I understand the hypothetical idea of this all.

But if you would create 300 revised cards in the proper format, spread them by this forum, you are actually creating a new line of player cards instead of just critisising/discussing them.

Sure this example is exagerated, but it is only to make the point more clear. I think critisising cards is fine, just as suggesting probable improvements, but creating these revised cards seems wrong to me.

I really like the idea of discussing/improving cards, but building revised sets is 1 bridge too far (even if just hypothical). If you really like those revised card then you can make them yourself, but don't spread them by any forum/website.

I fail to understand your point. What exactly here is wrong? Posting images?

I think he's essentially saying that you're creating an entire custom set of cards and that it's detracting from the real product, so it shouldn't be made public. Apparently Jban hasn't heard about the massive custom First Age set. I see nothing wrong with publicly releasing custom card sets, even if they are specifically designed to replace certain current cards in the pool, especially if the original card was being underused or overused.

If this was a competitive card game and these cards were being allowed in tournaments, then I might have something to say against them, but otherwise, there is no reason we can't share the cards we came up with.

I have heard of The First Age set, just as I know of custom quests which are available in OCTGN. But I make a difference in creating new ideas for the developers to be inspired, or by just creating Beta-versions of things that allready exist. Since the second interferes with the existing products of Fantasy Flight Games I find it inapropriate to share these cards.

So far my opinion.

Ok, everybody acknowledged your opinion, lets move on now.

If only the actual cards had art like this..

I bet they would have even better art if they came out this year

I bet they would have even better art if they came out this year

Some of them. There is some art lately that is a bit sub-par, but yea, most of it makes the Core Set look antiquated. In any case, some of the art you found is pretty top notch.

where are you going to get your art from?

Going? I've already got it, didn't I? Internet image search.

Going? I've already got it, didn't I? Internet image search.

I have tried image seacg but never seam to find much. I thought you might know some good websites or somthing you were going to to get them.

Many have been found there: http://www.deviantart.com/

But searching there is extremely tricky. When you search for something - it will mostly never display a result you're looking for. Most of the good and fitting art I found through the long chain of art referenced through "looks like" section. And sometime if art looks good but not quite matches the theme - I check the whole gallery of an artist in case he has some more fitting art.

Yea searching for art is a long, tedious task. If you havethe money, you should just hire someone to do the artwork for you

A couple of elephants in the room that still wasn't mentioned:

Love those. I still think Steward of Gondor should cost at least 1, though.

Well, that's a huge balance question. Old SoG costed 2 and immediately refilled this cost by it's active, essenitally costing 0 but requiring at least 2 leadershit resources in play. The one I made cannot give you resources instantly unless you've setup specifically to trigger it's response. I want SoG to be reliable resource income source with a bit of extra if you do something it wants you to do, but I don't want to punish the players who don't do it. If I price SoG with 1, then, without response "triggerment", it will start producing net income on the second turn after it was played (you attach SoG, next resource phase - you got 1 which you spent to play it, next resource phase - you got 1 again, which is now actual income), and that's the thing I want to avoid here.

Would the Steward of Gondor response be triggered by the passive effect? I know it's not designed to do that, but it is a card effect adding a resource.

Definitely like the changes to it though.

I specifically worded it as "collects" which does not equals "add". It's like all this stuff with moving resources, which is not considered as being added for the purposes of triggering responses and stuff.

I don't agree with you on Steward of Gondor, but that happens often enough. No need to keep arguing. Anyway, is there a reason Steward of Gondor isn't unique? Also, you misspelled "collect" on SoG.

Its pretty **** good now! Even Resourcefull costs 1 and doesn't even have the extra response (or the trait, but that one is a bit useless now..)

Ooops. Forgot to add the unique symbol And thanks for pointing out mistake!

Its pretty **** good now! Even Resourcefull costs 1 and doesn't even have the extra response (or the trait, but that one is a bit useless now..)

Resourceful is not unique, you can stack those for a great cumulative effect. Steward of Gondor is just one on the board. Resourceful is also neutral, while SoG is not. I added the trait just for laughs, because Denethor from core set had it and it never mentioned anywhere (sometimes I even wonder why they added the Steward trait while Noble covers it pretty much).

Yeah you're right. But you forgot the unique symb. I would want to see a Stewardattachment then! Something that is just as handy/strong as Gondorian Shield Gondor Trait combo!

I've added unique symbol and fixed the typo

Sorry for my English. It should have been 'you had forgotten the symbol" spoken out loud on a joking tone. But could you think of anything about a Stewardthing? Nothing comes up in my mind..