I ask for unbanned several cards, if you think the same, please, support me!!!!! yeahhhh!!!

Thjs plot at the beginning were very powerfull, but now there are many plots that are more powerfull and with the reprint of a clash of arms, i think that this plots are very interestings to allow players play "to be", i think that the furys must be restricted only in melee games because its most easy that you find a player that suffers the second effects of these plot.

-Fury of the lion

-Fury of the wolf

-Fury of the dragon

-Fury of the stag

-Fury of the viper

-Fury of the kraken

I know that this location its more powerfull with the new agenda, but if you use it you cant use many usefull neutral cards, and dont affect stark and characters with attachments, i think this location have many many handicaps to be restricted.

-Bear island

Firm for this!!!!

as a stark it would make my life a lot easier, but I don't think it's a good idea to unrestrict bear island. armys are getting more popular with the new fleets and bear island kills armys.

You are able to use every single one of the cards listed, because none of them are banned.

Yeah, Crevic beat me to it.

While I'm perfectly OK with cards coming off the restricted list in time (I'm one of the "living restricted list" supporters, and I suspect Bear Island will be back in the future), I like the current shape of the meta and don't think it's grown stale or problematic, and I don't think Stark is underpowered. There's no immediacy to doing this. Also, I think the reasoning behind restricting them still stands, many players would use a 5-7-1 just for the stats, secondary effect aside. That doesn't really make for a healthier game - and they *have* introduced new Military Battles/Intrigue gambits I quite like.

I think the reasoning behind not restricting them in melee is precisely the opposite of what you state - because the secondary effects are likely to be useful, it adds another dynamic to the card and makes it more interesting in shaping the play.