Submission - Breath of the Basilisk (SER/for combat card)

Name: Breath of the Basilisk Cardtype: Combat Discipline: Serpentis/Fortitude Cost: 1 blood [ser][for] Strike: dodge, with an optional maneuver, only usable to go to long range. [SER][for] Strike: 2 aggravated damage, only preventable by cards that require Fortitude [for], allocated among the opposing minion, his or her retainers and equipments. Any damage succesfully inflicted this way to an ally, retainer or an equipment burns it. Aims can't be played on this strike. How does this card address a compelling game need? Serpentis combat lacks some interesting toolbox combat cards. Destroying equipments and allies could bring diversity to the annoyance a Setite brings. I tried to balance the card by adding a fortitude requirement. Inferior effect brings versatility to the card (because against real combat deck you'll probably use the venomous cloud to hide you while you flee). For balance, the "only preventable by cards that require Fortitude [for]" (though canonic) could be dropped. WOD source: Vampire: The Dark Ages, pg. 163 Reference: Cobra Fangs, Revolutionary Council Art notes: a scaled vampire in a cemetary by night exhales a green cloud of poison that envelops an opposing vampire that tries to protect himself with his forearms, burning his clothes and burning the flesh of an owl nearby caught in the cloud. The shadow of the Setite on a tombstone mimics the shadow of a huge cobra. Created by: Ankha Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I would remove the "burn ally" part, because canonically the chance the power burn non mortal ally can be slim (ok against mage, maybe against garou, but against wraith or demons ?) I understand why it's not by looking at existing crypt. Otherwise, the card is pretty ok. I would better card because there is already cards in this thematic, but why not.

So I like the idea for the card and all the reasoning behind it, but the card as a whole seems odd. I'm with Ohlmann on the removing the burn ally text, just to strong to be able to torp vamps and burn anything else in combat. I think I might like it more if the inferior was just one discipline or if it had a third level like Elemental Stoicism. But all in all nice idea.

it is a decent idea, but i think assigning damage to equipment is a bit odd part, and could lead to confusing rulings...

> Pendargon wrote: > it is a decent idea, but i think assigning damage to equipment is a bit odd part, and could lead to confusing rulings... > I don't think there's any need for ruling, all is written on the card. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > Pendargon wrote: > > it is a decent idea, but i think assigning damage to equipment is a bit odd part, and could lead to confusing rulings... > > > I don't think there's any need for ruling, all is written on the card. > It's odd it'd be better to use the usual text if you want to destroy equipment - so just have [for] [ser]: Strike: destroy equipment I'm inclined to think the ally burn is overpowered for ser as it has access to so many burn ally options anyway (which are actually playable). This card is very flexible which allows it to be 'too easily played' i.e. if there are no allies at the table you can still do 2 aggravated damage only preventable by for.

I'd be tempted to make it "Serpentis Equipment" like Heart of Darkness, Rutor's Hand and Concordance. Breath of the Basilisk Fortitude/Serpentis 1 blood +1 stealth action. Put this card on the acting vampire. The vampire with this card may burn 1 blood to Strike: Dodge at close range or Strike: 1R aggravated only at long range. Mortal allies opposing this vampire are burned at the end of combat. As above, but untap this vampire at the end of this action. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

it's awful from the beginning, but the last version is just too much. Nadima multiactions ruins a imbued deck in 3 moves. Not good. At least when it was a strike, a react with conviction could save the imbued. Not with the latter. (oh and by the way, followers of set already have ways to trump allies and retainers. I can't see the urge to give them more, if the players are not willing to use the tool already at their disposal ) Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

@Reyda: If you ask me, ruining the ability of an Imbued deck to basically time out a table seems good to me. I don't really think that Imbued should be Crypt cards, and certainly shouldn't have the ability to completely shut down either or both decks seated next to them (which has been a common experience). Imbued trash plenty of games on their own. I doubt that this would add more to the VTES Ro-Sham-Bo of table seating if you were the Imbued player. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Reyda wrote: > At least when it was a strike, a react with conviction could save the imbued. > That was intended indeed. > Reyda wrote: > (oh and by the way, followers of set already have ways to trump allies and retainers. I can't see the urge to give them more, if the players are not willing to use the tool already at their disposal ) > Sure, but then you can't design any new card because: - either it's something the clan/discipline is good at already, then people have your reaction: "they can already do it! it's useless" - or it's something new (extreme example would be a Deflection in Serpentis), then people would react saying "it's bullshit, now each discipline looks the same!" I tried to stick to a canon material and give a new option. I know Serpentis already gives access to burn equipment/retainers cards (Kiss of Lachesis), but Breath of the Basilisk is a kind of variation that doesn't do exactly what the other serpentis cards do. It's main goal is not to trump allies specifically but make Serpentis more a nuisance (destroying your equipments, or retainers, or being dangerous with aggravated damage). True combat decks won't be much affected by this card (grapple, prevent, or dodge + additional, long rang combat... will be resilient enough). But still, it can make funny and interesting decks. And don't forget it requires [ser] + [for] which limits the decks it can go in. Here's the rewording: Name: Breath of the Basilisk Cardtype: Combat Discipline: Serpentis/Fortitude Cost: 1 blood [ser][for] Strike: dodge, with an optional maneuver, only usable to go to long range. [SER][for] Strike: 2 aggravated damage, only preventable by cards that require Fortitude [for]. For each damage that would be succesfully inflicted this way, you may burn one of the opposing minion's retainer or equipment instead. Aims can't be played on this strike. (I dropped the burn ally part, though I have a feeling that vampires should always have the upper hand over allies). Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Squidalot wrote: > I'm inclined to think the ally burn is overpowered for ser as it has access to so many burn ally options anyway (which are actually playable). > Sure, but see my remarks above. Does it mean no Serpentis card burning allies will be printed ever? > Squidalot wrote: > This card is very flexible which allows it to be 'too easily played' i.e. if there are no allies at the table you can still do 2 aggravated damage only preventable by for. > Yeah, if you play the right crypt, and enter combat combat with a guy that doesn't play grapple, nor dodge, nor combat ends, nor long-range combat. Compare it to Breath of Thanatos. Does the agg damage in NEC has created big imbalance in the game? I think not. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > Compare it to Breath of Thanatos. Does the agg damage in NEC has created big imbalance in the game? I think not. > No, but Breath of Thanatos is 1 agg at close range — 2R agg would destroy animalism combat... as to whether that's bad or not, that's another conversation. Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

> Ke. wrote: > No, but Breath of Thanatos is 1 agg at close range — 2R agg would destroy animalism combat... as to whether that's bad or not, that's another conversation. > There exactly 6 vampires that can play that out of the box, all cap 7+. And the card is not worse than the very common 2R agg for 1 blood, available with different level of efficiency in vissicitude, thaumaturgy, quietus, and daimonion. I don't think it will unbalance anything by being 2 aggravated damage. FoS still have nothing to protect against S:CE, and while it's harder to protect against than aggro poke, it's still easy to foil with several method, one of which being animalism combat. Because your FoS won't like to take 3 damage and pay 1 blood when you pay 3 blood total to go out of torpor.

> Ke. wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Compare it to Breath of Thanatos. Does the agg damage in NEC has created big imbalance in the game? I think not. > > > No, but Breath of Thanatos is 1 agg at close range — 2R agg would destroy animalism combat... as to whether that's bad or not, that's another conversation. > Where did you read that the damage was ranged? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

As a side note, a better wording would be : 'allocate two point between the opposing minion, his retainer, or equipment. Burn any equipment, retainer, or ally who have been allocated a point, and inflict as many aggravated damage as point allocated to non-ally minion". I believe it would be cleaner and avoid discussion about damage repartition on equipment, and about that at close range you can't target retainers.

> Ankha wrote: > Where did you read that the damage was ranged? > Looks like I mentally combined Juggernaut's post with yours... Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

> Ohlmann wrote: > As a side note, a better wording would be : > > 'allocate two point between the opposing minion, his retainer, or equipment. Burn any equipment, retainer, or ally who have been allocated a point, and inflict as many aggravated damage as point allocated to non-ally minion". > > I believe it would be cleaner and avoid discussion about damage repartition on equipment, and about that at close range you can't target retainers. > See the latest version for an even better wording Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I think assigning points or saying yo u can reduce the damage to burn equipment/retainer is more logical. I don't see this card being needed for setites since they have access to prevention, torping along with treat agg as normal. making setite combat more viable is as easy as printing more setites with [pot] and [ser] in g6. typhonic beast isn't a bad card, and only big vamps having access to it has been the issue with it from day one. I only know of one snake punch deck in the twda to date. I'm just not sure about giving serpents cards just because its a support discipline without agg combat.

Also, Hatch the viper exist. There is already 2 combat dual combat with serpent, with different discipline and on both case already somwhat bad crypt, especially for Hatch the viper. Why adding a third one ?

> Ohlmann wrote: > Also, Hatch the viper exist. > > There is already 2 combat dual combat with serpent, with different discipline and on both case already somwhat bad crypt, especially for Hatch the viper. Why adding a third one ? > are you implying that only one deck being able to use htv is too narrow? B-)