I posted the following idea in the Ent deck, but decided to immediately make a new thread for this since it's more likely Caleb would read it

The issue of Wizard heroes has existed since this game began. The main problem this poses is that of the difficulty of design since they'd have to strike a delicate balance between being playable and overpowered. Current ally versions of some wizards, like Gandalf or Saruman, have amazing stats and powerful abilities, but they're often considered "secondary" characters in the game and they're often one-time-use characters per copy (barring Sneak Attack, of course). So the question is, how could they make Istari heroes that are comparable to their ally versions without being overpowered? Should they have lower stats? one-time-use abilities? and so on.

Well, what I thought of (inspired by an idea Shipwreck wrote in the ent thread) is that the "condition" tu run Istari heroes is that they'd have to be "solo" heroes, that is, the only hero you could have in your deck. Since using only one hero means that if you lose it you lose the game, their stats would have to compensate for that. They should have really high stats and awesome abilities to be able to replace their ally versions (without being strictly better) but at the same time they'd have to have really high threat, as much as any other normal deck would have. This makes a lot of sense thematically, since being a wizard is probably the most "dangerous" race to be, since they're the direct enemies of Sauron. They were also, for the most part, lone wanderers, so it makes sense IMO that they should have this restriction of not being able to have more heroes at their side (in solo games at least).

Now, the only one reason I can see for dismissing the idea of making wizard heroes, is that this game so far seems to be focused on "the little people" of Middle earth. Wizards in this game are for the most part represented as occasional helpers and crutches for the rest of the heroes to do their part, so that would be a reason not to make wizard heroes. That's a pretty valid route, though very dissapointing to me (I really want wizard heroes!), but at the same time, when you have heroes such as Galadriel, Elrond and Celeborn (who were in some sense wizards or sorcerers, or at least very powerful magical beings) you really start to wonder what reason do they have to make those and not the wizards.

There's also the problem of uniqueness. If you run a hero Gandalf in multiplayer, your friends will not be able to play the ally version of Gandalf. That is troublesome, yes, but it's also the case with Hobbit saga Gandalf and Core Gandalf, and yet both of those exist. Plus, when you think about the current state of the game and also the future, you start to see that Core Gandalf is becoming increasingly less essential to decks, and to me the only decks that really must include Gandalf are the ones that cannot otherwise reduce threat. This problem will be solved the more effects they make to reduce threat.

The final design problem is the one of spheres. Which sphere would you include each wizard in? Should they make a new "Istari" sphere? To be honest I can't really offer a solution to this, but I still think they can find a way around it. Maybe they could pay for cards of any sphere BUT you can only include cards from up to two different spheres in your deck (you choose)?

The idea of wizard heroes also opens up a lot possibilities. How cool would it be if each one had different characteristics, such as one being better at combat, the other having lower starting threat than the others, the other producing more resources than the other, etc. That would be a very exciting new mechanic to make this game more complete, IMO.

So what do you think? Do you even want to see Istari heroes? Do you think it would be too troublesome to design? Do you not care? Please write your opinions about this and hopefully let's open up some debate and maybe, just maybe, we could inspire designers to make something radically new for this game.

I personally do not have a strong desire to see Istari heroes and still think they would be a designers nightmare. As suggested having only one hero for the deck wouldn't even be that enjoyable for me if only because of how limiting the gameplay options would seemingly be. I'm sure there's more creative minds than me than would be able to design a concept that is workable in the current format but for now I'm content with the single use ally versions

I love the idea. I've personally tried to make the blue wizards into heroes, and it is really difficult. But some of your ideas are really good, such as having only having one hero if you use a hero. Maybe you could have him start out with one or two allies to compensate for having only one hero. Cheap ones, of course. Although, he'd have to have an insane threat cost... At least higher than 20. Hopefully we'll see some good ideas on this thread!

Really difficult think to make it balance…..big headache for designers not sure it worse it…….. Big doubt about it…..

Actually, I never thought having Istari heroes in the game, since they do not feature all too prominent in the books. However, as the card game is not focused on the book's storyline it would be the perfect place to have more Istari action.

I think your approach is very interesting, although I still see some difficulties. Also, creating an Istari sphere would mean there have to be a lot of Istari cards and they could only be playable by the Istari. I'd rather place them in the existing spheres, since they cover the basic aspects of middle earth's characters greatly.

As have been stated by Pharmboys and Glaurung, I do believe it to be a very delicate thing to realise & balance for the designers, so I am not too convinced we are actually going to see them as heroes...

Besides, I still do love how thematic core set Gandalf is...his sudden appearing and disappearing is exactly how he is described to be working in the books

GANDALF (Spirit, 20 threat)
5WILL
4ATK
4DEF
5HP

You can not control other heroes.
During the setup add 3 resources to Gandalfs resource pool and search your deck for 2 neutral cards and add them to your hand. Then shuffle your deck.
Gandalf may spend resources for events from any sphere.
Lower the cost to play Istari allies by 2.
Gandalf has -1[Willpower] and -1[Attack] for each non-Istari ally you control.
Gandalf does not exhaust to commit to a quest.



Gandalf's Staff of Power. (neutral, cost: 3)
Attach to Gandalf. He has +2 [Attack].
Exhaust Gandalf's Staff of Power to:(choose one option) deal 2 damage to an enemy in play, add 1 resource to Gandalf's resource pool or heal 1 damage from Gandalf.

Glamdring (neutral, cost: 3)
Attach to Gandalf. Restricted.
Attached hero gains +1 [Attack] and +1 [Defense].
After Gandalf attacks and destroys an enemy exhaust Glamdring to draw 1 card and ready Gandalf.

Shadowfax (neutral, cost:4)
Attach to Gandalf.
Attached hero has +2[Willpower].
After an enemy engages you, exhaust Shadowfax and spend 1 resource pool from attached hero's resource pool to deal 1 damage to it and return it to the staging area. Then raise your threat by 2.





Maybe stupid but I wanted to share it.

I personally do not have a strong desire to see Istari heroes and still think they would be a designers nightmare. As suggested having only one hero for the deck wouldn't even be that enjoyable for me if only because of how limiting the gameplay options would seemingly be. I'm sure there's more creative minds than me than would be able to design a concept that is workable in the current format but for now I'm content with the single use ally versions

Well, I'm certainly not totally desperate to see them, but it would be really cool, especially if they plan on releasing the Blue Wizards. I still understand if people would not want to see them, since at this point they'd be a new card type in the game, much like the addition of planeswalkers in MTG, which at first I disliked but now I really enjoy.

Legolas18: Yes, the first round would be difficult. That's why I think each of the wizards should have a "Does not exhaust to X" to compensate for the lack of other actions. Some would not exhaust to quest, others would not exhaust to defend, etc. Plus some simple special ability specific to that wizard (maybe one can pay for cards of any sphere, other produces more resources, the other reduces threat, etc.

Scroll Lock: I think they should be made as simple and easy to understand as possible. Something like

Gandalf (25 threat, 4 wp, 3 atk, 4 df, 4 hp)

You cannot control other heroes. Gandalf does not exhaust to commit to the quest. At the beggining of each round, Gandalf produces 2 resources which you can use to pay for allies of any sphere (represents Gandalf's influence among all cultures of Middle Earth).

Radagast (20 threat, 3 wp, 4 atk, 3 df, 4 hp)

You cannot control other heroes. Radagast does not exhaust to attack. At the beggining of each round, Radagast produces 3 resources. At the end of each round, reduce your threat by 1. (Basically he'd be the "secrecy" wizard, and cancels the threat of each turn but not the 3 threat if you're playing RTM, for example)

Another wizard could produce more resources for the number of players in the game, the other could have Lore Bilbo's ability, etc. Something simple and concise yet balanced.

Besides, I still do love how thematic core set Gandalf is...his sudden appearing and disappearing is exactly how he is described to be working in the books

For the other heroes, that is. I'd like to be in Gandalf's shoes and explore the east or Rohan or whatever. Plus he was not like you described him in most of the actual Lord of the Rings! He was with the fellowship for a major part of the journey.

I think a giant threat cost for Istari Heroes is what's needed. So Gandalf might be something like 20 threat cost.

I'm for it! You guys do up some cards from your ideas there and test them out on Octgn.

I like what Scroll Lock is on to with the custom attachments. Remember, Durin's Bane is the baddest big boss we've faced and part of the problem came when he found his whip and sword. Makes sense that a "super" hero would have custom attachments as well.

I also like the thought of Radagast having an army of critters at his command, but that would almost have to be its own special expansion.

I have the Strange Eons card creator, but I have no idea how I would get cards from there to OCTGN... Anyone know how to do this?

I have the Strange Eons card creator, but I have no idea how I would get cards from there to OCTGN... Anyone know how to do this?

http://octgn.gamersjudgement.com/wordpress/lotrlcg/developer-guide/

Ah ha! Thanks.

What about splitting each wizard into 3 hero cards with different abilities or even spheres? You would have to take all 3 cards as your heroes and they would all be treated separately. Losing one card would be like taking a major wound for the wizard rather than a death. As 3 separate cards, each wizard would have plenty of space for abilities and it would be easier to design instead of trying to shoehorn everything into a single hero card.

Hmmm, interesting, it certainly helps with some of the problems, but it poses even more IMO. What would you call all these "parts" Would they be unique? If a scenario has an effect based on the number of heroes do these count as 3 separate hero cards or just one? I don't know, it just feels too weird and abstract for this game. I'd much rather have a 2 sided hero card even though I hate 2 sided cards.

Plus, I don't think there is too much stuff to shoehorn into one hero. The "cannot control other heroes" clause can be summed up in a keyword to save space (wanderer, or soemthing like that), and I feel that the abilities need not to be so complicated. As I said, the only thing they should state is the number of resources the hero produces each round, the "does not exhaust to X", and a special ability specific to that wizard, like "at the beggining of each round you draw an extra card", or "can pay for allies of all spheres", or "if this hero dies return him to play under your control with +1 to all stats" (Gandalf??), etc.

The two main problems with the idea of wizard heroes is, first of all, resource matching. Maybe each could have 2 resource icons, but if there are only 5 wizards there would be combinations that are left out. And the other problem is that they have to somehow replace having 3 heroes, but that is very doable I think.

Hmmm, interesting, it certainly helps with some of the problems, but it poses even more IMO. What would you call all these "parts" Would they be unique? If a scenario has an effect based on the number of heroes do these count as 3 separate hero cards or just one?

And what about Escape from Dol Guldur?

Leadership and spirit Gandalf are going to the DG dungeons to rescue their lore incarnation.

My $0.02:

One major premise of the thread seems to be how to accurately represent the "power" of an Istari in a hero card format and still make him balanced against other heroes. I suggest that the "power" of a character matters little in the end. What matters is thematically scaling them with the other heroes. Example:

Aragorn fights 3x better than Beregond?

Bilbo defends himself better than Glorfindel? (Really?)

I think if Caleb wanted to represent an Istari as a hero it would just be a matter of getting the stats proportioned correctly. Higher than average stats with higher than average threat is common enough. And remember, for as powerful as many people percieve Gandalf to be, I'd bet on Glorfindel in a matchup. He did kill a Balrog and return from the dead too. And the Nazgul soiled themselves on sight of him. The ally Gandalf has stats to reflect his extremely temporary nature.

Distractionbeast: That's also a pretty valid point, and an option that we may still get from the developers. Wizards could just be like all the other heroes, without special restrictions. The thing is, when you look at the ally versions of Gandalf, you see that they are at least much more powerful than regular heroes, and while most of them could be equivalent in power at least to Glorfindel, that still poses an issue of power creep, since now you have 5 new Glorfindels without special restrictions, which is maybe not something Caleb wants to repeat. That's why I think it's better that the Istari should be special heroes with pretty much their own new set of rules. However, if they do decide to make Istari heroes like you said, as "regular" heroes but better than average, I'm all for it, but as most people I was just being careful about the power creep.

Radagast would totally work exactly as-is, except a Lore hero, in an AP with a creature or two for each sphere.

I realy want to see Wizards (istari) as playable heroes.I know it will be hard for FFG to make this but if you make them neutral and have their own resource pool and you can have only one Wizard in your strarting heroes i think it will be possible.

Also they could have high threat value and their attachments/events etc will cost more than normal.They can even give them an attachment that gives them the oportunity to use cards from other spheres.Because that will make them too strong they must add a new rule.For example unexpected courage cost 2,if a Wizard wants to use it he must pay 4 resources insteed of 2.

I have only the core set so i dont know if those ideas can be possible.Also my English are not good i hope you can understand what i am saying.

Hmmm. I wonder how they would do that... Maybe something like "Gandalf must pay one extra resource when paying for attachments," or something like that, but have some really cool attachments to put on him, like Narya and (non-treasure card) Glamdring.

I'd love to see a Saruman hero that can use some of the "arts of the Enemy" against him, but at the cost of increasing threat and some type of corruption effect.

Something cool for that would be like "Exhaust Saruman to cancel the effects of a treachery card just revealed from the encounter deck. Then, choose an enemy in the staging area. Deal X amount of damage to that enemy. Then, raise your threat by X and discard one attachment you control."

Maybe that's too much for one effect, and maybe it's too powerful... But I think it would show that kind of "arts of the enemy" you mentioned, and it would also show his kind of traitorous side as well.

Hmmm. I wonder how they would do that... Maybe something like "Gandalf must pay one extra resource when paying for attachments," or something like that, but have some really cool attachments to put on him, like Narya and (non-treasure card) Glamdring.

And Shadowfax.I bet he will be a travell king