Val was only played in six decks at GenCon. Let's see if he's really "too strong" with here in this envrionment. Again - that has never been demonstrated in real, competitive play. Jsut a few groups, playing with proxies and not in the full environment.

If you're going to errata him - just leave him on the list already. Let's see how he plays for a whiel before we chaneg his text. I don't think it makes sense to bring him off is he is actually still a problem. May as well just leevae him in purgatory.

Maesters: this is going to get worse before it gets better. These new chains coming out are pretty much goign tot ake this agenda to the next level. i really think Collar needs to either be printed maester only 9kinda harsh) or not stackable on teh agenda liek Dab suggested a while ago. Just getting rid of the STR boost does not address the probelm of hwo easy it is to set up soem really OP combos.

Taking some ideas already posted, I like:

Restrict or Errata Prince's Plans (recursive combo with Burning is a bit ridiculous. We dont need to see this until Regionals next year to know this)

Errata Apprentice Collar to be "If printed Maester gets +1 per chain OTHER than Apprentice Collar, otherwise character gains Maester trait"

Errata Laughing Storm to be "cards can't be discarded due to opponent's card effects or claim" (as stated by another) and Un-Restrict it.

Also remove the "Overall Champion" from GenCon.

LaughingTree said:

Also maybe limit Apprentice to +2 or +3 max Str bonus

Personally I will never understand how maesters can have more STR than the strongest army in this game. That's incredibly stupid, just like Taste for blood x3. Corrupt Contender +10 STR? Maybe in next set we should have characters with +100 STR to deal with one maester? Maester should have useful abilities, not STR.

I think my main issue with this agenda is the fact that it technically lets you run a 50 (eventually 48) card deck, which is WAY too tight for this game. Of course Joffrey and Robert are going to steamroll you when they get the cards they need every setup and every round.

I think the agenda should be worded to just let you add chains to the agenda, instead of pulling them out of your deck.

Taking the chain keyword off of the apprentice collar is good too, that way you can still have the uber-character decks, you're just taking a risk to get the engine rolling.

JerusalemJones said:

I really think this might be the easiest errata to make. And a lot of the abuse is reduced. Takes away that sting of re-standing characters.

My other thought was making the "more abusive" chains, I think personally think, Iron Link (which has made attachments pointless), Lead Link (re-standing character removal) and the upcoming Valyrian Steel Link (way to easy of card draw), should be "printed Maester only". The other links all play in to combos really nicely, and if combined with "Once per turn" would fulfill their goal without the abuse.

The Prince's Plans is a sick card. Enough said. It needs to be Restricted. In a character-lite deck, using either Martell Summer (taking advantage of Open Market) or KOTHH, it's wrong. Not just for the BotS. But Red Vengeance. The Prince's Wrath. Orphans of Greenblood. Those permanent challenger blockers can lock down any deck that doesn't rely on claiming power by winning defense only.

An errata to TLS would be cool, so that it can be played.

I agree with Stags on TLS. Un-restrict it and see how it fares in tournament play. We had the promo Queen of Thorns in ccg days and she was neutral. Sure, this takes it to the next level, but I think we really should have seen how it affected the tourney scene before it got the Restrict hammer.

I can't really agreed all of you, cause your are thinking how to throw out standing deck.. But it's not really the good problem for me..

my big problem with the agenda is... how toolbox it is!!!HAve no idea of any agenda that suits your deck? Play this one! You will have a way to control a lot of thing for a cheap cost !!

Combo decks are a false problem, the real one is that you can play chains in every deck!

Ps : i'm a bara player and don't like to play the chains so , i don't play agenda on tourney.. so i don't say that to protect me ! ^^

diana olympos said:

Agreed the toolbox factor is incredibly high. Almost every house/ deck you chose to play can be enhanced by playing the maester agenda and 5-6 chains (gold, draw, attachment removal, apprentice collar and attachment return collar/or trait collar). Just add Aemon (claim soak is never wrong), one or two inhouse maesters (all are fairly good) and maybe 1-2 out of house and at the gates and you have a whole lot more toolboxing in your deck than your house would usually ever have.

Old Ben said:

And thats a problem. Build an agendaless 48 card deck, put in 2 apprentice collars, 2 in house maesters and 2 neutral maesters and let er rip with at the gates and 6 chains on your agenda.

In my opinion the necessary errata in next FAQ are:

-The Maester's Path: "Response: After you win a challenge in wich participate almost one maester character, attach 1 Chain from this card to a character you control" and the effect of agenda cannot reduce the deck under 60 cards.

-All chain atachments, except Apprentice Collar: "Only printed maester characters".

-Ban or errata on Venomous Blade.

-Ghaston Grey and The Prince´s Plans in restricted list.

Kaworu said:

Personally, I really like your suggestions.

But that's because I'm a fairly casual player who likes nedly interactions and games that aren't dominated by tourney-level decks that sprint to a win on turn two/three, or just lock down the board and stop the other guy from doing much of anything at all.

As such, I suspect that your suggested changes might be a bit too much for competitive players, whom you'd be robbing of the opportunity to use the Chains and their Agenda competitively (because they'd be relatively weak outside of a highly dedicated tribal build if your fixes happened).

Therefore, in the interests of keeping all sides of the cardpool happy, I'd suggest the following;

1. By itself, your fix for MasPath doesn't stop it from being an insane card-advantage engine that can tool up any character a player feels like. The suggested 'only attach to a printed Maester' wording stops that far better (i.e. stops MasPath from being a source of free cards for anybody you can stick a Collar on, which gives you a ready-made combo on turn 0 when you're playing a deck with StandRobert/KillerOfWounded/StandJoff). As such, I'd say that FFG should go with that instead.

2. Your errata to the chains would make the Apprentice Collar completely redundant. After all, who really wants to make a card a Maester if you can't then put the cool chains on them and exploit their inbuilt abilities? I appreciate the fact that you can then kneel newly initiated characters to activate some of the triggered effects in Oldtown like Citadel Law/Politics/Custom... but that just seems weak and pointless outside of highly casual play (which, again, I'm a really big fan of). Basically, while I personally like the sound of what you're suggesting, I feel like you'd be denying the competitive crowd of a large chunk of the Oldtown cycles functionality.

3. Isn't the real problem with the Maester stuff the fact that it allows players to set up an insane combo without having to (1) try particularly hard to assemble its various components, or (2) use any gold or cards to get it into play. The fact that the cards on the agenda don't have to be drawn or paid for, means that the only apparent challenge to playing the Maester-Toolbox deck is drawing the character you want, then winning a couple of challenges with it on the table. Once you manage that truly herculean feat you can start going to town and doing all of the absurd stuff that people have been calling an NPE recently.

4. As such, because in my opinion the NPE isn't the combo itself but rather the ease and speed with which it can be assembled and activated, isn't the real fix that's needed here to stop people from dropping the chains off of the agenda and onto their newly-collared maesters (i.e. Bob and Joff)? That way they are at least forced to draw the cards they need, then pay for them like decent and civilised human beings. Wouldn't making that change slow down the insane combo builds to a degree that made them slightly more manageable (i.e. brought the speed with which they could physically win in line with the rest of the metagame)?

Kaworu said:

Restrict the Martell housecard.

It's fast becoming AGoT's equivalent of MtG's 'Island'.

But seriously, joking aside; Martell does seem to be enjoying a long run of receiving genuinely incredible cards compared to the other houses (as evidenced by their consistently high representation and performance at tournaments).

While I don't feel like it's fair to immediately restrict PrincesPlans, as it seems only fair to let people enjoy a few months of doing outrageous things with it, I can't help but wonder why our (highly valued and much loved; please don't take this as a dig or a rant) designers feel the need to keep giving Martell so many incredible format-defining cards. Other than Ghaston Grey, none of their recent bombs have been 'sleepers' that the community only realised the power of once they'd been operational for a few months, they've all been jaw-dropping monsters that people regarded as insane from the moment they clapped eyes on them.

We all know Martell is one of the strongest houses right now. We all recognise the crazy power level of their cards the moment they're spoilered. So why does the design team keep putting them all in Martell?

Love the game, think the designers are great... but their big crush on Martell leaves me a bit baffled.

I think removing the chain trait from the collar is the most elegant solution. just adding the small element of risk of making you actually draw the collar would be enough, i think. however, it's just so painfully un-nedly. Drinking, whoring Robert and half-mad, inbred Joffrey the most accomplished maesters in the land? --Begin daydream-->I know it will never happen, but my vote is scrap Apprentice Collar entirely and replace it with a card called Here to Serve with the exact same cost and effects, that would represent the attached character gaining the services of a maester, a la Court Advisor. Give the card the Condition trait, and the Raven trait to represent the possibility of the maester being recalled by the citadel (while also making it searchable, keeping decks that hinge on that one card viable), then your combo builds have the appropriate amount of "glass" in their "cannon." <--End daydream--

There are 2 main issues in the environment right now. One of them is Maester Agenda (and Maesters in general), and the other is Martell.

As other people have already said, the main problem with Maesters is they're just too splashable and toolboxy - as Mathias said, you build a 48 card deck and slip in maesters. You can effectively thin your deck, and have a toolbox of chains that give you draw/destroy attachments/do trait manipulation. You can also get a resource advantage - if you win 2 or more challenges a turn, you're effectively gaining 2-3 extra gold worth of chains on characters.

My main changes would be :

- Limit the agenda so you must still have 60 cards in your deck after you take the chains out - otherwise, the deck would just be too finely tuned. A difference of 1-2 cards might not make much of a difference, but a 48 card deck would be much more consistent than a 60 card deck, because it has 20% less cards

- Make you pay for the chains as you take them off the agenda. You're already getting free search (the chains would otherwise be in your deck), and the drawback to the agenda (not being able to win unless you have taken all the chains off) would actually mean something.

- Limit the strength boost per apprentice collar, and possibly remove the chain trait. This would stop uber-maesters from just overrunning everything. You can still make Bob a maester, but he won't be strength 10, and you'd actually have to draw into an apprentice collar instead of just being able to get it from the agenda.

Martell, on the other hand, is a much more tricky beast. Martell's problem is that they have so much cancel and so much powerful crap, even if some of that is restricted. No other house has an unconditional response cancel that also cancels saves (He Calls it Thinking), challenge cancel (Burning on the sands), and in the rare event that you actually manage to push a challenge through, claim redirection (Red Vengeance), and Taste For Blood - which pretty much nullifies the claim effects of a claim 1 power challenge. And the ability to recycle everything and use it again with Prince's Plans or Inittiate of the Citadel

Their character base isn't excactly shabby either - Viper's Bannermen, apart from being good draw are 7 STR deadly stealthy armies. the Red Viper can whack your opponent multiple times and has renown and is immune to characters adn events, which makes him untouchable to most direct kill. Arianne raises claim while attacking and has stealth. Ellaria steals power from your opponents' characters if you lose ANY challenge, not just ones where you are a defender.

I'm not saying we should ban the lot of them, but compared to the other houses, Martell has so many nasty effects in its toolbox that it can pretty much do anything it wants.

My changes would be

- Restrict Prince's Plans, make it deathbound and dominance phase only. The whole point of the big Martell revenge effects is that they are one timers. You use them once and you don't get them back. This completely circumvents that, and the ability to recylce itself is horrific. Yes, it's expensive, but it's 4 cards that doesn't count towards the draw cap, and most likely 4 event cards that you'd want to re-use.

- Change Ghatson Grey to "return an opponents' character with equal or less printed cost" - this will stop stupid abuses where you are returning Edric (a 3 cost) to bounce a 4/5 cost character. You can still bounce a Blackfish or a Bob with an Arianne or a Viper - but at least you're paying 4 or 5 gold.

- Change He Calls it Thinking to "Cancel a non-save response". It's already far too toolboxy, and save cancellation is not very Martelly (It's much more of a Greyjoy thing)

- Change Ellaria to "When you lose a challenge as the defender", otherwise Martell can just throw lots of little weenie challenges agaisnt their opponents to suck power off opponents' characters. Right now, you're damned if you defend and damned if you don't.

- Adding (Cannot be cancelled) to Outwit. You're already paying a cost (particularly in terms of deckbuilding), AND you have to play it at the right time. You don't need the risk of it being cancelled by Martell as well. They (and soon Greyjoy) are the only house that can cancel Outwit

- Adding "Stand all participating Characters" to Burning on the Sand. You're already cancelling one of your opponents's 3 challenges a turn, preventing their claim/their renown. Having their characters knelt out is just icing on the cake. There should actually be a cost to playing this event, rather than just being able to do it for free.

JerusalemJones said:

~Yeah, let's do this right before the Lanni box. That sounds awesome. Then he can have the added text of 'you also HAVE to play lots of kneeling cards, or your new shiny agenda is useless'.

The reason Val wasn't played (much) is that they brought back Cache. I still think it would be a mistake to have TLS (as printed) in the environment. ~Oh, but I forgot, Bara sucks. I think she will be played more since there are so many Maester decks running aroudn right now discarding attachments (although they can get them back as well - GREAT design there, at least if you play the silly Agenda you can counteract the silly agenda somewhat!).

As long as TLS had some sort of erratta (like 'opponent's abilities' - screws Lanni's new box yes, but at least doesn't combo with 1/5th of your decks as well...or he cancels the first discard effect from your hand, or SOMETHING), I would love to play with him. Heck, my current Bara build plays with him now!

Comparing him to QoT is rather silly, since there are approximately 10% of the quality character control cards that there was (a time with PTTS, Tears, Contested Claim, Fire from the Skies, crazy burn, to name a few), and she didn't work on your own effects if I remember right (I don't remember EVER comboing her with my own effects).

rings said:

~I agree. You need to have enormous deck building skills to find room for some kneeling cards in a Lannister deck.

rings said:

I had the some thought about the design lately.

rings said:

QoT didn´t allow to initiate intrigue challenges against you as long as she was standing. So i agree TLS is very different. But it also means that the Lanni agenda won´t become obsolete with TLS in play since you get unopposed power. And of course QoT didn´t combo with your own cards. But before errating TLS i would rather have him on the restricted list, i think he´s just fine the way he is.

Tomdidiot said:

I somewhat disagree on that one.

I think this part of the maester theme is the most balanced one. Ever played with 12 chains on your agenda and a few maesters? First of all, in my opinion it's pretty hard to build a good working 48 card deck without cutting too much base cards (resources/counters/characters). Second: It actually takes a lot of time to remove those 12 chains and if you're out of maesters, you're pretty much screwed. Playing more than 6 chains is really risky in a maester light deck. If you want a change in this area, I would suggest, that you have to attach a minimum number of chains to the agenda, so not everyone plays with only 3 chains.

I think we need to look at where each of your problems are coming from, not just that they exist.

People don't like maesters because of the Uber character builds that are near-impossible to deal with when set up. It could be Bobert, or it could be Joffrey, or TRV, or Beric. Either way, just look at what actually makes them an issue: its that you can't get the chains off without having so much attachment control your deck is useless outside of that one antagonist. So, make it one Apprentice Collar per character. Then you need to get rid of one attachment for all those other chains to fall off. Really encourages spreading those attachments around on printed Maesters, and doesn't nerf the fun people are having with uber characters. I got a Beric up to more than 50 str a few weeks ago (thanks to 3 devious intentions and the Horn), but I couldn't win the game because I had no more maesters on the board, had chains on my agenda, and wasn't drawing into apprentice collar. It was an awesome game.

People don't like Martell because it is fun to do things successfully and have them make you closer to winning. It is not fun for people to try and do things, either succeed or not, and end up farther from winning for trying to do anything at all. Yes, they have powerful mechanics. So is Bear Island. So is Longship Black Wind. So is Wex Pyke. So is Qyburn. So is Pinch of Powder. I can name a hundred very good cards. But unique to Martell is the fact that when an opponent does something good for them, it ends up hurting them . And you can't get around it. If they were so overpowered then why were there 4 different houses in GenCon's top 4? Because they are not all that overpowered. Its just that its easy to run a vanilla martell summer build and not sweat it while things work nicely. Its forgiving because its got cards that are good enough you can make mistakes and still come out on top. The Stark siege of winterfell deck that was there has good cards too. So did the targ maester deck. They are just less forgiving. I don't have a solution other then saying deal with it.

TLS shouldn't be banned because every house can run Distraction, Lannister has kneel and Martell will be running Lost Oasis, and thats enough to nerf it in the swiss of any big tournament where it could be an end-all-and-be-all like everyone feared. Or just make the Bara player go first and its a 3 gold location that he can't kneel.

Every suggestion in an errata from the player base shouldn't be changing martell cards to be less good. Have you seen the new Greyjoy queen? Let your opponent not declare any defenders and try and use burning. See what happens. Between that and To Be A Kraken, I think you are doing fine.

You have not seen prince's plans yet, but everybody will end up using Hand's Judgement and then you wont have to worry about any other cancel than Doran's Game. And lets face it - if they just knelt 4 influence for a Prince's Plans, you can tell if they will be able to use Doran's Game. Nobody even runs that card for some reason anyway. Run your own cancel. Cancel it. Then it won't matter.

My last suggestion is to just run turn 1 Fear of Winter. oopsies no cyvasse or RV or burning? darn.

Ahzrab said:

I don't agree with this. A well made 48 card deck will setup wonderfully nearly every time. You will be on par, if not in better shape than your opponent, so winning challenges will come easier. You will get your draw and any toolbox cards not taken care of by the agenda in your hand pretty quick.

In a 48 card deck with 3x apprentice collar (one on the agenda), 3 or 4 printed maesters, and here to serve, you will always have a maester. You might not even need 3 or 4 printed maesters unless your opponent is heavy on the hate.

Let us not forget that the "Bastard" attachment will be reprinted in Lions of the Rock:

Bastard Gold (1)
[Neutral Attachment]
Condition.

After you play Bastard from your hand, discard all other attachments on attached character. Attached character gains the Bastard trait, loses a power icon and cannot have attachments played on it.

(original card text from A Crown of Suns)

This will not only discard all attachments on a specific character, but also prevent him from gaining new ones, so Maester Robert and other "super-maesters" out there will take a heavy hit. This is also a good card against other decks, such as turbo viper. As it also takes away a power icon, it is not a useless card against decks that do not use attachments. It saw a lot of play in its time.

So let's be careful with calling for an errata of the Chains. Those erratas tend to stick even if the original reason for them has long gone away.

AegonTargaryen said:

It doesn't prevent a character from getting chains from the Agenda attached to it, though, as those aren't played. Still, a good card to nerf Maesters.

Right but if they already lost the Apprentice Collar from the MP due to BAstard, they can't move any of the links to that card until they draw into their next APprentice Collar. I'm assuming the idea is to make the deck a little less reliable but still playable. Bastard is a pretty good way of hurting that kind of deck.

Couple that with one errata (agenda does printed maesters only would be my preference with Bastard coming out) and I think that deck is still viable, but not guaranteed. MP goes to being more about maesters than about non-maesters.

Bastard is really not the answer.

The Maester deck STARTS with the chains ready at hand. The other deck will need to luck into a 5% pull (since there is no search for it) or luck into it on the flop. The odds ar way in favor of the combo getting set up and rolling you before the Bastard attachment comes into play.

Bastard helps - but ti doesn't solve the problem.

5% pull? I guess 3/60 is 5%...

But your chances of bastard on first turn is more like 50%. With Mulligan its 75%.

My math is pretty simple. If you get an average flop of 3 cards, plus 7 you redraw to, plus draw 2, thats 12 cards first turn.

57/60 * 56/59 * ......* 46/49 = ~50% chance to NOT draw the card FIRST TURN.

Actually if you take a Mulligan and place 3 cards during setup your percentage of drawing at least one Bastard would be 65.4%

(There is a 31.5% chance of drawing one in your starting hand or in your Mulligan and a 26.2% chance of drawing one in your next 5 cards)