Aragorn and Grima in Breaking of the Fellowship

[Authraw 565]

Here's a puzzle for those of you who like to analyze edge cases in rules.

 

Let's say I'm playing Breaking of the Fellowship in Campaign mode. At the end of the quest, my only remaining heroes are Aragorn and Grima. (Maybe the third hero was pitched to the Balrog in the last quest, or maybe she has Fallen into Evil or something).

 

Who becomes the captive for the next quest? I can't pick Aragorn, because he'll become Fellowship Aragorn in the next quest. I can't pick Grima, because you're not allowed to use Grima in the Treason of Saruman quests.

 

Thoughts?

[Ecthelion III 382]

I'm thinking you have to take a +1 threat penalty and add a hero so he/she can be the captive in the next quest. Just a wild guess.

[DukeWellington 312]

Aaaannnnd the answer IS....... go back and start over.

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

I think you'd have to pick Grima.  Then, at the start of the next quest, you will be forced to trade Grima for another hero, take the +1 threat penalty, and that new hero is the captive.

[Authraw 565]

Hmm, that makes the most sense, I think. It brings up the interesting possibility of changing the captive out to a hero with low threat, only to switch it out again in the next quest for free.

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

Remember though that the +1 threat penalty for getting a new hero is permanent!  And it might apply to all players even if only 1 player switches a hero, can't remember off the top of my head.

 

So what happens if you're doing an Aragorn-only Secrecy deck in Breaking of the Fellowship?

[Ecthelion III 382]

Remember though that the +1 threat penalty for getting a new hero is permanent!  And it might apply to all players even if only 1 player switches a hero, can't remember off the top of my head.

 

So what happens if you're doing an Aragorn-only Secrecy deck in Breaking of the Fellowship?

Sorry Grishnakh, no captives for you today!

[PocketWraith 553]

Actually, I don't think there's anything stopping you declaring Aragorn as the captive, since you do that at the end of BotF, and special rules for Aragorn only come up in Treason of Saruman. So you could choose Aragorn to be the captive, when you move onto The Uruk-Hai you get to replace him for free and that replacement would therefore become the captive.

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

The campaign card specifically prohibits you from choosing Aragorn though:

 

"Each player chooses 1 hero he controls (other than the Ring-bearer or Aragorn) to be taken captive. Record the name of each "captive" in the Notes section of the Campaign Log. "

Edited August 9, 2015 by GrandSpleen

[Authraw 565]

So if every hero died except for the Ring-Bearer and Aragorn... No captive I guess?

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

worthy of official clarification... I will send a question now

[PocketWraith 553]

The campaign card specifically prohibits you from choosing Aragorn though:

 

"Each player chooses 1 hero he controls (other than the Ring-bearer or Aragorn) to be taken captive. Record the name of each "captive" in the Notes section of the Campaign Log. "

Oh, right. Guess that teaches me for trying to guess at rulings off the top of my head rather than actually reading the relevant cards...

[ppsantos 20]

Aaaannnnd the answer IS....... go back and start over.

I second this! You have to take into account that Grima can't be used in Treason of Saruman when deciding which hero you can afford to lose while playing a scenario.

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

Ok, I got some replies.  Bear with me, it went back and forth a couple of times.  First I sent:

 

"Hiya! There is a question on the forums about captives in the saga campaign mode and nobody's been able to think of a really satisfactory answer. If you finish Breaking of the Fellowship and the only heroes you control are Aragorn and the Ring-bearer (say, in a secrecy Aragorn-only deck, or if your other heroes have died), who becomes the captive? And how do you set up the next game of The Uruk-hai? Thank you very much for your help!"

 

And got this answer:

"If you’re only remaining heroes are Aragorn and the Ring-bearer, then you would not choose a captive at the end of Breaking of the Fellowship because you have no legal choice. When setting up The Uruk-hai, follow the instructions and choose a captive from your available heroes. Since you have no previous captive, you ignore the parenthetical. 

Cheers,
Caleb"

 

And later I remembered that we wanted to know about Grima as well, so I sent: 

 

"Hi, This is a follow-up to a rules question I sent yesterday about choosing a captive after finishing Breaking of the Fellowship in campaign mode. What happens if Grima is the only legal target for becoming the captive when you finish the game? Thanks again!"

 

And got this reply:

 

"Grima will remain the captive for The Uruk-hai scenario, and your heroes will be very disappointed to learn that they raced across Rohan in an effort to rescue a double-agent who attacks them at Isengard!

Cheers,
Caleb"

 

After that answer I wanted a bit more information so I replied with:

 

"Thanks for your answers.  About Grima as captive -- does this remain true even though the Treason of Saruman rules insert states: "When playing the scenarios in The Treason of Saruman, the players cannot use any ally or hero card with the title 'Saruman' or 'Gríma.'"

 

And got this reply:  

 

"There are 3 ways you can go about dealing with this situation:

1. Grima is the captive and you’re not really ‘using’ him because he’s not under your control for the entire scenario.

2. You chose Grima as the captive at the end of Breaking but you can’t use him in Treason, so you swap him for a different captive.

3. Don’t choose Grima as the captive at the end of Breaking.

My original answer (#1) is stretching the definition of ‘using’ a little because I genuinely think it would be hilarious for the heroes to pursue a captive Grima only to discover his true allegiance after a long foot chase. If you’re worried about using the strictest interpretation, then I would go with answer #2 or #3.

Cheers,

Caleb"

[GrandSpleen 1,756]

I gotta say, I like the flexibility he's allowing in the interpretation.  There wasn't a hard and fast answer about Grima.  Maybe acknowledging that this is a cooperative game, he's letting the players draw their own conclusions from the available text among concepts that aren't defined mechanically (like "using" a hero). 

[monkeyrama 133]

I also enjoy the sense of humour. Would be easy for Caleb to be really dry about this, but he sees the funny side (in a way).