Just now, Isawa Syd said:

I see. Okay. It was still a good card for us now it's stupidity not to autoinclude.

Yeah, it's good meta, especially since you can sacrifice him after he's bowed near the end of the conflict phase if he doesn't have fate to hang around.

6 hours ago, LordBlunt said:

I would say a Political version of the Banzai card would be #205, as that card has not been revealed yet.

I hope not. I would like to see political and military conflicts with some asymmetry.

1 minute ago, Suzume Tomonori said:

I believe @LordBlunt is referring to the possible newer text to Miya Mystic that now appears at certain places in product page, showcase page, or one of the first new articles. The newer text is something to the effect of sacrifice the Mystic to destroy an attachment. As far as I know, we don't know exactly which text is official yet, but the "sacrifice" one was discovered more recently. I believe gamepedia doesn't have a number of text updates (last I checked Kuroi Mori was still Mori Kuroi, etc.)

Correct.

From the little information that I have read, I think that the Mystic is able to sacrifice itself and remove an attachment that is in play.

Which, again, gives us a 2-Fate cost character, with 1 Mil and 1 Pol, a shugenja keyword and an attachment removing trait. (all stats, cost and abilities are speculation given the 2 different Mystic pics we have access to)

Just now, Suzume Tomonori said:

I hope not. I would like to see political and military conflicts with some asymmetry.

It does seem a little vanilla, but it would get better with expansions

3 hours ago, Joe From Cincinnati said:

If 205 was a political Banzai and 212/213 is a political Rout, that would make a lot of sense to me.

But what would be the point of having two types of conflicts if you can play the same kind of actions in both conflicts?

I'd rather have the MIL and POL conflicts play differently than look the same, except for the stat checked.

1 hour ago, Ser Nakata said:

But what would be the point of having two types of conflicts if you can play the same kind of actions in both conflicts?

I'd rather have the MIL and POL conflicts play differently than look the same, except for the stat checked.

I will counter with the example of Block and Dodge from Star Wars Destiny, another FFG card game. Both cost the same and do the same effect but for different damage types (melee and ranged respectively) but some decks will only run one not the other. I'm not saying that there will be a copy of the effect for political conflicts just that it is both possible that there will be and that there will be times where you chose to take one not the other.

I also think the different characters who have advantages in Mil vs Pol conflicts will change the feel of them more than just the number checked at the end but we'll have to see about that.

even with the a full 3 cores I suspect it would be suboptimal to auto include all your clan chars so some neutral splashes should help hone a deck.

ffg also likes single key neutral fate type cards to encourage multiple core buys. Personally I hope we have at least 2 of each card in a core.

Dynasty cards

The neutral dynasty cards are pretty bad, but in some decks better than other options, because of the trait or because they shore up a big weakness (except the Ronin, which seems like complete trash).

Conflict cards

I don't think that Banzai is straight up the strongest card, especially for clans that want their units to stick around. At the moment I play 3 Banzai, 3 Fine Katana and 3 Ornate Fan and 3 Charge in every deck I play, because they are needed for not overcommiting to destroy provinces, don't need any setup (except Charge) and are always usefull. I almost always play Court Games (exception are crab decks). The other ones except Rout and Fallen in Battle are really powerfull, but need some requirements, so if my deck is matching them, I will most likely play them. I think that the value of Fallen in Battle and Rout is too situational compared to the other ones.

Here's a proxy for the (probably) update / correct version of Miya Mystic:

(Edit the second: Fixed the typos, hopefully).

11 hours ago, Togashi Gao Shan said:

Here's a proxy for the (probably) update / correct version of Miya Mystic:

(Edit: aaand of course a couple pf typos slipped through. Oh, well).

Kudos to your (or whoever produced this image's) skills of proxy making. I had to inform a friend that while this may be the eventual text of the card in question, where are you getting that text by the way, that this was not an official spoiler. He was so happy about maybe not having to splash Dragon for Let Go.

From what I have seen they seem to fill the roll of basic foundations for all decks. Unlike other games where neutral cards seem to be filler these seem to provide the basic actions and characters that are needed by all decks that are not and not tied to any one clans style. That is not to say they are all good for all decks but they do provide a nice baseline.

3 hours ago, Klawtu said:

Kudos to your (or whoever produced this image's) skills of proxy making. I had to inform a friend that while this may be the eventual text of the card in question, where are you getting that text by the way, that this was not an official spoiler. He was so happy about maybe not having to splash Dragon for Let Go.

I wrote the flavor text myself. The rest of it is from the official Showcase Page. Specifically, this image:

When the showcase page was first added, it had the 'old' text for Miya Mystic (Action: Move an attachment on an enemy character to another enemy character). The page was updated weeks ago, to this version. We don't know for certain that this (sacrifice Mystic to destroy any attachment) is the final version, but it seems somewhat likely.

In any case, I just updated the image of my proxy to fix a few typos in the favor text.

3 hours ago, Cold Iron1 said:

From what I have seen they seem to fill the roll of basic foundations for all decks. Unlike other games where neutral cards seem to be filler these seem to provide the basic actions and characters that are needed by all decks that are not and not tied to any one clans style. That is not to say they are all good for all decks but they do provide a nice baseline.

Very well said.

I have expressed this belief in a few posts on these forums. Thing is, until the release of Dynasty packs, Neutral cards are going to be the only source for players to overcome the areas of need that a given deck might impose upon card selection. Which, once more, is why I believe that the Mystic is well worth the cost of 2 Fate.

Plus, there's a good chance by the time the Mystic runs out of Fate, there will be an attachment in play you might want to get rid of.

So there is a political Rout called Outwit. It appears in the rulebook. I wonder what the the political version of banzai will do, as I believe it will not be a raw + bonus.

15 hours ago, Ser Nakata said:

Plus, there's a good chance by the time the Mystic runs out of Fate, there will be an attachment in play you might want to get rid of.

Bingo!

A very powerful ability, a dual ability one can argue, which further elevates this personality/card.

I think I'll always include 2 in my deck -maybe even 3 - if I don't want to include Dragon cards (splash Dragon) with my Influence.