A Burning Brand · RingsDB

It seems this card was severely nerfed. It should read now "Item. Attach to a Lore character. Restricted. Response: Exhaust A Burning Brand to cancel a shadow effect just triggered during an attack that the attached character is defending."

Now it seems borderline playable to me.

Source: boardgamegeek.com

9/13/19

Benettnash 26

My card doesn't have those words so nope still good ;) — Christian_Medic 1053 9/14/19

After hearing about this errata, i was thinking that this would work well with the upcoming Three Hunters contract: the restricted is a good thing for once? Either way, exhausting is a nerf that i can't spin into a good thing though. — bento 15 10/22/19

What gives with this card not getting an errata in the FAQ but it's printed differently now? What other cards are like that? — slothgodfather 45 12/13/19

This change is certainly controversial, but I think for the best. The original version was OP. Not only did it make Dark Knowledge obsolete as the reviewer below says -- it pretty much made shadow effects obsolete so long as you had access to readying effects. The new version is still very playable. Being able to repeatedly cancel the worst shadow effect each round is still a powerful ability and well worth a restricted slot. What I'm more annoyed about is that people started spotting these changes a year ago now (see "Different cards with the new reprint?" in FFG forums dated April 2019), and there is STILL no updated FAQ from FFG?? — 3ric 140 4/5/20

I've been trying 2-player Ruins of Belegost with post-errata Burning Brand, and that quest got way harder. — Tegyrius 126 4/5/20

When an enemy gets multiple shadows, are they all revealed at the same time, or should you reveal one at a time and choose which one to cancel before checking them all? — Freeman 3 4/22/22

Burning Brand is bananas good. With the only restriction of having to attach to a hero, It has the potential of cancelling an insane amount of shadows throughout the game. upon it's (early) release it pretty much rendered Dark Knowledge obsolete. It's so satisfying when a sleeping sentry is woken by a burning brand.

8/5/17

Wandalf the Gizzard 2485

The card says "character", not "hero". There aren't many tough lore allies in the game that would benefit, though. — Edheliad 21 12/22/17

IMO, it's pretty much down to #Gildor (3 def), #Haldir (2 def, sentinel) and possibly a couple of Ents (since its not a restricted attachment) as viable targets. But I've had several games its really paid off. Of course there are other ways to get a lore symbol on heroes too, since it doesn't explicitly designate a character with the 'printed' lore icon (Narvi's Belt, Song of Wisdom, hero Gandalf's ability, etc) — Quetzal513 97 8/13/19

Narvi won't work because it only temporarily grants the lore symbol. The brand would fall off as soon as Narvi's effect lapses. — DunYoss 54 5/30/24

Attachments only check for eligibility the moment they are attached, so Narvi's Belt works (and hero Gandalf as well if you play the brand from the top of your deck) — Taudir 338 5/31/24

Oh wow! That's good to know. The Rules Compendium isn't perfectly clear on this topic. I agree with your reading of it (and I learned something new, thank you), but I would add that there is one exception to the general rule. You are correct that on page 54 it says: "Play restrictions, such as 'attach to a Gondor hero' are checked only at the time the attachment enters play." However, it also says on page 54: "If a character gains the text 'cannot have attachments,' any attachments on that character must immediately be discarded." Similarly on page 41: "The text 'cannot have attachments' is absolute. It is possible to play attachments on a card with this text while its text box is considered to be blank, but any attachments on that card must be discarded immediately the moment its text is active again." — DunYoss 54 5/31/24