Tom's Hardware: Topic KMW Precons: Interesting Cards
Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions.
Sign up now! Its free!
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
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
"Daneel" <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote in message
news
psmltvhzgo6j3lh@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
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
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)
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
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
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
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
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
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:12:39 GMT, Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:
>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.
Play a group 2-3 Lasombra Mind Rape deck. Nick other people's sabbat
vampires over 5 capacity. Make them bishops with Tobias Smith and
then when there's enough of them out there chuck 'em all out a window.
Sorted.
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 06:21:36 +1100, shawn stanley
<stanles@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:12:39 GMT, Daneel <daniel@eposta.hu> wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>Play a group 2-3 Lasombra Mind Rape deck. Nick other people's sabbat
>vampires over 5 capacity. Make them bishops with Tobias Smith and
>then when there's enough of them out there chuck 'em all out a window.
>Sorted.
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*
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)
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/
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
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 18:39:54 -0500, LSJ
<vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com> scrawled:
>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.
Yeah. It's much bigger.
(being more serious i think Powder and Immense are both 'hosey' type
cards...and we'll just ignore the fact that as far as i can recall
there were no vamps with vic in any of the starters...maybe one or two
at basic, but not enough so you'd notice...)
salem
http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:50:58 -0300, "Fabio \"Sooner\" Macedo"
<fabio_sooner@NOSPAMyahoo.com.br> scrawled:
>>(being more serious i think Powder and Immense are both 'hosey' type
>>cards...and we'll just ignore the fact that as far as i can recall
>>there were no vamps with vic in any of the starters...maybe one or two
>>at basic, but not enough so you'd notice...)
>
>Nitpick: the Tzimisce released in KMW has [VIC].
and which STARTER was she in, huh? 
>Couldn't find any other vampire with [vic] or [VIC], though.
i thought so. nyer!
salem
http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:56:15 +1100, salem
<salem_christ.geo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:50:58 -0300, "Fabio \"Sooner\" Macedo"
><fabio_sooner@NOSPAMyahoo.com.br> scrawled:
>
>>>(being more serious i think Powder and Immense are both 'hosey' type
>>>cards...and we'll just ignore the fact that as far as i can recall
>>>there were no vamps with vic in any of the starters...maybe one or two
>>>at basic, but not enough so you'd notice...)
>>
>>Nitpick: the Tzimisce released in KMW has [VIC].
>
>and which STARTER was she in, huh?
Gah Shouldn't post after careful reading, sorry.
>>Couldn't find any other vampire with [vic] or [VIC], though.
>
>i thought so. nyer!
>
>salem
>http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm
>(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
V:TES National Coordinator for Brazil
Giovanni Clan Newsletter Editor
-----------------------------------------------------
V:tES Brasil Site (only in Portuguese for now)
http://planeta.terra.com.br/lazer/vtesbrasil/
Please mind
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
Sponsored links
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
- 01:00 random1283 won the Freshman badge
- 08:48 Porksmuggler won the Sophmore badge
- 08:15 joshthor won the Sophmore badge
- 01:00 asianette won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 L O B O won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 kennaki won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 viktor911 won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 pkw4 won the Uniformed badge
- 01:00 tommy indanus won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 ssalem47 won the Freshman badge