Charles Brosky69 Tanner

I am pretty sure this card would never see play with Blood Brothers. He doesn't have or and he can't burn blood for any of their cards. Thematically, it doesn't make any sense for a Blood Brother to work with imbued. I am not familiar with the name, do you have a link to his history?

As a side note, from game perspective releasing more imbued would piss off several players who felt that imbued should have never been a part of the game.

thanks Azel, I figured another virtue would be ideal but you put thought into it where i did not.

I kinda prefer Defense.

But also, I was trying to figure out an Imbued that would work with the Blood Brothers. If someone else has an idea, please share!

jblacey wrote:

As a side note, from game perspective releasing more imbued would piss off several players who felt that imbued should have never been a part of the game.

Totalit agree. Many players (including me) think that Imbued are just a wrong turn in the game and that we will never never never see something like that again.

jblacey wrote:

As a side note, from game perspective releasing more imbued would piss off several players who felt that imbued should have never been a part of the game.

All the more reason to include more!

(I used to be an Imbued hater. Still am. But they are part of the game. And I have fun playing them ((never won a single game with the Imbued however.)))

Why not make fallen imbued leeches if you want more interacting. Let's say they only get one conviction ever and can leave incapacitated and gain a life for a pool and a conviction, have no access to imbued powers Even in Creed stuff but play basic disciplines like pot for cel. a cycle of those in G6 sounds like progress.. .

direwolf wrote:

(never won a single game with the Imbued however.)

How come you so rarely see one or two Inbueds added to a regular VTES deck instead of Imbued only decks?