I'm not sure I understand how "she may help you, she may hurt you" is an argument against using her. In that case, toss out some other weenie and put 1x Val in just in case. If you don't want to use her ability, then don't, and just use her for claim soak. Wouldn't you rather have her "just in case" than get stuck with cards you cant use, thinking "I really wish I had a draw mechanic right now"
Val and Pyromancer's Cache -- Is there a difference?
longclaw said:
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...
Actually I think Erick was joking about how many cards someone quoted you could draw with the Guard (and how situational it was). He was using the Guard VERY heavily for draw in some games at the Days of Ice and Fire (I don't think he got one draw off in my game with him, but silly Jayne Westy did the damage instead).
Stag Lord said:
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.
I agree - and I hope I showed that I see the other side of it. You were in a tourney, she discarded a card you needed. That sticks in the brain all right
Kennon said:
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.
Lars said:
she can get in the way of some decks, martell for instance, with a lot of events that I'd want to have sit in my hand. Where I think the best use of her is, is in the wildlings deck where she is usualy free to play and much more efficient as your gold curve is so low. But there the problem isn't here but a specific agenda.
next time i'll post in bold
That's probably a good idea. I tend to skip right over posts made by people that primarily play Baratheon.
Kennon said:
That's probably a good idea. I tend to skip right over posts made by people that primarily play Baratheon.
Didn't you play Bara at the last couple of tournies I have seen you at?
rings said:
Kennon
said:
That's probably a good idea. I tend to skip right over posts made by people that primarily play Baratheon.
Didn't you play Bara at the last couple of tournies I have seen you at?
its funny, before lcg i hardly played bara. i was more of an aggro guy out of targ, martell, or greyjoy.
Nah, I'm pretty sure Days of Ice and Fire was the only event I played Baratheon at. Although, I did play Martell at GenCon and Regionals. So yeah, strange that I haven't played Lannister in ages. Although, I'm experimenting with just a touch of Clansmen for claim raising and boy can that be fun.
Kennon said:
Nah, I'm pretty sure Days of Ice and Fire was the only event I played Baratheon at. Although, I did play Martell at GenCon and Regionals. So yeah, strange that I haven't played Lannister in ages. Although, I'm experimenting with just a touch of Clansmen for claim raising and boy can that be fun.
I find increasing claim past 5 or 6 gets relatively useless...
Agreed, actually. Plus, it's more effective against decks that actually have power on their house for you to steal.
Thats the inherent problem: if you want to do a claim 5 power challenge, they need 5 power. If you want to do a claim 5 military challenge, if they have 2 characters its unnecessary. And if you want to do a high claim intrigue with clansman, its foolish since when they have no cards in hand your abilities wont be active. I think keeping it around 2-3 is the best option.