Welcome to Picking at Nits, a series of reviews where I get upset and nitpick tiny details of otherwise perfectly playable games. Today's game: The Quest Kids!
TL;DR A lot of the problems I have with this game is with its production and graphic design. It's actually a great game for kids, minus competitve scoring.
On a crusade of playing games that my son's too young for, I've decided to jump into The Quest Kids with Tobias! He's 4 now and starting to read simple words, so with a low-text and high iconography saturation, The Quest Kids looked like an easy enough jump, considering we've done tough ones like Dragomino and Pokémon TCG for a while now.
I think The Quest Kids is a great entry point for dungeon-crawling board games. 2024 is a little late into the game, but I've seen the accolades and awards this game had on bgg and absolutely couldn't wait to get it! I even saw that it had a GIANT version which we could play physically. Ooh baby, exciting!
The Pros
So, just a rough overview of some mechanics I think Tobias learns with this genre that is not present in the other board games we're currently playing.
Avatar Embodiment. Games like Outfoxed or Numberblocks Race to Pattern Palace! are similar in that you are a token and have a physical place on the board, but nothing as concrete as this, having a miniature physically representing you outside your body.
Exploration and Discovery. Most kid games I've played with Tobias up to this point has been very structured. Tangible, observable elements on the board that children can choose from. Rightly so. Here, each tile has different elements under them. There's a sense of player agency and discovery when we choose something hidden without first knowing what is there.
Risk vs Reward: With the different colored dungeon tiles offering varying rewards (green - always a reward, red - monster or high reward), there's a choice to try for a more dangerous tile with a higher chance of rewards. For something so simple, the mileage it gets where I see Tobias struggle to choose risk is huge. At this age, I think learning how to parse feelings like this in a safe environment is such a boon.
Kind Kids Mechanic: This rule really appealed to me. It actively promotes and rewards being nice to other players. Every card I give allows me to reap a reward from the Kind Kids deck. However, let's leave how externalizing kindness erodes intrinsic satisfaction and motivation to simply be kind as its own merit as a separate conversation.
The Cons
And I really would've liked it to end there. However, there are just some things I couldn't overlook. Here are the nits.
Inconsistent Iconography
Let's take a look at the cards and try to figure out what's happening here.
Overall, looking good. Ability cards of distinct colors and symbols (could be simpler). Round treasure tokens, cool. And Dungeon Tiles with numbered with...
... wait. EXCUSE ME?
Dungeon and Monster tile iconography does not match the shape of their physical counterparts. Abilities are on rectangle cards with shield emblems but are shown as circles on the tiles. Round treasure tokens are shown as icons only. Why?
But the inconsistency doesn't end there! Exhibit number B.
Just look at it properly for a second.
Left Card: + [numeral] [text] [icon] [icon]
Right Card: + [numeral] [icon]
Also Right Card: + [icon] [icon]
What is happening? Why are there THREE different formats here? This is insane when I first looked at it. I barely got over the fact that ability cards are represented in round icons and round treasure tokens are represented as unbordered icons before this came along. Are we ACTIVELY trying to confuse the children who are playing the game?
Information density and Readability
Ability cards are the largest components but hold 1 piece of information, while the smallest components, the treasure tokens, hold at least 3 pieces of information. Look at this.
This treasure token grants you 2 stars at the end of the game. And, if you are that tiny, completely impossible-to-see character shown in the portrait, you gain those extra stars, instead.
Also, why instead? Why not + [star] [star], or +2 [star]? Serves the same purpose, is consistent with your tiles using the + symbol, and saves space to boot!
Also, their fronts and backs need to be more differentiated. My son kept asking what the reward was while looking confusedly at the token backs.
The tiles, text color, and icons don't work well together. The purple icons, as well as black text with black background disappear on Monster cards.
You would think contrast would help, but I would say otherwise. I dare you to tell me that this card doesn't actually read "TOLK. GEM OF NEED."
Sidebar: NEED should be separated from the stars earned. Truly, what is happening here...
Color Choices
I don't quite know about anyone else, but I think the colors can be chosen better. Red is a more aggressive color that should have been Power (axe). Magic (wisp) as yellow is okay but could be blue, as most mana/magic stats and potions are all colored as such. Mind as purple or yellow could work, either way.
But most importantly, why not primary colors? We need visual clarity and contrast here.
I actually really dislike these cards. Icon choice is to be desired, and if you remove everything but the center icon to make a token, they serve the same purpose. It's quite wasted for a deck of 60 cards, which I haven't found to run out yet. Did they consider component count?
Board Clarity
Doors on the map don't serve a real purpose and could've been left blank. Look at this section of the map. What looks like a traversable space?
The visual language of the map, along with the terrain, leads me (and maybe only me) to think that I can move past the gate into the plains beyond. But no, that's a hard wall and you're supposed to go to the right.
What is a wall needs to be clearer. Obviously it doesn't matter in a kid's game, and they should play however they want to play. Actually, scrapping doors altogether would be a great idea. But maybe it's used in an expansion...?
Also, when setting up, looking at this, how did you think I set up my tiles for my first game?
I placed the tiles exactly as per the setup diagram!
I had leftover tiles and was severely confused. Looking back at the rulebook, I saw the extra tiles on the left and thought, guess that's correct! I was so wrong. I looked it up and you're supposed to use ALL the tiles, covering the whole board. Well, that makes more sense.
Things like innate design can be incorporated into the map. The rooms that need red can be marked red, and the rest can be a different color. Things like Cave Entrance can be on the board. Rooms 1 through 7 were used as terms here and never seen again. Are the rooms important? Who knows. Are they marked? Guess not.
So, beyond the fact that each square is about 1cm larger than the tiles themselves (good for clumsy hands), some of the other board slots were questionable.
Quest cards are given out at the start of the game and the deck remains untouched for the whole game.
Health is removed for every un-scared-away monster. The deck remains untouched.
Kind Kids deck is so far away from everything else. Why is this? Logo space?
The ability cards just take up a lot of unnecessary room for what they are. If they were mini cards or tokens, more space could be saved.
Lastly, my 4-year-old likes to take things by himself. He couldn't reach the ability cards and kept knocking into everything else. A big board doesn't help this. Conversely, everything is big, but the treasure tokens were really small! Why?
Dashboard
So, for a moment, I thought the dashboard was doing that Japanese packaging food law thing... but I was wrong. The treasure token is way oversized on the dashboard.
In hindsight, that SHOULD have been the size of the token.
With the slots for items (which should be commended), the majority of components should be placed faceup, which added to my son's confusion when matching the component to the board space.
Also, the ability cards are placed OUTSIDE the dashboard. They are the most used thing in the game and deserve slots! And with the large character portrait, couldn't we add the characters' starting card? It doesn't change from game to game.
Sidebar: For all those who didn't know, Japanese food packaging law dictates a certain degree of difference between the packaging and the actual food itself. Size is particularly important. I think this law is great and should be a mandatory thing.
Vac Tray
And then packing. Card slots are not deep enough, and all the cards slide around.
Pretty sure there's space for it.
Thumb slots don't go all the way down, so there are always leftover cards in each slot when pulling them out.
Also, the token bag doesn't fit in the remaining hole, but doesn't quite fit anywhere else. I could lay it flat, but then I'd have to take all the tokens out. Not a fun experience.
LET THE CHILDREN COUNT
So here's probably my first rule gripe. Splendor ends at 18 points. Dragomino, also designed for 5+, ends with UNDER 10 points. Coffee Rush ends with under 7 points, in most games.
I started to count to my end of game points, reached 35... and gave up.
My son WANTS to count. He can count singular cards up to 80, but give him a card with 5 stars, and add tiles with weird symbols, then tokens with varying points, all it does is make him confused.
What is the point of making it so high? Halve or even quart the points. Children will have more fun. Sure, keep the coloring sheet. Remove the scoring bit from it.
Needlessly Competitive
And I think the biggest thing I disliked was what the counting represented. The Quest Kids promised to be a cooperative game about helping your friends explore a dungeon, sharing abilities, and helping each other scare away monsters. Friendship and aiding each other are interweaved into the theme and core mechanics of the Kind Kids deck.
But in the end, COUNT YOUR POINTS. LOOK! I'VE BEAT YOU!
Don't... don't make this competitive. Most games on the market already are. This genre is FOR cooperative play. Keep it that way. Making it competitive even actively disincentivizes kids from being Kind Kids. It's a total thematic disconnect.
Closing Thoughts
At the end of the day, I think this game is a good game. It is simple, fun, and teaches good sharing behavior. It is no doubt plagued with problems that I clearly see, but my child doesn't seem to mind, or at least is not aware of them.
When considering if I should keep this game, I compare it with his current favorite, Dragomino. It's smaller, faster setup, shorter game time, and dragon-themed.
And while this offers fun new things to explore, the lack of polish is a definite cut for me. However, I'll only ever get rid of it if my son no longer asks for it. His word goes.
Comments