This is just food for thought, but I thought I'd put the question here.
If you had the choice (and for the sake of the argument we focus only on the title, not capacity/disciplines), would you rather control an archbishop or a priscus?
And if you could control 2 of each, would you lean more to ab's, or prisci? And what if the number you control is further increasing?
For me it's clear. Archbishops are more reliable, vote-wise, and give more votes the more you control. Contrast to prisci, where you will have to contend with other players' prisci eventually, and the votes of the block are fixed at 3.
What is your opinion?
pckvtes.wordpress.com
When building a crypt I tend to add a single prisci to support the other votes as per vampire it is pretty nice. But then again the last tre decks i had using Prisci used Gratiano and he is alittle bit special...
Prince of Lidingö
> Amenophobis wrote:
> For me it's clear. Archbishops are more reliable, vote-wise, and give more votes the more you control. Contrast to prisci, where you will have to contend with other players' prisci eventually, and the votes of the block are fixed at 3.
>
You seriously believe this ? Or you have just never thought about it ? It's hard to take this as any other thing than a joke to be honest.
If you have a single priscus, he is exactly as reliable as a cardinal : 3 votes. If your opponent have a prisci, it's the same thing as your and his prisci having 3 votes (who cancel each other). If your opponent have two prisci, it's the same as each prisci having 3 votes (6 to your opponent, 3 for you). If your opponents get 3 or more prisci, then they are unlucky or have badly constructed deck, and in any case the situation is significantly less worse than if all four vampire were archbishop.
Your crosstable ally can have priscus. They can contest justicar or archbishop title too.
Well, Una is spectacular!
Having a Priscus usually gives a player three votes. Having Gratiano with a Cardinal Benediction is fantastic, as he becomes Godtiano.
Having an Archbishop gives a player 2 votes and Eternal Vigilance. Nearly no one uses Creation Rites, Private Audience, or Templar, and the other Archbishop cards are garbage.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/
Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017
> KevinM wrote:
> Well, Una is spectacular!
>
> Having a Priscus usually gives a player three votes. Having Gratiano with a Cardinal Benediction is fantastic, as he becomes Godtiano.
>
> Having an Archbishop gives a player 2 votes and Eternal Vigilance. Nearly no one uses Creation Rites, Private Audience, or Templar, and the other Archbishop cards are garbage.
>
Papillon isn't garbage, sigh.
Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.
> KevinM wrote:
> Having an Archbishop gives a player 2 votes and Eternal Vigilance. Nearly no one uses Creation Rites, Private Audience, or Templar, and the other Archbishop cards are garbage.
>
Note that Eternal Vigilance work with Priscus too. Archbishop card that does not work with priscus are rare : Sabbat Inquisitor, Shock Troops, Cardinal Sin: Failure of Mission, Deploy the Hand. Sabbat inquisitor seem the most useful of the three, and don't see much play.
On the other hand, Priscus can play Chalice of Kinship. It's nothing to write home about either ; maybe some trick deck can use it, but we can safely say they can play the same cards.
So, the difference is mainly that you should remember to not put two priscus in your crypt, in the same way you dont wan't to self contest city title or the justicar library card with a printed justicar.
(and justicar contesting is something I have seen a lot, maybe even more than priscus "contest", and they are bloody affair often)
> Amenophobis wrote:
> This is just food for thought, but I thought I'd put the question here.
>
> If you had the choice (and for the sake of the argument we focus only on the title, not capacity/disciplines), would you rather control an archbishop or a priscus?
> And if you could control 2 of each, would you lean more to ab's, or prisci? And what if the number you control is further increasing?
>
I think answers this question is meaningless without more context.
It's often useful to have incidental votes in a non-vote deck. It ensures you aren't the easy sink for stray damage for a KRC, gives you a negotiating position in poltical action debates and so forth. In decks like that, I'd prefer prisci to archbishops (all other considerations being equal). The benefits of the prisci title are at least as good or better than the archbishop, and the downsides irrelevant.
The difference in the cards that prisci and archbishops enable is pretty uninteresting (with the exception of Papillion), so there's nothing much to choose there.
In a dedicated vote deck, however, there is a benefit to controlling multiple distinct titles, and then archbishops are an advantage, but even there, I would favour 1 prisci and 1 archbishop over 2 archbishops.
This is before looking at capacities and disciplines, which is a frankly unrealistic restriction to place on the comparison. The prisci are often cheaper than archbishops (14 prisci with capacities 8 or less (which includes Gratiano), while there are only 9 archbishops), and often have better discipline spreads than comparable archbishops (compare Korah and Marie Faucigny, for example), which is a further point in favour of prisci.
--
National Coordinator
South Africa
> Ohlmann wrote:
>
> > Amenophobis wrote:
> > For me it's clear. Archbishops are more reliable, vote-wise, and give more votes the more you control. Contrast to prisci, where you will have to contend with other players' prisci eventually, and the votes of the block are fixed at 3.
> >
> You seriously believe this ? Or you have just never thought about it ? It's hard to take this as any other thing than a joke to be honest.
>
> If you have a single priscus, he is exactly as reliable as a cardinal : 3 votes. If your opponent have a prisci, it's the same thing as your and his prisci having 3 votes (who cancel each other). If your opponent have two prisci, it's the same as each prisci having 3 votes (6 to your opponent, 3 for you). If your opponents get 3 or more prisci, then they are unlucky or have badly constructed deck, and in any case the situation is significantly less worse than if all four vampire were archbishop.
>
This is the best case scenario where archbishops or prisci lead to the same vote difference.
The worst case scenario is when your cross-table buddy and you each control Prisci against a third player who controls an Inner Circle.
The prisci block will be worth 3 votes, no matter how many prisci are in play and will lose again the IC, whereas archbishops would have made a difference.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Ankha wrote:
> The worst case scenario is when your cross-table buddy and you each control Prisci against a third player who controls an Inner Circle.
> The prisci block will be worth 3 votes, no matter how many prisci are in play and will lose again the IC, whereas archbishops would have made a difference.
>
In worse case scenario, you contest title with your cross table buddies too. And archbishop are shared with camarilla vampires and throught group, while justicar are arguably more popular now than any single priscuses.
Can you really say with all seriousness when including a priscus "oh, no, if a crosstable buddy play a priscus too I will have less vote than an archbishop. Let's completely play an archbishop of the same size instead, it will make me much more likely to pass vote !" ?
The worse thing is, unlike unique title, the popularity of priscuses (?) don't affect their value, because if a lot of priscus are played, you are as likely to see them against you than with you. So it make even less sense than avoiding Lucian in your deck because Unmada and Marie Streck are very popular.
> Ohlmann wrote:
> Can you really say with all seriousness when including a priscus "oh, no, if a crosstable buddy play a priscus too I will have less vote than an archbishop.
>
This is a crappy reason, sure
> Ohlmann wrote:
> Let's completely play an archbishop of the same size instead, it will make me much more likely to pass vote !" ?
>
We're not talking about 1 random vampire in the crypt, but of a vote deck crypt with as many titled vampires as possible. In that case, I'd include 1 or 2 priscus only (for the sake of drawing 1 in the drawing crypt), the rest being non-priscus titled vampires because 2 Prisci have 3 votes whereas 2 Archbishops have 4 votes.
Considering that 3 vampires out is an average for vote decks, it even gets better with 1 Priscus and 2 other titled vampires (avg. 7 votes) rather than 3 Prisci (3 votes).
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> Lech wrote:
>
> > KevinM wrote:
> > Well, Una is spectacular!
> >
> > Having a Priscus usually gives a player three votes. Having Gratiano with a Cardinal Benediction is fantastic, as he becomes Godtiano.
> >
> > Having an Archbishop gives a player 2 votes and Eternal Vigilance. Nearly no one uses Creation Rites, Private Audience, or Templar, and the other Archbishop cards are garbage.
> >
> Papillon isn't garbage, sigh.
>
Papillon isn't an Archbishop card.
The discussion is about Priscus and Archbishops, not titled vampires.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/
Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017
> KevinM wrote:
> Papillon isn't an Archbishop card.
>
> The discussion is about Priscus and Archbishops, not titled vampires.
>
Papillon can be played while you have a ready Archbishop, but not while you have a ready Priscus. So, it is relevant to the conversation as a card that draws a contrast.
When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike.
pckvtes.wordpress.com
@pckvtes
With two ready vampires, here is how I would prioritize:
1) 1x Archbishop and 1x Priscus
2) 2x Archbishop
3) 2x Priscus
It is also relevant how those titles are gained. Any random Sabbat vampire can call a political action to become an Archbishop of a city. Many Pander have done so with great success. But becoming a Priscus requires another vampire to take the Investiture political action. Since it is easier to become an Archbishop, that title does gain a slight advantage in this respect.
When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike.
pckvtes.wordpress.com
@pckvtes
> Jeff wrote:
> With two ready vampires, here is how I would prioritize:
>
> 1) 1x Archbishop and 1x Priscus
> 2) 2x Archbishop
> 3) 2x Priscus
>
-I agree.
- Papillon is cool. Only an archbishop can play it, but so can princes and (Gasp!) anarch barons. The votes available to these two other types of city titles devalue Papillon as an argument for the value of archbishops, IMHO.
- I love Sabbat. I love the religious titles and flavor of the sabbat. I like to use votes. However, in the end, Camarilla can play Parity Shift, Independent can play Reckless Agitation, and Daughters can play Lily Prelude. If I could play a vote that could be different than these but help me oust with the same effectiveness, I would love to have any of these wonderful titles in play. (Where is Bakija when you need him?) For that matter, It would help to have any card that would make the Archbishop and/or Priscus titles stand out in their own way (I'd be drawn like a moth to the flame). The laibon have No Secrets at least (the Kohlo cards are pretty good too).
> TorranceCircle wrote:
> - Papillon is cool. Only an archbishop can play it, but so can princes and (Gasp!) anarch barons. The votes available to these two other types of city titles devalue Papillon as an argument for the value of archbishops, IMHO.
>
Why ? Because others can play it too ? Lets assume that archbishops can play Parity Shift (sic!). Would you say "but so can princes play it, and they have 2nd tradition, so it devalue PS as an argument for the value of archbishops". I don't think so.
Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.
I agree that papillon is an argument for prefering archbishop over priscus.
And so, I agree that in some cases, archbishop are better than priscii. For example, I think that Meshenka would love to have 2 additional bloods a turn (without the steal possibility of the Rack) and Lazverinus would be sad without it.
But those decks are star decks which rely on the title only for the card it allows and the number of vote provided is more a side effect (even if it is a cool one). For voting deck, everything else identical, I would go every day for 3/4 prisci in my crypt (in order to have a good chance of drawing 1 of them) and the rest as archbishop. And if I want it, I would still play 1 copy of Papillon and I would have a good chance of being able to play it.
With such a wide range of options, will you be coming up against other Prisci? More than likely not. That's a block of 3 votes you control most of the time on vampires easier to get out than a cardinal.
Sabbat sort of have it easy. Cardinal benediction is huge. If someone is going straight KRC's or other nice generic voting srats, Sabbat are better off than Camarilla. You don't get the Hospitality or Domain, but there are other avenues for that.
Is there a card to make a vamp a Priscus? I can't seem to recall one.
Could be an idea for a nice promo card in the future.
> Arthur wrote:
> Is there a card to make a vamp a Priscus
>
Investiture .
> Card wrote:
> If this referendum is successful, put this card on the chosen vampire to represent the Sabbat title of priscus. Camarilla vampires cannot cast votes or ballots during this referendum.
>
> Arthur wrote:
> Is there a card to make a vamp a Priscus? I can't seem to recall one.
>
I think this is good proof that people aren't interested in having Priscii but if one fits into the rest of their deck then they'll include one.
Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418