KMW Precons: Interesting Cards

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

....as I see it - and "interesting" does not necessarily mean "good.

(working from The Lasombra's precon-deck listings)

Note that I am just scanning the lists. There's no gurantee I caught
all the examples of a given class, such as listing _all_ "first reprints",
etc. Corrections of such things are welcome.

Fred
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Alastors
--------
Precon-Only Vampire: Echo (also a magazine promo)
Precon-Only Vampire: Benedict Giovanni
Precon-Only Library: Powder of Rigidity

Alastor - rare from Gehenna expansion
Depravity - first reprint in the new layout
Disarm - rare from The Sabbat and Sabbat War
Heidelburg Castle - first reprint in the new layout
Praxis Seizure: Barcelona - first reprint in the new layout
Praxis Seizure: Rome - first reprint in the new layout

Anethema
--------
Precon-Only Vampire: Jayne Jonestown
Precon-Only Vampire: Rabbat
Precon-Only Library: Threestar Cab Company

Anarch Revolt - new card text
Dreams of the Sphinx - "rare 2" from Ancient Hearts, first reprint in the new layout
Media Influence - first reprint in the new layout
Rebirth - rare from KMW boosters
The Final Nights - first reprint in the new layout

Baali
-----
Precon-Only Vampire: Maureen (2 copies!)
Precon-Only Vampire: Sahira Siraj
Precon-Only Library: The Book of Going Forth by Night

Call the Great Beast - "rare 1" from Bloodlines, first reprint in the new layout
Concordance - first reprint in the new layout
Conflaguration - first reprint in the new layout
D`habi Revenant - first reprint in the new layout
Ecstasy - first reprint in the new layout
Enticement - first reprint in the new layout
Fear of the Void Below - first reprint in the new layout
Form of Corruption - "rare 2" from Ancient Hearts/Rare from Final Nights, first
reprint in the new layout
Heart of Darkness - new card text, first reprint in the new layout
Mylan Horseed - rare from Gehenna
Psychomachia - first reprint in the new layout
Ruins of Charizel - rare from KMW boosters
Sense the Sin - first reprint in the new layout
Serpentis - first reprint in the new layout
Skin of the Adder - first reprint in the new layout
Temptation - "rare 2" from Ancient Hearts/Rare from Final Nights, first
reprint in the new layout

Gangrel Antitribu
-----------------
Precon-Only Vampire: Denette Stensen
Precon-Only Vampire: Jeffrey Mullins (2 copies!)
Precon-Only Library: Inquisition

Bay and Howl - rare from KMW boosters
Black Spiral Buddy - first reprint in the new layout
Campground Hunting Ground - first reprint in the new layout
City Gangrel Connections - first reprint in the new layout
Dreams of the Sphinx - "rare 2" from Ancient Hearts, first reprint in the new layout
Quick Meld - first reprint in the new layout
Shadow of the Beast - first reprint in the new layout
Shadow Feint - first reprint in the new layout
Talons of the Dead = rare from Black Hand
Wolf Companion - first reprint in the new layout
The Path of the Feral Heart - first reprint in the new layout

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

I don't understand the precon-only cards...

In the !gan there an Inquisition. It is the most unusable cards in then
KMW.
Otherwise, in the Baali precon is there an Book of Going Forth by
Night, that is very nice cards.

why????

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:
> Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
> the boosters.
>
> Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?

Do I want immense size as my rare either? So why isn't THAT in the
starters too? (just playing with reverse logic)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Daneel wrote:

> - A card that opens up a new strategy or strengthens a weaker
strategy is
> good.
> - A card that strengthens an already strong strategy is bad (except
if it
> adds
> another angle to the older strategy, by merging it with another
strategy,
> etc.).
> - A card that does something another card already does is generally
bad.

Unless that initial card was doing something weak/underused/under the
power curve itself.

> - A card that does something new is generally good.
> - A card that has so little practical use that not a single
archetypical
> deck would
> even consider its inclusion is bad.
> - A card that is conceptually well-designed is good.
> - A card that hoses/cancels another card or effect is generally bad.

Disagree: If the hose is light. Consider:

Specific Threat: AM aus dom: +1 bleed. No more bleed mods. If this
bleed actions target is changed, the methuselah you were initially
bleeding burns one pool. AUS DOM: as above, but +2 bleed, and the
methuselah burns a pool if he reduces the amount of the bleed by more
than one.

Hoses bleed bounce and reduction, but I think that's OK.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Bala wrote:

> I don't understand the precon-only cards...

I don't understand your question.

>
> In the !gan there an Inquisition. It is the most unusable cards in then
> KMW.
> Otherwise, in the Baali precon is there an Book of Going Forth by
> Night, that is very nice cards.
>
> why????

Why are there pre-con only cards? To provide incentive to buy starters
(although certainly in this set, the pre-cons are filled with fantastic,
hard to get rares as it is). Luckily, they all seem to be fairly low on the
"I need this card!" scale--Powder of Rigidity is pretty corner case except
for off color jokes; The book is again, fairly corner case--not bad, but not
real necessary; 3star cab Company is pretty much the same; Inquisition is,
again, pretty corner case. So there are three cards that provide collector
incentive to buy starters, but they have fairly limited play value, so no
one is going to be out of sorts 'cause they only have one of them.


Peter D Bakija
pdb6@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6

"How does this end?"
"In fire."
Emperor Turhan and Kosh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Peter D Bakija" <pdb6@lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:BE40AAC3.1DA6B%pdb6@lightlink.com...
> Why are there pre-con only cards? To provide incentive to buy starters
> (although certainly in this set, the pre-cons are filled with fantastic,
> hard to get rares as it is). Luckily, they all seem to be fairly low on
the
> "I need this card!" scale--Powder of Rigidity is pretty corner case
except
> for off color jokes; The book is again, fairly corner case--not bad, but
not
> real necessary; 3star cab Company is pretty much the same; Inquisition
is,
> again, pretty corner case. So there are three cards that provide
collector
> incentive to buy starters, but they have fairly limited play value, so no
> one is going to be out of sorts 'cause they only have one of them.


Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
the boosters.

Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:

> Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
> the boosters.

Umm, ok. I was simply pointing out that the starter only cards are good as
starter only cards, for the resons I pointed out.

>
> Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?

Of the 4, Powder is the most wonky. The other three easily could have been
rares.


Peter D Bakija
pdb6@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6

"How does this end?"
"In fire."
Emperor Turhan and Kosh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:
> Semantics.

You're not anti-semantic, are you?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Screaming Vermillian" <vermillian69@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109091841.052664.182360@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> LSJ wrote:
> > Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
> > the boosters.
> >
> > Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
>
> Do I want immense size as my rare either? So why isn't THAT in the
> starters too? (just playing with reverse logic)


The parallel is lost on me.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Bala" <bala@coder.hu> schreef in bericht
news:1109074009.028249.143890@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I don't understand the precon-only cards...
>
> In the !gan there an Inquisition. It is the most unusable cards in then
> KMW.
> Otherwise, in the Baali precon is there an Book of Going Forth by
> Night, that is very nice cards.
>
> why????
>
<mode = commie>because WWGS is a money-hungry capitalistic multi-national
corporation, why else? </mode>

probably, to get more people a reason to buy at least one of each precon, I
guess.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:
> "Screaming Vermillian" <vermillian69@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1109091841.052664.182360@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > LSJ wrote:
> > > Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be
in
> > > the boosters.
> > >
> > > Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
> >
> > Do I want immense size as my rare either? So why isn't THAT in the
> > starters too? (just playing with reverse logic)
>
>
> The parallel is lost on me.

(you were basically saying "Powder is in the starters because people
don't want it in the boosters" which I flipped to demand that any other
card that I don't want in the boosters should be in starters too)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:24:20 -0500, Peter D Bakija <pdb6@lightlink.com>
wrote:

> Bala wrote:
>
>> I don't understand the precon-only cards...
>
> I don't understand your question.
>
>>
>> In the !gan there an Inquisition. It is the most unusable cards in then
>> KMW.
>> Otherwise, in the Baali precon is there an Book of Going Forth by
>> Night, that is very nice cards.
>>
>> why????
>
> Why are there pre-con only cards?

No, you don't speak Hunglish. The question was, why is one
precon-only card (in this case, the Inquisition found in the Gangreal
Antitribu starter) pretty much bordercase, almost unusable, when another
one (the Book in the Baali starter) is a pretty solid card.

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:45:54 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
wrote:

> Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
> the boosters.
>
> Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?

Was powder REALLY needed? I mean, I'm not trying to say it is weak or
something, but I'm curious what sort of serious deck would consider it?
The only thing that can come into mind is a Tremere Antitribu that heavily
utilizes Selena and has lots of MotSs. Maybe. But then again, moving to
long and stealing blood is still better in the vast majority of cases.

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
newspsmltvhzgo6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:45:54 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
> > the boosters.
> >
> > Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
>
> Was powder REALLY needed?

Was Trophy REALLY [sic] needed?

Which cards are absolute necessities?

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:15:08 GMT, Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:45:54 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
>> the boosters.
>>
>> Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
>
>Was powder REALLY needed? I mean, I'm not trying to say it is weak or
> something, but I'm curious what sort of serious deck would consider it?
> The only thing that can come into mind is a Tremere Antitribu that heavily
> utilizes Selena and has lots of MotSs. Maybe. But then again, moving to
> long and stealing blood is still better in the vast majority of cases.

Don't forget foiling most Tzimisce, Gangrel and !Gangrel decks.

I don't mind packing one or two Powders in a tournament deck if I
expect to see some Protean or Vicissitude. It almost completely
negates Rotschreck availablity for these clans. Good addition to
Sire's Index Finger, which is of course better but is unique, so I
won't include more than 2 copies of it in any deck (even if I'm too
afraid of Rotschreck.)

Both have the problem of being equipments, which are always harder to
get when facing a Tzimisce wall, but there plenty of ways to overcome
this.

best,

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
V:TES National Coordinator for Brazil
Giovanni Newsletter Editor
-----------------------------------------------------
V:tES Brasil Site (only in Portuguese for now)
http://planeta.terra.com.br/lazer/vtesbrasil/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 10:17:16 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
wrote:

> "Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
> newspsmltvhzgo6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:45:54 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Actually, they're not in the boosters because they shouldn't be in
>> > the boosters.
>> >
>> > Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
>>
>> Was powder REALLY needed?
>
> Was Trophy REALLY [sic] needed?
>
> Which cards are absolute necessities?

You're the designer, so I presume you have a ready answer for that.

Anyaway, without really wanting to do your job, just for the sake of
argument,
I'd list a few criteria that pop into my mind that might be considered
when
designing the new cards (again, without even the faintest hint of
aspiration
to do your job or tell you how it should be done - I'm sure you know all
this
and even more).

- A card that opens up a new strategy or strengthens a weaker strategy is
good.
- A card that strengthens an already strong strategy is bad (except if it
adds
another angle to the older strategy, by merging it with another strategy,
etc.).
- A card that does something another card already does is generally bad.
- A card that does something new is generally good.
- A card that has so little practical use that not a single archetypical
deck would
even consider its inclusion is bad.
- A card that is conceptually well-designed is good.
- A card that hoses/cancels another card or effect is generally bad.

....dunno, there are probably many more arguments.

Powder is "bad" because it is a very specific _hoser_ that is _similar to_
Shape
Mastery and is _not powerful enough_ to be included in too many decks.

Generally, as for neccessity... Well, no card is really NEEDED per se.
However,
even KMW has some cards that do not unbalance the game but are worthy
additions.
Providing untap effects for fatties, interesting multi-discipline cards
that
open up new strategies, etc. I'm sure you kind of know what I am
referring to...

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

> and if anyone wants to trade (or give me) heaps of Mind Rapes to make
> this deck a reality then that would be tops. *grin*
>

I don't think I've seen someone actually play a Mind Rape before
yesterday.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Screaming Vermillian wrote:
> LSJ wrote:
>>"Screaming Vermillian" <vermillian69@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>LSJ wrote:
>>>>Do you want Powder as your rare? Common?
>>>
>>>Do I want immense size as my rare either? So why isn't THAT in the
>>>starters too? (just playing with reverse logic)
>>
>>The parallel is lost on me.
>
> (you were basically saying "Powder is in the starters because people
> don't want it in the boosters" which I flipped to demand that any other
> card that I don't want in the boosters should be in starters too)

I understood what you were trying to say, but the suitability of
Immense Size as the parallel keystone is lost on me -- it isn't
the same sort of animal.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@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/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On 22 Feb 2005 09:11:18 -0800, Screaming Vermillian
<vermillian69@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> - A card that does something another card already does is generally
> bad.
>
> Unless that initial card was doing something weak/underused/under the
> power curve itself.

Yeah, but even then the new card should be different enough to make the
old one better in special cases.

>> - A card that hoses/cancels another card or effect is generally bad.
>
> Disagree: If the hose is light. Consider:
>
> Specific Threat: AM aus dom: +1 bleed. No more bleed mods. If this
> bleed actions target is changed, the methuselah you were initially
> bleeding burns one pool. AUS DOM: as above, but +2 bleed, and the
> methuselah burns a pool if he reduces the amount of the bleed by more
> than one.
>
> Hoses bleed bounce and reduction, but I think that's OK.

This card isn't really a hoser. Sure, it hoses some of the defences
that can be used against it, but it is a legitimate bleed card in
its own right.

It would be a hoser if it would be an action to be put on a vampire,
and when that vampire plays a reaction card to change the target
(or reduce the amount) of a bleed this acting vampire attempts, his
or her controller burns a pool.

Hosing is bad. Consider Immortal Grapple, Disengage, etc. Hosers shift
the game towards the "I hose the hoser with which you want to hose my
hoser!" boredom. The reason I sometimes like to play without any
canceling card (even SR or DI) is that the game is more about
matching strategies that way.

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
newspsml3otfho6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> On 22 Feb 2005 09:11:18 -0800, Screaming Vermillian <vermillian69@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> - A card that does something another card already does is generally
>> bad.
>>
>> Unless that initial card was doing something weak/underused/under the
>> power curve itself.
>
> Yeah, but even then the new card should be different enough to make the
> old one better in special cases.

That's not really important in some cases. If a card is wallpapery enough,
screw it. Just admit that it was a mistake and write it off. Or do what
they did for Concealed Weapon and reissue it in a more useful form. Though
I'd rather they not try to fix the million or so chronically underpowered
Jyhad cards that way.

> Hosing is bad. Consider Immortal Grapple, Disengage, etc. Hosers shift
> the game towards the "I hose the hoser with which you want to hose my
> hoser!" boredom. The reason I sometimes like to play without any
> canceling card (even SR or DI) is that the game is more about
> matching strategies that way.

I don't think hosing is always bad. It depends on what you mean and what
you're hosing. Hosing a specific card that's clearly above the power
curve in order to reduce its power is probably bad because games start to
hinge too much on drawing individual cards at the right time. On the other
hand, entire strategies/deck archetypes that hose one another is a good
thing in my estimation - and these frequently depend on individual cards
that "hose" one another on some level.

Fred

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
newspsml3otfho6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> Hosing is bad. Consider Immortal Grapple, Disengage, etc. Hosers shift
> the game towards the "I hose the hoser with which you want to hose my
> hoser!" boredom. The reason I sometimes like to play without any
> canceling card (even SR or DI) is that the game is more about
> matching strategies that way.


One man's "hoser" is another man's "matching strategies".
Intercept hoses stealth. Bounce/reduction hoses bleed. etc.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
newspsmmgwkiyo6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 12:31:59 -0700, Frederick Scott
>> 2) Generalized cancel cards like DI and SR in fact *don't* hose most things because they don't "punish" you for playing them. If
>> I spend
>> a deck slot on a standalone (that is, non-combo-based) overpowered
>> card and you cancel that, how has that hurt me? I just say, "Oh, well -
>> it was worth a shot."
>
> The cancelation is often used on cards that are part of a combo, though.

Right. For purposes of idle discussion (no disagreement with your last
post), these are the functions of generalized cancel cards that I can
think of:

1) Cancel one-half (or one-third, one-fourth, etc.) of a combination - thus
gaining a one-card-to-two-cards (or three cards, etc.) advantage and
generally stalling the source of offensive and/or defensive power your
opponent was counting on creating when he built the deck. Thus, the
availability and usability of card-canceling cards are a large factor
in determining to what degree a collectable card game supports strategies
involving card combinations.

2) To negate a single key function in your opponent's overall strategy.
The classic example of this is based on the common use of relatively small
numbers of master cards for pool management. One possible means of
attacking your prey is to concentrate on stopping that function alone. If
part of your strategy is to do quick bleeding which will give you a short
term advantage balanced by a position that will weaken and peter out in the
long term, it's important to deny your prey his normal means of
replenishing his pool. Sudden Revearsal works great for that.

3) To combat toolbox-card advantages and/or to cover a glaring weakness in
your own strategy. I thought of separating these concepts but they're
really the same thing. The point of the 'toolbox' deck or even just
'toolboxy' cards is a calculated risk. Spend one or a very small number of
card slots on cards that are often worthless out of the conviction that
they'll yield enough of a payoff when they are relevant that they're worth
the risk. A toolbox deck is making a bunch of those bets, like a high-tech
venture capital firm that invests in lots of small high-risk enterprises
on the specualation that if even a small percentage are successful, the
payoff will be sufficient to cover losses of all the others and still make
a better than average profit. But cancel cards are the bane of toolbox
cards: "No, you can't have your payoff!". This is particularly important
when you have a deck that fears some particular type of toolbox card. My
boilerplate example is a weeny deck using Direct Intervention to stop the
Ancilla Empowerments, Domain Challenges, and so forth it has neither the
votes nor the intercept to deal with in the normal ways. (Works against
Aranthebes, too!)

Fred

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:01:08 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
wrote:

> "Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
> newspsml3otfho6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
>> Hosing is bad. Consider Immortal Grapple, Disengage, etc. Hosers shift
>> the game towards the "I hose the hoser with which you want to hose my
>> hoser!" boredom. The reason I sometimes like to play without any
>> canceling card (even SR or DI) is that the game is more about
>> matching strategies that way.
>
> One man's "hoser" is another man's "matching strategies".
> Intercept hoses stealth. Bounce/reduction hoses bleed. etc.

Well, Intercept and Stealth are integral parts of the game. So is bleed and
bounce. Being good against something is not hosing that something.

Canceling another card is generally an example of hosing. So is canceling
the effects of a card. Or preventing certain cards from being played. Etc.

--
Bye,

Daneel

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
newspsml42mhno6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:01:08 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
> > newspsml3otfho6j3lh@news.chello.hu...
> >> Hosing is bad. Consider Immortal Grapple, Disengage, etc. Hosers shift
> >> the game towards the "I hose the hoser with which you want to hose
my
> >> hoser!" boredom. The reason I sometimes like to play without any
> >> canceling card (even SR or DI) is that the game is more about
> >> matching strategies that way.
> >
> > One man's "hoser" is another man's "matching strategies".
> > Intercept hoses stealth. Bounce/reduction hoses bleed. etc.
>
> Well, Intercept and Stealth are integral parts of the game. So is bleed
and
> bounce. Being good against something is not hosing that something.

Yes, counters are integral parts of the game. IG counters Majesty, etc.

> Canceling another card is generally an example of hosing. So is canceling
> the effects of a card. Or preventing certain cards from being played.
Etc.

Semantics.

Getting +X intercept is a lot like canceling +X stealth,
Just like maneuvering back to close is a lot like canceling
a maneuver to long.

Bounce hoses bleed even worse than canceling it would, as well.

--
LSJ (vtesrep@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:26:41 -0500, LSJ <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com>
wrote:

>> Well, Intercept and Stealth are integral parts of the game. So is bleed
> and
>> bounce. Being good against something is not hosing that something.
>
> Yes, counters are integral parts of the game. IG counters Majesty, etc.

IG is borderline. It "hoses" a good deal of defensive and offensive combat
strategies. Also, it can give a press and for a close combat deck, the
setting range effect is also significant. So while it is technically a
hoser, its uses are wide enough to be part of a proactive strategy.

>> Canceling another card is generally an example of hosing. So is
>> canceling
>> the effects of a card. Or preventing certain cards from being played.
> Etc.
>
> Semantics.
>
> Getting +X intercept is a lot like canceling +X stealth,
> Just like maneuvering back to close is a lot like canceling
> a maneuver to long.

Dunno. You can use Intercept against most decks, as a good deal of
actions are at a default stealth. A maneuver can serve a deck well
even if the opponent uses no maneuvers.

> Bounce hoses bleed even worse than canceling it would, as well.

Well, theoretically true... But then, the result is simply a bleed
directed at your prey (which is nothing out of the ordinary, given
how bleeding is perhaps the most fundamental strategy). Also, your
benefits exceed the prevented effect.

You could probably argue, as far as semantics go, that everything is
a hoser, because - for example - pool gain hoses bleed, etc. While
intellectually amusing, I fail to see the validity of such an
argument. Common sense says that hosers hose and non-hosers instead
are proactive. Bounce bounces, so it isn't exactly a hoser; Detection
hoses, so it is. IG is beneficial to most decks even if there is
nothing to "hose"; Disengage hoses IG with little additional benefits.

I mean, "hoser" could be defined as something whose primary purpose
is to prevent another effect, and which is mostly unusable on its
own (without the effect to be hosed). Sure, you cannot use Intercept
if there is no stealth, but there is bound to be some, as a lot of
actions start at +1 stealth. Also, sure, bounce is unusable if there
is no bleed, but common sense reminds that about 99% of all decks
bleed at least once in a while, because bleeding is an integral part
of the game.

--
Bye,

Daneel