Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Negral Questions (Spoiler Free!)

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 3:27:04 AM

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

So while assumptions can be made, I don't think this is specifically spelled
out in the event rules, so I'm possibly confused:

Negral is everyone's predator and everyone's prey. If Negral is ousted, what
happens:

A) Everyone else at the table gets 6 pool and 1 VP (i.e. Negral dies with a
zero sum and the game goes on normally).

B) The person who actually lands the killing blow on Negral gets 6 pool and
1VP; everyone else gets nothing.

If (A), I can't see any reason at all why everyone wouldn't just kill him
outright from the get go. If (B), I can see jockeying and deal making
possibilities that are interesting.

Thanks,

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
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 3:27:05 AM

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

Peter D Bakija wrote:
> So while assumptions can be made, I don't think this is specifically spelled
> out in the event rules, so I'm possibly confused:
>
> Negral is everyone's predator and everyone's prey. If Negral is ousted, what
> happens:
>
> A) Everyone else at the table gets 6 pool and 1 VP (i.e. Negral dies with a
> zero sum and the game goes on normally).

"A" is correct.

Robert Goudie
V:EKN Storyline Director
vtesstory@white-wolf.com
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 3:27:05 AM

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

It's (A). Here are some reasons why everyone wouldn't want to just
kill him from the get-go:

- Negral offers to oust your prey for you if you don't hurt him and try
to oust your prey.
- The first person (or few people) to act against Negral will take a
beating, hurting their chances to win the game post-Negral.
- Some decks don't like everyone gaining 6 pool.

There are many somewhat analogous real-world situations, such as
pollution, recycling, or litter. If everone stopped littering and
picked up a little bit of litter, there wouldn't be any litter anymore,
and that would be for the greater good. Nonetheless, [for the sake of
argument] I personally would rather throw my trash wherever I feel like
it, as long as everyone else takes care of the problem for me.

So, ideally, I'll let everyone else kill Negral (or maybe I'll only
very weakly attempt to kill Negral, or claim that I would if I only
could...)

Peter, maybe your metagame has entirely trustworthy players who could
make a deal like, "Let's all agree to do nothing to each other, rescue
each other's vampires from torpor, and attack Negral until he's dead.
Then, we'll have one round of recovery for everyone, and then we'll
begin the real game."

Anything less of that, and someone is going to get the short end of the
stick against Negral, and that will be Negral's chance to make a deal.

I think it will be an entertaining variation on the game.

Personally, I would have enjoyed an opportunity to see this mechanic
played out throughout the tournament, rewarding the "man-in-the-middle"
player with a hand size of 15 or something like that. A while back,
Emmit S and I debated how well he would do in a Negral situation with a
normal deck, but with a handsize of 90.

I proposed that he would lose, even with a 90 handsize, and he seemed
extremely confident that he would win.

Ira


Ira
Related resources
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 9:15:27 AM

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

> I'd take the 90-card handsize in a microsecond.
> I'd play unbeatable, your-minion-is-dead-I-don't-take-a-scratch,
> 7-card combat combos.

We were discussing it in the context of "normal" decks, though.

For instance, in this storyline, instead of having just the final round
with a "man-in-the-middle" deck, you could have done that at each
table, every round. We'd have people that go over to the infernal side
just like last storyline, but this time it'd be only 20% of the
population, and the bidding currency would be hand size.

Or maybe the hand size would be fixed at 14 (or whatever), and then
people get randomly picked to be the man-in-the-middle. Or they
volunteer. etc.

I haven't really thought about it that much, so there are likely some
serious holes. But I feel like it does have potential.

Ira
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 1:54:00 PM

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

ira212@gmail.com wrote:

> It's (A). Here are some reasons why everyone wouldn't want to just
> kill him from the get-go:
>
> - Negral offers to oust your prey for you if you don't hurt him and try
> to oust your prey.
> - The first person (or few people) to act against Negral will take a
> beating, hurting their chances to win the game post-Negral.
> - Some decks don't like everyone gaining 6 pool.

Sure, there are reasons why some folks wouldn't want to kill Negral
(Nergal?) outright. But the kind of default position seems to be "Everyone
kill Nergal first. Then move on." Meaning that Nergal has a lot of incentive
to immediately make devil deals and play spoiler. Which is funny.

> Anything less of that, and someone is going to get the short end of the
> stick against Negral, and that will be Negral's chance to make a deal.

And that is who Negral will mke the deal with...

> I think it will be an entertaining variation on the game.

I agree.


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
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 4:57:14 PM

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

Peter D Bakija <pdb6@lightlink.com> writes:

> Negral is everyone's predator and everyone's prey. If Negral is ousted, what
> happens:
>
> A) Everyone else at the table gets 6 pool and 1 VP (i.e. Negral dies with a
> zero sum and the game goes on normally).

> If (A), I can't see any reason at all why everyone wouldn't just kill him
> outright from the get go.


If you spend actions ousting Nergal, you're not spending actions ousting
your prey.

It is in your best interests to make *someone else* oust Nergal, while
*you* concentrate on your true prey.

Of course, the more regular players are ousted, the more threatening Nergal
becomes. If the game is down to you and Nergal, and no-one has made serious
attempts to stop Nergal, you're screwed.

So it's a fascinating, "prisoner's dilemma" type of situation. Well done,
design team. :-)


--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 4:57:15 PM

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

Janne Hägglund wrote:

> If you spend actions ousting Nergal, you're not spending actions ousting
> your prey.

But Negral *is* you prey. If he dies, you get 6 pool and a VP. Everyone can
use 6 pool. And the VP, while a zero sum, certainly isn't disincentive.

> It is in your best interests to make *someone else* oust Nergal, while
> *you* concentrate on your true prey.

Sure. But everyone is in the same boat.

> Of course, the more regular players are ousted, the more threatening Nergal
> becomes. If the game is down to you and Nergal, and no-one has made serious
> attempts to stop Nergal, you're screwed.

At which point everyone goes "Man. We were tools. Why didn't we listen to
Peter and kill Negral from the outset!"

:-)


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
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 5:13:35 PM

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

"ira212@gmail.com" <ira212@gmail.com> writes:

> Personally, I would have enjoyed an opportunity to see this mechanic
> played out throughout the tournament, rewarding the "man-in-the-middle"
> player with a hand size of 15 or something like that. A while back,
> Emmit S and I debated how well he would do in a Negral situation with a
> normal deck, but with a handsize of 90.
>
> I proposed that he would lose, even with a 90 handsize, and he seemed
> extremely confident that he would win.

I'd take the 90-card handsize in a microsecond.

I'd play unbeatable, your-minion-is-dead-I-don't-take-a-scratch, 7-card
combat combos.

And I'd always have enough intercept to catch you, and it would never jam
my hand.

Ditto for stealth, masters, etc.

And I'd *definitely* use Waste Management Operation!

--
hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience,
iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 6:45:58 PM

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

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, Peter D Bakija wrote:

> A) Everyone else at the table gets 6 pool and 1 VP (i.e. Negral dies with a
> zero sum and the game goes on normally).
>

> If (A), I can't see any reason at all why everyone wouldn't just kill him
> outright from the get go.

I love it when my Predator gives me 6 pool for free. I imagine Nergal will
be put in lunge range and then left alone until someone *else* gets put
in lunge range.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 9:54:42 AM

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

Since position is Nergal's biggest advantage, I can't understand how
anyone will let the deck live. The non-Nergal players seem to have two
choices: oust their non-Nergal prey and give 1VP and 6 pool to
themselves and Nergal, or oust Nergal and give everyone six pool and a
VP but then be able to play V:TES. Unless there's a third option I'm
not seeing, it stikes me as only logical that you get rid of the
powerful VP destabalizing force of Nergal from the get-go.

I do like the design, though. It strikes me as quite demonic that,
should someone make a deal with Nergal, the Nergal deck has a good
chance of taking the final table.

cmb
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 10:09:13 AM

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

cmberry@purdue.edu wrote:
> Since position is Nergal's biggest advantage, I can't understand how
> anyone will let the deck live. The non-Nergal players seem to have two
> choices: oust their non-Nergal prey and give 1VP and 6 pool to
> themselves and Nergal, or oust Nergal and give everyone six pool and a
> VP but then be able to play V:TES. Unless there's a third option I'm
> not seeing, it stikes me as only logical that you get rid of the
> powerful VP destabalizing force of Nergal from the get-go.

Yeah, see, I thought that was the obvious conclusion that everyone
would come to. But apparently not. I figure that this is the base line
where the game starts, leaving Negral in the situation of having to
find a way to live from the get go (which isn't an unreasonable
position to make the game interesting, but not the best position to be
in as the Negral player) by making deals and promising to help someone
else win.

> I do like the design, though. It strikes me as quite demonic that,
> should someone make a deal with Nergal, the Nergal deck has a good
> chance of taking the final table.

Which is why, ya know, it is funny :-)

-Peter
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 12:32:59 PM

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

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 pdb6@lightlink.com wrote:

>
> cmberry@purdue.edu wrote:
>> Since position is Nergal's biggest advantage, I can't understand how
>> anyone will let the deck live. The non-Nergal players seem to have two
>> choices: oust their non-Nergal prey and give 1VP and 6 pool to
>> themselves and Nergal, or oust Nergal and give everyone six pool and a
>> VP but then be able to play V:TES. Unless there's a third option I'm
>> not seeing, it stikes me as only logical that you get rid of the
>> powerful VP destabalizing force of Nergal from the get-go.
>
> Yeah, see, I thought that was the obvious conclusion that everyone
> would come to. But apparently not. I figure that this is the base line
> where the game starts, leaving Negral in the situation of having to
> find a way to live from the get go (which isn't an unreasonable
> position to make the game interesting, but not the best position to be
> in as the Negral player) by making deals and promising to help someone
> else win.

Here's the obvious conclusion I came to. Ousting Nergal will be hard and
take a while. Then everyone gets 6 pool. This is good if you're top seed
and bad if you aren't because you're probably headed for a timeout.

Better to gain temporary alliance with Nergal, let him infernal his pool
away, get your own prey ousted, then go after Nergal. At that point, it
won't matter if you get him or not. You're winning.

If everyone has the same bright idea, then things get interesting.

Matt Morgan
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 5:03:28 PM

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

Morgan Vening wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:32:59 -0500, "Matthew T. Morgan"
> <farquar@io.com> wrote:
> >> Yeah, see, I thought that was the obvious conclusion that everyone
> >> would come to. But apparently not. I figure that this is the base line
> >> where the game starts, leaving Negral in the situation of having to
> >> find a way to live from the get go (which isn't an unreasonable
> >> position to make the game interesting, but not the best position to be
> >> in as the Negral player) by making deals and promising to help someone
> >> else win.
> >
> >Here's the obvious conclusion I came to. Ousting Nergal will be hard and
> >take a while. Then everyone gets 6 pool. This is good if you're top seed
> >and bad if you aren't because you're probably headed for a timeout.
> >
> >Better to gain temporary alliance with Nergal, let him infernal his pool
> >away, get your own prey ousted, then go after Nergal. At that point, it
> >won't matter if you get him or not. You're winning.
> >
> >If everyone has the same bright idea, then things get interesting.
>
> That's the way I see it. You've also got some decks that don't really
> care all that much about pool (weenie decks spend how much?). Giving
> your prey 6 pool, or allowing him to easily gain 6 pool will be hella
> disruptive to some decks. So those decks also wouldn't aid in the
> early destruction of Nergal. And those that devote the resources to
> killing Nergal, aren't devoting them to killing their 'real' prey. As
> others have said, the VP is mostly irrelevant, as everyone who is
> still alive (which is everyone according to the 'kill Nergal'
> enthusiasts) gets the VP, which washes out.
>
> Also, you have the very real possibility that the person who attacks
> Nergal first, or hardest, or is most vocal in 'kill Nergal' politics,
> will be the primary target of Nergal. And isn't that one of the core
> tactical rules? "He who has two predators, loses" (The other being "He
> who has no predator, wins")
>
> Rules query, as Nergal cannot win via VP, how does 'play to win'
> affect the player?

The Nergal player must play to be the last player standing. He cannot,
for example, accept an offer to take 3 VPs and xfer out as long as he
still has a chance to be the last player standing. As normal, if his
game is lost, he may choose to lose in any manner he wishes (taking a
VP deal, a revenge attack on any other player, xfer out, and so on).

-Robert

Robert Goudie
V:EKN Storyline Director
vtesstory@white-wolf.com
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 5:52:22 PM

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

Robert Goudie wrote:
> Peter D Bakija wrote:
>
>>So while assumptions can be made, I don't think this is specifically spelled
>>out in the event rules, so I'm possibly confused:
>>
>>Negral is everyone's predator and everyone's prey. If Negral is ousted, what
>>happens:
>>
>>A) Everyone else at the table gets 6 pool and 1 VP (i.e. Negral dies with a
>>zero sum and the game goes on normally).
>
>
> "A" is correct.
>
> Robert Goudie
> V:EKN Storyline Director
> vtesstory@white-wolf.com
>

Why?
It seems to conflict with the rules for targets. It could be argued that
being ousted is not a card play or a cardless action, and similar to
Afifa's effect then Nergal being ousted must "damage" his natural
predator with one VP and the gaining of six pool.

Sten During
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 9:28:20 AM

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

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:32:59 -0500, "Matthew T. Morgan"
<farquar@io.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, see, I thought that was the obvious conclusion that everyone
>> would come to. But apparently not. I figure that this is the base line
>> where the game starts, leaving Negral in the situation of having to
>> find a way to live from the get go (which isn't an unreasonable
>> position to make the game interesting, but not the best position to be
>> in as the Negral player) by making deals and promising to help someone
>> else win.
>
>Here's the obvious conclusion I came to. Ousting Nergal will be hard and
>take a while. Then everyone gets 6 pool. This is good if you're top seed
>and bad if you aren't because you're probably headed for a timeout.
>
>Better to gain temporary alliance with Nergal, let him infernal his pool
>away, get your own prey ousted, then go after Nergal. At that point, it
>won't matter if you get him or not. You're winning.
>
>If everyone has the same bright idea, then things get interesting.

That's the way I see it. You've also got some decks that don't really
care all that much about pool (weenie decks spend how much?). Giving
your prey 6 pool, or allowing him to easily gain 6 pool will be hella
disruptive to some decks. So those decks also wouldn't aid in the
early destruction of Nergal. And those that devote the resources to
killing Nergal, aren't devoting them to killing their 'real' prey. As
others have said, the VP is mostly irrelevant, as everyone who is
still alive (which is everyone according to the 'kill Nergal'
enthusiasts) gets the VP, which washes out.

Also, you have the very real possibility that the person who attacks
Nergal first, or hardest, or is most vocal in 'kill Nergal' politics,
will be the primary target of Nergal. And isn't that one of the core
tactical rules? "He who has two predators, loses" (The other being "He
who has no predator, wins")

Rules query, as Nergal cannot win via VP, how does 'play to win'
affect the player?

Morgan Vening
!