A Change to Deflection: Case Study

It's a simple question: How would the environment change if Deflection was changed to have a cost of X, where X is the current amount of the bleed?
e.g.

Deflection
Reaction
Dominate
X blood
[dom] Only usable when you are being bled, after blocks are declined. Tap this reacting vampire and pay X where X is the amount of the bleed. Choose another Methuselah other than the controller of the acting minion. The acting minion is now bleeding that Methuselah.
[DOM] As above, but do not tap this vampire.

Assorted thoughts:
1. People would bounce just as much.
2. Bleed modifiers would handjam people, as they wouldn't get to play them.
3. AUS / Disciplineless bounce would see more play (especially AUS)
4. KS would be stronger, because it would be used to overwhelm DOM bounce.
5. DOM decks would include more blood gain, to offset the additional cost.

KevinM wrote:

It's a simple question: How would the environment change if Deflection was changed to have a cost of X, where X is the current amount of the bleed?
e.g.

Deflection
Reaction
Dominate
X blood
[dom] Only usable when you are being bled, after blocks are declined. Tap this reacting vampire and pay X where X is the amount of the bleed. Choose another Methuselah other than the controller of the acting minion. The acting minion is now bleeding that Methuselah.
[DOM] As above, but do not tap this vampire.

Sounds like the CE Awe - you're paying 2X.

My opinion is that it would be too expensive.
A cardless card that deflects bleeds is already available: Lost in Translation.
Let's compare:
Usually, you're waiting for the lunge to play your KJMDeflection, so you wouln't use it on a bleed for 1 (except in some weird situations involving Helena adv).
So, KJMDeflection would always cost at least 2.

Basic KJMDeflectio vs Lost in Translation:
dom -- younger, same cost, you tap in each situation.
I'd say it's up to you. Some decks don't run dom, so Lost in Translation might be a more popular choice.

Then, on a Govern bleed:
KJMDeflection costs an extra blood, and you still tap.
I think it starts to be worse right here.

Now, sup' KJMDeflection, on a bleed for 2:
DOM -- youger, but tap.
DOM is better, since you can play a second one after that.

Now on a bleed for 3:
DOM costs 1 extra blood, LiT taps. Looks like the current choice between Deflection and Redirection. I'd say it's a tie. Deflection is good because it isn't that expensive, KJMDeflection is too expensive starting at +2bleed.

Now, the question is : Is LiT used?
Answer is not that often (some "Girls" deck might use it, but it's definitely not a card you see at every table).


But then the idea of increasing the cost to make it less playable is what Narrow Minds does.

I think that, if you increase the cost of Deflection (and Deflection only)
- AUS is going to get played a lot (and Tel Misd would be the next one you'd change)
- Redirection would get played a bit more
But most importantly, there would be a lot more decks that bleed for 3 (GtU with THA/OBF/OBT/PRO), KS DEM/obf).

I'd like to tell a story that happened to me at the LCQ in Montreal's NAC:
My prey played Parity Shift, tried to steal 5 from her prey, who played two Poison Pills. The vote passed.
That is: my prey lost 5 pool, my grand prey lost 5 pool. Guess who won.

In your proposition, you're having player X and her prey lose X blood/pool when X's predator is bleeding. Do you really think this will increase X's chances to get the GW? I don't I think it's too expensive. Actually, I think I wouldn't even put the card in a deck.

Maybe having it cost the cost of the action (including action modifiers) is a way to go.

Govern, Conditioning: 2 blood.
Kindred Spirits, Eyes of Chaos: 0 blood.
Fleetness, Alacrity, Conditioning: 4 blood

Why change anything to Deflection? Telepathic Misdirection is more polyvalent and Aksinya much harder to counter. The only problem is that the same discipline has Govern, Deflection and Conditioning.