card ideas: more ado about the gangrel antitribu

I do believe it's too much redesigning. VtES more or less work, so it seem risky to introduce the notion of packs to make sababt the small cap faction.

At the very least, it's better to introduce pack for one specific clan, especially if it have not too much potential for the moment, and see how it fare.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Lech wrote:

In the scenario, you want to do some bruise-bleed-block. You go with crypt. Both clans share and so it's covered, now you can use /, /, / , / and / combo cards to make sure every vampire in your crypt can play every card.

This is more or less re-designing V:TES from the ground up.

For example, are you going to duplicate effects across multiple combos? Does Fortitude get Freak Drive on an AUS/FOR card, a FOR/DAI card, a FOR/CEL card and a FOR/OBF card? The first is needed for my !Ventrue/Toreador deck, the second for my Gangrel Baali deck, the third for Brujah/Ventrue cross-over, and the fourth for my Nosferatu/Blood Brothers deck.

Of course not, it would be something/ card. It's very powerful card anyway.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

If it _is_ duplicated, does that get boring after a while? If not, and I really want the effect, do I have to put a card in my deck that's useless to half or more of my vampires, when other people apparently don't?

I don't know about you, but i put powerful cards that are only usable by half of my crypt, like parity shift, tattoo signal, alastor and others.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

If integrating it into the existing game, do we have to reprint dozens upon dozens of bread-and-butter effects onto new cards - with duplicates, to handle the discipline cross-overs?

Of course not, if integrated here, it's going to be dozen cards tops, most likely only common disciplines.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Does each card get 4 levels? (dom/DOM/cel/CEL) Makes the text box quite... tight, especially if you want to explain an unusual effect. Beware of using myriad keywords to overcome this! In part, they can steeply increase the learning curve; in part, you might find yourself issuing errata to dozens of existing cards to match the keywords.

Yes, there are already cards that have 3/4 levels in the game, so it's nothing new.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Is the dom/DOM level of the dom/DOM/cel/CEL card up to scratch with Conditioning? If it's exactly the same, we've just wallpapered Conditioning - why play it when you can play CeleritousConditioning, and maybe get the Celerity option too? If it's not as good, am I putting together a deck that's not as good as my pre-existing deck that uses Conditioning?

There are already many cards that are wallpaper. It can be as good as conditioning, usable in the same window but different.

Little Condi
1
+Bleed Mod.No further +bleed. Put on meth with 2 counters, during your discard burn counter or this card and 1 pool from the meth. Anyone can burn it as action.
Ditto, but with 3 counters.

Good? Yes. Better than Condi? In some cases, worse in others.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

There is almost certainly a potential, coherent game system in there. Grafting it onto the existing V:TES card set at this point, though? Not so much.

It would work nicely with restart. At this point i would like to see just a few such cards.

Lech wrote:

Of course not, it would be something/ card. It's very powerful card anyway.

Why "of course"? Should Freak Drive effects only go to Ventrue / Tremere cross-overs with a For/Tha card, but not Ventrue / Toreador ones? Why? What sort of imbalance are you seeking to embed here?

If every card in the deck should be usable by a vampire in some fashion, why do some decks get forced to play Freak Drive (which can't be played by non-Fortitude users) but the For/Tha deck which can? The history of powerful effects has been much more towards spreading them out, not keeping them exclusive in little silos.

Lech wrote:

I don't know about you, but i put powerful cards that are only usable by half of my crypt, like parity shift, tattoo signal, alastor and others.

But the point being made was that every discipline card should be playable by every vampire in your deck, at some level. (Okay, we can probably assume that Smudge the Ignored is exempt from this.)

Quoth you:
"you can still use [all the other combinations] to make sure every vampire in your crypt can play every card."

When that's the apparent, explicit intent, that's what I'm going to discuss!

Lech wrote:

Of course not, if integrated here, it's going to be dozen cards tops, most likely only common disciplines.

Yeah, you're moving the goalposts back and forth. On one hand, you want every card in a deck to be playable by every vampire. When I offer a critique of that approach, you say that's not the approach you're going for. Smooth.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Why "of course"? Should Freak Drive effects only go to Ventrue / Tremere cross-overs with a For/Tha card, but not Ventrue / Toreador ones? Why? What sort of imbalance are you seeking to embed here?

The hypothetical freak drive (in reboot), / card, would go into decks. On the other hand decks would benefit from other strong effect that don't go with ease to aforementioned decks. Not everything should get the same effects, goal is to create diverse metagame that is not dominated by one strategy or one effect. Besides, would also get strong effect that will make people create / decks (action mod that allow you to continue action at / after combat if you weren't hurt much and didn't s:ce). So decks are not hopeless if they choose to hit enemy back.

If we consider addition of such cards into non-reboot vtes, i still think that some such cards would be good splash, making all discipline in such fashion would change the game in dramatic fashion.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

If every card in the deck should be usable by a vampire in some fashion, why do some decks get forced to play Freak Drive (which can't be played by non-Fortitude users) but the For/Tha deck which can? The history of powerful effects has been much more towards spreading them out, not keeping them exclusive in little silos.

I'm not sure if you are right here, sure, some do - but on the other hand we don't see more disciplines with access to bleed bounce. We don't see ton of disciplines benefiting from successful political action. We don't see many disciplines restricting opponent's strike choices. Not to mention how many disciplines have untap after action effect ? Two? and

jamesatzephyr wrote:

But the point being made was that every discipline card should be playable by every vampire in your deck, at some level. (Okay, we can probably assume that Smudge the Ignored is exempt from this.)

Quoth you:
"you can still use [all the other combinations] to make sure every vampire in your crypt can play every card."

When that's the apparent, explicit intent, that's what I'm going to discuss!

Yeah, you can build a deck that do fine and use two clans in-clan disciplines and make sure every vampire can play every single card in reboot scenario. It would do fine, but it wouldn't have everything the discipline have to offer. BUT, it would allow player to play crypt with two sets of vampires without shared discipline that can play discipline cards with good consistency - something what is impossible currently.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Yeah, you're moving the goalposts back and forth. On one hand, you want every card in a deck to be playable by every vampire. When I offer a critique of that approach, you say that's not the approach you're going for. Smooth.

I just discuss two scenarios, one with vtes restart and one without restart. That blurs my intent in some cases.