London: I’ve had the same experience with Martin Wallace games that I had with pizzas when I was a kid: I assumed I wouldn’t like them for no good reason, until one day I tried one and discovered it was delicious. London is another tasty slice of the Treefrog pie. The crust and sauce are all vintage Wallace: tight economy, nearly mandatory but painful loans, cards as actions and as currency, rich historical theming. But then their are some toppings that are a little unexpected, like an action card tableau with interacting powers and even a little “take that” card play. It’s not a gourmet meal like Brass, but it’s a fine example of what you can get when a master chef tries his hand at comfort food.
Fun Fair: It’s nice when a game’s title serves as its own two word review. Some of the mini-games lead to lots of laughter (linking arms with a neighbor and acting out memorized roller coaster motions was particularly amusing), but most were a little thin on the “game” side. And yes, I know I’m taking this game too seriously, but it bugged me that after playing and earning points for 45 minutes, the winner was chosen by who picked the purple gem out of a bag.
Showmanager: Someone commented that we always seem to end up playing Showmanager when we’ve got six and want something heavier than a party game. There are worse problems to have. Showmanager is a terrific game and I was glad for the reminder that I need to be watching the supply chain for the reprint.
Spot It!: The round cards have eight or so of about twenty different simple icons. Each card apparently has one matching icon with each other card. You’re supposed to find the card on the table that matches the card in your hand faster than the other players. There are four different little games that vary the details of where the cards are and how you score, but that’s the game. It was quick enough, but like many speed games it suffered from the problem that good players and bad players are simply in different leagues, and if you’re in the little league, you’re barely playing. It was fine though, and now I want to do the graph theory problem to work out how the cards fit together.
Saboteur: You’re dwarves. Some of you are looking for gold, some of you are trying to sabotage the operation (presumably because you hate freedom). The gold diggers make progress by laying out tunnel cards to make a path from the start card to the gold. Saboteurs can try to redirect the path, blow up key cards, and break the diggers’ tools. The diggers can do basically the same things to thwart the saboteurs. It was pretty fun, though I don’t see much point to the hidden identity element. The saboteurs don’t have many options for being subtly nonconstructive, and both times I was a saboteur I outed myself straightaway and was still able to help my team inconvenience the diggers enough to keep them from getting the gold. Of course, the one time I wasn’t a saboteur, we made it to the gold pretty easily. So maybe I’m just really good at this game. Anyway, it’s nothing too special, but might be worth my picking up for the school game club.
Castle Ravenloft: It’s a dungeon crawl, based on D&D 4th Edition rules. It doesn’t do anything particularly better or worse than other dungeon crawls you have played. We had quite a bit of bad luck early on with bad dice karma along with an event card that punished us every time we used a treasure (and using a treasure is often mandatory). We made it to the dracolich and even managed to bust his phylactery, but then he smushed us good. It was a good time, but I’m still looking for the dungeon crawl that depends more on clever play than good dice and good draws.
