I realize there are quite a few of these but many of them are very intrusive in terms of rules alterations. I wanted to come up with something a bit more passive, something that offers some hope to having a good single player experience and the ability to actually succeed without going the two hand round. What I came up with below, was hoping to get some feedback from more experienced players. I have done about 4 games now and so far it seems to be working pretty well, most quests are still tough as hell but I'm finding that I can last a bit longer at least and sort of see the light.

DECK CONSTRUCTION

• Players use up to 4 Hero's Instead of 3 (see Leader special rule)

GAME SETUP

• Draw 8 Cards at the start of the first round, choose 6 cards and shuffle the unchosen cards back into the players deck or take a mulligan, drawing 6 cards as per normal rules.

SPECIAL RULES

Leader

The leader is a special 4th character that is added to the group of heroes. The Leader functions as a normal hero in every way except for the following special rules.

• After selecting a leader, select another hero with the lowest threat cost in the group. Add that characters threat cost with your leaders cost together and divide it by 2. Add this threat cost to the other 2 hero threat costs to get your total threat cost for your group

Leader Threat Cost + Lowest Threat Cost Hero / 2 + Other Hero Threat Cost = Starting Threat

• When your leader dies, you automatically lose and fail the quest.

Special Abilities

Some special abilities are only useful in multiplayer games, as such these are the solo variant rules.

Ranged

Ranged characters do not exhaust when attacking the first time in a combat phase.

Sentinel

Sentinel characters do not exhaust when defending the first time in a combat phase.

8 minutes ago, BigKahuna said:

Leader

The leader is a special 4th character that is added to the group of heroes. The Leader functions as a normal hero in every way except for the following special rules.

• After selecting a leader, select another hero with the lowest threat cost in the group. Add that characters threat cost with your leaders cost together and divide it by 2. Add this threat cost to the other 2 hero threat costs to get your total threat cost for your group

Leader Threat Cost + Lowest Threat Cost Hero / 2 + Other Hero Threat Cost = Starting Threat

What you've typed is not what you intended.

If Hero A has the highest non-Leader threat, B is the median threat, and C is the lowest threat, then Starting Threat = (Leader Threat + Hero C)/2 + Hero A + Hero B.

I have to agree, that the game is tough for new(er) playeres, so feel free to Change the rules as you like and did.

I guess you tried stuff like the "easy-mode" (more ressources and less mean Cards) or "sleezy mode" (more ressources), so onto the Feedback:

Drawing two extra Cards doesn't seem too impactful to me (didn't do the math though). What you can try is searching your deck for 1 specific Card before you draw your Hand, but therefore loosing your Mulligan Option.

Leader Option more or less takes 1/4 of your starting threat, so you get a free hero. I'd just have taken 75% of the total cost as starting threat, but the difference is marginal. The Leader-death rule shouldn't come into Play too often as most quests don't end well once heroes start to fall

Ranged and Sentinel only being useful in multiplayer (+handful of quests with specific enemies :D) for me always was to compensation for having to manage which Player gets engaged with which enemy (what isn't necessary or even possible in solo Play) so I wouldn't have changed something in that regard, but as you say you're having a hard time with the quests go for it, game's supposed to be fun after all

There isn't really much to criticize or improve as changing the rules in a singleplayer game is just for your Entertainment and I don't see gamebreaking Problems . Just Keep in mind that, if you want to Play by the rules some day it will be even harder the further you alter them now I'd say. But again: Have fun, that's the most important Thing!

Forgot to mention: If you didn't already check out other peoples decks (e.g. on: http://ringsdb.com/), read some Blogs/guides (e.g.: https://talesfromthecards.wordpress.com/new-player-guides/) or watch some Videos (a great youtuber for less experienced Players is the hive tyrant (former: the tenth nazgul). They Play two Player games, but you can take away much for your own singleplayer gameplay. Or at least I could :D)

Another solo variant option if you have any of the Saga boxes is to use boons and/or treasures to start yourself off with "legendary" heroes -- after all, why shouldn't some of your heroes be Valiant Warriors or Tireless Rangers? If the combat is getting you down, why not give your heroes an edge with Glamdring and a Mithril Shirt, or even Thror's Battle Axe? Trouble with treacheries? Call Ho! Tom Bombadil! for help. Would Galadriel really send you on a dangerous mission with no support? Add in some Leaf-wrapped Lembas or a Phial of Galadriel to help ward off hunger and other evils. This allows you to adjust the "sleaze" level for any given quest, as well, and has the added bonus of not changing the rules too much for when you do want to play with others.

Check out my 'Road Goes Ever On' blog for details of how I have handled solo play?

Thanks guys, great to get so much support.

It is a very tough game but I kind of get the impression that playing it solo with just 3 characters is not how the game was balanced throughout the various quest/sets. Some I have been able to beat with the normal rules, but quests like Conflict at the Carrock or the Saga expansion quests like the Black Riders just seem completely out of reach. Obviously I'm a noob, so skill is definitely an issue, but for example in the case of Conflict at Carrock, I usually lose the game before I even get to the trolls.

I've considered trying to do the two hand management thing, it does seem that most of the quests are a lot more doable (still tough but doable) with two sets of hero's. Right now though I still find it awkward to keep track off and manage one hand, let alone two hands.

Just out of curiosity, are there expert players out there that have managed to beat the various quests and expansions (like Saga) with just normal rules solo? Like is it possible to build up decks and get skilled enough to do this or is it simply physically not possible? I ask only because I tried a game where I just straight cheated. I played with the encounter deck flipped up (so I could see what cards where coming) and when I drew cards I went through my deck and drew out what I wanted. Even with that cheat in place I was not able to beat the quest. It was quite disheartening.

I don't want to discourage you, but yes every quest of the game was beaten solo with just the normal rules. Some quests, like the nightmare Version from the core-set quest "escape from dol guldur" have abysmal win-rates though.

One of the "more famous" decks, which beat at least about 90% (but 100% is realistic, too) of the quests is this one: http://ringsdb.com/decklist/view/42/seastan-s-boromir-1.0

What always helps improve your game is to post the deck you are using to get some specific Feedback and ideas for changes.

I'm not discouraged at all, quite to the contrary, knowing the quests can be beat solo gives me something to shoot for. I have a modest collection at the moment but this month I'm expanding it quite a bit. I do believe that part of my problem is card pool. Its still feels a bit limited, there are mechanical elements that I'm still a bit short on that I know exist in other sets.

I recognize that some quests are just very tough solo and that's just fine by me, but I sort of set out to take on the Saga expansions (as of today I have them all) and I'm hoping that the card pool there in helps a bit with getting some victory's under my belt. Right now the the only two quests I have managed to beat solo are Passage Through Mirkwood and The Hunt For Gollum.

I have been bashing my head against Conflict at the Carrock for quite sometime, so far I have been absolutely decimated, although this is a very different quest from all the others I have played so far. I have taken a crack at The Black Riders as well, the first section of it I have come very close to beating several times, some very tight games but I'm yet to crack that nut. I do think I understand the makeup of Conflict at the Carrock which is encouraging, at least I'm starting to understand how to at least attempt to beat it now.

I think for now I will continue to bash my head solo play. After trying the above approach, while I did a whole lot better it just didn't sit right with me. Call it OCD or whatever but I can't bring myself to claim victory of a quest when adjusting the rules. So I think for me, its back to war!

On the bright side in Coop mode my friend and I have done a lot better, having a partner definitely helps in a lot of these quests.

Skill and practice are very significant in this game. I'm pretty sure I had trouble with Carrok when it first came out. But now I'm confident I could beat it 19/20 times with a cardpool of just a single core set.

There's a sort of trick to that quest, and once you figure it out the difficulty drops from a 7 to a 1.

I will say that the quests in the Core Set and Mirkwood cycle favor higher player counts more clearly than the quests that come after. But they are still certainly doable in solo.

Well I'm happy to report that I finally beat Conflict At the Carrock, straight up solo with no altered rules. Probably the most satisfying win I have had to date. I really appreciated all the encouragement from the community, you guys are fantastic. The win actually inspired me to to write about my experience on my blog. Not sure if we are allowed to post links to blogs, but here it is, I will take my lashes if its against the rules.

Thanks again for all the great advice!

Congrats on beating Conflict at the Carrock - I think many long-time layers look back at that quest with fondness. The next tricky quest is Return to Mirkwood which is the final AP in the cycle - no spoilers though!

The next cycle (Khazad Dum) is truly excellent both in terms of player cards and adventure packs - in my opinion it's a major step up from the first cycle and far better suited to solo play. If you haven't started investing in that yet I recommend that you keep an eye-out for it, particularly as it can be hard to find.

As well as the variants mentioned above, there is also the 'Fellowship mode' which simulates 2 decks in one hand (i.e. 6 heroes but threat is only for 3). The advantage of that is there is less book-keeping than having two hands. Rules for it are in the files section of the BGG files page for LoTR LCG

Enjoy!

I feel like another easy mode is just to include the fellowship hero Frodo and his one ring, which you do if you play campaign so probably isn't too imbalanced if you want a thematic boost to your solo experience without changing the rules too much. He gets an extra resource around and helps out with frodo's intuition.

Have anyone else tried running the fourth fellowship hero in normal adventure pack quests? Or using the boons? Did it grossly imbalance or was it a nice help? Because so far having only just started the game, it's far far easier playing multiplayer versus single player. One extra encounter card draw for 3 whole heroes and their resources/decks.

Solo I have just beaten Journey down the Anduin after many many tries.

The core set is much easier two player than one player IMO, but that doesn't hold for all future quests or even for all of the quests in the Mirkwood Cycle.

To me most part of the game (including all of the first cycle) is easier with two player.

I use to play with or without the boons, and with and without the fellowship hero in the saga, I found that it make a big difference.

Rouxxor, you think Emyn Muil is easier with two players?

I'm not sure. But I don't remember ever loosing a game against Emyn Muil anyway ?. It could happen because of the location lock of course, but I'm not sure it is more likely with 2 players than one. As long as you play two deck as powerful as solo deck could be of course. Have one travel phase for each two cards seem not that low as long as you keep exploring an active location each turn, and for the same average of questing per deck and reveal threat per encounter card you will be able to advance twice as fast on the active location.

I agree that 3 players, or even worse 4 players is worse for Emyn Muil. But two is still absolutely ok.

I'm not arguing Emyn Muil is *difficult* for a two-deck fellowship, only that it's harder. The only real danger in Emyn Muil is location lock, or that Emyn Muil locations keep popping out of the deck every turn until you threat out -- both of those are much much more likely when you're revealing two cards per turn instead of one. I certainly don't think it's the case that Emyn Muil is *easier* with two decks, which was your claim.

I agree with @Rouxxor that most quests tend to be easier in 2-player compared to solo, particularly the first cycle where it seemed at times that they didn't even consider solo as a valid form of play.

Quests that come to mind as easier in solo would be Emyn Muil, Shadow and Flame, Massing at Osgiliath, Fog on the Barrow Downs, The Druadan Forest, and the sailing quests (due to the double ships).

And then there are also some quests that might be easier at 2 players, but going beyond that to 3 or 4 players can just be insane - far beyond the difficulty of solo. Encounter decks with a lot of "Each player does X" treacheries are the main culprit.