Hear hear! Well, we’re certainly doing our part. However, just look around the rest of this site and you’ll see, there are so many great games out there.

I think it’s probably fine the way it is. I like the penalty of getting weighed down with minor cards, and the strategy of beating a player by first taking out his minor. For example, that’s about the only way you’re going to beat Gandalf in LOTRED is by taking out Pippin and hopefully water down Gandalf’s draw. If we changed to your suggested rule, you’d no longer have that strategy available. As it is, heal is a pretty weak use of an action but it does come in handy at times, like when facing an opponent who relies on more direct damage.

Glad you enjoyed it! I am pretty pleased with it. It was actually fun to go back and listen to it, rewind, and sort of unpack it all.

Well, we could literally make the heal rule 25% more effective by allowing a player to play up to 2 cards at a time and heal up to 2 instead of 1. But, do you really want to make the games longer, and to drag out what might be the worst part of the game?

The only thing I have more than a few thoughts on is how in part two, he mentioned that ED was intended for 8-10 year olds and so they didn’t fuss over little things like trying to find a better replacement for the heal rule. I sometimes wonder what an “advanced” ED would look like, you know if it was re-made, but this time for an older audience and with more strategic depth. I think Mike Maloney has made some great decks that add a lot of strategy to the game without changes the basic mechanics, but that’s not quite what I’m thinking of. Probably it’s just better to let ED be a fun, fast shoot ’em up and look in other places for deeper games.