Danigral said:
Thanks to the Socratic method, I have obtained the answer I wanted: that restricting all agendas would be a bad decision because it would reduce the number of possible builds (not merely permutations). Despite being a part of the DC meta, I am actually more of a Shagga at heart, so seeing possible options lost is rather upsetting. Restricting several cards that are OP in certain builds may curb their power level, but the collateral damage is decimating creative builds that would be elevated to viability by running those particular cards (or even just one of them). That's why I wish that restricted cards were more selectively restricted by house, but hey, what can you do.
Nice. Bonus points for referring to the Socratic method. I kind of wish cards were restricted by house, too. I mean… We'll now never know how viable Kings of Winter is out of Martell now! Or something much more feasible… but I think that gets the point across. Universal restriction of the cards does lead to an ironic destruction of unusual, fun, non-tier 1 builds. I'd rather lose those builds than have an unbalanced meta game, though. I prefer the designers having a vision of the game and doing what it takes to maintain the integrity of that vision than to allow improperly balanced cards to remain in the game just so some fun builds are viable.