Movie Block Sitepath

[Pepin The Breve]

  I think this questions have already been debated somewhere but i wanna know if you people knows where i can find a official ruling for the sitepath used in movie block format.

  I have allways been played movie block with FoTR, TT or RoTK sites (just didn´t mixed the three, of course) and then in a game with Clockwork he noticed (after a played Bridge of Khazad-Dum) that i was using FoTR sites in a movie block deck.

   Anyway, what do tou think of this way to play it? Just take care to "re-rule" sites like Ettenmoors ("except and enduring character") and things shoul be fine. I actuallt feel that this way of playing add some dynamics to the game.

[Thranduil]

I don't know where an official ruling is but I know that Movie Block is only RotK sites. That said, if you and you're opponent don't have a problem with using FotR or TT sites, then why not? Though if they're depending on cards which use the RotK site numbers like Haradwaith they might be annoyed at you, just as if you're using Hobbit Stealth or something.

Thranduil

[Pepin The Breve]

  In fact i have done a search from some official rule about it and i just couldn´t find a simple mention of movie block on the decipher´s official documents... If anyone have something about i will be grateful to see it  .

[TheJord]

Movie Block was never recognised by DGMA (someone correct me if I'm wrong) so it doesnt have documented sitepath rules. The general consensus is towards RotK block sites, but as Thran said if you and your opponent dont mind, then why not!

[MR. Lurtzy]

I always played movie block with the first 3 sites from fotr, next three from ttt, and the last three from rotk.

[Kralik]

That's an interesting idea, Lurtzy... Hmmm...

The scoop on Movie Block: You play the game the way it was played before Shadows was released. So the X-list that was current at that time stands, and you use King sites. But casual play is fine too as long as you and your opponent are fine with it.

[Anautikus]

Yea in my meta we either mixed sites, or using shadows sites, we had a rule where only certain sites could be used in a certain site #, i.e. mt. doom couldn't be site 1.. etc. etc.

[FM]

It's not ENTIRELY related, but, wouldn't reducing the twilight number of previous sites by 6 make them more closely related to sites by region? You could make an X-List of old sites (specially considering the ones that got re-edited, of course), issue errata on some of them, and simply allow any site to be used on a sitepath. And I don't mean movie block only, even Open format could benefit from the design space this would create! ANd since the game is dead, there's no such nonsense as "Format Rules", anyway...

[Thranduil]

Unfortunately that doesn't work in most cases. Shadows sites follow the rule: better for FP deserves higher Shadow number, better for Shadow needs lower Shadow number. This was not true of the pre-Shadows sites so you'd end up with sites with a Shadow number of and an amazing Shadow ability (like Slopes of Amon Hen). Also, someone did rejig all the old pre-Shadows sites and made them into Shadows sites and posted his stuff on CC. The LOTR MAP system?

Thranduil