I see a lot of people posting deck lists with characters like Thorin & Ori from the Hobbit. Now they are great, powerful cards - but during the time period the LOTR game is set (as opposed to The Hobbit) those characters are very much dead, including Fili and Kili. However Nori, Bofur and other Dwarves from the twelve are alive.

Am I just being pedantic if I feel characters that died during the Hobbit are not usable in the LOTR quests? Or, with the introduction of the hobbit, is it assumed that from The Hobbit to the beginning of LOTR is entirely open to alternative events?

I find that hard to believe personally, due to Kazadum being an entire expansion to find what happened to Balin, and Ori was (according to the Books) there. Now if I was playing with a stranger I don't think I would take issue - but doesn't it seem appropriate to take the deaths of certain characters in the Hobbit to be pretty definitive, and playing them during LOTR quests to be inappropriate, continuity-wise? Or should we take the fact that the end of the Hobbit (in card release terms) hasn't happened - and that Balin (who pertinently doesn't have a card) is the only character who has to have *definitively* died in the "LOTR: The Card Game" - to mean that Thorin & Ori might have survived in *our* personal version of "The Hobbit" and "LOTR"?

What do you think? Does the introduction of Hobbit cards mean that events in the Hobbit are open to different outcomes? Are Thorin, Ori, Fili and Kili definitely dead when the "LOTR: The Card Game" begin, or could they have survived?

Most importantly, am I over-thinking this?

this was dicussed alot when the game came out- basically alot of people thought this game was set in a certain time period….but i think that has gone now

it seems much more open HOWEVER remember that the hobbit boxes are saga sets, not linked to the main game, so it is therefore really up to you how much you follow lore

i prefer this way then everyone can set their own standards of following the lore

personally i go for lore friendly decks, but dont mind throwing in an odd card here and there which needs some imagination to figure out why it would be there

i do not think though that the game tries to set any alternative events, just linear ones to the books

i tend to split my games up into two types

-ones where i take characters likely to be together and put them through a quest (eg. the twins and aragorn with a dunedain noldor deck)

-ones where lore flies right out of the window

rich

demonsbanenathan said:

Yes. When enough cards are available (probably in 1 more year), players will be able to customize more their deck thematically. Only then deck building based on the lore will be practical.

karagh said:

i think it is practical now- just limited to certain races ie noldor/silvan and dwarves. its also a case of how good you want the deck to be

my dwarf decks are ok i guess, but my lore correct noldor/dunedain decks are the best ive created

i assume gondor will also be one of those that is both powerful and theme correct by the end of numenor

rich

Yes, you're overthinking.

As a game, you should first think about having fun. Ok, that's obvious and lame, BUT, the cards were released to be used, there is already restrictions to play the game, there is no need to create more obstacles to a good deck.
Then, as a card-game… unless stated otherwise, everything is valid. So, you wanna pair up Frodo and Ori? Go ahead! Bilbo and Legolas? Thranduil (eventually, I hope) and Gimli? That's your call.

Thanks for the replies guys.

You're right of course, especially after a friend of mine just pointed out that quests mention Elrond and Radaghast, both of whom might be in your decks at the time.

I think starting to ponder out lore becomes a rabbit hole of infinite nonsense, so I'll be sticking to my own personal justification.

From the beginning of the Hobbit, everything is open to change.

demonsbanenathan said:

i think the best way to do it is, as you say, stick to your own ideas of lore boundaries. i believe most people think loosely about theme at some point, given that in one of my polls the majority (if i remember rightly) were 'bilbos'….however i think this is more about the theme of the quests and the design of the cards, not so much their application

but we're all different…..i used to think more limited in lines of theme and lore, but as i now see it, the more choice we have the better, and then we can make our own descisions

enjoy

rich

I think the main problem with the lore comes from the cards based directly on the books.

For the Khazad-dum cycle: Aragorn (both), Legolas, Boromir, Frodo, Gandalf, Gimli and dead dwarves from The Hobbit can be played for obvious reasons. Other characters like Elrond, Gildor, Glorfindel (both again), Arwen, Eowyn, Bilbo, Denethor, Erestor and eagles can be explained why they can't go into Moria. I'm not a LOTR lore master, and there must be another bunch of events and attachments that shouldn't be used for that cycle. Same happens with the Shadows of Mirkwood cycle.

FFG are limiting themshelves creating so many cards based on the books. I like playing book characters, but there should be more original characters and characters from the lore but we only have heard of.

demonsbanenathan said:

I know the misspelling of Radagast ("Radaghast") was probably unintentional, but it did bring a smile to my face (and interesting picture to mind).

I should note also I'm not trying to be critical or mean, just wanted to share my amusement of an aghast Radagast (no doubt something Tolkien had in mind in creating the name).

Sometimes I play lore-correct and sometimes I want to play a really strong deck and dont consider the lore. The main point for me is how to get the most fun out of this game. and yeah, i really look forward to send balin too khazad-dum to find out what happened to himself

karagh said:

How could the use of content and characters from the book (on which the game is based and what it is named after, as well as being its primary source material) be a limiting factor?

Sure, only using names and events from the books is limiting for FFG, but personally I see nothing wrong with having characters like Aragorn or Frodo in a game called "The Lord of the Rings, the Card Game". Or am I missing something?

There's nothing worng with playing them if we alk about LOTR LCG strictly as a game. But for the lore side of LOTR LCG, story characters have a background which these adventures may conflict with. In the example of the Moria adventures, we have about 15 heroes that shouldn't be played if lore is to be respected. That's half of the published heroes. I'd like to play these adventures with good lore-friendly decks, but right now we are pretty much limited to dwarf decks for those adventures.

This disussion gave me an idea. We may create a list of cards "forbiden" for the different scenarios/cycles if players want to respect the lore.

karagh said:

this may be problematic as different people will have different ideas of what is lore correct or not…..how strict are we talking?

are we talking only dwarves in moria? or are we talking elladan/elrohir/glorfindel took a wander in on an unwritten adventure hundreds of years before the events of the fellowship?

i like to create lore friendly, but still incorrect decks…the dunedain are especially good for this

rich

There seem to be two issues. 1) Making your deck internally lore-consistent (i.e., making a dwarf deck). 2) Only playing a given scenario with lore-consistent cards (i.e., not taking that dwarf deck into Dol Guldur).

If you are too strict regarding lore, there are some cards which you literally cannot use in any currently existing scenario (e.g., Bilbo SoM version, Eowyn due to age and location). So I think a flexible approach is more enjoyable.

OnkelZorni said:

I think that this is kind of a problem with the quest system they chose for this game. Stuff like Balin investigating his own death, Elrond requesting you to do X and also having him in your fellowship, etc. (There's a reason why the other Lotr ccg's took a general look on the story, as well as AGOT lcg, and others). So I think that these inconsistencies are inevitable in this game and we'll have to learn to live with them At least I don't really care much about them.

i don't know as much about the lore as you guys, but wasn't it gandalf and aragorn who hunted for gollum and captured him, before taking him to mirkwood?

if you stick too closely to the lore then i suppose you'll have to ban every single card except those two in the "dead marshes" and "return to mirkwood".

OnkelZorni said:

This is also what I do. I prefer lore, but sometimes I ignore it. BTW, I play with the Treasure cards for lore reasons.

Bottom line, there are no rules so it is up to you. It could be a fun challenge to create a lore appropriate deck (I've kind of done it with dwarves and Rohirrim), but most people just like to win.

Play it your way!