Old design choices that proved to be non-optimal

Ankha wrote:

Sambomb wrote:

Therefore, use of parentheses in "(limited)" is divergent from use in normal English because parentheses normally indicate a nonrestrictive element (which is done on many cards). In the case of "(limited)," parentheses indicate restrictive text, meaning it can't be removed without the meaning being altered (one could play more than one card if "(limited)" does not appear).

Wrong. You can remove them, and bleed modifiers would still be restricted per the rule: "No more than one action modifier card can be played to increase a bleed during a bleed action. Some bleed action modifiers explicitly state that they do not count against this limit; those can be played before or after modifiers that count against the limit."

Ah, yes, I had a brain fart and forgot that all + bleed action modifiers are now "limited" by default. With that in mind, the parentheses in "(limited)" are being used correctly. Meaning would not be changed if removed.

I would still fix the misplaced modifier in the description of "(limited)" in the rulebook though.

Previously, some text between parentheses was optional, and sometimes not. We aim at consistency: all text between parentheses is optional.

I'd argue the text between parentheses that was sometimes not optional should have never been enclosed in parentheses in the first place, and is an example of how parentheses have historically been used in inconsistent and confusing ways for the reader. I agree with the current approach.

Sambomb wrote:

I think there is plenty options to design new cards.
Maybe:
+1 bleed. If the action is blocked and this minion is ready, your prey lose 1 pool.
as above with +1 stealth ( even if not needed yet ). If no one attempt to block, gain 1 pool.

A minion can use more then one effect during this action.
+ 1 hand size during this action
+ 1 bleed
+ 1 stealth

I liked the new keywords, but maybe we can stick to "unique" keyword and add a modifier:

Unique ( Methuselah ) - Unique PER Methuselah
Unique ( Minion ) - Unique PER Minion
Unique ( Vampire ) - Unique PER Vampire
Unique ( Combat ) - Unique PER Combat
Unique ( Action ) - Unique PER Action
Unique ( Turn ) - Unique PER Turn

We can just drop parentheses and use the full description.

• Unique per Methuselah
• Unique per Minion
• Unique per Vampire
• Unique per Combat
• Unique per Action
• Unique per Turn

Maybe we can use Unique text for once per game cards too like Giants Blood.

Original wrote:

Name: Giant's Blood
[Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R, LoB:PG, Third:R, LotN:PG, KoT:R/PM]
Cardtype: Master
Master.
Fill a vampire to full capacity with blood from the blood bank. Only one Giant's Blood can be played in a game.
Artist: Richard Thomas; Edward Beard, Jr.

Revised wrote:

Name: Giant's Blood
[Jyhad:R, VTES:R, CE:R, LoB:PG, Third:R, LotN:PG, KoT:R/PM]
Cardtype: Master
Master. Unique per game.
Fill a vampire to full capacity with blood from the blood bank.
Artist: Richard Thomas; Edward Beard, Jr.

Unique means something very specific in VTES: Only one copy of a unique card can be in play at a time. If another Methuselah puts a copy of the card into play, the copies will be contested (and out of play) until all but one is yielded (see Contested Cards, sec. 4.1).

What your proposing is giving several different VTES definitions to the word Unique. Currently it only has one making it easy to remember. It also adheres closely to the dictionary definition, requiring little mental effort to draw the connection and remember the rule.

I think assigning common game rules to different, specific words is simple and clean.

Limited ("No more than one action modifier card can be played to increase a bleed during a bleed action.") is a good keyword. The only mystery to me is why it is in parenthesis at the end of the card-text, rather than being foremost like how Trifle and Unique on Master Cards, and how Titles and other Traits are presented 1st on the Crypt Cards.

Unique and Limited in VTES in my point of view has the same meaning. The only difference is that Limited could receive a numeric value, something like:
Limited to 2
Limited ( 2 )
Limited 1
Limited
When no number is listed, you implies a value of 1 and the meaning is the same as unique language-wise ( as a foreign language).

The "Unique" as a keyword that enable contest and the "unique" that I proposed would be confusing, the Limited could be used instead or any similar word like "restricted"

Restricted per Game / Limited per Game / only one "Card Name" can be played in a game.

Name: Kevlar Vest
[KoT:U/B2]
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Limited per minion./Restricted per minion.
Once each combat, the bearer can prevent 2 damage from gun strikes or 1 damage from any other source. A minion can have only one Kevlar Vest.
Artist: Juan Calle

Sambomb wrote:

Unique and Limited in VTES in my point of view has the same meaning. The only difference is that Limited could receive a numeric value, something like:
Limited to 2
Limited ( 2 )
Limited 1
Limited
When no number is listed, you implies a value of 1 and the meaning is the same as unique language-wise ( as a foreign language).

The "Unique" as a keyword that enable contest and the "unique" that I proposed would be confusing, the Limited could be used instead or any similar word like "restricted"

Restricted per Game / Limited per Game / only one "Card Name" can be played in a game.

Name: Kevlar Vest
[KoT:U/B2]
Cardtype: Equipment
Cost: 1 pool
Limited per minion./Restricted per minion.
Once each combat, the bearer can prevent 2 damage from gun strikes or 1 damage from any other source. A minion can have only one Kevlar Vest.
Artist: Juan Calle

This is an example of introducing shorthand language that's more harmful than helpful. If the expectation is for the reader to read "limited per minion", which looks like a short hand way of saying "limited to 1 per minion", and understand it as "A minion can have only 1 [x]", this is not likely to be the case. People will misunderstand this to mean any number of things, the most likely being "only one of your minions can have [x]", or "only 1 minion in the game can have [x]," or "Only minions and not methuselahs can control [x]", or even "You can only have a number of copies of [x] in play equal to the number of minions you control."

There's no such misunderstanding with the existing language.