out-of-the-box anarchs, 'group zero' vampires

The announcement of the upcoming Rebellion expansion may mean that
this question has already been settled, for the time being... but
anyway...

A discussion a few weeks ago about Anarchs included, among other
things, a little bit of debate about out-of-the-box Anarchs. The two
sides are basically "Just go ahead and print them, already" and
"Anarch is distinct from other traits because of how it is acquired,
let's maintain that distinctness".

Things usually not being exactly black-and-white, there's some middle
ground here. One option proposed was (a small number of) vampires
that, per special text, could go Anarch by burning some blood or pool
and/or tapping during some appropriate window. Another was (a small
number of) 4-cap Anarchs, possibly one standard-disciplined 4-cap from
each clan, that ignored the grouping requirements.

It seems like vampires that ignore the grouping rules (I'll call them
group 0) are a design possibility that will eventually be exploited,
if the game lives long enough. Putting user-friendly Anarchs there
would be a mistake, though, at least if you believe maintaining
distinct mechanisms for distinct traits is desireable. It would
change the Anarch trait from one that requires effort to acquire into
the most readily available in the game. (Imagine a bunch of group 0
Seraphs, one from each clan, or Princes, or...) And from the
standpoint of needing to keep printing and selling new cards, a bunch
of group 0 Anarchs would be a one-shot, unrepeatable thing that would
also weigh against the later release of grouped ootb Anarchs.

Here's another angle for having ootb Anarchs that wouldn't genericize
the trait too much (in my opinion, which is grounded in trying to
respect the trait's distinctness).

Alice, Thin-blood Anarch
Caitiff, capacity 2, group 2
Independent, Anarch. Thin-blood Anarchs are not unique. When this
Alice enters play, choose a discipline; this Alice may play cards
requiring an Anarch as though she had that discipline at the basic
level. During your untap phase, burn 2 pool if you do not control an
older, ready, unique Anarch.

Bill, Thin-blood Anarch
Caitiff, capacity 2, group 4
Independent, Anarch. Thin-blood Anarchs are not unique. When Bill
enters play you may search you hand, library or ash heap for a Master:
Discipline card and place it on him. During your untap phase, burn 2
pool if you do not control an older, ready, unique Anarch.

Cathy, Thin-blood Anarch
Caitiff, capacity 2, group 6
Independent, Anarch. Thin-blood Anarchs are not unique. Once per
turn, Alice may play a card requiring an Anarch as though she had any
one discipline at the basic level. During your untap phase, burn 2
pool if you do not control an older, ready, unique Anarch.

etc.

On Jan 28, 10:42 am, Malone <kffos....TakeThisOut@indiana.edu> wrote:
> It seems like vampires that ignore the grouping rules (I'll call them
> group 0) are a design possibility that will eventually be exploited,
> if the game lives long enough.  Putting user-friendly Anarchs there
> would be a mistake, though, at least if you believe maintaining
> distinct mechanisms for distinct traits is desireable.

Assuming fairly generic "G0", 4 cap anarchs, you'd still need to have
other non anarch vampires that have useful disciplines go anarch.
Having the start out anarch, however, saves you a blood (by giving you
that leg up) and lets you play some cards defensively even if you
can't go anarch with your other guys for whatever reason.

>  It would
> change the Anarch trait from one that requires effort to acquire into
> the most readily available in the game.  (Imagine a bunch of group 0
> Seraphs, one from each clan, or Princes, or...)

Why would we imagnie that? Why does making "G0" anarchs (which solves
an existing problem) equal making "G0" Seraphs of Princes (which
creates a new problem)?

-Peter