Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LordofBrewtown

Ned Stuff & New Sets

Recommended Posts

 So, just picked up the first chapter pack from the maester cycle & had a couple of observations on the House themes (which I'm partial to).  

The first thing I noticed is Lucas Blackwood, with the House Tully trait.  Interesting choice for a card, I thought.  More uniques are always better - but I found the House Tully trait interesting.  I could understand it in that not every minor house can be viable, so a House Blackwood trait probably isn't viable. But then, wouldn't one of the Tully's bannermen, like Jason Mallister or Tytos Blackwood been a better choice (maybe not for a one strength character) - or they could've filled out the Tully's with either Utherdays Wayn (Sterward), Ser Desmend Grell (Maester-at-arms) or Ser Robin Ryger (captain of the guards) - any of whom would've been fine in the 1 cost/strength slot (and this would have been my preference).  Lucas Blackwood just seemed like an odd choice for a character (at least at this point)

So, not my choice; but, more uniques with minor House traits are still always appreciated (and this still makes some sense).  And it is a bit harder to come up with 'nedly' 1 strength unique characters. 

However, then I see Leyton Hightower, and with the 'House Hightower' trait, as opposed to the "House Tyrell" trait.  So, what prompts the decision to go with one minor house (to another house not represented as their own faction in the game) but not another?  Or did they just throw the House trait on Hightower because they didn't have another to give him (would making him a Lord have unbalanced him somehow)?  

Anyone else notice or have any thoughts on this, or how you'd like to see FFG handle this in the future (with Mallisters, Freys, Tarlys, Rowans, Royces, Baelish's)?  I would've liked to have seen Lucas get 2 traits, 'House Tully' and 'House Blackwood' - just for nedly purposes.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LordofBrewtown said:

 So, just picked up the first chapter pack from the maester cycle & had a couple of observations on the House themes (which I'm partial to).  

The first thing I noticed is Lucas Blackwood, with the House Tully trait.  Interesting choice for a card, I thought.  More uniques are always better - but I found the House Tully trait interesting.  I could understand it in that not every minor house can be viable, so a House Blackwood trait probably isn't viable. But then, wouldn't one of the Tully's bannermen, like Jason Mallister or Tytos Blackwood been a better choice (maybe not for a one strength character) - or they could've filled out the Tully's with either Utherdays Wayn (Sterward), Ser Desmend Grell (Maester-at-arms) or Ser Robin Ryger (captain of the guards) - any of whom would've been fine in the 1 cost/strength slot (and this would have been my preference).  Lucas Blackwood just seemed like an odd choice for a character (at least at this point)

So, not my choice; but, more uniques with minor House traits are still always appreciated (and this still makes some sense).  And it is a bit harder to come up with 'nedly' 1 strength unique characters. 

However, then I see Leyton Hightower, and with the 'House Hightower' trait, as opposed to the "House Tyrell" trait.  So, what prompts the decision to go with one minor house (to another house not represented as their own faction in the game) but not another?  Or did they just throw the House trait on Hightower because they didn't have another to give him (would making him a Lord have unbalanced him somehow)?  

Anyone else notice or have any thoughts on this, or how you'd like to see FFG handle this in the future (with Mallisters, Freys, Tarlys, Rowans, Royces, Baelish's)?  I would've liked to have seen Lucas get 2 traits, 'House Tully' and 'House Blackwood' - just for nedly purposes.  

 

I've always appreciated your eye for the Ned, LoB, and I think this probably just falls in the "It was nice to give him Tully synergy" and "Never done a character with two House X traits." That certainly would be a cool way to go... not that it really works for say lesser bannerman in other areas, like the North.  We've gotten dedicated house traits, but outside Bolton there hasn't been a lot of synergy... aside from that CCG version of the Greatjon.  I don't recall Manderlys working together in any particular fashion, though SoS was before my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Never really had a Manderly unique, even back during Westeros and SOS ( and there weren't even House X traits then)

Just curious what others would like to see out of the minor houses.  I *think* everyone likes uniques - but: 

1)  How would people prefer to see the lesser houses incorporated - especially those of the Riverlands, Reach, and Vale, since they don't have separate houses in the game?   

2)  Would people prefer to see Houses 'fleshed out'/completed before starting others, or is it OK to introduce single characters from minor houses - even if there's no synergy (with the thought that there could be later)?  What's the best order/priority for introducing unique characters in general? 

3)  Does the ability/cost/strength of the character at all affect how/when you think a unique should be introduced (would you only prefer to see certain characters with a higher strength/etc. - or do you just want a copy of Ser X, no matter what the ability)?   

4) Minor houses - how many unique characters, locations, etc. and/or non-unique cards  are needed to make a minor house playable (not necessarily competetive tourny decks, but at least fun to play/a deck that has a chance)?  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice topic.

LordofBrewtown said:

Ser Robin Ryger (captain of the guards) - any of whom would've been fine in the 1 cost/strength slot (and this would have been my preference). 

Dunno...wasn't Ryger described as a silently competent grizzled veteran type? I think he'd be understrengthed at 1. He should be on par with the Cassels, for example.

As for question #3 in your latest post, I prefer it when important characters or those described as badass are better in terms of STR/abilities. I know this gets more and more difficult as the game grows, and that the game isn't much of a simulation of the books anyway, but the Ned in me does slightly cringe when an utterly inconsequential and not particularly badass character like Ser Eldon Estermont gets such a killer card. And as a Bara player, I LOVE Ser Eldon.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping in mind that I am very drunk right  now.  I liked what I remember of the house clegane stuff from the ccg.  It all kind of has similar effeats but didn't require any actual combo if you didn''t want to tie the threads together. 

 

Whst really worries me is that you probably came up with all those examples offf thetop of your head without any research, frar the LOB he gives a hell of a hug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How many people remember when Dagmar Cleftjaw was released in House of Talons with the Captain trait? And since then we're had a handful of cards with the captain trait, and no card that works off that trait in anyway. Back then, people were more upset that we were seeing traits that were essentially flavor and had nothing to do with game play. We may never know if Captain was meant to have some future design implication, but it has never come up. Also, look at Old Nan. What purpose does making her a Storyteller serve in game play?

Giving Lukas Blackwood the House Tully tait creates instant synergy with the current Tully theme, and is nedly in the effect that the Blackwoods are bannermen to the Tullys. It slots into a game effect and help make the Tully theme stronger. Sure, they could have given him House Blackwood (since we've had House Umber, House Hightower, House Quorgyle(?) and several other houses that have no in-game synergy), but I'd rather see him tied into an existing trait instead of getting a flavor-only trait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...good topic. 

I think we got 'Hightower' due to this cycle being about Maesters.  While that house is equally important as the other smaller houses, maybe it will actually translate into game play at some point considering one of the major character traits is associated with a house - you don't see that a ton. 

Otherwise, I really don't have a problem shoehorning minor houses with mid-majors to give more synergy (as long as it is accurate).  We probably won't get a House Braken sub-theme et. al. 

I am not a fan of a huge amount of text, so not sure if I am on-board with two different house designations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...