Submission: close the distance

Thinking about it, you might be able to remove the blood cost completely if you keep the melee weapon restriction. Though I would be concerned that WWS + Close the Distance may be close to broken.

I mean why is it WWS is so much better than actually getting a "real" weapon most of the time?

kschaefer wrote:

Thinking about it, you might be able to remove the blood cost completely if you keep the melee weapon restriction. Though I would be concerned that WWS + Close the Distance may be close to broken.

I don't think its broken. Because:
- Unless you grapple, you are vulnerable to strike:combat end.
- If you grapple, you can't strike with a melee weapon.

Sure you can psyche, but then this card was wasted and you would have to ensure being close again. I think overall this is reasonably balanced.
(Also: armor of vitality would be slightly better if melee weapons were a thing )

In comparison: Slam with costs 1 blood, strikes for 3 with a maneuver to close with just one card and one discipline, AND you can grapple. With signpost its a strike of 5 with two cards (comparable to close the distance + WWS for 2+2 that uses two disciplines. If anything, its inferior to what we already have). The way I see it, what elevates Close the distance to a valid option is the strike: Dodge option and possible synergies with melee weapons (such as wooden stake).

kschaefer wrote:

I mean why is it WWS is so much better than actually getting a "real" weapon most of the time?

Assuming you aren't just being rhetorical:

+ doesn't cost blood / pool
+ no discipline requirement
+ instant speed equip
+ damage comparable to most melee weapons
- can 'break' after five uses

It's hard to overstate just how valuable it is being a Concealed Weapon + Bastard Sword. It's one card that does the work of two for less cost. Makes you wonder how much smoother the game would be, and how much more potent combat would be, if all weapons could be played during combat.

LivesByProxy wrote:

- can 'break' after five uses

Not "can" break, WILL break. Also, how fast it breaks is related to vampires strength.

Without doing a blow-by-blow of each card in turn, I think the cards are misfiring.

Particularly at the POT/CEL level, you're already playing a fairly big vampire - nothing below 6, except Jimmy Dunn, and in any group pair you quickly stray into 7s, even 8s. Then they need a melee weapon and, leaving aside Weighted Walking Stick, that's probably required an action of some sort, or Concealed Weapon. Possibly some pool, depending on the weapon. If I have CEL, I could be playing guns instead - built in maneuver, Psyche! to deal with S:CE, pretty easy. If I have POT, I can be playing Immortal Grapple, Disarm - and if I'm lacking for maneuvers etc., pot/cel and pot/obf and similar combinations are easy to find, much more cheaply, without the need for a setup action. And such decks aren't really crying out for set range mechanics.

I think a fundamental issue of going about it this way is that Potence transient combat is pretty much just going to be better, card for card, except possibly with WWS. Though comboing it with Potence fits well with the WoD thematically, I don't think it works terribly well in V:TES, because its transient combat is already so good.

I'd personally be looking to give enhancements somewhere else. Perhaps Assamite assassins, perhaps an Anarch rabble, perhaps a bunch of things like that. I just don't think Potence or Potence/Celerity is really going to overcome the fact that Torn Signpost, Immortal Grapple and Disarm combine to be godly.

Lönkka wrote:

I'll agree to (almost) anything to make Melee Weapons actually more useable.

Good thing you added "almost" or I would've pitched PTO and madness of the bard with a melee weapon prerequisite. "Madness of the not very well armed bard" and "protect thine own with a stck"