Dominion

Today's game review is of the 2008 release, Dominion.  For 2-4 players, it takes 30 minutes.

Overview
Dominion is a deck building game, where you start with a small deck of weak cards (your dominion), but add more powerful ones as the game progresses.  Some cards have abilities or resources that will help you on the way.  Ultimately, your deck will need the most victory points (provided by victory cards), but to obtain those, you'll need kingdom cards and treasure cards.  Some examples of kingdom cards are below.

image from here

Simplified Gameplay
Set up rows of cards as described in the rules (see example below).  These are supply piles, and the game ends when any 3 are empty (or the supply pile of province cards is empty).

image from here

Each player starts with 10 cards (7 coppers and 3 estates).  Shuffle them and draw 5 to form your opening hand.  On your turn, you do three things:
A) Action: play an action card (a kingdom card that says "action" at the bottom)
B) Buy: buy a card (gain one card from the supply by playing cards to pay its cost)
C) Clean-up: discard (your hand, played cards, and cards obtained this round), and draw 5 new cards.

Your discard pile will be shuffled to form a new draw pile, which will increase as the game progresses.  In this manner your deck grows, and you'll see these cards repeatedly.  So plan carefully!  Some cards (like victory cards) are needed by game's end but dead weight early on (they don't help you play an action card or buy a card), so timing is important.  Since you get a hand of only 5 cards each round, you hope for both action and treasure cards to help obtain more powerful cards to build your dominion efficiently and effectively.

Review
This is a good game, and one of the most popular (in terms of number of reviews) on board game geek; it's a staple right up there with Catan and Carcassonne.  It has a CCG-like flavor to it, as you can build a customizable deck, but unlike a CCG (where the deck is built beforehand, using cards you own), here you're building the deck as the game progresses from a common supply (and you can vary the cards in the common supply, furthering the variety).  I like that customization ability, and there are several winning strategies, which makes for a different experience each time.  I give it only one ding: it feels less interactive than I'd prefer.  Most of the game, you're focused on building your own deck, and the only time you 'clash' with others is when you're going for the same cards in the supply.  (There are cards that affect others, too, but not too many in the games I played.)  Overall, though, this is a winner.

Rating: A-

Design evolution

image from here

Notice any changes recently?  The cool thing about web-based content is the ability to tinker and make continual adjustments (hopefully for the better).  One big reason I started this blog was to inform.  I have a horrible memory, and need easily-accessible references.  To that end, I had created a number of 'master' posts over the years on several topics- games, travels, King Arthur, and more.  However, those posts were sorted by date and thus buried, used only by those who already knew they were there . . . so I created stand-alone pages for each topic of interest, which you can access at the top of the page.  I hope they prove a useful reference for you.

On the right side of the page, below the blog archive, you can still filter by labels if you wish (these labels used to occupy the top of the page).  Enjoy!

Small World

Today's game review is of the 2009 release, Small World.  For 2-5 players, it takes 40-80 minutes.

Overview
It's a small world . . . there's not enough room for all.  Your object is to advance your race as far as you can, controlling terrain that benefits you the most.  Nothing lasts forever, though . . . eventually, it will make sense to put your race into decline and choose a new one to make its mark on the world.  You'll each have a certain number of turns (determined by the number of players) to earn victory coins, and once complete, the player with the most victory coins is the winner!

Simplified Gameplay
At the beginning of the game, you'll choose a race/special power combination (examples in the below picture).  Each race and power tells you how many race tokens you get to begin, and gives you unique abilities that will guide your strategy for the game.

image from boardgamegeek

Once everyone has their race and power, the turns begin.  On your turn, you can:
- conquer regions (using the number of race tokens required), earn victory coins for them, and redeploy your forces, OR
- put your race into decline, allowing you to choose a new race next turn and conquer afresh.

How many tokens a conquest requires depends on the impediments on a given territory- existing armies, mountains, troll lairs, and more can make a region use more of your limited tokens to conquer.  So choose wisely!

game in progress; image from boardgamegeek

Review
This is a nice game.  Similar to Risk, but much better (and faster).  It has a lighthearted fantasy flavor, and the race/power combinations (randomly chosen, making for lots of variety) can be hilarious.  Overall, this is worth a look.  Check out the rules here.

Rating: A

The Hobbit: Book vs. Films

image from here

Having recently re-read (and watched) The Hobbit, it's time to compare the book to the films, as I did for The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Notable Differences Between the Book and the Movies

- The first and most obvious difference: they took three movies to tell the story in one book.  To justify that move (which many viewed as a money grab), the movies cover more than just The Hobbit story; they include content from the appendices to The Lord of the Rings.
- Saruman, Galadriel, and Legolas never appear in the book, but play important roles in the movies.
- Tauriel never appears anywhere . . . she was made up for the movies to add a female presence in the film.
- Several events in the book are compressed in the movie- their stay with Elrond, time with Beorn, journey through Mirkwood, and days in the Elven king's jails.  I say 'oddly' because you'd think making 3 movies out of 1 book would preclude the need for such compression.  But I admit, those are slower parts, so perhaps they were modified for that reason.
- No orcs are ever hunting the company in the book.  Azog the Defiler and his son Bolg feature hardly at all in the book, but play prominent roles in the film.
- The Master of Lake-town and Bard feature much more in the movie.
- Several changes to the film reference, foreshadow, or mirror events in The Lord of the Rings in ways the book never did.  This site covers that and has discusses detailed changes.

Other Thoughts

The Hobbit films are, sadly, overly dramatic.  The first movie was okay, but things dovetailed in the second, and the third was a lost cause.  They made every little thing 'a big deal.'  Legolas in particular has some action scenes were are just plain ridiculous and unnecessary.  I haven't even seen the extended editions . . . I can't imagine further additions to an already-bloated series.

Inherently, making the lighthearted and child-friendly Hobbit after the serious and 'more epic' Lord of the Rings was a bad move- they tried to make the tone of the former match the latter, and in so doing deviated from the spirit of the book.  The films are visually splendid, and I enjoy watching them for what they are, but I can't help thinking about what might have been.  

Wonder Woman

At long last, DC's leading lady gets her own feature film.  Wonder Woman is the story of Diana, an Amazon born of Zeus and Hippolyta.  Living an idyllic life on the magically-concealed island of Themyscira, the Amazons get a rude surprise when a World War I conflict washes up on their shore.  Steve Trevor, an American spy in British employ, is captured and pumped for information.  His news gives all pause: the Germans are developing powerful weapons to turn the war in their favor at the last hour.  The death toll will be in the millions unless someone can intervene.  Diana has a choice- does she remain among her people, or step into the world of man to save the world?

There's a lot to like about this film.  The characters, music, and effects are good.  The humor is decent.  The themes are excellent (see next paragraph).  I had a few problems with the plot, though.  I especially struggled with the film once Wonder Woman & co. ended up at the WWI front line.  For some reason, superhero injections into real conflicts bother me (I had the same problem with Captain America in WWII), perhaps because I'm familiar enough with the history to critique the portrayal of the conflict (outside of the superhero element, which I expect to be far-fetched).  Also, I'd have liked to see the minor characters developed more.  Overall, though, this is worth your time.

Wonder Woman deals with two main themes:

1. The nature of the world and humanity.
• The movie opens with the contrast of the world's beauty and darkness.  "I used to want to save the world, this beautiful place. But the closer you get, the more you see the great darkness within."
• The Amazons believe that man is weak, cruel, and selfish, but was created good and then corrupted by Ares, Greek god of war.  They think when he's gone, all will be restored.  
• Ares only sees the dark side of man; Diana says "they're everything you say, but so much more," implying that man was created for much more than he has become.
• Steve Trevor argues instead that people aren't always good, and "we're all to blame," as everybody's fighting for their own.
2. Our duty in the midst of it.
• It is the Amazons' sacred duty to defend the world.  And Wonder Woman states that she will "fight for those who cannot fight for themselves."  However, given its darkness, multiple times this concept of what we deserve is discussed.  Wonder Woman knows people don't deserve her (and is told that multiple times).  Her response?  "It's not about what you deserve- it's about what you believe."
• Steve Trevor's thought: "If you see something wrong with the world, you can do something or nothing.  And I've already tried nothing."
• Wonder Woman ends with the quote of the movie: "Only love can truly save the world." 

I commend the film for exploring these themes and getting things (at least partially) correct.

Rating: A-

The Hobbit (J.R.R. Tolkien)

"In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort."  So begins J.R.R. Tolkien's classic The Hobbit, the tale of Bilbo Baggins.

At the wizard Gandalf's urging, Bilbo finds himself accompanying 13 dwarves as they seek to reclaim their homeland- the foreboding Lonely Mountain- where the dragon Smaug has lived for decades with his stolen treasure.  It's a terribly long journey; along the way, the company will encounter trolls, elves, goblins, giant eagles, the mighty Beorn, spiders of the enchanting Mirkwood Forest, and of course, the dragon.  How can they possibly prevail?

What an enchanting tale!  This prelude to The Lord of the Rings is a must-read, genre-defining book.

Rating: A

Bang! The Dice Game

Today's game review is of the 2013 release, Bang! The Dice Game.  For 3-8 players, it takes 15 minutes.

Overview
In the wild west, you are a sheriff, deputy, outlaw, or renegade.  Your goal depends on your role:
- sheriff: eliminate all outlaws and renegade(s)
- outlaw: eliminate the sheriff
- deputy: help and protect the sheriff
- renegade: be the last character in play

At the start of the game, each player is given a role card (kept secret except for the sheriff) and a character card (which grants a special and unique ability to each player and is visible to all).  Your character determines how much life you start the game with (represented by bullets).  Your goal (in general) is to eliminate other players based on their role.  Since you know only your role and the sheriff's, pay close attention to what other players are doing.  Once a person is eliminated (has 0 life), they reveal their role and sit out the rest of the game.

Simplified Gameplay
On your turn, roll 5 dice (the faces of which are described below).  You then re-roll some (or all) of them up to two times (see below for exceptions).  After your third roll, resolve the dice and play passes clockwise.

The dice faces, as paraphrased from the rulebook:
1. Indian arrow: take one arrow token immediately (not at the end of your turn) from the arrow pool.  You can re-roll.  If you take the last arrow in the pool, Indians attack and each player loses one life for each arrow in front of him.  After an attack, all players discard their arrows and re-form the arrow pool.

2. Dynamite: cannot be re-rolled.  If you roll three or more, you cannot re-roll and you lose one life (then resolve any other dice you may have).

3. Bull's Eye "1": choose a player next to you (right or left) to lose one life.

4. Bull's Eye "2": choose a player exactly two spaces away from you (right or left) to lose one life.

5. Beer: choose any player to gain one life.

6. Gatling: if you roll three ore more, each of the other players loses one life point.  Discard all of your arrows.

A game in progress; image from here

Review
Another fun, fast-playing game, this is a winner.  It's better than its card game cousin, Bang!, because it is faster to play and more streamlined.  A party game, this isn't one for deep strategy- but it's a nice change of pace, and rare in that it's better with more (I recommend 5-8) players.

Rating: A

No Thanks!

Today's game review is of the 2004 release, No Thanks!  For 3-7 players, it takes 20 minutes.

Overview
Your goal is to finish the game with the fewest points.  You gain points by picking up cards (the card number equals its points).  You also have 'pass tokens' (worth -1 point each) that you can put on a card to pass on it instead of picking it up.  You can pass on a card multiple times, but you have a limited number of tokens, so be careful!  The person who eventually picks up the card gets that card plus all tokens on it.

Scoring occurs at the end of the game.  Here's the key: if you have a 'run' of cards (sequential numbers), only the lowest number in that run gives you points.  Examples:
- 10,11,12,13,14 would give you only 10 points
- 10,11,--, 13, 14 would give you 10 + 13 = 23 points
Add up the value of your cards, subtract one point for each token you have remaining, and the lowest score wins!

Simplified Gameplay
Remove nine cards randomly from the deck of cards (numbered 3-35), shuffle, and place face-down in the center of the table.  Turn over the top card and put it next to the deck.  Give each player [x] tokens, where [x] will be 11, 9, or 7 depending on the number of players.

On your turn, either:
- take the displayed card (with tokens on it, if applicable) and add it to your play area.  If you do, turn over a new card.
- pass by putting a token on it and say "No thanks!"

Play passes clockwise.  It's that simple!  The game ends when the cards run out.

Review
I really like this game.  Easy to learn, fast to play . . . it's surprisingly addictive.  The obvious goal is to collect runs of cards, but since nine cards are removed, you never know exactly what you'll find.

Rating: A

Batman: Knightfall Part 3: Knightsend

In this conclusion to the Knightfall series, Azrael has become the new Batman and just defeated Bane.  The real Batman has healed and is training with Lady Shiva to regain his form.  Once ready, he confronts Azrael, who has (at this point) gone crazy and is unwilling to give up the cowl.  So Batman finds himself fighting an former friend . . . who will prevail?

This was . . . okay.  A shade below the other two parts, the art remained so-so and dialogue poor.  The conclusion itself was a bit of a letdown, but acceptable.

Rating: B+

The Drama of Doctrine (Kevin Vanhoozer)

The Drama of Doctrine, by Kevin Vanhoozer, is a heavy theological work.  So heavy I realized after reading the [ample] introduction that I couldn't handle it- I don't have the background to fully comprehend or appreicate it.  That said, I could glean enough from the beginning to understand just how amazing and important this topic is.  Vanhoozer wrote another book (Faith Speaking Understanding) on the same theme but for the layman- I'll have to pick that up.

Any quotes below are from just the introduction of The Drama of Doctrine.  I found it valuable enough to summarize here.

-------------------

Does doctrine/theology matter?  Increasingly, some Christians seem to abandon it in favor of calls to simply love each other.  Kevin Vanhoozer understands: "doctrine is thought to be a problem.  It is divisive, an obstacle to love and unity, it can appear insipid and irrelevant . . . [but] the fault is that doctrine is mishandled, with a misunderstanding of its nature and purpose."  Doctrine matters, because "theology involves a way of life, not merely a system of belief."  Indeed, "Christianity is distorted when it is treated merely as a system of beliefs."  You can't escape the connection between belief and action, "for the way one lives bodies forth one's beliefs about the true, the good, and the beautiful."  So doctrine is important, because our doctrine ultimately dictates how we live our lives.

Since Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6), "theology must deal with truth, with ways of living, and with the meaning of life . . . it must keep all three in mind at once.  Christian doctrine, similarly, should serve the purpose of fostering truthful ways of living," "not by admiring it from afar but by following and embodying it."  Theology has five basic tasks- celebrating (worshiping God), coping (with real-life crises), criticizing (demarcating true from false witness to God), communicating (explaining the meaning of God), and continuing (the way of truth and life).

"To be a Christian is to belong to Jesus' way, to be actively oriented and moving in the same direction as Jesus, toward the kingdom of God."  Does this come naturally to us?  No.  And sadly, Christians throughout the ages have misused the Bible and God's name to justify all sorts of evil.  Therefore, "Christian theology must distinguish between true and false knowledge of God."  It follows that "theological competence is ultimately a matter of being able to make judgments that display the mind of Christ." Said another way, "the purpose of doctrine is to ensure that those who bear Christ's name walk in Christ's way."  This enables us (the church) to faithfully carry out our unique responsibility "to proclaim and to practice the gospel."

How do Christians determine what is true?  "Where is divine revelation now to be found?  There are at least four possible candidates."
1. Biblical propositions (the Bible is coextensive with revelation)
2. The Person of Christ (the Bible is a witness to revelation)
3. Christian Piety (the Bible is an expression of one's experience of revelation)
4. Church Practices (the Bible is a product and condensation of the church's language and life)

Countering a postmodern cultural-linguistic theology, the point of Vanhoozer's book is to propose a canonical-linguistic approach to these four items.  He states that "meaning and truth are crucially related to language use; however . . . the normative use is ultimately not that of ecclesial culture but of the biblical canon."  To him, "Scripture is the norm for the Christian way, truth, and life, but only when Scripture is conceived as more than a handbook of propositional truths."

The author employs a theatrical metaphor throughout the book.  "At the heart of Christianity lies a series of divine words and divine acts that culminate in Jesus Christ: the definitive divine Word/Act.  The gospel . . . is intrinsically dramatic, a matter of signs and speeches, actions and sufferings."  Therefore, doctrine has a dramatic nature, Vanhoozer argues that "canonical-linguistic theology gives scriptural direction for one's fitting participation in the drama of redemption today."  And so the book "develop[s] the twin notions of doctrine as dramatic direction and the Christian life as performance interpretation."

Through this lens, the book presents "the Bible as a script that calls for faithful yet creative performance."  From that perspective, "the main purpose of doctrine is to equip Christians to understand and participate in the action of the principal players (namely, Father, Son, and Spirit)."  "Doctrine indicates the way, the truth, and the life of Jesus Christ and directs us to step on out.  Doctrine thus resembles 'stage directions for the church's performance of the gospel.'"

Ultimately, "the drama of doctrine is about refining the dross of textual knowledge into the gold of Christian wisdom by putting one's understanding of the Scriptures into practice."  "The proper end of the drama of doctrine is wisdom: lived knowledge, a performance of the truth."

To recap, "the ultimate goal of theology is to foster creative understanding- the ability to improvise what to say and do as disciples of Jesus Christ in ways that are at once faithful yet fitting to their subject matter and setting.  The church continues to perform the same text in different contexts, despite the difference of centuries, cultures, and conceptual schemes, by "improvising" with a canonical script."
-------------------
This book matters because it discusses how we are to approach Scripture- and life.  Sometimes, people treat the Bible as only "a handbook of propositional truths."  There are certainly many truths in it, but that creates problems and paralysis when people encounter situations not explicitly covered in Scripture.  I've experienced this.  How do I react faithfully in situations?  God commands me to love others, but that takes different forms depending on the person and situation.  A right understanding of Scripture guides us but doesn't necessarily give us the answer.  For example, the Bible doesn't tell me what job to take, who to marry, which way to go on a project, who to help with my finite resources . . . but it gives me guidance and requires that I humble myself, rely on the Lord, and "step on out."  I thus appreciated Vanhoozer's theatrical metaphor, and how we often must 'improvise.'  So this is a great book . . . I can't wait to read the more accessible version.

Rating: A

Logan

It's 2029.  No mutants have been born for decades.  An aging Logan (Wolverine) scrapes out an existence on the US/Mexico border as he cares for an elderly Charles (Professor X), the latter clearly suffering from a debilitating brain condition.  His goal is to raise enough money to buy a boat and live out the remainder of their days far away,  but plans change when a woman tracks him down and begs for help.  A group of mutant children have been created in a lab and raised for experimentation; they've escaped, and one in particular needs Logan's help.  Will he come to her aid, or is he through?

Dark, gritty, bloody/violent, full of foul language (note the R rating), this is different than any other X-men movie to date.  The overall message is good and basic: lives focused on self are marked by pain and futility; we're here to love and sacrifice for each other.  The film felt slow at times, though,  and the music was underwhelming/non-existent.  Overall, this is the first good Wolverine stand-alone film made.

Rating: B+