For those that think the Flail is too powerful given the relative ease of obtaining it, I'm thinking about testing the following house rule:

"When you roll doubles, you automatically win the battle, but the Flail breaks in the process, and cannot be used. You may repair the Flail for 2 gold by visiting either the Armory or the Village Blacksmith."

I think this strikes the right balance better than other proposals I've seen (increasing the price or banning it entirely). The Flail remains quite powerful, but this at least slows it down and encourages you to use it only when you really need it. I also like that this encourages you to retain and use alternate weapons. One of the things I don't like about the Flail is that there is almost never a reason to use a different weapon when you have it. Let me know what you think!

You could just use the Goblin Fanatic's 'Ball and Chain' ability from Talisman 3rd Edition.

I thought about that, but that replicates the Blood Flail from the Harbringer so I wanted to do something a bit different. I think this is better than the Blood Flail, but still nerfed enough to solve the problem with the Flail being overpowered.

My fix is this - I printed new version, sleeved old one and put my version over the original. (actually I did that with over half cards from armoury and emporium)

My fix is this - I printed new version, sleeved old one and put my version over the original. (actually I did that with over half cards from armoury and emporium)

That's also a good fix. Weaker than my version, and even weaker for characters that already have that ability. The only problem is that arguably the blood flail (even with its autolose if you roll doubles) may actually be better than that, and it's supposed to be a relatively negative item given that its cursed.

if you fix the flail you should really fix the battle axe as well.

the correct prices for the items is 6 for battle axe and 10 for the flail; high bonuses should not cost the same pr bonus failry basic gameengineering tbh...

your suggestion roughly equates to making the cost 5/6ths gold pr use, making it better than bow, somewhat balanced by the need for paying 5G up front, although if you have 5 G you'd definitely want the flail, but then the bow isn't very good if you aren't loaded so that's fine

But unless you fix battle axe as well i dont quite see the point as they are close to same power (flail adds 4, battle axe 3 strength), nerfing flail just makes battle axe the weapon of choice.

@bludgeon your fix makes the flail add an average of 1,5 strength making it less powerful than greatsword while being more expensive...

if you fix the flail you should really fix the battle axe as well.

@bludgeon your fix makes the flail add an average of 1,5 strength making it less powerful than greatsword while being more expensive...

You're right on both accounts. I did some math-fu and indeed my fix makes flail equal to +1,57 bonus, which is not enough for a price of 5 gold. Back to the drawing board

if you fix the flail you should really fix the battle axe as well.

the correct prices for the items is 6 for battle axe and 10 for the flail; high bonuses should not cost the same pr bonus failry basic gameengineering tbh...

your suggestion roughly equates to making the cost 5/6ths gold pr use, making it better than bow, somewhat balanced by the need for paying 5G up front, although if you have 5 G you'd definitely want the flail, but then the bow isn't very good if you aren't loaded so that's fine

But unless you fix battle axe as well i dont quite see the point as they are close to same power (flail adds 4, battle axe 3 strength), nerfing flail just makes battle axe the weapon of choice.

@bludgeon your fix makes the flail add an average of 1,5 strength making it less powerful than greatsword while being more expensive...

All good points. Perhaps I will just increase the price of the Battle Axe to 6G. Also, regarding the cost of repairing the Flail, keep in mind that unlike the Bow, with my suggested nerf you can't just pay the cost whenever you want. You have to actually travel to either the Village or the Armory, presumably burning turn(s) in the process. Let me know if you still think it should be 10G though (are you using some sort of calculation for these prices?)

for the base price it's not exactly math, just the principle that large bonuses/high values should cost more pr bonus than small bonuses. you'll see this in most games.

There's no excact way to determine how much (well there is but im far too lazy, if you wanted to you could calculate the average effect it would have a turn for various startinjg strengths, but you'd still have to guesstimate an average starting strength/median cost and the numbner of turns...)

anyway the minimum increase in price pr point is adding 1 G for extra strength making it

1S=1G

2S=3G

3S=6G

4S=10G

you will find that sequence (1-3-6-10-15 etc) in many games as well. not exactly science but the idea is to find the sweet spot where you are not sure which item you prefer to buy. if it's just 1-3-4-5G you will always go for the most expensive you can afford. Games are fun not just when you can get lucky but also when you have to make smart choices

As for bow vs flail, bow adds 3,5S making it's cost as a permanent item 8, at a cost of 2+1 tpr use it reaches its cost at 6 fights (7 if you count that you can dscard the bow); before that you made a bargain after that a permanent item might have been better.

Flail lasts an average of 6 fights for 5G and adds 4S, clearly better purchase, (except perhaps at the very end of the game) if you wanted to balance flail would have to cost 10 and still go to pieces at doubles.

However flail is balanced by the need for a 5G up front payment AND the fact that bow can be used as a boost WITH other weapons. Bow+ sword would cost 12G, reaches that at 10 fights, great sword 18G/14 fights. All in all well balanced.

Only thing that bothers me is that you can use fate to "save" the flail, but it's so rare for characters to have easy access to fate that one likely doesnt need to prevent that. If a character or object with the ability to create fate often or roll extra combat dice gets the flail it becomes a very good purchase though.

for the base price it's not exactly math, just the principle that large bonuses/high values should cost more pr bonus than small bonuses. you'll see this in most games.

There's no excact way to determine how much (well there is but im far too lazy, if you wanted to you could calculate the average effect it would have a turn for various startinjg strengths, but you'd still have to guesstimate an average starting strength/median cost and the numbner of turns...)

anyway the minimum increase in price pr point is adding 1 G for extra strength making it

1S=1G

2S=3G

3S=6G

4S=10G

you will find that sequence (1-3-6-10-15 etc) in many games as well. not exactly science but the idea is to find the sweet spot where you are not sure which item you prefer to buy. if it's just 1-3-4-5G you will always go for the most expensive you can afford. Games are fun not just when you can get lucky but also when you have to make smart choices

As for bow vs flail, bow adds 3,5S making it's cost as a permanent item 8, at a cost of 2+1 tpr use it reaches its cost at 6 fights (7 if you count that you can dscard the bow); before that you made a bargain after that a permanent item might have been better.

Flail lasts an average of 6 fights for 5G and adds 4S, clearly better purchase, (except perhaps at the very end of the game) if you wanted to balance flail would have to cost 10 and still go to pieces at doubles.

However flail is balanced by the need for a 5G up front payment AND the fact that bow can be used as a boost WITH other weapons. Bow+ sword would cost 12G, reaches that at 10 fights, great sword 18G/14 fights. All in all well balanced.

Only thing that bothers me is that you can use fate to "save" the flail, but it's so rare for characters to have easy access to fate that one likely doesnt need to prevent that. If a character or object with the ability to create fate often or roll extra combat dice gets the flail it becomes a very good purchase though.

I use different math:

+1 in battle or psychic combat = 2G per bonus

+1 to Str or Craft = 3G per bonus

trinket adds another +1G

So sword in the village has correct price of 2G, but stiletto definitely shouldn't cost 1G (it should cost 3G)

That sequence of 1-3-6-10-etc in other games doesn't really apply because in talisman you don't really get better at getting gold as the game progresses.

Flail (Im assuming the version from 1st post) lasts on average about 4 battles, not 6. Adds 3,5. It's hard to say how much it should cost because it's hard to calculate how much 16,6% chance of autodestruction reduces overall damage output and value. In my model simply adding 3,5 to attack costs 7, but the item would have to be cheaper. 5 might be just right.

imo sword is correctly priced because it has a slot limitation, it's the opposite effect of trinket. you are likely to find other weapons and only be able to use 1 of them. The error with the other weapons is that this reduction is also added to more powerful versions, not just once but for every boost.

the increasing prices pr boost is justified here not so much because it increases rewards exponentially , but to reduce/balance the usefulness of gold. it's for much the same reason that you can heal/replenish life and fate and not gain using gold, or why you can only buy 1 spell at a time. gold does not have a 1:1 (or 1:2 or 3) trade value vs fate spells life strength etc.

On the other hand the city screws A LOT with that balance the other expansions have, so maybe in this context your version is not unjustified. Except sword and greatsword are reasonable at 1 and 3 but 6 and 8 for battle axe and flailis not impossible, id prefer at least 9 tho...

regardless, flail is destroyed in 6 of 36 possible outcome or 1/6 rolls which means on average it will last 6 rolls

it adds 3,5 with a 1/6th chance of reducing opponents roll by 3,5 for a total of 4,0833, technically a bit more since now it's 1/6th of outright winning (although to be fair you are likely to win if you add 7 to your strength)

if you had a weapon adding 3,5 you could buy for 7 or a brittle version that lasted 6 uses you could buy for 5 i'd go for the permanent version. half cost seems about right, but I'd prefer to change either the price or the rules, not both.

anyway seems everyone is in accord even if our reasoning is not^^ .metalzo's flail is awesome and balanced, battleaxe shoul cost 6 and we aren't 100% in agreement on sword/greatsword, unless you find my slot limitation argument persuasive.

imo sword is correctly priced because it has a slot limitation, it's the opposite effect of trinket.

Isn't that base assumption and as such not taken into account?

regardless, flail is destroyed in 6 of 36 possible outcome or 1/6 rolls which means on average it will last 6 rolls

it adds 3,5 with a 1/6th chance of reducing opponents roll by 3,5 for a total of 4,0833, technically a bit more since now it's 1/6th of outright winning (although to be fair you are likely to win if you add 7 to your strength)

if you had a weapon adding 3,5 you could buy for 7 or a brittle version that lasted 6 uses you could buy for 5 i'd go for the permanent version. half cost seems about right, but I'd prefer to change either the price or the rules, not both.

I want to keep the extra die and I want to keep the price unchanged (because it's printed on the board). Not sure what penalty should be added to flail that's worth a -2 price.

id say not. a ring (non trinket) adding 1 to battle should definitely cost more than sword dont you think?

because it "stacks" w sword and other weapons

id say not. a ring (non trinket) adding 1 to battle should definitely cost more than sword dont you think?

because it "stacks" w sword and other weapons

And other rings, agreed. I thought you meant slots as in "every character has 4 item slots"

1 option for reducing price by 30%: if your attack roll is less than your opponents' the flail is destroyed after battle. (chance 20 of 216 = 9,3%)

alternatively doubles = attack roll of 1 (making flail add 2,5 on average, but more with fate)

What about "if you roll double, you hit yourself - lose 1 life".
Flail is very difficult to use weapon.

Or flail take additional object slot because it is very heavy.

Why not make the Flail just do it's doubles ability, but you still roll a single die.

"When you use the Flail in Battle, your opponent cannot make an Attack Roll"

This mimics the Assassin ability, giving you the +3.5 effective Str bonus in Battle, but reduces the effectiveness of the Weapon since it becomes consistent. For example, currently a Str 2 Alchemist with a Flail can defeat the Sentinel with a roll of double 4's, 5's or 6's, or with a roll of 9-11 if the Sentinel rolls low enough. With the proposed change, this same scenario would mean the Alchemist could never even generate a Stand-off, much less win with such low stats.

The Assassin would have no use for it, but he can still use any other Weapon in addition to his ability, so the Assassin still holds the edge here. The Warrior with a Flail and another Weapon is the same scenario as the Assassin with another Weapon, but he is delayed by the need for Gold and time to create the combo, plus has less Fate.