Shadows Revised.

[Cw0rk]

Are you wanting the adventure path to resemble the movie blocks?

Yes.
-wtk

Yes.

[MR. Lurtzy]

The new site path is much better imo.

[menace64]

A complete rework of Shadows sets and beyond, using the traditional site path, possibly makes sense ... because you are trying to tie it in with Movie block. Perhaps the site path could be redesigned using the traditional method to represent the entire journey, instead of just some of it. ??

Yeah that thought occurred to me shortly before Shadows was spoiled so many years ago. And it made more sense than what Decipher wound up doing, at least (as you said) thematically. Decipher's dynamic system, however, was much more conducive to gameplay.

All that being reiterated, I think the perfect solution would be a balance between both theme and gameplay. I'm beginning to see a way to achieve this: what if the term region is redefined, and each site has a printed region? Let's say, as is already the case, that region 1 is sites 1-3, and region 2 is sites 4-6, and region 3 is sites 7-9, which corresponds respectively to each movie. In this scenario, every site from Fellowship is a region 1 site, and the same applies to Two Towers and Return of the King. There would still be room to move things around and customize your site path, but the site path itself would become more rigid. This would also remove the (what I perceive to be) extremely clunky "add X while in Y region" rule, since the sites would return to individual shadow costs and would gain a printed region.

...is this a new idea, or am I late to the party?

[chompers]

i like it

[MR. Lurtzy]

As do I.

[Thranduil]

I think that sounds good. Go for it!

[legolas3333]

except that you would have to give every ste 1 a cost since they have none, and every choke deck would have 9 site 1s,

[Thranduil]

except that you would have to give every ste 1 a cost since they have none, and every choke deck would have 9 site 1s,

Just as at the moment you can't use more than 3 sites of the same Shadow number, in this case perhaps you would have to have 3 sites from each region.

[chompers]

except that you would have to give every ste 1 a cost since they have none, and every choke deck would have 9 site 1s,

Just as at the moment you can't use more than 3 sites of the same Shadow number, in this case perhaps you would have to have 3 sites from each region.

i thought that was the intent - 3 region 1, 3 region 2, 3 region 3 - only able to be played within their own region - you can even maintain the cost rule (no more than 3 of each site with the same cost). it seems to be the perfect balance between theme and gameplay.

[veBu]

Are you wanting the adventure path to resemble the movie blocks?

Yes.
-wtk

Yes.

You guys should try LotR TCG Map System

[menace64]

Since we're on the subject, I suppose we should begin the rewriting process with the sites of Shadows. But before I actually spoil cards, I'd like to spell out how this version of the adventure path will work. The 9 sites are split into 3 regions: sites 1-3 are region 1, sites 4-6 are region 2, and sites 7-9 are region 3. Each region encompasses the entirety of its corresponding film; so every location from Fellowship of the Ring falls somewhere within region 1, and the same is true for The Two Towers and Return of the King.

In the movie block sets, the upper-left of the site always had a printed site number, ranging from 1-9. Now, there is a printed region number, ranging from 1-3. The upper-right of the site is still reserved for the Shadow cost of the particular site. What this does, as far as building an adventure path goes, is to allow a player more flexibility than he once had up and through the Mount Doom set, but still keeping as much of the old thematic, progressive qualities that went with it, as well as balancing customization.

On the first page I have updated the Shadows adventure path, and have broken the sites down into their respective region, so that all region 1 sites come before region 2, and so on. Since this is the base set for the new site mechanics, I've tried to include a variety of different terrain-types into each region.

1 Barazinbar
<---
Mountain. At the start of your fellowship phase, you may exert a Dwarf to play a possession from your draw deck.

So, when before a player could play Barazinbar at any point along the adventure path, now it is limited to site 1, site 2, or site 3 - anywhere in region 1. Since this particular site didn't need to be altered to fit into its new restriction, the twilight cost of remains the same.

But some change is unavoidable.

1 Emyn Muil
<---
Forest. Until the end of the turn, the first minion played by each Shadow player is fierce until the Free Peoples player reconciles.

Since the old rules allowed Emyn Muil to be played at any time, Decipher had to reign in its power. Now, however, it can only come out until site 3, which means it needs to pack a little more of a punch. Even played as site 1, this new Emyn Muil can bring out fierce minions for many sites.

And now that the old Shadow cultures have returned, a different sort of change is required:

2 Rohirrim Village
<---
Dwelling. While you can spot 3 minions, Men may not take wounds during the archery phase.

Playable in region 2, this reboot of the old site carries over archery immunity for Dunland Men, except a few things are different now. First, it gets the Dwelling keyword (which didn't exist in Two Towers); and, second, the twilight cost has actually gone up. Why? Well, without the old rule in place where you add to the twilight poll while moving through a specific region, sites will need to doll out twilight more easily than before. After all, what if you saved Rohirrim Village until site 5 or 6, and it only had a twilight cost of 3? That's abusive, and if too many sites are costed low, every game would become one of choking the opponent. So most region 2 and 3 sites will have raised twilight costs than their older personas, but I'll try to match this increase by adding in additional costs or conditions where they're applicable.

Any questions, or comments on something I may have missed?

[chompers]

Looks good

Typo in first paragraph - region 2 is sites 4-6 not 2-6.

I like the way you have handled region and site costs.

Choke may be an issue .... For example .... If region 2 has three sites all with a site cost of four what stops me as the free peoples player putting all of them in my site deck and choking opponent by using cards to control the site path (this is potentially more powerful than the current dynamic site path system).

Perhaps more rules are needed to reign in choke decks - such as "Each site deck can contain contain no more than one site of the same site cost within each region" - this could be extended to "Each region can contain no more than one site of the same site cost in play at a time".

Just my thoughts ....

[menace64]

Perhaps more rules are needed to reign in choke decks - such as "Each site deck can contain contain no more than one site of the same site cost within each region" - this could be extended to "Each region can contain no more than one site of the same site cost in play at a time".

It would solve the problem but I think going in that direction would nullify any freedoms gained from this system. There's enough restriction built in already. It isn't perfect, but neither was the original dynamic adventure path, and I suppose we'll just have to watch how sites are being cost and make sure that, overall, every site produced is slightly more aggressively written.

[Thranduil]

1 Emyn Muil
<---
Forest. Until the end of the turn, the first minion played by each Shadow player is fierce until the Free Peoples player reconciles.

I worry that having a site that carries on working even if you're not there is confusing, especially for a set that's introducing new site mechanics. I would try and stick with the basics.

Perhaps it could simply be something like: "At the start of the maneuver phase, the first Shadow player may make a minion fierce until the regroup phase" or each Shadow player can fierce his own, or something.

Thranduil

[Faelach]

Are you wanting the adventure path to resemble the movie blocks?

Yes.
-wtk

Agreed.  That would be nice.