Honest Idea for fixing overly strong master cards!

Prepare to have your mind blown by the ultimate fix for any problematic card.
Large errata too complicated?
Banning out of question?
Not really that over-powered?

Introducing the "Louche" label! (Name is potential subject to change)
Deriving form the meaning of "not reputable or decent", a card that is labeled as "Louche" is hated by many, but still played nonetheless.
Potential candidates are many, from "Ashurs Tablets" to "Villein". (Note: "Louche" is only meant for master cards, rational further below)

"Louche" is labeled in the same way "Trifle" or "Unique" is. (see spoiler)
A card that is "Louche" is still played the same way and is not effected itself by that label.
When somebody cancels it though, that's a whole different story:

---

1.6.2. Master Cards

[...]

7. Louche: Some master cards are identified as being louche. When a louche master card is canceled, the canceling Methuselah may gain 1 pool. If the card used to cancel the louche master card is an out-of-turn master card, that card does not count against the canceling Methuselah's out-of-turn master card limit.

---

Ok, so let me give first an simple example:


More complex case:

---

So for the two effects:

As for gain 1 pool, I think that it helps cards like "Bleeding the Vine" and works well with "Rewind Time" and "Sanatoleus"' special, without making "Sudden Reversal" and "Wash" over-powered (more on that later). I decided to make it optional with "may", so that games are not too strongly effected by it and it removes the potential need for rewinds.

As for the out-of-turn master card effect, if somebody has e.g. 3 master phase actions, playing a "Sudden Reversal" on a "Villein" seems like a fruitless endeavor, with most probably the next "Villein" following. So allowing multiple cancels balances this out in my eyes. Also this is itself counteracted by the fact that any other Methuselah can stop a "Sudden Reversal" streak, by canceling it without loosing his out-of-turn master card. The trifle effect of "Wash" is covered by the rules and cannot give more than one additional master phase action, no matter in which turn the multiple "Wash"s are played. Although irrelevant of how many out-of-turn master cards you play, you gain only one fewer master phase actions next master phase. Also it makes carrying more canceling cards viable to counter act card like "Anthelios, The Red Star".

As for the label itself, I think that it is very easy to bring to public knowledge by having for example at tournaments a list of all cards labeled "Louche", with maybe potential reprints coming with the label included. Also if nobody cancels, then the label does not disrupt play.

And why only master card can be "Louche", the answer is very simple:
"Direct Intervention" and "Dark Influences". A free "Direct Intervention", with the ability to play another one or a "Sudden Reversal" afterwards is too strong (IMHO).

Also why I generally am not a big fan of countering like in Magic, I think that there has been a clear trend to more and more master cards, even in non-"Cybele"/"Nana"/"Anson" decks. So while more master cards is becoming viable, so should countering more master cards.

---

I also think that "Sudden Reversal" itself should be "Louche".
This should balance the pool gain and prevent too much abuse.
Here is the second example from before with "Sudden Reversal" as "Louche".



In the previous scenario Methuselah B's "Sudden Reversal" did not take effect, but it robbed Methuselah C of his ability to play an out-of-turn master card till his next master phase. Now in the new scenario Methuselah C had to give up a master phase action next turn, but he can still defend himself with another "Sudden Reversal" or "Archon Investigation" (etc). Now this might seem too beneficial for Methuselah A and C, but a "Sudden Reversal" from another Methuselah could turn this around again.

---

So now for the most controversial part, which cards to label:

Here are my candidates in two groups, certain and uncertain:

Certain:



Uncertain:


As you can see, even if all of those made it, it would just 13 (plus maybe a few I forgot), so nothing impossible to remember.

---

Please tell me what you think!
Just as a small rule for replying:

You may not recommend more cards for the list or criticize it, till you leave a meaningful review of the "Louche"-rule.
Same applies for name suggestions for the rule.

I really do appreciate the work you put in this. I mean it. However I am not sure that v:tes needs a rule like this. Here is the reason why I oppose this rule:

1. A rule like this would certainly (with no doubt) massively encourage people to play several copies of Sudden Reversal in basically every deck (but for sure every tournament deck).

2. Besides the desired effect of hosing those nasty master cards you listed, or at least making them less dominant, there will be a secondary impact on the game:

For the last few years before v:tes was "killed" the people designing it tried to make big cap decks more playable. Many cards show this, like Scourge of the Enochians, Neonate Breach, but also Villein for example. When asking players and taking a look at the decks played at tournaments big cap decks seem now to be close to what I would call "balanced". With still room left to "expand".

Big cap decks are more than any other deck archetype in the game forced to generate pool, which is mostly achieved by Minion Tap (old school) or Villein (new). Also many big cap decks need to have crypt acceleration cards like Information Highway, Zillah's Valley, etc.

Note something? All master cards!

Conclusion: if you favor the play of Sudden Reversal so much that will lead to a rise of weenie or weenie/mid cap aggressive bleed decks with a bunch of Suddens. An archetype that is already strong. This will have a very negative impact on big caps deck making them disappear from tournament play once more.

So while you would achieve your primary goal of making those nasty master cards less dominant you would sacrifice a way of playing v:tes (yeah, you do have to play and build big cap decks in a different way).

Of course all these thoughts here are based on my meta game and are entirely subjective. However I think these are solid arguments.

by: Mephistopheles

If a "fix" would be required for certain master cards (which I don't think is the case at the moment) then the last thing I would want is to add a keyword that will never be printed on those cards. Any changes at this point should be rule changes without requiring errata.

That said, I don't get all the sudden hate on master cards. Yes, Villein is a good card. Is it too good? Probably, but at least it allowed an ENORMOUS amount of decks to be playable. Yes, Ashur Tablets and Liquidation also spawned a new archtype. Well, actually it's more a new deck because Liquidation + Sudario has been around since Lords of the Night.

There is !Malk S&B at every tournament. There has been since forever and nobody ever complained. There is a lawfirm at every tournament. There has been since forever and nobody ever complained. There is dom/for powerbleed and/or dom/aus wall/bleed at every tournament as well. That has been the case since Ruben Feldman won like 7 tournaments with Vignes and I haven't heard anyome complain.

Now there is also Nana/Cybele at every tournament and suddenly people start randomly hating on master cards and decks that gain pool. Ye sure it's a good deck and everything but really... do we want a whole bunch of confusing errata and new rules JUST for one deck?

If the VEKN *really* agrees that something needs to be done (which, again, at this point is in my opinion not the case), then THE single easiest solution is to just ban Aksinya.

No additional rules fGS!

My present list of problematic masters:
Villein
Ashurs
both DI
Sudden/wash

And only villein is too powerful, all others are just bad designed.

elotar wrote:

No additional rules fGS!

My present list of problematic masters:
Villein
Ashurs
both DI
Sudden/wash

And only villein is too powerful, all others are just bad designed.

Sudden Reversal and Wash? Are you serious?

I don't think adding terminilogy to the game is a good idea as a prince.

Further every year people complain about certain decks or cards more than others. I have seen very little of parity shift this year. Yet it was awesome and running rampant 2 years ago. I don't think a single card should be added to the ban list at this time either. Aksinya Daclau was always there to abuse. And just like imbued there are ways to beat the deck. I could list other decks like Nergal or turbo royalty that drew much hatred towards them. Villein is a good card. So are other cards. Don't get up in arms in such a hurry. Let another year go by and see where we are at. By that time I am sure people will know how to play against the girls decks and frustrations will subside.

Consider any drastic moves made can weaken the player base and make it even harder to bring in new players.