Contesting Changes That Didn't Happen

It's been more than 18-months since Black Chantry Productions attempted to test a rule change for vampire contesting.  Given that my NDA has expired regarding that test and we have a new format in open playtest, I wondered if it was time to talk about resurrecting the potential change.

Proposed Change

This text is from the rules test and not my invention.  The highlight section is the proposed change:

At any time during this phase, if a vampire has at least as many blood counters as their capacity, you can move that vampire face up to the ready region, unlocked. The counters are kept on them to represent their blood.  Counters in excess of his capacity drain off immediately as usual. If the vampire grants additional transfers, those cannot be used on this turn because transfers are gained at the start of the influence phase. If the vampire would contest, you may choose to remove it from the game instead of moving it to the ready region and distribute the pool on it among other vampire(s) in your uncontrolled region. Other types of crypt cards are handled similarly.

I will not provide the results of the playtest feedback as I feel that is inappropriate even with the expiration of the NDA on this rule test.  I will say that change was well received. 

Evaluating the Change

A cornerstone of Vampire: The Eternal Struggle from the days when it was Jyhad, contesting unique permanents represents the wrestling for control over those permanents.  While two Methuselahs trying to obtain the Ivory Bow for their minions, is an interesting game mechanic, two Methuselahs struggling to control Theo Bell is a different matter.  Because vampires are the backbone of the game and the means by which you can attack your prey and defend yourself, contesting vampires is often detrimental to both Methuselahs involved.  In the early game, this is especially true, while in the late game, after Methuselahs are more established, there is a strategic element to it.

How does the proposed rule address the issues with not being able to play (especially at the start of the game):

• There's no delay in obtaining a replacement.  There's no need to transfer off the contestable vampire.  This means there's no delay in obtaining a replacement vampire.
• The potential contested vampire is removed from the game.  This prevents wacky Possession tricks.
• The blood is transferred, as you choose, among one or more other crypt cards.  Instead of an 8-cap Adrino, maybe you end up with a 6-cap Branimira and 2 blood on someone else.
• This does nothing for folks who are all-in on a star vampire, like Nergal.  You live by the star vampire, you die by the star vampire.
• It is still possible to contest vampires.  While early game you may wish to avoid contesting, late game you can remove a tooled-up vampire by bringing out your own copy.  The strategic level in contesting is actually more interesting and dynamic.

Does this solve all potential issues with crypt card contesting? No.  However, this ameliorates some of the problem in a way that makes it worthwhile for both players and gives each options.

The Two-Player Format

Why bring this up now?  We have a new format in public testing: Two-player Format.  The rules for this format make the following changes to contesting:

If more than one unique crypt card with the same name is brought into play, that means control of the card is being contested. If another unique crypt card with the same name is brought into play, it is immediately contested, and can still be used as normal.

This is quite similar to an open-playtest for the contesting rule. That approach was widely-panned by testers.  Update on 5/17/2025, after my initial writing, but before posting, this bad idea is further from the base game in that "contested" vampires do not contest their title.  So, now there's an exception on an exception.

While most parts of the two-player format are just limited versions of the multiplayer VTES that we know and love, the contesting rule is a complete change.

• Player count: reduced (obviously)
• Library size: reduced (but based on the same original Jyhad dynamic library size rules as multiplayer)
• Cards allowed: limited set of cards (but all cards that are usable in regular VTES)
• Starting transfers: accelerated, but similar (Player 1 simply start with Player 3's transfers)
• Contesting rules: completely different

Why Use the Blood-Move Rule?

If we decided to use the closed-playtest rule (henceforth the blood-move contesting rule) in the two-player format, there's no reason we could not adopt that for the regular format.  In so doing, everything that a player learns in two-player becomes useful in multi-player.  There are no "rules changes" only for that format; there are only rule adjustments for number of players.  Someone going from two-player VTES to multiplayer VTES shouldn't expect the contesting rule to change and, in my opinion, it shouldn't.  Since there's a need to make contesting less harsh for the two-player format, why not make it less-harsh for all formats?

Thoughts

I have been a proponent of this blood-move contesting rule and have taken opportunities to bring it up even after the playtest for it ended.  In my opinion, now is the perfect time to clue the wider community into this test.  Perhaps, in conjunction with the two-player format changes, we can push forward with this change as well.

However, I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter.  Do you think this will allow games to remain more competitive for the potential contesters?  If you're not a fan of it, why? Etc.