I go to the beginning of Maigret

 It had been a couple months since I had read one of Georges Simenon's Maigret books so I decided it was time to go back to them. More than that, I decided I should read the first one. The copy I read was called Pietr the Latvian but it has also been published as The Strange Case of Peter the Lett and Maigret and the Enigmatic Lett, and each one was by a different translator. 

I think, when it comes to serial characters (characters who are the protagonists of several individual stories, as opposed to one distinct story. Superman compared to Frodo Baggins, for example (yes, I’m stealing the term from Robin Laws) ), I don't think it's necessary or even wise to start with the first work. Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe mysteries are a series I routinely go back to but I don't know if I had started with Fer De Lance if it would have sold me on the books.

Pietr the Latvian isn't as extreme a case but I am glad that I started with one of the later books, Maigret’s Dead Man. At that point, Simenon had clearly gotten a very defined idea of who Jules Maigret was and how he operated. To be sure, Maigret is still very realized in Petr the Latvian. This isn't an case of you can see the seeds of the character to come. It's the sapling of the character to come.

I did have much more of a sense of Maigret's physical presence in this first book, as opposed to his emotional, intellectual presence. In the later books, I was never struck by the fact that Maigret is big slab of a human being while this first outing never lets me forget that. I have read some folks compare Maigret to Hercule Poirot, which I think is a stretch, but it's an even farther stretch at their starts. 

That being said, many of the elements that got me hooked on Maigret are already in place. The descriptions of places and people are very grounded and realistic. More than that, there is a strong psychological element to both the book and Maigret's methods. While Maigret is willing to use footprints and cigarette ashes to figure things out, he is much more about getting into the head of a suspect right out of the gate.

Pietr the Latvian has more of a noir vibe that the other two Maigret books that I have read. Maigret gets shot around the middle of the book and just powers through that in order to continue the investigation for crying out loud. That feels more like something Raymond Chandler or Dashiell Hammett would write. (I'd have to go back and look but I'm sure Hammett's Continental Op has done that more than once) To be fair, the book was written when both those guys were active. 

And the title character who is also the central antagonist is more of a larger-than-life bad guy compared to my previous reads. Not a super villain (and, yes, there’s a big twist to his nature) but not a realistically grounded character.

To be fair, Simenon wrote seventy-five books in the series, along with over a dozen short stories. I have read far too small a sampling to speak authoritatively about what Maigret and his stories are really like. However, despite what I think is some early installment weirdness, Pietr the Latvian just wants me to keep on reading.

I dunk on Rolling Slimes

 I have made it a habit to learn at least one Roll and Write every month. So I try and keep a few quick and dirty R&Ws on deck for the months where it’s tough to find gaming time. And sometimes, that’s how you find a diamond in the rough. And sometimes you don’t.

Rolling Slimes is not one of the diamonds.

It’s yet another game where you roll shapes and draw them in the grid. And It’s a formula that can lead to some really fun games.

If you have at least two players, the active player rolls three dice. The highest one gets pulled (if it’s a tie, you just pull one of them) The active player chooses one of the remaining dice and everyone else uses the other. If you’re playing solitaire or with a huge group, you roll two dice and take the lower one.

You are drawing shapes that are the same number of squares as the die number. You have to follow Tetris rules, no floating shapes. However, as long as it’s the right number of squares in a legal spot, you have flexibility in making the shape.

So, here’s the clever bit. At the start of the game, you can only place shapes of the three squares. Fours and fives and sixes are treated as ones. But when you get two three-shapes next to each other, you draw a four shape and fours are unlocked. And you unlock fives and sixes the same way. 

You win by unlocking and placing a seven shape.

I am amused at how Rolling Slimes reminds me of the video game Suika Game, although the best part of that is the physics engine and Rolling Slimes doesn’t have that lol

Okay. I think the problem with Rolling Slimes is a very simple. In order to get a seven shape, you have to roll double sixes (or triple sixes in a multi-player game for a non-active player to win). More than that, it has to be in endgame. Boxcars at the start of the game are worthless. 

And not only does it take a long shot to achieve the winning conditions, you don’t have a way to mitigate the odds. The die rolls are the die rolls.

While you could measure Beat-Your-Own-Score by the efficiency of how you fill the grid, that isn’t inspiring when you have actual winning conditions. And in a multi-player game, I want to win, not just lose as bad.

Now, there are a bunch of expansion modules. However, most of them actually make the game more difficult to win. The Wizard’s Apprentice is the only one that gives players a boost and I’m not sure I enjoyed the base game enough to try it.

I can’t be too hard on a free download but I didn’t enjoy Rolling Slimes.

Weeds is kind of, sort of good

 Weeds by TravelSoft (as opposed to other games named Weed or Weeds) is a (currently) free PnP Solitaire Tile-Laying game.

The game consists of twenty-seven cards. Eighteen of them are weed cards, which show a two-by-three grid of six weeds, ranging in size from one to three. The other nine cards are weed killers, which just show a spray bottle. The weeds are color-coded but the fact that they are clearly numbered and slightly size-differenced makes the game gray-scale friendly. In fact, I am colorblind enough that printing the cards in color wouldn't have helped me. 

The idea behind the game is that you are trying cover up all the weeds. Draw a card, place a card on your tableau. Cards can overlap (or else there wouldn't be a game) but weeds can only cover weeds of the same size. After you place all the cards, you take the weed killer cards and try to cover up all the weeds or at least as many as you can. That's the basic idea of the game. There are a couple other elements that I'll get to.

Okay, Weeds is pretty clearly a simplified version of Orchard: The Nine Card Solitaire Game. For me, Orchard was a game changer, completely changing my thoughts on how small a tile laying game could be. More than that, Orchard and its sequels, Grove and Forage, are truly solid games. One of the big questions that Weeds has to ask is "Is there a reason why I would play this over Orchard or Grove or Forage?" It also reminds me of a game from a Nine-Card Design Contest, Condense the Code, which also focused on laying cards to take up the smallest area possible.

First of all, I am just going to say that Weeds is not as good as the Orchard family. I do like it more than Condense the Code, whose noteworthy element was legacy play that felt very gimmicky. However, Weeds does bring one thing to the table that I think adds value: variations.

The base game has you use all eighteen weed cards and only six of the weed killer cards. However, the rules include variants for using fewer weed cards (and even identifies the two hardest-to-cover cards) and tweaking the number of weed killer cards, up to the complete nine. Shuffling all twenty-seven cards together and play the weed killer cards as they come out. And encouragement to make up your own variations.

I will also note that Weeds doesn't actually have a formal losing condition. Obviously, if you cover all the weeds, you win. However, there isn't a scale for officially judging how badly you've done. However, with the different variants requiring their own scale, I guess I can forgive that absence.

Weeds has one major issue, which I’ve already gone over. There are better alternatives to it. I've already mentioned the Orchard family, which share a core mechanic but add resource management (you only have so many dice for scoring), scoring, goals and ways to nudge the placement rules. Even if I am looking for a quick tile-laying game where I don't have to worry about dice and tokens, I would reach for Ukiyo or Confusing Lands or part of the Sprawlopolis family first.

With that said, Weeds should still get some play. There are too many times when I am too brain foggy to really do an Orchard or Spawlopolis game justice but I could still handle Weeds. The fact that you can easily shrink the game just makes that use even easier.

Weeds isn't a bad game. I don't mind having it around. However, there's a bunch of games I recommend before it.

https://travelsoft.ca/weeds.php

PnP Arcade - newsletter edition

 I have already written about the tragic ending of PnP Arcade as a digital shop. The closing of its doors was a sad moment for the PnP hobby. For someone like me, who was a customer, it was quite the handy resource. However, it was an even bigger blow for PnP game designers. It was a place where they had a chance to get noticed in the vast and seemingly endless and definitely uncaring sea of the internet.

However, the dream of PnP Arcade isn't completely gone. It lives on as a weekly newsletter Substack, which has forced me to learn of the existence of Substack. Which has been a whole adventure in and of itself lol

This isn't the first PnP newsletter. For a while, there was a blog called Print and Play Games News on BGG that I actively followed. That was one handy resource but it was also a colossal amount of work to produce. I can scarcely blame its creator for hanging up their hat in 2020. Nothing lasts forever and there's no denying that it takes a lot of work to keep a PnP resource going.

The PnP Arcade newsletter comes out every Friday. There are articles about the PnP world, links to new products and crowdfunded games that are either PnP or have PnP options, and links to active creators. Plenty of links to itch io, which I am convinced to the Etsy of game developers. 

And, no, it's not the same. A one-stop shopping space with a vast and varied catalog was a powerful resource. A newsletter is not going to offer as much.

However, as I said before, it is obvious that PnP Arcade was a labor of love and required a lot of labor. I also doubt it made much money (please prove me wrong) Having it for as long as we did was great. And a weekly newsletter is still a good thing and heaps better than nothing.

I'll be reading the PnP Arcade Newsletter on a regular basis and I hope it keeps on going for years to come.

Spoiler: I think This is How We Lose the Time War is a masterpiece

 I don't know if This is How We Lose the Time War is my favorite book that I read in 2025 but it may be the best written one. And I did enjoy reading it a lot.

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

This is How We Lost the Time War is about how two agents on the opposite sides of a great time war fall in love. One friend of mine described it as Spy Versus Spy as a love story. Which isn't entirely wrong but doesn't come close to doing the book justice.

So many elements of the book are so well done. The actual scope of the time war is an incredible work of world building. There are layers upon layers of details and the authors do an amazing job of showing, not telling. We aren't lectured on how the world works but shown how Red and Blue interact with their world. And what is left unsaid helps make us suspend our disbelief, the details we don't need to be told.

The actual plot is dynamic and engaging. I've spent most of my life watching Doctor Who so I wasn't particularly surprised by any plot choices. However, I can appreciate how well they were done.

And the character development is the glue that holds everything together. Over the course of the story, Red and Blue change and their relationship changes as well. We get to know who they are and understand them, which is impressive all by itself since the book goes into serious transhuman territory. Truth to tell, we can question if they count as human at all. However, the book makes us invested in them.

Both Red and Blue, the protagonists who fall in love, are identified as female. Since they change shape through out the book, down to the genetic level, I wasn't sure if they had a meaningful gender identity. However, we the readers do so I decided that it did have meaning.

The format of the book is also fascinating. Most of the chapters, which go back and forth between Blue and Red's viewpoints, are divided between the active characters up to some high concept time shenanigans and a letter from the other. (The physical nature of each letter gets increasingly bizarre) This gives us multiple layers to understand both characters.

This is How We Lose the Time War is a short work, which made it easy to fit into a busy schedule. However, I was rewarded by finding out that it is brilliant. 

The Farmer and the Deal: an In Hand game you already own

 The Farmer and the Deal is a mostly In Hand game that uses a regular deck of cards. The theme of the game is that you are renting a field from a farmer and you need to make enough money to cover the rent and try to make a profit too.

If you’ve played Palm Island (and if you’re interested in In Hand games, it’s a safe bet that you have), The Farmer and the Deal is pretty easy to pick up. In fact, the rules have you hold the deck sideways but I quickly just started holding it Palm Island style and found that a lot easier to manage.

What The Farmer and the Deal does is effectively combine the storage action and the upgrade action of Palm Island. When you turn a card sideways to become a field, that card (or that spot in the deck) is also what gets upgraded.   

However, you have to go in specific suit order. You have to start with spades, turning up the soil. Spades have to upgraded to clubs, planting seeds. Hearts are cultivating seeds. And you end on diamond, selling the crop. Those are removed from the deck for scoring, which is where’s the game isn’t quite In Hand.

Upgrading cards doesn’t just involve suits. The card has to either be equal or less than the card it’s upgrading. Your value in diamonds is your score so you are going for high numbers.

You go through the deck twice, using the jokers to keep track. And you have to have a heart field that you cycle through to turn into mulch. (Ending the game with no mulch is an automatic loss) You also have to get at least twenty points in diamonds or automatically lose.

What I haven’t figured out about the game is how much work really determines whether or not you’re going to win. I need more plays, but I have a feeling that, as you learn to grok the game, you figure out how to balance the risks and you learn how to make good decisions. The fact that you do get to go through the deck twice helps with that.

In Hand games aren’t a huge niche and Palm Island was a major milestone. I have played a lot of post Palm Island games. The Farmer and the Deal definitely shows the influence of Palm Island but does some interesting things with it. Effectively upgrading a space in the deck, rather than actual cards, leads to a different dynamic.

And I also think that it’s a pretty good game.

Sadly, one of its strongest selling points is also one of its weaknesses. Using a regular deck of cards makes it very accessible and just adds to my never-ending argument that one deck of cards is the biggest game library you will ever find. 

However, I also know that I am more engaged when I have themed cards. The Shooting Party, which is a weaker game than the Farmer and the Deal, got more play when I made a themed deck for myself. I know there’s part of me that wants to think that chrome doesn’t matter but it does make a difference. A themed deck for the Farmer and the Deal would make me play it more. But the core mechanics are solid.

The Farmer and the Deal is already in your game library. It’s worth checking out.

Dice Spray doesn’t do anything special but it does it well

 I originally came across Dice Spray as part of the 12th Roll and Write Design Contest in 2022. Since then, it’s gotten its own BGG entry and some revised rules so I figure it’s okay to write about it as its own thing.

Dice Spray is a Roll and Write where you’re filling in a six-by-six grid. In multiplayer, you roll dice equal to the number of players plus one. Draft die and everyone shares the last die. In solitaire or a whole bunch of people, two dice get rolled. 

You pick one die to be the column or row. The other die will be the shape, which is the pip formation. So a four is four squares in the sale of a square and a five is five squares in the shape of an X.

You can get three rerolls but each one costs you a point. All six pips are scattered on the spaces (there are six different patterned boards and blank ones to make your own) and they have to be covered by that number’s shape. The revised rules include expansion where players get special powers.

Ten turns. Each filled square is a point. Most points wins.

Dice Spray has seen some regular play from me since 2022 and it’s really for one reason. I keep a 4.7x7.3 clipboard around so I can play Roll and Writes on the couch, using a dice roller on the phone. Each individual Dice Spray sheet is small enough to easily fit enough on that. So it’s quick and convenient to play solitaire that way.

Because, really, Dice Spray is an incredibly generic Roll and Writes. Filling in a grid with shapes. I honestly wonder if I’ve seen over a hundred of them at this point. Having restricted spaces is the only interesting element of Dice Spray. And I think that some of the other games that live on that clipboard are meaningfully better (Criss Cross, 13 Sheep or Palatial)

With that said, between the random special powers of the expansion and the dice drafting, I suspect Dice Spray is better as a multiplayer game. 

Honestly, two of Dice Spray’s strongest selling points is that the PDFs are free to download and easy to make. The PnP Outlaw from 2014 is another example of those virtues that I have referenced in the past. And I think that Dice Spray is the better game.

On the one hand, Dice Spray does absolutely nothing special or new. On the other hand, it is intuitive and balanced. If the mission statement was a simple game that anyone can play, it does just that. 

It’s a good option for the budget gamer.