...

I had a thought about a better way to handle Caldara...

Errata Fortune or Fate to: "Limit one per deck. Action: Choose a hero in your discard pile. Put that card into play under your control. Remove Fortune or Fate from the Game."

That way she can be used twice. In spite of Seastan's deck, I just feel like we lost too much of an archetype with the current errata.

That would still kill her original archetype to my mind.

On 22/11/2017 at 0:28 PM, dalestephenson said:

On the other hand, the thematic connection between having characters destroyed and getting rewarded can also be argued. "Loud and clear it sounds in the valleys of the hills, and then let all the foes of Gondor flee!"

Exactly!

I cannot agree that the errated (this is not correct English right?) Horn of Gondor is more thematic. The problem is that the original Horn of Gondor was not thematic already. According to the lore, a thematic Horn of Gondor would give you resources when an enemy is revealed /added to the staging area. Limit it once per phase /round and there you are! A thematic Horn of Gondor you cannot abuse.

Besides Hama+thicket, which other combos of Hama do you think that break the game?

Because I don't buy the Hama+Feint one. Sentinel + Burning Brand or Gloin + Elrond trivialize combat much better than Hama + Feint

I think that Hama + ticket is a combo who are really powerful only on a small number of scenario when you have 4+ enemies, or in suboptimal build who can't handle enemies of the previous turn.

Since a many months my Hama work by cycling wait no longer and (with a ready) alternatively proud hunter and foe-hammer. It prove to be most efficient since you help the group avoiding a lot of harsh treachery, and the renfort/when revealed of the enemy. And (most important) you still can develop your board because you have enough resources left.

I still play not only 3 thicket but also 1 oath of Eorl (basically the same but can be payed differently when we don't play mono tactics, or need to handle resource differently because of Amarthuil or Mablung but you need to kill the enemies in the turn), so 4 thicket because it is a card who help. But having a deck who only play each turn a thicket, discarding his newly-drawed card and spend all his resources into not even care about 1/3 or the cards since he don't put willpower in quest egal to this enemies, and can't engage them all if there is too many.

Cold day in **** will be when i disgrace my game with those horrible erratas.

I guess it was good choice to stop applying them after Will of the West atrocity.

What card says is what i do, no more, no less.

Not knowing if this aspect has been raised through this topic (having not read all messages as some here are just re-writing what they already wrote thinking it might be more convincing if they write it numerous times), I wanted to add one point :

One thing that I would not mind having errata for, is having the power of the cards related to the importance of the characters in the books. I do not mind having Gandalf, Elrond or Galadriel powerful in the game. Some cards that are secondary characters for me like Erestor, Hama or Hirgon should not be a complete design archetype material. I like the game but I'd rather have most powerful line-up of heroes with either main characters of the books (Frodo, Aragorn, Boromir, ...) either most iconic/powerful being of the Tolkien's world (Galadriel, Elrond, Beorn, Treebeard, Gandalf, ...). I have fun playing Caldara archetype, however I would have more fun if Caldara card was named Pippin for instance. May be it is just personal, but I guessed that this might be taken into account when decisions about nerfing is made.

In addition, I think that the main issue is to not errating the cards that are never used as mentionned by some other fellow players.

Erratas really disappoint me. The thing is it isn't always a choice whether you play them or not. If I buy into the game now I may pick up packs with the errata included. If I buy at the start there won't be any cards with the errata included. It makes me feel like my collection is incomplete somehow.

I really think that if FFG are going to errata so many cards in a game like this then they should be offering a means to upgrade or replace those cards. They should be offering a print pack or something for purchase that will replace each altered card. It's hard enough remembering keywords, text, mechanisms, phases etc. without having to remember errata in a FAQ.

5 hours ago, AlBigGuns said:

Erratas really disappoint me. The thing is it isn't always a choice whether you play them or not. If I buy into the game now I may pick up packs with the errata included. If I buy at the start there won't be any cards with the errata included. It makes me feel like my collection is incomplete somehow.

I really think that if FFG are going to errata so many cards in a game like this then they should be offering a means to upgrade or replace those cards. They should be offering a print pack or something for purchase that will replace each altered card. It's hard enough remembering keywords, text, mechanisms, phases etc. without having to remember errata in a FAQ.

Well said, but I'm not holding my breathe. The schism between the creative arm of FFG and the business arm of ANA tells me that we will never see it.

Has anyone tried making a components request for errata'd cards? Might be worth a shot. I got some misprints replaced this way once.

http://parts.asmodeena.com

To me the only irksome thing about the errata is how Asmodee/FFG seems to have slapped the hands of a lot of online print services that used to print custom cards, and now they won't do it. I would have gladly paid them for some custom card reprints with the new text and some alt art. It makes me just want to play on OCTGN and not have to buy physical cards at all which seems like the opposite of what they would want.

I use Strange Eons to write the new text, print the card (only the text box) and insert it in the sleeve

I play without any reminder of the errata text, and if I happen to forget the errata, I blame that on FFG making the errata in the first place.

(Most of the time that works in my favor. However, the first time I played On The Doorstep I burgled a blank Arkenstone and didn't know it was supposed to be useful.)

Yeah playing solo how are you to know a card was errata'd

1 hour ago, Ywingscum said:

Yeah playing solo how are you to know a card was errata'd

Reading the FAQ.

Honestly, I agree with most of the new stuff in the FAQ. Caldara and Hama could have been done better, but they still work.

And I don't mind at all having pre-errata "outdated" cards.

Perhaps we should treat errata as an optional variant, similar to another difficulty level?

I for one prefer to ignore errata, because the game is still hard for me, and there is enough to keep track of as it is. Until I get annoyed or bored by a game-breaking combo I think I'll just stick to playing what's written on the cards. It's easier (and more fun) that way! (for me at least)

Sometimes I make up my own errata in lieu of the official errata. For example: There was an infinite combo with Master of Lore, Horn of Gondor, Erebor Hammersmith, and Borne Aloft. The FAQ team errata'd the Master, making him a sub-optimal card, and they changed Horn of Gondor. It was still on the same power level, but it didn't work as originally intended with the theme. So in my alternate history, Master of Lore was never errata'd, and Horn of Gondor still gives resources when characters leave play, but it now reads once per round. The combo is broken, and the cards work as intended without being OP.

Of course this would not be legal in organized play or at Gen Con, fellowship events, etc.