JCHendee said:

But counting cards is only PART of the game balance. Until you know how big of an impact the cards have on the game and how much they help or hurt players you're just looking at numbers that are a small part of the equation for game balance.

Until people actually get a copy of the expansion any estimates on game balance is based on guesswork and should clearly state so.

BTW, stronger opponents and weaker characters equals boredom plus frustration.

First, I never claimed it was the whole picture, and we've been doing a bit more than counting cards. Second, the numbers don't lie when you know the actual way that probabilities work. Third, a few games won't tell you anything; you'd have to play hundreds and record all the results of draws and rolls along the way in order to tabulate the results and figure the margin of error situationally. It's not necessary to do things the hard way, and it won't tell you with certainty what we're discussing. Fourth, I don't need to put an IMHO, or even an IMNSHO, on every post; it's blatantly obvious that its just my perspective, since I'm not speaking for anyone else.

There are important factors of probability to be extrapolated from any set of number mechanics, anytime, anywhere. Though indeed I have only scratched the surface herein. I don't have all of the numbers tabulated across the base game and multiple expansions. I probably won't go that far, since I don't really need to ... for expressing an opinion... or in that previous case a viewpoint (which aren't the same thing).

Here's hoping others still give us a game summary in testing out Frostmarch by its rule variations and alternative endgames in the other topic. I look forward to that.

ameritrasher said:

Well, ameritrasher, weaker characters can be a real challenge and a little bit of frustration is sometime welcome, but after looking at the spoilers list for Frostmarch, there is a lot of 1,2 or 3 strengh or craft enemy added to the adventure pack and not many strong enemy, now weezing through weakling monsters turn after turn is equal to boredom since I want some challenge from time to time to keep me interested at the game.

As to the matter of card count, I am much more frustrated at the obvious inbalance cause by the total lack of importance to the neutral characters who have to become either good or evil to benefit from the game, no magic object or weapon are for neutral character only! This is a clear case of game imbalance.

So in short: more stronger enemy, more special object or event for neutral characters, can't care less for card count and statistic, let's try to find some clue about the next big expansion now

Cheers

Old Master said:

Hey Oldmaster...

I agree that drawing tons of low strength boars is really boring (pun intended) but just because something has a low strength doesn't mean that it's weak. The reaper expansion had a bunch of low strength monsters that were very nasty. There is one card in particular called the trapper that is really dangerous. He makes you roll two dice and choose the lowest so even if you have good strength he can easily defeat you. A monster with a low number can be very deadly if they have a special ability. If Jon posts another card list it would be good to an arrow symbol ^ to show if a monster has a special ability so we have a better idea of how weak or strong the challenges really are.

Neutral characters are balanced because they have most of the benefits of good and evil without any of the drawbacks. A neutral character can heal at the chapel and get fate at the graveyard and he doesn't have to worry about losing a life by entering either one of them. Sure this costs gold but not many people complain about running out of gold in our games. A neutral character can also carry the runesword and the holy lance so he can carry all of the best objects in the game. Evil characters can't carry the powerful objects for good alignment for example.

If a card could only be used by a neutral character it excludes both good and evil alignments. All other good or evil objects can be used by at least two alignments so I'm not sure how I feel about cards being limited to only one alignment. Would that mean that you could have objects that can only be used by an evil character and exclude good and neutral characters?

The Basilisk is a low Strength Enemy (2 Strength), but if it rolls doubles your character is killed outright (check out the mythology of the Basilisk)! So that's a big risk card. It doesn't matter how great your Strength is against the Basilisk as it still has a chance of killing you.

Ell.

Velhart said:

Maybe there will be a completely new expansion. I'm still hoping for something with a focus on a special type of monster/race/enemy. How about a "Land of Dragons"? Or a realm with Isles and ships (and pirates of course)?

ameritrasher said:

Even if you put one strong event in the deck instead of 5 less strong events in the deck, then you have the problem that you will not draw so many events in the game.

I think, you must not see it that way..

We need enough events for the game, and some cards can be strong while others do other things. (less strong

Balance is important, ( and 7 events vs 28 objects+magic objects is not fair..

That feels not like a adventure..( And frostmarch should make it more dangerous, but if i look to the card list, then it will not reach that point..

Old Master said:

I fully agree

Neutral allignment is another big problem in this edition.

I hope they get it fixed in the City expansion + we need events/ objects/magic objects for neutral characters only.

We need indeed a lot of more stronger enemies ( because we have already 290 cards with frostmarch now)

Can't hurt to add 30 + strong enemies to the game Maybe the Dragon Expansion will fix that?

But if more expansions are coming with weak enemies, then it will be more difficult, that only one expansion can fix this..

Old Master said:

I vote for this

ameritrasher said:

That's right. special abilities can make the enemie more dangerous.

We can't see this in the frostmarch card list..

But it must be a really dangerous ability, if it is added to a low enemie.

Also.. most spaces on the mainboard are draw 1 spaces, so the chance that he will do a combined attack is not high..( so he must do it on his own..

It's better at least than a low enemie who has nothing..

But for me, that's not a excuse that we can't add high strength, craft enemies to the deck..

ameritrasher said:

Yes, they should add objects that only neutral characters can carry, this goes also for events that can change you to neutral

Then the neutral allignment will also become a important aspect to the game.

From this moment, it's no point to stay neutral, unless you want to stay away from both positive and negative effects..

And it's also weird, that characters who begins with a neutral allignment, and they must changed because of a event card or mystic, then they can never changed back, unless you are the Druid or you have the Druid Staff..

talismanamsilat said:

Thanks Elliot.

That looks like a challenge to me

redsimon said:

Haha, a land of dragons

Maybe that they will be some dragons flying in the mountains ( wyverns etc)

But if Dragon Tower show up, then the Dragon King comes flying out of the sky with his army of dragons, and the mainboard will be infested with a lot of dragons

No escaping anymore from low enemies haha

People will be Crucify by the Dragon Cult, and the King of the City have a difficult time to get rid of the them.

The King will send some Crusaders to find the cult, and they join you, if you draw them

Stay away from the cult, because if they find you, and you lose, they will crucify you, and you become a meal for the dragons

Maybe that the cult will kidnap the Princess or Prince too Revenge !

Too good to be true

I agree with V. about objects for Neutrals, and there is a way to still make them available to Good and Evil, so that like Good and Evil objects, there is some spread in use. Instead of just Alignment limitation, the Magic Object may have erhaps one or two limited abilities only usable by a Neutral character. The challenge of Alignment in Talisman is that it is built on a singular axis (sort of) instead of two or three, but them it leans to a strict binarism, bipolarism on top of that;. There are actually only two real alignments in Talisman. Neutral is treated as not having an alignment at all... hence why it has no alignment card.

As to the Basilisk, we should remember that Pliny (the main source now for its mythology), and the Greek and Roman Scholars in general, were trying to catalog and assimilate all the myths of the world and fit such into their own cryptozoological perspective. They considered themselves to be the definitive authorities, even though they weren't really doing more than a mash up of myths and often incomplete ones gathered through only word of mouth in some cases.

We have to go much further back and sideways into other cultures to find the true origins under other terms in other languages. The basilisk is not well represented anymore and overall it never was. It's andamalgamation of about 6 to 12 other creatures, of world myth, including the Cockatrice, and a very late history, rare variation called the Cock'o'guile (likely as a play on the term Cockatrice). There is also the pervasiveness of RPGs and their further adaptations which are now too often assumed to have gotten the details right. Oh, and the whole gaze thing sometimes associated to a Basilisk... that's actually from the Cockatrice.

A low strength Basilisk is actually somewhat correct, since they were very small by most accounts of creatures in multiple cultures that reportedly had similar physical and mythological make-up. And hence they often caught their victims by surprise or passed unnoticed. But the accuracy of the death stare thing would depend on which creature lumped into the Basilisk that we are actually talking about. On another tangent, the diversity of mashed up creatures behind the Basilisk and others creatures reference for a Greek and/or Roman origin is actually a good thing... if one is willing to do the real extra work and not just lean on pop culture. With some real research (and hopefully NOT using Wikipedia as if a primary source), lots of spice and variety are out there to be harvested in adding to Talisman's (or any game's) amalgamation of the fantastic.

Giving a low powered enemy a Special Ability (so to speak) as a way of making it more challenging, but doing that as a dominant pattern, or making the abilities too deadly or easily used, is a mistake as an attempted counterbalance. When they are overcome, they are still worth so little as a trophy by the rules. I'm not saying that this imbalance exists in Frostmarch, but it does seem to exist in the new Basilisk. I'm saying that this approach cannot and should not be used as a way to compensate for lowering the median and/or average Strength and Craft of enemies. The value of traded trophies is still lower regardless vs the challenge of those special abilities.

The secondary problem is how to make these particular trophies worth something extra, as a further potential balance, without messing with the whole trophy exchange mechanic by saying its worth more than its stated Strength or Craft. Sometimes adding an alternative trophy "use" can for that low attribute, high danger enemy is one way, though its not fully effective admittedly. I'm sure there are others, but that's one of the easier ones.

I think I'd be happy to take a 2 point trophy as opposed to being killed outright!

talismanisland said:

If I drew the Priest, I'd probably hope for the Basilisk to turn up, cast Resurrection (or one of those saver-Spells) on it when someone kills it, attack it myself, using Fate if I roll too high and start again with a better character .

talismanisland said:

No doubt... and hence a 2 point creature able to do that on a random roll... and force the use of a Fate point when it happens... is too much risk to gain that 2 points. And if that ultimate effect is random, with no way to overcome it, that's not the kind of toughness or challenge wanted in Enemy cards. Gains need to balance against risks that are truly faced by more than another random chance.

I saw the new artwork from the Yetti, Frost Drake and Frostbite on boardgamegeek

the Yetti looks very cool. His artwork is awesome ! He does the same as third edition. Before you fight him, you must roll on one die under your craft, if it is higher, the boulder he throws hits you and you lose a life

Frostdrake, has no special abilties, and is just the same as a normal dragon.

Frostbite sword is also nice

The Toadify art is funny

JCHendee said:

Hi JC,

After hearing that the transmutor( place card) is also dangerous, i have look again at the Frost march card list.

I don't know yet, what all the events will do in frostmarch, but if all 7 events are dangerous, and we add 2 dangerous place cards to the total, then we have 9 dangerous cards..

With Reaper expansion, only 6 events from the 12 cards are actually dangerous.. ( and the place cards in the reaper expansion are also not dangerous..

So maybe that the frostmarch expansion has stil more dangerous cards than reaper?..

This does not mean off course, that the card balance is better, but you know my point i think

PS: have you seen my other post) It are 254 cards(-36 events) instead of 248.. My mistake..

You are right again, V. It does sound more dangerous. But I too will have to see more about it before making final conclusions. My concern is the about of Objects in proportion to the average and median of Enemies being potentially lower than the main deck. If we add in extra danger from Enemy cards or others with no balanced gains to Strength or Craft from facing Enemies, then definitely that would be a concern. It further tilts the game to collecting possessions as the better way to "level up."

As to total cards, that's okay; it then actually brings the base + expansion ratio I calculated down closer to that of the base deck, which is good... where Events are concerned, that is. Of course it doesn't tell us about the balance of negatives and positives, though likely the negatives or just challenges should be the greater part to a reasonable margin.

So far, from some partial previews, the Spells don't enthuse me... or rather leave me ambivalent. There appears to be a spread like in the base game from the reasonable and CvC based to the ridiculous in the PvP... and the utterly godlike to a degree that exceeds the base game. I know for a fact that my group will demand the removal of the Obliterate spell. It will go over well with those interested in mostly PvP, but for a more CvC crew like mine it is going to be seen as too ludicrous. Freeze on the other hand is very utilitarian and CvC, and that one will be highly sought on our table.Toadify is probably a push, as the way we play Fate you can't use it on space persona rolls, so toading is still a reasonable chance as it has always been before the advent of Fate. None of us see the need to have a toading more than once every other game. Anything like that, which happens too often, loses its charm too quickly.

Velhart said:

I wanted to add the picture, so that more people can look at the artwork

Yeti, Frost Drake, Frost Bite, Toadify, Freeze, Obliterate

V., you should have linked it so people could go there to see the enlarged view. One still can't see the text clearly, and that may have led to the original mis-quote on Toadify.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/594608?size=original

JCHendee said:

I can't see that picture where the link leads too..

Because i am not a member there..

Time to become a member... since its easy and doesn't cost anything.

JCHendee said:

Done

Let's get a peek at the original image's..

From the Frostmarch list, i see we get around 16 old retro cards to the deck.

Are they maybe cards that has the same effect but change from wording? ( like the dungeon keeper, who replace the slaver..)

Does somebody know if the Altar card from frostmarch, is the same card as the Altar from the dungeon from third/or 2th?

I think Jon New may be the only one to answer that, since it requires that old expansion and a copy of Frostmarch.