Jump to content



Photo

The New Margaery Tyrell


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,552 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 01:22 PM

Wow. What a wonderful, cool, nedly and creative card design. Win.

 

http://www.fantasyfl...s.asp?eidn=4070



#2 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,409 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:06 PM

A shame Fishiste is no longer playing.



#3 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,552 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:36 PM

Khudzlin said:

A shame Fishiste is no longer playing.

Indeed.



#4 WWDrakey

WWDrakey

    Member

  • Members
  • 434 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 10:40 PM

Agreed, that card is really awesome. Really like how it combines a thematic feel with interesting and subtle mechanics. 



#5 Stag Lord

Stag Lord

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,482 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 04:39 AM

I'll echo the sentiments. not sure how well she will work with teh arrogant Counsellor, since he needs to be atatcking alone - but teh ability to kneel out an oppontn's threat character can be huge. She is nicely balanced without being broken and will see a lot of play witout being an auto include.

 

I also agree with the creator on the appeal of the dual Hosue Tyrell cards and the excellence of House of Thorns. I like his nod to the falvor of that set - still one of my favorites.

 

Great work here.



#6 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 973 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 08:24 AM

For easier reference:


Ugh… I really don't like cards like this from a design standpoint. He notes one of the benefits as being able to have more Queens for Pyromancer's Cache. I would argue that that is a bad thing for the game. Then this whole grappler concept is NPE. Loss of control should be brief, if it exists at all. Stealth is an example of appropriate length for loss of control. This cards loss of control is too severe. Losing my cost 4 army because you drew a cost 3 character is silly. Forcing me to lose a character to deadly is equally silly. You should add decision points, not take them away. Pretty much everything he highlights as being "good" about the card directly contradicts a positive play experience for me.

Add in a cancel option to give Margery or the player power and I think this card would've been brilliant. All you have to do is tweak the amount of power for balance. Non-numeric abilities are inherently difficult to balance and easy to mess up.



#7 Tomdidiot

Tomdidiot

    Member

  • Members
  • 189 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 02:07 PM

I like the card - I think it's interesting - there's lots of potential for fun shennanigans, but you really have to work to get the shennanians going.  My big issue is the the lack of a noble crest - Both previous Marges have the noble crest, as well as CCG Marge.  You'd kind of expect the daughter of one of the most powerful lords in the realm (Mace Tyrell), to, you know, be a freaking noble. 



#8 Crevic

Crevic

    Member

  • Members
  • 96 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:34 PM

I'm ok with her not having a noble crest.  Not every version of every character has to have the same traits and crests.  Only one Joffrey has a noble crest,  Tommen doesn't, nor does the Queen traited Myrcella.  I do love the flavor that she can get married with The Red Wedding.



#9 Skowza

Skowza

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,131 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:05 PM

mdc273 said:

Then this whole grappler concept is NPE. Loss of control should be brief, if it exists at all. This cards loss of control is too severe.

The control this card provides is nothing compared to Meera; its supposed to be a little OP since its a Champ card.  It helps the two Houses that are considered weak right now, the lack of a N crest means shes not an OP unstoppable beast, and her ability is a Response so there are cancels available for it.  I really like the fact that you can pull a NC Flank or TVB into an I challenge to get them out of the way, and I think its neat that we now have a "reverse Stealth" character to go with the "reverse Deadly" and "reverse Joust" and "reverse Vengeful/Vigilant" guys that we already had.



#10 Rogue Cypher

Rogue Cypher

    Member

  • Members
  • 106 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 09:18 PM

Interesting possibilities with this one. I like it.

 

Now if only we could get some more House Tyrell-centric locations that effect House Tyrell characters…



#11 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 973 posts

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:01 AM

Skowza said:

mdc273 said:

 

Then this whole grappler concept is NPE. Loss of control should be brief, if it exists at all. This cards loss of control is too severe.

 

 

The control this card provides is nothing compared to Meera; its supposed to be a little OP since its a Champ card.  It helps the two Houses that are considered weak right now, the lack of a N crest means shes not an OP unstoppable beast, and her ability is a Response so there are cancels available for it.  I really like the fact that you can pull a NC Flank or TVB into an I challenge to get them out of the way, and I think its neat that we now have a "reverse Stealth" character to go with the "reverse Deadly" and "reverse Joust" and "reverse Vengeful/Vigilant" guys that we already had.

Yea, I wasn't looking at how this card will make or break a faction. I was more looking at the design, and how it affects gameplay and specifically how these are the types of effects that prevent me from having fun when playing this game. There are WAY more powerful loss of control effects. Meera isn't even the worst offender. The Scourge and Bear Island are probably the worst, though Bear Island doesn't seem like loss of control since it's a kill effect.

If I had one wish for this game, it would be that locations got a hit point value and were attackable. If I could kill Bear Island by successfully attacking it once or twice, it would dramatically change the game for me. And I play Bear Island, lol.

The new card, in the grand scheme of things, fits the overall game.

Also, I'd like to note this "its supposed to be a little OP since its a Champ card". Why should this be acceptable? A card should always be appropriately balanced. It can have a really cool effect, like this has, but it should be balanced. I probably wouldn't have had nearly as much negative to say if Margery were more appropriately costed at cost 4. There are maybe 5 characters with a cost greater than 4 that actually see play, so she would rarely be overtuned then.



#12 kolixela

kolixela

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:09 AM

mdc273 said:

Skowza said:

 

mdc273 said:

 

Then this whole grappler concept is NPE. Loss of control should be brief, if it exists at all. This cards loss of control is too severe.

 

 

The control this card provides is nothing compared to Meera; its supposed to be a little OP since its a Champ card.  It helps the two Houses that are considered weak right now, the lack of a N crest means shes not an OP unstoppable beast, and her ability is a Response so there are cancels available for it.  I really like the fact that you can pull a NC Flank or TVB into an I challenge to get them out of the way, and I think its neat that we now have a "reverse Stealth" character to go with the "reverse Deadly" and "reverse Joust" and "reverse Vengeful/Vigilant" guys that we already had.

 

 

Yea, I wasn't looking at how this card will make or break a faction. I was more looking at the design, and how it affects gameplay and specifically how these are the types of effects that prevent me from having fun when playing this game. There are WAY more powerful loss of control effects. Meera isn't even the worst offender. The Scourge and Bear Island are probably the worst, though Bear Island doesn't seem like loss of control since it's a kill effect.

If I had one wish for this game, it would be that locations got a hit point value and were attackable. If I could kill Bear Island by successfully attacking it once or twice, it would dramatically change the game for me. And I play Bear Island, lol.

The new card, in the grand scheme of things, fits the overall game.

Also, I'd like to note this "its supposed to be a little OP since its a Champ card". Why should this be acceptable? A card should always be appropriately balanced. It can have a really cool effect, like this has, but it should be balanced. I probably wouldn't have had nearly as much negative to say if Margery were more appropriately costed at cost 4. There are maybe 5 characters with a cost greater than 4 that actually see play, so she would rarely be overtuned then.

 

The card really is standard fare for competitive card games, the ability to force an opponent to block a specific attack has been around since card games of a collective/competitive nature were invented (look at the M:TG core set card Lure for instance)

 

Given the relative power of the personality and the fact that her ability doesn't outright expend the personality, instead drawing them into the battle, it is a fairly balanced card. While it may not be fun to play against a card of this nature it is within the thematic playstyle of the family, you can't expect a card game to stay compeitive without allowing cards to exist that detract from an opponents play experience, especially if you feel that having a single card expended for a turn is NPE.



#13 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 973 posts

Posted 29 April 2013 - 06:56 AM

kolixela said:

The card really is standard fare for competitive card games, the ability to force an opponent to block a specific attack has been around since card games of a collective/competitive nature were invented (look at the M:TG core set card Lure for instance)

 

Given the relative power of the personality and the fact that her ability doesn't outright expend the personality, instead drawing them into the battle, it is a fairly balanced card. While it may not be fun to play against a card of this nature it is within the thematic playstyle of the family, you can't expect a card game to stay compeitive without allowing cards to exist that detract from an opponents play experience, especially if you feel that having a single card expended for a turn is NPE.

I agree that the card has been standard fare in card games, as indicated by my stating neard the end of my last post that Margaery fits within the current card pool.

Have you ever played Android: Netrunner? There really aren't any cards that cause loss of control. One side is putting up walls, the other side is trying to break walls. Occasionally you die, but when you die the game is over. This game was also created by Richard Garfield and is incredibly popular right now. So while it may be standard fare for card gaming, that doesn't mean it is an intrinsic property of it. Just because it's a go-to for designers doesn't mean it's good for the game.

I also don't find Lure to be a great example of this type of control. In MtG, creatures can die during combat. You can easily counter Lure through a number of effects. Disenchant removes it. Dark Banishing removes the creature. Or, and this is not possible in AGoT, you simply put in a creature that can kill it. Heck, you could just all out attack and effectively ignore Lure. Your characters can't be controlled out (due to non-simultaneous turns). There-in lies the massive difference between Lure and Margaery. In MtG, you could put in a big enough creature that would kill the Lure-enchanted creature in most circumstances in addition to drawing a removal effect or just ignoring Lure and attacking with your creatures instead of having Lure eat them. In AGoT, your only recourse is to draw a removal effect or go first.



#14 Alando

Alando

    Member

  • Members
  • 136 posts

Posted 29 April 2013 - 07:33 AM

I don't really see how Margaery is worse than any kneel, control or removal effect in the game. In fact she's a lot more interactive. The knelt character still adds its STR and abilities to the challenge. One with its icons removed or whatever can't do anything in challenges.



#15 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 973 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 06:20 AM

Alando said:

I don't really see how Margaery is worse than any kneel, control or removal effect in the game. In fact she's a lot more interactive. The knelt character still adds its STR and abilities to the challenge. One with its icons removed or whatever can't do anything in challenges.

The only way she is worse is that her ability is repeatable. You should get 2 - 3 turns of Margaery's ability on average. Also, I think I said that I don't like any Loss of Control effects with a longer duration than Stealth in my posts. Maergary is weak in that regard. I was looking at her from a pure standpoint of how does she affect player experience without looking at other, similar effects and how appropriately costed is she? She will always have a negative effect on player experience as she inherently causes you to lose control. Additionally, her strength is going to get silly if you happen to have a queen in play. Not all queens are created with an ability that makes them even stronger when a queen is in play. So, for example, if I'm Stark and have Jeane in play then Margaery both shuts down my character that is designed to be SHUT OFF by other queens and then gets a kicker of Melee to boot. That just doesn't make any sense to me. Never mind if I have a Lady in play. There are a lot of good Lady characters, but why am I being punished for just playing good characters? Mine don't go turbo when Margaery is in play. Then, with her ability she can kneel out my Northern Cavalry Flank. An incredible character that costs more gold than she does. You invest 1 less gold and negate my 4 gold character and probably still win the challenge because Margaery is likely to have Melee or you are using her ability to sucker my best character out of a challenge and make it winnable. I can't do anything to counteract the fact that Margaery exists except play an equally powerful card and draw into it. The same is obviously true of all similar Loss of Control effects.

TL:DR - She's not. I think all Loss of Control effects longer than Stealth are terrible. She's just the latest example of these types of cards.



#16 fhornmikey

fhornmikey

    Member

  • Members
  • 181 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 08:02 AM

mdc273 said:

The only way she is worse is that her ability is repeatable. You should get 2 - 3 turns of Margaery's ability on average. Also, I think I said that I don't like any Loss of Control effects with a longer duration than Stealth in my posts. Maergary is weak in that regard. I was looking at her from a pure standpoint of how does she affect player experience without looking at other, similar effects and how appropriately costed is she? She will always have a negative effect on player experience as she inherently causes you to lose control. Additionally, her strength is going to get silly if you happen to have a queen in play. Not all queens are created with an ability that makes them even stronger when a queen is in play. So, for example, if I'm Stark and have Jeane in play then Margaery both shuts down my character that is designed to be SHUT OFF by other queens and then gets a kicker of Melee to boot. That just doesn't make any sense to me. Never mind if I have a Lady in play. There are a lot of good Lady characters, but why am I being punished for just playing good characters? Mine don't go turbo when Margaery is in play. Then, with her ability she can kneel out my Northern Cavalry Flank. An incredible character that costs more gold than she does. You invest 1 less gold and negate my 4 gold character and probably still win the challenge because Margaery is likely to have Melee or you are using her ability to sucker my best character out of a challenge and make it winnable. I can't do anything to counteract the fact that Margaery exists except play an equally powerful card and draw into it. The same is obviously true of all similar Loss of Control effects.

TL:DR - She's not. I think all Loss of Control effects longer than Stealth are terrible. She's just the latest example of these types of cards.

TBH I read this and I just see a whole bunch of crying, she's an extremely well designed, NEDLY card that is relatively well costed although perhaps just a little strong for her costing.  Her ability fits in so well with her personality, as does the melee with other Queens in play, it's an INCREDIBLY well designed card.

This game is full of powerful effects, strong removal, and lasting control effects, is she a strong card?  Yes absolutely, is she as strong as many other cards in the environment?  Not at all.

TL:DR - Cry More.



#17 HoyaLawya

HoyaLawya

    Member

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 10:52 AM

fhornmikey said:

mdc273 said:

 

The only way she is worse is that her ability is repeatable. You should get 2 - 3 turns of Margaery's ability on average. Also, I think I said that I don't like any Loss of Control effects with a longer duration than Stealth in my posts. Maergary is weak in that regard. I was looking at her from a pure standpoint of how does she affect player experience without looking at other, similar effects and how appropriately costed is she? She will always have a negative effect on player experience as she inherently causes you to lose control. Additionally, her strength is going to get silly if you happen to have a queen in play. Not all queens are created with an ability that makes them even stronger when a queen is in play. So, for example, if I'm Stark and have Jeane in play then Margaery both shuts down my character that is designed to be SHUT OFF by other queens and then gets a kicker of Melee to boot. That just doesn't make any sense to me. Never mind if I have a Lady in play. There are a lot of good Lady characters, but why am I being punished for just playing good characters? Mine don't go turbo when Margaery is in play. Then, with her ability she can kneel out my Northern Cavalry Flank. An incredible character that costs more gold than she does. You invest 1 less gold and negate my 4 gold character and probably still win the challenge because Margaery is likely to have Melee or you are using her ability to sucker my best character out of a challenge and make it winnable. I can't do anything to counteract the fact that Margaery exists except play an equally powerful card and draw into it. The same is obviously true of all similar Loss of Control effects.

TL:DR - She's not. I think all Loss of Control effects longer than Stealth are terrible. She's just the latest example of these types of cards.

 

 

TBH I read this and I just see a whole bunch of crying, she's an extremely well designed, NEDLY card that is relatively well costed although perhaps just a little strong for her costing.  Her ability fits in so well with her personality, as does the melee with other Queens in play, it's an INCREDIBLY well designed card.

This game is full of powerful effects, strong removal, and lasting control effects, is she a strong card?  Yes absolutely, is she as strong as many other cards in the environment?  Not at all.

TL:DR - Cry More.

 

Good post Mikey. +1



#18 mdc273

mdc273

    Member

  • Members
  • 973 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 07:09 AM

fhornmikey said:

TBH I read this and I just see a whole bunch of crying, she's an extremely well designed, NEDLY card that is relatively well costed although perhaps just a little strong for her costing.  Her ability fits in so well with her personality, as does the melee with other Queens in play, it's an INCREDIBLY well designed card.

This game is full of powerful effects, strong removal, and lasting control effects, is she a strong card?  Yes absolutely, is she as strong as many other cards in the environment?  Not at all.

TL:DR - Cry More.

TBH I read this and I just see a dumb response.

Okay, back to not being a jerk. I apologize for that, but I will always turn people's inflamatory remarks back at them.

How is she extremely well designed? Don't just state it as a fact. What are the observations you are making that make you conclude that she is well designed? She is designed in such a way that she is powerful. Powerful does not necessarily equate to well-designed. How is she well-costed? Which 3 cost characters are equal to her and which do you consider stronger?

The Nedliness of the card, while nice, is ultimately meaningless. In MtG, Wrath of God would be Nedly if it immediately killed your opponent and you won, but that would be terrible for the game. The first goal should be a good, balanced card. Nedliness is a nice bonus, but completely irrelevant to whether or not a card increases the fun of the mechanical gameplay itself. A bad card is bad, no matter how Nedly it is. If this were some random character, not Margaery, would people feel she were a well-balanced card or overtuned? I have a feeling some people let her being slightly overtuned slide because she is both a champion card and a huge, beloved character in the series.

Yes this game is full of powerful effects. No one is arguing that. That does not make them good for the game. Adding more of those effects does not inherently make the game better.

TL:DR - Jerk less, please.



#19 Bomb

Bomb

    Cool Person Club

  • Members
  • 1,759 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 07:46 AM

I'm just not seeing her being overpowered at all. 

To use her Response, she must attack.  So, if you are not first player, she is not going to hurt the opponent immediately.

If she is knelt by a card effective, she cannot be used.

If her icons are taken away, she cannot be used.

Her ability is unique compared to other kneel effects in that it forces a character into a challenge.  If Deadly is involved(or effects that hit participating characters), then this is interesting.  Otherwise, it's not all that different from any other direct kneel effects(which is all about disabling characters) except that she just may be hurting your chances to win the challenge by already having it opposed.

She is once per phase, so she can't be abused using Distinct Mastery or Baratheon cards that stand characters.

 

As for equal powerful characters at that cost, these are relatively subjective, but I'll give it a shot:

Asha Greyjoy comes to mind.  In fact, I'd take Asha over Margaery.
Meera Reed, although restricted, goes without saying.
Knight of Flower(non-kneel), is also restricted but was excellent.
Ellaria Sand is one of the most annoying characters to be against in the game.
Ser Arys Oakheart is in almost every Lannister and Martell deck.
Alannys Greyjoy cancels any triggered effect.
Baelor Blacktyde keeps opponents from playing used events and has Stealth.
~Moon Boy, just being on the table will blow the opponents mind with confusion, causing them to make several mistakes.
The Laughing Storm doesn't need to be explained.
Damon Dance-for-Me is really strong against an agenda using opponent.  Otherwise he's immune to events.

I'm just spitting out a few characters that I think are relatively strong for being 3 gold cost.  I almost tossed 3 gold King Renly up there just for being renown and 4 STR, but decided not to.

I see the new Margaery as a kneel effect with a twist.  She doesn't necessarily help me win the game faster since she doesn't claim power.  Because she adds a character to the challenge, I can still lose it.  If all wanted to do was kneel a character, I'd find other ways, but since she also makes them join the challenge, that means there is still work that needs to be done.

 

TL;DR - She isn't overpowered as her ability is similarly acheived with other kneel cards.  I don't even think she is even close to being the best 3 cost unrestricted character.  She adds a twist to a form of character control, but if you go second with her, she is significantly less effective.



#20 Danigral

Danigral

    Member

  • Members
  • 803 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 09:56 AM

mdc273 said:

fhornmikey said:

 

TBH I read this and I just see a whole bunch of crying, she's an extremely well designed, NEDLY card that is relatively well costed although perhaps just a little strong for her costing.  Her ability fits in so well with her personality, as does the melee with other Queens in play, it's an INCREDIBLY well designed card.

This game is full of powerful effects, strong removal, and lasting control effects, is she a strong card?  Yes absolutely, is she as strong as many other cards in the environment?  Not at all.

TL:DR - Cry More.

 

 

TBH I read this and I just see a dumb response.

Okay, back to not being a jerk. I apologize for that, but I will always turn people's inflamatory remarks back at them.

How is she extremely well designed? Don't just state it as a fact. What are the observations you are making that make you conclude that she is well designed? She is designed in such a way that she is powerful. Powerful does not necessarily equate to well-designed. How is she well-costed? Which 3 cost characters are equal to her and which do you consider stronger?

The Nedliness of the card, while nice, is ultimately meaningless. In MtG, Wrath of God would be Nedly if it immediately killed your opponent and you won, but that would be terrible for the game. The first goal should be a good, balanced card. Nedliness is a nice bonus, but completely irrelevant to whether or not a card increases the fun of the mechanical gameplay itself. A bad card is bad, no matter how Nedly it is. If this were some random character, not Margaery, would people feel she were a well-balanced card or overtuned? I have a feeling some people let her being slightly overtuned slide because she is both a champion card and a huge, beloved character in the series.

Yes this game is full of powerful effects. No one is arguing that. That does not make them good for the game. Adding more of those effects does not inherently make the game better.

TL:DR - Jerk less, please.

~I don't see "When you kneel Margaery Tyrell, win the game" written on her text box.

Are all kneel effects NPE and bad design? Are all icon-stripping effects bad design? What about Red Vengeance or Lethal Counterattack? 

You have to combo cards with her to give her deadly, or put in another character into the challenge with deadly, and your opponent's character can't have deadly, for it to be slightly NPE. Even then, you can always throw a weenie in and kill it to deadly. Other wise, it's not even as good sometimes as a kneel effect because with kneel at least you might get unopposed power. With her it will always be opposed. This is not remotely OP or NPE.

And yeah, she's very Nedly, too. She's really good at manipulating people without them seeming to be manipulated; and she's better when other women are involved (like Cersei).






© 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