John Constantine is also from Ukraine. Coincidence? I think not.

I present you with the world's first multisphere card ever!

How the multisphere would work?

It's both spirit and tactics at the same time, has both printed icons, may be played with resources of both spheres in any combination.

The main question is, do you need to use at least one resource of each sphere and provide a resource match for both, or can I play that card in a mono-sphere spirit deck?

The reason is the former would make multi-sphere a restriction and because of that you can have the card be a little bit more powerful, while the latter would make the card easier to play so being a advantage so the card need to be a little bit weaker then a mono-sphere card.

" may be played with resources of both spheres in any combination ".

Stadistics are overpowered. Silvan Refugee is 2wp and 1 cost and only 1 hit point. In adittion, it had the restriction about discarding other character. This ally has not any restriction, it only has bonus, more than 3.

Do you realizes that he enters play attached to a quest card and stays there until that quest card is beaten, only then entering play under your control? You lose a resource with a chance of him not entering play if you can't quest through. And, ehm, for his effect to be effective ( ), you need an engaged enemy, which is not usually a healthy practice. Also, quest stages are usually beaten during the quest phase and before enemies engage you, so that enemy of your will probably be from one of your previous turns, already issuing you some beating before you damage him with this ally.

Regardless of the trickiness of actually getting him into play, I agree with Mndela that the card is way undercosted. Even without looking at the other stats, 3 direct damage alone is a lot . The only other allies that deal direct damage are either in tactics (and the cheapest one, Galadhon Archer, only deals 1) or the expensive Longbeard Orc-Slayer and core Gandalf. And for 1 cost in Spirit? Man.

I like the overall idea of an ally that attaches to a quest card, though.

And all alies you compare that deal damage, deal it immediately , and within much wider array.

This one will deal damage only when you advance the quest stage, and only if you have an engaged enemy at that time. It's a gamble, and if it'll cost 2 - this gamble simply wouldn't be worth it in most situations.

Mmmmmh, interesting

Oh yes, this is good!:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/184250-multiple-defenders/?p=1725402

A hero (or ally) that can replace or add his defense after the shadow card from enemy is revealed, as a response, if other character was defending. Very good idea.

And all alies you compare that deal damage, deal it immediately , and within much wider array.

This one will deal damage only when you advance the quest stage, and only if you have an engaged enemy at that time. It's a gamble, and if it'll cost 2 - this gamble simply wouldn't be worth it in most situations.

For stats reasons previously mentioned above, I think 1 is undercosted for the card even *without* a direct damage effect. Just considering the HP, only half of the 2-cost Spirit allies have 2 HP, and certainly none of the 1-cost ones (of which, admittedly, there are only three). Plus a Silvan Refugee's worth of willpower as soon as he enters play, plus 1ATK and DEF (none of the 1-cost Spirit allies have any ATK either)? Plus the -1 quest point effect? Barring the need to preserve my last Spirit resource for A Test of Will or something, I'd pretty much autoplay this every time it hit my hand (even knowing that it might be a while before he actually comes under my direct control), which I think makes it a little too powerful. It's really just the constellation of good effects he has. And if the direct damage didn't happen to hit, I'd just kind of shrug; I don't consider it the gamble you make it out to be.

Anyway, I've said my peace on this card, and again, I like the idea of an ally that comes into play when a quest card is completed.

Your problem is that you compare him to other allies without taking into account that the need to be attached to the quest and explored is a part of his cost, it's not just 1 resource.

You can usually tell if a sidequest is going to be completed on a given turn. Thus, you play him under that sidequest on the turn you will complete it. (Plus, if the quest only needs 1 more progress token, you can complete it instantly.) It's like having an ally that costs 1 and says "on the turn you play him, you get to deal 3 damage to an enemy engaged with you but you can't commit him to the quest".

No, you usually don't. I've had enormous amount of games when we struggled to clear a single quest stage at all.

Nope, it's like having an ally who enters play under the very specific circumstances, and if things don't go the way you planned - that doesn't enters play at all. And he has a specific target for this effect too, which was recently argued as not that viable in another thread.

This guy is OK people. He has lots of restrictions.

He is useless for the first few turns of the game, while you gearing up and dealing with the initial encounter setup that the quest dealt to you. The thing is, the first and second turn are the deal breaker of this game, win or lose situation. This card does nothing here.

His response need a lot of work to have it anything. You need to have a guy with 3 or less HP engaged at the exact time that you travel the quest. So, you engaged, survived one attack, dealt to enemy enough damage so he can die to 3 dmg, then you need to travel hard enough to complete, which some rare occasions can backfire since some treachery/enemy/location can foil your plan. I´d say that 50% of the time you don't actually use his response for something useful.

After that you basically have a 2wp guy that cost 1 less. Great?

This card is cool and interesting. Also OK enough to be played, not even close to be a powerhouse.

Wow I had not seen this guy. I actually really like the design. Similar to The Long Defeat which was spoiled: which for a cost of 1 lore resource allows EACH player to heal 5 damage from among characters he controls or draw two cards when the quest card it is attached to leaves play. Similarly this card is quite a good deal for 1 resource but you need to beat the current quest card to reap any benefits. I think perhaps it should only do 2 damage and should not give the quest -1 progress but other than that I think it is well balanced. Otherwise it seems like a great card, both in design and power level. I for one sincerely hope we do get more cards like The Long Defeat that give us benefits for defeating a quest card. Will make the player side quests more powerful and playable too if you can load various other cards onto them for extra benefits.

I think this card is too strong as is. Tactics has a lot of good cards that can deal with enemies for 1 cost, such as Hands Upon the Bow, Feint and Quick Strike.

If you compare him with those, I would say it is a lot better, safer and more reliable. He even cancel the When Revealed (not sure, the wording is not 100% clear), which most of the above don´t.

This card deserve some nerf. Definitely a cost increase to two, maybe something more. The idea is really cool and flavorful, I like it.

Cost is not just 1. It's an exhaustion of characters with combined attack of 5 or more. A Test of Will only costs 1, without any additional costs.

Well, with Feint you need to deal with the enemy threat, then exhaust enough people to kill, which is generally 2, some tough enemy is 3 guys (sometimes more). You can receive help from ranged, which is a plus. You have to deal with threat, when revealed, archery and engage effects.

Hands Upon the Bow need some setup with weapons or can only kill weak enemies, which is not ideal. Exhaust 1 ranged hero. The main advantage is that you deal with the enemy in staging, so you don´t need to deal with threat, archery and engage effects.

Quick strike is the weakest. You need a really strong guy, so need setup with weapons. Does not deal with engage, when revealed effects and threat. Main advantage is that you don't need to use a ranged guy.

Yours need to exhaust 2 heroes (one with 3 atk, other with 2 atk, can use allies also). Can be used with one guy with attachments (Eomer+Firefoot, Gimli+dmg, etc). It safely deal with when revealed, engage, threat, responses, everything. The cost of exhausting 5 atk is too cheap and easy to do.

Feint is one of the best cards of the game, Pushed Back is much better.

A Test of Will is one of the most overpowered cards of the game. That card is one of the reasons that some treacheries are really, really nasty, since you can easily deal with one card for one cost. There is no other card that compete with that one against Treachery, no competition what so ever.

Feint allows you to deal with an enemy already on the board, who might have been added there by means other than being revealed, + you don't need feint, it's resources, and 5 staning attack at the very moment the enemy is revealed.

Also, my card doesn't discards the enemy, it shuffles him back, so you might as well encunter him again soon enough. And you judge it only by the situation with the clean board. With a clean board it's a no-brainer, with some enemies already around, you'll think twice before spending that 5 standing attack of yours. Also, you might not have exactly 5 attack at the time and you might overspend it with exhausting 6 combined attack.

There is Eleanor, there is "The Door is Closed" or something event that is coming up.

Sure, feint is better in that situation, like Bosses (and many bosses are immune). The other 70% of the time, Pushed is better. You can play both in your deck.

Shuffle back in the encounter is a net zero effect unless the encounter deck is so thin that he for sure is coming back next turn (or even this turn!). If the deck is so thin, then killing the enemy has almost the same effect, since the discard is going to be shuffled. Also, he can be dealt as a shadow card and a lots of really nasty enemies have no shadow effects.

If I have enemies with engaged with me already, I prefer to shuffle the nasty crazy enemy back and deal with my enemies. I don't need more enemies that I have to deal with!

So if instead of Push Back I had feint when I had a enemy "B" engaged with me when I reveal a nasty enemy "A", now I have to deal with the new enemy archery/when revealed/threat/engage effect, feint him, attack to kill (if he is a nasty enemy "A", generally you need more then 5 attack) and also deal with my other engaged enemy. Or I can exhaust 5 attack (two guys, maybe one) to vanish the enemy "A" and deal with enemy "B".

You can safely make it cost 2 and it will still find a lot of spots in decks. For 1, it is crazy good.