Jump to content



Photo

Aurane Waters spoiled among other cards in next cycle


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,778 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:20 AM

A new character that turns into a Melee title has been spoiled in the most recent article:

 

 

An interesting dynamic to add to Melee.  I like the idea, but really am not caring for the "wait for X to happen to benefit".  I love adding some Titles interaction to the game overall.  He's easily killed, so I guess the kill condition is okay.

 

 

I like the new plot.  It should help a number of Stark decks protect themselves against intrigue challenges for the round. Siege decks may embrace this at least and it is even more useful in Melee games where the chance you'll be attacked more than one time in intrigue is higher. 



#2 Toqtamish

Toqtamish

    Toqtamish

  • Members
  • 3,326 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:25 AM

I find Aurane Waters very interesting. Should help to add a new dynamic to at least our local melee games.

The new plot for Stark I like as well. It fits with what it is trying to evoke from the books also.



#3 JCWamma

JCWamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:19 AM

Looking forward to Incinerating Orphan of the Greenblood cards by declaring "Master of Ships" as my trait.



#4 Francisco G.

Francisco G.

    Member

  • Members
  • 141 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:36 AM

I'm hoping from the description of the CP that the bara character is a smuggler and a knight!!! (and more recursion)



#5 dcdennis

dcdennis

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,376 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:48 PM

Waters is retarded. Why would you put a card in your deck that is probably only useful by turn three and even then could and most likely will be used against you just as often as you get to use it.  It's just a horrible idea. Most melee games are all but decided by plot three anyways. If they wanted a new title then add one. This is just garbage.



#6 Saturnine

Saturnine

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,558 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 05:12 PM

JCWamma said:

Looking forward to Incinerating Orphan of the Greenblood cards by declaring "Master of Ships" as my trait.

Not sure what you mean. Master of Ships does nothing against Orphan.



#7 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:12 PM

Saturnine said:

JCWamma said:

 

Looking forward to Incinerating Orphan of the Greenblood cards by declaring "Master of Ships" as my trait.

 

 

Not sure what you mean. Master of Ships does nothing against Orphan.

He means he'll play Incinerate and name Master of Ships as the killing trait.



#8 WWDrakey

WWDrakey

    Member

  • Members
  • 434 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:30 PM

Ratatoskr said:

He means he'll play Incinerate and name Master of Ships as the killing trait.

Well, hopefully he has already played a Harried By Dragons on the Orphan before that, since Aurane is neutral… ;)

 



#9 Saturnine

Saturnine

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,558 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:37 PM

Ratatoskr said:

 

He means he'll play Incinerate and name Master of Ships as the killing trait.

 

 

Oh. Right. Good luck with that. But even if it did work, I fail to see the awesomeness of this.



#10 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:20 PM

WWDrakey said:

Ratatoskr said:

 

He means he'll play Incinerate and name Master of Ships as the killing trait.

 

 

Well, hopefully he has already played a Harried By Dragons on the Orphan before that, since Aurane is neutral… ;)

 

Or he could use trait manip to give Master of Ships to one of his Targ guys…

Saturnine said:

 

Oh. Right. Good luck with that. But even if it did work, I fail to see the awesomeness of this.

I guess it's just a silly jest, so don't read too much into it. It's funny to find wacky ways to actually use a trait that is a singular oddity and will remain so.



#11 JCWamma

JCWamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:19 PM

Uh yeah, didn't think that silly joke would be controversial! Was just the most stupid way I could think to use the new existance of that trait.

 

Why would I need Harried by Dragons to kill something STR 0 though? Unless I've misunderstood how Incinerate works and there's no kill condition applied if X = 0?



#12 Skowza

Skowza

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,131 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:33 PM

dcdennis said:

Waters is retarded. Why would you put a card in your deck that is probably only useful by turn three and even then could and most likely will be used against you just as often as you get to use it.  It's just a horrible idea. Most melee games are all but decided by plot three anyways. If they wanted a new title then add one. This is just garbage.

Depends on how strong the Naval icon is when we get this far in the cycle.  Two N icons, unique and no bad traits, his ability might be useless but the icons might make him playable in melee or joust.



#13 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:58 PM

JCWamma said:

Why would I need Harried by Dragons to kill something STR 0 though? Unless I've misunderstood how Incinerate works and there's no kill condition applied if X = 0?

Yeah, but the characters with the killing trait must be Targ characters. This gets overlooked pretty often…



#14 JCWamma

JCWamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:07 PM

Ok, I'm confused now. It says X is equal to the number of Targaryen characters with the named Trait, but where does it say you must have at least one Targaryen character with the named trait in order for the targetted character to be killed if STR = 0? Surely if the targetted character's STR = 0 before you even play Incinerate, you could name literally any existing Trait and, presence of Targaryen characters in play under your control with that Trait or not, the targetted character would still die? Or is the text written really unintuitively (or alternatively am I being a massive idiot and misreading/misinterpreting the card repeatedly)?

 

Apologies for the off-topic-ness.



#15 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:25 PM

JCWamma said:

Ok, I'm confused now. It says X is equal to the number of Targaryen characters with the named Trait, but where does it say you must have at least one Targaryen character with the named trait in order for the targetted character to be killed if STR = 0? Surely if the targetted character's STR = 0 before you even play Incinerate, you could name literally any existing Trait and, presence of Targaryen characters in play under your control with that Trait or not, the targetted character would still die? Or is the text written really unintuitively (or alternatively am I being a massive idiot and misreading/misinterpreting the card repeatedly)?

 

Apologies for the off-topic-ness.

I apologize. I guess you're right. Reckon I was just following WWDrakey unquestioningly. Again. Gotta stop doing that.



#16 Saturnine

Saturnine

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,558 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:58 PM

JCWamma said:

 

Surely if the targetted character's STR = 0 before you even play Incinerate, you could name literally any existing Trait and, presence of Targaryen characters in play under your control with that Trait or not, the targetted character would still die? 

 

 

Right. I forgot about the Orphan already being at str 0.

As for Aurane Waters -- I'm still not convinced that the whole naval enhancement thing is good/fun, so his ability just makes me go "meh" right now. (The art is great, though!)



#17 Alando

Alando

    Member

  • Members
  • 136 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:48 PM

Manderly's Scheme looks good for Tully decks. Don't see it being used much apart from that.



#18 WWDrakey

WWDrakey

    Member

  • Members
  • 434 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:57 PM

Whoopsie.

Yes, I indeed forgot to check that Orphan actually has printed STR 0. Krhm. Sorry about that.

~ Now I know what the 'Walk of Shame' card is all about. :P



#19 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,778 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:43 AM

Alando said:

Manderly's Scheme looks good for Tully decks. Don't see it being used much apart from that.

Would it not be useful in a Siege deck?  Just curious.



#20 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,778 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 02:03 AM

dcdennis said:

Waters is retarded. Why would you put a card in your deck that is probably only useful by turn three and even then could and most likely will be used against you just as often as you get to use it.  It's just a horrible idea. Most melee games are all but decided by plot three anyways. If they wanted a new title then add one. This is just garbage.

I generally have to agree with this.  I think he should be a 2 gold cost because of the lack of opportunity and the chance it will be used against you at some point.  It might even still be the title that other players don't take because they want the benefits of the other titles(being Supported for example).  So maybe it won't work that well against you?  Even if he is chosen as someone elses title, that will free up another title that you might find more useful.

Consider his use in a 3 player melee game.  He gives(if he is a title at this point) the Round 2 3rd player a choice between 2 titles.  That COULD be interesting as it doesn't force the 3rd player to take a title they do not have a choice over.

The whole "character turns into something else if they die/discarded" condition is just too slow to feel like you are maximizing their use.  I wish there were other ways to make it happen sooner without compromising a lot of your deck or game flow.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS