Bandido – A Puzzle‑Based Introduction to Cooperative Games

In a nutshell…

What I love about them

For me a good cooperative game needs both the reassurance of building steadily toward a shared goal and the risk that it might not be reached in time. It’s even better if there is no obvious pathway. That allows different players to see the value of different approaches and communication (or trying to understand other players’ actions) becomes even more important.

The games’ core task is very simple but takes time and effort to achieve. The tunnel cards vary widely, players have only a limited set in their hand and nobody can see what others are holding. Successfully blocking a tunnel is very rewarding but the next turn a player might find themselves deciding between options that either add loose ends or risk blocking someone else’s next move.

And yes I love that after making Bandido the designers realised that they needed a female bandit too, and made her version the more sophisticated one.

Here are the links: Bandido: https://link.amazon/B0hCo5u0o and Bandida: https://link.amazon/B0hCo5u0o

Why Bandido and Bandida fit the way we play

• Everyone stays involved: Everyone contributes to the shared layout, and players concentrate because each new card affects what they might do next.
• You can see what is happening as you play: The tunnel network grows in full view, and players can easily count the remaining open ends.
• Mistakes do not last: Choices simply work out better or worse depending on the cards others hold, with no lasting penalties.
• Results make sense: Players can see clearly whether all escape routes are closed or not.
• Calm is the default: There is no time pressure or fast movement. As long as players can manage the cooperative element the game stays calm.

When I use them

Bandido and Bandida are easy to learn, and as a cooperative with a very simple mechanism they works well with mixed groups. Both are officially for 1-4 players but I’ve played them successfully with 6. The downside to a larger group is the wait between turns, which shrinks significantly if players are confident to make quick decisions and plan ahead a little.

They are excellent for portability (small box with characteristic Helvetiq long slim cards) but terrible for compact play. I use them only where we have a full table to sprawl over. Even then we occasionally run out of space on one edge.

I use the two games fairly interchangeably. I would pick Bandida over Bandido only if I had a more experienced group who would enjoy working out how to play with its additional features.

Variants or Alternatives?

When Bandida followed Bandido it introduced more game modes (e.g. block Bandida or help her escape) and specialist item cards such as “dynamite” (to play more cards) or “water bottle” (to trigger a silent round). We’ve found the game already sufficiently interesting without these extras, but I do use them with more experienced players.

Bandido and Bandida are simple but not games we consistently “win” as a group, so we sometimes ease the level of challenge by allowing players to show the cards in their hands. I avoid this option if I think one player might end up directing group decisions. We’ve tried keeping cards hidden but allowing players to describe them (without gestures), which was fun but I suspect didn’t make us any better at the game!

I’ve also experimented with simplifying the games by taking out some of the difficult cards that open up more tunnels than they close. This worked well with a less experienced group but took time to set up.

Other cooperative games I’ve written about recently, each with a very different feel, include Similo, which focuses on following visual clues to identify a target card, and The Mind, which is about the group playing numbers in order and is played in silence.

Some links in this post may be affiliate links. I only link to games I already use.