Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
32 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Splendor» Forums » General

Subject: Splendor vs. Jaipur rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Asa Swain
United States
Queens
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I want to buy a game for a friend who is looking for games to play with his fiancee. I've heard great things about Jaipur, and am glad to see it's back in stock. But Splendor is getting a lot of good press, and so I'm curious about the comparison between the two games. I appreciate how Jaipur is cheaper and has a smaller box. But Splendor seems to have more complicated gameplay and of course supports more players. But if you were just choosing a game for 2 players based on the gameplay, which would you buy?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek Thompson
United States
Marion
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quartex wrote:
I want to buy a game for a friend who is looking for games to play with his fiancee. I've heard great things about Jaipur, and am glad to see it's back in stock. But Splendor is getting a lot of good press, and so I'm curious about the comparison between the two games. I appreciate how Jaipur is cheaper and has a smaller box. But Splendor seems to have more complicated gameplay and of course supports more players. But if you were just choosing a game for 2 players based on the gameplay, which would you buy?


Both are great games, but I'd say Splendor, even if Splendor was just a 2p game.

They don't quite feel the same. Jaipur is a game of timing things just right to benefit you and not benefit your opponent. Splendor is a race to the finish, although Jaipur has some tense race-like moments. Splendor feels like an engine-builder like Dominion.

Splendor's tokens are seriously awesome. Jaipur's are nice but Splendor's are like, crack. Yes, it really does make a difference.

The reason I say Splendor is for the simple reason that the rules are cleaner. It's LESS complicated to play. Splendor has very easy to remember "small" rules - no more than 10 gems, can only take 2 gems of one color if the stack is full (that's how to remember it in a 2p game), and you can only snag one Noble at once (rarely, if ever, comes up anyways). And if you take more than 10 gems, you just discard down to 10 at end of turn, so it's not like "oh crap, I ruined the game" if you have 11+ for a moment.

Jaipur's small rules are pretty annoying. There's the maximum hand size, which is part of what makes the game work, but the more annoying and easy-to-forget one is that an exchange must include at least two cards. There's also the rule that you must sell 2+ if you sell silver/gold/diamonds. Have definitely had turns where the other player was frustrated by all the limiting of options simply because of these extra rules you have to remember.

Scoring is also kind of a crapshoot in Jaipur and some rounds (you play 2 out of 3) can end up being 70-50 or something like that. Splendor's a clear-cut race to a simple 15 points, which both makes scoring easy and increases the tension in the game in a good way.

But the main reason is that the "small rules" in Splendor (exceptions) don't get in the way nearly as much.
13 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've only played Jaipur once, but for 2 players I'd prefer it to Splendor. The rules are cleaner and it just seems better constructed.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Huzonfirst
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Best hobby, with the best people in the world. Gaming is the best!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I much prefer Jaipur and feel it's probably the better game for couples. It's got a nice light feel, but there's still plenty of tough decisions to make. It also may be harder to find in the future, while Splendor, the newer and SdJ nominated game, will probably still be readily available for a while.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mc Jarvis
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
I speak to improve upon the cacophony.
badge
This heart is meant to convince you that I feel.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I love splendor, but Jaipur is the one to buy if you are only playing with 2 players. Part of the reason I like Splendor so much is it lets me play a game like Jaipur with 3-4 players.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henrik Forsberg
Sweden
Borlänge
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What Derek said, plus in Splendor you can try to aim for certain nobles, in Jaipur you mostly just have to hope you get luckier than your opponent.

I'm getting rid of Jaipur, it won't get played any more.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek Thompson
United States
Marion
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorry but those who say the rules to Jaipur are cleaner are crazy. Splendor has one of the best rulebooks ever. I could completely understand the game before it was even in front of me.

Edit: and both rulebooks are online, so you can see for yourself
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not saying the rule book is cleaner. I'm saying the rules are cleaner. I.e., not considering how they are explained, the rules for Jaipur fit together logically better, at least for me.

For example, in Splendor you can take 1 chip each in 3 colors (but not a wild) or 2 chips of the same color, but if you take 2 of the same color, you must leave at least 2 of that color in the pile. It's not a problem, but it's slightly inelegant.

The 10-chip limit in Splendor and the 7-card limit in Jaipur seem similar to me, so neither game gets an edge there.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Hughey
United States
Indianapolis
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I prefer Jaipur to Splendor for a couple reasons.

Jaipur has three rounds so if you get some bad draws it is mitigated by the fact that it is a best of 3 format.

Splendor is more mathy, and I feel the pace is boring at the start whereas Jaipur is tense throughout.

Jaipur is cheaper and smaller and scratches a similar "trade in for points" itch.

Splendor doesn't have a hidden Panda ^__^

10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kathy Sheets
United States
Stuart
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We have both. Jaipur for 3 years with 17 plays and Splendor for nearly 3 months with 86. Almost all plays of Splendor have been 2p. Probably less than 5 have been with more.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Garnica
United States
West Covina
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mamadallama wrote:
We have both. Jaipur for 3 years with 17 plays and Splendor for nearly 3 months with 86. Almost all plays of Splendor have been 2p. Probably less than 5 have been with more.


"Nail in the coffin", right there. Goodbye Jaipur, hello Splendor.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek Thompson
United States
Marion
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
pacman88k wrote:
Mamadallama wrote:
We have both. Jaipur for 3 years with 17 plays and Splendor for nearly 3 months with 86. Almost all plays of Splendor have been 2p. Probably less than 5 have been with more.


"Nail in the coffin", right there. Goodbye Jaipur, hello Splendor.


+1
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek Thompson
United States
Marion
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eric Brosius wrote:
I'm not saying the rule book is cleaner. I'm saying the rules are cleaner. I.e., not considering how they are explained, the rules for Jaipur fit together logically better, at least for me.

For example, in Splendor you can take 1 chip each in 3 colors (but not a wild) or 2 chips of the same color, but if you take 2 of the same color, you must leave at least 2 of that color in the pile. It's not a problem, but it's slightly inelegant.

The 10-chip limit in Splendor and the 7-card limit in Jaipur seem similar to me, so neither game gets an edge there.


I still disagree. As far as the limits, they aren't the same. In Splendor, you can still take gems and just discard down to 10 end of turn. In Jaipur, you CAN'T have more than 7 cards EVER, so if you do, you screwed the game up. It's a much more restrictive rule that blocks you from doing something you might want to do.

The 2 chips thing is inelegant, but less so than "must sell 2+ silver/gold/diamonds" AND "must have 2+ cards in exchange" AND "can exchange camels but can't take camels in an exchange"


Edit: Let me reiterate that I do really like Jaipur and play it on yucata often. Someone mentioned the hidden scores and liking that - that's definitely a difference that might appeal to some over Splendor's non-hidden VPs, for example. And Jaipur isn't necessarily a difficult game by any means.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Asa Swain
United States
Queens
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I can see that Jaipur has it's fans, and it's a neat little game with lovely bits (I like the artwork in Jaipur more - who can resist camels and pandas), but it seems to be that after a while it loses it's luster. I read on the Jaipur forums about people losing interest after 15-20 games (and I am the first to admit that this is a common problem with fillers that are played too often). Clearly both are lightweight trading games, but it seems like Splendor, while maybe having simpler mechanics, has more potential for long term enjoyment.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kathy Sheets
United States
Stuart
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, I truly hope you like it. There are quite a few people who do not see its charms. Crossing my fingers that you're not one of them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kay Lee
United States
Ellicott City
MD
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I couldn't help but draw comparisons after playing splendor for the first time today. I have played both and they are both different but equally great games. I love how splendor. Can play up to 4 players. It should definitely have won the spiel de jahres!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David B
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
quartex wrote:
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I can see that Jaipur has it's fans, and it's a neat little game with lovely bits (I like the artwork in Jaipur more - who can resist camels and pandas), but it seems to be that after a while it loses it's luster. I read on the Jaipur forums about people losing interest after 15-20 games (and I am the first to admit that this is a common problem with fillers that are played too often). Clearly both are lightweight trading games, but it seems like Splendor, while maybe having simpler mechanics, has more potential for long term enjoyment.



Jaipur is a good game, but I am with most here in that I feel Splendor is better with more replay value. Jaipur is basically Rummy with a little more chrome. Splendor is an engine building game. I guess I just played too much Rummy when I was younger and am just burnt out on it. There are some Rummy based games that I like, but for some reason there is just not enough to Jaipur to separate it from Rummy to make me want to play it long term. Don't get me wrong. I do enjoy a game of Jaipur from time to time, but if given a choice, it would almost always be Splendor regardless of the player count.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
GeekInsight
United States
Whittier
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I only have one play of Splendor under my belt, but many of Jaipur. Splendor has the advantage in being able to go beyond two players. But if I was looking for a game to play solely or primarily with one opponent, it would be Jaipur.

Jaipur has tactical and strategic elements. There are a good deal more hard choices, and I find the hand management aspect to be a positive, not a negative.

By contrast, Splendor seems much more straightforward. Get gems, buy cards, get gems, buy cards, etc., etc. Of course, there are choices to be made as you struggle for nobles or look for cards that will provide discounts on higher value cards. And straightforward means less interesting. To me, at least.

But splendor certainly isn't a bad game. I think either would be greatly appreciated by most any couple who games together.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek Thompson
United States
Marion
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This thread inspired me to play Jaipur on yucata again. One thing I really like about Splendor is the feeling of engine-building. As you get more cards, you can buy even better cards! It's like the most basic version of that feeling from Dominion. When you get points in Jaipur, you end up with FEWER options because you had to ditch some cards, so you're kind of vulnerable for a while. Very different in feel. That adds its own kind of tension... but I like the powerful feeling of Splendor better.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jill Reid
United States
Lincoln
Nebraska (NE)
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
We really enjoyed Jaipur the few times we played it, but for us, the set up was too much for a short filler game. We just never seemed to pull it out to play. I traded Jaipur away. Splendor has been a hit for us, and most of our games are 2-player. Splendor will not be leaving our collection!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maverick Reborn
United Kingdom
Brighton
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Jaipur has traveled with me pretty much every time I have traveled either to judge magic or just traveled with my partner, splendor has yet to leave home for any reason. For me that says its all.

No question that Splendor has a nicer production value, would love to see an upgraded Jaipur with that quality of chips, but for game play Jaipur is a two player market trading game that works.

Splendor is very well crafted game which plays well but I have traded on so many that fall into that category now that I can't help but feel one day it to will be traded on. Jaipur continues to give satisfaction after easily a couple of hundred plays.

Also to my mind Splendor is a game that can get wrecked by subtle variance in card draws and that puts me of it for a game that I want to invest serious amounts of time in. Yes Jaipur has variance but there are strategies for playing around over and through most of them.

just one more opinion for the pot.
Hope you enjoy which ever you go for.

Mav.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Myers
United States
Redmond
WA
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
They're both great, but I do enjoy Splendor more.

Based solely on the gameplay, I'd pick Splendor.

I'd check with them on the theme, though -- I know they're both pretty abstract, but if they dig the Eastern theme at all, Jaipur might be an easier call. (You don't mention if your friends are gamers, etc., so this might be a thought.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Kauk
Canada
Winnipeg
Manitoba
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I just played Splendor yesterday for the first time. I played it with 3 as that is what is recommended as the best player count on BGG. It completely fell flat for me and was super boring. The first player beat me (the last player) by a point and I was 1 gem shy of getting a 2 point card.

I think I was more limited on my first turn in taking gems based on what the other 2 players did before me and was relegated to a little more luck of the draw as they were completing their first cards before me.

All in all, the game is slow moving at first, has a boring middle, and a mathy last couple rounds...and then someone wins. The game was played in complete silence and that seems typical based on my experience watching it being played.

I think there are many, many more 2-player games I'd recommend. Plus, Splendor is way too expensive for what you get in the box. The filler gameplay is not worth the $30 people pay for it, in my opinion.

I'd much rather play:

Battle Line
Arena: Roma II
Race for the Galaxy
Morels/Fungi

Those games are all significantly cheaper and more fun in my opinion!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aldaryn wrote:


I still disagree. As far as the limits, they aren't the same. In Splendor, you can still take gems and just discard down to 10 end of turn. In Jaipur, you CAN'T have more than 7 cards EVER,


Not true.



Never played Splendor, but Jaipur seems pretty dead simple to me. Check my collection for the kinds of rules I normally read (Terra Mystica, Netrunner, Troyes, Puerto Rico, etc).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gillum the Stoor
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In Jaipur, you can have more than 7 cards in your hand only in the following sense. Suppose that your have 7 cards, 5 spices and 2 leather, and you decided to trade the 2 leather for 2 gold. You are allowed to have more than 7 cards only if you imagine that you briefly hold 9 cards (the 2 leather and the 2 gold simultaneously).

But if you imagine that the trade of cards happens simultaneously, you are never allowed to have more than 7 cards - neither in the middle or your turn nor at any other time.

See this discussion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.