In some ways, yes. In the deck I ran at Days of Ice and Fire, Looters would have been the perfect discard engine for me. In fact, Looters are arguably a better discard engine than they are a draw engine. Of course, if you do want to draw, the Looters always make you discard, while Val does not. Looters also require extra cards to make them usable more than once a turn. And are limited to a single color. They are similar, but the ability for Val to see play in any deck without a guaranteed discard, and that she is repeatable 3 times a turn without cost and can still swing at the opponent? Yeah.... she's better than the Looters overall. If I have time to kill over the weekend, I might browse around the Gatherer and see if I can find something a little more comparable.

On an only slightly related note, Nate/Damon, would you guys print a direct Merfolk Looters analogue for me? Pretty please?

ktom said:

Here here! I've been preaching this to my Meta for a while and they still can't make that shift. Hence why, as stated earlier, raid decks are junk unless you can consistently deck someone or the discarding is fueling something else.

goshdarnstud said:

ktom said:

you lose more with val then you do with a raid effect. Val if you discard a card not only have you lost the card (equal to the raid effect) but you have also lost the chance to draw one more card that turn. Unless you are running a deck that has no other draw engine that lost draw oppurtinity can be a pain.

Also, the discard of val is different from a raid effect in that the opponent had to pay some cost (might have been minimal but still there) to discard your card, with val you are doing the work for your opponent. might go to the psycologic issue, but it at least is an actual difference more then a perception difference.

eygji said:

You mean the looters that don't give true card advantage (agreed, many times it helps to discard a land to draw something useful...alhtough many times you will just draw a land again), kneel to use their ability, and only really can be used once a turn? Those looters?

I don't see any comparision other than they both SAY draw. If Val said "kneel to draw a card and then discard a card" no one would be talking about her in the least. Bara would love her to put Armies in their discard pile, but that is about it.

Jef said:

Very good examples here. You NEVER wnat to hard cast Khal Drogo except in a last ditch, desperation move. I don't think Val plays well with non wildling Targ. Targ wants to have cardsd in hand - not cast on the baord or discarded (though they have some decent atathcment recursion) I think this is a good example fo why Val doesn't make every deck she is in better or more efficient. she is really strong in some builds - not as hot in others.

Which is why i think Sam is more reliable. Not as much as he was since not everyone plays Ravens anymore, but at least out of Targ - you can set thinsg up to net at least a couple fo cards off Sam and given recursion of the birds via Dany's - possibly a lot more.

Stag Lord said:

I see what you are saying, but what about the games where you wouldn't have drawn Khal Drogo at all unless you used Val? Or the game where you flipped 3 locations during the game, and they gave you the income needed to push through? It isn't like he is horrible, and I probably discard about 25% of the cards I reveal with her (including events).

I do agree, however, that she is the worst in Targ (non-Wildling of course). Targ also uses Threat the most. I would still play her 1X though

rings said:

I actually disagree that Targ is the worst house for Val...I think Val is great in Targ. Given Targ's numerous low-cost (often low-impact) characters/locations, she's a great way to get through a bunch of crap to the cards you really want. Unlike other houses, Targ is often forced to play crappy, low-cost cards to help manage the influence curve, and also just because a lot of the playable Targ cards are low-cost "chud" (to borrow a term from Rings). For example, if I'm playing minor fiefdoms, kingdom of shadows, brothels, and all those other low-cost locations in addition to other small characters, I'm going to need to play 2 cards for each of my opponent's to keep up with his/her more powerful cards.

As ambush becomes a more cohesive/designated build (rather than something that is coincidentally added a la Flame Kissed), Val's usefulness in Targ does diminish somewhat. Still, if I run 3x Waifs + To Be A Dragon + Dany chambers, I may even consider running 3x Val. So while the specific build matters, I can't think of any Targ builds that would avoid her altogether.

More to the theme of this thread, I think Val is pretty much an auto-include in any deck. In an event-heavy deck, I think 1x makes sense, especially if the deck already has a very strong draw engine (for example Lanni). I suppose some combo decks might not run her, since she could discard a key component of the combo. But I haven't seen that many combo decks around lately, and for 2 gold, there's really no reason to not run her for emergency draw. It's much more common to see weenie decks, and in this environment, she's an All-Star.

By the way, just because Val is easy to deal with, doesn't mean she has only a minor impact on the game. Here's a scenario...I play Val, draw 3, and play 2 of those (the third is discarded, let's say). Val is then immediately killed by Venomous Blade. So Val netted me 2 cards AND took one for the team so that one of my other characters could go another round. For 2 gold, that's amazing...probably even too good. Keep in mind that it's much more common for Val to last 2 marshalling phases, I think. That's 4 more cards (assuming one of the three is discarded, on average) that see play WITHOUT any comboing with other cards (for example Samwell and ravens). Finally, consider that Val is typically only supplemental draw to help get the main draw engine (whether it's drawing into a Golden Tooth Mines, Longship Iron Victory, etc.) going. In a tourney-competitive deck, this should really only take 2 marshalling phases to jump start the process. So in actuality, you're really paying 2 gold for a neutral guy that essentially makes the deck run when it otherwise would stall.

I pretty much agree with Twn2d here on everything.

Val is supplemental draw, not a primary draw engine (except maybe in a Wildling deck), but in that role she's almost absurdly an auto-include in any deck (barring some hypothetical combo -deck that we have not yet seen). She's there to help kickstart the deck, and maybe help fill up any draw gaps left by the primary draw engine. And if your deck doesn't get it's primary draw engine running (or doesn't have one to begin with), she can work as a decent substitute.

IMHO she works just as well in a Targ deck as any other - of course you need to exert discretion with her at times, and take the board position in to account... but she's a fixer, and you have complete control of either using or not using her in every situation.

Even though I really like her mechanic (this game needs more risk-reward mechanics to make decisions less obvious), I've sadly been starting to come to the view that she's really imbalanced, and possibly needs somekind of errata (make her an Ally? give her Neutral House Only?). Let's do a comparison with the other available supplemental draw characters (with similar prices, the list may not be exhaustive) available, as an example (using Twn2d's approximation of Val effectively netting around 2-4 cards during a game):

Martell:

- Flea Bottom Scavenger: Same cost, one less icon, very conditional, Ally, good net draw of three cards... very good in Brotherhood, but doesn't touch Val otherwise.

- Dornish Paramour: Net draw of only one card, if you take having to discard her into account. Can be killed off before getting to draw ANY cards. Same icons, better strength. Ally.

- House Messenger: Reveal, not draw, which is useful. Net draw of only one card. One less icon, better strength. Ally.

Overall: Martell has pretty good (supplementary) draw, but still I think replacing one copy of any of these with Val would help the deck run smoother.

Lannister:

- Tommen: Costs one less (which is very good), one less icon, needs to kneel to use ability, conditional (can be stalled by other kings, and plenty are run nowadays: Mance, Robert, Robb...) nicely repeatable though. Still, won't net you 4 cards during a game usually... will either get stalled by other kings or just bladed, burnt or eaten (Grey Wind)... much cuter than Val though.

Stark:

- Guard at Riverrun: Very conditional, one less icon, but better strength. Will never net you 4 cards in a game though. Can easily be killed before netting any cards (VB, burn, eaten).

Baratheon:

- Renly: Very different role in a deck, and you play him for other reasons than the possible draw. Though it's a good bonus.

Targaryen:

- Street Waif: Good, although more conditional (opponent chooses, and need cards in discard). Needs to kneel to use ability (so won't be participating in challenges). Ally. One less icon. Same strength. Usually won't net you 4 cards, and even then won't participate in challenges. Combo's well with Val discarding some cards for you though.

- Maegi Crone: She tries to be more of a primary draw engine for Targ, but her stats make her pretty steep to actually play. She can propbably net you at minimum 3 cards during her lifetime though, and sometimes much more. Costs one more (which hurts a LOT). Same strength. One less icon. Ally. Ehh...

- Jhogo: Same as Renly, conditional, fills a different role in the deck... but should be very good at that.

With Val, Narrow Escape, Varys, Milk of the Poppy, Syrio, Nightmares etc. I'm starting to get a bit worried about the card environment losing a lot of it's flavour due to all decks (regardless of house) running around 10-20% of the same cards. I really don't want to see AGOT go the way of CoC, with power-neutrals filling most of the competitive decks, and the importance of House being diminished. Most often nowadays, I first build a deck without that many neutrals, test it out a bit, then end up stuffing in 'the usual suspects' (to make it competitive), and vóila, it works better...

PS. (Off-topic, regarding the MTG discussion) If Val was an MTG card, she would be: 2 cost (no colored mana required), 1/1, If there are less than 3 charge counters on her to trigger her ability, at the beginning of upkeep remove all charge counters from her. She would be Rare (possibly mythic), cost at least as much as a CP, and every competitive MTG player would need to sell their left kidney to have four copies of her. Possibly also the right one, and what's left of their soul. Merfolk Looter has almost as much to do with Val, as say, Ancestral Recall ( http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/card/Details.aspx?name=Ancestral+Recall ), which is one of those cards from the first set that were way overpowered, and have never been reprinted. The most recent similar card to THAT now costs five times as much to play ( http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/card/Details.aspx?name=Jace%27s+Ingenuity ).

I agree with Twn2dn and WWDrakey. I don't like where it goes with Val and Narrow escape: just put more and more characters. Also I don't like that only Martell and Targaryen is able to kill Val easily (although I don't have a problem with Targaryen methods). Val is discussed second time here - people knew that something was wrong with her at the beginning. Personally I would ban/errata her.

Yep Val is too good for the current environment, agree with what most people said.

She's much better than Samwell Tarly in my opinion. Sam costs 1 less true, but he has no icons except in a night's watch build.

Also, the fact that you need to combo him with Raven cards makes a huge difference.

He might be better than Val in certain specific builds - true, but Val is a stand alone card - that's why she's a monster.

Where's the ban hammer at?

I completely disagree with you guys re; Val in Targ.

Targ does not wnat to just be playing or discarding cards. In an ambush or even burn deck - you wnat your resoruces in hand, not on the board. and half the time you wnat your resoruces to be a surprise because it affects how your opponent plays. I don't WANT to play Khal drogo in marshalling - EVER. That could seriously cost me a game right there. Or a Queen's Knight, or a Dragon Thief without a target. Ort any of my burn effects until an optimal time.

The allure of her filtering a little chud to get to a burn event may be attractive - but its a mistake. Targ has other ways of getting draw, and they may not be as easy as triggering her three times - but in the long run, they are better suited to the House.

She's just not an every deck solution. This game is not Magic, despite some player's sensibilities.

WWDrakey said:

*cough cough*

Stag Lord said:

Stag Lord said:

It does depend on the deck build a little, I agree. But if you are losing games because Khal Drogo hits your discard pile, you need to seriously rethink your deck building

And as people have said, Street Waif is an amazing card, one I don't think people look at closely enough. Two cards first turn, and if you don't deal with her, a card a turn after that. I have never had an opportunity (Val or no Val) where she just doesn't have a target.

You still haven't responded to my mail above. What about the games where you wouldn't have drawn into Khal, or Dragon Thief or had the 3 locations that helped you put out a win condition? Or you did get a Thief with an attachment on the board (~oh, no, if not you only got a 2/2 with two icons! The horror!). Or the time she helped you get 2X Forever Burning in your dead pile to start their recycling power? Yes, you can focus on the one game where she didn't help your cause (but barely hurt it, if at all), but in my experience, that is offset by the 3 where she seriously helped you out.

And, no, this game isn't Magic, but all CCG/LCG/TCG's have similar concepts, and efficent draw is one of them. Not running at least one just isn't making your deck as efficient as possible.

~Just say I win and we can all move on.

Rogue30 said:

Stark kills her easily (Grey Wind, Core Robb, various events). Lannister kills her easily (Ilyn Pane). Then you have City of Soldiers and Threat from the North.

There are ways to deal with her, if everyone thinks she is that powerful wouldn't metaing against her be the proper response instead of banning/errata?

I ignored your point Rings because it is a circular argument. soemtimes she'll help - soemtimes she'll hurt. Granted.

The question is; does she hurt more than she helps - and in the Targ build I am comfortable with: she clearly hurts what i am trying to do more.

And it sounds liike you and Dan and i acually agree on the main opremise of the argument: Val's efficiency DOES depend on the build. I'll concede that most builds - she will make better. she has certainly been money in my Baratheon decks. No argument.

i even agree with Drakey's main pint - too many deck slots are givens going in - and that's never a good thing. This will get even worse if/when Paper Shield gets a reprint. But I'm not ready for a ban on her yet - plenty of ways to deal with her out of three Houses (see Rogue's post just above) and Threat should be an answer too. But you run into the stupid wildling agendas there - which IMO are the worst cards in the environment at the moment. much worse than Val or Narrow Escape.

Stag Lord said:

Actually my point was very rarely will she hurt you (no matter the build), and there is just as much chance that cycling got you cards you wouldn't have had...and 'sometimes' (a high majority of the time) she will help. But, tomatoes tomatoes...

Heck, I would play her just to get Forever Burnings into my dead pile more quickly!

Well - we do disagree then.

There you have it. I regret having her in my Balck friday deck and i think i have fixed my draw issue in a way that better fits that build by replacing her.

*Shrug* at this point. Good discussion and some very good arguments raised by the other side.

Stag Lord said:

Okay, I was writing a long reply to Stag's post, and meanwhile all of the points I was going to make got made.

In short: Yes there are some builds (especially Targ Ambush) that don't like Val, but they're a definite minority, and mileage may vary. Something around 90% of decks get better with Val, several (but not all) Targ builds included, IMHO. finite is right on me giving riverrun guard a worse description than would have been truthful too. More truthfully: getting a similar amount of cards with one Guard at Riverrun than with Val takes much longer, and is more susceptible to the usual (VB, burn, breakfast for Grey Wind on Robb).

Stag Lord said:

Thank the Seven for that!

I'm surprised no one has commented on Martell. I'm not sure that Val is very good for a Martell event heavy challenge control deck. While I agree wholeheartedly with the points that a discarded card with Val is essentially the same thing as it being buried somewhere in your deck where you're unable to draw, I feel that Martell has enough other draw options that won't immediately discard Burning on the Sands, He Calls it Thinking, Red Vengeance, etc.

Kennon said:

That's probably a good point which feeds right into other posts point of using her as supplemental rather than primary. I created Targ ambush/Dothraki deck that had some draw but needed a little more umph (sp?) so I dropped in a Val. The only time a made a deck where she was the primary draw was in a heavy dupe/bodyguard/loyal guard Bara rush deck where most of my plays are free anyways and I had multiples of her in there as well.

I imagine Erick wasn't complaining so much about the description of Guard at Riverrun as he was the conspicuous absence of another Stark draw card...

Darksbane said:

If you fight against Wildlings she's 2 STR, so few above ideas don't work. City plots requires more city plots. The point is, if you need to take something special just for Val, then your deck suffers and that's mean she's powerful. (Do you take something special just for Sam?) I won't take 3 x Robb and 3x Grey wind just for Val (Icy Catapult is better just for this). Martell and Targaryen kills her easily with just one card, which is not prepared for Val - they got it in deck anyway for anyone. You don't need to win challenge or something - you kill her just like that - that's what I call easily. And what various events are you talking about? "Guilty!"?

Rogue30 said:

The same argument you are using for Martell and Targ can be used for any of the cards I listed above. None of them can only kill Val and there are plenty of uses for nuking a 1 or 2 STR character in just about any deck. Would I pack these cards just to kill Sam? No, but I wouldn't pack them just to kill Val either. I'd use them to kill all the annoying 1 and 2 STR characters that are in many decks. At the least they will usually help burn through your opponents claim soak.

I mean lets look at the draw engine stuff WWDrakey listed earlier, other cards which you could kill besides Val to hinder an opponents draw using some of the examples above: Dornish Paramour, Tommen, Sam, Guard at Riverrun, Street Waif, Maegi Crone. Stark has the advantage that much of its stuff can kill even bigger characters.

And if I saw the chance to kill off an opponents draw engine be it Sam or Val or any of the others I'd certanly kill those characters.

As for events Guilty is the stark one I was thinking of, but there are others which are useful not just for stark; like Death by Payne, Die by the Sword, Kill for Your King, and The Battle of the Whispering Wood.

The point is she is a low STR character and almost all decks pack some kind of character control, removal, or burn. And if a deck isn't packing that kind of control then that was a choice the deck builder made in light of his/her local meta and they'll have to deal with the consequences. I'm not saying she's not powerful but I think there are plenty of answers to her. That is the beauty of customizable card games, if Val is such a huge boon for your opponent then you should be changing your deck to meta against her.

I think I fall into the "Val is a really, really, good card" club. It's no Pyromancer's Cache, and I don't think it's worthy of the ban/errata stick either, but still a very good card.

As an acting member of the Mathlete Cronies Club, I would think less of myself if I did not contribute the following to this conversation given his current absence:

First Snow of Winter

That is all......