Card idea: Trust no One

Name: Trust no One Cardtype: Political Action Successful referendum means each Methuselah burns 2 pool for each ally he or she controls. Useful against full-ally decks (including Imbues). Useful in a Informant deck. Useless otherwise. It should be better than the never-used Kindred Segregation. Thoughts? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I'd say this is a prime example of bad card design. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

Well, better than kindred segregation. But still not totally sold. Name: Trust no One Cardtype: Political Action Select one or more Methuselahs. Successful referendum means each chosen Methuselah burns 1 pool plus 2 additional pool for each ally he or she controls. Like this, i feel, a copy of it would find a way in a political deck, as it gives you at least some pool damage to your prey even if he does not have allies, and prevents heavy damage cross-table just because they have, say, Mylan and carlton. Text i just edited from Neonate breach, which functions in more-less same way, and is seeing playtime. B)

> jhattara wrote: > I'd say this is a prime example of bad card design. > If you don't say why you think it's a bad card design, it's not very interesting. > Pendargon wrote: > Well, better than kindred segregation. But still not totally sold. > > Name: Trust no One > Cardtype: Political Action > Select one or more Methuselahs. Successful referendum means each chosen Methuselah burns 1 pool plus 2 additional pool for each ally he or she controls. > > Like this, i feel, a copy of it would find a way in a political deck, as it gives you at least some pool damage to your prey even if he does not have allies, and prevents heavy damage cross-table just because they have, say, Mylan and carlton. > I like your version, so the card isn't totally useless if noone controls allies. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I think it's terrible card design. Against an Imbued, Shabling Hordes, Nephandus, Kazars Diary, War Ghoul, etc type of deck, it could cause someone to instantly lose from a dominant position. I have on several occasions seen (or had) ready regions of more than 10 allies, which would mean losing 20 pool to a single political action. Neonate Breach can do a maximum of 4 pool damage. The only other action I've seen that can potentially do as much damage is Revolutionary Council, but that requires a lot of setup on the part of the acting player.

If imbued, Khazar or shambler player lose from a dominant position, i call that good! B)

> Pendargon wrote: > If imbued, Khazar or shambler player lose from a dominant position, i call that good! B) > I don't find those decks position too dominant at all. In addition that card would just single-handedly kill not so dominant ally decks and make them very unpopular. Somebody makes fun arms dealer casual deck, well too bad you just die from one vote. I must agree with terrible card design. New cards should add more depth for deck building, that vote just limits it.

I dunno... I'm up for more ways to deal with ally decks that don't involve "play presence or combat". I'm not sure if a political action is the way to go, it being so tied up to presence and everything, but something that would be good against Nephandus or Ghouls would be nice.

I think there is enough anti ally tech already. Problem I have with anti ally cards like Far Mastery is that it is useless without allies around and stealing ally can be very strong. So it is potentially useless or potentially very strong. I play with Nephandus in tournaments very often and it's usually big gamble. Sometimes I run against heavy entrancement decks and there is almost nothing I can do. That's why I don't find it so dominant, too many bad match ups. I also think most of the anti ally cards are designed poorly (like far mastery example). There should be more anti ally cards which are useful when you don't face the allies and not too strong when you do. But question should also be why we even need more anti ally cards. Ally decks are not too dominant at all or what is the problem?

> Izaak wrote: > I dunno... I'm up for more ways to deal with ally decks that don't involve "play presence or combat". > > I'm not sure if a political action is the way to go, it being so tied up to presence and everything, but something that would be good against Nephandus or Ghouls would be nice. > What's wrong with combat exactly? Tournament decks are anti combat at best as it is. A wee bit more red cards in there wouldn't hurt, I think. Just add a gun or two and that'll take care of Neppers and Ghoulies in the long run - and that ain't even an investment in combat department. Allies are a good and cool way to battle the bleeders, voters and whatnot, and hardly over powered. There are plenty of ways to deal with them. Start with blocking the recruitment actions, for example. And against Nephandi we already have that one vote, which burns all allies unless their costs are repaid. That ought to be enough. "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

You don't play many tournaments, do you? I'm not saying allies are too strong or anything. I just think they're obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view. More effective ways to deal with allies that don´t involve throwing Carrion Crows or playing Entrancement is good in my book.

> Izaak wrote: > You don't play many tournaments, do you? > How so? > I'm not saying allies are too strong or anything. I just think they're obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view. More effective ways to deal with allies that don´t involve throwing Carrion Crows or playing Entrancement is good in my book. > Even more effective? I think stealing allies is pretty powerful. Thaumaturgy destroys them either in combat or with Blood of the Sandman (which is bloody good to begin with), Presence steals them as does Dominate and Dementation, Potence, Celerity and Animalism kill them, Obfuscate hardly cares... I dunno, how effective are we talking about here? And against what kind of an ally threat are we preparing? War Ghouls are pretty nasty, alright, but Kindred Segregation already deals with them in a more interesting and balanced way than Trust No One does. At least in my opinion. "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: > > > Izaak wrote: > > I dunno... I'm up for more ways to deal with ally decks that don't involve "play presence or combat". > > > > I'm not sure if a political action is the way to go, it being so tied up to presence and everything, but something that would be good against Nephandus or Ghouls would be nice. > > > What's wrong with combat exactly? > > Tournament decks are anti combat at best as it is. A wee bit more red cards in there wouldn't hurt, I think. Just add a gun or two and that'll take care of Neppers and Ghoulies in the long run - and that ain't even an investment in combat department. > > Allies are a good and cool way to battle the bleeders, voters and whatnot, and hardly over powered. There are plenty of ways to deal with them. Start with blocking the recruitment actions, for example. > > And against Nephandi we already have that one vote, which burns all allies unless their costs are repaid. That ought to be enough. > There are also Permanent Vacation and Secret Must be Kept, so there is already 3 votes that specifically wreck allies, and anarchist uprising and ancilla empowerment hurt ally swarms just fine too.

I fear more anti ally tech will make ally decks weaker because I think ally decks are in good balance now. Usually it is ally combat which is biggest threat. I don't find ally combat defence so much different than other combat defence. At least you have some options for allies, not so much against weenie POT. But that is true there really isn't universal answer against allies, I don't think Permanent Vacation or Kindred Segregation are playable.

> Mael wrote: > I think it's terrible card design. Against an Imbued, Shabling Hordes, Nephandus, Kazars Diary, War Ghoul, etc type of deck, it could cause someone to instantly lose from a dominant position. > I have on several occasions seen (or had) ready regions of more than 10 allies, which would mean losing 20 pool to a single political action. > Neonate Breach can do a maximum of 4 pool damage. > The only other action I've seen that can potentially do as much damage is Revolutionary Council, but that requires a lot of setup on the part of the acting player. > Ancilla Empowerment? But it hurts the whole table so you can't play it to defend yourself (or attack) ally decks. > Kraus wrote: > And against Nephandi we already have that one vote, which burns all allies unless their costs are repaid. That ought to be enough. > Vote that does nothing if there is no ally at the table, and doesn't work against Shambling Hordes or Imbued. > Surreal wrote: > I think there is enough anti ally tech already. Problem I have with anti ally cards like Far Mastery is that it is useless without allies around and stealing ally can be very strong. So it is potentially useless or potentially very strong. I play with Nephandus in tournaments very often and it's usually big gamble. Sometimes I run against heavy entrancement decks and there is almost nothing I can do. That's why I don't find it so dominant, too many bad match ups. > Trouble is to manage to make the action pass. With an Unmasking, many decks can't steal allies because they don't go beyond the +1 stealth provided by the action. The vote is also at +1 stealth, but is undirected, which can make things easier. > Klaital wrote: > There are also Permanent Vacation and Secret Must be Kept, so there is already 3 votes that specifically wreck allies, and anarchist uprising and ancilla empowerment hurt ally swarms just fine too. > I've never seen played either of them (except in draft). The second is a bit more effective, but has a requirement that doesn't shows up often. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I put 1-2 Secret Must be Kept in all laibon vote decks I make, there is usually always a target for it.

> Pendargon wrote: > If imbued, Khazar or shambler player lose from a dominant position, i call that good! B) > I believe you may have misunderstood me. Those decks are not in a dominant position in the tournament scene. I meant that, in a game, after an hour of careful play, if you're lucky and skillful you may with one of those decks get into a strong position (as you can with any other good deck). There should not be a card which says that you lose because you are winning. As was pointed out, cards like Domain Challenge and Ancilla Empowerment are also a bane to swarm decks, but are balanced by the fact that hurting the whole table is often not something you want to do, or not something the table will let you do. > Izaak wrote: > I'm not saying allies are too strong or anything. I just think they're obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view. More effective ways to deal with allies that don´t involve throwing Carrion Crows or playing Entrancement is good in my book. > If you have a problem with ally decks, either play enough combat to be able to kill them (and they are a lot easier to kill than vampires), play enough stealth to reliably be able to perform actions at 2 stealth, or play enough intercept to be able to block a 1 stealth (recruit) action. This is not advice that is unique to playing against ally decks. The fact that playing an ally deck is a viable option when designing a deck is good, because the more viable options there are the better it is for the game. Sure it means you have another thing to consider when designing a deck. But as they can't bounce, can't vote, and fight worse than most combat decks, I find they're one of the decks that concern me least in deck design.

> If you have a problem with ally decks, either play enough combat to be able to kill them (and they are a lot easier to kill than vampires), play enough stealth to reliably be able to perform actions at 2 stealth, or play enough intercept to be able to block a 1 stealth (recruit) action. This is not advice that is unique to playing against ally decks. > Maybe you should try to read better. I'm not saying that I have issues dealing with allies in general. Neither do I think they are too strong or anything. Actually, the most annoying ally decks (ie, the fighty ones) do the same thing combat decks do: make someone at the table unable to play V:TES and then proceed to get ousted. The thing is, there are only two efficient ways to deal with allies. One is Entrancement, the other is beating them up. Yes I realize there are more "steal ally" cards but they are generally less useful than Entrancement because they do just that - steal allies and thus are usually not worth including. So in the deck building phase you either decide you want to play Crows or Presence, or you don't. If you choose to do so, allies are trivial to deal with. If you don't, you're going to get your game randomly destroyed every few games. This is not neccesarily bad or anything, but I think it's pretty silly there are so few playable (playable meaning it's actually usable when there are no allies) cards that mess up allies. I'm thinking of stuff like: Action, 1 blood obf: Bleed at +1 bleed OBF: +1 stealth action. Tap an ally and put this card on him or her. That ally does not untap as normal during its untap phase. The ally may burn 1 life to burn this card during its controllers master phase. Reaction ser: only usable when your predator is bleeding you. Reduce this bleed by 1. SER: only usable when an ally is bleeding you. Reduce the bleed to 0 and put a corruption counter on that ally. <insert standard corruption text> Action modifier, 1 blood chi: +1 stealth CHI: only usable when an ally attempts to block. The block fails. Take control of that ally until the end of your minion phase. You get the idea. At least give decks the option to deal with allies. As is, you're pretty much forced to ignore allies because there's just no viable options (ya know, outside of Entrancement and fighty stuff). > or play enough intercept to be able to block a 1 stealth (recruit) action. This is not advice that is unique to playing against ally decks. > FYI, you cannot block Piper. You cannot block Antonio's special. Good luck blocking a turn 2 Garou between Form of Mist and Earth Control and good luck blocking a summoned Remnant with Tangle and some random stealth card. You're just not going to block someone playing a dedicated ally deck. And if you do, you're probably playing the type of wall deck that will cause the two people next to you to be playing for 0,5 VP from the start.

Heh, so you are one of those people who think combat decks can't win tables? You must be playing against really terrible ones then. Here is some anti ally cards to you that are useful even when there is no allies around that I can think of right now. Chair of Hades Entombment Entrancement Force of Personality Mercy for Seth Sensory Deprivation Skin Trap Still the Mortal Flesh Target Vitals Tenebrous Form

One of my more successful ally decks is a Nephandus-type Deck. All in all it's an elaborate Cryptic Mission Deck. It regularly gets hosed by trumpy combat (Cel-Pot is making a revival around here) and with a few Osebo decks making appearances, I get frequently hammered off the table. Even with the fair whack of untap and Dominate flick, I reasonably frequently have to worry about keeping a S&B predator hunting as much as possible... and then it doesn't really get to the fun and cool stage until I get The Unmasking and/or Restricted Vitae. Is it effective? If it survives, it gets table wins. It's generally a 3VP or 0VP kind of deck (a bit like combat decks really). Would it be completely pantsed and hosed by most of the votes people are talking about? YOU BET YOUR DAMNED LIFE. Is the card proposed balanced? NOT ON YOUR LIFE. That thing is basically designed to single-shot oust a particular deck type. Its terrible design, its not promoting diversity and its a hamfisted way to solve a problem that I doubt is really there. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Mael wrote: > > > FYI, you cannot block Piper. > > > Setup required to make people anarch, plenty of solutions to deal with this. > I can't think of any practical solutions to prevent Anarch Convert > > > You cannot block Antonio's special. > > > He can fetch one useful ally with his ability. That ally has no intrinsic stealth or intercept. > +1 intercept from Unmasking > > > Good luck blocking a turn 2 Garou between Form of Mist and Earth Control > > > Since there are exactly two vampires in the game who can recruit Renegade Garou and can play Form of Mist at superior on turn 2, it's not something I'm going to get overly concerned about. > sixteen vampires with Info Hwy or Zillah's valley. twenty more if you play a protean discipline card on turn 2.

Both Renegade Garou and Shambling Hordes get pretty well wrecked by discplineless Target Vitals that any chump can play. War Ghoul is considerably more durable, but is fairly expensive and has no built-in manuever or additionals or anything like that so pretty much ANY kind of combat defense works against them

> Mael wrote: > why do you think the game needs more ally hosers? > It's not a "need", except maybe for the new options it brings. Likewise, was there a "need" for Neonate Breach? > Klaital wrote: > Both Renegade Garou and Shambling Hordes get pretty well wrecked by discplineless Target Vitals that any chump can play. > At the expense of losing your vampire too. Shambling are supposed to come back anyway, not to stay long. > Klaital wrote: > War Ghoul is considerably more durable, but is fairly expensive and has no built-in manuever or additionals or anything like that so pretty much ANY kind of combat defense works against them > Yeah, until you do not have any anti-combat left, or a Trap hits the table. They're not instant kill, but will get you in the end (try to resist 3 WG rush per turn). > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > That thing is basically designed to single-shot oust a particular deck type. Its terrible design > It's called a hoser, and there's plenty of them (Ancilla Empowerment, Break the Code, Scourge of Enochians, Recalled to the Founder). Or just Kindred Segregation, if it were more playable (meaning it should work against all allies, not only pool-costing allies). Does it prevent you from playing Nephandus? Apparently not. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> It's not a "need", except maybe for the new options it brings. Likewise, was there a "need" for Neonate Breach? > Not really, nor was there exactly for Scourge of the Enochians. I feel that the latter was a poor addition to the game. Anyways, if there is no need for a hoser card (those exist already, for the same offense even), I don't think there really is need to print one. No need really means no need, if you ask me. I actually blogged about the matter a wee bit. Not very cohesive, ground breaking or even well written I suppose, but first blog posts are always first. So yeah, I don't think there is need for an ally hoser that does exactly that: kills the ally player, not the allies. Over n' out! Have fun! "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

Ancilla Empowerment and Anarchist Uprising already work against allies. There is no need for this kind of card. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

> jhattara wrote: > Ancilla Empowerment and Anarchist Uprising already work against allies. There is no need for this kind of card. > No offense meant, but I think the "need" factor of the cards in this section should not be taken into account. This is a sand-box area, the only things that should matter are: - is the card balanced? - is it interesting? + the various debates it may generate, such as those about allies (most interesting). The cards won't be printed anyway. New cards are never needed, we can (and are forced to) play with whatever cards are printed today. So saying a fan-card is not needed is nonsensical. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Is the card balanced? This card does nothing against weenie vampire decks, but expressly penalises ally decks. I have no real problem with Ancilla Empowerment or Anarchist Uprising, since they are basically a carpet-bomb... indiscriminate and also hurt the user of the card. Neonate Breach I think was an unneccessary card (like Jussi). Is it an interesting card? Not really no. I can quickly think of much better ally-crippling cards that do not out-and-out destroy the player. This is basically just an Ancilla Empowerment for Allies only, and considering there is already a "re-buy your ally card" out there it is again unneccessary. So to show at least one simple way to penalise allies without destroying a player 'randomly' playing an Ally deck Cross table... Grand Feast Political Action Choose any number of Methuselahs who control a ready Ally. Each ally controlled by the target Methuselahs loses 1 life and for each ally you may give 1 blood to a vampire you control from the blood bank; a vampire can only receive 1 blood from this action. Only one Grand Feast may be played during a minion phase. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Haze wrote: > > > Mael wrote: > > > > > FYI, you cannot block Piper. > > > > > Setup required to make people anarch, plenty of solutions to deal with this. > > > I can't think of any practical solutions to prevent Anarch Convert > The solutions are to deal with the Piper, they include wash, sudden reversal, beating up the anarch, banishment, etc. > > > > You cannot block Antonio's special. > > > > > He can fetch one useful ally with his ability. That ally has no intrinsic stealth or intercept. > > > +1 intercept from Unmasking > So now you're talking about a 3 card combo and 2 pool to create a chump blocker/bleeder. They're good and all, but they don't win games on their own. > > > > Good luck blocking a turn 2 Garou between Form of Mist and Earth Control > > > > > Since there are exactly two vampires in the game who can recruit Renegade Garou and can play Form of Mist at superior on turn 2, it's not something I'm going to get overly concerned about. > > > sixteen vampires with Info Hwy or Zillah's valley. twenty more if you play a protean discipline card on turn 2. > Good luck reliably pulling that off in turn 2. If you can build a deck to do this, I'll happily let you have your Garou. > Ankha wrote: > No offense meant, but I think the "need" factor of the cards in this section should not be taken into account. This is a sand-box area, the only things that should matter are: > - is the card balanced? > No. > > - is it interesting? > No, because it hurts the diversity of the game. > > + the various debates it may generate, such as those about allies (most interesting). > Ok, I'll grant you that there has been interesting discussion generated

> Mael wrote: > > > > > You cannot block Antonio's special. > > > > > > > He can fetch one useful ally with his ability. That ally has no intrinsic stealth or intercept. > > > > > +1 intercept from Unmasking > > > So now you're talking about a 3 card combo and 2 pool to create a chump blocker/bleeder. They're good and all, but they don't win games on their own. > Sorry to disturb, but I've seen many times a Nephandus deck win. They can lock down completely some decks (1 stealth vote, or decks without strong combat. TV doesn't work against them), and they bleed as swell as a vampire swarm. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > Mael wrote: > > > > > > > You cannot block Antonio's special. > > > > > > > > > He can fetch one useful ally with his ability. That ally has no intrinsic stealth or intercept. > > > > > > > +1 intercept from Unmasking > > > > > So now you're talking about a 3 card combo and 2 pool to create a chump blocker/bleeder. They're good and all, but they don't win games on their own. > > > Sorry to disturb, but I've seen many times a Nephandus deck win. They can lock down completely some decks (1 stealth vote, or decks without strong combat. TV doesn't work against them), and they bleed as swell as a vampire swarm. > 2 pool for an ally with 2 life and no manuever or dodge, I wouldn't actually call that terribly strong. Anything that can fight even a bit is going to kill them without much trouble.

You're forgetting one of the major advantages of a Nephandus: 1R strike All damaging strikes deal 1 less damage (so the ol' 1-hands + TV does nothing). Admittedly in my deck, I'm trying to make up for the lack of maneuver by Biothaum Experiments (for the durability of the BioThaum). It's a great grinding deck that if it can get itself up and running with enough allies (also uses Impundulu, Succubus, Rafastio, Greg Winter & Talaq) it will keep at least one player constantly hunting and with a Restricted Vitae it can lockdown two players. Which is how it gets its 3VPs or 0VPs. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I would recommend using IR Goggles over Biothauma, gives you the same manuever and costs nothing.

IR Goggles Can be stolen Can be broken Biothaum Once it's on, it's on. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Klaital wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > > > > Mael wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You cannot block Antonio's special. > > > > > > > > > > > He can fetch one useful ally with his ability. That ally has no intrinsic stealth or intercept. > > > > > > > > > +1 intercept from Unmasking > > > > > > > So now you're talking about a 3 card combo and 2 pool to create a chump blocker/bleeder. They're good and all, but they don't win games on their own. > > > > > Sorry to disturb, but I've seen many times a Nephandus deck win. They can lock down completely some decks (1 stealth vote, or decks without strong combat. TV doesn't work against them), and they bleed as swell as a vampire swarm. > > > 2 pool for an ally with 2 life and no manuever or dodge, I wouldn't actually call that terribly strong. Anything that can fight even a bit is going to kill them without much trouble. > > So now you're talking about a 3 card combo and 2 pool to create a chump blocker/bleeder. They're good and all, but they don't win games on their own. > Good grief... Did you people EVER run into Nephandi at all? You are apparently forgetting they have an improved version of the War Ghouls prevent 1 damage each round, strike at range and also have a press. To top it off they can actually bleed too AND can eat vampires in torpor. How is 2 pool not a good deal? It's a freaking *AMAZING* deal. As added bonus they come for a clan that has dominate in-clan and can field a 5-cap vampire that recruits without you being able to stop it *in any way*. Also, we already established that "anything that fights back" kills allies. In fact, we have already established in dozens of threads that stuff that kills vampires stops most decks from doing anything. Allies die easier than vampires, so OF COURSE combat will stop Nephandi. Anyone that ever played a tournament knows that Nephandi kill anything that doesn't fight and get killed by anything that fights. Of course then we get to the topic where combat isn't a very consistant and viable way to win lots of games and is therefore usually a bad choice for tournaments, bringing me back to my original points that not having tech to counter allies is actually not really a choice in the deck itself, but more a result of what deck you are playing. Ergo, allies are obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view which was pretty much the first thing I posted in this thread. The goal of V:TES is to get a gamewin. To do so you need to oust 2 people. Making people miserable and unable to play the game is NOT the goal of V:TES. The "cool" thing about Nephandi is that they make people miserable AND actually consistently win games. Unlike War Ghouls and Garous. > Good luck reliably pulling that off in turn 2. If you can build a deck to do this, I'll happily let you have your Garou. > Garou decks are *designed* to do just this. Chandler comes up in turn 1 and puts a Garou into play in turn 2. By the time you have your first minion, the guy playing Garous will have 3 of them on the table. If you don't play prevent or serious hitback, your game is over. You may want to blare over the TWDA and check out the (few) Garou decks that won tournaments. Cos, ya know, as I said Garous only tend to kill vampires instead of pool.

Yes I have ran into Nephandi, last time it was with my Samedi ally deck that smashed the nephandi with shambling hordes, and reanimated corpses with walking sticks, actually. Antonio's special is nice but its not that uber because if you are using it then that means you aren't bringing out any vampires so its a trade-off, also you can stop it by beating/banishing Antonio. Even if you have no way to kill or steal them, they still only bleed for 1, if your deck can't either kill them or outpace that then there is likely something wrong in your deck to begin with. All good combat decks have a decent ousting module. For example, my !brujah rush deck has 8 legal manipulations in it in addition to 3 fames, 2 tensions, and a dragonbound. I have also won a tournament with a multirush deck with no other forward momentum than bleeds for 1 and fame/tension. So please don't go making generalizing statements like 'combat can't win'. You are wrong about garous, they tend to kill pool very fast, your own pool that is. 5 pool for an ally that gets one shotted by target vitals is a serious egg basket. Yes if you happen to be in a table where nobody can fight, then you will be strong, but even just a splash of target vitals will kill garous, they are by far the most fragile of the combat allies, in addition to being the most expensive.

> Izaak wrote: > Good grief... Did you people EVER run into Nephandi at all? You are apparently forgetting they have an improved version of the War Ghouls prevent 1 damage each round, strike at range and also have a press. To top it off they can actually bleed too AND can eat vampires in torpor. How is 2 pool not a good deal? It's a freaking *AMAZING* deal. As added bonus they come for a clan that has dominate in-clan and can field a 5-cap vampire that recruits without you being able to stop it *in any way*. > > Also, we already established that "anything that fights back" kills allies. In fact, we have already established in dozens of threads that stuff that kills vampires stops most decks from doing anything. Allies die easier than vampires, so OF COURSE combat will stop Nephandi. Anyone that ever played a tournament knows that Nephandi kill anything that doesn't fight and get killed by anything that fights. Of course then we get to the topic where combat isn't a very consistant and viable way to win lots of games and is therefore usually a bad choice for tournaments, bringing me back to my original points that not having tech to counter allies is actually not really a choice in the deck itself, but more a result of what deck you are playing. Ergo, allies are obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view which was pretty much the first thing I posted in this thread. > I can't agree more with Izaak. Nephandus are great, and can be impossible to handle for many decks (that is that play defensive combat). Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Klaital wrote: > Yes I have ran into Nephandi, last time it was with my Samedi ally deck that smashed the nephandi with shambling hordes, and reanimated corpses with walking sticks, actually. > Gosh. So a fighty deck killed Nephandi? WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE. > Antonio's special is nice but its not that uber because if you are using it then that means you aren't bringing out any vampires so its a trade-off, > Why would you want to bring out anyone other than Antonio? Sure, maybe Keith moody or Brooke somewhere midgame after there's 4-5 Nephandi on the table. > also you can stop it by beating/banishing Antonio. Even if you have no way to kill or steal them, they still only bleed for 1, if your deck can't either kill them or outpace that then there is likely something wrong in your deck to begin with. > Oh I see so that's why Nepahandi are such a great tournament deck choice. All the decks they meet are likely wrong to begin with. FYI, Nephandi don't win by bleeding you out fast. They win by destroying one prey quick and then be last man standing for a 3 VP gamewin. Also, !Tremere have dominate as in-clan and I'm told dominate is pretty good at bleeding for lots. > All good combat decks have a decent ousting module. For example, my !brujah rush deck has 8 legal manipulations in it in addition to 3 fames, 2 tensions, and a dragonbound. I have also won a tournament with a multirush deck with no other forward momentum than bleeds for 1 and fame/tension. So please don't go making generalizing statements like 'combat can't win'. > Oh I see. That's why there are SO MANY combat decks in the TWDA. I'll tell you what - I won my first tournament with flung junk. It had maybe 6 Computer Hacks and 1 Fame. Tension didn't exist. Dragonbound didn't exist. So, sure it can win. Does it win a lot? No of course not. You know why? Because it tends to spend ousting its predator instead of its prey. > You are wrong about garous, they tend to kill pool very fast, your own pool that is. 5 pool for an ally that gets one shotted by target vitals is a serious egg basket. Yes if you happen to be in a table where nobody can fight, then you will be strong, but even just a splash of target vitals will kill garous, they are by far the most fragile of the combat allies, in addition to being the most expensive. > I dunno, but Chandler and 3 Garous is 18 pool. That leaves you with a buffer of 12 which is plenty given that your predator doesn't have any ready minions anyway. Also... Glancing Blow is pretty core in Garou decks. But now we're diverting to specific deck discussions which was not the point of this thread. The point was, would it be nice to have OTHER and NEW cards that can deal with allies in NEW and INTERESTING ways without having to resort to Entrancement and Carrion Crows.

> Ankha wrote: > > > Izaak wrote: > > Good grief... Did you people EVER run into Nephandi at all? You are apparently forgetting they have an improved version of the War Ghouls prevent 1 damage each round, strike at range and also have a press. To top it off they can actually bleed too AND can eat vampires in torpor. How is 2 pool not a good deal? It's a freaking *AMAZING* deal. As added bonus they come for a clan that has dominate in-clan and can field a 5-cap vampire that recruits without you being able to stop it *in any way*. > > > > Also, we already established that "anything that fights back" kills allies. In fact, we have already established in dozens of threads that stuff that kills vampires stops most decks from doing anything. Allies die easier than vampires, so OF COURSE combat will stop Nephandi. Anyone that ever played a tournament knows that Nephandi kill anything that doesn't fight and get killed by anything that fights. Of course then we get to the topic where combat isn't a very consistant and viable way to win lots of games and is therefore usually a bad choice for tournaments, bringing me back to my original points that not having tech to counter allies is actually not really a choice in the deck itself, but more a result of what deck you are playing. Ergo, allies are obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view which was pretty much the first thing I posted in this thread. > > > I can't agree more with Izaak. Nephandus are great, and can be impossible to handle for many decks (that is that play defensive combat). > Forum ate my last post, so I'm just going to keep it short this time. 1) Nephandus are great, they are probably one of the best allies in the game and decks featuring them are capable of winning tournaments. No-one is saying otherwise. They are not overpowered. 2) Nephandus do not "kill anything that doesn't fight" as they have no answer to combat ends or no easy way to get into combat. Their 1 bleed is probably their best asset. 3) I have played against and beaten ally decks while playing Stealth Vote, Stealth Bleed, Bruise Vote / Bleed, Wall, Rush Combat, Swarm Bleed, and various other jank decks that are not so easily categorised. I rarely feel the need to include any specific anti-ally tech as usually vampires can do the same things better. 4) Viable Renegade Garou decks have to compromise between playing the Garou, paying it's considerable cost, defending it, and actually trying to oust their prey. This is not a trivial challenge. They don't have the space to do all this and try to reliably recruit it on turn 2 with sup Form of Mist (see the twd for proof if you want). If you want to build a deck that is designed to reliably get a Garou on turn 2 I'll quite happily be in a tournament with you as you won't be on the final table.

> Izaak wrote: > > > Klaital wrote: > > Yes I have ran into Nephandi, last time it was with my Samedi ally deck that smashed the nephandi with shambling hordes, and reanimated corpses with walking sticks, actually. > > > Gosh. So a fighty deck killed Nephandi? WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE. > > > Antonio's special is nice but its not that uber because if you are using it then that means you aren't bringing out any vampires so its a trade-off, > > > Why would you want to bring out anyone other than Antonio? Sure, maybe Keith moody or Brooke somewhere midgame after there's 4-5 Nephandi on the table. > > > also you can stop it by beating/banishing Antonio. Even if you have no way to kill or steal them, they still only bleed for 1, if your deck can't either kill them or outpace that then there is likely something wrong in your deck to begin with. > > > Oh I see so that's why Nepahandi are such a great tournament deck choice. All the decks they meet are likely wrong to begin with. FYI, Nephandi don't win by bleeding you out fast. They win by destroying one prey quick and then be last man standing for a 3 VP gamewin. Also, !Tremere have dominate as in-clan and I'm told dominate is pretty good at bleeding for lots. > > > All good combat decks have a decent ousting module. For example, my !brujah rush deck has 8 legal manipulations in it in addition to 3 fames, 2 tensions, and a dragonbound. I have also won a tournament with a multirush deck with no other forward momentum than bleeds for 1 and fame/tension. So please don't go making generalizing statements like 'combat can't win'. > > > Oh I see. That's why there are SO MANY combat decks in the TWDA. I'll tell you what - I won my first tournament with flung junk. It had maybe 6 Computer Hacks and 1 Fame. Tension didn't exist. Dragonbound didn't exist. So, sure it can win. Does it win a lot? No of course not. You know why? Because it tends to spend ousting its predator instead of its prey. > > > You are wrong about garous, they tend to kill pool very fast, your own pool that is. 5 pool for an ally that gets one shotted by target vitals is a serious egg basket. Yes if you happen to be in a table where nobody can fight, then you will be strong, but even just a splash of target vitals will kill garous, they are by far the most fragile of the combat allies, in addition to being the most expensive. > > > I dunno, but Chandler and 3 Garous is 18 pool. That leaves you with a buffer of 12 which is plenty given that your predator doesn't have any ready minions anyway. Also... Glancing Blow is pretty core in Garou decks. But now we're diverting to specific deck discussions which was not the point of this thread. The point was, would it be nice to have OTHER and NEW cards that can deal with allies in NEW and INTERESTING ways without having to resort to Entrancement and Carrion Crows. > If you count a deck with around 16 combat cards, third of them s:ce as a fighty deck... sure. Try to make up your mind, first you say you are only bringing out Antonio and then churn out nephandi, then you say that you have a horde of dom vampires out to bleed your prey out with, can't have both without recruiting the nephandi the old fashioned way. Also, exactly how are you going to 'destroy your prey' with allies that bleed for 1? Like I said, if your deck can't handle a couple guys bleeding it for 1 with no stealth, whether they are allies or vampires, then that deck has some issues no matter what its predator is playing. I already gave you a long list of cards that either kill/steal allies or make your actions unblockable by allies no matter how much intercept they have while still being perfectly useful even if you never see any allies several posts ago. If you think that 'if you play allies I oust you with one action' card is -interesting- then I don't know what to say, its a stupid hoser similar to scourge of the enochians that shouldn't exist.

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > You're forgetting one of the major advantages of a Nephandus: > 1R strike > All damaging strikes deal 1 less damage (so the ol' 1-hands + TV does nothing). > > Admittedly in my deck, I'm trying to make up for the lack of maneuver by Biothaum Experiments (for the durability of the BioThaum). It's a great grinding deck that if it can get itself up and running with enough allies (also uses Impundulu, Succubus, Rafastio, Greg Winter & Talaq) it will keep at least one player constantly hunting and with a Restricted Vitae it can lockdown two players. Which is how it gets its 3VPs or 0VPs. > <off topic> Hunger moon is also very good in such decks, and Guide and Mentor so your own vampires can take a +1 stealth action to gain 1 blood as a non-hunt action </off topic>

> If you count a deck with around 16 combat cards, third of them s:ce as a fighty deck... sure. > Whaaat? Your Reanimated Corpses, Sticks AND Shambling Hordes are 16 cards total? Does one Shambler actually hit the table, like, ever? Oooh you mean 16 red cards. I see. Shamblers can't fight without red cards and Corpses don't punch for 2 either. I see, I see. > Try to make up your mind, first you say you are only bringing out Antonio and then churn out nephandi, then you say that you have a horde of dom vampires out to bleed your prey out with, can't have both without recruiting the nephandi the old fashioned way. > I'm being pretty clear, actually. Try to read again. > Also, exactly how are you going to 'destroy your prey' with allies that bleed for 1? Like I said, if your deck can't handle a couple guys bleeding it for 1 with no stealth, whether they are allies or vampires, then that deck has some issues no matter what its predator is playing. > I'll tell you the secret: Nephandus plays Harass. Nephandus enters combat with prey's vampire. Nephandus hits for 1. Presses from Harass. Hits for 1 again. Presses with special. Hits for 1 again. All the while you *cannot touch it*. If no S:CE has been see yet, Nephandus plays trap on the third round. Prey's vampire dies. Some people like to mix in Molotov cocktails too and just outright burn them. > If you think that 'if you play allies I oust you with one action' card is -interesting- then I don't know what to say, its a stupid hoser similar to scourge of the enochians that shouldn't exist. > Maybe you should start reading my posts instead of randomly putting words in my mouth. I would have liked to have OTHER and MORE INTERESTING ways to deal with allies than just killing them or playing Entrancement. I also gave 3 examples that I made up in 15 seconds. Cards that are worth including in decks. Cards that are not fucking Far Mastery or Restructure. Basically like Legend of the Leopard but then with something useful on it. Shit that punishes people for mindlessly relying on allies, just as deflection punishes people that mindlessly rely on their Conditionings. You seem to think I somehow think allies are too strong or that it's impossible to play against them. It is not and other than Nephandus bullshit, ally based decks are tier 2 at best. See, what I would like to be able to do is get around Carlton + Unmasking without being forced to contest him (or play obfuscate). I want options. Options that don't suck. There is one such card in the game. It's called Entrancement.

So your Nephandus deck cheats? Trap can only be played on first round of combat. Reanimated Corpses and Shambling Hordes aren't combat cards no, and I count Reanimated Corpse as more a bleeder than fighter anyway, its just a nice bonus that it also punches for 2. Only combat cards in that deck are 6x Fake Out, 4x Spiritual Intervention, and 6x WWS. Carlton is pretty easy to kill, all you need is either IG, additional strike, press, or environmental damage. He is also unique so its not like you will be facing a horde of Carltons, at worst case and you can't handle him he will only block one action a turn without doing anything to your acting guy. Also for the third time, I gave a big list of cards in addition to Entrancement that you can use to deal with allies in addition to punch for 3+. Thinking about how you are going to deal with allies is a deckbuilding challenge, no different from how you are going to deal with votes, or intercept, or stealth bleed, or combat, hell, for most parts you can use same cards to deal with allies than you use to deal with either stealth bleed or combat so it doesn't neseccarily even require anything extra. Basically what your saying is that you want to be able to destroy an entire strategy with side effects from cards you would play anyway. Thats like saying that I want a card that at basic discpline bounces a bleed and at superior gives +3 bleed because putting both conditionings and deflections in my deck is not efficient enough. If you want to deal with allies with your dominate deck, play far mastery, its kind of the same as playing deflection and having a predator that doesn't bleed. Sometimes it happens, but there is usually always at least Carlton or Mylan around to target with your far mastery so its very rarely a dead card, and even if it is, its not that much of an issue to discard it.

> Izaak wrote: > I'll tell you the secret: Nephandus plays Harass. Nephandus enters combat with prey's vampire. Nephandus hits for 1. Presses from Harass. Hits for 1 again. Presses with special. Hits for 1 again. All the while you *cannot touch it*. If no S:CE has been see yet, Nephandus plays trap on the third round. Prey's vampire dies. Some people like to mix in Molotov cocktails too and just outright burn them. > Have you actually checked the TWD archive to see what's in winning Nephandus decks? It may surprise you. > If you think that 'if you play allies I oust you with one action' card is -interesting- then I don't know what to say, its a stupid hoser similar to scourge of the enochians that shouldn't exist. > Maybe you should start reading my posts instead of randomly putting words in my mouth. I would have liked to have OTHER and MORE INTERESTING <snip> [/quote] > > Izaak wrote: > But now we're diverting to specific deck discussions which was not the point of this thread. The point was, would it be nice to have OTHER and NEW cards that can deal with allies in NEW and INTERESTING ways > Since the point of this thread is quite evidently to discuss a specific card example, and further discussion that has arisen around it, you are clearly implying that you consider the card in question to be "new and interesting". If this was not your intention, perhaps you should try to be more clear. > > You seem to think I somehow think allies are too strong or that it's impossible to play against them. It is not and other than Nephandus bullshit, ally based decks are tier 2 at best. > See, people think you think allies are too strong because you're advocating card ideas to make them weaker. > > See, what I would like to be able to do is get around Carlton + Unmasking without being forced to contest him (or play obfuscate). I want options. Options that don't suck. There are so many such cards in the game I don't know which one to use. > Fixed that for you.

Then people fail at reading. I guess I'll just quote it up for you because apparently the two of you have reading issues. Here we go: First one: > I dunno... I'm up for more ways to deal with ally decks that don't involve "play presence or combat". > > I'm not sure if a political action is the way to go, it being so tied up to presence and everything, but something that would be good against Nephandus or Ghouls would be nice. > See, here I'm saying I'm not too sure if I like the proposed card. Nowhere near implying I actually like the proposed hoser. Next! > I'm not saying allies are too strong or anything. I just think they're obnoxious to deal with from a deck design point of view. > That quite literally writes the opposite of what you two are reading. *I* should be more clearer? Maybe I should write in caps then? Third one! > I'm not saying that I have issues dealing with allies in general. Neither do I think they are too strong or anything. > LOOK! I even fucking REPEATED IF for you. My god. After this the discussion kinda degenerates into some random discussion why Nephandi are apparently not a good deck. > See, people think you think allies are too strong because you're advocating card ideas to make them weaker. > Actually, no. I'm advocating having other options that do shit with allies that are not completely unplayable when there are not allies on the table. AND I gave three examples so I'm completely in the dark how you come to these conclusions. > There are so many such cards in the game I don't know which one to use. > By all means keep sticking shit like Restructure and Bloodform in your decks.

Izaak, I posted up a long list of cards that are excellent against allies and still good if you never see any, I have pointed that out three times now, and you still keep ignoring it so I am not sure who here has difficulties reading. People have to put cards in their decks that are only useful against a single strategy to deal with other things too so why should allies be any exception. Like I don't see you whining that you have to put Redirections or Deflections in your deck that are only useful against bleeds, or Delaying Tactics just to deal with votes, etc. And since both ally cards and political action cards are a subset of action cards, why should one be easier to deal with than the other? Especially if vote decks in general are more effective than ally decks. There are more than enough ways to deal with allies as it is, I am fairly sure that every clan has at least one ally hoser in their discplines, and on top of those there are many discplineless options also.

> Izaak wrote: > Then people fail at reading. > Pot, meet kettle > > I dunno... I'm up for more ways to deal with ally decks that don't involve "play presence or combat". > And both I and Klaital have supplied you with various ways. He gave a list of specific cards, I gave some general deckbuilding points. > > LOOK! I even fucking REPEATED IF for you. My god. After this the discussion kinda degenerates into some random discussion why Nephandi are apparently not a good deck. > Hmm, I'm pretty sure if you read what I've written you'll see I called them one of the strongest allies in the game. They still win less games than KRC does though. > > > See, people think you think allies are too strong because you're advocating card ideas to make them weaker. > > > Actually, no. I'm advocating having other options that do shit with allies that are not completely unplayable when there are not allies on the table. AND I gave three examples so I'm completely in the dark how you come to these conclusions. > Well it's like this, the more hosers there are for a particular strategy, the weaker that strategy is. The less opportunity cost there is to those hosers, the more they are likely to weaken the strategy in question. So the cards you are advocating would, by existing, make allies weaker. Hence, you are advocating making allies weaker.

I find this hate against allies quite random. I can understand hate against some decks that are dominant like girls or DEM weenie. Is the point more that it is not fun to play against allies? But even that point I don't understand. There are so many others good "my prey doesn't play" decks like Tupdog or Nana. So what makes ally decks so bad? Even limited options against allies is not so valid reason, options against heavy bleeds are more limited than options against allies anyway.

How about something like this instead? I'm not great at templating cards, but hopefully it gets the point across. Strained Relations Political Action Successful referendum means that until your next minion phase, allies do not untap as normal during each Methuselah's untap phase. A Methuselah may spend 1 pool for each ally they wish to untap during their untap phase.

> LunaSlave wrote: > How about something like this instead? I'm not great at templating cards, but hopefully it gets the point across. > > Strained Relations > Political Action > Successful referendum means that until your next minion phase, allies do not untap as normal during each Methuselah's untap phase. A Methuselah may spend 1 pool for each ally they wish to untap during their untap phase. > That would be fairly balanced, though could also make it to tap them as well, comparable to Snipe Hunt