as it says........ i like the attatchement

Wtf..........

muemakan said:

whats up?

Looks like it will make 2 Hero decks much more playable. Exciting!

Curious to seeing what kind of adventures Bilbo and Frodo can have together.

just didn't expect such a card.......no limitations on how many a hero can have.......

HOBBITS FTW!!! (yes thats right Dam - i said it hahahaa )

yes i would have thought theyd be restricted

Oh boy! My cold, dead heart suddenly had a jolt of excitement surge through it when I saw that card.

*rubs hands together excitedly*

I've been wondering when this sort of card would come out. I don't think the fact that it's not unique makes it too powerful, considering all the encounter effects that remove attachments. It's a super exciting card! I wonder if I'll be able to utilize it well in a non-secrecy deck. As the article mentioned, Resourceful could be useful if you get it out soon enough, but it wouldn't start paying off till turn 5 after being played.

It says:

Fortunately, The Watcher in the Water presents a solution for those players interested in testing the Secrecy mechanic and the two-hero fellowship. With its Secrecy discount, Resourceful (The Watcher in the Water, 62) costs only one to bring into play and brings you even for resources with a three-hero fellowship by your next turn.

But doesn't the card show a cost of 4 to play?

Secrecy is an amount to discount the printed cost of the card to play it. If you have a threat of 20 or lower, you can discount the cost of the card by the amount under Secrecy.

If you have a threat of over 20, then you can't take advantage of the discount provided by Secrecy and this specific card will cost 4 resources to play.

Almost painfully exciting new card. Woot!

So.... 1 +3 + 2(steward) = 6 resources a turn..... +Ziggy.... . . power creed is getting out of control in this game.

Sounds really powerful. Hope is worst it. Encounter cards should be powerful other wise.........

booored said:

booored said:

Sure, but at the same time you don't have to play it. Ziggy/Gildor + Steward of Gondor + Resourceful + Horn of Gondor. They're could all conspire to give you some serious resource per turn, but you could be looking at a potential of 10 to 15 cards in your deck just for resource advantage overkill. That's a lot of allies having to sit on the substitute bench, IMO. Furthermore, if you're going to play Resourceful in a three-hero deck then it's going to cost 4; you better hope you get SoG and/or Ziggy/Gildor out early doors to help foot that bill.

booored said:

That's not power creep. The most powerful card you listed is Steward of Gondor, a card from the core set. Resourceful is less powerful and more narrowly useful than Steward.

While it opens up the secrecy deck based on two heroes, Resourceful should be restricted, or at least limited to one sphere (Lore, for example). It is potentially broken, I must say... On the other hand, this will definitely signals what we are seeing so far: treacheries are getting nastier and nastier, and for Shadow and Flame, it would be essential to hold on to the attachments.

Expect most treacheries and shadows hitting on heroes with attachments from now on.

Second Breakfast and Erebor Hammersmith looking a lot better now.

Resourceful is less powerful and more narrowly useful than Steward.

Respectfully dissagree. the prospect of having 3 of these PER player, regardless of sphere, makes it much more powerful than the unique SoG... The price is not a problem, it will pay for itself in a few rounds, and it synergises with itself: the more Resourceful cards you have in play, the more likely you are to be able to play the next one.

A lot of games don't last too long... waiting 4 turns to get a card to simply pay for itself is a long time in this game. Those 4 resources could be better used playing a Northern Tracker or Haldir of Lorien and making progress on the quest.

Obviously, it does make a lot of sense for a secrecy deck to play the card (in multiple).

It looks balanced to me. Not overpowerful, but a great card to own as it opens up possibilities (just like getting the Songs attachment changed the dynamic of the game in the first cycle).

As for encounter cards attacking attachment, it's been a recurrent theme for KD and the Dwarrowdelf cycle. Road to Rivendell can be brutal in that respect. It'd be nice to see a hero with an ability preventing an attachment from being discarded later on.

I can't wait for that next preview, featuring not only the next hero, but also an actual decklist from the game's designers.

stupid forum fail... deleted

A 2 player deck that instantly springs to mind is Ziggy+Quest/Control deck and a Single hero (boromir or dunhere) secrecy deck. Put these new attachments on the secrecy deck (as Ziggy will be pulling 15 a turn anyway) + steward. Belt on Both. No songs needed. Run hammersmith for attachment fetching.... Also remember the card is neutral and 3 secrecy... so on a properly build low threat deck, it only costs 1 to cast.. not 4.

xibxang said:

SiCK_Boy said:

Ziggy can pull 15 resources a turn. On a perfect draw that will start happen on turn 2. Though in my experience it is normally running in turn 4. The point is that the resource phase is getting more and more trivial. You can already get a fairly reliable turn 1 northern tracker. Tragic posted that solo ziggy deck video on youtube that got 2 trackers and beon out in turn 3... the power of ziggy is well known. so 4/1 cost is not a problem for this new card.

The big problem with a ziggy deck (like any combo deck) is that if the combo dose not get set early the deck completely fails. Still with all the card draw in this game, that usually never happens, though running a dedicated "secrecy" deck would restrict card draw...

Bohemond said:

This card is more powerful than Steward. We had songs -> Belt. Steward -> Ziggy and now Ziggy + This... that is power creep.

xibxang said:

In a single player game sure... though you would not need to run that much, as proven already a Ziggy deck can get out the power super fast already, with out the need for ANY of the other cards you just mentioned.

I think the argument "Oh you just do not need to play it" is stilly. We are talking about game design here.. not about play experience. Sure you can set any kind of rule to make the game harder. I know a guy that plays so you can only get spend 1 type of sphere resource a turn to make it harder.

To me, power creep means that you'd never want to use the predecessor cards - if you say that Narvi's Belt is a power-creeped form of the Songs, then why are people still playing Songs?

I think it's just some more diversification; I don't really see it as a problem. Let us know if you end up breaking the game with it (keeping in mind that your example doesn't work as stated, as Narvi's Belt is unique, and needs to be attached to a Dwarf hero.)

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=201&efcid=4&efidt=598404&efpag=0#598580

booored said:

Since when you care about power creep?

Shelfwear said:

exactly, there is a big difference between playability and game design. The fact that the game is co-op and there is no torny system means that you can customize your own play experience how ever you like to make such problems other card games have meaningless. this dose NOT however suddenly mean that the designers should not be called out on bad decisions.

There is a lot of people holding out hope of a torny system, I for one think it will nvr happen.. and cards like this assure it will never happen,.

@radiskull

yeah that is a good definition of power creep. I'll start using that, I always thought it as meaning the slow continual increase of power of the cards as a whole.. as in each set ... so not individual cards.. but the entire game as a whole..

Boored: Narvi's Belt is unique, so it can't be part of 2 different decks (or at least, there can't be 2 copies in play at the same time). Your comment seemed to imply you could play two at a time.

Also, my comments were mostly from a 1 player perspective.

I don't see how Resourceful is going to combo much in a single hero deck paired with a Miner deck. The Miner deck needs his partner to run card draw (Bilbo or Beravor) as he can't just hope to always draw his combo. Getting 3 Miners in play by turn 2 without access to major draw is a fluke more than a reliable strategy. Also, the Miner deck needs some Spirit heroes to play the miner (idealy, 2 of them to ensure a first turn Miner). And he still needs to play the game. All that to say, I don't see this card making the Zigil Miner paired decks any stronger than they currently are. I'd much rather run two 3 heroes deck than try forcing secrecy for one of the two.

And I totally second Radiskull's take on power creep. I still believe this game will inevitably face the issue, but the rate at which we get player cards (as opposed to other card games where all cards are player cards) is playing for us in delaying the inevitable. We will see it. I still believe Zigil Miner was a mistake.

But Resourceful looks like a nice and balanced card to me.

For those who think they'd play it in a non-secrecy deck, what would you remove from your current build to play this new card?