Games - to Display or not to Display?

 My geek cred is pretty strong. It started around age 8 or 9 when my parents, avid swap meet and garage sale patrons (like a lot of immigrant types), would occasionally bring me stacks of comics. That started a collection that by adulthood had grown into several long boxes of mostly silver age stuff. 

My next intro to things geeky was probably an old copy of The Hobbit one of my older bros (non-geeks to be sure; oldest brother was a local biker-like badass, and my next oldest was all-city in several sports) left lying around. By the time I discovered D&D around age 13 I had read the LOTR trilogy a couple of times (plus a little Conan and others). So things comics, and things D&D were my main hobbies (besides playing sports myself - a local sports hero's younger brother is going to be forced to dabble). I surfed from around age 14-21, but as I grew up on the beach that was more of a lifestyle than sport or hobby. Comics and RPGS were the lifelong loves, though I pretty much stopped buying comics on the reg by age 25 or so. 

When you are young you love to display things you like. But for me coming up in a time when D&D and other games were more or less underground despite TSR's soon marketing to the general teeming masses, I treated it like a secret society. When I went to the secretive D&D club ("The Fantasy Role Playing Association" - sheesh) after football practice I snuck there with the James Gunn theme playing in the background so as not to be seen by my non-geek friends.

 It was an odd hobby, and I kind of dug the furtive nature of it then. I always stashed my gaming stuff away in drawers and closets in case my sports pals came over (or my earliest girlfriends - though by around 17 years old or so some girls I met were into D&D). Things I displayed were the usual rock posters and such. My D&D buddies were less furtive; they had minis and books and all kinds of stuff all over their rooms. 

I'm still not much of a hobby-displayer. I'm always kind of trying to minimize my life. When I left my hometown for a new city a few short years ago I pretty much tossed out about half my life. Clothes, furniture, and a lot of collectibles. Some action figures, fandom books (including things like my decades old Star Trek technical manual) and other things that were not exactly mint on card. I currently own exactly ONE small bookshelf, and its more for holding a few favored books and gifts from friends. Well, not exactly displayed. More like just tossed on there to keep them off the living room table...

My D&D stuff still stays stashed in a closet, more to get it out of the way than out of embarrassment. But with my current main hobby (outside of video gaming, playing music, and a couple other things) is boardgames. 

Above: me indulging in other things with non-gamer pals 

in Northern Cali...

As I mentioned in other posts, my board gaming passion only started around 3 years ago. My only real boardgame love for decades was Talisman. But I discovered Will Wheaton's Tabletop show and was dazzled by the incredible games being played there. I moved to a new town where I didn't know anybody. I made some friends at the local comic/game shop, but then I found some of the personalities in the local gaming community, especially that of board gaming, kind of boring, outside of my soon to be besties B and L and some of their local friends.

We teamed up to turn non-gamers
into gamers. Nice, eh?

 So with good friends eager to play I started collecting games I had seen on that show (or just saw at a store and had to have). My collection grew exponentially in the last couple years...

Have a couple of editions, but the one with
the phallic standee is a classic.

I'm probably leaving one or two out, but it doesn't take a lot of boardgames to make quite a pile. They outgrew the couple of lower shelves, and I pretty much had them stacked on the living room floor. But with my best friends being out of town for a few months in the earlier parts of the year (they travel to warmer climes to avoid the snow and such we get here near the Sierras), this is kind of my board gaming downtime. So, with pre-spring cleaning they go from the living room into some boxes in the office upstairs until such time as boardgame "season" comes back around.

My board game collection as currently displayed.

In some ways it's kind of a shame. These modern boardgame boxes are beautiful to look at.  I've seen some huge collections of boardgames displayed, and they look amazing. The hosts of my latest D&D campaign must have a hundred boardgames, and they are displayed around the house on a half dozen shelves. And there is a brew pub in town that had hundreds of games available to play. I've played a few games there with B & L, or other local friends, and it's a great atmosphere. I've even gone in there by myself on a quiet Sunday to have a couple ales and just stare at the walls...

So lonely...but fuck, look at all those games!

But honestly, in the spirit of minimalization, I have to resist the shelf thing. As I have for years, I get my artsy display ya-ya's out by hanging stuff on the walls. Mostly things with some personal importance.

More of a religious thing really, 
but counts as a display

Given to me over a decade ago
when Pearl Jam was a client 
at my office. 

Both an art and activity. I like to 
switch different comics in and out
of the frames from time to time.

Just as an aside, there can be a great display out of the box. I gave my pals a beautiful little game that they like to play (it's a two-player game so I don't have it) on their travels, but also keep it out as a nice model display...

OK, so as for my collection of board games, I am going to try and keep it down to the three boxes. But these boxes are pretty much full. There are at least a couple more games I'd like to own, so to fit I will need to eliminate a couple. The most likely choices for elimination are...

Really loving that box art.

OK, well, Munchkin can be fun, but honestly two things turn me off from playing it after the first couple tries. Basically, for what you get out of it, it takes too long. It can take over an hour. Both times we played it was closer to an hour and a half. For a game that is almost all whimsy, it should really be like other whimsical games I like such as King of Tokyo and Epic Spell Wars. A game should take a half hour or less. To me this is the big turnoff. A game that takes upwards of an hour and a half should have a bit more real meat on it. 

As for the Gloomhaven spin-off, well, I have some reasons there that I will save for a later post as the reasons I got it are quite specific. 

But long and short here and to wrap this post up, I will for the time being be keeping the games in the boxes, and my artsy side will just have to stay up on the walls. Out of the way. 

Bugbears. Jack-O-Bears. Same Same?

 I barely manage to make a post a couple of times a month lately. Besides my very casual approach to the blog these days (I make pretty much no attempt to advertise it in any way. If I was I would comment at Grognardia and other popular old school spots on the reg). Plus I work in health care which means often 50 hour weeks on the job. But one of the handful (and yes you could count them on one hand and have change left over) folk who are kind enough to comment on the occasional post had a comment on my post earlier today, and I thought "what the hell" rather than bury my reply in comments I'd make it a short post. Go a little deeper in the weeds on Bugbears. 

Not a bugbear. More
 like a Walktapus

The thing you're calling a "Runequest bugbear" is a jack-o-bear, a Chaotic critter that looks and acts less like a D&D bugbear than the similarly chimerical owlbear does. Just because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related. Doesn't even work as an attempted joke.

I could say "Fair enough," especially when it comes to my weak (I am a gamer after all) attempts at humor. But to the because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related I feel like I have to blow a time out whistle, or at least throw out a less shrill au contraire mon frair. There is a clear connection between the D&D bugbear and the Runequest jack-o-thing. 

Here is the current D&D bugbear.

Here is the 1st edition version.

All good. Now here is the earliest known depiction of a D&D bugbear.

Dang. That thing has a pumpkin for a head! 

OK, the crux of the matter. I am no D&D historian. And I certainly care less about the historical context of gaming things than I did when I started this blog. Though it's fun to walk down memory lane now and again. And it is memory lane, seeing as I pretty much was living it in my early gaming. As an adult I really didn't follow much of what was going on in the decades between my teens and when I first noticed the OSR about 10 years ago or so. But in my early to later teens I was in the thick of it. 

My earliest gaming outside of my friends was at Aero Hobbies, one two hobby shops in Southern California that specialized in D&D stuff and every other new RPG on the scene. I was playing games there starting around 1978 or so. By then the older locals were into Runequest, Traveller, Bushido, Empire of the Petal Throne. Anything but D&D. Some of the folk there would in some OSR circles be considered minor celebrity. And the older folk there certainly had plenty to say about the industry. I mean, we were surrounded by all the new books, and a galaxy of early miniatures. 

So, on bugbears my understanding is this: The artwork of "bugbear, ghoul, and friends" bugbear was a misunderstanding of Gygax's description (an "oval head shaped like a pumpkin") or some such. So there you go. Instead of a big hairy Chewbacca wanna be, you got that monstrosity. 

Mini's were produced before Gaz could get on top of it, like so:

So sometime during the populating of Glorantha, the powers that be suggested they come up with some creatures that already existed as mini's you could find. Things like Griffons were a no-brainer. Plenty of mythical creatures from D&D getting made. And maybe Prax is filled with herds of everything BUT horses because you could find packs of other kinds of hooved animals at the 5 and dime. Antelopes and boars and so forth. 

But this mini, this pumpkin bear thing (or another like it) inspired the creation of the Jack-O-Bear, as seen on the cover of the campaign book below:

Now, bugbears aren't known as spellcasters. But pretty much everything in Runequest is a spell caster. I think Jack's had some paralyzing power or another. They are chaos creatures and therefore are part of a solid ethos/grouping in that setting. And whereas D&D bugbears are fairly oricish/ogreish in general (big thugs who crack your skull for laughs), the Gloranthan ones at least appear (modernly) more bestial in nature. 

Just because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related. Doesn't even work as an attempted joke.

Wellll..., my weak jokes aside, there is a very clear line between the creatures. More than just the word "bear." The similarity to an Owlbear things is fine, but if you look at pics like the one of the Griffin mountain cover, they weren't meant to be four legged animals. I know bears can stand on hind legs, but that thing is blocking a spear and casting a spell. They were literally using the early D&D mini, a two-legged humanoid, as the basis. And the mini does not have a bear body. It looks more to me like they used a shambling mound mold and added the pumpkin. Regardless of what they make them out to be in later edition. That old stuff does still kind of count (if you are anywhere near my age anyway). So the joke, such as it is, has some validity. 

Or not. But fair enough. 

Cheers

Orcs, goblins, bugbears - same, same, same?

Early on in this blogs first run, I made a post about orcs in general. But my friend "L" has recently been reading a book called "Orconomics" or something like that which got me thinking a bit about them. Not so much as "what are they," but what I have had them be in the past and present. 

For sure I have gone back and forth about the general nature of orcs.  For most of my DMing life I have had them be of the almost demonic Tolkien variety. Murderous, hateful, cannibalistic.  Other times, like now, I have backed a little bit off my belief that most human women would rarely survive an assault scenario.  But there are a lot of half orcs characters in my games the last few years. For many years now various media (video games, non D&D rpgs, etc) often portray orcs as more or less barbarians, though sometimes noble. I've resisted that interpretion. I think its pretty boring just to make them human-like thugs or barbarians. Hateful and inherently and irredeemably evil beyond human ability to be so are my orcs.  Orcs, elves, dwarves, halflings; I like them to be pretty much drilled down into a single type of personality with particular behaviors. Its humans who should have the wide variety of behaviors. Saintly to thuggish. 

I have found over the years that everybody has a kind of orc they like. I guess my biggest change to them, starting around the late 90's up into more recent years, was to have goblins and bugbears just be different sizes of orc. Goblins are the wee ones, and bugbear stats used to signify Uruk Hai types. 

I may be totally wrong, but my impression from LOTR goblins were indeed just low forms of orc. The original hobbit of course had them be goblins, a separate race. Peter Jackson went that way with them. I think the old Rankin Bass Hobbit cartoon had them as goblins. 

Or...something...

This kind of made it easy on me. I did not feel I needed a wide diversity of humanoid types. With gnolls, kobolds, ogres, etc. around there seemed to be plenty. 

I think it was several years ago when I used The Keep on the Borderland's Caves of Chaos that I started going back on this notion a bit. The caves are a highly diversified series of apartment flats sectioned off by race. Orcs, goblins, gnolls, bugbears. At this point it was harder to think in terms of "ok, small orcs are over here, and a bunch of Uruk Hai are over there. " Doable but felt a little awkward to me. My thinking would have made the other races quite outnumbered by orcish types. 

But it was my adopting 5th edition about 3 years ago that had me breaking up the orcish diversity thing. In old edition the humanoids are mostly divided up by HP, AC, and damage ability.  But in 5th things are way more unique. Advantages and such giving them specialties. Abilities to gang up on foes, charge their foes, etc. So I parse them back out. Goblins have zero relation to orcs. Back to being creatures more akin to Brownies and Red Caps of legend.

"I'm a goblin. In a red cap."

 And I think I prefer it. I like to think of goblins classically, more mischievous than outright bloodthirsty, but also often murderous. A single blade-wielding goblin coming up in the dark to stab you in the back, or a small gang of them looking to take down a loot a "big'un." But also capable of just being families of mushroom farmers in the upper caves of the world, wanting to be left alone. My basic orcs are less diverse. They just want to torture you, kill you and maybe eat you.  

Bugbears are back to being their own thing as well, though I might still look to them as examples of nice big badass Uruk's. 

We just won't mention what they are like per Runequest.

What the hell is Grendel?

As a lifelong D&D guy, I never explored Beowulf to much a degree. Sure, I may have read some translation of the poem at some point as a kid, but I don't recall it. Probably because there is a certain amount of ambiguity and "minimal description" in some of the verbal imagery. Kind of like reading Dracula or Frankenstein.  What informs your mental picture of these creatures is more often than not things that come way after the debut of the literary works. Bela Legosi is our best-known image of Drac. Karloff is our Frankie. But what is our Grendel? 

Today while doing the usual early Sunday puttering around cleaning and cooking with the tellies on in all the rooms and trying to make up my razoodock about what to do with my Sunday afternoon, I saw that the 2007 computer animated film Beowulf was on. I remember seeing it a bit over 10 years ago (on TV I am sure), and how I was struck by the great motion capture and voice work of the monster Grendel. So, I took another look. Sure, there are other monsters in it (dragons are kind of ho hum these days), but Grendel is kind of the sweet spot. Crispin Glover gives a lot of personality to the creature. As Grendel busts into the great mead hall multiple times, he whimpers and moans as if each movement is agony. Indeed, he very much resembles Glover, but with fatal burn wounds all over his body and possible spinal stenosis.

He cries, he howls, he stomps the shit out of men with his size 32 feet. He picks up warriors and bites their heads off like chocolate bunnies. I have not seen a ton of the other film interpretations of Grendel, but I cannot imagine some growling, clawed animal like version of Grendel could be as scary as Glovers. He is both frightening and terrifying in that Frankenstein way. Even when taking a wound, he is angry and weeping at the same time. Disturbing. 

I have to guess that 90% of the people who own 
and display this got it as a gift or won it in a contest.

But what is this thing? I am no expert by a long shot. I've done maybe 20 minutes of research right now, and a lot is open to interpretation. Really, translations vary, and different translators have had their own take based on what they know of the ancient language. Some even seem to suggest Grendel is not necessarily humanoid. Or that he may actually be a bipedal dragon, seeing as dragons are a theme in the tales. But all seem to point at Grendel being a descendant of the biblical Cain.

 Grendel represents "a monstrous outsider enraged by the joy of brotherhood and society from which he is forever banished. His enmity towards Heorot is grounded solely in this moral perversion, which is another example of the hatred of the good simply because it is good."  Grendel exhibits his envy towards the warriors as Cain did to his brother, Abel, so long ago.

 

Some interpretations just suggest Grendel was simply a badass local warlord who attacked the mead hall with his followers on occasion. 

Maybe really go deep in the weeds and
imagine him as an evil wrestling clown.

OK, so whatever it is this monster is preying on the local community as food source, for pure hatred, or a combo of both (the 2007 film suggests he is just sensitive to sound and the noise of the mead hall keeps him up at night). And this is one of the elements that would make this part of the tale the perfect D&D scenario. Hell, a DIY DM who isn't all that aware of Beowulf is likely to come up with the scenario independently. Monster preying on the populace; heroes intervene to tackle the problem. 

What classic game monsters would make the best Grendel in the scenario? Well, the Crispin Glover Grendel seems very Troll to me. There are similarities between this version and the classic D&D troll. 

Really, if characters of around 3rd level stumbled into the situation a monster of around the power level of a troll would be probably perfect. It's a slobber knocker of a fight, but they likely prevail (especially if they go to fire use). If it's one single 8th or 10th level fighter (like Beowulf) the fighter will win, but he'll know he was in a fight.

A good old hill giant would make for a good, loud, stompy indoors fight.

 And I suppose a basic ogre would do if it's a group of 1st or 2nd level characters. Or you could go outside the box and have an outcast Beholder be the troublemaker. Maybe a minor demon of some kind? Vrock? Maybe one of those toadish ones? 

Or go full DIY and create something of your own. A creature that is both horrifying and unique. Maybe and alien. Xenomorph! The Predator! Clearly your Grendel can be whatever you want him to be. I have a lot of old monstrous minis that don't resemble any common D&D staple critters.

Hell yeah

But don't forget that dungeon component. Beowulf had to go to the caves and deal with Grendel's mom. So, after wasting the dude, characters can go nip down to the dungeon from whence he came to deal with the other creatures that lurk there. His mom, benefactor of some kind, or maybe his pets which happen to be a bunch of basic lesser monsters. 

There's a local con later in the year looking for DM's (I was tapped to do a rare con appearance last year but it got cancelled), and suddenly I'm inclined to use a scenario based on this. Perfect for a 3-4 hour one shot. Characters stop at an inn, the monster attacks and is slain/escapes, and it's off to the dungeon (for a hearty reward of course) to take care of the creature and/or his allies. Easy peasy, right?

 With things based on ancient literature, it's all good meat and potatoes for D&D adventures. 

Zombies as Weather

 

It's a subject that has been discussed to death the last decade or so, much in the way ninjas were in the 80's. 

Resident Evil games, Walking Dead, Shaun of The Dead, Zak Snyders Dawn of The Dead, several other zombie films with various takes on the genre, etc of the last 20 years or so have made spooky, hungry ghouls pop culture phenomenon. 

It's probably one of my favorite games, Dead of Winter, that has me in a zombie state of mind these days. Probably Walking Dead as well. A lot of the TV I stream is Pluto TV, and they have a Walking Dead channel constantly showing seasons 1-4. 

When I started playing D&D as a kid, I was super into the magical, Mythic dungeon concept. It was kind of bizarre, kind of scary, creepy; a mystery, usually a horrifying one, is around every corner (unless you buy into that Gygaxian/Grognardian "every third room should be empty" palaver). But after years of them, they are still fun but lose a lot of that mysterious wonder. When you watch Romero's Night of The Living Dead as a kid, those lumbering, weak ass dead people terrifying. I mean, they are dead! 

But then you get older, still thinking zombies are gross and creepy, but you start to get into the weeds a bit more on the subject. You're first major question is "how did this happen." Is it germ warfare gone wrong? Or is there a supernatural explanation? Each movie offers up possible clues to what might have happened. Astronauts bringing back radiation is mentioned on the telly in Night of the Living Dead. I think it was the original Dawn of the Dead poster that read "when there is no more room in hell.." 

On Walking Dead, after season two zombies became third class co-stars: a backseat to evil humans. The Guv'na, The Wolves, The Whisperer's, that boss from hell Negan. Zombies Are now just the backdrop, more or less treated the same as a form of bad weather. You plan for it. You have procedures (grab the umbrella, put on a coat, gas up the chainsaw). But the show has long since become about interactions of the characters and the human threat. And for any of us who love Mad Max movies we know what the threat is. If The Road Warrior had zombies, Lord Humongous and Wes would still remain the scariest things in the Outback.  Anyway, when in season two our heroes ended up on Hershel's farm, it was an area light on zombies (spoiler: they were getting roped and locked up in a barn). 

Fucking Hershel. Fucking Rick. Fucking farm. 

Speaking of that season, I disliked it quite a bit at first. Watching it I already knew why they were going to be exclusively at a single location the whole time, besides the odd trip to the bar for a drink or the pharmacy for pregnancy tests to see if Lori was rocking a Shane-baby, or birth control so Maggie could get her Glen on. But it was known that AMC was shifting the majority of the money for other, more critically acclaimed shows like Mad Men and Breaking bad, series that flounder a couple of seasons then blew up into huge ratings grabbers. And honey gets the money. But when I watch it now, I appreciate what happened in the same way I appreciate Spielberg not getting the shark to work. The toned-down season where characters talked their asses off in the kitchen about morals and dishwashing duties ended up putting the show in the direction of the new world still being about people, and zombies just a new normal in the background. Kind of like weather. And as was always kind of promised the human foes turned out to be often scarier than The Walkers. And the characters by recent seasons are just desensitized to the undead. 

Yeah, the farm kind of got what it deserved

It's a natural progression. Night of the Living Dead is about a single night. You might be stuck in a small farmhouse with a near catatonic lady and a family headed by a loud-mouther boor, but it's all about the zombie problem. Front and center. In the original Dawn of the Dead, it's a messed up, horrifying situation. But once you get into the mall, clear it out and lock it up, a few months later your thoughts turn to food and shopping and all that. You might have to deal with the ghouls now and again, but it's just another part of the world now. Another danger. But one you better take seriously. The bikers who show up at the end of the movie are having fun, but they pay the price for not taking "zombie weather" seriously. 

The Dead of Winter boardgame pretty much treats the zombies like weather conditions. When you leave the colony and go out in the field, or any time you want to kill a zombie, you roll a 12-sided die and the result is abstract. A wound (of which you can have three before dying), a frostbite condition (a wound that keeps on giving), or most rarely a zombie bite which can not only kill you but give you the hard choice of saving the victim or risking others getting infected and dying. 

As the actual weather effect of frostbite, regular generic wound, and zombie bite are on one dice, it's all baked together. It's all "exposure." From the cold, from the everyday hazards of a wild world, and from a good old zombie bite. Sure, there are zombie counters that can overrun an area eventually and cause characters to die in the location if you don't set up enough barricades or kill some zombies off, but once again it's like mother nature. A flood. Rather than pile up sandbags you try to thin them out. Zombies becoming once again an everyday thing. At least abstractly. "Make sure and take your galoshes and shotgun, dear!"

And just like Walking Dead or any modern zombie things, it's all about the characters. Dead of Winter has great characters galore, all with a special ability. It's what they do and what they get away with (or don't) where the fun lies. How they deal with the natural hazards, which includes the undead, is just dealing with nature.  

Whatever they are or how they came to be, zombies on a series such as Walking Dead are kind of in the background. It took a while, but the characters are kind of desensitized from being around them, easily killing them, living with the problem for years. Much like how we think of the weather. If its mild no problem. If there is a storm and threat of flood or heavy snow, we up our game and put it at least temporarily to the forefront of our thoughts. When it calms down, its back to not thinking of it. Same with getting used to the zombie problem. Big herd of them comes through its battle stations. Just a couple of them show up, meh, get out your gun or knife much like getting a raincoat or snow shovel out when you need it. 

You deal with it, but afterwards you don't wonder how this could be a science or supernatural thing. Why they can exist for years without blood or working organs. Why they eat and eat and never seem to have poopy pants. Why the hell their shoes don't fall off after a few days. You just deal with it like any other natural problem, then wonder what board game to bust out tonight.

 I recommend it be Dead of Winter.

Your chance to ask that cute girl you just met if she'd 
like to join you

 

NYE Boardgaming - The Long Night and King of Tokyo Halloween

 On NYE I got to spend the night with my local besties B and L, and some of their local friends who they have gotten into some of the boardgames we love. 

It was on a big rural property in the sticks. Foothills of the Sierra Mountain range about a half hour away. The area is still laden with snow from the big storms earlier in the week, and it's just beautiful. I got my own flat to sleep in for the night (with horses living just under it), so I was totally up for it and raring to go for drinking, smoking, and playing some games. B and L are also hitting the road soon (they spend about half the year out on the open road) so it was about my last real change to game with them for at least a couple months.

So after a bit of the usual holiday cheer we got down to it. B and L recently got the Dead of Winter expansion The Long Night. It ties in nicely with the original game, making it and even bigger play area. A bandit hideout is included, and also the location of "Raxxon," this games Umbrella corporation. I'm sure this is a ripe-off or Marvel comics old Roxxon evil corporation. Raxxon is making super zombies, and is also likely the cause of the zombie crisis. 

You also get a lot of new characters, including a monkey. 

It plays out just like regular Dead of Winter. This was the first time doing it with 5 players, so there was a lot going on. By halfway through the game pretty much everybody at some point was accused of being the traitor. But towards the end it was clearly Bill, who was promptly exiled. 

The paranoia is the best thing about the game, since everybody gets a motivation card with objectives, and if the player tries to meet them (such as the game being won with two weapons in your possession or whatever) and the actions don't appear to serve the common good, you will get eyebrows raised at you, traitor or not.

The players won the game, though I was lacking one of my objectives, so I didn't get to share in the bragging rights. 

We also then played a few rounds of King of Tokyo, one of my quick game faves. But our kind hosts for the night owned the Halloween edition so we played that. One of the change ups from the regular edition is every character gets a costume card. So your Kaiju might be dressed as a cheerleader, or a princess or witch. This gives you a special ability. 

Since you don't always get a lot of power up cards in the original edition, I welcome something to make your monster different. But the costume thing kind of destroys any verisimilitude. OK, that is kind of ridiculous statement seeing as this is a whimsical game to begin with. But it's all good. It was just s different way to play it. And I did enjoy the chaos of a 5 person game. 

And its all about being with friends on the last night of the year, and that is what counts the most. B and L have been really good to me the last couple of years, and spending time with them, even often as a third (or even 5th) wheel, is very important to me. So, the year for me was ended just right. 

Happy new year!