I agree with GrandSpleen. Just because lotr is techically one big novel split into 6 books divided in 3 novels doesn't mean it's not a trilogy. At least in my case long before the movies, lotr had always been a trilogy.

But it's not a trilogy. The volumes (i.e. FotR, TT, RotK) don't stand alone as individual narratives. One must read the entire Novel to get the story. Other trilogies (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Iron Man, etc.) have installments that are episodic and do stand alone (Jackson's movies do stand alone as well, unlike the three volumes) and also create a larger narrative, that makes them trilogies.

EDIT: from Wikipedia:

One of the most popular "trilogies" of fantasy books, The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien, is not a trilogy, though it is often referred to as such. Tolkien regarded it as a single work and divided it into a prologue, six books, and five appendices. Because of post-World War II paper shortages, it was originally published in three volumes. It is still most commonly sold as three volumes, but has also been published in one-volume and seven-volume editions (six books and the appendices).

Fair enough. That doesn't mean though that it was particularly because of the movies that it came to be considered a trilogy.

Definitely the second Saga Expansion of LOTR is when they'll have the biggest issue with repeating past scenarios, since much of the Dwarrowdelf cycle was just having us experience the Fellowship's adventures (Watcher, Caradhras, Moria). Judging by how they dealt with this in the Hobbit boxes, they won't shy away from repeating the scenarios, they'll just try to make them different enough that they feel like different quests. I think we can all agree that Flies and Spiders from On the Doorstep plays a lot different than Passage Through Mirkwood. I do wonder how Gandalf's stand against the Balrog will be represented. For the other Saga Expansions, they won't have to worry as much about repeating quest story lines.

yes- i think they did pretty well in the hobbit. i personally would prefer more emphasis on the adventuring part rather than the fighting parts...not sure if that will come across well. for instance, i love the 1b of road to rivendel. 20 progress points are nice becuase it gives the feeling of the wilderness.

in the hobbit i only got the adventuring feeling whenever i drew hobbit lands and the dreary hills. not that im saying the trolls/giants etc arent adventuring, they are a different type- an encounter type of adventure, whereas i want more travelling adventure.

this is of course difficult to do without making it boring, but i have high expectations for this style in the black rider at least, i really hope it conveys the style of the first book...which as i often say, i think is the best

rich

I miss any Parts there? Last Time I read the book was bout 3 years ago. I LOVE the Tolkien Books, but don't read them like every year or something. Better when you put a bigger space in between them I think. So yeah just wondering how good my memory is of the book.

Definitely the second Saga Expansion of LOTR is when they'll have the biggest issue with repeating past scenarios, since much of the Dwarrowdelf cycle was just having us experience the Fellowship's adventures (Watcher, Caradhras, Moria). Judging by how they dealt with this in the Hobbit boxes, they won't shy away from repeating the scenarios, they'll just try to make them different enough that they feel like different quests. I think we can all agree that Flies and Spiders from On the Doorstep plays a lot different than Passage Through Mirkwood. I do wonder how Gandalf's stand against the Balrog will be represented. For the other Saga Expansions, they won't have to worry as much about repeating quest story lines.

I was thinking about that. Moria I think will be hard to tell. I think they will skip Caradhras or wind it into another quest. Really really hope to see new version of Cave Troll that's even bigger and badder than the 2 we have now. I really hope they will capture the feel of fellowship fighting the Cave Troll. But Watcher I can definitely see being able to make different. Something like a watcher that is super powerful and engages you on the last quest stage and you have to make quite a few questing points to win before the watcher takes out you allies and Heroes. Maybe some kind of effect like "Deal 3 damage to 3 characters you control after watcher engages you" To get the feel of all his tentacles and how destructive he can be and running for you life while around your allies are getting grabbed by tentacles.

Definitely the second Saga Expansion of LOTR is when they'll have the biggest issue with repeating past scenarios, since much of the Dwarrowdelf cycle was just having us experience the Fellowship's adventures (Watcher, Caradhras, Moria). Judging by how they dealt with this in the Hobbit boxes, they won't shy away from repeating the scenarios, they'll just try to make them different enough that they feel like different quests. I think we can all agree that Flies and Spiders from On the Doorstep plays a lot different than Passage Through Mirkwood. I do wonder how Gandalf's stand against the Balrog will be represented. For the other Saga Expansions, they won't have to worry as much about repeating quest story lines.

I was thinking about that. Moria I think will be hard to tell. I think they will skip Caradhras or wind it into another quest. Really really hope to see new version of Cave Troll that's even bigger and badder than the 2 we have now. I really hope they will capture the feel of fellowship fighting the Cave Troll. But Watcher I can definitely see being able to make different. Something like a watcher that is super powerful and engages you on the last quest stage and you have to make quite a few questing points to win before the watcher takes out you allies and Heroes. Maybe some kind of effect like "Deal 3 damage to 3 characters you control after watcher engages you" To get the feel of all his tentacles and how destructive he can be and running for you life while around your allies are getting grabbed by tentacles.

I don't recall the fellowship actually fighting the cave troll in the novels, just that Frodo stabbed it in the foot. That appeared in the movie (and it was done amazingly btw), but I think we may still see another cave troll if they make another Moria scenario.

Yeah. In the movie, it's the Cave Troll that stabs Frodo, after he so determinedly tries to find where Frodo is hiding even though there are what, 8 other people in the fellowship that could have well qualified as better targets. But in the book, it's actually an Orc Chieftain, or something of that nature, that stabs Frodo. It also mentions Black Uruks of Mordor, so we'll probably see those too. And you got the stab in the foot right. It actually says Boromir's blade couldn't cut through the skin (or scales or armour of some sort). So the troll that we could possibly face might have really high defense...

on a not completely unrelated point i saw the most awful thing recently....the hobbit book, only in two parts! who would of knew that decades after existing perfectly fine as 1 novel, it would be 'reinvented' in two parts???

rich

Dare I ask. Would this new format of the Hobbit novel be a book based on the movies? I like both the novel and the first part of the movie so long, but we really don't need any new adaptions if this great story!! I had enough trouble picking what version of both the Hobbit and LotR I should buy being so many prints already. Poor newcomers. How are they to choose wisely? But I might be sidetracking this thread sorry for that

i really want to skip ahead of the battle i seemed to have started on the lord of the rings novel, as this isnt what this thread is about.., though i do have to do one last thing, more to just show how my statement was justified....here is a quote from the first paragraph of my lotr book.

"Note on the text: The Lord of the Rings is often erroneously called a trilogy, when it is in fact a single novel consisting of six books, plus appedices, sometimes published in three volumes...."

as i said originally, i didnt put that part in to wind people up, be pedantic etc etc. i put it in becuase i think it makes a considerable difference from a design point of view whether ffg takes it as 3 books, or 6. (see - it is relevant... )

@mr.thomasshcmidt: no, i dont think its a different story, its just been dissected into two

@everyone. i think that we will surely see a gandalf objective ally in the flight from moria, and the battle with the balrog. we have tried to escape it, we have fought it ourselves, the only thing left to do is have an objective ally take it down...ie. gandalf

rich

Yeah that would make sense to have him as an objective... I was secretly hoping to one day get a hero version of him, but I don't think that'll ever happen. Who do you think will be the heroes in the Saga expansion after Black Riders?

Yeah that would make sense to have him as an objective... I was secretly hoping to one day get a hero version of him, but I don't think that'll ever happen. Who do you think will be the heroes in the Saga expansion after Black Riders?

i think we shall either get key heros from the council of elrond.

i think

erestor or galdor

new gloin

new legolas

new gimli

we already have 2 boromirs

or most from lothlorien, it being the last key area before the breaking

new haldir

rumil / orophin

galadriel

celeborn

as for player card i think we shall see several attatchments from rivendell and lothlorien...lembas bread being one for sure, and the cloaks, the presents to the company...galadries hair to gimli should be an interesting one

allies will hopefully be silvan and noldor.

rich

How much I would love to see Rumil and Orophin made heroes. Have one be Tactics and the other be Spirit, and then have a new hero version of Haldir, and you could take all three brothers on adventures!

How much I would love to see Rumil and Orophin made heroes. Have one be Tactics and the other be Spirit, and then have a new hero version of Haldir, and you could take all three brothers on adventures!

yes, there could be a synergy between them...sort of like the twins. though i am not sure i like the 'having to include' both type characters suc has fili/kili and the twins

If they only get one thing right in the Saga Expansions, it must be that we as players get a moment that allows us to shout "You shall not pass" to the Balrog (I know, I know, it's "you cannot pass" in the books, but the movie version and Ian McKellen's voice is pretty well burnt into my brain by now)

If they only get one thing right in the Saga Expansions, it must be that we as players get a moment that allows us to shout "You shall not pass" to the Balrog (I know, I know, it's "you cannot pass" in the books, but the movie version and Ian McKellen's voice is pretty well burnt into my brain by now)

This is DESTINED to be an event card for sure yes?

Event:

discard and add to your victory area an X cost ally to discard a non unique enemy with hitpoints of X or lower

Cost Zero or one? What do you think? Cool card idea

Cost Zero or one? What do you think? Cool card idea

probably 0. you are afterall getting rid of potentially a 5 cost ally for the rest of the game, you cant even get it from discard pile.

what do you think?

Yeah after thinking about it again, 0 seems like a good cost. But I think it should be something like "If you control a Hobbit Hero, Discard a X cost ally, to deal X amount of damage to a enemy in play" Or maybe "If you control all Hobbit Heroes"

What do you think?

mmm, yes it should have some sort of dependency on a desperate reason for protection. i think your idea is a good one, if not all hobbits then at least one

rich

It also really supports the problem with Hobbits and fighting enemies

@everyone. i think that we will surely see a gandalf objective ally in the flight from moria, and the battle with the balrog. we have tried to escape it, we have fought it ourselves, the only thing left to do is have an objective ally take it down...ie. gandalf

rich

Can't say how much I like this as an idea! Makes for a great themed quest. But also will really make us all alter our decks (even just a little)... I mean, is there anyone who truthfully have 3 copies of Gandalf in at least 95% of the decks they make? Making him an invalid inclusion will remove that "crutch".. even for a single quest!

@everyone. i think that we will surely see a gandalf objective ally in the flight from moria, and the battle with the balrog. we have tried to escape it, we have fought it ourselves, the only thing left to do is have an objective ally take it down...ie. gandalf

rich

Can't say how much I like this as an idea! Makes for a great themed quest. But also will really make us all alter our decks (even just a little)... I mean, is there anyone who truthfully have 3 copies of Gandalf in at least 95% of the decks they make? Making him an invalid inclusion will remove that "crutch".. even for a single quest!

Please no. As you said, people already include Gandalf in 95% of the decks they make, and they should consider that since these expansions are supposed to be played with one core set. Also, as I've said in other topics, I really hope ffg doesn't keep on making unnecessary "objective" or "game mechanic" versions of things, something which really cripples the customizable aspect of what is essentially a variant of the ccg, and which is becoming slowly more like a board game that gives you predetermined tools to defeat a quest. Also, it gives unnecessary complexity and stuff to "keep track about" to an already complex game. I wish they would keep it simple and make as few versions of elements as possible, especially if some of those aren't really player cards but more like "game components" like objectives and treasures.

@everyone. i think that we will surely see a gandalf objective ally in the flight from moria, and the battle with the balrog. we have tried to escape it, we have fought it ourselves, the only thing left to do is have an objective ally take it down...ie. gandalf

rich

Can't say how much I like this as an idea! Makes for a great themed quest. But also will really make us all alter our decks (even just a little)... I mean, is there anyone who truthfully have 3 copies of Gandalf in at least 95% of the decks they make? Making him an invalid inclusion will remove that "crutch".. even for a single quest!

Please no. As you said, people already include Gandalf in 95% of the decks they make, and they should consider that since these expansions are supposed to be played with one core set. Also, as I've said in other topics, I really hope ffg doesn't keep on making unnecessary "objective" or "game mechanic" versions of things, something which really cripples the customizable aspect of what is essentially a variant of the ccg, and which is becoming slowly more like a board game that gives you predetermined tools to defeat a quest. Also, it gives unnecessary complexity and stuff to "keep track about" to an already complex game. I wish they would keep it simple and make as few versions of elements as possible, especially if some of those aren't really player cards but more like "game components" like objectives and treasures.

this is actually a very good point, despite me being the one who came up with the idea. i dont get overly excited with objective cards, but then i still sort of like the idea to

rich

Unless they're objects, like the Dol Guldur ones or the Gollum clues, or characters that can appear from the encounter deck but that are not essential to win the game, like Grimbeorn or the Ithilien Guardian, I normally hate objective cards. But that's just me. A Gandalf hero I wouldn't mind though.

a gandalf hero would be tough to make....mmm...tough.

Gandalf

13 threat

4 willpower

2 attack

3 defense

3 hitpoints

Action: exhaust gandalf to discard all encounter cards from play, shuffle the discard pile into the encouter deck, and reveal X encounter cards, where X is the amount you discarded

its sort of like a reset for the game when you are face with an awful staging area

Hmm.. Kinda like that idea. Though it may be overpowered. Especially when combined with something like Risk Some Light, and you could make sure you were safe. Though pretty nice stat selection. I would probably bump his hit points to 4... He seems a bit fragile.