LotR TCG Wiki → Card Sets:  All 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 → Forums:  TLHH CC

Author Topic: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion  (Read 32251 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

March 18, 2011, 01:23:19 PM
Reply #90

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #90 on: March 18, 2011, 01:23:19 PM »
I also disagree with block sets. Let us first get a decent set out (or a few), THEN we can look at themes and such. I know for a fact that some advocated a whole Vset devoted to X-ed cards, which is also block spanning.
Perhaps I wasn't very clear what I meant in my earlier post.  I'll try to do a better job this time.

The point was I was trying to get at was that I think in the long run it will be much cleaner if every card within a virtual set is allowed in the same formats. That way we avoid having a virtual set where 5 of the cards are allowed in FOTR, TS, and Movie, 2 of the cards are allowed in TS and Movie, and 3 of the cards are allowed in Movie, etc. In my opinion, it would look unorganized and would get confusing very fast (if every virtual set is like that).  

I'd prefer if we organized it where all the cards in virtual set #1 are allowed in FOTR, TS, and Movie (which means Fellowship block cards).  Then for virtual set #2, we target TS and Movie (which means Tower Block cards).  Then for virtual set #3, just target Movie (which means King block cards).

[BTW, this is the same idea that Star Wars CCG did for their first 3 virtual sets to get things started...]

Since the "theme" for the virtual set #1 is basically "remaking the worst or most underused card of each culture in Fellowship block", virtual sets #2 and #3 could continue that theme for Towers and King.

After all that, since we would then have 3 sets out and would have gotten the hang of the process, we then could talk about true "themed" virtual sets, introducing a new keyword, etc.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2011, 07:10:23 PM by Tbiesty »

March 20, 2011, 01:36:38 PM
Reply #91

Hobbiton Lad

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Horseman
  • Posts: 319
  • Well-spoken Gentlehobbit
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #91 on: March 20, 2011, 01:36:38 PM »
I also disagree with block sets. Let us first get a decent set out (or a few), THEN we can look at themes and such. I know for a fact that some advocated a whole Vset devoted to X-ed cards, which is also block spanning.
Perhaps I wasn't very clear what I meant in my earlier post.  I'll try to do a better job this time.

The point was I was trying to get at was that I think in the long run it will be much cleaner if every card within a virtual set is allowed in the same formats. That way we avoid having a virtual set where 5 of the cards are allowed in FOTR, TS, and Movie, 2 of the cards are allowed in TS and Movie, and 3 of the cards are allowed in Movie, etc. In my opinion, it would look unorganized and would get confusing very fast (if every virtual set is like that). 

I'd prefer if we organized it where all the cards in virtual set #1 are allowed in FOTR, TS, and Movie (which means Fellowship block cards).  Then for virtual set #2, we target TS and Movie (which means Tower Block cards).  Then for virtual set #3, just target Movie (which means King block cards).

[BTW, this is the same idea that Star Wars CCG did for their first 3 virtual sets to get things started...]

Since the "theme" for the virtual set #1 is basically "remaking the worst or most underused card of each culture in Fellowship block", virtual sets #2 and #3 could continue that theme for Towers and King.

After all that, since we would then have 3 sets out and would have gotten the hang of the process, we then could talk about true "themed" virtual sets, introducing a new keyword, etc.


This seems like the strongest option to me.

March 28, 2011, 08:58:58 AM
Reply #92

macheteman

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1936
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #92 on: March 28, 2011, 08:58:58 AM »
i've used leaping blaze in dunland decks. i'm really not sure its that card that needs a remake.

March 28, 2011, 09:21:46 AM
Reply #93

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #93 on: March 28, 2011, 09:21:46 AM »
i've used leaping blaze in dunland decks. i'm really not sure its that card that needs a remake.
Keep in mind that a virtual card is a "new" card, it does not replace the old one.  You may continue to use the existing leaping blaze as is.

March 28, 2011, 11:34:17 AM
Reply #94

Thranduil

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4996
    • Zalman's Dungeon (blog of SF stories by Thranduil)
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #94 on: March 28, 2011, 11:34:17 AM »
I've been converted, Tbiesty! I have come to the conclusion that your way makes the most sense. It seems very logical and simple to me to have every card in a particular V-set legal in the same formats.

Thran

March 31, 2011, 05:03:45 PM
Reply #95

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #95 on: March 31, 2011, 05:03:45 PM »
I've been converted, Tbiesty! I have come to the conclusion that your way makes the most sense. It seems very logical and simple to me to have every card in a particular V-set legal in the same formats.

Thran

Awesome!  So to sum it up, would this be the list we are using for Virtual Set #1?

Code                      Card                                                                
V1*R01                   The One Ring, The Ruling Ring                      
V1GA02                   Gandalf, The Grey Wizard                     
V1DW03                  Gimli, Dwarf of Erebor                                      
V1SH04                   Fearing the Worst                                          
V1EL05                   Lightfootedness                                                
V1GO06                  Strength of Kings                                                
V1WA07                  Beauty is Fading                                              
V1MO08                  Goblin Archer                                                  
V1IS09                    Alive and Unspoiled                                      
V1SA10                   The Weight of a Legacy
« Last Edit: March 31, 2011, 07:57:03 PM by Tbiesty »

March 31, 2011, 07:55:37 PM
Reply #96

Kralik

  • Guest
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #96 on: March 31, 2011, 07:55:37 PM »
I think The Grey Wizard is due for an overhaul far more than The Grey Pilgrim.

April 01, 2011, 12:17:45 AM
Reply #97

Thranduil

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4996
    • Zalman's Dungeon (blog of SF stories by Thranduil)
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #97 on: April 01, 2011, 12:17:45 AM »
I know there are more FP than SH cultures in FotR, but I kind of want to make an equal number of SH cards. In particular, we need a nice flagship character (which is a shame, because the WK worked perfectly for this, but I think we should leave off Lord of Angmar given that we're going to do Deathless Lord in V2).

Agreed with your choice of Beauty is Fading 100%.

Thran

April 01, 2011, 04:41:01 AM
Reply #98

FM

  • Future Judge
  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4074
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #98 on: April 01, 2011, 04:41:01 AM »
How 'bout Watcher in the Water for a Flagship Character?

April 01, 2011, 06:06:55 AM
Reply #99

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #99 on: April 01, 2011, 06:06:55 AM »
IMO, I think it's fine without another flagship character.

April 01, 2011, 07:14:48 AM
Reply #100

Thranduil

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4996
    • Zalman's Dungeon (blog of SF stories by Thranduil)
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #100 on: April 01, 2011, 07:14:48 AM »
How 'bout Watcher in the Water for a Flagship Character?
I actually really like this idea! But then how to make a Watcher in the Water different enough from the original and the reprint...

I was modelling the 2 characters based on starter decks. Also, LotR is an inherently dualistic game and I think different people will want a hero and a villain to get behind.

Thran

April 01, 2011, 07:27:53 AM
Reply #101

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #101 on: April 01, 2011, 07:27:53 AM »
In Fellowship block, the flagship characters for the starter decks were always Free Peoples companions.  In fact, for Mines of Moria, it was Galdalf and Gimli.  Therefore, it seems like at least for Virtual Set #1, this is already satisfied.

April 01, 2011, 08:04:52 AM
Reply #102

Thranduil

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Wizard
  • Posts: 4996
    • Zalman's Dungeon (blog of SF stories by Thranduil)
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #102 on: April 01, 2011, 08:04:52 AM »
In Fellowship block, the flagship characters for the starter decks were always Free Peoples companions.  In fact, for Mines of Moria, it was Galdalf and Gimli.  Therefore, it seems like at least for Virtual Set #1, this is already satisfied.
Yes of course! #-o Still, I like having both. But it's not necessary I suppose. I do kind of still want the same number of Shadow as FP, especially as it's the FotR Shadow sides that actually need a lot more work than the FP sides.

April 01, 2011, 08:14:45 AM
Reply #103

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #103 on: April 01, 2011, 08:14:45 AM »
I know what you mean.  Here's my thoughts...

For this first "virtual trip" through the blocks, we know we won't address everything.  I think a nice clean approach is to hit a single card from each culture (in many cases, the most forgotten card).  In FOTR, there are more Free Peoples cultures than Shadow cultures, but that's ok, because at that point the Fellowship hasn't encountered all the dangers they would later in their journey.

Once we get through each of the blocks, we can think about virtual sets being more as groups of cards that work together.  For FOTR, perhaps focus more on Shadow strategies, etc. at that time.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2011, 08:18:24 AM by Tbiesty »

May 27, 2011, 03:17:45 AM
Reply #104

Tbiesty

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 561
Re: TLHH Virtual Set #1: Preliminary Discussion
« Reply #104 on: May 27, 2011, 03:17:45 AM »
In case anyone was curious, my playing group just did complete our first virtual set.
If you are interested in seeing how it turned out and how it works in our formats, it can be seen here within the format rules for CCG League.