Community, our benevolent demigod TalismanIsland came up with a tweak for the Elementalist Character . It is a great, albeit minor, change I feel. After thinking about this, there are a lot of other cards that could probably use some tweaking as well, for instance some of the original and earlier characters are now really outclassed by some of the characters in later editions. There are also cards that just were not thought about in regards to using later expansions. What are some of the cards you think could use some tweaking or have even tweaked on your own?

Here are some that are group tweaked.

• The flail: We added text to include if you roll double 1-3 then you immediately take a life in addition to resolving the combat as though you lost.
• Luna: You may only use this ability once per round
• Trinket: We added Trinket to some of the following items: Amulet, Orb of Knowledge, Ring, Amulet of Speed, Blood Stone, Weighted Dice, Torch, Elixir of Destiny, Elixir or Might, Elixir of Wisdom,Orb of Destiny,Ancient Artefact and a few others but I can't find the complete list.
• Armour and Helmets: We did not actually change the text but allow someone to wear A Helmet and Armour and it will only take up one spot of your item capacity.
• We gave the dread knight an additional 3 starting fate so he begins with 4.
• Same with Chivalric Knight, we gave him 2 more to start with 4.
• We gave the Magus an additional 1 fate to have him start with 2.
• We changed the Alchemist to only be able to perform 3 Alchemize actions per turn and lowered his starting gold to 2 after someone abused him in a game! I am not really happy with this fix, but there is no doubt he is a little off-the-wall with the City expansion in play.
• The Dwarf is able to Evade any creatures on the Highlands board
• Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods"
• THe priest may use staffs and other such "weapons"
• We adjusted the thief's ability to steal: In addition to the Market, Village and Market Day he may steal from Shops in the City. Stealing from the city requires a roll: Roll a D6: If the score is equal to or higher than your current craft, steal one item of your choice. A 6 automatically succeeds. If he rolls lower than his craft...go directly to jail.
• Warrior starts with 2 fate
• Monks may use staff weapons

And this is all I have on my notes here at work :-P My friend has all My Talisman stuff currently so I can't refer to all the cards and stuff we adjusted.

Make Fez once per round.

Make Scribe discard to use.

Here's my thoughts:

• I used to think the flail needed tweaking but lately I have come to the thought that no its fine the way it is.
• Yep Luna needs fixing this is great
• Don't think its needed with Trinkets
• Armour and Helmets again not really needed just adds more confusion.
• How about Dread knight an additional 2 starting fate Chivalric Knight, Magus is a good idea,
• I do not think the Alchemist needs changing just make sure your playing with the 30 gold limit and players know of it.
• The Dwarf is able to Evade any creatures on the Highlands board is too much I was thinking of allowing him to take a "hills" terrain card and place it anywhere in the outer region at start of game. And if you don't have one print one to use.
• Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods" again way to powerful and there are a lot of woods in the woodlands anyway.
• THe priest may use staffs and other such "weapons" nah I was thinking of saying if any other player pays they must pay you a gold.
• We adjusted the thief's ability to steal: In addition to the Market, Village and Market Day he may steal from Shops in the City. Stealing from the city requires a roll: Roll a D6: If the score is equal to or higher than your current craft, steal one item of your choice. A 6 automatically succeeds. If he rolls lower than his craft...go directly to jail... No the Thief is fine that way he is in that regard I was thinking of saying "whenever a player in your region rolls a 1 on a die to move they must pay you a gold"
• Warrior starts with 2 fate - I'm on the fence here.
• Monks may use staff weapons - nope Monk is fine that way he is.

I had some good ideas in my homebrew idea here: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/216844-starting-a-new-home-brew-idea/

Oh and make Make Fez once per round and Make Scribe discard to use.

Demon and Lesser Demon should be enemy - demon

Bandit should be enemy - outlaw

Ring should be a trinket.

• Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods"
• We adjusted the thief's ability to steal: In addition to the Market, Village and Market Day he may steal from Shops in the City. Stealing from the city requires a roll: Roll a D6: If the score is equal to or higher than your current craft, steal one item of your choice. A 6 automatically succeeds. If he rolls lower than his craft...go directly to jail.

Two observations:

1) If the Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods," does the Elf get the same courtesy?

2) I think you might have your roll results for the Thief backwards. If he goes to jail if he rolls lower than his craft then what happens when his craft becomes 7? He would always go to jail. I think you meant to say that he succeeds if he rolls less than his craft and goes to jail if he rolls higher. Otherwise it would make no sense to have him steal if he gains craft. Ultimately, it seems like you are trying to give him a similar ability to the Cat Burglar. Perhaps a better way to approach stealing in the City is to treat it like the Black Market. The Thief can steal whatever he wants, but he gets caught and thrown in jail on a 1-3 roll and succeeds on a 4-6. This would make sense from the story aspect of Talisman, too, seeing as it would be easier to steal in smaller villages or even individual peddlers than it would be to steal in the City.

Ring should be a trinket.

I disagree. Ring should be a trinket if you think about it from flavor's standpoint - it's a tiny object after all.

But from mechanical standpoint trinkets are supposed to be objects that don't take inventory space because they are barely useful, or are one-time use only, or can be used only in certain places/circumstances. None of which is the awesome Ring.

I will say Potion of Strength should definitely be a trinket however.

characters: I reworked most of them to balance them at the pinnacle of noncaster power (and nerfed casters); as evidenced in the rate the character threads there is a huge spread in how powerful the characters are and that seems poor character design to me

i like the flail drawback although you should probably work some drawback for battleaxe in as well, since its almost as good. Generally i dislike weapons adding more than 2 strength

is there a particular scenario the limit on luna is for or is it just a general drawback?

characters: I reworked most of them to balance them at the pinnacle of noncaster power (and nerfed casters); as evidenced in the rate the character threads there is a huge spread in how powerful the characters are and that seems poor character design to me

i like the flail drawback although you should probably work some drawback for battleaxe in as well, since its almost as good. Generally i dislike weapons adding more than 2 strength

is there a particular scenario the limit on luna is for or is it just a general drawback?

Care to share your balanced characters?

Ring should be a trinket.

I disagree. Ring should be a trinket if you think about it from flavor's standpoint - it's a tiny object after all.

But from mechanical standpoint trinkets are supposed to be objects that don't take inventory space because they are barely useful, or are one-time use only, or can be used only in certain places/circumstances. None of which is the awesome Ring.

I will say Potion of Strength should definitely be a trinket however.

Incorrect. The Stiletto is a trinket. Plus, the Magic Rings for purchase in the City are trinkets, as are the Crooked Scales, the Everfull Purse, and the Brew Stein, all of which have more than one usage in them.

So also the Crystal Shard, the Eagle Talon, and the Ice Scepter (probably shouldn't be, though) from the Highlands, which introduced the concept of Trinkets to us.

There are some trinkets that have lasting/limitless effects. They are called Trinkets because they are small and wouldn't take up carrying space in the same way that a sword would.

I know I know, I just wish they didn't grant trinket keyword to objects left and right.

I know I know, I just wish they didn't grant trinket keyword to objects left and right.

I don't think they did. The Ice Scepter is the only questionable one, seeing as they didn't grant Trinket status to other hand-held wands.

Most of the trinkets are one-time use cards. A few things in the Highlands have two uses (such as the Luckstone or the Dawnstone), but then they go away. Most of them are potions or wanted posters or gems. A ring would slip over your finger while you're also wielding your Fate Stealer. There's no need to have it take up one of your four object spots.

So I guess I should ask, apart from the Magic Ring, what do you think was unnecessarily labeled as a Trinket?

characters: I reworked most of them to balance them at the pinnacle of noncaster power (and nerfed casters); as evidenced in the rate the character threads there is a huge spread in how powerful the characters are and that seems poor character design to me

i like the flail drawback although you should probably work some drawback for battleaxe in as well, since its almost as good. Generally i dislike weapons adding more than 2 strength

is there a particular scenario the limit on luna is for or is it just a general drawback?

Care to share your balanced characters?

We only have frostmarch so only bothered with those:

So I guess I should ask, apart from the Magic Ring, what do you think was unnecessarily labeled as a Trinket?

Stiletto, that object in highland that grants +1 strenght and craft, magic ring in the city. There are more but I would have to go through the decks.

OTOH some objects could be easily trinkets but are not, for example map, shovel, talismans... (very limited use, even if eventaully needed to win)

Trinket was a good idea but they should have gone back and corrected some items that are indeed trinkets.

• Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods"
• We adjusted the thief's ability to steal: In addition to the Market, Village and Market Day he may steal from Shops in the City. Stealing from the city requires a roll: Roll a D6: If the score is equal to or higher than your current craft, steal one item of your choice. A 6 automatically succeeds. If he rolls lower than his craft...go directly to jail.

Two observations:

1) If the Druid may treat the entire Woodlands expansion as "woods," does the Elf get the same courtesy?

2) I think you might have your roll results for the Thief backwards. If he goes to jail if he rolls lower than his craft then what happens when his craft becomes 7? He would always go to jail. I think you meant to say that he succeeds if he rolls less than his craft and goes to jail if he rolls higher. Otherwise it would make no sense to have him steal if he gains craft. Ultimately, it seems like you are trying to give him a similar ability to the Cat Burglar. Perhaps a better way to approach stealing in the City is to treat it like the Black Market. The Thief can steal whatever he wants, but he gets caught and thrown in jail on a 1-3 roll and succeeds on a 4-6. This would make sense from the story aspect of Talisman, too, seeing as it would be easier to steal in smaller villages or even individual peddlers than it would be to steal in the City.

Now that you mention it, the Elf should! :-) We did this initially because the Druid is fairly weak sauce.

You are correct on the Thief, I worded it backwards. Our group does a fair amount of role-playing so they are always looking for ways to tweak things so the flavour is better for characters...

So I guess I should ask, apart from the Magic Ring, what do you think was unnecessarily labeled as a Trinket?

Stiletto, that object in highland that grants +1 strenght and craft, magic ring in the city. There are more but I would have to go through the decks.

OTOH some objects could be easily trinkets but are not, for example map, shovel, talismans... (very limited use, even if eventaully needed to win)

See, you're basing the classification of "trinket" off of its usage, not off of the intended purposes of trinkets. Trinkets are small items that should not take up a carrying space. That is the purpose of the "trinket" designation. It is a small item. The Shovel does not qualify as that. But again, your definition of "trinket" doesn't match how the game intends it to be used.

So I guess I should ask, apart from the Magic Ring, what do you think was unnecessarily labeled as a Trinket?

Stiletto, that object in highland that grants +1 strenght and craft, magic ring in the city. There are more but I would have to go through the decks.

OTOH some objects could be easily trinkets but are not, for example map, shovel, talismans... (very limited use, even if eventaully needed to win)

See, you're basing the classification of "trinket" off of its usage, not off of the intended purposes of trinkets. Trinkets are small items that should not take up a carrying space. That is the purpose of the "trinket" designation. It is a small item. The Shovel does not qualify as that. But again, your definition of "trinket" doesn't match how the game intends it to be used.

First of all, you are only assuming what the intended purpose is, you can't now for sure your assumption is more correct than mine.

Don't tell me about game's "intentions" unless you developed it.

Second, not all trinkets fit your reasoning. Some objects are and shouldn't be, others fit your definition well but aren't.

If you, as you say, know game's intentions so well, explain to me why new talismans from cataclysm aren't trinkets. Look at any art with them, they are tiny.

So I guess I should ask, apart from the Magic Ring, what do you think was unnecessarily labeled as a Trinket?

Stiletto, that object in highland that grants +1 strenght and craft, magic ring in the city. There are more but I would have to go through the decks.

OTOH some objects could be easily trinkets but are not, for example map, shovel, talismans... (very limited use, even if eventaully needed to win)

See, you're basing the classification of "trinket" off of its usage, not off of the intended purposes of trinkets. Trinkets are small items that should not take up a carrying space. That is the purpose of the "trinket" designation. It is a small item. The Shovel does not qualify as that. But again, your definition of "trinket" doesn't match how the game intends it to be used.

First of all, you are only assuming what the intended purpose is, you can't now for sure your assumption is more correct than mine.

Don't tell me about game's "intentions" unless you developed it.

Second, not all trinkets fit your reasoning. Some objects are and shouldn't be, others fit your definition well but aren't.

If you, as you say, know game's intentions so well, explain to me why new talismans from cataclysm aren't trinkets. Look at any art with them, they are tiny.

Well, deducing the intention of the "trinket" designation is not hard. A trinket is a small object, and the vast vast majority of items that receive the "trinket" designation are just that: small objects that can fit in a pocket or on a hand--you know, things that wouldn't hinder someone's ability to carry other things. Outside of your imagination there is not a single place in existence (either real world or Talisman world) where a shovel would be considered a trinket.

Again, I have already conceded that the Ice Scepter is questionable. I don't think that one should have received the "trinket" designation. But that's the only questionable one. Everything else that is labeled a trinket is one.

So why didn't they label the new Talisman cards as trinkets? Probably because there are already a lot of Talisman cards that aren't labeled as trinkets. I think they should be. They have always been rather small in the artwork. But in considering previous expansions, it was best not to make some Talismans trinkets and others not.

But, of course, that brings up the Magic Ring. Well, there's only one Magic Ring prior to the additional two Magic Rings available for sale in the City. It's not like the ten or so Talismans--which will come up far more frequently.

So no, I didn't develop the game. However, I looked at the word they used (again, TRINKET) and how they applied it (again, things that don't count toward your carrying limit), and I was able to come up with a pretty good understanding of what they meant by it, stating with all confidence that a shovel doesn't qualify.

Everything you're saying Osbo25 is true. Maybe it comes down to preference.

What I don't like in that approach is the card bloat in the player's area. If trinkets were only one-time use items or rarely usable items, you would only ever have a handful of useful objects to keep track of. Because trinkets are designed like they are, you often have to read through tens of cards your character possesses to make sure you didn't forget some bonus or ability. Last game my character had over 20 objects - I would prefer if talisman was designed in such a way that that would not happen.

Talismans are like the One Ring: small in size but psychically very heavy.

Talismans are like the One Ring: small in size but psychically very heavy.

Aaand you can now drop them into a fiery chasm

Everything you're saying Osbo25 is true. Maybe it comes down to preference.

What I don't like in that approach is the card bloat in the player's area. If trinkets were only one-time use items or rarely usable items, you would only ever have a handful of useful objects to keep track of. Because trinkets are designed like they are, you often have to read through tens of cards your character possesses to make sure you didn't forget some bonus or ability. Last game my character had over 20 objects - I would prefer if talisman was designed in such a way that that would not happen.

Admittedly, a crap ton of trinkets to wade through is a difficult thing.

But this brings up something I had never considered before: even small items have weight. Too many small items will still weigh someone down. Just ask a rock climber or a long-distance hiker. They measure things by the ounce and try to get all of their equipment as light as possible.

Perhaps a carrying limit for Trinkets would be in order: 4 trinkets in addition to your usual 4 items, with 4 trinkets also equaling one regular item. So you could carry 4 regular items and 4 trinkets; 3 regular items and 8 trinkets; 2 regular items and 12 trinkets; 1 regular item and 16 trinkets; or 0 regular items and 20 trinkets.

What do you think?

Everything you're saying Osbo25 is true. Maybe it comes down to preference.

What I don't like in that approach is the card bloat in the player's area. If trinkets were only one-time use items or rarely usable items, you would only ever have a handful of useful objects to keep track of. Because trinkets are designed like they are, you often have to read through tens of cards your character possesses to make sure you didn't forget some bonus or ability. Last game my character had over 20 objects - I would prefer if talisman was designed in such a way that that would not happen.

Admittedly, a crap ton of trinkets to wade through is a difficult thing.

But this brings up something I had never considered before: even small items have weight. Too many small items will still weigh someone down. Just ask a rock climber or a long-distance hiker. They measure things by the ounce and try to get all of their equipment as light as possible.

Perhaps a carrying limit for Trinkets would be in order: 4 trinkets in addition to your usual 4 items, with 4 trinkets also equaling one regular item. So you could carry 4 regular items and 4 trinkets; 3 regular items and 8 trinkets; 2 regular items and 12 trinkets; 1 regular item and 16 trinkets; or 0 regular items and 20 trinkets.

What do you think?

This way madness lies

It's just too complicated for the benefits it provides.

But I would like something simpler, for example 4 normal objects and 4 trinkets. Every trinket above the limit counts as a normal object.

Everything you're saying Osbo25 is true. Maybe it comes down to preference.

What I don't like in that approach is the card bloat in the player's area. If trinkets were only one-time use items or rarely usable items, you would only ever have a handful of useful objects to keep track of. Because trinkets are designed like they are, you often have to read through tens of cards your character possesses to make sure you didn't forget some bonus or ability. Last game my character had over 20 objects - I would prefer if talisman was designed in such a way that that would not happen.

Admittedly, a crap ton of trinkets to wade through is a difficult thing.

But this brings up something I had never considered before: even small items have weight. Too many small items will still weigh someone down. Just ask a rock climber or a long-distance hiker. They measure things by the ounce and try to get all of their equipment as light as possible.

Perhaps a carrying limit for Trinkets would be in order: 4 trinkets in addition to your usual 4 items, with 4 trinkets also equaling one regular item. So you could carry 4 regular items and 4 trinkets; 3 regular items and 8 trinkets; 2 regular items and 12 trinkets; 1 regular item and 16 trinkets; or 0 regular items and 20 trinkets.

What do you think?

These sorts of things would be great for DE. Playing DE when you have 20+ cards is kind of stupid...

For the board game though it is going to be way too complicated!