Abolish Grouping Rule

Not ideal. this is all just ideas trying to make g6 playable. and ideas to balance out other groups. but g2 is.already huge.

I wanted g1&6 to wrap around, but I for mixed opinions both locally and at big tournaments.

the REAL solution is that more g5&6 need printed. KoT was too split between 4&5 to be useful like cam ed. and that leaves SoC and part of LotN as the only support for g6.

the fact that we didn't need g6 until more g5 and some non bloodline g6 were printed was also a problem. there shouldn't have been group 4 and 6 vamps in the same set either. but its timing with cancellation is what was the biggest problem.

so g6 and all perceivedgrouping issues are solved if we can print more cards. more g5-6 in the main clans us all it really takes to fix stuff.

Klaital wrote:

mirddes wrote: this is maybe why 'any 2 consecutive groups' would be ideal

No its not, because the groups are designed so that odd numbered groups has most camarilla vampires in them, while even numbered groups has most of the independent and sabbat ones.

does not compute, how is even/odd relevant if any 2 groups can be used?

mirddes wrote:

Klaital wrote:

mirddes wrote: this is maybe why 'any 2 consecutive groups' would be ideal

No its not, because the groups are designed so that odd numbered groups has most camarilla vampires in them, while even numbered groups has most of the independent and sabbat ones.

does not compute, how is even/odd relevant if any 2 groups can be used?

It is a reason to why that kind of suggestion wouldn't work. Because the groupings aren't designed for that.

Klaital wrote:

mirddes wrote:

Klaital wrote:

mirddes wrote: this is maybe why 'any 2 consecutive groups' would be ideal

No its not, because the groups are designed so that odd numbered groups has most camarilla vampires in them, while even numbered groups has most of the independent and sabbat ones.

does not compute, how is even/odd relevant if any 2 groups can be used?

It is a reason to why that kind of suggestion wouldn't work. Because the groupings aren't designed for that.

1/4 2/5 3/6 1/6 in addition to the pre-existing 1 1/2 2 2/3 3 3/4 4 4/5 5 5/6 6

it does seem to be a worthy tweak (15 group combinations, up from 11)

in as few words as possible, construct restriction of odd/even grouping

CryWolf wrote:

Chaitan wrote:

We had this discussion awhile ago and the best suggestion was to allow group 1 to join with the highest group (6).

Ashur wrote:

This has always been my idea too. It would be logical and beautiful.

I like this idea too. It appeals to me especially, since I only play with crypt cards from G1-3 then just buy/trade for library cards from later sets. Allowing G1 to mix with G6 will encourage me, personally, to go out and buy sets with G6.

i have mostly G1/G4 with a chunk of G3 and a tiny bit of G2/G5

i only have ~1200 cards

i only wonder if this breaks more than it creates

Kiddo wrote:

mirddes wrote: what would it take to make grouping g1/g6 official?

It's not that simple, purely because not every clan has g6, nor g1, for that matter. In fact, is there any clan that has vamps in both g1 and g6? (edit: checked, no there isn't)

Sabbat would then have g2/g5 rule, as would 4 main independent clans, Camarilla g1/g5 (which they actually don't need at all) and Bloodlines clans would get g2/g6, and they would benefit the most from it.

Why does all clans have to be equal good? (Because they clearly aren´t as it is now)

Klaital wrote: It is a reason to why that kind of suggestion wouldn't work. Because the groupings aren't designed for that.

Why does this matter?