Have now played the latest storyline, and this is the best by far!
However...
Shouldn´t Delaying Tactics have been banned? The vote deck has to set
up with getting the edge, get to a referendum, perhaps playing some
modifiers only to get the strategy trumphed by one card. When we played
there were 4-6 DT in several decks, and that made it VERY hard to get
the reverend.
The Cultist deck itself contained pretty much what had been promised
and what I expected. I had hopes for some more "exotic" cards. The only
suprise was that some cards were so much better compared to thier
regular version than others.
agzocgud wrote:
> Have now played the latest storyline, and this is the best by far!
I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
trying to oust their prey.
In the second and third round the Reverend was pretty much ignored on
my tables as people realised that if they wanted to make the final
they'd need a vp or two.
I only saw the Reverend actually being useful twice on the day. Once he
bled for quite a lot at stealth and in the final he was used to bloat
and survive a stealth bleed predator.
I didn't get him once the whole day and i won the tournament.
> The Cultist deck itself contained pretty much what had been promised
> and what I expected. I had hopes for some more "exotic" cards. The only
> suprise was that some cards were so much better compared to thier
> regular version than others.
I though most of the cards pretty ordinary. Sure they were a bit better
than their legal for play counterparts but they weren't necessarily
useful. There were a few super good cards though. The problem is that
the Reverend's controller can't discard from his hand so if there's
nothing particularly good in his hand (and everyone can see because the
cards are face up) then there's not much point taking him as you'd have
to play what's in his hand to try to get to the good stuff. You're
better off just trying to oust your prey.
Chris.
chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
> I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
> than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
> first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
> spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
> trying to oust their prey.
But, if you had the Reverend, it was really easy to oust your prey. In
our event, multiple times, someone got a hold of the Reverend, and was
like "Huh. Look at that. I can bleed you for 8 now..." and then they
did so.
> In the second and third round the Reverend was pretty much ignored on
> my tables as people realised that if they wanted to make the final
> they'd need a vp or two.
That is very strange. Is it possible that, like, no one ever managed to
notice what the Reverend could do? The Reverend deck mechanic was huge
in out event--most games were won by the guy who controlled the
Reverend most often, and the final was won by using the Reverend to
bleed a bunch.
> I didn't get him once the whole day and i won the tournament.
Like, if everyone else was ignoring him, then I can see that happening,
but in general, the Reverend was a pretty hard hitting element.
> I though most of the cards pretty ordinary. Sure they were a bit better
> than their legal for play counterparts but they weren't necessarily
> useful. There were a few super good cards though. The problem is that
> the Reverend's controller can't discard from his hand so if there's
> nothing particularly good in his hand (and everyone can see because the
> cards are face up) then there's not much point taking him as you'd have
> to play what's in his hand to try to get to the good stuff. You're
> better off just trying to oust your prey.
Hmm. This is difficult to discuss well without spoiling stuff, but from
our experience, if you got the Reverend, you'd generally get a bunch of
really good permanents and masters, and then use the Reverend to bleed
for 6 or 8 or something.
-Peter
This is getting a little spoilery.... so I'm adding some space.
"Peter D Bakija" <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:1165793942....@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>
> chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:>> I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
>> than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
>> first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
>> spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
>> trying to oust their prey.>
One nice thing about this concept, as opposed to the Nergal version, is that
everybody got to interact with the special deck, instead of just the lucky
finalist(s).
In 2 storylines, the amount of that interaction definitely varied from game
to game.
> But, if you had the Reverend, it was really easy to oust your prey. In
> our event, multiple times, someone got a hold of the Reverend, and was
> like "Huh. Look at that. I can bleed you for 8 now..." and then they
> did so.
>
Absolutely. The Rev's first action invariably seemed to be "I bleed you for
6 at stealth." :) (Given that the P.A. had just gone unblocked, it was
usually true that the victimized prey was in no position to block a stealthy
bleed.)
Plus those little baby cultist vampires are quite nasty if you have the Rev.
In the Allentown (PA, USA) tournament, I had four of them in play at one
point. 4 unblockable bleeds for 1 add up over a couple of turns... throw in
an unblockable KRC or two and the Reverend's bleeds for 6 at stealth, and
the power of the deck starts to add up. And if you control it long enough to
play the Cultist's Tribute to the Master, it gets even better.
>> In the second and third round the Reverend was pretty much ignored on
>> my tables as people realised that if they wanted to make the final
>> they'd need a vp or two.>
He was uncontrolled for the entire game in the Allentown final. The Toreador
player (who eventually won) had vote lock but could never successfully call
the referendum to take control.
On the other hand, he was controlled for over half of the game in the
Rockville (MD, USA) final, and he was key to my getting a sweep.
- Pat
Peter D Bakija wrote:
> chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
> > I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
> > than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
> > first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
> > spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
> > trying to oust their prey.
>
> But, if you had the Reverend, it was really easy to oust your prey. In
> our event, multiple times, someone got a hold of the Reverend, and was
> like "Huh. Look at that. I can bleed you for 8 now..." and then they
> did so.
Well there weren't many bleed cards in the deck so you'd be lucky to do
that and then it would only happen once. Plus someone could quite
easily block.
>
> > In the second and third round the Reverend was pretty much ignored on
> > my tables as people realised that if they wanted to make the final
> > they'd need a vp or two.
>
> That is very strange. Is it possible that, like, no one ever managed to
> notice what the Reverend could do? The Reverend deck mechanic was huge
> in out event--most games were won by the guy who controlled the
> Reverend most often, and the final was won by using the Reverend to
> bleed a bunch.
After the first round we all knew what the Reverend could do. As I said
though everyone at the table could see what was in his hand and if
there weren't any bleed cards in his hand when you took control of him
you would have to spend actions playing the other cards to get to the
bleed cards while everyone else was playing their decks.
>
> > I didn't get him once the whole day and i won the tournament.
>
> Like, if everyone else was ignoring him, then I can see that happening,
> but in general, the Reverend was a pretty hard hitting element.
>
> > I though most of the cards pretty ordinary. Sure they were a bit better
> > than their legal for play counterparts but they weren't necessarily
> > useful. There were a few super good cards though. The problem is that
> > the Reverend's controller can't discard from his hand so if there's
> > nothing particularly good in his hand (and everyone can see because the
> > cards are face up) then there's not much point taking him as you'd have
> > to play what's in his hand to try to get to the good stuff. You're
> > better off just trying to oust your prey.
>
> Hmm. This is difficult to discuss well without spoiling stuff, but from
> our experience, if you got the Reverend, you'd generally get a bunch of
> really good permanents and masters, and then use the Reverend to bleed
> for 6 or 8 or something.
Maybe it's a metagame thing. There was a fair bit of intercept at our
tables (I was playing Akunanse block) and blocking and killing the
Reverend was not difficult.
Chris.
Pat wrote:
> This is getting a little spoilery.... so I'm adding some space.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
> >> I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
> >> than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
> >> first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
> >> spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
> >> trying to oust their prey.
> >
>
> One nice thing about this concept, as opposed to the Nergal version, is that
> everybody got to interact with the special deck, instead of just the lucky
> finalist(s).
I agree with that. That's one of the reasons i liked the infernal
storyline when we all had to decide whether to be infernal or not
during the bidding.
>
> In 2 storylines, the amount of that interaction definitely varied from game
> to game.
>> He was uncontrolled for the entire game in the Allentown final. The Toreador
> player (who eventually won) had vote lock but could never successfully call
> the referendum to take control.
>
> On the other hand, he was controlled for over half of the game in the
> Rockville (MD, USA) final, and he was key to my getting a sweep.
>
Yep so his usefulness will depend on the metagame. In the third round
of our tourney there were five combat decks on the table (mix of
intercept and rush, mostly rush) and the Reverend didn't stand a
chance.
Chris.
chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
> Well there weren't many bleed cards in the deck so you'd be lucky to do
> that and then it would only happen once. Plus someone could quite
> easily block.
There were enough to make a mess in all the games I was in :-)
That, and the inherrent stealth helped a lot.
> Maybe it's a metagame thing. There was a fair bit of intercept at our
> tables (I was playing Akunanse block) and blocking and killing the
> Reverend was not difficult.
Very possible. Most folks came to our tournament with votey decks (as
they knew that you needed to call a vote to get the Reverend) and not
much intercept or combat--some, but not tons. If you were playing in an
environment where there were a lot of untap/blocky/fighty decks, then
it seems likely that it would be difficult to get the Reverend in the
first place, and then difficult to get him through.
-Peter
<chr...@comcen.com.au> wrote in message
news:1165797870.5...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>
> Pat wrote:>> This is getting a little spoilery.... so I'm adding some space.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > chr...@comcen.com.au wrote:
>> >> I disagree. I thought the Reverend element was more of a distraction
>> >> than anything else. We had 15 players so three tables of five. The
>> >> first round had time-outs on all three tables. On our table everyone
>> >> spent too much worrying about who had the Reverend and not enough time
>> >> trying to oust their prey.
>> >
>>
>> One nice thing about this concept, as opposed to the Nergal version, is
>> that
>> everybody got to interact with the special deck, instead of just the
>> lucky
>> finalist(s).>
> I agree with that. That's one of the reasons i liked the infernal
> storyline when we all had to decide whether to be infernal or not
> during the bidding.
>
Yeah, that one was very entertaining.
It was the source of one my my favorite in-game quotes of all time... I was
playing infernal Anson Anarch Revolt (before the rewording), and Trey Morita
was playing a First Tradition deck. Thanks to all the infernality (2 vamps)
and 1st trads (2) and AR's (2) in play, just as my predator's turn was
ending, Trey looked over at my ready region, did some quick math, and said
"It's going to cost you 8 pool to untap." And it did. :)
>>
>> In 2 storylines, the amount of that interaction definitely varied from
>> game
>> to game.
>>
>> He was uncontrolled for the entire game in the Allentown final. The
>> Toreador
>> player (who eventually won) had vote lock but could never successfully
>> call
>> the referendum to take control.
>>
>> On the other hand, he was controlled for over half of the game in the
>> Rockville (MD, USA) final, and he was key to my getting a sweep.
>>>
> Yep so his usefulness will depend on the metagame. In the third round
> of our tourney there were five combat decks on the table (mix of
> intercept and rush, mostly rush) and the Reverend didn't stand a
> chance.
>
Definitely true. When I was preying on the very intercepty Howler in the
end-game in Rockville, I didn't act with the Reverend at all. I just left
him untapped to play Delaying Tactics, while all my other vamps played with
the Cultist deck toys.
- Pat
> Very possible. Most folks came to our tournament with votey decks (as
> they knew that you needed to call a vote to get the Reverend) and not
> much intercept or combat--some, but not tons. If you were playing in an
> environment where there were a lot of untap/blocky/fighty decks, then
> it seems likely that it would be difficult to get the Reverend in the
> first place, and then difficult to get him through.
Virtually nobody was playing vote decks at the tourney that Chris won;
from memory - the decks that I saw were
Akunanse Block'n'Bash
!Ventrue denial - didn't do very well, needs tuning (my deck chosen on
a whim)
Ravnos traparition with some votes
Ravnos eldest are kholo bleed vote
Old School Toreador vote
Osebo Block'n'Bash
!Brujah Bruise'n'Bleed?
!Brujah Stealth Bleed (yes, playing Alacrity and Siren's Lure) - crazy
Brujah Bash
!Nos Bash featuring Cailean with a bit of block
!Malk Stealth Bleed
Malk toolbox?
Nergal toolbox
Settite Typhonic Beast Bash'n'Bleed
Gangrel Scratch?
The 3 decks with ? after them are ones that I didn't sit at a table
with.
Most of the tables seemed to have a number of vampires with votes,
Princes and Archbishops being common, which meant that very rarely did
anyone have vote lock. People often didn't try to put counters on the
Reverend for fear of someone else getting him, and if someone got him,
the table quickly conspired against the person who had him.
As such, in my second game, the Reverend's deck was left completely
ignored. We all knew what it could do, but didn't want to risk someone
else getting it.
I think this is why there were timeouts. When someone went hard for
the Rev the game spiralled out of control, because they either got him
and won, or they got bashed quickly out of the game and started a
chain-reaction.
--> J
> !Brujah Stealth Bleed (yes, playing Alacrity and Siren's Lure) - crazy
I mean, props to people for trying something different, but man, that's
one of the more preposterous deck ideas I've heard... especially
considering the crazy numbers of !Brujah in G3/G4 with obfuscate (six
of them, including a 5-cap). And there's always stealth ritus, heh...
Millenium Cultist Deck Spoiled (since Goudie never quite got around to it)
(If I've made any errors, hopefully he will at least step in and correct
them in the name of accuracy.)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
*
*
*
(***spoilers follow***)
Here they are. I have put double asterisks around spots in the card text
which are apparently changes from the equivalent standard cards. In the
real Millennium Cultist deck, these areas of text are shown in red. I
assume that is the function of the red text.
CRYPT (1 CARD) :
Reverend Adams, Millennium Cultist X 1
Caitiff
Capacity: 3
Group: 4
Disciplines: PRE aus
Text: Independent: Reverend Adams, Millennium Cultist gets +1 stealth on
non-political actions. Cultists cannot block Reverend Adams. +1 bleed.
LIBRARY (44 CARDS) :
Master Cards (5 cards) :
Cultist's Esgrima X 1
Text: Master. Unique Trifle.
Put this card in play **and gain 3 pool**. Tap during a political
action to give **5 additional votes** to a vampire with a capacity
**above 3.** During your discard phase, your predator takes control
of Cultist's Esgrima.
Cultist's Guardian Angel X 1
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Master.
Put this card on a ready vampire you control. This vampire gets **+2
intercept** when attempting to block a bleed against you. This vampire
may prevent **2 points** of damage each combat. Burn this card if this
vampire goes to torpor.
Cultist's Protracted Investment X 1
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Master. Investment.
Put this card in play and move **6 blood** from the blood bank to this
card. You may use a master phase action to move **2 blood** from this
card to your pool Burn this card when all blood has been removed.
Cultist's Tribute to the Master X 2
Text: Master.
Move **any number** of blood counters from **one or more vampires you
control** to your pool.
Allies (3 cards) :
Cultist's Arms Dealer X 2
Requirements: **Note: does not require a clan.**
Text: Mortal with **2 life.** **Cultist.** 1 strength, 0 bleed.
Cultist's Arms Dealer may take a **+2 stealth** action to allow you to
search your library **or the Rev. Adams deck's library** for a weapon
and move it to your hand. Discard to your hand size and shuffle
afterward.
Cultist's Survivalist X 1
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Requires a **vampire.**
Mortal with **2 life.** **Cultist.** 1 strength, **1 bleed.**
Cultist's Survivalist may strike for 2R damage. Tap to give a
**vampire** you control one maneuver.
Equipment (11 cards) :
Cultist's .44 Magnum X 2
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Weapon. Gun.
2R damage each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat.
Cultist's Assault Rifle X 3
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Weapon, Gun.
4R damage each strike, with an optional maneuver each combat.
Cultist's Bomb X 3
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Weapon.
5R damage as a strike. If the bomb is used in combat, the bearer
takes 5 damage as well. The minion with this weapon may burn a
location as a <D> action. Burn the Cultist's Bomb after use.
Cultist's Combat Shotgun X 1
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Weapon. Gun.
3R damage each strike, only usable once each round.
Cultist's Flamethrower X 2
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: Weapon.
2R aggravated damage each strike.
Actions (17 cards) :
Cultist's Atonement X 1
Cost: **0 blood**
Text: Requires a **vampire.** +1 stealth action.
Put this card on the acting vampire. This vampires gets **+2
intercept** when attempting to block. He or she does not tap when
blocking a vampire of the same age or younger. Any vampire may burn
this card as a <D> action; Followers of Set get -1 stealth when
attempting that action.
Cultist's Blood Feast X 1
Cost: **0 blood**
Text: Requires **a vampire.**
+1 stealth action.
Each **ready vampire** you control gains **2 blood** from the blood
bank.
Cultist's Creation Rites X 7
Cost: **0 pool**
Text: **Requires a vampire.** **+2 stealth action.**
Put this card in play; it becomes a **2-capacity cultist** vampire.
You may move a blood from the acting vampire to this card. This
vampire is not considered unique, **must hunt** this turn, and is
**clanless.** **While you control Rev. Adams, Millennium Cultist,
actions taken by this vampire are unblockable.**
Cultist's Enchant Kindred X 2
Discipline: Presence
Text:
(I) <D> Bleed with **+2 bleed.** **+3 bleed if the acting vampire is
Reverend Adams, Millennium Cultist.**
(S) <D> **+2 stealth** action. Move **4 blood** from the blood bank to a
**vampire** in your uncontrolled region.
Cultist's Entrancement X 2
Discipline: Presence
Text:
(I) Bleed with **+2 bleed.**
(S) <D> +1 stealth action. Take control of an ally controlled by another
Methuselah. **If the acting vampire is Reverend Adams, Millennium Cultist,
this action is unblockable.**
Cultist's Mind Rape X 1
Discipline: Dominate
Cost: **0 blood**
Text: (**Inferior and superior powers switched**)
(I) <D> Put this card on **a vampire,** and tap that vampire. The vampire
with this card does not untap as normal during his or her controller's
untap phase. During the acting vampire's controller's next minion phase,
he or she must burn this card to untap the vampire and take control of the
vampire until the end of his or her turn.
(S) <D> **Bleed with +2 bleed.**
Cultist's Revelations X 3
Discipline: Auspex
Cost: **0 blood**
Text: **+2 stealth** action.
(I) <D> Look at your prey's hand. He or she discards **2 cards** of your
choice.
(S) Put this card in play. Your **predator and prey** play with open hands.
Any minion may burn this card as a <D> action.
Action Modifiers (3 cards) :
Cultist's Aire of Elation X 2
Discipline: Presence
Cost: **0 blood**
Text: **You may play more action modifiers to further increase the bleed.**
(I) **+2 bleed. +3 bleed if the acting vampire is Reverend Adams, Millennium
Cultist.**
(S) **+3 bleed. +4 bleed if the acting vampire is Reverend Adams, Millennium
Cultist.**
Cultist's Awe X 1
Discipline: Presence
Cost: X blood
Text: Only usable during a referendum.
(I) This vampire gets **2 X + 1 votes.**
(S) This vampire gets **3 X + 1 votes.**
Reactions (5 cards) :
Cultist's Enhanced Senses X 3
Discipline: Auspex
(I) **+2 intercept.**
(S) **+3 intercept.**
Cultist's Precognition X 2
Discipline: Auspex
Text:
(I) **+2 intercept.**
(S) As above, and this vampire can prevent **3 damage** during the first
round of the resulting combat if he or she successfully blocks this action.
"Frederick Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message
news:kK6fh.51911$lL6....@newsfe08.phx...
[ quoted text not captured ]
<snip>
> Cultist's Precognition X 2
> Discipline: Auspex
> Text:
> (I) **+2 intercept.**
> (S) As above, and this vampire can prevent **3 damage** during the first
> round of the resulting combat if he or she successfully blocks this
> action.
Did you have 1 of these, or 2 of these?
AFAIK, our decks at Rockville this weekend had 43 library cards, 1 crypt
card, and 6 legal Reverend cards in each, for a total of 50 cards
(presumably 1 sheets worth?), and I believe the difference from what you
posted was 1 Precog.
- Pat
"Pat" <patric...@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message news:IKqdnVAB0NenoODY...@comcast.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Nope. I've seen three different promo decks opened and all three of them
had the same deck, so I'm pretty confident my numbers are right. There
are 2 Cultist's Precogs in each deck. The decks come with a single Reverend
used to play with the deck (wording as I listed in my previous post, card backs
the same as Cultist deck card backs) and five promo Reverends (legal for play,
wording as listed on the White Wolf official card list, standard V:tES brown
crypt card backs).
Fred
On Dec 11, 12:04 am, "J" <grai...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Virtually nobody was playing vote decks at the tourney that Chris won;
> from memory - the decks that I saw were
Yeah, that'd do it. Our event had a great deal of vote presence--not
everyone was playing Political Action decks, but pretty much everyone
had serious politcal power for calling the Reverend aquisition vote
when needed. I think our final consisted of:
-Nosferatu Prince/Justicar vote deck.
-Arika bleed/vote deck.
-!Toreador Cardinal/Archbishop Vote deck.
-!Malkavian Hanibal deck.
-!Brujah Presence vote deck.
Which is pretty much what the whole event looked like--there were a few
blocky decks, and a few fighty decks (I think there was a Tzimisce wall
deck and a Tupdog Rush deck), but in the long run, the decks that did
best were the ones with heavy vote power who could take and use the
Reverend (I was first seed with the Nosferatu Sheldon Parity Shift
deck, with like 2GW/7VP or something in 2 rounds by virtue of gaining a
lot of Reverend control).
-Peter
> I mean, props to people for trying something different, but man, that's
> one of the more preposterous deck ideas I've heard... especially
> considering the crazy numbers of !Brujah in G3/G4 with obfuscate (six
> of them, including a 5-cap). And there's always stealth ritus, heh...
he was playing Stealth Ritus as well.
The two vamps of his that I saw were Marcel de Breau and Miguel Santo
Domingo. It was very blood intensive.
If he got in combat it was dodge, blur, taste I think. Pretty much
just celerity I think.
He bled me in the first game for a bit, but was never going to have the
power to really threaten me - especially after I started drawing
intercept. Paying 4 blood for 2 stealth when I could just play
Enhanced Senses was never going to be a winning strategy IMO.
--> J
> Which is pretty much what the whole event looked like--there were a few
> blocky decks, and a few fighty decks (I think there was a Tzimisce wall
> deck and a Tupdog Rush deck), but in the long run, the decks that did
> best were the ones with heavy vote power who could take and use the
> Reverend (I was first seed with the Nosferatu Sheldon Parity Shift
> deck, with like 2GW/7VP or something in 2 rounds by virtue of gaining a
> lot of Reverend control).
I took down 2 vote decks but decided not to play them as I thought that
every man and his dog would play a vote deck. Which would mean that
there'd be no vote lock, and you'd be in the same position of nobody
getting the rev as everyone else would vote you down.
As it was, I reckon if I played my Nos Vote deck it would have rocked,
at least more than my sucky !Ventrue did.
--> J
J wrote:
> I took down 2 vote decks but decided not to play them as I thought that
> every man and his dog would play a vote deck. Which would mean that
> there'd be no vote lock, and you'd be in the same position of nobody
> getting the rev as everyone else would vote you down.
Yah, see, here is the thing with that--it is relatively easy to push a
vote through to gain control of the Reverend the first time around
(Bewitching, Awa, Telepathic Vote Counting, the MPA to add a vote
token, whatever). And once someone *has* the Reverend, it is going to
be in someone else's interest to help you *take* the reverend (i.e. if
your prey has the Reverend, it is totally in your grand prey's best
interest to help you take the Reverend away from your prey). That, and
often, when one person falls over, the vote balance often greatly
unhinges, so even if you have to wait for someone to get ousted,
eventually, someone is gonna have the vote weight necessary to gain the
Rev.
> As it was, I reckon if I played my Nos Vote deck it would have rocked,
> at least more than my sucky !Ventrue did.
Yeah, mine did pretty well--Sheldon, Selma, Nikolaus, a couple
Legendary Vampires in the mix and a whole lotta Parity Shift turned out
to be gold. If only I didn't use my first seed seating choice to sit in
front of Arika...
-Peter
[ quoted text not captured ]
[snip spoilers]
> >
> > AFAIK, our decks at Rockville this weekend had 43 library cards, 1 crypt card, and 6 legal Reverend cards in each, for a total of
> > 50 cards (presumably 1 sheets worth?), and I believe the difference from what you posted was 1 Precog.
>
> Nope. I've seen three different promo decks opened and all three of them
> had the same deck, so I'm pretty confident my numbers are right. There
> are 2 Cultist's Precogs in each deck. The decks come with a single Reverend
> used to play with the deck (wording as I listed in my previous post, card backs
> the same as Cultist deck card backs) and five promo Reverends (legal for play,
> wording as listed on the White Wolf official card list, standard V:tES brown
> crypt card backs).
Yep i've got the same numbers. 44 library cards, 1 crypt card and 5
promos.
Chris.
<chr...@comcen.com.au> wrote in message
news:1165886496.8...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Oh, bother, looks like I'm missing a Cultist's Precog, then. Rats.
Thanks anyhow for confirming the bad news. :)
- Pat
On Dec 11, 9:15 pm, "Pat" <patrick.l...@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote:
> <chr...@comcen.com.au> wrote in messagenews:1165886496.8...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...[ quoted text not captured ]
Now that I have a decklist, I can put it up on
trade.mahasamatman.com/VTES/ and maybe you can find one there.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
[ quoted text not captured ]> Cultist's Creation Rites X 7
> Cost: **0 pool**
> Text: **Requires a vampire.** **+2 stealth action.**
> Put this card in play; it becomes a **2-capacity cultist** vampire.
> You may move a blood from the acting vampire to this card. This
> vampire is not considered unique, **must hunt** this turn, and is
> **clanless.** **While you control Rev. Adams, Millennium Cultist,
> actions taken by this vampire are unblockable.**
Giangalleazo plays Cultist's Creation Rites. What Sect is the CCR?
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Dec 12, 11:39 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
The only time "clanless" appears in the online rulebook is "Caitiff,
who are technically clanless" (10.1). Now, I figured that you'd give
the answer you give, but the only thing the rulebook has to say on the
matter is "Some vampire cards from older sets do not have any sect
designation -- these vampires are all Camarilla vampires." - implying
that Camarilla is the default Sect of clanless vampires.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
PS, The Camarilla definition in the WoD Glossary needs updating.
Peter D Bakija wrote:
> Yah, see, here is the thing with that--it is relatively easy to push a
> vote through to gain control of the Reverend the first time around
> (Bewitching, Awa, Telepathic Vote Counting, the MPA to add a vote
> token, whatever). And once someone *has* the Reverend, it is going to
> be in someone else's interest to help you *take* the reverend
I played a three player game to try out the format in advance of the
tournament I'm going to run in January (I didn't intend it to be a
three player game, but Christmas is a time for no-showing). And a
similar dynamic applied, except that the good Reverend got Banished,
and stayed uncontrolled for the rest of the game, because the number of
votes on the table was so huge that it was virtually impossible to get
anything through.
Kevin Walsh