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

Additional first Cycle Spoilers! (16-Nov-2015)

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

#101
ScionMattly

ScionMattly

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1281 posts

Sorry, that was my fault.

 

I added the spoiler tags after he quoted it. I didn't realize there were spoiler tags on this forum until ScionMattly used them.

Hooray, I'm helping!
I'm having a wonderful time!



#102
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts

Is that because of the UK implications of the word "bird"?


:) I don't think Varys had such tastes... Also, if you call most girls a "bird" these days, you'll get your balls ripped off and fed to you. Now "lass" is more acceptable. Just a tip the next time you're in the UK and trying to pull in a kebab shop at 3am (yeah, we're right classy over here).

No. My reasoning why I don't like Little Bird and Syrio's Training is because they are such shoe-horned names referring to a specific character, Varys' network of spies and Syrio's tutelage.

We have Syrio now and he is very Nedly (though I would have loved him to have a trait like "Water Dancer"). He effectively does Syrio's Training with Stealth! (The only problem is he is not suited at all for Arya. But that's more Arya's strange design.) So why have the specificity of Syrio's Training when he could be in play against you? Why not something generic like Battle Hardened?

Varys also has a strange text ability. A mechanic to make Littlefinger and Varys a ubiquitous presence in most decks. So why have an attachment that refers to his spy network when he could be in play against you? Why not something generic like "Court Advisor" (from 1.0)? Else both players may have Little Birds. Why create that disjoint unnecessarily?

I like Noble Lineage because it's generic. People understand what it means. But you say "I give Balon a Little Bird" and you just get sniggers. It just sounds silly.

There's also an English colloquialism called "giving someone the bird" which is making a rude finger upwards hand sign at that person. I think the finger is meant to be inserted up an orifice...

So yes, "Little Bird" does have a lot of "UK implications".

Back on topic...

So I just remembered another strong attachment in Ward (Confiscation is such a necessity with all these good attachments) to steal a character like Cersei, Catelyn, Margaery and of course Theon (I think this demonstrates how underpowered they made the Queen). This seems another powerful Stark tool. Marshal phase control seems incredibly strong compared to dominance phase Take the Black. I don't know if such effective "spot removal" (when used for military claim) is going to create an apartheid on cost 4 like First Snow with cost 3. It seems an obvious way to make cost 5+ special.

#103
ErsatzNihilist

ErsatzNihilist

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 141 posts
"Little Bird" has been a colloquialism for "informant" from where I am in the UK for the duration of my life, my mother's life and her mother's. Probably long before that.

Having it give people an intruige icon seems completely on point to me.
  • theamazingmrg and Zeetro like this

#104
Zeetro

Zeetro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

"Little Bird" has been a colloquialism for "informant" from where I am in the UK for the duration of my life, my mother's life and her mother's. Probably long before that.

Having it give people an intruige icon seems completely on point to me.

In Puerto Rico, the Spanish word "pajarito" which is the diminutive version of "pajaro" which means bird has been used for as long as I know as a pseudonym for infomants. The phrase "un pajarito me dijo" (a little bird told me) is used a lot colloquially.
  • theamazingmrg and Gamaran like this

#105
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts
Yes, "a little bird told me" is a common colloquialism. But in the context of Thrones, "my little birds" is what Varys refers to his network of spies. His network. Which we witness are used quite brutally at the end of book 4.

So now we have Khal Drogo with "A Little Bird" and Balon with "A Little Bird" and Eddard with "A Little Bird" and Old Bear with "A Little Bird". They've all got access to Varys' Network of Spies? Or is this meant colloquially to be they've all got an Informant?

It's just such a specific reference that doesn't work for all hosts.

Now take Noble Lineage. You give that to The Tickler and you attribute some hidden birthright to him. Add it to Edric or Jaime and you confirm his lineage. It fits whatever host has it. And you know what? It's even a Condition! Cressen and Collared Maesters can dispute that Lineage, discarding it. Basically, the name fits.

If they want it to be a Condition, make it something appropriate like "Beguiling Voice" or "Cunning Schemer". That's an attribute like Noble Lineage, a condition that can be lost. Perhaps it's just my roleplay background but everyone having "A Little Bird" seems too narrow a reference to Varys' spies. As per the card flavour text (I assume).

Apologies, we've totally derailed this thread but I don't think I'm the only one that cringes whenever I say "I give Asha A Little Bird". I know I've had a snigger from a few people referring to the card.

Of course this is entirely subjective. Like the debate over whether Queen Cersei really should be a potential Stark Ward with less Power than mighty Dagmer. We're quibbling over Nedliness here which many Jaime forum goers don't care much about as cards are just instruments to win with.

All I'm saying is 1.0 had idiocies like Stalwart Eddard (he never died) that at least 2.0 doesn't. But that doesn't mean they have nailed Nedly interpretations (that make a good game experience, that's the primary objective, more than a good card interpretation). There are still areas to improve (IMO) and considering how easy it is to re-skin a good card design by giving it a more appropriate name, it seems a shame (to me) that they've made a few jarring inconsistencies on the Nedliness stakes.

Jeez, not often we see Nedly discussed here.

So, hopefully getting back to the title of the thread...

#106
ScionMattly

ScionMattly

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1281 posts

I guess i don't find it any more disruptive than a Stark/Lannister deck having Ice and Widows Wail on the same character.


  • Bomb and JoeFromCincinnati like this

#107
ingsve

ingsve

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Regarding the name of the icon attachments. One thing to know is that those were the names of the original icon attachments from the first ever A Game of Thrones release Westeros Edition. So while there have been more nedly names in later versions of icon attachments what they have gone for instead is honoring the cards from the original release which they have done with lots of cards in this first cycle.

 

For fun I did a check of what the icon attachments have been named over the years and this is the results:

 

Westeros Edition:

Syrio's Training

Little Bird

Noble Lineage

 

Ice and Fire Edition:

Court Soldier

Court Messenger

Court Advisor

 

Valyrian Edition:

Fighting Lessons

Secret Lessons

Etiquette Lessons

 

Winter Edition:

Born to Kill

Raised to Lie

Risen to Power

 

Iron Throne Edition:

Castellan

Counselor

Steward

 

5 Kings Edition:

The Art of War

The Art of Deception

The Art of Diplomacy

 

After that they didn't do complete cycles of icon attachments any longer but instead reprinted a few of the old ones.


  • Azeltir, sparrowhawk and hagarrr like this

#108
ErsatzNihilist

ErsatzNihilist

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 141 posts

Yes, "a little bird told me" is a common colloquialism. But in the context of Thrones, "my little birds" is what Varys refers to his network of spies. His network. Which we witness are used quite brutally at the end of book 4.

So now we have Khal Drogo with "A Little Bird" and Balon with "A Little Bird" and Eddard with "A Little Bird" and Old Bear with "A Little Bird". They've all got access to Varys' Network of Spies? Or is this meant colloquially to be they've all got an Informant?

It's just such a specific reference that doesn't work for all hosts.


I think that's the point though - they picked a name for the card with a Game of Thrones resonance. Everyone gets an immediate, clear mental picture of exactly what it is because Varys uses the term in the story about his Network.

Seems totally legit to me, and I'd prefer to have cards named to as to have resonance with the story rather than something generic like "Spies in Court" or whatever equivalent you'd choose.

Apologies, we've totally derailed this thread but I don't think I'm the only one that cringes whenever I say "I give Asha A Little Bird". I know I've had a snigger from a few people referring to the card.


I've never even thought to cringe - and my condolences for your situation being stuck playing with children. Perhaps game with some adults?

#109
ScionMattly

ScionMattly

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1281 posts

I know I'm not the only person whos gotten wood for sheep in Catan.


  • theamazingmrg likes this

#110
Toggle

Toggle

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 700 posts
FFG should release a "Little Bird" promo with a small messenger Raven as the art.

#111
Rivarama

Rivarama

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

 
For fun I did a check of what the icon attachments have been named over the years and this is the results:
 
Westeros Edition:
Syrio's Training
Little Bird
Noble Lineage
 
Ice and Fire Edition:
Court Soldier
Court Messenger
Court Advisor...
 
After that they didn't do complete cycles of icon attachments any longer but instead reprinted a few of the old ones.


Why did they even reprint them if there was no rotation?

#112
ingsve

ingsve

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Why did they even reprint them if there was no rotation?

These cards were all from the CCG where there was regular rotations. The actual reprints were in the later LCG where they took isolated cards from the CCH and reprinted them. The cards I listed weren't identical all the time. Other than giving an Icon they also tended to have an aditional effect as well like draw a card when it's played, the setup keyword, +1 STR, the ability to move it once per phase etc.  


  • Rivarama likes this

#113
sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2038 posts

the ability to move it once per phase etc.


Mmmm. That's nice. We never had that in 1.0 - though I'm thinking more a location like "The Small Council" that kneels to move an attachment you control between targets you control (like moving titles, goods etc). Not quite as abusive as Magic's Crown of Ages (which luckily wasn't competitively costed).

I firmly believe design should avoid "X times per phase/turn" clauses. The whole point of Tap / Exhaust / Kneel / place a focus token (Star Wars) is it signifies usage. To have to remember usage is just inelegant. I appreciate they are worried about future combos but surely there are other ways? To be very careful about stand effects for infinite combos (Kennon was so right about Tyrion's Thug in 1.0 yet Bran got the clunky 3 times errata) and open-ended benefits (maybe Old Forest Hunter would not need its limit if cards like The Watch Has Need had maximum cards kept). The "3 times per challenge phase" cards were the worst.

I guess I am spoilt coming from a "cards have no memory" background. But FFG quite often don't care. We see this in a new impending Conquest warlord Mavros who has several cards that have "once per turn" usage that require remembering (I've suggested by using that game's money resource). Surely FFG can see that this is contrary to the whole concept of "rotate the card to remind both players it has been used" doctrine?

Hmmm. Not content with being taken to task for one tiny (entirely subjective) throwaway comment about "A Little Bird" in a long post on another topic, I really haven't learnt my lesson by criticising memory usage card design, I await indignant refutals on this too.

Thanks for that extensive list, Ingsve. It was interesting to see the origins of Court Advisor and Art of Diplomacy both in 1.0 when all attachments were terminal and default no set-up. Always good to get the CCG perspective. You're like this hobby sage: "back in the CCG days, young whippersnapper, we had these cards...". :)

So let's get back to thread topic shall we?

#114
ingsve

ingsve

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Thanks for that extensive list, Ingsve. It was interesting to see the origins of Court Advisor and Art of Diplomacy both in 1.0 when all attachments were terminal and default no set-up. Always good to get the CCG perspective. You're like this hobby sage: "back in the CCG days, young whippersnapper, we had these cards...". :)

Hehe, ya I've noticed me doing that a lot lately. That's the result of the rare position of having played CCG but missed out on all of the LCG 1.0 while most other players only know the LCG 1.0 cards and none of the CCG history even for the cards that were later reprinted in 1.0.

 

It's also interesting since the relaunch of 2.0 revisits a lot of the old cards from early CCG so a lot of this stuff get a nostalgic feel as well.


  • WWDrakey likes this

#115
theamazingmrg

theamazingmrg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 901 posts

On the subject of "X times per turn" cards - they aren't as much of an issue when the core set gives you generic tokens that can be used as trackers.  Conquest, on the other hand, does not have those so it becomes more to remember.  But then again, remembering the board position is a skill that anybody wants to be a decent player has to learn.



#116
theamazingmrg

theamazingmrg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 901 posts

(double post) Grr.



#117
Skelton

Skelton

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 2099 posts
I have a box of several thousand CCG cards. One day, I am going to throw-down, old school and dust them off.
  • imrahil327 likes this

#118
nikotinlaus

nikotinlaus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts

I was thinking about Horas Redwyne a bit. His ability of standing a Lady character has no limit. This means that every effect that stands him and allows him to do another challenge, effectively stands a Lady too. That makes him super effective in Targaryen Banner Tyrell, where you stand him with Illyrio or Power behind the Throne and then stand Daynerys or Maergery when you use him in a challenge. I am realy looking forward to try to abuse this guy...


  • Shadowist and JoeFromCincinnati like this

#119
Shadowist

Shadowist

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts

I was thinking about Horas Redwyne a bit. His ability of standing a Lady character has no limit. This means that every effect that stands him and allows him to do another challenge, effectively stands a Lady too. That makes him super effective in Targaryen Banner Tyrell, where you stand him with Illyrio or Power behind the Throne and then stand Daynerys or Maergery when you use him in a challenge. I am realy looking forward to try to abuse this guy...

 

Doesn't this seem a bit win-more? Until we get cheaper one-off stand tech in Targaryen anyway, this combo with Daenarys would cost 7 (Daenarys) + 5 (Illyrio) + 5 (Horas) + 2 (ability), almost 20 gold. It can be interrupted by milk in two places, seems like the safer bet would be run 3x Rhaegal! Admittedly if you can drop Horas in with Queen of Thorns in Tyrell fealty, then it becomes interesting...



#120
nikotinlaus

nikotinlaus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts

Doesn't this seem a bit win-more? Until we get cheaper one-off stand tech in Targaryen anyway, this combo with Daenarys would cost 7 (Daenarys) + 5 (Illyrio) + 5 (Horas) + 2 (ability), almost 20 gold. It can be interrupted by milk in two places, seems like the safer bet would be run 3x Rhaegal! Admittedly if you can drop Horas in with Queen of Thorns in Tyrell fealty, then it becomes interesting...

What people do tend to forget when counting how much a combo costs is that you neither have to play the characters all in one turn and that you also want some of the combo pieces to be in play anyways. Daenarys is the heart-piece of most Targaryen builds and Illyrio is pretty good in a meta that has plenty of Baratheon. I am just saying that Horas makes something that is already pretty solid just a lot better.