The Last Homely House

Undying Lands => The Straight Road => House Rules => Topic started by: Tbiesty on February 18, 2011, 03:20:42 PM

Title: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 18, 2011, 03:20:42 PM
Greetings fellow players at TLHH!

At the time I'm posting this, there is a poll (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6476.0.html) that will decide whether Galadriel, Lady Redeemed should be banned at this time from "Movie Format (TLHH Rules)".  Galadriel, Lady Redeemed, if it is banned, will join a relatively small list of cards that are banned. There is concern that this card will never be allowed back at all.  Let me assure you that if the Rules Team is allowed to follow a process identified in this topic, that it will be back, as will the other banned cards.

First of all, let's just focus on cards within "Movie" block, since that is by far what most players play.  As Thranduil, hrcho, and I have mentioned, since the card pool for LOTR is not growing, and number of banned cards is small, we have the ability to get these cards out from being stuck in binders/boxes and into decks where they belong.

At some point in the near future (after the vote on Galadriel, Lady Redeemed is complete), unless there are any other more pressing matters, we can turn our attention to fixing the banned cards and letting them back into our decks.  Allow me to share what I'm thinking this will involve.

Here's a thought about the overall process and timeline (since it's very important that we have a plan):

Stage 1)
     Decide if the "promos" are to be allowed. (see discussion here (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6585.0.html))
           --Update GCCG based on results.
           --No other GCCG update (except bug fixes. etc.) for three months (March 2011 - June 2011) so players get a chance
             to use the promos that are allowed with no other changes.

Stage 2)
        During those three months (March 2011 - June 2011), hold discussions and iron out the "unbanning" (for each card,
        this would be either "completely unbanning", changing to "restricted", or "errata" as a last
        resort) of the "banned" cards.

The List
   Elrond, Lord of Rivendell
   Galadriel, Lady of Light
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Relics of Moria
   Ulaire Nertea, Messenger of Dol Guldur
   Forces of Mordor
   Sting
   Flaming Brand
   Filibert Bolger, Wily Rascal
   O Elbereth! Gilthoniel!
   Aragorn, Heir to the White City
   Horn of Boromir
   Saruman, Keeper of Isengard
   The Palantir of Orthanc
   Bill the Pony
   Frying Pan
   Uruk Regular
   Steadfast Champion
   Aggression
   Memories of Darkness
   Galadriel, Lady Redeemed
   Mordor Fiend    (see discussion (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6639.0.html))
   Gondorian Captain    (see discussion (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6623.0.html))

           --This would be a one-time "cleanup" to allow the card pool to be maximized (getting cards out
              of binders/boxes), but while still maintaining the fairness and balance that we expect.
           --A separate discussion topic for each card but discussions would be done in parallel, even if
              discussions seem to be done, we would wait the three months before "finalizing" it.
           --At the end of the discussions (i.e. in three months), hold polls in parallel to determine what to
              do with each card.
           --Update GCCG based on results.
           --Doing this as single "bulk" update would maybe take players a week or two to get used to
              the changes, plus they would be able try out everything together.  Furthermore, now that
              I think about it, if we did this as a long drawn-out series of single-card "monthly" updates,
              things would constantly be changing for a long time, which I find to be the most confusing
              scenario.
           --No other GCCG update (except bug fixes, etc.) for three months (June 2011 - August 2011) so players get
              a chance to use the "unbanned" cards.
           --After those three months (June 2011 - August 2011), players discuss/vote on whether the "unbanning"
              was successful or unsuccessful. We can keep, tweak, or complete undo the "unbanning" based on this feedback.

Stage 3)
      After step 2 is done (around September 2011), at some interval (say every 6-12 months), the "Dream Team" releases a
      small (around 10 cards) V-set.  The first one is currently in progress.
      This keeps the game fresh and helps add a little excitement.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Kralik on February 18, 2011, 04:06:01 PM
I think it would be best to get a consensus amount players or among the rules team as to whether banned cards should be "fixed" with errata vs. left banned. I know there are many who think that an X-listed card is better than having to remember an errata'd card... so I'm not sure it's a good idea to guarantee, for example, that GLR will be "back" later.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 18, 2011, 04:23:59 PM
... so I'm not sure it's a good idea to guarantee, for example, that GLR will be "back" later.
Very well. I have reworded my initial post so it basically says "If we are allowed to do this, GLR will be "back" later." instead.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: hrcho on February 18, 2011, 04:35:22 PM
...I know there are many who think that an X-listed card is better than having to remember an errata'd card...

But since we're doing this mostly for GCCG, isn't it possible to change the text of the cards? Like with Photoshop or something like that. I know that it's possible and that it's not really that difficult to do, especially to someone who knows that stuff, but I am not sure if we are allowed to do that (concerning legality issues). If someone who is more knowledgeable about legal stuff could assure us that it's safe to do that, then I see no problem.

Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Ringbearer on February 18, 2011, 04:37:51 PM
I is still hard to remember a bazillion errata. I have seen the last few days people not remembering the errata on FOTR Gimli.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Kralik on February 18, 2011, 04:44:39 PM
Well, you don't even have to change the image per se since there's an easy way to see the full game text of any card in GCCG (CTRL+H, /help cardname, or right-click menu). Still, to restore or not to restore, to errata or not to errata... that is the ?
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Kralik on February 18, 2011, 04:56:06 PM
I'm not ready to go there with the potential legal issues. Remember, if Decipher cares and wants someone to sue, it's the owner of the website/server...
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 18, 2011, 04:59:50 PM
Very well.  CTRL+H is better than nothing.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 23, 2011, 07:51:27 PM
Here is an example of how this could work for the "House Rules".

There would be no banned cards, so no cards have to stay in boxes/binders anymore.
There would just be a few restricted cards.

"House Rules"  Fellowship:
   Forces of Mordor

"House Rules"  Towers Standard:
   Elrond, Lord of Rivendell
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Forces of Mordor
   Flaming Brand
   Uruk Regular

"House Rules"  Movie:
   Elrond, Lord of Rivendell
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Forces of Mordor
   Flaming Brand
   Aggression

"House Rules" Poorman's:
   (none)


The following cards would need errata designed by the Rules Team and voted on in House Rules.

                                                              (for example, here are possible errata)

   Galadriel, Lady of Light                          (play Elf for twilight cost -2, instead of free)
   Ulaire Nertea, Messenger of Dol Guldur  (spot another [Wraith] and 5 companions to play a minion from discard pile)
   Sting                                                    (reveal 4 cards from opponents hand, instead of entire hand)
   Horn of Boromir                                    (discard after use)
   The Palantir of Orthanc                         (remove 3 twilight to use, instead of 1)
   Saruman, Keeper of Isengard                (Maneuver: Exert Saruman to make an Uruk-hai fierce)
   Steadfast Champion                              (cannot be played during regroup phase)
   Gondorian Captain                                (limit once per turn)
   Memories of Darkness                           (limit once per phase)
   Galadriel, Lady Redeemed                      (starting twilight cost -1, exert Galadriel twice and discard [Elven] event to...)
   Mordor Fiend                                       (limit once per turn)


One last thing…

GCCG can show you the errata'd game text (it's built in), and a link to download card "slips" for real cards can be provided.
Therefore, you don't need to worry about remembering these errata.

I'd be happy to hear any suggestions, changes, etc.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Imrahil on February 23, 2011, 09:05:32 PM
Some of those errata look pretty harsh.  If we make the card playable but so weak that nobody will touch it then what was the point of unbanning it in the first place?
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 24, 2011, 05:40:02 AM
Some of those errata look pretty harsh.  If we make the card playable but so weak that nobody will touch it then what was the point of unbanning it in the first place?
Are there individual errata'd cards that you see as so weak that nobody will touch them?  Please be specific. Thanks!
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: TheJord on February 24, 2011, 10:03:36 AM
Memories of Darkness could have "Discard this condition" at the end.

Mordor Fiend - "When you play this minion..." kind of like Goblin Runner, but with cultural enforcement, like "...add [3] if you can spot a [Sauron] possession or [Sauron] engine"

Sting was banned because Frodo was universal, making its power curve pretty steep. Make Frodo exert twice?

No one would use Gondorian Captain if it wasn't for Base of Mindolluin. In this instance the card isn't necessarily broken, but is broken with its interaction with another card. This represents a classic card game problem, a regular card gets broken by another regular card. I suggest limiting Base of Mindolluin.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Imrahil on February 24, 2011, 04:01:16 PM
Actually, on second glance it seems like you've done a pretty good job.  I was more concerned about the erratas I originally read in the link below your post.

I agree with TheJord that Memories of Darkness should either have a (once per turn) or discard itself.  I also agree that an errata on Mindolluin itself is probably the wiser choice.

For Saruman, KoI I feel that he's really being constricted.  Does he keep his ability to prevent wounds? If so, perhaps we should give him five vitality. 

I also think that Palantir should remove 2 not 3 twilight or the card is going to be basically worthless

And obviously LR will have to have her own thread. :-)

Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: hrcho on February 24, 2011, 11:33:24 PM
I think Elrond, LoR shouldn't be on any R-list, but on X-list. He is too powerful just by himself, not to mention in combo with other allies.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: jcb213 on February 25, 2011, 06:38:23 AM
What about Aragorn, Heir to the White City?  I don't see him on any of your lists.  You can't possibly want him to be unbanned and not receive errata.  He really needs to receive errata.

I also don't see Bill the Pony on any of your lists.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 26, 2011, 10:49:37 AM
Any more comments, etc. on these lists?

I'd like to make sure everyone (especially the Rules Team) gets a chance to make suggestions, etc. before we do any voting on the restricted lists or have discussions about the exact errata.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: jcb213 on February 26, 2011, 11:39:52 AM
Does R-listing Ottar fix the problem with him?  Since you can pull him with AWINL and heal him with Elrond, HtGG you really only need one copy to abuse him.

Also, I don't know that R-listing Flaming Brand is a good idea.  Nazgul already are bad against many of the best free peoples deck in Movie Block and most of the other shadows are much better too.  If Flaming Brand is allowed back even at one copy per deck (most decks only played 1 or 2 copies anyway before it was banned) that would make Nazgul even worse.  Perhaps it would be better to errata Flaming Brand to only play on Aragorn which would make creative deck choice as people would have to play something other than Anduril, FotW if they want to play Flaming Brand.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 26, 2011, 11:54:48 AM
Does R-listing Ottar fix the problem with him?  Since you can pull him with AWINL and heal him with Elrond, HtGG you really only need one copy to abuse him.
I think it would make you "invest" enough cards to get him to work. Elrond, HtGG would have to heal Ottar once instead of himself twice, that's a trade-off.  A positive thing about this being "House Rules", it that if we find that a specific card is a problem a month down the road, we would have the ability to correct it through this "House Rules" process.

Also, I don't know that R-listing Flaming Brand is a good idea.  Nazgul already are bad against many of the best free peoples deck in Movie Block and most of the other shadows are much better too.  If Flaming Brand is allowed back even at one copy per deck (most decks only played 1 or 2 copies anyway before it was banned) that would make Nazgul even worse.  Perhaps it would be better to errata Flaming Brand to only play on Aragorn which would make creative deck choice as people would have to play something other than Anduril, FotW if they want to play Flaming Brand.
That is certainly a fine idea.  I'll update the list.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 26, 2011, 11:57:08 AM
Great!  Thanks guys.  Those are some good ideas we can work out as far as the actual errata for those cards.  We'll get to the errata later.

First, let's discuss which cards would still need to be restricted in each format. Remember: no banned cards.  I'd like to hear opinions on these lists... Is a card in a list, but it shouldn't be?  Is a card not in a list, but it should be?

"House Rules"  Fellowship:
   Forces of Mordor (based on the results of this discussion (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6273.0.html))

"House Rules"  Towers Standard:
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Forces of Mordor
   Uruk Regular

"House Rules"  Movie:
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Relics of Moria
   Forces of Mordor
   Bill the Pony
   Frying Pan
   Aggression

"House Rules"  Poorman's:
   (none)    (based on the results of this discussion (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6274.0.html))


Errata:  (the exact errata will be figured out in later discussions, until then the following cards would remain banned in the "House Rules" Towers Standard and "House Rules" Movie formats)

   Elrond, Lord of Rivendell
   Galadriel, Lady of Light
   Ulaire Nertea, Messenger of Dol Guldur
   Aragorn, Heir to the White City
   Sting
   Flaming Brand
   Horn of Boromir
   The Palantir of Orthanc
   Saruman, Keeper of Isengard
   Steadfast Champion
   Base of Mindolluin
   Memories of Darkness
   Galadriel, Lady Redeemed
   Mordor Fiend

[I'll update and re-post this post as new suggestions, etc. come in.]
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Kralik on February 26, 2011, 01:10:25 PM
I'm thinking it will be best to make a separate thread and deal with each card at one time.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 26, 2011, 01:17:44 PM
I'm thinking it will be best to make a separate thread and deal with each card at one time.
That's fine.  I just wanted to make sure we have a "big picture" view of things first, so we know what all the cards involved in this process will be before we begin.

There is one other issue I want to get addressed before we go through these cards one-by-one.  Here is the thread for that issue. (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6571.msg67253/topicseen.html#msg67253)

Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 27, 2011, 06:24:00 PM
We will start going through the cards one-by-one starting March 4th (once this poll (http://lotrtcgdb.com/forums/index.php/topic,6572.0.html) is closed).

   Elrond, Lord of Rivendell
   Galadriel, Lady of Light
   Ottar, Man of Laketown
   No Stranger to the Shadows
   Savagery to Match Their Numbers
   Relics of Moria
   Ulaire Nertea, Messenger of Dol Guldur
   Forces of Mordor
   Sting
   Flaming Brand
   Filibert Bolger, Wily Rascal
   O Elbereth! Gilthoniel!
   Aragorn, Heir to the White City
   Horn of Boromir
   Saruman, Keeper of Isengard
   The Palantir of Orthanc
   Bill the Pony
   Frying Pan
   Uruk Regular
   Steadfast Champion
   Aggression
   Memories of Darkness
   Galadriel, Lady Redeemed
   Mordor Fiend
   Base of Mindolluin


We can go through the cards in whichever order people want, so suggest a card and it will be put at the front of the list.
Thanks in advance for your participation!
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Kralik on February 27, 2011, 07:36:39 PM
When and why did The Shire Countryside make the Movie list?

(Yes, it is one of my pet cards)
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 27, 2011, 07:51:31 PM
When and why did The Shire Countryside make the Movie list?
(Yes, it is one of my pet cards)
I at least wanted to have a discussion about it.  I've had decks and seen decks that use cards like A Light In His Mind, No Help For It, etc. with multiple copies of The Shire Countryside and the ability to heal your entire fellowship at every site may be considered by some unfair.  If nobody else thinks it's an issue, that's fine. I felt there was no harm in a least discussing it.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Ringbearer on February 28, 2011, 02:03:28 AM
Shire Countryide hit X fat after movie. I dont think its that bad that it need touching.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 28, 2011, 05:08:17 AM
Shire Countryide hit X fat after movie.
True, it wasn't banned until after Movie was defined. But the same was true for Galadriel, Lady Redeemed. Again, I think it's at least worth a discussion.
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: ket_the_jet on February 28, 2011, 05:17:55 AM
Discussion ended. There isn't any way to protect the condition in Movie Block. It requires set-up to run.

I think it is fine.
-wtk
Title: Re: Preliminary Discussion: Process for unbanning cards
Post by: Tbiesty on February 28, 2011, 09:22:19 AM
Ok, I took it off the list.  I'm glad we at least talked about it.  No harm, no foul.