file Card Idea: Ambush Defence

20 Mar 2012 08:06 #26277 by Ohlmann

I would agree if it were an ACTION to enter combat, but it is not. You want a vampire without intercept to enter combat as a reaction? You bet your ass there has to be restrictions. What I offered as a suggestion was an after-thought, and you treat it like it was in print.


Like blocking, which have the direct effect of canceling the card anyway ? Or Strix, which also cancel the action anyway in addition to the combat ?

Please note that I say this because I believe you don't understand how weak of an effect it is enter combat compared to outright canceling. You can lose combat you have initiated, which is both good for the game and explain why it should not be too much of an hassle to enter combat

If you want another argument, look at combat-entering vampires. They are not exactly priced at such extreme prices. The Beast have not shabby discipline for a 7-cap. The fact that it's a reaction that enter combat is not too much of an advantage anyway (so, I have an ambush defence, an OTQV, a magnum on the vampire, a pursuit, and a psyche. Good to go, only 4 card on 7 needed !)

(but I think you just don't understand that when the blood will not be burned, you will almost alway lose the combat or be trumped by S:CE, prevent, or anything)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Mar 2012 15:58 #26293 by direwolf


Please note that I say this because I believe you don't understand how weak of an effect it is enter combat compared to outright canceling. You can lose combat you have initiated, which is both good for the game and explain why it should not be too much of an hassle to enter combat



Stopping an action that has stealth, without using intercept runs contrary to the basis of the game. I'm not saying it's strong or weak. I'm saying it's bending the rules.

I often overlook what is "strong" or "weak" because I try to work out an idea as it makes sense to me.


:tore: :pre: :tem: :aus: Independent Futurist. Contrarian (titled, X votes where X is the number of votes as the acting minion.) Target Vitals is always the better combat card.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Mar 2012 19:13 - 20 Mar 2012 19:13 #26303 by Juggernaut1981

Stopping an action that has stealth, without using intercept runs contrary to the basis of the game. I'm not saying it's strong or weak. I'm saying it's bending the rules.

One card for you then... Yawp Court. It basically give you the chance to 'block' an action after it is successful. This card was modelled of Yawp Court. It is surprising that this card, and not the card which is basically "Potence Hide the Heart" is the one drawing all the heat...

:bruj::CEL::POT::PRE::tha: Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418
Last edit: 20 Mar 2012 19:13 by Juggernaut1981.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Mar 2012 20:06 #26307 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Card Idea: Ambush Defence

Stopping an action that has stealth, without using intercept runs contrary to the basis of the game. I'm not saying it's strong or weak. I'm saying it's bending the rules.

One card for you then... Yawp Court. It basically give you the chance to 'block' an action after it is successful. This card was modelled of Yawp Court. It is surprising that this card, and not the card which is basically "Potence Hide the Heart" is the one drawing all the heat...


You mean

Compare it to Yawp court which works only once per turn, requires a untapped minion, and works only on unblocked political actions.

?

Yawp court is much much more restrictive.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Mar 2012 20:45 #26314 by Juggernaut1981

Yawp court is much much more restrictive.

Yes, but Yawp Court is:
- A sect card (allowing even the smallest capacity vampire to play it)
- A permanent location (once they have one, it is not going away any time soon)
- Comes with similar 'downsides' (if you fail to dunk, the action continues and you get 'hurt' for trying).


The difference here is:
- Opportunity (You must have one in hand. Drawing one, once in a game is not enough)
- Has a cost (1 blood)
- Requires larger capacity vampires (:CEL::PRO: appears on 6+ caps only without playing M:Disciplines which is the 'broad scope', otherwise it is a Yawp Court for bleeds as a reaction)
- Comes with downsides (Failure to dunk adds a stealth and excludes the reacting minion)

:bruj::CEL::POT::PRE::tha: Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 Mar 2012 21:20 #26316 by jamesatzephyr

One card for you then... Yawp Court. It basically give you the chance to 'block' an action after it is successful. This card was modelled of Yawp Court.


I would be extremely cautious about adding more such abilities to the game, especially when they can both be usefully played in the same deck. Things would be somewhat different for - say - a card that required clan Giovanni, because it wouldn't stack with Yawp Court.

Stealth, Secure Haven, Sleep Unseen, chump blockers, unblockability, Seduction, and other such tools are the common ways that a stealth-bleed or stealth-vote deck can aim to avoid the problems of combat decks and combat walls. Key vampires are protected, and blocks are hard (or sometimes impossible).

Providing a deck with perma-anti-stealth-vote tech and easily played anti-stealth-bleed tech and generically usable intercept provides a high level of aggravation for a wide range of predators. (Thinking about using two votes in one turn to avoid me? House of Sorrow provides options of a sort.)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.104 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum