First game played with the new 7 cards!!!

[marcos]

Jambo and me just played a game with the new cards.

general comments:

Awakened plants: strong hazard but not broken, pretty solid as they ment to be
Nature's revenge: way too cool and very thematic
Chocking shadows: excellent booster, the tapping to cancel sentence makes it well balanced
Radagast: He being unique makes him balanced too, the recycling ability is great to keep the stronger trees in hand

Words of power and terror: I didn't played it too much because i couldn't put too much man creatures straight in deck due to all the slots that nazguls occupate, but i did wound Jambo's wizard with an abductor powered by words of terror though never played a nazgul after it...

that's it for the new cards! hope jamie posts his comments too

Btw, i sent Brian an email, let's hope he can have the update available for all of us so we can start doing some more "general" playtest and start with the tourney

Best!
Marcos

[Jambo]

Interesting game!

Awakened plants are good, very good. I'm glad we didn't give them a prowess bonus too, and it's good that Nature's Revenge will give an MP to both minion or hero alignments.

The Nazgul are Abroad is an extremely powerful and versatile card, probably more so than many of us first imagined. We may find that most players don't actually use it to aid Nazgul hazard strategies at all!

Like me, Marcos has realised that TNaA can be used to bolster other strats because many cards use the term "Nazgul" in their game text, even if they're not directly related to helping playing Nazgul! For instance, TNaA can be used to bring in cards like Scimitars of Steel, Helms of Iron, and Two or Three Tribes Present (one that I hadn't spotted!). The latter of these could be devastating if timed right in a creature heavy deck. Once per turn, one of these is completely free of hazard limit. I was perhaps lucky in the game that we played that Marcos opted for a few Rivers as opposed to a few more Man creatures.

One that note - I wanted to check the reason for the difference in wording between Half and Eye Open and TNaA? The former takes 3 from discard. The latter 4 from discard or sideboard which is infinitely more powerful.

The Fate of the Ithil Stone seemed better balanced with a cc@6 for my Wizard followed by a roll of 5 to succeed. I was thinking maybe the roll to succeed should have been modified by the MPs of Palantir you have in play rather than an arbitrary 3 for each. Then the Greater Item Palantiri with 3 CPs would be better than the 2 MP Palantir or Orthanc or Minas Tirith which only impart 2 CPs. Minion players, particularly those playing as Sauron or The Lidless Eye might be well advised to pack a Palantir or two.

Regards Words of Power and Terror, I think the restriction on having to have Nazgul in hand and also not being able to play it same m/h phase is excellent. It's potentially a very powerful card when used with TNaA.

Regards

[Thorsten the Traveller]

but i did wound Jambo's wizard with an abductor powered by words of terror though never played a nazgul after it...

but that was exactly what worried us/me, that you could play WoPaT for free from TNaA just for a little prowess boost....now you wounded him, but any other char would have been discarded.: nice for your Thorin under the Mountain! You both seem optimistic about the cards power, isn't there a little cause for concern then either?

Same for the any nazgul card clause. ToTTP already gives you unlimited hazards anyway, so playing it for free doesn't really mind I suppose, but if you stick it on TNaA, then there are no timing issues involved, you don't have to draw the card, or even stick it in the deck.
Nazgul Abroad might become a staple hazard in any deck, that's nice, but it was intended to give the nazgul-attack deck a boost, not other creature strategies...

good to see the plants rock though! Marcos you played minion then? I'm amazed if the plants work well against hero without strike booster. You need a very early draw on Radagast then I suppose to keep recycling them.

[Jambo]

Yes, I do have concern over TNaA. If I didn't convey that properly in my first post, it's because I put a instead of a lol.

Man hazards may indeed end up being a more popular choice of hazards to use with TNaA than Nazgul will. After all, both myself and Marcos have designed decks utilising this particular facet. However, although I can't speak for Marcos' deck, mine does also cater for Nazgul attacks too. It is worth noting that a pure Nazgul only hazard deck is never likely to work entirely on its own, given that the Nazgul as creatures can only be played at Dark places... Some form of combination will always have to occur.

The big question is maybe why TNaA changed during development from 3 cards from the discard to 4 cards from discard or sideboard? TNaA can also be used from under itself! Maybe some compromise middle ground between the older version and the newer would be more applicable? Remember one can always use the original version yourself. It can't be duplicated and so would prevent your opponent! (however, if they've got 3 of the virutal version in their deck, they're very likely to play the virtual version first!)

Furthermore, whilst I don't see any real issue with it being able to help Scimitars or Helms, I do foresee issues with Two or Three Tribes Present being so readily available. I did win our game, but I'm sure if Marcos had traded his Rivers in for more Man creatures, I would have been doomed.

Still, that's what this testing is all about. After the tournament we will be able to make any necessary alterations if cards appear out of whack.

[Bandobras Took]

I also built a hazard strategy on that idea.

Having tried a few times to run Helms/Scimitars non-Virtual, the timing can be brutal. Not only that, but because these are permanent events, they can work against you as well (if you're using them for men but your opponent's running orcs, watch out).

Two or Three Tribes is a debatable one because it only lists Nazgul as an exception to cards it affects. Overall I'd prefer it if cards which didn't require Nazgul were out.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

I agree, the phrase 'with the word nazgul' is sloppy anyway. If Eowyn were a hazard, I could play here under TNaA

[Nerdmeetsyou]

I don't like such kind of cards anyway...
cards that refer to non-gameterm words on cards...

maybe we find another way to make the nazgul are abrough work in another way... without makeing it more usefuller with other cards than the nazgul stategy!

[Bandobras Took]

Nazgul is gameterm; it's a keyword. I just don't think it makes sense to include hazards that only mention Nazgul in order to exclude them with TNAA.

[Jambo]

I agree with Bandobras, but other than just agreeing with you, does anyone have a elegant way to solve this issue?

If it's just this one card, then perhaps it just gets added to the exceptions?

Cheers

[Thorsten the Traveller]

just did a quick search using the spoilers at dutch council site, and these are the hazard-events that have 'nazgul' in game text.

Fell Beast
Fury of the Iron Crown
Morgul-horse
Morgul-knife
The Nazgul are Abroad
The Pale Sword
Words of Power and Terror
Black Breath
Helms of Iron
In Great Wrath
Long Dark Reach
Out of the Black Sky
Scimitars of Steel
Two or Three Tribes Present
Wraith-lord
Turning Hope to Despair

Most of these purely deal with a nazgul strategy, except: Fury, Helms. Scimitars, Three Tribes, Hope. Morgul Horse and Long Dark Reach are already excluded.
Of these, I wouldn't concider Scimitars/Helms a big problem. Sure, you can play a bunch of nazgul perms, wait till you draw Nazgul Abroad, and then play 3xScimitars/Helms. If you include 3x TNaA then your slot advantage is gone, only you have a timing advantage, but it is not that big I guess, you usually have alot of nazgul in the deck so chances to draw Scimitar without having a nazgul perm are small. Of course you don't have to draw/keep it in hand, and it's no HL, but that's the whole point of the card anyway.
Nevertheless, interacting with Fury and Three Tribes can make it dangerous for man-hazards, as Marcos has already testified...

I doubt anyone would consider Hope a problem?

Of course, some of these are begging to be virtualised, as has happened with Words of Power, so that might create whole new issues. Personally I don't like WoPaT coming from Nazgul Abroad, but hey it's a nazgul theme-card, better change the prowess boost on this card.

In sum I would propose to only exclude Two or Three Tribes, and leave the text for the moment. Having to deal with alot of Fury's in a game is tough too I can tell you, but it's a very nazgul-thematic card, so it would be harsh to exclude it.

People, start packing your dark quarrels and flatter a foes!

[marcos]

i think that there are not major problems with 2 or 3 tribes and Nazgul are abroad, after all, how many times you will get to have tons and tons of creatures in hand in order to make a "creature-rain"... I think that very few times... Maybe you think i'm wrong, but hey, i already playtested it and i can tell a bit of my experience here

Nazgul is gameterm; it's a keyword. I just don't think it makes sense to include hazards that only mention Nazgul in order to exclude them with TNAA.

completely agree with this

[Jambo]

Ah Fury if the Iron Crown. I don't think a unique card should ever be this east to play; it's unique for a reason! However, this could be easily fixed:

The Nazgul are Abroad V:
When this card is played, take up to four cards from your sideboard or discard pile and place them face-down with this card. You may play non-creature non-unique hazards placed with this card that have the word “Nazgûl” in their game text (except Long Dark Reach, Morgul Horse and Two or Three Tribes Present) as if they were in your hand. Once per turn, a card played this way does not count against the hazard limit. Discard if there are no cards with it, or when any play deck is exhausted.

Of course we should wait until after the tournament to make any final decisions.

Marcos, why wouldn't a creature rain be possible? Three TNaA is all you need, with a ToTTP under each one coming from the sideboard. For a creature rain, you don't stick to the creature minimum and don't include cards like River.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

Well it depends, doesn't it? you don't always need tons and tons, if you have a company with HL 2, like big guy plus two hobbits, then 3 creatures is already enough to get good benefit from ToTTP, more so because you can play other hazards besides playing 3 creatures, like your river
The thing I like about it is that it gives you a way to deal with the HL-reduction, which is pretty popular nowadays. Unless they can play deeper-shadow or many turns as often as the HL, you can always get creatures through. Or just play it before someone plays Flatter, then the reduction from flatter is moot. So, all in all it might not be bad for meta-game, but it is strong.

[Jambo]

you could always have 3 in deck? They don't need to be on tap so to speak.

[marcos]

The thing I like about it is that it gives you a way to deal with the HL-reduction, which is pretty popular nowadays. Unless they can play deeper-shadow or many turns as often as the HL, you can always get creatures through. Or just play it before someone plays Flatter, then the reduction from flatter is moot. So, all in all it might not be bad for meta-game, but it is strong.

you readed my mind
i think it's good, but it's not broken (just like trees)

Marcos, why wouldn't a creature rain be possible? Three TNaA is all you need, with a ToTTP under each one coming from the sideboard. For a creature rain, you don't stick to the creature minimum and don't include cards like River.

i already made some modifications like that in my deck, might need some testing...