So, I have been absolutely loving this game again after Lost Realms and Treason of Saruman. The six quests are probably my favorites of the entire game. I have also been loving the new player cards. I'm writing this post to tell everyone to calm down; the Ents are definitely not overpowered.

Here are some reasons why:

1. It is very hard to have any overpowered cards in LOTR as it is a coop game. More powerful cards don't mess up any metagame because there is no metagame. Power cards just make the game easier, so when you are saying that a card is OP, you are just saying it makes the game lame or boring. So far the only cards that have done that have been the infinite loop combo cards, as well as the dwarf trader guy and other cards that just needed caps, which have all been nerfed. (You might also be complaining about power creep and old obsolete cards, but I will get to that.) Even if Ents are SO powerful, they just make the game slightly easier, but... not really.

2. It is very, very hard to make a unique card overpowered because unique cards make your deck more inconsistent. Either you run 3 copies and end up with dead cards in hand or you run 1 copy and see it less often. The two most powerful Ent cards are Quickbeam and ally Treebeard, both of which are unique.

3. Specialized cards trump well rounded cards pretty much every time. Eowyn is still one of the best heroes in the game because she only quests and she is awesome at it. There are a glut of 2,2,2 heroes like Faramir that hardly ever get used because it is difficult to justify paying the extra threat cost when most characters can only do one thing each round. The thing about Ents is that they are all well rounded characters, which means most of their stats are left unused. The Wandering Ent, for instance, ends up mainly being used to quest, which means that basically all you are paying for is 2 resources for 2 willpower, hardly overpowered. The exception to this might be ally Treebeard, because he can ready Ents, but he readies 1 Ent every 2 rounds! Do you realize how underpowered that actually is? He basically always readies himself because he has the best stats, and it is slightly helpful, but nowhere near overpowered.

4. The, and I mean THE hardest part of every scenario is right at the beginning. As the designers get better at quest design this is starting to improve, but basically in 80% of the situations you have to stabilize the board position as quickly as possible, and once you do the quest is actually pretty easy. This means that Ents are often dead cards. Either you can't play them because they come into play exhausted, and thus it is too risky, or you don't bother to play them because you already have the situation under control, in which case you can win without them. Honestly, this is not a minor thing. I was playing with Ents for a while and I stopped because waiting a full round to use the Wandering Ent's 2 willpower was so slow I would rather just build a blue rohan deck and actually beat the scenario.

5. Group buffs always trump individual characters. Rohan has been around since the beginning and nobody thinks that it is overpowered. Well, why am I having more success with Rohan than with Ents? The answer is that Rohan has effects that help the entire tribe, like Astonishing Speed, which is more OP than any Ent card. Have you guys played with Eomund? The guy is amazing! He is like a chump blocker with a Lure of Moria effect built in. Even if you exhaust everyone to quest you can often kill him with archery damage, depending on the quest. They guy is outstanding. There is nothing even close to that with Ents. Cards like The Sword that was Broken and ally Faramir are more OP than any Ent. Would you rather have a bunch of underpowered allies with tribal discount and group buffs, or a bunch of individually overpowered characters with nothing to benefit the group? To me, the answer is obvious. Ents are not overpowered.

6, So, what we are really talking about here is 2 cards, Quickbeam and Treebeard. If you compare Quickbeam to Veteran of Nanduhirion then I can understand being upset, but remember, Quickbeam is unique and the veteran is a dwarf who benefits from things like Dain Ironfoot. I mean are we starting to think that a dwarf is underpowered? Speaking of underpowered, a lot of the cards that can be compared with Ent cards have always been underpowered, so... Quickbeam is really, really good, borderline overpowered, but I stress borderline. To me that is exactly where Ents should be, in order to capture their flavor properly. The exhaustion drawback is so severe on the other Ents that they can have the massive stats without being overpowered. It is fun to have one card that circumvents that, but without group synergy, it is nothing to be worried about (again, reflecting their flavor). When Treebeard is compared with Radagast, then he looks overpowered as well, but again, Radagast was really underpowered, right? He was underpowered when first printed, so this isn't exactly powercreep. To me, Treebeard is solid and strong, but not OP.

7. Old cards can be given new life. We can see this with the new spirit Theoden, who is amazing. The underpowered Rohan tribe just got a huge boost and it puts it above Ents on the power scale, even though Ents have much better cost to stat ratios. This trend can simply continue. In this way, even if powercreep is happening on some level, the old cards are not obsolete. As a result Ents are not really "overpowered" after all.

8. Treebeard the hero requires a ton of deck space to be good. Maybe you think hero Treebeard is OP. The only way you can think this is if you haven't played with him yet. Once you play with him you realize, it's not a big deal. You see, you can make Treebeard really good with Ent Draught and Self Preservation, and Lembas and all that, but the problem is that whenever you include one of those cards that means you are not including an ally. That means that Treebeard has to do everything himself and if you run out of effects to ready him, then he is only a slightly above average hero. Think about it like this, Self Preservation is a 3 cost card that gives 2 attack or 2 willpower. When you think about it like that, it isn't so impressive is it? Eventually Treebeard gets overworked and he has too much damage and you can't boost his stats anymore, then your decks lack of ally support starts to catch up with you and even Quickbeam isn't enough to save you.

I've been playing this game since day one, before Hunt for Gollum was released, and I have seen people complain about Dain, and about Spirit Glorfindel, and about Outlands (I tried playing with the "overpowered" Outlands and all I did was get destroyed, so I don't know what that is all about). To me, Spirit Glorfindel is too good because he is in every single deck, mainly because his threat is low so you can combo him with power heroes (and because Light of Valinor is a bit ridiculous). To me, Dain is fine because there are almost no purple dwarf allies making him useless in solo. Most dwarf synergies operate on the 5 or more rule, and Dain needs to be ready, so its just awkward enough to work. Outlands is squishy. Yet all these other effects are easily more OP than Ents. So everyone needs to calm down and play on.

1. There is a metagame, it just works a lot differently than competitive games. It's what the people in your area like to play.

2. Very true. I usually only include 2 copies of unique cards in my decks that have a good amount of card draw.

3. Readying 1 Ent every 2 rounds is not underpowered. It's like giving a hero +4 attack every other round. Plus, Fellowship Aragorn readies someone every other round, and no one complains about him being underpowered.

4. It depends on the scenario. Ones like The Weather Hills, Conflict at the Carrock, Foundations of Stone, The Road to Isengard, The Three Trials, The Morgul Vale, A Knife in the Dark, and a load of other quests are the hardest at the end.

5. This is also true, although I'd rather have a Booming Ent swinging for 5 attack every turn than an event giving all of my characters +5 attack for one turn.

6. Don't just compare cards like Quickbeam to other allies. Compare him to other 2-cost Lore cards. There isn't really much I would rather spend 2 Lore resources on (other than Asfaloth).

7. Only a select group of factions get cards that will breathe new life into them. I want to make a deck where Power in the Earth or The End Comes actually do something.

8. A ton of deck space? 2 copies of Ent Draught, 2 copies of Self Preservation, and 3 copies of Daughter of the Nimrodel only take up 7 slots of deck space, and that's all I need to make Treebeard a beast. Treebeard is one of my new favorite heroes and he far outshines Elrond or the like.

9. Yes, Dain and Glorfindel (and Steward of Gondor and Unexpected Courage and a bunch of other cards) are completely OP. I think a "Spirit Glorfindel: Ready for Errata" thread is long past due. Ents aren't as powerful as those cards, but they're amazing nonetheless.

Taken 1 by 1, I find Ent Allies overpowered (the stats makes them 3x resource, instead of the usual 2x), but not Treebeard. The problem may be that Ents won't be developed much more than what we have now. This will probably make them excellent staple cards for decks not heavily based on theme.

I'll concede that an ent deck in it's current form is not OP. Although with the spoiled custodian ent and one or two more key pieces, it could become a top tier deck.

However, Quickbeam is the most OP ally in the game. Prior to him, the only allies with 3 attack that cost less than 4 were Vassal of the Windlord, Knight of Minas Tirith, and Dunedain Hunter. The Vassal and Hunter have their obvious drawbacks, so it's really just the knight. Compare that to Quickbeam, who costs one less, has 2 willpower, and isn't even a tactics ally. He absolutely should have cost 3 or 4.

Treebeard is also really strong, but between his 4 cost and entering play exhausted I don't consider him OP. Although I do wish his readying ability didn't work on himself.

There definitely is a meta game, although it's different from competitive games. Every time you have a staple that works in every deck it limits the variety of all decks. Just think if we didn't have test of will. That would free up 2-3 slots in every spirit deck. Likewise with Steward, Sneak Attack Gandalf, Feint, and a few others. It's like by the time you pick your heroes, a good chunk of your deck is already locked in with staples. Cards that work well in every deck are bad for the game.

You can build decks without staples, but the power gamers will use them and make stronger decks. Then the designers need to make harder scenarios to challenge the power games, and it makes it harder and harder to play thematically and still have a chance.

To me, Dain is fine because there are almost no purple dwarf allies making him useless in solo.

This is somewhat of a tangent from your main point, I know: but you are way off beam here.

Dain is incredibly powerful in solo play. See these decks, for example:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/72091-thorin-company-very-powerful-dwarf-allies-deck/

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/121989-one-deck-to-rule-them-all-almost/

As an exclusively solo player I can assert that Dain is incredibly powerful in solo.

The Ents we have so far (judging them on the basis of the cards we have so far):

Wandering Ent: very nice card for solo, maybe 2p too given its sphere and flexibility. Multiplayer its drawback gets too punishing, IMO, and you don't need flexibility very much.

Booming Ent: right now it's only ok, since attacking usually works better with Heroes+Boosts and BE requires a few pieces to be in place to unlock its potential.

Treebeard: very good ally, for solo I'd say almost OP since he can add substantial fighting power to whatever deck needs it. Not broken though, just a staple card IMO.

Treebeard Hero: interesting, so far doesn't look OP since ability isn't easily abusable: it requires massive healing to be used consistently. Still a nice Hero, allowing Tactics-less decks to take on big enemies.

Wellinghall Custodian: 3 cost is a lot for a card that entrrs exhausted, you need Mono Lore or res acceleration. Ability is nice but not game-breaking. Ok, but nothing more IMO.

Quickbeam: clearly OP card, considering stats and sphere. Being unique mitigates the issue and being at most 3 cards in a deck prevents it from being broken. Surely a staple.

So I think it's safe to say so far Ents in general are not OP.

That being said, a couple ones signal themselves as future staples.

Are staples bad? It depends on how "staples" they are, but in general I wanted to point out Teamjimby's reasoning since I thinks he hit the mark perfectly: too many staples, too many power cards and the deckbuilding gets stale. Not only for thematic decks, but also for those who attempt building decks that work differently, exploit underused mechanics etc. : if there are many staples, you'll have to sacrifice power to pursue your goal, but having subpar decks is bad from many standpoints, not just from the Boromir's perspective. The meta takes into account everything, and shutting oneself out of the meta is not a good solution, one of the main reasons being that designers take into account meta as well.

I think it will be hard justifying the exclusion of Quickbeam when playing Lore (unless you're playing MP and fear unique clash), so it will mean 2 less cards to choose in your Lore decks.

Don't get me wrong, I think it was about time for Lore to get some good and efficient allies, it's just that QB looks a bit too good.

I think Eu8L1ch has the most reasonable response. What he says is basically what I was trying to say. The one area where I still disagree slightly is on Quickbeam. I could agree that he should cost 3 but even at 2 he is not OP because he is just one unique ally. All he contributes is some combat stats (because he is 3 attack in green you rarely quest with him, so his willpower is mostly irrelevant). Broken cards have to give more than 3 attack. They have to give card draw or resource acceleration or ready effects or something. If you look at the strategy thread about the Boromir deck, Quickbeam doesn't even make the cut (though it could) but Warden of Healing and Asfaloth do. Having played the deck in several quests I think both those cards are better in most situations (feint also doesn't make the cut, which is interesting).

As a side note, I rarely include Test of Will in my decks anymore. I think people overestimate how predetermined the card choices really are. I will give Dain another try in solo though.

As a side note, I rarely include Test of Will in my decks anymore.

Yes! Someone doesn't think I'm crazy! As a whole, I dislike Response events because they're way too conditional.

I think it depends on how many players are in your group. Tests of Will are absolutely necessary for 3-4 player games. There are so many treacheries like "Each player searches the encounter deck for X" and they are brutal in 3-4 players. I agree that you can do without them in solo because you see fewer cards and treacheries are generally less painful in a solo game.

Ents are freaking OP.

They destroyed Isengard and defeated an Istar.

/drops_mic

Each player searches the encounter deck for X Balrogs and add them to the staging area. You may not shuffle the encounter deck.

I think it depends on how many players are in your group. Tests of Will are absolutely necessary for 3-4 player games. There are so many treacheries like "Each player searches the encounter deck for X" and they are brutal in 3-4 players. I agree that you can do without them in solo because you see fewer cards and treacheries are generally less painful in a solo game.

To nebe honest only Test of Will not will be enough. Eleanor is must hero in that case

It depends on the scenario, really. Some scenarios absolutely require Test of Will, and even Eleanor as Glaurung said, because the treacheries are absolutely insane (thinking about HoN and VoI quests). But in others you can do without cancellation.

This might sound crazy....but I actually enjoy playing without Spirit sometimes, just to get more variety in my decks (solo or two-handed). That means no Test of Will. But playing without Test of Will for most scenarios isn't too bad. You just have to know your encounter deck and plan your deck/strategy accordingly.

And Ents aren't OP, just P. Lore needed good allies that didn't cost a million resources and it finally got some. Whenever people start saying cards are overpowered, I think "they need to play more nightmare mode"

It depends on the scenario, really. Some scenarios absolutely require Test of Will, and even Eleanor as Glaurung said, because the treacheries are absolutely insane (thinking about HoN and VoI quests). But in others you can do without cancellation.

<cough>Master's Malice<cough>

It depends on the scenario, really. Some scenarios absolutely require Test of Will, and even Eleanor as Glaurung said, because the treacheries are absolutely insane (thinking about HoN and VoI quests). But in others you can do without cancellation.

<cough>Master's Malice<cough>

Reply: Play Mono sphere.

Being serious though, yes, the need for Test of Will and/or Eleanor depends on the quest.

Now that I've got some games under my belt playing the treebeard hero I think ents are not OP.

Sure they are strong, but the drawback of coming into play tapped is a very good balance imo.

As for solo players this effect is quite heavy, since you miss out on the ally a turn.

No other deck to that has your back, and I would even call it a very heavy drawback on the first 3 turns of a game in solo, when you still need to get the deck running.

Enter Quickbeam, who can ready. I do think he is incredible, but OP? No.

If you have him on turn 1 then yay, and you probably will quest with him for 2, which is great for lore, but not game breaking. When you get him later you'll probably want to use his 3 attack. Very versitale card.

Yet I'd say he is on par with ally Arwen or ally Faramir. Those two are the strongest allies in the game imo.

Arwen quests for 2, gives 1 defense to your dedicated defender & sentinel! All for the same cost.

Faramir is more expensive, yet in leadership who can pay for it, and can make allies quest power simpley unstoppable.

Quickbeam can eighter queut for 2 or attack for 3 fron turn 1. Just compare their powers a minute. Who's more OP?

Now treebeard. He is amazing. Slap a UC on him and he is double amazing.

The amount of questing & damage control you get with him cannot be understated.

Just dump the need extra tokens on him when needed and you get progress or kill a strong enemy.

OP? No. He costs 13 threat & It takes quite a bit of setup to max him out.

Ent draught, self preservence, warden of healing, UC, & hero elrond together make a beast out of him.

But you will rarely have all that on the table at once. So not OP imo. Strong? Yes, but not stronger then Elrond.

As for multiplayer, the drawback effect of the ents are less servere, because you got other decks to back you.

Then again, the effect of 1 powerful ally played by you per turn is not breaking news with 3 players.

And your friends have to pull your weight too againts a 3-4 encounter card flip per turn when your ent is tapped.

Again, especially in the first rounds of the game this can be quite critical.

So, OP? No way. Balanced? Yes. Strong? Yes. But there are stronger cards out there.

The ent deck is shaping nicely, and in no way game breaking.

Thank you Noccus. Agreed.