You hit the nail on the head right there. For most groups, this game is asking too much of the players. The game doesn't really shine if you are just playing one-of games every couple of months. It's quirky and interesting but it's not what makes me want to go back to it. The campaign part is where this game is unique, but I don't know many groups that are willing to dedicate the time to just one game. I wanted to like it, I ended up thinking it was okay. I wouldn't mind playing it again in the future, but I sold my copy. For a completely different thought, Stationfall for me is what I wish Oath was. A great game that can be played once in a while and also tells a [funny] story.
@Gabriel I found Stationfall to be a little repetitive. I still love it "once in a while," but I also (personally) enjoy deep dives with games. I prefer exploring a specific game that can be played multiple times within a few months, etc. Stationfall tells fun stories, but for me it loses richness if I return to it that often. @@DriveThruReview Actually, you may be really interested in the next game Cole's doing with Kyle: a space game that takes some elements of the Chronicle system & the fast combat a la Root, to make a campaign-style strategy game that has a structure & ending. E.g., Joe built the death ray in the last game: now in this game, we have the death ray. Sally rescued people from this planet last game, now in this game there are refugees on her ships. This sounds a bit more concrete, perhaps, than what you're finding in Oath. Oath absolutely has consequences & impacts that carry over: the thing is, Oath wants to tell its stories across a long span of time, and not in a preset structure of "acts" (like the upcoming space game, or many legacy/campaign games, etc.) E.g., you might do something that will impact the World Deck, but over time. I wouldn't underestimate this: e.g., if you manage to make Arcane the dominant Suit in the deck, then over the course of 7-8 games you might even set up a situation where you can possibly "lock" the deck into being that way semi-permanently. Which presents some interesting choices for players: because to continue the e.g., in an Arcane-heavy deck, your Darkest Secret games are going to play certain ways b/c of how many Arcane cards interact with it. And that's just that Suit...there are other ways to impact the deck to influence People's Favor games, etc. So, you can really shape your game affecting the deck makeup. But, it happens slowly! Potential impacts ripple across multiple generations, so you might not see them immediately. In this way, you'll have moments of realizing something was caused by decisions made 3-5 generations ago. To quote from one of Cole's diaries, the history is "lossy," in the sense that there's an inexact data loss. I.e., history changes gradually in Oath. It sounds like you appreciate this, but you are also interested in something that will make consequences more immediately visible in the following game session. Well, that will be the space game.
@@matthewjonassaint440 Thanks Matthew. I think that lines up exactly with what I was trying to describe, but in about 15 less minutes :) Definitely interested in that new game!
oath is such a cool idea and it is almost there, but it just misses the mark for me. I am not invested in the game, so all that meta-story/meta-layer doesn't do anything for me. Everything is just too transitory, I don't end up caring much about anything cause too little sticks around or you lost yours things in one turn anyways. But I got a lot of conflicting thoughts about it.
Oath confuses me in a really pleasant way. I’m not sure it’s even a good game, but at the same time I know it’s great. Both seems to be true at the same time.
Oath is a decidedly niche offering from Cole, and I admire the ambitious design even if it does not (or has not yet) deliver on all of its potential. There is a high cognitive burden here and very much like Root, the players who have a reasonable knowledge of the card pool likely have a disproportionate advantage such that mixing new & experienced players might be challenging. While I feel there is a lot of player agency, the effects of victory on subsequent games are frustratingly opaque that counter that same feeling when the world deck is "rebuilt" and cards are shuffled into the dispossessed deck. Do my choices really make a difference, either enhancing my chances for future victories or challenging my opponents? I'm not sure, which is somewhat awkward for a game that advertises its legacy component. The tutorial from Jean-Michel Grosjeu is absolutely outstanding, but takes slightly less time than War & Peace. 😉 I'm still enjoying Oath, although I'm a little perplexed by certain aspects of the intricate mechanics. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Joel!
Good review, i think i get what you're saying about the legacy element, super cool and unique but do people playing the game in the present really care about the starting condition of the next game? say you're playing with Billy and he wins by becoming the successor of the Chancellor, is that motivation for a rematch with the same people with Billy now starting as the Chancellor instead of an Exile? just story flavor so next time anybody plays the same copy of the game you know whoever is the Chancellor is playing Billy's character who ascended to the throne? idk very interesting and creative game though.
I've found that investing in the roleplaying aspect really makes this shine. Kingmaking does more than change the winner, it carries the grudges and alliances forward.
The game reminds me of a different time decades ago when I used to play a lot of Junta. I played every few month with people from pretty stable pool, but it was never the exact same combination of players at the table. Those plays fostered a certain meta without any support or bookkeeping. I think Oath takes this kind of retro way of playing harsh political games and tries to give you just enough to justify your meta and give you some reason to carry it from game to game.
Our group has been enjoying it more with each new play. I like this type of game that encourages immersion through mechanisms, last one was a 4 player game for the first time and third time me being the douchey chancellor, and the amount of betrayals and twists that we experienced (and me in particular, since even my citizen wanted to blatantly take me down) was quite impressive. The only game with a similar feel for me is Pax Renaissance, in how everything is so interlocked and everyone has to be careful of the 4 victory conditions, but with less drama in its emergent narrative...
We're at about the 2.5hr play time mark now at 4p. We have played 5p as well, and it does add that extra 30min or so but the odd person really adds a completely different layer of complexity and interest. This was a good review, Joel.
Thanks for the review. This game is probably too unique for my group but I I enjoyed your thoughts and insight. You remain one of the very best in the hobby. Keep up the great work.
Appreciate your review Joel. Haven't gotten this to the table yet. Have been on the fence on whether or not to crack the shrink or just move it off the shelf. My playgroup is pretty disjointed right now and not sure if I can get them to focus on something longer than two weeks that isn't MTG.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
You hit the nail on the head right there.
For most groups, this game is asking too much of the players. The game doesn't really shine if you are just playing one-of games every couple of months. It's quirky and interesting but it's not what makes me want to go back to it. The campaign part is where this game is unique, but I don't know many groups that are willing to dedicate the time to just one game. I wanted to like it, I ended up thinking it was okay. I wouldn't mind playing it again in the future, but I sold my copy.
For a completely different thought, Stationfall for me is what I wish Oath was. A great game that can be played once in a while and also tells a [funny] story.
Oh. I'll have to check that one out. Thanks.
@Gabriel I found Stationfall to be a little repetitive. I still love it "once in a while," but I also (personally) enjoy deep dives with games. I prefer exploring a specific game that can be played multiple times within a few months, etc. Stationfall tells fun stories, but for me it loses richness if I return to it that often.
@@DriveThruReview Actually, you may be really interested in the next game Cole's doing with Kyle: a space game that takes some elements of the Chronicle system & the fast combat a la Root, to make a campaign-style strategy game that has a structure & ending. E.g., Joe built the death ray in the last game: now in this game, we have the death ray. Sally rescued people from this planet last game, now in this game there are refugees on her ships.
This sounds a bit more concrete, perhaps, than what you're finding in Oath. Oath absolutely has consequences & impacts that carry over: the thing is, Oath wants to tell its stories across a long span of time, and not in a preset structure of "acts" (like the upcoming space game, or many legacy/campaign games, etc.) E.g., you might do something that will impact the World Deck, but over time. I wouldn't underestimate this: e.g., if you manage to make Arcane the dominant Suit in the deck, then over the course of 7-8 games you might even set up a situation where you can possibly "lock" the deck into being that way semi-permanently. Which presents some interesting choices for players: because to continue the e.g., in an Arcane-heavy deck, your Darkest Secret games are going to play certain ways b/c of how many Arcane cards interact with it. And that's just that Suit...there are other ways to impact the deck to influence People's Favor games, etc.
So, you can really shape your game affecting the deck makeup. But, it happens slowly! Potential impacts ripple across multiple generations, so you might not see them immediately. In this way, you'll have moments of realizing something was caused by decisions made 3-5 generations ago. To quote from one of Cole's diaries, the history is "lossy," in the sense that there's an inexact data loss. I.e., history changes gradually in Oath. It sounds like you appreciate this, but you are also interested in something that will make consequences more immediately visible in the following game session. Well, that will be the space game.
@@matthewjonassaint440 Thanks Matthew. I think that lines up exactly with what I was trying to describe, but in about 15 less minutes :)
Definitely interested in that new game!
Future headline: Intruders Force UA-cam Influencer to Play Board Game
LOL
oath is such a cool idea and it is almost there, but it just misses the mark for me. I am not invested in the game, so all that meta-story/meta-layer doesn't do anything for me. Everything is just too transitory, I don't end up caring much about anything cause too little sticks around or you lost yours things in one turn anyways.
But I got a lot of conflicting thoughts about it.
Oath confuses me in a really pleasant way. I’m not sure it’s even a good game, but at the same time I know it’s great. Both seems to be true at the same time.
Yes. 😀
Oath is a decidedly niche offering from Cole, and I admire the ambitious design even if it does not (or has not yet) deliver on all of its potential. There is a high cognitive burden here and very much like Root, the players who have a reasonable knowledge of the card pool likely have a disproportionate advantage such that mixing new & experienced players might be challenging.
While I feel there is a lot of player agency, the effects of victory on subsequent games are frustratingly opaque that counter that same feeling when the world deck is "rebuilt" and cards are shuffled into the dispossessed deck. Do my choices really make a difference, either enhancing my chances for future victories or challenging my opponents? I'm not sure, which is somewhat awkward for a game that advertises its legacy component.
The tutorial from Jean-Michel Grosjeu is absolutely outstanding, but takes slightly less time than War & Peace. 😉 I'm still enjoying Oath, although I'm a little perplexed by certain aspects of the intricate mechanics. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Joel!
Good review, i think i get what you're saying about the legacy element, super cool and unique but do people playing the game in the present really care about the starting condition of the next game? say you're playing with Billy and he wins by becoming the successor of the Chancellor, is that motivation for a rematch with the same people with Billy now starting as the Chancellor instead of an Exile? just story flavor so next time anybody plays the same copy of the game you know whoever is the Chancellor is playing Billy's character who ascended to the throne? idk very interesting and creative game though.
I've found that investing in the roleplaying aspect really makes this shine. Kingmaking does more than change the winner, it carries the grudges and alliances forward.
Ya we tried to get into those aspects. I just kept feeling like I wanted a little layer of bookkeeping to go along with that piece of it.
The game reminds me of a different time decades ago when I used to play a lot of Junta. I played every few month with people from pretty stable pool, but it was never the exact same combination of players at the table. Those plays fostered a certain meta without any support or bookkeeping. I think Oath takes this kind of retro way of playing harsh political games and tries to give you just enough to justify your meta and give you some reason to carry it from game to game.
30:24 interesting how with the new oath expansion you predicted exactly what they are releasing, I can’t wait!
Well now I really regret not backing it :D
Our group has been enjoying it more with each new play. I like this type of game that encourages immersion through mechanisms, last one was a 4 player game for the first time and third time me being the douchey chancellor, and the amount of betrayals and twists that we experienced (and me in particular, since even my citizen wanted to blatantly take me down) was quite impressive. The only game with a similar feel for me is Pax Renaissance, in how everything is so interlocked and everyone has to be careful of the 4 victory conditions, but with less drama in its emergent narrative...
This game just arrived at my house recently and I'm excited to try it out. Looks like it has a Resistance feel to it
love this game
Thank you! Looove Pax Pamir 2nd edition and I have this one waiting on the shelf.
We're at about the 2.5hr play time mark now at 4p. We have played 5p as well, and it does add that extra 30min or so but the odd person really adds a completely different layer of complexity and interest.
This was a good review, Joel.
Thank you. Ya, I would definitely try it with five or six, but only if everyone was savvy :)
Thanks for the review. This game is probably too unique for my group but I I enjoyed your thoughts and insight. You remain one of the very best in the hobby. Keep up the great work.
Thank you Justin. Appreciate it.
Appreciate your review Joel. Haven't gotten this to the table yet. Have been on the fence on whether or not to crack the shrink or just move it off the shelf. My playgroup is pretty disjointed right now and not sure if I can get them to focus on something longer than two weeks that isn't MTG.
Hey Gregg. Long time. Ya Oath is demanding! :)