Missing from the Future poll: relaunch

I guess my question for many of you is how many cards need to be compatible for you to feel like VTES is still the same game? 100%? If so, then I agree that the idea of a relaunch is not what you want. But >50% playable? Well, now we have a lot of room for changes while effectively keeping the same game. Would current players be content with a version of VTES whose rules had been changed enough that some of their collection was banned if it meant that the game as a whole was improved and became open to more new players?

It would be easier to put a number by going through sets, but, just guessing, I'm looking for maybe 25% of my collection being legal in an overhaul, at least for some significant amount of time.

No bloodlines, no Laibon, no Imbued, no events, no Red List/Trophy, no BH, no promos, culling a bunch of cards for various reasons - complexity, uselessness, overuse, way they break general rules.

Over time, may add back in cards that would increase the usability of my collection.

But1, before getting into why, let me address a different game. See, the problem is not that I wouldn't play a different game, but that a different game is ... uh ... a different game. What's the relevance to V:TES? If you are going to steal mechanics from V:TES, then how are you making a different game? At that point, aren't you just fixing some things with V:TES? If you aren't taking mechanics from the game, then, sure, you can try to sell Mages v. Rage v. Changeling v. Mummy v. Vampires v. Other as a game, but, when I'm playing that game (or if I'm playing that game), I don't see how I can say I'm playing V:TES anymore.

But2, why such a low percentage?

Because I'd rather have a vibrant game than a game where someone plays every six months because that's the only regularity they can get a few other people to show up for. New players are the lifeblood of Magic - Magic and V:TES are different in that any multiplayer oriented CCG (V:TES, Babylon 5, Shadowfist, whatever) has greater similarities to boardgames and can be played by a tiny cadre of people in isolation forever as if they were playing Dominion or Descent - but, the most important thing is having a larger player base and that comes from constantly gaining new player not hoping your existing players stop aging.

Complexity, long play times, esoteric plays all make it harder to get masses of new players.

Second, I've had some games in the last year that are very reminiscent of my old, Jyhad or Jyhad+Sabbat days. I'm not going to argue that every game is better back in the 20th century. I would say the flow of these games felt exciting. Exciting is not a world I would attribute to V:TES from pretty much Camarilla Edition forward. Felt more like people were doing the same sort of things, for the obvious reason that there were less other things to do "I'm going to out of turn Shatter the Gate ..."

While there are plenty of good changes over the years - the game is likely far better balanced than it used to be, combat has a more interesting role than it used to, etc. - I think the bloating of the game has also seen a loss of what people enjoyed about Jyhad. It's not just elegance, which always gets decreased when you expand games, but pacing and the ability to comprehend what's actually going on and even such things as interaction when you consider how a Camarilla only environment sees a lot more titled vampires casually in play.

What complexity needs to be removed/reduced?

Would you be more happy with a number comparison combat like MtG?
Would you be more happy with removal of titles and each vamp having 1 vote?

**Insert Shameless Plug Here**

I did so something like that. I can see rebuild being a viable option. For my point of view, the rebuild would more be about ensuring that a future VtES-style game stays right out of IP that could be held by Hasbro (or at least Hasbro has enough possible claim to make a long and painful court case over the IP).

vekn.net/forum/expansion-sets-card-ideas/74276-vampire-the-card-game-a-rebuild

Players and indeed new players are the life of the game. I don't think that this point requires any further elaboration. Accepting this as a true-ism then what is the point of relauching or creating a new incompatible game?

The successful launch of a new game would need, in addition to being a good game, external stakeholder support. Generally, this is profit motive (think all those card shops selling MtG cards. Each of those independent card shops has a motive for recruiting new MtG players. WotC/Hasbro has another role to play in that dynamic, but is motivated by profit). Without a major network, a successful relaunch would remote. The only possibility would be that the new game would be so compellingly better that existing VtES players would instantly adopt it. It would also have to be free or nearly free because the existing VtES community is pretty happy with the current state of the game and a great deal of inertia would have to be overcome. I think the responses provided by Ylly, GregyB, Brum, and many others that voted in the poll speak to this.

A case could be made for VtES getting a major publishing house to resurrect the game, it happened before, but currently such a scenario at this point seems remote. Much work has already been done on this front and no success to speak of as of yet.

So, where VtES exists is likely where it shall remain; as a community led effort. Thus, it should be instructive to look at and learn from others in this same situation, namely Star Trek CCG and Star Wars CCG. Each of these card games continue to exist, but neither of them underwent a major and fundamental upheaval while in the state of a community led effort. Indeed I can only think of two CCGs that have ever been relaunched, Netrunner and Star Trek, but both of those CCGs had a corporation and profit motive behind them at the time of relaunch.

Permit me to venture a bit off topic now and discuss tenant of my arguement that players are the utmost importance to the game. What can be done to get more players into the game? The easiest would be to make and release a new base set (or reprint one or all of those sets). 3rd ed, SE, SW, VtES, Jyhad, CE, KoT, etc. are all but impossible for new would-be players to easily obtain. There is a clear need to put useful cards into the hands of new players. After all who wants to deck build using someone else's cards on someone else's schedule? There are efforts to get cards into the hands of new players Preston's Barbed Wire project as well as the countless other that donate excess cards to a play group pool, but these will never generate the wealth of cards that are really needed. Unless the community would like to see "Lost in a Mass of People" card released in an upcoming internet expansion, I think that the answer will be what it has always been; reprint important base cards. (Why reinvent the wheel?). I realize that the community had some strong opinions about proxies, but closing access to major tournaments for proxies will only hinder the recruitment of new players to the game.

Venturing a bit off topic a bit more, should there ever be a commercial game again, it might be wise to maintain a sales structure similar to how the free game is released, or indeed how BSC and 10th were released. Namely that for new core sets vampires and new cards could be sold as a mega pack and then the reprints would be sold as another pack. This would eliminate the needless amassing of 100 copies of torn signpost. The smaller releases could still be in the traditional booster packs.

finbury wrote:

Looking at the poll about the future of VtES, I was disappointed to see that "incompatible overhaul" is not an option. My view is that a reboot a la Netrunner is the best option for the future of the game.

You mean this option of the poll?
"A new card game based on Vampire: the Masquerade, with a whole new card base, incompatible with V:TES."

But there are flaws too:
- slow games, especially the start

I want to point out, that I specifically like the slower multiplayer-type game in the same vein as magic the gatherings 'commander' format. That, along with the WoD lore and setting that I love was the reason I started playing. I wanted a game that I challenged me as a player and a deckbuilder, but also allowed me to spend an evening playing it in good company with a drink in hand, with all players in the same game. Rather than fast and competitive 2-player game.

- needlessly baroque rules (transfers, combat rules, etc) and poor terminology / templating / timing
- existing card pool is a minefield of cards printed as a reaction to other cards, as a reaction to other cards, etc.
- bad balance between disciplines.
- bad balance between strategies; politics / bleed / combat isn't a real rock-paper-scissors

Oh definitely. I'm somewhat in favor of a reboot as well, as long as the core type of the game would stay the same and flavor was not lost.

Sure, that means our collections will be worthless. That sucks. But if the game dies - which I believe it will without this kind of reinvention - they'll be worthless anyway. And what do we love more, the game or our cards?

Tempora mutantur. Times change. I agree that we shouldn't be worried about rebooting the game. White wolf should think about potential new players rather than the select few who have stuck with the game this far.

Also: FFG's cardgame Game of thrones recently did a similar reboot after 13 or so years, needlessly complex rules, masses of cards and an anthill of a card pool. The reboot seems to have taken off nicely.

ICL wrote:

I
No bloodlines, no Laibon, no Imbued, no events, no Red List/Trophy, no BH, no promos, culling a bunch of cards for various reasons - complexity, uselessness, overuse, way they break general rules.

No bloodlines? I want to keep playing my Baali! Greater curse!

All of those things will probably happen anyway over time in any given card game because developers will continue pushing the envelope and come with something new and exciting; so players will continue buying their product.