No More Bounce Cards

We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: Inhibit creativity in deck design. Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. When I am not at work I'll be happy to further explain and defend my position. But I believe the case is quite strong. We do not need more bounce.

I disagree. Dominate and Auspex could use a few more bounce options Independent Futurist. Contrarian (titled, X votes where X is the number of votes as the acting minion.) Target Vitals is always the better combat card.

> Dorrinal wrote: > We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: Inhibit creativity in deck design. Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > When I am not at work I'll be happy to further explain and defend my position. But I believe the case is quite strong. We do not need more bounce. > /signed

I think I agree. Adding bounce to each and everyone would be rather boring and probably bad for the game in the long run. Adding something that weighs up for bounce would probably be good though, since dominate and auspex have a huge advantage due to those cards.

I will have to post the most unpopular and least contributive post on all forums, but it sums up my feelings about chimestry bounce, fortitude bounce and temporis bounce ideas floating around forum recently. I agree completely with the OP! Nice summed up, Dorrinal, no explanation needed!

> do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: > > Inhibit creativity in deck design. > Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. > Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > If we do not need more bounce, we need Lost in Translation to not be unplayble. Remove "younger" from it. There, discplineless (although costly) bounce. There are hundreds of vampires above capacity 7 that never see play for the simple reason that they don't have AUS or dom. Pool defense, for a LOT of archtypes, has resorted to retarded amounts of poolgain, up to the point where you simply cannot oust them within the time limit unless you pack some serious +bleed, increasing the need for bounce or even MORE retarded amounts of poolgain. > When I am not at work I'll be happy to further explain and defend my position. But I believe the case is quite strong. We do not need more bounce. > Go!

How about some form of bleed reduction that reduces the bleed to one? Not the most efficient in the world, but slows down hyper-bleed? Would it work to have something like a reaction form of daring the dawn? Could either of these concepts works as fortitude reaction cards? Just ideas. Baron of Berkeley

> Dorrinal wrote: > We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: Inhibit creativity in deck design. Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > When I am not at work I'll be happy to further explain and defend my position. But I believe the case is quite strong. We do not need more bounce. > We do need to have options other than: Speed Stealth-bleed Powerbleed Super-Bloat Prince-Vote (Mostly Toreador Vote) To do that we either need to - kick Dominate in the junk... - give many other deck types a boost (without helping the 'No Teeth Wall Decks' still sit there and do nothing) Games timing out due to Super-Bloat or Prince-Vote decks bloating beyond the capacity to oust them is purely a reaction to the expectation that any given tournament table will contain at least 1 Dominate-Based Sleaze Deck. "Girls will.." is again a reaction to the fact that you better bloat at a redonculous rate to survive Dominate Bleed predators. And so on. Improving the ability for decks such as Combat Decks to oust forwards, will concentrate more of their efforts forward; making Path of the Salmon much less attractive. Improving the ability for decks to limit constant fast aggressive bleed will also allow them to spend more resources and card slots going forward and less on bunkering down behind a mountain of pool or intercept. It seems to be a common theme that people want other strategies to be more effective, but seem unwilling to have them become as powerful as Dominate-bleed based decks. You can't have both. Either the decks become viable (and Dominate-bleed/flick loses its priviledged place of 'the no-brainer-built-this-and-you'll-win-a-few-VPs' discipline) or you accept that you're bonkers to bring anything to a tournament that doesn't contain 8 Deflections, Carlton van Wyck, Pentex Subversion and 2-4 SR/Washes. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I totally disagree with the "I don't play this 8-10 cap vampire because it has no AUS or dom" stuff. Out of the last 14 games I played at a tournament I had only 2 times a bleed predator. Also scrolling through the TWDA I see quite a lot of decks winning in 2011 that do not play bleed bounce. See for yourself, you'll find Assamite, DoC, big cap POT-PRE, Ahrimane, etc. So yeah, I agree with the original post: we do not need any more bleed bounce! NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

I'm not 100% sold on your thesis. When building tournament decks with the current card pool: - I often feel like I have three options: bounce, serious intercept, or weenies. (There would be four if I were willing to play Baali Girls, of course.) - I quite often choose a selection of vampires not because they're interesting, but because they bring me to 5 vampires in my crypt with dominate. - When examining crypt cards, I pay more attention to out-of-clan dominate than I do to all other out-of-clan disciplines put together. The last piece is what really tells me that there's an issue. The discipline system in VtES is actually really interesting. I love the concept that you can pick a couple of disciplines, choose vampires that support them for your crypt, and go crazy with it - only, if one of those disciplines isn't dominate (or superior auspex), the deck almost certainly won't be viable. As someone who likes to design decks, I find that pretty depressing. I don't buy that access to disciplineless bounce would make stealth bleed non-viable. I've seen stealth bleed take tables where every deck was running bounce. Hell, most tournament decks run bounce, and stealth bleed wins tournaments all the time. Nor is worrying about the strength of S+B a good way to make your point - I think I'd prefer that stealth bleed were a little less strong overall, and I don't think I'm the only one. I'm not sure I like the idea of disciplineless or ubiquitous bounce. I would like to think that there's a way to balance things out without forcing everyone to use the same approach; though, I've yet to see a solution I'm happy with. That all said, I _do_ think there's a place in the game for more Dominate bounce cards! Given the number of decks that run Dominate bounce, giving those decks choices other than Deflection makes for a better game without substantial overall changes. I like Redirection and Murmur of the False Will, and think they both have their place, just like Wake, OtQV, and Forced Awakening do.

> We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: > Inhibit creativity in deck design. > Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. > Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > Totally agree. One of the steps of building a viable deck is to think about how it should defend versus various archetypes. Giving bounce cards for every discipline makes any creativity concerning "How to defend against agressive bleed predator" going to thrash can.

> Izaak wrote: > If we do not need more bounce, we need Lost in Translation to not be unplayble. Remove "younger" from it. > Why on earth? I think that the card is just fine. The capacity/age restriction means that a weenie hordes aren't most likely able to use the card. Which is Good TM. > Dorrinal wrote: > We do not need any more Deflections in the game. > Agreed. Finnish Politics!

> alek wrote: > > > We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: > > Inhibit creativity in deck design. > > Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. > > Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > > > Totally agree. One of the steps of building a viable deck is to think about how it should defend versus various archetypes. Giving bounce cards for every discipline makes any creativity concerning "How to defend against agressive bleed predator" going to thrash can. > Do you consider Delaying Tactics a poor card, since it gives little creativity to "how to defend against aggresive vote predator"? If you consider a Daughter of Cacophony deck, I read earlier that they could vote and bloat. In fact, that is the only way for them to survive an aggressive deck. Does it improve creativity? No. With a bounce-like card, they could go other roads than vote. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> If you consider a Daughter of Cacophony deck, I read earlier that they could vote and bloat. In fact, that is the only way for them to survive an aggressive deck. Does it improve creativity? No. > With a bounce-like card, they could go other roads than vote. > First of all why do you think every clan and discipline should be good at defending against aggresive predator?! Some disciplines/ clans/ etc. are better at this other are better with some setup. Some are better for combat other for bleeding and this is very good. With out it we could just play with only one deck/ discipline/ clan. Daughters of cacophony is a good example of rather specialized clan. It's supposed to be good at voting and weak in defense and it's abolutly all right. Still with some effort (you can call it creativity) you can think of bulding it in more defensive ways. F.e. you can make very aggresive daughters of cacophony deck which kills his prey faster than his predator kills him, you can use shettering crescendo cards to control minions around the table, including your predator, you can build your defense basing on allies f.e. member of the entourage and unmasking, you can bloat using villein + concert tour, you can even add some vampires from other clans (which is how blood lines very designed to be played at the beggining) to improve defnsive capabilities of the deck.

> alek wrote: > > > If you consider a Daughter of Cacophony deck, I read earlier that they could vote and bloat. In fact, that is the only way for them to survive an aggressive deck. Does it improve creativity? No. > > With a bounce-like card, they could go other roads than vote. > > > First of all why do you think every clan and discipline should be good at defending against aggresive predator?! Some disciplines/ clans/ etc. are better at this other are better with some setup. Some are better for combat other for bleeding and this is very good. With out it we could just play with only one deck/ discipline/ clan. > Daughters of cacophony is a good example of rather specialized clan. It's supposed to be good at voting and weak in defense and it's abolutly all right. Still with some effort (you can call it creativity) you can think of bulding it in more defensive ways. F.e. you can make very aggresive daughters of cacophony deck which kills his prey faster than his predator kills him, you can use shettering crescendo cards to control minions around the table, including your predator, you can build your defense basing on allies f.e. member of the entourage and unmasking, you can bloat using villein + concert tour, you can even add some vampires from other clans (which is how blood lines very designed to be played at the beggining) to improve defnsive capabilities of the deck. > I'm not saying that every clan "should be good at defending against aggresive predator". I'm just contesting the argument saying that it would reduce creativity to give them such an option. Creativity would simply switch from "how do I survive" to "what can I do now that the surviving problem is solved". The real (unanswerable) question is "would the game be better with such a card?" Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Dorrinal wrote: > We do not need any more Deflections in the game. A new bounce card would: Inhibit creativity in deck design. Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. Further blur the distinction among the various disciplines. > Would you be similarly opposed to a new bleed defence card (of some sort) that was mechanically very different to bounce but was perhaps 90% as powerful as bounce? (Assuming we could measure things that accurately. Which we can't, but for the sake of discussion.) This could, potentially, do all the same things you list above - but it wouldn't be bounce. It's also difficult to know quite what you mean by 'inhibit creativity in deck design'. At the moment, creativity is inhibited (in some senses) by forcing a lot of deck designs to either: graft on bounce, of some sort (minor Dominate, predominantly) be scrapped (or be significantly awful) because they can't do that And thus potentially adding a new bounce card could potentially increase creativity in deck design, by allowing that (hypothetical) currently non-viable Samedi deck to be built with 6 copies of a bounce card (also hypothetical) based on Obf+For together. But if you define creatitivy in a different way - which you might be doing - then the argument would come out differently. It's also possible that with a 90%-as-effective-as-bounce card, that same Samedi deck might well get built - but would it be significantly more creative?

James: A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it.

> Why on earth? > I think that the card is just fine. The capacity/age restriction means that a weenie hordes aren't most likely able to use the card. Which is Good TM. > If the card is "just fine" then why doesn't it EVER see serious play? Why do people STILL end up picking guys that have dominate? Lost in Translation is trash. It's trash because it's unplayable with 6-7-8 caps. It's trash because vampires that *can* effectively play it have a viable alternative that has dominate or superior auspex. A bloodcost of 2 is already enough discouragement to spam the card with weenies. Even dominate weenies run out of blood all the time and deflection costs 1. > Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type. > No, what disciplineless bounce would do is keep bleed a viable deck type, except now bleed decks don't get a free oust every other game because their prey plays without bounce or ridiculous bloat. > Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. > The sad reality is that if you have a crazy new deck idea it's simply going to fall over and die all the time if you can't graft on dominate. *THAT* is the problem. > First of all why do you think every clan and discipline should be good at defending against aggresive predator?! > Because, among about 1000 other reasons, we want to see more deck variety instead of sitting down next to Girls, Nana, Walls, Stick Men, Weenie Dem and Lawfirm in every tournament game? > I'm just contesting the argument saying that it would reduce creativity to give them such an option. Creativity would simply switch from "how do I survive" to "what can I do now that the surviving problem is solved". > I'm quoting this because it doesn't get more true than this.

nice chat and all, so I'll add my 0.02 $ here (again). in my opinion, creating more bounce cards is extremely lame (please note that I'm not intending to insult the creator of the idea - just the idea itself. just in case you want to unleash some proper flaming ). don't know how I can emphasise more on this. doing that for disciplines with the theme not even close to the proposed card effects falls under the same category. besides, we already have enough bounce cards, or I'd even dare say - too many of them. don't get me wrong, I love deck variety and everyone in my country knows that I always play some crazy stuff nobody expects / knows / has played before. having said that - I think that creating more bounce cards is not adding variety, it's dumbing the game down. last thing I want to see is this game being dumbed down into oblivion, and - unfortunately and no offence - this is basically what is proposed here. so again - no, no more bounce cards please. besides, bounce is not the only option. you can back-rush (or back oust if you can) to save your butt, that's the worst case scenario but I guess we've all seen this happening. also, last time I checked the TWDA, I've seen plenty of decks that cannot bounce at all (Ahrimanes anyone? or maybe the "highly complex 6-cards Nana Buruku Ani rush deck"?). another thing is that dominate is simply too strong, but I guess there isn't much we can do about it. each time I see people adding some weenie dom dudes just to have a bounce option in the deck, I cry a little bit inside. but maybe that's just me... anyway, last thing I wanted to point out - each time you suggest something, think about the absolutely most overpowered archetype of today that can use this card. last thing I want to see is Nana having a viable bounce option or Tupdogs running with some crazy shit that was invented to "boost combat". seriously.

If you cannot build a viable deck without bounce then I am sorry to say this but you suck as a deck builder. I have 3 TWDA entries, two of them are with decks with no bounce or ridiculous bloat, I have also plenty of times got to tournament finals with decks without bounce, and more often than not, I was ousted by some other reason than not having bounce (votes most often).

> If you cannot build a viable deck without bounce then I am sorry to say this but you suck as a deck builder. > I can't agree more One more think, nobody point out yet, is a fact, that giving good bounce card for everybody would just kill bleed decks, limiting number of archetypes played at tournaments mainly to politic, combat and some toolbox decks. As a contrary imagine combat ends for every discipline that could be played under immortall grapple. What would be a reason to play combat decks in such an environment. Additionally it would have an effect on lenght of play. Without bleed decks more games would end with time outs.

How is card like this lame ? Bounce 2 Require a vampire with capacity above 6. Only usable during bleed action. Tap this vampire to Bounce bleed and reduce it by 1. Disciplineless bounce wouln't hurt the game, and bleed decks can cope with bounce just fine. Or something like: Bounce2 1 Require a vampire with capacity above 6. Only usable during bleed action by vampire who failed to block acting minion. Tap this vampire to Bounce bleed. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

What about this? Brooklyn Bounce requires a prince or archbishop of New York Reaction card, 1 blood Bounce a bleed Flavor text: "Get ready to bounce!" f.y.i.: for any Sheldon Coopers reading this forum: yes, this is sarcasm. NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

> dude_PL wrote: > I think that creating more bounce cards is not adding variety, it's dumbing the game down. last thing I want to see is this game being dumbed down into oblivion, and - unfortunately and no offence - this is basically what is proposed here. so again - no, no more bounce cards please. > This is a good argument. dude_PL is a little more pessimistic than I am, but I understand his concern. By adding bounce cards, the creativity part will move from defense against bleed (problem solved) to something else. But indeed if everyone packs 8 bounce cards in the deck, some other surviving options may be totally dropped (because less effective), increasing the proportion of "no brainer" cards in the deck. It's hard to evaluate though, and depends on the strength of the bounce card. > Klaital wrote: > If you cannot build a viable deck without bounce then I am sorry to say this but you suck as a deck builder. > This is a bad argument. I've no problem making a Daughter deck survive to heavy bleeds. It's just that all my Daughter decks will look the same, and I'd like some more variety. By giving different weapons against the same threat (here heavy bleed), it may result in different synergies between defense and the rest of the deck. The key is too create a card that is well-balanced (ie. neither wallpaper or no brainer), brings something new that may interact with new strategies. If it doesn't, then better leave the things as they are. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > The key is too create a card that is well-balanced (ie. neither wallpaper or no brainer), brings something new that may interact with new strategies. If it doesn't, then better leave the things as they are. > There is already Lost in Translation for that. Vast majority of the good bleed decks will bleed you with either midcaps or weenies, so any 8+ cap can use Lost in Translation fairly easily to defend against them if you feel you really absolutely must have bounce. If you are getting bled by a 10-11 cap, then I recommend Pentex Subversion or Archon Investigation, or just backrushing it generally works fine. There is also Protected Resources to keep you safe from bleedzookas.

I would like to see a option which can be used instead of bounce. For example: Traffic Jam Type: Reaction Cost: 1 blood Only usable by a vampire with capacity above 6 during a bleed action. The bleed action ends unsuccessfully. Untap the acting minion. Tap this reacting minion. ...or more like Delaying Tactics: Traffic Jam Type: Reaction Cost: 1 blood Only usable during a bleed action. The bleed action ends unsuccessfully. Untap the acting minion. Return one of the cards (if any) played during this action to its owner's hand (discard afterward). The second card may have some issues when you use it against your predator (he can get that Govern or Conditioning back and attempt to use it with another minion). ---- Banging trashcans, breaking windows We'll wake you up tonight We like the good time, we scream and shout And that's what fun's about

> Klaital wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > The key is too create a card that is well-balanced (ie. neither wallpaper or no brainer), brings something new that may interact with new strategies. If it doesn't, then better leave the things as they are. > > > There is already Lost in Translation for that. Vast majority of the good bleed decks will bleed you with either midcaps or weenies, so any 8+ cap can use Lost in Translation fairly easily to defend against them if you feel you really absolutely must have bounce. If you are getting bled by a 10-11 cap, then I recommend Pentex Subversion or Archon Investigation, or just backrushing it generally works fine. There is also Protected Resources to keep you safe from bleedzookas. > Do you know you're quite right? The more I think about Lost in Translation, the more I find it an interesting option. But I wouldn't play it without at least a 10-cap, so there's a hole to feed for 8-9 caps decks. On the other hand, I stopped playing Murmur of False Will the day I was bled to death by Stanislava with one Murmur in hand, thinking "I should have played Deflection instead". "Younger" is a terrible clause. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Jussi wrote: > Traffic Jam > Type: Reaction > Cost: 1 blood > Only usable during a bleed action. > The bleed action ends unsuccessfully. Untap the acting minion. Return one of the cards (if any) played during this action to its owner's hand (discard afterward). > > The second card may have some issues when you use it against your predator (he can get that Govern or Conditioning back and attempt to use it with another minion). > What about 'return the action card used to bleed to hand, he can't use them this turn' ? "Younger" is terrible if preventing from using the card, hovever: Bounce! 1 Tap to bounce bleed at -1 bleed. If the acting minion is younger this card cost 3 instead. -1 bleed can be changed to become dnr or 'not usable after blocks are declined' or 'not usable if this vampire not even bothered to block this bleed' or anything else. There is many options for disciplineless bounce. Point is, why only bounce should act as solid bleed defense ? Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

First we argue about why not make bleed bounce for other disciplines or even without discipline. What's next? Agg hand damage for presence? Vote push for protean? We already have Lost in Translation, but obviously it's not Tier1 enough for you guys. I stated it a year ago or so that bleed bounce is overrated and stick with it. Sometimes the key is not only in deck building, but play style. You can always try to backoust a bleed predator and still win the game. Done it like a 100 times meanwhile. NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

I am steering way clear of this argument. I have stated my opinion of it at the very begging Sometimes, listening to this community, it seems that some people want all the disciplines to bleed, bounce, vote and fight at the same time, because it would be "balanced" and "interesting" and " versatile". I say it only leads to boring Also, Mephistopheles : ---> Points at Loki's gift Sup. effect at protean : See, the doom started with KOT , vote push (kinda) for protean! B)

> Pendargon wrote: > > Sometimes, listening to this community, it seems that some people want all the disciplines to bleed, bounce, vote and fight at the same time, because it would be "balanced" and "interesting" and " versatile". > Agreed. And creativity is not about building 12 different decks for each clan or discipline. Creativity partly means how you use something despite its weakness. NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

> Mephistopheles wrote: > > > Pendargon wrote: > > > > Sometimes, listening to this community, it seems that some people want all the disciplines to bleed, bounce, vote and fight at the same time, because it would be "balanced" and "interesting" and " versatile". > > > Agreed. And creativity is not about building 12 different decks for each clan or discipline. Creativity partly means how you use something despite its weakness. > Create mono quietus deck then. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

I did, several times (though some obf and some cel were there, with some masters) See, i play Assamites, there is probably not a single thing with them i have not played

Mono quietus TWD Mono quietus won a tournament recently. 'nough said. NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

> Mephistopheles wrote: > Mono quietus TWD > > Mono quietus won a tournament recently. 'nough said. > Anything can win a tournament, especially one with 10 players. So there are two quietus TWDA entries (one is QUI OBF), find me a SINGLE discipline with less TWDA entries. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

And what is your conclusion? That a quietus bleed bounce card would suddenly solve all problems? Even though it totally doesn't fit in the theme? No, the solution is not bleed bounce. The solution would be to make better cards for what quietus is about. Make better quietus combat cards for example. When I suggested one everybody was nerfing the shit out of it, cause obviously a strong quietus combat card is soooooo broken. No, instead let1s have bleed bounce!!! This is so nonsense... NC for Hungary hunfragment.blogspot.com

> Mephistopheles wrote: > Make better quietus combat cards for example. When I suggested one everybody was nerfing the shit out of it, cause obviously a strong quietus combat card is soooooo broken. No, instead let1s have bleed bounce!!! This is so nonsense... > I agree with this. The assassin clan that can´t beat anything in combat is a joke. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Mephistopheles wrote: > And what is your conclusion? That a quietus bleed bounce card would suddenly solve all problems? Even though it totally doesn't fit in the theme? > > No, the solution is not bleed bounce. The solution would be to make better cards for what quietus is about. Make better quietus combat cards for example. When I suggested one everybody was nerfing the shit out of it, cause obviously a strong quietus combat card is soooooo broken. No, instead let1s have bleed bounce!!! This is so nonsense... > Seconded. This is the path that should be taken. Make the non-bounce clans better at what they do, not give them bounce... Assamites should be killing things, and not voting and bloating and bleeding at stealth...

> Lech wrote: > > > Mephistopheles wrote: > > Mono quietus TWD > > > > Mono quietus won a tournament recently. 'nough said. > > > Anything can win a tournament, especially one with 10 players. So there are two quietus TWDA entries (one is QUI OBF), find me a SINGLE discipline with less TWDA entries. > There might be more. But I think it is a mistake to see without the added advantages of the other clan disciplines. The problem with is that doesn't add much to that it did not do already by itself. And before Loss or Death Star, there wasn't anything worth using allot of stealth for. Turning back to the discussion, I would think that a card to bounce/reduce would do more sense if it was clan based, not discipline. Or an Ally that can tap to reduce a bleed against you. Not overpowered, might be creative design and would add a nice extra flavor to decks.

> Ashur wrote: > I agree with this. The assassin clan that can´t beat anything in combat is a joke. > Assassins are target killers, not full fledged frontal assaulting armies. Put a contract on something and that something will go down, if you survive long enough. "Well, mr Ventrue, you want me to take care of Lambach? 2 Consanguineous Boon Assamite and have a Contract on mr Cardinal." Huge problem: it takes allot o time, allot of resources and doesn't give any real advantage in a table to be a specialist rusher. are still the best combat disciplines for Another case of something that is very much like the RPG spirit and mostly useless in the card game. EDIT: sorry for double post, but I pressed to continue on something and split the post in 2.

I hate Assamite fanboys. They turn every thread into thepathofblood.com.

> Brum wrote: > > > Lech wrote: > > > > > Mephistopheles wrote: > > > Mono quietus TWD > > > > > > Mono quietus won a tournament recently. 'nough said. > > > > > > > > Anything can win a tournament, especially one with 10 players. So there are two quietus TWDA entries (one is QUI OBF), find me a SINGLE discipline with less TWDA entries. > > > There might be more. > But I think it is a mistake to see without the added advantages of the other clan disciplines. > The problem with is that doesn't add much to that it did not do already by itself. > And before Loss or Death Star, there wasn't anything worth using allot of stealth for. > > Turning back to the discussion, I would think that a card to bounce/reduce would do more sense if it was clan based, not discipline. > Or an Ally that can tap to reduce a bleed against you. Not overpowered, might be creative design and would add a nice extra flavor to decks. > Each of those disciplines are used in high quantities in decks from TWDA. The problem of is that doesn't add much to in combat, and outside combat it don't do anything at all (except stealth, but for a clan with it's meaningless)(it's similar case with , it's good discipline on it's own, but combat is very risky and ineffective for high cap vampires, require specific conditions to mill cards and generally speaking don't help you oust). is great delivery system, but Loss aside, there is not many actions worth it (and even Loss itself is not very strong, , , , have better choices. But i'm not advocating bounce, rather more useful combat cards for and and some good card for . Maybe something like momentary delay for , but without capacity requirements (it fit the theme) and on superior allow combat last longer than 1 round of combat. It would make bruise&bleed that use action cards viable. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

Sorry thought you asked for twd's with mono-disciplines.

> Lech wrote: > > > Jussi wrote: > > Traffic Jam > > Type: Reaction > > Cost: 1 blood > > Only usable during a bleed action. > > The bleed action ends unsuccessfully. Untap the acting minion. Return one of the cards (if any) played during this action to its owner's hand (discard afterward). > > > > The second card may have some issues when you use it against your predator (he can get that Govern or Conditioning back and attempt to use it with another minion). > > > What about 'return the action card used to bleed to hand, he can't use them this turn' ? > Um, if you mean Metusaleah by "he", then the answer is that I just wanted to have slightly different mechanism than Delaying Tactics. Also, I wanted the card to be sort of a double edged sword, so you'll risk helping your predator instead of just denying him bleeds (which, in my opinion is too strong effect indeed). I'd even consider Traffic Jam to be usable only once per each Metusaleahs' turns. ---- Banging trashcans, breaking windows We'll wake you up tonight We like the good time, we scream and shout And that's what fun's about

I posted this in another thread, and while it underwent some evolution to the point where I now think it's better in Abombwe and not in Animalism, I still fail to see what's wrong with the concept...I think it'd be a really cool addition to the game Unleashing the Beast Reaction Cancel a frenzy card played on this vampire. Not usable during combat. The acting minion gets +1 strength and -1 stealth until the end of the action. Only usable during a bleed action against you. Only usable when a minion controlled by your predator is bleeding you. Tap this reacting minion, and choose a ready minion controlled by your prey (not usable when only one other Methuselah is in the game). The acting minion enters combat with the chosen minion. If only one is ready at the end of that combat, he or she gains 4 blood.

> Dorrinal wrote: > James: > A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it. > I'm confused, then. In the initial post, you say that we shouldn't have more bounce because it would: "Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type." But you seem to be happy for new cards that aren't bounce, and which involve interesting deck design/construction/play choices - even if those cards would make the metagame equally as hostile for stealth-bleed. I think the point I'm getting at is that your justification about hostility for stealth-bleed decks doesn't lead to, or support, a conclusion of "No more bounce." It supports the conclusion "No more useful bleed defences, at all." So I'm not sure what it is you actually want.

Hostility toward stealth and bleed/vote decks is always welcome. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > > > Dorrinal wrote: > > James: > > A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it. > > > I'm confused, then. > > In the initial post, you say that we shouldn't have more bounce because it would: > > "Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type." > > But you seem to be happy for new cards that aren't bounce, and which involve interesting deck design/construction/play choices - even if those cards would make the metagame equally as hostile for stealth-bleed. > > I think the point I'm getting at is that your justification about hostility for stealth-bleed decks doesn't lead to, or support, a conclusion of "No more bounce." It supports the conclusion "No more useful bleed defences, at all." So I'm not sure what it is you actually want. > Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type. On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards.

> Dorrinal wrote: > > > jamesatzephyr wrote: > > > > > Dorrinal wrote: > > > James: > > > A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it. > > > > > > > > I'm confused, then. > > > > In the initial post, you say that we shouldn't have more bounce because it would: > > > > "Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type." > > > > But you seem to be happy for new cards that aren't bounce, and which involve interesting deck design/construction/play choices - even if those cards would make the metagame equally as hostile for stealth-bleed. > > > > I think the point I'm getting at is that your justification about hostility for stealth-bleed decks doesn't lead to, or support, a conclusion of "No more bounce." It supports the conclusion "No more useful bleed defences, at all." So I'm not sure what it is you actually want. > > > Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type. > > On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards. > Bullshit, in competetive enviroment with high amount of bounce s&b is still good archetype to play. Especially with those anti-bounce cards of late (hide the mind, touch of clarity) I would welcome stronger anti-bounce or bounce with restrictions (like, you have to block the bleed and fail it or bounce that reduce the bleed so it's not useful for redirecting bleed for less than 3, or bounce card that "share" the bleed - so TWO meths can block the action and if they fail the amount of pool loss is shared between them in some way). There are many choices for card design, even for such trivial thing like bounce. Also, wtf stealth and bleed should be encouraged ? If anything, bruise and bleed should be encouraged and s&b should be discouraged. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

> Dorrinal wrote: > Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type. > > On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards. > How is that different to any of the current qualifiers, like the many we have seen around Sydney, with a large number of Dominate Decks that are all flicking to each other around the place and it just becomes a game of "Who doesn't have the flick in hand?". We've all seen the "Everyone has Flick" game. It's called a Qualifier tournament. So increasing the ability for other decks to pack some kind of flick just means that more decks get the chance to join in the "Flick Roulette". I don't mind the idea of anti-bounce technology, but the disciplines it gets chosen for must be VERY carefully chosen because we do NOT need clans that already have access to Block Fails to get Flick Fails. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > > > Dorrinal wrote: > > Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type. > > > > On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards. > > > How is that different to any of the current qualifiers, like the many we have seen around Sydney, with a large number of Dominate Decks that are all flicking to each other around the place and it just becomes a game of "Who doesn't have the flick in hand?". We've all seen the "Everyone has Flick" game. It's called a Qualifier tournament. So increasing the ability for other decks to pack some kind of flick just means that more decks get the chance to join in the "Flick Roulette". > > I don't mind the idea of anti-bounce technology, but the disciplines it gets chosen for must be VERY carefully chosen because we do NOT need clans that already have access to Block Fails to get Flick Fails. > Um, malkavians ? they have all flick fails and 1 block fails. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

Pre-emptive Psychic Paralysis Action Modifier Cost 1 Blood Play when a Bleed action is announced Minions cannot play reaction cards that require Auspex that would change the target of this bleed. As above, but reactions that require any discipline. As above, but younger vampires get -1 Intercept for the duration of this action. ...what? But seriously, I don't think any other disciplines than Auspex or Dominate need Bounce cards - nor do Bounce need counters as much. Two Wrongs is pretty okay as it is. "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

> Kraus wrote: > Pre-emptive Psychic Paralysis > Action Modifier > Cost 1 Blood > Play when a Bleed action is announced > Minions cannot play reaction cards that require Auspex that would change the target of this bleed. > As above, but reactions that require any discipline. > As above, but younger vampires get -1 Intercept for the duration of this action. > > ...what? > > But seriously, I don't think any other disciplines than Auspex or Dominate need Bounce cards - nor do Bounce need counters as much. Two Wrongs is pretty okay as it is. > That kind of card requires very much thinking and testing to see how it changes game. Anyway -1 intercept is not cool. We need more defensive options against bleed first until we think of nerfing bounce. I don't even want to nerf bounce with those kind of cards. If people would start pack anti bounce, other people would stop using bounce or vice versa. Somebody would have dead cards in deck anyway and person who guess the metagame will win. I don't want to change metagame so much with fan expansion. Things should go stable at first, maybe bigger changes later when we see how things start rolling with fan expansions. So I would like to see just "safe cards" which doesn't warp metagame too much at first. EDIT Lost in Translation almost fixed the limited bounce issue but younger vampire thing killed the card. That should had been removed and replaced with only usable by vampire above 4 (or 6) to stop weenie abuse or higher blood cost if bleeder higher capacity.

> That kind of card requires very much thinking and testing to see how it changes game. > Probably I should've made it more explicit that this one was a Joke. With a capital J. I'd really hate to have that kind of a card printed. Ever. Then again, I hated the printing and legalisation of Lilith's Blessing and that one event that destroys weenies. I mean, just think what !Ventrue could do with Dom and For if that card was printed. "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

> Kraus wrote: > > > That kind of card requires very much thinking and testing to see how it changes game. > > > Probably I should've made it more explicit that this one was a Joke. With a capital J. > > I'd really hate to have that kind of a card printed. Ever. Then again, I hated the printing and legalisation of Lilith's Blessing and that one event that destroys weenies. > Oh, I didn't feel it was joke . There has been some anti bounce discussion and I can understand it. Those cards would just changes things too much and it is hard to predict to what way.

> Dorrinal wrote: > Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. > To the same extent, not necessarily, no. But it's not the case that all future bleed defence cards have to be passive, like bleed reduction. You could include offensive mechanics in them. e.g. Phantasmal Scapegoat. Reaction. Chimerstry. [Some cost or restriction or one per action or something - I don't care what exactly.] [chi] Something bland. [CHI] Reduce a bleed against you by 2. Additionally, if this action is successful (even if the bleed amount is zero), you may burn up to 2 blood from a vampire controlled by your prey or up to 2 life from an ally controlled by your prey at the end of the action. Best card ever? No, of course not. But you can make cards offensive without making them bleed bounce. > Dorrinal wrote: > In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type. > Even in highly competitive tournaments, where anti-stealth-bleed tech is rife, stealth-bleed still seems to be viable.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > Best card ever? No, of course not. But you can make cards offensive without making them bleed bounce. > Yes, I totally agree. There are lots and lots and lots of effects to explore for this game - we have only scratched the surface! "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Let me put it this way: if bounce is rock to bleed's scissors, the metagame would be worse off if every viable deck can play rock. And a quick glance at the TWDA for the past year shows a metagame that is quite balanced.

> Dorrinal wrote: > Let me put it this way: if bounce is rock to bleed's scissors, the metagame would be worse off if every viable deck can play rock. And a quick glance at the TWDA for the past year shows a metagame that is quite balanced. > Yes, quite. But wouldn´t it be nice with more tier 1 decks, or at least more tier 1.5? "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."