Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (
More info?)
lehrbuch wrote:
> Ector wrote:
> >>> I also don't like to "remember" anything, but the version with
> >>> require skill cards would be much weaker. Those skill cards can clog
> >>> in your hand if you get them without breeding cards...
> >>
> >> So? Third Tradition has to worry about such issues, and is more
> >> restrictive (need to be Prince or Justicar).
> >
> > Actually, this is LESS restrictive, as your vampires start as
> > Princes/Justicars, but not Anarchs. Moreover, the titles provide votes
> > and access to very good cards (Traditions, Parity Shift etc.) that are
> > much better than most Anarch bonuses.
>
> It's easier to become an Anarch than a Prince (cardless action/trifle vs
> political action) and those that are inherently princes pay for it. And
> princes are contestable, I suppose.
Surely, a Prince title is worth 1 "point". But we all know that having
2 permanent votes + access to very good cards worth it. I've never seen
a deck with a decent number of Traditions, but without
Princes/Justicars in the crypt. Surely, their titles can be contested,
but this doesn't happen too often, especially for non-American cities.
The absence of "ready" Anarchs is a huge penalty. You need to waste an
action (and some blood) or pack special cards for this, which makes
your deck weaker. That's why Anarchs are getting more and more cards in
each set - to compensate them for this penalty. And that's why I
suggested the breeding card for them.
> >> > I don't think that anybody would use the card to breed vamps
> >> > with different Disciplines, so all of them would usually mean
> >> > the same one - easy to remember!
> >>
> >> As Daneel says elsewhere, given that Anarch cards are generally
> >> multi-discipline, it seems that breeding vampires with different
> >> disciplines is exactly what you would want to do.
> >>
> > Please see my answer to Daneel. You need a vamp with superior
> > Discipline to create a progeny with inferior version - would you really
> > do this and for what purpose? If your deck isn't focused on a single
> > discipline, you won't need this breeding card at all.
>
> Yes, but the Anarch minion cards are multi-discipline, it's no stretch
> of the imagination, to envisage a deck that has a large minion with
> several disciplines at superior creating specialist small anarchs or
> tailoring the anarchs he creates for his environment.
>
> For example, a deck based around Count Germaine and Diversion may want
> to create some minions with for and some with cel.
This may happen (though I'd prefer to use Groundfighting with Potence),
but it would hardly become a problem. Just keep your for-minions and
your cel-minions separated.
> > ...there are no Bloodlines card that are overpowered even at inferior.
>
> I think many people would disagree if those disciplines were more easily
> available.
They ARE already easily available at inferior - Ian Forestal can play
them all. There is Infernal Pact, and the new Promo card to get them
even at superior. Now what? Did anybody "break" these cards?
Personally I think that many people would appreciate a chance to play
Choir
> >> What's wrong with using Embraces and Seattle Committee or Galaric's
> >> Legacy, to generate a horde of small anarchs?
> >
> > EVERYTHING. Galaric's Legacy should be dismissed outright, since you
> > would need a horde of them (for each Embrace). Seattle Committee is
> > better, but, again, how many Committees would you put and when you will
> > get one of them?
>
> That's what building a deck is all about, finding an optimal ratio of
> such cards.
It's quite easy to make a conclusion that breeding isn't a viable
option for Anarchs at all. The "optimal ratio" would be something near
6 Seattle Commitees, just to find one in time, and you'll get only
1-caps without disciplines. That's why a special breeding card for
Anarchs is needed.
> Anyway, there's nothing wrong with sticking, say, half a dozen or more,
> Galaric's legacies in a deck that's determined to make its minions
> anarch. You just need to have some purpose to making these anarchs that
> justifies the inclusion of the cards.
Half a dozen won't be enough if you want to breed new Anarchs. It would
be enough just to make your base vampires Anarchs - the popular Anarch
decks play 5-6 Legacies now. Having more Legacies would clog your hand.
> > Anyway, why should you breed a horde of vampires without disciplines at
> > all? POT-weenies and PRE-weenies are useful, but disciplineless 1-caps
> > can be used only with Palla Grande, Week of Nightmares and similar
> > cards.
>
> You're the one who wants to breed a horde of small anarchs, you tell me
> why.
But I want to have weenies with a discipline! Please don't tell me that
I need to play Embraces, make them Anarchs with Galaric's
Legacy/Seattle Committee and put Master
iscipline cards on them
> There's plenty of non-anarch things to do; but, seeing as we're talking
> about hordes of Anarchs: Anarch Salon, Groundfighting, Rant!, Cry Wolf,
> Car Bomb, and Border Skirmish can all be usefully played by a player
> with many small anarchs (for a greater or lesser effect).
>
Anarch Salon: a political action that needs votes to pass. Anarchs
rarely have a lot of votes, and even if they play Fee Stakes, they
can't afford having BOTH politics and breeding.
Groundfighting: usually needs at least one combat discipline to be
really effective. Thrown Sewer Lids is a good example.
Rant!: Too expensive for 1-caps, as they all would hunt afterwards.
Car Bomb: Interesting option... Doesn't justify breeding Anarch
Embraces, of course, but would be playable with my card if it would
exist. One POT-weenie plays Car Bomb, another blocks and fights.
Border Skirmish: Usually doesn't make much sense, but may unify the
table against you.
Don't you see that Anarchs are currently unable to breed effectively
(at least, as effectively as Ravnos or Setites)?
IMHO, the suggested card would provide the option to them.
Yours,
Ector
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram