You would avoid it (for the targeted character only). The effect would still trigger and effect everyone else of course,

Hey does 'Don't be hasty!' Offer a way to negate cards with cannot? Or is 'cannot' not a considered a 'keyword'?

Cannot is not a keyword.

Thanks

Although is your point that you could use Don't be Hasty to avoid an effect that cannot be cancelled? Because you certainly could do that.

Perhaps he was wondering if there has to be a keyword on the encounter card to trigger DbH's effect?

Cannot be canceled is not a thing that can be triggered so it's irrelevant if it present on a card you're trying to avoid or not.

Cannot be canceled is not a thing that can be triggered so it's irrelevant if it present on a card you're trying to avoid or not.

I had to read that twice to fuly understand it. Going to read it again to make sure I'm on the right track.

leptokurt, since you changed your avatar image I'm unintentionally percieve you as a different person.

leptokurt, since you changed your avatar image I'm unintentionally percieve you as a different person.

More... cowish?

I approve of your change.

We needed more cattle in here.

Only good can come from it.

I approve of your change.

We needed more cattle in here.

Only good can come from it.

More cowbell!!!!!!!!

http://vimeo.com/91715361

What game is your avatar from leptokurt?

What game is your avatar from leptokurt?

Had to look it up. It's called "Black Sheep".

Brandnew: With cows.

Wow really excited about this pack. Waters of Nimrodel will go straight into my doomed deck. And that Captain of Gondor, can't wait for Lost Realm so I can play it on tactics Aragorn. Thematically it makes sense too!

It is very hard. And very funny. Glaurung sure will enjoy a lot. ^^

In 3 players we finally won, after 4 tries. Hard, very hard.

Initially I thought Erkenbrand was way better and that he could take damage to cancel any shadow effect as long as he had defended that phase and he would still be lmited by only 4 hit points but only being able to use his ability for himself is just meh.. also Don't Be Hasty is terrible, yeah you could situationally pull one character out to save them from a bad treachery but its still going to affect someone else. Why couldn't this card been a great ent card? it has nothing to do with them

All the other cards are great though! lol

People don't seem to understand the way I see Don't Be Hasty should most commonly be used: overquesting protection. If you're questing with Haldir, Treebeard, Theoden or some other character that is decent at both combat and questing, and you don't reveal as much threat as you expected or that you revealed an enemy that you will need that combat character's help with, then you can pull him back. As mentioned it's the opposite of Late Adventurer, which so few seem to play with, but that I think is underrated.

If Late Adventurer was an attachment, I might have cared. They release weak, thematic cards, but enforce an envirnemnt where are no place for such cards in a deck.

I agree that as an unrepeatable event action, it's difficult to make room for it in decks because there are so many better cards that take up that space first. It doesn't mean that it is a bad card. It just means that it isn't good enough to compete with the staple cards.

It's not bad, it just does not fits.

By the way, your signature gave me a giggle. When I was going through military training in my school, I once shot a nail's head. Sadly, I was aiming for an actual paper aim that nail was holding

Well, I was also thrilled by Late Adventurer, but now, it's being in my "useless" list.

Don't Be Hasty will be the same.

It takes one slot, you could have use another card to better effect

It is too situationnal, I don't see even one game out of ten where having it in hand would change drasticaly the outcome of the game

It does not give you any advantage at all, but only overquesting (or underquesting with Late Adventurer) with ONE character. This character might be the one with the most willpower to benefit from Late Adventurer, and if you didn't put it in the quest, you did something wrong, or it would be on a low willpower character, so that it would not change much the outcome. With Don't Be Hasty, it is the same, either you have quested with some high willpower that need to be covered from a treachery, but it will not prevent his peer, and you would lose a good lot willpower, or you just overquest with someone who was better at other things, so why did you put him in the quest in the first place ?

The only way it could be fine was with a good all stats character. But then, you could have switch either cards with more apporpriate event, like a rumour from the earth in the first case or a feint in the later.

The advantage this card(s) gives does not overcome the dead weight it represents.

The idea isn't bad, it just that the game doesn't comes with enough cards to play it with (like a little combo with dunedain tracker, or good round stat characters like gandalf) and treachery cards where this cards would be more valuable than a Test of Will.

So I agree that it is not good enough to compete with the staple cards, but by a lot, enough to find it underpowered rather than underated.

Having it as an attachment would be too great, it would need to cost a lot (3-4 at least, maybe unique), but some recursion like rumour would have make them to the "not enough good" list.

Yeah, I can't see ever choosing Don't Be Hasty over a card like Radagast's Cunning or Secret Paths. Instead of sending extra characters and relying on Don't Be Hasty in case you overquest, you can instead send fewer characters and rely on Radagast's Cunning or Secret Paths in case you underquest. And we're just talking about quests where you are worried about overquesting. Most of the time it doesn't even matter so Don't Be Hasty is worthless while RC/SP can be worth 3-5 willpower for a turn.

Having it as an attachment would be too great, it would need to cost a lot (3-4 at least, maybe unique), but some recursion like rumour would have make them to the "not enough good" list.

Nonsense. A cost of 1 would already be debatable.

I think it is good to debate the power of different cards but there's more to playing this game then just the power of different cards. Maybe I'm sick of just playing Steward of Gondor or Unexpected Courage over and over again! Because this game is not competitive we can think outside of just which cards are going to win a game for us and think about having some fun and exploring different options!
I really like that the designers are not just giving us more and more powerful cards but are giving us different ways of doing the variety of things we can do in a game. I say bring on the variety and don't dismiss a card just because it's not as powerful.

I think it is good to debate the power of different cards but there's more to playing this game then just the power of different cards. Maybe I'm sick of just playing Steward of Gondor or Unexpected Courage over and over again! Because this game is not competitive we can think outside of just which cards are going to win a game for us and think about having some fun and exploring different options!

I really like that the designers are not just giving us more and more powerful cards but are giving us different ways of doing the variety of things we can do in a game. I say bring on the variety and don't dismiss a card just because it's not as powerful.

Dude, it's would be OK, but most quests deisgned with the most powerful cards in mind, so you won't have much fun with the thematic weakling unless you're a masochist.

Having it as an attachment would be too great, it would need to cost a lot (3-4 at least, maybe unique), but some recursion like rumour would have make them to the "not enough good" list.

Nonsense. A cost of 1 would already be debatable.

I agree with you MNT. If it's an attachment, it would only allow you to use the ability with that specific character (that's how I would make it, otherwise attachment doesn't make sense), so it has another fundamental weakness over the event. I'd accept a cost of 1, but there's still a lot of competition between cards and it could still be considered a dud with the current set of cards we have available.

I don't know why people are always saying they're upset about how few cards that get released compared to other games. We tend to think that more cards = more options, and while that is true, if we want to prevent power creep, we'll always end up introducing "duds", not because the "dud" is bad, but because there are too many good cards and the "dud" will never butt them out. I'm glad player cards don't come out any faster than they do. I'm lucky if I get to try out 30% of a cycle's cards, and I'd love to try somewhere around 90% of them.

The biggest benefit I see in Don't Be Hasty is that it targets any character in play. Late Adventurer is limited to characters you control. This allows DBH to be a useful component of a support deck. The ability to save another player's character from a nasty treachery or ready an emergency defender while allowing other players to focus their decks could be huge. Though of course this is situational. I'm just not so down on this card as I was when I first read it.

DBH is not too bad. It's situational, true, but it makes decision making easier. Avoiding treacheries is only half of the story, and IMO not very important when you look at the current treachery cards. Keeping the balance between questing and fighting is far more important, and here is it where DBH is shining.

Imagine the following scenario: you're playing The Antlered Crown and you're at stage 2. You wanna make it through as quickly as possible, so send all your characters to the quest. However, you draw a nasty enemy from the encounter deck you is going to attack you this round. Fortunatly you can play DBH to call back one of your adventurers to block that enemy.

That's the reason why I think DBH is better than Late Adventurer. You can keep DBH in your hand until you desperatly need it, and meanwhile you can send one extra character to the quest. Late Adventurer can do this only once, and then it is gone.