Jump to content



Photo

New LOTR:LCG developer


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 wojo

wojo

    Member

  • Members
  • 99 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 06:31 PM

 I am sure most of you visit BGG's forum for LOTR:LCG as often as this forums but just in case someone missed it:

Aidyn Newman aka Feonix (creator of several custom scenario for the game including one of the best according to the list on BGG : The Culling at the Barrow-downs) accepted a position with Fantasy Flight Games as an Associate LCG Designer with a main role bing working on LOTR:LCG. Here is the link to the announcement:javascript:void(0);/*1352961754813*/

I have not played any of the scenario created by Feonix but quick glance at The Culling at the Barrow-downs showed me that he has grate ideas (ex: objectives guarded by a specific enemy not random card, will power as defence against wight's attacking). In any case I am looking forward to the things he will bring to the game.



#2 Rapier

Rapier

    Member

  • Members
  • 510 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:33 AM

 Any chance of his custom scenarios getting a pod release now he's hired? That would be pretty cool.



#3 wojo

wojo

    Member

  • Members
  • 99 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:53 AM

 I thought abut the same question actually but unfortunately it would not work as you need to mix custom encounter cards with original (core) encounter cards so it would not work in POD format. Actually this is the main reason why I didn't try them as mix of printed (proxies) cards and regular seemed messy. Although I have to say that I am tempted to do it with the Barrow scenario.

Maybe we will get core ideas of his scenarios as a regular expansion.



#4 Shiv@n

Shiv@n

    Member

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:05 AM

Rapier said:

 Any chance of his custom scenarios getting a pod release now he's hired? That would be pretty cool.

They would have to make new illustrations since they are not "official" and most probably taken from around the web ! But the mechanics can still be usable.



#5 CJMatos

CJMatos

    Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:23 AM

wojo said:

 I thought abut the same question actually but unfortunately it would not work as you need to mix custom encounter cards with original (core) encounter cards so it would not work in POD format. Actually this is the main reason why I didn't try them as mix of printed (proxies) cards and regular seemed messy. Although I have to say that I am tempted to do it with the Barrow scenario.

Maybe we will get core ideas of his scenarios as a regular expansion.

 

Why not? They just need to do the custom encounter cards and in the quest card make mention of the encounter sets needed to play the quest. 

 

It is like a quest card from an Adventure Pack (it uses his own encounter deck and some of the expansion released before) Ex: The Hunt for Gollum AP quest uses:

The Hunt for Gollum encounter set (comes with the AP)

Journey Down the Anduin encounter set (comes with Core)

Sauron's Reach encounter set (comes with Core)

 

It's just needed to say in the quest card an rules that may come with it that it uses some encounter set from Core, Khazad-dum, HoN, etc….

 

I don't see why it cannot work in PoD format. 

 

Massing at Osgiliath and Battle of Lake Town don't use any but they could (especcially Battle of Lake Town if released after both the Hobbit saga).


Carlos José Matos


#6 jjeagle

jjeagle

    Member

  • Members
  • 362 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:57 AM

 The issue is mixing POD cards in a deck with non-POD cards. 

The cardstock is different enough for them to be readily distinguishable from each other (even if sleeved, I think).


"I have no help to send, therefore I must go myself."


#7 CJMatos

CJMatos

    Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 04:03 AM

jjeagle said:

 The issue is mixing POD cards in a deck with non-POD cards. 

The cardstock is different enough for them to be readily distinguishable from each other (even if sleeved, I think).

 

Cardstock means the material use to build it?

 

If my assumption is correct, why is that relevant? Every card is faced down in the encounter deck, so you do not know which one will be revealed unless you touch it or is the difference noteable simply by looking to it?

 

PS: I'm writing withou the cards with me….


Carlos José Matos


#8 John85

John85

    Member

  • Members
  • 264 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 04:22 AM

CJMatos said:

jjeagle said:

 

 The issue is mixing POD cards in a deck with non-POD cards. 

The cardstock is different enough for them to be readily distinguishable from each other (even if sleeved, I think).

 

 

 

Cardstock means the material use to build it?

 

If my assumption is correct, why is that relevant? Every card is faced down in the encounter deck, so you do not know which one will be revealed unless you touch it or is the difference noteable simply by looking to it?

 

PS: I'm writing withou the cards with me….

POD cards use a different cardstock and (if I remember correctly) are printed by a different printer. Also, I believe, POD cards are a bit smaller. So yes even when turned-down the POD set  would be distinguishable from the normal sets.



#9 Feonix

Feonix

    Member

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 07:48 AM

Oh, hi there. 

I was literally just browsing the forums to see what people are looking for in new Lord of the Rings scenarios when I stumbled across this thread. I am truly humbled!

Anyway, yeah, it's me. I haven't technically started at FFG yet, but I really hope to stay active within the community (forums and what not). I can't talk a lot about what FFG has planned for Lord of the Rings and I certainly don't want to get in trouble for chatting too much, but suffice it to say I'll be working on some very cool stuff.

As for my custom scenarios, it's sad, but I think the chances of them becoming official scenarios is pretty slim. I can raise the subject of re-making them as PoD scenarios, but it might take some heavy convincing, since they already have their own plans and all. That being said, I would *love* to see Bandits of Chetwood & Culling at the Barrow-downs as official scenarios, not to mention my cycle of Battle of Dale scenarios that I didn't get the chance to finish.

Either way, I'm super happy to be working on Lord of the Rings, and I'm totally flattered that this thread even exists.  I hope you guys enjoy the future of Lord of the Rings: the Card Game, and let me know what kinds of things you hope to see!

 



#10 CJMatos

CJMatos

    Member

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:31 AM

Feonix said:

Oh, hi there. 

I was literally just browsing the forums to see what people are looking for in new Lord of the Rings scenarios when I stumbled across this thread. I am truly humbled!

(…)

As for my custom scenarios, it's sad, but I think the chances of them becoming official scenarios is pretty slim. I can raise the subject of re-making them as PoD scenarios, but it might take some heavy convincing, since they already have their own plans and all. That being said, I would *love* to see Bandits of Chetwood & Culling at the Barrow-downs as official scenarios, not to mention my cycle of Battle of Dale scenarios that I didn't get the chance to finish.

(..)

 

As for the first part, keep looking that we are going to keep posting our opinion and wishes. You shouldn't be humble because we talked of you. We should be thankful to FFG hire some one that likes very much this game and has proven himself as a good quest designer….

 

In regard of the second part, I have played once the Culling at Barrow-downs scenario in Lackey program, if I'm not mistaken… It was great in all aspects (design of the quest, the game experience). I will keep praying (even i'm not religious) to them becoming at least PoD….

 

Keep up the good work and gives a lot of new experiences in this lovely game… 

 

PS: I will put FFG as THE reason to my bankrupt, if it happens (joking)


Carlos José Matos


#11 Shiv@n

Shiv@n

    Member

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:53 PM

Feonix, I can only congrat you again for your new job.

If anything is important, it is to keep the good work with the game.
If I can give FFG an advice about it : don't let the forum and its members down !!
- FFG official members should take part in the thread to give some "mini-spoilers" or just answer and participate to discussions.
- At least FFG should answer the rulings questions from the forum.
- FFG should keep advertising the game with good news.

 



#12 richsabre

richsabre

    Tea Drinker of the West

  • Members
  • 4,835 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:41 AM

congrats- not to make this thread about that again, but i agree with the points Shiv@n makes….id also like you to stick around (if not for anything else it would be cool to have an official ffg member posting regularly) but no worries if not - you do have a job to do after all

rich


My Deviantart profile. Infrared Art http://richsabre.deviantart.com/

My Portfolio http://richardbyers.portfoliobox.me/

 


#13 Rapier

Rapier

    Member

  • Members
  • 510 posts

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:44 AM

Feonix said:

Oh, hi there. 

I was literally just browsing the forums to see what people are looking for in new Lord of the Rings scenarios when I stumbled across this thread. I am truly humbled!

Anyway, yeah, it's me. I haven't technically started at FFG yet, but I really hope to stay active within the community (forums and what not). I can't talk a lot about what FFG has planned for Lord of the Rings and I certainly don't want to get in trouble for chatting too much, but suffice it to say I'll be working on some very cool stuff.

As for my custom scenarios, it's sad, but I think the chances of them becoming official scenarios is pretty slim. I can raise the subject of re-making them as PoD scenarios, but it might take some heavy convincing, since they already have their own plans and all. That being said, I would *love* to see Bandits of Chetwood & Culling at the Barrow-downs as official scenarios, not to mention my cycle of Battle of Dale scenarios that I didn't get the chance to finish.

Either way, I'm super happy to be working on Lord of the Rings, and I'm totally flattered that this thread even exists.  I hope you guys enjoy the future of Lord of the Rings: the Card Game, and let me know what kinds of things you hope to see!

 

 

In reguards to POD expansions, isn't it the case that they cost very little to make, since people pay for them then they get printed? I.e. the design costs are most of the money that FFG has to put up. The main reason not to release them as POD is if FFG are planning to use the same concepts later on.

 

The barrow downs for insntance could make a deluxe expansion + cycle, using it on a POD might not be the best use of the location. However in that cycle, you might be able to get your quest worked in.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS