Grima + Campfire Tales = Deep Knowledge at -1 to both amount of threat gained and number of cards drawn. Might bring Campfire Tales out of more binders.

Interesting thought, probably more practical the more players there are as for solo a 1 time event to draw one card even if it's free is probably not worth the space; would rather put in a different card that I would have hoped to draw instead. Possible side board replacement or something like that if the number of people you play with varies a lot

keys of orthanc, grima, loragorn and the new isenguard cards .... it seems we have another new combo to play with

Regarding Grima and Saruman art... is this the first time we have seen box cover art used on actual cards? Unless I'm mistaken, deluxe sets have always had unique art, although the APs use card art.

Regarding Grima and Saruman art... is this the first time we have seen box cover art used on actual cards? Unless I'm mistaken, deluxe sets have always had unique art, although the APs use card art.

Hmm, I think many of the deluxe expansions do have their art on the cards as well, but restricted just to quest or encounter cards and no player cards.

I like the mechanics of our new "hero" and I'm certainly going to try a Theodred-Grima secrecy deck, but...

I already had a hard time to accept that we got an evil objective ally which really makes replaying every scenario including Alcaron as an ally an uncomfortable task to me. And now I shall have a hero that is going to mindrape the Rohan king? And I am kind of helping him? :o

Grima is not "bad" by himself. He is corrupted by Saruman. And he wasn't like that all the time. Like designer said, he didn't got promoted to his position by giving the bad advice. He just lacked willpower to resist. He was just a human caught in a bad circumstances, and would it be otherwise - he would prove extremely helpful to Rohan and stuff.

Well, I don't buy this "just a human caught in bad circumstances" excuse.

Anyway, my solution for dealing with Grima and my conscienc is that I'm going to "accidently" let through one enemy attack undefended just before I finish the scenario.

I like the mechanics of our new "hero" and I'm certainly going to try a Theodred-Grima secrecy deck, but...

I already had a hard time to accept that we got an evil objective ally which really makes replaying every scenario including Alcaron as an ally an uncomfortable task to me. And now I shall have a hero that is going to mindrape the Rohan king? And I am kind of helping him? :o

Grima is not "bad" by himself. He is corrupted by Saruman. And he wasn't like that all the time. Like designer said, he didn't got promoted to his position by giving the bad advice. He just lacked willpower to resist. He was just a human caught in a bad circumstances, and would it be otherwise - he would prove extremely helpful to Rohan and stuff.

Well, I don't buy this "just a human caught in bad circumstances" excuse.

Anyway, my solution for dealing with Grima and my conscienc is that I'm going to "accidently" let through one enemy attack undefended just before I finish the scenario.

I care not of what you buy and what you don't buy. It's not an excuse, it's how things are if you follow the origins. Isildur got his mind twisted by simple holding the ring for few moments, and who is Grima compared to him? And Grima have been under the influence of the Saruman far too long.

The problem I have with the Grima hero is that, from an author's perspective, the whole point of the character was to turn evil and remain evil afterwards. He's even physically described as "evil" (typical of classic epics), he's short, ugly, pale, creepy, etc. We know that he wasn't always evil, but we always see him as such, and thus there's just nothing to base this hero on or something we can draw inspiration from. We know nothing about him before he allied with Saruman and he's just irrelevant at that point in the story. There's just no real justification. It's like having a Bill Ferny hero card. Sure, he wasn't ALWAYS evil, but it's just pointless to make a hero card of him. The character's whole purpose was to turn to evil. Plus, be sure that we will see Grima enemy cards and objective cards (we already do), so that only creates confusion and incompatibility.

The problem I have with the Grima hero is that, from an author's perspective, the whole point of the character was to turn evil and remain evil afterwards. He's even physically described as "evil" (typical of classic epics), he's short, ugly, pale, creepy, etc. We know that he wasn't always evil, but we always see him as such, and thus there's just nothing to base this hero on or something we can draw inspiration from. We know nothing about him before he allied with Saruman and he's just irrelevant at that point in the story. There's just no real justification. It's like having a Bill Ferny hero card. Sure, he wasn't ALWAYS evil, but it's just pointless to make a hero card of him. The character's whole purpose was to turn to evil. Plus, be sure that we will see Grima enemy cards and objective cards (we already do), so that only creates confusion and incompatibility.

Grima was King's Counsellor. Ofc he was irrelevant before his corruption, lol. You can start making sense any time now.

Also, I draw a lot of inspiration from redemption, and Grima is filled with redemption theme. Turning back to light, to his people. It didn't happened in the books, but in LotR LCG a lot of thing that didn't happened in the books happens. Characters with inner struggle are those who invoke most of the sympathy, not the bold straightforward good guys in shining armor, which LotR is filled with as protagonist. It's good to have someone with hard fate at my side.

Wow, and I had thought that rudeness in these forums had died.

Of course he wasn't irrelevant in Rohan. But he was pretty irrelevant in the big picture at this point. None of his deeds were recorded or remembered. Anyway, i don't dislike the Grima hero, I think he can be thematic when you think speculatively, but still a little counter-intuitive.

The timeline of the game has been pre-LOTR since the beginning (as stated in an early, early article that I'm too lazy to look up!). As such, I have no problem with Grima as a hero. Honestly, I'd not have a problem even if this was the LOTR timelime.

It opens up design space, creates interesting, different kinds of heroes, and is just plain fun. This is a game, after all.

I hope to see "different" sorts of heroes in the future, as well. Whether it's an Ent, Eagle, or Istari hero - something we've not seen before but would be really cool. I'm not as well versed in the lore as many of you here, but I'm sure there are other cool "bad" guys that we could stretch our imaginations a bit and have fun with as a hero!

The designers of this game have changed 3 times. They aren't beholden to what's been done in the past - though, some seem to think they are (there was a discussion about deluxe boxes only having 1 neutral card earlier, since the other two deluxe boxes did. that doesn't always have to be the case and we shouldn't assume that it will always be that way).

Either way, I'm really excited about this cycle, more than I ever was for HoN!

Theoden was a good king partly because Grima was a good counsellor. Rohan exists in it's state not because Grima did nothing for it in his lighers yers. Pretty big picture to me. There are less relevant for big picture characters amongst the lotr lcg heroes.

Regardless of whether or not I will play Grima, I salute the designers (Caleb and Matt) for making such a flavorful card. Everything we've seen so far from VoI is full of story and based on what they did with Black Riders, I expect this cycle to be a story focused flavor homerun. Mechanically, who knows? But the choice of Grima as hero fills me with confidence that the designers are going to shake things up a bit which I think is a good thing. It would be easy for them to keep churning out scenarios and player cards that are basically re-flavored copies of what we've already got, but it's clear they don't want to do that. I'm really excited about this cycle.

Regardless of whether or not I will play Grima, I salute the designers (Caleb and Matt) for making such a flavorful card. Everything we've seen so far from VoI is full of story and based on what they did with Black Riders, I expect this cycle to be a story focused flavor homerun. Mechanically, who knows? But the choice of Grima as hero fills me with confidence that the designers are going to shake things up a bit which I think is a good thing. It would be easy for them to keep churning out scenarios and player cards that are basically re-flavored copies of what we've already got, but it's clear they don't want to do that. I'm really excited about this cycle.

hear, hear!

We know that he wasn't always evil, but we always see him as such,

Couldn't you make the same argument for Denethor? A lot of people seem to like him, even though by the time we meet him in the books he is pretty much at wit's end and making bad decisions for his kindgom. We know he wasn't always so, and for many people *that* is the "true" Denethor, the noble steward of Gondor, rather than the character who is depicted in the Lord of the Rings narrative.

We know that he wasn't always evil, but we always see him as such,

Couldn't you make the same argument for Denethor? A lot of people seem to like him, even though by the time we meet him in the books he is pretty much at wit's end and making bad decisions for his kindgom. We know he wasn't always so, and for many people *that* is the "true" Denethor, the noble steward of Gondor, rather than the character who is depicted in the Lord of the Rings narrative.

Except that Denethor we saw being good. Plus we know his deeds and efforts to defend Gondor. He has a reputation that we can actually justify. We know pretty much nothing about Grima except that he was chief counselor, which is not completely irrelevant, but it's nothing that Tolkien cared enough to explain. Any "good" version of Grima is almost entirely based on speculation, which is fine (i'd like to see Alatar and Pallano as well, and that'd be pure speculation), but again, it's like Bill Ferny. Its not that we know so little about him or his past, it's the fact that everything we know for sure about him is how evil he becomes, so that makes Grima a bit weird, there's no real purpose in making him a hero IMO.

That said, I still like him and I think he can be really thematic. This is just my initial impression.

A big part of the theme and fun of this game is that you are creating your own adventures in the LOTR universe. Having a hero like Grima only adds to the idea that you are writing your own stories and blazing new territory. A hero like Grima gives me hope for alternate ring-bearers, something I liked in the Decipher game and hope to see here too.

A big part of the theme and fun of this game is that you are creating your own adventures in the LOTR universe. Having a hero like Grima only adds to the idea that you are writing your own stories and blazing new territory. A hero like Grima gives me hope for alternate ring-bearers, something I liked in the Decipher game and hope to see here too.

A big part of the theme and fun of this game is that you are creating your own adventures in the LOTR universe. Having a hero like Grima only adds to the idea that you are writing your own stories and blazing new territory. A hero like Grima gives me hope for alternate ring-bearers, something I liked in the Decipher game and hope to see here too.

Yes that what i like about this game is alternative story… We play so many times story of Frodo in other games (Decipher game a good example) is boring to play it again . That Why i love Lotr lcv. Alternative ring-Bearer we will have in saga for sure. I believe fellowship sphere from saga expansion will bring a lot of alternative ring bearer.

If you do not like Grima, do not use him- problem solved.

I will play him for sure, always trying to make an alternative story- that is the best thing about LOTR LCG- there are many cards and you only use those cards you want.

I hope so much we will get a scenario of guarding Isengard. If Saruman made alliance with Rohan and Gondor, Mordor would mostly attack Isengard for sure.

Aww, thank you Caleb for this new faction, it is awesome

No matter how we alternate the story - Grima is going to end up as the bad guy. VoI tells a story that is set before LOTR that is unrelated to what is going to happen. Nothing a player does here is going to change anything that happensin the books (ok, if you don't catch Gollum or you let Frodo die, infact it does - but that is not the kind of story one wants to tell their grandchildren). Only if you play Black Riders, you can influence the story of LOTR

Like I said, I'm certainly going to use Grima, but I wished they would have made a real hero (Erkenbrand!) instead. Grima could have been used as an ally.

To Leptokurt: DONT BE AFRAID! WE WILL SEE ERKENBRAND! HE MUST BE IN THIS CYCLE!

I hope he will be in the 1st AP of the Ring-Maker (but he won't be as we will probably see spirit hero).

But honestly, I am bored with heroes like Beregond or spirit Glorfindel. For me ability is more important and much more enjoyable than stats. I hope Erkenbrand/Gamling and another awesome characters wont be new Glorfindels, but new Grímas (not in meaning of traitor).

I look forward to making a Rohan deck using Eowyn and Grima and titling it "star-crossed lovers"

Man, just look at Grima's hair; that male pattern baldness just exudes his limitless manliness and testosterone. A true symbol of Rohan's strength and valor.

I'm personally ok with the idea of Grima as a hero since I don't care too much if there is some inconsistencies between the game and the LOTR lore. In the end, it remains a card game. I do understand though the people that find the idea a little bit too far stretched.

One thing I would have like however, is to see an artwork that would have represented a younger Grima with a more heroic stature. I find that he really looks like the villain he is meant to become on the current artwork of the card. But in the end, it is not a big deal. Like I said, I will still play him, even though his ability will require a little bit more coordination with the other players I play with than I'm used too.

Everytime i see Grímas artwork, I MUST look at that place without hair (I do not know how to call it).

Am I the only one?

I personally was surprised to see Grima, but I think it is a very intriguing and thus good choice I really like how Caleb actually admits that he reckons not all the fans being to happy about this decision, but still decided to go through with it. I believe the game is in the right hands when it comes to flavour at least.

Also I do like Grima's ability very much, although I have not made my mind up concerning the Doom mechanic. It seems to bear some inherent danger of corrupting the game balance between Solo and Multi play. As has been mentioned before, in a multiplayer session it might be quite dangerous to make too much use of the doom cards, whereas in a well-built solo deck it might mean having access to overly cheap but powerful cards.

Even so, I am looking forward very much to this cycle and the first Deluxe Expansion to kick things off and test & experience the new mechanics

I prefer Master of Lore than Grima. The only diference is to pay 3 resources instead increase 3 threat level, and with Master of Lore you loss 1 card from hand (himselve) instead hability of other hero.

What do you prefer to loss?:

a. 3 resources and 1 card (Master of Lore option)

b. 3 threat level points and 1 hero's hability (Grima option)

....

Grima's option is good after 3 rounds: in 3 rounds Master of Lore recover his resources but also you raise 3 threat level points (3 rounds, of course)..., so Grima is better, but anyway: 3 resources is better than the other 1 hero's hability?