$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 126.77

7,525 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
47.4% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

Legends of Andor» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Not A Legend In My Book - Unfortunately. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: Legends_of_Andor [+] [View All]
Jeff
Canada
Ontario
flag msg tools
There's no simple explanation for anything important any of us do, and yeah the human tragedy consists of the necessity of living with the consequences, under pressure, under pressure. -Courage (For Hugh Maclennan): The Tragically Hip
badge
We're forced to bed, but we're free to dream. -Gift Shop: The Tragically Hip
mbmbmbmbmb
Legends of Andor is a fantasy based co-op game with a euro bent. In it players are trying to defend the castle of Andor from hoards of invading creatures, while also attempting to complete side missions.

The game is very innovative in that it is episode based, and the episodes teach you the game as you go. In particular episode one, or rather legend one, teaches placement of pieces out on the board, and how they are used, etc. Another innovation is that the game uses two time tracks. One track shows you how much time you have left in a day, or round. The other one shows how many rounds are left before the game ends. It's this second track that posses a great problem for players. You see, as the monsters steadily march toward the castle only a small number can get in before the castle is overrun. If it is ever overrun the players lose. So, you must kill monsters off. However, every time you kill a monster it advances the round track, leaving players with fewer rounds to accomplish their goals. So, when it comes to killing monsters you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. This aspect of the game makes Legends of Andor very difficult to win. The game is essentially a giant moving puzzle where players must work against time, and space, to do all the things they need to do.

Legends of Andor sports maybe the most beautiful game board ever created. It is a sprawling vista of the land of Andor - on one side. The other side depicts the underground caves that exist beneath the mountains. All the pieces, in fact, are very well rendered.

I like Legends of Andor. I wish I loved it, but I don't. It all comes down to that round track. I feel like the game is cheating me. I have no choice but to kill monsters to protect the castle, but every time I do the game takes another round away from me in which to complete my mission(s). Bad form, I say. Bad form.
6 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Kundlak
Slovakia
Bratislava
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I would not say "bad form". Only "different form".

There is a load of amerithrash-y dungeon crawlers and adventure games, where you can hack and slash as many monsters as you can stomach.

And that is precisely why I love Legends of Andor - that it is different and you have to think diffeently while playing it. And that the Legend cards let you live through a story - or create a new one from scratch.

To each his own!
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wolfram Troeder
Germany
Bruchkoebel
Hessen
flag msg tools
Boardgaming is not a matter of life or death...
badge
...it's much more important than that!
mbmbmbmbmb
Killing someone is not a solution, it is a problem.
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Calvin Le Huray
Jersey
St. Johns
United Kingdom
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Maximuss wrote:


I like Legends of Andor. I wish I loved it, but I don't. It all comes down to that round track. I feel like the game is cheating me. I have no choice but to kill monsters to protect the castle, but every time I do the game takes another round away from me in which to complete my mission(s). Bad form, I say. Bad form.


I understand your woes, the front cover of the game suggests a dungeon crawl like game, but the reality is it is nothing like that at all.

When I played it for the first time I found it a pleasant surprise, it has become my favourite co-op game and I can't wait for the expansions.

Horses for courses; I can see it is not for everyone.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Mahr
Austria
flag msg tools
"Andor" is not a Tower Defence with side missions. Like your regular fantasy game, where some big baddie threatens the world, but he is nice enough to wait in his dungeon, giving you all the time to "level up" by killing swamp rats and fetching cats from the tree for the village barber to get all the "experience" for killing the boss at the glimpse of your eyes.

In "Andor" what you call the side missions are just as vital important as defending the castle, because evil will not wait for you. Yes, you don't have time to kill all the monsters. Yes, you do not get all the gold to make fighting the "Legend Bosses" a piece of cake. But if you observe the movement pattern and determine, which monsters to pick for a fight, so that not all of them run into the castle at once, the game is beatable.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Jacobs
United States
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
Maximuss wrote:
You see, as the monsters steadily march toward the castle only a small number can get in before the castle is overrun. If it is ever overrun the players lose. So, you must kill monsters off. However, every time you kill a monster it advances the round track, leaving players with fewer rounds to accomplish their goals.


I think this is interesting because you've just summed up the intentional puzzle at the core of the game.

And I think it's a polarizing one. If what you've described doesn't sound like and interesting or enjoyable one for you or your group to solve, there's just no way you're going to get much fun out of this game.

I disagree this is "bad form." It's simply a puzzle you don't like.

It is a well designed puzzle, and people who enjoy solving that particular puzzle are going to be the fans of the game.

It is, however, a very different kind of puzzle than one usually expects from a game with this presentation, so I can understand when so many people are disappointed with it.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Morro Bay
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
mournful wrote:
Maximuss wrote:
You see, as the monsters steadily march toward the castle only a small number can get in before the castle is overrun. If it is ever overrun the players lose. So, you must kill monsters off. However, every time you kill a monster it advances the round track, leaving players with fewer rounds to accomplish their goals.

I think this is interesting because you've just summed up the intentional puzzle at the core of the game.

I agree. But other co-ops offer similar choices. People don't seem to be bothered by them, presumably because of the theming.

In Pandemic, you might want to eradicate the diseases. But you generally can't, because while you're clearing out all the blues, the other colors will explode and you'll lose.

In Arkham Horror, you might want to defeat every monster that comes on the board. But you generally can't, because there are other pressures that you can't ignore.

You can't ignore the cubes in Pandemic, or (some of) the monster in AH. But you have to avoid putting too much energy into them. The same is true with Andor. It's just more explicit, and unexpected.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian M
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
peakhope wrote:
mournful wrote:
Maximuss wrote:
You see, as the monsters steadily march toward the castle only a small number can get in before the castle is overrun. If it is ever overrun the players lose. So, you must kill monsters off. However, every time you kill a monster it advances the round track, leaving players with fewer rounds to accomplish their goals.

I think this is interesting because you've just summed up the intentional puzzle at the core of the game.

I agree. But other co-ops offer similar choices. People don't seem to be bothered by them, presumably because of the theming.

In Pandemic, you might want to eradicate the diseases. But you generally can't, because while you're clearing out all the blues, the other colors will explode and you'll lose.

In Arkham Horror, you might want to defeat every monster that comes on the board. But you generally can't, because there are other pressures that you can't ignore.

You can't ignore the cubes in Pandemic, or (some of) the monster in AH. But you have to avoid putting too much energy into them. The same is true with Andor. It's just more explicit, and unexpected.

There is a radical difference between the choices in Pandemic, Ghost Stories and most other co-ops and Andor.

In most of those games, you are faced with time pressure that flows in a reasonable and thematic manner and requires you to trade off and decide where to focus your attention.

In Andor, you are faced with a completely arbitrary mechanic that causes time to jump ahead when you defeat monsters, and requires you to literally spend turns just passing your turn because there is nothing useful to do.

"Time is running out! I better get the resources to cure that disease!" That's Pandemic.

"Time is running out! I better twiddle my thumbs and do nothing!" That's Andor.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Calvin Le Huray
Jersey
St. Johns
United Kingdom
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
StormKnight wrote:
peakhope wrote:
mournful wrote:
Maximuss wrote:
You see, as the monsters steadily march toward the castle only a small number can get in before the castle is overrun. If it is ever overrun the players lose. So, you must kill monsters off. However, every time you kill a monster it advances the round track, leaving players with fewer rounds to accomplish their goals.

I think this is interesting because you've just summed up the intentional puzzle at the core of the game.

I agree. But other co-ops offer similar choices. People don't seem to be bothered by them, presumably because of the theming.

In Pandemic, you might want to eradicate the diseases. But you generally can't, because while you're clearing out all the blues, the other colors will explode and you'll lose.

In Arkham Horror, you might want to defeat every monster that comes on the board. But you generally can't, because there are other pressures that you can't ignore.

You can't ignore the cubes in Pandemic, or (some of) the monster in AH. But you have to avoid putting too much energy into them. The same is true with Andor. It's just more explicit, and unexpected.

There is a radical difference between the choices in Pandemic, Ghost Stories and most other co-ops and Andor.

In most of those games, you are faced with time pressure that flows in a reasonable and thematic manner and requires you to trade off and decide where to focus your attention.

In Andor, you are faced with a completely arbitrary mechanic that causes time to jump ahead when you defeat monsters, and requires you to literally spend turns just passing your turn because there is nothing useful to do.

"Time is running out! I better get the resources to cure that disease!" That's Pandemic.

"Time is running out! I better twiddle my thumbs and do nothing!" That's Andor.


Or complete one of the ever evolving objectives, which is what makes this game so fun. Those other games, from turn one, tell you how to finish the game, but in Andor the story evolves and your objectives change making it a much ,much more interesting game. And one of the few co-op games with a real narrative.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Morro Bay
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
StormKnight wrote:
In most of those games, you are faced with time pressure that flows in a reasonable and thematic manner and requires you to trade off and decide where to focus your attention.

In Andor, you are faced with a completely arbitrary mechanic that causes time to jump ahead when you defeat monsters, and requires you to literally spend turns just passing your turn because there is nothing useful to do.

I don't think I have ever passed a single turn in Andor because there was nothing to do, let alone multiple. Once in a while, I stand still for an hour to give another hero time to meet me. But I view that as a planning failure, not a flaw of the game.

Thematically, killing monsters agitates the big bad boss, causing him or her to speed up their plans. Seems reasonable.

Thematically, a single battle with a monster is worth a scene in a play. So it makes sense that the NARRATOR who is retelling this LEGEND would advance at that point.

You might find it unreasonable, but it's arguably thematic, if you squint. Meanwhile, in Pandemic you can lose even if there are no disease cubes left on the board. Pandemic also has the completely un-thematic set collection and limits on information (card) sharing. Every game bends the theme in favor of gameplay in some way.

I go back to: almost every co-op puts pressure on you to accomplish more than you think you can, in less time than you think you need. This particular mechanism irritates more people because it feels odd thematically. But mechanically it's not that different.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
corum irsei
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
StormKnight wrote:
In Andor, you are faced with a completely arbitrary mechanic that causes time to jump ahead when you defeat monsters, and requires you to literally spend turns just passing your turn because there is nothing useful to do.
That comment really surprises me. I don't think that ever happened in any of the games I've played.

I'd argue, you've been doing something wrong. In my experience every turn your actions need to be carefully optimized and you also need a cohesive strategy in order to be successful in the game.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Mahr
Austria
flag msg tools
No rule mistake regarding this. Peakhope is right. It is possible, that you have to pass a turn, if you need to meet an other hero, may it be for fighting or exchanging goods without falcon. But this is always the result of bad planing ahead. And by the way, thematic too. You just have to "wait an hour", if you did not meet at the same spot in time.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian M
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm surprised that people haven't just passed turns, and I'm possibly even more surprised that people would consider it "bad planning".

One player is busy carrying McGuffin A to point B. That will win the game. The other player can't help the McGuffin go any faster; only one player can carry it. All the other player can do to help is fight monsters, but at a point there's no longer a need to fight monsters and fighting more will just cause turns to vanish. So that player just sits around and literally does nothing, because there is nothing for them left to do.

Quote:
Every game bends the theme in favor of gameplay in some way.

Sure, but most people don't claim that Pandemic is such an amazing game because of how thematic it is that you need 5 cards of one color.

Quote:
And one of the few co-op games with a real narrative.

"Take Object A to point B while a stream of monsters approaches the castle and we invite several of them in for tea?"

I guess maybe my expectations of what "narrative" is are just unreasonably high, but that seems pretty much like bottom of the barrel to me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Morro Bay
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
StormKnight wrote:
One player is busy carrying McGuffin A to point B. That will win the game. The other player can't help the McGuffin go any faster; only one player can carry it. All the other player can do to help is fight monsters, but at a point there's no longer a need to fight monsters and fighting more will just cause turns to vanish. So that player just sits around and literally does nothing, because there is nothing for them left to do.

Hmmm. I sure haven't seen anything like that recently. From memory, maybe that sounds like maybe Legend 1, without a falcon? Most of our games have ended with a big battle. Have you tried Legend 3 (the "replayable" legend with variable setup and end conditions)? This is definitely a game that shouldn't be judged without playing that legend, because it is so different from the others, and plays out more along the lines of other co-ops.

EDIT: Also, a player can move as far as they want in a single turn. Why would the other players sit and do nothing for multiple turns in a row?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Mahr
Austria
flag msg tools
peakhope wrote:
StormKnight wrote:
One player is busy carrying McGuffin A to point B. That will win the game. The other player can't help the McGuffin go any faster; only one player can carry it. All the other player can do to help is fight monsters, but at a point there's no longer a need to fight monsters and fighting more will just cause turns to vanish. So that player just sits around and literally does nothing, because there is nothing for them left to do.

Hmmm. I sure haven't seen anything like that recently. From memory, maybe that sounds like maybe Legend 1, without a falcon?
Well, there is no falcon in Legend 1. But it is true, this also appeared in our game of Legend 4.
Spoiler (click to reveal)
There was no point, all 4 characters walk back through the lake, delivering the jewels at the exit. So only one of us was assisting removing the rubble out of the path.

But I would call this a really minor problem. (If you insist on calling it a problem at all.) It only affects maybe a minute of game play in this particular legend. And besides, just because the characters on the board are not longer involved in the game play, does not mean, the players aren't either.

I also had an "unpleasant surprise" in the game, in which we have beaten Legend 3.
Spoiler (click to reveal)
I was the dwarf, had loads of strength, then it turned out, the boss foe multiplied the strength of the players involved in the fight, so I could not participate in the final fight.

Was kind of annoying, but then, there was still something useful to do to help as "body building errand boy", and it did not bother me really, because we finally beat the game on this legend.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian M
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
peakhope wrote:
StormKnight wrote:
One player is busy carrying McGuffin A to point B. That will win the game. The other player can't help the McGuffin go any faster; only one player can carry it. All the other player can do to help is fight monsters, but at a point there's no longer a need to fight monsters and fighting more will just cause turns to vanish. So that player just sits around and literally does nothing, because there is nothing for them left to do.

Hmmm. I sure haven't seen anything like that recently. From memory, maybe that sounds like maybe Legend 1, without a falcon? Most of our games have ended with a big battle. Have you tried Legend 3 (the "replayable" legend with variable setup and end conditions)? This is definitely a game that shouldn't be judged without playing that legend, because it is so different from the others, and plays out more along the lines of other co-ops.

EDIT: Also, a player can move as far as they want in a single turn. Why would the other players sit and do nothing for multiple turns in a row?


Been way too long to remember which one. I think it happened in at least two games.

But what would the player have done besides sit around doing nothing? There was simply nothing else TO do.

(And I'm pretty sure moving costs time, but that's beside the point - it's not like they were doing anything else with the time )

Quote:
I also had an "unpleasant surprise" in the game, in which we have beaten Legend 3.

Yeah, there was that to. That idiotic "draw a card and discover that you lose because you are TOO powered up". Pure idiotic trial and error stupidity.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Mahr
Austria
flag msg tools
Well, like I wrote, we did not loose that game because of that particular card, I was just "player eliminated" of some kind for the final battle. (And we wasted some coins. My personal task required me to level up to a degree, but I was way overpowered for the needs of it, with the thought in mind, we could use it for the boss fight.) But according to the BGG wiki entry, that's one of the cards, were FFG botched the translation in the first English edition. So maybe you got it wrong because of that? But for that, the game can be hardly blamed, just the former American publisher itself.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Morro Bay
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Susumu wrote:
But according to the BGG wiki entry, that's one of the cards, were FFG botched the translation in the first English edition.

Oh, wow. I assumed party strength meant everyone. We hit that card last time we played, and it would have been much much easier for
Spoiler (click to reveal)
a 2-strength hero to fight a 4-strength gor than for both of us to take on the 22-strength gor together.
We still won, though. I might continue to play with our original interpretation as a houserule to maintain the challenge.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ares dante
msg tools
peakhope wrote:
[q="StormKnight"]
Thematically, a single battle with a monster is worth a scene in a play. So it makes sense that the NARRATOR who is retelling this LEGEND would advance at that point.


No it does not make sens and it is not thematic. Its just a game mechanism, nothing more.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Kundlak
Slovakia
Bratislava
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
peakhope wrote:

Thematically, a single battle with a monster is worth a scene in a play. So it makes sense that the NARRATOR who is retelling this LEGEND would advance at that point.

suella4ever wrote:

No it does not make sens and it is not thematic. Its just a game mechanism, nothing more.

Yeah, it does... a monster figurine does not represent "1 monster", but rather an "enemy", which can be one or multiple ones (a band etc...). Therefore a battle represents a clash between a hero (or heroes) and monsters. Summed up, the narrator advances as the result of a clash between these two sides, not just because a hero killed one wolf.

But it is not a dungeon delver, no. Therefore you cannot approach it as such.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dmitriy Razumov
Russia
Vladimir
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
suella4ever wrote:
peakhope wrote:
[q="StormKnight"]
Thematically, a single battle with a monster is worth a scene in a play. So it makes sense that the NARRATOR who is retelling this LEGEND would advance at that point.


No it does not make sens and it is not thematic. Its just a game mechanism, nothing more.


Consider it like evil overlord or dungeon master who reacts when you kill a monster: speed up evil actions and send new creatures.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.