What would you change in FOTR Block?

[Cw0rk]

I have to mention that I won the FOTR league with a deck that neither choked nor contained a horn.

Perhaps you should post that list on the board.

Is it Gandalf, FttS with the Hunters?

[Hobbiton Lad]

I have to mention that I won the FOTR league with a deck that neither choked nor contained a horn.

Nice work. I'd love to see a decklist as well.

The exception does not disprove the rule, however.

[Witchkingx5]

Really? I think Ranger's are better, but if you can show me strong Pipeweed Deck (besides mine), we can keep on discussing about it.

[Ringbearer]

I dont have a list on this comp but its a gandalfFTTSF trust with troll heavy moria.

[chompers]

when fotr league was running i had minimal success with a range of experimental decks, most notably my hobbit swarm deck (using the horn) which lost about 8 games in a row before i gave up. I only started to win once i played pipeweed - didn't lose a game with that deck (paired with Uruks).

[Hobbiton Lad]

Pipe decks are good too. The healing helps a lot v. Uruks.

Rather than make a new format I think Id rather see a 2nd edition, truth be told.

[chompers]

2nd edition would be tops - start right back at the beginning !! with new playing experiences and different combinations of cards. rip the worst stuff out and stick with what works

[FM]

I don't want to necro or anything, but I just came by this Topic today, and since the PC is underway I think it might raise a fine point - I was willin to move it there, but since I don't take part in any PC action (thus far), decided against it, unless the people involved game me the green light to do so. Anyway, the basic idea here is simple: we all know LotR Limited play sucked. Big time. Draft was abysmal, to say the least. And we all know some cards are just not worthy in their rarity OR usefulness (or BOTH... I'm looking at you, The Weight of a Legacy!). Considering this, should a PC actually turn able to issue virtual errata'ed cards and whatnot, how about revamping the already-existing sets before setting out to create new V cards? You could simply remove from the V list cards that didn't do anything or were too subpar for Constructed play, and replace it with a revamped version in the same slot. For instance, The Weight of a Legacy is a rare Sauron card to make Aragorn weaker, being a condition, and it's a rare. You could work on making a new The Weight of a Legacy, be it by as simply as giving it a new line of text "Abilities that exert Aragorn can't be used", be it by changing it completely. Just an idea, though.

[Elessar's Socks]

Just to note, a virtual card doesn't necessarily have to replace the original. Players could be given the choice of using The Weight of a Legacy or The Weight of a Legacy (V).

And to throw this out there, would this even interest people?

1. Select a small group of people to design Fellowship Block 2.0. This will have no effect on the original block--no new cards or rulings will transfer over. This is basically a house set.

2. Hold an online tournament using these cards, awarding top finishers real/virtual cards, the chance to design a card for the next release, etc.

3. Repeat with expansions.

[chompers]

Just to note, a virtual card doesn't necessarily have to replace the original. Players could be given the choice of using The Weight of a Legacy or The Weight of a Legacy (V).

And to throw this out there, would this even interest people?

1. Select a small group of people to design Fellowship Block 2.0. This will have no effect on the original block--no new cards or rulings will transfer over. This is basically a house set.

2. Hold an online tournament using these cards, awarding top finishers real/virtual cards, the chance to design a card for the next release, etc.

3. Repeat with expansions.

Giving LOTR something new whilst retaining the original integrity of the game would definitely interest some players and should minimize the angst for those that don't want change.

[FM]

SO, how 'bout it, PC guys? Should I move it there? (btw, I thought a PC talk WAS underway, am I wrong?)

[chompers]

SO, how 'bout it, PC guys? Should I move it there? (btw, I thought a PC talk WAS underway, am I wrong?)

Last I heard about it decipher indicated a lack of willingness to support it. This is contrary to what they have done with their other licenses which may indicate that they have an interest in continuing their license with the release of the hobbit. Just speculation though. It may also be due to the poor organization and lack of leadership?

[Kralik]

poor organization and lack of leadership?

[chompers]

To echo what Kralik is saying, the "PC" is largely Kenddrick and chompers signing in once or twice every other week and saying, "Hey, have you done anything for the PC lately?"
-wtk

Well have you? Seriously, talk of the PC will only go away if we ALL leave it alone.

I am back at the moment on the forums to talk LOTR and play some games of LOTR on GCCG. Hopefully to have some fun doing it.

[Elessar's Socks]

Assuming there are enough people interested in making Fellowship 2.0 + online play happen, I'm not sure it's a good idea to have it absorbed into larger PC plans. Seems more than once that a focused idea has bitten off more than it could chew, only to fizzle in the end.