Card Idea: Descent

Descent
Cardtype: Master
Your prey loses one pool.

Thinking about Ascendance, I was wondering why there wasn't a corresponding damaging card. I'm not so much suggesting that this be created as I'm wondering why this card wasn't created alongside Ascendance back in 1994. Would it be unbalanced? Even if you had three MPAs, you could only knock three pool off of your prey - so I don't think it's unbalanced. And you could always throw an "only one per turn" clause on it. Would it be playable? It's not as strong as Anarch Revolt or Antediluvian Awakening, certainly, but it's also not as complicated, and there are certainly circumstances where one extra pool damage would go a long way - so maybe it's playable. So maybe it doesn't make sense in terms of the theme of the Jyhad, meaning that Methuselahs are simply incapable of affecting one another directly.

What do you think?

No way such a card would ever see print. Way overpowered. Gaining pool and loosing pool can't be put on same scale. This is just bad card design. Sorry man.

DeathInABottle wrote:

Descent
Cardtype: Master
Your prey loses one pool.

Thinking about Ascendance, I was wondering why there wasn't a corresponding damaging card.

What do you think?

There is.

Personal Involvement
[Gehenna:R]
Cardtype: Master
Cost: 3 pool
Master.
If your prey has more pool than you (after paying the cost of this card), your prey burns 3 pool. Any Methuselah can cancel this card as it is played by burning 2 pool (the cost of this card is not paid in that case).

Mephistopheles wrote:

No way such a card would ever see print. Way overpowered. Gaining pool and loosing pool can't be put on same scale. This is just bad card design. Sorry man.

No worries. I don't actually want to see this printed, as I said above; I'm just curious as to why it wasn't. So maybe you could be more specific: why can't gaining pool and losing pool be put on the same scale? Why is this "just bad card design"?

There should be some restriction on the card such as: "not usable if your prey has less than 2 pool." It's not in the spirit of the game to be able to oust someone with a master phase action, which is probably why it wasn't printed back in the beginning of Jyhad.

Here's something that might fit with your idea conceptually:

Descent
(or as I would call it: "I'm better than you! (nyah nyah!)"
Master: trifle.
This turn, the only master card you may play is Ascendance. When you play Ascendance this turn your prey burns one pool.


Edit: How about this one?

Descent
Master. Trifle.
Put this card in play. When any player plays Ascendance he or she may add or remove a counter from this card. Each Methuselah loses pool equal to the amount of counters on this card during his or her master phase.

Ok, here are my thoughts:

You play Ascendance to get +1 pool. Yay. Really not a big deal. If you want to make it a big deal than you need to play many of them. Yay. You play many of them and you will have a hard time making any VP's.

Now let's look at the other side.

You make your prey loose 1 pool. Annoying but shit happens. You play it let's say 5 times. Ouch! It's direct pool damage that your prey can't defend against. Don1t come with Suddens or Wash because you can't expect people to start each of there deck list with 4+ Suddens.

Now let's take a look at what unpreventable pool damage could mean with a few examples.

Anson and friends: make some damage with Descent+Ashur until within ousting range, play 1-2 TGB, vote, done.

Cybele + Nana + Parthenon: 4 pool damage per/turn?

You don't need Descent do all the pool damage. Just causing 5-7 damage/player is already awesome.

The difference is, that with pool damage you make vp's.

Or maybe I am wrong.