On Parity Shift 6. "problematic card".

With enough setup (easier than say, the setup to use Parity Shift), I think Reckless Agitation is a far, far worse card.
Ridiculous at times.

echiang wrote:

Shard wrote: You didn't like, change the requirement to primogen only?

Alternatively, you could go the other direction and keep to to Justicars only.

I clearly have to say that it is irrelevant what I like or not. As a moderator of the polls I have to keep neutrality. Of course I vote in the polls because I'm a player too and have a opinion. But I have to make sure the options in the poll correctly reflect the discussion.
I see a problem though if we have too many options, so I summed up these two points. Is that okay?

Brum wrote: With enough setup (easier than say, the setup to use Parity Shift), I think Reckless Agitation is a far, far worse card. Ridiculous at times.

fr.ex.: There are 10 decks with Parity Shift and 3 decks with Reckless Agitation in the TDWA... in the last THREE months.

We could go on and on and on, but I think we know which card is more abused and has a greater pool shift total than almost anything else in the game.

but that's just the flavour of the clans. take Parity Shift and you destroyed Camarilla vote decks. Let's ban something sabbath has over Camarilla like Abbot then, how many decks in the TWD have Abbot in it?

Väinämöinen wrote: but that's just the flavour of the clans. take Parity Shift and you destroyed Camarilla vote decks.

Well, no.

If you take Parity Shift, then Camarilla Vote decks then have to be just kind of better than non Camarilla vote decks instead of crazily, over the top better. Without Parity Shift, Camarilla Vote decks still have all the rest of the incredibly handy Tradition cards (like 2nd, which is also insanely good), Closed Session (which is just plain better than Private Audience) and then all the rest of the vote cards that all those hamstrung non Camarilla vote decks have to settle for, like KRC, Con Ag, and Neonate Breach. And Banishment. And Con Boon. Man. That Camarilla Vote deck is going to be destroyed.

Let's ban something sabbath has over Camarilla like Abbot then, how many decks in the TWD have Abbot in it?

Really? Your argument hinges on comparing Abbot (a moderately useful action card) to Parity Shift (easily one of the best actions in the game?). Yeah. Ok.

If Parity Shift was once per game (per player?), it would be almost a reasonable card. I mean, still wildly overpowered, but at least only wildly overpowered once per game. Which isn't that unreasonable.

Peter, sorry man, but in Europe Private Audience is way better than Closed Session.
Besides those specifically for Politics, lots of deck archetypes these days have Camarilla Titles as a good side effect, just because.
In fact, Law Firms have to have vote push in them. Even those that consistently put two or three Princes on the table.

By lore, Camarilla is always better in most things. Bigger sect, more resources, etc.
Sabbat can put up a fight with focused groups of vampires. Sometimes even endanger certain Camarilla areas / resources.
But never, never are they in equal grounds.
In some parts of the World, Sabbat has a footing and a strong one.
To try to put the two sects in the same level at politics is not the way to go, imo.

Back to the point: Parity Shift requires a set up that is harder and harder to pull through.
You will see in TWD less and less decks that rely on Parity Shift.
Too many things can go wrong. Too many moving parts in your deck and too many dependences on other people's plays.
Unless, of course, something changes in the game.
Killing some archetypes will always benefit others, and sometimes not in a good way.