Saving characters from being killed...

[Ser Folly 27]

So in our game we had a controversy:

Robert Baratheon has Lightbringer (saving him from being killed by kneeling it)

Lannister attacks Baratheon with a lot more strength than necessary in a military challenge, killing one Baratheon character.

Can Baratheon player choose Robert and then just kneel lightbringer? That would mean at least two military challenges must be successful in one round to kill any Baratheon character, that seems a bit weird.

 

And by the way how does Mellissandre from ashai from the core rules work?

 

I'd be very grateful for help!

[Darksbane 82]

Ser Folly said:

So in our game we had a controversy:

Robert Baratheon has Lightbringer (saving him from being killed by kneeling it)

Lannister attacks Baratheon with a lot more strength than necessary in a military challenge, killing one Baratheon character.

Can Baratheon player choose Robert and then just kneel lightbringer? That would mean at least two military challenges must be successful in one round to kill any Baratheon character, that seems a bit weird.

Yes that is how it works, 2 claim plots and out of challenge kill effects are the answer to this.

Ser Folly said:

And by the way how does Mellissandre from ashai from the core rules work?

How do you mean? Her Game text :

While Melisandre is standing, Asshai characters get +1 STR.

Power on opponents' characters does not count towards their total power.

What part are you having trouble with?

[ktom 598]

Ser Folly said:

Can Baratheon player choose Robert and then just kneel lightbringer? That would mean at least two military challenges must be successful in one round to kill any Baratheon character, that seems a bit weird.

Why does that seem weird? They still win the challenge. They still get all the privileges of winning the challenge. You have just mitigated your losses. 

 

Ser Folly said:

And by the way how does Mellissandre from ashai from the core rules work?

When she is standing, Asshai characters (including those controlled by your opponent, and including herself) get +1 STR. Of course, if you attack or defend with her, she is no longer standing, so she loses the +1 bonus when she is participating in the challenge. (You always look at the character's STR at the time of resolution.)

And as long as she is in play, your opponents characters can continue to claim power for Renown, card effects, etc., but when you look to see how much total power they have, you ignore power on their characters.

[Ser Folly 27]

Thanks both of you,

 

@ ktom

first: I 'weird' means it seems quite powerful (especially in a joust)

second: yesterday we confused power with strength ;-) beeing German and late in the evening I think that may be excused.

 

So far we do not kneel characters after they have attacked (like for example the framework window says) but only after resolving the challenge. Now I see that I will have to enforce that in future games, thanks for that valuable insight 

[Kordovan 0]

Darksbane said:

 

Yes that is how it works, 2 claim plots and out of challenge kill effects are the answer to this.

 

I would say anti attachment cards is actually the quickest and the best way to get rid of that situation, right?

[ktom 598]

Kordovan said:

I would say anti attachment cards is actually the quickest and the best way to get rid of that situation, right?

Yes and no. Depends on the deck. The usual philosophy is "why gun for the attachment to kill the character when you can just kill the character - getting rid of both?" Also, many people struggle with the place anti-attachment cards should have in their decks. They tend to have limited use against decks with little to no attachment use. On the other hand, direct kill effects tend to be useful whether you need to kill a character with Lightbringer a second time or not.

Do you see enough attachments in general within your meta that you want to use specific anti-attachment cards? On the other hand, do you see enough of certain individual attachments that you want to build general anti-attachment cards into your deck? Or, do you prefer going all-out on general kill effects, letting the attachments "take care of themselves"?

Both strategies are completely viable and good choices, depending primarily on the player. So it's kind of a strategy, deckbuilding and playstyle choice. In my humble opinion, anyway.

[Darksbane 82]

Kordovan said:

 

I would say anti attachment cards is actually the quickest and the best way to get rid of that situation, right?

Attachment control is extremely lacking for all houses other than Targ. Outside of Targ you've got 5 cards I think which can nullify attachments like Lightbringer.

Zealous Collector (requires you to have 3 kingdom locations in play)

Deepwood Mercenary (can be fairly easily played around)

Ill Tidings (Requires a Learned or Maester character, will be much easier to play in next cycle I'd assume)

Let My Porridge Fly (requires a plot spot and a intrigue challenge won)

Frozen Solid (currently the best of any of them IMO, but House Stark Only)

 

As kotm touched on, all these require deck space and some require even more cards in your deck to make them work. This might be OK depending on the type of deck you are wanting to build but generally you will get more milage out of something that directly kills characters IMO.