DC Brawl [Wolves]

[macheteman]

standings:

#4: 7
#3: 6
#5: 1
#2: 1

[menace64]

Is it alright to only place two votes? If so, #4, then #3.

[macheteman]

standings:

#4: 10
#3: 8
#5: 1
#2: 1

[Thranduil]

I'll make some comments, and vote below. I'd also like to suggest that biting the head off someone who's running (or who contributed to) one of the only things that is going on in the Chamber at the moment hardly seems necessary to me, regardless of how much you disagree with the card choice or design.

Tom Bombadil, Bearer of Aid
STR- 10   
VIT- 5
RES- 10
Each time the fellowship moves during the regroup phase, add three burdens. 
If a character is about to take a wound, exert Tom Bombadil, or add a burden to prevent this.
"Get out, you old wight! Vanish in the sunlight

I'm not sure this is a big enough drawback. You could resign yourself to moving once per turn for a Shadow kill deck—for a FP side that is designed to survive while your Shadow side kills your opponent. Also, I'm not sure about Tom being able to use his ability on himself (and it should probably be templated "Response:...", though actually, is this an optional or required action? It's not that clear, I think...), though otherwise the ability is good and makes sense. But I like that this was one of the entries to find some flavour text; I really think it does make a huge difference to a card.

•Tom Bombadil, Bearer of Memories
Companion
Strength: 14
Vitality: 9
Ringed-Resistance: 11
Each time Tom Bombadil takes off The One Ring, exert him.
Each time the fellowship moves, wound Tom Bombadil three times.
Fellowship: Exert Goldberry twice to heal Tom Bombadil and draw a card.

The second line is a great drawback, but I'm not sure what the first is adding to the card. If you're putting on the ring, the chances are your exhausted because you're having to take burdens and so you won't be able to exert, and anyway, you'd certainly do that if you had to exert every time you took it off. But without the first line, and the slightly strange number of 11 for resistance (I suppose, it's more than Frodo which I guess is one of the points here), this card works fell for me. I'd love to see the Goldberry that goes with him!

•Tom Bombadil, Beloved Bearer 
Companion
Strength: 9
Vitality: 9
Resistance: 10
While Tom Bombadil bears the One Ring, it's gametext does not apply and each time a burden is added wound Tom Bombadil instead.
Skirmish:  Exert Tom Bombadil  times to cancel a skirmish involving a ring-bound hobbit and a minion, where  equals that minion's vitality.
....."the ring has no power over him."

This is an interesting alternate game you can play whereby burdens become wounds. The only bizarre thing here is that you end up with resistance that doesn't do anything and a vitality that's actually resistance. He's also still quite powerful, with his 9 strength (not including a ring) and the Tom Bombadil, The Master -esque ability (though is it not quite strange that it only works with Ring-bound Hobbits when Tom clearly helps Merry and Pippin as well?). Still, a good flavour text that compliments the card well.

•Tom Bombadil, Hope of Middle-Earth
Companion
Strength: 14
Vitality: 5
(Resistance): 0
Ring-bearer.
You do not lose the game when Tom-Bombadil's resistance is 0.
Tom Bombadil may not wear The One Ring, and each time a burden is added, wound him instead.
Tom Bombadil is strength -X, where X is the current site number.
"'He would not take it unless we begged him, and then he would just lose it or throw it away. Such things have no hold on Bombadil.'"

This is perhaps a more extreme case of #4 where he doesn't even have any resistance, which on the one hand doesn't fool you into thinking his resistance matters, but on the other hand requires another line of text to make sense within the rules so that you don't automatically lose when you play him, so it seems to me a seriously mixed blessing. Also, it's not clear how much sense that really makes given that, if anything, Tom should have resistance infinite, not 0. There's also the strange question of changing the vitality from 9 to 5, which I suppose does something to balance the very high strength but might be too extreme. The flavour text doesn't have the closest tie-in to the abilities—something supporting the third line of text might be nice. (It does seem strange that this is the only card here to actually have the Ring-bearer keyword and/or ringed resistance!).

Tom Bombadil, Unhindered
Companion
Strength 14
Vitality 5
Resistance 1
Tom Bombadil is resistance +1 for each companion you can spot. If Tom Bombadil is the Ring-bearer, you may remove a burden at the start of your turn.

Surely you should have put the justification you used for one of the lines of text as flavour text (which I think is quoted in #6), which would have got rid of the need for a designer's note (which is often the point of flavour text!). There are a couple of other things which aesthetically don't sit well with me, for example the fact that his cost has changed to for no particular reason and that his starting resistance is 1 not 0 (I would much rather his resistance was equal to the number of companions, because that seems much simpler to look at, or else resistance 1 with his ability saying "... resistance +1 for each other companion..."). Also, the further advantage of removing burdens over a strength 14 Ring-bearer seems very high. I would think this card might be on the right track, but probably far off on power level.

•Tom Bombadil, Reluctant Bearer
Companion
Strength 14
Vitality 9
Ringed Resistance 5
While Tom Bombadil is the Ring-bearer, he is strength -5, and each time the fellowship moves, add 2 burdens.
Regroup: If Tom Bombadil is the Ring-bearer (unless the fellowship is in region 3), kill Tom Bombadil to transfer The One Ring to another companion with ringed resistance.
"'And if he were given the Ring, he would soon forget it, or most likely throw it away. Such things have no hold on his mind. He would be a most unsafe guardian...'"

(I know we're not voting for this card, but I thought I'd give some thoughts anyway!) I'm fairly sure that the best thing to do with this card is not to play him as the Ring-bearer and just a regular strength 14 vitality 9 companion! But assuming he has to be the RB, apart from the strength -5 clause which doesn't seem to particularly follow flavour, it looks quite cool. He walks along, and then he throws it away and someone else has to pick it up.

So my votes:

1) #2
2) #3
3) #1

Thran

[macheteman]

standings:

#4: 10
#3: 10
#2: 4
#5: 1
#1: 1

[menace64]

(I know we're not voting for this card, but I thought I'd give some thoughts anyway!)

I don't think it was my best design ever, but why are you under the impression that my card cannot be given a vote?

[NappyKorn]

He probably assumed the last entry was MM's and MM said he would submit an entry, but not have it count.

[Mabrothrax]

I've voted already but thought I'd throw a few comments/ideas down as well.

After looking at the cards I kind of felt that they all came close but didn't quite get the feel that Tom has a very odd relationship with the ring, if indeed he has one at all

•Tom Bombadil, Beloved Bearer 
Companion
Strength: 9
Vitality: 9
Resistance: 10
While Tom Bombadil bears the One Ring, it's gametext does not apply and each time a burden is added wound Tom Bombadil instead.
Skirmish:  Exert Tom Bombadil  times to cancel a skirmish involving a ring-bound hobbit and a minion, where  equals that minion's vitality.
....."the ring has no power over him."

This is an interesting alternate game you can play whereby burdens become wounds. The only bizarre thing here is that you end up with resistance that doesn't do anything and a vitality that's actually resistance. He's also still quite powerful, with his 9 strength (not including a ring) and the Tom Bombadil, The Master -esque ability (though is it not quite strange that it only works with Ring-bound Hobbits when Tom clearly helps Merry and Pippin as well?). Still, a good flavour text that compliments the card well.

•Tom Bombadil, Hope of Middle-Earth
Companion
Strength: 14
Vitality: 5
(Resistance): 0
Ring-bearer.
You do not lose the game when Tom-Bombadil's resistance is 0.
Tom Bombadil may not wear The One Ring, and each time a burden is added, wound him instead.
Tom Bombadil is strength -X, where X is the current site number.
"'He would not take it unless we begged him, and then he would just lose it or throw it away. Such things have no hold on Bombadil.'"

This is perhaps a more extreme case of #4 where he doesn't even have any resistance, which on the one hand doesn't fool you into thinking his resistance matters, but on the other hand requires another line of text to make sense within the rules so that you don't automatically lose when you play him, so it seems to me a seriously mixed blessing. Also, it's not clear how much sense that really makes given that, if anything, Tom should have resistance infinite, not 0. There's also the strange question of changing the vitality from 9 to 5, which I suppose does something to balance the very high strength but might be too extreme. The flavour text doesn't have the closest tie-in to the abilities—something supporting the third line of text might be nice. (It does seem strange that this is the only card here to actually have the Ring-bearer keyword and/or ringed resistance!).

Cards 3 & 4 come closest to how I'd work this and Thranduil makes some good observations.

Here's something;

•Tom Bombadil, Bearer of Song 
Companion
Strength: 14
Vitality: 6
Ringed Resistance: (blank)
Tom Bombadil is Str -X where X is the current site number.
Ton Bombadil cannot be corrupted.
While Tom Bombadil bears the One Ring, each time a burden is added remove the top two cards of your draw deck from the game.
Skirmish Wound Tom Bombadil twice to make the Ring-bearer take off The One Ring.

The first line is simply to justify his high strength and add thematically in his power being tied to his home.

The second and third lines (and the blank resistance) are where it's at for me. Burdens are still a massive part of the game, but Tom is immune to them, however he's careless and so goes your deck.

The skirmish action gives him usefulness other than being the ring bearer.

But that's just me sticking my nose in

[Thranduil]

(I know we're not voting for this card, but I thought I'd give some thoughts anyway!)

I don't think it was my best design ever, but why are you under the impression that my card cannot be given a vote?

I do apologise! Yes NK hit the nail exactly on the head: I thought #6 was mm's and therefore I wasn't going to vote for it! I suppose that's not the case? @mm: what's going on?

Thran

[macheteman]

oh, i just threw mine in the mix. i suppose in future contests i'll just leave my ideas ut. no sense in muddying the waters. sorry for the confusion. one or 2 more votes would be nice.  we need to break up some ties.

[macheteman]

ok, i'm really tempted to just call this one a tie and move on.

since The Hobbit is in production, i was thinking of doing themes from The Hobbit for future rounds. what say ye?

[Thranduil]

I say: "Good idea!"

[Ringbearer]

Yup. If it fits theme, I'd be interested in joining as well.

Just to be curious: how should we define play, as in expanded, standard, movie... I wanna know what power level and cards I should keep in mind.

[macheteman]

its a brawl. you're at the mercy of the mob.

[Ringbearer]

In that case, look at this nice card called Namarie....