<h2>Welcome to your friendly local board games club</h2>We meet at Ousebank House in Newport Pagnell - see <a href="/find-us" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">directions here</a>. We meet every Thursday night at 6:30pm and once a month on Saturdays from 9am.<ul><li>We advise you <a href="/#" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">pre-register</a> on this website and <a href="/games" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">book into a table</a> to play a game.</li><li>Aim to meet at 6:30. If you are going to be late, please let your table know.</li><li>The attendance fee is £2.50 (£3 non-members) for evening sessions, and £5 for whole-day Saturdays. This can be done via contactless payment.</li><li>The next Saturday games day will always be listed on <a href="/games" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Looking to play</a>. For future games day dates, and other club events, see <a href="/calendar" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Calendar</a>.</li></ul>New visitors are most welcome –&nbsp;read <a href="/about" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">about the club.</a> If you wish to arrange your first visit with us please either email npbgclub@gmail.com or contact us on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NPBGClub" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">facebook.</a> Once you are all setup on the site,&nbsp;<a href="/say-hello" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">say hello</a>&nbsp;if you want to introduce yourself.<h3>How to use the site</h3>You will need to sign up in order to interact with the site. This is very simple: just press the Sign Up button at the top-right, provide your email address, and click the link on the email confirmation. You can then join games or suggest new games on the <a href="/games" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Looking to play</a> tab. Once you are known to us, we will mark you as a "trusted" user: then you will also be able to post comments.If anything is unclear, please check out our <a href="/faq" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">FAQs and Troubleshooting</a> page, where we will provide answers on any difficulties you report on using the site.<h3>Players Paradice nights</h3>Following the opening of the <a href="https://www.wargamesworkshop.co.uk/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Players Paradice</a> games shop/cafe on St. John Street, the club are also trying out Tuesday nights there. The fee is the usual £2.50 - the club block-books tables based on how many are attending, so if you are planning to attend, please join the Tuesday game on <a href="/games" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Looking to play</a>. Players Paradice closes at 10pm (whereas Ousebank House remains open till 11pm), so the Tuesday sessions tend to feature lighter, shorter games.<h3>Note on booking tables</h3>The club normally has access to the downstairs front bar (2-3 tables), the upstairs main room (max 4 tables), and the upstairs side room (1-2 tables). We use the club's tables, which are stored in the upstairs main room.There are 4 "standard" size tables (6' x 3') and 4 "large" tables (6' x 4'), along with the fixed table in the front bar. Apart from the fixed table (table 1), these are all stored in the upstairs main room. In general, we advise games using the large tables to play in that room, as the smaller ones are easier to move.The "book a table" dropdown list allows you to specify your table type and the corresponding preferred room. You can use a large table downstairs if you are prepared to carry it - just put a note on your booking to say so. There is no lift, so please make every effort to accommodate those who can only play downstairs.

Home

The AireCon West people had carelessly planned their big day to clash with our schedule, so we were thinner on the ground than usual at the NPBGC Saturday games day. There were just four games on the board. The <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/237179/weather-machine" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Weather Machine</a> group had chosen the increasingly-popular side room for their game, which left just 3 others set up in the main upstairs room. This configuration turned out to be unexpectedly important for what transpired later.As it turned out, I actually got to play two of the four posted games. Though, for a few minutes early in the morning, it looked as though I might not play any of them. For reasons of illness and miscommunication, I was the only one who'd turned up for <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a>, and I didn't have the game. The other 3 games were all fully booked, but Marton and his group took pity on me and opened up a fifth space on their game <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a>. They had initially restricted themselves to 4 players, because they hadn't played the game and thought it might go on too long with 5; but, despite a leisurely breakfast and rules run-through, and some additional downtime introduced later on for reasons I'll come onto, we were finished by 5pm.<a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a> is an <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/421/1830-railways-and-robber-barons" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">1830</a>-type <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/19/series-18xx" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">18xx</a> game (but set, as you may have guessed, on the Moon in the future). So for the first few hours of the day, I settled happily into stock trading and running moon trains. "Happily" insofar as I ever feel that in the early part of <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/421/1830-railways-and-robber-barons" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">1830</a> games, which for me tend to start with a sense of pessimism and persecution. It was all going fine until the first stock round, when I was undercut by Pedro and out-marketed by Dave-A, so my company didn't float. I finally got going in the second round, and then they both blocked my route. I guess I was probably causing them problems in return, but it's easier to spot the ones where I'm the victim.Or at least, so it seemed at the time. Dave kept telling me he was trying to help me, and as it eventually transpired he probably did, though I can't believe anyone realised that at the time. I've played a few <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/19/series-18xx" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">18xx</a> games now, and as far as I can see I've never come lower than 2nd in any of them, but it still feels more like luck than judgement. For now, come 1pm with the game maybe 40% of the way through, I was grumbling away quietly in my corner. Possibly the board game gods were telling me I should have gone to Telford.But then things took a turn for the better, as in walked Mario with <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a>, all ready to get started. Apparently some nominal rival Saturday games day, somewhere else, starts at 1pm and he'd got the wrong timetable. And just about that time, my <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a> line finally broke through Dave's various obstructions and started looking very competitive. How the board game gods mock us! I'd signed up for <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a>, and that was always the game I'd wanted to play, and I couldn't subject Mario to the fate that I'd avoided earlier. But after my initial couple of hours of sulking, I was suddenly really looking forward to the next phase of <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a>. What to do?This time, it was Ed who stepped in to save the day, with a distinctly Ed-esque brainwave: why don't I play both at the same time? And moreover, with his game of <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/391137/galactic-cruise" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Galactic Cruise</a> still going, he would join <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a> simultaneously as well. As I mentioned earlier, it was lucky that the <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/237179/weather-machine" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Weather Machine</a> group had taken the side room: the other 3 games now ran with players shared across them.So for the next 4 hours, I played two games simultaneously. Not something I'd done before, and not for everyone (though for Ed it was perhaps a step down from his usual 3 or 4); but I did rather enjoy it. We all knew the rules for <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a> so rattled through it quite quickly. I think <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/391137/galactic-cruise" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Galactic Cruise</a> finished a lot earlier in the afternoon, but my two games both finished together at 5pm. I don't think I created too much downtime when both my turns coincided, but I guess other players will correct me if I'm wrong on that. For me, of course, there was very little downtime.I won't say much about <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/324090/scarface-1920" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Scarface</a>, as I did a write-up on that <a href="/posts/fri-jun-27-2025-26th-june-2025-scarface-bloody-business" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">previously</a>. I wanted to try the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_O%27Banion" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">notorious flower-arranger Dion O'Banion</a> this time, also because having previously played as Arnold Rothstein I'd felt like Arnold was overly powerful, and wanted to see what I could make of one of the less-obviously-good bosses. And I didn't manage to do nearly as well with the flowers as Ed managed with Arnold. But then that was Ed, so who knows? Maybe we can play again sometime with Ed doing the flowers and me as Arnold to do a proper analysis.A bit more on <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a> now: I ended up winning the game somehow. I think I must have missed some significant developments while playing the other game, and initially it seemed completely implausible that I could have won. But on reflection it begins to make sense. So read on for the lowdown on what's important about <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a>. What follows is just <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/19/series-18xx" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">18xx</a> stuff, so if you're not one of the <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/19/series-18xx" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">18xx</a> tribe, best stop here...In <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/308305/21moon" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">21Moon</a>, you don't entirely choose when your company pays a dividend. Each company has 2 fixed "bases", and each of its trains is assigned to one or other of the bases, which it has to run through. One of the bases is the central spaceport, and the other is that company's (other) base location somewhere else on the map. Income from trains assigned to the spaceport is paid as dividends, while income from trains assigned to the remote base is paid into the company treasury. If you have only one train that touches both bases, you can choose like normal whether you're paying dividends or not; but if you have multiple trains, you can split them and so only pay a partial dividend. The share price still drops if you pay no dividend, but it goes up based on how big your dividend is vs your share price.I started the "Co-op" company (nothing co-operative here, but it'll be obvious which one I mean when you see the logos). It had the farthest remote base from the central spaceport. This, combined with the aforementioned machinations of Dave and Pedro, meant that for a significant early part of the game, I was forced to run two separate trains, because my two bases were not connected anyway, and they were far too far apart for the low-value trains to reach between them. So while the others were building nice long lines out of the spaceport and getting big(ish) dividends, I was gradually inching my two separate lines towards each other, and the remote base line was generating more revenue, pouring it into the company coffers.Like most of the <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/19/series-18xx" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">18xx</a> games, there comes a point when the low-value trains rust and you need to get a modern, high-value train to replace them. Unlike most of the other players, my company had comfortably enough money to get one of those at the right time. And critically, I had just about managed to join my bases up at that time. So, before everyone else, I had one long-range train whose income I could direct to dividends or treasury as I pleased. But unlike everyone else, my company still had money in its treasury, so mine started paying out big dividends before the rest.So far, I think the best tip for the game I can see is "get the Co-op company". But that in itself wasn't enough to win me the game. That's where the "help" that David and Pedro, knowingly or otherwise, had given me came in. Having been repeatedly blocked out of towns between my two bases, I ended up with a long line across the map with very few stops on it, except for the two mineral sites near my remote base, which were the reason that I went for that company in the first place: the two highest-value minerals were both randomly seeded next to my company's base. Moreover, Dave and Pedro had blocked me out so effectively that it was very hard for any other company to reach those minerals.So I never needed a "diesel" or whatever it was called in this version: I was able to get by with a permanent 6-train until the end, and still make a lot of money. And so my company was able to buy its train upgrade without needing further investment, and get all the big-value earnings.Was that luck or judgement? At best, a bit of both. But I guess the tips for next time are: far-away remote bases are good; long lines without stations are good (there are specific bonuses for reaching from one side of the map to the other); the high-value minerals are good; and try and get those things while maintaining a pretence of victimisation, so that no-one else will try and get them, or buy your shares. And perhaps also play another game on the side - it worked for me (and it worked for Ed as well, of course).

4th Oct 2025 Games Day - Scarface and 21Moon

This is Robin’s latest offering, and, at the risk of offering up a massive ‘spoiler’, it’s excellent. Interestingly, we elected to play the hard core version, which Robin had yet to test ‘in anger’. The idea is that up to 6 players (and there were 6 of us), are owners of a Show Boat that plies its trade along the Mississippi during a 36 week period (Spring through Summer and then Autumn), first travelling downstream, and then filling in the gaps at the cities back upstream. The movement mechanic, affected by the monthly weather changes, worked really well, though coming upstream made the additional movement cards even more valuable. Overall winner determined by the most money. With only 4 actions available, a player’s turn was pretty ‘snappy’, so even at 6 players there was very little downtime. Despite an untested ‘hard core’ playthrough, Robin made virtually no notes on how things could be improved, which is testament to the clean and simple ruleset. One particularly mechanic of note, is the determination of turn order. All I will say is that it can change mid round, and has a juicy ‘take that’ element. It’s fairly brutal, but thematically valid. We all loved it. There may well be a need to change the way some of the scoring of the packet delivery cards works, as clearly they are flawed because I won! Having said that, with experienced players, there might be more attention paid to what other players are doing, and take moves to counter it. Definitely worth playing again to see. Overall, it is excellent, and a lot better than many other games that seem to get a lot of attention in the market. “Bring on the Dancing Girls”, I say!

Show Boat- a player's review

New invention is best thing since sliced bread, says inventor...I won't bore you with too much of that, but it went pretty well for a first-time playtest: good flow, low downtime, high player interaction, (mostly) well balanced, ran to my estimated playing time of 30min per player to the minute. That's what I think, anyway. For a true read on whether <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/452011/show-boat" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Show Boat</a> is any good, you'll have to ask one of the 5 brave/reckless souls who signed up to playtest it with me.Maybe not so reckless as all that, though, given the various good playesting experiences that we've had at the club. I know not everyone is a fan of playtesting per se, but we've seen some genuinely good games on our tables under the Play Test banner recently. I didn't manage to try Kristian's game, but I would totally recommend John N's <a href="/posts/sat-mar-29-2025-27th-mar-2025-space-traders" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Space Traders</a>, and of course there's the celebrated <a href="/posts/mon-may-22-2023-barton-in-bloom-review" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Barton In Bloom</a> from Dan B which I think we all enjoyed. The only one that didn't go so well was <a href="/posts/sun-may-28-2023-playtesting-steam-legacy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">my last offering</a>. Lessons have been learned!This was the first time I'd actually played <a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/452011/show-boat" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Show Boat</a> with other players. I had done a fair few simulated playthroughs with a computer mock-up, playing against myself, so it should have been somewhat balanced already. But then almost as an afterthought I had added a "hardcore" variant with auctions, which I hadn't even simulated. I had planned to playtest the base variant but predictably, knowing our members, I was informed that we would be doing the hardcore one instead. So it really was fresh off the drawing board.Even so, the only balancing issue that we noticed was quite niche, relating to one specific card, and it didn't have any impact on the general arc of the game. And I came away with lots of good suggestions from most of the others about how to sort it. Paul, meanwhile, who won the game with possibly just a little bit of help from the balancing issue, seemed to think the balance was fine. I will tweak it for next time, but I think if we'd fixed that issue Paul would probably have won the game anyway.So hopefully we're straight into that latter stage of playtesting with this game, of ironing out the subtle imbalances that you have to play it a few times to detect. And be warned: I'll be taking every opportunity to bring it back, until people stop signing up - or tell me less subtly to stop. Unlike my previous efforts, maybe this one has a future.For those who were playtesting, I'll just add a bit more here that won't make much sense to anyone else. I think Richard's idea about tweaking the value of the Packet cards depending on the player count is something I should do at some point - there's a couple of cards that clearly pay better with higher player counts at the moment. And David, I really like your idea about the blind bidding; I'll definitely try that one at some point. But the game played well enough that I don't want to make a bigger change than I need to for the moment, and Tim's suggestion of just capping the payouts is the light touch option.But I had another idea that might be even lighter touch: when the new auction cards are revealed, simply discarding the "+0" ones so that only the remaining ones can be bid on. Paul do you remember how many +0s you picked up? I'm guessing it was about 5, at $3 a piece, which would have brought you down to a less embarrassing winning margin. As I said, if the game was properly balanced you should still have won it, just not by as much. So I think I'll try that for next time, and only tweak the payouts if it doesn't work.If you have any more suggestions, please let me know. I'd also be interested to hear where you'd all place the game on BGG's complexity rating.I'm away for the next two weeks, but I'll list it again in October. Huge thanks to all who took part in the playtesting: it was really helpful - and I really enjoyed it!

Robin...I've posted my own review, and I'll msg you separately with a thought on the tweak that fixes the imbalance 

Welcome to your friendly local board games club

How to use the site

Players Paradice nights

Note on booking tables

4th Oct 2025 Games Day - Scarface and 21Moon

Show Boat- a player's review

11th Sept 2025 - Show Boat