Game: Enchanted Forest

Image

themilkcrate — 2008-08-18T01:55:26+00:00

1994 Box Cover

Image

Carrotteer — 2008-06-22T19:52:27+00:00

Boxback of Dutch edition "Sprookjesland" by Ravensburger

Image

fractaloon — 2008-06-08T12:20:20+00:00

Back of the 1990 box.

Image

fractaloon — 2008-06-06T22:34:55+00:00

Inside the 1990 edition. The box describes the game as 2-6 players but note that there are only 4 pawns included.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

volnon — 2008-06-04T23:54:14+00:00

Thanks Sphere. I will continue looking under 2 trees when possible...

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

Sphere — 2008-06-04T03:15:18+00:00

I'm one of the folks with rules that say each die is a separate move, thus allowing you to look under two trees. My copy was published by Ravensburger and the date on the back page of the rules is 1982.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

volnon — 2008-06-04T02:32:58+00:00

My rules do not say you can only look under one tree per turn. I suggest that it is OK to possibly look under 2 trees if your dice allow it.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

happyjosiah — 2008-03-20T02:38:32+00:00

RPardoe wrote:

And I would disagree, as the rules I have cleary state that one can end at the castle (to guess) after 1 die, or send someone back (hitting them during the move with one die), but don't have such a statment for looking under trees.

The rules clearly state that you treat each die as a seperate roll. It is possible to look under two trees, or send two people back to start, etc. The castle is different though, because when you land there, you stop and guess and either reamain on the key or go back to start. So if you are one space away and roll a 5 and a 1, you could move onto the key, guess, and never use the 5.

Thread: Nasty game played by reasonably mature adults

Randougall — 2007-12-11T15:02:38+00:00

Bringing out Enchanted Forest for a group of 5 reasonably mature adults always brings out the groans. Playing were Chris, Corinne, Paul, Melissa, and myself.

"Oh no, it's that damn memory game again!" or Paul with "I HATE this stupid game"

Yet, I find that we always laugh our butts off playing this game, and if that makes us less than mature, so be it

The game started with a flurry of sending your opponents back to start as everyone made their starting rolls and channeled out of the village's single pathway of death. Looking under trees was forgotten as pawn after pawn was ruthlessly stomped upon and send back to start. (A well known fact in our group is Enchanted Forest could also be named 'Send Melissa back to Start')

Eventually, we learned from our mistakes and started to space ourselves out to 'claim' various parts of the forest, which we guarded ferociously.

Soon enough, players started edging their way towards the castle. "No really, I'm just heading towards those trees that just happen to be on the way to the castle"

Also, another phenomenon experienced by adults playing this game. Basically, CRS syndrome. (Um, if you don't know what CRS is, its can't remember um, squat. Yeah squat, that's the ticket) Groans of "OH no, I've seen too many treasures. I can't remember where the damn boots are..." fill the air.

Finally, Chris was able to get three treasures - I believe two treasures were actually remembered and one was a very lucky guess.

If you have this game gathering dust somewhere in your closet, by all means try it! You'll find yourself laughing and scratching your head in confusion as much as we do.

Thread: Review/Session Report

YancyS — 2007-12-07T07:25:11+00:00

Heads up: My first review for BGG

Why this game is not just for kids.

The scene: Warroad, Minnesota, middle of nowhere, January 2006, 12 inches of snow on the ground and nothing to do but sit around the pot-bellied wood-burning stove, smoking cigarettes, drinking port and whiskey, and tell each other stories. We even wrote an opera.

This was the winter Men's Retreat, myself and four good friends, a sauna, lots of fresh eggs (from the chickens in the yard), tea, real fresh honey (buddy's dad keeps bees) and other good food.

We had a number of games, but Enchanted Forest was pushed and in the end, it was the only board game that we actually played, and it sort of became the thing to do when we had half an hour to kill (which was every half hour for four days straight).

All told, we played probably eight or so sessions of Enchanted Forest over the weekend. It's a memory game where you all play wizards looking for treasure. We made up the story that we were all these irresponsible rich kids. The idle rich of the village. And wizards, of course. One of the pieces (I think it was the pillow) had been chewed on (Hans said it was probably him when he was six) and so we always knew where that one was. And so we role-played the whole thing (we're all avid role-players). "My liege, the magical boots are....here!"

It became more than a game in this situation. The game has fantastic art, a nice presentation, and proves, once and for all, that any game can be fun when you do things right. There we were, five grown men, (I think I was the youngest at 26), playing this kids game, hamming it up and having a great time.

We varied the rules so the game ended when all of the treasures had been located, and then whoever had the most, won (I think the official rules require you to find only three). Usually it was a landslide.

I give this game a 7, but that doesn't capture the joy this game was for us. It's a 7 because we will never be able to capture that weekend again in quite the same way. Buddy's folks probably aren't going to be going out of town any time soon so we can smoke in the house around the stove and play Enchanted Forrest and read comic books and be kids again.

What's important about this game, is that you can actually be that kid that's locked up inside waiting to be let out for a weekend once in a while.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

Beowulf — 2007-12-01T01:31:34+00:00

This is the exact question I had after playing our first game together as a family. I was hoping there would be an "official" answer here.

So far, we have been playing that you can only look under one tree per turn. The game goes pretty quickly as it is, especially when you get a "free look" under any tree upon reaching the key (even if you haven't seen the item on the revealed card yet).

Do the original rules in German offer any additional clarity?

Image

aleo09 — 2007-11-26T19:50:05+00:00

My Future Gamer playing EF

Thread: Re: Good game for kids, especially little girls

aleo09 — 2007-11-21T22:13:58+00:00

Thanks for the suggestions. I think I might try the tree removal next time we play.

Image

Toynan — 2007-11-18T20:13:23+00:00

A tree

Image

Toynan — 2007-11-17T21:58:59+00:00

The French Canadian edition board

Image

Toynan — 2007-11-17T21:58:25+00:00

Inside of the Box

Image

Toynan — 2007-11-17T21:57:50+00:00

French Canadian edition back of the box

Image

Toynan — 2007-11-17T21:57:03+00:00

French Canadian edition

Thread: Re: Different versions

Tinweasel — 2007-09-21T15:55:16+00:00

Yes, does anyone know why they changed that beautiful art in the new edition? Copyright troubles?

Thread: Re: A Dissenter's Review

herman_the_german — 2006-11-22T17:17:32+00:00

One problem with the board is that the different tree locations are not very distinct, thus it is difficult to relate the treasure to the location. In the Wizard Of Oz version this is not so. There is the Witch's Castle, The Poppy Field, The Woodman's House, etc. Thus it is easy to create a mental image relating the location to the tree (a simple mnemonic exercise) and you don't strain your brain so much.

Playing Chicken Cha Cha Cha I find that placing the tiles in a grid helps me remember locations better. If the tiles are placed willy nilly it is almost impossible for me to remember anything, thus the game ceases to be one for me, (maybe I'm just old.)

Back to EF, we have pretty much realized that you need to find most treasures before going to the castle. If you do this you can finish the game pretty quickly. Thus the game is a race to flip the trees over, and we use magic numbers to visit all the trees.
Only at the end (of this) do we go to the castle. Someone might miss one treasure, then a second player will go thru the stack and finish the game.

Thread: Re: Variant to make the game harder

verandi — 2006-11-21T15:32:03+00:00

This was by far my favorite game when I was a kid. In fact, I hold it responsible for getting me into gaming (albeit 10 years later)

Thread: Re: Variant to make the game harder

fimbulvetr — 2006-11-21T15:22:20+00:00

Well, yeah, but the whole pointof a game like this is to lose to the youngsters -- unless you like watching your kids cry as they lose another game to you. Most games are biased towards adults anyways.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

RPardoe — 2006-09-03T00:05:00+00:00

asmiles wrote:
So you can move with die A (looking under a tree or sending another player home) and then move with die B.

And I would disagree, as the rules I have cleary state that one can end at the castle (to guess) after 1 die, or send someone back (hitting them during the move with one die), but don't have such a statment for looking under trees.

I agree with others - would make the game go faster, but think that looking under trees is only done at the end of both parts of the movement.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

davebo — 2006-08-25T00:40:43+00:00

asmiles wrote:
You roll both dice at once, but you treat each individual roll as a seperate turn. So you can move with die A (looking under a tree or sending another player home) and then move with die B. Unless of course, you use your doubles for magic.

Well, that'd certainly make the game go quicker.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

asmiles — 2006-08-24T23:40:17+00:00

You roll both dice at once, but you treat each individual roll as a seperate turn. So you can move with die A (looking under a tree or sending another player home) and then move with die B. Unless of course, you use your doubles for magic.

Thread: Re: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

jstahl — 2006-08-24T23:38:29+00:00

As I have played it, no.
Move your full allowance, changing directions between die values if you wish, and then look under a tree if you are adjacent.

But since this is a great kid-equalizer game, I think that adults should be allowed to look after both die value movement.

Thread: Dice, movement, and looking under trees.

davebo — 2006-08-24T22:51:56+00:00

Say I'm 6 away from one tree, and 9 away from another.

If I role a 6 and a 3, can I move 6, look under that tree, then move 3 more and look under the next tree?

That is, can you look under a tree after only moving one of your die roles?

Thread: Re: A Dissenter's Review

generalpf — 2006-06-14T13:53:12+00:00

Good review, though I dissent (ha!).

I didn't find it difficult at all to land on the key at the castle. Remember you can use each die separately, so if you're within 6 spaces of the key, your chances are actually greater than 1/6 + 1/6 = 1/3 of landing on it, because you can use both dice if necessary. Say you're 3 spaces away from the key. You could roll a 3 and anything else, or a 1 and a 2, or even a 4 and a 1 (move 1 back, 4 forward). It's very rare to see someone try more than two turns in a row to make it onto the key.

As for strategy, there's a fair bit of it. If you see someone peek at a tree one turn and then make a break for the castle, you can be quite sure that was the correct tree. Of course you can bluff. Another strategy is to look at all the trees (or most of them) and then go to the castle since you know where all the symbols are. Then you only incur the trip to the castle once.

As for remember where the symbols are, keep in mind that each tree location has some kind of visual mnemonic near it, so if you can associate the visual on the location with the tree symbol, it will be that much easier.

One nitpick: you mentioned that rolling doubles lets you peek under any tree. It doesn't. It lets you *move* there and peek under it. Quite a big difference.

Anyhow, thanks for the review. Let's agree to disagree.

Thread: Variant to make the game harder

Michel — 2006-03-29T11:12:05+00:00

Whenever Double "1" is rolled, the player is allowed to change the position of two trees of his choice, without looking under the trees.
Increases the chances to win this game for the older players (who usually lose against youngsters).

Thread: A Dissenter's Review

Jatoha — 2005-12-29T02:13:48+00:00

Enchanted Forest: A dissenter’s review

After reading so many positive comments about Enchanted Forest, it seemed to be the perfect game for my family. I’ve had the game for two years now and after playing it more than a dozen times, I just don’t get what people like about it.

This is a game that my kids would frequently request, but I don’t believe that we ever finished one game because we all would get sick of it by the end. The last time we played everyone finally agreed that this game needed to go.

First of all, as is typical of Ravensberger games, Enchanted Forest has a gorgeous presentation. The artwork, the bits, the cards, the dice are all top notch and beautiful to look at—this is the best part of the game.

Game Summary:
The object of the game is to collect three cards from the King’s castle. The deck of cards is placed at the castle with the top card facing up. Players race around the board looking under trees for various treasures. When they find a treasure that matches the top card at the castle, they race to be the first to the castle and identify which tree the treasure is hiding under. If they are correct, then they get that card.

Players roll two dice and count them separately. So, if a two and a four is rolled, a player could move two spaces forward and four backward. If a player rolls a double, then they can change the card at the castle, they can peek under a tree or they can transport themselves to the castle gate. If a player lands on another player, then they send the player back to the start.

Impression: Yuk.

I feel that this game is worse than the ordinary roll and move because of the dreaded memory mechanic. The memory games that I enjoy are ones that play fast and don’t require you to remember things for very long. This game relies so heavily on memory with players having to remember the locations of all the items over a long period of time. Although memory can be the great equalizer when playing games between adults and kids, there isn’t a need for that in this game because there is very little strategy. Your moves are all luck of the dice.

Players have to land on the trees and castle by an exact count, this makes moving very tedious as players count back and forth a bunch of different routes to try to land on a tree. There is quite a bit of downtime between turns as each player counts their spaces.

This game is very slow to get started because so much of the early game is looking under trees and trying to remember where items are before heading to the castle. The worst part is when a player goes back and forth trying to land on the castle space over several turns and another player rolls doubles and changes the card. That causes a lot of frustration and tears (mine). The game can really drag on and on and on because of this rule.

Davebo’s review has a couple of suggestions for addressing some of these issues and I would recommend those suggestions. Still, it wasn’t enough to fix the game for me.

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

Chemik — 2005-12-20T18:08:23+00:00

A rule change I thought would be very beneficial, especially when playing with just 2 people would be that you can get the face up card if either you guess it while in the castle OR if you reach the blue circle with that tree before someone guesses the face up card's location.

Why? Because with 2 people once you get sent back home, the other person can just sit there guessing like crazy until they get kicked out of the castle which can take awhile. But, if the person sent back can get to the circle before the castle sitter guesses it, they at least have a fighting chance.

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

toguopp — 2005-10-26T16:43:11+00:00

I Just wanted to add that Chicken Cha Cha is a memory game that doesn't give me a headache and I find to be a lot of fun. Probably because the memory game part is stripped to its bare essentials. Interesting how design can affect game play even when using a very similar game mechanic.

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

fmoros — 2005-10-26T07:34:45+00:00

With kids (and this is surely a kids games) I had to make some changes in order to make the game little bit faster. I usually played this one with 10 years old kids or younger.

- yes, we remove the tree, when a treasure is found
Most times we play without going back to the castle to reveal the treasure .I know this is a major change from the rules, but with that age is better, and the game is still long enough.
Actually, i can not even think how long would take to play a game, with the proper rules.. i dont think we would ever finish it.

And to finish with,... I have to confess, that some games i have even to turn 2 treasure cards at the begining instead of only one, because the game goes too slow...

these are just ideas, i dont mean the game is better or worst the way i play it. It is just that playing with younger kids, which are the main players of this game, in my case, i had to make those changes.

thanks and happy games not matter what!

fer

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

toguopp — 2005-10-25T13:58:20+00:00

>1. If a treasure is found, remove the tree.

Sounds like a good idea. I always get a headache playing this game. It's initially fun and then wears outs its welcome. Your variant sounds like it would prevent the game from dragging.

Thread: Good game for kids, especially little girls

davebo — 2005-10-25T04:59:30+00:00

Being that I have two older boys (7 & 9), my little girl (6) tends to get the short end of the stick when it comes to game purchases. There are certainly more battling and bloodletting games coming through the door than princesses and ponies.

To remedy this I published a geeklist asking for "girl games". http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist.php3?action=view&listi... I got my second recommendation for Enchanted Forest, the first being when I posted a geeklist requesting "games for the pre-reader". I decided it was time to pick it up.

I have the 1990 Ravensburger version.

Visuals
The bits are quite nice. Wooden dice, and nice, thick card stock on the cards. The movement pieces are also wooden. The trees (which hide the "treasure" in their bases) are well-formed plastic. The board is also well done.

Mechanics
The players move around a board, trying to land on spaces so they can pick up the trees and look at the treasure under them. You must remember where these treasures are. When the top card of the stock shows a treasure that you can locate, you must make your way to the castle and declare where it is. If you're right, you get to keep the card. Three cards = victory. A bad guess just sends you back to the beginning village.
If you role doubles you can:
1. Move to any tree.
2. Move to the bridge to the castle.
3. Shuffle the cards, and place a new card on top.
4. Move.

Movement is a bit unique. The rules state you move the die independantly, so if you role a 6 and a 4, you can move forward 6 and backward 4.

Impressions
The kids really enjoy this game. We'll see if it has legs. My 9-year-old has a better memory than I, so it's that works to level things a bit. It's such a nicely constructed game that it raises its stock.

Suggestions
1. If you can, form teams. An adult with a child makes the game smoother.
2. When a treasure is found, remove the tree from play. One less thing for them to remember.
3. Instead of trying to convey "you can go forward and then backward" with the dice, we tell our children "you can move one die plus the other, or one die minus the other". The end results are the same, but it's simpler, and it also helps them with their math.
4. Teach the children some memory skills. I have the kids come up with a little "story" to help them remember where treasures are ("The gold crown is by the hay, because the hay is gold").

I rated it a 7, because even though it's not my favorite game, if the kids ask to play it I'll usually play it with them. I'll also recommend it from time to time.

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

RPardoe — 2005-10-25T04:53:21+00:00

davebo wrote:
2. Instead of trying to convey that each die can be moved independantly, tell the child they can either move one die plus another, or one die minus another. Same thing, but it's just easier to grasp, and it teaches them a bit of math.

If your movement is in a straight line, yes it is. But if it involves a fork, no it isn't.

Quick example on a roll of 3 and 2. By your method, one moves 1 or 5. However, if I move up a fork and back out again and proceed in my original direction, I could move forward 3:
[c]X-O-O-Z-O-O
|
Y[/c]
by moving from X to Y (3 spaces) and then from Y to Z (2 spaces) for a net movement of 3 spaces forward.

Thread: Re: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

Sphere — 2005-10-25T04:44:48+00:00

I played this quite a bit with my kids when they were young, and it always worked just fine without changing anything.

Thread: Some rules to make it a bit more palatable.

davebo — 2005-10-25T04:20:55+00:00

1. If a treasure is found, remove the tree.
2. Instead of trying to convey that each die can be moved independantly, tell the child they can either move one die plus another, or one die minus another. Same thing, but it's just easier to grasp, and it teaches them a bit of math.
3. If you can, play with teams. One adult with a child. Makes the game run smoother.

Thread: A resounding win

melissa — 2005-06-19T02:52:36+00:00

The only "just for kids" game played on the day was Enchanted Forest, contested between Biggie and V (both 6).

Session report constructed from Biggie's memory of the game

The girls spent a long time moving around the board, checking on the trees, before either of them went to look at the top card.

Biggie rolled a lot of doubles early on but chose to move normally rather than use her magic powers. Later, she rolled double 2s and moved straight to the horseshoe and got the top card.

V missed a few but later got to land on Biggie's pawn near the key, sending her straight back to the village. Surprisingly (it's usually something they enjoy doing to parents), the girls didn't land on each other very often.

The girls decided to take the trees off once they had been guessed, rather than leaving them on the board - this makes the game a little easier, I think.

The winner was Biggie, with 12 of the 13 treasure cards (they decided to play for all rather than for the first 3 only).

Both girls enjoyed the game very much.

Thread: Re:Session Report

waddball — 2005-03-03T15:06:28+00:00

I agree that EF does run a bit too long. However, when contrasted with other dice-based movement systems, I think it's not too bad. At least you have choices, and of course the possibility of rolling doubles. My principal objection to it is the "send them back to the village" mechanism. It's rather nasty for a child's game, and of course adds to the length, as it's almost always the best move to send someone back.

My suggested house rule is to allow the displaced player to go to a tree of their choice. With that, you avoid the nastiness, except when someone's actually on the final space and you must displace them. It also accelerates the game, but doesn't really affect the fundamental flavor.

Thread: Session Report

sbwilson — 2005-03-01T06:18:36+00:00

It has been a LONG time since we last played this. I think it reflects more upon my own feelings for the game than that of my children. Mom, Dad, Mary (7), Isaiah (5), and Rebekah (3) all joined in the tromp through the forest. At first, we tried to play by the regular rules. That seemed to be going fine for everyone except the 3-year old (to be expected).

As things began to drag out (and attention spans growing shorter) because of poor dice rolling, Dad made the command decision to change the rules mid-game. One of the options in the rulebook for younger kids is to not use the cards and just collect trees when you land on them. We still had to land on a tree space by exact roll, but didn't have to worry about the trip to the castle.

The game started to pick up again as everyone crowded around the few remaining trees. Dad got send back to the village several times, to the amusement of all the kids. Even when one of the kids got sent back, they took it in stride and raced back into the fray to try and land on someone else.

It went on longer than either Mom or Dad wanted, but the kids had a lot of fun. This was a good reminder to me about how a good game can be marred (maybe too extreme of a word) by dice-controlled movement. Still, it has lots of atmosphere - and that is always important to me and my kids.

Thread: User Review

steveoliverc — 2004-12-22T03:47:30+00:00

Just received a used copy of Enchanted Forest from an eBay purchase, everything complete and in good shape, so it was time to test it out and see how appropriate it will be for the upcoming after school game club. So this is a review of the game based on playing it with kids who seem to be the intended audience.

THE HEAD’S UP
What a treat! I guess I should have known that an Alex Randolph game was going to be fun (his others include Ricochet Robot and Inkognito), wouldn’t it be nice if more designers took the time to make great kid games. This game plays quick, rewards good memory, has great pieces, and is fun.

THE BITS
Well it’s a Ravensburger game so of course everything is way above average here. The artwork is imaginative, the plastic trees are a treat to look at and pick up, and the cards are exceptionally thick so you know they will withstand a lot of playing (which is good, because this game will be seeing a lot of action).

THE THEME
The king is getting old and will reward the player who explores the enchanted forest and returns to the castle and reveals the locations of three magic treasures. The story is explained in detail in the rule book, and combined with the art on the board and cards, it all comes together in a very apt theme which helps explain the game quickly to the youngsters.

SETUP
From 2 to 6 players, each grabs a token and starts in the village. The board is laid out in a forest, with the castle at the opposite end. 13 trees are scattered about, each with a different treasure hidden under its base. The trees are randomly distributed at the start. The 13 cards go on the castle with the top card face up.

GAMEPLAY
Each play rolls 2 dice. You get to move twice: once for each die. You must move exactly the number on each die, so you might go past a tree etc. until you land on a tree space. If you do so, you get to turn the tree over and look at the treasure underneath it, but not showing the other players. When you think you’ve memorized enough trees, you head for the castle, which you need to land directly on in order to announce which tree you think has the treasure indicated by the top card. If you’re right, you show the other players and place the card in front of you. If you’re wrong, you return your piece to the village without showing the treasure to the other players. Either way, you return the tree to its location on the board. The first player to get 3 cards wins the game.

If you land on another player, you send them back to the village.

If you start your turn at the castle, you can remain there and guess another treasure location.

If you roll doubles, you may take move as usual, or do 1 of 3 magic things: move to the bridge near the castle (or move directly to the castle if you’re already past the bridge), re-shuffle the cards at the castle, or move to any tree space and look under the tree.

STRATEGY
You need to balance memory (which treasure is under which tree) with timing (when should you go to the castle versus stopping the other players from doing so). I tried wandering around the forest and visiting several trees before heading for the castle. The kid went to the castle as soon as she got to a tree with the treasure matching the card (which happened right off the bat, apparently). I managed to land on her piece once, sending her back to the village, but she got back to the castle quick enough and claimed the first card. Then I got two cards in rapid succession, then she got one, and we were tied. We both wandered around some more but I got the last card. So even though we tried out two differently strategies, it was neck and neck the entire game.

AGE RANGE
At first glance, the fairy tale theme makes it seem like it will be just for girls, but the competitive nature of the game makes me think that boys will enjoy this as well. Probably not as good for the 5 year olds as I was hoping, and might need to stick to 8 years old like it says on the box, because of the need to remember where you saw the treasures out in the forest.

PLAY TIME
Took us about fifteen minutes for two players, although it would most likely take longer with 3 or 4 players. Very little down time for the other players as the turns go quickly.

OVERALL
To sum up: A lot of fun, plays in less than half an hour, wonderful art & bits, mostly a memory game for kids 8ish and over, but strategy is rewarded as well. This game is going to work at the game club!

Thread: Reifferent versions

fmoros — 2003-09-24T09:19:36+00:00

Dingus (#19704),
do you have a pict of that version??

ferdie

Thread: Different versions

Dingus — 2003-09-22T13:17:59+00:00

I kept reading how beautiful the components are and wondering why my game isn't - - then I realized I have the newer version. The art is different and the treasures are, too.

Thread: User Review

FuzzyLogic — 2003-05-27T14:12:11+00:00

I would like to add a few points about Enchanted Forest, especially reagarding play with children. John Athan's review does a wonderful job of iterating the mechanics of the game; I won't repeat them here.

I have played this game about a dozen times with my 5 year old daughter. The game serves well as a "step beyond Candyland" for those kids (and parents) that are tired of decisionless roll-the-dice-and-move games. There are two primary sources of decision making in the game. the first revolves around the dice rolls. Although two dice are rolled, the are counted separately, thus a 3 and a 5 is just that, not 8. This introduces a bit of strategic maneuvering to get your pawn where you want it to go (i.e. using the above roll to go forwards 5 spaces then backwards 3 with a net move of 2). It took my daughter a few tries to get the hang of this, and she still needs a bit of reminding. The other decision making involves how to maneuver you pawn around the board in order to visit as many trees as possible, and when to make a run for the castle.

The core of the game is memory, and if your child can handle concentration, the child can handle this.

The fairy-tale theme is a hit with my little girl. You are looking for such things as Cinderella's glass slipper, a hat from one of the Seven Dwarfs, etc. There are a few items I haven't heardof before, which I gather are from tales more popular in Europe than the US (the Star Talers, anyone?). I'm not sure how boys would like it, and I suppose it would depend on the boy.

In summary, if your child has enough memory to play Concentration, and is ready to make some decisions regarding movement, Enchanted Forest is a winner. My daughter is asking for it to be played - a lot. Now where the heck did I see that glass slipper....

Thread: User Review

Hellburner — 2003-05-19T18:47:11+00:00

Enchanted forest is a fairytale game. The theme is all fairytales, while the mechanism is heavily memory oriented. This factor may put off many players. It will help your enjoyment if you can recognise the stories represented!

The Components:

The board is sturdy and depicts a village at one end, and a fairytale castle at the other. In between these are a number of curved, dotted paths. Next to the dotted paths at roughly even intervals are spaces for trees. The trees are made of conical green plastic to resemble pine trees. Under the base of each is a symbol to represent a particular fairytale.

For each tree there is a card. These are very thick card, most sturdy looking. On one side is the symbol connecting the card to the tree and a graphical representation of a fairytale. Most of these symbols are well chosen, though the belt looks very like a wristwatch... The cards are shuffled and are placed face down at the Castle, the top card is turned face up.

(It can be fun going through the cards and trying to mentally tick off all the legends, the art work is nice to look at in any event!)

Each player posesses a single wooden man (each coloured strongly to differentiate them) to move about the board (starting at the village). The pieces are hereafter called Meeples for my own convenience.

The Gameplay:

Each player rolls two dice to move. Each die may be used independantly to move the Meeple (similar to backgammon). Should this manouvering bring the Meeple to land next to a tree the owning player may pick up the tree, look at the picture and place it down again. Players may only look at a tree they are currently next to (going back just to check your memory when your Meeple is elsewhere is strictly cheating).

When a player knows where the face up legend shown at the castle is (under which tree), they move their Meeple to the castle. If they get onto the exact castle space they may announce that they know where it is. The player then may check the tree they think it is. If they are correct they show the other player(s) and take the card. On their next turn they may try again with the next face up card. If they are incorrect they replace the tree, look ashamed and put their Meeple back in the village.

The winner of the game is the one with the legends at the end. The game suggests a limit, but I usually play through the pack (there aren't that many of them).

Rules:

Landing on another player banishes them back to the start. Rolling a double entitles you to teleport to any tree you wish, or to beyond the river surrounding the castle if you are in the forest, or to the castle if you are beyond the river. You may instead change the castle face up card.

Strategy:

Having a good memory will always help, but apart from that, in my opinion checking all the trees either below or above the main village-castle path and then running to the castle is the way to victory. Once at the castle the order in which the legends turn up is random, but the odds are good enough to guess on the unknown trees.

Game plusses:

The artwork and components are excellent quality, the satisfaction from successfully remembering tree locations can be a buzz, as can deliberatly sending other players back to the start again and again. Having to land exactly on the castle space leads to players bouncing around while watching everyone else converge on them, which is exciting.

Game Minuses:

Let us be frank. This is at heart a memory game. Some people like them, others will loathe them. The rest of the game is a bit of simple dice rolling. As such it may be a little intimidating. Apart from this, the first person to go to the castle, if they are fortunate with the card order can rattle off a victory 1,2,3 before anyone else has so much as a look in.

My own opinion:

This game sat around our house for years after I first played it. My initial playing put me off it in a big way, due to the memory aspect. More recently I have played it again, and got more satisfaction. It seems to get easier to remember with practise (so I guess the game is doing my brain some mild good). I wouldn't play it often, but I like it enough to still haul it out now and then.

Thread: Session Report

sbwilson — 2003-01-24T04:57:53+00:00

For our final game, we pulled out Enchanted Forest. We usually play this as a normal memory type so everyone can play, but Dad wanted to do something to make it more interesting (at least for the adults). Mom hit upon the idea of using one die to move and anytime you *passed over* a tree space you could look under that tree or trees. It seemed like it'd be worth a try and it worked out pretty well. We still used the house rule that if you found a match to the top card you didn't have to make it to the castle to claim it - just take the card and turn over the next one.

Mary (4) enjoyed this much better than trying to roll an exact number to land on a tree space and was able to take an early lead in finding matches. Isaiah (2) also liked rolling the dice and moving his piece around the trees - although he wanted to look under trees whether he passed over a space or not . Mom latched onto a clever ploy by hovering around a few trees in the corner and waiting for the cards to come up while the rest of us ran all over the board looking for the hidden treasures. In the end, Mom prevailed, but just barely.

Mom - 4
Mary - 3
Isaiah - 3
Dad - 3

Thread: Session Report

sbwilson — 2003-01-13T20:53:52+00:00

Next on the list was a VERY quick game of Enchanted Forest. We modify the game rules so that our two-year old can play with us. While Mary (4) is able to understand the concept of “roll the dice and move,” she quickly gets frustrated when she doesn’t roll a number that allows her to land on a tree space – not that I blame her. So we essentially turn the game into a more traditional memory game. We turn up a card and then take turns looking under the trees until someone finds a match. Okay, it defeats the whole purpose of the game, but the kids like the little trees and the pictures on the cards.

Mary – 4
Mom – 4
Dad – 3
Isaiah – 2

Thread: General Comment

BoardGameGeek — 2002-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

This isn't a game I'd seek out to play, but if you want a game that you can play with your kids where they have a chance of winning, and where it ISN'T just a luckfest, you could do a lot worse.

Thread: Session Report

BoardGameGeek — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

February 6, 2001 Played a quick game of this tonight with Jeanette and Sam. Seems like I remember it being a little more fun. I had a solid grasp of 7 trees in my memory, but couldn't get the right rolls to either move the card off the top of the pile to possibly get a card up that I knew, to knock either of my kids back to start to slow them down, or to do much of anything. Plus when I finally got onto the key space I blew my guess and ended up back at the start. And can somebody please tell me why you should just sit on the key space turn after turn and not be forced to move in between guesses? This has always bothered me about the game. You should at least have to move off the space, or roll doubles, or something. Maybe I just don't care for memory games. And the rolls went against me too. Oh well. Final score: Sam=8?, Jeanette=5?, Dad=1. Rating: Judging by the kids' reaction they love it. I am not that thrilled with it any more. My rating is dropping, now it's 5, take it or leave it.