Lars said:

Yeah, Stark didn't get much this pack. But I disagree with the assessment of Eddard and Sansa. Cancel Eddard is amazing if you build around him, so much so that I can't see myself going back to the CS version. And he's sooo good against Lannister. Mind you, I wasn't saying this when he came out, as I couldn't see myself going without Stalwart Eddard, but I've changed my mind after lots of testing with and against him.

With the new Sansa I've had a second turn win. That extra renown can be huge if you're not playing a Shadows deck. I can see a lot of decks only running between 2-5 Shadows cards, so there's a good chance she can be great if they don't draw into their Shadows at the right time. Four strength has been very annoying to play against as well, especially that much intrigue in a Stark deck.

And really, I never got all that much with CS Sansa in the first place. I guess I just don't play enough attachments in Stark to make her worthwhile. At most I was getting two cards in a game from her, but usually just one after I put an Icy Catapult on her. She is good with Bodyguard, but I'd rather use Bodyguard on Eddard or Robb, characters I actually need around as long as possible.

I also like Bound by Duty. It certainly can be more efficient than a Distinct Mastery, and usable on Hodor which is a plus. Played at the right time, it can give you two more challenges out of a character instead of just the one with Distinct Mastery.

I've never gotten Shadows Stark to run very smoothly, however, so Catelyn's effect, while potentially devastating, is quite fragile and one I've never been able to fully exploit. Winter and Shadows seem to be at cross-purposes to me, but maybe I need to revisit it now that a few more packs are released.

longclaw said:

sansa with ice (kill, discard, repeat) and needle = 3 STR, stealth, and almost an unopposed win, plus drawing 2 cards with a noble crest that does not go away. you can add renown to the equation by playing lady for free. And while it might seem like a lot of cards on your part , they are all usuable elsewhere and you control all of them, your opponent putting one card into shadows does not take any of it away... If she dies or if you have to play those other cards on someone else no big loss and you still have a noble crest in your deck for a guilty at the least.

Assassin - outside of lanni i rarely have the luxury of keeping shadows cards in shadows for the 'ideal' time for them to come out. even if i did it is still a hard timing wise combo to pull off. you talk about this guy replacing red warlocks, but the combo still requires you to draw into what red warlock could have searched for and to have 2 standing influence and 2 gold (still running summer w/out red warlocks?). without redwarlock or without the perfect situation and 90% of the time you are still needing a forever burning (side question, would targ be playable if that card wasn't recursible?) to make it really have umph...to me that screams conditional at best. Sansa is different in that she adds to the other cards that work as well as without her. ice kills someone (or gives you unopposed challenges) no matter what character its on, Sansas condition just adds a whole lot to it. Even lady can contribute to different cards in stark decks. Flame kissed has an established issue, that this doesn't really help solve. targ has no shortage of weenies/icons, better shadows burn (for 1 gold less you can go after that double renown bobby with 2-3 attachments on him, and a card that combos much better both cost, and timing wise with flame kissed that for 1/4 the gold cost (or looking only at the turn it comes out of shadows 1/2 the gold cost) goes right back into your hand. If i want to split up a gold cost for a combo with flame kissed that isn't forever burning i'd use drogon. yes he is a little more expensive up front, but cheaper over the long haul as if you use 3 assassins thats 12 gold total, but to use drogon 3 times is only 10 gold. You trade 1 STR on the burn, but gain stealth in challenges...

like i said, give me something new, not a condtional rehash of an effect. Its why i like new eddard in a baratheon deck as he brings something they don't do while contributing to a theme that works. in stark i have CS eddard's renown/deadly!, and he is a ***** to kill, i can add cancel (w/ a bonus) already w/ vyman if i'm really missing new eddards effect and i make it much broader and more germane to 95% of my characters (stark instead of noble) in the deck and i can control the condition (season) instead of having the limited condition (nobles only) imposed upon me.

The warlocks can kill that really $#@! annoying 2 str no attachment bara knight.

By themselves 4 gold for 2 burn does not seem worth it... but consider:

Drogon's ability costs 2 gold for 1 burn (similar ratio).

You can put it into the shadows and use it to bolster or hinder other effects in the game... if you're running

a shadows deck you need at least 20 shadows cards in the deck.

I'm considering making a deck with all of targ's burn and see how well it does.

bloodycelt said:

knight of the rainwood? why is he really f'ing annoying.

bloodycelt said:

same ratio, but repeatable at will with only drawing one card and don't have to worry about the timing issues for flame kissed, one of which is if you drew it after the start of the phase

Yeah - Knight of the Rainwood. A huge, huge pain in the ass for Targ decks IMO. I can't stand the little suckers when they are across the table from me.

Always kind of an under rated card.

And after playing some over the weekend - Varys is better than advetrised. Passive effects are sweet ,a dn this is a pretty target rich environment.

Stag Lord said:

why? not trying to be obtuse, i just don't see his pain factor (there are about 12 bara weenies that i prefer to him right now)

Lars said:

It's the "No attachments except weapon." Makes him much harder for Targ to terminally burn than your typical 2-STR weenie.

I guess i'm asking, whats the big deal if you don't burn him?

if he and bastard of robert (or edrick storm, or devan seaworth) are on the board and KoR doesn't have no attachments i burn bastard of robert first every time. If KoR is the only weenie on the baord, i'm not sweating hard...

Could be more of a "finish them off" kind of thing. Targ often relies on burn to clear the way for their many low-STR characters. Sure, if you're defending, you're burning the Stealthy guy off first. But if you're attacking and all you have are 1- and 2-STR characters yourself, that Knight (plus some Bara weapons) can be a real pain. I guess it depends on the way you play Targ. Being unable to finish off the KoR can make it harder for Targ to "close the deal." At the very least, it screws up the pacing for a lot of Targ players.

Also bastard of robert has no attachments.

As does a few of bara's 3 str armies.

So lars what are you gonna do if the bara player swarms on you with bastards and kors. Oh and maybe lightbringer on Mel. And toss davos in.

And its fury of the stag.

Something I noticed about Targ's Shadow Burn is that it is far less reliant on influnce. Get a Chambers and maybe a fiefdom and My Forever Burning is great, and I now have some depth and versatility to Burn I didnt have before (a major reason Lanni kneel is so strong).

Have you tried building a Targ Shadows deck from scratch Lars or have you been trying t find a place for the cards in your existing decks and been finding out they don't really work as well in that deck? (I'm honestly curious)

Im convinced it is better than Targ Attachment+Burn but I do see it as a definite legitimate build. I'm interested to see what come sin the 6th and final Chapter Pack and see if something really boosts it comes out.

bloodycelt said:

isn't that what valar is for? mel w/ lighbringer....to qoute someone in this thread targ and attachment control...

if its fury of the stag your screwed anyway...

dormouse said:

yep, tried making a shadows deck. Shadows w/ more then 7 cards i find gets in the way of the deck and optimizes at about 3-4 (would you rather have 3 of this guy and the red keep or selmy, the red keep and 2 silent sisters for 2 less gold?). This is true even in my lanni deck where if you don't count dupes i have only 9 shadow crests, 3 of which draw me a card when they enter play. Also, I find i have the same issues with a targ shadows deck as a stark shadows deck, lack of gold. I don't want to pay 4 gold and 2 influence to burn one 4 STR character and have a 2 icon 2 str seductive promise-able character when i could pay 3 gold for a 3 STR Unique tricon and 2 influence to burn one 2 STR character. its the same amount of strength on the board but gives me many more options in the challenge phase, plus one more gold to spend on either an Aegon's blade on the tricon or to save for hand's judgment or to pull FB out of my deadpile.

When i look at targ's weakness i guess i don't see being able to burn what ever character they want w/ 3-5 cards as the solution. Heck their toughest opponent right now is bara for many reasons and the top 4 Gencon bara deck was a very anti-shadows deck. KLA does not solve Targ's reliance on locations right now (you might not have LDC, but it has been advocated to put in Dragon Pit which is 1 gold more and your opponent can turn it off, not to mention King's landing). Twn2nd brought up 6 burn events....that makes sense in that you will have twice as many chances of drawing it, but Aegon's legacy is not FB as it requires too much going on and has to sit in your hand until dom...before this card came out Targ not only relied on locations, but had issues managing their resources (do i kneel this fiefdom to reduce a character or do i want that influence standing for later in the round?) and now you're just making more choices (hmm i played KLA into shadows last turn, but that 2 gold i'd need for it this turn could really help me play a better character, what do i do, i could kneel my fiefdom but then i might need that influence....oh-boy)

Honestly it sounds more like Shadows is just not your thing. I discovered quickly I could not build or play a Shadows deck the way I would a regular deck. The mind set for me is totally different, with differences as big as how I build and play a deck for melee versus joust. I haven't played against an anti-Shadows Bara deck so I have no idea how that would impact my thoughts on how worthwhile the deck type for Targ is, but pretty much everyone agrees Targs weakest matchup is against Baratheon.

I first started seeing the differences when I included a few Shadow cards to an existing deck. I wanted that immediate effect, or that immediate entry of a character. I found myself foregoing the Shadow cards for regular cards because it was how I was used to playing. It seemed more effecent, more direct. I realized that Shadows was really about indirectness and when I played with a mindset about long range planning, playing my game my way, and not worrying about what my opponent was doing and could do immediately, my deck building with Shadows cards improved and my play style changed with them.

I found myself putting cards into Shadows knowing I would want them two or three turns later. My resource curve changed, as well did my expectations and management of said resources. I now think that a Shadws deck works best with at least 9 Shadow cards (with 12 being a more optimal number) and the two Shadows plots that let me put two cards into Shadows for free, and then repeat that ability, Gwtting around for paying for them is a very different issue.

I remember back in the early days of winter everyone was don on Targ and then Europe started having reports of Targ taking major tournaments playing with crazy recursion decks and eventually that became a pretty normal feature across the AGoT world. I can see Shadows requiring a serious rethinking of how to build and play a deck... but may require more from the player to make it work well than they are willing to giv eit (no closed mindedness or anything on their part, just to removed from their style/preference).

It'll be interesting to see how it turns out after the KLE is all done with and the Martell expansion comes out.

I really agree with you Dormouse. I've found a Shadows deck really needs 10+ cards - 12 seeming to be the optimal number- to do what it wnats to do. And yes - its going to take you a couple of turns tog et ti set up and running - though the 3-6-1 City Plot that plays two of them for free is a big help.

It does take a lot of long term planning and it does take a lot of patience. you probably need two resets to keep things manageable until its time to make your move. Fortuantley the metagem is slow enough at the moment to allow you the time - except maybe for a Greyjoy rush deck with support Of Harlaw could be an issue. They close pretty quick. You just need to hold your atatchment control and some spot removal for that matchup. But hte point rmeains valid: a Shadows deck really needs a different approach to the game.

Stag Lord said:

I think this is the crux of the disagreement. Bara rush w/ 2x power of blood is not slow. you mentioned GJ, but left out winter making it even more fun to pay for your over costed shadow stuff. Eric/Corey's lanni deck, or a simular build w/ 2 resets, can go slow enough with you in the begining to out last your two resets and then punish you with their 2 resets and the cards they play from hand that don't require setup of 5 cards (counting plot...) or extra gold.

I don't have a problem with shadows in general i just like the effects that benifit you for cards coming out of, not staying in, shadows and/or bring something new to the deck when they come out of shadows. Examples: Tyrion (duh), Arya, The queen of thorns, Margaery Tyrell, Gold cloaks, Syrio, Black cells (and i don't even run it any more....), Kingswood Trial, and the shadow of the south/east.

so i used a targ deck using 3x of KLA tonight. I played 3 games, was able to burn a 4 str character in 2 of the 3 and lost both. I had to use more then one card each time and then had little left for the rest of the phase and eventually in the game. THe game i did win i was able to burn two charcaters in one turn with 2 cards w/ drogon who was played the turn before (and fetched with a dragon attack) and a flame kissed. I was in control from there on out especially becuase i had a 4 STR character w/ stelth standing after the burn(s).

I think a deck that uses building season for red keep and 2-3 queen's knights would be a lot more flexible and workable then a deck using city of shadows and 3 KLA. coupled with targ's other jumpers it greatly reduces the relience on a large amount of locations, doesn't tax or make you make hard choices about the resources you have, and helps you get around resets.

That's OK, Lars!

You keep practicing!

You'll get better! You'll see!

Actually Targ's ability to just say "Its summer deal with it!" is what made me play greyjoy summer. So I don't understand how targ can have difficulty making sure its not winter.

Targ's ability to fetch and recurse attachments gives them greater flexibility and control over seasons than other House.