The Last Homely House
Middle-Earth => Bag End => Topic started by: Tbiesty on May 06, 2010, 07:38:18 PM
-
Greetings!
With players spread all over the world, I thought it would be helpful to share how my playing group plays LOTR TCG.
There are about 7 of us that get together regularly in the Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA area. We've basically always played expanded format since we get to play more of the cards we have (plus more variety of decks). However, since there aren't any more cards coming out, it was a good time to look at making banned (i.e. X-list) and obsolete cards (e.g. specific to a certain site block) playable again; some cards have just been sitting in our binders for years, and that's no fun!
What we did was made a single virtual set for the banned and obsolete cards, so they are playable again. We then just play "Open" format, including this virtual set. This way we can make use of all of our cards! It's been really nice to do this now, since all cards have been released, so we had the knowledge to make the slight card changes needed.
Anyway, I thought I'd share this with the LOTR TCG community out there. If anyone is interested in what changes we made in this virtual set, just let me know and I'll e-mail it to you. I'd be happy to help.
Thanks!
-
I'm interested in your changes.
-
Yes, me too.
-
Me three.
-
maybe you could post them in the DC section so we could see a few?
-
Whisper in the Dark is still unplayable, as followers can't bear cards, but for the most part I like them.
I also think that Gil-galad's abilities need to be start of phase actions.
-
@ tbiesty- you know, i was wondering when someone would would revamp the banned cards. I'd really like to see them
@ minion-what do yo mean bears cant bear cards? Whisper in the dark says it right on the card, "bearer must be a follower." I thought cards did what they said? I'm so confused....
-
Those are great Tbiesty! Mucho gold for you!
I just play as if there's a ruling saying that WitD's text overides it and therefore can be played. I suppose it would be an issue if I were ever to join a tournament.. lmao.
-
Since Whisper in the Dark came out, looks like Decipher and many of us forgot about what the Starter Rulebook said about followers not able to bear other cards. I added a rule update to my group's virtual set to clarify that followers can bear other cards. Thanks!
-
I'd like to see as well :)
-
Also interested here :)
-
isn't there also a rule in the decipher rule book indicating that the text of cards takes presidence over the rules of the game. IE flaming brand. The rules are a companion may only bear 1 kind of each possession, but flaming brand says it may be born in addition to one additional hand weapon. I think whisper in the dark falls into the same category
-
isn't there also a rule in the decipher rule book indicating that the text of cards takes presidence over the rules of the game. IE flaming brand. The rules are a companion may only bear 1 kind of each possession, but flaming brand says it may be born in addition to one additional hand weapon. I think whisper in the dark falls into the same category
I would agree with both of the above examples - occasionally a card is made that intentionally works outside the rules - when they do they say so.
Perhaps this occasionally this leads to confusion with cards that appear to work outside the rules. If the card can work without breaking the rules - then that is how they should work IMO. For example - Pass of Caradhras allows you to play weather cards from your draw deck provided they can play in the shadow phase. This card works without the need to play weather events out of phase (which breaks the rules of the game).
-
isn't there also a rule in the decipher rule book indicating that the text of cards takes presidence over the rules of the game.
Find it, and then perhaps there could be a debate.
-
isn't there also a rule in the decipher rule book indicating that the text of cards takes presidence over the rules of the game.
Find it, and then perhaps there could be a debate.
without the rule - doesn't that mean that flaming brand can't be played as well - the rule book clearly states no more than one possession of each type per character. or is everyone happy to go with this as it has been used since set 2?
From the rule book - "Each character may bear one possession or artifact of each class at one time."
-
but flaming brand specifically says it can be born with another hand weapon. that game text supersedes the rules.
-
Whisper in the Dark specifically says "bearer must be a follower"- the same is true.
If that is not enough to over ride the existing rule how would you propose Decipher have written it?
-
They made the rule that Followers cannot bear cards. Simply putting bearer must be a follower doesn't mean a follower can bear it. It means they are the only ones allowed to. And if they can't bear cards to begin with, then whisper in the dark cannot be used.
-
They made the rule that Followers cannot bear cards. Simply putting bearer must be a follower doesn't mean a follower can bear it. It means they are the only ones allowed to. And if they can't bear cards to begin with, then whisper in the dark cannot be used.
Your logic makes sense ... so the card needs to say ...
This card may be borne by a follower .. or similar ... yeah?
-
I think that would probably do it.
-
The original purpose of this topic was to let others know about how my playing group plays LOTR TCG and how the virtual set we use fits into that. It's funny how debates about a specific rule can creep up on these forums when that's not even what the discussion is supposed to be about. :-)
Anyway, just a reminder that if anyone else is interested in the virtual set that my playing group uses, just let me know and I'll send it to you. Thanks!
-
Sorry - i like what you have done with the cards BTW - thanks for sharing!
-
I'd love to see these changes.
-
Anyway, just a reminder that if anyone else is interested in the virtual set that my playing group uses, just let me know and I'll send it to you. Thanks!
Why don't you just post it here? Or if it's a file perhaps you could place it somewhere.
-
I just read the PDF file you sent. It looks cool. here are a few comments:
All of the modification you made to cards like Book of Mazarbul and The Long Dark are not working in formats like movie block, but I guess that you guys are playing open with post-shadows sites.
Why did you choose to make Saruman's Snows weaker?
I like how you changed some Isengard cards to make Isengard Men more playable. However, the original Saruman, BT was good and doesn't need to be modified.
Your Palantir of Orthanc, SSS looks weaker than the Palantir of Orthanc from RotEL which is legal in your format.
Your Sting allows people to cheat.
Other than that, these are great ideas to play with friends. However, on a larger scale, people are resistant to changes.
-
The virtual version is for The Palantir of Orthanc from RotEL (not from TTT); I just have the title above it labeled incorrectly. Nice catch. I'll fix that up. :-)
Yes, we play "Open" with the post-shadows sites and this virtual set.
-
i didn't see a difference between relics of moria and your virtual relics of moria. Other than that, most of the ideas you present were pretty neat.
-
i didn't see a difference between relics of moria and your virtual relics of moria. Other than that, most of the ideas you present were pretty neat.
Did you not notice the "Restricted" icon? That was the only difference. Just added that for ease of remembering.
-
Why did you make Saruman's Snows so weak?
-
Why did you make Saruman's Snows so weak?
Because it was on the x-list. So having a card that does something is still better than nothing.
-
i didn't see a difference between relics of moria and your virtual relics of moria. Other than that, most of the ideas you present were pretty neat.
Did you not notice the "Restricted" icon? That was the only difference. Just added that for ease of remembering.
nope, i missed that one. I caught most of them, but indeed i missed the restricted mark.
-
where is the list :-k
-
Can you send it to me too? Would you mind if I post it on my site at lotrtcg.blogspot.com?
-
I'd like to take a look, too! Thanks.
-
(Post moved to the "Adventure deck made from all available sites" topic in this "Bag End" forum)