Stag Lord said:

I totally see your point.

I certainly never played Tears in my Stark deck. Now, my wife and her Lannister deck…

Stag Lord said:

I am not a fan of cards that get around game mechanics. A specific example is Search and Detain. It goes off easy, its a plot so it happens when you flip it. And the real kicker is it "Cannot Be Saved." So duped up characters get discarded. What is the point of a "save" and running dupes if this is the new deal? Its even more frustrating when the only way to fight it has become much more unreliable, by having attachments on your character. It is basically accepted that most people don't run attachments since the Tin Link joined the party. Where does that leave us? Everybody runs Search and Detain and it gets your fatty most of the time. You have to Outwit! it or have higher initiative and go second to avoid getting bounced.

AceManUSC said:

I think you're overstating the importance of this card.

First of all, from your statements, am I to assume that you equally dislike any "Cannot be saved" effect? How about characters with immunities? They also "get around game mechanics."

Secondly, it's a plot. That means you're going to encounter this effect, at most, what… once every seven rounds? And it doesn't even stop you from playing the character again.
What's the point of saves and dupes? How about every other savable character removal mechanic in the game? Works for me. If you'd rather not have any dupes or saves so you don't feel cheated by one plot, feel free. I will continue to enjoy having them for directed kills and claim absorption.

I don't like it because it makes deck building around a main character too risky. Blackfish in a Tully deck, Cersei in a PBtT deck, Beric in a Brotherhood deck, or any other powerful character that gets loaded up with power. You want to run dupes to protect against directed kill, but they are still bounced back. And when they have 3 or 4 power or more..I think its chicken sh!t.

AceManUSC said:

I call it the risk of building your deck around a main character. I find it unfortunate you feel that someone exploiting the weakness inherent in your deck build is unfair, or cowardly.

It's kind of like complaining that Threat from the North is unfair because you run a deck that swarms your opponent with STR 1 characters.

There is no "safe" build style.

AceManUSC said:

If you feel that Search and Detain is an issue, then build some anti-S&D in your deck. It isn't difficult. Simply add a couple attachments in your deck. In the case of Blackfish or Cersei, Bodyguard works triple duty: it saves, it stops S&D, and it prevents some burn. Or you could go the Plot route. Outwit works if you are using Learned crest characters. There are also 20-ish plots that have more than 5 initiative. Many decks already run Retaliation. So, play your Retaliation on the turn where you think the other player is going to use S&D.

KristoffStark said:

You must want to pick a fight. I never said its unfair or cowardly, I said chicken s. I meant that it is cheap and easy to make it happen. I think it sucks that the one plot can basically render a bunch of fun deck types as too risky to play. Other people pointed out ways around it, but they all require far more effort and time than flipping a plot card. You have to anticipate and counter flip the right plot (outwit), or draw into the right cards (attachments) and play them in order to protect your main character BEFORE they decide to flip the plot. You comparison rings hallow since those characters aren't loaded up with power like a main is.

That's fine if you think I am wrong or a bad deck builder. But please don't put words in my mouth or twist them.

AceManUSC said:

I'm sorry. My understanding of the phrase "chicken $%#&" is "very cowardly," as such I didn't think I was twisting your words or putting any in your mouth, and I understood your use of said term as calling out anyone who would stoop so low. I found it unreasonable in the extreme, hence the aggressive nature of my reply.
I wasn't looking to pick a fight, I was looking to make a point.

I don't think the comparison is hollow. I'd say a deck who's character base was just swept clean in the Plot phase is probably in just as much trouble as one who's power-monger was bounced back to your hand.

Unfortunately, I still find your stance unreasonable. You think this plot makes these deck types too risky to play. I disagree. It it a set back to have a strong central character bounced to your hand? Certainly. Does this plot do that easily? Yes. Does that make this kind of deck unviable? I don't think so. You seem to (having called it "too risky to play").

Given that, it seems unlikely that we'll find any common ground here, and there's likely no point is contuing this discourse.

I am not one of them, but there is a contingent of people who think S&D should jump right past the Restricted List and be Banned altogether.

dcdennis said:

Is it possible, also, that you just became more familiar with the cards, which are good, which are bad, which are more efficient or have a bigger impact on the meta? And as a consequence, all the houses just fall in their tracks of sticking with their strong tech, when there are certainly answers out there for cards. There are some meta calls that could dramatically shake up the game experience for you. Maybe this is a good time to try that out.

Banned? Seriously? On what grounds?

If anything - why not Restrict it? That would render it far from an auto include (if that is the problem) and it would still see some play.

Wow - ban Search and Detain and there is weeping and flouncing when we suggest Restricting Valar .

I would be in favor of the Restricted List, or errata that takes away the Cannot be Saved part.

Wonders if anyone else who were here in the long, long ago has been reminded of The Things I Do for Love.

Stag Lord said:

Personally, I see no need to restrict it (and certainly not to ban it). It's a great plot, but it's not quite an auto-include (though, admittedly, like a reset, it comes close to "You'd best have a good reason not to include it" status).

The way I look at it, very few cards are truly "overpowered" (and most of those have already found their way to the Restricted List or been subjected to errata to tone them down). The reality is, the slot a card takes in a deck is a valuable commodity. If I use this card, I probably can't use that one; I only have so much room. With only 7 plots allowed, S&D takes up a truly precious slot in a deck. To use it, I am most certainly giving up something else that would also be really useful. In fact, it's very ubiquity serves to balance it somewhat; like Valar, we know it's probably coming more often than not, so we can plan for it, both in deckbuilding and in play.

I tend to think, for instance, that Bear Island is a tad overpowered. But I recognize that it's balanced--a lot--by the requirement that every card you control have the Stark affiliation. Thus, including it in a deck has a profound effect on the construction of the deck as a whole. Reams of potentially useful cards have to be set aside to gain access to its powerful effect. That's a cost, just not as obvious a one as the 3 gold in the upper left-hand corner. Add in that it's unique and (like S&D) can't hit characters with attachments and it's not nearly as bad as it seems the first time someone uses it to blithely wipe your 4-cost unique off the board.

Likewise, cards that "get around game mechanics." Having played CCGs since the relatively early days of M:TG, I don't really understand this objection. A big part of the very idea of CCGs is that cards that 'break' the rules win out over the rules. Finding clever and efficient ways to leverage these interactions between cards and the rules is a big part of the challenge (and fun) of deckbuilding. Agendas, the foundation around which decks are usually built are almost entirely comprised of "getting around game mechanics." Saves, replacement effects, melee titles, "add to hand" (vice "draw"), immunities, bounce cards, stand effects, and so on and so on… they're all about dodging the basic rules of the game to win the game. But whichever ones you chose, you must necessarily forgo something else. Choosing one thing over another is an inherent, albeit hidden, cost.

S&D's effect on game mechanics seems pretty mild to me compared to a lot of others that stay in play a lot longer than one character being put back in hand. Like, say, Bear Island. Or the Maester's Path, even after the errata.

I would venture that really the issue isn't Search and Detain. Search and Detain as it is is very strong yes, and annoying, but not really broken. The real issue is the synergies of KotHH, Search and Detain and First Snow of Winter. I think one of the reasons KotHH is doing so well right now is because between those two plots a KotHH deck can shut down a rush deck or shut down a deck with a single big flop and a bunch of cheap ones or resources. Point is that between the two of them any non KotHH deck going up against a non KotHH deck will probably bounce at least 4 gold worth of cards back to their opponent's hand first round essentially mitigating the drawback of their agenda. Also what makes Search and Detain truly devastating in this case is that it's no longer a 5 initiative, that would be more easily dealt with. When Search and Detain has a base initiative of 7 it gets a whole lot harder to get around.

AceManUSC said:

It's not hard to anticipate a S&D that is going to mess-up your game. If you have a Blackfish with 3 Power on it, then there is a good chance that you'll see S&D that next turn, or if you have a main character (such as Cersei) and you double duplicate it, then there's a good chance that you'll see S&D. The opponent is not going to use S&D unless they have a good reason, and if they don't have a good reason…then it doesn't even matter.

The problem with S&D is that currently it is always a huge reward and barely any risk plot. When you get it working like you want (most of the time), you are always getting a huge tempo advantage not to even say about how many different utility purposes this plot can serve, save own character from opponents valar, return a comes into play character back to hand (jorah, vipers bannermen, arys, daario…), slow down opponents resources or draw. This plot has many uses and on top of that it has amazing stats 4-5-1 now that is nothing to laugh at. When everything fails oh no I have to return a zero cost card to my hand maybe 1 cost on the bad day not really a drawback as you forced your opponent to reveal a certain plot to counter yours. S&D just does too much for the stats it has.

Interesting discussion. However, I think we're trying to argue too many things all bunched up together, since there's quite many issues here. So I'll try to slice these into portions.

Are decks built around a single unique character viable currently? I'd say no. There's very little proof of them BEING viable (to counter this, just show me a TR where that über-viper/Brotherhood/Whatnot deck won a Tourney.) I'll believe it when I see it. As a counter-argument of a metastate, when these were viable I'll give an example from 2010, when somebody (Fatmouse maybe? Not sure.) won Black Friday with a Beric/Viper deck.

Is this caused by Search and Detain? Alone? No, like someone mentioned, S&D can still be worked around. Naturally, as a clear T1 card, which works as a counter for character-centric decks, it has an effect on this, but by itself it would not skew the environment THAT much. In a way, it's quite similar to Fear of Winter really, since that works as a similar counter for KotHH decks.

However, one plot CAN have a large impact on the meta currently. Just consider what the game would be like, if Raven's Song's printed text were changed to: ' Raven . When revealed, discard one Raven card from play'. It could still be worked around, but it would definately have an impact on the game, especially since trait-manipulation decks would run it in a heartbeat. The real question to be asked about Search and Detain is that would restricting/banning it give rise to more variety in the meta, or lead to it just being replaced with the nextlow-risk high reward plot. For example, Retaliation! doesn't make EVERY competitive deck anymore.

If this is not caused by S&D, then what? Unique-centric decks already have inherently quite a large risk associated with them, so it doesn't really take all that much for them to become unviable. However, I'd say that the weakness of duplicates in the current environment is really the main issue nowadays. Just too many cards that are also efficient against most other decktypes, that can completely stop your duplicate saves from working or hit your duplicates. Want a list? Alannys, He Calls it Thinking, The Iron Throne, Seasick/To Be a Kraken, Burn, Wintertime Marauders. Now, naturally duplicate saves can be supplement with attachments, so what's the issue? First, all of those cards will also work against the attachments. Second, positive attachments are just not worth it in the competitive environment currently. Third, Tin Link.

EDIT: The rules change regarding immunity extending to character abilities also had an effect on the strength of duplicates. Want an example? The new Stannis vs. The Lannister Iron Throne.

WWDrakey said:

I won the MO Regional in 2011 with a Martell Brotherhood deck that was all about Beric. That year we had the largest stateside Regional event.

WWDrakey said:

Hmmm…. you're pretty close to what I believe is the truth here. Is Search and Detain itself the only reason that Uber character style decks are not playable at the moment? No. The problem is indeed the large amount of hate against duplicates that is available right now. The problem is that Search and Detain is the most simple, point and click duplicate control available in the game right now and it's available with essentially no risk but high reward to all 6 houses. If it was something like "House Baratheon Only" then we'd have to consider it in the meta and it would have an appreciable impact on games, but I don't think that it push nearly so hard for the whole field to not utilize duplicates.

Duplicates have long been something it it feels like the game designers want to encourage with the occaisional "uniques matter" themes that they work into the game, but each time they print something that "Cannot be Saved" they push far harder against their use than they ever do for them.

Kennon said:

I totally agree with this statement, Will. I like to take credit for the shift that allowed you to save from bounce with duplicates after the release of Locked in the Tower , but in reality they still aren't that helpful, especially with the rise in CBS effects (which I'll just lump burn into). And one thing no one has mentioned (since it's not super competitive outside melee) are Dragons . You could have Core Set Rhaegal with 8 dupes, and it wouldn't matter because he can't take attachments. Give us the Emissary of the Red Keep , or at least a plot that does they same (not that I can ever time those sort of things) and take the sting out of it. I wouldn't mind losing him to a Bear Island with Assault on King's Landing , since I'd have had a chance to blow it up, and they took the time to build their house deck to synergize with their plots. I like it when attachments are playable, and in an environment where they're risking, they have to be strong to be playable, since they won't be around for long, assuming the answer is tutorable, if your opponent's not got it in hand.

That feeds into something Twn2d has been talking about: high risk, high reward. Attachment control should always be a part of the environment, same with location control. But when it becomes so ubiquitous that only the most efficient, most bombtastic locations get played, then you're going to get complaints both ways "Man, it sucks that I can't play attachments." "Man, it sucks that X attachment/location is so broken." because if that ubiquitous control doesn't happen to be in hand, then you suffer. And not mildly. It feels like the situation in Ice & Fire block where characters become fragile to events (Die by the Sword, Terminal Schemes, Seductive Promise, Game of Cyvasse) that they had to add Immunity to the game. We've still got it, but you search the list for what's out there: KotS Euron Crow's Eye , PotS The Red Viper , and Galbart Glover are the only unique characters in the game with Immunity to Events that's not conditional.

Sorry I rambled. S&D is strong, it has almost no downside (~Crud, I don't have 0-cost location, or a "Comes into Play" effect to bounce), and your choice of defenses require a decided commitment, and counters to counters. There's gotta be a way to deal with "Voltrons," and I'm sure I'd been complaining if it weren't around, but people like to play uniques, and making dupes near-pointless just isn't fun. I wouldn't be unhappy to see it on a restricted list (if we separate out the plots), but eliminating the "(cannot be saved)" _and_ "without any attachments" would be nice.

Actually I generally think that there is an art to timing a "bomb" character that loads up on attachments and takes a ton of power.

Like Valar, you should only play this kind of guy when you think you can take control or win before the next plot, or S&D was already played.

And… you need a backup plan. Granted… I would also be in favor of bara getting something like Good God's Own Kiss but for the discard pile, a one turn buy crap from discard. Would be a great combo with the resurrection event.

And while we are on the subject, they do need a little more character control, terminal schemes will not cut it. I don't think direct kill or kneeling is key, I think a character steal effect that is fair would work. Swayed for example or Shadow Play. And Yes they can steal that character you foolishly put 14 power on… but that's just vengeance for you keeping bob, kof, and melisandre knelt the entire game.

KristoffStark said:

I remember this from the BF Cube draft. It's definitely a 1st pick.

HoyaLawya said:

The crazy thing, Brian, is that he's not referring to the ITE plot , but to the original banned event from Westeros Edition, the first base set.

Maester_LUke said:

That event is crazy. Kneel a weenie to place a big character on the top of their deck. The resource and draw advantage of that event is huge.