Yeah I'm all for a new Jaqen! That'd be awesome! I'm still trying to find a use for the latest versions. I just think its a lost cause trying to make the old one balanced.
Confused by DotN reprint announcement
Staton said:
If you are going to do that though, you are making a new card. The point of the old Jaqen was that he was all houses and had all the houses keywords. You can never make that balanced.
Staton said:
If you are going to do that though, you are making a new card. The point of the old Jaqen was that he was all houses and had all the houses keywords. You can never make that balanced.
What if he had the opposite of his current text: "Jaquen H'ghar gets -1 strength for each power token on him" ala Former Champion?
I hate these boards
Four cost three str. tricon. ally. Deadly. While Jaqen is attacking he gains Response: after a character dies to deadly, stand him and he gains stealth until the end of the phase. (He gains renown instead if it was a unique character.)
perpetual noob said:
What if he had the opposite of his current text: "Jaquen H'ghar gets -1 strength for each power token on him" ala Former Champion?
Its still too strong, because you don't need to put power on him. He still has Vigilant and Intimidate. There are tons of strength boosters out there as well.
Staton said:
perpetual noob said:
What if he had the opposite of his current text: "Jaquen H'ghar gets -1 strength for each power token on him" ala Former Champion?
Its still too strong, because you don't need to put power on him. He still has Vigilant and Intimidate. There are tons of strength boosters out there as well.
what if he had renown, or a passive response requiring any unopposed power gained to be placed on him? Not that it matters, since I'm not a designer!
Tone him down by removing Infamy, then make him Baratheon only :-)
perpetual noob said:
Staton said:
perpetual noob said:
What if he had the opposite of his current text: "Jaquen H'ghar gets -1 strength for each power token on him" ala Former Champion?
Its still too strong, because you don't need to put power on him. He still has Vigilant and Intimidate. There are tons of strength boosters out there as well.
what if he had renown, or a passive response requiring any unopposed power gained to be placed on him? Not that it matters, since I'm not a designer!
While this would be getting closer to a balanced card, he is still going to be able to win any challenge he wants, especially with pumps. What if you just threw Devious Intentions on him? You just canceled out his -1 str for each power on him.
How about just adding a cost to the keywords? IE. "Any Phase: Kneel 1 influence to give Jaqen H'gar infamy, intimidate, vigilant, vengeful, or stalwart until the end of the phase."
I suppose he'd still have to have printed ambush though. Actually, he'd still need the +1 STR for each power on him ability or the infamy is relatively pointless. I could see the +1 changed to something else provided it still gave him a use for the infamy.
Kennon said:
How about just adding a cost to the keywords? IE. "Any Phase: Kneel 1 influence to give Jaqen H'gar infamy, intimidate, vigilant, vengeful, or stalwart until the end of the phase."
I suppose he'd still have to have printed ambush though. Actually, he'd still need the +1 STR for each power on him ability or the infamy is relatively pointless. I could see the +1 changed to something else provided it still gave him a use for the infamy.
While Jaqen H'gar has three or more power on him he gains renown/stealth/deadly/wahtever?
Sadly I think all this discussion on Jaqen is moot, as I don't believe that FFG have any plans to reprint the Clash of Arms cycle. They announced three cycle reprints within one week... that was months ago... nothing at all has been mentioned of a clash of arms reprint, and I suspect that they will be 'quietly cycling it out'. If no announcement is made by the end of March I'll be pushing our local TO to ban that cycle from our tournaments, as it's unfair to the players who can't obtain those cards. The whole point of an LCG is that everyone has access to all the cards they want by purchasing the appropriate chapter packs. No so, when they're sold out and not being reprinted.
Nitro Pirate said:
They announced three cycle reprints within one week... that was months ago... nothing at all has been mentioned of a clash of arms reprint, and I suspect that they will be 'quietly cycling it out'.
What are you talking about? They didn't announce the reprint of ATfR either. All they officially announced was KL and DotN, and we have those by now. There was some kind of informal statement that they planned to reprint the other two cycles when they're OOP. A quick check on Amazon, Eaglecard and FFG sites tells me that ACoA and ATfR are still available, so of course there hasn't been a reprint announcement.
Nitro, those cards are available. Your local store may not have any stock but they are readily available online.
Kennon said:
I suppose he'd still have to have printed ambush though. Actually, he'd still need the +1 STR for each power on him ability or the infamy is relatively pointless. I could see the +1 changed to something else provided it still gave him a use for the infamy.
What are you talking about Will? ~Core Set Jaime is totally awesome with his Infamy. But agreed on the alternate ability... maybe something like the Vendor of Venoms. I think he'd be fine if he just had "JH's STR cannot be raised." Then you can still debuff people to increase the utility of the intimidate... And that's what makes the Vigilant overly strong.
And Nitro... those of us who were playing from the beginning were told the opposite regarding chapter packs. When the CEO introduced the changes to the game, his letter included:
Chapter packs will be limited edition product. When they are gone, they are gone. We don’t want retail stores to worry about an ever expanding line of decks, and we want the limited nature of AGOT cards to remain intact. Note that individual cards from Chapter Packs could make an appearance in later sets and products (just as prior cards have been re-introduced in the past in Premium Starters and the Legacy Pack).
I'm not suggesting that it's a particularly fair policy, but it illustrates the point that FFG reserves the right to change their minds whenever. And they are notoriously tight-lipped when they are holding off on making announcements for reasons of not wanting to annoy people. In their mind, better that a few be irritated at the lack of information than a larger group be alienated by bad news.
Maester_LUke said:
Kennon said:
I suppose he'd still have to have printed ambush though. Actually, he'd still need the +1 STR for each power on him ability or the infamy is relatively pointless. I could see the +1 changed to something else provided it still gave him a use for the infamy.
What are you talking about Will? ~Core Set Jaime is totally awesome with his Infamy. But agreed on the alternate ability... maybe something like the Vendor of Venoms. I think he'd be fine if he just had "JH's STR cannot be raised." Then you can still debuff people to increase the utility of the intimidate... And that's what makes the Vigilant overly strong.
And Nitro... those of us who were playing from the beginning were told the opposite regarding chapter packs. When the CEO introduced the changes to the game, his letter included:
Chapter packs will be limited edition product. When they are gone, they are gone. We don’t want retail stores to worry about an ever expanding line of decks, and we want the limited nature of AGOT cards to remain intact. Note that individual cards from Chapter Packs could make an appearance in later sets and products (just as prior cards have been re-introduced in the past in Premium Starters and the Legacy Pack).
I'm not suggesting that it's a particularly fair policy, but it illustrates the point that FFG reserves the right to change their minds whenever. And they are notoriously tight-lipped when they are holding off on making announcements for reasons of not wanting to annoy people. In their mind, better that a few be irritated at the lack of information than a larger group be alienated by bad news.
That was before all of the other LCGs came out and the selling point has been that with fixed distribution you dont have to chase rares. Mind you, this is only implied but it should also mean that you dont have to chase OOP cards.
QFT. Chapters are available if someone wants to buy them. If not than don"t do it but stopp bubbling about banning legal cards.
Staton said:
"Blood of the first men is no longer banned. The previous edition is now considered to be errat'd to match the newest reprint. Currently all the agenda's maintain the NW/Wildling errata. It was not printed on the cards to allow us to revert back to all six agendas being useable at some future point. That will depend on the state of the meta and will be something we review each time we prepare for a new FAQ." - Damon
Sorry, is this a mail you got from damon? Don't we have to wait to a new FAQ to play Blood of the First Man in tournaments???
matamagos said:
Staton said:
"Blood of the first men is no longer banned. The previous edition is now considered to be errat'd to match the newest reprint. Currently all the agenda's maintain the NW/Wildling errata. It was not printed on the cards to allow us to revert back to all six agendas being useable at some future point. That will depend on the state of the meta and will be something we review each time we prepare for a new FAQ." - Damon
Sorry, is this a mail you got from damon? Don't we have to wait to a new FAQ to play Blood of the First Man in tournaments???
This was an email from Damon, yes. I don't believe that we have to wait for a new FAQ, no. Much like if FFG rules on something, they start using that rule in the tournaments, rather than waiting for the next FAQ to come out before using it.
Staton said:
This was an email from Damon, yes. I don't believe that we have to wait for a new FAQ, no. Much like if FFG rules on something, they start using that rule in the tournaments, rather than waiting for the next FAQ to come out before using it.
I disagree. There's a fundamental difference between a rules clarification and if a card is on the banned list or not. Most rules clarifications never even make it to the FAQ, while the banned list has official status. I'd consider BotFM banned until it's officially taken off the list. Not that it's likely to matter much - the next FAQ update can't be far off now, right?
Ratatoskr said:
Staton said:
This was an email from Damon, yes. I don't believe that we have to wait for a new FAQ, no. Much like if FFG rules on something, they start using that rule in the tournaments, rather than waiting for the next FAQ to come out before using it.
I disagree. There's a fundamental difference between a rules clarification and if a card is on the banned list or not. Most rules clarifications never even make it to the FAQ, while the banned list has official status. I'd consider BotFM banned until it's officially taken off the list. Not that it's likely to matter much - the next FAQ update can't be far off now, right?
That's fine. Send an email to Damon then. Us discussing it isn't going to do anything
Staton said:
That's fine. Send an email to Damon then. Us discussing it isn't going to do anything
Nah, no need to bother him. It'll be off the banned list by the next FAQ update anyway, which I expect to come in the near future. If I organized a tourney in the meantime, which I won't, I'd consider it banned, though. If you organize a tourney in the meantime, you're free to allow it on the grounds of Damon's E-Mail. What anybody does in casual play is their business anyway.
Ratatoskr said:
If you organize a tourney in the meantime, you're free to allow it on the grounds of Damon's E-Mail.
If that sentence sounded like it was up to me giving you permission to do so or anything, I apologize. That wasn't my intention.
lol nah its all cool Broseph. ~I'm totally going to organize a tourney where you HAVE to use this agenda. 
Staton said:
~I'm totally going to organize a tourney where you HAVE to use this agenda.
~Do you mean every player in the tourney, or do you mean me specifically?
Ratatoskr said:
Staton said:
~I'm totally going to organize a tourney where you HAVE to use this agenda.
~Do you mean every player in the tourney, or do you mean me specifically?
You specifically. Also, you need to be in IL next Tuesday.