yeah but the reason is not prowess, or is it? People still want to keep adding prowess to everything, I think that's a dangerous thing to do, then you'd need to up the resources and characters also, look at what Decipher did to LotR, in the end you just get a 50 prowess Sauron...

okay, here goes: Shadowfax: cool! definite yes Radagast : cool! but I'm not too hot on the wolves, not thematically, and not game-technically. In Darkness: sure thing Great Goblin : cool! I go with latest version too (hazard limit, not the plus prowess). But I disagree with the untapping, otherwise ...

Actually I'm not too thrilled about this card. It creates more combo's between nazgul attacks and other creature strategies, that's fine, and it's nice thematically, but mentioned categories don't need any buffing up, do they? And if it's about the following nazgul, then just make it about the nazgu...

interesting situation I hadn't thought of before, if you play an ent ally, then your opponent can play AP's on you too, that's right! hmmm. And of course opponent doesn't know that you are playing FW Rada when he constructs his deck, so Rada could face AP's when he's with his Bird, that doesn't feel...

That one's fine too, but for general purposes of course the first one (any ap may be played on company after defeated attack) is better. I had thought of that Wellinghall clause too, but then I was wracking my brain to think if there weren't any other allies that could be played at Wellinghall. Are ...

interesting proposal Marcos, then you actually want your huorn to die...since the Huorn doesn't make it for playtesting, I'd say why not? Try wording it like this: any awakened plant creature may be played on a company that has defeated an awakened plant attack in the same movement-hazard fase. [bec...

well, not sure why he mentions the 'one or two of these attacks', how's it gonna be more than 2 attacks then? you can't duplicate DuT, did we not mention that on no.3 proposal? Surely you wouldn't want both attacks cancelled by tapping? about the huorn ability, of course you can add 'any AP can be p...

Or the sheer utility of The Grey Hat

I always understood it to be undefeatable, because you can beat the strikes prowess but there's no body-roll nor do you get mps for it, nor is it places out of play. But a simple non detainment would solve that and would be better, funny and thematic though it might be :wink: Anyway, the fact remain...

huh? you mean like when? I've played rings with every FW, just not at tourneys, but then they all suck at tourneys. Try Celeborn as a never refusing Pallando's apprentice with a shadowmagic ring and hounds of sauron every turn, that's cool....

Ah, I see you removed the 'keyed to site' clause from no.2, that actually makes it a lot better, yes this could work, actually it could be very strong indeed. But how about the detainment attack from Ent in Search, it can't be defeated can it? So this Treebeard is going to talk you into eternal empr...

okay, I'll check them out and post something tonight. Just for now about Jamie's Waiting Shadow/Lost in Wildernes, I think it's cool, but with very limited use, so if we are talking about only 3 slots for the AP's I think it could be put to better use.

No we do not understand 'useless' differently, we just set the bar higher/lower to which point the use of a card has any real meaning. Of course I agree that we should strive to keep all cards playable and thus always diversify, but what about cards that are virtually never played? Besides, with Bar...

Okay, you win but you know what I mean.
So AtEF is standard in you hazard portion/sideboard vs. minion? good to know.

yeah, that's true. Ah, a challenge! :wink: . But how serious do we have to be about this requirement, that the old one must maintain its use? I mean, ICE made some earlier cards obsolete as well, and how on earth can you virtualize something like Awaken the Earths Fire without making the old version...