Thanks, appreciate the quick feedback. I'm really not that interested in tournaments, but I do want to be able to build cohesive and functional decks. I had absolutely no problem buying a second core because 2 of every plot and extra tokens are almost always welcome, lot's of value there still. A third core is difficult because a lot less value than a second as far as I can tell. How essential is it to have 3x vs. 2x of most of the core set cards? Can you still run pretty good decks with 2x core cards and 3x house expansion cards? Also, what would you recommend the next purchases be? Interesting that Thrones 2.0 players use cardgamedb rather a Thrones specific db site? Ringsdb is pretty much the center of the LOTR:LCG universe.

Hey guys, Myself and a friend just recently got into Thrones 2.0. My main game is Lord of the Rings LCG (been playing for 6 years and own almost all content) and I wanted to branch out into a competitive game for a change of pace. Being new to Thrones 2.0 but an old hand to FFG LCGs, here are my questions: 1. The obvious, what to buy when? I already went ahead and bought 2 core sets from the get go because I know how FFG works....whether it's an LCG or X-Wing..one core set is always just half the game meant to be a teaser. Beyond that, I haven't purchased any other content. What order do you guys recommend buying content? How necessary is a third core set? I normally don't mind buying 2 but it hurts to have to buy 3. 2. What are some great community resources for new players? I could really care less about tournament scenes, but am really interested in deckbuilding and strategy discussion. Any good blogs and podcasts?...especially for beginners with a small card pool learning the basics? 3. I've been a bit overwhelmed having 8 factions (Lord of the Rings only has 4!). Could somebody describe to me each house in a nutshell, how good they are, what makes them fun to play, and what their downsides are? 4. Any good link threads for this forum with some good indepth strategy discussions for newbies? Thanks in advance.

Cool... looks like I hold a minority opinion. We'll see if I'm correct. Also.... point 5.) The game lost a developer to the new Lovecraft card game. Personally, I'd happily buy into a 2nd edition of LOTR LCG long before I'd spend a single sense on Lovecraft nonsense. Getting pretty tired of seeing that stuff plastered everywhere.

Curious, Does anybody else strongly suspect that LOTR:LCG 2nd edition is right around the corner? Here is my reasoning: 1. Rings is the the last original LCG still standing after Thrones 1st ed. went down a couple years ago. 2. The last LOTR source material saga box is supposedly going to be announced at any time (I"m a little surprised at how long the announcement is taking). 3. The size of the card pool and scenario difficulty curve have reached a point where it has gotten very difficult for new players to jump in and play the latest expansions. 4. Even the condensed FAQ is like 20 pages long at this point. 5. They've been fairly quiet for a while now, not withstanding the release of Sands of Harad... as if they are working on something big? My Prediction: Gen Con 2017 announces LOTR:LCG 2nd edition! I for one would welcome it. There are a lot of substandard card designs (*cough, cough... Steward of Gondor...cough*) and clunky mechanics (*4 players, 1 active location anyone?,) that could be learned from and perfected in a second edition. LOTR:LCG was an experiment that succeeded greatly, and we can already see some lessons learned applied to the design of the new Lovecraft LCG. They've had a chance to experiment with A LOT of game mechanics that could be incorporated into the base game or set up for similar scenario mechanics with more finesse. I also look at how much better designed and more thematic just about every nightmare deck is over it's early cycle predecessors. Discuss

Oh..crap. This is a 2nd edition thread isn't it? ​I only have first edition. Pretty sure in first edition that it's center of square to center of square rather than corner to corner. Lol... Didn't realize that was something that they changed in the new edition (which I have not played yet). No wonder I was confused.

Wow.....I am actually more confused on what has line of site on what "after" reading this thread. I initially came here wondering if that little visual depiction of a wall corner that appears IN the empty space diagonally adjacent to the corner space was enough to justify blocking line of sight on lines traced through the tiny corner. Now I read that objects which have one wall space between them share line of sight only because they don't share the corner????

I've gotten in the habit of carrying bags of red and blue tokens. If a card as ongoing negative effect, I put red token on. If it has ongoing positive effect, I place blue token. I just remind myself to constantly be scanning all token cards to check if they come into play for current phase.

Wait until you play scenarios like Deadman's Dike. I think I had something like 9 ongoing card effects to keep track of at one point. Nothing like realizing that you had a Power of Angmar side quest up 3 turns after you played that Will of the West and thus it was an illegal (but irreversible at this point) action.

Love Master of Lore's stuff.....best blog out there I think. Problem is that he doesn't update much. Has he picked up lately?

Curious, have you played much with side quests? I ask because I used to have trouble justifying putting them in my decks as well. While playing Deadman's Dike, the perfect scenario for experimenting with side quests, I learned how awesome they are. However, I've had a tremendous amount of success with them as they are. My favorite is Double Back.....It's pretty easy to drop it on a round that you are reasonablycertain to get four progress....and that 5 threat reduction per player is legit! I've also gotten good use out of gathering information and scout ahead as well....especially in mirlonde or scry decks. And we haven't even seen the high point yet with the new lore Dunedain!

I have realized for a long time now that the what this community really lacks is good encounter deck and scenario discussion. There are tons of resources dedicated to decks and player cards, and almost nothing to encounter cards. I've always found this odd since the player cards are meaningless without fun scenarios to go up against. I've thought about starting my own blog to deal exclusively with scenarios, encounter decks, and theme....but don't have time. Perhaps you could fill this glaring gap in community content?

Anybody else notice the mistake regarding Spirit Beregond? How does he reduce threat by 2 for two attacks when it's a once per round ability?

Agreed. Another issue with the proposed errata is that it would severely nerf a multitude of decks that are currently viable into uselessness. The most obvious effect of this, would be decks that are currently strong now and unaffected by the errata would only become more ubiquitous because they would have less competition from other viable decks. Basically, everyone would just play Boromir if they wanted to get a high win rate...instead of being able to use a variety of decks. I don't see anything wrong with that. If a deck is so reliant on the card that it will be useless if an errata hits, then for one, the card was too powerful to begin with and finally, that's the very definition of a crutch. We saw Horn of Gondor get nerfed and that was a total surprise (but I feel a thematic win). Very late in the game's life too. I suspect SoG is next on the chopping block. Agreed, the fact that SOG becomes necessary for a variety of decks to be viable means that a variety of decks aren't using more interesting and niche forms of resource acceleration. This actually gets at the problem of just how much interesting practical design space is blotted out by one OP card that becomes the crutch. Sadly, I don't think we will get errata for SOG at this point. They would probably argue that it's too fundamental to the core set decks for new players. My hope is that they learn from this and avoid this problem from the start in LOTR 2.0.

Umm... correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you only use this ability once? ​I thought that this was sort of like Steed of Imladris where is specifices that you discard "a" card to put 2 progress on the quest. I thought that there was a ruling that this meant that this particular steed was limited to "a" discard. ​Wouldn't that be the exact same with Na'Asiyah? ​That's still pretty boss to be able to buff +2 for any 1 attack or defense...especially in the action window after shadows.

​I would also add that thematic is sort of a "meta" value and can be applied to any of the above. For example, I prefer to build trait decks, but I will typically select a slightly less powerful card if it's thematically more satisfying than it's counterpart. ​Thankfully, the current card pool makes it a heck of a lot easier to build and play "thematic" decks of all types nowadays.