I don't know if I'm a good former Lutheran to ask: I just found out, decades after becoming Orthodox, that what I believed as a Lutheran was more on the side of Orthodoxy than I thought the case when I converted. I just found out that the belief that the Body and Blood just touch the bread and wine, which remain bread and wine, actually portrays acuarately what Lutherans believe. When I converted I renounced this just out of obedience: I actually believed that in more of a physical, Real Presence already, and was taught so by my Lutheran pastors.
The Lutheran churches of Sweden and Finnland do claim apostolic succession, which I found intriguing when I was Lutheran. The Reformation here was more like the formation of Anglicanism in England, with similar results. Swedish bishops, for instance, did not (I do not know what happens now) did not take part in the ordination of other Lutheran clergy because of this.
Apostlic succession never plays a part in Lutheran eucharistic theology, because only baptism and Lord's supper are sacraments (and maybe confession, opinion is divided, which now practically means that most do not accept it as a sacrament but the old Lutheran confessions do, since the early Lutherans were divided). With the priesthood of all believers, yet leaving the pastor to be the usual minister of baptism and likewise the other sacrament, the Lord's supper, is seen more of an issue of good order and delegation of the congregation to someone to act in their name in an official capacity. For instance, the pastor who confirmed me (also not a sacrament among Lutherans) had to be from our Lutheran church in America (our old pastor had just died).
Btw, I know that a lot is being read into Luther's own personal demons. The same has been done on Augustine. Luther and the Lutherans ended up not believing in Apostolic succession for the most part, not that someone lacking "something vital" could "confect the sacrament." They simply didn't see it as vital, or existant.