2d edition rules to consider

Errata issued by the CoE, open discussion of candidate rules for errata, and submissions for the Annual Rules Vote.
Post Reply
Logain
Council Member
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm

2d edition rules to consider

Post by Logain »

Below the most important changes to the game ICE wanted to make in Meccg's never published second edition.
What would their impact be on standard or dream card play ? Could such a rule be used in your home games, in your favourite format, in DC, or even in limited ? Discuss !

1. A player may not have more than 2 companies in play.
Pro - Quickens play, reduces snowball effect of a player winning
Con - reduces snowball effect of a player winning, less possibilities in a game for a player succedding in his ressources part.
2. Characters MP do not exist anymore. MPs have been lowered.
Pro - Characters should be a tool and not a result. Less squatting companies, lowers interst of Whctk. There's a post somewherer suggesting that idea for DC already.
Con -
3. There is no limit to the number of characters you can bring into play during an organization phase, other than influence and company limits.
Pro - makes coming back into a game easier, more fun.
Con - Needs #2 i suppose, might make a game less tactical if opponent can too easily come back
4. Site selection for a moving company happens at start of movement phase, not during organization phase.
Pro - covers a rule problem lost somewhere on the forum, quickens play, less lethal as second company can base its destination on first company's success
Con - less lethal as second company can base its destination on first company's success
5. Sideboarding is made easier, for example you can sideboard a hazard when you play no hazard on a company, or a ressource when your company enters a site and plays nothing.
Pro - more possibility to react is welcome on a game
Con - my beloved sideboarding cards will be less usefull
6. Conditions. Short events become events. Long and permanent events become conditions, to be discarded when their effect ends.
Pro - easier to understand, solves some issues
Con - Maybe to complicated to take into account
7. Timing rules - Only counter cards or specific cards may interfere on a previously non counter played card. A counter can't counter a counter.
Pro - simplicity : i never loved chain of effect which only experimented players really understand, casuals are at a loss, some situations are complicated to see or solve
Con - Some love to counter the counter of a counter which countered that masterful move. Counter keyword does not exist (but is the list that long ?)
8. Reserve pile concept – When you want to shuffle cards into your deck you first put them in the reserve pile, and shuffle the reserve pile into the deck only once : at the end of the turn.
Pro - You won't use a card you just shuffled in you play deck, quickens play (especially in DC),
Con - You won't use a card you just shuffled in you play deck

And that's my idea :
10. Avatars are unique, and played before character draft (an avatar draft, or players with the same Avatar do not play each other in a tournament). A main character starts play at his home site and is not shuffled in a deck. Your starting company starts at your Avatar's site.
Pro - less random play (no more games won or lost because of a first turn or late Avatar, or because one player played the opponent's avatar), more themed deck (spells in a hero deck can be used turn 1, Avatar-specific cards are immediately useful...). More game openings (Alatar at Edhellond for exemple)
Con - if the meta deck is Balrog, Balrogs will never play each other in a tourney. Factions earn more MPs when far from Rivendell.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Theo »

I like the idea of (8). Some of the tactical use of putting cards into your deck could be maintained by changing the timing so that the once/turn shuffle occurs at the beginning of each player's movement/hazard rather than end of turn. And maybe the ridiculous Vilya errata can be altered.

I'm not a fan of most of the other changes. In brief:
Complicated company management is one of my top enjoyments of this game, so 1-3 would seem like no fun.
(4) I think would slow play, as it is adding more opportunities to reconsider overall turn strategy. I also don't like the implications that somehow company 2 is able to use company 1 information to decide what they want to do. These guys don't have phones, and in my opinion they *should* thematically be moving at the same time.
(5) I like this proposal's tactical triggering of sideboarding (vs. e.g. Long Bottom Leaf), but I feel like sideboarding already reduces fun (and increases play time). Maybe if the sideboard-accessing cards were all banned (or otherwise restricted to maybe 3 total resource+hazard per deck), I could get behind this change. This would make returning to Havens less of a waste, which I think would be neat. This would also make squatting in general more powerful, which I think would be very not neat.
(6) To the extent that the effects themselves aren't changed, what is the point? Seems like it would require a lot more thought, going through each card for potential changes, to be meaningful.
(7) A counter not being able to counter a counter is a killer for me. I'm generally a fan of giving players options (at a price) for thwarting their opponent messing them up: ideally, every offense should have a possible defense, every defense a possible offense. But I'm not sure what you'd consider a counter.

Mixed about 10:
I'd definitely be against Avatars starting in play, because it removes the "reveal" choice among other reasons (but would be willing to consider players starting the game with a copy in their hand to reduce randomness and avatars not blocking character play for the turn). Any non-random version would obviously necessitate the drafting, or first player would be too advantaged.
I'm against Avatar homesite starts. I might get behind a version with additional balancing caveats (like each or all-but-one character in starting company must be normally playable at the starting site).
The suggested tournament implications seem problematic for organization, and also may discourage avatar diversity. ("I can avoid my hardest opponents by being like them!", rather than the current "If I do what everyone else is doing, my Tournament Points will probably be closer to middle on average.") I'd rather both players have to play without their avatar, or something. Although swapping between hero/minion-targeted decks seems like a greater underlying problem with current tournament rules, in my opinion.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2995
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Bandobras Took »

Even if complicated company management is enjoyable, axing character MPs might open up a wider variety of strategies rather than constricting them.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly. This prompted the backlash erratum that I will link to as soon as I notice it is officially posted. :)

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Theo »

Yeah, maybe I should have pulled the MP one out as separate.

To discuss (3) in slightly more detail:
The one character per turn limit seems advantageous for preventing a lucky/unlucky first turn draw gap. Randomly being able to drop 3 characters for a solid second party versus zero characters on turn one seems like it would overshadow almost all other meaningful strategy, far more than the reference in proposal (10) to avatar drop differences (for some decks at least).

I guess a balanced way to avoid this would be to remove character cards from the play deck entirely, and make them their own separate deck (and probably remove all of the extra restrictions from initial companies to avoid first turn advantage). But this would be less fun for me from the viewpoint of each game with a deck being more similar to the next, reduced strategic tradeoff between safety and exhaust speed, and could cause bigger game delays every time a character is eliminated.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
the JabberwocK
Council Chairman
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by the JabberwocK »

Theo wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:32 pm
I'm not a fan of most of the other changes. In brief:
Complicated company management is one of my top enjoyments of this game, so 1-3 would seem like no fun.
What Theo is really trying to say here is that when I call the game at the end of my turn while enjoying a 12 MP lead, he won't be able to split into 5 companies on his final turn in a desperate attempt to catch up. :P

dirhaval
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by dirhaval »

I am happy to read about the possible changes and eager to playtest them. Here are my thoughts.
Let it be known that some changes can support or modify other changes.

1. company limit
I am not a fan of seeing many companies, which slows the game. However, the opponent can play more on-guard cards.
But it this theme-correct of a Wizard wandering Middle-Earth moving mens' hearts. But what about Ringwraiths
or the Balrog as Flame of Udun? I feel that will leave one company for the player. I can accept a maximum of four companies
and debate against three. Larger companies though wil mean a greater hazard limit and thus more eliminated characters, which
can support the idea of playing more characters each turn. Theoden with 6 body - no armor for him and no tapping to face
that Crebain strike of 6 prowess: Oh rolls a 2 and fails body check, no problem I will play Brand next turn along with Erkenbrand.
Is it brandy if you play Potion of Prowess at Dale? Nevermind. A greater hazard limit will move through the deck faster, which
supports having more characters in the playdeck to use. More characters in a company supports using more items and thus
bear more corruption points, which can offset losing characters MPs as a point source including seeing more mission events
like Pass the Doors of Dol Guldur.

2.Character MPs
It is true that Wizards, in the story, must gain some accomplishment through things or events besides characters. I would like to dicuss the idea
that those MP values stay on the card, but are used as the maximum number of characters than can be played with that company
during the Organization phase, Wizards are set at 4. This will encourage using higher mind characters and not just load a company
with low minders as cannon-fodder. But eliminating these MPs will encourage having no company limit so to find more points elsewhere.
This though will reduce the effectivess of Call of Home, which is find with me since it seems that companies will spread importance around.

3. Characters Brought into Play
I do enjoy using my hazards to eliminate one or two characters especially with Subtelty of Guile. I like to use the idea in #2 about this.

4. Site Selection.
If other things are considered, then I can see this as a good change. Remember the Council of Elrond sending out scouts? Gandalf sent a letter
to Frodo. This change will help with gaining MPs, loss to characters MPs, can eat-up hazards, so you can instead move the second company somewhere else. Other changes must be accepted, like company size, before I can readily accept this change. Sideboarding more hazards than will push me to accept this change. Also with limiting companies, if you have a company composition violation, then that will hurt your "other" allowed company. I like using the meta-game of... moving minions to CvCC heros, then next turn follow-up with the Fell Rider Ringwraith, because you played Roadblock hazards in between, but if you get Roadblock, then the Ringwraith is sent back to site of Origin.

5. Sideboard.
I am weary about the hazards, and resources if you enter "a haven." I am okay with the resource portion if the site is not a Haven. You can though attack with an agent, which will increase their usefulness. Oh, you want to enter Beorn's House just to sideboard a resource? Okay, let my Baduilia attack you. Now, that will wound a character, but again you can play more than one character next turn. I like to open the idea to take the normal half-hazard limit sideboard and apply it to companies: Three companies, so you half-hazard limit for two companies to sideboard two hazards. OR sideboard a second hazard when you play no hazard on a company when you already halved the hazard limit. I can the idea to not play weak creatures just to sideboard a hazard. Who speaks for the trees? Who speaks for poor Orc-Patrol or Light-Drake? The OPLPC (Organisation of the Poorly-Low Prowess Creatures) speaks.

6. Conditions
I like it for the idea of knowing when the effect ends.

7. Timing
I like the "chess" aspect of counters on counters. I think that part of the game truly showcases intellgience of my opponents, I mean players.

8. Reserve Pile
I am bias on this change for my opponents are much better timing their shuffling of cards near the end of their exhaust. This ties in with limiting companies, but you can force your opponent to exhaust because you have so many companies. Does anyone know the maximum number of companies possible for a player? Let me see my character list. Okay a quick check has, Fallen-wizards can have 19 normal 1-mind characters. Use 9 mind rings for 9 or the 30 normal 2-minders, and six more from six spirit-rings on three-mind characters for a grand total of 34 companies: Saruman can control the six 3-minders using 12 DI, and 14 DI of bonuses must be had with the 29 mind of characters: Oracle's Ring x2 and Thrall-Ring x2 bring +10. Ioreth and Halbarad already have 1 DI a piece. So you can force your opponent to draw 34 cards if the rule of no maximum of characters brought into play is allowed. I rather play a drinking game with an elf than have that happen.
But the reserve pile does speed the game, but I want to open the debate to shuffle the cards at the end of the site phase to give a chance to draw a card during the End-of-Turn phase. I feel too that such a change can reduce suspicion of cheating. Oh, you just shuffled a hazard and you next draw you get this hazard to hand no one would start the game with it in the playdeck - how convenient. I like the change as first written.

Overall, this will help /me/ the game have players take more risk of not tapping to face a strike, carrying more corruption, doing more during site phases, and having more fun by allowing the resource player more options to take those risks.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Theo »

the Jabberwock wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:36 pm
Theo wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:32 pm
I'm not a fan of most of the other changes. In brief:
Complicated company management is one of my top enjoyments of this game, so 1-3 would seem like no fun.
What Theo is really trying to say here is that when I call the game at the end of my turn while enjoying a 12 MP lead, he won't be able to split into 5 companies on his final turn in a desperate attempt to catch up. :P
Precisely. What would be the fun of calling the game so far ahead on your turn if there was no chance for seeing your opponent's companies fracture and flounder? :twisted:
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
CDavis7M
Posts: 1625
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:10 am
Location: California

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by CDavis7M »

Most of these changes could be "house-rule'd" (company number, movement, side board). But it seems like the others would require an entire rework (MP, characters played, timing).

I'm a fan of making sideboarding easier. Given that the size of the side board is limited, and that you'd still need to draw the cards, I don't see why access to the side board is so limited. But I am naive.

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk


User avatar
the JabberwocK
Council Chairman
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:46 am

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by the JabberwocK »

CDavis7M wrote: I'm a fan of making sideboarding easier. Given that the size of the side board is limited, and that you'd still need to draw the cards, I don't see why access to the side board is so limited. But I am naive.

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk
Sideboarding shouldn’t be too easy IMO because playing a sideboarded card can have a devastating affect (particularly when you’re grabbing hazards to play against your opponent).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Logain
Council Member
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Logain »

Main problem is that sideboarding at the moment is based on having drawn your Avatar and tap him, or on having Nazguls in the deck.
Rules don't allow for sb without those cards, hence that modification i suppose.

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Theo »

And all of the cards/Balrog player that access the sideboard.
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

User avatar
Theo
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 2d edition rules to consider

Post by Theo »

Now I'm curious where Logain got his list. I recently found this one for the non-santioned Type 1.5 tournament at the 1999 Council of Lorien North American Championships:
1999 July 22, Van Norton wrote:As some of you may know, we are currently in the process of revising MECCG, and this tournament will showcase some of the new rules we are currently playtesting for the revision. The tournament will be run as a Wizard only tournament (hazards and hero resources from any set may be used), with the following additional rules:

* Active Conditions: Characters may not be used as active conditions during the movement/hazard or site phases unless they are in the currently phasing company.

* Calling the End Game: The End Game (or the Free Council) may be called by either player if they have at least 20 MPs. The End Game is automatically called after both play decks have been exhausted (at the end of the turn).

* Characters: Character MPs are ignored (except for negative MPs). You may bring a character into play at a Haven or his home site, regarless of the position of your Wizard. To bring a character into play, you must have enough influence available to control the character.

* Character Draft: The draft is no longer simultaneous. Before the draft, dice are rolled by each player. The high roller choose whether to draft the first character or take the first turn. Once the first drafter is determined, players draft in alternation until the normal requirements are met. Wizards may be drafted, counting as 0 mind characters.

* Company Limit: You may only have two companies. Characters with Await the Advent of Allies played on them do not count against the two company limit.

* Discards: All players must dicard face up.

* Extra Strikes: Extra strikes now give a -1 to prowess *and* a -1 to body. No character¹s body may be lowered to less than 6 by excess strikes.

* Gold Rings: You may tap a sage to test a gold ring. If you test a ring in this fashion, results indicating the One Ring are ignored.

* Influence Attempts: You may not make an influence attempt against an opponent¹s resource unless you have a copy of that resource in your hand, and reveal it for the influence attempt.

* Minor Items: One minor item may be played after entering any site, from the sideboard, hand, or discard pile. Tap a character to play the minor item on that character. Minor items that may be discarded for an effect may not be played from the discard pile, and Star-glass may not be played from the sideboard.

* Movement: You may not use starter movement, and you may only move three regions per turn.

* Reserve Pile: There will be a reserve pile for each player. All sideboarded cards, and any other cards that would normally be shuffled into the deck, go into the reserve pile. Your free discard during the end of turn phase may go into the reserve pile if you wish. After your turn, shuffle your reserve pile into your deck (as your opponent is planning his turn).

* Sideboarding: You may not sideboard into the discard pile or into the play deck. Any effect that normally allows sideboarding a card into the play deck puts that card in the reserve pile instead. When you exhaust your play deck, you may put five cards from the sideboard into the reserve pile before reshuffling. However, you may not remove cards from your deck at that time. Two new ways to sideboard are added. If a company enters a site and plays no resources, you may tap one character in that company to sideboard one resource into the reserve pile. If an opponent¹s company moves and you play no hazards on them, then you may sideboard one hazard into the reserve pile.

* Starting Site: You may start at Rivendell, Lorien, Minas Tirith, or Edhellond.

* Weakest Link Method: This will not be used. Ties will stand, and each player will gain 3 tournament points.
The Character Draft seems like a neat way to balance the first resource player, although not so much for hero vs. minion games. O_o

Morgul-rats become insanely deadly!
It is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world.
One [online community] with hammer and chisel might mar more than they make... Cautious skill!

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”