New article up on the front page. Quorin, the new plot and the War crest related kill event could result in some nasty murder decks.

The new Agenda I think is going to cause a lot of confusion because of what "claim power" means, which may be lost on casual players (not to mention me). Is the following right w/r/t the new Agenda?: I cannot get power for a challenge being "unopposed" or collect renown except if it is military challenge. I can still "steal" power by winning a power challenge. I can't get power for winning dominance.

LetsGoRed said:

Yes to everything except Renown. Power for Renown is collected on a character, not your House. So Renown works in any challenge type. Everything else (including Dominance) only works during a military challenge.

and you can still steal power during a power challenge, as that's not "claiming power" for your house, per se

LetsGoRed said:

First off, great card, Jonathan.

Second, at least we now know why Feigned Retreat probably went from a 0-cost to 2 influence cost in it's design process

I thought the same thing, Jason. To expand on what others have said: The Agenda would restrict you from claiming extra power for winning an unopposed challenge, claiming power for winning dominance, claiming power from events such as Make An Example, and claiming power from plots such as Winter Festival. You can still claim renown as the power is being claimed by the character, not your House. You can still "steal" power in power challenges as moving power from one card to another is not the same as claiming power. As an addition, Infamy can't be used as replacement for effects that would let you claim power for House. The Agenda is not a restriction on your House card. It restricts claiming power for your House in general. The only way to claim power for your House with the Agenda is by triggering the Agenda's response.

ktom said:

D'oh, read the card too fast and glossed over the "for your House" part.

Noobs are cute. Welcome to 2005.

Stag Lord said:

lol, Chris. I'll make sure to continue heckling Jason later tonight

FATMOUSE said:

Be careful with this statement. There is an additional qualifier. Unopposed, Make an Example, and other effects that claim power for your House still work if you use them between the initiation and resolution of a Military challenge.

I love the new Quorin card. Renown and targeted kill are awesome in any deck. Congrats Jonathan on designing a great card!

DOH!!! Can't believe I misspelled Qhorin.

FATMOUSE said:

and yet again if military challenge is too good don't assign a cost, don't give it. Now you have created a situation where ever intrigue win effect has to be less then winning a military challenge otherwise you've mis-cost the intrigue one.

and we'll ignore the assumption that the cards were play tested at the same time.

ktom said:

Alright, ktom, you have begged the question from me.... is it possible to win dominance during a military challenge??? Or is that your way of saying you can't claim power for winning dominance with this agenda?

Lars, would you rather a card not be printed than costed fairly?

schrecklich said:

Yes. Primarily it was my way of saying you cannot get power for Dominance with this Agenda. But hey, you never know what Nate will come up with in the future!

I really like the new agenda. The artwork for it is awesome. I'm a little worried that it could be overly powerful since it allows you to gain power from defending a Mil challenge too, but I guess we will see.

Qhorin seems ok but I don't really like the artwork. From the expression on Qhorin's face I just can't buy that he's some fearless maniac who's about to pound his attacker to death with his bloody stump of a hand. By the same token the wildling attacker (Jonathon) looks like he's smirking, or at best slightly peeved, not in full-on battle frenzy mode. Also Qhorin's sword is turned the wrong way in his hand.

A very cool card Jonathan. This expansion's going to be lots of fun

ktom said:

Right, I should have noted that. Thanks, ktom.

FATMOUSE said:

Second, at least we now know why Feigned Retreat probably went from a 0-cost to 2 influence cost in it's design process

and yet again if military challenge is too good don't assign a cost, don't give it. Now you have created a situation where ever intrigue win effect has to be less then winning a military challenge otherwise you've mis-cost the intrigue one.

and we'll ignore the assumption that the cards were play tested at the same time.

I agree with you Lars, I was just trying to be optimistic. With cards like Lannisport and Cersei Shadows kneel I can see Misinformation being just as effective as Stark winning a military challenge with Feigned Retreat. I wonder if there will be an auto-win power challenge card. Perhaps it will be for Targ? It will be interesting to see if that card has a cost or not.

I quite despise the quoting/editing on these forums

FATMOUSE said:

~Actually, the power one is going to add two gold to your gold pool when you play it ; )

FATMOUSE said:

~but lannister doesn't need misinformation

I was wondering about auto-win power for a while, before I didn't think it could happen (can you really let someone auto-win the challenge that only directly impacts winning the game?).

Now with costs being assigned almost willy nilly based on percieved bonus of challenges I'd have to think Power challenge would be 4 influence...

schrecklich said:

I thnk i've said as much with my argument that if they felt military was so much stronger then intrigue then they should have taken military away from stark (targ could use it) instead of inflating, and more importantly deflating the other, challenge.

Wait! what?

Take military away from Stark? Jesus - stark was the sixth Hosue - why would they take away the only thing they do well? I'm really starting to lose the thread of your arguments.

Stag Lord said:

Put it into context, Stag.

I believe Lars is saying that if canceling an opponent's military win was so much stronger in Stark than canceling an opponent's intrigue win is in Lannister, Feigned Retreat should have been "House (something other than Stark) only" instead of giving it a different cost from Misinformation because the two event effects are ostensibly identical. I doubt he is advocating taking the overall "military powerhouse" identity away from Stark, only taking the Feigened Retreat event away if it is so much more powerful (as has been theorized during the discussion) in the House.

If I'm following the whole thing between the two threads correctly, he is essentially saying that he sees military in Stark as being pretty much the same as intrigue in Lannister, so sees the difference in costs on the two events as inconsistent, a design mistake, and even a little stupid.

ktom said:

not stupid, shortsighted. perhaps not as shortsighted as MWnK then night'swatch/wildiling and a neutral house card....