Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
13 Jul 2011 16:24 #6249
by brandonsantacruz
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
-Friedrich Nietzsche
brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/
Grouping rule- wrap around grouping? was created by brandonsantacruz
I believe this has been mentioned before, but maybe not on this forum or at length. What do you folks think about allowing group 6 and group 1 to work together? I don't see anything particularly broken there, especially since group 6 has only 33 vampires, but it might be fun.
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
-Friedrich Nietzsche
brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- brandonsantacruz
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- Antediluvian
-
Less
More
- Posts: 1284
- Thank you received: 229
13 Jul 2011 17:52 #6257
by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
It wouldn't hurt, but won't be very playable.
It would allow to see more group 1 vampires though.
It would allow to see more group 1 vampires though.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
13 Jul 2011 20:23 - 13 Jul 2011 20:26 #6264
by Haze
Replied by Haze on topic Re: Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
I can't think of anything too game-breaking there. It'd be kinda fun to have Shalmath and Masika in the same deck.
but I don't think it would add much to either group. Most of the bloodlines like to mixed in with independents (mostly Giovanni for NEC) or Sabbat (like Lasombra & Kiasyd, or !Salubri & !Ventrue). They already got the G5 independents, but not a good G5 Sabbat selection unfortunately. mixing them with G1 Camarilla is redundant since there's already a nice G5 Camarilla to choose from.
G1 already has so many great crypt combos with G2. It's still quite popular, despite the wallpaper cards like Dr Jest. and if someone wanted to mix with Bloodlines, they can already use G2! instead of handicapping themselves by going backwards to G6 where there's no IC and no Sabbat weenies.
but I don't think it would add much to either group. Most of the bloodlines like to mixed in with independents (mostly Giovanni for NEC) or Sabbat (like Lasombra & Kiasyd, or !Salubri & !Ventrue). They already got the G5 independents, but not a good G5 Sabbat selection unfortunately. mixing them with G1 Camarilla is redundant since there's already a nice G5 Camarilla to choose from.
G1 already has so many great crypt combos with G2. It's still quite popular, despite the wallpaper cards like Dr Jest. and if someone wanted to mix with Bloodlines, they can already use G2! instead of handicapping themselves by going backwards to G6 where there's no IC and no Sabbat weenies.
Last edit: 13 Jul 2011 20:26 by Haze.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 Jul 2011 05:29 #6272
by Mephistopheles
NC for Hungary
hunfragment.blogspot.com
Replied by Mephistopheles on topic Re: Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
I very much like the idea!!!
NC for Hungary
hunfragment.blogspot.com
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Mephistopheles
-
- Offline
- Methuselah
-
Less
More
- Posts: 266
- Thank you received: 38
14 Jul 2011 06:19 #6274
by Juggernaut1981




Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418
Replied by Juggernaut1981 on topic Re: Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
I don't have a problem with it, but honestly I think it would be about as useful as a waterproof teabag. So if you want, go for gold.





Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Juggernaut1981
-
- Offline
- Antediluvian
-
Less
More
- Posts: 2376
- Thank you received: 326
14 Jul 2011 06:31 #6275
by Cyrus
Replied by Cyrus on topic Re: Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?
As several pointed out above, there might not be a lot of use in doing it. And without a clear use, I would say no, as all rule changes are cumbersome.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.098 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Expansion Sets & Card Ideas
- Grouping rule- wrap around grouping?