Jump to content

Ratatoskr

Members
  • Content Count

    1,592
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from Tetsubo517 in What should I do with all my 1st edition LCG cards when 2nd comes out?   
    I find this a tad unfair. When they switched from the CCG to the LCG, they did keep the old backs, and cards were usable in a Legacy format (that hardly anybody ever played btw).
     
    Now that they announced that 2nd edition rules and timing would change sufficiently to render the two editions incompatible, I don't think they should be blamed for introducing new card backs. In fact, I think they *should* introduce those, to avoid confusion.
     
    For people who'd like to try to establish a unified card pool despite the mechanical differences, there's always opaque sleeves.
  2. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Arthen in The Quill & Tankard Regulars return! - Article series on rules and timing issues   
    Just to agree, thank you for the work in breaking down the game!  I'm thrilled to be on the ground floor for the launch and look forward to future issues as this thing finally gets released.
  3. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from Tear44 in The Quill & Tankard Regulars return! - Article series on rules and timing issues   
    I'm a tad late posting this, admittedly, but Quill & Tankard Regulars, our article series on rules and timing issues, has made the switch to 2nd edition. The first three issues are already up, and issue 4 should follow shortly.
    These four issues offer a preview on 2.0 rules and what the most important changes are compared to 1.0, accompanied by exclusive spoilers. Well, they were at the time.
    Enjoy!
    Quill & Tankard Regulars - Out with the Old, in with the... Old?
    Issue 1: Seen in Flames - Reactions and Challenge Resolution
    Issue 2: Seen in Flames - Attachments, Duplicates and Setup
    Issue 3: Seen in Flames - Phase Structure
     
    Issue 4: Seen in Flames - Interrupts, Cancels and Saves
    I will try and update this thread when new issues are released. Links to all issues can also be found here. If you're looking for the first series, that covered AGoT LCG 1st edition, you'll find links to all issues here.
  4. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Raven1015 in The Quill & Tankard Regulars return! - Article series on rules and timing issues   
    Super helpful in wrapping my head around the changes between 1.0 and 2.0.
  5. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Nick Demus in The Quill & Tankard Regulars return! - Article series on rules and timing issues   
    Endless thanks for this. Well done!
  6. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from Raven1015 in The Quill & Tankard Regulars return! - Article series on rules and timing issues   
    I'm a tad late posting this, admittedly, but Quill & Tankard Regulars, our article series on rules and timing issues, has made the switch to 2nd edition. The first three issues are already up, and issue 4 should follow shortly.
    These four issues offer a preview on 2.0 rules and what the most important changes are compared to 1.0, accompanied by exclusive spoilers. Well, they were at the time.
    Enjoy!
    Quill & Tankard Regulars - Out with the Old, in with the... Old?
    Issue 1: Seen in Flames - Reactions and Challenge Resolution
    Issue 2: Seen in Flames - Attachments, Duplicates and Setup
    Issue 3: Seen in Flames - Phase Structure
     
    Issue 4: Seen in Flames - Interrupts, Cancels and Saves
    I will try and update this thread when new issues are released. Links to all issues can also be found here. If you're looking for the first series, that covered AGoT LCG 1st edition, you'll find links to all issues here.
  7. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from alexbobspoons in What should I do with all my 1st edition LCG cards when 2nd comes out?   
    I find this a tad unfair. When they switched from the CCG to the LCG, they did keep the old backs, and cards were usable in a Legacy format (that hardly anybody ever played btw).
     
    Now that they announced that 2nd edition rules and timing would change sufficiently to render the two editions incompatible, I don't think they should be blamed for introducing new card backs. In fact, I think they *should* introduce those, to avoid confusion.
     
    For people who'd like to try to establish a unified card pool despite the mechanical differences, there's always opaque sleeves.
  8. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from MarthWMaster in The upsides of getting a second chance   
    I'm very much against reducing the deck size for tournament decks. If anything, I'd be for *increasing* it. I'd like to see more variance, both in deckbuilding and in game play.
     
    With a smaller tournament deck size, the number of cards that will see actual play will be even smaller, and the number of those never leaving the binder will be even bigger. The effect that we'll see ever the same decks and can reliably predict the vast majority of cards in them will be more pronounced.
     
    In game play, smaller decks will have a bigger focus on pattern execution. They will be more like well oiled machines. Games will be more one-sided and less swingy, and there will be more NPE.
    In short, smaller decks will reward the better deck builder, bigger decks will reward the better player. Bigger decks are also more luck dependent, but I can live with that.
     
    The bigger deck size is the reason why so many people say DWDW decks are so much fun.
     
    Personally, I'd hate a min deck size of 50. I'd love a general 70 or 75 card min deck size, but that doesn't seem likely. If I can't get that, please leave it at 60.
     
    If one CS doesn't provide enough cards for several tournament legal decks, that's not a problem. Never was much of an issue with the 1ed CS.
  9. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Grimwalker in If you are making the Core set cards not 3x...   
    So now they're going to the expense and trouble of creating, shipping, and asking retailers to stock an entire other product whose sole purpose is to reduce sales of the central product?
    Never going to happen. Never have done for any of six LCGs.
  10. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from TwiceBorn in The New Houses!   
    They're welcome to that.
    Maybe I should just get my head out of my ass. It's a card game. It is very much abstracted by nature. In fact, I always looked down a bit at players who tried to build thematic decks in a game where a bird could don golden plate mail and then go visit the brothel. But the faction composition is so fundamental, and Arryn would make so much more sense than NW, that I'd really be a put down if they went NW. I guess it would make sense in a way, there's quite little Arryn and a ton of NW in the stupid TV series, so I guess I could understand if they decided to go for bigger mass appeal and just live with the grumbling of a few nerds. But I still hope they'd treat the source material with respect.
  11. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Grimwalker in Much hinted at in 2C1C podcast interview   
    2C1C interviewed Michael Horvath at Worlds, who dropped a lot of very interesting hints.
     
    We can reasonably expect:
     
    Conquest sized box. No Melee Figurines Split Rulebook Shadows may not be re-implemented. (it was mentioned in the same breath as Influence on things that would be difficult to phase out through rotation alone) Deck Size remains 60 Constructing a full sized mono-faction deck will not be possible with one core set. House Card front: House Lannister. House Card back: Agenda - Support of House Lannister Splashing OOF without the agenda will not be allowed.  No mention of any matchups excluded from cross-faction alliances. (no "alliance wheel.") Rules refer to Factions, not Houses. "For reasons."  current playtest version retains all seven phases. the identities of the eight factions will be released before Gen Con.  
    Also, discussing might-have-beens, rotation rather than reboot would have entailed a new Core Set. But the pains of losing much of the card pool related to Seasons was cited as a big problem, as well as presenting a barrier to the templating and rules cleanup that they needed. Phasing out Influence or Shadows would have taken six years if they just stopped printing anything related to it.
  12. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from attrition2 in What should I do with all my 1st edition LCG cards when 2nd comes out?   
    I find this a tad unfair. When they switched from the CCG to the LCG, they did keep the old backs, and cards were usable in a Legacy format (that hardly anybody ever played btw).
     
    Now that they announced that 2nd edition rules and timing would change sufficiently to render the two editions incompatible, I don't think they should be blamed for introducing new card backs. In fact, I think they *should* introduce those, to avoid confusion.
     
    For people who'd like to try to establish a unified card pool despite the mechanical differences, there's always opaque sleeves.
  13. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from attrition2 in The upsides of getting a second chance   
    I'm very much against reducing the deck size for tournament decks. If anything, I'd be for *increasing* it. I'd like to see more variance, both in deckbuilding and in game play.
     
    With a smaller tournament deck size, the number of cards that will see actual play will be even smaller, and the number of those never leaving the binder will be even bigger. The effect that we'll see ever the same decks and can reliably predict the vast majority of cards in them will be more pronounced.
     
    In game play, smaller decks will have a bigger focus on pattern execution. They will be more like well oiled machines. Games will be more one-sided and less swingy, and there will be more NPE.
    In short, smaller decks will reward the better deck builder, bigger decks will reward the better player. Bigger decks are also more luck dependent, but I can live with that.
     
    The bigger deck size is the reason why so many people say DWDW decks are so much fun.
     
    Personally, I'd hate a min deck size of 50. I'd love a general 70 or 75 card min deck size, but that doesn't seem likely. If I can't get that, please leave it at 60.
     
    If one CS doesn't provide enough cards for several tournament legal decks, that's not a problem. Never was much of an issue with the 1ed CS.
  14. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to MarthWMaster in House Alliances?   
    The books take place over a very brief span of time in the context of the Seven Kingdoms' history. The events which would preclude House X from allying with House Y have occurred in the last couple of decades at the most. By contrast, the Night's Watch has historically never tried to take part in the struggles between houses, choosing instead to serve the Realm as a whole. So it's more easy to swallow, say, the alternate version of history in which Stark and Lannister join forces, for example, than for the Night's Watch to ally with either against the other.
  15. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to -Istaril in Thinking Outside the Box: On Card Game Graphic Layouts   
    While I certainly hope we won't need borders and can get full-bleed art (in the sense that it runs to the edge of the card), I actually disagree with the OP. I'd like cards to have a recognizable template that clearly identifies card-type, a text box that doesn't change size as a function of the text included, that *has* flavour text. 

    Sure, that Wyldside is pretty bad - only about 33% art and I'd love to increase that proportion, but not to the extent of using the full-art, full-bleed promos. On the whole I think Netrunner's art 'template' is very clean. Each faction uses the same space/template, with differences in colour and secondary 'pattern' to delineate factions. Lord of the Rings, a fantasy game also based on a literary work with a wealth of flavour quotes, is also a good model.

    This is in contrast with Conquest, which has considerable variation in between factions (A unit's attack is in an oval "bubble" for Eldar, a square for... ), to the point of detracting from consistency of templating.
     
  16. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from TwiceBorn in What should I do with all my 1st edition LCG cards when 2nd comes out?   
    I find this a tad unfair. When they switched from the CCG to the LCG, they did keep the old backs, and cards were usable in a Legacy format (that hardly anybody ever played btw).
     
    Now that they announced that 2nd edition rules and timing would change sufficiently to render the two editions incompatible, I don't think they should be blamed for introducing new card backs. In fact, I think they *should* introduce those, to avoid confusion.
     
    For people who'd like to try to establish a unified card pool despite the mechanical differences, there's always opaque sleeves.
  17. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from Kennon in The New Houses!   
    They're welcome to that.
    Maybe I should just get my head out of my ass. It's a card game. It is very much abstracted by nature. In fact, I always looked down a bit at players who tried to build thematic decks in a game where a bird could don golden plate mail and then go visit the brothel. But the faction composition is so fundamental, and Arryn would make so much more sense than NW, that I'd really be a put down if they went NW. I guess it would make sense in a way, there's quite little Arryn and a ton of NW in the stupid TV series, so I guess I could understand if they decided to go for bigger mass appeal and just live with the grumbling of a few nerds. But I still hope they'd treat the source material with respect.
  18. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from Kennon in The New Houses!   
    That's not Night's Watch, that's the falcon of House Arryn. Night's Watch would be super-duper unthematic. The Game of Thrones is played by the Great Houses of Westeros. It is deeply engrained in the credo and identity of the Night's Watch that it DOES NOT take part in the strifes of the realm.
    We know that Martin himself was involved in the decision what houses were playable factions in the CCG. I've heard that he made them pick Martell over Tyrell back then. I don't know if he was involved this time again, but I'm certain he'd veto the idea of making NW one of the factions.
  19. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to Vaapad in 11/29 - Red Saturday 2014 - NYC Tournament   
    Way back on Thanksgiving weekend of 2005, the NYC Meta held our first ever "Black Friday" tournament, played on the day after Thanksgiving. We have continued that tradition ever since, and this year will reach our 10th consecutive Thanksgiving weekend tournament. To my knowledge, this is the longest running continuous tournament in the history of the game (at least in the US). To celebrate, we'll have some excellent and truly unique prizes, some of which will feature the custom art partially spoiled below.
    For now, let's get some details out there:

    What: Black Friday (Red Saturday) Joust Tournament
    When: Saturday, November 29, 2014. Registration will be at 10:00, play at 10:30.
    Where: The Compleat Strategist, 11 East 33rd Street (between 5th Avenue and Madison Avenue), New York City
    Cost: $15

    If you're on Facebook, you can RSVP here: https://www.facebook.com/events/999800720046640/

    If you can't make it to Worlds and want go send off the 2014 season with a bang, come to NYC. If you are going to Worlds and want one more hurrah, come to NYC. Our Meta will also do our best to host traveling players who need a place to stay - just ask.

    And finally, here's a sneak peek at that art! As we get closer to the tournament, I'll uncover more and more of this beauty!


  20. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from alpha5099 in What should I do with all my 1st edition LCG cards when 2nd comes out?   
    I find this a tad unfair. When they switched from the CCG to the LCG, they did keep the old backs, and cards were usable in a Legacy format (that hardly anybody ever played btw).
     
    Now that they announced that 2nd edition rules and timing would change sufficiently to render the two editions incompatible, I don't think they should be blamed for introducing new card backs. In fact, I think they *should* introduce those, to avoid confusion.
     
    For people who'd like to try to establish a unified card pool despite the mechanical differences, there's always opaque sleeves.
  21. Like
    Ratatoskr got a reaction from MarthWMaster in Card Backs   
    Never!  

    Hey! "Because Ktom said so. Cf this thread from 2007. The old forum is defunct but I saved a mirror" IS a clear answer!
  22. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to jesterhawk in Welcome to the Forums for A Game of Thrones: The Card Game Second Edition   
    I was a HUGE player of the CCG. 
     
    When the LCG came out I was laid off and not able to get in.
     
    Was out in the world for a while.
     
    Now I am looking to get back into GoT:LCG but the v1.0 is daunting.
     
    SOOOOOO excited for GoT:LCGv2 (or GoT2)!!!!
     
    When can I order?
     
    Pat
  23. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to ktom in Smuggler's Cove, Swamps of the Neck, Painted Table questions   
    One of the hardest things for M:tG players to get used to in AGoT is that, because there are no LIFO (last-in-first-out) effect stacks, strategy tends to be more proactive than reactive.
     
    The questions about Stealth are a good example of the different ways of thinking between the two games. The questions asked about stealth here have more-or-less been, "Once Benjen uses stealth so I know which defender he is trying to keep out of the challenge, what can I do to negate his choice and use that character as a defender anyway?" The answer is, "Nothing" because once a choice is made in this game, it is too late (short of a Response effect that uses the word "cancel" or "save" - the only true interrupts in the game) to do anything about it.
     
    A seasoned AGoT player is instead going to say, "He just attacked with Benjen who has stealth. It would be really inconvenient for him to sealth past Ser Courtnay Penrose. What can I do to take that option away from him before he gets a chance to do it?"
     
    Essentially, the timing rules of M:tG encourage players to think reactively - ie, see what the opponent does and try to block it on the fly - while the timing rules of AGoT require players to think proactively - ie, anticipate what the opponent might to and find ways to take the choice away, or set up to mitigate the consequence.
  24. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to ktom in Just started playing and I have questions about certain cards   
    Welcome! Let us know what questions you have. We're always happy to help.
     
    Be warned, though, that some of us have been playing for a long time, and when you ask a question, we might also answer a bunch of extra questions you didn't ask or bring up card-specific exceptions that you haven't seen yet. So if there are times when we come across as a college calculus professor making algebra waaaay too complicated because we know what's ahead of you, please forgive.
     
     
    Correct. Since Robb says to choose a character, without limiting that to a "participating character" or a "kneeling character" or something like that, you can choose absolutely any character controlled by that losing player.
     
    You are also correct about claim effects coming first. As a general rule, settling claim (killing a character for military, discarding a card for intrigue, or stealing power for power) will ALWAYS happen before any "response" effect to winning/losing/resolving the challenge can be used.
     
     
    That is true. They can choose him to die for military claim, take them back into hand, play him again next round, and do it all over again. It is powerful, but it isn't as over-powered as it seems at first glance. For one, they have to keep PAYING for them, which means they are not paying for other things that get them closer to winning themselves. But yes, when playing with just the Core Set, that can get pretty annoying to play against.
     
     
    Yes. When a character says "save from being killed," they can save the character from any kill effect, even military claim. (The exception, of course, is if the kill effect specifically says "cannot be saved".)
     
     
    Yes. There is no "minimum cost" for characters, locations, etc. If you have enough reducers to lower the cost to "free," awesome!
     
     
    No. When you trigger an effect, you can only do what it written. You cannot assume variables or flexibility where there is none. So "pay 2 gold to choose and kneel a character" doesn't give you any room to increase or decrease the number of gold or the number of characters knelt. If you had two copies of the event in your hand, you could play both copies, one after the other, so that it worked out to "pay 4 to kneel 2," but you cannot arbitrarily multiply the single event card by 2.
     
     
    Yes. This is just like the question about Strong Belwas. It is strong, but again, not as overpowered as you might think at first glance. For one thing, people will pile up the kills on that one character until it is gone. For another, think some of the "discard an attachment" effects that are in the Targaryen deck. True, when playing in with just the Core set, it can be annoying, though.
  25. Like
    Ratatoskr reacted to HastAttack in Just started playing and I have questions about certain cards   
    One thing it to me a long time to get when I first started was to learn to read the text on the card
     
    It sounds obvious but there is a tendency to enhance, restrict or otherwise translate the text
×
×
  • Create New...