Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
kr4ng

Request: Young Griff Errata

17 posts in this topic

I was wondering if any else out there besides me wants to get young griff errata'd so that you don't actually have to stand a character before bringing another card out of shadows?

I just think he would be more playable in certain types of city of shadows decks if this were the case.  

He is still ok either way, but I think it would be cool/nice if the next FAQ errata'd this card back to what I believe was the true intent of the card's designer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After Young Griff comes out of Shadows, stand ANY number of characters you control.

 

Bolded the important bit. Im pretty sure you can use 0 for any number of characters?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah you'd think that is how it should work would't you. 

But apparently it doesn't.  You have to actually stand something to bring another card out of shadows.  

What I don't understand is, why can't you choose to stand a character already standing, just like in cyvasse you can choose and kneel a character that is already kneeling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, if you are <able> to kneel a character with intrigue, you can still kneel one that is already kneeling even though I could actually accomplish the kneeling of a character.  So in effect players can ignore the if able on cyvasse, because they are able to do it, but can still kneel a character already kneeling.

if able in this argument doesn't really matter. but maybe I am missing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i understand that text before then has to resolve before you can do the text after the then.

Surely if you choose 0 as the any number of characters the text before the then has been resolved  correctly because "Did any (0 in this case) characters stand?" Well yes any (0) characters stood so move on to after the then part.

As i chose 0 for any number then it makes the above statement true/yes right, if not im really confused and think that either any number needs be > 0 or um something.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totalgit said:

Surely if you choose 0 as the any number of characters the text before the then has been resolved  correctly because "Did any (0 in this case) characters stand?" Well yes any (0) characters stood so move on to after the then part.

As i chose 0 for any number then it makes the above statement true/yes right, if not im really confused and think that either any number needs be > 0 or um something.

That's how I'd read it, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dcdennis said:

As ktom says in the thread you're linking to, 0 *is* included in "any number", but that's not the point. The point is that, to quote the FAQ, "If a card uses the word "then," then the preceding effect must have been resolved successfully for the subsequent dependent effect to be resolved." A standing effect cannot resolve successfully if no card is going from a kneeling to a standing position. Easy as that.

Also, the "if able" on Game of Cyvasse has nothing to do with this. If it wasn't there you could only play Game of Cyvasse if all players control at least one character with an INT icon. The "if able" gets around that. It has no bearing on the standing/kneeling situation.

You can choose a kneeling character for Game of Cyvasse, but since no actual kneeling happened (no character went from a standing to a kneeling position), you can't win the Game of Cyvasse.

Young Griff is a bit different, because there is no target (no word "choose") but the principle is the same. Technically, 0 is included in "any number", but if no card goes from a kneeling to a standing position, the pre-Then part of the effect is not successful, and the post-Then part doesn't happen.

As for the calls for an erratum - really? A 3-for-3 tricon with stealth who can stand your Street Waifs, Maesters and Lanni Kneel victims, and it's not good enough for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ratatoskr said:

As for the calls for an erratum - really? A 3-for-3 tricon with stealth who can stand your Street Waifs, Maesters and Lanni Kneel victims, and it's not good enough for you?

So you will not be signing my petition to errata Meera to read "if Meera Reed would be killed or discarded from play, she goes into Shadows instead," I assume?

 

As for Young Griff, ktom's explanation makes sense, but it does irk me a little as one of those cases where a card invites you to think of having a certain intention behind the card effect that is not fulfilled by its text. Certainly, it's not exactly a deal breaker, but it does diminish the flavor of the card, imho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saturnine said:

So you will not be signing my petition to errata Meera to read "if Meera Reed would be killed or discarded from play, she goes into Shadows instead," I assume?

While you're at it fixing Meera, give her Deadly, make her STR 5 and add some power grab effect. Something like "claim 1 power for your house for every card blanked" or something. Might make her borderline playable, although I'm not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you think errata is unecessary--and you may be right--I was only requesting it because in city of shadows decks that are not targ decks (i.e., don't have street waifs, or something else you can easily kneel in the marshalling phase), pulling young griff out in the challenge phase just isn't as good--and may be too pricey.

I know in targ decks you can get things in knelt, but without the use of flea bottom (which you would only run 1 of anyways and 1 young griff), a lot of other builds don't have the option.  Sure you could bring him out in the dominance phase and stand a dude and then bring out another shadows card, but that just invites a fat valar oppurtunity. 

tl;dr - He should be errata'd, it will make him more fun, and he still won't be as overpowered as other shadows cards such as a certain 2 str mil/int bicon in house stark.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you either trust FFG's R&D or you don't. Because if we assume that they did a good job and card does what they wanted it to do (so that you need to have at least one knelt character to trigger), then there is no reason to errata it. Otherwise you can argue same thing (that cards will become more fun/more playable/suck less) about probably ~ 75% of the current card pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBSB12 said:

Otherwise you can argue same thing (that cards will become more fun/more playable/suck less) about probably ~ 75% of the current card pool.

That's a gross overstatement. Of course, trying to infer the designer's intent is a tricky proposition. However, I think most people can agree that on over 99% of the cards, there is no difference between what the card does within the current rules and rulings and what you intuitively think it does. There is precedent for cards that have been errata'd that subsequently worked more like many people's intuitive understanding of how the card was meant to work when it was first released, but didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the sheer stat efficiancy of this card pretty much serves as a good indicator that this is in fact how the card is meant to be played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Penfold said:

But the sheer stat efficiancy of this card pretty much serves as a good indicator that this is in fact how the card is meant to be played.

Well, I guess you of all people would know best.  /thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0