Abusing Leroux

Izaak wrote: And even then, if you have less than 4 minions, which is a reasonable assumption, a Conditioning will do exactly the same thing, at the cost of 1 blood and 3 less actions.

3 minion = Andre Leroux bleed for 6 for 3 total actions.

So, your math is off. A sup' conditionning alone is the same thing as leroux with one other minion acting. 4 minions bleeding total are needed to have the same potential as govern + conditionning.

More importantly, I compare it to Palla Grande because both double your bleed potential, something very few to none other vampire do, on a 3-cap. As I have said right off the bat, there is significant drawback to Leroux use, namely that it is Leroux who do the entire bleed to compensate for that.

It does not mean he broke the format, but there is a reason for which both the Enkidu deck and the Shalmath deck were running some Leroux and not some weenie and 4 conditionning : he is way more convenient, for an often superior bleed potential.

3 minion = Andre Leroux bleed for 6 for 3 total actions.

Yes, and normally those 3 minions would bleed for 3 instead of just Andre for 6.

So Andre's special adds 3 (which is exactly what I said, since you have 3 minions in play) and therefore the Conditioning does exactly the same thing, except that it doesn't require you to first take two succesfull bleed actions for it to work.

I mean, it's not bad or anything, but it certainly isn't gamebreaking. The only thing that's kinda retarded is that you can use his special on himself, basically making him a 2-bleeder for 3 pool.

If you'd argue that's probably too much bang for buck I'd be inclined to agree but given his abysmal inferior auspex, I don't mind too much, especially since he's Toreador and those tend to not really have issues bleeding anyway.

I'm still looking for a rule question in here..

About the Fida'i: Their previous cardtext allowed them to untap several times per turn (including in the minion phase).

In my Shalmath deck, I use Andre for several purposes:
- Anima Gathering
- Responsible bleed (yes, he can reduce Shalmath's bleeds that get deflected to my grand prey)
- his finishing ability, once Shalmath has cleaned the place.

Pascal Bertrand wrote: I'm still looking for a rule question in here..

Hmm, well to keep this topic relevant here, I do have one. It has to do with ordering effects. In a bleed of greater than 1, can I Andre LeRoux's special and then Spying Mission on the same bleed?

Both require a "would be successful" bleed therefore the bleed must equal at least 1 by the time Spying Mission goes off. So a "would be successful" bleed for 2 can be reduced by one to get +2 for LeRoux, then since it's still at least 1, play Spying Mission to store +2 bleed for a future bleed. Naturally this only works in this order, but it's legal, yes?

Andre LeRoux
Toreador
Capacity: 3
Group: 5
Camarilla: When a vampire you control would successfully bleed, you may reduce the bleed amount by 1 to give Andre +2 bleed this turn.

Spying Mission
Action Modifier
Obfuscate
obf: +1 stealth.
OBF: Only usable when a bleed would be successful. The bleed burns no pool; it is unsuccessful. Instead, put this card on the acting vampire. The next time this vampire would successfully bleed the same Methuselah, burn this card for +2 bleed.

If so, I have an OBF Assamite Alamut Death Star deck to adapt.

Azel wrote: Hmm, well to keep this topic relevant here, I do have one. It has to do with ordering effects. In a bleed of greater than 1, can I Andre LeRoux's special and then Spying Mission on the same bleed?

Yes.

Azel wrote: Both require a "would be successful" bleed therefore the bleed must equal at least 1 by the time Spying Mission goes off. So a "would be successful" bleed for 2 can be reduced by one to get +2 for LeRoux, then since it's still at least 1, play Spying Mission to store +2 bleed for a future bleed. Naturally this only works in this order, but it's legal, yes?

Sure.