HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: amlogan@room.Princeton.EDU (Adam Meredith Logan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sniveler
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:21:31 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Nov5.221956.6210@njitgw.njit.edu> tac6189@hertz.njit.edu (Tom Carmichael) writes:

>Sure.  Here is an exact quote from the Mayfair version:
>
>SNIVLER
>You have the power to whine.  As a main player, whenever you have the most 
>tokens in the warp, have the fewedt bases of any player, or lack a 
>Challenge Card you need, you may "whine" about it.  If you whine about your
>tokens, either all others must agree that you can free all your tokens from 
>the warp, or they must place tokens into the warp until each matches your 
>number there.  

Suppose that Sniveler whines about having the most tokens in the warp in a
game with Zombie.  Is there any way (short of Cosmic Zapping Zombie) to 
prevent Sniveler from removing all its tokens from the warp?  Zombie's tokens
cannot go to the warp.

Adam
Organization: Junior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 09:50:00 -0500 
From: "Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Threats (was Re: Sting)
	<1992Nov12.053158.15548@muddcs.claremont.edu>

>Sometimes, sometimes not. If the other players' response is "Jeez, what a
>jerk! Let's do everything we can to hose him," then you spend your time
>hosing one person, while everyone else spends their time hosing you. You end
>up most hosed.
How is this done?  Everyone hoses me?  GREAT!!!  Now I get to totally
hose the person who hosed me first.  What are they going to do, take
away my cards?  Ok, I was giving those up anyway. Send me to the warp?
COOL!  Now I get to *really* maul the player I promised.  The worst
thing they could do would be never to invite me as an ally. Fill, me
in, how do you hose Sting? 

In the event no one wants to let you ally talk to someone (not the
person who originally 'hosed' you) and tell them that if they let you
ally on defense, you'll send this guys tokens to the warp for them.
Suddenly other people begin to see the usefullness of being on your
good side.  If you actually win on defense, oh well, cringe, draw your
cards, burn edicts quickly, and iterate.  

	joe
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer)
Subject: Re: Sting
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:51:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.025433.9356@muddcs.claremont.edu>, irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
> 
> But, since I haven't playtested it, what the hell do I know? Playtesters,
> you've been invoked several times: how did you play this card, and what did
> you think of it?

Alright, already!  

This is the text of the Sting that we playtested (I still haven't got
MCE yet):

You have the power to substitute.  Whenever you lose tokens to the warp,
you may designate another player to lose them instead.  Your tokens 
return to bases, and he chooses an equal number of his own to lose to
the warp.  He then can draw one card from your hand for each token he lost.

We added the following sentance:  You can not force a player to lose more
tokens than the number of cards you have remaining in your hand.

As you can see there was none of this involuntary token loss crap.  The
above is pretty much how we played the power and, is probably how I will
alter the power text to for my game.

As this stood I thought the power was more balanced towards CE with Eon
flares (where there is alot stronger incentive to hold onto your hand)
than it was towards CE with Mayflares (where there is virtually no 
incentive to keep your hand).  I also think that the addition of the
negative Attack cards further exacerbated this problem.  I would like
to note at this point that I was against the negative Attack cards 
from day one, eight o'clock but, what the hell do I know?

I think Josh pegged it pretty well when he described the power as a Vacuum
variant.


Nick Sauer
From: phil@miracle.com (Phil Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Anyone else think some powers are TOO powerful....
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:22:38 GMT
Organization: Miracle Computer Consultants

Elliott Conan Evans <ee0r+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>stranger@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (William John McNelis) writes:
>> DEMON: i dont remember how this was phrased, but i think it lets you
>> always  take over for the offensive player...
>> Doesnt that make it almost impossible for anyone to get a base?!?!?
>
>Yes, until people decide you are too close to winning and start
>stomping you down to below three bases. Plus, if you do this
>constantly, people may not want to play with you ever again.

Not only that... but people begin to play bad attack cards or compromise as
the offense.  Demon takes over, and just ends up being sent to the warp.
Pretty soon Demon ends up with no tokens in the game.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Hill                     | "All you people in TV land,           |
| Miracle Computer Consultants  |   I will wake up your empty shells.   |
|                               |  Peak time viewing blown in a flash,  |
|                               |   as I burn into your memory cells.   |
| Email: phil@miracle.com       |  'cause I'm alive." - Peter Gabriel   |
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer)
Subject: Re: Wrack (was Re: more questions)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:26:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.202207.5772@wuecl.wustl.edu>, kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Ken Cox) writes:
> 
> On the same topic, some posters have said that they let the Wrack change
> his deal offer during the torture process.  Our group doesn't play this
> way; once the Wrack makes his offer, it can't be modified.

This is the official answer from Kittredge (as presented in Encounter vol. 1
issue 6) as well.  The Wrack can not change his deal between tortures.

Nick Sauer




Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith)
Subject: Re: Sniveler
Originator: irilyth@fenris
Organization: HMC Academic Computing Services
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 10:07:46 GMT

Excerpts only, for brevity.

In a prior article, Richard Amick (Eric-Amick@cup.portal.com) writes:
> If you whine about cards, you name what you need. [...] Either one player
> gives you such a card, or all players must discard all such cards in their
> hands.
> [...]
> Do you believe that the Sniveler who finds himself without
> Challenge Cards when his turn begins (or when he's challenged) can
> legitimately whine about having no Attack Cards at all BEFORE drawing in
> the hope that the players can't agree on who should give him an Attack
> Card?  After all, if they can't agree, it would seem to me that they
> would have to discard all their Attack Cards.....  :)

Well, the power description says players have to agree to give Sniveler a
base, or agree to let you take your tokens back, but it doesn't say they
have to agree to give you a card--just that one player "gives you a card".
We usually played at Swarthmore that first player to toss a card Sniveler's
direction (or to say "Sure, here") gave Sniveler the card. There could, of
course, be discussion beforehand (via table-talk rules), but this was one
situation where we usually let speed be the deciding factor.
-- 
Josh Smith, User Support Coordinator  ::  irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu
Harvey Mudd College, Claremont CA     ::  consult(std-disclaimer.pl).
"Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why
several of us died of tuberculosis." -Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts
From: Scott Abfalter <thx1138@angus.mi.org>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: New Lucre
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 09:11:29 EST
Reply-To: thx1138@angus.mi.org
Organization: North Star BBS

 
Well, I have More CE now and played one short spur of the moment game
with a pair of friends.  
 
The new lucre rules are nice.  This is the first change that Mayfair
has made that I have actually liked.  There is more that you can _do_
with it.  
 
I also liked the Special Destiny cards and Comets as they added a lot
to the game.  Reinforcements are cute and not too powerful, so they
are OK.  
 
All in all they did a lot to make the game nicer --I was a little wary of
spending the $35 on something from Mayfair (as I was unhappy with what
they did to CE) but they certainly did a lot to make it nicer. 

It was also a much more well-written rulebook.  Easier to read. 

THX

--
Scott Abfalter (thx1138@angus.mi.org)
North Star BBS, Royal Oak, MI --------------------------------------------+-
From: cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sting
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:50:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Nov11.025433.9356@muddcs.claremont.edu>
irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>Ye gods, this voluntary/involuntary stuff is as bad as the communication
>question wrt Silencer! Everything you do can be construed as "communication";
>thus the Minkoff Rule, which differentiates between mandatory and optional
>communication. (Mind if I name a rule after you, Tony? incidentally, if
>anyone else wants to claim this rule, feel free; I remember Tony explaining
>it first, though.)

Of course, I don't mind at all.  In fact, I'm flattered.

>Very little is involuntary in CE, but my suspicion is
>that the intention was for Sting to be able to use his power more frequently
>than he would be allowed to using the Katz Criteria. (grin)

Okay, so what do *you* think the intention was?  I agree that the
Katz Criteria have some problems, but it's the best interpretation
I've seen so far.


Incidentally, I still haven't seen anyone address the issue of Sting
vs. Insect.  Is there any way to resolve this, or should we add to
the Sting power, "Do Not Use With Insect"?

Tony
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Anyone else think some powers are TOO powerful....
From: "Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 09:35:38 -0500 
Distribution: usa
Organization: Junior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>DEMON: i dont remember how this was phrased, but i think it lets you
>always  take over for the offensive player...
>Doesnt that make it almost impossible for anyone to get a base?!?!?
You want to see a game where no one gets bases?  Try playing against
Diplomat - Zombie/Sting...  Also, I don't think Demon can take over as
offensive player if being attacked, so eventually bases will be
gotten.  

>VIRUS: even if you only put two tokens in a  challenge, it makes a 
>whole lot of difference... allies would almost ally with four, since it
>would almost guarantee a win... its like the "dont bother playing a
>card" power.  
Not quite.  Loser does quite well against this.  So does obverse, so
does sorceror (switch the person a compromise), so does visionary
(hope they have a compromise), wrack looks good, so does empath, so
does Pacifist (a better combat power IMO).  So Virus isn' that bad if
the other people have cool combat powers (a big IF but...)

I think diplomat is worse.  Basically it's "don't bother fighting this
challenge because I'll straighten matters out personall".  Read the
Sting thread for another gross power.  And if you're using 'Judge' you
should reread the power.  Mayfair suggests caution with the power when
there example of a proper use is obscene.  So yes, there are a lot of
problem powers in MCE if you like having powers being remotely
balanced (to the person who wanted people to sort powers by ability,
I'm working on it).  


	joe
From: tac6189@hertz.njit.edu (Tom Carmichael                                                  )
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sniveler
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:19:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: njitgw.1992Nov5.221956.6210
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Nov4.232927.9926@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>In a prior article, Jeff Hildebrand (hildebra@math.wisc.edu) writes:> 
>> 	Well if the Eon version doesn't specify, then I think in this
>> case Mayfair may have done the right thing modifying the power. There are
>> some very nasty circumstances that can arise if Sniveler can snivel for
>> flares. In a game I was in we were misplaying Sniveler and the following
>> happened. (Let's see if I remember this right. Luke, are you out there to
>> verify this?)
>
>This story sounds familiar, but I don't think I was actually in that game.
>What was I doing at the time? You don't have to answer that, especially if
>it involves jello. (grin)
>
>As others have mentioned, Sniveler is defined in two parts: in the second
>part, which Brian Kohn quoted elsewhere, it does not restrict Sniveler to
>Sniveling about challenge cards, but in the first part, it does. Someone
>with the power in front of them want to quote the whole card?
>

Sure.  Here is an exact quote from the Mayfair version:

SNIVLER
You have the power to whine.  As a main player, whenever you have the most 
tokens in the warp, have the fewedt bases of any player, or lack a 
Challenge Card you need, you may "whine" about it.  If you whine about your
tokens, either all others must agree that you can free all your tokens from 
the warp, or they must place tokens into the warp until each matches your 
number there.  If you whine about a base, either all other players
must agree to let you have one extra base (you pick where) or they each
lose one (their choice).  If you whine about cards, you name what you need
(example:  "I don't have an Attack Card higher than a 15.").  You can't lie.
Either one player gives you such a card or all players must discard all such
cards in their hands.  You may whine only once per challenge.


As you can see, this is very clear that you cannot whine for flares or edicts.

I don't know how the Eon power phrased it, but I hope that this is a help.

Tom Carmichael
From: cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sting
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:52:31 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <11NOV199217501816@zeus.tamu.edu>
dwr2560@zeus.tamu.edu (RING, DAVID WAYNE) writes:
>>Incidentally, I still haven't seen anyone address the issue of Sting
>>vs. Insect.  Is there any way to resolve this, or should we add to
>>the Sting power, "Do Not Use With Insect"?
>
>Defender plays last.

Uh, wait a sec, Dave.  Sting says, "*Whenever* you lose tokens..."
Now, are you saying that in the Insect vs Sting case, when Defender
designates the Offensive Player to lose tokens, the Offensive Player
can not designate, because the Defensive Player has already
designated?

Tony
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: A possible use for the Chosen!?!
Date: 10 Nov 92 19:06:17 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1992Nov10.163623.15539@njitgw.njit.edu> tac6189@hertz.njit.edu (Tom Carmichael) writes:
>We had a very interesting Mayfair game last night were the Chosen was 
>actually a power to be reconned with.  It was used in combo with the 
>Connoseur.  This makes it a nasty combo.  The Chosen can keep drawing
>cards two at a time until he gets a card he wants or draws two challenge
>cards.  Boy did we burn through the deck fast.

	I may be mistaken, but I don't think that is correct.  I believe the
Chosen says to "turn over the top card of the deck", while Connosieur says to
draw twice as many cards as you are entitled to, discarding half.  Strictly
speaking, Chosen isn't drawing cards, since they never go to his hand, so I
would say these two powers are not synergistic.  Of course, I could be wrong.

>
>Just an interesting combo I thought I would share with the net.
>
>Tom

--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation
From: cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Anyone else think some powers are TOO powerful....
Date: 12 Nov 92 07:32:38 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Nov11.231924.18715@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> stranger@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (William John McNelis) writes:
>Just got MCE a few weeks ago, and after about 30 games in four nights
>(classes? what classes?) we decided to toss two powers out of our set
>because they seemed a little TOO powerful...
>
>DEMON: i dont remember how this was phrased, but i think it lets you
>always  take over for the offensive player...
>Doesnt that make it almost impossible for anyone to get a base?!?!?

I agree that Demon is powerful, but not overwhelming if the other
players play aggressively.

Say the other players use an average of three tokens on offense,
and, when you possess, you lose as often as you win.  You will lose
15 tokens before you get 5 bases, which means it's pretty darn
unlikely that you'll get 5 bases.

>VIRUS: even if you only put two tokens in a  challenge, it makes a 
>whole lot of difference... allies would almost ally with four, since it
>would almost guarantee a win... its like the "dont bother playing a
>card" power.  

Yeah, Virus is pretty powerful.  The last time I played CE (a
four-player game), one player was the Pentaform with the Virus as
his four-base power.  When he evolved into the Virus, the other
players were just about ready to concede.  I convinced them not to.
It was my turn, and I needed a new hand.  I drew my new hand, and
got the Pentaform Flare.  I used the Pentaform Flare immediately,
and got the Changeling.  Then I drew the Pentaform in the Destiny
Pile, and took the Pentaform (including the Virus).  Kinda drastic,
but, hey, it did stop the Virus...  :-)  The moral of the story is,
never concede.  (Except maybe against the old Eon Aristocrat.)

BTW, Anti-Matter, Loser, and Obverse make for neat defenses against
the Virus.  Mirror may help, too.  Or Cone Size Moon, or...

In another recent game, I got the Plant.  That was fun, especially
in deal situations.  "I'll tell you what.  I'll give you a base in
my system, and you give me a base where you have a base in *his*
system.  Then next time I challenge him, I'll invite you to
ally..."

Tony
From: Eric-Amick@cup.portal.com (Richard E Amick)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sniveler
Date: Thu,  5 Nov 92 18:00:21 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa

Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.board.ce: 1-Nov-92 Sniveler Qwyrx
@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (928)

>>   About the Sniveler power.  The card says that one of the players
>> options is to whine about CARDS.  Then it says that the player must
>> state a specific card or set of cards, and then for example "I don't
>> have an attack card higher than 15."  My question is, can the
>Sniveler whine about cards other than attack cards?
>
>At least in the Eon rules (Mayfair may have horked it up again), it
>specifies "challenge cards". So you may whine for compromises, or attack
>cards lower than 12, or prime attack cards, or even something like "I
>don't have a 5, 9, -10, or compromise."  But kickers, edicts, flares,
>reinforcements, etc are no good.

In a (probably hopeless) attempt to end this, here is the VERBATIM text
from Mayfair's Sniveler card:

As a main player, whenever you have the most tokens in the warp, have
the fewest bases of any player, or lack a Challenge Card you need, you
may "whine" about it.  If you whine about your tokens, either all other
players must agree that you can free all your tokens from the warp, or
they must place tokens into the warp until each matches your number
there.  If you whine about a base, either all the other players must
agree to ler you have one extra base (you pick where) or they each lose
one (their choice).  If you whine about cards, you name what you need
(example: "I don't have an Attack Card higher than 15.").  You can't
lie.  Either one player gives you such a card, or all players must
discard all such cards in their hands.  You may whine only once per
challenge.

It strikes me as a real stretch to suggest that "whining about cards"
means "whining about any kind of card" after the power is explicitly
limited to Challenge Cards.  In the interests of stirring up
controversy, do you believe that the Sniveler who finds himself without
Challenge Cards when his turn begins (or when he's challenged) can
legitimately whine about having no Attack Cards at all BEFORE drawing in
the hope that the players can't agree on who should give him an Attack
Card?  After all, if they can't agree, it would seem to me that they
would have to discard all their Attack Cards.....  :)
From: njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Wrack (was Re: more questions)
Date: 5 Nov 92 04:09:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsh.1992Nov5.040921.9388
Organization: AT&T

My apologies if anyone has seen this before but, I think our newserver died
and never sent this out the first time.

In article <1992Nov2.160359.28726@wuecl.wustl.edu>, kcc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Ken Cox) writes:
>
>Are you sure making a Wrack deal concludes the challenge?  I think this
>subject has been discussed on the group before, and the conclusion was
>that it doesn't -- because the power card doesn't specifically say that
>making the deal ends the challenge.  

I remember the previous discussion because (as I recall) I started it.
I have since spoken to Jack Kittredge about this power and have the
answer (see below).

>The Wrack is one of the more complicated powers since it involves several
>options.  I think the previous discussion produced the following logic
>for the use of the Wrack:
>
>If the Wrack doesn't offer a deal, continue (the challenge normally, with
>	the play of Challenge cards).

Correct.

>If the opponent accepts the deal, implement it and continue.

Wrong.  This is what I had thought at first upon closer examination of the
power text.  However, this was not the intent.  According to Kittredge, if
the deal is accepted the challenge is over (and the Wrack can opt to take 
a second challenge if he was the offensive main player).

>If the Wrack chooses not to torture, continue.

Correct.  This is on the power card itself.  The last sentance on the (Eon)
power card reads: "If initially you elect not to torture, proceed with the
challenge normally."

>If the opponent breaks and accepts the deal, implement it and continue.

Wrong.  See above.  If the deal is accepted the challenge is over.

>If the opponent never breaks, the opponent wins the challenge and the
>	Wrack loses; resolve the challenge as such, without playing cards.

Correct.


Nick Sauer
From: cs161feu@sdcc10.ucsd.edu (Anthony Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Sting
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:27:55 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J. McCarthy) writes:
>I nominate Sting as the worst-phrased MCE power.
>
>
>	"Whenever you lose tokens involuntarily, you may
>	designate another player to lose them instead."
>
>
>"Involuntarily"?  What does that mean?

Agreed!  Unless this is clarified in a future issue of Encounter, I
recommend it be put in the category of "Not Recommended for Use
without Prior Understanding."

Playtesters?  I'm sure this question must have come up.  How was it
played?

Tony