V:TES Rules in effect?

With the rule changes out, I'm curious if people will play with them right away, or wait until the cards come out to play them. I was considering going to Dream Con ( a gaming convention in Everett Washington) this weekend and I'm curious what rules people will be playing with. I see no reason to wait around, if the rules are already out we might as well play with them.

Richard Reinking <ri...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >unless *both* players have V:TES cards I would in no way assume that the >rules for V:TES would be applicable.... smile biomech8! ;) Why should having VTES cards matter? You can play VTES with Jyhad cards just fine, except for the two cards that involve Paralyze. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

Thomas R Wylie (aa...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote: : Why should having VTES cards matter? You can play VTES with Jyhad cards : just fine, except for the two cards that involve Paralyze. So you are as much as admitting that the Stake and Rowan Ring are going to be taken out of the mix for VTES then? Just checking... Shane H.W. Travis | I try to take one day at a time, tra...@duke.usask.ca | but sometimes several days attack at once. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | -- Ashleigh Brilliant

tra...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Travis) writes: >Thomas R Wylie (aa...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote: >: Why should having VTES cards matter? You can play VTES with Jyhad cards >: just fine, except for the two cards that involve Paralyze. >So you are as much as admitting that the Stake and Rowan Ring are going >to be taken out of the mix for VTES then? Just checking... calm down! is there really any doubt about this? Tom already mentioned that "a handful" of cards would be removed. obviously, cards that do things that the rules specifically state are no longer part of the game will be removed (at least i hope so!) -- -chad -- -chad

Chad Ray McDaniel (ch...@unhinged.engr.sgi.com) wrote: : tra...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Travis) writes: : >So you are as much as admitting that the Stake and Rowan Ring are going : >to be taken out of the mix for VTES then? Just checking... : calm down! is there really any doubt about this? Tom already mentioned : that "a handful" of cards would be removed. It is _diametrically_ opposed to all of WotC's past policies to give any clue whatsoever about which cards will be removed in upcoming sets, and I found this 'slip' on Tom's part to be both interesting and odd. (This sort of information is unfair as only those who have net-access are privy to it, and it fuels speculation over given cards.) It has since been cleared up that there _are_ Paralyze rules in the VTES rules, so these two cards are not _necessarily_ being taken out of the mix. [ quoted text not captured ]

tra...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Travis) writes: >It is _diametrically_ opposed to all of WotC's past policies to give any >clue whatsoever about which cards will be removed in upcoming sets, and I >found this 'slip' on Tom's part to be both interesting and odd. (This >sort of information is unfair as only those who have net-access are privy >to it, and it fuels speculation over given cards.) Interesting Considering the relative rarety and usefulness of both cards Stake is like Common or Uncommon Rowan Ring I assume is rare but not very useful Not like freak drive and Ivory Bows So if someone starts offering large amounts of money foreither of those not terribly useful cards I'll happily sell them for more Freak drives >It has since been cleared up that there _are_ Paralyze rules in the VTES >rules, so these two cards are not _necessarily_ being taken out of the mix. >Shane H.W. Travis | I try to take one day at a time, >tra...@duke.usask.ca | but sometimes several days attack at once. >Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | -- Ashleigh Brilliant -- Stu Pieloch TLTT Players-Lord High And Mighty Potentate of the Known Universe DramaTech Theatre Improv Troupe http://photobooks.gatech.edu/~zync/lttp.html GE/T/S d++(--) H(-) s++:- g+(-) p2 au++ a- w+++(--) v++ C++ U N++ W---() M+ V-- po+++(---) t--- 5+++ G+++ B--- e++ u++ f+ r++ n--- y*

tra...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Travis) writes: >Chad Ray McDaniel (ch...@unhinged.engr.sgi.com) wrote: >: tra...@duke.usask.ca (Shane Travis) writes: >: >So you are as much as admitting that the Stake and Rowan Ring are going >: >to be taken out of the mix for VTES then? Just checking... >: calm down! is there really any doubt about this? Tom already mentioned >: that "a handful" of cards would be removed. >It is _diametrically_ opposed to all of WotC's past policies to give any >clue whatsoever about which cards will be removed in upcoming sets, and I >found this 'slip' on Tom's part to be both interesting and odd. (This >sort of information is unfair as only those who have net-access are privy >to it, and it fuels speculation over given cards.) >It has since been cleared up that there _are_ Paralyze rules in the VTES >rules, so these two cards are not _necessarily_ being taken out of the mix. Well, I agree with your first point that WotC seldom gives any info out about the future card mix. I did think that it was obvious when the Vampire rules came out that they were removing Rowan Ring and the Stake; I thought this before I even say Tom's post about changing the card mix. Concerning your point about whether Paralyze is actually part of the VtES rules: Paralyze appears thrice in the rules: ---- (section 4.2, paragraph after Step 3): For the Basic Game, there's another step you should go through when you prepare your deck. There are some words and phrases that are used in the Advanced Game that do not apply to the Basic Game. Remove cards that use these words or phrases: intercept, maneuver, additional strike, press, torpor, diablerie, paralyze, and ante. You should also remove any cards that say "Only usable at long range" or "Not usable in the first round of combat." ---- 22.1 Paralyze This term appears in the limited edition, but has been dropped from the unlimited edition. A card that can "paralyze" a vampire will send the vampire to torpor tapped. The card is then placed on the vampire. The paralyzed vampire cannot be untapped during the untap phase. Any vampire who encounters the vampire in torpor may rescue him or her without burning blood, and the vampire can still be diablerized. ---- (Appendix D: Rules Glossary): Paralyze: During the Check Damage phase, this effect taps a vampire and sends him into torpor. The card that inflicted the damage is put on the victim. This term was used in Jyhad, but has been dropped from Vampire. (See Section 22.1) ---- I think we can ignore the first excerpt since it only applies to the beginner's rules. The next two excerpts make it clear that the word "paralyze" will not appear on any VtES cards. While it's entirely possible that Rowan Ring and the Stake will merely restate what appears in section 22.1 instead of using the word "paralyze", I doubt this because WotC obviously wanted to remove the entire concept of a 'Vampire in torpor that really isn't in torpor.' Chances are that they'll also remove Pulled Fangs for the same reason (and also due to the fact that the new agro rules make PF even worse as Curt says.) -- -chad -- -chad

I downloaded the new rules and started using them immediately. All in all, I'm pleased with the way they have revised them, especially in the voting clarifications, the ability to trade equipment, and the enhancement of aggravated damage. "That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die." Travis H.