www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp

tyrion looks interesting....i really hope other house get in-house stuff like this...lanni is probably the one house that didn't need this kind of card as the are pretty tactical already...

Artwork spoilers tend to imply an Arya with Shadows. Who knows who else we'll get, but I'm willing to bet at least 15 characters (unique and non from each house, plus a few neutrals) plus some events and possibly even locations. Wouldn't be surprised if 30 cards -- give or take -- ended up being part of the Shadow mechanic in some form or another.

Oh that card is a thing of strategic beauty.

heres possibly a dumb question, but i want to make sure i ask it anywya.

If you are running a shadow character OOH, do you not have to pay the extra two gold if you reveal him outside of marsahlling? (i'm also assuming you pay the extra two gold, if it all, on the reveal of the character not when you put it in shadows.)

Lars said:

We don't really know yet because we haven't seen a "rules sheet" or breakdown. It'll depend on how "comes out of Shadows" is defined. If it is defined as playing the card from Shadows, you would have to pay any OOH gold penalty (because you pay the 2 gold penalty only when you play cards from another House). If it is defined as putting a card into play from Shadows, you would not (because you don't factor OOH gold penalties into "put into play" effects).

Hypothetically, however, I notice that Tyrion (the only non-neutral Shadows cards spoiled so far) is "House Lannister only." If that trend continues with non-neutral Shadows cards, maybe it's indicative of Nate trying to avoid this very question.

thanks. i'm going to hope for house x only then on all of them

Lars said:

I noticed that too, and I agree that I'm hoping all the non-neutral cards we get with the shadows mechanic on them will be X House Only. Keeps things simpler and much more flavorful.

Yeah, it would be far to easy to have some less than scrupulous players break rules if the non-neutral Shadows cards aren't House X Only, so I fully expect them to be.

Shadows cards are all House Only. The Shadows Agenda let you play Shadows House only cards.

We already have it in Spain, and you can read a spoiler in Roca Casterly (in Spanish)

Masi said:

Thank, Masi. Some interesting cards. Can't say I'm really overwhelmed yet though. Shadows Arya seems awesome, even if it's not Winter a recurring unkillable Arya is pretty neat.

I'm also suprised at the Barristan Selmy card being in this pack. But its definitely a pretty cool card too.

Unfortunately, I think the new Treaty agendas just plain suck. Can't play allied House Only cards, and potentially letting your opponent win at just 10 power is way to huge a drawback. I don't see myself ever wanting to use one of these in the current environment. The only card I can think of that crosses over that would be strong is Winter Marauder's in my Lannister deck. And even then, I'd rather just pay the extra 2G.

And the City of Lies plot is just plain sick in any deck planning to use Shadows cards. An absolute must have.

EDIT: I just realized Arya only has Mil/Pow icons... no Intrigue? If Cat is a tri-con... I really have to wonder why shadows Arya didn't get the Int icon? Oh well.

RJM said:

And as I mentioned in the last MwNK thread, how will THAT card factor into whether or not anyone plays these "Treaty" Agenda?

RJM said:

I think in terms of flavor in that. Without getting into spoilers, "Shadows" Arya could represent a time in the novels where the only "intrigue" she was really a part of was disappearing instead of being killed. Cat o' the Canals and her intrigue icon could represent some of the development the character goes through.

RJM said:

honestly....i don't see myself using this arya...as you talk about in your edit CoC has int, CS arya can get stealth in a Bear island deck (and renown instead of deadly). ~OH OH OH i can pay 2 gold to have a 1 gold claim soak every round (poor man's visyerian Targ...). Stark winter is just a step behind right now, this and ranger of winter are its only in hosue options (and frankly thats all i can look at right now).

I like selmy...i'd use him over any of the other selmy's as i like card discard the Clash of arms version.

ktom said:

well i'm fairly sure i wouldn't play them even e/out MWnK...10 power is a joke.

what i'm more intrigued by is the effect MWnK will have on is the shadow treaty. This is a solid treaty. It lets you build a theme (advantage) and a low disadvantage (no unopposed power w/out card in shadows area, effectivly being: keeping at least 1 card in the shadows area).

I think we again have a situation where you are losing out by experimenting with deck building or trying to find non in house stuff to make your deck better. If i'm running this agenda i'm running it out of Lanni because of Tyrion (and not wanting to lose him), but if i'm doing that, do i really need this agenda? is Selmy going to make that much of a difference to my deck? do i really need expensive claim soak (though it could fuel tyrion...but if i build my deck right i shouldn't need her to fuel him)? is my kneel so weak i need the challenge control from the bara shadow location? I think tyrion w/ some combonation of the 3 shadow events is plenty in a lanni deck...so add another card to the nice, but i can't use pile....

note: the translation for "Skull Dragon" makes it hard for me to tell what it does excatly so i left it out of my consideration

Lars said:

Attached character gets -2STR and is killed at 0, I believe. Response is to attach it to an opponent's character when it comes out of Shadows.

Looks like Flame-Kissed with Shadows instead of Ambush. (And without the "no other attachments" restrictions, so it combos with Poison Wine.)

thats what i was thinking, though on my translation STR seemed to be WAS so i didn't know (want to guess) what 2FUE was.

Is it worth 4 gold w/ the treaty? maybe, but again does lanni need a different form of control? probably not. So, it doesn't change my opinion on the shadows treaty.

I'm going to wait until i see them in native english and have a tactile sense of them, but stay tuned for a post about card pool expansion and MWnK in the MWnK thread.

Based on google's translation....

My first response is "This is ******* awesome". (My appologies for the strength of my language... but I feel this is one of the rare times where it's most appropriate).

SPOILER ALERT

<font color="white"> <!-- where is the color setting for these boards?

I finally can build a nedly themed Targ deck about the players behind the scenes bringing Dany to her throne. Varys, Tyrion, (Hopefully Illyrio). Add in the concept that Arya may join up in the future. I've been lethargic about building new decks since the LCG only environment came about... I'll have to build both LCG and Standard Variations.... there's no way I'm not going to explore how ambush + shadows will make 5KE Viserion a monster.

</font>

END SPOILERS

Which brings up the $60,000 question: Do characters entering play from Shadow in the Challenge Phase trigger the 5KE dragons?

Waiting somewhat impatiently for the full rules, and ktom's wisdom.

bloodycelt said:

Even if you had been able to color the text, I don't think the white text (the default color, BTW) would have had the desired effect against the gray background....

It will all depend on whether "Shadows" because a phase of it's own in between each phase or if it is a piece of each Framework Window at the beginning of each Phase. So if it goes like this,

MARSHALLING PHASE (cont.)
Framework Action
1.End Marshalling Phase.

CHALLENGE PHASE
Framwork Action
1. Begin Challenges Phase
2. Bring cards out of Shadows
Player Actions
Framework Action
1. Active Player declares challenge type.

Then yes Viserion would certainly kick in.

but if it was

MARSHALLING PHASE (cont.)
Framework Action
1.End Marshalling Phase.

SHADOWS PHASE
Framework Action
1. Shawdows Phase Begins
(some stuff happens)
Framework Action
1. Shadows Phase Ends

CHALLENGE PHASE
Framwork Action
1. Begin Challenges Phase

Then no, no card that isn't Any Phase or Response would be able to be triggered... which is why I'm leaning towards the former.

Well Nate said that you can bring one card out of Shadows at the beginning of each phase. So I'm guessing its just part of the Beginning of the phase stuff, like Winter Storm.

I have posted the Shadow Rules.

Again in Spanish, I´m sorry...

Masi said:

Thank you for these! Wow, I just read over the rules and the card texts...looks like a lot of fun. Though Lanni obviously made out well, it looks like Stark received some good stuff too. Targ's cards look pretty neat too. I like that FFG incorporated the summer/winter themes into some of the cards while still making the cards good outside of season-based decks.

Masi said:

Thanks for the rules and the spoilers. Can you possibly post what Dragon Skull does in English? I've tried translating the cards myself, but I can't quite figure that one out...

Mentioned earlier. It's essentially Flame-Kissed from Shadows instead of Ambush (without the "no other attachments" restriction).

"Attached character gets -2 STR and is killed at 0. Response: when it comes out of Shadows, attach it to a character."

How come a spanish spoiler is available but not a english one?

Please FFG, it won't keep us from buying the cards, show us a complete spoilers with pictures!!

its not really a spoiler. its that the Cards get to spain before they get to america and are distributed earlier. A member of the spanish community posted them on his webiste (ala Tzumainn) which we then latched on too.

BGG should have them up when they get released (or something will happen)