Still thinking about using old sites in new site-mechanic

[Smeagollum]

Before the tournament in Amsterdam we had a discussion about experimenting using old sites in new site-mechanism.

One of the issues was Allies in combo with this system. I had a long thought about it and actually the answer is quite symbol. The allies don't work!

Why don't they work? Well it's actually in the gametext!
For instance Hobbit Farmer:
Game Text: While you can spot your site 1, this ally has the game text of that site. Fellowship: Exert this ally and spot opponent's site 1 to replace it with your site 1.

Hobbit Farmer will never work with a tt, rotk site 1 as hobbit farmer specifies it has to be site 1 and it can't be tt or rotk because those sites have their own sign. (for example: Site: 1T).
It also don't work with the new sites because there is no site 1: You can use all new sites as site 1; there's no 1 on the card, so Hobbit farner's gametext for this is invalid.

What if a site 3 is played as site 1? Well let's take an example:

Set: The Fellowship of the Ring
Twilight Cost: 0
Type: Site
Site: 3
Game Text: Sanctuary. When the fellowship moves from Council Courtyard, remove (2).
Rarity: C

This won't work either as the site specifies: 3 And hobbit Farmer says 1.

What will work is playing a site 1 on for example region 2. Hobbit Farmer spots a site 1.

Another issue about using old sites in the new site-mechanism.
Old sites with a newer version. Very simple the old site get's automaticly the same text as the newer version.

The only problem I can see in using old sites in the new mechanism is Rotk site: City Gates (7U344) in combination with Northern Ithilien (7U359). City gates will get the text of it's newer version. Still this can give a problem with Northern Ithilien (7U359). Then again it has become a lot thougher to do this, because of the different gametext on the newer version of city gates. A solution could be to say you can do Northern Ithilien gametext only once per game.

If you use old sites then you have to use all sites from the same block. So you can't combine site fotr with tt-, rotk- and standard-sites. Its either 9 sites from fotr, tt, rotk or standard.

Well maybe worth a little discussion!

[Disco Stu]

i think, it is not possible to allow every site from movie blocks for the new path system. there are just some sites that are too good to be played more than once per game (think of each site 9, if you are moving behind with pathfinders).
so each site has to be considered and adopted carefully or not at all.

Example:
Hollin
Uruk-hai are not roaming.
this needs to be reworded to
Uruk-hai are not roaming in region 2.

you see what i mean. another point is the shadow number of each site. for shadows block that number depends on the danger for the fellowship at that site. the bigger the danger, the lower the shadow number. this contradicts with the site 2, i played at the tournament in amsterdam: Dagorlad. it gave me overpowered 3 threats and a (nearly) maximum of 3 pool. (after that both players' fellowhips were completely red and had a dead companion)

the allies that correspond with certain sites don´t work at all. just imagine starting with a solo smeagol fellowship at caras galadhon and a hobbit farmer. i know, sites in your adventure deck don´t have site numbers, but once they hit the table, they have. so hobbit farmer could copy the site´s text, but could not exchange opponent´s site.
fighting allies could work, although i don´t like the free double move over the bridge of khazad-dûm to your elven team at site 6 in fellowship block.

[Smeagollum]

Disco, Thx for going  into discussion with me. Actually, we (in Amsterdam) have done playing this and actually it worked. I agree that not everything is out crystalized, but this discussion will help.

Hollin
Uruk-hai are not roaming.
this needs to be reworded to
Uruk-hai are not roaming in region 2.

Actually I think it will make it more interesting.... Why won't you leave the text as what it is. Some standard sites do the same or are worse. I don't see a problem with it.
Will bring an extra dimension to the game:) Just try it out.., maybe you will agree or not agree with me after you've tryed it.

you see what i mean. another point is the shadow number of each site. for shadows block that number depends on the danger for the fellowship at that site. the bigger the danger, the lower the shadow number. this contradicts with the site 2, i played at the tournament in amsterdam: Dagorlad. it gave me overpowered 3 threats and a (nearly) maximum of 3 pool. (after that both players' fellowhips were completely red and had a dead companion)

...uhm, you missed something in the earlier discussion..., which I forgot to mension in this topic...
The trick with the sitenumber is:
total twillight= shadownr site - fee orignal region + fee region played

For example:
 A site 9 from fotr-block with 9 shadow which will be played in region 1

9 - 6 + 0 = 3 twillight

So that will take away your argument, I think.

the allies that correspond with certain sites don´t work at all. just imagine starting with a solo smeagol fellowship at caras galadhon and a hobbit farmer. i know, sites in your adventure deck don´t have site numbers, but once they hit the table, they have. so hobbit farmer could copy the site´s text, but could not exchange opponent´s site.

Actually technacly, you are very wrong here. The text of the ally will not apply. I think it's even somewhere in the rulings! The sites will still have no sitenumbers. You only play them on the position which could be 1 to 9.

fighting allies could work, although i don´t like the free double move over the bridge of khazad-dûm to your elven team at site 6 in fellowship block.

Please specify what you exactly mean, because I don't get what you exactly mean or what you think. I can't picture a free double move here?!

regards, jw

ps.: I asked Mark to make the report and he promised again, but so far I did not receive anything from him

[legolas3333]

when me and my brother play with old sites we say they can only be played in their given region i.e. sites 1,2,3, in region 1 etc. and then sites with shadow numbers < 3 are 1, numbers <6 are 2 and < 9 are 3... if that makes sense to anyone else

[Thranduil]

Check out this link which includes a list of all the old sites updated to post-Shadows format which someone made a while back. Can't remember who though... There's some other interesting stuff on there as well like a way to play going from the Shire to Mount Doom in 27 sites. It's good and interesting stuff!

Thranduil

[Smeagollum]

Ah ye the famous lotr-mapsystem! I lost that link! I thought it was made by someone from Finland. A nice alternative

[Vroengard]

I think it is all cheating, when I play, for example ''two towers'' I play the sites, as you plaayed them ever, I ever thought that this ''adventure path'' system is complete nonsense, when you think of the reality factor... YES I go from Mount doom to rivendell, yeah, then I switch to bree and then again to orodruin, and ohh, yeah, wanna go to nurn after that ....makes no sense. It is just TOO GOOD, the ''new'' sites give too many mechanics. just use them as they are supposed to be

[Disco Stu]

@smeagollum
your calculation explains exactly, how much pool i got by dagorlad in region 1 at site 2. 9-6+0=3. in terms of the new site mechanics it is a very very dangerous site with 3 pool.

the free double move over the bridge is what you get, when you have ~4 allies at site 6. no matter how many minions are still in play during the regroup phase at site 5, you can risk the double move to site 6, where you have 3 additional archers and 4 additional fighters. free doesn´t mean, it doesn´t cost anything, it is just not risky.

and for the new site path, i am sure, sites on the site path or in the support area have numbers. otherwise you would not know, which site to liberate.

[Thranduil]

Just to clear some things up:

and for the new site path, i am sure, sites on the site path or in the support area have numbers. otherwise you would not know, which site to liberate.

Yes, this is true. Site have numbers once they are played. This is why Ulaire Nelya, Lieutenant of Morgul and Grimbold don't work with Shadows sites because the sites don't have numbers in the adventure deck but do once their played (which is why something like Held or Final Strike does work).

BUT allies still do not work because the numbers they reference are specific to block sites. When Elrond, Herald to Gil-Galad says "Home 3" that means "Home Fellowship block 3" and therefore you never go to his home site in Towers, King or Shadows sites.

Also, @ Smeagolgollum, the problem with your method is that many old sites work differently to post Shadows sites in the way that they'll be great for the Shadow player and have massive Shadow numbers (like most site 9's), or be great for the FP player and have low Shadow numbers. Why would you play West Gate of Moria in your system when you could play Council Courtyard? Post Shadows sites in general work the other way - the better the text for the Shadow player, the lower the Shadow number.

Thranduil

[TheJord]

I know its superfluos, but the old sites have sanctuary on them... you could have 9 of them!

[Smeagollum]

I know its superfluos, but the old sites have sanctuary on them... you could have 9 of them!

That's something you should negate:)

But people, please try it out and come with suggestions.

It's not cheating Vroengard: that would mean according to you that the new mechanism with the standard sites is also cheating!  Think about what you say, before you say  something.. It's the same as when people like to trade a tengwar Ugluk with you and you say that tengwar Ugluk not exist.. I can't do anything with it.

[Smeagollum]

@smeagollum
your calculation explains exactly, how much pool i got by dagorlad in region 1 at site 2. 9-6+0=3. in terms of the new site mechanics it is a very very dangerous site with 3 pool.

the free double move over the bridge is what you get, when you have ~4 allies at site 6. no matter how many minions are still in play during the regroup phase at site 5, you can risk the double move to site 6, where you have 3 additional archers and 4 additional fighters. free doesn´t mean, it doesn´t cost anything, it is just not risky.

and for the new site path, i am sure, sites on the site path or in the support area have numbers. otherwise you would not know, which site to liberate.

Disco, there will be no free move except when you are playing a site 6 from fotr-block. Other sites won't work with it. The elven allies have fotr homesite 6.

I don't see any problem with the pool at all. To me it makes it more interesting. And anyway i play either giving you so much twilight as much as you can spend or as less as you can get or I control the sitepath. It makes sure that people will be more creative. And it gives you more options to play with!