Game Review: Solomon’s Stones

By Greg Schloesser
August 13, 2008

Publisher: Solbenk
Designer: Paul Edels
Players: 2
Playing Time: 10 minutes

I recently receive two abstract strategy games designed by Paul Edels and published by Solbenk. I thoroughly enjoyed Saikoro, finding it intriguing as a nice tactical maneuver game. Sadly, I cannot give the same praise to his other design, Solomon’s Stones, which I find to be very basic and simply not much fun to play.

The game is played on a plastic board whereupon 28 hematite gemstones are placed into an isosceles triangular grid. Players will alternate removing stones – singly and in groups – attempting to force the opponent into removing the final stone.

It warrants mentioning that the components are very nice. The stones are actual hematite, and the board is constructed of sturdy plastic that has a depression wherein the stones are placed as they are removed from the board. Solomon’s Stones is a quality production that is, sadly, not matched by the game play.

Each turn, a player may remove one or more stones from the grid. If he opts to remove more than one stone, he must remove them from one row or column. These stones do not need to be adjacent, so players do have numerous options. Play continues until one player is forced to remove the final stone, giving victory to his opponent.

That’s all for the rules. The game is exceedingly simple to teach and learn, and can be played in five-to-ten minutes. The game is one of tactics and not long-term strategies, especially in the early stages of the game. As more and more stones are removed, players can begin attempting more maneuvers to trap their opponent and limit his options. Usually, the winner will become clear when several stones still remain on the board.

Perhaps Solomon’s Stones has deeper strategies, but if so, they are eluding me. What’s more, if they are present, I don’t have a desire to find them as I find the game dull and unexciting. Little, if any, tension is generated during play, and there isn’t much of a sense of accomplishment when victory is achieved.  The game works, but it simply isn’t exciting or terribly strategic in nature. When measured against other two-player abstracts, there are far better games to choose.

Comments: