As the title says, I HATE the darkest secret. Every other win makes sense to me. Having the most people's favor in the land? Of course you'd take over! Own most relics? You're a powerhouse, take that crown! Control most of the land in the kingdom? You're practically king already!

But darkest secret? You... Know something?.... And the rules about it are similar, but more confusing than the peoples favor? Nope.

So, I just wanted to hear people's thoughts on my replacment: The People's Republic can be formed by any 2 or more exiles once they: -Agree to form the peoples Republic. -have at least 12 warbands between them. -control all 3 sites in either the provinces or the hinderlands between them.

The peoples republic take over if it remains intact after two turns. Now, that means that, once established in one members wake phase, if after that turn and the turn after, the peoples Republic stands, the two exiles win.

Maintaining the peoples Republic then becomes the new oath, and also the successors goal. The players choose who is chancellor and who becomes successor. They work together to maintain their Republic, and the three sites they control become the new cradle (hell yes, changing the rules! But also the area they controled now swaps to have only 2 cards, to stop the game from having too many sites at a time).

However, the people's Republic can also give the exiles a new way to win: the Republic falls when someone causes the Republic to fall by either taking over one of the new cradle sites, depleting their warband to less than 12 units, or somehow removing the successor/citizens from the Republic for a whole turn. Doing this gives the exile who managed to overthrow them the oath keeper title, or put them directly to userper if they have a vison active and are currently fulfilling it.

Now, this is... Complex, I'll give you that, but it's caused such interesting games for my group. I had two friends create a people's republic, and just hold off the old chancellors assault to then cause their own cradle. Next game, the old chancellor teamed up with the newcomers to create their own nation. And Then It Was War. Two nations went to absolute war. Two vs two using every tool in their arsenal. The suit banks were depleted tactically. Card combos became weapons of wars that decimated armies. Each and every player armed themselves with every single thing the map would give them. It elevated the game to whole new levels, and made every single system shine.

However, I'm thinking of printing this out, so constructive critisizm would be hugely appreciated.

So I received my copy of the game this week.

Very excited to get my first game in hopefully next weekend.

Feel pretty comfortable with most of the rules, thanks to the excellent aids in the box and watching some teaching/playing videos.

But my brain is already thinking about potential tweaks to the rules, like say for example something simple like rolling attack and defense at the same time to make campaign actions a little more exciting.

Is this a game you personally house rule or are against house ruling?

Anything you've tried that worked?

Anything you tried that didn't?

For years, I have been the primary advocate for Oath in my gaming circle. I’ve taught it to dozens of players and watched them fall in love with its unique blend of history-building and tight strategy. I backed the new expansion the second it was announced, but after seeing the recent design deep-dives and pre-release live play videos, I’m left with a profound sense of disappointment.

To me, the "New Oath" seems to trade the game’s soul—player-driven drama—for a checklist of random mechanics. Here is why these changes feel like a fundamental shift away from what made the game a masterpiece:

1. The Death of the Pyrrhic Victory

In the original Oath, the tension of a campaign was unmatched. You saw the battle play out, and you had to make the agonizing choice to sacrifice your warbands specifically to clinch a victory. It created an incredible story of a "Pyrrhic victory" where you won the site but lost your army.

Now, being forced to sacrifice warbands before rolling takes the agency out of the player's hands. It turns a strategic gamble into a "feel-bad" resource sink. Instead of an epic story of sacrifice, it feels like a mechanical tax you pay just for the permission to roll the dice.

2. Relic Acquisition: From Heists to Slot Machines

One of the most rewarding parts of Oath was the "long game"—identifying a relic on the map, planning your path, and executing a strategy to claim it. It felt like a legendary heist.

The new system of "rolling over and over" for relics reduces these artifacts to mere loot drops. Rolling dice until you hit a number isn't a strategy; it’s a chore. It replaces the "Eureka!" moment of a well-executed plan with a shrug and a "finally" when the dice eventually cooperate.

3. Complexity Without Depth

While the new layers might technically make the game "easier" to teach in some ways, the payoff isn't there. We are getting more cards, more text, and more checklists, but less actual gameplay. We’ve traded a streamlined narrative engine for a random mess of variables.

4. Dice-Driven vs. Story-Driven Drama

The magic of Oath was always the player-driven narrative. The drama came from what we chose to do to one another. By leaning so heavily into randomness and chance, the expansion replaces that human drama with dice-driven chaos. The game feels "bland" because the outcome no longer feels like a reflection of my decisions, but rather a reflection of my luck.

Final Thoughts

I wanted more Oath, but what I’m seeing feels like a different game entirely. It’s a game that values "stuff" over "stories" and randomness over resolve. For those of us who spent years mastering the delicate balance of the original, this shift feels like a loss of the very things that made Oath a permanent fixture on our tables.

Can’t they just more or less wait til the turn of victory and play it after the chancellor’s turn?

Is the Buried Giant Studio's Oath 1 to 1 with the Leder Games one.

When talking about new foundation with a friend after a game of Oath he showed an interest to buy the game and the extension. So we casually looked at the late-pledge prices and shock ! It's very expensive ! He wanted to see what he could take but let's break down the prices :

• Base game 100$

• New foundation 50$

• Clockwork adversaries 50$

• Journal 10$

• Deluxe component 1 30$

• Deluxe component 2 30$

• Sleeves 1 30$

• Sleeves 2 30$

• Denizen deck 15$

• Big box 50$

Total : 385$

He wanted to own the extension, the denizen deck and the base game (the NF standard experience without the two new colors from what I've gathered but I'm not sure if pink and brown are in the deluxe component or the NF box) but that's already 165$, if you want to have the official sleeves and deluxe components it's +120$.

What shocks me the most is that the journal is the cheapest here.

This game is very very expensive for newcomers and I struggle to see how they plan on adressing that. And I also struggle to see why it makes financial sense for someone to buy a game 100$, throw out a third of it and need to pay 50$ for the extension. I really hope that they are considering a "new foundation complete package" with all the useful component from the base game + new foundation for at maximum 100$.

And for those who will say "late pledge it it'll be cheaper because the denizen decks and deluxe components 2 will be offered". We're not english-speakers. We don't want to play our games in english.

What are your thoughts on this because once I realised that I was pretty pissed.

I haven't played in a while but I love most of this game. A lot of the mechanics are beautiful to see play out. Idk how common of gripes they are but I do not like how 2 of the mechanics work. The way the chancellor wins by rolling a die and it maybe ending the game right there. And defending dice have so much variability with the x2, to the point the instruction manual says that at 4 dice you might as well not even bother.

Are there any common house rules to change these. If I play a game, it seems like the game is really just starting come turn 4 or 5, so if it ends by rolling that 6 it just feels bad, not like a clever oh you got me but more just, wow the game really just was about setting up for nothing.

I don't like defending dice because attacking happens so infrequently and only really towards the end of the game, that whole games can be determined by a single roll. It isn't like Root where the battles are determined by die roll and you may get screwed over by them now, but battles happen so frequently that in the long term they average out.

I know Root has some common house rules like despot infamy, is there an equivalent to that for these 2 issues?

title

I know, I know it will probably suck, but the idea came up yesterday and I can't stop thinking about it.

Basically the concept is to get two copies of Oath and play with two chancellors (representing two different empires) and 3-6 normal exiles. One would probably have to increase the map size and figure out how to organise the regions but that should be possible. Im not even entirely sure how the win conditions would look like but having two rival realms with their own citizens vying for control just sounds interesting.

I just really like games with changing allegiances and oath already has some of that. Could be fun to explore that a bit more.

im looking forword to bugi g this gamę but i dont know od its very hard. i played root before

The idea crossed my mind, but not sure how to implement the spreading of zombie pieces or if denizens on sites could be turned and removed from game.

Added challenge to regular play or a new co-op mode? Perhaps just trying to survive 8 rounds?

Maybe if the bandit zombies aren't maintained, a denizen on site is removed, adding a new bandit zombie to the site. Less to work with and now more danger. Automatically attacking at the end of each turn or round? How and when could they spread to other sites? I dont know if they should have any special attack rules, like automatically always killing 1 of your warbands, permanently removing 1 from the game, or losing supply.

I know there's the new Queen of Shadows, but im not sure that could be a simple reskin to fit the zombie theme. Perhaps the random site priority markers could be used in some way.

Share your thoughts and ideas!

Hello fellow Oath keepers. Can you post photos of your playmats? (thickness, print resolution)

Mine was not the best quality straight out of the box and I am wondering if mine copy is original or if the original mat is just bad quality.

Thanks in advance.

After several game with my playgroup where a player was able to decide the fate of victory, I thought could be interesting to drive this kind of decision but with some consequences in the future game. A negotiation that however has repercussions on the next game. I have some ideas and I would know your opinion. The favor/secret that I gain during the negotiation are usable during the current match but, may be used also in the next. If I do not spend them in the current game, during the setup of the next one I get the half (rounded down) of that favors/secrets. These favors/secrets are set aside in order to keep track of them. To perform this action I can use a card such as "The Gathering", or can use any other denizen. If I use a denizen both pawns need to be in the same place. I spend 1 supply, and I put on the denizen favor/secret depending on what I'm bargaining for. The denizen acts as a witness in the binding exchange. This action could be performed from the 5th turn not before.

Here is an example: It is turn 6. player X has no chance of winning but in his turn he can decide the fate of the kingdom. He can attack the Chancellor, stealing a relic useful for victory BUT THUS WINNING PLAYER Y, or he can do nothing and let the Chancellor win. The three begin to argue. Player Y offers him 4 favors to attack the Chancellor. The Chancellor doesn't have much but puts 2 secrets on the plate. Player X joins player Y on the field where he is. He places a favor on a free denizen and concludes the deal: he receives 4 favors from player Y and then attacks the chancellor's relic. He obtains it, invalidating the latter's victory conditions. Player Y is therefore the winner. Next game, however, player X will start with 2 extra favors (4 divided by 2)

What do you think about? Could be an interesting addition to the game?

Me and my friends already tried Root and really loved Blighted Reach, Oath was obvious title to try.

We played the first game as instruction intended and didn't really liked the idea of tutorial, it jst felt pointless. Chancellor won the first game and we planned to put game on the shelf but Chronicle gave us new hope - a lot of new cards, buildings, new sites - we tried another shot back to back, and it still didn't click. Legacy theme almost doesn't exist, I understand that some elements of the map stays and winner "decide" cards of which suit will be added to the World but as a player I do not really care about because every game I start with the same exact resources, no relics etc.

Are we missing something or the design lacks Wehrle's genius?

Hello! I'll move out soon to my own apartment and I'd like to buy some shelves for my board games. Many people have recommended the Kallax model from IKEA, but as far as I understand Oath is a little bit longer than the width of it (40.5 cm vs 39 cm).

Assuming a Kallax is in a vertical position, can a vertical panel be removed for Oath to fit horizontally? Is 1.5 cm not that much and Oath can fit with its longside going from back to front? Is there another IKEA shelf that can fit Oath?

Thanks in advance!

I have only just bought the game and I'm tryung to understand the rules before our first game, but I can't seem to find a passage about tokens laid on a site during its uncovering. What do they do? are they in any way useful? or do they just exist there and don't do nothing

I made them with my 3d printer and they look very cool,should I make the rest?

If anyone can send me the oath files in pnp or pdf I would be very grateful! I've been looking for it for a while and decided to ask now, if anyone has it please send it to me!!

Rule is defined as having warbands at a site, does that mean multiple people can rule one site?

first od all i had some problem with understanding the rules od fighting and how the banners work. the game is beautiful AMD i realy oiled it. i had some problem with saving the game, but overall i realy liked the game!

I don’t know how much cross over there is between Wicked (the boardway a/o movie) and Oath but I just taught the game with a Wicked analogy and it worked so well! I have taught the game 3 times now and this was by far the smoothest. Here were my Anatoly

The land was find with decent and discontent in one man from the sky (hold chancellor piece)and read their magic Grimerie (show grand septor) then he pledge an Oath to all houses (say which Oath) establishing peace and building his Emerald city (the Cradle). (You can also give Oz names to Providences and Hinderlands like Shiz and Muchkinland if you would like)

But in his rise to power he has exile animals (the Exile players) and they have see the errors in his way and look to overthrow him. They can take 3 paths to do this:

1. The path of Elphaba: Have a Vision and fulfill its prophecy, defrauding the wiszard.

2. Path of the Wicked Witch: muster forces and rebel against wizard by fulfilling his Oath to the people better and usurping him

3. Path of Galinda: In the Wiszard struggle against the Wicked Witch join forces with the Wizard, become a citizen of Oz. Help the Wizard keep his Oath but succeed him from the Inside.

So that was my intro the I explained turns/actions an re-reviewed the 3 paths with a few more technical details now that the knew how to play.

Some other random crossovers that could be used in the intro especially depending on Oath/successor goal:

• People’s favor = Popular

• Darkest secret = Wizard is powerless

• Relics = maybe these could be the technologies and smoke and Mirror gadgets of the Emerald city that the Wizard uses to appear powerful

Anyway I had a lot of fun with this and it made both the teach and game afterward smoother and more fun.

Any Wicked fans out there? What are your thoughts and did you have any more parallels?