Flight originally told you how to treat the skill until changes in LoB. All the Bloodlines and at least one LoB Flight cards specifically stated on the card how to use them 'Requires a minion with flight.'

Pagan wrote:
Yes, but not any more.
(Patrol: vtes.pl/card/43303 vtes.pl/card/395512, Pounce: vtes.pl/card/43309 vtes.pl/card/395517 And of course non-reprint cards from HttB: See Roll: vtes.pl/card/43501)
I'm not sure what you're trying to show by talking about old card text that has been changed.

He's trying to state that the old cards were more consistent and actually told you how they functioned.

A new version of say Pounce doesn't tell you what it requires, the reference bar doesn't link to anything and that seems a little stupid.

All the disciplines and traits should be in an Appendix to the Rulebook. This is especially true of traits as the Rulebook doesn't cover them so Rulebook + card does not tell you how it functions.

The Rulebook specifically covers Clan and Discipline requirements of cards (but not Trait) so I don't know how you can expect it to be complete without something to tell you how to use Scobax etc.

Any card saying 'Str is not a discipline' just tells you how to NOT use it not how to use it.

It was a relatively weak (poorly designed) playtest fix.

Separate Note: Which set was the last set to Include Rules + Summary card in the starters?

1.5. Overview of Crypt Cards


This would indicate that Striga and Maleficia are in fact disciplines. Treat them as disciplines when you play them. However, all Maleficia and Striga cards have card text stating they are not disciplines. That text does not change the requirements to play the card.

1.6.3. Minion Cards


There are other requirements for cards that are not stated by the rules, such as sect, titles etc. Why can't Chandler Hungerford play the Second Tradition? I can ignore "Requires a Prince or Justicar" because the rulebook doesn't tell me how to play a card that says that.

The card text " is not a discipline" does not remove the requirement that the vampire must have in order to play the card. The text is there to prevent Ian Forestal from having and to prevent "Agent of Power" or "Spontaneous Power" from granting . It prevents Pherydima from stealing with "Absorb the Mind."

sure but the rulebook tells you about titles and princes and justicars.

it doesn't tell you about Maleficia, Striga, Flight or other traits.

Squidalot wrote:


Are you referring to the rulebook link to the left? because that rulebook doesn't mention Potence, or Celerity, or any other disciplines. Yet the rules describe how to play a card that requires a discipline, even if you have no idea what they are called.

There are other keywords and traits such as "Gehenna" or "Investment" or "Government" or "Inquisition" that don't have explanations in the rulebook. This is because they are defined by the cards.

The rulebook does not need to address Striga/Maleficia, nor Flight. You see a minion card with a requirement on it, you look for a vampire that can play it, or vise-versa: you see a vampire and you look at what minion cards she can play. Some minion cards let minions play additional cards (such as Master: Discipline cards, or Striga for examples.)

These issues do not need to be addressed in the rulebook. Perhaps, something more in-depth like a reference guide or a "wiki" would be more appropriate.

Ahh, Maleficia and Striga, the un-disciplines! Just like 7UP is the un-cola! God I love this game.

As a side note, I believe Striga and Malefica would have been way better served as requiring infernal instead of being no-discipline. The main difference would have been some infernal !tremere would have been able to infernal pact them out. It don't seem too much of a stretch.

Ohlmann wrote:
There was more a concern about the Great Beast.

Just out of curiosity, and admitting that I don't know the Striga and Maleficia cards very well, would it be a problem for the Great Beast to be able to choose one or both of those traits?

I mean, we are talking about the Devil incarnate, apparently, so it certainly would make sense.