Any heroes you avoid using and why? Whether you don't care for their stats or ability or in my case I cant build anymore glorfindel spirit because I just feel like he's too cheap and easy to play with' do tell.

Also I really like Boooreds idea about releasing a box set that has a lot more player cards in it to start getting into more creative deck building besides the usual combos. Thoughts?

I don't think there is such hero. There are heroes I can't quite use, like Brand (because I almost never play multiplayer), though I'd love to use him. I even used Caldara outside of monospirit deck.

I'm just burnt out on glorfindel, I guess I feel like he's an easy out. The only other hero I never really use is bifur, not that I dislike him, I just always find a better option

From solo perspective, Bard the Bowmen and Brand are heroes I have never been able to build a deck around. It's not that I refuse to play them. It's more that there abilites are mostly related to multi player game. There are a bunch of Dwarves that also fall into this category. I think Dwalin is the worst of them. Reducing threat by 2 for destroying an orc is cool but, starting with 2 attack means he needs tactics attachments to even damage most orcs let alone destroy them. Glorfindel Lore is one that is never sees much use any more, althogh I did build some sucessful decks with him early on, now him and his ability are pretty much useless.

On certain scenarios some of these heroes might be useful, but I don't think I'll ever get much use out of Bard and Brand. Faramir also falls into this category, but I did make a Gondor deck with him that worked okay to get some use out of him.

Also, these heroes might be revived as new player cards emerge.

Awhile ago my list would have included spirit pippin, fatty, and caldera, but I have built some very fun and good decks with them. But these 3 may still be on the list of some other players.

Lorefindel gets almost no love in my decks

Yeah I guess refuse to play was a poor choice for the thread title. . . . .but yeah tracker I'm primarily a solo player as well so that does take a few heroes out of the mix

I don't think I'd ever flat out "refuse" to play with a given hero, depending on the game and quest.

But for me, if there's a hero I "avoid" playing, it's Elrond, mostly because like wyrm187 said, Elrond + Vilya feels like an easy out. That, plus his ability to pay for allies of every sphere significantly lowers the degree of difficulty.

I think I'm almost to that point with Spirit Glorfindel as well. It's almost more fun to try and build solo decks WITHOUT him than with him. I already know I can build a killer deck using Spirfindel, Spirit Frodo, and Loragorn. It's more fun to try other stuff out.

This is also mitigated by the fact that one of the guys I play with regularly refuses to play anything BUT his favorite deck---Spirfindel, Elrond, and Legolas. So I'd constantly have to be reconfiguring my decks between solo and multiplay anyway if I was using Elrond and Spirfindel.

My next challenge is to build a thematic "princes" deck around Faramir, Eomer, and Imrahil. I've also wanted to do a "Heroes of Ithilien" deck using Eowyn, Faramir, and Beregond. Actually, that Eowyn/Faramir/Beregond combo could be pretty awesome, come to think of it . . . .

Hirluin the Fair and Dain Ironfoot will never see play in our play group until there is reasonable errata.

I really like Fatty Bolger but have so far been quite unable to put him in a deck.

I used to play Tactics Boromir a lot but now I prefer the Leadership version.

Lore Glorfindel has had his role cut out by the Spirit version. And Spirit Pippin by Lore Pippin.

Hirluin the Fair and Dain Ironfoot will never see play in our play group until there is reasonable errata.

I really like Fatty Bolger but have so far been quite unable to put him in a deck.

I used to play Tactics Boromir a lot but now I prefer the Leadership version.

Lore Glorfindel has had his role cut out by the Spirit version. And Spirit Pippin by Lore Pippin.

Hmmm you think Dain and Hirluin deserve errata? Do you think they are too powerful?

I will probably never play Caldara. She's not horrible, but I don't like hero-sacrificing abilities. When I play, my friend and I have an unofficial rule that all heroes must survive for a victory. That adds a tiny bit of challenge to some scenarios and I think keeps the game more interesting. After all, the fewer heroes you have the flatter the experience becomes - less resources, sometimes loss of a sphere, loss of critical abilities and synergies... As much as I love Tactics Boromir, I will never use his sacrifice ability. Consequently, this means cards like Landroval are pretty much useless to us too. But I definitely prefer to play this way.

BTW - Bifur is awesome, especially in multiplayer. Any hero that "stretches" resources is immediately useful. Hirluin and Elrond are great for similar reasons, though they've got other talents that often overshadow their resource stretching.

Spirit Pippin... why did they release him with such a bad ability when Lore Pippin was released a month after with a far better ability ?

Also lore Glorfindel, even if I used him once, it was for fun. Same for Prince Imrahil.

Legolas is always prefered to Bard, Brand, Ellandan, Gimli or Theoden with his unique and usefull ability.

Dwarfs are played only when we all play dwarfs, and oin, gloin, dwalin are avoided.

Caldara can be quite useful in a spirit deck if you find yourself swamped by enemies. Use her for small 1hp damage effects and to block small enemies. Then when all your blockers are exhausted (including Caldara) switch her out for a couple of big(ish) guys to help with blocking or attacking.

Bring Caldara back in with Fortune of Fate (if you got it set up) in the same combat phase and you´re pretty good ahead ahead.

Hirluin the Fair and Dain Ironfoot will never see play in our play group until there is reasonable errata.

I really like Fatty Bolger but have so far been quite unable to put him in a deck.

I used to play Tactics Boromir a lot but now I prefer the Leadership version.

Lore Glorfindel has had his role cut out by the Spirit version. And Spirit Pippin by Lore Pippin.

Hmmm you think Dain and Hirluin deserve errata? Do you think they are too powerful?

I think they are poorly designed, Dain and Outlands. Dain because there seems little reason not to run him if you are looking for a powerful Dwarf deck. I believe there should always be a challenge. As it is, it seems lazy, especially with the vast number of readying effects: Lure of Moria, Cram, Erebor Record-keeper (all these even within the Dwarf theme, two of them same sphere as Dain). I believe if they treated Dain as Erebor Battle Master, he would still be a very powerful hero but things would get a bit more interesting. Boosting allies would still be great but the immediate boost for every hero would no longer apply -- in the beginning where stats are most important as a rule.

As for Outlands, we have had a discussion on the topic, and I totally now stand as follows: if each booster (Swordsman, Knigtht, Warrior, Heardsman) could only count once (no matter if you had one or three copies out, each would only grant +1), then things would again be a bit more interesting, though the problem with the Outlands is bigger than that: you have basically got all the cards given to you, there is little room left for deck-building.

Caldara can be quite useful in a spirit deck if you find yourself swamped by enemies. Use her for small 1hp damage effects and to block small enemies. Then when all your blockers are exhausted (including Caldara) switch her out for a couple of big(ish) guys to help with blocking or attacking.

Bring Caldara back in with Fortune of Fate (if you got it set up) in the same combat phase and you´re pretty good ahead ahead.

Caldara will get better when more Spirit allies arrive, especially the stronger ones of the likes of Damrod. Personally, I have never had trouble with the weaker looking heroes, unless they had a stronger alternative version: Glorfindel and Pippin, there seems to be very little competition between the two.

Glorfindel spirit - Eowyn - Hirluin - Dain

If i can, i dont play them. But it is ok, anyway.

The only one I can think of that I will actually refuse to play is Hirluin the Fair, as I refuse to play Outlands in general (other than splashing in certain Outlands allies into regular decks). I actually find Dwarves more palatable, as at least there are a bunch of different variations and interesting combos you can do with them.

I think dwarfs (and maybe outlanders) in the future wont be so overpowered. Quest will be harder, too harder..., and lots of other nice combos will be: silvans, rohans, etc...

I think traits will be more regular. But from progression series approach: now outlanders and dwarfs are overpowered (and Glorfindel over-played )

(image from TalesfromtheCards)

If I want to stick fairly close to Tolkein's canon I won't use any of the hobbit heroes, except perhaps Bilbo (lore), (unless I'm playing with the Saga packs of course). If I'm playing with a single deck then I obviously wouldn't be taking Bard or Brand.

Hirluin the Fair and Dain Ironfoot will never see play in our play group until there is reasonable errata.

I really like Fatty Bolger but have so far been quite unable to put him in a deck.

I used to play Tactics Boromir a lot but now I prefer the Leadership version.

Lore Glorfindel has had his role cut out by the Spirit version. And Spirit Pippin by Lore Pippin.

Hmmm you think Dain and Hirluin deserve errata? Do you think they are too powerful?

I think they are poorly designed, Dain and Outlands. Dain because there seems little reason not to run him if you are looking for a powerful Dwarf deck. I believe there should always be a challenge. As it is, it seems lazy, especially with the vast number of readying effects: Lure of Moria, Cram, Erebor Record-keeper (all these even within the Dwarf theme, two of them same sphere as Dain). I believe if they treated Dain as Erebor Battle Master, he would still be a very powerful hero but things would get a bit more interesting. Boosting allies would still be great but the immediate boost for every hero would no longer apply -- in the beginning where stats are most important as a rule.

As for Outlands, we have had a discussion on the topic, and I totally now stand as follows: if each booster (Swordsman, Knigtht, Warrior, Heardsman) could only count once (no matter if you had one or three copies out, each would only grant +1), then things would again be a bit more interesting, though the problem with the Outlands is bigger than that: you have basically got all the cards given to you, there is little room left for deck-building.

After giving this post some thought I think perhaps restricting Dain's ability to dwarf allies would be fair.

In regard to Outlands, I have never really had that much success with them, although they certainly look very powerful on paper and I have heard alot of complaints about them being broken.

After giving this post some thought I think perhaps restricting Dain's ability to dwarf allies would be fair.

In regard to Outlands, I have never really had that much success with them, although they certainly look very powerful on paper and I have heard alot of complaints about them being broken.

My opinion:

Dain was OP after Dwarrowdelf because of the glut of Dwarf card support. Today, he is less so, since other synergies have been built up to rival him. He's still very potent, but unless I'm going for a straight-up Dwarf theme, he's not a shoe-in. Of course the more players you have, the closer to OP he gets.

Outlands are OP, but they do take some effort to get up and running. The problem is they shift the balance of gameplay and make it anticlimactic. If you can get them going, most scenarios become ridiculously easy. I've often found myself questing for 20+ without involving my heroes and leaving good attackers and defenders behind - all due to their incredible stat stacking. And in a 2 player game, my partner never has to worry about questing at all. Usually, it's downhill from there. My proposed solution would be to increase the cost of each of the buffing outlands allies by 1. That would force players to dedicate more support to getting it going. They wouldn't look nearly as appealing unless you're building specifically for them.

The only hero I would be really reluctant to try would be Spippin.

Of course there are some other commonly known misfits, but most, like Dwalin or Brand, are actually underrated.

Spippin is not that bad.

Pippin is used by very good gamers, even without using his hability. They love spirit sphere with only 6 threat level points. And maybe is good his hobbit trait (for some cards in spirit).

Spippin is not that bad.

I'd have to disagree here.

IMO... Worst. Hero. Yet.

I can understand some people will find it challenging to build a deck around him, or simply play him.

But to me he is hands down the worst of the worst.

Plain crappy design right there. +3 threat is ridiculous for what he does.

But again, that's IMO.

There's definitely some bad heroes that I rarely use or haven't had the chance to use. As the card pool grows there are more and more heroes to choose from and I don't play as often as I would like so I can't give every hero a play to see if they are any good. So instead I just don't use many because of time restrictions and there are more powerful options. Heroes I don't use are:

Pippin (Spirit)- terrible ability that is quite restricted but as a Spirit hero with 2 willpower and low threat he could be used

Glorfindel (Lore)- There are so many better options for healing that his ability and the high threat seem bad

Bilbo Baggins- his threat seems too high and he is only good for his ability

Fatty Bolger- his stats are only good for defending but he's super weak for that but his ability could be very useful in a multiplayer game