Correct me if I'm wrong, but this card seems ridiculously broken...? Any have thoughts or comments on this card?

Insightful. There is an ongoing debate as to the champion cards, descendant, assistant, and mentor. Le Cenacle discusses the problem of, and deck build against, the inevitable 8 sledge dog, descendant deck. A poster suggested limiting decks to one. Here, I occasionally fire up debate on how to bring together CCG and LCG. A few cards reappear in the discussion, including the champion cards. A good case was made against the single card approach - primarily, because it'd be an all new construct, but also because the single power card can be drawn from decks in other ways.

About whether Descendant of Eibon is overpowered or broken or not, I'll pass on the question.

You can ban the Rip Off, but I'll miss it all the same.

MechSpike said:

Regarding the Sledge dogs, I've been wondering if the ability to play eight of them isn't a heritage of the old rules, allowing four copies (2x4=8) and only six copies of them should be allowed in the LCG. I'm not sure if it would help much, though.

There's currently only one I absolutely hate: The Ravager from the Deep.

It's not that the card is actually broken, since there are quite a few ways to counter it, but I really hate it's effect on the game. In my games it almost always leads to a terrible slowdown and sometimes actual paralysis. Once it's out, the opponent cannot really do anything on his turn until he draws a card that can counter it. If he has a numerical advantage (which is often the case) the game will turn into a siege. Both sides will churn out huge numbers of characters for lack of something better to do and several turns will pass without any story phase occuring.

Games with the Ravager in play are just unfun.

Concerning the Descendant : We, in france, decided that regular tournament may include (its the servitor's choice) a clausis that mention that, in LCG environnement, descendant can only be included once un the deck. This card is not broken, but do provide situation where newcomers and beginners prefered to claim a loss in a way to start a new game.

the problem can be fixed if the card was to be unique (read Carioz's and Johnyshoes's proposition on the thread concerning the possible faq). But we are waiting for FFG to receive the new FAQ !

Concerning the dogs, the limitation of 8 is an heritage we got from the forbidden relic edition, where 2 cards were to be added in any number in the deck (grim avenger, ravenous hunting horror).

concerning Ravager, what Jhaelen said about it do amaze me !

Ok, it can gain some tempo to cthulhu, but this character is only a defending one. He's sensible to insanity and offense is difficult with it's stat. Y'go is much more powerfull for the same price.

I agree it does slow down the game, but, if he wasn't there, Deep one decks would have no interest ! He is the pinpoint of the developping strategy for a cthulian deck (Ravager + single Path = yummy!)

Descendant is quite powerful - Often he'll get back his own investment. Quite a fun card too, since he is quite flexible in his uses. Making him Unique doesn't seem an answer since only one is enough to turn around games. Making him a Highlander/Restricted card will just make games more random. He might need some tweaks, although there will be some solutions available along the way.

The Sledge Dogs could use some errata. Cost 2 seems perfect, and they should grant skill and combat to other dogs, instead of counting other dogs. This will cause them to be vulnerable to insanity and blanking, greatly expanding the tools to deal with 'm.

Ravager is just fine the way he is - Yes, he's annoying and you'll risk towards a standstill. This is what the Cthulhu faction does, though: Slowing the game down, and then play superior, if slow and expensive threats. That's why you don't see as much powerful cards in the lower costs for Cthulhu outside of some spot removal. You race this faction, and get into big problems as they stabalize.

For the Dogs 100% agree, yes counting icons and skill only for the other dogs is a good idea to try. Change the cost, I'm not sure, an errated card should not be so different from the original. May be the idea to have only 6 cards in a deck, why not.

Yes Descendant is powerful and very funny to play, but in tournament too repetitive. The winner of the game is the first guy to have it in hand. You can save a bad dekbuilding with 3 descendants in your deck.

In tournaments in Paris, we have tried with only one copy but it changes nothing. It's make a random game because of the same thing, the first guy to have it in hand can make the game. For the moment, for the next tournament in march, we will banish the card, because we want to have fun to play and see the real value of decks. You win because you play well and have a good deck, not because you have the Descendant in hand.

Well, the cost is important. Dropping 3 dogs turn one is a bit excessive. Right now, even one dog on it's own is strickly better than most 2 cost characters. The balance should be that only when you a third you will get above the curve. When they start to be bad against insantiy it'll help a lot, though.

Okay...so that's really the only answer, to have the servitors ban the card? That's pretty ridiculous. So your saying FFG has printed a card that defines the entire metagame of Call of Cthulhu, and if you don't have it in your deck, you lose. Also, games come down to merely who draws him first...

Hearing things like this just makes me doubt the games credibility when it comes to competitions.

You must think that Champions cards are made by "players". And the player wants a powerful card, not thinking entirely about the metagame. "Yes I'm champion, I will make a terrific card". For me, a card like the descendant as not been playtested. The meta of the card is very nice, the idea to discard success very good but it's a card with no limit. The Willpower or the Investigation's icon are too much and if you have 2 succes token, take it from your discard and put it into play modify one of the important aspect of the game, the commitment phases (The limit could be you can't return it in your hand from the discard and put it into play in the same turn, for example). Sure you can have cards to block the descendant but when you deckbuild, if you must do it by keeping in mind your opponents will play Descendant (an they will play descendant) it's not a funny way. Play mirror game are not very fun for me ("ho you are playing dogs ? Agency and Hastur and the descendant). Even if I don't know my opponent I could devine about 15 cards he could have in his deck.

So, no, ban cards are not the only way, and it's a very bad way. We will make a test in Paris, just to see. Make errata for cards it's an idea, but a better way is to make reprints of the cards errated. If for example Dogs should be played with a cost of 2, FFG could make a reprint of the card.

I don't want to be unpolit or anything, but keep on thing in mind, Mechspike :

Our community are playing this game for 2 or 3 years. They still playin Mixed CCG/LCG, CCG and LCG. The servitors do their job the best they can and this was a french-located decision originated with a debate on the Cenacle, with the agrement of everyone who play the leagues and Nationals/tournaments.

Once we wanted the players to play in pure LCG, the AP with the Descendant was out and the Ligue has been difficult to finish. We're not saying this card is totally broken, but what will the servitor do when, by popular demand, he is told to limit the impact of this card on the game ?? Some players told me "That's unfair, my opponent get his descendant and I could'nt win even a token ..."

The solution are coming right now (I'm thinking of stuffs that avoid the neutrals to commit or Cavern of the flame), but what you call a ridiculous solution is a simple matter of keeping the community together while the game is relauching in a new format. What may be obviously difficult if you consider gamers that don't want to buy every set of the AP and still want to play normaly. The descendant had a huge influence on the meta and we considered changes for the nationals, which allowed diversity in the deckbuilding.

Is it the best solution ? No

Did we had an opportunity to do something else (except banning, which is pure bullsh...t)? No

So we proposed this solution and it works quite well.

What dadajeff wrote is perfectly write : Most of the players tend to use the same old factions + Dogs+ descendants, which means that 11 cards of the two decks (50cards) are exactly similar. The player are running for the first to put it in play.

BUT, this is a champion card, not a normal one. This card is not a card that fit the tournament environment. But don't throw the baby with his bath's waters !! The rest is perfect in tournament, and I can't let you say it has no credibility. Once the twiking done, our league + tournaments ran perfectly. This is simply a point that's need to be clarified, considering champion cards are not "balanced" enough to enter the tournmanet pool !

Hmm, I'm not trying to point any fingers, or anything of the sort. All I'm saying, is FFG printed this card...did they not listen to the play testers? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume they said something along the lines of "Hey this is way overpowered, don't print it." To me this is a mild assumption considering that people have to restrict it for their games to be "fun." I definitely understand why you would want to do so. If every deck is just Dogs + Descendant, that can get very redundant, but that's my point, is FFG doing anything to help sway these decks? You mentioned some cards that help...I'm still pretty new and am not familiar with any of them at the moment. Thanks for the replies everyone, I didn't realize it would spark such a debate, it just happened to come up one day as I pulled Descendant from my latest Asylum Pack and read him, realizing how GOOD he actually he is. I also only have one of him in my deck, and he pretty much usually steals the game as soon as he shows up.

eibon is a pretty good card but i dont feel he is broken. i use to use him but then the whole thing 'eibon wins the game started' so i encouraged others to play him and i pulled him out of my decks. i havent played him since then and on top of that i havent lost a game to eibon. the cost of one success token is a huge cost and that was my argument for not banning him in our group. if you play smart almost every faction has a very simple way to deal with him. even within the pack he came from there were simple ways to deal with him. path of blood awesome, deals with eibon and dogs. the thing that has to be remembered is if you cancel eibon, not only are you blocking a character but removing a success token. and what is a fair cost for removing a success token??

Well I think even as a base character, for what you get his cost is ridiculously low it seems. 4 icons, willpower AND fast...for 3 resources. This is not even including the ability he has...Oh, and to top it off, he has transient.

The only drawback I see, is the one you mentioned, which is the discard of a success token.

It cost one success token but with its investigation icon you can gain again this success token by winning the investigation struggle. What you can do by playing cancel cards on him, his just to know you will see it again on the next turn.

The only real way to deal with him, is to destroy it and have a Snowgrave on the opponent's discard or playing the Agency Interrogation center card.

i think transient is also a drawback. but thats a whole other issue i think. put terror of the tides can be a 3 cost, 4 skill and and +2 toughness. so eibon isnt that far above what else is out there. and you dont have to cancel him, you can still wound him.

what im trying to say is that blocking, canceling eibon for one turn can be worth the removed success token based on the cost of past cards.

i honestly believe eibon isnt super powerful. you just have to be prepared for it. just like you have to be ready for certain cards with certain factions. i remember from the old forums with the west and vaughn being broken thread it was pointed out how the top decks didnt use them or something. so while eibon might be really good, its possible to build better decks without him. and people that cant win without eibon probably dont have a good deck either.

When you play the surprise action of the terror of the tides, it have only Thougness +1 when it is on the table.

The terror have 2 combat icons, the same for the descedant but the descendant is FAST so the terror is wound again.
Then, The descendant is powerful when play in defense (and it's the best way to play it in surprise defense) after the commitment of your opponent. You play it to win the struggles and (re)gain the succes of investigation you use to put it into play. The news cats of ulthar could be a way to block it well.

you really couldnt play both cards as a surprise, offensive and defensive. if you played terror before you commit its not really a surprise at all.

cthulhu has its own version of a surprise character that isnt that far behind eibon. actually hastur has one too (not as strong). its just at this point in the lcg eibon shouldnt be a 'surprise.' when you commit to stories you should almost think that a eibon, terror of the tides, or even thing behind you could be blocking. and at that point either commit knowing that, or have a back up plan for when they try to play it.

Inevitably there is the most powerful move for the cost. Cthulhu three domains and Tides comes at any action window, but not to a story after characters commit. (The Cats of Ulthar can!) But the skill, terror and toughness are undeniable. Hastur puts a one cost into play, nope its The Thing Behind You (but just lots of terror and one skill.) Might as well be a Giant Albino Penguin to begin with, or Victoria. Is the Fast and the surprise worth the shenanegins / deck space. So expect any one cost Hastur to zap you with terror.

By the way, "during the story phase" is a very broad window for Cats of Ulthar to appear. How about after the terror struggle. I guess it is assumed during the valid action windows within the story phase" commit cats.

johnny shoes said:

its an action so it cant be played once stories resolve.

Just wanted to throw my 2 cents into the pot.

1 - Descendant is not broken. Strong? Yes, no question. It has some silver bullet's now, but really I certainly suspect that in the possibly near future we will see a "removed from game" pile (based soley on the elder sign card poll that popped up a long time ago). Which would break the illusion of its current brokeness. So while it may be one of the top cards right now, its not SO far beyond everything else that it would warrant bannings or an erratta.

2 - Dogs are not broken. Strong? Yes, again no question. They add consistancy and are cheap and are decent in nearly every phase of the game provided that it has friends. As terror becomes more important (and it probably will), and more quality characters and removal cards come out the dog team will seem less overpowered than they do now. Though, in my humble opinion, they will continue to stay a strong choice for a great long time to come simply because I can have 8 of them in the deck when I can only have 3 max of everything else. And I'm a man who loves his consistancy. Having said that though, they aren't SO strong that they need erratta or banning

3- Raver never was and never will be broken. Strong? Yes. Annoying? At times, but can be easily dealt with.

But thats just me, ya know, being me.