Abolish Grouping Rule

Ashur wrote:

I was only arguing for that the most recent group would be playable with group 1. Can´t really see how that would cause much trouble.

It does not cause problem per se because it's extremely unplayable.

For starter, there is exactly one camarilla vampire gr6, and 0 non-camarilla vampire gr1. Granted, nothing prevent you from mixing independant, sabbat, and camarilla, but it does restrict extremely the interest of the whole thing.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

How about that???

Wo-hooo!

mirddes wrote:

then surely 1/4 2/5 1/6 and 3/6 wont break anything1/

2-5 would break the Independent clans: for historical reasons (Final Nights was printed before the grouping rule), gr2 has more than 20 of each clan but group 3 is empty. So while gr 2-3 and 4-5 are on par, a gr 2-5 would have a crazily large crypt choice. If the game gets reprinted, one might consider making Final Nights vampires group 3 instead of 2 to balance the group sizes. That would enable a gr 3-4 crypt.

one of the purposes of new expansion (Danse Macabre) is to fill group 5 (maybe 6 as well) with more vampires, so the problem of groups 5-6 will be non existing.

Also, if we're talking about allowing first group being played with last group, how would that affect the current setup of groups? Camarilla has most of its vamps in odd groups with several bridge vamps in even groups, Sabbat has it reversed, while Blood lines have usually only 1 bridge vampire in odd group each.

So, with this proposed rule, for example Camarilla, now doesn't have one 'main' group backed up by one splash group, but is now played with two main groups (1 and 5). Also, aside from game mechanic point, how is that affected by a fluff standpoint, being theoretically able to have more than one Inner circle/Justicar of the same clan in your deck?