New previes: Tupdog

Hi all, Here's today's new vampire. *** Tupdog Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 POT VIS Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to your uncontrolled region. Flight. *** So, you need at least one Tremere antitribu in play to make Tupdogs work. And for the rest... a 30-cards crypt? Interesting concept, though, a self-destroying 1-cap with 2 superior disciplines... Cheers, Emiliano

> Tupdog > > Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 > > POT VIS > > Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika > cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may > enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs > are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn > Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to > your uncontrolled region. Flight. Giving new and horrific meaning to "Launch the Dingus". -- Derek insert clever quotation here

Could also be used well when you have a small number of !Tre you want to use, but not double-up on. Just cycle Tupdogs until you have the !Trem you want in your uncontrolled. Also possible: 30 tupdogs, 60-card KRC&ConsBoon deck. :) (Tweaked a bit, of course, but you get my meaning, I'm sure).

Emiliano Imeroni wrote: > > Tupdog > > *** > > So, you need at least one Tremere antitribu in play > to make Tupdogs work. And for the rest... a 30-cards > crypt? > > Interesting concept, though, a self-destroying > 1-cap with 2 superior disciplines... > Very interesting, though I doubt that anyone (myself included) will be able to resist calling them Supdog. ('sup dog? nothin, supitchoo?) How worthwhile will they be? Hard to tell. You'll need at least a 30-card crypt, and the less duplication, the better. Plus some Effective Managements will help. Visceratika is such an odd discipline - is it for combat? is it for stealth? is it for defense? It's sorta like a less powerful Protean, that also has less options, and is more rare on vamps. Tupdog also has Flight, so a High Ground/Flung Crap deck wouldn't be out of the question, but you need to get as much mileage out of each action as possible, and Flung Crap is thwarted by basically every type of combat defense (though High Grounds will get around the maneuver defense). Stone Quills costs him one less blood, so that's nice. As does Bond With The Mountain, in case he gets in a fight he can't win - though it relegates him to bleeding for 1 afterward. You can also use the Tupdogs for intercept their first turn around the table, and them letting them bleed or rush before they get burned. Their intercept options aren't all that strong - Patrol, plus Media Locations, maybe a Special Report? If they *are* able to intercept, then you've got Collapse the Arches - which is such a nice card with a tough restriction. And last, but not least, Tupdogs do have access to all the usual Potence combat, including Immortal Grapple. With Swoop, Pounce, Roll, IG, and Torn Signpost, they can do a whole lot of damage - maybe not any better than other Gargoyles or even other POT vamps, but at a cost of 1 pool per rush (plus the one-turn block option), it just might be worth it.

[ quoted text not captured ] a related question if you have more than 1 tupdog out (say 3) do you draw 1 crypt card or 3 when they burn? >From the wording i would say 1 (but without much ground to sustain this interpretation) thx Andrea

[ quoted text not captured ] Sweet sweet trick decks. Sure to do a nice 12 pool damage before someone's able to stop it... but, not much else after that... Some vote providing location? Vis stealth? ~SV

Emiliano Imeroni wrote: > Tupdog > Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 > POT VIS > Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika > cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may > enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs > are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn > Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to > your uncontrolled region. Flight. > > *** > > So, you need at least one Tremere antitribu in play > to make Tupdogs work. And for the rest... a 30-cards > crypt? I was thinking in Valerius Maior adv (has nec) with Possession to bring one back from time to time... i don't have any idea if this works! :-P On the other hand, as someone already said you have a cheap vampire for 1 turn to call an undirected action (political perhaps) taking advantage of Visceratika cards mainly. Anyway, the idea seems really nice and very interesting. .- Luis Duarte

Finally it makes sense to build a deck that uses Pugfar. Although a solid vampire he was very hard to use being the only !tremere slave. The next thing that comes to mind is Yong-Sun, Harmonist (ADV). He must be a nightmare for every tupdog deck. Then Mark of the Damned. But that only hurts your predator. regards pallando --------------- pallando(at)gmx(dot)at

> >a related question if you have more than 1 tupdog out (say 3) do you >draw 1 crypt card or 3 when they burn? >>From the wording i would say 1 (but without much ground to sustain this >interpretation) > >thx >Andrea hi, my guess is, that you burn them in one after the other, fulfilling card text, and thus drawing one new crypt card for each tupdog (in your example 3) regards, Chris.QJ

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > Also possible: 30 tupdogs, 60-card KRC&ConsBoon deck. :) (Tweaked a > bit, of course, but you get my meaning, I'm sure). "Wha? Whatta ya mean there is a Primogen on the table and I can't pass my votes!" :-) Now, here is an idea that can't *possibly* be bad--as many Tupdogs as you can muster and a deck of a lot of combat and enough Clan Impersonations to play one every turn. Unless Clan Impersonation costs 2... -Peter

p...@lightlink.com wrote: > > Also possible: 30 tupdogs, 60-card KRC&ConsBoon deck. :) (Tweaked a > > bit, of course, but you get my meaning, I'm sure). > > "Wha? Whatta ya mean there is a Primogen on the table and I can't pass > my votes!" Thus the 'tweaked a bit' statement.

Emiliano Imeroni wrote: > Hi all, > > Here's today's new vampire. Btw, did you notice that Saulot wasn't a troll afterall...

> Tupdog > > Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 > > POT VIS > > Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika > cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may > enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs > are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn > Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to > your uncontrolled region. Flight. Last weeks 'Roll' preview just made a whole lot more sense... It will really work great in a Tupdog deck!

tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > Thus the 'tweaked a bit' statement. Well, yeah. Thus the smiley :-) Anyway, what could you tweak to make the deck (i.e. a million Tupdogs and lots of KRCs) work? They have POT and VIC, neither of which (as far as we are aware) give out vote power. You can't bleed to get the edge. Most of the vote giving masters are clan specific. Lemme think... -Powerbase Rome! Gives you votes (slowly--1 vote token per MPA spent) and is not clan specific. A gimme! -Escrima, or whatever--gives you 3 votes the turn you play it, but then you give it to your predator. So you get 1 turn with some votes. Maybe for only 1 PA (as I think you have to tap the Escrima, or whatever) -Bribes! "Hey! I'm an unstoppable weeine vote horde! Help me pass my votes!" Uhh, that's all I can think of. This deck is going to be a hard sell. But there has to be a way to make it work. No, wait! get out 4 Tupdogs! Have 1 clan impersonate to a Camarilla clan! Have a second call [New Clan] Justicar for which you will have 2 votes in favor! Have the next 2 each call KRC! That can't *possibly* not work! Or...40 Tupdogs, 1 Matahari, enough Recruitments to reliably get her into play, and then all the clan specific vote gaining master cards! Gold! So crazy it just might work! -Peter

My favourite card of the set, no doubt. Gonna make the deck of my dreams with it... It has to be tested long enough to know if a Possession deck (including Marino R. Vasquez of course !) would be worth it. Valerius would need the Sargon to be efficient. Of course, any small vamp with NEC could be a worthwile addition. But then you'd need prevents for the dogs, Possessions, stealth etc... No, I definitely think that a Tupdog deck can work quite well (after lots of tweaking and the right, "not for beginners" type of play) by itself. Orpheus

pd...@lightlink.com wrote: > Anyway, what could you tweak to make the deck (i.e. a million Tupdogs > and lots of KRCs) work? They have POT and VIC, neither of which (as far > as we are aware) give out vote power. You can't bleed to get the edge. > Most of the vote giving masters are clan specific. Lemme think... You could support their votes with Gratiano becoming Regent ;) (Who needs to take D actions?!)

Of course, focusing a little bit away from ONLY Tupdog...: Tupdog's a great diablerizer. If you do not enter combat, or one of the other Tupdog's already sent a vamp to torpor, Tupdog can diablerize freely 'cause he knows he's going to burn anyway. You can Skin for +2 stealth, and flow within the mountain to continue. Ie: Play a straight forward !Tre Succubus deck. Succubus Agg-poke, Tupdog diablerize. Far from flawless, but at least a module in an existing deck.

Emiliano Imeroni <emiliano...@gmail.com> wrote: > *** > Tupdog > Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 > POT VIS > Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika > cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may > enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs > are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn > Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to > your uncontrolled region. Flight. > *** If Ian Forestal goes Anarch, he can bring these guys out for free instantly with Undue Influence at [qui]. This corner-case brought to you by Josh :)

<pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message news:1131374896.0...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > -Escrima, or whatever--gives you 3 votes the turn you play it, but then > you give it to your predator. So you get 1 turn with some votes. Maybe > for only 1 PA (as I think you have to tap the Escrima, or whatever) > "Esgrima, Master: unique trifle. Put this card in play. Tap during a political action to give 3 additional votes to a vampire with a capacity above 6. During your discard phase, your predator takes control of Esgrima." Note the part about the vampire with capacity above 6... regards pallando ----------- pallando(at)gmx(dot)at

[ quoted text not captured ] hi, one more corner-case-ish one-turn-only solution would be to use dia de los muertos and daisy chain your votes with cryptic riders. unfortunately, as someone else has already pointed out, clan imp costs 2 blood and thats not a option (parthenon, a skill card and a life in the city would be a solution, but as unpracticable as the dia de los muertos one...) regards, Chris.QJ

"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:FcSdnRZ9r8TJxvLe...@giganews.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Huh? What was the old meaning to "Launch the Dingus"? Was it also horrific? Fred

Chris Berger wrote: > Emiliano Imeroni wrote: > > Tupdog > > Interesting concept, though, a self-destroying > > 1-cap with 2 superior disciplines... > > > Very interesting, though I doubt that anyone (myself included) will be > able to resist calling them Supdog. ('sup dog? nothin, supitchoo?) I'm going to go with Topdog. Though Supdog is pretty good too. Maybe they're good for cheap bleed defense, maybe they're good for one nasty combat or something, maybe they're good with dip. I don't know. But I think it's an interesting idea. Xian 'sup dog?

p...@lightlink.com wrote: > tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com wrote: > > Thus the 'tweaked a bit' statement. > > Well, yeah. Thus the smiley :-) Lol. Here's one of my own. :) Anyway, any scarce or recruited vampire with votes that seems a likely target? You could always call that one vote that gains the edge! :) Or computer hack with Jake to get the edge.

>>...How worthwhile will they be? Hard to tell. You'll need at least a 30-card crypt, and the less duplication, the better... Why will you need a 30 card crypt? It seems like a handful of these guys could go into any Gargoyle (or even plain old POT rush) deck. They even have the advantage of being like their own Effective Managements. Have a crypt with only 2 or 3 vampires you really want? Just load of the rest of it with Tupdog and screw doubling. Maybe Pugfar, Obsidian (or whoever the Indy Gargoyle is...I think it's him), and a couple nasty !Tremere, such as Reverend Blackwood, Bryan Van Deusen, or Ian Forestal. Jesus people--why is it that the first thing everyone wants to do with cool new cards is make one trick pony decks? This isn't that other card game, remember?

CthuluKitty wrote: > Jesus people--why is it that the first thing everyone wants to do with > cool new cards is make one trick pony decks? This isn't that other > card game, remember? 'Cause one trick pony decks are funny. Especially when they involve 15 Clan Impersonations... -Peter

pallando wrote: > Note the part about the vampire with capacity above 6... Heh. I don't even know what the cards is actually called. You think I'm going to remember the part about needing a capaicity above 6? Hmm. Is there anyway to include in the "Tupdog Vote Push" deck a way to get 6 skill cards on one of them in one turn? -Peter

> 'Cause one trick pony decks are funny. Especially when they involve 15 > Clan Impersonations... Peter, Clan Impersonation costs 2. We all weep tears of combo-rifficness lost to the ages. We do. :) Ankur

Chris.QJ wrote: > one more corner-case-ish one-turn-only solution would be to use dia de > los muertos and daisy chain your votes with cryptic riders. Ooh! Now we are talking! Maybe something like: -Build up influence phase actions through, like, Info Highway and Dreams. And play a Parthenon. And get a Rumors of Gehenna in play. And ply The Coven. -Get a lot of Tupdogs into your uncontrolled reigon with, say, Effective Management. -Influence 6 or 7 Tupdogs into play. -Have 1 Tupdog get a fortitude skill card on one MPA and then a Life in the City followed by, uh, Perfectionist? And then on your third MPA, you play Dia De Los Muertes! -Tupdog Clan Impersonates into a Sabbat clan (does that even work?) -Tupdog gains a blood and Freak Drives. You tap the Coven that you played earlier which has since made its way back around the table to you, filling Tupdog up with blood! -Tupdog calls a vote that passess automatically! You Cryptic Rider! -You repeat vote/cryptic till the end of the turn, 'cause Cryptic doesn't have a "Can't be played on a vote that is automatically passing" clause! (well, ok, it might, but I'd like to assume not for now!) This can only work out well! -Peter

Ankur Gupta wrote: > Peter, Clan Impersonation costs 2. We all weep tears of combo-rifficness > lost to the ages. > > We do. :) No, see! You have the Parthenon, and then you play a skill card followed by a Life in the City and another useful master! It can only work! -Peter

On 7 Nov 2005 05:41:29 -0800, "Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi all, > >Here's today's new vampire. > >*** > >Tupdog > >Gargoyle, capacity 1, group 3 > >POT VIS > >Sabbat. Tremere antitribu slave: Visceratika >cards cost Tupdog 1 less blood to play. Tupdog may >enter combat with any minion as a (D) action. Tupdogs >are not unique. At the end of your minion phase, burn >Tupdog and move the top card from your crypt to >your uncontrolled region. Flight. > >*** I was thinking maybe a Shambling Hordes deck, possibly Tre/!Tre, but just as easily Gio. Pack a 12 card crypt with 1 of each of your 'king' vampires, and fill the rest with Tupdog's to cycle, and provide munchies for the Shambling Hordes if you go the non-Chill way. Morgan Vening

>>Tupdog Clan Impersonates into a Sabbat clan (does that even work?) Ummm...you do realize that the majority of this combo is completely pointless since Tupdog is already Sabbat, right?

[ quoted text not captured ] Cthulu Kitty already said it. But BTW, even if Tupdog was cam or indy, Into the Fire makes him sabbat, and is a trifle for Dia De Los Muertes...

[ quoted text not captured ] Yeah... Too bad Ian can't play Govern the Unaligned, he could bleed or get a Tupdog + 2 pool for just one blood... ;)) BTW, is the Tupdog a "card" that you can play if you control Mata Hari ? Orpheus

>> If Ian Forestal goes Anarch, he can bring these guys out for free >> instantly with Undue Influence at [qui]. >> This corner-case brought to you by Josh :) >Yeah... Too bad Ian can't play Govern the Unaligned, he could bleed or >get a Tupdog + 2 pool for just one blood... ;)) Well, regardless of the relative utility of Govern over UI, I think the above combo is still pretty cool. As a +1 stealth action you get a free minion that rushes once with POT VIS Flight and then burns, bringing a new vampire into your uncontrolled, ready to influence to that turn. The Govern trick is nifty too, but you have to spend all 4 transfers to get the 2 pool, which might not be what you want to do, and the excess will vanish if you don't. >BTW, is the Tupdog a "card" that you can play if you control Mata Hari? Why do you even bother to ask questions like this, or was it just a joke? Yes. Tupdog is a "card", and you can play it if you control Mata Hari. I have absolutely no idea what kind of interaction between Tupdog and Mata Hari you think might happen though.

Orpheus wrote: > BTW, is the Tupdog a "card" that you can play if you control Mata Hari > ? Since Tupdog is a crypt card (i.e., a vampire), Mata Hari and her special are totally irrelevant to Tupdog and vice versa (aside from the fact that no, Mata Hari does not count as the appropriate clan for slave Gargoyles to allow them to take D actions, since that doesn't involve Mata Hari playing cards.) > Orpheus -John Flournoy

[ quoted text not captured ] Building on the crypt ideas, you can now make a "virtual" less than 12 card crypt without doubling up. Say you would like to get out each of the 5 Group 2 Daughters of Cacophony. Previously you did something like include 2 of each and an extra copy of the 2 Daughters you like the most to get to 12. Now you can put 1 of each Daughter and 7 Tupdogs in. It takes a couple influence phases and some extra pool, but you can easily get all 5 Daughters in your uncontrolled region. And if you are doing votey Daughters, you can have the Tupdogs call votes the one turn they are around, maybe even calling Ancilla Empowerment when you have lots in play. The possibilities when combined with necromancy and Possession are interesting and I'll definately be exploring those. Maybe some sort of Turbo Tupdog deck. Now to work on convincing the rest of my playgroup they are no good, so they'll trade them to me for that 30 card crypt Tupdog deck. Later, ~Rehlow

CthuluKitty wrote: > Ummm...you do realize that the majority of this combo is completely > pointless since Tupdog is already Sabbat, right? While certainly a valid point, you realize that *that* is not the actual reason that the majority of the combo is completely pointless, right? :-) -Peter

Rehlow wrote: > Building on the crypt ideas, you can now make a "virtual" less than 12 > card crypt without doubling up. Say you would like to get out each of > the 5 Group 2 Daughters of Cacophony. Previously you did something like > include 2 of each and an extra copy of the 2 Daughters you like the > most to get to 12. Now you can put 1 of each Daughter and 7 Tupdogs in. That is actually quite a clever idea. I don't know if it is going to pay off any more than just doubling up as you need to pay pool and wait time to cycle, and then hope nothing bad happens to the vampires that you now only have one of each of in the crypt, but on the other hand, you have some extra cheap blockers. But it seems like it should be a good idea. -Peter

> Now to work on convincing the rest of my playgroup they are no good, so > they'll trade them to me for that 30 card crypt Tupdog deck. > > Later, > ~Rehlow Not gonna happen, unless you promess to share them ;) Dan

<pd...@lightlink.com> schreef in bericht news:1131385147....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] include a malk and you can keep chaining auto-votes too if someone else calls a vote (and thus uses the Cryptic Rider autovote) you can play Malkavian rider clause.

Chris.QJ wrote: >>a related question if you have more than 1 tupdog out (say 3) do you >>draw 1 crypt card or 3 when they burn? >>>From the wording i would say 1 (but without much ground to sustain this >>interpretation) >> > my guess is, that you burn them in one after the other, fulfilling > card text, and thus drawing one new crypt card for each tupdog (in > your example 3) Correct. -- That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet. Keep a little and let a little come back to me. LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply) http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Rehlow wrote: > Building on the crypt ideas, you can now make a "virtual" less than 12 > card crypt without doubling up. Say you would like to get out each of > the 5 Group 2 Daughters of Cacophony. Previously you did something like > include 2 of each and an extra copy of the 2 Daughters you like the > most to get to 12. Now you can put 1 of each Daughter and 7 Tupdogs in. > It takes a couple influence phases and some extra pool, but you can > easily get all 5 Daughters in your uncontrolled region. It will require far fewer transfers and less pool: Dig the next card out of your crypt: 4 transfers and 1 Pool Dig with Tupdog: 1 transfer and 1 Pool It even gets around Leandro. :) -- - Gregory Stuart Pettigrew

Gregory Stuart Pettigrew wrote: > It will require far fewer transfers and less pool: > > Dig the next card out of your crypt: > 4 transfers and 1 Pool > > Dig with Tupdog: > 1 transfer and 1 Pool > > It even gets around Leandro. :) Sure. But you also end up with the possibility of a crypt full of Tupdogs early, and then you *have* to burn them out to get important vampires. -Peter

Morgan Vening wrote: > I was thinking maybe a Shambling Hordes deck, possibly Tre/!Tre, but > just as easily Gio. Pack a 12 card crypt with 1 of each of your 'king' > vampires, and fill the rest with Tupdog's to cycle, and provide > munchies for the Shambling Hordes if you go the non-Chill way. Hmm... But then in practice you're raising the costs in 1 extra pool (and 1 transfer) for each Horde. Is it worth a cost just to free library slots usually wasted on allies/retainers? best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

On 8 Nov 2005 07:14:52 -0800, "Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo" <fabio....@gmail.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] If that's what it just was, then yeah, you'd be right. But the other advantages (less dedication to the crypt, the ability to utilise most Potence cards you include, the ability to chump block a non-stealth bleed deck). I was actually thinking of using the reverse Gird Minions, but didn't realise Sermon of Caine only shifted among minions. Morgan Vening

Frederick Scott wrote: > Huh? What was the old meaning to "Launch the Dingus"? > Was it also horrific? "Launching the Dingus" refers to the practice of taking an (D)-action (Launch) with a small-cap vampire or ally (the dingus), with the understanding that should the dingus not return, he or she was just a dingus, loss of whom would not compromise a deck. Appropriate imagery includes loading, say, Igo the Hungry, into a trebuchet, cannon, or other applicable seige engine, armed with a Legal Manipulations, Arson, or other (D)-action. Dingii are only as horrific as the actions they take, and the label usually carries a built-in disposal factor. They are useful for Wake/Untap checks, small bleeds under threat of large bleeds, card burning/stealing, and any other dirty work that isn't worth the risk of a deck's important minions.

[ quoted text not captured ] That's what I thought, and why I "bothered asking that question", since some people mentionned Mata's Tupdogs decks. Thank you. Orpheus

Mike Perlman wrote: > Frederick Scott wrote: >> Huh? What was the old meaning to "Launch the Dingus"? >> Was it also horrific? > > "Launching the Dingus" refers to the practice of taking an (D)-action > (Launch) with a small-cap vampire or ally (the dingus), with the > understanding that should the dingus not return, he or she was just a > dingus, loss of whom would not compromise a deck. > > Appropriate imagery includes loading, say, Igo the Hungry, into a > trebuchet, cannon, or other applicable seige engine, armed with a Legal > Manipulations, Arson, or other (D)-action. Famous dingus-related quotes include: "OK, Basil, I want you to take this Computer Hack and go in there and see if Lambach has any untap left." (this should portray the proper mental image as well.) -- Derek insert clever quotation here

So Tupdog has an inherent D action. Slaves cannot take D actions without a member of their owning clan being controlled/ready (doesn't matter for my question). So doesn't the golden rule of card games (that the card trumps) mean that TupDog can rush WITHOUT an owning clan member? Or does the fact that his "slave" status is part of the card prevent this? Color me confused.... -tpl

[ quoted text not captured ] There is no mention on the card text of an explicit overruling of the slave status. Therefore Tupdog can perform a (D) action (including the one granted by his card text) only if you also control a !Tremere. Emiliano

[ quoted text not captured ] He has the ability to take a (D) action, just like all vampires have the ability to bleed (which is also a (D) action). But, he cannot actually do so unless you have mitigated his slave status somehow (say, by bringing out the right clan). He simply has more "default" (D) actions available to him than the average bear. Ankur Gupta Prince of West Lafayette

Orpheus wrote: > That's what I thought, and why I "bothered asking that question", since > some people mentionned Mata's Tupdogs decks. Thank you. I think most of the references to Mata Hari in Tupdog decks revolve around using Mata Hari to enable you to play with a whole lot of vote providing, clan specific master cards, so your endless stream of voting Tupdogs can pass their votes. Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6 "So in conclusion, our business plan is to sell hot, easily spilled liquids to naked people." -Brittni Meil

Huh...anybody notice yet that Tupdog is a common? Looks like getting a whole lot of these guys might be pretty easy...

In message <1131577692.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, CthuluKitty <vtana...@riseup.net> writes: >Huh...anybody notice yet that Tupdog is a common? Looks like getting a >whole lot of these guys might be pretty easy... Seems reasonable. If the vast majority of vampires in any given set are Uncommon / Vampire rarity, it's because - in general - you're only going to want, what, two or three of them in a given deck. Of course, you can make decks focused around specific vampires, but you rarely need lots of them to make a potentially good deck. e.g. you can have 12 Arika if you want, but 2 or 3 in an Obfuscate Ventrue deck is still a very solid deck. Non-unique vampires that you look likely to base a deck around are probably going to be wanted in more significant numbers - perhaps 6 - 9 in a given deck? Making them more common seems sensible. This also lends support to the suggestion that the Blood Brothers in the set may be non-unique, or special in some similar way. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

CthuluKitty wrote: > Huh...anybody notice yet that Tupdog is a common? Looks like getting a > whole lot of these guys might be pretty easy... Both the Blood Brothers are common as well. Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

>>Both the Blood Brothers are common as well. Yeah, I noticed that as well, but I figured it wasn't worth starting an entirely new thread to point that out, whereas post #53 on the Tupdog thread wouldn't appear as such an irritating stating of the obvious.

[ quoted text not captured ] How sweet is that going to be. Unholsome Bonding out 12 Blood Brothers! Free Fight might actually see play. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > Orpheus wrote: > > > That's what I thought, and why I "bothered asking that question", since > > some people mentionned Mata's Tupdogs decks. Thank you. > > I think most of the references to Mata Hari in Tupdog decks revolve around > using Mata Hari to enable you to play with a whole lot of vote providing, > clan specific master cards, so your endless stream of voting Tupdogs can > pass their votes. > Plus, she can get an Infernal Pact for Visceratika. Have I mentioned that I love Mata Hari with Infernal Pact? ;)