Preliminary Discussion: Lady Redeemed

[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.