The most killed hero i have seen a lot of times dying is Beregond. For me he is not broken.

Beregond is not a broken since he manage only defence.... But Glor he quest, fight, have 5 hit point and also deal with location with Asfaloth. And his starting threat is 5! what you want more?!

Beregond is not a broken since he manage only defence.... But Glor he quest, fight, have 5 hit point and also deal with location with Asfaloth. And his starting threat is 5! what you want more?!

Fruit of game elements being tied to a named character.

Sure, Light of Valinor is for Noldor or Silvan, but who are we kidding? It was created to negate spirit Glorfindel's born weakness, thanks god they didn't restricted it to him.

To me i play this game for fun, i don't care about tournament play and banning cards. Combining heroes and building decks are a big part of what interests me and whether i win or lose scenario is not really big deal.

A blessing and a curse with this game is that you can't select any 3 heroes and build a deck around them. It's a blessing because it leads to some creative and strategic deck building choices. It's a curse because it really limits which heroes can be played together. Glorfindel became a crutch in many of my deck because i allowed me to take 2 other hight threat heroes and play them together. Sure he has good stats, but i would probably even if he was a 1/1/1/3 hero for 5 threat it would lend a similar versatility to deck building that glorfindel provides. That seems to be the case with the amount of decks with merry and pippin at least.

Any hero with 7 or lower threat is going to be considered when playing with 2 other high threat heroes. Glorfindel floats to the top so often because we have so few options keep a reasonably low starting threat when using high threat heroes, of course his stats make him the obvious choice to fill this much needed role.

Okay, i sound like a broken record at this point. Whatever, we'll see what the developers have down the line.

So, really all i'm calling for are more heroes like Bifur. Since heroes like that are enough to give the players a slight advantage in threat, while providing deck building options with many of the high threat heroes that are difficult to play together.

Bifur is a good example of a hero that isn't broken but has a slight threat advantage (along with Mirlondre imo, who has a slightly better threat advantage but no other benefits).

I think maybe all heroes could do with a threat reduction of 1 sometimes, because as you say, in current games, starting with 30+ threat is too harsh.

On the other hand I believe the game is like this to make up for Glorfindel having such good stats at a low threat (because otherwise he would trivialize current quests).

A blessing and a curse with this game is that you can't select any 3 heroes and build a deck around them. It's a blessing because it leads to some creative and strategic deck building choices. It's a curse because it really limits which heroes can be played together.

True, true. It somewhat challenges the idea of the game being a Tolkien sandbox. Which is what I would LOVE this game to be.

What I find funny is that the community seems to limit themselves when it comes to Outlands. As in it is agreed they are overpowered and boring, and "friends do not let friends play Outlands". Of course this is a generalisation and people may think otherwise, but you do get those vibes from the community. At the same time, Glorfy is not frowned upon as much. Why is that? I personally do not know, because I have absolutely no problem with cards being very strong (cue all "it is a co-op" arguments). Perhaps the theme factor comes into play? I see Outlands as a bunch of more-less anonymous Gondory-related folk, while Glorfindel is one of the mightiest and coolest heroes of Middle-earth.

If you think 5 threat Glorfi is so broken and op w8 until you see Elrond with Light of Valinor, a burning brand, Vilya, Rivendel Bow, Rivendel Blade, Elven Mail, Unexpected Courage (3 to be sure) some Dunedain quests,warnings and marks and a litle favor of the lady, riding Asfaloth, making some of his councils and bringing a few warden of healing with him

Glorfindel is great as a band-aid hero for decks that have a high threat that you want to have a lower threat. And he enables Elrond's Council from turn 1.

Once upon a time, I would have said that Asfaloth is what made him broken. Because there were a lot of low progress locations that he could snipe in between staging and quest resolution. But the designers have been working pretty hard against location destruction in recent quests.

And I've actually been using less and less of him in decks, because the quests more and more are not set up to really punish high threat starts. 30 threat doesn't automatically mean you're hosed now.

I predict we'll see less of him as time goes on. And if you play multiplayer it's already not that big of a deal.

To be honest, if Outlands were called Gondor instead, much fewer people would complain, that's for sure.

Ain't nobody got time for Ethyr bro.

And I've actually been using less and less of him in decks, because the quests more and more are not set up to really punish high threat starts. 30 threat doesn't automatically mean you're hosed now.

^this!

i've found the core set really "brainwashed" us (hello, hill troll!) into thinking any hero lineup with 30+ threat is too high.

in modern quests/with the modern card pool, i no longer really feel that's the case. with higher threat comes better stats, so your heroes should be able to deal with it. and if you don't have ally drops the first (and second) turn in your opening hand, i'd argue your deckbuilding skills need work.

i have no problem starting with over 30 threat anymore (and would probably never have dreamed of it a few years ago).

And I've actually been using less and less of him in decks, because the quests more and more are not set up to really punish high threat starts. 30 threat doesn't automatically mean you're hosed now.

^this!

i've found the core set really "brainwashed" us (hello, hill troll!) into thinking any hero lineup with 30+ threat is too high.

in modern quests/with the modern card pool, i no longer really feel that's the case. with higher threat comes better stats, so your heroes should be able to deal with it. and if you don't have ally drops the first (and second) turn in your opening hand, i'd argue your deckbuilding skills need work.

i have no problem starting with over 30 threat anymore (and would probably never have dreamed of it a few years ago).

Except of course, with higher threat comes better stats ... or you can take Glorfindel. The issue for him, isn't that high threat is unplayable, it's that you can get a threat cost 12 hero with 7 less threat.

He'd be pretty good at threat 9. (Mirlonde basically has no special ability but starts with threat -3), having him be 5 with a penalty that you can trivially circumvent (use his amazing attack instead of his amazing willpower), is just stupidly good.

I do think there's scope for having low threat heroes, but I think the issue is that lower threat is generally better - the hobbits are great because of their low starting threats (Except Bilbo).

And I've actually been using less and less of him in decks, because the quests more and more are not set up to really punish high threat starts. 30 threat doesn't automatically mean you're hosed now.

^this!

i've found the core set really "brainwashed" us (hello, hill troll!) into thinking any hero lineup with 30+ threat is too high.

in modern quests/with the modern card pool, i no longer really feel that's the case. with higher threat comes better stats, so your heroes should be able to deal with it. and if you don't have ally drops the first (and second) turn in your opening hand, i'd argue your deckbuilding skills need work.

i have no problem starting with over 30 threat anymore (and would probably never have dreamed of it a few years ago).

Except of course, with higher threat comes better stats ... or you can take Glorfindel. The issue for him, isn't that high threat is unplayable, it's that you can get a threat cost 12 hero with 7 less threat.

He'd be pretty good at threat 9. (Mirlonde basically has no special ability but starts with threat -3), having him be 5 with a penalty that you can trivially circumvent (use his amazing attack instead of his amazing willpower), is just stupidly good.

I do think there's scope for having low threat heroes, but I think the issue is that lower threat is generally better - the hobbits are great because of their low starting threats (Except Bilbo).

i wasn't trying to make a point about glorfindel - but rather, starting over 30 isn't the detriment it used to be. but points well taken!

and if you don't have ally drops the first (and second) turn in your opening hand, i'd argue your deckbuilding skills need work.

.

Well your talking to a guy who builds decks to beat Into Ithillien and a number of other quests with no allies in the deck at all. So, dropping allies to chump block to survive the early game is only one way to play the game, and when it comes to building decks i find it one of the easiest strategy to employ in deck building that takes minimal skill.

I do agree that the modern quests allow for more flexibility in starting with high threat. Engagement cost of enemies seems to be higher especially in the current cycle. The Morgul Vale was the last quest that we had that starting under 30 was a big issue.

Much of this comes down to player styles, personal preferences, and the number of players played with. Personally, I like low threat decks, enjoy shooting for secrecy decks. I like attachment heavy decks, which often take a bit of set up time etc. I'm a solo player so it's easier to control the pace of the game to build decks with the parameters that I like. Also in solo game, i don't have any other players decks to help me out where my deck is lacking, so starting with higher threat decks in multiplayer is often easier, since the team of players can work together with ranged and sentinel heroes to work it out. In solo some of these higher threat decks just get swamped early on and it's tough for them to recover without any help.

and if you don't have ally drops the first (and second) turn in your opening hand, i'd argue your deckbuilding skills need work.

.

Well your talking to a guy who builds decks to beat Into Ithillien and a number of other quests with no allies in the deck at all. So, dropping allies to chump block to survive the early game is only one way to play the game, and when it comes to building decks i find it one of the easiest strategy to employ in deck building that takes minimal skill.

right, i really just meant if you are using allies in your deck (obviously). allies can take the heat off a high starting threat, if you have a bad staging/first round. i was trying to talk about the cost curve (a la the mana curve in Magic) and got lazy and didn't want to type all that out (i.e., how it's crucial to have 1 cost cards in your deck, as well as 2).

if it's an attachment deck, i'd hope you are dropping some of those in the first turn, as well. (but, i do find more attachment hate lately that really wrecks this particular strategy - or, at least, makes it riskier).

but, certainly you are right - your buddies can (potentially) take the heat off your deck in multiplayer that doesn't happen in solo.

on a more personal note, i've learned we have polar opposite deckbuilding styles/approaches to the game, tracker1, and there's nothing wrong with that. i.e., i don't understand all this love/want/need for secrecy, i find solo boring (no offense!), and an ally-less deck also seems boring/not fun/one-trick-pony.

but i'll reiterate here what i've said elsewhere - that's the beauty of this game. there are so many different ways to play it, beyond simply the one vs. multiplayer.

.

on a more personal note, i've learned we have polar opposite deckbuilding styles/approaches to the game, tracker1, and there's nothing wrong with that. i.e., i don't understand all this love/want/need for secrecy, i find solo boring (no offense!), and an ally-less deck also seems boring/not fun/one-trick-pony.

but i'll reiterate here what i've said elsewhere - that's the beauty of this game. there are so many different ways to play it, beyond simply the one vs. multiplayer.

No sweat, i appreciate the diversity of opinions and playstyles, and none is more valid than the other. it's enlightening for me to see beyond the box that i live in. Your statement just rubbed me the wrong way because it sounded like a "this is this is the way to play", which i know is not true, but i now understand what your getting at. Until next time!

.

on a more personal note, i've learned we have polar opposite deckbuilding styles/approaches to the game, tracker1, and there's nothing wrong with that. i.e., i don't understand all this love/want/need for secrecy, i find solo boring (no offense!), and an ally-less deck also seems boring/not fun/one-trick-pony.

but i'll reiterate here what i've said elsewhere - that's the beauty of this game. there are so many different ways to play it, beyond simply the one vs. multiplayer.

No sweat, i appreciate the diversity of opinions and playstyles, and none is more valid than the other. it's enlightening for me to see beyond the box that i live in. Your statement just rubbed me the wrong way because it sounded like a "this is this is the way to play", which i know is not true, but i now understand what your getting at. Until next time!

yeah, definitely not what i was trying to do (be a jerk know-it-all) - but i was typing at work (sssssh!) and was trying to be quick, which is always a bad thing. haha. sorry if it offended!

Really the way to fix him is pretty simple with a couple of lines of errata:

Replace the card text with the following - Forced: After Glorfindel exhausts, raise your threat by 1.
Forced: At the end of the round, if Glorfindel is ready, spend 1 resource from Glorfindel or exhuast him.

Really the way to fix him is pretty simple with a couple of lines of errata:

Replace the card text with the following - Forced: After Glorfindel exhausts, raise your threat by 1.

Forced: At the end of the round, if Glorfindel is ready, spend 1 resource from Glorfindel or exhuast him.

Would make him one of those worst heroes, if not the worst.

I'd just replace his text with the following:

Forced: After Glorfindel commits to the quest, raise your threat by 1.

It's not like he wouldn't still be awesome. It doesn't diminish the usefulness of Light of Valinor and in Spirit sphere, such a threat increase is easy enough to counter. He'd still be a shoe-in for secrecy (which I think is fine), but he'd have to be more carefully played and his drawback can't be so easily negated.

I'd just replace his text with the following:

Forced: After Glorfindel commits to the quest, raise your threat by 1.

It's not like he wouldn't still be awesome. It doesn't diminish the usefulness of Light of Valinor and in Spirit sphere, such a threat increase is easy enough to counter. He'd still be a shoe-in for secrecy (which I think is fine), but he'd have to be more carefully played and his drawback can't be so easily negated.

Unless you plan to only quest with him 2 or 3 times and otherwise plan to use his 3 attack stat instead.

I'd just replace his text with the following:

Forced: After Glorfindel commits to the quest, raise your threat by 1.

It's not like he wouldn't still be awesome. It doesn't diminish the usefulness of Light of Valinor and in Spirit sphere, such a threat increase is easy enough to counter. He'd still be a shoe-in for secrecy (which I think is fine), but he'd have to be more carefully played and his drawback can't be so easily negated.

Unless you plan to only quest with him 2 or 3 times and otherwise plan to use his 3 attack stat instead.

Exactly. He'd still be super-powerful, especially for his threat cost, but the fact that Light of Valinor just instantly negates his only drawback is just too much. I could suggest "better" balances, but this is the lowest impact one I can come up with that keeps his essence intact.

Maybe this?

Forced: At the end of the combat phase, if Glorfindel is exhausted, raise your threat by 1.

Light of Valinor then still allows him to quest freely, but if he is used for his attack, you'll need another readying effect on him to prevent the threat gain. I like the idea of raising your threat any time he commits to the quest too; just throwing more ideas out there.

I don't think he needs fixing. (At least not as much as Bilbo.). I've had games with him where LoV never came out and it was pretty miserable. If anything needs to be changed it's LoV. I think limiting it to one or two per deck is the best way.