Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)
Unfortunately, I'm a new player, so I didn't have a chance to
participate in the Great PTO Battles
But I did studied the arguments of both sides, and I have played decks
with PTO and against such decks. The accumulated
experience convinced me that the card realy needs to be changed, so I'd
like to suggest a new wording of PTO.
Note that this is just a theoretical suggestion, and personally I don't
need any "help" or "advices" against PTO. Please post ONLY arguments
"pro" and "contra" the suggestion here, or the alternative erratae.
Here is the suggested text, and my arguments for it follow it.
Name: Protect Thine Own
Cardtype: Political Action
Cost: 1 blood
Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any justicar or Inner Circle
member at +1 stealth.
Choose a non-Camarilla vampire with a capacity below 6. If the acting
vampire is a member of the Inner Circle, you may choose a non-Camarilla
vampire {WITH A CAPACITY BELOW 9} instead. If this referendum is
successful, burn that vampire.
As you see, the suggested errata just makes non-Camarilla vamps with a
capacity above 8 immune to PTO. The most devastating
effect of PTO is achieved when someone burns a non-Camarilla fatty.
This essentially ousts the controller of the burned
vampire - such vampires are typically played in the "one-man show"
decks, and without the "man" the show cannot go on...
IMHO, the non-Camarilla fatties deserve their place in the VtES world,
but the existence of PTO (in its current form)
virtually prevents them from being popular in tournaments.
Here's the most sound argument: pure statistics. I processed all
tournament-winning decks from The Lasombra's TWD archive with at least
20 participants from 2002 till nowadays and counted number of used
PTOs, Inner Circles and non-Camarilla fatties with capacity 9-11. Here
are the results:
Decks: 129 (I could miscalculate, but roughly so)
PTOs: 18
Inner Circles: 51 (16 Stanislava, 8 Leandro, 18 Arika, 1 Etrius, 4
Alexandra, 4 Harrod)
Non-Cam 9-11s: 88 (3 Genevieve in Stanislava decks, 7 Quentin, 1 Marthe
Dizier, 9 Huitzilopochtli, 4 Khay'tall, 11 Lazverinus, 2 Kyle
Strathcona, 3 Antonio Delgado, 2 Francisco Domingo de Polonia, 3
Spider-Killer, 6 Cailean, 3 Julio Martinez, 2 Nefertiti, 2 Vasantasena,
4 Baron, 2 Zayyat in Stanislava decks, 6 Marconius, 5 Silvia Giovanni,
5 Ambrosio Luis Moncada,
3 Lambach, 1 Stravinsky, 1 Alvaro, 2 Hannibal, 1 Hannibal (adv))
Note that there are 7 Inner Circles and 88 (!) non-Camarilla vampires
with capacity 9-11 in the game. Clearly, most non-Camarilla fatties are
worse than Inner Circles, as 4 votes and +2 bleed are very good, but
there ARE good fatties, too.
Even if we assume that only half of the fatties (44 vampires) are good
enough to win a tournament, the combined number of them in the 129 TWD
decks would be much more than 88. This clearly demonstrates the PTO
influence - many deck ideas just died when their creators realized its
threat. Yes, one can try to defend against PTO, but this usually
requires a special card module, and this weakens the main theme of the
deck.
Note also that just a few of the listed non-Camarilla fatties were used
more than in one TWD. Notable exceptions are Lazverinus (which can
block PTO most of the time), Quentin (which can cancel votes of the
Inner Circle member calling PTO) and Huitzilopochtli (for some reason I
can't understand)
Since the PTO represents an enormous threat to non-Camarilla fatties,
the following situations are quite common:
Enkidu player (EP): My Enkidu rushes Arika (cross-table) to get rid of
the possible PTO.
Arika player (AP): But I'm not going to play PTO on your Enkidu! Why
are you rushing me?
EP: Maybe, you aren't going to play it NOW, but the situation will
change. I cannot risk with PTO! (Torporizes Arika)
Next time:
AP: My Arika plays PTO. No blockers? I want to burn cross-table Enkidu.
EP: WHY Enkidu??? I've got my predator and my prey!
AP: Because Enkidu is a major threat for my Arika, and I need to remove
it.
EP: But I didn't rush Arika in this game! And I'm not going to!
AP: Since you know that I have PTO in my deck, which can burn your
Enkidu, it would be logical to rush Arika... (burns Enkidu)
Note that in both situations nobody can accuse players in violation of
PTW rule - they are really playing to win. The
effect of PTO is simply too powerful in these situations, as burning
Enkidu with all his master cards and retainers will
almost immediately force his controller to lose the game. Limiting the
power of PTO to 8-caps (or less) would minimize
chances of such disasters. Losing a 8-capacity vamp is very painful,
but this doesn't always mean a loss. And non-Camarilla
fatties would finally have a chance to play without wasting slots to
"anti-PTO tech" like Writ of Acceptance, Confusion of the Eye or
Delaying Tactics.
Now I'm going to deal with the old "pro-PTO" arguments, just to avoid
hearing them again:
1). PTO can be blocked; The referendum can be failed; Somebody can play
Direct Intervention; You can play Confusion of the
Eye/Delaying Tactics/Scalpel Tongue, etc. etc.
These arguments add nothing to the theme of the discussion (should PTO
be fixed or not), so they aren't valid at all.
Suppose that we have an obviously broken card:
Name: The Broken Vote
Cardtype: Political Action
Cost: 5 blood
Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Inner Circle member at +1
stealth.
If this referendum is successful, your prey is ousted.
The Broken Vote could also be blocked, the referendum could also be
failed, and all anti-PTO cards would work against it. This, however,
doesn't make The Broken Vote "balanced" - it still remains broken.
Burning a 9+ cap vampire with a single political action (PTO) is also
too powerful for a single card, even for a card that require an Inner
Circle member.
Note that most "anti-PTO cards" aren't very flexible, and, in fact,
most of the TWD decks with non-Camarilla fatties had no
such cards at all. To get a reliable defense against a deck with 3 PTO,
you should have at least 10 "anti-PTO cards", which
would generally make your deck much weaker. Thus, the deckbuilders are
trying to block/outvote PTO, or (mostly) just hope not to encounter it.
2). Banning and changing cards should be avoided - if the card exists
now, it should remain unchanged. The card was created
by professional designers, so it's balanced well.
Very weak argument. A lot of bad and ugly things exist now - narcotics,
crime, etc. etc. Does this mean that nobody should
try to fix these things? Surely, having the changed card text,
different from the printed one, may confuse players, especially
novices, but the current text angers much more players, including
seasoned ones
Talking about the designers... as you know, everyone makes mistakes,
even the most brilliant people. Many old cards were
already changed or banned, and this made the game better in most cases.
3). PTO makes Justicars and Inner Circle members better and justifies
playing them in tournament decks.
The accumulated statistics invalidates this argument. Most decks with
Inner Circles had only 1-2 PTO without any way to fetch them and it's
simply impossible to believe that these 90-card decks would become much
worse without them. IMHO, these decks use PTOs "just in case of worthy
targets", e.g. large enough non-Camarilla vamps.
Justicars almost never playing PTO anyway, as the effect is much less
versatile than Banishment for them. I've never encountered PTO in a
deck with Justicars and without Inner Circles.
Note that most Inner Circles are much better than most non-Camarilla
fatties even without PTO.
4). PTO isn't very popular, which alone proves that the card isn't
unbalanced.
PTO is better than Banishment only if somebody plays large enough
non-Camarilla vamps (say, 7-cap or more), or plays a lot of
masters/equipment/retainers on a single non-Camarilla vampire. The
existence of PTO, even 1-2 copies in a deck, forces players to avoid
building decks that could become an easy prey of PTO.
That's why PTO isn't very popular, and most decks have no more than 3
copies of it. PTOs can be easily counted, but who can
count number of decks that were never built or never won a tournament
due to the PTO? THIS number would really demonstrate
the power of this card.
The suggested errata wouldn't change popularity of PTO, as there would
still remain enough "casual" targets for 1-2 PTOs in a deck, but it
would enable a lot of different decks based on non-Camarilla fatties.
It would, for instance, eliminate the
abovementioned ugly situations with Arika and Enkidu. And the errata
even looks "natural", as the text already has a capacity limitation for
Justicars - why shouldn't it have a similar limitation for Inner
Circles?
What do you think about it?
Yours,
Ector
Unfortunately, I'm a new player, so I didn't have a chance to
participate in the Great PTO Battles
But I did studied the arguments of both sides, and I have played decks
with PTO and against such decks. The accumulated
experience convinced me that the card realy needs to be changed, so I'd
like to suggest a new wording of PTO.
Note that this is just a theoretical suggestion, and personally I don't
need any "help" or "advices" against PTO. Please post ONLY arguments
"pro" and "contra" the suggestion here, or the alternative erratae.
Here is the suggested text, and my arguments for it follow it.
Name: Protect Thine Own
Cardtype: Political Action
Cost: 1 blood
Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any justicar or Inner Circle
member at +1 stealth.
Choose a non-Camarilla vampire with a capacity below 6. If the acting
vampire is a member of the Inner Circle, you may choose a non-Camarilla
vampire {WITH A CAPACITY BELOW 9} instead. If this referendum is
successful, burn that vampire.
As you see, the suggested errata just makes non-Camarilla vamps with a
capacity above 8 immune to PTO. The most devastating
effect of PTO is achieved when someone burns a non-Camarilla fatty.
This essentially ousts the controller of the burned
vampire - such vampires are typically played in the "one-man show"
decks, and without the "man" the show cannot go on...
IMHO, the non-Camarilla fatties deserve their place in the VtES world,
but the existence of PTO (in its current form)
virtually prevents them from being popular in tournaments.
Here's the most sound argument: pure statistics. I processed all
tournament-winning decks from The Lasombra's TWD archive with at least
20 participants from 2002 till nowadays and counted number of used
PTOs, Inner Circles and non-Camarilla fatties with capacity 9-11. Here
are the results:
Decks: 129 (I could miscalculate, but roughly so)
PTOs: 18
Inner Circles: 51 (16 Stanislava, 8 Leandro, 18 Arika, 1 Etrius, 4
Alexandra, 4 Harrod)
Non-Cam 9-11s: 88 (3 Genevieve in Stanislava decks, 7 Quentin, 1 Marthe
Dizier, 9 Huitzilopochtli, 4 Khay'tall, 11 Lazverinus, 2 Kyle
Strathcona, 3 Antonio Delgado, 2 Francisco Domingo de Polonia, 3
Spider-Killer, 6 Cailean, 3 Julio Martinez, 2 Nefertiti, 2 Vasantasena,
4 Baron, 2 Zayyat in Stanislava decks, 6 Marconius, 5 Silvia Giovanni,
5 Ambrosio Luis Moncada,
3 Lambach, 1 Stravinsky, 1 Alvaro, 2 Hannibal, 1 Hannibal (adv))
Note that there are 7 Inner Circles and 88 (!) non-Camarilla vampires
with capacity 9-11 in the game. Clearly, most non-Camarilla fatties are
worse than Inner Circles, as 4 votes and +2 bleed are very good, but
there ARE good fatties, too.
Even if we assume that only half of the fatties (44 vampires) are good
enough to win a tournament, the combined number of them in the 129 TWD
decks would be much more than 88. This clearly demonstrates the PTO
influence - many deck ideas just died when their creators realized its
threat. Yes, one can try to defend against PTO, but this usually
requires a special card module, and this weakens the main theme of the
deck.
Note also that just a few of the listed non-Camarilla fatties were used
more than in one TWD. Notable exceptions are Lazverinus (which can
block PTO most of the time), Quentin (which can cancel votes of the
Inner Circle member calling PTO) and Huitzilopochtli (for some reason I
can't understand)
Since the PTO represents an enormous threat to non-Camarilla fatties,
the following situations are quite common:
Enkidu player (EP): My Enkidu rushes Arika (cross-table) to get rid of
the possible PTO.
Arika player (AP): But I'm not going to play PTO on your Enkidu! Why
are you rushing me?
EP: Maybe, you aren't going to play it NOW, but the situation will
change. I cannot risk with PTO! (Torporizes Arika)
Next time:
AP: My Arika plays PTO. No blockers? I want to burn cross-table Enkidu.
EP: WHY Enkidu??? I've got my predator and my prey!
AP: Because Enkidu is a major threat for my Arika, and I need to remove
it.
EP: But I didn't rush Arika in this game! And I'm not going to!
AP: Since you know that I have PTO in my deck, which can burn your
Enkidu, it would be logical to rush Arika... (burns Enkidu)
Note that in both situations nobody can accuse players in violation of
PTW rule - they are really playing to win. The
effect of PTO is simply too powerful in these situations, as burning
Enkidu with all his master cards and retainers will
almost immediately force his controller to lose the game. Limiting the
power of PTO to 8-caps (or less) would minimize
chances of such disasters. Losing a 8-capacity vamp is very painful,
but this doesn't always mean a loss. And non-Camarilla
fatties would finally have a chance to play without wasting slots to
"anti-PTO tech" like Writ of Acceptance, Confusion of the Eye or
Delaying Tactics.
Now I'm going to deal with the old "pro-PTO" arguments, just to avoid
hearing them again:
1). PTO can be blocked; The referendum can be failed; Somebody can play
Direct Intervention; You can play Confusion of the
Eye/Delaying Tactics/Scalpel Tongue, etc. etc.
These arguments add nothing to the theme of the discussion (should PTO
be fixed or not), so they aren't valid at all.
Suppose that we have an obviously broken card:
Name: The Broken Vote
Cardtype: Political Action
Cost: 5 blood
Political Card - Worth 1 Vote. Called by any Inner Circle member at +1
stealth.
If this referendum is successful, your prey is ousted.
The Broken Vote could also be blocked, the referendum could also be
failed, and all anti-PTO cards would work against it. This, however,
doesn't make The Broken Vote "balanced" - it still remains broken.
Burning a 9+ cap vampire with a single political action (PTO) is also
too powerful for a single card, even for a card that require an Inner
Circle member.
Note that most "anti-PTO cards" aren't very flexible, and, in fact,
most of the TWD decks with non-Camarilla fatties had no
such cards at all. To get a reliable defense against a deck with 3 PTO,
you should have at least 10 "anti-PTO cards", which
would generally make your deck much weaker. Thus, the deckbuilders are
trying to block/outvote PTO, or (mostly) just hope not to encounter it.
2). Banning and changing cards should be avoided - if the card exists
now, it should remain unchanged. The card was created
by professional designers, so it's balanced well.
Very weak argument. A lot of bad and ugly things exist now - narcotics,
crime, etc. etc. Does this mean that nobody should
try to fix these things? Surely, having the changed card text,
different from the printed one, may confuse players, especially
novices, but the current text angers much more players, including
seasoned ones
Talking about the designers... as you know, everyone makes mistakes,
even the most brilliant people. Many old cards were
already changed or banned, and this made the game better in most cases.
3). PTO makes Justicars and Inner Circle members better and justifies
playing them in tournament decks.
The accumulated statistics invalidates this argument. Most decks with
Inner Circles had only 1-2 PTO without any way to fetch them and it's
simply impossible to believe that these 90-card decks would become much
worse without them. IMHO, these decks use PTOs "just in case of worthy
targets", e.g. large enough non-Camarilla vamps.
Justicars almost never playing PTO anyway, as the effect is much less
versatile than Banishment for them. I've never encountered PTO in a
deck with Justicars and without Inner Circles.
Note that most Inner Circles are much better than most non-Camarilla
fatties even without PTO.
4). PTO isn't very popular, which alone proves that the card isn't
unbalanced.
PTO is better than Banishment only if somebody plays large enough
non-Camarilla vamps (say, 7-cap or more), or plays a lot of
masters/equipment/retainers on a single non-Camarilla vampire. The
existence of PTO, even 1-2 copies in a deck, forces players to avoid
building decks that could become an easy prey of PTO.
That's why PTO isn't very popular, and most decks have no more than 3
copies of it. PTOs can be easily counted, but who can
count number of decks that were never built or never won a tournament
due to the PTO? THIS number would really demonstrate
the power of this card.
The suggested errata wouldn't change popularity of PTO, as there would
still remain enough "casual" targets for 1-2 PTOs in a deck, but it
would enable a lot of different decks based on non-Camarilla fatties.
It would, for instance, eliminate the
abovementioned ugly situations with Arika and Enkidu. And the errata
even looks "natural", as the text already has a capacity limitation for
Justicars - why shouldn't it have a similar limitation for Inner
Circles?
What do you think about it?
Yours,
Ector
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram