The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Legacy of Dragonholt
Ironsworn
City of Brass (5E)
Android: Shadow of the Beanstalk
Hogwarts: A Role-Playing Game
Dread
The Armitage Files
B2: The Keep on the Borderlands
World of Gor: Gorean Roleplaying World Encyclopaedia
These Weird Breads Are Sad
The Solo Investigator's Handbook
Wollstonecraft The Role-Playing Game
Maze of the Blue Medusa
The Two-Headed Serpent
Slaves of the Machine God
The Forsaken Kingdom of Fungithrill
Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set (Second Edition)
Labyrinth Lord
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook
Apocalypse World
Microscope
Vornheim: The Complete City Kit
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Beginner Box
Dungeons & Dragons Starter Set
Monster Manual (D&D 5e)
Kids on Bikes: Deluxe Edition
Forbidden Lands Core Boxed Set
Passion Guides My Hand
Book 01: The Warlock of Firetop Mountain
The Flood
Warhammer Adventure
B1: In Search of the Unknown
Masks of Nyarlathotep (3rd & 4th edition)
The Deryni Adventure Game
Eyes Only
B10: Night's Dark Terror
Deadlands
The Great Pendragon Campaign
T1: The Village of Hommlet
Forgotten Realms Campaign Set
Book 1: The War-Torn Kingdom
Faction Guide
Swords & Wizardry Complete Rulebook
The One Ring: Adventures over the Edge of the Wild
Gildenbrief (Issue 25 - Jul 1992)
Monster of the Week
The Covetous Poet's Adventure Creator and Solo GM Guidebook
Player's Handbook (D&D 5e)
The Strange
Microscope Explorer
Recommend
24 
 Thumb up
 Hide
83 Posts
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 

RPG» Forums » General Discussion » General Role-Playing

Subject: QOTD FEB 7: What makes a role playing game "old school"? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: qotd [+] RPG_Design [+] RPG_Hobby [+] [View All]
True Blue Jon
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think old school is different than OSR. Old school are RPGs played "back in the day" or new RPGs that play like those RPGs "back in the day". It's a nebulous thing, evoking a feeling of when everything was new and cool because you were a teenager exploring this brand new way of game-playing.

OSR is a bit more specific, as it means anything compatible with D&D pre-3rd edition.

Of course, there's overlap.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Caroline Berg
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
...124 to run fleeing from the mountain. ...125 to use a rope to climb the cliff. ...126 to quickly cast "summon stairs." ...127 to dodge under the falling rocks.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lorddillon wrote:
Yes, it is the part of the OSR that I dislike. A one-true-way kind of thinking that drives me nuts and really turns me away from some groups. I like both old- and new-school styles of RPGing, so I have no patience for chuckle-heads who claim that there is only one way to play if you want to be a real gamer shake

I agree... I like playing OSR games and PbtA and storytelling games so far on the fringes of RPGs that some people don't even think they are games... I enjoy them all. And I like that games cover such a broad swath of types of games and styles of play.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chuck Dee
msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It all seems arbitrary to me, but definitely something opposite storytelling based or rules-lite.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmb
If I don't tell it to get off my lawn, it's Old School.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Vincent
United States
Ridgefield
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I’m a fan of old-school gaming and OSR games, but I find it interesting that a lot of OSR evangelists (as in, the people who write blogs about it) didn’t actually play D&D in the 70s and 80s. They’re either too young, or just got into gaming late, post 3e D&D.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dangit Hurtz
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
skalchemist wrote:
That brings up another element of old-school feel for some, which is a kind of DIY, whatever works works, doesn't matter that much if it is coherent, aesthetic. DCC exemplifies this feel. Rules are almost expected to be incoherent and arbitrary; this is a feature, not a bug. (I say this as a person who loves DCC.)

This is what I think of first whenever this subject comes up -- the accumulation of subsystems that feel improvisational and don't bear much design relationship to each other. It reaches peak wooliness with AD&D -- thief abilities, ranger tracking ability, turning undead, psionics(!!!), surprise rules vs. initiative rules, helmets vs. other types of armor, etc. My own feelings about this aspect run ambivalent. I think AD&D is out of control, but feel games like FATE are rational to the point of feeling sanitized. I do think DCC hits a kind of sweet spot, although I'm not sure I could explain why off the top of my head.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rebus Carnival
United States
Da Burbz
DC METRO
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Oh, you can stand it alright.
Avatar
mbmbmb
petegrey wrote:
What about Jennifer Connelly?

I sense she’s near the cutoff.

robbbbbb wrote:
ctimmins wrote:
The damsel in distress looks much like either Farrah Fawcett or Cheryl Tiegs.


Raquel Welch.


Bette Midler circa Hocus Pocus
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Robben
Belgium
Antwerp
Antwerp
flag msg tools
And here...
badge
I should really add something smart and sparkly here.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Endless dungeons with random monsters in every room waiting to be killed but don't want to use the killy "treasure" they're "guarding". No plumbing, no females, no reason for them to be there, no clue why the whole thing even exists.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guest Starring...
Austria
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Another one:

In the old school days, RPGs strongly influenced video game design. At some point, this relationship was reversed, and you can now find plenty of video game design concepts (and vocabulary) in RPGs.
8 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
john Whyte
New Zealand
Hamilton
None
flag msg tools
designer
Whoever the five of you are who nominated me for Citizen Recognition I am truly touched
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Old school, to me, is defined by low hit points, and a playstyle that seeks players to 'solve problems' and also to 'push their luck'. The dungeon isn't meant to be cleared, rather the players need to determine at which point they'd like to take their winnings and leave.

I think its the last point that leads to a particular type of GM style where the GM is the casino house and the players are trying to beat it.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger
United States
Montgomery
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
henry proctor wrote:
jasperrdm wrote:
This is a non question. Until YOU define "old school", I can not answer this question. On Enworld someone posted an article of Old School vs New School. Trouble was half of what was listed as New School I was seeing in 1980. And half of what was listed as Old School is currently happening in my Adventure League group.


Then the question is effectively how do you define "Old School". Clearly you disagree with the Enworld poster. Why? Please elaborate.


I think people will agree that at least 1st ED D&D is "Old School".
How far beyond that, will likely vary.

Given when/where I've seen comments like "how Crom intended" and the like, I would say rolled stats over point buys have a more "old school" feeling.
A hard HP cutoff between living and dead is also a sign. (No death saves)

Sometimes it's easier to define what it isn't. So I'd say the usage of dice with symbols on them is certainly not Old School.


Here the link of lewpuls my comment is number 94 about page 10
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?656147-Worlds-of...-“Old-School”-in-RPGs-and-other-Games-–-Part-1-Failure-and-Story

But to sum up old school
1 .You can lose
2. Same module plays differently with each new group.
3. You must cooperate to survive. Hints at well balanced party.
4. This is the adventure I am going to run it.
5. Death is on the line
New school
A.You fail forward
B. Same module results in same game play regardless of the group
C. You will survive no matter what
D. This is a story we are doing together.
e.Lots of healing options

My updated response.
1. I dm adventure league and people have failed at story objectives.
A. Posters on Enworld have used "fail forward" back in 1E. I did too after a while.
2B. I have DMed some 1E and 5E modules multiple times and the outcome and details vary wildly.
3C. Various posters of Enworld and I had non balanced groups in 1E and 5E. 5E with the (E.) option lots of healing options make the survival a little bit easier. But in 1E I had magic shops with wands/potions of healing.
4. I running Fangs and Frogs Sunday at 2 PM at the local game store. If my table does not make, I going home at 2:20 PM. Back in 1E I would do the module or we would not play. So 4 has not changed.
D. Too many Enworld posters said back in 1E the Story was what mattered.
5. And C. Old school death was on the line is lie as plenty of 1E players would only allow pcs to die if the story demanded it.
TPKs in old school were common. I think I had 1 TPK in 1E. Most of time if came close to a TPK someone would run away. And the party generally had a rod of resurrection.
No tpks in new school. I have about 110 sessions of Adventure League as a DM. 2 TPKs and Skully has 47 names on him.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger
United States
Montgomery
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok taking from various posters Old school is
DM Samuel, Clark Timmins, Hans Messersmith, Caroline Berg
Slow natural healing.
PC don’t level at same rate
Players metagaming is acceptable ( well okay)
Everyone is wearing glasses
Simple less detail pc. Hans 5th level thief is exactly like Clark’s.
Crawls are the focus.
Resource and weight management importance depends on GM.

Most of the rest depends on the group and GM.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hans Messersmith
Canada
Hamilton
Ontario
flag msg tools
admin
designer
With your head held high and your scarlet lies You came down to me from the open skies It's either real or it's a dream There's nothing that is in between
badge
Twilight, I only meant to stay awhile Twilight, I gave you time to steal my mind Away from me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
splendiferous wrote:
My own feelings about this aspect run ambivalent. I think AD&D is out of control, but feel games like FATE are rational to the point of feeling sanitized. I do think DCC hits a kind of sweet spot, although I'm not sure I could explain why off the top of my head.
You are not the first person I have heard express that sentiment about Fate, although you express it succinctly and eloquently. When I first got involved in indie games back in the early 2000s, that rationality of design was a wonder to me, tremendously exciting, and I still generally prefer it. I'd much rather play a game where people have actually thought through what the consequences of the different rules they are implementing will be, instead of just using them because they are traditional and/or somehow "simulate reality".

But my exposure to a lot of good "old school" writing has made me realize that that pendulum can swing too far (at least for me), and that at least some weirdness and incoherence can be fun and interesting. Its ok to kit bash things together on the spur of the moment, its ok if you don't have a consistent mechanic for everything, its all a matter of how and why you do it.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hans Messersmith
Canada
Hamilton
Ontario
flag msg tools
admin
designer
With your head held high and your scarlet lies You came down to me from the open skies It's either real or it's a dream There's nothing that is in between
badge
Twilight, I only meant to stay awhile Twilight, I gave you time to steal my mind Away from me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jasperrdm wrote:
My updated response.
1. I dm adventure league and people have failed at story objectives.
A. Posters on Enworld have used "fail forward" back in 1E. I did too after a while.
2B. I have DMed some 1E and 5E modules multiple times and the outcome and details vary wildly.
3C. Various posters of Enworld and I had non balanced groups in 1E and 5E. 5E with the (E.) option lots of healing options make the survival a little bit easier. But in 1E I had magic shops with wands/potions of healing.
4. I running Fangs and Frogs Sunday at 2 PM at the local game store. If my table does not make, I going home at 2:20 PM. Back in 1E I would do the module or we would not play. So 4 has not changed.
D. Too many Enworld posters said back in 1E the Story was what mattered.
5. And C. Old school death was on the line is lie as plenty of 1E players would only allow pcs to die if the story demanded it.
TPKs in old school were common. I think I had 1 TPK in 1E. Most of time if came close to a TPK someone would run away. And the party generally had a rod of resurrection.
No tpks in new school. I have about 110 sessions of Adventure League as a DM. 2 TPKs and Skully has 47 names on him.
Although I am of an age where I could have played a lot of old-school D&D I didn't; my friends and I saw Traveler Classic in 1982 and never played anything else (well, ok, some Gangbusters).

But one thing I have noticed in hearing people talk about the actual D&D they played before, say, 1985, is that while everyone was technically playing the same game, in practice every game group was really playing their own thing. For every group that had TPK's every night there was another group running long form epic stories. For every group that did dungeon crawls 24/7 there was a group doing picaresque travelogues. I think this has to do with the fact that the game itself was evolving nearly in real time, with each new Dragon article or supplement adding something different. There were a whole smorgasbord of options. But also, there was little communication between groups; there was no internet, no social media, the only time they would interact would be at conventions/tournaments or in the letter pages of the magazines. So you had all these groups of people evolving their own often highly localized form of D&D, with their own house rules, rituals, and practices.

I think what is called "old school" today is the set of those old rules, rituals and practices that is the most different (at least to its advocates) to what they see as "new school". But as you are saying, Roger, it was not really the only way people actually played in the "old days".
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
skalchemist wrote:
But my exposure to a lot of good "old school" writing has made me realize that that pendulum can swing too far (at least for me), and that at least some weirdness and incoherence can be fun and interesting. Its ok to kit bash things together on the spur of the moment, its ok if you don't have a consistent mechanic for everything, its all a matter of how and why you do it.

I'm somewhat okay with that sort of thing now, but it took a lot of experience, exposure to other games, improv training, and just generally thinking about how to trust people at the table for me to reach that point. At the time, back in the 80s and 90s, every time I'd want to do something and not see in the rules how to do it, or see that the rules were clunky or lame, I got more frustrated. Basically, I wanted to be able to rely on the rules for the fun of the game, rather than trusting myself or my friends to get things right. I felt that boardgames, video games, and even sports did that for me, so why not RPGs?

I realize now that the rules, even of a modern RPG, aren't like a recipe that can be followed to result in guaranteed fun, but I still don't trust incoherent rules to lead to anything but disaster.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
skalchemist wrote:
I think what is called "old school" today is the set of those old rules, rituals and practices that is the most different (at least to its advocates) to what they see as "new school". But as you are saying, Roger, it was not really the only way people actually played in the "old days".

Exactly. There was also a range of enjoyment level. I always had a lot of hopes for RPGs, but I would wager that most people who had the experience I did with them in my middle school years simply left them and didn't come back. I have almost zero nostalgia for my RPG experiences of that time.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Jome
United States
Franklin
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
One thing that sets some things apart is narrative authority. In the old school, players decide character actions arbitrated in a setting by an impartial GM. If your game lets characters establish other kinds of things or restricts the GM closely, that's a different style.

For example, if players can invent NPCs they know or state that they just happen to have gear or a skill or knowledge, that's putting narrative in front of simulation.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
cosine wrote:
One thing that sets some things apart is narrative authority. In the old school, players decide character actions arbitrated in a setting by an impartial GM.

A GM who was commonly advised, even in the early days, to mine players for ideas, albeit indirectly.

cosine wrote:
If your game lets characters establish other kinds of things or restricts the GM closely, that's a different style.

Players, you mean?

cosine wrote:
For example, if players can invent NPCs they know or state that they just happen to have gear or a skill or knowledge, that's putting narrative in front of simulation.

That's an oversimplification, at least as I understand those terms. Allowing players to establish things also contains aspects of simulation, because one of the reasons for allowing it is to enable players to establish things that make sense to them. It can also cut down on out-of-character back-and-forth between players and GM. What's more simulationist? The wizard stating in-character that he knows something that a wizard would be likely to know, and the GM agreeing and backing that up, or the wizard player conversing with the GM about whether or not the wizard would know something? When a GM is accommodating and the players are reasonable, asking "Can I do this?" or "Do I know this?" will so often be answered "Yes," that the questions aren't really going to be good for much except impinging on everyone's immersion.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Jome
United States
Franklin
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
enduran wrote:
What's more simulationist? The wizard stating in-character that he knows something that a wizard would be likely to know, and the GM agreeing and backing that up, or the wizard player conversing with the GM about whether or not the wizard would know something?


The latter.

Quote:
When a GM is accommodating and the players are reasonable, asking "Can I do this?" or "Do I know this?" will so often be answered "Yes," that the questions aren't really going to be good for much except impinging on everyone's immersion.


From thus was born narrative focused games. Indeed, the entire concept of being immersed in a story and staying in character without OOC discussion with fellow players and the GM is not old school.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
cosine wrote:
enduran wrote:
What's more simulationist? The wizard stating in-character that he knows something that a wizard would be likely to know, and the GM agreeing and backing that up, or the wizard player conversing with the GM about whether or not the wizard would know something?
The latter.

So "simulation" doesn't mean "trying to create what's actually going on"?"

cosine wrote:
From thus was born narrative focused games. Indeed, the entire concept of being immersed in a story and staying in character without OOC discussion with fellow players and the GM is not old school.

I didn't say anything about story. Establishing facts that make sense doesn't have to involve story at all.

If I think it makes sense for my character to have rope in his pack and no one is going to dispute that it makes sense for my character to have rope in his pack, then me asking if my character would rope in his pack is just a speedbump in the game that doesn't aid anything.

Or, if you like, if it's reasonable for rope to be available for sale in a shop, me asking if I see rope available for sale doesn't benefit the game. There's a threshold for every table below which the players should be allowed to simply decide things for themselves, simply to keep things moving.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Jome
United States
Franklin
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
It's important to remember that old school was only one style. It was not objectively better than later innovations. Many such inventions were created specifically in reaction to the original form. That's progress.

And old school wasn't all bad either. It had charms and advantages beyond the rose colored view of nostalgia.

As time goes by "old school" changes. For many old school just means first school. I've seen a lot of "back in the day" sentiment for Dungeons & Dragons (3rd Edition), but to me that was not my old school.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
cosine wrote:
It's important to remember that old school was only one style. It was not objectively better than later innovations. Many such inventions were created specifically in reaction to the original form. That's progress.

That's how I like to see it. I think what happens with progress though (and not just in RPGs) is that some people just want the original thing slightly refined, but still fully recognizable, whereas others would prefer to utterly rework it.

cosine wrote:
And old school wasn't all bad either. It had charms and advantages beyond the rose colored view of nostalgia.

I know, I just never experienced them myself, even though I think I could be said to have played in the old school. In thinking about aspects of it now, I believe I can see the advantages of things like random tables and frequent character death, though I'm still not too interested in making much use of them.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Jome
United States
Franklin
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
enduran wrote:
If I think it makes sense for my character to have rope in his pack and no one is going to dispute that it makes sense for my character to have rope in his pack, then me asking if my character would rope in his pack is just a speedbump in the game that doesn't aid anything.


The old school says that if you didn't get the approval from the GM when you said you shopped for and bought the rope, then you don't have rope.

Simulation means playing out the details. Is that fun? Clearly not for everyone. But simulation was to my mind a big factor in old school.

Old school says players control the decisions of characters only. They cannot cause their characters to miraculously create a rope where there was none before anymore than you could create a rope in the real world by assuming it.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Unwin
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
cosine wrote:
The old school says that if you didn't get the approval from the GM when you said you shopped for and bought the rope, then you don't have rope.

Surely there's a line. I'm almost certain I remember reading advice in early books about the limits to the kinds of things GMs need to approve. Without such limits, games would utterly bog down with questions, even more than many already do.

cosine wrote:
Simulation means playing out the details.

Okay, sure, you have to do the shopping, because the characters have to do the shopping. But the characters don't have to ask if they can see rope, they just see rope. So, the more assuming and establishing the players can do, and the more they can reduce back-and-forth with the GM, the more the game can focus only in the in-game details.

cosine wrote:
Old school says players control thee decisions of characters only. They cannot cause their characters to miraculously create a rope where there was none before anymore than you could create a rope in the real world by assuming it.

Every time. Every time, it's assumed I'm talking about unrealism when what it's about is more realism.

It's not "creating a rope where there was none before," it's "a rope that obviously would have existed the whole time, but no one felt the need to mention yet." The rope's not "not there," it just hasn't been part of the game yet, even though in the given case, it would obviously have been there. The characters are on a sailing ship, and they need to tie up a mutineer. If they ask if there's rope on a ship, they're impeding the overall goal of simulation.

Okay, yes, some tables actually did bother with encumbrance of mundane equipment, and sometimes, at some of those tables, the presence or not of a few pounds of rope, or whatever, would have made a difference. That's fine. But in any case, talking to the GM for information or permission simulates nothing, because that's not what the characters are doing. Just doing something the character would and plausibly could do, is simulation, so the more players are allowed to do that, the more simulationist the game can be. I'm not saying that this was generally how old school was played out (though there were limits to what the GM needed to be consulted on), but I want to make clear that simulation and a degree of player control are not mutually exclusive.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Emperors Grace
United States
Rexford
New York
flag msg tools
Hello!
badge
All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost;The old that is strong does not wither,Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Skalchemists 1st page post is probably the closest understanding to my kind of OSR.

Specifically:

skalchemist wrote:

* No level/encounter security - you could easily blunder in to an area of the dungeon far more dangerous than you can handle
* "rulings not rules" - an expectation that players will try to do all kinds of stuff that the rules don't account for, and the GM rolls with that and adjudicates.
* A lot fewer rules in general


I never liked truly random but we did worry a lot less about consistency:

skalchemist wrote:

* a focus on random generation of story elements (people, places, things, character features, etc.).
* Simple characters, with relatively few traits and special feats/powers/etc.
* Simple monster descriptions; monsters usually take up no more than a few lines of text, as opposed to entire blocks of space in later versions.



Also for me it's about the interrelation of PC's and monsters. The power curve if you will.

There was a great article years back in KODT about the difference in the power curve in the D+D editions. I wish I could find it again. IIRC, they did the stats on sending kobolds against a first level fighter until death.

The 1st ed and 2nd Ed were close to each other around 2 IIRC.

From 3.0 onward the curve shot way up. maybe 8 for 3rd? and like 20 for 3.5 or 4th?

I remember thinking that it was the clearest representation I'd seen on why I disliked the "feel" of later editions - and why my group would generally vote to restart once characters achieved roughly ~15th-20th level.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.