2 Champs and a Chump- Episode 156

okay just started listening and gotta say well done sir well done indeed on that intro lol.

Mel's Scheme may have been restricted because of the infinite gold combo with Tywin's Favor, attachment saving Davos and his wife. You could put a ton of characters into your discard pile then bring all of them out on a Mel's Scheme's turn. If enough have renown you win right there.

It doesn't end the game pre-plot of turn 2 like Bran, but its big and not that hard to hit.

Since both Myra and Davos both pop in and out of the discard pile during the combo a per phase limit would not stop it. Errata on Tywin's Favor with "(cannot be saved)" would let FFG prevent it. If you don't have nightmares or a way to cancel a character ability you just sit and watch your opponent flood the board.

Only 1 of the 4 pieces is restricted, so this deck is still in the meta. However, it's a lot less viable since Red Queens Faithful significantly increased the deck's stall power until the combo was ready and gave it a good PLAN B.

To Greg, who disagreed with the Bleeds/Red Keep restrictions, this FAQ has received nearly unanimous approval. The designers explained in the accompanying article that the game had moved away from challenges mattering, and a lot of that was fueled by the Red Keep making Bleeds, HF, Favorable Ground, Prince's Plans, etc. too easy. We can argue about it being "only" a resource, but it's an efficient, difficult to stop, and rather unique resource.

@Scantrell, I wouldn't say that nearly everyone voting for an 8 out of 10 means that everyone thinks it's a perfect, FAQ, however. I voted an 8 myself because I think it's a solid update overall but I disagree with the Red Keep restriction and find the KotHH errata to be cluncky.

I'm guessing the chapter pack review is next week's episode then? I was expecting it today, but then noticed the podcast was 2 hours long just on FAQ, so can understand why it was left for later!

I have gotten flamed quite a bit for my opinions on this FAQ, but I am a stubborn mule.

I think restricting Red Keep is bad for the game. It effectively soft bans a lot of cards and more importantly deck types from being viable in competitive play (especially with the amount of location hate in the current meta. I am completely fine with (and agree) that restricting certain play cards are necessary. Restrict Plans, Feast, Bleeds, etc... Then let the deckbuilders pick which of those powerful effects their deck requires to be competitive. Restricting the Red Keep (in the current card pool) takes those choices away from players.

My tweaks to the FAQ would be (in order of importance):
1. Take Red Keep off
2. Put Gran or Naval Escort on
3. Put Favorable Ground on
4. Put Alannys on (imo she should have been on since the TLV FAQ)
5. Make KotHH count as 3 cards at command (but agree this errata in general is not very refined)

1. Take Red Keep off
3. Put Favorable Ground on

I'd be fine with that.

I think restricting any Core Set card is a bad decision. We've gone years without needing to restrict any core set cards and I don't think any are needed now.

Furthermore, if the designers want to limit resets, why didn't they restrict Valar Morghulis? There are several cannot be killed characters in the game right now. How are they not the new version of WB+Red Viper. There are only 2 cards that can stop Valar (Outwit and Counterplot) but many more that could cancel Westeros Bleeds. Most decks just expect that they'll be losing a batch of characters at some point in the game. Whether that comes from Valar or Bleeds isn't that big a deal.

Finally, how many Martell Decks have needed to be restricted because they abuse the Red Viper? Wouldn't it make more sense just to restrict the Red Viper like they did in Melee?

I honestly feel like some people forget how much more influence the game has now than it did before. The Red Keep will be quite easy to replace when it comes to influence specifically.

Even if it is soft banned, if you can't adapt to it's loss by replacing it with other influence sources, then I don't know what to tell you.

Great cast, guys. So glad CGDB loads on my work PC now, I can actually keep up! I disagree with a few opinions this week, but I will start with what I do agree on. Taking off the Refugees and Retaliation was probably a mistake on FFG's part. I liked the meta without knowing there were 3 of those guys and a 4-gold 2-claim plot in every deck. The FAQ updates in the past have always addressed "auto-include" cards like these, so it's strange to me that these came off. Sure, they want to promote Aggro in 5.0, but I think this will make a lot of games less exciting.

As for the Red Keep/Westeros Bleeds restriction, I think this was a result of new cards making them more powerful. Wiping the board and still drawing 2 cards for not marshalling anything was ridiculous. It's not necessarily that WB or RK were overpowered by themselves, but they combine too well with other, newer effects. I think they made a smart move hitting these IF they had not also taken off the Refugees and Retaliation.

not sure if retaliation will make it into a lot of decks these days. Rivers, Cities so many good control plots...we will have to see.

other than quentyn and non-cities lanni kneel,no one should play retaliation anymore.far better options than a blank 4 gold double claim.there is already an identical option in men of pride,only better.

I honestly feel like some people forget how much more influence the game has now than it did before. The Red Keep will be quite easy to replace when it comes to influence specifically.

Even if it is soft banned, if you can't adapt to it's loss by replacing it with other influence sources, then I don't know what to tell you.

Have you ever tried to play Influence cards without KotHH and Red Keep, if the opponent plays any sort of location control you will never play a single card that requires influence, unless you get lucky.

I don't want to play a game of luck and I also do not want to play Rock, Paper, Scissors. So having something that keeps a great part of your deck alive even if the opponent plays location control is needed.

other than quentyn and non-cities lanni kneel,no one should play retaliation anymore.far better options than a blank 4 gold double claim.there is already an identical option in men of pride,only better.

Retaliation! also lets you win initiative and trigger things like Bay of Ice, it is also a sure way of going second unlike Men of Pride where your opponent can decide. This thou comes to player references do you most of the time want to go first or second, still Men of Pride will rarely give you the result you want. Not to mention that for some aggro decks the keyword blank of the Men of Pride actually hurts more than helps. I wouldn't say Men of Pride is all that better, its has it uses as does Retaliation! I wouldn't be surprised to see both of them ran in same deck thanks to 2 claim and 4 income, even more so if we gets more winter decks.

rlx i think you just need to make sure you have a bit of extra inf in your deck if your running lots of inf events. Also don't forget their are other ways to get inf then locations. A few chars have inf as well..

Here is the thing, I knew it was only a fun deck in a non-influence house and I threw every available influence producing card into the deck, except Crossroad because that card is just bad, even Shivering Seas was in there. If you then just get destroyed by double Wintertime Marauders and two Price of War in the first round, I would rather lose 6 game in row to Bloodthirst, atleast I have fun when playing against Bloodthirst.

I mean, I know that I'm in the minority on thinking Crossroads is ok in the right deck, but man, someone has to agree with me that it's better than Shivering Seas, lol!

On Retaliation, I do agree that it's going to be tough for decks that are already using some type of City or River chain to fit it in, but many of those decks are somewhere on the control to tempo spectrum. Along with the other changes in this FAQ, decks farther along on the spectrum to hard aggro become much more viable. The ability to have another 4 gold, 2 claim plot in those decks is something that they will love.

It's gonna be annoying to have the Red Keep restricted with the addition of the new greyjoy event that wipes all locations. KoTHH locationless greyjoy anyone?

Take a look at the deck that I've been working on for All Things Shagga. It's not quite locationless, but it's sure KotHH with Reaver's Song!

If anyone remembers the thirtysomething-plot NPE Bloodthirst deck Kyle talked about a few episodes back after the Bloomington, IL SC, I'll just point out that the new FAQ drove six stakes through its heart: Meraxes, Bleeds, TRK, Prince's Plans, Bungled, and Preston. It had all of those with Burning on the Sands.

I sent the Questioned Claim/Burning on the Sands/Hand's Judgment/Westeros Bleeds/Prince's Plans/Blessed by the Maiden combo to Damon, and in so many words said "this should not be."

Wiping the board and still drawing 2 cards for not marshalling anything was ridiculous.

You know, if you wipe the board, then no one draws any cards.

If you loop bleeds and keep the Viper out, then your opponent draws cards and the Viper kneels to attack.

In response to Bran/Standing/Combo - Bran has been used in multiple abusive decks during my time with the game, so he definitely needed to be limited. He is the source of the combo, though I see your point that standing is what empowers him - he himself is the center of the combo. I actually agree with Daryl that pretty much all effects should have some blanket limit for effects in a round/phase.


I'd like to request less speculation on what the designers are intending for the FAQ and/or the game and get Nate on the show and ask him!

Have you ever tried to play Influence cards without KotHH and Red Keep, if the opponent plays any sort of location control you will never play a single card that requires influence, unless you get lucky.

I don't want to play a game of luck and I also do not want to play Rock, Paper, Scissors. So having something that keeps a great part of your deck alive even if the opponent plays location control is needed.

I don't play with influence costing cards normally. You are probably speaking of Bloodthirst?

To that, I say your deck is a victim to the other decks that run it. If The Red Keep is important to this type of deck you are speaking of, then make it your restricted card. If it is not, then, like I said before, you have many influence providing options now to replace it with.

I imagine you are against a tremendous amount of location hate in your meta. If location hate is a big concern, you might need to re-evaluate your deck so that you can overcome that kind of location hate.

The problem is that those other decks had 5 influence that was reliable and resilient. It sucks when a card is restricted because of the other cards it works well with. Decks that don't take advantage of those other cards end up getting punished when using the card differently.

Threat from the East is a prime example of a card that got restricted because of certain combos and abuse. I would like to use this plot in different ways, but I cannot do this now because I don't think it's worth running as my restricted card. If you feel The Red Keep is important to your deck, you might want to pick it as your restricted card instead of what is currently there. If it is not pivotal to your decks success, add the other influence locations and try to overcome some of the location hate you face frequently.

You know, if you wipe the board, then no one draws any cards.

If you loop bleeds and keep the Viper out, then your opponent draws cards and the Viper kneels to attack.

That's the reason Bloodthirst with Bleeds recursion is so nasty: If your deck makes challenges (it's been known to happen) and you pursue your built-in strategy, Martell wipes out whatever you throw down. If you don't pursue your built in strategy and don't play anything, then they start winning dominance with Meraxes.

Very fixed now, thank god.

Simplest combo for that is just Open Market+Summer+Blessed by the Maiden: If you play out characters so that he would *need* to play WB, then you've turned on the means by which he can pay to pick it right back up again.

It's not hard to consistently keep it Summer if you can never get a challenge off with a Carrion Bird.

Influence effects like Westeros Bleeds are likely meant to be similar to high cost global game changers from other CCGs. The fact that they were so easy to play was in opposition to the strength of the cards. Even Targaryen Ambush is a powerful ability dependent on influence. Making it trivial to do is something KotHH already does and I'd rather see the Keep restricted than the agenda.