Ada
fun, durable, and easy to pack
Tower Stack is a fast and fun stacking game that’s perfect for family game night. It’s gone viral on TikTok and for good reason. Players take turns stacking blocks based on challenge cards, trying not to topple the tower. It’s part strategy, part luck, and all chaos.The game includes 36 cards, 24 blocks, a tower body, a stand, and instructions. The components feel sturdy and well-made, with smooth edges and a solid tower base that holds up to repeated play. The blocks are lightweight but durable, and the cards are thick enough to resist wear and tear. Setup is quick and gameplay is easy to learn, with a pace that keeps things moving without dragging. Kids ages 8 and up can jump right in, and adults will get hooked too.Tower Stack works anywhere. It’s fun at home, on road trips, at parties, or around a campfire. The compact size makes it easy to pack, and the screen-free play is a welcome break for families looking to unplug. Whether you’re playing with two people or a whole group, it’s a great way to laugh, compete, and bond.The design is simple but clever, with bright colors and a clean layout that makes it easy to follow the action. It’s engaging for all ages, from younger kids learning coordination to adults who love a good challenge. If you want a game that’s silly, strategic, and totally addictive.
Annette G.
A great starter set with an imperfect rulebook
I’ve been an Ultimate (“ULT”) enthusiast for some time, so when I saw an inexpensive new physical board on sale at Amazon, I thought I’d that I’d like to pick it up. Physical games make the pastime seem more serious, and it also ensures that people will place proper Xs or Os, instead of scribbling down random symbols. Now that I finally have purchased it, I thought I’d give a brief rundown of what it’s like here.* On the packaging *The main box opens up on the side, allowing the inside to slide out. Mine was taped shut, which a quick slash from a pocket knife quickly fixed.The inner box is aqua-colored cardboard, and initially holds the board, rulebook, and bags of pieces. I think the rulebook and an advertising leaflet were also entangled in there somewhere. (The miniboard covers were mostly in place on the board already, but one or two may have been loose.)My complaint with the inner box is that after you’ve taken everything out, it loses a little shape, and it’s not easy for someone with a poor grasp of managing space and physical objects to figure out how to repackage it. I’ll probably struggle with it for a while longer, to keep my set ‘complete’, but in the long run there’s a fair chance that I will end up discarding it. It’s a pity they didn’t find a way to turn it into a piece-holding mechanism so that it could be used for some purpose during play.The pieces come in two plastic bags. The bags are fine, although nobody will confuse them for premium-quality. Having logos on them instead of just the warning label would have made them look nicer and more official.Takeaway: Below average packaging, but adequate for the price.* On the components *The board is aqua plastic and measures a bit smaller than the average chess board. There are lines inside each miniboard to keep the pieces from sliding around; I’m pleased to report this feature works exactly as intended during ordinary play, although you might have trouble if you’re rough and start shaking things around. They also have notches to help the miniboard covers fit properly.The Xs and Os are purple and yellow, respectively. The colors are good, even if not my strict preference. The pieces are almost small, but well-formed and fun to manipulate. For OCD people it might have been nice if the bottom of the pieces were more distinguished from the top, so that you could pick out the correct side more easily, but you can easily argue that this being difficult to determine is a feature.My only significant complaint with the components is the board covers. Being opaque, they obstruct players’ view of pieces on the miniboards. It would be better if these were transparent, in the color of the side who owns them. The snapping might work a little too well; it can be tricky to get them off the miniboard. Finally, there are not quite enough of them: as contrived as it may be, it is theoretically possible to reach board positions where a player has captured 6 or even 7 boards. While 7 may be a bit much, I think 6 is a reasonable compromise that should cover all but the most extreme edge cases.Takeaway: Well done. The board covers are the only objective weakness.* On the booklet *“Orthodox” is defined as “what Ben Orlin’s guide says” for the purpose of this review. The rules for the game on the Wikipedia page happen to agree exactly with his and can also be used as a source.ULT terminology and nomenclature isn’t standardized, and so theirs is different from Orlin’s, from mine, and from several other sources, but the terms they use here are pretty clear and understandable even if they aren’t your preference.However, there are four notable variations in rules and terms from what’s orthodox, some minor and some major:1) The rules say you should ‘choose which player will play Xs and which will play Os’, but that the ‘youngest player goes first’. This is faulty on both counts: while it’s true players may personally prefer one shape or another to go first, the set’s own design assumes that X will go first, because there are 41 Xs and 40 Os. While it is, again, unlikely the entire board will be filled with pieces, it is theoretically possible, and it only works if X is the first mover. Regarding who goes first, this latter rule is typical for board game instructions, but unnecessary for an abstract skill game in the tradition of checkers and chess. If I were writing the rules, I would say that the less experienced player should go first, or if that is impossible to judge, the guest should go first (while the owner of the set plays second). Ideally the competition should be at least a two-game set, with the lead alternating between players.2) A miniboard being ‘won’ is referred to as it being ‘closed’ here. I’d guess they were trying to keep players from confusing winning a small board with winning the entire game. This isn’t really “wrong”, but it is unusual among ULT versions, and it’s unnatural for players coming from a tic-tac-toe background (which is virtually everyone).3) This set’s rule on free moves (the move that results from being sent to a won, or ‘closed’ board) reads, “If you are sent to a Small Game that is also ‘closed,’ you can go in any open Tiny Square you want.” This could be taken to mean that free moves only count if the move redirecting you to a won (‘closed’) board is itself on a won board. I don’t think this is what is intended, but it’s possible it’ll be interpreted this way. (In practice, I think people will figure out that free moves happen every time you’re sent to a won board, because playing this way would involve taking the board covers (“Big Pieces”) off every time.)4) 3 boards in a row (“3br”, or ‘3 in a row in the Big Game’, as they put it) still wins the game. However, they attempt to settle ties by the means of “whoever has more large pieces on the board”. This is a major deviation from orthodox ULT, an extra win condition that means this game is technically a hybrid between ULT and Tic-Tac-Ku, which uses the latter condition as its main scoring method. I suspect this change will tend to benefit X, which is dangerous given that X already has a first-move advantage. Although it hasn’t been studied, there’s the chance that this is just enough to shift a game that, like chess, is ‘almost certainly drawn’, to being a slight forced win.Grade takeaway: Has a good, succinct explanation of the tricky ideas in ULT, but the difference in win condition rule would make this a different game!* Final conclusions *While there are a number of computer versions of the game (I’m working on one which I hope will be the ultimate networked version), I’ve been sorry that there aren’t many physical editions. I bought this feeling that it was poised to take the ‘starter set’ position in the market. Now that I’ve bought it, I’m satisfied to give it a qualified endorsement for that purpose. This set is good for the price and worth buying, so long as players are aware that the provided rulebook deviates from the established order. A similar, premium set with higher-grade everything would be nice to see someday.
