https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2016/2/2/counsel-from-the-loremaster/
FAQ has been updated. Horn of Gondor and Love of Tales have received errata, among other clarifications. I haven't read it all yet but I thought at least this much should be shared now.
Yikes, take that Seastan!
Well, crap. My newly created Rohan deck just got completely obliterated 
That's a seriously big change to Horn of Gondor.
Everything obliterated.
Before digging into the nitty-gritty of the new FAQ (Horn of Gondor, whaaaaat), let's pour out a glass for Seastan's Love of Tales combo decks... All of the videos are great, but this one is a very clean demonstration of the idea:
You will be missed, ridiculous 0-cost attachment!
Edited by sappidusSorry everyone.
That's a seriously big change to Horn of Gondor.
Yup...My Rohan deck had Born Aloft and all the discard abilities (with Gamling recycling them) as well as chump blocking to generate quite a bit of resources. And even though I didn't use Sneak Attack/Gandalf, it was used by other players so often that I could capitalize on it. I still think I can make the deck work, but Horn of Gondor will just be put back on the shelf.
In reply to Sappidus, yes, I understand why they had to errata it as I've seen Seastan's video, but unfortunately there are plenty of decks that relied upon its old wording and will now be unusable. So basically, it is still disappointing, even if necessary.
Edit: Oh I think I misread Sappidus a bit, but Horn of Gondor had to be errataed because of the 700 card deck with Emery spam and Horn of Gondor that Seastan created. I guess this particular deck could have been dealt with a different way, but inevitably there would have been another card that surely could abuse the "leave play" wording on Horn of Gondor.
Edited by cmabr002Nah, never used that thing anyway 
So, can we de-nerf the Master of Lore now? If I recall, his errata was for the Erebor Hammersmith, Horn of Gondor, Born Aloft combo.
Sorry everyone.
I was wondering why they errata'ed Horn of Gondor at all, then I remembered your Emery combo deck. SEASTAAANNNNNN!!! 
(The sheer chutzpah of that deck design remains my single favorite break-the-game idea.)
Man, Eagles and Horn of Gondor just got a lot worse. But I'm with TeamJimby on the Master of Lore thing.
Edited by sappidus-
Edited by cmabr002Little bit disappointed Horn of Gondor doesn't trigger when an encounter card forces you to discard an ally, but aside from that they seem fine. 
And yes, Master of Lore de-nerf! Although that seems unlikely as they've probably already printed the nerfed card in the last run.
Just two days ago I was playing with a newer player, and he was so excited about his mono lore deck that relies on Master of Lore. I couldn't bring myself to tell him about the errata, so we played with the original text. He takes a few turns to set up and he's very fragile, but that Master of Lore was really fun to watch. It encouraged you to hold back allies then flood the board, so I appreciate the decision-making it adds. It was such a nice glimpse into what could have been (and may happen again some day).
Edited by TeamjimbyInteresting about the Lasting Effects rule. I kind of always played it that way anyways. Not for any rules-justifiable reason, I think it seemed more natural. I saw such effects on player cards as one-shots, but on encounter cards as a passive ability.
And since I've never abused Love of Tales nor Horn of Gondor, and I have physical pre-errata copies (of course), I'm going to keep playing them the way they're written for me. The only "abuse" I've done with the Horn is my Aragorn/Gondor deck which relies on chump blocking with Squires and then reviving them with Spirit events.
I wonder if the developers saw seastan's decks when deciding on these new erratas 
Interesting about the Lasting Effects rule. I kind of always played it that way anyways. Not for any rules-justifiable reason, I think it seemed more natural. I saw such effects on player cards as one-shots, but on encounter cards as a passive ability.
You almost get two different meanings depending on where "until the end of the phase" appears. If it's at the start of the sentence it implies it should be recalculated, at the end it's an effect applied to the current state.
"Until the end of the phase, all characters get -1 Willpower" - lasting effect, recalculated when the state changes
"All characters get +1 attack until the end of the phase" - calculated for the current state.
Edited by blinkyI wonder if the developers saw seastan's decks when deciding on these new erratas
Almost certainly. They admit they read the boards and look at the direction our "metagame" is going.
I remember hearing that the philosophy behind player card errata was usually geared toward endless (or limitless anyway) combos, e.g. Will of the West. I think on The Grey Company once they discussed the idea that there should be limits on certain cards like Horn of Gondor, or maybe I was hearing Dan talk or something. This is good though, feels much more thematic as well.
This makes me want to play these cards more and more intentionally instead of throwing them in any old deck for resource generation.
Did anyone see the bit about resolving active location Response effects after completing the main quest and moving to a new main quest card? I thought that was interesting. I have always played it that the location was explored, resolved if it had an effect, then continue on with completing the quest and moving on.
Sorry, but I don't understand the Master of Lore de-nerfing... 
Jokes aside, this nerf sucks. Not because I am using any deck with Horn of Gondor in it, but because it highlights the worst tendencies of FFG's card review and errata process.
Horn of Gondor wasn't broken. It wasn't OP in 99% of decks. On average, it was solid-good. In a deck custom built to work with it, that maybe graduates to very strong. But nowhere near OP--I mean, this is a game where we have Steward of Gondor.
Yes, it could be intentionally exploited to lead into OP territory but...why do the designers care? It takes a very specific deck design to accomplish that goal. It's not something a player could just accidentally stumble into in their deck-construction process and somehow not notice that suddenly the game's gotten a whole lot easier than it used to be.
You have to want to exploit the card to OP levels to get those results--and if that's clearly your design philosophy then you are waving all responsibility on FFG's part to balance Quests based on your OP, crazy exploit deck. They simply do not have to care about your choice to break the balance of the game as you clearly know what you're getting into.
That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with making crazy, broken decks--I've done it myself. It can be a stimulating challenge. It's fun! But nobody is expecting FFG to cater to my desire to clearly break the game's balance.
Ultimately, this is a coop game. There is no competitive edge that needs to be balanced to make sure no one faction or combo has a significant advantage. FFG should balance for the average, the center, and let people play around at the margins as they please. The only reason we should be getting errata are literally game-breaking effects (ie: card A and card B literally conflict in the rules of the game or disrupt the structure of play).
Edited by JonofPDXSo, can we de-nerf the Master of Lore now? If I recall, his errata was for the Erebor Hammersmith, Horn of Gondor, Born Aloft combo.
This please!
I do agree with the horn of gondor & love of tales errata's though.
Both were getting too powerful...
Jokes aside, this nerf sucks. Not because I am using any deck with Horn of Gondor in it, but because it highlights the worst tendencies of FFG's card review and errata process.
Horn of Gondor wasn't broken. It wasn't OP in 99% of decks. On average, it was solid-good. In a deck custom built to work with it, that maybe graduates to very strong. But nowhere near OP--I mean, this is a game where we have Steward of Gondor.
Yes, it could be intentionally exploited to lead into OP territory but...why do the designers care? It takes a very specific deck design to accomplish that goal. It's not something a player could just accidentally stumble into in their deck-construction process and somehow not notice that suddenly the game's gotten a whole lot easier than it used to be.
You have to want to exploit the card to OP levels to get those results--and if that's clearly your design philosophy then you are waving all responsibility on FFG's part to balance Quests based on your OP, crazy exploit deck. They simply do not have to care about your choice to break the balance of the game as you clearly know what you're getting into.
That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with making crazy, broken decks--I've done it myself. It can be a stimulating challenge. It's fun! But nobody is expecting FFG to cater to my desire to clearly break the game's balance.
Ultimately, this is a coop game. There is no competitive edge that needs to be balanced to make sure no one faction or combo has a significant advantage. FFG should balance for the average, the center, and let people play around at the margins as they please. The only reason we should be getting errata are literally game-breaking effects (ie: card A and card B literally conflict in the rules of the game or disrupt the structure of play).
Wisdom.
The Passage of the Marshes Should read: “Setup: Each player may change hero cards he controls without incurring the +1 threat penalty. Each player shuffles 1 copy...”
After 3 or 4 years, love-tales is faqqed. I was convinced developers know it and they leave them in play. I will reset my logs with songs. I wrote and old article in TftC blog. I say it 'old' because .... well, you know.
PD: i dont mind the faq on the Horn-Gondor, i never use it
Edited by Mndela