On a side note as well we've been tossing around the idea of using 15 card side boards to let us "customize" decks between quests. The card pool isn't huge enough to really call for it, but there are definately some quests that seem to require a tiny bit of meta to get through effectively (Emyn Muil, Lore is just handy, so is Spirit).
Will anyone switch to single sphere decks
Bungo_Underhill said:
As this game requires you to "build" the encounter deck each game you change quests between though - maybe you should just shuffle in that quest's cycle's player cards to the core set decks?
jhaelen said:
Bungo_Underhill said:
As this game requires you to "build" the encounter deck each game you change quests between though - maybe you should just shuffle in that quest's cycle's player cards to the core set decks?
That's a really good idea! Considering the player card previews we've seen from the Khazad Dum box, that should work quite well. They looked like they were designed with the next AP cycle in mind.
Glad I could be of help 
The problem is Booord, that the deckbuilding aspect falls flat for me when trying to combine multiple spheres. Let's say I am (as an example) building a 2 sphere hero and 1 leadership hero deck. I can't have too many Leadership cards otherwise they'll sit in my hand and I'm not drawing enough of the cards I need/want. If I have too few then I'm not getting the cards and I am gaining resources that won't get spent. If my single Leadership hero dies or leaves play for any reason then roughly a third of my deck becomes dead weight. I can include the songs that given sphere icons but that takes up space in my deck for better and more useful cards. I know what you mean by a big part of the game being the deck building experience but the above makes it far too hard to make spheres work well together in my experience. Doesn't mean that i don't try but I always come back to single sphere decks.
I think there is another reason to play single sphere decks that we haven';t touched on (and I say this as someone who plays primarily dual sphere decks).
Many of the scenarios are front loaded. You face an immediate challenge out of tha gates, and often need to resolve that challenge during the first few turns. Single Sphere decks have a lot more flexibility in terms of early turn drops. They can play a 3 cost card on turn 1 or a 5 cost card on turn 2 (I am looking at you Gildor). Once you make it to the mid game, I find dual sphere decks out perform their single sphere counterparts because of added versatility and card power, but the trick is getting to that stage of the game.
Wow, I don't know how this conversation got so heated!
Anyway, I definitely play single sphere decks sometimes. I almost always play single sphere with 3 or 4 players and frequently with 2 player games. This has increased some more recently as the card pool for the spheres has expanded and I feel like each has become more versatile (ie Ancient Mathom for Spirit...). Also, as Bohemond said, it really helps economically to have three resources right away. I play single sphere less frequently solo, usually dual sphere. However, at first I was shocked at how many people play tripple sphere! I thought, "How do you pay for anything!?!" But they seem to have success with it and I've tried it and had some success myself.
The_Big_Show said:
The problem is Booord, that the deckbuilding aspect falls flat for me when trying to combine multiple spheres. Let's say I am (as an example) building a 2 sphere hero and 1 leadership hero deck. I can't have too many Leadership cards otherwise they'll sit in my hand and I'm not drawing enough of the cards I need/want. If I have too few then I'm not getting the cards and I am gaining resources that won't get spent. If my single Leadership hero dies or leaves play for any reason then roughly a third of my deck becomes dead weight. I can include the songs that given sphere icons but that takes up space in my deck for better and more useful cards. I know what you mean by a big part of the game being the deck building experience but the above makes it far too hard to make spheres work well together in my experience. Doesn't mean that i don't try but I always come back to single sphere decks.
Well that is what deck building is about. Building a deck that "dose" something. Rather than just put int it all the cards you like. Evaluating cards on their synergy with other cards is one of the harder concepts in these card games. It is a lot easier to just look at a card and evaluate it on its face value. Like "Westfold Horse-Breaker", not really joyish in a solo spirit deck, but in a spirit/leadership running the Prince, that card becomes a amazing winner.
Remember this is early days, soon, and not that far away either. You will have to deck build to make a solo-sphere deck, as even in a single sphere there will be many many many more cards than you can place in a single deck.
You see I am almost the exact opposite of you. IMO, solo sphere decks are extremely weak in comparison to multi-sphere. Especially for solo play, there is defiantly a place for single sphere decks in 3+ players. I mean I can not even understand how a single sphere tactics deck is able to play mirkwood, what do you do when you come to Journey? But a Lore, Tactics owns that quest. A Lore, Tactics, Spirit with a leadership splash can beat every quest in the entire cycle.
I mean each to their own, have fun is the point, but even if you "hate" deck building... eventually you will have to as the card pool will just get bigger and bigger.
Bohemond said:
Many of the scenarios are front loaded. You face an immediate challenge out of tha gates, and often need to resolve that challenge during the first few turns. Single Sphere decks have a lot more flexibility in terms of early turn drops.
This is an extremely good point. Recently I got a regularly 3 player game running once a week and we have found having a single player running a mono-sphere deck allows you greater flexibility in that very first ally drop.
A pure Tactics deck doesn't work at all solo. I agree with that. Solo Leadership, Lore or Spirit can do almost any mission solo, and I always know that I have the right sphere cards and suitable resources. I'm not opposed to deckbuilding, but the challenge is to make a working solo sphere deck for me.
I've been enjoying the conversation in this thread. 
As our pool of cards expands, I think monosphere is such a fun option to play around with.
For those of you interested in playing with monosphere decks, you might especially enjoy this week's Solo Player Tournament.
And for those of you who enjoy multiplayer games, it would take at least a couple of core sets plus an adventure pack each, but you could give this month's 2 Player Tournament a whirl with 2 monosphere decks as well. I don't even know if victory is achievable that way for EfDG, but I'd sure love to see someone try.
Bohemond said:
I think there is another reason to play single sphere decks that we haven';t touched on (and I say this as someone who plays primarily dual sphere decks).
Many of the scenarios are front loaded. You face an immediate challenge out of tha gates, and often need to resolve that challenge during the first few turns. Single Sphere decks have a lot more flexibility in terms of early turn drops. They can play a 3 cost card on turn 1 or a 5 cost card on turn 2 (I am looking at you Gildor). Once you make it to the mid game, I find dual sphere decks out perform their single sphere counterparts because of added versatility and card power, but the trick is getting to that stage of the game.
Speaking with regard to solo play only:
This is perhaps the only reason I can see a mono-sphere deck being viable -- if you can get the "jump" on the encounter deck or get over the initial challenge, the rest of the game becomes much more manageable when you're not playing catch-up (i.e. you don't get location locked, you have freedom to choose when to play cards and when to wait). As Bohemond has pointed out, this is much easier to accomplish using powerful, expensive cards on turn two. I've noticed that you can emulate this strong early game play by using heroes that are powerful individually (but generate more starting threat) or that are able to function well together without being dependent on drawing certain cards in your starting hand. As an example of this, I run Eowyn, Boromir, and Glorfindel in one of my decks, which incurs what to me is a high starting threat of 32, but gives me an extremely strong starting base -- I can fight, quest, defend, heal, etc., depending on the need.
That being said, I personally play with all duo or tri-sphere decks, as I feel like it gives me more room for creativity. A lot of cross sphere cards synergize well with each other, and allow you to cover the weaknesses of one sphere or the other. I feel as though the spheres are intentionally designed to excel in certain areas to encourage players to explore different deck combinations, and while future player cards may increase the versatility of each sphere on its own, as it stands now I feel as if it's impossible to play a mono-sphere deck as successfully in solo play as a mixed deck without forcing yourself to use certain cards. Of course, mixing also limits you in ways -- for instance, I generally don't normally don't include cards of (colored) cost five or higher unless I run at least two heroes from that sphere or unless it is critical to that deck. Although, that principle is more related to my personal preference for reliability -- in multi-sphere decks I feel as if cards of cost four or more are usable and optimal in fewer situations, particularly so for cards that aren't for your main sphere if you're running a two-color deck.
But I think what is currently holding back deck design is a lack of resource generating cards. With basically only SoG as a reliable source of additional resources, I feel as if FFG has played it safe so far. Since drawing cards has already been revealed to be a game breaking mechanic, I guess they have to keep resource generation in check, but I think they should try to explore better ways of obtaining resources other than "move all your resources from one hero to the other" or "gain a resource when an ally goes out of play or takes damage."
Anyway, I'm rambling on here, but the only reasons right now that I would play a monosphere deck is for fun, for thematic reasons, or for multiplayer games.