I made some more Ending cards.

Mostly re-makes of the 2nd edition ones, with some 4th ed tweaks, plus a new one.

Most of this art is simply googled, if anyone has anything more legitimate I can use, please get in touch.

Alternative Dragon King, retro 1E:

You're probably better off with the retro dragon rather than using the artwork from 4E®, scan from the box, and then posted on the copyright holding company's own forum.

Well, BOTH of them are held by GW.

This also falls within GW's usage policy as far as I can tell (IANAL).

GW does hold the rights to all the game and design ... the image may be another matter. And that one for FFG is definitely held by FFG, not GW. It was created by an artist specifically for the 4E and 4ER editions... not 1E and 2E... at a guess.

Is it my faulty memory, or is the Titan's Gauntlet the same as Hecurle's Belt?

JCHendee said:

I believe it is the same idea.

Ttian's belt has only strength 12

Grimoire of Lore should give possibility to attack in psychic combat. Without it, it is completely useless.

Well, as long as we're now analyzing these endings, the Grimoire doesn't enthuse me. It looks like big power trip for the weilder and that's all.

A +10 makes the bearer (not wearer) so potent that fighting him/her is pointless based on a 1D6 roll in combat, even if Psychic Combat was included as a given special ability. It just prolongs the game with little to no chance of a turnabout... so what's the point if I'm not the one to get to it first? I'd just forfeit and not waste another 30+ minutes of my time while the bearer runs around playing out some personal fantasy at my expense (and that of everyone else). Tthere have been other variations on this structure as well.

Revisions recommended: Gain +4 Craft, Teleport to any space (not just one with another adventurer), the option of Psychic Combat, and you always have your full compliment of Spells.

NOTE: a grimoire is specifically a textbook, of sorts, on magical practice. It passes knowledge of magic and is not a spell book; that's a pop culture delusion. But with Talisman's rather wishy-washy spell system, it would still work for (1) how spells are acquired and (2) providing Craft "skill' boost based on the knowledge that it would impart. But if this much verisimilitude isn't of interest, the structure failing of the uber-Magic Object endgame is still a pertinent problem.

Any endgame that involves going after other players to finish them off should have reasonable potency, features that match its theme, and a legitimate risk for interesting endgame variation. Without the latter at least, it is pointless for the rest of the players to bother with it, and they might a well just play the king of the hill version where the first one to the CoC automatically wins. If the uber-Magic Object (or other similar paradigm) forces any other players to say "why bother, it's probably over," then its the same ending as king of the hill. And then even the winner doesn't get much of thrill for drawing that endgame card. There are similar problems with a couple of the other endgames here.

Don't assume that just because some of these were commercially produced in a previous edition that they weren't flawed when analyzed rationally. Then again, I don't remember at the moment if what you have here is exactly the same as those.

Most alternative endings, endgames, can be classified according to standard adventure cards. In fact, looking at it from that perspective helps focus an ending's design to fit the game's mechanics; Magic-Objects are potent, but not so potent that they'd never been left just lying around for a random draw.... or left unattended on the Crown of Command. But using the standard adventure card types as endgame paradigms can also lead to notions that are fun for all involved if the card type emulation isn't pushed beyond reasonable. There are paradigms to consider for uber-Enemies, uber-Objects or Magic Objects, uber-Strangers or Events, and so on, that are suitable for mixed random draws.

Thx for the feedback folks. I'll change the Grimoire based on the above I think, a lot of good points there.

As for the Gauntlet: It was the Belt of Hercules, with a slight re-theme and slight change of rules to make it simpler based on various 2E feedback.

I kept the Black Void, Dragion King and Pandora's Box the same, the Demon received a small stat-boost in light of the Ice Queen's stats.

And for what it's worth, the 4E dragon image is from the 4E, nor 4E® box, it was actually a wallpaper on the BI web site of old.

The Grimoire is better now; still quite potent but not excess, allowing for some potential turnabout. I'd definitely play it as something new for a mid-length endgame, not fast but not too drawn out.

As to the Dragon King artwork, it is still copyrighted, regardless that it was put out as wallpaper. For most people its not a big deal; it just one of my own concerns for the business I'm in.

I had intended to save, as it needs a bit more work on text and graphics. I'd even had plans to split off its options into three cards with their own subvariations. I imagine you and I are not the only ones wanting to resurrect / update 2E endgames. But here it is anyway, as another variation on the Dragon King. Right-click and Save / View if you need a closer look.

ADDITIONAL: At present this is the only endgame I will be displaying. Others will follow later if and when time is available and I learn what is acceptable or not in use of concepts and graphics that FFG may have plans for.

Very nice! Just a few tweaks and it's much better.

I'm mpre that au fey with copyrights and such.

Even the card layout is copyrighted, so even with the one you posted, you've breached copyright.

That said, there are two parties who may hold the rights: GW have a policy on fair use, which AFAIAA, this work adheres to; and FFG who have never seemingly had a problem with other such fan material. If either ask nicely, I'll most certainly take them off the web.

Slev said:

It isn't that FFG may or may not have a problem, and fair use is another legal matter with guidelines not fully covered by this situation. I know fair use as an ex-college and university instruction, as well as an author ...and amateur ex-graphics designer of long ago. I've also worked with professional artists over the years on various projects, including through my publisher concerning novel book covers.

FFG has been very gracious in releasing card templates for our use, officially so to speak. Jon New of TalismanIsland.com handles most of that, though at present the status of the endgame template is not fully certain. That's why I'm only sharing this single card at present.

The card I threw up isn't intended to be exactly that of 2E, but if you spot anything excessively out of the ordinary, let me know.

Legal grey-areas for the fail!

Your card looks fine from here. Minor tweaks on 2E.

One more:

Overall, not bad, though its not much more than a "sudden death" that pretty much assures that no one without either (1) lots of toys and followers and/or (2) some legitimately built up Craft and Strength, can likely win the game. Much as I agree with the latter, the former is the only way to win in the modern faster play, where Magic Items and Treasures are being accessed and acquire in ever growing ways. It's a essential the old Arena card pumped up to the max.

King of the Hill, for us is a perfectly acceptable ending. We don’t like endings to begin with (for us, it’s the journey) so anything less painful than Crown and Sceptre is ok.

Since I like to figure out the meta-gaming, i.e. the WHY things are there, I’d assume the +10 stats are to balance out the Hail Mary plays, i.e. dwarf with crap stats and a pocket full of Fate, who drew the Talisman on Turn 1 (WISH I was making this up) by our “ever so loved ending rusher” (the rest of us like to dawdle) charged the CoC on basic stats and luck. And made it.

This allows a small mitigation on Hail Mary plays for the CoC.

However, I agree, for a basic “normal” game, a person pounding on you with +10 stats is basically king of the hill.

Then again, some people would graciously “let them have their fun.” Doing otherwise is kinda like conceding a Civilization type game before the end once you’re past the “I can’t win, s/he's too far ahead” part. Some would say “Cmon. Let him have his/her legit win.” Type deal.

Fortunately for us, winning isn’t the point. It’s the play that’s fun.

Agreed on wins... the play of the game is what matters. Easy wins are boring. Fast games are boring. And with some shortcuts in the game, and a larger group of players, I've seen the endgame last longer than the game itself. Again... BORING!

My take is that the boost is the reward for winning the race to the Crown, and mitigates some of the risk from you actually havibng to fight people insead of just blacting them with a dozen Command Spells.

I consider +10 more than a boost. We'll just call it demigod status and be honest about it... considering that you teleport around as well. I'm really tired of that trick being used in Talisman.

As to finishing out a no-win game just to statisfy someone else, especially when a shortcut is used... I ain't no duck in a shooting gallery. That's not why I cut time from a busy life to play a game with other people. Anyone into that can go off for some solo FPS. A good game lets the ducks shoot back - always with a chance to kill you.

Some of the endings herein are good or at least sound... some of them aren't. The gauntlet isn't. The grimoire is probably the best example herein... the scepter is okay, if that's the kind of endgame players enjoy. It definitely can have some risk, if someone gets lucky and gets into the CoC without deserving it. The scepter will turn out to be a nightmare when that lame spud has to start calling in the toughest other characters firs. That part I like... and the ducks get to pound on the shooter who turns out to have forgotten his ammo before showing up at the shooting gallery.

Fair call mate.

Out of intrest, how would you fix the Gauntlet?

Also, what else would you consider to need work?

Slev said:

Overall, I think most others will statisfy this or that group, whether they appeal to me or not. Most I would use as well. I still like the grimoire best, though the ol' teleport thing is just getting very old, even if it is becoming more and more the standard for the sake of pure speed. Even the scepter has its place as a possible threat to those who are too interest in a win rather than in actually playing the game (essentially they really don't care what game they play as long as the can "beat" somebody).

I think the gauntlet could follow suit on the grimoire. In place of its spells, perhaps it has a some benefits in combat besides say a +4 in battle. A gauntlet is also armor, and from the look of it, it could do some serious damage. Since any combat is a fight to the death already, its damage potential is moot... but if it weren't, I would give it the power to take 2 Lives on a with, Save the bearers life on a 4,5, or 6, and destroy any armor or weapons used by an opponent, say, in place of taking a life. Just some notions, that's all.

Pandora's box is okay, but I think the random roll for what is drawn may be a bit much for some. And it isn't balanced. At an average of 3.5 cards each, a small count of players would be easily overwhelmed; a large count just the opposite. Larger the count, the more protracted the endgame. Small the count, it almost becomes pointless to even bother.

What if the weilder was allowed to draw an Adventure and Spell per player still in the game? You might also want to mention explicitly that all cards not used are discarded at the end of the turn. I for one know there are players (even here on this board) who would try to weasel something from the lack of that word. Fortunately that kind is a minority, but they can be a real annoyance in the middle or end of a game. Another possibility (though I hesitate for some the more exaggerated new spells) is to allow the weilder to cast any one spell on itself per draw... but that's a bit iffy.

Now let me ask you a question in turn... have you ever come up with any notions for a scenario based alternative, even something as simple as the Warlock Quests? I ask because I've toyed with a few myself and not been satisfied enough to even mention them around here. One involved Talismans having to be searched for by finding clues, with quest being an additional way to gain a clue, but the mechanics weren't working out.

JCHendee said:

Well, I'd rather not add any saves to this end game, so, how about, if you win the combat , in addition to the normal victory conditions, either take an additional life from the target (can't be saved), or destroy (discard) one object or follower they have.

JCHendee said:

A nice ballence, and a nice choice of how to spend that cards for best damage potential.

JCHendee said:

I've not had any scenario ideas myself, but I've though vaguely on other peoples' ideas. I'm much better at making other people's ideas work than comming up with my own

Perhaps the "Prophecy" card. A selection of cards to be drawn, each one naming some kind of encounter (e.g. a spirit, an enemy with Craft 7+, any enemy in the Cursed Glade, visiting the Tavern, etc) which who's defeat the player will gain a clue, represented by the face-up prophecy.

Obtaining a Prophecy could be done in several ways: Discard two Fate, complete a Warlock's Quest, visit the Temple and donate a coin, etc.

When a player reaches the CoC, they roll a die and subtract their completed clues. They loose theat number of lives. If they loose any lives, they are thrown back to the Plain of Peril. Otherwise, they take the crown!

Slev said:

I could see that... that works too!

Slev said:

Yeah, I follow you. Dth was a great help to me in expanding the next version of Talisman Tasks... but it's still needs to go a little further... and I'm still wrestling with it.

Slev said:

Interesting... That's a new twist. I hadn't thought of "clue" like cards connected directly to winning the game but rather just accessing by a Talisman, to whatever endgame is in play or will be drawn.

What I'd originally worked out was any player who completed an encounter on a space all the way through (all cards successfully dealt with) could roll a die. On a six they gain a clue card or token (a new component) for the type of draw space they are on: Woods, Hills, Fields, Plains, Ruins, Runes. Once they have five different clues and can land on the sixth type they don't have, they gain a Talisman. But in running the probabilities, I didn't like what the numbers showed. At around the 4th and 5th necessary type of space, the odds were dropping too low because of the changes in movement randomness in 4ER. So I added on completed quests allowing a player to take any clue it doesn't have (since quests are for a Talisman anyway). This helped bypass having to hit a type of space they hadn't checked yet. But it still was iffy.

Another was to remove all talisman's from the game and deck and have pieces of Talisman's (three pieces each for three or four Talisman's total) inserted instead. A player has to assemble a Talisman with the right pieces (each Talisman is broken a different way, some maybe in only two pieces)... probably including stealing or trading for them. But that probably wouldn't appeal to most players. I sort of nicks the whole quest thing, unless extra matching broken Talismans were made a available via a Quest, so the necessary pieces for any one talisman could be gained one of two ways. Overall, it looked a bit fussy to create.

The use of clues is one of the mechanics from Mythgardia.

As the game starts, you get a card with a space to visit, which is where you then find out where the real treasure is and then you travel there. It's a cool, simple mechanic.