First time I've noticed this:
All my Enchant Kindred cards (for sup.) say:
Jyhad: move 2 blood from the blood bank to a younger uncontrolled vampire;
V:TES: a younger uncontrolled vampire gains 2 blood
the official text starts with: +1 stealth.............
When did this happen? How come I (AND nobody in my playgroup) never noticed
this and never play with this card?
Jeroen
"jeroen rombouts" <jeroen....@pandora.be> a écrit dans le message news:
z%vx6.1391$Pm4.5...@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
[ quoted text not captured ]
It appeared in sabbat war set. LSJ even said this card was intended to have
the +1 stealth text from the beginning ! =)
I'm glad it will be played much often now... But what took them so long to
realize there was a mistake on this card ? will someone tell us next time
that damage from tron signpost is aggravated ? i hope no =)
reyda
Reyda wrote:
> > All my Enchant Kindred cards (for sup.) say:> It appeared in sabbat war set. LSJ even said this card was intended to have
> the +1 stealth text from the beginning ! =)
No. The two changes in SW based on known intent were Caitlan and Legacy of
Pander. Other changes were for logic, uniformity, balance, and/or clarity.
--
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/
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3AC707A7...@white-wolf.com...
> Reyda wrote:
> > > All my Enchant Kindred cards (for sup.) say:
> > It appeared in sabbat war set. LSJ even said this card was intended to
have
> > the +1 stealth text from the beginning ! =)
>
> No. The two changes in SW based on known intent were Caitlan and Legacy of
> Pander. Other changes were for logic, uniformity, balance, and/or clarity.
>
> --
> LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
while you"re at there LSJ, you know a lot of people complained about the
previous text of Legacy of Pander. As a player, do you think it was
uber-powerful, or rather than complaining people didn't tried hard enough to
beat LoP decks ?
reyda
Reyda wrote:
> while you"re at there LSJ, you know a lot of people complained about the
> previous text of Legacy of Pander. As a player, do you think it was
> uber-powerful, or rather than complaining people didn't tried hard enough to
> beat LoP decks ?
Not sure what your question is there.
LoP was powerful (maybe "too" powerful, maybe not) and, according to files from
WotC, misprinted. The combination led to the card being changed when it was
reprinted.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
[ quoted text not captured ]
In message <3AC79D53...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ
<vte...@white-wolf.com> writes
>Reyda wrote:>> while you"re at there LSJ, you know a lot of people complained about the
>> previous text of Legacy of Pander. As a player, do you think it was
>> uber-powerful, or rather than complaining people didn't tried hard enough to
>> beat LoP decks ?>
>Not sure what your question is there.
>LoP was powerful (maybe "too" powerful, maybe not)
I think the question goes something like this:
"As a player (*not* as netrep), do you think the card should have been
errata-ed even if the original printing was what was intended? Do you
think that the problem with it was people not being skilful enough to
work around it, or was it "too" powerful?"
--
James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D
"What's wrong with wanting more?
If you can fly -- then soar!
With all there is, why settle for just a piece of sky?"
> In message <3AC79D53...@white-wolf.com>, LSJ
> <vte...@white-wolf.com> writes>> Reyda wrote:>>> while you"re at there LSJ, you know a lot of people complained about the
>>> previous text of Legacy of Pander. As a player, do you think it was
>>> uber-powerful, or rather than complaining people didn't tried hard enough to
>>> beat LoP decks ?>>
>> Not sure what your question is there.
>> LoP was powerful (maybe "too" powerful, maybe not)>
> I think the question goes something like this:
>
> "As a player (*not* as netrep), do you think the card should have been
> errata-ed even if the original printing was what was intended? Do you
> think that the problem with it was people not being skilful enough to
> work around it, or was it "too" powerful?"
If so, the question is either insincere or ridiculous. Why would one
care so much about LSJ's opinion on Legacy of Pander, and not anyone else's,
unless one wanted to somehow relate that to LSJ's influence on the decision
that resulted in a change to Legacy of Pander?
Not to hack on LSJ here, but if you wanted a player's opinion, why not
ask The Lasombra or Derek Ray? Well, because they're *not* the NetRep.
Honestly, L. Scott has a hard enough job in which he can't please
everyone, and does a damn fine job, all things considered. Considering that
this also isn't a full-time job for him, people shouldn't expect to get to
debate him on every single change made to the game, except on "legal
grounds" (such as rulings that appear inconsistent).
We live under a benevolent dictatorship, and for the good of the game,
shouldn't be changed to democracy, which, in essence, is what getting LSJ to
voice his "personal" opinion is all about.
--
Pat Ricochet
Soul Jar'rn Fool of Atlanta
In message <B6EE5B95.3218%sp...@socrates.gatech.edu>, Pat Ricochet
<sp...@socrates.gatech.edu> writes
> If so, the question is either insincere or ridiculous. Why would one
>care so much about LSJ's opinion on Legacy of Pander, and not anyone else's,
>unless one wanted to somehow relate that to LSJ's influence on the decision
>that resulted in a change to Legacy of Pander?
Because everyone else gets to argue over such things.
LSJ imposes on himself (for very good reasons) a tendency to not comment
on such things. Of all the noted, respected players on the newsgroup,
he's the only one I can think of who has never got involved in the
arguments regarding its power.
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:06:31 +0100, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk>
wrote:
>Of all the noted, respected players on the newsgroup,
>he's the only one I can think of who has never got involved in the
>arguments regarding its power.
I haven't argued about it......<g>
Misdirection was my holy war, and it was finally won!
-------------------------------
Ethan Burrow - Prince of Austin
saa...@yahoo.com
http://whitestar.ddg.com/vtes/
I don't think LoP before SW was broken (or it would've been errata'ed much
earlier). But it was powerful enough so that correcting the misprint was a
good idea, IMO.
[ quoted text not captured ]
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3AC9B687...@white-wolf.com...
> I don't think LoP before SW was broken (or it would've been errata'ed much
> earlier). But it was powerful enough so that correcting the misprint was a
> good idea, IMO.
>
thank you for your personal thoughts ;)
-thinking the same thing
reyda
[ quoted text not captured ]