Forbidden Lolly Test: Buuo 18/1 BDC Review

Forbidden Lolly Tested: Good Data, but the Flower Clearly Falls Short

Buuo 18/1 BDC Forbidden Lolly · Batch 2503271 · tested on 08.07.2026

Forbidden Lolly sounds like a modern, sweet-fruity hybrid. The strain profile is categorized as Forbidden Fruit × Runtz. That is why expectations are clear: some fruit, some candy, distinctive visual appeal and buds that make you want to try the strain.

Too little of that came through in our 5-g pack. Batch 2503271 was traceable, the order and shipping were excellent, and the packaging was proper. The flower itself, however, fell clearly short of this standard.

Above all, resin coverage, flower structure, freshness, uniformity, aroma and flavor failed to convince us. That is why Forbidden Lolly scores 4.12 out of 10 in this test.

Brief Conclusion

• Overall rating: 4.12 out of 10
• Rating class: Weak
• Strengths: Batch available, product data easy to verify, order and shipping handled properly
• Weaknesses: little resin coverage, weak flower structure, restrained aroma, narrow flavor profile
• Order & shipping: 9.6 out of 10

Forbidden Lolly shows in this batch why good packaging and accurate data alone are not enough. What matters is what is in the pack: appearance, aroma, flavor and the overall impression during testing.

Why Forbidden Lolly Should Be Exciting

Forbidden Fruit × Runtz is an attractive combination on paper. Forbidden Fruit represents a darker, fruity direction. Runtz brings the modern candy side. Together, this reads like a strain that should stand out through aroma and distinctive character.

This is exactly where the tested batch disappoints. We are not rating the name or the genetics on paper, but the purchased 5-g pack. And this pack brings too little of what should make Forbidden Lolly exciting.

The Tested Flower

The Rating in Detail

Traceability – 10 out of 10

There is little to criticize when it comes to traceability. Batch 2503271 was available, and the key product data could be clearly assigned.

This is important because a low score is only fair when it is clear what it refers to. In this case, we are specifically discussing this batch, not making a blanket statement about every Forbidden Lolly pack.

Appearance and Flower Structure – 4 out of 10

Forbidden Lolly failed to convince visually. Flower structure, bud size, freshness and uniformity each scored just 4 out of 10. Resin coverage was the weakest individual point at 3 out of 10.

The buds were not entirely off, but they had little appeal. With a strain carrying Forbidden Fruit and Runtz expectations, there should be considerably more frost, density and freshness.

Moisture and Drying – 5 out of 10

Moisture and drying landed exactly in the middle. The flower was not so poorly dried that this point alone explains everything.

At the same time, it did not create a fresh, elastic top-shelf impression. The moisture was acceptable rather than good. Combined with the weaker appearance, this pulled the overall impression down further.

Aroma – 5 out of 10

The aroma was too restrained. With Forbidden Fruit × Runtz, we expect a recognizable sweet-fruity direction, ideally with some candy, fruit and depth.

There was too little intensity in this batch. The aroma was not completely absent, but it was not clear enough to carry the strain. This is exactly where Forbidden Lolly loses many points, because the name promises more aromatically.

Flavor – 4 out of 10

The strain also lacked punch in terms of flavor. The impression remained narrow and could not compensate for the weaker appearance.

Importantly, we do not expect every strain to be maximally loud. But with Forbidden Lolly, the flavor should at least provide enough distinctive character to make the genetics recognizable. That was not achieved in this pack.

Our Impression – 4 out of 10

Overall, Forbidden Lolly came across as bland in this test. It was not one isolated issue, but the sum of little resin, weak structure, limited aroma and limited flavor.

This is especially disappointing because the external framework was considerably better. With a clear batch, fast shipping and proper packaging, the foundation was there. The buds themselves, however, did not capitalize on this advantage.

Packaging and Order – 9.6 out of 10

The order and shipping were excellent. The delivery arrived quickly, the packaging was proper and the product data was easy to verify.

This area is assessed separately from the flower rating. Good delivery does not suddenly make weak flower good, but it does show that the low overall score was not caused by the process.

Who Is Forbidden Lolly Suitable For?

This batch is best viewed as an example of why we strictly separate strain tests by batch. On paper, Forbidden Lolly sounds exciting. In our pack, however, the strain was too quiet.

If you expect strong visual appeal, a loud aroma, visible resin coverage and a clear candy-fruit character, this batch delivers too little. Those who primarily value traceable product data and fast shipping will at least find the stronger points there.

Our Conclusion on Forbidden Lolly

Forbidden Lolly from Buuo clearly falls into the weaker range in our test. The positives are fast delivery, a traceable batch and proper packaging.

The actual strain impression, however, remains too thin. There is too little resin, structure, aroma, flavor and distinctive character. As a result, the 5-g pack is rather disappointing, especially because Forbidden Fruit × Runtz suggests there should be more.

The rating applies to our purchased 5-g pack from batch 2503271. Other batches may turn out differently.

All Ratings at a Glance