I think this is the best review channel for boardgames. Because it is fair and honest. You focus on games I like (mid-heavy), explain your opinions clearly. But most importantly, are not shy to be properly critical. Big fan
I'd just like to add to the many people here who compliment you for your review. I've watched way too many reviews of Oath lately, and yours definitely puts some professional reviewers to shame! It's incredibly insightful, well articulated, and concise. You did not just list pros and cons... you painted a very coherent and vivid picture of what the game feels like! Fantastic job.
Mmmm.. you are quite good at talking about a game in general, giving an overall overview while not diving deeply. These seem great for anyone interested in it, but not really invested in investigating a lot. Can't really explain it, but I quite enjoyed it. Easy to watch.
I could see how competitive players, meaning if you play with the sole intent to win, could be very disappointed and frustrated with the game. But you can't play it too casually either because of its complexity. It's a weird balance which I personally really enjoy, a complex game with high player interaction. And as long as interesting or cool moments happen during the game, I'm more than fine with losing.
Totally get what you mean and indeed it does really create some cool and funny stories! (In our experience - once people have calmed down 😅). I think for us it’s not so much losing that’s frustrating - it’s more that by the end you end up feeling a bit powerless as if you’ve got more war bands out you have less supply and less actions you can do - in our games it’s more often than not become so restrictive and tight to the point where it’s just not that fun... but you’re absolutely right it is a unique balance in this game for sure!
@@BoardOfItReviews Hm, thanks! That makes sense, I suppose in a way with supply you get punished for doing well. I'll have to see and experience the game for myself when I get the opportunity to play it.
Personally, this is one of the best review i've ever seen. I love Oath but all you said is true. You rock guys, you are capable of say good and bad things with true honesty.
Wow thank you so much for the lovely comment - that’s really made our day! 😃 Really appreciated. The thing is - we also do really like the game and always look forward to playing it - but just want to be honest with the negatives as well as the positives that we see from our own experiences so people can make an informed choice when deciding whether a game might be for them or not!
A friend of ours got their copy and we basically just had a weekend long Oath fest - a lot of fun, but can definitely see this frustrating a lot of players- but that is actually an itch I like being scratched! I love tight economy and frustration in gaming. If approached from the right angle, even if you’re losing, you can just enjoy watching the story unfold. Great video!
Thank you! That is such a brilliant way of describing Oath - an itch to be scratched! Totally agree with this - despite the frustration we experienced and the critique we gave the game - we actually always look forward to playing the game and it’s that weird thing of as soon as we’ve finished a game, even if some of the players have felt so annoyed, most of us just want to give it another crack immediately! 😅
One of the most clear and comprehensive reviews of Oath that I’ve watched on RUclips. You both did an excellent job objectively stating the pros and potential cons. I feel very informed after watching your review. Thanks for the post! PS - Although Inis and Seasons of Inis are older games, I would love to see and hear your thoughts on them.
Really amazing to hear that, it means a lot to us and we just hope it was helpful! It's funny you mention Inis, because before this week we were pretty lukewarm on Inis (had played twice). It was pretty meh and never grabbed us - we much preferred Kemet. Then, this week we played another two games, and both of them were so much fun. They were tight and tense and both games we took the pretender tokens in the same round which is so cool. Haven't tried Seasons of Inis yet though!
@@BoardOfItReviews I felt the same way with my Inis games! Your tastes in board games definitely align with mine. I’ve been following your channel since Scythe and watching your reviews is definitely part of my research process before I purchase anything. Btw, which game do you guys prefer between Scythe and Kemet?
@@pete7421 That's so cool! Gotta be Scythe for us, although they are hard to compare directly. Scythe is basically our favourite game of all time (both of us). Probably a decent amount of nostalgia there that helps it stay at the top spot, but whenever we go back to it we always have a great time. Kemet is a really top notch 'dudes on a map' game, but that genre isn't our favourite.
@@BoardOfItReviews Awesome, thanks for the quick reply! I just realized I made a mistake and meant to ask what your preference was between Kemet and Inis. 😂
@@pete7421 That would currently still be Kemet: Blood and Sand. It's swashbuckling fun, with silly powers, great miniatures, and smart card driven combat. It really grabbed us our first play too. That said, it's a bigger box, probably more expensive and takes longer to set up. Inis is more serious and thinky, but TBH as we said, we've really only started warming up on Inis this week.
The paw on the shoulder was so cute! Really appreciate this review, I played for the first time last night and my friend and I were disappointed that we really couldn't immediately start at two people, or at least the game didn't want us to. Hoping to get it to the table again soon with more players to give it more of a chance to shine
It was super cute, made our hearts melt when we watched the video back 😅 thanks for watching - we’re glad you enjoyed our review. For sure this game needs more players to shine so we hope you get the chance to play at higher player counts soon. We have played some games at 2 player and enjoy them but it’s for sure not a game we’d ever recommend if people will only ever have the chance to play at 2!
I've been watching a few of your videos, but this is the video that made me subscribe. Not only is this well explained, and beautifully presented, but I got a real sense of what you liked and wished were better.
I want to get this game so bad, but I’m still not sure it’d make it to the table often due to the complexity. And I usually only play with 2 total players, which seems like this game doesn’t shine with? Thank you for the detailed, yet quick overview!
As tough as it is, we'd have to recommend you don't get it. We'd love to play it more but it's been sat in our cupboard almost since this review because our group doesn't like it. I'm not sure if they've worked on tightening the two player variant, but if they haven't I wouldn't recommend that either. So it sounds like with your situation isn't very compatible with Oath as it was defo made to be played repeatedly by the same group or groups. Perhaps Root with the Clockwork Expansion might be a safer bet?
@@BoardOfItReviews I finally just got root! (It’s been tough to find recently). Now I need to learn it! I’ll take a look into the expansion too, thanks for the suggestion.
This is the most cohesive and easy to understand review and overview I have found of Oath. I recall when you first posted your Brass review onto reddit and was pleasantly surprised to find this video and it's noticeable how much work you have put into improving your style and editing. Unfortunately for Oath, per usual with Cole's designs, looks like a game I would love but may be hard to find others who feel the same. Particularly, to keep at it through multiple playthroughs. I think it will still be worth the purchase and may have better luck finding a gaming group, outside of my usual 3-4 friends, as the pandemic situation improves.
Wow thanks so much for the nice words, that really means a lot to hear you can see the difference in this from some of our early videos! So cool to hear! Hope you can get some people onboard to take the time to learn and appreciate Oath after several plays as it does unlock its secrets after some time 🙏🏻
@@BoardOfItReviews Well they are both dashing, and the two of you are very charming and delightful to watch. I really like your writing, how you connect with the audience and how you convey the feel of the games. I was an instant subscriber. Keep up the good work.
Thanks so much - honestly we’re really happy to help on this one - as you said it’s a lot of money so if we can help people make a decision as to whether it’s a game for them or not then we have done our job! 👌🏻
@@BoardOfItReviews I only discovered you a few months ago and you do seem to tell it like it is but also in a constructive way. Funnily enough by the middle of the video I have decided not to buy but by the end you piqued my interest again. A bit like Feudum which I have a love hate relationship with. Oath seems to have a beautiful concept that clearly rewards committing time and I do have the right groups but we have so many games to catch up with after lockdown. So maybe I'll look again in a few months. So yes a truly useful review - I will keep watching.
Great review. First honest critiques about the game that I've seen so far. I've watched a lot of gameplays of it and made some of the same diagnisis thay you did, and yet the people that were experiencing it didn't mention those at all. I think you're on point on those and who this might be for.
Thanks a lot for watching and for the comment! That’s interesting and good to know you have witnessed similar things through watching game plays and it’s not just us that has faced the issues we have mentioned. It’s a strange one as despite the issues we do look forward to playing again and it is a good game, it just really needs the right group...
Thank you! (And sorry for the delayed reply!) we could think about doing an intro playthrough 🧐 but I think the issue with this one would be much of the time spent is in silent thought mode so it might not be a very riveting watch 😅😅
Exceptional review. The details gave me a clear idea of whether or not this game is right for me. I don't think it is, as 90%+ of my gaming is 2 player. Thanks.
"Supply is in short...supply". LOL nailed it :) Great review! Really looking forward to playing this one but I can definitely see how its a tough sell.
Haha thank you!! It is a really brilliant game if you can push through the first few and find the right group for it. Let us know how you get on when you get around to playing!
Like the Pax series, and some other games, Oath has a learning curve I'd describe as less of a curve & more of a cursive 'U.' So, the "late game fatigue" is a funny thing, because it's like a weird lull...it's (usually) before the 8th or 10th play. But once players start to see how the game itself is changing its shape, they adapt their play to it: they still play to win, yet not for its own sake, but to affect the suit makeup, or the geography, or (sometimes especially) Edifices. This, at last, is when they find they're playing *their* game, and not so much "the" game, and this is when Oath really comes into its own for groups. That "late game fatigue" lessens or disappears, as they can better see how to manipulate the resource systems, how to be flexible, and how to build up so you lock right into position at the right time (like a Pax game). With this kind of experience, the die roll is also often dramatic...because even though its a die, a series of choices led to one another that made the ending roll so valuable, and players are good enough to look back & understand the causality at work. In this way, esp. with experienced players, it really rewards strategic inertia & multi-turn planning, really paying off the die roll happening (or not). I'd say it rewards strategic inertia even better than Root, probably- and, this is also why with experienced players, it sings with 3. EDIT: a tip...if it's too costly to Search the World, try to Recover the Darkest Secret.
Thanks for a terrifically well written counterpoint! I hope everyone who sees this video reads this to get more information and an alternate opinion. I would say we still disagree on a few points. While we've played 10+ games now, and at least Tallie and I know how to work the game pretty well, sometimes the players still just can't get out from under the economy because of the way the game played out. Some games a lot of favour is burnt, some none is. Our last game was actually our most satisfying and enjoyable - but it still got to a point where everyone became stuck because there was only 3 favour or so left in the banks. It would take an entire turn to move, collect favour and muster, and then your supply is spent and all you've got is two troops to show for it. It's also interesting you say about the Edifices as we've found them to be so situational as to be almost ignored in our games unless they align with exactly what you're doing. I don't think anyone as ever actually used one. Not to say they are useless mind, I'm sure other people in other positions could do great things with them. The issue with being flexible as you say, is that you can do that, and it's great, but when one person suddenly will win on their next turn, what you have to do is very specific. You have to either fight them, or out-do them, and maybe both. Often at this point you have advisors in play, the board is filled up with cards, and the banks are a little low, so it becomes quite a struggle to be so specific. Being flexible early on might help with that, but it probably won't absolve it. We'd have to disagree about multi-turn planning, because while you can of course foresee and come up with a strategy, Oath is so chaotic and interactive we've found you'll almost be wasting your time doing that. So much can change, and will, that it's better to be reactive (IMO). The player who goes before you could empty the favour bank you plan to use, multiple players could attack your sites meaning you no longer have access to cards you wanted, the PF could change hands twice and end up with impossible amounts of favour on it...etc. A decent number of our games have been won by the random actions of two players creating a clear opening for a 3rd player, and allowing them to pounce. Lastly, I think it's also important that you mention playing 8-10 games to get past the late game fatigue. While Oath is obviously best for a committed group of regulars, and we always stand by playing a game multiple times before an opinion is formed, that is a huge time commitment. We aren't criticising Oath for that either, just stating it's an incredibly high bar. How many of the 13,400 backers will get that chance? I'd have to argue that even if you're completely right our review is still pretty valid, because how many people will play this 10+ times? Anyway, we'd like to thank you again for a terrific counterpoint! It sounds like you have real experience with the game so I hope people consider what you have to say, and I think you've highlighted some great stuff that people should always be thinking about when playing Oath.
@@BoardOfItReviews Your review is great! I mean, I think my only actual point of difference is that I think it's really great (and at its most strategic) with 3 seasoned players. I was a playtester. So, my views about replayability may be slightly colored by that, esp. about losing that late game fatigue. But in a nutshell: the "big ask" here has far less to do with Oath itself, actually, and more to do with the typical, "en vogue" gaming habit/diet...try a game a handful of times, make up your mind about it, then move right along to the next game. So the thing is, none of Cole's games are good for that. And, I personally believe most people who aren't casual about his games understand that pretty well. Because there are also some gamers who vastly prefer giving lots of playtime to 1 game at a time, instead of lots of playtime spread over a game rotation. This is also part of Root's success: the core community around Root are people who have played far more than 20, 40, 50+ games of it. Of course that's not all Root players. It would be crazy to expect that from all who come to Oath, too. But you are absolutely correct to point out it's a commitment any way you slice it. ...A lot of this is also to say...I hope people realize the people who worked on the game really did play it heavily. Oath was in development for over a year, longer than Cole's other games. Playtesters clocked in several dozens of games. We saw how skill develops, to the point where you're not only making multi-turn strategies: you're making "multi-game" strategies! Really seeing how to shape one's Chronicle, one's copy of the game itself. Esp. when Chronicles get pretty old (like 40+ games old). So, what may happen is, some groups who reach that depth will start pulling double (or triple) headers with Oath, making a day/eve of it every so often. Such "deep divers" might even meet & exchange copies with each other, and see what it's like to play in other Oath worlds...and metas. Again, this isn't gonna be everyone, even people who really enjoy the game. But it has this potential, to expand how people think about their gaming...what it means to win, what campaigning a game means, how might a game change as your group meta changes...There is an appetite for this potential. I really believe that.
@@malexander4094 Very well made points! Again, a great read. I think we'll have to direct people to your comments in our monthly look back video so they can appreciate the opinion of someone who knows how the game shakes out over time. You're totally right though about the need to shift the general view of how to consume games when it comes to Oath. I especially like the part about expanding how people think about gaming with Oath. I defo think something incredible has been designed here if the right group can harness it.
Solid review. I personally am very excited to Oath, but curious seeing alternate opinions and love finding this channel which states both sides which is what a review channel should do. Great job! Oath is definitely a different game, and I think people’s opinions will be colored by other games they want to correlate to Oath. Personally I think Oath gets more interesting when people make bids to end the game before turn 5 even though a lot of people seem to wait until turn 5 to do so. Thanks again for the great and honest review!
You make quite a good point about the early bids! That is also something we'd like to see more of, as I think it would certainly be a much more fun and engaging battle early on when the game is more open. Hope you get to play soon! Also, thanks so much for the kind words. It's really awesome to keep hearing that people appreciate we talk about both sides. We honestly feel bad sometimes (like with Oath) critiquing it because we do really like it, but it's important people know the issues. It seems that sometimes the bad points of a hot new game get glossed over - in our reviews of Lost Ruins and Beyond the Sun, lots of people said we were the first review they had seen to even discuss negatives.
I have played 5 games on a 3-players setup and the conclusion is that your review is spot-on on every aspects. This game is a gem but it's not for a lot of gamers and require a dedicated group who are into storytelling more than turn optimization (just for this game).
Thanks for the kind words! Means a lot that you feel the same. We're actually a bit gutted that our friends aren't more into it, as we'd like to play it more often. Cole Wehrle is a brilliant designer, but Oath is in a weird position in that it's a game everyone wants because it's by Cole, but it's not a game everyone will like, so we tried to get that across.
@@BoardOfItReviews ...and to be honest, on these 3 players: one does not want to play it anymore, the other and I are dying to form a 4-player group to create new chronicles. In good or bad, we will hear about Oath for a while.
Re: ending up in a position where you can't possibly win, Root has the same issue -- if you werent attacked/policed by other players, then you have a great chance of winning. But in Oath the cards all feel very overpowered (by design) and so one good card and negotiation between others can sway things dramatically. And the same person doesn't have to be chancellor. If your group has a salty player (upset about not seeing a path to victory), then maybe they can be chancellor next game? It's less about who is in the seat of power, and more about the shape of the empire from one game to the next. THAT is the story of Oath :)
We'd argue the difference is that in Root there is usually always the chance for other players to bash the winner, and if they don't take it, it's on them (90% of the time). Plus, Root has a snowball effect where if you get your engine going, you will be grabbing 10+ points in the final round compared to 1-2 in the first, so the end often comes mercifully quick. In Oath, because of the board state, players can have literally no way to attack/recover the winner, as the actions have costs and limits, unlike Root, and then have to wait round after round for the end if the chancellor is the oathkeeper. I don't think the issue has been people not being chancellor or not winning, it's often the manner of how they didn't win and were forced to suffer. That's only our experience though!
@@BoardOfItReviews You can also ask for citizenship if you’re losing as an exile, or you can team up with another exile to take down the chancellor. You can make a pact that if one of you wins the game, you will make the other person a citizen in the next game. If you can’t win this game, maybe you can at least become and citizen and increase your chances of winning next game. I feel like Oath was designed with this sort of multi-game strategizing in mind.
@@WideMouth We just think the issue is it's great in theory, and all well and good to say this - but try convincing a frustrated newer player who can't do anything meaningful for two turns that they can start in a mildly better position next game. Rightly or wrongly, I bet a lot of them won't much care. Plus, it's all situational...the chancellor might not grant anyone citizenship, or maybe the exiles have utterly different goals. That said, you're totally correct on everything. There's just often a disconnect between what can happen, and what does happen. It's tough for players to rewire their gaming brain in that way!
Great review, honest and concise. I have Root and Vast: The Crystal Caverns, I am still on the fence whether to buy Oath. You points of caution are worth thinking about.
Thanks for watching - and for the comment - we really appreciate it! It is a tricky one to recommended since not all of our games are enjoyable for the reasons we mentioned in the review but also that being said, this game is addictive and like an itch that needs to be scratched and despite the frustrations, we always end up really looking forward to playing again sooner or later. Let us know if and what you decide either way!
7:54 'the roots available to them' I caught that. This was a great review! Just played this last week and won as the citizen, but it didn't feel like a strong win. I did enjoy the playthrough, though.
@BoardOfItReviews Hey everyone! We really appreciate you watching! If you found this helpful, please consider subscribing as it helps us grow our channel. More subscribers makes us more attractive to publishers, which allows us to collaborate with them and make more videos! It's costly and time consuming to make these videos, so we could really use the support! :)
Despite the (very fair) negatives highlighted, this review has only further fuelled my anticipation! Really intrigued to hear more about your experiences with the Clockwork Prince - from your comments and what I've read elsewhere, it sounds like it may need some attention from the better bot project.
Glad you enjoyed it! It means a lot and we're glad our criticisms didn't come off harsh. Yea, we certainly think it does. The system itself is quite cool, but in action...not so cool. It gets so many resources so easily that on the second turn it'll show up at a players only site with 10 warbands and decimate them....then hoover up about 4 favour from the bank. It just feels totally unlike another player and just makes you feel frustrated that you have to struggle for anything while it has no boundaries. Or, it just breaks down completely because it tends to dump all 10-12 warbands it has on one site. In our third game it got stuck in a loop and all it did was steal all the money from the shared bank so nobody could do anything.
Oh wow, that sounds... Painful. The warband dumping is something that's been highlighted a lot on BGG from the TTS games. It seems the consensus is that in a solo game the Prince should place all warbands on the campaigned sites as per the rules, but for 2p games to spread them equally between the sites and their board. This seems to stop the cycle it gets stuck in.
16:15 So it's fair to say that your friend SWORE AN OATH to never play the game again? Sounds like the makings of a good Chancellor... 😂 On the serious side, this is one of the better reviews that I've seen, not only for this game, but for any game. I love the presentation style of the two of you taking turns sharing thoughts and feelings about the game, as well as your ability to be comfortable sharing negative thoughts without fear of backlash. SUBSCRIBED!👍😎🚛
Wow thank you so much for the lovely comment that’s so nice of you to say! Haha he did but he is for sure an Oathbreaker because we managed to convince him to play once again after we filmed the review 😅 but he’s resumed the Oath once again as that game did not go well for him haha! Thanks for watching!
Great review, as always. Your cinematography keeps getting better and better, but what really got me is how you distilled a complex experience and its pluses and minuses so well in a reasonably short review. Question: I haven't gotten to play Root often (maybe twice in 2 years) and so it feels quite overwhelming to me. How complex would you say the teach for Oath is in comparison? Do you also need to be aware of asymmetric powers and rules for all factions at the table from the start? I think your negative points and frustrations were well presented. And yet, the review makes me wish I had a weekly gaming group to dive into this one.
Thanks for the kind words, it means a lot! Regarding Oath vs. Root, I'd say it's better and worse, which is a terrible answer...sorry! Root is overall easier, but the issue is you each faction is playing a different game, so it's really hard for someone to teach each faction if they haven't played as them, or even to check what everyone is doing. But the core concepts are quite simple, and the factions are often not complex. In Oath, it's really hard to know what to actually do with the options available to you until you just stumble through a full game. It's a complex game with a lot of sub-rules, plus the ever changing array of cards adds further complexity. That said, everyone has the same actions, and the same 4 goals are always in play, so there really isn't any difference between an exile/chancellor besides 'when' you can win. Bottom line is Oath is the more complex to learn, but in some ways easier to teach as you don't have to teach each faction.
@@BoardOfItReviews That makes sense. And a good reason to play this game regularly if you are going to get it at all. Allows players to get a good grasp of the rules and remember what all the cards and possible turn actions allow. Definitely something to consider. Thanks again!
Do the legacy components hold up fine with a variety of player counts and individuals showing up throughout the campaign, or would that necessitate a reset of the board state?
You can absolutely swap players in or out from game to game with no issues at all - we did this throughout our first plays of the game. The legacy elements are barely even ‘legacy’ and it’s just more than one game affects the board state of the next game but it bears no impact on players coming in. That said, as some other commenters have mentioned, we feel like the game does need some dedicated players who are willing to push through the first playthroughs which can be pretty tough to fully appreciate what the game offers - so from that perspective it’s less recommended. But legacy wise - it’s fine! Hope this helps 😊
Really great video! I was seriously thinking of buying this, but after watching the review I don't think it'd be right for me and my group, at least for now
Thank you! Yeah in our opinion it’s really not going to be for everyone…especially when of course it’s quite an expensive game that ideally you need to be able to play multiple times to both enjoy it and get the value out of it. We’re glad we could help you make a decision on this!
Thank you for a very fair & honest review, which touches upon both strengths and weaknesses of this game without blindly regurgitating the hype I've watched on some other venues. I backed Oath because I enjoy Cole's designs which generally reward repeated plays and a fuller understanding of card effects. Having said that, you confirmed some of the issues I suspected would frustrate players, complicated by some degree of unavoidable AP. Regarding the "legacy" element- did you find the relatively small number of cards removed/added to the World Deck between turns significantly impacted the next gaming session? Does this mechanic incentive the losing players to create the best possible starting position for the next round? Cole described this as a "multi-generational" game- what kind of stories emerged from your experience? I'm excited to give this (several) tries, and reasonably confident that it will retain most of its value if later on I decide to trade/sell it for another title. 🖖
Regarding the cards, it's a bit of a mixed bag in our experience. Generally, the number of cards drawn will relate to the number of players, and then again to strategy, and then again to free space either on sites or advisors. It's hard to say if they significantly impact the game (although they certainly can if you get the right combos), because often you just don't personally see that many. You can honestly go a few games where the landscape barely changes if the chancellor keeps holding onto power (or a citizen wins) - which gives you less chance to play cards to sites. Usually what has happened for us is once everyone has a vision, or all the visions are drawn, people stop drawing from the world deck because it's too expensive (unless they have the Darkest Secret Banner). So we often only go through a fraction of the deck, which makes it hard to even know if we've seen new cards from the previous game, or new cards from 6 games ago! But over time it will likely have an impact, because trading is very related to the suits in play. I wouldn't personally say the world deck itself incentivizes anyone to get themselves into a good starting position more than any other aspect. But the cards are totally awesome. Thanks for the kind words, it means a lot, and hope we could help!
Thanks for a great review. I was really keen on this game despite knowing so little about it. Your clear and honest review made me reconsider getting this game not because it's a bad game but based on your explanation on the type of group it best suits. I struggle to get my group together more than once a month so I really don't think this is the kind of game they will enjoy. Thank you!
Oath is my favorite game when there are five players, at least a $5 buy in, and pot splitting is part of deal making for citizenship and alliances among Exiles. The tension, deal making, and backstabbing floweth!
Despite the issues we mentioned in our review - totally agree it’s such an excellent game when you get into the spirit of things! Our only negative with the five player games we played was the length of time between turns can get too much in the later stages when everyone is analysing every possibility... 😴
Played this in Print and Play form a couple of times with friends who were quite excited about the Kickstarter, but it left a sour taste in my mouth how the single die roll can decide if you win this round or not. In two games I had managed to set up a win, but didn't manage to roll high enough twice in a row (and the chances were quite high in the second round). That was very frustrating.
The creator explained that he did that to incentivize players to take more risks. Leaving the end of the game vague means that players either have to take drastic actions in case the game ends early, or take a more slow and cautious route and hope the game doesn’t end early. The creator said that while the end dice might cause anti-climactic endings to some games, he felt that it was worth it for that sense of risk and uncertainty it added to strategy and politics. You may not agree and that’s fine, but that was his reasoning and I personally think it was a good trade-off. And there are ways to stop and alter the end dice, like taking the Oathkeeper title or using the Squalid District’s ability.
Indeed it can be frustrating or just plain anti climatic in our games. We do however get the point that thematically it represents that the chancellor has held onto the power and it might teeter over the edge into them losing the empire - however it doesn’t always work thematically because of the Chancellor has lost the Oathkeeper title in say round 2, and only just got it back in the preceding round to a winning dice roll - it doesn’t represent them holding onto power - if that makes sense...
We discussed our thoughts on it in one of our lookback videos actually and I don't think they've changed since then if you want a more in depth answer, but I think we quite like it, however it defo needs to be played with more people than less, and we just haven't been able to get it on the table for a while.
@@BoardOfItReviews oh really? Do you have a link to the video i haven't seen that one. Have you played Pax Renaissance by the way? It's like a more involved 2-4 player Oath. Really shines at 2 players
@@chadvader974 ruclips.net/video/uWB88vlepSA/видео.html It's the terrible rulebook award ;). But I personally found it to be quite fun, but I think it would really shine with a full 6 players. Haven't played PR yet...we have it, but the rulebook scared us and we've kinda pretended it doesn't exist. One day I'll tackle that rulebook...
@@BoardOfItReviews Happy to teach you :) Also, this video is excellent ruclips.net/video/JDMWjdHwPr0/видео.html I watched that a few times set the pieces out, then used the rulebook as a reference guide. The player aids are also excellent once you grok the rules.
You *think* you're panning across the table showing off Oath, but all I see is your cupboard of games. I wanna see videos for Food Chain Magnate, Empires of the Void II, Arnak, 1960, Dune, Irish Gauge, Pax Pamir, and Imperial Struggle. =D
Really great job with this; just enough rules and explanation at the top, lots of points and counterpoints to ponder, and a deep, multifaceted takeaway that’s anything but being swept up in the Oath hype (which I’ll be the first to admit to be a subscriber to!). Even still, it left me -someone desperately excited to get this game and see if it works with my groups- a lot of great things to consider in how I present it and to whom, and that’s a great takeaway from any review! Also, bonus points for showing us your chronicle with the absolute gem of an opening line: “well, we got absolutely f*cked by the devious clockwork prince - gutted.” Hahaha
That’s honestly really great to hear! Our take is - if we can highlight any issues that we found with a game and somebody still wants to play it then that’s brilliant - they know at least potential issues that might come up but if those things aren’t issues for them personally then that’s great! And to be fair - we do actually really enjoy the game and look forward to the next time we play! Haha I did wonder if anybody would spot that 😂😂😂 10 points to you haha! Thanks for watching!
Root is my favorite game and I have been so anticipating this game. How is the game compared to Cole Wehrle's other games, Root and Pax Pamir? Would you pick this one over either of those?
So, Oath is addictive. We like it. However, it's really designed to be played with a core group repeatedly to get the best out of it. I think we'd personally say we prefer the other two more, because while being similar in that they are very interactive, have kingmaker elements, etc, they just don't feel as frustrating or limiting. If you wanted the closest experience, it'd be Pax Pamir, but Pax just feels much more snappy and dynamic and ruthless, with very minimal negatives.
It does not need a core group. But, like Root or Pax Pamir, it will not shine with players who don't play it very often. All of these games are bad "in the rotation" games, and suffer if even people who enjoy it play only a handful of times in a year. So, Oath will be great with a group who dives deeply with it, or it's even better if you have different small groups who grow experienced with it. The other big difference is, Oath is very sandboxy, like some of its influences (Blood Royale, or the Lords series which in turn led to the Pax series), so the guardrails are all the way down. It won't tell you what to do. But that said, it rewards exploration a lot more than the other two...or rather, it's is less punishing if that's all a first timer does their first game.
@@BoardOfItReviews Well, here I'll speak for myself: I don't really have a single core group. Of course, many do...but I also know there are many who have more than one. To continue with the personal example: I have roughly 2-3 groups, and then my siblings. I will likely get to play lots of Oath with 1-2 of those, plus my siblings (and the others will either be lukewarm or not play it as often). Again, not universally the case...but I think there are many players in a similar situation.
@@malexander4094 Ah I see! I think it was just a misunderstanding - we never meant a single core group. Core group was more of a broad term for a group who plays it repeatedly rather than you need one specific group. Apologies if it sounded that way! Wish we had multiple groups like you!
I'd love to hear more in detail about 2 players. Can't wait for that video! I've been a huge fan of pax pamir 2e and this game sparked my interest but i only play games with my wife so not being able to have a fulfilling game at 2p is a major deal breaker. I don't like having games collecting dust on my shelf for that one day when friends come over and we pull it out. And even at that, sounds like you need a dedicated group of ppl to pull off this game... Too bad though, I really want to get into root too, but cole werhle seems to be only making games that aren't designed for 2p... I know these games have AI opponent as a stopgap for 2p but I want games that work without these half-butt measures. I don't want it to simulate a 3p, I want a 2p game
Thanks for watching! To be fair the Root Clockwork expansion that simulates the third player we do find to be really great and relatively ‘life like’ - we enjoy playing Root at 2 players this way. However if you will only ever get to play at 2, even though the Clockwork expansion is great - it would be a shame to never be able to play with more so probably not worth it alone. Hope you enjoy the Clockwork Prince video when it comes out!
Maybe you have some rules wrong? The favour banks shouldnt be empty as in a closed economy anything paid for should go back to one of the banks (or people are hording) and the draw costs for the region (or discard) decks remains at 2 supply for the whole game, its only the world deck that goes up in price as vision cards are drawn.
Depending what's in play, certain cards can burn favour, plus favour is burnt if the PF is seized. So we've almost always had some favour leave the economy, and at worst a lot. Plus, player count makes a big difference - you have the same amount of favour at 2 as at 4, but twice as many people, which means less available. That's our experience anyway! We also did state the world deck was what cost 4 supply (I believe! I hope we did). You're right about the discard piles, but we've just found that you can be in a position where you are fairly aware of what is in there, or in that one discard pile is very empty and one is very full. We more meant the world deck is always a fair rub, and lets be honest, we all wanna see more new cards right!
Yea, I think we've just had a few games where for example: The chancellor fights off a few attempts, and comes out strong. It's great for that player. Then the exiles are all ruined basically, because their attempts have failed and they now have no/limited favour/secrets, and they really can't do much to come back. They become unhappy, because they have nothing to do but the game goes on. Chancellor rolls, the dice - the game doesn't end. They have another turn like this. Now the Chancellor isn't even having fun because they know nobody else is having fun. For us, it's swung wildly between being an awesome, great experience one game, or just a bit frustrating and annoying another.
It really does - except for us we really feel much more frustration than say, Pax Pamir 2E which is the one we’ve played the most by far - at the end of the game as we mention in the review. What you can do becomes more limited towards the end in Oath whereas in our experience that’s not typically the case in Pax Pamir 2E!
Thanks for the kind words :). Yea, this is the KS edition, although we did a late pledge. That's why we didn't go too much into the components, as they differ between retail and KS I believe.
I think if you find that happening in Root, Oath probably won’t be for you even more. We find it to be much worse than Root as at least in Root, because it’s a points based system and hopefully by the final few turns you could be scoring more and more turns at least some hope remains and there’s some incentive to score more points - whereas with Oath because the win condition is just win or lose it can really decrease your desire to even try if it feels like it’s impossible to do anything! That’s been our experience anyway!
Brutally honest? Yeah, but that's fine. I play with a couple of groups. Based on this review, one group will likely not care for this game while the other I think will totally dig it.
Thanks for the comment and thanks for watching! Yeah, we just want to be honest with our experiences and point out things we personally found issues with so people can be aware - and if those issues aren’t a problem for them then that’s great!
Strangely ... one of Cole Wehrle's main focuses is "king making" ... one would have thought he had considered the points you make here about the end game.
It's very possible people will see the end game differently. Maybe in testing they found it exciting and dramatic, or through the benefit of playing probably hundreds of games, they have a much better grasp on the system than anyone else would and don't encounter these issues.
@@BoardOfItReviews Probably ... Anyway ... I'm (as you mentioned) very hardwired to regard 1 board game play as standalone, so I guess Oath is not for me. I'll stick to Root, PaxPamir2 and JohnCompany when it comes to Cole's games.
I think he’s aware of it. He’s mentioned specifically that he WANTS this interaction. Oath seems to have one thing some of his other games don’t, the legacy aspect. If your losing and can’t win, you strike a deal w/ another player for citizenship (in this or the next game). I think this review did a good job of emphasizing the “need” for multiple plays to really enjoy it. Also did a good job in explaining it might not be for some/many.
@@BoardOfItReviews In testing, we found that the game is fully itself when players have grown a world over many games...at least a dozen, perhaps. This is when they start seeing how to manipulate the systems, they lose that "late game fatigue," the die roll is always far more dramatic, and most importantly they are shaping what that copy of the game is like.
The "Late Game Fatigue" section is weird to me but at the same time I get it. Competitive type players just straight up won't like this game because of how swingy it is. This is a game for stories. After a few plays the stories my group has from playing this game are unmatched in any other game, and we regularly play things like Twilight Imperium and the like. If you go into the game knowing it isn't fair, it isn't balanced, and you could lose out of nowhere, you'll have a much better time.
Totally fair - I think by late game fatigue we just mean how by the end of the game you often end up just not being able to do anything meaningful and players tend to sit there analysing for ages to try to stop the player who is inevitably going to win and it just can slow it all down for us. We didn’t personally find the stories jumping off the board naturally for us but indeed perhaps we’re just too competitive! I’m curious - does your group proactively ‘tell the story’ as you play and narrate the actions to create the story? For us there’s just not enough of a strong narrative for it to feel like we’re in a story! That all said we do still enjoy Oath a lot!
Not feeling this review so much. They voice a lot of negatives. Yes, the game changes from turn-to-turn. That’s bad?? Yes, you can feel like you’re too far behind, but then suddenly you’re not. And winning sometimes can feel undeserved…but there’s more than just winning in this game. There’s a narrative you’re making with your group. Good group = fun. Bad group = meh. Just like anything. This is an absolute treasure of a game. Slow down, enjoy the process, and bask in the physical beauty in all of it. The art is just stunning! Winning is almost not even the point when there’s so much brilliance along the way.
The game changing turn to turn is only bad in the context that turns in this game can take exceedingly long due to all the possible decisions you can make. Then, because a single turn can flip the board state there is often no point in thinking about your turn until your turn, which then longs the game out further. We also only said it in the context of it's bad if you don't like games with long turns and wild swings in board state, not that it's bad outright :). I wouldn't say that we are overly negative, just that we pointed out many things which people should know before they buy this because it looks pretty or they think it's Root 2.0. One person's negative is another's positive!
@@BoardOfItReviews Fair enough. I get the thing about long turns. But the last 5 games I played, 3 games: Furnace, Code Names, Pandemic Legacy 0, also required some pretty long turns. Legacy 0, in particular, by the last half of the game, with about 20 different actions you could do (with 3 different characters) was especially challenging. But what’s wrong with thinking through a game? It’s a journey. Not a quick sprint just to win. Don’t want to think too much, then party games are probably more to taste. Learn quick, play quick, drink quick. Games like Oath, however, offer considerably more to sink your teeth into. And yes, more substance takes time. It shouldn’t be a knock against it. To say you wished Oath allowed for quicker turns and less game changing turns, is to wish it were a whole different game. Risk, maybe. And how many times do we all pull out that old weathered chestnut? Or talk about how beautiful and unique it is?
@@JaKrish It's not about thinking too much, it's that Oath is a game where you could wait the better part of an hour waiting for your next turn to come round, and often, people playing board games want to spend the majority of the time they're at the table playing the game, not waiting to play the game. Complexity doesn't have to equal turn length. Also, we defo never said we wished Oath had quicker turns/less changing of the board state or that we personally disliked Oath's long turns/changing board, we said "it'll likely be an issue for some people". Clearly you're a big fan of Oath, and we're quite fond of it too, but I don't see the harm in laying out potential issues for other types of people, particularly considering the hype combined with the fact this game requires very specific types of players/groups to get the best out of it.
@@BoardOfItReviews Thanks for the review and feedback. These reviews likely don’t come easy, production-wise alone. I may disagree with you about Oath is almost every way, but maaaaaybe that just makes it an even more compelling game!
Thanks for the review. Really appreciated hearing your detailed thoughts based on several plays. Great depth and wonderful presentation of your ideas!
Thanks for the lovely comments! It's so cool to hear that from you lot - totally made our day.
I think this is the best review channel for boardgames. Because it is fair and honest. You focus on games I like (mid-heavy), explain your opinions clearly. But most importantly, are not shy to be properly critical. Big fan
Wow that’s so nice of you to say - thank you so much! It really motivates us to keep going 😊
I'd just like to add to the many people here who compliment you for your review. I've watched way too many reviews of Oath lately, and yours definitely puts some professional reviewers to shame! It's incredibly insightful, well articulated, and concise. You did not just list pros and cons... you painted a very coherent and vivid picture of what the game feels like! Fantastic job.
Thank you for the incredibly nice comments, it really makes doing the channel worthwhile :). Hope the video was helpful!
Mmmm.. you are quite good at talking about a game in general, giving an overall overview while not diving deeply.
These seem great for anyone interested in it, but not really invested in investigating a lot. Can't really explain it, but I quite enjoyed it. Easy to watch.
Thank you!
I could see how competitive players, meaning if you play with the sole intent to win, could be very disappointed and frustrated with the game. But you can't play it too casually either because of its complexity. It's a weird balance which I personally really enjoy, a complex game with high player interaction. And as long as interesting or cool moments happen during the game, I'm more than fine with losing.
Totally get what you mean and indeed it does really create some cool and funny stories! (In our experience - once people have calmed down 😅). I think for us it’s not so much losing that’s frustrating - it’s more that by the end you end up feeling a bit powerless as if you’ve got more war bands out you have less supply and less actions you can do - in our games it’s more often than not become so restrictive and tight to the point where it’s just not that fun... but you’re absolutely right it is a unique balance in this game for sure!
@@BoardOfItReviews Hm, thanks! That makes sense, I suppose in a way with supply you get punished for doing well. I'll have to see and experience the game for myself when I get the opportunity to play it.
Personally, this is one of the best review i've ever seen. I love Oath but all you said is true. You rock guys, you are capable of say good and bad things with true honesty.
Wow thank you so much for the lovely comment - that’s really made our day! 😃 Really appreciated. The thing is - we also do really like the game and always look forward to playing it - but just want to be honest with the negatives as well as the positives that we see from our own experiences so people can make an informed choice when deciding whether a game might be for them or not!
Very nice succinct and honest review! Thanks for taking the time to do this video!
Thanks for the lovely comment and for watching - we’re happy you enjoyed it!
I think this is one of the cleanest presentations of a review I've ever seen. Good job
Thanks a lot for the very kind comment - we really appreciated it!
A friend of ours got their copy and we basically just had a weekend long Oath fest - a lot of fun, but can definitely see this frustrating a lot of players- but that is actually an itch I like being scratched! I love tight economy and frustration in gaming. If approached from the right angle, even if you’re losing, you can just enjoy watching the story unfold. Great video!
Thank you! That is such a brilliant way of describing Oath - an itch to be scratched! Totally agree with this - despite the frustration we experienced and the critique we gave the game - we actually always look forward to playing the game and it’s that weird thing of as soon as we’ve finished a game, even if some of the players have felt so annoyed, most of us just want to give it another crack immediately! 😅
One of the most clear and comprehensive reviews of Oath that I’ve watched on RUclips. You both did an excellent job objectively stating the pros and potential cons. I feel very informed after watching your review. Thanks for the post!
PS - Although Inis and Seasons of Inis are older games, I would love to see and hear your thoughts on them.
Really amazing to hear that, it means a lot to us and we just hope it was helpful!
It's funny you mention Inis, because before this week we were pretty lukewarm on Inis (had played twice). It was pretty meh and never grabbed us - we much preferred Kemet. Then, this week we played another two games, and both of them were so much fun. They were tight and tense and both games we took the pretender tokens in the same round which is so cool. Haven't tried Seasons of Inis yet though!
@@BoardOfItReviews I felt the same way with my Inis games! Your tastes in board games definitely align with mine. I’ve been following your channel since Scythe and watching your reviews is definitely part of my research process before I purchase anything.
Btw, which game do you guys prefer between Scythe and Kemet?
@@pete7421 That's so cool! Gotta be Scythe for us, although they are hard to compare directly. Scythe is basically our favourite game of all time (both of us). Probably a decent amount of nostalgia there that helps it stay at the top spot, but whenever we go back to it we always have a great time. Kemet is a really top notch 'dudes on a map' game, but that genre isn't our favourite.
@@BoardOfItReviews Awesome, thanks for the quick reply! I just realized I made a mistake and meant to ask what your preference was between Kemet and Inis. 😂
@@pete7421 That would currently still be Kemet: Blood and Sand. It's swashbuckling fun, with silly powers, great miniatures, and smart card driven combat. It really grabbed us our first play too. That said, it's a bigger box, probably more expensive and takes longer to set up. Inis is more serious and thinky, but TBH as we said, we've really only started warming up on Inis this week.
Woah great in-depth review. Instant subscribe!
Thanks so much for the comment, for watching, and for the sub! We really appreciate it!
The paw on the shoulder was so cute! Really appreciate this review, I played for the first time last night and my friend and I were disappointed that we really couldn't immediately start at two people, or at least the game didn't want us to. Hoping to get it to the table again soon with more players to give it more of a chance to shine
It was super cute, made our hearts melt when we watched the video back 😅 thanks for watching - we’re glad you enjoyed our review. For sure this game needs more players to shine so we hope you get the chance to play at higher player counts soon. We have played some games at 2 player and enjoy them but it’s for sure not a game we’d ever recommend if people will only ever have the chance to play at 2!
This is a really insightful review! Thanks!
Happy to hear this! And thanks for watching! 😊
I've been watching a few of your videos, but this is the video that made me subscribe. Not only is this well explained, and beautifully presented, but I got a real sense of what you liked and wished were better.
That’s really cool to hear - glad you enjoyed and thanks a lot for the sub we appreciate it!
I want to get this game so bad, but I’m still not sure it’d make it to the table often due to the complexity. And I usually only play with 2 total players, which seems like this game doesn’t shine with? Thank you for the detailed, yet quick overview!
As tough as it is, we'd have to recommend you don't get it. We'd love to play it more but it's been sat in our cupboard almost since this review because our group doesn't like it. I'm not sure if they've worked on tightening the two player variant, but if they haven't I wouldn't recommend that either. So it sounds like with your situation isn't very compatible with Oath as it was defo made to be played repeatedly by the same group or groups. Perhaps Root with the Clockwork Expansion might be a safer bet?
@@BoardOfItReviews I finally just got root! (It’s been tough to find recently). Now I need to learn it! I’ll take a look into the expansion too, thanks for the suggestion.
This is the most cohesive and easy to understand review and overview I have found of Oath. I recall when you first posted your Brass review onto reddit and was pleasantly surprised to find this video and it's noticeable how much work you have put into improving your style and editing. Unfortunately for Oath, per usual with Cole's designs, looks like a game I would love but may be hard to find others who feel the same. Particularly, to keep at it through multiple playthroughs. I think it will still be worth the purchase and may have better luck finding a gaming group, outside of my usual 3-4 friends, as the pandemic situation improves.
Wow thanks so much for the nice words, that really means a lot to hear you can see the difference in this from some of our early videos! So cool to hear! Hope you can get some people onboard to take the time to learn and appreciate Oath after several plays as it does unlock its secrets after some time 🙏🏻
I can't help but see Sarah Chalke and Rob McElhenney explaining board games. (Great videos!)
Haha Farrell hears that a lot - that he’s a Rob McElhenney double! 😂 Thank you!
@@BoardOfItReviews Well they are both dashing, and the two of you are very charming and delightful to watch. I really like your writing, how you connect with the audience and how you convey the feel of the games. I was an instant subscriber. Keep up the good work.
Wow thanks so much for saying that - comments like this really make our day and make us happy we started our channel! Thank you! ☺️
Very helpful review - you have saved me a lot of money!
Thanks so much - honestly we’re really happy to help on this one - as you said it’s a lot of money so if we can help people make a decision as to whether it’s a game for them or not then we have done our job! 👌🏻
@@BoardOfItReviews I only discovered you a few months ago and you do seem to tell it like it is but also in a constructive way.
Funnily enough by the middle of the video I have decided not to buy but by the end you piqued my interest again. A bit like Feudum which I have a love hate relationship with. Oath seems to have a beautiful concept that clearly rewards committing time and I do have the right groups but we have so many games to catch up with after lockdown. So maybe I'll look again in a few months.
So yes a truly useful review - I will keep watching.
That’s so great to hear - thank you! And it does sound like one to keep your eye on in that case...
This is the kind of content I want to see when I look for a review. Thank you!
Thanks so much for the comment and for watching! We’re happy you enjoyed our review!
Great review. First honest critiques about the game that I've seen so far. I've watched a lot of gameplays of it and made some of the same diagnisis thay you did, and yet the people that were experiencing it didn't mention those at all. I think you're on point on those and who this might be for.
Thanks a lot for watching and for the comment! That’s interesting and good to know you have witnessed similar things through watching game plays and it’s not just us that has faced the issues we have mentioned. It’s a strange one as despite the issues we do look forward to playing again and it is a good game, it just really needs the right group...
Now I'm even more excited to get ours. You folks are the best!
You’ll have to let us know how you get on with your first few games and whether you have similar or different experiences to us!
Love, love, love the format. Very insightful and very well done.
Thank you so much for the comment and for watching - we’re super happy you enjoyed it! 😊
Would you do a play through or maybe a sample of first few rounds towards autonomous play? Would love to see it 🙏🏻 great work again!!
Thank you! (And sorry for the delayed reply!) we could think about doing an intro playthrough 🧐 but I think the issue with this one would be much of the time spent is in silent thought mode so it might not be a very riveting watch 😅😅
Exceptional review. The details gave me a clear idea of whether or not this game is right for me. I don't think it is, as 90%+ of my gaming is 2 player. Thanks.
Thanks so much for watching for the lovely comment - we really appreciate it! And we’re really glad we could help with your decision on this!
"Supply is in short...supply". LOL nailed it :) Great review! Really looking forward to playing this one but I can definitely see how its a tough sell.
Haha thank you!! It is a really brilliant game if you can push through the first few and find the right group for it. Let us know how you get on when you get around to playing!
Like the Pax series, and some other games, Oath has a learning curve I'd describe as less of a curve & more of a cursive 'U.' So, the "late game fatigue" is a funny thing, because it's like a weird lull...it's (usually) before the 8th or 10th play. But once players start to see how the game itself is changing its shape, they adapt their play to it: they still play to win, yet not for its own sake, but to affect the suit makeup, or the geography, or (sometimes especially) Edifices.
This, at last, is when they find they're playing *their* game, and not so much "the" game, and this is when Oath really comes into its own for groups. That "late game fatigue" lessens or disappears, as they can better see how to manipulate the resource systems, how to be flexible, and how to build up so you lock right into position at the right time (like a Pax game).
With this kind of experience, the die roll is also often dramatic...because even though its a die, a series of choices led to one another that made the ending roll so valuable, and players are good enough to look back & understand the causality at work. In this way, esp. with experienced players, it really rewards strategic inertia & multi-turn planning, really paying off the die roll happening (or not). I'd say it rewards strategic inertia even better than Root, probably- and, this is also why with experienced players, it sings with 3.
EDIT: a tip...if it's too costly to Search the World, try to Recover the Darkest Secret.
Thanks for a terrifically well written counterpoint! I hope everyone who sees this video reads this to get more information and an alternate opinion.
I would say we still disagree on a few points. While we've played 10+ games now, and at least Tallie and I know how to work the game pretty well, sometimes the players still just can't get out from under the economy because of the way the game played out. Some games a lot of favour is burnt, some none is. Our last game was actually our most satisfying and enjoyable - but it still got to a point where everyone became stuck because there was only 3 favour or so left in the banks. It would take an entire turn to move, collect favour and muster, and then your supply is spent and all you've got is two troops to show for it.
It's also interesting you say about the Edifices as we've found them to be so situational as to be almost ignored in our games unless they align with exactly what you're doing. I don't think anyone as ever actually used one. Not to say they are useless mind, I'm sure other people in other positions could do great things with them.
The issue with being flexible as you say, is that you can do that, and it's great, but when one person suddenly will win on their next turn, what you have to do is very specific. You have to either fight them, or out-do them, and maybe both. Often at this point you have advisors in play, the board is filled up with cards, and the banks are a little low, so it becomes quite a struggle to be so specific. Being flexible early on might help with that, but it probably won't absolve it.
We'd have to disagree about multi-turn planning, because while you can of course foresee and come up with a strategy, Oath is so chaotic and interactive we've found you'll almost be wasting your time doing that. So much can change, and will, that it's better to be reactive (IMO). The player who goes before you could empty the favour bank you plan to use, multiple players could attack your sites meaning you no longer have access to cards you wanted, the PF could change hands twice and end up with impossible amounts of favour on it...etc. A decent number of our games have been won by the random actions of two players creating a clear opening for a 3rd player, and allowing them to pounce.
Lastly, I think it's also important that you mention playing 8-10 games to get past the late game fatigue. While Oath is obviously best for a committed group of regulars, and we always stand by playing a game multiple times before an opinion is formed, that is a huge time commitment. We aren't criticising Oath for that either, just stating it's an incredibly high bar. How many of the 13,400 backers will get that chance? I'd have to argue that even if you're completely right our review is still pretty valid, because how many people will play this 10+ times?
Anyway, we'd like to thank you again for a terrific counterpoint! It sounds like you have real experience with the game so I hope people consider what you have to say, and I think you've highlighted some great stuff that people should always be thinking about when playing Oath.
@@BoardOfItReviews Your review is great! I mean, I think my only actual point of difference is that I think it's really great (and at its most strategic) with 3 seasoned players.
I was a playtester. So, my views about replayability may be slightly colored by that, esp. about losing that late game fatigue. But in a nutshell: the "big ask" here has far less to do with Oath itself, actually, and more to do with the typical, "en vogue" gaming habit/diet...try a game a handful of times, make up your mind about it, then move right along to the next game. So the thing is, none of Cole's games are good for that. And, I personally believe most people who aren't casual about his games understand that pretty well. Because there are also some gamers who vastly prefer giving lots of playtime to 1 game at a time, instead of lots of playtime spread over a game rotation.
This is also part of Root's success: the core community around Root are people who have played far more than 20, 40, 50+ games of it. Of course that's not all Root players. It would be crazy to expect that from all who come to Oath, too. But you are absolutely correct to point out it's a commitment any way you slice it.
...A lot of this is also to say...I hope people realize the people who worked on the game really did play it heavily. Oath was in development for over a year, longer than Cole's other games. Playtesters clocked in several dozens of games. We saw how skill develops, to the point where you're not only making multi-turn strategies: you're making "multi-game" strategies! Really seeing how to shape one's Chronicle, one's copy of the game itself. Esp. when Chronicles get pretty old (like 40+ games old).
So, what may happen is, some groups who reach that depth will start pulling double (or triple) headers with Oath, making a day/eve of it every so often. Such "deep divers" might even meet & exchange copies with each other, and see what it's like to play in other Oath worlds...and metas.
Again, this isn't gonna be everyone, even people who really enjoy the game. But it has this potential, to expand how people think about their gaming...what it means to win, what campaigning a game means, how might a game change as your group meta changes...There is an appetite for this potential. I really believe that.
@@malexander4094 Very well made points! Again, a great read. I think we'll have to direct people to your comments in our monthly look back video so they can appreciate the opinion of someone who knows how the game shakes out over time.
You're totally right though about the need to shift the general view of how to consume games when it comes to Oath. I especially like the part about expanding how people think about gaming with Oath. I defo think something incredible has been designed here if the right group can harness it.
Solid review. I personally am very excited to Oath, but curious seeing alternate opinions and love finding this channel which states both sides which is what a review channel should do. Great job! Oath is definitely a different game, and I think people’s opinions will be colored by other games they want to correlate to Oath. Personally I think Oath gets more interesting when people make bids to end the game before turn 5 even though a lot of people seem to wait until turn 5 to do so. Thanks again for the great and honest review!
You make quite a good point about the early bids! That is also something we'd like to see more of, as I think it would certainly be a much more fun and engaging battle early on when the game is more open. Hope you get to play soon!
Also, thanks so much for the kind words. It's really awesome to keep hearing that people appreciate we talk about both sides. We honestly feel bad sometimes (like with Oath) critiquing it because we do really like it, but it's important people know the issues. It seems that sometimes the bad points of a hot new game get glossed over - in our reviews of Lost Ruins and Beyond the Sun, lots of people said we were the first review they had seen to even discuss negatives.
I have played 5 games on a 3-players setup and the conclusion is that your review is spot-on on every aspects. This game is a gem but it's not for a lot of gamers and require a dedicated group who are into storytelling more than turn optimization (just for this game).
Thanks for the kind words! Means a lot that you feel the same. We're actually a bit gutted that our friends aren't more into it, as we'd like to play it more often. Cole Wehrle is a brilliant designer, but Oath is in a weird position in that it's a game everyone wants because it's by Cole, but it's not a game everyone will like, so we tried to get that across.
@@BoardOfItReviews ...and to be honest, on these 3 players: one does not want to play it anymore, the other and I are dying to form a 4-player group to create new chronicles. In good or bad, we will hear about Oath for a while.
Re: ending up in a position where you can't possibly win, Root has the same issue -- if you werent attacked/policed by other players, then you have a great chance of winning. But in Oath the cards all feel very overpowered (by design) and so one good card and negotiation between others can sway things dramatically. And the same person doesn't have to be chancellor. If your group has a salty player (upset about not seeing a path to victory), then maybe they can be chancellor next game? It's less about who is in the seat of power, and more about the shape of the empire from one game to the next. THAT is the story of Oath :)
We'd argue the difference is that in Root there is usually always the chance for other players to bash the winner, and if they don't take it, it's on them (90% of the time). Plus, Root has a snowball effect where if you get your engine going, you will be grabbing 10+ points in the final round compared to 1-2 in the first, so the end often comes mercifully quick.
In Oath, because of the board state, players can have literally no way to attack/recover the winner, as the actions have costs and limits, unlike Root, and then have to wait round after round for the end if the chancellor is the oathkeeper. I don't think the issue has been people not being chancellor or not winning, it's often the manner of how they didn't win and were forced to suffer. That's only our experience though!
@@BoardOfItReviews You can also ask for citizenship if you’re losing as an exile, or you can team up with another exile to take down the chancellor. You can make a pact that if one of you wins the game, you will make the other person a citizen in the next game. If you can’t win this game, maybe you can at least become and citizen and increase your chances of winning next game. I feel like Oath was designed with this sort of multi-game strategizing in mind.
@@WideMouth We just think the issue is it's great in theory, and all well and good to say this - but try convincing a frustrated newer player who can't do anything meaningful for two turns that they can start in a mildly better position next game. Rightly or wrongly, I bet a lot of them won't much care. Plus, it's all situational...the chancellor might not grant anyone citizenship, or maybe the exiles have utterly different goals.
That said, you're totally correct on everything. There's just often a disconnect between what can happen, and what does happen. It's tough for players to rewire their gaming brain in that way!
Great review, honest and concise.
I have Root and Vast: The Crystal Caverns, I am still on the fence whether to buy Oath. You points of caution are worth thinking about.
Thanks for watching - and for the comment - we really appreciate it! It is a tricky one to recommended since not all of our games are enjoyable for the reasons we mentioned in the review but also that being said, this game is addictive and like an itch that needs to be scratched and despite the frustrations, we always end up really looking forward to playing again sooner or later. Let us know if and what you decide either way!
Great review. You really emphasize the right points in how swingy it can be
Thanks, that's great to hear. Means a lot that you agree!
7:54 'the roots available to them' I caught that. This was a great review! Just played this last week and won as the citizen, but it didn't feel like a strong win. I did enjoy the playthrough, though.
Haha that wasn’t even intentional 😂 we’re not that clever 😅 congratulations on the win and thanks for watching!
@BoardOfItReviews
Hey everyone! We really appreciate you watching! If you found this helpful, please consider subscribing as it helps us grow our channel. More subscribers makes us more attractive to publishers, which allows us to collaborate with them and make more videos! It's costly and time consuming to make these videos, so we could really use the support! :)
Despite the (very fair) negatives highlighted, this review has only further fuelled my anticipation!
Really intrigued to hear more about your experiences with the Clockwork Prince - from your comments and what I've read elsewhere, it sounds like it may need some attention from the better bot project.
Glad you enjoyed it! It means a lot and we're glad our criticisms didn't come off harsh.
Yea, we certainly think it does. The system itself is quite cool, but in action...not so cool. It gets so many resources so easily that on the second turn it'll show up at a players only site with 10 warbands and decimate them....then hoover up about 4 favour from the bank. It just feels totally unlike another player and just makes you feel frustrated that you have to struggle for anything while it has no boundaries. Or, it just breaks down completely because it tends to dump all 10-12 warbands it has on one site. In our third game it got stuck in a loop and all it did was steal all the money from the shared bank so nobody could do anything.
Oh wow, that sounds... Painful. The warband dumping is something that's been highlighted a lot on BGG from the TTS games. It seems the consensus is that in a solo game the Prince should place all warbands on the campaigned sites as per the rules, but for 2p games to spread them equally between the sites and their board. This seems to stop the cycle it gets stuck in.
Super interesting this is happening on TTS too... it’s definitely a shame as it’s of course going to limit who is able to get this to the table...
16:15 So it's fair to say that your friend SWORE AN OATH to never play the game again? Sounds like the makings of a good Chancellor... 😂
On the serious side, this is one of the better reviews that I've seen, not only for this game, but for any game. I love the presentation style of the two of you taking turns sharing thoughts and feelings about the game, as well as your ability to be comfortable sharing negative thoughts without fear of backlash. SUBSCRIBED!👍😎🚛
Wow thank you so much for the lovely comment that’s so nice of you to say! Haha he did but he is for sure an Oathbreaker because we managed to convince him to play once again after we filmed the review 😅 but he’s resumed the Oath once again as that game did not go well for him haha! Thanks for watching!
Great review, as always. Your cinematography keeps getting better and better, but what really got me is how you distilled a complex experience and its pluses and minuses so well in a reasonably short review. Question: I haven't gotten to play Root often (maybe twice in 2 years) and so it feels quite overwhelming to me. How complex would you say the teach for Oath is in comparison? Do you also need to be aware of asymmetric powers and rules for all factions at the table from the start?
I think your negative points and frustrations were well presented. And yet, the review makes me wish I had a weekly gaming group to dive into this one.
Thanks for the kind words, it means a lot!
Regarding Oath vs. Root, I'd say it's better and worse, which is a terrible answer...sorry! Root is overall easier, but the issue is you each faction is playing a different game, so it's really hard for someone to teach each faction if they haven't played as them, or even to check what everyone is doing. But the core concepts are quite simple, and the factions are often not complex. In Oath, it's really hard to know what to actually do with the options available to you until you just stumble through a full game. It's a complex game with a lot of sub-rules, plus the ever changing array of cards adds further complexity. That said, everyone has the same actions, and the same 4 goals are always in play, so there really isn't any difference between an exile/chancellor besides 'when' you can win.
Bottom line is Oath is the more complex to learn, but in some ways easier to teach as you don't have to teach each faction.
@@BoardOfItReviews That makes sense. And a good reason to play this game regularly if you are going to get it at all. Allows players to get a good grasp of the rules and remember what all the cards and possible turn actions allow. Definitely something to consider. Thanks again!
Great and informative review!
Subscribed
Thanks a lot for the nice comment and also the sun - much appreciated!
Do the legacy components hold up fine with a variety of player counts and individuals showing up throughout the campaign, or would that necessitate a reset of the board state?
You can absolutely swap players in or out from game to game with no issues at all - we did this throughout our first plays of the game. The legacy elements are barely even ‘legacy’ and it’s just more than one game affects the board state of the next game but it bears no impact on players coming in. That said, as some other commenters have mentioned, we feel like the game does need some dedicated players who are willing to push through the first playthroughs which can be pretty tough to fully appreciate what the game offers - so from that perspective it’s less recommended. But legacy wise - it’s fine! Hope this helps 😊
Really great video! I was seriously thinking of buying this, but after watching the review I don't think it'd be right for me and my group, at least for now
Thank you! Yeah in our opinion it’s really not going to be for everyone…especially when of course it’s quite an expensive game that ideally you need to be able to play multiple times to both enjoy it and get the value out of it. We’re glad we could help you make a decision on this!
Thank you for reviewing this!
Thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed 😊
Thank you for a very fair & honest review, which touches upon both strengths and weaknesses of this game without blindly regurgitating the hype I've watched on some other venues.
I backed Oath because I enjoy Cole's designs which generally reward repeated plays and a fuller understanding of card effects. Having said that, you confirmed some of the issues I suspected would frustrate players, complicated by some degree of unavoidable AP. Regarding the "legacy" element- did you find the relatively small number of cards removed/added to the World Deck between turns significantly impacted the next gaming session? Does this mechanic incentive the losing players to create the best possible starting position for the next round? Cole described this as a "multi-generational" game- what kind of stories emerged from your experience?
I'm excited to give this (several) tries, and reasonably confident that it will retain most of its value if later on I decide to trade/sell it for another title. 🖖
Regarding the cards, it's a bit of a mixed bag in our experience. Generally, the number of cards drawn will relate to the number of players, and then again to strategy, and then again to free space either on sites or advisors. It's hard to say if they significantly impact the game (although they certainly can if you get the right combos), because often you just don't personally see that many. You can honestly go a few games where the landscape barely changes if the chancellor keeps holding onto power (or a citizen wins) - which gives you less chance to play cards to sites.
Usually what has happened for us is once everyone has a vision, or all the visions are drawn, people stop drawing from the world deck because it's too expensive (unless they have the Darkest Secret Banner). So we often only go through a fraction of the deck, which makes it hard to even know if we've seen new cards from the previous game, or new cards from 6 games ago! But over time it will likely have an impact, because trading is very related to the suits in play.
I wouldn't personally say the world deck itself incentivizes anyone to get themselves into a good starting position more than any other aspect. But the cards are totally awesome.
Thanks for the kind words, it means a lot, and hope we could help!
Excellent review
Thanks so much - we’re happy you enjoyed it!
Great review
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the explanation
Just glad it helped!
Thanks for a great review. I was really keen on this game despite knowing so little about it. Your clear and honest review made me reconsider getting this game not because it's a bad game but based on your explanation on the type of group it best suits. I struggle to get my group together more than once a month so I really don't think this is the kind of game they will enjoy. Thank you!
Thanks for the comment and thanks for watching! We’re really happy we could help you make a decision on this! 😊
Oath is my favorite game when there are five players, at least a $5 buy in, and pot splitting is part of deal making for citizenship and alliances among Exiles. The tension, deal making, and backstabbing floweth!
Despite the issues we mentioned in our review - totally agree it’s such an excellent game when you get into the spirit of things! Our only negative with the five player games we played was the length of time between turns can get too much in the later stages when everyone is analysing every possibility... 😴
Played this in Print and Play form a couple of times with friends who were quite excited about the Kickstarter, but it left a sour taste in my mouth how the single die roll can decide if you win this round or not. In two games I had managed to set up a win, but didn't manage to roll high enough twice in a row (and the chances were quite high in the second round). That was very frustrating.
The creator explained that he did that to incentivize players to take more risks. Leaving the end of the game vague means that players either have to take drastic actions in case the game ends early, or take a more slow and cautious route and hope the game doesn’t end early. The creator said that while the end dice might cause anti-climactic endings to some games, he felt that it was worth it for that sense of risk and uncertainty it added to strategy and politics. You may not agree and that’s fine, but that was his reasoning and I personally think it was a good trade-off.
And there are ways to stop and alter the end dice, like taking the Oathkeeper title or using the Squalid District’s ability.
Indeed it can be frustrating or just plain anti climatic in our games. We do however get the point that thematically it represents that the chancellor has held onto the power and it might teeter over the edge into them losing the empire - however it doesn’t always work thematically because of the Chancellor has lost the Oathkeeper title in say round 2, and only just got it back in the preceding round to a winning dice roll - it doesn’t represent them holding onto power - if that makes sense...
I see you have got a copy of pax viking hidden away behind you. Any thoughts on this?
We discussed our thoughts on it in one of our lookback videos actually and I don't think they've changed since then if you want a more in depth answer, but I think we quite like it, however it defo needs to be played with more people than less, and we just haven't been able to get it on the table for a while.
@@BoardOfItReviews oh really? Do you have a link to the video i haven't seen that one. Have you played Pax Renaissance by the way? It's like a more involved 2-4 player Oath. Really shines at 2 players
@@chadvader974 ruclips.net/video/uWB88vlepSA/видео.html It's the terrible rulebook award ;). But I personally found it to be quite fun, but I think it would really shine with a full 6 players. Haven't played PR yet...we have it, but the rulebook scared us and we've kinda pretended it doesn't exist. One day I'll tackle that rulebook...
@@BoardOfItReviews Happy to teach you :) Also, this video is excellent ruclips.net/video/JDMWjdHwPr0/видео.html I watched that a few times set the pieces out, then used the rulebook as a reference guide. The player aids are also excellent once you grok the rules.
Thank you for the link!
Can’t wait for it to come to retail! Keep it up!
Thanks for watching and thanks for the comment! Hope you get to play soon 🤞🏻
You *think* you're panning across the table showing off Oath, but all I see is your cupboard of games. I wanna see videos for Food Chain Magnate, Empires of the Void II, Arnak, 1960, Dune, Irish Gauge, Pax Pamir, and Imperial Struggle. =D
Well we do have videos for Arnak, 1960, and Pax Pamir ;). The rest we'll get right to work on!
Really great job with this; just enough rules and explanation at the top, lots of points and counterpoints to ponder, and a deep, multifaceted takeaway that’s anything but being swept up in the Oath hype (which I’ll be the first to admit to be a subscriber to!). Even still, it left me -someone desperately excited to get this game and see if it works with my groups- a lot of great things to consider in how I present it and to whom, and that’s a great takeaway from any review!
Also, bonus points for showing us your chronicle with the absolute gem of an opening line: “well, we got absolutely f*cked by the devious clockwork prince - gutted.” Hahaha
That’s honestly really great to hear! Our take is - if we can highlight any issues that we found with a game and somebody still wants to play it then that’s brilliant - they know at least potential issues that might come up but if those things aren’t issues for them personally then that’s great! And to be fair - we do actually really enjoy the game and look forward to the next time we play! Haha I did wonder if anybody would spot that 😂😂😂 10 points to you haha!
Thanks for watching!
Root is my favorite game and I have been so anticipating this game. How is the game compared to Cole Wehrle's other games, Root and Pax Pamir? Would you pick this one over either of those?
So, Oath is addictive. We like it. However, it's really designed to be played with a core group repeatedly to get the best out of it.
I think we'd personally say we prefer the other two more, because while being similar in that they are very interactive, have kingmaker elements, etc, they just don't feel as frustrating or limiting. If you wanted the closest experience, it'd be Pax Pamir, but Pax just feels much more snappy and dynamic and ruthless, with very minimal negatives.
It does not need a core group. But, like Root or Pax Pamir, it will not shine with players who don't play it very often. All of these games are bad "in the rotation" games, and suffer if even people who enjoy it play only a handful of times in a year. So, Oath will be great with a group who dives deeply with it, or it's even better if you have different small groups who grow experienced with it. The other big difference is, Oath is very sandboxy, like some of its influences (Blood Royale, or the Lords series which in turn led to the Pax series), so the guardrails are all the way down. It won't tell you what to do. But that said, it rewards exploration a lot more than the other two...or rather, it's is less punishing if that's all a first timer does their first game.
@@malexander4094 But wouldn't a group who dives deeply with it be a core group?
@@BoardOfItReviews Well, here I'll speak for myself: I don't really have a single core group. Of course, many do...but I also know there are many who have more than one. To continue with the personal example: I have roughly 2-3 groups, and then my siblings. I will likely get to play lots of Oath with 1-2 of those, plus my siblings (and the others will either be lukewarm or not play it as often). Again, not universally the case...but I think there are many players in a similar situation.
@@malexander4094 Ah I see! I think it was just a misunderstanding - we never meant a single core group. Core group was more of a broad term for a group who plays it repeatedly rather than you need one specific group. Apologies if it sounded that way! Wish we had multiple groups like you!
I'd love to hear more in detail about 2 players. Can't wait for that video! I've been a huge fan of pax pamir 2e and this game sparked my interest but i only play games with my wife so not being able to have a fulfilling game at 2p is a major deal breaker. I don't like having games collecting dust on my shelf for that one day when friends come over and we pull it out. And even at that, sounds like you need a dedicated group of ppl to pull off this game... Too bad though, I really want to get into root too, but cole werhle seems to be only making games that aren't designed for 2p... I know these games have AI opponent as a stopgap for 2p but I want games that work without these half-butt measures. I don't want it to simulate a 3p, I want a 2p game
Thanks for watching! To be fair the Root Clockwork expansion that simulates the third player we do find to be really great and relatively ‘life like’ - we enjoy playing Root at 2 players this way. However if you will only ever get to play at 2, even though the Clockwork expansion is great - it would be a shame to never be able to play with more so probably not worth it alone. Hope you enjoy the Clockwork Prince video when it comes out!
Also looking forward that clockwork prince video since it will most likely be my first mode I will try as 2 players.
Maybe you have some rules wrong? The favour banks shouldnt be empty as in a closed economy anything paid for should go back to one of the banks (or people are hording) and the draw costs for the region (or discard) decks remains at 2 supply for the whole game, its only the world deck that goes up in price as vision cards are drawn.
Depending what's in play, certain cards can burn favour, plus favour is burnt if the PF is seized. So we've almost always had some favour leave the economy, and at worst a lot. Plus, player count makes a big difference - you have the same amount of favour at 2 as at 4, but twice as many people, which means less available. That's our experience anyway!
We also did state the world deck was what cost 4 supply (I believe! I hope we did). You're right about the discard piles, but we've just found that you can be in a position where you are fairly aware of what is in there, or in that one discard pile is very empty and one is very full. We more meant the world deck is always a fair rub, and lets be honest, we all wanna see more new cards right!
To each their own I guess. I have played this a couple of times now (with different groups) and no one at the table felt frustrated.
Yea, I think we've just had a few games where for example: The chancellor fights off a few attempts, and comes out strong. It's great for that player. Then the exiles are all ruined basically, because their attempts have failed and they now have no/limited favour/secrets, and they really can't do much to come back. They become unhappy, because they have nothing to do but the game goes on. Chancellor rolls, the dice - the game doesn't end. They have another turn like this. Now the Chancellor isn't even having fun because they know nobody else is having fun.
For us, it's swung wildly between being an awesome, great experience one game, or just a bit frustrating and annoying another.
Seems to have a lot of feeling and play style from Pax games. 😀
It really does - except for us we really feel much more frustration than say, Pax Pamir 2E which is the one we’ve played the most by far - at the end of the game as we mention in the review. What you can do becomes more limited towards the end in Oath whereas in our experience that’s not typically the case in Pax Pamir 2E!
Is this the KS edition ? Great video though 👍
Thanks for the kind words :). Yea, this is the KS edition, although we did a late pledge. That's why we didn't go too much into the components, as they differ between retail and KS I believe.
I’m glad you reviewed this:)
Another great review!
This is another game I’ll avoid. Definitely Not for me.
See you next time. :)
Thanks so much for the continued support - and very happy we could help you decide it’s not for you!
great review
Thank you - and thanks for watching!
Oh no, the late game fatigue was horrible in root too, I hoped they would improve on that
I think if you find that happening in Root, Oath probably won’t be for you even more. We find it to be much worse than Root as at least in Root, because it’s a points based system and hopefully by the final few turns you could be scoring more and more turns at least some hope remains and there’s some incentive to score more points - whereas with Oath because the win condition is just win or lose it can really decrease your desire to even try if it feels like it’s impossible to do anything! That’s been our experience anyway!
Brutally honest? Yeah, but that's fine. I play with a couple of groups. Based on this review, one group will likely not care for this game while the other I think will totally dig it.
Thanks for the comment and thanks for watching! Yeah, we just want to be honest with our experiences and point out things we personally found issues with so people can be aware - and if those issues aren’t a problem for them then that’s great!
Strangely ... one of Cole Wehrle's main focuses is "king making" ... one would have thought he had considered the points you make here about the end game.
It's very possible people will see the end game differently. Maybe in testing they found it exciting and dramatic, or through the benefit of playing probably hundreds of games, they have a much better grasp on the system than anyone else would and don't encounter these issues.
@@BoardOfItReviews Probably ...
Anyway ... I'm (as you mentioned) very hardwired to regard 1 board game play as standalone, so I guess Oath is not for me.
I'll stick to Root, PaxPamir2 and JohnCompany when it comes to Cole's games.
We also love Root and Pax Pamir 2E - will be very very interested to try John Company!
I think he’s aware of it. He’s mentioned specifically that he WANTS this interaction. Oath seems to have one thing some of his other games don’t, the legacy aspect. If your losing and can’t win, you strike a deal w/ another player for citizenship (in this or the next game). I think this review did a good job of emphasizing the “need” for multiple plays to really enjoy it. Also did a good job in explaining it might not be for some/many.
@@BoardOfItReviews In testing, we found that the game is fully itself when players have grown a world over many games...at least a dozen, perhaps. This is when they start seeing how to manipulate the systems, they lose that "late game fatigue," the die roll is always far more dramatic, and most importantly they are shaping what that copy of the game is like.
I wish someone would look at me the way your dog looks at you 4:56. 🤣
It’s only because we give them treats on the regular 😉
The "Late Game Fatigue" section is weird to me but at the same time I get it. Competitive type players just straight up won't like this game because of how swingy it is. This is a game for stories. After a few plays the stories my group has from playing this game are unmatched in any other game, and we regularly play things like Twilight Imperium and the like. If you go into the game knowing it isn't fair, it isn't balanced, and you could lose out of nowhere, you'll have a much better time.
Totally fair - I think by late game fatigue we just mean how by the end of the game you often end up just not being able to do anything meaningful and players tend to sit there analysing for ages to try to stop the player who is inevitably going to win and it just can slow it all down for us. We didn’t personally find the stories jumping off the board naturally for us but indeed perhaps we’re just too competitive! I’m curious - does your group proactively ‘tell the story’ as you play and narrate the actions to create the story? For us there’s just not enough of a strong narrative for it to feel like we’re in a story! That all said we do still enjoy Oath a lot!
A bit stilted in front of camera but that will go away after more vids I am sure. Good job
Thanks a lot!
Not feeling this review so much. They voice a lot of negatives. Yes, the game changes from turn-to-turn. That’s bad?? Yes, you can feel like you’re too far behind, but then suddenly you’re not. And winning sometimes can feel undeserved…but there’s more than just winning in this game. There’s a narrative you’re making with your group. Good group = fun. Bad group = meh. Just like anything. This is an absolute treasure of a game. Slow down, enjoy the process, and bask in the physical beauty in all of it. The art is just stunning! Winning is almost not even the point when there’s so much brilliance along the way.
The game changing turn to turn is only bad in the context that turns in this game can take exceedingly long due to all the possible decisions you can make. Then, because a single turn can flip the board state there is often no point in thinking about your turn until your turn, which then longs the game out further. We also only said it in the context of it's bad if you don't like games with long turns and wild swings in board state, not that it's bad outright :). I wouldn't say that we are overly negative, just that we pointed out many things which people should know before they buy this because it looks pretty or they think it's Root 2.0. One person's negative is another's positive!
@@BoardOfItReviews Fair enough. I get the thing about long turns. But the last 5 games I played, 3 games: Furnace, Code Names, Pandemic Legacy 0, also required some pretty long turns. Legacy 0, in particular, by the last half of the game, with about 20 different actions you could do (with 3 different characters) was especially challenging. But what’s wrong with thinking through a game? It’s a journey. Not a quick sprint just to win. Don’t want to think too much, then party games are probably more to taste. Learn quick, play quick, drink quick. Games like Oath, however, offer considerably more to sink your teeth into. And yes, more substance takes time. It shouldn’t be a knock against it. To say you wished Oath allowed for quicker turns and less game changing turns, is to wish it were a whole different game. Risk, maybe. And how many times do we all pull out that old weathered chestnut? Or talk about how beautiful and unique it is?
@@JaKrish It's not about thinking too much, it's that Oath is a game where you could wait the better part of an hour waiting for your next turn to come round, and often, people playing board games want to spend the majority of the time they're at the table playing the game, not waiting to play the game. Complexity doesn't have to equal turn length.
Also, we defo never said we wished Oath had quicker turns/less changing of the board state or that we personally disliked Oath's long turns/changing board, we said "it'll likely be an issue for some people". Clearly you're a big fan of Oath, and we're quite fond of it too, but I don't see the harm in laying out potential issues for other types of people, particularly considering the hype combined with the fact this game requires very specific types of players/groups to get the best out of it.
@@BoardOfItReviews Thanks for the review and feedback. These reviews likely don’t come easy, production-wise alone. I may disagree with you about Oath is almost every way, but maaaaaybe that just makes it an even more compelling game!