Preamble:
Long ago, I was still deciding on Thoughts Betrayed, its power, its cost, and whether or not it was broken. To me, thoughts betrayed is a good card, perhaps a little too good for its cost, but like Algustas, I don't think it would warrant a 3 blood cost. 2 is about right.
However, it is not a Jyhad card. Its effect (the complete disallowing of card playing by an opponent) is entirely contrary to the paradigm of Jyhad: a "card-in-hand" card game.
(Apologies to non-players of the "other")
This game's action and conflict tends towards a player's hand, unlike
other card games. Magic, for example, is mostly about what cards are on
the table. Even in decks that have no spell-based permanents, resources
like land are the limiting factor of the X-spells that are often found in
these decks. Even a non-permanent's effect often directly resolves around
the permanents on the table. Many games are made with this "permanent
paradigm".
In Jyhad, the permanents are usually secondary. A Bum's Rush may cause a combat, but most of these combats are not decided by the intrinsic powers of the cards, but on the cards in hand. That Bum's Rush could have any effect for the rusher, from win to loss to utter devastation. It is a rare combat deck that does not rely on its hand. Vote decks and bleed decks have the same issues, albeit at a slower, less flurried pace.
The "other" card game also tend to have a huge reliance or at the very least an ease of use on direct counters to specific strategies. Playing a common strategy can be dangerous, not because other players will know what to expect, but because they are likely to be able to play the one "screw" card that totally destroys that strategy. Specific cards became important to be defended against. Dysotopia is a good example of such a card in the "other" game. The other game is much more a game of singular cards than of strategies (not to say that there isn't unity in those singular cards in good decks, but that the singular cards hold the power.)
In Jyhad, strategies could not originally be countered by single cards. Combat was the closest that it would come to this, with a combat deck being run-away from by S:CE. But this could be easily dealt with with more combat cards that were useful not only against S:CE but against other combat decks. Thus, the combat deck could be defended against, but not "screwed" by defenses against it. Singular cards are nice, but not as all-important as the total strategy/counter-strategy of a deck.
Thoughts Betrayed, however, disallows the use of the most important resource, the hand, while similarly creating a situation where a singular card can destroy a strategy (combat) as well as a counter-strategy (anti-combat). My objection to it is not on the grounds that it is too powerful for its cost, but that it is inappropriate for the game.
On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Algustas wrote:
No one disputes that it is an annoying card, but I still haven't
seen anyone with a way to win with a TB deck.
Snip. I have to _somewhat_ agree. While _horribly_ effective when used, it requires more setup time to use.
[Snip Algustas's example of a slow TB deck being eaten alive by a fast predator, allowing its prey to get away.]
Most of my experience with TB decks involve Giovanni or Tremere, so I am used to this option The Tremere work best,
Contestable, but really unimportant. I think the Giovanni ability to recycle the old cards used in previous combos make them more powerful than Tremere in a TB deck. A greater number of permanents make it easier (since you will set up anyway) to not need to recycle a big combo, but only 1 or 2 cards (TB and Amaranth, for example).
One simple common answer, guns! Big guns, small guns, shotguns, even the useless chainsaw, they are all problems for this deck, as long as it is relying on traps and Theft of Vitae (OK, well, maybe not chainsaw :)
Here, Algustas, your argument defending TB breaks down. No deck should be forced to use a specific strategy, according to Jyhad's paradigm. While all decks must have their strategy and counter-strategy (and to continue with this, counter-counter-strategy (I'm really serious about that last one)), when certain things _must_ be played to be able to handle a strategy, the game has broken down to specific card issues.
On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Scott Whittaker wrote:
Thought Betrayed is just too much of a broken card to be used.
Too broken? No. Not in the spirit of the game? Totally. It should never have been printed.
It's unfortunate, because the Giovanni really need some offensive punch from their dominate, and TB isn't totally out of line as a *defensive* card for Malkavians, either: but as written it's superior cheese.
I agree. Too bad TB just shouldn't have been the answer.