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!
* * * * *

Poisoned Coin

Poisoned Coin

Poisoned Coin

Type: Attachment House: Stark
Game Text:
House Stark only.
Response: After attached character stands, kill attached character. Then, draw 1 card.
Flavor Text: And when all the coins had been counted and tasted, the old man would scrawl upon a parchment...
Number: 83 Set: THoBaW
Quantity: 3 Illustrator: Paul Guzenko
Recent Decks: Stark: Wolves & Arya (Final Version 60 Cards)
Stark Noble Conquest Martell
Stark: Wolves & Arya v3 (Final)
Robb & Roose
Stark KotHH River Control


Sep 26 2012 09:35 PM
and this is instantly one of my favorite new cards
    • ShadowcatX2000 and brunopontes like this
Oh my....

This card is amazing.
I´m pretty sure this card will make it to the restricted card list.
Lots ot combos are possible: recirculation Bronze Link (FtC) / To Be a Wolf (SB) / Galbart Glover (CbtC) or instant kills with The Inn of the Kneeling Man (FtC) / Distinct Mastery (Core).
Get it back with Bronze Link and put into play with Pale Steel Link (FtC) on a character that is already kneeling (do it after your military challenge, so the target can't be killed for claim)

edit: And once you have all 3 Coins circulating, attach one to Eddard Stark (TTotH) for your own Golden Tooth Mines (Core) :P You can always Tin Link + Bronze Link + Pale Steel Link when you want to pass it on again :D
    • MasonThornberg and Kennit like this
That won't work, this is not a choose ability. So if you trigger the response, Eddard cannot cancel as it is not a targeted ability. Too bad though.
You're right, my bad. It was more of a joke, but thanks for pointing that out :)
It's quite funny how FFG styles this card a "good deal" in the new offical release article, instead calling it "sonofbitchkillingmotherfucker" :)
Well. It does not have an instant effect and there is a lot of effective attachment hate floating around.
    • Grimwalker likes this
I think that's why this is not just a good card, but an *entertaining* one. It's one thing to just murder some poor schmuck, but you put this out there and suddenly the other player has *decisions* to make. Do they dedicate the resources to getting it off through some kind of attachment hate? Do they throw the character away to try and have a decisive challenge? Etc.
For 1 gold I have a 90% certain kill and a card draw. I can wait until refresh... Or the other player has the option not to use the character, stay idle with it. Either way I'm closer to rule the table and winnig the game. Of course the card can be discarded, but there are only 4-5 effects that can discard in any phase, and not just in marshalling.
    • jackmerridew likes this
I'm guessing it's more like 10% certainty on the kill :P

In most cases the player will just keep the character alive and standing until he or she have attachment removal available or just kill the character for claim, and you won't draw a card. And if the player chose to use the character, its only in a scenario where that's worse for you.

Don't get me wrong, I like the card and I think it's definitely playable at times. Not just a "sonofbitchkillingmotherfucker" card ;P
    • BtrLuckyThanGood likes this
Not using the character means no attack and no defense. If I can get through with some unopposed challenges because the other player is waiting for the attachment removal, it was worth the one gold. And this card can be put on almost every army char too.
I'd say there's a good chance that the opponent just kills the character for military claim. In which case, you are technically at a one card disadvantage.
Oct 01 2012 12:47 AM
You have to look at the quality of that card though. Even if you didn't get card draw from it, you made your opponent choose something for claim he wouldn't have otherwise. Still sounds like a good deal to me unless you waste the coin on some shmuck they didn't care about in the first place.
    • Alaka likes this
Thing is you opponent only chooses to kill that character for claim if that's the best option for him or her. If it is an important character, I bet the player kills something else until attachment control is available. Or the opponent may choose to use th character in a challenge and then let it die to claim or card effect, if that's the best option for him or her.

Bottom line is, there's always at least 3 alternate ways to handle this, and it's never you making the calls. Your opponent is. But sure, it's only one gold. Still, try to think of as Fishing Net - but for 1 less gold, you offer your opponent the possibility to use the character once if he or she so wishes, but at the cost of giving you one card draw. (And yes, there is of course other differences too, like kneeling for effects and dominance counting).

(And no, it can't be played on almost every army character since close to half of them have "No attachments" without the "except weapon" addition :)"
I still dont get it. Are we argueeing on a card that has a direct kill effect and a card draw for one gold? Its not a surprise effect, but I'm not intend to use it some 0-1 gold weenie, but on chars like the double-renown Robert Baratheon, Wendamyr, all the maesters, the ever standing Jaime, all the charaters, that are there for their strength, or for their ability... If any of those are standing and are not used, I'm happy. And most likely they are going to die anyway. If he/she defends, attacks with them, they die. If not, maybe the player won't have enough power the win challenges. You say I get card disadvantage. I say I get gold and card advantage :)
The thing is that you see it as a kill and draw effect, when it's neither unless you opponent chooses it to be (unless you combo it to put it into play outside marshalling) :)
Okay. From now on I see this card as an upgraded milk of the poppy, and not a direct kill card. :P

Edit: The card comment portal really shouldn't display more then the last entry for each card to avoid the list being flooded by a single card when there have been an discussion.
Oct 01 2012 03:09 PM
That sounds like a good suggestion Laxen. As for this attachment though, even if I am giving my opponent the option of how this card will affect them, it's not like it is options they will like.
As long as I have Ser Davos Seaworth (TBoBB) I think I'll be okay. As long as they don't, ya know, put it on him. ;D
slothgodfather: Yes. In many cases all options will be bad for the opponent. Still, the odds for any of the cards multiple options may not be that bad, or bad at all, are multiple times higher than the odds for a straight out kill effect. The player does after get to chose between:

A: Wait for attachment control - slightly considerable if available in deck and character is important, very considerable if available at the moment.
B: Leave the character as is - considerable if the character has a non-kneeling ability which is useful or if winning dominance is valuable.
C: Use the character as normally - considerable if the usage has an effect greater then loss of the character + one card to the opponent, for example if it makes you win the game.
D: Claim soak - considerable if nothing else is.

That gives you opponent 4 different options. And he or she will be sure to choose the one that you'll like the least. So you have to play it in a situation where neither of these options are manageable - which may end up pretty tricky :)

A straight out kill effect would enable only one option: Kill the character, and possibly save it if able.

(Edit: I don't know why I'm ranting so much about this specific card. I guess I just like to argue... it's Browbeat from Magic all over again :P)
What happens if the response is canceled? Since it doesn't say to discard attachment to kill character, I would imagine that it stays attached to the character and waits to be triggered again... Does this sound right?
Oct 02 2012 05:53 AM
Yeah the card stays in play for the next time the attached character is knelt. There would also be no draw. Interestingly if the controller of the character saves it from the kill effect you would still get the draw!
Oct 02 2012 06:05 AM
How would that work Empty as the pre-then "kill character" did not resolve successfully?