[REPORT] GenCon Create-a-Clan

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

I'm totally going by memory here, so please forgive all the ?s.

ROUND ONE

Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
Darby (?) -- Muses (?)
Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]

Emiliano's Earth Melds were frustrating my fighty gun-wielding anarchs, so I
was not able to go forward fast enough before Martin ousted me with
unblockable bleeds. Darby was also ousted fairly quickly. Martin ended up
with the win. I don't remember much else about this round.

ROUND TWO

Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
David Something -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
John Flournoy -- Addams Family [aus/dem/nec]

I managed to oust David in about the fifth round thanks to a lucky guess on
a Game of Malkav. Strangely, that card being played by other players was
helping me oust all weekend; each time I gained pool while everyone else
lost. Emiliano used his Extra Dimensions card (Madness Network) to oust
John. The table ended up as a long and fierce war of attrition between my
guns and Emiliano's endless Earth Melds. With less than a minute left to the
game, no cards left in my library and LSJ watching over us in that special
unnerving way of his, Emiliano graciously conceded the game to me. It was
obvious that I would have ousted him with a few more minutes but he could
have easily stalled for a tie. I was very impressed by his being a good
sport about this.

FINAL

Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
Mike Ooii -- No idea what he called these guys [ani/aus/dem]
Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]

A very tense but enjoyable game. Mike was very close to ousting Emiliano
when I rushed his Famous vampire, rescued, and then attempted another rush.
The second rush was blocked... Gah! Fortunately, Emiliano managed to survive
one more round; long enough for me to lay down an Anarch Revolt and bleed
Mike out. Emiliano was already very much weakened at that point and his
Madness Network combo was messed up due to cross-table shenanigans by yours
truly. For most of the game, Martin had been doing little else but hunt and
defend against Emiliano, so I had very little pressure on me. I ended up
sweeping the game with 4VPs.

============================

Libertarian Socialist All-Stars

2x Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 5 FOR cel tha, +1 bleed vs Independents
2x Emma Goldman 6 CEL FOR THA
2x Piotr Kropotkin 6 CEL FOR tha, +1 bleed vs Sabbat
2x Errico Malatesta 7 CEL FOR THA obf, +1 intercept
2x Nestor Makhno 7 FOR THA cel dom, +1 bleed vs Camarilla. Anarch.
William Godwin 3 CEL
Mikhail Bakunin 4 THA cel

(Here are the images. Note that I did not create any library cards for my
clan.)

http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptgodwin.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptbakunin.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptproudhon.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptkropotkin.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptgoldman.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptmakhno.jpg
http://www.mnsi.net/~ghost/jyhad/cryptmalatesta.jpg

7x Galaric's Legacy
5x Blood Doll
2x Perfectionist
Anarch Free Press
Anarch Revolt
Direct Intervention
Fame
Fortitude
Powerbase: Los Angeles
Retribution
Rumor Mill
Seattle Committee
WMRH Talk Radio

5x .44 Magnum
Carlton Van Wyk
Ossian
Procurer
Stolen Police Cruiser

21x Diversion
5x Concealed Weapon
4x Groundfighting
4x Taste of Vitae
2x Burst of Sunlight

4x Harass
Rutor's Hand

6x Forced march
2x Dawn Operation

7x Wake with Evening's Freshness

COMMENTS ON DECK

Create-a-Clan is a very fun format, but it does require a lot of work and
time. Because I did not have time and am essentially lazy, my crypt was the
*exact same* as the deck I played in the DC create-a-clan last year (one of
the first c-a-c's).

Because LSJ changed the c-a-c rules, I ended up with a few extra points to
give to my two 7-caps. I penciled in one as an inherent anarch and gave the
other one +1 intercept. I don't think there was a c-a-c deck that didn't
feature a vampire with +1 intercept. At a cost of only 1 point, everyone saw
the value, I suppose. IMO, the format would be improved if intercept was a
bit more hard to come by, if only so people could play their crazy tricks
without getting blocked so much.

Having an inherent anarch helped a lot in my first game. Makhno was my first
vampire out, saving me from paying 2 blood to cardlessly anarchize my first
vampire. The built-in intercept also helped a lot as there was very little
stealth played at any of my tables. All I ever really needed to do was block
typical +1 stealth actions like hunting and votes.

My library changed quite a bit from last year's deck. Forced March was not
available at that time but was an obvious card to include thsi time around.
The old version of the deck had tonnes of Rutor's Hand, Flurry of Action and
Freak Drives, giving me far more untaps than I really needed. When all you
do is bleed and shoot people, there really isn't that much point untapping
four times per turn, though it is funny.

With both Diversion and Forced March requiring only basic Celerity and
Fortitude, it really does not matter what levels of both my vampires have.
Superior FOR is nice for the occasional Dawn Op, and THA is nice for the one
Rutor's Hand (which did get used in two games, quite effectively). Burst of
Sunlight, with damage prevented by Diversion is a combo that people rarely
see coming. Other than that, it's a pretty simple deck:

1) become an anarch
2) get a gun
3) shoot people

Unlike most other create-a-clan decks, I did not try to be original so much
as effective and efficient. The deck works as far as that goes, but is
perhaps less fun to play against than the "trick" decks that many people
brought to the table. The Buffy player was a bit upset that he did not get
to play many cards in our game. Honestly, I'm not even sure what his deck
was supposed to do. A more honourable predator might have spared his life
for a few rounds in order to let him play some tricks *shrug*.

Overall, I really enjoy this format and I definitely look forward to future
create-a-clan games. I've got some great ideas for new clans and discipline
combos that are more interesting than CEL/FOR/THA. I have this great idea
for an AUS/DOM/OBF deck... what you do is bleed a lot at stealth. Saying any
more than that would ruin the surprise.

Cheers,
WES
31 answers Last reply
More about report gencon create clan
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Wes wrote:

    > Libertarian Socialist All-Stars
    >
    > 2x Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 5 FOR cel tha, +1 bleed vs Independents
    > 2x Emma Goldman 6 CEL FOR THA
    > 2x Piotr Kropotkin 6 CEL FOR tha, +1 bleed vs Sabbat
    > 2x Errico Malatesta 7 CEL FOR THA obf, +1 intercept
    > 2x Nestor Makhno 7 FOR THA cel dom, +1 bleed vs Camarilla. Anarch.
    > William Godwin 3 CEL
    > Mikhail Bakunin 4 THA cel

    Hi-sterical. Assuming, like, all of these people are Libertarian Socialist
    All-Stars, could you quickly describe who all these people are? Ya know, so
    I don't have to google them :-)


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

    "So in conclusion, our business plan is to sell hot,
    easily spilled liquids to naked people."
    -Brittni Meil
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Howdy,

    Wes wrote:
    > I'm totally going by memory here, so please forgive all the ?s.
    >
    > ROUND ONE
    >
    > Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    > Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    > Darby (?) -- Muses (?)
    > Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]

    Errr... So, did they change the format so that you can duplicate the
    disciplines of an existing clan? 'Cause aus/dom/for is already
    claimed...

    Also, there was originally a rule about not using multi-discipline
    cards - does that not apply to Anarch discipline cards? I'm guessing
    it doesn't rule out Bloodlines discipline cards either? Or is that
    rule gone altogether?

    > Libertarian Socialist All-Stars
    >
    > 2x Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 5 FOR cel tha, +1 bleed vs Independents
    > 2x Emma Goldman 6 CEL FOR THA
    > 2x Piotr Kropotkin 6 CEL FOR tha, +1 bleed vs Sabbat
    > 2x Errico Malatesta 7 CEL FOR THA obf, +1 intercept
    > 2x Nestor Makhno 7 FOR THA cel dom, +1 bleed vs Camarilla. Anarch.
    > William Godwin 3 CEL
    > Mikhail Bakunin 4 THA cel

    Trotskyite! Where's Chomsky? It would be hilarious to watch him arm
    up and go on a rampage! Also good alternatives: Sacco and Vanzetti,
    Tolstoy (heh), and Wikipedia seems to think Zeno would work too (and
    make a good large cap).

    > (Here are the images. Note that I did not create any library cards for my
    > clan.)

    Mmmmm... You need to Battle in Seattle (== Palla Grande or Week of
    Nightmares). (Heck, practically every clan needs one or the other,
    unless they're voting.)

    Cool concept!

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

    Wes wrote:
    > I'm totally going by memory here, so please forgive all the ?s.
    >

    > ROUND TWO
    >
    > Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    > David Something -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer

    Dave Robins' deck was pre/for/tha.

    > Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    > John Flournoy -- Addams Family [aus/dem/nec]
    >
    > I managed to oust David in about the fifth round thanks to a lucky guess on
    > a Game of Malkav. Strangely, that card being played by other players was
    > helping me oust all weekend; each time I gained pool while everyone else
    > lost. Emiliano used his Extra Dimensions card (Madness Network) to oust
    > John.

    And actually, I ousted myself with my own Game of Addams. Doh!

    > Cheers,
    > WES

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

    On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, wumpus wrote:

    >> ROUND ONE
    >>
    >> Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    >> Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    >> Darby (?) -- Muses (?)
    >> Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]
    >
    > Errr... So, did they change the format so that you can duplicate the
    > disciplines of an existing clan? 'Cause aus/dom/for is already
    > claimed...

    I was checking out the nice crypt cards on this table while I prepared to
    draft and I thought Martin was playing something that used Dominate and
    Protean and something else (auspex?). It struck me that three of the four
    players at the table had figured out that Protean combined with some bleed
    discipline would be really strong since it gives you stealth and combat
    defense all rolled into one. I remember thinking how Wes was doomed.
    Fortunately, it wasn't enough to spell utter defeat and he could go on to
    win the tournament. Congrats, Wes!

    > Also, there was originally a rule about not using multi-discipline
    > cards - does that not apply to Anarch discipline cards? I'm guessing
    > it doesn't rule out Bloodlines discipline cards either? Or is that
    > rule gone altogether?

    That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    okay, if I recall correctly.

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

    Hi Wes,

    Very nice report, and congratulations
    again for the win!

    Few comments...

    > ROUND ONE
    >
    > Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    > Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    > Darby (?) -- Muses (?)
    > Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]
    >
    > Emiliano's Earth Melds were frustrating my fighty gun-wielding anarchs, so I
    > was not able to go forward fast enough before Martin ousted me with
    > unblockable bleeds. Darby was also ousted fairly quickly. Martin ended up
    > with the win. I don't remember much else about this round.

    If I remember correctly, the Muses' player's name
    was Chad Brinkley. And as Martin already pointed out,
    his G-force deck was a dom/qui/for bleed deck with Seduction and
    Deed the Heart's Desire. "Ken the Eagle" also had PRO, though,
    and played Wolf Claws once (in the final) against one of my vamps.

    After you were ousted, thanks to Telepathic Misdirections
    and bleeds for 3 I was able to oust Chad relatively easily,
    but then succumbed to Martin.

    > ROUND TWO
    >
    > Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    > David Something -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer
    > Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    > John Flournoy -- Addams Family [aus/dem/nec]
    >
    > I managed to oust David in about the fifth round thanks to a lucky guess on
    > a Game of Malkav. Strangely, that card being played by other players was
    > helping me oust all weekend; each time I gained pool while everyone else
    > lost. Emiliano used his Extra Dimensions card (Madness Network) to oust
    > John. The table ended up as a long and fierce war of attrition between my
    > guns and Emiliano's endless Earth Melds. With less than a minute left to the
    > game, no cards left in my library and LSJ watching over us in that special
    > unnerving way of his, Emiliano graciously conceded the game to me. It was
    > obvious that I would have ousted him with a few more minutes but he could
    > have easily stalled for a tie. I was very impressed by his being a good
    > sport about this.

    Thanks for your words, Wes! I tried to resist with all my strength
    until I had Second Trads and Earth Melds left, but with
    all my vamps in torpor it became clear that you would soon
    have won and didn't make sense to stall the game!

    ....but why on Earth did I meet your evil deck
    at ALL tables??? ;-)))

    Ah, by the way, as John already said, he was ousted
    by his own Game of Addams (i.e. Malkav), since
    I guessed correctly he would risk for 6 pool,
    so I put 5 pool in my hand.

    > FINAL
    >
    > Wes -- Libertarian Socialist All-Stars [cel/for/tha]
    > Mike Ooii -- No idea what he called these guys [ani/aus/dem]
    > Emiliano (sp?) -- Followers of String [aus/dem/pro]
    > Martin Laganiere -- Battle of the Planets [aus/dom/for]
    >
    > A very tense but enjoyable game. Mike was very close to ousting Emiliano
    > when I rushed his Famous vampire, rescued, and then attempted another rush.
    > The second rush was blocked... Gah! Fortunately, Emiliano managed to survive
    > one more round; long enough for me to lay down an Anarch Revolt and bleed
    > Mike out. Emiliano was already very much weakened at that point and his
    > Madness Network combo was messed up due to cross-table shenanigans by yours
    > truly. For most of the game, Martin had been doing little else but hunt and
    > defend against Emiliano, so I had very little pressure on me. I ended up
    > sweeping the game with 4VPs.

    I tried to survive in every possible way, including
    proposing "dirty" deals to Mike towards the end,
    but you resulted to be really unstoppable. At least,
    I should have tried to give Martin some turns of
    no pressure to try and weaken you, but I'm not sure
    it would have worked...

    I will probably post my C-A-C deck soon
    (now I don't have the decklist with me).

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

    "Wes" <ghost@NYETSPAMmnsi.net> wrote in message
    news:dek8ch01cv1@enews1.newsguy.com...

    > Overall, I really enjoy this format and I definitely look forward to
    > future create-a-clan games. I've got some great ideas for new clans
    > and discipline combos that are more interesting than CEL/FOR/THA. I
    > have this great idea for an AUS/DOM/OBF deck... what you do is bleed a
    > lot at stealth. Saying any more than that would ruin the surprise.

    You probably missed the discussion earlier in the week, initiated by
    Devin Villegas (playing DOM/OBF/QUI, I don't know why he felt the need
    to stick QUI in there, I personally think the Deed the Heart's Desires
    and Selective Silences and Tastes of Death only kept him from drawing
    his stealth and bleed fast enough ;-) of the 2-point a la carte ability:
    "May take an action to bleed your prey at +1 bleed (0.5), at +2 stealth
    (1.5), costing 1 blood (-0.5)."

    That was universally deemed the most broken of all a la carte abilities.
    :-)

    And congratulations on the win! Gotta love those libertarian socialist
    anarchists.


    Josh

    though my "may steal up to 2 blood from a ready vampire (2) controlled
    by any Methuselah (0.5) as a +1 stealth (D) action (1) that costs 1
    blood (-0.5)" was also widely considered pretty cheesy
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Hi Wes , my clan was QUI , FOR , DOM.
    No AUS in it !

    Cya ,

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

    Awesome. Congrats on a theme close to my heart as well. So, why no
    Moles? I find that when I'm using location-based intercept, that extra
    point of surprise intercept can really make the difference. And Nestor
    can even use it at the dom.

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

    "Mechadick" <mechadick@hotmail.com> wrote

    > Hi Wes , my clan was QUI , FOR , DOM.
    > No AUS in it !

    Oh, hi Martin.

    I remember now that you were using that Succulent Vitae card a lot. Sorry
    about that.

    No wonder you weren't blocking me much :)

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

    "Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano.imeroni@gmail.com> wrote
    >
    > If I remember correctly, the Muses' player's name
    > was Chad Brinkley.

    D'oh. Where did I get Darby from? Ah well... sorry Chad.

    > ...but why on Earth did I meet your evil deck
    > at ALL tables??? ;-)))

    Because anarchists and string theory go together like gasoline and matches?

    OK, I have no idea what that means. But yeah, probably because there were
    only eight of us playing in the tournament.

    > Ah, by the way, as John already said, he was ousted
    > by his own Game of Addams (i.e. Malkav), since
    > I guessed correctly he would risk for 6 pool,
    > so I put 5 pool in my hand.

    I knew he got hurt by it, but I wasn't sure if he was ousted or not.

    >> FINAL
    >>
    > I tried to survive in every possible way, including
    > proposing "dirty" deals to Mike towards the end,
    > but you resulted to be really unstoppable. At least,
    > I should have tried to give Martin some turns of
    > no pressure to try and weaken you, but I'm not sure
    > it would have worked...

    Well, I wasn't lying about that Retribution in my hand. It was there the
    whole damn game! :)

    > I will probably post my C-A-C deck soon
    > (now I don't have the decklist with me).

    Please do! I really liked your deck. And it was a pleasure to meet you.

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

    "Peter D Bakija" <pdb6@lightlink.com> wrote
    >
    >> Libertarian Socialist All-Stars
    >>
    >> 2x Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 5 FOR cel tha, +1 bleed vs Independents
    >> 2x Emma Goldman 6 CEL FOR THA
    >> 2x Piotr Kropotkin 6 CEL FOR tha, +1 bleed vs Sabbat
    >> 2x Errico Malatesta 7 CEL FOR THA obf, +1 intercept
    >> 2x Nestor Makhno 7 FOR THA cel dom, +1 bleed vs Camarilla. Anarch.
    >> William Godwin 3 CEL
    >> Mikhail Bakunin 4 THA cel
    >
    > Hi-sterical. Assuming, like, all of these people are Libertarian Socialist
    > All-Stars, could you quickly describe who all these people are? Ya know,
    > so
    > I don't have to google them :-)

    Whoa... tall order :)

    Well, basically, they're all anarchist philosophers... and they become
    anarchs... geddit?!? Geddit?!?

    As for more detailed information about each individual, you might be better
    served by looking them up in Wikipedia. The descriptions there are only a
    page or two long for each person, so they're an easy read. I hope this will
    be sufficient:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proudhon
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Goldman
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kropotkin
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errico_Malatesta
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_Makhno
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Godwin (father of Mary Shelley!)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakunin

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

    "wumpus" <wumpus7@comcast.net> wrote
    >>
    >> 2x Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 5 FOR cel tha, +1 bleed vs Independents
    >> 2x Emma Goldman 6 CEL FOR THA
    >> 2x Piotr Kropotkin 6 CEL FOR tha, +1 bleed vs Sabbat
    >> 2x Errico Malatesta 7 CEL FOR THA obf, +1 intercept
    >> 2x Nestor Makhno 7 FOR THA cel dom, +1 bleed vs Camarilla. Anarch.
    >> William Godwin 3 CEL
    >> Mikhail Bakunin 4 THA cel
    >
    > Trotskyite!

    Whah? Who you calling a Trotskyite?

    > Where's Chomsky? It would be hilarious to watch him arm
    > up and go on a rampage!

    Yeah, I could have gone with all the pacifist anarchist types like Tolstoy
    and Gandhi, but really, I just picked some of my favourites. Tolstoy
    clocking a 44 Magnum would have been amusing for me and you and
    unappreciated by everyone else heheh.

    > Mmmmm... You need to Battle in Seattle (== Palla Grande or Week of
    > Nightmares). (Heck, practically every clan needs one or the other,
    > unless they're voting.)

    Week of Nightmares would work very well, with the extra bleeding power as
    well as giving the ones without guns some extra punch. Most of the time I
    could have easily gotten away with short range instead of using the guns.

    > Cool concept!

    Thanks!

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

    "Matthew T. Morgan" <farquar@io.com> wrote

    > I remember thinking how Wes was doomed.

    A common misconception, that.

    > Fortunately, it wasn't enough to spell utter defeat and he could go on to
    > win the tournament. Congrats, Wes!

    Thanks, Matt. Too bad you couldn't join us this time. I liked the clan you
    made for DC last year.

    > That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    > to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    > okay, if I recall correctly.

    I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.

    Scott's new rules are a big improvement to the format, though I still think
    they could use a little tweaking.

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

    "Joshua Duffin" <jtduffin@yahoo.com> wrote

    > And congratulations on the win! Gotta love those libertarian socialist
    > anarchists.

    Indeed! And thanks!

    > though my "may steal up to 2 blood from a ready vampire (2) controlled by
    > any Methuselah (0.5) as a +1 stealth (D) action (1) that costs 1 blood
    > (-0.5)" was also widely considered pretty cheesy

    Yes, Emiliano used that one to great effect; stealing blood to fuel his
    Homunculus untaps between turns.

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

    Joshua Duffin wrote:
    > You probably missed the discussion earlier in the week, initiated by
    > Devin Villegas (playing DOM/OBF/QUI, I don't know why he felt the need
    > to stick QUI in there

    Well that's because you aren't privvy to the Texas Create a Clan
    Equation :

    Bleed + Bounce + Agg + Stealth = Win!

    He needed qui for the Agg dude, how else is he gonna Rotschreck.

    ------------------------------
    Ethan Burrow - the pre/vic guy
    http://monger.vekn.org/
    http://wiki.vekn.org/
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    <volya42@yahoo.com> wrote

    > Awesome. Congrats on a theme close to my heart as well. So, why no
    > Moles? I find that when I'm using location-based intercept, that extra
    > point of surprise intercept can really make the difference. And Nestor
    > can even use it at the dom.

    For some reason, stealth disciplines seem rather uncommon in the
    create-a-clan. So, I didn't really plan on having more than light, permanent
    intercept. That worked out for the best.

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

    On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:

    >
    > "Matthew T. Morgan" <farquar@io.com> wrote
    >
    >> I remember thinking how Wes was doomed.
    >
    > A common misconception, that.

    Weren't you ousted first at that first table? You were doomed!

    >> Fortunately, it wasn't enough to spell utter defeat and he could go on to
    >> win the tournament. Congrats, Wes!
    >
    > Thanks, Matt. Too bad you couldn't join us this time. I liked the clan you
    > made for DC last year.

    I played the same clan at the earlier CaC tournament we held at WoN and
    managed 2nd place. I wrote some about that on the blog we keep
    mentioning. I could've played again, but you know I just can't resist
    draft.

    >> That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    >> to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    >> okay, if I recall correctly.
    >
    > I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.

    I don't think it was. Hardly matters now.

    > Scott's new rules are a big improvement to the format, though I still think
    > they could use a little tweaking.

    Some of the a la carte abilities are a little out of hand, but otherwise
    it's nice to have all the options available.

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

    Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:
    >>That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    >>to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    >>okay, if I recall correctly.
    >
    > I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.

    Correct.

    Split Discipline cards are allowed.
    Multi-Discipline cards are not.

    > Scott's new rules are a big improvement to the format, though I still think
    > they could use a little tweaking.

    I'm open to suggestions.

    --
    LSJ (vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
    Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar:
    http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    "LSJ" <vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com> wrote
    >
    >> Scott's new rules are a big improvement to the format, though I still
    >> think they could use a little tweaking.
    >
    > I'm open to suggestions.

    Cool. I mentioned a few ideas/concerns while we were there, but I'll give it
    some thought and email you something.

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

    LSJ wrote:
    > Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:
    > >>That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    > >>to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    > >>okay, if I recall correctly.
    > >
    > > I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.
    >
    > Correct.
    >
    > Split Discipline cards are allowed.
    > Multi-Discipline cards are not.

    Well, 'were' not - as Matt noted, there was no ban on Multi-discipline
    cards anymore - which is good, as I used a couple of them (Call, Random
    Patterns.)

    > LSJ (vtesrepSPAM@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)

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

    Joshua Duffin wrote:
    > "Wes" <ghost@NYETSPAMmnsi.net> wrote in message
    > news:dek8ch01cv1@enews1.newsguy.com...
    >
    > You probably missed the discussion earlier in the week, initiated by
    > Devin Villegas (playing DOM/OBF/QUI, I don't know why he felt the need
    > to stick QUI in there, I personally think the Deed the Heart's Desires
    > and Selective Silences and Tastes of Death only kept him from drawing
    > his stealth and bleed fast enough ;-) of the 2-point a la carte ability:
    > "May take an action to bleed your prey at +1 bleed (0.5), at +2 stealth
    > (1.5), costing 1 blood (-0.5)."
    >
    > That was universally deemed the most broken of all a la carte abilities.
    > :-)
    >
    > Josh
    >
    > though my "may steal up to 2 blood from a ready vampire (2) controlled
    > by any Methuselah (0.5) as a +1 stealth (D) action (1) that costs 1
    > blood (-0.5)" was also widely considered pretty cheesy

    People were similarly dismayed at my having a vampire that when merged
    could do "Bleed your prey for 3 at 2 stealth costing a blood",
    something that was relatively cost-effective thanks to pieces of it
    being spread across two vampires and a merge ability. (It even had a
    vote!)

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

    LSJ wrote:
    >
    > I'm open to suggestions.
    >
    Oh, NOW you've done it. Time for the deluge of suggestions...
    starting with me... ;)

    1) The "bleed your prey at +1 bleed for .5 points" special is
    definitely overpowered, especially when you can combine it with stealth
    and blood costs for a very reasonable price.

    2) Archons should be available starting at 6 capacity, rather than 9
    capacity. All of the current archons (or vampires with similar
    diablerie-type abilities) are around 6 cap, which makes more sense than
    a 9 cap going around eating younger vamps. Not to mention that when
    you're a 9 cap, you get to *boss around* the archons. I don't think it
    would be particularly unbalancing to restrict it to 6+, as long as it
    isn't available to a 2-cap. (it's funny, for the create-a-clan that I
    made, even though I wasn't able to go to Gen Con this year, the Priest
    of Syrinx would have been more powerful if I gave him Flight like the
    other vampires in the bloodline and an extra discipline, but it just
    seemed more in character to give him immunity to blood hunts and a vote
    - made me kind of upset when I re-read the rules and noticed that
    archons had to be 9-cap).

    3) Allow bloodlines disciplines as out-of-clan. Perhaps no more than 1
    vampire per clan can have the same bloodlines discipline as an
    out-of-clan, although that would be less useful than having them act
    like regular out-of-clans. If necessary, restrict Temporis and Obeah.

    4) There was a suggestion ealier on the newsgroup - too lazy to look it
    up right now - that vampires be able to, as a new ala-carte special,
    once per turn, mimic a library card that requires a discipline that
    they possess. They may play the inferior effect only, and it costs X +
    1 blood (where X is the cost of the card). Cards which are "put into
    play" may not be chosen for this ability. Restrict any necessary cards
    - the only one that occurs to me as being too strong is Voter
    Captivation, even without the superior ability. Redirection and
    Deflection probably out of principle.
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Berger wrote:

    > 4) There was a suggestion ealier on the newsgroup - too lazy to look it
    > up right now - that vampires be able to, as a new ala-carte special,
    > once per turn, mimic a library card that requires a discipline that
    > they possess. They may play the inferior effect only, and it costs X +
    > 1 blood (where X is the cost of the card). Cards which are "put into
    > play" may not be chosen for this ability. Restrict any necessary cards
    > - the only one that occurs to me as being too strong is Voter
    > Captivation, even without the superior ability. Redirection and
    > Deflection probably out of principle.

    Nice suggestion (even if it wasn't yours).

    "Once per turn after blocking an action, this ready vampire may burn a
    blood to untap."

    "Once per turn during a bleed action, this ready vampire may burn a blood
    to untap."

    "Once per turn, if this vampire is ready and untapped, he may burn a blood
    to reduce a bleed against you by 1."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may take a +1 stealth action that costs 2
    blood to look at your predator or prey's hand and discard one card."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn a blood for a dodge."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood for an additional strike."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may bleed any Methuselah as an action that
    costs one blood. If this bleed is successful, gain a pool."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may bleed at +1 bleed and +1 stealth as an
    action that costs 3 blood."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood for +2 bleed."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood to prevent all damage from
    the opposing minion's strike in combat."

    "Once per turn at the end of a successful action, this vampire may burn 2
    blood to untap."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to gain +1 stealth."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to restrict strikes for both
    combatants to hand strikes. This effect may be cancelled by cards that
    cancel Grapple cards and cards that cancel cards that restrict strikes."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood to strike strength ranged
    damage. This strike may not be dodged."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood to strike: combat ends."
    (probably too good)

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to gain two votes."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood to make her hand damage
    aggravated for the duration of the current round."

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to prevent all but 1
    non-aggravated damage per round for the duration of combat." (probably too
    good)

    "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to steal 1 blood as a
    strike."

    etc....

    Not seeing anything too broken so far. The Dominate effects are still
    probably overstrong, but at least they cost loads of blood. Non-standard
    disciplines could get worse. A built-in Conflagration probably isn't
    desireable, even at inferior. Many of the above effects are quite
    reasonable, I should think, but there's still probably some way to break
    it.

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

    Matthew T. Morgan wrote:
    > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Chris Berger wrote:
    >
    > > 4) There was a suggestion ealier on the newsgroup - too lazy to look it
    > > up right now - that vampires be able to, as a new ala-carte special,
    > > once per turn, mimic a library card that requires a discipline that
    > > they possess. They may play the inferior effect only, and it costs X +
    > > 1 blood (where X is the cost of the card). Cards which are "put into
    > > play" may not be chosen for this ability. Restrict any necessary cards
    > > - the only one that occurs to me as being too strong is Voter
    > > Captivation, even without the superior ability. Redirection and
    > > Deflection probably out of principle.
    >
    > Nice suggestion (even if it wasn't yours).
    >
    I looked it up, it was Emmit Svenson. Also, I neglected to mention
    that it should be a 1 point ability (seems like a fair price).


    >
    > "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 2 blood to strike: combat ends."
    > (probably too good)
    >
    Nah, I don't think it's that good, since you're still liable to be
    grappled, and 2 blood is a lot. Not to mention the opposing minion
    will know that you're capable of this and can choose not to waste too
    many cards (ideally, would do just 2 or 3 damage, and see if you choose
    to S:CE).

    > "Once per turn, this vampire may burn 1 blood to prevent all but 1
    > non-aggravated damage per round for the duration of combat." (probably too
    > good)
    >
    This would be pretty good, but on the other hand, it's not that much
    better than burn 2 blood to prevent all damage from a strke.

    As I said, I would definitely ban Voter Cap, and I'd consider banning
    Earth Meld (like Majesty, but half the price when used as this
    special), Flesh of Marble, and Immortal Grapple. Perhaps cards which
    have a multi-round effect (like Flesh of Marble, Apportation, etc.)
    would only apply for the current round. And reactions should
    definitely stipulate that they must be played by an untapped, ready
    vampire.

    >
    > Not seeing anything too broken so far. The Dominate effects are still
    > probably overstrong, but at least they cost loads of blood. Non-standard
    > disciplines could get worse. A built-in Conflagration probably isn't
    > desireable, even at inferior. Many of the above effects are quite
    > reasonable, I should think, but there's still probably some way to break
    > it.
    >
    Built-in Conflagration is burn 2 blood for 1R agg damage. And requires
    a vamp with Daimoinen - not all that good. Luckily, most really good
    cards require superior to be great, which keeps a lot of these from
    being broken.
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    "texasjusticar" <texasjusticar@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1125024884.069721.225910@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > Joshua Duffin wrote:
    >> You probably missed the discussion earlier in the week, initiated by
    >> Devin Villegas (playing DOM/OBF/QUI, I don't know why he felt the
    >> need
    >> to stick QUI in there
    >
    > Well that's because you aren't privvy to the Texas Create a Clan
    > Equation :
    >
    > Bleed + Bounce + Agg + Stealth = Win!

    Oh man, no wonder I lost! Not only did my disciplines (Chi/Obf/Pre)
    have no bounce, I wasn't even using Mayaparisatya to have the agg!

    > He needed qui for the Agg dude, how else is he gonna Rotschreck.

    But of course. At last I understand. :-)


    Josh

    at least my cel/dom/tha clan would have had walk of flame...
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:
    > "Emiliano Imeroni" <emiliano.imeroni@gmail.com> wrote
    > > I will probably post my C-A-C deck soon
    > > (now I don't have the decklist with me).
    >
    > Please do! I really liked your deck. And it was a pleasure to meet you.

    Ok, here's the deck. Top scientists doing research
    in String Theory (the field I'm also working on), and
    of course they all have Dementation ;-)

    No links to pictures, though, or my career will be
    instantly ruined!

    Cheers,
    Emiliano

    --------------------------------

    Deck Name: Followers of Strings
    Author: Emiliano Imeroni
    Description: Create-A-Clan Deck for Gen*Con 2005


    Crypt [12 vampires]
    --------------------------------

    2x Ed 10 AUS DEM PRO for
    (Justicar. +1 bleed. +1 stealth.)
    2x Cumrun Alwaysright 8 AUS DEM PRO
    (Prince of Boston. +1 bleed.)
    2x Cumrun Alwaysright (ADV) 8 AUS DEM PRO
    (+1 intercept. [MERGED] May steal 2 blood
    from ready vamp controlled by prey as D action.
    +1 bleed against Cam vamps. +1 stealth.)
    1x Juan Martin 8 AUS DEM PRO cel
    (Prince of Sao Paulo. May burn equipment on any
    minion as D action that cost 1 blood.)
    2x Ashoke, The Wise 5 aus dem PRO
    (+1 bleed against Sabbat vamps.)
    1x Cryptic Mike 4 AUS dem
    1x D-Joe 3 dem pro
    1x Hirosi 2 dem

    Library [90 cards]
    --------------------------------
    Action [14]
    1x Blessing of Chaos
    4x Call, The
    4x Dive into Madness
    1x Dual Form
    3x Madman's Quill
    1x Sleep of Reason

    Action Modifier [10]
    5x Crocodile's Tongue
    5x Earth Control

    Action Modifier / Reaction [4]
    4x Random Patterns

    Action Modifier/Combat [2]
    2x Deny

    Combat [18]
    2x Claws of the Dead
    12x Earth Meld
    4x Form of Mist

    Equipment [2]
    1x Bowl of Convergence
    1x Ivory Bow

    Master [16]
    3x Blood Doll
    5x Extra Dimensions (spoofed Madness Network)
    1x Giant's Blood
    1x Gift of Experience
    5x Perfectionist
    1x Rotschreck

    Political Action [2]
    2x Parity Shift

    Reaction [17]
    2x Babble
    9x Second Tradition: Domain
    5x Telepathic Misdirection
    1x Voice of Madness

    Retainer [5]
    5x Homunculus
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Where can I find the uptaded Create a Clan rules? Are they the same of
    2004 that is in the White Wolf website?


    Thanks

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

    Fabio Ciccone wrote:
    > Where can I find the uptaded Create a Clan rules? Are they the same of
    > 2004 that is in the White Wolf website?

    Yes.
    http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/?line=cac
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Fabio Ciccone wrote:

    > Where can I find the uptaded Create a Clan rules? Are they the same of
    > 2004 that is in the White Wolf website?
    >
    > Thanks
    > Faibio Ciccone

    Fabio,

    I have translated those rules. Right now, I have made a version
    available to Brazilian princes so I can have feedback on how it looks
    like.

    If you wish, I can send you a copy privately. Your comments would be
    very appreciated.

    Regards,

    Luiz Mello
    VEKN Prince of Vitória
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    LSJ wrote:
    > Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:
    > >>That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    > >>to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    > >>okay, if I recall correctly.
    > >
    > > I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.
    >
    > Correct.
    >
    > Split Discipline cards are allowed.
    > Multi-Discipline cards are not.
    >
    Do you mean that Multi-Discipline cards WERE not allowed? AFAIK, Forced
    March was played at Gen Con, and it's a Multi-Discipline card.

    Another question: is 3 votes for Independent vampires really costs 1
    point, not 1.5 points, as stated on the CAC page?

    Thanks in advance,
    Ector
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Ector wrote:
    > LSJ wrote:
    > > Andrew 'Wes' Weston wrote:
    > > >>That rule is gone from the current CaC rules and I believe it only applied
    > > >>to dual disciplines like Read the Winds. Three-ways have always been
    > > >>okay, if I recall correctly.
    > > >
    > > > I used Diversion last year too, so I hope it wasn't illegal.
    > >
    > > Correct.
    > >
    > > Split Discipline cards are allowed.
    > > Multi-Discipline cards are not.
    > >
    > Do you mean that Multi-Discipline cards WERE not allowed? AFAIK, Forced
    > March was played at Gen Con, and it's a Multi-Discipline card.

    The rules, this time around, did not ban Multi-Discipline cards, and
    several people put them to use. They were banned from previous sets of
    Create-a-Clan rules.

    > Another question: is 3 votes for Independent vampires really costs 1
    > point, not 1.5 points, as stated on the CAC page?

    It really was. Whether or not that's an oversight is a different
    matter; given the capacity restriction, it didn't seem to make any
    significant difference.

    > Thanks in advance,
    > Ector

    -John Flournoy
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Memory Video Games Product