what the **** is the problem, just always make sure you have a spare resource on spirit and a test of will.. end of story. Put some card draw in to make sure you pull it, between 4 players you can pack a lot of card draw. This card is a bad ass .. sure.. but it is SO TRIVIAL to play around that this thread is a joke.

learn your quests, learn your requirements, learn your threats build your decks and play accordingly.

You can not just play each quest like a ******* robot, you need to make strategic decisions... like... always having a test of will in hand and resource ready.

Stop bitching and learn to play.

Did you have a hard childhood? I pet your red and steaming head, my friend. Cool down and speak friendly as the majority of us does.

One word to rich: I apreciate your future wish to playtest once 4-handed in Ithilien. It shows you really want to know how it is. But it has again a drawback. I think you know it: 4 players = 4 different heads and 4 different hidden hands. If you play 4-handed you can plan like a strategic master, absolutely I agree. But in a 4 player game with real people everything is different. Maybe one could play in combination with songs Faramir (what would be the best decision in that situation), but plays a Galadriems Greeting cause he is afraid of his actual threat. Maybe he tells about it, maybe not. Tabletalk is a topic per se. Maybe other player plays sth else cause he just dont see the possible strategic point.

I know, you would admit. Also not every player must be a 100%-expert like us. People like booored expect that every player on earth knows every nice move in LOTR, thats sad. It should be possible to play Ithilien even with players that play only once in one or two weeks.

To leptokurt: I heard of them and you see it by yourself, 4/6 of your named allys are heavy cost which was actually my thought, it would take very long time to get them. I mean, Damrod...

To put everything in a nutshell... In my opinion, that card should mean "Every player raises his threat by the amount of his own questing characters" And as another user said before here, then it would still stay a horrible card.

.One word to rich: I apreciate your future wish to playtest once 4-handed in Ithilien. It shows you really want to know how it is. But it has again a drawback. I think you know it: 4 players = 4 different heads and 4 different hidden hands.

just a quick side point. i think that you can share what is in your hands in this game though? at least we have been playing it that way whenever i have played with actual people (rather than the people in my head)

rich

Look, Dood. Not everyone is playing Spirit with three tests of wills in their deck.

exacty my point. People can not blame FFG because some players suck so badly at the game. You can not just make a deck and go "this is my deck now I should be able to play it vs any quest" While the need to make quest specific decks is less than before it is still a big part of what this game is. Also when you play multiplayer, you are not buliding say 4 deck, your building ONE get played by four people. if you are just taking your existing deck and palyign it with a mate.. then again you simply doing it wrong. You can not just stubonly say "i wana play it my way" you have to use strategy in your deck building choices.

FFG can not be responsible for terrible players.

just a quick side point. i think that you can share what is in your hands in this game though? at least we have been playing it that way whenever i have played with actual people (rather than the people in my head)

rich

No, your not allowed to share any information at all. All cards and all things like Denathor looking at the encounter deck or quest effects and stuff are 100% hidden choices. Your not even allowed to mention the card names that you are going to use in a play. What makes this co-op experience so great is that so much is based on trust with your partners and unlike many co-op you can not have one player "controlling" the game. Basically all infomation apart fomr what si revealed on the table to is hidden and illegal to talk about.

Keep test of will or Eleonora ready in this case...

Glaurung, your "advices" are always so trivial... You cant allways include Test of Will or Eleanor and even if you do, 3/50 cards is not really a good chance to draw it.

My playergroup also had the worst experiences with Watcher in the woods and it is ridiculous. The quest punishs you by all sides, if you send all characters to the quest, you get destroyed by watcher in the woods and suffer by the blocking wargs and if you dont send them, you dont make progress and the morgul-spider gets incredible strong.

Not long time ago we had a discussion, cause 4 players and you draw this card means you loose imediately. Even the most stupid idiot in the world who playtested Into Ithilien with 4 players must have realized that. As a result it might be that its only the amount of personal characters and not of all of the group. But anyway, I dont change my opinion about Into Ithilien, its the worst quest of all and I hate it.

Very good quest. On of the best. Yes you cal lose a game which is exiting.

And thanks to this card you can lose it even when you think you win already.

what the **** is the problem, just always make sure you have a spare resource on spirit and a test of will.. end of story. Put some card draw in to make sure you pull it, between 4 players you can pack a lot of card draw. This card is a bad ass .. sure.. but it is SO TRIVIAL to play around that this thread is a joke.

learn your quests, learn your requirements, learn your threats build your decks and play accordingly.

You can not just play each quest like a ******* robot, you need to make strategic decisions... like... always having a test of will in hand and resource ready.

Stop bitching and learn to play.

Your strategies to combat this card are superfluous to my problem with the card. This scenario is full of difficult treacheries you are required to deal with.

True, but you need to plan your strategy. The general rule is if it doesn't kill you and end the game, do not cancel it. There are other threats sure, but this one WILL end the game, so it has higher priority. So if another card is bad, this is worse.. so you hold the cancels for this one and this one alone.

there is no errata. Why

Because the game has to speak to the entire population of players not just *******. While no one is forcing collectors to buy 3 copies of core and the like , many do. i have played 4 player games were every player is running 3will+3Tomb for a total of 24 Test of will cards on the table. That was unusual but I hope you get the point. We need super hard quest with super hard threats as some of us play with large card pools and spend a lot of time making powerful decks. It is not out of line for FFG to design a card for 4 player games and expect each player to have there own copy of core. Just cause you have only 1 or 2 for a 4 player game doesn't reflect everyone, and FFG need to make allowances for ALL players. That doesn't mean each quest is for all players, it means that a quest has to come now and then out of the tons available that caters to these people.

This is why it will not get errata.

1) It is piss easy to play around even with smaller card pools

2) anyone playing with a decent card pool (as in more than one player collects) will have no trouble at all

3) if it pisses you off, just take it out of the deck. end of story. This is a co-op game, just change the card text yourself.

5+

Look, Dood. Not everyone is playing Spirit with three tests of wills in their deck.

my basic philosophy for multiplayer games is that at least 1 player should be playing spirit with 3 ATOW...and if it's a 4 player game, at least 2.

Yeah agreed. Yes its a bad card, yes you can lose a game from it. But with 4 players you should always have a Test Of Will ready for this card and if you don't, you might lose the game, but guess what? You lose games in LOTR LCG.

Look, Dood. Not everyone is playing Spirit with three tests of wills in their deck.

exacty my point. People can not blame FFG because some players suck so badly at the game. You can not just make a deck and go "this is my deck now I should be able to play it vs any quest" While the need to make quest specific decks is less than before it is still a big part of what this game is. Also when you play multiplayer, you are not buliding say 4 deck, your building ONE get played by four people. if you are just taking your existing deck and palyign it with a mate.. then again you simply doing it wrong. You can not just stubonly say "i wana play it my way" you have to use strategy in your deck building choices.

FFG can not be responsible for terrible players.

I like that you have a strong opinion and are so willing to display it. I also quite enjoy that you're flat out wrong and are willing to display it also.

You're saying that EVERY deck in 4 players should be running spirit sphere because Test of will is the only way to play the game.

Well. If that WERE the case, then that would be FFG's fault. To design a LCG with 4 spheres yet making just one of them paramount would be a design blunder of the highest order. (And at one stage I actually think this was somewhat true)

The decks I am playtesting have 2 with Spirit and test of wills obviously. And Dwarven Tombs to fish them out as I recognize they are the best situational cards there are.

Most of the suggestions on how to handle this would have the players in a board situation where I would put it to you, you have already won.

This game is all about surviving the first 4 turns with limited allies and other help. Once you've achieved that often times the players will have enough assets available to solve the puzzles they are faced with

This quest doesn't allow that. In Normal mode it has multiple ways to cut you down in an efficient and ruthless manner. On your first turn once the 4 encounter cards have been added to the Southron Companies you'll be facing 20+ threat.

You can beat that, but over 2/3rds of your characters will be questing to get to the 20+ range

It's just mathematics, _NOT_ a strategic choice. Nor does understanding the math make me "terrible at the game" or "suck"

Now after you've dealt with the 20+ threat, Ithilien road is probably still the active location (I have seen it cleared once by some lucky Rohan Shenanigans so far) So the 5-7 enemies in the staging area are ALL coming out at you. 4 of those have an attack of 5. If a Spider popped he has an attack of 8-9 this round so you better have a meat shield.

Good decks (and Gondorian shield) can get you through this round But most of these enemies will still be there for the beginning of next round. You simply don't have the characters to spare yet to be able to attack them (Boromir helps here)

So it begins, You're already neck deep in dangerous foes and you still have to quest a significant portion of your forces as each card revealed has 3-4 threat. OR even better it's Southron support bringing 4 more Harad enemies (which will either be the archers bringing down a rain of unmitigated damage or the elites who will strip away your defences by making immediate attacks) Or as the title of this thread notes at some stage watcher will pop and you'll cop say 8-15 threat, depending. (there's already a lovely sprinkling of Doom 3 cards in there already. basically you're heroes will start falling Turn 2 or with luck turn 3 and then the power curve shifts and your forces are annihilated a turn or two later.

So, at the moment I am treating your posts somewhat with disdain, I am speaking from experience (and in this world that is the thing I have come to respect the most) and you good sir? You're speaking out of your A**

Have a lovely evening.

Sidebar. I would expect such difficulty from a level 9 quest. THIS my friends, is supposedly level 4.

You're saying that EVERY deck in 4 players should be running spirit sphere because Test of will is the only way to play the game.

no that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that quests require strategic deck building and choices that are not constrained by personal preference, thematic ideals or limited by small card pools. I am saying that if you have a quest with a treachery that will instantly loose you the game .. that si NOT game breaking or even a problem, as all you need to do is build your deck to be able to handle it.. in this case by adding a strong spirit splash. Saying, "i do not play sprite and this quest is unbeatable" is just ridiculous. It would be like saying I suck at baseball, but I refuse to use a baseball bat.

If it was a conundrum like Sleeping sentry I would agree. But unfortunately that's not the case.

There are other treacheries that are just as bad. (Southron Support) and that comes in multiple copies.

In one test game I got to use test of will 3-4 times but still lost. It's just brutal

You're saying that EVERY deck in 4 players should be running spirit sphere because Test of will is the only way to play the game.

no that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that quests require strategic deck building and choices that are not constrained by personal preference, thematic ideals or limited by small card pools. I am saying that if you have a quest with a treachery that will instantly loose you the game .. that si NOT game breaking or even a problem, as all you need to do is build your deck to be able to handle it.. in this case by adding a strong spirit splash. Saying, "i do not play sprite and this quest is unbeatable" is just ridiculous. It would be like saying I suck at baseball, but I refuse to use a baseball bat.

That what i love about HON and NM quests: you must ot use you brain. strategy and really build up synergy decks to be able to win. Yes yes use your brain and your partners.

No, your not allowed to share any information at all. All cards and all things like Denathor looking at the encounter deck or quest effects and stuff are 100% hidden choices. Your not even allowed to mention the card names that you are going to use in a play. What makes this co-op experience so great is that so much is based on trust with your partners and unlike many co-op you can not have one player "controlling" the game. Basically all infomation apart fomr what si revealed on the table to is hidden and illegal to talk about.

Here are the Table Talk rules from the Core Set:

So, you are allowed to share information - nothing prohibits that - you just can't read from a card nor can players name a card.

Nothing here says you can't hint at what you have, though ("I have a wizard friend that can enter play," for example).

Look guys the point Again, is not whether this is a beatable quest. It is brutal and fun but troy has hit what I am trying to say on the head.

He is right. Most of the advice showering in here is completely out of context. How are we supposed to strategically quest or play sneaky debuff secrecy decks when you start off with an average of 20+ threat against you and the engagement costs of all enemies is 0

Please go try this thing before you start telling us we just need to build better decks.

And yeah let's bring back my original question. Who playtested this and thought it appropriate to rate it 4 out of ten difficulty.

And I am not attacking FF. This wouldn't bother me if it weren't completely out of character with the card effects and rating system of the rest of the game

Ps thanks dain!

Look guys the point Again, is not whether this is a beatable quest. It is brutal and fun but troy has hit what I am trying to say on the head.

He is right. Most of the advice showering in here is completely out of context. How are we supposed to strategically quest or play sneaky debuff secrecy decks when you start off with an average of 20+ threat against you and the engagement costs of all enemies is 0

Please go try this thing before you start telling us we just need to build better decks.

And yeah let's bring back my original question. Who playtested this and thought it appropriate to rate it 4 out of ten difficulty.

And I am not attacking FF. This wouldn't bother me if it weren't completely out of character with the card effects and rating system of the rest of the game

Ps thanks dain!

Like I said, it is not too difficult to get 20+ points during the first furn into the quest.

Some other thoughts which might be helpful:

- Thalin is very useful in this quest. He gets 3 ATT when you play with Dain and he kills the bats before the can do any damage.

- obviously Erebor Battle Master can help you so much in this game

-Light the Beacons can be played on turn 2 (even on turn 1, if you use the Hobbit synergies). Helps to reduce the mass of enemies. That's indeed a bit situational, but if it hapnes that you get Goof Meal and LtB in your starting hand, using a mono spirit deck, you could play this card on turn 1, send eough characters to the quest that it doesn't hurt to much, engage all enemies and kill most of them.

I don't think that a difficulty of 4 was given for the 4 player modus. The game is designed for 1-2 players (where II is certainly beatable) after all and should be designed accordingly. I completely understand why you're frustrated, perhaps you should simply change some of the card effects. Like every player raises his threat by the amount of characters he sent to the quest?

If it was a conundrum like Sleeping sentry I would agree. But unfortunately that's not the case.

There are other treacheries that are just as bad. (Southron Support) and that comes in multiple copies.

In one test game I got to use test of will 3-4 times but still lost. It's just brutal

That is indeed a card that they should have worded differently. It's not working in a 4 player game. Out of the Wild might help, perhaps with a (Hobbit?) secrecy deck.

I appreciate the input lepto we actually were replaying this recently for the first time since we got it and beat it which is what prompted me to start this thread. Three player game and Our layout was actually gimli, thalin, battlemaster, etc and an entire deck dedicated to threat reduction and treachery cancelation with a side of healing.

The decks were great. Designed to battle quest if not to beat that specific scenario

Who was playtesting this with any number of players and thought this was easy? Has anyone here beaten this quest the majority of the time they played it with any deck setup? If so please explain in detail

So I just won a 4 handed game. Thalin killed 3 of the bats, Palantir got used quite often, Eleaonor cancelled some Blocking Wargs. Fortunatly both Southron Supports were dealt as shadow cards early in the game. The rangers took out some of the 4 threat locations, a Sneak Gandalf destroyed one of the Mercs. Beregon (with UC) and Dain were my defense bulwark, and A Very Good Tale filled my ranks with dwarves. Erebor battle Master (who was in my tactics deck) quested with 5 ATT, Gimli with 7 (got the Haradrim Elite on turn 1 and let them attack undefended). Sword that was Broken pimped my WP during stage 3 (plus i had all three objective rangers and Gandalf). Stage 4 was quite easy with Light the Beacons in my hand. Didn't get a single copy of A Test of Will. I guess I was lucky that the treacheries didn't pile up so Eleanor could handle them (but Palantir helped me to make my quest decisions; also: Palantir + Baramirs Ring = 7 HP for Glorfindel!). Took me five turns to complete the quest.

Edit:

Oh, and that Lampmaker cancelled one surged Blocking Wargs on turn 2!

Heroes:

Thalin, Gimli, Beregond (tactics deck)

Ori, Thorin, Dain (dwarf deck)

Aragorn (lore), Boromir (leadership), Mirlonde (Gondor deck)

Glorfindel, Eleanor, Frodo (spirit deck)

I appreciate the input lepto we actually were replaying this recently for the first time since we got it and beat it which is what prompted me to start this thread. Three player game and Our layout was actually gimli, thalin, battlemaster, etc and an entire deck dedicated to threat reduction and treachery cancelation with a side of healing.

The decks were great. Designed to battle quest if not to beat that specific scenario

Who was playtesting this with any number of players and thought this was easy? Has anyone here beaten this quest the majority of the time they played it with any deck setup? If so please explain in detail

Thank you!

Well, it certainly ain't easy. What helped me in my last game was the Palantir. It's really helpful, as it helps you planning your next steps (Southern Support!). Of course you still have to take some risks, but the dwarf synergies alone allow you to use a minimum of characters. Strong Leadership was also very helpful btw, had it in my starting hand.

Another trick I used was Bergond, Spear of the Citadel, Thalin and Fresh Tracks. That way you can kill a Haradrim Elite while it is still in the staging area.

I was able to defeat Ithilien in solo mode at a rate of 60 percent. I used Beorn as a hero and new Boromir to boost Celador's WP. Beregond was left as my defender. Explored the Ithilien Road and tried to take out the enemies one by one afterwards.

Compared to AoO I think Ithilien is harder in solo mode, while AoO is still a bit harder in two player mode. But AaO feels better scaled to multiplayer and it offers you some player cards with great synergie effects. If i had to rate ithilien I'd give it an 7-8. It becomes a lot harder with more players though.

The game is designed for 1-2 players (where II is certainly beatable) after all and should be designed accordingly.

5+ point for your remark leptokurt

Best of Ithilien is that according to the story of the quest you are supposedly ambushing the southerners. What a wonderful ambush when you get your ass kicked by one of the treacheries or enemies of this "witty" quest. Brilliant commanders we have in the gondorian armies.

The game is designed for 1-2 players (where II is certainly beatable) after all and should be designed accordingly.

Finally someone else saying it IT'S A 1-2 PLAYER GAME.

I've been saying this until I was blue in the face from the day the game came out. Still even so I think that the quest base is so large now that you can find something for all formats now. This is what I was saying before in my first post. The game is large enough now as in has a lrge enough pool of quests, that FFG can start to add quest that are designed for less used formats, Some you will find 4 players much harder, and some ust right and some easy as hell. I do not think it is unreasonable of FFG to build a quest now and then for any given formate of the game. Just because a scenario sucks in solo, doesn’t mean it sucks in 2 player, just cause one sucks in 2 player doesn’t mean it sucks in 4. Sure people want to play every quest in their group, but I would rather have the occasional targeted quest than generic ones. I mean we have what... 32 quests now and counting. Surely there are some that are good in that for your formate and play style. Every single one dosn't need to match someones personal tastes.

No, your not allowed to share any information at all. All cards and all things like Denathor looking at the encounter deck or quest effects and stuff are 100% hidden choices. Your not even allowed to mention the card names that you are going to use in a play. What makes this co-op experience so great is that so much is based on trust with your partners and unlike many co-op you can not have one player "controlling" the game. Basically all infomation apart fomr what si revealed on the table to is hidden and illegal to talk about.

Here are the Table Talk rules from the Core Set:

Players are permitted and encouraged to talk to one another during play, and to work as a team to plan and execute the best course of action. Players can discuss anything they would like, but they cannot name or read out loud directly from cards in their hand, or from cards that they have seen but the rest of the players have not.

So, you are allowed to share information - nothing prohibits that - you just can't read from a card nor can players name a card.

Nothing here says you can't hint at what you have, though ("I have a wizard friend that can enter play," for example).

This is probably its own thread, but I'll just be quick, if it takes off I'll move the posts it a new thread.

Still this is not how I interpret this ruling. For starters using code words or "a wizard might show up and then leave to help us in this phase" imo is a sneak way to dodge the rules. While it isn't technically cheating it is breaking the spirit of the rules. I mean you may as well just say the card name, this is obviously cheating. There are quest cards that say "reveal to current player" and others that say "reveal". Why is this distinction there is you can just tell everyone what card you are peeking at in the deck, it is there due to the 2nd part of the sentence you quoted that I underlined. So Denathor, for example is not a group decision. The Hunt for Golum 2a is NOT a group decision. Only the first player can look and choose the cards and is NOT allowed to discuss them.

I interpret the "discuss anything" text as anything to do with PUBLIC cards.

This idea is what really elevates this game into something special. It returns the game to a more CCG like feeling where you can have your partner do some amazing combo to t=save the day, right out of nowhere. A real "wow that was awesome" moment. I also think this is hidden information severely reduces the "analysis paralisis" that can occur in the game, greatly speeding it up and completely removes "leader syndrome" that all co-op games can suffer.

Still what it dose that is great beyond all this is form trust between players. Something I feel is so thematic and makes the game a billion times better. You need to trust your friend is playing well, not tell him how to play well. As a team you have to have each others back and both be good players. This is like falling backward and having your mate catch you, trust, honour and ability makes a fellowship and playing the table talk rules correctly fosters all of this.

The table talk rule and its restriction on communication is probably the best game design in the entire game, it amazes me people pay ignoring it.

So I just won a 4 handed game. Thalin killed 3 of the bats, Palantir got used quite often, Eleaonor cancelled some Blocking Wargs.

And exactly how long did this take you to get a working deck and a good run? Not long I woudl think, maybe build it and then 1 or 2 games to tweak the deck.. if that.

Still more importantly how GREAT did it feel when you won.. you achieved something right... that was fun yea? Do you come away from quest you crush with that same feeling ?

No, your not allowed to share any information at all. All cards and all things like Denathor looking at the encounter deck or quest effects and stuff are 100% hidden choices. Your not even allowed to mention the card names that you are going to use in a play. What makes this co-op experience so great is that so much is based on trust with your partners and unlike many co-op you can not have one player "controlling" the game. Basically all infomation apart fomr what si revealed on the table to is hidden and illegal to talk about.

Here are the Table Talk rules from the Core Set:

Players are permitted and encouraged to talk to one another during play, and to work as a team to plan and execute the best course of action. Players can discuss anything they would like, but they cannot name or read out loud directly from cards in their hand, or from cards that they have seen but the rest of the players have not.

So, you are allowed to share information - nothing prohibits that - you just can't read from a card nor can players name a card.

Nothing here says you can't hint at what you have, though ("I have a wizard friend that can enter play," for example).

This is probably its own thread, but I'll just be quick, if it takes off I'll move the posts it a new thread.

Still this is not how I interpret this ruling. For starters using code words or "a wizard might show up and then leave to help us in this phase" imo is a sneak way to dodge the rules. While it isn't technically cheating it is breaking the spirit of the rules. I mean you may as well just say the card name, this is obviously cheating. There are quest cards that say "reveal to current player" and others that say "reveal". Why is this distinction there is you can just tell everyone what card you are peeking at in the deck, it is there due to the 2nd part of the sentence you quoted that I underlined. So Denathor, for example is not a group decision. The Hunt for Golum 2a is NOT a group decision. Only the first player can look and choose the cards and is NOT allowed to discuss them.

I interpret the "discuss anything" text as anything to do with PUBLIC cards.

This idea is what really elevates this game into something special. It returns the game to a more CCG like feeling where you can have your partner do some amazing combo to t=save the day, right out of nowhere. A real "wow that was awesome" moment. I also think this is hidden information severely reduces the "analysis paralisis" that can occur in the game, greatly speeding it up and completely removes "leader syndrome" that all co-op games can suffer.

Still what it dose that is great beyond all this is form trust between players. Something I feel is so thematic and makes the game a billion times better. You need to trust your friend is playing well, not tell him how to play well. As a team you have to have each others back and both be good players. This is like falling backward and having your mate catch you, trust, honour and ability makes a fellowship and playing the table talk rules correctly fosters all of this.

The table talk rule and its restriction on communication is probably the best game design in the entire game, it amazes me people pay ignoring it.

where as this is the most important part to me: "Players are permitted and encouraged to talk to one another during play, and to work as a team to plan and execute the best course of action. Players can discuss anything they would like"

you can't make the best plan if you can't discuss what you'd like to play, commit, etc. either way, no real tournament system for this game, so it really doesn't matter.

you can't make the best plan if you can't discuss what you'd like to play, commit, etc. either way, no real tournament system for this game, so it really doesn't matter.

well commuting to quests, tactics in handling engagements, blocking and attacking assignments, talkign about game threats, about who has card draw priority etc etc is all able to be done using public information. There are plenty of tactics and discussion to be had with out violating these rules.

But for example, you are not allowed to discuss hidden information in your hand, this is directly in the rules, nor can you discuss hidden information form the encounter deck, this is also in the rules. A surprising upshot is this is that you can not say cast a unexpected courage and then go "who wants this" and discuss where it gets placed. This is hidden information, says right there in the rules you quoted. You have to trust your partner and accept his risk assessments, working as a true team not as extensions of each others will.

you can't make the best plan if you can't discuss what you'd like to play, commit, etc. either way, no real tournament system for this game, so it really doesn't matter.

well commuting to quests, tactics in handling engagements, blocking and attacking assignments, talkign about game threats, about who has card draw priority etc etc is all able to be done using public information. There are plenty of tactics and discussion to be had with out violating these rules.

But for example, you are not allowed to discuss hidden information in your hand, this is directly in the rules, nor can you discuss hidden information form the encounter deck, this is also in the rules. A surprising upshot is this is that you can not say cast a unexpected courage and then go "who wants this" and discuss where it gets placed. This is hidden information, says right there in the rules you quoted. You have to trust your partner and accept his risk assessments, working as a true team not as extensions of each others will.

if we follow the letter of the law, you are incorrect. the rules simply say that one cannot read off of a card nor name any card in a player's hand.

there is nothing that (literally speaking) says you cannot ask: "who would most benefit from a readying attachment?" that neither names a card nor reads directly off of one. for all we know, someone is just asking a hypothetical question and doesn't even have UC or Cram or Fast Hitch in their hand!

this has been debated for ages and there has been no official ruling on it - probably b/c it doesn't really matter.

And exactly how long did this take you to get a working deck and a good run? Not long I woudl think, maybe build it and then 1 or 2 games to tweak the deck.. if that.

Still more importantly how GREAT did it feel when you won.. you achieved something right... that was fun yea? Do you come away from quest you crush with that same feeling ?

I got there quite quickly, to be honest, after seriously building four decks. The most fun is when some of your planned strategies come true during the game, like Palantir/Lampmaker or, my personal highlight, Light the Beacons during turn 2. Just want to add that of course a four handed single player game cannot be compared to a real four player game. Have to admit that I shared all informations with myself, so the game was much more plannable.

Anyway, it still felt good!