Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
65 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Twilight Imperium (Fourth Edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: 87.7 - Simultaneously vs Initiative Order rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
So 87.7 states as follows:
The game ends IMMEDIATELY when one player has 10 victory
points. If multiple players would SIMULTANEOUSLY reach 10
victory points during the STATUS or agenda phase, the player who
is nearest the speaker
in clockwise order is the winner.

Status Phase:
70.1 STEP 1—SCORE OBJECTIVES: Following INITIATIVE ORDER,
each player may score up to one public objective and one secret
objective...

Seems to me that 87.7 is in controversy with itself OR under "simultaneously" it is understood the whole STEP 1.
Because in SP there is no other way get a VP then within step 1 of SP.

So question is: if there are two players who will have 10 VP during SP step 1 who will be the winner:
1. the one with lower SC number or
2. the one sitting next to speaker?

P.S. it was just the case of a game i had yesterday...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
Also I have just opened a regular Rules Reference and there is another redaction of 87.7(!!!):
"The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points. If two players would gain 10 victory points during the same status phase, the player who is earlier in initiative order is the winner, because he has the opportunity to score objectives first."

Compare with LRR 87.7:
"The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points. If multiple players would simultaneously reach 10
victory points during the status or agenda phase, the player who
is nearest the speaker in clockwise order is the winner
.
"


So looks like it is allowed for everyone to score a VP in a step 1 SP and then the player sitting closer to the speaker is the winner.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Initiative Order is key. If we are both at 9 (and the only players to simplify the example) and you socre first, you win. That is how TI rolls.

The simultaneously part is just there to work through some weird situations like exchanging supports for the throne for mutual win or some other things that might come up (in future expansions for example).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
donmakaron wrote:
Initiative Order is key. If we are both at 9 (and the only players to simplify the example) and you socre first, you win. That is how TI rolls.

The simultaneously part is just there to work through some weird situations like exchanging supports for the throne for mutual win or some other things that might come up (in future expansions for example).


In this case please explain:

1. change of the wording in 87.7
2. the legal way to exchange PN in SP
3. Golden Rules concept:
If information in this Rules Reference contradicts the Learn to Play booklet, the Rules Reference takes precedence.

Also the conception of "living" means it follows the game not predicts its future expansions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It goes in Initiative Order and immediately ends when someone scores 10. That's the main rule.

In case of any situation where more than one player getting 10 points, the player who is closest to the Speaker (clockwise). That's to settle unlikely event of more than one player reching 10 points. It is never ever going to happen by scoreing Public Objectives in Status Phase. It might happen due to exchanging Supports for the Throne or some other funky business.

I get that the wording might be confusing, but it's there only to be applicable to all possible situations.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
donmakaron wrote:
It goes in Initiative Order and immediately ends when someone scores 10. That's the main rule.


it was so in old wording of 87.7 in LRR it is nothing about IO anymore. lets follow rules not our beliefs.

i really want some clear short answers to a questions i asked.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
marc lecours
Canada
ottawa
ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
The objective scoring step of the status phase is not simultaneous ! Players score objectives one at a time in initiative order when scoring objectives in the status phase.

I suspect that your confusion is that you view that step as simultaneous...but it isn't. The rule about what to do when VP points are obtained simultaneously does not apply here. Late in the game, there is a huge advantage to choosing strategy cards with low numbers.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal Liszewski
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
Ragnarwarbar wrote:
donmakaron wrote:
It goes in Initiative Order and immediately ends when someone scores 10. That's the main rule.


it was so in old wording of 87.7 in LRR it is nothing about IO anymore. lets follow rules not our beliefs.

i really want some clear short answers to a questions i asked.


87.7 doesn't mention IO any more, but 70.1 still does.
Living Rule Reference wrote:

70.1 STEP 1—SCORE OBJECTIVES: Following initiative order,
each player may score up to one public objective and one secret
objective that can be fulfilled during the status phase. To score
an objective, he must fulfill the requirements on the card; if he
does, he gains a number of victory points indicated on the card.


This means that during normal play, if there are multiple players that can go up to 10 points, the player with the lowest initiative wins. The other players will not even get the opportunity to score points.

I don't know of a way for players to simultaneously get victory points in the status phase, I suppose the rule is there to future proof it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clayton Threadgill
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ragnarwarbar wrote:
donmakaron wrote:
It goes in Initiative Order and immediately ends when someone scores 10. That's the main rule.


it was so in old wording of 87.7 in LRR it is nothing about IO anymore. lets follow rules not our beliefs.

i really want some clear short answers to a questions i asked.

70.1 describes the order you should follow during the first step of the status phase. 87.7 says what to do if something the players somehow reach victory at the same time. They don't conflict with each other at all.

You need to find a rule somewhere that says that players score points simultaneously during the status phase. As far as I know, that's not actually possible. If you can't quote a rule like that, then don't be a hypocrite.

To answer your other questions, the change in the LRR v1.1 was to answer questions about how to resolve the issue when players reach the victory goal at the same time, which is possible during the agenda phase. Future expansions may make it possible in the status phase, but for now that's a redundant ruling.

You cannot exchange notes during the status phase. You can exchange notes during the action or agenda phases, but those notes will resolve in initiative order (like all simultaneous effects), so one player will get their victory point before the other. It's not possible to tie the game this way.

The Rules Reference and the Living Rules Reference both contain passages that were obviously planned for future expansions. The easiest example is the definition of ground force units, which only includes infantry. It would be much simpler to write the rules referring to infantry, but by defining ground forces and using that term, it makes it easier to add more ground forces to the game in the future.

And a note for someone who seems to enjoy arguing more than they want to get it right: "the player who is nearest the speaker in clockwise order" is the exact same thing as initiative order during the agenda phase.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Clinite
msg tools
mbmb
So to clear up:

Order for players to score objectives during the Status Phase: in initiative order.

In case of a rare event where 2+ characters simultaneously score 10 VP (trading Support for the Throne, for example), the tie is broken by whoever is closest to the speaker.

The rules are consistent in this.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
islan wrote:
So to clear up:

Order for players to score objectives during the Status Phase: in initiative order.

In case of a rare event where 2+ characters simultaneously score 10 VP (trading Support for the Throne, for example), the tie is broken by whoever is closest to the speaker.

The rules are consistent in this.


So I see we stuck here...

1. SFTT - it is not the case in SP at all. I do not understand why people continue saying that...

2. We talk only about SP not action or agenda phase.

3. We talk about game and rules we have already not "what might happen"

4. There is some logic behind the wording. And i do not see any meaning in changing 87.7 if it stays just the same. If IO is the case - you just add one sentence to 87.7 about agenda phase and "nearest the speaker". But it is written: "in status AND agenda phase" and then it says "nearest the speaker" instead of "initiative order is the winner, because he has the opportunity to score objectives first".

So creators of the game sort make a hint that logic of play is changed. It is no more the winner with lowest SC nr it is "nearest the speaker".

5. And there are also some good point for making those changes:

a. having IO creates a big risk that the whole game will be decided only by SC pick up. Since normally on late stages of the game there are plenty objectives to be resolved. Which makes the last round a bit meaningless.
b. Naalu Collective is always first in IO so they have huge advantage in winning a game.
c. everyone should have a chance to win a game and keep motivation to play till the end not just observe how one player jogs alone to finish.

It goes to the conclusion that yes you score VP in IO, but you win the game upon "nearest the speaker".

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Let's leave 87.7 the same (despite the fact my personal assumption is there was a typo and it meant the strategy, not status phase) and read what it actually says one more time:

Living RR v1.1 wrote:
87.7 The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points. If multiple players would simultaneously reach 10
victory points during the status or agenda phase, the player who
is nearest the speaker in clockwise order is the winner.


The question is, does this apply to scoring of objectives in Step 1 of the strategy phase. Are multiple players simultaneously able to reach 10 points in this stage? No, as the rules say that you score objectives in an specific order.

Taking the wording as it is without making assumptions based on what the section used to say means you literally cannot apply 87.7 to the scoring objectives step.

Is there any situation where the simultaneous clause of 87.7 would apply during the Strategy Phase? No. But that is irrelevant. The extra rule could simply be future proofing or even just a typo.

Thus, you can only conclude that initiative order is used in the Scoring Objectives step and should some method arise that ever would cause simultaneous scoring, we would use closest-to-Speaker order instead.

If you still want to continue arguing that we are all wrong about this, then ask the question via FFG's rules query page. You can get a definitive answer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
Clipper wrote:
Let's leave 87.7 the same (despite the fact my personal assumption is there was a typo and it meant the strategy, not status phase) and read what it actually says one more time:

Living RR v1.1 wrote:
87.7 The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points. If multiple players would simultaneously reach 10
victory points during the status or agenda phase, the player who
is nearest the speaker in clockwise order is the winner.


The question is, does this apply to scoring of objectives in Step 1 of the strategy phase. Are multiple players simultaneously able to reach 10 points in this stage? No, as the rules say that you score objectives in an specific order.


So that was my question: it looks like 87.7 contradicts to itself:
first of all it says IMMEDIATELY which is together with 70.1 and IO means right now and no scoring after.
and then it says WOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY - which is just not possible. and this is in the amended clause!



Clipper wrote:
If you still want to continue arguing that we are all wrong about this, then ask the question via FFG's rules query page. You can get a definitive answer.


yes, can you provide a link or something please?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok maybe I missunderstood your question, I'm sorry for my messy answers. But I don't get what seems to be the problem? If you keep close to the rules as written you will have no problems following them to end the game. There are no hints there. Just rules of conduct. If during Status Phase someone gets to 10 points it's over. If there are more people at 10 at this point, there is a tiebreaker. Is there anything unusual in that?

1. People are bringing up SFtT because 87.7 also referes to Agenda Phase.
2. You brought up 87.7 that talks also about Agenda Phase. In this regard we should also refere to it, as it might just be one rule relating to two phases for simplification.
3. By "what might happen" I mean what didn't show up when the game was in tests, but designers still have to foolproof it for things they didn't think about. They did not planned the game to end with more people at 10 point, but that might happen.
4. FFG rules are not perfect. They somethimes make small changes just to answer some specific questions or confusion. The part about ties refers only to tie situation. You won't get to tie situation most of your games due to 70.1 (scoring Public Objectives in Initiative Order in Status Phase) and immediate end of the game when anybody reaches 10 points.
5. I believe it is intetional that the picking of SC for it's initiative number is a vital part of planning to win the game. It is easy to win with Imperial, but other people might beat you to it. That's why it is number 8. That's why Naalu was created. And it doesn't breake the game, it creates it's flow.

You bring up logic, so let's follow the rules closely:
It is Status Phase and players get to score VP. Player with the lowest Initiative Order had 7 scores 3 and now have 10. What does the 87.7 tells us to do? End the game. IMMEDIATELY. Are there multiple players at 10 points? No. Not ever in this way. Game ended by the rules. Is it not logical? Did we breake any rule?

It should go to conclusion that you score VP in IO and win the game immediately if you reach 10; then if there are more than one person on 10, the final winner is the one "nearest the speaker".

At least the rules say so.

P.S. Maybe you are reading too much into the would in 87.7?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Petersen
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Off topic, if your problem is "what SC did you choose last round?" has decided who wins, why would you advocate for "I chose 3/the losing player to my right chose 3" over "I chose 1/the losing players chose higher cards than me"?

On topic, you are arguing that 87.7 states "if players simultaneously reach 10 during status phase" that it must be possible to do so. It is not, because objectives are scored in initiative order.
Nobody can answer the intent of including a rule that has no current application nor quote a rule that doesn't exist that would make it applicable.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ragnarwarbar wrote:
Clipper wrote:
Let's leave 87.7 the same (despite the fact my personal assumption is there was a typo and it meant the strategy, not status phase) and read what it actually says one more time:

Living RR v1.1 wrote:
87.7 The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points. If multiple players would simultaneously reach 10
victory points during the status or agenda phase, the player who
is nearest the speaker in clockwise order is the winner.


The question is, does this apply to scoring of objectives in Step 1 of the strategy phase. Are multiple players simultaneously able to reach 10 points in this stage? No, as the rules say that you score objectives in an specific order.


So that was my question: it looks like 87.7 contradicts to itself:
first of all it says IMMEDIATELY which is together with 70.1 and IO means right now and no scoring after.
and then it says WOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY - which is just not possible. and this is in the amended clause!

Nobody here is disputing the fact that currently it is not possible for two players to simultaneously get to 10 in the Status Phase. That doesn't make it a contradiction - it just means part of the rule, as things sit now, are just not applicable.

However, the only part of 87.7 that is currently non-applicable is the two words "the status"; the rest of the rule still applies. And putting "the status" phase reference in there doesn't add contradiction, it just adds a condition that will not come up.

Most likely, that bit was put there to future proof, or, as Jorgen suggests, may have been a typo that should be "strategy". Regardless - its weird, but there is no contradiction. Since there are no times in the status phase that two players would reach 10 simultaneously, that condition just never applies. It's not contradictory, it's just superfluous. (And in an expansion, it's possible that it MAY become possible somehow).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ragnarwarbar wrote:
yes, can you provide a link or something please?


It's available via their Contact page under Customer Support...

But here you go.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
sigmazero13 wrote:
Nobody here is disputing the fact that currently it is not possible for two players to simultaneously get to 10 in the Status Phase. That doesn't make it a contradiction - it just means part of the rule, as things sit now, are just not applicable.

However, the only part of 87.7 that is currently non-applicable is the two words "the status"; the rest of the rule still applies. And putting "the status" phase reference in there doesn't add contradiction, it just adds a condition that will not come up.

Most likely, that bit was put there to future proof, or, as Jorgen suggests, may have been a typo that should be "strategy". Regardless - its weird, but there is no contradiction. Since there are no times in the status phase that two players would reach 10 simultaneously, that condition just never applies. It's not contradictory, it's just superfluous. (And in an expansion, it's possible that it MAY become possible somehow).


1. When i wrote the first post i was 95/5 sure that IO is the case. Then i saw that redaction of 87.7 got amended and it was a turning point for everything. And now i am only 20/80 about IO.

2. I wonder that despite the fact that in 87.7 trigger is still the same but the outcome is changed everyone keeps saying that outcome is still the same.

3. I also wonder that noone sees contradiction between "immediately/order" (which excludes simultaneously) and simultaneously (which excludes "immediately/order").

4. Now we have two different points of view:

- it is IO, with reasoning of "typo" and "just in case for future"
and
- it is nearest to speaker, with reasoning of "changed wording of 87.7" and "logical attempt to make end-game phase more dynamic".

5. i see it still 20/80 in favor of "nearest to speaker" since with all epic and beauty of TI4 the end-game phase has some issues with motivation and dynamics.

actually assuming it is IO - in this case upon conditions that i have the lowest IO nr and it is not reasonably possible to invade my home system - i am the winner just after Strategic Phase and there is no meaning to play the following round of Action Phase.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
Clipper wrote:
Ragnarwarbar wrote:
yes, can you provide a link or something please?


It's available via their Contact page under Customer Support...

But here you go.


yes i wrote them. thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Immediately and simultaneously in this case are not contradicting. If you ask me is there a way for more than one player to score 10 points simultaneously in Status Phase or Agenda Phase, the answer I would give is yes. And such situation would end the game immediately.

The simultanous reaching of 10 points in 87.7 is not refering to players simultaneously scoring Public Objectives (because it's not how it's done). It refers gaining points in general. If two players would reach 10 points, there is a tie breaker. If any player scores Public/Secret Objective in 1st step of Status Phase and have 10 points now, the game immediately ends and they are the sole winner.

I hope your message to FFG will solve any doubts (maybe by proving me wrong ). Looking forward to see the question and the answer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
donmakaron wrote:
Immediately and simultaneously in this case are not contradicting. If you ask me is there a way for more than one player to score 10 points simultaneously in Status Phase or Agenda Phase, the answer I would give is yes. And such situation would end the game immediately.


Witold, with Agenda Phase it is clear: VPs from a Law / PN SftT / AC Imperial rider and here we go - 3 winners simultaneously.

And with Status phase i do not see any eligible way to score VP simultaneously. Do you really?

Key point here is how to understand "simultaneously". So i checked LRR and there is only 3 times this term is used besides 87.7 - since the whole TI4 is very sensitive with order and timing.

so i assume that:
"would simultaneously" = "SP Step 1"
"immediately in SP" = "after SP Step 1 is made by each player"

and yes - waiting for official response.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
But the fact that there is no way of scoring simultaneously in Status Phase (you are right, I do not see any eligible way) has nothing to do with the general rule that if you simultaneously reach 10 points, you apply a said tiebreaker. I do not see how it implies a different way of understanding the 70.1, especially when it refers to two phases in one paragraph, so why treat them separately. If anything it is redundant to mention the Status Phase in 87.7. I wouldn't try to read between the lines too much. Rules are just written in such manner. And hey did anyone check all the cards in the game and confirmed there is no way an Agenda Card can weirdly score points in Status Phase for two players? Then did anyone check if this is the only redundant rule that refers (partly!) to impossible situation?
edit: yes, someone did

Note that 87.7 is not talking about scoring Public Objectives. It referes to any instance of reaching 10 points (or to simplify any instance of scoring points). 70.1 clearly states that each player scores points for Public Objectives separately. So during Status Phase there can be 6 instances where you need to check if the game ended or even 12 if you separate Public from Secret Objectives.

Probably our mind just work in different ways and that's ok. I truly believe we opposing your read on the rules are right and that's wy I keep on with those posts. For me rulebook is like a program or a protocol you follow to conduct the game. If you can follow it stricktly and the game will conclude without jamming, it's good. Might not be perfect, but it's good. Even if it has redundant parts. And that seems to be the case.
And I enjoy the discussion, that too.

I'll try not to post more, because we seem to be running around. The official answer will settle it I guess
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
donmakaron wrote:
Note that 87.7 is not talking about scoring Public Objectives. It referes to any instance of reaching 10 points (or to simplify any instance of scoring points). 70.1 clearly states that each player scores points for Public Objectives separately. So during Status Phase there can be 6 instances where you need to check if the game ended or even 12 if you separate Public from Secret Objectives.

I'll try not to post more, because we seem to be running around. The official answer will settle it I guess


In this case there is no place for "simultaneously" in 87.7 and 70.1 since it is clear IO.
Or there is no place for Status Phase in 87.7 since there is no "simultaneously" in SP.

wording like:
--------
"The game ends immediately when one player has 10 victory
points.
If upon any game effects multiple players simultaneously reach 10
victory points, the player who is "X" is the winner."
--------
would be just fine. modest

but no - they mentioned SP in every redaction of 87.7 and changed outcome from "IO" to "nearest the speaker". shake

yes we are running around. lets just wait a bit laugh
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ragnar Warbar
Estonia
flag msg tools
mb
TomBoombs wrote:
Off topic, if your problem is "what SC did you choose last round?" has decided who wins, why would you advocate for "I chose 3/the losing player to my right chose 3" over "I chose 1/the losing players chose higher cards than me"?

On topic, you are arguing that 87.7 states "if players simultaneously reach 10 during status phase" that it must be possible to do so. It is not, because objectives are scored in initiative order.
Nobody can answer the intent of including a rule that has no current application nor quote a rule that doesn't exist that would make it applicable.


I did not get the point of your "off topic" part. blush

My reasoning is:
1. trigger of 87.7 is the same, outcome is another => new order of play is to be applied
2. assuming it is IO - in this case upon conditions that i have the lowest IO nr and it is not reasonably possible to invade my home system - i am the winner just after Strategic Phase and there is no meaning to play the following round of Action Phase. this is a problem of game play.
3. 70.1 does not regulate winning conditions only technical part of passing SP.

to solve contradiction of 87.7 and 70.1 i assume that:

"would simultaneously" = "SP Step 1"
"immediately in SP" = "after SP Step 1 is made by each player"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold Jakubowski
Poland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
For me you are still mixing two separate things together. Scoring Objective is not equal to reaching 10 points. 70.1 talks how you score Objectives, 87.7 talks about end game condition (that can occur when scoring Objectives). I get that the mention of an imposible situation of a tie is the issue here, but why would it overrule a clear and simple 70.1 in any way?

Let me ask you this: What if you score objectives in status phase, but nobody reaches 10 points? Why would you apply 87.7 speaker order then, since it only applies reaching 10 points. So you score in Iintiative Order every Status Phase but the last when you score in initiative order?

If you assume like you mentioned above, and we score public objectives simultanously, then the whole 70.1 is redundant or contradictory to 87.7, how does that help anything?

Personally I love the Initiative Order scoring. It is an very interesting bargain to decide between a Strategy Card that helps you win by it's ability (like Warface, Tech or Imperial) or pick a lower one to score before others. And how often are you in place where you are at 8-9 points, can pick up Leadership, have some Sabotages to cancel Action Cards and nobody has an option reach your Home System? If you are set this way, the other players just serverd you the victory anyway and the Initiative Order wouldn't chage a thing

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  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.