Entries from April 2006 ↓

On the first day of our vacation in the Outerbanks, Lauren and I rented bicycles with the intention of riding them around a few times during the week. I know they say you never forget how to ride a bike, and I certainly didn’t forget, but man, I sure don’t remember it hurting so much. We weren’t a quarter mile away from the rental place before our legs started burning. I mean burning. It was a five-mile ride back to the house and by the end my heart was pounding and my legs were ready to give out. I couldn’t seem to stay on the seat very well and every time I slid down, it wedged the underwear up my butt a little bit further. I remembered that as a kid, whenever we’d ride our bikes and wanted to go faster, we’d stand up and peddle. I tried that for about two seconds, shouted, “Ah crap!” and sat back down. The burning in my quads multiplied thanks to that little stunt.

How did we do this as kids? I know that I was using muscles I don’t normally use and all, but geez, I don’t remember feeling that kind of pain the first time I rode a bike—I mean, you know, other than the pain of my skull slamming against the concrete when I wiped out. If it had hurt like that the first few times, I don’t think any of us would have learned how to ride our bikes. Kids aren’t like adults. We don’t find amusement from painful activities.

Not surprisingly, even though Lauren and I had paid for a full week rental, that ended being our only bike ride.

Hera and Zeus is a two-player card game which is really hard to learn at first, but once you figure it out, it is a lot of fun to play. The gist of the game is that each player takes on one of the eponymous roles from Greek mythology. As the story goes, each of the gods has kidnapped the other’s favorite mortal: Argus and Io respectively. Players build up their gods’ armies by laying cards of varying strengths facedown into three attack columns as they attempt to locate Argus or Io in their opponent’s deck.

Your cards consist of numbered “fighting cards” which are placed into the three attack columns, as well as “mythology cards” that give you special functions but cannot attack. The initial difficulty comes from the fact that there are a lot of cards to keep track of, each with their own strengths, weaknesses and special skills. The Pythia card, for instance, has a strength of zero which means anybody can kill her. But, if Pythia attacks Poseidon or Nemesis, the two strongest cards in each opposing deck, then she wins the fight. In addition, rather than attacking, Pythia can also be used to spy into an opponent’s hand or reveal all the facedown cards in any one column. With me so far? Don’t worry, we weren’t either.

The first time Lauren and I tried playing this game we got fed up and quit before we were even two turns into it. There were just too many cards to keep track of and we kept getting confused about who did what and what went where. To be fair, we were exhausted at the time and didn’t have the energy to figure it out at that exact moment. The next night we did it right. We went through each card one by one and figured out what they did, who they could beat, who could beat them, and any special circumstances where their special powers wouldn’t work. That gave us a good perspective on how to proceed and even though we still referred back to the directions and “cheat sheets” several times in the first few games, we at least had a working knowledge of the game’s mechanics and flow. Since then, we’ve had nothing but fun.

There are so many different strategies that one can use in Hera & Zeus, not the least of which is the use of bluffing. Placing cards facedown in a certain way so that your opponent thinks you’ve got a stronger card on the table than you actually do; hiding your Io or Argus card behind weaker cards so that your opponent won’t think to attack it; holding onto really powerful mythology cards for a long time in the hope that your opponent won’t attack it in your hand… these are all typical “bluffs” that one will employ.

But beyond that, and in my opinion the mark of a really good game, strategy is a consistently fluid thing and you find yourself constantly reworking how you fight and counteract your opponent’s likewise evolving methods. Lauren and I have been on similar learning curves with this game and are constantly figuring out how to exploit the inherent weaknesses in the other person’s strategy. No game is ever the same and the tension is palpable during those close matches that get down to the very end. Sometimes a game has literally been decided by a single card left in somebody’s draw pile.

And just to sweeten the whole pot, the artwork on each of the cards is beautifully rich and dark and complements the theme of the game perfectly. There’s a lot to love about this one and we pick it up often.

VITALS: This is a two-player card game which tends to last an average of 30 minutes. It’s definitely one of the harder games to pick up on so I trust the box’s appraisal of ages 12 and up.

BoardGameGeek.com Reviews

Lauren and I got new cell phones a couple of weeks ago which will finally allow us to take and send pictures and videos in addition to regular text messages.

“Oh, this will be good if one of us is ever involved in a car accident,” Lauren said to me the day we got them.

Well, it might have been that way if she and her sister hadn’t gotten the exact same phone with the exact same capabilities. Now the two of them, I swear, are like teenage girls, sending cutesy little messages back and forth all day long, shooting and sending pictures of everything they see, dressing up the pictures with pretty borders, attaching different ringtones to the pictures and typing the text messages to make it seem as though one of their kids wrote the sentiment.

One of the ladies (I won’t reveal who) actually took a picture of her own butt and sent it to the other. Maybe they aren’t like teenage girls at all. Maybe the new phones are bringing out the teenage BOYS in them. “Hey Marc, lookit ‘dis. ‘Dat’s my BUTT!

When they send something, it of course prompts the other person to call them back, and then they proceed to have an hour-long conversation. They sit up until midnight chitty-chatting on the phone about this and that. Except instead of whispering about the boys they snuck a kiss and a trip to second base with behind the dugout, they’re gabbing on about their latest Tupperware parties and PartyLite orders.

But it’s the videos that are the most out of control. Sure I’ll admit that it was fun for the first couple of days. I’d shoot a scene of Allison on the swings or throwing rocks at the neighbors’ kids and send it off to Lauren for a quick laugh. But these sisters think they’re Martin Scorcese armed with a cell phone. The thing about it is, it’s really all the same video. Fifteen seconds of one of the kids saying “Hi” to their aunt. “Hi Aunt Lisa” on the slide. Then “Hi Aunt Lisa” in the car. Then “Hi Aunt Lisa” at the grocery store. Then “Hi Aunt Lisa” in no place special except for the fact that she’s is just being really cooperative with the camera this time around.

I’d get mad, but it really is very cute, the two of them. They think it’s the pictures of their kids that are adorable, but really, it’s the two of them who are just so precious. Like little boy-crazy girls with technology. Can’t wait to see our next wireless bill.

I took the day off today and spent the whole day with the girl. Around lunchtime we went down to visit Lauren at the birth center. On Thursdays they have a sort of “Mommy-and-Me” get together and the place was filled with moms and their babies. While we all sat around talking, there was one mom there who had just given birth about two weeks earlier. And apparently, she still hadn’t named him yet. The kid is two weeks old and still has no name!

This is hardly an unusual occurrence. In her years as a labor-delivery nurse, and now as a midwife, Lauren has come across I’d say at least a dozen couples who, by the time they leave the hospital, or even by the time they come in for their TWO WEEK checkup, still haven’t been able to come up with or agree on a name. How does that happen? Seriously, how? Believe me, I understand the dilemma that comes with picking out baby names. Lauren and I started brainstorming names before we were even married. It took forever to agree on one we both liked. But even then, that wasn’t the end of it. A lot of times, I’d be crazy about a name which Lauren was opposed to. After months of bringing the name up again, she would finally start to come around to liking it… right about the time I decided, you know what, that’s actually kind of a dumb name. Boys names were (are) the worst. We’ve got all our girls names picked out one after the other until one of us goes either barren or senile. But after nearly 6 years of discussions, we still haven’t found a single boys name that we both liked consistently, and at the same time, for more than a month or two.

So yes, I get the hardship that comes with picking out your kids’ names. After all, this is a decision that will be with them for their entire lives. But to not have a name picked out by the time your kid is born, much less two weeks AFTERWARD! It’s not like it was a surprise that the kid was coming and would need a name. I mean, you had at least… let’s say seven months from the point when you first figured out you were pregnant. You’re telling me in all that time you didn’t spend even a little time thinking about what you might name this kid? That’s kind of like putting off writing your doctoral dissertation until the night before it’s due isn’t it? Or really, it’s like handing it in TWO WEEKS LATE.

So as of now, this poor kid still doesn’t have a name. What do you call a kid – your kid – for two weeks if you haven’t named him. The birth certificate and hospital papers can just say “Baby Boy” but geez, can two parents coo that informally for that long over their own son?

Can somebody who has gone through this little dilemma personally please explain it all to me? Because I just don’t get it.

Cartagena (said: car-ta-HAIN-ya) is advertised as a “prison break” game where you’re trying to get a band of pirates down a tunnel and into their awaiting sloop. That initial theme serves as a jumping off point for the artwork (which utilizes a lot of skulls and guns and other creepy pirate paraphernalia), but when you get right down to it, the game is really just an abstract goal of getting your pieces from point A to point B. But that doesn’t hurt the game a bit. In fact, I think it helps because the game doesn’t get so bogged down in sticking to a “theme” (like Monsters Menace America) that it tries to make more of itself than it really is. In fact the simple design of Cartagena gives it a certain timeless quality where you could see yourself playing this exact same version with your grandkids forty years down the line.

I’ve read reviews that call Cartagena “Candyland for adults,” and I think that’s an accurate, if overly simplistic description. It’s similar in that you draw cards then move your pieces down a path and whoever reaches the end first wins. But this game goes beyond merely flipping a card and moving, flipping a card and moving. Players control six pieces (pirates) and have the choice on each turn of moving forward or backward—three moves per turn. To move forward, you have to play a card from your hand and move to the next available space with that picture (skull, ruby, knife, key, bottle, gun). If the closest applicable space already has a pirate (yours or somebody else’s) on it, then you move to the next available space with that picture. In theory, if all ruby spaces between you and the sloop are filled, you could play a ruby and move your pirate all the way to the end of the tunnel.

You start the game with only four cards, which is obviously not enough to get all your pirates down the tunnel. You pick up new cards by moving a piece backwards to the closest space that has one or two pirates already on it. If there is one pirate on that space, you pick up one card. If there are two pirates, you pick up two cards.

Those are the only rules. Very simple and easy to explain while still lending itself to plenty of strategy as you “make chains” and “break chains” with your pirates, allowing your pieces to jump farther down the board without allowing your opponents to take the same advantage. Another little twist for this game is that the “board” is actually comprised of six sections of tunnel that you assemble randomly at the beginning of each game, making the layout different every time.

Since I was introduced to the world of German Style Board Games, I’ve come to realize that, for serious gamers, the word “luck” is definitely a four-letter word. The less a game depends on any “luck factor” the more integrity it apparently has. In Cartagena the two luck factors are that you don’t know what cards your opponents have and you don’t know what cards are next in the draw pile. So even though there is still a good deal of strategy going on, the actual decision of whether to draw or move is more dependent on luck than skill. For those strategy diehards, there is a second way of playing that lends itself to being more “skill based” than “luck based.” In the “Tortuga version” of Cartagena all cards are face up. You can see what your opponents have and they can see what you have. In addition, the first five cards of the draw pile are also face up. Much more strategy comes into play because you can see exactly which chains your opponents can exploit and make a much more educated decision about where to move and what to draw.

While I’ve never personally attempted the Tortuga version, I’ve read several reviews that say it isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. It takes what should be a fun and simple game that employs just the right amount of strategy, and tries and turn it into something it’s not. In the end, everybody’s turn ends up taking twice as long as they agonize over every single move and every single decision. The game ends up turning into a slow boring march rather than a fun sprint through the tunnel. So I say stick to the basic rules. There is still plenty of strategy involved and it keeps the game fast paced and fun, which, if you’ll remember, was the whole point of this anyway.

VITALS: This is a 2-5 player game which I’ve found can last anywhere from 10-45 minutes depending on how long people agonize over their moves. The age on the box says 8 and up, which seems a pretty good assessment. Perhaps a precocious six-year-old could play it provided an adult helped walk them through their decision making process.

OVERALL FUN FACTOR: Classic and timeless board game fun. Since it’s not based on some trivial novelty, the “novelty” of it never wears off, which means if you like it the first time you, you’ll like it for the rest of your life. 8 out of 10.

BoardGameGeek.com Reviews

I took the girl to the park the other day and while we were there another father showed up with his five-year-old son. The kid was your typically rambunctious boy – loud, excited, lots of energy. He’d brought with him to the park a toy gun. A very realistic looking toy gun. Like the kind that could get you accidentally killed by the police in the wrong situation. I was surprised they made those anymore. Don’t toy guns have to be painted bright green or something now?

I know all about playing guns when you’re a kid. My sister and I used to play a game we called “Spies” which was essentially just hide and seek with guns. And I really hate the way the pansy-girl ex-hippies have tried to ruin good harmless pretend violence. I hate how as soon as a kid uses his finger as a gun and pretends to shoot his friend in school, all of a sudden people freak out, call the principal, put the kid in counseling. I personally think we’re setting ourselves up for more disaster by NOT allowing kids to get out their aggressions in a playful manor.

But when this kid started pointing his play gun at me and the girl and making loud “POW POW” sounds, I’ll admit, something inside me said, “This is wrong.” And it didn’t stop there. The kid started shouting, “Better watch out or I’ll shoot you. Watch out or I’ll kill you.” Mind you, he was laughing the entire time. There was certainly no malicious intent behind his words. He was just playing. And I KNEW he was just playing. I was even playing back at him, pretending to be hit by a bullet when he shot me. But even so, something rubbed me very wrong about this whole situation. Especially when he ran up to other random kids and started shooting THEM.

Why did I feel that way? Have I allowed the wussy patty-cake movement of the 1990’s to infect me? Or was there something truly unique about this particular situation? Perhaps it’s simply a matter of the fact that I didn’t know this kid. He didn’t know me. He didn’t know the girl. He didn’t know any of the kids he was shooting at. I guess when I was a kid I never pretended to shoot anybody a) who I didn’t know and b) who didn’t know for certain that this was a game and they could shoot me back. We never said, “I just killed you,” to random strangers, even as we said it constantly to each other, to our friends and siblings. Maybe that’s the difference.

Man, I HOPE that’s the difference. Otherwise who knows what other core values I may have gradually turned over to the creampuff bourgeois over the last 15 years?