Re Usriev:

Where the Virtual Boyz plan their latest capers
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Re Usriev:

Post by Jambo »

Frodo's suggested change was to make this unique. However, that in itself can impact on the potential to use the original version, and perhaps more importantly, it will effect the likelihood of ever seeing Usriev in play.

Based on such, I wonder if there's a better solution than making it unique?

For instance:

1. How about changing the phase in which the attack occurs? If we made it site phase it would then give the opposing company the opportunity to split and return the treacherous characters to havens to store the items or to continue to carry out things on their own.

Or

2. How about making it depend on a roll to add some flavour and uncertainty to the item's treachery? If the roll is greater than the character's mind +2, then the character, etc, etc.
marcos
Posts: 2017
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Post by marcos »

or add the sentence i used for Valiant sword:

"If this card is in play, non-virtual versions of this card can still be played and viceversa"

or similar...
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

Of course, can make it not duplicable on opponent also, or on yourself for that matter.

I still don't have clear who "the card's owner" is. Marcos said it is the player transferring the item, which would be expected in a way, you own your own cards. If that be the case, I think it's stupid to award more points to the owner when stored, the receiver should get extra points for surviving. I think if you reward extra points for surviving, the player will be careful if and to whom he transfers it, or to play alot of them, and that will balance it a bit more. Either way I see no reason to reward extra points for storing it yourself, there is little achievement in that.

nb the item doesn't give any corruption points?

The mind option is nice, you would have at least 45% chance of getting an attack. We can make it automatic if borne by an elf. I'd prefer this over site phase.

Don't know the story behind this item, the item is treacherous, or the people become traitors? If former, item should attack bearer himself. If latter, maybe we can have a char. in comp attack bearer in stead of other way around. What's difference? Well, owner could get to choose? (to max mind). People trying to steal it from bearer because they're enchanted by it. If bearer dies, the Thief becomes the new bearer...as it is, when bearer's dead you can leave it in the road.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Frodo
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

Post by Frodo »

Regarding Uniqueness:
Is it really a big deal that the card (if unique) might not come out until late game? Isn’t that an excellent way to balance its power—and this is no different than an opponent hoping to get out his Wormsbane early, or his Narsil, or Ancient Black Axe? Thematically, also, it seems that the object is so evil it must be unique.

However, even if we made it unique, we’d still have to add a line allowing the regular versions of Usriev to be played. I realize that almost nobody plays the regular Usriev, but they might eventually, and it’s ridiculous to make a new card that would suddenly strip a person of his ability to play a non-unique item (maybe all of them!). Given the need to add this clause anyway, I wouldn’t mind forgetting the whole uniqueness idea. Now obviously putting multiples of these on your opponent’s company is too strong, and I don’t like the idea of multiples on his different companies either. But we can fix this new problem easily enough. Instead of the card saying “If Usriev of Treachery is inverted, it cannot be transferred again,” we can have it say, “If Usriev is inverted, no copies of it may be transferred again.” This prevents Usriev from ever being played on more than one of the opponent’s companies, but they don’t become dead weight in the resource player’s hand. Is this okay?

Corruption:
>nb the item doesn't give any corruption points?
It was supposed to give 2 MP, which is what it says on GCCG. Thorsten, can you put this on the MS-word version?

Storing, and Marshalling Point Value:
>I still don't have clear who "the card's owner" is. Marcos said it is the player transferring the item, which would be expected in a way, you own your own cards. If that be the case, I think it's stupid to award more points to the owner when stored, the receiver should get extra points for surviving. I think if you reward extra points for surviving, the player will be careful if and to whom he transfers it, or to play alot of them, and that will balance it a bit more. Either way I see no reason to reward extra points for storing it yourself, there is little achievement in that.
You could look at this way. However, another way to look at it is that the card is currently doing precisely want you want it to do, only from another perspective… if the cursed company (who received Usriev) can keep the item in play and “survive,” rather than storing it, they are **preventing** the opponent from getting 3 MP, and forcing him to keep only 1 MP. So the receiver is still being rewarded.

The reason why minions also get 3 MP for the item if stored is partly for simplicity but also because minions have, to date, very few good major items, and they’ve never had one that they can get 3MP for if stored. Storing a card is just plain annoying I think the extra 2 MP is fine from a balance-perspective.

Requiring a Roll for Usriev:
I really don’t think we need this option, especially if we limit the anti-opponent use of Usriev to once only (unless it gets stored). It’s not like it would take too many extra words to add (about 15), but it keeps complicating the card even further, if it’s just the purpose of just making the card’s usage more unpredictable, isn’t it already not a guarantee? You have to keep your diplomat **untapped**. That’s not an easy thing do to, especially as it has to be a covert, non-RW diplomat who won’t have more than 5 normal prowess (no I’ll Report Yous here), and your opponent will see you coming at him. Also, I haven’t seen many non-RW, covert minion decks that actively attack the opponent. Which brings me to the other point: I think Usriev will often be used as a **defensive** card against the HERO company coming after him! For example, I one gccg game Brian Min had a typical vs. minion company of uber-Elves with 9 prowess minimum. I was usually within striking distance from him, but he never attacked me, because he said he was too nervous about the Usriev. Yet, the cost of this was that *every single turn** I had to make sure my Diplomat did not tap, because he had to be ready to transfer Usriev should Brian come seeking my death and destruction (not to mention Brian tried to target him with creatures!)

Also, even if the hero company gets Usriev, we have to remember that the character can simply go off by himself and still achieve things for the opponent (getting factions, even another item). Not to mention he has a weapon, so his prowess is probably greater too! in summary, I don’t think Usriev is too strong, if we limit it’s use to one likely transfer (or less; just the threat of one) per game.

Story of Usriev:
>Don't know the story behind this item, the item is treacherous, or the people become traitors?

A bit of both, I assume. The gift of it from a skillful minion diplomat encourages lust for power, and respect for the minion side of things, perhaps also avarice. I don’t think the item “comes alive”, or anything quite like a Cursed Sword in Dungeons and Dragons.

>maybe we can have a char. in comp attack bearer in stead of other way around. What's difference? Well, owner could get to choose? (to max mind). People trying to steal it from bearer because they're enchanted by it. If bearer dies, the Thief becomes the new bearer...as it is, when bearer's dead you can leave it in the road.

Hmm… Thorsten, that’s a tempting proposition! Yes, it would need a similar >6 mind rule. Something like: “…he may tap to transfer Usriev of Treachery (invert this card) to any non-avatar character in opponent’s company. If Usriev is inverted, no copies can be transferred again, and opponent must choose one character in bearer’s company with a mind less than 6 to attack the bearer at the end of each of his untap phases. If bearer dies, place Usriev with attacker.”

Hmm, perhaps it should only be transferred to people with less than six mind too--because why would Aragorn except such a gift? Maybe it doesn't need to say that opponent must choose someone with less than 6 mind... although there are thematic problems if he doesn't (again, why would Aragorn attack someone with this weapon?)

I like this option because it eliminates the need for an important clarification on who controls the attacks. Still, we’d need a less important clarification to make sure people don’t think that infinite attacks are being created until the entire <6 mind party is slain! (Btw, there’s no reason to repeat the full “Usriev of Treachery” every single time in the game text.) It also gives the resource player some tough choices to make, like does he want the bearer or the attacker to survive? I also think this option is more analogous to a Tolkien situation—people attack someone who has a pretty item, a.k.a. the One Ring or even the dwarf’s desire for Mithril, etc. Am I missing anything else… does this option create any unforeseen side effects, or drastically different game situations? Thoughts?

Frodo
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo »

I like that idea. Ok, how about something like this:
Weapon. Warrior only: +1 prowess (+2 against Elves). Covert Diplomat only: if bearer is at the same site as opponent’s company during any site phase, he may tap to transfer Usriev (invert this card) to any character in opponent’s company with a mind less than 6. If Usriev is inverted, no Usriev can be transferred again, and you may choose one character in bearer’s company with a mind less than 6 to attack the bearer at the end of each of his untap phases. If bearer dies, place Usriev with attacker. This card gives 1 MP to the card’s owner (3 MPs if stored).
Isn't it the case that heroes bearing this item won't receive the bonus to prowess? Non-overt FW characters will since they can use cross-alignment items.

Also, can you tap to transfer this during your opponent's turn? I'm not sure if doing something like is allowed during CvCC when it's your opponent's turn.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

if the cursed company (who received Usriev) can keep the item in play and “survive,” rather than storing it, they are **preventing** the opponent from getting 3 MP, and forcing him to keep only 1 MP. So the receiver is still being rewarded. (-) The reason why minions also get 3 MP for the item if stored is partly for simplicity but also because minions have, to date, very few good major items
I find that different way of looking at rewarding mp's for effort not really in line with meccg. Here it is better perhaps, or probably, to discard your character and the item on him, than to store the item to get rid of it. Either bearer or character in company gets wounded each turn, body rolls will have to be made, so keeping bearer and item around is no option. While I like this ostracising aspect of Usriev very much, there is nothing for it but to keep your character sitting at a haven if you want him to stick. A simple Alone and Stupid will do it for him should he move. And on top, your opponent still gets 1 MP if you keep it in play. So the difference is between keeping a useless char in play that yields a max +1 mp gross, but costs you 5 GI, or keeping the char storing the item giving opponent 3 mps, or discarding it and play another guy. Choice is easy, generally speaking.

Rewarding extra mp's for storing it yourself should reflect some effort, or thematic idea behind it, not just because there is as yet no storable major item yielding more, I think that's a poor reason. Either it must be valuable to Sauron, or you must come a long way to do it. Now, you will want to use it and storing is a bother, I agree, but unless we make it non duplicable, 3 of them can be played at let's say Raider Hold/Sarn Goriwing and stored in 1 turn for 9 mp's just around the corner. I don't like that. Also a possible Swag V would make it worth alot. Your tapping restriction doesn't help here because you don't have to transfer it of course.

All in all, since object is to destroy bearer or keep him twiddling his thumbs, I would say: this item is worth 1 mp to card's owner (3 if inverted). This way you are incouraged to transfer it, you get points for the effort of transferring, you might not want to corrupt or kill the guy since he yields also 3 mp to you, and opponent doesn't want to store it, so he'll either discard the guy, in which case you can play it again. Most likely, he'll send the guy on a suicide mission! how's that for theme! (which means it can backfire, even better!)

Then, about having a char attacking bearer, if we make it stolen, i.e. not transferred, if bearer gets wounded, you can actively choose to have it on another guy which suits you better. I like that. Usriev becomes not only an ostracising item, it becomes an object that really divides the company and makes each of them mean competitors. If opponent choses your Bilbo, you can have Beregond attack him, take the weapon and run off with it. :twisted:

come to think of it, maybe it should be char (non hobbit) with mind <6. Neither greedy nor warlike those guys.

I would simply make it: "only one Usriev may be in play inverted per player". Making it unique has too many down sides. It takes time to play it and then move to opponent. If you don't store it yourself, you may play it 3 times for all I care, you get increased chances of transferring one, and if bearer dies you can invert another one. Opponent should still be able to give you one, why not?

more questions:
-why site phase only? if you're dumb enough to move to or stick around a site where there's a covert diplomat with Usriev, you deserve it coming. Or, if you Siege your opponent, you deserve it also.
-can you play cards on the attack? for both attacker and defender?

Usriev of Treachery. 1(3)
Weapon. Warrior only: +1 prowess (+2 against Elves). Covert Diplomat only: if bearer is at the same site as opponent’s company, he may tap to transfer Usriev of Treachery (invert this card) to any non-Hobbit character in opponent’s company with a mind <6. If Usriev of Treachery is inverted, it cannot be transferred again, and each untap phase a character in bearer's company with a mind <6 attacks him (defender's choice, opponent makes attacker's rolls): if bearer becomes wounded, attacker takes control of Usriev. Only one inverted Usriev may be in play per player. This item is worth 1 MP to the owner of this card (3 if inverted).

btw. not only D&D weapons 'come alive', Anglachel kind of had his own way with Beleg and Turin.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo »

That looks good Thorsten!

What happens if the character is killed or the player discards him? Does the item just get discarded or should it go into an MP pile? There's obviously the rather strange situation whereby the player who transferred the Usriev will be torn as to what to do regarding that character. Killing the treacherous character with creatures or an auotmatic attack will only take 1 MP away from opponent whereas he would lose 3....
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

That was my intention, because if you go through alot of trouble to get a designated character the Usriev, why should you then kill or corrupt him? is he not worth more to you being a nuisance to your opponent? You want opponent to be with the difficult choice of letting the char live/be around or not, not yourself.

But I do see the problem that if the character becomes reckless and if you don't want to kill him or give him creature mp's, he could play some factions easily. Items no problem, he would just load up on corruption. Allies the same, it's not that difficult to discard this guy. Ok it's a low minder, but maybe he can play some factions, or keep some site in play or whatever.

As it was, I suppose Usriev would just be discarded like any other item: it's in the road to be found by whosoever. If it goes to MP pile inverted, you can only play one. Maybe we can place it in mp pile uninverted, being worth 1 MP, so if char is killed it still gives you a point for the whole affair. An Usriev in mp pile would then more or less be not the item but a representation of the item at work. You can then find it again in the road, by playing another one.

But come to think of it, we can even add: may not be stored. Opponent will not gladly store it anyway, giving you 3 mp, but at least he's rid of it, he keeps his character, and it's in play so you can't transfer another on him. But if we make it unstorable - character is possessed with it after all, so why give it up? - he would have to go to his doom somehow.

btw. you would of course preferably play this on a 5 minder, like Gloin/Balin, so opponent would lose 2 mp's plus a valuable character.

It's complex to balance this card, that's for sure, it's a tricky weighing of tactical advantage vs awarding mp's, and who should get which reward?
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo »

But the point I was making was that your opponent in all likelihood will just discard the character at a haven. He'll lose 1 or 2 MPs, you'll lose 3. Either that or he'll use him recklessly to play factions or whatnot.

My thought was that your opponent should be encouraged in someway to see discarding the character as a last resort, not as the easiest way out.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

But that's the effect that you want, isn't it? what else is the purpose of the card? If it's just to let char sit useless in haven, then we must let Usriev attack bearer himself, or not reward any extra points to Usriev so he doesn't store nor move. But then there is no action in the card. nb. at least if char is dead/discarded you gain 1 mp from Usriev, like I suggested.

You can't expect him to hang around and keep attacking himself. My version doesn't change from version now, like I said in post above, it will always be more profitable to discard him than to store the item, it just depends on how good/essential the char is for opponent. You're basically saying that it should be somehow profitable for both players, in different ways, that's not easy to accomplish.

I suppose the main task for player is to pick the right character, and for receiver to get rid of it as fast as possible. That's the storyline.

We could make it: if character is discarded at haven or home site, place this card (inverted) in owners mp pile. Then character will have to go beserk and on suicide missions. But do we really want that? that's effectively killing a character. Well, he could decide to give you the 3 mp's, and maybe he get's some mp's to boot.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Frodo
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:09 am
Location: NYC, NY

Post by Frodo »

Thorsten’s version is looking good to me. Some comments:

RESOURCE PLAYER STORING USRIEV
>but unless we make it non duplicable, 3 of them can be played at let's say Raider Hold/Sarn Goriwing and stored in 1 turn for 9 mp's just around the corner.
What do you mean? How can you play 3 Usrievs at one site on one turn? If you simply meant that you can store a copy a full turn after you play it, I don’t see that as broken… if they weren’t Usrievs, they’d be real major items worth 2 MP each, so it means you can net 3 extra MP maximum by taking at least one extra turn to move the item to a haven.

I think we can invent theme easily enough; e.g. Sauron wants these items to replace or make the curses stronger on them, or just to nourish and build-up his own evil with such devices (especially if we make them playable at the free-people's homes; see my suggestion below). However, Thorsten’s new version encourages the minion player to actually transfer the item, which I like a lot. I think we can forgo the storage bonus unless we decide to award MPs, like maybe just 2, even if the item is stored (then we have that apply regardless of WHO stored it).

DISCARDING BEARER
>But I do see the problem that if the character becomes reckless and if you don't want to kill him or give him creature mp's, he could play some factions easily. Items no problem, he would just load up on corruption. Allies the same, it's not that difficult to discard this guy. Ok it's a low minder, but maybe he can play some factions, or keep some site in play or whatever.
I’m not too worried about that. You are still getting 3 MP for the
inverting.
>>As it was, I suppose Usriev would just be discarded like any other item: it's in the road to be found by whosoever. If it goes to MP pile inverted, you can only play one. Maybe we can place it in mp pile uninverted, being worth 1 MP, so if char is killed it still gives you a point for the whole affair. An Usriev in mp pile would then more or less be not the item but a representation of the item at work. You can then find it again in the road, by playing another.
[…]But come to think of it, we can even add: may not be stored. Opponent will not gladly store it anyway, giving you 3 mp, but at least he's rid of it, he keeps his character, and it's in play so you can't transfer another on him. But if we make it unstorable - character is possessed with it after all, so why give it up? - he would have to go to his doom somehow.
[…]We could make it: if character is discarded at haven or home site, place this card (inverted) in owners mp pile. Then character will have to go beserk and on suicide missions. But do we really want that? that's effectively killing a character. Well, he could decide to give you the 3 mp's, and maybe he get's some mp's to boot.
Hmm… first of all, if we simply say that the item goes to the MP pile when discarded, I don’t think it’s inverted unless we say so, since “cards in the MP pile have no memory of how they were played”, but does this mean played TO the MP pile, or does it mean placed into play? Technically the inverting happens after the playing, so who the hell knows? (Though logically it seems to me that inverted status should be kept.)

I think that we can argue either way about the storing, theme-wise, so then our decision should be balance. Let’s let it happen for now.

Ok, now I don’t think discarding a character is as obvious a solution as it seems. You need two turns to do this, first of all. Second, sure there’s a GI issue, but you don’t necessarily have a character to back him up with, either, especially mid or late game. So the “reckless alone” play, which would ideally be slightly encouraged anyway, is (depending on the character).

Let’s review the options for a 5-minder:
1) Discard your guy (Opponent loses 3 MP (and an item!), you lose 2 MP)
2) Store the weapon (Opponent loses nothing, you lose nothing but a turn (plus two movement/hazard phases of company safety-in-numbers)
3) Wander around like Johnny Cash (Opponent loses nothing, you lose nothing and can continue to immediately seek out MPs)

This looks pretty fair to me, except that number 1 might still be too negative an effect on the minion player—imagine, the opponent can try to skillfully place the Usriev on an **already** wounded character, so then he would be actually losing very little but discarding this guy. Also, it would be nice to encourage option 3. Maybe it already is.

We could have Usriev give 1 MP if discarded; or 1 MP if discarded and 2 MP if stored (by either player). We might be splitting hairs too much. Shall we try it without any additional MP clauses for now?

HOBBITS
Why not let it play on hobbits? Pippin, for example, was still obsessed with the Palantir, even going so far as attempting to steal it. But also, even though hobbits in general are not full of greed per se, they are intensely curious, especially about weird objects (crystal balls and spoons I suppose!) My concern was whether hobbits would attack the bearer. I suppose if they truly recognized the character as corrupted they would. (Attacking still seems like a more severe activity than merely accepting the Usriev. Maybe hobbits would accept the weapon, become objects of divisiveness for others (aka the company fighting over Frodo’s ring, the jealousy over his mail coat) but the hobbits themselves would not covet the items by attacking them… I mean, they give out presents on their own birthdays!

OTHER
>why site phase only? if you're dumb enough to move to or stick around a site where there's a covert diplomat with Usriev, you deserve it coming. Or, if you Siege your opponent, you deserve it also.

Site phase only simply limits the strength of the card, because you need to actually enter the site. It’s not just a question of being dumb enough to stick around to get pinned with it during the organization phase… if we make it at any time, than a minion company with Usriev can chase a hero company anywhere, even a normally safe to hide in like Lorien, and before the opponent even gets a chance to move away again, you can decide NOT to enter the site, then tap the diplomat during your end-of-turn phase and give Usriev over to someone, skipping all those nasty autos! So we need to say site phase, as follows:

“if bearer is at the same site as opponent’s company during any player’s site phase”

>>can you play cards on the attack? for both attacker and defender?

Sure, why not? It’s your turn. Just like the minor item traps in Dark Minions that create an attack.

>Also, can you tap to transfer this during your opponent's turn? I'm not sure if doing something like is allowed during CvCC when it's your opponent's turn.

Hmm, it depends whether giving somebody a weapon counts as “adding prowess”, or if that’s too indirect. But even if you can’t do it during CVCC, you simply have to do it before CVCC, since that must always be the last action initiated during the site phase. I’m sure that actions are allowed during an opponent’s site phase, otherwise, why would magical harp work? I’m sure you can declare twilight as well.

Btw, obviously this is a pretty strong major item! if you guys thought it needed a slightly harder playability, we could add something rather thematic like: “Playable only at a free-hold or border-hold where major items are playable.” If we really wanted to make it crazy, we could just say “free-hold.” It still bother me that if you can't find (or risk finding) an opponent's company, this item is only worth 1 MP to you. Remember that if you chase down a hero company to give this to and then give it to them on your turn but you don't initiate cvcc 'cause they are huge, the opponent will suffer one attack, let the cursed fellow move away with the item, then STAY there and whale on your sorry minion ass! ANOTHER reason why I think Usriev might also be used defensively, perhaps even more often, depending on how your "covert diplomat" company measures up to the heroes. I wish it was worth, say, 2 MP stored at least (and if it was playable at free-people's homes, the storage theme feels more appropriate), because then you'd have the option of returning it to Sauron at the end of the game.

Current version? Unless we agree with the hobbit change. Also, do we really need to have opponent make attacker’s rolls? It’s not like attacker has full control anyway, like choosing whether to tap or not, etc. Kind of spookier to have owner do it too.

>
Usriev of Treachery. 1(3)
Weapon. Warrior only: +1 prowess (+2 against Elves). Covert Diplomat only: if bearer is at the same site as opponent’s company during any player’s site phase, he may tap to transfer Usriev of Treachery (invert this card) to any non-Hobbit character in opponent’s company with a mind <6. If Usriev is inverted, it cannot be transferred again, and each untap phase a character in bearer's company with a mind <6 attacks him (opponent’s choice): if bearer becomes wounded, attacker takes control of Usriev. Only one inverted Usriev may be in play per player. This item is worth 1 MP to the owner of this card (3 if inverted).
Frodo
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

It still bother me that if you can't find (or risk finding) an opponent's company, this item is only worth 1 MP to you. Remember that if you chase down a hero company to give this to and then give it to them on your turn but you don't initiate cvcc 'cause they are huge, the opponent will suffer one attack, let the cursed fellow move away with the item, then STAY there and whale on your sorry minion ass!
well, yes, such is the risk involved in going for this strat. But it is still a good usable item, a simple broad spear or mechanical bow yields 1 mp and this has alot of possible added bonus, the original was a hoard item so worth 2 mp, but I would rather keep this easy to play and yielding more after a difficult transfer, than more difficult to play and yielding more in general. It's the mission theme part that makes it interesting.

Covert companies don't have to be pussies, though. A regular Atilla the Hunn company (Asternak/Pon Opar/Mionid/Jerrek) is pretty strong I'd say, more than a regular hero company. But, it's all in the game!

We can also make it transferrable by tapping a diplomat, regardless of who bearer of Usriev is in the company. That could help a little...

I said 9 mp's total not in one turn of course, but when you do a burning deck then this is a very good item if you can store it for 3 mp's, you would get 5 mp's out of a border hold, while normally you would get either 3 or take the more difficult ring road which does not combine as well with burning as weapons do. And there is Come by Night which makes play of multiples of these at one border possible. Anyway, bottom line, you invent this card for the interaction, not just to be additional item mps in a general deck.

I don't mind playable only at border or free, there are quite a few of those around, maybe it's thematically more sound if these are cunningly created by some blacksmith at Sarn Goriwing, but you can find them already at a border, so why not? I wouldn't make it only free though, that's too limited. Would that be any border/free, or only where majors/weapons are playable? I'd say the latter.

Technically speaking it is possible to give the bearer two minors and to keep transferring item back and forth while at any site, until you roll a 2...or has this been ruled? If we add the discard clause it will be profitable for the hazard player also to get him discarded if he becomes too succesful in gathering factions. Or do we want to keep the discard way open to the defender? If stored item has no memory being inverted, then currently you can play another one after it's been (discarded) stored. But, I don't think that is broken given the difficulty in transferring it.

So, I would go with: this item is worth 1 MP to card's owner (2 if stored, 3 if inverted). If inverted and bearer is discarded, place this item in mp pile as if stored.
the opponent can try to skillfully place the Usriev on an **already** wounded character.
that would be rather hard to do and rather risky to boot, but it is possible yes. You'd need some weapon to transfer and a boost card probably to be sure of the roll. Others can tap to support him. Jee, that would be ultimately evil, everybody teaming up to steal the item! :lol:
But, depending on the situation of course, you would prefer to transfer Usriev to the strongest guy possible, as he would have most chances of killing his teammates.

@hobbits. I suppose you're right, it would be transferrable to Hobbit, but it would be unlikely he would attack someone over it.

@site phase. Yes, I forgot about the stupid end of turn...

@rolls. Well, it just strange to make your own body rolls.
Usriev of Treachery. 1(3)
Weapon. Playable only at Border-holds and Free-holds. Warrior only: +1 prowess (+2 against Elves). Covert Diplomat only: if bearer is at the same site as opponent’s company during any player’s site phase, he may tap to transfer Usriev of Treachery (invert this card) to character in opponent’s company with a mind <6. If Usriev is inverted, it cannot be transferred again, and each untap phase a (non-Hobbit) character in bearer's company with a mind <6 attacks him (opponent’s choice): if bearer becomes wounded, attacker takes control of Usriev. Only one inverted Usriev may be in play per player. This item is worth 1 MP to the owner of this card (2 if stored, 3 if inverted). If inverted and bearer is discarded, store this card.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo »

If you're worried about the hobbit involvement, wouldn't it be better to make it that the attacker couldn't be a hobbit?

Also, I like Thorsten's input on the discard/stored aspect and the idea of it not having to be the covert diplomat who bears the items. They just have to tap to transfer.

What I don't like is the Free/Border-hold restriction. I don't see it's value. More than likely these will be covert guys anyway and therefore visiting shadow-holds or ruins & lairs isn't all that sensible.

So:
Usriev of Treachery wrote: 1(2/3)
Weapon. Warrior only: +1 prowess (+2 against Elves). Tap a covert diplomat during any player’s site phase to transfer Usriev (invert this card) to a character in opponent’s company at the same site with a mind <6. If Usriev is inverted, it cannot be transferred again, and each untap phase bearer is attacked by another non-Hobbit character in his company with a mind <6 (your choice): if bearer becomes wounded, attacker takes control of Usriev. Only one inverted Usriev may be in play per player. Usriev gives you 2 MPs if stored, 3 MPs if inverted. If inverted and bearer is removed from play, this card is stored.
Do we need to specify owner?

By the way, no hero character will receive the prowess bonus, since cross-alignment items have no effect. Conceivably, only a FW character or another minion would benefit.
User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller »

well, this is a first for actual (cross alignment) resource transferral, so it's potentially confusing as to who is owning this card, in game terms, I suppose. My first thought was actually: if I get this item bestowed upon me, and store it, I would get mp's...seems only logical.

about borders/free, I'm not set on it, but don't see problem with it either. Why would a covert comp. not travel to shadow/lairs? It depends on the situation and the hazards opponent is running I suppose. Site path to Sarn Goriwing is still easier than to Shrell Kain, I can play wolf at Sarn and Stabbed at Shrel, play Come by Night/Secret Book on Shrel and Records on Sarn...so covert/overt it doesn't really matter much. Such restriction only serves to limit play somewhat because you are less flexible in your choices.
wouldn't it be better to make it that the attacker couldn't be a hobbit?
isn't that what I just did? :wink:
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Jambo
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo »

Ah, yes, that was directed to Joe. :)

just had another amusing idea - what if the attack could be initiated by any character at the same site rather than one specifc to bearer's own company? You could choose one of your own characters and go for the kill points. But then you'd get the inverted Usriev... :mind boggles: ;)
Locked

Return to “Development”