Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Lord of the Rings LCG


Search for Cards
Name:
Order By:
More Search Options
Trait:
Text:
Set:

Encounter Set:
Unique:
Deck:
Type:
Sphere:



Restricted:
Cost:
Willpower - Threat:
Attack:
Defense:
Hit - Quest Points:
Hide Search Options
Recent Card Discussion
Mithlond Sea-watcher
-----

Today, 02:31 AM by rmunn

Another possible combination with Lindon Navigator: Lindon Navigator quests and is discarded, then at the start of the Combat round before enemies' attacks are resolved, Mithlond Sea-Watcher fires off a Skyward Volley.

Mithlond Sea-watcher
-----

Today, 02:25 AM by rmunn

Combines well with the Lindon Navigator. Resolve the quest, choose to discard the Navigator, and now the Mithlond Sea-Watcher has Ranged and 3 Attack. "Discard an attachment" shadow cards can spoil this plan, though.

Grappling Hook
-----

Today, 02:22 AM by rmunn

One interesting thing to note is that Grappling Hook is not restricted. So it could be attached on, say, Vassal of the Windlord. This is ridiculously hilarious from a theme standpoint (I picture an eagle carrying a rope in his claws, the grappling hook trailing across the ground), but powerful from a mechanics standpoint. It would allow the Vassal to quest for 3 even on a non-battle quest, and still be available on a later turn to make an attack. (Or even on this turn if Narya readies him).

Anchor Watch
-----

Today, 01:54 AM by joezim007
It sounds like you're using a single card to defend multiple enemies, but that's incorrect. This card allows you to declare multiple exhausted characters as defenders against a single attack... So it's kinda like Stand Together, except that it gives you restrictions on the number of defenders you can declare, and those defenders should already be exhausted. So it accounts for less pseudo reading, but it allows you to attack defense stats up to build a nice walk after a while. In general, though, I agree is not generally worthwhile, cuz it's halfway between reading and Stand Together and nobody plays Stand Together and you must likely won't get to play it with two copies in your deck, so it's not cost effective reading either.
Anchor Watch
-----

Today, 01:31 AM by JonofPDX

Color me underwhelmed.

 

Let’s look at the math.

 

This is essentially an action-specific readying effect in Leadership so the first time it’s used it should look something like this: For 2 Leadership resources (which is like, what, 1.5 non-Leadership resources?) you are essentially standing up a character and immediately dropping them back down to defend an attack. The second time you play it, you are doing that twice for that 2 resources, which is a lot better. And the third you could trigger a fantastic 3 defenses for 2 resources. That adds up to about 1 resources per defense if you can play out all three cards.

 

And that’s actually a pretty good return on investment. Not counting shadow effects you are talking about the same 1:1 payout as Feint (and remember, Leadership resources are cheaper)—but there are a whole lot of caveats here.

 

First of all, you have to have enemies attacking you. Which, duh, but it’s worth noting. Remember, this is allowing you to defend with a character you’ve already dropped. Meaning that if it’s a dedicated defender (like a Defender of Ramas, Beregond or Winged Guardian) you have probably already defended an attack from somewhere. And if you’re using this on a non-defender…well, then you are probably taking some damage on characters. Damage that will add up. And that’s the first time you’re using this effect. The second time it’s triggering twice…meaning that for it to be efficient you (yes—you as it only works for your characters and enemies attacking you) have to be taking an attack from 2-3 enemies that turn. And the third time you have to be taking 3-4 attacks. And you have to have a character still alive (and in play as you will have had to pay a Tactics resource after each defense to pull this off with Winged Guardian—ditto with a card if you’re running Watcher of the Bruinin) to take all these attacks if you aren’t using a big defender (though you can spread it out as it allows you to pick different targets).

 

And for every available defense you either can’t or choose not to take this card becomes more and more inefficient.

 

All that being said—it does have some uses I can see.

 

Certain Tactics/Leadership decks designed to draw all or most of the enemies in a multiplayer game will love this card as it will let them run more offensive cards and trust that a few core, strong defenders can hold the line (Beregond, Erkenbrandt, Defender of Ramas, etc.).

 

Ditto with Dunedain that want to engage as many enemies as possible.

 

Setups dependant on Sentinel characters should also be helped as the Sentinel can drop to defend across the table before using Anchor Watch to defend on their side (though it’s a real bummer that this doesn’t allow you to use a single Sentinel defender to defend enemies attacking all players).

 

Dori’s made a little better since he can either drop to buff a character taking multiple attacks somewhere else at the table or buff someone else for their single defense and still be the target for the multiple defense.

 

And Noldor-discard obviously likes the card generally. Watcher of the Bruinin could ditch a copy or two to power multiple defenses on its own while powering Anchor Watch up. Protector of Lorien could potentially buff a characters defense (by discarding Anchor Watch) while also making that character more able to survive the multiple attacks. And of course there are a plethora of new and beneficial ways to discard cards in that deck-type. But finding a Leadership Hero to worth playing in that kind of deck may be difficult as the strategy is geared towards Spirit and Lore (Narya and Vilya tricks not withstanding). And a lot of Noldor discard decks will want to play Hero Arwen, meaning you wont be able to count on Ally Arwens extra defense each round to pad a character for multiple defenses.

 

Blah—long post is long. TL;DR: card's not worth a slot from what I can tell. Would love to be proven wrong though. 

Squire of the Citadel
*****

Yesterday, 10:42 PM by JonofPDX

Lol—dark as it is I’ve always pictured Prince Imrahil taking the broken remains of some young, idealistic squire back to his parents and demanding a refund.

 

…yes, I know I have problems. 

Squire of the Citadel
*****

Yesterday, 04:09 PM by slothgodfather

Nope.  That squire has resources in his pocketes and we are going to loot them after they are killed.  Jokes aside, I would agree with Istari's interpretation of the theme. 

Squire of the Citadel
*****

Feb 08 2016 08:14 PM by Istari97

I know I am many years late to this conversation, but I am pretty sure the theme of this card is that the Squire is sent away to bring supplies to his hero, which is why the effect triggers when the Squire leaves play and not when its "destroyed." I picture it as a young teen waiting for the call to bring supplies, and then dashing off to help when called upon.

 

Also, if it helps, you can imagine the squire running away in fear to find his hero when confronted by an enemy instead of being killed lol.

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 05 2016 09:30 AM by Nerdmeister

The scout actually doesn't leave after entering (and Errand-rider moves resources)

Quite right you are; I was thinking about Escort from Edoras

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 11:18 PM by LoneElfRanger
The best thing to do would have make it "enters the discard pile from play"; this way you're not over-nerfing.
Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 06:50 PM by slothgodfather

If they simply put a limit on it, instead of changing the way it functions, then it wouldn't be that big of a deal.  I agree with Jon that this change hurts a lot of decks that were utilizing this as a resource generator and not abusing this as a broken combo.  A similar thing could be said for the Love of Tales errata, but even without the errata the card was a coaster for me but since it could be used in a broken combo they "fixed" it.   Again, imposing limits to this card is the best way to handle it.   (Yes, I get that the new change to HoG is essentially "imposing limits" but I mean limits to how often it can trigger, not changing what triggers it.)

 

I honestly only tend to use HoG in a pure tactics deck and now it doesn't even pair well with several "staple" cards such as Westfold Outriders (a personal favorite), the Vassal of the Windlord or Winged Guardian eagles.  Especially in a smaller card pool, HoG is the only chance Tactics players have of getting resources.  And in the current card pool there are still only two cards that generates them a resource (Mablung being the second).   This change also hurts rohan decks - which I've build several of and tend to be under performers anyways.  Rohan characters are just not strong enough on their own and take way to much "work" to make better, compared to other traits such as Silvan, Dwarves and even Dunedain - and this change hurts them indirectly (since they are mostly spirit anyways).

 

Coming from AGoT LCG and their recent reboot, it still baffles me why FFG doesn't just implement a hard rule of "limit 3 times per round" on everything unless the card effect says otherwise - limit per phase, etc.  This would counter every "broken" "infinite" combo in their games without having to errata a card to correct for a combo that comes out.  I suppose they don't want to pigeon-hole themselves into a corner, but it seems like the end result is the same.  They have to errata a card that allows for an infinite/broken combo to be harder to trigger or imposes actual use limits.   Why not just start with the limits in place already?

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 05:43 PM by JonofPDX

Not a bad call at all. There is still (however underused) a supported tournament side to the game. There is also the, for me at least, inherent desire to mirror ones rate of success against that of others; most noticably through the QuestLog, making it necessary for those who do so to follow the same rules of play in order to make it comparable. And not all of us who try to make good-scoring decks to compare with do it from a perspective of having to break the cards; thus putting those people at a disadvantage when comparing against those who "just follow the rules".

And speaking of SoG I think that should have been addressed as well but putting that aside I wonder why one OP card makes it ok to not errata another OP...

 

That is actually a really good point and honestly one I haven’t heard anyone mention.

 

I do not play this for the tournament setting. I don’t care to measure my progress against anyone else’s. I approach this game less like the other LCGs and more like a coop adventure game (which I think is how it’s presented from the Core box and all marketing outside of tournament kits).

 

And if I did care? Then most player-created resources to track progress include the type of deck used because that is a huge variable (there’s a thread that was started just a couple days ago on the FFG forums along just that line).

 

But ultimately you’re right. FFG does have an official (-ish, it’s very rarely acknowledged) competitive scoring system for this game. And from the standpoint of the integrity of that (terrible, in my opinion) system they have to balance the game in the same way they would one of the competitive LCGs—even if it makes the core coop experience worse (assuming you are going to play by their rules/errata). Which means specifically going after cards that can be intentionally exploited.

 

Even though that exploitation doesn’t hurt anyone. Even though the steps they take to fix it suck because they limit players to fewer and fewer viable deck-types against the very difficulty modern quests.

 

But you’re right—if they are going to continue saying that the scoring system is “official” then they have to do this. I just wish that a scoring system so few use wasn’t negatively impacting the game in general (and it is reducing the choice of even non-OP viable decks). 

 

 

 

The scout actually doesn't leave after entering (and Errand-rider moves resources), only when he fulfills his destiny to chump block :P

 

I see quite a theme for Born Aloft - "The eagles are coming, hope is near! Blow the horn™!" It is a bit harder with Gandalf's usual mischief  - "Stand and fight to the last men! I am going to... help the west wall! Rally your men!". Yet how would you explain the effect with Caldara is beoynd me - "Here, take my place! Blow this horn and good luck!" ;)

 

I agree though that now the Horn is a lot more thematic - and quite a bit worse as well.

 

As for theme, it should really be an exhaust ability. Something along the lines of:

 

Attach to a Hero. Action: exhaust Horn of Gondor to do something cool. If Horn of Gondor was attached to a Gondor Hero do something cooler. If Horn of Gondor was attached to Boromir do something coolist (limit once per whatever). 

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 01:32 PM by Valdemart

The scout actually doesn't leave after entering (and Errand-rider moves resources), only when he fulfills his destiny to chump block :P

 

I see quite a theme for Born Aloft - "The eagles are coming, hope is near! Blow the horn™!" It is a bit harder with Gandalf's usual mischief  - "Stand and fight to the last men! I am going to... help the west wall! Rally your men!". Yet how would you explain the effect with Caldara is beoynd me - "Here, take my place! Blow this horn and good luck!" ;)

 

I agree though that now the Horn is a lot more thematic - and quite a bit worse as well.

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 10:37 AM by Nerdmeister

I´m not sure I would say that Blowing the Horn™ because a scout surveys a stream of water (errand rider helps during quest) or an ally is carried to safety (born aloft) is thematic :P

It is supposed to be a rallying cry during combat: "Gather here and we will make our stand together", to which a destroyed (slain) friend is an event grim enough to necessitate Blowing the Horn™

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 09:02 AM by Valdemart

And speaking of SoG I think that should have been addressed as well but putting that aside I wonder why one OP card makes it ok to not errata another OP...

 

Another bothersome thing - how many more cards will face errata. Anyway, I completely understand your point on the comparability but somehow I still think most people looked into the game for the adventure and didn't even thought about tournaments or competitiveness - at least I didn't. There are plenty of other good LCGs with strong theme to them that are ideal for a tournament setting ( I own a decent chunk of Netrunner and a friend of mine has almost everything of War 40k) so marketing wise it was my last thought.

 

Now don't get me wrong - there are cards that initially were flawed. Will of the West comes to mind and the errata there is not just needed - it should have been the design from day 1. The problem here is that HoG's primary use now will be when you intend to chump block like crazy, which is fine when done once or twice. But to actually net some kind of profit or resource acceleration you have to sacrifice at least 3 characters, for which you paid at least the resources you will get. The only real reason to do so is if the scenario is by itself a massacre and allies will be killed left and right.

 

A better correction would have been to actually put a limit of once per round, which reduces the net gain to about 5 or 6 resources on average. That's 3-4 rounds of SoG, seems fair and is actually more thematic than blowing the horn 5 times per battle - you have to breathe there.

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 04 2016 08:07 AM by Nerdmeister

Not a bad call at all. There is still (however underused) a supported tournament side to the game. There is also the, for me at least, inherent desire to mirror ones rate of success against that of others; most noticably through the QuestLog, making it necessary for those who do so to follow the same rules of play in order to make it comparable. And not all of us who try to make good-scoring decks to compare with do it from a perspective of having to break the cards; thus putting those people at a disadvantage when comparing against those who "just follow the rules".

And speaking of SoG I think that should have been addressed as well but putting that aside I wonder why one OP card makes it ok to not errata another OP...

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 03 2016 08:59 PM by JonofPDX

This simply should not have faced errata.

 

Horn of Gondor wasn’t broken. It wasn’t OP in 99% of decks. On average, it was solid-to-good resource acceleration. In a deck built to work with it that maybe graduates to “very strong”. But it was never anywhere near OP—I mean, this is a game where we have Steward of Gondor!

 

It could be abused to OP levels through very intentional deck manipulation. But if your design philosophy is to intentionally break the resource curve of the game so that you can play out your entire deck…I don’t know why FFG cares. Clearly at that point you are waving any responsibility on FFG’s part to balance Quests based on your OP, crazy exploit deck. So why punish the vast majority of players who don’t build and play these type of exploit decks?

 

Bad call, FFG…

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 03 2016 02:49 PM by Valdemart

I see. Still it strikes me as a bad design when you make a new card that will inevitably lead to forced changes on already printed cards.

 

PS: Once Rohan decks were considered subpar and when they finally get a kick forward, the designers try to choke them back. No love for Rohan, only discard.

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 03 2016 11:29 AM by Nerdmeister

Rohan discard shennanigans plus Gamling. Even if you discard them and have to pay for them again they still put you ahead.

Eagles of Misty Mountains buff-up scheme.

Two obvious examples of being rewarded even more for doing what you intended to do anyway.

For less obvious example there is the event The Tree People to just simply switch around allies or Feigned Voices.

Also if you combo it with 3 x errand-rider or parting gifts then it is not just one player any longer.

 

This errata simply takes alot of opportunity to manipulate HoG for resources away from the players; which I don´t think is a bad idea.

Horn of Gondor
****-

Feb 03 2016 09:46 AM by Valdemart

I am not convinced on the Errata on this card - barring Sneak Attack all effects that remove a character you have somehow paid for had the drawback that you are actually quite behind on resources for using them. Indeed if all 4 players build around this idea the player with the horn will amass brutal amount of resources. Still, it is only 1 player.

 

Maybe this change is due to the many return effects that Sylvan-related effects added to the game. Thoughts?



© 2011 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc., all rights reserved. No part of this product may be reproduced without specific permission. Middle-earth, The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and the characters, items, events and places therein are trademarks or registered trademarks of The Saul Zaentz Company d/b/a Middle-earth Enterprises. Fantasy Flight Games, Fantasy Flight Supply, and the FFG logo are trademarks of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved to their respective owners.