Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ)

Jozxyqk wrote:
> Fouez <fouez DeleteThis @aei.ca> wrote:
> > It looks like the new wording for Visit from the Capuchin changes the
> > way the card works so that it won't be possible to avoid the "do not
> > replace" clause of many Event cards anymore. Do I understand the new
> > wording correctly?
>
> > VftC is mainly (only?) used in Gehenna based decks and NoR opened new
> > horizons for those decks with the addition of the Imbued. Still, I
> > never saw those decks as a real threat to the game balance and I'm
> > curious to know the reason behind this drastic change.
>
>
> > Original wording (Final Nights):
> > Unique master. Put this card into play; put four counters on this card
> > from the blood bank. Your hand size is +X, where X is the number of
> > counters on this card. Each time you play or discard a card (except
> > when discarding down to your hand size), burn a counter from this card
> > (do not draw a replacement card). Burn this card when the last counter
> > is removed.
>
> > New wording (3rd Edition):
> > Put this card into play with 4 counters on it. You get +X hand size,
> > where X is the number of counters on this card. Each time you would
> > draw to replace a card (not counting the card to replace the Visit),
> > burn a counter from this card instead. Burn this card if it has no
> > counters.
>
>
> This new wording definitely changes something:
>
> With Current wording:
> I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it, and 11 cards in hand.
> I play Dragonbound and burn a counter.
> Now I have 3 counters on the Visit and 10 cards in hand; when
> the Visit is completed, I have 7 cards in hand.
>
> With New wording:
> I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it.
> I play Dragonbound and never burn a counter.
> Now I still have 4 counters on the Visit, but 10 cards in hand; when
> the Visit is completed, I'll have 6 cards in hand.
>
> But:
>
> With Current Wording:
> I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it, and 11 cards in hand.
> I play Wake with Evening's Freshness and burn a counter.
> Now I have 3 counters on the visit, 10 cards in hand. Final
> handsize will be 7.
>
> With New Wording:
> I have Visit in play, 4 counters, 11 cards.
> I play Wake with Evening's Freshness and do not burn a counter.
> During my untap phase, I burn a counter.
> 3 counters, 10 cards in hand. Final handsize will be 7.

Cool! Thanks, didn't get that, else i would definitely have tried to
abuse it...
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Jozxyqk wrote:
> Fouez <fouez DeleteThis @aei.ca> wrote:
> > It looks like the new wording for Visit from the Capuchin changes the
> > way the card works so that it won't be possible to avoid the "do not
> > replace" clause of many Event cards anymore. Do I understand the new
> > wording correctly?
>

<snip>

> This new wording definitely changes something:
>
> With Current wording:
> I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it, and 11 cards in hand.
> I play Dragonbound and burn a counter.
> Now I have 3 counters on the Visit and 10 cards in hand; when
> the Visit is completed, I have 7 cards in hand.
>
> With New wording:
> I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it.
> I play Dragonbound and never burn a counter.
> Now I still have 4 counters on the Visit, but 10 cards in hand; when
> the Visit is completed, I'll have 6 cards in hand.
>

I agree, it seems to have changed the way Visit interacts with DNR
Events.

So since this language seems to have nerfed the most common usage of
Visit, is there some other usage that's now enabled by the new
language? Nothing comes to mind for me, but I'm always the last to
think of such things.

BTW, are there any changes in DI? (other than rarity, of course)

- Pat
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Fouez <fouez.RemoveThis@aei.ca> wrote:
> It looks like the new wording for Visit from the Capuchin changes the
> way the card works so that it won't be possible to avoid the "do not
> replace" clause of many Event cards anymore. Do I understand the new
> wording correctly?

> VftC is mainly (only?) used in Gehenna based decks and NoR opened new
> horizons for those decks with the addition of the Imbued. Still, I
> never saw those decks as a real threat to the game balance and I'm
> curious to know the reason behind this drastic change.


> Original wording (Final Nights):
> Unique master. Put this card into play; put four counters on this card
> from the blood bank. Your hand size is +X, where X is the number of
> counters on this card. Each time you play or discard a card (except
> when discarding down to your hand size), burn a counter from this card
> (do not draw a replacement card). Burn this card when the last counter
> is removed.

> New wording (3rd Edition):
> Put this card into play with 4 counters on it. You get +X hand size,
> where X is the number of counters on this card. Each time you would
> draw to replace a card (not counting the card to replace the Visit),
> burn a counter from this card instead. Burn this card if it has no
> counters.


This new wording definitely changes something:

With Current wording:
I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it, and 11 cards in hand.
I play Dragonbound and burn a counter.
Now I have 3 counters on the Visit and 10 cards in hand; when
the Visit is completed, I have 7 cards in hand.

With New wording:
I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it.
I play Dragonbound and never burn a counter.
Now I still have 4 counters on the Visit, but 10 cards in hand; when
the Visit is completed, I'll have 6 cards in hand.

But:

With Current Wording:
I have Visit in play and 4 counters on it, and 11 cards in hand.
I play Wake with Evening's Freshness and burn a counter.
Now I have 3 counters on the visit, 10 cards in hand. Final
handsize will be 7.

With New Wording:
I have Visit in play, 4 counters, 11 cards.
I play Wake with Evening's Freshness and do not burn a counter.
During my untap phase, I burn a counter.
3 counters, 10 cards in hand. Final handsize will be 7.
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Pat wrote:
>
> So since this language seems to have nerfed the most common usage of
> Visit, is there some other usage that's now enabled by the new
> language? Nothing comes to mind for me, but I'm always the last to
> think of such things.
>

It may have closed the loophole that made VFtC more effective than
normal in a Gehenna deck, but there's still some reasons to use it in
such a deck, just to help you by increasing your hand size. Gehenna
decks always need some increased hand size.
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Pat wrote:
>
> For me, the gold standard of increased hand size (barring research counters
> and similar tricks) is Dreams.
>
> Now that the Gehenna loophole is closed, would you ever prefer Visit to
> Dreams (for arbitrary values of "you," of course)?
>

Possibly. Dreams has the pool cost (negligible if you're using it for
pool gain, but worth noting if you're using it for hand size), and is
more likely to be contested. Visit also pays off right away by giving
you 4 cards, while Dreams takes 2 turns to give you 4 cards (though it
does give you 6 cards in 3 turns). Also, Visit lets you hold onto the
4 cards as long as necessary until one becomes useful. Though, on the
other hand, it makes any discarding you have in the deck much less
useful. Though in a heavy event deck, you're not likely to use your
discard phase for actual discarding anyway.

It's probably obvious that most people prefer Dreams to Visit on a
general level, but when it comes *just* to increasing hand size, I
would probably prefer the Visit. Not that you can't use both, of
course.
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

"Chris Berger" <arkayn RemoveThis @ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message
news:1156099902.638212.51690@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> Pat wrote:
>>
>> So since this language seems to have nerfed the most common usage of
>> Visit, is there some other usage that's now enabled by the new
>> language? Nothing comes to mind for me, but I'm always the last to
>> think of such things.
>>
>
> It may have closed the loophole that made VFtC more effective than
> normal in a Gehenna deck, but there's still some reasons to use it in
> such a deck, just to help you by increasing your hand size. Gehenna
> decks always need some increased hand size.
>

For me, the gold standard of increased hand size (barring research counters
and similar tricks) is Dreams.

Now that the Gehenna loophole is closed, would you ever prefer Visit to
Dreams (for arbitrary values of "you," of course)?

- Pat
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

>
> For me, the gold standard of increased hand size (barring research counters
> and similar tricks) is Dreams.
>
> Now that the Gehenna loophole is closed, would you ever prefer Visit to
> Dreams (for arbitrary values of "you," of course)?
>

Yes, most definitely. Visit shouldn't be seen as a replacement to
Dreams, rather as an addition.
Dreams is a card which makes your card flow increase, as well as give
you additional influence.
Visit only increases your hand size, temporarily, but with bigger qty.

So:Apatr from it just being an absolutely string card, which suffers
from the contesting issue a lot less than Dreams, there's 4 decktypes
that benefit greatly -or to say the least, noticeably more than
others,from Visit:
1) decks that rely on large combos
2) decks that do specific stuff with library+ash heap control (thinkin
for example of Sudario Refraction/Inquisition/Sargon Fragment etc)
3) decks that lie in wait for a while, and then come out of nowhere.For
them, Visit it's the ideal catalyst
4) decks that work a lot with master card recurrence (like, palla
grande, TGB,AAA...)

The added on difference for the Gehenna cards, is imo, exactly that: a
nice-to-have-add on

greetz,
jo
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Wolflord wrote:
> So:Apatr from it just being an absolutely string card, which suffers
> from the contesting issue a lot less than Dreams, there's 4 decktypes
> that benefit greatly -or to say the least, noticeably more than
> others,from Visit:
> 1) decks that rely on large combos
> 2) decks that do specific stuff with library+ash heap control (thinkin
> for example of Sudario Refraction/Inquisition/Sargon Fragment etc)
> 3) decks that lie in wait for a while, and then come out of nowhere.For
> them, Visit it's the ideal catalyst
> 4) decks that work a lot with master card recurrence (like, palla
> grande, TGB,AAA...)

I use it often in decks that need a "jump start" to get going--like
some sort of gun based multi-rush deck, where until you get a gun and a
concealed in your hand, you got nothing. Dropping an early Visit to get
4 more cards in your hand often is exactly what is needed to get the
engine primed and start moving. Yeah, the Dreams is probably a bit more
efficient, in reality, but it does cost the pool, it does often get
contested, and it only gets you 2 extra cards *now*, where the Visit
gets the 4 extra cards now, which is often really what you need.

-Peter
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

> For me, the gold standard of increased hand size (barring research
> counters and similar tricks) is Dreams.
>
> Now that the Gehenna loophole is closed, would you ever prefer Visit to
> Dreams (for arbitrary values of "you," of course)?

Yes. There exist many reasons I would still consider it and place it in
decks. These are reasons that are worthwhile for anyone to consider.

1) To contest less (which follows due to the ubiquitousness of Dreams)

2) For decks that have combo dependencies and discarding down from dreams
at the end of a turn could cause problems. Visit gives you a greater
chance of seeing those cards in hand at the same time. Decks that get guns
are a prime example: Oh, I discard concealed weapon, draw up the weapon.

3) For decks that cycle well in a given turn once they have what they
need. Vote decks are a prime example of this: I dig into my deck in a
single turn for FOUR cards instead of two, and I draw the enabling
KRC/Bewitching/Voter Captivation/stealth that I'm missing in my current
hand.

4) For decks that toolbox and can handle a great many threats, that might
have some weird 11 card combo that annihilates the table. Still, keeping
all of the elements of that weird combo isn't worth it. So, dreams will
encourage you to simply cycle it out of your hand. Visit allows you to
keep it and still play. Examples include Turbo Baron (not a toolbox), a
decent intercept/beat/bleed deck, etc.

5) It's free. And, if you make Dreams "free" as well in the standard way,
they both dig 4 cards into your deck. Dreams gives you an additional
transfer at the cost of discarding 4 cards that you might have wanted.

Interestingly enough, the reasons that motivate Visit from Capuchin are
similar to those that motivate Storage Annex vs. Barrens, though it's not
an exact parallel.

Ankur Gupta
Prince of West Lafayette
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

> Yes. There exist many reasons I would still consider it and place it in
> decks. These are reasons that are worthwhile for anyone to consider.

I should say this as a hint of some decks that might work better with
Visit:

A "standard" archetype of deck with just 70 cards that uses Visit instead
of Dreams. It's less likely that you'll get jammed on garbage or iterative
things, and you simply never discard. No need to jam extra copies of cards
into your deck to guarantee seeing it.

It's a design method that could yield powerful results.

Food for thought.

Ankur Gupta
Prince of West Lafayette
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Blooded Sand wrote:
> Jozxyqk wrote:
....
>> With Current wording:
....
>> With New wording:
....
>
> Cool! Thanks, didn't get that, else i would definitely have tried to
> abuse it...

I'd personally never seen it ABused, just _used_. Seems like an
unnecessary change to me. However, just because I haven't seen it being
abused doesn't mean other people weren't abusing it. Oh well, lucky I
only traded for, like, 4 of them. (Note: This here is a _play_ effect
issue of changing cards. See how it's different to changing rarities and
how that upsets those collectory people? Also, I'm not even upset. I
just haven't borne witness to whatever horrors brought this about).

--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

Johannes Walch wrote:
> Uh, but if you don´t get the gun in the 4 cards you are really screwed, because you can´t cycle.

Sure. But then you were screwed anyway. And you can still cycle cards
with the Visit. Just play them (which you probably can do anyway) and
burn out the Vist. I mean, like, the gunless
Rush/Flash/Prevent/Blur/Taste/Psyche! isn't going to do *that* much,
but if you were screwed, you were screwed.

-Peter
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ) 

pdb6.DeleteThis@lightlink.com wrote:
> Wolflord wrote:
>
>>So:Apatr from it just being an absolutely string card, which suffers
>>from the contesting issue a lot less than Dreams, there's 4 decktypes
>>that benefit greatly -or to say the least, noticeably more than
>>others,from Visit:
>>1) decks that rely on large combos
>>2) decks that do specific stuff with library+ash heap control (thinkin
>>for example of Sudario Refraction/Inquisition/Sargon Fragment etc)
>>3) decks that lie in wait for a while, and then come out of nowhere.For
>>them, Visit it's the ideal catalyst
>>4) decks that work a lot with master card recurrence (like, palla
>>grande, TGB,AAA...)
>
>
> I use it often in decks that need a "jump start" to get going--like
> some sort of gun based multi-rush deck, where until you get a gun and a
> concealed in your hand, you got nothing. Dropping an early Visit to get
> 4 more cards in your hand often is exactly what is needed to get the
> engine primed and start moving. Yeah, the Dreams is probably a bit more
> efficient, in reality, but it does cost the pool, it does often get
> contested, and it only gets you 2 extra cards *now*, where the Visit
> gets the 4 extra cards now, which is often really what you need.

Uh, but if you don´t get the gun in the 4 cards you are really screwed, because you can´t cycle.
Dreams allows you to cycle. Still VotC is good for combat decks because you don´t "waste" any precious cards that could hurt some vampire

--
johannes walch
 >> Stay informed about: Visit from the Capuchin - Event (LSJ)