The new FAQ is up, and it has well worded answers and explanations in it.

The most interesting thing to me is the new "Restricted" list for tournament play - these cards are not banned, nor do they have errata. Instead you may only include one of the cards from the list in any given deck for an official tournament (well, 3 copies of that one card). Interesting approach.

TheProfessor said:

Awesome FAQ, I would say.

I can play again the Aspiring Artist, my favorite card of the game :DD

Konx

I'm a little confused by a new ruling in the FAQ:

The Restricted list for CoC LCG:

* Descendant of Eibon (Summons of the Deep F75)
* Nyarlathotep (Dreamlands F117)
* Guardian Pillar (Dreamlands F78)
* Itinerant Scholar (Core F30)
* Jeffrey Farrington (The Order of the Silver Twilight F18)

I wanted to remark that while I think this is better than dumping yet more cards in the banned list by making 1 of the choices in the list still usuable, it makes me wonder how relevant the banned list now is.

The banned list now only consists of:

* Endless Interrogation (Summons of the Deep F82)
* Magah Bird (Dreamlands F110)

...and since most of their imbalance comes from using them in combination, I question if it would be better to simply throw them in the restricted. list.

I am sure the guys at FFG thought of this possibility already so I am not trying to sway anyone's minds (Lord knows I am in no hurry to see those two cards again any time in the near future).

Hellfury said:

The way I see it is that those 2 cards are really overpowered: Magah Bird bypass the concept of "limited amount of actions per turn" and simply, played on turn 1, gives too much advantage.

Endless interrogation is just too gamebreaking if played, again, really soon. If reworded in a way that you could use it only once per turn (even if it goes back to your hand) than maybe you could put it in the restricted list.

My Opinion, of course

Konx

Restricted list won't change anything in my meta. And what's the point to put itinerant scholar in it? I don't get it. Nyarla is just a bifaction and tri factions deck killer. Alone. He still can come into play turn one or two and then, the game is nearly over for 80% decks. So I don't understand what this restricted list will change.

And I have questons with the dopplganger. Well th sames question that I had months ago. What if I blank the doppelgame text. DOes it return to my hand if the original copy dies? And about that. Where is the original gametext of the doppel? Th part where we have to return the doppel in the hand, where is it on the table?

Finally, if the doppel is destroyed by a dimensional rift with the original copy does it return to my hand anyway since it's destroyed?

B_P said:

To prevent using it in some infinite combo, maybe? It's probably the same reason Jeffrey Farrington is on the list.

Like what? Itinerant scholar + peaslee+ ritual of summoning? You still can play this one. THere's only the itinerant scholar in the restricted list so it's fine.

I don't understand why they have changed again the Doppelganger to abuse him with rats or descendant ? + all problems this card pose.

And why they have not put the Doppel in the restricted list if they keep the card so powerful !

Well to be honest, I'm pretty surprised that they didn't put an errata on Snow Graves and Dreamlands Fanatic.

Don't get me wrong, I love to play those cards but I was expecting at least a steadfast icon for SG.

I think the Regionals will give us a good sense of whether or not the Restricted List works.

We just need good reports from everyone! I plan to give you guys full details from our Philadelphia area June 4 event, and let you know if certain cards or combos are dominating (and perhaps need fixing).

Having Farrington and Descendant in my latest deck is now broken!!! Time for retooling I suppose... On the plus side, it didn't affect my Yog/ST mill deck!

@Hellfury, even if EI was off the banned list or had been errated, do you think either one of us would really get to play it? You know how our usual play partners "love" it

B_P said:

Well, the problem with having itinerant and farrington not in the restricted list is that it allows you to wipe 4 to 6 characters off the opponent's board during their refresh phase leaving them with no domains free. This definitely went in there due to the "overpowered combo" part.

And it's no exaggeration. It happens to me at least once per day playing against my buddy, regardless of the deck I use. We're practicing for regionals so we do three game matches, and this happens at least once per match.

Dadajef said:

I'm pretty sure they were not changing Doppelganger, so much as making sure people realized he still had the rest of his text. I think it was a clarification of the previous errata. And Doppelganger is awesomely good, but I wouldn't call him overpowered. Essentially he just lets you stack your deck with 3 additional copies of the best non-unique card in play or can afford. This is a very strong card, but not broken by anything I've seen, nor part of any combo that just kills the fun. I suppose it may find its way on to the Restricted List if a lot of the Regionals are being won with Yog-Sothoth decks and he makes an appearance as a lynchpin of all of them.

KallistiBRC said:

Here's the official response from Damon:

The Byakhee Attack says to choose 2 cards and do this thing to them if able. You are unable to choose 2 cards so nothing is done.

Julia Brown's effect is not directing you to choose a set number of cards for a thing to happen to them collectively, it is detailing an action (discard) and how many times you must do it (2).

some mistakes in the faq

- you can notice the aspiring artist is not the spoil version from Marius. Actually it means he keeps its arcane icon ? The spoil version is:

So the text from the faq should be :" Aspiring Artist should have a skill of 0, no arcane icon , and read: “Response: After playing Aspiring Artist, draw a card...”

- Can Neutral Ground (The Order of the Silver
Twilight F15) blank the textbox of Guardian
Pillar (Dreamlands F78)?
Yes, but it will have no practical effect.
When Guardian Pillar’s controller uses
the Support’s passive effect in its printed
textbox to exhaust it to a story as a
character with with 4 skill, @###, and
Invulnerability, Neutral Ground would
then blank the printed textbox but that
would not alter the lasting effect on
Guardian Pillar that makes it a character,
grants it skill, icons, or keywords.

Keywords are in the printed textbox, the Neutral Ground remove the Invulnerability.

And here's another response regarding another rules question about the discard cards.

The rules request:

Since cards are drawn or discarded singularly". Does this open up multiple response windows to each draw and discard or is the action that caused the draw/discard the thing that is responded to. (This becomes important for cards like Ritual of the Construct or Damon Rhodes, both of which have a response to "1 or more cards" being discard.

So even though you discard one at a time, it's still just one discard event? i.e. in an example where you discard 4 cards for some reason, you wouldn't be able to place 4 success tokens on Ritual of the Construct nor be able to draw 4 cards with Rhodes?

The FFG response:

KallistiBRC said:

Yes, I know that. And what if... Just a though, you change Jeffrey by... High wizard of the order? Ho! It works again!

I feel stupid here. What combo with It. Sch. and L. J. Farrington can remove 4-6 characters and drain opponent's domains? What am I missing?

This is the best handling of a restricted list method used to control power cards/combos in an environment than I have ever seen in a CCG, LCG, TCG, etc.

What typically happens is restricted cards get a limit of x1 per deck. The x1 approach is bad because it reduces mirror match games into, who gets to the power card first.

By allowing x3 of only one card from the list the powers that be are forcing players to make an intelligent choice as to which power curve bending tech they want to add to their deck formula. Finally, we will be able to see some deck construction discussions that do NOT end with, "...you should also add Eibon if you want it to be competative."

Even though the restricted list is for tournaments it makes sense for playgoups to adopt the list for all games.

Huge props to FFG for having the courage to provide an innovative approach to a restricted card list.

More huge props to FFG for being more responsive to general rules questions.

TheProfessor said:

You're not alone, it's the same for me. I obviously have missed a powerful combo there.

Ahzrab said:

That's not the only part of the combo actually. You'll need at least 2 more cards, 1 specific and 1 with options. So it *is* a 4 card combo, but not hard to pull off by any stretch of the imagination. I'm intentionally being a bit vague on it as a buddy is using a deck similar to this for regionals.

As for High Wizard of the Order... this is definitely true. Maybe the 4 cost vs 3 was enough to justify allowing it or something.

Ah okay, now I know. Well I guess...

I thought it was a 2/3 card combo...I tried this sort of a deck some weeks ago but for me it was pretty hopeless to get the combo working against a rush deck.

Oh, like Shub and Ritual of Summoning combo. But things like Flux Transducer stop that cold...