On how I hate Rego Motus

Reyda wrote:

You don't say ? But I'm glad you came to understand thate we are talking about the whole THA combat here. Saying the same thing twice makes it more interesting maybe ?

I really can't tell if you're still unable to understand why RM doesn't change the functionality of other cards which don't interact with it. So...

No response to any the of the points I made about how RM is conditional and therefore not an auto-include card, and therefore not a card that encourages laziness in deck building? That's what you're exhorting people to respond to. I did, and you're ignoring that response.

Chaitan wrote:

Let's talk about what's really happening in a game, and not talk silly.

In a real game THA combat packet consist of 70-90% Theft of Vitae. The rest is a mix of Apportation, Walk of Flame and Rego Motus.

I'm happy you are trying to say something else that "but Beast with 9 cards can punch you so hard !". Because everybody know that.
Real game THA consists of 70-90% of what you said. Except that Real THA deck affords more copies of Blood fury (I usually play 5 or 6 myself) mainly because it trumps most of those annoying Alastor decks with assault rifles, and other annoying stuff like Ivory bows.

In a real game RM will probably save you from going to torpor even against ANI or CEL or POT combat that round.

I'm glad to hear that too. That's precisely what I was trying to say.

In a real game ANI, CEL, POT simply press to the next round and in a real game you are most likely out of RM by now.

Why should I be ?

In a real game you will hate having RM on your hand when stealth/vote or stealth/bleed decks fiercly target your pool.

THA comes in a nice package with 2 bounce disciplines, remember ? I guess it's the Beast you talked about who would likely become the Bleed sink of the table. Because the nosferatu hate me, but everybody hates a 8 strength puncher.

Chaitan wrote:

Seriously, if you hate RM you probably have one person in your playgroup who has adapted to your meta and inserted just the right amount of RM to specifically cancel that type of combat you often use.

Solution is not to cry foul against a card that is OK at best. It is to change the meta.

Mmm the card is not OK. The card is Good. And it does not value intelligent deckbuilding. It's juste an auto include whereas before you had to try mixing crypt and working your brain. That was the whole point of this silly rant

Ohlmann wrote:

You say that Rego Motus is lazy card design. A card of a very narrow focus, that need a lot of thought to either have cycle solution or fetching solution is clearly more lazy than Deflection.

Yes, I did write that Rego Motus is lazy card design, and so far nothing you wrote changed my mind on this, I'm sorry to say.
It's hard to find a real argument in the middle of BEAST PUNCHING FOR 8 OWNZ YOU or YOU GETTING HANDJAM.
and as for

reality have shown that Rego Motus is not that good of a solution to Thaumaturgy problem.

I'm sorry, but so far I always saw Tremere getting out of fights like a boss thanks to Rego Motus.
Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn, because celerity is the main source of additionals and a lot of fighters don't use celerity at all.
Reality has shown me that Rego Motus is a perfectly good card, preventing up to 4 damage, even ranged aggravated from the Unnamed or a !salubri playing badass cards.

Kushiel wrote:

No response to any the of the points I made about how RM is conditional and therefore not an auto-include card, and therefore not a card that encourages laziness in deck building? That's what you're exhorting people to respond to. I did, and you're ignoring that response.

What point ? That it's usable once per round ? So what ? As said before : Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn. Yes, it costs a blood, but it can always be cycled against a non fighter by stealing blood at close range and preventing the incoming hands for one. Especially when you can choose who you want to intercept. It's not an argument at all.

So far we say a lot of things in common, especially that Potence is in a lot of cases trumped by Rego Motus.
Because prevention out of nowher is an excellent addition to the THA Arsenal. Why not include it automatically in every THA combat deck ? There is virtually no reason.
You told about how THA can avoid combat with Mirror Walk : that is not the point. You don't avoid a fight when you play THA combat, you want to suck vamps dry -except maybe if you know that your bleed will be deflected.


And for other arguments I read there and there "but if there is no combat, the card sits in your hand"... Come on. If there is no bleed, the deflection is of no use, and if there is no vote, I am annoyed by this delaying tactics... Are you really serious when you say it's a point I am ignoring ?
The card is good, the card is cheap, and the card is better at inferior than a lot of fortitude cards I played during 15 years of V:TES...

As for Lazy deckbuilding, I would feel the same way if a fortitude card was printed that would say "Strike : strength +2 damage, with an optional press". I would call it lazy exactly like I call Rego Motus Lazy.

Again, it's just a silly little rant. But if you can prove me wrong, i would have learned something interesting and would thank you !

Reyda wrote:

Yes, I did write that Rego Motus is lazy card design, and so far nothing you wrote changed my mind on this, I'm sorry to say.

Problem being that the argument can be reversed : you have exactly the same argument (I.E. Rego Motus is a magical trump card that make everything go away in combat) than the one for saying that, for example, deflection is worse (I.E. Deflection is a magical trump card that make everything go away in bleed)

So, you may not be convinced that Deflection is worst. I am not convinced that Rego motus is a trouble at all, and all your smugness does not constitute something that convince me.

Also, what make it worse than the two fortitude card that do more at inferior level than Rego Motus at superior ? I was already used to take thoses card into account, and near everything that work on those work on Rego motus.

Reyda wrote:

What point ? That it's usable once per round ? So what ? As said before : Reality showed me that most combat decks strike ONCE a turn. Yes, it costs a blood, but it can always be cycled against a non fighter by stealing blood at close range and preventing the incoming hands for one.

If you think that cards that can be cycled for zero effect are so good that they warrant automatic inclusion in every deck that can play them, we have very different deckbuilding philosophies.

Reyda wrote:

Especially when you can choose who you want to intercept.

A lot of your arguments hinge on you always having the cards you want when you want them. In this instance, if you build a deck that's always going to be able to intercept anyone you want to, you're not also going to have room for a pile of THA combat and still be able to oust anyone reliably. That's what makes RM conditional, and therefore not an auto-include: there are often going to be better cards to put into your deck.

That's my point: cards that warrent automatic inclusion in every deck that can use them have to be so unconditionally amazing that they're nearly always going to be better than other cards, in every single game you play. The list I posted upthread indicates that this isn't the case for RM; quite a lot of the time, it's going to do absolutely nothing all game except take up space in your hand until you get a chance to cycle it. From looking at TWDA reports, it appears that at the moment the most common offensive combat is Crow/Bats, and the second-most common is Cel/guns (due to the rise in popularity of the Anson/Volker decks). And most of the rest of the time, you're going to see S:CE or no combat at all. So in those most-common cases, RM isn't worth playing, because there are better cards to use.

EDIT: Though I should add that RM is good against War Ghoul and Shambling Hordes decks that don't rely on Trap to kill vampires.

If you really want to convince people that RM is so good that auto-including it is laziness on the part of the card design rather than laziness on the part of your deckbuilding, you have to prove that it's not as conditional as I claiming it is. So far, you haven't done that.

Reyda wrote:

So far we say a lot of things in common. Except that Prevention is an excellent addition to the THA Arsenal.

No. I'm saying that RM is only worth including in a deck in the situation that you're pretty sure that you're going to be facing POT combat or non-pressing, rushing allies. Even against a POT deck, you're likely going to be Grappled and smashed next round (because a good deck is not going to be able to include as many RMs as a Potence deck includes Grapples, another point people keep making which you continue to choose to ignore). Other forms of combat beat RM, so I don't see why you'd bother to include RM in a deck unless you're fairly sure that you're going to get facing POT combat, and are using Movement of the Mind rather than Apportation. In other situations, you're going to be better off using other cards. I had a lot more success with Obedience than I would have had with RM in the last Tremere deck I built, for instance, because Obedience is much less conditional and much more powerful than RM.

Reyda wrote:

And for other arguments I read there and there "but if there is no combat, the card sits in your hand"... Come on. If there is no bleed, the deflection is of no use, and if there is no vote, I am annoyed by this delaying tactics... Are you really serious when you say it's a point I am ignoring ?

Yes. Because the number of times that RM is going to be useless, or at best cycled for no effect, is much much larger than the number of times than Deflection or Delaying Tactics is going to be useless. That's what "conditionality" means. And as I keep telling you, conditionality is the only way to measure the auto-inclusiveness of a card.

EDIT: The Typo Beast is really making me its bitch today, sorry.

It feels this is just discussion is just about what kind of decks you usually face when playing. Combat decks I see are POT, ANI, Stickmen and bit more rare CEL+sticks and/or guns. Rego Motus is only good against POT but even then you can't press against grapple. If you happen to get random aggra long damage to face once in ten games, it happens and not wise for me to plan my deck to counter that. My other post already explained this better.

You say Rego Motus is not good card design. This is totally opposite what I feel. Designing simple, effective and balanced card which can provide some new options is the hardest design and requires the most creativity. Everybody can design wonky cards like Shatter the Gate or Summon History. But designing solid and simple card for basic discpline really needs skill.

EDIT
OF course you can play Movement of the Mind instead of Apportation and press against grapple but then you are planning to use your combat more as defense and you really can't use control aspect of combat so much at all. You are not torporising any minions with one round THA combat.