LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just too easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just too easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Nope, he is pretty much mandatory for many decks which is why he is so ubiquitous. If you chose to play on easy mode you have the luxury of playing weaker heroes and have a more thematic experience, but if you want to play normal or nightmare Spirit Glorfindel should not be limit 0 per deck.

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?

A ban.

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.

100% agree. Asfaloth MAKES Glorfindel. If it was not for Asfaloth I think the vast majority of decks would take someone like spirit merry, galadriel or the new arwen hero instead. I know I would.... the main issue I had when trying to substitute Galadriel into my decks in place of Glorfindel was the lack of Asfaloth, not the lack of willpower from turn 1 (but potentially more later on), not having one less awesome attacker, not light (light was actually great as it was going on Elrond instead who is great at questing and defending) and not even starting threat but purely Asfaloth. No Asfaloth more or less means no clearing locations in staging (unless you have a super expensive Northern Tracker out or some of the other location control cards and even then all of them don't come anywhere close to the cheap raw repeatable power of Asfaloth) which means location lock from time to time.

Location lock is most peoples most hated way of losing as well.... I know I get extremely frustrated when I lose more or less purely because of how many locations appeared in a particular game and because I haven't drawn Asfaloth yet. It has very little to do with your choices or skill at playing the game (yes you obviously need to decide just which location to travel to and sometimes this can save you but honestly most times you are location locked it doesn't matter which locations you travel to first, you are screwed either way) so its no surprise it can be so **** frustrating.

Compound this with the fact that player cards that target locations are extremely few and incredibly weak when you compare them to player cards that affect threat or help with controlling enemies for example.

Yes recently we have gotten a few decent player cards to help deal with locations (Expert Trackers and Distant Stars) but even these are quite situational and incomparable to Asfaloth.

Nothing else in the game even comes close to replicating Asfaloths ability and I really wish that he allowed any hero to place two progress and perhaps only costs 1 instead of 2 if placing it on Glorfindel or something along those lines.

Honestly as much as I am against house rules or doing anything that does not 100% follow the rules I think eventually I might just have to house rule Asfaloth to place 2 progress regardless of what hero he is attached to if I am ever going to escape using Glorfindel....

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?

because he showed up right after Trololo was banned, makes the same kind of custom cards, posts the same kind of article summaries Trololo did, and engages in flame wars in much the same way.

If it's not the same person - it's Trololo's separated-at-birth twin.

Though, John does have better grammar...

I agree with the sentiment that Asfaloth is part of what makes Glorfindel so ubiquitous, but it can't be just Asfaloth--otherwise we'd see the in-sphere Corefindel pretty often too. I think Spirit Glorfindel single-handedly solves so many problems all at once: low threat, high attack, high willpower, Asfaloth, easy readying through LoV, in-sphere access to Elrond's Counsel... Whatever you're missing, Spirit Glorfindel can provide it. He's the most splashable hero, so we see him everywhere.

I agree with the sentiment that Asfaloth is part of what makes Glorfindel so ubiquitous, but it can't be just Asfaloth--otherwise we'd see the in-sphere Corefindel pretty often too. I think Spirit Glorfindel single-handedly solves so many problems all at once: low threat, high attack, high willpower, Asfaloth, easy readying through LoV, in-sphere access to Elrond's Counsel... Whatever you're missing, Spirit Glorfindel can provide it. He's the most splashable hero, so we see him everywhere.

The reason we are not seeing more of the Lore Glorfindel is because his ability is highly questionable at the very least, and when we look at high threat heroes - we expect something spectacular. Just a quick comparsion to other heavy threaters:

Aragorn can ready himself for a resource and is a sentinel, Gimli grows stronger with each wound and can dish out tons of damage with a right setup, Imrahil readies any time something leaves play, Boromir can ready as much as you want as long as you can show some threat, Dain buffs all the dwarves, Aragorn resets your threat completely, Elrond can pay for all allies and boosts the healing across the board... should I continue? Compared to all of this, Lorefindel is such a pushover, being able to only heal 1 health for 1 resource (most expensive heal 2014). The problem with the two versions is not just about spirit one being ultimately superior, but also about lore one being ultimately inferior.

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just too easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Nope, he is pretty much mandatory for many decks which is why he is so ubiquitous. If you chose to play on easy mode you have the luxury of playing weaker heroes and have a more thematic experience, but if you want to play normal or nightmare Spirit Glorfindel should not be limit 0 per deck.

Exactly, he's a crutch. If a card is so powerful it's mandatory, there's a problem. I personally ban the card.

The point isn't that the Lore version is better, or even equal - it's that if Asfaloth were the sole reason you saw Glorfindel as much as you do, you'd see both equally. The Lore version isn't THAT inferior - the healing may not be the most efficient, but you have it from the very beginning, repeatably, without having to dedicate card slots. His stats are still solid (Willpower and Attack are both especially good for a Lore hero), and he makes an excellent (if high threat) combo with Elrond to really pump the healing. He may not be absolutely amazing, but IMHO he's not so awful as to never be worth taking to get Asfaloth, especially since he provides the sphere match.

No one said Asfaloth was the sole reason, but he was one of the reasons for sure. Reducing the progress from non-Glorfindel heroes was a wrong thing to do, they should have just costed him 3 and lowered the price to play it on Glorfinderl by 1. The Lore version is THAT inferior. Yes, you have it from the very beginning, but it is extremely weak and a pure waste of resources (and it's not even in leadership). When you take lore Glorfindel, the chances are big that you won't triggered his ability at all, and when comparing a blank 12/3/3/1/5 hero to a 5/3/3/1/5 hero with a downside that can be mitigated with 1 card worth of 1 resource, the second one will always win. This "combo" with Elrond is very expensive threat-vise, and there are plenty of healing effects to rely on that combo. He is not absolutely amazing, and compared to the hero pool of his threat range - he is below average, and that's the reason why he is underplayed even while Asfaloth exists in the same sphere with him.

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just too easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Nope, he is pretty much mandatory for many decks which is why he is so ubiquitous. If you chose to play on easy mode you have the luxury of playing weaker heroes and have a more thematic experience, but if you want to play normal or nightmare Spirit Glorfindel should not be limit 0 per deck.

While I don't go so far in my aversion to Glorfindel as to ban him from my play entirely, placing a blanket ban on him would not be the end of the world. He's incredibly good, but he's not mandatory, especially with how much the card pool has advanced since his release. Pick any normal quest, I can beat it without Glorfindel (and probably have). Pick any nightmare quest, I'm still pretty confident I can.

He's definitely not mandatory, but he is a crutch.

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just too easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Nope, he is pretty much mandatory for many decks which is why he is so ubiquitous. If you chose to play on easy mode you have the luxury of playing weaker heroes and have a more thematic experience, but if you want to play normal or nightmare Spirit Glorfindel should not be limit 0 per deck.

While I don't go so far in my aversion to Glorfindel as to ban him from my play entirely, placing a blanket ban on him would not be the end of the world. He's incredibly good, but he's not mandatory, especially with how much the card pool has advanced since his release. Pick any normal quest, I can beat it without Glorfindel (and probably have). Pick any nightmare quest, I'm still pretty confident I can.

He's definitely not mandatory, but he is a crutch.

You are right, he is not mandatory as this is a casual co-operative game and we can all chose to play as we wish with whatever heroes we wish. If this game was competitive though you would have to make a pretty sound argument why not to run him as he is one of the most powerful heroes in the game. I take issue with the original comment that any deck using Spirit Glorfindel is automatically dismissed, some decks absolutely need his low threat (Gandalf, Elrond, Spirit Glorfindel for example). I myself don't use him in every deck but when I do sleeve him up I don't want to be shamed into putting him into the binder because other posters think he should be banned and is boring to play or whatever.

Don't like a card? Just don't build with it. The group I play with hasn't used Glorfindel in at least 6 months and he hasn't been missed. However, complaining about a card like him being used to often would be like complaining Ally Gandalf is in every deck. Subsequently, we haven't been using him either since my trap deck uses Hero Gandalf. Anyways, I don't think Glorfindel is broken. Powerful, sure, but his little 3 attack isn't going to do much without weapons. and he still won't do much without ranged. And I'm sure the tactics player wants to put those things on his own guys first.

You are right, he is not mandatory as this is a casual co-operative game and we can all chose to play as we wish with whatever heroes we wish. If this game was competitive though you would have to make a pretty sound argument why not to run him as he is one of the most powerful heroes in the game. I take issue with the original comment that any deck using Spirit Glorfindel is automatically dismissed, some decks absolutely need his low threat (Gandalf, Elrond, Spirit Glorfindel for example). I myself don't use him in every deck but when I do sleeve him up I don't want to be shamed into putting him into the binder because other posters think he should be banned and is boring to play or whatever.

Emphasis bold: You're putting too much stock into my opinion on whether or not I use a deck if spirit glorfy is present. I have very strong opinions that he is OP (I wouldn't bat an eye if he were nerfed or even banned), but don't let me stop you from using the guy. Play as you wish. And I do the same. As someone who exclusively net decks, I find it frustrating when I see him crop up more often than not. To me, personally, I avoid decks that use him because I'm getting tired of seeing the guy.

Emphasis bold: You're putting too much stock into my opinion on whether or not I use a deck if spirit glorfy is present. I have very strong opinions that he is OP (I wouldn't bat an eye if he were nerfed or even banned), but don't let me stop you from using the guy. Play as you wish. And I do the same. As someone who exclusively net decks, I find it frustrating when I see him crop up more often than not. To me, personally, I avoid decks that use him because I'm getting tired of seeing the guy.

I think the way you stated your original objection was far stronger than this. Saying a card should be banned is not a "Play and let play" way to put things, which is what I think people found objectionable.

If you exclusively use other people's deck designs I can see how the overuse of the card could have some actual impact on you, but I think that is more your playstyle than anyone else's. If you're tired of seeing people using a card you don't like in their decks, stop copying their decks and make your own. I know that's a pretty obvious comeback there, but it really is the truth. "Stop using things I don't like in your decks that I'm copying" is something I have a hard time generating sympathy for.

Emphasis bold: You're putting too much stock into my opinion on whether or not I use a deck if spirit glorfy is present. I have very strong opinions that he is OP (I wouldn't bat an eye if he were nerfed or even banned), but don't let me stop you from using the guy. Play as you wish. And I do the same. As someone who exclusively net decks, I find it frustrating when I see him crop up more often than not. To me, personally, I avoid decks that use him because I'm getting tired of seeing the guy.

I think the way you stated your original objection was far stronger than this. Saying a card should be banned is not a "Play and let play" way to put things, which is what I think people found objectionable.

If you exclusively use other people's deck designs I can see how the overuse of the card could have some actual impact on you, but I think that is more your playstyle than anyone else's. If you're tired of seeing people using a card you don't like in their decks, stop copying their decks and make your own. I know that's a pretty obvious comeback there, but it really is the truth. "Stop using things I don't like in your decks that I'm copying" is something I have a hard time generating sympathy for.

**** dude, do you always come out attacking? So what if I net deck to play the game? I don't have time to build my own decks so I look online. I understand there are limitations to that aspect of play, and I take that into account (i.e. ignoring spirit glorfy). I do what I can with my limited time, and for me, that time is better spent actually playing the game. And I'm not the only one here who is claiming the card is overpowered, overused, a crutch, etc. I feel like I'm being attacked for stating an opinion. Seriously, wtf?

I applaud the designers' decision to make Asfaloth lore instead of spirit.

LoV is fine. Instead, Spirit Glorfy should read: "Limit 0 per deck."

The guy is everywhere and it's annoying. He's just easy to use and very boring too. The first thing I do when looking up a deck list is to see if he's in the line up or not. If he is, I immediately look elsewhere. Unfortunately, I do that more often than not.

Your original post was a little bit harsh as I have posted decks in the deckbuilding strategy forum with Spirit Glorfindel as part of the strategy for people to use and to think that they were annoying to you is upsetting. There was a popular saying during the Heirs of Numenor cycle that friends don't let friends play Outlands. I say why not, you bought the cards play with whatever you want. About his current power level, at one point he was probably the best hero in the game but recently has been eclipsed, Galadriel, Erestor and Gandalf are all superior to Spirit Glorfindel IMO so I do not welcome any sort of ban or Errata. Lastly, this game is all about the thematic experience of questing through middle earth, there are no boring heroes only boring quests.

I use Glorfindel constantly and without apology. As has been said before, he is not used because he is POWERFUL, but because his threat is crazy low without penalty (assuming LoV). I like to use big threat heroes and I basically have to combine that with a low threat hero or I threat out. Most low threat heroes totally suck. It's basically that simple. Recently, I have shifted to using Lore Pippen a lot instead for the card draw. I also like Galadriel's threat reduction. I have personally found Spirit Merry to be a bust, but I will keep trying. Basically, there a ton of big powerful heroes (Gandalf, Elrond, Treebeard, all versions of Aragorn, Boromir etc.) There are a ton of 9ish threat mid range heroes (Hama, Legolas, Galadriel, Gloin, Sam etc.) But there are like 2 low threat heroes, maybe 3 if you go mono green with Mirlonde. That's it. We need more low threat heroes, and good ones. Why is Glorfindel the only hero with low threat and a drawback? That is all.

We really do need more low threat heroes that don't just completely suck. They need decent stat distribution and abilities we actually want to use. We have got an over abundance of mid range heroes that are absolutely fantastic and quite a few high cost heroes that are also fantastic but so few low threat heroes, especially ones that aren't garbage.

A couple of things:

1. I was one of those during the Against the Shadow cycle joking about "friends don't let friends use Outlands". It was certainly a joke, though I can see how it would be misconstrued as a judgement of those who play Outlands. Far from it. People should play whatever they enjoy. I just happen to enjoy interesting mechanics and decks which require a bit more nuance to play. This can be my opinion and still not reflect poorly on those with other opinions or other styles of play. The worst thing to me about the forums (especially lately) is how many absolutes get thrown around. Things are allowed to be relative. I am allowed to never build or play Outlands/Dwarves/Spirit Glorfindel/New Archetype X without that having to be some kind of damnation of those who do. I can even strongly state my opinion about what I prefer to play without that implying that those with a different opinion are inferior. If everyone on the forums agreed all of the time, no one would be here because every thread would be incredibly boring. The important distinction (and one that somehow keeps getting lost) is that it is possible to respectfully disagree with someone without disparaging them. It actually gives your argument more merit when you don't need to resort to name-calling or other cheap tactics to get your point across.

2. I have used and continue to use Spirit Glorfindel in decks, especially before Spirit Merry was released. This was partly by necessity to make certain strategies work (e.g. Secrecy), and party because I enjoy playing harder quests - including some Nightmare. Sad to say, but Core Set Glorfindel is not going to cut it as your marquee hero against certain more difficult quests. Light of Valinor and Asfaloth are so good that they combine with Spirit Glorfindel to form what remains one of the best archetypes in the game. That said, I am definitely feeling the Glorfindel fatigue and I go out of my way lately to find alternatives to using him in my decks.

3. To me, this argument is a bit more complex than "if you don't like him, don't use him". The problem is a systemic one, and it has to do with the way that the metagame has formed around these cards for everything released since the Dwarrowdelf cycle. It's all well and good to say "just stop using Glorfindel/LoV/Asfaloth", but if new quests are designed around the assumption that low-starting threat, cheap readying/action advantage, and powerful location control are all available, then I am basically handicapping myself not to at least consider these cards for the harder quests. I can't speak for others, but I have found The Battle of Carn Dum solo to be very difficult. I want to try different decks, but the concern that I have with these more challenging quests is that they will push me right back to these same arguably-broken staples. Maybe there is another path, using cards like Thror's Map, threat control and questing via Galadriel, and other more interesting tricks. I certainly hope that there are alternatives, because even if they never again print something as broken as Spirit Glorfindel and his toys, he can still warp the metagame into an unwholesome shape.

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?

because he showed up right after Trololo was banned, makes the same kind of custom cards, posts the same kind of article summaries Trololo did, and engages in flame wars in much the same way.

If it's not the same person - it's Trololo's separated-at-birth twin.

Though, John does have better grammar...

Still, they are indeed not the same person. So, culture could be an explanation.

I just wanted to add that I absolutely agree with Duke and Psycho - we NEED more low threat heroes with good stats and useful traits/abilities. For example, a Leadership Gondor hero with a 7 or 8 threat cost and 2 willpower would be amazing. It would allow for much more interesting Gondor builds. As it is, I either include Balin as one of my heroes or have a mediocre but thematic deck with a starting threat in the 34 or 36 range. Same thing for Spirit Rohan where I can go with Dunhere as my third hero - who might fit thematically but makes no sense strategically - or I splash Galadriel/Glorfindel/Eleanor etc. so that my starting threat is not insane and the deck can actually function.

To be clear, I'm not arguing this from a "slave to theme" all of my decks have to be "thematically perfect" standpoint. But trait synergy is a thing - Spirit Rohan for example has multiple powerful effects that are more useful if all of my heroes are Rohan. It would be nice to actually be able to make use of these "coaster" cards like Astonishing Speed or We Do Not Sleep, but as long as I have to splash random heroes to make the deck work, these cards will continue to lose out to other more universally powerful alternatives.

This is not a criticism of the designers, the fact of the matter is that the card pool grows relatively slowly - even with the addition of Saga expansions. This is me adding my voice to those lobbying for some attention to 6-8 threat "glue" heroes. Before we get versions of every single marquee 11-13 threat cost hero in every other sphere, it would be nice to see a few more of these "lesser" heroes. It would certainly make deck-building a heck of a lot more interesting as there would be much less of a reason to "splash" Spirit Glorfindel into a Rohan super-questing deck.

**** dude, do you always come out attacking? So what if I net deck to play the game? I don't have time to build my own decks so I look online. I understand there are limitations to that aspect of play, and I take that into account (i.e. ignoring spirit glorfy). I do what I can with my limited time, and for me, that time is better spent actually playing the game. And I'm not the only one here who is claiming the card is overpowered, overused, a crutch, etc. I feel like I'm being attacked for stating an opinion. Seriously, wtf?

I never said anything against you for netdecking. Netdecking is fine. But "I hate this card and people need to stop using it in the decks I copy" is a pretty ****** attitude. The nice thing about a co-op game is that you don't have to deal with what anyone else chooses to play. You not wanting to make your own decks doesn't change that.

So again: Netdecking, fine. Crying at people for building their decks with a card you don't want, not so fine.

I just wanted to add that I absolutely agree with Duke and Psycho - we NEED more low threat heroes with good stats and useful traits/abilities. For example, a Leadership Gondor hero with a 7 or 8 threat cost and 2 willpower would be amazing. It would allow for much more interesting Gondor builds. As it is, I either include Balin as one of my heroes or have a mediocre but thematic deck with a starting threat in the 34 or 36 range. Same thing for Spirit Rohan where I can go with Dunhere as my third hero - who might fit thematically but makes no sense strategically - or I splash Galadriel/Glorfindel/Eleanor etc. so that my starting threat is not insane and the deck can actually function.

I've been running a Faramir/Boromir/Denethor leadership/lore deck with almost pure Gondor. Appropriately thematic for Against the Shadow, and been doing relatively well. It's a bit low on willpower at the start, but Visionary Leadership spikes that REALLY fast.