I don't want this to be in response to Zeiler's Gencon-winning deck. It's not. I knew about Robert-Maesters before Gencon. It can be done with Renly (influence-standing), Satcliffe (Ironborn) and a few other standing charatcer cards (Marya + Inn of the Standing Man), etc. But....once all six chapter packs are released and all of the chains are available, there are a few abusive combos and some broken, infinite combos out there. What errata would I recommend? Make the Maesters that target of the chains. Errata the Maester's Agenda to "attach to a character with the PRINTED Maester trait.

How about Prince's Plans? This card is awesome! (Awesomely broken!) Imagine a deck with Westeros Bleeds x3, Red Vengence x3, Burning in the Sand x3, Orphan of the Greenblood x3, Prince's Plans x3 add in a few Plots (Loyalty, Valar, Muster, Lineage and Legacy, etc.). Finally, throw in The Viper x3 and a character-lite deck is pretty nasty! I think Prince's Plans should be restricted, but just remove Burning from the list above and I can still make a very nasty deck. If CP #4 was available for Gencon, you would've seen Martell Knights of the Hollow Hill as the predominant deck. Should the card be banned? I'm not sure. Definitely restricted!

What do you guys think? Any other cards?

I think some consideration should be given to Martell's power in general. From what I understand, there was a fleet of clones out there of the Martell Summer deck, and not like "My version of the build" but the exact same deck, all of which went undefeated until they had to play each other in round 5.

That kind of deckbuilding is NOT indicative of what I feel the spirit of an LCG environment should be (Player skill, not cash, should be the determining factor). This should be taken into consideration in building future Cycles and when the next FAQ comes out, I'd hope to see at least The Prince's Plans, and Kings of Summer on the list, and perhaps some variety encouragement through restricting auto-include plots like Retaliation.

Granted, if that second part goes through, I hope they'd have the sense to make a separate Restricted list for Plots and allow 1 House Deck and 1 Plot Deck restricted slot.

Nerdcore said:

Can you amplify on this statement? It is unclear what you mean about the "cash".

JackT said:

Perhaps he means cash with which to pay for high-speed internet with which to netdeck with?

In games released in traditional TCG format, I.E. Magic, YuGiOh!, and Pokemon are notorious for this, decks can be built where there is little need for the player to have much skill on a base, mechanical level. The deck's interactions and abilities from the so called "Money" cards can override a player with greater skill's efforts purely on that basis. High level decks in many TCG's "Play Themselves", which is something I'm not a fan of.

Granted, we have a similar issue in Thrones derrived from the old 1 of/3 of packs (King's Landing Cycle, I'm looking at you...) but the player has significantly increased importance, as evidenced by Zeiler winning very bad matchups in his first two rounds of the top 16, and Greg Atkinson's reinforcements deck making the final table, and basically any aGoT World Tournament, the top decks haven't necessarily been the strongest ones in the field. Since Greg published the deck to AGOTCards.org, I've tried playing it, and it's obvious that his skill is what makes the deck run, not the cards in it. Much of this in Thrones is sourced by the skill in choosing Plot order, and the initiation and ordering of challenges, which make or break games.

So in summation, I feel that in a TCG as a mediocre player starting in that system, I could drop $500 on a deck and still make top 8's all the time, while in an LCG as a mediocre player starting in that system, I'd still be mediocre if I didn't take the time to learn to build and play the deck properly.

That is the charm of the LCG format to me--It takes the skill required to play a Miniatures game and brings it into a format that I'm more comfortable in (And don't have to paint anything for.)

So in reference to my earlier statements, The Martell Summer build is a very TCG style mode of thinking. Something should be done about it to preserve the LCG style of competing deck types with relatively equal chances.

hklown said:

Also yes.

Like i wrote already in some other discussions i don´t feel that it´s at the moment necessary to to ban/restrict or errata any cards which are currently available. Such interactions always mean that you keep up with the status quo of the current lcg decks.

If the majority of players decides to play charachter lite and event heavy Martell decks or a attachemt heavy maesters builds other players maye have the creativity to e.g. run an attachment hate heavy Targ deck or build a Greyjoy deck based around Baelor Blacktyde and cancels (which should pretty mess up a charachter lite Martell deck). By interventing through a FAQ you prevent certain deck builds from shining in the future.

So once again i ask all the players to search for in game solutions instead of asking for erratas for xy cards currently in the game. I think there should be a difference between a one man army card like Jaqen (which surely deserved to be banned) and a card that´s part of a combo or is just a little bit hyped because it was part of a winning deck.

I still think that the princes plans should be erratad to say that it can't grab itself from the discard pile.

Fieras said:

Or make it deathbound.

I like that even better, Dan.

Old Ben said:

Old Ben said:

I couldn't agree more. There are hundreds of cards available. Sure there are some cards that are weak and won't be in any competitive decks and others that are more powerful and used more frequently. That doesn't mean the more powerful cards in the new shiny should be given ban, restrict or errata. Instead, players should go back to their toolboxes and find ways to respond to the new shiny.

Right now maesters is the new shiny. That just made your attachment hate cards even more valuable. There's also trait manipulation to remove maester and all the chains go away.

Maester Agenda is broken in so many decks. Baratheon deck based on Robert, Lannister deck based on joeffry immune, Greyjoy, ecc.

The problem is that we have an entire cycle "Maesters" and an agenda used with decks with no maesters. So, for the good of the cycle, I kindly ask to have a true maester build. The problem is Apprentice collar. So:

1- apprentice collar only playable on printed maester chars

2-agenda that put chain only on printed maesters.

Only in this way the agenda will be powerful but not NPE.

Gualdo said:

QFT

I kinda agree that Apprentice Collar has some design flaws, that shouldn't have survived the playtesting.

It's 0 cost, has good traits and two strong abilites (make someone a maester, +1 str for each chain attached) + setup keyword.

A higher cost and/or a condition/raven trait would've helped. As I said in another thread, I'm not a friend of overhasty decisions and excessive nerfing.

If FFG decides to do something about the collar, I would appreciate it, if they start out slow with errata/changes like restricting the collar and give it an

additional condition trait or something like that.

I don't think we are anywhere near close enough for combo to be OP right now. I really don't see any problems with the Joffrey maester or Robert maester decks. I know my Targ deck can easily dismantle either build, and judging by the fact that only 6 Targ players participated in the GenCon joust, maybe we need a bit more combo to encourage people to play Targ or add more potent character removal to their decks. I think the problem is that everyone has become so used to control and aggro being pretty much the only competitive deck types. The maester's cycle seems like it was designed to give a boost to combo, and I just don't understand why people think that's a major problem.

All that said, I do think a minor errata to the Apprentice Collar or Maester's Path would be a good idea to at least slow down some of the more egregious combos coming down the pipeline (ie GJ mill). Here area few changes I would like to see made:

1. Errata to the Apprentice Collar to remove it's "chain" trait (easiest), or errata to the agenda to say attach to a maester character only (so that you can't attach the collar to a non-maester from the agenda). In other words, if someone plays main-deck collars and gets one out on their Joffrey/Robert/Killer of the Wounded/etc, then kudos to them.

2. Restrict Prince's Plans. I think no matter how it's errata'd, a net 3-card swing is too big, especially as an any phase and when you're getting back Orphans and events. A restriction would significantly affect Martell's ability to control the opponent, by sacrificing either VB or Burning. My guess is VB would remain the dominant restricted card, but PP could be very good in certain combo builds.

3. Consider un-restricting The Laughing Storm. I think the restriction for GenCon was the right move, given his power level and uncertainty about how he'd be used. But this guy really doesn't see enough play, and as OP as he could potentially be with Val or Threat from the East, Bara could use a boost, especially if the Apprentice Collar somehow gets nerfed to prevent the maester Robert Build.

Apprentice Collar is one of the unfortunate by-products of the current chapter pack distribution model. The collar was absolutely necessary in the first pack of the cycle to Maesters playable at all since there were so few natural Maester characters worth playing. Now that most of the cycle is out, the collar isn't really necessary and is detracting from the new cards (i.e. people are using it instead of real Maesters). So I think it's fine to nerf it now. I give FFG credit though. Cards like Apprentice Collar and At the Gates managed to make Maesters relevant right from the start, whereas the themes of previous cycles have been basically non-existent in the meta until about the fifth chapter pack and then just been all over the place.

Twn2dn said:

+1

I never saw a real problem with The Laughing storm, it´s a good card and of course it´s really good with threat from the east and Val. But it´s not that strong and Bara definetely needs the boost.

1 - I think it's time we ban Venomous Blade. It's seen the light of day long enough. Enough with the immortal blade killing tons of characters. It's not even a triggered effect for heaven's sake. Or just remove it's return to shadows ability altogether.

2 - Remove the Response action from Dragon Skull. VB and Pinch of Powder are neither response actions so why is Dragon Skull? Makes no sense that martell can cancel it and not the others.

3 - Take The Laughing Storm off the restricted list. It's not that bad any more. I think normal Bara rush decks need a boost and this guy just doesn't warrant the restriction.

4 - Restrict Prince's Plans or you will see PP - BotS combo decks stalling games out and creating a huge NPE for opponents of Martell. Or it will just get a slot in a Martell Summer deck and the control you get back with it will make that deck so much worse to play against than it already is.

I think I fall on the side of "Let's see if the environment can deal with Apprentice collar before we ban/errata/restrict it." I think maybe this is all a bit of an overreaction to Zeiler's Joust win (which was, by the way, one of the best matches I've ever watched...and not just because of Rings shouting at them from two tables over)

Like has been previously mentioned here (or maybe in another thread) all the Houses have ways to deal with the No-Shadow Bob/Apprentice Collar combo. Targaryen, of course, has more than the others, so maybe we will (or should) see an uptick in Targaryen decks at events, or at the least, in the use of attachment hate. Is Zeiler's build and the general Bob/Chains combo powerful? Oh yeah, without a doubt, but it can be disrupted.

If FFG does decide to do something about the combo, I hope it isn't an errata of Apprentice Collar. For one, i thinkt hat's confusing for players, particularly casual ones. Second, I think Apprentice Collar is a pretty decent Nedly card in that it gives a character the Maester trait. If errata'd for printed Maesters only, or if given the Condition trait, I think the flavor is watered down.

I see everyone's point with Prince's Plans, especially when combined with Burning on the Sand, but I'd like to see it in action for a little while before it gets restricted/errata'd/etc.

And yes, let's unrestrict The Laughing Storm. I feel like we never got a chance to know him.

widowmaker93 said:

"Is it we already?" - Jaime Lannister. ;-)

As much as i disklike VB, i don´t think it´s necessary.

I think twn2dn's suggestion of removing the chain trait from the Apprentice Collar is by far the most finessed option. This prevents it from being attached to the agenda, so it requires the player to actually draw it in order to get one of the combos going.

Restricting the Maester's Path will pretty much just ensure no one plays it, which seems counter to the design philosophy FFG has had with the LCG (let's keep as many of the cards playable in the environment as we can). Again, most uber maester builds can be easily disrupted with proper deck-buildling taking into account their existence.

Twn2dn said:

+1

All that said, I do think a minor errata to the Apprentice Collar or Maester's Path would be a good idea to at least slow down some of the more egregious combos coming down the pipeline (ie GJ mill). Here area few changes I would like to see made:

Twn2dn said:

This is an interesting idea, but I think might go too far. In my opinion the issue is not so much that you can make a non maester character a maester. The abusive issues start when you get 2 or even 3 of the collars on a character. Suddenly that character is uber strenght. I'd be in favor of errata that limited to one appentice collar per character or something like that

Old Ben said:

Yeah you are probably right. I just hate that card.

There are a lot of great ideas going around as ways to reduce the effectiveness of the Maester stuff out there right now. I definitely think we should let things be played for while before we start messing with it. Like fhornmikey said, each house has ways of dealing with the current meta, we as players have the responsibility of finding the cards to make it happen and tweaking the decks we play accordingly before we cry foul and demand a restriction/errata. STOP with the complaining already. Maester Bob is not unbeatable. He did lose 2 games in the Swiss and had a few good matchups in the finals and a really good matchup against Greg's deck. It's not his fault that noone was prepared for all the attachments. If you have a problem with maesters...then simply run more attachment hate. Every house has access to it.

I think we need more combo deck out there. That is something that is sorely missing from the current environment. I would like to see more decks like Greg's in the competitive scene. I would consider his deck a combo deck with all the crazy action/reaction cards he had going on in there and I'm very glad that he made the finals.

I agree with Shenanigans that we should see how the meta deals with the collar. If it should be errata'ed at all, I think it should just give +1 to printed maester-traited characters like that asshai attachment that no-one uses. There's still enough trait-manipulation and attachment hate to make depending on Apprentice collar dangerous for combos. I do think that the agenda should be errata'ed to move a chain to a printed maester, even perhaps only when you win a challenge attacking.

I also think The Laughing Storm should be removed from the restricted list. It hasn't even seen the light of day, and afterward we can really assess the broken-ness of this card. I think at most, it should be errata'ed to be "If it is not the marshalling phase, The Laughing Storm gains..." which would get rid of the val combo, but still not be OP.

Like others, I agree that Prince's Plans should be changed. I think it should be deathbound at least. I'd rather see some erratas before banning or restricted. There aren't that many character-lite builds, and this combined with KotHH is great, but in its current form it's out-of-control good.