Jump to content



Photo

Misfortune. What rerolling really means


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 Croonos

Croonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 161 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 12:41 AM

Ok but generally I think that Talisman is rather simple game. Precise examination of wording on every card may lead to a dead end... For example Immobility spell where wording on the card is different from the use of stated in the rules.

I agree with Talismanamsilat that you can use Moon Charm and Marked For Glory after Misfortune.

In Marked For Glory after always problematic first sentence "Cast on yourself when you are about to make a die roll" (which IMO can not be taken too literally), second sentence precise: "After rolling, you may add up to 6 to the result of the die roll".



#22 Uvatha

Uvatha

    Member

  • Members
  • 421 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:04 AM

Ok but generally I think that Talisman is rather simple game. Precise examination of wording on every card may lead to a dead end... For example Immobility spell where wording on the card is different from the use of stated in the rules.

I agree with Talismanamsilat that you can use Moon Charm and Marked For Glory after Misfortune.

In Marked For Glory after always problematic first sentence "Cast on yourself when you are about to make a die roll" (which IMO can not be taken too literally), second sentence precise: "After rolling, you may add up to 6 to the result of the die roll".

 

Trying to get my head around this myself. This all comes down to spells timing and effects surely if Misfortune is casted then no other effects or spells can be cast until Misfortunes effect is over (unless its a counterspell etc etc) So any spell or effect that says "Cast on yourself when you are about to make a die roll" Cannot be played becuase the die roll has been rolled..

 

And then lets say Misfortune doesn't count as making the die "count as" rolled, then every effect that allows a player to cast at "Cast on yourself when you are about to make a die roll" would be allowed to have a effect?

 

So its either one or the other?

 

I don't think you can just ignore the first sentace of a spell or effect and then go with the second sentance? The first sentace is to do with spell targetting!, I think it has to be taken literally until there is some-other ruling.



#23 The_Warlock

The_Warlock

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,600 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:51 AM

I don't think you can just ignore the first sentace of a spell or effect and then go with the second sentance? The first sentace is to do with spell targetting!, I think it has to be taken literally until there is some-other ruling.


In absence of Spell casting rules clarifications, which were never given officially, Spells are resolved one after the other. If Misfortune is cast first, it takes its full effect before any other effect or Spell can be played.

My doubt was about Misfortune having the effect of "making" the die roll, not only setting the result to 1. After some discussion, I think the Spell wording is clear enough to be sure it fixes the die roll to 1 and makes it happen as well. You won't be able to use any "before rolling" effects, then.

The problem of Spells being cast one after the other is old and weary. There will always be players that think they can play LIFO, or that interpret Spells case-by-case. In my experience, wording in Talisman is the only way to understand how to resolve unclear situations, or to spot situations that cannot be settled without a FAQ or a house-rule. Don't throw away sentences because they seem to be the cause of the problem; you'll find another situation where this will not be acceptable for everyone and arguments will arise. I recommend you to play Spells carefully, and do not get used to play Spells or "at any time" effects in response to Spells, except for Counterspell and Reflection, or when the card you're using specifically mentions the current scenario. Always allow a Spell to be resolved first, then check if you can do something. This is actually a simple rule, not another attempt at overcomplicating things.

Edited by The_Warlock, 14 May 2014 - 03:56 AM.


#24 Croonos

Croonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 161 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 05:19 AM

Ok generally I agree with your way of thinkink but... Talisman is a familly game (also for older children) and my point od view was that not every word has a great importance. Sometimes I just try to predict what was going to use the card by the authors/playtesters without over-complicating. Let's take Immobility spell:
 

"Cast at the start of a character's turn, before he moves. If cast on a character, he is immobilised (may do nothing apart from negating this Spell with Counterspell) for the duration of that turn. If cast on a creature, it cannot be attacked but may be evaded until the end of the turn."

If you read this literally it is not playable for creatures...
But the example from the rules show it can be also used in the middle of the turn if cast on a creature. Author's intention was to eliminate the situations in which character would be immobilised during his turn (after some actions).

When someone cast a Misfortune, you can still consider that this is your phase in which you are about to make a die roll. As with simultaneous effects the player whose turn lasts decides which effect is first. Of course this is only my opinion, some situation cleared FAQ for others we have to wait but generally I try to simplify. The same with Valkyrie resurrect abbility (apart from the situations when the exact word "kill" is used) I play that Follower is killed only in situation where a Character may also lose a life.



#25 The_Warlock

The_Warlock

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,600 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:13 AM

I've heard many definitions in the years: family game, beer & pretzels game, roll-and-move-and-see-what-hit-you game; a lot of enthusiasm and an equal amount of hate. I can say I've played it with about 40 different persons in completely different situations, and discussed things on these forums with many others, and everyone had a different feeling of Talisman. There are players who are satisfied with the theme, others that play only for winning; there are persons that prefer to interpret the rules, others that analyze word-by-word; some gamers house-rule every situation as they like, others want an official answer to the slightest doubt.
 
Don't get me wrong, I think Talisman should play smoothly without so many rules constraints. But the game we have now is very different from the Revised 4th Edition published in late 2008. The more cards you add, the more interactions you have, so trying to interpret the designer's intents becomes more difficult as expansions follow each other. Surely the current Immobility Spell does not work as intended, but while some players may try to figure out the "intended use", or just play it as it was in 2nd or BI 4th edition, others will get stuck and won't understand the example in the Rulebook. The card unfortunately had not enough room to host the required text! I hope we'll get an errata for it after 6 years.

If everybody was in the mood of simplifying things, surely we won't need an updated FAQ, but there are so many Q&As lost in these forums that I can hardly imagine how the FAQ could be compiled. In my games, when something is unclear we always stop for a while and discuss the matter. If we had no rules to refer or words to analyze, I don't think we would ever get on. Interpretation is used only when we cannot find an applicable rule or wording. A FAQ would help us a lot, even a forum digest would be ok.

Yesterday I played a game with my wife and she wanted to use Dragon's Blood after rolling the dice for combat. I had to remind her of a rule that doesn't come up very often, but it's there: you must apply effects that modify Str/Cft before dice are rolled. Even if the Blood can be used at any time, she could not use it after seeing how bad she rolled. She complained a bit and I apologized for never explaining that rule to her, but you know, it never came up like that in 50+ games! Some fixed reference helps a lot with the ever increasing variety and complexity of Talisman.

With Spells the natural inclination is to cast them as required, like Interruptions in Magic the Gathering; unfortunately, Talisman rules for casting Spells are very basic and the current set of Spells is advanced. If you're not careful, you may discover that the Spell you've cast cannot be cast at that point. This is particularly irritating, because you've already revealed the Spell to everybody. I hate those kind of situations. Then ok, in the absence of comprehensive Spellcasting instructions, everybody is entitled to play as he sees fit for his games.


Edited by The_Warlock, 14 May 2014 - 10:22 AM.


#26 Uvatha

Uvatha

    Member

  • Members
  • 421 posts

Posted 14 May 2014 - 10:20 PM

 Let's take Immobility spell:
 

"Cast at the start of a character's turn, before he moves. If cast on a character, he is immobilised (may do nothing apart from negating this Spell with Counterspell) for the duration of that turn. If cast on a creature, it cannot be attacked but may be evaded until the end of the turn."

If you read this literally it is not playable for creatures...
But the example from the rules show it can be also used in the middle of the turn if cast on a creature. Author's intention was to eliminate the situations in which character would be immobilised during his turn (after some actions).

 

Sorry I'm at a loss, Why? Cast at the start of a characters turn target a character or a creature? Its not playable for creatures? are you saying the creature casts the spell or the spell cant target a creature?

If its the later (which I think you meant it to be) I do not see the prob.

 

Oh you mean the rule example on page 18 of the main rule book.. Giggles.. Yes this is obviously wrong they must of meant to say the sorceress casted immobility at the start of her turn then rolled and moved. I never noticed this before. Who knows if it was a misprint (fixed later on) or it just slipped through before pre-printing.



#27 Croonos

Croonos

    Member

  • Members
  • 161 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 12:57 AM

Yes, I was just saying about this example from mail rule book. Note, if they would use Immobility in accordance to the spell text it should be cast on creature at the start of character's turn. But then Sorcerer could roll 1 for his movement and... spell would be wasted. 

I agree with Warlock that probably card had not enough space in the box for a full clarified text.
On the other hand I like Talisman for its simplicity. If we had over 100 pages FAQ we can lost in it. There are many questions on this forum which are clarified in rulebook or FAQ but they return from time to time. Of course some rules requires clarifications. Spell timing is always problem but I do not think they can easily solve it because text on cards won't change - some of them are problematic. There are many situations really difficult to choose a sensible solution but creation explanations for each card in FAQ would be a nonsense. Hence my suggestion to go in the second side and simplify what can be.
The same with Glimmer and Blink from Nether Realm and Bow from City. If you play closely to the card text you may use Bow (as it is not consider as an attack roll) when you attack Glimmer or Blink, which of course was not the intention of the designer - discussed on this forum.
Apart from that... rules clafification in itself, is on its way, interesting and fun. I hope each group of players has its own ideas and clarifications. Worse when such groups will meet each other :lol: .


Edited by Croonos, 15 May 2014 - 07:54 AM.


#28 Uvatha

Uvatha

    Member

  • Members
  • 421 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 06:45 PM

Yes, I was just saying about this example from mail rule book. Note, if they would use Immobility in accordance to the spell text it should be cast on creature at the start of character's turn. But then Sorcerer could roll 1 for his movement and... spell would be wasted. 

I agree with Warlock that probably card had not enough space in the box for a full clarified text.
On the other hand I like Talisman for its simplicity. If we had over 100 pages FAQ we can lost in it. There are many questions on this forum which are clarified in rulebook or FAQ but they return from time to time. Of course some rules requires clarifications. Spell timing is always problem but I do not think they can easily solve it because text on cards won't change - some of them are problematic. There are many situations really difficult to choose a sensible solution but creation explanations for each card in FAQ would be a nonsense. Hence my suggestion to go in the second side and simplify what can be.
The same with Glimmer and Blink from Nether Realm and Bow from City. If you play closely to the card text you may use Bow (as it is not consider as an attack roll) when you attack Glimmer or Blink, which of course was not the intention of the designer - discussed on this forum.
Apart from that... rules clafification in itself, is on its way, interesting and fun. I hope each group of players has its own ideas and clarifications. Worse when such groups will meet each other :lol: .

Well as for the sorceress "yes" if she rolls a 1 she can't do it. But thats tough :) and its what fate is for anyways. She could wait until she is on the sential space or just cast it on another character at the start of their turn.

 

As for the bow and spells and effects that stop a player rolling a die for their attack roll that is a prickly one but I imagine its the same when the warrior gets assassinated by the assassin in effect.

 

I do not think its the intention of the designer to make the bows extra die roll "not considered a attack roll", why do you say such a thing? As far as I understood the bow is now considered a weapon, and anything that rolls a die to add to strength during battle "to my understanding" is called a attack roll adding together to make the attack score. Plus if it was "intended" to be such I think it would say? Like Misfortunes "No fate can be used".

 

If you could paste a link to the topic of the forum I could take a look :).



#29 The_Warlock

The_Warlock

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,600 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 12:03 AM

The discussion about the Bow and Blink is here
 
http://community.fan...blink/?hl=blink
 
If you feel that topic requires some more discussion, you should continue there before going OT too much.
 
However, yours a good example of a hopeless argument about "designer's intentions" and personal interpretations, when the scenario is perfectly resolved applying the rules. The Bow (and Bolster Spell) are worded clearly and they say that the roll is added to the attack score. Blink says you cannot roll a die for your attack roll. The attack score is the result of Strength + attack roll + Bow/Bolster roll, so I don't think the designer's intent matters too much in this case. If no die had to be added to Strength, he should at least have worded Blink as the Assassin, whose wording has turned out rather unclear but at list leaves us in the doubt. Blink is super clear. Moreover, Jon New said that he's ok either way it is played, even though he meant the Blink to be attacked with bare Strength only.
 
Glimmer does not come into question, because the Bow is used only in battle and Glimmer fights in psychic combat. Bolster on the contrary works perfectly.


Edited by The_Warlock, 16 May 2014 - 12:06 AM.


#30 Nioreh

Nioreh

    Member

  • Members
  • 116 posts

Posted 17 May 2014 - 02:14 PM

...

I agree with Talismanamsilat that you can use Moon Charm and Marked For Glory after Misfortune.

In Marked For Glory after always problematic first sentence "Cast on yourself when you are about to make a die roll" (which IMO can not be taken too literally), second sentence precise: "After rolling, you may add up to 6 to the result of the die roll".

 

IMO this makes no sense, I'd say it can and should be taken exactly as it is worded otherwise you are making a house rule.

In conclusion to the topic I'd still say that the only things that currently work are:

-Moon Charm (Warlock reward from The Sacred Pool Expansion)
-Gift of the Wild (Warlock reward from The Sacred Pool Expansion)
-Magic Lamp (Magic Object from The Firelands Expansion)

 

Other cards have to be used when you are about to make a die roll which you're IMO not. The die has rolled a 1 when the spell has been cast.
But sure, if you rule it like "the die will roll a 1 when I roll it" this allows for more cards to be used. I'd still say that this goes against resolving a spell before the next effect can come into play.


Edited by Nioreh, 22 June 2014 - 04:18 PM.





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS