ShivesMcShivers said:

Ain't it though?

Sweet! It'll be good to see you. Unless I've lost count, we're up to 15.

And maybe you and Sheik can have one of your epic Martell-on-Martell matches.

I will definitely be representing the house of the (rising) sun.

Just note what I mentioned to LGR above. You are welcome to update, tweak and play completely different decks over the course of the day.

BTW: Basic structure is "Standard" - which in Chi-Town means ITE block, 5KE, CPs and Core Set. Essentially, anything in the "new" card layout.

Jaqen ban is in effect, but Pyromancer's Cache and TGS (for Joust) are welcome.

I think it needs to be noted that reprints are only welcome if they have the same card text as the newer versions.

Example: The old forever burning can't be used.

Wrecking Ball said:

Thank-you. Yes. Modified reprints from the CS of ITE/5KE cards replace the ITE/5KE version. And you should not play with the ITE/5KE version under the assumption that everyone will know and/or remember the exact modifications.

ktom said:

Forever burning is a WED card! However, of course it makes sense to ban old card versions from the tournament, but i would allow some older version of cards under the condition that only their original (printed) game text can be used. I think it´s safe to assume that CS Forever burning is much better than the WED version.

I know that this might cause other problems as well, but i can´t see why a long time Targ player should be forced to buy three CS to play one key event thrice when he already owns a bunch of old WED copies.

Just my two cents.

Old Ben said:

Well, for one thing, since this it ITE+ and the modified reprint of Forever Burning is a different card (i.e., has different text), the WED version is outside of the legal card pool. It's arguable whether the CS version is "much better" than the WED version anyway. Is an additional 2 gold option really all that much better (I don't see many LCG Targ players taking that option, BTW)? And what about the Targ player that has 2 from the CS and 1 from WED. Are they really the same card? Do you really play only what is written on the card? And then there are things like Gilded Plate that are far more different. Are they the same card or different cards if you have to play them as written? And if they are different, can you put 6 (3 of each version) in your deck?

So the reason why a long-time Targ player can't just use the WED versions the have "as is", other than that the old version is not in the Standard pool, is that the line has to be drawn somewhere. It's not like among all the people who will be there, enough copies of the CS haven't been bought. Players can always borrow cards.

Old versions of unmodified reprints (e.g., Seductive Promise) are fine, though.

I'm shooting Nate an e-mail for confirmation, as I don't believe there was ever an official ruling for the OP landscape post-CS release, but I thought (when there were still debates about "standard" that something like Gilded Plate would be legal in both versions... and with identical names for different cards you'd still be limited to a total of 3. Are there any other simultaneously "standard" cards with differing text like that?

Maester_LUke said:

Why would there be an official OP ruling when Standard isn't an official format? Legacy is Highlander (one copy of any card by title), so is a non-issue.

The last I heard before the point became moot last October was that modified reprints were considered separate cards. Which makes sense. They are. Despite the same title, the card has different text and characteristics. And, BTW, the FAQ says that you can only have three copies of a card by title regardless of type. That ruling goes all the way back to the unique Direwolf attachments in AToB, IIRC.

So this creates two separate situations for "Standard":

#1 - Modified reprints where the original is in a "non-Standard legal" set (like Forever Burning). Seems pretty clear that if they are different cards, the version from the non-legal set cannot be used in the event. Same way VED-Bran, for example, is persona non grata in a "Standard" event. Most of the modified reprints from the CS fall into this category.

#2 - Modified reprints where the original is in a Standard legal set (like Gilded Plate). Because there are a number of brand new players who don't have unfettered access to the old cards, and to ease the confusion of the "same" card that does different things, my house rule is that the old versions are preempted by the new ones. I think there are only 2 cards, anyway (Gilded Plate and War Host of the North).

In the end, since most of these cards fall into category #1, this discussion really comes down to a house rule of "you cannot proxy a modified reprint with it's 'out-of-date' original." You can proxy an exact reprint with it's "thus still current" original

Thanks Kevin, you just summarized the argument I had mid-email as I was composing the message to Nate.

same format we are using in NY, cool.

And on the reprints - carefully check Renly's Courtier all you Bara players. she has gained an icon in the Core Set - and you want to be aware of that if you are running the card,. In either format, being able to text blank neutrals is a pretty sweet ability these days. I note this in particualr because I didn't notice until I actually had two on the table in a tournament that they were different.

Stag Lord said:

Okay. Three in "category #2," then.

(I should have recognized this because I was looking at her as a possible check for MwNK.)

I know Stag is in agreement and I haven't really put up any resistance to the view because, frankly, no one that I'm seeing is playing Guilded Plate or War Host in standard anyways (hadn't noticed the Bara card discrepancy before), but I don't see why an event that is using the standard format cannot allow both versions of Guilded Plate et al that are found in the standard card pool and play them as printed (I fully agree that old cards should not be permitted as proxies for their slightly modified successors since it's confusing and unfair to an opponent to have to remember the differences). I have access to three Eddards when building a standard Stark deck and if I wanted to I could put in one copy of each. Whichever one I put into play is played just as printed. If somehow he got bounced to my hand or discarded and I put in a different version, it would play as printed without regard to the former copy. My opponent can at all times see its text. Same could be true for Guilded Plate --you just have to play it as printed and can't say "oh, I'm using this to represent the other version that's legal in standard." As a courtesy I think when playing a second Guilded Plate that differs from a version you played earlier in the game you should point out that you have played a different version given that it shares the same art, but other than that I don't see why both can't be permitted.

And I just noted that on Mainn's site, the CS version of the Courtier doesn't have the image up, and the card placeholder still lists it with only INT.

Yep - she's got the power icon now as well.

And ktom - we're thinking alike again. That's why she was in the deck x3, and I KNOW she'll work well against them. She's money against that awful Castellan as well.

Maester_LUke said:

The stats on Mainn's site are incorrect. The card has two icons.

There is no intrinsic "harm" in letting different legal version be played as written. However, I'm thinking about the way people play most of the time. Seriously, when was the last time you read the text on, oh, a King Robert's Chambers or even CS-Robert Baratheon himself? You just know what the cards do, right? That leaves a lot of room for mistakes when there are two cards with the same name, the same art and slightly different text. Your "courtesy" of pointing out the difference may not work particularly well if you yourself are not noticing which version you are playing. Look at Stag's experience with the Courtier! In all the time he was designing, building, drawing and otherwise using the deck, he didn't notice the difference in the two versions until they were on the table right next to each other during a game! And that's something as significant as an icon, let alone the text differences on something like Gilded Plate!

So no, there is nothing particularly wrong or harmful with allowing different legal versions of CS modified reprints to be played "as is." My personal feeling, though, is that there is too much room for error and as a TO, I don't want to have to deal with "Hey! you should have discarded 2 power from your House instead of paying 1 gold when you used Gilded Plate last round! You're at 13 power, not 15!" So this is my house rule when I'm TO.

ktom said:

I'll be sporting Martell as well, though for some reason it doesn't run smoothly and needs some help. It seems that lately if I'm not running Lannister my decks just don't quite seem to click. And GJ Winter bull$hit has me very concerned. Sick Winter Marauders beats have been a little too frequent lately...*cough* Meanie ktom *cough*

All in all though I am **** happy to be seeing Shives and everyone else this weekend!

Yes! A martell deck that completely removes the challenges phase! Thanks Shives! lol Seriously though, it should be a pretty awesome weekend! Can Ktom's place handle anymore people?!

Staton said:

We'll tie you up outside. Then we should be fine.

ktom said:

~If complord is bringing alcohol, you might need to tie HIM up outside.

About 12 hours or so until we start playing. I'm pumped! I think the last count I had for confirmed players was 19.

Staton said:

The about 3 people are telling you they are coming, but not me. ~Good way to go hungry.

Well, looks like I hadn't confirmed the AY appearance in this thread. So touche Ktom!

Anyway, thanks for an awesome AGoT get together! My only regret is that I didn't get to play more games! All in all, I think my deck did pretty well. I believe I only lost 3 games? Twice to The Shiek and once to Luke? I'm kinda forgetting my first couple of games. Still, after winning 2 out of 3 games against Luke(although I admit, he should've won the last game I think.) I consider it a plus overall. And it reminded me how much I HATE Targ burn. ugh. Now if I could only beat the Shiek! At least the second game was pretty good. I'm sure I'll post more thoughts later.