The Quacks of Quedlinburg

Overview

We sat down at a friend’s house with four players — all of us brand-new to The Quacks of Quedlinburg — and dove into what everyone had described as an award-winning bag-building, potion-brewing romp. Designed by Wolfgang Warsch and widely published by a long list of publishers (Schmidt Spiele, 999 Games, Arclight, and more), the game promises a clever mix of push-your-luck tension, engine-building, and variable setup through different ingredient books. In our lively, energetic session the core concept was exactly what the box advertises: you pull ingredient chips from your bag to brew potions, try to avoid explosions, then buy new ingredients to improve future draws. The rules came across as mostly clear — we learned them using a combination of methods and the first game took the expected learning curve — but the joy is immediate. We found the game to strike a balanced feeling of luck versus skill, with moderate strategic depth and very high replayability thanks to the different ingredient books.
That said, our group’s overall star rating settled at a 5/10. Why such an even split between affection and frustration? The game is charming, incredibly thematic, and produces memorable social moments — cheering when a risky draw pays off and groaning together when a potion explodes. But the randomness can be punishing, especially early on, and managing the many ingredient books and their special powers feels fiddly. If you love games that reward risk-taking and enjoy a friendly dose of chaos, this is a near-perfect fit. If you prefer tight, catch-up-driven Eurogames with low variance, you might leave a play feeling a bit beaten up by luck.

Setup and Components

Setup for a four-player game took us about 5–10 minutes. The process mostly involves sorting and arranging the ingredient books, setting up the central board for the round track and market, and distributing starting resources and bags. The physical components are a clear strength: everything is well labeled, colorful, and whimsically designed. We especially enjoyed the artwork and the little ingredient chips — they feel like tiny, thematic tokens that matter. Component quality overall is good, and there were no component issues in our session.
The organization can be a bit fiddly the first time. Each player gets specific ingredient books that alter available chips and graphics, and the graphical iconography is mostly clear but has minor issues where new players might pause to double-check what an icon does. The publisher’s production value shows in the heavy cardboard, attractive art, and clear player boards, but don’t expect a minimalist setup. If you like the tactile feel of drawing actual bits from a bag and the visual payoff of a colorful brew tableau, the game delivers.

Gameplay and Theme

Gameplay is the heart of the experience. Each round we simultaneously revealed and executed actions: pulling chips one by one from our bags in a tense, shared rhythm, deciding whether to stop or push for one more draw. The push-your-luck core is the most memorable element. In one round I remember drawing three high-value chips in a row — the group cheered — and then drawing the dreaded exploding chip and losing the round’s gains; everyone groaned sympathetically. Those swings are the social magic of the game. After the draw phase, you use gained points or coins to buy new ingredients and build your bag, and between rounds there are events and delayed purchase choices that slightly shake up the market.
Mechanically, the game blends bag- and pool-building, dice-rolling-adjacent randomness in the draw, simultaneous action selection pacing, and open drafting in the market. The ingredient books add strong variable setup that changes strategies dramatically from game to game; we found this greatly increased replayability because the combinations and synergies you chase differ each play. Thematic integration is excellent — every mechanic feels like brewing a potion: adding ingredients to your bag is like acquiring new reagents, and pulling a chip that causes an explosion genuinely feels like a failed experiment. Interaction is present but largely indirect: most turns felt solitaire as we focused on our own bag, but there were moments of contest at the endgame and through shared events that created lively table banter.
Strategically, the game sits in the middle. There’s room to plan (which ingredients to prioritize, when to buy), but the push-your-luck draws and random order of chips mean you need to adapt constantly. The tension of deciding whether to pull one more chip or stop is the highlight. However, bad luck early — especially when a poor draw or an early explosion ruins your capacity to buy better ingredients — can set players back in a way that feels hard to recover from. Our group suggested a catch-up mechanism would improve fairness; as it stands, falling behind early can be demoralizing even though the game’s engine-building elements give players tools to close gaps sometimes.

Final Thoughts

After one play with four new players, our impressions were mixed but heartfelt: The Quacks of Quedlinburg is a charming, beautifully produced game that nails theme and social moments. The pull-and-brew rhythm created memorable highs and lows. We all agreed the game is pure fun and we’d definitely play again, largely because of the very high replay value driven by the ingredient books. That variability keeps each game fresh and invites experimentation with different strategies.
But this is not purely rose-colored. The middling overall rating reflects genuine frustration with variance and the potential for early bad luck to derail a player’s trajectory. For groups that prize tactical, low-variance gameplay or for competitive players who dislike swings of fortune, this title will be less satisfying. The experience is best for groups who appreciate shared narrative moments — cheering successful combos and commiserating over explosions — and who enjoy moderate strategy underpinned by randomness. If you enjoy push-your-luck games and don’t mind letting chance shape some outcomes, this is a strong, thematic pick. If you prefer strict catch-up mechanics or minimal swinginess, consider whether the charm and theme outweigh the volatility.
In short: bring The Quacks to game nights where the table is ready to laugh, groan, and celebrate together. Just be prepared that the game’s delightful chaos can sometimes sting one unlucky player early on, and that managing the many ingredient books slows setup and learning on first plays. With a consistent group that embraces its randomness, the game’s replayability and thematic delight will likely keep it on your shelf.

Pros

• Exceptional thematic integration — everything from the artwork to the chip draws feels like brewing potions, creating strong immersion.
• Tense and satisfying push-your-luck moments that produce memorable social highs (cheers) and lows (groans).
• High replayability thanks to variable ingredient books that change strategies and combinations every game.
• Solid component quality and clear labeling make setup pleasant and the components enjoyable to handle.

Cons

• Early bad luck can be punishing with limited built-in catch-up; consider adding a house-rule catch-up mechanism for a more balanced experience.
• Managing and referencing multiple ingredient books can be fiddly and slow down initial plays; iconography has minor clarity issues.
• Interaction is mostly indirect/solitaire — players who want heavy player confrontation may find the game light on interaction.