As for discard piles: put the deck in the center of the table and have each players discard pile beside the deck, between them and the deck. That way it’s real easy to see whomst’ve discarded where. Just like a windmill of discard piles in the center, surrounding the draw deck.
This game is so good and so cutthroat. After enough plays you really need to read people to figure out what's in their hand in order to do well. So many tough choices every turn yet you're only doing two things. I love it. One of the best card games I've played.
I think that because of the rule that if no one has a type of tree in their hand at the end of the game, everyone scores that tree type , the most you can score would be 19. But of course that would very rarely happen if ever.
The original card art was fantastic, as well, but I do believe I prefer the new Beth Sobel art. Love this game... and I am usually a hard-sell on card games.
We always have each players discard pile in front of them but up by the draw deck. So there was no confusion what so ever. So in a 4 player game let’s say, there would be the facedown draw deck in the middle with 4 face up discard piles around it. This game is great at 3-4 players no so much at 2.
Yeah, exactly this. I thought the rules actually told you to do this, but maybe not. Each of our discard piles is right up against the draw deck so there is never any confusion.
As for the confusion with the discard piles, I usually have my discards tapped(tm). Since they aren't the same orientation as the trees in your tableau, there will be less confusion.
Tom, you introduced me to Lost Cities MANY years ago in one of your old top 100 of all time videos. Nothing had really replaced Lost Cities for my wife and I..........until now. I just bought Arboretum in this recent re-print and I have to say that there is finally a Lost Cities KILLER. I can confidently say that I will not play Lost Cities if I have Arboretum on me. My old beat up version of Lost Cities my be traded or gifted away to make more shelf space. This gives the same feeling as Lost Cities, but better. And what's more, you can also play it 3 or 4 players.
Sal Conz not that Arboretum isn’t fantastic (it is!), but if you like Lost Cities, try to track down a copy of Keltis the card game. It’s like Lost Cities to the next level, and was what ultimately replace Lost Cities for me. The only issue is it wasn’t released in the US, so you have to find a foreign (German) version. But it’s a small card game, so it’s not too expensive, and the rules are available on BGG in English.
I saw this card game while looking for a different game entirely, but it looked interesting and I was curious about it. I'm glad that you made a video on it so I can understand it a bit better.
There was? Huh, I did not know that. I will have to watch that video soon, thank you for letting me know about it. I just recently saw the game and try to look up videos for it and found this one.
5:34 IIRC, actually if you managed to get all 8 cards of a tree in your arboretum, you still score it despite having none of it in your hand, because then it's a tie of zero between all players, so everyone gets the right to score it but you're the only player with any points, so it's 8+8+1+2 = 19 pts.
Also if there's a tie for who has the most of a tree in their hand, everyone gets to score --- even if everyone is tied with zero of that tree in their hands. So you could make a path 1-8 of a single tree type and get 19 points, if you're really lucky!
Thanks for the review! Are you planning to review Monsterpocalypse, maybe? As a Warmachine fan I'm looking at it with interest, but for some reason it doesn't get much attention from mainstream reviewers online. I'm surprised the Dice Tower doesn't have a review of MonPoc, even though the game is made in the US.
It's not as good with 2 because you either have the cards or your one opponent does. So by the end, you know if you won or not. With 4, too many suits so its too hard to stop an opponent. 3 is the best balance
I don't get it, the tree art in the new edition is horrible, I went to an art-for-adults classes a decade ago where we were drawing trees and even those were better. This is a huge disservice to the original's art :(
As for discard piles: put the deck in the center of the table and have each players discard pile beside the deck, between them and the deck. That way it’s real easy to see whomst’ve discarded where. Just like a windmill of discard piles in the center, surrounding the draw deck.
Interesting word there... Lol
Whomst've?
Whomst've?
Whomst've?
Who must have. It's a contraction - invented, of course, like all other words.@@mrdaykerry
This game is so good and so cutthroat. After enough plays you really need to read people to figure out what's in their hand in order to do well. So many tough choices every turn yet you're only doing two things. I love it. One of the best card games I've played.
My wife and I really like this game. We find the various mechanisms work well together, and are interesting and challenging.
I think that because of the rule that if no one has a type of tree in their hand at the end of the game, everyone scores that tree type , the most you can score would be 19. But of course that would very rarely happen if ever.
The original card art was fantastic, as well, but I do believe I prefer the new Beth Sobel art. Love this game... and I am usually a hard-sell on card games.
We always have each players discard pile in front of them but up by the draw deck. So there was no confusion what so ever. So in a 4 player game let’s say, there would be the facedown draw deck in the middle with 4 face up discard piles around it. This game is great at 3-4 players no so much at 2.
Yeah, exactly this. I thought the rules actually told you to do this, but maybe not. Each of our discard piles is right up against the draw deck so there is never any confusion.
Only played once but my oh my this game is incredible for how easy it is to teach
As for the confusion with the discard piles, I usually have my discards tapped(tm). Since they aren't the same orientation as the trees in your tableau, there will be less confusion.
You mean flooped(tm)?
You mean in defense position(tm)?
@@revimfadli4666 also a fellow Adventure Time Card Wars gamer? Rare indeed
Tom, you introduced me to Lost Cities MANY years ago in one of your old top 100 of all time videos. Nothing had really replaced Lost Cities for my wife and I..........until now. I just bought Arboretum in this recent re-print and I have to say that there is finally a Lost Cities KILLER. I can confidently say that I will not play Lost Cities if I have Arboretum on me. My old beat up version of Lost Cities my be traded or gifted away to make more shelf space. This gives the same feeling as Lost Cities, but better. And what's more, you can also play it 3 or 4 players.
Sal Conz not that Arboretum isn’t fantastic (it is!), but if you like Lost Cities, try to track down a copy of Keltis the card game. It’s like Lost Cities to the next level, and was what ultimately replace Lost Cities for me. The only issue is it wasn’t released in the US, so you have to find a foreign (German) version. But it’s a small card game, so it’s not too expensive, and the rules are available on BGG in English.
It quickly becomes a game, where you don't want to put any of the cards in your hand into the discard pile - but you still have do to do it.
Loveeee, loveee this game!! Great for 2 players. Highly recommended!
Huh. The Renegade box cover is much prettier, but having gotten a chance to see the trees on the cards here... I'll be keeping my Z-Man edition.
I saw this card game while looking for a different game entirely, but it looked interesting and I was curious about it. I'm glad that you made a video on it so I can understand it a bit better.
there was already a video review of arboretum since 2015
There was? Huh, I did not know that. I will have to watch that video soon, thank you for letting me know about it. I just recently saw the game and try to look up videos for it and found this one.
5:34 IIRC, actually if you managed to get all 8 cards of a tree in your arboretum, you still score it despite having none of it in your hand, because then it's a tie of zero between all players, so everyone gets the right to score it but you're the only player with any points, so it's 8+8+1+2 = 19 pts.
(only player with any of those trees)
@@darbyl3872 Nope, see the "Note 2" entry in the "Gaining the Right to Score Paths" section of the manual.
@@EmrysTernal The parentheses were clarification of what you said. (That's what they are for.) See.
Good looking game that's for sure. thank you Tom 👍👍
We put the draw pile in the middle of the table, and everyone has a discard pile on their side of the draw pile.
Also if there's a tie for who has the most of a tree in their hand, everyone gets to score --- even if everyone is tied with zero of that tree in their hands. So you could make a path 1-8 of a single tree type and get 19 points, if you're really lucky!
Thanks for the review! Are you planning to review Monsterpocalypse,
maybe? As a Warmachine fan I'm looking at it with interest, but for some
reason it doesn't get much attention from mainstream reviewers online.
I'm surprised the Dice Tower doesn't have a review of MonPoc, even though the game is
made in the US.
Where did you get a meeple tie??
It's not as good with 2 because you either have the cards or your one opponent does. So by the end, you know if you won or not. With 4, too many suits so its too hard to stop an opponent. 3 is the best balance
Thats a good game.
I was very meh with this game with 2 players. I would like to try it out with 4 to see the difference.
I pronounced it as "are bore tum"
Here the beautiful, almost relaxed artwork camouflages a gameplay that is stupidly math-y at every turn. A turn off.
I’ve realized I don’t like this company’s games
I don't get it, the tree art in the new edition is horrible, I went to an art-for-adults classes a decade ago where we were drawing trees and even those were better. This is a huge disservice to the original's art :(
I prefer the new edition's art (I think both are good though), but I will admit that the card backs were better in the old edition.
Maybe a case of bad drawing with great colors?