New card idea: Pawn of Hunedoara

Pawn of Hunedoara Requires a non-anarch, non-Black Hand vampire of capacity 8 or more. +2 stealth action Put this card on this vampire. Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to untap. Burn this card if this vampire votes in a referendum och plays a card that requires a title. Game development: Big caps without title or fortitude seldom see play. Flavor: The Inconnu (or one part of it?) highly secretive sect based in Hunedoara, Transylvania. They are after Golconda, or are they infernalists? They recruit old vampires that are not very affiliated with the Jyhad. Being part of their network has advantages. Balance: - Narrow in appliance, tries to pin-point seldom used vampires. The reason for not making it “non-titled” is the huge amount of high-cap primogen and bishops that never see play. - Strong effect, but doesn´t make bleed+vote possible (ie too much ousting power) – might open for some tricky decks though. Competitiveness: Not sure. What do you think? "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Ashur wrote: > - Strong effect, but doesn´t make bleed+vote possible (ie too much ousting power) – might open for some tricky decks though. > The first thing I think seeing this is multi-rush. One big cap, like Chaundice, act two time per turn to kill minions, while your smallcaps kill methuselahs. It's doubtfully uber-strong, but Rutor Hand have proven being a nice card, and this one will often be even cheaper. I would add non-Baali, for two reason : * Inconnu is not openly baali,while baali vampires in VtES are not of the cloaked variety. * infernal big caps does not need another way to be cheaper to untap.

Exactly. Multi rush decks would be horror with this. Basilia, Lazverinus, Qawwya, Enkidu...

nice idea. however, the vampires that benefit most will still be the ones that already see a lot of play (nergal, enkidu, ignazio g., qawiyya, cybele, ...). i would make it for non-infernal only (shattering the gates out-of-turn with enkil cog would perhaps become too easy, a.o). and perhaps they could become independent (or even clanless) when they get this card? (further distancing them from the sects and their struggle). doesn't seem to fit the laibon either, so i would probably exclude those. the card could cost around 2 blood, i feel, especially with the nice built-in stealth (which is fitting though). they're high-caps anyway who can pay this easily (think how ariadne would becomes cra-zy with this card and a perfectionist). needs some tinkering but could be a great addition imo!

Thanks for the replies. I regonize all your points and will try to adress them in the second draft. It gets very messy though, and I prefer as few words as possibly on cards I design. Non-infernal: Yes, although I would prefer not too add that, because of the rumours of the Inconnu being infernalists. Multi-rush: Yes, that will possibly get broken. But I´m not sure what to do about it, in a nice design. Any ideas? Making the Pawn independent: Sure, would be easy, but I kind of like the idea with keeping the votes and forefeiting the card in dire straits. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Ideas and thoughts: *Add a clause like the one on Blithe Acceptance: Burn this card if this vampire enters combat. This vampire can burn 1 blood when he enters combat instead of burning this card. *Non-Baali is also mainly solving the Infernal problem. Would Helena or Petaniqua be broken with this card? I don't know too much lore, but wouldn't it be possible to argue that Baali are those openly infernal, while this card relates to those secretly infernal? I like the card! Good work!

> Malex wrote: > Ideas and thoughts: > > *Add a clause like the one on Blithe Acceptance: > Burn this card if this vampire enters combat. This vampire can burn 1 blood when he enters combat instead of burning this card. > This would mean too much text for my taste. It´s kind of ok, but also kind of crappy. If the use of the extra action gets too limited, the card become crap. > Malex wrote: > *Non-Baali is also mainly solving the Infernal problem. Would Helena or Petaniqua be broken with this card? I don't know too much lore, but wouldn't it be possible to argue that Baali are those openly infernal, while this card relates to those secretly infernal? > Well kind of, but Baali is also actually a bloodline/clan, ie the vamps are actually related, by blood. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Ashur wrote: > Non-infernal: Yes, although I would prefer not too add that, because of the rumours of the Inconnu being infernalists. > But they are not open infernalists. Infernals vampire in VtES are vampire which are evidently infernal. If the inconnu were dealing openly with Petaniqua, they would quickly be known as infernalists, not just rumored to be. If you want, infernal are the demon army, while non-infernal pawns are corrupters.

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Ashur wrote: > > Non-infernal: Yes, although I would prefer not too add that, because of the rumours of the Inconnu being infernalists. > > > But they are not open infernalists. Infernals vampire in VtES are vampire which are evidently infernal. If the inconnu were dealing openly with Petaniqua, they would quickly be known as infernalists, not just rumored to be. > > If you want, infernal are the demon army, while non-infernal pawns are corrupters. > First of all, there is no "openly infernal" or "closet infernal." An infernal vampire is infernal, exhorting a cost to the Methuselah controlling them. (In the case of non advanced vampires, the non advanced versions are in fact, not infernal.) Whether a vampire is "known" to be infernal or not does not matter. Just because a vampire in V:tES has the text "Infernal" does not mean that the rest of the vampires in the game "knows" that the vampire is infernal (in fact, that is irrelevant.) Also, I take issue with "inconnu dealing openly with Petanique." The Inconnu is a "secret society" if at all they actually exist. They don't deal openly. And if they are rumored to deal with Patanique.... As I mentioned above, it is not necessarily well known that Patanique is infernal (though she is Red List, so in this case, maybe it is well known?) 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.

From what I recall Petaniqua is in the red list mainly because of her extensive dealings with the black spiral dancer werewolves.

> direwolf wrote: > Whether a vampire is "known" to be infernal or not does not matter. Just because a vampire in V:tES has the text "Infernal" does not mean that the rest of the vampires in the game "knows" that the vampire is infernal (in fact, that is irrelevant.) > By this reasoning, the base version of Marcus Vitel should be Lasombra, not Ventrue. Also, infernal is not attributed to each and every vampires that do infernalism (hi tremere antitribu !), and few of thoses who are infernal. Infernal pact doesn't give the infernal trait, either . Also, Infernal extract a price by it being known. Your average methuselah lose pool because he is know to be in league with infernal ; it's not himself that sell it soul, either because he's already a demon or because he is wise enough not too. In both case, demon want to control you, not make you became useless. Last thing : card infernal only - and daimonion - are not exactly subtle. No, when you use conflagration, you can't hope to be undercover. Now that I have explained why I believe that the infernal trait mean open infernalism, I would like to recall that the card mean an somewhat open support from the Inconnu. Putting an open infernalist in the closest known connection to the inconnu would be extremely bad for their cover. (also, dealing with black spiral openly is about as obvious infernalism as you can do. It's more or less like "I am not american, I just work for the CIA and can call airstrike of the US army")

Suggested cardtext: A vampire may only have one Pawn of Hunedoara. Changes? - If a vampire you control casts a vote in a referendum or plays a card that requires a title, burn Pawn of Hunedoara. (to make the it even more restricted) - Once per turn, if this vampire sucessfully performs a x-action, it may burn one blood to untap. x can be a number of things, type of action, cost of action (like cavalier) or condition of action. Like this idea. Cavalier is a well-designed card, but its biggest drawback is that it´s a master card. Overkill is highly underrated. You know, like in computor games and such.

> Pendargon wrote: > Exactly. Multi rush decks would be horror with this. Basilia, Lazverinus, Qawwya, Enkidu... > Monster does this already. I don't see any problem with it. Should be limited to 1 per minion (or be unique). Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > Pendargon wrote: > > Exactly. Multi rush decks would be horror with this. Basilia, Lazverinus, Qawwya, Enkidu... > > > Monster does this already. I don't see any problem with it. Should be limited to 1 per minion (or be unique). > true, but monster is an archetype (thus preventing, say, perfectionist that would go well with this card), and is a master, and untaps only AFTER you dunk someone. Monster and this do not exclude each other, they rather complement in what i think is not so favorable way for the game

For starters it needs to be one per minion. Maybe even unique. And even then, all it does is help the guys with fortitude more. I don't think adding an action-based *disciplineless* permanent untap is a good idea. Especially one that costs no actual action since you get to use it right away. And if you do, you have to look at its relative power with the existing ones. Helicopter, for example, is as close as it gets and that costs 3 pool, is an equipment, cannot be used the round you get it AND only works on successfull actions. Rutor's Hand requires a fairly uncommon discipline, cannot be used the turn you get it and sends you to torpor. I suppose there's Tattoo Signal which is actually amazingly insanely strong, but that requires a Seraph of which there are a whole 9. Ye ye, there is this vote card, but really, did anyone actually put that card in a serious deck, like ever? It also untaps another vampire and not the one with the card. The non-Anarch non-Black Hand restriction seems completely random. Is that to prevent abuse with CrimethInc or Tattoo Signal? And if so why can it be abused with fortitude untap, which is the more realistic scenario? And what about stacking it with Enkil Cog? Metro Underground and Enkil Cog is already pretty abusive as is, but at least it costs a pool and Metro Underground is a master. And what about Infernals? This card basically removes the infernal penalty. And aside from that, Cybele is already quite competitive enough when she has 1 action per turn. Totally broken. I´d much see fortitude untap powered down instead of power creeping everything else up to that level.

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > direwolf wrote: > > Whether a vampire is "known" to be infernal or not does not matter. Just because a vampire in V:tES has the text "Infernal" does not mean that the rest of the vampires in the game "knows" that the vampire is infernal (in fact, that is irrelevant.) > > > By this reasoning, the base version of Marcus Vitel should be Lasombra, not Ventrue. > Not so. Clan is a perceived factor, I.E. "Clan Impersonation." A vampire can masquerade as a member of another clan in order to use the benefits (and restrictions!) of that clan. An infernal vampire exhorts it's cost from the Methuselah regardless of whether you use cards that would indicate that the vampire is infernal. You can have a deck with infernal vampires, without a single card that requires an infernal vampire. 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.

Pawn of Hunedoara Cost: 2 pool. Requires a vampire of capacity 8 or more. +2 stealth action Put this card on this vampire. Once per your minion phase, this vampire may untap. This vampire burns additional blood when untapping during your minion phase. Burn this card if this vampire votes in a referendum, plays a card that requires a title or becomes infernal. * prevents using it with other untap cards. * costs 1 blood to untap. * costs pool to represent difficulty of contactin Iconnu * infernal thing is optional.