Jump to content

tylorlilley

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tylorlilley

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 03/20/1994

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://tylorlilley.com

Profile Information

  • Location
    Columbus, OH

Recent Profile Visitors

340 profile views
  1. Hello, I got a reply from Matt Newman today. Unfortunately it muddies the waters quite a bit (in my eyes): I'm not sure what to make of the rules now as I clearly must not have a good understanding of them as this is not what I would have expected. I'd be interested to know how everyone else in the thread that seemed to agree with my understanding can explain this. I have edited my original post to highlight where I went wrong with my reasoning based on Matt's response... let me know if you think it holds up. Thank you.
  2. Ah, I did so as well earlier. Hopefully that helps and doesn't hurt. For those wondering, I asked a similar question on BGG first and it was received with a lot more debate/disagreement than the reception here has been. I posted here because I figured more voices would better help me understand where I was getting it wrong, but I'm not sure if that's the case based on the response here. The bgg thread can be found here (https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2299362/) if anyone is interested in doing further reading of arguments about this rules topic.
  3. Ah, sorry for misinterpreting. If that is indeed the case, then I think we are all on the same page?
  4. Thank you for this post. I agree with everything you've said, for sure. I think the places I get confused are in the edge cases, like what counts as a performed action for Pay Day type effects, and where the line is for free triggered abilities/reaction abilities that either are actions because they have a bold designator (like Shortcut Lv. 2) or because they immediately give you an action and have you take it (like Ursula's ability). I'd be interested to hear how you'd answer the Pay Day question in regards to Leo, Ursula, and Shortcut's triggered abilities (to know if I got it right above). Thanks!
  5. By this do you mean that Shotcut Lv. 2's free triggered ability does not count as an action-the-quality even though it has a bold Move action designator? I am aware it doesn't cost an action-the-resource but if it is also not an action-the-quality than wouldn't you NOT take 2 damage when triggering it while at Balcony and moving to the Theater? That would contradict several things I said above if so. Thanks!
  6. I'm sorry if this is a lot, but I am desperately trying to make sure that my interpretation of the rules surrounding what is and what isn't an action works, and the above is the only way I've been able to reason it that complies with ALL of the FAQ entries listed above. The questions I've tried to answer here are: What determines whether a game ability or effect is an action or not? (for things like Balcony's forced effect) What is considered to have been a performed action (for things like Take the initiative and Pay Day) Is there a functional difference between moving with Shortcut Lv. 0 (which has no bold action designator) and Shotcut Lv. 2 (which DOES have a bold action designator), and if so, what? So, with that laid out, here we go: It is my understanding that whether something is an action (as in having the quality of being an action) or not has nothing to do with how many actions (as in the resource that players by default get three of to spend each turn) are spent to perform that action. Actions-the-quality and actions-the-resource are two different things as far as the game is concerned, despite the same english word "action" being used to describe both of them. This is determined based on the following FAQ entries: If I play an event with a Fight ability, like Backstab, does it provoke attacks of opportunity? No. Abilities with a bold action designator (like Fight, Evade or Investigate) count as an action of that type. In this case, since Backstab counts as a Fight action, no attacks of opportunity are made, because Fight actions do not provoke attacks of opportunity. The same goes for Fight abilities on assets, like .45 Automatic. Because all "abilities with a bold action designator count as an action of that type", and because there exist abilities with bold action designators that do not require actions to be spent to trigger them (Shortcut Lv. 2 for example), there must be a distinction between whether an ability or card effect is considered an action-the-quality and how many action-the-resource was spent to trigger it. Therefore the definition of whether something counts as an action or not is if it has the bold action designator (or is one of the standard actions available to you on your turn; each of which has a bold designator describing it on the player reference card as well). (is this correct? EDIT: No. According to Matt's response, an action is simply defined by whether an action is spent to use it, so Shortcut Lv. 2 is not an action.) Proceeding from here, we can look at Attacks of Opportunity, and when they trigger. They only trigger when actions-the-resource are being spent, and not in response to just any action-the-quality type ability being used. This is supported by the following FAQ entry: (1.1) Attacks of Opportunity Attacks of Opportunity are only triggered when 1 or more of an investigator’s actions are being spent or used to trigger an ability or action. [free triggered ability symbol] abilities with a bold action designator do not provoke attacks of opportunity. This further supports the above idea of actions-the-resource and actions-the-quality being different, and further supports the idea that Shortcut Lv. 2 would be considered a "move action-the-quality", but not provoke AoO because no "actions-the-resource" were spent to trigger it. (Is this correct? EDIT: No. According to Matt's response, in addition to not provoking attacks of opportunity, free triggered abilities with a bold action designator are not actions at all.) Following this line of logic, we can see how Ursula's triggered ability, which causes AoO, must be gaining and spending an action-the-resource on a new investigate action-the-quality effect as a result, whereas William Yorick or Leo Anderson's triggered ability, which do not cause AoO and have no bold action designator, are not the gaining and spending of an action-the-resource and do not have the action-the-quality as a result. To rephrase: Ursula's triggered ability is an action-the-quality because it allows you to take an investigate action (which is why it can provoke AoO and why it can be used to take any investigate action available to you, and not just the standard one), and does so by giving you a new action-the-resource which you must immediately spend on an effect at your disposal that is an investigate action-the-quality. These statements are supported by the following FAQ entries (from the latest, v1.6): Does the ability on Ursula Down allow me to take an investigate action on an asset or event card? Yes. Ursula’s reaction allows you to take any investigate action, including those performed via the activate action or via the play action. Does the investigate action taken via the ability on Ursula Down provoke attacks of opportunity? Yes. If an ability allows you to “take an action,” it is as though you are gaining an action and immediately spending it to perform that action. This is different from reaction or free triggered abilities that simply perform the effects of an action directly, such as the reaction on Survival Knife. We also know that investigator effects like Leo Anderson's or William Yorick's do NOT provoke AoO. Based on the Ursula rulings above, we can infer that this is because these abilities do not provide you with an action (note they don't use the word action in their text, unlike Ursula's). If this is true, if a card with a bold Play action designator were to ever exist, we can assume that this abilities would NOT be able to use them instead, because they are not allowing you to take an action but rather instructing you to play-the-game term an asset not gain an action and perform a play-the-action-type action. These statements are supported by the following FAQ entries (the first from v1.3, the rest from the latest, v1.6): Does Ursula Downs' ability trigger AoOs? It does. You're doing the full process / rules for taking an action. It's different from something like Yorick's or Leo's ability, if that's the comparison being made. If I play an event with a Fight ability, like Backstab, does it provoke attacks of opportunity? No. Abilities with a bold action designator (like Fight, Evade or Investigate) count as an action of that type. In this case, since Backstab counts as a Fight action, no attacks of opportunity are made, because Fight actions do not provoke attacks of opportunity. The same goes for Fight abilities on assets, like .45 Automatic ( 16). Because Ursula's ability is as though she is gaining "an action[-the-resource] and immediately spending it" and "it's different from something like Yorick's or Leo's ability", I conclude that Ursula's ability counts as performing an action, whereas Leo and Yorick's do not. This means if she were to play Pay Day, she would gain an extra resource for having used her triggered ability, but Yorick and Leo would not. Similarly, to circle back around to Shortcut Lv. 0 and Shortcut Lv. 2: Because Shortcut Lv 2's effect includes an action designator which therefore makes it an action performed, it would cause an investigator to gain an extra resource for the action performed if Pay Day is played after using its free triggered ability. Conversely, Shortcut Lv 0 does NOT contain an action designator, but like Leo/Yorick, is simply a game action being performed, and thus does not have action-the-quality, and then is NOT counted by a PayDay played after it. (Is this correct? Edit: No. According to Matt's response, Shortcut Lv 2's activation is not an action, and thus wouldn't count as an action you've performed this turn for the purposes of Pay Day. I think Pay Day would still count Ursula's investigation, however, since that one is specifically performing an action.) In another comparison for Shortcut Lv. 0 and Lv. 2, consider the circumstance where an investigator is at the Balcony location from the first scenario from the Path to Carcosa campaign. This location has a Forced ability that explicitly looks to see if a "move action[-the-quality]" was performed when moving from it to the Theatre. Based on the discussion above, an investigator using Shortcut Lv. 0 would NOT trigger this forced ability because the movement from the Balcony to the Theater was not an action-the-quality effect. Conversely, using Shortcut Lv. 2 WOULD trigger this forced ability because it was still an action-the-quality type effect even if no action-the-resources were spent to trigger it. PLEASE let me know if I have anything wrong in any of these assertions, and more importantly WHY I am wrong based on rules found in the RR, FAQ, etc. Thank you so much in advance!
  7. Hello everyone. Just wanted to post an update to let everyone know there is a new version of the app available. It fixes some bugs, and adds the new feature of allowing you to customize specifically what characters and endings you would like to include or exclude in the randomization. EDIT: You can download the new version here. Happy Talismaning!
  8. Thank you for the kind words! I'm glad you like the direction I took things with the songs and the artwork! The intention was that the "Spell" spell could backfire and make everyone including yourself a Toad. It was somewhat modeled after the Toadify spell and it seemed a bit more balanced (and Talisman-y) if it could backfire.
  9. I just wanted to post an update to say that I did end up making a set of spells comparable to those in the base game based on the spells in Zelda II as well as the three spells in Ocarina of Time and the non-warping Ocarina songs. Feel free to check them out and leave feedback if you are interested; I added them to the same gallery that was posted before.
  10. I'm glad you guys like it! I could easily see myself expanding the project into additions for the Spell deck and/or the main board, but I wanted to post what I had completed as I'm not sure how much time I will have to work on this more in the near future, what with the holidays coming up. I'm sorry if your favorite Zelda games were under-represented; as stated in the first post the expansion takes about 70% of its inspiration from the original zelda, with the other 30% being filled in by Ocarina of Time. There is enough material even in a single Zelda game to make 104 cards from, probably, so I aimed at what the "biggest" two Zeldas were to try and achieve a classic or generalized Zelda feel. If this got popular enough I could see myself making another set fo Adventure cards or two for some of the "smaller" Zelda games (Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are personal favorites of mine!) Thanks again for the support!
  11. Hello all! I had the idea recently to combine two of my favorite things, Talisman and The Legend of Zelda. It seemed like it would be a great fit! After working on it for some time I am ready to show the world the 104 card adventure deck I completed. The cards in roughly the same proportions as they appeared in the original base game Adventure deck. So you can use these cards alone as their own Adventure deck for the game, or you can mix them up with other sets if you want to. Inspiration was mostly drawn from the original NES game, with a little bit of Ocarina of Time mixed in for good measure. I originally planned to make a set of spells and/or character cards to go with these too, and I might still do that if I feel like it or if demand is high enough. For viewing convenience, I uploaded all the cards to an imgur gallery that you can find here. Let me know what you think! I'd love to hear feedback on them as I've yet to try and print them out to play with them. If anybody else is interested in doing so, feel free to ask and when I finish compiling all of the cards into a printable document I will let you know. Thanks in advance!
  12. Thanks for the kind words! I appreciate it coming from you.
  13. Hey everyone! I have recently got into Talisman big time, and I decided I wanted to create a faster and easier way to randomize which characters and alternate endings we used each game. So I made a randomizer app to do so! You can find it in the google play store here. It supports all of the existing official expansions, as well as the characters introduced by the Digital Edition of the game. It will randomize game set-up, hiding or revealing the ending depending on the card and the user's preferences. It also allows you to press a button when a character dies during the game to get the next character for that player or reveal the current ending. Feel free to leave me feedback however you'd like if there is something missing you would like to see included! I can't promise I will be able to add everything but I will try to update the app with new features if there is a feature that becomes widely requested. Thanks!
  14. I would agree with this interpretation, that this rule is only in effect for this particular ending. Nothing on the original ending card or the original rule book mentions not being able to heal once the Crown of Command has been reached, to my knowledge. There's no such thing as "original ending card" unless you mean a page from rulebook or default ending card from Cataclysm. Yes there is. I referenced it earlier in the thread, and you can find it on the Talisman FFG Website under Player Resources (here). It is also what the Digital Edition uses when the original ending is chosen.
  15. So this alt ending says you can't heal when someone is on CoC. That pretty much dictates that normally you can heal. I would agree with this interpretation, that this rule is only in effect for this particular ending. Nothing on the original ending card or the original rule book mentions not being able to heal once the Crown of Command has been reached, to my knowledge.
×
×
  • Create New...