|
Elysium posted:So given how almost pointless the board is in Temporum, this is how I'll be traveling with it this weekend: Props to your method; board game compression is the way to go. This is how I'm going to pack for an upcoming convention. I'm being restricted to one suitcase and a small pack for luggage. Oh the games that will be squeezed in that suitcase.
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Elysium posted:p.s. this is how I roll with the entire contents of the Carcassonne Big Box (minus the scoring board and instructions): Speaking of compression, I've got the first Galaxy Trucker expansion to fit in the main game's box no problem. Room to spare, in fact. Think I'll be able to fit the second one in, too?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
echoMateria posted:That is not a house rule but listed on the rules as one of the two choices to run the game that players decide ahead of the game. Basically it is very hard for the Mastermind to win if players spend 15 minutes to discuss what to do every day and pick what card each one places. It also makes the game last ten times longer than the alternative. So it is recommended to play the game with "table talk" until players manage to win and then switch to "table talk off" which just means no strategy talk during loops (not even your "I'll take care of X" or "I'll make sure Y gets out of the shrine"). Anyways, I'm pretty excited to play it again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Just played six hours straight of 7 Wonders with two friends. I have stayed up far too late on many nights playing 7 wonders over BSW. I'm actually starting to get appreciably better at it but goddamn is this an addictive game that despite being short hours seem to disappear into it. everyone play 7 wonders
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
I have put panic on wall street, bsg, resistance and cah in the bsg box for my ski trip. Going hand luggage only
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
My friend just grabbed Carcassonne, and I forgot how much I enjoyed playing it. I never got into any of the expansion and was wondering what are some of the better ones to start with and possibly which to avoid. I just amazon'd it to see if there was anything cheap to pull on, but there are like 50 with all kinds of mechanics, and like the minis??? and the big boxes cost too much. I just want a flat rate like top 3 under 30 dollars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
How does one play Carcassonne well anyway? I've only played it a few times and sure I can score points and stuff but I'm usually doing the thing that seems most immediately useful rather than playing to any sort of strategy. Is it just that kind of game? first time I played the game, it was a four player game and I expanded out into a corner of the map that nobody else ever put anything down on so I spent the entire game dicking about with rivers on my own while the other three players bickered eventually resulting in one of the players completely giving up (I don't know if they thought they couldn't win, were being spiteful or what, i was barely paying attention) and just straight up giving points to one of the other players in a very blatant display of kingmaking that obviously gave the game away. The guy who got kingmade rolled with it but I wasn't amused and the other guy was straight up angry about it. It doesn't seem like an especially kingmaking prone game but at the same time it does seem like it kinda runs into the issue of enabling shitheads to pull "Ok, I can't win but I can make someone else win".
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
I just bought one of the giant Ultra Pro deck boxes to put Temporum in. I am very happy that I will have Temporum in the palm of my hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:How does one play Carcassonne well anyway?... well first I'd like to say it is incredibly lame if you play with people that throw and decide to just spend the rest of the game making it one sided, you might as well forfeit and start over or play something else/play with other people. I play Carcassonne well by either looking at how to snake property from others or leech onto their valuables (take too long to build a castle, start one right next to it and get in on it, then rush to finish it) or otherwise spend my time trying to tie up other players buildings when my draws aren't beneficial to the few castles or roads I am running (I'd invest in a monastery but I didn't draw one in two games but I'd say thats fair with only 4? of them in the game) You can also throw a chip in the works, not only should you actively choose someone that is taking an early lead and hit them with a wrench (making roads curve away from monasteries or encasing empty spaces so they can't be played) is a small way in the strategy of Carcassone (I locked up my friends 3 monks because they went hard on them, but I just didn't let them complete the nineth tile ruining their castle scoring all game.) while you can also play the possible backstabbing alliance route, I would propose when a few properties got interesting that I'd go in on it with someone else so we could both soak in the points, as long as you don't give them the space to come in and dominate the area with several units, you can safely create handshake alliances to make castles a little bigger, and share some of the points from shields. If someone gets mad playing Carcassonne though, they probably won't ever enjoy it, even though its competitive I'd say its one of the most relaxing games there is. You're just trying to build a puzzle with territory control mechanics along the way, and having a few friends to do it with. Please rage the gently caress out on a game that takes less than twenty minutes if you keep a lively pace with some small talk, that is just keen. Anyway tl;dr for ya if you really want some lame tips [Use the reference sheet on the rulebook, leave it out, so you can get an idea of what possible moves can be made in the future] [build against people, if you can't use the giant castle space piece, add it to another incomplete castle, and early game attach to it, or do that late game so that it can't be built, just try to be a dick] [build with people, everyone that isn't in first has something to gain by building together, and its pretty hard to setup a backstab that can't be telegraphed a round or few in advance.] [If someone gets mad playing a simple tile laying competitive puzzle doodle, they are not chill enough to probably ever enjoy a fun game.] [Also you gotta consider your meeple eco, you want about half in long term investments, with the rest going into short term two to four tile endeavors, with a tiny bit of wiggle room to have a dude ready to deploy for dominance of a castle.]
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Had a long night tonight. Enjoyed Augustus ("Euro Bingo") by getting two "2 points per senator" Senators. 6 total senators and a 13 point campaign in Gallia was enough to take it. Concept was fun. Some blue words are a lot harder than the rest. Colt Express was great the 2nd time. We misread the rules last time; punching knocks away the other person! I played as Django and had great fun shooting people into the marshall (so they'd take 2 bullets and bounce to the roof). Cheaty Mages was meh: too rules heavy and three rounds feels awfully short. I think I won with 4 coins since with four players, every round ended up with a non-entrant winning. I won the last round when someone played a -12 on my Demon, then someone else randomly replaced him...with a ghost, so the -12 turned into a +12.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
While at a board game cafe over the holiday, I managed to play some games I had been eyeing for a while (and some I hadn't). Just played with two people: Galaxy Trucker: Played it, had a blast, immediately bought it afterwards. Wasabi: Interesting sort of concept, with some sort of strategy there that I could see being fun to play with more people...but I can't really say I enjoyed it that much. Played it on a whim. Kemet: Played this after people raved about it on here. Was actually considering buying it, but then I played it and now I'm glad I didn't. I did not like it at all. The complete imbalance in the tiles, the ability to know all the tiles pretty well before you can really enjoy any of the game...basically it got to the point where my opponent had a marauding army of 7 units and a mummy walking across the desert and there was nothing I knew of to do to stop him. He also held the 3 Attack, 3 Defense card (or something similar). I had no chance and realized I wasn't really having any fun (and neither was he) so we just stopped playing. Dungeon Lords: Had fun with this one. Liked a lot of the mechanics, and was considering purchasing it, but already had way too many games to bring home with me (seriously, my backpack, luggage, and an extra large bag were filled to the brim with them). Will have to pick it up in the future. That or Dungeon Petz, which I didn't get a chance to play but would really like to. Forbidden Desert: Kind of liked it as a light coop that didn't require as much thought or frantic planning from games like Space Alert or Pandemic. Some thinking required, but it's definitely in the intro-level category of coop games. Played some Forbidden Island with my family over the holiday as well, I think I preferred Desert though I'm not sure we played artifact placement totally correctly. Also we lost because I ran out of water one freakin' turn before we would've won. Stupid sun, always beating down. Adventure Time Munchkin: Well...it's Munchkin. But there's something refreshing about playing a single deck of Munchkin that isn't filled to the brim with forty different loving expansions, that takes four hours to get through and is a giant pain in the rear end to reconcile like six different conflicting sets of rules as you're a Kung-fu Cultist with Cheese weapons, henchmen, minions, wtf ever, etc. Plus I like Adventure Time. I think that was all of them. Played a shitload of boardgames, that's for sure, more than I have in a while.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
Kemet would not be a good game with two people, regardless of its other merits or weaknesses. I would probably only play it with four or five as I think it needs that many for balance. The zero sum nature of a two player game would really enable snowball effects and reward strategies that aren't really in the spirit of the game, IMHO. I mean it still might not be the game for you but it should play quite differently at a higher player count with more competition over the board, so I'd keep that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
Also there are several reference sheets for Kemet at BGG. Print your favorite out for your players before playing. This will help a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
PROTOSTORM!!! posted:My friend just grabbed Carcassonne, and I forgot how much I enjoyed playing it. I never got into any of the expansion and was wondering what are some of the better ones to start with and possibly which to avoid. I just amazon'd it to see if there was anything cheap to pull on, but there are like 50 with all kinds of mechanics, and like the minis??? and the big boxes cost too much. I just want a flat rate like top 3 under 30 dollars. The River / River 2 are decent changes to the start point and forces the map to spread out a little. Also Inns & Cathedrals is a good expansion without complex rules, I pretty much always use it and consider it part of the base game (also it adds a 6th player if that's important to you). Depending on which printing of the base box your friend they may already have one of these. Out of the other expansions, avoid the Catapult as it's a janky piece of crap that adds dexterity to a tile placing game. The Tower feels a bit gimmicky with a more direct 'gently caress you' mechanic so maybe avoid that. Traders & Builders is good as is Hills & Sheep (the latest one). Abbey & Mayor is fine though the Barn and Wagon can be a little hard to grok. King & Scout is a neat mini-expansion but I think that's now only available as part of a larger collection since Z-Man took over printing. I haven't played with the others enough to have an opinion. In general it's not a good idea to just throw in all the expansions as many of them rely on specific tiles cropping up to trigger effects - if you have a lot of different effects to track then it can get confusing, and the more you add the further apart they can trigger. Stuff that adds extra special followers can all be used together no problem though, as well as the Messengers and the Phantom as neither of these rely on special tiles. Overall my list would be: 1. Inns & Cathedrals 2. The River / River 2 (the second one has a branching river path and also has some elements which interact with the Princess & Dragon expansion so is preferable if you get that one) 3. Traders & Builders 4. Hills & Sheep 5. Abbey & Mayor Do not buy: 1. The Catapult. Ever. 2. The Tower unless you want the tile organiser it comes with and don't mind the gently caress you mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
The tower dies add to that "knife fight with tiles" feeling you get in a two player game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
This feels SO WRONG but it might be right: [q]....As gamers know, these 'hidden objectives' have only recently become a fairly regular feature of games. A publisher explained to me that a problem they found with game buyers in their country was that they often didn't want to finish playing a game if they realised they were not going to win. But these hidden objectives revealed at game end meant that the winner wasn't known until the game was over and a player in apparently last place could end up winning. So everybody stayed round the table to the end! This is why they started to introduce them and the idea has clearly caught on.[/q] The reason I don't like them is that no one can tell who is winning and that seems totally random to me. At the same time, they don't interfere with the process of playing I guess, so maybe I'm overreacting to them. I just don't like the feel they give to games. What do you guys think (and yes this is a follow on to the 'should newbies always have a chance to win discussion we had)
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
I mean, Trucker kinda does a bit both ways, you can look at the cards you'll be facing at the cost of time, and don't get to see all of them. Works decently well. But it is a pretty chaotic game, deliberately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Hidden objectives are fine as long as the players have a reference that they can use to have educated guesses on what the opponent might help, and even better if there's enough wiggle room between building the engine and winning so that someone could try and bluff their win condition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Thing is, usually with hidden goals you should know what the goals *could be* so by paying attention to what your opponents are doing you should be able to play to your strengths and their weaknesses even if you're not sure what those strengths/weaknesses are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
It depends on how well-designed they are, and if they fit the type of game they're implemented in. I think Dead of Winter's a good example of how not to implement them. For example, when I played I actively did not contribute to the game-winning goal (everyone contributes X Medicine cards or whatever) just because I wanted to achieve my win condition on my agenda first. Then I got exiled, drew a "win if everyone loses" card with a criteria I already had fulfilled, and proceeded to sabotage to victory. The agenda prolonged the game because while there was a common goal, there was no incentive for me to actually work toward it until I got what I wanted. I can understand hating them in general since it's pretty easy for them to gently caress up a game's balance and can prolong an inevitable result, but I think in the right context they can enhance a game a great deal. That said, it's probably pretty telling that I don't have any examples of good uses offhand besides general traitor mechanics like BSG and Resistance (and I'd hesitate to count those anyway).
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Mega64 posted:It depends on how well-designed they are, and if they fit the type of game they're implemented in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
This quote came from this discussion. Not sure if you can tell in Panamax what goals people have. In real time discussions I'm having, I think the main problem I have is that I get zero feedback on how well I am doing if the goals are hidden. I'm horrible at figuring out what people really need or are doing or whatever, and I'm sure that plays into my disdain for hidden goals. If I don't know who is actually winning, then it feels like (and Egizia was awful for this) that I'm kingmaking without even realizing that I'm kingmaking. I sure hope they figure out another way to get people to keep playing than to make it nearly impossible to judge your own effective play in a board game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Blamestorm posted:Kemet would not be a good game with two people, regardless of its other merits or weaknesses. I'm convinced the only good two player board games are two player board games. Everything else is merely adequate at best. PerniciousKnid fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Agricola is a fantastic 2 player game. Really, most good games that are good for both 2p and more-than-2p are generally super cutthroat 2p and less so more-than. Turns em into zero sum games rather than engine games, or such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I'm convinced the only good two player board games are two player board games. Everything else is merely adequate at best. Mage Knight, Hanabi (if that's your thing), Carcassonne, Tash-Kalar and possibly Agricola, just off the top of my head, are good with two or more people. I would also possibly include Pandemic, although it requires a non-quarterbacking group. Direct aggression is a lot different in two player games than multiplayer games, so that gameplay may change a lot depending on the game, which in some cases works and other doesn't. Hidden agendas work if they're a way to settle tight races in my opinion, but not if they're "gain a million points and also you win". Suburbia works in this regard as far as I've played it: You aren't going to pull a victory just from hidden agendas if you were roleplaying trying to build Finland by laking everything, but they do add that element of "I can still win if I snatch that last office building" if you're slightly behind and the board state is not otherwise favourable. Also, it gives you a direction in the beginning, which is nice to newbies and forces more experienced players to try something different. Oh, and hidden agendas are aMAZEing in The aMAZEing Maze 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I'm convinced the only good two player board games are two player board games. Everything else is merely adequate at best. I'm convinced that Dominion is really a 2 player game and DXV was conned by a publisher to say it could be more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I'm convinced the only good two player board games are two player board games. Everything else is merely adequate at best. Castles of Burgundy is excellent with two, and I would wager better than with four. It's on par with three players. It also sounds like Kemet isn't the game for that person, regardless of player count. I wouldn't recommend against playing it again with a different set up, but it might not fix any of the problems they have with the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:I'm convinced that Dominion is really a 2 player game and DXV was conned by a publisher to say it could be more. DXV balanced it specifically for 3 players so that it could go down to 2 and up to 4 easily; he hesitantly was willing to go to 5 for the expansion but hates the idea of 6 player Dominion (that is where the publisher influence came in). It's easily the best at 3, but good at 2 and 4.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Most euros play really well with 2 players and scale well for more. Most Felds, most Rosenburg games, Keyflower, Dominion, Istanbul, etc. As for hidden objectives I like exactly what was described in that scenario, that you don't know for sure until the end of the game how well someone is doing and so you aren't as worried about losing because you can only guess. Some games definitely do it better than others though. In Keyflower I think it's great because the actions your opponent is taking and the length of the game give you enough info that by the third season you can guess and react to what your opponents are doing, and in Winter you can grab the tiles they want or block their resources. Troyes is another good one for similar reasons, you can get a good sense of what your opponent is going for based on where they put their workers and what actions they take so you can get in on their card. You are also scored based on meeting a certain threshold and not just 'who did best, who did second best'. I haven't liked it that much in Archipelago, though I've only played it a few times and only with 2 players. Most of our games have only last 3 or 4 rounds, sometimes 5 or 6, which isn't very long. There are also a lot of different goals, some of which are hard to interpret, so it's extremely difficult to guess what your opponent is doing and then to try and capitalize on it before the game ends. Then at the end of the game chances are you'll score top points on your goals and get second on theirs, so it's sort of rote. I'd still like to try this with more players before deciding but I don't know how it would go over, it definitely feels like it needs multiple plays before you can even start to really play the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Has anyone gotten to try out Roll for the Galaxy? Looks like it's finally back in stock, but I can't find any impressions with a search. We had a board gaming day on New Year's Eve. Played Some Bang: The Dice Game, Red7, Lost Legacy, Caverna, 7 Wonders (just base game), and this Carccassone knockoff called Ark of the Covenant. As usual, I lost 7 Wonders by 2 points. I need to figure out my age 1 and/or brown resource play more, I think. Did win Caverna, though. The Broken Token organizer makes it so much easier to play, it's kind of silly. I think we'll actually be playing it more now that I don't dread setting it up. Red7 was a surprise hit, everyone really liked it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
EBag posted:I haven't liked it that much in Archipelago, though I've only played it a few times and only with 2 players. Most of our games have only last 3 or 4 rounds, sometimes 5 or 6, which isn't very long. There are also a lot of different goals, some of which are hard to interpret, so it's extremely difficult to guess what your opponent is doing and then to try and capitalize on it before the game ends. Then at the end of the game chances are you'll score top points on your goals and get second on theirs, so it's sort of rote. I'd still like to try this with more players before deciding but I don't know how it would go over, it definitely feels like it needs multiple plays before you can even start to really play the game. Archipelago definitely has too many hidden objectives to work with two people, I agree, but I think it's fine with four or five (assuming everyone has access to a player aid so you don't have to memorize that poo poo).
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
We like the gameplay and mechanics it's just the scoring and hidden objectives don't feel very good with just 2. I can definitely see how it would be much better with more players though and will hopefully be able to try it out soon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Kemet is playable with two people in that same way that Game of Thrones or Twilight Imperium are playable with three people. The box says "yes" but don't you loving dare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Prepare your rear end in a top hat Also there is a munchkin news site and forum because we all have needs. Played some games over Christmas, most of which I have already talked about but one I haven't. Paperback. It's a deckbuilding word game. You start with a deck containing R S T L N E letter cards and 4 "wild" cards that can be any letter. You draw 5 of them on your turn and try to spell a word. Any cards used provide money you can use to purchase new letters (wilds provide no currency). The letters you can buy can be normal letters, two letters together such a TI (they have to be used together and in that order.) and letters with powers that can only be used if they are used in a word (like an S that gives you +1 card to your next hand if it is at the end of the word.). When you are making your word there is a common letter card, usually a vowel, that is in the market area. You can include it in part of your word and redeem the money it would make you but you do not get to buy/take/keep the card UNLESS the word you made uses the number of letters indicated to win the card (7-10 letters, as they get won the difficulty to obtain them increases.). You win by having the most victory points, you can get those by winning the common letter cards or buying wild cards that have varying prices but provide the most victory points. The game ends when the common cards are all bought or two of the 4 victory point wilds are depleted. The game also comes with some wooden cubes and variant rules that use them. The one we used was if you were stumped you could offer a cube to someone to make a word for you and they could use it on their turn toward buying cards. I don't like trivia or word games because I'm just plain awful at them. This game was actually pretty fun. Even if you're not great at word games you can use knowledge of how to play deckbuilders to build the combo necessary to make a lot of cards enter your hand and spell simple words. I faced off against two people who are good at word games, spelling, and grammar but I got the win because I knew what powers to combo and when to buy VP. One thing that is harsh is if you spell that big word that gets you the common card chances are you made a lot of money making that word and can use the money to buy a victory point card. The cards that have VP values go from 1-15, common letter cards give 5. The last turn I spelled INSTALLERS and got the common card that would end the game and because the game would be over at the end of my turn I used the money to buy a 8 VP card. I may change it to the turn that you win a common card you can't buy VP cards or something. Also the starting wild card are worth 1 VP each and I don't know why. I'm guessing it is so you have to decide to trash them to cleanse your deck of cards that don't make you money but no one did it because wilds help and it didn't feel like 1 VP was worth getting rid of to maybe end up with a hand full of consonants. I wouldn't play this game often but it is good if people are clamoring for word games and it is a great simple way to introduce deckbuilders. The concept is simple and you don't have to explain anything except the shuffling. Everything else is already known and familiar, you need to build big words, you build words to buy letters to make bigger letters, you sometimes buy VP cards. Done. Also one of my highest point words was "molesters".
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
quote:Munchkin Steampunk – A new base set bringing steampunk to the Munchkin universe. It's illustrated by Phil Foglio. I think we've ended up in board game hell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Also there are several reference sheets for Kemet at BGG. Print your favorite out for your players before playing. This will help a lot. We had them. I just don't like having to pore over a list of stuff, trying to decide what to buy, especially since some are markedly better than others. I don't think I'd have fun if there were more players, either - its simply not a game that appeals to me, so I'm really glad I could play it first before I bought it on a whim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Asymmetrikon posted:It's illustrated by Phil Foglio. I think we've ended up in board game hell. No, I think that would be when Cards Against Humanity combines with Munchkin and you're playing against someone who has AP, even on that game. I played Castles of Mad King Ludwig last night, being my third time playing, and I realized that due to the nature of the Master Builder role, the game could potentially have a bit of a kingmaker problem, especially with new/bad players who don't know how to price something. Namely, I noticed at least a couple times when a piece was severely underpriced, enabling someone else to get a ton of points for very few moneys. The game was also determined pretty early when someone got an individual bonus for Activity rooms and one of the goals was most Activity rooms That is a lot of points. Also, gently caress the circle rooms for rotating and making it difficult to see if things line up the way they "should." And because we like geometry for some reason, we played Galaxy Trucker, which was fun and chaotic as always. Turned out it was two guys' first time playing, which was fun to watch them die on rounds 1 and 2. I also played a small game called Sellswords, which is basically Triple Triad from Final Fantasy 8. I enjoyed the game, but the rules (which folded like a map for some weird rear end reason and was kinda uncomfortable to use as a result) were a bit unclear, especially in terms of terminology and some of the effects. Still, I had a good time with the game, but we'll see if cracks start showing on repeat plays.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Was there actually anyone in the world at all who was clamoring for a Munchkin Gloom?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Gimnbo posted:Was there actually anyone in the world at all who was clamoring for a Munchkin Gloom? Keith Baker, maybe?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:23
|
|
