Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (
More info?)
James Coupe wrote:
> In message <1108336106.913489.315360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> Ector <Ector@mail.ru> writes:
> >Michael Luther is currently so overpowered that anyone can easily
call
> >him broken:
>
> A word of advice. Given how people have reacted to your other
> protestations of doom, gloom and how things are, when you are tempted
to
> post "<X> is broken", I would suggest writing a post which is,
instead,
> called "I'm having trouble with <X>. Any help?" And then write an
> appropriate post for that title.
>
> Asking for, and critically engaging with, assistance is likely to get
> you far more respect and useful responses. Then, if you find that
there
> is no useful advice, move on to issues of overpowered or broken.
I really appreciate your attitude. And I really know that I shouldn't
even try to do LSJ's job
But I really don't see anything especially
bad right now; moreover, I win in any case - if people convince me that
I'm wrong, I'll get precious knowledge, if not, the game may become
better.
And I really don't see any point of "I'm having trouble with Michael
Luther" topic. Yes, I know that I can tap him, and I can convince a
Rush deck to kill him, etc. etc.
But I really wonder, why the 4-cap is so overpowered that I should use
special card module against him? And I really can't find any answer.
> Why weren't you including other sources of vote in your deck? Vote
> cancellation isn't unheard of. Other people also voting isn't
unheard
> of. With a Vox Senis on a table, say, that and the odd political
card
> is enough to cramp your style early on. Having other methods of vote
> push is useful++.
Well, I lied (just tried to make things clear but shame on my head
nevertheless...) My deck wasn't a "regular" voting deck, it was a
DOM/OBF S&B deck with a voting module. So, I almost never have a second
voting card in my hand, and I have no Bewitching Orations. But I
usually have at least 6 permanent votes (or even 8), plus one from the
PA card and plus one for the Edge, if necessary, so I generally can
push my referendums... but Michael Luther really destroys my voting.
> >Playing a voting deck, I couldn't get rid of him, and even if
> >I'd manage to torporize him, this wouldn't change much, as he can
use
> >his ability even in torpor!
>
> Erm, with 8 votes, you're probably going to survive a Blood Hunt. So
> you get him into torpor and then diablerise him.
If I only could torporize him... Yes, I know that I should convince a
Rush deck to do this for me, but this isn't always possible.
> Additionally, playing a voting deck doesn't mean you *only* have to
> include votes! It's perfectly acceptable, indeed sensible, to
include
> (say) pool gain which you use for a Sub Machine Gun, or capitalise on
> your buffer of pool with a tasty ally, or whatever. If there's one
> thing a Camarilla vote deck should be able to do well, it's gain
pool.
> Not only have you got good Presence, you've got good mono-clan
options
> (should you choose) for Consanguineous Boon and, with two Princes,
you
> have one of the best cards in the game - Parity Shift.
As I said, my deck was primary S&B, with Arika, Gilbert Duane and
Greger Anderssen. It has Parity Shifts, as well as few PTOs, some
Banishments, Disputed Territory and Reins of Power. Consangineous boons
aren't especially good for me, as my vampires belong to different
clans, and Presence is a problem. Nevertheless, without Luther I
usually can play most of my political actions.
> If the options above don't appeal for spending your pool, what clan
are
> you playing? Ventrue? Well then, let's drag out a Hostile Takeover.
> You can afford the pool - you're *planning* for it. How much pool
are
> they willing to spend to keep him? You should be either able to
extort
> pool or steal him. A good result both ways.
What a GREAT advice!!! I will look for this card.
> Not playing Ventrue? What are your Justicar options like?
Temptation
> of Greater Power. This is not the game destroying card it once was,
> culling soul of vampires everywhere. But if you have the opportunity
to
> include it in a deck with pool gain, it's a significantly strong
card.
Again, I'll try to find it, though it would be very painful to play it
for a 4-cap vampire.
>
> Don't like the above? 5 of the Inner Circle have Presence. Leandro,
> Alexandra, Gwendolyn and Arika have PRE, Harrod has pre. The others
are
> Nosferatu (Harrod) and Tremere (Etrius). Yes, you could be including
> either of them in an unconventional vote-y deck. But you have 5
options
> with PRE/pre. And your other vampires may well have Presence too.
Want
> a good card? Mind Numb. Tap them now AND next turn.
Unfortunately, only Arika can play it in my deck, and wasting her
action for it isn't good enough.
> Want another option? Even if you don't have Presence? That old
Jyhad
> stalwart, Misdirection. Tap 1 vampire, 1 pool. And you can generate
> the pool. Hell, just play Bribes. You don't even have to win the
vote,
> you get a pool!
Tap him for a one turn for a pool and master phase action? Seems not
very good to me. Unfortunately, Bribes aren't suitable to my deck, as I
don't have a lot of politics.
> Are these specific defences against a single vampire? No. Vote
push,
> pool gain and/or secondary threads to your deck (allies, equipment,
> theft of vampires, whatever) are generally useful. Methods of
tapping
> vampires are generally useful. Want to get a bleed through? Tap the
> vampire first. Worried about Delaying Tactics? Tap the vampire
first.
> At least that way they waste a Wake too (if they have one)
Well, I can bleed at stealth even without tapping them
Anyway, I
cannot play Mind Numb, and Misdirection is too expensive for a one-turn
solution.
> The vote deck, of course, has the option of Banishment. Not so great
on
> a small vampire, but if you could (as you suggested) get him in
torpor,
> he was losing blood. You call a vote and send him to torpor. Do I
> bring him back out? That's another pool, or two, or three. Sure,
you
> probably wouldn't include it just for him - which is good - but if
the
> opportunity comes up, it's worth considering. And if you're playing
an
> Inner Circle vote deck, Banishment is always on your "consider" list.
> You're playing big vampires and have lots of votes. These things
work
> *well*.
Oh, I really like Banishment, and I have them. But Michael is almost
always full, so even if I manage to Banish him, he will return on the
next turn.
>
>
> >If this isn't enough to call him broken, let's check his point cost.
> >Normal 4-cap vampire should have 3 points... so, BOTH his abilities
> >cost just ONE point? It's too generous for a small vampire.
>
> "Tap to" for any ability is a big cost. He can't act. If his
> Methuselah is calling votes, he's paying four pool to cancel your
votes,
> and not acting with it. A good use of pool? Well, maybe.
> Questionable. Why not just include some free vote push instead?
Sure,
> it might work out well this way, but...
Well, what would be the fair price for a LOCATION that could tap to
change votes of a Camarilla vampire? At least 2 pool, IMHO. Now add two
disciplines, ability to hunt, bleed, resque, block, etc. etc. and "draw
card in combat" ability.. I simply can't understand how all this
combined can cost 4 pool.
And Michael Luther CAN act, if you don't need his ability. This may
easily happen if you with your allies have more votes or if nobody
plays Camarilla. "Free vote push" can appear in your hand when you
don't need it and disappear when needed, and your Luther is always with
you. Moreover, what prevents you from using BOTH Luther and vote
pushing? At least this allows to play a lot of Voter Captivations.
> Is he using him to cancel your votes? Well, for a start, he doesn't
> know if you're going to be playing a vote deck, or with Camarilla
> vampires. That's a risk. Sure, he gets an okay vampire at the end
of
> it, but for 4 pool (if no-one else is playing a vote deck), he's
> probably underpowered.
The maximum risk is 1 pool for him, as Michael's disciplines alone are
worth 3 pool. He also has 4 blood (not 3) and an interesting combat
ability, so I'd say that you lose almost nothing even if nobody plays
Camarilla.
> Look at Mariel, for instance. In Jyhad, 7s got 7 points (pretty
much)
> and Mariel's ability is "tap to". It's a good ability, but it's
> expensive.
The difference is clear: an action of 7-cap vampire (that you lose to
tap Mariel) is much more expensive than an action of 4-cap weenie.
After all, Mariel's ability is defensive, and it alone won't allow you
to win. Michael's ability can be used to push your politics, so it's
much more powerful.
>
> Draw a card on entering combat isn't that great. It's good, but he's
> not that great a vampire to use it effectively - if it was on a
combat
> monster, say, it would be huge. With aus/pre, you don't generally
want
> combat. You probably want cel to make offensive combat a realistic
> possibility. So you're either bleeding (and defending) or blocking
(and
> defending). Oh look. Blocking taps you. Bleeding taps you.
Surely, THIS ability isn't great... but it still worth something. If
Luther's primary ability is useless, you may gain an advantage from the
second one. Play Presence skill card on him and play Majesty. Oh
look... combat ends AND UNTAP! Yes, I know this isn't very realistic,
but it can work.
> The two abilities aren't mutually exclusive - you could be rushed,
say -
> but it's hard to use both effectively. Even if you go for PRE, anti-
> S:CE tech is hardly unheard of (especially in your combat heavy
> playgroup, perhaps).
God thanks that it's hard to use both of the abilities! Luther is
broken enough even now.
> And if he *is* seriously good, anyone with resource manipulation
tactics
> could try and take him out. Banish him, rush him, whatever.
Vampires
> with good abilities have a "KILL ME NOW" sign lit above their head.
> Your deck doesn't have any way to manipulate vampires and only plays
> straightforward votes damage votes with a little pool gain and
nothing
> else? Too bad. Thankfully, there are other decks that can be done
> better.
Michael Luther is dangerous only for the voting decks (or in the voting
deck). He's not Jost Werner or Arika. Thus, a voting deck needs a
really good reason to make a Rush deck to rush him.
All that said: don't you think that my suggestion would make the game
better? After all, it's simply unrealistic to have a 4-cap vamp that is
able to regularly change the votes of IC members. How could he do that?
Yours,
Ector
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram