I'm trying to get back into playing LotR LCG . However, at the same time I keep hearing great things about Gloomhaven . I would love to have a game that I can play in the living room a couple nights a week, either solo or with my girls (9 and 7), that feels episodic, like chapters in a long story, with a sense of progress.

Don't get me wrong, I really like the board games I play with my girls (Ticket to Ride, Carcassonne, Catan, 7 Wonders, Pandemic, etc.) but those games don't give me a sense of progress or "story". They're great for chillin' out, but they don't satisfy my craving for a good story.

I know from my little [20 games or so] experience with LotR LCG that it does, indeed, provide enough "story" for me to feel curious about what happens next. And it definitely gives me a sense of progress when I beat a quest after failing multiple times.

On the downside, it takes me a long time to play (about 2 hours per game), mostly because I don't play often and have to re-learn the rules each time. And when I tried to get my girls to play Passage Through Mirkwood with me, it took even longer, because I had to explain stuff to them, and I still ended up making all the decisions, doing all the calculations, etc. The girls just basically sat there. I suspect it will be a long time before I can teach them enough that they will be active participants and we will have enough momentum for me to not have to be re-learning each time. So maybe it would be best if I just played solo?

And now I am wondering if Gloomhaven has the same issues. Does it take so long to learn that if you put it aside for more than a couple weeks, you end up having to re-teach yourself the game, making games take longer than the estimated "30 minutes per player"? And would it be difficult to teach enough of it to kids so that they can be (or at least feel) involved and not just "sitting there"?

For those of you who have played both, what are your thoughts?

Do you think it makes sense to focus on playing LotR LCG solo, or keep trying to teach the girls? Or should I try Gloomhaven with the girls (or solo) now and then return to LotR LCG later, when the girls are older and more able to deal with the complexity (and have read the books)?

Which game is most rewarding solo vs coop? And which is more replayable, if I opt to go through it solo first, and then coop with the girls later?

If you had LotR LCG, Gloomhaven, and 2 kids (9 and 7) what would you do?

I love Gloomhaven! I don’t know that I would try it with kids those ages though. I would say there’s a lot more turn to turn tactics in Gloomhaven rather than overall strategy so you might end up making the decisions for them even more there.

both are great solo. My main question would be do you enjoy deck building and the puzzle solving elements of that? That’s the biggest difference between the two games for me, I can think about decks and brainstorm swapping in and out cards, whereas Gloomhaven is mostly just on the table if that makes sense.

also set up and take down of gloomhaven is much longer. The story element of Gloomhaven is much more interwoven then the lcg tends to be.

it also depends on your girls and how much experience they have gaming. Do they want to play? Do they have a preference? If they are wanting to learn then definitely stick with it because they will pick up either game eventually if they are working at it.

In summary both great games but I don’t know if either would be great for your girls.

My girls enjoy playing video games (Roblox, LOTRO, and the Sims mostly) and board games (the ones I listed above), especially the 7 year old, who is very mathematical/logical and seems to win most of the games we play together. The 9 year gets bored with abstractions and puzzles (and often takes more coaxing to play board games than the 7 year old), but she loves stories; if she's not playing a game she's reading a book.

My hope is that a really good story-driven game would engage the 9 year old's love of narrative while having the puzzly/strategic aspects which engage the 7 year old.

However, I am worried that LotR LCG and Gloomhaven just have too many rules and exceptions for either girls to feel like they are really "participating" in it. If I'm the only one making decisions, and the only one really understanding the story, then neither girl is going to be enthusiastic about playing often!

If it's just too early for the girls to play either game, then which should I solo first? Does one of them have an edge in terms of replayability when the girls are old enough for me to try again?

I love both games, but for different reasons. LotR is the superior solo experience, in my opinion. I love thinking about deckbuilding in my downtime and trying to figure out how to defeat tough quests. But Gloomhaven is a great group tactical game, and we have a group of four people who play it once a week and have a blast. I don't think I would enjoy it solo.

Both games have a story element to them, but I find the storyline of Gloomhaven to be pretty cheesy. That's okay, though, since the tactics and progression are really what get us coming back for more. LotR's stories are hit or miss sometimes, but at least it feels like a story worth digging into.

Neither game is great for kids. It might be fun to ham it up reading the Gloomhaven story text aloud (a few parts might get a little dark though) and the minis are fun and visceral, but the tactics are really complex and often hard to wrap your mind around. Maybe play it at a lower difficulty or change some rules. With LotR I could see kids getting the hang of it eventually, if you run the encounter deck and they're willing to stick with it.

LotR is infinitely replayable, and remains fun for years. Gloomhaven, however, is one of those games that you put stickers on and change the game state forever, so it probably won't last once you've played it out (although there are probably hundreds of hours of gameplay in the box).

Good luck!

Both great games, but I'll have to echo what's been said so far in that neither are probably suitable for 7-9 year olds, even intelligent, game-loving ones. LotR can be a big ask even for some experienced adults; it was my love for the theme/art that pushed me to get over the hump of learning all those rules and exceptions. The appreciation of all the clever mechanics came later. Most quests are more complex than Passage Through Mirkwood, and deck design - while massively enjoyable once you get into it - is probably an additional case where you would be doing all the work and your girls would have more of a spectator role. And I'm not sure if I speak for most players, but LotR seems less of a casual game that you bring out on occasion - for my girlfriend and I it's almost part of a lifestyle. It'd be a rare week we don't play a few quests, which means the rules do get ingrained. Like other LCGs, it also gets better, more customizable and more replyable as you increase the card pool. I'd say you don't start to see it at its best until you've invested in several deluxe expansions and their full cycles. (Oh, and as I very much share your love of story, I'd recommend you get some of the Lord of the Rings Saga expansions early on - it's very rewarding to link up quests and proceed with the effects/choices of previous ones).

As for Gloomhaven, it shines in a group. It can be enjoyable solo, and does have replayability (though not to the level of LotR), but my advice would be to get a copy and (if you can resist!) put it away for a few years. There is story, but perhaps not quite enough to satisfy your itch, and I think you would run into the same issue of controlling the game too much; like the LotR, it's complex and the difficulty is high, so the need to optimize moves is there. (A co-op game like Eldritch Horror - though maybe not theme-wise - is probably better suited to the three of you at the moment.) But if you're choosing between the two, LotR seems your best bet for now. Play it solo, which can be hugely satisfying, and if you really get into it one or both of your girls may end up joining you eventually. Especially, as you say, if they read the books and fall in love with the world. It would also be a great collection for them to have later on if that does happen.

Okay, thanks for the advice!

I think I'll keep Gloomhaven in the closet (as long as I can resist) and will focus on progressing through LotR LCG solo. If the girls want to join me in a quest here and there, my feeling is it wouldn't be as disruptive as it it would be if I was in the middle of a long Gloomhaven solo campaign.

Does that sound correct?

In both case it wouldn't be disruptive. You can include another player... but it is very different to play solo or multiplayer (in LOTR for sure, in gloomhaven I presume too) so you may loose if you never play this way before ^^

Well, if the kids cause me to lose a quest in LotR LCG, I know I would simply shrug it off and retry that quest later by myself (with or without desk adjustments). I'd never feel like the girls "ruined" things or even slowed down my progress through the series of quests, since I lose all the time in LotR LCG and regard each loss as an opportunity to observe and learn. In other words, there really isn't anything at "stake" when I play a quest in LotR LCG.

With Gloomhaven, however, I'm worried that if I do not "win" (or "maximize") a scenario, I will miss out on something in the long run. This is based on my experience with video games, which often have bonus rewards for finishing missions quickly or completing optional objectives. Would bringing "weaker" players on a Gloomhaven mission potentially cause you to "miss out" on a some of the rewards or content? Or is Gloomhaven like LotR LCG in that any rewards (or opened up content) for beating a scenario are always the same, no matter how sloppy or close your victory?

(Also, can characters "permanently" die or get hurt in Gloomhaven? Or is it like hero death and damage in a LotR LCG, where once you beat a quest all your heroes are magically healed/resurrected?)

This is totally unsolicited advice, but you may look at Mice and Mystics or Stuffed Fables as co-op, story based adventure Games to play with your daughters. They're both very child friendly themes (one is simliar to Redwall and the other has you playing as stuffed animals protecting a little girl) and are quite a bit lighter on rules than LOTR LCG or Gloomhaven.

I know you asked about the other two specifically, but thought I'd throw these out as they might be what you are looking for.

Cheers!

Thanks for mentioning those 2 games. I'm checking them out now.

Have you played one or both of them? If so, which was your favorite? And which would serve as a more effective "lead-in" to either LotR LCG or Gloomhaven?

26 minutes ago, tripecac said:

With Gloomhaven, however, I'm worried that if I do not "win" (or "maximize") a scenario, I will miss out on something in the long run. This is based on my experience with video games, which often have bonus rewards for finishing missions quickly or completing optional objectives. Would bringing "weaker" players on a Gloomhaven mission potentially cause you to "miss out" on a some of the rewards or content? Or is Gloomhaven like LotR LCG in that any rewards (or opened up content) for beating a scenario are always the same, no matter how sloppy or close your victory?

(Also, can characters "permanently" die or get hurt in Gloomhaven? Or is it like hero death and damage in a LotR LCG, where once you beat a quest all your heroes are magically healed/resurrected?)

If you fail a scenario in Gloomhaven, you reset it and try again, keeping any loot and XP you gained. So it's pretty forgiving. You can miss out on things - notably some unique loot in chests - if you don't grab it before you finish. Gloomhaven ends when it ends, and you don't get to collect anything that's on the board. A lot of people dislike that, but IMHO it creates a nice tension between finishing the scenario and getting everything, must like Arkham Horror LCG does.

There is no permanent negative to your character in Gloomhaven. Some events can cost you a little side progress, but that's generally minimal.

I love both games, but for different reasons. Gloomhaven is - BY FAR - the better campaign experience. It's honestly integral. I won't recommend it to anyone who can't manage a consistent group. In the actual gameplay, they're different enough that you can't really compare them. Gloomhaven will give more direct game time, even with it's hefty setup time, but whether that's good or bad probably depends on how much you enjoy deckbuilding, and whether you'd rather do that than play.

I'll agree with the above though - at 7 and 9, I'd say your kids are too young for Gloomhaven. The gameplay has a certain MMO-like flavor to it, in that your core tactics often come down to exploiting the AI. The rules for how monsters act can often be cryptic and if you don't understand them you'll get wrecked, which can be frustrating.

Okay, I ordered "Mice and Mystics" and "Stuffed Fables". I'll play those with the girls first, and then, by the time we're done with those (and any expansions), we'll be ready to tackle LotR LCG or Gloomhaven.

14 hours ago, tripecac said:

Thanks for mentioning those 2 games. I'm checking them out now.

Have you played one or both of them? If so, which was your favorite? And which would serve as a more effective "lead-in" to either LotR LCG or Gloomhaven?

Sorry for the late reply! Was in the car all day....

I think they are both great games and have tried them both with my kids. Stuffed Fables is lighter on rules than Mice and Mystics. Personally, we are working on a family Stuffed Fables playthrough first, then tackling M&M.

Hope you and your girls enjoy them!

One other idea about LOTR...my kids can't quite sit through a game without getting bored, but both of them have really enjoyed building decks around themes they like (eagles and ents for my son, anll female chars for my daughter). Might be a fun, exercise for you and your daughters.

Okay, so even though Stuffed Fables is newer, do you recommend playing it first, and then doing M&M later? I wasn't sure if SF was a "sequel" to M&M or not (sort of like how Forbidden Desert is a "sequel" to Forbidden Island in that it adds complexity and difficulty to the game).

Also, out of curiosity, did you paint your M&M/SF figures? Or did you let the kids do it? I saw some awesome looking paint jobs when I was researching the game yesterday, but it's hard to imagine little kids having enough dexterity and patience to paint those figures accurately!

They are totally separate fictions, so no worries playing them in any order or playing one and not the other.

I do not have painted figures...would love them, but I definitely don't have the skill/patience to do it!

We've been playing Stuffed Fables. The kids are excited and even my partner is joining in.

However, we're a bit "stalled" at the moment because I'm having trouble interpreting some of the card rules. As with LotR LCG, sometimes the instructions on the cards can be interpreted in multiple ways, and I do not like continuing until I've read an the "official" (or at least "consensus") ruling which removes any ambiguity.

For example, pretty soon after starting, we were engaged by a "Mongrel Leader" card, which has an action called "Chilling Howl"; for this action, the mongrel does not move, but does have a special instruction:

"After this mongrel attacks, discard all dice stored on stuffy cards, except blue dice."

So immediately I had these questions:

1) If this minion is not already adjacent to a stuffy, then it cannot "attack" during its turn, correct?

2) If it does not attack, then does the instruction ("after this mongrel attacks...") not trigger? In other words, if the mongrel leader isn't close enough to attack a stuffy, then will Chilling Howl cause the mongrel leader to do nothing that turn?

3) If, instead, the mongrel leader is already adjacent to a stuffy, then does the "after this mongrel attacks" instruction always trigger, even if the stuffy blocks/avoids the attack using defensive dice? Or does the attack have to succeed (damage a stuffy) in order for the instruction to trigger?

4) If the "after this mongrel attacks" instruction triggers, then do *all* stuffies in play lose dice on their stuffy cards, or only the stuffy that got attacked?

The card's instruction says "stuffy cards" (plural) but there is a marketing page on Plaid Hat's site which says "stuffy" (singular):

https://www.plaidhatgames.com/news/844

"Their leader's chilling howl will make a stuffy freeze in its tracks and lower his defenses."

This implies only one stuffy (presumably, the target of the attack) has to remove dice. But the card itself says "stuffy cards" (plural).

5) What is a "stuffy card"? Is that what the rule book labels a "character card" on page 3? What about a status card (like "Courageous"). Is that a "stuffy card", from which dice need to be removed by the mongrel leader's Chilling Howl?

And so on. We've had other questions pop up since then. Lots of different interpretations, lots of head-scratching and wondering what is the intent of the wording.

I've read some unofficial Stuffed Fables FAQs, and posted questions on the BGG forum for it, but so far haven't received any answers.

So I am wondering:

Is rule ambiguity a "problem" of many cooperative games (like Stuffed Fables, LotR LCG, etc.) because the rules haven't been aggressively edited in order to "survive" the scrutiny of a competitive environment? And are coop kids' games the "sloppiest" of all, because the game designers are trying to keep the "nitpicky" wording to a minimum?

Also, could a "justification" of cooperative games' rule ambiguity be: leaving rule interpretation up to the discretion of the reader allows the reader to adjust the difficulty in the desired direction (lenient interpretation when playing with kids, harsh interpretation when trying to maximize game play) and/or optimise the sense of immersion (e.g., "the mongrel howls loudly, but no one is close enough to hear it over the din of battle, so no one gets scared.")?

And finally, how do you hand "slack" in LotR LCG rules? Do you favour the lenient interpretations, or the harsh ones, or do you always go on the forum and look for a consensus?

In LotR, always go with the ruling that hurts the players the most. It's almost always the correct ruling. But definitely check/post here first. You'll usually get a quick answer. You can always submit an official question.

I can't help you with your Stuffed Fables questions.

19 hours ago, tripecac said:

Is  rule ambiguity a "problem" of many cooperative games (like Stuffed Fables, LotR LCG,  etc.) because the rules haven't been aggressively edited in order to "survive" the scrutiny of a competitive environment?

As an fan of several FFG games, including X-Wing and A:NR (RIP), I will say that for this company at least, it is equal-opportunity in its rules ambiguities, lol—co-op vs. competitive does not figure into it.

A glance at Plaid Hat's FAQ for their competitive Ashes: Rise of the Phoenixborn also shows that a whole lot of ambiguities needed clarification there.

Okay, so you think rule ambiguity is more related to the designer/publisher than the cooperative-vs-competitive aspect?

Is there a certain type of player that doesn't mind rule ambiguity and are perfectly comfortable inventing their own "house rules" (which may or may not be consistent from session to session or even turn to turn)?

Would demographic be kids, perhaps?

And maybe the subset of parents who are able to set aside any OCD tendencies in order to enjoy some family bonding time?

If Stuffed Fables is anything like Mice & Mystics, then the rules won't trouble themselves to explain a lot of edge cases, but it won't be the sort of game where it's really worth worrying too much. Resolve rules questions quickly and arbitrarily and get back to having some light fun.

I like the "hurt the players the most" tie-breaking philosophy because it's simple, fast, and teaches tighter game play. Doing the opposite (favoring the player) seems like "cheating", and being inconsistent seems weird.

However, I'm wondering whether "hurt the players the most" will work okay with kids' games like Stuffed Fables and Mice & Mystics. Are those games' rule ambiguities relatively rare "edge cases" or are they so common and severe that we'd end up losing excessively, resulting in frustration, boredom, and/or tears?

Oh, I was mostly talking about how LotR questions are usually ruled. That philosophy probably doesn't (might not?) apply to Stuffed Fables or M and Ms.