Removing weariness sounds like readying to me. Inspiring people against despair sounds like a stat boost. Imagine a personal, transferable Unexpected Courage, that can ready nearly anybody or give anyone a stat boost during any action window. If he gets a ring that does anything like that, he'll be ridiculous. But then again, he'd better be, otherwise everyone else at the table will be annoyed that they can't play their Gandalf allies.

Could be like a Sam ability but applies to another person. Ready and add +1 to all? Or maybe only willpower. Seems decent.

Why is everyone so negative about doubling up an ally with a new hero? I've already had to take my Gandalf and Faramir out of my decks because another deck had Faramir hero and my other friend used persistent Hobbit Gandalf.

We have quite a lot of double ups already and everyone seems to want a third Boromir (although maybe only for thematic reasons?), and everyone seems super keen about a Haldir hero. So why not Gandalf? It seems like people are blowing his expected threat cost and abilities out of hand. He hobbles are holding a stick most of the time, haha. Look at the thematic and low cost Galadriel for an example of good game design.

We will see some continued doubling and some form of Gandalf hero for sure. He is the most iconic character in any of the books or movies.

Thematically Gandalf shows up when you need him; which is pretty decently expressed by his card text on both ally versions to "discard him at the end of the round".

He is someone that you are happy about when he makes an appearance in the darkest of times but since his work is never done and he is always needed somewhere else, he cannot stay too long.

EDIT: I´m in the movement against a Gandalf hero if that did not come across

Simply, I don't like the Hero Gandalf idea, but it seems coming close.

Yeah I don't want a Gandalf hero either but it seems like it will happen. I also don't want a Haldir hero or at least have no interest in one, I'm psyched to have the three brothers as allies, works better that way I reckon.

I think not giving us a hero Gandalf is a good move. Every time I get to play Gandalf into my table it is a big event. It is as if the other cards cry "Mithrandir is come, we are saved!", you know, the essence of eucatastrophe. This makes so much thematic sense. Having a Gandalf hero at our disposal at all times would take all that away.

With that said, I would not mind if he is made a hero tied only to a quest or two (as Bilbo or Frodo). That would give us this toy we all want to play with, but only for a while and it would end before it gets boring and all to common.

I completely understand where all you "Gandalf hero haters" are coming from. ;-) You make some good points. Here's how I ultimately see it: any hero they choose to create in this game is one more hero I own and can choose from. If Gandalf is not a viable LOTR hero, then Caledra and that Lore elf hero aren't either. I'd much rather they make actual characters into heroes (like good ol' Gandy) before making some up.

It's Caldara.

An appropriate place for Gandalf to show up as a hero would be in The Road Darkens saga set. He is so central to the Moria episode.

Thank you spell check! I was too lazy to go find the card. I never play it.

An appropriate place for Gandalf to show up as a hero would be in The Road Darkens saga set. He is so central to the Moria episode.

I´d more suspect that he will appear as an objective ally, but we´ll see.

Thank you spell check! I was too lazy to go find the card. I never play it.

There is cardgamedb.com for the cases when you're too lazy to look for physical card

Quest Action: While Gandalf is committed to the quest, you may raise your threat by 1 to ready a hero you control which is committed to the quest. Any player may trigger this effect.

Why is everyone so negative about doubling up an ally with a new hero? I've already had to take my Gandalf and Faramir out of my decks because another deck had Faramir hero and my other friend used persistent Hobbit Gandalf.

We have quite a lot of double ups already and everyone seems to want a third Boromir (although maybe only for thematic reasons?), and everyone seems super keen about a Haldir hero. So why not Gandalf? It seems like people are blowing his expected threat cost and abilities out of hand. He hobbles are holding a stick most of the time, haha. Look at the thematic and low cost Galadriel for an example of good game design.

We will see some continued doubling and some form of Gandalf hero for sure. He is the most iconic character in any of the books or movies.

Doubling is fine, and inevitable. I'd rather see multi-sphere versions of my favorite heroes than lots of FFG created heroes. But doubling does make co-op more difficult, especially if you don't have time to coordinate decks beforehand. This is why I think a hero Gandalf would be such a big deal. Faramir the ally is a great card, but if someone shows up with Faramir the hero, there are a few in-sphere options for replacing what he does (Sword that was Broken, Visionary Leadership, Dain). There isn't a replacement for Gandalf. Whether you're a leadership deck using the Sneak Attack-Core combo, a low threat deck running Hobbit Gandalf as a fourth hero, a Tactics deck relying on Gandalf to drop their threat, etc. There's no way to replace his neutral sphere versatility. I know that there are sometimes conflicts because someone is running Hobbit Gandalf and someone else wants to play Core Gandalf, but if the person who needs to play Core Gandalf is that desperate, you can always allow Hobbit Gandalf to be discarded at the end of the round. A hero Gandalf would take away that flexibility, and lock down any deck that was counting on Gandalf in some shape or form. That's why the hero Gandalf would have to be amazing. otherwise, he wouldn't be worth it.

That's why I think we could have a saga specific Gandalf hero in store. It makes a lot of sense for him to appear at this point in the story, it would be very cool to recreate Gandalf's moments of glory (who isn't excited about the idea of Gandalf taking down the Balrog?), and would maintain the balance for the rest of the quests.

If they simply made a Gandalf hero with stats 4wp, 4a, 4d, and 4hp without any abilities on his card, that would be insanely amazing. Make him Lore and make his starting cost 15 or 16. His abilities would come in with his items, sword, staff, ring etc. Such a Gandalf would easily rival the ally version.

Oh, he must be Neutral, I feel. It really fits his character, I feel. Gandalf had no home, he travelled tirelessly to help anywhere he could. He could be kind and funny, he could be great and terrible, a supporter or a leader when needed, though never through finding respect in others out of fear.

Long I suspected Saruman as a hero with shifting resource Icon. He was a neutral by default and at the setup, you were able to choose a resource icon for him until the end of the game.

Saruman of Many Colours, that would make sense. On the other hand, at this stage he was already altogether corrupted. By the way, has anyone had success with the Saruman ally? I sort of hesitate to play him, partly because of the theme but he also does not seem too intriguing as a strategy option -- but I say this totally without experience.

He is great. Costs only 3, puts one encounter card out of their misery for the entire turn and hits hard for 5. I would say that he is most usable in the quest where to proceed you need to get rid of something. Like, second quest of Black Riders - just flipping one of the Nazguls for the entire turn, and then dealing with it's brethren and winning.

Saruman of Many Colours, that would make sense. On the other hand, at this stage he was already altogether corrupted. By the way, has anyone had success with the Saruman ally? I sort of hesitate to play him, partly because of the theme but he also does not seem too intriguing as a strategy option -- but I say this totally without experience.

Best time I used him must have been to remove a hunter from mordor, who was in the staging area, while 4 clue cards where in play and then quest the game to victory with just 2 willpower to spare.

Yes, he seems an excellent end-game card, unless you are in deep with the threat. Alternatively, he can also be great to overcome opening odds. So yes, I see he must be good, and I need to try him. The doom decks have thus far been a bit of a disappointment for me though.

You don't need to run a doomed deck to use him.

Of course, I won't. If I use him, I probably will in the Silvan deck with Galadriel to get two actions out of him. He quests nicely and shall fight even better. Plus, Galadriel can sort of keep the threat low. And the Island Amid Perils might help even more.

Oh, he must be Neutral, I feel. It really fits his character, I feel. Gandalf had no home, he travelled tirelessly to help anywhere he could. He could be kind and funny, he could be great and terrible, a supporter or a leader when needed, though never through finding respect in others out of fear.

Making Gandalf neutral (and only able to spend resources on neutral cards) I think is the main point they have to help balance him.

If he'll be able to only pay for neutral cards, then it'll be dullest decision ever. My bet is that he won't be 4/4/4/4, but will be really strong, with some drawback.