For my board game review, I wanted to revisit a property I know well: Stardew Valley. As much as I love the original, I will try to keep comparisons to the video game to a minimum, considering Stardew Valley: The Board Game (SV:BG) was made for a very different medium. Additionally, while the charming aesthetic matches the video game, much of the gameplay is very different. Even the aspects of gameplay that match up with the original tend to be enjoyable more as references than as board game mechanics.
Plot-wise, SV:BG intends to stay true to its roots while offering a unique tabletop experience. This is a cooperative game where one to four players take on the roles of newcomers working together to tend a farm, the same plot as the video game. Each player takes on a specific role or “profession” that earns different skills and tools as the game progresses. The players must complete “Grandpa’s Goals” and, ideally, restore the Community Center during the course of their first year at the farm. The game is divided into four seasons, with each season presenting its own challenges and opportunities for players to explore.
In terms of first impressions, SV:BG is aesthetically inviting, but logistically intimidating. From the moment you open the box, it’s evident that the creators cared a lot about the details. The game pieces are beautifully crafted: everything from the crops to the villagers are bursting with color and that classic “cozy game” vibe. The artwork goes a long way towards transporting you to the idyllic world of Stardew Valley. Unfortunately, the sheer amount of stuff that goes into the game’s set-up is a bit overwhelming for someone expecting that flavor of coziness. There are seasonal tiles to place and buildings to pick from; two different sets of goals to be assigned; classes with their respective skills and equipment; many different sets of cards; plus all of the crops, fish, and relics to familiarize yourself with. The gameplay itself only gets more convoluted.
A quick note: I played the “standard” version of SV:BG, following the standards laid out in the first part of the rulebook. However, ConcernedApe and his team actually included a list of suggestions to adjust the game to your liking, which I sincerely admire. They directly encourage players to experiment and design a game experience that suits their taste. That said, it wouldn’t be much of a critique if I didn’t try to play by and understand the rules of the game.
At the start of each round, players draw a “Season Card” which indicates the passing of time and triggers a handful of potential events that affect all of the players. Following that, the next step is the planning phase, where players talk to each other about what they will do during their turn. They can trade items, resources, and place their pawn (indicating their individual character) in any location without it counting as movement. In the action phase, each player either takes two actions wherever they are on the board, or takes one action, moves, one space, and then takes another action. To me, this set-up is a bit too specific, and I would prefer if movement and action could happen in any order – most people would end up doing action-move-action anyway, but allowing move-action-action or action-action-move would make it much easier to collect all of the forageable tiles without feeling the need to “waste” an action in a location you didn’t really need to be at. At the end of the day, player movement is “reset” and all pawns return to the farm.
The cooperative nature of the game is expressed largely in the planning phase and in the group “pass/fail” objectives. All of the actual in-game actions are performed alone. This kind of cooperation does certainly mimic the multiplayer experience in the video game, where a lot of communication and organization is necessary, but it falls short of other cooperative tabletop games with a stronger player interdependence. While my friends and I made an effort to coordinate our turns, it didn’t really feel necessary to win the game. Additionally, the “wandering cat” that changed the order in which we took our turns didn’t seem to have any effect on our planning whatsoever, so I’m not sure that element was a necessary addition to the game.
Overall, the game felt more like a series of mini-games than a cohesive whole. The wide variety of mechanics and things to do were interesting, but also quite difficult to manage for something that presents itself as a relaxing experience. Some elements felt superfluous, such as Grandpa’s Goals being a win requirement rather than focusing on the more narrative-relevant and complex Community Center Bundles. Collecting from animals pretty much never seemed worth it due to the odd luck-based element, in which you could completely waste an action if you only rolled animals that you didn’t have. The luck-based element of fishing was similarly frustrating, but at least that matched the way it worked in the original game and makes for a decent equivalent to the feeling of real-life fishing. Joja Tiles were an interesting new obstacle, but felt almost too easy to avoid or solve. While we never ended up getting the item that allowed a player to marry a character, looking into the rules behind the Spouse mechanic was an odd experience. It seemed almost overpowered, yet also so niche that I don’t know how anyone would be able to use it – I have to assume it was only included for fan service, so players can marry whichever character they like best in both versions of the series. Interestingly, a friend that had not played the original video game enjoyed the Mine mechanics the most out of the group – for the other three of us, it only served as a reminder of how much more exciting the video game was.
In conclusion, Stardew Valley: The Board Game succeeds in capturing some aspects of its digital counterpart while still standing on its own. With its beautiful components, collaborative gameplay, and wide variety of things to do, it’s certainly not a bad way to spend a few hours.
