Also called : "Card Text." (LSJ).
All the cards are played according to Card Text. This means that Return to
Innocence, Monocle of Clarity, Thoughts Betrayed, Tomb of Ramseses III, 5th
Trad, etc, are all authorized and played according to what is written on the
card being played, no matter what the (good) erratas have said since.
A format to play only once : right before you lose all your friends...
"Correct", LSJ ? ;-)
Orpheus
P.S. : I'm actually serious about this...
Orpheus wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes into
torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
From there it's just Day Operations and Freak Drive, baby. I picture
it like this:
Famous vampire (controlled by me) bleeds. I play Day Operation. Famous
vampire goes to torpor, prey loses a pool for the bleed, then three pool
for the Fame.
Famous vampire freaks.
Famous vampire attempts to leave torpor (cardless action, so no NRA).
Regardless of blocks, play Day Operation. Famous vampire leaves torpor
successfully, then goes right back. Another three pool lost by my prey.
Famous vampire freaks. Etc.
--Colin McGuigan
>Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
>that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes into
>torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
Hmm...refresh my memory. Was the Jyhad Fame unique?
Halcyan 2
Orpheus expounded:
[ quoted text not captured ]
So what happens when I play my "once per game" card and soeone else
wants to play another one without that text? (or vice versa?)
> Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
> that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes into
> torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
>
> From there it's just Day Operations and Freak Drive, baby. I picture
> it like this:
>
> Famous vampire (controlled by me) bleeds. I play Day Operation. Famous
> vampire goes to torpor, prey loses a pool for the bleed, then three pool
> for the Fame.
>
> Famous vampire freaks.
>
> Famous vampire attempts to leave torpor (cardless action, so no NRA).
> Regardless of blocks, play Day Operation. Famous vampire leaves torpor
> successfully, then goes right back. Another three pool lost by my prey.
>
> Famous vampire freaks. Etc.
>
> --Colin McGuigan
ROTFL
Yes, many cards were actually pretty bad. I think two rounds of this shit
would be enough, and quite fun when not totally unbearable...
A way to give an hommage to the work accomplished by the design team since
those Dark Ages...? :)
------
Orpheus
Colin McGuigan expounded:
> Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
> that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes into
> torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
>
> From there it's just Day Operations and Freak Drive, baby. I picture
> it like this:
But woud this be the MOST broken combo?
> So what happens when I play my "once per game" card and soeone else
> wants to play another one without that text? (or vice versa?)
LOL
Errr... Good question !!
I'd say we apply the card text of the "one per game" versions, so the others
can ba played multiple times but this one can't be played after another, and
no other can be played after it.
Any idea in mind ? PTO maybe ? ;-)
Well, trouble is we can't ask LSJ about these rules, because
a) they are in total contradiction with all the (mostly good) work he did on
this game
b) he would only have one thing to answer...
Timlagor wrote:
> But woud this be the MOST broken combo?
Probably not, but it'd be the easiest broken combo to pull off. If you
got out the Ankara Citadel, a Tremere with for (such as Kyoko, 5 cap)
could do the combo indefinitely. As long as your cards held out, you
could oust everyone in a single turn after you got the Ankara.
--Colin McGuigan
[ quoted text not captured ]
The only thing that bugs me about this is that LSJ and the current
design team have been the ones tweaking card text for "balance concerns"
since VTES reverted back to WW.
If you want an LSJ format, only use cards that have the most current and
correct text. What you describe would probably be better defined as the
"WotC format".
The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)
BernieTime
Lansing, Michigan
Halcyan 2 wrote:
> Hmm...refresh my memory. Was the Jyhad Fame unique?
No. Uniqueness was added in the 1995 unlimited base set.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
> The only thing that bugs me about this is that LSJ and the current
> design team have been the ones tweaking card text for "balance concerns"
> since VTES reverted back to WW.
>
> If you want an LSJ format, only use cards that have the most current and
> correct text. What you describe would probably be better defined as the
> "WotC format".
>
> The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
> card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)
LOL
The "LSJ" term came up when I told my friends about the "Card Text" idea. It
is meant to be funny but in no way disrespectful.
It is obvious that these erratas were needed, as some people feel that the
some cards still need to be errated.
Such a tournament will show the difference between "then" and "now", as if
you could temporarily go back to prehistoric times : it would be
interesting, fun (if you survive the experience...), but I'm sure few of us
would like to live all their lives there...
--
Orpheus, from his Mausoleum, Massilia
"Orpheus" <orph...@DEADSPAMfree.fr> wrote in message news:<4017010d$0$24050$626a...@news.free.fr>...
> > So what happens when I play my "once per game" card and soeone else
> > wants to play another one without that text? (or vice versa?)
>
> LOL
>
> Errr... Good question !!
>
> I'd say we apply the card text of the "one per game" versions, so the others
> can ba played multiple times but this one can't be played after another, and
> no other can be played after it.
AFAIK the "once per game" only restricts the copy of the card with the
text (as the copy that was played before is no longer in effect, and
cards don't exert their effects from the ash heap).
So...
You once you play ToGP (regardless of whether the new or the old
version) any further new ToGPs are unplayable.
> Any idea in mind ? PTO maybe ? ;-)
PTO is not (yet?) limited to once per game.
> Well, trouble is we can't ask LSJ about these rules, because
>
> a) they are in total contradiction with all the (mostly good) work he did on
> this game
> b) he would only have one thing to answer...
Bye,
Daneel
So the old independant vampires are back to non-camarilla again,
making pto finaly balanced? or shall we restart a threat about
"non-camarilla" in card texts.
hmmm drool... the famous fame....
lol
Oortje
http://www.oortje.bravehost.com/vampire.htm
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:03 GMT, berni...@comcast.netHOLDLeSPAM
scrawled:
>The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
>card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)
i thought that was just some crappy duellist article, or something. i
never seemed to actually play with card limits at all, and i've been
there from the start. well, been here. whatever, you know.
salem
domain:canberra http://www.geocities.com/salem_christ.geo/vtes.htm
"Orpheus" <orph...@DEADSPAMfree.fr> wrote in message news:<4016d2b8$0$24024$626a...@news.free.fr>...
> Also called : "Card Text." (LSJ).
>
> All the cards are played according to Card Text.
We already do this. A typical passage of play at Legbiter Towers:
Lady Legbiter: "Alright, i play <card x>"
Another player: "It doesn't work that way any more, the text has been
changed to <>."
Lady Legbiter: "But that's not what it says on the card."
Another player, often this one: <sigh> "OK, play it the way it says."
Timlagor <Timlagor...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a8109178...@news.freeserve.com>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Worse would be combining this with Old-Skool RTI abuse,
Make the bleed action Return to Innocence, using Daring the Dawn to
make it unblockable and then fall into torpor (if you can order the
agg. damage before the RTI burn clause) to trigger Fame, followed by
burning. Add Jyhad-era Soul Gem for latherrinserepeatability
(although the Fame wouldn't survive the RTI burn, of course)...
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
>>The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
>>card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)>
>i thought that was just some crappy duellist article, or something. i
>never seemed to actually play with card limits at all, and i've been
>there from the start. well, been here. whatever, you know.
The only Gen Con tournament I played in had card limits, though I may have
forgotten what they were, obviously a fair number of years ago. Vaguely recall
a 6 player table with single elimination. Was a funny (very stupid) game.
Prey AIed my predator. Such helped tremendously with my getting a VP - my all
Malk deck's first discard was Owl Companion, which had the nice benefit of
causing someone else to discard a Malk Dementia before I brought anyone out but
had the significant problem that I was playing with Owl Companion in an all
Malk deck. Only like 2 real decks being played at the table and the guy with
the superior seating position won easily.
Colin McGuigan <maguaSP...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<NtKcnb9Z5cm...@speakeasy.net>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Better yet, with Muaziz (in case you actually have to take an action
without a day op, it would be at an additional stealth).
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:03 GMT, berni...@comcast.netHOLDLeSPAM
wrote:
>The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
>card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)
>
What were those limits, please?
-- pseudosoldier
> > Colin McGuigan expounded:
> > > Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
> > > that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes
into
> > > torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
> > >
> > > From there it's just Day Operations and Freak Drive, baby. I picture
> > > it like this:
> >
> > But woud this be the MOST broken combo?
>
> Worse would be combining this with Old-Skool RTI abuse,
> Make the bleed action Return to Innocence, using Daring the Dawn to
> make it unblockable and then fall into torpor (if you can order the
> agg. damage before the RTI burn clause) to trigger Fame, followed by
> burning. Add Jyhad-era Soul Gem for latherrinserepeatability
> (although the Fame wouldn't survive the RTI burn, of course)...
Oh my, the abuses !!! :-D
But very few players here have enough of Jyhad cards to go that far...
-----------
Orpheus
[ quoted text not captured ]
In 1996, the DCI had a "restricted list" in addition to the banned list.
The cards on the restricted list were limited to 2 in a deck (each).
Then 6 (each). Then 2 again. (or maybe the other way around).
The DCI ran a blanket card limit (or 4, IIRC) at one tournament in Gen*Con
(an unadvertised change to the printed DCI rules, IIRC).
[ quoted text not captured ]
> > > So what happens when I play my "once per game" card and soeone else
> > > wants to play another one without that text? (or vice versa?)
> >
> > LOL
> >
> > Errr... Good question !!
> >
> > I'd say we apply the card text of the "one per game" versions, so the
others
> > can ba played multiple times but this one can't be played after another,
and
> > no other can be played after it.
>
> AFAIK the "once per game" only restricts the copy of the card with the
> text (as the copy that was played before is no longer in effect, and
> cards don't exert their effects from the ash heap).
Urm, isn't it what I said, only explained differently ??
> So...
>
> You once you play ToGP (regardless of whether the new or the old
> version) any further new ToGPs are unplayable.
>
> > Any idea in mind ? PTO maybe ? ;-)
>
> PTO is not (yet?) limited to once per game.
Hence the ;-) ...
CU,
Orpheus
> > All the cards are played according to Card Text.
>
> We already do this. A typical passage of play at Legbiter Towers:
>
> Lady Legbiter: "Alright, i play <card x>"
> Another player: "It doesn't work that way any more, the text has been
> changed to <>."
> Lady Legbiter: "But that's not what it says on the card."
> Another player, often this one: <sigh> "OK, play it the way it says."
LOL.
When you come over, be sure to present me this lady to whom no one can
refuse anything... :-)
Orpheus, eager to apply 5th Trad once more...
Colin McGuigan <maguaSP...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<OrKcnYWSOq9...@speakeasy.net>...
> Heh. My deck would consist of my old Jyhad Fames. You know, the ones
> that say, "Your prey" loses three pool when the famous vampire goes into
> torpor, rather than the vampire's controller?
>
> From there it's just Day Operations and Freak Drive, baby. I picture
> it like this:
>
> Famous vampire (controlled by me) bleeds. I play Day Operation. Famous
> vampire goes to torpor, prey loses a pool for the bleed, then three pool
> for the Fame.
>
> Famous vampire freaks.
>
> Famous vampire attempts to leave torpor (cardless action, so no NRA).
> Regardless of blocks, play Day Operation. Famous vampire leaves torpor
> successfully, then goes right back. Another three pool lost by my prey.
>
> Famous vampire freaks. Etc.
>
> --Colin McGuigan
If I'm remembering the story correctly, this is the origin of the
"Legend of Stu". The way the story went was Stu Pieloch had a deck
that essentially did the above (pre-Sabbat War)and while playing this
at a tournament he called LSJ over and asked "Is this broken yet?".
It's been a few years since since I've heard the story so I may be all
wet.
Doug
> What were those limits, please?
LSJ got the limitations correct.
The actual restricted list was something like this:
ANy card that said "Strike: Combat Ends"
KRC
Conservative Agitation
Other votes may have been restricted, too.
Fanboy
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:12:11 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
>pseudosoldier wrote:>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:03 GMT, berni...@comcast.netHOLDLeSPAM
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>The question then would be whether you'd reinstitute those few/funky
>>>card limits WotC had in place ages ago? Remember those? :)
>>>>>
>> What were those limits, please?>
>In 1996, the DCI had a "restricted list" in addition to the banned list.
>The cards on the restricted list were limited to 2 in a deck (each).
>Then 6 (each). Then 2 again. (or maybe the other way around).
Per my recollection, something like 8-10 cards were restricted to 6CL,
and a few other cards (3-4) restricted to 2CL concurrently.
Everything else was no card limit.
>The DCI ran a blanket card limit (or 4, IIRC) at one tournament in Gen*Con
>(an unadvertised change to the printed DCI rules, IIRC).
WotC was soooo bad :P
>LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
BernieTime
Lansing, Michigan