Also Ktom. Could you post your reprint list that will be used at Gencon (Provided nothing currently changes between now and August).

I understand all of ktom's points. There's not too much incentive for FFG to put a lot of effort into organized play right now. However, how much would it really cost them to put an explicit, official list of allowed reprints up on the support page? They could outsource the work of compiling the list to some willing community leader like ktom or thorondor and all they'd have to do is throw the resulting list into a pdf and put a link up. Considering how easy it is to miss things like "kneel" vs "Kneel" on the fiefdoms or the extra "l" on Randyl Tarly and also the fact that the game is published in other languages in which there could be other typographical oddities, I think an official list that everyone could agree to go by would be good for the game.

Ultimately, though, is it really that big of an issue? Seriously, how hard is it to get enough LCG versions of any card?

for me and a few of my meta mates its not so much about getting copies as it is about being able to use our older cards. i know i enjoy being able to use more then 3x lannisport steward/weaponsmith, cersi's attendent, and enemy informer which i can only get in core sets and don't want to pay $40 for a 4th copy of. I also didn't notice the new spelling on randyl, but i like to use him in more then 3 decks, especially because he is a nuetral and don't want to pay what $25-$30 for a 4th copy.

Here is my proposal for "common sense": Look at "Forever Burning". The core set version added game relevant text (the gold part). So the old version can't be used.

"Kingsguard Squire" and "Parting Blow": "a" was changed to "1". Does this change the way the card can be used? No.

Now turn your head to other languages. Let's say the old Spanish version is identical to the new one just because the translator didn't care. Can a Spanish player use his old card while the English speaking player cannot? The Spanish card stayed the same!

As long as FFG does not make a more precise statement e. g. an official list we should not be more rigorous than the company itself. If they don't care why should we?

Even if an opponent in a game plays the old Forever Burning, well I wouldn't care as long as he wouldn't try to get it back with 2 gold in dominance.

At Stahleck the Spanish cards of the houses I don't play myself troubled me much more than a Rusted Sword could ever do. It's hard to play against cards that you cannot read yourself and either have to remember after the first explanation by heart or constantly have to ask about.

Because of our love for international tournaments we endure this and it puts the one player with the English cards at a slight disadvantage because all of his cards are readable to most other players while he has to deal with French, Spanish, Japanese or whatever cards. Why not give some love to the older players and allow their Rusted Swords?

If you don't agree with me I will bring as much officially allowed German reprints to the next game I am facing you as possible. Preferring versions where the art has changed.

From my point of view, a reprints list is a must. At least, for us here in Europe. Many languages, many translations, many problems ;-P . Thorondor has done an excellent work with the last European Championship, but I think it isn't his responsability to choose which reprints can or can't be played. Even more when a minor change can "strictly" invalidate a card if we apply the "identical" criteria. I think that's a FFG's task clearly.

In addition, for me, this "identical" criteria is very odd because I've played other CCG's and most of them use a much easier one: if it has the same name, it can be used and its text will always be the last reprinted (in English, of course). I think this would be the best and easiest solution. Not the most profitable, but the most respectful with our environment...

If we want to get into an OP discussion, we should move it to another thread. Currently there is a topic in the LCG sub-forum about "Underwhelmed by OP" and there have been some good ideas suggested about improving OP. With any luck, this will become an issue for FFG this year, because the game line has matured to a point where there needs to be a true OP program in place. This game is just as strong as any ccg out there, and needs to be recognized as such.

Don't expect cash prizes, though, except for maybe huge events. Magic still sells $$millions, so WotC can afford to award cash and related prizes. The LCG model doesn't even come close to that its the difference between selling limited product (LCG) to players ve. open-ended product (ccg) to players.

FFG should, however, come up with something similar to what Tzu-mainn has done, with a card database. And an authorized reprint list. These are not only courtesies to the player community, but they also emphasize the commitment to the game that FFG has. Not that I doubt their commitment in any way, and I love the game and where it is at. But I guess I just want to see this game push to the next level, where it deserves to be.

I completely agree with Jerusalem Jones' comments on a reprint list and a card site. It would be great to have an up-to-date database that can build decks.

An officially supported card database would be nice. Personally, I'd like to have tzumainn.com continue to be updated. There is a wealth of information in the card comments (especially regarding commonly asked rules questions). Hopefully, any new card database would have commenting capabilities.

Yes, that's true. Maybe FFG could offer Tzu Mainn free product to continue maintaining it. His site was a big part of getting me hooked on the game.

Tzu has done a wonderful job with his site, and I reference it all the time. I wouldn't even be upset if FFG choose to make it their "official" site for cataloging the cards.

naizen said:

I think this would have been nice if AGOT had done what L5R, Dune or SW had, where different versions of uniques have subtitles. I don't want to be limited to a single version of uniques in standard play. And we can no longer differentiate by artwork, as we've seen that rearranged between card name & type.

JerusalemJones said:

Just to add my voice to the Tzu support. Love his site, used to use it all the time, still use it occasionally now (wish the Martell stuff would be updated there for the latest expansion). I'd be happy if his site became the official site and was regularly updated again as well.

Maester_LUke said:

Yes, multiple uniques with the same name are a problem. I haven't realized, sorry. In this case, an official reprint list is the only easy way to solve this problem. And if FFG wants to take the game to the next level (e.g. a great community like L5R's), I think they should take care of this as soon as possible.

I think that some cards (like Parting Blow) people may want to use around 9 copies (3 decks 3 cards each)... or more. In the CCG days common and uncommons were often so commone people gave them away to new players. So having 9 copies was easy.

Does anyone plan on Buying PoTS 5 times to support 3 decks?

If FFG has no interest in maintaining a reprint and errata list then the community has to step up since they are required for community play.

As you can see in the tread different people and different TO's have different ideas on what is allowed and what is not for reprints. In fact I can cite the last Official Reprint List still had Lanni brothel as a reprint even though one is unique and the other is not.

The intelligent way I think is a few TO's for the popular events hash out Official Reprint Lists for their events, this way you have the list you know what you can and can't use outside of LCG. Hopefully they could work out a more unified list.

I would also argue that Punctuation changes, spelling changes do not equate to text changes, unless the TO feels that it changes the meaning of the effect.

After all it would be wrong to put both Ranyl and Randyll Tarly in a highlander deck, this is a clear need for an errata.

I would also argue that since I've never heard of a ban on foreign langauge cards, changes from an or a to 1 do not equate a text change since it's more of a translation. (an, a, one, and 1 all have the same meaning).