Author

Jeff McLeod

Cat In The Box: A Trick-taking Twist

by Jeff McLeod September 13, 2022

Trick-taking games are a dime a dozen. The basic premise is always the same: Bid how many tricks you will take, lead card, trump suit, highest point value or trump wins the trick. Repeat. To try to differentiate themselves from each other, different games add a little something extra. Wizard has additional cards with different trump/not trump abilities. Skull King adds a layer of rock-paper-scissors to the top cards. In Spades, you want to avoid taking any tricks – unless you want to take them all. Cat in the Box (Designed by Muneyuki Yokouchi and Published by Bezier Games) trumps them all by taking something you take for granted in a card game and asking, “What if there were no suits?”

Then it has the nerve to add another puzzle on top of it.

Clever stuff.

Here Kitty! Kitty! Kitty!

Cat in the Box is a trick-taking game based on the infamous Schrodinger’s Cat mind-f*&$ of a thought experiment. It’s a way for the paradox of quantum mechanics to be explained. To the chagrin of feline lovers everywhere, Schrodinger put a theoretical cat in a box, along with a vial of poison that may or may not break open due to a subatomic event that may or may not occur.

A person would not know if the not-real cat is alive or dead until they open the box. They would consider the cat alive and dead simultaneously, and its actual status is only known once the box is opened, aka “observed.”

In Cat in the Box, players have the same problem.

Not with made-up kitties in made-up boxes. None of the cards have suits, colors in this case, on them. (Double shout-out to the cleverness that cats are colorblind). As the players, in turn order, lay down a card, the exact suit is unknown for the card until it is declared or “observed” by all the players.

To keep track of the cards as the experiment plays out, players employ a central board. When a player observes a card, they cover the declared suit with a cute acrylic token. Once someone has declared a Blue 5, no one else can ever claim Blue 5 for the rest of the round.

The kicker is that while four suits are being “observed,” there are 5 of each number in the deck. This imbalance provides both a problem and a strategy. Simultaneously. At the same time. Like quantum Schrodinger’s Cat. Which is the theme.

I told you Cat in the Box is clever.

Cat In The Box Trick Tracker — I Bid You, Fare Well!

A Cat In The Hand…

A couple of things happen when you pick up your hand of 10. The first thing you do is panic, as you notice that all of the cards are black while the suits are yellow, green, blue, and red. You wind up muttering, “What the heck am I supposed to do with this?”

The second thing you do is discard one of the cards.

These two are not unrelated.

At this point, I wish to bring something up. In terms of being “observed,” one could make the argument that the very act of the player picking up the cards is observing them. Thus their colors are already “known.” Even though the game has not been played yet, by looking at the cards, a player starts to formulate a plan. The player is already starting to solidify the card states for the round about to be played.

In board game speak, you can attempt to map a plan out, just in a different way. In a typical trick-taking game, players value high cards and trump cards, and everything else is filler. With Cat in the Box, while high cards are still valuable, you are now actively looking for groups. Having three or four of the same number gives you a wealth of information.

Deductive reasoning comes into play here.

With five of each card possible, if you have two or more cards in your hand, you can safely discard one of them, knowing that there are only three more out in other people’s hands. After throwing out your repeat, that’s only four left in the game. That number is now “safe.” Even if your plans go wrong, at least you have an out.

And having outs is very important for your bid.

…Is Worth Two in the Bid

While there is the typical bidding mechanism in Cat in the Box, it by no means work in the usual fashion. Of course not!

First, you can only bid an amount out of a predetermined three. You can never bid zero. And in a three-person game, you can never bid two. This difficulty certainly comes into play if you bid one, as you have to strategize when you take a trick and then quickly relinquish control on the next turn.

Second, there are no negative points if you bid over or under your final tally. At the end of the round, players earn a point per trick captured, no matter the beginning bid. This might seem like a sigh of relief, but to win, you must keep an eye on the second game I alluded to previously.

Like Schrödinger’s thought experiment, you think you have it down, and then in a blink of an eye, you don’t. When you feel you have a strategy, you observe a new possibility and hope to play again.

It’s a Two-fer

When laying down your cute little acrylic tokens, you aren’t just marking the cards you have played. If the number of tricks taken is EXACTLY what you bid, you get a bonus. That bonus is the number of your tokens in your largest grouping on the player board.

So, where you place your tokens now becomes paramount. And you are in effect, playing two games simultaneously. One is the regular trick-taking game, ensuring you hit your bid and your opponents miss theirs. The other is area control, ensuring that your opponents don’t place too many tokens next to each other.

You find yourself bouncing back and forth between the two, making decisions on the fly, pondering about two states simultaneously, desperately trying to keep your focus on one or the other.

So why can’t you play with reckless abandon? Why can’t you try to capture as many tricks as possible? What’s preventing you from observing that you have no more blues and placing tokens to block your opponents?

What on earth is stopping you from doing whatever you want to do?

Cat In The Box Board — Mice are both Cat AND Science Related – So Much Clever!

Hickory Dickery Dox

While there are no negative points from incorrectly bidding, there still are negative points. With the difficulty of trying to get your tricks and dodging cards already claimed, it is highly likely that soon, someone will not be able to play a card in their hand because all appropriate spots have been taken.

This is called a paradox.

The player declares that they can’t and shows their remaining cards. Play immediately stops and no one collects that trick. The player who caused the paradox, no matter what their bid was, loses points equal to the number of tricks they’ve taken up to that point. And they can’t collect the bonus points.

This clash of conditions creates a glorious tension throughout the round because of multiple worries. Simultaneously. Again.

Did you miss the bid and now need to switch to collecting as many tricks as possible?

Are there enough 2 spaces?

Can you connect more tokens?

Will that put you in danger of a paradox?

So many questions. And you won’t know the answer until you have observed all the cards.

You don’t know until you know.

Trick or Treat

There are a couple of caveats for Cat in the Box, of course. Most of them are trivial. To make sure the math works out correctly, different player counts require different set-ups and cards used. Praise Bezier Games for including a quick set-up chart on the back of the instructions so you’re not digging through the pages.

I do like that the number of players determines the number of rounds. Dealer is a powerful position. You can control at least two, if not more, of the first tricks played. Everyone gets one shot at the dealer position, balancing that control.

Speaking of player count, it is possible to play a 2-player variant of the game. But it’s very different from regular gameplay. With the way the number of cards vs. the number of board spaces works out, it is now elementary to avoid a paradox.

What is usually a tense game full of “will I or won’t I” now because a head-to-head strategy game. It works, but it’s a different feel and doesn’t have the full circle of choices that comes with the 3, 4, or 5-player count.

With that being said, Cat in the Box is an incredible achievement. There is so much depth here. And like Schrödinger’s thought experiment, you think you have it down, and then in a blink of an eye, you don’t. When you feel you have a strategy, you observe a new possibility and hope to play again. On the off chance that your little experiment just might work.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

September 13, 2022 0 comments

Review

Lanterns: The Harvest Festival – This Little Light of Mine

by Jeff McLeod September 1, 2022

There’s something about a game taking you by surprise. Seemingly coming out of nowhere and pouncing on you like a kitten attacking a paper ball. This gives you a sense of discovery. The joy and wonderment that something that you were not even aware existed is now not only present but happily there. It’s not just A game. It is now YOUR game. Lanterns: The Harvest Festival did this to me.

Twice.

Learning the Ropes, I mean Lights

The first instance is much easier to explain and not quite as abnormal as you would think. Lanterns, first published in 2015 by Foxtrot Games and Renegade Game Studios and designed by Christopher Chung, was a gift from my niece. I’ll be honest, I had not heard of this game before. There is no denying that it is always a good day when someone gifts you a game.

In a small but decorative box, it consisted of colorful square tiles, simple colored cards, single- sided printed wooden tokens and scoring tiles.

I sat down on my bed with the relatively small rules book and set about the task of learning this game.

It seemed to be really, really simple. Place a tile to the collection in front of you. If one or more sides match, you get the corresponding cards. In addition, every player gets a card that matches the one facing them.

You can turn in the cards as a set to collect point tiles, and along the way you can also collect little wooden tokens to help you mitigate the rules.

Tile placement, set collection, bonus action. Got it!

Which is also the problem. It seemed too simple. Games that give you things on other players’ turns are awesome, but I didn’t see too much else there. On the surface it seemed to straightforward. Dominoes with a couple of extra steps. Carcassonne with no meeples.

Was there a game here?

My Wife Shows Me What’s What

When I sat down to play with my wife, she opened my eyes to the possibilities

Oh my gosh, yes there is a game here. It’s subtle, but there are two rules do something sharp to make Lanterns diabolical.

First, there are only a certain number of each colored card in the market. The market is finite. If you are owed a colored card, but all the colors are out, you don’t get anything. You have to wait until people turn their cards in for points.

This alone creates an interesting dynamic. It’s one thing to be give something on someone else’s turn. It’s quite another to be able to control if other players get anything at all.

What it all is, is empowering.

The other rule is that people don’t have to turn in cards for points immediately. They only have to if their hand limit has reached 12. Then they have to turn in cards for points, or just discard down.

Paired with the other rule, and my wife was the first of us to figure this out, is that if you plan it out carefully, you can snag a majority of the cards of a color or two, forcing another player to have to wait. If the timing is really right, they’ll have to give up their cards for some lower points instead of the high value one that they were looking for.

It is fiendish and it is brilliant.

Who knew that a game about lights would actually be all about timing.

Lanterns color cards — This little card of mine. I’m going to let it shine!

It’s All in How You Play

What was a particular joy was realizing that two simple rules that are often overlooked when learning a game are what drove this chicanery

“Yeah, yeah, hand limit…must turn in…got it.”

Which is exactly what I said to myself when learning the game.

But those oft under appreciated rules are what’s key to the game. What’s normally used for balance in game design, in Laterns is used for strategic game play. The underpinnings are now the focal point.

This does come with one caveat though. While the structure is there for players to do some cunning maneuvers, there is nothing there to force them to.

Take the game Azul for example. If you are not careful, if you don’t pay attention to what your neighbors are doing, you could be loaded with negative points at the end of a round. Azul forces you to figure out what the other players want or even can do.

Lanterns doesn’t have that negative feedback in its gameplay.

It is perfectly possible to play Lanterns and not worry about your neighbor’s collection. You can simply play your tile, collect your cards and be on your merry way. And if your card is not there, okay. You just have to wait until it comes back. Ho-hum. It’s fine.

It’s not the way the game is supposed to be played, but it can. Except for the having-to-wait bit, there is no negative feedback for imperfect choices. No negative points. No loss of turn.

Nothing.

So the people that play that “It’s fine” way think exactly that. That Lanterns is “fine.”

But when everyone is honed in, focused and ready to tear their neighbors apart, this game pops. Points available, points collected, sets obtained are all open information. This creates an in game narrative. The three act structure is strong here. What starts off as calm and tranquil, leads to an act two full of slyness and guile. That then rushes into a third act of anguish and defeat.

Lanterns is a brilliant little game that will always stay in my collection. I can thank both my niece and my wife for that.

(If you’ve enjoyed this post and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

September 1, 2022 2 comments

Essays

How SKULL Taught Me To Be a Content Creator

by Jeff McLeod August 30, 2022

Board games and the Art of Risk Taking

The very thesis of this board game review website is that modern board games are designed to provide an experience. And that experience can help you figure out what makes you tick (see my essay on UNO and the Art of Game Design) People are defined by their choices. By telling the players to make a decision, games reflect back to us who we really are. Like movies, music or books, games are a consumable art. Some are bad, most are fine, the great ones make us dig deeper into ourselves. With that in mind, this is a story about creating content, and the bluffing game Skull.

Stick with me.

This blog isn’t the first time I’ve tried some sort of creative endeavor. It’s not even my second.

Or my third.

I have made multiple attempts at some sort of creative outlet and my path, both physical and digital, is littered with failed attempts, projects left unfinished and a general dumping ground of broken things left undone.

What’s the hold up? Why do I keep hitting a wall?

Oh, you know – Overthinking, overanalyzing, lack of know-how and an all-around crippling fear of self doubt.

So, you know, nothing relatable at all.

But in working on this site, I’ve come to the realization that the mindset I have to play the game of SKULL, is the exact same mindset I need to have to, well, play the game of content creation.

The Game

Everyone starts with four cards – three roses and one skull. Starting with the first player, everyone lays down one of their four cards. Players keep going around, laying down cards until someone decides to bet. After that, no more cards. Only betting.

What players are betting is how many cards they can flip over without hitting a skull.

Everyone raises or passes until there is only one person standing. And that person starts flipping over cards, wanting to only reveal roses.

However, and this is a big however, they have to start with their own pile first.

If they reveal a skull, including their own, before fulfilling their bet of roses, their turn ends and they lose a card for the rest of the game.

If they are correct, they get a point.

First person to two points or last person with at least one card wins.

But while it’s easy to teach the game and just start, I think there is something deeper to it. There are life lessons to be learned here.

I know it sounds pretentious as hell to make that statement, but I stand by my original statement. We are defined by our choices. And SKULL repeatedly gives you the choice of whether you risk it all or if you fold.

Viking Skull Game — I didn’t know Skulls could grow beards

Here are the top three SKULL strategies that can teach you how to get over yourself and just create.

Strategy One: Know What You Have

Whenever I teach the game of Skull to new people, I always wait for that moment. It doesn’t always happen, but it’s hilarious when it does. At some point, at the start of a round, someone randomly slams down one of their cards and says,

“I’m going to play blind! I’m not going to look at my card!”

And then, when it comes back around to them, they realize they have made have made a huge mistake and quickly look to see what the heck they put down.

Why do they realize it’s a mistake? Because in a game of strategy, reading people and uncertainty, the one crucial thing they have, the one tool that they have at their disposal, is their knowledge of what they played.

It’s the same with any endeavor. Putting yourself out there is tough. Taking a risk can be tough. But you have something that can help. You have at your disposal the tool of knowing what you have.

And what you have is you.

You have a voice. You have a viewpoint. You have a card to play.

You might not even know at the moment what that voice is! But making a video, or a blog, or a game itself sure will reveal it. Both to you and your audience.

Taking a risk reveals both to you and everyone else if you made the right choice. And if you haven’t that’s okay. You now know something for the next time.

Skull Box Cover — How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Trust the Death Stare

Strategy Two: Don’t Be Afraid to Lose a Battle to Win the War

Which dovetails into the second tip I’ve learned from SKULL.

Another scenario I see all the time is after someone scores their first point. The next round commences. The person with a point bets a low number. The rest of the players, scared of hitting a skull, pass. They don’t want to lose a card like they just saw someone else do. In doing so, the rest of the players just hand the victory to the one point player.

The first few things you create are going to suck. You are going to make mistakes. You are going to look back and say “I should have done this!”

This is your Unreasonable Expectation Monster. It feeds on fear. It needs that fear. And as it rears its ugly head, it bellows in yours “You are new at this, so we expect you to be perfect. Rowr!”

My past is littered with broken projects because I am scared. I’m not saying was. I AM scared. This is tense. But all I’m doing is playing chicken and other people that take the risk are winning the game.

Take the hit. Lose a card. Play another round.

What are you afraid of loosing? One card? Your pride?

There will be another round. There will be another game. There will be another chance.

Strategy Three: You Have to Bet in Order to Win

While the rule about being the last player standing exists, it’s nearly impossible to win that way from the start. If you continue to lay down skulls, passively playing and never taking a gamble, two things are going to happen:

1. People are going to avoid you.

2. Someone else taking the risk is going to win the game before you do.

Think about it. In a five player game, there are 15 cards roses, 12 of them are not yours. So you would have to wait through at least 12 rounds. That’s not counting rounds where someone gets a point.

And in 12 rounds, one of four people can certainly get two points.

Being passive isn’t going to cut it.

It’s a risk making a blog. It’s a risk becoming a self-appointed critic. It’s scary because it’s being vulnerable. But that’s also what makes it exciting. You get to be you, in all your you-glory and share it.

You have to go for it. You’ve weighed your options. It’s fun to take the risk. You have to take the risk.

If you don’t, then why are you sitting at the table?

Do it.

Risk it.

Say it.

All in.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

August 30, 2022 0 comments

Review

Long Shot The Dice Game: Coming Out on Top

by Jeff McLeod August 25, 2022

Simulating a race in a board game is difficult. A race is based on athletic training and skill, muscles and split-second decisions. It is not something easily transferable to a board sitting in the middle of the table. A lot happens during a race that gives it that excitement for both watcher and participant. But with cardboard, a race is either purely determined by a dice roll or a card flip, which is way too luck-bound to be comparable to skill. Or it’s so bogged down by logistics that it stilts the play and again, doesn’t bring the excitement of a live race. Long Shot: The Dice Game, however, perfectly replicates the feeling of gambling on a horse race.

Note that I said gambling.

Long Shot Game Board — And They’re Off! On the Board!

Across the Board

Long Shot: The Dice Game, designed by Chris Handy and published by Perplext! Games, is a roll and write game centered around one horse race. Everyone has their own dry erase sheet to track their bets and gameplay. In the middle is one large board portraying the horse race with large chunky wooden standees for the horses as they race around the track. Each horse has their own card, with a special power and some Xs on the bottom.

The goal of the game is exactly on the nose for a racing game. The players will be able to bet, buy, and manipulate horses as they run. When the third horse crosses the finish line the race is done and the player with the most money wins.

Each turn is simple. Roll the two dice, and then there are two actions. The first action is the obvious move the rolled horse forward and how far.

The second action, and this is really the key of the whole game, is the secondary movement. Each horse brings with it one or two predetermined horses exactly one space. The trick is that some of the horses have the possibility of being moved three times. Others have exactly zero possibilties, making them The Long Shot.

[*roll credits*]

Long Shot Board — Here’s Where I Make My Mark

Let’s Make This Interesting

The third action is the kicker. One at a time players can choose an action from a list.

They could bet on the horse.

They could make sure they can bet later on the horse.

They could even buy the horse.

Which is hilarious when you think about it. Imagine a horse going around the corner and you make a quick phone call, “Yes, I’m looking at it right now and Lucky Streak looks really good. I’ll take her.….Whadaya mean I have to wait till the race is over. I want her now!”

Owning a horse not only means you win the purse if that particular horse Wins, Places or Shows, but there is usually a little bonus that each horse gives the owner at some point during the game. This is a good trade off, because buying a horse means you have less money to bet on one.

So it’s not just owners that want a particular horse to win. Those with money to gamble put their stakes into a horse and do what they can to propel that horse forward.

The best way to do that is with the Jersey action. Remember those X’s on the secondary movement line for every horse? Mark off the jersey and you can now mark an X on any box on that horse, increasing the likelihood of the horse winning, while the payouts never change.

Long Shot All the Kings Horses — All the King’s Horses

Double Action

The one last action I haven’t talked about is the concessions. Instead of placing bets or messing with the odds, you can visit the small board and cross out a number. While the one action doesn’t do anything on its own, if you cross out a row or column, you get to choose from a slate of free bonus actions.

Because if you can buy a horse in the middle of a horse race, you certainly have time to play Bingo.

Once you cross out your straight line, you are rewarded with free bets or some outright cash. Or, and this is important, move horses that are getting to close to the finish line BACKWARDS!

The dynamics at play here are gripping.

One, if one horse is running away with it, people’s own self interests act as an in-game check and pull back that runaway. Or, if the group think is that it’s okay that horse wins, then it wins.

In step by step action, it simulates the will they or won’t they, the push and the pull, part of an actual race.

Odds Are

This also really gets the feel of gambling on a horse race across. At the start of a race, the odds are established depending on the horses or the jockies past performance. Once betting begins, the odds change depending on how everyone is betting. As a horse gets popular, the payout goes lower. On the flip side, as a horse has less and less bets placed on it, the higher the payouts.

Long Shot simulates that by cleverly flipping it. You still must decide whether you are going to go with the crowd or against it. But instead of changing the payouts, it’s the odds that are changed. As players mark more and more Xs for a secondary action, the more likely your favored horse will win. But not garunteed.

Two, and far more tense, is the issue of time. Completing a concession row takes multiple turns. The rewards are moreore powerful than the regular actions, but it is time consuming. The only way to cross out the numbers is to roll the die – The same die that propels the horses forward! But completing a row means you can manipulate the time.

In essence, you have choices to make between fast and slow play against a clock of which you are not sure exactly when times up will be.

Giving you that “Come on, Go!” you feel when you watch an actual horse race.

Even if you’ve only placed a fake $3 bet.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

August 25, 2022 0 comments

Review

Gimme That!: Silliness Intensifies

by Jeff McLeod August 23, 2022

Not all games need to have gravitas. I know that I have waxed poetic about how some games bring reality crashing into your psyche like This War of Mine. I’ve droned about how the smallest rule change can create a different experience in my essay on, of all things, UNO. Games are important. They do tell us something about ourselves and the decisions we make. But sometimes….

Sometimes…

Sometimes you want to be stupid and loud and just play a silly game.

Gimme That! by Dolphin Hat Games delivers exactly that.

Can You Describe the Ruckus?

My wife and I were at GenCon ‘22 and waiting to jump into a game of Blood on the Clocktower. We saw a group of people sitting around a coffee table. They were being loud and boisterous and drawing a crowd.

Including us.

We looked over their shoulders and saw one person frantically rolling a ginormous yellow die, while another was furiously writing on a piece of paper. After each die roll, everyone but the writer would do some sort of uniform hand movement, shouting “MASH” or “HIGH-FIVE”. It seemed like they were either trying to call forth an Angry Elder God or sharing recipes. Hard to tell. When the die roller rolled a pencil, that player then ripped the pencil from the writer and the die was passed to the next person. The ritual began again.

They were laughing and groaning, yelling and waving their arms about. They looked like they were having the best time of their lives.

We wanted in.

When the game finished, they were kind enough to ask complete strangers to join (aren’t games wonderful) and by the end I was sweating and laughing and we were once again drawing our own crowd.

I’m waxing poetic again. Much easier to say that you can pick up the game in about a minute.

No, Seriously, That’s It

Everyone starts a sheet of paper with 100 blank spots (they are actually potatoes, but it really really doesn’t matter). The goal is to be the first person to reach 100 on whatever sheet of paper is in front of them.

The problem is that there is only one pencil for the group to share.

The driver of the game is the die. While one person is writing, the person to their left is rolling. Or more likely throwing the die. And then chasing the die. Four of the six spots are a group hand movement. When rolled, everyone but the writer has to pound the table (mashing potatoes) or give high fives to their neighbors or something else.

The trick is that one of the die face merely says “LEFT”. With that comand, everyone has to slide their paper to the person to their left, once again skipping over the person feverishly writing.

When a pencil is rolled, the writer is supposed to hand the pencil to the roller and the dice is to be handed to the next person to the left.

What really happens is that the old roller rips the pencil unceremoniously out of the writers hand, rendering them like a confused raccoon washing sugar in water. The new roller is left to fend for themselves to find and grab the die. Luckily, the rest of the table is on their side and pushes it towards them.

And THERE is why this simple game works so well.

A Boisterous Contest Dealing Exponential Frenzies

Gimme That! obviously falls into the same wheelhouse as Spot It!, Happy Salmon or Left Right Center. But there are some key differences that make this game stand out.

For instance, unlike Left Right Center, Gimme That! has no player elimination. Even if your paper has no numbers written on it at all, with that all important LEFT die face, it won’t remain there for very long.

Which leads to the other key difference.

There’s something really satisfying about a game that gives a shared benefit. And it doesn’t always have to be a complicated market like in Concordia or Clans of Caledonia. In Gimme That!! a very simple, but very effective, dynamic shift takes place as the game progresses.

Every time the pencil goes from your hand to the next player, your role changes. As a pencil holder, you are one against many, frantic against an unknown countdown clock.

As the now pencil-less, you are one of the many against one. But you are the lowest in the hierarchy of being able to reach the goal of getting that pencil back. The highest of the new pecking order, and now the loudest, is the person to the left of the die roller, who find themselves within reach of making their own progress.

That three person energy of pencil, die roller, and next in line flows around the table. Building higher and higher as the count-up continues. Add in unifying hand gestures, groans and yells as paper changes hands, and you get a glorious cacophony of silliness.

This review is now 800 words. I’ve talked long enough. All you really need to know is this: Gimme That! is fun, it’s easy and it’s cheap. For what it is, it does it fantastically.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

August 23, 2022 0 comments

Lists

GenCon 22: Top 5 Eye-Catching Under the Radar Games

by Jeff McLeod August 9, 2022

Leading up to GenCon 22, there are a plethora of previews of all the new games coming out over the next year. In a crowded market, building the hype beforehand is paramount. So, of course, there are talks before, during and after of new games no quite out yet (Terracotta Army), games that have been available for a few months (Ark Nova) and the tent poles of larger publishing companies like CGE (Starship Captains) and AES (The Guild of Merchant Explorers).

But over 500 games were being shown this year. Surely amongst them are some worthy contenders for people’s attention that just didn’t have the same reach! So among the Planet Unknowns, the Brazils and the Gutenbergs, here are my Top 5 GenCon 22 Eye-Catching Under the Radar Board Games.

Evergreen

Published by: Horrible Guild

1-4 players

We start off with Evergreen by Hjalmar Hach. I don’t recall seeing this on anybody’s video previews or lists. But now, after looking at all of the obligatory #GenConhaul pictures on social media, I’m seeing it everywhere. Evergreen, in my opinion, has become THE sleeper hit of GenCon 22.

This is made all the more impressive when you realize that the booth was a no nonsense affair in the far back corner of Exhibiter Hall. It sold out by mid-day Saturday and has two things going for it.

One, as mentioned before, is the production quality. Double layered player boards, cute individualized tokens representing trees and water and cards where the art goes all the way to the edges. This is a beautiful game.

The other is that it is somewhat like popular game Photosynthesis (no surprise, it’s by the same designer) with one obvious difference. Instead of competing on a single board, each player is now building their own. This gives a sense of agency and ownership that is very appealing.

This is a game I am looking very forward to getting to the table.

Nacho Pile

Published by: Pandasaurus

2-6 players

How can this one not catch your eye? Nacho Pile literally comes in a chip bag that hangs on a hook and is used during game play. The tokens themselves are plastic tortilla chips that are drawn out of the bag and placed in front of you in the hopes of reaching your plate.

It’s a press your luck game where you hope that you are able to get chips to your plate when it comes to your turn. The trick to this game is that the winner is NOT the person with the most plated chips, but the player who has the most chips of the LAST chip in the bag.

Nacho Pile is a family friendly game that occupies the same game space as UNO, especially in the schadenfreude department.

Gimme That!

Published by: Dolphin Hat Games

3-8 players

Continuing with the theme that not all games have to be narrative works of genius that transport players to other worlds and possibilities, sometimes you just want to have stupid fun with your friends. Gimme That! by Dave Campbell delivers that in spades.

Or should I say spuds.

Simple in nature, players are racing to write from 1 to 100 on their piece of paper covered in blank potatoes (I don’t know why and it really doesn’t matter). The problem is, there’s only one pencil.

One chunky dice controls the game play as tables are pounded, sheets are switched and the precious pencil is stolen.

My wife and I happened to come across this game being played in the hallways of the Convention Center. They were being very, very loud. As we stopped to check the game out, we were invited to join in on the next one. We were taught the game in one minute. Fifteen minutes later, my heart was pounding, I was sweating buckets and, most importantly, laughing my fool head off.

Any game that attracts a crowd as it is being played is doing something right.

USPS: The Great American Mail Race

Published by: Big Potato Games

2-4 players

Postal Truck for The Great American Mail Game booth

USPS: The Great American Mail Race caught everyone’s attention for two reasons. One was their booth. As it’s a game about the US Postal Service, they went all out and brought in an actual front yard and mail truck(!) into the Vendor Hall. Save for EBAYs two story tall display with a podcast booth on top, it certainly wins my Biggest Eye Catching Marketing Gimmick of GenCon.

It should come as no surprise that a game about the United States Postal Service is literally a pick up and deliver game. What does come as a surprise is who published it. Known more for their party and trivia games, Big Potato took a big chance by creating an actual board game, board-placed-in-the-middle-of-the-table and all.

The game itself is a light affair geared more towards families, as Big Potato likes to make their games as accessible as possible. But they have one more gimmick up their sleeve. For the individual scoring pad, instead of marking off accomplishments with a pencil, included in the game is a check mark stamp that is very, very fun to play with.

Game developers take note: If possible, add a CA-CHUNK! to the game.

Winterhaven Woods

Published by: Featherstone Games

1-6 players

While I was at the Featherstone Games booth, I had a chance to talk with the designer Joel Bodkin. He explained he designed Winterhaven Woods to teach the mechanics of Magic: The Gathering and booster drafting to his young son.

While that alone is a very cute and admirable story, there’s one big reason why I purchased this game. Along with being the game designer, Joel is also the artist. The artwork on the individual cards and the magnetic box are absolutely gorgeous!

Calm, eye-catching and beautiful, I can not wait to get this game to the table.

Those are my top 5 eye catching sleeper hits of GenCon 22. I’m sure there were others that caught your eye. Be sure to leave a comment below of some of yours.

I look forward to getting all of these games to the table and giving them and others the full review treatment.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

August 9, 2022 0 comments

Review

Cascadia: Enjoying the View

by Jeff McLeod August 2, 2022

Cascadia just won the 2022 Spiel des Jahres. Based in Germany, the SdJ awards the Game of the Year to the family-friendly game that “seems best suited to promote the cultural asset of board games in society.”

By that criteria, I think that it absolutely deserves the award.

I also think that the game is…pleasant.

I know, not the most compelling review for a game.

Don’t get me wrong, I am thrilled for the designer Randy Flynn and the publisher Flatout Games. I enjoy the game. Cascadia is extremely easy to get to the table. I have, in fact, done so more than I have its “sister” game Calico, a game realized within the same year as Cascadia by the same publisher, Flatout Games. (Which leads to the inevitable comparisons between the two.)

But first, Cascadia itself.

The Name of the Game

Set in Northwest America, Cascadia is, in essence, two tile-laying puzzles in one.

The first puzzle is comprised of five geographical elements of Northwest America. Each hexagon has either one or two ecosystems and players lay a tile one by one, in an effort to build the largest of each of the six terrains.

The second puzzle involves five animals. Each tile contains one, two, or three animal symbols. When an animal token is chosen, it can only be placed on an empty tile showing that animal. At the beginning of the game, one scoring card from a stack of six possible for each animal is drawn, detailing how each animal will score at the end. Some animals like to be grouped, others fly solo, while others want to meander through.

Cascadia tiles — Salmon and Foxes and Bears, Oh My!

The open market contains the crux of the game, where four habitat tiles and four animal token are paired.

Players choose a pair, place a token, and turn goes to the next player.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

Sum up the score when everyone has placed 20 tiles and tokens. That’s it.

And the fact that I say “That’s it” also explains why the game is good, but not compelling.

More of a Point Ecosystem

There is tension. You see a pair that you desperately want, you have a place for both, but you have to wait until your turn, hoping that someone doesn’t take that very pair. That waiting anticipation is always fun.

There is strategy. From the beginning, it’s usually pretty obvious which animals are high scoring ones and which are lowest (looking at you Fox). This leads to one of two situations. Either (a) Everyone will be gunning for the very same animal, creating a low supply/high demand for that particular animal. Or (b) that animal will refuse to show up when the market is replenished. Meaning you have a choice of either going for that really popular one, or continuously taking the foxes and gain points by sheer volume.

When the game is done and all that is left is the scoring, the issue becomes clear. There are multiple ways to gain points, and bonus points, and extra points. Before you score, you might beat yourself up for neglecting a certain feature or not completing an animal condition. After all is said and done, you see that it didn’t make that much of a difference. You have usually made up the difference in some other area and might even wind up winning the game.

Cascadia Elk tile — One Elk to Rule Them All

Huh, Look At That

Over the numerous times I have played Cascadia, someone has won by only one point. Usually, that kind of game ending is very exciting. But with Cascadia and it’s many scoring options, it’s difficult to say which strategy lead to that victory. So instead of moments where the victor proclaims “Whoo, did it!”, it leads more to “Huh, look at that.”

In an odd way, Cascadia is too forgiving. Besides the score, there is no compelling reason to make a certain move. On one hand, there is the refreshing sense of freedom of doing whatever you want to do and then see how you did. On the other, there’s no reward either save for Keystone tiles. These are tiles with only one animal possibility which, when fulfilled, gives you a singular pine cone that either manipulates the market or is worth points at the end.

Sister, Sister

This brings back round Cascadia’s sister game, Calico. While the obvious comparison between the two is the ability to manipulate the market in Cascadia and wish it was available in Calico, there is a much more subtle difference to note.

When playing Calico, you receive rewards as you play. Complete three colors, get a button. Complete a pattern, get a cat. Then there is the other side of the coin, where you have the excruciating feeling that you are not going to be able to complete all objectives, and so you fill in the space with something else, closing off that scoring possibility.

Cascadia doesn’t have that coin.

I realize this is an odd criticism. It’s like going to Yosemite National Park and complaining there are no rollercoasters.

Cascadia made no promise to provide such an experience. Considering the setting, it would oddly feel out of place if it did.

There is nothing revolutionary here, but not every game needs to be. There’s something to be said about having a pleasant journey, rather than one that crushes your brain or your opponents.

Sometimes, when you go someplace new, you just want to be able sit back and enjoy the scenery.

It’s what Spiel des Jahres saw in Cascadia. And I see it too. They aren’t looking to necessarily reward innovation or boundary-pushing experiences. They are looking for games that propel games to families tables. Which it does very well.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and Cardboard Reflection, would you consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

August 2, 2022 0 comments

Essays

UNO and the Art of Game Design

by Jeff McLeod July 28, 2022

Rules, Death, Happiness and Schadenfreude

I want to tell you a story.

I want to tell you a story about a board game experience that began to open my eyes to what board games are, what they do and what they tell us about ourselves and each other.

“Wow!”, you must be saying to yourself, “That’s seem like lofty goals there. What is this paradigm-shifting experience that you had? It must be a game of staggering design to be able to elicit such a response. Surely it must be the most grandiose game of all games to cause such a pondering!”

First off, you used some ace Scrabble words there. I am impressed, but you should also calm down.

And second, the game was UNO.

Stick with me.

It Happened One Night

It was a Saturday night and my family and I had just finished a game of Carcassonne. The evening was obviously winding down, but we weren’t quite done yet. We needed one more game to cap off the evening.

We gave my 70 year old mother Dealer’s Choice and she chose UNO. This would not have been my selection, but I understood why she would gravitate towards it.

Like most people who have taken a hard dive into the board game hobby, I grew up playing mass market games. But, with both parents as teachers, the games we played would trend towards the “educational”. Instead of Monopoly, Sorry and Parcheesi, I grew up playing nerd-faire like Scrabble or Trivial Pursuit at 9 years old. My parents would bend the rules a little, and help me along the way, with the primary goal not to win but to improve. To become smarter.

It obviously didn’t work.

*Insert joke about wild and crazy night here*

Back to present day. My foray (oh look, another Scrabble word) into modern board gaming had only just recently begun . Mom enjoys playing games, no doubt. But these hobby games were new and rules heavy, and some were turning out to be quite complicated. She needed to go back to her home turf. She needed something familiar and comforting.

So UNO it was!

The Butterfly Effect

Now, none of us had played UNO in forever and couldn’t quite remember the rules. We could have looked them up, but how hard could it be? Play a card that matches either color or number, first one out wins. I suggested we play like I remember when I was a kid where, if you didn’t have a card to make a match, you kept drawing till you could.

The game started fine, but as it progressed, a certain chill filled the room. One of us would be down to two and on the very next turn would have to take ten cards to get a match. It was funny at first, but then it became maddening. Over and over. More and more cards. A skip turn or a reverse used as defensive soon became a plea of forgiveness, “I’m sorry, it’s the only one I could match!”

But what really struck me was the mood around the table. At first we were laughing at playing such a silly game. That turned to annoyance. Then frustration. Then despair. 2 cards would become 20 and there was nothing we could do to stop it. What was once holding on to last pairs became a desperate hope that we would die soon to put us out of our misery. And that soon turned to the cold hard realization that the only way to have that sweet release of death was to take the cards and sli….

….so we looked up the rules.

Turns out, you’re only supposed to take one card if you can’t match. Not all of them.

Whoopsie.

As Good As It Gets

We picked up where we left off, but playing with the correct rules. And it was here that I noticed something. The table state had changed. Not the game state. We still had three hands, a draw pile and a discard pile. But our frame of mind as group had changed. What was once a frantic mess of anguish and pain had become much calmer, thoughtful and considered. Choices now became apparent and useful. Instead of solely focusing on our hand, we were paying attention to others. If a wild came up, what someone declared became extremely important.

It had become interesting and pleasant.

I mean, it was still a simple card game. But at least it wasn’t painful.

But here’s the thing that hit me, and is the whole reason why I’m writing this essay and creating this blog – there’s something to learn here.

Now the obvious thing is that the game design defines the experience. One simple rule change clearly highlights that. Playing one way was an excruciating experience for all involved and another was the nice pleasant half-hour we enjoyed finishing the game.

But here’s the other side of the coin – the reason we were playing by that first rule was because that’s what I remember playing as a kid and enjoying it. Many kids do. So much that many people think those are the actual rules.

So the question is why – why do kids play enjoy playing that way?

Groundhog Day

As any parent of a toddler will tell you, and really any one that has been near a child knows, they love repetition.

This is not because kids are dumb or annoying. I mean they are, but that’s not why. Studies have shown that the love of repetition is actually a learning process. Seeing and saying and doing something over and over not only brings comfort, it helps them learn how the world works.

Take the game of peek-a-boo.

One of the most universally played games by babies everywhere – it’s a game of no consequence for the adult, but the entire world for the baby. Literally. When their eyes are covered and then uncovered and everything is still exactly the same, the babies are learning that the entire world doesn’t disappear when they close their eyes. Everything is still there.

Peek-a-boo helps a baby learn object permanence.

When a kid is playing UNO, they aren’t learning object permanence. Instead, when they see that someone has to take a huge stack of cards, they are learning that the pain of someone else is funny.

Someone else has to take a stack of cards? Yep, still funny. Now you have to take a huge stack of cards. Yep, that’s funny, too.

Schadenfreude. While playing UNO, the kids are learning and reinforcing Schadenfreude.

They might not be dumb, but kids sure can be jerks.

About Time

All of this begs the question, “Isn’t it ridiculous that you are doing that deep of a dive into the game of UNO?” And I would say, “Abso freaking lutely!”

But does that necessarily make it wrong? I don’t think so.

A game is designed in a time and place.

That game is then played by people in a time and place. And not necessarily the same one.

But the decisions made by both the designer and the player, the creator and the participant of an experience are a reflection of those people. And of their respective time and space, their values and their thought process.

Games that were played in ancient Egypt are different from games played in Victorian England, which are different from games played today. But people can play those games and get another viewpoint of how someone else viewed what they considered fun.

And that look and reflection doesn’t always have to be deep and philosophical Sometimes it’s just fun or funny.

For instance:

UNO was invented in 1971 by a barber and his son after an argument about, get this, the rules of Crazy Eights. After creating the game, the father would sell it out of his barber shop and his son would give them away at school. When other local businesses started selling it a year later, he sold the rights to a group that was headed by someone who owned, and again I’m not make this up, a funeral parlor.

Apparently, UNO has a long standing history of not remembering the rules while also hoping for death.

(If you’ve enjoyed this post and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

July 28, 2022 3 comments

Review

Heading Forward: Doing the Work

by Jeff McLeod July 26, 2022

One of the hardest things to do in any art, and really the most important job, is to have the audience care. There’s lots of tricks and strategies to have them say ooh and aah, or to quickly turn to the next page. You can distract and bombast them with glitz and glam. But to have the person truly moved, to have them set the book down or walk out of the theatre and stop and think about what they just experienced, that is truly a feat in itself. That being said, I have never felt more like I was experiencing one man’s personal story than I did while playing Heading Forward.

It made me pause. And think.

Heading Forward components — *Beware the red circle of doom*

Making Progress

Your goal in Heading Forward, and the game play itself, is relatively simple. In this solitaire game, you have experienced a traumatic brain injury, but you aren’t trying to discover what happened or reverse time or find the culprit. Your humble job is to simply – get better.

In a nod to the current mess of our healthcare system, one that treats mental issues with much less understanding than physical issues, you have to progress enough before the insurance runs out. Or they will drop you.

In Heading Forward to make progress, the four areas you can work on are called your “suits”. They are Financial, Cognitive, Endurance and Adaptability.

Each of those are split into categories like “Work”, “Socialize”, or “Memory”. And each of those are split into four levels, one through four.

At the beginning, all of your card levels are at one. Your ultimate goal then is to progress three categories, one from each suit, from one to four before time runs out – aka the big calendar sitting in front of you, ominously counting down the days.

This all sounds immensely depressing, especially if you have had any experience with the American Healthcare System. But there is a quite hope here. A tenacity that you wouldn’t expect from a quiet solitaire game.

The suits of Heading Forward — *Your goal? Write a shopping list*

Repeat After Me

To that end, there bits of game play that I would normally eviscerate in any other game. For instance, on your first go around of cards, it is very, very repetitive. You spend one card (either for time, heart or both) by placing it in the discard pile. You also move a spoon – which represent energy in this game – by moving it from one side of the calendar to the other side. This enables you to turn another card in your hand into a level two. You place that newly turned card also onto the discard pile. For the third card, you have no more cards or spoons left. That third card goes in the discard pile.

You then reset your one spoon, moving it from the used area back to the unused.

Draw three cards.

Spend one card.

Spend a spoon

Turn another.

Discard the third.

Reset the spoon.

Draw, spend, turn, discard, reset.

Over and over and over.

I don’t mean to say that there is absolutely no strategic thought put into the beginning of Heading Forward. You do have to think about which cards you are turning into level 2. Because once they show up on your second turn, the rewards start appearing. Are you keeping things balanced? Do you have enough resources? Are you turning enough of different suits to progress enough to keep the insurance happy?

What I am pointing out is that it’s repetitive and basic and kind of annoying. “Couldn’t there be a faster way?“

And that’s the point.

I have never felt more like I was experiencing one man’s personal story than I did while playing Heading Forward.

It’s Always There

Heading Forward puts you in the place of the designer, John du Bois, who suffered a traumatic brain injury of his own and made this game out of his experience. The repetition is part of the process. You have to relearn the most basic things, doing them over and over, before you can move on to the next.

It’s moments like that that drive the point home of what it’s like to go through this type of recovery.

Most prominent is the “Trigger Card”. At the beginning of the game, you pull out one of the categories to the side and replace it with the red Trigger Card. Whenever that card appears, you have to try to progress that category first. If you can’t, because you don’t have the proper resources, that category is atrophied (brought down one level) and your whole hand is atrophied as well.

Hitting a Trigger and not having the resources to handle it is devastating.

There’s nothing you can do for that Trigger card. You can never get rid of it. You can never progress the Trigger out of the game. As the rules states, “The possibility of coming across a Trigger is always with you.” That creates an ever present anxiety that things can collapse at any moment.

It’s a burden you have to live with.

Quietly Changing Perspectives

And that anxiety only grows worse. As your progress increases, so does your ability to draw more cards. As you draw more cards, you increase your chances of coming across your one Trigger.

At the very least, you take on more and more tasks that you might not have the proper resources to handle. You then have to make a choice between the tasks you can at least keep at their current level and others that will atrophy, sliding back in their progress.

What forms every time you sit down to play is a strong narrative story of one person’s journey. The repetition, the having to choose between what is atrophied and what is not allows the simple yet effective story to unfold in front of you. There is heartbreak and sighs of relief and a sense of accomplishment.

The bare bones production value, save for the nicely printed map, the drawings on the suits, the minimal art – they all lend to the credence that this is a deeply raw and solitary journey.

Will this game change the world? No. But then, it’s not trying to. Heading Forward slowly and humbly doing the much harder job – making you care about the day to day things we take for granted.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

July 26, 2022 0 comments

Review

Letter Jam: How to Cheat at Scrabble

by Jeff McLeod July 19, 2022

I can’t play Letter Jam without thinking about other word games. Growing up, I played a lot of Scrabble. Both of my parents were teachers, and while they enjoyed playing games, the modern hobby hadn’t taken hold in the US yet. Like everyone else, the only games they purchased were mass produced games. And they were certain to have some sort of education based redeeming value – math, geography, spelling, general trivia, etc.

No Mousetrap in that household, that’s for sure.

So even at a young age, I would sit down with my parents and play the classic. They would, of course, let me “cheat”. I could look in the dictionary. They would give advice. They would let me move my words if there was a better placement. The point was to learn and grow and help me feel like I was achieving.

I hated Scrabble.

How is Qi a Word?!?!

On the periphery, it’s an imbalanced game. While the letter and point distribution is “balanced”, there is no getting around the fact that previous knowledge, both in word and in strategic play, greatly affect the outcome of the game.

Even with all that encouraging help from my parents, I would still lose. I’m not saying I was spoiled and wasn’t taught how to lose graciously. But at the end of the game, I would look silently at the board. I could see the two letter and vowelless antics of the adults and be left thinking “How can I compete against that?”

Letter Jam, designed by Ondra Skoupý and published by CGE, gets rid of that problem by turning Scrabble into a cooperative game that provides what Scrabble sorely lacks – empathy.

There is no getting around that there is a lot of set-up for this game. An exercise involving each player creating a five letter word, scrambling it, passing it to their left and then very carefully setting up a letter card so that everyone can see it, save the actual player. Trying to walk new people through this can be a test of patience and skill.

The goal is for each player to guess the word that they’ve been handed. But first they need to figure out what their secret letters are. Everyone learns that by giving clues to each other, in words, based off of the letters that they can see in front of them – everyone else’s but their own.

The players do this through truncated table talk. “I have a five letter word that helps 4 people.” Once the team decides on the clue giver, that player then place numbered chips, one in front of the letters used to make that word. This lets all players know the correct order of the letters, even though they can’t see them all.

It is here that the essence of the game resides. You don’t need to have a vast knowledge of complicated words to succeed. And giving only two or three letter words won’t help either. Also, the clues can’t be so simple that multiple letters could be a possibility.

I could see the two letter and vowelless antics of the adults and be left thinking “How can I compete against that?”

I C U R A Q T

For example, say you can clearly see the word MAST in front of you.

Player one would have the clue *AST, meaning that their letter can be one of six possibilities.

Player two sees M*ST, leading to just about every vowel except for E.

And so on and so forth.

So ”MAST” would not be a good clue in Letter Jam.

It is only when a player is confident that they think they know what their letter is that they can put it face down and move on to the next one. But, they never get to check if they are correct until the very end of the game.

It is this uncertainty that forces every player to hone their ability. They have to see how the puzzle looks to each of their fellow players and what benefits the most people. And the only reward they receive is “job well done.”

In other words, Empathy.

This also creates moments within the game that is honestly lacking from even the most cooperative games: the selfless positive feedback.

When a player gives a clue that benefits the group, it is not just the game that looks on you favorably by moving the game forward. Fellow players do as well. When you are clever in Scrabble, what you receive is just for you. Your cleverness benefits you and you alone, except for the few new letters you have placed on the board.

Unless, of course, you played completely strategic and made a New York Times crossword out of your tile placement.

The cleverer you are, the more selfish you are.

Yes, I realize Scrabble is a competitive game. Please refer to my childhood trauma described above.

Altruist The Game

Letter Jam gives players the opportunity to be clever for the benefit of the group. With the use of extra letters and higher scoring capabilities, Letter Jam takes care of the common but dreaded problem that plagues most cooperative games – the alpha player.

If you are confident in your letter, you move on to the next one. If not, don’t worry, you keep it and the next clue should, hopefully, help you figure it out.

When everyone feels like they know their letters, or the predetermind number of rounds have passed, they then try to guess what word the five letters make. Even though they are still unaware if they’ve guessed the letters correctly. If they are feeling particularly clever, they can also try to make a bigger word using letters from the play of the game.

The fact that I am skimming over both the beginning and ending of Letter Jam should tell you two things. One is that they are very hard to describe when not in person and not so intuitive. And two, that the real meat of the game is the actual game play. That’s where the focus is and that’s where it should remain.

The rules themselves highlight this by, interestingly, playing fast and loose with end game winning conditions and winning itself. The five letter word guessed at the end doesn’t have to be the original word intended. So even if somebody is wrong in their letters if, by some miracle, it spells out a word, you still get points.

Even when it comes to scoring, the section starts off with the sentence “If you like, you can count up your LetterJam score.”

The point is that the heart of Letter Jam is the clue giving and the puzzle solving. Everything else is the framework to provide that experience. In a rules-lawyer heavy hobby, this can be off putting for some. But like the red strawberry with a secret message on the cover, it can be quite refreshing.

(If you’ve enjoyed this review and what I’m doing on Cardboard Reflection, please consider helping the website by donating a cup of Ko-fi.)

July 19, 2022 0 comments