thoughts on the usage of keywords in Vtes.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Grammatically "Use a ..." is not an imperative statement; it does not have an implied directive. Unlike if I said "Sit down" or "Leave here". "Use a DPA to..." may not be 'polite speech' but it is not an implied directive.

If it was phrased as "Your prey or predator..." there is no alternative given, it does not have an implied permission to not do it.

I don't know where you're getting that from. I agree that "Your prey or predators discards x" removes all ambiguity, but I don't agree that "Use y" can be understood in anything but an imperative sense. Even if you could point me to a grammar book that suggests something different, I think that the majority of people would interpret the phrase as a non-optional order.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

It seems really interesting that many of you, Reyda included, want to "change VTES without changing VTES". You would like it to be easier, or briefer, or similar but every time a suggestion is made on how to change it your immediate response is "Oh but we can't change that..." Hopefully the irony isn't lost on everyone. I'm not saying that every change I advocate is the one that must be done. I'm just saying that if you plan to change VTES for the better (by whatever means), will actually require CHANGES.

Fair point, but I'm actually not in the "We need to change a whole bunch of things!" camp. Whenever there are polls about changing text or banning cards, I've almost always voted for the status quo. I think that the game is unfortunately complicated, but I don't think that there's any way to really change that at this point. Writing errata means that existing cards no longer work the way that a casual player thinks they do, which I personally find more off-putting than issues in wordiness (which LSJ and previous designers generally, but not always, managed to avoid), inconsistency across cards that have similar effects (which can be parsed), or card balance (which can be addressed by introducing new cards). Changing the rules is a slightly more viable approach, but I don't see a lot of places where global changes are necessary; the only exception that comes immediately to mind is turning trophies into trifles.

Don't get me wrong: if I could go back and rewrite the game to make it simpler and more consistent, I would do it, but at this stage, I think that we're facing four thousand cards, dozens of rules (and hundreds of official rulings), and nearly twenty years of collective memory. There's a lot of inertia preventing changes. If we want to improve the game, then - and by this, I mean if we want to attract new players and retain old ones - I think that we need to look to less juridical approaches.

Your grammar related mistakes make me a conservative v:tes wise.
Cool story !

@DeathInABottle:
There is an unprecedented opportunity.
We are entering a phase when we can potentially reprint EVERY card.

This gives us the opportunity to rewrite EVERY card. That's a non-trivial event in the life of VTES. There is scope to seriously restructure the text on VTES cards.

Are there things you think should be changed on card texts? The next year or two possibly represents the BEST chance to make those changes.

Are there rulebook changes you think should be made? This complete reprint is possibly the BEST chance to make that change.

@Reyda:
Your ever useful, constructive and productive advice is always welcomed.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

@DeathInABottle:
There is an unprecedented opportunity.
We are entering a phase when we can potentially reprint EVERY card.

This gives us the opportunity to rewrite EVERY card. That's a non-trivial event in the life of VTES. There is scope to seriously restructure the text on VTES cards.

Are there things you think should be changed on card texts? The next year or two possibly represents the BEST chance to make those changes.

Are there rulebook changes you think should be made? This complete reprint is possibly the BEST chance to make that change.

You're right about it being a great opportunity to make large changes, provided that it comes to pass, but, as I said, I'm still not sure that it would be a good idea to do so. I don't like the idea of issuing errata to hundreds of cards: it would make it difficult for new players to pick up anything printed before 2012 (the same way that new players who get their hands on Jyhad-era Majesties and Forms of the Mist are often confused and irritated, but on a much larger scale).

...But this probably isn't the right venue to be discussing such major changes. If the VEKN reprints EVERYTHING, we'll no doubt have the chance to weigh in on the possibility of errata.

@DeathInABottle:

Being able to 'reprint' every card ever created for VTES, means that 'errata' becomes a non-problem. It becomes a 'future' problem because all of the 'older print' cards can be edited, printed 'new' and if/when the changes get made to the game the card texts can reflect this. The problem of 'old cards' already exists (this is a legacy of the game). IF PoD is cheap ENOUGH, then this does become trivial, but most of the experienced players already have enough practice in teaching new players around that issue.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

@DeathInABottle:

Being able to 'reprint' every card ever created for VTES, means that 'errata' becomes a non-problem. It becomes a 'future' problem because all of the 'older print' cards can be edited, printed 'new' and if/when the changes get made to the game the card texts can reflect this. The problem of 'old cards' already exists (this is a legacy of the game). IF PoD is cheap ENOUGH, then this does become trivial, but most of the experienced players already have enough practice in teaching new players around that issue.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't address the problem of the continued existence of old cards with old, now-incorrect text. This is a problem that grows in severity as the scope of changes grows. For this reason, my preference is to preserve the vast majority of the existing cards and rules and instead focus efforts on creating new cards that are consistent, comparatively simple, and easy to access so that we can retain old players and attract new ones.

Anyway, this is all highly speculative at this point, since I'm pretty skeptical that the VEKN intends to reprint everything that came before. If that happens, and if the idea of large scale changes gets floated, I'll happily take this debate to that forum. Until then, I wouldn't mind dropping it.