2C1C- Episode 202

-Kennon wins for that early pun. 

 

-I have to agree, I'd have preferred different card backs for the plots (admittedly, I just sleeve them a different colour anyway, so I guess it functionally doesn't matter).

 

-I like that our plot spoiler for this week directly shuts down yours! I hope FFG continues this trend...

Halfway through the podcast I was planning my day and thinking that it was Friday. 

Glad someone liked my pun, Istaril!

 

Ha, and yeah, sorry about that Scantrell. We had to delay this one a bit to launch it at the appropriate preview date.

Don't the unsullied have short swords in the books? Why do they only use spears in the show?

not to be pushy but it's 2 days now

not to be pushy but it's 2 days now

 

Well it does say "posted tomorrow" . . . which is never today, so Kennon basically covered his ass there.

Just a point on comparing the 2nd edition banner agendas to Conquest agenda - the latter lets you take any card, the former only the non loyal (which should in theory be weaker). Imagine Martatheon rush decks without access to Robert Baratheon, Knight of Flowers, Melissandre, for example.

I think it will be a necessity early game to have enough cards for a varied deck. During the first cycle of packs it may well go out of fashion as the factions get enough stuff in house. Then as the card pool expands further it becomes more popular again as factions have enough good non loyal cards to fit.

Will be an interesting evolution I think.

My apologies, guys! All cards are now posted!

thanks

So, the fact Summons is a Kingdom means that Naval Superiority will work against it. Relatively poor stats compared to currently spoiled plot apart from reserve too.

I can see Iron Island Shipwright maybe working in Martell as an answer to Dany etc. You can search it out with the Task plot, and if you have played the castle plot before this you can get around the OOH penalty too. A cheeky copy depending on meta, and as long as you already intended to use castles, could work. If you didn't want castles its not worth it though.

Iron Kings Guard is harder to justify I think, unless you go full Bay of Ice winter choke with kingsroads and high initiative. Of course, there are plenty of good choke plots with weak initiative so even then it doesn't entirely work.

Just a point on comparing the 2nd edition banner agendas to Conquest agenda - the latter lets you take any card, the former only the non loyal (which should in theory be weaker). Imagine Martatheon rush decks without access to Robert Baratheon, Knight of Flowers, Melissandre, for example.

 

I'm pretty confused by this statement.  I thought Loyal and "House X only." were synonymous.  Conquest agendas cannot have "House X only" cards for the House you are "conquesting" just like banner agendas cannot have their respective Loyal cards in their decks.

 

Unless I am totally misunderstanding what you're trying to say?

Basically, I think there will be a lot more loyal cards in 2nd edition than there are house X only in first. If Conquest the lcg is anything to go by most of the best cards are loyal (though there are a few that are more dodgy).

I thought the examples you quoted were not house Baratheon only, if they are than substitute other rushy equivalents - I would expect cards like these to be loyal in 2nd edition.

The art is a re-use of Summoning Season, which makes sense.

Basically, I think there will be a lot more loyal cards in 2nd edition than there are house X only in first. If Conquest the lcg is anything to go by most of the best cards are loyal (though there are a few that are more dodgy).

I thought the examples you quoted were not house Baratheon only, if they are than substitute other rushy equivalents - I would expect cards like these to be loyal in 2nd edition.

 

I think we are simply just not on the same page.

I'll try again if I'm not making myself clear (it could be I am and you simply disagree )

In first edition, events aside, House X only is not particularly common. You can take Robert Baratheon in any deck for example. Until an errata the same applied for the most recent Daenerys.

In second edition, I think loyal will be a lot more commonplace and expect to see it on most unique characters and locations (current dual house cards like Theon and Jorah might be a bit different, I think they should just get versions for each faction), plus the best events and attachments.

Therefore comparisons between the banner agendas in 2nd edition and the conquest agenda in 1st are not really valid. If you had to take 12 cards for the Conquest agenda in, lets say, Martatheon, and couldn't take any unique Bara characters, would it be worth it? That's more the kind of decision to weigh up with banners. Early on it will be necessary just to get a deck going, but later in the game's life it becomes a tougher choice.

OK now that you have explained it more, it makes more sense to me. 

 

If we are going off of what is known, they are comparable functionally because of deck building restrictions.  In any case, perhaps we will see more Loyal than "House X only." cards, but I think it will be more for balancing purposes.  It is easier to see what may end up being broken with a card pool in it's infancy(and learning from 1.0) so I'm thinking that is likely what is happening here with seeing some cards have the loyalty tag slapped on.

 

I see some spoiled unique characters without the loyalty tag slapped on them too.  See Eddard Stark, The Tickler, Arya Stark, the Hatchlings, Ghost, Jon Snow, and I can't find anything else spoiled... so it looks like we will still see a fair amount of non-loyal unique options.

That's true, there are less loyal than I thought there would be already.