If it were "Limit one per deck", would spirit Glorfindel be so ubiquitous?

Nerfing an innocent card because of a single hero? (even though it was created specially for him)

I think a lot of people forget that the card text does not state "attach to Glorfindel". With the recent cycle, there are now several viable targets for this card.

Elrond was always a good target.

Didn't even need to play a spirit hero with Vilya on him.

And yes, LoV is strong.

But as trololo ...err...john said: it's the single hero that's the problem, not LoV.

I'm aware of all that of course. What then would be the best balance? Starting threat 7? 9?

In terms of balance the best thing would be the lack of existance of an attachment that has no problem exploring stuff and is dedicated purely to him.

I would go with either "When Glorfindel commits to the quest, raise your threat by 1" or "When Glorfindel exhausts, raise your threat by 1". His starting threat is still probably too low even with that modification, but at least then LoV doesn't give you unconditional use of Glorfindel's attack AND willpower.

To the original question—“No, Spirit Glorfindel probably would not be as ubiquitous if Light was nerfed.” I would even go so far as to say that it would make Glorfindel a more interesting card to play. But it would pretty much ruin Light of Valinor—there would just be no need for it.

From a practical gameplay stand-point giving it a “1 per deck” restriction means that you could never be sure of getting it in a given game. So why not play a more versatile readying effect. There was just a big discussion in another thread about whether or not Dain and Steward of Gondor limited the available design space for other cards. Here, UC seems to fall into the same category. With the additional restriction, there just wouldn’t be a good reason to play Light vs another readying effect (except perhaps treacheries that punish exhausted characters?).

And from a thematic standpoint it would be a pretty big let-down in comparison with other similar cards. All the other “1 per deck” cards all have a high element of drama. You won’t see them every game, and half the time when you DO see them you won’t get good use out of them. But when they really hit you can have HUGE turns that define games (and help to create memorable dramatic moments). This…doesn’t. It’s arguably the best of all of those cards in your opening hand and the worst very late in the game but either way it’s the least exciting.

Honestly, Light is really pretty balanced in a world that includes the ability to run 3x UCs. The problem (if there is a problem—more on that in a sec) is Glorfindel. He’s the one that’s so over-powered and it really doesn’t have that much to do with Light of Valinor or Asfaloth’s balancing.

I would personally have loved for Glorfindel to read more like: (5) 3/3/1/5, Glorfindel does not exhaust to commit to the quest. Forced: When Glorfindel commits to the quest, raise your threat by 1 (or perhaps: “raise your threat by 2, another player may reduce their threat by 1” if you want to maintain the awesome and theme while giving players more to think about). This would free up 3 spots in your deck where Light of Valinor used to be (possibly for a redesigned Light that had a more interesting effect with a similar restriction) and would make Glorfindel players have to think a little more about whether to take advantage of Glorfindel’s ability.

But he wasn’t designed that way, at least in part because Glorfindel was originally released to make secrecy a viable option. The quests at that time were hard enough that you simply HAD to run higher-stated heroes to consistently do well and that ran counter to the keyword theme FFG was trying to establish. FFG just evidently didn’t realize how good the hero they made was in almost ANY deck archetype.

I do want to take a quick moment to defend poor Glorfindel, though, since he gets such a bad rap for is OPness. Yes, he is very powerful. But…we have other very powerful heroes (Elrond can straight-up break the game if you build him right). What makes Glorfindel unique is that he might be the easiest to play of the super-powerful cards. And I get why people hate that (just like people hated Outlands and some people are starting to make noises about Ents). They feel like this is a game of skill and they don’t want to purposely sabotage their own decks to get a challenge. And I understand that position. But…this is a coop game—and that changes things. Much more so than in a competitive setting you will be playing with players of varying skill-levels. And I think that as hard as the game can be in some quests, we NEED some of these “over-powered” deck archetypes to balance out for player skill and allow for teams including weaker players can still play together and have fun (I run a Gandalf-Hirluin-Eleanor Outlands deck for my girlfriend for that very reason). And yes, Easy-Mode makes up for that to an extent, but Easy-Mode tends to strip out some of the encounter decks most interesting and challenging cards; not to mention the diminished play-experience for the more skilled players in Easy-Mode…

Blah blah—long comment is long. Sorry @ Bullroarer Took! Didn’t mean to right a freaking essay in your thread.

I play Glory too, but his problem isn't that he's overpowered, it's that he's EVERYWHERE.

"Look at my Rohan deck! Eowyn, Théoden and Glorfindel..." Etc... Why? Because his starting threat is so low and with Light, there is no real penalty for it.

Sorry for any derailment possibilities. I have proof that John is not Trololo.

So, please refrain yourself from making that mistake. They are not the same person.

I think Glorf's ubiquitousness (is that a word?) comes not from him being powerful but from the lack of alternatives. Only 3 attack spirit character for a long time, one of two targets for Asfaloth (which in itself is an almost must-have card, especially in multiplayer) and only hero that starts with 5 threat. So if you needed any of these elements, he was your only choice. And having everything together also made him 'better' than most alternatives.

But Elrond and Gandalf are certainly on the same powerlevel but we're not as 'compelled' to use them. So I don't think nerfing anything Glorfindel related would influence his use much. Just add more alternatives. I for one would like more Glorfindel/Beorn heroes that have better stats/lower starting threat at some cost.

I think Glorf's ubiquitousness (is that a word?) comes not from him being powerful but from the lack of alternatives. Only 3 attack spirit character for a long time, one of two targets for Asfaloth (which in itself is an almost must-have card, especially in multiplayer) and only hero that starts with 5 threat. So if you needed any of these elements, he was your only choice. And having everything together also made him 'better' than most alternatives.

But Elrond and Gandalf are certainly on the same powerlevel but we're not as 'compelled' to use them. So I don't think nerfing anything Glorfindel related would influence his use much. Just add more alternatives. I for one would like more Glorfindel/Beorn heroes that have better stats/lower starting threat at some cost.

This is a super great point and you said it way better than I did.

Glorfindel is just so EASY. Throw him anywhere with 3 copies of Light and Asfaloth and he'll do well. And I actually think that's a strength, but it is also a weakness since he shows up SO often. And beyond just Glorfindel fatigue, it also makes pick-up games pretty hard to organize.

Ultimately I don't think this gets resolved until there are other low threat options (Mirlonde could have been that but you have to run mono-Lore before it approaches that level and there's no up-side vs Glorfindel) and another Glorfindel that people want to play (Ally MIGHT help with that, but I still prefer Hero).

DunedainLoreKeeper has a point there. Look at the alternatives available when Glorfindel was released: Eowyn (great), Eleanor (never really caught on), Dunhere (only in specific decks), Frodo (actually really good), Dwalin (uhm...yeah). So two actually good spirit heroes you've acutally already been using for quite a while. The next cycle and 3 saga boxes give you the following: 2 dwarfs with very specific applications, 2 hobbits that consistently rank at the bottom of all hero ratings, and Caldara, who is essentially mono spirit specific, i.e. you're usually playing her with Glorfindel.

So up to the 4th cycle, you have just about 3 universally good spirit heroes. If you play mono, he's in. If you play 2 spirit heroes, he's still probably in. And the low threat just makes him super easy to splash.

By the way, my preferred fix would be to change Light of Valinor to after attached character commits to the quest, ready him.

DunedainLoreKeeper has a point there. Look at the alternatives available when Glorfindel was released: Eowyn (great), Eleanor (never really caught on), Dunhere (only in specific decks), Frodo (actually really good), Dwalin (uhm...yeah). So two actually good spirit heroes you've acutally already been using for quite a while. The next cycle and 3 saga boxes give you the following: 2 dwarfs with very specific applications, 2 hobbits that consistently rank at the bottom of all hero ratings, and Caldara, who is essentially mono spirit specific, i.e. you're usually playing her with Glorfindel.

So up to the 4th cycle, you have just about 3 universally good spirit heroes. If you play mono, he's in. If you play 2 spirit heroes, he's still probably in. And the low threat just makes him super easy to splash.

By the way, my preferred fix would be to change Light of Valinor to after attached character commits to the quest, ready him.

Only problems there are that A) it becomes just a way more restrictive UC (maybe reduce the cost? But then that may be overpowered...) and B) doesn't do what the designers originally needed it to do--keep Glorfindel's threat low so he can be used for secrecy decks.

By the way, my preferred fix would be to change Light of Valinor to after attached character commits to the quest, ready him.

I like it.

Sorry for any derailment possibilities. I have proof that John is not Trololo.

So, please refrain yourself from making that mistake. They are not the same person.

To me it was quite obvious even without a proof. Not sure why some folks are convinced that they're the same person...

Btw, what happened to trololo?

I'm aware of all that of course. What then would be the best balance? Starting threat 7? 9?

His starting threat to best balance him would be 10, 11 due to his stats and his "negative" ability...

Just look at Lore Glorfindel... Same stats... threat 12

I don't hate Glorfindel really. He's strong, but I certainly think we have other heros who are more powerful. He's everywhere because, as stated, spirit didn't have a lot of competitive options until recently. With Galadriel, Theoden, and now Arwen and Ciradan, there are some good options opening up.

I can definitely run Glorfindel without Light, and he's still strong. Light isn't what makes him so good, not by a long shot. It's Asfaloth. Asfaloth is the single best thing about Glorfindel, Asfaloth is IMO practically the entire reason to run Glorfindel outside of secrecy.

There is nothing currently in the game that can do what Asfaloth does even close to as well. The only repeatable progress tokens on locations cards are The Riddermark's Finest with Gamling -which is difficult to set up and still expensive, even with Theoden helping, and Northern Tracker, which is far slower and more expensive than Asfaloth. Asfaloth is also really easy to get out early because of Horse Breeder and possibly Mirror.

So if we had another card that could help to deal with locations in a repeatable fashion, I think we would see a lot less Glorfindel. But we don't, so he's still almost too good to pass up.

EDIT: A little more to say. Northern Tracker used to be good, but he just doesn't synergize well with anything. Back when you could run a good card because it was a good card, Tracker was great. But his traits are only Ranger -which has almost no synergies, and Dunediain, which now has synergies but pretty much all of them are out of sphere. Even then, there isn't anything amazing. You can ready his middleing-good stats with Descendants of Kings, you can reduce his cost with Heir of Varanil, and that's about all. I hardly ever see Tracker anymore because it's so hard to pay for him (maybe Arwen will rekindle him?) and in a deck that is built around traits he just doesn't fit in anywhere.

It's something of a tangent, but I find Thror's Map to be even more valuable than Asfaloth for location management. The extra progress is certainly great, but avoiding travel effects and being able to control which locations your progress clears (before they can sit in the staging area) is almost more important for any but the most location-heavy scenarios.

I'm obviously in a minority, since there seems to be such community hate, but Glorfindel doesn't bother me. I think with no ability, his stats put him around a 10 or 11 threat. I think it's easy to underestimate the drawback, too - every turn you quest with him (and his high willpower makes that natural) you're increasing his starting threat. If he were an 11, 2-3 turns not finding Light would make him one of the most expensive heroes in the game, and completely awful. It's a tough balance point. I've had games where Light just didn't show up at all, and he gets very limiting.

I also think that people tend to look at him idealized - that first turn Light of Valinor does indeed make him awesome. But if it doesn't come early, there's literally no other way to avoid his drawback. Early game it's annoying, late game it can be crippling.

Ok so I partly agree with Buhallin. The goal of the game is not equality. there is a reason why there are cards like keen eyed Took. You can get creative and use cards that aren't so good, build cool mechanics, and maybe beat mediocre quests, or you can use the better stuff and battle it out with the better quests. yes, hes OP. yes, he goes good with almost anything. but he doesn't break the game. Hes good, but if you think he is TOO good then just don't use him. No offence, but I think hes fine. I mean, if you are going to fix EVERYTHING that is OP in this game, start with steward, unexpected, eoywn, test of will, riversong, sneak attack, feint, ect... just to start in the core. again, the goal of the game is not equality. All decks were not created equal, and neither were all the cards that make up the decks.

It's something of a tangent, but I find Thror's Map to be even more valuable than Asfaloth for location management. The extra progress is certainly great, but avoiding travel effects and being able to control which locations your progress clears (before they can sit in the staging area) is almost more important for any but the most location-heavy scenarios.

I'm obviously in a minority, since there seems to be such community hate, but Glorfindel doesn't bother me. I think with no ability, his stats put him around a 10 or 11 threat. I think it's easy to underestimate the drawback, too - every turn you quest with him (and his high willpower makes that natural) you're increasing his starting threat. If he were an 11, 2-3 turns not finding Light would make him one of the most expensive heroes in the game, and completely awful. It's a tough balance point. I've had games where Light just didn't show up at all, and he gets very limiting.

I also think that people tend to look at him idealized - that first turn Light of Valinor does indeed make him awesome. But if it doesn't come early, there's literally no other way to avoid his drawback. Early game it's annoying, late game it can be crippling.

Thror's Map has received errata to be a Travel Action. This means that you can no longer use it after staging but before quest resolution to change which active location is about to get cleared. Before the errata, I agree with your comments about it being an amazing location control card. Now, Asfaloth on Glorfindel stands alone as the best repeatable location control, especially because there are a growing number of effects which punish Northern Tracker's "put progress on everything" effect. I suppose post-errata Thror's Map could be combined with Steed of Imladris to form a decent solution for repeatable location control, but this involves multiple cards and requires you to discard extra cards every round. Asfaloth is part of what makes Spirit Glorfindel so ridiculously powerful, and like Steward and Dain in their respective roles, seems to have warped the metagame in terms of all subsequent forms of location control. It is also why any location with 2 or fewer quest points now has either a terrible forced effect when it is explored, or is immune to player card effects.

Thror's Map has received errata to be a Travel Action.

GAH. How did I miss that? That is truly sadness inducing

I'm not entirely sure that it drops its stock THAT much, though. It still avoids travel effects, which is great. It still lets you get nasty effects out of the staging area, if only before combat rather than quest resolution, and lets you do it even if you're stuck with another active location. So sadly more limiting, but still solid. Better or worse than Asfaloth? Hard to say, honestly, because they serve different roles.

Asfaloth is part of what makes Spirit Glorfindel so ridiculously powerful, and like Steward and Dain in their respective roles, seems to have warped the metagame in terms of all subsequent forms of location control.

I'm not sure that it really holds as an issue for Spirit Glorfindel. Lore Glorfindel can provide the same benefit, and does so without the second sphere requirement. If it's JUST about Asfaloth, sticking to Lore seems a better bet.

I do agree that Asfaloth is a defining card for location control though, mainly because of the timing. Northern Tracker can often put far more progress out, but is a bit more expensive and does so before staging.

But I do think Sauron raises an excellent point that I was reluctant to wade into. This is a cooperative game, not a confrontational one, and you control the power level of the cards you use. I run a single deck with Glorfindel and Asfaloth because I find that in multiplayer (and I almost always play 2-3) you MUST have some location control. Asfaloth provides a solution for the location lock would otherwise end many games regularly. If you don't find that a problem, or play solo, just don't use it. Same goes for Glorfindel.

I have to admit that I've found the hate for certain "metagame-skewing" cards strange. There really is no metagame - you have tools of a particular power level, and you choose the ones you need. But this isn't a game where you may sit down across from someone and get hit by cheesy cards, and we complain about them because there's no other option. You're in control of your experience, and bashing other people because they use certain cards more than you like is a strange thing. Telling people how to play the game is rude but valid when you have to experience that; telling them how to play the game when they're playing separate from you is... a step past rude.

Pre-errata Thror's map was the most OP card ever. It was a repeatable Strider's Path. I would just destroy quests with that thing. It deserved the nerf, even if it did make me sad.

Thror's Map, even post-errata, has been a total boss in recent quests. It's invaluable in The Land of Shadow quests!

All the Land of Shadow quests and Murder at the Prancing Pony have multiple locations with negative Travel effects. I've found Thror's Map in my deck to be very important in handling these sorts of locations; one copy in a deck is usually sufficient.

The nerf certainly hurt greatly, but was reasonable.