On how I hate Rego Motus

Hi gentlement. Delende Rego motus There is a card that represents the epitome of Lazy Deckbuilding. It's called Rego motus. ( www.lotusnoir.info/vampire/cartes/rego-motus/ for img+card text) Basically the card says " F*** you, I prevent 4 damage while i Suck 2 blood out of you or inflict 3 unpreventable" How this card can be bad ? Well, there was a time where you had to use your brain a little and build carefully tinkered decks. You played some hand-picked thaumaturgists with fortitude, or celerity, or any other discipline that could provide some advantage in combat, because most of the times Thauma is strong except against other fighters who can smack you with 4 or 5 damage and dunk you to torpor, or just disarm you after you stole some blood. Not anymore ! So now, why bother ? I take the big fat Tremere intercept deck that already works, I put some rego motus and voilà, the recipe for lazy deckbuilding is complete. What the game needs now is a card that trumps combat for obfuscate, so when a player wastes all his intercept in a desperate attempt to block your stealthy bleeds, you end combat anyway. That would be cool... Oh wait ? Delende Rego Motus, good bye gentlemen. Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

Two words: Environmental damage Also "inflict 3 unpreventable" should be "inflict 3 unpreventable with fortitude", n'est–ce pas? Finnish Politics!

Rego Motus is only good (well, more like decent) against non-committed combat like Stick + Vitals or really bad combat like Taste of Death, aggra-poke or Thrown Junk. Any real combat module will answer it card for card or better.

It is also fairly weak against additional strike combat. Combat brujah/guns toreador will cripple it hard. Consider .44 Magnum+blur vs Theft+Rego Motus: 6 damage dealt and 3 lost vs 2 damage dealt and 5 lost (assuming the tremere can gain the blood from theft).

Tbh its not even really that good against dedicated flung junk decks that generally uses quite liberal amounts of stackable Increased Strengths. About only things it IS good against is agg poke (either claws or one of the numerous ways to do 1-2 ranged agg), and discplineless combat (sticks and vitals etc). Although tbh, Chaitan's math is a bit off. It should be 2 damage dealth and 3 lost for the tremere if he wasn't full to start with (preventing the first 2 with rego motus, blood stolen with theft effectively negating the second, and then losing the 2 from the last strike + the cost of rego motus).

> Klaital wrote: > Tbh its not even really that good against dedicated flung junk decks that generally uses quite liberal amounts of stackable Increased Strengths. About only things it IS good against is agg poke (either claws or one of the numerous ways to do 1-2 ranged agg), and discplineless combat (sticks and vitals etc). > > Although tbh, Chaitan's math is a bit off. It should be 2 damage dealth and 3 lost for the tremere if he wasn't full to start with (preventing the first 2 with rego motus, blood stolen with theft effectively negating the second, and then losing the 2 from the last strike + the cost of rego motus). > True. That's what I get for "only" double checking the math.

Celerity + Potence laugh at it. Celerity + weapons laugh at it. Celerity + Aggpoke smirks at it. Animalism shrugs at it whilst calling birds. Hell, determined Potence grits its teeth and punch you for 6. Sure, prevent 4, you still take 2 damage and I'll rip your arm of. It's a good card to use when you expect to meet non-combat-centric combat. It helps against combat-centric decks, but not by very much. I have no problem with it. Now, if it was the version of Rolling with the Punches, I would have issues with it, but that's not the case.

> Lönkka wrote: > Two words: > Environmental damage > > Also "inflict 3 unpreventable" should be "inflict 3 unpreventable with fortitude", n'est–ce pas? > Yup. But most people prevent with fortitude you know... The point was : they can negate weapon strikes too. While sucking your blood. Environmental damage is what ? 90% of the time Carrion crows and Weather control. If you steal 2 blood and prevent your opponent's strike, you should be okay... I'm amazed so many people replied to my stupid rant by the way > Shadowhunter wrote: > Celerity + Potence laugh at it. > Depends on the deck, really. > Celerity + weapons laugh at it. > Not at all. See "Blood fury" "Soul Burn". > > Celerity + Aggpoke smirks at it. > A type of deck that does'nt work (discipline combo allows for nothing really good) and rarely sees play. But ok. > Animalism shrugs at it whilst calling birds. > But the trem can steal blood (better yet, steal 2 blood from the raven spy) and still be pretty safe. It's a 1 blood tradeoff. That's not what i would call shrugging :/ > Hell, determined Potence grits its teeth and punch you for 6. Sure, prevent 4, you still take 2 damage and I'll rip your arm of. > Determined potence hitting for 6 ? If you opponent's deck can hit for 6, you are wise and stay at long range... Or you hitback for 3 not preventable by fortitude and torp the bugger. I can't imagine a scenario where the Tremere is not safe here ? :/ > It's a good card to use when you expect to meet non-combat-centric combat. > It helps against combat-centric decks, but not by very much. I have no problem with it. Now, if it was the version of Rolling with the Punches, I would have issues with it, but that's not the case. > the problem lies as much in "it's a rather strong card" than in "i don't have to be creative". Which is the main point of this silly rant Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Shadowhunter wrote: > Hell, determined Potence grits its teeth and punch you for 6. Sure, prevent 4, you still take 2 damage and I'll rip your arm of. > Or presses from Immortal Grapples. It's also worth noting that some forms of dedicated POT-combat are actually viable, while anything with more than a splash of THA-combat will suck. Even if Rego Motus does answer POT-combat card for card you can be sure that a good POT-deck will have more of those Immortal Grapples than a good THA-deck has Rego Motuses.

> Suoli wrote: > It's also worth noting that some forms of dedicated POT-combat are actually viable, while anything with more than a splash of THA-combat will suck. > Not so sure... Dedicated THA combat is really really strong. Plus THA comes with nice disciplines in the same package (like " i see you" and " you no bleed me"). But everyone would have his own opinion here Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

Rego Motus doesn't make a huge difference in and of itself. The fact that it costs a blood and is only good against one strike each round make it only a bit better than glancing blow, and not all the time. How many people do you hear complaining about glancing blow being broken? Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

" make it only a bit better than glancing blow " yeah, sure ! Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > Not so sure... Dedicated THA combat is really really strong. Plus THA comes with nice disciplines in the same package (like " i see you" and " you no bleed me"). But everyone would have his own opinion here > Card for card, THA-combat loses hard to anything that isn't Stickmen, disciplineless combat or hands for 1. It's a decent support plan and an absolutely horrible basis for a dedicated combat deck.

> Suoli wrote: > > > Reyda wrote: > > Not so sure... Dedicated THA combat is really really strong. Plus THA comes with nice disciplines in the same package (like " i see you" and " you no bleed me"). But everyone would have his own opinion here > > > Card for card, THA-combat loses hard to anything that isn't Stickmen, disciplineless combat or hands for 1. It's a decent support plan and an absolutely horrible basis for a dedicated combat deck. > You count Disciplineless combat and hands for 1 as combat ? I thought I was trolling a bit, seems i found my master here. When you say "horrible basis for a combat deck", it's your own experience right ? Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

Good thing about Rego Motus is that whole deck can't be very good if it includes many copies of the card because deck can get too unfocused and jammed. Usually it is not wise to include many cards which only works as defense against specific combat. You have to have some knowledge of decks you will face. That why it is more metagame question. Rego Motus (+theft) can be good when facing slowish toolboxy not very focused combat decks. Also Tremere shines in that metagame. Just simple Magic -> Heart of Nizchetus is very strong. There many other reasons too what makes tremere work so good in that metagame.

> Reyda wrote: > You count Disciplineless combat and hands for 1 as combat ? > I thought I was trolling a bit, seems i found my master here > I count combat: deck has any plan (even little) trying to effect the opposing minion in combat step.

> Reyda wrote: > the problem lies as much in "it's a rather strong card" than in "i don't have to be creative". > Rego Motus is so highly conditional, in terms of when it's worth playing in a deck, that I'm not sure how much less of an auto-include card it could be while still remaining playable at all. 1) Against no combat cards, it's playable, but has zero effect on the game state. 2) Against the most common form of combat, S:CE, you can't even cycle RM for no effect. If you think you're going to see a lot of S:CE, you have even less reason to include RM than if you think you're going to see zero combat cards. 3) Against Crow-Bats, RM can be cycled, but for no effect. 4) Against CELguns, RM can be played for a small effect (net prevent one damage), but that's it. Cel-guns are still likely to destroy THA combat, with or without RM, unelss your THA deck is packed with Soul Burns...but that's got nothing to do with RM. 5) Against big-hit POT and Sticks and/or Vitals, RM is worth playing. If that doesn't look like a highly conditional list to you, all I can think is that your metagame is very stagnant. > Reyda wrote: > Plus THA comes with nice disciplines in the same package (like " i see you" and " you no bleed me"). > But that's exactly why RM requires a lot of consideration before being put into a deck: Since THA almost always comes bundled with the two best disciplines in the game, RM's conditionality means that you often won't want to include RM because there are far better Auspex and Dominate (and Thaumaturgy) cards you'd much rather have in your deck. Arguments that RM beats environmental damage or weapon damage because of Theft and Soul Burn are meaningless; RM isn't beating those strategies, the other THA cards are. Those cards would beat environmental damage and weapon damage without RM (as history shows us), so RM has no impact on the game in those cases. Finally, in terms of discipline drift, Thaumaturgy has been a toolbox discipline since Jyahd. With the exceptions of its trick cards and Theft, it's always been a discipline that duplicates a wide range of effects that other disciplines do better. Giving it a highly conditional damage prevention card fits in line with the rest of the discipline without needing to push the envelope of What Thaumaturgy Is About in any way. EDIT: Forgot to add that since some THA-centric decks can do an excellent job of avoiding combat entirely via liberal use of Mirror Walk and Obedience, RM is even less of a card that you're automatically going to throw into every deck with significant amounts of THA.

> Reyda wrote: > You count Disciplineless combat and hands for 1 as combat ? > I thought I was trolling a bit, seems i found my master here. > Sticks, Zip Guns, Concealed Weapons and/or Target: Vitals is a highly viable module for certain weenie or Imbued decks. "Hands for 1" combat is a euphemism for no combat. See also: "hope they don't have blasters" combat module. > When you say "horrible basis for a combat deck", it's your own experience right ? > Yes.

> Surreal wrote: > I count combat: deck has any plan (even little) trying to effect the opposing minion in combat step. > I bleed you with Hadrian Garrick. He's got +1 strength, he's a fighter you know. And Watenda over here can cancel a combat card so watch out. Playing badasses since 1994... > Kushiel wrote: > Arguments that RM beats environmental damage or weapon damage because of Theft and Soul Burn are meaningless; RM isn't beating those strategies, the other THA cards are. > You don't say ? I thought we were talking about Rego motus in a THA combat strategy, but maybe i'm from another planet ? Anywa, it's Ok : as stated before, RM is less interesting than glancing blow. Thanks for the info man, I'm sure my playstyle will improve now Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

In a low combat meta THA combat can be really good. Card for card, few strikes beat Theft of Vitae in effectiveness. RM, although limited add a function that THA didn't have before - prevent. Apportation with the option to manouver OR press is also very good, add 1-2 Flame strike to the deck and you can seriously make people regret ending up in combat with a tremere. Burst of Sunlight+rotshreck has made more than one methuselah cry foul. With that said. THA truly suck in a real combat. Once you pass 1-2 played cards per round the effectiveness of THA drop considerably for reasons already explained by other people. You simply can't match the raw damage potential of potence, celerity, animalism and whatever little trick many other disciplines can come up with. The number of times I (when playing tremere) ended up in torpor can't be counted and justified only with a "HAH! Atleast I stole two blood from you!" - only to see the opponent play a Taste of Vitae one second later. RM isn't a bad card but any common fortitude card would be better in a tremere deck. Manouver+1prevent, press+1 prevent, soak, resiliance, prevent all strikes. The only truly unique part about RM is that it is available in a discipline that historically has had no prevent at all.

> Reyda wrote: > You don't say ? I thought we were talking about Rego motus in a THA combat strategy, but maybe i'm from another planet ? > Let me try putting it another way. Theft of Vitae helped to "protect against" environmental damage (by virtue of bloodgain being very similar to damage prevention in the case of non-aggravated damage) before Rego Motus was printed. That didn't change with the printing of Rego Motus. The "haha your weapons failed" class of THA strikes protected their user from weapon damage before Rego Motus was printed. That didn't change with the printing of Rego Motus. Do you understand now? > Reyda wrote: > Anywa, it's Ok : as stated before, RM is less interesting than glancing blow. > Kushiel =/= brandonsantacruz. Hell, our names on this site aren't even the same color.

Only thing tha combat is really good at is staying alive. Thats major theme of it with all the steal blood, weapons don't work, etc stuff they had before, rego motus just adds a bit to that, its main function is to make you not automatically lose to (non-weapon) aggravated damage.

go win a couple of tournaments in a row with Rego Motus decks, and then I'll consider this thread something other than a sack of shit

> Chaitan wrote: > With that said. THA truly suck in a real combat. > Sorry gentleman, but allow me to disagree here. THA had a big flaw for real combat, and it was the total lack of prevention. Rego motus is here : problem solved. > Kushiel wrote: > > > Reyda wrote: > > You don't say ? I thought we were talking about Rego motus in a THA combat strategy, but maybe i'm from another planet ? > > > Let me try putting it another way. > > Theft of Vitae helped to "protect against" environmental damage (by virtue of bloodgain being very similar to damage prevention in the case of non-aggravated damage) before Rego Motus was printed. That didn't change with the printing of Rego Motus. > > The "haha your weapons failed" class of THA strikes protected their user from weapon damage before Rego Motus was printed. That didn't change with the printing of Rego Motus. > You don't say ? But I'm glad you came to understand thate we are talking about the whole THA combat here. Saying the same thing twice makes it more interesting maybe ? And yes, I understand that Kushiel =/= brandonsantacruz. Hell, your names on this site aren't even the same color, yes. It's just that the level of some arguments just match each other. > Haze wrote: > go win a couple of tournaments in a row with Rego Motus decks, and then I'll consider this thread something other than a sack of shit > Same lame argument. "Oh, if you don't win a tournament with it, it's not good". Yeah, sure ! Usually it's a DECK that wins a tournament, not a CARD. But if you resort to this kind of arguments, you have nothing much to say. Now what about the LAZY deckbuilding stuff that started it all ? Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > > > Chaitan wrote: > > With that said. THA truly suck in a real combat. > > > Sorry gentleman, but allow me to disagree here. THA had a big flaw for real combat, and it was the total lack of prevention. > Rego motus is here : problem solved. > <START OF A MOCKUP BATTLE. YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PLAY ANY NUMBER OF COMBAT CARDS USING THAUMATARGY, EVEN ANARCH CARDS> Beast with 7 blood enters combat with your <insert generic tremere with superior THA> Beast play inferior Drawing out the Beast Beast play superior Torn Signpost Beast play superior Increased Strength Beast play inferior Carrion Crows <your move?> Beast play superior Immortal Grapple Beast play superior Undead Strength for 8+1 damage <your strike?> <This is where you play Rigo Motus if you so choose> Beast play Taste of Vitae, Disarm and Decapitate <Your move?> <COMBAT ENDS> <YOU HAVE WON THIS MOCKUP BATTLE IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A MINION IN ASH HEAP>

Sorry for your dream scenario, but it doesn't work like this actually. Beast rushes ? Ok, i just put a chump blocker in his path and if the beast player wants to wast 6+ cards to burn Almiro suarez, so be it, fine with me. If not, then he will be back during my master phase thanks to the Chantry. I hope you don't get mad while reading this. Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

The argument wasn't about how good the decks are or if you can sacrifice something (lose the battle but win the war). It was about effectiveness of THA in a real fight. Noferatu Hates You may not be the best of decks out there but it is a real decktype you see every once inawhile and its ability to clean up the table forces people to remember that the table meta can't be all about no-combat.

> Chaitan wrote: > The argument wasn't about how good the decks are or if you can sacrifice something (lose the battle but win the war). It was about effectiveness of THA in a real fight. > Sorry to put it like this, but your last post was not an argument about the effectiveness of THA. It was just a nerd fantasy where you could play 7+ different cards one after another without trouble, with a full beast entering combat with a tremere. Which does not really happen usually. Don't be silly, you know that even Uriah Winter, a 1 cap Caitiff (which happens to be my favorite vamp) can disarm/amaranth Arika or even Enkidu with 3 cards. But do you see it happen often ? non non... Is the Uriah Bomb a winning archetype ? Nope, neither. Let's talk about what's really happening in a game, and not talk silly. Minions striking for 8 damage on a 5 cap tremere under a grapple, for exemple ? Not usually happening. They will hit you for just what they need to torp you, saving cards for the next combat, because they know how to play their game. Now, they must stay alert because a Rego motus can be in the way. That's what i'm talking about : real applications for a "new" card. > Chaitan wrote: > Noferatu Hates You may not be the best of decks out there but it is a real decktype you see every once inawhile and its ability to clean up the table forces people to remember that the table meta can't be all about no-combat. > I totally agree with you here. But this archetype is usually badly annoyed by chump blockers getting in the way of the real targets. The same way that Tremere are usually badly annoyed against combat. But now, Tadaaa ! Rego Motus ! Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > THA had a big flaw for real combat, and it was the total lack of prevention. > Rego motus is here : problem solved. > Well, reality have shown that Rego Motus is not that good of a solution to Thaumaturgy problem. One of the reason for this is that it's very narrow, in a discipline full of narrow use card. Draw your soul burn against a potence rush ? Draw your Rego Motus against Animalism ? Draw theft of vitae against aggro poke ? Not your lucky day, punk. The fortitude version tend to be a lot less focused. You have Heart and some other card to make up for that. Then again, you can also use them with other disciplines than thaumaturgy, even with tremere or magic of the smith. You say that Rego Motus is lazy card design. A card of a very narrow focus, that need a lot of thought to either have cycle solution or fetching solution is clearly more lazy than Deflection.

> Let's talk about what's really happening in a game, and not talk silly. > In a real game THA combat packet consist of 70-90% Theft of Vitae. The rest is a mix of Apportation, Walk of Flame and Rego Motus. In a real game RM will probably save you from going to torpor even against ANI or CEL or POT combat that round. In a real game ANI, CEL, POT simply press to the next round and in a real game you are most likely out of RM by now. In a real game you will hate having RM on your hand when stealth/vote or stealth/bleed decks fiercly target your pool. Seriously, if you hate RM you probably have one person in your playgroup who has adapted to your meta and inserted just the right amount of RM to specifically cancel that type of combat you often use. Solution is not to cry foul against a card that is OK at best. It is to change the meta.

> Reyda wrote: > You don't say ? But I'm glad you came to understand thate we are talking about the whole THA combat here. Saying the same thing twice makes it more interesting maybe ? > I really can't tell if you're still unable to understand why RM doesn't change the functionality of other cards which don't interact with it. So... No response to any the of the points I made about how RM is conditional and therefore not an auto-include card, and therefore not a card that encourages laziness in deck building? That's what you're exhorting people to respond to. I did, and you're ignoring that response.

> Chaitan wrote: > > > Let's talk about what's really happening in a game, and not talk silly. > > > In a real game THA combat packet consist of 70-90% Theft of Vitae. The rest is a mix of Apportation, Walk of Flame and Rego Motus. > I'm happy you are trying to say something else that "but Beast with 9 cards can punch you so hard !". Because everybody know that. Real game THA consists of 70-90% of what you said. Except that Real THA deck affords more copies of Blood fury (I usually play 5 or 6 myself) mainly because it trumps most of those annoying Alastor decks with assault rifles, and other annoying stuff like Ivory bows. > In a real game RM will probably save you from going to torpor even against ANI or CEL or POT combat that round. > I'm glad to hear that too. That's precisely what I was trying to say. > In a real game ANI, CEL, POT simply press to the next round and in a real game you are most likely out of RM by now. > Why should I be ? > In a real game you will hate having RM on your hand when stealth/vote or stealth/bleed decks fiercly target your pool. > THA comes in a nice package with 2 bounce disciplines, remember ? I guess it's the Beast you talked about who would likely become the Bleed sink of the table. Because the nosferatu hate me, but everybody hates a 8 strength puncher. > Chaitan wrote: > Seriously, if you hate RM you probably have one person in your playgroup who has adapted to your meta and inserted just the right amount of RM to specifically cancel that type of combat you often use. > > Solution is not to cry foul against a card that is OK at best. It is to change the meta. > Mmm the card is not OK. The card is Good. And it does not value intelligent deckbuilding. It's juste an auto include whereas before you had to try mixing crypt and working your brain. That was the whole point of this silly rant Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Ohlmann wrote: > You say that Rego Motus is lazy card design. A card of a very narrow focus, that need a lot of thought to either have cycle solution or fetching solution is clearly more lazy than Deflection. > Yes, I did write that Rego Motus is lazy card design, and so far nothing you wrote changed my mind on this, I'm sorry to say. It's hard to find a real argument in the middle of BEAST PUNCHING FOR 8 OWNZ YOU or YOU GETTING HANDJAM. and as for > > reality have shown that Rego Motus is not that good of a solution to Thaumaturgy problem. > I'm sorry, but so far I always saw Tremere getting out of fights like a boss thanks to Rego Motus. Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn, because celerity is the main source of additionals and a lot of fighters don't use celerity at all. Reality has shown me that Rego Motus is a perfectly good card, preventing up to 4 damage, even ranged aggravated from the Unnamed or a !salubri playing badass cards. > Kushiel wrote: > No response to any the of the points I made about how RM is conditional and therefore not an auto-include card, and therefore not a card that encourages laziness in deck building? That's what you're exhorting people to respond to. I did, and you're ignoring that response. > What point ? That it's usable once per round ? So what ? As said before : Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn. Yes, it costs a blood, but it can always be cycled against a non fighter by stealing blood at close range and preventing the incoming hands for one. Especially when you can choose who you want to intercept. It's not an argument at all. So far we say a lot of things in common, especially that Potence is in a lot of cases trumped by Rego Motus. Because prevention out of nowher is an excellent addition to the THA Arsenal. Why not include it automatically in every THA combat deck ? There is virtually no reason. You told about how THA can avoid combat with Mirror Walk : that is not the point. You don't avoid a fight when you play THA combat, you want to suck vamps dry -except maybe if you know that your bleed will be deflected. And for other arguments I read there and there "but if there is no combat, the card sits in your hand"... Come on. If there is no bleed, the deflection is of no use, and if there is no vote, I am annoyed by this delaying tactics... Are you really serious when you say it's a point I am ignoring ? The card is good, the card is cheap, and the card is better at inferior than a lot of fortitude cards I played during 15 years of V:TES... As for Lazy deckbuilding, I would feel the same way if a fortitude card was printed that would say "Strike : strength +2 damage, with an optional press". I would call it lazy exactly like I call Rego Motus Lazy. Again, it's just a silly little rant. But if you can prove me wrong, i would have learned something interesting and would thank you ! Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > Yes, I did write that Rego Motus is lazy card design, and so far nothing you wrote changed my mind on this, I'm sorry to say. > Problem being that the argument can be reversed : you have exactly the same argument (I.E. Rego Motus is a magical trump card that make everything go away in combat) than the one for saying that, for example, deflection is worse (I.E. Deflection is a magical trump card that make everything go away in bleed) So, you may not be convinced that Deflection is worst. I am not convinced that Rego motus is a trouble at all, and all your smugness does not constitute something that convince me. Also, what make it worse than the two fortitude card that do more at inferior level than Rego Motus at superior ? I was already used to take thoses card into account, and near everything that work on those work on Rego motus.

> Reyda wrote: > What point ? That it's usable once per round ? So what ? As said before : Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn. Yes, it costs a blood, but it can always be cycled against a non fighter by stealing blood at close range and preventing the incoming hands for one. > If you think that cards that can be cycled for zero effect are so good that they warrant automatic inclusion in every deck that can play them, we have very different deckbuilding philosophies. > Reyda wrote: > Especially when you can choose who you want to intercept. > A lot of your arguments hinge on you always having the cards you want when you want them. In this instance, if you build a deck that's always going to be able to intercept anyone you want to, you're not also going to have room for a pile of THA combat and still be able to oust anyone reliably. That's what makes RM conditional, and therefore not an auto-include: there are often going to be better cards to put into your deck. That's my point: cards that warrent automatic inclusion in every deck that can use them have to be so unconditionally amazing that they're nearly always going to be better than other cards, in every single game you play. The list I posted upthread indicates that this isn't the case for RM; quite a lot of the time, it's going to do absolutely nothing all game except take up space in your hand until you get a chance to cycle it. From looking at TWDA reports, it appears that at the moment the most common offensive combat is Crow/Bats, and the second-most common is Cel/guns (due to the rise in popularity of the Anson/Volker decks). And most of the rest of the time, you're going to see S:CE or no combat at all. So in those most-common cases, RM isn't worth playing, because there are better cards to use. EDIT: Though I should add that RM is good against War Ghoul and Shambling Hordes decks that don't rely on Trap to kill vampires. If you really want to convince people that RM is so good that auto-including it is laziness on the part of the card design rather than laziness on the part of your deckbuilding, you have to prove that it's not as conditional as I claiming it is. So far, you haven't done that. > Reyda wrote: > So far we say a lot of things in common. Except that Prevention is an excellent addition to the THA Arsenal. > No. I'm saying that RM is only worth including in a deck in the situation that you're pretty sure that you're going to be facing POT combat or non-pressing, rushing allies. Even against a POT deck, you're likely going to be Grappled and smashed next round (because a good deck is not going to be able to include as many RMs as a Potence deck includes Grapples, another point people keep making which you continue to choose to ignore). Other forms of combat beat RM, so I don't see why you'd bother to include RM in a deck unless you're fairly sure that you're going to get facing POT combat, and are using Movement of the Mind rather than Apportation. In other situations, you're going to be better off using other cards. I had a lot more success with Obedience than I would have had with RM in the last Tremere deck I built, for instance, because Obedience is much less conditional and much more powerful than RM. > Reyda wrote: > And for other arguments I read there and there "but if there is no combat, the card sits in your hand"... Come on. If there is no bleed, the deflection is of no use, and if there is no vote, I am annoyed by this delaying tactics... Are you really serious when you say it's a point I am ignoring ? > Yes. Because the number of times that RM is going to be useless, or at best cycled for no effect, is much much larger than the number of times than Deflection or Delaying Tactics is going to be useless. That's what "conditionality" means. And as I keep telling you, conditionality is the only way to measure the auto-inclusiveness of a card. EDIT: The Typo Beast is really making me its bitch today, sorry.

It feels this is just discussion is just about what kind of decks you usually face when playing. Combat decks I see are POT, ANI, Stickmen and bit more rare CEL+sticks and/or guns. Rego Motus is only good against POT but even then you can't press against grapple. If you happen to get random aggra long damage to face once in ten games, it happens and not wise for me to plan my deck to counter that. My other post already explained this better. You say Rego Motus is not good card design. This is totally opposite what I feel. Designing simple, effective and balanced card which can provide some new options is the hardest design and requires the most creativity. Everybody can design wonky cards like Shatter the Gate or Summon History. But designing solid and simple card for basic discpline really needs skill. EDIT OF course you can play Movement of the Mind instead of Apportation and press against grapple but then you are planning to use your combat more as defense and you really can't use control aspect of combat so much at all. You are not torporising any minions with one round THA combat.

Well Reyda, I'm no lazy deckbuilder, but I still can't figure out what slots can be easily replaced by Rego Motus without even thinking. Rego is good. Govern is good. Conditioning is good. Deflection is good. Theft is good. Basically, they're all good. Why don't you cry over how Raking Talon is a no-brainer in a gargoyle deck? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Reyda wrote: > > > Haze wrote: > > go win a couple of tournaments in a row with Rego Motus decks, and then I'll consider this thread something other than a sack of shit > > > Same lame argument. "Oh, if you don't win a tournament with it, it's not good". > Yeah, sure ! Usually it's a DECK that wins a tournament, not a CARD. But if you resort to this kind of arguments, you have nothing much to say. > > Now what about the LAZY deckbuilding stuff that started it all ? > I'm offended, you completely misread my post! I'm not saying Rego Motus isn't good. I'm saying you're not good. at trolling. or anything in life, really.

Here's a Rego Motus example from a real live tornament. At that time I used to play my Hardestadt deck, some of you have probably seen it, where Hardestadt generally aims at hitting people for 8, sometimes for even more. Well... In this game I had my Hardestadt all set up with his little Greek island resort (Yiaros). Generally, if Hardestadt goes to combat with someone who doesn't fight back, the opponent will go to torpor. Period. Well... in this particular game my predator was playing some (!)Tremere, and I really wanted to torp some of his guys. Well, I found that with Rego Motus around this became almost impossible without Disarming them first. Pounded my head against his maneuvers and Rego Motuses for a while, before I was overwhelmed by them. The deck is a pretty dedicated non-card intensive combat deck. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

> Haze wrote: > I'm saying you're not good. > > at trolling. > > or anything in life, really. > Here we go again, good people of internet... Just maybe chill down a little, peeps? "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

I would really like to hear of all of those fortitude cards that you say are worse at basic than rego motus? From what I can think of right away... Armor of Vitality = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!! Hidden Strength = Better at basic than rego motus Indomitability = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Resilience = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Rolling with the Punches = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Skin of Night = Worse at basic than rego motus (woo hoo we have a winner!) Skin of Rock = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Skin of Steel = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!!! Soak = Situationally either better or worse at basic than rego motus Superior Mettle = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!!! Unflinching Persistance = Slightly better at basic than rego motus. Did I forget anything? From that list that at the very least goes over most of the fortitude prevent cards you actually see, grand total of 1 is worse at basic than Rego Motus, and one is roughly the same, all the rest are better, some even better at basic than what rego motus is at superior.

> jhattara wrote: > Here's a Rego Motus example from a real live tornament. At that time I used to play my Hardestadt deck, some of you have probably seen it, where Hardestadt generally aims at hitting people for 8, sometimes for even more. Well... In this game I had my Hardestadt all set up with his little Greek island resort (Yiaros). Generally, if Hardestadt goes to combat with someone who doesn't fight back, the opponent will go to torpor. Period. Well... in this particular game my predator was playing some (!)Tremere, and I really wanted to torp some of his guys. Well, I found that with Rego Motus around this became almost impossible without Disarming them first. Pounded my head against his maneuvers and Rego Motuses for a while, before I was overwhelmed by them. The deck is a pretty dedicated non-card intensive combat deck. > The discussion aside, how does Rego Motus prevent you from being punched for 8? Assuming you're a dedicted combat deck and the Tremere guy isn't, then you should have more maneuvers because you (should) play Unflinching Persistance as part of your prevent and you (should) grapple so him can't flush his Thefts. So you smack him for 7, he prevents 4 you prevent 1 and he gets disarmed or just torped straight away. If you're saying that your deck relies on rush - grapple - disarm then you're not a dedicated combat deck and thus get foiled by fairly common and easily available combat defense. Which means your deck is probably bad and would get totally trashed by a single .44. Or Animalism. Neither of which is uncommon by any standards. If the above is not the case, that means that the tremere guy *is* a dedicated combat deck with like a 12 Maneuvers and 15 Thefts. In which case you're basically saying that your superstar Hardestadt rush deck, designed to make your prey miserable instead of getting VPs got overwhelmed by a swarm of smaller guys. Gosh, what a fucking surprise... that never happens right? And this is Rego Motus´s fault exactly how?

> Haze wrote: > I'm not saying Rego Motus isn't good. > > I'm saying you're not good. > > at trolling. > > or anything in life, really. > Maybe, but at least I never ever had any complaint from the ladies ! > Ankha wrote: > Rego is good. Govern is good. Conditioning is good. Deflection is good. Theft is good. Basically, they're all good. > That's exactly what i'm telling : Rego is GOOD. But most people here pretend it's a mediocre card, or an "ok" card at best. No, no, it's really GOOD. To the point of being a no brainer, like deflection can be in a tremere/anti deck. > Klaital wrote: > I would really like to hear of all of those fortitude cards that you say are worse at basic than rego motus? From what I can think of right away... > I like your list and want to thank you for the effort, but two things are bothering me : who around you is still playing skin of rock ? Fortitude is cool, but card slots are not infinite. Most potence/fortitude fighters don't even really use unflinching because its too weak as a prevention card. They'd rather play a sewer lid or an earthshock because they know the "maneuver" game is lost against other fighters (except Ani bat/carrion). Another thing you should take in account is : you can safely think that you always have blood to pay for rego motus. And most of the time, even if you were empty at the start of combat, this blood just comes comes from your opponent ! Let's also think that preventing 2 damage is better than preventing 1 damage. Most of the cases, when you prevent, you want to prevent real damage, not hands from 1 from a non fighter -especially since you will steal blood. And of course, you want to prevent Agg damage. So here is your revised list : Armor of Vitality = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!! -> Mainly because it prevents environmental from aid/carrion Hidden Strength = Better at basic than rego motus Indomitability = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Resilience = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Rolling with the Punches = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Skin of Night = Worse at basic than rego motus (woo hoo we have a winner!) Skin of Rock = Slightly better at basic than rego motus Skin of Steel = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!!! Soak = Situationally either better or worse at basic than rego motus -> i can't count the number of times i was punched for 1 agg with 2 soak in hand, but it's good since it trumps aid/carrion. Good card. Superior Mettle = Better at basic than rego motus at superior!!! Unflinching Persistance = Slightly better at basic than rego motus. So you see, if we take in account the synergy between other THA cards and Rego, which renders its blood cost moot, most of the fortitude cards are not so strong compared to rego motus. > jhattara wrote: > Here's a Rego Motus example from a real live tornament. At that time I used to play my Hardestadt deck, some of you have probably seen it, where Hardestadt generally aims at hitting people for 8, sometimes for even more. Well... In this game I had my Hardestadt all set up with his little Greek island resort (Yiaros). Generally, if Hardestadt goes to combat with someone who doesn't fight back, the opponent will go to torpor. Period. Well... in this particular game my predator was playing some (!)Tremere, and I really wanted to torp some of his guys. Well, I found that with Rego Motus around this became almost impossible without Disarming them first. Pounded my head against his maneuvers and Rego Motuses for a while, before I was overwhelmed by them. The deck is a pretty dedicated non-card intensive combat deck. > Thank you for the real life example. Thank you for showing that a dedicated THA fighter includes more manoeuvers overall than a regular POT fighter. I'm glad i read this The argument "you get grappled and then..." is quite nullified when people realize the synergy between THA cards allow for greater flexibility against most fighters except CEL which outmaneuvers THA thanks to Pursuit. Well, I don't know for you, but even if i'm a bit on the trolling side, the arguments we are all deploying here are interesting, aren't they ? Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Izaak wrote: > > > jhattara wrote: > > Here's a Rego Motus example from a real live tornament. At that time I used to play my Hardestadt deck, some of you have probably seen it, where Hardestadt generally aims at hitting people for 8, sometimes for even more. Well... In this game I had my Hardestadt all set up with his little Greek island resort (Yiaros). Generally, if Hardestadt goes to combat with someone who doesn't fight back, the opponent will go to torpor. Period. Well... in this particular game my predator was playing some (!)Tremere, and I really wanted to torp some of his guys. Well, I found that with Rego Motus around this became almost impossible without Disarming them first. Pounded my head against his maneuvers and Rego Motuses for a while, before I was overwhelmed by them. The deck is a pretty dedicated non-card intensive combat deck. > > > The discussion aside, how does Rego Motus prevent you from being punched for 8? Assuming you're a dedicted combat deck and the Tremere guy isn't, then you should have more maneuvers because you (should) play Unflinching Persistance as part of your prevent and you (should) grapple so him can't flush his Thefts. So you smack him for 7, he prevents 4 you prevent 1 and he gets disarmed or just torped straight away. > > If you're saying that your deck relies on rush - grapple - disarm then you're not a dedicated combat deck and thus get foiled by fairly common and easily available combat defense. Which means your deck is probably bad and would get totally trashed by a single .44. Or Animalism. Neither of which is uncommon by any standards. > > If the above is not the case, that means that the tremere guy *is* a dedicated combat deck with like a 12 Maneuvers and 15 Thefts. In which case you're basically saying that your superstar Hardestadt rush deck, designed to make your prey miserable instead of getting VPs got overwhelmed by a swarm of smaller guys. Gosh, what a fucking surprise... that never happens right? > > And this is Rego Motus´s fault exactly how? > I don't use maneuvers, I have undodgeable ranged strikes keyed on strength instead (Eerthshock) and the Tremere were not weenies, they were 7-9 caps. And it really was Rego Motus that made the difference. I just wasn't able to torp the key guys by punching for 8 at long range, when they prevented 4 and stole 2 at the same time. And about being a dedicated combat deck, if a deck has permanent rushes, transient rushes and 40 red cards on top, I'd call it a dedicated combat deck. Animalism guys just go down when I tap them, be it long or close. Gun decks can be an issue, but then again, they are an issue to any combat deck that doesn't pack huge amounts of maneuvers and/or ranged strikes. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

@ OP : I sort of agree in that I didn't like that Thaumaturgy gets a decent damage prevent, if it really needed any more combat cards it should have been a better maneuver/press card, could have been simply a THA Flash that said "Eh, you know what, Apportation just wasn't good enough". Who cares what it wallpapers. However I can't say I have had trouble with it 'cept with the Tzimisce so I couldn't say it's anything broken. And I also agree that Obfuscate so didn't need a S:CE, neither did Animalism. These days it's all just about Immortal Grapple. Didn't draw any of your 12 grapples? Now you pay 6 pool for that. GG

Even with your saying that preventing two at 1 blood is better than 1 for free, Hidden Strength at basic is STILL better than Rego Motus at basic since it prevents that same 2 at 1 blood with option to prevent more (and prevents environmental also). And yeah I don't use Skin of Rock, I use Resilience instead which is better in most situations (only part where Skin of Rock is better is if you are getting hit for exactly 2 aggravated damage). But pretty much only one of the fortitude prevent cards that cannot be played for free to prevent 1 damage or better that I use is Armor of Vitality, and that only in decks that have only or mostly basic fortitude. Since cards that you can cycle for free to prevent h1 are always better than ones that cost blood for the same thing. Hence why I pretty much never play either Skin of Steel or Superior Mettle anymore (back before Armor of Vitality was printed I did). Resilience, Rolling with the Punches, and Hidden Strength are the three prevent cards I use most often in a generic FOR prevent package.

> Demnogonis wrote: > @ OP : I sort of agree in that I didn't like that Thaumaturgy gets a decent damage prevent, if it really needed any more combat cards it should have been a better maneuver/press card, could have been simply a THA Flash that said "Eh, you know what, Apportation just wasn't good enough". Who cares what it wallpapers. However I can't say I have had trouble with it 'cept with the Tzimisce so I couldn't say it's anything broken. > > And I also agree that Obfuscate so didn't need a S:CE, neither did Animalism. These days it's all just about Immortal Grapple. Didn't draw any of your 12 grapples? Now you pay 6 pool for that. GG > I have NEVER seen anyone play Flesh Bond. Crows + Bats is just so good short chain combat that I would rather play that over Flesh Bond in about any deck with ANI (including nos/!nos stealth vote). No Trace likewise I have only very rarely seen played, mainly because it requires superior obfuscate to be at all reliable, and unless your playing huge fatties, most likely at least half your guys have only basic in any deck that would want to use it, and if you have superior obfuscate, you might just as well use Swallowed by the Night instead.

> Klaital wrote: > I have NEVER seen anyone play Flesh Bond. Crows + Bats is just so good short chain combat that I would rather play that over Flesh Bond in about any deck with ANI (including nos/!nos stealth vote). No Trace likewise I have only very rarely seen played, mainly because it requires superior obfuscate to be at all reliable, and unless your playing huge fatties, most likely at least half your guys have only basic in any deck that would want to use it, and if you have superior obfuscate, you might just as well use Swallowed by the Night instead. > I've seen both Flesh Bond and No Trace played successfully even in tournament environments. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

> Klaital wrote: > I have NEVER seen anyone play Flesh Bond. Crows + Bats is just so good short chain combat that I would rather play that over Flesh Bond in about any deck with ANI (including nos/!nos stealth vote). > I know it's strange, but i used 4-5 Flesh bond in a couple of vote decks for 3 reasons. 1- it's a SCE that works at any range, is rarely expected and that trumps bat/carrion 2- the two damage works at any range and can destabilize a chump blocker. 3- mainly because 2 damage is exactly what it takes to destroy a raven spy. That said, my experience with this card is not so great. No trace, on the other hand, I see it every week because 1-it trumps ani/carrion once or twice in a while. 2- It's great against sniper rifle 3-you can always use the maneuver provided by Mind tricks played earlier or simply from swallowed by the nigh as you just said. Better than being hit by earthshock or sewer lid with a press Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > To the point of being a no brainer, like deflection can be in a tremere/anti deck. > 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and deflection = 104 results 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and Rego Motus = 21 results 10+ player TWD deck with deflection = 696 results 10+ player TWD deck with Rego Motus = 23 results Deflection is up there in the top 10 best cards in the game. Rego Motus doesn't even play in the same league. [source: secretlibrary]

> Chaitan wrote: > > > Reyda wrote: > > To the point of being a no brainer, like deflection can be in a tremere/anti deck. > > > 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and deflection = 104 results > 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and Rego Motus = 21 results > > 10+ player TWD deck with deflection = 696 results > 10+ player TWD deck with Rego Motus = 23 results > > Deflection is up there in the top 10 best cards in the game. Rego Motus doesn't even play in the same league. > [source: secretlibrary] > Considering that -The table winning deck archive traces tournament back to 1997. -Rego Motus was released end of end of november 2008. -and Deflection is in the game since day one. I'd like to ask : Please, before trying to use numbers as reflection of facts, think twice. Thank you. Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

Since December 19, 2008. Rego Motus 22 decks. Deflection 292 decks. Deflection w/(!)Tremere 49 decks. Since it came legal Rego Motus has been used in almost half of the TWD Tremere/!Tremere decks. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

> Chaitan wrote: > > > Reyda wrote: > > To the point of being a no brainer, like deflection can be in a tremere/anti deck. > > > 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and deflection = 104 results > 10+ player TWD deck with Atleast 50% tremere/!tremere and Rego Motus = 21 results > > 10+ player TWD deck with deflection = 696 results > 10+ player TWD deck with Rego Motus = 23 results > > Deflection is up there in the top 10 best cards in the game. Rego Motus doesn't even play in the same league. > > [source: secretlibrary] > It's not a bad performance for RM considering that it's been available only since KoT while deflection was in game from the start. And the statistics not filtering on tremere just made me laugh : way to introduce bias ! ^^ It's not like dominate is much more of a easily available power discipline than thaumaturgy. Anyway Rego Motus vs Deflection is apples vs oranges. Every deck has to bleed some time or another Even if it weren't game-changing (maybe it is, maybe not, it's not really the matter), Rego Motus follows that trend that nowadays every discipline does a bit of everything (intercept with protean, etc.). E.g. if you wanted to combo blood theft with prevention you had to play THA-FOR, but it's not necessary anymore. Why play Cardano when Masika St John will just do the trick ? Hence the "lazy deckbuilding" Reyda is talking about, I guess. Which makes me wonder, concerning the future designs to introduce in the game (*crosses fingers*), would it really be a good thing to design more discipline requiring cards ? How to do it without diluting each discipline specifics and while avoiding redundancy ?

Both Protean and Thaumaturgy have sort of been 'bit of everything' type discplines from the start, and intercept is definetily thematic for protean. The very first level of protean is about enhancing your senses for example, and taking in all of the various paths of thaumaturgy, it really can do about anything in the rpg too.

> Klaital wrote: > Both Protean and Thaumaturgy have sort of been 'bit of everything' type discplines from the start (...) > Considering the rest of your post I am not sure if this sentence is supposed to apply to card design (in the ccg) or the general masquerade lore. Invoking lore-based arguments in card design discussions does not really make sense. I mean, if you design a card on a lore-based game of course you should be able to translate it in some way into lore stuff, but the opposite is not true. That it exists in the lore does not automatically make it ok as far as card design is concerned. By the way I'm not a lore expert but wasn't the first level of protean "gleam of red eyes" a power that has been translated into the game from the start as press/maneuver ?

iirc the name for the same power in another edition was 'Eyes of the Beast' which was made to an intercept card. And really, being able to see in the dark sounds more like intercept than manuevers or presses to me. (From what I recall, IR Goggles and Sport Bike were originally going to have their effects other way around, which would make more sense also, but for whatever reason were swapped, probably because stackable intercept would have been more potentially unbalanced than stackable manuevers.) Thats not the only case where same power from the rpg has multiple vastly different adaptations in the card game either. Most extreme example of this is that most of the Spiritus cards are different 'modes' of the Spiritus level 3 power, Aspect of the Beast (pretty much every spiritus card that has some animal in the name).

> jhattara wrote: > Since it came legal Rego Motus has been used in almost half of the TWD Tremere/!Tremere decks. > What percentage of those decks used Mirror Walk? If we want to complain about ubiquity being a sign of lazy card design, I'm going to guess that MW is a much better contender for the complaint box.

> Reyda wrote: > Another thing you should take in account is : you can safely think that you always have blood to pay for rego motus. > You can't, because you might not have a Theft, or your opponent might have no blood to steal, or you might be Grappled, etc. But it's illustrative that you claimed that you can think this way, while on the topic of lazy deckbuilding.

> Kushiel wrote: > > > Reyda wrote: > > Another thing you should take in account is : you can safely think that you always have blood to pay for rego motus. > > > You can't, because you might not have a Theft, or your opponent might have no blood to steal, or you might be Grappled, etc. But it's illustrative that you claimed that you can think this way, while on the topic of lazy deckbuilding. > Yes I can, because most of the time it's what happens. In games. Of Vtes. I hope at some point you't going to think about the game globally instead of tossing another "you might be grappled" phony argument... Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

Forget it; I was probably being stupidly hostile. Ice cream sandwich, ahoy!

Mmmh ! Ice Cream !! Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > Mmmh ! Ice Cream !! > I like to find common ground with other humans. Attachment icecream.jpg not found

> jhattara wrote: > > I've seen both Flesh Bond and No Trace played successfully even in tournament environments. > Surprisingly (to me), I've seen Alpha Glint used to great effect as well. Used as sort of an obedience for an acting vampire.

> FrançoisV wrote: > Even if it weren't game-changing (maybe it is, maybe not, it's not really the matter), Rego Motus follows that trend that nowadays every discipline does a bit of everything (intercept with protean, etc.). E.g. if you wanted to combo blood theft with prevention you had to play THA-FOR, but it's not necessary anymore. Why play Cardano when Masika St John will just do the trick ? Hence the "lazy deckbuilding" Reyda is talking about, I guess. > When I read the OP, this is how I read it. All these fortitude cards and the discussion why they are better than Rego or not seems to be irrelevant to me. The point was that with Rego you do not need to comb through possible crypts to find the right combonation of (!)Tremere with fortitude. Part of the challenge to building a (!)tremere deck with fortitude was you had to figure out how to get around or play with possible less than optimal crypt choices (and all the library choices this would involve). Rego to some degree eliminates this hurdle.

my thoughts exactly. but this led to interesting discussions ! Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

But what I think others are arguing is that it does not do enough to warrant switching tactics with Thaumaturgy. Generally, from what I'm getting of their assessment (though I'll be corrected if I'm reading them wrong, naturally), the Tremere are better off doing more important things to get VPs and just surviving combat. Getting Rego Motus does not push THA combat into a higher combat tier to compete, or make competitve those rather neglected +str THA strikes. Not having enough Rego Motus myself, I cannot comment either way. Any donations of extra cards, including your languishing unwanted Magics of the Smith & Rutor's Hands, will be welcome. Then I will experiment and report back to you at your leisure.

I play alot of combat (thus, i win very few games in tournaments...) and i can honestly say that rego motus has cost me a final table at a tournament. john bell had a carna deck also using mistress fanchoin and mark loughman had his multiple-tournament winning carna deck. i was playing lucinde and victorine 2nd trad untap dom with burst of sunlight (and dawn op+weather control+repair the undead flesh...) bell was my predator, and dropping the mistress meant i had no predator who could put pressure on me and i just had to tear through my prey with some dawn op weather control dunking. i 2nd tradded and blocked the standing bleeds of 3, threw burst of sunlight, and was answered with rego motus. i was not surprised, since bell, as a good player, knows how combat heavy the ohio meta is. rego doesn't make thaum good because of preventing damage/ mitigating bead loss most of the time, but it does keep them from going to torpor from agg. its a good card, but certainly nos even the best thaum card. petaniqua combat is the only card i've used rego motus in recently, but i've tried tremere wall and dedicated thaum combat walls with it (Uta loves it...). its another good card from thaum. its not better than Magic of the smith, and not as efficient as most thaum combat. it lets them not cry to Basilia, or a falmethrower, or eye of unforgiving heaven, or whatever random agg poke. its good, but i can't ever see it being too good. i run 4 if i run it. it fulfills the same function for me as adaptability (its just more generally useful than adaptability). as i said, i play alot of combat, and its cost me a tournament by existing. but its far from broken.