To me, the greatest asset of card games is the hidden element of your 'hand' from your opponent. The chance to bluff and counterbluff. Would Poker work as a cooperative game? The Tolkien theme is excellant for games - I still have hundreds of cards from the first 2 efforts to use it - but have reservations about the cooperating aspect against the game itself. The original 2 used an opponent to oppose you on your turn, then you opposed their effort to succeed. A good concept that works well with card play. The excellant, but now defunct 'Stargate' ccg used the team of heroes with differing skills to overcome a number of sort of Quests. Here again, your opponent used cards to hinder you and vica versa on alternate turns.

Much as I love the theme and FFGs record so far in lcgs, I really think I will have to study this game more closely - and hopefully play - before being convinced that hidden hands work in cooperative games. Why are they hidden? If it is 'all win or all lose', why not all cards on view? Although that sounds more like 'solo' by commitee. A video of play as they did for 'Warhammer Invasion' - brilliant! - would be very useful. Cheers!

Some of the enemy cards are unknown but others you know. So you can prepare for what you see and hope to be prepared for the unknown variables which is a good thing for an adventure no?

I think it lends itself well to a cooperative game. In too many cooperative games, I find that it generally breaks down into one person tells everyone else what to do, or the most experienced folks just order around the newbies. Play pandemic and see what I mean. While this doesnt happen every time, it happens enough. I think the hands allow for single player decisions within the framework of a multiplayer co-op game. Each player can construct their own deck, play resource cards from their own hand, and take their own turn. While the players must work together to win, this allows for each player to make their own decisions, free from the direction of the rest of the group. Once that player plays their cards for the round, the group can then work out who is exploring, attacking, defending, ect.

When I teach this game to friends, we'll likely play with decks Ive made and with our hands showing so I can show them how it goes. After that, I'll turn them loose with my cards and let them make their own decks and play their own hands how they want to. if I want to play a game where I just direct the flow, I'll play solo with single or multiple decks. I think not being able to tell other players what to do makes the game more fun and challenging, as I am not simply telling them what to play and when, but letting their choices and deck work the way they want them to, and then combining it with my deck and choices, and then seeing how we do as a team.

I see no reason why you can't have hidden hands. There aren't any mobile phones in middle earth so you can't constantly be in touch with everyone unless you all go around in a pack all the time. Also if you're in a fight with something you're hardly going to stop and say 'two ticks old chum, I just need to check that the other guys have the right cards for this fight. Thanks ever so much'. Hidden hands could represent the split second decision making needed for fights and the unexpected.

spirit said:

Sure there are, why do you think Celebrimbor (and Sauron) were so keen on making rings of power . Just for the bling? Nah, they are the iPhone of M-E.

Or in a more limited edition, Palantirs.

Yes but apart from the palantir's hideous line rentals, You could rarely ever get signal on them and the few times you managed to get one high enough up a mountain to get a bar of signal the bloke on the other end would be otherwise engaged

And then the battery would die.

Dam said:

Sure there are, why do you think Celebrimbor (and Sauron) were so keen on making rings of power . Just for the bling? Nah, they are the iPhone of M-E.

Rats!, You beat me.