Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Ghoul: I'd add "Whenever you lose a battle you must immediately (after losing a life or winner takes his reward) roll a die and add the result to your strength value and attack the opponent for another battle. If you win this battle, you must take a life as a reward." Gives a nice ghoulish feel to it, and yes the ability triggers again after a 2nd loss etc.
  2. I checked but somehow had missed it up till now:) thanks! love the burning effect!
  3. jin-blooded who doesnt get a source of spells is one of the weakest characters, relying entirely on an item you can lose and might not even get makes a character weak imo, and he's not even that strong with spellbook/wand bounty hunter is strong without and very strong with full plate but even then he's just strong in fights, so much of the game is about so many other things than simply winning fights a caster will outpace him more often than not even if he does get his hands on a full plate relatively early. +2 fate makes the dread knight mediocre, i like to fix characters to top 25%. Having his strength depend on the horse that is easily lost to follower eating ancounters or craft enemies is a SERIOUS drawback. there's a lot of characters as useless as elf and priest, their abilities are among the least useful, admittedly, but their high starting stats help them just past the shittiest characters (knights, philosopher etc). I only have an issue with mechanics that interact with other mechanics in unforseen ways if they are broken, only the alchemist comes close imo and he's not VERY OP vs the strongest characters. But I can agree about the uselessness, in some ways the worst part about many characters abilities isnt that the characters arent strong enough but that the abilities dont affect the game enough and give it a different feel, that's potentially the strength of a game like talisman where you choose abilities before starting; that each game is very different from the other. But again, this is an issue with the majority of characters imo.
  4. Talisman is a race, playing the game at higher speed makes you more likely to win. Deaths are relatively rare, but if you go below 3 lives it's a good idea to play it safe unless you're hopelessly behind. For this reason middle region is a great place to adventure. Most of the time you can land on oasis, temple, hidden valley or a draw 1 card space. If a few of those spaces become occupied by a card you dont want to encounter leave and find new hunting grounds. Dungeon is a very dangerous place, I wouldnt go there unless you have at least 7 strength, preferably more. Dungeon has a much higher % of enemies. If you can't beat the majority of them there's no point in going there. Highland is similar although enemies have lower strength, so you can go there early, even at the start of the game. One way to play expansion, that makes the game faster and allows for more pvp, is to play them without mainboard, possibly 2 expansions linked together. Simply add 1 life, Strength and craft for highland, 2 for dungeon and houserule 1 or two spaces that are worse than draw 1 card to a tavern+graveyard+chapel+rogue's guild+healer
  5. lot of people underestimate casters because people who play them hold on to their spells till the perfect moment rather than casting as many as possible. If all the spells do during a game is steal an object and maybe kill or toadify an opponent they are good but not imbalanced, Still among the better characters but nok broken. However if casters cast spells left and right for several small advantages every turn they become extremely powerful. The ability to hinder opponents regardless of where they are is especially powerful. Casters CAN be more balanced depending on the spelldeck if there is only 1 caster in the game as some spells are hard to cast without other players having access to spells, and some objects like wand even out the difference. basic game was more balanced in this way, the more expansions there are in play the more powerful casters tend to become. I'd say its a tossup between replenish spells and fate, which is why i like playing doomsayer.
  6. A strange list. jin-blooded and bounty hunter: I don't see either becoming an issue terribly often, especially jin-blooded who is also generally very weak so an exploit only helps a little. Bounty hunter potentially becomes one of the strongest in the game but not by much. elf priiest and magus are midlevel characters imo, if they need fixing so does most characters (incidentally : most characters need fixing;) ) dread knight is very weak I agree, but your fix seems insufficient, although I can agree to the always evil ability:) I'd prefer +2 strength or +1 strength +2 fate alchemist its important to note that the issue is interaction w city, without city he's actually midlevel at best. My preffered fix is to limit characters to 1 scroll and alchemist to 1 transmutation pr turn at beginning. And starting with 0 gold if city is in play. Imo it's hard to point to specific characters that need fixing, most non-caster characters are fairly evenly spread out from bad-good and while the strongest are far stronger than the weakest, they are only slightly stronger than the 10 characters next-strongest characters. So either you'd had to redo 90% of the characters or just live with the imbalance and allow 3 picks to make sh*tty characters less likely. My one exception, other than alchemist+city, is casters, those that gain spells every turn or so, who are by far the strongest. My fix has been to remove the ability to cast spells on characters on other spaces (and in turn remove the timing restriction on spells: immobility takes effect on targets next turn fx)
  7. I've scoured the web a few times for news but can't find anything. Does anyone know anything about when or if we might see another expansion? I fear that perhaps too many has gone for the full package and there's noone who will actually buy the expansions if they do get made, thus removing incentive to actually make them,...
  8. it's usually very easy for me to break down a game and identify flaws. I like to point them out before games, suggest a fix and shamelessly exploit them if my suggestion isn't agreed upon:) Talismans 1 great flaw is the massive imbalance between characters. Most people seem to think it's more of a feature but I like to compare it to drawing a card to determine how much you start with in a game of poker. You can still win w small starting cash, but far too many games are decided but that 1 initial draw. The other big change I've made is take out all the complete setbacks (lose all objects/followers/strength/craft/life) and reduced them to smaller setbacks. The game is long enough without having to start over. That is definitely a feature/matter of taste though, and really changes the nature of the game. Other than that the issue w a game like talisman is really finding when to stop, there's so many cards/features that are broken. I managed to limit myself to adding a catchup mechanism for core game. For expansions id remove scribe spellbook battle axe and flail, limit to 1 bow, 1 horse, 1 scroll. Ban "teleports" to or in inner region.
  9. had the kind of opposite experience: turn 8 flight potion-->toadify eagle king-->arnknell-->lucky charm+fate to pass portal of power-->win sometimes the stars align:)
  10. Rawsugar

    Fixing the Flail

    I'm not quite sure how it makes the average gain of the flail only +3 when what I'm proposing always gives the flail +6. Could you show your math, please? This just isn't making any sense. I don't mind the costs of the weapons. What I do mind is how easy it is to get things at either no cost or only 1g. average roll 3,5, average benefit from always 6= 2,5. chance of rolling doubles 1/6 * opponent average roll of 3,5= 0,58333. Total = 3,08333. battle axe can cut through armor. which id say is worth more than the 0,08333 extra strength... True, even if you fix cost you wouldnt fix people getting the right cards...its not too big an issue, there's only a few cards doing so and generally city cards dont give much on average, even if you do have gold. I agree battleaxe is also OP, but greatsword is actually more or less correctly costed. Perhaps the fix is to remove battle axe and flail or give them some clear disadvantage like a chance of breaking them, losing the battle or losing a life. Perhaps making flail +1, roll 2 dice but choose best and opponent doesnt add if double (equals +2,5) and battleaxe some special effect like 3d6 in battle dont add strength or if roll equals opponents always win regardless of battlescores. Or just let it be:) There's a fairly long list of things that are stupidly imbalanced in talisman, and once you start houseruling its hard to find a place to stop:P although i agree the armoury is one of those that comes into play most often
  11. talisman digital seems the best fix. you're already losing some of the coziness of boardgaming whether your build in tiers or god forbid start playing correspondance talisman.but either digital or a sofa bed^^ - or perhaps a gamercafe/half empty cafe in your area?
  12. Rawsugar

    Fixing the Flail

    you'd be reducing average gain of flail from +4 strength to +3 making it slightly worse than the battle axe. Perhaps just +3 and if roll equals opponent only your roll is added? would make it +3,5 personally i'd prefer to double all weapon costs in the armory. in some ways spellbook and warhorse are a lowcosted as the weapons but at least those are somewhat easier to lose.
  13. Personally i prefer just core game, the balance is also better (expansions make characters that depend on landing on other characters much worse, character that depend on spaces in outer region become worse, the core game is balanced so that just when people start becoming strong they can take the chance to go for win whereas bossendings disrupt this mechanism, city makes gold suddenly worth 2 or 3 times as much...and so on) Core game fits perfectly for a good evening of casual players looking for some hours of fun (its still easily 4 hours if people arent somewhat focused on game), characters make for great variety, enough if you dont play it every weekend. We play with frostmarch which is basically just coregame but a doubles adventure cardpile and adds a few chars.
  14. I think +1 pr character is plenty, gain/discard spell if alone. Personally I like that teams can be outnumbered no need to have equal sides teams when you have a balance rule in place. Honestly, due to winning battles, a bonus to S/C likely gives even more growth than trading trophies at lower rate, but: 1.S/C makes the outnumbered team more powerful as well, so they are less likely to be easy prey early game. 2. trophy trading risk switching teams just to trade trophies at low rate and then return to team. 3. +S/C is especially important in the beginning and loses importance as you progress, whereas rate of trading is the opposite. Therefore a bonus to S/C makes it more likely teams are balanced in the beginning and will stay balanced, whereas tweaking rate of trade depends alot on the character(s) actually killing enemies. I like this concept by the way:) would consider adding an option of teleporting next turn to the space of an opponent when landing on allies, to increase player interaction
  15. if you can switch teams the balance should not be permanent. Instead set it to +X to strength and craft. And gain/discard 1 spell pr turn if alone on team.
  • Create New...