A hero with 0 starting threat has to have a pretty substantial drawback. The idea is that you can go secrecy (obviously) and other players have to keep the enemy off your back by making sure you don't need to engage, or by increasing their threat. It's harsh, but certainly not crushing, especially considering his 0 threat.
In a non-Hobbit deck you run Gloin or Gimli, good to go.
+1 for each discarded card would warrant cost increase of 1, but I prefer it being +1 for each instance of cards being discarded, as it requires more effects being triggered to fulfill the ultimate goal.
+1 for each discarded card would warrant cost increase of 1, but I prefer it being +1 for each instance of cards being discarded, as it requires more effects being triggered to fulfill the ultimate goal.
How often do you discard multiple cards by a single effect, apart from Erestor (who does not help this ally at all).
Some encounter cards can make you discard crazy amount of cards. To prevent this ability from being unrestricted and from having things like +15 wp, she needs to trigger per card discarding instance.
Sure, but it's pretty hard to abuse a card like that by hoping a particular encounter card from a particular quest comes into play.
A deck that is built for it will get her to 5 WP every turn without trouble. But I guess that's the idea.
That's the point, the card is designed for discard-heavy decks. I don't want players to hope for big discard encounter cards, I want players to work for that willpower.
I also don't want cards like these to suddenly give you +30 wp and draw you 3 cards
A hero with 0 starting threat has to have a pretty substantial drawback. The idea is that you can go secrecy (obviously) and other players have to keep the enemy off your back by making sure you don't need to engage, or by increasing their threat. It's harsh, but certainly not crushing, especially considering his 0 threat.
In a non-Hobbit deck you run Gloin or Gimli, good to go.
That's the point, the card is designed for discard-heavy decks. I don't want players to hope for big discard encounter cards, I want players to work for that willpower.
I also don't want cards like these to suddenly give you +30 wp and draw you 3 cards
Also you could specify that only a player card effect's discard can trigger this ability.
Edited by joezim007With Protector of Lorein it's pretty clear, because you trigger it separately each time for every card you discard, so you'll get +1 willpower each time you trigger it.
I could, but then it would remove the satisfactory of those rare-rare ocassions when encounter deck indirectly gives you some advantage
I've been thinking of how to improve the Hobbit-secrecy style of play, as I find it very fun but just not that strong. I think a Smeagol hero would be a good and thematic way to make Secrecy more powerful. The main problem with Secrecy, as I see it, is that you get kicked out of it very early and end up with a bunch of overpriced cards, so my ideas with Smeagol try to address that.
His main downside is that he's neutral, which gives me a bit of flexibility in giving him a strong ability.
I thought of a couple different versions, let me know what you think.
This one is a little crazier:
First one is too strong. His threat cost (in hobbit deck) is 2 (0 in campaign?) and he gives you 2 resources when your threat is low. Moreover, as the first card you play has secrecy 1 he can always use his resources, which is OP (but I guess you didn't mean that). His abilities are all fun, but overall I think they are too strong. The second version is crazy. I can't say if it's strong or weak without playing him, but he looks really interesting. Unfortunately he wouldn't work in some scenarios like Assault on Osgiliath, where there is only one quest stage
I find that concept pretty interesting, but to my taste, he's doing too much on his own.
A note on the lore side of things. Smeagol should wear the Hobbit trait. Once he will be released as a hero and he doesn't, I'll eat my hat!
Wow, very good ideas Seastan, and pretty thematic. Good good...
I have a question. If you were to use boons/treasures like Glamdring, Anduril or Arkenstone what cost would you give them? It would be nice to play them outside the campaign, but current cost (0 for treasures and 2 for +2 attack and special rule for Glamdring, for example) is really low
I kinda like the first one, but he seems too powerful. The second one is just weird. Not sure if I'd ever play it.
Thanks for the feedback. Yeah the first one is very strong, and that was kind of the idea. You can give Secrecy a lot of bonuses before it will be on par with some other archetypes (at least for solo), in my opinion. It's really tough when 3 of the hobbit heroes (Frodo, Fatty, Spirit Pippin) who all have a mechanic around raising threat.
Spirit Merry (Fixed): Combat Action: Exhaust Pippin to return an enemy engaged with you to the staging area.
I like the relic idea, but it still allows you to have one super strong card, even if it's unique I would always run 2-3 of them. Maybe they shouldn't cost resources, but require you to defeat boss enemies (6+ hp) or finish location with victory points. But that would be scenario specific...
even if it's unique I would always run 2-3 of them
You wouldn't. It says "1
Relic
per deck", and if you put in 2-3, it is no longer 1
Relic
per deck
Oh, that is a very cool idea. "You cannot play this card unless you have at least 2 VP in the victory display" or something like that. There are enough side quests and player cards worth VP to make that work. It is kind of how Keen as Lances already works. Interesting...
even if it's unique I would always run 2-3 of them
You wouldn't. It says "1 Relic per deck", and if you put in 2-3, it is no longer 1 Relic per deck
Maybe reword to "1 Relic card per deck" to maybe clarify that you're don't mean one type of relic per deck.
even if it's unique I would always run 2-3 of them
You wouldn't. It says "1 Relic per deck", and if you put in 2-3, it is no longer 1 Relic per deck
Maybe reword to "1 Relic card per deck" to maybe clarify that you're don't mean one type of relic per deck.
It's redundant. Limit 1 Relic per deck means exactly what it says: no more than 1 card with Relic trait can be in a player deck at the same time.
even if it's unique I would always run 2-3 of them
You wouldn't. It says "1 Relic per deck", and if you put in 2-3, it is no longer 1 Relic per deck
Maybe reword to "1 Relic card per deck" to maybe clarify that you're don't mean one type of relic per deck.
It's redundant. Limit 1 Relic per deck means exactly what it says: no more than 1 card with Relic trait can be in a player deck at the same time.
Well koriakin97 apparently misinterpreted it, so it may be wise to reword it, though that's also what the FAQ is for, right?
It just one person. People make mistakes all the time, even in places where rules are as clear as day. The "Limit 1 Relic per deck" limiter works just as any other limiter currently existing in the game, I see no reason to change that.