Grafted weapon

The idea is inspired by a RPG power that require both Vissicitude and Protean. The card I propose require only Vissicitude because VtES vampire with both discipline are pretty scarce. Name: Grafted weapon Cardtype: Action / Combat Discipline: Vissicitude While this card is on a weapon, the weapon can't be destroyed, stolen, or moved, and striking with this weapon is a hand strike. [vis] +1 stealth equipping action. Equip a non-unique melee weapon and put this card on the weapon. This acting vampire can pay the pool cost with its blood. [VIS] as above, but playable in combat before range is determined. While it does not solve every problems with melee weapon, it does solve three of them : Canine horde, Immortal Grapple, hefty pool cost.

> Ohlmann wrote: > Name: Grafted weapon > Cardtype: Action / Combat > Discipline: Vissicitude > [vis][ACTION] +1 stealth equipping action. Equip with a non-unique melee weapon from your hand and put this card on that weapon. The acting vampire may pay any part of the pool cost of that weapon with his or her blood. This weapon can't be destroyed, stolen, or moved, and striking with this weapon is made as a hand strike. > [VIS][COMBAT] As above, but only usable before range is determined. > Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Why bother with weapons when you have access to and combat? I am afraid the competition is too hard as a card. There could be one way to abuse it with Dagger: if it is ruled that a grafted dagger can be thrown and that it still counts as a hand strike, then one could use Chiroptean for aggravated damage at both close and long range. Apart from that, I am afraid the good old Chiroptean / Breath of the Dragon / Rötschreck combination still comes ahead.

Why not ? Also, this allow Tzimisce to have (..relatively) powerful permanent combat card that work well with Chiroptean Marauder.

I would say permanent +2 strenght (Bank-nakh) for 2 blood which is unblockable to equip and doesn't require an action (in case of VIS) is for sure worth considering in Tzimisce deck.

> Ohlmann wrote: > Why not ? > Because it adds moving parts, costs blood and gives something you don't need. The Tzimisce do not need more damage output in combat: they can already block the rescue attempts. What they lack is combat defense. > > Also, this allow Tzimisce to have (..relatively) powerful permanent combat card that work well with Chiroptean Marauder. > It does not combine with Rötschreck, and Rötschreck is both the combat defense and the counter to the opponent's defense.

> Non-existant user wrote: > Because it adds moving parts, costs blood and gives something you don't need. The Tzimisce do not need more damage output in combat: they can already block the rescue attempts. What they lack is combat defense. > This card may not be useful on your stereotypical already existing tzimisce deck, and that's okay. But it open new possibility for tzimisce, enabling to remove a lot more blood per combat and / or to have a permanent damage source. A tzimisce with a grafted weapon does not need much combat support usually, being it for three being pretty scary already, especially if you get some press. I does not target this card to existing deck, I created the concept because it's cool, can allow alternative combat strategy, and make existing card (melee weapon) more useful.

> Non-existant user wrote: > There could be one way to abuse it with Dagger: if it is ruled that a grafted dagger can be thrown and that it still counts as a hand strike, then one could use Chiroptean for aggravated damage at both close and long range. > Not sure. According to new rule clarifications, aggravated damage that is threated as normal still remains aggravated, so Soak may not be played. Here may be similar situation: you are allowed to strike with this weapon as if it were a hand strike, but it doesn't become one.

> Non-existant user wrote: > There could be one way to abuse it with Dagger: if it is ruled that a grafted dagger can be thrown and that it still counts as a hand strike, then one could use Chiroptean for aggravated damage at both close and long range. > I have not seen that and it is a valid concern. The card need, in addition to the fix highlighted by Ankha, to : * restrict the "weapon as hand strike" to close range strike It may also need to protect against destruction by other player and not by everyone. I can see abuse with Baal bloody talon, but it is far too weak to be a concern.

I made a few edits. Keeping it safe from theft as well as Canine Hordes, Fast Hands, Broken Armament, "steal equipment abilities", etc. It does allow you to do something like Baal's Bloody Talons or Heidelberg, it just hurts... Grafted Weapon While this card is on a melee weapon the melee weapon cannot be destroyed or stolen by cards or effects from other minions. If this weapon is moved or destroyed this vampire takes 2 unpreventable damage. This weapon may be used at any time when a hand-strike can be used. +1 stealth equip action. Equip a non-unique melee weapon from your hand and put this card on the weapon. This acting vampire can pay the pool cost, incresed by one, with its blood. As above, but only playable before range is determined in a combat. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

In a general sens, making vampire pay 1 blood more than the pool cost is a good idea, and there is already some card implementing this idea. For melee weapons, it reinforce the fact that they are way too costly. Seriously, even without the problem of equipment hate, all melee weapon could use a 1 pool reduction. I'm not even sure it would be enough.

> jAvel wrote: > Not sure. According to new rule clarifications, aggravated damage that is threated as normal still remains aggravated, so Soak may not be played. > That's not new. [LSJ 20040517] > > LSJ wrote: > > 4) Can a vampire who has played Skin of Night and taken aggravated > > damage play Soak to prevent it? > > No. Soak cannot prevent aggravated damage, regardless of how the > minion will end up treating that unprevented damage. > The point being made in [RTR 2011-12-02] is that this existing ruling applies to the damage handled by the cards that have now been errata-ed. Previously, a few cards could actually change the damage to normal (so Soak would be playable, Rotschreck wouldn't) - but that damage now isn't being actually changed, so follows the existing ruling.

> jamesatzephyr wrote: > The point being made in [RTR 2011-12-02] is that this existing ruling applies to the damage handled by the cards that have now been errata-ed. Previously, a few cards could actually change the damage to normal (so Soak would be playable, Rotschreck wouldn't) - but that damage now isn't being actually changed, so follows the existing ruling. > It's even worse, players browing the newsgroup would find these two: 2010 - groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/3bb78bde5ca24e3b (search for "Target Vitals"). Merrill only changes the nature when the damage is successfully inflicted, which means Ivory Bow + Target Vitals inflicts 1 normal + 2 agg. 2006 - games.groups.yahoo.com/group/vtes-rules/messages/172?threaded=1&m=e&tidx=1 damage is changed *before* rotschreck (contradiction with previous statement). "changed" damage is preventable with Soak / Resilience Consistency was required.

I feel kinda insulted... Ok, ok. Not NEW clarifications, but OLD clarifications. I've just wondered, if the text of card "This weapon can't be destroyed, stolen, or moved, and striking with this weapon is made as a hand strike." would allow to make strikes under grapple, but no "aggravated hands" effect are applied.

> jAvel wrote: > I've just wondered, if the text of card "This weapon can't be destroyed, stolen, or moved, and striking with this weapon is made as a hand strike." would allow to make strikes under grapple, but no "aggravated hands" effect are applied. > The closest similar effect is probably Bundi. (This strike is both a hand strike and a melee weapon strike). And with Bundi, it operates under Immortal Grapple. Bundi also benefits from claw effects - card text varies but they make hand damage aggravated (and hand strikes deal hand damage), or they just make hand strikes aggravated. So the quick answer is that probably IG-avoidance and Claws would work with "striking with this weapon is made as a hand strike" effects.

That's why I specifically wanted to say that you could use the weapon when you would normally only be allowed to use a hand strike (not *as* a hand strike). That way it works under Grapple and can't be used with Claws/Chiropteran but could be used with Target: X. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > That way it works under Grapple and can't be used with Claws/Chiropteran but could be used with Target: X. > Well, I have written the card specifically with the thought of being able to use Chiroptean throught it. Both for lore reason and because it's hardly overpowered. It may even be needed for the card to be playable. Again, Preternatural Strength is a good reference. Nobody think it's overpowered, it's not widely played with potence combat, and almost nobody try to match it with aggrav weapon, claw, or even burning wrath.