file Abolish Grouping Rule

27 Nov 2012 07:51 - 27 Nov 2012 08:44 #41840 by Juggernaut1981
Deck Name : Noah's Crazy Ark
Author : Juggernaut1981
Description :



Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 3 max: 5 average: 4

2x Apache Jones 5 DEM aus for obf !Malkavian:4
2x Arthur Denholm 5 AUS DEM obf Malkavian:5
2x Bela 3 DEM ani obf pro Malkavian:5
2x Jackie 3 DEM !Malkavian:4
2x Midget 3 DEM obf pre !Malkavian:3
1x Muriel Foucade 5 DEM aus !Malkavian:2
1x Persia, The Beauti 5 DEM aus obf Malkavian:3

How about that???
(This was using Direwolf's rules adjustment)

:bruj::CEL::POT::PRE::tha: Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418
Last edit: 27 Nov 2012 08:44 by Juggernaut1981.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Lönkka

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Nov 2012 08:21 #41844 by Ashur
Replied by Ashur on topic Re: Abolish Grouping Rule

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


Two problems here.

1) Arbitrarily ruling that certain groupings wrap around for certain clans but not certain other clans will give rise to much confusion, not only to the existing player base (I shudder at the thought of having to check crypt legality under such a ruling) but also to new players.

2) If you simply say that any two groups will do, then certain clans becomes quite broken (Kiasyd comes to mind) and weenie monodicipline decks will get a much undeserved boost.

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.

"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Nov 2012 08:26 #41845 by Ohlmann
Replied by Ohlmann on topic Re: Abolish Grouping Rule

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.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Nov 2012 08:27 #41846 by Lönkka
Replied by Lönkka on topic Re: Abolish Grouping Rule

How about that???

Wo-hooo!

Finnish :POT: Politics!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Lönkka
  • Lönkka's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Antediluvian
  • Antediluvian
  • War=peace, freedom=slavery, ignorance=strength
More
27 Nov 2012 08:31 #41848 by Ashur
Replied by Ashur on topic Re: Abolish Grouping Rule

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.

Yes, for the moment that is the case.

"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Nov 2012 08:33 - 27 Nov 2012 08:53 #41849 by Boris The Blade

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.
Last edit: 27 Nov 2012 08:53 by Boris The Blade.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.107 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum