The Last Homely House

Middle-Earth => Chamber of Mazarbul => Topic started by: Thranduil on May 21, 2009, 01:02:49 PM

Title: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 21, 2009, 01:02:49 PM
You know me, I just don't know when to quit! ;)

I've been having some ideas, so I thought I'd share one of them and see what you think (the title is obviously a stop-gap - it's just a thesaurus job on Enduring/Abiding):

[X] Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0).)
To play, exert 2 minions (or spot a [Sauron] minion)
Make a companion strength -X.

So what do you think of this idea? The point is that it's a Shadow card that you can spend however much you want on, or however much is available. It's inspired by the X costing cards in MTG. Obviously in LotR an [X] cost only works for Shadow cards (because FP can add an infinite amount of twilight), and you could attach other costs to the card, like "To play, exert a [Sauron] minion" or something.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: MR. Lurtzy on May 21, 2009, 01:11:07 PM
I think you should exert the minion.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: BattleWarg on May 21, 2009, 01:33:03 PM
[X] Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0).)
Spot a [Sauron] minion to make a companion strength -X.
So, what's the difference between this and...

(0) Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
Spot a [Sauron] minion and remove [X] to make a companion strength -X.

Okay, actually I can think of some (namely twilight cost reduction), though I'm not sure if there are any that affects Eternal Evil...

As for the card itself...  Probably should be an unbound (or at the least, except the Ring-bearer).  With that, could work - maybe "a companion skirmishing that minion"?
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Bombadil on May 21, 2009, 02:23:28 PM
[X] Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0).)
Spot a [Sauron] minion to make a companion strength -X.
So, what's the difference between this and...

(0) Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
Spot a [Sauron] minion and remove [X] to make a companion strength -X.

Okay, actually I can think of some (namely twilight cost reduction), though I'm not sure if there are any that affects Eternal Evil...

As for the card itself...  Probably should be an unbound (or at the least, except the Ring-bearer).  With that, could work - maybe "a companion skirmishing that minion"?

Encirclement would reduce its cost, so there is a little difference...

it seems a little overpowered for me... one Gorgoroth Soldier, for example, could surivive till skirmish and overwhelm anyone with the remaining twilight...
 :-k but it would be a nice ent stopping card  :twisted:
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 22, 2009, 08:44:38 AM
Yeah, I've been thinking what makes this different from what you suggested BW, and I think you're right. There isn't much difference, but once the format becomes established and you no longer need helper text, then writing [X] would be a significantly simpler way to do this.

Thranduil
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: macheteman on May 23, 2009, 08:34:54 PM
[X] Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0).)
Spot a [Sauron] minion to make a companion strength -X.
So, what's the difference between this and...

(0) Eternal Evil [Sauron]
Event • Skirmish
Spot a [Sauron] minion and remove [X] to make a companion strength -X.

Okay, actually I can think of some (namely twilight cost reduction), though I'm not sure if there are any that affects Eternal Evil...

As for the card itself...  Probably should be an unbound (or at the least, except the Ring-bearer).  With that, could work - maybe "a companion skirmishing that minion"?

Encirclement would reduce its cost, so there is a little difference...

it seems a little overpowered for me... one Gorgoroth Soldier, for example, could surivive till skirmish and overwhelm anyone with the remaining twilight...
 :-k but it would be a nice ent stopping card  :twisted:

yeah, a little OP, great idea, but it would probably need to exert the minion and then have a limit. like +8. but the idea is solid.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 24, 2009, 04:59:42 AM
So the idea is fairly popular, here are 2 other possible incarnations of it (obviously the titles are again bad, just ripping off old cards that do similar things!):

[X] Entrapment [Gollum] (SH)
Event • Regroup
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0)).
Discard Gollum to exert the Ring-bearer X times. If the Ring-bearer is exhausted, add X burdens instead.

[X] Saruman's Mastery [Isengard]
Event • Shadow
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0)).
To play, exert 2 minions (or spot an [Isengard] minion).
Discard conditions with total twilight cost equal to the value of [X].
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: sickofpalantirs on May 24, 2009, 06:33:39 AM
entrapment is WAY OP...you just need to save 4 twilight...a limit of 2 and its maybe ok.  or if its exert...

second one is fine.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 24, 2009, 06:55:07 AM
entrapment is WAY OP...you just need to save 4 twilight...a limit of 2 and its maybe ok.  or if its exert...
My thought was that all rings allow you to take burdens during the skirmish phase, but then I realise that AtAR or RoD will not necessarily have had a chance to trigger. I will change it, and it's also changed from skirmish to regroup.

Thranduil
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Gate Troll on May 24, 2009, 11:11:21 AM
I'd think it'd be rather redundant unless you made this sort of card:

[1][X] Gollum's Desire [Gollum]
Event • Manuever
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is [1](0)).
Add X burdens or X wounds. Discard Gollum.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Smeagollum on May 25, 2009, 05:01:41 AM

(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0)).


Uhmm... I don't get it and probably it's because of my limiting knowledge of english. How can you choose x, but when you play it it's allways 0??? Doesn't become x then not automaticly 0???
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 25, 2009, 05:09:26 AM

(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is (0)).


Uhmm... I don't get it and probably it's because of my limiting knowledge of english. How can you choose x, but when you play it it's allways 0??? Doesn't become x then not automaticly 0???
Sorry for the confusion. The card is twilight cost (0) if it's in your hand, draw deck or discard pile, but when you play it its twilight cost becomes the [X] you choose. As soon as it hits the discard pile, it becomes (0) again.

Thranduil
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Smeagollum on May 25, 2009, 05:24:03 AM
But is it then nescesarry to add "Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is 0)" in the text?
It actually confuses me more...
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Jerba on May 26, 2009, 10:31:53 AM
But is it then nescesarry to add "Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is 0)" in the text?
It actually confuses me more...

Ditto. I like BattleWargs phrasing better, more straight forward and constistent.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: BattleWarg on May 26, 2009, 02:47:49 PM
Maybe "This card's twilight cost is (0) except when it is played.  When played, you choose the value of X."?  Does that help?

My wording's slightly easier to understand without experience in other games, but there are some situations where it would come in handy to have that form.
My Fellowship block deck would have an example if there were an X-cost Hobbit.  Maybe that removes a burden (or 2) if you cannot spot X burdens.  (Meaning that you have to add more twilight than you have burdens to remove them)
However, it can put out 4x Hobbit Farmer with my Green Hill Country.  So, I could set X to 4 and as long as I can't spot 4 burdens, I get a (0)-cost burden removal.
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Smeagollum on May 27, 2009, 01:41:53 AM
Hey the idea is good, we just need the right phrase. My English ain't that good. So, I leave that up to you people :)
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Thranduil on May 27, 2009, 01:51:55 AM
Maybe "This card's twilight cost is (0) except when it is played.  When played, you choose the value of X."?  Does that help?

My wording's slightly easier to understand without experience in other games, but there are some situations where it would come in handy to have that form.
My Fellowship block deck would have an example if there were an X-cost Hobbit.  Maybe that removes a burden (or 2) if you cannot spot X burdens.  (Meaning that you have to add more twilight than you have burdens to remove them)
Those are both very good and interesting ideas. :gp: to you BW!

Thanks for everyone's thoughts on this. :up: I may return to this, or have new idea sometime in the future.

Thranduil
Title: Re: An Idea
Post by: Beregond25 on July 27, 2009, 01:55:27 PM
I'd think it'd be rather redundant unless you made this sort of card:

[1][X] Gollum's Desire [Gollum]
Event • Manuever
(You choose the value of [X]. Except when you play this card, its twilight cost is [1](0)).
Add X burdens or X wounds. Discard Gollum.


Still OP. I mean I play with people who give me tons of twilight and often move on. All you would need is 22 twilight and you win. (2 for gollum 10 for card 10 for x adding 10 burdens)
Maybe a bit more for some cases like the 12 resistance frodo phial of galadriel the box thing Etc.
I think there should be a limit of 5