The Year in Review

As is my custom, I find it helpful to reflect upon the good and the bad of 2023.  I start the year with goals; this post looks back at some of them and considers other factors we experienced this year.

Our year was defined by two factors:

- home improvement

- church involvement

As mentioned last year, our kitchen flooding (plus supply chain problems) meant we didn't get that fully fixed in 2022. Thankfully, we finished that project in March 2023. Then it was on to the basement, which we tackled this summer with a lot of help from friends. We rounded out the year fixing the porch, replacing the worn (and increasingly dangerous) wood with trex material. Let's hope next year sees less home projects; it was good, but exhausting.

For church involvement, my wife and I increased our responsibilities. She is on two teams handling various aspects of church matters; I became an elder, continued leading the men's ministry and a community group, and led a Sunday school in the fall. These efforts are 'joyful burdens,' and though they can be heavy, we pray that we can help.

On to goals:

Spiritual
My goals here:

- Be disciplined in prayer.
- Overcome two besetting sins.

Prayer was pretty consistent when in my routine, but easily dropped when 'out of sync' due to illness, vacation or other factors. I need to be better about keeping the first things first, even when the day is abnormal.

I did make some progress in besetting sins, so that was encouraging, but more progress is needed. 

Nutritional/Fitness

My goals here:

- Get (and keep) weight under 185 lbs.
- Complete 240 workouts (run, bike, gym, hikes, etc.).
- Eat more fruit/vegetables.

I didn't meet the weight goal, though I had dropped to 192 by early December, the holiday excesses have me now at 197 lbs. My goal remains 185 lbs, and I've learned that it can be achieved only by dieting: eating a lot less (generally around lunch), snacking less, and so on.

I was diagnosed with a partial tear in my shoulder and moderate/severe arthritis in my knee, which did minimize my running and affect my workout approaches.

I did complete 298 workouts (not counting PT sesssions or basement hours), which is satisfactory. I am still "fit fat," meaning I'm in decent shape and can do cardio and weights without problems. I just need to lose some pounds. Most workouts were runs, gym, bike rides, and yardwork. My gym workouts 'shot up' as I did them more frequently for shorter time periods. As with last year, I incorporated a healthy dose of ab/core focus into what is typically upper body-focused. Included 2022 totals for reference:

2022: 38 runs for 91 miles, 113 gym workouts, 68 bike rides for 1061 miles, 7 hikes for 30 miles, 43 mow/yardwork, 5 misc.

2023: 22 runs for 54 miles, 182 gym workouts, 58 bike rides for 623 miles, 15 hikes/walks for 55 miles, 21 mow/yardwork, 113 hours spent working on the basement.

My diet was marginally better but could still use improvement.

Reading
My goals here:

- Read 40 books.
- Focus on American authors/topics.
- Pick another topic and 'get smart' (i.e. read a few books) on it. Probably humor.

No problem here; I read 50 books, and kept my 'owned but unread' pile at a pleasant number (down to about a dozen until Christmas). My post here caps this year's book recommendations. I made an American Reading list (see the link in the prior sentence) and chipped away at that. I did attempt to find books on humor, but there is shockingly little out there. Overall, I'm satisfied.

House

My goal here:

- Finish the basement.

We did it! We actually did it. I spent August blogging about what it took; this summary post links to the others.

Language
My goal here:

- Continue studying Spanish.

I did Spanish until April, then switched to Latin for a month or two, then went back to German until November, when I quite DuoLingo altogether (I explain my frustration here).  They didn't send me statistics for the year, so I don't know how much time I put into it. Language is valuable, and I will seek another means of practicing in 2024.

Games
My goals here:

- Minimize clothing.
- Minimize game collection.

I did minimize clothing over the summer, which was helpful, but I've noticed it crept back up to the point where drawers are stuffed. Need to clean up again. 

For games, my time was focused on minimizing my Magic collection. I sold 10,000 cards from there and got a nice return. 

Conclusion
Looking across the six categories above, it was a pretty good year. The main thing that stands out as needing improvement are spiritual goals and the weight. Here's to a better 2024. "Never stop starting."

Thus Concludes 2023

Another reading year "in the books." This post recaps the year and presents what I consider the best of the bunch.

I read 50 books this year, totaling 13,067 pages—about 36 pages a day. My average rating was 90.7/100.

Of the 50 books, 0 were audiobooks, 1 was an eBook, and 15 were borrowed from the library or friends. By genre, I read 7 fantasy books, 9 on religion, 3 graphic novels, 16 literature, 4 history, 2 humor, and a smattering of others.

I formed a 200-book American Reading List (presented in three parts: here, here, here) and read 16 titles on those lists. I dabbled in humor (here and here), though I didn't study it as thoroughly as I intended. And I read down my 'owned but unread' pile, getting that down to about a dozen books (before Christmas swelled that back into the twenties).

Here are my top ten reads from this year:

J.L. Carr: A Month in the Country

Harper Lee: To Kill a Mockingbird

Michael Palin: Erebus

Peter Beagle: The Last Unicorn

Robert McKenzie: We the Fallen People

Anthony Doerr: All the Light We Cannot See

Dane Ortlund: Deeper: Real Change for Real Sinners

Thomas Harris: The Silence of the Lambs

Brandon Sanderson: The Hero of Ages

K.A. Kitchen: On the Reliability of the Old Testament

On the whole, this was a good reading year. May 2024 bring further works of excellence. Happy reading!

Marvel Dice Throne

Today's review is of the 2022 release, Marvel Dice Throne. For 2–6 players, it takes 20–40 minutes.

Overview

Even friends fight sometimes. In Marvel Dice Throne, you are each a superhero determined to be the last one standing. Each of you starts with 50 health (in a 2-player game); reduce your opponent(s) to 0 to win.

In this game, each player has their own hero, complete with hero board (with attack an defense options based on the dice you roll), hero leaflet (with tokens you can add to your board, granting more abilities), deck of cards, and dice. You also have a combat point meter and life meter.

game setup for two players; image from here

At the start, each player sets their combat points (CPs) to 2 and draws 4 cards. On your turn, you have the following phases:

1. Upkeep phase

2. Income phase (gain a CP, draw a card)

3. Main phase 1 (spend CPs to play cards from your hand, or 'sell' [discard] one or more cards to gain that many CP)

4. Offensive roll phase (roll your 5 dice in up to 3 roll attempts. Then activate an offensive ability on your hero board based on the dice you rolled.)

5. Targeting roll phase (for multiplayer only)

6. Defensive roll phase (if you activated an attack, the defending player may have a defensive ability they can roll to activate)

7. Main phase 2 (exactly like main phase 1)

8. Discard phase (sell one or more cards to discard down to 6 cards)

For more details, see the rulebook here.

Players take turns until someone is reduced to 0 health.

Review

With a deck of cards, dice, hero board, and hero leaflet, this game seems complex and overwhelming at first, but it is surprisingly straightforward and easily grasped. There are a lot of options, but that gives the game meaningful decisions to complement the heavy luck component (from the dice and card draws). There are echoes of King of Tokyo here, with the yahtzee-style dice rolling and symbols that grant different effects. The defensive rolling phase is a nice feature, as it gives you the ability to minimize damage (or gain some other benefit). The game is superbly packaged, with each hero getting its own encapsulated tray with everything you need, making for easy setup and storage. Overall, it is a fun experience, and I look forward to trying out the different heroes. 

Rating: A

Blood Meridian (Cormac McCarthy)

Blood Meridian follows 'the boy' through various terrors and hardships, mostly in the 1850s Mexico/American West. He falls in with a small gang of men who get paid to protect villages from Indians; they get paid based on the scalps they bring in. Sometimes the gang does scalp the intended targets; other times, they massacre innocent villages. They meander through this region committing various atrocities until the boy eventually finds his way to California and elsewhere, eking out a more honest living even as he remains among the scum and villainy. 

On style: this was my first Cormac McCarthy book. I didn't care for it much. It was unusual and hard to follow. He seldom uses any punctuation outside of periods and the occasional comma (dialogue, which is rare, isn't in quotes). Some chapters have breathtaking run-on sentences. Sometimes he switches to Spanish for a few sentences without translating. He rarely uses names (sometimes you learn of them only as a character is dying). It is mostly a series of declarative statements of events, though he does 'sidebar' into lengthy descriptions of weather and terrain. His vocabulary is impressive. I appreciate that he is a talented writer; I just didn't appreciate his style. 

On subject: McCarthy paints a poignant portrait of a terrible time. The desert is harsh and unyielding; its inhabitants the same. The violence is portrayed without regret or compassion; the nonchalance of the main characters reveals that they know nothing different. They just exist and go on. The point of the work appears to be stated near the end, where 'the judge,' a most intriguing character, tells the boy (now in his thirties) that life is "a solitary game, without opponent . . . you of all men are no stranger to that feeling, the empitness and the despair. It is that which we take arms against, is it not?" And looking around the room of a typical western saloon, he goes on as he picks a man at random, claiming that "his life is so balked about by difficulty and become so altered of its intended architecture that he is little more than a walking hovel hardly fit to house the human spirit at all." McCarthy rightly diagnoses the human condition—for that I commend him—but he paints a picture without hope. 

Rating: C

Images in the Margins (Margot McIlwain Nishimura)

This "book is intended to evoke the rich and varied world of the Middle Ages as seen through the lens of manuscript illumination." This is a book of marginalia, "a modern term that refers to words or images in the margins of a page . . . [which were] especially common in English, French, and Italian manuscripts of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries." In "the margins of illuminated manuscripts lie a world of inviting images equally at odds with the solemnity of their settings . . . you will find a surprisingly fresh array of the fantastic, the real, and the ridiculous among the images in the margins." You will find a mixture of sacred and profane surprising to modern readers—yet humans are no stranger to bizarre, hilarious, and often irreverent pictures. In just 75 pages, this book walks the reader through a brief history of marginalia, looking at topics, placement, and meaning (where known) of these delightfully weird images.

not in the book (image from here), but gives you an idea of what marginalia is

In 2015, I read the first book in this series: Beasts Factual & Fantastic. Like that volume, Images in the Margins is done well, intriguing, and too short. Personally, I enjoy absurd humor, and marginalia is right up my alley when done to that effect. I like the more serious depictions, too, and wonder what might have been behind the chosen scenes. Some are symbolic and instructive, others appear to be inside jokes, and still others may have been the modern equivalent of playfully poking fun at friends, society, or life in general; a visual satire, perhaps. Whatever the reason, there is a 'tale within a tale' in old manuscripts, and I enjoy studying such scenes whenever I come across them.

Rating: A-

Sentinels of the Multiverse

Today's review is of the 2011 release, Sentinels of the Multiverse. For 2–5 players, it takes 30–60 minutes.

Overview

You and your friends are superheroes, each with your deck of cards granting you special abilities (like high-damage moves) or features (like artifacts, equipment, etc.). You are cooperatively against a 'bot' villain (with his/her own deck), and play at a location (with its own deck, too). After all heroes, the villain, and location are chosen, decks are shuffled, players draw initial hands, and the game begins.

The game turns are straightforward:

- the villain goes first, playing the top card of the deck and doing its effects

- each hero goes in clockwise order, playing a card and using an ability

- the location goes, playing the top card of its deck and doing its effects

game in progress; image from here

Generally, the villain deck will put out artifacts or powerful cards that are effectively shields for the main bad guy. The goal is to destroy all the artifacts and the villain before all the heroes die. Heroes will play cards that do damage, enable more actions, or do other things. Can you all succeed in time?

Review

This is a nice game. There are lots of options for villains, heroes, and locations, enabling good replayability. The villain, hero, and location decks remind me of a more complex version of Marvel United. As there isn't any licensed property here, the heroes/villains are all 'knock-offs' with clear equivalents in mainstream culture. The art isn't great, and the cards can be wordy. Still, it's a solid offering, and a definitive edition of this game (released in 2022) might have improved the presentation. Overall, I like Marvel United better, but this is worth checking out.

Rating: B+

On the Reliability of the Old Testament (K.A. Kitchen)

Is the Old Testament (39 books of the Bible) reliable? A concept known as "Biblical minimalism," starting in the 1870s (and gaining popularity in the 1990s), argued that the Bible is not reliable as history, and in fact even the concept of "Israel" should be disputed. Minimalists view the OT has being written 400–200 B.C., well after the events they cover. In addition, they argue that the books are basically fiction, with "no roots in the real history of the Near East during circa 2000–400 B.C." Is this true? Along similar lines, one school of thought believes Deuteronomy was "fraudulently cooked up in 622 [B.C.] by priests wanting temple reform . . . and that this then became the fount of everything else similar in the Hebrew Bible." Again, is this worthy of trust? 

In On the Reliability of the Old Testament, scholar K.A. Kitchen disagrees vehemently with the minimalist position (he is a Biblical maximist), and presents his case for the historicity of the Old Testament. His approach is to "go back both to the writings of the Old Testament and to the very varied data that have so far been recovered from the world in which those writings were born, whether early or late." This 'very varied data' includes external records (writings found in Egypt, Assyria, and so on) and Archaeological evidence. And then he compares all against each other to see what results. Put another way, in each chapter, he examines "first the actual physiognomy and contents of the biblical account, and then its wider literary, conceptual, and archaeological context." A summary follows. 

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

Kitchen starts with the 'most recent' (930–400 B.C.) and works backwards.

A good percentage of Near Eastern history in the years 930–580 B.C. is provided by Assyria and Babylon (to the east) and Egypt (to the southwest). Biblically, this time frame corresponds to the divided monarchy or two kingdoms (Israel and Judah) period, which lasted from 931–722 B.C. (Israel) and 931–586 B.C. (Judah). He argues that the extant Egyptian records complement what we find in the OT (specifically, 1 and 2 Kings) quite well, both in terms of rulers and historical events.

Aside: some people argue that the mention of a deity in a writing invalidates the possibility of historical accuracy in the account. Kitchen argues, looking across multiple cultures of the age, that "the ancient writer's theological beliefs in each case have nothing to do with the reality of the events—only with the imputed cause behind the events."

From 600–400 B.C. (the period of exile), we have good and complementary records from Babylonia and Assyria.

From 1042–930 B.C. is the period of united monarchy (under Saul, David, and Solomon, respectively). There is not a lot of external evidence from this time period, though there is external mention of the House of David, and what little does exist realistically agrees with known "practical and cultural aspects" presented in the Biblical accounts of that era. 

From 1210–1042 B.C. is the Biblical period of the judges (as discussed in the Biblical books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and 1 Samuel 1–10). Like the united monarchy, "there are almost no external sources that mention people and events that feature in the books of Joshua and Judges." Why? Kitchen argues that Assyria, a major source of documentation from that time, was well east of the region and no interest in (nor reason to comment on) affairs in Canaan until centuries later (when they would invade). Egypt had more control/interest, but focused on the productive coastal regions, not the poorer highlands where Israel would settle. In addition, "tented wanderers like the Hebrews (and others) have commonly left no surviving traces." However, there is some evidence: Egyptian mention of the people of Israel in 1209/1208, and "many features of the narratives in Joshua (and Judges) find direct echoes and counterparts in texts and representations in their surrounding world." 

Continuing going back in time, we reach the Exodus, that famous episode where Moses leads the Jewish people out of Egypt. There is not a lot of evidence here, either, in part due to terrain: Egypt's East Delta, where Israel would have been, is stone-free, muddy, and subject to frequent flooding. Poor conditions for survival of (say) papyri. Comparing the OT 'oath narratives' with their Egyptian counterparts, and restricting timelines further based on places and people groups mentioned (or not) across several sources, Kitchen places a potential oppression period and Exodus around 1320–1260/1250 B.C. All else that can be said about this is "that the existing Exodus narratives fit readily into the general East Delta topography as presently known," and "their correspondence with not just attested realities but with known usage of the late second millennium B.C. and earlier does favor acceptance of their having had a definite historical basis."  

Now we're back to the Patriarchs: the time of Abraham and Genesis. Looking at a variety of factors (to include inheritance procedures, names, cultures of the age, the use of divination, animals, and more), Kitchen dates Abraham to Joseph as 1900–1600 B.C. And "the patriarchal narratives do retain much data faithfully preserved from the early second millenium." 

Kitchen then 'fast forwards' to look at the prophets who worked across the centuries. These were recorded, intentionally and faithfully, to check against their later fulfillment. And, not surprisingly, the prophetic books in the Bible "are inextricably linked to the limited historical periods in which they are set."

Finally, he looks at the Biblical beginnings (Genesis 1–11), covering a period likely before 2700 B.C. (and beyond written records). It is obvious that these chapters are "a very characteristic literary composition . . . which shares this particular schema with a small group of related compositions in early Mesopotamia, all of which were of a type in vogue in the early second millenium B.C., and seemingly only then."

His basic point in summary: if the OT narratives were written centuries later and largely invented, "how come so consistent a correlation emerges between the "tales" and the archaeological sequence if they were separated by many centuries? . . . It is easier to accept that the "tales" contain a basic history, faithfully transmitted via these books, either themselves written quite early or else written later but drawing upon earlier source data." He argues that from the divided monarchy onward, there is a "very high level of direct correlation (where adequate data exist) and of reliability . . . when we go back (before ca. 1000) to periods when inscriptional mentions of a then-obscure tribal community and its antecedent families . . . simply cannot be expected a priori, then chronologically typological comparisons of the biblical and external phenomena show clearly that the Hebrew founders bear the marks of reality and of a definite period. The same applies to the Hebrews' exodus from Egypt and appearance in Canaan, with one clear mention, of course (Israel on the stela of Merenptah). The Sinai covenant (Deuteronomy included) has to have originated within a close-set period (1400–1200) —likewise other features . . . [all told] we have a consistent level of good, fact-based correlations right through from circa 2000 B.C. (with earlier roots) down to 400 B.C."

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

Agree with him or not, Kitchen is certainly thorough. This book is 500 pages of text, 100 pages of notes/citations, and 40 pages of figures. The reading is systematic and dry; he presents as much as the archaeological field knew at the time (2003). He also looks at all literary/textual aspects: names, people groups, cultures, elements like pottery and tabernacle styles, terrain/livelihoods, literature characteristics, population explosion during a certain era, and more. Overall, he does a great job, and this is an excellent reference. Unless a plethora of additional material turns up (and it just might), there is a lot we will not know for certain . . . but there is good reason for confidence in what we have.

Rating: A

Ex Libris

Today's review is of the 2017 release, Ex Libris. For 1-4 players, it takes 45 minutes.

Overview

You are a book collector, always looking to expand your library. Across the six genres of books, collect the most varied collection, arrange it alphabetically, make sure your shelves are stable, avoid the banned books, and grab as many as you can of your preferred genre (a secret card given to you at the start) to win!

Ex Libris is a worker placement and set collection game, featuring different locations and abilities. On your turn, you will 'send out an assistant' (place a worker) to one of the available locations. Each location has a special ability, but limited slots per turn, so make sure you stop at your preferred places before they fill up. The abilities might allow you to draw cards, discard them, shelve them (see next paragraph), or rearrange them to your liking. Once a player has shelved 12 book cards, the game ends at the end of that round and final scores are tallied.

some game components; image from here

Each card in the game has 2-4 books on it, of varying genres, along with a letter and sequence at the top left. To shelve a card, you put it in somewhere in your existing stack, but be warned: cards out of alphabetical order won't count at the end of the game. But you can't rearrange shelves once placed, and you get points if your shelves are stable (in a rectangular grid) at game's end. So arrange and place wisely!

At game's end, you get points for a variety of categories, as hinted in the first paragraph.

Review

I enjoyed this game. The alphabetization/shelf placement component is an interesting twist to the set collection/worker placement mechanic. Visiting various locations (randomly chosen out of a large pool) makes for a different experience each time. You can pick it up pretty quickly and it is solid overall, if not spectacular. 

Rating: B+

Birds of Prey

When the Joker breaks up with Harley Quinn, she struggles to find her purpose and (now-unprotected) way in a city where almost everyone hates her. But a new mission is on the horizon . . . Roman Sionis and his cronies are after a diamond, which (due to some bad choices) is in the stomach of a young girl. Harley tries to help her, but she can't do it alone—she'll need Huntress, Black Canary, and even a cop to help her. Together, can these Birds of Prey save the day?

Told through Harley Quinn's snarky viewpoint, this movie had some potential but didn't quite deliver. There are flashes of greatness here in dialogue, characters, message, and sets, but the goodness is overshadowed by the typical pitfalls: overly fast development, plot leaps, and so on. I couldn't quite buy Huntress; she seemed more like an angsty teen in need of therapy than a polished assassin. The others were better, though I thought the child would have more of a role. And the assembly of the team was way too rushed. This is a short film, so they could have added some content to improve in these areas. Ultimately, the message seems to be a line Quinn delivers near the end: "you made me want to be a less terrible person." And that's not bad, though it's also clear Quinn still wants to be bad. Just not *so* bad. Meh. It's better than both Suicide Squads (films with similar tone), surprisingly, but not what it could be.

Rating: C+

Elminster: The Making of a Mage (Ed Greenwood)

Elminster's life changed forever the day the dragon came. Helpless, he watched as its rider destroyed his parents and village. Left for dead, he vowed to get revenge on all the archmages in the realm . . . even if it took years to do so. But with their cruel hold so securely on the lands, what chance would he have?

The Making of a Mage traces the backstory of Elminster, a well-known character in the Dungeons & Dragons (Forgotten Realms) universe. The novel is told as a series of snapshots in his past, looking at how he spent time as a thief before being trained in magic by the elves and (then) a powerful sorceress until he became a great mage himself—strong enough to take down those who subjected his kingdom. For Elminster is also a prince.

I read my first Forgotten Realms book a few years ago and was pleased. This one wasn't as good—it was far too fast-paced for my liking. In each snapshot of the past, there are a lot of characters without introduction or backstory, making me wonder if the author was referencing characters familiar to those who play the roleplaying game. They weren't to me, so I felt lost part of the time. I was also confused by the way the magic system worked (though I also enjoyed it)—apparently every wizard knows different spells, and has finite ability to use them in a given situation (I guess they can run out like arrows can). Interesting but mystifying at times. Overall, it's not bad, but I enjoyed the Drizzt tale more.

Rating: B-

The Hero of Ages (Brandon Sanderson)

The Mistborn trilogy concludes! Shortly after The Well of Ascension . . .

Vin and Elend, victorious yet deceived, rally their forces to consolidate those who remain and brace for what's to come. As they scramble and plan, small victories are met with further defeats and shocking revelations. It seems that the world is truly ending . . . is there any point? Is hope dead?

I can't say much about this work for fear of spoilers (indeed, I'm afraid I already said too much). I'll say this: this felt like a 750-page climax to a much longer story (much longer than the preceding two books). Sanderson took a story some would tell over five, seven, or ten volumes and did it in three (I'm not complaining; better rushed than dragged out). The entire book was filled with suspense and unexpected turns. Mysteries from prior volumes were cleared up at breakneck speed. It was beautiful in places, bizarre in others (the theology of this fantasy world has some profound reflections of real truth—and some decidedly wrong ones). Overall, it was intriguing, well-done, and enjoyable.

Rating: A

World's Fair 1893

Today's review is of the 2016 release, World's Fair 1893. For 2-4 players, it takes 45 minutes.

Overview

You are an exhibitor at the famous World's Fair. Your goal is to gain influence and acquire exhibits across five areas (transportation, manufacturing, fine art, electricity, agriculture). Smart choices will gain you a nice variety of exhibits, key to gaining points at the end. But along the way, you can also pick up points by area control and ticket collection. Do you have what it takes to stand out?

3-player setup; image from here

Play is straightforward. On your turn, place one of your cubes in one of the five areas on the board. Take the corresponding cards; if you took any tickets, advance the ferris wheel car that many spaces. Draw three cards from the top of the deck and place one in each area going clockwise from the area you selected. If a given area already has the maximum number of cards, place the card in the next available area.

If, on one turn, you pick up one or more influential figures, you must play them on your next turn in addition to playing a cube. These can give you the bonus of placing an extra cube or moving a cube.

When the ferris wheel car has completed one rotation, scoring happens for that round. 

- the player with the most tickets gains a 2-point bonus

- every player gets coins equal to the number of their tickets

- the player with the most cubes in an area on the board gets a 2-point bonus and can discard one or more cards that matches that area's color to gain a token of that color

- all ticket cards are discarded

- the next round begins

After 3 rounds are over (each with scoring as described above), a final 'set collection' scoring happens, where players get points based on the diversity of tokens they have collected (each complete set of 5 a player has is 15 points, each set of 4 is 10, and so on, as indicated at the bottom of the board). Final scores are tallied; highest score wins!

Review

Quick to learn and simple to play, I would call this game solid but unspectacular. It is a combination of mechanics: worker placement, area control, and set collection. The combination itself is fun, but each element is rather standard. The theme is also cool, but pasted on, and (as my friend pointed out) won't hold interest in repeated plays. The beginning seemed liked 'points salad,' meaning you could score many different ways and it was hard to strategize, but subsequent rounds tightened up and had meaningful decisions. I don't dislike the game, but other games do each element better, so this won't see a lot of play. It is a great gateway game for those getting into the hobby, though.

Rating: B-

Mists over Carcassonne

Today's review is of the 2022 release, Mists over Carcassonne. For 1–5 players, it takes 35 minutes.

Overview

Like its parent, this is a tile-laying game. On your turn, you will draw a random tile, add to the existing map by placing it appropriately (it must not 'disrupt' any existing feature on the map), place a worker if possible/desired, and (in some cases) score points. That's all like normal Carcassonne. What makes it unique?

Mists over Carcassonne is the first variant (I think) to be cooperative. Here, you are playing against the game. When you place a tile, it may have 1–3 ghost symbols on it. Place that many from the ghost pool on that tile. Then play your turn as normal. If, on any turn, you complete a segment with a worker, you have a choice:

- gain the points earned (as normal), or

- remove all ghosts from one tile from the map, returning them to the pool.

You can also remove all ghosts from a completed mist region automatically (like completing a city).

game in progress; image from here

Your collective goal is to score 50 points before you run out of tiles or run out of ghosts. (If, at any point, you have to place a ghost and cannot because the pool is empty, you lose.)

There are variants you can play that add graveyard tiles and other ways of scoring. The options are described in the rulebook.

Review

I love the concept. I'm uncertain about the execution. This game is hard. The tradeoff between scoring points or removing ghosts is certainly a meaningful decision with a 'push-your-luck' element. It just seems, in the games I've played, that the ghosts are placed too quickly, forcing you to always choose their removal, so you never get close to scoring enough points to win. We may have been unfortunate in our tile drawing, but it seems harder than it should be. Perhaps the variants are easier. My initial rating is based on the difficulty; I may raise it later if subsequent plays show more promise.

Rating: B