Search
Paul O'Grady's Country Life
Book
Paul O'Grady's Country Life for the first time lifts the lid on the home life of one of Britain's...
biography comedy
Gray's Anatomy: Selected Writings
Book
From the author of Straw Dogs, John Gray's Gray's Anatomy is a pugnacious and brilliantly readable...
My Virtual Pet Shop - Pet Store, Vet & Salon Game
Games and Entertainment
App
Welcome to your new Pet Shop! Build your own pet store and take care of cute animals as clients...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Com-Pet-Ability in Tabletop Games
Apr 14, 2020
I have two dogs: a Yorkshire Terrier and a Powderpuff Chinese Crested. I love them dearly, but I just cannot see myself having any more 4-legged mammal pets. We promised our son a pet fish when we move (or a whole aquarium community if my wife will allow), but other than that, we will NOT be adding more pets to our household. So when I heard about a game that requires you to collect cards so that you have five pets to take home I immediate gave the deer-in-headlights look. No, I would not have a pet deer.
ComPetAbility is a card game with two play modes: a mode for players aged 7+ and one for younger gamers. We will be taking a look at the game for older gamers. In this game mode a player is attempting to amass five pets that will be accepting of each other and not cause heck in your house.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of the game for the purposes of this review. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and deal five to each player. Put the rest of the cards in the middle of the table as a draw pile, flip one over for the “shed” pile. You are now setup and ready to go!
The goal of the game is to begin a turn with five compatible pets (com-pet-able). This is achieved by having five cards whose three icons are satisfied with each other. For instance, turtles are compatible with every other type of animal, so the three icons on turtle cards are all green – compatible with all dogs, cats, and birds. Some dogs are compatible with other dogs but not cats, and some cats are compatible with other cats or kittens but not birds.
So on a turn, a player will choose a card to draw from either the draw pile or the shed pile to add to their hand. A turn ends when that player sheds (discards) a card to the shed pile. Turns continue in this fashion until a player begins their turn with five compatible animals. Players will then add up the points in their hands (the numbers in the upper right corner of the cards) of compatible animals. The player that ended the game with a completed set of five animal pets will score a bonus 10 points to add to their total. Whomever scores the highest is the winner of ComPetAbility!
Components. This is a stack of cards in a tin can. Yep, a tin can with a plastic lid. It’s very novel and lovely, but heck for someone who cares about how the games look and fit on their shelves. The game cards are good quality, which is handy because the game mode aimed at smaller children have them handling the cards a lot too so they have to be able to withstand that abuse. The art is cute, and the layout is easy to understand – even for young ones. No issues with the components from us (aside from the can not being a box, wink wink).
So here’s the thing with this one. We liked it. It is a great idea and is executed well. I don’t think I will pull this one out with adult gamers anymore though. The children’s mode of this game is what I hold dear, as my three-year-old LOVES it and “wins” every time. I have just played this one too many times where a player can be dealt either a winning hand or four of the five cards right away. I’m no designer, so I don’t know how to mitigate that besides chalking it up to “luck of the draw.” But that’s a negative for me, and perhaps I shouldn’t let it detract from an otherwise enjoyable game, but it’s what comes to mind every time I see on the shelf as a possibility for Game Night. However, if you like the theme, the style, and ease of play between two different modes then check it out. It can be used as a light filler, a gateway game, or children’s game. So for the pure flexibility of this one, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a canned (hehe) 13 / 18. The turtles are really cute, but the hybrid animals are kinda weird-lookin’.
ComPetAbility is a card game with two play modes: a mode for players aged 7+ and one for younger gamers. We will be taking a look at the game for older gamers. In this game mode a player is attempting to amass five pets that will be accepting of each other and not cause heck in your house.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of the game for the purposes of this review. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rule book, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy from the publisher directly or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, shuffle the large deck of cards and deal five to each player. Put the rest of the cards in the middle of the table as a draw pile, flip one over for the “shed” pile. You are now setup and ready to go!
The goal of the game is to begin a turn with five compatible pets (com-pet-able). This is achieved by having five cards whose three icons are satisfied with each other. For instance, turtles are compatible with every other type of animal, so the three icons on turtle cards are all green – compatible with all dogs, cats, and birds. Some dogs are compatible with other dogs but not cats, and some cats are compatible with other cats or kittens but not birds.
So on a turn, a player will choose a card to draw from either the draw pile or the shed pile to add to their hand. A turn ends when that player sheds (discards) a card to the shed pile. Turns continue in this fashion until a player begins their turn with five compatible animals. Players will then add up the points in their hands (the numbers in the upper right corner of the cards) of compatible animals. The player that ended the game with a completed set of five animal pets will score a bonus 10 points to add to their total. Whomever scores the highest is the winner of ComPetAbility!
Components. This is a stack of cards in a tin can. Yep, a tin can with a plastic lid. It’s very novel and lovely, but heck for someone who cares about how the games look and fit on their shelves. The game cards are good quality, which is handy because the game mode aimed at smaller children have them handling the cards a lot too so they have to be able to withstand that abuse. The art is cute, and the layout is easy to understand – even for young ones. No issues with the components from us (aside from the can not being a box, wink wink).
So here’s the thing with this one. We liked it. It is a great idea and is executed well. I don’t think I will pull this one out with adult gamers anymore though. The children’s mode of this game is what I hold dear, as my three-year-old LOVES it and “wins” every time. I have just played this one too many times where a player can be dealt either a winning hand or four of the five cards right away. I’m no designer, so I don’t know how to mitigate that besides chalking it up to “luck of the draw.” But that’s a negative for me, and perhaps I shouldn’t let it detract from an otherwise enjoyable game, but it’s what comes to mind every time I see on the shelf as a possibility for Game Night. However, if you like the theme, the style, and ease of play between two different modes then check it out. It can be used as a light filler, a gateway game, or children’s game. So for the pure flexibility of this one, Purple Phoenix Games gives it a canned (hehe) 13 / 18. The turtles are really cute, but the hybrid animals are kinda weird-lookin’.
Complete Outdoors Encyclopedia: Camping, Fishing, Hunting, Boating, Wilderness Survival, First Aid
Book
This latest (fifth) edition of the award-winning Complete Outdoors Encyclopedia will once again...
Poetry is Useless
Book
In Poetry is Useless, Anders Nilsen redefines the sketchbook format, intermingling elegant, densely...
Guinea Pig
Book
Guinea pigs are a popular pet, 'cute but dim' friends for those looking for an alternative to dogs...
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2072 KP) rated Doggone Deadly in Books
Nov 20, 2021
Doggone Fun
Kari Stuart has taken a booth at a regional dog show to promote her newly renovated pet rescue shelter. Her best friend, Suz Holden is grooming dogs for the event and helping to run it. The first night, Kari is helping Suz make sure everything is shut down when they find the dead body of a local dog breeder. The murder weapon appears to be a pair of Suz’s distinctive grooming scissors, so she leaps to the top of the suspect list. Naturally, Kari adds playing detective to her weekend plans. Can she figure out what is going on?
I enjoyed the first book in this series, and I’m thrilled to say that the second is just as much fun. The set up before Kari and Suz find the body is good, and things only pick up from there. The background of the rules around dog shows is presented in an entertaining way, so it never feels like a data dump. It’s wonderful to see the returning characters again, and the suspects are just as strong. Plus, there’s plenty of cuteness from the four-legged animals. You are in for a treat when you pick up this book.
I enjoyed the first book in this series, and I’m thrilled to say that the second is just as much fun. The set up before Kari and Suz find the body is good, and things only pick up from there. The background of the rules around dog shows is presented in an entertaining way, so it never feels like a data dump. It’s wonderful to see the returning characters again, and the suspects are just as strong. Plus, there’s plenty of cuteness from the four-legged animals. You are in for a treat when you pick up this book.
*** I received a free advance copy of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review ***
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Queens Corgi (2019) in Movies
Jul 13, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Queens Corgi is an animated children's movie about Rex, the Queen's favourite who, after a disastrous visit from Donald Trump, is tricked into leaving the palace and winds up in the dog pound. This is a common formula in children’s movies both animated and live action and I'm sure most of us can guess what happens next, Rex tries to get back home and, on the way makes some friends and falls in love. So when my daughter wanted to see it I though I'd be in for a funny, possibly sad film. God I was wrong. There is so much wrong with this film and it all seems to go wrong from the scene where Donald Trump visits the Queen and I really wish I could say my problems were politically motivated but unfortunately the film was just that bad.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.