[Submission] Advanced Agaitas and two low-cap HoSk

Submitting as a different thread so any discussion doesn't get too confusing (first set of HoSk submissions ).

Interesting facts: there's supposed to be about 50 HoSk ( White Wolf Wiki ) but none of them have embraced since returning to the Skinlands.

Pure speculation about the lack of embraces, but a few guesses:

1. not bothered, got a project to destroy the Giovanni and the Camarilla instead,
2. reforming their bodies in the Skinlands somehow rendered them sterile
3. the embraces become Samedi instead.

(Incidentally, the third possible explanation is why the first three submissions had Thanatosis).

Agaitas,The Scholar of Antiquities - Advanced v1
Clan: Harbinger of Skulls
Level: Advanced
Group: 2 [assuming has to always be the same group?]
Capacity: 6
Disciplines: AUS FOR NEC

Sabbat.Younger non-Sabbat vampires get -1 intercept when attempting to block Agaitas.

Black Hand. May enter combat with any minion as a D action.

Art notes: Does it need new art if the basic already exists? Otherwise keen to get the 'shark eyes' mentioned in his WW Wiki entry (any way to communicate the cold aura?).

World of Darkness reference: WW Genealogy , White Wolf Wiki entry on him . Merged rush ability because he is the HoSk enforcer. Black Hand membership is not from the source, but I think it makes sense for the character if his role is to be a clan enforcer.

How does this card address a compelling game need?: Need for more HoS; allows greater Samedi/HoS mixed decks.

Created by:
Chris Nelson


Dr. Ishaq ibn Khayrat - v1
Clan: Harbinger of Skulls
Level: Basic
Group: 3
Capacity: 5
Disciplines: aus FOR NEC

Sabbat. Rescuing a vampire from torpor costs Ishaq 1 less blood.

Art notes: Gaunt even by HoSk standards, bespectacled and wearing a doctors uniform (with the cap and mask like a surgeon).

World of Darkness reference: WW Genealogy .

How does this card address a compelling game need?: Need for more HoS; allows greater Samedi/HoS mixed decks.

Created by:
Chris Nelson


Serena - v1
Clan: Harbinger of Skulls
Level: Basic
Group: 3
Capacity: 4
Disciplines: for NEC

Sabbat. Damaging strikes made by Serena that require Necromancy inflict +1 damage.

Art notes: No source description. I sort of have the idea of a very calm-looking woman (dress and mask style being the only indicator) wearing a large masquerade mask.

World of Darkness reference: WW Genealogy .

How does this card address a compelling game need?: Need for more HoSk; need for more lower cap HoSk; allows greater Samedi/HoS mixed decks.

Created by:
Chris Nelson.

Two new equipments to follow later today and I'm done....

Advanced versions need not be the same group, but they do need to be only +1 or -1 group.

Previously, advanced vampires were of the same group as the original, but there is no need for this.

Making advanced vampires of different groups could be used to expand one group of vampires, while limiting the expansion of another group.

I.E.
Dr. Douglas Netchurch is group 3.

Lets say that there is a need of an advanced version. I would propose a couple options:

Dr. Douglas Netchurch, advanced
Group 2

Anarch. Retainers cost Netchurch 1 less blood or pool.
Camarilla vampires have -1 intercept while Dr. Netchurch is acting.

Dr. Douglas Netchurch, advanced
Group 4

Camarilla. When Netchurch successfully employs or recruits a ghoul, he gains 1 blood and untaps.
You may tap Dr. Netchurch to give a ghoul ally +1 bleed.

Both versions fit within the character of Dr. Douglas Netchurch, and both are viable advanced versions of the character. In theory, we could have both advanced versions of the vampire. The group 2 version might be useful for making group 1 and 2 more anarch friendly. The group 4 version would be more useful for an ally-centric deck.

In either case, you would be tied to group 3 if you are looking to take advantage of the merged ability. But, independent of the merged ability, you could use the group 2 version with group 1, or the group 4 version with group 5.

In a story-line sense, having two different advanced versions of a vampire represents more than one plot twists in the storytelling of V:tES. Each game of Vampire: the Eternal Struggle is a story expressed by the players. Time and time again we see the same vampires, but each different deck offers a different narrative for that vampire. Why not embrace this concept and offer different versions of vampires that progress their story in more than one direction?

Dr. Netchurch as an example is a compromise for group 1 Malkavians with Dominate and group 3+ Malkavians with Dementation. Maybe a group 2 advanced version should have superior Dominate and a group 4 advanced version should have superior

Design team take note: the only restrictions are the ones you set for yourself.

direwolf wrote:

Advanced versions need not be the same group, but they do need to be only +1 or -1 group.

I remember - but can't find - a discussion about this at some point in the past. Maybe it was on the WW forums, or my Google-fu is failing me.

The short version was that technically, advanced vampires could be different groups (as you say), but LSJ's design was for them to be the same group. Designs can, of course, be changed, but it's worth doing so consciously rather than accidentally.

The thing to watch out for if you put an Advanced vampire into a neighbouring group is that you slowly ratchet up the number of vampires in different group pairs. Roughly speaking, the settlement we have now is that we appear to aim for roughly 20-25 vampires in a group pair for a "proper" clan, roughly 7-9 for a bloodline, and roughly 2-4 for a scarce bloodline. These aren't hard and fast numbers, and it's perfectly reasonable to tweak them in some circumstances (e.g. the Gangrel antitribu's weirdo split clan annoyances), and to a fair extent, advanced vampires don't count against these numbers because of the fact that they're not an entirely separate vampire - you can't play Arika and Arika-ADV as two separate vampires together.

Shoving a vampire from group 2 as an advanced vampire into group 3 will often have no impact a group 2-3 deck - it simply doesn't care which group the vampire is in, unless it wanted to be more a group 1-2 deck. But this does have a meaningful impact on a group 3-4 deck, which now has a whole new vampire it didn't before. So, do you:

- reduce the number of vampires in the next group pair by one, to account for this vampire (keeping the numbers roughly the same)? This is fine, but it may also mean the next group pair may be slightly less exciting than it could be, because one of the vampires is offering many of the same options that were already available. Even if you change things about quite a bit (e.g. a vampire gains a new sect and a title and a special ability), usually the disciplines will be very similar so it's harder to play around with new combos.

- allow the size of the group pairings to creep up a bit, which potentially ratchets up the power of the clan a fair bit. This might be fine, but it's probably something you want to do consciously. For example, any extra Daughters being available in such a way makes a number of their clan/discipline cards potentially quite a bit more tasty, and a few bloodlines disciplines have some potentially tasty tech stuffed in them that would be a lot more powerful with a wider selection of vampires to take into your crypt. (Thanatosis, not so much.)

@james

I wasn't suggesting that you add vampires to groups haphazardly. Thank you for the detailed thoughtful post regarding the issues of adding vamps to the game (not just advanced versions).

While "clan strength" is an issue (defining the term is a thread in and of itself) I think the bigger concern is discipline spread and vampire discipline efficiency.

With Sabbat and Cam in different groups, you will find building two or three discipline decks give you many more vampire choices for clans that have an antitrubue. Without grouping this would be exacerbated to the point of being able to build pretty much any two or three discipline decks with a solid set of super efficient vampires. Same goes for titles and voting.

It's tied to the clan strength issue but that's because of clan disciplines. The clan only cards can be used with any group of vampires. As far as crypt cards go, clan strength is affected by disciplines and special card text (with capacity determining efficiency and overall vamp strength)