Most abstract games lack in theme, and some of them are willing to own that—think checkers and YINSH. Others try to pretend that a special spatial arrangement of blue, red, and yellow cubes somehow equals a house for a woodland squirrel as part of your Tiny Town, even though that’s a stretch.
Then there’s Michael Kiesling, who strikes a happy middle ground; he has previously tasked players with carefully arranging colored “ceramic” or “glass” pieces to make mosaics or stained glass artworks. It’s not as thematically exciting as Terraforming Mars or building a dinosaur island, but the theme works, and the result is pretty. In Kiesling’s latest abstract creation, Intarsia, he tasks 2-4 players with placing intricately carved colored wooden pieces to assemble parquet flooring for a Parisian café over 30-60 minutes. The result, in this reviewer’s opinion, is his prettiest production yet. But does the gameplay hold up?
Gameplay Overview:
Players start with a random hand of ten cards in four colors plus wilds. On your turn, you exchange 1-4 uniformly-colored cards (or wilds) for a wooden piece of corresponding color and level (1-4). A level 1 piece forms the outer portion of a flower-like decorative element. A level 2 piece forms a slightly smaller inlaid element, and a level 3 an even smaller inlaid element. Level 4 lets you build a table at the center of your “flower” or expand to a new part of the floor altogether.
The mechanic that keeps play going is that whenever players spend 2, 3, or 4 cards, they receive 1, 2, or 3 cards back, respectively, usually of a color different from what they just played. Thus, if a player is perfectly efficient over the three rounds with 10 cards each, they should be able to place 30 different wooden elements in total.
The special wrinkle that largely dictates the order in which you’ll want to place wooden pieces is the tool board which contains contract tiles specifying 24 unique parquet design elements divided across six different tool categories. The first to achieve any given design element gets to collect the corresponding contract tile and its associated points. Whenever you achieve another contract belonging to the same tool category you get to re-score all previously achieved contracts belonging to that category in addition to the new contract.
Final scores are ultimately a combination of in-game contract points and end-game points corresponding to the overall level of completeness of your floor.
Game Experience:
Those familiar with the Azul series will feel the design DNA in Intarsia as they are both artistically-themed abstracts. The key difference is how those artistic pieces are selected. In all the Azul games, there is some version of a draft, whereas Intarsia is all about the management of your personal hand of cards. The player interaction of Intarsia mainly comes from a shared rondel and tool contracts. Timing the placement of your level 4 pieces in Intarsia matters because they provide a 3-card reward of color-types dictated by a shared rondel; you may want to rush or delay this placement depending on the current state of that rondel.
The bigger interaction comes from racing to claim tool contract tiles which are limited in number based on player count. While you may have the cards to add several different types of wood elements to your board on any given turn, you will likely prioritize one that gets you closer to a contract in danger of being nabbed by one of your competitors. Or maybe you’ll focus on claiming a contract of the same tool category you’ve already collected, since you’ll be eligible for additional points.
Importantly, the organization of the tool contracts is such that any given tool category encompasses design elements across all four colors in the game. Thus, if you want to maximize in-game points you’ll have to dabble at least a little in each of the colors. Similar to Azul, end-game points heavily reward fully completing certain design elements, so focusing on specific colors is also important. Balancing color focus with well-timed variety is ultimately the key to doing well.
While you do care about your opponents’ boards in Intarsia, especially at 2-players, you can quickly get into the realm of information overload at 3- and 4-players considering the 24 unique contracts up for grabs, so while the game still flows smoothly up to 4-players, it almost feels less interactive because there’s too much to keep track of. At all player counts, Intarsia feels less intense than the Azul games because other than losing out on contracts (and their points), you usually cannot be blocked from building what you want to build. This point could be a pro or con. I personally love the cutthroat nature of Azul at 2-players, but sometimes after a stressful day, I might prefer the more relaxing nature of Intarsia, knowing I still get a thinky puzzle that allows me to build something beautiful.
And this game is indeed beautiful. It comes with a fantastic organizer for all the wooden pieces, which are precisely cut intricate wood designs that fit snugly together when assembled on the playerboards, granting players immense satisfaction each time a new component is slotted into place. Plus, how cool is it that your mini parquet floors are actually made from wood pieces?
The main potential shortcoming of Intarsia is replay value. The contracts are the same for each game. Your starting hand and the actions of other players will dictate your timing of moves, but the game may nonetheless start to feel samey after a couple of plays. There is a more restrictive “B” side of the playerboards to offer a more challenging experience, which is nice, but it only adds a bit more variability. One more nitpicky critique is the way tool contracts are labeled: pictorial depictions of woodworking hand-tools that are thematically relevant, but not officially named in the rulebook. Granted, this could be a me-problem; I can readily recognize the hammer and the saw, but it’s a little awkward to request, “please hand me the second contract for the crank-like thingy.”
Final Thoughts:
Intarsia is a thinky abstract puzzle that requires planning ahead to build your colorful parquet floor in an order that maximizes both in-game contract points as well as end-game completion points. The design is solid, if not the most innovative, and some may find it lacks replay value. The level of player interaction is perfect for those who want more than multi-player solitaire, but ultimately a more relaxing, as opposed to a cutthroat experience. If you enjoy abstract games with great table presence, you will probably find Intarsia—replete with impressively intricate colored wooden pieces that precisely fit together—to be a bonafide work of art.
Final Score: 3.5 Stars – a solid abstract design that delivers a familiarly enjoyable experience in a stellar production
Hits:
• Beautiful production
• Fun thinky puzzle
• Light player interaction
Misses:
• Lacking replay value
• Lack of tension
