Darksbane said:

Yes, if that combo gives me 3 cards a turn, protection against the intrigue challenge (and a host of effects like Confession), combos with other cards (albiet to a lesser extent, like the discard down to four event and Kingsguard), and gets 1-2 challenges off at the same time. For sure. It really isn't dedicating that much, 6 of them are characters which I heard are useful, and the other 6 are not dead cards if not being used to protect the combo. ~It isn't like I am putting in 12 Littlefinger's Meddlings

It isn't comparable to Lanni or Martell's draw engines. Lanni's takes more effort and gold to hit the cap, and usually don't get you as many cards on the first turn you get those cards out (I am assuming GTM's are the main thought here). Martell's are usually one shot. Neither use the same cards that draw you cards to get a host of other effects (spelled out above). GTM costs 2, you get a card a turn starting the next turn. No other effect. I am not sure what the main one people are thinking for Martell - the draw 3 conditional chick? The reveal 2 chick?

Plus, remember, Lanni and Martell draw is supposed to be a strength. If Lanni got every main character with double renown or some sort of non-kneeling effect on their renown guys, would the fact that Bara has that already really be a defense? I don't think so...

rings said:

I've heard Rings say that he has use Retreat long before this combo (~his decks normally have a couple unique characters), and Val and TLS are awesome in their own right. So the only card that I feel he is committing a deck slot to that may not normally be in there is the Asshai Initiate.

And this draw engine blows away all other draw engines. Its an auto-three cards. GTM, considered by many to be the best draw card in the game, gets you one card per turn, and it takes two full rounds of plots (after playing GTM) for it to actually have given you card advantage. (-1 for GTM, +2 draws). So that is what is causing people to be up in arms about TLS + Val.

JerusalemJones said:

JerusalemJones said:

+1. Really well said.

Though it is fun listening to the control players whine. Let see how many Top Fours Baratheon rush makes this May - given Heir in;'t even out yet (~ of course that's probably getting banned before the Targ box even ships - just the mere thought of it is already soiling undergarments all acorss the Realm!)

Stag Lord said:

Haha, ok, I'll try to ask again, who is planning on running the Val+ LS draw engine and associated cards as a rush deck? I'm a control player and I'm seeing this run in and as a control deck. That is why I think it's likely too much. Not because of how it would work in rush.

Kennon said:

+1

Can I +1 your +1? lol

Kennon said:

Wouldn't that just be +2?

~Oh wait, that would require you know how to add. And as Rings has shown, you don't have to know how to add to work at a bank.

JerusalemJones said:

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but if you're saying they'll still have to play the cards with Val after they draw them, that's only if they can trigger/pay the costs of the cards; otherwise, they'll stay in hand. I suspect most players will be drawing their cards with the combo before counting gold and/or after all their gold is spent.

On a more global note, this is (one reason) why I've previously said Val should be errata/banned.

rings said:

~It isn't like I am putting in 12 Littlefinger's Meddlings

What, you mean you don't like situational one-shot response effects that target one very narrow deck type and, even then, don't do anything to help you win? Next you're going to tell me that Cannot be Bribed, Cannot be Bought is terrible. Jeesh, it's like you have a vendetta against all the best silver bullets!

Oh, and add me as a +1 (if I'm not already counted) for restricting TLS, and for Heir too if that's up for discussion. ~I don't support these because I think it would be good for the environment as a whole...I do it because I'm an ultra-control playing snob who hates all aggro builds and never want to see Bara or any other rush house be on top.

~ Can I just +1 that you're an ultra control playing snob?

Kennon said:

Why the ~?

Of course I'm an ultra control playing snob. Which is why my first Bara control deck includes 3x Val and 3x TLS. Yup, picked up my new chapter pack yesterday.

At least the facade is being dropped!

Stag Lord said:

Dropped? I never wore that facade! I've always been a control player. And anyone who spends enough time around me knows I'm a snobby ass.

However, I'm not a Valar-lover, nor am I net-decking, follow-the-crowd control player. In 2009 at Gencon when everyone and their mom played Lanny, I refused to. And after I get sick of playing TLS + Val, I'm sure I'll build decks meant to tech against it rather than use it. But I can already see such power level in that combo (combined with cards like Threat from the East), that I feel like I'm left with two choices...use it or tech against it...and that isn't a fun proposition when deck building.

Dobbler said:

~But that's part of the game.

You neglect a third option, just kill TLS. As a Stark player, I've never found a task so inviting. Honestly, the amount of targeted hate vastly surpasses the ability of a Bara player to keep him alive. I guess dealing with him outside of that might be a little more difficult though.

Mathias Fricot said:

That's what I mean by "tech against it". Basically build a deck that has as many immediate answers to him as possible. Heck, while Fortified Position has never been a bad plot, I can already see most of my decks running it now. The last thing I want to see is my OPP flopping TLS on setup then reveal Threat from the East first turn. I will be at a 3 card disadvantage to start the game with my draw already capped out for the round. Thus, in goes Fortified to have the gauranteed first turn blank of TLS if they flop him.

Dobbler said:

Or...

Maybe the real issue is that some of us actually do enjoy playing aggro builds and play both rush and aggro in many houses (including Bara). And while we may be draw to control most of the time, we really love the existence of powerful aggro (even Bara rush) builds. We just don't want the environment to devolve into "you have to run X or run anti-X to be competitive," like it had felt like for awhile with Lanni's 2-year dominance.

Dobbler said:

To be fair, this is going to happen whether TLS is restricted or not. So unless you're pushing for an errata, which I still think would be the best option but seems like a direction FFG is unlikely to take (given the advent of the restricted list), this is inevitable in the situation you highlighted.

Now of course TLS in general will be a lot less attractive if it's on the restricted list, so cases like this are much less likely to occur (I guess), and wouldn't happen round after round (Val + TLS).

EDIT: Sorry for double post. I still can't figure out how to manage the quotes in this forum system. They're confoundingly counter-intuitive (at least for a lay technical person like me).

TLS is like TRV, its a huge target that forces your resources. Its a bomb. You deal with it, or things just don't end well for you. Hell, I might throw it in a single copy in each Bara deck I make just to throw my opponent's focus off the other things I have on the table.

Twn2dn said:

Agreed, TLS with Threat from the East would still happen if TLS is on the restricted list..however, that is a one shot deal. I'm ok with that. Its sort of like someone using a pre-plot action before the first plot, then revealing RBD, thus giving themselves a 2 card advantage to start the game. Or if someone wants to mix TLS with For R'hllor or Preston Greenfield...at least those interactions require some effort to pull off.

However, when you combine the Threat from the East stuff with Val shortly there after in the game, it gets ridiculous. Val + TLS takes no effort other than getting them both in play. Lets take the scenario where you had TLS on the flop....assume a 3 card flop. 3 cards (setup) + 7 cards (opening hand) + 3 (Threat) + 2 (Draw)....that is 15 cards, which means there is a decent chance you drew into one of your 3x Vals.

However, at the end of the day, we will get a good indicator at Regionals if this truly is a problem. I don't think we will see TLS or Heir on the restricted list prior to regionals, since they didn't do it in the first iteration of the restricted list and the first regional is 3 weeks away. There will be two indicators I will be interested in seeing. 1) Do Bara decks increase significantly in total % of decks being played at an event (33%+)? and 2) Do they subsequently win an equal number of Regionals?

Dobbler said:

I hate these kinds of indicators. I think you're right that they have value, and if the sample polling size included 300 people I think they'd be effective, but three weeks out from regionals season I suspect many people are not going to change their fundamental approach to deck building or the houses they've been focused on for the past year. So I don't expect to see a major increase in Bara decks, though a small bump is likely (and a major bump *definitely* would carry weight).

Between the two, the better indicator seems to me how well Bara performs, but even then I think that's not necessarily the best indicator. If everyone techs against Bara rush (traitors, tons of spot removal, etc.), Bara's going to do horribly, but that doesn't mean the cards aren't powerful. I suspect some players will tech, most won't, and Bara will do slightly better than it has in the pst, despite what I perceive as a *major* environmental shift to accommodate for Bara's new toys.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I don't want us to pin our hopes on "indicators" that ultimately don't indicate much. If anything, I think the biggest "indication" will be a soft indicator of how people feel, and specifically whether they feel like they were excessively restricted in how they wanted to build their decks or play the game.

Gotta say though, despite all this back and forth about Bara, it still seems an improvement that we're worried about Bara (and in my opinion rightly so) than Lanni and Martell. I was getting tired of looking at all those yellow and orange cards.

Agreed wholly with Dobbler's last point. Let's just see how many Top Fours House Baratheon makes and how many players actually bring bara decks to Regionals.

I suspect a lot of this noise will be revealed as alarmism, and i'll concede publcily in teh unlikely event I am proved wrong.

For the sake of accuarcy i just wnat to observe that if I don't buy Dobbler's dichotomy that having a way to deal with TLS means your choices are running him or teching against him - any more than you're teching against TRV, Beric or any other strong character in the environment. If you don't have character control answers in your deck - you deserve to lose. period. TLS isn't going to suddnely make people start running Milk, kneel, burn or kill - they already are.

I certainly don't mind seeing where things go after Regionals. I have a sneaking suspicion he will be restricted at some point or another. Giving the house that theoretically and historically had the worst draw (although some recursion) the best repeatable draw mechanic just isn't goign to fly.

But, I will have fun playing Bara Control in the meantime, since I almost never have

~Where is the Bara traitor when you need him?!?

Man, miss a day, miss a lot. So let me get this strait.. The real deck problem that the TLS+Val combo creates is Bara control? Not Bara Rush? So now the big "Monster in the Closet" that we all should be scared of and clamoring for instant errata and/or banning is a good draw engine for Bara control? ~Really???!!! Well unless I miss my guess, Bara control has the same two problems that every other control build has. 1) It takes time to lock your opponents's board. 2) It's card intensive so it needs a reliable draw engine. TLS+Val possibly solve the 2nd problem. Not sure yet on the ability to lock.

Also, isn't the creation of a reliable draw engine for Bara control good for all you Shaggas out there who wanted more deck building options in each house? Weren't you guys clamoring for "Lanni not just being kneel, Stark not just being kill, Bara not just being rush, etc. etc" just a few months ago? Now that Bara is half way to a reliable control build, it's now a bad thing? ~God forbid anyone have a reliable control build besides Lanni or Martell.

And when did Bara Control ever win anything?

Once again, lets make sure it breaks the environment before we start restricting, errataing or banning anything.

I won a small tournament at christmas with Bara control