[Melee] Lannister, Rains of Castamere 1.0

• Versions
• 1.0

This is the update of the deck i played at "Héritiers du Nord". I made three games, then understood how Lannister has to be played in melee and design this deck. This is a "rough" deck, he does not have a lot of experience. He also stays simple, applying basic concepts.

Rule 1 : You must be able to powergrab fast Rule 2 : because everybody apply Rule 1, you need some tools to regulate the table and prevent people to finish before you.

The Agenda

Since everything is about powergrab in melee, you could wonder why i choose "The Rains of Castamere" and not The Lord of the Crossing. First of all, the bonus point of Lord of the Crossing turns out to not be significative in winning or not games. Additionally, i had no interests to use the +2 STR bonus outside of playing Support of the People, which is more easily doable in melee since players tend to kneel their boards. The drawbacks of the agenda, -1 STR and trigger three challenges thus kneel characters, is of less consequences in melee, but overall I felt like LotC was not a good agenda because he does not provide great benefits.

"The Rains of Castamere" of Castamere still allows me to play as much neutrals as I want. The drawbacks of not playing Scheme in main plotline is not important, they are more efficient in the additional one. Additionally, the drawback of winning by a 5 STR difference is much (much) more reachable in melee : players tend to underinvest in intrigue and you can deal with an opponent to trigger your agenda, especially if he benefits from it.

Benefit of playing the agenda is to obtain a toolbox reacting to game state : Power Behind the Throne allows you to easily cope with being first player, accelerate your powergrab with Tywin, make a "bonus" power challenge in attack with Cersei or Tyrion, deter opponent from attacking you by threatening him to stand a character and block. More subtily, make a crosstable move in order to block a player.

Filthy Accusations allows to make a deal with a player in order to block a third one, or simply to take responsabilities to slow one opponent that you identify as a threat.

A Game of Thrones turns out to be bad as a normal plot since players can deal between them to bypass it, while he has mediocre income and poor initiative. I want to use it not as a total table locker, but simply as a locker of a mil/pow rush player that cannot be controlled otherwise. Since you can deal to win your intrigue challenge in defense, it becomes a deal plot reacting to a particular game state. I still have to playtest it.

The idea behind Wildfire Assault is to came back from a slowest start than your opponents, or to punish a player that played his hand thanks to an excellent start and kept nothing : Wildfire should be enough to be a rude move against his hopes of victory without totally putting him out of the game and anger him. A sense of measure, always.

Varys's Riddle is a "by default" plot. In a desperate move, it could copy a Valar Morghulis, but if you're up to the point of creating such chaos, you're really desperate. Copying card advantage plots or Confiscation is not really expected, a Wildfire or Calling seems more likely, which is of poor use. Littlefinger's Meddling is not particularly interesting : Events are tools, not the basis of my strategy. The only reason to play it would be because i want to play 2-gold events, which is not the case.

I honnestly think that Wardens of the West is better : Hand size is a parameter to take into account in melee, and some players can prepare a Valar or more likly try to pass "below the radar" by keeping their cards in hand for later rush. It's a counter to these strategies. More likely, if a player appears as a threat, you can reduce his positions with a "claim 3". The fact that discard is chosen is very important : it makes the card playable : You do not angry to much your opponent by ruining his hand. It is rather an "appropriate regulation" measure. Oh, and it makes Cersei powergrab, which could be very useful for a finish, especially because in last turn you are likely to have excess gold.

Plotline

I open with Summer Harvest The wrong reasonning would be that everybody does the same, but if everybody does the same, everybody is loosing. If you're not, you are the looser since you cannot constest initiative. Since you have Tywin, you can manage easily this counterpart.

Then I play Calling the Banners in case of a failure at T1, for the high initiative and in case i need to spread my hand T2.

A Clash of Kings is the finisher.

And that's all. All the rest is circumstantial tools.

Fortified Position is the defensive plot if nobody can do something against one player, or if you're too behind in points compared to other players. It is easily playable here because you naturally have a location line-up + Support of the people. Also note you can switch it with Rains, thus you could deal initiative with another player. It is especially useful for a targeted collusion against somebody, but in a situation where you could be the only winner of the plot, expect your opponent to know that you can switch it, and thus name you first player.

Confiscation because it has a high initiative, correct gold benefits and if players play well, they should have Nightmares or Poppy inside their decks. And a Poppy can ruin you.

Summons in case your hand is terrible at T1 and you desperately need something, or if your hand is already empty T2, or if you expect a Valar and want to search for a duplicate.

Battle of Oxcross is here for no particular reason. Just high init and useful ability. If the deck was fitted to the use of a reset it would be FSoW or Valar.

The choice of the deck are simple : always a power icon, if possible, which limit the choices in Lannister. Small Council Chamber is expensive to pay and has no influence on game state. It is also a consequence of CR in term of usefulness. Thus i play it in *1 and try to tutor it with Support of the People. In backup case, there is The Iron Throne, because the contested point of dominance can actually make a difference between winning and loosing.

Why did i play Nightmares Milk of the PoppyTears of Lys ? Because of Rule 2.

Since melee V2 is very limited in term of interractions, i consider direct control is the best way to satisfy Rule 2. Nightmares is auto-include in melee. Milk of the Poppy could seems harsh because it is "definitive", but actually melee is very fast and if your opponent is a rationnal and not an emotional guys, he knows you are right about controlling him. Tears of Lys because 6 control cards are a bit unsufficient. Treachery does not convinced me, but Poppy was actually excellent : When a character was blanked, it was enough to make a drastic cut in the chances of winning for this player. Because it "removes" a leader. Thus, i added a leader "removal". Since Military and Pow are the main considerations of melee, many players plays this kind of biicon leaders. Removing at the end of the phase has his advantage : the losing player can continue is short-term plan, and winning players (the two others) will not be put in the position of exploiting a weakened position at the table, which could be the case with PttS.