Anduril82 said:
Thoughts anyone?
I don't know. You're the one who said this isn't complicated. 
/wolf
Appeal to FFG: Pls make the game rules simpler and easier to understand
Svenn said:
Anduril82 said:
Of course, I just realized that "A Test of Will" only says to cancel the "when revealed" effects of a card. It doesn't say that you discard, which I assume means that any surge effects on a treachery card would still be resolved. Thoughts anyone?
Surge is still resolved even if Eleanor cancels and then discards a card, so Surge definitely resolves when using A Test of Will.
Svenn said:
Surge is still resolved even if Eleanor cancels and then discards a card..
Yeah, I guess you would be right about that. The rules just state "when" a card with "surge" is revealed that you resolve it's effects after the when revealed effects, which is really just a clarification of the timing. Sheesh. Oh well. Actually, this makes the clarification in the FAQ regarding Thalin make even more sense. When they updated the FAQ, they included the phrase "keyword" in addition to "when revealed" effects.
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Final verdict: if you draw the "flooding" treachery card, you're screwed. *lol*
Vyron said:
I think that the game is still pretty straightforward... as to "interpretations" - language is not an exact tool... the designers have their mindset, but they cannot possibly foresee all the problems: they're human...
different people, different opinions - cf. the law! 
FAQ are an essential part of the game and you have to stay on top and be up to date if you want to play a lcg/ccg - I think we are lucky that we can start and play the game from the beginning, thus having a pretty simple job of being up to date... imagine in 2-3 years!
what would be useful though - dear FFG and Nate French: ANSWER the FAQ questions in the forum, or get a rules expert or designer to monitor our NEEDS and answer our questions - then update the rules with the FAQ (or just update the FAQ)... that would be a big step!
[/quote
Completely true. You are always going to have different interpretations to the same wordings. Happens in every game. I don't think that the issue is really the rules being complicated, but the possibility that some card interactions will be so. Again, that's going to happen in every game too. What the designers need to do is make clearly worded cards, which in my opinion, they haven't always done with this game. Clear wordings make for easier to understand card effects, which in turn, make for an easier time working out those effects.
And absolutely the questions should be answered here. Doing it at BGG and who knows where else is just pure nonsense.
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Its not that it is complicated, its that it is not clear and that's why there's a whole 4 page thread on the very topic of Eleanor. Because there are different interpretations and the rules and offiicial FAQ don't really clarify it. Let me give you an example:
On page 2 of the official FAQ it says "When an enemy card is revealed from the encounter deck, Thalin's ability resolves before any keyword or when revealed card effects on the encounter card".
To me if you read this sentence from a grammar perspective it looks as though the word resolve or the word resolve or the word trigger should have been on the end. I mean does it mean that Thalin's ability resolves before the effect or keyword resolves or does it resolve before they trigger? The sentence is ambiguous.
This is the sort of thing I'd like to see more clarification on, Also the card Flooding reads: Doomed x1. Surge. and then there is a when revealed effect. Wouldn't it make more sense if it read Doomed, When revealed and then surge?
silverhand77 said:
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Its not that it is complicated, its that it is not clear and that's why there's a whole 4 page thread on the very topic of Eleanor. Because there are different interpretations and the rules and offiicial FAQ don't really clarify it. Let me give you an example:
On page 2 of the official FAQ it says "When an enemy card is revealed from the encounter deck, Thalin's ability resolves before any keyword or when revealed card effects on the encounter card".
To me if you read this sentence from a grammar perspective it looks as though the word resolve or the word resolve or the word trigger should have been on the end. I mean does it mean that Thalin's ability resolves before the effect or keyword resolves or does it resolve before they trigger? The sentence is ambiguous.
This is the sort of thing I'd like to see more clarification on, Also the card Flooding reads: Doomed x1. Surge. and then there is a when revealed effect. Wouldn't it make more sense if it read Doomed, When revealed and then surge?
I see what you mean, and I agree. The end of that statement in the FAQ regarding Thalin should definitely specify whether his ability resolves before effects "trigger" or "resolve." I believe the assumption is "trigger," but if it is "resolve," then the effects would still occur. As for word placement on the card, I wonder if they just wanted to keep keywords together and then have effects that involve specific statements posted at the bottom of the card. I'd have to look back over the cards to verify if this is always the case. If so, more than likely, it was a stylistic choice that requires players to know beforehand the order in which effects resolve. I don't have as much of a problem with word placement on the card as long as it is consistent. I like keywords being kept together at the top of the card.
Anduril82 said:
silverhand77 said:
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Anduril82 said:
It's still not that complicated. *lol*
Its not that it is complicated, its that it is not clear and that's why there's a whole 4 page thread on the very topic of Eleanor. Because there are different interpretations and the rules and offiicial FAQ don't really clarify it. Let me give you an example:
On page 2 of the official FAQ it says "When an enemy card is revealed from the encounter deck, Thalin's ability resolves before any keyword or when revealed card effects on the encounter card".
To me if you read this sentence from a grammar perspective it looks as though the word resolve or the word resolve or the word trigger should have been on the end. I mean does it mean that Thalin's ability resolves before the effect or keyword resolves or does it resolve before they trigger? The sentence is ambiguous.
This is the sort of thing I'd like to see more clarification on, Also the card Flooding reads: Doomed x1. Surge. and then there is a when revealed effect. Wouldn't it make more sense if it read Doomed, When revealed and then surge?
I see what you mean, and I agree. The end of that statement in the FAQ regarding Thalin should definitely specify whether his ability resolves before effects "trigger" or "resolve." I believe the assumption is "trigger," but if it is "resolve," then the effects would still occur. As for word placement on the card, I wonder if they just wanted to keep keywords together and then have effects that involve specific statements posted at the bottom of the card. I'd have to look back over the cards to verify if this is always the case. If so, more than likely, it was a stylistic choice that requires players to know beforehand the order in which effects resolve. I don't have as much of a problem with word placement on the card as long as it is consistent. I like keywords being kept together at the top of the card.
Yes I agree, I like the style too, so I'm thinking that perhaps they should have included a section about the correct way to read a card in relation to the timing of its effects and abilites.
silverhand77 said:
some of the wording on cards, in the rules and in the officail FAQ is ambiguous and can be interpreted different ways so there needs to be clarification. It might be ok for casual play, but some of us would like to be involved in tournaments and so forth and in such a setting there need to be a set agreement on the interpretation.
Yeah, I agree to that. I'd especially like the timing of effects or "card reading order" to be covered in a single place, with a clear structure. I just noticed the new CoC FAQ 2.0 (link if you're interested, but 17 MBytes: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffg_content/coc/support/coc-faq%20Ver%202.0.pdf ), and I really like it. On p. 15 and 16 FFG explicitly gives a timing structure (when you execute actions, responses etc.). I'm no CoC player, but this structure seems very clear (perhaps not simple to memorize, but not ambiguous). I'd love to have such a thing for LotR, too! So let's hope FFG is fulfilling this wish with the next LotR FAQ :-)
I bet they will. They've had one for Game of Thrones for quite some time, and it gets used absolutely extensively. It's nice to have such a detailed framework available.
Yeah, great news :-)
My point (and I might be wrong but I think the OP would agree with me) is that I don't care how CLEAR they make it.
If they start to go down the Magic road and introduce Event Stacks, and rigorous timing rules... they could be 100% crystal clear... and I would still hate them.
That is NOT the game I want to play basically.
It's a design choice.
So why I am disapointed in some of the answers, is not only because I think they are unclear or causes more questions.
It's also because I simply don't like the way the game is taking.
I'd rather play games with broad generic and SIMPLE rulles that I can explain to my 8 year old daughter (who btw love this game) without her looking at me funny and go; "What?"
And right now... with the direction I can see this game taking... that's not going to happen and it makes me sad.
/wolf
I agree. The LotR LCG is too complicated for most casual players. As are all LCGs. As are all CCGs, too. As are most of FFG's games.
Still, there's apparently a large enough number of geeks enjoying these games. Personally, I don't believe it's possible to create 'simple' rules for any game that is extensible in the way LCGs are.
jhaelen said:
Personally, I don't believe it's possible to create 'simple' rules for any game that is extensible in the way LCGs are.
I do.
That's where we disagree I guess, and that is why I'm disappointed in FFG (Nate) right now.
It's all a matter of design choices.
And we play lots of games, tons of them in fact. So I wouldn't categorize myself (or my friends and family) as casual gamers.
/wolf
booored said:
I do not think the game needs to be more simple... in fact I would like more complex interactions.. my problem is that the design of the keywords and stuff are to simplistic, meaning that it breeds confusion. If the game had better defined keywords and stuff the rules would be more plain, and allow more complex interactions. There are many rules that are easy to "assume" and understand.. but in fact if you read the cards these effects can be interpreted 100% correctly in a number of ways due to the cards simply not have the devices needed to be more accurate at a low word count.
I think this could be the OPs original point.. not simple as in simplistic rules, but if the rules were better written and the card keywords were more refined then the entire game as a whole would be much easier to understand and not require 21 page unofficial FAQ, that doesn't even address many issues.
I think I would have to agree with booored. As a primarily solo player I found the rulebook challenging enough that I had to keep referring to it throughout my first game (and probably will for the next few too), but haven't so far come across a scenario that has had me rushing to the Web to do some research. Sure, I did come across one or two rather ticklish moments in the game when I got a bit confused, but I just re-read the rules carefully, examined the card(s), and thought about it carefully before interpreting it for myself. Perhaps I got it wrong, perhaps I got it right... at the end of the day my objective was to enjoy myself and try and win the game (I didn't). With more games under my belt, and further exploration of the FAQ and forums, I'm sure I'll be able to resolve these issues better/more accurately in the future, but I also believe more questions will be raised in this way too.
I just think that if the game ever becomes so much about struggling to ensure you are getting the rules exactly right and you spend more time agonising over that than actually playing the game... then what's the point?