Sat, 22 Aug 1998, James Hamblin wrote:
> Nah. Delaying Tactics is pretty solid vote defense. It may seem like
> only a one turn stay of execution, but it keeps the vote from being
> called for the whole turn, and with NRA they can't vote with that
> vampire again either.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that NRA is applicable to
Delaying Tactics. Last I heard, NRA only applies to actions which
resolve, (ie. was either successful, or blocked), and not to actions that
are cancelled before this can be determined, Direct Interventioned, or
Masked to another Vampire.
I'm not sure how this applies to Change of Target, which also cancels an
action (but after the block).
[ quoted text not captured ]
I believe the card text for DT disallows that vote to be called by
that methusaleh again that turn. So you stop one KRC that turn....
and you stop them all (that turn).
Jaysen
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <35DEE92B...@leila.ping.de>, Michael Beer
<Mi...@leila.ping.de> writes
>>
>>
>>
>> > * 1x Ventrue Headquarters
>>
>> Seems to me there aught to be something better here, since you don't
>> have any of your own votes. The Grand Temple of Set could be fun,
>> although you don't have much intercept.
>>>
>Diablerie. Vote defense. Diplomacy.
You already have five princes in the deck. You need one of them out
(Suhailah) to get this out. There's a difference, I think, between
diplomacy and vote defence and over kill. You're not a vote deck so you
won't be able to get a vote lock on the table, but should be doing just
enough to annoy people - especially with other players on the table.
Like I say, everyone should have voting vampires!
>> > * 4x Night Moves
>> > * 2x Form of Corruption
>> > * 2x Temptation
>> > * 1x Lure of the Serpent
>> > * 1x Rampage
>>
>> Hmmm, which locations are you scared of? I'd probably ditch the Lure and
>> the Rampage for another Temptation + Form of Corruption. What else
>> are the Settites really for? ;-)
>>>
>Scared? Of none. But to see an Art Museum of your prey burning down to the
>ground is always satisfying AND helps you.
I do have to agree with you here. Having a prayer card to kill
locations with is a generally quite common tactic from what I see. It's
useful because it means that people bringing locations out still have
that edge of doubt. Actually, Rob Treasure noted that the tournament
metagame in England seems to shifting away from master: locations
anyway. But still......
>The main reason that I didn't put
>in more of those serpentis corruption cards is - that I own only two of each.
>They're rares. Possible replacements for the Rampage and Lure of the Serpent
>are Heart of Darkness (unlikely because you need SER to gain maximum effect),
>Mark of Damnation (cool in this deck. Setites are NOT only for corruption ;),
That might work well in a deck designed round it actually...... put that
on the vampire, and rush them. An alternative take on the deck - go
more for heavy combat.
>Sacrificial Lamb (one may be ok)
Always nice. If you can get someone on the table in torpor, KILL. Then
you don't need the diablerie vote dominance. And the blood from it
works on capacity, not blood left like diablerie.
>and Computer Hacking (You don't block: you
>die.)
Always a possibility in any deck.
--
James Coupe (Prince of Mercia) Change nospam to obeah to reply
Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
http://madnessnetwork.hexagon.net
In article <35DF5188...@math.wisc.edu>,
James Hamblin <ham...@math.wisc.edu> wrote:
[snip]
> > Well, a couple of points.
> > -Ditching cards out of your hand can very easily be a _good_ effect,
> > especially in a stealth deck.
>
> I don't know. There are better ways to cycle your hand than with DoMC.
DoMC gives you _some_ potential benefits out of the cards you're
cycling, unlike cyclers like Barrens, and Fragment.
> > -Most Potence decks I've seen don't use much dodge, and in order
> > for it to matter, it'd have to be a dodge with an extra strike.
>
> No, no. Your _opponent_ dodges. After you've spent 3 blood and ditched
> half your hand.
I believe the intention of DoMC in this deck is to give the Potence
Rush predator something to think about. That deck wouldn't normally
be dodging, and if it drops the IG, they've sealed their own torpor
destination.
It has the potential to torporize even the big Richter size rushers.
> > -Torn Signpost is already in there, and Fist of Death costs blood too.
>
> But Fists is _so_ much better than Death. The only advantage Death
> gives you is the ability to have a _very_ high base hand damage, which
> is only really cost-effective when you get to about +6.
Also cost effective for the cycling of jammed stealth.
> > -10 Hand Damage isn't the issue (although I've seen that be usefull!),
> > but being able to easily do 5 or 7, or have a vampire with only pot
> > do 6, can be quite usefull.
>
> Try Pushing the Limit or Increased Strength. Both of these are much
> better alternatives.
Doesn't give you the oomph to smack them down while they're
beating you into torpor.
> > Plus, while it's true that if it doesn't work it sucks, if you're
> > in combat against someone like that, you're going to _lose_ badly
> > anyway and the extra blood isn't going to save you.
>
> It's certainly not uncommon for an opponent to play with Dodge or S:CE.
> It's very, very common. My point is that in a not-very-dedicated combat
> deck, it's not worthwhile to put so much effort into getting a big
> strike when you can't guarantee that it will connect (i.e., with
> Immortal Grapple). In a dedicated combat deck, there are many less
> costly and better alternatives to Death.
I'm getting the picture that the combat angle of this deck is more
along the "Surprise! You're Dead!" route. It won't actively seek out
fights, and most non-combat decks that use Dodge or S:CE
won't either.
> James
> --
> James Hamblin
> ham...@math.wisc.edu
>
> V:EKN FAQ Maintainer
> http://www.math.wisc.edu/~hamblin/faq.html
>
> "We _do_ kill people... that's sort of our
> raison d'etre" -- Spike
Scott Harris
kub...@imsa.edu
[ quoted text not captured ]
You miss the point. I am aware of DT's card text. However the card text
only covers "the same political action", whereas NRA covers the same
action type, which is alot more restrictive, and would prevent the same
minion from playing *any* political action.
If NRA does not cover DT, then it makes a big difference. Suppose there
are 3 anarch revolts in play. I call a vote to burn 1 of them, but my
oppontent plays DT. I can then call a vote to burn the second one. He
again plays DT. I can now call a vote to burn the 3rd. If that 3rd
political action is stopped, I can still call a Consanguinous Boon, etc,
etc. But NRA covers *any* political action.
On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Jaysen Knight wrote:
> I believe the card text for DT disallows that vote to be called by
> that methusaleh again that turn. So you stop one KRC that turn....
> and you stop them all (that turn).
>[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980822225535.15229A-100000@amanda>, Lupus
Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> writes
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that NRA is applicable to
>Delaying Tactics. Last I heard, NRA only applies to actions which
>resolve, (ie. was either successful, or blocked), and not to actions that
>are cancelled before this can be determined, Direct Interventioned, or
>Masked to another Vampire.
A Delaying Tactics-ed vote has been successful. You cancel it during
the referendum, which is part of the resolution of the vote. But the
action itself has been successful. And there's text on Delaying Tactics
to the same effect anyway.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Lupus Australis wrote:
> You miss the point. I am aware of DT's card text. However the card text
> only covers "the same political action", whereas NRA covers the same
> action type, which is alot more restrictive, and would prevent the same
> minion from playing *any* political action.
>
> If NRA does not cover DT, then it makes a big difference. Suppose there
> are 3 anarch revolts in play. I call a vote to burn 1 of them, but my
> oppontent plays DT. I can then call a vote to burn the second one. He
> again plays DT. I can now call a vote to burn the 3rd. If that 3rd
> political action is stopped, I can still call a Consanguinous Boon, etc,
> etc. But NRA covers *any* political action.
>
Voting away Anarch revolt #1 and voting Anarch revolt #2 is the same political
action,
like calling KRC #1, Freak Drive, calling KRC #2.
There is no difference.
Delaying Tactics would jam voting the Anarch Revolts away for 1 turn for the
Methusalah calling the vote.
Michael Beer
In article <35E025B4...@leila.ping.de>,
Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
>Voting away Anarch revolt #1 and voting Anarch revolt #2 is the same political
>action,
>like calling KRC #1, Freak Drive, calling KRC #2.
Actually, it's legal. In the same way that one can attack Vampire A
through Haven Uncovered 1, Freak Drive, and attack Vampire B (Or even
vampire A again) through Haven Uncovered 2.
Each instantiation of the card is a 'different action' under the NRA
rules.
The difference is that these aren't 'action cards' but provide the
opportunity for an action. Any non-unique card that provides an
action (Army of Rats, Gangrel Revel, Haven Uncovered, Anarch Revolt, &c).
Are considered 'different actions' under NRA.
gomi
On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, James Coupe wrote:
> In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980822225535.15229A-100000@amanda>, Lupus
> Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> writes
> >Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that NRA is applicable to
> >Delaying Tactics. Last I heard, NRA only applies to actions which
> >resolve, (ie. was either successful, or blocked), and not to actions that
> >are cancelled before this can be determined, Direct Interventioned, or
> >Masked to another Vampire.
>
> A Delaying Tactics-ed vote has been successful. You cancel it during
> the referendum, which is part of the resolution of the vote.
That would imply that it was cancelled before it could resolve fully.
> But the
> action itself has been successful.
Well, that's definitely not true. Cancelled actions are not considered
successful:
"An action is successful if it is unblocked and uncancelled, even if it
has no other effect..." [RTR980623]
> And there's text on Delaying Tactics
> to the same effect anyway.
It is not to the same effect at all. DT covers the same
(political) action. NRA covers the same action type, and so would forbid
the vampire from taking *any* other political action. It does make a
difference if NRA covers DT.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Michael Beer wrote:
> Voting away Anarch revolt #1 and voting Anarch revolt #2 is the same
> political action,
Nyet. It is a different political action. Please check the "Rulings"
section under "Terminology"
"Same Action" means: 1) The same inherent (cardless) action taken
against the same target. 2) The action taken with the same card
played from hand, regardless of target. 3) The same action
provided by the same copy of a card in play. (Each action provided
by a card in play is a distinct action (and doesn't count as the
"same action")). :T02: [RTR 950905]
> like calling KRC #1, Freak Drive, calling KRC #2.
Well, this is forbidden by NRA, not card text or base rules. I guess you
meant "KRC #1, Delaying Tactics, KRC #2". But you're right. That would
of course be considered the "same political action" (as well as being the
same action type, of course), and so would be forbidden by DT card text
even if you were not playing with NRA, or even if you tried to do it with
another minion.
> There is no difference.
Well, there is a difference, actually. One is a case of a political
action allowed by a Political Action card. The other is a political
action allowed by a card in play. The question is whether this difference
is relevant. According to the above "terminology" ruling, it is.
> Delaying Tactics would jam voting the Anarch Revolts away for 1 turn for the
> Methusalah calling the vote.
No. Even if NRA *does* cover DT, one could still call a vote to burn
one Anarch revolt with one minion, have it cancelled, and then use another
minion to burn another anarch revolt. If NRA does not cover this case,
then you could use the same minion on the second anarch revolt.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On 23 Aug 1998, Gomi no Sensei wrote:
> Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> >Voting away Anarch revolt #1 and voting Anarch revolt #2 is the same> >political action, like calling KRC #1, Freak Drive, calling KRC #2.> Actually, it's legal. In the same way that one can attack Vampire A
> through Haven Uncovered 1, Freak Drive, and attack Vampire B (Or even
> vampire A again) through Haven Uncovered 2.
>
> Each instantiation of the card is a 'different action' under the NRA
> rules.
Well, I believe you are right about the "Haven Uncovered" example.
However, remember that what is informally called "Rush" is not an "Action
Type" as defined by the rulebook, and so would not be covered by NRA.
Thus, two "rush" actions would not be considered the "Same Action Type"
unless they were in fact the "Same Action".
However, "political actions" are an action type. Thus, you could not, as
in the above example, call a vote to burn Anarch-Revolt-1, Freak Drive,
and then call a vote to burn Anarch-Revolt-2. NRA forbids it, even though
they are different actions, because they are the "Same Action Type."
That is why it makes a difference whether an action cancelled by DT is
counted as "taken" for purposes of NRA.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <Pine.SUN.3.96.980823200036.24183D-100000@amanda>,
Lupus Australis <jbwh...@dorsai.org> wrote:
>On 23 Aug 1998, Gomi no Sensei wrote:>> Actually, it's legal. In the same way that one can attack Vampire A
>> through Haven Uncovered 1, Freak Drive, and attack Vampire B (Or even
>> vampire A again) through Haven Uncovered 2.>Well, I believe you are right about the "Haven Uncovered" example.>However, remember that what is informally called "Rush" is not an "Action
>Type" as defined by the rulebook, and so would not be covered by NRA.
>Thus, two "rush" actions would not be considered the "Same Action Type"
>unless they were in fact the "Same Action".>However, "political actions" are an action type. Thus, you could not, as
>in the above example, call a vote to burn Anarch-Revolt-1, Freak Drive,
>and then call a vote to burn Anarch-Revolt-2. NRA forbids it, even though
>they are different actions, because they are the "Same Action Type."
You are correct, sir. There is naught left for me but to hang
my head in shame.
gomi
alack.
Lupus Australis wrote:
>
> On Sat, 22 Aug 1998, James Hamblin wrote:
>
> > Nah. Delaying Tactics is pretty solid vote defense. It may seem like
> > only a one turn stay of execution, but it keeps the vote from being
> > called for the whole turn, and with NRA they can't vote with that
> > vampire again either.
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that NRA is applicable to
> Delaying Tactics. Last I heard, NRA only applies to actions which
> resolve, (ie. was either successful, or blocked), and not to actions that
Delaying Tactics cannot be played until the action resolves (i.e.,
remains unblocked) due to the "only usable during a political action"
card text. As such, the acting minion is prohibited from taking
another political action this turn (by the NRA rule).
This was ruled explicitly in RTR 970630:
7) Delaying Tactics doesn't pretend that the political action was never
taken; it simply cancels the voting process. Thus, it does not allow the
acting minion to overcome the "no repeated action" rule, assuming that rule
is in effect.
> are cancelled before this can be determined, Direct Interventioned, or
> Masked to another Vampire.
Direct Intervention cancels the action card before the action can
be taken (note the "remains untapped" instruction regarding the
acting minion).
Mask has been ruled to "pass on" the NRA restriction to the new
acting vampire, so that the original acting minion is not restricted.
> I'm not sure how this applies to Change of Target, which also cancels an
> action (but after the block).
Same as Delaying Tactics - the acting minion cannot attempt the same
type of action again this turn.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings:
http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch
Lupus Australis wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Michael Beer wrote:
>
> > Voting away Anarch revolt #1 and voting Anarch revolt #2 is the same
> > political action,
>> Nyet. It is a different political action. Please check the "Rulings"
> section under "Terminology"
>
> "Same Action" means: 1) The same inherent (cardless) action taken
> against the same target. 2) The action taken with the same card
> played from hand, regardless of target. 3) The same action
> provided by the same copy of a card in play. (Each action provided
> by a card in play is a distinct action (and doesn't count as the
> "same action")). :T02: [RTR 950905]
Correct. They are two different actions, even though they are
the same type of action.
> > like calling KRC #1, Freak Drive, calling KRC #2.
>> Well, this is forbidden by NRA, not card text or base rules. I guess you
> meant "KRC #1, Delaying Tactics, KRC #2". But you're right. That would
> of course be considered the "same political action" (as well as being the
> same action type, of course), and so would be forbidden by DT card text
> even if you were not playing with NRA, or even if you tried to do it with
> another minion.
Correct. Same action and same type of action.
> > There is no difference.
>
> Well, there is a difference, actually. One is a case of a political
> action allowed by a Political Action card. The other is a political
> action allowed by a card in play. The question is whether this difference
> is relevant. According to the above "terminology" ruling, it is.
Right. KRC is an action by card name. The vote to burn Anarch Revolt
is an action by instance of a card in play.
> > Delaying Tactics would jam voting the Anarch Revolts away for 1 turn for the
> > Methusalah calling the vote.
>
> No. Even if NRA *does* cover DT, one could still call a vote to burn
> one Anarch revolt with one minion, have it cancelled, and then use another
> minion to burn another anarch revolt. If NRA does not cover this case,
> then you could use the same minion on the second anarch revolt.
Correct. DT protects the specific Anarch Revolt being used to call
the current political action, but doesn't protect others.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <35DF3DBC...@leila.ping.de>, Michael Beer
<Mi...@leila.ping.de> writes
>I DOUBLED both my one Ventrue and my one Setite because I want both of them
>to show up. When they show up, both cards may be useful.
>
>Opium Den is immediately useful, Ventrue HQ *may* be useful, Dreams of the
>Sphinx is probably the better choice. I will definitely keep the Den.
It's still unlikely that you'll get either of them in your inactive
region though. And Opium Den ONLY benefits Dedefra (Tap to give a FoS).
For something so fragile - hard to get out, hard to use much (what if
Dedefra goes to torpor, say, or is burned - no other FoS to use it),
can't be defended (not a major concern normally but for something so
hard to get out, I'd like to keep it) - it just seems like a wasted card
slot.
The same is true of the Ventrue HQ - although you could still use it if
Suh went to torpor etc. A deck with so many votes in it (for a non-vote
deck), surely doesn't need any more?
[ quoted text not captured ]
James Coupe wrote:
> In article <35DF3DBC...@leila.ping.de>, Michael Beer
> <Mi...@leila.ping.de> writes
> >I DOUBLED both my one Ventrue and my one Setite because I want both of them
> >to show up. When they show up, both cards may be useful.
> >
> >Opium Den is immediately useful, Ventrue HQ *may* be useful, Dreams of the
> >Sphinx is probably the better choice. I will definitely keep the Den.
>
> It's still unlikely that you'll get either of them in your inactive
> region though. And Opium Den ONLY benefits Dedefra (Tap to give a FoS).
> For something so fragile - hard to get out,
only if you don't have Dedefra in your active region
> hard to use much (what if
> Dedefra goes to torpor, say, or is burned - no other FoS to use it)
every time Dedefra acts - as good as Suhailah's permanent stealth
> can't be defended (not a major concern normally but for something so
> hard to get out, I'd like to keep it) - it just seems like a wasted card
> slot.
>
If I would think that it is wasted, I would drop it. But Dedefra is my only vamp
with superior Serpentis - a good reason to give her the possibility to act
always at +1 stealth.
>
>
>
> The same is true of the Ventrue HQ - although you could still use it if
> Suh went to torpor etc. A deck with so many votes in it (for a non-vote
> deck), surely doesn't need any more?
>
It depends on what you are doing. WITH my Ventrue HQ I plan to do a lot of
Diablerie (especially eat away rival voters) and some boon mongering. It is
something guarding your back. Nice to have, an insurance. You don't need it
until your house catches fire, and then you're glad that you have it.
Michael Beer
In article <35E1D583...@leila.ping.de>,
Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
>> Suh went to torpor etc. A deck with so many votes in it (for a non-vote
>> deck), surely doesn't need any more?>
>It depends on what you are doing. WITH my Ventrue HQ I plan to do a lot of
>Diablerie (especially eat away rival voters) and some boon mongering. It is
>something guarding your back. Nice to have, an insurance. You don't need it
>until your house catches fire, and then you're glad that you have it.
Well, wouldn't it be nice to have something that's good whether your
house is burning or not? Just about anything can be usefull at the
proper time (i.e. "when your house is burning"), but that doesn't
mean there aren't better things to include.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, LSJ wrote:
> Lupus Australis wrote:
> >
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that NRA is applicable to
> > Delaying Tactics. Last I heard, NRA only applies to actions which
> > resolve, (ie. was either successful, or blocked), and not to actions that
>
> Delaying Tactics cannot be played until the action resolves (i.e.,
> remains unblocked) due to the "only usable during a political action"
> card text. As such, the acting minion is prohibited from taking
> another political action this turn (by the NRA rule).
I'm not sure it matters, but one *could* still Mask the action to another
minion at the exact same point. (Right?) That is why the situations
seemed similar to me. Mask cancels the action with respect to one minion,
and resumes it with respect to another. DT cancels the action, and sends
it right back to your hand (to be resumed later).
Just out of curiousity, if the text had said "only usable during an
attempt to call a vote", would this have changed the ruling?
[ quoted text not captured ]
Jasper Phillips wrote:
> In article <35E1D583...@leila.ping.de>,
> Michael Beer <Mi...@leila.ping.de> wrote:
> >> Suh went to torpor etc. A deck with so many votes in it (for a non-vote
> >> deck), surely doesn't need any more?
> >
> >It depends on what you are doing. WITH my Ventrue HQ I plan to do a lot of
> >Diablerie (especially eat away rival voters) and some boon mongering. It is
> >something guarding your back. Nice to have, an insurance. You don't need it
> >until your house catches fire, and then you're glad that you have it.
>
> Well, wouldn't it be nice to have something that's good whether your
> house is burning or not? Just about anything can be usefull at the
> proper time (i.e. "when your house is burning"), but that doesn't
> mean there aren't better things to include.
>
Of course. A simple Information Highway, for example. I will simply test it out.
Michael Beer
Lupus Australis wrote:
> LSJ wrote:
> > Delaying Tactics cannot be played until the action resolves (i.e.,
> > remains unblocked) due to the "only usable during a political action"
> > card text. As such, the acting minion is prohibited from taking
> > another political action this turn (by the NRA rule).
>
> I'm not sure it matters, but one *could* still Mask the action to another
> minion at the exact same point. (Right?)
Mask cannot be played after the action starts to resolve, no.
You can play Mask after everyone has declined to block and before
you start the referendum, yes.
Delaying Tactics can only be played during the referendum part.
> That is why the situations
> seemed similar to me. Mask cancels the action with respect to one minion,
> and resumes it with respect to another. DT cancels the action, and sends
> it right back to your hand (to be resumed later).
>
> Just out of curiousity, if the text had said "only usable during an
> attempt to call a vote", would this have changed the ruling?
Possibly. That's a strange mechanism, though, so would probably
introduce some strange rulings one way or the other.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Michael Beer (Mi...@leila.ping.de) wrote:
: Ditch 4x Thrown Sewer Lid for 3x Death of my Concience + 1x Amaranth. I will
: keep the Shattering Blow since annoying equipment shows up often enough and I
: want to get rid of enemy's Flack Jackets and Sport Bikes. I love their face
: expression when they see their sport bike spit all over the street in pieces.
Regarding Death of my Conscience - I don't think this is a very good
card most of the time. I really wanted to like it. I played with
it both in a non-combat-heavy deck and in a heavy potence combat deck.
The blood cost is high. The ditching lots of cards is good for
cycling - except that you don't replace them till after combat,
which sucks badly in a combat deck and isn't that great even in a
non-combat deck (you don't get any increased chance of seeing the
Skin of Steel you want or whatever).
On the whole, it just never worked out for me. If you want to try
it out, you certainly should. If it works, definitely let me know.
(And tell me how it worked and why it was good too, because I couldn't
figure out how to make it good.)
Josh
likes unpopular cards, but some of them just aren't any good.... I
had the same problem with Island of Yiaros...
On 25 Aug 1998, Joshua Duffin wrote:
> Regarding Death of my Conscience - I don't think this is a very good
> card most of the time. I really wanted to like it. I played with
> it both in a non-combat-heavy deck and in a heavy potence combat deck.
> The blood cost is high. The ditching lots of cards is good for
> cycling - except that you don't replace them till after combat,
> which sucks badly in a combat deck and isn't that great even in a
> non-combat deck (you don't get any increased chance of seeing the
> Skin of Steel you want or whatever).
>
> On the whole, it just never worked out for me. If you want to try
> it out, you certainly should. If it works, definitely let me know.
> (And tell me how it worked and why it was good too, because I couldn't
> figure out how to make it good.)
I don't use it in combat decks. I do use it in my various wierd Nosferatu
Prince decks, the ones that have a few big vampires with POT. It can come
as a nasty surprise to someone who rushes me on the assumption that I have
no combat ability. I might put in one or two, but Pushing the Limit or
Sacrament of Carnage is often more versatile.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, LSJ wrote:
> > > Delaying Tactics cannot be played until the action resolves (i.e.,
> > > remains unblocked) due to the "only usable during a political action"
> > > card text. As such, the acting minion is prohibited from taking
> > > another political action this turn (by the NRA rule).
> >
> > I'm not sure it matters, but one *could* still Mask the action to another
> > minion at the exact same point. (Right?)
>
> Mask cannot be played after the action starts to resolve, no.
> You can play Mask after everyone has declined to block and before
> you start the referendum, yes.
Ah. Well, I guess that's consistent enough then. I had always thought
that Mask could be played at any point outside of combat.
I guess that means I cannot call a vote, modify it with Bewitching
Oration, Mask it to another minion, and then have the second minion modify
it with Bewitching Oration. Damn! I always wanted to do that. :)
I guess that means that Lucretia has a hard time using Mask of 1000 Faces
to get into combat by surprise (by waiting until the block is successful
and then Masking the action to herself). She must do so during the block
attempt, and so adds her inherent stealth which the blocker can then
decline to counter.
But how does this fit with Form of Mist? Suppose a minion is blocked,
enters combat and plays Form of Mist to continue action at +1 stealth.
Can the action be Masked at this point, or is that forbidden because the
action already began to resolve during the previous block?
[ quoted text not captured ]
Lupus Australis wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, LSJ wrote:> > [Re: Masking a political action]> > Mask cannot be played after the action starts to resolve, no.
> > You can play Mask after everyone has declined to block and before
> > you start the referendum, yes.
>> I guess that means that Lucretia has a hard time using Mask of 1000 Faces
> to get into combat by surprise (by waiting until the block is successful
> and then Masking the action to herself). She must do so during the block
> attempt, and so adds her inherent stealth which the blocker can then
> decline to counter.
Right, unless the blocker already has sufficient intercept (he had
played superior Enhanced Senses against a +1 stealth action, for
instance).
> But how does this fit with Form of Mist? Suppose a minion is blocked,
> enters combat and plays Form of Mist to continue action at +1 stealth.
> Can the action be Masked at this point, or is that forbidden because the
> action already began to resolve during the previous block?
Form of Mist continues the action "as if unblocked", so Mask
can be used during that continuation.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In article <35E165...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> writes
>Correct. DT protects the specific Anarch Revolt being used to call
>the current political action, but doesn't protect others.
I point the honourable gentleman to his answer dated Friday 5th
December, 1997
Message-ID: <34886D...@wizards.com>
Subject: The Compleat NRA (Re: LSJ:? Numerous Questions)
From: LSJ <vte...@wizards.com>
***
First, a quote from the DCI rules (July 1, 1997):
1. Repeat Action rule: No single vampire can repeat an action in a
turn.
This refers to the particular action type. For example, a vampire
which
successfully bleeds its prey via Computer Hacking, then untaps via
Freak
Drive, cannot perform any bleeding action again whatsoever that turn,
regardless of whether or not it is a Computer Hacking action.
Note: the word "vampire" in the first sentence should be "minion".
Implementation is complicated by two things: timing (only really
interesting in cases like Mask of a Thousand faces where the acting
minion changes) and figuring out what constitutes the same "type of
action".
The easy one first: Timing.
Implementation of NRA can be viewed as a restriction the acting
minion receives. The restriction is applied when the action
resolves (that is, when it ends, either successful or not). Only
the acting minion at that time gets the restriction (not any
prior acting minion, in the case that the action was taken over
by some new minion playing Mask of a Thousand Faces).
The second one is addressed by simply defining what the different types
of actions are:
1) Action types defined in the rulebook (6.4, 7, and 19)
These are:
* Bleed
* Hunt
* Employ (Retainer)
* Recruit (Ally)
* Equip
* Transfer Equipment
* Call a vote
* Leave Torpor
* Rescue (from Torpor)
* Diablerize (in Torpor)
2) Actions allowed by action cards that are not covered above.
Every action card is of the "type" of its card name.
Examples: Bum's Rush, Army of Rats (putting into play), Far
Mastery.
3) Actions allowed by cards in play that are not covered by 1).
Each of these is a distinct type per card in play. So each
Haven Uncovered provides a unique action type (to attack the
target vampire), even though the cards have the same name.
Additionally, since any "same action" is of the "same type".
Since actions taken by action cards are the "same" based only
on card name (for purposes of Change of Target and Obedience),
this makes inferior Govern the Unaligned the "same action" as
superior Govern the Unaligned (since they have the same action
card name). Therefore, they are also the same action type.
(Which means that inferior Govern is in two types: "bleed" and
"Govern").
***
3) Actions allowed by card in play that ARE NOT COVERED BY 1).
Anarch Revolt's vote *is* covered by 1. So is this a change in the
rules, a slip-up at this point or a slip-up now?
[ quoted text not captured ]
James Coupe <ve...@obeah.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <35E165...@wizards.com>, LSJ <vte...@wizards.com> writes
> >Correct. DT protects the specific Anarch Revolt being used to call
> >the current political action, but doesn't protect others.
>
> I point the honourable gentleman to his answer dated Friday 5th> December, 1997:
>
> [Begin Quote]> First, a quote from the DCI rules (July 1, 1997):
>
> 1. Repeat Action rule: No single vampire can repeat an action in a
> turn.
> This refers to the particular action type. For example, a vampire
> which
> successfully bleeds its prey via Computer Hacking, then untaps via
> Freak
> Drive, cannot perform any bleeding action again whatsoever that turn,
> regardless of whether or not it is a Computer Hacking action.> [snip]> The second one is addressed by simply defining what the different types
> of actions are:
>
> 1) Action types defined in the rulebook (6.4, 7, and 19)> 2) Actions allowed by action cards that are not covered above.> 3) Actions allowed by cards in play that are not covered by 1).
>> Additionally, since any "same action" is of the "same type".
> Since actions taken by action cards are the "same" based only
> on card name (for purposes of Change of Target and Obedience),
> this makes inferior Govern the Unaligned the "same action" as
> superior Govern the Unaligned (since they have the same action
> card name). Therefore, they are also the same action type.
> (Which means that inferior Govern is in two types: "bleed" and
> "Govern").
>> [End Quote]>
> 3) Actions allowed by card in play that ARE NOT COVERED BY 1).
>
> Anarch Revolt's vote *is* covered by 1. So is this a change in the
> rules, a slip-up at this point or a slip-up now?
Delaying Tactics prohibits any minion from calling the *same* vote.
Equivalent to a prohibition against attempting the same action.
No Repeat Actions prohibits that single minion from calling any vote
(the same vote, a vote burn a different Anarch Revolt, or any other
political action). This is because of point 1.
DT isn't interested in action *type*. It's interested in the exact
action. If the DT'ed vote was a Kine Resources Contested, then no
minion could call that vote this turn, and the acting minion couldn't
call any vote this turn. The other (non-acting) minion could call
any vote they like, except for the specific vote denied by DT.
Since the vote to burn Anarch Revolt is provided by a card in play,
each distinct card in play provides its own distinct action. For
instance, if player A and player B both had their own copies of
Anarch Revolt in play, you would have to declare which of those
two actions you were taking when you take an action to call a
vote to burn one. If two Anarch Revolts are controlled by the same
player, then they still provide two distinct actions - one to
call a vote to burn itself, and the other to call a vote to burn
itself.
--
L. Scott Johnson (vte...@wizards.com) VTES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast.
Searchable database of official card text, errata, and rulings:
http://deckserver.net/cgi-deckserver/rulemonger.cgi/powersearch
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
[ quoted text not captured ]