Submission: Claws of Living Stone
17 Apr 2016 17:01 - 17 Apr 2016 17:02 #76482
by Ankha
What was the point you tried to demonstrate? I would never play Thoughts Betrayed nor Drain Essence in a Tremere combat deck. I would never play Blood Sweat in an Assamite combat deck. The Gargoyle package seems more viable, but only in a Tupdog deck (which is basically the only viable Gargoyle deck left) and they cycle easily.
Replied by Ankha on topic Submission: Claws of Living Stone
I don't understand what these combat modules are supposed to perform (send a vampire to torpor?) neither how they are comparable.Ps. lets show the combinations rather than addressing them one by one.
Tremere
[/i]Thoughts Betrayed + Theft of Vitae + Apportations + Drain Essence + Soul Burn[/i]
The 2 blood cost of TB might seem to costly for most people, but it lasts throughout the combat and with Apportation a Tremere has loads of maneuvers and presses. ToV and DE quickly gets you back the missing blood and a Soul Burn can finish the opponent off, add the occasional Rego Motus to mitigate aggravated ranged strikes from the opponent. Takes a lot of cards, causes the occasional hand jam, but pretty impressive combat and at the end of combat the vamp is full again.
Assamite
Sanguine Entrapment + Dam the Hearts River + Blood Sweat + Pursuit + Taste of Vitea[/b]
Again a pretty killer combination, toss in an occasional Sanguinary Wind to cancel dodges and you put vamps into torpor faster than Tremere's. Usually need only 1 Sanguine Entrapment per combat. Assamite do have to be weary about ranged aggravated strikes heading their way though.
Gargoyle
Raking Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce/Slam/Lead Fist + Brick by Brick + Taste of Vitae
Now this looks like you need the same amount of cards to get an equal combination going, except it fails against Fortitude. And since combat is also close range, the Gargoyle player needs to pack prevention cards. This combat package is simply weaker than the options for Tremere & Assamite.
The interesting point now is... If Tremere and Assamite have a better combat package than Gargoyles, why aren't they played that much? Answer: Because it takes too much and too many different cards. Trick: get guns, avoid strike cards. This was my idea of removing strike cards from Gargoyle combat. Could play Gargoyles with guns, well... yay another combat theme ruined.
Anyways, this was just 1 idea
What was the point you tried to demonstrate? I would never play Thoughts Betrayed nor Drain Essence in a Tremere combat deck. I would never play Blood Sweat in an Assamite combat deck. The Gargoyle package seems more viable, but only in a Tupdog deck (which is basically the only viable Gargoyle deck left) and they cycle easily.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 Apr 2016 18:23 #76498
by GreyB
Combat packages to send vampires to torpor in an unpreventable way (mostly) as a response to James. By no means reasoning to justify the card design.
That the option is there for those clans and equal in terms of cards it takes to do so, as a response to James. By no means reasoning to justify the card design.
It was more about card availability than what people actually play, I believe I made a remark about that.
Though it seems to me that TB is an rather underrated card imo. It's way more powerful than IG, but yeah, it costs 2 blood (Easily fixed with Ankhara, Taste of Vitae or Steal Blood cards). The cost also puts me off, but every time I played with them, I never regretted it, off course I never put more than 4 copies in a deck.
I did try Blood Sweat decks a couple of times, but yeah, your deck at 90 cards is too small for Blood Sweat combat.
I finally managed to put a tupdog deck together, a lot of fun to play, but quite hard to play well and easily destroyed by grinder decks and a few other cards are deadly against them. I prefer the other gargoyles though, feels way more progressive. With tupdogs you basically start your round 3 each and every turn.
But yeah, I have to take tupdogs into account, add clauses to card ideas that exclude tupdogs. Tupdogs certainly are not my target for improvement concerning Gargoyles. People tend to have a fit, start foaming at the mouth, when a card idea pops up on the forum that empowers tupdogs...
-1 Strength
Replied by GreyB on topic Submission: Claws of Living Stone
I don't understand what these combat modules are supposed to perform (send a vampire to torpor?) neither how they are comparable.
Combat packages to send vampires to torpor in an unpreventable way (mostly) as a response to James. By no means reasoning to justify the card design.
What was the point you tried to demonstrate?
That the option is there for those clans and equal in terms of cards it takes to do so, as a response to James. By no means reasoning to justify the card design.
I would never play Thoughts Betrayed nor Drain Essence in a Tremere combat deck. I would never play Blood Sweat in an Assamite combat deck. The Gargoyle package seems more viable, but only in a Tupdog deck (which is basically the only viable Gargoyle deck left) and they cycle easily.
It was more about card availability than what people actually play, I believe I made a remark about that.
Though it seems to me that TB is an rather underrated card imo. It's way more powerful than IG, but yeah, it costs 2 blood (Easily fixed with Ankhara, Taste of Vitae or Steal Blood cards). The cost also puts me off, but every time I played with them, I never regretted it, off course I never put more than 4 copies in a deck.
I did try Blood Sweat decks a couple of times, but yeah, your deck at 90 cards is too small for Blood Sweat combat.
I finally managed to put a tupdog deck together, a lot of fun to play, but quite hard to play well and easily destroyed by grinder decks and a few other cards are deadly against them. I prefer the other gargoyles though, feels way more progressive. With tupdogs you basically start your round 3 each and every turn.
But yeah, I have to take tupdogs into account, add clauses to card ideas that exclude tupdogs. Tupdogs certainly are not my target for improvement concerning Gargoyles. People tend to have a fit, start foaming at the mouth, when a card idea pops up on the forum that empowers tupdogs...
-1 Strength
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 Apr 2016 22:14 #76505
by GreyB
I am quite ambivalent towards banning tupdogs. Yes, it makes card ideas for Gargoyles hard, but it's really a breath of fresh air to occasionally see weenie gargoyles wreak havoc amongst well established painful tier 1 decks and like other tier 1 decks, it's no sure win by a long shot. To me tupdogs are no worse than a montano purge deck or maris/unmada/lutz deck or other painful tier 1 decks, it's just different, one of the last options to play pure combat as a strategy.
Designing cards not to work for tupdogs is easy though, add one of the following clauses:
- Requires a vampire of at least capacity 4.
- Can only be played by an independent Gargoyle.
Predominantly, I am simply against banning cards because they work well using a strategy that most tier 1 deck players dislike. There are plenty ways to stop Tupdogs, so dislike is the only reason to ban them, not balance (though the anti combat crowd will disagree) nor rule difficulties. I'd rather go the extra mile and design cards that don't work for them.
I recently played against a Montano Purge deck and he had the vote lock. Result, freak drive diableries and the occasional grave robbing cleared the table for him. I'd take on tupdogs any day, at least table aggro works against them. They really are less painful to play against than other tier 1 decks... but then again, I'm not a player that relies on 10-20 combat ends cards...
We'll see what happens, all I can do is think up card ideas
-1 Strength
Replied by GreyB on topic Submission: Claws of Living Stone
At the moment, it's hard to even think about giving new cards to Gargoyles because of how it might help Tupdogs. Only cards with specific restrictions will avoid helping the dreaded Tupdog deck, and the more restrictions you put on a card, the less likely it will ever be played (see all Anarch/Black Hand cards). Honestly, I think the very best move that the VEKN could make is to ban Tupdogs so that the design team can dream big without throwing a bunch of restrictions on every gargoyle card they make.
I am quite ambivalent towards banning tupdogs. Yes, it makes card ideas for Gargoyles hard, but it's really a breath of fresh air to occasionally see weenie gargoyles wreak havoc amongst well established painful tier 1 decks and like other tier 1 decks, it's no sure win by a long shot. To me tupdogs are no worse than a montano purge deck or maris/unmada/lutz deck or other painful tier 1 decks, it's just different, one of the last options to play pure combat as a strategy.
Designing cards not to work for tupdogs is easy though, add one of the following clauses:
- Requires a vampire of at least capacity 4.
- Can only be played by an independent Gargoyle.
Predominantly, I am simply against banning cards because they work well using a strategy that most tier 1 deck players dislike. There are plenty ways to stop Tupdogs, so dislike is the only reason to ban them, not balance (though the anti combat crowd will disagree) nor rule difficulties. I'd rather go the extra mile and design cards that don't work for them.
I recently played against a Montano Purge deck and he had the vote lock. Result, freak drive diableries and the occasional grave robbing cleared the table for him. I'd take on tupdogs any day, at least table aggro works against them. They really are less painful to play against than other tier 1 decks... but then again, I'm not a player that relies on 10-20 combat ends cards...
We'll see what happens, all I can do is think up card ideas
-1 Strength
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.115 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Expansion Sets & Card Ideas
- Submission: Claws of Living Stone