Preliminary Discussion: Lady Redeemed

[Crabby Imposter]

Why we're discussing legality, can we *please* ban Galadriel, Lady Redeemed?  Every single time someone uses her I want to do three things:
1) punch them in the face;
2) immediately quit;
3) never play LOTR again.
I can't do 1, haven't done 2 yet, and 3 is becoming tempting as I see more and more players using her, then justifying their actions by saying "I see other people using her!" GAH!!

[Kralik]

Better start a new thread for that one once Frodo is resolved. I know that she is banned either officially or unofficially in most circles.

[Gil-Estel]

Than make it happen, since I agree with Crabby Imposter. But Jm, since I know Smeagollum plays LR, I can punch him in the face for you. He lives 200 kilometer from my house. More than happy to make that effort.

[Crabby Imposter]

wtk: "I saw Lady Redeemed  yesterday. As much as I hate her and it crippled my deck, my honest rationale is, "If you use her, I have all rights to pout and call you a sullen #$&*@! and #$&*@! and whatnot the whole game and not be a good sport.""

That's the tactic I normally use.  I'd really like to be able to punch them in the face though.  That would make be feel better.  So does somehow pulling off a win against GLR, especially a shadow kill.  Few things excite me in LOTR as much as killing Lady Redeemed.

[Imrahil]

I absolutely agree 90% of the time.  Unfortunately, I am also a dedicated elven player and am pretty much convinced that LR is necessary against Corsairs and to a lesser extent Besiegers.  I'm not saying that it's impossible to win without her, but it's very unlikely.  In King block, Possessions and Conditions were meant to be transitory, and without LR Elves have no possession removal.

Of course, against everything else she is utterly broken.

[Kralik]

On the other hand (not that I am for LR), should Elves have possession removal? Hobbit, for example, have neither Possession nor Condition removal. But they are great healers! Pros and cons...

[Gil-Estel]

Indeed, each culture has their own gimmick. LR doesn't have a place in the culture, since she opens doors to options they shouldn't have. She makes Elves practically unkillable. Even when you can expect everyone to play Terrible as the Dawn, you can anticipate by packing wound prevention and Aiglos, Nenya and Tale of Gil Galad on her. Stand against Darkness is nice vs self assign besiegers and even then, you are likely to pack a whole bunch of events so skirmish shouldn't be too big of a problem.

[Not a Zombie]

Indeed, each culture has their own gimmick.

Exactly! Kinda like Dwarfs can kill just about any minion and choke reasonably well, but they don't have condition/possession removal. Oh, wait, BRC

[Kralik]

Right then. Let's here some more feedback on whether LR should be removed from Movie block.

[MR. Lurtzy]

This would be the TLHH version of Movie Block right? Because as far as I'm concerned no one can change any offical format.

[Kralik]

This would be the TLHH version of Movie Block right? Because as far as I'm concerned no one can change any offical format.

TLHH version of anything is the purpose of all of these forums. "House Rules."

[Legolis]

I think she should stay, she is hot!

[Tbiesty]

Right then. Let's here some more feedback on whether LR should be removed from Movie block.

I agree that LR, as printed, should not be allowed. It would need to changed before allowing it back.

[Ringbearer]

Ban the #$&*@!!

[hrcho]

Fools, you have no perception!
The stakes we are gambling are frighteningly high!
We must crush her completely,
So like Lady of Light before her, this Lady Redeemed must die.
For the sake of the nation, this Lady Redeemed must die.

Must die, must die, this Lady Redeemed must die.*

*Off topic: this is my favorite scene and song from the remake of Jesus Christ Superstar. The voices and the singing is sooo much better. Do not respond to this, it's off topic.

[Imrahil]

Get rid of her and my lovely elves are screwed, let her stay and everything else is screwed.  I agree that she should be banned as a TLHH house rule, but that's going to force me to run a Gandalf splash.

I mean, you guys remember how it was at the end, you had to run a freeps side capable of beating corsairs, and a minion side capable of sniping Galadriel.  Get rid of Galadriel and we're still all going to have to run corsair-hate.  And for someone like me (50% of what I face is either Besiegers or Corsairs), it's a tough pill to swallow.

[Kralik]

Perhaps it would be better to consider whether she could stay with errata. I could see her as being somewhat feasible if the cost was increased to... maybe... two exerts. Shadow Between (for example) makes one exert not enough.

[Shelobplayer]

I think you should either ban her or leave her as she is. I always hated errata, but that's not my point here. Not everyone reads these forums, who plays on GCCG, it would only cause unnecessary conflicts (and bad gaming experience) to change her game text. On the other hand, if the deck validator marks a deck with LR illegal, there wouldn't be place for argument.

[Gil-Estel]

Agreed with that. Leave the Elves without possessionremoval, go with the old Bearded Wizard to add that to your decks!

[Thranduil]

As soon as LR was released, every deck that could possibly stretch to play her was doing so. Very soon after that, every deck that could possibly stretch to play Terrible as the Dawn was playing it to kill LR.

Any card that makes everyone bend over backwards to include it in a huge variety of decks, and that is so powerful and so scary that the entire format has to be warped by everyone bending over backwards to fit in its hoser is a broken card and should be banned.

Errata can come at a later date. If we want a ruling now, I don't really see any reason that she shouldn't be banned.

Thran

[Kralik]

Thran has a point...

[Witchkingx5]

Yeah, it's kinda like Survival of the Fittest...

but still, you'll to have Tier One Decks, and as soon as LR is officially banned, you'll soon have some random dudes crying how OP Castamir of Umbar is, and how they get crushed by that Monster and bla bla bla...

So from my point of view, ban her, but do never ever ever ever again ban anything else that is legal now. Even though some cards might be strictly "better" thatn others, you just can't avoid that kinda situation. Or just go and paly Chess and start complaining about the 0.25 pawns advantage the White player has for being able to begin the game.

[Kralik]

Castamir of Umbar is OP with or without LR. I don't see taking LR away as really changing that much.

[Inspire]

I do not play with cards from RotK and further very often, but it seems to me the simplest solution might be to just remove her reduced cost in the starting fellowship. She would still remain a great card, just a more appropriately costed one. Plus, it's likely a much easier errata for players to remember than changing her ability to remove conditions/possession.

[Witchkingx5]

Castamir of Umbar is OP with or without LR. I don't see taking LR away as really changing that much.

But you don't play castamir of Umbar much besides a Corsair Deck, do you? And LR just roasts Corsairs.

[Thranduil]

Castamir of Umbar is OP with or without LR. I don't see taking LR away as really changing that much.

But you don't play castamir of Umbar much besides a Corsair Deck, do you? And LR just roasts Corsairs.

But that's the point. LR goes in almost any deck. Castamir only goes in Corsairs. This is one of the major reasons that I think LR is OP while Castamir is not.

Thran

[Kralik]

Even though I think Tubby is OP, I do not suggest that he be removed. I think the same about Cirdan, for example. LR goes much further than either of those, and messes with many, many more Shadow decks than just being a counter for Corsairs. My opinion, as it stands, is that Elves do not need LR, nor should they have her.

You might say, "but what else can I do to save myself from the Corsairs and Besiegers?"
To which I reply, "What can my poor four hobbits (non-Shadowplay) fellowship do to save themselves from the same?"

My fellowship is vulnerable to a number of things, but other times it does quite well. That's the nature of the game. I don't think it's a problem that Elves, already having an advantage with archery and companions like Cirdan and Gilgalad, are vulnerable to certain Shadows either.

[Kralik]

What was Decipher thinking in making her free anyway?

[Imrahil]

Castamir of Umbar is OP with or without LR. I don't see taking LR away as really changing that much.

But you don't play castamir of Umbar much besides a Corsair Deck, do you? And LR just roasts Corsairs.

But that's the point. LR goes in almost any deck. Castamir only goes in Corsairs. This is one of the major reasons that I think LR is OP while Castamir is not.

Thran

The easy answer to the problem then, is to provide LR with cultural reinforcement.  Unfortunately, I think most players will agree with me when I say that cultural reinforcement alone is not enough.  The fact that "Castamir only goes with Corsairs" didn't stop everyone and their mother from playing Corsairs back in the day, just as cultural reinforcement on LR will just encourage people to play elves.

I admit that I don't really play with LR, because I too feel that the effect is too good for the cost.  In consequence I have died to Corsairs countless times.  I have been swarmed, I have been overwhelmed, I have had all my bows discarded, I have been destroyed by Under Foot, and even (insult to injury) Red Wrathed.  I just can't touch the shadow support area, and against a good Corsair side that means I will lose 80% of the time.

And I am getting tired of losing.

I understand that a ban is inevitable, and I accept that.  But bear in mind that Decipher's designers meant each set to be balanced, and that means that LR was printed as a check on other elements in the set, just as the other elements were strengthened to counter LR.

So if you ban her, just remember to make all those stupid ships into conditions, or my poor, doomed little elves will continue to sacrifice themselves in futile displays of courage.

[Kralik]

Do you play anything besides Elves? Or other styles of Elves? My Elven discard seems to do well vs. Corsairs...

[Imrahil]

I play a number of different variations, although my personal favourites are elven archery, and Glimpse of Fate/ Forearmed mashups.  Elven discard is something I enjoy, but don't play seriously.  I lack the sauron shadow to pair it with, and I would like my friends to keep playing with me. :-)

Therefore I personally am in favor of an errata to Galadriel, not an outright ban.  I want cultural reinforcement and a harsher cost for her ability, but I still want playability.  Decipher's designers were mortals such as ourselves, not gods in whose footsteps we should fear to tread.  Let us recreate Galadriel LR in our own image, as the TLHH player community, and realize a better, more balanced game.

Within reason of course. :-)

[Tbiesty]

Therefore I personally am in favor of an errata to Galadriel, not an outright ban.  I want cultural reinforcement and a harsher cost for her ability, but I still want playability.  Decipher's designers were mortals such as ourselves, not gods in whose footsteps we should fear to tread.  Let us recreate Galadriel LR in our own image, as the TLHH player community, and realize a better, more balanced game.

I agree with what you say here.

This is the errata that I've been using that has brought balance:

Galadriel, Lady Redeemed
While Galadriel is in your starting
fellowship, her twilight cost is -1.
Fellowship or Regroup: Exert Galadriel
twice and discard an event from hand to
discard a Shadow condition or Shadow possession.

The card as printed should be banned. However, once players on TLHH get a chance to playtest an errata and realize that it does work, we can bring Galadriel, Lady Redeemed back with an errata.  Even adding the errata to GCCG is a simple update.

[Imrahil]

Hmmm...so instead of cultural reinforcement you've decreased her splashability by increasing her cost.  An interesting idea, although I would prefer to keep her cost at zero in the starting fellowship and instead require a "spot" of two other elven companions.

Both ideas work I think, but I'd love to hear what methodologies you used to arrive at your current errata.

[ramolnar]

In the Corsair deck, the strongest card is not Castamir of Umbar. It's Corsair Marauder, because that's the card that takes things away. It makes playing possessions extremely difficult. There's a reason the strongest beatdown deck AND the strongest swarm deck in Movie Block play Marauder. 
Elves have a choice without Lady Redeemed - archery! Intentionally, Corsairs were built with no wound prevention. But the Marauder strips all the Elven Bows. The same thing applies to other decks. The best decks against Corsairs run few to no possessions: Knights, Gandalf/Gondor, big Elven events. My tourney version of Knights runs just 3 Gondor Bow, and might run even less and more Men of Numenor just because of the Marauder. It defines the format.

Galadriel, Lady Redeemed causes similar problems: she makes a lot of Shadow sides not viable. LR is the best deck and defines the format. It makes it very difficult to play any deck that uses Shadow conditions or possessions. There are still ways to oppose it, like Southron archery which plays at most Rallying Call in the condition area. Low-cost Isengard Orc swarm isn't a good deck, but it attacks one of the other weaknesses, slow expensive companion setup.

Because she shuts down too many sides, I believe Galadriel needs a ban or errata. Imrahil's suggestion isn't enough, because the Best Deck (big Elf event) remains the best deck. If anything, it makes it worse, because it means one should play big Elves or Last Alliance. Tbiesty's errata would do it, I guess. Have you tested removing all the starting fellowship cost and requiring just one exertion? That would be my first guess at "balance".

[Tbiesty]

Tbiesty's errata would do it, I guess. Have you tested removing all the starting fellowship cost and requiring just one exertion? That would be my first guess at "balance".

With the ability to heal her with cards like Elrond, Venerable Lord or Shadow Between, requiring just one exertion didn't require enough "investment", and still allowed her to be easily used multiple times.  Two exertions fit the bill nicely, plus making it easier for the Shadow player to prevent her from using her ability.  Changing the starting cost to just -1, allowed you to still start her in an elf-centered deck, but now only with help from one other elf, so she might have to actually fight.

Hope that helps.

[Kralik]

Imrahil, are you seeing abundant Corsairs on GCCG or in your local playing group?

Yes, Corsair Maurader is rough too, but I still think Tubby takes the cake. Imagine what he is with a Raider Halberd: Str. 22 and fierce for (SEVEN?!) twilight. And loads of token reinforcement. Compare with other minions of similar cost (The Witch King, Lurtz, etc) and those with a higher cost (Uruk Vanguard or The Balrog, for example, which both have specific play requirements) and I think the issue is clear.

But that's beside the point. LR still needs the boot.

[Inspire]

With the ability to heal her with cards like Elrond, Venerable Lord or Shadow Between, requiring just one exertion didn't require enough "investment", and still allowed her to be easily used multiple times.  Two exertions fit the bill nicely, plus making it easier for the Shadow player to prevent her from using her ability.  Changing the starting cost to just -1, allowed you to still start her in an elf-centered deck, but now only with help from one other elf, so she might have to actually fight.

Hope that helps.

There is an opportunity cost associated with using cards like Elrond, Venerable Lord and Shadow Between to heal her just like there is an opportunity cost for players who would use 4 copies of her if her cost reduction is removed. Even one exertion creates wounds (and a need for healing) where there were none before, thus preventing the player from healing other key companions that they might have when using pre-errata Lady Redeemed.

[Imrahil]

I disagree with ramolnar in that I believe a double-exertion is an adequate cost increase without removing LR's ability to start with two other elves.  The big elf event deck suffers accordingly because it can no longer cycle events through LR freely, or easily discard several possessions/conditions in the same turn.  Also, a two elf spotting requirement prevents LR from being "splashed" in with other cultures, which I believe was one of the major complaints in prior posts.

I also disagree with Inspire that a one-exertion cost is an adequate errata.  Even if a player is forced to pack four copies and play her outside the starting fellowship, the other copies provide easy healing. 

Kralik:  I see Corsairs a lot in my local playing group, mostly because my group has limited cards and therefore limited deck options.  I agree with you that pound for pound, the Castamir is much superior to comparable minions, even if the comparable minions tend to have the potential for better toys (and therefore might deserve higher initial costs).

[ramolnar]

With the ability to heal her with cards like Elrond, Venerable Lord or Shadow Between, requiring just one exertion didn't require enough "investment", and still allowed her to be easily used multiple times.  Two exertions fit the bill nicely, plus making it easier for the Shadow player to prevent her from using her ability.  Changing the starting cost to just -1, allowed you to still start her in an elf-centered deck, but now only with help from one other elf, so she might have to actually fight.

Hope that helps.

I haven't tested errata, so thanks for the reply. Would you even want to start with her, then? Wouldn't it be better to play 3 or 4 for the healing? I'd rather start Glorfindel and Legolas Greenleaf.

I'm also not strongly in favor of my suggestion; it comes from memory. I've only played her in big Elves and Last Alliance. Do people really splash? Dwarves don't want her - Blood Runs Chill is fine. Gandalf/Gondor would rather run on-color events. Knights don't care. What else?

What was Decipher thinking in making her free anyway?

My best guess, given the era? It was a late change to counter Corsairs. Corsairs were by far the "best" deck after set 8, leading to a lot of negative complaints. At the time, my tourney deck started Derufin and ran Gandalf for Roll of Thunder, and that's still barely enough. She does neuter Corsairs.

[Thranduil]

The easy answer to the problem then, is to provide LR with cultural reinforcement.  Unfortunately, I think most players will agree with me when I say that cultural reinforcement alone is not enough.  The fact that "Castamir only goes with Corsairs" didn't stop everyone and their mother from playing Corsairs back in the day, just as cultural reinforcement on LR will just encourage people to play elves.

There always have to be top tier decks, and sometimes there is one deck that dominates a format (for example, Jund in MTG before Shards of Alara rotated out). Corsairs is one of those decks. And that's fine! (Of course, MTG does try and avoid this if possible because a wider range of decks is more interesting, but this is always going to happen occasionally).

Obviously a game which isn't out of print which keeps releasing new sets and rotates older ones solves this problem just with time, as Corsairs would rotate out of a standard environment and new cards would be added to an extended environment and the dominating decks will change. So I suppose the problem here is that (barring TLHH V-cards) the format is never going to change. That's a shame, but it still doesn't make LR any less ridiculous!

Thran

[Ringbearer]

Corsairs has still difficulty vs elves, especially late game. Elves dont need posessions to tacke corsairs if they have forearmed and cirdan. Its not an easy matchup, but it is dobale. Also, corairs lack any form of wound protection, so you double more easily vs castamir and then enact the movie (extended) and shoot castamir with greenleaf.

I was at the EC in Utrecht when they spoiled LR to a few dAgents, and the general consensus was: broken.

LR might be suitable check against corsairs, but she neuters: moria, old school sauron, trackers, dunland, besiegers, uruk archery, berserkers.... and prolly a few that I forgot. Het impact on the gamescene is too big. One card should not lock down 5 or 6 strategies.

[Gil-Estel]

Amen

[Imrahil]

Let's all have a moment of silence for rubbercarp...followed by the public humiliation of whoever he's playing against...

I guess we have to settle the basic question then:  Are we in favour of an outright ban or just an errata?

I would propose that Kralik remove her from GCCG as a temporary solution, but I fear that such an action might inevitably become a permanent solution.  As I am in favor of errata, I hesitate to "shoot myself in the foot" so to speak.

[Tbiesty]

I guess we have to settle the basic question then:  Are we in favour of an outright ban or just an errata?

I would propose that Kralik remove her from GCCG as a temporary solution, but I fear that such an action might inevitably become a permanent solution.  As I am in favor of errata, I hesitate to "shoot myself in the foot" so to speak.

There are several other cards like Mordor Fiend, Gondorian Captain, Memories of Darkness, etc. that are in this group as well.  A small fix, and they're back in play.

Therefore, I propose that she is banned for now.  Then sometime in the near future the rules team conduct a discussion like this to address erratas for these cards so they can join back into the card pool.  Even if "Movie" format keeps these cards on an X-list, the "Extended Movie" format that I'd like to add to GCCG would allow the errata'd cards back.  That way players have a choice.

Is that a fair solution?

[Gil-Estel]

Maybe, in the future, each one of us can have their own deck validator....Running by an opponent's deck: illegal! Why? You play Saruman's Power. You play LR!

But seriously, I suggest we be gentlemen about it at first and wait for a sollution. Don't forget to ask first when ever playing a moviegame. Do you play LR, if yes, sorry, I don't play. Allthough LR can't though my LttG, mhuahaha.

[Thranduil]

I agree with Tbiesty and Imrahil. Ban her now, and errata her later.

Though I think errata is confusing and annoying (to have a card that doesn't do what it says) and I probably wouldn't endorse it for a still-printed game, for LotR and it's finished card pool, I think erratas are ultimately the only sensible solution, rather than bans. But I don't think we should be sitting here now arguing about how LR should change, and so we should ban her. Then, at a later date, go through X'ed cards and give them all errata.

[Ringbearer]

Poor rubbercarp is playing a game against her right now...good for him for not complaining, but bad matchup with Ninja Gollum and all...
-wtk

That wasnt rubbercarp, that was me. And go easy on the guy, he didnt know about the "gentlemans agreement".

[Kralik]

If it's a "Gentleman's Agreement" on GCCG, then can't we all be "Gentlemen?"

[Crabby Imposter]

IMHO, a "gentleman's agreement" only works when playing against people who frequent TLHH.  And it only works with people willing to be "gentlemen"... sorry Kralik, but we just can't all be gentle.  Ban her, and don't look back.

[Kralik]

That was rather the point, my dear crabby friend.

We "agree" to force gentlemanly behavior.

[plnp123]

I'm also for banning her immediately.
Many seemingly new players are starting to use her and its very annoying. Also in GCCG corsairs aren't played that often. Many of us agree4ee to have different more creative decks. Its shouldn't be much of a problem.
I don't know who was ringbearer playing against but Ive seen at least two people using her. I played against one with my new ninja gollum deck -hrcho and wtk have played against it- and didn't stand a chance against it.
I propose that we start voting on this matter as soon as possible before LR usage gets out of hand

[jcb213]

If you don't like Galadriel, LR the  easy solution is just to not play a game against an opponent who is using her.

• If you are playing casually in person, just tell your playgroup that you won't play against a deck using her.  There are plenty of other decks to play with and people will oblige
• If you are playing online, just tell your opponent before you start the game that you will not play against a deck using her.
• If you are running a tournament, see what the majority of players feel (which is usually to just ban her) and then do what they want for that specific tournament. 

For the LOTR tournament at SW worlds last year I announced in advance that we were banning her for that specific tournament.  For the LOTR tournament at the TX SW event in April I will also be banning her.  That's what the majority of players who will be at the event want so that's what we will do.  As long as people know in advance there should be no issue.

Galadriel LR is definitely a pain, but some people do enjoy both the decks she goes in and the challenge of building a competitive deck that can beat a deck with her in it (or changing the strategy of how you play your favorite deck to be able to run to 9 against a deck with her in it).  For our local playgroup we just make sure to only play a deck with her in it if the other person doesn't mind playing against her.  If someone really wants to play with her, then there are others who also want to play with/against her and they can play.

Basically, there is no reason to modify the official ban list (because that can open a can of worms and be a slippery slope once people start complaining about other cards - everyone has different opinions about what is broken or NPE), just make your preference known in the games/tournaments you play in ahead of time and all is well.

[Kralik]

First, we aren't modifying any "official" list.

Second, there is a reason: I don't want the conversation to be:

Kralik: Anyone for Movie?
JoeBob: I will!
Kralik: OK, but no Lady Redeemed.
JoeBob: Awww, I like Lady Redeemed.
Kralik: Sorry, won't play vs. her. Pick a different deck.
JoeBob: Fine...

...later...

Kralik: Anyone for a game of Movie w/o LR?
JoeBob: Anyone for a game of Movie with LR accepted?
Franky: I'll play, JoeBob! (meanwhile, picks a shadow deck tailored vs. LR and Elves).

If the majority of GCCG/TLHH players don't want LR (yes, that is a real "if" question, which is why we will vote), why not remove her from the possible options to keep it simple?

[Kralik]

Deck validator takes care of that.

[Imrahil]

On GCCG Kralik is God.  God provides universal morality and/or absolute law.  Therefore GCCG rules/formats/realities are whatever Kralik decides.

Philisophically, you can spend as much time arguing the potential non-existence of gravity as you want, but you still won't be able to fly.

[Thranduil]

Philisophically, you can spend as much time arguing the potential non-existence of gravity as you want, but you still won't be able to fly.

I would contest that. All you have to do is forget to hit the ground!


Seriously, for people in this thread saying that you don't think that any ban lists should be changed, good on you—you have a completely valid opinion and you should stick by it if you want to.

But, I can't see a reason why you are therefore posting in this thread (or indeed this board!) which is designed to create a TLHH format. This format will be created by modifying banned lists, issuing errata, promoting new formats etc. If you don't want that to happen, then that's completely fair enough, but it's really unhelpful and useless for everyone for you to be posting here! I believe there is even another thread which addresses this precise issue.

Thranduil

[hrcho]

I think this has gone long enough. I've posted the poll. Have your say and let's be done with this dirty business.

All you have to do is forget to hit the ground!

Hitchhiker Fan?

[ununtrium]

There is always the "casual" play environment. Movie Block has to be simple and fair. LR is a card I like a lot, but our not very competitive players group uses her only, when we're in an even less competitive mood, if you know what I mean. So I voted Yes on the ban.

It is a matter of wanting to win or wanting to be entertained...

[jcb213]

If people want to ban Galadriel, LR that's fine, but how long will it be until someone is calling for a ban of Sam SoH?  Decipher banned him at the same time they banned Galadriel, LR and he really makes burden decks not competitive in movie block.  Or what about Saruman's Power?  That wipes out the entire free peoples support area of conditions, so condition heavy decks are destroyed by it.  You can make arguments for lots of different cards that are not fun to play against and totally destroy multiple decks or limit deck-building options.  What about all the other cards that are part of movie block that Decipher banned later on?  Fortress Never Fallen?  Saruman's Snows?  Legolas, Dauntless Hunter?  All of those can destroy certain decks and make the game not enjoyable for your opponent as well.  I absolutely had discard decks and think they are completely detrimental to the game, can we ban all discard related cards as well?

I guess my question is really this - will this be a one time addition to the GCCG movie block x-list or is the community open to adding more cards to the x-list later on?  You can call this "LHH Movie Block"  and say it's a different format from movie block, but if you are changing the GCCG x-list for movie block then aren't you effectively changing movie block for all online players?  I'm just worried that this could set the precedent for multiple additional bannings for GCCG.

[hrcho]

@jcb213:

I doubt your fears will come true. None of those cards you mentioned are as OP as Galadriel, LR. This was thoroughly discussed and I will not go into reasons why.

Even if many players do show dislike to certain cards, we can always open a discussion similar to this one and then push it to voting.

Also note that we are banning Galadriel, LR only as a temporary action until The Rules Team decides (with the help and agreement of TLHH community) upon the best errata for Galadriel, LR. No one really likes errata, but as Thran and Tbiesty both said, there are no new LotR TCG cards in the making. There will be no more set rotation and we've got ourselves hands full of cards that are unusable. The best way to make those cards usable is to fix them. That process has already started and even though it might take some time to get there, we are moving. The great advantage of online playing and virtual cards is that they are a lot easier to fix than the real cards. Have faith and feel free to help.

[Kralik]

Cards like Sam, SoH and Legolas, Dauntless Hunter were around for a good, long while before they were banned. They were always powerful, but when they were banned, it was because of the addition of new sets that made them ridiculous. For example: Legolas, Dauntless Hunter normally had only two unbound hobbits (possible) to work with. After Shadows? Many, many more.

On the other hand, LR was known to be overpowered immediately after printing and was had a very short life span before banning. She is officially banned in many circles, including in the French Movie X-list (distributed, for example with Zorbec's). So I think you are comparing apples to oranges. In general the goal will be to open up more play styles, more creative decks, and a better play experience. As Thran pointed out, LR vastly sways decks to have to come up with ways to deal just with her. This messes with creativity and provides a negative experience for any Shadow deck that relies on possessions and conditions (*cough* most *cough*).

As to changing online play in general: Aside from GCCG, you can also play with your friends on SdA or Lackey. All the files are available for both, and I can help you if you have questions on either. The current GCCG server is hosted and "owned" by TLHH, so the tie-in seems quite natural. You could set up your own GCCG server if you wished, and I would be more than willing to send you the necessary instructions and/or playerfiles if that is what you want.

Also, as an online player, feel free to vote! Remember that the only changes that will happen are those are approved by a majority of players!

[MR. Lurtzy]

And remember you can always go and play Decipher's formats instead of these.

[V-R4NG3R]

I vote for BAN!! get her out of here!!

[Jimmy_aR]

Guys, LR is really strong card. No discussion about that. But it cannot be banned. Let me show you perfect example of how one strong card changed whole system of game: Ulaire Enquea, LoM.
This U card completely changed whole LOTR TCG. Since release noone has played more than 5 companions and you can find Sam, SoH in every deck. This Enquea is much stronger card than LR is. And wasn't banned.

Now we have to find some way in our Shadows, how to get rid of this wITCH.;-)  Exactly the same as we did before, when Enquea was launched.

Banning is the easiest way, how to deal with her. But then we could talk about the Enquea and how he is destroying the 9-charactered fellowship.

Just my point of view...

[Ringbearer]

Because of the hand size of 8, any fellowship above 5 is hard to touch with minions. If someone goes to 9 comps, you cannot even touch frodo without hand extension. The over 5 punish was chosen to balance the fact that large fellowships fight easier against a number of minions.

[Kralik]

Shotgun Enquea is ESSENTIAL. Remember that when the game was first created there was (ideally) a tight balance of twilight. The flavor or lore behind it was that if the number of the Fellowship was few, they would attract less of Sauron's attention. If they traveled with many, they would be sure to face DANGER. Enquea simply reflects that reasoning and, along with cards like GREED, make it dangerous to travel when The Number Must Be Few.

And as a sidenote, I can't see how you can make the case that Shotgun Enquea "completely changed whole LOTR TCG" when he was released in the very first set.

[TheJord]

I think it fits the feel of the books that, as a large group they faced big dangers, but when Frodo, Sam and Smeagol were heading to Mount Doom, they faced different dangers.

[plnp123]

Don't want to be an a-hole here and forgive me if I am. But jimmy it seems that LR is the only deck you play.

It seems that the list of players who use her is growing, saying that they fear corsairs. Come on almost no one on gccg uses corsairs. Grond wont affect a good built elven deck because almost no minion would make it to Regroup phase -or just pack Stand Against Darkness. And I can think of a ton of counter measures vs conditions. -Company of Archers, Secret Sentinels, Herald to Gil-Galad + Vilya ....

If the trend continues one of two -sad- things may happen.Either the ones that don't like her will stop playing the ones we know use her -a black list- or having possessions and conditions decks scrapped.

Either way is a loss for everyone because we will keep playing the same decks and styles over and over in two groups of the same community.

So I say: ban her for the sake of creativity and innovation!!! Even with a static card pool we can create unexpected strategies or reinvent old ones!

[Imrahil]

I understand your reasoning but I'm not sure if I trust your argument.  In my understanding, up until a few months ago very few people on GCCG used LR because of the "gentleman's agreement", and yet now this discussion has become necessary.  What's to stop the same phenomenon from suddenly increasing the popularity of corsairs with LR out of the picture?

But I guess we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.  For the moment, banning her seems to be the best option (although I'm not officially allowed to vote as I don't play on GCCG :-).  With the promise that we immediately start working on an errata to "fix" the balance of power.

[Gil-Estel]

LoM is needed since with the escalation of the nowadays standard game, almost all fellowships grow to size 9. With 9 companions, there is really not much you can do. That is not the nature of the game. I have always liked the essense of the game, descriped by Kralik, travel light, draw little attention, little danger is ahead of you. Nowadays it is like every game is like the last move made by Gondor, without the despair. Grow big, strong and you will face trouble! There should be a card like: shadow: draw a card for each companion over 5. You want trouble? You will get it!
So LoM is nowhere near as bad as LR. He doesn't change decks, he brings balance to the game. Every type of deck can be played vs Enquea, as long as you keep a smaller crowd or use something to ignore him. Slaked Thirsts comes to mind along with Might of Numenor, Nenya, RoA, Baruk Khazad, and others can do the job as well. Not to mention woundprevention. So please think about that, before saying he is OP.
I do not care about banning her, I don't use her either way. I hate playing vs her, so I think banning is the best option. Like Ringbearer said, no card should be able to lock down 4-5 strategies by her own.

[Smeagollum]

People you make me laugh in this discussion. Really:)

Let me state one thing first: I don't like playing Elven decks and I dont like to encounter them in movie. Still I use Galadriel, LR (that is if I use her). Mostly in combo with Sam, Smeagol and Frodo or with Isuldur (running Gandalf, Aragorn, wraiths and a copy of an Elrond ally and a copy of Legolas). Why I don't like palying against elven decks in movie. Well I find it lacking of some fantasy and all elvendecks in movie are 100% possible tournament winners. For me there is no challenge to that and it explaines why I don't like playing elvendecks.

If we look closer to what people call the problem GLR. She can discard elven events to ditch conditions and possesions in fellowship and regroup. That is hard, sure. Especially in combo with Cirdan. Secondly she is a free comp. And third she is awesome for cycling your deck fast. So far her advantages. Then her weakness: Her strength and vitality and she is unbound.

Most people would agree with me that her ideal combo is with Cirdan in play. But is there a reason to ban her?

IMHO: NO

Let me explain:

1. How many cards are there for freeps to discard possesions in movieblock: Erkenbrand, GLR, Roll of thunder, arrow slits and possible to ditch possesions, but not certain of it will happen: Turn of the tide, Catapult. That are not many cards to be honest, while there are reasons to have the ability for freeps to discard possesions in movie: Besiegers, Corsairs, Ninja Gollum and in lesser Dunlend (hides).

If you want to play something else then elven and you want to stand a chance against those shadowdecks then you have limitid options if you ban GLR. In fact GLR gives more variety in the freep decks.

If you don't run her in an elven deck she is vulnerable. Also have her in such a deck you cant have that many elven events ín your deck, because that will unballance it.

I think most people can agree with me so far.

2. Does it matter she is free. Well I wouldnt mind if she would have cost 2, but generally it's just one comp more in the starting fellowship, but she will provide also a one cost more to move. Actually Smeagol does the same: He is free to and he has ways to kill a shadow to. Dont see a very big point in the fact that she is free.

3. All cards which are not on the official decipher x-list are meant to be played and to have fun with it.

4. People should be inventive to work around her. If she is the meta you will see rise other decks that will work against that meta and something else will become more populair to play with. Archerydecks, Discard decks, Swarmdecks, burdendecks (without using possesions and conditions that is) and decks with only minions and decks in which you can assign a minion to a companion (most times those cards are specified to assign to an unbound comp) will be able to defeat decks with GLR. And really to say that she kills 4 or 5 strategies doesn't mean you should ban her, because there are enough strategies left and in a tournament that will even the odds to all decks.

5. Elven decks with GLR have a different ringbearer; that means you will also need cards to give some protection for the ringbearer. If you want to have a deck that runs fast you want to have a deck with a small deck. A non-elven ringbearer in an elvendeck means more cards and slower cycling and so less ballanced. In an elvendeck I would prefer Galadriel as ringbearer above GLR.

6. GLR can only ditch conditions and possesions in fellowship and regroup; that means that the shadow can have a one time use and advantage of a possesion or condition (all the other possesions discard cards in freeps dont give that option).

7. If you want to ban her you should also ban grond for example, because that can ruin a fellowship to.

8. There are cards that makes it able to discard an unbound companion and there are cards that can wound companions. That makes it able to the shadowplayer to kill her.

9. GLR is the only Galadriel card that makes Kate Blanchet look awesome:p

So here are 8/9 reasons why she isn't that broken as people refer to. Yes she is a nuisance and especially in combo with Cirdan, but hey people be more inventive and don't whine about it.

These are the reasons why I will keep playing her: Gentlemens agreement or unofficial x-list or not. Yes she can be abused (though I think people who played against my decks will admit that I don't use her that much), but imho opinion there is enough against her that makes it ballanced enough. So if you want to do against her then do something with an errata. I could go with a good one there. But then take it down to where she is the strongest and that is in combination with Cirdan. If you want to errata her then make it instead elven event an Elven condition from the support area.

[Smeagollum]

Oh and Heije... Pounch me will not help, because I will sui you for it:p And that will give you a problem if you want to change jobs (think of Provement of good bahaviour):p

[Gil-Estel]

1. You have to pack other cards, that indeed can be worthless. She is an elf, that is there no matter what, and she runs events. She is like an insurancepolitcy. Run into trouble, she will deal with it.
2. Free extra companion with awesome options. You could burn her for great support, to launch your fellowship. Smeagol can be burned, but only helps you shadow. Limited options. There is also not a single Smeagol that ruins multiple decks. Oh, and he has a cost: add a burden.
3. True, but doesn't mean anything. We know decipher has made terrible mistakes in the past.
4. There are limited options to kill her. The point is also that you don't want gameplay to hit a specific card, that in the rerun will counter that specific gameplay. LR runs events, and so she is able to deal with a lot.
5. There are multiple options to protect your ringbearer, so that is nowhere near a viable argument to not ban LR. There are stronger RB's than Galadriel
6. Only in fellowship or regroup? ONLY? You get to choose your moment. A lot of possessions benefit later game.
7. You have no guarantee to get Grond from the start, you have no guarantee of tokens etc etc. You start her, you run events and a lot of them. Big dif. Oh, and some events directly target grond, where as there is just 1 that somehow hit Galadriel.
8. Discard her is an option, but again nowhere near as easy as a roll of thunder.
9. Agreed

[Smeagollum]

1. There is no insurance, because you still have to draw the events.
2. The burden you add with smeagol can be an enormous advantage. And if you kill her off then you have a dead comp in your deadpile wjich is still a dead comp which limits you to play other comps by one less. Benefit with shadow cards can be more abusive.
3. depends what you see as a mistake. I don't see her as a mistake.
4. Dont agree with you on that. There are enough ways to work around her. This argument only means you lack of being inventive.
5. There are multipele ways to protect your ringbearer true, but you still need the cards to do that, which will make your deck thicker or more unballanced. dont agree with you that there are stronger rb then galdriel except for frodo.
6. Yes only. You still have the ability to have advantage of use 1x. Also a lot of possesions and conditions benefit during skirmish.
7. Might be a big difference. But GLR isnt able to kill the ringbearer with just one action. Oh remove a vitality or a resistance adder. hey your rb (or other comp is dead) or is corrupted. Still very strong. And meant as it is to be meant. Same counts for GLR. She is meant to be strong, but there is enough to do against her.
8. I see this as you actually agree with me on this.
9. :p

As you see there are anough counter arguments to eachother statements, but that's no reason to x-list her. And please note that no tournament or game in Amsterdam will x-list her in movieblock.

Again I am very against putting her on an x-list on which she isn't on yet. But wouldnt mind an errata. What do you think of my proposal of altering: Discard an elven event from hand into Discard an Elven condition from your support area?

[Ringbearer]

1. There is no insurance, because you still have to draw the events.
2. The burden you add with smeagol can be an enormous advantage. And if you kill her off then you have a dead comp in your deadpile wjich is still a dead comp which limits you to play other comps by one less. Benefit with shadow cards can be more abusive.
3. depends what you see as a mistake. I don't see her as a mistake.
4. Dont agree with you on that. There are enough ways to work around her. This argument only means you lack of being inventive.
5. There are multipele ways to protect your ringbearer true, but you still need the cards to do that, which will make your deck thicker or more unballanced. dont agree with you that there are stronger rb then galdriel except for frodo.
6. Yes only. You still have the ability to have advantage of use 1x. Also a lot of possesions and conditions benefit during skirmish.
7. Might be a big difference. But GLR isnt able to kill the ringbearer with just one action. Oh remove a vitality or a resistance adder. hey your rb (or other comp is dead) or is corrupted. Still very strong. And meant as it is to be meant. Same counts for GLR. She is meant to be strong, but there is enough to do against her.
8. I see this as you actually agree with me on this.
9. :p

As you see there are anough counter arguments to eachother statements, but that's no reason to x-list her. And please note that no tournament or game in Amsterdam will x-list her in movieblock.

Again I am very against putting her on an x-list on which she isn't on yet. But wouldnt mind an errata. What do you think of my proposal of altering: Discard an elven event from hand into Discard an Elven condition from your support area?

1. Any decent elven deck stacks about 16 events minimal.
2. She is still an extra free comp, and if you burn her, its still for a reason.
3. She is a HUGE mistake. One card cannot control the entire meta.
4. She kills off Ninja Gollum, Corsairs, Besiegers, Berserkers, Moria, tracker sauron, Dunland. There isnt much you can do to kill her, only TATD. Dont say she can be overwhelmed easily cause everuy deck with ehr plays a lot of pumps.
5. If LR is in play, a pocket of 2 stings and a tale help a lot.
6. They are named conditions and posessions and according to the rules they are meant to stick around. LR nullifies that.
7. Grond needs to be drawn.... grond needs to see minions in play. LR can be started for free and needs a meager event, which your deck is loaded with.
8. There is no decent card which 100% discards an unbound companion. There are always buts and ifs... And most of those cards wont make it to the regroup phase due to the awesomeness that is Elvents.
9. Agreed.

Take note also that she is banned until a suitable solution is found.

[Jimmy_aR]

But to be honest, you wont hurry to find it, right? ;-)...

[Smeagollum]

Take note also that she is banned until a suitable solution is found.

Take note I don't give a .... about it.

Because you don't see ways to encounter her it should be banned. That is really stupid. There is enough reasons not to ban her. If you don't like her then it's your problem and not mine. Find a way to work around her or are you not able to? Think the last. To ban something is the easiest way to something. but hey you vote vvd and that sounds the same.

 Please don't attack others' political beliefs; it is irrelevant to the subject.

[Jimmy_aR]

Nicely said...

[Thranduil]

As you say, RB, Elvents is going to play about 16 events. Those events are all good on their own, or they wouldn't be in the deck. LR not only does all the stuff we've been talking about up till now, but she also turns 16 of your cards (that's a quarter of your deck) into 16 other cards: they can not only do whatever good effect is on their texts, but also use them as Roll of Thunder. That is mad.

Also, Decipher did ban her, just not in all formats. The fact that she was banned basically as soon as she was released surely invalidates your point 3, Smeagollum.

Thran

[Smeagollum]

Can be that an elvendeck runs about 16 events. My point is that most elvendecks would use galdriel rb and i dont remember a rule that there are 2 galdriels can be in play. It's either one or the other. If it's glr that will mean that the deck is less ballanced. And there are alternatives to get rid of her or work around her. I f everybody is using her then loads of people will counter that and peolpe will start to play something else then glr and if that becomes meta then everybody will counter that.

If people play Nazgul with shadow between and orcs then it will be soon enough over with playing glr.
If you play dunlend make sure you control a site and then play that condition that you can assign a minion to an unbound condition. If you play innitiative burdendeck with mordor (without conditions then she won't be affective as well.

So there are enough strategies to work against her. there is no point to ban her, because if everybody would play her then you will see more of those decks. That people start to play her is maybe because lot of people play besiegers, ninja gollum or corsairs. That means you will change decks to and because of that you will see that glr will be less played in the end.

Besides that I think people prefer galadriel rb above glr in an elvendeck. Also note that and maybe you don't know and i cant proof it to you, but, I actually was the first player who started to play ninja gollum in tournaments. Its actually my favourite shadow. dont you think that i hate it to see her in play, because I know i will probably lose. Same counts for if I see RoTEL Elrond. But it's still no reason for me to get her banned.

If you start to ban her how long will it take that you will ban slacked thirst? If something gives npe then its slacked thirst or card discard. Shall we ban archery as well, because you never get to skirmish how npe is that? Know what let we start to ban all the cards which are not nice for the so called good players to make it more comfartable for them to win. I vote to ban every ringbearer (not you Bert, you are just a funny nice guy and not very mean) So far being sarcastic.

Accept also the fact that decipher did decide not to ban her for king and movieblock. And there are good reasons for it why they decided this so. So it doesn't invalidate point 3. Maybe there were other reasons then you can imagine.

But to come towards you so called GLR haters i will think with you to a solution, but that will not be a ban. Read my posts above again for my propasal. If something will cut her down then it will be the errata I propose.

[Smeagollum]

Thank you for the compliment:D

But let's play sometime together and let me use her you will see that there are other ways of playing her.People have seen how I use her. allways not more then 4 to 6 elven events. I can even tell you which ones: 4x elven song and 2 x company of archers.

[Thranduil]

Banning a card because it's an NPE is basically a fundamentally bad reason, I completely agree with you! Also, banning cards which are "good" is also ridiculous. The slippery slope argument is important to remember, but as long as we're careful about this and ban cards for the right reasons (for example, not because they're NPE or tournament-worthy), then it will not be a problem.

But neither of those reasons are why I think LR should be banned. You only ban cards as a last resort—cards that, in retrospect, probably shouldn't have been printed. In my mind, LR falls under this category (so do cards like Frenzy of Arrows and Mordor Fiend and other cards that were indeed completely banned by Decipher). She is far too versatile for any one card, and completely warped the format around her.

Also I would make the point that this is not an irreversible decision. We can try banning her in TLHH formats for a bit, see if that changes any of the metagame or anything. If we like the change, then we can keep the ban (and wait for errata). If actually in retrospect the Rules Team feels the ban isn't necessary, then it can be removed.

Thran

[Kralik]

Smeagollum, LR turns EVERY Elven event into a twilight Roll of Thunder and Company of Archers. Also note that Shadow possessions are SUPPOSED to be very hard to discard. When TTT was released Decipher put out lots of strategy articles. One of them included how the new/upcoming Dunland culture would be using Hides as a possession--oooh! aaah!--and it would be very hard to counter.

[Kenddrick]

What is wrong with Lady Redeemed I don't see what 's wrong?

It's good that her ability cannot be used during skirmish, if not she will be very imbalanced. Also her strength is 3 so she cannot fight.

[Kralik]

Kenddrick, haven't you read the whole thread? People have given many, many answers to that question.

[Gil-Estel]

Seriously Ken, if you don't try to read the topic, than don't react. A lot of good arguments have been mentioned, and some try to ignore those arguments. Let's agree to disagree, but I feel supported by many players of whom I know they rock.
I guess you never play hobbits, since they all have 3 strength, so make poor companions too.

[Kenddrick]

Ok sorry I haven't read it before and now i've read it.

But somehow I still don't understand why Lady Redeemed should be banned. She can discard but that's only during fellowship/regroup so that isn't too bad. That's my opinion though.

[Witchkingx5]

1. Results from Worlds when LR was legal: Each Deck from the Top 16 either played LR or was anti-LR.

2. Elves simply are the most annoying culture in LotR. Their only weakness is the lack of posession removal which LR provides.

3. The possibility to play Stand against darkness 3 or 4 times in a Deck. When you're opponent is playing Sauron, then you have the best anti-card. If not, well they "just" turn into Company of Archers or Roll of Thunder for Zero Twilight.

... (I'm too lazy to list all other arguments too, but those should be enough to ban her.)

[Smeagollum]

Yeah, but that doesnt mean you can ban her. Why not just create a new format in which you can ban her. So the people who want to play with her are still able to. Again cards should not ben banned.

[Gil-Estel]

That is the whole general idea JW, to create a TLHH format. But please stop the 'if you can't handle her, be more creative' argument, cause that doesn't make sense. A whole list has been provides, with valid points, that you don't counter well. If you don't see the difference between Grond and LR, and chanches in getting 1 of the both cards to work, well, than I won't argue anymore, and we will agree to disagree. But I could do the math, eventhough math isn't my strongest point.

[Smeagollum]

In that case count me out of lotr. Because you are screwin up the game.

[Jerba]

In that case count me out of lotr. Because you are screwin up the game.

No, the game is screwed by crappy DECIPHER made cards. Efforts are being made to salvage it. This discussion has no bearing on official Decipher formats, which you are free to continue playing.

If you continue playing GLR, whether she is banned or not, people won't want to play you anyhow. Threats about your personal play habits are not going to deter this discussion. Temper tantrums about this are only making this discussion uncivil.

[TheJord]

Typical women, causing trouble.

The pool of cards for Movie block is well over 1500 cards. This one card is enough to make you stop playing LOTR TCG?

[plnp123]

It seems that the thing that Jerba said would happen. people wont play against those who use LR. And they may stay  isolated since the vote now is on a clear trend against her.

The pro group said that it enhanced creativity by making other players find a way to circumvent her danger. I think that it is exactly the opposite. /You are forced to kill some types of decks that wont survive at all.
Some other say that Saruman's power  also kills decks. well true but its a 2-cost one-tiem event. Even then it also kills the Shadow player's support area. You cant use SP on may kinds of decks. On the FP side, Gandy kills shadows a lot too. But a cost event or plus one exert is expensive enough.  Even Deep in Thought isnt usable  right away.

The points of Witchkingx5  are very true indeed. I think that people that only use LR would be able to kill movie format. I know some of the people in the pro group use other kind of decks. But many others seem to stay with a kind of "certain win" deck. And that for sure closes a lot of doors.

The whole point of this new subforum is to create a new format in which most people agree. Even the we can make new erratas like the ones suggested earlier (double exertion, cultural support, cost increase). But the short term solution is a ban. then we can start a new discussion wether it was good bad or if a errata is better.

[jcb213]

I totally agree that Galadriel, LR is a terrible card that should never have been printed, and if the majority of the community votes to ban her on GCCG I'm fine with that.

But, I would like to correct some misconceptions that are out there:
1. Galadriel, LR was not banned almost immediately after she was printed.  After Mt. Doom came out it took 2 updates to the x-list for her to be banned.  She was legal at worlds that year, and when Shadows came out and there was a major update to the x-list (including cards like Dauntless Hunter and Sam SoH) she wasn't on it yet.  She wasn't banned until the next x-list update and she was legal for tournament play for 6-8 months.  I played in 3 or 4 events after Shadows came out that she was still legal for.  This doesn't make her any less broken, but she was NOT banned immediately.

2.  Galadriel, LR didn't dominate when she was legal.  At the worlds where she was legal she was only in 4 of the top 16 decks.  She was in the winning deck, but only for the final confrontation between the winner and runner-up; Emir hadn't played her on any previous day and she was largely a meta call because he was extremely confident that Josh would play his besieger deck from the previous 2 days.  She was definitely good, but it took people a while to realize just how good she was and once they did she got banned so even when she was around she wasn't the only competitive choice.  Man-Elf and Knights were both as good as Elves at worlds that year (man-elf was a lot more heavily played) and Gandalf Gondor was as good as elves once Shadows came out.


I guess I have a totally different perspective from most people on here, because I will always view Movie Block as "LOTR Worlds 2004" and since she was legal then I'm happy to let her be legal now.  I think most people on here don't associate Movie Block so strongly with that worlds or that meta.  I don't like playing Elves, but I do like playing other random decks with LR in them.  I think if you ban her you remove some competitive Free Peoples options in order to allow more competitive Shadow options, which is a fine trade-off.  I will be entertained if people start calling for a ban to Corsair cards next.  Saying "people on GCCG don't play Corsairs" is the same as saying "we have a gentleman's agreement to not play LR," it does nothing to bind anyone to anything.

[Kralik]

This has been a good discussion with vocal opinions and arguments on both sides -- keep it up!

[Witchkingx5]

Well, Lady Redeemed is kinda Tarmogoyf or Aether Vial that wasn't discovered immediately, but still, even if the card goes under the radar for the first couple of weeks, the power of the card itself, doesn't decrease.

Even though some of you do not play or hate MtG, it's the longest living TCG. And it's history shows what happened when overpowered cards took over the Format. The best example is the situation a couple of months ago.

A whole Format, Legacy, where over 15 thousand, yes, 15 thousand cards can be used was defined by the card Survival of the Fittest. This card is just ridiculously overpowered, and when I say that, I really mean it. The whole Format, consisting of over 15'000 cards was defined by Decks that a) either used Survival (about 60% or so) or Decks that tried to beat Survival (just try, because the card is so good).

Now, imagine that we would officially allow LR in Movie Format. In Movie, you "only" have like 1700 cards or so, and in LotR, there is no Sideboard. So each Deck should pack in a  Splash and Terrible and Evil to kill Galadriel or play a Deck that doesn't rely on Conditions or Possesions and isn't affected by random anti-cards the Elven player can play like Stand against Darkness because he can cycle them easily.

So, to sum up the whole thing: Do you want this? Do you want a Lady Redeemed Format instead of a Movie Format? DO you either want to take the anger of some random dudes complaining they can't play with their overpowered and unfair Decks anymore or have a Format everyone can enjoy because they can play a Format they're used to in a fun and fair way? It's on you to choose.

[MR. Lurtzy]

Now, imagine that we would officially allow LR in Movie Format.

Nah man. She's allowed in movie and that you will never change. What this discussion is all for is the TLHH format.

[jcb213]

How do most people view Movie Block?  Does anyone besides me view it as "LOTR Worlds 2004?"

Is there the same outcry to ban cards like Aragorn, HTTWC and Saruman, KoI in Fellowship block, because they are as broken as Galadriel, LR (Saruman, KoI probably moreso), they totally warp Fellowship block, and they totally warped the environment when they first came out.

Note - I don't want to start a discussion of Fellowship Block here, I'm just using a comparable example from that format.  I'm more curious how people view Move Block in general.

[Witchkingx5]

Now, imagine that we would officially allow LR in Movie Format.

Nah man. She's allowed in movie and that you will never change. What this discussion is all for is the TLHH format.

I meant that we make a s*** on the gentlemans' agreement. Or if we would organize tournaments on GCCG, like a Movie Block League.

[ramolnar]

How do most people view Movie Block?  Does anyone besides me view it as "LOTR Worlds 2004?"

Is there the same outcry to ban cards like Aragorn, HTTWC and Saruman, KoI in Fellowship block, because they are as broken as Galadriel, LR (Saruman, KoI probably moreso), they totally warp Fellowship block, and they totally warped the environment when they first came out.

Note - I don't want to start a discussion of Fellowship Block here, I'm just using a comparable example from that format.  I'm more curious how people view Move Block in general.

To answer your question, I don't think of Movie Block as Worlds 2004. There wasn't much development time after Mount Doom's release. Mount Doom released on July 14. Worlds were 5 weeks later. Since then, there have been years of development time, even though the number of players is smaller.
I played in Worlds 2004, so I remember it a little. I played a fun deck that had Mumaks, and I think the FP was Knights. It went 3-5. I had the best .hack deck for Saturday and Sunday, so I was playing for fun on Friday. I played Emir in Round 1 and got corrupted by Ninja Gollum. If I was playing Galadriel LR, it would have been a lot better matchup.

The question to me is the following: "Is this card so strong that in order to be competitive in a serious tournament, I need to play it or hate against it?" Galadriel LR meets that standard for me.
To answer your question about Fellowship Block, I would answer Yes to Saruman, Keeper of Isengard, because with him Uruks are by far the best Shadow. I would also answer Yes to Horn of Boromir, actually, because I know I splashed Such a Little Thing at times. But not Aragorn Heir to the White City, because there are other ways to do choke and that takes away Aragorn Ranger of the North.

[Kralik]

Indeed. That title goes to swarm.

[Kralik]

For those who don't believe my last post...

Behold the terror of... ORC SLAYER!

[Gil-Estel]

Smeagollum, did you just deleted your account because of this debate over creating a format next to movie block? Seriously? Come on man, get your act together, we are almost all grown ups here! Wtk and Lurtzy also participate in the debate, eventhough Lurtzy seems only to want to make sure we don't forget we can't alter formats, for which I applaud you, but they don't want this format either.

Kom op man, als je dit leest, maak je account weer aan en doe gewoon weer mee. Vind je niet dat je een beetje sterk reageert? Je wilt de hele tijd een PC en nu lijkt er een beslissing democratisch te worden genomen over een format dat je niet eens hoeft te spelen en dan kap je er mee? Volgens mij is de discussie ook erg 'clean' gebleven, zonder persoonlijke aanvallen oid.

Since I can't send him a personal message anymore, I did a part in dutch.

[Witchkingx5]

So well, if there will ever be a movie tournament on GCCG, expect me to play the Deck that abuses LR the most.

And just a Side note: Nazzies are also really nice in FotR. On Ford of Bruinen, with two Morgul gates in your hand, I won countless numbers of games.

[Kralik]