inconsequential ruminations

We finally got to play Taj Mahal yesterday. We played with four players and it went down fairly well. I was expecting the Second Coming, so I am not surprised that I was a little disappointed.

Bruno Faidutti wrote this about it in his review of Ivanhoe:

When my gaming group tries Taj Mahal, one of the big monster board games by Reiner Knizia, we were unanimous in finding it really bad. An artificial and badly pasted theme, a scoring system so convoluted that it became absolutely obscure and uncontrollable, and, above all, an overlong, tedious and repetitive gameplay.

It was basically this paragraph that made me hesitant to try it. Now I have, I think it’s overly harsh. The theme is artificial, but this didn’t bother me as the components are quality. I agree that the scoring system is convoluted, but that’s the whole point. You have to master it to win. I cannot think of an example of a big game like this where the scoring system is so intertwined with the play. Despite that, I agree that it is a bit slow and tame. This is not as good as Knizia’s masterpieces, but it’s still pretty reasonable – 7/10. Bruno prefers Ivanhoe, a much more dramatic, exciting game, and so do I.