Ha! I didn't notice the round ears. My bad.

When I think of Arwen hero, in my mind she is 3/1/2/3 Noldor. Noble. hero with something very special in her text box, as all of the Noldor heroes have. When I'll think of something particular, I'll post here my prototype.

I can think of a custom Gamling , Quickbeam and Narya.This cards can be in Treason of Saruman(official versions,not mine versions ).

Gamling

Cost 4,Spirit,Unique

Rohan.

Willpower :0

Attack:0

Defense:0

Hit Points:1

As long as Gamling is in play,Theoden gains the printed Spirit,Tactics ,Lore and Leadership resource icons.

Ally

Quickbeam

Cost 5,Lore,Unique

Ent.

Willpower: 1

Attack:2

Defense:3

Hit Points:5

Cannot have restricted attachments.Enters into play exhausted.

Action:Deal 1 damage to Quickbeam to draw 1 card and give Quickbeam +1 Defense until the end of the phase(Limit 3 times per round).Quickbeam cannot be healed until the end of the round if you used this action.

Forced:If there are no Hobbits caracters in play,discard Quickbeam.

Forced:After Quickbeam is healed,each player must chose and discard 2 cards from his hand.

Ally

Narya

Ring.Artifact.

Cost 3,Neutral,Unique

Attach to Gandalf.He gains a Leadership resource icon.

Action:Exhaust Gandalf and Narya to exchange a card from discarded pile with the top card of your deck.

Attachment

Lol Gamling.. cost 5, gives you 0. Why would I ever wanna play him? Not to be rude, but I can get three Songs for cheaper and not risking it to go away if Gamling dies.

I like Quickbeam, but I think for thematic reasons, he should be the only Ent who doesn't enter play exhausted, thus you should change his stats I guess.

Like Narya, but I would cost it 3, maybe even 4. This would be a new recursion effect and those are strong. It's essentially a new WotW, less powerfull, but repeatable to the max.

Quickbeam is mega OP.

Lol Gamling.. cost 5, gives you 0. Why would I ever wanna play him? Not to be rude, but I can get three Songs for cheaper and not risking it to go away if Gamling dies.

I like Quickbeam, but I think for thematic reasons, he should be the only Ent who doesn't enter play exhausted, thus you should change his stats I guess.

Like Narya, but I would cost it 3, maybe even 4. This would be a new recursion effect and those are strong. It's essentially a new WotW, less powerfull, but repeatable to the max.

Narya should probably just remove the Leadership icon and I think it would be good enough at 2. It doesn't deserve 3 or 4 because it exhausts Gandalf as well, though I wouldn't be too upset at a cost of 3. It is arguably less powerful than Vilya which also costs 2 since it doesn't bring anything into play for free, but it could also be argued that it is more powerful than Vilya, since it gives you access to cards that are no longer generally accessible. They do such different things, though, that it's very difficult to judge.

Quickbeam is mega OP.

I agree. I say that you either need to set the HP to 3 and Def to 2, or get rid of the bonus defense ability, otherwise with some decent healing, you could draw 3 cards per round and have a 6 defense defender, which is pretty ridiculous. At 3 HP and 2 defense base, you can normally draw 2 (3 if you heal and then damage some more) and have a 4 defense defender, which is still pretty darn strong, but still breakable.

Honestly, though, I think the ability would be best as a response to taking damage rather than as an action to place the damage yourself, especially because just doing the action automatically builds up the Booming Ent as well.

As for Gamling... I really don't know what to say. Sounds more like an attachment than an ally.

Yeah, you're right about Narya from the card you're talking about. Giving Gandalf a permenant resoure icon should cost you a lot.

Plus the ability.

Cost 3.

Yeah, you're right about Narya from the card you're talking about. Giving Gandalf a permenant resoure icon should cost you a lot.

Like... 1? So*cough*ngs*cough*.

Quickbeam with the new Custodian lol

Ngs ?

Yeah, you're right about Narya from the card you're talking about. Giving Gandalf a permenant resoure icon should cost you a lot.

Like... 1? So*cough*ngs*cough*.

That was a pretty awkward "*cough* __ *cough*" joke. I agree with you though.

Ngs ?

So...ngs -> Songs. Songs only cost 1 to give anyone a permanent icon so claiming that it should cost a lot is silly. My point was that the icon does add value to the card and if you get rid of that icon-granting, you help keep Narya more affordable. I certainly wasn't claiming that granting Gandalf an icon is too powerful, but I don't think it belongs on the ring, though the other rings grant an icon, so it makes sense to keep it.

Ah, lol, I mentioned songs myself with the Gamling card. It was silly indeed.

My opinion on the card is actually the same as yours joezim007. It does add value.

I edited my cards.Are better?

I edited my cards.Are better?

A bit.

Gamling's effect still seems better on an attachment, but if you really want it on an ally, you should give him something to do besides die. Just give him a few stat points. Also, his ability should probably specify that it works on Theoden hero, just in case they come up with a Theoden ally. I'm not sure what effects it would really have on an ally.

For Quickbeam I would have rather had reduced numbers than a raised cost. I like that you made the "damage = defense" part of the action and limiting it to the end of the round instead of making it static, so that you can't just damage him and leave the damage there to be an uber defender forever, but the combo with a decent healer still stands as I mentioned it, though now it is actually stronger. You can damage him for 3, then heal him for 3 immediately, and he'll be a 6 defense, 5HP ally, plus you'll get 3 cards. I think this would be better:

Quickbeam

Cost 3,Lore,Unique

Ent.

Willpower: 1

Attack:2

Defense:2

Hit Points:4

Cannot have restricted attachments. Enters play exhausted.

Action :Deal 1 damage to Quickbeam to draw 1 card and give Quickbeam +1 Defense until the end of the phase (Limit 2 times per round).

Cost of 3 makes him way more affordable and still a good discount, 2 Defense and 4 HP limits the power I was talking about before. Also limiting the action to 2 times per round and limiting the defense boost until the end of the phase instead of the end of the round makes it far more balanced. Now he maxes out at 4 Def, which is probably the highest an ally should be able to get without help. Even a 5 or 6 cost ally shouldn't have the power you gave him.

As for Narya, I'm still on the fence between 2 and 3 cost. 3 means people shouldn't consider it overpowered, but when compared to Vilya, I'm still not sure it's more powerful. I would accept 3 cost though.

I edited my cards.Are better?

A bit.

Gamling's effect still seems better on an attachment, but if you really want it on an ally, you should give him something to do besides die. Just give him a few stat points. Also, his ability should probably specify that it works on Theoden hero, just in case they come up with a Theoden ally. I'm not sure what effects it would really have on an ally.

For Quickbeam I would have rather had reduced numbers than a raised cost. I like that you made the "damage = defense" part of the action and limiting it to the end of the round instead of making it static, so that you can't just damage him and leave the damage there to be an uber defender forever, but the combo with a decent healer still stands as I mentioned it, though now it is actually stronger. You can damage him for 3, then heal him for 3 immediately, and he'll be a 6 defense, 5HP ally, plus you'll get 3 cards. I think this would be better:

Quickbeam

Cost 3,Lore,Unique

Ent.

Willpower: 1

Attack:2

Defense:2

Hit Points:4

Cannot have restricted attachments. Enters play exhausted.

Action :Deal 1 damage to Quickbeam to draw 1 card and give Quickbeam +1 Defense until the end of the phase (Limit 2 times per round).

Cost of 3 makes him way more affordable and still a good discount, 2 Defense and 4 HP limits the power I was talking about before. Also limiting the action to 2 times per round and limiting the defense boost until the end of the phase instead of the end of the round makes it far more balanced. Now he maxes out at 4 Def, which is probably the highest an ally should be able to get without help. Even a 5 or 6 cost ally shouldn't have the power you gave him.

As for Narya, I'm still on the fence between 2 and 3 cost. 3 means people shouldn't consider it overpowered, but when compared to Vilya, I'm still not sure it's more powerful. I would accept 3 cost though.

Thank you and sorry for bother you,but I edited again Quickbeam.

Well, let's say the top card of your deck is Grim Resolve. You're playing a deck with Elrond, Gandalf and X. Gandalf has 5 resources, Elrond has Vilya attached and Gandalf Narya. You then play Grim Resolve with Gandalf after questing. Then use Narya and after defending use Vilya again for a massive swing.

In this example, I would say thay Narya should cost more then Vilya, because of it's ability uniqueness. WotW tgus it more powerfull but shuffles instead of picks the top card (which you can play to be card X, like the new Hama maybe), and the Spirit event adds it to your hand and is limited to spirit. Narya is just great with Gandalf and alliws so more tricks.

What would be your view on that, joezim007? Maybe you'll have some better examples, mine is also very situational..

Well, let's say the top card of your deck is Grim Resolve. You're playing a deck with Elrond, Gandalf and X. Gandalf has 5 resources, Elrond has Vilya attached and Gandalf Narya. You then play Grim Resolve with Gandalf after questing. Then use Narya and after defending use Vilya again for a massive swing.

In this example, I would say thay Narya should cost more then Vilya, because of it's ability uniqueness. WotW tgus it more powerfull but shuffles instead of picks the top card (which you can play to be card X, like the new Hama maybe), and the Spirit event adds it to your hand and is limited to spirit. Narya is just great with Gandalf and alliws so more tricks.

What would be your view on that, joezim007? Maybe you'll have some better examples, mine is also very situational..

I still don't know. I still think putting cards into play for free is more powerful than single-card recursion. I think that if you really need to make this card weaker, then specify that it must be the top card of the discard pile rather than allowing you to choose any card in the discard pile. I could potentially see changing the card to make it get shuffled into the deck, but then it doesn't mesh as nicely. I prefer swapping the top cards.

Today is in fashion... Dúnedains!:

I really like the Dunedain Vigilant, however there are many quest cards and unique encounter cards with forced effects that should not be bypassed or the quest can break. For this reason I would suggest the following revision:

Response: Discard Dunedain Vigilant to cancel the forced effect of a non-unique encounter card.

Sure! I thought the same just when i exit from photoshop (and i dont save the original psd file).

And here is our spirit dunedain hero (this time Caleb sure copies me ^^ -would be a pleasure-):

Play only if you control a Hobbit hero.

Attach to a non-unique location. Limit 1 per location.
Response: When attached location leaves play as an explored location, reduce the first player's threat by the attached location's .

Attachment

Unnoticed Travels

Spirit,Cost 1

Condition.

Play only if you control a Hobbit hero.

Attach to a location. Limit 1 per location.

Response: When attached location leaves play as an explored location, reduce the first player's threat by the attached location's .

Attachment

http://hallofbeorn.com/Cards/Details/The-Lonely-Mountain-Location-THOtD

http://hallofbeorn.com/Cards/Details/Great-House-TBoLT

http://hallofbeorn.com/Cards/Details/Zigil-Mineshaft-KD

http://hallofbeorn.com/Cards/Details/The-Brown-Lands-Core

http://hallofbeorn.com/Cards/Details/Gladden-Marshlands-JAtAN

....mmmmh, too powerfull?

I think that since those locations are so few, it wouldn't be too bad. Also, Secret Vigil can easily lower the collective threat of a 3- or 4-player party by as much or more than most of those, I'm not too worried about it. I might agree that it should be 2 cost though.