I see now, though I'm utterly unfamiliar with that game... but it doesn't work from my perspective for the paradigms upon which Talisman is built. Talisman isn't really "crew" based; I could never see looking at followers that way, since they aren't crewing a vessel (?). They are following one individual... and it is an equipment based game in some ways, equiping the individual not a vessel. In this, perhaps its also the inverse; aside from a few characters with special abilities, it's the Followers that can't be touched (usually). But they can be killed or driven off under some rare conditions (or at least they were now and then in previous editions... maybe not so much in 4ER.)

Sorry about your quoted reply crash. We've all been there! Again and again!

Now perhaps back to the wishful notions for expansion boards, though I do realize with three (or four?) already in the pipeline it is just that... wishful.

JCHendee said:

I can hear all the "table space challenged folks" screamming NO to more board expansion after the 4 corners. I wonder why these people think that they have to put all expansions availables in the same game. I remember back in 2nd edition, that sometime we would play with timescape, some other times not, same with dungeon or city. This approach was very good in the way of changing the way your character would be played and each game was different. Personnally, I hope you are wrong JCHENDEE, and FFG go beyond the current commercial design paradigm.

My wish for Talisman is to have so many varied type of expansion that choosing which ones to use on a single game will be part of the fun.

I dare FFG to make me a "table space challenged folks" member with Talisman

Cheers

Oh, I could go for some swap outs too... though I expect that for the BIG expansions (with a board), they will probably stick to what all the previous players were used to. The small ones (cards only) look like they will be either selective reprints and some new cards and components, like was done with Repear and now Frost March. Should prove to be a good strategy, satisfying the new players and the old guard with something for each. And based on such a strategy (as an educated guess), the schedule of future expansions might be tentatively set for the foreseeable future.

Yes, you can always choose to omit an expansion board. I wouldn't normally vote for that though.

As for swap outs I think the best place for that is the centre. We are already accustomed to variable endgame scenarios.

And the more I think about it, I strongly susspect we'll see a version of Timescape but changed a lot. Changed enough that poeple who didn't like it will consider giving the new one at least a chance. I'd like to see it as an ending only (with it's own climax).

Hmmm... do you have any notions about how Timescape could be refitted for an endgame scenario?

I hadn't really put much thought into it.

The obvious way to do an ending realm is to have a final destiny space. That's how the inner realm works in the basic game (CoC), as well as (I think) how the Dragon Tower works in 3rd. A central destination space in the Timescape board could resolve a number of ways. Just brainstorming:

• you could fight a big bad evil guy.
• You could find a teleport pad, where you summon your opponents to kill in combat one by one (this is similar to Monster's Menace America).
• A special weapon with which you return to hunt the other characters. Roll a die roll for an straight kill, or perhaps an auto kill (but only when you encounter them).

Timescape could include just one such ending, or have a die roll at the final spot.

Another idea without a final space - The Crown of Command has been sucked into a vortex! Are you brave enough to follow? You can travel the multiverse in search of this precious lost artifact. There could be several ways to find it - you could outright draw it; defeat a nasty enemy with a crown icon (roll to see if they had the crown); complete some sort of Timescape quest for the mad scientist? When you find the crown, you win!

Just ideas. I'm sure there more and better things a qualified game designer could imagine.

Some of these endings are similar to the 2E alternative endings, but combined with Timescape board scenario they might be more interesting. The downside is that most 4ER players want a direct fast game with a certain ending that is there waiting when they reach the CoC, so I'm not sure how much appeal there would be for a additional board to get through before acheiving the end.

Unless you're thinking of the overlay as replacing the Inner Region, in which case, that's not a bad set of options to combine with it.

JCHendee said:

JCHENDEE correct me if I'm wrong but from what I can recall from many post on this forum, the thing that players from 2nd edition hated the most from Timescape was the "sci-fi" themes, Black Void being a close second!

As I've stated before in another thread, Timescape should work with a medieval theme as a starting point, then going backward in time, it might even go back to the "big bang", the new ending would be Master of all creation. Winning player would have bragging rights until next game...

Cheers

....ahem, ahem : as I said above.......... NO TIMESCAPE DAMMIT !!!!

JCHendee said:

Agreed. An additional ending board would be used only when you start early and only on occasion. That's exactly why Timescape woks so well for it. A lot of players (like me) wouldn't want to play it all the time, while others (like Hem) might never want to play it.

Centre boards could be great for swapping. Each set could come with an optional centre board (along with corresponding ending card), and (to ensure everybody buys it), some new characters, new adventure (and other) cards, and maybe even another ending not related to the board.

JCHendee said:

That would require rules for all the cards that reference or can apear in a space in the inner region. Even the treasure room would need an errata. I'm not saying it couldn't be done. It could be as simple as any card or character that would appear in any space in the inner realm instead appears at the Portal of Power, or at the first space on the new board.

Old Master said:

I think (?) what Crimhead is after is something similar to what you suggest: a reworked Timescape-like board that would tone down or eliminate the SF theme. I never liked Timescape, but its mechanics in a more Fantasy-esque motif might work for what he has in mind. But of course, I'm not really certain what that would "look" like aside from barely remembering the underlying mechanics of that board. I'd have to go find it and see what it looks like again to deterime the Fantasy alternatives that might be applied.

crimhead said:

Okay, I can understand that concern, but maybe I'm forgetting some of the cards you're referring to. Do you have an example?

Old Master said:

If we can go backward in time, then maybe we can get a stone age board haha

But actually, we have already a mammoth, and it has already a middle age fantasy board.

So how much backward must we go, and what do we want to see...

To me, there is a very practical limit to the number of expansion boards: the main board is already far too big, adding "corner boards" around it is really out of the question for me. As such, I really don't like the Dungeon in its shape, I'd rather of had it a smaller rectangular or square board to place next to the main board. Adding three more boards around the main board simply isn't going to work for me because there isn't enough table real estate to support it.

I guess I'll have to wait for 6th Edition (FF edition is 5th, not 4th "revised") for a smaller, more practical main board to return.

Everyone should go read THIS topic for a clue as to what comes next. I must admit that I was disappointed. I guess those of us here who've aired our views on past expansions must be very much in the minority; that's the only way it would make any sense. Very disappointing news to me if its accurate, though it's not official until FFG says so.

I will not be buying that next expansion after Frostmarch unless it is radically altered. Maybe not even then. In fact, I know that no one in my extended players circle will be buying it either... again, IF the leak is true.

I too have had my longstanding concerns about table space, for which I'm working on my own solution to that ridiculously sized main board. I'm building myself a more economical 20" x 20" board (maybe 18" x 18"), complete with my own created graphics (no copying of the commercial board's graphics will be done). Yes, I like Talisman that much, and I hate the big board that much.

The Dungeon, as infrequently as it is played, will still fit on a corner of the new board if need be. Players will always know how it is accessed, so lining up with the Ruins really doesn't matter (and it never did). But the Wife and I while playing alone won't have to get and move around as much, and we'll have some decent table space within reach.

It may be a while yet until I can finish the graphics, maybe another month at least. Once those are ready, I will try to do an article on my LiveJournal showing how to make a blank quad fold game board from scratch, should anyone else like to learn how. And then I will mount my graphics on it and show the finished product.

Don't worry JC, that was just Geoff's little joke at us keeping tight-lipped! Thumb screws are useless against us, however if he had brought cake it may have been a different matter!

JCHendee said:

Not really. In long 26 years of Talisman history, it got many, many different expansions that cover almost every aspect of the game. More, these homemade expansions still are under production, so that means there is still many new ways to increase fun of playing the game as well as there is still many ways to increase its possibilities. And I'm talking not only about cards-only expansions, but about board ones as well. Even myself I made a card that moved all Characters into new board of Necromancer, so somehow that could be Back to the Future Part III. Eventually they might do a underground to the base game, that could connect some Outer and/or Middle Region spaces, eventually spaces of other Realms, so that could be easier to travel. There is still many possibilities, even when they will reach 4th corner + Tower.

crimhead said:

Seems You don't know me But fact, from what I noticed, only I'm here want TS back. But that doesn't matter, I'm playing my MiM, I mean Talisman, with 2nd Edition TS as well asMagiczny Miecz - Krypta Upiorów (Magical Sword - Crypt of Wraiths www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/28579)

JCHendee said:

Once I said to Jon, that I'll stop playing Talisman, if they (FFG) will make City, and mostly Master Cards, based on 3rd Edition. While I really hate the City Expansion, because it has 10 spaces to draw a card, and 90 cards, while half of them are always-stay-on-this-space Stranger or Place card, there is one thing I love it - Master Cards. Crypt of Wraiths, I mentioned above, had 3 Master Cards, and whole target of that board was getting one of them. But first You were forced to have a Rune Magic Object that allow You to enter to the centre of the board and challenge warrior for Master Card. Crypt of Wraiths was the hardest expansion in whole Magia i Miecz, Magiczny Miecz and Talisman history but its prize wasn't cheap. Fact, the City Master cards were.... hmm.... practically only High Mage and Sheriff had big chances to see the light and the game. Rest not really. Master Thief completely - one single card among 90. And its ability: If the Master Thief appears again... Never ever..

Master Cards gave us possibilities that we never had before. In Magiczny Miecz - Grod (to be more exact - Magia expansion) expansion, while Master cards were even worse than in 3rd Edition, it introduced two cards (same effect but different image) that affected Master Card Characters - we were able to take their cards regardless, where these Characters actually were. Additional abilities is harder to lose than Treasure card.Only if Master cards could be enough worth to go for them, I could see a great expansion with them.

JCHendee said:

Not really. Board can stay outside the game until it will be needed. Not all expansions must be near base board. Also Talisman players always will know from which space and/or card they may go to another Realm.

crimhead said:

While itself that could be nice (something like my Necromancer board), but that could be waste of the board. Single board used once per some games isn't something that FFG would like to intoduce.

crimhead said:

Rune Gates are nice, however they should not be discarded IMO or should be used when next time someone will encounter them. Now they are a great possibility to flee from attacking Character. Then the attacking Character is in the middle of nothing, while defending Character might be in base board just near Portal of Power. That's little unfair IMO. if Rune Gates could be a permanent line between rest of them (like Star Gate) and also indestructible like old Dungeon Door, their role in CvC could be more advanced.

Hem said:

Is that discussion sounds like Blast from the Past? xD

JCHendee said:

But players could be like dog in the manger, they won't use given Object/Follower but also they won't give it to their enemies, if they always may attack a Character and take it without giving something in exchange. Too much Monopoly.. (nota bene could be funny to see Monopoly in Talisman, where Characters could be able to buy given spaces for their own).

JCHendee said:

I made a set of Chaos cards which bring Chaos to the game. As a example is a card that is exchanging spaces from Inner Region (except of VoF) to other from Middle and/or Outher Region; appearing of Fire Mountains (from 2nd Edition, missed in rest other Editions), that locked Inner Region for forever, so Characters must fight each other and the one who survive is the winner of the game; eventually Inner Region all space instructions now are exactly same as Hidden Valley. Anyone, who will reach CoC is moved back to his/her starting place with a 1 Win counter. Character, who will have 4 Win counters, win the game.

But yes, all of that three ideas are rather complicated, and I heard from people that they are hard to remember (which is a lie, since in my games many times happen to remember 5 and more global effects and I didn't found that is hard to remember them all).

crimhead said:

Nah, that's drastic example, and while possible, it very rarely appeard. But that was one of strategy elements. Personally i don't like PvP in Talisman. I and my team very rarely are attacking each other, there is plenty more occaisons to got the power from cards than from attacking, however, if You are playing in "aggressive" team, I would like that example above. Why? Because that's true PvP - if You won't kill other Character using all possible ways (even that 20 Spells), it will kill You using 21 more deadly Spells. Or Talisman is a nice fairy game or it is a warfare.

JCHendee said:

Or homemade rules. I always was playing, and I'm playing even now, that if You lose a Mule, Horse and Cart &c, You additionally lose all Objects on it. If someone stole You a Mule, he or she also stole all Objects on it. My players always were forced to think, what they must carry by themselves or what is not that important, so they may risk it carrying on Mule, Anti-Grav Platform &c.

crimhead said:

When I shown that my idea about Ice (Frost) Queen, and read what You think about it ("It's overpowered"), I start to laught. When I show Your opinion to my few Talisman friends, not only that ones I'm playing with, they were laughting with me. Maybe that depends of what we want from Talisman, what for us is a hard game or maybe how many hours we are playing the game, however Frost Queen with S and C equal to 12 and possibility to choose kind of fight is a crap. No challenge at all. Final boss should be really a final boss - should have big amount of parameters, special abilities that could affect the fight, not only: "if the attacking hero ever loses, he or she will face a punishment in addition to the loss of a life, and it may include being sent all the way back to the plain of peril!"

...

We all know many bad final characters, and their tricks &c. Definitely, Frost Queen is not a bad character at all. Weak parameters, (very little upgraded Sentinel), weak abilities (seriously, it's really hard to lose with her). Only her appearance is eventually not bad. But she should be functional, not just looks good.

crimhead said:

Nah, as JC later said, it's enhanced Belt of Hercules, but this time we can use our own parameters as well as we are summoning other Characters to us, not otherwise. TS was that good, that Character with Belt of Hercules weren't able to teleport (nah, even if, it still wasn't able to start a fight) to TS, so Character inside of it was temporary safe.

crimhead said:

Not good thing, because it easy can be stolen or destroyed by Spells or card effects, so basically that Ending could be a waste of time.

crimhead said:

That could be a better idea. However, after revealing this Ending card, some spaces now should be able to move us to TS as well (like old Mystic, Enchantres and Warlock). Going through whole Inner Region just for a gate to TS is a little.. not nice.

While I'm very big lover of TS, there was only one thing I hate in it (and I'm happy that in Polish edition I didn't had that) - Hand of Fate.

Just

...

from me about this. Yes, I've made plenty of card types, Chaos, Warzones, Apostles, Attachments, Oracles, Traps, Continuums, Demiurgoses, Taroks, Lords of the Other World, *creatures of the Other World*, Pyramids or Stained-Glass Windows, nah, even Event/Attachment cards, but every single card type has a different unique Rules, while Event and Hand of Fate cards are exactly same cards. Just name different...

Old Master said:

True, but because art lines of 2nd Ed. cards were, nah, waste of words. I think, I could hate it as well, if I could be forced to play original version of it. But I had very detailed version (I show some examples there: www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp), I start to love it. For me it had a great gameplay, it was really dangerous, and finally we weren't able to choose our destination space - we were moved from a space to space.

-

So, some words from me. Personally I'm more like a munchkin - I'm trying to gather the most power I can. I don't care about expansions themes as long as at their end they have something good to give. So, if it's fantasy, SF, prehistory &c, personally I don't care. I would like many expansions, because I could be able to choose with which ones I would like to play. They may even use same corner (then we would choose if we want to move for example to Dungeon or to Underground) or expansions to expansions. Frostmarch one of Ending cards is named Crown and Sceptre. If one of expansions could introduce Sceptre of Command (heh, before I knew about Frostmarch I even made two WarZone cards - Wizard's Tower, where we were moved to Graveyard and were casting Command Spell and where after defeating its guardian, we were winning the game) somehwere else, in other expansion, and we could be forced to gather bof oth them in order of winning. Eventually, both of them could cast Command Spell, even at Character, who has the counterpart of Command item.

When (long time ago) I was making Hell Exp. Set, I had a Character, who had alternative winning condition, not CoC, however, he could access CoC space and take it as Magic Object, so other players were forced to hunt him and take it back in order to win the game. And now we are at that point I'm really missing in Talisman - strategy. I mean lack of strategy. That Character above, Lucifer, was a good strategy addition to the game. One player against rest other ones. Finally, instead of going to one well known place (centre of the board), CoC was moving around the board, so they were forced to have a good strategy, not just good parameters, if they would even like to think about winning. Goodenough should add new strategy aspects to the game, not just some boards with new possibilities to reach CoC space.

Play with a homemade rule - ones a Character wil reach CoC space, it is teleported to his or her starting space with CoC Magic Object that allow him or her once per turn cast a Command Spell. When he will lose it, the next its owner is casting it &c until just one Character will survive this. It's a lot better that being sad and awaiting at CoC space another Character, who will eradicate us.

I'm sure most of PvP / CvC players would like more strategy in Talisman than something else (new boards, new Treasure cards &c). I've made a WarZone Exp. Set which introduces War Zone cards. They are hidden in a same manner as Spell cards, when we draw Adventure cards, we don't show them automatically but we look, if they have any WZ cards, and we put them hidden in our Character's Area. Then we are revealing other cards and we are encountering them as normal. In every fight (battle or psychic combat) player on our left can use a WZ card. If he or she won't, possibility has next player on his or her left &c, until any WZ card will be played or untill all players will pass). WZ cards are modyfing Character and/or creature parameters, abilities, some of them are moving to another space, some of them break a fight &c. When used in CvC, any instances to a Character means attacking Character, and any instances about creature to defending Character.

Even, if they would not introduce new card types just like that WZ, with they could make at least some Treasure cards or something, bah, maybe even separated like-a-Spell deck with possibilities that we would be affect other Character's other aspects, not only parameters or object/Followers.

talismanisland said:

Thank goodness... and Geoff is going to get it someday! I know what I'd do with his cake if he brought one.

JCHendee said:

I think that might work. Whatever other worlds or dimensions used would have to be drastically distinct from those in regular Talsiman, which is mostly medieval but kind of generic. I think it would work best with serperate decks for each world, which may be off the menu.

Personally, I don't mind (and even like) the sci/fi theme. Just not all the time. A D&D adventure involving a crashed space ship, aliens, and technology might be very cool, but not every time you play. I also like worlds in which fantasy an sci/fi themes are both common place, but Talisman isn't like that.

I know there is always the option of usually playing without it, but I'd prefer if it was in every game, but didn't often come up. Poeple might not buy a set that didn't get used much, but it could be an optional rule. If I were to play 2nd edition again, I would want the house rule of using only one vortex card (should be an option), or even no way in except Black Void (also should be an option).

Nemomon said:

I figured that object would ahve soem built in protection (but perhaps not comlete immunity).

Anyway, I'm not attached to those endings, just trying to suggest that a new centre inlay would have pretty much the same possibilities for and ending as the does CoC.

talismanisland said:

But If he's right by fluke it won't look very good for you, will it.

Nemomon said:

I can see that, it's a trouble that plagues any potential centre realm. You could build a board that covers the entire inner realm, but that would be an awkward match with the map, shovel, and other cards which reference spaces in the centre.

JCHendee said:

Not really, my games at my friends house so I can't brwoes the cards. I do remember recently one of the strangers who gives away a Talisman found his way in somehow.

The Object + Starting Space option mentioned above is a variation on the Belt of Might (title?). The Belt played just fine, and it did not teleport the adventurer, if I remember right. Yes it could stolen or removed. If it was removed (discarded), then like any card in the game, it returned to its discard point... the CoC. And yes, it did happen... and YES, someone else could get it. The game did not end because it was removed or "destroyed" - that never happens in Talisman mechanics unless stated explicitly on an individual card.

So there was always an endgame to complete with the Belt, no matter what happened to it. Among all the old endgames of 2E, it was one of the favorites for those players most into the CvC aspect of the game. It wasn't liked by those into PvP (alias "god-mode"), since the Belt required adventurer (character) interaction to use, hence CvC. But the typical tactic of the PvP players was to run away until they got a "god-mode" option (Spell, etc.) to assault the potential winner from afar. This is one of the critical differences in CvC vs PvP, and why certain types of endgames were popular with one group and outright hated by others. The CoC "Command" Spell was purely PvP, not CvC. (Terribly misleading name which should have been "Death" Spell, since you don't really "command" anyone.)

However, I did see a game where the Belt was set before play began as the endgame of choice for the night. The first one to get it died (and was out of the game since the endgame was in play). But this left the Belt in play in new hands. The next person to take ultimate control of it whipped the Amulet out of a Hidden Pocket the first time some threw a spell across the board, even from another region (coward). PvP was hobbled in dealing with the Belt wielder. The game was forced to lean more to CvC, especially once the Belt wielder kicked some ass and got its hands on the old 2E horse (+0, +1, or +2 after movement roll) for some real control over movement. Bloody game, good CvC, and hobbled "god-mode" for Players.

One of the best games ever... and by the by, I was the first one to die and I still enjoyed it. Rigging an endgame that's entertaining for all, including those reduced to spectator status, is pretty tricky. And the standard CoC endgame was always boring to watch... until CvC kicked in when a second ... or third... adventurer reached the CoC.

I think overall, the teleport option is a bad idea as a variation. That's just a cheap way for the Object wielder to go after those adventurers who are the furthest behind and thereby likely in the Outer Region. Better that the potential "winner" with the uber-magic-object has to work its way out of the Inner Region. My goodness, if it was powerful enough to get in there and take that potent magic object as well, why should it wimp out using a Teleport? If it got in on a fluke and tricks... then it should have to do so again to get out of the Inner Region... or better yet, let that sneaky wimp die trying to run off with something its not fit to carry!

Well this was the state of play at the game I just finished and lost..

Vampire v Space Marine!

Definitely You sould not play with the Cave Expansion Set . It was crappy translated, and it has many errors. Also not all cards were properly translated. Not to mention, originally it itself was FULL of bugs. But I'm happy seeing it in Your collection . Also, as once I mentioned, FFG never ever won't make such overpowered Characters like B.P.I.R.F. Sfera once did with Cave.

But it's nice to see a TS in Your game. Personally I'm playing with it and with Haunted Crypt as well. Generally I really like Your Talisman game Backs for TS cards are nice.

What's a Character near a Vampire?

Anyway, could You be interested in sending me images (Character cards and possibly Cave cards) of them to Your 4th Revised Edition?

Nice Photo

Very funny, to see the small Dragon Tower standing in a very large inner region

This goes also for the small regions from third, vs the Dungeon from 4thR haha