Since FAQ updates occur usually every three months or so, I think it's reasonable to expect the next update in a few weeks.

Which topics do you think should be addressed in the next update, and which ones do you think will be addressed? Are there rules questions you'd like to see clarified? Any card errata you'd expect or wish to see?

Specifically, do you think the Maesters theme in general or the Maester Robert build in particular should be nerfed? Do you think it will be done in that next update, or will FFG wait until after Stahleck? Or will they simply leave things as they are and wait for solutions to come up in the evolving cardpool?

If you think something needs to be done about Maesters and/or Maester Robert, what would you like to see? What do you think about the following errata that have been proposed?

- Change Apprentice Collar to "Printed Maester only"

- Remove the +1 STR boost from Apprentice Collar

- Remove the Chain trait from Apprentice Collar

- Change KL Robert to "No attachments" or "No Chain attachments"

Finally, do you think The Prince's Plans should/will be restricted?

Personally, I think something should be done about the Maester Robert build. It is pretty insane now, and it will get infinitely worse when Here to Serve is released. Brass Link anyone?

I like the idea of removing the chain trait from the Collar. It leaves the mechanic intact, but might slow down Robert or Joffrey enough for opponents to deal with them.

As for Prince's Plans, yeah, I can see that one being restricted. I wouldn't mind if they kept it off the list for the moment, though. Right now I figure Maesters are the bigger problem.

I'm not sure that removing the chain trait from the Collar is resolving the problem. Having 3x in the deck, it's really easy to draw them in first turns, having Bobby back on track (remember they are setup and cost 0 gold).

I'd prefer to have a FAQ about the Agenda, changing to "printed maester trait".

About Prince's Plans: let it be for a while, it's too early to restrict it, even if I'm afraid of what it can do.

All I got from this thread is that someone really did not enjoy playing against Maesters. Let combo happen already, its nice to finally see some play that isn't mad crash against a wall of control effects.

I'm afraid they will FAQ the agenda to "printed maester." I like removing chain trait from apprentice collar better. They can even remove the +1STR too. Assuming they do FAQ the agenda, Targ is the only house with enough recursion to get the chains back and play them from their hand onto other characters given the maester trait by the Apprentice Collar. Requiring the apprentice collar to go on a "printed maester" ruins the point of the card. It's there to make non-maester characters into maesters.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear something done about Prince's Plans. I like Danigral's idea of making it deathbound the best. Any option that keeps a card off the restricted list is a good one in my book.

Can I just go on record that while I understand the sentiment (as I have really disliked losing to maester Bob decks, and for that matter, playing them casually) it just sounds asinine to make the Apprentice Collar "printed maester only." Think about it, the card that is supposed to create new maesters can only go on someone who is ALREADY a maester. What? Or thematically, why if I was already a ___________ would I then put on something that indicates that I'm only an apprentice. Should a Army general go walking around with a 2nd Lieutenant bar on his collar? Again I understand what the aim is when people suggest it, but it's been a pet peeve of mine because of how backwards it sounds and I needed to get it off my chest.

There, I'm done.

Go on with the thoughtful discussion of potential FAQ items.

Edit: Must be a lawyer thing- +1 to HoyaLawya

goshdarnstud said:

Oh, I agree with you there. Not only does it remove the entire point of the card, it is totally inane from a thematic point of view.

The thematic angle is another point in favor of removing the Chain trait from the collar, BTW. An Apprentice Collar is not part of a Maester's chain, after all.

That said, maybe we shouldn't base our arguments too much on theme anyway. The game is chock-full with decidedly un-Nedly card interactions anyway. It's the nature of the beast that is a customizable card game, I guess.

I don't think the Maester stuff needs any sort of errata or restriction. If the no-shadows Robert build becomes that strong or common, then people will start to tech against it, making it less powerful. Not to mention that my favorite underdog Targ would be particularly strong against the build with their attachment hate.

The main issues I have with Maesters are the Apprentice Chain, which should't give +1 strenght to every chain, and Tin Link which is by far the easiest and most abusable/ubiquitous attachment control in the game - it makes non-Chain attachments pretty much unplayable, because they just get destroyed whenever a Maester kneels - it is as easy, if not easier, than Targ's meereneese brothel, and Targ is supposed to be the "Attachment Control" house. I'm not saying other houses shouldn't have attachment control, but it shouldn't be nearly as easy as it is for Targ.

We discuss the Maester chain and possible errata in tomorrows episode of 2 Champs and a Chump. Be sure to listen.

Yes, I'm a shill.

I'd take away the +1 STR for each attachment on the Apprentice Collar - I had an up-to ST13 Baelor Blacktyde (Horn of Dragons boost, too) walloping Lannisters left, right and centre last night. If it had been the likes of Euron Crow's Eye (with the Raider trait, saving Baelor from having to have a second Copper Link on him to make himself a Raider & using Training Vessel & Support of Saltcliffe to re-stand), then he would have been unstoppable in that game.

Plus, you shouldn't be able to add them onto printed Maester characters, either, otherwise it's a completely free STR boost, and they can have chain links already for extra free STR boosts.

Ratatoskr said:

So if you remove the only 2 abilities that apprentice collar has, what exactly do you think it will do?

No longer gives the maester trait

No longer gives +1.

Might as well throw it in the garbage.

Fieras said:

There's a severe misunderstanding here.

I do not propose to apply all the changes listed. I simply collected suggestions I've seen made, and asked for people's opinions on them.

Here is your solution: make it so you can only have one apprentice collar attached at a time. Done? done. It makes the combo more fragile, it makes uber strengthing the chars impossible, and rounds it out a lot more. You cant be 3x an apprentice, your an apprentice or your not. So its nedly too. Done and done.

Good show everyone.

Making apprentice collar restricted to one per character would certainly help some. I don't like seeing people able to double up on collars so that if you blank / get rid of one they still retain maester.

Personally, I feel that they should just leave things alone. My reasoning behind this:

1. Not every single deck is like this. You still have a very good spread of decks around the houses in tournament showings, with some themes remaining very strong even with them being older. (Example: Summer Martel).

2. The metagame around you will evolve to deal with it if it becomes that big of a threat. An example would be the Black Summer for Magic the Gathering in 1996. When the Necropotence deck it came out, no one had anything to go against it. Then as it became dominant people started putting things that would counteract Enchantments and counteract Black decks.

3. A new chapter pack comes out EVERY MONTH! It's not like the community is starved of options on the horizon and waiting 6 months for a new set to come out to try and counteract things like most CCGs.

4. These changes that have been proposed also seem a little too broad for dealing with what looks like the "Problem". It'd like doing brain surgery with a claymore. Sure, they would shut down maybe one deck, however they could also be detrimental to other decks. An example might be like Maester Viseriys, where you load him up with links to lower the amount of power you need to win the game. These broad sweeping changes cut down on the creativity of the deck building community and will lead to people rushing to use the same deck, which stagnates the organized play community and just shifts the idea of "Everyone is going to play this OP deck" to "Everyone is going to play this other OP deck" and the cycle will just continue.

In the end, we have to take a look at this like an economy. Let the Invisible Hand do it's job, and let the power cycles of the game work themselves out.

If you guys are worried about the +1 STR on non-maesters, why not just "If the character has the printed maester trait, it gains +1 STR for each chain attached..." instead? That way, you either get the trait or the STR boost, but not both.

Had some testing with maester Joffrey build, with easy search for his dupes and 2 power of bloods my opponent really had no way of killing the Joffrey. I just kept on claiming easy power with it thanks to gold link and I can really say that the deck wasn't challenging to build or to play (heck I even forget to trigger few of my own things and it didn't cause my deck to do any worse) and it seemed even worse in case of my opponent as for him it was mostly "can I draw my attachment control" (and thats only with one collar) which to all houses isn't even a choice as few houses are lacking in the attachment removal.

I really don't want to see an enviroment where you are either maester or anti-maester with your build.

I guess the best solution would be to get rid of the "chain" trait on the collar as many have said.

Un-restrict Laughing Storm please. Thanks.

Stag Lord said:

+1

I'm hoping the Prince's Plans stays off the restricted list to start with. Let's see how it impacts the environment and then maybe restrict.

What about restricting Apprentice Collar? Personally, avoiding errata is a good thing to me. Sure, Maesters would have to rely on something other than Pyromancer's Cache for draw, but they are getting Valyrian Steel link. This would make Maesters an even more combo-ish build, all the eggs in one basket and such.

I'd definitely like to see them unrestrict TLS, and maybe change its wording a bit or something so it only affects intrigue challenges or something.

Twn2dn said:

Personally, I like the solution quoted above. Or, for semplicity, just remove the +1 str part altogether. Removing the chain trait from the collar is also a good solution.

Tin link and setup deck are the other aspects that should be adressed better. Tin link should only be targeting chain attachments., This way Targ speciality remains valued.

At setup, I would make chains on agenda in eccess of the 60 cards so that all decks start with same chances.

Anyway, I still don't see the maesters builds particularly strong as compared for example to a nasty martell deck.

Martell are consistently getting good events and good chars and this is becoming more of an issue in my opinion.

If the biggest threat is characters that can re-stand to trigger chains in several phases, why not a blanket change to restrict their use to "Once per turn" instead of "Once per phase." Easy to remember and limits their abuse.

Since Robert depends on empty shadows wouldn't it be enough to just give each house more shadow cards that can be played without dedicated shadows deck?

Like Arya Stark and incoming Mera Reed (and Mera will be great anti-maester tech too - blank apprentice colar all other collars on non printed maester get discarded)

I actually whoieheartedly agree with Twn2dn's Opinion about combo decks needing a leg up in the game... However, I'm not completely sold on the argument that the chains are simply Combo. Some definately are (copper link, gold link, steel link...) while others are more control (tin link) and the Agenda itself + the STR pumps with Apprentice Collar feel more like Aggro to me (aggressively costed permanent strength pumping that you can get into play on turn 1 every game... smells like Wildlings to me).

What I'd like to see lessened with the chains is their Aggro aspects, and because of this I'd prefer as an errata (in order of preference):

1. The removal of the 'chain' trait - nedly (collar =/= chain), makes the risk of the agenda a bit less irrelevant, reduces the absurd strength pumps, still doesn't destroy combo potential.

2. Twn2dn's idea (below) - the collar stays Aggro only on printed maesters

3. Mathias Friscot's idea of limiting the collar with 'Limit 1 per character' - helps retain the vulnerability of Combo

...the thought here is that Combo should be really effective, but require quite a bit of work to get going. To me, the small but present risk of not getting all the pieces required for your puzzle is one of the most crucial parts of playing a combo deck... and leads to interesting games, where you have to rethink your strategy. Additionally... Combo should win against Aggro using tricks, not by one STR 15 character alone blocking all challenges from a pile of armies.

Twn2dn said:

What if Laughing Storm had an errata saying "cards can't be discarded due to opponent's card effects or claim"? That would kill almost all of the combos available for him, but it would also still let him serve his original purpose of protecting the player from intrigue challenges. We were discussing that card last night. With the Val combo he's too strong, but as a restricted card he's too weak on his own to really be worth playing in most decks.