Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Uvatha

Pick the Ending

Recommended Posts

Suggestions:

Make the trigger tied to the movement roll rather than the Reaper.  That way if you aren't playing with the Reaper figure you could still use this card as is.  Make it roll a one for movement -> add a counter, if someone catches you forgetting they can add one.

Make it a generic counter rather than a fate counter.  Fate counters are a limited resource, and I would hate to not be able to draw one because they were all tied up on ending cards.

I'd let people keep adding counters to the ending on the CoC.  Why not let them defend the ending they want from getting swapped out?

You have already removed all of the revealed-only endings from the deck, so referring to the remaining endings as hidden becomes redundant.  Plus, they aren't exactly hidden if they are all face up on the table.

 

All in all, I think it is a neat idea.  I probably won't use it due to the extra steps involved plus all of the table space that would be needed to keep the extra cards around.  If the Black Void ending ever pops up again I would absolutely ban it from this rule, it would be far too easy for the bottom two or three people to keep it on the CoC, especially because people in the Inner Region don't get the movement rolls needed to place counters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bah, no edit and I realized I misunderstood part of the rule.  <Double Bah, just found the Edit button on the top.  I did not expect it to be there.>

If the ending gets replaced on the CoC as soon as a new one gets 3 tokens I see a few issues.  At the least, the ending card being removed needs to have its tokens removed so it can have a chance to rebuild back to three.  Alternately, all ending cards could have all their tokens removed each time one gets three and is put on the CoC.  Or is your intent that each ending only has one shot on the CoC?

Yet another option is how I thought it went initially, the first to three gets placed on the CoC.  If another ending gets more tokens then it replaces the one on the CoC.  In that case I would allow additional tokens on the ending on the CoC to make it harder to replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea, I will edit it to allow the play of non-reaper games.
Yeah Fate counters to is a good idea, I always end up with heaps of counters left over but in a large game I see the stack can get short again thanks great idea.
I can allow the placement of tokens on the ending on the CC space that way as soon as it’s off someone can return it when it gets to three counters. Anything else gets very trying with rulings. Or even allow players to remove a token on a event as well (instead of) placing one?
With the Endings the trouble is that there is only two types of Endings "Revealed" and "Hidden" and more different types might come later. So in the rules I still really have to refer to them by their rule names even though yes they are not hidden anymore.
Yeah The Black Vold would need to be banned under this rulecard. If it ever turns up in the master set I will have to re-look at rulecard.
The adding tokens continually is another great idea :), thanks I'm getting ready to playtest.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Choose-your-Ending--2.png

Ok took out bad grammer and fixed some of the rules: Now ending when discarded from CoC are out of the game. Thus now players can try and "Get rid of" that ending they hate the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've stayed out of this just to see where it goes, but Talisman already has too many rolled triggers... especially tied to movement.  [The Reaper and like mechanics are disliked in my group.]  There is also the fact that characters who haven't done anything or earned some right to such an influence shouldn't be the ones who get to beseech the Powers That Be to set the endgame. Instead of movement rolls, make the characters earn such a godlike influence.

"When a player's Character earns a Craft or Strength by exchange of Trophy Points [only], the player may place one counter...."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Uvatha: I don't like the gone forever variation.  I kind of liked the thought of the various endings that people want trading in and out as the players try to outmaneuver each other.

@JCHendee: I agree that using the movement roll for a trigger is less than an ideal choice, but it is reasonably "fair". (meaning every player has a more or less equal chance of invoking the mechanic) My concerns about tying it to trophy trade ins is the potential for a run-away win if someone gets out to an early lead. Maybe for the right to choose an ending we should make people pay dearly for it.  Perhaps you can sacrifice 1 strength or 1 craft for the right to add a token to an ending card.  The right to choose the ending is a huge deal and this way people would have to think long and hard about throwing tokens around.  If that is too nasty, maybe 1 life or 1 fate would be a good alternative as those are easier to replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daefaroth said:

 

I agree that using the movement roll for a trigger is less than an ideal choice, but it is reasonably "fair". (meaning every player has a more or less equal chance of invoking the mechanic). My concerns about tying it to trophy trade ins is the potential for a run-away win if someone gets out to an early lead.

 

 

Random doesn't equal fair... it just means no one has any control over it.  And what about those special players who have a penchant for roll high or low?  Sorry, there really isn't anything fair about probability; equal "chance" is not the same as "fair."

Daefaroth said:

 

Perhaps you can sacrifice 1 strength or 1 craft for the right to add a token to an ending card.  The right to choose the ending is a huge deal and this way people would have to think long and hard about throwing tokens around.  If that is too nasty, maybe 1 life or 1 fate would be a good alternative as those are easier to replace.

 

I really don't get it now. If it's a "huge" deal, then why make it purely random?  I do realize Talisman is mostly a giant chance machine and little more than that... which is probably why some control and choice might attract some attention from players.

As to sacrificing a Strength/Craft point off one's character, I don't think even my hardcore group would go for that let alone the majority of more whimsical players. "Earned" S/C (vs the freebie ones from Spells, Strangers, etc.) are tough to come by, and more and more the game is being won by those who find shortcuts to boosts or shortcuts to the CoC.  Anyone who does so, will be at the mercy of those who got to collectively pick the ending through tokens because they earned their S/C.  Because....

If one player is getting ahead through luck (no matter what mechanics for tokens), it'll be obvious which ending they are choosing (the one that will be easiest for that character). This means that all other players will be looking to the ending that's hardest for the leader, perhaps in place of the one they each want. They will to some degree collectively pile tokens on that one that might rub out that leader... and there's only one leader and more other players piling tokens.  As you can see, plenty of PvP vying for the ending, and strange player alliances that shift and turn.... no matter how the tokens are added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize for not clarifying what part I thought was the "huge" part.  My concern is that (as you point out) earned strength and craft are tough to come by.  At my table, generally only one or maybe two people make any significant number of trophy trade ins in a given game. So, only those people would have a notable influence on which ending were chosen, if the trade in trophies and also get a token choice is used.  If tokens are randomly distributed, it is no longer such a huge deal because it is no longer primarily under a specific persons control.

And yes, I agree that fair wasn't exactly the word I wanted (which is why I put it in quotes and put a clarification afterwards).  Perhaps equal or balanced would have been better, but fair seemed closest to what I was trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JCHendee said:

I've stayed out of this just to see where it goes, but Talisman already has too many rolled triggers... especially tied to movement.  [The Reaper and like mechanics are disliked in my group.]  There is also the fact that characters who haven't done anything or earned some right to such an influence shouldn't be the ones who get to beseech the Powers That Be to set the endgame. Instead of movement rolls, make the characters earn such a godlike influence.

"When a player's Character earns a Craft or Strength by exchange of Trophy Points [only], the player may place one counter...."

Thought of that already, it does make the leading players very powerful. I don't really think adding another mechanic to the "1" roll is alot of a prob and the random chances about it does allow players to all have a chance at influrencing the ending. I even thought of quest rewards being the trigger but again the leading characters will gain way to much of a lead that way. Given that the Reaper is already in play (my group loves it) I find its really the best way to go. Plus you have the extra "forgetting to move the Reaper" rule.

Random doesn't equal fair... it just means no one has any control over it. And what about those special players who have a penchant for roll high or low? Sorry, there really isn't anything fair about probability; equal "chance" is not the same as "fair."

I disagree, oppose to allowing leading players gain even more advantages ingame is more unfair. If players want to use a item to roll that "1" then ok, there are more other things ingame that are more important to get a good dice roll.

@Uvatha: I don't like the gone forever variation. I kind of liked the thought of the various endings that people want trading in and out as the players try to outmaneuver each other.

The "gone forever variation" works very well with the "1" roll trigger. The amount of times players roll a 1 for movement is very low and the token placement on endings is also low. The endings slowly get resolved and players can "get rid" of that nasty ending. If the trigger is chanced to lets say the "exchange of Trophy Points" then the token placement would be way to fast. Players this way can bluff and place their bets on what ending is coming or going.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uvatha said:

 

The amount of times players roll a 1 for movement is very low and the token placement on endings is also low. The endings slowly get resolved and players can "get rid" of that nasty ending. If the trigger is chanced to lets say the "exchange of Trophy Points" then the token placement would be way to fast.

 

 

That's interesting, because in my experience the opposite is true.  I see a lot more 1s rolled for movement than I see trophies traded in.  Maybe that is just because I mostly play 4 player games, so it is odd to see a full 3 turn cycles go by without at least one player rolling a 1 for movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daefaroth said:

Uvatha said:

 

The amount of times players roll a 1 for movement is very low and the token placement on endings is also low. The endings slowly get resolved and players can "get rid" of that nasty ending. If the trigger is chanced to lets say the "exchange of Trophy Points" then the token placement would be way to fast.

 

 

That's interesting, because in my experience the opposite is true.  I see a lot more 1s rolled for movement than I see trophies traded in.  Maybe that is just because I mostly play 4 player games, so it is odd to see a full 3 turn cycles go by without at least one player rolling a 1 for movement.

Seriously, given that most of the time players trade in muti-copies of trophies you end up with quite a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll add on last point... overall, the math would show that "earned" (not just "gained") Strength or Craft over the course of a game is lower than the probability of a 1 being rolled in any one round (not turn) according to the number of players in a game.

It is not the number of trophies traded in but rather when a single Strength or Craft is gained by exchange of necessary trophies. That happens less often (in the first phase of the game) than the roll of 1 for movement. In fact, the chance of gaining enough trophies of the right kind (S or C) to earn and S or C in one turn is so very very low that no one could claim it is higher than the chance of rolling a 1 for movement

NOTE: in the latter third of the game where auto-kill of Enemies starts occurring, token placement will increase if by trophy exchange. BUT in phases of the game, as estimated by progression through the three regions, Outer 60%, Middle 30%, and 10% Inner (where  movement dice are not rolled and trophies are not gained).

In any one player's turn, sans use of any mechanic for re-rolling movement, there is a 16.7% chance of a 1 being rolled. BUT... when looking at a 4-player game, for the odds of at least one 1 being rolled in a round (not turn), the odds are higher according to the number of players. It is a nested compound probability:

  • 16.7% + (16.7% x 16.7%) + ((16.7% x 16.7%) x 16.7%) + (((16.7% x 16.7%) x 16.7%) x 16.7%) = 20.03% chance of at least one 1 rolled for movement round (not turn) in 4 player game.
  • Hence, a 20.03% chance a of an endgame token being placed during a round, or 1 token placed on average every 5 rounds.
  • ASIDE: then chance of two 1s in a round is about 4%.

Chance of exchanging trophies for S/C is dependent upon:

  • chance of an Enemy being draw (27.9% chance in turn; 39.46% per round) NOTE: a player's chance of landing on an Enemy in play is far lower than drawing one, and hence isn't really worth calculating at this point.
  • subchance of that Enemy then being defeated (based on average character S/C of 3.5 at the beginning of a game), or 46.6% overall across both Strength and Craft.
  • Chance of gaining enough trophy points in that of the right kind (S or C) to gain an S/C in that turn.
  • the (estimated) escalation of the chance of an Enemy being defeated during a round over the course of game

Considering the use of expansion boards with shortcuts to the CoC, the escalation factor is not as high as it might seem. Shorter the game, lower the escalation of character's Strength or Craft purely by earned S/C. Because there are fewer turns in which to encounter Enemies, defeat them, amass trophies... etc.  With expansions came more artificial boosts and non-trophy boosts to S/C to the point that trophy use began to drop in percentage for how many S/C/ were earned instead of gained.

This is why a token should only be placed when a S/C is "earned" rather than "gained." It keeps the number of tokens placed lower than just when you get a S/C for any reason... and lower than the odds of rolling that 1 for movement across the whole game.  I won't run you through the math unless you want me to, but the claim that rolling 1s is the lesser occurrence is false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...