Jump to content



Photo

Reprint Clarification (maybe list?)


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:17 AM

My buddies and I have been playing AGOT since the beginning, and we have a ton of old CCG cards. We all pretty much quick when it went to LCG, but we are getting back into it now. Some of us are going through our old cards to get some extra copies of stuff like the Fiefdoms and Crossroads, but we have some questions about other reprinted cards. The FAQ states this:

 

This ruling does not apply to CCG cards that 
have been modified and printed in the LCG. 
CCG copies of cards with text that is in any 
way different than their LCG counterparts are 
not legal in LCG events.

How should this be interpretted? How strict should we be? For example, the old-school See who is Stronger says "…choose a Knight or Army character…" while the new version says "…choose 1 Knight or 1 Army character…". Is that difference enough to make it not legal? If so, most of the older cards did not have a capital letter after the bolded Action Phase: gametext, but all of the new LCG cards start with capital letters? That isn't considered to be different than the CCG text, is it? It would wipe out nearly every reprint they have made. Only cards like Crossroads and the straight gold locations would survive.

 

Also, does anyone happen to know of a list of the old CCG cards that have been reprinted? So far, I have gone over Plots and Stark using the AGOT Deck Builder site, and it is quite tedious. I have more than a 5000 count box of the old cards that I have to sort alphabetically, then go through 1 card at a time to see if the text is "close enough". If someone knows of a site that already has this stuff listed out, I would really appreciate a link.



#2 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:20 AM

I'd like to see such a site. Also a site with the rarity as a search criterion.

About how close text has to be, as a judge, I'd go for functional sameness (do the cards work the same). So your examples would be OK. Frozen Solid would not be OK because the CCG one is not House Stark only and can be attached to limited locations and attachments. Narrow Escape would be refused as well, because the ACoS one lacks the "minimum 1 card" requirement to cancel it (even though it is othewise worded as the post-erratum modern one).



#3 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:47 AM

That is how I was thinking it should work as well. I had pulled out the See who is Stronger, but left the Flea Bottoms. I didn't realize that Frozen Solid had changed (I guess I better put those back into my CCG pile), and I brought the Narrow Escapes to the LCG. While Narrow Escape has been reworded to state at "a hand of at least 1 card", the ruling was always that you had to have at least 1 card to be able to "discard your hand", so as far as I was concerned, the effects were the same.

To me, I think the best thing would be if the current site out there that I use (http://www.cardgamedb.com) would just add a "Reprint" option to their cards. It could show that it was reprinted when you pull up the new card, or you could check "Reprint" in the search criteria and it would just show cards that have been reprinted. That would, in my opinion, be the easiest way to do this. You could search using faction, traits, card type, cost, etc. The one thing it wouldn't have is the rarity thing for you. Maybe if he added a filter like "Reprint Rarity" as well.



#4 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 975 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:10 AM

Khudzlin said:

I'd like to see such a site. Also a site with the rarity as a search criterion.

About how close text has to be, as a judge, I'd go for functional sameness (do the cards work the same). So your examples would be OK. Frozen Solid would not be OK because the CCG one is not House Stark only and can be attached to limited locations and attachments. Narrow Escape would be refused as well, because the ACoS one lacks the "minimum 1 card" requirement to cancel it (even though it is othewise worded as the post-erratum modern one).

I'll second this. If the card as written would function identically to the LCG card, our meta would let it fly. Hell we'd probably just pretend it was a proxy for the real one if we knew what it was (but this part wouldn't fly in a tourney).



#5 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM

mdc273 said:

Khudzlin said:

 

I'd like to see such a site. Also a site with the rarity as a search criterion.

About how close text has to be, as a judge, I'd go for functional sameness (do the cards work the same). So your examples would be OK. Frozen Solid would not be OK because the CCG one is not House Stark only and can be attached to limited locations and attachments. Narrow Escape would be refused as well, because the ACoS one lacks the "minimum 1 card" requirement to cancel it (even though it is othewise worded as the post-erratum modern one).

 

 

I'll second this. If the card as written would function identically to the LCG card, our meta would let it fly. Hell we'd probably just pretend it was a proxy for the real one if we knew what it was (but this part wouldn't fly in a tourney).

Yeah, I was thinking that if I ever needed extra Arriane Martells or Red Vipers, I would take the old school ones and draw a noble crest in the corner, just as a proxy.  8)



#6 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:52 PM

tjstyles said:

the ruling was always that you had to have at least 1 card to be able to "discard your hand", so as far as I was concerned, the effects were the same.

Actually, the Legacy FAQ says the opposite:

(v3.14) Narrow Escape U118

When Narrow Escape is played, an opponent may choose to block its effect even if he has no cards in hand; he is considered to be discarding his hand, even though his hand size is zero.

Personally, I'd let fly close wordings for non-uniques (like Narrow Escape or Frozen Solid) but not for uniques (because uniques may have multiple versions), though I wouldn't be tough on that if the text was really close (Ser Amory Lorch http://www.agotcards.org/card/v/1811 vs http://www.agotcards.org/card/v/4403 is just over that limit: he now has the Ally trait and his ability costs 1 gold).



#7 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 01:43 AM

I am currently working on that list (about 30 % done).



#8 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:24 PM

I found a link to a list (http://greyjoychris....lcgreprints.htm). There are errors (for instance, the CCG version of Knights of the Realm is subtly different, so it not legal).



#9 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 975 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 07:39 AM

Khudzlin said:

I found a link to a list (http://greyjoychris....lcgreprints.htm). There are errors (for instance, the CCG version of Knights of the Realm is subtly different, so it not legal).

FYI, that list is no longer maintained. It's the old NYC Meta website and is now defunct as we've migrated over to Meetup. The list is probably accurate, but I couldn't tell you when the last update was.



#10 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 01:37 AM

As I pointed out in my previous post, there is at least one error in the list:

  • CCG Knights of the Realm's drawback reads "While you control fewer Knight characters than at least one other player, draw 1 fewer card during the draw phase."
  • LCG Knights of the Realm's drawback reads "While you control fewer Knight characters than each other player, draw 1 fewer card during the draw phase."

Even if the result is the same in Joust, it's not the same at all in Melee.

I've done A-R. I might have missed a few due to naming errors in OCTGN (though I've spotted a few like Allanys Greyjoy and Infamous without "!"). I'm unsure about Longship Iron Victory vs Longship 'Iron Victory' (though none of them are like the LCG one, so it doesn't really matter).



#11 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:02 PM

I am done with the list (barring a few naming mistakes). I come up with a total of 258 reprints, excluding House cards (counting each printing in the CCG). I have accepted cards on the basis of whether they work the same rather than whether the text is strictly identical (and used the errata'd text from the LCG and Legacy FAQ's). So I have accepted the following:

  • lower/reduce
  • kneel to/kneel <card name> to
  • redundant "limit 1 per plot deck"
  • redundant "this round" on plot
  • trait or keyword order
  • capitalization
  • at least 1/1 or more
  • a/1


#12 Vaapad

Vaapad

    Member

  • Members
  • 373 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 12:37 AM

I agree with all that's been said, but ill just point out that the LCG valar did carry forward the antiquated "limit 1 per plot deck."  Maybe for some quirky reason FFG really does mean "identical." Has anyone sent the question to Damon?  Or Ktom for that matter - how would you rule this at a tourney?


"And for the first time in hundreds of years, the night came alive with the music of dragons."

#13 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 01:11 AM

For a regional, I'd advise to go with strictly identical just in case (but I would only ask to switch the cards). For an unsanctioned tournament, I wouldn't be strict (but the cards would have to be functionnally identical - that would still exclude cards like Forever Burning or Rusted Sword).



#14 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,761 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:13 AM

FFG has been very strict about this at their events. Any difference in text, even if it does not change the function or timing of the card, effectively makes the CCG card a proxy, and therefore not legal in the sanctioned event. 

So that's what I enforce when I am judging FFG's national events (not that the question comes up all that often). Although at my own Regional or other events, I go "functional equivalency."



#15 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 02:07 AM

What exactly do you mean by "national" events? Are official Regionals included?



#16 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,761 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 03:57 AM

Khudzlin said:

What exactly do you mean by "national" events? Are official Regionals included?
I mean anything where the people directly responsible for event are wearing FFG shirts. If an appeal to FFG about an issue that arises is effectively impossible because you can't appeal Damon to Damon, that's a national event. If you could raise your hand to ask a question during the tourney and reasonably expect Nate to come over and answer it for you, that's a national event. 

So primarily, I'm thinking Gencon, Worlds, and pretty much anything that happens at the FFG event center. Another way to say it would be any event where the rule about "the TO has final say" is unnecessary because FFG is the TO.

What I'm saying is that ultimately, it is the TO who gets to decide on the legality of "functionally equivalent" reprints. When the TO is FFG (which happens at Gencon, Worlds, and events at the FFG Event Center), the result has always been "exact text; no leniency." That doesn't demand that TOs at other events must follow the same philosophy.



#17 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:18 AM

Thanks for the clarification.






© 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