When constructing a deck, you are allowed up to three copies of a particular card in the draw deck.

That of course includes Characters, right? Or am I missing something here?

If it DOES include characters, how are people justifying, say, three Ser Jamie Lannisters in their deck? Doesn't that disrupt the narrative of the game for players? Or is it just me?

Thanks!

Because Jaime Lannister is a unique (signified by the symbol next to his name) you cannot play a further copy while you control one character of that name. If a copy of Jaime is in your dead pile, you cannot play him. Multiple copies of Jaime and other uniques can be attached to him or her, as a duplicate -- an "extra life"that can be discard to save him for being killed, dicarded or removed from play.

There is a narrative problem in the fact that, for gameplay reasons, players can each play the same character. However, given the tone of the AGOT books it is not hard to imagine Littlefinger or Varys assisting both sides at the same time! A little less plausible for Eddard or Tywin, or indeed when two decks of the same House, packed with the same characters, play. But that's probably a necessary sacrifice for gameplay.

Great. Thanks, Winter. I appreciate the reply!

I had previously played a CCG based on the Dune novels, and that game actually was "unique to the table." So If I got my Duke Leto into play, you were just out-of-luck until you could neutralize him. We debated playing an alternate rules tournament to try that out, and more than anything it definitely makes people play less representative houses. The only downside is with the dead pile concept, though we made the concession that you only looked at your own deadpile for those purposes.

L5R has a similar rule, only it applies to experienced versions of the character. So both side could have the generic version of the character out but whoever play the exp. version first could have them, unless you kill the opposing version and then you could play your exp version.

However in regards to running multiple copies of a unique character in your deck, that is your personnal choice. I personnally don't run dupes unless that character is vital to the operation of my deck. At which point by having multiple copies you increase the odds of drawing them sooner, plus you then have the copy to put on them to as a save attachment. The multiples of a unique just eat up space that could be used for other cards. That's my two cents.

White Phoenix said:

They had that rule untill the last edition. Now both sides can control the same unique card (each deck can only include one of each unique card though)

(btw: Your example isn't entirely correct. There was a keyword, Unique since the beginning of L5R, which gave it the mentioned limitations, all experienced characters had it though)

I stand corrected. I had forgotten about the Unique keyword. Haven't they replaced Unique with singular now?

White Phoenix said:

Singular means you can have it up to 3 times in your deck but only 1 of them can be in play. ( abit like the heroes/uniques in WH:I)