New round structure - OPTION A - we'd like your feedback!

TwoRazorReign wrote:

Taste vs Press is such an unintuitive thing that people who have played for decades still occasionally have to remind themselves how it works in my local games.

I don't think it's necessarily unintuitive. I think that's a function of an outline of all combat steps never being included in the main rulebook. Had something like this been included, perhaps people would know how to handle combat, ie, that the "end of round" step exists even if there are no cards played in that step (players have to actively decline playing cards in that step).

What is unintuitive in my opinion, is that taste should happen immediately afterward you have dealt damage, since taste is a reward for dealing damage. The press step in between sort of 'doesn't belong'. Instead, choice of continuing combat should be the last part of a round of combat in my opinion.

Bloodartist wrote: What is unintuitive in my opinion, is that taste should happen immediately afterward you have dealt damage, since taste is a reward for dealing damage. The press step in between sort of 'doesn't belong'. Instead, choice of continuing combat should be the last part of a round of combat in my opinion.

I hear you, but playing Taste of Vitae after presses allows for nuanced strategy that would be lost if it were played elsewhere. For example, perhaps one may decide to hang onto their Taste of Vitae and save it for a later combat if it was known combat was not going to continue via a press. I think the perceived non-intuitiveness is a small a price to pay for the strategic potential in this case.

TwoRazorReign wrote: I hear you, but playing Taste of Vitae after presses allows for nuanced strategy that would be lost if it were played elsewhere. For example, perhaps one may decide to hang onto their Taste of Vitae and save it for a later combat if it was known combat was not going to continue via a press. I think the perceived non-intuitiveness is a small a price to pay for the strategic potential in this case.

You need to elaborate this a bit, I don't understand what you are getting at. Example?

Almost always, if I play taste of vitae, I'm playing a combat deck and it is me, not the opponent, who decides whether or not to continue to next round. Whatever you are trying to get at sounds like a real fringe scenario..

He seems be saying that he plays through the round, maybe draws enough extra cards to deal more damage in subsequent rounds (like draws a Blur off of playing pursuit for an additional strike with guns, or prevents hands for one with and draws a slam with ) and his opponent is either another combat deck or a "soft target" that can generate presses to end (kindred spirits with Deny). So if they press to end, he plays taste. They don't, he holds it.


Now, I could argue that it should be played after the last opportunity for damage. So, end of strike resolution or beginning of press step (disarm, taste, DOTB damage) then presses can get played. Then round ends. Because that's simpler than current setup, gains the same opportunities it loses, etc.

I did this flow chart with some new keywords for steps that already exists in the game but is addressed as before/after something

I prefere that choice, because will set specificly each step between the combats fases.