Week 8 (23rd - 29th December 2013) - Eldritch Horror: Playing Solo on the Flute of the Outer Gods

Yes, I know - possibly one of the crappest inneundos so far - it was either that or something about polishing the lamp of Alhazred. In any case, this week's offering is another new solitaire outing: Fantasy Flight Games' Eldritch Horror. I picked this up about three weeks back, and have only just had the opportunity to play it.

I am a massive Lovecraft fan, such that my obsession also extends (occasionally) into my professional life. Over the years, I have tended to purchase virtually anything and everything gaming-related with a Lovecraft theme. In recent years, I've been much more cautious in this regard, as slapping a Lovecraft/Cthulhu theme on stuff does not itself a great game make. Being at the forefront of Lovecraftian boardgaming  - producing the reboot of Richard Launius' Arkham Horror (and its many expansion) - Fantasy Flight Games can usually be trusted in this regard. Indeed, for a time Arkham Horror which seemed to be FFG's signature product and, I believe, one of the company's biggest sellers. Despite it being a great game, like Lovecraft's Great Old Ones, Arkham Horror has transfigured into something of a bloated monstrosity. Whilst I love the game both in solitaire and co-op mode, the older I get, the more loath I am to play it given the time it usually eats up (about 5-6 hours last time it hit my table). Indeed, whilst FFG are still reprinting the AH, they seem to have focused their energy on expanding their stable of Lovecraft games with new offerings rather than additional product for AH (which hasn't seen a new expansion for a couple of years). The most recent edition to this stable being of course Eldritch Horror: a wonderfully streamlined and globe-trotting spin on the older game, and whose core mechanics are similar to Arkham Horror.

In Eldritch Horror, players take the role of investigators, whose job it is to halt the return of one of the Ancient Ones (such as Azathoth, Cthulhu or Yog-Sothoth) whilst retaining life and sanity in the process. Eldritch Horror differs somewhat from AH in that players have to solve three mystery cards to defeat the Ancient One threat, rather than closing gates to other worlds (although this remains a helpful strategy - see below). As per AH, EH also sports a doom track, which various events (usually the opening of gateways to various horrible dimensions) will push forward from turn to turn. Should the doom track reach zero, the Ancient One awakens and usually bad things happen - most likely resulting in the players loosing. Various other mechanisms (usually driven by cards that are revealed throughout the game) can also cause the players to lose if they do not fulfil certain objectives within a given timeframe. In the game I played, a card was revealed which forced my characters to stop a Tcho-Tcho cult within a certain number of terms or otherwise I would lose. This, of course, causes interruptions to players seeking to solve the mystery cards before the doom track reaches its end.

If Arkham Horror tries to represent in boardgame terms a typical Call of Cthulhu rpg scenario, Eldritch Horror seeks to replicate a typical world-spanning CoC campaign - but does it in a much more streamlined manner than its precursor.

Eldritch Horror set up in preparation for my first game.

The two investigators I chose for my first game: Mark Harrigan and Leo Anderson: manly men doing manly things...

 

Pimping out my game using FFG dice (including Blessed and Cursed dice - not shown here) and Litko stands for gates and monsters. I also have an FFG dice bag (see the photo above) with big green tentacles on the front from which monster counters are randomly drawn. Oh, and a dice cup with a supposed 'Elder Sign' emblazoned on it as per the dice bag shown here: uncanonically, a star, not a tree...

 

For goodness sake, people, this is what an Elder Sign looks like!

Rather than provide a detailed review of gameplay, I will instead summarise (probably already evident from the above) what I think makes this the better game comparable to the otherwise excellent Arkham Horror. Firstly, it has a slightly smaller footprint and set up time. Whilst the board is of a good size and, as per usual for FFG, the gaming components are of the highest quality, I can fit this on the desk in my study (which I can't with AH). Gameplay is far more streamlined: there are fewer phases/stages to go through, such that each turn runs fairly quickly and fluidly. As a consequence, the game takes significantly less time to play.  Notably, the processes of closing open gateways (one of the ways of stopping the doom track from advancing) only takes a single turn - it could take up to three turns in AH. My first play - using two investigators - lasted two hours, including set up time: a massive difference in comparison to AH. Bearing in mind, this first game was also a learning game, so I would anticipate this taking maybe 90 minutes on average (although more players/investigators will of course expand the typical length of a game). Like AH, EH also scales to the number of investigators used. Being fully co-operative, it also works extremely well as a solitaire game. Whilst I lost my first game, it was quite close - and this to me is the mark of a good solitaire or co-operative - as per my comments about the LotR card game, if the game system likes to beat you with a heavy stick very early on, it tends to be a frustrating and not terribly enjoyable experience. Like AH, EH is dripping with theme and colour, and does replicate the feel of a desperate race against time in order to stop the end of the world - as per the previous point, losing the game regularly is not a issue for me as long as it 'feels' winnable and that the journey to the endpoint was narratively immersive (which for me, EH is). The rules are also somewhat shorter and slightly better organised that those of AH.

Given that Arkham Horror has not seen much love in recent years, my suspicion is that Eldritch Horror may emerge as AH's 'replacement' - at least until FFG get around to doing a new (and hopefully more streamlined) version of the older game. Overall, this is highly recommended - especially if you are a Lovecraft fan. On the Gaming Self-Abuse Scale (tm), this scores a whopping 9/10.

Week 7 (16th - 22nd December 2013) - The Lord of the Rings Card Game: One-Handed Tossing of the Hairy Dwarf

Well, whatever else did you think this post's title was referring to?

 

 

In my last post I promised that entries for the ensuing month would focus on solitaire games from my collection as yet unplayed. However, with the recent release of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, I've decided to take a more thematic approach to this week's game (although it is one I've played solitaire previously): The Lord of the Rings Card Game from Fantasy Flight Games.

The LotR Card Game is one of FFG's 'Living Card Games' - a response to the crash of the CCG market in lieu of the disastrous rush of many game companies to cash-in the success of Magic: The Gathering (which almost lead to the demise of Chaosium, whose excellent CCG Mythos I shall be posting about at a later date). The LCG model involves producing card games via an introductory box with fixed of cards (no randomisation), and allowing players to expand on this through regular releases of fixed expansion decks, meaning that competitive players aren't spending huge sums of cash ripping open randomised booster packs in search of rare cards.

 

Whilst The LotR Card Game is no stranger to my table, this week games have included a previously unplayed expansion: The Hobbit: Under Hill and Over Hill.

 

Whilst the core game explores the build up to the War of the Ring (being set twelve years prior to the events of The Lord of the Rings), The Hobbit: Under Hill and Over Hill is the first of a set of 'saga' additions to the game that will eventually enable you to play your way through the entirety of epic story arc of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

 

The LotR Card Game is designed for both solitaire or collaborative play, pitting players against scenarios consisting of a number of stages (usually three), each represented by a card. Scenario cards also define the contents of the encounter deck, consisting of a number of challenges and enemies players must overcome  in pursuit of the scenario's objectives. To do so, each player chooses a number of heroes (again, each represented by a card), portraying many of the well-loved figures from Middle Earth (in The Hobbit expansion, these include Bilbo Baggins and Thorin Oakenshield). Heroes have distinctive characteristics and abilities which aid players in fulfilling scenario conditions and thus winning the game. Each player also constructs a deck of around 50 cards, from which they draw a hand of 6 at the start of the game, gaining an additional draw each turn. These cards can be played at various points to garner allies, equipment and other benefits which will facilitate players/heroes success. Cards are paid for using resource tokens acquired by heroes throughout the game (also usually at the start of each turn). Heroes and cards have an associated trait such as lore, tactics or spirit, such that cards can only be paid for using resources from a hero with a corresponding trait. This, in turn, effects deck-building, in that choosing heroes with the same trait makes it easier to pay for cards, but limits the kind of cards that can be included in the deck.

 

The LotR Card Game with Hobbit expansion set up for first play

As per most solitaire or collaborative games, The LotR Card Game utilises a variation of the 'doom track' mechanic. In The LotR Card Game, this is the Threat Tracker, represented by a nifty cardboard dial. The Tracker is initially set according to the value of the heroes chosen. The more powerful the hero, the higher his or her cost, and the higher the Threat Tracker is set. If at any point the Threat Tracker reaches a Threat Level of 50, the game ends and the player(s) lose.

 

Achieving scenario objectives often involves placing a number of progress tokens on the card marking the current scenario stage. When these equal or exceed the quest number of the card, that stage of the scenario is completed and the players move to the next stage. Acquisition of progress tokens is via questing. This involves exhausting a number of heroes, then revealing cards from the scenario encounter deck. If the combined willpower of the exhausted heroes is greater than the threat level of revealed encounter cards (which remain in what is called the 'staging area' from turn to turn, so their combined threat level regularly increases), then players have quested successfully, and place a number of progress tokens on the current scenario equal to difference between the heroes willpower and the threat level of revealed cards. If the heroes' willpower is lower than the combined threat of revealed cards, then the Threat Tracker is increased by the difference. Following this, if any monsters have been revealed, they may have the opportunity to attack and do damage (and possibly kill) the heroes. However, only heroes who are not exhausted can defend against and counterattack monsters. The game is, therefore, all about effective resource management - of when to devote heroes to questing, and when to leave heroes free to deal with various beasties (orcs, trolls, goblins, giant spiders and the like).

The problem is that the game is so damn difficult to beat (or at least some of the scenarios are). During earlier plays (without The Hobbit expansion), I found that a typical scenario took about 8 plays to beat, with each new play requiring a refining of the player deck and choice of heroes. In this respect, I've also found The LotR Card Game to be too 'gamey' - or at least very much a 'gamer's game' with an emphasis on number-crunching, deck-building strategy and card synergy rather than theme. My experience so far with The Hobbit expansion (8 plays this week) reinforces this, in that it doesn't seem to play very well using thematic deck/set of heroes - indeed, looking on Boardgamegeek, received wisdom seems to be that using Gimli (a hero from the game's core set) - who of course does not appear in the narrative of The Hobbit, even though his old dad Gloin does - is one of the best ways to beat the first scenario (in which Bilbo, Thorin and company famously have to deal with a trio of hungry trolls).  After 8 plays, I've not come anywhere near beating this scenario using the themed cards and heroes included in this expansion, usually loosing the game by turn 3 (I've found that a typical scenario usually lasts about 10-12 turns or longer). It's not that I mind a game being difficult, or being beaten more times than I win; rather - and to use a somewhat tired analogy  -  for me it is about the journey and not the destination: if a game is dripping with theme and narrative, and seems reasonably well-balanced such that I have at least a chance of winning every 5 plays or so, then all is well and good. But frankly, with so many games ending so abruptly, I've become somewhat disillusioned with The Hobbit expansion. This is a shame, as I was really excited about beginning what I anticipated as being an epic journey through the entirety of the events of War of the Ring (and thus flinging more of my hard-earned cash FFG's way); now I'm on the cusp of giving up. FFG themselves have recognised this as a problem, subsequently releasing a set of optional rules to facilitate themed play - rules which I did in fact institute for all of this week's games, but seemingly to no effect.

 

That said, previous plays have been enjoyable albeit difficult, so it is likely that I will give this another go. The cards themselves are absolutely beautiful, and as per usual with FFG, production values are of the very highest - all of which draws me to the game. However, the frustrating nature of game play - at least with the first Hobbit expansion (there is one other which completes the story) does mean that, on the Gaming Self-Abuse Scale (tm), this currently scores a 6/10.

Week 6 (9th - 15th December 2013): Pandemic.

This week's solitaire outing is yet another of Z-Man Games' offerings, Pandemic. In truth, I had intended on giving the new Eldritch Horror a spin but, with the usual pre-Xmas rush as work winds down, I found myself pushed for time and so opted for a game that a) I was familiar with and b) had a short enough play time and could fit into my rather hectic schedule.

Game set-up at the start of play

Sadly, this also means I don't have time to review the game in detail subsequent to my playing. In brief Pandemic is a co-operative/solitaire game in which the players are battling to cure four diseases before they reach epidemic levels, bringing about an apocalyptic end of things if too many outbreaks occur. Overall, I've found this game quite a tough cookie to crack - needless to say, during tonight's game I lost spectacularly (although I had managed to find the cure to one disease, and was close to curing another before the end). Whilst I don't quite have the time to go into the details of gameplay, Pandemic is very quick and easy to pick up, and involves a number of very clever (but simple) mechanics which drive the game's AI. The great thing about this game is the level of tension is manages to ratchet up as the players race against time to save the world, which works extremely well in terms of Pandemic's theme. This is also a game which can be played quite easily multiple times in an evening (an average game takes about 45 minutes - 1 hour), and works well as a filler between longer games.

On the Gaming Self-Abuse Scale (tm), this one scores 8/10.

Apologies for the brevity of this post, but as I have some time off over the next few weeks, expect longer and more detailed posts during the coming month, where I will be turning my attention to a number of as-yet-unplayed games.

Week 5 (2nd - 8th December 2013): Yggdrasil - 'In The Halls of Valhalla, Where the Brave May Live...Forever!'

Vikings and shit.

Now we're talking.

Yggdrasil by Z-Man games is a relatively light solitaire/co-operative Euro-style game which, like the previous offering, is quick and easy to learn (about 8 pages of rules).

Game set-up is relatively quick (about 5 minutes), and the production values are extremely high - the board is a beautifully rendered, and the components are generally of very high quality:

Yggdrasil set up and ready to play - the four coloured bags contain counters which are drawn at various points in the game.

This has been sat on my shelf for over a year since I splashed out on it, and until now has remained unplayed. So time to crack one out (a game, that is) over its lush board. In the game, players take on the role of one of the Nordic gods (Odin, Thor, Freya, etc.) and aim to forestall Ragnarok by preventing their enemies from entering the hallowed realm of Asgard. Each of the gods provides a unique ability or benefit to game play. On this occasion I chose Thor, whose ability is to give a +1 bonus to combat in the game (this seemed like a significant benefit, as combat is one of the principle means of preventing enemies from breaching Asgard's defences):

At the start of each player's turn, the top card of the enemy deck of is revealed: each of these holds the image of one of Asgard's enemies: the dragon Nidhogg, the Fire Giant Surt, the sea-serpent Jormungand, the monstrous wolf Fenrir, the God Loki, and Hel (Loki's daughter); once revealed, the depicted enemy's counter is advanced along the Asgrad track towards Valhalla and Odin's stead. When activated, each enemy also produces an effect which impinges upon players' opportunities for winning the game. Loki, for example, reveals the top card of the Giant deck, which usually limits the kinds of actions players can take, or makes it harder to beat enemies in combat; Fenrir causes the current player to use up one or more of their actions; Jormungand impedes players from calling forth the souls of dead Viking warriors to take up arms against Asgard's enemies.

The current player then takes three actions from a range of nine available (mirroring the nine worlds of Norse mythology as arrayed upon the tree Yggdrasil), each of which can be helpful in limiting the advancement of Asgard's enemies into Valhalla. However, on a given player's term, no action can be taken more than once. Actions include acquiring various artefacts helpful in defeating enemies, acquiring a warband of Viking warriors (useful for the same), or engaging directly in combat with either any revealed Giants (thus ending their effects if player's win the combat) or one of the enemies of Asgard (which forces said enemy to move back one space, effectively giving the players more breathing space in face of the relentless onslaught of the game).

A unique six sided dice is also included in the game, with each side either blank or depicting an icon of a crossed sword and hammer on a coloured background. The dice has multiple uses in the game. In combat, the number of icons rolled by the player adds to his or her combat total. This total can be increased by returning Viking warriors to the world of the dead prior to rolling. These warriors are acquired by drawing a number of tokens from one of four coloured bags, each containing a different mix of Viking and Fire Giant tokens. Various enemy effects cause Vikings to be removed from bags, or Fire Giants to be added according to the corresponding colour of the icon rolled on the dice.

The game is lost if 5 enemies make it beyond the walls of Asgard (three spaces along the Asgard track), or if 3 enemies make it beyond the door of Valhalla (five spaces along), or one enemy make;s it into Odin's stead (the eighth and final space). Player's win if they can prevent any of the above after all of the cards in the enemy deck have been revealed.

Overall, I found Yggdrasil to be fast and fun. Whilst randomness has a role to play in the game, player choices are relatively open, allowing for a range of specific strategies to be deployed. Despite being a Eurogame, Yggdrasil did feel remarkably thematic with regard to its how its mechanic worked to reinforce the feel of its subject matter: playing Thor, I was eventually defeated (appropriately, for the Marvel fans out there) by Loki, whose rapid advancement along the Asgard track during the end of the game meant that a large number of Giants ended up being revealed, each of whose abilities seriously limited the scope of my actions. Whilst I lost the game, it did feel quite close - given a few more turns, I might have prevailed. Had the Hulk been around, things may have turned out differently:

Score on the Gaming Self-Abuse Scale (tm): 8/10. This is a lovely looking game, which can be played fairly quickly (my solitaire outing took about 90 minutes from set up to finish), and the rules are generally clear and concise. Strategic options mean that the game has good replay value.

Week 4 (25th November to 1st December 2013) - Onirim (what, no innuendo?)

Sadly, real life has intervened this week such that my planned solitaire game of Yggdrasil did not reach its ludic climax, but collapsed instead into a state of flaccid detumescence. Also an update on last week's game - in retrospect, it seems that I was playing the Doctor Who Solitaire Story Game wrong in one respect: I should have been rolling for an encounter at the end of each round, which would have significantly raised my chances of revealing an enemy before the end of turn 12.

Fortunately, being somewhat prescient to the possibility of a complete fuck-up on the gaming front, I have factored in a number of back-up plans whereby, in dire emergency, I can implement a game of something quick and easy to fill the gap (as it were). However, on this occasion the urgency of the situation was such that I had neither the time nor inclination to arrive at a suitable game-related onanist innuendo as this week's sub-title...

So with only a few hours to spare before the end week's end, I managed to knock out a few hands of Onirim by Z-Man Games. This is a solitaire/collaborative card game based on the conceit that you are trapped in some kind of dream labyrinth, and need to wend your way through the oneiric maze whilst acquiring keys to 8 doorways that will allow you to escape.

Onirim consists of a deck of 76 cards made up of 6 variants: 4 different location cards each marked with one of three symbols (sun, moon or key) and keyed to a particular colour; doorway cards; and nightmare cards. In order to win Onirim, you must acquire 8 doorway cards from the deck before the final card is drawn. You start with a hand of five cards, and have to draw up to this amount at the end of each turn. At the start of your turn, you can play a location card which can be of any colour, but must display a symbol different to the previous card played. If you are able to play three cards of the same colour consecutively, you can search the game deck and acquire a doorway of that same colour. If you ever draw a doorway and you have a card of the same colour with a key symbol in your hand, you can discard the key card to acquire that doorway (otherwise place it in a 'limbo' pile, after which it is reshuffled into the deck at the end of each turn). If you draw a Nightmare card, various bad things can happen, such as placing an acquired doorway into the limbo pile, discarding a card with a key symbol from your hand, or discarding a number of cards from the top of the deck (thus cycling through the deck more quickly). The game is incredibly quick to pick up (I learnt the rules in less than 5 minutes), but is quite challenging. That said, Onirim seems fairly reliant on random factors, such that opportunities for player strategy can be somewhat limited.

Top to bottom from Left to Right: the game box, a nightmare card and one each of the coloured locations (I forgot to include an example of a doorway card).

I terms of production values, the cards are illustrated in an interesting manner (although they do have a somewhat childish quality to the design aesthetic which may not be to everyone's taste), but in limited variation (there are only 6 different card designs). On the plus side, Onirim does play very quickly (a solitaire game takes about 20 minutes), and is quite addictive. It also has a very small footprint, so is ideal as a travel game.

For me, the initial appeal of the game (outside of its solitaire playability) was that it seemed to be about cats in a dreamworld (well, the cover illustration looks like a black cat to me - though it is in fact a Nightmare from the in-game world). As a big Lovecraft fan, this struck me as having a certain resonance with some of HPL's 'Dreamlands' stories. Sadly, this is not quite the case, though I do enjoy the game enough to have considered producing, via Artscow,  my own thematic variant based on The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath.

On the Gaming Self-Abuse scale (tm), this scores a 6.5. Overall, a fast and fun game, but lacking in depth and with some visual/aesthetic limitations.

Next up: Yggdrasil (hopefully!).