BRASKY said:

Then use the cactus example I used?? I dunno.

BRASKY said:

Yeah I mean, I'm not trying to rip on people. I'm just trying to understand what people's problem with this is. Like, everyone wants all this in-universe make believe role-playing stuff to reflect real life or something, but at the end of the day, it's not real life. It's a board game. And you can't use make believe "how it should be in real life" rules to make a game balanced. You need a set of rules in place so that the game is fair, balanced and without bad interactions, and from that solid foundation you can then role-play out whatever you want for it to make sense.

Or houserule whatever you want. But again, the rules are in place for a reason. So when you have less PvP in the Middle Region late game when people are rushing for the Crown or whatnot because someone doesn't want to possibly lose 2 lives because of your "thirsty" houserule, then you messed up the game I guess.

Mattr0polis said:

Agreed... but there's nothing fair and balanced about one character coming along, succumbing to influence of the space, AND THEN choosing to encounter the option it presents (drawing a card). The encounter is with the card or a persona or option on the space, regardless of how its worded. And then someone else comes along and the space's influence (not its encounter options) are suddenly nerfed because they attack someone there.

I respect that you have your own viewpoint, and that you wish to play by official rules / rulings. But issues of versimilitude (or realism) cast aside, there is no logical support within just the mechanics (not the game ambiance) for calling that fair and balanced. The influence of space in a game that is suddenly separated from one player and not another is an advantage skirting the game environment's mechanics. It is a flaw, officially reinforced or not.

JCHendee said:

Yes it IS balanced, by the risk involved in attacking another character! They may win the combat and take a life from you, they may cast a horrible combat spell on you, or worse they may take one of your best objects as a reward. A combat win is never a gaurantee. They may even be much stronger than you to begin with and thus would be a poor choice for you to choose to fight instead of encountering the space.

Player A's Turn

1. Character A lands on the Cursed Glade: While here you cannot count any Strength or Craft pointe derived from any Objects or Magic Objects, nor may you use any Magic Objects or cast any Spells.
2. No other Characters are present; Character A must draw a card or encounter a card present under the influence of the Cursed Glade
3. Encounter resolved. Turn ends.
4. Character A is still here on the Cursed Glade having not moved on.

Player B's Turn

1. Character B lands on the Cursed Glade and chooses to encounter Character B by Battle, Psychic Combat, Special Ability, etc..
2. In not drawing or encountering a card present, it thereby gets to ignore the space's instructions, which says while here .
3. Character A is still here , regardless of being encountered by another Character.

So... where's the official ruling that tells us if Character A is still under the influence of the Cursed Glade when Character B encounters it? And if no, then that may be balanced. If it is still under the influence, then it is not balance. And again, no ruling on this obvious contradiction created by the FAQ . If we want to talk offficial rules, what about the space's explicit statement of while here ? What's more clear than that? Where in the rules or flow chart does it override this to say that any Character is no longer on its present space when its turn is over, and thereby doesn't have to apply its influence when another Character lands on that same space?

FAQs on this issue have not cleared up anything but only obfuscated it further, even for official rulings outside of the base game product. Similar and more plain contradictions exist for the Desert spaces in like fashion when this new ruling is applied. It makes things worse not better by adding an escape from the Middle Region remaining always as dangerous as it is supposed to be. And it removes sense for the obvious rules of the game, written right on the board in very plain language.

JCHendee said:

JCHendee said:

Thank you, JC. That's well put.

I love the danger/adventure in Talisman. I don't want a less challenging game. Thus, I will continue to play as I have been playing because it makes sense to me. This whole issue of environmental effects within certain spaces being ignored because a character is assumed to be "concentrating" on something else reminds me of when Wile E. Coyote chases Road Runner off a cliff, but only succumbs to gravity once he realizes his situation - because he was "concentrating" on the chase (Ironically enough, these scenes usually appear in desert-type settings).

Laughable.

I have take my time to read the FAQ, and i have absolute no problems with it.

It all sounds good !!

Thank you FFG, for your hard work to release the FAQ !!

Thanks FFG so much for the official rulings!

I have to say, the Assassin got a much-needed bump into Dark Cultist-style power, but other than that, no complaints.

MegaDestroyo said:

Then why would you DISCOURAGE PvP by instituting house rules like that?? It makes no sense. By playing that way all it will do is make EVERYONE who is smart NEVER move to & attack a character at a Desert or Cursed Glade. Congratulations, you've basically just made three safe havens against the greatest game equalizer of all: PvP.

JCHendee said:

Page 9 in the Rulebook:

Encounters

"After a character has finished his movement, he must either encounter the space he lands in OR a character in that space."

And then a bit further down in the same entry:

"Characters ONLY have encounters during their own turn , unless specifically instructed otherwise."

That doesn't answer the main question. Is Character A still on the space when Character B encounters it? If so, then that encounter is taking place in the Cursed Glade. There's little point to call a space anything if encounters happen somehow outside of it while the characters are still inside of it. And it still does not address the nerfing of the space's own instructions which on inherently counter to that one FAQ ruling. While here...

The FAQ is still in direct conflict with clear specific instructions on the board, and that's only the simple part of that rulings problems. And characters do have encounters outside their own turn... whenever something comes at them.... like Character B. Both characters are involved in an encounter. There is nothing to refute that, even in the rule book.

JCHendee said:

The encounter is taking place at the Cursed Glade but neither player is encountering the Glade. Character A already encountered it when he moved there and then fi nished encountering it when his turn ended. Character B isn't encountering it because he chose to encounter Character A instead as his choice per the rules.

So.... there it is! The characters are not on the space. There space's rules say while here , so if they aren't affected they can't actually be there. This is exaclty the contradiction (among others) that the FAQ rule has created. It's conundrums aren't worth repeating again. It's a lousy ruling that is going to lead to more glitches in the game, especially when the like paradigm is applied similarly in other ways elsewhere... and it will.

JCHendee said:

Again dude, the characters are on the space. They are not encountering the space. "while here" is irrelevent as soon as Character A's turn ends because his encounter with that location is over. It's not a contradiction. It's pretty straight forward actually. Sorry that you don't like it or don't seem to understand it. But it's the rules dude.

Mattr0polis said:

Haha. This isn't going anywhere. If we're all happy playing out our own interpretations of the rules then that's great. But "my way" isn't discouraging PvP at all. There's ALWAYS plenty of PvP in every game my group plays inside and out of these controversial spaces. If someone in the Cursed Glade has something I want, and I believe I've got a good chance of defeating them in a combat, then I'm going to risk entering that combat without the use of my items, which isn't always a big deal at all if a "smart player" chose to direct his efforts toward gaining permanent stats. And, in the same Cursed Glade instance, a smart player would jump at the chance to enter combat with another player who happens to be on their last life.

It's the same principle in the desert, only with a different sacrifice (loss of one life instead of the inability to use items). If I really want that runesword held by an opponent, I'm going to kill said opponent and take it. I lose one life, which, in many cases, isn't very detrimental either considering the numerous spells, strangers, spaces, items, etc. that make lives FAR easier to come by and FAR less valuable than the rare items in the game (runesword, ring, belt, crown, wand, etc.)

There you have it: easy-mode avoided, PvP galore.

MegaDestroyo said:

It's not "my interpretation" of the rules. It IS the rules.

So is the space... if you read that as well.

And Mega is right... playing by the space's rule without nerfing it doesn't discourage PvP... or more importantly even CvC. The only players who think that are too gutless to fight on spaces that will cost them for it... like making them fight with real Craft and Strength instead of a pack of toys. Half the fun of the rare encounter on the Cursed Glade is taking out someone who consistently leans on prosthetic boosts.

JCHendee said:

Lol? I did read it! Along with the rules that say it doesn't affect me after I'm done with my turn!

Mattr0polis said:

I couldn't have said it better Mattr0polis!

Character combat is the riskiest and most dangerous encounter even if you have a big advantage in strength or craft. The other player could kill you with the finger of death, toadify you, or simply evade you which means you wasted your turn for nothing. The high risk of confronting a character balances out the fact that you don't get screwed by space effects. Of course lightweights that don't get into a lot of pvp might find this concept difficult to wrap their head around.

Or some of us with legitimate Strength and Craft, or moreso than toys, can't wait for someone leaning on toys to go there. We play by the space in our crew, anyone landing in the Cursed Glade (or forced there in other ways) is often given a world of hurt in PvP (CvC) if they suddenly have drops in attributes when too many toys stop working. That's dangerous CvC on our board. The Cursed Glade is only one space, so it doesn't happen often; that's another reason the ruling sucks; none of us want that dangerous moment taken away... and its a lot more dangerous than the plain old pvp.

And on the other obvious tangent, nothing should decrease or override the innate danger of the Middle Region.... on top of any PvP or CvC.

Lightweights are the ones who can't handle PvP and the space effects. Might as well go find a video death match and custom code your own arena. Play hard, die hard, or slink back to the Outer Region.

Mattr0polis said:

When some people get too opinionated and emotional about something there is nothing you can do to help them look outside their narrow viewpoint.

We've always played that you encounter a character OR the space. The faq ruling makes perfect sense because that is the way we've always played it. If you were playing the cursed glade differently for 20 years it's perfectly natural to have a hard time comprehending other people's viewpoint.

Carrion Prince said:

Couldn't have said it better, huh? That's surprising and unfortunate. I can: There are many instances in which a combat win is very much a gaurantee.

Example : You are in the Cursed Glade. I Attack you. I have a strength value which is 6 points greater than your strength value. I win.

Go ahead and rattle off a barrage of "what if this happens?" and "what if that happens?". There are an equal number of counter arguments to conclude that guaranteed combat victory is not only possible, but common. I hope no attempt is made to discredit this point; let's not get too ridiculous here.

Wow. Thanks guys. Hooray for the FAQ!

JCHendee said:

It's not a contradiction - the Characters are on the space, but the instructions only effect them when they are encountering the space. It's as though the Glade is written "while here (and encounterring the space)" . The bit in brackets is not explicit, as it's a core rule. Admittedly it was unclear

JCHendee said:

The Valley of Fire is an exception to this core rule, becuase the instructions on the space can effect you even when not encountering that space (aka, when you're about to move). I think this was worth mentioning.

Carrion Prince said:

Not sure I want to step into the middle of this bun-fight (Is it in Desert or Cursed Glade by the way ?)

I am not sure you can complain about someone else being entrenched in their position whilst yourself equally but oppositely entrenched.

Anyway, a few points on both sides, there was always a flow-chart on the back of the rule book, right back to 1st edition.

It does indeed have a clear path between encountering a player and encountering a space.

However, it does say that this is a general sequence of events only

Addionally, within the examples of the 1st and 2nd ed booklet there are in fact two examples given pertaining to the Cursed Glade.

1.

A Wizard with a Craft of 5 has a Solomon's Crown ( a Magic Object which add 2 to his Craft) so his Craft is 7.

This allows him 3 spells which he has acquird.

He now lands on Cursed Glade where he cannot count Craft gained from Magic Objects. He craft to 5 while he is there.

He is now only allowed 2 Spells, so he must immediately discard one. As soon as he leaves the Cursed Glade , he can count the Craft for

Solomon's Crown again and may have 3 Spells if he can acquire another.

2.

The Warrior has a total of 5 Strength Counters, the Magic Belt (a Magic Object that increases Strength by 1),

the Unicorn (a Follower that increases Strength by 1) and a Sword (an Object which increases Strangth by 1 in Combat only)

So his total Strength is 7 (5 plus 1 for the Unicorn and 1 for the Magic Belt). In Combat his Strength would be 8 since he can then

use the Sword. He now lands on the Cursed Glade where the Strength from Objects and Magic Objects cannot be counted.

Thus while he is there his Strength is 6 (5 plus 1 for the Unicorn) even in Combat.

Both of these, from the original Rule book 26 years ago (!) imply that the intended effect of the Cursed Glade is not restricted as to wether

you encounter a player or not.

If the Wizard was sat there and you moved in an attacked with Psychic Combat, according to the example,

the Cursed Glade still had an effect, he cannot gain another spell until he leaves because his Craft is lowered whilst he is there. The new player to the Cursed Glade should not be able to say " I am encountering a player so it has no effect on me but does on you ". Or maybe the curse is lifted on the Wizard by nature of being attacked? Don't think so.

So my point is that the rules of Talisman have always been a little ambiguous and.... open to interpretaion.... that is part if it's charm.

We used to have huge fights over it, quite often the board and cards going flying. That is why it is remembered so fondly.

The timings of the Spells used to be an issue with us, we introduced a rule where you had to say "Pzazz!" to notify you were casting a spell.

That was supposed to sort out which spell was cast first. Still ended up in a fight...

The Rules quite often contradict themselves and I think the fact that there is a Home Brew section means some people take what is there originally

and then mould it, create it to be more than it was originally.

An FAQ is interesting, it gives you an idea of what FFG are thinking about but as someone said, they are not going to come round your house

and make you play that way.

The most important thing is that you enjoy playing the game the way you play game.

Vive le difference.

Ooh - how much do I hate the fact that the editing window is not the same width as the published result.