We play with only a few leaders available at any one time. Then replace as they are taken/ ditch unwanted ones at the end of each round. It works much better for us. We found that having them all available led to less replay-ability because technically your choice is always the same spread of cards. Narrowing the decision space has created more replay-ability.
Big Valkyrie Rules Clarification!: When discussing Sigrdrifa and Hildr, two of the best ones, Tom says you need four heroes for Sigrdrifa and three distinctions for Hildr to get their max score. You actually need three heroes for Sigrdrifa and two distinctions for Hildr. The point token on each card starts at the top, so for example, with Sigrdrifa, she has four slots. You need to move down three slots by getting three heroes to get to 16 points. This is a big difference. Here is a quote from the rulebook for further clarification: "As soon as you recruit a Valkyrie, put her in your Command Zone and place 1 Strength token on the highest notch of the card. Each time you meet the requirements described on the Valkyrie, move the Strength token down one notch." This expansion is in alpha or beta on BGA right now and is programmed to work this way, also. Also, on a personal note, as someone who plays this a lot online and in person, winning scores very often have four heroes. Sigrdrifa only requires three. I'm very surprised this isn't the instant favorite valkyrie card for everyone because she rewards you for something you generally should be trying to do anyway to max out your points. (This comment is just to clarify one rule. The general criticisms of the expansion I don't disagree with. It is a great expansion for experienced Nidavellir players who want to play it over and over. For casual or new players of Nidavellir, this is too much. I personally love it.)
Thank you for the clarification, as well as your agreement with the review for casual or new players versus your personal opinion as a frequent player. (A balanced opinion in the comments section of a video AND a positive reply? Something must be wrong with the cosmos...)
Thingivellir is actually included in all my games, I feel like it gives more decision space without adding too much. This one adds 25 different effects to figure out though. It would be one thing if the effects were relatively simple, but listening to the overview, they don't seem to be. A little bit disappointing, but still willing to give it a shot. Thanks for the video!
As always nailed it for me = "I like an expansion to elevate the game and not complexify." I feel Thingavalier was a decent addition, not too complex, added more............. but Idavoll seems to do too much. Streamlined base game is perfect and I think Thingavalier will likely just stay in its box most of the time too.
What shines on Nidavellir is how simple it is. Taught it to my non-gamer mom in 5 minutes and she never once asked what the normal cards did, just needed a reminder on heroes when she went for the first one. I got excited because of the mithology theme but after the review I'm certain I'll never expand this game.
Played Nidavellir last night for the first time, 4p. Lots of fun - this looks like this will bog the game down quite a bit. We loved the game partly because it was so snappy and quick turns (even for the first time). Only thing that slowed us down was looking up hero powers. The legends powers look even more cumbersome than the ones in the main box. No thanks
This really seems like they are making expansions just to make expansions. Watching the how to play portion of your video instantly turned me off of that expansion for very much all the reasons you state in your review section.
Sad to hear it. That's mostly how I felt about Thingvellir. Slows the game down having to frequently reference what the new cards do. Was hoping this one wouldn't be the same in that regard.
What this does reminds me of is the latest cosmic encounter expansion. A bunch of modules that you could add if you feel like it, but not required of any game.
Agreed. Idavoll is a lot to take in for an expansion, it slows things down, and some of those cards would take quite a few plays (that, given the added complexity/bloat, may not happen) before you get how they work. Otherwise, it is frustrating and unnecessarily lengthens the game. Thingvellir, my gaming group and I play this about half the time we play Nidavellir. Idavoll - I think we've played it maybe twice? It just didn't gel with our group.
i have to agree with Tom and comments below, this seems cool at first, but in practice will slow down the game and add too much complexity without making it much more fun or interesting , meeh ;C
Thingvellir adds something i felt was lacking in 2 players games which was reason to bet high on a row nobody wants, this one just seems to add powers for the sake of it
I'm totally cool with this expansion making the game an extra round or so longer, I always felt like nidavellir was always too short. I feel like some of these cards give the opportunity for a player to catch up which isn't a bad thing.
This evening I played with the expansion Thingvellir and I came to the same conclusion as Tom, the base game is good enough. I will certainly not buy this expansion Idavoll.
My wife loves this game. Me? Not so much. Probably one of the few games that I disagree with Tom Vasel on. I'm lucky that most of his recommendations really work for me.
+2 to all your coins "not worth any points"??? Has he played this game? At the end of the game, you get points equal to all of your coins, so you are immediately gaining 8 points (I'm assuming you don't add to your '0'). And then, every time you combine coins, you are working with coins that are already 2 higher, so it's effectively 2 more points each turn when you combine coins. How is that not just a ton of points? Not saying it's better than any of the others he explained, but it's a huge oversimplification to simply say it's 0 points.
He obviously meant the giant was worth 0 points, not it's effect. He literally said at the start of the video he's played the game 10 times just this year already.
The "effect" of the giant is that your coins are higher, so you win taverns more. But you cannot properly evaluate the points from the giant without pointing out that you get points for your coins at the end of the game. So no, the giant isn't worth "0" points. I understand that those points are "indirect", but his implication was that the giant doesn't increase your score, which is simply not true. In terms of points, it is immediately worth 8 points plus another 2 (effectively) every time you combine coins for the rest of the game. That is potentially more points in terms of points alone than some of the heroes, so it shouldn't be glossed over, which is what he did. And I clearly knew he had played the game...but he seems to be discounting the giant as not being worth points, just effect, and that is not true.
@@joaorobalo7594 Put another way...if you were to get the Giant on the very last turn of the game, you will end the game with 8 points more than if you didn't get the giant. Clearly, the earlier you get the giant, the more those points compound, but to say it isn't worth any points just because it is printed with a "0" is incorrect.
@@ericbess5917 I'm not going to read all of that, when the situation we're discussing is so simple . Everyone that isn't on the spectrum understands what he meant when he said the giant was worth 0. I understand it's frustrating to have a harder time evaluating social situations, but it's easier if you're less aggressive when you don't understand said situations. Next time just say "well, actually the giant is worth X because Y", instead of asking whether he's played the game or not and acting like he doesn't know a basic rule.
We play with only a few leaders available at any one time. Then replace as they are taken/ ditch unwanted ones at the end of each round. It works much better for us. We found that having them all available led to less replay-ability because technically your choice is always the same spread of cards. Narrowing the decision space has created more replay-ability.
I really like this idea! Thanks :)
Big Valkyrie Rules Clarification!: When discussing Sigrdrifa and Hildr, two of the best ones, Tom says you need four heroes for Sigrdrifa and three distinctions for Hildr to get their max score. You actually need three heroes for Sigrdrifa and two distinctions for Hildr. The point token on each card starts at the top, so for example, with Sigrdrifa, she has four slots. You need to move down three slots by getting three heroes to get to 16 points. This is a big difference.
Here is a quote from the rulebook for further clarification: "As soon as you recruit a Valkyrie, put her in your
Command Zone and place 1 Strength token on the highest notch of the card.
Each time you meet the requirements described on the Valkyrie, move the Strength token down one notch."
This expansion is in alpha or beta on BGA right now and is programmed to work this way, also.
Also, on a personal note, as someone who plays this a lot online and in person, winning scores very often have four heroes. Sigrdrifa only requires three. I'm very surprised this isn't the instant favorite valkyrie card for everyone because she rewards you for something you generally should be trying to do anyway to max out your points.
(This comment is just to clarify one rule. The general criticisms of the expansion I don't disagree with. It is a great expansion for experienced Nidavellir players who want to play it over and over. For casual or new players of Nidavellir, this is too much. I personally love it.)
Thank you for the clarification, as well as your agreement with the review for casual or new players versus your personal opinion as a frequent player. (A balanced opinion in the comments section of a video AND a positive reply? Something must be wrong with the cosmos...)
Thingivellir is actually included in all my games, I feel like it gives more decision space without adding too much. This one adds 25 different effects to figure out though. It would be one thing if the effects were relatively simple, but listening to the overview, they don't seem to be. A little bit disappointing, but still willing to give it a shot. Thanks for the video!
As always nailed it for me = "I like an expansion to elevate the game and not complexify." I feel Thingavalier was a decent addition, not too complex, added more............. but Idavoll seems to do too much. Streamlined base game is perfect and I think Thingavalier will likely just stay in its box most of the time too.
Thanks for the review.
"Complexify" I'm using that term
What shines on Nidavellir is how simple it is. Taught it to my non-gamer mom in 5 minutes and she never once asked what the normal cards did, just needed a reminder on heroes when she went for the first one.
I got excited because of the mithology theme but after the review I'm certain I'll never expand this game.
Played Nidavellir last night for the first time, 4p. Lots of fun - this looks like this will bog the game down quite a bit. We loved the game partly because it was so snappy and quick turns (even for the first time). Only thing that slowed us down was looking up hero powers.
The legends powers look even more cumbersome than the ones in the main box. No thanks
This really seems like they are making expansions just to make expansions. Watching the how to play portion of your video instantly turned me off of that expansion for very much all the reasons you state in your review section.
Agree. I usually want to buy all the expansions for my games but this one will NOT be purchased. I just am not interested in this at all.
Sad to hear it. That's mostly how I felt about Thingvellir. Slows the game down having to frequently reference what the new cards do. Was hoping this one wouldn't be the same in that regard.
Agree with you there, really disappointed to see what it adds. All this adds is a bunch of trips to the rule book each game.
What this does reminds me of is the latest cosmic encounter expansion. A bunch of modules that you could add if you feel like it, but not required of any game.
Agree.... as much as I love Cosmic, in the end I got the expansions for the aliens and not so much the modules.
I think expansions like these reward those who just use them every time. When everyone understands the new content.....less slog.
Nice decorating your Box Thrones. Cloud Puncher Games should ask you permission to use a few photos of that setup.
Agreed. Idavoll is a lot to take in for an expansion, it slows things down, and some of those cards would take quite a few plays (that, given the added complexity/bloat, may not happen) before you get how they work. Otherwise, it is frustrating and unnecessarily lengthens the game.
Thingvellir, my gaming group and I play this about half the time we play Nidavellir. Idavoll - I think we've played it maybe twice? It just didn't gel with our group.
i have to agree with Tom and comments below, this seems cool at first, but in practice will slow down the game and add too much complexity without making it much more fun or interesting , meeh ;C
Thingvellir adds something i felt was lacking in 2 players games which was reason to bet high on a row nobody wants, this one just seems to add powers for the sake of it
I guess I should have waited for the review...
When will you review the new everdell expansions?
When will you wear wigs?
Too fiddly for me. It's already hard to explain all the cards and now there are even more special powers.
I skip this one
Been looking forward to this review and very disappointed for what is included. Not intuitive at all. Fingers crossed for expansion number 3 lol.
Fantastic breakdown. This will unfortunately be a skip for me!
Eh, not a fan of this one. It looks like it slows the game too much and there are a lot of "this looks bad/complicated/too specific" cards.
I'm totally cool with this expansion making the game an extra round or so longer, I always felt like nidavellir was always too short. I feel like some of these cards give the opportunity for a player to catch up which isn't a bad thing.
I have gotten my 5 year old playing Thingvellir
This expansion would make kt too complex
This evening I played with the expansion Thingvellir and I came to the same conclusion as Tom, the base game is good enough. I will certainly not buy this expansion Idavoll.
My wife loves this game. Me? Not so much. Probably one of the few games that I disagree with Tom Vasel on. I'm lucky that most of his recommendations really work for me.
+2 to all your coins "not worth any points"??? Has he played this game? At the end of the game, you get points equal to all of your coins, so you are immediately gaining 8 points (I'm assuming you don't add to your '0'). And then, every time you combine coins, you are working with coins that are already 2 higher, so it's effectively 2 more points each turn when you combine coins. How is that not just a ton of points? Not saying it's better than any of the others he explained, but it's a huge oversimplification to simply say it's 0 points.
He obviously meant the giant was worth 0 points, not it's effect. He literally said at the start of the video he's played the game 10 times just this year already.
The "effect" of the giant is that your coins are higher, so you win taverns more. But you cannot properly evaluate the points from the giant without pointing out that you get points for your coins at the end of the game. So no, the giant isn't worth "0" points. I understand that those points are "indirect", but his implication was that the giant doesn't increase your score, which is simply not true. In terms of points, it is immediately worth 8 points plus another 2 (effectively) every time you combine coins for the rest of the game. That is potentially more points in terms of points alone than some of the heroes, so it shouldn't be glossed over, which is what he did. And I clearly knew he had played the game...but he seems to be discounting the giant as not being worth points, just effect, and that is not true.
@@joaorobalo7594 Put another way...if you were to get the Giant on the very last turn of the game, you will end the game with 8 points more than if you didn't get the giant. Clearly, the earlier you get the giant, the more those points compound, but to say it isn't worth any points just because it is printed with a "0" is incorrect.
@@ericbess5917 I'm not going to read all of that, when the situation we're discussing is so simple . Everyone that isn't on the spectrum understands what he meant when he said the giant was worth 0. I understand it's frustrating to have a harder time evaluating social situations, but it's easier if you're less aggressive when you don't understand said situations. Next time just say "well, actually the giant is worth X because Y", instead of asking whether he's played the game or not and acting like he doesn't know a basic rule.
I don't like expansions that slow the game down. Also, when's Nidavellir gonna make a bad named game list?
Never, probably. It's hard to pronounce for me, but that doesn't make it a bad name.