Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
36 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Hanabi» Forums » General

Subject: Etiquette - Cheating and Alpha Gaming rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Kyle Johnson
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've recently been playing Hanabi online a bit with people other than my normal gaming groups and have to ask, at what point is it cheating?

I don't play random cards, people get upset and say 'you should have done this' or 'this means that' (other peoples strategies contradict each other) so I just watch them play, follow their patterns , play with reason, calculate the odds. This isn't one or two games, this is like, half the people. Whose turn is it!?

I've heard Hanabi eliminates alpha-gaming but I have seen far from it, I am not playing with people online anymore. Sometimes they even say things like 'oh the other one is useless, discard it' to another player.

Who the heck feels the need to cheat in a co-operative, filler, card game?

So not playing online ever again!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wood
United States
Davis
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You are not allowed to give information about the cards except as specified in the rules. About all my group would allow would be to ask 'What do you know about your cards?' when we aren't sure just how lost the player is.

At no time do we tell anyone how useful a card is as you say. That is cheating. That is not a 'group method', that is cheating. You are well quit of people who decide victory is easier without those pesky rules that make the game as great and difficult as it is.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Blankstein
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't played online, but most of my in-person games, I try to have a conversation first and establish what level of communication people are looking for. Usually, it ends up being just what's allowed by the rules plus "what do you know about your cards?", but it's useful to have everyone start out on the same page.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pierre Beri
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
It is very risky to go and play unguided on Boardgamearena, there are conventions most players follow and that make little sense and that they impose upon new players. BGA style is pretty terrible and you need to impose yourself and be very selective.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tor Sverre Lund
Norway
Trondheim
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have enjoyed playing it online, but have also had experiences like you describe. I just downvote the most aggressive players, and have found others that fit my style who I have given thumbs up, so I just screen players basically ^_^ Now it's mostly "good luck, have fun" in the beginning, then total silence until after the last card or so is played and THEN we can sit and talk about the game almost as long as we played it.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kyle Johnson
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I just don't believe in any game that any player should be dictating other another player's turn. It's THEIR TURN, and while I may not always agree with their decisions, it is theirs to make; that's part of the variation that makes gaming...gaming. Adapt and make the best of any situation and most importantly HAVE FUN
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Carter
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
epinema wrote:
Adapt and make the best of any situation and most importantly WIN

FTFY whistle
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dylan Thurston
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
epinema wrote:
Who the heck feels the need to cheat in a co-operative, filler, card game?
I'm totally on board with not cheating and with restraining impulses to give advice, but I just found this amusing: I don't think of Hanabi as a filler game at all.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Cooper
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
epinema wrote:
I've recently been playing Hanabi online a bit with people other than my normal gaming groups and have to ask, at what point is it cheating?

I don't play random cards, people get upset and say 'you should have done this' or 'this means that' (other peoples strategies contradict each other) so I just watch them play, follow their patterns , play with reason, calculate the odds. This isn't one or two games, this is like, half the people. Whose turn is it!?

I've heard Hanabi eliminates alpha-gaming but I have seen far from it, I am not playing with people online anymore. Sometimes they even say things like 'oh the other one is useless, discard it' to another player.

Who the heck feels the need to cheat in a co-operative, filler, card game?

So not playing online ever again!


I haven't played on BGA for a few months now, but I have to say I never had this experience. Perhaps I just got lucky? Most games I've played there, nobody said anything except at the beginning and end. There have been some games where people have tried to explain what they were thinking with the clue after it was interpreted differently. I don't hate that, I think that is how people learn. I love to try cluing in a way I haven't done before to see if other people will get what I'm trying to do.

I definitely don't think anybody should ever say, that card is useless now, or make suggestions like that which are things that should only be indicated by an appropriate clue. In general with online gaming, you'll get people who aren't patient and they'll get upset when you do what they don't expect. I already knew most (if not all) of the conventions that people use on BGA before I played there, so I haven't run into that myself, but I can definitely see how some people would jump down someone's throat for not doing it the way they think is best.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Cooper
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
beri2 wrote:
It is very risky to go and play unguided on Boardgamearena, there are conventions most players follow and that make little sense and that they impose upon new players. BGA style is pretty terrible and you need to impose yourself and be very selective.


I'm curious, which conventions do you think make little sense? I haven't run into one that they use yet that didn't make sense. Some of them I don't think are the best, and my normal group just plays differently, but I understand why they play the way they do.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kyle Johnson
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dthurston wrote:
I'm totally on board with not cheating and with restraining impulses to give advice, but I just found this amusing: I don't think of Hanabi as a filler game at all.


Ditto; I apologize. It's a lighter game but definitely above filler weight
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pierre Beri
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
monkeyboy157 wrote:
beri2 wrote:
It is very risky to go and play unguided on Boardgamearena, there are conventions most players follow and that make little sense and that they impose upon new players. BGA style is pretty terrible and you need to impose yourself and be very selective.


I'm curious, which conventions do you think make little sense? I haven't run into one that they use yet that didn't make sense. Some of them I don't think are the best, and my normal group just plays differently, but I understand why they play the way they do.
I'm gonna make a lot of enemies here but I think playing from the left regardless of the context makes no sense, especially when the clue hits the chop, especially when the clue hits the chop and does not hit the newest card. If there were no flaws to this technique, it would make sense to adopt it, but there are.

Also, reading finesse into clues that have another basic meaning (and therefore striking, aka bombing) is quite widespread on BGA.

The problem on BGA is that you will find players that tell a newcomer "hey buddy, sit down, be quiet and let me tell you how it works: play left, discard right, and now I'll tell you about finesse and bluff. Play this way and no harm will be done to you." No/little room is left for questioning these techniques and trying to understand them rather than applying them blindly.

Finesse and bluff are very advanced logic and IMO should not be taught by word until a player has played at least 100 games, because they severely disturb the process of learning the basics and the perception one has of "normal", non-finesse smart clues. Therefore, the efficiency that is sought with finesse is more than negated by the lack of mastery of basics.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Cooper
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
beri2 wrote:
monkeyboy157 wrote:
beri2 wrote:
It is very risky to go and play unguided on Boardgamearena, there are conventions most players follow and that make little sense and that they impose upon new players. BGA style is pretty terrible and you need to impose yourself and be very selective.


I'm curious, which conventions do you think make little sense? I haven't run into one that they use yet that didn't make sense. Some of them I don't think are the best, and my normal group just plays differently, but I understand why they play the way they do.
I'm gonna make a lot of enemies here but I think playing from the left regardless of the context makes no sense, especially when the clue hits the chop, especially when the clue hits the chop and does not hit the newest card. If there were no flaws to this technique, it would make sense to adopt it, but there are.


To me it comes down to needing to know what other people are going to do. You can't always single out one card, there are a ton of situations where you have to clue multiple cards. If I can't predict which card you'll try to play, then it takes extra clues every time. There are situations, as you hinted at, that playing the new card does make sense. We've been waiting for a green 3 for several turns around the table, you draw and somebody immediately tells you about some green cards, including the one you just drew. This is an example of a situation where the newest card is the one we care about and I feel like most people could agree with this conclusion.

Now look at some random clue given during a game. Say somebody clues your two middle cards as blue, and to make matters worse, somebody just barely played the blue 2. So, we haven't been waiting on your 3, it was just made playable. Which of the two is more important? Obviously they are the same, I can't really know which one you want me to play. What if you play the one from the right? I feel like this is really bad, because now I have an extra layer of interpretation for clues. Sometimes when I clue you, you'll play from the left, other times I clue you, you'll play from the right. Now I have to figure out what decision you'll make in each situation, and we won't always be thinking in the same context. So, it breaks down and now any clue to multiple cards we should always just wait for a second clue. This is too inefficient. It quickly became apparent to us that always playing from one side or the other makes things clear for the entire table. You can pick either side, but for us, the situations where the newest card really is important made us decide that playing the newest card first helps.

We were playing this way before I read any strategy guides, or before I did any playing on BGA. It looks like many other people have come to about the same conclusion, so to me it makes sense. You're definitely right, it does have its flaws. But it helps in so many instances that we are willing to take the hit and double clue when it has a problem. It has a huge advantage over waiting for another clue.

With your point on a chop card, I definitely wouldn't play anything if you clued my chop and it has any potential that you were trying to save. Sometimes you can't clue the chop alone, and we've learned, through many strikes, that it is safer to assume they were trying to get me to save a card. Now, sometimes we get desperate near the end of the game and play anyway, but generally I'll not play if I can see any possibility that the clue was a save on my chop card. I actually haven't seen people play much on a clue like that when on BGA, but then again, I haven't played there in a while.

beri2 wrote:
Also, reading finesse into clues that have another basic meaning (and therefore striking, aka bombing) is quite widespread on BGA.

The problem on BGA is that you will find players that tell a newcomer "hey buddy, sit down, be quiet and let me tell you how it works: play left, discard right, and now I'll tell you about finesse and bluff. Play this way and no harm will be done to you." No/little room is left for questioning these techniques and trying to understand them rather than applying them blindly.

Finesse and bluff are very advanced logic and IMO should not be taught by word until a player has played at least 100 games, because they hardly disturb the process of learning the basics and the perception one has of "normal", non-finesse smart clues. Therefore, the efficiency that is sought with finesse is more than negated by the lack of mastery of basics.


I definitely agree that finesse and bluff are advanced. When I play on BGA, I don't try to give these clues at all, until I see somebody give one. So, if I see you attempt to give a finesse, and it is just missed, then later in the game I'll look for opportunities to finesse a card out of your hand, because I feel like you'll probably understand it. Otherwise I just don't give those clues. But that isn't to say that I don't think a finesse or a bluff don't make any sense.

I get what you're saying about imposing rules on new players. I have definitely seen that. They expect that you'll play their way, and when I play on there I play different from how I play with my normal group. With our normal group, we love to try out weird, "new", clues. Sometimes they are terrible, sometimes they work great. Sometimes I feel like it was good, but was just missed, so I'll try it several times and see if anybody ever picks up on what I'm trying to do. This is how we evolve as a group, try new things and see if somebody interprets it correctly, then decide if it is even helpful. It might seem to some as a "rule" or a clue that doesn't make sense, but for our group it has just come from a lot of plays together.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pierre Beri
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
monkeyboy157 wrote:
There are situations, as you hinted at, that playing the new card does make sense. We've been waiting for a green 3 for several turns around the table, you draw and somebody immediately tells you about some green cards, including the one you just drew. This is an example of a situation where the newest card is the one we care about and I feel like most people could agree with this conclusion.
Agree.

Quote:
Now look at some random clue given during a game. Say somebody clues your two middle cards as blue, and to make matters worse, somebody just barely played the blue 2. So, we haven't been waiting on your 3, it was just made playable. Which of the two is more important? Obviously they are the same, I can't really know which one you want me to play.
Exactly

Quote:
Sometimes when I clue you, you'll play from the left, other times I clue you, you'll play from the right.
This is too risky and random if it's not based on the only common reference we can rely on when unable to communicate: logic. Why would one go risky and random instead of just holding the cards?

Quote:
But it helps in so many instances that we are willing to take the hit and double clue when it has a problem. It has a huge advantage over waiting for another clue.
It also has a big disadvantage: it forbids a number of great, efficient clues, because you know the clue receiver will play leftmost and bomb if you give them. This got me quite frustrated.

I guess both ways work, I just have much more fun with the more situational one that requires analyzing a bunch of parameters, deeper thinking and that really fits the game's philosophy IMO.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kyle Johnson
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
See, I'm a horrible person...

Periodically, if someone is really over-bearing and pushy to the point of the game being no fun, I will discard this second unmarked card from the right, just because I swear one guy almost had an aneurysm laugh

Isn't that what the skill levels are for? If someone is going to employ top-tier tactics they probably shouldn't be joining games with average level players and berating them for not studying Hanabi like it's Chess.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Cooper
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
beri2 wrote:
monkeyboy157 wrote:
There are situations, as you hinted at, that playing the new card does make sense. We've been waiting for a green 3 for several turns around the table, you draw and somebody immediately tells you about some green cards, including the one you just drew. This is an example of a situation where the newest card is the one we care about and I feel like most people could agree with this conclusion.
Agree.

Quote:
Now look at some random clue given during a game. Say somebody clues your two middle cards as blue, and to make matters worse, somebody just barely played the blue 2. So, we haven't been waiting on your 3, it was just made playable. Which of the two is more important? Obviously they are the same, I can't really know which one you want me to play.
Exactly

Quote:
Sometimes when I clue you, you'll play from the left, other times I clue you, you'll play from the right.
This is too risky and random if it's not based on the only common reference we can rely on when unable to communicate: logic. Why would one go risky and random instead of just holding the cards?

Quote:
But it helps in so many instances that we are willing to take the hit and double clue when it has a problem. It has a huge advantage over waiting for another clue.
It also has a big disadvantage: it forbids a number of great, efficient clues, because you know the clue receiver will play leftmost and bomb if you give them. This got me quite frustrated.

I guess both ways work, I just have much more fun with the more situational one that requires analyzing a bunch of parameters, deeper thinking and that really fits the game's philosophy IMO.


Do you have an example of a great, efficient clue, that this forbids? As I see it, the only limitation is if we didn't leave enough clues to double clue before your turn. If you usually hold after a clue including multiple cards, I always have to give you 2 clues. If you usually play, then a lot of the time I can get away with just 1 clue, and sometimes I have to give 2.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henry Dove
United States
Easton
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I have played over 500 games of Hanabi on BGA. I play many other games on BGA and have very few red thumbs. However, two thirds of them are from Hanabi. This game seems to generate more nasty comments about mistakes then any other game on BGA. That being said, if you play with new people you should try to guide not demand before or after the game or during the game if it is designated a learning game. Otherwise no talking during the game. If I play with excellent players or Masters then most of the conventions are assumed and if somebody departs we discuss why after the game is over.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Gough
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I know a lot disagree with me on this, and different practises have become commonplace with this game, but I firmly believe that a game's rules are what MAKE the game.

They set the tone, difficulty and enjoy-ability for me. I'm not saying that you should never play variants, or that you should never throw in the occasional house rule, but with Hanabi, I find the modifications and conventions that people play with are not only way outside of what the rules actually state, but they also go completely against the spirit of the game.

People will use these conventions - and they like to call them "conventions" because "coded instructions" or "shorthand for illegal clues" expose the cheating nature a little too much - and then they'll try to act all superior to you because they can hit a score of 25 in 9 games out of 10.

Great! Well done!
But you're not playing Hanabi.

You're playing a variant that's way easier.

For me, the fun of playing Hanabi is knowing that the difficulty is so high. What's the point in celebrating a win if you spend the whole game with this "nudge nudge, wink wink" mentality, giving people information outside of the permitted colour and number clues?

Yes, I get that information can be logically inferred about which cards you give information about, and WHAT information you give, WHEN. But that logic should be left to the player receiving the information.

Knowing beforehand that "if I say 'this is a five' and I'm pointing the 4th card in your hand, that also means that the one immediately to it's left should be played next" ... to me, that's is blatant cheating.

It doesn't matter how clever your system is. To me, it's just the same as card counting in a casino.

Don't get me wrong, I like playing games that involve deep strategy and memory. So, teach me your Hanabi Variant rules and we'll have a great time. But I won't be telling people that I beat Hanabi.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Hendee
United States
Frisco
Texas
flag msg tools
I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Whenever you become anxious or stressed, outer purpose has taken over, and you have lost sight of your inner purpose. Your state of consciousness is primary. All else is secondary.
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Are you telling me that if I learn anything from my first play of Hanabi that helps my second play then I am cheating? If not, what am I allowed to learn, in your opinion, and not be cheating?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Burgess
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No, I don't think that's what's being said at all.

The point is that a lot of people seem to play with conventions that are agreed on up-front. That alters the game to not-Hanabi. If you can surmise the intentions of your fellow players during a game, or even from game-to-game, well, then that's very Hanabi. But if you discuss it, formalise it and agree amongst yourselves that this-means-that then no.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Hendee
United States
Frisco
Texas
flag msg tools
I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Whenever you become anxious or stressed, outer purpose has taken over, and you have lost sight of your inner purpose. Your state of consciousness is primary. All else is secondary.
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
MercifulBiscuit wrote:
No, I don't think that's what's being said at all.

The point is that a lot of people seem to play with conventions that are agreed on up-front. That alters the game to not-Hanabi. If you can surmise the intentions of your fellow players during a game, or even from game-to-game, well, then that's very Hanabi. But if you discuss it, formalise it and agree amongst yourselves that this-means-that then no.


So two groups could play the same way and one is cheating, in your mind, because they discussed it beforehand. I can see that requiring conventions to develop through experience has some appeal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robb Effinger
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
MercifulBiscuit wrote:
No, I don't think that's what's being said at all.

The point is that a lot of people seem to play with conventions that are agreed on up-front. That alters the game to not-Hanabi. If you can surmise the intentions of your fellow players during a game, or even from game-to-game, well, then that's very Hanabi. But if you discuss it, formalise it and agree amongst yourselves that this-means-that then no.


So it's fine if you can surmise the intentions of your fellow players, because of actions you/they have taken in past game... just so long as no one talks about it between games?

And if someone new joins your group, you can also never explain anything to them - you just have to keep playing with them until they figure everything out all by themselves?

----

I mean, the above system is doable. But it feels a lot like insisting that you're not allowed to use the Pythagorean Theorem until you can derive it yourself from base principles. Sure, you're going to be a lot better at math in general, and understand that theorem in particular, if you do derive it yourself. But if your friend shows up with no background whatsoever looking to find the length of the hypotenuse with you, you might at least point him in the right direction - explain addition or multiplication, for example, or show him how proofs generally work. And I don't see what's actually wrong with just showing him the entire proof either, or giving him the formula and asking him to apply it.

(Personally, I think that a lot of the fun of the game comes from discovering the conventions for yourself. But all the conventions are just that - conventions - the way that you should generally act, because that is the way that generally makes the most logical sense. They can be discovered for yourself. But they can also be explained to you. They also aren't some magic formula that guarantees success - personally, every time my game group tried out of "house rule", an X always means Y convention, we'd always found that it limited us as much as helped us. The game because became easier when we just did the logically correct thing... and had played a bunch (and talked about it with each other a bunch) to all understand what that was)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robb Effinger
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
But really, the above is just my opinion on it. The designer has stated his opinion very clearly - people should play the game however they want to have fun.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Burgess
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think I've stated my position on this accurately enough. To be clear, I think you can talk about extrapolated logic and how to do that. You can have the "Pythagoras" conversation about how to figure out what move is best to make given the current game state and the information that you're allowed to convey by the rules of the game. But that's very different from convention.

Let's take an example. Green 1-4 have all been played. It's my turn and I give you a clue that one of the cards in your hand, about which you previously had no information, is green. Now, I either mean "this is a 5, you can play it now" or I mean "this card is useless and you may as well discard it". One of those might be more likely than the other given previous discards, so you can certainly have a conversation about that (outside of the game). But it seems that a lot of people are agreeing to conventions like, for example, if I give you such a clue, it means that the card is playable.

To me, that's not Hanabi. That's extra information conveyed, and like Adam said above, maybe you get to 25 that way - but you can't really say you beat the game.

However, like you said, people should play how they want and have fun with it. But people should also be honest with each other if they're comparing games. I don't know if that's not happening, of course, just saying...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Malachi Brown
United States
Hermitage
TN
flag msg tools
It's turtles all the way down.
badge
“Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.”
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MercifulBiscuit wrote:
Let's take an example. Green 1-4 have all been played. It's my turn and I give you a clue that one of the cards in your hand, about which you previously had no information, is green. Now, I either mean "this is a 5, you can play it now" or I mean "this card is useless and you may as well discard it". One of those might be more likely than the other given previous discards, so you can certainly have a conversation about that (outside of the game). But it seems that a lot of people are agreeing to conventions like, for example, if I give you such a clue, it means that the card is playable.

Thanks for providing a real example, your original example was a totally artificial convention. In this situation, it is not that we are agreeing to play the card in advance when clued this way, it's that playing the card that was clued is the logical thing to do. While you might have some people who were "taught" the convention of playing a single clued card (Cargo Cult Hanabi), the underlying reason why that is the "conventional" response is based on logic. All of the "extra information" is contained in that set of logical conclusions drawn from the clue that was given.

If I gave that clue to a skilled and experienced (logical) player, I would expect them to play the card at their earliest convenience without any additional information. (There are some possible corner cases, but the scenario does not involve information for them.)

I can understand how it can seem like an arbitrary, pre-set convention to someone who hasn't worked out some of the finer points and, in the hands of someone who has just been told what to do, it could be seen as an artificial convention. However, when you understand the logic, it's only arbitrary in the same way that technology is magic to people who don't understand it.

I will admit that early in my Hanabi career, there were a lot of things that had not occurred to me that caused me to think that some of the conclusions that people came to were unfounded, but as my play has developed, I have worked out for myself what makes sense and why.
4 
 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.