Arkham Horror: The Card Game or The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game | WHAT SHOULD I BUY?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 07. 2024
- Please click the Like button if you enjoyed this video. It's the best way to help out our channel!
Hey everyone! In this video, we break down the differences between Arkham Horror and Lord of the Rings to help you understand which game is better for you.
SUPPORT US BY
Joining Our Patreon: / playingboardgames
Watching us on Twitch: / playingboardgames
Joining us on our discord: / discord
Buying our merch: merch.streamelements.com/play...
0:00 Intro
1:00 Arkham Horror
2:55 The Lord of the Rings
5:22 Differences
FOLLOW OUR SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / boardgametwitch - Hry
Easy - buy all three LCGs, then feel intense regret on your decision to buy three gigantic money sinks and ask yourself why you are like this. 100% hypothetical scenario here, I am not speaking from experience. *Sweating*
I've never seen anything more relatable
Lol
Maybe in addition MTG? 🥲
That’s why u pick one and nail it. The one that appeals the most To u. Me, lotr, but I like the idea of Arkham.
Marvel, the movies, card games? Don’t interest me at all.
@@Jan-th6osI could never buy mtg. No solo mode ?
What I love of Lord of the rings is that the game get to the table fast if everyone have already build their deck. I really like Arkham but sometimes it can take a long time to prepare a scenario. Both are good. Just different.
I have both since I love The Lord of the Rings as well as Lovecraftian settings. Both games are challenging but so satisfying as they both pull you and immerse you right into the setting.
In LotR you play individual scenarios with different party members each time, with an immersive theme. In AH you play a series of connected scenarios ( you can play them individually if you wish) with the same party. As mentioned in LotR the enemies are in an area on the board. AH uses cards to make a map and sometimes the map changes as play progresses. In AH you feel like you are travelling more than in LotR because of this. Basic mechanics and combat are very similar for both. Replaying scenarios in AH results in very different results each time, and adding different investigators (up to about 60 at this point) and the Return To (Nightmare) expansions add even more variation to the replay results. I have both and play AH much more for these reasons.
Which is ironic given that the whole point of LotR is the motif of literal and metaphorical voyage.
Lets not forget that all the LOTR "reprint" cycle big boxes recieve the Campaign Saga-Upgrade with additional cards for the campaign mode (like they did with the revised core). But those cards will always be free print&play for all those people that already have the full cycles.
Have both - love both. LotR is my #1 solo and AH is better with more players 🙂
Same here :)
Thanks for being my number 1 place to get Arkham tips. I like your comparison here, LOTR was a very different game. My wife and I tried to build one deck to do it all and got very frustrated. I guess we thought it would be cheating to build a deck that can only beat one scenario. In Arkham you kinda fall in love with your beat cop and it can be hard to take them out when upgrading. I mean best cop won the game doing that last point of damage... There must be someone, something, else I can replace instead
Nice comparison guys! I think I prefer AH but I enjoy both :)
Arkham is such a well designed game but I hate horror. Wish they would just use that system with LOTR as I LOVE LOTR lore. I enjoy Marvel a lot but I feel LOTR needs that deep storey telling that Arkham delivers.
Excellent video. I think I’ll stick with AH’s story driven gameplay for now.
Very helpful, thank you!
I have both and while LOTR is a great game with a great gameplay, AH is just a unique blast! You can replay the campaigns with different investigators and every ending makes the campaign go in a way or another so replayability is great too.
Thanks for this. I was pretty sure Lord of the Rings wasn't the game for me, but this helped solidify that.
Thanks for the comparison. I was thinking about getting LotR, but now I know its not something for me :)
I agree with the sentiment that LotR leans towards being more of a puzzle.With a decent collection it is still perfectly possible to build thematic decks that you can keep for an entire cycle with a fair chance at winning each scenario.
Also hallofbeorn would surely agree with Bryn’s approach towards synergistic deckbuilding :)
My personal favourite part of playing LotR is seeing what decks Bryn comes up with.
Definitely AH for the progression and not having to face check a scenario repeatedly. In the small amount of LOTR I've played, it feels more like a puzzle game where, after beating a scenario, I have little incentive to replay it. There's branching, that I'm aware of, and after figuring out the puzzle, the turn by turn play is less engaging.
Comparison with Marvel Champions at some point?
When I play a LoTR campaign, I create a 15 card sideboard for each deck. Going through the campaign, I freely swap cards between the deck and the sideboard at the start of each game. I think this makes the deck build very challenging, but goes a long way towards making each deck viable throughout the whole campaign.
Thank you for making videos, gentlemen. I hope I’ve said this at least once in the past, but if not, today is the day.
I love this sideboard idea. In reality, when we say your decks need to change to approach a scenario, it usually is only 3-9 cards of your deck, so I think that sideboard makes it less likely you'll need to dig through your collection as often. I love it.
Oh yeah I love this idea too!
I do wonder what Lord of the Rings would look like if it had come out now after Arkham & Marvel - it feels like a lot of the negatives around Lord of the Rings is due to it being the first co-op LCG - the other 2 games definitely feel like they benefit from stumbles made by Lord of the Rings, and built on area's of the game Lord of the Rings did not do well.
Like imagine Lord of the Rings with Arkham like maps/locations you move between instead of the more abstract threat/quest/travel system it uses - or if the characters had signature cards that dictate the base of your deck (to represent that character better, like in Marvel) - or Arkhams deck construction rules for the heroes.
One thing I do love in Lord of the Rings, that the other 2 games don't, is the use of bad weather (rain, storms, snow etc.) as treacheries/bad events that hinder your party. It can be very thematic and helps give the feel of going on a long journey.
I own both games. They are equally good but AH is more refined than LOTR. In AH players actually move and investigate while in LOTR you move (or do quest) because you tab cards. One mechanic that LOTR has better is ally card. In LOTR ally card works like real ally as it can do action. In AH ally card feels more like attachments (to the investigator) because it does not do action. I wish that ally in AH could do 1 specific (or limit) action per turn to represent that it is really alive.
Let's go! Comparison AH vs MC should be cool. Except I already know for answer for myself, that I don't prefer that solitaire game over arkham. ;)
I just want to say: Incredible thumbnail on this one, it somehow feels real next level!
And congrats to 10.000, it's well deserved! 😍👏👏
I prefer LOTR theme but AH is the best game for me. I love the campaign system. Adding a card or two feels more rewarding like you are improving your character in a roleplaying game.
The puzzle game of LOTR is less thematic. You can enjoy the scenarios but the campaign system is only narrative. It doesnt affect what you do in a scenario to the next.
I love and have both but sometimes Arkham just gets too long on setup
I have a question. I started with the revised core set of Lord of the Rings and it's nowhere near as difficult as people have made it sound, even when I'm not playing the new campaign stuff in the revised core set. Could it be that the multiple copies of each card makes the game so hugely easier?
This is old, but, well, I can reply if you're still interested in knowing. The revised core set makes the game easier, yes, that's the short answer. The long answer -> yes, having 3 copies of some powerful cards (where in the original core was only 1 or 2 copies), helps a lot. The recommended mixed decks are great, and that alongside the new campaign boons/ally card, makes it possible to solo the first 3 scenarios, including scenario 3 - Escape from Dol Guldur, which was near impossible as a solo player in the core set.
@@Primus_prime_time Nice. No surprises there. Thanks.
I want what you describe AH as but in a lotr theme
I play all 3 LCGs (marvel,AH,LOTR) and they all fill a need. Marvel is a nice light game if I want to play but not have to do too much thinking. Arkham is a nice step up from marvel and a better story experience and LOTR I liken a lot to MTG and there is a lot of strategy and thinking involved which depending on how my work day has gone, is the last thing I want to do 😂
Love all 3 and coming from TCGs the money spending seems like a better value since I’m actually playing with the cards and i know what im getting
As much as I love Fantasy Flight and everything they do, the LOTR card game has some real problems. Arkham Horror feels more like what they wanted LOTR to be.
It's hard for me to pick a favorite child here, but fortunately I don't have to! It's worth another emphasis of how different the games are in play. Justin is right: Lord of the Rings will not hesitate to kick you in the throat. Arkham is both the new design and the kinder game, but the consequence of their relative design choices means higher highs and lower lows in Lord of the Rings. There are some incredible scenarios designs in that game.
If you want a genuine horror experience, filled with danger and monsters and impossible odds...pick LotR.
People who are new to these kind of games Arkham Horror is better
I prefer LOTR overall. It has real problems in the scenario design. Really kicks you hard sometimes.
The campaign and location systems in arkham are so much better. Deckbuilding part is less interesting, but the experience system feels so good.
How does Marvel Champions compare? For new players, it’s now really a 3 way choice
I enjoy MC, but it plays differently than the AH and LotR. MC is about getting in a quick fix, especially if playing 1H solo. Between exchangeable modular encounter sets and a wealth of difficulty choices, MC is focused on offering single scenarios adapted to you challenge appetite. Deckbuilding exists, but is rather limited - almost half of your deck will be pre-defined by your hero. Campaigns exist (via campaign expansions), but the narrative glue and carry-over effects are limited.
AH has the deepest campaign structure and most rpg-like feel of the three.
LotR has deep deckbuilding and ok narratives in campaigns. The campaigns, however, are mostly narrative glue without one scenario affecting another. The saga boxes and the new campaign re-releases add some minor effects via boons and burdens, but offer nothing like the deep progression system of AH.
Mc has a better single player and premade decks. Set up is faster and it easier to get games in. Issue is the game is more binary. You defeat scenarios by dealing them enough damage. So in the end, you're always going to be punching bad guys. Which is fun, but I prefer more variety.
Arkham horror has a lot more choice and gameplay elements, but takes more investment to get on the table. Building decks is a real cost and some people struggle.
To me MC got boring after like a year or so? Heroes have 15 set cards, everything else is interchangeable between the 4 aspects (protection, agressin, justice, leadeship) + neutral. I did not like this, for thematic reasons (Groot leadership... lol), and also, to me it did not provide as big of a difference between heroes as AH. Which is odd, since in AH you only have like 1-3 personal cards, but there is a much more strict pool of cards to build from.
And as others pointed out. In the end you do the same thing every scenario, or every campaing. Build untill you stabilise, then beat down the bad guy. The build part is tedious due to the overuse or surge mechanic (a lot of time it felt like a gamble). The beatdown part is usually boring, since you will know when you got them, and it is only a matter of time to just finish off.
I think Arkham is the better game overhall, i honestly think Arkham is the evolution of what Lotr was supposed to be.
I love deckbuilding so i love Lotr a bit more and i like how much unforgiving it is, BUT is also unbalanced as hell in 4 players so i get how someone can find it annoying.
Only real problem is my wallet
I would love a comparison for Marvell Champions. Also, the “How to Win” series for each game would be awesome.
Let’s have a three way fight Arkham vs LOTR vs Marvel!
AH vs MC
Answer=All three. Marvel Champions needs to be included in this duo.
I owned and sold Arkham horror LCG. I loved the stories but hated the setup time. Lord of the rings made it much simpler by just matching the icons on the scenario card. That alone is a huge win for me.
what about marvel champions vs ahlcg?
I'll have a video of that coming out soon!
BBBB
Both are a scam designed to sell endless amounts of cards to a bunch of idiots who grew up playing Pokemon and other kid "games". I hate deck building...worst money-grab ever perpetrated on dim-witted gamers ever.
Lol. Yur funny
I wish all scam where like those LCG.
But there are not even deck-building games.