New versions of old cards

This idea is a culmination of two different discussions on these forums:

Advanced Library Cards discussion and: After Successful Referendum discussion .

What I suggest is a way to make different version of older cards. One of the problems with designing a new card that is "playable after a successful referendum" is that you have to take into account "Voter Captivation."

Almost all bleed action modifiers state "You cannot play another action modifier to increase this bleed amount." This change to the game (yes it wasn't always like that!) allowed the game designers to create any number of bleed modifiers.

Vote modifiers do not have this restriction. I know, it's "Apples and Oranges" when talking about the differences between votes and bleed modifiers. But +vote cards can be increasingly restrictive in the requirements to play them. With +bleed cards, you can print any number of different bleed modifiers.

The problem lies in specific cards, such as "Voter Captivation." You will never see a card printed again that says "Only usable after resolving a successful referendum called by this acting vampire." This is because any card with that text would have to take into account "Voter Captivation." Even if it has different requirements (discipline, clan, sect, title, etc.) you STILL have to consider that any vampire that can play the new card might be able to play the old card as well.

What I suggest is that there be "alternate versions" of cards. Alternate versions would have a unique card name, but would have a space on the card for a sub-title, either in the normal text box, or these cards would have additional formatting changes (IE: a the space for card name would be two lines, pushing the image down and making the text box smaller.)

The sub-title would be the name of an existing card. The new cards would be considered the same card as the card named in the sub-title. Any other card that references that card by name would also affect the same card.

This would mean:
A) Action cards would follow the no-repeat action rule. A vampire could not play Govern the Unaligned and an alternate to it in the same turn.

B) Modifiers and Reactions would follow the one-per-action rule. A vampire could not play Voter Captivation or an alternate to it during the same action. (Imagine if "Forced Awakening" and "On the Que Vive" were alternates of "Wake With Evening's Freshness!")

C) Unique cards would contest with alternate versions of them. Think about it... Mr. Winthrop has some talents for gossip... but why should that be limited to intercepting actions? What if his employer sets him to different tasks?

D) Some cards have a clause that only one may be played per game (and this includes all events!) Imagine the mayhem if there was an alternate use for "Giant's Blood." And who says "Ancient Influence" is used to gain pool?

Why is this a good idea? Because it allows the card designers to make alternate cards that can be designed knowing that both cards could not be played at the same time. They can be created WITHOUT changing cards in existence.

Okay, I will finish this up with a few examples to illustrate the point:

"Bask in Glory" Voter Captivation

Only usable after a successful referendum. Move this card to the acting vampire with X blood where X is the number of votes by which the referendum passes. During your untap phase you may move a blood from this card to the vampire.
As above, but you may immediately move two blood to this vampire.

"Running on E" Freak Drive

Only usable after a successful action. This vampire gains a blood from the blood bank. The action is also considered a hunt action.
Only usable when announcing a hunt action. This vampire gains one blood immediately and declares an action. The vampire takes the declared action.

"Mr. Winthrop, Sr." "Mr Winthrop"

Mortal ally with 1 life.
You may tap Mr. Winthrop when your predator announces an action to untap his employer.
Untap Mr. Winthrop if he is used and his employer successfully blocks.
(Yes, there would need to be rules for merging allies, retainers and equipment. If a minion equips or employs an alternate while equipped with the original or vice versa, merge them. If a minion recruits an advanced while his or her controller controls the original, or vice versa, merge them.)

dude, don't suggest. just do it and post your findings. any other playgroup can take what you learn and apply it to their own.

ruiza97 wrote:

dude, don't suggest. just do it and post your findings. any other playgroup can take what you learn and apply it to their own.

I'm not interested in doing this for myself or my playgroup. I am interested in discussing the future design of this game.

VEKN is making a small expansion for the game. There is talks of a print-on-demand option. This game may be "in torpor" but it is not dead. And if it is dead, this dead horse will be beaten for many years to come.

I present these ideas to be discussed. My hope is that the game designers read these discussions and it influences the continuing design of the game.

direwolf wrote:

ruiza97 wrote:

dude, don't suggest. just do it and post your findings. any other playgroup can take what you learn and apply it to their own.

I'm not interested in doing this for myself or my playgroup. I am interested in discussing the future design of this game.

VEKN is making a small expansion for the game. There is talks of a print-on-demand option. This game may be "in torpor" but it is not dead. And if it is dead, this dead horse will be beaten for many years to come.

I present these ideas to be discussed. My hope is that the game designers read these discussions and it influences the continuing design of the game.

Sounds valid enough to me. This exact line of thinking is what we need. I dont even like the concept so far presented, but id give some of it a try.

Im mote concerned about the g1 justicars getting playable advanced versions than playable library cards getting them. But effort and creativity are always good to see.

direwolf wrote:

The problem lies in specific cards, such as "Voter Captivation." You will never see a card printed again that says "Only usable after resolving a successful referendum called by this acting vampire." This is because any card with that text would have to take into account "Voter Captivation." Even if it has different requirements (discipline, clan, sect, title, etc.) you STILL have to consider that any vampire that can play the new card might be able to play the old card as well.

That's not a significant design problem, and never really has been.

Take a (hypothetical) new vote modifier for the Giovanni when they pass a vote, allowing them to get +1 awesome and +3 corpses. Add the keyword "Captivation" to it. Add the keyword "Captivation" to Voter Captivation through errata. Add "Only one Captivation may be played per action" to all new Captivations, and add it to Voter Captivation through errata.

Strictly, since VC would be the only Captivation in the game without it, it could survive without the sentence (since every other Captivation would limit being combined with). It would need the keyword, but that's not the end of the world - it's been done on Grapples, for example.


The bigger design issue with VC that LSJ expresssed on several occasions is that you essentially can't make a 'more powerful' vote and balance it with an appropriate blood cost. (At least, not easily.) For example, I make the awesomest vote in the history of V:TES and give it a cost of 3 blood because it's so awesome. In the normal flow of cards without this new vote, I'm already expecting to generate a lot of blood with VC, perhaps even on this very action, so it doesn't really help. After I finish this KRC, I end up on full blood. After I finish this 3-blood-vote, I end up on... full blood. Yes, the cost obviously has some effect (e.g. you won't have those blood to blow on Awe, or you have to make your Villein for slightly less), but with most voters being mid-caps and upwards, it's rarely the end of the world. As a designer, it makes life awkward, at least.

To combat this, LSJ experimented with "no blood can be gained on this action" on Eldest Command Undeath, and discussed a possible "no action modifiers can be played on this referendum". Which are interesting, but can hurt non-Presence voters just as much, if not more so.

direwolf wrote:

A) Action cards would follow the no-repeat action rule. A vampire could not play Govern the Unaligned and an alternate to it in the same turn.

Any bleed action would be caught anyway. Would it really be a problem if I was doing a different, non-bleed action? e.g. inferior Govern bleed, untap, superior AlternateGovern to do something non-bleedy. Not sure what design space is opened up by this.

direwolf wrote:

B) Modifiers and Reactions would follow the one-per-action rule. A vampire could not play Voter Captivation or an alternate to it during the same action. (Imagine if "Forced Awakening" and "On the Que Vive" were alternates of "Wake With Evening's Freshness!")

The reaction element would be a pretty uninteresting niche of the game. How often do you find yourself trying to play two different Wakes with the same vampire?

direwolf wrote:

D) Some cards have a clause that only one may be played per game (and this includes all events!) Imagine the mayhem if there was an alternate use for "Giant's Blood." And who says "Ancient Influence" is used to gain pool?

Not sure we really want to push more "Once per game" effects. Giant's Blood, in particular, is often moaned about. If the AlterGB is sufficiently worthwhile playing, it's likely going to have to be pretty good. It's a master card, and you want ALL the master cards you play to be pretty damned good. If you just wanted to screw someone else's GB, you could just include your own, normal Giant's Blood.

direwolf wrote:

"Mr. Winthrop, Sr." "Mr Winthrop"

Mortal ally with 1 life.
You may tap Mr. Winthrop when your predator announces an action to untap his employer.
Untap Mr. Winthrop if he is used and his employer successfully blocks.

A free, perma-untap strikes me as significantly more powerful than Mr Winthrop's usual options.

As an actual untap, Enkil Cog/Madness Network decks have scope for actually acting. Not the funnest thing in the world.