Good day, readers and players!

It's time to look on the next adventure pack of Dwarrowdelf cycle - The Watcher in the Water :

https://visionofthepalantir.com/2020/02/02/player-card-review-the-watcher-in-the-water/

I'm looking forward to your comments and own experiences. Do you like player cards from this adventure pack? Which cards are the best, which are the worst for you?

Silblade

I only use Loragorn if I really need his ability to reduce my threat. While this effect can be very powerful with a threat reduction of 20 or more, I would only use it when playing a quest with a lot of threat gain like Return to Mirkwood or doomed cards. Otherwise there is nothing he can do compared to his leadership version aside from using A Burning Brand right away. His sentinel keyword is quite useful for defending, but his two points of defence are not: I prefer defenders with more durability. In the fourth deluxe expansion there will be some great doomed player cards, which can give you a headstart against the encounter deck in exchange for raising threat and Loragorn is the perfect card to counter this issue. So in conclusion his effect is very powerful but rarely needed for most quests and decks.

There is not much I can add to Grave Cairn, what you have not already mentioned. The best combo comes from sneaking in Gandalf into the quest phase, apart from that there are better cards to boost attack (like For Gondor, Khazâd! Khazâd! Unseen Strike) or to trigger from characters leaving play (Valiant Sacrifice or Prince Imrahil).

I usually call Sword that was Broken Sword that is Broken. Of course you need to attach it to Aragorn, otherwise it is a glorified Song of Kings with an inflated cost. But I also think, this sword is worth attaching to Coragorn, if for whatever reason I plan to use him. Surely I cannot gain an extra leadership symbol, but this is only a side effect. If you play a swarm deck that uses Aragorn, use Sword that was Broken, and your willpower will go through the roof.

I do not like the Watcher of the Bruinen. While not exhausting to defend and sentinel are great, his cost is too steep for a tactics deck, as you need other spheres to draw you cards. But the biggest drawback is his frailty: I expect at least three points of defense on a proper defender, otherwise he will just die too often. And while you can defend some goblins in Moria, their shadow effects can screw you up. I would rather use the Winged Guardian because his defense his harder to overcome.

Rivendell Bow finally allows a tactics deck to make one of their elven characters or Aragorn ranged, so you no longer have to rely on an overprize Dúnedain Cache. This attachment is great on Elladan, but also good on Glorfindel and Aragorn. But for Legolas and Haldir it means an unrestricted attack boost which is always useful. And even the Mirkwood Runner can now kill any non-immune enemy with three hitpoints. I would not attach this bow to Gildor, as he is far too expensive to use him as a ranged attacker.

Arwen Undómiel is hands down the best card in this pack: You do not only get a great image of her and two points of willpower, but also the ability to give another character sentinel and a point of defense for the low cost of only two resources. Now two Spirit resources for two willpower is great value, as only the West-road Traveller has the same price while being more fragile with only one hitpoint. Arwen can sustain one point of damage during questing and still live. But also giving another character extra defence is just the icing on the cake. She is so good, I would still play her, if she costed three resources. And if you jump several cycles ahead, you can use her ability with a Spare Hood and Cloak and a Long Lake Trader to give another defense boost (to the same or another character).

Elrond's Counsel is cheap willpower and threat reduction. While I usually do not care about the willpower boost, even though it is free, the threat reduction is always great. Just keep in mind, you need a unique Noldor character to play this card and another character two benefit from the willpower boost.

As you already have mentioned, Short Cut is a terrible card for all the reasons you listed; It costs a resource, requires the presence of a Hobbit to exhaust and reveals another card. And on top of that it does not even cancel the card just revealed. It might be useful on Branching Paths or Zigil Mineshaft, but this just depends on your overall willpower. Otherwise I cannot think of a location I would want to shuffle back into the encounter deck just to reveal a new card. This is potentially the worst card in the whole cycle.

The Legacy of Durin is a great way to draw another card per round, if you play a dwarf deck. Card draw is one of the most powerful effects in the game, as it allows you to faster find the cards you need for the deck to function. Resource generation does not help you, if you run out of cards, but card draw can help you to find the resource generation and still ensure to have enough cards to play with all those shiny tokens. Outside of a dwarf deck this card is useless, so it cannot be used with any deck compared to Gléowine, but it is cheaper and being an attachment has its own drawbacks and advantages compared to allies.

Resourceful is another secrecy card and therefor has all the issues I have listed in the two previous reviews. At least it has the potential to make up for the loss in resources compared to three heroes. Still, as long as there is no way to reliably build a three hero secrecy deck, all secrecy cards remain bad. And while you could play full price for Resourceful outside of secrecy, it will take four rounds to make any profit. And while it can help to strenghten your weak sphere in the long run, you have to refrain from playing other cards for now in order to pay this card. And if you can live with less resources in the current round, chances are, you will do so in the later rounds as well. I would rather use the cash to play a card that will improve my board state immediately.

As I have already written, Arwen is my most favourite card in this adventure pack. Two points of willpower, two hitpoints and the ability to buff another character with sentinel and one point of defence for the cheap price of two resources is a bargain. And on top of that you get a great artwork of the Evenstar.

The worst card is Short Cut: It requires a Hobbit to exhaust, a lore resource and reveals yet another card, while locations are usually the friendliest cards in the encounter deck. I have never used this card and I will refrain on doing so ever.

The most enriched sphere is Spirit: It gives as an awesome ally and a free event which requires a certain trait, but in exchange reduces threat which is handy most of the times to avoid losing the game or engaging an enemy one is not yet prepared to face.

My take:

Lore Aragorn is my least favorite Aragorn. He has an incredibly powerful ability, but it's once per game. Against quests designed to make the player threat out, it's incredibly powerful -- against the other quests (most quests), you are unlikely to ever use it -- unless you care about the badly imagined "scoring". That his ability is always useful for something worthless at the end at the quest is damning.

But that's just in isolation -- his ability is always useful in decks where the *player* drives the threat up -- Tactics Boromir, doomed cards and Grima being the most notable example. He's the one hero in a Strider deck that *doesn't* want Folco Boffin as a sacrificial third hero. But at this point in the game, the only synergy is with TaBoromir, and with Boromir's nerf even that doesn't press the threat as much as used to. And when Spirit Glorfindel appears, his threat is still too high to fit in a three-hero secrecy deck. So he's a great hero for (say) Return to Mirkwood, but not a great hero in general. He's Sideboardagorn.

He does have one important feature which is *still* unique -- he's the only sentinel hero in Lore. With 5 hit points and 2 defense he has good defensive potential (if not immediately due to just 2 defense), and if Burning Brand weren't nerfed and it was harder to make heroes Lore, this would be a big deal.

I agree with the assessment Grave Cairn -- it's a nice little combo with Sneak Gandalf, since it increases attack for the round you can Sneak Gandalf to help quest, then use Grave Cairn to borrow Gandalf's four attack. But that's a three card combo and two of the cards go away when you use them, so it's not reliable. It's a shame, because dropping +4 attack on a specific individual would be handy for attacking alone with Dunhere, Firefoot, Hands Upon the Bow, Quick Strike, etc.

If you're running an Eagles deck, you can easily arrange a +3 attack with Vassal of the Windlord, which leave play after attacking naturally and makes setting up the combo much easier. However, that limits the application to cases where you are making two attacks.

Once Rohan allies become recursive and once the Silvan deck arrives, there are a lot of characters reliably leaving play -- but they lack the high attack values to make the card worthwhile. But in the far future, Grave Cairn *finally* becomes interesting with Lothriel, who can (for free) take a Gondorian (or Rohirrim with Eomer) and send it questing, then shuffled back in the deck at the end of phase. With Visionary Leadership there's a lot of 2-3 attack Gondorians who could contribute to the quest while setting up a boost. Unfortunately this combo doesn't help Leadership Eomer, who wants to attack *before* his wife's ally leaves play.

On Sword That Was Broken, I agree that the sphere granting is a bit odd -- unlike Ring of Barahir, Celebrain's Stone, and Roheryn, it gives Aragorn the sphere you presumably already have access to -- however, that actually makes the sphere-granting a bit more useful for Lore and later Tactics and Saga Aragorn. Giving access to a sphere you don't have *at all* isn't very useful, since you are unlikely to have cards in your deck requiring a sphere you don't start with. But turning Lore Aragorn into Leadership when you already leadership gives you another hero with leadership access, and that's going to have value, helping you play expensive cards (like this one....)

However, the fact that the sphere granting does nothing for Leadership Aragorn does *not* mean at all that this card isn't worth playing on LeAragorn! The sphere granting is just a throw-in despite being the only use for non-Aragorn recepients (really, this was pointless, it should've said "attach to Aragorn and be done with it"). The main effect is +1 willpower for every character and that's an *incredibly* powerful effect. Really, this is more limiting to Loragorn because he can't pay for this incredibly powerful card. LeAragorn should absolutely always have this in his deck unless he's running without allies, and maybe even then too. As LeAragorn's ability allows him to quest *and* fight every turn, LeAragorn himself gets more personal benefit from STWB than LoAragorn does.

This is a five star card, unless Aragorn is not at the table. Then it's a 0-star card.

I agree with your take on Watcher of the Brunien. His defensive stats (2/2) aren't good enough to do a lot of defenses, and the cost in cards makes defending an expensive proposition (especially in tactics). Even in Noldor decks in the far future, this guy's still not popular. All that can really be said in his defense is that he's not that expensive and at least he can chip in an attack after defending.

The raw ability to exhaust without defending does have potential with enough setup -- Arwen gets him to three defense, lots of other (future) cards can boost his defense further, Honour Guard can mitigate the damage, and Silver Harp can cover a defense or two if you have spirit heroes who can spare the restricted slot. He's already got sentinel. But that's a lot of work, and at this point in progression only Arwen is around to help.

I think you overstate the difference in 2-attack enemies between Mirkwood and KD cycle -- Mirkwood may have more, but it doesn't have vastly more, and in practice those two-attack Goblin Spearman (5 copies) put themselves in play as shadows. Because of the way enemies swarm in KD/Dwarrowdelf, I think it's the cycle where you'll actually be engaged with the most 2-attack enemies in practice -- doesn't matter, because Brunien is still too expensive to keep in play. But supposing it *were* true, it makes me wonder how you're evaluating progression-style. Are you anticipating that a player progressing through KD is not going to go back and play the Mirkwood quests with the new decks? Shouldn't it be a point in Lore Aragorn's favor (for instance) that he makes beating Return to Mirkwood solo much easier?

I agree with your assessment that Rivendell Bow should be in decks with Noldor/Silvan/Aragorn heroes, with the caveat (which you imply by do not state) that there are at least two decks in play -- this attachment is practically useless in solo. It also isn't useful for future Noldor/Silvan heroes without good attack. While the lack of restricted may be considered a "small positive" at this point in the game due to lack of weapons, it's actually the *big* positive that keeps this card relevant even in the context of the full card pool. Going on a character and not just a hero also adds to its utility, if you have Noldor/Silvan attacker allies, extra copies for your hero aren't dead cards.

Note that while this doesn't give +1 attack to Hands Upon the Bow, granting ranged at least makes Hands Upon the Bow playable for non-ranged heroes, one of the few uses this card has in one-deck solo. In the future it will also make an eligible target for Black Arrow or Bow of the Galadhrim -- though not Great Yew Bow, which requires a printed ranged keyword.

Arwen well deserves six stars, she's the best ally in the game when released and still a contender for that today. Even in one-deck play where sentinel is typically not useful, the +1 defense is *always* useful, and at 2-for-2 willpower she's an efficient quester and not completely fragile. However, your example of non-questing exhaustion has one flaw -- this Arwen will never be exhausted by Sleeping Sentry, because Road to Rivendell has the Arwen objective ally!

The one (future) annoying thing about her when-exhausts effect is that if she's in a deck with Galadriel she doesn't exhaust to quest when she enters, so gives no defensive boost on that turn. Since she's a born quester, she's the one ally that Galadriel makes worse.

Once Dread Realm arrives, there's suddenly an excellent reason not to play this version of Arwen -- her hero form is incredible, and at this point likely the most popular spirit hero in the game.

I routinely add 3x Elrond's Counsel to my Noldor-hero decks, though unless the quest drives threat it doesn't make much difference. But it's free and it gives 1 willpower, so it's not like it's useless even when you don't need threat reduction. As an event, you can get the tiny willpower boost after staging, when you know exactly how much willpower you want. On threat-raising quests, I used this as a sideboard when I had 3x Arwen in the deck but no Noldor heroes.

It's true this doesn't synergize with Dwarf decks, but no cycle is all about a single archtype. Dwarrowdelf gives us Noldor heroes, Noldor allies, and Noldor attachments -- even though the Noldor archtype won't become a deck until Grey Havens, fleshing out factions *other* than Dwarves makes KD/Dwarrowdelf more useful than if it had a Hobbit-like fixation on one particular archtype.

Short Cut is a terrible card, I agree. Limiting it to hobbits and requiring exhaustion raises the cost and reduces the reach of the card, but even with no trait and no exhaustion it would be unpopular at one-cost and replacement reveal, especially since it puts the location back in the deck to come out later anyways. One marginal sideboardish-case for this card is quests with a particularly damaging location either in terms of threat or in terms of in-staging effects -- nothing comes to mind for this, but I'm sure nightmare packs have something that fits the description. Another might be location-focused quests where the presence of a new location could prevent you from advancing, such as Emyn Muil or future quests like Assault On Osgaliath.

Legacy of Durin is the victim of stealth errata. I agree that, for those with older cards, there's no obligation to use the errata in the absence of an official FAQ announcing it -- but those who purchased the last reprint of Watcher in the Water already have the errata on their cards, which is how the community found out about it in the first place. The errata definitely makes the card weaker, but not weak -- even at max one card per turn, that's still a good deal for one resource. Other dwarf-friendly cards (especially We Are Not Idle) got it worse. Still, if someone is playing progression, I think they'd be justified in using the as-released text *even if* it's been errata-ed for years, if they're trying to duplicate the original progression experience. Since dwarves were the first power deck to come online, it's unfortunate that it's so much weaker now than it was back in the day.

I don't think Resourceful was "primarily intended" for 2-hero decks. My understanding is that cycles are developed as a whole, meaning that Resourceful was developed in a card pool that *included* Spirit Glorfindel. Resourceful can help mitigate the defect of two-hero secrecy decks, but only does so by taking half of that turn's resources and only gets up to par in resource generation. In a three-hero secrecy deck, Resourceful confers an *advantage* over non-secrecy decks, which you need since low-threat heroes tend to be weaker. Still, in KD you're going to be looking for Light of Valinor in your three-hero secrecy deck, not Resourceful, so this too will wait for Black Riders to become a mulligan target.

Is it ever worth playing Resourceful for 4? Not for resource generation, the four-turn payback means you don't come out ahead until five turns after you first paid for it -- and if you can afford to pay 4 resources for something with such a long payback time, you aren't short of resources in the first place! One place where it might be useful is for resource smoothing -- if you have Steward of Gondor in a mixed-sphere deck (especially a tri-sphere deck), you can easily end up with one sphere having plenty of resources and the other sphere starved. Resourceful is an expensive way to fix that problem.

It's a pity that unlike SoG, it has to go on a hero you control. I can think of lots of fellowships where it would be handy for deck A to pay for a Resourceful on deck B.

Top Card: Arwen, easily.

Sheep Card: Short cut, easily. Grave Cairn may be a coaster, but at least it has possibilities. Short Cut is both narrow and useless.

Most Enriched Sphere: Spirit, easily.

I have never used Loragorn so far, I prefer his tactic version which I commonly use for a combat focus deck.

Grave cairn is not good, you generally want to avoid losing you good attackers, so it is only usable in decks with allies who can leave play (not my favorite kind of allies).

Sword that was broker is very good for its +1WP, I try to include it every time I play Aragorn.

Watcher of the bruinen is a weak defender and a defender who force you to pay something when he defend. Winged guardian is a far better defender for the same cost.

Rivendell bow is a good weapon, but I prefer that other weapon which give +2 attack to ranged characters (don't remember the name).

Arwen is very good, everybody knows why.

Elrond's councel is a very good reduce threat tool, but less flexible than Galadrim's greeting. Its 0 cost allow to easily include it in every deck with a noldor character.

Short cut is the kind of card I will never use : you exhaust 1 character to... do nothing, because you draw another encounter card which will often be worst (I think locations are generally not the biggest problem)

Legacy of durin is a very good card and a staple for dwarf swarm deck.

Resourceful is a good alternative to the ever-present SoG when you play a secrecy deck.

Top card : I find Arwen deserves this title more than Loragorn. Loragorn is very good in only a few situations while Arwen is almost an auto-include when you have access to spirit (and you don't play her hero version). And it's one of the best art in this game.

Sheep card : shortcut, a card which make you exhaust a character to worsen the situation

Most enriched sphere : spirit, because Arwen Undomiel.

I think generally you have assessed the pack well, but I will agree with the other responses that you have certainly underrated Sword that was Broken.

Obviously in reference to the willpower boost which only works with Aragorn, the card is worthless without him. But I would say that with Aragorn (any version), STWB is practically an auto-include. I'd even go so far as to speculate that the reason this "Aragorn attachment" works differently to the others is that the effect is too powerful to be available to just any deck. It's not even restricted.

And just a note on Legacy of Durin, I have a copy with the new errata and it is still great. You can't get a better rate for repeatable card draw and I suspect a good amount of the time you are not triggering it multiple times per turn anyway, or by the time you can the game is already in hand. If you are swarming with dwarves then you are likely using effects like A Very Good Tale or Fili/Kili which do not work with it.

58 minutes ago, Miceldars said:

Rivendell bow is a good weapon, but I prefer that other weapon which give +2 attack to ranged characters (don't remember the name).

Bow of the Galadhrim. For Silvans you definitely get more bang for the buck, +2 attack when ranged and +1 attack in general, and the same cost. But it doesn't get released until the Ringmaker cycle (Nin-in-Eleph), and since Rivendell Bow doesn't take a restricted slot they can actually co-exist.

The ranged characters who have their attack boosted by Rivendell Bow at time of release are Legolas, Haldir, and Silverlode Archer. For Legolas, the other weapon options are Dwarven Axe (2 cost, +1 attack), Rivendell Bow (1 cost, -2 attack), and Blade of Gondolin (1 cost, +1 against orcs), all of which take a restricted slot. No weapons are available for Haldir or Silverlode Archer. I think Rivendell Bow is well worth inclusion in a multiplayer deck that can play it on Legolas, Glorfindel, Aragorn, or Elladan at this point in the card pool, and in the case of Legolas and Elladan it's probably *still* worth including today.

7 minutes ago, rees263 said:

And just a note on Legacy of Durin, I have a copy with the new errata and it is still great. You can't get a better rate for repeatable card draw and I suspect a good amount of the time you are not triggering it multiple times per turn anyway, or by the time you can the game is already in hand. If you are swarming with dwarves then you are likely using effects like A Very Good Tale or Fili/Kili which do not work with it.

But in the original progression, We Are Not Idle could give you the resources you needed to trigger it multiple times early. Legacy of Durin has been weakend more by the extreme WANI nerf than by its own errata IMHO, but it's definitely weaker than it was. Still a great card, still an auto-include for Dwarf swarm with Lore, but no longer more powerful than Gleowine. (Still cheaper, though.)

20 minutes ago, dalestephenson said:

Bow of the Galadhrim. For Silvans you definitely get more bang for the buck, +2 attack when ranged and +1 attack in general, and the same cost. But it doesn't get released until the Ringmaker cycle (Nin-in-Eleph), and since Rivendell Bow doesn't take a restricted slot they can actually co-exist.

The ranged characters who have their attack boosted by Rivendell Bow at time of release are Legolas, Haldir, and Silverlode Archer. For Legolas, the other weapon options are Dwarven Axe (2 cost, +1 attack), Rivendell Bow (1 cost, -2 attack), and Blade of Gondolin (1 cost, +1 against orcs), all of which take a restricted slot. No weapons are available for Haldir or Silverlode Archer. I think Rivendell Bow is well worth inclusion in a multiplayer deck that can play it on Legolas, Glorfindel, Aragorn, or Elladan at this point in the card pool, and in the case of Legolas and Elladan it's probably *still* worth including today.

Don't forget Rivendell Blade. While it technically does not increase the attack value of a character, the end result is most of the time the same.

Thanks guys for your responses, I'm glad for your observations and your opinions! I'll try to answer on every reflections you have (because they are quite similar and they have much in common):

Lore Aragorn : About him, I like he belongs to the Lore sphere, so he can utilizes A Burning Brand - thus you don't have to solve shadow cards and you can make a better plan in order to not endanger his life due only 2 Defense. Also, he is a "good version" for maximizing the potential of Sword that was Broken - he will get +1 global Willpower AND access to Leadership sphere. But before that, you have to have already the access to Leadership sphere to be able to pay for this attachment at all, as dalestephenson have pointed out correctly.
Otherwise, I see his ability as quite universal. Not so universal like LeAragorn's ability, but with each adventure pack the menace of "overthreating" is becoming more and more common issue. It's not only about Return to Mirkwood , where this scenario is mainly about raising threat. Thus, Loragorn can for one player totally replace any "reducing threat" cards, because he can do it all by himself.

Grave Cairn : I have no anything to add this, agree with everything.

Sword that was Broken : I agree that LeAragorn can also benefit from this attachment as well, because +1 global Willpower is too strong to just simply ignore it, when played with any Aragorn .

Watcher of the Bruinen : Exactly. With 3 Defense I would consider him to add him into a deck, because, well... 3 Defense, Sentinel and repetitive defending for 2 cost would be amazing. Still, somebody could argue that discarding a card for each defending is still too disadvantegous cost.

Rivendell Bow : Agree. Miceldars, unfortunately I dunno, which card with +2 Attack for Ranged you mean.:(

Arwen Undómiel : She deserves 6 stars - and she's got them.:) Auto-included card in any Spirit deck, she has just amazing ability. Dalestephenson, you got me! 1:0 for you.:)

Elrond's Counsel : To be honest, I had to correct it several times in articles from Gildor's Counsel .:D +1 Willpower is nice bonus but the biggest advantage is according to me -3 threat. Miceldars, in my point of view, Galadhrim's Greetings can't compete with this card - while you have to pay 3 resources for it, you reach the same result (-6 threat) by 2 Elrond's Counsel... and still for free, without spending single resource.

Short Cut : Good we all agree that the searching of usefulness of this card is very, very hard. The revealing of the new encounter card did KO for usefulness of this card.

Legacy of Durin : Amicus Draconis, very interesting and very true observation you made, it didn't come to my mind. Drawing cards is really very precious, because even if you have many resources but you haven't anything for playing, then it won't help you much.

Resourceful : Here I think my opinion is the most different from you. I know that you payback Resourceful in 4 turns, that is a quite many rounds. But... it's Neutral card. And with that, you can play it within 2 rounds with no problem. And from the second round your income will be 4 resources per round. I wouldn't condemn this possibility.

Only to TOP CARD , I was splitted between Aragorn and Arwen Undómiel , because I love them both. But I see the resetting of threat as considerable change in game, which can directly win you the game. How? Well, sometimes you just need more time to beat the given scenario, but too quick raising threat can spoil your plan. Aragorn solves that by the single using ability, though it is limited once per game (per player).

To questions of @dalestephenson : Well, of course players are free to use the new Aragorn in older scenarios, it's nothing about it. From the progression mode, however, he brings the "future hero" into "past". So if I had written about Lore Aragorn in Return of Mirkwood , then it would have been a spoiler.:) But yeah, Lore Aragorn is the right hero, right choice, for Return to Mirkwood.

Because I don't know too many future (current) cycles, I dunno to what extent other traits are appearing in this cycles. I just thought it as interesting thing that the Dwarrowdelf cycle, considered as the "home of Dwarves " and the main "hatchery" of Dwarves characters, provides also Noldor characters and Noldor synergies to a such common extent.

Very true, Rivendell Blade is the best weapon available at this point of the game for those who can use it. If it's on a ranged character with readying, they can lower the defense *twice* on an enemy engaged with another player.

And to errata of Legacy of Durin , I agree with rees, that despite errata, it didn't harm the usefulness of this card much. It's "must have" card in any Dwarf deck with access to Lore sphere, because its advantage is too good to just ignore it and let it aside.

3 minutes ago, dalestephenson said:

Very true, Rivendell Blade is the best weapon available at this point of the game for those who can use it. If it's on a ranged character with readying, they can lower the defense *twice* on an enemy engaged with another player.

My favourite combination for Legolas .:)

Sillblade: in my experience there's three main ways to lose at LOTR (caveat -- I haven't played nightmare quests):

1) Dead heroes. They can make your situation unviable in a hurry.

2) Inability to quest successfully. It doesn't matter how much threat reduction you have, if you can't quest successfully you aren't going to win, and the problem will get worse rather than better due to location lock. If you play it out it will be the threat that technically makes you lose, but that's symptom and not root cause.

3) Scenario-induced threat raise brings you to 50 *even though* you can quest successfully. Road to Rivendell is an example of this.

Now, threat can also lead to dead heroes because of engagement cost, for instance starting with 30+ threat against Anduin or engaging Hummerhorns, so threat reduction can be useful even in quests that aren't actually trying to make you threat out. But Lore Aragorn is most useful in quests that are trying to make you threat out, and those quests are neither that common nor increasing in frequency IMO. It's true that Loragorn can replace threat reduction cards, but unless you're running Spirit your threat reduction is Gandalf, and you'll be running him anyways. And even in Spirit GG had already become a sideboard card for me in the second cycle.

However, Watcher in the Water is closest, since it has seven encounter cards capable of raising threat (3x Stagnant Creek, Ill-Purpose and 3x Disturbed Waters), and especially in multiplayer that could be a problem. But it lacks any mechanical threat raising, and I don't think any of the other KD/Dwarrowdelf are as bad as this.

Ironically, the quest where threat matters the most (I think) is the toughest quest, Shadow and Flame. With an initial threat of 0 Loragorn's ability is never going to be a factor, but being able to avoid attack by an early play of Elrond's Counsel can really pay off!

In general Short Cut is not a card you will want to include in your deck, but it is a pretty good card to tech against certain locations. More recent scenarios have locations you just dread to reveal, likes ones that have X threat, where X is the number of characters you control— have seen that particular stat a few times recently. Almost anything would be better to reveal.

Wrath and Ruin: discard the location to prevent more locations from building up in the staging area, since you win by controlling more locations than are otherwise in play.

Or, in a location control deck, get rid of one of those cards that prevents progress from being placed on locations in the staging area.

It’s usefulness overlaps with Thror’s Key in most cases. But that card is in a different sphere.

So yeah, generally not useful, but good tech to have exist in the card pool. You just need to actually remember that it exists when you are deck building, if you are the sort of player who enjoys building decks specifically to counter the scenario you plan to play. It’s an easy card to forget.

@dalestephenson I think that heroes is the main reason of losing games. Yeah, being not able to quest can't be saved by reducing threat. It may give you more time for turning the game, but the success isn't guaranteed.
Increasing threat causes mainly the earlier engaging of stronger enemies, thus there is the biggest chance you lose because of dead hero. And on the other hand, increased threat is caused by the inability to quest, as you mentioned. Everything is interconnected and Lore Aragorn can help you out from such situations… sometimes. Of course, if you are losing, because you are not able to produce the sufficient amount of Willpower, then even Aragorn won't help you.

I probably exaggerated that the frequency of overthreating scenarios is constantly increasing, that wasn't right statement.

To Gandalf , I save him mostly for damaging duties, because he is amazing opportunity to get rid off some troublesome enemy. In the "peace time" I'm deciding between threat reduction and drawing cards, depends on the given situation.

You start talking about very interesting thing, that doesn't come to my mind and that's Loragorn in Shadow and Flame scenario. Does Loragorn can reduce the threat back to 0, when the overall starting threat is 0? But I agree (and I used it frequently) that Elrond's Counsel is one of the TOP cards in this scenario. Best to have some in the opening hand.

@GrandSpleen Thank you for beneficial response, it's interesting that Short Cut can be useful in certain scenarios with certain locations. I didn't play recent scenarios (that's the progression (and slow) style of playing :D), but I believe that some locations must be so disgusting that Short Cut can look like a good idea, even with the risk of revealing another encounter card (enemy, treachery).
The Hills of Emyn Muil can look like a suitable environment for testing of Short Cut, but alas the locations don't threat you here so much and what is most important - you seek them because of obtaining victory points.

Silblade, the player's initial set up (initial hand, mulligan, total threat) happens before the quest setup happens, so Loragorn does not return you to zero in Shadow and Flame. He restores you to the original threat, whatever that is -- so against that particular quest his ability is not likely to be useful.

It's true that Loragorn's ability can be used to avoid nasty engagement threshold (or in Mirkwood nasty threat threshold for treachery effects), but the 35 threat-punishing treacheries of the first cycle and the starting 30 engagement of Anduin aren't represenative of later cycles -- and as a high threat hero, Loragorn gets you closer to magic thresholds at start. In KD's repeated sets, there's no nasty when-engaged effects, and the roughest enemies are Great Cave Troll (38) and Chieftain of the Pit (27) -- starting threat for a Loragorn deck is likely to be some turns under 38 and over 27, and given a few turns to set up you should be able to handle larger enemies. KD's usual mode is to swarm you with weak enemies, which tend to have very low engagement cost.

Looking forward to Heirs you have some *terrible* when-engaged effects, but Zealous Traitor (17) is too low to prevent engagement, and Umbar Assassin (40) is Archery 2 -- you'll have to engage him optionally to avoid losing a hero, and with Aragorn's 5 hp it may be better to do that sooner rather than later.

I also usually use Gandalf for damage instead of threat reduction, but that's generally because I don't *need* to use Gandalf for threat reduction. And that's why Loragorn is my least favorite Aragorn -- most of the time, I don't need his one ability.

Good to know, wasn't now certain about that. Thanks for clearing.:)

Yes, the biggest threat from the view of threat in Dwarrowdelf , are locations, like Zigil Mineshaft , Lightless Passage , Branching Paths etc.

My view of Loragorn is probably skewed because of scoring system, which I use, and which can be considered for broken. But we would get into discussion why to use score system again. It was here already, I remember it well.:D

Because of option to lower threat and the possibility of holding A Burning Brand (and because he is becoming one of the most powerful heroes in Lore sphere we have got now), I prefer Aragorn's Lore version. Now I realize also why: in Leadership sphere, the spot of Aragorn occupies Prince Imrahil . He hasn't Sentinel and owns only 4 Hit Points, but the possibility of repetitive readying during one phase makes from him my champion compared to LeAragorn. I don't like in common abilities, for which you must pay resources. But losing allies is quite natural and many times inevitable thing, which you can only utilize to own profit. But I understand that our tactics can differ significantly - some players try to avoid losing allies as much as possible, thus Prince Imrahil within such tactics would be useless --> LeAragorn is clear pick.

Yes, if you don't chump block Imrahil doesn't do much -- at least until Silvan decks or Rohan recursion or making him Outlands becomes an option. I like spending a resource *way* more than spending an ally!

31 minutes ago, dalestephenson said:

Yes, if you don't chump block Imrahil doesn't do much -- at least until Silvan decks or Rohan recursion or making him Outlands becomes an option. I like spending a resource *way* more than spending an ally!

And I fully accept it and understand your preferences.:)

On 2/3/2020 at 9:19 AM, dalestephenson said:

But in the original progression, We Are Not Idle could give you the resources you needed to trigger it multiple times early. Legacy of Durin has been weakend more by the extreme WANI nerf than by its own errata IMHO, but it's definitely weaker than it was. Still a great card, still an auto-include for Dwarf swarm with Lore, but no longer more powerful than Gleowine. (Still cheaper, though.)

You always refer to the "original progression" as if thats the way the game should be played by people. A lot of us dont care about playing progression style; I personally care more about playing balanced cards like the new legacy of Durin. Sure I had fun back in the day playing it in its original form but when the errata came out I played the new version. Thats the way it should be played since the designers decided it needs to be balanced.

And as others have mentioned its still a great card.

There's no reason you should care about playing progression style. I played progression-style originally by necessity, as I couldn't play what I didn't have, but in the current state of the game I recommend to new players that they don't worry about playing progression style. However, this series of card reviews is *explicitly* from a progression point of view, and that affects the discussion. The value of Resourceful is much higher if you've already purchased all the later cycles and then circle back to add Watcher in the Water to your pool!

Legacy of Durin is in an odd state because the errata *isn't* official and hasn't landed in the FAQ. As it stands there's no rule to point to that justifies me playing Legacy of Durin and other stealth errata -- more power if you want to, it's a co-op game and that hurts no one, but technically my card has not actually been errataed yet. "How it should be played" is a matter of opinion.

That Legacy of Durin was nerfed for "balance" instead of for its involvement in assorted game-breaking resource loops is speculation, and also asks the question -- balance with what? Certainly in the context of the full card pool there was no reason for a typical dwarf swarm to be nerfed to balance it with other power decks; Vilya left them in the dust long ago. As errata goes, it certainly was far less damaged than Erebor Battle Master or We Are Not Idle and it still remains a good card -- but I do think it's a shame that someone playing progression style now, with newly published cards, will see their first power deck significantly weaker than the original players did, though the quests have not gotten any easier. But there may not be many people in that category, given the difficulty of acquiring the expansions in original publication order.

@MikeGracey I just enter to this discussion. I am persuaded that dalestephenson doesn't mean it that the progression style of playing is the only way, how to play this game. Nor I think this. This series is viewed just from the one of possible ways - progression style of playing. If some card has got errata, I always refer on it. I also think that the cards should be played in their actual state. But I understand that someone is against any errata since the printed cards cannot be changed and if designers made the broken card, it's their own fault.

2 hours ago, Silblade said:

@MikeGracey I just enter to this discussion. I am persuaded that dalestephenson doesn't mean it that the progression style of playing is the only way, how to play this game. Nor I think this. This series is viewed just from the one of possible ways - progression style of playing. If some card has got errata, I always refer on it. I also think that the cards should be played in their actual state. But I understand that someone is against any errata since the printed cards cannot be changed and if designers made the broken card, it's their own fault.

Its true that the designers did make the broken card in the first place. I just can't help but sympathize with them. It was early in the life of the game, and they just didn't know how to design balanced cards yet. This was evident not only in the broken cards like burning brand but in the duds like The end Comes. Nobody plays that card because its terrible.

But look at the recent cycles; there are so many good cards that are both balanced and fun. Now that the designers have learned, through experience, how a card should be made, they can look back on the cardpool and see the problematic player cards. They just cant fix all the duds; there are too many. But they can fix some overpowered cards and thats what they did.

MikeGracey, you're absolutely right. Early in the life of the game, the designers were inexperienced and they produced some cards that, if they were to design again, they would make weaker. The venerable Steward of Gondor, for example. They also produced a *lot* of dud cards that were at best marginally useful at the time and have shrunk to complete insignificance. Silblade's covered a lot of duds. The End Comes or Short Cut are flat-out horrible cards, at best sideboards in a few very specific quests. Thankfully some duds have been brought back from uselessness by clever design, even Power In the Earth is usable (if not great) in a Woodman deck. I applaud that sincerely.

"They can't just fix all the duds; there are too many". Why can't they? If they want to move away from fixing cards that are used in *actually broken* combos and start on providing "balance" to early cards, why not fix the duds? The large number of them means they can cherrypick the worst of the lot, there's no natural or logical requirement that they fix all or none (they certainly haven't done so with "overpowered" core cards). And the best part is that the cost of errata is practically nil -- no one is using these cards, so errata merely invalidates some old don't-use-this-its-terrible commentary. It expands the card pool for *everybody*. It's a clear win.

Meanwhile, "fixing" overpowered cards has a substantial cost -- people *are* using these cards still, and people have published dozens or even hundreds of decks using these cards. Depending on the errata it may weaken old decks or completely break them. And by toning down "overpowered" cards without simultaneously fixing duds, it also has the net effect of making the early releases weaker -- since the early releases already have less "good cards", I don't see that as a desirable outcome, especially for those lucky (unlucky?) enough to play progression-style through the original publication order.

Sometimes fixes may be necessary when there is an *actually* broken combo; Legacy of Durin has been part of more than one of these IIRC, since it has the potential for infinite card draw as long as you can infinitely play a dwarf. Of course there were other cards involved likely more deserving of errata (and which got errata before Legacy of Durin, which was finally stealth-errataed with *no* known remaining combo exploiting it).

Nor does anyone need to wait on designers for fixing some of the allegedy overpowered cards. To play Legacy of Durin or A Burning Brand in its current form was *always* an option for players who felt that they were overpowered. Attaching cards can be constrained in practice by any additional restrictions you wish to impose, whether it's treating a card as if it had Restricted or imposing your own personal one-mount-per-character or one-armor-per-character rule. And responses are always optional -- if you thought playing Legacy of Durin would be better if you treated it as if it were exhausted, that was always in your power. Since it's not a competitive game outside a handful of POD quests, official errata for "balance" reasons are only necessary if you want *other* players, who don't currently play the way you like, to conform to the way you prefer to play.

But this is all a well-worn argument that doesn't apply much to this particular pack. Everybody agrees that while the latest printing of Legacy of Durin is weaker, it's still a good and useful card than you want in any dwarf deck using Lore. That won't be the case when he gets to Shadow and Flame, where WANI went from auto-include to marginal.