They could have put this game in a big box, added a couple more pieces of unnecessary cardboard and charged 30 bucks for it and people would have gladly payed. They could have released a starter set with a bunch of duplicate cards, and then milked the fans with expansion after expansion, or worse-- booster packs. Instead they made over 100 unique cards, all with thrilling artwork, and charged the least amount of money possible (around 10 bucks). Something that has never been done before: a monetarily accessible, massive TCG right out of the box. And Sam Healey takes a big ol' steamy dump on it. With criticisms that are absolutely cringe worthy. I love watching Dice Tower videos, and this doesn't change that. But this was like listening to an old man yell at clouds: "The cards have too many different words on them!" "Drafting takes too long!" "I can't count on my own!"
The difficulty that many are having with this review stems partly from our love and respect for The Dice Tower. You guys have, through consistent quality of work, elevated yourselves to essentially one of the, if not the premiere tabletop gaming review site. So, viewers have come to expect a level of objectivity and critical consideration which is not present in this review. The lack of which makes this review seem to be unjustifiably leveling certain negative subjective criticisms onto a single game, which justifiably apply to an entire genre of card games. 1. CCG lingo - not savvy. 2. Drafting - takes longer than game. 3. Memorizing key words - don't want to. 4. Incomplete package - need some dice, etc. All of these are subjective criticisms of the CCG/TCG and to a lesser degree LCG genres, and have nothing technically to do with EPIC itself. 1-4 are reducible to: "I don't like CCGs. That style of game is not for me." Which would have been a perfectly valid judgment. Then come the conclusions. 5. Great artwork, but there is no game. 6. Not appealing to me - more investment than I want to make, because there is no game. 7. Star Realms is great - EPIC is terrible. You explained the mechanics of the game reasonably well, a few minor mistakes not withstanding. But when it came to your review, you said nothing about the mechanics of the game, instead railing against characteristics that EPIC shares with the vast majority of games in the genre for which it is designed, and then making the blanket statement that "there is no game," without explaining what you mean beyond something like "I don't like it." If you do not like this kind of game, that is fine, but that is distinctly different than the judgment that EPIC is an objective failure of a game that no one should consider. Which is how the review comes off. As stated at the top, part of the problem is that some of your viewers expect to receive a certain level of reasonably objective critical criticism from the Dice Tower. We do not expect each of you to like every game, and we even enjoy it when you guys publicly disagree. But some of your viewers do expect that personal taste will be properly contextualized in your reviews, so that all of the reviews have maximum utility to a wide variety of viewers for making responsible game choices. And that was not the case here.
This is an utter failure of a review. Sam completely misses the point of this game, because, as he says, he's not a CCG player. This game is Magic: The Gathering without the price tag. You need to buy one set of cards to play up to a four-player game. In addition, Sam says he didn't like drafting -- great! Then don't draft. I think the rules have 2 or 3 other options for playing the game. One of them is as simple as, "Deal each player 30 cards at random." As for the keywords being a "problem," that's just silly. Keywords are present in every card game, board game, and even roleplaying game worth their salt. They're a time saver and they make cards more readable. They may cause a bit of confusion the first two times you use a particular keyword, but after that, it's cake. Finally, his criticism that the game doesn't come with everything you need to play? Cheapass Games made it's reputation on not giving you everything you need to play a game; Magic doesn't include anything to track your life, etc. If you can't find a few dice to represent token creatures or track your life -- well, it's a ridiculous criticism. Hopefully someone who actually understands card games will review this game based on how it actually plays (which is almost exactly like Magic) rather than thinking their personal feelings about the game are more important. What a waste of a review.
Drafting, imo, would've been the best option as I usually really enjoy a drafting mechanic in card games...as I said it took longer to draft the decks than the actual game took...I don't have time for that kind of nonsense. Also tried just dealing 30 cards out, and that made the decks even more swingy and lop-sided...which makes for an even worse game. Who enjoys playing a game only to find out that you didn't have a real chance at winning in the first place? My review is just one review...and I didn't like the game at all. it isn't fun to me, and my son's didn't enjoy it, either. Check out other reviewers and see what they say, try before you buy, and come to your own conclusion. That's what I did. I think I "got" the game just fine, and I simply know that it isn't what I'm looking for in a game. IF I wanted to play a game like MtG, why not just buy a couple of the starter sets that MtG has available? MtG doesn't require a lot of investment to play casually. But I don't want to play MtG, or games that mimic it for whatever reason.
+Sam Healey It also takes longer to draft for Magic than it does to play the game, so that seems a weak criticism at best. Also, a casual investment in Magic will still cost you more than this game. It was an off-base review.
It was an honest review. I expected at least the same caliber of game as Star Realms, and it wasn't even close. We can disagree, of course, but don't expect me to put sunshine where there isn't. If you like the game, fine and dandy...no worries. But that doesn't mean I have to like it, too.
+Jon Leitheusser By the way, every single game/company that you mentioned in your original post are ones that I have historically not enjoyed. I wanted to give Epic the benefit of the doubt because of White Wizard Games track record with Star Realms and how much I enjoy it. I would've loved to have been able to endorse Epic, just can't.
+Sam Healey Fair enough. I guess that says more about your preferences than it does about this game. As I said, I think the review is more about your opinion than a fair review of the game. FOR WHAT IT IS, it's a good game that people who like Magic, but can't afford to invest heavily or no longer can (due to kids, whatever), this is an excellent alternative with a lot of flexibility and game play value. Your review makes it sound like it's a bad game -- and it's not.
I love the Dice Tower and really enjoy most of their reviews, but this review needs many corrections. Sam obviously didn't enjoy this game and that is fine, but he gets many rules incorrect including banish and the rules for readying champions. Sam also doesn't seem to fully utilize the way Epic encourages you to play spells constantly on opponents turns and many champions have the ability to play on opponents turns and attack step as well. I find the interactions in this game to be less complex (and less entertaining) than Magic, but it has a really fun and swingy back and forth feel that Sam totally missed. I wish he would have reviewed the rules closer before posting this review.
+Michael Austin That was what my wife and I thought as well. Our experience playing the game is vastly different than the experience he described. Playing more than one or two creatures on your side of the board is often suicidal due to the vast amount of spells and abilities that wipe them away.
I am surprised that Sam Healy reviewed this game. He seems like the worst match of the core 3. Yes drafting the first few times will take longer... it is like that for every game. Heck 7 Wonders is 99% doing the drafting. I don't care if it was a bit longer, was it interesting? Likewise if getting a handful of 1 gold cards is an issue... don't play with so many 1 cost cards. Any card game is going to have unlucky hands and this hardly seems gamr breaking. I appreciate frank reviews and I haven't played the game so I can't attest to the quality of the game, but this review was set up to fail. I think Sam was chosen to review this based on availability not suitability.
I am not sure this review does me any good. Sam just doesn't seem like the target audience for this. I would just as soon ask Rahdo if he likes Rum and Bones.
+Jean Laurant Zee might have been the better choice, as he's mentioned he likes older CCGs. I think Tom would've had the same knee jerk reaction to not having the game spoonfed to him in regards to deck building.
+TheGreatHamEl I like the game. It only cost me a few Euros at Essen. It's not a big gamble. On the other hand, I spent about 200 Euros for a complete set of Rum n Bones...in that case, the reviews were much more important!
+jaxommm Thanks for the input. I almost backed but figured I'd wait for reviews. Still waiting for some input that's reliable. Board Game Brawl did one but that guy seems to only like expensive Kickstarter games and otaku BS.
I've seen a couple people here mention that people shouldn't dislike the video merely because they disagree with the review. It's a sentiment I agree with. I didn't dislike the video because I didn't agree with the review. I disliked the video because Sam attempted to paint Epic as a failure of a game, when it's just not to Sam's liking. He brings up some objective cons(Lack of tokens, for instance), and intermixes them with subjective cons that don't mention the entire context(Drafting taking longer then one game, without mentioning that drafting is often used at the beginning of a series of games and the deck you create is used through all of them). I thought, when his final thoughts started, that while it'd likely be negative, it'd at least acknowledge that the group Epic is targeting isn't one he belongs to. Instead, we got him hamfistedly attempting to paint Epic as a failure because he doesn't care for the experience it's attempting to capture. So that's why I disliked it. Because instead of putting critical thought into what the game is attempting to do and who it's trying to target, and commenting on it, he decided that because he doesn't like it, no one will. Sam is usually one of my favorite Dice Tower reviewers, but this actually makes me think less of him.
+Gary Schroeder I'm not fluent in english but you have say all I want to say, but barely can. Last week I made a 2 player draft + 4 games in a row + eat a sandwich + small talk in less than one hour and a half for lunch. It's not a bad review, it's a wrong one, with a lot of bad faith and a harsh final pun. The kind of review you have to let someone else do when you are in such a state of mind.
I was definitely struggling with finding good things to say about it, but at the same time, I know that a lot of people are going to like or already like this game. And in my opinion, it is a failure of a game, especially compared to the hit that Star Realms was and is to this day. If you know me at all from any of the videos of which I am part on this channel, you should also know that I usually expect people to disagree with me because my personal likes and dislikes are just that, my own. In my opinion, they had the know how and the ability to make the production quality at least what it was for Star Realms, and they didn't. This was a step back for White Wizard Games, in my opinion. Star Realms was an absolute grand slam...I doubt this will even be a double.
I'm not, by any means, challenging what you do or don't like. Like you said, your opinion is yours, and I don't think anyone should have to apologize just for liking or disliking anything. By the same token, I think we can both agree that there's a difference between a game that fails as a game, and a game that fails to appeal to someone. Epic, as a game, functions. It's modeled after CCGs, and shares conventions of those games. People participates in Drafts and Sealed games on a daily basis, and sometimes the big thing people look forward to are Magic or Dice Master tournaments. Those aren't for you, and I completely understand that. Heck, they aren't for me. But not working for you isn't the same as failing. I think Warmachine, when I tried it, is two hours of boredom, but I can recognize that even though I'm not a wargamer, it doesn't fail as a game. At the beginning of your final thoughts you mentioned you don't care for CCGs, then preceded to absolutely ignore that as you listed off subjective reasons that the game objectively fails. I watched because I wanted your thoughts on it, because even for reviews of games you don't like, you're generally aware of your biases and have commentary worth listening to about a game. Instead, I watched someone who thinks that because they aren't the target audience, the game is inherently broken. And, personally speaking, I find that level of navel-gazing depressing.
Gary Schroeder There might be a slight misperception here. I said what I said based on my experiences with the game, not on whether or not I liked CCGs. I said that as a mere disclaimer, not as a point of logic and/or reasoning. The rulebook contradicts itself...it doesn't come with everything you need to play the game...the gameplay is mind-numbingly boring, which may at first sound like an opinion, but quite frankly, you have incredibly few real decisions to make on your turn that aren't "do I play this card now or later?"...and that's IF you have 0 and 1 coin cost cards in your hand at the same time. And yes, I know one could just use a die or a counter of some kind to stand in for those token champions, but what I'm saying is that we shouldn't have to in this day and age. Include what we need to play the game in the game, or make a rule that states that there is a limit to how many tokens can be in play at a time...but don't sell us an incomplete game and expect us to fill in the cracks with our own stuff. I understand your point of being more comprehensive in my final thoughts...duly noted. But I do believe that people will be able to make their own decision based on what I presented in this video.
Sam Healey I don't think there is a misconception on my part. I understand you were reviewing the game, not CCGs. And I share many of your criticisms, such as wishing the game came with an easy way to track health out of the box or painfully, obviously needing more tokens. I think the thing that really rubs me raw from the review, however, is that you're trying to review the game as something it's not. For example, say you have a friend who just doesn't like deck builders. Has heard about them, but hasn't played them before. Of his own accord, one day, he goes out and buys Demesne, a Dominion knock-off that's a living card game, with a new deck released each month. He tries it, and comes back with a laundry list of complaints about the game. He can't build decks beforehand, or draft, and the rules basically come down to play a card or buy something each turn, and when you buy victory point cards it just gives you less options when you draw the victory point cards, and he doesn't like that the rulebook doesn't include which decks to use in a game, and all of this makes him feel like the game doesn't stack up to his favorite game from the same company, BattleWorld Universita, a sci-fi game about people randomly being a Thing-like traitor trying to kill everyone else. Not having played prior deck builders, he doesn't have the same perspective or preconceptions we do, like the victory cards are supposed to slow your engine to limit just buying them all, or that the replayability comes from different decks being used every game, or that part of the appeal is having a starting deck you slowly build up. It's not part of the hobby he enjoys, so when he tries one, he thinks it's the game itself failing. It's not. Demesne might be a perfectly awesome made-up game, but his lack of fun is because it's speaking to a specific segment of the audience that he just isn't a part of. Similarly, his complaints are not invalidated because he doesn't share a love of deck builders. But he needs to temper his opinion of the game with the knowledge that while he doesn't find it fun, it's a game that didn't go out of its' way to be fun to people who don't enjoy deck builders. Epic is a standard card game, but much like Millenium Blades, it's trying to provide a CCG experience. It's meant to be setup like one(via draft, sealed, constructed, et cetera for deck setup), and the game engine is meant to act like one. It is literally a CCG in all ways but collectibility, and meant to appeal to people who want a CCG without cost. White Wizard has been upfront about this from the earliest talk about the game. I've seen other reviews of Epic that basically ended with "I'm not a CCG player, it's not for me, but it does what it set out to do, which is be a CCG in a box", and I'm just disappointed that someone who I thought would provide an interesting view point on a game straddling two sections of the hobby that don't intermingle often might as well have written "Artwork is nice, game sucks. 0/10"
I agree with Sam. The turn order is not clear in the instructions, the card actions are many and vague (cards with definitions of the actions to give each player would have helped) and there isn't enough tokens. Part of this is my fault. I thought I was getting a game along the lines of Hearthstone. But this really is MTG with large attacks and all the recent editions levels of complication. One of the few Kickstarters I've backed that I kinda regret.
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I have read and will continue to read every bit of criticism levied against me. I'm always trying to improve. This is the first negative review I've done on my own. I'll be sure to do the next one better, as it will inevitably happen again, sooner or later.
+Sam Healey No worries Sam. This is a very polarizing game. Different strokes for different folks and all that. Certain games aren't for everyone. My wife and I bought Summoner Wars after hearing you and Tom gush about it for so long, and it turned out we hated it with a passion. That's on us though. It is clearly a very popular game. It just didn't fit our particular tastes.
Don't Sam, if a game is bad even if it's from your view, always speak your mind. Have a iron heart like tom does, that's why he is loved by many people in this hobby.
40kbolter Oh, don't misunderstand what I said...I didn't say in would go easier on any future game, but that I would do the negative review better. That doesn't mean I'm gonna go easy on it. As a matter of fact, it might even feel like I'm being harder on it, as I will use a much finer comb, next time.
+Sam Healey I don't think the problem has to do with this being a negative review as much as you're giving a negative review to a game within a genre you're already predisposed to hate. That's not fair to the game. If you find a game that you enjoy within a genre that you normally don't like, that review can be useful to signal to people, "Hey, if you don't normally like abstracts (example), you might give this a shot." But if you play a game you're predisposed to not like and you -- wait for it -- **don't like it**, then criticizing the elements that are a necessary part of the genre (lack of theme in abstract, combat tables in wargames, assembling miniatures in a minis game, deck building or drafting in *this* game) comes across more as a rant than a proper review. I do want to offer something in your defense: this game's rulebook is written with an assumption that the reader is already versed in Magic. People without that experience such as yourself will both face a steep learning curve with this as well as not having the experience to manage some of the necessary game tracking elements (life totals, tokens, counters, etc.) that Magic players already take as a given. Perhaps in testing this game, you should've tried a game or two with someone that has experience in the genre so you can report their reaction. Then your own criticisms would have a more balanced context. Sorry for the sermon, and please know that I do think you're otherwise doing a fantastic job. Your videos on Memoir 44 were exceptional.
+Sam Healey I thought it was a fair review and it relayed to me exactly what I needed to know. I suspect that all of the sad Magic players commenting here could better use their time taking a shower.
I like this game. It's not perfect, but it's an enjoyable and inexpensive game that will scratch your CCG itch (if you have one). Like Sam said, it has amazing artwork which is really worth the $10 alone in my opinion.The keywords are mostly translations of Magic keywords so if you've played Magic they are easy to learn. If you don't love CCG-style games this is probably not the game for you. But if you're like me and you've spent endless hours playing Magic and other 90's CCGs, give this game a try!
Loved the ending Sam. As a heavy Netrunner player (and board gamer) I think Epic falls into an unhappy medium. It's very finicky and face smashy with inexperienced players, followed by a huge skill wall when it comes to deckbuilding. You can literally include any amount of cards in sets of 3 (1x 0 cost, 2x 1 cost). When our playgroup decided to try to amp up the game and see what it looks like at its 'final level', there was just no incentive and we never met up again with constructed decks. Common complaints were "too much to wrap my head around" and "why bother?"
+Waggabagaboo Well I used to be a heavy ANR player too and I can just tell you that Epic is what I play not ANR. Why? EPIC is quick and you want to play it as draft NOT construction. ANR is slow and requires construction (a few hours at least on netrunner.meteor.com)
Well I would really like to see Tom review EPIC! I know he likes magic and I suspect that his review would be a 180 on this. I don't fault you Sam I know we don't all like the same things in games. I was just excited to see EPIC! get some love and was very disappointed when all you did was talk about why you didn't like it. I love the game and have you to have a bad experience with it. Maybe Tom having a M:tg background will see the game more like I do.
+Steven Loomis I like MtG and Epic doesn't do anything for me (haven't played, just watched a few reviews). It doesn't have a build up (yeah, which sometimes results in mana screw). It is similar, but at the same time different too much.
knowing the game i skipped the (insanely long) rules explanation to the review part. i find it very odd that Sam doesn't say anything at all about gameplay there, then just says the game sucks because instead of costing a lot more and giving you components you don't really need, they packaged it tightly and made it cheap. btw if you don't like drafting/constructing, just play single color decks, those work and are zero time to set up and it's not that hard to figure this out. i know this game just won't click with everyone immediately, and you don't have to like it, but this is just one lazy review. this game has way more depth and interesting mechanisms than to just be dismissed like this. and just a sidenote: my ten year old little brother did construct two decks in 10 minutes which were great to play against each other. come on Sam!
"I skipped over half the video... The part I watched didn't explain your views enough so you must be lazy." Seriously, watch the whole video before saying dumb things. Or don't watch it at all.
you're right i should have watched the whole video before criticising. but in my defense in most videos the rules explanation and the review part are very divided. i watched it now, but it didn't change my opinion. sorry if i have come off rude but i'm going to try to rephrase the main thing i wanted to say without addressing specific points in your video: of course you don't have to like the game, but i would like to know WHY you don't like it. not just what parts of it you don't like but why you don't like them, how they feel, what decisions they give you. i hope this is constructive criticism to you and sorry again if i was rude.
Sorry Sam but I totally disagree on this one. Its a great game and its packaged very well. I think its works best for people that have a background in MTG. Its basically MTG LIGHT. Drafting is FUN. It gives you some control over your deck and is part of the game. I draft a deck and play 2 out of 3. I used to do that with MTG but it would cost you $24 EACH TIME just for 2 players. I think $15 for 200 unique and fun to play cards is a steal. As for the game not coming with what you need to play the game. It really does. You dont need a life counter and if you want one you can just use dice we all have dice laying around or grab a MTG life counter app there are dozens of them out there for free. Sorry you didnt like the game. I hope people will give it a chance its actually a lot of fun.
Oh I never said mtg wasn't well designed. I think it's arguably the best game ever designed. I also never said I couldn't get over the collectable aspect of the game. I spent thousands of dollars on magic in my 2 year run and I enjoyed ever minute of it. I finally stopped because it was unhealthy for me. I was spending to much on it, but I don't hate the game. Idd just rather play many games than spend all my money on one game. I don't hate magic though. As I already started I think it's the best game ever designed. Now as for the wildly swingy nature of epic. That can't be denied, but its fun, its quick and its not to be taken so seriously. It is after all a different game. It is MTG light but that don't mean its as serious. I know many magic players who like it. In fact I have never taught the game to someone who hasn't liked it.
I also think you overstate how unbalanced it is. It is swingy but it dosnt change who is wining evey turn. Sure it is possible to catch up unexpectedly, but I think the swingy nature is one of the games strengths. It's kind of like the fight scenes from the matrix. Over the top. I think the game apeals strongly to the Timmy in players.
I think Epic is for people who enjoy the gameplay and formats of CCGs/MTG but not the collectability of them. I used to play a lot of CCGs in the past but nowadays I have learned to despise the CCG business model. I love what Epic is trying to be: A MTG-like game you can draft with a fair business model. I think Epic fixes some issues in the gameplay of MTG as well like mana screw/flood. So far I have really enjoyed playing Epic :)
I get your point about not everything being included... But, really? I just hear "Waaaah." It's unlimited sealed and draft play for $15. $15! Get a sheet of paper, a pencil and some loose change. Problem solved.
What boggles my mind is that when he reviewed Star Realms he said he threw away the authority cards that track you life total and downloaded an MTG life tracker. You'd think he would've done the same here. I can tell he really hates the very idea of a CCG style game and he makes that bias pretty apparent when he won't even consider that he had a solution for a problem that he had with the game.
Sorry Sam, but I feel this is not a review of the game. It's a review of the packaging and a couple of the variant rules. I think you didn't even mention what you felt about the game(play) here. Did you like the 1 coin vs 0 coin cards? The big monsters and ways to get rid of them? The way blocking and attacking works? The card interactions you can find and build in random decks? All those aspects are incredibly fun for me. I partially agree with you on the cards/tokens/tracker. It's inconvenient, but come on, how many dice do we all have laying around? There are plenty of games that are not 'complete' in that way, even Magic the Gathering is often sold in boosters or duel-decks w/o dice/life trackers. I don't think that should be such a harsh criticism on Epic specifically. It is quite common. But yeah, a way to keep track of scores would've been nice. Drafting. I think drafting is a valid way to play the game. You find it takes to long. I agree. But then you can play it as a tournament, play games with multiple opponents with the same deck. Having said that, drafting is not for me either. I just deal 30 cards to both players and play with what we get randomly. Even than, Epic works excellent. Epic as such is quick, fun, and challenging. It's very lucky, card draw is vital, but it's fun, overpowered, broken and that works for me. You don't have to deck-build, draft or do complicated stuff with the game.. Just deal 30 cards and play. As such, Epic is a fun, quick CCG-ish/Magic-ish filler. And for that purpose I really enjoy it.
+Ruud2009 That was my take on the review too, Ruud: just not Sam's best reviewing performance. From the review, what made the game bad was the lack of an included pencil and scratchpaper, the lack of gold tokens, and the use of keywords on cards. In my opinion those are trivial complaints. If Sam were to enjoy playing the game then those non-issues wouldn't have mattered, so I want to hear about why Sam didn't enjoy the actual gameplay!
+antoyal Yeah , it's a shame. I can totally see why people could dislike Epic. I totally understand why Sam wouldn't like it (cards, ccg). I feel it just is a not a review w/o any gameplay comments. Sadly this likely won't get reviewed by Zee or Tom. Both of which are closer to the audience for Epic. Both I feel could've given a more interesting analysis/opinion on this game.
***** He might. I'm not a rabid fanboy on Epic. I like it, but I like Magic ( a lot) better. I understand why people wouldn't like the game. It's not for everyone. But I think that Tom or Zee could better describe what they don't/do like about than Sam. They're more into card games anyway. Sam didn't really delve into the game/mechanisms, he mentioned two things "drafting takes too long" and "it should've come with a life counter". I really enjoy most of Sam's reviews, I think he does a terrific job most of the time and I really think he does an excellent job on his gameplay movies. Very comprehensive. But he didn't do a review of Epic. He reviewed the packaging/model.
+Sam Healey I'm sorry Sam. I really enjoy your contributions to the dice tower otherwise. But I just don't think you reviewed Epic. I understand your irks with the packaging and drafting. But there is more to Epic than just those two issues :). I don't feel you gave your opinion on how the game plays. Hope for a DT review that does go into more depth on that topic.
Reviews are personal opinions of course, but I Sam was really a wrong person to review this game, and you can see it from the like / dislike ration. If you are not a CCG person this game is not for you. Same would be if person who is into deck building games reviews Memoir '44 and complains that combat and miniatures are too much for the card play in that game. This is not Star Realms, same people created it, it's sort of the same size, but it's not same type of game. Star Realms is super simply game that plays it self. The game has one decision point in it, what you buy each turn, nothing else. Epic is a fast version of Magic The Gathering. You have accelerated mana build up with the coin and all the other features are from MTG. Ok, you don't want to build your deck, guess what, that is one of the biggest parts of the whole genre. You put more thought into single deck build than 100 games of Star Realms together. The game box is small, but the game play it provides is huge. Game has it's own flaws, but it is a cheap and fast alternative for Magic, and I don't think it even tries to be anything else.
Hmm.. I'd rather take an opening hand filled with 1-cost cards rather than a hand with only 0-cost cards.. the 1-cost cards are so much better than the 0-cost ones, so I'm likely to kick my opponents butt in the long run. Plus doesn't the champion "untap" at the beginning of your next turn and not at the end of your turn?
I love watching The Dice Tower and typically enjoy hearing Sam Healey's opinions, but this is by far the worst review I've ever seen. Sam seems to have missed the point of the game. The whole idea is that two players can open the box and play without having to draft or build decks. However, players CAN do this if they so wish. It's not at all required or mandatory or even all that suggested, but it is possible. Why knock the game for giving players options? He was also upset about the game using keyword labels instead of printing out each and every effect. First of all, there would be no way to write all of the effects AND keep the text a readable size. I understand that it's annoying to refer to the rulebook whenever a new card comes up, but it takes all of 5 seconds and is easily learned after one or two plays. Finally, his complaint about the resource system (0 cost or 1 cost) seems to have corrected itself while he was playing. Yes, if one player were to draw five 1-cost cards and the other were to draw five 0-cost cards, the 0-cost person would gain an immediate lead. However, the 0-cost person would also be wasting their 1 gold every turn, which is an extremely valuable. Anything worth any amount of strength in Epic costs 1 gold. The 0-cost cards are good and all, but they hardly aid in the big plays or powerful creatures. The 1-cost player would soon overtake the board with their stronger cards and completely negate any lead that the 0-cost person had. It's cool if Sam doesn't like this game. Not every game is for every player. But this review was not fair. He was biased from the beginning, played many of the effects wrong (which is what his gameplay section was based off of), and then knocked the game for allowing other playing conditions. Really, the most valid complaint that I heard was at the lack of counters, but that can easily be remedied with some dice or a pen and paper. I do agree, though, that this shouldn't be necessary, so I get why he was annoyed there. Again, I usually enjoy the directness and honesty of Sam's reviews, but I do not think this one did the game justice.
As a CCG player who picked up Epic, I think this was simply not geared to your play preferences. In fact I greatly enjoy having a game I can pull out and play that is similar to magic, with huge swingy monsters bashing face each turn, and I personally think that the ability to draft is a huge draw to the game. I love to sit a draft (heck 7 Wonders is pretty much nothing but the draft part of the game and it's one of my favorite board games) but for non ccg players a draft can seem like a waste of money. With epic I can sit down with my kids, do a quick draft, play a few games to see who got the strongest deck and all in less time and energy than a friday night magic draft. The game has it's issues, but I think you may not have been the audience it was made for.
I guarantee you now that I am not the target audience, but, because of who put it out, and how much I enjoyed another of their games, I wanted to give it a fair shake. It is most definitely not my cup of tea.
+TheGreatHamEl Well. Tom Vasel said on Nomerous times that he enjoys Magic. He also like to deckbuild in games like Mage Wars and "New" Summoner Wars". Let me also say. I own and love Star Realms. I backed Epic and still haven't gotten around to play it cause the rule book is what it is. I was expecting a game more like Star Realms in ways of easy understanding and I think Sam was too.
+Kristian Törnkvist -- well said... that does seem to be the case... i also love Star Realms [even though i am truly awful at it], and i really wish i'd Kickstartered Epic... i'd love to get my hands on one of those promo packs...!!!
I played a couple of Epic games and I think that there's one thing in Sam's review that he got wrong: the one coin rule. Let me take something out of the way first: I'm a former Magic the Gathering player (not a pro player) so I might be more into the logic of the game. The feeling I got from Epic was to play a MtG game that started around the fifth turn and was high on speed. The general idea of the one coin rule is that there's a HUGE gap between free cards and cost cards in epic, the same gap there's in MtG between putting out a bunch of small creature or your first big hitter at the fifth turn. For a bit of context, putting a cost card in play is like putting a full-on Dreadnought in TI3. I played a three players game and over half of my deck were cost cards and I was able to stay in play effectively up to five rounds from the end. I don't think that's a problem, but I do agree that the mechanic could have been done better. I think that most of the issues with Epic comes from the fact that the authors are both MtG hall of famers, so most of the lingo and mechanics are obvious to them, but they're not for others. With Star Realms they did it simple because they felt that simpler was better, here they let their habits get the best of them.
+Francesco Castelli I agree, this is a game for folks who have played many, many games of MtG. It's exactly what it says on the tin: an accelerated game of Magic that gets you right to the point where the creatures drop that can end the game after a couple of unblocked turns. I don't have time to play MtG anymore, but I do have time for this. Once you play a bit mono-color you can move over to the draft format and improve the longevity of the game. I think there is a lot here for 10 bucks.
The one coin cards are much heftier than their free counterparts, sure...but more often than not, those hefty champions can still be blocked by just one person, no matter their cost...so, having multiple champions is far better than one huge guy. That was my experience with the game, at least. And the games were over rather quickly, too...and we're mostly lopsided victories.
+Sam Healey I can see your point and, as I said above, I think that the general issue here is that the author created a game that is meant to appeal a much more specific demographic than Star Realms and has a much different learning curve.
+Francesco Castelli I'm in total agreement with you on that point. The Epic section on BGG is littered with complaints from people that thought what they were purchasing was Star Reals: Fantasy Edition, not a game that attempts to simplify the experience that comes with playing a CCG game. That is why my wife and I raised an eyebrow when we received a subscription notification that Sam had done a review of this game. I didn't think CCG-style games were Sam's cup of tea. I had thought those style of games were more of a Tom and Zee thing. I had perceived Sam having a distaste for the genre akin to Zee having a distaste for games lasting longer than six minutes.
+Sam Healey Try playing at least 2 sealed games to JUST KNOW THE RULES and then do at least 2-3 open drafts. Then you will know what the game is about. Almost all games with similar skill have been going for 30minutes and it was not as volatile as it looked to be first.
I must be one of the odd ones out. I really enjoy Epic. I'm also glad that it wasn't just Fantasy Star Realms, because had it have been I'd be massively disappointed. It would essentially mean that WWG is nothing more than a 'one trick pony'. It's great that you can just start a game, without the slow, long drawn out, start that many other games of it's ilk have. Does it have it's issues, sure the rule book is woeful I almost thought that I'd opened a console games rule book.
I did not kickstarter the game. I picked it up after watching an interview with wwg, and I love it. incidentally the only kickstarter I have ever backed was the dice towers.
+Steve Gale Yeah, I know, Kickstarter backers can be so defensive, and they form a love-fest. For instance, why did we need yet another variant of the same game we have in Chaos in the Old World and Cthulhu Wars? People who backed *Blood Rage* surely were lured by the minis like so many other Kickstarters... :)
I don't ever kickstart games and I really enjoy Epic. It gives you the MTG like experience without the rip-off CCG business model. Epic also fixed mana screw/flood and the problem of drawing late-game cards early because you have enough resources to play any card even on your first turn.
+Steve Gale The problem is not that it is a negative review, the problem is that it is a hasty and rather bad review. The review is for sure a lot worse than the game ;-) (even if the game has its small flaws, which mostly have to do with the rules as written). This might have helped Sm: www.epiccardgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/EpicOneSheet.pdf
lastburning yeah I for one hope we get more 120 card sets yearly perhaps. I realize it is not as strategic as magic but it is fun. It gets right to the fun part, and it gets rid of some of the things about magic that are not fun mana screw and drawing a land when you don't need it.
Maybe the text in the rule book was too small, but Sam missed a ton of things that I feel would have made the game better for him. One major one, one of the biggest things he complains about, is having to make your deck. He must have missed the part where it says to randomly deal 30 cards and BOOM there is your deck. That's literally the first thing it says to do before going into the other options such as drafting. The second one is just use all 30 cards of a faction. Again, no thinking, there are only 30 of each faction. He jumped straight to the "advanced" variants and then complained about it.
I realise this is an old video and peoples views may have changed. Just completely gave up on the “money pit” that is MTG, after 20 years. Saw this game and immediately bought a copy firstly because of the awesome card artwork and then because I couldn’t believe the cost / value. Love the Dice Tower but this review seems unfair and uninformed - although I understand where the reviewer was coming from (not a TCG background).. The value for money is outstanding, the gameplay is fun and a bit like a “skirmish” game compared to others. There is no need for constantly shelling out many, many hard earned dollars because of new frequent set releases and new booster packs (invariably with no cards you want or need). All extra that is needed is a couple of dollars for some D10 / 20’s to keep score. Maybe the review would have been completely different if he had experienced the expectations, disappointments and significant financial investment required to play Magic The Gathering and the like in competition, with the insane cost of cards if you want any chance of not loosing every game.
Just because it's missing some components (my biggest gripe is not having coin tokens... so I made some myself), doesn't mean the gameplay is bad. Epic IS epic; Every turn something huge happens. There's no waiting to get the right mana. But I will echo the many here and admit it's going to mostly appeal to folks who already enjoy TCGs, like myself.
I am an avid CCG style player. Used to play Magic. Now a AGOT 2.0 and Netrunner fan. So I am more of the target audience. I actually played this game when it originally came out as a CCG. And I didn't like it. So I agree it's not a good game. But not for the reasons Sam thinks it sucks. Keywords don't make a game bad. :p
+Seth Dortch -- i think you'll find that it has changed quite a bit, & for the better, since the CCG, though, it doesn't sound like you'd be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt... your loss...
Kevin Scribner Yes my loss. I will probably cry myself to sleep tonight since I'm not smart enough to try this version out like you were. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
dont dislike video because the guy didnt like the game. i hate the trend that people try to find something good in the game even if its not there. respect the honest review.
I'm actually really curious as to why you chose to review this game instead of Tom or Zee? As others have mentioned it just doesn't seem to be your kind of game. I did find the conclusions to the game unhelpful, as many packaged games are missing point-tracking components, and in the case of the 1 vs 0 coin thing I can't understand why that would be difficult to keep track of on one's own. Not sure if I am maybe just not understanding the rules for the coins correctly? Since you lose the coin if you don't use it and then get another one on an opponent's turn, it's basically the same as all those games that let you a certain number of actions per turn, right? Like in Smash Up I don't need a token to keep track of whether or not I've played an action or a minion. Don't know why it would be a big deal for this game, when it's such a simple thing to track on one's own. Please confirm that my understanding is not completely wrong. In any case, thank you for your review.
+Tam Lee (crystalusagi) Thanks for commenting! I wouldn't equate the two examples that you gave. Having a limited currency that you must use (or don't use) in order to play certain cards from turn to turn isn't the same (in my mind) as being able to always play two different kinds of cards on your turn. In Smash Up, it isn't restricted by whether you have the right currency or not, but rather how many of those cards you have already played. Use of currency is simple to track on one's own, but it is also easy to become confused from turn to turn, especially once more and more units are on the board, and the fact that the currency is both gained and used/lost on both player's turns. Having a token provided in the game that could represent it having been used by a simple flip would've been advantageous. And I don't know of "many games" that are missing point/life tracking components that I frequently play (and I play a LOT of games). When I do come across a game that doesn't include such components, it displeases me. As I said in the video, another of White Wizard Games' products (Star Realms) did it, so why not Epic? You are correct that this is not my target genre. Tom will be reviewing the game as well. So, the possibility is that he will have a different take on the game than I did. But at the very least, I guess, other people who are not into CCG-style games like MtG will be able to use this as a warning. I always say "try before you buy"...in other words, this is my opinion, but yours could most definitely be different. Thanks for your time!
But honestly, how many of us use those cards in Star Realms to keep track of life, when we have a smart phone or some dice? I actually really hate having that extra bulk in the box because then I can't fit any expansions in there. I do understand that for the casual player who may not have any other alternatives for keeping score, it presents a bit of a problem, but not enough to affect the game's overall playability. I like having lots of reviews to compare against, and while this review wasn't really on par with a lot of other Dice Tower reviews that you guys have done in the past, I still appreciate that you took your time to tell us a little bit about the gameplay and what your thoughts were. Hope all the negative comments doesn't make you feel too bad. Happy gaming.
Whether I use them or not isn't really the rub...it's the fact that they were considerate enough to say during design meetings, "Hey, we should include something for our consumers to use to keep track of their Authority." Whether we use it or not is on us, but not including it is on them. And if we don't want to use it, we can chuck them, making room for those expansions. But I have played Star Realms with people who insisted on using those Authority cards...few and far between, but they are out there. Have a great day!
And the most simple way to enjoy the game is to pick one of the "factions" and play with those 30 cards (while your opponent does the same). Simple and fast!
Whilst it may have it's flaws and I genuinely agree they need to provide all the parts (like health and enough tokens)... This is a great game that rolls the joys and strategy of MTG and other trading card games into a nicely bundled, non-elitist format. You buy a box and at most some expansions... And you're done... You have a fun, quick and strategic game right off the bat. You don't need to worry about other players having OP expensive decks, you have absolute equality because you get to play from the same selection. Sure you may get some unlucky draws but that's the nature of any card game. It's a solid game that doesn't exclude people because anyone can pick it up, invest a little time in learning 20 functions and then play a balanced game. I love MTG but it simply isn't accessible to anywhere near the degree this is. For a £13 box you can have a fun game with expansions if you want more diversity... You can pay that on a fairly basic MTG single card that you need a free of to run your deck...I really admire White Wizard games for making accessible, inexpensive, compact games with decent art and simple enough rules, they are in my mind the future. I have 200+ board games, piles of trading cards, heaps of deck builders and WWG produce some of the most approachable ones alongside others like stoneblade etc. As a helpful criticism, I simply believe someone better acquainted to the type of games reviewed would be better so they can make a better review, judgement and comparison to other games in order to give a fair picture of the game in question.
I think this is the very first Dice Tower Review I saw which was not fair: No clear arguments why the game is not good, some obvious dislike/misunderstandings of the concepts of the genre itself, and ,please, the thing with the life counter and tokens?! Not really an issue at this price point, it is part of it -> Pen n Paper. Who used the life cards in Star Reamls anyway? In short: It looks as if Sam just personally didnt like the game/genre and has no background in similar games. Which is both fine with me. I like his reviews. But this time it was like "Hey I dont like deck construction games so Magic is a bad game"... PS: I have not played Epic yet, just a neutral point of view
I was honestly quite disappointed with this game. I backed it on Kickstarter because it was the same people who brought Star Realms. Before you jump on me about how this is not like Star Realms so don't compare, I know that. It is presented as a simpler, cleaner, entry level CCG without all of the cost. I never played MTG but always wanted to, however the cost and sheer vastness of it is just to overwhelming to try and get into now. So when I saw this and saw who was putting it out i was excited. Finally I thought here is kind of an entry level MTG, cheap, but also drops you right into the fun of MTG not the competitive aspect of MTG, but just fun card playing. I thought that sense White Wizard had done Star Realms, which is an amazing entry level Deck Builder, this would be an amazing entry level CCG / MTG experience. I was wrong. First, yes, the rule book is not near as clear as it should be. Now maybe that is my fault for thinking White Wizard was putting out a game that ANYONE could pick up and play, when clearly it is written for those with some MTG or CCG experience. That being said, one would think that a company that raised over $585,000 for this game would be able to ensure that the amount of effort and quality that went into the artwork would have also gone into explaining this rules to ANYONE who picked them up, not just those familiar with the specific genre of gaming that this is clearly meant to target. I have played and own many board games( my BGG collection is in the hundreds), so I am not stranger to a bad rule book, however if you are trying to make a game that appeals to everyone, the basics in your game need to at least be understandable for everyone. One example of how this could have been helped would have been to put more than just the keyword on the cards, like Sam says. Why make the gamer, who may be new to this, learn 20 new terms. An example of a game that does this well is Elysium. It has iconography for what the cards actions are along with a brief description on every card. In no way does this take away from the game or artwork. Nor does it clutter the card. It is simply an aid for the player. Second, as for tokens and counters, i agree with Sam, it is annoying to buy a game and it not have everything it needs, or enough of items to play it smoothly. If nothing else, write on the back of the box something that states tokens will be needed for such and such. Something like that would have been helpful. People in comments below try to attack Sam's statement where he compares, stating that Star Realms at least provides authority cards, by saying that it does not provide counters for gold or combat. The thing is that you don't need those counters because nothing carries over and you do not get any new money or combat on your opponents turn. In Epic you get a gold on every turn, even your opponents. Having something to track that would be helpful as it does get confusing at times on whether or not you have spent your gold. Other people stated that MTG players are used to using dice to track their health so jut get a die and your good. Again, the point is that i am NOT a MTG player so how would i know that unless it states it somewhere. Finally, i would like to point out that Sam is my least favorite reviewer on this channel in general simply because i do not agree with his opinions on 90% of games( except TI3, best game ever!), so in no way am i writing this just to stick up for him. All that being said I think I understand some of the frustration that comes out of Sam during this review. It was disappointing to see the potential that was there in this game, not come to fruition at all and kind of fall flat. That is my opinion as someone who was hoping for an entry level way to get into CCG / MTG and have some fun and see what the hype was all about. This just left a bad taste in my mouth. That being said, i am not giving up, i have printed some of the player aids from BGG and some that others in this thread have posted(thanks), and am going to play this game a couple more times before i decide whether or not it is something i like or truly just do not like. You may not like Sam or how he did this review, but he has always been blunt about how he feels about a game. If you expected something different that is on you. I could tell within the first 30 seconds when he introduced the game and said it was from those that brought us Star Realms that he did not like it near as much as Star Realms. That being said, he still shows how to play the game (as best as the rule book explains to a new player), and gives his very blunt "Sam's Opinion" at the end. If you did not like it, watch another review by someone else, as any good gamer will tell you, you need to watch multiple reviews before making a decision, and as Sam always says, "Play it before you buy it folks." Not every game is for every person, but there is a person for every game.
I can understand if one is not the target audience. As others noted, there's a lot of equivalency between this and Magic: The Gathering that Sam is missing. The review feels extremely whiny, however. Rather than discussing the important things like the flow of the game, the decision making process as turns go by, and the tactics/strategy of it (or lack thereof), the review skips right to dismissal. It feels like this review was missing the body and went straight to conclusion. I notice a lot of your reviews ramble on a bit, Sam, and you have improved in this regard from some of your first posted reviews I watched. This review, however, has the opposite problem. It doesn't have enough context or talking points to help the consumer make an informed decision.
+S Clever Thank you for commenting! As I have said to other commenters here, I am reading everything, and the next negative review, when (not if) it happens will be better. As far as sounding whiny, sure, I can see that. But that is mainly because I was expecting more than a MtG clone from White Wizard Games. I was VERY disappointed, and that came through.
+Sam Healey Reviews can and should include opinions, and disappointment is a valid reaction to something. A good review, however, needs to include explanations for those reactions. As someone who uses reviews to make purchasing decisions, I just didn't feel this review provided enough. Either way, I'm glad that you are reading everyone's comments, and trying to learn from them for the next review. Keep up that great mindset :)
I think what is unfair about Sam's review here is that he's basically saying it's a bad game because it did, and it does, exactly what it was trying to do. It's like going into Carcassonne and complaining that it's a tile-placement game. Like, you might not like that about it, but that's what it's meant to be. EPIC is meant to give you the feel of a CCG, without having to pay the high-prices that CCG's cost. It's giving you that experience for a very low price point. And it does a very good job of it.
Couldn't agree more, I Kickstarter it and have player it with a few people, and if I have my way I won't ever play it again. It basically feels like MTG but with none of the decision making (IE the actual gameplay). The art's fantastic but the game is not.
I understund sam, he piked a game based on the company that make the game and not based on the mecanics of the game. He dislike the game....is ok. Is like If Zee reviw a 5 hours game and didnt like it, Whould be a bad reviw? no, but a positive reviw is almost imposible.
Hey Sam, you are not getting younger now. So stop complaining with those game instruction manual and buy those games with larger font on its manual. Stop being so bias in your review and be objective.
Was looking so forward to this game. Almost kickstarted it. Glad I didn't. Haven't read or watched even one positive review of it. Such a disappointment... I hear ya, Sam, publishers should include everything needed to play the game. But isn't that exactly what dice masters lacks? Too less dice and cards... a paper bag for crying out loud... you even have to print out your own two boards. While DM is so high on everybody's lists these days...
+SensualEMO Dice Masters doesn't "lack" anything. You get enough to play with from the STARTER set, which is exactly what it is. You do not need mats. You do not need 4 dice per character. For $15 MAX, you get a TON of dice. It is not meant to be an end all solution, but it is very playable out of the box.
+Kenny Johnson You don't get life counters in MTG either, which this game is strongly emulates. (You do get them in certain products.) Gotta look at value vs cost. I don't think it's worth giving a game a crap review over it.
+TheGreatHamEl I agree. I was simply explaining SensualEMO's point: Dice Masters, like Epic, lacks life counters. I think Sensual's point was that DM doesn't seem to be criticized for that while it seemed to be a main complaint of Sam's about Epic.
I ordered this game without researching it because it was cheap and star realms is great. After I was done reading the rulebook I decided it was basically just a poorly simplified version of Magic the Gathering. They took out good things and didn't add any back. Still sitting on shelf untried, and likely to stay that way.
Sounds like Sam isn't the target audience for the game. I like it for what it is.. it gives me the Magic type fix I need for half the cost and more replayability than a MTG Clash Pack. The criticisms like needing to learn key words is kind of odd. Many games, especially TCGs and LCGs have key words with no explanation on the card. I agree that cards representing gold and a few more token creatures would have been nice but I can't say what impact this would have had on shipping... and is finding 2 pennies really that hard? I hope Tom reviews the game. He is more versed on mechanics and the inner workings of the industry. Even if he does not like a game personally he points out who the target audience may be. Sam doesn't seem to look at a game from other perspectives.
+Erik Hurst The difference is that games like magic are mostly played by people who spend years playing this game, trading cards, buying boosters and such. This kind of audience doesn't have any problem with learning a new ability everytime a new edition comes around (not to mention that magic actually puts a description in italic on the cards quite often). Epic doesn't seem to be the kind of game you'd be fanatically playing for years. That's why so many abilities without any on-card descripions was a bad idea.
There are literally 19 key words in the rules. 4 of them have un prefixes so if a player knows what the rule for break is unbreakable isn't that hard to figure out. Figuring out airborne is not much of a brain burner. Some cards do tell you what the actions mean but there is limited space so they cannot explain the rules on all of the cards and keep a decent font size. I think the complexity of the key words is way overblown in the review. Many games make the players memorize abstract symbols and colors without explaining it on every piece. Small World which is one of my favorite games has a tremendous amount of symbology but it's still used as a gateway game. If someone does't get the vocab by turn 3 hand them a rule book. There are 4 pages of key words... and by pages i mean a quarter of a page because the rule book is tiny.
Couldn't agree more, I Kickstarter it and have player it with a few people, and if I have my way I won't ever play it again. It basically feels like MTG but with none of the decision making (IE the actual gameplay). The art's fantastic but the game is not.
+PepsiTwistMagic -- if that's the case, email me, if your cards are still in good shape & you have the Kickstarter Promo Pack complete... i'll purchase it off of you for a reasonable price, no problem at all... everybody wins...!!!
Rebuttal to Point 2, Incompleteness: Why complain about coin, but bring up Star Realms. And no, I'm not talking about the health/Authority cards here. You had to keep in your head the trade/coin and combat/attack numbers of what you played. What difference does it make that you don't have the coins here? Or cards that represent them, if we go back to what could have been taken from SR?
The trade coins and attack values are actually listed on the cards as you play them, and you use them as a resource. That's completely different than Epic.
+Sam Healey I am with you that it misses some components actually. The coin is on BGG and the rest I linked here in comments already. But yes, a few mistakes have been made. Does not stop the game from being an excellent game that crushes DM.
I agree that the game ideally should have come with means to track your life points, gold coins, more tokens and counters. But realistically, at this price point you can't really argue. You get a ton of game in this tiny box. It's true that drafting takes longer than playing the game. This is why I suggest playing a mini tournament with 4 players and/or to play best of 3/5/7.
+Marco Schaub Yeah well, but then the price may be wrong :D If this is supposed to be some kind of starter set you better make sure everything is in there, even if it raises the price by a couple of dollars.
+Hitchslapped I can only guess, but I assume that if they added dice for life tracking, gold coins, counters and more tokens, the price of the game would likely increase by much more than a couple of dollars. That's because they'd have to switch to the next bigger box, which increases shipping costs, storage costs, and the cost for the box itself. Besides from the materials themselves. Maybe they'll produce a deluxe version of this game some time in the future.
+Hitchslapped As Marco Schaub says, including dice and gold coins would likely raise the price tag by more than a few dollars. I picked it up for about $17 here in Sweden, while most card games in a slightly bigger box are around $22-25. Had it cost that I wouldn't have gotten it, as the price tag was one of the main draws for me (I weighed between Epic and Pixel Tactics which had a similar price tag, if one was an extra $5 it would have been an easy decision). Since part of the selling point is that you get some of the fun of a TCG like Magic at a fraction of the price, making that fraction really really low is a good design choice. That said, d30's aren't easy to come by so for that purpose it would have been nice to have! :D
About not having a way to keep track of life in the box I know Star Realms had a way but people probably used other ways too. Most of us could use a life or score app on a phone or whatever. A lot of trick taking games don't come with a way to keep score but it doesn't stop people from playing them. If you didn't enjoy the game well that's fine but it seemed like some of it was very nitpicky.
personally, i found the need for a coin as an excuse to put some of the foreign currency i've gathered in my travels to good use... one of the first things i did after opening Epic was toss a couple of old-style 50-yen coins in the box...
MtG doesn't come with a way to track life: most people either use dice or buy a life-tracker, or use a digital device... i was very heavily into Jyhad / VtES, for a long time, and with that game you need at least 30 tokens to represent your blood pool, plus spare for the community bank, and then there needs to be some distinctive object to represent "The Edge..." that actually turned into a thing among VtES players, having a cool & distinctive Edge... maybe later down the line, when they do a collector's tin, in addition to a rewritten rule book & a couple of copies of the one-page summary / reference, they'll include a set of nifty coins... oh, and speaking of rulebooks, does anyone remember the hot mess that came with the original MtG starters...?! Epic looks pretty good, by comparison [my first MtG cards had square corners, i ought to include here]...
+Kevin Scribner there's actually an official app for the game that keeps track of life for both players, rolls a d6 for each player to determine start player and even has a way to track if you used your coin for the turn. Very helpful and totally free.
While I respect Sam's opinion on this game I do disagree like many others. However, I wont really try to point out why he is wrong or anything else. If you don't like a game...you don't like it. Fair enough. I really do though have to say Im...."disappointed" in how he chose to criticize the game. To bash the game so strongly because he doesn't want to learn 8-9 game terms or because they didn't include health tokens is extremely silly. That paired with his kinda childish box drop at end just really struck me as being negative just to be funny or....to Troll others. Regardless...thanks for the review.
Okay, I want to start off by saying some of Sam's criticisms of the game are valid, some less so. And if you play the way depicted, it would probably be horrible, as reviewed. In addition this will be a very long but thorough, and I believe fair review. Forward: This game was designed and packaged (to my knowledge) as an inexpensive card game alternative to Magic (similar mechanics but important differences). For that reason a few decisions were made that Sam does not like. From a design perspective, the game is designed to focus on making decisions with less restrictions imposed by mana requirements, etc. Sam's Complaints: A decent number of these complaints should have been expected from Sam because he has consistently made these complaints about other games. If he doesn't like something for reasons he has given in the past, he is not going to like them now, and as a reviewer he should tell us that, which he did. - Dinky rule book: Agreed, I reread the rule book after watching this video and reading the comments. For Non-CCG players, it seems like it would be very hard to wrap your head around all of the rules and how they interact (especially since some need to be understood together). As people we like games/things that are both new and familiar, and if the game isn't familiar it is harder to understand. Even for myself who has played a lot of CCGs and loves them, I had to reread a few sections multiple times the first time I played the game. - Not providing the components needed to play the game: Agree/Disagree, Sam has mentioned he wants everything needed to play a complete game in the box, including ways to track health and resources so this is a valid criticism from him. This game does not provide that because of the CCG assumption that players are used to not having it, it isn't necessary for the game play, and it keeps costs down. - Keywords instead of full remainder text on every card: Disagree, This would not be feasible for a game of this nature because it would be impossible to fit all that text on a card while maintaining a large enough font size and room for the amazing art. Learning the keywords is an obstacle, undoubtedly, but necessary. They are in the back of the book and there are reference sheets on their website. www.epiccardgame.com/rules/ - Cards cost 1 or are Free is bad: Disagree heavily, but will discuss later. - Drafting takes longer then playing the game: , For CCG players that enjoy building their deck and fighting to see who can make the better deck, drafting is a very large part of the game. To me it is not just setting up to play the game. - Too much investment required for a game this small: Personal opinion, This is an inexpensive game but not a small one. This is a full-on CCG-like game without the collectible nature and carries with it a necessary complexity that will turn off people who dislike the genre, Same for example. This is neither Sam's fault nor the game's. It is what it is. Rules Misunderstandings/Omissions: The rules are difficult to understand, but there are a few things I want to clarify (some have already been mentioned and addressed in the comments, and some aren't critical to the review) 3:31, Fire Shaman Ally ability: It triggers, while Fire Shaman is in play, any time you play a card of the same faction that costs a coin (1). Not when she comes into play. 4:36/5:35/8:58/11:30, ending your turn: When you want to end your turn, your opponent gets the chance to play events or creatures with ambush. If they do, you may play cards or attack further on your turn. Then when you are finished and want to end your turn again, the same thing happens until your opponent no longer wants to play a card (or is unable to) and lets your turn end. In general, you may play events and champions with ambush on your opponent's turn at 3 times: 1) after your opponent declares that 1 or more champions are attacking you 2) after you declare which champions are blocking 3) when your opponent tries to end their turn. This is a bit of back and forth at all of these times, but that is the gist. 6:00, banish: Put the banished card on the bottom on its owner's deck. 8:12, attacking expends champions until the start of your next turn: Expended champions can't attack, block, or use "expend" abilities. Champions are prepared at the start of your turn. Aside in response to a comment: Expended, Prepared, and Flipped are positions of the card. Deploying is a state. When a card comes into play it is both Prepared and Deploying. If it blocks that turn, it would be Flipped and Deploying. 9:47, block with a creature flips it until end of turn: Sam was correct to flip Medusa to show it can't block again this turn, but should not have expended her (turned her sideways). If Medusa had an expend ability and was not deploying, it could still be used that turn. 1 Cost and 0 Cost explanation: This is one of the biggest design decisions in the game. Unlike other CCGs, this costing mechanism makes it so any card is playable from the start of the game. Instead of tying the cards to lands (Magic) or Crystals (Hearthstone) each turn you can choose any card to play instead of: I have 2 resources available, I'll play my 2 resource card. I love this because it makes the decisions of which 1 cost card to play each turn much more important. All 1 cost cards are designed to be dramatically powerful, while 0 cost cards have significantly smaller niche effects. Conclusion: Sam's review is very valid for any non-CCG players that just pick up the game and play it. Rules are serviceable for CCG players, but the mechanisms are too complicated for such a small book. You need a way to keep track of health, your 1 resource each turn, and excess tokens when you need them (and you will). However, by apparently not playing with the ability to play a card at the end of your opponent's turn, the game is very stale. Most of the tension comes from who can use their coin better each turn and deciding when to use it. Do it think Sam would enjoy this game if he had a complete understanding of the game (which the rules make difficult), probably not since it is basically a non-collectible CCG. There are also some features that CCG players do not like as well (prevalence of board wipes, 1 coin each turn, no "responding" like in Magic), but I'm not going to get into those here (but I do personally like how all of those things are implemented in this game though). Personally, I am someone who kickstarted the game, is a CCG player (to an extent) did well in the tournament of it at Gencon, am in the process of playing the mess out of it, and I love it. Besides a few of the mistakes, the spirit of Sam's review is fair, and I think a lot of people would feel the same, but if you want to get the rich CCG experience Magic offers, are willing to put in the effort that CCG-like games require if you want to compete, and don't want to shill out thousands ($10-15 for 1 set playable with up to 4 players, $30-45 for 3 sets to be able to build any competitive deck), Epic might be perfect for you.
This review is harsh and the presenter, Sam, is clearly frustrated and it shows, but he is blatantly honest in his review. He even points out he played the game a few times before this video. Star Realms was a complete game. As is Hero Realms. I just recently picked up EPIC this week after Hero Realms a few months ago. Love Hero Realms, and really love Star Realms, but for this game I had to go find life counters (30 sided dice for now) and had to print out the tokens and additional NPC cards as well. The presenter in this video points that out as well. I also wish the instructions were a huge fold out sheet with clear instructions and examples would be provided and was double sided. To me it didn't matter Sam got some of the rules incorrect, I too have been having trouble with the rules and referencing them constantly till I memorize them from the micro book. Off to printing a large version of the rule book I guess. I'm going to push myself to learning this game as I have always been curious about MGT, but have never played it, but I have friends who are addicts of it.
I like MtG (on a casual level) and i don't care for this game (or other simplifications like Hearthstone, etc.). But one thing in this game really annoys me. It's that you win by losing all your cards.. Very unthematic and not logical to me. Yeah, it might be mechanically and strategically. But i get that you play a wizard, and you win when your spellbook is over (you don't have to actually play all the spells, so you can't say that you in some way overwhelmed your opponent with the power of your whole spellbook, you can even be on a last thread of life and quickly mill your deck to .. "win".. Nothing sounds epic for me in this game. You get all the big champions and spells on your first turns and it is anticlimactic and there is no exciting build up for the win. Yeah, i know that this game is emphasizing on using those huge cards clever. So it should be called "Clever" or "Tricky" not Epic..
To the people complaining he reviews a game he doesn't like: He explained the rules and mechanics. you can tell if you, yourself, will like it. You like drafting? He tell you you can do that. Yes, he doesn't like it, but you get how the game works. Some people say he got rules wrong. Yeah, that's bad. But just saying "This game has these mechanics, and I don't like them" should be fine.
Many are saying that this is a bad review because Sam is not a target audience. I don't think this is a problem. We are not living in a perfect world where everyone only plays/watches/reads what is suitable for him. One can hear about this game and think "hey, this card game might be interesting for me, because i like this and this little card game". If you watch a review from a CCG player, who likes this, you might be convinced to buy this game (glorified reviews can do this). So it is a good thing there is a negative review about this game for non-CCG players, from Sam's perspective, for those who is aligned with his perspective. Honestly, most of the bashers of this review are already loving this game and don't need any review :) I wonder why they've even stopped playing this epic game to watch a review :D
I think you should have approached the game a little differently. In my opinion you should have played Limited Sealed first, which each player randomly dealt 30 cards. Shuffle and play, very easy to get into and learn the keywords in the game. Then I recommend you play, constructed pre-constructed. Each set contains four preconstructed decks, sepearate by color. This allows you to get more familiar with the cards and possible combos. This gives you a better understanding of the decks and keywords and combos and allows you to either go to drafting or playing with your 4 different preconstructed decks afterwards. Overall I love the game and I think they did a good job of giving you a cheaper version of magic the gathering with all the epic cards.
hmm Interesting review and wow Sam good job getting that comment fire started got toasty fast lol. I don't mind this game i was given it as a gift so i have messed with it as well as played embarrassing amounts of magic way back when. So the terms became second nature within a couple of games. There is 0 argument vs the buy in cost vs magic for sure it would be dumb to try. Unless no more expansions then its gonna get dry fast. Who would only want 4 summoner wars armies, or 4 basic Pokemon decks or .....ya get point. If they add more sets of cards than not a thing. I did not find it hard to do the gold math in my head but yeah how much more would the price point be to add 2 more punch out cards to the deck with various chits. I do have in my house various quarters, dimes, nickels, and pennies. I have 5 sets of 5 each all shinny just for games in a bag so keeping health was easy enough as well. I have to say i did see what others saw...I don't think ya dig ccgs lol (maybe it was just this one). That said even if i did not already have the game I can totally make a judgement as to if i will like this easy with what you gave us. Your opinion on it still does not change you pretty much gave the run down of that game (Variants aside but all games kinda have them so). So thanks for the review I think it was good enough to base an option as to if i will like it. Be Safe.
I Kickstarted the game and have played it several times. Before this game I had only played MTG a few times, never wanted to jump in because of the cost. I saw Epic as a nice alternative. However, when I tried to play with my friends we spent more time debating and trying to look up rules than actually playing the game. Note, I also demoed it at GenCon and the guy there showing it off did not even seem to fully understand the rules or timing of different events. Needless to say, when I've tried to play I usually end up just feeling frustrated more than anything else.
We've gone from shocked/disappointed to ecstatic in our opinions of Epic. Those who hadn't played MtG were quite lost at first. The MtG vets like me who had played it extensively ages ago needed some time to shrug off our old habits of terminology and proper phasing. White Wizard Games is their own worst enemy right now, being behind the curve on player support. Perhaps they thought their target audience would be more like them? But they have a very nice extensive example of play now (the BEST way for someone to see if the game will have appeal): www.epiccardgame.com/category/videos/ They have a page up with larger format rules, play aids, PnP tokens, etc here: www.epiccardgame.com/rules/ Back to Sam's "review". It says a lot more about Sam Healey than it says about the game. Stick with Memoir '44! ;)
He is complaining about aspects of this game that he is ok with in other games. My prediction: He played the game and got trounced. Then he trashed the game. OR He played the game with someone who also didn’t understand the mechanics. Then he trashed the game. The game isn’t for everyone(games can be short and people may not enjoy the back and forth swings), but it’s better than what he makes it out to be.
No, drafting is really really easy and especially dark draft (each draws 5, each picks 1, pass on, picks 2, discard the other 2) goes on ultra quick. Do open or dark draft, don’t do pack draft. Yes, tokens missing, life counter dial missing
Good review Sam. I jumped on this when it came out with the low price point. I also am a big fan of star realms but this game for all the reasons you stated and more just doesn't feel right. I wanted a balanced out of the box no frills, no hand building game like star realms (though not just a re-skinning of star realms). This is not that. I know many folks have compared this to Magic the gathering and to a degree I agree. I'm assuming that wizards of the coast/Hasbro assumed this game company having the word wizard in the title is part of that gaming empire, as that must be the only reason they haven't taken legal action over the similar feel. So from this old codger to you Sam I say "keep the printing font larger and see you on the flip side" :)
Sam is 100% right. I kickstarted this game, and just could not get into it like star realms. It just does not hit the right notes. I would stay away from this game just as Sam suggested.
I backed this on Kickstarter (my first backed game actually), and I went with the full compliment of 4 boxes as I felt that that would give me the most options for playing the game and also make it more interesting for constructed play. I unfortunately haven't had the chance to play it a lot yet but my experience with it so far is that it's a faster Magic: The Gathering. I would recommend the game based on that. I do agree about the keywords being a lot to take in, even if you're familiar with Magic. I solved that by writing down a reference sheet that had the Magic keyword counterparts listed by the Epic ones. Blitz = Haste, et cetera. I usually enjoy Sam's reviews but this one was a bit of a miss. I get that it's not a game for everyone but going into it not liking Magic: The Gathering then you're bound to not give it a fair shot, as it's pretty much advertised as a quicker and cheaper Magic.
You did a great Job Sam. I kickstarted it and have not played it yet. It helped to see it played. I will give it a try. I see your points on the game. It can be a real luck game depending on what cards you get if they are a random draw. I love dice games so for me random luck is fun. I play to have fun, win or lose it's the experience and social fun with friends that count. Some people have to win at all costs, not me I enjoy laughing and talking about what happens while playing. Like I have said before in past comments on the Dice Tower, I love that you guys are honest about your feelings about a game. That's what keeps me coming back to watch them. Whether I agree or not, you feel the way you do and that is fantastic. Keep up the good work buddy.
+Joel Petersen What did I get wrong? I'm not being snarky, either...I read that rulebook many times, and I had it with me as I was doing the review, stopping periodically to check that I wasn't making mistakes during the gameplay portion. To my knowledge, I followed the rulebook as best I could. I don't have the rulebook anymore, as I have returned the game to Tom...so, I'm curious.
Well the big thing (besides some keyword mixup, and you did say that you found that part hard. If I recall correctly you also dislike RFTG for having to learn the 'language of the game' (symbols), so that is not surprising. Also, people should study the keywords themselves, not just rely on a reviewer. That goes for all reviewers and all games I think) is the timing of resetting your champions. They refresh at the beginning of your turn, so if you attack with them during your turn, you cant defend with them during the opponents turn (if you have played the Star Wars LCG, it is actually quite a similar turn structure). The confusion might come from the end of turn deployment to active status of your newly played champions? That makes a whole lot of difference imo. This game has a quite loose 'phase' structure (just like SW:LCG, wich might be why I enjoy it so much), in that you can attack, summon a champion and attack again with that champion if it has blitz (or whatever it is called, I am at work atm and cant check the cards) or another chamipon. There is a lot of trying out your opponent, trying to get him/her to use their powerful events on some of your lesser champions or faking a bluff so that they wont block an attack because they fear that something bigger is comming. That means that playing all the cards you can might very well not be the best strategy. Those things alone makes EPIC a 'more tham zero game' if you ask me, even if you don't like it.
+Joel Petersen +Sam Healey Sorry it sounds like you had a bad day Joel. I just wanted to let Sam know I thought he did a great job. I sometimes use the wrong words in a game. There are so many terms used in games it gets confusing sometimes. I got the way it basically plays, I will read the rules when I decide to play. Sam is one of my favorite reviewers, he is honest how he feels about a game. As a matter of fact most of the time he likes games I like. Remember, it's just a game. You can like it and Sam does not have to like it. Keep up the great honest reviews Sam. I watch the Dice Tower reviews all week long from all the people that contribute. After working all day it's nice to come home and watch Sam, Zee and Tom talk about games and laugh. That's true friendship.
+wetwillyccma I have had a fine day, thankyouverymuch. Utube ate half my comment though. My point is, go look for yourself, dont trust reviewers for a rules explanation. I dont see how that translates in to 'sam cant dislike the game'?. I do think its silly that he claims there is zero game, but I dont see reviewers as the authorities you do maybe?
I played the game where you just pick 30 random cards each... (Drafting would be better but whatever) I see this game as a filler in the spirit of MTG. Most of the rules and terms have direct MTG equivalents and if you're not familiar with iMTG... You can figure this out as you go... 3 plays and you have the gist of it. Which is my beef with this review... Sounds like Sam played maybe 5 sessions of a game of which he does not have the background most customers getting this game would. Instead of approaching this as a careful outsider... He just goes in completely obnoxious and ranting right out of the gate ... Do your homework before you hand it in and knock off the attitude.
+HarfangX I think two weeks (touch and go, of course) of watching other's reviews and reading the rulebook multiple times and playing it multiple times counts as "doing my homework".
I think with deck building you have more control over your hand, since you can decide how many 1-cost cards and how many 0-cost cards actually go in the deck. But I agree, with the drafting variant, you could end up with a ton of 1-cost cards and not be able to play much on your turn. I think the best way to play this game is by deck building, but that creates another problem. To get the most out of deck building you have to buy 3 sets. I agree that the game should actually come with a few gold coins. Pretty dumb that it doesn't.
+Carl Frodge The game is meant to be either played as draft (open, dark or pack draft) or as a construction game. There are about relation of 1-coin:0-coin cards is about 4:1. When drafting you will make sure thats the ratio you about get. The resource management is really good!
As this game is clearly "polarizing" when it comes to opinions, I have to say that Sam's opinion is a valid as anyone else. I have enjoyed Epic the 3 times I have played it, but have found that a random shuffle and distribution can lead to some imbalance issues, but going in knowing that we've still enjoyed it. I still value Sam's opinion based on past reviews. Thanks for this review Sam, even though atm, I don't agree.
+Ivan Conrad It's polarizing because Sam made an absolute rubbish review. He basically took the Star Realms as a base and then complained that the game wasn't like Star Realms. That would be the same as someone making an review of Memoir'44, and trash it because the game is not like Ticket to Ride. Opinions are ok, you can say you don't like the game and it's fine. But if you base your opinion on a false pretext, especially when doing a review, you will get ripped about it. I also would like to know how many of the "polarized" people are like Sam, who basically thought it's another Star Realms?
+C r s No, I did not compare this to Star Realms. I went into it wanting to give it a fair go because of how much I enjoy Star Realms...that is much different than comparing it to Star Realms. The only way I "compared" it to Star Realms was when I posited that they did such a good job with Star Realms, and this is no where near that caliber of game.
What a meh review. I agree we nee|) more token, but you can't say you nee|) some car|) to remember HP in a 2 player game, come on. Also, there are like 6 new wor|)s on this game an|) you learn them as fast as you finish your first game, specially if you alrea|) playe|) MTG. This game is fast, enjoyable, cheap an|) comes with several game mo|)ality...my only |)oubt is the \)raft thing, it can be really long with new players. Sorry, my |) letter is broken an|) I can't write it properly.
I think the problem that most of us have with the review is not because he gave it a negative one. Far from it! In fact, it was his honest opinion about the game and I really appreciate that. Keep up the good work Sam! The problem I have with this review is the fact that Sam hasn't "logged in" enough games in order to judge it fairly (as shown in the video when he made several rule mistakes. I know that the rulebook is terrible as explaining the rule, but the game has just entered the market less than a month ago and a comprehensive rulebook, the end-all be-all rulebook, is being developed at the moment). I understand that the box seems small which lead many people to think that this is a simple game that could be played straight out of the box. That could not be more wrong! This is actually a huge, complicated game which lots of intricate details and would require more time to get used to compared to Star Realms. This game is more akin to Race for the Galaxy, an excellent game but does not suit the more casual audience. I just wish you would gave it a second chance. Watch the official Gameplay Walkthough (because they at least got the rule correct) or play the game with someone with a TCG background. Pretty please?
+RuBisCO Thanks for responding! Your second paragraph is the one with which I will voice my main issue...IF what you say is true, and the rulebook is still being developed, why on earth did they release the game??? One should never put a game on the market without doing everything within their power to make sure it is a comprehensive rulebook that can be understood by anyone. Besides gameplay, I think that the rulebook is the next most important part of designing a game. You could have the best game in the world, and if people can't understand how to play it or are confused about how to play, you and your game are dead in the water.
+Sam Healey Sorry for the late respond! To my understanding, the comprehensive rulebook for trading card game is often long, complicated and doesn't need to be read fully in order to enjoy the game (heck, the comprehensive rulebook for Magic the Gathering is 210 pages long!). Because the producers of Epic are Magic Hall of Famers, I would expect them to create a similar rulebook. This obviously takes considerable amount of time and is not vital to the production of Epic (as the core gameplay, cards and included rulebook are fully functional, admittedly confusing to non-TCG players.) Using the comprehensive rulebook is very similar to using a dictionary in order to write an essay. Most of the time, you don't need a dictionary to construct your paragraphs as the sentences would usually contain commonly used words. However, you may want to use uncommon words sometimes and that's when you need the dictionary. In the same sense, most game state in Epic would be resolved simply by looking at the included rulebook, while the comprehensive rulebook will help in the occasionally special cases. Now, you may say that this business with the rulebook is unnecessary and overcomplicated. Why even bother with it? The short answer in my opinion is because the developer would want to add expansions in the future. When the game is laid out cohesively in the rulebook, adding extra stuff to it would be easier in the long run. We can look at a popular TCG game that currently lacks a rulebook, Hearthstone. The developers for Hearthstone try to add new flavour to the game with each expansion by creating new keywords, new interactions. However, without the comprehensive rulebook, they are running into a lot of problems. For example, in Hearthstone, when the opponent plays Lord Jaraxxus while you have the Repentance secret, the opponent's hero will be replaced with a 1 health Lord Jaraxxus. However, while the cards are worded similarly, if you have the secret called Sacred Trials in play and they play Lord Jaraxxus while having 3 other minions in play, the secret will activated but Lord Jaraxxus won't be destroyed. The example above supports the need for a comprehensive rulebook. When an expansion for a TCG come out, there will be lots and lots of rule interactions. The developers may not be able to predict everyone of those interaction by themselves. With a comprehensive rulebook, the players (or judges, in the case of Magic because that game is THAT complicated to play) can use that as a guideline to determine how the interaction would work and adapt swiftly. Without the rulebook, every weird interactions that the players are unsure about need to answered by the developers of the game and hardcode back to the game if it doesn't work as intended. So in summary, every TCGs need a long, overcomplicated rulebook that acts similar to a dictionary. Producing such a rulebook is a very hard task and requires months in order to complete. However, such rulebook is not needed when the game first come out because the common interactions are included in the short rulebook and waiting until the comprehensive rulebook come out to release the game would means delaying the release of the game by a couple of months. In the mean time, White Wizard Game compensates for the lack of rulebook by creating this page (www.epiccardgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/EpicCardRulings151019.pdf) : "You have card questions? This document probably has the answer. If it doesn’t, please email support@epiccardgame.com." So there's that. When I first learned to play Magic the Gathering, I need 4-6 months in order to understand the game fully (obviously, some players learn at a faster pace than me). However, when I want to learn other TCGs, I could use that knowledge and know how to play them in a couple of hours. In short, for people who are not familiar with TCGs, it is vital for them to play with someone who is familiar with such rule system. TL;DR: Faulting Epic by saying that it should have a comprehensive rulebook at the beginning is somewhat unfair as it is modelled after several other TCGs and is still functional even without the comprehensive rulebook. In the mean time, WWG are doing their best to compensate for the lack of rulebook. I hope my reply does not come off as ignorance or offensive to you and I hope you could understand the point I'm trying to make. Epic is a fantastic game and seeing it get negative reviews due to minor problems sadden me :(
Wow Sam, you hurt so many grown men's feelings with your valid opinion, quite the super power you have there. I just wanted to see how close this was to a CCG, because the typical MtG fan's taste tends to only be in their mouth. I'll give this a pass too, thanks for the heads up.
+Austin Riddle Except that there is not much valid about it. That’s the point. Saying something bad is okay. BGG misses that, most reviews miss that. Barley knowing a game and expressing opinions about it in mass media is just a mediocre move.
+Sam Healey We have found the game much more enjoyable when we each other take one color or two colors and shuffle them together and play. I Think the drafting might be more enjoyable for people who play this all the time.
Another thing is if you don't want to draft your deck there is the option to just deal out thirty random cards to each player and play. Games are so short it doesn't really matter what cards you get just deal out new decks each time.
They could have put this game in a big box, added a couple more pieces of unnecessary cardboard and charged 30 bucks for it and people would have gladly payed. They could have released a starter set with a bunch of duplicate cards, and then milked the fans with expansion after expansion, or worse-- booster packs. Instead they made over 100 unique cards, all with thrilling artwork, and charged the least amount of money possible (around 10 bucks).
Something that has never been done before: a monetarily accessible, massive TCG right out of the box. And Sam Healey takes a big ol' steamy dump on it. With criticisms that are absolutely cringe worthy.
I love watching Dice Tower videos, and this doesn't change that. But this was like listening to an old man yell at clouds: "The cards have too many different words on them!" "Drafting takes too long!" "I can't count on my own!"
Hear hear
He's either teething or needs a nap. I've never seen such a meltdown over something so trivial. He just got so nit-picky.
The difficulty that many are having with this review stems partly from our love and respect for The Dice Tower. You guys have, through consistent quality of work, elevated yourselves to essentially one of the, if not the premiere tabletop gaming review site. So, viewers have come to expect a level of objectivity and critical consideration which is not present in this review. The lack of which makes this review seem to be unjustifiably leveling certain negative subjective criticisms onto a single game, which justifiably apply to an entire genre of card games.
1. CCG lingo - not savvy.
2. Drafting - takes longer than game.
3. Memorizing key words - don't want to.
4. Incomplete package - need some dice, etc.
All of these are subjective criticisms of the CCG/TCG and to a lesser degree LCG genres, and have nothing technically to do with EPIC itself. 1-4 are reducible to:
"I don't like CCGs. That style of game is not for me."
Which would have been a perfectly valid judgment. Then come the conclusions.
5. Great artwork, but there is no game.
6. Not appealing to me - more investment than I want to make, because there is no game.
7. Star Realms is great - EPIC is terrible.
You explained the mechanics of the game reasonably well, a few minor mistakes not withstanding. But when it came to your review, you said nothing about the mechanics of the game, instead railing against characteristics that EPIC shares with the vast majority of games in the genre for which it is designed, and then making the blanket statement that "there is no game," without explaining what you mean beyond something like "I don't like it."
If you do not like this kind of game, that is fine, but that is distinctly different than the judgment that EPIC is an objective failure of a game that no one should consider. Which is how the review comes off.
As stated at the top, part of the problem is that some of your viewers expect to receive a certain level of reasonably objective critical criticism from the Dice Tower. We do not expect each of you to like every game, and we even enjoy it when you guys publicly disagree. But some of your viewers do expect that personal taste will be properly contextualized in your reviews, so that all of the reviews have maximum utility to a wide variety of viewers for making responsible game choices. And that was not the case here.
This is an utter failure of a review. Sam completely misses the point of this game, because, as he says, he's not a CCG player. This game is Magic: The Gathering without the price tag. You need to buy one set of cards to play up to a four-player game. In addition, Sam says he didn't like drafting -- great! Then don't draft. I think the rules have 2 or 3 other options for playing the game. One of them is as simple as, "Deal each player 30 cards at random." As for the keywords being a "problem," that's just silly. Keywords are present in every card game, board game, and even roleplaying game worth their salt. They're a time saver and they make cards more readable. They may cause a bit of confusion the first two times you use a particular keyword, but after that, it's cake. Finally, his criticism that the game doesn't come with everything you need to play? Cheapass Games made it's reputation on not giving you everything you need to play a game; Magic doesn't include anything to track your life, etc. If you can't find a few dice to represent token creatures or track your life -- well, it's a ridiculous criticism. Hopefully someone who actually understands card games will review this game based on how it actually plays (which is almost exactly like Magic) rather than thinking their personal feelings about the game are more important. What a waste of a review.
Drafting, imo, would've been the best option as I usually really enjoy a drafting mechanic in card games...as I said it took longer to draft the decks than the actual game took...I don't have time for that kind of nonsense. Also tried just dealing 30 cards out, and that made the decks even more swingy and lop-sided...which makes for an even worse game. Who enjoys playing a game only to find out that you didn't have a real chance at winning in the first place?
My review is just one review...and I didn't like the game at all. it isn't fun to me, and my son's didn't enjoy it, either. Check out other reviewers and see what they say, try before you buy, and come to your own conclusion. That's what I did. I think I "got" the game just fine, and I simply know that it isn't what I'm looking for in a game. IF I wanted to play a game like MtG, why not just buy a couple of the starter sets that MtG has available? MtG doesn't require a lot of investment to play casually. But I don't want to play MtG, or games that mimic it for whatever reason.
+Sam Healey It also takes longer to draft for Magic than it does to play the game, so that seems a weak criticism at best. Also, a casual investment in Magic will still cost you more than this game. It was an off-base review.
It was an honest review. I expected at least the same caliber of game as Star Realms, and it wasn't even close. We can disagree, of course, but don't expect me to put sunshine where there isn't. If you like the game, fine and dandy...no worries. But that doesn't mean I have to like it, too.
+Jon Leitheusser By the way, every single game/company that you mentioned in your original post are ones that I have historically not enjoyed. I wanted to give Epic the benefit of the doubt because of White Wizard Games track record with Star Realms and how much I enjoy it. I would've loved to have been able to endorse Epic, just can't.
+Sam Healey Fair enough. I guess that says more about your preferences than it does about this game. As I said, I think the review is more about your opinion than a fair review of the game. FOR WHAT IT IS, it's a good game that people who like Magic, but can't afford to invest heavily or no longer can (due to kids, whatever), this is an excellent alternative with a lot of flexibility and game play value. Your review makes it sound like it's a bad game -- and it's not.
I love the Dice Tower and really enjoy most of their reviews, but this review needs many corrections. Sam obviously didn't enjoy this game and that is fine, but he gets many rules incorrect including banish and the rules for readying champions. Sam also doesn't seem to fully utilize the way Epic encourages you to play spells constantly on opponents turns and many champions have the ability to play on opponents turns and attack step as well. I find the interactions in this game to be less complex (and less entertaining) than Magic, but it has a really fun and swingy back and forth feel that Sam totally missed. I wish he would have reviewed the rules closer before posting this review.
+Michael Austin That was what my wife and I thought as well. Our experience playing the game is vastly different than the experience he described. Playing more than one or two creatures on your side of the board is often suicidal due to the vast amount of spells and abilities that wipe them away.
I am surprised that Sam Healy reviewed this game. He seems like the worst match of the core 3.
Yes drafting the first few times will take longer... it is like that for every game. Heck 7 Wonders is 99% doing the drafting. I don't care if it was a bit longer, was it interesting?
Likewise if getting a handful of 1 gold cards is an issue... don't play with so many 1 cost cards. Any card game is going to have unlucky hands and this hardly seems gamr breaking.
I appreciate frank reviews and I haven't played the game so I can't attest to the quality of the game, but this review was set up to fail. I think Sam was chosen to review this based on availability not suitability.
Michael Austin best wishes from Norway....glad there is an app for this game...its really interesting.
I am not sure this review does me any good. Sam just doesn't seem like the target audience for this. I would just as soon ask Rahdo if he likes Rum and Bones.
+TheGreatHamEl Just let Rahdo review Cosmic Encounter :p
+TheGreatHamEl And this game probably won't be reviewed by Tom or Zee because of this :(
+Jean Laurant Zee might have been the better choice, as he's mentioned he likes older CCGs. I think Tom would've had the same knee jerk reaction to not having the game spoonfed to him in regards to deck building.
+TheGreatHamEl I like the game. It only cost me a few Euros at Essen. It's not a big gamble. On the other hand, I spent about 200 Euros for a complete set of Rum n Bones...in that case, the reviews were much more important!
+jaxommm Thanks for the input. I almost backed but figured I'd wait for reviews. Still waiting for some input that's reliable. Board Game Brawl did one but that guy seems to only like expensive Kickstarter games and otaku BS.
I've seen a couple people here mention that people shouldn't dislike the video merely because they disagree with the review. It's a sentiment I agree with.
I didn't dislike the video because I didn't agree with the review. I disliked the video because Sam attempted to paint Epic as a failure of a game, when it's just not to Sam's liking. He brings up some objective cons(Lack of tokens, for instance), and intermixes them with subjective cons that don't mention the entire context(Drafting taking longer then one game, without mentioning that drafting is often used at the beginning of a series of games and the deck you create is used through all of them).
I thought, when his final thoughts started, that while it'd likely be negative, it'd at least acknowledge that the group Epic is targeting isn't one he belongs to. Instead, we got him hamfistedly attempting to paint Epic as a failure because he doesn't care for the experience it's attempting to capture.
So that's why I disliked it. Because instead of putting critical thought into what the game is attempting to do and who it's trying to target, and commenting on it, he decided that because he doesn't like it, no one will. Sam is usually one of my favorite Dice Tower reviewers, but this actually makes me think less of him.
+Gary Schroeder I'm not fluent in english but you have say all I want to say, but barely can.
Last week I made a 2 player draft + 4 games in a row + eat a sandwich + small talk in less than one hour and a half for lunch.
It's not a bad review, it's a wrong one, with a lot of bad faith and a harsh final pun. The kind of review you have to let someone else do when you are in such a state of mind.
I was definitely struggling with finding good things to say about it, but at the same time, I know that a lot of people are going to like or already like this game. And in my opinion, it is a failure of a game, especially compared to the hit that Star Realms was and is to this day. If you know me at all from any of the videos of which I am part on this channel, you should also know that I usually expect people to disagree with me because my personal likes and dislikes are just that, my own. In my opinion, they had the know how and the ability to make the production quality at least what it was for Star Realms, and they didn't. This was a step back for White Wizard Games, in my opinion. Star Realms was an absolute grand slam...I doubt this will even be a double.
I'm not, by any means, challenging what you do or don't like. Like you said, your opinion is yours, and I don't think anyone should have to apologize just for liking or disliking anything.
By the same token, I think we can both agree that there's a difference between a game that fails as a game, and a game that fails to appeal to someone. Epic, as a game, functions. It's modeled after CCGs, and shares conventions of those games. People participates in Drafts and Sealed games on a daily basis, and sometimes the big thing people look forward to are Magic or Dice Master tournaments. Those aren't for you, and I completely understand that. Heck, they aren't for me. But not working for you isn't the same as failing. I think Warmachine, when I tried it, is two hours of boredom, but I can recognize that even though I'm not a wargamer, it doesn't fail as a game.
At the beginning of your final thoughts you mentioned you don't care for CCGs, then preceded to absolutely ignore that as you listed off subjective reasons that the game objectively fails. I watched because I wanted your thoughts on it, because even for reviews of games you don't like, you're generally aware of your biases and have commentary worth listening to about a game. Instead, I watched someone who thinks that because they aren't the target audience, the game is inherently broken. And, personally speaking, I find that level of navel-gazing depressing.
Gary Schroeder There might be a slight misperception here. I said what I said based on my experiences with the game, not on whether or not I liked CCGs. I said that as a mere disclaimer, not as a point of logic and/or reasoning.
The rulebook contradicts itself...it doesn't come with everything you need to play the game...the gameplay is mind-numbingly boring, which may at first sound like an opinion, but quite frankly, you have incredibly few real decisions to make on your turn that aren't "do I play this card now or later?"...and that's IF you have 0 and 1 coin cost cards in your hand at the same time.
And yes, I know one could just use a die or a counter of some kind to stand in for those token champions, but what I'm saying is that we shouldn't have to in this day and age. Include what we need to play the game in the game, or make a rule that states that there is a limit to how many tokens can be in play at a time...but don't sell us an incomplete game and expect us to fill in the cracks with our own stuff.
I understand your point of being more comprehensive in my final thoughts...duly noted. But I do believe that people will be able to make their own decision based on what I presented in this video.
Sam Healey I don't think there is a misconception on my part. I understand you were reviewing the game, not CCGs. And I share many of your criticisms, such as wishing the game came with an easy way to track health out of the box or painfully, obviously needing more tokens. I think the thing that really rubs me raw from the review, however, is that you're trying to review the game as something it's not.
For example, say you have a friend who just doesn't like deck builders. Has heard about them, but hasn't played them before. Of his own accord, one day, he goes out and buys Demesne, a Dominion knock-off that's a living card game, with a new deck released each month. He tries it, and comes back with a laundry list of complaints about the game. He can't build decks beforehand, or draft, and the rules basically come down to play a card or buy something each turn, and when you buy victory point cards it just gives you less options when you draw the victory point cards, and he doesn't like that the rulebook doesn't include which decks to use in a game, and all of this makes him feel like the game doesn't stack up to his favorite game from the same company, BattleWorld Universita, a sci-fi game about people randomly being a Thing-like traitor trying to kill everyone else.
Not having played prior deck builders, he doesn't have the same perspective or preconceptions we do, like the victory cards are supposed to slow your engine to limit just buying them all, or that the replayability comes from different decks being used every game, or that part of the appeal is having a starting deck you slowly build up. It's not part of the hobby he enjoys, so when he tries one, he thinks it's the game itself failing. It's not. Demesne might be a perfectly awesome made-up game, but his lack of fun is because it's speaking to a specific segment of the audience that he just isn't a part of.
Similarly, his complaints are not invalidated because he doesn't share a love of deck builders. But he needs to temper his opinion of the game with the knowledge that while he doesn't find it fun, it's a game that didn't go out of its' way to be fun to people who don't enjoy deck builders.
Epic is a standard card game, but much like Millenium Blades, it's trying to provide a CCG experience. It's meant to be setup like one(via draft, sealed, constructed, et cetera for deck setup), and the game engine is meant to act like one. It is literally a CCG in all ways but collectibility, and meant to appeal to people who want a CCG without cost. White Wizard has been upfront about this from the earliest talk about the game. I've seen other reviews of Epic that basically ended with "I'm not a CCG player, it's not for me, but it does what it set out to do, which is be a CCG in a box", and I'm just disappointed that someone who I thought would provide an interesting view point on a game straddling two sections of the hobby that don't intermingle often might as well have written "Artwork is nice, game sucks. 0/10"
I agree with Sam. The turn order is not clear in the instructions, the card actions are many and vague (cards with definitions of the actions to give each player would have helped) and there isn't enough tokens.
Part of this is my fault. I thought I was getting a game along the lines of Hearthstone. But this really is MTG with large attacks and all the recent editions levels of complication. One of the few Kickstarters I've backed that I kinda regret.
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I have read and will continue to read every bit of criticism levied against me. I'm always trying to improve. This is the first negative review I've done on my own. I'll be sure to do the next one better, as it will inevitably happen again, sooner or later.
+Sam Healey No worries Sam. This is a very polarizing game. Different strokes for different folks and all that. Certain games aren't for everyone. My wife and I bought Summoner Wars after hearing you and Tom gush about it for so long, and it turned out we hated it with a passion. That's on us though. It is clearly a very popular game. It just didn't fit our particular tastes.
Don't Sam, if a game is bad even if it's from your view, always speak your mind. Have a iron heart like tom does, that's why he is loved by many people in this hobby.
40kbolter Oh, don't misunderstand what I said...I didn't say in would go easier on any future game, but that I would do the negative review better. That doesn't mean I'm gonna go easy on it. As a matter of fact, it might even feel like I'm being harder on it, as I will use a much finer comb, next time.
+Sam Healey I don't think the problem has to do with this being a negative review as much as you're giving a negative review to a game within a genre you're already predisposed to hate. That's not fair to the game. If you find a game that you enjoy within a genre that you normally don't like, that review can be useful to signal to people, "Hey, if you don't normally like abstracts (example), you might give this a shot." But if you play a game you're predisposed to not like and you -- wait for it -- **don't like it**, then criticizing the elements that are a necessary part of the genre (lack of theme in abstract, combat tables in wargames, assembling miniatures in a minis game, deck building or drafting in *this* game) comes across more as a rant than a proper review.
I do want to offer something in your defense: this game's rulebook is written with an assumption that the reader is already versed in Magic. People without that experience such as yourself will both face a steep learning curve with this as well as not having the experience to manage some of the necessary game tracking elements (life totals, tokens, counters, etc.) that Magic players already take as a given. Perhaps in testing this game, you should've tried a game or two with someone that has experience in the genre so you can report their reaction. Then your own criticisms would have a more balanced context.
Sorry for the sermon, and please know that I do think you're otherwise doing a fantastic job. Your videos on Memoir 44 were exceptional.
+Sam Healey I thought it was a fair review and it relayed to me exactly what I needed to know. I suspect that all of the sad Magic players commenting here could better use their time taking a shower.
I like this game. It's not perfect, but it's an enjoyable and inexpensive game that will scratch your CCG itch (if you have one). Like Sam said, it has amazing artwork which is really worth the $10 alone in my opinion.The keywords are mostly translations of Magic keywords so if you've played Magic they are easy to learn. If you don't love CCG-style games this is probably not the game for you. But if you're like me and you've spent endless hours playing Magic and other 90's CCGs, give this game a try!
Loved the ending Sam.
As a heavy Netrunner player (and board gamer) I think Epic falls into an unhappy medium. It's very finicky and face smashy with inexperienced players, followed by a huge skill wall when it comes to deckbuilding. You can literally include any amount of cards in sets of 3 (1x 0 cost, 2x 1 cost). When our playgroup decided to try to amp up the game and see what it looks like at its 'final level', there was just no incentive and we never met up again with constructed decks. Common complaints were "too much to wrap my head around" and "why bother?"
+Waggabagaboo Well I used to be a heavy ANR player too and I can just tell you that Epic is what I play not ANR. Why? EPIC is quick and you want to play it as draft NOT construction.
ANR is slow and requires construction (a few hours at least on netrunner.meteor.com)
Well I would really like to see Tom review EPIC! I know he likes magic and I suspect that his review would be a 180 on this. I don't fault you Sam I know we don't all like the same things in games. I was just excited to see EPIC! get some love and was very disappointed when all you did was talk about why you didn't like it. I love the game and have you to have a bad experience with it. Maybe Tom having a M:tg background will see the game more like I do.
+Steven Loomis i´ll second that
+Steven Loomis I would be very surprised if Tom didn't like the game.
+Steven Loomis I like MtG and Epic doesn't do anything for me (haven't played, just watched a few reviews). It doesn't have a build up (yeah, which sometimes results in mana screw). It is similar, but at the same time different too much.
knowing the game i skipped the (insanely long) rules explanation to the review part. i find it very odd that Sam doesn't say anything at all about gameplay there, then just says the game sucks because instead of costing a lot more and giving you components you don't really need, they packaged it tightly and made it cheap. btw if you don't like drafting/constructing, just play single color decks, those work and are zero time to set up and it's not that hard to figure this out. i know this game just won't click with everyone immediately, and you don't have to like it, but this is just one lazy review. this game has way more depth and interesting mechanisms than to just be dismissed like this.
and just a sidenote: my ten year old little brother did construct two decks in 10 minutes which were great to play against each other. come on Sam!
I disagree with you. I played around with this game for two weeks, trying to see something more. It just wasn't there for me.
Additionally, I did give some comments on gameplay in the playthrough part of it, which is why I didn't reproduce them at the end.
"I skipped over half the video... The part I watched didn't explain your views enough so you must be lazy."
Seriously, watch the whole video before saying dumb things. Or don't watch it at all.
you're right i should have watched the whole video before criticising. but in my defense in most videos the rules explanation and the review part are very divided.
i watched it now, but it didn't change my opinion.
sorry if i have come off rude but i'm going to try to rephrase the main thing i wanted to say without addressing specific points in your video:
of course you don't have to like the game, but i would like to know WHY you don't like it. not just what parts of it you don't like but why you don't like them, how they feel, what decisions they give you. i hope this is constructive criticism to you and sorry again if i was rude.
+Kyle Martin -- you do make a valid point...
Sorry Sam but I totally disagree on this one. Its a great game and its packaged very well. I think its works best for people that have a background in MTG. Its basically MTG LIGHT. Drafting is FUN. It gives you some control over your deck and is part of the game. I draft a deck and play 2 out of 3. I used to do that with MTG but it would cost you $24 EACH TIME just for 2 players. I think $15 for 200 unique and fun to play cards is a steal. As for the game not coming with what you need to play the game. It really does. You dont need a life counter and if you want one you can just use dice we all have dice laying around or grab a MTG life counter app there are dozens of them out there for free. Sorry you didnt like the game. I hope people will give it a chance its actually a lot of fun.
Oh I never said mtg wasn't well designed. I think it's arguably the best game ever designed. I also never said I couldn't get over the collectable aspect of the game. I spent thousands of dollars on magic in my 2 year run and I enjoyed ever minute of it. I finally stopped because it was unhealthy for me. I was spending to much on it, but I don't hate the game. Idd just rather play many games than spend all my money on one game. I don't hate magic though. As I already started I think it's the best game ever designed. Now as for the wildly swingy nature of epic. That can't be denied, but its fun, its quick and its not to be taken so seriously. It is after all a different game. It is MTG light but that don't mean its as serious. I know many magic players who like it. In fact I have never taught the game to someone who hasn't liked it.
I also think you overstate how unbalanced it is. It is swingy but it dosnt change who is wining evey turn. Sure it is possible to catch up unexpectedly, but I think the swingy nature is one of the games strengths. It's kind of like the fight scenes from the matrix. Over the top. I think the game apeals strongly to the Timmy in players.
I think Epic is for people who enjoy the gameplay and formats of CCGs/MTG but not the collectability of them. I used to play a lot of CCGs in the past but nowadays I have learned to despise the CCG business model. I love what Epic is trying to be: A MTG-like game you can draft with a fair business model. I think Epic fixes some issues in the gameplay of MTG as well like mana screw/flood. So far I have really enjoyed playing Epic :)
I get your point about not everything being included...
But, really?
I just hear "Waaaah."
It's unlimited sealed and draft play for $15.
$15!
Get a sheet of paper, a pencil and some loose change.
Problem solved.
What boggles my mind is that when he reviewed Star Realms he said he threw away the authority cards that track you life total and downloaded an MTG life tracker. You'd think he would've done the same here. I can tell he really hates the very idea of a CCG style game and he makes that bias pretty apparent when he won't even consider that he had a solution for a problem that he had with the game.
Sorry Sam, but I feel this is not a review of the game. It's a review of the packaging and a couple of the variant rules. I think you didn't even mention what you felt about the game(play) here. Did you like the 1 coin vs 0 coin cards? The big monsters and ways to get rid of them? The way blocking and attacking works? The card interactions you can find and build in random decks? All those aspects are incredibly fun for me.
I partially agree with you on the cards/tokens/tracker. It's inconvenient, but come on, how many dice do we all have laying around? There are plenty of games that are not 'complete' in that way, even Magic the Gathering is often sold in boosters or duel-decks w/o dice/life trackers. I don't think that should be such a harsh criticism on Epic specifically. It is quite common. But yeah, a way to keep track of scores would've been nice.
Drafting. I think drafting is a valid way to play the game. You find it takes to long. I agree. But then you can play it as a tournament, play games with multiple opponents with the same deck. Having said that, drafting is not for me either. I just deal 30 cards to both players and play with what we get randomly. Even than, Epic works excellent. Epic as such is quick, fun, and challenging. It's very lucky, card draw is vital, but it's fun, overpowered, broken and that works for me.
You don't have to deck-build, draft or do complicated stuff with the game.. Just deal 30 cards and play. As such, Epic is a fun, quick CCG-ish/Magic-ish filler. And for that purpose I really enjoy it.
+Ruud2009 That was my take on the review too, Ruud: just not Sam's best reviewing performance. From the review, what made the game bad was the lack of an included pencil and scratchpaper, the lack of gold tokens, and the use of keywords on cards. In my opinion those are trivial complaints. If Sam were to enjoy playing the game then those non-issues wouldn't have mattered, so I want to hear about why Sam didn't enjoy the actual gameplay!
+antoyal Yeah , it's a shame. I can totally see why people could dislike Epic. I totally understand why Sam wouldn't like it (cards, ccg). I feel it just is a not a review w/o any gameplay comments.
Sadly this likely won't get reviewed by Zee or Tom. Both of which are closer to the audience for Epic. Both I feel could've given a more interesting analysis/opinion on this game.
+Ruud2009 Actually, I gave the game back to Tom. Maybe he should review it. I'll encourage him to do so.
***** He might. I'm not a rabid fanboy on Epic. I like it, but I like Magic ( a lot) better.
I understand why people wouldn't like the game. It's not for everyone. But I think that Tom or Zee could better describe what they don't/do like about than Sam. They're more into card games anyway. Sam didn't really delve into the game/mechanisms, he mentioned two things "drafting takes too long" and "it should've come with a life counter". I really enjoy most of Sam's reviews, I think he does a terrific job most of the time and I really think he does an excellent job on his gameplay movies. Very comprehensive.
But he didn't do a review of Epic. He reviewed the packaging/model.
+Sam Healey I'm sorry Sam. I really enjoy your contributions to the dice tower otherwise. But I just don't think you reviewed Epic. I understand your irks with the packaging and drafting. But there is more to Epic than just those two issues :). I don't feel you gave your opinion on how the game plays. Hope for a DT review that does go into more depth on that topic.
Reviews are personal opinions of course, but I Sam was really a wrong person to review this game, and you can see it from the like / dislike ration. If you are not a CCG person this game is not for you. Same would be if person who is into deck building games reviews Memoir '44 and complains that combat and miniatures are too much for the card play in that game.
This is not Star Realms, same people created it, it's sort of the same size, but it's not same type of game. Star Realms is super simply game that plays it self. The game has one decision point in it, what you buy each turn, nothing else.
Epic is a fast version of Magic The Gathering. You have accelerated mana build up with the coin and all the other features are from MTG.
Ok, you don't want to build your deck, guess what, that is one of the biggest parts of the whole genre. You put more thought into single deck build than 100 games of Star Realms together. The game box is small, but the game play it provides is huge.
Game has it's own flaws, but it is a cheap and fast alternative for Magic, and I don't think it even tries to be anything else.
Hmm.. I'd rather take an opening hand filled with 1-cost cards rather than a hand with only 0-cost cards.. the 1-cost cards are so much better than the 0-cost ones, so I'm likely to kick my opponents butt in the long run.
Plus doesn't the champion "untap" at the beginning of your next turn and not at the end of your turn?
I would love to see Sam do a review of Magic the Gathering... :D
+Grunspreke Not gonna happen...;)
+Grunspreke -- well said...!!! i'm sure he'd have said that MtG was NFG & wouldn't resonate with gamers... ;-)
I love watching The Dice Tower and typically enjoy hearing Sam Healey's opinions, but this is by far the worst review I've ever seen. Sam seems to have missed the point of the game. The whole idea is that two players can open the box and play without having to draft or build decks. However, players CAN do this if they so wish. It's not at all required or mandatory or even all that suggested, but it is possible. Why knock the game for giving players options?
He was also upset about the game using keyword labels instead of printing out each and every effect. First of all, there would be no way to write all of the effects AND keep the text a readable size. I understand that it's annoying to refer to the rulebook whenever a new card comes up, but it takes all of 5 seconds and is easily learned after one or two plays.
Finally, his complaint about the resource system (0 cost or 1 cost) seems to have corrected itself while he was playing. Yes, if one player were to draw five 1-cost cards and the other were to draw five 0-cost cards, the 0-cost person would gain an immediate lead. However, the 0-cost person would also be wasting their 1 gold every turn, which is an extremely valuable. Anything worth any amount of strength in Epic costs 1 gold. The 0-cost cards are good and all, but they hardly aid in the big plays or powerful creatures. The 1-cost player would soon overtake the board with their stronger cards and completely negate any lead that the 0-cost person had.
It's cool if Sam doesn't like this game. Not every game is for every player. But this review was not fair. He was biased from the beginning, played many of the effects wrong (which is what his gameplay section was based off of), and then knocked the game for allowing other playing conditions. Really, the most valid complaint that I heard was at the lack of counters, but that can easily be remedied with some dice or a pen and paper. I do agree, though, that this shouldn't be necessary, so I get why he was annoyed there.
Again, I usually enjoy the directness and honesty of Sam's reviews, but I do not think this one did the game justice.
As a CCG player who picked up Epic, I think this was simply not geared to your play preferences. In fact I greatly enjoy having a game I can pull out and play that is similar to magic, with huge swingy monsters bashing face each turn, and I personally think that the ability to draft is a huge draw to the game. I love to sit a draft (heck 7 Wonders is pretty much nothing but the draft part of the game and it's one of my favorite board games) but for non ccg players a draft can seem like a waste of money. With epic I can sit down with my kids, do a quick draft, play a few games to see who got the strongest deck and all in less time and energy than a friday night magic draft. The game has it's issues, but I think you may not have been the audience it was made for.
I guarantee you now that I am not the target audience, but, because of who put it out, and how much I enjoyed another of their games, I wanted to give it a fair shake. It is most definitely not my cup of tea.
+Sam Healey You guys need a CCG / LCG guy. Not a criticism.
+TheGreatHamEl Well. Tom Vasel said on Nomerous times that he enjoys Magic. He also like to deckbuild in games like Mage Wars and "New" Summoner Wars".
Let me also say. I own and love Star Realms. I backed Epic and still haven't gotten around to play it cause the rule book is what it is. I was expecting a game more like Star Realms in ways of easy understanding and I think Sam was too.
Kristian Törnkvist Yeah, you're right about the MTG thing, I forgot about that.
+Kristian Törnkvist -- well said... that does seem to be the case... i also love Star Realms [even though i am truly awful at it], and i really wish i'd Kickstartered Epic... i'd love to get my hands on one of those promo packs...!!!
I played a couple of Epic games and I think that there's one thing in Sam's review that he got wrong: the one coin rule. Let me take something out of the way first: I'm a former Magic the Gathering player (not a pro player) so I might be more into the logic of the game. The feeling I got from Epic was to play a MtG game that started around the fifth turn and was high on speed. The general idea of the one coin rule is that there's a HUGE gap between free cards and cost cards in epic, the same gap there's in MtG between putting out a bunch of small creature or your first big hitter at the fifth turn. For a bit of context, putting a cost card in play is like putting a full-on Dreadnought in TI3. I played a three players game and over half of my deck were cost cards and I was able to stay in play effectively up to five rounds from the end. I don't think that's a problem, but I do agree that the mechanic could have been done better.
I think that most of the issues with Epic comes from the fact that the authors are both MtG hall of famers, so most of the lingo and mechanics are obvious to them, but they're not for others. With Star Realms they did it simple because they felt that simpler was better, here they let their habits get the best of them.
+Francesco Castelli
I agree, this is a game for folks who have played many, many games of MtG. It's exactly what it says on the tin: an accelerated game of Magic that gets you right to the point where the creatures drop that can end the game after a couple of unblocked turns.
I don't have time to play MtG anymore, but I do have time for this. Once you play a bit mono-color you can move over to the draft format and improve the longevity of the game. I think there is a lot here for 10 bucks.
The one coin cards are much heftier than their free counterparts, sure...but more often than not, those hefty champions can still be blocked by just one person, no matter their cost...so, having multiple champions is far better than one huge guy. That was my experience with the game, at least. And the games were over rather quickly, too...and we're mostly lopsided victories.
+Sam Healey I can see your point and, as I said above, I think that the general issue here is that the author created a game that is meant to appeal a much more specific demographic than Star Realms and has a much different learning curve.
+Francesco Castelli I'm in total agreement with you on that point. The Epic section on BGG is littered with complaints from people that thought what they were purchasing was Star Reals: Fantasy Edition, not a game that attempts to simplify the experience that comes with playing a CCG game. That is why my wife and I raised an eyebrow when we received a subscription notification that Sam had done a review of this game. I didn't think CCG-style games were Sam's cup of tea. I had thought those style of games were more of a Tom and Zee thing. I had perceived Sam having a distaste for the genre akin to Zee having a distaste for games lasting longer than six minutes.
+Sam Healey
Try playing at least 2 sealed games to JUST KNOW THE RULES and then do at least 2-3 open drafts. Then you will know what the game is about. Almost all games with similar skill have been going for 30minutes and it was not as volatile as it looked to be first.
I must be one of the odd ones out. I really enjoy Epic. I'm also glad that it wasn't just Fantasy Star Realms, because had it have been I'd be massively disappointed. It would essentially mean that WWG is nothing more than a 'one trick pony'.
It's great that you can just start a game, without the slow, long drawn out, start that many other games of it's ilk have. Does it have it's issues, sure the rule book is woeful I almost thought that I'd opened a console games rule book.
Actually rulebook is very complete
This game is basicly hearthstone the card version. i'm quite positive that if you like it you will like this game
Well, Sam, you gave a negative review to a game that people kickstarted. Now you must face the consequences....
I did not kickstarter the game. I picked it up after watching an interview with wwg, and I love it. incidentally the only kickstarter I have ever backed was the dice towers.
+Steve Gale Yeah, I know, Kickstarter backers can be so defensive, and they form a love-fest. For instance, why did we need yet another variant of the same game we have in Chaos in the Old World and Cthulhu Wars? People who backed *Blood Rage* surely were lured by the minis like so many other Kickstarters... :)
I don't ever kickstart games and I really enjoy Epic. It gives you the MTG like experience without the rip-off CCG business model. Epic also fixed mana screw/flood and the problem of drawing late-game cards early because you have enough resources to play any card even on your first turn.
+Steve Gale The problem is not that it is a negative review, the problem is that it is a hasty and rather bad review. The review is for sure a lot worse than the game ;-) (even if the game has its small flaws, which mostly have to do with the rules as written).
This might have helped Sm: www.epiccardgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/EpicOneSheet.pdf
lastburning yeah I for one hope we get more 120 card sets yearly perhaps. I realize it is not as strategic as magic but it is fun. It gets right to the fun part, and it gets rid of some of the things about magic that are not fun mana screw and drawing a land when you don't need it.
I 100% agree with you Sam. I had very high hopes for this game, but it comes up short.
Wow, I'm surprised that Sam didn't like Epic. I absolutely love it. Weird...
Jeez.... There seems to be a rather sensitive bunch here in the comment section.
Maybe the text in the rule book was too small, but Sam missed a ton of things that I feel would have made the game better for him. One major one, one of the biggest things he complains about, is having to make your deck. He must have missed the part where it says to randomly deal 30 cards and BOOM there is your deck. That's literally the first thing it says to do before going into the other options such as drafting. The second one is just use all 30 cards of a faction. Again, no thinking, there are only 30 of each faction. He jumped straight to the "advanced" variants and then complained about it.
+neonshadow And that, in my opinion, actually makes the game worse. That was the first way I tried it, and I disliked it even more then than I do now.
I'm not sure reviewing games is your strong point.
Pfff magic the gathering used to come with a rulebook that size. Same for most of them old CCGs. That's Old skool baby!
+godofzombi Don’t get me wrong. The game is G R E A T. The rulebook and missing tokens are not.
I realise this is an old video and peoples views may have changed.
Just completely gave up on the “money pit” that is MTG, after 20 years. Saw this game and immediately bought a copy firstly because of the awesome card artwork and then because I couldn’t believe the cost / value.
Love the Dice Tower but this review seems unfair and uninformed - although I understand where the reviewer was coming from (not a TCG background)..
The value for money is outstanding, the gameplay is fun and a bit like a “skirmish” game compared to others. There is no need for constantly shelling out many, many hard earned dollars because of new frequent set releases and new booster packs (invariably with no cards you want or need). All extra that is needed is a couple of dollars for some D10 / 20’s to keep score.
Maybe the review would have been completely different if he had experienced the expectations, disappointments and significant financial investment required to play Magic The Gathering and the like in competition, with the insane cost of cards if you want any chance of not loosing every game.
Just because it's missing some components (my biggest gripe is not having coin tokens... so I made some myself), doesn't mean the gameplay is bad. Epic IS epic; Every turn something huge happens. There's no waiting to get the right mana. But I will echo the many here and admit it's going to mostly appeal to folks who already enjoy TCGs, like myself.
I am an avid CCG style player. Used to play Magic. Now a AGOT 2.0 and Netrunner fan. So I am more of the target audience. I actually played this game when it originally came out as a CCG. And I didn't like it. So I agree it's not a good game. But not for the reasons Sam thinks it sucks. Keywords don't make a game bad. :p
+Seth Dortch -- i think you'll find that it has changed quite a bit, & for the better, since the CCG, though, it doesn't sound like you'd be willing to give it the benefit of the doubt... your loss...
Kevin Scribner Yes my loss. I will probably cry myself to sleep tonight since I'm not smart enough to try this version out like you were. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
dont dislike video because the guy didnt like the game. i hate the trend that people try to find something good in the game even if its not there. respect the honest review.
I'm actually really curious as to why you chose to review this game instead of Tom or Zee? As others have mentioned it just doesn't seem to be your kind of game. I did find the conclusions to the game unhelpful, as many packaged games are missing point-tracking components, and in the case of the 1 vs 0 coin thing I can't understand why that would be difficult to keep track of on one's own. Not sure if I am maybe just not understanding the rules for the coins correctly? Since you lose the coin if you don't use it and then get another one on an opponent's turn, it's basically the same as all those games that let you a certain number of actions per turn, right? Like in Smash Up I don't need a token to keep track of whether or not I've played an action or a minion. Don't know why it would be a big deal for this game, when it's such a simple thing to track on one's own. Please confirm that my understanding is not completely wrong.
In any case, thank you for your review.
+Tam Lee (crystalusagi) Thanks for commenting! I wouldn't equate the two examples that you gave. Having a limited currency that you must use (or don't use) in order to play certain cards from turn to turn isn't the same (in my mind) as being able to always play two different kinds of cards on your turn. In Smash Up, it isn't restricted by whether you have the right currency or not, but rather how many of those cards you have already played. Use of currency is simple to track on one's own, but it is also easy to become confused from turn to turn, especially once more and more units are on the board, and the fact that the currency is both gained and used/lost on both player's turns. Having a token provided in the game that could represent it having been used by a simple flip would've been advantageous.
And I don't know of "many games" that are missing point/life tracking components that I frequently play (and I play a LOT of games). When I do come across a game that doesn't include such components, it displeases me. As I said in the video, another of White Wizard Games' products (Star Realms) did it, so why not Epic?
You are correct that this is not my target genre. Tom will be reviewing the game as well. So, the possibility is that he will have a different take on the game than I did. But at the very least, I guess, other people who are not into CCG-style games like MtG will be able to use this as a warning. I always say "try before you buy"...in other words, this is my opinion, but yours could most definitely be different. Thanks for your time!
But honestly, how many of us use those cards in Star Realms to keep track of life, when we have a smart phone or some dice? I actually really hate having that extra bulk in the box because then I can't fit any expansions in there. I do understand that for the casual player who may not have any other alternatives for keeping score, it presents a bit of a problem, but not enough to affect the game's overall playability.
I like having lots of reviews to compare against, and while this review wasn't really on par with a lot of other Dice Tower reviews that you guys have done in the past, I still appreciate that you took your time to tell us a little bit about the gameplay and what your thoughts were. Hope all the negative comments doesn't make you feel too bad. Happy gaming.
Whether I use them or not isn't really the rub...it's the fact that they were considerate enough to say during design meetings, "Hey, we should include something for our consumers to use to keep track of their Authority." Whether we use it or not is on us, but not including it is on them. And if we don't want to use it, we can chuck them, making room for those expansions. But I have played Star Realms with people who insisted on using those Authority cards...few and far between, but they are out there.
Have a great day!
And the most simple way to enjoy the game is to pick one of the "factions" and play with those 30 cards (while your opponent does the same). Simple and fast!
oh my gosh... what a negative review. He even sounds upset the entire time LOL Game seems fun to me!
Whilst it may have it's flaws and I genuinely agree they need to provide all the parts (like health and enough tokens)... This is a great game that rolls the joys and strategy of MTG and other trading card games into a nicely bundled, non-elitist format. You buy a box and at most some expansions... And you're done... You have a fun, quick and strategic game right off the bat. You don't need to worry about other players having OP expensive decks, you have absolute equality because you get to play from the same selection. Sure you may get some unlucky draws but that's the nature of any card game. It's a solid game that doesn't exclude people because anyone can pick it up, invest a little time in learning 20 functions and then play a balanced game. I love MTG but it simply isn't accessible to anywhere near the degree this is. For a £13 box you can have a fun game with expansions if you want more diversity... You can pay that on a fairly basic MTG single card that you need a free of to run your deck...I really admire White Wizard games for making accessible, inexpensive, compact games with decent art and simple enough rules, they are in my mind the future. I have 200+ board games, piles of trading cards, heaps of deck builders and WWG produce some of the most approachable ones alongside others like stoneblade etc. As a helpful criticism, I simply believe someone better acquainted to the type of games reviewed would be better so they can make a better review, judgement and comparison to other games in order to give a fair picture of the game in question.
I think this is the very first Dice Tower Review I saw which was not fair: No clear arguments why the game is not good, some obvious dislike/misunderstandings of the concepts of the genre itself, and ,please, the thing with the life counter and tokens?! Not really an issue at this price point, it is part of it -> Pen n Paper. Who used the life cards in Star Reamls anyway? In short: It looks as if Sam just personally didnt like the game/genre and has no background in similar games. Which is both fine with me. I like his reviews. But this time it was like "Hey I dont like deck construction games so Magic is a bad game"...
PS: I have not played Epic yet, just a neutral point of view
I was honestly quite disappointed with this game. I backed it on Kickstarter because it was the same people who brought Star Realms. Before you jump on me about how this is not like Star Realms so don't compare, I know that.
It is presented as a simpler, cleaner, entry level CCG without all of the cost. I never played MTG but always wanted to, however the cost and sheer vastness of it is just to overwhelming to try and get into now. So when I saw this and saw who was putting it out i was excited. Finally I thought here is kind of an entry level MTG, cheap, but also drops you right into the fun of MTG not the competitive aspect of MTG, but just fun card playing. I thought that sense White Wizard had done Star Realms, which is an amazing entry level Deck Builder, this would be an amazing entry level CCG / MTG experience. I was wrong.
First, yes, the rule book is not near as clear as it should be. Now maybe that is my fault for thinking White Wizard was putting out a game that ANYONE could pick up and play, when clearly it is written for those with some MTG or CCG experience. That being said, one would think that a company that raised over $585,000 for this game would be able to ensure that the amount of effort and quality that went into the artwork would have also gone into explaining this rules to ANYONE who picked them up, not just those familiar with the specific genre of gaming that this is clearly meant to target. I have played and own many board games( my BGG collection is in the hundreds), so I am not stranger to a bad rule book, however if you are trying to make a game that appeals to everyone, the basics in your game need to at least be understandable for everyone. One example of how this could have been helped would have been to put more than just the keyword on the cards, like Sam says. Why make the gamer, who may be new to this, learn 20 new terms. An example of a game that does this well is Elysium. It has iconography for what the cards actions are along with a brief description on every card. In no way does this take away from the game or artwork. Nor does it clutter the card. It is simply an aid for the player.
Second, as for tokens and counters, i agree with Sam, it is annoying to buy a game and it not have everything it needs, or enough of items to play it smoothly. If nothing else, write on the back of the box something that states tokens will be needed for such and such. Something like that would have been helpful. People in comments below try to attack Sam's statement where he compares, stating that Star Realms at least provides authority cards, by saying that it does not provide counters for gold or combat. The thing is that you don't need those counters because nothing carries over and you do not get any new money or combat on your opponents turn. In Epic you get a gold on every turn, even your opponents. Having something to track that would be helpful as it does get confusing at times on whether or not you have spent your gold. Other people stated that MTG players are used to using dice to track their health so jut get a die and your good. Again, the point is that i am NOT a MTG player so how would i know that unless it states it somewhere.
Finally, i would like to point out that Sam is my least favorite reviewer on this channel in general simply because i do not agree with his opinions on 90% of games( except TI3, best game ever!), so in no way am i writing this just to stick up for him. All that being said I think I understand some of the frustration that comes out of Sam during this review. It was disappointing to see the potential that was there in this game, not come to fruition at all and kind of fall flat. That is my opinion as someone who was hoping for an entry level way to get into CCG / MTG and have some fun and see what the hype was all about. This just left a bad taste in my mouth. That being said, i am not giving up, i have printed some of the player aids from BGG and some that others in this thread have posted(thanks), and am going to play this game a couple more times before i decide whether or not it is something i like or truly just do not like.
You may not like Sam or how he did this review, but he has always been blunt about how he feels about a game. If you expected something different that is on you. I could tell within the first 30 seconds when he introduced the game and said it was from those that brought us Star Realms that he did not like it near as much as Star Realms. That being said, he still shows how to play the game (as best as the rule book explains to a new player), and gives his very blunt "Sam's Opinion" at the end. If you did not like it, watch another review by someone else, as any good gamer will tell you, you need to watch multiple reviews before making a decision, and as Sam always says, "Play it before you buy it folks."
Not every game is for every person, but there is a person for every game.
I can understand if one is not the target audience. As others noted, there's a lot of equivalency between this and Magic: The Gathering that Sam is missing.
The review feels extremely whiny, however. Rather than discussing the important things like the flow of the game, the decision making process as turns go by, and the tactics/strategy of it (or lack thereof), the review skips right to dismissal.
It feels like this review was missing the body and went straight to conclusion. I notice a lot of your reviews ramble on a bit, Sam, and you have improved in this regard from some of your first posted reviews I watched. This review, however, has the opposite problem. It doesn't have enough context or talking points to help the consumer make an informed decision.
+S Clever Thank you for commenting! As I have said to other commenters here, I am reading everything, and the next negative review, when (not if) it happens will be better. As far as sounding whiny, sure, I can see that. But that is mainly because I was expecting more than a MtG clone from White Wizard Games. I was VERY disappointed, and that came through.
+Sam Healey Reviews can and should include opinions, and disappointment is a valid reaction to something. A good review, however, needs to include explanations for those reactions.
As someone who uses reviews to make purchasing decisions, I just didn't feel this review provided enough.
Either way, I'm glad that you are reading everyone's comments, and trying to learn from them for the next review. Keep up that great mindset :)
I think what is unfair about Sam's review here is that he's basically saying it's a bad game because it did, and it does, exactly what it was trying to do. It's like going into Carcassonne and complaining that it's a tile-placement game. Like, you might not like that about it, but that's what it's meant to be.
EPIC is meant to give you the feel of a CCG, without having to pay the high-prices that CCG's cost. It's giving you that experience for a very low price point. And it does a very good job of it.
Couldn't agree more, I Kickstarter it and have player it with a few people, and if I have my way I won't ever play it again. It basically feels like MTG but with none of the decision making (IE the actual gameplay). The art's fantastic but the game is not.
I understund sam, he piked a game based on the company that make the game and not based on the mecanics of the game. He dislike the game....is ok. Is like If Zee reviw a 5 hours game and didnt like it, Whould be a bad reviw? no, but a positive reviw is almost imposible.
Hey Sam, you are not getting younger now. So stop complaining with those game instruction manual and buy those games with larger font on its manual. Stop being so bias in your review and be objective.
I 100% agree with you Sam. I had very high hopes for this game, but it comes up short.
I'm glad I pulled my kickstarter pledge :)
Was looking so forward to this game. Almost kickstarted it. Glad I didn't. Haven't read or watched even one positive review of it. Such a disappointment...
I hear ya, Sam, publishers should include everything needed to play the game. But isn't that exactly what dice masters lacks? Too less dice and cards... a paper bag for crying out loud... you even have to print out your own two boards. While DM is so high on everybody's lists these days...
+SensualEMO Dice Masters doesn't "lack" anything. You get enough to play with from the STARTER set, which is exactly what it is. You do not need mats. You do not need 4 dice per character. For $15 MAX, you get a TON of dice. It is not meant to be an end all solution, but it is very playable out of the box.
+TheGreatHamEl You don't get life counters, which is what Sam was complaining about for Epic.
+Kenny Johnson You don't get life counters in MTG either, which this game is strongly emulates. (You do get them in certain products.) Gotta look at value vs cost. I don't think it's worth giving a game a crap review over it.
+TheGreatHamEl I agree. I was simply explaining SensualEMO's point: Dice Masters, like Epic, lacks life counters. I think Sensual's point was that DM doesn't seem to be criticized for that while it seemed to be a main complaint of Sam's about Epic.
+SensualEMO You should give it a real try, it will be like 10-15 USD price tag.
I ordered this game without researching it because it was cheap and star realms is great. After I was done reading the rulebook I decided it was basically just a poorly simplified version of Magic the Gathering. They took out good things and didn't add any back. Still sitting on shelf untried, and likely to stay that way.
+Eric Glimme Dude - at least Sam played the game before he decided he didn't like it.
+Eric Glimme It's a fun game! You should give it a try sometime, especially it you have a CCG enthusiast to play with.
+Eric Glimme If you have people that like 1on1 confrontational games, give it a go!
+Ryan Lee Not sure he “really” played it … he tried to play it once and failed at the rules already (yes the rulebook is bad).
thanks sam for keepin it real once again! that being said i agree with some others here and would like to see an additional review from tom.
Sounds like Sam isn't the target audience for the game. I like it for what it is.. it gives me the Magic type fix I need for half the cost and more replayability than a MTG Clash Pack. The criticisms like needing to learn key words is kind of odd. Many games, especially TCGs and LCGs have key words with no explanation on the card. I agree that cards representing gold and a few more token creatures would have been nice but I can't say what impact this would have had on shipping... and is finding 2 pennies really that hard? I hope Tom reviews the game. He is more versed on mechanics and the inner workings of the industry. Even if he does not like a game personally he points out who the target audience may be. Sam doesn't seem to look at a game from other perspectives.
+Erik Hurst The difference is that games like magic are mostly played by people who spend years playing this game, trading cards, buying boosters and such. This kind of audience doesn't have any problem with learning a new ability everytime a new edition comes around (not to mention that magic actually puts a description in italic on the cards quite often).
Epic doesn't seem to be the kind of game you'd be fanatically playing for years. That's why so many abilities without any on-card descripions was a bad idea.
There are literally 19 key words in the rules. 4 of them have un prefixes so if a player knows what the rule for break is unbreakable isn't that hard to figure out. Figuring out airborne is not much of a brain burner.
Some cards do tell you what the actions mean but there is limited space so they cannot explain the rules on all of the cards and keep a decent font size.
I think the complexity of the key words is way overblown in the review. Many games make the players memorize abstract symbols and colors without explaining it on every piece. Small World which is one of my favorite games has a tremendous amount of symbology but it's still used as a gateway game. If someone does't get the vocab by turn 3 hand them a rule book. There are 4 pages of key words... and by pages i mean a quarter of a page because the rule book is tiny.
Couldn't agree more, I Kickstarter it and have player it with a few people, and if I have my way I won't ever play it again. It basically feels like MTG but with none of the decision making (IE the actual gameplay). The art's fantastic but the game is not.
+PepsiTwistMagic -- if that's the case, email me, if your cards are still in good shape & you have the Kickstarter Promo Pack complete... i'll purchase it off of you for a reasonable price, no problem at all... everybody wins...!!!
always count on Sam Healey to tell it like it is and drop the mike
Basically it's not for boardgamers. It's geared for MTG players. I'm glad I skipped on this game.
+daekwankim I do play boardgames nowadays only and love it.
Rebuttal to Point 2, Incompleteness: Why complain about coin, but bring up Star Realms. And no, I'm not talking about the health/Authority cards here. You had to keep in your head the trade/coin and combat/attack numbers of what you played. What difference does it make that you don't have the coins here? Or cards that represent them, if we go back to what could have been taken from SR?
The trade coins and attack values are actually listed on the cards as you play them, and you use them as a resource. That's completely different than Epic.
+Sam Healey I am with you that it misses some components actually. The coin is on BGG and the rest I linked here in comments already. But yes, a few mistakes have been made. Does not stop the game from being an excellent game that crushes DM.
I agree that the game ideally should have come with means to track your life points, gold coins, more tokens and counters. But realistically, at this price point you can't really argue. You get a ton of game in this tiny box.
It's true that drafting takes longer than playing the game. This is why I suggest playing a mini tournament with 4 players and/or to play best of 3/5/7.
+Marco Schaub Yeah well, but then the price may be wrong :D If this is supposed to be some kind of starter set you better make sure everything is in there, even if it raises the price by a couple of dollars.
+Hitchslapped I can only guess, but I assume that if they added dice for life tracking, gold coins, counters and more tokens, the price of the game would likely increase by much more than a couple of dollars. That's because they'd have to switch to the next bigger box, which increases shipping costs, storage costs, and the cost for the box itself. Besides from the materials themselves.
Maybe they'll produce a deluxe version of this game some time in the future.
+Hitchslapped As Marco Schaub says, including dice and gold coins would likely raise the price tag by more than a few dollars. I picked it up for about $17 here in Sweden, while most card games in a slightly bigger box are around $22-25. Had it cost that I wouldn't have gotten it, as the price tag was one of the main draws for me (I weighed between Epic and Pixel Tactics which had a similar price tag, if one was an extra $5 it would have been an easy decision).
Since part of the selling point is that you get some of the fun of a TCG like Magic at a fraction of the price, making that fraction really really low is a good design choice.
That said, d30's aren't easy to come by so for that purpose it would have been nice to have! :D
About not having a way to keep track of life in the box I know Star Realms had a way but people probably used other ways too. Most of us could use a life or score app on a phone or whatever. A lot of trick taking games don't come with a way to keep score but it doesn't stop people from playing them. If you didn't enjoy the game well that's fine but it seemed like some of it was very nitpicky.
personally, i found the need for a coin as an excuse to put some of the foreign currency i've gathered in my travels to good use... one of the first things i did after opening Epic was toss a couple of old-style 50-yen coins in the box...
MtG doesn't come with a way to track life: most people either use dice or buy a life-tracker, or use a digital device... i was very heavily into Jyhad / VtES, for a long time, and with that game you need at least 30 tokens to represent your blood pool, plus spare for the community bank, and then there needs to be some distinctive object to represent "The Edge..." that actually turned into a thing among VtES players, having a cool & distinctive Edge... maybe later down the line, when they do a collector's tin, in addition to a rewritten rule book & a couple of copies of the one-page summary / reference, they'll include a set of nifty coins... oh, and speaking of rulebooks, does anyone remember the hot mess that came with the original MtG starters...?! Epic looks pretty good, by comparison [my first MtG cards had square corners, i ought to include here]...
+Kevin Scribner there's actually an official app for the game that keeps track of life for both players, rolls a d6 for each player to determine start player and even has a way to track if you used your coin for the turn. Very helpful and totally free.
While I respect Sam's opinion on this game I do disagree like many others. However, I wont really try to point out why he is wrong or anything else. If you don't like a game...you don't like it. Fair enough. I really do though have to say Im...."disappointed" in how he chose to criticize the game. To bash the game so strongly because he doesn't want to learn 8-9 game terms or because they didn't include health tokens is extremely silly. That paired with his kinda childish box drop at end just really struck me as being negative just to be funny or....to Troll others. Regardless...thanks for the review.
Real Talk with Sam! Thanks for an honest review!
Sam you aren't the target market
+qzxerty Thanks for that...;)
This is one of the most disappointing reviews I've seen this year (can't believe its coming from the Dice Tower) "epic is anything but epic"
Okay, I want to start off by saying some of Sam's criticisms of the game are valid, some less so. And if you play the way depicted, it would probably be horrible, as reviewed. In addition this will be a very long but thorough, and I believe fair review.
Forward:
This game was designed and packaged (to my knowledge) as an inexpensive card game alternative to Magic (similar mechanics but important differences). For that reason a few decisions were made that Sam does not like. From a design perspective, the game is designed to focus on making decisions with less restrictions imposed by mana requirements, etc.
Sam's Complaints:
A decent number of these complaints should have been expected from Sam because he has consistently made these complaints about other games. If he doesn't like something for reasons he has given in the past, he is not going to like them now, and as a reviewer he should tell us that, which he did.
- Dinky rule book: Agreed, I reread the rule book after watching this video and reading the comments. For Non-CCG players, it seems like it would be very hard to wrap your head around all of the rules and how they interact (especially since some need to be understood together). As people we like games/things that are both new and familiar, and if the game isn't familiar it is harder to understand. Even for myself who has played a lot of CCGs and loves them, I had to reread a few sections multiple times the first time I played the game.
- Not providing the components needed to play the game: Agree/Disagree, Sam has mentioned he wants everything needed to play a complete game in the box, including ways to track health and resources so this is a valid criticism from him. This game does not provide that because of the CCG assumption that players are used to not having it, it isn't necessary for the game play, and it keeps costs down.
- Keywords instead of full remainder text on every card: Disagree, This would not be feasible for a game of this nature because it would be impossible to fit all that text on a card while maintaining a large enough font size and room for the amazing art. Learning the keywords is an obstacle, undoubtedly, but necessary. They are in the back of the book and there are reference sheets on their website.
www.epiccardgame.com/rules/
- Cards cost 1 or are Free is bad: Disagree heavily, but will discuss later.
- Drafting takes longer then playing the game: , For CCG players that enjoy building their deck and fighting to see who can make the better deck, drafting is a very large part of the game. To me it is not just setting up to play the game.
- Too much investment required for a game this small: Personal opinion, This is an inexpensive game but not a small one. This is a full-on CCG-like game without the collectible nature and carries with it a necessary complexity that will turn off people who dislike the genre, Same for example. This is neither Sam's fault nor the game's. It is what it is.
Rules Misunderstandings/Omissions:
The rules are difficult to understand, but there are a few things I want to clarify (some have already been mentioned and addressed in the comments, and some aren't critical to the review)
3:31, Fire Shaman Ally ability: It triggers, while Fire Shaman is in play, any time you play a card of the same faction that costs a coin (1). Not when she comes into play.
4:36/5:35/8:58/11:30, ending your turn: When you want to end your turn, your opponent gets the chance to play events or creatures with ambush. If they do, you may play cards or attack further on your turn. Then when you are finished and want to end your turn again, the same thing happens until your opponent no longer wants to play a card (or is unable to) and lets your turn end.
In general, you may play events and champions with ambush on your opponent's turn at 3 times:
1) after your opponent declares that 1 or more champions are attacking you
2) after you declare which champions are blocking
3) when your opponent tries to end their turn.
This is a bit of back and forth at all of these times, but that is the gist.
6:00, banish: Put the banished card on the bottom on its owner's deck.
8:12, attacking expends champions until the start of your next turn: Expended champions can't attack, block, or use "expend" abilities. Champions are prepared at the start of your turn. Aside in response to a comment: Expended, Prepared, and Flipped are positions of the card. Deploying is a state. When a card comes into play it is both Prepared and Deploying. If it blocks that turn, it would be Flipped and Deploying.
9:47, block with a creature flips it until end of turn: Sam was correct to flip Medusa to show it can't block again this turn, but should not have expended her (turned her sideways). If Medusa had an expend ability and was not deploying, it could still be used that turn.
1 Cost and 0 Cost explanation:
This is one of the biggest design decisions in the game. Unlike other CCGs, this costing mechanism makes it so any card is playable from the start of the game. Instead of tying the cards to lands (Magic) or Crystals (Hearthstone) each turn you can choose any card to play instead of: I have 2 resources available, I'll play my 2 resource card. I love this because it makes the decisions of which 1 cost card to play each turn much more important. All 1 cost cards are designed to be dramatically powerful, while 0 cost cards have significantly smaller niche effects.
Conclusion:
Sam's review is very valid for any non-CCG players that just pick up the game and play it. Rules are serviceable for CCG players, but the mechanisms are too complicated for such a small book. You need a way to keep track of health, your 1 resource each turn, and excess tokens when you need them (and you will). However, by apparently not playing with the ability to play a card at the end of your opponent's turn, the game is very stale. Most of the tension comes from who can use their coin better each turn and deciding when to use it.
Do it think Sam would enjoy this game if he had a complete understanding of the game (which the rules make difficult), probably not since it is basically a non-collectible CCG. There are also some features that CCG players do not like as well (prevalence of board wipes, 1 coin each turn, no "responding" like in Magic), but I'm not going to get into those here (but I do personally like how all of those things are implemented in this game though).
Personally, I am someone who kickstarted the game, is a CCG player (to an extent) did well in the tournament of it at Gencon, am in the process of playing the mess out of it, and I love it. Besides a few of the mistakes, the spirit of Sam's review is fair, and I think a lot of people would feel the same, but if you want to get the rich CCG experience Magic offers, are willing to put in the effort that CCG-like games require if you want to compete, and don't want to shill out thousands ($10-15 for 1 set playable with up to 4 players, $30-45 for 3 sets to be able to build any competitive deck), Epic might be perfect for you.
This review is harsh and the presenter, Sam, is clearly frustrated and it shows, but he is blatantly honest in his review. He even points out he played the game a few times before this video. Star Realms was a complete game. As is Hero Realms. I just recently picked up EPIC this week after Hero Realms a few months ago. Love Hero Realms, and really love Star Realms, but for this game I had to go find life counters (30 sided dice for now) and had to print out the tokens and additional NPC cards as well. The presenter in this video points that out as well. I also wish the instructions were a huge fold out sheet with clear instructions and examples would be provided and was double sided. To me it didn't matter Sam got some of the rules incorrect, I too have been having trouble with the rules and referencing them constantly till I memorize them from the micro book. Off to printing a large version of the rule book I guess. I'm going to push myself to learning this game as I have always been curious about MGT, but have never played it, but I have friends who are addicts of it.
I like MtG (on a casual level) and i don't care for this game (or other simplifications like Hearthstone, etc.). But one thing in this game really annoys me. It's that you win by losing all your cards.. Very unthematic and not logical to me. Yeah, it might be mechanically and strategically. But i get that you play a wizard, and you win when your spellbook is over (you don't have to actually play all the spells, so you can't say that you in some way overwhelmed your opponent with the power of your whole spellbook, you can even be on a last thread of life and quickly mill your deck to .. "win".. Nothing sounds epic for me in this game. You get all the big champions and spells on your first turns and it is anticlimactic and there is no exciting build up for the win. Yeah, i know that this game is emphasizing on using those huge cards clever. So it should be called "Clever" or "Tricky" not Epic..
To the people complaining he reviews a game he doesn't like:
He explained the rules and mechanics. you can tell if you, yourself, will like it. You like drafting? He tell you you can do that. Yes, he doesn't like it, but you get how the game works.
Some people say he got rules wrong. Yeah, that's bad. But just saying "This game has these mechanics, and I don't like them" should be fine.
Many are saying that this is a bad review because Sam is not a target audience. I don't think this is a problem. We are not living in a perfect world where everyone only plays/watches/reads what is suitable for him. One can hear about this game and think "hey, this card game might be interesting for me, because i like this and this little card game". If you watch a review from a CCG player, who likes this, you might be convinced to buy this game (glorified reviews can do this). So it is a good thing there is a negative review about this game for non-CCG players, from Sam's perspective, for those who is aligned with his perspective. Honestly, most of the bashers of this review are already loving this game and don't need any review :) I wonder why they've even stopped playing this epic game to watch a review :D
I think you should have approached the game a little differently. In my opinion you should have played Limited Sealed first, which each player randomly dealt 30 cards. Shuffle and play, very easy to get into and learn the keywords in the game. Then I recommend you play, constructed pre-constructed. Each set contains four preconstructed decks, sepearate by color. This allows you to get more familiar with the cards and possible combos. This gives you a better understanding of the decks and keywords and combos and allows you to either go to drafting or playing with your 4 different preconstructed decks afterwards. Overall I love the game and I think they did a good job of giving you a cheaper version of magic the gathering with all the epic cards.
hmm Interesting review and wow Sam good job getting that comment fire started got toasty fast lol.
I don't mind this game i was given it as a gift so i have messed with it as well as played embarrassing amounts of magic way back when. So the terms became second nature within a couple of games.
There is 0 argument vs the buy in cost vs magic for sure it would be dumb to try. Unless no more expansions then its gonna get dry fast. Who would only want 4 summoner wars armies, or 4 basic Pokemon decks or .....ya get point. If they add more sets of cards than not a thing.
I did not find it hard to do the gold math in my head but yeah how much more would the price point be to add 2 more punch out cards to the deck with various chits. I do have in my house various quarters, dimes, nickels, and pennies. I have 5 sets of 5 each all shinny just for games in a bag so keeping health was easy enough as well.
I have to say i did see what others saw...I don't think ya dig ccgs lol (maybe it was just this one). That said even if i did not already have the game I can totally make a judgement as to if i will like this easy with what you gave us. Your opinion on it still does not change you pretty much gave the run down of that game (Variants aside but all games kinda have them so). So thanks for the review I think it was good enough to base an option as to if i will like it.
Be Safe.
I Kickstarted the game and have played it several times. Before this game I had only played MTG a few times, never wanted to jump in because of the cost. I saw Epic as a nice alternative. However, when I tried to play with my friends we spent more time debating and trying to look up rules than actually playing the game. Note, I also demoed it at GenCon and the guy there showing it off did not even seem to fully understand the rules or timing of different events. Needless to say, when I've tried to play I usually end up just feeling frustrated more than anything else.
We've gone from shocked/disappointed to ecstatic in our opinions of Epic. Those who hadn't played MtG were quite lost at first. The MtG vets like me who had played it extensively ages ago needed some time to shrug off our old habits of terminology and proper phasing.
White Wizard Games is their own worst enemy right now, being behind the curve on player support. Perhaps they thought their target audience would be more like them?
But they have a very nice extensive example of play now (the BEST way for someone to see if the game will have appeal): www.epiccardgame.com/category/videos/
They have a page up with larger format rules, play aids, PnP tokens, etc here: www.epiccardgame.com/rules/
Back to Sam's "review". It says a lot more about Sam Healey than it says about the game. Stick with Memoir '44! ;)
He is complaining about aspects of this game that he is ok with in other games.
My prediction: He played the game and got trounced. Then he trashed the game.
OR
He played the game with someone who also didn’t understand the mechanics. Then he trashed the game.
The game isn’t for everyone(games can be short and people may not enjoy the back and forth swings), but it’s better than what he makes it out to be.
No, drafting is really really easy and especially dark draft (each draws 5, each picks 1, pass on, picks 2, discard the other 2) goes on ultra quick. Do open or dark draft, don’t do pack draft.
Yes, tokens missing, life counter dial missing
Good review Sam. I jumped on this when it came out with the low price point. I also am a big fan of star realms but this game for all the reasons you stated and more just doesn't feel right. I wanted a balanced out of the box no frills, no hand building game like star realms (though not just a re-skinning of star realms). This is not that. I know many folks have compared this to Magic the gathering and to a degree I agree. I'm assuming that wizards of the coast/Hasbro assumed this game company having the word wizard in the title is part of that gaming empire, as that must be the only reason they haven't taken legal action over the similar feel. So from this old codger to you Sam I say "keep the printing font larger and see you on the flip side" :)
Sam is 100% right. I kickstarted this game, and just could not get into it like star realms. It just does not hit the right notes. I would stay away from this game just as Sam suggested.
I backed this on Kickstarter (my first backed game actually), and I went with the full compliment of 4 boxes as I felt that that would give me the most options for playing the game and also make it more interesting for constructed play.
I unfortunately haven't had the chance to play it a lot yet but my experience with it so far is that it's a faster Magic: The Gathering. I would recommend the game based on that.
I do agree about the keywords being a lot to take in, even if you're familiar with Magic. I solved that by writing down a reference sheet that had the Magic keyword counterparts listed by the Epic ones. Blitz = Haste, et cetera.
I usually enjoy Sam's reviews but this one was a bit of a miss. I get that it's not a game for everyone but going into it not liking Magic: The Gathering then you're bound to not give it a fair shot, as it's pretty much advertised as a quicker and cheaper Magic.
Sam mostly criticized the TCG/LCG genre of games. It was almost funny but it didn't do justice for Epic.
Incredibly generic and ill-considered game. Star Realms was also pretty generic and terrible. Time to put wwg on my "don't care" list.
This game is fun really life card tokens? who doesn't have a PHONE these days to keep life smh bad review of a decent game.
Epic is epic fail.... Good thing I saw this review. Star realms is epic! But this game I would not take even if it was free.
You did a great Job Sam. I kickstarted it and have not played it yet. It helped to see it played. I will give it a try. I see your points on the game. It can be a real luck game depending on what cards you get if they are a random draw. I love dice games so for me random luck is fun. I play to have fun, win or lose it's the experience and social fun with friends that count. Some people have to win at all costs, not me I enjoy laughing and talking about what happens while playing. Like I have said before in past comments on the Dice Tower, I love that you guys are honest about your feelings about a game. That's what keeps me coming back to watch them. Whether I agree or not, you feel the way you do and that is fantastic. Keep up the good work buddy.
Just dont learn the rules by watching this video, as it gets a couple of major things wrong
+Joel Petersen What did I get wrong? I'm not being snarky, either...I read that rulebook many times, and I had it with me as I was doing the review, stopping periodically to check that I wasn't making mistakes during the gameplay portion. To my knowledge, I followed the rulebook as best I could. I don't have the rulebook anymore, as I have returned the game to Tom...so, I'm curious.
Well the big thing (besides some keyword mixup, and you did say that you found that part hard. If I recall correctly you also dislike RFTG for having to learn the 'language of the game' (symbols), so that is not surprising. Also, people should study the keywords themselves, not just rely on a reviewer. That goes for all reviewers and all games I think) is the timing of resetting your champions. They refresh at the beginning of your turn, so if you attack with them during your turn, you cant defend with them during the opponents turn (if you have played the Star Wars LCG, it is actually quite a similar turn structure). The confusion might come from the end of turn deployment to active status of your newly played champions? That makes a whole lot of difference imo. This game has a quite loose 'phase' structure (just like SW:LCG, wich might be why I enjoy it so much), in that you can attack, summon a champion and attack again with that champion if it has blitz (or whatever it is called, I am at work atm and cant check the cards) or another chamipon. There is a lot of trying out your opponent, trying to get him/her to use their powerful events on some of your lesser champions or faking a bluff so that they wont block an attack because they fear that something bigger is comming. That means that playing all the cards you can might very well not be the best strategy. Those things alone makes EPIC a 'more tham zero game' if you ask me, even if you don't like it.
+Joel Petersen +Sam Healey Sorry it sounds like you had a bad day Joel. I just wanted to let Sam know I thought he did a great job. I sometimes use the wrong words in a game. There are so many terms used in games it gets confusing sometimes. I got the way it basically plays, I will read the rules when I decide to play. Sam is one of my favorite reviewers, he is honest how he feels about a game. As a matter of fact most of the time he likes games I like. Remember, it's just a game. You can like it and Sam does not have to like it. Keep up the great honest reviews Sam. I watch the Dice Tower reviews all week long from all the people that contribute. After working all day it's nice to come home and watch Sam, Zee and Tom talk about games and laugh. That's true friendship.
+wetwillyccma I have had a fine day, thankyouverymuch. Utube ate half my comment though. My point is, go look for yourself, dont trust reviewers for a rules explanation. I dont see how that translates in to 'sam cant dislike the game'?. I do think its silly that he claims there is zero game, but I dont see reviewers as the authorities you do maybe?
I played the game where you just pick 30 random cards each... (Drafting would be better but whatever)
I see this game as a filler in the spirit of MTG. Most of the rules and terms have direct MTG equivalents and if you're not familiar with iMTG... You can figure this out as you go... 3 plays and you have the gist of it.
Which is my beef with this review... Sounds like Sam played maybe 5 sessions of a game of which he does not have the background most customers getting this game would. Instead of approaching this as a careful outsider... He just goes in completely obnoxious and ranting right out of the gate ... Do your homework before you hand it in and knock off the attitude.
+HarfangX I think two weeks (touch and go, of course) of watching other's reviews and reading the rulebook multiple times and playing it multiple times counts as "doing my homework".
I think with deck building you have more control over your hand, since you can decide how many 1-cost cards and how many 0-cost cards actually go in the deck. But I agree, with the drafting variant, you could end up with a ton of 1-cost cards and not be able to play much on your turn.
I think the best way to play this game is by deck building, but that creates another problem. To get the most out of deck building you have to buy 3 sets.
I agree that the game should actually come with a few gold coins. Pretty dumb that it doesn't.
+Carl Frodge
The game is meant to be either played as draft (open, dark or pack draft) or as a construction game. There are about relation of 1-coin:0-coin cards is about 4:1. When drafting you will make sure thats the ratio you about get. The resource management is really good!
As this game is clearly "polarizing" when it comes to opinions, I have to say that Sam's opinion is a valid as anyone else. I have enjoyed Epic the 3 times I have played it, but have found that a random shuffle and distribution can lead to some imbalance issues, but going in knowing that we've still enjoyed it. I still value Sam's opinion based on past reviews. Thanks for this review Sam, even though atm, I don't agree.
+Ivan Conrad
It's polarizing because Sam made an absolute rubbish review. He basically took the Star Realms as a base and then complained that the game wasn't like Star Realms. That would be the same as someone making an review of Memoir'44, and trash it because the game is not like Ticket to Ride.
Opinions are ok, you can say you don't like the game and it's fine. But if you base your opinion on a false pretext, especially when doing a review, you will get ripped about it.
I also would like to know how many of the "polarized" people are like Sam, who basically thought it's another Star Realms?
+C r s And that is your opinion...
+C r s No, I did not compare this to Star Realms. I went into it wanting to give it a fair go because of how much I enjoy Star Realms...that is much different than comparing it to Star Realms. The only way I "compared" it to Star Realms was when I posited that they did such a good job with Star Realms, and this is no where near that caliber of game.
What a meh review. I agree we nee|) more token, but you can't say you nee|) some car|) to remember HP in a 2 player game, come on. Also, there are like 6 new wor|)s on this game an|) you learn them as fast as you finish your first game, specially if you alrea|) playe|) MTG. This game is fast, enjoyable, cheap an|) comes with several game mo|)ality...my only |)oubt is the \)raft thing, it can be really long with new players.
Sorry, my |) letter is broken an|) I can't write it properly.
I'm glad I didn't back this now...Sam if you want to play me on iOS star realms my name there is "dkoehnlein" :)
+David Koehnlein SR is really a boring game and the app on iOS was really bad for me (iPhone)
banish it means put the banished card on the bottom of your deck not in discard pile
soulds like the epic card game is a cash grab to buy into more of those expansions, mini or larger ones...and where is the solo mode?????
I think the problem that most of us have with the review is not because he gave it a negative one. Far from it! In fact, it was his honest opinion about the game and I really appreciate that. Keep up the good work Sam!
The problem I have with this review is the fact that Sam hasn't "logged in" enough games in order to judge it fairly (as shown in the video when he made several rule mistakes. I know that the rulebook is terrible as explaining the rule, but the game has just entered the market less than a month ago and a comprehensive rulebook, the end-all be-all rulebook, is being developed at the moment).
I understand that the box seems small which lead many people to think that this is a simple game that could be played straight out of the box. That could not be more wrong! This is actually a huge, complicated game which lots of intricate details and would require more time to get used to compared to Star Realms. This game is more akin to Race for the Galaxy, an excellent game but does not suit the more casual audience.
I just wish you would gave it a second chance. Watch the official Gameplay Walkthough (because they at least got the rule correct) or play the game with someone with a TCG background. Pretty please?
+RuBisCO Thanks for responding! Your second paragraph is the one with which I will voice my main issue...IF what you say is true, and the rulebook is still being developed, why on earth did they release the game??? One should never put a game on the market without doing everything within their power to make sure it is a comprehensive rulebook that can be understood by anyone. Besides gameplay, I think that the rulebook is the next most important part of designing a game. You could have the best game in the world, and if people can't understand how to play it or are confused about how to play, you and your game are dead in the water.
+Sam Healey Sorry for the late respond!
To my understanding, the comprehensive rulebook for trading card game is often long, complicated and doesn't need to be read fully in order to enjoy the game (heck, the comprehensive rulebook for Magic the Gathering is 210 pages long!). Because the producers of Epic are Magic Hall of Famers, I would expect them to create a similar rulebook. This obviously takes considerable amount of time and is not vital to the production of Epic (as the core gameplay, cards and included rulebook are fully functional, admittedly confusing to non-TCG players.)
Using the comprehensive rulebook is very similar to using a dictionary in order to write an essay. Most of the time, you don't need a dictionary to construct your paragraphs as the sentences would usually contain commonly used words. However, you may want to use uncommon words sometimes and that's when you need the dictionary. In the same sense, most game state in Epic would be resolved simply by looking at the included rulebook, while the comprehensive rulebook will help in the occasionally special cases.
Now, you may say that this business with the rulebook is unnecessary and overcomplicated. Why even bother with it? The short answer in my opinion is because the developer would want to add expansions in the future. When the game is laid out cohesively in the rulebook, adding extra stuff to it would be easier in the long run.
We can look at a popular TCG game that currently lacks a rulebook, Hearthstone. The developers for Hearthstone try to add new flavour to the game with each expansion by creating new keywords, new interactions. However, without the comprehensive rulebook, they are running into a lot of problems. For example, in Hearthstone, when the opponent plays Lord Jaraxxus while you have the Repentance secret, the opponent's hero will be replaced with a 1 health Lord Jaraxxus. However, while the cards are worded similarly, if you have the secret called Sacred Trials in play and they play Lord Jaraxxus while having 3 other minions in play, the secret will activated but Lord Jaraxxus won't be destroyed.
The example above supports the need for a comprehensive rulebook. When an expansion for a TCG come out, there will be lots and lots of rule interactions. The developers may not be able to predict everyone of those interaction by themselves. With a comprehensive rulebook, the players (or judges, in the case of Magic because that game is THAT complicated to play) can use that as a guideline to determine how the interaction would work and adapt swiftly. Without the rulebook, every weird interactions that the players are unsure about need to answered by the developers of the game and hardcode back to the game if it doesn't work as intended.
So in summary, every TCGs need a long, overcomplicated rulebook that acts similar to a dictionary. Producing such a rulebook is a very hard task and requires months in order to complete. However, such rulebook is not needed when the game first come out because the common interactions are included in the short rulebook and waiting until the comprehensive rulebook come out to release the game would means delaying the release of the game by a couple of months.
In the mean time, White Wizard Game compensates for the lack of rulebook by creating this page (www.epiccardgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/EpicCardRulings151019.pdf) : "You have card questions? This document probably has the answer. If it doesn’t, please email support@epiccardgame.com." So there's that.
When I first learned to play Magic the Gathering, I need 4-6 months in order to understand the game fully (obviously, some players learn at a faster pace than me). However, when I want to learn other TCGs, I could use that knowledge and know how to play them in a couple of hours. In short, for people who are not familiar with TCGs, it is vital for them to play with someone who is familiar with such rule system.
TL;DR: Faulting Epic by saying that it should have a comprehensive rulebook at the beginning is somewhat unfair as it is modelled after several other TCGs and is still functional even without the comprehensive rulebook. In the mean time, WWG are doing their best to compensate for the lack of rulebook.
I hope my reply does not come off as ignorance or offensive to you and I hope you could understand the point I'm trying to make. Epic is a fantastic game and seeing it get negative reviews due to minor problems sadden me :(
17:30 You should show that data at the beginning of the video, not the end of it.
This is the first dice tower video I thumbs down.
Wow Sam, you hurt so many grown men's feelings with your valid opinion, quite the super power you have there. I just wanted to see how close this was to a CCG, because the typical MtG fan's taste tends to only be in their mouth. I'll give this a pass too, thanks for the heads up.
+Austin Riddle Except that there is not much valid about it. That’s the point. Saying something bad is okay. BGG misses that, most reviews miss that. Barley knowing a game and expressing opinions about it in mass media is just a mediocre move.
I picked it up mostly as my MTG methadone.
+Sam Healey
We have found the game much more enjoyable when we each other take one color or two colors and shuffle them together and play.
I Think the drafting might be more enjoyable for people who play this all the time.
Another thing is if you don't want to draft your deck there is the option to just deal out thirty random cards to each player and play. Games are so short it doesn't really matter what cards you get just deal out new decks each time.
This game is just magic, with less stuff.Very disappointing
Just with less RNG, faster, and much cheaper to get the cards for. So, better then magic imo.
I actually enjoyed this review. if you have that mtg itch, just buy a lot of random mtg cards and play casual with friends
Thanks Sam! I am not a CCG player, either. You just saved me a purchase. Such good art, but not targeted toward me.
Love the last comment - "Epic is anything but. . . . . . epic." Well done review Sam, thanks