I was reading an older article written by Nate French that mentions Targ being the top house during the Ice and Fire and Valaryian Blocks.

http://www.agameofthrones.com/rd-journal8.html

I was not a player during those times, so I was wondering if any of the long time players could reminisce about what made Targ so powerful back then, and why they're no longer a Tier 1 house (even today it seems like they're not a competitive build). Did the other houses grow faster than Targ, or did Targ lose some powerful cards from those blocks that they no longer have?

Targ has access to mcuh easier and more effective burn. In a nutshell. They had cards that just cost you a character kneel to hand out a -1, they had locations that did it as well - and ways to stand those locations. Almost all burn had the terminal condition. And draw was a lot easier - even after the 10/10 FAQ which implemented the draw cap - you had Seal of the Lion. This was a House Lannister atatchment that basically let you net a crd or tow a turn. And get this: Targ had a lcoation called Quartheen Trader's Guild that let you play ANY attachment with no OOH penalty.

Sigh.

You really couldn't keep characters on the board against a decent Targ deck and they would unoppose you to death the way Lannister and Martell do today. It was just way more of an NPE for a lot of players -because it basically rewarded character lite play.

Targ's character base was better too. COre set Drogon was aorudn back then - but hee wasn't limited to a ocne per pahse effect. You coudl hand out -1 reduction as long as you had gold - and there was an 8 gold Plot and some +2 gold locations floating aorund back then. Machine Gun Drogon was orders of magnitude better than the Core Set version. Horseback Archers were free (no INF cost) to jump and there were plenty more rewards for winning a MIL challenge. Great Khalassar didn't kneel to attack on MIl challenges and your opponent couldn't block. The orignial Khal drogo killed anyone with STR less than his by kneeling. There were ways to stand him over and over again, and as he was STR3, it didn'tt ake mcuh for him to hit every sweet target on the board.

Targaryen has really been dialled abck as a House, and I'm not at all sure their boxed set really boosted them that much.

I disagree to some extent. Field of fire unburnt, shade of evening, crown of mereen, horseback archers, pyat pree, and myrish villa helped round out targ summer.

Stag Lord said:

Actually Chris, Immolate and Whirlwind Assault were both "Give -2 STR and Kill if 0." The first was Any Phase: and it was one character. Whirlwind Assault was kneel X characters to give X different characters the -2 and kill, but it was limited to "1 per phase" and Marshalling only. They only got stronger when Killer of the Wounded debuted in Tourney of Swords.

Actually it really wasn't even about the burn at all though yes there were some more effective burn options. The real strength of Targ at the time was the mostly stronger and more flexible card base especially some key cards, and the strength of some of their other subthemes.

Quartheen Trader's Guild - Reduced the cost of an attachment by 1 and negated gold penalties on that. Gave Targ all the best attachments from any house recycleable with Lady Daenrys Chambers which were also legal at the time.

Illyrio's Estate - Probably the best attachment hate card ever printed. It was zero cost and discarded an attachment any time you revealed a new plot card. Until an errata making House only it was basically in every deck Targ or not.

City of Bones - More than anything else this was THE Targ card people hated. Targ's real strength was not burn it was attachment control and combos. City of Bones let you target a character with an attachment and allow that character to not kneel to attack or defend. It was super easy to attachment Voltron a power character and have a tricon non-kneeler. Since you could recycle attachments via the Chambers even if an opponent killed off the character you could just play another put the attachment back on and have another non-kneeler.

Horseback Archers - Perhaps you've played with this great quasi-reprint from the new Targ box. The original was exactly the same except they had no cost to use.

Shadow Conjurer - This was the original Red Warlock but with no pesky summer limitation.

Dragons - Stag Lord mentioned the Ice and Fire Drogon (The Chaingun) and he was good though on the west coast he was mostly played in Targ/Lanni treaties rather than pure Targ to take advantage of the gold. Also popular was Flight of Dragons Drogon who knelt all non Dragon characters when he came into play (much like Balerion but much more affordable at 6 cost). FoD Rhaegal was also rather useful as he was relatively untouchable since as a response he killed every character an opponent had in play if they targeted him with an event or character ability. Then there were the Valyrian Dragons - each one a two icon character with 5 strength and all with the printed text "Cannot be killed." And that of course was HUGE.

And those were just some of the best cards. There was a lot of other good stuff there that all networked quite well and frankly gave Targ a lot of options beyond burn. Targ also had a minor theme of specialty unopposed effects. Maegi and Dothraki screamers both prevented characters without attachments from defending when attacking, and the Great Khalasar just plain said while it is attacking no character can defend (and it didn't kneel to attack during a military). Sure it was an 8 cost army, but it was non-unique and if you could get on into play as long as it wasn't knelt out you were basically guaranteed to win military and power unopposed.

Freerider’s post is interesting in that it highlights the difference in metagame experience and how this phenomenon goes back to the earliest days of the game. I purposely omitted City of Bones form my discussion of powerful early Targaryen cards – here on the East Coast, it was considered a gimmick and given the availability of efficient location hate in those days: Put to the Torch, Bandit Lord, a plethora of Greyjoy cards….no deck relying on locations for is win condition could be considered efficient or reliable.

Similarly – Baratheon had a location that kept characters standing for power challenges – and that was never a big deal either.

Here it was all about efficient burn in depth. Luke names a couple of the big offenders, though I agree that Whirlwind never took off until Killer of the Wounded appeared, Immolate was a Tier 1 card form the moment it saw print. Eviscerate saw a lot of play as well, even though it was Dominance phase. Targ at its best, through the beginning of Winter Block (when Immunity started really spreading and their best stuff started to rotate) had control tech as good as Lannisters, but more final and thus more efficient.

This is all really interesting stuff. It sounds like Targ used to be cheaper to run than it is now, not to mention more efficient burn effects (chaingun Drogon and Whirlwind Assualt sound awesome!). I was looking at some of the reprinted stuff, like Bloodrider's Arakh. Before it was -1 strength to an opponent and kill if strength = 0. That seems a whole lot more useful then a strength boost to your characters and kill if strength = 0 that it is now. Basically it changed it from an effective tool to stop chump blocking to something that probably won't make it into many decks at all.

Also, City of Bones would have been awesome to combo with Shade of the Evening. Too bad that wasn't in the Targ box!

I have to agree with Stag Lord. The "old" power of Targ was their efficient control, plus the power characters to hammer things home. And yes, the "burn" pretty much always ended in "kill at 0," something that is not the virtual guarantee it was in the past.

And yes. They were generally more efficient. Here is why Targ was THE house to beat at one time in a nutshell:

Dark Pact (Baratheon attachment)

vs.

Khaleesi's Favor (Targaryen attachment)

Yes. They do the exact same thing, and were both in the legal card pool at the same time. But Baratheon had to pay 1 more gold for the exact same effect.

Wasn't Khal Drogo still legal at that time as well?

They just seemed to have a ton of very efficient characters that had kill effects, to combine with probably the best control events in the game (since you couldn't save vs. them).

Alliance house card was available as well? I played Lanni/Targ to great effect at this point (although scrubbing out of 'Worlds' for the only time) - Lanni for draw and some additional income, and Targ for control. The only time I played something other than Lanni or Martell.

Yes to both, Rings - and I mention FoD Khal Drogo in my intial response. And Alliance was really big - LanniTarg was THE deifning build for a whiel there.

Good assesment, noob. Targ's stuff is just several notches belwo what they used to have. It took a long, long time for R&D to find a playable balance with burn - and i'm not entriely sure its there yet - it is still a little too card/resource intensive and disruptable - but I know why they are being cautious. You couldn't stop it in the old days.

i just they'd be a littel mroe careful with some of Martell's silliness as well - how do some of those cards get through the pipeline? But there have been some encouraging signs lately.

Oh - and City of Bones would be MUCH stronger in the modern environment than it used to be. It would be pretty scary, actually.

Yeah, burn was much more powerful back then. Following Ice & Fire, it was dialed back a bit, but cards like Festering Wound and some of the doomed stuff were still probably a bit too powerful.

Today's burn feels about right, at least in my opinion. Flame-Kissed, Forever Burning, and Hatchling Feast all feel like appropriate abilities given costs + risks of cancel, etc. Some of Targ's other burn might be a bit on the weak side though. Flaming-Pitch Tower is pretty poor, especially given how difficult it can be to win a challenge by 4 STR with all the low-STR characters. The assassin is nifty when he works, but he's expensive, can't target characters with attachments, and is often canceled by Martell players.

I think the main reason Targ really suffers as a house though is the lack of truly efficient characters, the dual resource curve (which exacerbates the character problem), and the low amount of competitively viable in-house draw. The characters are especially problematic...compared to Stark, Martell, and GJ, Targ's cost-to-STR ratio is very bad, and worse when you factor in how common Venomous Blade is. Lanni's cost-to-STR ratio is probably comparable to Targ, but unlike Targ, Lanni has a lot of gold boosts and no need for influence.

So basically, Targ's burn and characters were pulled WAY back...to the point where the burn is probably where it needs to be, but the characters are much too inefficient for how the house as a whole operates.

*begin rant*

I don't really know how Targ used to be seeing as how I never played "back in the day" of CCG so I can't comment on that. But seeing the way Targ plays now I have to say that TWN2DN hit the nail on the head. The designers apparently are so afraid to give Targ a decent 3 STR character with a decent cost that it seriously makes me sick. The new Jhogo and Pyatt Pree were steps in the right direction, but spoiling the new Daario just made me almost vomit when I saw he was printed STR 2...seriously?! SERIOUSLY?!?!. I mean Targ is so bad off right now that Venemous Blade kills about 75% of the characters you have to play to make a decent burn deck work. And with the growing number of Martell Summer builds out there is almost makes Targ unplayable as a house without doing the whole Dragon thing. But then that opens another can of worms since that just lays down and cries when you have to play Lanny Kneel. And heck martell is no fun to play against either in that case.

Targ Summer is probably the best deck that Targ has right now and it's still the most inconsistent deck I can think of due to the fact that is is far too resource intensive and has very few characters with a good cost/STR ratio or even cost/icon ratio(grey worm anybody?). And with all those parts that you have to have to make it work you can't afford to ever play good solid characters(which Targ has very few of). Bara used to be on the bottom but with the new Maester stuff i believe leaped Targ again to leave them at the bottom. I have seen some amazing things with a Bara Maester deck recently. Sad really.

And don't even get me started on the new FAQ that took the legality for Gencon of Targ's only printed In-house Maester that can take link attachments. As if it weren't bad enough that every house out right now can run a good Maester deck EXCEPT Targ. Would it have been too much to ask for a decent copy of Maester Aemon that is not neutral, could take attachments, and actually did something other than save NW characters from dying? And maybe had an Icon? Even if he were no attachemnts except Chain that would have been better than the nothing.

Blah...trying to play Targ competitively right now is so frustrating.

*end rant*

widowmaker93 said:

Targ's draw/card advantage is fundamentally the same...very strong once you are already winning or have all the pieces in play (attachments + chambers/xaro's home, crone + burn), but often terrible early game.

I agree with you both on the difficulty of getting a competitive Targ deck up and running (God knows I agree) - though if you survive the early game, you'll probably be OK. But for teh record - I wnat to sya again that i don't really have a problem with venomous Blade when i am playing Targ. It is pretty easy to dispose of - via a couple of means which i typically have at ahdn. So - i am kind of excietd for Daario - I think he will actually eb a help.

But yeah - a couple more Targ cards that help you beat control would help. Immunity maybe? Ist kind of an under used keyword in this environment - but t is still an option.

Stag Lord said:

Yes, there is a couple different ways to take care of VB out of Targ. The most common obviously being Dragon Thief and Meereenese Brothel. The major flaw with both of these options is that they are responses that typically you will only be able to play during the challenge phase since that is the only phase that the VB will be out(if they lose a challenge). And as we all know responses are something that Martell can easily deal with due to He Calls it Thinking being a 3x staple card in every Martell deck. So yes you can get rid of the blade...if they let you. But I guess that is just the chance you take.

I actually always run MAd king's Legacy - but yeah: given 3 x Dragon Thief and 3 x Brothel - you'll usually get rid of the blade without an issue. Esepcially teh Brothel - becuase it is easily repeatable.

But I mean yeah - Targ characters are still too pricey for what they do, and as twn2dn points out - they really don't help you power home a winning challenge - they jsut help you capitalize on a challenge you have already won. All three of us are in agreement here.

Sure, you can get rid of it, but after your opponent has already killed Daario most likely. So they got a 2-for-1 card advantage kill probably, and a 3-for-2 gold advantage. And that is if you successfully get your attachment control off (assuming you dont' have a 'kill it in shadows' card I haven't seen). That is best case. 3/2's are still very hard in the current environment with Blade, Grey Wolf, and in a mirror targ burn (which hits the 2-strength most easily).

Don't get me wrong, I actaully like that there is a 3/2 spot open for very good cards that comes with a price. I just haven't seen many 3/2's to justify it

Who has the card slots to run 3x Brothels? I mean to run 3 of those what are you not running in the deck that could possibly help you win more challenges? Or to burn more characters or draw more cards?

I agree with Rings. I can't bring myself to play a 2 str character that costs more than 2. The cost/benefit in my mind is just not there because you just don't have the resources to play a character with that cost and str. Especially when mirror matches will be horrible for you and Martell will just laugh at you for spending 3 gold on a dead character.

Mad King's Legacy... LOL...We all know that VB is hardly ever out of shadows during the plot phase.

But, yes, we are all in agreement.

It's kind of funny that the (arguably) best "burn" card in the game isn't even house Targ, it's house Martell. VB is cheap, easily repeatable, and very hard to get rid of. Sure it doesn't stack like flame kissed, but hitting printed strength instead of actual strength is pretty amazing. Strength buffs (like GotC Daenerys) basically do nothing for you against VB, but they do stop Targ burn cards like flame kissed unless you can stack. Not to mention Flame kissed is going to cost me either 2 gold or 2 influence everytime I play it, and that's assuming I can recur it through LDC. Martell just has to lose a challenge (I lose challenges all the time! )

widowmaker93 said:

I agree as well. I'm not going to run 3x brothel when most deck don't have more than 3-5 attachments, especially when it does nothing on its own without burn. Most Martell Summer decks only run 3x VB anyway. And to use Mad King's Legacy on ONE VB (when there may be multiples out) you would have to have lost all challenges the previous turn, which probably isn't a sacrifice most would make, unless they're already ahead. The best chance to discard it is ambush in Dragon Thief, or to burn the character with it attached.

Danigral said:

Really? I have always devoted three slots to the Brothel - I run tehm more than Thieves actuually and can't imagien not doing so. What slots am i giving up? Not sure - Aegon's hill maybe? Flaming Pitch Tower? Not sure - but my targ decks are all location havey and i sure wta to make sure O ahev 3 of these in the arsenal to amke sure and get one out. Metas are metas and all that - but there are atatchemtns in EVERY hosue that i need to account for and this card is way more important than some of Targ's other gimmicks. *shrug*

All i'm saying si that VB is not what is keeping Targ in the lower tier. They have a problem in the character base, but more times than not they cna deal with the Balde. thsi isn't just theory here - Martell is very popular in Ny and the East Coast in general and I beat two Martell decks out of three at the last big tourney i brought Targ to. The one I lost was because of that stupid Army that netted twn2dn about 15 carsd off of one Valar - and gave him decisive board edge. - but I'm getting long winded on the point.

I'll agree to disagree - I play Targ at least 50% of the time and my experience with the Blade has been fine. Targ has problems - but this isn't one I worry about while building. YMMV.

I hate the software on these boards with a passion.

Stag Lord said:

~But they let you type that entire sentence without a single typographical error.

Stag Lord said:

Stag Lord said:

+1

Dear Widowmaker,

Please make my day by making a forceful post about the forum software here. Your rant about Targ almost prompted me to get up out of my seat and applaud.

Regards,
LW

Oh, and look at that, just to reiterate how incredibly crap it is, the forum software decided to poop out a double-quote on my previous post.

Up yours worthless forum software. Up yours.