Scratch-pad for brainstorming ideas

[Not a Zombie]

How about... just dont play her? Its quite easy actually. Try it out, you'll be amazed afterwards.

I'll drink to that!

[MarcinS]

Due to card borders being used by the Gemp-LotR itself, to mark that card is selectable/playable at certain times, but also to hide the white corners of card, I suggest to mark them with a red wide semi-opaque line in right-bottom corner. See the example.
I can even do this automatically in the browser, without having to modify the card image itself.

[Vroengard]

guys, make a re-errata for frenzy of arrows, I think my idea and of my friends is pretty good. What they did there doesnt even need a comment or should even be called ''errata''.

Keeping the original text and just reducing the numbers from 2 to 1 is pretty dope I think.
(As well as maybe including a Limit: 3 line)

[TelTura]

I can even do this automatically in the browser, without having to modify the card image itself.

This was precisely how I figured it would be done; dynamically and without additional card images.  The test image you showed is a good alternative to the border; that works for me.

guys, make a re-errata for frenzy of arrows, I think my idea and of my friends is pretty good. What they did there doesnt even need a comment or should even be called ''errata''.

It changed from " minion" to " archer minion" which is actually a substantial change; it means the card changed from a splash that any player who has an minion in their deck can use, to a more limited subset of people working archers.  Nonetheless, you're right in the sense that the card is OP in spite of the errata.

[Vroengard]

I can even do this automatically in the browser, without having to modify the card image itself.

This was precisely how I figured it would be done; dynamically and without additional card images.  The test image you showed is a good alternative to the border; that works for me.

guys, make a re-errata for frenzy of arrows, I think my idea and of my friends is pretty good. What they did there doesnt even need a comment or should even be called ''errata''.

It changed from " minion" to " archer minion" which is actually a substantial change; it means the card changed from a splash that any player who has an minion in their deck can use, to a more limited subset of people working archers.  Nonetheless, you're right in the sense that the card is OP in spite of the errata.

You are aware of the fact that there is no ORC archer right? lol....Thats why I said ''errata''  

Jokes aside, the guy who made that change just destroyed a good card, thats it. So its up to us to make a WORKING errata. Productive replies are welcome.

[TelTura]

Ha, alright, you got me.  I mostly do Fellowship and Movie and stick to Nazguls when I do Expanded, so I haven't perused the selection.  In spite of that the OPness stands, and you're right, if there are no archers then the guy in charge had his head up his #$&*@!.

[Thranduil]

•Aggression                      
Condition • Support Area
While you have initiative, each Dwarf is
damage +1.
Fellowship: Spot a Dwarf and
discard this condition to draw a card.

Know that this is still incredibly powerful. Not completely broken as it was, but nonetheless powerful. Also, if you are printing errata slips for these cards, will they be able to give cards uniqueness? If not, my suggestion would be that it loses the fellowship ability altogether.

•Filibert Bolger, Wily Rascal
Ally • Home 1 • Hobbit
Strength: 1
Vitality: 2
Skirmish: Exert Filibert Bolger and
exert a Hobbit companion twice to
cancel a fierce skirmish involving that
Hobbit companion.

Exerting Filbert Bolger has solved the problem: it no longer needs to exert the Hobbit companion twice. Once would be more than enough to make it a decent and not overpowered card.

•Flaming Brand
Possession • Hand Weapon
Strength: +1
Bearer must be a Man.
This weapon may be borne in addition
to 1 other hand weapon.
Bearer is strength +2 and damage +1
while skirmishing a Nazgul.

I don't see how this has been made much worse. Was it really just too good for companions? That seems unlikely to me. My fix would be lose either the strength and damage bonus for fighting Nazgûl or the fact it can be borne as a second weapon.

Forces of Mordor
Event
Shadow: Spot X roaming minions
to add (limit ).

The limit has solved this card—it doesn't need the roaming restriction as well. In fact, the same card with the roaming restriction and no limit is really intriguing and might also not be overpowered.

•Frying Pan
Possession • Hand Weapon
Strength: +1
Bearer must be a Hobbit.
Skirmish: Exert bearer to wound a
Orc he or she is skirmishing.

Don't see how this has solved the problem. Admittedly, it now makes the card much more narrowly good, but still against this is just a blowout (how many Orcs have 1 vitality, for instance?). I think it should exert twice or, perhaps, lose the skirmish ability altogether.

•Memories of Darkness
Condition • Support Area
To play, spot a Dwarf.
Each time you lose initiative (except
during the fellowship phase), you may
play a condition from hand.

I feel that, in order to keep the spirit of the original, it should return conditions from your discard pile to your hand.

•Ottar, Man of Laketown
Ally • Home 3 • Man
Strength: 2
Vitality: 2
To play, spot Gandalf.
Fellowship: Exert Ottar and discard up
to 3 cards from hand to draw a card.

I understand what you've done here, but now the card just feels completely wrong—all the symmetry has been broken. I would suggest "Fellowship: Exert Ottar and discard a card from hand to draw a card."

•Saruman, Keeper of Isengard
Minion • Wizard
Strength: 8
Vitality: 4
Site: 4
Saruman may not take wounds during
the archery phase and may not be
assigned to a skirmish.
While you can spot 5 companions,
Uruk-hai are fierce.
Response: If an Uruk-hai is about to
take a wound, exert Saruman to prevent
that wound.

Is 5 companions enough to keep this card in check? I might go with 6: if they're on 6 companions, they deserve to have to face something as obscenely powerful.

Overall, pretty nice. Some elegant solutions to some of the problems.

Thran

[TelTura]

Also, if you are printing errata slips for these cards, will they be able to give cards uniqueness?

This would mostly be concerned with Gemp-lotr, so actually setting up how these errata would be used IRL seems to be out of scope for the project.  It's downright trivial to do it in the enforced online environment, however.

[Tbiesty]

Updated Frying Pan and Ottar, Man of Laketown.

[TelTura]

•Flaming Brand
Possession • Hand Weapon
Strength: +1
Bearer must be a Man.
This weapon may be borne in addition
to 1 other hand weapon.
Bearer is strength +2 and damage +1
while skirmishing a Nazgul.

I don't see how this has been made much worse. Was it really just too good for companions? That seems unlikely to me. My fix would be lose either the strength and damage bonus for fighting Nazgûl or the fact it can be borne as a second weapon.

Actually, I heard talk that the lack of cultural enforcement was in fact a problem.  Eomer with dual Flaming Brand was apparently troublesome, not to mention inadvertent hilarity with Strange-looking Men putting it on Shadow minions.  What do you think of my proposals?   "Bearer must be a  Man.  Limit one per bearer.  This weapon may be borne in addition to one other hand weapon.  Bearer is strength +1 when skirmishing a Nazgul (or if bearer is a Ranger, strength +2 and damage +1"  Alternatively, "Bearer must be a Ranger.  This weapon may be born in addition to one other hand weapon.  Response:If a skirmish involving a Nazgul is about to end, exert bearer and discard this possession to wound that Nazgul."

Updated Frying Pan and Ottar, Man of Laketown.

  The restriction is quite counterproductive; as pointed out it's the only culture that suffers anyway, enforcing that weakness doesn't do any good.  The Sam-only exertion is nice, I think

[Tbiesty]

Updated Flaming Brand.

[mikefrench]

the problem with the vast majority of the banned cards in lotr was NOT costing.  you can't just slap a cost on some mechanics and hope they'll be balanced.  the problem with the banned cards in lotr was that many of them did things that the game fundamentally should not do.

things that permanents should not do:

remove twilight (httwc)
reduce the twilight number of sites (bill the pony, no stranger)
look at opponent's hand (sting)
play cards for free

so anything that does any of the above things simply will not work.  httwc cannot work in lotr.  period.  there are plenty of other aragorns, why does anyone need access to httwc?  play fotr block if you want to play him.

many of the banned cards are fine if some other cards remain banned.  for instance, ottar does not need to be banned if elrond remains banned.  he never needed to be banned, if they had simply banned elrond.  he would've transitioned from a broken card to a very powerful card that would've given people reason to play more tower assassins.

and in my opinion, savagery never needed to be banned.  it was a fine card.  it would be a fine card in any legal format, fellowship block, towers standard, or movie block.  it would instantly become a very strong card, but it would not remove all reason to play anything BUT uruks, which saruman KOI did in fellowship block.

[TelTura]

I find it interesting that everything that you point out that should not be done are done from the very beginning of the game.

Perhaps what we ought to do is start with a completely wiped slate and first test for a while with absolutely no errata or restrictions or bannings, and go from there.  It's quite possible that current strats have out-stratted the old restrictions anyway (this happened in the Star Trek CCG when they waited long enough), and if things become a problem, then address them.  It's possible we're looking at things with too much theory and not enough practice.

[MarcinS]

I don't think the problem with Sting is looking at opponent's hand. I think it's once again the problem you have mentioned - removing twilight.

[tanzhamster]

marcin, maybe it would be better to mark the cards in the upper left corner because there are some cards which have to be equiped and a mark on the right wouldn't be visible then.