New vampire: Lord Leopold Valemar, Lasombra Priscus
Obtenebration might not be as good in stealth as Obfuscate, but it is good enough, you don't need 20 different ways to get +1 stealth to have sufficient stealth, like hell I don't even use all of the different obt stealth cards usually, Shadow Play, Shroud of Absence, and Shroud of Night are enough, together with Elysian Fields, and bondings if I am playing bleed focused deck. And shadow play is the only one of those that costs blood.
I guess that was already addressed previously.
Klaital wrote: You don't need to be 'best' at things to win tables, or even tournaments, like hell, my first TWDA was with an Akunanse multi rush deck with no counter to s:ce, and in the finals my prey was a shadow court satyrs with earth meld deck.
I get you. Lasombra are super cool, and with some niches unique. They are also powerful. Much of that is thanks to Under Siege as well, as it gives them something similar that prince crypts already have.
That said, it can't be denied that making clans and disciplines actually unique instead of just doing the same thing with slightly different numbers should be a goal. Lasombra do suffer from the Dominate syndrome a bit. Their crypts and a few unique cards like Nocturn set them apart, but it's practically a stealth clan with dominate and votes.
Nothing new under the moon. That much I'm willing to give to DJHedgehog. Even if the arguments are exaggerated.
When designing next cards to supplement Lasombra or Obtenebration, I'd for sure love to see something unique done with them. I guess that was the point. Saying Obt is 'bad' is stretching it, I think. It's not. It gets the job done and has a few tricks. But I wouldn't mind having something wholly unique in there to set it apart from Obfuscate more. Chimestry for sure accomplishes that, as do all Independent clan disciplines.
Things like Shadow Twin and Shadowed Eyes are cute but won't cut it because of their power level.
BTW, saying Black Metamorphosis sucks is psssft. I guess it's been unoptimal because Lasombra have lacked combat abilities. But oh em gee Valdemar has the sh*t to get BM done!
"Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!"
Facebook @ VtES: Joensuu
DJHedgehog wrote: But the discipline isn't functionally good.
It fulfills its function, which is providing a meaningful amount of delivery system at a reasonable cost, along with a useful number of toolbox effects. I don't understand the basis of your argument that it's not functional, because like I mentioned before, we have evidence that it is - it's not exactly an uncommon discipline to see in the TWDA, and decks that have access to it usually use it.
You've argued that both OBT and CHI suck, so I gotta ask - what disciplines do you think are functional stealth disciplines?
DJHedgehog wrote: Ultimately obtenebration, and Lasombra as a whole, don't add anything to the game except fluff. They replicate existing strategies and do them worse.
Much like my comment about which disciplines your logic would describe as good, this would leave, what, four clans in the game that "add something to the game"?
The reductiveness of your attitude toward "if it's not the best, it's worthless" isn't useful here, either.
DJHedgehog wrote: This whole "granularity in a complex system" argument may sound elegant, but it's a smoke screen. The system is relatively simple: manage your resources and remove the resources of your opponent while trying to manage the table to earn a table win. Obetenebration doesn't provide a different strategy in managing your resources (unless your strategy is to spend more to get less), in taking away opponent's resources, defending your resources, or in managing the table.
The system I referred to is the relative balance of disciplines' power levels, not the basic objective of the game.
Kushiel wrote: The system I referred to is the relative balance of disciplines' power levels, not the basic objective of the game.
Then you're wrong about two things.
Almost all of the non-core disciplines aren't good. Quitus, Serpentis, Obtenebration, Chimerstry, Necromancy, Viscissitude. These all fill niche or combat rolls that 1. don't lead to victory 2. don't necessarily need to exist. I'm not saying these decks can't win, but they win in spite of these disciplines, not because of them.
Lasombra win? Was it obtenebrate or dominate that won?
Giovanni win? Was it necromancy or dominate and the diary that won?
Tzimice win? Was it viscissitude or Animalism/Auspex that won?
Setite win was certainly stealth bleed or vote.
Assamite win? Lol good luck.
For every one deck you find with obtenebrate on the TWDA, you'll find 10 with dominate, 10 that abuse masterphase actions, 10 that abuse allies. Yes this is hyperbole but I think you understand the jist.
I agree that each of these has a "toolbox" feel but they pay for their lack of focus with increased blood cost and decreased functionality.
Look, I'm a tryhard MTG. I come from playing 2-player competitive games and my views of cards come from that scope. Yes, I understand that VTES is different and the 5 player aspect means random shit happens. That being said, I guarantee that the more focused deck with the most optimal cards will get game wins more often.
A blind squirrel will find a nut from time to time. Sub-optimal decks will win on occasion. That's not a reason to prop them up and say "This is working as intended". Ultimately, nothing in chimerstry can compete with a stealth bleed of 6. That's the lens you have to look at this through from a design perspective when you want to compete instead of playing things you enjoy from a fluff angle.
I personally think the power level of the "bad" disciplines is perfect for the game, but the existence of the stronger disciplines makes them obsolete from a purely competitive mindset.
DJHedgehog wrote: Almost all of the non-core disciplines aren't good. Quitus, Serpentis, Obtenebration, Chimerstry, Necromancy, Viscissitude.
Not sure how you came up with this list... but you are wrong.
I will also go farther and say that one of the most vicious decks that I have is a weenie combat deck that doesn't use a single card that requires a discipline. I have swept multiple games in tournaments and casual with this deck.
In fact, I would argue (and have decks as reference) that say both mono Necromancy and mono Vicissitude decks are totally viable. I don't generally play Quietus or Chimerstry (others in my play group do...) but I never left a game thinking they were worthless. Are there sub-optimal cards? Yes, though I would argue that is the case with disciplines that you feel are "core" as well.
Note: I am the only one in my play group that plays Serpentus normally and the key card in that deck is Spell of Life. The other notable actions are Temptation and Form of Corruption. If you have never witnessed the power of these cards... then you have missed out.
DJHedgehog wrote: Almost all of the non-core disciplines aren't good.
You didn't answer last time, when I asked this question vis a vis stealth disciplines, but I'll try again: Do you believe that there's a middle ground of disciplines that are good enough to be a benefit to a deck, without being the best? Or do you believe that there are only two categories, "best" and "bad"?
DJHedgehog wrote: Assamite win? Lol good luck.
DJHedgehog wrote: For every one deck you find with obtenebrate on the TWDA, you'll find 10 with dominate, 10 that abuse masterphase actions, 10 that abuse allies. Yes this is hyperbole but I think you understand the jist.
I do. And I agree with you that Dominate is overpowered. What I don't agree with is the notion that any discipline less powerful than DOM/AUS/PRE/OBF is bad.
DJHedgehog wrote: Yes, I understand that VTES is different and the 5 player aspect means random shit happens. That being said, I guarantee that the more focused deck with the most optimal cards will get game wins more often.
A blind squirrel will find a nut from time to time. Sub-optimal decks will win on occasion.
And yet, there are sooooooo very, very many decks in the TWDA that don't fit your criteria. Am I understanding you correctly, that you think that every single one of them is this kind of fluke, and that all of the people playing them would've been better off playing Malk stealth/bleed or inner circle vote, and still would've won those tournaments if they'd done so?
DJHedgehog wrote: Ultimately, nothing in chimerstry can compete with a stealth bleed of 6
I've never seen anyone oust their prey by redirecting a Sensory Deprivation to them.
DJHedgehog wrote: That's the lens you have to look at this through from a design perspective when you want to compete instead of playing things you enjoy from a fluff angle.
I'm trying to envisage Peal or Keeney approaching some of the goofy-ass shit they've won tournaments with because they liked the fluff angle, and...I just can't get there.