Beano said:

As soon as other spheres start to be able to reduce threat, the spheres begin to lose their distinctiveness, perhaps to the point that there might be little need to even have spheres. To be sure, we've had sphere "bleed" already, and it's probably inevitable, but I'd prefer Spirit be the sphere that excels at threat management.

That's not to say other spheres can't dabble in it, but by no means should they be as manipulative of threat as Spirit.

Hi, I’m quite new to the game, I’ve played it only a couple of times, but from what I’ve seen there are several cards that will work great in a secrecy deck; without the secrecy ability.

I can’t list all I’ve seen from the top of my head, but for example:

Peace and thought. For 1 resource you get to draw 5 cards.

Drawback is that you have to exhaust 2 hero’s.

Ok. So if you’re thread is low enough nothing will engage you from the staging area right?

(again, I’m new to the game so correct me if I’m wrong.)

So you basicly get to draw 5 cards for 1 resoucre without any danger. Sounds good to me!

I haven’t tried a secrecy deck yet , but from what I’ve seen it should work especially fine in multi-player. What I’m thinking is Lore + Leadership. Your buddies keep the monsters engaged and you draw cards and heal with Lore, and dish out Leadership cards to your buddies without anything engaging you.

In short, my idea when I went over the cards for a secrecxy deck was that a secrecy deck uses secrecy cards as a added bonus. There are cards without secrecy that would work great in a deck build for it, making a worth playable deck in multi-player.

Off-topic:

This is my first post, though I’ve been lurking for a while.

Because of the friendly community responses in all threads I decided to join J

Anyway, I’d like to ask a question.

I have a idea for the game, but I haven’t seen a forum to post/discuss playerbase suggestions.

Where should/can I do that?

Noccus said:

Hi there!

I tried to play with Peace, and Thought in some of my decks, but I used it only on a few occasions. I am playing solo, and I'm certain this card might be more handy in a multiplayer game. However , in most of the cases this card makes no sense anyway. To play this card in a secrecy deck you need 1) a lore hero which 2) has a low threat. That's Bifur, Ori, Bilbo and Denethor. Ori and Bilbo already offer advanced card draw, and Bifur can make use of Legacy of Durin to get you more cards.

But the main point is that there already exists are card that is better than PaT - A Very Good Tale. That is a card that should be in every secrecy deck. Ok, it is  card that should be in every deck. And there is of course Ancient Mathom which can also provide you with some cards.

If you want to use PaT you sould probably include a Hobbit hero, as they can easily be readied with a Fast Hitch at the start of the next round.

I support there being more secrecy, if for no other reason than it bugs me to have a mechanic in the game that is essentially unfinished.

Raven1015 said:

I agree.  I also think an adventure pack focused primarily on secrecy would be thoroughly enjoyable. Sam's rescue of Frodo in the tower of Cirith Ungol as desribed in the Return of the King comes to mind immediately.

Titanium said:

I think we need special secrece heroes. Then secrecy will start to shine. We have Lore Aragorn and Spirit Glorifindel they suppose to be a good boost for secrecy. But in the end of the day players use them in 3 heroes decks. So why they designers didn make those 2 heroes with text:

Forced: If you can spot another 2 heroes under you control discard Glorifindel, Aragorn from play.

Then the players will doomed to make some secrecy decks cose those heroes a very powerful and players love to play with them.

Secrecy looks like a good idea from the begin but then suddenly was forgoten and ababndon by designers……

Glaurung said:

Glorfindel and LoV is a good example how to boost the secrecy sphere. I'm not so sure if everyone would be happy about a hero that is designed for the purpose of running a secrecy deck. Many players dislike Brand, for example.

Btw, HoN has a good card for secrecy - Damrod. He can be exremely useful on a secrecy deck, but he is just too expensive. The lack of the secrecy keyword on him is a missed opportunity.

leptokurt said:

I agree completely.  I don't think there should be any restriction on Deluxe or Saga Expansions including secrecy cards.

HoN already has some good Secrecy cards in it.  They just don't have "Secrecy" printed on them.  Wealth of Gondor?  Free resources for the impoverished 2-hero Secrecy deck!  Master of Lore?!  He's like a permanent "Secrecy" discount.  Instead of restricting cards into decks designed around the Secrecy mechanic (like that silly Dunedain Wanderer), the developers are putting out more flexible cards that can find a home in non-Secrecy decks as well.  That sort of robust design is a big step up from the one-trick-pony cards that we saw in the Core set, currently gathering dust in your game box.

leptokurt said:

I agree that Damrod is perfect for a Secrey deck.  And that is why I think there should NOT be a Secrecy discount on him.  His effect is potentially very powerful, and 4 resources is a reasonable price even for a Secrecy deck, especially considering that he can pull his weight as a well-rounded ally until you need to trigger his effect.

If we discount every card with a potential Secrecy use, eventually we will end up with a card pool capable of making decks that completely neutralize the resource disadvantage of having only 2 heroes.

If you slap "Secrecy 2" on Damrod, he becomes a no-brainer, must-include card that can potentially reduce your threat by 10 -- or more! -- for a paltry cost of 2 resources--- way too powerful!  His effect would work great as an event, but you get him as an ally too… super bonus!  Even Secrecy 1 would be too high.

You don't have to print "Secrecy" on a card in order to make it good for a Secrecy deck.  Damrod is a good example of a card that makes you think/plan/sacrifice in order to gain his full benefit.  I'm fully convinced that the developers have NOT forgotten Secrecy, and they are approaching it with the long-term in mind.  We didn't see the Secrecy keyword at all in HoN, but HoN gave us some fantastic cards for a Secrecy deck.

GrandSpleen said:

I agree a card doesn’t need the keyword in order to be useful in secrecy decks.

But overall, do you think the current inventory of cards (both with and without the secrecy keyword) lends itself to truly viable secrecy decks?

I’d posit the answer is no, for the most part, and that is the main problem I am addressing.

I think FFG could introduce some interesting strategies with more options to evade or stealthily execute enemies, rather than confront them openly.  I suspect and hope we'll see more of this as they further develop the hobbit trait.  This fits perfectly from a thematic standpoint.

Here are some rough ideas:

-An elven cloak attachment that allows you to ignore an enemy’s threat when questing (the attachment equivalent of Radagast’s Cunning).

-An event card that allows you to evade an enemy and move it from the staging area back into the encounter deck (either shuffled in or placed at the bottom.)  This would be the staging area equivalent of O Elbereth! Gilthonial!

-An option to place progress tokens on an enemy in the staging area instead of, or in addition to, the active location when questing successfully.  Each progress token would reduce the enemy’s threat by one. This "evade" option for questing could be fleshed out with various ways of adding and removing progress tokens on enemies and triggering effects.

Yeah, it's not a fully expanded mechanic by any means.  I just think the tendrils are actively growing (whereas a theme in this thread suggests rather that the mechanic has stagnated).  

I like some of your ideas.  Moving an enemy back to the bottom of the encounter deck made me think of Short Cut (for locations) more than anything else.  Actually, just the other day I wondered if such a card already existed, and was kind of surprised when I realized it didn't.

I mentioned in an earlier post that Secrecy should get some kind of Doomed insurance.  Maybe an ally (we'll call it "Hobbity McHobbit") with the text: "If your threat is less than 20, Hobbity McHobbit gains: Response: When a card with the Doomed keyword is revealed from the encounter deck, discard Hobbity McHobbit to cancel the Doomed effect."

GrandSpleen said:

That's a great idea.  The "Doomed" effect can't be canceled with "A Test of Will" and rapidly obliterates all aspirations of sub-20 threat.

I concur, particularly with notion of expanding secrecy into other spheres.  It is an idea with a lot of promise given how much of the LOTR story involves evading detection, whether by goblins, Nazgul, Shelob, or above all, the Lidless Eye.  

Well I wold be nice to see some more secresy cards! But they have to be thinked carefully! It is very easy to brake the balance by making secrecy too good! In Desipher Lord of the rings card game there were somewhat similar system that reduced the twilight that was brodused by the fellowship and they were forced to errata or ban many of those cards… So more secresy cards would be nice to they have to be playtested carefully so that the game balance does not run havok!

Maybe some really cheap heroes with bad or even dangerous features? A warrior with depression. Every time one character get wounded you have to wound the warrior (self cutting…) A hobbit with cleptomanic. Every time someone gets an item the Hobbit try to steal it and hide it somewhere (discard)… A Elf that is tired of Middle Earth. Every round there is a chance (or tricker) that forces that elf to go to the sea (discard).

But they have to be really well playtested!

Titanium said:

This is a great idea for a new mechanic and is just what secrecy needs. Details could be hammered out in a variety of ways, but in my mind the biggest obstacle to making Secrecy not just viable, but potent, is that enemies and their threat start building up in the staging area. We need more ways to neutralize that threat, other than engaging enemies, if Secrecy is to function well, and I think your idea (as well as the other ideas you mentioned) are a good way to do that.