$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 131.02

7,703 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
48.5% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
30 
 Thumb up
 Hide
41 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Scythe» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Scythe - This summers Blockbuster Mix tape. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mike B
United Kingdom
southampton
hampshire
flag msg tools
Dare To Roll - www.whodaresrolls.com
mbmbmbmbmb
Scythe was massively hyped even before hitting Kickstarter and unsurprisingly proceeded to smash through its initial funding goal in a matter of hours, going on to be really rather popular. Little has subsequently diminished the frenzy of hyperbole leading up to its release. It's the cardboard equivalent of a summer blockbuster.

Scythe represents Jamey Stegmaier's second difficult album, technically his third but I hope you get my point. Coming as it does off the back of the highly praised Euphoria and the beloved Viticulture reprint, fans had lathered themselves up to a frothing fit of expectation. Not least due to the fabulous artwork supplied by Polish artist Jakub Rozalski that was integral in the development of the game alongside all the bells and whistles now expected of a Stonemaier product.

And putting aside any other opinions one thing that cannot be taken for granted is just how fantastically handsome this game is, from Jakub's stunning art to the extravagant components the collector's edition of this game cements Stonemaier as THE premium board game publisher on the market.

But is the actual game any good? While I'll agree it's a robust and thought-provoking experience and a highly entertaining thing to play I have to admit to finding it falls short of the lofty expectations heaped upon it.

The game is actually very straight forward, players each control a faction represented on the map by workers, and the towering mech's a sort of steampunk equivalent of Pacific Rims kaiju thumping robots. Each faction comes with two randomly chosen and distinct player boards one representing a technology tree and the other offering perks unique to those peoples.
The meat of the game sees each player racing to develop their tech tree into building the most efficient engine to make the best of where on the board they find themselves. Each round a player takes an action to activate one section on the board and carries out those orders and pays whatever resources that are required, a more costly second option is also available on each that will allow them to manipulate their board in some way and progress the development of their faction.

Think of this a little bit like Civilisations tech tree but represented by the player board from Terra Mystica that as you upgrade sections or build structures you uncover better perks or abilities that then go on to give your Mech's or faction more perks.

It's this activity that is the beating heart of the game as the decisions you make here affect how effective your forces are on the board the resources you can harvest and the points you'll ultimately score. Don't get me wrong its enthralling fun as you focus on this business, but it is essentially a table of people playing their own little solo games of tech tree Sudoku.

Lauded as part Euro and war game this is where Scythe fumbles the ball. While the Euro is there for all to see with the resource gathering and engine building the combat system feels like a cobbled on afterthought. Battles are a deterministic affair with either side secretly choosing the amount of power they will be spending on the fight up to a maximum of 7 and adding combat cards to boost this total.

Borrowing a little from Rex and Kemet yet nowhere as exciting as either, the problem is the combat cards, most of them being either a 2 or a 3 with a few scant 5's scattered amongst them. Kemet's battle system with duplicated hands of cards for each faction lead to enthralling skirmishes of bluff and double bluff with neither side quite sure of what their opponent was going to choose, but with the knowledge of what had been played previously. It simulated the fog of war effortlessly and allowed for some real tactics and ploys. Whereas Scythes battles hold no surprises the player with the most power is invariably going to win. And worse the game is handicapped against the aggressor, for every worker you dislodge in your warmongering you lose Popularity, and Popularity, as we're about to discover, is I believe central to winning the game.
Ultimately war is not so much hell as just really rather disappointing, a well-planned raid on an opponent in one of their production centers can certainly derail their game engine but ultimately it's a thrill-less experience.

And as I brought it up let's discuss Popularity, at the edge of the board is a track charting each factions Popularity rating, this is split into three tiers with the higher you are, the bigger the multipliers for your end game score. It's my opinion despite all the multitude of choices and options on offer, it is this one score that can make the difference between victory or defeat.

There are other adornments available to you, in the center of the board is the Factory some long abandoned facility that when reached for the first time gives you a choice of a permanent additional board action that you add to your tableau. This will be a shortcut to one of your techs that if you can pick one that compliments your engine early enough can be a great boon.
Also scattered across the board are encounter tokens when visited the player draws an encounter card. These offer a choice of three options two are mild perks and then a naughty one that will require losing something you need to gain a juicy reward, they are nearly always useful, and almost always you'll choose the 3rd most powerful option, because really why wouldn't you. Again more of Jacobs art is lovingly daubed across the cards along with the choices, and despite how lovely the art is, and it is, part of me feels either a title or dash of flavor text would have been helpful to set the scene a little more.

Finally after all of that when a faction hits 6 stars the game is over. Immediately.

And if you found that a little jarring then well it is. After all this world building and tech tree manipulation there's this arbitrary end, finished kaput and it can be sudden with little warning. A game of Scyth will go as such, everyone spends an hour maybe two harvesting, moving and tech sudokuing picking up the odd one or two stars, and then in the space of a round maybe two suddenly everyone can hit the total. Its then this mad dash of trying to suddenly grab territories or resources throwing any gestating plans on the fire in this mad grab for stuff. It's just so sudden and unsatisfying after the journey we've taken, Imagine if Lord of the Rings Return of the King decided to skip that whole Gondor siege thing and volcano and ring business and just jumped to the bloody Hobbits high fiving at Rivendale. The End.

Now this sounds like I'm ragging on Scythe, and I don't mean to. It is an enormous amount of fun, when you're engrossed in the business of tweaking your engine and messing with your tech tree, it's all very enjoyable, but here's the rub.
There really isn't anything all that innovative, it feels like I'm playing this potpourri of popular mechanics. The player boards are excellent fun, but I think TM did it better, the combat again borrowed from Kemet is nowhere near as much fun as that game. There's a dash of Eclipse a pinch of Viticulture a niblet of Euphoria. Everything is immaculately balanced, but you know what? I love a little chaos in my world, a bit of random, there is nothing here to chance, and inevitably the whole thing ends up despite the incredible art and extravagant components feeling great when I really want to be jumping on my chair, and bellowing like Brian Blessed "It's incredible!".
I think I get it now Jamey is the Ridley Scott of board games, both of them it cannot be denied are masters of their form. They create these epic stylishly produced masterpieces beautiful to admire but ultimately lacking in something.

I'm so torn because I have enjoyed every game of Scythe I've played, it's a robust design it's hugely enjoyable, there's nothing wrong with it at all but it ultimately falls short of the sum of its very impressive parts.

Originally Published @ www.whodaresrolls.com
31 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Garnica
United States
Pasadena
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mibar01 wrote:

I'm so torn because I have enjoyed every game of Scythe I've played, it's a robust design it's hugely enjoyable, there's nothing wrong with it at all but it ultimately falls short of the sum of its very impressive parts.


I'm not here to start a hate war because this is a somewhat negative(?) review. But this seems contradictory. You like the game, find it enjoyable, nothing wrong with it, yet it falls short? With all due respect, it sounds like you don't want to admit to yourself how much you like the game in spite of the reasons you presumed you ought not to like it.

Again, not trying to spark controversy, I'm perfectly fine with negative reviews, but your ultimate conclusion feels ambiguous at best.
21 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken B.
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the review.

Every time I hear complaints about the combat system, I wonder how much those complaining have ever played the classic Dune, for it is largely the same. Bid an amount, play with a card or no. Dune's is more robust, of course. But the statements about, "Well, you know you can bid 7 and win" misses a key point, and it's the crux of such a battle system. Yes, you *know* you can win with 7. However, your opponent knows that too. Why waste power on a losing battle? They still want their combat card, so they bid 1....yes, then you win with 7, but you just wasted power you didn't have to spend 7! (The same in Dune where you can win by sacrificing your large group, but wouldn't it be nice if you could have won by losing less?)

And the player that can win a battle by spending 3 power versus 7 power is going to be in a much better place. And that's the game involved in such battle systems.
28 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Cat Five
United States
Monterey
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting. I find the battles extremely tense, as the blind bid is nearly always a tough call as you want to spend the least amount of combat power for maximum effect. Spending a lot of your power and losing has huge ramifications, but so is making a minimum bid and your opponent calling your bluff. The results of each combat changes how the other players perceive you as a threat and may be the chink in your armor that causes your empire to collapse, as the others move in for easy stars and territory gain.

That being said, combat has its place and doesn't overstay its welcome. Depending on the players and current game, there may not be any combat at all, and the game still works well. I've never played a game like this that has this level of optional, yet fully integrated combat.

To each his own, of course. Great review!
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Pilkus
United States
South Riding
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mike,

First, great write-up! I always appreciate well-written reviews or thoughts on a game. Second, I'm not sure if anyone, including Jamey ever billed Scythe as a war game. While it certainly has elements, such as the mechs, a combat section in the rules, and disposition of forces following a battle, it's really the threat of conflict vice a war game (of which I have much more experience having been on the development team for more than two dozen published games).

I think most folks would agree that what Scythe does, it does seamlessly, but I agree that it's incredibly balanced and may cause some to question the lack of what you called, chaos. Take Cosmic Encounter...all of the races are not only asymmetrical, some are downright imbalanced. But, for some players, that imbalance is necessary for the overall game.

As one who thoroughly enjoys Scythe, though not impressed by the combat-driven Kemet or the quasi-civ building nature of Terra Mystica (I"m a fan of Castles of Burgundy), this one hits the mark for me...maybe it's similar enough to the others without pure imitation which I find exciting.

Anyway, well-written...hope you get it to the table again.

Cheers,
Joe
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reverend Uncle Bastard
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Great review! I do have one quibble though. The popularity track is nowhere near as important as you make it out to be. I have played 15 games of this so far and in at least 4-5 of those games the winner has been on the bottom tier of popularity. At least once the winner had 0 popularity. I would respectfully suggest that the depth of this game is much greater than a first few plays reveals. There are definitely many paths to victory!
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
United Kingdom
southampton
hampshire
flag msg tools
Dare To Roll - www.whodaresrolls.com
mbmbmbmbmb
My ambiguity is due to the fact I'm ambiguous to the game. If I was to come on here and call it a terrible game I'd be wrong. Anyone buying it, is getting a stunningly produced item. I personally expected something innovative and revolutionary instead its more a vague feeling of deja vu, enjoyable certainly, but I expected more than this delivers.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carsten Saathoff
Germany
Oldenburg
Niedersachsen
flag msg tools
In our game group we discussed very similar issues after a couple of games. In our opinion, what's missing in Scythe, is actually a reason to fight. In none of the games we really had a reason to fight except to get a star for it. We have never been directly competing for resources. It is extremely easy to get resources via trade, so why should I run across the board, spend actions, just to fight for resources. I just choose to trade them. As a result, playing Scythe feels a bit like traditional worker placement, but without really competing for spots, because every one has plenty of them right in front of his nose. Furthermore, except the already mentioned star, fighting has no other advantage for me as a an aggressor. I cant destroy an opponents star, his popularity, tech or structures. In the end, it's me who has lost actions, power and maybe popularity for no direct benefit. That's why I usually try not to fight.

So while it is a great game with amazing components, amazing artwork, and very solid mechanics, so far we did not have the outstanding experience we were expecting. Maybe the game will change and become more competitive after more plays, that's something we don't know yet.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
United Kingdom
southampton
hampshire
flag msg tools
Dare To Roll - www.whodaresrolls.com
mbmbmbmbmb
I had a whole game as Saxony being a bit fighty, which led to much of my critical feelings over combat in the game. It can certainly mess up your rivals with well timed strikes and yumming up of their resources especially if they've set up shop on a tunnel. But it never felt like a winning strategy.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken B.
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, saying "the only reason to fight is to get a star" is kind of like saying, "the only reason to fight is to earn one of the six major victory point markers and push me towards my goal of earning six of them."



And if everyone feels super comfy sitting on weakly defended piles of resources, marching one mech in can cost you a couple of points of popularity...but earn you four or five resources, disrupt your opponent's back-and-forth bonus action chain, and cost them actions to mobilize those workers again. It is deceptively but brutally punishing.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg
United States
Lowell
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
kodemaniak wrote:
In our game group we discussed very similar issues after a couple of games. In our opinion, what's missing in Scythe, is actually a reason to fight. In none of the games we really had a reason to fight except to get a star for it. We have never been directly competing for resources. It is extremely easy to get resources via trade, so why should I run across the board, spend actions, just to fight for resources. I just choose to trade them. As a result, playing Scythe feels a bit like traditional worker placement, but without really competing for spots, because every one has plenty of them right in front of his nose. Furthermore, except the already mentioned star, fighting has no other advantage for me as a an aggressor. I cant destroy an opponents star, his popularity, tech or structures. In the end, it's me who has lost actions, power and maybe popularity for no direct benefit. That's why I usually try not to fight.

So while it is a great game with amazing components, amazing artwork, and very solid mechanics, so far we did not have the outstanding experience we were expecting. Maybe the game will change and become more competitive after more plays, that's something we don't know yet.


Sure you get a star, but that may be the final star ti end the game and it may be sooner than your opp are ready for. Additionally, if you win, if you had left a unit on the territory you left from before battle, you will gain another territory for extra pots and deny that opponent those points.

You could also take over a territory that has an opponent's mill, so they won't get its benefits any longer. Or take control of a territory that an opponent has a building on that would give them building bonus points at the end of the game.

I've also found out on a few occasions that losing a combat cost a player from being able to complete an objective.

It could also delay an opponent from being able to take an action that would have them end the game in their next turn or two.

It could give you 3 territories and cost an opponent 3 territories when battling at the factory.

I see plenty of reasons to want to attack in this game, though some rely on timing and situations, there are certainly reasons to attack.

While combat isn't a central feature of the game, I find that some of the combats can be pretty memorable because of a good fake out in use of power, or because of costing an opponent something big they were planning on.

I have plenty of combat oriented games for when I just want a lot of fighting, so for me anyway, Scythe has enough and it's style works for me. Of course, it can also depend on player count and other player personalities as well. So not for everyone.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reverend Uncle Bastard
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
franklincobb wrote:
Well, saying "the only reason to fight is to get a star" is kind of like saying, "the only reason to fight is to earn one of the six major victory point markers and push me towards my goal of earning six of them."




This exactly! Also while you can trade for 2 resources at the cost of one coin, a well timed combat can net you a significant number of resources (if your opponents are hoarding in preparation of a 4 resource cost action for example) at 0 cost for the action, plus you also get to move 1-2 other units, plus you get a star which is worth 4-6 points at end game. This becomes particularly attractive if you are at 5 stars and want to end the game, or if you have already maxed your power chart and received that star (in which case loss of power is no big deal).

This game is, as far as I can tell, meant to be more like a "cold" war than a hot one. While combat may not feature in all games (depending on player style), the decisions you make are usually affected by the risk of combat, whether it is actually happening or not. If you play with people who are conflict averse, you may indeed see very little, but as soon as one person clues in to the advantages of the occasional combat the rest of you will be forced to contend with it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reverend Uncle Bastard
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hahma wrote:
Or take control of a territory that an opponent has a building on that would give them building bonus points at the end of the game.


Incorrect!

Rules, Page 29, Scoring Categories:

"Structure Bonus Tile: Gain coins based on the number of structure bonuses you achieved. You gain this bonus even if you don't control the territories your structures are on."

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg
United States
Lowell
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
reverendunclebastard wrote:
Hahma wrote:
Or take control of a territory that an opponent has a building on that would give them building bonus points at the end of the game.


Incorrect!

Rules, Page 29, Scoring Categories:

"Structure Bonus Tile: Gain coins based on the number of structure bonuses you achieved. You gain this bonus even if you don't control the territories your structures are on."



Ok Rev, that was my bad. I was just going off the top of my head from work what may be some reasons to attack. That one I've never tried, so never played wrong.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Klaus Kristiansen
Denmark
Kongens Lyngby
flag msg tools
mb
First you say that popularity is extremely important. The you ask why not take the third, most powerful option on the encounter cards. You have answerede your own question: because that option costs popularity. In my (very limited) experience, people rarely take that option. Of course if it gets you something that you really need, you would take it. E.g. if Polonia can get a mech from her first encounter.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luke Hector
United Kingdom
Portsmouth
flag msg tools
http://brokenmeeple.blogspot.co.uk/
mbmbmbmbmb
To be honest, I wasn't expecting the game to be incredibly innovative, but it's taking a lot of popular mechanics and tropes and splicing them together in a clean and neat way. I get variable encounters, asymmetrical player powers, multiple paths to victory, a choice between combat and non-combat, stunning artwork, great components and a lot of variety all in one game and each bit hits it out of the park. Doesn't even use dice which is another feat for a Euro.

Hype is a big killer for a game though, everyone goes nuts on the internet over everything without taking a step back and just thinking "you know what, it could be good, it could be bad, I'll wait and see and make my own mind up". No game lives up to the hype, it's impossible for a game to do so period - I think I gave a mini-rant on this in my audio review of Scythe on the podcast.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sky Zero
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It's Rivendell.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
United Kingdom
southampton
hampshire
flag msg tools
Dare To Roll - www.whodaresrolls.com
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes it is, oops. There goes my geek credentials. Corrected.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
corum irsei
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mibar01 wrote:
Battles are a deterministic affair with either side secretly choosing the amount of power they will be spending on the fight up to a maximum of 7 and adding combat cards to boost this total.

Borrowing a little from Rex and Kemet yet nowhere as exciting as either, the problem is the combat cards, most of them being either a 2 or a 3 with a few scant 5's scattered amongst them.
Not having played the game yet, this was/is my main worry and criticism, too. Imho, if a game implements combat using cards, why not fully utilize the possiblities? Having a deck of cards with nothing but a single numerical combat bonus is really lackluster, especially given that Kemet was cited as one source of inspiration for Scythe.
kodemaniak wrote:
In our game group we discussed very similar issues after a couple of games. In our opinion, what's missing in Scythe, is actually a reason to fight. In none of the games we really had a reason to fight except to get a star for it. We have never been directly competing for resources.
With how many players did you play? I can quite understand why you wouldn't see any reason to fight each other in a two-player game, but if the board's more crowded, surely, combat becomes almost a necessity?

It's also a bit odd, since some players reported that they felt they had to attack certain factions to prevent them from auto-winning, if left unchecked.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike B
United Kingdom
southampton
hampshire
flag msg tools
Dare To Roll - www.whodaresrolls.com
mbmbmbmbmb
Fighting shouldn't be underestimated in that it can severely hamper a player, it's certainly a way to slow down someone running away with the lead. However in recent game I saw this coming but was unable to do very little about it as my Riverwalk ability made it impossible to get at them. If you're playing a game a theres players unwilling to get in on the fights there isn't a whole lot you can do to stop a leader other snatch as much end game points you can.
And totally agree the battle system could have been implemented far better
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thibaut Palfer-Sollier
France
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
To me, the references in simple-yet-brilliant card-only combat system are both Sekigahara and Maria, in two very different styles and both fitting perfectly well their purpose.
And that is the important point here. I feel like the combat system in Scythe fits perfectly well its purpose. Combat in Scythe is not important enough to justify a more evolved combat system.
To me, it looks like you would have liked combat to be more central to Scythe than it is.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carsten Saathoff
Germany
Oldenburg
Niedersachsen
flag msg tools
Quote:
kodemaniak wrote:
In our game group we discussed very similar issues after a couple of games. In our opinion, what's missing in Scythe, is actually a reason to fight. In none of the games we really had a reason to fight except to get a star for it. We have never been directly competing for resources.
With how many players did you play? I can quite understand why you wouldn't see any reason to fight each other in a two-player game, but if the board's more crowded, surely, combat becomes almost a necessity?

It's also a bit odd, since some players reported that they felt they had to attack certain factions to prevent them from auto-winning, if left unchecked.


Both 3 and 4 player games. We have not played with 5 players yet. But so far we have not really come into situations where combat was a necessity.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carsten Saathoff
Germany
Oldenburg
Niedersachsen
flag msg tools
tublefou wrote:
To me, the references in simple-yet-brilliant card-only combat system are both Sekigahara and Maria, in two very different styles and both fitting perfectly well their purpose.
And that is the important point here. I feel like the combat system in Scythe fits perfectly well its purpose. Combat in Scythe is not important enough to justify a more evolved combat system.
To me, it looks like you would have liked combat to be more central to Scythe than it is.


Yes, that's the point maybe. My expectation was that combat is more central to Scythe, but it is not. And at least for me I still think it would have been better with a stronger focus on combat. But a) I am not a game designer, so I might be wrong, and b) it might be a personal preference or the preference of my game group.

As I wrote above: It is a great game, just a bit different than expected to me.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg
United States
Lowell
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
kodemaniak wrote:
tublefou wrote:
To me, the references in simple-yet-brilliant card-only combat system are both Sekigahara and Maria, in two very different styles and both fitting perfectly well their purpose.
And that is the important point here. I feel like the combat system in Scythe fits perfectly well its purpose. Combat in Scythe is not important enough to justify a more evolved combat system.
To me, it looks like you would have liked combat to be more central to Scythe than it is.


Yes, that's the point maybe. My expectation was that combat is more central to Scythe, but it is not. And at least for me I still think it would have been better with a stronger focus on combat. But a) I am not a game designer, so I might be wrong, and b) it might be a personal preference or the preference of my game group.

As I wrote above: It is a great game, just a bit different than expected to me.


I think that the combat is less central and less complex than some people/group expect or prefer. While on the other hand, the combat system may be more appealing to some and even get some non-combat people to try and enjoy the game.

So ultimately it depends on which type of group people fall into. Some may find it lacking and some may find it just right.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthias Reitberger
Germany
Nürnberg
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I see attacking as an very good option in the end game.
You can get a star, expand your territory by taking it away from an opponent, which is better than expanding into empty areas.
Spending power and combat cards often doesn't hurt and the popularity loss is predictable and there's often a possibility that it will not put you down a step.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.