OO Boardgamers, what did you play this weekend?

[YellowKing]

Thanks guys. Think I'll give a solo 3-investigator session a whirl next week and see how it goes.

[LordMortis]

There's no 'bad guy' player, nothings hidden/secret between players. So choose how many characters you want to use and be those players. I believe the guys here do that to reach the number of players they want and trade off control or cooperate decision to use extra guy.

We we just each take two characters if we are playing 2 or 3 players and want to move up to 6 (or play at all with 2 players) and the dynamic works well.

However, playing single player will give you a great feel for the mechanics of the game but you won't really feel the spirit of the game. The joy of the game really is in working together, doing your part to support a team goal.

[hepcat]

I'm gonna be looking it up on BGG as always but am interested in an OO take on 7 Wonders. What's so awesome about the game?

I'm not going crazy over the game like some on BGG are. any time a new game comes out that has some decent word of mouth, the feeding frenzy begins and it shoots to the top of their hot list for a few weeks. i always find it best to either play the game first or wait for some reviews after the initial honeymoon period.

that being said, i did play 7 Wonders before buying it and it's a solid, fun resource game in card form that takes less than an hour to play. heck, if you know the rules (which are fairly easy to follow, although the 2 player variant is a bit daunting for a first time player...which is why they suggest holding off on that variant until you're more familar with the game...something I refused to let Hentzau make me do ) it can clock in at around 30 minutes easily.

You basically get a wonder and you have to gather enough resources (ore, wood, stone, etc.) to build it's 2 to 4 stages. there are three ages represented by decks of cards that come out whenever their stage begins (usually after the 6th turn in each age) that contain various guilds, civilian structures, resource generators, etc. specific to that age (for example, guilds don't appear until the third age and resource generators are only found in ages 1 and 2). if you don't have a resource, you can buy it from a neighbor, who does have it, paying less if they have some kind of trade building that allows you to buy from them (represented by arrows pointing in the direction of players who can purchase resources from them).

at the end of the game, you earn victory points from various buildings, money and what your wonder generates for completed stages. whoever has the most vp's wins.

It's not an innovation in gaming, but it's fun. And sometimes that's more than enough.

also, the game can take up to 7 players. that makes it a great game for those game nights when too many folks show up...a problem we should ALL have.

[El Guapo]

Interesting. I don't have a seven player game, though my favorite games tend to be more "crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their women" rather than organize an economy and build some stuff.

Also - what good three-player games are there? I have plenty of games that ostensibly accommodate three people but that don't play super-great with that number. Otherwise I have games for 2, 4, 5, and 6 people, but there's a gap for three.

[Jow]

Colossal Arena and Samurai (Knizia) are both excellent with 3 players.

[hepcat]

For 3 player, I loves me some Ad Astra. But many games actually start at 3 player and work their way up. You shouldn't have trouble with that many folks with most games.

[El Guapo]

For 3 player, I loves me some Ad Astra. But many games actually start at 3 player and work their way up. You shouldn't have trouble with that many folks with most games.

That does look interesting.

The issue is not with finding games that start at 3 players. The issue is games that play *well* with three players. I find that lots of the "3-6 player" type games can do three players, but just aren't that fun with only three.

[Boudreaux]

The issue is not with finding games that start at 3 players. The issue is games that play *well* with three players. I find that lots of the "3-6 player" type games can do three players, but just aren't that fun with only three.

Middle Earth Quest, from Fantasy Flight, is excellent with three players. It plays 2-4 but I think is best with 3.

End of the Triumvirate is a military/political strategy game based on the Roman Empire that is actually made for 3 players. It pretty much only plays with 3, and is also really good.

[Chaz]

Didn't you grab Axis and Allies Pacific? That's a 3 player game. Otherwise...um...three is a hard number. Reef Encounter is a semi-Go-ish euro game that plays with three because of a variable sized board. I think Puerto Rico plays alright with three. I can't think of any crush 'em games that work with three off the top of my head though. Oh, wait, Nexus Ops is good with three. Who grabbed that one?

[NickAragua]

Triumvirate is a military/political strategy game based on the Roman Empire that is actually made for 3 players. It pretty much only plays with 3, and is also really good.

Finally, a game where I can play as Crassus and not send a bunch of dudes into the desert to get killed by horsemen for no good reason.

[El Guapo]

I didn't grab either of those. Not that this is an urgent need, exactly. Just that Hepcat's post about 7 Wonders accommodating seven players made me think about the numbers of players called for by the games that I have.

[Chaosraven]

Played Dungeon Lords last night (after an extensive reread of the rules, and a read of their FAQ online). Got our asses handed to us. Kenetickids wife won with 3 points. I took second at negative one. The other two were so dismal they would be ashamed if I posted their scores. Hee hee hee. We had an awesome time and everyone agreed we have to play again.

[hentzau]

I'm gonna be looking it up on BGG as always but am interested in an OO take on 7 Wonders. What's so awesome about the game?

I'm not going crazy over the game like some on BGG are. any time a new game comes out that has some decent word of mouth, the feeding frenzy begins and it shoots to the top of their hot list for a few weeks. i always find it best to either play the game first or wait for some reviews after the initial honeymoon period.

that being said, i did play 7 Wonders before buying it and it's a solid, fun resource game in card form that takes less than an hour to play. heck, if you know the rules (which are fairly easy to follow, although the 2 player variant is a bit daunting for a first time player...which is why they suggest holding off on that variant until you're more familar with the game...something I refused to let Hentzau make me do ) it can clock in at around 30 minutes easily.

You basically get a wonder and you have to gather enough resources (ore, wood, stone, etc.) to build it's 2 to 4 stages. there are three ages represented by decks of cards that come out whenever their stage begins (usually after the 6th turn in each age) that contain various guilds, civilian structures, resource generators, etc. specific to that age (for example, guilds don't appear until the third age and resource generators are only found in ages 1 and 2). if you don't have a resource, you can buy it from a neighbor, who does have it, paying less if they have some kind of trade building that allows you to buy from them (represented by arrows pointing in the direction of players who can purchase resources from them).

at the end of the game, you earn victory points from various buildings, money and what your wonder generates for completed stages. whoever has the most vp's wins.

It's not an innovation in gaming, but it's fun. And sometimes that's more than enough.

also, the game can take up to 7 players. that makes it a great game for those game nights when too many folks show up...a problem we should ALL have.

Hep summed up the game really well. I do think the game is kind of overpriced for what you get, and that the quality of the cards does leave something to be desired. Those are my negatives for the game right now. I've managed to get four games under my belt, and if someone asked me what I want to play right now, 7 Wonders would be my choice.

Also, if you want to add an 8th wonder to our game, BGG has a promo card in their store right now. Link here.

[hepcat]

7 Wonders is basically what I wanted Innovation to be. But that's not Innovation's fault, it's mine for not researching it more before buying it. What can i say, it was an impulse buy. there's a downside to having game nights in a fully stocked game store that stays open until past midnight most nights.

[Jow]

took a little trip to the friendly local gaming store yesterday just to peruse and discovered that apparently 7 Wonders is the hottest thing since Dominion. They were long out of copies though with ETA of new ones well into the new year. According to the owner, it isn't anywhere right now.

While we were there, a buddy of mine decided to gift me a game as a graduation present so I walked home with Dungeon Lords. Great game. I'm starting to really enjoy the quirkiness of Chvatil's games (I also own Space Alert). Also, the board components are some of the best I've seen in terms of helper icons and art in general. We only played with two of us, so we each had to control one of the non-player cards. Judging by the average scores for four players (at least from CR's recent post) I have to assume scores range higher for two players as I ended up in the mid 30s. Really fun. CR: Did you play the "full" game or the "first game" setup?

There's also a set of additional rules over on the official website for all the magic items that were included with the game, but they're supposedly for experts to make the game really tough. Definitely nowhere near ready for that.

[Chaosraven]

We played full game, with the random event cards.

[Zarathud]

The way Chaosraven and the Detroit crew tore into Dungeon Lords an Octocon ago, I think they were experts after the 2nd game. A couple of the "rules calls" I made to keep the game moving turned out to be incorrect, as they kindly pointed out later.

[Chaosraven]

Couple of things: two player with the dummy minions rarely screws you out of a choice. And second: those random events SUCK! We got hit with Pay for your rooms or they turn into tunnels right before Taxes... Most of the negative came from lack of gold to pay taxes as we preferred to keep the rooms the previous season.

[Jow]

Dummy minions: yeah, I wondered about that. Is a 4-player game as chaotic in terms of getting choice-screwed as I'd expect it to be? I'm thinking of 4 or 5-player Colossal Arena games where you have little control over what happens because the board can change significantly by the time play gets back to you... and hoping it's not the same dynamic with Dungeon Lords.

[YellowKing]

Finally got to sit down and play a session of Castle Ravenloft tonight.

THE GOOD:

- The game is really well produced. The quality of the materials and miniatures is just top-notch. Even the instruction manual is in glossy full color. Everything about the set screams "quality" and we were very impressed with the durability and artistry of the tokens, dungeon tiles, and assorted pieces.

- If you want a tabletop D&D experience that doesn't drag out for hours and doesn't require a DM, the game provides a nice quick fix. The focus is definitely on combat and not on story, so that may disappoint some players. However, I feel that like the real D&D experience, the game can be as rich or as shallow as the people playing it want it to be. There's definitely nothing stopping you from treating this like a "real" D&D game and adding your own flavor.

- The game comes with something like 12 pre-made scenarios to play through, and Wizards of the Coast posted two official bonus scenarios on their site. Considering each scenario represents at least an hour or hour and a half of play, there's a lot of content to explore. And because the game board is modular, even playing the same scenario twice will result in a completely different game.

THE NOT-SO-GOOD:

- The rules are unfortunately very vague in a lot of areas, which seems to be the chief complaint of the game on message boards. There have been some user FAQs that clear up some of them, but looking back over it we definitely screwed some stuff up majorly on our first play through because the rules were so unclear.

- This is streamlined D&D, so it may not appeal to either extreme: regular D&Ders may find it too simplistic and too combat-centric, while those who don't enjoy D&D at all may just be turned off by the gameplay in general.

- Because you're playing Level 1 adventurers (with a max of Level 2), your skill set is pretty basic. Also you're fighting creatures with 1-2 HP a lot of the time. While it actually makes the game pretty challenging due to your limited health, it's hard to feel like a real hero when you have 8 HP.

Overall though I actually quite enjoyed it. I'm an ex-D&Der who grew up, lost friends, and ran out of large blocks of free time. So it was wonderful to get some D&D combat/dungeon crawling in without worrying about DMing or how long the session would last. The vague rules were definitely frustrating, but I'm hoping by combing through FAQs and WoC support I'll be able to fix up a cheat sheet to clarify all that. In our two player game we did manage to achieve victory for our adventure, though at times it got a little doubtful. The game plays reasonably well with 2 people, though I think it would work better with more just because the number of monsters in play depends almost entirely on the number of people playing. With two the dungeon tends to be a bit sparse, and you don't get as many opportunities to use more advanced combat tactics involving multiple enemies.

I'm definitely looking forward to the follow-up set due out early next year, and I'm hoping it continues the adventure so that you can hit levels 3-4.

[Chaosraven]

Played Settlers of Catan with my mom day before yesterday, then taught the boys Dungeon Lords. Xmas day played Blokus, edh magic, and regular 60 card magic (with my son *and* my daughter). Kids playing magic today as I got ready for work.

[Chaosraven]

Dummy minions: yeah, I wondered about that. Is a 4-player game as chaotic in terms of getting choice-screwed as I'd expect it to be? I'm thinking of 4 or 5-player Colossal Arena games where you have little control over what happens because the board can change significantly by the time play gets back to you... and hoping it's not the same dynamic with Dungeon Lords.

if you don't gamble, and stick to orders that at least one player has inaccessible there's no getting screwed. Don't forget if you cannot use (or choose not to use) an order, you can take that order back in place of your returning first order

[YellowKing]

As posted in the Christmas loot thread, I got the following:

Small World
Forbidden Island
Pandemic
Last Night on Earth
Ghost Stories

My wife and I played Forbidden Island last night and had a blast. We lost the first game (badly), but beat it on Novice fairly easily due to some lucky draws on the adventurers we played. I honestly can't believe the game is as cheap as it is. The production value is outstanding, it comes in a metal tin, and it's a ton of fun - and available online for under $13? Ridiculous value.

I read through the rules for Last Night on Earth and it sounds really fun. Right up my alley.

I attempted to learn Ghost Stories but failed miserably. Going to have to watch some video tutorials for that one. Looks fun but complex. Don't think my wife is going to like it though, as she probably won't have the time/patience for it.

I think my wife will really like Pandemic as well since it's along the same lines as Forbidden Island, and though I haven't cracked open Small World yet it's enough of a "classic" that I have no doubts she'll love it.

[MonkeyFinger]

Finally got to sit down and play a session of Castle Ravenloft tonight.

I saw the official 'unboxing' video and was interested in this... and then I stumbled across the Board to Death review. It's not exactly positive and the few comments there are pretty polarized. I'm curious how people who have played the game line up with the reviewer's thoughts.

[YellowKing]

I saw the official 'unboxing' video and was interested in this... and then I stumbled across the Board to Death review. It's not exactly positive and the few comments there are pretty polarized. I'm curious how people who have played the game line up with the reviewer's thoughts.

I'll give it a whirl by going through their list of negatives:

- The rule book lies. (About Healing) - Just like in real D&D, we found that you almost have to have a cleric in the party. They're right in that the game can be brutally difficult. However, the rulebook also explicitly states that you are free to increase the amount of healing surges available to adjust the challenge to your liking. I think anybody who has ever DMed knows that the toughest level in the game is probably Level 1, when nobody has any HP. You're playing Level 1 characters here, and bad dice rolls can get you killed quick. That's just D&D.

- The adventures feel very similar. - I'm going to pseudo-disagree here. Since I haven't played all of the adventures I can't state this conclusively, but again, this is a D&D dungeon crawl. You go through, fight monsters, and typically face a big bad boss at the end. If that's what they mean by "very similar" then I guess that's true, but I'm not sure what else you'd expect. Personally I thought there was enough variety to keep things fresh - you're facing different bosses with different powers, there are additional tokens in play, different artifacts, etc.

- There is poor replay value. - Again I have to pseudo-disagree. I haven't played a bunch, so I can't tell you if it gets old real fast or not. However, with 13 different scenarios and 2 official bonus scenarios available online, I'm not sure how you can label replay value "poor."

- The dungeons always feel the same, even though you draw a random tile, they are almost all the same anyway. - I have to agree with them on this point. Most tiles are hallways, corners, or rooms of the same nondescript variety. While your dungeon may look slightly different from game to game, it will probably be functionally almost identical. The only truly random element is usually the adventure-specific "boss" room.

- The artwork is almost non existent. - Kind of a nitpick, I think. The miniatures are pretty awesome, and more than make up for the lack of a treasure chest logo or whatever it is they were expecting on the cards.

- Treasure cards are useless unless you are lucky enough to draw one of the 5 good ones. - Have to mostly agree here. Even in the game we won I think we only actually used 1 or 2 treasure cards the entire game. Lots of useless duds in the deck.

- Rats have an attack bonus higher then the Dragonborn… like come on! These guys obviously aren't real D&D players if this is a major negative. Rats have a higher attack bonus because it's not A rat, it's a rat SWARM. Who has the higher chance to hit you - one guy with a sword, or several hundred rats swarming your body? Also, the rats only have a higher attack bonus if you're using your default attack or Cleave (which actually allows you to hit TWO mobs). Other attacks have higher attack bonuses.

- They Banked on their D&D Name to try an sell a below average game. - I totally disagree. I think this was a sincere attempt to simplify the D&D rules and bring them to board gamers and younger/more casual players. If it was just a cash-in, I wouldn't expect as high a production value with the miniatures and tokens. As a hybrid attempt it works well in some areas and not-so-well in others. But it's a first attempt, and I expect them to refine it in the next expansion.

- Position of Bones on the tiles don’t make a difference. - I don't really know what the heck they are trying to say here. The bone piles are pretty much just markers to show you where to spawn a monster, because being able to spawn one anywhere would give you 9 possible choices that could potentially give you (or the monster) an unfair advantage. They're not meant to be strategic spawn points; they're meant to take the guesswork out of the player's hands in regards to monster AI.

I think it's a fun game IF you enjoy D&D, dice combat, and are up for a challenge. I bought it for my friend because he's a D&D player who doesn't always have the time or people to play. This was a way for us to get our "D&D fix" in quickly without a lot of fuss or preparation. For those purposes, I think it's perfect. People who straddle the fence between D&D and board games will likely find it entertaining.

Who won't? Well, I don't think it will appeal to D&D players who regularly play "real" D&D. The rules are greatly simplified, and they'd likely find it too dumbed down to be enjoyable. The board game rigidity of the rules may also not appeal to those who love the free-wheeling style of real D&D play.

I also don't think it will appeal to hardcore board gamers who have played a lot of other co-op board games. This is probably the angle the Board to Death dudes were coming from. The fact is that on a pure game mechanics basis, there are definitely much better co-op games out there. Castle Ravenloft's simplified ruleset and heavy dependence on combat are probably not going to appeal to those who are used to playing deep strategic games that offer tons of player options per turn.

Is it the case that Castle Ravenloft, in an attempt to please D&Ders AND board gamers succeeding in pleasing no one? I don't think that's true, but I do think if you are on the extreme end of either spectrum, you may find the game not to your taste.

[MonkeyFinger]

Excellent information! Thanks YK.

[hepcat]

I think my wife will really like Pandemic as well since it's along the same lines as Forbidden Island, and though I haven't cracked open Small World yet it's enough of a "classic" that I have no doubts she'll love it.

I've yet to meet a female who doesn't instantly love Pandemic. I've used it as a gateway game for friend's wives and sisters for years and it never fails to get rave reviews.

[Two Sheds]

My wife gave me Civilization for Christmas. We walked through the setup and the rules and a quick 2-player game over a few hours last night. I am super-psyched to have some friends over for a proper 4-player game later this week. And luckily, so is she! A couple hours after we had boxed the game back up she was thumbing through the rule book and said "I want to play this game again now!" We didn't. But we will.

I think I'll have to pick up Pandemic. I've heard nothing but great things about it. It was the other game on my list, so I think I feel a late Christmas present purchase coming on . . .

[Zarathud]

Finally got to sit down and play a session of Castle Ravenloft tonight.

I saw the official 'unboxing' video and was interested in this... and then I stumbled across the Board to Death review. It's not exactly positive and the few comments there are pretty polarized. I'm curious how people who have played the game line up with the reviewer's thoughts.

I had a long post that got lost on its way through the internet, but I generally agree with YellowKing. After watching a fwe Board to Death reviews, they're rules lawyers and really nitpicky. What they don't give a good feel for is how and why they liked a game.

Castle Ravenloft isn't a license added to another game's mechanic. It simplifies the D&D experience in the 4.0 rules, but isn't a strategic table top miniatures game. The rules are simplistic, and a lot of the design choices make sense if you understand that they're solely to simplify the game mechanics. For example, I don't believe you're really "level 1" because you're not at risk of dying in 1 hit. Each hit die of damage is approximated as "1 hp." While any 1 tile isn't that much different, there is a fair amount of variation after you've placed 3-4 tiles. There's definitely replay value here even on the same missions.

It's a dunegon crawl where you hack-and-slash your way to the boss fight. It brings back the horror and tension of playing the original Castle Ravenloft module. You're constantly at risk of everything turning against you. When I played with a vicious DM, each player brought 3 characters into Castle Ravenloft but only 1 character out. Castle Ravenloft brings back the feeling of that module and playing D&D again. For that reason alone, Castle Ravenloft is a good game even if it doesn't technically have the best game mechanics. You'll enjoy it if you're looking to play fast & loose D&D in a system that moves along so that even hepcat can pay attention to the game.

[Jow]

if you don't gamble, and stick to orders that at least one player has inaccessible there's no getting screwed. Don't forget if you cannot use (or choose not to use) an order, you can take that order back in place of your returning first order

Thanks for that last bit especially. Knew you could take the order back if you got screwed out of it but didn't know you could pull it back if you chose not to use it.

Other games:

--my one play of Pandemic left me feeling a bit less than impressed. I think my biggest problem was with the pacing... It felt like we just got into the swing of things when the game was suddenly over and we were blown out of the water. Interesting mechanics, but seems brutally hard.

--Picked up Neuroshima Hex over the weekend. Didn't get to complete the first game because one of the players was basically falling asleep at the table, but it's interesting. Setting up in the middle of the board seems pretty restrictive and makes me feel like luck plays a huge role. Raven, have you done much with scenarios and other things that allow you to utilize some of the other tiles? How much of a must do you feel like the other expansions are?

[Chaosraven]

Having the other armies makes for lots of replay. Having the other board hasn't really come into play much, as the Cost of using the abilities is rough (damage to your HQ or tossing tiles instead of playing them). The terrains are nifty, but the game doesn't have a bunch of scenarios to play out. We took to rolling up random terrain rather than making up scenarios. So I would say getting the armies is great (still looking for that promo Doomsday Machine on ebay), but you would need to make up your own scenarios to use the terrain.

[Chaosraven]

Also - setting up in the middle is for armies that are primarily Melee oriented. Ranged armies should set up one hex from .the edge.

[Jow]

That was something I didn't really understand (mainly because the rulebook doesn't explain it particularly well). It tells you to set up your hq anywhere you want and seems to indicate that you can put your units anywhere too. Then the little supplement at the end that explains how the board has changed says to set everything up in the middle, use the 18 red hexes surrounding the middle for something else, and utilize the additional hexes beyond that for scenarios. Obviously close quarters in the middle doesn't give the ranged units a chance to shine. When you say one hex from the edge, do you mean the edge of the middle zone or the edge of the entire board?

[Chaosraven]

Middle zone, you are only supposed to use that. Game is designed for close quarters. And it is how you force battles (by filling up the board). The excess edges are for making up scenarios. The second board is that small as well. You set up ranged one space out to have your ranged fire thru your HQ, protected by it.

[YellowKing]

Forgot to add that I watched a 45 minute or so video some guy on boardgamegeek posted as a tutorial for Ghost Stories. Not only did I understand the rules completely (something I couldn't do after reading the booklet), he gave a lot of nice strategy tips. Can't wait to give it a try tomorrow. Going to have a board game & dinner night for some friends to try out some of the Christmas loot.

[MonkeyFinger]

I think my wife will really like Pandemic as well since it's along the same lines as Forbidden Island, and though I haven't cracked open Small World yet it's enough of a "classic" that I have no doubts she'll love it.

I've yet to meet a female who doesn't instantly love Pandemic. I've used it as a gateway game for friend's wives and sisters for years and it never fails to get rave reviews.

From what I've read, the 'On the Brink' expansion is well worth getting and makes a good game even better.

[Boudreaux]

Forgot to add that I watched a 45 minute or so video some guy on boardgamegeek posted as a tutorial for Ghost Stories. Not only did I understand the rules completely (something I couldn't do after reading the booklet), he gave a lot of nice strategy tips. Can't wait to give it a try tomorrow.

This is a favorite of mine, but I honestly don't understand the comments on BGG and elsewhere that claim it's "too easy". I've played it easily 30 times, always on the easiest difficulty level, and we've won the game once. Once. I still keep coming back to play it again and again, though. Either the game is good or I'm an idiot.

[hepcat]

I think my wife will really like Pandemic as well since it's along the same lines as Forbidden Island, and though I haven't cracked open Small World yet it's enough of a "classic" that I have no doubts she'll love it.

I've yet to meet a female who doesn't instantly love Pandemic. I've used it as a gateway game for friend's wives and sisters for years and it never fails to get rave reviews.

From what I've read, the 'On the Brink' expansion is well worth getting and makes a good game even better.

I bought it the moment it hit the shelves. And I just bought a copy for Redwarlord's wife for christmas since she loves Pandemic. It adds some great new roles and we're all dying to eventually play the Bioterrorist.

[baelthazar]

I think my wife will really like Pandemic as well since it's along the same lines as Forbidden Island, and though I haven't cracked open Small World yet it's enough of a "classic" that I have no doubts she'll love it.

I've yet to meet a female who doesn't instantly love Pandemic. I've used it as a gateway game for friend's wives and sisters for years and it never fails to get rave reviews.

My wife detested Pandemic. She disliked it enough that I eventually sold it and it's expansion. Oddly enough, she likes Defenders of the Realm and Ghost Stories!

Like Two Sheds, I also got the new FFG version of Civilization. We played last night, an overly long learning game (which took far longer than it should have), and I'm thinking that it might be pushing Twilight Imperium off of its "Favorite Game" throne. The big draw for Civ is that you can play it 2-player, combat is not random, and you can literally win the game without choosing an aggressive military stance (which is technically possible with TI:3rd, but highly improbable). Civ does lack some of TI's character and "epic-ness" but only a little, and the Civilizations are as varied to play and interesting as the races in TI. I'm very pleased with getting this gift!

I also got Merchants & Marauders, a pirate-themed trade and combat strategy game. We didn't get to play, but I am excited to delve in. The rules look pretty easy to follow, the gameplay looks like it has a good amount of variety and the pirate-theme is very strong.

Unfortunately, one of my wife's gifts to me, Mansions of Madness, slipped back to a February release. This was the game I was most excited to get, because I eat up anything Lovecraft, but it will be just as exciting a month from now as it would have been for Christmas. And FFG promises the same high quality of components that we have come to expect from their brand name, so I'm buzzing with anticipation at the beautifully modeled Mi-Go!

As to Castle Ravenloft, I quite like it, but I've only played solo. Recently some friends wanted to get into D&D 4e and after reading the rules in preparation to be DM, I can see how CR is really a streamlined version of the 4e ruleset. Initially, I thought that the power cards for the PCs were an interesting compromise for player abilities in D&D but now (after exposure to 4e rules) I see that they are literally an adaptation of the new class skills and powers in RPG system. I'm tempted to start off my group wanting to play D&D with a game of Castle Ravenloft, as a way to ease them into the system - but I think it might be too simplistic to be of much use. Instead, CR seems to be better to scratch the D&D itch with seasoned players who only have an hour or so to play in a night. CR is sort of like the Dungeon Delve concept, with "pick-up-and-play" rules.

Bael

[Jow]

I wasn't real big on Pandemic either, though I've only played it once. Pacing seemed weird, in that it seemed like the game just got rolling and suddenly it was over (and we were blown out of the water).

I was digging around at my FLGS for Mansions of Madness the other day and was bummed to hear about the delay. That one's been on my radar for a while, mainly to have something else Lovecraftian to play besides Arkham Horror in the event no one is in the mood for a 4-hour game.