An entry in Fortnightly Topic Challenge #33: Surface Geometry Mazes

Welcome to The Tower, a sequel to my recent 'cube' maze (check it out here). Featuring a 60% larger maze and over 100 more nodes, are you up to the challenge?


As before, I have unfolded the maze and created a legend to aid your mission, you can also find the rules below! (Click images for a closer look):


Here is the maze in all it's unfolded glory, remember even in this condition it is still a cuboid!:


Answers should adhere to the above parameters, shown preferably with a nice long scrawl over my original image but feel free to improvise! (Check out Gareth's fantastic solution to the cube maze here, he was very fast!).

There is at least one correct path but as with the nature of such a puzzle other solutions may exist. The first answer given that meets the criteria will be awarded the tick, if it's quite different to my solution I will also share mine as a second answer :)

Extra information for those that like to think out of the box, you can't jump walls, climb, fly, reach that node just over there, squeeze past your old paths (see double wide rule), re-use tunnels or become a giant to take the whole maze and all it's nodes in one grab, etc ;)

EDIT: Quick rules clarification as a relative brought it up when attempting the puzzles, use of tunnels is optional. Whether completion is possible without them is another thing!

Good luck and I hope you have fun solving it!

  • $\begingroup$ I'm surprised noone mentioned this on your previous maze, but the red nodes should be squares or something other than triangles, because they look like one-way arrows. Also, it is sad that you had to resort to double-wide paths. $\endgroup$
    – NH.
    Jul 16, 2017 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ @NH I just wanted the nodes to stand out from the rest of the cubic environment, they could look like anything to be fair (Originally they were circles). I actually considered adding direction to the triangles as a hint but their orientation is completely random. I didn't resort to double wide paths, it just happened in the design and I thought it would be a nice addition, it's only the same as having two paths parallel to each other. (I don't actually think they're a requirement for solution and they were my choice to leave in). Are those two things stopping you from finding a solution? ;) $\endgroup$ Jul 16, 2017 at 8:38
  • $\begingroup$ The rooms with the tunnels appear to have not-quite single paths surrounding them. Are you intended to be able to walk past a tunnel in those few areas with two exits? $\endgroup$
    – Sconibulus
    Jul 17, 2017 at 18:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Sconibulus I think it was more to create multiple routes to and from tunnels rather than make them obvious like in the cube maze (and to stitch up the less observant as using one 'doorway' over the other can lead to blocking access to other nodes, upper tunnel in the left most face for example). You can indeed go around (or 'over') those tunnels if needed, although you will be blocking it from use in doing so. $\endgroup$ Jul 17, 2017 at 18:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Sconibulus I didn't anticipate people wanting to not use the tunnels and my solution uses them. It's entirely plausible that you can finish without them, I just can't guarantee it lol. I'll add more 'tunnel' rules in any further mazes, if anyone finishes this. $\endgroup$ Jul 17, 2017 at 18:54

1 Answer 1


Here’s one solution.

MKII - The Tower solution 0

I began by mapping out forced paths, then completed the route manually.

  • $\begingroup$ Well done, you took advantage of nearly every tunnel too! It seems those 'forced paths' are becoming a nice stepping stone for solution. I wonder if I can get past that with the next maze :P $\endgroup$ Jul 17, 2017 at 21:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.