Card Game DB
Sign In
Create Account
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!
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!
1
Quill & Tankard Regulars - Issue 8
Aug 06 2012 05:25 AM |
CardGameDB
in Game of Thrones
Small Council Quill & Tankard Regulars Ire Ratatoskr WWDrakey GoT FAQ 3.3
Welcome to a special issue of Quill and Tankard Regulars. On Friday, FFG updated the FAQ to version 3.3. The new version of the FAQ can be found here.A Raven from the Citadel
A Raven from the Citadel explains new developments in the A Game of Thrones FAQ and Tournament Rules.
In this issue we will explain the most important updates, why they were made and what they mean, from a rules viewpoint. We will not go into the new FAQ’s implications on strategy and deckbuilding - look for further Small Council articles to address these topics.
Threat from the East
[lightbox='got/threat-from-the-east-qod.jpg']got/qtr_threat-from-the-east-qod.jpg[/lightbox]
As originally printed, Threat from the East has the following text:
When revealed, you choose one:
-Each player draws 3 cards and then discards 3 random cards from hand.
-Each player discards 3 random cards from hand and then draws 3 cards.
After the erratum, the effect reads as follows:
When revealed, you choose one:
-Each player draws 3 cards. Each player that drew 3 cards discards 3 random cards from hand.
-Each player discards 3 random cards from hand. Each player that discarded 3 cards draws 3 cards.
To understand the issue, you need to remember how then-effects work. If two effects are separated by the word then, the part before then needs to resolve sucessfully for the part after then to happen. The question with the original wording of TftE was whether the successful resolution of the pre-then part was checked for each player individually or for all players universally. The first common interpretation was that the effects were to be looked at individually: If, for example, the “discard 3, then draw 3†option was chosen, each player who discarded less than 3 cards would not draw any cards at all, but each player who discarded the full 3 cards would draw. Some players disagreed with that interpretation, however, and lengthy discussions on the Rules board ensued. The matter was brought before FFG, and it was ruled that the way the card was worded, the effect applied universally to all players: In our example, if *one* player discarded fewer than 3 cards, *no one* would draw.
This FAQ update is but a reversal to the old interpretation, worded in unambiguous terms: The effect is to resolved for each player individually.
Shield Islands Dromon / Sorrowful Man
[lightbox='got/shield-islands-dromon-lotr.jpg']got/qtr_shield-islands-dromon-lotr.jpg[/lightbox][lightbox='got/sorrowful-man-aps.jpg']got/qtr_sorrowful-man-aps.jpg[/lightbox]
Shield Islands Dromon
Old text:
After an opponent plays a location, put Shield Islands Dromon on the bottom of your deck to have that player choose to either place that location on the bottom of his or her deck or discard 2 power from his or her House.
New text:
After an opponent plays a location, put Shield Islands Dromon on the bottom of your deck to choose that player. That player must either place that location on the bottom of his or her deck or discard 2 power from his or her House.
Sorrowful Man
Old text:
Response: After an opponent's character enters play, kneel 2 influence to bring Sorrowful Man out of Shadows and into play. Then, that character's controller must choose to either pay you 1 gold or kill that character.
New text:
Response: After an opponent's character enters play, kneel 2 influence to bring Sorrowful Man out of Shadows and into play. Then, that character's controller must either pay you 1 gold or kill that character.
These are two different examples of the same issue. The old text of these cards made a player choose one of two options. The player was under no obligation to choose an option that would actually resolve successfully, though. You could for example choose the pay one gold option to satisfy the Sorrowful Man, even if you didn’t have any gold.
The new wording makes sure that you have to actually do one of the two things: If you don’t have gold to give, you must kill the character. If you have less than 2 power on your house, you must put the location on the bottom of your deck.
Note that nothing has been done about Penny (VD). You still can choose to discard a card from hand, even if you don’t have any.
Griff
[lightbox='got/griff-cd.jpg']got/qtr_griff-cd.jpg[/lightbox]
Old text:
If Griff would be killed, instead attach him to your House Card as your only agenda with the text: 'If you do not control more attachments than each opponent, unattach Griff and return him to play.
New text:
House Targaryen only. If Griff would be killed, instead attach him to your House Card as your only agenda with the text: ‘If you control fewer attachments than each opponent, unattach Griff and return him to play.
The addition of House Targaryen only brings Griff in line with the other Character Agendas, which all have the corresponding keyword.
The change to the passive ability he gains when he’s an Agenda leads to that ability kicking in less often. Before, Griff would always unattach and return to play as long as you controlled no attachments. Now, all opponents need to control more attachments than you for Griff to come back into play. The concern here was that people would just run very few or even zero attachments and abuse Griff as easily repeatable claim soak instead of playing him for his Response.
The following has been obsolete'd by an updated version of the FAQ coming out after this article was written:
The Response says:
After a [Targaryen] attachment you control is discarded from play, kneel 1 influence to return it to your hand.
As we all know, a card that has been successfully discarded is in a moribund:discard state and cannot be removed from the game a second time. In order to work correctly, the Response would have to be worded either as a save response (“Save a [Targaryen] attachment you control from being discarded from play, then kneel 1 influence to return it to your hand.â€) or as a replacement effect (“After a [Targaryen] attachment you control is discarded from play, kneel 1 influence to return it to your hand instead of placing it in your discard pileâ€).
Before the Black Walls
[lightbox='got/before-the-black-walls-vd.jpg']got/qtr_before-the-black-walls-vd.jpg[/lightbox]
The text on Before the Black Walls says:
When revealed, name a challenge type. In order to declare any characters to attack or defend during challenge of that type, a player must declare all of his or her eligible characters. Then, if this is your revealed plot card, trigger the 'when revealed' effect of the top River plot card in your used pile.
The last sentence about the top River plot card in your used pile is shared by all River plots.
The problem here is that the way Before the Black Walls is worded, the second sentence (“In order to declare...eligible charactersâ€) is a constant effect and as such not part of the plot’s “When revealed...†effect. As long as BtBW is your revealed plot, there’s no problem. But if you were to play another River plot, and came to resolve BtBW again as the top River plot card in your used pile, all you’d get to do would be to name a challenge type. The other stuff about declaring attackers/defenders wouldn’t apply.
The FAQ update fixes this, and BtBW can be triggered as written even if it is the top River plot in your used pile.
3.39 Cards enterting play between initiation and resolution of an effect
If a card enters play after the initiation of a general (non-targeting) effect, but before that effect's resolution, it may be affected by the general effect.
Imagine the following situation:
Plot phase. It is Summer. You have a Maester of the Sun (ASoS) in play and a copy of Darkstar (PotS) in hand. One player flips Valar Morghulis (Core). Valar’s effect is initiated (step 1). You trigger Maester of the Sun’s Response to save him (step 2). In order to do that, you must discard a card from your hand. You discard Darkstar. When Darkstar is discarded from hand or deck, he’s put into play instead. So Darkstar ends up in play. Valar’s effect resolves (step 3).
Now, people were unsure if Darkstar would die to Valar. Sure, some said, he’s around for the resolution of the effect. No way, others claimed, he wasn’t there when the effect initiated after all. The FAQ update resolves this dispute. Darkstar would indeed die in the above scenario.
The same thing can also happen if you use Bloodrider (MotA) to cancel a save on a Valar turn.
Updated Framework Action Window (plot phase)
There has been uncertainty and some back-and-forth in the past on when exactly titles are chosen in multiplayer games. The updated flow chart (FAQ p. 20) thankfully fixes this.
Tournament Rules Updates
In addition to the FAQ, competitive AGoT players also received some updates to the the AGoT Tournament Rules.
The most important changes are:
- Collusion and deals before or in-between games are now forbidden. This essentially means that you cannot, for example: enter a Melee game with a friend and promise to support each other, promise to try and stop a certain player from doing well in a Melee game, or decide that you will take a draw from a Joust Swiss game.
- Scouting has been expressly forbidden. This means that you are not allowed to try and intentionally find out the contents of another players' deck beforehand during the Tournament, in order to obtain a tactical advantage.
- Modified wins (winning when the game reaches the time limit) in Joust now provide 4 points instead of 3.
- If a card effect states that for some reason you cannot win the game, then you cannot even recieve a Modified Win - the best result you can hope for is a draw. This has an impact on the The Maester's Path (GotC), since now having chains stuck on your Agenda is a much larger risk.
- Changes to the Overall Scoring for events that combine Joust and Melee points. This was probably changed due to the old system being criticized after GenCon last year.
Questioned by the Conclave
Questioned by the Conclave is a series of quizzes for our readers, loosely based around the topics of the Issue in question. Correct answers will be posted in the comments, after enough readers have had their chance of testing their knowledge. The difficulty of the questions will vary from those directed at Apprentices, to those best suited for Archmaesters.
1. Your opponent is running The Brotherhood Without Banners and has 5 power on his Beric Dondarrion. He plays a Ghaston Grey from his hand, while you have a Shield Island Dromon in play. What happens?
2. Your opponent puts Catelyn Stark (LoW) into play as a defender. Can you bring The Sorrowful Man out of shadows using his ability to attempt to kill her?
3. What happens now if you reveal Threat from the East, your opponent has 2 cards in hand (you have 4) and you choose the "discard first then draw" -option?
Antti Korventausta (WWDrakey) is a self-proclaimed Finnish AGoT philosopher and nitpicker, who also used to practice Quantum Mechanics, but found that it paled to AGoT in both interest and complexity. As a Stahleck regular and judge, he sometimes has oddly vivid dreams of understanding portions of the game. In AGoT, he'll play anything as long as it's suitably twisted... often ending up with something that has horns on it.
Helmut Hohberger (Ratatoskr) started playing AGoT in September 2010 and has never looked back (although his wife has, longingly). As a German, he loves rules - and I mean *loves* 'em. Try triggering a Response at the end of a phase on his watch, and he'll probably invade your country. He has actually read the FAQ, and was made a judge at Stahleck 2011 and at various other events. He sometimes answers rules questions on boardgamegeek and the FFG rules board. Some of his answers haven't even been contradicted, corrected or expanded upon by ktom - there is no higher accolade for a rules board morlock.
Every Maester needs a Raven on his shoulder. As a Finn, Iiro Jalonen (Ire) got pulled under the waves by Krakens years ago, and has never looked back. A self-inflicted Shagga and active member of the global AGoT community, he has always strived to know the rules of the game, in order to make them do ridiculous things.
- Zaidkw likes this
30 Comments
2) Yes (assuming you have 2 influence standing, of course), because the trigger for Sorrowful Man is a character entering play.
3) Your opponent discards their 2 cards and draws nothing, you discard 3 random cards and draw 3.
2) Catelyn enters play, so Sorrowful Man can trigger. When it comes to "entering play", there is no difference between "put into play" and "play". Sorrowful Man wouldn't be able to trigger if the response read "after an opponen plays a character".
3) The opponent discards the last two cards in his hand, and draws none (due to not fulfilling the condition of discarding 3 random cards). You discard 3 random cards (being left with 1) and proceed to draw 3 new cards.
2. Hell yes.
3. You discard and then draw. He discards 2 and draws none.
The answers are of course exactly as Khudzlin, Flint and Grimwalker explained above.
1. Against the Brotherhood Agenda the Shield Island Dromon becomes extremely effective location removal.
2. The Sorrowful Man can trigger to almost anything entering play, from Meera Reed (TftH) to Khal Drogo (Core).
3. Threat from the East now works as a nice plot for discarding the last 1-2 cards from an opponent's hand. Additionally, you can use it in combination with any pre-plot draw, since you will not be able to reach the draw of 3 and thus will not have to discard (when using the draw then discard option).
I know the argument is that other cards have have the words "instead of" and to that I say "OK, that's nice. Where does the rules state that it needs to say that to have the same effect?"
I would like to think that since FFG didn't "fix" his response that they don't feel it is "broken" and is indeed "working as intended."
Just my 2 cents. Sorry for beating a dead horse.
As for the rest of the rules changes, I am a little shocked that they made an errata for Sorrowful Man and the Dromon specifically instead of just making an FAQ update in regards to the "choose" mechanic in the first place. Unless they don't intend to "fix" Penny or any of the other "choose" cards.
Well, I can sort-of see the argument for Griff's Response being a replacement effect, just one that's been worded completely differently to every other replacement effect in the game.
The problem really here is identification of replacement effects... so far it has been pretty clear cut: "if it has the word instead, it is a replacement effect". Now, if they were to state that Griff's Response is indeed a replacement effect, without changing it's wording, how would we identify a replacement effect?
Have a look at say, Meera Reed (TftH). If instead is not a special word that identifies a replacement effect, how can you deduce that Meera's effect isn't actually a replacement effect, that's supposed to trigger even from herself leaving play? How would you see this affecting her strength as a card, and would these kind of problems arising on many other cards be worth allowing Griff to have his ability unchanged?
I'm actually *very* glad that they didn't go and make any kind of blanket rules change in order to fix Sorrowful Man and Shield Island Dromon. How many cards could that have potentially affected, something like 50-200? Has anyone looked at every single card with the word 'choose' to make sure that it wouldn't cause anything silly with them? Blanket statements have a bad way of starting more fires than they stop.
Besides, I don't see why we should only have cards that force you to choose an option that succesfully does something. Look at say Theon Greyjoy (PotS). I've always thought he's fine the way he is... and he would be pretty brutal if he didn't have that 'out' in his ability.
There. Your turn.
BTW, I have a question concerning agot rules, I've already posted it here: http://www.cardgamed...f-the-wolf-acos, nobody answered though (maybe it's just too easy, but still, I'd like to know the answer). I'd apprieciate if some of you guys could take a look at my last comment there.
Also, I imagine the Sorrowful Man question was to show how fun can it be now that he works (since he could trigger to almost anything even before the errata, it's just it was extremely useless)?
Though I don't know why I am arguing my point. Regardless everyone will play like he "works" anyways, and FFG didn't see fit to change him, so either they haven't noticed the various posts discussing his "broken" response or they don't see it as broken and didn't feel the need to include an update into the FAQ. who knows.
I understand the reluctance to do a blanket change. However, I say that because it seems to me they never inteneded for the "choose" option to work as it has, where you are able to choose an unsuccessful option. I got this from the news report about the FAQ:
"A few cards in A Game of Thrones offer a choice to the players they target. Some are intended to be all upside for the player triggering the effect, and some are intended to affect all players equally, either negatively or positively...Then there are cards which are meant to be entirely negative for your opponent. Those cards are intended to allow players to put pressure on their opponents, making them pick between two undesirable effects. The wording on the cards like Shield Islands Dromon (Lions of the Rock, 46) and Sorrowful Man (A Poisoned Spear, 110) allowed for an unintended “out.†Some players would choose an effect they could not fulfill and thereby ignore the effect. These cards have received errata, so the opponent must fulfill one of the effects if possible. The only way to avoid fulfilling the effect is to be unable to fulfill either effect."
They say "some cards" and "choices" and talk about the available "out" and then specifically mention 2 of the cards with the "choose" wording. Then proceed to errata just those 2 examples given. It just seems odd to me to make the statement that "on cards like ...." when they could have just said that they indented for those 2 cards to be more powerful without the option of an out. Instead they make a statement that, to me, indicates it will be a global change, giving 2 of the best known examples, and then... only changes those 2 cards in the example.
As for Theon, yes his effect would be pretty brutal if we didn't have an out. SM and Dromon can be pretty brutal now too. Does that version of Theon see any play as it is now, where you still have an out? Because if not, then he suffers the same fate as the pre-errata SM.
"I would like to think that since FFG didn't "fix" his response that they don't feel it is "broken" and is indeed "working as intended."
Watch out. This can sometimes be pretty tricky logic. Is Thundering Calvary (QoD) working as intended because FFG hasn't updated it's text in the FAQ? You'll note, if you read closely, that its ability refers to a card that doesn't exist, meaning that the passive will never go off, similar in many ways to Griff.
Are you saying you would rule TC doesn't work simply because it references a card that doesn't exist, and since FFG didn't make a clarification that it will remain broken and have no effect?
Nice to see FFG fix Griff fully, and Sandsnake Veil and Jhogo are good to hear also. Looks like they've finally cleaned up many of the dangling typos.
EDIT: Oh, and I saw Theon run in a few Stark Sieges at Stahleck last year, if I remember correctly. To nice effect as well, apparently.
EDIT2: Also fixed up the portion in the article by overlining the portion on Griff's Response.
side note of semi-related topic: Can't wait for next season of GoT - has anyone else watched the cast intros of the new characters for the 3rd season?
Looks like a brilliant cast for Season 3. Since Storm of Swords is one of the best books in the series, my hopes are pretty high for the next two seasons. =)
Oh, and gotta love the choice on Oleanna, should do her justice.
Is that the same guy who was Beric on the first season?