1. Bob Schaffer for Team Bloodshot GC Summit January 28, 2012 of 21

2. Participating Cities: Albuquerque, Austin, Bay Area, Boston, Chicago, Davis, DC, LA, New York, Portland, San Diego, Seattle, South Bend and St. Louis!!!

3.  Rose Hulman/Harvey Mudd: 2 cities (S)  BANG 25: 2 cities (R, 1 st )  DASH 2 - Bay Area Coordinator: 10 cities (S)  DASH 3 – National Coordinator: 12 cities (S)  WHO: 2 cities (R, 2 nd )  DASH 4 – National Coordinator: 14 cities (S) of 21

4.  Bay Area Team  Schedule  Before and After the Seattle Run  Big Picture Decisions  Feedback  Tools  Recast Pros/Cons  Budget  Summary of 21

5.  Core Group: Team Bloodshot  5 Blood & Bones members, 1 Longshot  Responsible for big picture/organization  Major support from: Burninators  Provided puzzle fixes and reconstruction effort  Supported playtest and recast  Additional final weekend support from others of 21

6.  Played in Seattle WHO in June  Fairly minimal effort started in July  Ramped up by September  Big push in October  Event was Nov. 4-6 of 21

7.  Applications  Seattle made their selections first  BA applications shared after Seattle decisions  Trusted Seattle GC with pre-game logistics  Chose date blind  After game, Seattle relinquished all decisions  Staying blind until after first-run  Maximal enjoyment  No Advantage of 21

8.  Extending application deadline  Attempt to expand… added two teams  Collected info from Seattle  Clue materials, documents, etc. (Puzzle Bible!)  Budget  Recommended changes  Made big picture decisions of 21

9.  Stay true to original game  When possible, avoid major changes Participants would get the same experience Gives original GC more visibility /  Drives major decisions  Removes some flexibility  Could have been a lot more work  Avoid re-shooting videos  Less work on our part  Tribute original actors/GC of 21

10.  Read comments on Facebook  Used our own experiences  Seattle GC recommended fixes  Surveyed original participants  Things they liked  Things they didn’t like  Importance of story, hotel stay  Bugs  Scoring of 21

11.  More transparency  Scoring  Purpose of Friday night events  Not scored  Collaboration recommended  Reduced bottlenecking Good for the participants  Straining on GC (especially the actors)  Puzzles  Some re-ordering  Bug fixes/eliminated red herrings  Considered other changes of 21

12.  Internet Troll puzzle… AKA KANYE! of 21

13.  Google Docs for all local shared documents  Puzzle Bible  Used Seattle’s as a resource  Wrote our own as well  Google Latitude aided with day-of tracking of 21

17.  Puzzle writing & storyline… all done!  Neil Patrick Harris already filmed!  First game: A giant playtest  Each puzzle playtested by 20 teams!  Few modifications necessary  Changes made with full support of Seattle GC  Be nice* to original GC and they just may travel to your location to help**! of 21 * Seem incompetent enough? ** watch the chaos!

18.  Less creativity involved  Focus is on logistics  Wheel may get reinvented  Support from original GC minimized this for us  Locations driven by puzzles and not vice-versa  Seattle thought up some puzzles based on locations  We had to make locations fit the scheme  Breeders Cup  Daylight Savings Time of 21

19.  Distribution seems less for clues than for a first-run  Staff: Seattle flights  Location: Friday/Pier  Prep: Hotel of 21

20.  Very pleasant experience!  With right support, recast can be pain-free  Telling that at the end – both sides thought the other side had done more work for the recast than had actually been done  Rewarding to share Seattle’s game w/Bay Area of 21