At worlds at the final melee table, Erick Butzlaff turned to Nate and said, glancing at the Hellholt Engineers wreaking havoc on the board, "How soon 'till this gets FAQ'd", to which I believe Nate jokingly replied something along the lines of "Gonna write up a new one tonight".

Obviously that didn't happen. We haven't seen an FAQ since before worlds, and the meta has had some time to settle - and I think that was a good call by FFG. I was wondering whether people think one is coming, whether it's necessary, and what it should contain?

First and foremost, I'd like it to come with an acompanying article explaining the designer intent behind any changes in the FAQ.

Personally, I hope to see something changed with melee scoring/collusion in the tournament rules, to make collusion rulings clearer. I'd like to see a few of the "triggered by a willing opponent" card interactions looked at for melee (Hellhollt being one example).

I'd like to see "Maeser Cressen" erratad to "Maester Cressen".

I also hope to see something done to Meera (Restrict?), Long Lances (Restrict?) and Game of Cyvasse (Restrict?), although I realize that restricting Cyvasse and Meera would be a big boon to Maesters and they'd probably need another slap on the wrist (Conclave probably has the biggest target painted on it, or the agenda itself again). They're a bit too "Auto-include" for my tastes, although I admit that restricting them wouldn't necessarily change that for Meera/Long Lances. I'd like to see the errata/restrictions used to shake up some of the decks that have remained top-tier for most of last year, in some cases not because there's anything wrong with those decks but just to nudge the meta which has built up a little too much inertia. I'd like the Erratas to Jaqen and Compelled by the Rock to be up there, even before the cards themselves make it to stores…

I'd like to see the " Burned and Pillaged " ruling (can affect KotHH) added to the FAQ, as well as the "Little and Less" clarification (and possibly the Burning Bridges and "Loose All Traits" ones), since they all caused a fair bit of confusion at the time.

And most of all, but least likely, I'd like to see some indication that there's a long-term plan to help with the ever-increasing barrier of entry/burden of knowledge from the ever-increasing cardpool.

Meera and long lances, for sure. Other than that, we are hopefully able to play the old versions of JH and CbtR.

long lances should be limited response at least and also shouldn't work on chars with att just like castellan.(it's like castellan but in reverse)

I think we need some FAQ but we don't need a witch hunt. No need to restrict long lances ( just limit response ),Meera ( str 2 char with a great and fun ability )( I know she freaks you out, you "control freaks" !!! That is why she is there ). Maester path just need to be corrected to paying chains when you take them off the agenda. If more is needed make chains at start in excess of 60 cards. If you want to restrict something stark, then northern cav would be a better target.

One card i would like removed from the game is "manning the city wall". Armies are big but should cost money… A lot of money. The combo with bannermen (stealth deadly army turn 1) is just not right. Please remove that card from the game.

For ultimate clarity, how to interpret what abilities Burning Bridges keeps from triggering. Gained abilities being safe.

I wish Pentoshi Manor was unique

ShivesMcShivers said:

+1

Red Viper PoTS should be restricted, as should Long Lances.

A couple of the city plots should be restricted as well.

While some of the city plots may be awfully pervasive in the current meta, restricting them would have far reaching implications. Aside from the effect on other city plots, the weakening of the best HoD tech out there would have to be approached carefully…

First Snow of Winter could be restricted. It seems like every top deck either uses it or has plans to counter it. Of course, you could say that even more about Valar and it's accepted as necessary for balance by most players.

Edit: And after writing this I see only one top 8 deck at the Moonboy used it… the winning deck! Coincidence? I THINK NOT!!!!111

I don't think any reset plots will ever be restricted.

having to plan for multiple different resets, imo, is what keeps decks diverse. If valar was the only non-restricted reset, decks would tend towards cheap uniques and dupes. First snow existing prevents that.

Restrict/Ban/errata Rule by Decree. It is probably one of the most ubiquitous, and one of the most degenerate/powerful plots, especially when combined with First Snow. There are just too many ridiculously good pre-plot actions that can be done to allow you to wreck somebody's hand on the first turn/on subsequent turns. I don't mind first snow on its own - it's a perfectly valid tempo play. First snow + rule is just incredibly strong - forcing your opponent to throw away 7 cards in one plot, with almost no way of preventing it (bar a forgotten plans - but FP is a silver bulle for pretty much everythign nowadays) shouldn't exist, especially when your opponent is often holding a hand of 10 to your 12.

Forgotten plans does zero to RBD.

So I still have a question. How does FFG change Banned/Restricted List? Is it based on some gutsy feeling or amount of hate that some card generates on forums, or some tourney stats? Otherwise, I personally think that high quality ambush cards + KotHH are too good of a combination, so KotHH should join Maester's Path on Restricted list. :-P

dcdennis said:

It stops First Snow.

dcdennis said:

I think he meant that Forgotten Plans prevents the First Snow/RBD combo by stopping First Snow from triggering

dcdennis said:

True. But it does turn off First Snow the turn before. Presumably that's what he meant.

I would actually like to see errata to RBD to "every player discard to 4". This would give more hand to aggro decks as it would be more anti-control and not anti-aggro like it currently is. I don't feel control needs as much tools as it currently has in the environment.

Ire said:

+1

If you ban/restrict RBD you will be back here in 2 months wondering why no one plays anything but Martell KotHH

I don't find RBD particularly hurting. The combo with threat from the east was truly devastating but 6 cards are usually good enough for me to get going. Draw engines is the answer to RBD.

Ire said:

That's a really good idea. I don't like restricting/banning RBD, because there are decks (especially Martell, that can generate ridicoulus amount of CA) that are kept in check with it. But your idea keeps this decks in check and don't allow "unfair" combinations with "Any Phase" events and First Snow.

RBD should not be banned, restricted, or suffer errata. There are other items, many mentioned in this thread, that are more important. RBD can be a great card, depending on your draw, and a clever little way to make sure that you start with some nice card advantage; but, it isn't a massive threat to the fun and playability of AGoT.

I love seeing someone get hosed by their own RBD shennanigans. Super funny.