file Proposal: Crypt = Pool

26 Nov 2012 17:23 #41765 by Jeff Kuta
New Rule Proposal:
You may spend 4 transfers and remove a crypt card in your uncontrolled region from the game to gain 1 pool.

Crypt cards in your uncontrolled region are assets to start the game. I think a rule like this would very subtly add more variety to the game. "Superstar" decks would actually benefit the most since they often have superfluous copies of the main vampire left to no effect in the uncontrolled region. Weenie decks would largely not benefit from this rule since they usually strive to get more than 4 vampires into play anyway.

Since the cost to draw a new card from your crypt is 4 transfers and 1 pool, this rule provides the next possible step and gives you an option to gain the 1 pool back when the card is completely removed from the game.

Thoughts?

When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike.
:CEL::DOM::OBF::POT::QUI:
pckvtes.wordpress.com
@pckvtes
The following user(s) said Thank You: mirddes

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

More
26 Nov 2012 17:34 #41767 by Dorrinal
Replied by Dorrinal on topic Re: Proposal: Crypt = Pool
I'm not impressed by the rule, but I appreciate the sentiment. It would be nice for transfers to be worth something later in the game. On the other hand the effect would have to be very strong indeed to provide a worthwhile alternative to Enchant Kindred, et al.

Inconnu Tutelage
Event
Inconnu.
A Methuselah may spend four transfers and remove a vampire in his or her uncontrolled region from the game to search for any card in his or her library and put it in his or her hand (discarding and shuffling afterward).


:trem:

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

More
26 Nov 2012 19:37 #41782 by Juggernaut1981
Seems to be a less viable option than Wider View. 1 Transfer = 1 New Vamp which usually costs 4 transfers & 1 pool.

:bruj::CEL::POT::PRE::tha: Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

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

More
26 Nov 2012 21:49 #41793 by Jeff Kuta

I'm not impressed by the rule, but I appreciate the sentiment. It would be nice for transfers to be worth something later in the game. On the other hand the effect would have to be very strong indeed to provide a worthwhile alternative to Enchant Kindred, et al.


The main point is that this is a potential new rule which does not require any card text to be effective.

Suppose you played a superstar deck and randomly drew 3 copies of the star in your opening crypt. As the game progressed, you could get out the star and one support vampire. If your pool permitted, you could then decrypt hoping to get a third vampire. If that didn't work, you could then start removing your uncontrolled vampires from the game to gain pool back. Two of them would be likely immediate candidates for RFG.

If you were also fortunate enough to play with Governs or Enchants, then you might also use those as well and just transfer pool back. For those crypts which rely on "weaker" disciplines, you still can make use of the uncontrolled crypt cards as a small pool gain resource.

Seems to be a less viable option than Wider View. 1 Transfer = 1 New Vamp which usually costs 4 transfers & 1 pool.


Wider View is a card which has an opportunity cost to include in a deck. Its function is to help sift through your crypt faster to find the vampires you need.

This proposal is a new rule which makes use of the fundamental principles of the game to provide a way to convert crypt cards into pool. It is the inverse of drawing new vampires.

When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike.
:CEL::DOM::OBF::POT::QUI:
pckvtes.wordpress.com
@pckvtes

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

More
26 Nov 2012 22:04 #41794 by DeathInABottle
Superstar decks are very vulnerable, and could use the support. This rule would help a little. At the moment, I can't see any downsides to it. (The existence of cards that interact with the crypt doesn't strike me as a downside.)

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

More
26 Nov 2012 22:08 - 26 Nov 2012 22:09 #41795 by Izaak
Replied by Izaak on topic Re: Proposal: Crypt = Pool
I dunno, I kinda like the idea to be honest.

I can't really see any obvious downsides at first glance and it's a decent way to recoup some decrypting cost when you're missing the guy you're looking for. The 4 transfer cost makes it not really abusable (if it already was) with cards like Effective Management. +1 from me.
Last edit: 26 Nov 2012 22:09 by Izaak.

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.102 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum