Sealed-deck Tournament, Groningen, The Netherlands

Hello Jyhad-players, On Sunday July 11th, there will be an open Groninger Kampioenschap tournament in the city of Groningen. It will be a sealed-deck tournament, with only the real Jyhad-cards. That's right, the real deal, the old stuff. You will get a Jyhad starter and at least 2 Jyhad boosters (exact number of boosters to be determined later, depends on amount of players participating). We are not sure at this moment whether we will play it with a drafting/trading system or just have the players take the starter and boosters as is, but the starter decks and boosters have been bought already. Best 4 players after two rounds will play the final and get some extra boosters before this final match. Participating will cost about EUR 10,00 (maybe less if we get enough players), and you get to keep your cards of course. If you are Dutch and are interested in playing at this tournament, contact me by e-mail (the 'reply-to', not the 'from') and I'll answer your questions. Alternately, if you are interested in playing Jyhad (not V:tES) in the city of Groningen on a regular basis, you might be interested in our Yahoo-group 'Jyhad in Grunn'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jyhad-in-grunn //Doc. -- "Wees jezelf, er zijn al zoveel anderen" - Loesje begin Your_MS_program_incorrectly_interprets_this_as_an_attachment.txt

Hey, I just read a bit through your Yahoo group (me being Dutch and all), and I couldn't help but notice a couple of houserules. Will these houserules be in effect during this sealed deck tournament? See, most of them are incorrect (in comparison with official tournaments) and as such any players joining from outside your playgroup will be unfamiliar with them. More specific: * 2nd Tradition *REQUIRES* you to attempt to block. Only if that block fails, you can use a reaction card. Also note that if your block attempt fails and you choose to play no reaction cards (or one that doesn't require you to tap such as Telepathic Counter), you remain untapped. Finally, the card costs a blood if you're tapped when playing it. * You may *never*, ever bleed twice in a turn, regardless whether or not you used a card or not. In the same line, you may never attempt two political actions with the same vampire, even if it are two different ones. * Aside from being Unique, Fame damages the controller of the famous vampire. Not its prey. * You're perfectely allowed to to transfer more to a vampire than its capacity; be it by cards as Fourth Tradition or Govern or by regular transfers. If the amount of blood on the uncontrolled vampires equals or exceeds its capacity, it's moved into play at the end of your influence phase. Any excess blood then flows off. * I noticed you made Misdirection unqiue "per player". It may help to know that the card has been errata'd to always cost 1 and always tap a single minion. * Rotschrek does torporize the minion it's played on; the one receiving the aggravated damage. It's more a card for defensive decks, since you can't play it during you own turn. Thematically, it represents the Red Fear (hence the name) vampires experience when dealing with sources of damage that may kill them (sunlight mainly). What you do with Rotschrek, is induce this fear into another vampire, causing the Rotschrek Frenzy. * Bloodrage is indeed a thaumaturgy card and Concealed weapon is indeed disciplineless. Note that allies can use it also. I'll propose this to my own playgroup and see if we can find some transportation to Groningen. It's always fun to meet new players.

Izaak wrote: > > I just read a bit through your Yahoo group (me being Dutch and all), and > I couldn't help but notice a couple of houserules. > > Will these houserules be in effect during this sealed deck tournament? > See, most of them are incorrect (in comparison with official > tournaments) and as such any players joining from outside your playgroup > will be unfamiliar with them. Thank you for your input. We are basically Jyhad-only players, and we do not play by the "official" rules unless we like them ourselves. But we've only recently started the process of getting our rules down in writing. After 10 years, we think it's about time to get serious about our hobby. We have always been angry about "them" changing the backs of the cards of "our" game, and we basically think they lost the right to tell us how to play the game at that point. We use only cards that are in the original Jyhad set (we don't mind people using the newer prints of them, if they put them in sleeves with non-transparent backs). So our rules reflect our own rulings on Jyhad cards, and have absolutely nothing to do with whatever may or may not be 'official' at this point in time. It is probably more similar to the situation in 1996 or 1997. At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules issue very soon. Where are you from exactly? We may be able to help with transportation or a place to stay overnight, as more of our players come from different corners of the country. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <40BBD35D...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Izaak wrote: >> >> I just read a bit through your Yahoo group (me being Dutch and all), and >> I couldn't help but notice a couple of houserules. >> >> Will these houserules be in effect during this sealed deck tournament? >> See, most of them are incorrect (in comparison with official >> tournaments) and as such any players joining from outside your playgroup >> will be unfamiliar with them. > >Thank you for your input. >We are basically Jyhad-only players, and we do not play by the >"official" rules unless we like them ourselves. That said, have you read the official rules and rulings? http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES/rulebook/rulebook.html http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES >But we've only recently started the process of getting our rules down in >writing. After 10 years, we think it's about time to get serious about >our hobby. Fortunately for you, a lot of other people whose hobby it also is got serious some time ago, and there are a good number of rules changes in the rulebook that address what seem to be some of your original issues. Most, if not all of us have found that the game is noticeably more balanced with these rules than it was in 1996-1997 -- and as a result, is a lot more fair and fun to play. >We have always been angry about "them" changing the backs of the cards >of "our" game, and we basically think they lost the right to tell us how It's worth noting here that "they", ie Wizards of the Coast, no longer own the rights to Vampire/Jyhad. White Wolf purchased the rights back some time ago and began printing cards again, beginning with the Sabbat War expansion. It's also worth noting that no VEKN-sanctioned tournament has ever forbidden the use of Jyhad cards in the same deck as Vampire cards; for a long time there was no mixed-back rule, then it was 60%/40%, and these days the rule simply reads "must be sufficiently mixed". The card-back change made it difficult for a lot of people. VEKN has always taken great care to ensure that people who had Jyhad cards didn't lose the use of them. >to play the game at that point. We use only cards that are in the >original Jyhad set (we don't mind people using the newer prints of them, >if they put them in sleeves with non-transparent backs). So our rules >reflect our own rulings on Jyhad cards, and have absolutely nothing to >do with whatever may or may not be 'official' at this point in time. It >is probably more similar to the situation in 1996 or 1997. Honestly, this doesn't sound like a lot of fun to me. I'm glad you guys are enjoying it, but there were a lot of balance issues with the base set, and a person intent on winning was typically able to break the game with a minimum of effort. I hope you take some time and look into the official rules. It seems a very silly thing to me to hold a grudge for so many years; especially when the new expansions have added so much to the game, as well as addressing the balance issues inherent with the base set. >At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players >together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules >issue very soon. Do you mean minimum here by any chance? I'd hate to see anyone travel and be turned away... -- Derek a host is a host from coast to coast and no one will talk to a host that's close unless the host that isn't close is busy, hung, or dead

(Sorry for the Dutch - Since I figure not every Dutch player can be bothered to sign up for the Grun Yahoo site, I thought I would mirror a post I made there over here). ----- Dag Groningers... Even voorstellen: Tobias op den Brouw, 'prins' van Deventer, speel regelmatig toernooien in binnen- en buitenland. Zijn jullie op enige wijze bekend/gerelateerd aan Noorderspel, btw? Daar ken ik nog mensjes van uit m'n Catan-toernooitijd. Lange tijd niks gehoord over Groningen, V:TES-technisch, maar goed om eindelijk een extra studenten-stad te kunnen verwelkomen. Ik snap jullie keuze van 'alleen jyhad' ook wel een deel (eerlijkheid gebied me te zeggen dat ik er ook wel problemen mee heb), dus ik overweeg sterk om de 11e langs te komen. Ik wil in ieder geval alle groningers die WEL geinteresseerd zijn in sets na Jyhad van harte uitnodigen om me te mailen/een keer een toernooi in de rest van den lande bij te wonen. Altijd een zeer sociale gebeurtenis, de laatste tijd ook vaak met internationale bezoekers. Kijk anders ook op www.vtesholland.com en het bijbehorende forum. Ook de opmerkingen van Derek Ray, op de nieuwsgroep, zou ik even lezen, en ter harte nemen - hij en Izaak zijn niet zo zeikerig als je misschien zou denken. :) Hoe komen jullie trouwens aan je kaarten? Is er een winkel in Grun die het verkoopt? Of via internet? > ------- Original Message -------- > > From: "Izaak" <i.havelaar@S...> > > Newsgroups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad >> >> * 2nd Tradition *REQUIRES* you to attempt to block. Only if that >> block fails, you can use a reaction card. Also note that if your >> block attempt fails and you choose to play no reaction cards (or >> one that doesn't require you to tap such as Telepathic Counter), >> you remain untapped. Finally, the card costs a blood if you're >> tapped when playing it. > > Kweenie, dit vind ik maar gezeik. Dit lijkt me niks. Maakt het > alleen maar ingewikkeld. Errmm. Wat Izaak zegt is precies wat jij zegt. :) Met uitzondering van het feit dat 2nd sinds de laatste veranderingen een bloed kost - in de oude Jyhad set is dat inderdaad niet zo. > Kaarttekst is: +2 intercept. Usable by a tapped vampire that untaps > and attempts to block. > > Als je untapped bent kan je hem gewoon als intercept gebruken, als > je getapt bent kan je hem gebruiken om te untappen en dan ga je ook > proberen te blocken. Maar inderdaad, je kan er niks aan doen als > dat block faalt, je hebt het geprobeerd... Inderdaad. > Ik vind wel in dat ie NIET gebruikt kan worden om alleen maar te > untappen, zonder meer. Hetzelfde, dus. :) >> * You may *never*, ever bleed twice in a turn, regardless whether >> or not you used a card or not. In the same line, you may never >> attempt two political actions with the same vampire, even if it >> are two different ones. > > Dit vind ik wel een aardige regel. Lekker simpel ook. Dit is de zogenaamde 'No repeat action' regel. Te vinden via http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ of http://www.thelasombra.com/vtes_faq.htm Deze regel is niet alleen 'aardig', hij is zelfs noodzakelijk. Anders is het namelijk 'bleed met stealth', freak drive, 'bleed met stealth', freak drive, 'bleed met stealth', etc. etc. >> * Aside from being Unique, Fame damages the controller of the >> famous vampire. Not its prey. > > Hmm, nee. Waarom zou ik schade krijgen omdat een van mijn beroemde > vamps wordt gemold? Ik kan me nog beter voorstellen dat de > controller van de vamp die hem in torpor mept de schade krijgt. > > Er is niks mis met de verwoording van Fame lijkt mij? > Maar goed, het is op zich speltechnisch wel heel leuk. Ook Fame is flink veranderd. Inderdaad, tegenwoordig krijgt de controller van de vampier met Fame de 3 pool schade - maar de Fame wordt tegenwoordig dan ook meestal op een vampier van je prey gespeeld, waarna je het met een potence mannetje in torpor rost. :) Reden van de verandering: stel je het volgende voor: Ik plaats de OUDE fame op een van mijn mannetjes. Daarna bleed ik met dat mannetje voor veel (8, oid) en maak het unblockable met day operation. Jij raakt 8 pool kwijt, ik ga naar torpor, jij raakt nog 3 pool kwijt. Eventueel speel ik freak drive met het mannetje in torpor om het nog iets naarder te maken. >> * You're perfectely allowed to to transfer more to a vampire than >> its capacity; be it by cards as Fourth Tradition or Govern or by >> regular transfers. If the amount of blood on the uncontrolled >> vampires equals or exceeds its capacity, it's moved into play at >> the end of your influence phase. Any excess blood then flows off. > > Dan zou je dus tijd hebben om dat excess er af te influencen... > De logica daar achter ontbreekt wat mij betreft. Hoe leg je dit in > het verhaal uit? Net zo makkelijk iets voor te verzinnen als andere minder-logische handelingen. > Maar goed, wel een simpele regel, en zo kan je tenminste een andere > manier van poolgain maken. >> * I noticed you made Misdirection unqiue "per player". It may help >> to know that the card has been errata'd to always cost 1 and >> always tap a single minion. > > Boring. Ben benieuwd of Archon Investigation dan ook al errata > heeft. Bovendien is deze kaart bijna alleen sterk in een sealed > deck omgeving, de reguliere omgeving heeft genoeg WWEFs. Ik zie hem > liever volgens onze 'uniek per speler' constructie. Elegante > oplossing, maar je mag deze 'killer' dan nog wel gebruiken. Misschien leuk om de 'Elder Library Deck Builder' te downloaden? Dan kan je gelijk zijn wat alle text van alle kaarten is. En nee, het is niet (bijna) alleen sterk in een sealed omgeving. Stel je voor, ik speel weenie's met dominate of presence - en ik influence er 6 uit, oid. Daarna speel ik m'n misdirection - en ik kom 6* bleeden voor 4 a 5. Knappe jongen als je meer dan 2 WWeF hebt - en zelfs dan nog heb ik misschien stealth? Maar goed, je hebt in ieder geval gelijk in dat ie aangepast moet worden. :) >> (Rotschreck) > > Why bother? The aggravated damage would cause more pain. > You save your vamp by sending it to torpor by scaring it? > The card just does not make sense, and everyone knows it. > > Oh gut, ben ik zomaar engels aan het lullen. Nah ja. > Hoe dan ook, de kaart is het gezeik niet waard, ik blijf bij mijn > ban-mening. Rotschreck is een rot-kaart. Van een rotschreck gaat (tegenwoordig) in ieder geval het mannetje dat aggravated schade zou gaan krijgen naar torpor. Angst voor vlammetjes en zonlicht en meer van dat... > > * Bloodrage is indeed a thaumaturgy card and Concealed weapon is > > indeed disciplineless. Note that allies can use it also. > > Joepie, de officielen zijn het ook wel eens ergens met ons eens. Oh, je hebt zeker gelijk dat een aantal oude kaarten errata nodig hadden. Dat is dan ook ruimschoots gebeurd. Hoewel het me erg leuk lijkt om meer spelers te verwelkomen die met meer sets dan Jyhad alleen spelen, kan ik het wel begrijpen als je het bij Jyhad wil houden. Maar dan stel ik voor dat jullie alsnog even kijken naar hoe dat tegenwoordig aangepast/ge-errata'd is. Toen white wolf het spel terugkocht is er een hoop ten goede veranderd - en jullie hoeven niet opnieuw het wiel uit te vinden. Veel speelplezier, en misschien tot de 11e. Tobias

> >> (Rotschreck) > > > > Why bother? The aggravated damage would cause more pain. > > You save your vamp by sending it to torpor by scaring it? > > The card just does not make sense, and everyone knows it. > > > > Oh gut, ben ik zomaar engels aan het lullen. Nah ja. > > Hoe dan ook, de kaart is het gezeik niet waard, ik blijf bij mijn > > ban-mening. > > Rotschreck is een rot-kaart. Van een rotschreck gaat (tegenwoordig) in > ieder geval het mannetje dat aggravated schade zou gaan krijgen naar > torpor. Angst voor vlammetjes en zonlicht en meer van dat... (forgive me the Dutch here) Het punt van Rotschrek is dat het "wint" van Strike: Combat Ends, Dodge en damage prevention. bv: Ik bleed jou met een vampier (laten we zeggen Walter Nash) Jij blockt met een Gangrel (zeg, Chandler) Er komt combat Niemand maneuvert of iets dergelijks Walter Nash speelt Majesty als strike (voor het geval, Majesty "wint" van alle strikes, zelfs van first strike) Chandler zegt dat hij hand damage probeert en speelt dan Wolf Claws (die het aggravated maakt) Normaal gesproken kom je dan in de "strike resolution" fase. Daarin gaat de Majesty eerst af, combat eindigt en de Wolf Claws hebben geen effect. Hetzelfde gaat op als hij bv een Skin of Rock zou hebben. Als je nu met Chandler een Rotschrek speelt op Walter Nash, wordt Walter Nash zo "bang" dat hij in Rotschrek Frenzy gaat VOORDAT de Majesty afgaat (of voordat je damage kan preventen) en DUS gaat hij naar torpor. Iets wat anders niet gebeurt was. Bovendien blijft hij een beurt langer getapt. Het is dus meer een offensieve dan een defensieve kaart. Veel mensen *haten* Rotschrek (zo ook Tobias :p), maar hij is redelijk balanced omdat het een out of turn master is en dus niet speelbaar in je eigen beurt. Je gebruikt hem dus niet om je eigen vampier te redden, hoewel dat in theorie ook zou kunnen als je bv ge-Amaranth of op een andere manier geburnt zou worden anders. Beter in torpor dan geburnt.

In message <ud4ob09s9jlt0c6vo...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: >In message <40BBD35D...@freemail.nl>, >The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: > > >>At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players >>together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules >>issue very soon. > >Do you mean minimum here by any chance? I'd hate to see anyone travel >and be turned away... Right, a sealed event, of course. Nevermind, my bad; a maximum makes more sense here since you clearly only have a limited amount of product. But in that case I'd certainly want to make sure there was a clear signup list available at the time of announcement... [ quoted text not captured ]

Izaak wrote: > Het punt van Rotschrek is dat het "wint" van Strike: Combat Ends, Dodge > en damage prevention. > bv: > > Ik bleed jou met een vampier (laten we zeggen Walter Nash) > Jij blockt met een Gangrel (zeg, Chandler) > Er komt combat > Niemand maneuvert of iets dergelijks > Walter Nash speelt Majesty als strike (voor het geval, Majesty "wint" > van alle strikes, zelfs van first strike) > Chandler zegt dat hij hand damage probeert en speelt dan Wolf Claws (die > het aggravated maakt) Scary thing is, I speak nary a word of Dutch, yet I could follow what you were saying exactly. Jyhad: the modern day Babel. --Colin McGuigan

Derek Ray wrote: >>At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players >>together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules >>issue very soon. > > Do you mean minimum here by any chance? I'd hate to see anyone travel > and be turned away... Since we have 20 starters available, I did mean max :) But we have enough boosters to stretch it up a bit, but not too much. The intention is to get people to sign up before the tournament, so we know how many will be there. And though I hope to get 20, I doubt it. Within The Netherlands there is this strange mass hypnosis hysteria that makes people think Groningen is far away :P So people don't bother to travel here. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > In message <ud4ob09s9jlt0c6vo...@4ax.com>, > Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> mumbled something about: > > >>In message <40BBD35D...@freemail.nl>, >>The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >> >> >> >>>At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players >>>together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules >>>issue very soon. >> >>Do you mean minimum here by any chance? I'd hate to see anyone travel >>and be turned away... > > > Right, a sealed event, of course. Nevermind, my bad; a maximum makes > more sense here since you clearly only have a limited amount of product. > But in that case I'd certainly want to make sure there was a clear > signup list available at the time of announcement... The list is very clear, but it's not a list everyone can see :) Signup is through e-mail, as I mentioned, but maybe not mentioned clearly enough. [ quoted text not captured ]

Izaak wrote: > > (forgive me the Dutch here) > > Het punt van Rotschrek is dat het "wint" van Strike: Combat Ends, Dodge > en damage prevention. > bv: > > Ik bleed jou met een vampier (laten we zeggen Walter Nash) > Jij blockt met een Gangrel (zeg, Chandler) > Er komt combat > Niemand maneuvert of iets dergelijks > Walter Nash speelt Majesty als strike (voor het geval, Majesty "wint" > van alle strikes, zelfs van first strike) > Chandler zegt dat hij hand damage probeert en speelt dan Wolf Claws (die > het aggravated maakt) > > Normaal gesproken kom je dan in de "strike resolution" fase. Daarin gaat > de Majesty eerst af, combat eindigt en de Wolf Claws hebben geen effect. > Hetzelfde gaat op als hij bv een Skin of Rock zou hebben. Dunno whether we missed out on another rules change, but AFAIK the combat ends at the Majesty, there will be no Wolf Claws. The defender does not get the oppurtunity to play a strike card or whatever after the Majesty, coz there basically never was combat (which would be the effect of Majesty, looked at from Role-Play perspective) Basically what we do in our rulings is check it against the roleplaying game. What is the effect of that thing in the RPG of Vampire:the Masquerade. And then we usually rule a card to mimick that effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > That said, have you read the official rules and rulings? > > http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES/rulebook/rulebook.html > > http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES Check this one out: Seattle Committe: Seattle Committee put into play when played. [LSJ 20030522] Not that I care much, since I don't even know that card, but it's listed as 'errata'. It sortof makes me shiver :) There's probably a good reason for this, but reading it as is kinda scares me. [ quoted text not captured ]

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> wrote in message news:40BBB829...@freemail.nl... [ quoted text not captured ] Glad to see your still playing. Long time no see, missed you last Euro trip. Maybe next time. Raille

The Doctor wrote: > Dunno whether we missed out on another rules change, but AFAIK the > combat ends at the Majesty, there will be no Wolf Claws. > The defender does not get the oppurtunity to play a strike card or > whatever after the Majesty, coz there basically never was combat (which > would be the effect of Majesty, looked at from Role-Play perspective) According to the real rules, no. There's a strike declaration phase, and then a strike resolution phase. Majesty's effect takes place during strike resolution, but the following is valid (Strike Declaration) Acting Minion: I strike with Majesty. Blocking Minion: I strike with hands. Blocking Minion: I play Wolf Claws. Blocking Minion: I play Rotschreck. Combat ends, acting minion goes to torpor. The combat never gets to strike resolution, so Majesty never goes off. --Colin McGuigan

The Doctor wrote: > Check this one out: > > Seattle Committe: Seattle Committee put into play when played. [LSJ > 20030522] > > Not that I care much, since I don't even know that card, but it's listed > as 'errata'. It sortof makes me shiver :) There's probably a good reason > for this, but reading it as is kinda scares me. Seattle Committee (a card you tap for an effect) lacks the text, "Put this card into play". Yes, it's obvious if you read the card that it should be put into play, but its so much better safe than sorry. (I'm also fond of the RTR ruling on Rotschreck: "Should be played as written...") --Colin McGuigan

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> wrote in message news:40BC8D16...@freemail.nl... > Derek Ray wrote: > >>At this point, I am more concerned with getting a maximum of 20 players > >>together for our tournament. But I'm sure we'll be addressing the rules > >>issue very soon. > > > > Do you mean minimum here by any chance? I'd hate to see anyone travel > > and be turned away... > > Since we have 20 starters available, I did mean max :) > But we have enough boosters to stretch it up a bit, but not too much. > > The intention is to get people to sign up before the tournament, so we > know how many will be there. And though I hope to get 20, I doubt it. > > Within The Netherlands there is this strange mass hypnosis hysteria > that makes people think Groningen is far away :P So people don't bother > to travel here. I concur, although I did make the trip and it was a bit over 4000 miles for me. You'd think that the NL players could stretch their legs once in awhile and hike out to their back yard (Gronigen) and have a little fun. Raille

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> wrote in message news:40BC8EFE...@freemail.nl... > Dunno whether we missed out on another rules change, but AFAIK the > combat ends at the Majesty, there will be no Wolf Claws. > The defender does not get the oppurtunity to play a strike card or > whatever after the Majesty, coz there basically never was combat (which > would be the effect of Majesty, looked at from Role-Play perspective) > > Basically what we do in our rulings is check it against the roleplaying > game. What is the effect of that thing in the RPG of Vampire:the > Masquerade. And then we usually rule a card to mimick that effect. There is a defined line between the RPG effects and the CCG effects, and certain items are just square pegs in round holes, no matter how are you force them, they just can't be made to work well or proper in the CCG format. I know I been there and done that with the Old 7/7 and NJL thing. (shuders). Seems that everytime you set an effect to mimic the RPG, it creates some other broken effects to cascade down onto other cards and or card combinations. Raille

> Dunno whether we missed out on another rules change, but AFAIK the > combat ends at the Majesty, there will be no Wolf Claws. > The defender does not get the oppurtunity to play a strike card or > whatever after the Majesty, coz there basically never was combat (which > would be the effect of Majesty, looked at from Role-Play perspective) I can't help but wonder how you would handle this if the defender plays Majesty (the more common scenario). The Wolf Claws can now be played but simply don't have effect? Seems inconsistent to me. Anyway, officially speaking there's a strike declaration phase and a strike resolution phase. In the former both combatants can announce their strike and the chose strikes resolve in the latter. Rotschrek has its timing window between these two phases. Also note that you can play Wolf Claws at inferior any point in the round as you see fit. Card text does not specify it as being a strike, but just gives your vampire an ability for "the remainder of the round". All in all, I don't really care about people using houserules. Play however you want to play. I personally cannot imagine VTES being fun with Majesty being free, for example. It's just that if you want to attract people from outside your usual playgroup (in this case via this newsgroup), you're likely to see Tobias, myself and some of the guys from Utrecht. We are used to playing by the official rules and as such use the errata's. Isn't stacking Army of Rats bothering your group? How about PRO weenies, computer hacks and Form of Mist? There's a ton more cards in jyhad that can be abused to a gamebreaking effect. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <40BC94E...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> That said, have you read the official rules and rulings? >> >> http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES/rulebook/rulebook.html >> >> http://www.white-wolf.com/VTES > >Check this one out: > >Seattle Committe: Seattle Committee put into play when played. [LSJ >20030522] > >Not that I care much, since I don't even know that card, but it's listed >as 'errata'. It sortof makes me shiver :) There's probably a good reason >for this, but reading it as is kinda scares me. The card text for Seattle Committee reads: "Unique master. During your master phase, you may tap this card to put an anarch counter on a ready non-titled, non-anarch vampire you control. A vampire with an anarch counter is considered anarch (and independent) even if this card leaves play. If a vampire with an anarch counter changes sects, burn the counter." Compare with Specialization: "Unique master. Put this card in play. During your untap phase, you may tap this card and discard two copies of the same card from your hand to gain 1 pool. Draw back up to your hand size afterward." All other cards of this type (Unique non-location Masters) have the boilerplate text at the front which reads "Put this card in play". Seattle Committee lacks it and it's something that it should have, because cards are, by default, played directly to the ash heap. Now, I doubt anyone has ever actually played Seattle Committee as anything OTHER than "put into play", and I'm sure very few people have even noticed that text missing, but it is something that needed addressing. So, there is a token errata available for reference, such that the card text does what everyone already expected it to do, and any rules lawyer types trying to claim otherwise can go pound sand. The current Rules Team has done an excellent job of some very small things like this; making sure that players are able to read the card text and determine what should be done with the card, instead of having to argue over it -- and also consistently making rulings that are in line with that card text. It may seem silly at first glance, but there are thousands of players in the V:EKN registry, and the Continental Championships are a big thing, as well as other local tournaments. When disputes arise, it's mandatory to have something concrete in place, as opposed to having to make snap decisions on the spot. While this particular instance isn't a difficult decision, consistency is also a positive -- and there are other oddly-worded cards (Rotschreck is favourite) that WOULD be difficult decisions. ...And there've been a lot of new cards printed since Jyhad. ;) I think it's a total of 700 vampires now, and almost 1300 library cards. That's an awful lot out there to keep in one's head... [ quoted text not captured ]

Izaak wrote: > > I can't help but wonder how you would handle this if the defender plays > Majesty (the more common scenario). > The Wolf Claws can now be played but simply don't have effect? Seems > inconsistent to me. As an attacker, you run into the alley with your claws ready, but once you get up close to your opponent you are in awe of the person who activated their Presence. You simply choose not to attack such a majestious being. Makes perfect sense to me, RPG-wise. > All in all, I don't really care about people using houserules. Play > however you want to play. I personally cannot imagine VTES being fun > with Majesty being free, for example. It's just that if you want to Ah, another hint at something :) Majesty has a cost eh? I've been looking into the official rulings list too, and we'll get a list ready before the tournament. We got more then a month to go, no worries. > attract people from outside your usual playgroup (in this case via this > newsgroup), you're likely to see Tobias, myself and some of the guys > from Utrecht. We are used to playing by the official rules and as such > use the errata's. Isn't stacking Army of Rats bothering your group? How > about PRO weenies, computer hacks and Form of Mist? There's a ton more > cards in jyhad that can be abused to a gamebreaking effect. We have been playing this game for 10 years, we have rules and rulings about just about every card. We just never bothered to write them down :) So we are now in the process of recalling the rulings and putting them down in writing. IN general, 3 people who are the main organisers of the group handle the rulings and such, but we have to get these things out of our heads and onto file. And it doesn't hurt to look at what the official sayings are about those same cards either. Most of our rulings have become such an integral part of the game we play that we no longer know it was a ruling. So we have to recall them first to be able to write them down. More specific example: we have never allowed stacking of army of rats, not even in 1996. If you had not just mentioned it, I would not have recalled it's not completely obvious to play it as such :P [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <40BC8EFE...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Izaak wrote: >> >> Normaal gesproken kom je dan in de "strike resolution" fase. Daarin gaat >> de Majesty eerst af, combat eindigt en de Wolf Claws hebben geen effect. >> Hetzelfde gaat op als hij bv een Skin of Rock zou hebben. > >Dunno whether we missed out on another rules change, but AFAIK the >combat ends at the Majesty, there will be no Wolf Claws. Which is true in this set of rules as well if you leave out Rotschreck. First player strikes Majesty. Second player strikes hands, and plays Wolf Claws to modify the hand strike to aggravated. Majesty ends combat as part of the strike resolution phase, and the hand damage doesn't matter because you don't get to damage resolution. >The defender does not get the oppurtunity to play a strike card or >whatever after the Majesty, coz there basically never was combat (which >would be the effect of Majesty, looked at from Role-Play perspective) THIS reading of the effect disturbs me, though. I would think that this would lead to Presence-based bleed decks being overpoweringly strong in your game, honestly; although then again, in the Jyhad set the only effective counters to Majesty were Immortal Grapple, Psyche!, and Rotschreck, so PRE bleed was already superstrong. If "there never was combat", would you then rule that a vampire could not play superior Psyche! after the Majesty to continue/restart combat? Does Immortal Grapple prevent Majesty from being played? The role-play perspective says "there was no combat", so it no longer matters whether or not Majesty is a hand strike... and in fact it's not a strike at all in the RPG, it's a continuing effect, so it should be playable under Immortal Grapple with this line of thinking. This leaves no real defense against a solid Majesty-based deck, and is kind of worrisome. [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > Now, I doubt anyone has ever actually played Seattle Committee as > anything OTHER than "put into play", and I'm sure very few people have > even noticed that text missing, but it is something that needed > addressing. So, there is a token errata available for reference, such Why not just errata it as 'Insert "Put into play." <at the appropriate spot>', this wording of the errata is just erm well, weird :) But then again, must be just me that got a big laugh out of reading that line. > as well as other local tournaments. When disputes arise, it's mandatory > to have something concrete in place, as opposed to having to make snap > decisions on the spot. While this particular instance isn't a difficult > decision, consistency is also a positive -- and there are other > oddly-worded cards (Rotschreck is favourite) that WOULD be difficult > decisions. This is exactly why we decided we would go about writing things down, as opposed to relying on the things in the heads of our organisers (being me and 2 others) > ...And there've been a lot of new cards printed since Jyhad. ;) I > think it's a total of 700 vampires now, and almost 1300 library cards. > That's an awful lot out there to keep in one's head... With just 111 vamps and some odd 380 library cards, it's doable :) We're just trying to find out what's in our heads though, and finding out if there's still things we did not all agree upon. I'm sure many things will just end up adopting the real rules. But some things we may still not like. I recall the days of Tom Wylie calling out all kinds of rulings that nobody liked :) Ghehe. Those were the days. Jeez, I just realised I haven't been reading this group for about 5 years. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] No, that would be fine, it simply means you are psyched up so much your will to attack is stronger then the Presence of the opponent. (Unless of course they too are persistant and Majesty again :P ) > Does Immortal Grapple prevent Majesty from being played? The role-play > perspective says "there was no combat", so it no longer matters whether > or not Majesty is a hand strike... and in fact it's not a strike at all > in the RPG, it's a continuing effect, so it should be playable under > Immortal Grapple with this line of thinking. Well, gameplay wise I like the idea of IG preventing Majesty, but afaik in our group S:CE has been allowed in these 'hand strike only' cases. I'd have to check with the other 2 people. I think I'd personally like IG to work against S:CE, coz S:CE is pretty strong (not just Majesty), but indeed it makes no sense in the RPG. You do not grab that person at all, you are awed. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <40BCA9F1...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Derek Ray wrote: >> Now, I doubt anyone has ever actually played Seattle Committee as >> anything OTHER than "put into play", and I'm sure very few people have >> even noticed that text missing, but it is something that needed >> addressing. So, there is a token errata available for reference, such > >Why not just errata it as 'Insert "Put into play." <at the appropriate >spot>', this wording of the errata is just erm well, weird :) It looks like it might be a ruling, as opposed to errata. There's a fine line of distinction between the two, and any errata would have meant that eventually Seattle Committee would need a reprint to have the most current card text. Perhaps the Rules Team decided it only warranted a ruling, since everyone knows what's supposed to happen with the card anyway. =) >> ...And there've been a lot of new cards printed since Jyhad. ;) I >> think it's a total of 700 vampires now, and almost 1300 library cards. >> That's an awful lot out there to keep in one's head... > >With just 111 vamps and some odd 380 library cards, it's doable :) > >We're just trying to find out what's in our heads though, and finding >out if there's still things we did not all agree upon. >I'm sure many things will just end up adopting the real rules. But some >things we may still not like. > >I recall the days of Tom Wylie calling out all kinds of rulings that >nobody liked :) Ghehe. Those were the days. Curiously, a number of Tom's rulings have been reversed. ;) One of the advantages of the strict-card-text system; everyone knows to base their initial impressions on the most recent printing of the card, and that leaves a lot less "up in the air" interpretation open to chance (cf. Catatonic Fear, etc.) [ quoted text not captured ]

> This is exactly why we decided we would go about writing things down, as > opposed to relying on the things in the heads of our organisers (being > me and 2 others) > Ah, but LSJ has already written it all down for you. And his version of the rules is even compatible with ours AND the rating system.

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> wrote in message news:40BCA5E5...@freemail.nl... > We have been playing this game for 10 years, we have rules and rulings > about just about every card. We just never bothered to write them down :) > I'm certain you must realize how very debilitating such a situation can be for newer players, and simply do not care to add more participants to your current group (although posting a tournament invitation here suggests otherwise). For certain, it is your group, and you can grow it (or not grow it) as you see fit. The official rulings serve best as a means for all participants to play on a common footing. > So we are now in the process of recalling the rulings and putting them > down in writing. IN general, 3 people who are the main organisers of > the group handle the rulings and such, but we have to get these things > out of our heads and onto file. And it doesn't hurt to look at what the > official sayings are about those same cards either. Once eratta'ed cards are reissued with most recent card text, the errata is effectively repealed. When you do take this look, check out the White Wolf website for the list of card text migrations, which might be a productive thing for you to see what has been altered... > Most of our rulings have become such an integral part of the game we > play that we no longer know it was a ruling. So we have to recall them > first to be able to write them down. > The sooner, the better, if anyone else is expected to participate. > More specific example: we have never allowed stacking of army of rats, > not even in 1996. If you had not just mentioned it, I would not have > recalled it's not completely obvious to play it as such :P > It is to us (most recent card text) ;-) Happy hunting DaveZ Atom Weaver

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> wrote in message news:40BCAC48...@freemail.nl... > Derek Ray wrote: > > In message <40BC8EFE...@freemail.nl>, > > The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: > > Does Immortal Grapple prevent Majesty from being played? The role-play > > perspective says "there was no combat", so it no longer matters whether > > or not Majesty is a hand strike... and in fact it's not a strike at all > > in the RPG, it's a continuing effect, so it should be playable under > > Immortal Grapple with this line of thinking. > > Well, gameplay wise I like the idea of IG preventing Majesty, but afaik > in our group S:CE has been allowed in these 'hand strike only' cases. > I'd have to check with the other 2 people. > Yelch. I'd hope it wouldn't. House rules or not, it seems like your system is leaning the meta game heavily towards strong stealth tectics with vote and bleed, and away from combat-centric. That may be what you intended, or not... > I think I'd personally like IG to work against S:CE, coz S:CE is pretty > strong (not just Majesty), but indeed it makes no sense in the RPG. You > do not grab that person at all, you are awed. > If you cannot conceive of an RPG argument to support valid CCG play, then you simply aren't thinking creatively enough :-) This same truth is what makes your RPG metric for house rules largely unwieldy and untenable. I can see why you don't want to consider anything but the base Jyhad set. Considering the many interactions, and your standard for dealing with them, you'd be years trying to get through house rulings for Dark Sovereigns and Ancient Hearts alone... DaveZ Atom Weaver P.S. In your group, is Wake with Evening's Freshness is only usable by vampires with Thaumaturgy?

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, The Doctor wrote: > Well, gameplay wise I like the idea of IG preventing Majesty, but afaik > in our group S:CE has been allowed in these 'hand strike only' cases. Eek! > I'd have to check with the other 2 people. Eek! > I think I'd personally like IG to work against S:CE, coz S:CE is pretty > strong (not just Majesty), but indeed it makes no sense in the RPG. You > do not grab that person at all, you are awed. No I'm not. I'm not impressed at all, 'cause I have him in a headlock and I'm about to break his spine with my Undead Strength. When I'm done with that, I'll rip his arms off and drink some of his blood, then go off on my merry way leaving him in a torpid heap. If that guy wanted to impress me with his Majesty, he should've put a little distance between us and not let me grab him. That's how I see things RPG-wise. Matt Morgan

In message <40BCAC48...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Derek Ray wrote: >> In message <40BC8EFE...@freemail.nl>, >> If "there never was combat", would you then rule that a vampire could >> not play superior Psyche! after the Majesty to continue/restart combat? > >No, that would be fine, it simply means you are psyched up so much your >will to attack is stronger then the Presence of the opponent. (Unless of >course they too are persistant and Majesty again :P ) OK -- I do point out that there is a disconnect here with the other ruling, though; not so much in the results as in the logic behind them. This doesn't matter in this instance, but is a trap you've potentially set for yourself in the future. I don't mean to sound argumentative here; I'm trying to point out that whatever you may have run into in the past, the current set of rulings/errata actually have a whole lot of sense to them... and a LOT of thought went into each one, AND into making the logic consistent. Unlike some previous off-the-cuff rulings you may have encountered. :) We'll take a short break so that those regular denizens who spewed their drinks all over their monitors at the first sentence in that last paragraph can get a tissue or something. Everyone ready? Good. >> Does Immortal Grapple prevent Majesty from being played? The role-play >> perspective says "there was no combat", so it no longer matters whether >> or not Majesty is a hand strike... and in fact it's not a strike at all >> in the RPG, it's a continuing effect, so it should be playable under >> Immortal Grapple with this line of thinking. > >Well, gameplay wise I like the idea of IG preventing Majesty, but afaik >in our group S:CE has been allowed in these 'hand strike only' cases. >I'd have to check with the other 2 people. The logic chain used since time immemorial is: A strike such as Thrown Sewer Lid is clearly not a hand strike. The wording for Sewer Lid is "Strike: 3R damage." It's a frisbee. A strike such as Undead Strength, on the other hand, clearly IS a hand strike when played by itself: it reads "Strike: use your hand or melee weapon..." Obviously, it would no longer be a hand strike when used with a melee weapon, but that's pretty easy to get to. Majesty's card text reads "Strike: End Combat", as does Earth Meld's. When attempting to determine designer intent, it was noted that Majesty's text matches Sewer Lid's (and various other non-hand strikes), and did NOT match Growing Fury, Mighty Grapple, or Undead Strength, all of which are blatant hand strikes and specify "use your hand..." on them. From this, the only possible conclusion is that Majesty and Earth Meld are not hand strikes; and this is even backed up somewhat by the RPG, because it's difficult/impossible to use either discipline when someone has you by the throat and is shaking you. Nobody's pretty when they're turning all purple and stuff. >I think I'd personally like IG to work against S:CE, coz S:CE is pretty >strong (not just Majesty), but indeed it makes no sense in the RPG. You >do not grab that person at all, you are awed. Note that Immortal Grapple is played before strikes are chosen; meaning that in the timing of the game, you can grab someone before they have a chance to turn on their Majesty. As far as Earth Meld goes... well... honestly, do you really WANT to grab the Gangrel and get a faceful of Claws while they prevent your strike? All things considered, Earth Meld is one of their milder options. =) (By the way, in the latest Camarilla Edition printing, Majesty costs 1 blood, and the untap effect at superior is free. So the superior version effectively doesn't change; but it DID slow down the weenie PRE bleed decks that were previously very difficult to handle.) [ quoted text not captured ]

Colin McGuigan <magu...@BGONEspeakeasy.net> wrote in message news:<Gd2dnaIlC6N...@speakeasy.net>... [ quoted text not captured ] You see dutch aint that of a problem:) dino

Matthew T. Morgan wrote: > > No I'm not. I'm not impressed at all, 'cause I have him in a headlock and > I'm about to break his spine with my Undead Strength. When I'm done with > that, I'll rip his arms off and drink some of his blood, then go off on my > merry way leaving him in a torpid heap. > > If that guy wanted to impress me with his Majesty, he should've put a > little distance between us and not let me grab him. > > That's how I see things RPG-wise. Nice way to put it... I'm almost conviced :) [ quoted text not captured ]

Derek Ray wrote: > > I don't mean to sound argumentative here; I'm trying to point out that > whatever you may have run into in the past, the current set of > rulings/errata actually have a whole lot of sense to them... and a LOT > of thought went into each one, AND into making the logic consistent. > Unlike some previous off-the-cuff rulings you may have encountered. :) > > We'll take a short break so that those regular denizens who spewed their > drinks all over their monitors at the first sentence in that last > paragraph can get a tissue or something. Everyone ready? Good. > [snip] > > (By the way, in the latest Camarilla Edition printing, Majesty costs 1 > blood, and the untap effect at superior is free. So the superior > version effectively doesn't change; but it DID slow down the weenie PRE > bleed decks that were previously very difficult to handle.) The problem with the card changes and rulings that are perhaps very well thought out, is that they are thought out for the 4000+ card world that V:tES is in, not the 430 some cards of Jyhad. Some of the problems you guys encountered simply do not exist in Jyhad, for example because there simply aren't enough vamps to make a good crypt for the deck you might want. Or any number of reasons. Similarly, problems that existed in Jyhad may have already been solved by newer cards becoming available to counteract them effectively. So for our Jyhad-only environment, we're not likely to adopt every change, but even if noone else from our group looks at them, I certainly will consider all the official rulings and re-wordings to be incorporated in our list, and will most likely be the strongest supporter of being as close as possible to the official stuff. To me it seems indeed, like WW have taken this game way more serious than those Magic-guys that did VTES on the side. POwer hungry as everyone was to design the newest favorite card they kept inventing new powers in Magic, and seemed to think this was a good plan for Jyhad as well. As far as I can see, White Wolf is paying way more attention to the balance of things and adding flavor, rather then powers. Maybe some day I might even be pursuaded to try some expansions :P (As a matter of fact, I have quite a few DS cards and even some AH, they're simply never used :) ) [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <40BD518D...@freemail.nl>, The Doctor <D...@freemail.nl> mumbled something about: >Derek Ray wrote: >> >> (By the way, in the latest Camarilla Edition printing, Majesty costs 1 >> blood, and the untap effect at superior is free. So the superior >> version effectively doesn't change; but it DID slow down the weenie PRE >> bleed decks that were previously very difficult to handle.) > >The problem with the card changes and rulings that are perhaps very well >thought out, is that they are thought out for the 4000+ card world that >V:tES is in, not the 430 some cards of Jyhad. Certainly. But that doesn't mean that the initial focus on those areas that needed rulings didn't come about from the Jyhad days. >Some of the problems you guys encountered simply do not exist in Jyhad, >for example because there simply aren't enough vamps to make a good >crypt for the deck you might want. Or any number of reasons. I'm not so certain about this. The Majesty problem still exists in spades in Jyhad -- while weenie PRE isn't quite as weenie as it can be after 9 expansions, it's still possible to take Gideon Fontaine, Violette Prentiss, Marianna Gilbert, Ramiel Dupre, and Jazz Wentworth... and make a solid deck core around them that does nothing but "bleed for 3, block? Majesty, untap. call KRC/Prince vote..." Backfill with Igo the Hungry, Delilah Easton, Roland, and Uma Hatch if necessary, and dupe up on the bigger guys. Blood Dolls all around; your guys will have plenty from the Voter Caps. Use some Cryptic Riders as necessary to make sure your Prince votes get passed; Toreador and Ventrue Justicar will help. Sell KRC points if you must. See, the real problem is that while the weenie deck's crypt becomes less robust, so does the defending crypt -- you're forced to include larger vampires, or vampires with weaker disciplines, simply because there aren't more to choose from. I believe many of the problems began in Jyhad and were aggravated by WotC's careless design in later expansions. Inner Circle members and PTO clearly are not a problem, but the Fame torpor recycle deck certainly was. >Similarly, problems that existed in Jyhad may have already been solved >by newer cards becoming available to counteract them effectively. One of the stronger arguments for the post-Sabbat expansions. (White Wolf's first expansion was Sabbat War. Previous expansions were from WotC.) >So for our Jyhad-only environment, we're not likely to adopt every >change, but even if noone else from our group looks at them, I certainly >will consider all the official rulings and re-wordings to be >incorporated in our list, and will most likely be the strongest >supporter of being as close as possible to the official stuff. I suppose this is all we can ask for, but I ask that you PLEASE carefully think through the reasoning behind each of these rulings; consider that we've had many countries to draw empirical information from, and a lot of those countries had people who were willing to win at any cost. Many of these rulings were drawn from those players. I am always openly concerned about house rules, especially ones that deliberately go against the current "official" rules. As someone else has pointed out, it must make it terribly difficult for you to gain any new players; while this is a testament to your current playgroup's dedication, what would you do if suddenly some people with all the new Cam Edition cards heard about you and wanted to play? I personally hate turning people away, so that would bother me... >To me it seems indeed, like WW have taken this game way more serious >than those Magic-guys that did VTES on the side. POwer hungry as >everyone was to design the newest favorite card they kept inventing new >powers in Magic, and seemed to think this was a good plan for Jyhad as >well. As far as I can see, White Wolf is paying way more attention to >the balance of things and adding flavor, rather then powers. We _did_ have Magic to see "what not to do". =) >Maybe some day I might even be pursuaded to try some expansions :P >(As a matter of fact, I have quite a few DS cards and even some AH, >they're simply never used :) ) Suggest beginning from Sabbat War and moving forward. =) [ quoted text not captured ]

The Doctor wrote: > The problem with the card changes and rulings that are perhaps very well > thought out, is that they are thought out for the 4000+ card world that > V:tES is in, not the 430 some cards of Jyhad. Minor nitpick: VtES currently stands at 2127 cards, not 4000+ :) Flux

Flux wrote: > > Minor nitpick: VtES currently stands at 2127 cards, not 4000+ :) Ghe, who's counting? :P //Doc is not. PS There seem to be different opinions on whether Jyhad has 437 or 438 cards, anyone got a definite answer there? [ quoted text not captured ]

"The Doctor" <D...@freemail.nl> schreef in bericht news:40BE53C0...@freemail.nl... > Flux wrote: > > > > Minor nitpick: VtES currently stands at 2127 cards, not 4000+ :) > > Ghe, who's counting? :P > > //Doc is not. > > PS There seem to be different opinions on whether Jyhad has 437 or 438 > cards, anyone got a definite answer there? It's 437, originally. Maybe some people count the two promo cards and leave out Camille Devereux? Dunno.

The Doctor wrote: > PS There seem to be different opinions on whether Jyhad has 437 or 438 > cards, anyone got a definite answer there? Jyhad: 437 V:TES (1995): 436 438 may come from counting RenAgade Garou separately from RenEgade Garou. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

LSJ wrote: > > 438 may come from counting RenAgade Garou separately from RenEgade Garou. Sounds plausible. thanx //Doc. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > The Doctor wrote: >> PS There seem to be different opinions on whether Jyhad has 437 >> or 438 cards, anyone got a definite answer there? > > Jyhad: 437 > V:TES (1995): 436 > > 438 may come from counting RenAgade Garou separately from > RenEgade Garou. What about the ever-famous Psychic Projection and Physchic Projection? =) > LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. > Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: > http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Kevin M., Prince of Henderson, NV (USA) "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

So, are there any active players left in Groningen? On Tuesday, 1 June 2004 00:56:41 UTC+2, The Doctor wrote: > Hello Jyhad-players, > > On Sunday July 11th, there will be an open Groninger Kampioenschap > tournament in the city of Groningen. > It will be a sealed-deck tournament, with only the real Jyhad-cards. > That's right, the real deal, the old stuff. > > You will get a Jyhad starter and at least 2 Jyhad boosters (exact number > of boosters to be determined later, depends on amount of players > participating). > > We are not sure at this moment whether we will play it with a > drafting/trading system or just have the players take the starter and > boosters as is, but the starter decks and boosters have been bought > already. Best 4 players after two rounds will play the final and get > some extra boosters before this final match. > > Participating will cost about EUR 10,00 (maybe less if we get enough > players), and you get to keep your cards of course. > > If you are Dutch and are interested in playing at this tournament, > contact me by e-mail (the 'reply-to', not the 'from') and I'll answer > your questions. > > Alternately, if you are interested in playing Jyhad (not V:tES) in the > city of Groningen on a regular basis, you might be interested in our > Yahoo-group 'Jyhad in Grunn'. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jyhad-in-grunn [ quoted text not captured ]

Hi, as your friendly neighborhood r.g.t-c.j lurker, I'm going to point out that you're replying to a 10 year old post. This newsgroup has not been actively used for a few years now. If you want to find out more information about the current state of affairs of VTES, you are much better off heading to http://www.vekn.net/ and browsing the forums. Good luck! [ quoted text not captured ]