A fun way to play

[HAL_9OOO]

but flaming brand specifically says it can be born with another hand weapon. that game text supersedes the rules.

[chompers]

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?

[MR. Lurtzy]

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.

[chompers]

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?

[MR. Lurtzy]

I think that would probably do it.

[Tbiesty]

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!

[chompers]

Sorry - i like what you have done with the cards BTW - thanks for sharing!

[Hobbiton Lad]

I'd love to see these changes.

[Cw0rk]

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.

[Cw0rk]

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.

[Tbiesty]

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.

[jdizzy001]

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.

[Tbiesty]

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.

[Cw0rk]

Why did you make Saruman's Snows so weak?

[Tbiesty]

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.