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 - Volume 2, Issue 9
Apr 03 2016 11:30 AM |
WWDrakey
in Game of Thrones
WWDrakey Istaril JCWamma Ratatoskr Ire
Quill & Tankard Regulars - Volume 2, Issue 9Ok. Who bloody stole my Chain? I’m sure I left it here with my coat.
Hey, where’s my ink pot? And all my spare feather quills!
My letter opener! My letter opener!
Ye’ve been mugged, ‘vent ya?
There’s an old piece of lore that could pertain to such a predicament, let me fetch out the vellum… Indeed, here it is. I fear we have suffered at the hand of the dreaded… Hotpie? No, MAGPIE!
Daft Maesters, Magpies dun nick whatchamacallits. ‘Tis one o’ ‘em “Bourbon Legent’s”. ‘Tis n’ urch’n nicked yer doodads.
Backroom Rumours
Backroom Rumours brings up various timely topics related to current developments in the game and specifically rules matters.
In parallel with GAMA (Game Manufacturer’s Association, annual trade show), FFG has announced a number of changes to their organized play program:
A new organized play policy, separating “Star Wars” and “non-Star Wars” (including the upcoming L5R) organized play into two streams, with distinct seasons and culminating in different Worlds. While Thrones keeps a timing pretty close to its current one (SCs are moved up to just after Worlds), the extra space at Worlds and the incentives (flight and accommodation) for defending champions from now on, sound like direct improvements.
Some specific points here:
- All FFG games gain a new European “Continental” championship. As Thrones has one already (Stahleck), it may be pulled under the same umbrella as the other games (and may thus affect Stahleck’s Status).
- One implication of the articles is that card designs would be limited to World Championships, stripping Stahleck (like Gencon) of that reward.
- FFG also continued their policy of awarding reserved spaces at Worlds for North American regionals, but this policy has not been extended to cover Europe.
A Judge program will be implemented this year, with certification in July 2016. There’s a discussion on what this could encompass here.
The Fundamental Event document is a new framework of terms and definitions from which each game’s tournament rules will (and do) draw from. Some key points of interest are the new tournament tiers (Relaxed, Formal, Premier) - where Judges are required (and cannot participate) in the latter two, alternate tournament structures (records-based and graduated cuts)
New Tournament Rules, now called the “Tournament Regulations”, which formalizes key concepts of the fundamental event document for the Thrones tournament scene. Key changes include the illegality of non-FFG components, a requirement for opaque sleeves at Formal+ events, the requirement of an adult’s consent for a minor to play and the ability to concede or intentionally draw (ID) a match.
Also worthy of note (and an entire article) are the originally sloppy proofreading (fixed with a ninja update 1.01), complete omission of melee rules, and ‘advanced’ cut structure with some truly absurd breaking points.
Finally, an addendum on Volume 2, Issue 8. We’ve got an answer (directly from FFG, Ktom & Istaril) on what happens in the scenario when a 2 STR character (like Arya Stark) with stealth is declared as an attacker, with a Blood of the Dragon and Daenerys Targaryen affecting her.
The short of it is, that since the text for stealth in the RRG is:
When a player initiates a challenge, for each character with stealth he or she declares as an attacker, that player may choose one character without stealth controlled by the defending player. Each chosen character is considered bypassed by stealth, and is not eligible to be declared as a defender for that challenge.
The end result is that the usage of stealth happens immediately when declaring, so Arya gets to sneak past one more hapless Dragon loyalist before her inevitable doom. Yet another noble Stark sacrifice for the Pack.
The Raven’s Message
The Raven’s Message exclusively reveals and discusses an up-and-coming, either mechanically or rules-wise interesting, card. The cards are from future products, and have been obtained directly via raven from the Archmaesters at the (FFG) Citadel.
With attachments becoming a larger force in the game than they ever were in first edition, Weapons at the Door could prove set to be a highly influential plot... as we'll look at in a minute, after first acknowledging the most important part of any new card, the rules quirks!
By the standards of the Quill & Tankard this card is no great sphinx. There are only two tricksy aspects worth covering - the timing of the Forced Reaction:, and what qualifies as a card with the printed attachment cardtype.
Firstly let's focus on the timing. As a Forced Reaction: at the beginning of a phase, Weapons at the Door must happen before any other reaction to the phase beginning - for instance, if a Milk of the Poppy is attached to your Brothel Madame, the Milk would be back in hand before the Madame's reaction window, meaning you could trigger the Madame. As for other forced reactions? If they conflict, it falls into "first player decides" territory. For example, if your Samwell Tarly has a Milk of the Poppy on him and two of the plots revealed are Weapons at the Door and First Snow of Winter, the first player gets to choose whether First Snow happens first - and the terminal Milk of the Poppy is discarded when Samwell leaves play, or whether Weapons at the Door happens first - and Milk of the Poppy is returned to hand. Of course, with 9 initiative you'd expect the Weapons player to win that particular battle, provided they remembered to go first.
The other question is of what qualifies as a "card with the printed attachment cardtype", and how this differs from, say, an "attachment". The difference is that the latter covers everything currently in play that is considered an attachment - this includes events that turn into attachments, such as Risen from the Sea. Since FFG was wise enough not to provide Greyjoy with a plot to recur all their copies of Risen from the Sea for free, this plot only fetches back printed attachments. And that's the only difference, right?
Wrong. There's another, fairly common example of a card that has a different cardtype to the one printed on the card - namely, duplicates. Whereas Risen from the Sea gains the attachment cardtype but does not have it printed, a duplicate of a unique attachment loses the attachment cardtype but does have it printed. What this means is that, when the forced reaction triggers, if you control a duplicated unique attachment, you have an interesting situation. In essence, both the card and the duplicate are printed attachments. However, as the Interrupt happens before the cards bounce, you can still choose to use the duplicate to save the original (as with First Snow)… or, you may return not only the unique attachment to your hand but the duplicate as well (unlike First Snow). Clear Quill & Tankard territory there!
A couple of final points. Firstly, note that this doesn't stop attachments from re-entering play at any time - so minimal damage is done to some attachments, in particular those with Ambush. Secondly, all attachments are bounced simultaneously, so if we hypothetically had a terminal attachment that attached to other attachments, it would return to your hand instead of falling off and being discarded.
So, with the rules implications safely considered, it's time to look at the actual card effect and what it means for the game. On the face of it, there are five main usages for this card:
- Like any mass-targetting card, Weapons at the Door acts as a safety valve for the game if ever attachment-heavy decks become too prevalent. Expect this plot to surface in decks then, ready to act as a hard counter to decks relying too heavily on one strategy.
- Attachment Control. If you have some key characters that you need to keep free from negative attachments, or know that particular positive attachments will cause you serious trouble that your deck will otherwise struggle with, this plot could be powerful for you - especially if you have the hand attrition to be able to snipe those attachments before they return to play. Think, for example, of being able to remove Milk of the Poppy from your Robert Baratheon, then immediately play Seen in Flames to discard it before the opponent could reattach it. Or perhaps removing an Attainted from your Cersei Lannister, then using your ability to hit for 2 claim on intrigue to take it straight back out of the hand. Or simply rely on reserve to do your work for you!
- In a deck running lots of attachments, the plot may be useful to give you an opportunity to reassign them. This is particularly true if you deploy terminal attachments and couldn't simply remove the character to get them back - maybe you put a Milk of the Poppy on Paxter Redwyne because your opponent was choked at the time, but now they've put down the Arbor and you'd rather have your Milk on their Margaery Tyrell or Randyll Tarly. It also applies to your positive attachments - maybe you put a Noble Lineage on Jorah Mormont for safe-keeping, but don't want to sacrifice him - and the 2 power on him - to get the attachment back to put on your shiny new Merchant Prince. With only 6 reserve though, it is worth pointing out you need to be careful with not forcing yourself into discarding too many cards.
- If you rely on an opponent's character having no attachments, this plot will provide you with a simple guarantee of that fact. Weapons at the Door in both title and art represents the fact that no weapons may be taken into Vaes Dothrak, so it is perhaps fitting that Targaryen can put this effect to good use by sniping previously-protected characters with their Plaza of Punishment. Less thematic, perhaps, is the degree to which Greyjoy can exploit this plot, first by pushing unopposed through more easily with Raiding Longship and secondly by killing any character they want with the Seastone Chair. I suppose Euron showed us that not being allowed to spill blood doesn't stop you from being a devious killer?
- If an attachment were to be printed with a powerful comes into/leaves play effect, this plot would be a powerful engine for triggering those effects. While no such attachment currently exists in second edition, we can get something of a close parallel with Lightbringer - with Melisandre in play, if you're lacking for R'hllor cards you could return Lightbringer to your hand and have it ready to play again next round. This is the only actual example in the cardpool at the moment, so for now you'll have to use your imagination...
Antti Korventausta (WWDrakey) is a self-proclaimed Finnish AGoT philosopher and doomsayer hermit, who used to practice Quantum Mechanics, but found that it paled to AGoT in both interest and complexity. Having played and judged for more years than he would like to admit, he has found himself on the winning side of rules arguments more than he would expect. In any game he plays, he has a tendency of playing anything he considers to be off the beaten path, whether it makes sense to others or not.
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. He is the quintessential rules board morlock. While the others played and frolicked about outside, he sat by candlelight in a remote corner of the library and tried to get a grasp on the intricacies of the 1st edition rules. He even thought he did not do too bad at it, but then the Call of the Three-Eyed Crow drove him into the darkest depths of madness and despair. But he’s all better now, honest, and looking forward to new challenges.
Iiro Jalonen (Ire) Started AGoT in 2009, got pulled under the waves by Krakens years ago, and has never looked back. While not an Oldtown local, he has often been spotted in the Quill & Tankard Inn making sure that the rules of sportsmanship are maintained with the traditional finger dance games. 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.
James Waumsley (JCWamma) is a first edition veteran who has judged at multiple large tournaments including the European championship of Stahleck. A renowned loudmouth and pedant, he will shout about the rules loud enough that he can be heard by those north of the wall.
Alex Hynes (Istaril) co-hosts Beyond the Wall, writes articles for FFG, created and curates the Annals - and even tried to fill in ktom’s shoes in the big ktom drought of 2013. When the Regulars asked him to be an honorary member, he, of course, refused and said he didn’t have the time. Or should have, anyway. Still, how much work can being an “Honorary” member be?
- agktmte and sparrowhawk like this
8 Comments
I have a facedown card as duplicate on Arya Stark, and it happens to be an attachment card. How it will interract with this plot? My opponent doesn't know that it have an attachment cardtype. Hell, even I may not know, if I haven't looked at it.
Brilliant question. It hinges on the words "A facedown card has no inherent attributes other than “facedown card,” being extended to included printed attributes (an inherent attribute).
I'm going to have to look into this in a little more detail and get back to you, make sure I'm not applying the wishful thinking of "obviously you don't want a game state the judge has to keep checking" to your question.
I've had a chance to dig into this, and confirmed my conclusion (with some helpful input from Ktom). Cards don't, and in fact, could not, refer to card information on the back of a card (the 'front' of a facedown card). You couldn't interact with a faction card from the core as a printed agenda simply because the back of it has the printed Agenda type. Put another way, the "printed" characteristics of a facedown card is the card back.
Whilst most of this point was covered above, the ambush is particularly of relevance imo because it lets you get them back out that turn and have less fear of reserve.
Greyjoy's gotta love this plot. All those pesky attachments preventing Raiding Longships and Seastone Chairs go away. Targ too with Plaza of Punishment.
This plot has some cool interaction with Ambush attachments if you have the gold available during a turn this is revealed. Also... maybe you have better targets for negative attachments after you've already placed them?
A cool alternative attachment control card.
I was wondering if you guys could elaborate on why this plot can interact with duplicates of attachments. From the rules reference a duplicate has "no text, title, characteristics, type, or traits. A duplicate is only considered a blank "duplicate card" while it is in play." Does the word "printed" override the duplicate being considered a blank card? Just sort of confused on that one. Thanks!
Aye, it's the word "printed" that's doing the work there. It may not currently have a card type while in play, but the physical card still has a printed one.