War of the Ring (Second Edition)
The WAR OF THE RING is a grand strategy board game that allows its players to immerse themselves in the world of J.R.R. Tolkien’s THE LORD OF THE RINGS and experience its epic action, dramatic conflict, and memorable characters.
150m - 180m
2 - 4 Players
Ages 13+
ajewo
War of the Ring is a complex, long, epic, strategic dudes on the map war game for two players telling the Lord of the Rings saga by Ares Games (This War of Mine, Swords & Sorcery, Wings of Glory). This review will give a major summary of the game, not all rules or elements may be covered. [b]What makes it special?[/b] * Thematic: covers the whole epic story and most characters of the Lord of the Ring * Dice-driven action selection with multi-used dice * Hand management with unique, multi-used cards (for either event or combat) * Asymmetric gameplay: defensive free people vs aggressive shadow player * The hunt for the Ring layered on top of a war game including fellowship management * Multiple win conditions: hunt for the Ring vs military win [b]Pros:[/b] + Artwork Characters are drawn (no pictures of the movies). The artwork for the cards and the map is very clear, clean, and well formatted. + Very thematic Captures the whole story of Lord of the Ring including most characters, the hunt for the ring, and the war between the nations. Event cards represent certain story points of the book. The characters have different abilities and stats according to the books. + Components Plenty of individual plastic minis (for each faction). Custom dice for both players. Standard white combat dice. Oversized cards. Quite inexpensive for so many miniatures. The big main board and the minis create a very epic table presence. + Multi-used dice for action selection Bother players roll action dice at the beginning of each round. Alternating, both players spend a die to do an action depending on the shown symbol. Most symbols allow different actions to choose from. The free people player can spend Elven rings (once per round and up to 3 for the whole game) to rotate an action die to any side. However, these rings are handed to the Shadow player who than can spend these rings as well to manipulate an action die (luck mitigation, decision-making when to spend the limited ability). + Finding a balance between war and hunt for the Ring The shadow player has to decide to sacrifice action dice for the hunt for the Ring to increase the odds and the pressure on the free people player. The Shadow player immediately wins if the end of the hunt track is reached. In my opinion, this interwoven hunt mechanic in a themed war game is what makes this game so good. + Very strategic The politics track simulates that factions are passive at the beginning of the game and do not act yet because they are not convinced of the peril. Each nations must be activated and move along a track to be "at war" to remove the movement and recruitment limitation. Leaders are a good investment for dice reroll and more flexible army movement. Another important factor is that the deployment and movement of troops takes time. Furthermore, you can recruit companions and minions. In addition to new abilities, some also offer additional action dice for the rest of the game. + Fellowship hidden movement The fellowship move in a kind of hidden way on the map but may be revealed several times during the game. If revealed they are exposed for certain event cards of the shadow player (it is not a hidden movement deduction game like Sherlock Holmes or Star Wars: Rebellion). The free people player may move the unrevealed fellowship multiple times in a round. However, each time the odds get worse for being hunted. The number of Eye dice spent by the shadow player should also be taken into account (push your luck). The result of a successful hunt is determined by drawing a random token which may reveal the fellowship and advance the hunt track (or cause damage / sacrifices). + Asymmetric gameplay The free people permanently loose units in battle. The shadow player can infinitely spawn new troops. Both players have different win conditions. The free people play more defensively, they try to keep losses at bay, stalling the enemy, and hold their keeps. Moreover, the fellowship needs to be moved to Mount Doom. They may try to win by a military victory which is quite hard to achieve. The shadow player tries to conquer strongholds to score points for a military victory as well as to cut off and hunt down the fellowship before they reach Mount Doom. Both players have different decks of cards and a different number of action dice. + Both sides feel very balanced. + Fellowship management The free people player manages the members of the fellowship and may play event cards to separate particular characters from the fellowship. The leading character can be chosen who for the fellowship who grants a special ability each round. Moreover, characters in the fellowship can be permanently sacrificed to prevent the hunt track to advance. + Unique, multiple-use cards Each player draws cards from two decks. Each card is unique. One deck mainly effects characters and the fellowship, the other deck effects troops and war efforts. However, some cards may lead to scripted gameplay, e.g., move Gandalf the Grey to Fangorn. I like that players can impact the battle by playing one card at the start of each combat round, especially because these cards have multiple uses (combat or event). + Hand management with multiple-used cards Both players draw one cards each round from both decks. Action dice can be spent to draw more cards. The player has to choose from which deck (strategic decision). Each card has a upper event ability and a lower combat ability. Both players have to decide how to use a card: either for event or ability (decision-making). The hand limit is 7, so players are induce to play cards and try to prevent to be forced to discard cards. The decks are shuffled, so that players draw them in different order each game which makes the available options different in each game and provides replayability. Players may know the cards in their deck but they do not know when they will come up. Thus, they have to adjust their strategies. The impact of a card highly depends on the right timing which is a big part of the game and the strategy. The cards provide a lot of replayability and fascination by exploring new strategies to play the game. [b]Neutrals:[/b] # Language dependent A lot of different ability text on the unique cards. # Luck of the draw The timing for drawing certain cards can have a big impact here. Some cards are better or useless in the beginning or in certain situations. After a successful hunt, a corruption token is randomly drawn and may cause different effects. Depending on the timing, the damage can be big or low. # Combat based on dice Depending on the number of units, both players roll up to five D6 dice. Hits are usually done by rolling a 5 or 6 (defending keeps and cards effects may change that). The shadow player must spend elite units to hold a siege in combat. Each present leader allows to re-roll a combat die and also grant special combat abilities. Since combat highly depends on die rolls, it can sometimes lead to very swingy outcomes (uncertainty). # Long playing time and slow pace At least 3 hours. Slow movement pace for the shadow player and the fellowship - you see armies coming and have some time to react. Both players can get more action dice over the course of the game which makes rounds even longer. It is a big epic game. # Table space Requires some table space due to the big main board # Expansions available They add even more (small, hard to remember) rules, units, and cards (replayability, variability, strategies, and complexity). The Lords of Middle-earth expansion is the best of the three. # Big box Quite big game box that requires some shelf space # Map can be hard to read There are a lot of minis that cover up the location names and fortress symbols on the map. The shadow player can replace the minis with up to three army tokens for better ease of use. However, it gets better better the more familiar you become with the map. Also annoying: the map consists of two parts that may slide and may form a crack in the middle. Improvement: the bigger map of the deluxe edition or the playmat (the playmat is quite expensive for its quality). I highly recommend 3D mountains upgrades (e. g., from Etsy) which make the map easier to read. [b]Cons:[/b] - Hard to learn The rules are complex: there are many small rules to remember and many special abilities (what is the special ability of this character?). Some cards effects require or benefit from characters in a certain location. If you know these cards, you can position them in advance. Usability: There are no hints on cards where a mentioned region is located on the board and there are quite many. Symbols for the unnamed faction tokens need to be learnt. - Hard to distinguish (unpainted) miniatures Army minis are hard to distinguish because they all have the same color (red or blue). Painting them would help a lot but is also expensive (Anniversary edition) or time-consuming. - Long set-up Placing all the different minis on the board. It would have helped if the starting units have been printed on the board. - Mount Doom track is too indirect and can be swingy Tokens are drawn from the bag that manipulates the corruption track. The chances can be passively manipulated by putting additional tokens into the bag. However, it still feels indirect and swingy, especially if you draw multiple bad or good tokens in a row. I hate the "roll a d6" hunt token... The game finale thus feels rather out of control. - Little luck mitigation Luck is based on multiple factors in this game: roll for action and combat dice, luck of the draw for event cards and corruption hunt tokens. The action selection and combat depends on dice rolls. Players have some abilities, e.g., Elven rings, Joker symbol, leaders, and event cards to mitigate the luck of a roll but very bad rolls in a row or at certain times may be quite devastating. For example, sometimes the Shadow player only rolls eye symbols and thus cannot do much in a turn. Still, the dice rolls create tension and uncertainty. - Rare rules reminder The game could be more approachable by putting rules reminder or even pictures on cards and/or board. - No artwork I miss artwork on the event cards. [b]Thoughts:[/b] War of the Ring is Lord of the Ring in a box. [b]Similar games:[/b] * War of the Ring: The Card Game * Star Wars: Rebellion (2 players only, cat and mouse gameplay with more deduction: find the hidden rebel's base, hand management, stone-paper-scissors combat with rolling dice, less overall randomness, long playing time, complex but more easier to teach, learn, and play) * The Battle of Five Armies (2 players only, spin-off, more focus on combat, potential quicker playing time, less complex, story plays during The Hobbit) * The Games of Middle Earth (2 players only)
afafard
Finaly managed to get the beast on the table. This is an epic game in all aspects and regards. The rulebook is almost as daunting as the actual Lord of the Ring trilogy. We had to refer to it so often that it almost felt like a court debate. The game is also very long. On the good side, the narrative is very real. It is Lord of the Ring in a box. Both players are on the edge of their seats in the final rounds, waiting to see if the armies of Sauron will crush the Free People before the ring is being tossed into the Crack of Doom. All in all, it is a very good wargame that is almost impossible to bring out due to its length and harsh rules (hence the rating). I do want to get it out again but would play a lot more often if it was shorter.
aforandy
Four-player & two-player is like The World and The Nam, when you're in one you want to be in the other.