Pentex Subversion Poll #2 and Discussion

Why is this brought up?

We couldve curtailed Tablets ages ago by adding "minion" between 13 and cards on its face.

Pentex is a staple, yes, screws thngs, yes, designed to. If vtes as a 2 player game was a thing, pentex would be worse. But theres other problems than that.

Jeff, we arent in print, and may not be there like ever. So, id rather see erratta printed on self adhesive labels on existing cards than become "that shitty game where 68% of your deck is printer paper cards".
Pentex is good. It axhieves a goal. 1 per game per player seemed logical 2 years ago, but that seems less needed now not saying to make it stop abilities and cost less, but i still like it as is.

Edit: the FB conversation in mind,

Erratta it.

As Litwin suggested, burn it during untap stops some complaints.

As Johannes suggested, making it not stop both acting and blocking is viable

What it you had to choosexif they couldnt act or couldnt block?

What i feel is more importat:

Big caps and making them better:

I dont think big bleeds all around is the answer, but assigning things based upon discipline spread seems intelligent. All the fatties with big potence? Let them burn a blood for +2 strength. Aus? Let them burn a blood to get intercept against d actions. Dominate? +1 bleed for a blood. Fortitude? Bun a blood to prevent 3 damage. Obf? +2 stealth on a hunt or equip. Celerity? Blood for a dodge protean? Burn a blood to treat strike agg as normal. Obt? Sealth on any obt action. Tham? Steal on a tham action.

You get the idea. All once a turn, probably, but it helps them. If they cant multiact, they suck, but adding these is better than not. Or, we at LEAST print superior FOR symbol stickers and erratta g1 justicars.

Jeff wrote:

Generally speaking, errata to radically change a card is just plain bad design policy. Seriously. Ban the problem card and make a new one. I'm (not?) surprised that the VEKN Design Team is even considering anything else.

Where do you see that the VEKN Design Team is considering a change to Pentex Subversion?

KevinM wrote:

Jeff wrote:

Generally speaking, errata to radically change a card is just plain bad design policy. Seriously. Ban the problem card and make a new one. I'm (not?) surprised that the VEKN Design Team is even considering anything else.

Where do you see that the VEKN Design Team is considering a change to Pentex Subversion?

If memory serves, between EK and HttB Scott was kinda bugged to ban it. Wasnt needed, and now we still have bigger problems to address. Dont recall erratta being the plan though......

Still waiting for an answer from Jeff Kuta.......

It's already unique and it costs 2 pool. Leave it alone.
If you're running a star deck and can't handle losing that vampire, that's not Pentex's fault - you have a bad deck.

It sucks to lose in a final lunge to it, but there's an entire game that gets played before that last lunge. That's not Pentex's fault - you played badly.

If it gets played early, locks you down and allows a sweep - that's the table's fault for not removing it.

If your entire deck depends on ONE guy, that's your fault.
In my almost 20 years of playing, I have never seen a Pentex-off or someone who plays multiples to use on every player. Our meta hardly uses it at all because of the cost and table hate it usually creates.

No one has a problem with Sensory Deprivation or Seduction or block denial tech, I don't see why people have such a hate-on for Pentex Subversion. It's a single card, you can't really use it as a "deck concept". It's usually played as a final nail in the coffin or a hail Mary.