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!
* * * * -

Horn of Gondor


Horn of Gondor
Type: Attachment Sphere: Tactics
Cost: 1
Item. Artifact.
Attach to a hero. Restricted.
Response: After a character leaves play, add 1 resource to attached hero's pool.

"Slow should you be to wind that horn again, Boromir," said Elrond, "until you stand once more on the borders of your land, and dire need is on you." - The Fellowship of the Ring
Set: Core Number: 42
Quantity: 1
Illustrator: Mark Winters


15 Comments

It shines in a deck built around Prince Imrahil (AJtR), but gets stronger with more players anyway.
Can help with adding a few resource tokens, but pales in comparison to grossly powerful Steward of Gondor (which should have the restricted keyword rather than the Horn). I like that you're rewarded when your guys start dying (or being discarded) which can help you turn things around.

sirprim is right about mulitplayer but I still use it in solo. I only use the Horn in a deck if I'm not pairing Tactics with Leadership, and even then not all the time. A solid 4 out of 5

FAQ 1.8: Should read:

“Response: After a character is destroyed, add 1 resource to attached hero’s pool.”

    • JonofPDX and fourthdb like this

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?

    • JonofPDX likes this
Photo
Nerdmeister
Feb 03 2016 11:29 AM

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.

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.

    • JonofPDX likes this

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…

    • slothgodfather likes this
Photo
Nerdmeister
Feb 04 2016 08:07 AM

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...

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.

Photo
Nerdmeister
Feb 04 2016 10:37 AM

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™

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.

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). 

Photo
slothgodfather
Feb 04 2016 06:50 PM

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?

    • JonofPDX likes this
Photo
LoneElfRanger
Feb 04 2016 11:18 PM
The best thing to do would have make it "enters the discard pile from play"; this way you're not over-nerfing.
Photo
Nerdmeister
Feb 05 2016 09:30 AM

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

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


© 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.