Striga/Maleficia

Haze wrote:

wrong. nowhere in the rulebook does it tell me is a discipline. if the only two cards I own are KoKo and Dread Gaze, I'll have no idea what is (all I know is that it's a requirement), but I'll assume it's a discipline similar to the thingy on my vampire's discipline bar.

I was looking at the online rulebook and did not find the specific discipline symbols either. I wondered how I would know what these symbols stood for specifically (presence, potence, auspex), if I did not learn from others. I looked in a paper rulebook and found in the center a list of all the clan symbols and names, but no discipline symbols with the corresponding names. Then i saw one of those card inserts in a starter deck that shows all the symbols and the respective names. Would it be possible to add this into the rulebook on the VEKN site? Perhaps in the appendix? Is it needed?

Haze wrote:

Pagan wrote:

Only if I have one of those master cards on a minion in play. Without one of the master cards there is a requirement indicated that does not exist in the game.

wrong. nowhere in the rulebook does it tell me is a discipline. if the only two cards I own are KoKo and Dread Gaze, I'll have no idea what is (all I know is that it's a requirement), but I'll assume it's a discipline similar to the thingy on my vampire's discipline bar.

and are discipline requirement symbols so I play them like all discipline requirement symbols in the game by following the rulebook. but the Golden Rule of VTES kicks in from the card text that they are not disciplines, which prevents me from playing them in any manner that specifies disciplines (effectively, any card that is not titled Striga or Maleficia).

I'm reading a Jyhad rulebook. It lists and shows all disciplines on the back. Now I'm reading a Legacies of Blood rulebook. It has an image of Jeremey MacNeil on the back with all of the card components labeled, including disciplines.

Even though I don't know what Necromancy is from reading these books, I can assume that it's a discipline. I would also naturally assume Striga and Maleficia are disciplines with only this knowledge, which would be wrong.

Also, I have at least 30 small yellow cards with all of the disciplines and clans listed, named, and with the images shown on them.

1up20x6 wrote:

I'm reading a Jyhad rulebook. It lists and shows all disciplines on the back. Now I'm reading a Legacies of Blood rulebook. It has an image of Jeremey MacNeil on the back with all of the card components labeled, including disciplines.

Any new player who tries to learn the game from the Jyhad rulebook is gonna have bigger things to worry about than Striga and Maleficia. it was so badly written.
since this whole discussion seems to assume all new VTES players lack a single iota of common sense, maybe showing them the Jeremy MacNeil example page from older rulebooks will confuse them further. they might wonder why their vampires are not all named Jeremy MacNeil.

Even though I don't know what Necromancy is from reading these books, I can assume that it's a discipline. I would also naturally assume Striga and Maleficia are disciplines with only this knowledge, which would be wrong.

even though you don't know whether Striga is a discipline or not from reading the rulebook, you can PLAY any Striga card in the exact same fashion as those Necromancy cards! "how to play these cards?" was the topic brought up here, not magically knowing a piece of rules trivia about Striga -- a piece of trivia that is pointless if you don't have any Striga cards at your table to play with, and yet is printed on every single Striga card ANYWAY.

Even though I don't know what a Hunting Ground is from reading my rulebook, I can naturally assume that one vampire can gain blood from multiple Hunting Grounds each turn, which would be wrong. Until I find out that every single Hunting Ground ever printed says otherwise. The rulebook should've told me ahead of time so I wouldn't assume things about cards I'm about to read for the first time.

From the rulebook, I can also naturally assume I can play multiple Carrion Crows in a combat, just like all other combat cards. Oh wait, I can read the card and see that it overrides that rule from the rulebook. Why don't they tell me how to play Carrion Crows in the rulebook if it's so dang different?

Also, I have at least 30 small yellow cards with all of the disciplines and clans listed, named, and with the images shown on them.

I have at least 30 small white reference cards that have disciplines and clans but don't have Abombwe listed on them. how the hell do I play an Abombwe card??????? JUDGE! OVER HERE!

Haze wrote:

1up20x6 wrote:

I'm reading a Jyhad rulebook. It lists and shows all disciplines on the back. Now I'm reading a Legacies of Blood rulebook. It has an image of Jeremey MacNeil on the back with all of the card components labeled, including disciplines.

Any new player who tries to learn the game from the Jyhad rulebook is gonna have bigger things to worry about than Striga and Maleficia. it was so badly written.

What a wonderfully interesting opinion that has nothing to do with this discussion.

since this whole discussion seems to assume all new VTES players lack a single iota of common sense, maybe showing them the Jeremy MacNeil example page from older rulebooks will confuse them further. they might wonder why their vampires are not all named Jeremy MacNeil.

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about, but I'm discussing the fact that a new player would have a lot of common sense and naturally assume that Striga and Maleficia are disciplines, which they are not.

Even though I don't know what Necromancy is from reading these books, I can assume that it's a discipline. I would also naturally assume Striga and Maleficia are disciplines with only this knowledge, which would be wrong.

even though you don't know whether Striga is a discipline or not from reading the rulebook, you can PLAY any Striga card in the exact same fashion as those Necromancy cards! "how to play these cards?" was the topic brought up here, not magically knowing a piece of rules trivia about Striga -- a piece of trivia that is pointless if you don't have any Striga cards at your table to play with, and yet is printed on every single Striga card ANYWAY.

There is a master who's name escapes me which counts as any discipline. A new player might try to use it to play Striga or Maleficia, which cannot be done.

Even though I don't know what a Hunting Ground is from reading my rulebook, I can naturally assume that one vampire can gain blood from multiple Hunting Grounds each turn, which would be wrong. Until I find out that every single Hunting Ground ever printed says otherwise. The rulebook should've told me ahead of time so I wouldn't assume things about cards I'm about to read for the first time.

I'm sorry, are you being sarcastic? I can't be positive, but I think you are, so I'll respond as though you are.

As you said, all Hunting Grounds have the text. Not all Striga/Maleficia discipline cards do (in fact, aside from the masters, none of them do). The main point is that these are not disciplines when they seem as though they should be to a new player. You don't need to go into a 40-page description of every card that requires the disciplines in the rulebook, you simply need to write that they are pseudo-disciplines, and possibly explain how to play them for clarity.

From the rulebook, I can also naturally assume I can play multiple Carrion Crows in a combat, just like all other combat cards. Oh wait, I can read the card and see that it overrides that rule from the rulebook. Why don't they tell me how to play Carrion Crows in the rulebook if it's so dang different?

Oh, how clever. You used yet another example that still does not in any way affect the topic at hand. You get a gold star!

Check my paragraph above - since you're trying to use the same point with two different cards, I don't really need to change my argument at all.

Also, I have at least 30 small yellow cards with all of the disciplines and clans listed, named, and with the images shown on them.

I have at least 30 small white reference cards that have disciplines and clans but don't have Abombwe listed on them. how the hell do I play an Abombwe card??????? JUDGE! OVER HERE!

If you have some form of brain injury that prevents you from forming long-term memory, I apologize in advance. Otherwise, I am confused as to why you cannot remember the point you had made in your last post, which had nothing to do with Striga/Maleficia, and instead dealt with the availability of the names of the disciplines.

wrong. nowhere in the rulebook does it tell me

 is a discipline. if the only two cards I own are KoKo and Dread Gaze, I'll have no idea what 
 is (all I know is that it's a requirement), but I'll assume it's a discipline similar to the [pot] thingy on my vampire's discipline bar.

1. You made a point (That a new player has no reasonable way of knowing what any given discipline is called)
2. I provided three examples (Jyhad rulebook, LoN rulebook, and the reference card)
3. I disproved your point

Nowhere did I mention the reference cards not containing Striga or Maleficia (Whether they should or not is irrelevant) and therefore new players not knowing how to play them. I merely disproved your rather weak argument, as shown above.

Haze,

SNIP

Haze wrote:

From the rulebook, I can also naturally assume I can play multiple Carrion Crows in a combat, just like all other combat cards. Oh wait, I can read the card and see that it overrides that rule from the rulebook. Why don't they tell me how to play Carrion Crows in the rulebook if it's so dang different?

I've only kept your one example as essentially they are all the same.

As I stated above the Rulebook + card should tell you what to do in any given situation.
The point of the Rules isn't to be fully comprehensive but they should be comprehensive enough to deal with any given card in isolation.

That's all Pagan is saying should be the case (it's less helpful that newer versions of the Rulebook don't have a list of disciplines and names which I assume from his first post he thought they still did and I certainly did) for Str and Mal [and Flight].


Carrion Crows + Rulebook (let's assume old version that tell you that this discipline is Ani + how to play cards requiring discpline + card text) clearly is consistent with Rulebook + Card = I know how this works,

Striga/Malefica don't exist anywhere as definitions apart from on those non-discipline master cards and in the short notes on the Heirs release.

I would find it useful to have a glossary in the rulebook which named the disciplines and non-disciplines like Striga/Malefica/Flight so new players to the game can understand what these are and how they interact with other cards in the game.

If you're going to have a section like this is the Rulebook I would like it to be complete:

Requirements for Playing Cards. Each library card has symbols on the attribute bar (the marble stripe on the left side) for the card type (except for master cards), the clan or Discipline (if any) required to play the card and the cost (if any) of playing that card. Some cards will have other requirements (such as capacity or title) stated in the card text. Only a minion who meets the requirements given on a minion card can play it, while only a Methuselah who controls a ready minion who meets the requirements of a master card can play it.

Additionally the Crypt section of the Rulebook links to the Special terms section which doesn't talk about Flight which is present on currently printed Crypt cards. This seems like an oversight as I can't see why Flight wouldn't be in the Rulebook.

1up20x6 wrote:

Haze wrote:

1up20x6 wrote:

I'm reading a Jyhad rulebook. It lists and shows all disciplines on the back. Now I'm reading a Legacies of Blood rulebook. It has an image of Jeremey MacNeil on the back with all of the card components labeled, including disciplines.

Any new player who tries to learn the game from the Jyhad rulebook is gonna have bigger things to worry about than Striga and Maleficia. it was so badly written.

What a wonderfully interesting opinion that has nothing to do with this discussion.

then why did you bring up the painfully out-of-date Jyhad rulebook? you said that it lists and shows "all disciplines" which is clearly false. the Jyhad rulebook does more harm than help for this hypothetical new player everybody's talking about.

There is a master who's name escapes me which counts as any discipline. A new player might try to use it to play Striga or Maleficia, which cannot be done.

maybe the new player might try to use Agent of Power to gain one level of his made-up discipline, Poop, which he's never seen before.
this new player could possibly read their Striga/Maleficia cards which clearly say "is not a discipline" before deciding whether or not to illegally play Agent of Power. If he's never seen a Striga/Maleficia card, then he'll never think of trying to play it that way in the first place.

As you said, all Hunting Grounds have the text. Not all Striga/Maleficia discipline cards do (in fact, aside from the masters, none of them do).

wrong wrong wrong.
every single card that requires or has this text.
why are you not reading the cards we are discussing?

The main point is that these are not disciplines when they seem as though they should be to a new player. You don't need to go into a 40-page description of every card that requires the disciplines in the rulebook, you simply need to write that they are pseudo-disciplines, and possibly explain how to play them for clarity.

the cards themselves say they are not disciplines.
you play them like any other card with requirements.
if needed, one could go to this page for more clarification, and also learn about that Research Area doohicky that isn't explained in the rulebook either. because the only cards that interact with the Research Area are the ones that have cardtext about the Research Area.

Oh, how clever. You used yet another example that still does not in any way affect the topic at hand. You get a gold star!

"Whenever the cards contradict the rules, the cards take precedence."

Since the topic at hand is "cards that have text on them that break the rules" I figured it was very relevant. I've seen people who've played the game since 94 make assumptions about cards because they didn't bother reading them fully. Just like how YOU made assumptions about Maleficia & Striga cards because you didn't read them.

If you have some form of brain injury that prevents you from forming long-term memory, I apologize in advance. Otherwise, I am confused as to why you cannot remember the point you had made in your last post, which had nothing to do with Striga/Maleficia, and instead dealt with the availability of the names of the disciplines.

Woah, a passive-aggressive accusation of brain injury! Watch out, we're dealing with a real badass over here!

The point here is that the cards were designed so that players could play "match the icons" for requirements such as Clans and Disciplines, regardless of actually knowing the names of the icons.

The rulebook does not list all these icons found in the game, and maybe they should be added or maybe not, but that doesn't stop new players from quickly understanding how to play most of the cards in the game. Striga and Maleficia are completely intuitive when played normally by using the related master cards, and are confusing when trying to break the rules with specific cards such as Ian Forestal, Agent of Power, Inceptor, etc. Thankfully, every single Maleficia & Striga card has text to give us a ruling on this. (NOT A DISCIPLINE. IF IAN FORESTAL IS PLAYING THIS CARD, DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200)

It's far more likely that a new player would be confused over Caitiff not counting as a clan, despite this being mentioned in exactly one line of the rulebook but nowhere on any cards. it's even worse because cards like Con Boon and The Embrace treat Caitiff differently. and they might also be confused by Flight having its own icon. It's not difficult to play the Flight cards, but you wouldn't know if it's a Discipline, Clan, or Trait without seeing it on a vampire, because its icon design is unique. These are examples where common sense AND the rulebook fails the new player.

I know the entire opening post was a bunch of rules lawyering, but it disguised itself with "think of the new players, because they can't use common sense here." Yeah, right.