Would it hurt VTES to lose Contesting Titles??
Poll: Removing Contesting Titles
|Total number of voters: 0|
|Only registered users can participate to this poll|
Juggernaut1981 wrote: SO, put simply...
Do you think we would lose anything of significance if we removed Title Contesting from VTES?
A breed-boon deck being able to solidify its vote lock by making all its weenies Clan Justicar seems more than a little curious. All of your independent vampires can become Liaison by taking an action. All your big Sabbat vampires can become Regent , because the card isn't unique.
Seems like it makes it massively easier for sufficiently-motivated vote decks to solidify their vote lock, and much more annoying for a deck that wants to pass a few votes to do so (e.g. a mostly bleed deck, with a a handful of voting tech in the whole deck). Even with the usually-solid vote-push of Awe, you can now be facing massively unpleasant walls of opposing votes, having meant that - say - every Ravnos Tumnimos or Setite Waters of Duat now has easy access to four votes.
If the next iteration is "Well, you'll contest titles with yourself still" or "We'll find all the problem cards and errata them", why is that added complication a good thing?
TheLich wrote: Vampire contestation is probably one of the more important aspects of the game in my opinion. It influences players away from siting down at a table and having everyone playing Nergal decks (sorry, I just hated this time period). While I would agree that this can be somewhat troublesome for random scenario purposes, killing the rule completely doesn't sound great either. I feel this rule isn't broken as it is, but if someone were trying to somewhat rework it, I would be interested in contributing to it.
Biggest reaso for vampire contestation? Imagine a deck with a crypt made from just Arika, and they all come out