Caitiff and Anarch part of recent announcement

I forgot about this part of the last newsletter, but the potential for caitiff to get cards to reflect things unique to them is incredibly exciting for me. Thin blood offers walking in the sun and making partially vamp babies, while less removed caitiff like Dr Grey and Stoneman created thier own sorts of discipline powers.
It's like getting a whole new design space with 2 distinct different sides of the clan for diverse stuff.

Anarch as a sect.... If it aligns with paradox printing us, it frees up some card text too, so I'd be fine.

But our other conversations went other directions, so what's everyone else feel on these?
Or is it just me excited and everyone else worried convert becomes the new Arika?

ReverendRevolver wrote: I forgot about this part of the last newsletter, but the potential for caitiff to get cards to reflect things unique to them is incredibly exciting for me.

It's totally irrelevant to the rules change, though. If the rule stays exactly as it is, there is nothing stopping a card being printed that says:

That's not to say that the rules change is wrong. But designers have been able to create cards for Caitiff for the last 23 years, in exactly the same way that cards require other non-clan traits e.g. Seraph has no supporting rules, but cards say "Requires a Seraph" without any issues.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

ReverendRevolver wrote: I forgot about this part of the last newsletter, but the potential for caitiff to get cards to reflect things unique to them is incredibly exciting for me.

It's totally irrelevant to the rules change, though. If the rule stays exactly as it is, there is nothing stopping a card being printed that says:

Card Name
Action modifier
Requires a Caitiff
+3 million bleed

That's not to say that the rules change is wrong. But designers have been able to create cards for Caitiff for the last 23 years, in exactly the same way that cards require other non-clan traits e.g. Seraph has no supporting rules, but cards say "Requires a Seraph" without any issues.

But there would remain the weirdness of:

- Not being able to create a card that uses the clan icon as a requirement even though Caitiff have that clan icon on their cards.

and

- Using text to refer to a Caitiff keyword (akin to "Seraph") that doesn't exist on the Caitiff cards.

I understand that, strictly speaking, Caitiff are clanless in the canon. However, I'm having a hard time seeing how it's worth it to have a specific rule to cover that, and which requires coming up with a new way to refer to them collectively than the one printed on their cards. From personal in-game experience, the only effect has been on Con Boon and Diversity.

As I said, the change itself may be fine - clearing up a couple of glitches caused by Caitiff is reasonable enough - but in so far as ReverendRevolver and the author of the announcement thought it opens up new design possibilities, that's entirely bogus.

BenPeal wrote: - Using text to refer to a Caitiff keyword (akin to "Seraph") that doesn't exist on the Caitiff cards.

That's easily resolved by "Requires a Caitiff [Caitiff Symbol]".

But to the extent that referring to non-existent text is a problem, having "Master" entirely absent from master cards affects the game an awful lot more often.

jamesatzephyr wrote: That's easily resolved by "Requires a Caitiff [Caitiff Symbol]".

That's exactly the same thing as treating Caitiff as a clan, which they're presently not.

Eh, we're basically in agreement and we're belaboring the point. It just shows how asinine the rule is.

There's a lot of asanine rules in this game. I don't understand why Caitiff is being picked on. At least cannon gives a reason why Caitiff are as they are. I don't see a problem here.