V1: The One Ring (alpha playtests)

[hrcho]

Vitality Minus rings are stupid and they guarantee that anyone using an ARB doesn't use it.
-wtk

I'd use it with an ARB, but I'd have to pack heavy burden removal. Even though it lowers the vitality, the option of taking a burden instead of wound AT ANY TIME is very powerful. Although, with such good burden removal, Isildur's Bane perhaps becomes a better option. So I'd suggest something like this:

  The One Ring, The Ruling Ring (V)
Strength +1
Vitality -1
Resistance +2
Response: If bearer is about to take a wound, bearer wears The One Ring until the regroup phase. While wearing The One Ring, each time bearer is about to take a wound, add a burden instead.

This would encourage it's usage with ARB's, but I fear it might be too powerful. Maybe +1 resistance is better as Tbiesty suggested, but we should playtest both.

We could also go a bit higher with stats. Such as +3 strength and -2 resistance for example. This most certainly is not for ARB's, but it would encourage Frodo as the RB.

[Witchkingx5]

Agree on ket, I don't thnik a Ring should have a drawback by giving -1 vitality. Or maybe it's just me, nut I think that modifing to many stats isn't a good way to go.

I submitted my version before though.

[hyvee_doughboy]

Vitality Minus rings are stupid and they guarantee that anyone using an ARB doesn't use it.

Not to mention that my original point was that the danger in wearing the Ring was that two that's needed to be added, a condition that is relatively hard to meet (in exchange for the action being a response).
-wtk

I disagree.  I don't see a problem with using it with Galadriel, or Gimli RB, and it would work very well in a few of my decks that use Frodo.  Yes, it's bad for Boromir and not great for Isildur, however,  a lot of rings don't work good on everyone.   

To be honest, most RBs don't fight that often, so the vit-1 isn't a big deal, especially when you consider it's a response-ring AND only 1 burden per wound. 

It'll get my vote :-)

[Cw0rk]

I just wanted to say. I think that we should avoid having a One Ring that deals with threast, initiative or any other mechanic that was not there during FOTR Block.

[Tbiesty]

I just wanted to say. I think that we should avoid having a One Ring that deals with threast, initiative or any other mechanic that was not there during FOTR Block.

That's a good point.  A good rule to go by with these "V-cards" is that it can only use game mechanics, etc. that existed at the time the original version of the card was introduced.

[Thranduil]

I just wanted to say. I think that we should avoid having a One Ring that deals with threast, initiative or any other mechanic that was not there during FOTR Block.

That's a good point.  A good rule to go by with these "V-cards" is that it can only use game mechanics, etc. that existed at the time the original version of the card was introduced.

I would strongly disagree on this point! V-cards have to deal with a variety of different formats. We will need to make cards that support King block, Fellowship block, Extended, Standard etc. And I don't think we should restrict ourselves to the format in which the original card was present. I think it will be unhelpful and far too restrictive.

Also, that particular point doesn't apply to the Ruling Ring as it has been printed in every large set in Fellowship block and beyond!

Wkx5, can you post your version again so that they're all in a short space of posts?

Thranduil

[Tbiesty]

I would strongly disagree on this point! V-cards have to deal with a variety of different formats. We will need to make cards that support King block, Fellowship block, Extended, Standard etc. And I don't think we should restrict ourselves to the format in which the original card was present. I think it will be unhelpful and far too restrictive.

Ok. It was just a thought.  "Restrictions breed creativity". ;-)

[Inspire]

That's a good point.  A good rule to go by with these "V-cards" is that it can only use game mechanics, etc. that existed at the time the original version of the card was introduced.

If the threat idea is no longer a viable option, what about having the Ruling Ring give a strength or resistance bonus based on the number of FPs cultures or races that you can spot?

[Thranduil]

I would strongly disagree on this point! V-cards have to deal with a variety of different formats. We will need to make cards that support King block, Fellowship block, Extended, Standard etc. And I don't think we should restrict ourselves to the format in which the original card was present. I think it will be unhelpful and far too restrictive.

Ok. It was just a thought.  "Restrictions breed creativity". ;-)

No you make a great point, and we should probably discuss it and bear it in mind. (It happens that I personally disagree, but that's neither here nor there!). And restrictions do indeed breed creativity—but only the "right" amount of restriction! Obviously if you put on too much restriction, you no longer have any space for your creativity.

Thran

[Kralik]

I would agree with Tbiesty's point this time -- it makes no (or little) sense to me to have threats in Fellowship block when they cannot be accessed by any Shadow cards that play off of them.

[Kenddrick]

What is the bottom part for? The place where there is the name of the card? How does it fit in?

[hyvee_doughboy]

They have this for Star Wars V cards as well, and it's very helpful (will be more helpful as the number of v-cards grows.  Basically, it just says what card is supposed to go underneath the V-slip.  For example, if we eventually have a bunch of virtual Gimli's, this will tell youmwhich v-slip goes with which card.

Also think about the case of printing a whole page of v-slips and not remembering which v-slips go on which card.

Hope that helps.

Thanks Biesty for taking initiative on this.

[Thranduil]

Okay. I'd put at least one of the threat versions on the slips as well (the one that adds threats to wear the ring and/or the one that removes threats when you move). I'm also interested in seeing how the double-moving ring plays ("At the end of each turn, if you did not move more than once, add a burden").

Once that's been done, we want designers to download the strips and play, play, play! At this point, I don't think many other people should get involved (that will be for the beta playtesting phase—right now we're in alpha).

I'm looking at:

Wkx5
hrco
Ringbearer
Tbiesty

and whoever else posted a version of the card (sorry I've just encountered a very busy week so I'm not quite equipped to go through this stuff as much as I'd like, or to help much with the testing).

I think each person should go for 1 version which they will be mainly in charge of testing (of course they could test others too), and if possible that shouldn't be the version they designed.

So, in summary, add some more cards to the document, and divvy up the cards amongst yourselves!

Post any observations, great moments, terrible moments, thoughts etc. that come to you while playtesting right here!



And I'd just like to say how incredibly excitingly awesome this is! 8)

Thranduil

[hrcho]

I call dibs on this one:   

The One Ring, The Ruling Ring (V)
Strength: +1
Vitality: -1
Resistance: +1
Game Text: Response: If bearer is about to take a wound, bearer wears The One Ring until the regroup phase. While wearing The One Ring, each time bearer is about to take a wound, add a burden instead.

designed by Tbiesty.

I'll do my best at playtesting, even though it will most often be me against myself

I will build several different decks with several different ring-bearers and test it against the most common shadows (Corsairs, Moria Swarm, Sauron Wound...).

[Ringbearer]

Problem is I have no real time playgroup, I just play on GCCG a lot.