Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Night's Watch Fealty / NA Discussion

- - - - - Nights Watch Nightswatch Fealty joust

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts
I thought I'd do a separate topic for the discussion of Night's Watch Fealty and No Agenda Decks.

Share yours, discuss ideas and decks, etc.


Here is mine:
CardgameDB | ThronesDB

Back in black

The Night's Watch / Fealty

Packs: Core Set (3)

Plots
1x A Clash of Kings (Core Set)
1x A Storm of Swords (Core Set)
1x Building Orders (Core Set)
1x Heads on Spikes (Core Set)
2x Marched to the Wall (Core Set)
1x Sneak Attack (Core Set)

Characters
2x Littlefinger (Core Set)
2x Rattleshirt's Raiders (Core Set)
3x Benjen Stark (Core Set)
2x Ghost (Core Set)
2x Jon Snow (Core Set)
3x Maester Aemon (Core Set)
2x Old Bear Mormont (Core Set)
2x Samwell Tarly (Core Set)
2x Ser Waymar Royce (Core Set)
2x Yoren (Core Set)
3x Messenger Raven (Core Set)
2x Old Forest Hunter (Core Set)
3x Ranging Party (Core Set)
3x Steward at the Wall (Core Set)
3x Veteran Builder (Core Set)

Locations
3x The Kingsroad (Core Set)
3x The Roseroad (Core Set)
2x Castle Black (Core Set)
3x The Wall (Core Set)

Attachments
3x Milk of the Poppy (Core Set)
2x Longclaw (Core Set)

Events
2x Superior Claim (Core Set)
3x A Meager Contribution (Core Set)
3x The Sword in the Darkness (Core Set)



#2
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts
I'm thinking of changing the plots a bit and of dropping the Superior Claim from the deck.

One card I've been eyeing is Wildling Horde. It will provide an use for the Faction card when not used for Fealty and the Pillage can bring targets for Yoren. I'm not sure if it's 36 character count is too high though.

Another few cards I've been eyeing are Varys, the Iron Throne, and Put to the Torch (currently Locations are very important and PttT undervalued in my book) but neutral slots are tight due to Fealty.

#3
agktmte

agktmte

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1294 posts

I'm thinking of changing the plots a bit and of dropping the Superior Claim from the deck.

One card I've been eyeing is Wildling Horde. It will provide an use for the Faction card when not used for Fealty and the Pillage can bring targets for Yoren. I'm not sure if it's 36 character count is too high though.

Another few cards I've been eyeing are Varys, the Iron Throne, and Put to the Torch (currently Locations are very important and PttT undervalued in my book) but neutral slots are tight due to Fealty.

 

36 is not too high.


  • Zeetro likes this

#4
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

36 is not too high.

I guess, even more so that it is Night's Watch that is kinda winnie.

What cards would you change in the deck, if any?

#5
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

I'm thinking of changing the plots a bit and of dropping the Superior Claim from the deck.

One card I've been eyeing is Wildling Horde. It will provide an use for the Faction card when not used for Fealty and the Pillage can bring targets for Yoren. I'm not sure if it's 36 character count is too high though.

Another few cards I've been eyeing are Varys, the Iron Throne, and Put to the Torch (currently Locations are very important and PttT undervalued in my book) but neutral slots are tight due to Fealty.

 

Iron Throne is great if you get it early. Past turn 4, it can be difficult to get much value out of it. By then, unless you run Wildfire Assault, your opponent should have enough strength that they can get one or two challenges off and still combat your dominance. 

Then it's only really worth 1 or 2 power. 

 

Now, if you run wildfire assault, it may be worthwhile late game. But a lot of people are of the opinion that Wildfire is not great in NW because your three characters will never be greater than their three.

 

Is it worth several spots in your deck? Maybe. I'm not sure. It has helped me in 3 of my 6 games though, so its not a dead card by any means.

 

Also, the problem with PttT is you need to win a military challenge by 5 as the attacker. Not the easiest for a NW fealty deck. Basically, you can only use that card when you get Jon and a few ranging parties out haha.

 

Superior Claim is another card that I put in my NW Stark deck. I haven't actually used it yet, mainly because I haven't needed to. That's another card, I feel, that works great early. But past turn 4 or 5, I don't know if you win many challenges by 5 or more, especially if your opponent is making you go first each turn.

 

It's still up in the air for me at this point as well.

 

As for plots, I think the Storm of Sword is a bit odd. Head on Spikes is a fine plot, but I bet you could fit Fortified Position (one turn where you're basically guaranteed to proc the wall) and Filthy Accusations in your deck and it would run a bit more smoothly. The two Marched to the Walls are very Nedly, so I have a hard time arguing against them, but your economy seems horrible. You may want to fit in Calling the Banners if you can.


  • Zeetro likes this

#6
szczudel

szczudel

    Advanced Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 370 posts

What I really enjoy is to put The Wall on the board (while playing NW-fealty) suggesting defensive playstyle. Then while having Jon, letting one UO. Opponents goes : "A-Ha, gotcha!". 

And I go: "Put to the Sword, Superior Claim, Teayrs of Lys in response kind of gotcha?".

 

I love this game :)



#7
ooo

ooo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 526 posts

Common wisdom is that there are two big reasons to play NW (as in iconic cards) and that they work counter to one another.

 

The Wall asks you to defend.  It doesn't matter what with or whether you win or, just defend and defend and defend.

Jon Snow asks you to attack.  It doesn't matter with with, really, because he'll pitch in whatever.  Just attack three times a turn.

At the moment the NW cardpool is caught badly between those two stools.  Most NW decks I see are trying to pick one of those two cards and maximise it, rather than try to include both.



#8
CrocodileJames

CrocodileJames

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts

Common wisdom is that there are two big reasons to play NW (as in iconic cards) and that they work counter to one another.

The Wall asks you to defend. It doesn't matter what with or whether you win or, just defend and defend and defend.

Jon Snow asks you to attack. It doesn't matter with with, really, because he'll pitch in whatever. Just attack three times a turn.

At the moment the NW cardpool is caught badly between those two stools. Most NW decks I see are trying to pick one of those two cards and maximise it, rather than try to include both.


If you get the chance to go second though Jon Snow and the Wall can work together. Defend with The Wall and then your turn attack if you know you can get them all through.

#9
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

Common wisdom is that there are two big reasons to play NW (as in iconic cards) and that they work counter to one another.

 

The Wall asks you to defend.  It doesn't matter what with or whether you win or, just defend and defend and defend.

Jon Snow asks you to attack.  It doesn't matter with with, really, because he'll pitch in whatever.  Just attack three times a turn.

At the moment the NW cardpool is caught badly between those two stools.  Most NW decks I see are trying to pick one of those two cards and maximise it, rather than try to include both.

 

I used to feel the same way.

 

Until I played some Night's Watch games.

 

Then I realized that you can play the Wall and Jon Snow in the same game. Then whatever you still have standing after opposing their three attacks, you can turn around and attack them with.

 

With Jon its extremely efficient and can allow you to get a lot of really strong attacks off with just, say, a Veteran Builder, Old Forest Hunter and/or Steward at the Wall standing.

 

Or, you can allow some unopposed attacks, kneel the Wall, get all 3 of your attacks off, throw in a superior claim, and then sacrifice your kneeling Veteran builder for another 2 power.

 

It allows for flexibility. If you have 5 defending characters and need to kneel 3 of them to oppose, you still have one standing to attack with Jon and then Jon himself can attack for 2 retaliations that will likely be won, if not unopposed in addition to getting the Wall proc'd.

 

The deck can actually be pretty dynamic when it comes to keeping your opponent guessing as to your intentions that round.


  • Zeetro likes this

#10
ooo

ooo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 526 posts

I used to feel the same way.

 

Until I played some Night's Watch games.

 

Then I realized that you can play the Wall and Jon Snow in the same game. Then whatever you still have standing after opposing their three attacks, you can turn around and attack them with.

 

With Jon its extremely efficient and can allow you to get a lot of really strong attacks off with just, say, a Veteran Builder, Old Forest Hunter and/or Steward at the Wall standing.

 

Or, you can allow some unopposed attacks, kneel the Wall, get all 3 of your attacks off, throw in a superior claim, and then sacrifice your kneeling Veteran builder for another 2 power.

 

It allows for flexibility. If you have 5 defending characters and need to kneel 3 of them to oppose, you still have one standing to attack with Jon and then Jon himself can attack for 2 retaliations that will likely be won, if not unopposed in addition to getting the Wall proc'd.

 

The deck can actually be pretty dynamic when it comes to keeping your opponent guessing as to your intentions that round.

 

So Jon Snow becomes a mid-lategame kicker card once you defenses are set?

I guess I'm struggling to see myself spending 6 gold on a card that I can't really kneel to defend with and needs lots of other standing characters as well.  So The Wall and Jon Snow work best together when you've got... 7 characters out (with the right spread of icons)?  That's a hell of a lot to ask.



#11
szczudel

szczudel

    Advanced Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 370 posts

I used to feel the same way.

 

Until I played some Night's Watch games.

Watch out, habesjn!!

It is dangerous to have opinion based on actual faction experience!!

 

Edit: in order not to make spam-only post I will add that when playing on Jon Castle Black is as Important as The Wall. Habesjn knows what  I am talking about because he actually plays the sh!t out of NW right now.


  • Zeetro and JoeFromCincinnati like this

#12
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Iron Throne is great if you get it early. Past turn 4, it can be difficult to get much value out of it. By then, unless you run Wildfire Assault, your opponent should have enough strength that they can get one or two challenges off and still combat your dominance.
Then it's only really worth 1 or 2 power.

Now, if you run wildfire assault, it may be worthwhile late game. But a lot of people are of the opinion that Wildfire is not great in NW because your three characters will never be greater than their three.

Is it worth several spots in your deck? Maybe. I'm not sure. It has helped me in 3 of my 6 games though, so its not a dead card by any means.

Also, the problem with PttT is you need to win a military challenge by 5 as the attacker. Not the easiest for a NW fealty deck. Basically, you can only use that card when you get Jon and a few ranging parties out haha.

Superior Claim is another card that I put in my NW Stark deck. I haven't actually used it yet, mainly because I haven't needed to. That's another card, I feel, that works great early. But past turn 4 or 5, I don't know if you win many challenges by 5 or more, especially if your opponent is making you go first each turn.

It's still up in the air for me at this point as well.

As for plots, I think the Storm of Sword is a bit odd. Head on Spikes is a fine plot, but I bet you could fit Fortified Position (one turn where you're basically guaranteed to proc the wall) and Filthy Accusations in your deck and it would run a bit more smoothly. The two Marched to the Walls are very Nedly, so I have a hard time arguing against them, but your economy seems horrible. You may want to fit in Calling the Banners if you can.


I was thinking Iron Throne to guarantee dominance when the opponent Wildfires.

Agreed on economy.
- 1 Storm of Swords
+ 1 Calling the Banners

Fortified position is a very interesting idea. Would make whoever has Longclaw on the board great (add the third copy then?). Thought what plot could Fortified Position replace? Clash of Kings? Sneak Attack?

#13
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts
Well the forums where down and I made a new deck from the ground up. I went and posted it on the Facebook group.

It is an early draft. It is a Rush deck. Partially inspired by the mini-curve deck discussion on Episode 222 of The White Book Podcast.

I focus on non-Uniques, only running 2 of each Unique except Maester Aemon. I'm considering dropping Fealty (I know this is the Fealty Topic but bear with me) and run No Agenda | Banner of the Watch. This could let meadd other Neutral cards (like Littlefinger, Varys, The Iron Throne, or Rattleshirt's Raiders) but it might raise the cost curve to much.

As I said, the list is pretty much a draft. It is untested and unpolished. It needs work.

Without further ado...

Decklist on ThronesDB

My Watch Begins
The Night's Watch / Fealty

Plots
1x A Clash of Kings (Core Set)
1x Building Orders (Core Set)
1x Calling the Banners (Core Set)
1x Counting Coppers (Core Set)
1x Filthy Accusations (Core Set)
1x Fortified Position (Core Set)
1x Marched to the Wall (Core Set)

Characters
2x Wildling Horde (Core Set)
2x Benjen Stark (Core Set)
2x Ghost (Core Set)
2x Jon Snow (Core Set)
3x Maester Aemon (Core Set)
2x Old Bear Mormont (Core Set)
2x Samwell Tarly (Core Set)
2x Ser Waymar Royce (Core Set)
2x Yoren (Core Set)
3x Messenger Raven (Core Set)
3x Old Forest Hunter (Core Set)
3x Ranging Party (Core Set)
3x Steward at the Wall (Core Set)
3x Veteran Builder (Core Set)

Locations
3x The Kingsroad (Core Set)
3x The Roseroad (Core Set)
2x Castle Black (Core Set)
3x The Wall (Core Set)

Attachments
3x Milk of the Poppy (Core Set)
3x Longclaw (Core Set)

Events
2x Put to the Sword (Core Set)
2x Superior Claim (Core Set)
3x A Meager Contribution (Core Set)
2x The Sword in the Darkness (Core Set)



#14
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

So Jon Snow becomes a mid-lategame kicker card once you defenses are set?

I guess I'm struggling to see myself spending 6 gold on a card that I can't really kneel to defend with and needs lots of other standing characters as well.  So The Wall and Jon Snow work best together when you've got... 7 characters out (with the right spread of icons)?  That's a hell of a lot to ask.

 

Not necessarily.

 

The beauty of NW is you can selectively defend.

 

In terms of Icon spread, the biggest weakness in NW right now is intrigue. You basically have your stewards, Sam, Yoren and Jon. Maester Aemon can defend too, but unless you have Castle Black, I would never recommend blocking with him.

 

Some decks don't run Yoren as he isn't really reliable because intrigue and Marched to the Wall are really the only way we can discard cards.

 

So that leaves you with Sam, Jon and your stewards, who are common claim soak. So Jon as an intrigue defender is actually really useful.

 

You get to choose when you defend and when you do not defend.

 

As for the concern about having your defense set...it really isn't difficult to have your defenses set. For example, I played 3 games yesterday.

 

My three set ups, and forgive me if they aren't exact, but they were the following, if I recall correctly:

 

Game 1: Tumblestone Knight, Benjen, Rose Road, Winterfell Steward.

Result: Defenses set before turn 1. Then I played a Ranging Party and Sansa turn 1 with Noble Cause. I was able to get at least one attack off each turn for the entire game.

 

Game 2: Sansa, The Wall, Winterfell Steward

Result: Turn 1 Waymar Royce and Castle Black off of Calm Over Westeros. Defenses set.

 

Game 3: King's Road, Ranging Party, Maester Aemon

Result: Turn 1, Samwell, Arya, Benjen using Noble Cause. Defenses set and a free military save.

 

It really isn't that difficult to set your defenses very early in the game, as you are only really concerned with opposing, rather than truly winning on defense. I didn't get the Wall in the 1st game, but I still won with Dominance, Sansa and some strong counter attacks with Ranging Party and Benjen. I got the wall late in game 3, and it clinched the game, but the score was pretty even to that point regardless.

 

Yes, Jon Snow is typically icing on the cake, but it is a strong effect for 6 gold, especially after you have your board set up pretty well. He is not a turn 1 or 2 character. He is a turn 4 or 5 character. That's why I personally only run 2 of him, rather than 3. I mulligan hands that he shows up in during set up because I know I want him once I get a Waymar and Ranging Party out. Hell, even a Veteran builder really helps him get in stride.

 

You just gotta play the deck. I didn't believe it until I started playing them either.

 

I was thinking Iron Throne to guarantee dominance when the opponent Wildfires.

Agreed on economy.
- 1 Storm of Swords
+ 1 Calling the Banners

Fortified position is a very interesting idea. Would make whoever has Longclaw on the board great (add the third copy then?). Thought what plot could Fortified Position replace? Clash of Kings? Sneak Attack?

 

I personally think Heads on Spikes is merely a bonus card.

 

Here's my thinking.

 

Imagine you're facing a Greyjoy deck or a Baratheon deck.

 

In those decks, you're terrified of Balon Greyjoy, who can reduce all your blockers to 0, making it unopposed, and Robert and Mel, who can both kneel your valuable, valuable blockers.

 

In these types of situations, what plots will assist me in procing the Wall?

 

Well, Filthy Accusations allows me to kneel Balon. That makes him a non factor, then I just need to get around the stealth. If I have Benjen out, I can block at least one challenge, and they don't have any stealth intrigue, so I just need another ranger or another blocker past their stealth.

 

It also kneels Robert, which would make his intimidate a non factor that turn, nor do I have to contend with a 10+ attack from one character.

 

Fortified position also allows me to defend the wall. With no stealth, intimidate or Mel kneel, it is a turn of your icons vs my icons. And if I have the spread to oppose, I can. Very few tricks to play a that point.

 

Power Behind the Throne. Another good one if I only have one ranger, but need to defend both power and military. Or, it allows me to defend with Maester Aemon and stand him for military claim prevention.

 

 

 

On the other hand, Heads on Spikes has a chance of being impactful, but it doesn't really lend towards my overall strategy. I'm not trying to thin your hand. I don't have any ability that bounces a character back to your hand, in the hopes of spiking him. I don't have a lot of intrigue challenges or increased intrigue claim to make you cling to every card you have. The plot helps me gain power in some games, is the equivalent of an intrigue challenge in other games, but it doesn't increase the reliability of my deck's core strategy, nor is it a consistent form of power for my rush to 15.

 

If I'm playing it for the power, I have a much better chance, going second a lot (or having the option to just skip my challenges if I am forced to go first), of getting Dominance than randomly picking a character out of my opponent's hand, making Feast for Crows a better plot for my power rush than Heads on Spikes. Especially since I, personally, am running Iron Throne. And you seem to be thinking about it.

 

HOS is a fantastic splash play, but hardly reliable on a game to game basis.

 

 

Similarly, Marched to the Wall is another fine card. I have smaller guys. Maybe other factions don't run so many smaller guys. I have a relatively good chance to sacrifice just a small guy in exchange for a 2 or 3 gold guy, or in extreme scenarios, a 5 or 6 gold cost guy. If they had a reeeeeeally bad start. I'm not a Stark or Targaryen deck that will get 2 or 3 kills in a turn via Ice, Winter is Coming, Greywind, Plaza of Punishment or Dracarys, leaving just your one high impact card that I can march next turn. I don't even necessarily have the one character to spare, as I may need all my characters to oppose challenges and get maybe one attack off.

 

In the Nedly sense, I love Marched to the Wall in a NW deck. In terms of playability, it only really lends itself towards Yoren. If I'm not running Yoren, I really have no need for Marched to the Wall, except in extremely rare occurences, like if I can predict a Wildfire Assault, which can happen depending on the board state.

 

I think you have a lot of room to really play with your plot deck and find what plots help your deck the most and which are just frills on the edge that could be cut with little to no love lost

 

PS. Holy crap what a long website downtime. I have been waiting to post this for, literally, hours haha.


  • agktmte and Zeetro like this

#15
chrsjxn

chrsjxn

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts

My Night's Watch fealty deck is gimmicky right now, but it's fun to play against newer players who aren't rocking the Baratheon Fealty cheese. 

 

http://thronesdb.com...f-the-joust-1.0

 

Jon's ability gets around the wording on Jousting contest, so you're just about guaranteed to win as many challenges as you make on those rounds. And it lets you double dip on the strength boost from The Wall. It is, however, incredibly weak to kneel or Milk.

 

The best aspect of the deck is the draw economy from the Messenger Ravens and the Fealty discount. It's why I think NW is one of the few factions that really benefits from Fealty more than No Agenda.



#16
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

My Night's Watch fealty deck is gimmicky right now, but it's fun to play against newer players who aren't rocking the Baratheon Fealty cheese. 

 

http://thronesdb.com...f-the-joust-1.0

 

Jon's ability gets around the wording on Jousting contest, so you're just about guaranteed to win as many challenges as you make on those rounds. And it lets you double dip on the strength boost from The Wall. It is, however, incredibly weak to kneel or Milk.

 

The best aspect of the deck is the draw economy from the Messenger Ravens and the Fealty discount. It's why I think NW is one of the few factions that really benefits from Fealty more than No Agenda.

 

Eh, that's not so weak to Milk. It's not like Jon can be milked.


  • Zeetro likes this

#17
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

I personally think Heads on Spikes is merely a bonus card.

Here's my thinking.

Imagine you're facing a Greyjoy deck or a Baratheon deck.

In those decks, you're terrified of Balon Greyjoy, who can reduce all your blockers to 0, making it unopposed, and Robert and Mel, who can both kneel your valuable, valuable blockers.

In these types of situations, what plots will assist me in procing the Wall?

Well, Filthy Accusations allows me to kneel Balon. That makes him a non factor, then I just need to get around the stealth. If I have Benjen out, I can block at least one challenge, and they don't have any stealth intrigue, so I just need another ranger or another blocker past their stealth.

It also kneels Robert, which would make his intimidate a non factor that turn, nor do I have to contend with a 10+ attack from one character.

Fortified position also allows me to defend the wall. With no stealth, intimidate or Mel kneel, it is a turn of your icons vs my icons. And if I have the spread to oppose, I can. Very few tricks to play a that point.

Power Behind the Throne. Another good one if I only have one ranger, but need to defend both power and military. Or, it allows me to defend with Maester Aemon and stand him for military claim prevention.



On the other hand, Heads on Spikes has a chance of being impactful, but it doesn't really lend towards my overall strategy. I'm not trying to thin your hand. I don't have any ability that bounces a character back to your hand, in the hopes of spiking him. I don't have a lot of intrigue challenges or increased intrigue claim to make you cling to every card you have. The plot helps me gain power in some games, is the equivalent of an intrigue challenge in other games, but it doesn't increase the reliability of my deck's core strategy, nor is it a consistent form of power for my rush to 15.

If I'm playing it for the power, I have a much better chance, going second a lot (or having the option to just skip my challenges if I am forced to go first), of getting Dominance than randomly picking a character out of my opponent's hand, making Feast for Crows a better plot for my power rush than Heads on Spikes. Especially since I, personally, am running Iron Throne. And you seem to be thinking about it.

HOS is a fantastic splash play, but hardly reliable on a game to game basis.

Hmm. Good points all around.

Similarly, Marched to the Wall is another fine card. I have smaller guys. Maybe other factions don't run so many smaller guys. I have a relatively good chance to sacrifice just a small guy in exchange for a 2 or 3 gold guy, or in extreme scenarios, a 5 or 6 gold cost guy. If they had a reeeeeeally bad start. I'm not a Stark or Targaryen deck that will get 2 or 3 kills in a turn via Ice, Winter is Coming, Greywind, Plaza of Punishment or Dracarys, leaving just your one high impact card that I can march next turn. I don't even necessarily have the one character to spare, as I may need all my characters to oppose challenges and get maybe one attack off.

In the Nedly sense, I love Marched to the Wall in a NW deck. In terms of playability, it only really lends itself towards Yoren. If I'm not running Yoren, I really have no need for Marched to the Wall, except in extremely rare occurences, like if I can predict a Wildfire Assault, which can happen depending on the board state.

I think you have a lot of room to really play with your plot deck and find what plots help your deck the most and which are just frills on the edge that could be cut with little to no love lost

PS. Holy crap what a long website downtime. I have been waiting to post this for, literally, hours haha.


I think I'll always run at least one Marched to the Wall for Nedlyness and for Yoren, one of the few Intrigue Night's Watch characters. Power and Military are easy to come by. Intrigue, not so much. That's what I did on the deck I linked on the post above yours.

#18
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

Hmm. Good points all around.


I think I'll always run at least one Marched to the Wall for Nedlyness and for Yoren, one of the few Intrigue Night's Watch characters. Power and Military are easy to come by. Intrigue, not so much. That's what I did on the deck I linked on the post above yours.

 

I think 1 marched is fine. I was just suggesting you could take 1 out.

 

NW is, basically, the only faction capable of skipping confiscation (since basically only Benjen and Old Bear can be milked), which is great for plot manipulation. Gives you that extra slot to really drive home your strengths.

 

I've seen a lot of NW decks run two filthy accusations just because it is so good at stopping one big challenge in the right scenario.

 

I still personally prefer Fortified position for my "I need to defend everything no matter what this round" card, but Filthy Accusations is a close second.

 

My one comment about your plot deck above is that there doesn't really seem to be a strong opening plot. Obviously a large portion of decks run Noble Cause, but NW fealty can't do that because Old Bear is their only lord. You aren't currently running Calm Over Westeros, which is another common opener.

 

Your best opener is probably building orders.

 

Counting Coppers is a great card, but I am not sure you really need it since you have the three Ravens plus 2 Sams for card draw. I don't often find myself out of cards very quickly in a NW deck.

 

That said, I definitely understand why you have Counting Coppers in there.



#19
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

I think 1 marched is fine. I was just suggesting you could take 1 out.

NW is, basically, the only faction capable of skipping confiscation (since basically only Benjen and Old Bear can be milked), which is great for plot manipulation. Gives you that extra slot to really drive home your strengths.

I've seen a lot of NW decks run two filthy accusations just because it is so good at stopping one big challenge in the right scenario.

I still personally prefer Fortified position for my "I need to defend everything no matter what this round" card, but Filthy Accusations is a close second.

My one comment about your plot deck above is that there doesn't really seem to be a strong opening plot. Obviously a large portion of decks run Noble Cause, but NW fealty can't do that because Old Bear is their only lord. You aren't currently running Calm Over Westeros, which is another common opener.

Your best opener is probably building orders.

Counting Coppers is a great card, but I am not sure you really need it since you have the three Ravens plus 2 Sams for card draw. I don't often find myself out of cards very quickly in a NW deck.

That said, I definitely understand why you have Counting Coppers in there.

Filthy Accusations...need to fit that in my second deck list. Maybe I'll cut out A Clash of Kings. I like this A Clash of Kings' stats, decent gold and great initiative, and the ability can get a point in. But under NW it might not be so hot. Guess I'm a bit biased because I've used it a few times under Greyjoy who can easily stealth a Power Challenge to trigger it.

#20
JoeFromCincinnati

JoeFromCincinnati

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1346 posts

Filthy Accusations...need to fit that in my second deck list. Maybe I'll cut out A Clash of Kings. I like this A Clash of Kings' stats, decent gold and great initiative, and the ability can get a point in. But under NW it might not be so hot. Guess I'm a bit biased because I've used it a few times under Greyjoy who can easily stealth a Power Challenge to trigger it.

 

By turn 4 or 5, my opponent has figured out what telling me to go second does. And they don't like it.

 

So initiative becomes a definite factor later in the game to continue going second. Sneak Attack and Clash of Kings are kind of interchangable at this point. I'm personally running Sneak Attack just because I don't want my Clash of Kings to lose to Sneak Attack.

 

My plot deck for my NW Stark deck is:

 

Obviously, in a NW fealty, you take out Noble Cause, but you can sub in Marched to the Wall. I really like this plot deck, but it's still a work in progress. Calm Over Westeros feels kind of in between. Not super impactful, not does it help me proc the Wall, as my opponent will still use the attack I lower, just to try and get unopposed. Been thinking about making it a second Filthy Accusations, as that could be essentially the same thing, especially early game when they only have one big guy who, if I kneel, he can't initiate one of that character's challenges that turn.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Nights Watch, Nightswatch, Fealty, joust