Lord of the Rings LCG Rewind: Revising My Core Issues

[@PickleTheHutt]

The best expansion to grab after the revised core is the Dark of Mirkwood scenario pack. It repackages the 2 beginner friendly (relatively easy quests but both are more involved than the one easy core quest) from the Limited Edition 2 player starter set from several years ago. These quests also have campaign mode which can be played on its own or incorporated into the 3 core set campaign.

[@matslarsson6919]

This game is not for the faint of heart, but it has an almost limitless depth (if you are ok with spending lots of money on expansions). You have to put in a lot of work, but all that work rewards you tenfold. Highly recommended as a solo game especially. If you don't like the deck construction aspect of the game I am not sure I can recommend it. Others might disagree as there are excellent resources out there for "net decking". The game's difficulty is a draw for me, but to some it can probably come off as obnoxioulsy grindy. I love the loop of being crushed by a scenario, going back and tweaking your deck, try again and being marginally less crushed etc etc. When you eventually win it feels super awesome, in a way I haven't come across in any other game. My favourite game by far.

[@andresm377]

While this had been in my radar for a long time due to the Tolkien theme and solo playability, I was a bit hesitant to jump in before this new core set and starter decks, but finally took the plunge earlier this year and I absolutely love it. The deckbuilding is very satisfying (and does not require to tailor your deck for each scenario, at least on easy mode, which is something I was not thrilled about), the games are tense and exciting (again I play only on easy and for me it is the perfect level), and the theme really comes through, especially through the scenarios (something I think this game does a bit better than Marvel Champions, where I find the theme comes more from the heroes themselves). I have already bought a ton more sets (most of the new stuff, but also plenty of older ones as well), and after 250+ games since the end of March is already one of my favorite solo games.

[@JonnyLuscious]

Gameplay-wise, this is actually my favorite LCG.... But it does suffer from the issue of deck building pretty much being required. Instead of having a variety of ways to win a scenario, typically the puzzle is solved by knowing how to make a deck that works for it. The preconstructs help a lot to resolve that, but it can still be a bit of a weakness if you're not into deck building (there are websites now though that list decks, so you can always copy a deck from online). With higher player counts, there can also be an issue with locations not scaling well with the original rules (ie the number locations that can come out per turn increases with player count, but you can still only travel to one a turn, which means a bad pull of a lot of locations in a row can wreck a game unless you always add characters that can resolve locations without travel.) I had somewhat hoped they would remake the game with rules somewhere between these and arkham horror LCG, but at least this release strategy didn't invalidate the cards I already own... So overall a good choice.

[@keithhammons2605]

Excellent review, thanks! I'm in a similar boat, I was always intrigued but put off by the time required for deck building and lack of campaign. Having now played loads of AHLCG and Marvel Champions, and as a LotR fan I think I'm ready to give this a shot.

[@bushibayushi]

played this game over 600 times, my fav game of all time. Brilliant for solo and 2p. It's very demanding, but each scenario is endlessly replayable. And if you invest in a few cycles, you will see a universe of possibilities.

[@PickleTheHutt]

FYI, when playing campaign mode you can always replay a scenario even if you win. That usually means you never have to worry about losing a hero if you are ok with simply replaying a scenario for a better outcome (the same that you'd do if you lost). This isn't a house rule but is the standard campaign rule.

[@spunx44]

Everyone keeps saying this is the official rule but I've yet to see anyone post proof of that. The rulebook does NOT say that at all.

[@PickleTheHutt]

@@spunx44 One of the designers clarified it. There's a post somewhere with that info (not sure if BGG or the old FFG forums) but I don't have a link. FFG is known for designers giving rules answers that never make it into the official FAQ. Even if it weren't, you could just stop trying and lose as soon as a hero died for the same effect.

[@DeepFriedwater1]

I picked this up on a whim due to it being Tolkien related. and I love it! its one of my favorite co-op games I have ever found!

[@BenetTribble]

I have read about the attempts by some very well known players to build one deck, played true one-handed solo, and play it successfully against all scenarios (even on nightmare mode). The most recent versions of these decks are built using the Bond of Friendship contract card. Being able to pull out a pre-made deck that you can have fun with against any scenario may allow people to have more fun with the game, experiencing the variety of the scenarios, and with the least amount of time spent (less deck construction, less game duration as you are playing single handed).

[@bobsteel1981]

Personally I would suggest a separate storage solution anyway: for the player cards anyway. I have everything from before this release, and find deck-building and tracking which cards I have / am using a lot easier by putting the cards in sleeve wallets in a ring binder. (Well three ring binders when you have everything). It's much easier to just flick through pages in an order rather than through a pile of cards. Not sure how you intend to store the enemy sets, but I have printed dividers between them in card boxes since the last release's boxes aren't useful for storage.

[@douglaspearson4853]

Loved this review. I like the Lord Of The Rings theme. But have been burnt by FFG with the Game Of Thrones LCG. I have and enjoyed the Star Wars and Warhamer 40K LCG's. So I was torn do I go with this one or not. I didn't want to get it and find out they upgraded and was now stuck or got into it and find I can't find a pack I wanted. I really like your telling of the 2 passed versions experiences and and the differences. I do feel you answered my 2 biggest questions and did pick up this edition. I do feel anybody interested in this game should see this video I do do trust your reviews. Thank You

[@truemrfu9673]

This is the best solo game ever made imo. The core box isnt good. It was the first solo LCG made so there were issues but they were all fixed in later cycles. If someone gets into this I suggest the core set and the re-released angmar cycle. And maybe 1 of the start let decks. Whichever theme speaks to you.

[@aSyphodias]

Agreed, I started with Marvel Champions then AH revised and now LOTR. With the revised core only I was going to sell LOTR but I gave it another chance getting the starter decks and Mirkwood and it is now my favorite of all 3 solo :)

[@Sem5626]

that's a big call... i'm mostly a solo gamer and this has been on my radar for a long time, only heard good things maybe its time to finally pull the pin and buy the revised

[@Hudsonbba]

100 percent agreed as well. I got in with Arkham, own everything still love, played 30 games of Marvel Champions and sold it, then got everything for LotR and OMG it’s now my in my top 5 board games all time and I’ve NEVER had a solo game that high for me as I vastly prefer playing board games not solo because of the social interaction. Dang this game is GOOD!

[@alessandromassi3659]

Dunno. I’ve AH e 2 exp and the “old” core set of LOTR and I prefer AH for the story aspect of the game. If you win the story will be played a little different and if you fail a scenario you can still go ahead with the story but it will be harder. Love it. And you have you character too that you upgrade during the campaign. In LOTRLCG you just go from scenario to scenario, doing every time new decks and that’s a “meh” for me.

[@Hudsonbba]

@@alessandromassi3659 Completely agree on enjoying AH for it's story and when it comes to these LCGs it definitely comes down to preference. I've everything there is to offer for AH but I much prefer playing it cooperatively with others. I've played close to a 100 games of LotR, all solo, and even though it's not very strong in the story aspect I VASTLY prefer it for it's gameplay/card mechanics/deck building as it's closest game I've ever played to giving me similar feels of a TCG in solo form. The issue here though LotR doesn't unlock it's full potential until you've amassed a large card pool which most aren't going to get to unless they were hooked with the core box, which I think is meh compared to even the AH core box, or played some else's large collection.

[@aorakis5795]

This box is as much a huge improvement (cards in x3) as it is still a miss opportunities : Such as reworking some cards, quest and what cards are actually selected in this corebox.. (coz still 70% of those are real rubbish) I wished they reworked as well the 3rd quest in that box Wich is still a pain for a new coreset owner (but is better than before with that "campaign" mode) All in all, LOTR lcg is still one of my all time best game. And the best solo lcg from ffg. But unfortunately it still requires a lot of investment. Hopefully they're gonna re edit all the older content for the newcomers. Maybe the new TV show is gonna push ffg in that way. Happy playing and cheers from belgium

[@Clappincardboard]

Imo this is the best of the three ffg lcgs.

[@lexodius]

I agree. I enjoy the arkham deckbuilding better, but the lotr mechanics are smoother.

[@pb-bx1ll]

I really enjoy this game solo, and I'm glad they're they are releasing products, love Arkom horror for coop

[@ArsenicDrone]

Anyone recognize the brand of those plastic component boxes? Those look well designed.

[@PsychicLord]

An awesome review, easy to see why you are number one at the DT. Look forward to purchasing this myself now.

[@francoisbouchart4050]

Two questions: Have any of the mechanics been changed or updated? Are the cards compatible with the previous editions?

[@MyKonaRC]

They are the same cards, reprinted. Game still plays exactly the same.

[@iggy8u]

Rules updates: No. Compatible with previous releases: Yes.

[@ryandude3]

The mechanics haven't changed, but they add a campaign mode that smooths out the difficulty of the harder core scenarios. The cards are indeed compatible with the previous editions--it's basically a new sales format for the same game.

[@ravenbom]

Fantasy Flight needs to outsource their rulebooks. There's always a better rulebook on BGG for every FF game.

[@LegendxWolfe]

Can you elaborate on why you won’t play it with 3 or 4 players? Is there an issue with it or do you usually just play with a single other person? Considering it for a group of 3.

[@JonnyLuscious]

It works with 3, but it does slow it down a little bit (I still enjoy playing up to 4 though)... The main issue, which I mentioned in my own comment, is that locations can be problematic with higher player counts (as far as I know they haven't changed this rule, although some people do house rule to allow a way to clear them quicker)... at least in the original rules, you are only allowed to travel to one location per turn (and having locations you aren't traveling to out increases the threat you are dealing with), but the number of cards you flip is based on player count.... So at higher counts, there is a possibility that locations come out faster than the game allows you to deal with. There are some allies that can address the problem, but it kinda sucks to ALWAYS have to play the exact same cards to deal with a rule issue. It should also probably be noted that some scenarios' difficulty can greatly be effected by player count (the 3rd scenario in the original core box being one that is near impossible solo, but not bad with a high player count)

[@vincentlepine]

I've never played with 3-4 players but what I've heard is you can have considerable downtime between turns and game can take too long for what is is... but if you dont mind, play with 3 players, it will be fine. Also some quests are way easier with high player counts. Im currently stucked with a quest in the angmar awakened campaign and i probably think the only way to win is to play 3-4 players.

[@deltaarena2447]

I had been wondering whether to pick up this game or not for a while. I think I'm finally sold on this one.

[@DeltaDemon1]

For me, the inherent problem with the original game (and possibly this new edition) is that expansions come with additional cards for deck building almost requiring deck building to become a part of the game. Not a problem so far...I play MTG and love deck building. But, to build a deck that is functional requires a fairly in-depth understanding of a game. I own the game so, not a problem but other players joining me on quests for this game do not. They will therefore not be able to build a robust enough deck. Additionally, no one wants to spend an hour building a deck on game night before playing. So this means quickly slapping together some cards to form a makeshift deck which usually does not work very well. Therefore, this game stays unplayed.

[@Grimmlocked]

i keep two decks together designed to play together together at all times. and when it's just me and a buddy i throw one of the decks at him

[@BenetTribble]

I've read that the Bond of Friendship contract card leads to deck construction rules which can make the game easier for true 1 handed solo. I intend to try this game again and build a deck using those rules and see if it's true.

[@greygoo5319]

I don't remember it being released in a smaller format box. Unless that was the limited two-player starter set?

[@rokkon]

It was just a box size change with a slightly updated rulebook / rules reference. No changes to the release format at the time. Same cards as the original box.

[@kumanight]

I love that cover. I'm too invested in Marvel Champions to buy into another LCG but I would like to give the one a try

[@haukionkannel]

I agree a lot in this! It was hard start with original release, this one is much better in this and experience helps a lot. The new prebuild character decks helps also new players to get inside of this game without need to heavy deckbuilding that is essential when you make own decks. Also the new campaign mode definitely make me like this game more.

[@seileen1234]

One of my fav game of all time

[@warpaint9385]

Had the original also and sold it. Always found the game too hard. It probably came down to poor deck building in the end. Was never good at deciding what cards to use. I have the same problem with Netrunner and Game of Thrones especially when you’ve added extra packs and there’s now a hole heap of new cards to choose from. This new format in a way might be more to my liking as there’s starter decks I can buy and just go from there. I’d probably stick to the starter decks in the core set for awhile as well. Might revisit this game.

[@DrMcFly28]

I love this game, but after buying a good number of expansions at some point I got reeeally burned out on deckbuilding. The game is extremely fun while you're deep into it, but leave it for a few months and getting back is absolute hell. AH LCG is much less stressful in that regard - you can enjoy the game even if you keep playing with pre-built decks from the web. But in LOTR LCG the game pretty much **is** "build a deck that can beat this level", so getting other people's decks feels much less satisfying.

[@nuuqbgg]

So no need for 2 core boxes anymore?

[@rennyroufail728]

Not really. You get a full playset of everything. Only reason I can think of is is you want to have a lit of decks pre-made.

[@TheBalg]

Most people can’t grasp how good this game actually is..

[@patrickvalo8822]

I own the entire game. Love this game

[@sm5574]

There's a lot that I love about this game, but the base rules just don't click for me. In particular, I really -- _really_ -- dislike the fact that most characters cannot both defend and attack on the same turn. It makes absolutely zero sense. Characters (at least heroes!) should get two actions before being exhausted. I also don't like the math-iness of the combat; I'd rather there be at least some form of randomness to it (yes, I know about the Shadow cards, but I'd rather you roll 3 dice instead of dealing 3 damage, or stronger characters roll dice with more sides, etc.), so there's at least a chance that you could get lucky when the cards just aren't going your way. And I wish there were a way for the locations to be completed in an order that makes sense, rather than just randomly popping up.

[@floodkevin4716]

Disagree 😢

[@danacoleman4007]

Lol. I did the same thing. Owned the game when it first came out and hated. It. Repurchased it for some crazy reason when the new edition came out. Still hate it. Even though it's based on one of the best IPs of all time.

[@CosmicTavern]

Are sleeves recommended for this game?

[@vincentlepine]

Yes, you shuffle a lot. So sleeve the cards is essential for this game.

[@danacoleman4007]

I sometimes play with no shirt at all

[@CosmicTavern]

@@danacoleman4007 It has been pretty hot lately.😆

[@JCB82787]

That rule where a hero dies and stays dead sounds like an instant house rule to me as well, without the threat penalty possibly because this game is hard enough.

[@spunx44]

Well you sold me.

[@V081WLBlue]

So are there different cards for each sphere and for the baddies as well?

[@bol317]

The artwork on the box is a huge improvement

[@fufu1405]

Thematically I love game, but everybody agrees Arkham Horror does things better. The way locations work just makes it so much more immersive. I would love a 2nd edition where they go the Arkham Horror route. I want freedom with deck building and not have to build a deck a certain way. I've been thinking about LotR or AH and thematically I love LotR, but it seems like a much more punishing experience that AH, which is ironic, considering AH games tend to be super punishing. Also the way locations work, just seems better in AH.

[@grivours]

Agree 100%

[@DeltaDemon1]

Another problem with this game is that unless you are very familiar with the world (having read the books), the game becomes a bunch of mechanisms without much context. I like the game but, not having read the books and having only a passing interest in the movies, the "adventures" mean nothing to me.

[@wekufeh]

Well that is a common issue whit the themathic games.

[@RadeTcg]

Live play of this please

[@bushibayushi]

only 7/10 on BGG? I thought you'd give it an 8 judging by what you said ;)

[@garykellogg2758]

Just started watching. Please don't tell me I need buy this game. Let's see.....

[@MattD007]

Whose core issues? Please, PLEASE add who is in the video in the thumbnail like you used to. Watch to find out is a pretty cheesy way to get a view.

[@erickshaffer6615]

Tom answered this in a Q&A saying it doesn’t matter who. It is just the “dice tower studios”

[@MattD007]

@@erickshaffer6615 it matters to people who like and line up with particular reviewers over others. You have to start the video just to back out? Makes a lot of sense. It just comes off as a cheap way to get views.

[@erickshaffer6615]

@@MattD007 Not saying I agree with it. I do like the names in the titles as well. Just letting you know that it probably won't change going forward.

[@thecuriousboardgamer]

Both my phone and my desktop display the video such that I see the vid start before I click it, so I can always see who's doing the review.

[@MattD007]

I appreciate it, and sorry if you thought my comment towards you came off as negative. Feedback can be good, so I certainly hope they can see that. My gaming tastes simply do not line up with certain reviewers they have, so needing to click onto a video to see who it is reviewing a specific game is counterproductive and a waste of time. I know I'm not alone in this thought. They have no issues making MIke's solo reviews known, or contributors like Graeme. Thanks for letting me know their official answer.