I got Maharaja and St. Petersburg yesterday.

As anybody who’s followed Spielfrieks recently can tell, Maharaja rules have caused lots of discussion (Goa has been another hot topic, but since I don’t care about it, I just skip those). It’s a pity if a good game has bad rules. I’ve only leafed through the rules myself, I haven’t even tried to learn them so it’s hard to say.

It’s often hard to say who’s right: designer or publisher. Designer has designed the game, sure, but publisher might have made some changes to the design. I think I’ll consider publisher’s rules official, but I will pay notice to designer’s comments if necessary. Like in this case: when Wolfgang Kramer says something (in this case splitting actions) is very important to the game, I believe it really is. Well, I’ll just have to see how Maharaja works out. Oh, and doesn’t the box have the most useless tray ever? I wonder what game it is designed for…

St. Petersburg, in the other hand, is pleasantly simple game. Goa comes up again: I didn’t like the complexity of Goa. St. Petersburg looks like a very simple game that still offers agonizing decisions. I also like the theme, which is refreshingly different. It also has a Finnish dimension to it, because St. Petersburg (or Leningrad) has always been very important city for Finland, it’s so close to us. I’ll hopefully get to try the game this weekend. After reading the rules, I’m very excited and eager to try the game.