[CharlesW]

> …I could see the fun and value in an immutable and distributed record of a board game.

Blockchains are mutation-resistant, but not immutable. For example, here's the cost of performing one-hour "51% attack" on various PoW-based blockchains: https://www.crypto51.app/

Because of the relatively small audience that would dedicate their computers to running this vendor's blockchain 24/7, the cost of brute-force attacking this game's blockchain would likely be much lower than any of those. That assumes the software running on each node was unhackable, which would potentially make it much easier to alter or destroy.

> Cheating would be very hard…

At best, a distributed solution doesn't make cheating more difficult. Depending on how it's implemented, a distributed solution can make cheating and other abuse much easier (the idea of community managers banning bad actors isn't a thing, etc.).