rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

Lasombra Questions

6 messages from 6 participants · 13 January 1997 – 17 January 1997
original thread on Google Groups

Chris Michalek

I'm trying to put together a Lasombra deck. In looking at some of the cards, several questions came up. 1. Lisette Vizquel- "Lisette gets +1 intercept against any vampire who attempts diablerie." How does this work? Does this mean that she gets the intercept for the rest of the game vs. vampires who at some point have attempted diablerie? or Does she gain the intercept only during an attempted diablerie? in which case Can she attempt to block "any vampire" even if they are not diablerizing a vamp of her controller? 2. Antonio Delgado- "If Antonio performs a successful political action, untap him at the end of the turn." Does the vote have to pass in order to be considered a "successful political action"? or Does the fact that the action is not blocked and the referrendum comes to vote designate success? 3. Political Struggle- The acting vamp "gains X votes, where X is the number of non-contested votes the vampire with this card has" What happens if these votes are contested at a later time, does the acting vamp then lose those votes? 4. Sabbat Threat- "Called by a Prince or Justicar" What ?!?! The leaders of the Sabbat cannot call for a Sabbat Threat? Has there been an errata for this? If not, can there be?? This makes no sense. As you may guess, I'm trying to make a bruise/vote deck. So far it hasn't worked very well. Most of the effective vote cards require a prince/justicar. The votes out of the Sabbat expansion are weak when compared to the camarilla votes. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated...

Philippe DUCHON

"Chris Michalek" <CMi...@aol.com> writes: >I'm trying to put together a Lasombra deck. In looking at some of the >cards, several questions came up. > >1. Lisette Vizquel- "Lisette gets +1 intercept against any vampire who >attempts diablerie." How does this work? >Does this mean that she gets the intercept for the rest of the game vs. >vampires who at some point have attempted diablerie? or >Does she gain the intercept only during an attempted diablerie? in which >case She gets +1 intercept against any diablerie attempt. >Can she attempt to block "any vampire" even if they are not diablerizing a >vamp of her controller? As diablerie attempts against vampires controlled by another player are (D) actions, she can normally attempt to block only diablerie attempts against vamps of her controller, or by a prey/predator diablerizing his own, _unless_ she also plays an Eagle's Sight, I'd say. > >2. Antonio Delgado- "If Antonio performs a successful political action, >untap him at the end of the turn." >Does the vote have to pass in order to be considered a "successful >political action"? or Does the fact that the action is not blocked and >the referrendum comes to vote designate success? By the rules, I think this is an unblocked political action. I don't know what happens if the vote is unblocked but somehow cancelled. That is, unless there was a ruling/erratum on that, but I don't remember too many rulings since Sabbat came out :( > >3. Political Struggle- The acting vamp "gains X votes, where X is the >number of non-contested votes the vampire with this card has" >What happens if these votes are contested at a later time, does the acting >vamp then lose those votes? I don't think Political Struggle should be affected, but I'm not sure on this one. > >4. Sabbat Threat- "Called by a Prince or Justicar" What ?!?! The >leaders of the Sabbat cannot call for a Sabbat Threat? Has there been an >errata for this? If not, can there be?? This makes no sense. > CCG view: it has "Prince/Justicar" on it, so only Princes and Justicars can call it. No problem. World of Darkness view: "Sabbat Threat" is a vampire trying to convince his Camarilla buddies that the Sabbat is really a threat, I'd say, and not really the Sabbat vamps taking any kind of action, so it should only be called by Camarilla elders. One question you left out: what's the word on the two Prisci (Gratiano and the other I forget) that have an additional vote (Gratiano having one during the Prisci vote) ? What happens if they lose Priscus status, etc ? >As you may guess, I'm trying to make a bruise/vote deck. So far it hasn't >worked very well. Most of the effective vote cards require a >prince/justicar. The votes out of the Sabbat expansion are weak when >compared to the camarilla votes. Any suggestions would be greatly >appreciated... > Well... you might try a Writ of Acceptance or use a dummy Camarilla member, but that somehow defeats the idea of the Lasombra politics (although using Lasombras as recipients for Cardinal Benedictions and a Camarilla vampire like Volker (the Puppet Prince) or Vasilis (Traitor of Don Cruez: make him Brujah Justicar :) as a Camarilla puppet would be fun - probably not very effective, but fun). I haven't tried a Sabbat political deck yet, but the Sabbat votes don't seem too effective in the damage-dealing division, although vote accumulation seems easy enough (with Cardinal Benediction not being limited clan-wise, and the Prisci vote bringing 3 votes, possibly for a single Priscus). That's why I'd probably try a dual-sect deck. --- Philippe Duchon duc...@labri.u-bordeaux.fr

L. Scott Johnson

"Chris Michalek" <CMi...@aol.com> writes: >1. Lisette Vizquel- "Lisette gets +1 intercept against any vampire who >attempts diablerie." How does this work? >Does this mean that she gets the intercept for the rest of the game vs. >vampires who at some point have attempted diablerie? or >Does she gain the intercept only during an attempted diablerie? in which The latter. She gets +1 intercept during the diablerie action. >case >Can she attempt to block "any vampire" even if they are not diablerizing a >vamp of her controller? Not without the aid of Eagle's sight or somesuch. Having intercept does not grant you the opportunity to attempt to block. >2. Antonio Delgado- "If Antonio performs a successful political action, >untap him at the end of the turn." >Does the vote have to pass in order to be considered a "successful >political action"? or Does the fact that the action is not blocked and >the referrendum comes to vote designate success? This hasn't been ruled on. I'd guess that the vote must pass for this effect to happen. >3. Political Struggle- The acting vamp "gains X votes, where X is the >number of non-contested votes the vampire with this card has" >What happens if these votes are contested at a later time, does the acting >vamp then lose those votes? No. The X is set when the Political Struggle resolves. It won't change. >4. Sabbat Threat- "Called by a Prince or Justicar" What ?!?! The >leaders of the Sabbat cannot call for a Sabbat Threat? Has there been an >errata for this? If not, can there be?? This makes no sense. It works fine. The Sabbat can say that they're working in cahoots with one of the Methuselahs (or his minions) - but until a Kindred with status in the Camarilla says so, who's going to believe the Sabbat scum? No errata has been issued. And I don't think any is needed. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Freedom means choosing http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | your burden. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | -- Hephzibah Menuhin

John Whelan

Chris Michalek (CMi...@aol.com) wrote: : I'm trying to put together a Lasombra deck. In looking at some of the : cards, several questions came up. : 1. Lisette Vizquel- "Lisette gets +1 intercept against any vampire who : attempts diablerie." How does this work? : Does this mean that she gets the intercept for the rest of the game vs. : vampires who at some point have attempted diablerie? or : Does she gain the intercept only during an attempted diablerie? in which : case Dunno. : Can she attempt to block "any vampire" even if they are not diablerizing a : vamp of her controller? On the last part, I would assume her ability does not give her special blocking abilities, but if she used another card to allow her to block (eagle's sight) then she would still have +1 intercept : 2. Antonio Delgado- "If Antonio performs a successful political action, : untap him at the end of the turn." : Does the vote have to pass in order to be considered a "successful : political action"? or Does the fact that the action is not blocked and : the referrendum comes to vote designate success? ? : 3. Political Struggle- The acting vamp "gains X votes, where X is the : number of non-contested votes the vampire with this card has" : What happens if these votes are contested at a later time, does the acting : vamp then lose those votes? ? : 4. Sabbat Threat- "Called by a Prince or Justicar" What ?!?! The : leaders of the Sabbat cannot call for a Sabbat Threat? Has there been an : errata for this? If not, can there be?? This makes no sense. This card is from the original set, designed before a Sabbat expansion was even anticipated. The card treats the Sabbat merely as a dangerous force that only the most powerful vampires can influence against their enemies (thus Princes and Justicars--IC members did not exist). The card title no longer makes sense with the Sabbat expansion, but there is no other reason to fix the card. It is quite clear about what it does, and it is not broken. John Whelan : As you may guess, I'm trying to make a bruise/vote deck. So far it hasn't [ quoted text not captured ]

Martin Ward

In article <01bc01bb$6b385fa0$bed2...@CMichale.byu.edu>, "Chris Michalek" <CMi...@aol.com> wrote: >As you may guess, I'm trying to make a bruise/vote deck. So far it hasn't >worked very well. Most of the effective vote cards require a >prince/justicar. The votes out of the Sabbat expansion are weak when >compared to the camarilla votes. Any suggestions would be greatly >appreciated... > I must congratulate you on your attempts at experimentation. This is what I plan to do with a Lasombra deck, once I get off my butt and build new decks. Some ideas: 1. Sabbat threat - Try the other card 'Camarilla Threat' from the Sabbat expansion. It causes any player discarding a card at the end of their turn (ie during the Discard phase) to burn 1 pool. 2. Try this combo - Political Seizure and Thanks for the Donation. What does it do? PS is a master card that is put into play and contests a location (unique or not). When the location is given up by the other player, instead, the PS card is burned and you get control of the location card. Thanks for the Donation is a Dominate action that puts the card into play and causes your prey to pay the contesting cost for one of your cards. However, I think it can be burned as a directed action. 3. For combat, you got Potence, but try getting your claws on some Entombments. It's a rare (which may be a good thing) Obtenabration combat card that burns an ally as a strike or, at superior, sends a vampire to torpor as a strike.

legrand

>>As you may guess, I'm trying to make a bruise/vote deck. So far it hasn't >>worked very well. Most of the effective vote cards require a >>prince/justicar. The votes out of the Sabbat expansion are weak when >>compared to the camarilla votes. Any suggestions would be greatly >>appreciated... >> >I must congratulate you on your attempts at experimentation. This is what I >plan to do with a Lasombra deck, once I get off my butt and build new decks. > >Some ideas: > >1. Sabbat threat - Try the other card 'Camarilla Threat' from the Sabbat >expansion. It causes any player discarding a card at the end of their turn (ie >during the Discard phase) to burn 1 pool. That seems nice, but be sure that you won't burn too much pool that way yourself. Other nice votes are Transfer of Power (gain 1 pool from every player who has more pool than you) and Political Stranglehold (each meth. gains 3 pool per vampire of 8 cap and more). I know the first one doesn't beat Parity Shift, and the other is good only in a deck with big vamps, but do remember that KRC and Conservative Agitation do not need princes. >2. Try this combo - Political Seizure and Thanks for the Donation. What does >it do? PS is a master card that is put into play and contests a location >(unique or not). When the location is given up by the other player, instead, >the PS card is burned and you get control of the location card. Thanks for the >Donation is a Dominate action that puts the card into play and causes your >prey to pay the contesting cost for one of your cards. However, I think it can >be burned as a directed action. It works just wonderfully. But be sure to load your deck with these cards, as they are best used in combo (a Thanks for the Donation is pretty useless by itself). And be sure to keep some stealth to help this action, as your prey will do everything to block it (especially if he owns the contested card). The only way one can get rid of PS is by yielding the card, but unfortunatly, the Thanks for the Donation may indeed be burned by a D action. >3. For combat, you got Potence, but try getting your claws on some >Entombments. It's a rare (which may be a good thing) Obtenabration combat card >that burns an ally as a strike or, at superior, sends a vampire to torpor as a >strike. And don't forget Arms of the Abyss, for dodge and an additional strike. It's so nice to see a Tremere play cauldron of blood for 5 to somebody who isn't quite there, then comes out of the shadows for a high potence strike. And if you really want to use prince votes, add Constanza Vinti and Donal O'Connor to your crypt. They cost a lot, but they are princes, camarilla and have Dominate and Potence. Philippe Richer