That Pesky Little "3"

That pesky little "3". Small and tucked away in the corner of the card. I paid no attention to it when I first saw it. But then I found out what it meant. It means that none of the new vampires in the Camarilla Edition can be used in the same deck as vampires from the Jyhad or V:tES sets! And looking into the future (if the game survives), WW may at some point come out with new sets that they call group 4. And none of the vampires from that set could be used with vampires from any of the following sets: Jyhad, V:tES, AH, DS, Sabbat, SW, FN, and BL. One of the great things about this game is that you can use cards from any set and put a deck together. But not anymore. Now your choice of vampires is significantly restricted. This is a bad idea. It destroys one of the great things about this game. Lots of very surprising changes were made with this expansion. When they changed the Jyhad backing to V:tES many players left. I hope that doesn't happen here. I am one of many, I'm sure, that will not buy as many cards or any cards at all. We will just wait and see. Wishing things were different, but not this different.... -Kevin J. Wiebe Prince of Edmonton (Alberta, Canada)

kev...@shaw.ca (Kevin J. Wiebe) wrote in message news:<42b2972f.02070...@posting.google.com>... > That pesky little "3". > > One of the great things about this game is that you can use cards from > any set and put a deck together. But not anymore. Now your choice of > vampires is significantly restricted. This is a bad idea. It > destroys one of the great things about this game. I was in the game shop for our Wednesday VTES game, and various Magic players wandered by the table. One bright young lad was astonished when I told him you could use any card from all the way back to the beginning, and all of them worked with each other. He thought that was great, and I had him psyched for the new Camarilla set, convinced he could buy it for new cards and use them with old cards (all of the older players, myself included, keep collections of older extra cards to give to new players). That won't happen now. Old crypts won't work with new vampires, and it's going to be a royal pain to use new library cards with old ones (anyone here know what kinetic memory is? White Wolf doesn't seem to). I understand why WW is doing it, but I think it's going to make it somewhat harder to recruit new players, and MUCH harder to retain old ones. JSpektr

"Kevin J. Wiebe" wrote: > > That pesky little "3". > > Small and tucked away in the corner of the card. I paid no attention > to it when I first saw it. But then I found out what it meant. It > means that none of the new vampires in the Camarilla Edition can be > used in the same deck as vampires from the Jyhad or V:tES sets! > > And looking into the future (if the game survives), WW may at some > point come out with new sets that they call group 4. And none of the > vampires from that set could be used with vampires from any of the > following sets: Jyhad, V:tES, AH, DS, Sabbat, SW, FN, and BL. > I would assume that we are likely to see 3 for a little while yet (The Anarch and next small set) simply as it would be difficult to sell any cards to players that so rapidly cannot use them. My feeling is, that when 4 comes out, we may also see the odd vamp with 3 on it. What would be the point of producing vamps that should obviously mix with 2, as they wouldn't ever be able to mix with 3 (e.g. new vamps for bloodlines). It is probably just going to be to limit numbers of certain types for crypts, in order to keep numbers relatively stable. I like the idea. It will keep things fresh, and shouldn't allow too much power gaming. Yes it will be awkward to police, and when all is said and done, for house rules, you could say anything is legal. There is nothing to stop you playing a non-sanctioned "free-for-all" tourney. (Dare I say it, people play with card limits, and possibly have them.) It will change the way people think to build decks, that always happens with new rulings, and new sets (I know one group that has put all their bloodlines away as they don't like the way they change play). You can't please all the people all the time, and you certainly can't make an ommlette without breaking some eggs. What happens to this game in the future I don't know, but I think that some of these quite radical decisions will probably prove themselves worthwhile. It takes a lot to make changes to an established game such as VTES. Some people will not like it, some will (e.g decimalisation in the UK, watching two people converse whilst building something, one in cm, one in inches, is really quite amusing). I will reserve judgement about these changes until the set is out, and I have had a chance to play the game. I like that there is no outright banning of sets (like Magic) but that power play should not be increased. I play the game for it's social aspect. I have made a lot of new friends since coming back to playing it, and more since becoming Prince of Cambridge. I hope that this won't be spoiled. I'm in the fortunate position of being in a job where change is always occuring, I'm used to it. I take it on board, analyse everything as a whole and then make informed decisions. Some people on this group don't. As a Prince, I would like more info to tell my players via our email newsletter, but White Wolf's marketing strategy is doing what my marketing course always told us. Get people talking about the product. Anything that puts a product in your mind is a "good thing" (tm). When it comes to going and looking for a new game/game expansion, we will go into the shops, see CE, and say, well lets see what the fuss was about. We buy some, try it out and then make a further decision. Yes Pre-orders may end up being down. Most of my play group don't buy much anyway. The most is probably 2 boxes of an expansion over time, we don't usually have the cash to buy much straight off. When the dust settles, the game will survive, because people want to play it, not because (unlike I feel in Magic) we have become brainwashed, and big prizes are at stake. (Are you worried about your ranking?) Just my little rant. I'll sign off now and let you all get back to your choices. I hope to still be playing some of you in the future (those in St. Louis in a couple of weeks!) and I will still be playing this game for the foreseeable future. Andy "Slytherin" Brown VEKN Setite Ruler of Cambridge SET awakens, watch out all non-believers

(snip) > That won't happen now. Old crypts won't work with new vampires, and > it's going to be a royal pain to use new library cards with old ones > (anyone here know what kinetic memory is? White Wolf doesn't seem to). > I understand why WW is doing it, but I think it's going to make it > somewhat harder to recruit new players, and MUCH harder to retain old > ones. So it finally happened we have type 1 and type 2 play styles in Vtes. I can also understand why WW did this but I don't think it does the game any good. But the restriction only works for Vtes and Jyhad right? Then again that's the beauty of Vtes if you don't like a new ruling ignore it :P Emile (ecstatic because I graduated)

[ quoted text not captured ] I would say this is true. I only play Magic for fun these days, and I just make decks using any cards, sod the Type 1, 1.5, 2 and extended. If the new rules don't seem to be working, then I shall ask my playgroup as to whether they want to use them or not. If not, then for fun sessions, we won't. For sanctioned tourneys though, we will have to abide by the rules, and I shall do so. > > Emile > > (ecstatic because I graduated) Congratulations, and all the best for the future. [ quoted text not captured ]

ebo...@hotmail.com (Emile Bosman) wrote in message news:<cbf416fb.02070...@posting.google.com>... > (snip) > > That won't happen now. Old crypts won't work with new vampires, and > > it's going to be a royal pain to use new library cards with old ones > > (anyone here know what kinetic memory is? White Wolf doesn't seem to). > > I understand why WW is doing it, but I think it's going to make it > > somewhat harder to recruit new players, and MUCH harder to retain old > > ones. > > So it finally happened we have type 1 and type 2 play styles in Vtes. > Nope. I'd suggest a re-read the rule. All your cards are still uable. A minor restriction now prevents you from building overtly redundant crypts... This is an improvement to the game. > I can also understand why WW did this but I don't think it does the game any good. The alternative puts too much advantage into the hands of small and mid-cap decks. > But the restriction only works for Vtes and Jyhad right? > Presumably it'll work like this: You can mix Jyhad/VTES crypt cards with crypt cards from any subsequent expansion, through Bloodlines. You can mix crypt cards from any expansion with crypt cards from the upcoming Camarilla Edition. You _cannot_ mix Jyhad/VTES crypt cards with crypt cards from the upcoming Camarilla Edition, and thereby get an unfair advantage over players who only have access to CE... > Emile > > (ecstatic because I graduated) Fantastic!!! Congratulations... DaveZ Atom Weaver

"Kevin J. Wiebe" wrote: > That pesky little "3". > > Small and tucked away in the corner of the card. I paid no attention > to it when I first saw it. But then I found out what it meant. It > means that none of the new vampires in the Camarilla Edition can be > used in the same deck as vampires from the Jyhad or V:tES sets! > > And looking into the future (if the game survives), WW may at some > point come out with new sets that they call group 4. And none of the > vampires from that set could be used with vampires from any of the > following sets: Jyhad, V:tES, AH, DS, Sabbat, SW, FN, and BL. Well... not necessarily. The "3" in the Camarilla Edition is a necessary balancing factor, because Camarilla clans would otherwise have about twice as many vampires to choose from than Sabbat/Independent. If ever WW gets around to additional Sabbat/Independent sets that even out the number of available vampires, maybe this rule will once again disappear? Thomas

Thomas Pichler wrote: > Well... not necessarily. The "3" in the Camarilla Edition is a necessary > balancing factor, because Camarilla clans would otherwise have about twice > as many vampires to choose from than Sabbat/Independent. > > If ever WW gets around to additional Sabbat/Independent sets that even out > the number of available vampires, maybe this rule will once again > disappear? No. The rule is needed to prevent the ranks of vampires from bloating into unbalanced territory. Having the Sabbat ranks bloated into the same unbalanced territory would only make the whole group of clans unbalanced. If you want to play VTES with custom crypt generation rules (Take 12 blank cards - write on them distinct names. Give each vampire a clan and a capacity. Then choose X points worth of disciplines and specials, where X is a function of capacity. Take these 12 cards as your crypt), then go to it. No need to wait for all those vampires to eventually get printed. -- 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/

> > Then again that's the beauty of Vtes if you don't like a new ruling ignore it :P > I tend to agree with this. But looking at the spoiler list, I noticed this. To follow the RPG, WW has reprinted new Justicars and princes to match the changes in the world of darkness. Cock Robin replaces Sheldon and Pascek will replace Don Cruez, Vitel will replace Emerson Bridges, and so on. Ignoring the new rules might then create some very ackward situations, having two princes (and an archbishop) all for the same city? It gets difficult to play around this...

Creature wrote: > I tend to agree with this. But looking at the spoiler list, I noticed > this. To follow the RPG, WW has reprinted new Justicars and princes to > match the changes in the world of darkness. Cock Robin replaces > Sheldon and Pascek will replace Don Cruez, Vitel will replace Emerson > Bridges, and so on. Ignoring the new rules might then create some very > ackward situations, having two princes (and an archbishop) all for the > same city? It gets difficult to play around this... No problem at all. They would contest their titles as normal. It will still happen if you bring out a group-3 Ventrue Justicar and someone else brings out a group-1 Ventrue Justicar. All that indicates is that the two vampires are contesting the title, just as if you had brought out Democritus and then Gideon Fontaine called the "Venture Justicar" referendum, naming himself (and it passed). [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Most of WOD history deals with power struggles over certain cities or regions. Usually there are two or more key vampires involved in this. Whos to say that these power struggles should not be played out in the game by having both Emerson and his imposter contest the same title? The contesting rules in essence already deal with this problem, although granted it wont necesarily solve the 'problem'. T