Perhaps you've already played some games in the gccg tourney using TNaA and you find otherwise, but I think that Marvelling/Voicing it in order to fizzle will be limited, wether it's possible or not, because you can make a Nazgul Abroad machine with the cardtext from Nazgul Abroad, so you will run out of Marvels quickly.
This in fact might be a problem with the clause 'discard if no hazards on it', because that actually increases the recycling speed of the nazgul hazards, and with Fury that might be lethal. A Ranked and Furied Abductor/Thief/Pickpocket is worriesome in any game, but more so if you face it thrice in a game.
Just play TNaA1, get a Fury and a TNaA2 under it, play Fury, and then play TNaA2 and discard TNaA1 and get back Fury and a third TNaA, doing the trick all over again. Only thing is to get 2 or 3 TNaA, but that can be done via sideboard/Mouth.
So, maybe it's best not to discard it upon draining it? Then you can decide to weather it and not marvel it at least. Otherwise we'll see many occurances of TNaA for just the man/orc boosters.
First game played with the new 7 cards!!!
- Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
and the problem is? If opponent decides to go to wilderness, there's not much one can do with a man hazard strat, even with 1, 2 or 6 TNaA in deck Orcs are a problem in the other hand, but there aren't any orc abductor/thief/pickpocket... I played a game vs Ringbearer some days ago and i hardly could play him any creature because he went to wilderness, shadow lands and man creatures attack mostly at border holds, free holds, border domains and shadow holds (sellswords)... Orc TNaA hazard strat is very strong in the other hand...
- Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
come one, how many games did you play where there were no border/free-holds/domains visited? You have to play a faction/ally somewhere, and that usually involves one of these (for heroes). Also heard of Anduin Vales? people go there sometimes. Or Gap of Isen. But anyway, you are thus pushing people into using non border/free holds/domains. And what if I play man hazards with a Fog strategy?
So, alot of ifs, but are we really debating the strength of man-hazards now? that would be a first.
So, alot of ifs, but are we really debating the strength of man-hazards now? that would be a first.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
- Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3109
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Especially combined with Uvatha Unleashed.marcos wrote:Orc TNaA hazard strat is very strong in the other hand...
well i played that deck 3 times and only worked 1, when i got a broken hand, opponent visited old forest and i played corsairs, dunlending raiders, assasin, abductor and killed his entire company, but after that, i never got to kill anybody in any other gameThorsten the Traveller wrote:come one, how many games did you play where there were no border/free-holds/domains visited? You have to play a faction/ally somewhere, and that usually involves one of these (for heroes). Also heard of Anduin Vales? people go there sometimes. Or Gap of Isen. But anyway, you are thus pushing people into using non border/free holds/domains. And what if I play man hazards with a Fog strategy?
So, alot of ifs, but are we really debating the strength of man-hazards now? that would be a first.
especially when opponent doesn't run much marvels/voices and always fail rolls by 1Bandobras Took wrote:Especially combined with Uvatha Unleashed.marcos wrote:Orc TNaA hazard strat is very strong in the other hand...
I'm not against removing the clause "discard if there are no hazards on it." It's only there because someone suggested it should be in order to keep it in line with other host hazards.
Balance-wise, is the problem only with Fury? Or other hazards too?Fury is probably the most playable of the cards that TNAA can target, right?
Basically, if playtesting proves Thorsten right, I'm wondering if we should go with Jamie's old suggestion of TNAA targetting only "non-unique" hazards, or if we simply should drop the clause "discard if no hazards on it".
Frodo
Balance-wise, is the problem only with Fury? Or other hazards too?Fury is probably the most playable of the cards that TNAA can target, right?
Basically, if playtesting proves Thorsten right, I'm wondering if we should go with Jamie's old suggestion of TNAA targetting only "non-unique" hazards, or if we simply should drop the clause "discard if no hazards on it".
Frodo
- Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3109
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
3 x Scimitars and 3 x Helms is brutal with Orcs. Too brutal or not is for wiser heads than mine to decide.