combat rebalancing

I'm not understanding what you mean by "Death seeker" is an edge case and IG is the status quo." In my definition, "case" means "situation." A card cannot be a situation.

TwoRazorReign wrote: I'm not understanding what you mean by "Death seeker" is an edge case and IG is the status quo." In my definition, "case" means "situation." A card cannot be a situation.

Last try

The availability of a S:CE counter is the situation.
IG is widely available/usable by many vamps/clans.
DS is only available/usable by !Salubri.
DS is therefor edge case as a S:CE counter.

I cannot use DS with my Nosferatu/!Nosferatu.
I cannot use DS with my Brujah/Brujah.
I cannot use DS with my Gargoyles.
I cannot use DS with my Gangrel potence vampires.
etc. etc. etc.

Reminder context by OP: Ban IG.

If I see a vampire come into play with potence who looks like he wants to fight I expect to see Immortal Grapple. If I see a vampire come into play that is a !Salubri who looks like he wants to fight I expect to see Death Seeker. You all can make up or misuse terms that describe 'seen less often' or 'not as common' but call a duck a duck and realize that that is what you are doing.

As for the ban IG topic:

If I were to alter or ban Conditioning for whatever balance reasons, like weenies having access to too much bleed for cost, I would also alter or ban the Toreador effect of Aire of Elation, though used less often the balance problem would still exist and needs to be addressed.

Robert Scythe wrote: If I see a vampire come into play with potence who looks like he wants to fight I expect to see Immortal Grapple. If I see a vampire come into play that is a !Salubri who looks like he wants to fight I expect to see Death Seeker. You all can make up or misuse terms that describe 'seen less often' or 'not as common' but call a duck a duck and realize that that is what you are doing.

As for the ban IG topic:

If I were to alter or ban Conditioning for whatever balance reasons, like weenies having access to too much bleed for cost, I would also alter or ban the Toreador effect of Aire of Elation, though used less often the balance problem would still exist and needs to be addressed.

Not that the opinion of a neonate matters much, but I don't consider either combat ends or immortal grapple a problem. This despite my voting ventrues getting regularly torn apart by grappling combat in my weekly games. Both combat end cards and immortal grapple as an answer to them are in my opinion important cornerstones of VTES. You can't ban these, it would have too big an effect and not necessarily a positive one. In my opinion banning anything should be the last resort. I would first try to fix things by printing new cards that help with the problem, if a problem even exists.

(ps. Theres also maneuver to long range as an answer to grapple. As an answer to combat end, theres psyche for celerity, telepathic tracking for auspex and grapple for potence. Thats quite a lot of bases covered. )

Rather, when considering game balance, I would direct our attention to the clans and ponder whether clans have an equal access to these combat options or the counter-options? I mean some of the clans have been considered weaker than others. Does the access to these cards have anything to do with that?

(In my opinion it has more to do with access to game winning actions such as bleeding, voting and defense, but I digress )

I like to Dark Influence those pesky Immortal Grapples in key timing and then, if I can, oust the guy doing them (if he's not my Prey already).
All the while humming parts of Karma Police by Radiohead.