Osebo NO!

Deck Name: Osebo NO! Author: tarantulus Description: Osebo Wall Deck block and beat, throw in carver's for a nice little bonus, Ignore the deck size/group restrictions, this was build to fit house rules. N.B: the house rules state NO MORE than 6 of any card per deck. Crypt (Capacity min=3 max=7 avg=5.42; 12 cards) ================================================== 1x Abiku 6 cel obt AUS POT Osebo:4 2x Homa 6 AUS CEL POT Osebo:4 1x Ismitta 4 aus cel pot Osebo:4 1x Kamaria 3 aus pot Osebo:4 1x Kisha Bhimji 5 cel obf pot AUS Osebo:3 2x Mamadou Keita 7 aus pot pre vic CEL Osebo:4 1x Onaedo 6 aus pot DOM OBT Lasombra:4 2x Titi Camara 5 pot AUS CEL Osebo:5 1x Uzoma 5 aus cel vic POT Osebo:4 Library (94 cards) ===================== Master (10 cards) 1x Base Hunting Ground 1x Blood Puppy 2x Bravo 2x Carver's Meat Packing and Storage 3x Dreams of the Sphinx 1x Potence Equipment (6 cards) 3x Bang Nakh -- Tiger's Claws 3x Bowl of Convergence Retainer (3 cards) 3x Ghoul Messenger Reaction (27 cards) 6x Burnt Offerings 6x Enhanced Senses 6x Eyes of Argus 6x Quicken Sight 3x Sins of the Cauchemar Combat (48 cards) 3x Burning Wrath 3x Concealed Weapon 6x Earthshock 6x Flash 6x Growing Fury 6x Immortal Grapple 6x Increased Strength 6x Taste of Vitae 6x Torn Signpost Created with Secret Library v0.9.3. (Oct 9, 2012 15:56:45)

The 6 card maximum mean nobody here will be able to give cookie-cutter advice. Also, invalid grouping (3-4-5). But no need to be cookie cutter here. The deck is horrible, and maybe it won't be killed immediatly by its predator, but it can't oust anyone. While not being comparatively threatening in combat. Either your goal is not to oust and a lot of special rules are in effect, and without them we can't help ; or you should try to do something simpler to learn how vtes work, like a classic dementation bleeder.

> invalid grouping (3-4-5) > I did state that this can be ignored > The deck is horrible > ok > your goal is not to oust > this is correct, My goal is to weaken my prey so much, or strike enough fear of combat into them that I can slow-bleed them.Clearly I haven't achieved this. > not being comparatively threatening in combat. > This is the crux of the matter, I want this to be a combat deck. what am I missing? > or you should try to do something simpler to learn how vtes work, like a classic dementation bleeder. > this is slightly patronising, I'm fully aware of how the game works, I'm just not very good at building decks.

If you're playing a combat deck with very little acceleration, and a bit more of a wall than a rush deck, I highly recommend - Fame (2 copies) - Powerbase: Luanda - Haven Uncovered (2 copies) That should allow you to cycle some combat cards when your hand is clogged with non-waky/non-intercepty stuff. Then, the crypt needs to be revised. You're clearly using AUS+CEL. Then make vampires with these disciplines mandatory. 3 Abiku 3 Homa 1 Kisha 1 Camaria 1 Ismitta 1 Uzoma 2 Titi Camara Master: Drop Blood Puppy for Powerbase: Montreal, and Bravo (you don't even have a single rush card). Consider Monster or Sociopath instead. Equipment: Bang Nakh is sadly very terrible. Torn Signpost + Weighted Walking Stick is strong enough. Drop them. 3 Bowls of Convergence is 2 too many. I would chante the quipment part to: 1 Bowl of Convergence 1 Blood Shield 1 Ivory Bow / Sengir Dagger 1 Heart of Nizchetus 2 Leather Jacket Ghoul Messenger is pretty bad. I would have Procurers instead (but they're still not that good). Sins of the Cauchemard are nice, but I think something like Precognition or Spirit's Touch are better. Precognition prevents 1 damage (difference of 2 blood with Sins of the Cauchemard), and Spirit's Touch gives you a maneuver. Adding a couple of On the Qui Vive is always good. Combat: Concealed Weapon should be dropped for 6 Weighted Walking Sticks. You don't need that many Earthshocks. Drop 3. 4 Flahes should be enough Growing Fury is extremely bad. Consider something else instead. Slam, Target Vitals, ... You can use Brute Force as your strike (but that kind of makes the WWS useless) Finally, your deck another 5 rushes. Nose of the Hound, Bum's Rush, whatever.

> tarantulus wrote: > this is correct, My goal is to weaken my prey so much, or strike enough fear of combat into them that I can slow-bleed them.Clearly I haven't achieved this. > Problem is that it won't work. People will be able to easily gain more pool than you do pool damage (for example, Dmitra can make your prey gain 2 easy pool per turn, and you won't be bleeding for more than two with any competent predator). Or redirect your every bleed and eating the rest of the table before you can beat them. > > tarantulus wrote: > This is the crux of the matter, I want this to be a combat deck. what am I missing? > Several thing. If you are not extremely sure of your plan, cramming more than 30 combat card is usually an extremely bad idea. You are (rightly) focused on combat, but your crypt lack consistent , meaning inefficient beating Bang Nakh, Burning wrath and Growing fury are joke card which have ridiculously low situation where they are useful. The first one is way too expensive and don't allow for Immortal Grapple, and the other two are too narrow. You can't enter combat with anyone, meaning your prey never fear you as long as he can survive the 2 or 3 pool per turn damage without blocking. And it's very easy to do. While you do have enough reaction to survive an average, not overly aggressive predator, you will have a lot of pool management problems, and you will have to often stay untapped instead of killing your prey, simply because you have no way to regain pool and your minion are relatively expensive. You should add blood doll or minion tap or thing like that. Also, you have too many card that cost blood, especially reaction that give +1 intercept. Since you don't have good blood generation, and in combat you take hit since you have no defensive card, you will run out of blood, which may very well mean instand death. > tarantulus wrote: > this is slightly patronising, I'm fully aware of how the game works, I'm just not very good at building decks. > This kind of deck is the one people who don't understand how the game work do. Your focus in vtes is alway to oust people, not to beat vampires. Also, combat is the more difficult part of the game, one which is often pretty weak and need a lot of thought. That's why you should try to begin with something that oust people first, either via bleed or politic, and not something that destroy vampires. As a last note, there is a lot of reason to believe your community have extremely specifics rules. If you want advices, you should really, really try to make them play the "official" rule, simply because they have a ton of advantage and will allow us to give you more sound advice.

Its really hard to give advice on house riles like this when many players know what this deck could be. but ill try. take out the extra copies of all unique but dreams. tiger claws are not optimal. Switch yo either potence grappling or ranged, grapple can use like 3 lids or whatever, but you want to streamline damage output. add blood shield. combat needs fame/tension/dragonbound to do pool damage in your case. maybe one pulse of c for standing bleed. Drop burnt offerings and sin ftomyour reactions. you would defend better with a no secrets moduel. house tiles are making your deck bad. period. the grouping thing is letting you get an abnormality optimal crypt, but you want 8 grapples and 7 ish signposts. take advantage of the grouping nonsense and build all free gargoyles or something that isn't as hampered by the limits also, this deck needs sideslip, pursuit, psyche, and blur more thanburning wrath, flash, and other sub optimal cards. I'd argue todrop the card limit so you can actually play vtes the way it was designed. less than 8 grapples, governs, kindred spirits, etc isn't how the deck would exist under real rules. its limiting your playgroup's deckbiulding options and abilities. hope I helped some, I tried not to be too harsh. kinda.

> tarantulus wrote: > This is the crux of the matter, I want this to be a combat deck. what am I missing? > Ousting power. Why would anyone block your bleeds for 1? Maybe add a few Ancestor's insight. And Nose of the hounds to rush — you have no rush. Add Fame, Dragonbound and maybe Tension in the Ranks. Eagle Sight could be used to catch your prey — so maybe a few 419 operations would help once they're all in torpor. Also, you have loads of AUS — but no bounce? At least add some Telepathic Misdirections. Finally, convince your local players that they play with bullshit rules — there is no 6 card limit in VTES. Ke Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

> tarantulus wrote: > this is correct, My goal is to weaken my prey so much, or strike enough fear of combat into them that I can slow-bleed them.Clearly I haven't achieved this. > You need spare actions for that. An intercept deck gets room to act by playing wakes. 6 Eyes of Argus are not enough, you need at least 6 more, for example 3 On the Qui vive, 2 Forced Awakening, 1 Wake. But anyway, it is far too slow to reasonably oust. Even a simple Arcane Library might be enough to keep you at bay. You have several options to oust: -the combat package: Fame, Tension in the Ranks, Dragonbound, Codex of the Edenic Grounskeepers, -the intercept package: Smiling Jack mainly (eventually Anarch Revolt), 419 Operation, -the Laibon package: Ancestor spirit mainly (eventually Kduva's Mask), Ancestor's Insight. Pick what you want, but you need to do better than bleeds for 1. > > This is the crux of the matter, I want this to be a combat deck. what am I missing? > 6 Psyche to begin with Seriously, it is very hard to play combat with card limits because your opponents can still play 12 combat ends if they want while you are stuck with 6 grapples only. But the Osebo have access to a lot of permanent Strength increase (Enforcer and Preternatural Strength), which makes a combined approach Psyche + Grapple possible.

> tarantulus wrote: > My goal is to weaken my prey so much, or strike enough fear of combat into them that I can slow-bleed them.Clearly I haven't achieved this. > This is a bad plan in general. Every non-wall prey you could have will either bloat too much, oust too fast or Deflect too much for your bleeds of 1 to have any impact. If wall decks have either better combat or Blood Dolls/Vessels you are, again, ineffective. At the very least you should be playing Fame, rush cards, Camera Phones and Smiling Jack. That won't turn this into a great deck but it might make it an acceptable casual deck. > I want this to be a combat deck. what am I missing? > Cards that say "enter combat". Without them, you are letting your opponents dictate when, if and with whom you get to fight. Start with at least 6x Bum's Rush and 1x Powerbase: Luanda. Haven Uncovered might be an acceptable replacement if you can't get the latter. Other improvements: Cut Blood Puppy. It's unplayably bad. Use Mbare Market or pretty much any of the Powerbases instead. Cut Bravo. You currently have exactly 0 ways to succesfully enter combat as an action. Even if you did, Perfectionist would still be better. Cut Bang Nakhs. It's not worth the pool and doesn't work with Grapple. Use Preternatural Strength, Ivory Bow, Enforcer or Baseball Bat instead, according to availability. Cut Ghoul Messengers. They will only give your opponents an easy way to dump intercept cards without tapping or having to fight you. See Perfectionist + Leather Jacket/Baseball Bat for a similar effect that doesn't completely suck. Switch Burnt Offerings to Telepathic Misdirections. Make your prey burn the pool instead of you and your predator. Add 6x On the Qui Vive/other wake. 12 is a minimum for a 90 card wall deck. Cut Growing Fury, it's just unplayable. Play Disarms and Slams or something instead. For further pointers, I would look for tournament winning wall/combat decks and see what they do differently. Here's one example: thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011pstf55

Well, there are a coulpe of, even minor, things you could do to make the deck even tournament legal. The crypt might fit nicely into G4-5 with dropping Kisha, who doesn't really fit into the general combatty aspect of the deck anyways. I would add a second Uzoma. Concealed Weapons and Bang Nakhs are the second thing I think should go. They do not really mesh well with the immortal grapples you have. That, too, would help in reducing the deck within the tournament legal 90 card standard. I'm not saying you should, but I am saying this might help the deck to work better. There are some weird concepts in there as well, like three copies of Bowl of Convergence. It's unique, so shouldn't you settle with one one? Permanent intercept is easily achieved by, say, Anima Gathering or Sport Bike. They even stack with Bowl! If you want to have some more blood, I wouldn't really go with Ghoul Messengers. A procurer would do the same, really, and it's easier to use as well - he costs some blood, sure, but I don't see that as a real problem. Ghoul messenger costs you actions! So, I'd change those three Ghoul Messengers to 1x Ghoul Messenger, 1x Procurer, and something else, like another master. About masters, I can't see why you'd want to play two Carvers. One should be plenty enough! Instead I'd like to see an auspex master in there to get the best out of your reactions. Some permanent intercept in the form of news radios or other media locations might be worthwhile as well. And here comes the thing: you could oust as well as block stuff! Play two copies of Fame, and a Tension in the Ranks. If you decide to use Dragonbound, Carvers can really wreck games. Another idea to deal pool damage while blocking and combating is Anarch Revolt or Smiling Jack, the Anarch. I can't see why you would play maximum copies of both Burnt Offerings as well as Sins of Cauchemar. Maybe reduce both to 2 copies, and add some more wakes, like On the Qui Vive and Forced Awakening? You should really play some bounce in there as well! At least 4 Telepathic Misdirections should be a must in any AUS deck. The combat package seems pretty cool, but I'd consider playing some Telepathic Misdirections (if not Psyche!s) for you to go through Combat Ends when you can't have a grapple. The lack of the simplest forms of bloat is pretty bad as well. You'll need to add some vessels or blood dolls in there to keep yourself alive. Eagle's Sight is a great card as well, when you'll really need to take care of that famed vampire that's not taking an undirected action. Hope it helps! "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

> Kraus wrote: > And here comes the thing: you could oust as well as block stuff! Play two copies of Fame, and a Tension in the Ranks. If you decide to use Dragonbound, Carvers can really wreck games. Another idea to deal pool damage while blocking and combating is Anarch Revolt or Smiling Jack, the Anarch. > While Dragonbound, Tension, and Fame may work, it's telling that even combat-ish deck are moving away from thoses when they can. They tend to be subpar solutions when played optimally, which is very hard (you need to analyze the table situation pretty well before dropping a Dragonbound). I would say a "modern" way to oust in combat would be Pulse of the canaille and other permanent bleed (the unique retainer and/or equipment like a laptop or cameraphone) with a dash of Flurry of Action and / or Andre Leroux. And of course, blood doll / minion tap to make sure you can have 2-3 minion on table.

Forgot to mention Well-Marked. It's basically free prevent, play 3-4 copies.

I'd have suggested Flurry of Action/Speed of Thought + Pulse of the Canaille. You'd use Taste of Vitae to refill. Pack a good handful of Eagle Sights and a good number of 419 Operations. Well Marked is good. Settle for Thrown Junk or Bear Hugs... Thrown Gate + Lid + Sacraments + Earthshocks + Stunt Cycles versus Immortal Grapple + Pushing the Limit + Undead Strength + Torn Signposts + maybe a couple of Decapitate There should be Terra Incognita in this deck. Reduces and flick cancels are just what you're looking for so you can focus the pain forwards. I'd stay away from the Fame/Tensions type module in this purely because you COULD go for a 419 Operation type strategy which gives you more pool to ignore your predators bleeding/voting. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> tarantulus wrote: > I'm just not very good at building decks. > Why do you think that is? The questions in the sticky vekn.net/index.php/forum/7-deck-clinic/383-how-to-get-the-best-results-from-deck-clinic-posts are rather useful. Maybe it's just being too far removed from what it was like to be a newer player, but I have a hard time relating to the idea of being bad at building decks. Trial and error will eventually give an idea of what works for someone. I certainly built terrible decks in the early years, but it was mostly about forgetting to put in Blood Dolls, wakes, and/or bleed bounce. I build terrible decks now, but it's mostly intentional. After discarding a few Bang Nakh because they are too expensive to equip or wondering why it's worth paying a blood for intercept with Burnt Offerings (the superior is kind of the opposite of what you want to do), can drop such awful cards. After wondering how to work through 15 pool with bleeds of one, a simple search will lead to the copious number of options for transient or permanent bleed - Laibon have Ancestor Spirit, Kduva's Mask, (with Auspex) Ancestor's Insight, and there's always Computer Hacking, bleed retainers, bleed equipment, etc. After having a hand full of intercept and combat and having people walk right by your tapped vampires, will realize that there's nowhere near enough wakes in the deck. I suppose it's useful for people to think others can improve their decks, after all, most CCG discussion is around deck builds, but I'm surprised at how much people seem to value advice from strangers versus simply playing the game, paying attention to what happens in games, and seeing what the better players in one's group have to say. Traveller Card Game

To step off ICL's comments. Keep records of your social games. Note down any card you discard more than 1 of in a game. Note down how many turns you had no wakes when you wanted/needed at least 1. Etc,etc,etc. In time you will be able to analyse the deck on your own, and then just ask people things like "Do you think I should use Card X or Card Y in this deck? Why?" Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I would build it as follows: Deck Name: Osebo rushwall Created By: Ivan Marin-Rivas Description: Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 22, Max: 36, Avg: 7) 2 Homa AUS CEL POT 6 Osebo 2 Khalu ani AUS CEL POT pro7 Osebo 4 Massassi AUS CEL POT QUI obf9 Osebo 2 Titi Camara pot AUS CEL 5 Osebo 2 Abiku cel obt POT AUS6 Osebo Library: (81 cards) Master (13 cards) 1 Powerbase: Luanda 1 Pentex Subversion 4 Villein 2 Blood Doll 1 Powerbase: Montreal 1 Mbare Market, Harare 1 Ancestor Spirit 2 Dreams of the Sphinx Action (18 cards) 4 Well-Marked 2 Enforcer 4 Preternatural Strength 6 Flurry of Action 2 Pulse of the Canaille Action Modifier (1 cards) 1 Strange Day Reaction (26 cards) 6 Eyes of Argus 3 On the Qui Vive 2 Forced Awakening 4 Eagle`s Sight 2 My Enemy`s Enemy 3 Quicken Sight 4 Telepathic Misdirection 2 Precognition Combat (18 cards) 4 Flash 4 Pursuit 6 Taste of Vitae 2 Blur 2 Side Strike Retainer (2 cards) 1 Shaman 1 Mr. Winthrop Equipment (3 cards) 1 Heart of Nizchetus 1 Bowl of Convergence 1 Ivory Bow The thinking is that basically you're playing a walldeck with a long buildup, you're aiming for a 3 player sitation where you will be the strongest deck. Perfect matchups would be against bigcaps where you get the first turn when the 3 player situation arrives. You will be doing alot of walling and getting equipment, more strength etc. The main use for the flurry of action will most likely be to draw cards and get the necessary buildup cards. You also have the second win-condition of building up some bleed on your vampires and trying to bruisebleed, this will probably not work until midgame since the combat package is dependent on permanents. The reason you want a small deck (80) cards and permanents is due to your houserule of 6-card limit, you want each of your cards to be as effective as possible and permanents is the only way combat will work in this environment, also you want to maximize your chances of drawing into the important cards in the deck and thus you need a smaller deck. Even more useful would be a normal celerity/guns walldeck but you seem to want to build Osebo. Try this and be very careful of who you end up in the endgame with, you might have to let your crosstable buddy die horribly since you are wholly dependant on a decent endgame, you will not be sweeping any tables. Ivan - Maybe this?

playing Osebo without Blood Shield (one of the best laibon equipement if you want to fight) and zero copies of Ancestor's insight ( -1 / +1 bleed) is too bad. Try to make room for that Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > playing Osebo without Blood Shield (one of the best laibon equipement if you want to fight) and zero copies of Ancestor's insight ( -1 / +1 bleed) is too bad. Try to make room for that > I considered both those cards in my version, but Blood Shield is expensive and the deck won't build much on press combat since it will not have grapples, otherwise I would agree. The 6-card limit kind of stumps grappledecks since you can't pack the necessary 8-10, it's more of a jab-deck where you hit for 1-3 (depending on buildup) and check for combat ends to be able to pack on additionals if the coast is clear. If more than well-marked is necessary I would probably add a guardian angel instead in this deck, which does not cost an action and has an additional bonus for the same cost. As for Ancestor's insight, it's just a bad card imo, and since it's transient bleed it's even worse. But that's just a matter of opinion =). Ivan - Maybe this?

> I'm surprised at how much people seem to value advice from strangers versus simply playing the game > Why can't we have both? My intention was to get advice from you guys to get a halfway decent deck, before playtesting and tweaking with my friends. There are certain players in my regular group who make playtesting impossible, they'll just brainwash the fuck out of you, or play some nasty min/maxed dominant combo so you never get a real "feel" for how your deck plays, hence the decision to come here first. I'm not sure where the low level of vitriol in this thread has come from, since nobody is forcing anyone to answer me, it's almost like some people are actually offended that my deck is bad. I didn't just throw some cards together, I took experience from other combat decks I've played and made notes. for reference, some of the choices I made and why: -melee decks often beaten by maneuvres, throw in earthshock to hit at range -all of the TWDs I've played, and the meta in my area, suffer from a lack of intercept, throw in lots to mix it up. -find some way to manage blood, throw in the blood puppy -once everyone is torpored, bleed to death (granted I was short of wakes, my bad). I guess the point I was making is that I actually have put some effort into this, I understand the game mechanics and the meta in my area, I'm just not quite *there* yet. EDIT: I should add that my situation is rather unusual in that, since I play exclusively in a virtual setting (Lackey/OCTGN) access to cards is unlimited and my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. this is the reason for the six card limit, since we had shit like "Return to innocence + Byzar" spam decks.

> tarantulus wrote: > EDIT: I should add that my situation is rather unusual in that, since I play exclusively in a virtual setting (Lackey/OCTGN) access to cards is unlimited and my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. this is the reason for the six card limit, since we had shit like "Return to innocence + Byzar" spam decks. > Couldn't you find other player online to playe with "regular" rule ? Else, put some inner circle and 6 PTO. Or play Imbued with Edge Explosion and Memory of Mortalitie. With a bit of tinkering, you should be able to show them *why* thoses cards were banned. Also, you can do Return to Innocence + Byzar deck easily enough. You just need to fill the deck with 30 burn cards, like Dirty Contract.

> tarantulus wrote: > EDIT: I should add that my situation is rather unusual in that, since I play exclusively in a virtual setting (Lackey/OCTGN) access to cards is unlimited and my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. this is the reason for the six card limit, since we had shit like "Return to innocence + Byzar" spam decks. > Couldn't you find other player online to playe with "regular" rule ? Else, put some inner circle and 6 PTO. Or play Imbued with Edge Explosion and Memory of Mortalitie. With a bit of tinkering, you should be able to show them *why* thoses cards were banned. Also, you can do Return to Innocence + Byzar deck easily enough. You just need to fill the deck with 30+ burn cards, like Dirty Contract.

> tarantulus wrote: > EDIT: I should add that my situation is rather unusual in that, since I play exclusively in a virtual setting (Lackey/OCTGN) access to cards is unlimited and my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. this is the reason for the six card limit, since we had shit like "Return to innocence + Byzar" spam decks. > Return to innocence Added to the V:EKN banned list in 1999 Although this doesn't apply to casual games it is however a good idea copy as many tournament rules as possible.

> tarantulus wrote: > > > <snip> > > for reference, some of the choices I made and why: > > > > -melee decks often beaten by maneuvres, throw in earthshock to hit at range > > > > -all of the TWDs I've played, and the meta in my area, suffer from a lack of intercept, throw in lots to mix it up. > > > > -find some way to manage blood, throw in the blood puppy > > > > -once everyone is torpored, bleed to death (granted I was short of wakes, my bad). > > > > I guess the point I was making is that I actually have put some effort into this, I understand the game mechanics and the meta in my area, I'm just not quite *there* yet. > > > > <snip> > > > I toss in a few thoughts since I usually play these kind of decks myself. > > If you are in a vote heavy meta you will not be able to do well, while the 3-player situation will be in your benefit, if the meta is vote heavy you will get cross table ousted. On the other hand, if you are in a bleed heavy meta you will do quite well since Auspex bounce is very strong, pack in more bounce and you might even start getting some early ousts. In a mixed vote-bleed meta you will do well depending on seating and the game progression. With the right play you will balance the table so that when 3 players are left you will be strong enough to pick up your 3 points and win the table. > > Important!: The only time you should torpor the entire table to bleed freely is when there are 3 players left (including you) and you will be able to control both predator and prey simultaniously. > > While melee decks lose vs manuevers, you will only be in trouble if it's there are alot of ranged combat decks, in which case you might want to change deck to suit your meta better. You could build a decent aus-cel guns wall with Toreador princes, that way you get alot of wakes and cheap intercept+bounce even with the 6card limit. > > Blood puppy is just bad, always consider Villein and blood doll or vessel instead. Both do the job better. > Ivan - Maybe this?

> tarantulus wrote: > > > tarantulus wrote: > > my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. > > Then abuse the banned list until they change their minds — those cards are banned for a reason. Deck Name : Why some cards are banned Author : Ke @ vtes-consumed.blogspot.com Description : Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 1 max: 11 average: 7.91667 4x Arika (11) inner circle Ventrue (group 2) 2x Etrius (11) inner circle Tremere (group 2) 2x Ur-Shulgi, The Shepherd (11) 2 votes Assamite 2x Mustafa Rahman (2) Tremere (group 2) 1x Samson (2) Ventrue antitribu (group 2) 1x Royce (1) Pander (group 2) Library [60 cards] Action [10] 5x Govern the Unaligned 5x Return to Innocence, The Action Modifier [19] 5x Conditioning 6x Elder Impersonation 2x Freak Drive 6x Lost in Crowds Master [16] 2x Direct Intervention 1x Lilith's Blessing 6x Villein 1x Wider View 6x Zillah's Valley Political Action [2] 2x Protect Thine Own Reaction [13] 3x Deflection 6x Obedience 4x On the Qui Vive Crafted with : Anarch Revolt Deck Builder. [Wed Oct 10 13:07:23 2012] * Added PTO Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

No PTO? I guess it's time to have it legal again, then

> Ke. wrote: > > > tarantulus wrote: > > > > > tarantulus wrote: > > > my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. > > > > > > > > > Then abuse the banned list until they change their minds — those cards are banned for a reason. > The thing is, I'm not an a-hole, and I don't want to become an a-hole just becasue one or two of the players in my group are a-holes. I play to enjoy myself, and if I'm ruining everyone else's game by playing unfair decks, then I can't enjoy that, guess I'm just too nice eh?

> Pascal wrote: > No PTO? > Yes, got too excited about Return to Innocence — added. Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

And no seating changers? > > tarantulus wrote: > I play to enjoy myself, and if I'm ruining everyone else's game by playing unfair decks, then I can't enjoy that, guess I'm just too nice eh? > There is no such thing as an unfair deck. There is only legal or illegal. Your buddies already chose the rules, it is only fair that you exploit them to their full extent. P.S.: how is that Byzar + Return to Innocence deck supposed to work? Return to Innocence does not burn the vampire, it removes it from the game, so Byzar's special does not work (neither does Blessed Resilience). Or are your buddies against errata too?

> Non-existant user wrote: > And no seating changers? > Yes, yes — my experience with banned cards is limited... Bleed, Freak, Return to innocence is pretty decent motivator. Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

> tarantulus wrote: > The thing is, I'm not an a-hole, and I don't want to become an a-hole just becasue one or two of the players in my group are a-holes. > > I play to enjoy myself, and if I'm ruining everyone else's game by playing unfair decks, then I can't enjoy that, guess I'm just too nice eh? > But that's the point — by playing with the current rules it help ensures people play with fair decks. The cards got banned for a reason. The 6 card limit also gives too much of an advantage to certain disciplines / archetypes — so again, sticking to the rules help there... Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

> Ke. wrote: > But that's the point — by playing with the current rules it help ensures people play with fair decks. The cards got banned for a reason. The 6 card limit also gives too much of an advantage to certain disciplines / archetypes — so again, sticking to the rules help there... > That is not the help he is asking for, even though we might think that they should follow the VEKN rules since it helps in general balance, he is asking for help for his deck under those specifik rules. Not be be a bastard, but help that is not asked for is seldom well recieved =). Ivan - Maybe this?

> Myrdin wrote: > That is not the help he is asking for, even though we might think that they should follow the VEKN rules since it helps in general balance, he is asking for help for his deck under those specifik rules. Not be be a bastard, but help that is not asked for is seldom well recieved =). > Then again, most people can't give him sound advice because we are not accustomated to that kind of format. And giving him advice to convince people to follow the rule may lead him to play more entertaining games. (I also believe they are likely to not follow errata) It is likely that a surprise Return to Innocence can be a good trick in this kind of environnement. But it's unlikely somebody here know whether 1 is enough or 2-3 would be better, or if it's worth it to nudge the capacity a bit higher to get the maximum out of this. On the same topic, cramming 3-4 delaying tactic, or even the full 6, in a non-camarilla deck in a environment where PTO is not banned, may be very well worth it. Edit : Tarentula, by the way, Byzar does NOT work with Return to innocence at all, because vampires are removed from play woth RtI, not burned

> DeathInABottle wrote: > > > tarantulus wrote: > > > > > I'm not sure where the low level of vitriol in this thread has come from, since nobody is forcing anyone to answer me, it's almost like some people are actually offended that my deck is bad. I didn't just throw some cards together, I took experience from other combat decks I've played and made notes. > > > > > I'm also kind of mystified by how aggressive some responses have been. Some good points have been made, but they could have easily been made with less condescension. > > > This. > > Maybe people just seem agitated because people are doing things differently than they have gotten used to. It's weird anyways. > > I'm a fan of using the official rulings, as well as rules in the rulebook (say, about the groupings) to avoid super cheesy stuff. I think that's how the game is at its best. I don't really mind people playing some other way. The game essentially is the same anyways. > "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

> Kraus wrote: > Maybe people just seem agitated because people are doing things differently than they have gotten used to. It's weird anyways. > I'm slightly agitated as I've heard of a number of play groups in NZ playing with a 6 card limit and no time limit — and one day I'll probably head back there... Tarantulus is this an NZ play group? Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

I would also add that there is two different source of agitation here. First, the incompletely exposed custom rule mean people think he have less fun than what he could, and frustrations ensue when the OP think it's a bad idea. (in addition to mean advices are a bit off ; with PTO authorized I believe the first advice is "play camarilla instead of Osebo") And then, there is people frustrated by the fact that very few knowledge from, say, vtesone.wordpress.com/ or secret library to be extremely improved, without even touching the fact the archetype is very difficult to play. It's extremely bad and still human. Also, when someone say he has some experience and took clue from experienced player, and then play Blood Puppy and Burnt Offering, my guts reaction is to believe he is a beginner.

> Ohlmann wrote: > (in addition to mean advices are a bit off ; with PTO authorized I believe the first advice is "play camarilla instead of Osebo") > Generally good advice, I think. Osebo are hard to play. > Ohlmann wrote: > And then, there is people frustrated by the fact that very few knowledge from, say, vtesone.wordpress.com/ or secret library to be extremely improved, without even touching the fact the archetype is very difficult to play. It's extremely bad and still human. > I can normally understand your points, but I'm afraid I don't understand this. Do you mean that you expect tarantalus to have already familiarized himself with extrala and the other information out there on VTES? If so, I think that's an unreasonable standard, and actually one toward which we shouldn't want to aim: it's preferable to have people coming here for interactive advice than going to a static page, since it gives the community a chance to show how supportive and active it can be. ...In theory. > Ohlmann wrote: > Also, when someone say he has some experience and took clue from experienced player, and then play Blood Puppy and Burnt Offering, my guts reaction is to believe he is a beginner. > If that's the case, it's all the more reason to treat that player with kindness.

> Ke. wrote: > > > tarantulus wrote: > > > > > tarantulus wrote: > > > my group refuses to abide by the banned cards list. > > > > > > > > > Then abuse the banned list until they change their minds — those cards are banned for a reason. > Deck Name : Why some cards are banned > Author : Ke @ vtes-consumed.blogspot.com > Description : > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 1 max: 11 average: 7.91667 > 4x Arika (11) inner circle Ventrue (group 2) > 2x Etrius (11) inner circle Tremere (group 2) > 2x Ur-Shulgi, The Shepherd (11) 2 votes Assamite > 2x Mustafa Rahman (2) Tremere (group 2) > 1x Samson (2) Ventrue antitribu (group 2) > 1x Royce (1) Pander (group 2) > > Library [60 cards] > > Action [10] > 5x Govern the Unaligned > 5x Return to Innocence, The > > Action Modifier [19] > 5x Conditioning > 6x Elder Impersonation > 2x Freak Drive > 6x Lost in Crowds > > Master [16] > 2x Direct Intervention > 1x Lilith's Blessing > 6x Villein > 1x Wider View > 6x Zillah's Valley > > Political Action [2] > 2x Protect Thine Own > > Reaction [13] > 3x Deflection > 6x Obedience > 4x On the Qui Vive > > Crafted with : Anarch Revolt Deck Builder. [Wed Oct 10 13:07:23 2012] > > * Added PTO > Mix zillah's with the old good tombs of ramses III to get free vampires.

> Dr.Mafrune wrote: > Mix zillah's with the old good tombs of ramses III to get free vampires. > Or replaceable Wakes, free majesties, agg damage from pulled fangs, embraces with skill cards etc... Amaranth Deck Building Tool : VTES NZ : VTES ANZ Facebook

Just say NO to the other players. If the don't abide the rules, play the posted deck EVERY game. They will discover soon, there are strong reasons why certain cards were banned. Deck name. DISCIPLINE Author. Dr.Mafrune Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 4 max: 5 average: 4.58 4x Travis "Traveler72" Miller 5 mar def Imbued:4 3x Jennie "Cassie247" Orne 5 inn jud vis Imbued:4 3x John "Cop90" O'Malley 4 jud ven Imbued:4 1x Jack "Hannibal137" Harmon 4 def jud Imbued:4 1x Paul "Sixofswords29" Moreton 4 def vis Imbued:4 Library [76 cards] Action [1] 1x Aranthebes, The Immortal Ally [4] 1x Carlton Van Wyk (Hunter) 1x Gregory Winter 1x Ossian 1x Wendell Delburton (Hunter) Combat [5] 5x Target Vitals or mix it with some old Pulled Fangs Conviction [15] 3x React with Conviction 6x Second Sight 6x Strike with Conviction Equipment [4] 1x Crusader Sword, The 1x Ivory Bow 1x Sniper Rifle 1x Heart of Nitzchetus Event [7] 1x Anthelios, The Red Star 2x Edge Explosion 2x Unmasking, The 1x Slow Withering, The 1x Veil of Darkness or Dragonbound Master [24] 2x Church of Vindicated Faith, The 4x Direct Intervention 1x Fortschritt Library 5x Memories of Mortality 1x Millicent Smith, Puritan Vampire Hunter 2x Parthenon, The 1x Pentex(TM) Subversion 2x Smiling Jack, The Anarch 1x Society of Leopold 1x Tension in the Ranks 1x Vampiric Disease 2x Not to be 1x Wider View Power [11] 4x Champion 2x Discern 1x Rejuvenate 4x Vigilance Reaction [3] 3x Determine Retainer [3] 1x JS Simmons 1x Tasha Morgan 1x Mr.Winthrop

I haven't been paying attention to the thread, but it's amazing how it started as an Osebo deck and ended up as an Imbued deck

In the spirit of helping him out, here is a modified deck to fit those house rules. It won't win any tournaments and the original design has 15 eagle sights, I added ashur tablets so you can pick up eagle sights again. The idea is to be mainly passive. Block everything your prey does included his actions forward using Eagle Sight. Punish your prey hard. If you predator bleed you, redirect the bleeds to your prey. Pulled Fangs so your prey doesn't get his vampires up from torpor again and Dragonbound/Tension/Fame to finish him off. If you like you can sacrifice a card to include Powerbase: Luanda. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 6 max: 7 average: 6.33333 4x Khalu 7 AUS CEL POT ani pro Osebo:3 4x Abiku 6 AUS POT cel obt Osebo:4 4x Homa 6 AUS CEL POT Osebo:4 Library [90 cards] Action [9] 3x Enforcer 3x Heroic Might 3x Well-Marked Combat [36] 1x Blur 6x Immortal Grapple 2x Psyche! 5x Pulled Fangs 6x Pursuit 6x Sideslip 5x Taste of Vitae 5x Torn Signpost Equipment [1] 1x Bowl of Convergence Event [1] 1x Dragonbound Master [11] 6x Ashur Tablets 1x Base Hunting Ground 1x Fame 1x Mbare Market, Harare 1x Celerity 1x Tension in the Ranks Reaction [31] 6x Eagle's Sight 6x Eyes of Argus 2x My Enemy's Enemy 6x On the Qui Vive 5x Quicken Sight 6x Telepathic Misdirection Retainer [1] 1x Mr. Winthrop

> Chaitan wrote: > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 6 max: 7 average: 6.33333 > 4x Khalu 7 AUS CEL POT ani pro Osebo:3 > 4x Abiku 6 AUS POT cel obt Osebo:4 > 4x Homa 6 AUS CEL POT Osebo:4 > excuse me but the crypt is crap. You will likely play with 2 vampires. Which is quite risky in terms of "block denial can and will happen", "pentex can and will happen". Please consider adding more vampires or at least some ways to browse your crypt. Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Reyda wrote: > > > Chaitan wrote: > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 6 max: 7 average: 6.33333 > > 4x Khalu 7 AUS CEL POT ani pro Osebo:3 > > 4x Abiku 6 AUS POT cel obt Osebo:4 > > 4x Homa 6 AUS CEL POT Osebo:4 > > > excuse me but the crypt is crap. You will likely play with 2 vampires. Which is quite risky in terms of "block denial can and will happen", "pentex can and will happen". > Please consider adding more vampires or at least some ways to browse your crypt. > I have played with all kinds of combinations and this is a good mix between "what I can afford", "really good vampires for really cheap cost" and "I will minimize bad crypt draw". Adding weenies can easily result in uncessary pool lost from my own tension and dragonbound. Pentex is annoying but not crippling. There is no star vampire in this deck. If you disable one vampire, two other can still block and it can be tough to defend Pentex against this deck. The pentexed vampire can still deflect bleeds so it's not a total loss. I said this is not a tournament winner but it is a clear improvement to the original posters deck.

Then at least add Wider View, several copies. With 3*4 vamps in your crypt, you are quite likely not to see a third (unique) vampire amongst top 6 or 7 crypt cards.

> tarantulus wrote: > > > I'm surprised at how much people seem to value advice from strangers versus simply playing the game > > > Why can't we have both? > > I'm not sure where the low level of vitriol in this thread has come from, since nobody is forcing anyone to answer me, it's almost like some people are actually offended that my deck is bad. I didn't just throw some cards together, I took experience from other combat decks I've played and made notes. > May or may not be including me in here, certainly I can see how my post would come across as condescending. Either way, I'm trying to make a different point that really has nothing to do with the deck. I don't care if decklists are bad. I don't care if people want to play with bad cards. I consider it necessary to my enjoyment of CCGs to play bad cards. Nor do I care about card limits, house rules, or whatever. In recent years, I was playing in a 4CL environment with a house list of banned cards, such as Events being banned but not things like RTI, with some cards played as written and some not. That meant that an old copy of Majesty could be played for free but not a new copy, or an old copy of Pulled Fangs did agg. May not be interested in this point, but I find it curious to seek advice on a specific deck rather than seek to be a better deck builder. I wasn't asking a rhetorical question. I am curious as to why people think they are bad at building decks. Is it because there isn't a three card limit or four card limit to help limit decisions? Is it because of the nature of V:TES (as compared to another CCG or games without deckbuilding)? Is it because there are too many card options? Is it because of the variety of card types? Having two decks? Poor card flow? Poor card value assessment skills? You did mention that playtesting anything is difficult, so that helps explain why trial and error isn't as productive. Makes me wonder what the opponents do to build better decks, but whatever. While I hear from people in conversation about how they think they are bad at building decks often enough, I find it rare for someone to say so on a forum, which is why I found that far more interesting than the deck at hand. If I could, I'd rather help someone be better at building decks than be better at building a specific deck. That may not be of interest and you really just care about the specific deck. Traveller Card Game

> Kiddo wrote: > With 3*4 vamps in your crypt, you are quite likely not to see a third (unique) vampire amongst top 6 or 7 crypt cards. > Hmm, I got a sudden inspiration of xkcd.com/386/ and started calculating Hypergeometric Distribution and other probability methods but after a few hours I gave up. I'm fairly sure there is a 29% chance of getting three unique vampires from just a three card draw. The fourth crypt card should have about 40-55% chance of getting scoring a third hit. Then it grows exponentially up to the ninth crypt card which of course is 100% success. Unfortunately I can't back up my counter claim with real math but I'm sure your claim is extremely exaggerated. If there are any math guru's out there, I'd love to see a solution to this problem.

> If I could, I'd rather help someone be better at building decks than be better at building a specific deck. That may not be of interest and you really just care about the specific deck. > This is very much of interest to me, but any time I've been told this before, I've ended up with some guy telling me I have to build a thousand stealth and bleed decks before I can try anything fun. (hyperbole, but you get my meaning). I LIKE unusual things, I like dementation decks, I like turbo decks, I like things that play well without having to spend turn after turn going "bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth" ad nauseum. if this means I end up with some shitty decks, that's fine, but I'm going to keep doing it until I find what works.

> Chaitan wrote: > Unfortunately I can't back up my counter claim with real math but I'm sure your claim is extremely exaggerated. > > If there are any math guru's out there, I'd love to see a solution to this problem. > I can't speak to genius, but Ira Fay has a decent tool for card drawing simulations. www.irafay.com/cards.php See also: www.thelasombra.com/utilities.htm

> Chaitan wrote: > Hmm, I got a sudden inspiration of xkcd.com/386/ and started calculating Hypergeometric Distribution and other probability methods but after a few hours I gave up. > With 3 vampires in 4 each, you have a bit more than 58% of chances to get the 3 in the starting crypt. If you had a bad draw with only 2 different vampires, then you have 50% of chances that the fifth vampire is the missing one.

> tarantulus wrote: > I LIKE unusual things, I like dementation decks, I like turbo decks, I like things that play well without having to spend turn after turn going "bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth" ad nauseum. > > if this means I end up with some shitty decks, that's fine, but I'm going to keep doing it until I find what works. > Ahh, you like to explore... just like me. I feel you. But the key to exploration is to still bring some threshold of viability to the table, otherwise you're wasting your time and everyone else's time (been there, done that, felt like a heel). Masochism isn't a commonly shared trait, so it's better to make our experiments meet a baseline strength. Now, for me, it made sense when I asked myself what are the clear goals of VTES, now compare what are the clear (thematic, card specific, module) goals of my experiment. I can easily isolate the former: oust your preys for VP and profit, ftw! The latter I isolate as tight a block of experimentation I can, which would be the heart of why I'm playing. Then I look at the heart and ask where is it weak in: a) accomplishing my clear VTES goals, a.k.a. offense, and b) thwarting my predator's clear VTES goals, a.k.a. defense. My experiment would obviously swing to one or the other. Thus the other remaining aspect needs more traditional support. And for that you use a more tried and true tight module to then complement. From here you test vigorously through solo play ("goldfishing") to check crypt/deck flow. And then you test it against live opponents. From there you learn the strengths and weaknesses of your experiment. It'll give you data on whether an alternate tried and true complement -- or even new support to your experiment's goal -- would make your idea better. Basically, long story short, you gotta be familiar with what the cards can do; small experiments build up to big experiments. Part of that is using a bit of the already beaten path, and then adding just enough of your own thing to be off of it. That'll give you confidence about how your experiment cards work in practice so you can then beat your own path to victory in the future.

> tarantulus wrote: > > > If I could, I'd rather help someone be better at building decks than be better at building a specific deck. That may not be of interest and you really just care about the specific deck. > > > This is very much of interest to me, but any time I've been told this before, I've ended up with some guy telling me I have to build a thousand stealth and bleed decks before I can try anything fun. (hyperbole, but you get my meaning). > > I LIKE unusual things, I like dementation decks, I like turbo decks, I like things that play well without having to spend turn after turn going "bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth, bleed for 2.. +2 stealth" ad nauseum. > > if this means I end up with some shitty decks, that's fine, but I'm going to keep doing it until I find what works. > I do advise people to play stock decks until they understand them. Well, in theory, can understand decks by observing others play them, but that tends to be much less reliable. An often comment from people who play Imbued is that they aren't as unassailable as they seem and one will understand that from the other side. Of course, to get off on a tangent, it comes from whether there's a real desire to improve or not. I got into a long conversation over lunch yesterday with someone about improving one's success at V:TES, with the thrust of my view being that people speak of wanting to be better (which we will say equates to being more successful, here) but don't do the things that will improve their games meaningfully. Anyway, this all should really become its own topic, rather than further threadjacking your Osebo deck thread. I don't have a quick list handy for tips on better deckbuilding, but I could try to think about such. To somewhat relate to this specific deck, the concept of intercept combat is fine - it's a far more robust archetype than rush combat. The crypt doesn't bother me. Many of the card choices don't bother me. But, I would take to heart the questions in the sticky post, as mentioned. I would also ask the question going in for any deck, "Does this deck appear to do what I want it to do?" One must always keep in mind that there are other players trying to do things that you may not want them to do, like try to oust you or try to stop you from ousting or, if playing a combo deck, disrupting the combo. The follow up holistic question would be something like, "If my opponents play any of common strategies M, N, or O, what is likely to happen?" Just to be inconsistent, here is one tip: think about how to build the deck as a 60 card deck. Regardless as to how big it ends up being at the end, by trying to conform to a smaller deck size, you focus on what you need to accomplish your goals. Once you covered your goal(s), you can add more cards to shore up a weakness, build on a strength, run good stuff cards, run metagame cards, or run fun or goofy cards. With this deck, the need (as I understand it) is intercept, wakes, and smash face. I see the second not being served well enough, but that's just my judgment. That doesn't mean 20 intercept cards, 30 combat cards, and 15 wakes. That could be some permacept with 10 or so transient intercept (that includes bleed bounce), permabeatings with 15 or so transient beatings, and maybe eight wakes to start out with. Let's say that's a core of 43 card slots used. Twelvish masters and five "I need some way to oust people" cards takes to 60. Then, what does the deck look like? Sad, pathetic? Well, have 0-30 more slots in a normal environment to change that; in your environment, more, though why this deck archetype is advantaged by being fat is unclear. By the way, the problem with making judgments about the quality of decks is that V:TES games are not short, relatively few get played, very few tend to get played with specific decks (varying considerably by player, many of my decks only ever get played once and hardly any more than thrice, but that seems unusual). Results, therefore, suffer immensely by sample size issues. Then, play skill varies to where it's difficult to distinguish the deck's contribution from the player's contribution. Then, you have metagame considerations that bias results. Etc. You may find that a particular build that someone else thinks is awful works great. I find that builds of my own decks that I think are awful can be successful in any given game. I could point to my most recent tournament winning deck as a deck build that offends me for what it omits. Traveller Card Game