A really bad Hero, unless you desperately need (more) card draw (and highly questionable even then)
Not gonna lie, Bilbo Baggins is imo a strong contender for the title "worst hero in the game". Insanely overpriced at 9 for his absolutely horrible stats.
How bad he is is actually somewhat showcased by Beravor, a card that comes in the core set, that is, for all (relevant) intents and purposes a better hero.
For just 1 more Beravor can both draw your table 2 cards per turn and choose the drawing player.
Plus her 2 2 2 4 make her a better emergency... well everything than Bilbo Baggins.
The only edge Bilbo has over Beravor, is that he doesn't need to exhaust to draw cards so he is free to...?
To do what exactly is my question?
Quest for 1 paltry ? Attack for equally paltry 1 ? Defend with his 2 and 2 ?
Just questing puts poor little Bilbo Baggins in very serious danger of dying due to damage from treacheries from the encounter deck (and the cycle Bilbo Baggins appears in already contains such "fine" Treacheries like Necromancer's Reach, Evil Storm and Rockslide). I don't think i really need to elaborate, why defending seems a surefire way for Desaster...
Attacking is mostly fine but do you really need exactly 1 more ?
If you need card draw (and you decided you do, why else include Bilbo Baggins?) Is this 1 (or if quest permits it 1 ) worth drawing 1 less card and not even being able to choose who it goes to?
And sure you can try to compensate for Bilbos extremely lacklustre stats with attachments... But to what end? Why not play the same attachments on an already good hero to make that same already good hero even better?
In short, don't play Bilbo Baggins unless you desperately need card draw and you (or someone else at the table) already plays Beravor (and even then strongly consider if the 1 extra card per round is really worth basically getting an almost useless hero).