bloodycelt said:
I actually don't see much point in him outside of a knights deck.
An asshat deck has enough intrigue icons to not worry. And a rush deck requires perfection in execution, and considering he lacks renown... I don't see him adding anything there.
I see him as a trap for the overly anxious folk that have the need to toolbox. Unlike old qOt he doesn't stop the player from doing the challenge, he might have been interesting as a martel card though.
Jef said:
When cancelling Narrow Escape, you discard your hand, not any cards, that's the reason Darkstar doesn't come into play there, and the same reason TLS has nothing to do with NE.
So, that's not a flaw.
Is this correct? Your hand is made up of cards so I think it would be a strange distinction to say discarding your hand does not mean those cards count as being discarded.
Darksbane said:
Jef said:
When cancelling Narrow Escape, you discard your hand, not any cards, that's the reason Darkstar doesn't come into play there, and the same reason TLS has nothing to do with NE.
So, that's not a flaw.
Is this correct? Your hand is made up of cards so I think it would be a strange distinction to say discarding your hand does not mean those cards count as being discarded.
See FAQ 4.12, The Hand:
Any reference made to a player's "hand" refers to that hand as a single entity, and does not refer to any of the individual cards in that hand. Thus, it is possible to discard a hand of 0 cards. Further, if you do discard your "hand," you are not considered to have discarded any of the individual cards that make up that hand (for the purpose of initiating other effects).
Saturnine said:
See FAQ 4.12, The Hand:
Any reference made to a player's "hand" refers to that hand as a single entity, and does not refer to any of the individual cards in that hand. Thus, it is possible to discard a hand of 0 cards. Further, if you do discard your "hand," you are not considered to have discarded any of the individual cards that make up that hand (for the purpose of initiating other effects).
Wow, I think that is one of the most counter intuative rules I've ever seen in a card game, good to know though, thanks.
Agreed on it being counter intuitive.
Discard basically means "discard from play", then?
evilidler said:
Discard basically means "discard from play", then?
How do you mean? Discarding a card from your hand is still different from discarding a card from play (in play are all non-agenda cards that are not in your deck, hand, dead pile or discard pile). But discarding your hand and discarding a card from your hand are two different concepts in this game.
I have tried the new guy this saturday and undoubtly he is a very powerful card.
A merit that it's necessary to recognize alec is that his card has made possible a baratheon deck based on the war crest.
I played this kind of list, very aggresive, with the knight's of the realm agenda and all the war crest playable in baratheon. One good trick is to open the game with Retaliation! and playing Knights of the Storm to become the first player and crush your opponent with claim 2 from the beginning.
I want to notice that the Lauging Storm has a very good combination with Narrow Scape, as the even can remain in my hand at safety until my opponent needs to play Valar. I can also kill him through military claim and play narrow scape to return him to play untapped (and maybe getting rid of milk of the poppy in the process).
I played 3 copies of Val and 3 copies of Lauging Storm. Val helps to find the copies of both characters and keeping the combo alive. I can even draw 5 cards in the plot phase, before my opponent plays Valar and destroys the combination.
I played 5 games and lost 1 against martell + beric dondarrion, so it's quite a good rate. It seems not a unwinnable deck and it has open the door to a new strategy in baratheon.
I recognize, nevertheless, that probably a cost 4 for the laughing storm should be more balanced.
Well, based on matamagos experience with the card I must say that I do think the card is a bit overpowered.
It´s not the end of the world, because if you don't have ways to deal with it, then you will also lose for sure against ViperBeric decks.
There are many more ways to deal with TLS than with other overpowered cards like say Venomous Blade.
I agree that the abilities that TLS provides are in no way connected to the strenghts of house baratheon and the comparison with Black Fish is not valid because his ability depends on a house stark caracteristic of winning MIL challenges.
TLS will most definely put house baratheon, which is already pretty strong after the last chapter packs, firmly on top. Especially now that the Wildlings are out of the scene...
Again this is my opinion and in no way meant to antagonize anyone
(geez what a flame war in the previous posts...)
Congrats to Alec for winning and designing the card and he sure set the benchmark for future champions card design...
Please Gualdo, you won in Staleck so could you please design the most broken Greyjoy card ever and bring back this house to the game?? Please Please!!
>Please Gualdo, you won in Staleck so could you please design the most broken Greyjoy
>card ever and bring back this house to the game?? Please Please!!
Since I don't like mill strategy FFG is putting greyjoy on I will betray Greyjoy house :-( I cannot speak about card I submitted but my only thought was to create a card I would use in future big tourney and to be the most fun to play for all players that have my kind of play style... we will see in the future players reaction...
Mathias Fricot said:
Valar.
Marched to the Wall.
Milk.
Nightmare.
Distraction.
Claim.
Anything that kneels.
Anything that blanks text.
Need I continue?
There are answers. The game expands, so new things come out and change it. So deal with the changes.
There has been plenty of good back-and-forth here.
However, this line of logic has been killing me (Dobbs had it as well). EVERY character in the game (with small exceptions) has the weaknesses to kill/control, and every 'when standing' character has the same weaknesses to kneel.
So, why not make Mr. TLS 20 strength for 1 cost? Tricon? Or 'when he dies he returns to hand'? Heck, how about 'you cannot lose challenges ever'?
Obviously those are all tongue in cheek. Those would be obsenly overpowered...but using the logic that he can be controlled doesn't change the fact that he is overpowered. If the above changes were all made on him, I think everyone would agree on him...so it is percieved power-level issues I guess.
IMHO he is the most efficient character printed since the original Cannot Be Killed characters using the old Cannot Be Killed rules. People don't like the direction of the card (totally shutting down claim if not controled, actually going one step farther and shutting down any discard effect).
No one here isn't saying he can't be controlled. We are just saying he is overpowered and takes the game in a worrisome direction (we love claim!).
Stag Lord said:
I'm not sure where you're going with the comparisons to other champs cards but TLS (who hasn't actually been played in the metagame yet) on the surface is no more powerful than fourth;
1. First Snow. it was a Plot. Plots are stronger than characters. Ad um, this one kind of shook things up across all levels and across all houses.
2. Ghost. Please Rings. Just please. Your card was a cannot be discarded 2 STR, crested character that not only let you look at an opponent's hand but let you **** it as well. Better by leagues than TLS. Much more dangerous to the opponent, much better protected. Please.
3. Bandit Lord - some will argue but that card really sent shock waves through the environment with a neutral lord who gave you point and click location control, which is always, always a good thing and useful in just about every game you will play. We'll see if TLS really sees more action than BL did back in the day. Those of us who were there will be able lo tell.
And I really think the other bomb characters Greg mentioned are stronger. Cards that wreck your opponent’s board, resources what have you are almost always better than cards that protect you. Typically, when the defensive cards are dealt with - you end up wide open. so Marauders is better because given very little work, it can wreck your day. Ok TLS doesn't require any work at all - but again: he's purely defensive. Viper costs more bout does way more and has way better protection than TLS. Castellan (again) opens up your opponent for attacks you can exploit to win. TLS does not. he (maybe) lets you protect a couple of resources in hand.
I can see the point on First Snow - it was a defining card. However, it was in a time with TONS of defining cards. The power level has really been lowered since it rotated IMHO (which it should be with a smaller card pool).
You are giving Ghost of HH WAY too much credit. She was much more easily controled at 1 (or 2) strength, and she didn't give any true card advantage (she discarded a card by kneeling - ~see what triggered abilities can do, rather than passives! - but then they drew one). Yes, she hurt combo decks and at times could turn a game...but I can think of 50+ cards that could do that. Again, at this time in the game most people had a ton of cards in hand as well - if you ever got 'raped' from her, it was your own fault
Bandit Lord. Really? Really. ~Okay, this conversation is over now. Bandit lord was solid, but not that great. He was printed to basically hit King's Landing. Heck, I would rather have Saan for repeatable control for 1 more gold...or just run PTTT which was legal then (as was Fire from the Sky).
Castellean is good (as I said), but they put a negative trait on them for a reason, and it is always fun to steal a non-unique. Not sure what you are talking about on 'defensive cards leave you wide open'. So they knelt/killed TLS...~dang I made them use a kill effect on a 3/3 character with two icons and deadly, I am SO behind the 8-ball now! Now they can use intrigue claim again! There is NO downside to the card.
Gualdo said:
>Please Gualdo, you won in Staleck so could you please design the most broken Greyjoy
>card ever and bring back this house to the game?? Please Please!!
Since I don't like mill strategy FFG is putting greyjoy on I will betray Greyjoy house :-( I cannot speak about card I submitted but my only thought was to create a card I would use in future big tourney and to be the most fun to play for all players that have my kind of play style... we will see in the future players reaction...
So what's your play style?
i love to play unique chars that i love in the books :-) That have nedly ability. And to have the possibility to play a card I love with an art that I love... anyway I cannot speak about nothing... but there will be the time for insults or love :-)
Ps I'm anti control player and usually i focus all my decks in military. This is my play style :-)
rings said:
So, why not make Mr. TLS 20 strength for 1 cost? Tricon? Or 'when he dies he returns to hand'? Heck, how about 'you cannot lose challenges ever'?
actually giving him more strength would have made him a bit more balanced. As dobbler pointed out, one of the costs of TLS is actually using him. By making him more attractive to use in challenges players will be less inclined to have him just 'stand' there.
yes baratheon has standing effects, but if i'm a control player and can't control tls i'll happily take the trade of you protecting your hand while not standing double renown robert when i'm lacking control....
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...so yes maybe he can deny you claim but he denies the owner 3 str, deadly, and a war crest in a military or power challenge.
Gualdo said:
huh weird....sounds just like what alec did.....
Lars said:
Lars said:
huh weird....sounds just like what alec did.....
Hmm, so Gualdo wants an anti-control, unique, military card. Stark and Bara have been done, he's not going Greyjoy, so here's my guess of what he submitted:
"The Laughing Targaryen"
Mil Pow, 3 STR Renown, Ambush
While The Laughing Targaryen is on table, players can only declare military challenges.
Flavor text: "Hey control players... Ha ha ha ha. Ha ha ha ha ha!"
Lars said:
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...
I'm remembering this argument the next time I see complaints about GTM mines or any other draw in Lannister.
Nope, not even a tilde.
~
Lars said:
rings said:
So, why not make Mr. TLS 20 strength for 1 cost? Tricon? Or 'when he dies he returns to hand'? Heck, how about 'you cannot lose challenges ever'?
actually giving him more strength would have made him a bit more balanced. As dobbler pointed out, one of the costs of TLS is actually using him. By making him more attractive to use in challenges players will be less inclined to have him just 'stand' there.
yes baratheon has standing effects, but if i'm a control player and can't control tls i'll happily take the trade of you protecting your hand while not standing double renown robert when i'm lacking control....
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...so yes maybe he can deny you claim but he denies the owner 3 str, deadly, and a war crest in a military or power challenge.
Lars said:
actually giving him more strength would have made him a bit more balanced. As dobbler pointed out, one of the costs of TLS is actually using him. By making him more attractive to use in challenges players will be less inclined to have him just 'stand' there.
yes baratheon has standing effects, but if i'm a control player and can't control tls i'll happily take the trade of you protecting your hand while not standing double renown robert when i'm lacking control....
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...so yes maybe he can deny you claim but he denies the owner 3 str, deadly, and a war crest in a military or power challenge.
I'm not sure I agree with your argument. The fact that he has a pretty kick-butt capacity BOTH as an attacker (3/3/Deadly/War) AND as a defender of your hand (special ability) makes him pretty dang versatile - so either way he seems worth the measely 3 Gold. As far as him doing nothing to help you win the game, well there are lots of great cards that are primarily defensive in nature, so if someone chooses to use him so, why is that any less useful than other cards (aside from maybe the 3 Gold cost, which admittedly is more expensive than, say, a "Hand's Judgement" card, or Bodyguard, or Milk, etc - but even then you still have the option to switch him in to offensive mode or active defense if you want to at some point)? Even if he saves you from a couple of discards (either from lost INT challenges, or an Alter of Fire, or Merchant Spy, or whatever) and then you use him for a challenge or two and then he gets killed, isn't that still pretty good for a dude that cost you $3?
I'm really just playing Devil's Advocate. I'm not really convinced either way on him, but since I'm still new to the game and am looking to start a Baratheon "Asshai" deck soon, I really don't see why I wouldn't want a couple copies of him in my deck to round out my Asshai characters a little bit, especially with a Knight "subtheme".
Side Notes: Love the card's flavor text! Not so hot on the artwork, though...
Kennon said:
Lars said:
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...
I'm remembering this argument the next time I see complaints about GTM mines or any other draw in Lannister.
Nope, not even a tilde.
~
This. Oh, so much, this.
Thank you Kennon - next time someone in my group yells "OMG, HOW IMBA IS GTM!!!" I'll be sure to point them to this thread. Specifically your post
Lars said:
huh weird....sounds just like what alec did.....
I just hope nobody will think about a ban at the moment the card will be spoiled... the overpowered cards are the most boring things in the enviroment... anyway since this is a GAME boredom is the opposite of fun for me... so I hate overpowered cards in house and most of all neutral that fits in all decks... just my opinion...
Lars said:
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...so yes maybe he can deny you claim but he denies the owner 3 str, deadly, and a war crest in a military or power challenge.
Lars said:
actually giving him more strength would have made him a bit more balanced. As dobbler pointed out, one of the costs of TLS is actually using him. By making him more attractive to use in challenges players will be less inclined to have him just 'stand' there.
yes baratheon has standing effects, but if i'm a control player and can't control tls i'll happily take the trade of you protecting your hand while not standing double renown robert when i'm lacking control....
one more time for those in the back. By himself he does zip, 0, nadda to help you win the game. In fact if his overpowered ability is consistiently on he is doing less to actually help you win the game as he isn't participating in challenges...so yes maybe he can deny you claim but he denies the owner 3 str, deadly, and a war crest in a military or power challenge.
I laughed when I read this
How does giving him more strength make him more balanced? So by your logic, if TLS had a passive ability that said while TLS is knelt, characters cannot be killed, then he would be more "balanced" because you had the incentive to leave your hand unprotected? An improvement with no downside will never make any card that is overpowered more balanced. In this case you simply give more options to the TLS user, I really don't see how that balances him out.
We hear you here in the back, i'm afraid we don't understand.
So the fact that you have the option of completely protecting your hand from any sort of discard effects while having the option to use a 3 str deadly war crest character in military and power challenges does not help you win the game? ... ...
Ah, I think I've been playing the wrong game then
Apologies for the double post.
I am assuming Lars is being sarcastic, since not one of those comments is logical that I can tell.
More strength balances him? How really? By making you want to use him in challenges more? That doesn't make sense in the least.
Keeping all your cards in hand doesn't help you win? Or are you assuming that you have initative 0% of the time so can't have him standing during the opponent's challenges and then he can challenge himself? Or ever win dominance? Or ever get any combo (like the very easy Val combo) that allows you to easily draw cards you wouldn't without him - or wait drawing cards doesn't help you win I guess either?
I don't even know where to go with this *shrug* So I will assume he was being sarcastic. I hope so
