The return to Innocence

Is it true that return to Innocence is banned??? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

no. it just got a new text: New card text: "Bleed. If you successfully bleed your Prey for one or more, put this card on the acting vampire. Burn this card if this vampire loses any blood or goes to torpor, or if your Prey is ousted. During your next untap, this vampire is removed from play and your Prey burns X pool, where X is the capacity of this vampire." [RTR 19980707] pallando <take...@my-deja.com> wrote: 8fakeo$pmd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

"pallando" <pall...@gmx.at> writes: ><take...@my-deja.com> wrote: 8fakeo$pmd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com... >> Is it true that return to Innocence is banned??? >no. it just got a new text: > >New card text: "Bleed. If you successfully bleed your Prey for one or more, >put this card on the acting vampire. Burn this card if this vampire loses >any blood or goes to torpor, or if your Prey is ousted. During your next >untap, this vampire is removed from play and your Prey burns X pool, where X >is the capacity of this vampire." [RTR 19980707] Actually, it did get banned in DCI play. The new text, I take it, is the rules team's suggestion for how to play it in informal play. Fred

> Actually, it did get banned in DCI play. The new text, I take it, is the rules team's suggestion for how to play it in informal play. I suppose the question I have is why? It's not as if it's dealing with stuff that is irrelevant ( such as Ante - High Stakes, Playing for Keeps, etc) or just plain irritating (Madness of the Bard). It's expensive, and it works, and it's quite a rare card so it's use is inherently limited. Why was it banned? [ quoted text not captured ]

you're right fred! i'm glad someone is paying attention. i just found a list of dci-banned cards: Cunctator Motion (V:TES) High Stakes (V:TES) Madness of the Bard (Dark Sovereigns) Monocle of Clarity (Jyhad) Playing for Keeps (Dark Sovereigns) The Return to Innocence (Ancient Hearts) Rowan Ring (Jyhad) does anybody know if this list is complete / correct? pallando Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: > Actually, it did get banned in DCI play. The new text, I take it, is the > rules team's suggestion for how to play it in informal play. > > Fred >

"pallando" <pall...@gmx.at> wrote: > you're right fred! > i'm glad someone is paying attention. > > i just found a list of dci-banned cards: > Cunctator Motion (V:TES) > High Stakes (V:TES) > Madness of the Bard (Dark Sovereigns) > Monocle of Clarity (Jyhad) > Playing for Keeps (Dark Sovereigns) > The Return to Innocence (Ancient Hearts) > Rowan Ring (Jyhad) > > does anybody know if this list is complete / correct? The list of cards banned at V:EKN tournaments matches the list you give above. V:EKN tournament rules can be found at White Wolf's web site (see link in .sig). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to rulebook, rulings, errata, and V:EKN (tournament) rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

> The list of cards banned at V:EKN tournaments matches > the list you give above. > > V:EKN tournament rules can be found at White Wolf's > web site (see link in .sig). > I found this list a while ago, but still does not answer my earlier question: why is Return to Innocence banned? [ quoted text not captured ]

hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > why is Return to Innocence banned? Many people found the errata confusing. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ [ quoted text not captured ]

> > why is Return to Innocence banned? > > Many people found the errata confusing. That's too bad. I love that card. If I started a "Bring back RtI" campaign could that change? :-) Who's with me!!! Or even better (and slightly more seriously) could it get reprinted in a refined form (maybe with a different name) with the new "Sabbat War" set? It would be more apt, since the Sabbat are a bit more... dedicated, as any minion playing an RtI would have to be. [ quoted text not captured ]

hamd...@my-deja.com writes: >and it's quite a rare card so it's use is inherently limited. Why was it >banned? I don't know whether it should be banned or not. But I know the above piece of logic is very bad. The fact that RtI is a rare card from a hard-to-get expansion will not prevent any given person from having as many as he or she needs to dominate a tournament. In fact, I can make a much better argument the other 'way around: if they're common as dirt, then everyone can get one and it's not a huge problem if a card's a bit too powerful. But the tournement organization should be very sensitive to whether extremely rare cards go over the line. Fred

On the banning of Return to Innocence hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > I suppose the question I have is why? It's not as if it's dealing with > stuff that is irrelevant ( such as Ante - High Stakes, Playing for > Keeps, etc) or just plain irritating (Madness of the Bard). http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=378505942 James Coupe 1998/08/06 Yes, this is very long. Yes, it probably repeats itself. Yes, a lot of it is probably just everything that's been said before, but please read all of it as you go along because I've tried to explain things which you might otherwise jump on, I'm just not the most organised of people. In article <35C8E34F...@buffnet.net>, badger <bad...@buffnet.net> writes >You can have whatever beautifully constructed deck you >want, but it can't survive in such an environment. So, rather than toning down a couple of cards like Return to Innocence, you advocate that we shouldn't be able to play Assamites, Brujah, Brujah Antitribu, Followers of Set, Gangrel, Gangrel Antitribu, Nosferatu, Nosferatu Antitribu or Ravnos in a tournament setting. Let's see, that stops me using all the cards for each of those respective clans (masters, allies etc.), all the Quietus cards, all the Serpentis cards, all the Protean cards and all the Chimerstry cards as well. Well, that's quite a lot of the card set we've just culled. The point is, though, that the ONLY way to defend against an unblockable, transient Return to Innocence in many cases is through the use of bleed bounce. One HUGE bleed is made unblockable. No bleed bounce, I die. You never actually answered my question, though. Is there any way of my putting Auspex or Dominate into those decks *reliably*? If your answer is no, I'd like to see why you would justify forcing me to leave out 9 different clans when choosing a deck to create. The problem with an RtoI is that, because it's disciplineless, it will fit in ANY deck. And there are enough BIG vampires out there with Fortitude and Protean as a secondary discipline (or, if playing one of their clans, as a primary discipline) that you may well have one out to make the action unblockable. 129 Big vampires (greater than 6 capacity) 58 big vampires with fortitude or protean: 0 Assamites, 3 Brujah and Antitribu, 2 Setites (from 10 vampires, this is huge), 14 Gangrel and Antitribu, 1 Giovanni, 4 Malkavian and Antitribu, 7 Nosferatu (and no Antitribu), 5 Ravnos, 2 Toreador (and no Antitribu), 4 Tremere (and no Antitribu), 14 Ventrue and Antitribu. So, only someone playing a dedicated Assamite deck has no real access to an unblockable Return to Innocence at high levels, although they could borrow Elisabetta Romano for a little go at it. She fits quite well into an Assamite deck anyway (I've seen her in quite a few) and with a couple of discipline cards which may well be in the deck, she'd be in a moderately good position to pull of an RtoI. Antitribu without any vampires in their clan (well, they only have 11 vampires) could always steal a couple from their respective Camarilla clans without sacrificing much in the deck in terms of disciplines. So, I'm playing against a Gangrel deck, it whacks away at my vampires, killing my vampires, maybe dropping a few Fames on my vampires to have a go at me - something like that. So, I'm using all my cards to defend against their attacks. So I probably have to ditch a few of the cards I'm not using - my bleed defence. Bang. I'm dead. A single unblockable bleed for 14 from Stansylvania. From nowhere, too. Should I have been forced to hold an Archon Investigation in my hands at all times, buggering up my strategies by denying me access to a full view of cards at once? Should I have been forced to hold onto a Direct Intervention, simply so that I could have cancelled the Return to Innocence? If I was facing a standard bleed deck, I would have been able to guess and attack. Okay, let's see, my predator is bringing out his first vampire - I note the presence of lots of bleed oriented disciplines on that vampire, maybe a bleed bonus. So, I get my first vampire out. It comes round to my predator's turn. He bleeds me with his vampire for a small-ish amount. With transients, it's not that huge really, and he would have had to had a fairly lucky draw to draw a perfect hand of stealth and bleed, and not get clogged with a little bit of one and not the other, and masters etc. get in the way. So let's say he gets a bleed for 6 past. 1 bleed for six won't kill me. It shouldn't, anyway. So, I get to my turn - my first chance to do something about that vampire actively. But last turn, I could have discarded my combat defence cards, because I could see I wouldn't need them, say. And if I'm sensible and have a couple of copies of things like The Barrens and Fragment of the Book of Nod in my deck, I might have been able to cycle a bit quicker to *some* way of defending against that bleeder. So, my turn: - I'm playing a vote deck. If it's an Inner Circle vampire (unlikely if I've only just brought out my first vampire, I might already have a couple out), I could call a Justicar Retribution and burn the vampire. If not, I could call a Banishment to get rid of it. That bleed may not have been cheap so it'll be at least another turn before he can get it out. I could call an Anathema and coax my friend the combat deck on the table to have a go at the vampire. After all, Anathema benefits it tremendously. I could call a Dramatic Upheaval or Kindred Restructure and make sure that he has a go at someone else. All of these are viable defences against bleed. If he'd been working on one BIG vampire, I might have even been able to call this with a smaller vampire I already had out on the turn after he brought out his bleeder and so might not even have got caught. - I'm playing a combat deck. Same thing goes about the fact that he might not have had a chance to act yet, if he's got a big vampire out and I'm using low to mid range vampires as is de rigour for combat decks at the moment. Again, though, a bleed of about 6 shouldn't have ousted me this early in the game. If it did, I should get up and go home. I rush the vampire and have a good go against it. A heavy stealth bleed deck probably doesn't have enough combat defence to stand up to a properly constructed combat deck. It might be able to stop a few hits, but it might not. Disciplineless dodges etc. can be got round by all but the most basic of combat decks. Keep pressing until they run out. Immortal Grapple them. Scorpion Sting them. Hit them on Additional Strikes. Use Hidden Lurker, Fast Reactions and Thoughts Betrayed to stop them playing them. So, I can come in and tromple that vampire into the ground if I'm lucky. How about a Ventrue deck? Well, it could have a Majesty lying around, maybe a Catatonic Fear. So, in my powerful combat deck, I throw down my Immortal Grapple or maybe I've managed to sneak out a Dog Pack and Freak Drive before I've rushed. Or maybe I've thrown down a Thoughts Betrayed with my Euro-Brujah, Lasombra, Giovanni or Tremere deck to make sure that they can't Majesty. Okay, what can they do back then? Well, they could have also played a Thoughts Betrayed to make sure I couldn't strike (because, of course, you don't have the problems of TB preventing another TB now, because it only prevents strikes). Okay, Potence doesn't really give a monkey's about it. IG isn't a strike. Torn Signpost isn't a strike. Fists of Death isn't a strike. I'm doing more damage to you than you can cope with, so a Pulled Fangs is also playable - not a strike and now you can't hunt. Gangrel doesn't really give a monkeys either. I can maneuver back and forth to my heart's content with Protean - Claws of the Dead, Gleam of Red Eyes, Form of the Ghost etc. I can hit you with my claws - the aggro damage for which *isn't* a strike card. If I'm playing Animalism in the deck, I've got things like Carrion Crows and Song of Serenity for you to go away. Thaumaturgy sits around and has a think. Okay, it says, we'll go to range this round, wave at you from afar with hands and then press to the second round. Oops, Blood to Water. Ain't a lot you can do about that. Then the Tremere probably feel safe enough to slap you for hands to make sure you go to torpor. Okay, so that's the opposing minion's supplies of Majesty and Thoughts Betrayed rendered useless. I can counter with my own TB, Dog Pack, IG whatever. How about prevent damage? Well, if they've only got prevent damage to play then a Potence deck can just keep pressing, say with a Trap, and just popping at it for enough damage each round for them to play that Prevent Damage. A trap, a Torn Signpost (effective for all of combat from V:TES text, I believe) and the ability to just have a pop at them every now and then with a card played every round or so will get through their Damage Prevention pretty quickly. Since Fortitude has a little ability to press itself, you've got Potence for supplemental presses from Immortal Grapple, Mighty Grapple or even (coughs) Twisting the Knife. Or even the disciplineless presses. A Gangrel deck? Well, it's got the environmental damage from Carrion Crows, or any retainers it's had the good fortune to bring into play. Drawing Out the Beast gets round the prevent damage nicely. Again, the Gangrel have PLENTY of ability to press to the second round to make that damage useful and DotB means that the Ventrue vampire can't press to end. And a few birds pecking all around. That Prevent Damage can soon go out of the window. The Tremere have enough strikes that don't give a shit about damage because they AREN'T damage. So, the combat deck starts dropping that bleed predator into torpor. It's predator (ie my grand predator) can help keep up the pressure so that the vampire doesn't get out of torpor. And what helps here? Well, the errata on Thoughts Betrayed actually because it stops the deck being far too powerful - only requiring and utilising one card as effective combat defence against all tacks. So, it would need Thoughts Betrayed, S:CE, Damage Prevention and so forth to prevent a combat deck onslaught against it. And if it's got those in such large numbers that it can defend itself against all combat, it's pretty much not going to be bleeding me that effectively because it boots out space for bleeds, action modifiers, Seduction etc. Political decks and combat decks can both defend themselves against the onslaught of a heavy bleeding predator. But they work by stopping it bleeding again. How about just not being bothered by it's bleeds? Well, I can do things to react against it's bleeds if I'm playing other types of decks. An intercept deck, for instance, does wonderfully against it. It'll hopefully have enough blockers, a few wakes or similar, a few bits of combat etc. Hopefully, with a bit of luck, you'll drop it into torpor. If you don't, it doesn't really matter because you can block again. Okay, so they drop down a way of making it unpreventable. This isn't a blockable action. Damn. If my intercept is from Auspex, I can bleed bounce. If my intercept isn't from Auspex, I'm a little more screwed but, as said, a bleed for 6 isn't going to oust me if I've been sensible. If I haven't, well, that's my fault. If they want to get a bleed up to higher heights, that's more actions for me to block. They can't make them all unblockable because they can't afford to send all their vampires to torpor or make them all lose 4 blood each time. You'll run out pretty quickly. So I *will* be able to block actions. It *will* happen. Another stealth bleed deck? Well, I've got problems with (D) bleeds now, but if I've been sensible, a few Night Moves etc. have been placed lying around the place so I can have a little pop at him if needs be. If I'm using Dominate in the deck (a distinct possibility) I can bleed bounce. If I'm screwed because I'm playing, say, a Setite deck and can't Corrupt them fast enough, say, then I do have the other defences which people always mention and (some) condemn. Things like Archon Investigation, Protected Racehorses and so forth are there if you want them. All of the above, though, assumes I can see the bleed deck coming. Why do I have to assume that? Well, there are two things which constrain me in Jyhad/V:TES. 1) My pool and 2) My library I can only put so much into play before my pool it starts going away rapidly. If I'm having to pay for combat defence, bleed defence, vote defence AND weird defence, then I run out of pool. So I have to be able to see what my predator/prey/whoever is doing to make an informed decision about what I can afford. This is the point the rest of us are trying to make. Because Return to Cheese is disciplineless, it can pop up from nowhere. I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. Anything can happen in the next half hour ;) -- James Coupe (Prince of Mercia) [ quoted text not captured ]

I agree with hamdamcwa If the answer is because the errata is too confusing, the card must be accepted. The errata is totally clear, crystal. Confusing errata, the belonging to mind rape, and it is not banned. I'll vote for the acceptance of RTI. Clubjyhad Mexico it's with me. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fdd5q$sgf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, take...@my-deja.com wrote: > I agree with hamdamcwa I do not.** Did you look at what Legbiter posted? It was complete and (I feel) convincing. > If the answer is because the errata is too confusing, the card must be > accepted. The errata is totally clear, crystal. > Confusing errata, the belonging to mind rape, and it is not banned. On what basis was the errata _not_ confusing? I had a difficult time remembering it with out seeing it written down. Your point is understood about mind rape, but some old saying says "two wrongs don't make a right." The solution would be to simplify the errata or ban mind rape, not return RTI to tournament play. > I'll vote for the acceptance of RTI. I don't think that the issue can be voted on. Rob Grau rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu **I thought hamdamcwa said he changed his mind. Based on your context I don't think you saw that post. To clarify: I do not think RTI should be reinstated. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fdf76$udu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rfg...@eos.ncsu.edu wrote: > In article <8fdd5q$sgf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > take...@my-deja.com wrote: > > I agree with hamdamcwa > > I do not.** Did you look at what Legbiter posted? It was complete and (I > feel) convincing. > You mean Lasombra. However, i don't want to see RtI back in tournaments, because that would result in a proliferation of stupid big vamp decks. i HATED the errata just like i hate all text-unsupported errata, and was VERY PLEASED when the tournament ban came in instead. <snip> [ quoted text not captured ]

> So, only someone playing a dedicated Assamite deck has no real access to an unblockable Return to Innocence at high levels, True, but I'm sure that you could add stealth. Isn't one of the clan disciplines for the Assamites Obfuscate? Not unblockable, but you can still get up to 5 stealth which is usually enough to get through. > So, I'm playing against a Gangrel deck, it whacks away at my vampires, > killing my vampires, maybe dropping a few Fames on my vampires to have a go at me - something like that. So, I'm using all my cards to defend against their attacks. So I probably have to ditch a few of the cards I'm not using - my bleed defence. Bang. I'm dead. A single unblockable bleed for 14 from Stansylvania. From nowhere, too. So what is your decks strategy then? Surely if you can't deal with it (up until the Return to Innocence is played) then the deck isn't very robust anyway. :-) With the errata on RTI, then is is not a single unblockable bleed for Stanyslavania - or anyone else - she bleeds and then the card is placed on her. The RTI takes it's damage at the beginning of the next turn, giving you a whole turn to Bums Rush the critter and torporise her (taste of death, etc) to get rid of the RTI. Lets face it, RTI is expensive. REALLY expensive. It costs 4 blood for a kick off - so only vamps of 5 blood or more need apply - not to mention the extras needed to get it to work (paying pool for stealth and getting the bleed through etc). Furthermore, it is a pretty hardcore gambit - you lose the vamp at the end - so the bleed has to be pretty spectacular - vamps of 8 or above are the ones worth doing it with, otherwise you do insignificant damage for your investment. So methusulas using it are going to be careful about doing so. You are not going to see them played that regularly. >I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. I don't think you've put me off. I still would love to see it happen. Half the fun of the game is preparing for the unexpected, and you haven't really convinced me that RTI is the unbeatable card that it is proported to be. Yes it is clanless, but so are lots of cards that can have equally damaging, if not quite so dramatic effects. Anything can happen in the next half hour ;) I'll expand on this late - I have to go to a meeting now! :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fbilf$pre$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > I found this list a while ago, but still does not answer my earlier > question: why is Return to Innocence banned? > Short answer: Because tournament level V:TES is one of the most skillful CCGs around. Adding RTI to the mix makes the game less skillful (arguments to the contrary anyone..?). It means, essentially, that lower skilled players have a chance to beat higher skilled players just for the virtue of drawing a particular card from the deck when the more skilled player can not draw a counter-measure. The less cards like this we have in the game, the more skill baised the environment becomes. If you are looking for random fun, then sure, play with RTI and Madness of the Bard. Play for ante. Play BattleTech. Just what i fink, anyway. matt. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fdus8$fa1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, mgre...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8fbilf$pre$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > I found this list a while ago, but still does not answer my earlier > > question: why is Return to Innocence banned? > > > Short answer: Because tournament level V:TES is one of the most skillful > CCGs around. Adding RTI to the mix makes the game less skillful > (arguments to the contrary anyone..?). It means, essentially, that lower > skilled players have a chance to beat higher skilled players just for > the virtue of drawing a particular card from the deck when the more > skilled player can not draw a counter-measure. The less cards like this > we have in the game, the more skill baised the environment becomes. Right. RtI is still a fun-card at home, where it may actually be DESIRABLE to give the less-skilled player[s] a bit of chance. > > If you are looking for random fun, then sure, play with RTI and Madness > of the Bard. Play for ante. Play BattleTech. Miss! Miss! O please Miss! Matthew just said that Battletech was fun, miss! Oyoudidyoudidtoo!!!! [ quoted text not captured ]

<snip> > > If you are looking for random fun, then sure, play with RTI and Madness > of the Bard. Play for ante. Play BattleTech. > > Just what i fink, anyway. > > Actually for random fun you could play Kult, Guardians or even better Quest for the Grail!! Does anyone play these games anymore?? Tim [ quoted text not captured ]

Back from my meeting :-) > > > > So, only someone playing a dedicated Assamite deck has no real access > to an unblockable Return to Innocence at high levels, > True, but I'm sure that you could add stealth. Isn't one of the clan disciplines for the Assamites Obfuscate? Not unblockable, but you can still get up to 5 stealth which is usually enough to get through. > > So, I'm playing against a Gangrel deck, it whacks away at my vampires, > > killing my vampires, maybe dropping a few Fames on my vampires to > have a go at me - something like that. So, I'm using all my cards to > defend against their attacks. So I probably have to ditch a few of the > cards I'm not using - my bleed defence. Bang. I'm dead. A single > unblockable bleed for 14 from Stansylvania. From nowhere, too. > > So what is your decks strategy then? Surely if you can't deal with it > (up until the Return to Innocence is played) then the deck isn't very > robust anyway. :-) > With the errata on RTI, then is is not a single unblockable bleed for Stanyslavania - or anyone else - she bleeds and then the card is placed on her. The RTI takes it's damage at the beginning of the next turn, giving you a whole turn to Bums Rush the critter and torporise her (taste of death, etc) to get rid of the RTI. From the errata, all you have to do is one point of damage to said vampire and the RtI is burned. Is that really that hard? Favourites are (as I mentioned) bums rushes / ambushes and taking precautions that a strike gets through - eg Drawing out the Beast (Advanced), Fast Reactions, even Catatonic Fear! But, hell, there are so many ways of making sure that 1 point of damage gets through as to make the RtI seem almost like a bad card to play! > Lets face it, RTI is expensive. REALLY expensive. It costs 4 blood for > a kick off - so only vamps of 5 blood or more need apply - not to > mention the extras needed to get it to work (paying pool for stealth > and getting the bleed through etc). Furthermore, it is a pretty > hardcore gambit - you lose the vamp at the end - so the bleed has to be > pretty spectacular - vamps of 8 or above are the ones worth doing it > with, otherwise you do insignificant damage for your investment. > > So methusulas using it are going to be careful about doing so. You are > not going to see them played that regularly. Votes such as Banishment are also going to stop this vampire getting away with a RtI being fullfilled > >I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially > since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any > deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot > strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. > > I don't think you've put me off. I still would love to see it happen. > Half the fun of the game is preparing for the unexpected, and you > haven't really convinced me that RTI is the unbeatable card that it is > proported to be. Yes it is clanless, but so are lots of cards that can > have equally damaging, if not quite so dramatic effects. > The only point that has seriously rattled my train so far is Legbiters - that it will encourage a dearth of BIG VAMPIRE decks. But this will always be offset by the fact that weenie decks never seem to go out of style. Someone made the point about this card not being skillfull... I think the above trains of thought only go to show that both playing an RtI and actually fullfilling the action does require a fair bit of skill, as it is very hard to actually get away with it. Surely any player unable to counter the action being resolved is the unskilled player. I am standing by my thoughts... any one think of a good slogan? "Vive la difference! Return to Innocence" ? :-) DJH Note: humour doesn't come accross terribly well here. Yes, although I would like to see RtI in tournaments, I am not 100% serious about it. I am not going to sulk like a Pokemon player if my views are not taken seriously, I am just challenging a few views to stimulate interesting discussion (Seems to have worked so far!). [ quoted text not captured ]

Please note: The post Lasombra copied is quite old. I still agree with lots of it, but there are many arguments left out. On Thu, 11 May 2000 hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > Lets face it, RTI is expensive. REALLY expensive. It costs 4 blood for > a kick off - so only vamps of 5 blood or more need apply - not to No, it's not. That's the point. An oust, a VP and six pool vs one vampire (who you have probably minion tapped anyway) are perfect recompense for the card. > >I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially > since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any > deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot > strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. > > I don't think you've put me off. I still would love to see it happen. > Half the fun of the game is preparing for the unexpected, Unexpected, yes. however, I can deal with most things. Please, tell me how, as an Assamite deck, I deal with Arika playing Return to Innocence, Day Operation and a few bleed modifiers, in a predictable manner? With the Assamites, it's just not possible, unless you load your deck with unacceptably high numbers of AI and Protected Racehorses (which then screw you, because you do need to oust someone somehow). GenCon UK 1997 proved beyond doubt that RtoI was possibly the most harmful card *ever* to be printed for Jyhad. You either played it, or you didn't win. > and you > haven't really convinced me that RTI is the unbeatable card that it is > proported to be. Yes it is clanless, but so are lots of cards that can > have equally damaging, if not quite so dramatic effects. Bollocks (tm). Show me a disciplineless, clanless card that can allow me to bleed for 12. -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "But I don't have the right to be with you tonight, so please leave me alone with no saviour in sight. I will sleep safe and sound with nobody around me."

On Thu, 11 May 2000 take...@my-deja.com wrote: > If the answer is because the errata is too confusing, the card must be > accepted. The errata is totally clear, crystal. I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word "confusing" in this context. If you sit down and read it, yes. But it's not something you can explain to anyone in a few seconds, like other errata. > I'll vote for the acceptance of RTI. Vote all you like. V:EKN tournament rules are not subject to votes. They are subject to decisions based on the necessity of a balanced, stable tournament environment. RtoI is *way* too powerful in its original form. It is still powerful in the errata-ed form, but the errata-ed form veers a *long* way from card text, such that 'no-one' can remember it, at all. The simplest answer is to just ban it and save the hassle of the card. RtoI unbalances the tournament scene in an unacceptable manner. Play it all you want in friendly games - no-one will stop you. Friendly games are just that, friendly. It is only banned in tournaments, and there, different priorities are played with. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005111125130.12865- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > Please note: The post Lasombra copied is quite old. I still agree with > lots of it, but there are many arguments left out. > > On Thu, 11 May 2000 hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > > Lets face it, RTI is expensive. REALLY expensive. It costs 4 blood for > > a kick off - so only vamps of 5 blood or more need apply - not to > > No, it's not. That's the point. An oust, a VP and six pool vs one > vampire (who you have probably minion tapped anyway) are perfect > recompense for the card. This is starting to make sense. > > > >I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially > > since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any > > deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot > > strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. > > > > I don't think you've put me off. I still would love to see it happen. > > Half the fun of the game is preparing for the unexpected, > > Unexpected, yes. however, I can deal with most things. Please, tell me > how, as an Assamite deck, I deal with Arika playing Return to Innocence, > Day Operation and a few bleed modifiers, in a predictable manner? With > the Assamites, it's just not possible, unless you load your deck with > unacceptably high numbers of AI and Protected Racehorses (which then screw > you, because you do need to oust someone somehow). I remain by my earlier point. Bums Rush the meany and have a few Psyches lying around - you have got one turn before the bleed takes effect. > GenCon UK 1997 proved beyond doubt that RtoI was possibly the most harmful > card *ever* to be printed for Jyhad. You either played it, or you didn't > win. Fair enough point - if everyone has got one and built a strategy around them, the game is short, bloody and dull. Yet there are so many ways to stop the effect. > Bollocks (tm). Show me a disciplineless, clanless card that can allow me to bleed for 12. RtI doesn't allow you to bleed for 12 - it's net effect is a loss of eg 12 blood. My point is not that there are disciplineless clanless cards that rival RtI in blood loss, but there are cards out there that can change the balance of the game very easily - most of them votes. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fe4eu$kp7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005111125130.12865- > 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, > James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > > Please note: The post Lasombra copied is quite old. I still agree > with > > lots of it, but there are many arguments left out. > > > > On Thu, 11 May 2000 hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > Lets face it, RTI is expensive. REALLY expensive. It costs 4 blood > for > > > a kick off - so only vamps of 5 blood or more need apply - not to > > > > No, it's not. That's the point. An oust, a VP and six pool vs one > > vampire (who you have probably minion tapped anyway) are perfect > > recompense for the card. > > This is starting to make sense. > > > > > >I hope I've been able to prove why that's a bad thing, especially > > > since you could conceivably make RtoI unblockable in virtually any > > > deck, without *that* much difficulty. Vampires allow you to spot > > > strategies. Return to Innocence can happen whenever. > > > > > > I don't think you've put me off. I still would love to see it > happen. > > > Half the fun of the game is preparing for the unexpected, > > > > Unexpected, yes. however, I can deal with most things. Please, tell > me > > how, as an Assamite deck, I deal with Arika playing Return to > Innocence, > > Day Operation and a few bleed modifiers, in a predictable manner? > With > > the Assamites, it's just not possible, unless you load your deck with > > unacceptably high numbers of AI and Protected Racehorses (which then > screw > > you, because you do need to oust someone somehow). > > I remain by my earlier point. Bums Rush the meany and have a few > Psyches lying around - you have got one turn before the bleed takes > effect. Ehm,..the decks that were played after the initial errata included Secure Haven. Kinda difficult to touch them then. And moreover not all decks include BR as not all decks are combat orientated decks. Furthermore going after the RTI vampire will not enhance your chances of winning as you will have ro spend your resources against you predator, which is not the object of the game. Even WITH the errata, RTI is still way too powerfull. Okay you will have to wait a turn, but as it is NOT a bleed anymore, even AI will not save you. Basically DI is the only card that stops it cold. RTI is a card that almost any deck can and will abuse. Guess you've never seen a dedicated RTI deck in action... > > > GenCon UK 1997 proved beyond doubt that RtoI was possibly the most > harmful > > card *ever* to be printed for Jyhad. You either played it, or you > didn't > > win. > > Fair enough point - if everyone has got one and built a strategy around > them, the game is short, bloody and dull. Yet there are so many ways to > stop the effect. Which? Again resources spend the wrong way IMO. > > > Bollocks (tm). Show me a disciplineless, clanless card that can > allow me to bleed for 12. > > RtI doesn't allow you to bleed for 12 - it's net effect is a loss of eg > 12 blood. My point is not that there are disciplineless clanless cards > that rival RtI in blood loss, but there are cards out there that can > change the balance of the game very easily - most of them votes. Again, now even Archon Investigation will not save you. Sure votes are somewhat unbalancing sometimes, but each vampire/clan has acces to votes, votes can be stopped by more strategies than RTI, how about delaying tactics? DI? Anti-vote general is more accessable IMO. Just my thought on the matter, Tim [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fdv8j$ft0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8fdus8$fa1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > mgre...@my-deja.com wrote: > > If you are looking for random fun, then sure, play with RTI and Madness > > of the Bard. Play for ante. Play BattleTech. > > Miss! Miss! O please Miss! Matthew just said that Battletech was fun, > miss! Oyoudidyoudidtoo!!!! > > erk.*splutter* It is true through, unfortunately. Just as there are people in this world who find pleasure in Badger baiting, trainspotting and dressing up in steel collars (...), there are people who somehow find pleasure in playing that most accursed of games. I mean, fair play to the sad saps: "Wow! I _love_ my new missiles deck!! Take this, Mr.obviously better opponent, you can block my mechs as often as you want, but my missles can still mill down your deck for... *roll* *roll* *roll* ...18 cards!!! Most excellent, now you have less resources and countermeasures to deal with my threats! Mearly by winning a coin toss and getting first attack i can have a statistically higher chance of winning this game turn on turn. This is Amazing!!! To think that the nurses at the home said i would have no chance of winning the UK nationals and getting an all expenses paid trip to US Gencon. I'll show them, all i need is to roll up to the tournament with a bag of dice and my lucky coin and I'm as good as on the plane!" I am sure there is more strategy in a game of Yachtzee. I mean who was the game aimmed at? People who thought Magic wasn't random enough? hmm, i lose when my opponent draws land- it can't be my lack of play ability or fundamental stupidity to blame, it must be a game mechanic fault...rant..rave..rant...froth...repeat to fade. Ahh, i feel purged now. matt. > > Just what i fink, anyway. > > > > matt. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 11 May 2000 hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > Back from my meeting :-) I think you've seriously missed the context of the post. The post was why old RtoI was bad, and needed to be fixed in some fashion - that's all. It was not an advocation of banning over fixing, or using the errata. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 11 May 2000 hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > I remain by my earlier point. Bums Rush the meany and have a few > Psyches lying around - you have got one turn before the bleed takes > effect. Indeed. That relies on the errata though, which is very, very messy. I *may* see if I can come up with something else, which could go to LSJ, if I have the time. The original post which you're arguing with does not invite a critique of the current errata - it was a rebuttal of the claims that no errata was needed. > > Bollocks (tm). Show me a disciplineless, clanless card that can > allow me to bleed for 12. > > RtI doesn't allow you to bleed for 12 - it's net effect is a loss of eg > 12 blood. For the purposes of power, the distinction is little. > My point is not that there are disciplineless clanless cards > that rival RtI in blood loss, but there are cards out there that can > change the balance of the game very easily - most of them votes. Votes require lots of things to get working. Other people have a say in votes. You don't just pass them automagically. And there is no vote in the game capable, in a tournament environment, of generating a pool swing of 20+ - 14 for an RtoI with Arika, and I *gain* 6 pool from the oust. The best I can do elsewhere is Parity Shift, generating a maximum pool shift of 16 - but for that case, you would have to be precariously low in the first place, in order that you could pull the Parity Shift off - something that isn't needed for RtoI *and* they would need to be on exactly 5 pool, and you would need everyone still in the game. [ quoted text not captured ]

> hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > I am standing by my thoughts... any one think of a good slogan? > "Vive la difference! Return to Innocence" ? :-) After the steal vamp/RtI decks that I came up with (who said the vampire to be burned would be your own?) I can give you a great slogan: "Show me your RtI and I'll show you a lighter." Noal McDonald National Jyhad League -- "What you cannot enforce, do not command." -- Socrates [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fe62n$mip$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, mgre...@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <8fdv8j$ft0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > legb...@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <8fdus8$fa1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, > > mgre...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > If you are looking for random fun, then sure, play with RTI and > Madness > > > of the Bard. Play for ante. Play BattleTech. > > > > Miss! Miss! O please Miss! Matthew just said that Battletech was fun, > > miss! Oyoudidyoudidtoo!!!! > > > > > erk.*splutter* > It is true through, unfortunately. Just as there are people in this > world who find pleasure in Badger baiting, trainspotting and dressing up > in steel collars (...), (...) is a beleived to be a euphemism for the Hated Coupe, beneath whose Steel Collar the Kinky Kindred of Central England Nightly Choke. there are people who somehow find pleasure in > playing that most accursed of games. > > I mean, fair play to the sad saps: > "Wow! I _love_ my new missiles deck!! Take this, Mr.obviously better > opponent, you can block my mechs as often as you want, but my missles > can still mill down your deck for... *roll* *roll* *roll* ...18 cards!!! > Most excellent, now you have less resources and countermeasures to deal > with my threats! Mearly by winning a coin toss and getting first attack > i can have a statistically higher chance of winning this game turn on > turn. This is Amazing!!! To think that the nurses at the home said i > would have no chance of winning the UK nationals and getting an all > expenses paid trip to US Gencon. I'll show them, all i need is to roll > up to the tournament with a bag of dice and my lucky coin and I'm as > good as on the plane!" Actually that is not only a cruel but fair summary of Battletech, but also of Pokemon. Last time i wiped Michael out with my Pokevamp deck [a green affair that does lots of paralysing and poisoning] he said "hey! i know a fun game we can play! Let's toss this coin! Heads! You win! Heads! you win again! Great stuff, and a lot quicker than playing cards!" > > I am sure there is more strategy in a game of Yachtzee. I mean who was > the game aimmed at? People who thought Magic wasn't random enough? hmm, > i lose when my opponent draws land- it can't be my lack of play ability > or fundamental stupidity to blame, it must be a game mechanic > fault...rant..rave..rant...froth...repeat to fade. > > Ahh, i feel purged now. > It's quite a good way of creating battletech tabletop metastories. Thta's clumsily put, but what i mean is you can play a Battletech game and then pick out a combat or two to play out on the tabletop. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <8fblp1$tdf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > > why is Return to Innocence banned? > > Many people found the errata confusing. > > -- > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) VTES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > As it stands now, the card can not be used in any Tournament play. So can anyone provide any really good reason as to why the card still has errata attached to it? I currently don’t see any errata on any of the other banned cards. So, if it can’t be played why mess with it? Michael -- Worry comes from the belief you are powerless. (So get in there and kick some butt!) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 12 May 2000, Ramsteiner wrote: > As it stands now, the card can not be used in any Tournament play. So > can anyone provide any really good reason as to why the card still has > errata attached to it? As a possibility for people who still want to play it in friendly play (where everyone can be made aware of what you're playing easily, since random people don't just turn up). > I currently don’t see any errata on any of the other banned cards. So, > if it can’t be played why mess with it? If people don't like the errata on it, since they can only play it in friendlies, there is nothing stopping them ignoring it. [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > hamd...@my-deja.com wrote: > > > why is Return to Innocence banned? > > > > Many people found the errata confusing. > > As it stands now, the card can not be used in any Tournament play. So > can anyone provide any really good reason as to why the card still has > errata attached to it? > > I currently don?t see any errata on any of the other banned cards. So, > if it can?t be played why mess with it? Monocle still has errata (and is banned), BTW: Monocle of Clarity - Unique Equipment * Questions about questions may not be asked. [RTR 19950530] * Questions can only pertain to the current game. [RTR 19950530] * Question about the future are only binding until your next untap. [RTR 19950530] The reason they haven't been un-errated is two-fold: the errata is good at removing the unbalancing effects of the card (so that it may be "enjoyably" played in "friendly" games); and because the errata was issued before the ban - and un-issuing the errata would be a change (an unecessary change). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <391BEEBB...@white-wolf.com>, [ quoted text not captured ] Alright then, but I thought I had heard/read that cleaning up or scrubbing some of the errata was going to take place. Was this true or was I mislead. Michael Eichler > -- > 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/ > -- [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner <ramst...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Alright then, but I thought I had heard/read that cleaning up > or scrubbing some of the errata was going to take place. > Was this true or was I mislead. There has been work to remove inconsistencies in current errata as evidenced by the most recent RTR post. There's nothing inconsistent with the RtI errata. It's just unweildy and since the card was banned in VEKN and DCI tournaments, there was no incentive to do further work on it. Incidentally, RtI was not banned in NJL tournaments, but we did issue different errata. Play as printed except no action modifiers may be played and the vampire is removed from play, not burned. To be honest, I wouldn't shed a tear if we ban it, but our errata has kept the card from being too abusive for our environment. Although, I might try a Setite tap/steal/bleed deck at our next tournament that makes a case for banning it out of spite. Noal McDonald National Jyhad League Rules Team Member -- "What you cannot enforce, do not command." -- Socrates [ quoted text not captured ]

Ramsteiner wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > Ramsteiner wrote: > > > I currently don?t see any errata on any of the other banned cards. > So, > > > if it can?t be played why mess with it? > > > > Monocle still has errata (and is banned), BTW: > > > > Monocle of Clarity - Unique Equipment > > > > * Questions about questions may not be asked. [RTR 19950530] > > * Questions can only pertain to the current game. [RTR 19950530] > > * Question about the future are only binding until your next untap. > > [RTR 19950530] > > > > The reason they haven't been un-errated is two-fold: the errata is > > good at removing the unbalancing effects of the card (so that it > > may be "enjoyably" played in "friendly" games); and because the > > errata was issued before the ban - and un-issuing the errata would > > be a change (an unecessary change). > > > Alright then, but I thought I had heard/read that cleaning up or > scrubbing some of the errata was going to take place. > > Was this true or was I mislead. It is true. It has already happened. Check Deja News. See the above two-fold reason for why Monocle and R2I remain as they are. (Similarly, the errata to Asylumn Hunting Ground was not removed) [ quoted text not captured ]

RTI again: I think that this card will give "old vampire's decks" a new chance. I'm getting bored of all the winie decks. Cards like RTI, are the one that balnce the game because a Caittif with offuscute, a political caittif Pander, or a mini Malkav, a almost undefeatables. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Mon, 15 May 2000 take...@my-deja.com wrote: > I'm getting bored of all the winie decks. Cards like RTI, are the one > that balnce the game because a Caittif with offuscute, a political > caittif Pander, or a mini Malkav, a almost undefeatables. RtoI *unbalances* the game. This is a proven fact over many tournaments. If weenie Caitiff needs to be dealt with, there are many ways of doing that. Not least, consider the fact that new cards are being printed in Sabbat War. I think LSJ has seen on the news group that there are a number of concerns which people would like addressed, and I believe he is skillful enough to cater to them, where possible, and will presumably be consulting with whichever people are recruited as Design Team, Rules Team and Playtesters in order to try and satisfy everyone. I would rather see a balanced card in Sabbat War, than a rehash of RtoI. For my money, the areas which people seem to have cited are, in no particular order: 1) General lack of cards for a number of clans/disciplines 2) Equipment (speed of getting it, cost) 3) Allies (cost, and fragility - speed never really seems to be an issue) 4) Strike: Combat Ends, and ways for decks to not be completely killed by it 5) Make big vampires more useful I have every confidence that, where possible, the new cards will help address these issues. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.0005151043450.25278- 100...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2000 take...@my-deja.com wrote: > > I'm getting bored of all the winie decks. Cards like RTI, are the one > > that balnce the game because a Caittif with offuscute, a political > > caittif Pander, or a mini Malkav, a almost undefeatables. > > RtoI *unbalances* the game. The original poster is right to imply that RtI was meant to give the big vamps a chance, [and to boost the Gangrel and Nosferatu [IMO]]. Unfortunately what it actually did was to encourage the creation of Stupid Big Vamp decks - bring out Arika or indeed pretty much any big stealthy vampire, stonewall for a turn, bleed for far too much. THAT Was boring. Now there is a nice balance between various kinds of weenie decks and big vamp decks which are NOT stupid [though maybe they over-rely on Minion Tap/Fifth Tradition/Giant's Blood]. > > This is a proven fact over many tournaments. If weenie Caitiff needs to > be dealt with, there are many ways of doing that. Not least, consider the > fact that new cards are being printed in Sabbat War. I think LSJ has seen > on the news group that there are a number of concerns which people would > like addressed, and I believe he is skillful enough to cater to them, > where possible, and will presumably be consulting with whichever people > are recruited as Design Team, Rules Team and Playtesters in order to try > and satisfy everyone. I would rather see a balanced card in Sabbat War, > than a rehash of RtoI. > > For my money, the areas which people seem to have > cited are, in no particular order: > > 1) General lack of cards for a number of clans/disciplines > 2) Equipment (speed of getting it, cost) > 3) Allies (cost, and fragility - speed never really seems to be an issue) > 4) Strike: Combat Ends, and ways for decks to not be completely killed by > it > 5) Make big vampires more useful > > I have every confidence that, where possible, the new cards will help > address these issues. > i agree. [ quoted text not captured ]