wastedyuthe
-
Content Count
171 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by wastedyuthe
-
-
Just posting to say I received my replacement Dark Cultist figure in the post this morning- YAY!! My Reaper pack is finally complete!
Thaadd was great. She emailed to say she was posting the figure the day before she did so, and it came nicely wrapped and protected. Ok, FFG seem to be making this mistake a fair few times it seems, but at least Thaadd provides excellent customer service for them, which (almost) made up for the cock-up.
Oh happy day!
-
Gelmaron said:
Since Fate in general lets you re-roll a die roll and (possibly) achieve a new result, the option to spend a Fate must come before determining the outcome of the die roll. Therefore, if you roll bad on the Wheel of Fate, I see nothing stopping you from spending a Fate point and re-rolling that die roll.
Look at it this way: Ignore the fact that the card deals with fate at all. If this was the Shrine, the cave or some similar roll-die-and-consult-card, would you be able to spend a Fate and re-roll? Yes. Therefore I see no reason why this would work differently on the Wheel of Fate. If you are not supposed to be allowed to use a Fate, then the card should state such.
It might seem cheap, but it does not break the rules (as far as I can tell). I see nothing in the rules that would prohibit this.
What he said.
-
The_Warlock said:
Today I played one of the longest and bloodiest games ever.
4-player game, 6 hours long, 5 midgame deaths, 8 total corpses. A single game featured: Ghoul, Philosopher, Monk, Dwarf as starting Characters, then Ghoul was killed by Monk, replaced by Assassin that died in Dungeon and was replaced by Wizard (winner); Philosopher died in Dungeon and was replaced by Minstrel, Reaper killed Minstrel that was replaced by the Knight, who died on the Crown against the Wizard, despite of an impressive Strenght of 25 (+ Mercenary if needed). Monk was the leading Character in the first part but was killed by the Reaper (double 1), replaced by Gypsy that suffered very much from other player and further Reaper harassment (Reaper killed Followers, took Lives, made people lose Turns). Dwarf was the only Character to survive throughout this carnage, but never developed enough to keep the pace of the others, mostly because of Reaper.
Even though the Wizard won the game with a significant edge (Runesword granted him about 11 Lives when he reached the Crown), the real winner has been the Reaper. She killed the Monk who ought to be the winner because everything was going really well for him (of course I was playing the Monk); she was active like never before and slowed down the Dwarf very much. A roll of 5-6 was very, very rare on the Reaper table and the result was impressive. The Wizard won for a simple reason: he didn't care for the Reaper even if he had no Fate. Reaper never landed on him. Other people were scared by the Reaper and were constantly targeted by her, and were happy if they only had to lose a Turn playing chess.
Funny, Reaper made me lose another game but I loved the tension and chaos it created today.
Haha! Sounds great, although 6 hours seems a little tiring. It sounds like the Reaper actually gives weaker characters a better chance, which is a good thing.
-
There are a few opportunities for spending your hard earned (found) cash, but I still wish there were more.
There is one enemy (can't remember which) that will accept 1 gold as a bribe to not fight them, and I think we ought to have more of those. Dragons like gold, so why can't you offer 2 gold to the Dragon not to fight him (even if it may not be worth it compared to the risk of losing a life sometimes, at least its another option)? Or having the option of paying a ranger to take you safely through the Chasm? Again, probably wouldn't be used much (does anyone actually land on that space?), but at least it's another option, depending on what's waiting for you the other way round the board.
-
Velhart said:
You can better choose to buy the Revised edition instead of the Upgrade Pack..
Then you have the board with the new text.
Agreed. If you are going to pay the same amount of cash or more on the upgrade pack, you are better off getting the revised edition.
-
Dam said:
Slightly OT, but something I just noticed today (yeah, I'm slow as today was the 8th game with Dungeon) and hope that FFG fix in Frostmarch. Dungeon expansion's Adventure and Spell cards are bigger than those that came in base + Reaper (base = Upgrade pack for me). The Spell cards don't stick out that much, maybe because there are more of them, but the Adventure cards stick out like crazy. At least to my OCD they do. You can clearly feel the difference when holding the deck (Dungeon cards are longer, width seems the same) and you can see them by the naked eye as well.
****, I hated that when I had the 2nd Edition all those years ago, and bought the Adventure pack and Dungeon. I can't remember which, but one of the expansion packs had adventure cards that had a lighter green back than the pack in the base set. You could always see straight away if you were going to get one of the new cards or original. Kind of spoilt it for me. I have the Reaper pack for the 4th, but haven't bought the Dungeon one. This is a little off-putting.
-
Too true GregC. That certainly seems to be the case with me and my group too. We'll get it right in the end. At least we are having fun while we are learning
-
footoomba said:
oviously adjustable by fate
Of course! That's if you have it. In my game last night, I must have had only 3-4 fate counters in my possession the entire game. But when my wife rolled a 1 last night and failed in Battle, she used a fate and rolled again, and got 1 again!
-
Dam said:
If 2+ characters are at CoC, their turns consist of encountering each other, so in that sense no different than if you'd encounter a char on the Outer Region. If you have no option there to initiate Psychic Combat, why would you have one at CoC? Other than taking the Craft-path, so you probably have a lot of Craft.
"Psychic Combat occurs when:
(snip)
2. A character whose special ability permits him to attack
another character by psychic combat elects to do so." (p. 12)As for Runesword, IIRC "Enemy" is capitalised even. Same deal on the Fate Stealer, no Fate from non-Enemy battles.
Thanks Dam. Like I said, I need to read the rules again for some of this to sink in. I do remember it saying Psychic combat can only be an option for those who's abilities allow now. I just forgot last night for some reason. Still, like I said, even with just battles I still would have won the same. It's a bit unfair that you can't use Psychic Combat- why not for heaven's sake? If you have to with certain enemies, then you should be able to with each other, right?
-
Velhart said:
wastedyuthe said:
I would like to try the Dragon Tower, but it looks so hard to get hold of now (only seeing one second hand one on eBay without the dragon) and besides, I only want to buy for this 4th ed now. You must surely agree though Velhart, the 4th ed inner region and CoC is much better than the 3rd's Dragon King cards in its base set, yes?
Hi Wastedyuthe,
well, to be honest......No
For me, the Dragon tower is the ultimate ending to end the game.
The inner region in 4th is always the same, and the Dragon Tower is a new board, where you must also draw cards, and you battle the dragon at the top of the tower..
It's not about that the Crown is not exciting, but i don't like that ending...
So i am happy that we get 3 different ending cards with the frostmarch expansion.
But i still hope, that the Dragon Tower will come in the future. That Tower must be really huge, because the board in 4th is larger than the 3th.
I didn't say "Dragon Tower"- I said the 4th edition CoC was better than the 3rd editions "Dragon King cards in its base set", NOT the Dragon Tower extention. We all know how much you LOVE the Dragon Tower!
-
Dam said:
Cheater, cheater, wife-beater
. Runesword gives you a life when you defeat an Enemy (at least IIRC), Enemy = Adventure card with that keyword. Sentinel, Wolf-pup, Pit Fiends don't count). Runesword of old was worded Monster, so no life for Dragons or Animals back then either.And just how did Dwarf or Thief initiate psychic combat if I might ask??? Unless mentioned as ability (Wizard, Sorceress, Ghoul, Dark Cultist), all you can do is battle against another char. I'm personally hoping for an Object/Follower that allows people to attack in psychic combat. Necromancer Staff or something could be the name.
Man I need to go over these rules again!
I will look at the Runesword card when I get home. It probably does say something like "when you kill an enemy in battle", but I was just focusing on the "battle" and not the "enemy" keyword. I forgot that the word "enemy" literally does just mean any card with that word on it, not anything you see on the board. Even so, I would have still beaten them, and even without the extra lives, I still had enough, AND had a healing spell, AND had a follower tart (can't remember who) who would have healed me back to full too. So my wife had no chance.
So, you can only encounter in Battle on the CoC? I don't remember reading that in the rules at all. I went through them when I landed on the CoC to make sure we were doing it right. The bit that I read for the CoC when you land on it with someone else already there said you must "encounter" them. I assumed that meant Battle or Psychic Combat. Again, even if it was just supposed to be battling, I would have still won as I had higher stats than her in both Strength and Craft. Mwahahaha!!
-
katana_one said:
Um. Logic is overrated. Especially in a fantasy board game.
Haha! You got that right mate.
-
She did have bad luck, as she kept getting cards that would boost her fate, gold, and lives, but got a few enemies that was too strong for her to begin with and not enough enemies to level up, unlike myself. However, I had a bit of bad luck myself, with a whirlwind blowing my objects away all over the board, and a horse thief pinching my thief's mule- the nerve!!! However I pinched another mule from the village, collected my objects again, killed the enemies that was too strong for my wife, and the rest is history.
I would like to try the Dragon Tower, but it looks so hard to get hold of now (only seeing one second hand one on eBay without the dragon) and besides, I only want to buy for this 4th ed now. You must surely agree though Velhart, the 4th ed inner region and CoC is much better than the 3rd's Dragon King cards in its base set, yes?
-
I think I've just answered my own question- I had to look on the weapon cards themselves, not the Portal of Power section in the rule book, or the PoP space. The card says "add 1 to your score in Battle". It does not say "add 1 to your score when trying to beat the hell out of the big wooden door to get to the inner region". So, case closed I suppose. Although, logically, you'd think it would be possible to use weapons for such a task.
-
I had my first ever win by PvP at the CoC tonight! It was a superb game! I was actually behind my wife- she reached the CoC while I was still at the Mines. However, I caught her up and managed to gain more lives before I reached the CoC (as my Runesword gave me a life for every Pit Fiend I killed), even though her CoC spell was successful every turn. But because her Dwarf wasn't as developed as my Thief, the Thief trashed him in both battle and psychic combat for several turns, with the Dwarf's 7 lives soon reduced to 1. Even his fate couldn't save him from my Thief's mighty power. One final die roll sealed the Dwarf's fate, and he died at my Thief's feet. That is the first time I have played this where it was a real race to get to the CoC and do battle at the centre of the board. We both thought it was a fantastic climax to a great game. I even managed to fight the Sentinel this time, and won, as he was the quickest way for me to reach the middle region and PoP as my wife had already entered the inner region for the third and final time (she got chucked out the last two times! Haha). I have always loved this game, but the 4th ed is MUCH better than the 3rd ed's Dragon King climax, and it is even better when it is a close race. Can't wait to play again.
-
JCHendee said:
I fixed that typo and changed some wording (do a hard refresh to see the changes above). I think one point of making truer "quests" is to eliminate the "buy out" or trading of what an adventurer already has for a Talisman (in most cases).
Personally, the idea of paying a Fate you already have is ridiculous. That's something based in pure mechanics rather than game play, as a person cannot just hand over part of their "fate" or destiny. Then again, Fate has been poorly labeled in the game. So "new" Fate and "seek" pretty much indicate that you have to go out and find a new Fate point to put into the bottle, but I've tried to make it more explicit.
While we're at it, I don't have access to by friend's quest cards. Can you itemized the titles of the standard ones for me when you have time? Also, feel free to make more suggestions for alternative ones... or to replace the standard ones. Hopefully some diversity can be created beyond just going out and fighting things in order to get a talisman.
I completely agree about just handing over something you already have. Hardly a "quest" is it?
Here is the list of quest cards from the Reaper pack you requested:
Deliver (discard) one magic object
Deliver (discard) one spell
Kill one enemy
Deliver (discard) five points of Craft trophies
Deliver (discard) one follower
Travel to the City
Deliver (discard) one fate
Take one life from another character
Deliver (discard) five points of strength trophies
Deliver (discard) two gold
Deliver (discard) three gold
Travel to the Cursed Glade
My wife had the "Travel to the Cursed Glade" quest tonight and completed her so-called "quest" 2 moves later. Whoopee!
-
I have just played a game with the 1&6 rule (if you roll a 1 and your enemy rolls a 6, you lose- and vice versa). This made the game A LOT better in mine and my wife's opinion. Not only did it keep the game simple enough for non-RPG'ers to play, but it also removed the auto-win completely. a 1 and 6 on the dice only ever happened about twice in the entire game, but that's not the point. The point is, there is always a chance you can fail now, and that keeps the game exciting. I thoroughly recommend people try this out if they haven't already.
-
Going back to the Sentinel for a second (although he has nothing to do with the thread topic as such), I just played a game with my wife. She had been on the middle region for ages, while I was struggling to find a way across. I was the Thief, but couldn't land on the Village to steal a raft or axe, couldn't land on the Tavern and when I did, couldn't roll a 6 for the boatman, and was rapidly running out of time as my wife had already tried twice to enter the inner region and got booted out both times- but she was going back for a third. I had built up 13 str and 13 cr, including weapons, objects, and followers- much better than her 10 str and 8 cr. So I thought "sod it" and fought the Sentinel to cross the bridge, succeeding in the process. As I said before, all other ways are not always available, and so the quicker way has to be the toughest to give you some kind of choice to make- risk going for it early, or risk holding off till later for an easier approach. I didn't have time, so I took the fight to him and won. See, the Sentinel plays his part just fine imo. The only thing I don't like is that if you are concentrating on building up Craft- then you won't stand much of a chance against him in Battle.
By the way, regarding my game- my wife reached the CoC while I was at the Mines, and every turn her CoC spell succeeded. However, I had the Runesword which gave me life after a successful battle, and so gained another 4 lives from the Pit Fiends, before having the final showdown with my wife at the CoC!! It was awesome! Every turn I beat her either in Battle or Psychic Combat, and she didn't stand a chance! My Thief killed her Dwarf and I stood the victor. The best game of Talisman I have played so far, and far more satisfying than the Dragon King finalé of the 3rd ed. Love it!
-
The rules state "you may only use one weapon during an attack", but there is nothing to say if you can use them against the PoP- can you? It certainly makes sense that someone with an axe or sword would use it to try and force the PoP open. But saying that, spaces such as the Crypt are not meant to count weapons toward your score, so should we apply that rule to the PoP too? Please enlighten me. Thanks.
-
Velhart said:
Jon said to me, that you can called him the brother of the Warlock
But Apprentice sounds also good..
( anyway, in Third edition, the Warlock has also a grey beard) ( same as the ending card, without a pointy cap..
Thanks for the confirmation pal.
-
noc1o1 said:
Not having the chance to play this game extensively, this seems like the underlying problem with him. He is able to spam his ability with no real draw back and gain strength at an enourmous rate. Only assassinating face up cards is an option, although I would argue that in most games you would assasinate meaningful creatures far less times than you would having to spend a Fate. Tracking down face up creatures and obtaining the die roll to land on them before someone else is not that easy. Also, don't forget that the Assassin is evil and can replenish his Fate pretty consistantly if needed. So he should be able to assassinate a fair amout of times, not too few or too many, throughout the game. Charging Fate most likely will require players to put forth more thought into when to use the assassination ability.
As with losing when just rolling a 1, I think that doesn't balance him out enough. To me, that is hardly a deterrent to not assassinate every chance you get. And losing on a 1, 2, or 3 I think is too big of a deterrent. That would make his ability, not factoring in fate, hurt him just as much as it helps. So, that leaves us with losing on a roll of 1 or 2 which I could see as being acceptable.
Of the two options, lose on a roll of 1 or 2 and charge a Fate, I am leaning towards the latter. It will add another element to the game that is not die dependant, which is always good IMO, as the player will have to smartly use their Fate's in the best instances offered.
I do like your variant to battles though. If you roll and 1 and the other participant rolls a 6, it is an automatic loss. Allows even the most dominate characters a chance to lose to something weaker that normally has no chance to win.
All fair enough points. Why don't you have a play test of your house rules and let us know how you get on? I should be able to test out the 1&6 dice rule tonight. The only reason why I would have the "roll 1 to lose" for the Assassin is because it is basically the same rule as my 1&6 dice rule but without the 6 needed to be rolled for the enemy, so it is easy to remember.
-
Jenxstar said:
Why not just implement a simple house rule stating that if an enemy can be defeated without having ro roll the die then they cannot be cashed in as trophies and are just discarded instead?
That doesn't seem to be a bad idea at all. I like the sound of that. But then again, it's not often we come across the more powerful enemies, so it would slow the game down if we can only level up using enemies of a certain strength. Plus it doesn't solve the issue of automatic wins that the op suggested a fix for.
I have posted on the first thread linked above- saying I am in favour of the 1&6 rule. Roll for combat as usual, but if you roll a 1 and the enemy rolls a 6, you lose. And vice versa. Assassin only needs to roll a 1 to lose when assassinating as the enemy can't roll. When I have played my next game with this rule, I shall post my opinion of it on that thread.
-
That's a really nice card. Can you use a fate that you already have to fill the phial?
Note: There is a slight spelling error "gain or replentish new fate" (remove "t" in replenish)
Good stuff. If I can ever get these printed out I shall indeed strive to use them.
-
Lubricus said:
Hmm... They should have called him "Warlock's Apprentice" or something. Otherwise, it looks like he is THE Warlock.
Exactly!!! You hit the nail on the head. Too many people will mistake him for THE Warlock, not another one. Only when you look at both pictures (on the character card and on the Quest rule sheet) do you realise they look different. Those who don't pay too much attention to the pictures will automatically think what I said earlier- why the hell is the Warlock completing his own quests to reward himself with something he already has?
As you say, they should have called him something else to differentiate him.
how much do you play by the rules?
in Talisman Rules Questions
Posted
I am not going to dwell on the Assassin much- only to say I thought he was over-powered at first, only for me to beat him easily the next game simply because he didn't come across many Battles. It's all the luck of the game as to how well he does. Therefore, I have decided to keep his rules as written.
I always try and stick to any rules written down on the board or the cards. I found the game played better by having an extra rule for Battles or Psychic Combat though- whereby if you roll a 1 and the enemy rolls a 6, you automatically lose and vice versa. I came upon this idea from these forums, where auto-wins were discussed and how to stop them from making the game dull. It works perfectly, allowing you to lose even to a boar, and to win even against a dragon and a giant together! Also, with this in mind, I allowed one exception to the Assassins rules, whereby if he rolled a 1 when assassinating, he automatically fails and loses a life.
Other than that, I am (trying) to stick to the rules as best I can, although I do make the odd mistakes (like using Psychic Combat at the CoC last time we fought there!)