Editor’s note: GAMA is one of the sponsors of the BoardGameWire newsletter and an advertiser on the site.
Hobby games trade organisation GAMA is facing another shake-up of its senior leadership, with interim executive director Melinda Prickett and board vice president Ross Thompson both announcing they are leaving their roles.
GAMA said its board of directors scheduled a “rapid response meeting” after being informed of Prickett’s departure on October 26, in an effort to determine its next steps – and would be taking immediate steps to appoint temporary leadership to oversee day-to-day operations.
Her departure leaves GAMA still hunting for a permanent executive director more than a year after its previous leader, John Stacy, announced his resignation.
A statement provided to BoardGameWire from GAMA board president Meredith Placko and secretary Tiffany Reid said, “Recruiting top talent for an executive position is a laborious process, and finding the right fit for our organization has taken longer than anticipated.
“As well, we have been forthright during public board meetings that the biggest reason for the delay was that we needed to get the foundations of the organization in better order, as we had been advised. To that end, Melinda Prickett did amazing work in bringing our financials from a planned deficit for the year, to a resounding success and raised more money than we anticipated for the organization.
“She also worked on creating stability amongst for the organization, the staff, and membership. Her work helped GAMA grow and succeed in the year she was with us.
“That being said, GAMA’s Board of Director’s had interviewed a strong candidate and we were in negotiations with them, but ultimately it did not work out. Because of that we will need to begin the search again.”
The pair said they could not comment on why Prickett’s notice period was so short, or whether she had been a formal candidate for the permanent executive director role.
They added that GAMA was currently working through a short list of people to bring in a new interim executive director “very soon”, adding that the goal was to “make sure GAMA Expo and Origins are a success, and the overall day to day running of the organization is met”.
The statement said, “To that end, the Board of Directors is currently seeking RFPs from firms that specialize in hiring executives in the trade association and member organization sectors. We feel it will be valuable to have the expertise of a company that knows how to recruit top talent in our search for an Executive Director.”
Placko and Reid said there was currently no estimate on when a permanent executive director would be appointed, but said an interim “to handle the most immediate needs of the organization should be decided upon very soon”.
Prickett’s exit comes after GAMA reported a significant improvement in its financial position during her tenure, with the organisation saying it had moved from a deficit budget at the beginning of 2026 to an expected surplus by the end of the year.
In a statement emailed to GAMA members, the board credited Prickett and treasurer Jamie Mathy with stabilising the organisation’s finances, as well as increasing member participation in events outside GAMA Expo and Origins Game Fair and developing new partnerships.
The statement said, “Though it is a bittersweet announcement to make, we are grateful for Melinda’s tireless work with our organization. She has been an incalculable force in leading GAMA during a transition period, setting us up for success in a way that is visibly reverberating through the organization.”
Prickett previously spent more than a decade at Girl Scouts of Ohio Heartland, including almost five years as chief operating officer, before being hired by GAMA last September to oversee its growing day-to-day operations.
But Davis’s contract ended in March, with Prickett subsequently confirming to BoardGameWire that she had taken over as interim executive director on May 21.
The latest leadership departure follows a period of significant change for the organisation’s board.
Ross Thompson, who was elected as vice president following Placko’s elevation to president, has now also resigned from the board after just over six months in the position.
Thompson only joined GAMA’s board in October last year, winning a special election to replace former secretary Monica Rasso, who had stepped down after five years as a director.
His resignation means the organisation will now hold its second special election for the same Media & Events board seat in little more than a year.
The latest departures also follow a turbulent period for GAMA’s board, which publicly apologised in March after some directors were accused of being rude and disrespectful towards members during a heated annual general meeting over proposed changes to the organisation’s bylaws.
GAMA did not give a reason for Thompson’s departure, but praised his work alongside Prickett in streamlining organisational processes and strengthening representation for its Media & Events members.
Thompson wrote on Facebook, “After being part of GAMA for many years, I was happy to lend my time, energy and experience to GAMA serving on the Board during the past year and a half. It was wonderful to be able to work with passionate people, identfying projects that needed support or upkeep, along with bringing new ideas to life.
“By far, GAMA is one of the best organizations to grow your business in the tabletop game industry. The connections made at events like GAMA Expo can revolutionize the way your work and that is truly special.
“There are things that need attention within GAMA, at the Board level and the Organization as a whole. I hope the membership, staff and current Board are able to continue to support GAMA’s mission and identify the obstacles it faces so the tabletop industry can continue to connect.
“I’ll still be around and am not going anywhere, but needed to end my time on the Board.”
The organisation said it would hold a special election to replace Thompson as Media & Events director, with nominations opening today and closing on November 8. Voting will take place between November 10 and 16, with the successful candidate serving until the next annual election in March 2027.
The changes come at a key time for the organisation’s professional trade show GAMA Expo, which has experienced rapid growth in recent years and is preparing to move from Louisville, Kentucky, to Baltimore, Maryland to accommodate rising demand.
The first Baltimore edition is scheduled for April 25 to 29 next year. A statement provided to BoardGameWire from GAMA board president Meredith Placko and secretary Tiffany Reid said, “We are currently working to ensure there is no visible impact on the preparations for GAMA Expo.
“GAMA staff has been diligent in doing an excellent job to bring us to our new home in Baltimore. They continue with the work that needs to be done, including finalizing programming, working with vendors on booth placement, and everything that needs to happen to make GAMA Expo a success!
“Melinda has led an amazing team, and even in her absence, they will continue with the work that needs to be done.”
GAMA’s other major convention, Origins Game Fair, is set to return to Columbus in June. That show has struggled to recover its pre-pandemic attendance, with visitor numbers falling 2.5% this year to 18,700 – the show’s first annual decline since Covid-19, and still below its 2019 record of 20,642.
The event could face further pressure next year from the launch of PAX Unplugged Houston, a new tabletop gaming convention scheduled to take place just 12 days after Origins, which could potentially force publishers and exhibitors to choose between the two shows.
CMON übergibt dem langjährigen Fertigungspartner Top Games das Eigentum an „The Adventurers“, seinem seit Monaten verzögerten Vorbestellprojekt auf Gamefound. Das meldet BoardGameWire. Im Gegenzug übernimmt Top Games die verbleibenden Produktions- und Versandkosten, CMON bleibt laut gemeinsamer Erklärung weiter unterstützend an Bord. Die Spiele sind nach Angaben beider Unternehmen bereits produziert, im Werk verpackt und versandbereit. Für die deutschen Unterstützerinnen und Unterstützer der im März 2025 gestarteten Kampagne ist das der konkreteste Schritt seit Monaten in Richtung Auslieferung, wann die Pakete tatsächlich ankommen, sagen CMON und Top Games nicht.
Was der Deal für die wartenden Unterstützer bedeutet
CMON hatte die Gamefound-Vorbestellung im März 2025 gestartet: neue Auflagen der beiden Reihenklassiker plus den neuen dritten Teil „The Adventurers: Tomb of the Pirate Queen“, ursprünglich für Dezember 2025 angekündigt. Schon einen Monat später kündigte CMON Entlassungen und einen Stopp neuer Kampagnen an, aus Sorge vor den damals unberechenbaren US-Einfuhrzöllen. Die Lieferung von „The Adventurers“ blieb seither offen, zusammen mit acht weiteren Crowdfunding-Kampagnen, die laut CMON mehr als 14 Millionen Dollar an Unterstützerverpflichtungen ausmachen, darunter „DC Super Heroes United“ und „DCeased“, sowie drei weiteren Vorbestellungen, zu deren Wert die Quelle keine Zahl nennt. Einen Liefertermin für die deutschen Unterstützer haben CMON und Top Games nicht genannt, und ob die Übergabe auch Stretch-Goal-Erweiterungen und Add-ons der Kampagne umfasst oder nur das Grundspiel, sagen beide Unternehmen ebenfalls nicht. Dass ausgerechnet „The Adventurers“ jetzt den Weg zu den Kundinnen und Kunden findet, ist für alle übrigen Wartenden immerhin ein Signal, dass CMON Lösungen für den Rückstau findet, wenn auch nicht aus eigener Kraft.
Die Spielereihe hinter The Adventurers
Die Reihe stammt von den Autoren Guillaume Blossier und Frédéric Henry und begann 2009 mit „The Adventurers: The Temple of Chac“ bei AEG und Dust Games, 2011 folgte „The Adventurers: The Pyramid of Horus“ bei Dust Games und Fantasy Flight Games. CMON belebte beide Titel für die Gamefound-Kampagne neu und ergänzte sie um den dritten Teil, die Sammelausgabe führt laut BGG alle drei über ein gemeinsames Kernsystem für Abenteurer und Ausrüstung zusammen. Top Games selbst ist dabei kein Neuling im CMON-Kosmos: Der Fertigungspartner arbeitet seit 2009 in der Tabletop-Fertigung, seit 2018 mit eigener Kunststofffabrik in Dongguan, und war laut BoardGameWire schon an mehr als einem Dutzend CMON-Spielen beteiligt, etwa an „Cthulhu: Death May Die“, „Massive Darkness 2: Hellscape“ und „Zombicide: Undead or Alive“. Seit wann genau die Zusammenarbeit mit CMON selbst läuft, nennt die Quelle nicht.
Ein Jahr der Restrukturierung
Der Tausch ist das jüngste Kapitel einer Sanierung, die wir seit Januar 2026 begleiten. Für 2024 und 2025 weist CMON zusammen fast 23 Millionen Dollar Verlust aus, der Umsatz brach von zuletzt über 37 Millionen auf 9,9 Millionen Dollar ein. Die Belegschaft wurde halbiert, neue Kampagnen blieben gestoppt. Im Sommer warnte CMON vor einem „anhaltenden strukturellen Abschwung“ und suchte frisches Kapital von außenstehenden Investoren, Anfang September wurde das bekannt, Ende des Monats stand die Kapitalerhöhung über rund 19 Millionen Dollar. Etwa 40 Prozent davon sind laut CMON für laufende Kosten wie Personal, Lizenzgebühren und Versand im kommenden Jahr reserviert, also genau für Fälle wie „The Adventurers“. Dass der Verlag trotzdem einen Fertigungspartner mit Eigentum entlohnt, statt die Auslieferung komplett selbst zu stemmen, zeigt, wie knapp der Spielraum auch nach der frischen Kapitalspritze bleibt.
Was wir davon halten
Für die wartenden Vorbestellerinnen und Vorbesteller zählt am Ende nur, dass die Pakete verschickt werden, und ein Schritt in diese Richtung ist das hier erkennbar. Uns fällt trotzdem auf, dass CMON dafür ein Stück Eigentum abgeben musste: Frisches Kapital allein hat offenbar nicht gereicht, um den Rückstau aus eigener Kraft aufzulösen. Und solange kein Lieferfenster genannt wird, bleibt „versandbereit“ bei CMON vor allem eines: eine Momentaufnahme, keine Zusage. Ob sich das Muster bei den übrigen offenen Projekten wiederholt, dürfte sich erst im nächsten Quartalsbericht zeigen.
Final Titan als taktischer Auto-Battler von Richard Garfield zu bezeichnen ist zweifach nur die halbe Wahrheit. Kommt mit auf meiner Entdeckungsreise zu einem Spiel, das ich als einen meiner absoluten Höhepunkte der SPIEL 2026 in Essen bezeichnen möchte. Dabei ist es ganz nüchtern betrachtet, nur ein Würfelduell. Aber eines, das voller Emotionen steckt.
Erstmalig hatte ich von Final Titan im Vorfeld meiner SPIEL 2026 Recherche nach aussergewöhnlichen Neuheiten in einem Dice Tower Vorschau-Video mitbekommen, dass es dort mehrfach erstaunlich hoch bewertet wurde. Der Autorenname Richard Garfield zieht natürlich und weckte auch bei mir Neugier. Aber eventuell ist es auch nur der Nachhall einer erstaunlichen Persönlichkeit, die uns Magic The Gathering gebracht hat. Das habe ich übrigens wie fast alle Trading Card Games nie gespielt, weil mir der Sammelaspekt und der Deckbau fernab des Soieltisches nicht zugesagt haben.
Mit Mindbug konnte ich in seiner verdichteten Art auf wenige Karten in meiner Erstpartie nicht recht warm werden, weil mir die spielentscheidenden Keywords nicht eingängig genug waren. Und auch Keyforge habe ich trotz des neuen Druckkonzepts, das damit in einem Deck alles möglich sein konnte, nach dem Starterset nicht tiefer erforscht. Die Idee fand ich damals besser als das Spielgeschehen an sich.
Umso überraschender, das mir Final Titan so viel Spaß macht. Aber eventuell ist dafür auch der zweite Autor Christian Kudahl verantwortlich, der mit Agent Avenue die Essenz des „Einer teilt, der andere wählt“-Mechanismus in einem herrlich taktisch spannenden Ich-denke-dass-Du-denkst-Mindfuck herausgearbeitet hat. Jetzt also Final Titan, das mir Marvin von Nerd Labs auf der Neuheitschau am Messe-Mittwoch euphorisch überzeugend vorgestellt hat.
Ich war skeptisch, ob ein Auto-Battler mit bewusst seichtem Spielablauf mich überzeugen würde. Angeblich sollte das Spielgefühl mit jeder Partie wachsen und zum regelrechten Sog werden. Ich wollte das selbst erleben und so steuerte ich direkt am Messe-Freitag um kurz vor 10 Uhr den Stand von Nerd Labs in Halle 5 an, um Final Titan zu spielen. Eventuell gab es ja noch Restposten der Ultimate Deluxe Version zu kaufen, aber bei so einem Spiel sollte die normale 40-Euro-Version eigentlich völlig ausreichen. So redete ich mir im Vorfeld zumindest ein.
Lauscht im Audio-Mitschnitt, wie ich die Spielerklärung und ebenso unsere launige Vierertruppe aus Messe-Zufalls-Mitspielern erlebt habe. Wir haben unsere Champions gegenseitig angefeuert und das Mitbieten auf die Mitspielerkämpfe ohne eigene Beteiligung war ebenso spannend. Final Titan spielte sich dabei weitaus taktischer als ich dachte. Um als letzter Champion zu gewinnen, muss man das richtige Timing abschätzen, wann man was wagt und wann eher nicht. Die Kämpfe gehen superflott und machen Spaß, weil dabei so viel und so viel Unerwartetes passieren kann. Hier kam bei uns echte Arena-Stimmung auf, die ich bei King of Tokyo wegen des gemächlichen Spannungsaufbaus vermisst hatte. Bei Final Titan geht es die ganze Zeit zur Sache und das macht es für mich besonders und spielenswert.
Eigentlich reicht die Grundbox für 40 Euro völlig aus. Eigentlich wollte ich die nach meiner Anspiel-Session mit der auf zwei Champions verkürzten Partie auch kaufen und dabei auf Sleeves verzichten. Eigentlich, so hatte ich es mir vorgenommen. Weil dann gab es trotz fortgeschrittener Messezeit unerwartet doch noch die Ultimate Deluxe Version und die passenden Sleeves dazu und ich konnte mit Karte diesen Spontankauf zahlen. Tja, was soll ich sagen? Der Rest ist Geschichte und mein persönliches Messegeschenk, das ich mir gegönnt habe, fernab aller Vernunft. Muss auch mal sein und das ist auch gut so.
Wie die Ultimate Deluxe Version aussieht, mit ihrem besonders schimmernden und kräftigen Druck dank UV-Lack-Veredelung mitsamt den dickeren und größeren und ebenfalls mit UV-Lack-Veredelung versehenen Pappcountern, das könnt Ihr in meiner Unboxing-Bildergalerie sehen. Aber laßt Euch eines sagen: Rein spielerisch reicht das Grundspiel mit seinen 100 statt 135 Champions und doppelseitigen dünneren Pappmarkern locker aus. Für 40 Euro ist Euch dieser Draft-Battler, weil Ihr in einer regulären fernab einer Anfängerpartie Eure Champions passend selbst per Kartendraft zusammenstellt, ans Spielerherz gelegt. Aber ebenso wie das Kennerspiel des Jahres 2023, das viele schon längst verdrängt haben, könnte auch Final Titan die Meinungen spalten und so manchen von Euch kopfschüttelnd zurücklassen.
Strohmann Games bringt im Dezember 2026 mit Eternal Decks ein international bereits gut aufgenommenes kooperatives Kartenspiel aus Japan auf Deutsch, und zwar nicht als einfache Übersetzung: Laut Brettspiel-News erhält die deutsche Ausgabe eine komplett neu strukturierte Anleitung, ein überarbeitetes Insert und an Farbsehschwäche angepasste Farben.
Gemeinsam gegen die Uhr, mit eingeschränkter Kommunikation
Eternal Decks ist laut BGG-Beschreibung ein kooperatives Deckbau-Kartenspiel mit Kommunikationseinschränkung: Alle Mitspielenden gewinnen oder verlieren gemeinsam, sobald eine Person keine gültige Aktion mehr ausführen kann. Ihr startet mit nur fünf Karten im eigenen Deck und erweitert es im Spielverlauf durch Karten der „Eternals“, besonderer Charaktere mit je einem eigenen Achter-Kartendeck. Pro Zug bleibt genau eine Aktion: eine Karte ausspielen (aufs Feld, auf den Fluss oder über eine Fähigkeit), einen Juwel erzeugen, oder eine Karte an eine Mitspielerin oder einen Mitspieler abgeben. Beim Ausspielen gilt eine Einschränkung: In keiner der drei Feldreihen dürfen Karten derselben Farbe oder derselben Zahl direkt nebeneinanderliegen, je nach gespielter Stufe kommen weitere Einschränkungen hinzu. Juwelen heben die negativen Effekte der Eternals auf. Wie sich das Spiel zwischen zwei und vier Mitspielenden unterscheidet, insbesondere bei der Absprache über die drei gemeinsamen Feldreihen, sagt keine der vorliegenden Quellen. Laut einer Rezension von Punchboard bietet jede der sechs Stufen mehrere Schwierigkeitsstufen von Beginner bis Pro, nach dem Durchspielen aller sechs schaltet laut derselben Quelle ein „New Game+“-Modus mit zusätzlichen Varianten frei. Ob die sechs Stufen von Anfang an frei wählbar sind oder nacheinander in einer festen Reihenfolge freigeschaltet werden, sagt die Rezension nicht eindeutig. Eternal Decks ist laut BGG auch allein spielbar, wie sich die Solo-Partie von der kooperativen Runde in größerer Besetzung unterscheidet, verraten die vorliegenden Quellen nicht. Designer ist Hiroken, Illustration stammt von MUJUNSHA.
Was sich an der deutschen Ausgabe ändert
Die namensgebende Neuerung der deutschen Fassung ist laut Verlag die Barrierefreiheit: Strohmann Games erklärte gegenüber Brettspiel-News, die Ausgabe erhalte „eine komplett neu strukturierte Anleitung, ein überarbeitetes Insert und angepasste Farben, damit auch Menschen mit Farbsehschwäche gut spielen können.“ Welche konkreten Farben oder Symbole dabei geändert wurden und was genau an der Anleitungsstruktur neu ist, sagt die Quelle nicht näher. Bei einem Spiel, das laut eigener Beschreibung stark auf das Unterscheiden von Kartenfarben in den Feldreihen setzt, ist eine Farbsehschwäche-Anpassung aber kein kosmetisches Detail, sondern berührt einen Kernmechanismus des Spiels. Ob die Fähigkeitstexte der Eternals-Karten über Symbole oder über Fließtext laufen und ob dieser Text für die deutsche Ausgabe übersetzt wird, lässt sich aus den vorliegenden Quellen nicht klären. Zu Schriftgröße oder Kontrast der Zahlen und Farbflächen in den höheren, zusätzlich eingeschränkten Stufen sagt ebenfalls keine Quelle etwas.
Eckdaten zu Eternal Decks
Spielerzahl: 1 bis 4, mit Solo-Modus
Spielzeit: 30 bis 40 Minuten
Alter: ab 10 Jahren
Regelgewicht: 2,8 von 5 (laut BGG, 3.513 Bewertungen, Schnitt 8,18 von 10, Rang 469 gesamt)
Designer: Hiroken, Illustration: MUJUNSHA
Verlag: Tricktakers Games (Original), deutsche Ausgabe: Strohmann Games
Preis: rund 39,90 Euro (laut Brettspiel-News, Stand: 29.10.2026)
Termin: Dezember 2026
Für wen das was ist
International ist Eternal Decks längst kein Geheimtipp mehr: Über 3.500 BGG-Bewertungen bei einem Schnitt von 8,18 und Rang 469 unter allen Brettspielen sind für ein Koop-Deckbauspiel dieser Größenordnung ein deutliches Signal, auch wenn das für uns ein Hinweis bleibt, kein Gütesiegel. Designer Hiroken ist dabei kein Erstling: Er zeichnet laut BGG auch für das Stichspiel TRICKTAKERs (2021, erschienen bei Joyple Games/MTS Games/Portland Game Collective) und das Ablegespiel Eternal Sevens (ebenfalls bei Tricktakers Games erschienen) verantwortlich. Für deutsche Vielspieler, die kooperative Deckbau-Spiele mit Kommunikationslimit mögen, etwa in der Tradition von The Crew oder Hanabi, aber noch nicht zur englischen oder japanischen Originalausgabe gegriffen haben, ist der Dezember-Termin der naheliegende Einstiegspunkt. Ob die angepasste Farbgebung tatsächlich hält, was der Verlag verspricht, lässt sich erst mit dem fertigen Produkt beurteilen, als Ankündigung ist der Schritt aber bereits ein ungewöhnlich konkretes Bekenntnis zur Barrierefreiheit für eine deutsche Lokalisierung.
Stop whatever you’re doing. Just stop. I need to tell you about one of the weirdest, wildest, and most interesting board games I’ve played all year. Scratch that. Ever. That’s right. Ever.
This is Grinivil. It was designed, illustrated, and published by Rudy Priecinsky. It’s tempting to lob a jab in there — “I can tell!” hardy har — especially once you get a look at the scattershot rulebook, the potato-headed character portraits, the mishmashed card layouts, the box itself… okay, as soon as you get a look at pretty much anything it has to offer.
But don’t make the easy joke. Set that aside. Because Grinivil is a gift from a parallel universe where Eurogames are never wrung dry through market testing and impersonal development, but instead allowed to blossom into bespoke artifacts that are equally uncanny and compelling and inventive. This is Grinivil. It’s breathtaking.
In its early stages, Grinivil is mostly empty lots.
When Grinivil begins, Grinivil — the town the board game is named after — has been thrown open to new development. As towns go, Grinivil is small. Actually, I’m not even sure it qualifies as small. The municipality has started construction on a few things, drawn at random, but they’re as yet unfinished. There are plots for houses and additional commercial spaces, but nobody has filled them. Even the trees have yet to be planted. If Grinivil were deposited in the Old West, they wouldn’t have the livestock to qualify as a one-horse town.
But where there’s a vacuum, there’s opportunity. As a developer, you’re here to buy and sell land, construct amenities, and finagle clients into houses.
It’s a normal enough pitch, in other words. Maybe even an unexciting pitch. There are plenty of board games about real estate, and Grinivil doesn’t sound all that far off from titles like Rebuilding Chicago, The Estates, or Magnate: The First City. Tough competition. Solid games. Good bones.
But it takes Grinivil all of ten seconds to set itself apart as those titles’ spiritual opposite. For one thing, there’s the way the game looks. And I promise I’m not about to ding it. Quite the opposite. Grinivil’s earliest state, when it’s nothing more than a traffic loop and a few partially-constructed buildings atop a single pizza-slice of land, is full of potential. You can see what it might become after some walls have been put up and a few trees have been planted.
What’s more, those walls and trees mean something. They signify investment. When you add a floor to a building, you mark it with a piece of your color. Now that isn’t just the second story of a bowling alley or the foundation of a house. It’s your share in the bowling alley. It’s your ability to profit off the sale of the home. Those trees are bumps in property value. That road, now paved, is a sign that a new portion of the town is open for business.
And it isn’t only your investments you’re interested in. It’s everybody else’s, too.
The Time Action Ring is a rondel. An amazing rondel.
Let’s approach it from another angle. Turns.
Turns in Grinivil take place on the Time Action Ring, also called the TAR. The TAR is a rondel. Starting at the top-left, you move your pawn clockwise around the TAR, stopping at any action you want to perform. You know. It’s a rondel. It behaves like most rondels.
There are a few wrinkles to this process. First and foremost, most actions, once completed, will move you forward an extra space or two. (Or three or four.) Sometimes this bypasses another action you were hoping to take. Fortunately, you can pay cold hard cash to move fewer spaces. If pouring that foundation will move you forward three spaces, therefore passing the space you were hoping to use next turn, you can pay some money to move a little less.
That’s not all. Unlike some rondels, which limit movement, here you’re allowed to visit any space. You can even circle the entire TAR in a single move if you so desire. The limitation is that passing Go will not award $200. In fact, the opposite is the case. Whenever you pass the space at the top left, you pay both taxes and your workers. Taxes, now, that’s a flat rate. But workers consume a few bucks apiece. If you don’t have any workers on the table, whether constructing a building or squatting on an ability space on the TAR, that’s not the biggest deal. But if you have three workers out, it suddenly behooves you to stretch your time on the TAR as much as possible.
And then there’s the real highlight: the actions themselves. Put simply, Grinivil offers some of the coolest actions I’ve seen put to a rondel. Some are fairly routine, like buying or selling resources, but others transform the state of the board in ways that are hard to describe without seeing them in action.
I’m not sure the score and road track had to be this, ah, eccentric.
You might, for example, add a wedge to the map. This costs some money and awards a few points. Far more importantly, it gives you ownership over that wedge. Basically, you’re speculating on land. Now whenever anybody wants to build on that land, they’ll be paying a premium for the opportunity.
Or you might turn victory points into cash. Points are the game’s objective, of course, but they don’t really matter until the end. So why not turn them in for walking-around money? This isn’t the first game to feature such an option, but it’s the only one where I’ve seen players accept that devil’s bargain. Sometimes multiple times. If you’re still short, you could also collect unemployment for all the workers who aren’t currently out there collecting a wage, or host an auction and collect the proceeds, or flip all that timber and concrete for more than you spent on it.
Or you could alter the rules altogether. This is mostly the domain of abilities, spots on the TAR that must be occupied by one of your workers. This uses up the worker — and you’ll have to pay them, of course — but gives you that space’s perk until you loop back around to it. To a one, these are ridiculous. There’s the Manager, who removes the need to spend extra time on the TAR. As in, that entire portion of the game is just deleted. Or there’s the Architect. She lets you use any resources when building rather than using specific materials, letting you pass off concrete monstrosities as homes or build a pet store out of nothing but cheap steel. So much for the game’s inventory management! The Banker gives you three coins per turn. Just gives them to you. The Ecologist — my group calls him Treesus — does something similar, adding periodic trees to your inventory.
Surprisingly, the most foundational action, construction, is anything but perfunctory. As you might expect, construction is where you spend materials to add a floor to the map. But it’s also so much more than that, inserting players into the overgrown thicket of incentives that is Grinivil’s principal draw. More on that in a moment.
It might sound like the efficacy of these actions is game-breaking, but in practice it really means that every decision carries considerable heft. On any given turn, you’re presented with a wide-open decision space between three or four tremendous opportunities. Sometimes a shortfall can be covered by having the right resources on-hand, and it isn’t unheard of for an action to become better thanks to a cash infusion. But the real cost is always paid in the opportunities you passed by on your way to something else.
As Grinivil develops, it becomes a minefield of overlapping interests.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the game’s residents. Grinivil, at its core, is about attracting newcomers to town. Each resident has a number of needs, some underlined in red, others more negotiable. When the game begins, you have two in-hand. There’s also a display of additional cards that can be acquired or swapped out.
Here’s an example. When you first sit down to play, you could be holding Miriam and Nela. Both are worth some points, but Miriam will pay a bunch of cash if her house is on a lot with many trees, whereas Nela is willing to pay a flat rate. Okay, simple enough. So Nela is easier to place on undeveloped land, right?
Sort of! Both also have some hard-coded requirements. Miriam won’t move in unless there’s a grocery store within three spaces of her new home and a bus stop somewhere in town. Nela, meanwhile, isn’t too picky about distance, but wants a pet store and a garden center. When placed, they also provide bonuses. If there’s a playground within two spaces, Miriam will award a few extra points. She’ll also pay a premium for a nearby garden center, giving her some overlap with Nela. For her part, Nela wants a library and a music venue. Deep breath: They also provide end-game bonuses. Miriam wants a hospital in town. Nela insists on a police station.
Here’s the thing. Call it a double-edged sword. Like everything in Grinivil, residents pose a certain hurdle. Their cards are, charitably, a mess of information. Less charitably, they’re just a mess.
But that mess, apart from being somewhat hard to untangle visually, is important, because it’s how everything gets evaluated. When you house a resident, each of those boxes tells you something different. The top box is how many points and coins they give you right away. But everything underneath that, all three boxes of potential rewards, are awarded to whomever owns the thing in question. If I built the garden center for Nela, and then you later welcome Miriam to town, I get the cash for her proximity to the garden center even though you played the card. If I own two of the hospital’s three floors, then two-thirds of Miriam’s fifteen end-game points are mine, even if I never so much as glanced at her until the final tally.
This makes Grinivil a stern plaything indeed, but it’s always fair in its unfairness. There’s hidden information, but not so much that it can’t be overcome with watchfulness and shrewd investments. There are few guardrails, but open-ended actions and a few dashes of chance make it possible to wrestle out of tight spots.
I love everything about this.
Which isn’t to say that these rough edges can’t prove frustrating, especially during the first play or two. Once, a player’s early investment in a water treatment plant — and we’re talking about their third or fourth action, maybe fifteen minutes into a two-hour session — translated into a game-winning swing when a half-dozen residents all insisted that their town have potable water.
The beauty of Grinivil, though, is that this was entirely our fault. The table’s fault, I mean. Mine. My co-players’. Because as soon as that rival invested so much in clean water, we should have shifted our priorities. No more residents who care weirdly a lot about their drinking water being certified amoeba-free! Only cop-loving residents, or residents who insist on accessible hospitals, or residents who hang out at churches and retirement communities.
Or, perhaps, we could have ensured that our game-ending tally was dwarfed by residents whose earlier payouts were sufficient to overcome any final swings. There are many ways to earn points in Grinivil, and just about as many ways to invest one’s attention and money.
In all cases, though, this is a game that benefits from both experience and table-talk. It’s a game where it’s not only not impolite, but necessary to say, “Hey, let’s stop attracting so many residents who love the aroma of water being treated.” In that sense, Grinivil is a game about cutting through the clutter to see what’s really important. (And boy howdy is there clutter, hardy har!) It’s about reading the state of the table, about observing which properties are likely to pay off big and which might only be worth a little bit here and there. It’s about watching your opponents and knowing when to feed the animals and when to hold back. Sometimes, it’s even about snaking somebody’s investment by paying a pittance to slap a roof atop their house and hustle one of your residents inside before they can protest.
As more people move in, costs go up. Sorry. Them’s the rules.
I like a polished game. But we’ve reached the point where too many games are polished. Some are so polished, I’d say, so devoid of rough edges, that there’s nothing left to snag one’s attention.
Grinivil is the other thing. Snaggy and shaggy. Some of its actions don’t have immediate utility; others are so potent that it’s impossible to choose between them. Sometimes a corner feels too painted-in. Its art is, um, undeniably not crafted by a plagiarism engine. Personally, I like how it looks. Not only the town, which is gorgeous, but the wackadoo resident cards. Just look at those nerds. I love them like my own ex-girlfriends.
For all of that — or more likely because of it — Grinivil is captivating. As in, it captures and holds one’s attention the way no number of over-smoothed experiences possibly could. It grabs your elbow, shows you the dance floor, and asks you to move. Then it probably shouts at you a little bit, before apologizing and rumpling your shirt and tucking a buck into your back pocket. No matter. This artifact, this singular vision, this gift from another dimension, is so spellbinding that it reminds me why I started playing board games in the first place.
A complimentary copy of Grinivil was provided by the designer and publisher.
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#100: KSM from Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001-? from GMT Games
Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001-? from GMT Games is a 2-player asymmetrical Card Driven Game that pits the mighty and powerful United States military and all of its various antiterrorist agencies against the Jihadists in the Middle East whose sole goal is to spread terror, sow the seeds of deceit and ultimately destroy Western civilization. The game is a Card Driven Game where the cards contain Operation Points or Events and each turn the player must strategize and use their cards to their best ability in order to effect the state of the board and further their individual and asymmetric victory conditions. But the game is raw and is tied to the actual events of the early 2000’s as the United States was reeling to recover from the terrorist attacks in New York.
In the game, the Jihadist player is working to destabilize the Middle East through a series of clandestine activities such as destroying stability, toppling governments and forcing the US to react to their actions. One of their biggest strategies is to work to place what are called Plots out on the board in order to destabilize but also to generate local support and funding for their activities from the populace. If left alone, these Plots will go off at the end of a round and cause trouble that will then have to be cleaned up by the US player over the next turn. In order to uncover these Plots, the US player will have to play a 3 Ops card to take the Alert Action and different from most other actions there is no die roll required and the the Plot removal is automatic. But, the cost is steep as a 3 Ops card is pretty rare and spending it on this action is very painful. Jihadists use these Plots to force the US player to have to stamp out fire after fire rather than working to reform and stabilize governments to create allies. And when these Plots appear, the player’s long-term strategy will have to be put aside and a focus will have to change from managing regime change and the Global War on Terror (GWOT) posture to dealing with urgent plots. The KSM card is a very powerful tool in this game as it allows for the US player to remove Plots from an Ally or non-Muslim country but also to replace this investment with drawing 2 cards to replace it. This is specifically tied to the intel that was obtained from the capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammad and how it was then used to defuse several ongoing plots. The Jihadist player also gains a pretty large benefit as they will be allowed to place a Plot Marker into a non-Islamist Rule country with a cell. The process of successfully placing a Plot can be very challenging for the Jihadist player as it takes the play of a card for Operations points, uncovering a cell in a country and then rolling a die equal to or less than that country’s Governance Level to then place a face-down Plot Marker. This takes the need for a roll away and makes the placement of a Plot an automatic success.
I think that one of the other important distinctions and differences with the KSM card is that it is a 3 Ops Neutral Card that can be played by either side but when played by the US player for the event, it will be removed from the game while when being played for the Jihadist portion of the event it will remain and be able to be used in a later turn when it is drawn again. This reflects the important role that KSM played in al-Qaeda’s plans and if allowed to stay at large he will continue to plan and execute plots across the globe.
Khalid Sheik Mohammed was a member of Osama bin Laden’s militant organization al-Qaeda, and was specifically in charge of leading al-Qaeda’s propaganda operations from around 1999 until late 2001. Mohammed was captured on March 1, 2003 in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi by a combined operation of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Immediately after his capture, Mohammed was taken to secret CIA prison sites in Afghanistan, then Poland, where he was interrogated by U.S. operatives. By December 2006, he had been transferred to military custody at Guantanamo Bay detention camp. Sensationally nabbed in Pakistan, alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was photographed for the world in a disheveled state immediately after his capture—symbolizing an apparent laying low of the once mighty al-Qaeda network. According to his US captors, he later provided information that thwarted other attacks.
Mohammed is widely regarded as the chief planner of the September 11 attacks. The United States government has alleged that he further participated in planning Richard Reid’s shoe bombing attempt to attack an airliner, the 2002 Bali bombings in Indonesia, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the murder of Daniel Pearl and various foiled attacks as well as numerous other crimes. These claims have been criticised by others, such as military prosecutor Moe Davis and journalist Andrew Brown, as inadmissible due to being obtained through torture. He was charged in February 2008 with war crimes and murder by a U.S. military commission at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, which could carry the death penalty if convicted. A 2008 decision by the United States Supreme Court had also drawn into question the legality of the methods used to gain such admissions and the admissibility of such admissions as evidence in a criminal proceeding.
This image shows Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the September 11 terrorist attacks, photographed shortly after his capture during a joint raid in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on March 1, 2003.
In the next entry in this series, we will take a look at Constantinople Sends Aid Core Event from The Shores of Tripoli from Fort Circle Games.
Zum Kennerspiel des Jahres 2025 gibt es brandneu eine Erweiterung mit mehr Missionen und für mehr Abwechslung im Grundspiel. Also für alle, die nicht genug von den taktischen Tiefsee-Tauchgängen bekommen können. Auch wenn die exklusive Vorbestellung der lokalisierten Deluxe-Version längst vorbei ist, könnt Ihr die Retail-Version ab November auch im Fachhandel erhalten. Auf der Neuheitenschau hat mir Robin alles im Audio-Interview erzählt, worauf Ihr Euch bis dahin freuen könnt.
Die Erweiterung richtet sich klar an Fans des Grundspiels und vor allem an Solo-Spieler. Mir persönlich reicht noch das Grundspiel völlig aus und solo sowie auch kooperativ habe ich die Tiefsee noch nie erkundet. Die Zielgruppe ist somit eng umgrenzt, allerdings ist auch völlig klar, was Ihr in und mit der Erweiterung bekommt. Wer neue Herausforderungen sucht, für den genau das Richtige. Auf die Mini-Erweiterung „Pinguinwanderung“, die zwei Ozeankacheln und fünf Pinguinfiguren mitbringt, sowie ein GAMETRAYZ-Insert vergleichbar mit dem Deluxe-Grundspiel müsst Ihr leider verzichten. Diese Art der künstlichen Verknappung mag ich nicht, weil damit die Zweitmarktpreise nur nach oben getrieben werden.
Die Kickstarter-Kampagne zu Excursions, dem neuen Ableger im Galactic-Cruise-Universum, endet in zwei Tagen, am 30.10.2026 um 22 Uhr UTC. Bei unserem Check am 28.10.2026 steht sie bei 536.992 von 30.000 US-Dollar, also 1.789,97 Prozent, bei 4.863 Unterstützenden. Designer ist erneut Ben Rosset, bekannt unter anderem für Between Two Cities (Stonemaier Games) und The Search for Planet X, Illustrator Ian O'Toole, Verlag Kinson Key Games. Kurz erwähnt hatten wir die Kampagne bereits in der Crowdfunding-Wochenschau KW 42, die Rekordsumme und das nahende Ende sind jetzt ein eigener Anlass.
Leichter als das Original, aber nicht leicht
Excursions ist laut BGG ein eigenständiges Spiel im selben Universum wie Galactic Cruise, keine Erweiterung. Der Vergleich der BGG-Eckdaten stützt die Einordnung als leichteren Ableger: Regelgewicht 3,17 statt 3,98, Spielzeit 60 bis 90 statt 90 bis 150 Minuten, Alter ab 10 statt ab 14, dazu laut BGG ein variabler Spielaufbau für Wiederspielwert. Mechanisch verzichtet Excursions auf die Worker-Placement-Basis des Originals: Die aktive Person wählt eine von sieben Aktionen rund um eine rotierende Raumstation, danach führen laut Verlagsbeschreibung alle Spielenden gemeinsam dieselbe Aktion aus, nur die aktive Person bekommt zusätzlich einen Bonus, dessen Stärke mit der Stationsdrehung wechselt. Konkurrenz um einzelne Stationsplätze entsteht dabei also nicht, eher ein geteilter Rhythmus mit wechselndem Vorteil. „Leichter“ heißt hier allerdings nur leichter im Vergleich, mit Regelgewicht 3,17 von 5 bleibt Excursions ein Spiel für geübte Vielspielerrunden, kein Absacker-Filler.
Solo-Modus noch in der Entwicklung
Zum Solo-Modus findet sich in der Kampagnenbeschreibung selbst wenig, eine Vorschau von Opinionated Gamers ordnet ihn aber ein: Der Automa steckt demnach noch in der finalen Entwicklung, in der getesteten Prototyp-Version dauert eine Solopartie 35 bis 45 Minuten, geplant sind sechs unterschiedliche Automa-Gegner mit je eigenem Spielstil und Schwierigkeitsgrad, einer auf der Rückseite jedes Spielertableaus. Zum genauen Ablauf der Automa-Karten sagt die Vorschau nichts.
Eckdaten zu Excursions
Spielerzahl: 1 bis 6, beste Besetzung laut BGG-Community 3 bis 4
Spielzeit: 60 bis 90 Minuten
Alter: ab 10 Jahren
Regelgewicht: 3,17 von 5 (laut BGG, Galactic Cruise zum Vergleich 3,98)
Designer: Ben Rosset, Illustration: Ian O'Toole
Verlag: Kinson Key Games
Plattform: Kickstarter, Laufzeit bis 30.10.2026, 22 Uhr UTC
Lieferdatum: August 2027 (Hauptpledges), September 2027 (Handelspledge)
Galactic Cruise kommt gerade erst auf Deutsch
Für deutsche Leser kommt die Kampagne zu einem interessanten Zeitpunkt: Galactic Cruise selbst, das auf dem Deutschen Spielepreis 2026 bereits Platz 3 belegte, erscheint laut PD-Verlag voraussichtlich im vierten Quartal 2026 auf Deutsch, der Preis liegt bei mehreren Händlern zwischen 116 und 140 Euro. Ob und wann Excursions selbst eine deutsche Ausgabe bekommt, sagt die Kickstarter-Seite bislang nicht. Zur eigenen Kickstarter-Kampagne von Galactic Cruise lässt sich dagegen schon mehr sagen: Fast 8.100 Unterstützende finanzierten sie mit rund 808.000 US-Dollar, die Auslieferung lief ab Anfang 2025 nach Region gestaffelt, laut mehreren Shipping-Updates des Verlags ohne größere öffentlich bekannte Komplikationen.
Pledges und eine große Sammelstufe
Die regulären Pledges reichen von der „Retail Edition“ für 39 US-Dollar über die „Deluxe Edition“ für 59 US-Dollar, laut Pledge-Beschreibung nicht für den regulären Handel vorgesehen, bis zum „ALL-IN“-Pledge für 129 US-Dollar mit drei noch unbekannten „Secret Items“. Ob und zu welchem Preis die „Retail Edition“ später tatsächlich im Handel steht, nennt die Kampagne nicht, der Name allein ist dafür kein Beleg. Für Fans, die gleich beide Spiele wollen, bündelt „The Galactic Collection“ für 349 US-Dollar zusätzlich das Hauptspiel Galactic Cruise samt mehreren Erweiterungen. Mehrere teure Sammlerstufen bis 699 US-Dollar sind laut unserem Check bereits ausverkauft. Die Add-ons zielen fast ausschließlich auf bestehende Galactic-Cruise-Fans: diverse Erweiterungen, Sleeves und Komponenten-Upgrades für das Hauptspiel, teils ebenfalls nicht mehr verfügbar.
Lohnt sich das?
Für Vielspieler, die Galactic Cruise mit seinen 90 bis 150 Minuten und Regelgewicht 3,98 zu sperrig fanden, aber das Universum mögen, ist Excursions ein naheliegender, spürbar kompakterer Einstieg, auch wenn „leichter“ hier relativ zu verstehen ist. Mit nur noch zwei Tagen Restlaufzeit bleibt kaum Zeit für eine fundierte Kaufentscheidung, wer jetzt noch pledgt, verlässt sich vor allem auf Designer-Pedigree und die bislang unauffällige Lieferbilanz des Verlags bei Galactic Cruise, nicht auf eine eigene Bewertung von Excursions selbst.
Jon said I’d probably like Fetz, because it’s a lying game. It is true
that many of the games I design have some form of deceit. I like that kind of
psychological play. I like having a bit of gaming the people in games and not
only problem solving. Fetz is a game from Thailand and it is the best party game winner of the 2026 Thailand Board Game Awards.
The game
Ah, Captain’s Chair. I’ve already logged my appreciation of Nigel Buckle and Dávid Turczi’s remapping of Imperium into the Star Trek universe. Like that series, now sadly defunct thanks to the shuttering of the board-gaming side of Osprey Games, this is an information-dense deck-builder that absolutely revels in its moreishness. Quite literally. It features more icons, more decks, and more chrome-laden rules per cubic micron than any other deck-builder I can recall.
Now there’s a second-wave box, To Boldly Go. If you’ve played the original, you know what to expect. Seriously, newcomers can just read my previous review.
Kirk out here Kirking.
I really wasn’t bluffing. I’m not about to spill anything new. OR AM I? Look at me, playing like Q.
For the most part, To Boldly Go repeats the accomplishments of that original set, featuring six new captains who can either be commanded in one of the game’s default duels or faced as an opponent in the (excellent) solitaire mode. As with Imperium, these decks are what make Captain’s Chair Captain’s Chair. Like an unassimilated technological and biological lifeform, they’re distinct.
How distinct? Distinct enough that there’s good news and bad news.
First, the good. The captains in To Boldly Go are even more dissimilar than those in the base box. Even the ones that are relatively “baseline,” like Soval, Philippa Georgiou, and the long-awaited James T. Kirk feel different on the table. Having served as an ambassador to Earth, Soval fuels his abilities by dismissing them as a species — in game terms, by literally chucking them out of his hand. Which is a bit of a double-edged ability, since he wants to fill his deck with enough exemplars of mankind to keep his better abilities churning. Kirk, meanwhile, is an all-rounder, forced to emphasize the game’s various flavors of influence equally. The flipside is that, as the grandfather of this galaxy, he’s more likely to draw encounters, the ultra-powerful scoring cards that most captains only see one or two of throughout an entire session.
The other captains are wackier, and I mean that entirely as a positive. Khan breaks the game’s usual rules, dispensing with the customary science/diplomacy/military track to instead mind-control a diverse crew and start shouting Moby Dick quotes at his enemies. No, really. He has Moby Dick quotes. Archer, being the flashback character, starts with a deck that fits in his starting hand and nearly no away team tokens for conquering planets. Instead, he has to rush to form the Federation from scratch, giving him some incredible early-game momentum but the testiness of having to forge synergies from first principles. And then there’s Rebner. I haven’t seen a single episode of Lower Decks, so I have to trust Buckle and Turczi when they inform me that Rebner’s whole deal is that he’s a total moron. He draws only three cards per turn, can’t utilize science or diplomacy at all, and his cards get stronger as they find and don big hats.
Aha, a card market!
Actually, Rebner has become my object lesson for To Boldly Go at large. He’s a total hoot to play, and moreover he’s forced me to embrace a portion of the game I’ve always tended to overlook. Returnees to Captain’s Chair might already know what I’m talking about. In the market, there are four main decks that players can freely recruit from. Three of those decks — people, ships, and allies — offer immediate utility. The fourth, the one called “cargo,” has always been a little trickier to use. These are special items that… well, they do all sorts of things. Which is both the value and the drawback of cargo. You’re never quite sure what you’re going to get. Most function as attachments, things you can merge with other cards to bestow new abilities. But they aren’t always that, and sometimes their wilder effects can be more trouble than they’re worth.
Rebner, with his crew’s emphasis on securing and wearing fancy hats, makes cargo a necessity. His starting deck has a bunch of hats, both in its starting pool and for later recruitment, a stark contrast with most captains who might have one or two tucked into their reserve. What’s more, a couple of additional hats can be found in the cargo market deck. They get a “helmet” tag and everything.
But that reveals an issue with To Boldly Go. More specifically, an issue with merging To Boldly Go with the original Captain’s Chair and any forthcoming sets.
In short, the original game didn’t contain any helmets. Which means that poor stupid Rebner is going to have a heck of a time finding any hats for his crew when using the original Captain’s Chair market, whether on its own or blended with the offerings from To Boldly Go.
Of course, the issue is broader than a shortage of hats. It’s that each captain has their own objectives to pursue, and these objectives often require them to dive through the market for specific keywords. Some of these tags are standardized across sets. Roughly half the card pool has been duplicated from the original box, and there are always plenty of humans, Vulcans, and Klingons. For captains who need specialized tags, merging or crossing-over sets just became a testy proposition.
As before, the icons are nice and crisp, but also… there are tons of them.
This isn’t to say the issue is a dealbreaker. Nor that it presents an intractable problem. There have always been tools for rifling through the decks of Captain’s Chair, in particular the “scan” ability that allows players to search through a certain number of cards — even multiple market decks — to mine a specific keyword. It’s pretty rare that you’re beholden solely to whichever cards are currently on display.
But it highlights a certain jankiness to the system. Turczi has compared sets to drafting cubes. Captains function best with the cards in their box, not necessarily when merged across sets. Which, to some degree, makes the whole thing a little less appealing, at least to this guy. I’d much rather rest assured that I could have Kirk face down Koloth or Picard take on some theoretical third-wave Borg Queen without worrying about the composition of the market introducing its own subspace turbulence.
Because, yeah, Captain’s Chair is good enough, even with these bumps, that I want to keep exploring what it has to offer. Even at its most maximal — frankly, thanks to that quantity-is-quality — there’s a thrill to seeing how Buckle and Turczi can mine their deck-building system for new ways to express this particular setting. I loved the diversity of cultures in Imperium, that it was possible to have something sprawling like the Roman Empire throw down with the Olmec and the Inuit, each with their own cultural focuses, and still function at all, let alone present such a compelling contest.
Here, decks are even more distinct. Combined with the additional flexibility of a system that stretches further than its predecessor, the result is a game that keeps me coming back. Even when, on occasion, it frustrates me with its avalanche of icons, a lane-battler core that sometimes gets lost amid everything else, and now the persnicketiness of sets that don’t effortlessly merge.
Captain’s Chair is also a lane-battler. Sorta.
Maybe this was always inevitable. As Imperium grew, that system faced similar aches and readjustments. Any growing pains are only compounded by the sheer enormity of what’s contained in each box. So much for balance; then again, it was always a remote possibility with decks as varied as these.
Either way, here’s to another Captain’s Chair. Going forward, I think I’ll boldly shuffle everything together, consequences be damned.
A complimentary copy of Star Trek: Captain’s Chair: To Boldly Go was provided by the publisher.
German board game designer Mathias Wigge has pulled off an impressive feat at the Deutscher Spiele Preis – Germany’s biggest community-voted board game award – by winning with both of his first two standalone games, Ark Nova and Sanctuary.
Sanctuary claimed top spot in the annual award ahead of Pegasus Spiele’s commercial hit Boss Fighters QR and space tourism-themed worker placement title Galactic Cruise, which has already scored a string of major award wins.
The win also cements Feuerland Spiele‘s position as the most successful publisher in the Deutscher Spiele Preis since the company was founded in 2012, with four victories – twice as many as any other publisher over that period.
Feuerland scored an early DSP victory with Terra Mystica in 2013, before a flurry of three wins in eight years via Wingspan in 2019, Wigge’s debut design Ark Nova in 2022, and Sanctuary this year.
The game, released in Germany as Artengarten last year, aims to offer a shorter and more accessible take on Ark Nova’s zoo-building and wildlife conservation theme, replacing much of the original’s card-driven gameplay with tile placement.
Feuerland also positioned the game at a lower price point than Ark Nova, with a recommended German retail price of €49.90 against €64.90 for the original.
The win follows huge critical and sales success for Wigge’s predecessor design Ark Nova, which had sold more than 300,000 copies worldwide and racked up over 10 million plays on Board Game Arena according to a report from German newspaper Der Patriot in February this year – as well as being ranked in second place among all the titles on BoardGameGeek.
The app-driven cooperative game spent six years in development, with Palm and Zach revealing that extensive work was needed to ensure its QR code scanning technology operated reliably and to develop the digitally controlled bosses.
Boss Fighters QR was also nominated for this year’s Kennerspiel des Jahres, alongside Moon Colony Bloodbath and eventual winner Rebirth.
Galactic Cruise’s third place finish follows a striking awards run for the game, which was the first major release from US publisher Kinson Key Games.
The title, designed by TK King, Dennis Northcott and Koltin Thomson, had already been crowned Heavy Game of the Year at BoardGameGeek’s Golden Geek Awards in May, before taking Game of the Year, Best Strategy Game and Best Game from a New Designer at the Dice Tower Awards in August.
Germany’s Frosted Games was represented twice, through Reiner Knizia’s Kennerspiel des Jahres winner Rebirth in sixth place and Star Trek: Captain’s Chair in ninth, while Kosmos took eighth with River of Gold.
This year’s children’s Deutscher Spiele Preis went to Wojciech Grajkowski’s Toriki: The Castaway Island, published by Mirakulus, ahead of Mooki Island and Paleolino.
The Deutscher Spiele Preis, which has been presented since 1990, is decided by public voting among players in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, rather than a specialist jury.
Organisers said “many thousands” of players took part in this year’s voting. Eligible games were released in German between May 1, 2025 and April 30, 2026, with the winners announced at the Spiel Essen game fair.
Whenever a game has a double-digit player count, there’s a 99.97% chance it involves social deduction. Now, I love social deduction games. They give you an excuse to break the social contract and lie to your friends and family, all in the name of fun. They’re also one of the few genres that let you discover just how good the people around you are at scheming and lying. Eventually, you start wondering if their name is even real. That said, I’m also kind of sick of every single large group game being dropped in the social deduction box.
Coalition: Council of the Republic sings a different tune here, focusing on negotiation rather than inevitable betrayal. Better yet, it’s team-based, with four teams competing for influence and potentially a few independents thrown in to make things even messier. Instead of simply figuring out who’s lying, you have to convince people to work with you, negotiate deals, cross your fingers while making promises, and figure out how long those lofty alliances will actually last. All of this in one hour.
Draft Laws, Not Friends
The story behind this is a little more complex than most. The country is suffering through political turmoil and demanding reform, so four teams are tasked with drafting new laws. Naturally, each team wants to push laws…
When she isn’t pretending to be a dragon, my seven-year-old pretends to be a cat. “Mrrrowrrr,” she says when she pounces on me in bed in the morning. “Raawwwrrr,” she purrs when it’s time for her to line up for second grade. “Grrrrrr,” she rumbles at bedtime, her bones suddenly transforming to jelly. If certain “news” articles were to be believed, we’d have a litter box in the bathroom.
So, as a surprise, I picked up Cats Knocking Things Off Ledges. Designed by Sen-Foong Lim and David Killing, it’s as descriptive a game as they come. My seven-year-old treats it as a tornado simulator.
These cats love to climb.
On the surface, Cats Knocking Things Off Ledges isn’t meant to be a tornado simulator. Instead, it plays like a parallel version to Rhino Hero. Turns consist of three steps. First you expand your kitties’ playspace, adding one or two pillars and a single card, whether rectangular or circular, to create a new climbing platform. Second, your kitty leaps to a new space, managed by a pair of tweezers. Third, your kitty bats a toy from their perch. If it happens to land on another platform, you score points. The greater the fall, the more the score.
It’s adorable. And not in any pejorative sense. The tweezers, for example, have little kitten paws on the inside edges. The toys are wooden versions of squeaky mice and pizza slices. The platforms show fuzzy carpet for kitties to test their claws against, but it’s really their reverse side, which reveals fabric stapled to wooden bases, that feels like something you might actually stack into a climbing tree.
That adorableness extends to the rules. They’re simple, which suits the game’s format and age target. But more importantly, they capture feline caprice. Cats, according to this game, are agents of mischief. Why do they knock things off ledges? One expects the things had it coming. If the things didn’t have it coming, the cats wouldn’t have batted them from their ledges. Simple. Circular. Incontestable.
Which does make it a shame that the components are so darn light. I think back on the original Rhino Hero, before its blown-up version or Rhino Hero Super Battle made it easier to handle, or that popsicle-stick stacking simulator Tokyo Highway that collapsed as though the slightest hand tremor was a seismic event. For little fingers to make a stacking game work — and seven isn’t especially little — the components need a certain heft.
Aw.
Sure, the box rates the game for ages 10+. Fair enough. But let’s be real: those are there to cover the publisher’s backside if a kid chokes on a meeple. No matter the specific digit on the box, Cats Knocking Things Off Ledges is what a seven-year-old who wants to be a kitten and only breaks character to insist she wants chicken nuggets for dinner wants to play. Who else would it be for? It isn’t for my twelve-year-old. She regards it coolly. She doesn’t complain. She’ll humor her younger sister. But this isn’t the sort of thing she’ll directly seek out. Who else is there? Me? My wife? Sure, we have a fine time with it. But the one who jumped up and down at the sight of the box was three years below the stated age limit.
In practice, then, Cats Knocking Things Off Ledges becomes a tornado simulator. The platforms in particular are so light that their surface warps ever so slightly, closer to cardstock than proper cardboard. Not even that heavy of cardstock either. Without proper architectural planning — and, again, let’s be real here — it isn’t long before the tower teeters and shudders. At times, that’s part of the fun. Look at our tower, barely held together with thumbtacks! But when the tower keeps collapsing, especially when it collapses from even slight errors, and doubly especially when it always collapses on the youngest kiddo’s turn, well…
Well, it becomes a tornado simulator. Because the kiddo starts knocking things over on purpose. “Mrrrowwwrrr,” she says, jabbing a pillar with the kitten-stick. Everything tumbles.
Which is fine, as these things go. I’m not about to insist she play the cats-making-a-mess game properly. But it puts the game in a strange place. She adores it. But her adoration has been tempered by the fragility of this plaything. It’s so delicate that she can’t help but break it, and so the breaking has become the game. For the rest of us, Cats Knocking Things Off Ledges becomes a game about rebuilding a similar edifice over and over again, eking out one or two points at a time, and then restarting the process.
Bump!
To be honest, I’m surprised. Lim was half of the design team behind Junk Art, one of the chunkiest stacking games on the market. If only this title had received similar care. Instead, it winds up overstaying its welcome and growing repetitive within the span of a single session.
Here’s the good news: my kiddo has repurposed the pieces for building a cat tower beyond the confines of the rules. Good initiative, kitten.
In the wide world of board game themes and gameplay, ‘Alchemy’ feels like one of the most commonly represented. This might just be my own bias though, as it turns out I have quite a few alchemy focused games in my own collection. From the widely popular Flamecraft to the hit bagbuilder Quacks to marble mayhem favorite Potion Explosion and more, I’d somehow become an accidental alchemy aficionado.
Maybe that’s why when Meeple Mountain was provided with a review copy of Grimbrew from Lucky Omen Studios, I quickly (maybe subconsciously) volunteered to provide a review for it.
Even though Grimbrew thematically has a lot in common with other alchemy themed games, it also separates itself in some unique and interesting ways.
Collect & Brew
As you might have expected, in Grimbrew, two to five players compete to collect the most points by gathering ingredients and brewing potions. Turns are as simple as the premise of the game.
On a player’s turn, they can:
Take an ingredient from a shared market
Brew a potion
Rekindle flames
Active flames are required in order for players to brew potions and refresh the market (more on this in a moment). When taking the ‘rekindle flames’ action, players flip two of their five flame tokens from inactive to active,…
A few years back, we backed a very interesting looking miniatures based board game set in World War II called Aces & Armor from PKB Games. We played it last year and very much enjoyed the combat system as well as the way units gain experience and become more effective. That game did very well on Kickstarter and PKB Games is back with a new addition to the series called Aces & Armor – Spitfire: Battle of Britain & North Africa We reached out to the designer Philipp K. Berger to see if he could give us a look at the game and answer our questions and he was more than willing to accommodate our request.
Grant: Philipp, welcome back to our blog. What is your upcoming game Aces & Armor – Spitfire: Battle of Britain & North Africa about?
Philipp: Thanks for having me back!
Aces & Armor: Spitfire is a tactical World War II strategy game where players command infantry, tanks, artillery, and aircraft in exciting battles.
This time we’re taking the action to two very different theaters: the Battle of Britain, including the evacuation of Dunkirk, and the North African campaign.
The game combines accessible rules with quite a bit of strategic depth. You need to maneuver your troops, coordinate different unit types, capture strategic positions, and make the most of your resources. Your individual units also gain experience throughout the battle, so a rookie Spitfire pilot might eventually become a highly effective war hero!
Spitfire works as a standalone game for 1–2 players, but you can also combine it with the original Aces & Armor for battles with up to five players.
Grant: Why did you want to take your Aces & Armor System to the skies of Britain and the deserts of North Africa?
Philipp: One of the things I love about the history of World War II is how different the various theaters of war were. The original Aces & Armor focuses on land warfare in continental Europe, while the Battle of Britain and North Africa presented completely different strategic challenges.
The Battle of Britain is particularly fascinating because air superiority was absolutely crucial. Suddenly, protecting airfields, intercepting bombers, and coordinating your fighters become central elements of the game.
North Africa, on the other hand, is all about mobility and logistics. You might have the strongest tanks on the battlefield, but they’re not much use if you’ve run out of fuel and ammunition!
I also wanted to introduce the British as a playable faction. Their iconic units, especially the Spitfire, were simply too good to leave out of the series.
Grant: What is your design goal with the game?
Philipp: My main goal has always been to create games that offer meaningful strategic decisions without requiring players to spend hours studying the rules.
I love complex strategy games, but I don’t particularly enjoy unnecessary complexity. Ideally, players should understand the basic rules within 10–15 minutes while still discovering new strategies after many games.
Another important goal is making every unit feel valuable. I don’t want players to simply throw endless disposable troops at each other. Individual units can gain experience, become more effective, and develop into veterans you really want to protect.
And, of course, the game needs to be fun! Historical accuracy is important to me, but whenever historical detail and enjoyable gameplay conflict, I try to find a sensible compromise.
Grant: How have you modified the Aces & Armor System to tell the story of WWII in the Battle of Britain and North Africa?
Philipp: We kept the core mechanics that players already know from Aces & Armor, particularly the combat system, combined-arms tactics, and individual unit experience.
However, we introduced new gameplay elements to capture the distinctive challenges of each theater.
On the Battle of Britain map, aircraft play a much more prominent role. Players fight for control of the skies, defend airfields against bombing raids, and can play scenarios inspired by the evacuation of Dunkirk.
North Africa introduces an entirely new supply mechanic. Your units need access to supplies to operate effectively. This makes supply depots and supply lines strategically important, opening up possibilities such as cutting off enemy forces instead of attacking them head-on.
The result is that the two maps feel quite different, despite using the same underlying game system.
Grant: What elements do you feel are most important to model from the period?
Philipp: I believe it’s more important to capture the strategic realities of a historical conflict than to simulate every technical detail.
For the Battle of Britain, that means air superiority, fighter interception, and the importance of protecting infrastructure such as airfields.
For North Africa, it’s the enormous importance of logistics, mobility, and controlling vital supply routes across a vast desert.
Another major element is combined-arms warfare. Tanks, infantry, artillery, and aircraft become significantly more effective when working together.
I also wanted the different types of equipment to feel distinct. A heavily armored Churchill tank should play differently from a fast Daimler armored car, just as a Spitfire should serve a different purpose from a Junkers Ju 88 bomber.
Grant: What major design challenges did you encounter and how did you overcome them?
Philipp: One of the biggest challenges was introducing two very different theaters without making the rules significantly more complicated.
For example, supply logistics are fascinating from a strategic perspective, but I certainly didn’t want players to spend half their turns calculating fuel consumption and managing spreadsheets!
The challenge was to reduce these historical realities to mechanics that create interesting decisions while remaining easy to understand and manage.
Another challenge was balancing air and ground combat. Aircraft need to be powerful enough to reflect their historical importance, but not so powerful that ground forces become irrelevant.
I approached both challenges by keeping the successful core mechanics intact and adding specific rules only where they meaningfully change the gameplay. And of course gameplay testing and testing and testing!
Grant: What new units are included in this version of the game?
Philipp: Spitfire includes two factions with six different unit types each, represented by 24 detailed miniatures.
The new British faction includes infantry, the Daimler Armoured Car, the Churchill tank, the Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft gun, the Hawker Hurricane, and, of course, the legendary Supermarine Spitfire.
The German faction features infantry, the Sd.Kfz. 251 half-track, the Panther tank, the famous 8.8 cm Flak, the Messerschmitt Bf 109, and the Junkers Ju 88 bomber.
I particularly like the selection of aircraft because it creates some interesting asymmetry between the factions. The British have two different fighter aircraft, while the Germans combine a fighter with a dedicated bomber.
Grant: How have you differentiated the capabilities of the units from those in your great game set in Europe?
Philipp: Every unit has its own characteristics, including movement speed, combat effectiveness, armor, and cost.
The original Aces & Armor includes some powerful late-war equipment, such as the German Tiger tank and Me 262 jet fighter, the American B-17 Flying Fortress, and the Soviet Katyusha rocket artillery.
Spitfire introduces a different selection of units and therefore different tactical possibilities.
The British Churchill, for example, emphasizes protection, while the Daimler Armoured Car provides mobility. The Spitfire is an excellent air-superiority fighter, whereas the German Ju 88 is particularly useful for attacking ground targets.
The German 8.8 cm Flak is another very interesting unit because it can threaten both aircraft and armored vehicles.
I wanted each faction to have its own strengths, rather than simply giving every nation the same units with different miniatures.
Grant: How can this game be incorporated into the original Aces & Armor?
Philipp: The two games are fully compatible!
You can play Spitfire completely independently, but you can also combine its factions, miniatures, and gameplay content with the original Aces & Armor.
The original game includes American, Soviet, and two German factions. Spitfire adds the British, bringing the total to five playable factions.
This creates opportunities for much larger battles, additional combinations of units, and entirely new scenarios.
I particularly enjoy the flexibility of the system. Players can recreate historically inspired confrontations or experiment with their own hypothetical battles.
Grant: How does the combat system work?
Phlipp: The combat system is probably my favorite mechanic in the game.
Each unit has an individual combat profile that determines how many dice it rolls, its chances of hitting, and how well it withstands incoming fire.
When two units fight, both players can roll their dice simultaneously, provided the defender is able to return fire.
The number of dice depends on how much damage a unit has already suffered. As units take damage, their combat effectiveness decreases. However, as they gain experience, their probability of hitting improves.
Another important element is combined-arms warfare. If your tanks attack an enemy position while supported by infantry, artillery, or aircraft, they can receive additional combat dice.
Finally, terrain and armor determine how much actual damage the hits cause.
So combat involves much more than simply comparing attack and defense values. Positioning, experience, damage, terrain, and supporting units can all significantly influence the outcome.
Grant: What drove your decision to use 12-sided dice for combat? What advantages does this give your system?
Philipp: I wanted a combat system that offers a lot of differentiation between units without requiring complicated calculations.
Using 12-sided dice gives us twelve possible outcomes, allowing much finer distinctions in hit probabilities than conventional six-sided dice. This is particularly useful because combat effectiveness changes as units gain experience. Different units can have different hit probabilities, and improving from rookie to veteran or war hero can make a noticeable difference.
Also, a higher number of dice (you roll up to 15 in one attack) and a higher number of sides per die (12) creates roll results closer to the statistical expected value which rewards players estimating the odds well and limits pure dice luck.
At the same time, resolving combat remains straightforward: roll your dice, check which results count as hits, and determine the damage.
I also think rolling a handful of D12’s simply feels great!
Grant: How is experience gained and tracked for individual units?
Philipp: Every unit begins the game as a rookie and gains combat experience by fighting.
When a unit damages an enemy, it gains one experience point. If it destroys an enemy unit, it receives two experience points instead.
After gaining enough experience, a unit advances from rookie to veteran and eventually to war hero, improving its combat effectiveness.
What makes this system special is how we track the experience. Each miniature has a small transparent holder attached to its base, where players insert colored markers for experience and damage.
This means you can immediately see the condition and experience level of every unit directly on the battlefield, without having to consult separate unit sheets.
It also creates some wonderfully memorable moments when an experienced unit survives against overwhelming odds!
Grant: What type of economy does the game use? How is money produced? What can players spend their money on?
Philipp: The game uses a relatively straightforward economy built around controlling strategic production facilities.
Players earn money from factories they have captured. These resources can then be used to recruit new units or repair damaged ones.
This creates an interesting strategic dilemma. Do you spend your resources replacing casualties, invest in additional troops, or repair your experienced veteran units?
Capturing factories is therefore important not just for victory, but also for strengthening your economy and maintaining your army.
I particularly like how the economic and military aspects interact. Sometimes capturing a strategically important factory can achieve more than destroying several enemy units.
Grant: What is the layout of the maps? How does terrain affect the game?
Philipp: Spitfire includes a large double-sided, hex-based game board featuring two very different environments.
One side depicts southern Britain, northern France, and the English Channel. This allows for combined land and air battles, including the Battle of Britain and Dunkirk scenarios.
The other side represents North Africa, with its expansive deserts, roads, mountains, and strategically important supply positions.
Terrain influences movement and combat. Roads allow ground units to move faster, forests provide defensive advantages, and natural obstacles can restrict movement.
Aircraft, of course, aren’t slowed down by ground terrain.
The North African map adds another strategic consideration: supply. With fewer natural obstacles and long distances between important positions, maintaining your logistics becomes crucial.
Grant: What do you feel the design models well from history?
Philipp: I think the game does a particularly good job of modeling the importance of combined-arms tactics.
Historically, even the strongest tanks were vulnerable when operating without adequate infantry, artillery, and air support. The game encourages players to coordinate different unit types rather than relying on one particularly powerful unit.
I also like how the North African scenario illustrates the importance of supply lines. An army can have superior equipment and still lose because it cannot maintain its operations.
And finally, I think the experience system captures something that’s often missing from tactical board games: troops aren’t interchangeable. A battle-hardened veteran unit can be much more valuable than a newly recruited replacement.
Of course, Aces & Armor is a strategy board game rather than a detailed historical simulation, but I hope it captures the important tactical and strategic decisions commanders faced.
Grant: What type of experience does the game create for players?
Philipp: I’d describe it as an accessible strategy game with a surprising amount of tactical depth.
There are plenty of exciting combat moments, but the game isn’t just about rolling dice. You need to plan your movements, coordinate your troops, control strategic locations, and decide when to attack or retreat.
The experience system also creates an emotional connection to your units. Losing a rookie infantry unit is unfortunate, but losing your heavily experienced Spitfire that has survived several battles really hurts!
I also love the way the battlefield evolves. Units move, take damage, gain experience, and new reinforcements enter the fight. The situation can change dramatically within just a few turns.
A typical game takes around 60–90 minutes, so it offers a fairly substantial strategic experience without requiring an entire afternoon.
Grant: What are some general strategies for each of the sides?
Philipp: That depends somewhat on the scenario.
In the Battle of Britain, the British player should pay particular attention to controlling the skies and protecting important airfields. Their Spitfires and Hurricanes provide considerable flexibility, but they need to be positioned carefully to respond to German threats.
The German player can take advantage of the Ju 88’s bombing capabilities while using the Bf 109 to contest British air superiority. Coordinating air attacks with ground operations can be very effective.
In North Africa, both sides need to think carefully about supply. A powerful offensive can quickly become vulnerable if the enemy manages to interrupt your supply lines.
In general, my most important advice is to use combined-arms tactics and not spread your forces too thinly. A well-coordinated group of different unit types is often much more effective than several isolated powerful units.
Grant: What has been the feedback of your playtesters?
Philipp: Playtesting has been particularly important for getting the balance between historical flavor, strategic depth, and accessible gameplay right.
One of the main things I’ve focused on is making sure the two theaters offer genuinely different experiences without forcing players to learn an entirely new game.
The air battles need to feel exciting, and the supply mechanics in North Africa need to create meaningful tactical decisions rather than unnecessary bookkeeping.
We’ve also been refining the balance between individual units and factions.
What I always look for during playtesting is whether players are making interesting decisions, developing strategies, and enjoying the tension of the battle. That’s ultimately much more important to me than adding another layer of rules.
Grant: What other designs are you currently working on?
Philipp: There are always several ideas floating around in my head!
One project I’m currently exploring is bringing the Aces & Armor game mechanics to a SciFi scenario.
I’m also thinking about where to take Aces & Armor next. World War II offers so many interesting factions, units, and theaters that there’s certainly plenty of room for future additions. And I am getting a lot of great ideas from backers of the current Kickstarter campaign. I just love this creative community and couldn’t be more grateful!
For now, though, most of my attention is on making Aces & Armor – Spitfire as good as possible and delivering another successful Kickstarter campaign.
Thank you for your time in answering our questions Phillip and also congratulations with the game funding already. I really like the look of this one and I am sure that it will be a fun gaming experience.
Board Game Arena hat in den vergangenen sieben Tagen zwei neue Titel ins Programm genommen, die kaum unterschiedlicher sein könnten: ein frisches Experten-Kennerspiel um den Bau von Streichinstrumenten und ein vierzig Jahre altes Familienspiel-Urgestein mit verschiebbaren Gängen. Wir zeigen euch beide mit allem, was ihr vor der ersten Partie online wissen solltet.
Luthier
Mit Luthier bringt Board Game Arena ein Expertenspiel um den Bau und Verkauf von Streichinstrumenten online. Für diesen Titel wird ein Premium-Abo benötigt. Ihr steigt als Geigenbauerin oder Geigenbauer ins Handwerk ein, wählt Holzsorten, baut Instrumente und verkauft sie an Musikerinnen und Musiker, Sammlerinnen und Sammler oder Orchester. Auf Board Game Arena spielt ihr zu zweit, dritt oder viert, BGG nennt zusätzlich einen Solo-Modus für die Partie am Tisch. Eine Partie dauert online im Schnitt 83 Minuten, BGG nennt für den Tisch 90 bis 150 Minuten: Offenbar spielt sich eine Partie online zügiger. Designer sind Dave Beck und Abe Burson, das Spiel erscheint bei Paverson Games, die deutsche Fassung bei Funtails. Über die deutsche Vorbestellaktion von Funtails haben wir 2024 bereits berichtet.
Eckdaten zu Luthier
Spieleranzahl: 2 bis 4 auf Board Game Arena (BGG nennt zusätzlich einen Solo-Modus)
Spielzeit: 90 bis 150 Minuten laut BGG, im BGA-Schnitt 83 Minuten
Alter: ab 14 Jahren (laut BGG)
Komplexität: 4 von 5 auf Board Game Arena, BGG-Gewicht 3,83 von 5
Designer: Dave Beck und Abe Burson
Verlag: Paverson Games, deutsche Fassung bei Funtails
BGA-Zugang: Premium-Titel
Labyrinth
Labyrinth ist seit dieser Woche ebenfalls auf Board Game Arena spielbar. Das Spiel lässt sich ohne Abo spielen. Ravensburger brachte das von Max J. Kobbert entworfene Familienspiel 1986 erstmals heraus, in diesem Jahr wird es vierzig Jahre alt. Ihr schiebt Gangteile durch ein Labyrinth aus losen Fliesen und steuert euren Charakter zu euren Schätzen, während sich die Gänge mit jedem Zug neu verschieben. Eine Partie dauert laut BGG 20 Minuten, im BGA-Schnitt sind es 24. Komplexität und BGG-Gewicht liegen übereinstimmend am unteren Ende der Skala, das Spiel richtet sich an die ganze Familie.
Eckdaten zu Labyrinth
Spieleranzahl: 2 bis 4
Spielzeit: 20 Minuten laut BGG, im BGA-Schnitt 24 Minuten
Alter: ab 8 Jahren (laut BGG)
Komplexität: 1 von 5 auf Board Game Arena, BGG-Gewicht 1,35 von 5
Designer: Max J. Kobbert
Verlag: Ravensburger
BGA-Zugang: kostenlos spielbar
Welches spielen wir zuerst?
Für uns ist die Wahl diese Woche leicht: Labyrinth ist in einer Partie durchgespielt und eignet sich bestens für eine schnelle Runde zwischendurch, während Luthier eher der Abend für die Kennerrunde ist, die sich Zeit nimmt. Wer noch unsicher ist, ob sich das Premium-Abo für Luthier lohnt, kann mit Labyrinth kostenlos reinschnuppern und danach entscheiden.
Die Woche vom 20. bis zum 26. Oktober 2026 war eine der dichtesten Crowdfunding-Wochen des Jahres: Allein auf Gamefound sind binnen vier Tagen zwei große Kampagnen gestartet, dazu kommt auf Kickstarter ein offiziell lizenziertes Final-Fantasy-Brettspiel und eine Zombie-Abwehr mit Garten-Deko. Auf der Spieleschmiede bleibt die Ausgabe dagegen leer: Dort ist diese Woche keine neue oder laufende Kampagne gestartet, die unsere Kriterien erfüllt. Arkham Horror Remastered (Vault Series), ebenfalls diese Woche auf Gamefound gestartet, haben wir bereits in einem eigenen, laufend aktualisierten Artikel behandelt und führen es deshalb hier nicht noch einmal auf. Wir haben die vier übrigen Kampagnen herausgefiltert, die für deutsche Brettspielerinnen und Brettspieler wirklich zählen.
Dungeons of Tanares
Mit Dungeons of Tanares schließt Dragori Games die Trilogie um die Welt Tanares ab, nach Arena: The Contest und Tanares Adventures. Ein bis vier Heldinnen und Helden erkunden eine lebende Welt zwischen den Quests, rüsten ihr Arsenal mit bis zu vier Angriffsarten aus und passen sich unvorhersehbaren Gegnern an, die ihr Verhalten je nach Spielsituation ändern. Gestartet am 20. Oktober 2026, hat die Kampagne ihr Ziel in wenigen Minuten gesprengt und mittlerweile mehr als zwanzigmal überschritten, mit neuen Gegner-Miniaturen als Stretch Goals fast im Stundentakt. Als Designer nennt BGG Alexandre Aboud. Welche Sprachen der Pledge Manager am Ende anbietet, steht in den abgerufenen Kampagnendaten ebenfalls nicht. Ob die beiden Vorgängerkampagnen der Trilogie, Arena: The Contest und Tanares Adventures, pünktlich und wie versprochen ausgeliefert wurden, lässt sich aus den abgerufenen Daten nicht beurteilen.
Eckdaten zu Dungeons of Tanares
Spieleranzahl: 1 bis 4
Spielzeit: etwa 120 Minuten
Alter: ab 16 Jahren
Designer: Alexandre Aboud (laut BGG)
Verlag: Dragori Games
Plattform: Gamefound
Kampagnenstand: 2.021 % von 50.000 US-Dollar, 2.448 Unterstützer, Laufzeit bis 5. November 2026 (Stand: 26.10.2026, 8 Uhr)
Einstiegspreis: ab 109 US-Dollar für den günstigsten Einstieg in die Gesamtkampagne (Stand: 26.10.2026)
Liefertermin: nennt Dragori Games in den abgerufenen Kampagnendaten nicht
Grimdark Future: Jade & Claw
One Page Rules legt mit Grimdark Future: Jade & Claw nach der erfolgreichen Broken-Truth-Kampagne die nächste Zweispieler-Battle-Box seines kostenlosen Tabletop-Regelwerks vor. In der Box stehen sich die Eternal Dynasty und die Alien Hives gegenüber, mit vorbemalten Kunststoffminiaturen, Geländeteilen zum Flachpacken und allem, was für ein Duell auf Anhieb nötig ist. Die Kampagne lief am 20. Oktober 2026 an und hat ihr Ziel inzwischen mehr als verdreifacht. Das Grimdark-Future-Regelwerk geht auf den Designer Gaetano Ferrara zurück, der One Page Rules gegründet hat. Eine deutsche Fassung der Regeln nennt One Page Rules in der Kampagne nicht. Zur Lieferung äußert sich die Kampagnenseite selbst: Laut eigener Angabe wurde Broken Truth innerhalb von sechs Monaten erfüllt.
Eckdaten zu Grimdark Future: Jade & Claw
Spieleranzahl und Spielzeit: nennt One Page Rules nicht, üblich für Tabletop-Skirmish-Systeme ohne feste Partiegröße
Kampagnenstand: 367 % von 50.000 US-Dollar, 549 Unterstützer, Laufzeit bis 6. November 2026 (Stand: 26.10.2026, 8 Uhr)
Einstiegspreis: ab 99,95 US-Dollar für die Starter-Pledge (Stand: 26.10.2026)
Liefertermin: nennt One Page Rules in den abgerufenen Kampagnendaten nicht
Origins of Light: A Final Fantasy Board Game
KessCo bringt mit Origins of Light ein offiziell von Square Enix lizenziertes Final-Fantasy-Brettspiel auf Kickstarter. Ein bis vier Spielende stellen eine Heldentruppe zusammen, statten sie mit Zaubern und Ausrüstung aus und ziehen in Dungeons gegen Bosse aus Final Fantasy I bis III, die sich an den Pixel-Remaster-Fassungen orientieren. Die Kampagne startete am 20. Oktober 2026 und hat ihr vergleichsweise niedriges Ziel von 10.000 US-Dollar binnen Stunden um ein Vielfaches überschritten. Als Designer nennt BGG Alex Kessler. Eine deutsche Fassung erwähnt KessCo in der Kampagne nicht, Versandkosten werden erst nach Kampagnenende über den Pledge Manager abgerechnet.
Eckdaten zu Origins of Light: A Final Fantasy Board Game
Spieleranzahl: 1 bis 4 (laut BGG)
Spielzeit: 90 bis 180 Minuten (laut BGG)
Alter: ab 12 Jahren
Designer: Alex Kessler (laut BGG)
Verlag: KessCo (lizenziert von Square Enix)
Plattform: Kickstarter
Kampagnenstand: 8.587 % von 10.000 US-Dollar, 2.800 Unterstützer, Laufzeit bis 18. November 2026 (Stand: 26.10.2026, 8 Uhr)
Einstiegspreis: ab 100 US-Dollar für die Retail-Pledge (Stand: 26.10.2026)
Liefertermin: Juli 2027 (laut Pledge-Beschreibung)
Plants vs. Zombies: The Board Game
Mantic Games setzt mit Plants vs. Zombies: The Board Game die PopCap-Lizenz kooperativ um: Ein bis vier Spielende verteidigen ihren Garten mit Sonnenblumen, Erbsenschleudern und Walnuss-Wällen gegen anrückende Zombiehorden, mit vorbemalten Miniaturen in der Deluxe-Fassung. Gestartet bereits am 14. Oktober 2026, läuft die Kampagne außerhalb unseres Sieben-Tage-Fensters für Neustarts, qualifiziert sich aber über ihr Volumen: Mehr als 750.000 britische Pfund bei über 5.500 Unterstützern sind für den deutschen Markt eine Hausnummer. Einen einzelnen Designer nennt Mantic nicht, auch BGG führt keinen Designer-Credit. Welche Sprachen Mantic am Ende anbietet, wählen Unterstützer laut Kampagnenseite erst im Pledge Manager nach Kampagnenende.
Eckdaten zu Plants vs. Zombies: The Board Game
Spieleranzahl: 1 bis 4
Spielzeit: nicht genannt
Alter: nicht genannt
Designer: nicht genannt (auch BGG führt keinen Designer-Credit)
Verlag: Mantic Games (Lizenz von PopCap Games)
Plattform: Kickstarter
Kampagnenstand: 3.031 % von 25.000 britischen Pfund, 5.535 Unterstützer, Laufzeit bis 5. November 2026 (Stand: 26.10.2026, 8 Uhr)
Einstiegspreis: ab 40 britische Pfund für die Standard-Pledge (Stand: 26.10.2026)
Liefertermin: September 2027 (laut Pledge-Beschreibung)
Welche Kampagne reizt uns?
Uns zieht es diese Woche zu Dungeons of Tanares: Die Kampagne schließt eine Trilogie ab, die sich bislang sauber durch drei Kampagnen gezogen hat, auch wenn die Lieferbilanz der beiden Vorgänger für uns noch offen ist. Origins of Light ist der Titel mit dem breitesten Publikum, Final Fantasy zieht auch Leserinnen und Leser an, die sonst selten crowdfunden. Grimdark Future und Plants vs. Zombies sind dagegen eher etwas für die bereits eingeschworene Zielgruppe ihrer jeweiligen Marke.
Korrektur vom 27.10.2026: Als Designer von Origins of Light stand zunächst Anthony Thorp mit einer Liste angeblicher Vorarbeiten (One Piece, Spy x Family, Sonic the Hedgehog), ohne dass sich diese Angabe einer Quelle zuordnen ließ. BGG, eine der zitierten Quellen dieses Artikels, nennt stattdessen Alex Kessler als Designer. Der Artikel wurde entsprechend korrigiert.
Anmeldenhttps://boardgamewire.com/
The Players' Aid
