Inquisition Related Cards

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Santiago gets +1 bleed and +1 strength against Bahari and Infernal minions.

formatting error. I don't bleed minion.

Choose a younger Sabbat vampire. That vampire loses any Sabbat-related keywords and any titles they may have (e.g. Black Hand, bishop, templar, etc)

Black hand is not tied to sabbat in VtES. Nor does inquisitor anyway. You need to put an exhaustive list I fear.

In a more subjective sense, I really am not sold at all by thoses card. The infernal !Nosferatu may lead to broken deck, others vampires tend to be overpriced and with stranges discipline combo.

The !Nos's text is an attempt to mirror an Infernal Merit which allows the vampire to "kiss" another and deal aggravated damage. (Which from the source suggested required basically grappling them or ambushing them).

The strange discipline combos come from the source texts mostly. It's all VtM stuff and the is mostly because these vampires have gained access to Dark Thaumaturgy from their infernalism (since I'm assuming its the Infernalist disciplines you have issue with).

Actually, I am attempting to force Inquisitor to be a Sabbat trait (as it is in VtM) which may not be something that PCK are planning (or have planned). But from the texts I've read, Inquisitor is Sabbat at least as much as Black Hand should be Sabbat. And to be brutally honest, every vampire printed with Black Hand are Sabbat and Blooding (to go Black Hand) requires a Sabbat... so it has always seemed to be some fairly flimsy semantics that Sabbat and Black Hand are not tied together in the same way as Independent and Anarch (Can't be an Anarch if you're not Independent).

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

So it has always seemed to be some fairly flimsy semantics that Sabbat and Black Hand are not tied together in the same way as Independent and Anarch (Can't be an Anarch if you're not Independent).

On a pure lore logical sense you are right (well, except if you begin to talk about "true" black hand, but some things are best left forgotten).

But you can here and now go anarch and keep both Black hand and Seraph trait. There is even deck based on that.

So it is better to not let an imprudent formulation lead to unfortunate misunderstanding.

I understand well the intend for the !nos. But the card resulting can still wreak havoc, not least because it is non-combat minion removal, something that is alway worrisome. Also, vampire kiss is alway aggravated (I don't have infernals sources handy to look up what add the merit) and it can't be done on immortal grapple, which seem odd.

For the vampires, Santiago, capacity 10, does not even have its clan discipline at superior. Instead, random thaumaturgy and auspex. And no useful special most of the time. It's just a very bad vampire on the card game, regardless of how it's supposed to "fit" the lore. Most other vampire you have shown have the same problem of being unuseable because of strange combination that don't lead to useable crypt or put them as high-capacity filler for crypt.

As a general note, you should never feel obligated to follow strictly the RPG discipline. Most of the time they are mere indication which may very well not be true. The important thing is to be in line with what he is supposed to be. To take an example, Huizi is supposed to have visceratika, but the card forgo it to save place and still give the feel that it is an undead unstoppable behemot.

Don't forget : VtES is a game, and is different from the RPG. Making thing enjoyable should be a primary concern (as in the RPG, but throught different means), and following the lore only the next concern. Especially since VtES is notorious for its unprecise and adaptative lore.

RE: Saul
How is it going to wreak any more havoc than POT combat? It's an alternate way to dunk someone... and that's about it. And he can't multi-act. And he's infernal. So you're paying a pool each turn to maybe, long shot, deal 1 or 2 pool or maybe 3 pool with Fame/Dragonbound/etc.

RE: Santiago
There have been numerous examples of large capacity vampires missing a clan discipline in favour of other disciplines. He's got all three disciplines, just inferior and in the canon references he has better Auspex than Celerity.

RE: Canon Adherance
I'm not sticking rigidly to canon, but when there is an OBVIOUS difference (particularly with out of clan disciplines) then it's certainly worth adhering to the oWoD Canon at the expense of the "VTES Canon".
Plus VTES lacks the numerous merits/flaws that exist in Canon. Hence pricing them is somewhat complex.

RE: "Alternate Phrasing"
I actually think that some of our current syntaxing in VTES has unnecessary levels of complexity or just the results of pedantry. And after you, and others, complained of the length of texts it is ironic that you are now forcing a single sentence (which isn't too difficult to understand) into two sentences at its most word efficient.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

RE: Saul
How is it going to wreak any more havoc than POT combat? It's an alternate way to dunk someone... and that's about it.

It's plenty different from POT combat. You don't need to spend card. You are a lot less likely to fail - you just have to stealth the action and not take into account the numerous solution to potence combat.

And no multiacting (except, of course, Rutor Hand, but it don't allow multiple torpor action anyway) but plenty way to block with animalism, which may be just as bad seeing that it work in combat.

1 pool for 1 vampire in torpor is hellishly good. Which make sense but may broke things. Minion removal is powerful in VtES, and when it does not involve combat it is often on the verge of broken.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

There have been numerous examples of large capacity vampires missing a clan discipline in favour of other disciplines. He's got all three disciplines, just inferior and in the canon references he has better Auspex than Celerity.

Yes, and there have been numerous case of bad vampire. There is very few vampire with this discipline spread and more importantly they don't work together well. The only thing I see is Rutor Hand for vote and bleed... with an untitled vampire. He also have no really useful special.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

RE: Canon Adherance
I'm not sticking rigidly to canon, but when there is an OBVIOUS difference (particularly with out of clan disciplines) then it's certainly worth adhering to the oWoD Canon at the expense of the "VTES Canon".
Plus VTES lacks the numerous merits/flaws that exist in Canon. Hence pricing them is somewhat complex.

I do believe that creating a bad vampire because the wod version have a particular discipline is a bad move. You may not put him with every clan discipline, but you should ensure he have a set of discipline that work together and are shared by enough other vampires.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

RE: "Alternate Phrasing"
I actually think that some of our current syntaxing in VTES has unnecessary levels of complexity or just the results of pedantry. And after you, and others, complained of the length of texts it is ironic that you are now forcing a single sentence (which isn't too difficult to understand) into two sentences at its most word efficient.

A simple and vague (like the one we talk about) is exactly as bad as a precise and long one. You may say it's easy to understand for people involved in the lore, but fact is, rule does not support that. There explicit rule that a prince must be camarilla, but none that force black hand to be sabbat, nor Inquisitor.

"
Death to the Inquisition
Master
1 pool
Requires an Archbishop, Cardinal or Seraph.
Choose a Sabbat vampire. If that vampire is an Inquisitor they burn 5 blood. If that vampire is a Templar they burn 3 blood. Otherwise that vampire burns 2 blood. If the chosen vampire has less blood than they must burn, they are burned instead. Reduce the cost of this card by 1 pool if you control a Seraph."

Am I the only one to think that burning a ready lazverinus with one blood with no action is a bit too much ? No relation whatsoever to the inquisition, burn him anyway. Oh, and let's anthelios that back for the next victime. bah... -_-