Bahari Vampires

etherial wrote:

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Well as I've mentioned in the past, it makes perfect sense for there two be two categories of weapons, based on their 'range of effectiveness'.

Can only cause damage/strike effectively at close range - Melee Weapon
Can cause damage/strike effectively at long range or close range - Ranged Weapon (i.e. Gun)

Sweet! I'd love to be able to use ammo cards with the Ivory Bow. Note that, in the case of Mr. Winthrop, Retainer/Ally subtype was added in Final Nights and they decided to ensure that all Retainers and Allies had a subtype.

That is not quite true, there are some retainers that don't have a type, such as Hatch the Viper.

Klaital wrote:

etherial wrote:

Retainer/Ally subtype was added in Final Nights and they decided to ensure that all Retainers and Allies had a subtype.

That is not quite true, there are some retainers that don't have a type, such as Hatch the Viper.

There are a few similar, weird-but-no-one-cares gaps for allies.

- Blood Brother Ambush
- Sonja Blue (when blocking as a typeless ally)

Maybe others.

RE: Melee Weapons you don't want using "strength" strikes.

There are a few options...
1) Fix the value of the strike. (e.g. Strike: deal 2 damage, combat cards played with the strike of this weapon cannot increase the damage of this strike)

2) Make it a non-damage-dealing strike, since they ignore the strength of the wielder (e.g. Rowan Ring or something like Strike: Burn 2 blood from the opposing minion, if they have they may use damage prevention to reduce the amount of blood burned by this strike. Or for your cattle-prod idea... Strike: Burn 2 blood or 3 life from an ally.)


Option 1) gets you the effects that could be caused by magic items or similar. Option 2) would get you around the idea of Tasers/Cattle Prods or other unusual weapons that would not be particularly affected by strength.


Yes, I wasn't suggesting that all ranged weapons are guns, but that Guns are obvious Ranged Weapons. Was just a brain explosion in the middle of a busy teaching day.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

1) Fix the value of the strike. (e.g. Strike: deal 2 damage, combat cards played with the strike of this weapon cannot increase the damage of this strike)

Why would I want to take up masses of card text with unnecessary garbage, when I can just not print the words "melee weapon" on it instead?

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

2) Make it a non-damage-dealing strike, since they ignore the strength of the wielder

It isn't based on the wielder's strength, therefore it isn't dealing damage?

Why the hell is a Blowtorch (Weapon, not melee weapon, 1 non-ranged agg damage per strike) now not doing damage, despite the fact that it's setting a vampire on fire?



How's about... we have effects that work on weapons that we want them to, we print a keyword on those weapons, and leave it off weapons that we don't want those effects to work with? This is simple, clean, and requires precisely zero changes to the game.

Sometime, trying to do better just overcomplicate everything. Juggernaut, your idea make me think of the rule in magic of "using an artefact tap it and it stop working once taped". It seemed simple and intuitive for the one who wrote it, and it quickly became a problematic point. Let's card be what is written on them and not try to infer that from what they do.

In the same idea, why not remove the sabbat trait from antitribu, because everone know that they are sabbat ? why not remove the flying trait from the gargoyle since they all fly ? I am sure there is an awful lot of keyword you could just guess from the card instead of it being printed.

(note that it's easy to imagine a short range gun that work only at close range, would be a gun, and would not be a melee weapon at all ; or a javelin that can be thrown or used at close range, if you believe that knife like Kerrie or dagger should not be ranged)